I appreciate the support. Thqnkyou all for showing some care toward the victims of the quake.
@dadudemon: I couldn't care less if you where Christian. Making statements as you have proves nothing more than your ignorance and/or complete contempt for your fellow human being. I think what you've posted is highly offensive and I'd hate to know you outside of KMC if that's what you're like all the time.
Originally posted by TRiNiTYfemi
I appreciate the support. Thqnkyou all for showing some care toward the victims of the quake.@dadudemon: I couldn't care less if you where Christian. Making statements as you have proves nothing more than your ignorance and/or complete contempt for your fellow human being. I think what you've posted is highly offensive and I'd hate to know you outside of KMC if that's what you're like all the time.
Y3@ WH@T $H3 $@1D!!!!!!!!!
Anyone else seen this? 21 earthquakes rocked Christchurch yesterday
http://www.christchurchquakemap.co.nz/today
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Now forgive me for saying so, but heres why I dont believe that.1: An unfair, unwarrented, uniformed assumption which is far uglier than you accuse the OP poster of being when she objected, especially as for all you know they could be nice, hard working people, some of which may be dead of dying.. It reads like an interfaith spat-dig from a Mormon hinting that their non-mormon Christianity was to blame.
No, wrong.
1. Get off my nuts.
2. It's one of the conclusions a Christian would come to in a situation like that.
3. I don't believe it: it's only a possible "Christian" justification.
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
2: In this assumption you assume you know god well enough to make that assertion. You claim to be Christian AND Mormon, and as provable here, they are differing definitions of god:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-acb/acb-r002a.html
So which versions of god are you speaking for in assumption number 2?
No.
"2. It's one of the conclusions a Christian would come to in a situation like that.
3. I don't believe it: it's only a possible "Christian" justification."
To your faith bashing proposition, you can kindly keep those to yourself or take them to the Relgion forum will I won't address them, either.
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
3: You assume that god at least is a man, so is that Smith's flesh and blood god your siding with for this one...? God hasn't sorted out the LAST bit of promised land yet.... Will he now be earthquaking the middle-east?
Dude, seriously, get off my balls. You've actually gone too far, this time.
"2. It's one of the conclusions a Christian would come to in a situation like that.
3. I don't believe it: it's only a possible "Christian" justification."
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
4: Classic silly circular argument built for logic confrontation avoidance.
Because it doesn't fit some anti-Christian mode of insulting, from you, you automatically hate it. Bad form considering "faith testing" is an integral part of Christianity.
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Even the asterisk caveat cannot make up for the glaring conflicts in your reasoning.. I think tbh OP poster's noting of your tone was accurate.... It was facetious/flippant at best.
Yeah, the asterisk is only a supplement (And, with #4, constitute how I really feel about the topic). You can't be a Christian and ignore God's MO: He destroys things because of 4 reasons:
1. Bad spiritual leaders (people of Israel were destroyed on more than one occasion for their idolatrous beliefs and perversion of the Gospel by various "soothsayers" "witchcraft" and evil church leaders.)
2. Bad people. (Similar to above but it's the people that won't listen. Sodom and Gomorrah would be examples: good faith leaders, they just wouldn't listen.)
3. He wants the people to move. (Various hardships of the unfaithful and/or moving/relocating.)
4. He is testing their faith. (Job).
If a Christian does not believe in those 4 points above, then they do not believe that the Bible is the word of God.
You can pretend it's some sort of "inter-faith" bashing to suite your Christian bashing objectives, but it's simply not and your personal attacks against me have been noted. Additionally, that was rather immature of you.
Originally posted by TRiNiTYfemi
@dadudemon: I couldn't care less if you where Christian. Making statements as you have proves nothing more than your ignorance and/or complete contempt for your fellow human being. I think what you've posted is highly offensive and I'd hate to know you outside of KMC if that's what you're like all the time.
I don't see saying that the situation is "awful" as being ignorance and contempt for my fellow man; nor do I see it as ignorance and contempt for my fellow man to want them to "GTFO" of a dangerous situation so they can live and prosper as followers of Christ's teachings.
