Originally posted by Cow Poke
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Christianity Today Op Ed
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostI thought amen's were trivial, and that people that took offense at amen's were a few nuts short of a full set. That certainly is what you and others told me when I took offense at amens.
And it was also mentioned quite forcefully that amening a post does not necessarily amen the entirety of the post.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostOx, is this the part you're amening?!
Do I need to make that bigger or bolder?
You need to hold to your own standards CP.
You and others most certainly do.
You and others consistently attempt to trivialize legitimate concerns about Trump's policies and actions by accusing those raising those concerns as irrational and afflicted with "TDS".
You post here more than I do CP - by something close to a factor of 10.
(But, you'll note that on the "blogging", I was referring specifically to Charles, who rarely has a point of his own, but constantly nannies the conservatives, and amens the... um... other people)Last edited by Cow Poke; 01-20-2020, 01:47 PM.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostI think the only "entertainment" is that after you obviously manipulated and got caught doing so you are now acting in a very inappropriate way.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostTrivial, yes, but entertaining.
Which is why I ASKED, Jim....
Do I need to make that bigger or bolder?
If I weren't ASKING, your little rant might actually have a point, Jim, but.... sheeesh, I ASKED.
Honestly, Jim, I think this is more evidence of TDS.
Because of you who exhibit symptoms of TDS like to jump to wild conclusions like I illustrated in my list that you mocked.
Not only more in quantity, but in quality and clarity, too!
(But, you'll note that on the "blogging", I was referring specifically to Charles, who rarely has a point of his own, but constantly nannies the conservatives, and amens the... um... other people)
But today is not that day.Last edited by oxmixmudd; 01-20-2020, 02:32 PM.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostSo, as long as I provide an "or", I can accuse you of being a serial rapist OR a Tweb Nanny, and as long as one of those can be defended.....
Thanks, Charles, for the entertainment.
My point, which I made clearly and you chose to not respond to, was that the assertions that one is not a Christian and one cannot be a legitimate commentator on Scripture are closely linked -- even, I'd argue, that asserting the latter almost necessitates the former. The clauses were paired deliberately and specifically to identify their close tie while still acknowledging them as separate assertions. If you think "serial rapist" and "TWeb Nanny" are similarly closely tied, I suppose that's an argument you can try to make.
But I would not suggest that strategy.
--Sam"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostThe problem for you is that your understanding of scripture is at odds with your social views. If your interpretation of Exodus is correct (or at least how you understand it to have been interpreted) then it is morally permissible for a woman to have an abortion if she catches it early enough, and there is nothing Biblical you can say against it even though this apparently rankles you. Is that dogma I see creeping into your post? "Hoisted by your own petard", as the saying goes.
I do not think it is proper to use the passage in Exodus as a guideline for abortion because its purpose is to establish case law for an unintentional action and is not meant to define the "value" of the child at various stages of its prenatal development.
From the Article.
Plus there were two other words Moses could have used to denote Miscarriage nepel and sakal.
also from article.
The noun nepel[11] means "miscarriage" or "abortion," and is used three times:......
Job 3:16 "Or like a miscarriage which is discarded, I would not be, as infants that never saw light."
Eccl. 6:3-4 "If a man fathers a hundred children and lives many years, however many they be, but his soul is not satisfied with good things, and he does not even have a proper burial, then I say, 'Better the miscarriage than he, for it comes in futility and goes into obscurity.'"
Psalms 58:8 "Let them be as a snail which melts away as it goes along, like the miscarriages of a woman which never see the sun."
The verb sakal[12] means "to be bereaved" and is used four times, including one time when it's actually translated "abort:"
Genesis 31:38 "These twenty years I have been with you; your ewes and your female goats have not miscarried, nor have I eaten the rams of your flocks."
Exodus 23:26 "There shall be no one miscarrying or barren in your land; I will fulfill the number of your days."
Hosea 9:14 "Give them, O Lord-- what wilt Thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts."
