Why suddenly have you objected to answering ad nauseum which you haven't concerning these two specific questions when you have regurgitated your junk theories ad nauseum? Seems you demand everything to go your way or it isn't fair play.
Not at all. By all means, support your arguments, support your assertions. I've made no complaint about fairness. I've restated and explained my arguments, addressing the few issues you've brought up, at length. Rather than continue to argue the evolving issue, you keep taking us right back to the beginning, complain that I'm allowed to speak, threaten me, or insult me. And when I say "me", I'm speaking only of myself, but I have noted all of these addressed at others.
Now, you asked for people to address a specific question; I've addressed it. Would you care to address my arguments, or would you rather just keep trading barbs about eachother's characters?
Quote:
And by the way who elected you to be offended for "so many other people?"
Are you suggesting now that I can't be concerned with the well being of my fellow man?
__________________
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
This verse is regularly forwarded as one that offends those who reject.
My questions are these: What is the offense in this verse? Is it the fact that Jesus said it, or that Jesus was speaking for and as God, or that He, Jesus, is the only way to the Father?
Curious............and interested.
These are the original questions that you still have not answered.
And the verse referred to is. Jesus said: "I am the way the truth and life, no man comes to the Father but by me."
These are the original questions that you still have not answered.
And the verse referred to is. Jesus said: "I am the way the truth and life, no man comes to the Father but by me."
And here is my response:
Quote:
The statement attributed to Jesus makes the same presumption that mankind is evil. That's what I take offense to. The rest is simple arrogance, which only offends me in that it has fooled so many people.
I responded as such in #29. Dorph addressed it in #25. (and I commented on his response in #26, to which he responded in #27) Hillman asked it again in #24. Dorph addressed it in #23. Hillman originally asked it in #22. Dorph originally made the comment in #21.
The question has been extensively commented upon and exactly what was meant has been demonstrated by both the original commentator and by myself. The issues raised (the question of mankind being inherently evil) has been a running theme in several threads in the forum, a theme which has been expanded upon quite extensively. Can we move on to this issue, or would you like to expand upon the previous issue? Either way is fine with me, but I would note that "expand" doesn't mean "repeat".
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
RA: If only you could be so diligent to research the things of God.
I look at the world around me, I listen to the people around me, and I use my brain. Your arguments thus far suggest that you believe these were all created by god. What more do you want from me? You want me to rely on a book so convoluted that it leads its followers to contradictory conclusions? That inspires some to completely ignore the world around them? That has people believing that dinosaurs and mankind coexisted anywhere but on the Flintstones?
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
A friend of mine visited Ankor Wat and saw the Stegosaurus depiction in stone on the temple. It begs the question, did man and dinosaur co-exist, if not where did they get the idea for the image?
That carving looks more like a wild pig with a background of jungle vegetation to me. I believe the assumption that the carving represents a Stegosaurus is fundamentally flawed, but has been taken up by certain factions in an effort to bolster their world view.
That carving looks more like a wild pig with a background of jungle vegetation to me. I believe the assumption that the carving represents a Stegosaurus is fundamentally flawed, but has been taken up by certain factions in an effort to bolster their world view.
That carving comes from Cambodia. Stegosaurus remains haven't been found outside North America and Europe. That's not to say that they won't be, of course, but even if we assume it is a stegosaurus, there isn't much to corroborate that theory.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Linear Mode
