Michael
Captain
Red Baron Fight XX and XXI Champion
Posts: 407
|
Post by Michael on Feb 23, 2010 20:05:27 GMT -5
Kevin, I am not trying to get Michael to convert to a V for Vendetta character, but I'll tell you what I use to tell all the Satanists and pagans on TOL Comparing myself and PASTOR Kevin to " satanists and pagans" is hardly mature. |
|
phoenix
Second Lieutenant
This has all just gotten so bizarre and pointless...
Posts: 80
|
Post by phoenix on Feb 23, 2010 20:44:30 GMT -5
Comparing myself and PASTOR Kevin to " satanists and pagans" is hardly mature. So is continuing to ignore the one question I have asked all thread.  But my apologies, I didn't mean it as a comparison so I'm sorry if you took offense. ;D |
|
Michael
Captain
Red Baron Fight XX and XXI Champion
Posts: 407
|
Post by Michael on Feb 23, 2010 22:02:25 GMT -5
Bin laden is an insane madman, a liar, Devil spawn, a tool of evil, satin's fist. Take your pick.
I won't try to explain what comes from a liar's mouth.
It's not worth my time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 23, 2010 23:12:10 GMT -5
Question: Can't one's behavior and actions that they have taken clearly identify said person's character so that one doesn't necessarily have to meet them to say they were either good or evil? Yes, but only if the information available on said person's character is complete, reliable, and held up to the light of truth from every angle. |
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 23, 2010 23:21:49 GMT -5
Question: Can't one's behavior and actions that they have taken clearly identify said person's character so that one doesn't necessarily have to meet them to say they were either good or evil? Yes, but only if the information available on said person's character is complete, reliable, and held up to the light of truth from every angle. From every angle? Really? So from Hitler's angle he wasn't evil. From Satan's angle, he's not wrong he should be ruling the universe instead of God. This is sounding like you've fallen down the path of moral relativism. I hope that's not the case and I'm misunderstanding you. |
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 23, 2010 23:23:58 GMT -5
Kevin, I am not trying to get Michael to convert to a V for Vendetta character, but I'll tell you what I use to tell all the Satanists and pagans on TOL Comparing myself and PASTOR Kevin to " satanists and pagans" is hardly mature. No I don't think he was doing that Michael. I understood what he was saying. He got into quite a bit of discussions with pagans and atheists over at TOL. I don't think he was directing that at you or I. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 23, 2010 23:24:25 GMT -5
All you are doing is setting up strawman arguments that can be defended if your particular worldview is not used to define terms. That is why you answered my statement by harkening back to a demand to meet your definition. It will wind up being circular and the underlying worldview (i.e. the purpose of government and why God created it) is the real problem. If you cannot define a terrorist, you have no means of accurately identifying one and no moral grounds for making the attempt. And if you could define the term in a manner that did not condemn your own statements, you would not be afraid to discuss it. Until you can present something rational and reasonable, do not fault others for calling it what it appears to be... mindless propaganda. |
|
phoenix
Second Lieutenant
This has all just gotten so bizarre and pointless...
Posts: 80
|
Post by phoenix on Feb 23, 2010 23:26:10 GMT -5
Bin laden is an insane madman, a liar, Devil spawn, a tool of evil, satin's fist. Take your pick.
Prove. It.
|
|
phoenix
Second Lieutenant
This has all just gotten so bizarre and pointless...
