Abortion
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Your views are wrong. I respect your right to have those opinions, but they are wrong. This is not arrogance, it is simply stating a fact.
:rolleyes: This OBVIOUSLY is not arrogance... it's irony.
-
The irony or hypocrisy is that he is calling me arrogant because he claims his view is right and mine is wrong. I simply stated the same thing back.
Pot, meet the kettle. At least almost everyone else have been giving you extended explanation of their PoV... while you just respond putting words in their mouths and then demanding explanations (that they already gave you). The sad part is that you are ruining a perfectly fine topic of Ahmed Zahmed, where everyone was debating civically by just trolling everyone who don't share your opinion (i.e. everyone) But, hey, good job, I guess. Your stubborness reminds me of he who shall not be named. What happened to him btw?
-
I have to correct you on this one. According to the bible, sex is acceptable for more than just procreation. It also has god's stamp of approval in the form of rape :doh: Since ryan will likely tell me I'm misinterpreting the bible again, then I would suggest he read the following biblical passages: Judges 21: 10-24, Numbers 31: 7-18, Deuteronomy 20: 10-14, Judges 5:30(this was is really awesome), Zechariah 14:1-2.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
Once you start quoting the bible and god and involve religion I withdraw from the conversation. As an agnostic I refuse to get involved in what I consider complete drivel.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
So if I'm sterile (vasectomies do work) then I can basically have sex with anyone.
None of what I said implies that at all. You're twisting my words. I didn't address the "pleasure" aspect of sex at all.
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
What utter moralistic bullsh*t.
So being responsible for one's actions, exercising self-control and self-restraint is moralistic bullshit? Wow, thanks for your enlightenment.
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
You stand does not take into account the way people are
Actually it does. I am saying people need to be more than they are and act more responsibly.
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
assumes that sex has only 1 function - procreation
No it doesn't assume that. You can have sex for pleasure, but you must also be cognizant of the consequences of said pleasure-taking: the possibility of creating life. If you're unwilling or unable to be responsible for that possibility, then do the responsible thing: abstain until you are willing and able.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von BraunTrue I was twisting your words, we are after all in the soapbox! However expecting personal responsibility from all humanity is just not realistic. While I think a rather high % has a reasonable moral (within their culture) stance it only takes a few aberrants to pollute the population. Then you have the cultural abberants, the fundies who by their own standards are moral but most of us find disgusting or disturbing.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
The irony or hypocrisy is that he is calling me arrogant because he claims his view is right and mine is wrong. I simply stated the same thing back.
ryanb31 wrote:
he claims his view is right
Please show me where that is the case. I am just making observations, no claims to "fact".
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
1. That is not how the King James version reads. Whatever version you have has changed it. However, you claim that God demands the woman have sex is not even true. Your Bible reads
Quote:
then you may go to her
. May is not a word that implies demand. 2. You contradict yourself. You say that statement claims both parties of a rape should be stoned; however, in verse 26 it reads
Quote:
but to the lady you shall do nothing
. So, yes, they had capital punishment for this. The first one, as you say, is consensual or as we would call this today adultery or cheating and the second one is the guy raped her and it says to do nothing to her. So, where does it say to punish both in a rape? 3. So what is the mark? You admit it was a misinterpretation but you said it wasn't far from the mark. What is the mark then? 4. Another misinterpretation. It is not referring to rape. The main issue; however, is this is old Mosaic Law that applied only to the house of Israel. When Christ came he brought with him the new and everlasting covenant of the gospel and told them to take it to all of the world. He said he was fulfilling the prophets. There was no more eye for an eye or tooth for a tooth (read the Sermon on the Mount) So, even if your interpretations were right, which they are not, that was for a specific people for a specific time. Like I said, you do not understand the Bible.
Well, first of all, I am not Marcus Kramer who posted the 4 points[^]: 1) According to the bible, rape is something god demands that his followers do when he wants them to. 2) According to the bible, the rape victim along with the rapist should be taken outside the city gates and stoned to death. 3) According to the bible, you can sell your daughter into slavery where she is to "please the man who bought her". 4) According to the bible, a rapist must marry the woman if he gets caught. 1.
ryanb31 wrote:
That is not how the King James version reads.
But "King James had many, many men, not prophets, translate the Bible to the best of their knowledge. So, yes I believe in the Bible as far as it is translated correctly. But some of the plain and precious truths have been removed, even some of them were removed intentionally."[^] So I used a different version.
ryanb31 wrote:
May is not a word that implies demand.
