New Christians Have A Voice

[Mr Sparkle]

No, you judged the sin

by extension, the sinner.
if we used race as an example, I'd call someone a racist if he said
" no, no, I don't dislike black people, I dislike the act of having black people skin"

 

[Gilpesh]

Actually, some scholars believe that story is nothing more than a test of faith. God wanted to see if Abraham believed enough to go through with it. When God saw he did, he let Abraham off the hook. Something like that....

That would be what we call a literalist view of the story of Abraham.

Wrong! IMO of course.

Congratulations on showing just how up for intelligent discussion you are. You present no other viewpoint, declare my view (and others) completely false, and then try and cover yourself and your ass with the wonderful, "In my opinion".

 

[rodhulk]

No, you judged the sin, and that's what I'm referring to. But I don't see how you're as qualified as God to pass along that judgment, or why you think its your civil duty to point out every sin and tell us all that, if we commit them, we're violating your doctrine of faith. So essentially, you're judging the sinner by association, regardless of whether you mention anyone by name.

According to scripture, I'm to inform anybody/everybody of sin. Sins are made clear in the Bible and so when somebody makes a sin clear/visible to people, it's not judgement, it's a fact. If, however, the person falls under a certain thing the Bible also talks about, then it might not actually end up being a sin (it is, but the person isn't guilty of it). That's why I keep saying, the judgement is God's.

 

[rodhulk]

That would be what we call a literalist view of the story of Abraham.



Congratulations on showing just how up for intelligent discussion you are. You present no other viewpoint, declare my view (and others) completely false, and then try and cover yourself and your ass with the wonderful, "In my opinion".

Actually, I agreed with Squeek on another page so yes, I did explain my thought on the subject in my agreement with Squeeknes.

 

[rodhulk]

so having Jesus on your side gives you the right to be an overbearing, hypocrit . . . why did I not see the light in the past; I'm signing up for some of this action!

Or am I being a good preacher of the good book?

 

[rodhulk]

actually, you being on the side of Jesus is part of your faith.
you have to " be with him" not the other way around.

It's both.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

It's both.

so YOU say.
you're incorrect however.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Or am I being a good preacher of the good book?

pride is a sin.

 

[Gilpesh]

Actually, I agreed with Squeek on another page so yes, I did explain my thought on the subject in my agreement with Squeeknes.

No. You just took someone else's opinion and then bashed me because mine didn't match.

Also if you knew anything of discussion, you'd know opinions can't be right or wrong. And you again used flamboyance in your posts to try and make me appear stupid and of course what goes along with that wrong. Which is another logical fallacy.

 

[Purple Prancer]

Rodhulk reminds me of a kid that sat next to me in a hospital and started preaching to me and said that I'm likely going to hell for not taking him and the Lord seriously

 

[DV8]

Or am I being a good preacher of the good book?

I don't know but lucky for you being delusional isn't a mortal sin . . .

 

[Kelly]

No. You just took someone else's opinion and then bashed me because mine didn't match.

Also if you knew anything of discussion, you'd know opinions can't be right or wrong. And you again used flamboyance in your posts to try and make me appear stupid and of course what goes along with that wrong. Which is another logical fallacy.

Really, Opinions can't be right or wrong?



And people try and make people look stupid on the hype?


I'm learning something new every day....

 

[Gilpesh]

Really, Opinions can't be right or wrong?



And people try and make people look stupid on the hype?


I'm learning something new every day....

I'm just saying. There's no attempt at intelligent discussion on his part.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I'm just saying. There's no attempt at intelligent discussion on his part.

...Well most people here read comics and not much else, so...

 

[JStorm]

I wear my wilhelms on my sleeve.

 

[Kelly]

I can't take this anymore.

A thread that was created to promote the 'possibility' of compassion and knowledge, for all sides, has turned into "you're wrong; I'm right; gays are bad; you're going to hell" slug fest.


I refuse to promote useless banter on the part of my kinsmen.

In short, if we can't play nice, fair, and with understanding and love, why do we call ourselves Christians?

For shame.







Mods, please close this thread.

I hear ya........but J Storm started the thread....if he wants it closed.....I'll comply.

 

[Purple Prancer]

banana

 

[JStorm]

I am JStorm.

 

[Purple Prancer]

I wanted the last post


hee hee hee hee hee hee

 

[Mr Sparkle]

...

 

[Purple Prancer]

HOLY ZOMBIE JESUS!

 

[JStorm]

...

My thoughts, exactly. . .considering the revolutionary ideas of the interviewee.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

My thoughts, exactly. . .considering the revolutionary ideas of the interviewee.

well, then just bring the thread back ot it's roots then.
it's not like you can't.

 

[JStorm]

Sure.

But after I leave, I would bet someone would bring in the hate.

:babyjesuscries:

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Sure.

But after I leave, I would bet someone would bring in the hate.

:babyjesuscries:

Innevitable, part of life and stuff.
the only critique I have regarding the original post is that though I might like or agree with the stance adopted by the author, how does one reconcile that with the doctrines of the religion itself, and that would go for all religions?