Originally posted by FMFWhat difference would it make to you?
Do you subscribe to the same tortured-for-eternity/eternal torment theology propagated by the likes of sonship and Grampy Bobby on this forum?
You don't subscribe to any revealed truth, so no matter what I believe you will invariably do your best to trash it. That's your problem. You've placed yourself beyond the reach of the truth of God's Word and subscribed to your own authority and words.
Besides, you must have a thick skull because we've covered this topic and many others throughout this forum, and you don't seem to be able to remember any of it.
The argument is over.
Originally posted by josephwI find many things you say quite fascinating because they are either blatantly evasive, incoherent or based on circular logic. I have never felt you've offered a single inkling that you have anything credible to say about "the reach of the truth of God's Word". If you do, I will let you know. And I have never claimed to be an "authority". Simply finding the stuff you come out with far-fetched, and saying so, is not to have placed myself as an "authority". I am no more or less an "authority" than you are.
You don't subscribe to any revealed truth, so no matter what I believe you will invariably do your best to trash it. That's your problem. You've placed yourself beyond the reach of the truth of God's Word and subscribed to your own authority and words.
Originally posted by josephwI remember your evasions and red herrings and other tricks. I will remember your equivocal performance on this thread. This has nothing to do with whether I have a "thick skull" or not.
Besides, you must have a thick skull because we've covered this topic and many others throughout this forum, and you don't seem to be able to remember any of it.
05 Nov 14
Originally posted by josephwI have no problem "comprehending"; you are just sounding like Galveston75 now.
Pure Goodness thread, page twenty three.
@sonship: on chains and other worlds thread, page two.
Maybe if you didn't spend so much time focused on your own posts you wouldn't have to be so redundant. This time read what I said. Try to comprehend.
On neither page do you explicitly express you position on this matter, in fact on one of those pages (page 23) I was asking you what you believe on this matter even then.
Your lack of forthrightness and your persistent hemming and hawing, avoiding the topic is interesting and revealing.
05 Nov 14
Originally posted by josephwA number of posters are asking you what you believe about this topic Joesephw; responding petulantly with insults is not casting you in the best light.
What difference would it make to you?
You don't subscribe to any revealed truth, so no matter what I believe you will invariably do your best to trash it. That's your problem. You've placed yourself beyond the reach of the truth of God's Word and subscribed to your own authority and words.
Besides, you must have a thick skull because we've covered this ...[text shortened]... ughout this forum, and you don't seem to be able to remember any of it.
The argument is over.
05 Nov 14
Originally posted by shavixmirNot in all cases, but it it involves deceiving someone, if it harms them or there is some form of coercion or emotional blackmail, then yes I think adultery is immoral. Breaking a promise to be faithful is not morally sound to my way of thinking.
Is adultery immoral?
05 Nov 14
Originally posted by wolfgang59Adultery, like murder, is a thick ethical concept; it includes in it both a description of the act done and an evaluation of the act as wrong. Murder isn't simply killing another, it is the unjust killing of another. Similarly, adultery isn't just extramarital sex, but extramarital sex that violates the marital trust or breaks faith with one's spouse. That's straight from the etymology of the term and tracks how we use the term in language. In the case of fully-informed swingers, I don't think the concept adultery even applies. Of course, this doesn't settle anything about whether every case of adultery is, all things considered, morally wrong. As with lying, it could be that particular cases are regrettable and unfortunate, but, overall, justified by the circumstances.
Not if all parties are fully aware of the situation.
Open marriage.
Swingers.
Not immoral.
05 Nov 14
Originally posted by bbarrAgreed. I stand corrected. 😞
Adultery, like murder, is a thick ethical concept; it includes in it both a description of the act done and an evaluation of the act as wrong. Murder isn't simply killing another, it is the unjust killing of another. Similarly, adultery isn't just extramarital sex, but extramarital sex that violates the marital trust or breaks faith with one's ...[text shortened]... particular cases are regrettable and unfortunate, but, overall, justified by the circumstances.
replace adultery with sex outside of a current relationship.
05 Nov 14
Originally posted by whodeyI do not have any STDs and I do not have sex outside of my relationship.
Sure, just spread your STD's around and/or kill off the unborn.
No one gets hurt, do they? 😵
That is my choice.
I do not impose my lifestyle on others.
And in an honest adult relationship (and that is what I am talking about)
all know the risks (if any).