"you may take her as your wife" i.e., he is permitted to take her. She has no say in the matter. She has to enter his household, has to shave her head, has to pare her nails, and finally, has to perform her 'marriage duties' as his wife. Rape within marriage. Torah "[10]When thou goest forth to battle against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God delivereth them into thy hands, and thou carriest them away captive, [11]and seest among the captives a woman of goodly form, and thou hast a desire unto her, and wouldest take her to thee to wife; [12]then thou shalt bring her home to thy house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; [13]... thou mayest go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife." 2.
ryanb31 wrote:
The first one, as you say, is consensual or as we would call this today adultery or cheating
No. I said it was biased towards an assumption of consensual sex. Let's spell it out. If t
-
Well, first of all, I am not Marcus Kramer who posted the 4 points[^]: 1) According to the bible, rape is something god demands that his followers do when he wants them to. 2) According to the bible, the rape victim along with the rapist should be taken outside the city gates and stoned to death. 3) According to the bible, you can sell your daughter into slavery where she is to "please the man who bought her". 4) According to the bible, a rapist must marry the woman if he gets caught. 1.
ryanb31 wrote:
That is not how the King James version reads.
But "King James had many, many men, not prophets, translate the Bible to the best of their knowledge. So, yes I believe in the Bible as far as it is translated correctly. But some of the plain and precious truths have been removed, even some of them were removed intentionally."[^] So I used a different version.
ryanb31 wrote:
May is not a word that implies demand.
"you may take her as your wife" i.e., he is permitted to take her. She has no say in the matter. She has to enter his household, has to shave her head, has to pare her nails, and finally, has to perform her 'marriage duties' as his wife. Rape within marriage. Torah "[10]When thou goest forth to battle against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God delivereth them into thy hands, and thou carriest them away captive, [11]and seest among the captives a woman of goodly form, and thou hast a desire unto her, and wouldest take her to thee to wife; [12]then thou shalt bring her home to thy house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; [13]... thou mayest go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife." 2.
ryanb31 wrote:
The first one, as you say, is consensual or as we would call this today adultery or cheating
No. I said it was biased towards an assumption of consensual sex. Let's spell it out. If t
You and the others do not understand God, your relationship with Him, who Christ is, what the Bible is, you are not Christian and we are supposed to go with your interpretation of Holy Scripture? How would you feel if a Project Manager tried to interpret a C# book for you? You have contradicted yourself. We can go on and on but the point is none of you have even the basic understanding of who God is therefore you cannot even begin to understand Holy writ authored by Him such as the Bible. Yes, the Bible was translated by men, not prophets, so we cannot take everything directly as written. We need to also have the Spirit to understand, which is where all of you fail. I have provided plenty of evidence to support my point, you simply refuse to accept it. And if you had any evidence to contradict me, I would refuse it as well because it would be wrong. We are at an impasse. I never expected anyone in this forum to believe what I was saying. I just want you all to remember that not everyone in the world thinks like you. It just seems the loudest people in this forum are the left-wing, liberal, anti-god, atheist, anarchist types. I am simply reminding everyone that there are other people that do not believe the same thing so they are not in a delusion that their opinion is shared by everyone. I wouldn't waste my time trying to teach a 3 year old calculus, nor am I going to try and teach you the advanced concepts of the gospel, until you understand the foundation.
-
Purdah, with homosexuality before marriage/significant partnership? :-D
Use carrots and sticks to force the little fish into the big tent - Anon
That's a different issue. Of course, I think scientists would be extremely interested if a pregnancy occurred in a homosexual sexual union.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
You and the others do not understand God, your relationship with Him, who Christ is, what the Bible is, you are not Christian and we are supposed to go with your interpretation of Holy Scripture? How would you feel if a Project Manager tried to interpret a C# book for you? You have contradicted yourself. We can go on and on but the point is none of you have even the basic understanding of who God is therefore you cannot even begin to understand Holy writ authored by Him such as the Bible. Yes, the Bible was translated by men, not prophets, so we cannot take everything directly as written. We need to also have the Spirit to understand, which is where all of you fail. I have provided plenty of evidence to support my point, you simply refuse to accept it. And if you had any evidence to contradict me, I would refuse it as well because it would be wrong. We are at an impasse. I never expected anyone in this forum to believe what I was saying. I just want you all to remember that not everyone in the world thinks like you. It just seems the loudest people in this forum are the left-wing, liberal, anti-god, atheist, anarchist types. I am simply reminding everyone that there are other people that do not believe the same thing so they are not in a delusion that their opinion is shared by everyone. I wouldn't waste my time trying to teach a 3 year old calculus, nor am I going to try and teach you the advanced concepts of the gospel, until you understand the foundation.
ryanb31 wrote:
You have contradicted yourself.
