Go back
Rajk999 I accept more BECAUSE ....

Rajk999 I accept more BECAUSE ....

Spirituality

1 edit

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

Nevertheless, your aim of taking a swipe at Rajk backfired in spectacular fashion.


Preytell?

And . . . if things were to go 100% as I wanted them to go, how would it have turned out ?


( And PLEASE everyone, vote with your thumb )
I would be interested in hearing your response to that ... that this thread is to take a swipe at me...
What doctrine of Christ that I promoted makes you want to take a swipe at me. What makes our doctrines so incompatible?

I reciall that this is not the first thread you started designed to condemn me.

2 edits

@Rajk999


I was not interested in taking a swipe at you.

I was interested in why SO MANY swipe compulsively at me and some other Christians here as oppose to swipe at you.

How many tit for tate snarks from atheists follow almost all of your posts?
Seems much less. And I am asking the prime swipers WHY.

And I am not disappointed at the responses that have come, which most of which I take at face value.

Did Ghost ever tell you that your thread backfired on you . . . ha ha ha?


@ghost-of-a-duke said
Nevertheless, your aim of taking a swipe at Rajk backfired in spectacular fashion.
You think atheists agreeing with rajk999 is a victory for who or what?

Given rajk999’s doctrine, it doesn’t surprise me at all. He and atheists have a lot in common, which is hardly an endorsement of Christianity.


@sonship said

Did Ghost ever tell you that your thread backfired on you . . . ha ha ha?
No, maybe because my threads do not backfire.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@rajk999 said
No, maybe because my threads do not backfire.
They don't frontfire either.


@rajk999 said
I sincerely hope we get the opportunity to socialise in person one good day FMF. What is amazing is that I have to argue with professed Christians about what Jesus said, after which they claim that I am the one that does not believe in Jesus Christ.,
Lick FMF's hand well enough and maybe he'll grant you an audience.


@rajk999 said
No, maybe because my threads do not backfire.
That’s only ‘cause you ignore obvious criticisms and pointed questions about your doctrine.

2 edits

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

@sonship said
This is a typical post written by old timer here Rajk999.
[quote]There is One God, and One mediator, Jesus Christ. God so loved the world [not Jews or Christians only], that he gave his Son Jesus to die so that .. by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (Romans 5:18 KJV) [all men - regardless of religion], so that whosoever be ...[text shortened]... , BigDogg, FMF, to name a few.

I do not argue as much with Rajk999 because . . . . .
A point in his favor: he focuses on things that make practical sense in the real world, like giving to the poor, and caring for the sick.

A point against: he condones slavery. I have taken him to task over this several times.

1 edit

@BigDogg


A point against: he condones slavery. I have taken him to task over this several times.


Sounds like you believe in an ultimate justice and real human dignity.

Can you just tell me where is your ultimate source for these two things ?
I mean the final decision on the reality of these two things in the universe is who?

You?
Them?
Which them?


@sonship said
I think my perception is not too far off.

That more vocal atheists here reason - "If I have to have someone here tell me about Jesus, I prefer it be Rajk999 to say, PB1022, KellyJay, sonship, josephw"
What a peculiar thing to say.

2 edits

@FMF

For fuzziness and shifty obscurity your answer was the most so.

Way back when, Rajk999 made it crystal clear to me that he's not here to discuss atheism or theism with atheists. Fair enough. He's stuck to that, and I respect him for that choice and for his constancy.

There are only a few posters here I'd quite like to have a beer and bite to eat with one day, and Rajk999 is one of them.

I've always thought his theology - though I don't subscribe to it - is clear and tenaciously argued.

It's been fascinating, down through the years, to see the number of informal fallacies his fellow followers of Jesus, a motley lot for sure, have resorted to and brandished in their efforts to assail his cogent and brusquely delivered interpretations.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Os this the most important part?

I've always thought his theology - though I don't subscribe to it - is clear and tenaciously argued.


@sonship said
For fuzziness and shifty obscurity your answer was the most so.
There is no "fuzziness" or "shifty obscurity" in anything I have said. You sound like you are trying to hurt my feelings, sonship. It's so mean of you.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@sonship said
Os this the most important part?

I've always thought his theology - though I don't subscribe to it - is clear and tenaciously argued.
Important to whom? You?