|
Post by fs on Dec 7, 2008 12:18:41 GMT -5
The secular humanists have blinded you, Val.
|
|
|
Post by valentine on Dec 7, 2008 17:32:17 GMT -5
Yeah, I mean, those "secular humanists" and their silly things like "Constitutions" and "human rights" and "science" and "reason"! What your Sky Daddy thinks is clearly a better way to determine how to make laws in the United Christian States of America, because in a theocracy like ours, we always govern based Tony Holland's religious beliefs.
Orrr not. Move to Iran, you godless communists.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Dec 8, 2008 9:47:06 GMT -5
Well in France, we do know that those who say they are on the ‘good side’ of reason and human rights , can be much intolerant and arrogant ; they claim tolerance and other good things with their mouth , but have often war in their heart. We had in the past such arrogant philosophers partisans of the “Reason” , they were in part responsible of the slaughter of hundred of thousands people , butchered at the hand of the new “enlightened”.
|
|
|
Post by valentine on Dec 8, 2008 10:47:47 GMT -5
they were in part responsible of the slaughter of hundred of thousands people , butchered at the hand of the new “enlightened”. Boohoo, cry me a river. IF that's even true, the Christians have killed many, many more in the name of your Sky Daddy. Which brings us back to my original point that so enrages Micah: A SMALL FRACTION OF X DOING BAD THINGS DOES NOT MAKE X BAD.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Dec 8, 2008 16:25:56 GMT -5
and you call Micah immature ? of course it's true and these AntiChristians and Anti God haters did that in only a few years, not counting the rapes. They shew no pity for children either. the Christians have killed many, many more in the name of your Sky Daddy. Check your source please, unless you are lying deliberately
|
|
|
Post by valentine on Dec 8, 2008 18:44:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by fs on Dec 8, 2008 22:00:56 GMT -5
My pastor preached a great sermon on lobe conquering hate, but he clearly has not had to deal with people like Valentine and others on the board who are the most mockinh and blinded by sin I have ever seen. I was warned not to waste my time with you by one of the brothers here who comapred you all to dogs before the Lord and the more I deal with you I think he and not my pastor may be right. I never thought people to be beyond redemption, but in constantly being mocked, seeing my lord mocked and other storng Christians mocked, my patience is going to relaly grow thin. I have too many pronlems in my own life and in the lvies of dear frioends to have to continually deal with your negative attitudes, lust, sins and support for perversions. Sadly, the unbelievers here are starting to sicken me.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Dec 9, 2008 1:09:02 GMT -5
Lol, you are just showing your ignorance. Crusaders were idolaters , and had no part with Christ. The battles between Crusaders and Muslims were nothing more than idolaters fighting against pagans ... Another argument or a better source to show ? No stats on the Esoterist power of the Nationalist-Socialists , or the Atheists power of USSR and other communists ?
|
|
|
Post by valentine on Dec 9, 2008 6:35:04 GMT -5
Crusaders were idolaters , and had no part with Christ. LOL INDEED, isn't it oh so very convenient that THOSE Christians "had no part with Christ" because they did something you didn't like? I'm sure they'd disagree if you asked them. In fact, they'd probably disagree and then cut off your head and then disagree some more. Those homosexuals in the original post weren't real homosexuals. See, I can play this game, too. ETA: When did I even mention them being "real Christians." I said in the NAME of your Sky Daddy. Those people you mentioned are no more real atheists than the people in the crusades are "real Christians." "Kill innocent people" is nowhere in what atheists believe; however, I distinctly remember a lot of killings in the Bible, so even IF the crusaders reached an incorrect conclusion, I can understand why they reached it.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Dec 9, 2008 9:40:54 GMT -5
Err, where have you seen killings of people by Christians in the Bible ? Give it a look and you won't find any ...
For your info, the people i mentionned were real atheists, and the leaders were all left wing , no need to say that they were haters of God and religion, even if their goal and vision was global , and appealed to some people with their false promises of "equality" . I think it is also fair to say , that they became so bloodthirsty that some of them not only continued to kill any opposant of their goal of One New world order , but ended to kill each other , showing that their stupidity was only second to their beastiality.
