|
Post by blondie on Apr 23, 2007 16:03:57 GMT -5
Isaiah 13: 9. Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, 16. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes 18. Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children. 22. And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces:
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 23, 2007 16:10:22 GMT -5
I have experienced just a tiny bit of the FIERCE WRATH OF ALMIGHTY GOD!
I would say you might be on 'thin ice' with HIM!
|
|
|
Post by blondie on Apr 23, 2007 16:11:51 GMT -5
I have experienced just a tiny bit of the FIERCE WRATH OF ALMIGHTY GOD!
I would say you might be on 'thin ice' with HIM! All I did was quote the Bible.
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 23, 2007 16:15:02 GMT -5
I have experienced just a tiny bit of the FIERCE WRATH OF ALMIGHTY GOD!
I would say you might be on 'thin ice' with HIM! All I did was quote the Bible. Your Blasphemous picture of HIS Son is not in the Holy Bible!
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Apr 23, 2007 16:20:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by blondie on Apr 23, 2007 16:24:28 GMT -5
All I did was quote the Bible. Your Blasphemous picture of HIS Son is not in the Holy Bible!What do I care? I ain't afraid of no ghost. The picture came from here: objectiveministries.org/kidz/crafts.htmlI thought it was for real at first.
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 23, 2007 16:28:19 GMT -5
Not being 'afraid' will not negate the reality of HIS WRATH!
|
|
|
Post by blondie on Apr 23, 2007 16:31:53 GMT -5
Pretending ain't gonna get you into heaven either.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 23, 2007 16:32:41 GMT -5
This thread is only for Pro-Choicers. If other groups would like to discuss a topic among those of the same belief, then it should be respected across the board. My opinion. Sorry for my intrusion on this thread.
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 23, 2007 16:44:20 GMT -5
Pretending ain't gonna get you into heaven either. So.....you just acknowledged there is a Heaven! Maybe there is a little hope for you?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hobbs on Apr 23, 2007 17:24:05 GMT -5
Show the world that you Love Our Lord..with the Laughing Jesus thong. www.cafepress.com/objectivemin/569716 On a more serious note: why is posting a picture of a smiling Jesus next to the words "Loving our Lord" blasphemous? That thought process sounds a little Muslim-ish to me. Would you rather him look mad, filled with anger and fierce wrath? Would that be less blasphemous?
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 23, 2007 17:33:57 GMT -5
Probably because of who the picture is coming from. Historically it can not be shown that the motivation or it's desired effect is positive in nature. www.cafepress.com/antireligion/639003
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 23, 2007 17:38:10 GMT -5
I believe the TRUE implication of the LOL under the picture is how I took it to mean......LAUGH OUT LOUD, especially with the uncharacteristic grin on the face!
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 23, 2007 17:41:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Dale Jackson on Apr 23, 2007 17:45:58 GMT -5
Lawman, You can not hold non-believers to your standards. The Muslims in Europe tried to do that. Here was the result
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 23, 2007 17:51:10 GMT -5
Lawman, You can not hold non-believers to your standards. The Muslims in Europe tried to do that. Here was the result Hey, do what you want to do....you're fre..I guess! GOD allows a lot of bad....HE allowed HIS SON to be nailed to a Cross! But, there is a judgement Day! You can take that up with HIM...not me! I just tell the Truth as I know HIM! (it)
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 23, 2007 17:54:47 GMT -5
Dale,
So, you think blondies' post was meant as a subtle jab? I'm still trying to figure out how his scripture quotes relate to pro-choicers. All I can see is another troll posting to irritate Christians on the forum.
|
|
|
Post by Dale Jackson on Apr 23, 2007 17:57:39 GMT -5
It was meant to provoke you. As was the Muhammed bomb cartoon. Wrong for them to not want people to draw those photos and wrong for you to try to hold blondie to your religious standard. Not your job, if God wants her to burn because of lol jesus, then maybe Erwin was right about New Orleans.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 23, 2007 18:04:42 GMT -5
Ok. Just wanted to know what types of provocation on the forum are acceptable, if not encouraged, by you.
|
|
|
Post by Dale Jackson on Apr 23, 2007 18:12:13 GMT -5
I wouldn't say encouraged, let's see if it turns into a 40 post pissing contest, as of now it seems to actually be a discussion. It may be off topic, but it is still a conversation.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 23, 2007 18:19:57 GMT -5
We shall see. Blondie hasn't followed up with a volley yet. LOL. I will leave this thread with this link from an Agnostic. www.duomo.ac.nz/acnz/?p=431
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Apr 23, 2007 18:21:55 GMT -5
I just find it funny that lawman fell for Blondie's trap.
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 23, 2007 18:27:25 GMT -5
I just find it funny that lawman fell for Blondie's trap. Maybe some set traps.......maybe others should shut theirs?
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Apr 23, 2007 18:34:24 GMT -5
Maybe some set traps.......maybe others should shut theirs? Well, since you asked.....here's your answer! ;D
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Apr 23, 2007 19:48:02 GMT -5
Not that this particular response has anything to do with the thread topic, but I thought that the "Buddy Christ" statue in "Dogma" was just about as funny as anything I'd seen in a long time.
I'm secure enough in my spiritual beliefs so as not to be threatened by others who might disagree with them.
I'm also secure enough in my pro-life convictions to be prepared to 'enter the belly of the beast' (so to speak) and debate the issue with those who think otherwise. You're never going to get any better defending your views by speaking only with those who already agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by solinvictus on Apr 23, 2007 20:30:48 GMT -5
I can see the abortion issue as a conservative/libertarian one from these two perspectives. First, abortion is cheaper than raising a child on the public welfare system, so it's fiscally conservative to abort an unwanted fetus rather than creating another neglected welfare baby with an absent mother and a "babydaddy" who's being processed by our criminal justice system. Secondly, it's a libertarian issue because it's not the public who has to carry the child to term; it's the pregnant woman. If she wishes to cease this process and abort the fetus, then that's her business.
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Apr 23, 2007 20:36:42 GMT -5
The actual abortion issue boils down to when life begins. That's where these arguments all end up at because that's what's most important.
|
|
|
Post by solinvictus on Apr 23, 2007 20:39:28 GMT -5
I personally believe life begins when the fetus is realistically viable outside the uterus. At present, I'd likely kick our current first trimester statute back a bit.
|
|
|
Post by zoomixer on Apr 23, 2007 20:49:56 GMT -5
I'm curious. Why do you consider that to be the point that life begins? And as our technology improves, we are able to save babies at younger and younger ages. It's not impossible to think that we would be able, at some point, to "grow" a child outside of the uterus from conception on. Does the point that life begins change as our technology changes?
|
|
|
Post by solinvictus on Apr 23, 2007 20:59:11 GMT -5
Sticky issue; medical technology has improved younger premature babies chances of survival, so I'm not certain. Yes, I can see a completely in vitro process in the future.
|
|