Nope, the book contradicts itself. You just choose to apologize those contractions away.
ryanb31 wrote:
Yes, the Bible was translated by men, not prophets, so we cannot take everything directly as written.
Exactly... So, how exactly do you receive these interpretive revelations from the Spirit. How does it relay it's information to you? Do you hear his voice in your head? Do you just "know" when he speaks to you? If so, how can you possibly know the difference between the spirit and your own thoughts?
ryanb31 wrote:
I have provided plenty of evidence to support my point, you simply refuse to accept it
On the contrary. You have ignored and insulted anyone who provided evidence against or questions to your way of thinking? The only evidence you have provided it "You can't possibly know because you don't have the spirit?" There is nothing concrete in anything you have said.
ryanb31 wrote:
I just want you all to remember that not everyone in the world thinks like you.
And thank god (pun intended) that not everyone thinks like you.
ryanb31 wrote:
I wouldn't waste my time trying to teach a 3 year old calculus, nor am I going to try and teach you the advanced concepts of the gospel, until you understand the foundation.
Bad-a-bing. Parting with another insult. Very unchristianlike, don't you think? By the way, how long have you spent studying the bible in a place of higher education? Have you gone to bible college and study to become a minister? If you did, you would certainly temper your comments a bit. This last comment "teach you the advanced concepts of the gospel" is only insulting to yourself because I pretty much can guarantee you I know as much about these things as you do. I was a fundamentalistic christian for the better part of my life which mean I was a christian for longer than you probably have been alive. That's why I do not throw insults out at other believers when they make comments. That is why I treat people with respect. It is not the christian upbringing that achieved this, it is because I understand how the delusion works in a much deeper way than you understand at this time. As you grow older, you may understand that, but for now I also understand th
-
That's a different issue. Of course, I think scientists would be extremely interested if a pregnancy occurred in a homosexual sexual union.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von BraunThat would open a can of worms, wouldn't it? :)
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
That would open a can of worms, wouldn't it? :)
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
LOL. Eww
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
ryanb31 wrote:
You have contradicted yourself.
Nope, the book contradicts itself. You just choose to apologize those contractions away.
ryanb31 wrote:
Yes, the Bible was translated by men, not prophets, so we cannot take everything directly as written.
Exactly... So, how exactly do you receive these interpretive revelations from the Spirit. How does it relay it's information to you? Do you hear his voice in your head? Do you just "know" when he speaks to you? If so, how can you possibly know the difference between the spirit and your own thoughts?
ryanb31 wrote:
I have provided plenty of evidence to support my point, you simply refuse to accept it
On the contrary. You have ignored and insulted anyone who provided evidence against or questions to your way of thinking? The only evidence you have provided it "You can't possibly know because you don't have the spirit?" There is nothing concrete in anything you have said.
ryanb31 wrote:
I just want you all to remember that not everyone in the world thinks like you.
And thank god (pun intended) that not everyone thinks like you.
ryanb31 wrote:
I wouldn't waste my time trying to teach a 3 year old calculus, nor am I going to try and teach you the advanced concepts of the gospel, until you understand the foundation.
Bad-a-bing. Parting with another insult. Very unchristianlike, don't you think? By the way, how long have you spent studying the bible in a place of higher education? Have you gone to bible college and study to become a minister? If you did, you would certainly temper your comments a bit. This last comment "teach you the advanced concepts of the gospel" is only insulting to yourself because I pretty much can guarantee you I know as much about these things as you do. I was a fundamentalistic christian for the better part of my life which mean I was a christian for longer than you probably have been alive. That's why I do not throw insults out at other believers when they make comments. That is why I treat people with respect. It is not the christian upbringing that achieved this, it is because I understand how the delusion works in a much deeper way than you understand at this time. As you grow older, you may understand that, but for now I also understand th
I was not insulting you and I am sorry you took it that way. I was simply making a comparison that I hoped you would understand. Just because my points of view are different, they are not insults and they are not arrogant. You continue to insult me and to put me down and then cry when you feel I have done that to you. Seems a bit hypocritical.
Quote:
So, how exactly do you receive these interpretive revelations from the Spirit. How does it relay it's information to you? Do you hear his voice in your head? Do you just "know" when he speaks to you? If so, how can you possibly know the difference between the spirit and your own thoughts?
