Originally posted by FMFI am permitted to defend myself and my family, I am not permitted to take life. taking action does not necessitate violence as you have erroneously assumed and its known that violence leads to more bloodshed.
And you would not have raised a hand in violence to stop anyone from lynching black people back in the day, and you would not have raised a hand in violence to stop the lynch mob from kidnapping black people you'd given sanctuary to in order to go and lynch them, and you wouldn't have got involved in any political efforts to change the circumstances that made the lynchings possible, right?
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNo that is not what you said. You said:
no i am claiming that your standing in opposition is based on ignorance and prejudice. How hard can it be?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No one has displayed as much ignorance, prejudice or bigotry as he has. Not even R J Hinds.
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo the lives of your wife and family are, in fact, not sacrosanct to you. You would choose to see them die rather than prevent their deaths with lethal action, right?
I am permitted to defend myself and my family, I am not permitted to take life.
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by FMFthe people who perpetrated and were witnesses to lynchings were prejudiced, ignorant and bigoted and found a justification for violence. Divesgeeter has also displayed ignorance, prejudice and bigotry and can also easily find a justification for violence. you will tell me in what aspect he is any different?
What does divegeester's criticism of the JW organisation have to do with people lynching black people?
Originally posted by FMFAll life is sacrosanct, even that of those bent on violence, like you and divesgeester by way of example.
So the lives of your wife and family are, in fact, not sacrosanct to you. You would choose to see them die rather than prevent their deaths with lethal action, right?
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by divegeesteryou were telling us in what way your justification from killing people by violence is any different that their justification for their killing people by violence, were you not?
Are you saying that Joshua was as ignorant, bigoted and prejudiced as the perpetrators of the lynchings because he took lives in war? And indeed in executions most likely.
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo what's happened here is you've got bent out of shape by some criticism of the group you're a member of, and you are now lashing out by claiming that divegeester is ignorant, prejudiced, bigoted and hateful enough to hang black people from trees?
the people who perpetrated and were witnesses to lynchings were prejudiced, ignorant and bigoted and found a justification for violence. Divesgeeter has also displayed ignorance, prejudice and bigotry and can also easily find a justification for violence. you will tell me in what aspect he is any different?
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by divegeesterI don't believe not believing in hell is enough to get someone tossed into hell. I do believe anyone teaching others there is no hell gives tacit approval for not obeying God due to a lack of consequences, and can lead to behavior that gets someone tossed into hell. For a Christian to ignore anything Jesus has said because it doesn't suit them is a dangerous game to play.
Lemon Lime I'm beginning to wonder if you are a little limited, let me lay this out for you:
I do not contest that RJHinds thinks that hell is real.
I do not contest why he thinks it is real.
I do not contest that Hinds believes I (a fellow Christian) deserve to burn in hell for eternity for not believing in the doctrine of eternal hell.
I'm ...[text shortened]... I'm ask you and the other Christians if they agree with hinds or not. So do you agree with him?
But let me make this clear, you telling me what RJ claims to have said carries very little weight with me. Both you and FMF have misrepresented many of my past statements and claimed I've said things I never said. You have both proven to be a couple of lying troublemakers working only to keep your contrived conflicts alive at these threads... if you think this is your ticket into heaven because it's what God wants you to do, then you are sadly mistaken.
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNo not at, I'm deconstructing your ridiculous strawman which is nothing more than you lashing out with an elaborate ad hominem.
you were telling us in what way your justification from killing people by violence is any different that their justification for their killing people by violence, were you not?
Originally posted by FMFThere is ample evidence of his ignorance, his prejudice and bigotry, he himself has stated that he can easily find a justification for violence. You have failed to sate despite being asked both to provide evidence that he would have some kind of moral imperative to make him refrain from such acts had he been party to that epoch and system, or to state in what way his prejudice, ignorance and justification for the use of violence is in anyway different?
So what's happened here is you've got bent out of shape by some criticism of the group you're a member of, and you are now lashing out by claiming that divegeester is ignorant, prejudiced, bigoted and hateful enough to hang black people from trees?
Perhaps you can let us know when you can or we may be forced to acknowledge that its because you are bent out of shape that you cannot.