13 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't believe you. This -
On the contrary I was simply looking for an explanation for a phenomena that appears alien to me.
None of the Christians able to offer an explanation? Suffice to say that this shameful historical episode is reflective of the emptiness of the teachings that one finds in nominal Christianity. Insipid and lukewarm its unable to refresh the adherent and motivate them to acts of mercy and compassion. Its as Christ stated, 'Look your house is abandoned to you'.
Is not you looking 'for an explanation', it's baiting and trolling.
13 Apr 15
Originally posted by FMFI am not trying to be anything other than logical and reasonable. You have stated that blood transfusions are morally reprehensible because they result in death, you have also stated that not taking blood transfusions are morally reprehensible because they also result in death. Nothing you have said manes any sense in this regard.
You are trying too hard to be funny, robbie. Nothing even remotely like this has been said by anyone on this thread.
13 Apr 15
Originally posted by Proper KnobThis is merely a call for confession. Rather than being an attempt to bait it was a call for a cleansing of mind and spirit. Yes nominal Christianity is empty and devoid, we admit it. Let the healing begin.
I don't believe you. This -
None of the Christians able to offer an explanation? Suffice to say that this shameful historical episode is reflective of the emptiness of the teachings that one finds in nominal Christianity. Insipid and lukewarm its unable to refresh the adherent and motivate them to acts of mercy and compassion. Its as Christ sta ...[text shortened]... bandoned to you'.
Is not you looking 'for an explanation', it's baiting and trolling.
13 Apr 15
Originally posted by FMFMore interesting debate on this here on Thread 159598.
Parents deliberately letting their children die in order not to displease their God figure is certainly morally reprehensible in my book. As for the rest of the debate about blood transfusions it was covered not so long ago here Thread 160899.
13 Apr 15
Originally posted by FMFIt is clear you have no idea why we refuse blood transfusions and what is more you don't care either. You have no answer for those person who have died as a direct result of being given a blood transfusion in an attempt even to save their life, who knows what might have transpired if they were given alternative treatment. Your moral stance is therefore unjustified and blatantly biased and based on ignorance.
Refuse a blood transfusion by all means, end your life in any way you want, but allowing a child to die for want of one seems to me to be clearly morally reprehensible. If your personal suicidal decision brings suffering to those who survive you, then I would consider it morally unsound. If you refused to save another's life with a donation of blood then I would ...[text shortened]... your fellow man, or any mumbo jumbo justification you might attempt for letting that person die.
13 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieConfession for what exactly, what does anyone who posts on this board have to do with the lynchings in your OP? Answer........nothing.
This is merely a call for confession. Rather than being an attempt to bait it was a call for a cleansing of mind and spirit. Yes nominal Christianity is empty and devoid, we admit it. Let the healing begin.
This is you trolling and baiting. Any attempt by you to claim otherwise is a lie.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI do understand. We have discussed it many times. You have explained it very clearly. And I care enough about the topic to have discussed it in great detail with you and others on many occasions.
It is clear you have no idea why we refuse blood transfusions and what is more you don't care either.
13 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf anyone was given a blood transfusion so as to deliberately kill them or if there was criminal negligence and innocents died, then of course it would be morally reprehensible.
You have no answer for those person who have died as a direct result of being given a blood transfusion in an attempt even to save their life, who knows what might have transpired if they were given alternative treatment.
13 Apr 15
Originally posted by FMFOh dear and hear you are talking of mumbo jumbo. Does that sound like a man who knows why another has taken a stance on an issue. I don't think it does.
I do understand. We have discussed it many times. You have explained it very clearly. And I care enough about the topic to have discussed it in great detail with you and others on many occasions.