Spirituality
15 Apr 18
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneSorry, did you just mention the word “integrity”?
The fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted." - despite your disingenuous claims to the contrary. Not that I expect you to have the integrity to admit it.
Oh the irony.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @divegeesterThe fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted." - despite your disingenuous claims to the contrary. Not that I expect you to have the integrity to admit it.
Sorry, did you just mention the word “integrity”?
Oh the irony.
Originally posted by @thinkofoneJust try to answer the questions with some principle and integrity Mr “words of Jesus”. 😉
The fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted." - despite your disingenuous claims to the contrary. Not that I expect you to have the integrity to admit it.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneThis tactic does not show you in a good light thinkofone. You seem to lack respect from both atheists and theists alike because of your lack of integrity.
The fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted." - despite your disingenuous claims to the contrary. Not that I expect you to have the integrity to admit it.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @divegeesterJust admit that the fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted."
Just try to answer the questions with some principle and integrity Mr “words of Jesus”. 😉
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneI think you are the biggest intellectual coward I’ve ever met.
Just admit that the fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted."
Period.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @divegeesterJust admit that the fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted."
I think you are the biggest intellectual coward I’ve ever met.
Period.
Period.
16 Apr 18
2 edits
Originally posted by @thinkofoneThis question is bang on topic with the OP and the the theme of the thread so far, claiming it is not is just dishonest and cowardly behaviour by you:
Just admit that the fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted."
You ascribe (in this thread) no divine or supernatural attributes to Jesus and yet you vociferously uphold his words, so how do you reconcile this when Jesus said that he was sent by God the father, that god the father was in him and that when someone had seen him, they had seen God the father? What is literal and what isn’t?
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneExplain how the question in my post above is not on topic.
Just admit that the fact remains that "Your questions are not 'on topic' as you asserted."
Period.
“The words of Jesus”
From a closet atheist.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @divegeesterAny can read through our discussion and see how you subsequently and dishonestly moved the goal posts and are now pretending that you haven't. Even at that you've botched your attempt to do so.
This question is bang on topic with the OP and the them pe of the thread so far, claiming it is not is just dishonest and cowardly behaviour by you:
[b]You ascribe (in this thread) no divine or supernatural attributes to Jesus and yet you vociferously uphold his words, so how do you reconcile this when Jesus said that he was sent by God the father, t ...[text shortened]... hat when someone had seen him, they had seen God the father? What is literal and what isn’t?[/b]
You're in full on "troll mode" which unfortunately is typical for you.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneOh I’m a troll now! I see.
Any can read through our discussion and see how you subsequently and dishonestly moved the goal posts and are now pretending that you haven't. Even at that you've botched your attempt to do so.
You're in full on "troll mode" which unfortunately is typical for you.
I see you thinkofone, right through you.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneI read through the discussion, and it's clear you're being disingenuous and lack principled integrity.
Any can read through our discussion and see how you subsequently and dishonestly moved the goal posts and are now pretending that you haven't. Even at that you've botched your attempt to do so.
You're in full on "troll mode" which unfortunately is typical for you.
Originally posted by @divegeesterYou've been a troll for quite some time now. Why are you pretending that this is the first time that I've pointed it out?
Oh I’m a troll now! I see.
I see you thinkofone, right through you.
What a nutter.
You removed any and all doubt just now on the "How To Be Washed in the Blood" thread.
Originally posted by @secondsonAn example of your delusional thinking is your denial in another thread that in the following passage chattel slavery is clearly and unambiguously being condoned::
I read through the discussion, and it's clear you're being disingenuous and lack principled integrity.
Leviticus 25
44‘As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45‘Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46‘You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves...
Just because it doesn't square with your conception of God doesn't mean that it doesn't say what it says.
Evidently you are unable to cope with this fact and are desperately engaging in one ad hom after another in an attempt to make yourself feel better.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneOh, I see, I posted in that thread in error.
You've been a troll for quite some time now. Why are you pretending that this is the first time that I've pointed it out?
What a nutter.
You removed any and all doubt just now on the "How To Be Washed in the Blood" thread.