I agree that making an analogy between sexual practise and religion is highly laughable indeed , as if homosexuals could be something else than homosexuals.
|
|
|
Post by valentine on Dec 9, 2008 13:10:34 GMT -5
Err, where have you seen killings of people by Christians in the Bible ? Give it a look and you won't find any ... Nah, nobody important; just your Sky Daddy. The crusaders were real Christians. You have completely missed my point. You're arbitrarily defining "real" Christian and choosing who to claim because some people who claim Christianity make you look bad. THE POINT IS, AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, that a portion of a group doing bad things doesn't mean the group itself is bad, NOR does it mean that the group is bad BECAUSE they are part of that group. Micah's logic, and yours, is epic fail. The only way I could forgive something this stupid is if English wasn't your first language. No, what's "laughable" is that you still don't understand that "individual" does not equal "group," and "does bad things and happens to be part of group" doesn't mean "does bad things BECAUSE they are part of a certain group." Okay, example: Bob has brown hair. Bob kills his daughter. Jan posts on Openairoutreach that because Bob has brown hair and killed his daughter, people with brown hair murder their children. Did Bob's brown hair cause him to kill his daughter? No. Is Jan a moron for suggesting otherwise? Yes. The fact that there is one man who happens to have brown hair who killed his daughter does NOT mean that having brown hair makes you ANY more likely to kill your daughter. Even if you found Bob, Ben and Bill, three men who ALL had brown hair and killed their daughters, it STILL wouldn't make you any more likely to do so purely because you had brown hair. There is really no way to make this simpler for you, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Dec 9, 2008 16:36:16 GMT -5
The crusaders were real Christians. You have completely missed my point. You're arbitrarily defining Christian and choosing who to claim because some people who claim Christianity make you look bad. THE POINT IS, AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, that a portion of a group doing bad things doesn't mean the group itself is bad, NOR does it mean that the group is bad BECAUSE they are part of that group. Micah's logic, and yours, is epic fail. What abour yours ? Aren't you defining arbitrarily yourself what a Christian is, if you think you are able to discern that Crusaders are Christians. Or is it others that have said that and you are just repeating it? Quote: I think it is also fair to say , that they became so bloodthirsty that some of them not only continued to kill any opposant of their goal of One New world order , but ended to kill each other , showing that their stupidity was only second to their beastiality. The only way I could forgive something this stupid is if English wasn't your first language. Keep your benevolent condescendence for people who deserve it. I don’t have problem in understanding and typing English. When I type bloodthirsty and stupid I really mean bloodthirsty and stupid. Is it so difficult to understand ? The point is that you seem to know nothing about France history. So why are talking about stupidity , let alone talking , when you don't even know the real facts ? No, what's laughable is that you still don't understand that individual does not equal group and does bad things and happens to be part of group; doesn't mean does bad things BECAUSE they are part of a certain group. Your reasoning is full of stereotypes. In fact it depends of who we are talking about. In some circles , some groups strictly equal the sum of the individuals. For example if you take Satanism , no matter what the individuals involved in it are as bad as the group itself. A bad tree can not produce good fruit. for Atheism and Socialism there may be well intentioned people who are atheists or socialists , but what is true is that atheism or socialism can not produce good fruit. History of the nations proves it. As for homosexuality , it does not matter if the individuals are sincere or well intentioned or not , no homosexuals can produce good fruit , the wages of sin is always spiritual death.
