1
   

Should we handle victory the way the Christian god decrees?

 
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 03:21 pm
dyslexia wrote:
Ok one more time Rex (seems like I'm talking to Foyfyre) just answer the question re Michael Farris.


I don't even know who Michael Farris is... Should I look that name up for any reason?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 03:32 pm
Rex said;
Quote:
Any biology, Bible or other courses at PHC dealing with creation will teach creation from the understanding of Scripture that God's creative work, as described in Genesis 1:1-31, was completed in six twenty-four hour days.

the Home page of Patrick Henry College Statement of worldview contains this statement;
Quote:
Creation. Any biology, Bible or other courses at PHC dealing with creation will teach creation from the understanding of Scripture that God's creative work, as described in Genesis 1:1-31, was completed in six twenty-four hour days.

interestingly enough the home page also states;
Quote:
The Bible in its entirety (all 66 books of the Old and New Testaments) is the inspired word of God, inerrant in its original manuscripts, and the only infallible and sufficient authority for faith and Christian living. [II Timothy 3:16-17; II Peter 1:20-21; Hebrews 4:12; Psalm 119:11]
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 05:51 pm
nice slide Rex, as Nixon once said, "its not the crime, it's the weasel out that counts that gets you in to the deep doodoo."
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 07:32 pm
This is the part that bothers me the worst about PHC.

Quote:
The Mission of the Department of Government is to promote practical application of biblical principles and the original intent of the founding documents of the American republic, while preparing students for lives of public service, advocacy and citizen leadership.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 07:52 pm
Well, we all know what they mean by "biblical principles." How scary!
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 08:29 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Well Mesquite, between you, C.I and Dys, all pretty much cut from the same cloth it seems, I will give you an aggregate 1/3rd of a clue on your take on this. I see no need to rebut a half dozen or so strawmen built into a discussion--I didn't really count them all so the count may be a tad off there--nor does there seem any point in attempting to reason with people who blame Christianity for all the world's ills even before there was Christianity.
You never tire of try to fit people into your little boxes do you foxfyre. I suspect that Dys, c.i. and I are from quite different cloths although we share some common threads, that being the realization of the threat posed by fundamentalists to our democracy as exemplified by the current caretaker.

Foxfyre wrote:
Let's just let it rest on the fact that you three blame all that has ever been,. is, or will be wrong socially, politically, internationally, globally, interterrestrially, and also warts and acne, on the fact that there are people of faith, many of whom call themselves Christian and that you despise anything associated with that. I will further concede that you three believe that if the entire world was athiest, there would be no hunger, poverty, sickness, death, or human conflict.


I had never thought of blaming acne on the fundies, but I have been have a problem lately with senior's zits and have been something to blame it on. Thanks for the suggestion. Note that I said fundies, and by that term I mean the religious right that is using religion as a wedge and means of gaining political power.

Foxfyre wrote:
There, does that about cover it? Sure save a lot of time since arguing with facts from our side goes begging for rebuttal while each attempt seems to dig another ridiculous notion/accusation out of one of your closets. It probably isn't even your fault so I won't hold it against you. But I sure am glad there are people like Reallife and MommaAngel and Intrepid and others out there because I sure like the world they live in better than any alternative.


You are such a sweetheart fox. We are gonna miss ya.

Before we part though I want you to know that I do understand your method of interpreting ancient texts. It is what anthropologists do. The problem IMO is when you try to ascribe those techniques to sort what is of divine origin and what is not.

So long as there are factions that are not content to practice their religion without inflicting it upon others, I will continue to oppose them and shine light where light needs to be shown.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 08:56 pm
C.I.,

In my opinion, you have NO CLUE as to what we mean by biblical principles.

Mesquite,

If you and others would not ask questions, we wouldn't be here talking about it and "inflicting" it on you. Or are you just talking about the ones that use it to gain political power? And if that's what you mean, how do you know that's what they are doing? You know every time?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:02 pm
Ditto for me. LOL
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:04 pm
RexRed wrote:
1Co 14:32
And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

Comment:
Maybe if every part of fundamental Christianity was not under attack by the pedophile loving witches of the ACLU the fundamental Christians would be more reasonable about what was appropriately kept in the US courthouses?


Since Rex is so incensed about the ACLU defending pedophiles, I think it is interesting to note that just three posts ahead of the one I am replying to here was this...
mesquite wrote:
It is the Basis of a religion purported to be the word of God. Numbers 31 begins with

1. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

and goes on to say

17. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

And there is nothing in between or after that would change the meaning one iota.


