- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
22 Mar 21
@secondson saidWhat about levelling innuendo, hurling abuse and using biblical text make the most vile insults...against other people, which you have done on a regular basis?
We have talked, and unlike the rest of you we didn't feel the need to level innuendos against each other even when we disagreed.
22 Mar 21
@secondson saidMy question to sonship was rhetorical.
You must not recall how I did disagree, though I do understand the position.
@secondson
Should I infer from your lack of response that you are affiliated with the same religion as Sonship? Or is it a deeper, mystical relationship, are you actually Secondsonship, come again even though we haven't even crucified the first one yet?
22 Mar 21
@avalanchethecat saidSame religion as in both Christian, but not affiliated to the same branch of Christianity. (Sonship sits on his own twig). It is true though that many Christians are strangely accommodating or quiet to his non-biblical ramblings.
@secondson
Should I infer from your lack of response that you are affiliated with the same religion as Sonship? Or is it a deeper, mystical relationship, are you actually Secondsonship, come again even though we haven't even crucified the first one yet?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
@ghost-of-a-duke said It is true though that many Christians are strangely accommodating or quiet to his non-biblical ramblings.There are hardly any Christians here, at least not frequently.
Secondson rocks up every so often try to get the squeak out of his new Doc Martin bovver boots.
Other than myself and I suppose Rajk999, who doesn’t really identify as “Christian”, thats about it.
22 Mar 21
@ghost-of-a-duke saidWhen you say 'accommodating' do you mean they show agreement? Or just don't show disagreement?
Same religion as in both Christian, but not affiliated to the same branch of Christianity. (Sonship sits on his own twig). It is true though that many Christians are strangely accommodating or quiet to his non-biblical ramblings.
22 Mar 21
@avalanchethecat saidDisagree but without significant challenge.
When you say 'accommodating' do you mean they show agreement? Or just don't show disagreement?
22 Mar 21
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI guess that's understandable. Differences between brands of christianity are less overt than those between christianity and the a-religious.
Disagree but without significant challenge.
26 Mar 21
@divegeester saidYou want to cherry-pick the bits of Christianity you like and leave off the bits you don't like. There's a word for people who do that: it's "heretic."
This idea I’m floating here is for a poster, me in this case, to start a new thread entitled “Diagnose me” and to create an OP describing their belief structure or motivations honestly, concisely and with the knowledge that they will probably get a little roasted. But it might be interesting and it might be fun.
So I’ll go first:
- I seem to have a robust belief that ...[text shortened]... ellant.
- I believe in Jesus Christ, still, somehow.
Diagnose me, feel free to speak your mind.
Thank secular institutions the true believers aren't allowed to burn you at the stake anymore.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
26 Mar 21
@moonbus saidYour first sentence is pure sonship from a couple of years ago, maybe less.
You want to cherry-pick the bits of Christianity you like and leave off the bits you don't like. There's a word for people who do that: it's "heretic."
Thank secular institutions the true believers aren't allowed to burn you at the stake anymore.
I’d far rather be burnt at the stake by a dark ages witchfinder than take my chances with sonship’s version of eternal suffering.
27 Mar 21
@divegeester saidThank God it's not either/or, eh?
Your first sentence is pure sonship from a couple of years ago, maybe less.
I’d far rather be burnt at the stake by a dark ages witchfinder than take my chances with sonship’s version of eternal suffering.
27 Mar 21
@divegeester saidIn other words, "you gained a few brownie points with me by attacking the same guy I've been attacking for years, so don't waste them by attacking me too."
You have a few points in your bag after your excellent comment to sonship a couple of weeks ago; try not to throw them away on cheap unreferenced, unqualified insults.
Are you threatening him? Trying to inform him on which side his bread is buttered, by insinuating he can benefit from your support?
As Eric Idle used to say, "oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, yes."
27 Mar 21
@moonbus saidThis is saying that Christianity is some monolithic, etched-in-stone dogma that can't be questioned.
You want to cherry-pick the bits of Christianity you like and leave off the bits you don't like. There's a word for people who do that: it's "heretic."
Thank secular institutions the true believers aren't allowed to burn you at the stake anymore.
Funny, but in fact, you might have something there because nearly everyone seems to think their particular belief is the only reasonable one. So, in effect, everyone becomes a "heretic".
Even Jesus in his time.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
@suzianne saidHe gained a points of my respect after making an on topic reply to Sonship’s claims about “Jesus flowing through people”. He quoted the biblical description of Jesus “abiding”, not flowing. It was an excellent on topic debating point, succinctly made and perfectly pitched.
In other words, "you gained a few brownie points with me by attacking the same guy I've been attacking for years, so don't waste them by attacking me too."
Are you threatening him? Trying to inform him on which side his bread is buttered, by insinuating he can benefit from your support?
You should try it sometimes.