|
|
|
Post by valentine on Dec 9, 2008 18:55:15 GMT -5
What abour yours ? Aren't you defining arbitrarily yourself what a Christian is, if you think you are able to discern that Crusaders are Christians. Or is it others that have said that and you are just repeating it? HE SHOOTS, HE SCORES. Exactly! YOU are arbitrarily deciding who can "produce good fruit" because, I suppose, it came out of your storybook. There is NO conclusive evidence that you are correct outside of said storybook. You still don't get it. Correlation is not causation. Ahahaha, who is stereotyping? You're the one that said nothing good can come from homosexuals. Have I ever said the same thing of Christians? Like, anywhere on this board that wasn't obviously a joke? Ever? Evidence? That doesn't come from your storybook? "I FOUND THIS ONE REALLY SMALL SUBSET OF {GROUP} ON TEH YOUTUBES THAT WAS REALLY MEAN, THEREFORE ALL {GROUP} ARE BAD" is not evidence any more than your storybook is, by the way. Oh right, you don't have any. Just like Micah didn't and dodged the bullet when I asked him the same question.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Dec 10, 2008 7:13:54 GMT -5
Sinners can’t bring forth good fruit. Good fruit is only the one that lasts forever. Unrepentant sinners are hellbound , thus they can’t give lasting fruit. It does not depend if the individual is "nice" or not, if one is a sinner he is dead in his sins, and so are all homosexuals, and many heterosexuals too. The only difference between homos and heteros is that we can be sure that all homos go to hell … except those who repent and believe and want to be free from sin. When the thought of repenting of the evil deeds which they have done has come into their hearts. But if it does not come into their hearts, they will not be saved, on account of the hardness of their heart.
|
|
|
Post by valentine on Dec 10, 2008 8:43:04 GMT -5
Sinners can’t bring forth good fruit. Good fruit is only the one that lasts forever. Unrepentant sinners are hellbound , thus they can’t give lasting fruit. It does not depend if the individual is "nice" or not, if one is a sinner he is dead in his sins, and so are all homosexuals, and many heterosexuals too. The only difference between homos and heteros is that we can be sure that all homos go to hell … except those who repent and believe and want to be free from sin. When the thought of repenting of the evil deeds which they have done has come into their hearts. But if it does not come into their hearts, they will not be saved, on account of the hardness of their heart. Isn't that nice. Too bad NONE OF IT belongs in our government. It's also still not evidence for what I asked you. Correlation is not causation, but you don't even have a correlation; you have baseless speculation from a storybook. Give me evidence that isn't your own baseless speculation or from your storybook that homosexuals are predisposed to violence just because of their sexual orientation.I don't know why I think you could, considering that, once again, Micah ran away when I asked the same thing of him. And in case you've forgotten, my post that you've yet to answer: I wrote --
|
|
|
Post by Kureji on Dec 10, 2008 9:30:48 GMT -5
Val these guys don't understand evidence and deducing things with scientific methods. All they know is how to read out of their story book. It's a very narrow sad life in which if something agrees with the magic story book, then it's good, if it disagrees then it's evil.
In short, they don't have evidence other than the storybook, they never have evidence other than the storybook. I doubt many of them even know how to write a research paper properly with correct citations. (Let alone how to research.) Unless of course it involves looking up a bible verse and reading it to you. (They'll even give you their interpretation of it for free since they're so nice!)
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Dec 10, 2008 10:12:28 GMT -5
Give me evidence that isn't your own baseless speculation or from your storybook that homosexuals are predisposed to violence just because of their sexual orientation.Uh, are you talking to me ? where did i wrote that homosexuals are predisposed to violence ? Or are you this kind of person who are twisting what others have written , without even knowing it ?
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Dec 10, 2008 10:20:19 GMT -5
And in case you've forgotten, my post that you've yet to answer: I wrote -- Why can't you discern by yourself what is evil and what is good , or have you lost all common sense ?
|
|
|
Post by valentine on Dec 10, 2008 10:40:07 GMT -5
Dude, you're in the "LEIK OMG HOMOSEXUAL VIOLENCE!!11eleventy" topic, what am I supposed to think?
Fine: if you don't agree with that (and I assume you don't, since you haven't even attempted to provide evidence for it), then move on to a topic that you introduced. Insert "atheists" for "homosexuals" and "beliefs" for "sexual orientation." Get to it.
Sorry, bub, but "IT'S JUST COMMON SENSE D=" isn't an answer. I think supporting gay rights is "just common sense," but that's obviously not going to fly with you.
|
|
|
Post by fs on Dec 11, 2008 10:50:14 GMT -5
What is so great about your own sin and the sort of sins iothers do where you are unwilling to give them up and approval of others who do them and live a pure life for Jesus, Valentine?
|
|
medea
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by medea on Dec 11, 2008 19:14:43 GMT -5
I think Sarah Palin wrote that last statement
|
|