Why are Christians under attack ?

Why are Christians under attack ?

Spirituality

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by divegeester
No not at, I'm deconstructing your ridiculous strawman which is nothing more than you lashing out with an elaborate ad hominem.
you are floundering, tell us why your justification for the use of violence is any different form theirs. Phone a friend?

Starmer is a liar

More in my profile

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
119033
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by lemon lime
I 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 danger ...[text shortened]... s is your ticket into heaven because it's what God wants you to do, then you are sadly mistaken.
Oh no you don't. YOU have been proven to be a liar twice in these forums (general and spirituality) by myself proper knob and others. So cut the bleating and either engage with the topics in hand or leave us to get on with it.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by lemon lime
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.

Do you think discussions on a message board can have a bearing on a Christian's chances of going to "heaven"?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
There is ample evidence of his ignorance, his prejudice and bigotry, he himself has stated that he can easily find a justification for violence.
But you are equating his criticisms of JW doctrine with with murder. Why?

Starmer is a liar

More in my profile

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
119033
25 Apr 15
2 edits

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you are floundering, tell us why your justification for the use of violence is any different form theirs. Phone a friend?
What violence is you think it is I've done robbie? I am simply not a pacifist and would defend my community and family. You would not and that is your projective, but then you wouldn't give your child a blood transfusion to save its life so it's not surprising.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by FMF
But you are equating his criticisms of JW doctrine with with murder. Why?
No they are merely symptomatic of an underlying moral predisposition.

Starmer is a liar

More in my profile

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
119033
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No they are merely symptomatic of an underlying moral predisposition.
So let's be clear, this is great stuff...

You are now saying that criticising your religious organisation is immoral?

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by divegeester
What violence is you think it is I've done robbie? I am simply not a pacifist and would defend my community and family. You would not and that your business, but then you wouldn't give your child a blood transfusion to save its life so it's not surprising.
You cannot tell us why your use of violence is in anyway different.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No they are merely symptomatic of an underlying moral predisposition.
So you are not equating divegeester's criticisms of JW doctrine with murder, is that it?

Starmer is a liar

More in my profile

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
119033
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You cannot tell us why your use of violence is in anyway different.
I haven't used any violence robbie. The same way you haven't yet allowed your child to die from not permitting a blood transfusion.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by divegeester
So let's be clear, this is great stuff...

You are now saying that criticising your religious organisation is immoral?
no my dear locally challenged fiend, I am saying that ignorance if its wilful, prejudice and bigotry are morally reprehensible. Man how hard can it be?

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
25 Apr 15
1 edit

Originally posted by divegeester
I haven't used any violence robbie. The same way you haven't yet allowed your child to die from not permitting a blood transfusion.
so that is your reason? you are different because you haven't used any violence? and yet we find in you the same moral disposition of finding justification for the use of violence. I would amend your statement to yet, you have not used any violence yet!

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by FMF
So you are [b]not equating divegeester's criticisms of JW doctrine with murder, is that it?[/b]
what is it about 'they are symptomatic of an underlying moral disposition', that yet fails you?

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
25 Apr 15

when is my kilt supposed to fly up and expose my nether regions ? Any time soon?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
25 Apr 15

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what is it about 'they are symptomatic of an underlying moral disposition', that yet fails you?
I think the expression "'they are symptomatic of an underlying moral disposition" is failing you, not me. You are trying to use it to justify the preposterous comparison of criticisms of JW doctrine with lynch mobs murdering black people. On one level, I sense that you are trying to be a funny maverick but I think you are losing sight of how simply daft and appalling this whole convoluted ad hominem is, here and on the thread where you tried it out the first time.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.