Sarah Palin and Holy War in Iraq?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]"Still you refuse to answer my question with just 2-3 charactors (yes /no) even after I have had the decency to answer yours."

You're really pathetic. If it isn't deceit after deceit, it's stupid assertion after stupid assertion.

1) Once again, the questions were rhetorical.

2) Once again, you didn't answer either question.

3) Your beh ...[text shortened]... swer any questions from you. You have shown yourself to be as dishonest as they come.[/b]

But at least I TRIED to answer the question. You didn't.

This is what it was like at the very beginning. Even before we "fell out" you refused to answer any challenging questions.

I noticed a pattern as well . It was the challenging questions that you pulled away from. If I asked you an easy question there was no problem.

For example--
A question like " Do you believe in the active Father God that Jesus preachd?" creates obviously difficulties for you. If you answer "yes" then there's a whole line of argument that follows on regarding the Holy Spirit and salvation that creates big flies in your ointment.

However, answer "no" and you are in even deeper doo-doo because you would be denying a fundamental teaching of Jesus that was at the core of his commandments.

So , the only thing you can do is to find a way of not answering yes/no. Which is of course what you are doing. You are rationalising yourself into a corner. The real reason I suspect that you won't answer is that you can see ahead the problems that engaging in a proper debate will create for you. I can see it's a problem and that's why I asked the question.

You did this with Ephin , Jaywill, josephw as far as I can see. All "liars" I presume?? Infact I have never seen you answer a challenging question from anyone or admit that you struggle with anything. That's interesting in my book.

So , you will no doubt find some way of justifying your intellectual dishonesty to yourself by calling me a liar again , but I have held up a mirror to you anyway in the hope you can see what is happening.

What's ironic is that in a way every time you refuse to answer my question it just confirms my suspicions that your position is just too flimsy to be explored properly. Whilst I applaud your moral stance on many things your interpretation of Jesus does not hold logically hold together.

So-----" Do you believe in the active Father God that Jesus preached?"

(BTW- I also strongly suspect the answer to this question is "no" because you seem to have given hints of this at times. If so , then it's a huge problem because it's at the heart of everything Jesus did and said. If you deny this then why should anyone listen to you regarding Jesus's teachings?)

Originally posted by Rajk999
The flood killed everybody except Noah and his family. What about the word 'everybody' implies that toddlers are excluded?

Nothing. But what makes you assume that there were any toddlers alive at the moment the flood happened? 🙂 Couldn't there have been only people over the age of accountability when the flood occurred?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Do you think any retarded people drowned in the flood, or any pregnant mothers?

No. And no.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
No. And no.

How naive can you be? You really think that it is likely that there was a time during human history when there were no toddlers, pregnant mothers or retarded people?

On average, how many times out of every 1,000 years would you say this condition is likely to arise, and how long on average do you suppose it lasts?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
How naive can you be? You really think that it is likely that there was a time during human history when there were no toddlers, pregnant mothers or retarded people?

On average, how many times out of every 1,000 years would you say this condition is likely to arise, and how long on average do you suppose it lasts?

Don't you see? Before the flood there was no death and stuff. Everything was cool before the flood - the laws of nature didn't apply before the flood.

Originally posted by knightmeister
But at least I TRIED to answer the question. You didn't.

This is what it was like at the very beginning. Even before we "fell out" you refused to answer any challenging questions.

I noticed a pattern as well . It was the challenging questions that you pulled away from. If I asked you an easy question there was no problem.

For example--
A q this then why should anyone listen to you regarding Jesus's teachings?)

Like I said, you're really pathetic. As I've shown earlier in this thread a few times, if it isn't deceit after deceit, it's stupid assertion after stupid assertion. Evidently it's pointless to continue doing so.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
How naive can you be? You really think that it is likely that there was a time during human history when there were no toddlers, pregnant mothers or retarded people?

On average, how many times out of every 1,000 years would you say this condition is likely to arise, and how long on average do you suppose it lasts?

"With God, all things are possible." In His infinite wisdom, he could have seen to it that there were no children born for "X" number of years before the flood was put in motion. He could have healed and/ or received the souls of the afflicted before the flood. Don't you see, Sir? God can do anything.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
"With God, all things are possible." God can do anything.

Can he microwave a burrito so hot that he can't eat it?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Can he microwave a burrito so hot that he can't eat it?

I'm no theologian, but I would say yes

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
I'm no theologian, but I would say yes

Hilarious.

I'm afraid we've reached that critical yet inevitable point in our discussion at which I must either desist or be mistaken for the fool.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
No. And no.

That's awfully selective. Considering that women and children aren't much more than property in the best of circumstances in ancient times, why would they somehow be excluded from death by flood? Simply because your modern sensibilities refuse to accept that - along with a litany of other events and laws in the Bible that you also refuse to accept? That you also ignore because to follow those laws and teachings would be, to modern humans, barbaric and illegal?

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
"With God, all things are possible." In His infinite wisdom, he could have seen to it that there were no children born for "X" number of years before the flood was put in motion. He could have healed and/ or received the souls of the afflicted before the flood. Don't you see, Sir? God can do anything.

I'm confused. What was the flood for? Was it some sort of test or punishment for Noah and his family and pets? Showing off?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Hilarious.

I'm afraid we've reached that critical yet inevitable point in our discussion at which I must either desist or be mistaken for the fool.

Okay. Glad I could help.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Like I said, you're really pathetic. As I've shown earlier in this thread a few times, if it isn't deceit after deceit, it's stupid assertion after stupid assertion. Evidently it's pointless to continue doing so.

Yes ,I know KM is stupid and deceitful ..blah blah..but all the time the core issues are not explored. I am the one who wants to go forward into exploring the discussion ,YOU are the one who is stalling.

Can you not come up with some other way of not answering the question? It would at least make it more interesting.

I guess you are not going to either confirm or deny my suspicions then ? Good plan , at some later date you can then claim I have "misrepresented" you , yes?

As I suspected , this question puts you in all sorts of difficulties so I fully understand why you won't answer. What I don't understand is how you can hold your head up high and think you have really got your hands dirty by exploring the issues in full. You seem to just tinker at the edges really. What the hell , one last try......

Do you believe in the active Father God that Jesus taught?

Originally posted by Badwater
That's awfully selective. Considering that women and children aren't much more than property in the best of circumstances in ancient times, why would they somehow be excluded from death by flood? Simply because your modern sensibilities refuse to accept that - along with a litany of other events and laws in the Bible that you also refuse to accept? That you ...[text shortened]... e because to follow those laws and teachings would be, to modern humans, barbaric and illegal?

I never said they were excluded from death by flood. I said some people (pregnant women and children) COULD have escaped death simply by not being on earth at the time of the flood. My suggestion was that God, knowing the exact time and date of the flood, might have made certain that there were no babies born in the 12 or so years leading up to the tragic date, hence there were no pregnant women for that period of time either. This keeps God out of the "killing of 'innocents'" business that some people seem to love to throw out there.