transfusions

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
That is simply untrue as I always had a belief in God, i had no idea what the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses were until i examined them and I have at least made a diligent search and came to a rational decision concerning my faith which rather refutes the ludicrous assertion that its lucky or coincidental. Did you really think this thing through? ...[text shortened]... came into contact with it, I questioned it. There was nothing lucky nor coincidental about it.

That is simply untrue as I always had a belief in God,

untrue??? i actually stated what youve just said, that you had already decided you believed in something, then set about finding what that was.

I have at least made a diligent search and came to a rational decision concerning my faith

is god so unclear we need to search for him through a pile of false gods. a kinda 'wheres wally' of religion.

interesting use of the word 'rational'.

which rather refutes the ludicrous assertion that its lucky or coincidental

its not luck that you found the jehovahs witnesses. its lucky that you just so happen to agree with every single thing they say. doesnt that strike you as a bit odd, is more like you decided to agree with them 100% as it would be to big a coincidence that you just so happen to naturally agree with them 100%............typical cult member behavior.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am on my phone great barron and I hate texting ill tell you when I get home from work but I searched all kinds of religions and read all kinds of religious books. Listened to preachers hindhus muslims seihks hari krishnis catholics protestants mormons bahai and the one that appealed to me was Jehovahs Witnesses.

This autobiographical information throws interesting light upon a couple of catchphrases you like to toss at people incessantly. You made a personal choice regarding which religion to believe in and now you reckon it is the one and only true one ~ so you have effectively self-sanctified your opinion ~ and yet by saying another person's opinions and choices are "self-sanctified" is so often the way you try to dismiss them.

Similarly, you often try to dismiss the beliefs of others with a catchphrase about them selecting what they want from the "spiritual buffet" and yet that is exactly what you have now admitted you did: you had a look at the "spiritual buffet" ~ you even listed the 'dishes' on offer ~ before choosing the one you liked.

You've used both these catchphrases literally dozens and dozens of times over the years in order to avoid addressing what people say and try to derail discussions by making them personal, and now here you are demonstrating that both of these dismissive catchphrases fit you down to a tee.

Originally posted by FMF
This autobiographical information throws interesting light upon a couple of catchphrases you like to toss at people incessantly. You made a personal choice regarding which religion to believe in and now you reckon it is the one and only true one ~ so you have effectively self-sanctified your opinion ~ and yet by saying another person's opinions and choices are " ...[text shortened]... now here you are demonstrating that both of these dismissive catchphrases fit you down to a tee.

When you have "something of interest" to say, robbie carrobie will respond to you.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am on my phone great barron and I hate texting ill tell you when I get home from work but I searched all kinds of religions and read all kinds of religious books. Listened to preachers hindhus muslims seihks hari krishnis catholics protestants mormons bahai and the one that appealed to me was Jehovahs Witnesses.

The Protestants appealed to me, for then I could even protest the Protestants.

Originally posted by FMF
This autobiographical information throws interesting light upon a couple of catchphrases you like to toss at people incessantly. You made a personal choice regarding which religion to believe in and now you reckon it is the one and only true one ~ so you have effectively self-sanctified your opinion ~ and yet by saying another person's opinions and choices are " ...[text shortened]... now here you are demonstrating that both of these dismissive catchphrases fit you down to a tee.

you are THE spiritual buffet king eff-him, gorging yourself on a self made concoction of spiritual haberdashery and secular liberalism. You profess belief in a God but it has no name, no form, ill defined and vague, we cannot ask it any questions, as for guidance, it provides naught but a blackened light sucking all and sundry into its gelid tentacles to be consumed by cynicism and nitpicking.

I have made a diligent study of religious belief and for this you attempt to condemn me, hard to understand and even harder to respect. Where possible if i disagree with a religious belief i try to cite the reasons why, usually with reference and illustration which is something entirely different from your grotesque and monstrous portrayal.

You appear to me to be like a tabloid journalist who searches garbage cans for some incriminating vestige with which to concoct a libelous story, entirely transparent and rather cheap, if I am honest. 'Tis a great pity to see you reduced to this eff-him you were once a great and worthy foe!

Originally posted by RJHinds
The Protestants appealed to me, for then I could even protest the Protestants.

you were not brought up a protestant and made an informed decision? best be careful, we live in a cynical world.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
[b]That is simply untrue as I always had a belief in God,

untrue??? i actually stated what youve just said, that you had already decided you believed in something, then set about finding what that was.

I have at least made a diligent search and came to a rational decision concerning my faith

is god so unclear we need to search for ...[text shortened]... at you just so happen to naturally agree with them 100%............typical cult member behavior.[/b]

Are you so unreasonable to condemn someone for having made an informed decision concerning his religious belief, wow, hard to respect that, all things considered. I never knew study and knowledge were such dirty words.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you were not brought up a protestant and made an informed decision? best be careful, we live in a cynical world.

The Triune God that had love for one another was also important other than my being able to protest. I believed this God could also love me while i am protesting whatever I want to protest, like JWs not giving blood.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The Triune God that had love for one another was also important other than my being able to protest. I believed this God could also love me while i am protesting whatever I want to protest, like JWs not giving blood.

well thats hardly rational, nor very informed i hasten to add. It appears more like an emotive decision. A Christian is advised in scripture to live a quiet and modest life.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
well thats hardly rational, nor very informed i hasten to add. It appears more like an emotive decision. A Christian is advised in scripture to live a quiet and modest life.

