LittleNipper wrote:Man sins. God simply spelled it out so that man would get it. Man is rather dense.Other than Christ, man is unable to fulfill the LAW. That is because of his sinful nature, and why Christ needed to become the REAL sacrifice that all the animal sacrifices of the Bible only hinted at...
The Erotic Apologist wrote:LittleNipper wrote:Man sins. God simply spelled it out so that man would get it. Man is rather dense.
Like most of your posts, this only applies if you buy into Christianity's supernatural faith claims. If you don't, it's pretty much irrelevant.
You're confusing atheism with naturalism, and in any case I'm not an atheist, which you would know if you bothered to read any of the other posts.LittleNipper wrote:Like most of your posts you prescribe only atheistic thought processes as being relevant.
What is it about fundamentalists that makes them resort to name calling when their arguments fail?LittleNipper wrote:You are very narrow minded and egotistical to a fault in this regard.
Your problem is not that you post biblical responses; your problem is that you have nothing to offer that doesn't depend on an a priori assumption of biblical divinity. In other words, you have nothing to offer people who don't already believe in the Bible.LittleNipper wrote:And while I do post biblical responses.
On the contrary, I'm contributing by offering an opposing viewpoint. I thought that was pretty obvious.LittleNipper wrote:Your time is spent being negative without contributing.
ludwigm wrote:I wouldn't pass the abrahamic test.
If it were about my daughter or my four stepchildren, three grandchildren or seventeen stepgrandchildren (the listed 5+20 are all equal for me, by the way) I would say "f* you, no".
There is no god.
If there were one --- assumed but not allowed --- then he/she/it would not do or institute the many s*** written in Bible or quran or whatever so-called scripture.
as an answer to above, LittleNipper wrote:Man sins. God simply spelled it out so that man would get it. Man is rather dense.
subgenius wrote:Wow, glad to know you support infanticide.
Yet I clearly stated that this episode is the introduction of morality as it were. That something being "perfectly natural" is actually not the measure for good, bad...preferred or not preferred.
For example:
infanticide - "attributed to stress causing factors ... ... considered pathological and maladaptive"
see, there is "moral" implication there...yet....
So, while we see homosexuality occur "naturally" in a severe minority population across a severe minority of species this in no way validates or invalidates its moral implication. However, good science - especially evolutionary science - can only conclude that homosexuality as a "natural" occurrence is maladaptive and the product of defective genes or defective psychology.
(by the way, nice how you compared the LGBT to intestinal parasites (gut worms)...especially since, ironically, gut worms may be transmitted by anilingus)....
but there is hope...science is moving in the right direction
"Hope for commercial gut worm vaccine"
http://www.heraldscotland.com/business/ ... e.22899420
ludwigm wrote:ludwigm wrote:There is no god.
If there were one --- assumed but not allowed --- then he/she/it would not do or institute the many s*** written in Bible or quran or whatever so-called scripture.as an answer to above, LittleNipper wrote:Man sins. God simply spelled it out so that man would get it. Man is rather dense.
This blabber has nothing to do with my comment.
As expressed in Hungarian, even there is no nodding acquaintance between the two. "Köszönő viszonyban sincsenek."
ludwigm wrote:ludwigm wrote:There is no god.
If there were one --- assumed but not allowed --- then he/she/it would not do or institute the many s*** written in Bible or quran or whatever so-called scripture.as an answer to above, LittleNipper wrote:Man sins. God simply spelled it out so that man would get it. Man is rather dense.
This blabber has nothing to do with my comment.
As expressed in Hungarian, even there is no nodding acquaintance between the two. "Köszönő viszonyban sincsenek."
The Erotic Apologist wrote:LittleNipper wrote:Man sins. God simply spelled it out so that man would get it. Man is rather dense.
Like most of your posts, this only applies if you buy into Christianity's supernatural faith claims. If you don't, it's pretty much irrelevant.
Bazooka wrote:subgenius wrote:Wow, glad to know you support infanticide.
Yet I clearly stated that this episode is the introduction of morality as it were. That something being "perfectly natural" is actually not the measure for good, bad...preferred or not preferred.
For example:
infanticide - "attributed to stress causing factors ... ... considered pathological and maladaptive"
see, there is "moral" implication there...yet....
So, while we see homosexuality occur "naturally" in a severe minority population across a severe minority of species this in no way validates or invalidates its moral implication. However, good science - especially evolutionary science - can only conclude that homosexuality as a "natural" occurrence is maladaptive and the product of defective genes or defective psychology.
(by the way, nice how you compared the LGBT to intestinal parasites (gut worms)...especially since, ironically, gut worms may be transmitted by anilingus)....
but there is hope...science is moving in the right direction
"Hope for commercial gut worm vaccine"
http://www.heraldscotland.com/business/ ... e.22899420
Shades, can you pin this ^ somewhere under the heading "How to create a straw man"
