30 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRobbie, stop playing the fool.
Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, all have committed atrocities.
Religions do not commit atrocities, evil men commit atrocities. What religion they claim doesn't enter into it.
But any excuse to bad-mouth any religion except your own, eh?
30 Apr 15
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsSo can you tell us how many children we have killed in this way so as to make a comparison with our atrocities and those of Methodists, Presbyterian and Baptists? We have already seen how Methodists, Presbyterian and Baptists have cruelly killed 4.000 persons after church services on Sundays. The Methodist preacher U.S. Army Colonel John Chivington was directly responsible for the massacre of innocent children and women. Here is a description of his handiwork.
I don't know if any Jehovah's Witnesses were involved in those type of atrocities or not, but Jehovah's Witnesses are known for allowing their children to die by refusing blood transfusions for them which i think is an atrocity.
I saw the bodies of those lying there cut all to pieces, worse mutilated than any I ever saw before; the women cut all to pieces ... With knives; scalped; their brains knocked out; children two or three months old; all ages lying there, from sucking infants up to warriors ... By whom were they mutilated? By the United States troops ...
—- John S. Smith, Congressional Testimony of Mr. John S. Smith, 1865
Can you tell us in what way we have perpetrated a similar atrocity?
Or what about Solomon Stoddard pastor of the Congregationalist Church in Northampton who proposed to use dogs "to hunt Indians as they do Bears", the argument being that dogs would catch many an Indian who would be too light of foot for the townsmen. This was not considered inhuman, for the Indians, in Stoddard's view, "act like wolves and are to be dealt with as wolves." Three years later. Massachusetts passed an act for the raising of dogs to better secure the frontier borders.
In what way have we hunted others with dogs?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat kind and degree of responsibility are you claiming that Christians like Suzianne, RJHinds and divegeester have to take for the murder of 4,000 people by lynching 100 or so years ago in the USA?
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with Reductio ad Hitlerum. Too bad for you. Neeeeeext!
Originally posted by FMFI have not claimed any degree of responsibility yet, if you can point out where I have then please do so now. If you cannot then why are you suggesting that I am?
What kind and degree of responsibility are you claiming that Christians like Suzianne, RJHinds and divegeester have to take for the murder of 4,000 people by lynching 100 or so years ago in the USA?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo, if you are drawing no moral parallel or equivalence between people who call themselves Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists nowadays and those people who committed murders 100 years ago in the USA and who called themselves Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, then what is the point you are trying to make?
I have not claimed any degree of responsibility yet, if you can point out where I have then please do so now. If you cannot then why are you suggesting that I am?
Originally posted by FMFI am replying to a comment that Jehovahs Witnesses have committed similar atrocities made by R. J. Hinds. I am challenging that statement and asking in what way have we committed similar atrocities. Again I have not said that I am drawing no moral parallel, what I have actually said is that I have drawn no moral parallel, YET and I am simply prepared to leave the matter open at present, but don't let that stop you assuming anything in your obligatory way.
So, if you are drawing [b]no moral parallel or equivalence between people who call themselves Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists nowadays and those people who committed murders 100 years ago in the USA and who called themselves Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, then what is the point you are trying to make?[/b]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat moral parallel could you possibly draw? Haven't you already tried this Christian-bashing riff across two or three threads in the last week or so and ended up retracting your attempts to draw moral equivalence between murderers in the USA a century ago and Christian posters on this message board in 2015?
Again I have not said that I am drawing no moral parallel, what I have actually said is that I have drawn no moral parallel, YET and I am simply prepared to leave the matter open at present, but don't let that stop you assuming anything in your obligatory way.
30 Apr 15
Originally posted by FMFIf I find a moral parallel you'll be the first to know. Your petty whinging holds no immediate interest for me.
What moral parallel could you possibly draw? Haven't you already tried this Christian-bashing riff across two or three threads in the last week or so and ended up retracting your attempts to draw moral equivalence between murderers in the USA a century ago and Christian posters on this message board in 2015?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThree days ago, after being pressed on your claim that divegeester ~ someone you describe as a "nominal Christian", as you do with several other Christians here ~ had "the same moral disposition as lynch mob murderers", you finally said "I retracted all my statement with regard to his moral equivalence". Indeed you said you retracted it "without pretence or reservation". It's all there in your posting history. Now all of a sudden your latest stance is... "I have not said that I am drawing no moral parallel". Are you now un-retracting the retraction?
If I find a moral parallel you'll be the first to know. Your petty whinging holds no immediate interest for me.
30 Apr 15
5 edits
Originally posted by FMFI am replying specifically to a statement that was made by R.J.Hinds. It has nothing to do with your silly assumptions and petty whining about this thread or that thread. It was made in response to a comment on the forum, now if you don't like that or are having trouble accepting the fact then perhaps this is not the thread for you.
Three days ago, after being pressed on your claim that divegeester ~ someone you describe as a "nominal Christian", as you do with several other Christians here ~ had "the same moral disposition as lynch mob murderers", you finally said "I retracted all my statement with regard to his moral equivalence". Indeed you said you retracted it "without pretence or rese ...[text shortened]... "I have not said that I am drawing no moral parallel". Are you now un-retracting the retraction?