If you fly of the handle, incorrectly, like this in real life, why WOULD I want to know someone like that?
And you can't "steal" my comment: what you've said to me, was offensive and shameful for another Christian to do.
Originally posted by Ax3l
What is with all the numbered statements?1. It's extremely arrogant.
2. Doesn't help getting any sort of point across
3. You have to have more than three.
4. Refer to #3.
1. Weird because it has nothing to do with me. (Unless you're referring to the leaders, then that kind of makes sense, but it seems out of context with everything else.)
2. It should be the same as #1 and the "point" should be known to any Christian that has spent a tiny bit amount of time in Sunday School.
3. Nah, just more Christian "logic."
4. No, it's probably the most important and most likely THE reason for the quakes, from Christian "logic's" perspective.
Originally posted by dadudemon
1. Weird because it has nothing to do with me. (Unless you're referring to the leaders, then that kind of makes sense, but it seems out of context with everything else.)2. It should be the same as #1 and the "point" should be known to any Christian that has spent a tiny bit amount of time in Sunday School.
3. Nah, just more Christian "logic."
4. No, it's probably the most important and most likely THE reason for the quakes, from Christian "logic's" perspective.
The parenthesis around Logic in this instance are very well earned.
1. The leaders didn't made that statement though, did they? It was you who posted your post. And even of they were so silly as to say that, wouldnt a smart fellow such as yourself have the critical faculties to disagree...? And see answer 4, below.
2. Then wheres the proof that life works that way? Maybe Sunday School is wrong, then....regular science based school, certainly would indicate so.
3. You quotemarks around 'logic' in your post belies the manner of a man who doesn't really take it to be entirely logical. Yet you attempt to follow this "logic" to the bone. See answer 4 below.
4. Still doesnt make it true: And certainly not true enough to assert assertions like that whilst people have been killed. Look up Jerry Fallwell/911 on google.
The post came across as talk that made light of actual human suffering that not only happened but is still happening...
When the OP Poster objected, you tried to paint her motives as ugly.
Theres really not anything more than that, despite how you seem to have taken it in the MVF. Now lets move on.
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
The parenthesis around Logic in this instance are very well earned.1. The leaders didn't made that statement though, did they? It was you who posted your post. And even of they were so silly as to say that, wouldnt a smart fellow such as yourself have the critical faculties to disagree...? And see answer 4, below.
2. Then wheres the proof that life works that way? Maybe Sunday School is wrong, then....regular science based school, certainly would indicate so.
3. You quotemarks around 'logic' in your post belies the manner of a man who doesn't really take it to be entirely logical. Yet you attempt to follow this "logic" to the bone. See answer 4 below.
4. Still doesnt make it true: And certainly not true enough to assert assertions like that whilst people have been killed. Look up Jerry Fallwell/911 on google.
The post came across as talk that made light of actual human suffering that not only happened but is still happening...
When the OP Poster objected, you tried to paint her motives as ugly.Theres really not anything more than that, despite how you seem to have taken it in the MVF. Now lets move on.
It's more or less my distrust for religious leaders, even in my own church, that leads me to say such cynical or paranoid things like I did on the first page. It was not jokes and was not facetiousness, more like crusty old man syndrome because I think they should move before they get crushed while worshipping (something like that happened in Okie land and several people died, but it was fire or something, and it was "warned" multiple times as a fire safety issue. I don't remember the details but I think it happened in the city called Broken Arrow in the 80s. I just think, sometimes, religious people think God will save them and people end up dying that shouldn't. I detest that.)
I apologized, of course because I did show too much grumpiness. But no one can claim that I was being insensitive to human suffering, even a little.
Yes they could/did/have. But you've apologised so lets move on and avoid your essentially undoing that apology.
But anyway.. the situation isn't getting any better:
Hopes of rescuing survivors from the earthquake that devastated Christchurch were fading today as the death toll rose to 98.
With 238 people missing and an estimated cost of £7.4 billion, New Zealand prime minister John Key declared the incident a national disaster.
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/nz-quake-death-toll-rises-to-98-1.1087006