If so, then perhaps Christ and the apostles should have taken that advice and they wouldn't have been crucified or martyred.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

you are THE spiritual buffet king eff-him, gorging yourself on a self made concoction of spiritual haberdashery and secular liberalism. You profess belief in a God but it has no name, no form, ill defined and vague, we cannot ask it any questions, as for guidance, it provides naught but a blackened light sucking all and sundry into its gelid tentacles to be consumed by cynicism and nitpicking.

Well, yes, I'm not a religionist, like you are, if that's what you're trying to say.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have not been faced with anything, your insinuations are ludicrous, in fact there is no issue for me

I don't take blood, i retain the right of self determination.

You have provided nothing but egotism and some rather transparent cheap shots.

When you do post something interesting i may respond and then again i may simply dismiss it. You ...[text shortened]... an continue to promote belief in your own propaganda, it may have meaning to someone, somewhere.

No issue for you, uh-huh, it certainly looks that way Robbie... the way in which you have relentlessly defended your overly flawed stance on this topic is certainly not an inclination of an issue with you at ALL.

Self-determination, yes, basically you are saying you have your own right to have your beliefs, that's fine.
But just so you know, we ALL have this right... repeatedly saying you have self-determination make your rights no more special than anyone else's, and so it is not necessary to keep spouting this out.
Also, repeating things in debates like this - even copy and pasting whole sentences into other posts (which you have clearly done) - is a sign of disrespect and immaturity.

Egotism is a word that best describes your very own motives, not just on this particular thread, but across the entire forum. Everyone is granted an opinion, yes, but when you can't even commit to an intellectual debate but instead insult your opposition by throwing 'buzz' words at them (cheap, transparent, ludicrous, diatribe etc.) then you basically allow yourself to look like a deflated politician fighting an already lost battle.

Ultimately, I would rather that you didn't respond, but seeing as though I /know/ you are going to, I'm just gonna finish with this, an excerpt from Carl Sagan's book Broca's Brain (New York: Ballantine Books, 1979, pp. 332-333):

--------

"Doctrines that make no predictions are less compelling than those which make correct predictions; they are in turn more successful than doctrines that make false predictions.

But not always. One prominent American religion confidently predicted that the world would end in 1914. Well, 1914 has come and gone, and -- while the events of that year were certainly of some importance -- the world does not, at least so far as I can see, seem to have ended. There are at least three responses that an organized religion can make in the face of such a failed and fundamental prophecy. They could have said, "Oh, did we say '1914'? So sorry, we meant '2014.' A slight error in calculation. Hope you weren't inconvenienced in any way." But they did not. They could have said, "Well, the world would have ended, except we prayed very hard and interceded with God so He spared the Earth." But they did not. Instead, they did something much more ingenious.

They announced that the world had in fact ended in 1914, and if the rest of us hadn't noticed, that was our lookout. It is astonishing in the face of such transparent evasions that this religion has any adherents at all. But religions are tough. Either they make no contentions which are subject to disproof or they quickly redesign doctrine after disproof. The fact that religions can be so shamelessly dishonest, so contemptuous of the intelligence of their adherents, and still flourish does not speak very well for the tough-mindedness of the believers. But it does indicate, if a demonstration were needed, that near the core of the religious experience is something remarkably resistant to rational inquiry."

-------

Maybe the above would be more relevant in the "false prophecies" thread, but it is just as useful here in underlining your many flaws, both in your methodology and the manner in which you have treated other posters.

Should you ever come to terms with rationality, I will praise you, but until then I will refrain from posting here any further, as I grow tired of being subjected to your bloodless claims and downright ignorance.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have made a diligent study of religious belief and for this you attempt to condemn me, hard to understand and even harder to respect. Where possible if i disagree with a religious belief i try to cite the reasons why, usually with reference and illustration which is something entirely different from your grotesque and monstrous portrayal.

"Grotesque and monstrous portrayal"? They are just observations: (a) your choice of religion is, for all intents and purposes, a "self-sanctified" opinion that your belief is correct and that those of others are not ~ this is exactly how you use the term "self-sanctified opinion" to refer their beliefs. Furthermore, you have now admitted that you sampled the "spiritual buffet" and selected the religion you liked the most ~ and you use the term "spiritual buffet" to refer to the beliefs of others where they differ from yours. They are just two observations about the terminology you use on this forum, that's all. If you don't ever use those terms, just say so.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You appear to me to be like a tabloid journalist who searches garbage cans for some incriminating vestige with which to concoct a libelous story, entirely transparent and rather cheap, if I am honest. 'Tis a great pity to see you reduced to this eff-him you were once a great and worthy foe!

If what you mean by this is that I often confront religionists with evidence of their contradictions and inconsistencies ~ as well as issues of coherence ~ then I agree, although you seem to be trying to make a rather emotional 'point' rather than actually addressing what I have put to you by way of my two observations.

Originally posted by FMF
"Grotesque and monstrous portrayal"? They are just observations: (a) your choice of religion is, for all intents and purposes, a "self-sanctified" opinion that your belief is correct and that those of others are not ~ this is exactly how you use the term "self-sanctified opinion" to refer their beliefs. Furthermore, you have now admitted that you sampled the "sp ...[text shortened]... e terminology you use on this forum, that's all. If you don't ever use those terms, just say so.

On the contrary eff-him, a spiritual buffet king is someone who picks and chooses those elements which appeal on no other basis than personal preference, this is something entirely different from making a study of religious doctrine and trying to ascertain its veracity according to its texts. I have admitted nothing of the sort other than making an informed decision and for this I make no concessions. Its utterly shameful that you have attempted to misconstrue the process of study, ascertaining knowledge and making an informed decision.