Job 21:10 "His ox mates without fail; his cow calves and does not abort."
If Moses had 2 words that would denote a dead child coming out of the womb why did he choose one that in all instances it is used is translated as living hmm?Last edited by RumTumTugger; 01-20-2020, 03:11 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostMy point, which I made clearly and you chose to not respond to, was that the assertions that one is not a Christian
and one cannot be a legitimate commentator on Scripture are closely linked
-- even, I'd argue, that asserting the latter almost necessitates the former.
The clauses were paired deliberately and specifically to identify their close tie while still acknowledging them as separate assertions.
If you think "serial rapist" and "TWeb Nanny" are similarly closely tied, I suppose that's an argument you can try to make.
But I would not suggest that strategy.
--SamThe first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostPerhaps one day you will actually try to engage honestly and legitimately with one of my replies to you.
But today is not that day.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostNo. As I already stated, I believe somebody can be a Christian and STILL be wrong on issues.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostNo. It's because he's only using the scripture to justify his political aspirations and to justify his own lifestyle - and the lost world praises his "refreshing" approach to the Bible. And you left out my reference to his pro=abortion stand, squishy though it may be.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI did, Jim --- You just refuse to see it. I think it's part of your condition. You're posting really wacky stuff, and I DO answer it, but then you come up with this crap, or goofy smilies.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostKeep trying, you'll figure it out eventually. The first step would be to stop trying to divine motives.
The second step would be to stop assuming the motives are necessarily bad.
Again, when you master that, let me know, k?
We could start there. I'm sure if you will try, we will see nearly instant improvement in the quality of your replies.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostWhen you master that, Jim, demonstrate it.
Yeah, like you do repeatedly with Trump?
Again, when you master that, let me know, k?
Hypocrite much?
You know, if you put as much thought into the subject matter of your replies as you do figuring out pithy little jabs, you might find yourself engaged in productive conversation a larger percentage of the time.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostYou are so predictable.
You know, if you put as much thought into the subject matter of your replies as you do figuring out pithy little jabs, you might find yourself engaged in productive conversation a larger percentage of the time.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostLead the way, Ox. Come on, you can do it!My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by RumTumTugger View PostActually it is a mistranslated as Miscarriage in the NASB as Greg Koukl points out the 2 hebrew words used in that instance have been used to denote a living birth.here in fact Yasa means to go or come forth.
From the Article.
Plus there were two other words Moses could have used to denote Miscarriage nepel and sakal.
also from article.
The noun nepel[11] means "miscarriage" or "abortion," and is used three times:......
Job 3:16 "Or like a miscarriage which is discarded, I would not be, as infants that never saw light."
Eccl. 6:3-4 "If a man fathers a hundred children and lives many years, however many they be, but his soul is not satisfied with good things, and he does not even have a proper burial, then I say, 'Better the miscarriage than he, for it comes in futility and goes into obscurity.'"
Psalms 58:8 "Let them be as a snail which melts away as it goes along, like the miscarriages of a woman which never see the sun."
The verb sakal[12] means "to be bereaved" and is used four times, including one time when it's actually translated "abort:"
Genesis 31:38 "These twenty years I have been with you; your ewes and your female goats have not miscarried, nor have I eaten the rams of your flocks."
Exodus 23:26 "There shall be no one miscarrying or barren in your land; I will fulfill the number of your days."
Hosea 9:14 "Give them, O Lord-- what wilt Thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts."
Job 21:10 "His ox mates without fail; his cow calves and does not abort."
If Moses had 2 words that would denote a dead child coming out of the womb why did he choose one that in all instances it is used is translated as living hmm?Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seer, Today, 11:40 AM
|
2 responses
31 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 03:28 PM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 06:30 AM
|
15 responses
79 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 04:20 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 11:24 AM
|
25 responses
144 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Today, 04:13 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, Yesterday, 09:13 AM
|
43 responses
241 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:07 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 06-02-2024, 09:15 AM
|
31 responses
150 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:12 PM
|
Comment