25 Dec 11
Originally posted by FMFHe has stated that he is not trying to portray his own personal opinion, why you dont
But galveston75 said "God is the one who made these laws and for many different reasons. He did not set us up as judges when it comes to his laws. If he left this open to humans he would have stated that." So, I again ask galveston75 - not you robbie - if he believes that, ideally, homosexuality would be punished by death?
understand that, yet insist on asking it anyway, despite the fact that he has stated
that's its unimportant.
25 Dec 11
2 edits
Originally posted by LemonJellono i did not lie i stated that the mosaic law and its ordnances are no longer binding
No you didn't. Please do not lie.
You stated before that it only matters what God thinks. Well, what does God think?
answering your question, its not my fault of you do not understand what that means
and how it has a bearing upon our beliefs, in fact, all you can now is what you have
always done in your ignorance, accuse others of lying, its one thing not to understand
a concept, quite another to try to project your ignorance onto others by stating that
they are lying, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. It seems that you
are forming a pattern.
25 Dec 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell he either believes that, ideally, homosexuality would be punished by death in accordance with what he states "god thinks" or he doesn't think that that punishment is ideal. Perhaps he will answer this straight forward question about his beliefs when he returns to this thread.
He has stated that he is not trying to portray his own personal opinion, why you dont
understand that, yet insist on asking it anyway, despite the fact that he has stated
that's its unimportant.
25 Dec 11
Originally posted by FMFperhaps he will.
Well he either believes that, ideally, homosexuality would be punished by death in accordance with what he states "god thinks" or he doesn't think that that punishment is ideal. Perhaps he will answer this straight forward question about his beliefs when he returns to this thread.
25 Dec 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf I am to believe your prior implication that it is only what God thinks that matters, then it is not directly of matter that "the mosaic law and its ordinances are no longer binding" (even if I understood what exactly that means).
no i did not lie i stated that the mosaic law and its ordnances are no longer binding
answering your question, its not my fault of you do not understand what that means
and how it has a bearing upon our beliefs, in fact, all you can now is what you have
always done in your ignorance, accuse others of lying, its one thing not to understand
a c ...[text shortened]... hen in fact nothing could be further from the truth. It seems that you
are forming a pattern.
So, again, what exactly does God think about the topic?
It's not that hard to understand why you obfuscate so much in these discussions: the implications of your view are totally absurd.
25 Dec 11
2 edits
Originally posted by LemonJelloif they are totally absurd then why are you asking about them? Indeed is this all
If I am to believe your prior implication that it is only what God thinks that matters, then it is not directly of matter that "the mosaic law and its ordinances are no longer binding" (even if I understood what exactly that means).
So, again, what exactly does God think about the topic?
It's not that hard to understand why you obfuscate so much in these discussions: the implications of your view are totally absurd.
you are capable of, conning to spirituality, accusing people of lying, of obfuscation,
of absurdity? is it really the best you can do? how does that contribute to anyone's
understanding of anything? Its simply a waste of time, your and others who have
the misfortune of having to engage you in a fruitless process.
So God believes that, ideally, homosexuality would be punished by death?
we are no longer under the mosaic law, that law has been superseded by the law of
Christ, its basis in conscience rather than mandates and ordinances, now if that is
the case, why are you asking if God thinks persons should ideally be punishable by
death, the practice of which was contained solely in the old, now nullified, no longer
binding, ordinances of the Mosaic Law, your question is absurd if that is the case,
either that, or you you have not understood what these terms mean.
25 Dec 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBecause it is a fair method of debate. If someone has a view with absurd implications, then it is fair to subject them to local consistency arguments that expose the absurdity. Of course, there is no guarantee they will be responsive to the absurdity....
if they are totally absurd then why are you asking about them? Indeed is this all
you are capable of, conning to spirituality, accusing people of lying, of obfuscation,
of absurdity? is it really the best you can do? how does that contribute to anyone's
understanding of anything? Its simply a waste of time, your and others who have
the mi ...[text shortened]... bsurd if that is the case,
either that, or you you have not understood what these terms mean.
Please just answer my question. You still have not answered it. Look, you implied before that the only thing that really matters here is what God thinks. So, what does God think? Are you telling me that you cannot even expound directly upon the only thing that really matters here?
25 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by LemonJelloPerhaps a verse shall help us out,
Because it is a fair method of debate. If someone has a view with absurd implications, then it is fair to subject them to local consistency arguments that expose the absurdity. Of course, there is no guarantee they will be responsive to the absurdity....
Please just answer my question. You still have not answered it. Look, you implied before that t ...[text shortened]... u telling me that you cannot even expound directly upon the only thing that really matters here?
(2 Peter 3:9) . . .Jehovah is not slow respecting his promise, as some people
consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire any to
be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.
It seems in view of this verse that God exercises a patience towards humanity, so
that, in time they may attain to repentance, thus while there are many acts of
morality which are contrary to the scriptures, it is hoped that persons will leave off
from these practices of which homosexuality, fornication, theft , greediness are only
some. So while these things are allowed to exist at present, the promise is, as the
verse states is that ultimately God will remove a world of unrighteousness and
immorality
Now in view of your question, it is clear that the ideal situation is not death or
destruction, but repentance, a reconciliation, however, it must be noted that God will
not tolerate immorality, indefinitely.
25 Dec 11
It's hilarious, another JW car crash of a thread. The formula goes like this:
- JW person posts something provocative and ambiguous from JW lore (WT)
- Others either disagree outright, challenge or ask for further clarification on the ambiguity, which is not forthcoming
- JWs close ranks and remain dug-in, obfuscating and completely agreeing with everything the other one says.
25 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterYou forgot the part (in your obfuscating section) where they keep telling you that they have already answered the question, and tell you that you're lacking something (reading comprehension, intellegence, etc...) They insult while assuming the moral high ground.
It's hilarious, another JW car crash of a thread. The formula goes like this:
- JW person posts something provocative and ambiguous from JW lore (WT)
- Others either disagree outright, challenge or ask for further clarification on the ambiguity, which is not forthcoming
- JWs close ranks and remain dug-in, obfuscating and completely agreeing with everything the other one says.
25 Dec 11
Originally posted by usmc7257I am sure you will agree that these are very good tactics for use in the
You forgot the part (in your obfuscating section) where they keep telling you that they have already answered the question, and tell you that you're lacking something (reading comprehension, intellegence, etc...) They insult while assuming the moral high ground.
spiritual war against their perceived enemies.
25 Dec 11
Originally posted by divegeesterPretty predictable about the disagreement part huh? We're used to it.
It's hilarious, another JW car crash of a thread. The formula goes like this:
- JW person posts something provocative and ambiguous from JW lore (WT)
- Others either disagree outright, challenge or ask for further clarification on the ambiguity, which is not forthcoming
- JWs close ranks and remain dug-in, obfuscating and completely agreeing with everything the other one says.