As I stated, you do not understand the Spirit so you cannot understand anything regarding this. "
Quote:
I pretty much can guarantee you I know as much about these things as you do
" This is laughable. You have no idea who I am. However, as I stated before, you cannot begin to pretend to understand anything about God until you understand who He is and your relationship with him. This is not an insult, but my 3 year old knows more about this than you do because he understands he is a child of God. He understands the nature of God. Since you do not, you have nothing.
-
You say you exist because you are self-aware. Everyone in the matrix thought they existed, thought they were self-aware, but they weren't. The matrix is silly but my point is you do not have proof for what you believe. I have heard all of the rebuttals. I get downvoted all the time in this forum for believing in God, which is fine, and in other forums I am praised for believing in God. This group is quite godless for some reason. The proof is simple. Open your eyes, it is everywhere. It is not possible for the universe and everything to have been created from nothing. It was created from God. However, for you to accept that you must understand how spiritual things work. Spiritual proof is both intellectual and in the heart. Godless people are strictly intellectual types (not necessarily intelligent) so they can NEVER understand anything spiritual, even the most basic concepts, such as God existing. You will never understand God until you first understand what your relationship with Him is. It would be like me trying to teach you calculus without you even understanding addition and subtraction. It would be impossible. So, I give you the physical proof of everything and you chose to deny it. If you had an open heart, then we could continue on in the proof of spiritual items, but until then, there is no point.
-
"
Quote:
Answering to yourself is just as important (if not more IMO) than anyone (or any"thing" else)
" So, you are the supreme being? How nice not to have to answer to anyone else. You can make up your own rules and whatever you do is right because there is no one and nothing higher? Wish I could convince myself to think that way.
ryanb31 wrote:
So, you are the supreme being?
That's not what he said. You missed his point. These sorts of replies on every post I've seen you put in this thread is why you get downvoted.
ryanb31 wrote:
How nice not to have to answer to anyone else
That's not what he said either. If you could read between the lines a little bit. You could actually interpret it to be something that christians understand quite well and agree with.
ryanb31 wrote:
You can make up your own rules and whatever you do is right because there is no one and nothing higher?
Not what he said either Try not to be combative all the time, and people will stop downvoting you.
If it moves, compile it
-
I was not insulting you and I am sorry you took it that way. I was simply making a comparison that I hoped you would understand. Just because my points of view are different, they are not insults and they are not arrogant. You continue to insult me and to put me down and then cry when you feel I have done that to you. Seems a bit hypocritical.
Quote:
So, how exactly do you receive these interpretive revelations from the Spirit. How does it relay it's information to you? Do you hear his voice in your head? Do you just "know" when he speaks to you? If so, how can you possibly know the difference between the spirit and your own thoughts?
As I stated, you do not understand the Spirit so you cannot understand anything regarding this. "
Quote:
I pretty much can guarantee you I know as much about these things as you do
" This is laughable. You have no idea who I am. However, as I stated before, you cannot begin to pretend to understand anything about God until you understand who He is and your relationship with him. This is not an insult, but my 3 year old knows more about this than you do because he understands he is a child of God. He understands the nature of God. Since you do not, you have nothing.
ryanb31 wrote:
As I stated, you do not understand the Spirit so you cannot understand anything regarding this.
Nothing but a cop-out. If you read the last paragraph again, you'll see that I do understand "the spirit", and for you to say otherwise, is nothing but judgemental foolery.
ryanb31 wrote:
you cannot begin to pretend to understand anything about God
Still passing judgement. Tsk! Tsk! Now you're telling me I wasn't a "real" christian back in the day?
ryanb31 wrote:
my 3 year old knows more about this than you
The delusion runs deep in you it does.
ryanb31 wrote:
he understands he is a child of God. He understands the nature of God.
ryanb31 wrote:
This is laughable
You said it...
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
Certainly, right now. But, ultimately, if we want to survive as a race: no.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
Yeah, I got it. I was just making fun. Yes it is nice to think it might one day come to pass. If we don't try, then it never will.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
Once you start quoting the bible and god and involve religion I withdraw from the conversation. As an agnostic I refuse to get involved in what I consider complete drivel.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
ryanb31 wrote:
I get downvoted all the time in this forum for believing in God
It's not for believing in god, it's your attitude.
If it moves, compile it
-
ryanb31 wrote:
I see much worse go on in here.
If you can find "much worse" that has gone without being down voted, please show us them. It is blanket statements like this that irritate people. If you are going to make a statement, back it up, please. Without backing it up, this last post or yours even carries a sense of arrogance.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.