2 edits
@bigdoggproblem saidvan·quil·a·trist
*ventriloquist
[just trying to help]
noun
a person who can speak or utter sounds so that they seem to come from others so as to thoroughly defeat them.
Are you not aware of what the JWs claim about themselves vis a vis going door to door and what it means with regard to "salvation" and their take on the Bible and how they define themselves as the only 'real' Christians? Can you really still be unaware of it, after all these years?
Rajk999 is directly confronting galveston75 over the teaching and the message and he is making that the issue. You don't seem to realize. You seem to be berating him on autopilot.
Your totally oblivious comment above makes you sound like you have no idea what Rajk999 and galveston75's conversation is about. This is a message board, sonship. People have conversations.
I know what the JWs believe.
You sound ... concerned.
Is this the atheist's concern or the deist's concern ?
Or do you just delight to see readers of the Bible fight with each other regardless of who is who ?
-Removed-Point No 1: I clearly showed by quoting your post, that if anybody changed the topic, it was YOU. So don’t accuse ME of red herrings, you hypocrite.
Point No 2: My even continuing this conversation with you, is merely to show everybody on this Forum that you are a hypocrite, who accuses other people (in this case Galv) of behaviour (in this case avoiding questions) that you yourself practice with impunity.
Point No 3: I told you exactly what I think about the JW’s beliefs, and nothing more needs to be said. I repeat that they are entitled to their beliefs, (no matter how repugnant, illogical or superstitious) as long as they don’t infringe on other people’s rights and as long as they don’t break the law. In some countries authorities have forced blood transfusions at times, and that is also their right to do. It is between them and the JWs.
Point No 4: I have no intention whatsoever of starting a thread with you about the Bible or anything else, for the simple reason that I don’t give a rat’s ass as to what you believe. My position on JWs, Fundamentalist Christians, Hindus or anybody else is simply that I give them the right to their opinions. The only times when I will engage anybody in a debate is when they want to push something over on me, or promote something as logical and sane when it clearly isn’t.
For example, I would gladly give you the right to believe in the FSM, as long as you don’t want to convince me that it is the only religion worth anything.
Do we understand each other now?
Go in peace!
@fmf saidI think that repeating a question is appropriate at times.
I repeat questions too. I am sure it comes across as "childish" to some. Or "ad nauseam". I have taken plenty of flak over the last 10 or so years. People have said worse things.
For example, if somebody asks you a direct question, or makes a challenge or something and you respond and/or refute the assertion, then you have every right to a response. If the original poster then disappears, that would be dishonest or at least discourteous behaviour.
I don’t believe this was the case here. Dive asked Galv a question, and Galv ducked it. He could have said “I take the Fifth!” At that point it is simply childish to badger the other guy to continue the discussion.
That is simply my pov, and others may differ.
@caljust saidCalJust, I think it's your prerogative to treat galveston75 as if he is someone who turned up here just a couple of days ago for the first time ever and for you to assume he posts in good faith, and to treat him as if he doesn't have a track record as a profoundly dishonest, cowardly, misanthropic and sanctimonious poster. Personally, I would say that would make this place like a venue for conversations with strangers on a train, all suffering from amnesia, but that's your prerogative.
I think that repeating a question is appropriate at times.
For example, if somebody asks you a direct question, or makes a challenge or something and you respond and/or refute the assertion, then you have every right to a response. If the original poster then disappears, that would be dishonest or at least discourteous behaviour.
I don’t believe this was the case here. ...[text shortened]... to badger the other guy to continue the discussion.
That is simply my pov, and others may differ.
@fmf saidGive the old man a break. He is probably losing his memory. He has been around long enough to know Galveston and his antics.
CalJust, I think it's your prerogative to treat galveston75 as if he is someone who turned up here just a couple of days ago for the first time ever and for you to assume he posts in good faith, and to treat him as if he doesn't have a track record as a profoundly dishonest, cowardly, misanthropic and sanctimonious poster. Personally, I would say that would make this place like a ...[text shortened]... or conversations with strangers on a train, all suffering from amnesia, but that's your prerogative.