07 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieGod so loved the world .........except for all the animals that go through the slaughter house.
So why are you making a distinction between Gods love and everlasting life? Is not everlasting life an expression of Gods love? why are you assuming that they are mutually exclusive? if they are not mutually exclusive then your assumption that they are and the reasoning you give make NO SENSE, so tell us why they should be considered mutually exclusi ...[text shortened]... will make it easy for you
everlasting life is not an expression of gods love because. . . . .
Thats millions of animals every year that suffer.
What a strange God that slaughters and eats his unloved animals................and to think God so loved the world.
Words are cheap.
Originally posted by DasaHow many of these animals has God killed? you have not said! and personally I am a Vegan, i do not eat meat, eggs, fish or dairy products or anything that walks, swims, crawls, flies, hops or slithers.
God so loved the world .........except for all the animals that go through the slaughter house.
Thats millions of animals every year that suffer.
What a strange God that slaughters and eats his unloved animals................and to think God so loved the world.
Words are cheap.
Your reasoning is devoid and your ability to form a rational argument non existent. Shad-up-a-yo-face.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHow widely a piece of writing has been distributed / translated isn't really a measure of its factual or scholarly merit, it is merely a measure of its demand.
We love ridiculer's, they unwittingly fulfil scripture. An airhead like you doesn't stand a chance, you know practically nothing about scripture. The most widely translated and widely distributed book in the history of humanity and you are bereft. I say its indicative of a lack of education.
In the UK "The Sun" is a widely distributed tabloid newspaper, and the same crap peddled in that piece of writing no doubt finds its way into similar tabloids in a different language. I doubt you would say that the reading of red-tops should hence feature in school curricula though.
08 Apr 15
Originally posted by CalJustShortly before 04.30 my time: "I therefore reject your silly assertion that we push our religion on anyone, we are probably the most diplomatic of all people that go from house to house and certainly the most polite. "
There's a list for crackpots like you?
Nah, don't think I'll remove you from that just yet...
A few moments later, the same self-identified follower of Christ: "Eight million witnesses world wide celebrated the memorial of Christ death, almost certainly twenty million attended it overall, not bad for a, 'pernicious cult steeped in error, falsehood and dangerous unsociable practices'. Where was a socialite like you? In your house handing our caramel wafers and ribena to your congregation of action figures. Yup plastic through and through. Haters gonna hate and dweebs gonna keep on dweebin."
08 Apr 15
Originally posted by CalJustyou have been caught in public making assumptions and spreading falsehood about the beliefs of others and in typical fashion refuse to admit your error and make restitution. I dont think we shall be taking lessons in rationality from you.
There's a list for crackpots like you?
Nah, don't think I'll remove you from that just yet...
08 Apr 15
Originally posted by AgergNo it is not, never the less to be unacquainted with the most widely translated, widely distributed and widely available book in the history of humanity is in itself an indication of a lack of education.
How widely a piece of writing has been distributed / translated isn't really a measure of its factual or scholarly merit, it is merely a measure of its demand.
In the UK "The Sun" is a widely distributed tabloid newspaper, and the same crap peddled in that piece of writing no doubt finds its way into similar tabloids in a different language. I doubt you would say that the reading of red-tops should hence feature in school curricula though.