1 edit
Originally posted by karoly aczelHe was commenting on everybody except himself.
Remember there are over 40 000 denominations of christianity, so its hard to say which particurlar denomination he is commenting on.
My real objections to his initial comment is that he was not clear what he meant by 'child abuse', he singled out Mr Calvin (when his claim applies to everyone), when challenged he resorted to insults, and finally the same charge applies equally to him too.
Originally posted by twhiteheadto TwhiteHead
He was commenting on everybody except himself.
My real objections to his initial comment is that he was not clear what he meant by 'child abuse', he singled out Mr Calvin (when his claim applies to everyone), when challenged he resorted to insults, and finally the same charge applies equally to him too.
No, you weren,t clear, and your still not clear, and you will never be clear, if you remain a blind atheist.
As i said before, to discern spiritual matters requires insight, so go and get some insight, and then come back, otherwise i will allways speak against your atheistic views in this forum.
There are people in this forum, who are trying to help you understand, but while you maintain a argumentative and brash attitude, then you will get no where.
Originally posted by vishvahetuVishvahetu, again you rudely dismiss clearly intelligent people who don't share your theological viewpoint. Your attitude is far more 'brash' and 'argumentative' than that shown by anybody else here. I concede that there may be some elements of truth in your views, as, like everybody else here, the glass through which I try to view spiritual truth is so dark as to be opaque. You, however, persistently and arrogantly profess higher 'knowledge' while waving away data and opinion of value inestimably higher than your own as 'false', 'ignorant', less-intelligent and lacking in insight. The inevitable consequence of this attitude is, I am afraid, that you come across as ill-informed and unpleasantly arrogant, which is a shame, as it makes reasonable discussion with you a very difficult if not impossible proposition.
to TwhiteHead
No, you weren,t clear, and your still not clear, and you will never be clear, if you remain a blind atheist.
As i said before, to discern spiritual matters requires insight, so go and get some insight, and then come back, otherwise i will allways speak against your atheistic views in this forum.
There are people in this forum, who a ...[text shortened]... derstand, but while you maintain a argumentative and brash attitude, then you will get no where.
1 edit
Originally posted by avalanchethecatto AvalanchtheCat
Vishvahetu, again you rudely dismiss clearly intelligent people who don't share your theological viewpoint. Your attitude is far more 'brash' and 'argumentative' than that shown by anybody else here. I concede that there may be some elements of truth in your views, as, like everybody else here, the glass through which I try to view spiritual makes reasonable discussion with you a very difficult if not impossible proposition.
Lets go straight to the point, you say mans origins, started in a muddy puddle, after it was hit by a lightning bolt, ( a random accident) and from that occurance we now have millions of complex living species, including man.
But you fail to explain, where the universe came from, and the puddle, and the lightning bolt, and the amoeba, and consciousness, and intelligence, and the thousands of different foods to feed all these speices, and all the nutrients to make growth possible, etc etc etc
And clearly your proposal is not intelligent.
Now after hearing this, i protest strongly, and you complain that my disagreeance with that goobl gook, is arrogant and insulting, but your proposal is rediculous, and the worst thing is, that you teach this rubbish to young children.
If this wasnt taught to children, then i would not bother to speak against it.
So my request is, do not teach the children this, its your belief, and keep it to yourselves.
vishva
Originally posted by vishvahetuSkipping the first two paragraphs (as you have proven singularly impervious to logical explanation of these concepts)...
to AvalanchtheCat
Lets go straight to the point, you say mans origins, started in a muddy puddle, after it was hit by a lightning bolt, ( a random accident) and from that occurance we now have millions of complex living species, including man.
But you fail to explain, where the universe came from, and the puddle, and the lightning bolt, and the amoe ...[text shortened]... equest is, do not teach the children this, its your belief, and keep it to yourselves.
vishva
And clearly your proposal is not intelligent.
There you go again. It doesn't seem intelligent to you because you haven't taken the time to understand anybody's position but your own. So you just dismiss differing opinions with insult, again.
but your proposal is rediculous, and the worst thing is, that you teach this rubbish to young children.
Firstly, the word is spelt with an I - "ridiculous". Secondly, if you are unable to understand somebody's argument, how can you judge it? Thirdly, what makes you think I teach anything to young children? Fourthly, could you please learn to argue without resorting to your tiresome insults?
So my request is, do not teach the children this, its your belief, and keep it to yourselves.
One could argue that your opinions (not to mention your grammar and spelling) are uneducated and ill-informed nonsense, and that teaching them to young children in the way you do is child-abuse. So keep them to yourself.
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou can't reason with a psychopath, tw. Might as well not even try.
He was commenting on everybody except himself.
My real objections to his initial comment is that he was not clear what he meant by 'child abuse', he singled out Mr Calvin (when his claim applies to everyone), when challenged he resorted to insults, and finally the same charge applies equally to him too.
Originally posted by PinkFloydDont tell me what to tell you. Ok.
Don't tell me how to act you little --------
Whats up your but anyway? I thought you were one of those more reasonable christian types, hence my apppeal to your better nature.
Sorry if I offended you, twas not my intention. Feel free to snap back at me- you got a free shot. 😉