10 Jan 16
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeIt's not just atheists; Hinds told me (a Christian) that I deserve to burn in hell, because I don't accept the teaching of eternal burning in hell.
A fair comment sir.
My point however is that Hinds often takes the high moral ground in these forums, and uses his Christian standing to do so. (Especially when making comments to non-believers; for example, that atheists will burn for all eternity in hell). Indeed, he automatically assumes he is a more moral and 'godly' person, simply because he ...[text shortened]... you; due to your evangelical preoccupation.
What say you sir? (*Bad luck today in the cup)
But the JWs are just as bad; robbie carrobie keeps telling me I'm a "son of satan" because I disagree with him on the Internet. Galveston75 said I was worse than satan..or as bad as satan, can't remember which, maybe both.
Originally posted by divegeesterSo saying that you are 'a son of Satan' is ' just as bad', being the moral equivalence of stating that millions of person should be nuked? Care to explain the equivalence?
It's not just atheists; Hinds told me (a Christian) that I deserve to burn in hell, because I don't accept the teaching of eternal burning in hell.
But the JWs are just as bad; robbie carrobie keeps telling me I'm a "son of satan" because I disagree with him on the Internet. Galveston75 said I was worse than satan..or as bad as satan, can't remember which, maybe both.
I don't think that anyone who was outed as clearly misogynistic when he was held to account for terming the female members of this site as 'bitches', should be thinking of looking at anyone but himself. Don't you?
10 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAre you asking me to rank in descending order or grotesqueness, the comments that you, Galveston and RJhinds have made? I find it amusing that you chose to publicly post that you think calling me son of a demon is not as bad as something Hinds has said. Pure forum gold 😵
So saying that you are 'a son of Satan' is ' just as bad', being the moral equivalence of stating that millions of person should be nuked? Care to explain the equivalence?
Originally posted by divegeesterYou have not explained the moral equivalence nor can you because its ludicrous. I don't think someone with your public record in addressing women should be let loose on a thread with the title, 'A womans place'. Still amused?
Are you asking me to rank in descending order or grotesqueness, the comments that you, Galveston and RJhinds have made? I find it amusing that you chose to publicly post that you think calling me son of a demon is not as bad as something Hinds has said. Pure forum gold 😵
10 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou are just deflecting from thepersinal abuse you dish out here. Ghost is rightly calling hinds out for the vile things he says and I'm saying you and Galveston75 are just as vile. Accusing another Christian of being the progeny of a demon is probably the worst thing one Christian can say to another - and for what - because I disagree with you on the Internet.what you say is not equivalent to what hinds said to me, it's worse.
You have not explained the moral equivalence nor can you because its ludicrous. I don't think someone with your public record in addressing women should be let loose on a thread with the title, 'A womans place'. Still amused?
Originally posted by divegeesterYou have no moral sway here and your comparisons with me terming you a son of Satan and the statements that Hinds have made are ludicrous. Your misogynistic dealings are well documented. Just take the advice and instead of looking at what others do, have a good look at yourself first.
You are just deflecting from thepersinal abuse you dish out here. Ghost is rightly calling hinds out for the vile things he says and I'm saying you and Galveston75 are just as vile. Accusing another Christian of being the progeny of a demon is probably the worst thing one Christian can say to another - and for what - because I disagree with you on the Internet.what you say is not equivalent to what hinds said to me, it's worse.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe irony is too much. If only you could follow your own advice.
You have no moral sway here and your comparisons with me terming you a son of Satan and the statements that Hinds have made are ludicrous. Your misogynistic dealings are well documented. Just take the advice and instead of looking at what others do, have a good look at yourself first.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't think someone with your public record in defending kiddie fiddlers should be let loose on a thread with the title, 'A womans place'. Still smug ?
You have not explained the moral equivalence nor can you because its ludicrous. I don't think someone with your public record in addressing women should be let loose on a thread with the title, 'A womans place'. Still amused?
Originally posted by Captain StrangeI don't have a record of defending any kiddy fiddlers despite your quite serious and slanderous accusations. I suggest that if you continue in the same vein I will personally report you to the site administration and possibly the law for quite frankly people like you who are intent on spoiling the reputation of others on the basis of nothing more than your prejudice and hatred don't belong in civilised society never mind the internet. Do I make myself clear? good.
I don't think someone with your public record in defending kiddie fiddlers should be let loose on a thread with the title, 'A womans place'. Still smug ?
10 Jan 16
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipDidn't watch the op vid,eh?
[b] It seems rjhinds and sonship are in support of the youtube in the op.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I never watched the op. I spoke to the verses from Paul's epistles with no need to see any sensational "guilt-by-association video."
Sad...just sad.
There are just so ...[text shortened]... ---------------
Nope. Sorry. You're language from the gutter doesn't make your case stronger.
I usually don't, but after the thread title and subsequent comments, it seemed pertinent.