Posts: 80
|
Post by phoenix on Feb 23, 2010 23:30:57 GMT -5
I won't try to explain what comes from a liar's mouth. It's not worth my time. Answering my question is not worth your time? Ok, then, I suppose our conversation if finished. If you'll pardon me I'm going to go talk with the Satanists on TOL who will give me a hearing. |
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 23, 2010 23:31:54 GMT -5
Don't you dare ask me to question my faith again. You should question your faith every day. You should question God's existence, the divinity of Christ, the virgin birth and the resurrection continually. Every day you fail to do so is another day of living in defiance of God's word. Do not be so afraid to hold your beliefs up in the light of truth. They will stand the test. You will soon begin believing, not because you are a blind follower, but because of genuine conviction and evidence. Your faith will be strengthened because of it, and that is why we are told to seek truth. We are to continually seek truth at all costs, to seek understanding, to seek wisdom and to re-examine and reconsider everything. Failure to do so is rebellion against scriptural commands. I don't generally disagree with what you are saying here. There is certainly a benefit to closely examining everything you believe in light of what God's Word teaches us. That is how you become more versed in what you believe and more rooted in the faith. The problem with what you are saying isn't that. The problem with what you are saying is that you're basically saying we have to accept your view that all government is wicked or we are not examining our faith and we're only believing propaganda. I think you and Michael are having a communication problem right now, and that is the heart of it. |
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 23, 2010 23:35:25 GMT -5
All you are doing is setting up strawman arguments that can be defended if your particular worldview is not used to define terms. That is why you answered my statement by harkening back to a demand to meet your definition. It will wind up being circular and the underlying worldview (i.e. the purpose of government and why God created it) is the real problem. If you cannot define a terrorist, you have no means of accurately identifying one and no moral grounds for making the attempt. And if you could define the term in a manner that did not condemn your own statements, you would not be afraid to discuss it. Until you can present something rational and reasonable, do not fault others for calling it what it appears to be... mindless propaganda. And around and around in circles we go. I'll say what you said to Michael. Stop. Think. Re-read what I said to you and the response given. I have no problem defining a terrorist. Is it a subjective term? It can be somewhat. One person's terrorist is another person's hero. Terrorist is just one word. Why focus your whole debate on how someone defines a terrorist? Why not get to the heart of the matter? For all of your pontificating about how we are close minded, you've become very close minded yourself my friend. |
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 23, 2010 23:39:03 GMT -5
Stephen or Stephen Dale, would you identify yourselves as pure anarchists? I will give a basic definition of anarchism here: "Anarchism is a political philosophy encompassing theories and attitudes which consider the state to be unnecessary, harmful, or otherwise undesirable, and favour instead a stateless society or anarchy". This is a fairly generic definition of the term that can be found here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism. |
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 23, 2010 23:40:47 GMT -5
Since you have asked for it Stephen, and so that I avoid the accusation of being non-responsive, here is a basic definition of terrorism: (Again from Wikipedia) "Terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.[1] At present, there is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism.[2][3] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians)." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 23, 2010 23:42:21 GMT -5
I will ask again, what is truth? If you don't know what truth is, how can you claim to possess it? That is a presumptive question. I never said that "my" truth was superior or inferior to anyone else's. So you are addressing a statement I never made. There is no "your" truth or "my" truth. There is only the truth. What did you have for breakfast this morning? If you answered "Christ," then you must be telling the truth because Christ is truth! That's obviously nonsense. So when Christ said he was truth, he clearly did not mean that a relationship with him automatically anointed the believer with all truth and knowledge. And if it did, it would be ridiculous for scripture to repeatedly command us to seek truth and understanding. There is no reason to seek what one already possesses. So either the Bible is a foolish contradiction, or there is another more practical lesson in John 14 that you have yet to discover. Here we have another presumptive question. I'll offer you a presumptive question as well, just as an example: "Michael, do you worship Satan on Tuesdays or Thursdays?" As you can see, presumptive questions are a poor way to communicate. I recommend that you abandon them. There is no such thing as "my" truth. |
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 23, 2010 23:44:18 GMT -5
All you are doing is setting up strawman arguments that can be defended if your particular worldview is not used to define terms. That is why you answered my statement by harkening back to a demand to meet your definition. It will wind up being circular and the underlying worldview (i.e. the purpose of government and why God created it) is the real problem. If you cannot define a terrorist, you have no means of accurately identifying one and no moral grounds for making the attempt. And if you could define the term in a manner that did not condemn your own statements, you would not be afraid to discuss it. Until you can present something rational and reasonable, do not fault others for calling it what it appears to be... mindless propaganda. The problem is not defining terrorism. The problem is defining "What is evil", and what should be done about evil? Yes ultimately all evil will be done away with and judged by God. I know you and I agree on that. But we disagree on the belief that there is no human institution with the authority to stop evil doing right NOW. |
|