How many times have we seen Rex defending this pedophile's dream? Thirty-two thousand was the count of female virgin children in the above scripture.

35 And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him.

Numbers 31
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:07 pm
Hot damn, how are they gonna rationalize that one? LOL
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:07 pm
Mesquite,

Does your bible have a New Testament in it? If it does, might I suggest that you read it. If you do, it will give you much more information about God.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:09 pm
Cicerone Imposter Wrote:

Quote:
Hot damn, how are they gonna rationalize that one? LOL


We don't need to rationalize. The truth never needs rationalization.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:11 pm
So, not only does your god condemn homosexuals, and allows slavery, but also approves of rape of virgin women. What a nice it.
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:15 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
Mesquite,

If you and others would not ask questions, we wouldn't be here talking about it and "inflicting" it on you. Or are you just talking about the ones that use it to gain political power? And if that's what you mean, how do you know that's what they are doing? You know every time?


You misunderstood MA. By inflicting on us, I was speaking of actions such as Judge Roy Moore's monument, trying to get creationism / ID taught in public schools, loading the supreme court with judges based solely on religious belief, etc.

This is a voluntary discussion forum. As such there can be no inflicting by either side.
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:43 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
Mesquite,

Does your bible have a New Testament in it? If it does, might I suggest that you read it. If you do, it will give you much more information about God.


Are you telling me that the Old Testament does not count, or is in error? Judge Roy Moore did not put up a monument listing the Beatitudes. He erected a monument of the Ten Commandments. You yourself have complained about such monuments being removed.

Sorry MA, but as I have said before many times, I will continue to shine light where light needs to be shown. If your book is so great, why do you object to it being exposed? I do ocassionally post some New Testament passages. We just finished up with quite a run on 1 Corinthians 14.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:52 pm
mesquite wrote:
It is the Basis of a religion purported to be the word of God. Numbers 31 begins with

1. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

and goes on to say

17. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.




Thirty-two thousand was the count of female virgin children in the above scripture.

35 And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him.

Numbers 31

And praytell, what did god have in mind with these virgin women children?

And how were they supposed to learn that man did not lay with them?
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 10:04 pm
dyslexia wrote:
In 1948, George Gamow and his student Ralph Alpher, proposed that if the universe was created in a gigantic explosion that the various elements observed today would be produced within the first few minutes after the big bang, when the extremely high temperature and density of the universe would fuse subatomic particles into the chemical elements. This theory provided a basis for understanding the earliest stages of the Universe and its subsequent evolution. The extremely high density would cause the universe to expand rapidly. As t expanded, the hydrogen and helium would cool and condense into stars and galaxies. Einstein published his general theory of relativity in 1920.


Where did the matter and energy involved in this 'gigantic explosion' come from?
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 10:14 pm
real life wrote:
Where did the matter and energy involved in this 'gigantic explosion' come from?

It came from the previous collapsing universe.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 11:30 pm
mesquite wrote:
real life wrote:
Where did the matter and energy involved in this 'gigantic explosion' come from?

It came from the previous collapsing universe.


Where did the previous collapsing universe come from?
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 02:17 am
Mesquite Wrote:

Quote:
Are you telling me that the Old Testament does not count, or is in error? Judge Roy Moore did not put up a monument listing the Beatitudes. He erected a monument of the Ten Commandments. You yourself have complained about such monuments being removed.

Sorry MA, but as I have said before many times, I will continue to shine light where light needs to be shown. If your book is so great, why do you object to it being exposed? I do ocassionally post some New Testament passages. We just finished up with quite a run on 1 Corinthians 14.


Mesquite, I have told you countless times that the Old Testament does matter. I have told you there are laws in the Old Testament that matter. Yes, I have a problem with removing the Ten Commandments from courthouses.

You can shine all the light you want. That's the the problem I have with your light shining. I just wish you'd get a bigger flashlight! The one you have has a very narrow beam. Occassionally post some New Testament passages? I think rarely would be a much more fitting word here IMO.

Many of us have tried to point out to you and others the meshing of the Old and New Testaments. We have tried and tried to explain the full character of God. Yet, we are constantly met with well explain this verse...where something pretty harsh is happening. These explanations are met with dismissal or jokes (no jokes from you Mesquite).

It's just hard to have a discussion with anyone when they only take into account their own side and don't (IMO) really seem to be trying to understand the full picture.

But, I'm willing to keep trying.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 11/02/2024 at 03:32:18