I don't have the time to address all your points, but I did respond (rite here), but it strikes me odd that someone who will sprout 3,4 sometimes 5 posts in a row will not take the time to watch the 3minute op video -just to have some clue of what the op was getting at.
As soon as jc or christianity is mentioned you blaze away, seemingly unaware whenever your comments are even relative to that particular thread.
But please continue. I am not saying you are all bad in anyway.
(I do understand you were addressing a different poster)
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI also think some of your JW views are extreme. You refuse to allows blood transfusions to save lives, you believe it is evil to defend liberty and freedom by serving in the military for your country, you think celebrating birthdays is a sin, you think the Watchtower society is God's voice of authority on earth, you think Jesus did not rise physically from the grave as reported in the New Testament, and there are many more extreme views that you hold. So stop being a hypocrite and then you can tell me about my extreme views and I might even pay attention. But right now you have no credibility to tell me about my extreme views. 😏
Your views are extreme, the value you place on the life of others difficult to comprehend for a professing Christian. It may be because the gospel of social justice coming in from New England did not penetrate as far as the South and this is the reason why you still harbour this idea of judicial execution, I don't know.
Originally posted by RJHindsThis highlights nothing more than more ignoranmce and prejudice,
I also think some of your JW views are extreme. You refuse to allows blood transfusions to save lives, you believe it is evil to defend liberty and freedom by serving in the military for your country, you think celebrating birthdays is a sin, you think the Watchtower society is God's voice of authority on earth, you think Jesus did not rise physically from ...[text shortened]... ven pay attention. But right now you have no credibility to tell me about my extreme views. 😏
1. we do not refuse blood transfusions because it saves peoples live. That is demonstrably false, hundreds of thousands of persons have dies as a result of blood transfusions making your statement logically incoherent. We do not take blood because its a religious principle, not because it does or does not save lives as your have ignorantly asserted.
2. We do not serve in the military because we follow the example of Jesus Christ and the principles found in the Bible. Not because we do not value liberty and freedom as you have once again ignorantly stated. Clearly serving in the military goes beyond defending liberty and freedom or how will you account for the countless atrocities committed by those serving in a military capacity. the weapons of our warfare, are not fleshly', as the apostle stated. Yours might be thermo nuclear devices, bombs and bullets, but ours is not.
3. We do not think that celebrating Birthdays is a sin as you have ignorantly stated. We are merely aware that neither Jesus nor a single apostle of Christ has a Birthday celebration recorded in scripture and those occasions which are recorded are portrayed in a very negative light.
4. The Bible states that Flesh and blood cannot inherit Gods Kingdom, it therefore follows on logically that Christ could not have ascended to heaven in a physical body.
5 The Watchtower and Bible tract society is nothing more than a legal entity used for the production and dissemination of Bible literature, your ignorant stance notwithstanding. It is not Gods voice on earth as you have erroneously asserted.
these are not extreme views they are solidly based on an understanding and practical application of Biblical principles. Its not wonder that you would find them extreme.
So we wont be taking any lessons in morality from someone like you that has no respect for the sanctity of life and has shameless views about killing other people as if they were merely chaff in the wind. Your lack of anything approaching Christian love has been exposed, I suggest that you take measures to correct the defect in yourself. I do not moralize over you, I pity you, for I sincerely do not want to ever end up like you.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI am not dissing your religion, but the bit about birthdays seems odd. You say the rational is birthdays were not mentioned in the bible but there was this one birthday everyone talks about, right?
This highlights nothing more than more ignoranmce and prejudice,
1. we do not refuse blood transfusions because it saves peoples live. That is demonstrably false, hundreds of thousands of persons have dies as a result of blood transfusions making your statement logically incoherent. We do not take blood because its a religious principle, not be ...[text shortened]... . I do not moralize over you, I pity you, for I sincerely do not want to ever end up like you.
But the Apostles not mentioning it, so what? They didn't mention brushing teeth either, did they? Does that mean you stop brushing your teeth?
It just seems a bit illogical to take a negative as something to apply to daily life.
They didn't mention TV's either, does that mean you are prohibited from watching TV?
I would think at the time of Jesus, there wasn't that much time spent with him by the Apostles so it would seem birthdays would have been pretty low on the priority list don't you think? That wouldn't make it a non issue with them I don't think, since one thing the birth day celebrates is the birth mother, they didn't mention their parents did they? Does that mean we should forget about our parents?
12 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI am Glad to hear that you believe that the Watchtower and Bible tract society is not God's voice on earth. Now if you would stop believing in their propaganda then we would be getting somewhere and maybe be able to reason together. 😏
This highlights nothing more than more ignoranmce and prejudice,
1. we do not refuse blood transfusions because it saves peoples live. That is demonstrably false, hundreds of thousands of persons have dies as a result of blood transfusions making your statement logically incoherent. We do not take blood because its a religious principle, not be ...[text shortened]... . I do not moralize over you, I pity you, for I sincerely do not want to ever end up like you.