Originally posted by Zahlanzi not the canaanites though, they needed to vacate the premises . to make room for his favourite people
Maybe the people who declared themselves "His favourite people" also wrote all the accounts we have of the depravities of their enemies, justifying their mass murder or genocide etc. etc. Amen? Could it be?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie nothing could be further from the truth, I have a mind of my own which is honed to evaluate things for itself. I have evaluated the scripture and it clearly portrays homosexuality as unnatural and that those who practice it as facing consequences.
Yes, you've made your opinion quite clear. As a disinterested observer however I have to say that Wesley Ellis makes a very much more convincing case than you - this may be due to his willingness to actually consider your position openly and clearly, succinctly countering points I have to assume you are holding (since you seem unwilling to openly discuss them), while you have simply dismissed his without reference.
Originally posted by avalanchethecat Yes, you've made your opinion quite clear. As a disinterested observer however I have to say that Wesley Ellis makes a very much more convincing case than you - this may be due to his willingness to actually consider your position openly and clearly, succinctly countering points I have to assume you are holding (since you seem unwilling to openly discuss them), while you have simply dismissed his without reference.
I asked you to produce a summation, you have not done so. Your repeated references to my personality are irrelevant.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie I asked you to produce a summation, you have not done so. Your repeated references to my personality are irrelevant.
Originally posted by avalanchethecat I'm sorry, where did I refer to your personality?
you say that i am disinterested, i am not disinterested, you stated i am reluctant to learn, i am not reluctant to learn anything, i have stated my case, you have provided a reference which appears to you to be more compelling, yet homosexuality is still portrayed as both unnatural and that those who practice it, in whatever guise, will receive a type of punishment for their error. You say that this is not the case, but cannot say why, oh well, hum ho, life goes on.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie you say that i am disinterested, i am not disinterested, you stated i am reluctant to learn, i am not reluctant to learn anything, i have stated my case, you have provided a reference which appears to you to be more compelling, yet homosexuality is still portrayed as both unnatural and that those who practice it, in whatever guise, will receive a typ ...[text shortened]... ir error. You say that this is not the case, but cannot say why, oh well, hum ho, life goes on.
Homosexuals are just as natural as you and I. I should know because my youngest son is homosexual. I don't see anything unnatural about him, unless you consider having a genius IQ as unnatural.
Originally posted by RJHinds Homosexuals are just as natural as you and I. I should know because my youngest son is homosexual. I don't see anything unnatural about him, unless you consider having a genius IQ as unnatural.
Perhaps as a genius he might teach you to read properly. My text does not say that homosexuals are unnatural, it states that homosexuality is unnatural.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie you say that i am disinterested, i am not disinterested, you stated i am reluctant to learn, i am not reluctant to learn anything, i have stated my case, you have provided a reference which appears to you to be more compelling, yet homosexuality is still portrayed as both unnatural and that those who practice it, in whatever guise, will receive a typ ...[text shortened]... ir error. You say that this is not the case, but cannot say why, oh well, hum ho, life goes on.
No, I stated that I was disinterested. I did imply that you don't have an open mind, which of course you don't - you can't, by definition, have faith and an open mind. Do you really think this qualifies as repeated references to your personality?!
Originally posted by avalanchethecat No, I stated that I was disinterested. I did imply that you don't have an open mind, which of course you don't - you can't, by definition, have faith and an open mind. Do you really think this qualifies as repeated references to your personality?!
but I understand your reluctance to risk enlightenment should that entail alteration of your deeply held beliefs
appearers to me to be an insult, never the less, I realise that its an irrelevancy as to the actual point at hand and I would rather not talk of personalities, if you don't mind. As to not being open minded, I do take exception for it appears to me to be an arrogant statement considering that i examined many faiths, attempted to experience many things prior to my adoption of Christianity. I do not accept the platitude that faith, by definition means one is of necessity closed minded, on the contrary, I have found that the most closed minded persons are those that have made no room for the supernatural and who have limited their search for truth to unintelligent agencies. Such a stance appears to me to be as about close minded as one can get.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Perhaps as a genius he might teach you to read properly. My text does not say that homosexuals are unnatural, it states that homosexuality is unnatural.
Okay, perhaps we are misunderstanding each other then. Maybe it would be better for you to say that homosexuality does not fit the normal standard and is different from what is generally accepted as being normal behavior. Or that certain acts that are associated with homosexuality is unnatural and considered an abomination to God according to the Holy Bible, if you wish to use that word. 😏
Originally posted by RJHinds Okay, perhaps we are misunderstanding each other then. Maybe it would be better for you to say that homosexuality does not fit the normal standard and is different from what is generally accepted as being normal behavior. Or that [b]certain acts that are associated with homosexuality is unnatural and considered an abomination to God according to the Holy Bible, if you wish to use that word. 😏[/b]
No there is no misunderstanding I knew perfectly well what I meant and stated as much in clear and unambiguous language, it was you who failed to comprehend it properly.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie No there is no misunderstanding I knew perfectly well what I meant and stated as much in clear and unambiguous language, it was you who failed to comprehend it properly.
Maybe it was not in as unambiguous language as you thought, if I did not comprehend it. Don't you think you could state it in such a way that even a redneck like myself would understand that you did not intend to attack the person, but an act associated with homosexuality? 😏
Originally posted by robbie carrobie but I understand your reluctance to risk enlightenment should that entail alteration of your deeply held beliefs
appearers to me to be an insult, never the less, I realise that its an irrelevancy as to the actual point at hand and I would rather not talk of personalities, if you don't mind. As to not being open minded, I do take exception for it ...[text shortened]... nintelligent agencies. Such a stance appears to me to be as about close minded as one can get.
However insulting you might find it, it in no way comprises 'repeated references' to your personality. To raise this phantom topic and then plead that you'd 'rather not talk of personalities' seems rather ludicrous to me. As to the rest of your post, are you trying to tell me that you are open to the idea that the god you profess to believe in might not exist? Because if you're not saying that, then you are, by definition, closed-minded. Sorry if that sounds trite or uninteresting to you, but you can't have it both ways.
Originally posted by avalanchethecat However insulting you might find it, it in no way comprises 'repeated references' to your personality. To raise this phantom topic and then plead that you'd 'rather not talk of personalities' seems rather ludicrous to me. As to the rest of your post, are you trying to tell me that you are open to the idea that the god you profess to believe in might ded. Sorry if that sounds trite or uninteresting to you, but you can't have it both ways.
The God that we confess to believe in may not exist, if there is really no heavens and earth and no living creatures that exist. If I really do not exist, then and only then could I believe the God I confess to believe in does not exist. But since I believe that I all these other things exist, I could not deny that the Creator of these things also exists. 😏
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Glory be to God! Holy! Holy! Holy!
Originally posted by avalanchethecat However insulting you might find it, it in no way comprises 'repeated references' to your personality. To raise this phantom topic and then plead that you'd 'rather not talk of personalities' seems rather ludicrous to me. As to the rest of your post, are you trying to tell me that you are open to the idea that the god you profess to believe in might ded. Sorry if that sounds trite or uninteresting to you, but you can't have it both ways.
If you can cite evidence for the proposition that God does not exist then please do so, if not then there is logically no basis for concluding that the proposition is sound. Its a mere opinion, unsubstantiated and without the slightest foundation. Surely any open minded and rational person will consider any evidence prior to making an evaluation with the mind? To entertain anything to the contrary is prejudiced and close minded.
25 Jan '13 12:45
Are Christians permitted to own slaves?
Back to Top