100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
|
|
Why im Satan of course? What does that mean?  lol you wish |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't be a hypocrite. How am I being a hypocrite?  The thread is titled "is evolution compatible with the Bible" Yes and that is exactly what we were discussing before you decided to interject a quote that was taken from the very beginning of the thread. It is obvious to everyone but you. The quote interjected from the very beginning of the thread was YOUR QUOTE. lol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whether it was stated at the beginning of the thread or not you stated it not me and then you tried to say that I started it. And you call me a fiber! You are a fibber because you implied that I somehow got off topic when it was you who took a quote back from the very start of the thread (where it was being discussed with the OP by the way) and then pasted that quote during the evolutionary discussion. Yet you are denying doing this and I just quoted it! Now you are trying to blame the off topic debate on me. Not trying. I just quoted where you interrupted the debate with an off topic quote. You are the one implying I did something wrong not vice versa and you know it. Grow up. You DID do something wrong and you annoyed a lot of people by picking up my quote (from the very start of the thread) and posting it again during the debate on evolution. What is so difficult to understand here? Who are you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ImGary
on
Thu 02/12/09 07:19 PM
|
|
krimsa said: "You would be fully aware of this if you had taken the time to read and digest about the past 3 pages of this thread." Yes, I did tell you to read the last three pages of this thread which were about EVOLUTION. Isnt there something in the bible about not telling fibs Gary? Show me a fib Krimsa. You are crap starter plain and simple. You engage in character and creditbility assassination, even when it is unwarranted, at every opportunity and you dare judge me. Get a life. You told a fib when you stated that I was somehow responsible for interjecting this into the discussion about evolution when I clearly posted where you had interrupted the debate with it. Don't be a hypocrite. The thread is titled "is evolution compatible with the Bible" and was started before YOU interrupted the debate within by posting the FIRST so called contradiction over Baptism. I am sooooo sorry that I was stupid enough to follow you over the cliff. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What are you talking about? This was stated way at the beginning of the thread. So you go and quote it and interrupt during a debate about evolution that was going on like 15 pages (or more later.) What I quoted was your interruption of that debate which was already in progress and ON TOPIC. I don’t understand your second comment at all. You were the one that interjected non related subject matter. Are you implying I did something wrong? I should report you right now.  Whether it was stated at the beginning of the thread or not you stated it not me and then you tried to say that I started it. And you call me a fiber! lol Now you are trying to blame the off topic debate on me-lol. Thank you for admitting finally that you started the off topic discussion. You are the one implying I did something wrong not vice versa and you know it. Grow up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ImGary
on
Thu 02/12/09 07:08 PM
|
|
krimsa said: "You would be fully aware of this if you had taken the time to read and digest about the past 3 pages of this thread." Yes, I did tell you to read the last three pages of this thread which were about EVOLUTION. Isnt there something in the bible about not telling fibs Gary? Show me a fib Krimsa. You are crap starter plain and simple. You engage in character and creditbility assassination, even when it is unwarranted, at every opportunity and you dare judge me. Get a life. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ImGary
on
Thu 02/12/09 07:26 PM
|
|
This was your original quote taken from this very thread when you ORIGIONALLY bought up this off topic discussion; Gary said: Well according to you, God can not be tempted? Alright if you fail to see the contradiction there, I will move on. I keep notes as you are well aware.. Did Jesus baptize anyone? YES John 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. NO John 4:2 Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples. Krimsa John 4:2 States that Jesus baptized his disciples, it does not state that he did not perform any baptisms. You have taken this scripture out of context. HELLO- that is your quote and my reply! In order for me to reply to a quote the quote has to exist. What is so hard to understand here? You stated this what you call OFF TOPIC contradiction on THE FIRST PAGE of this thread- I didn't join until like the 25th page-HELLO And stop with the off topic crap, I see where you are going but the Mingle administrators aren't stupid. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ImGary
on
Thu 02/12/09 06:50 PM
|
|
I apologize. I cant even remember who brought up this contradiction but they did and then feral and Eljay jumped in. Someone needs to just start a separate biblical contradiction thread. I agree it has no place and this one in particular is stupid. All that happened was either whoever wrote this was drunk at the wheel or someone inserted a contradictory verse later because they didnt read John 3. You brought it up. That Gary guy brought it up and then you and Feral leaped on it like chimps at feeding time screeching. No Maam-that Gary guy did not bring it up- YOU my dear Krimsa brought it up- to use one of your quotes "You would be fully aware of this if you had taken the time to read and digest about the past 3 pages of this thread.". You brought it up and I posted a response. To recap Jesus baptised with the Holy Spirit NOT water. One of the verses in John that you quoted is talking only of baptism by water(which Jesus did not perform) and the other is speaking of two different types of baptism. As I stated if Peter was in the river performing a baptism of water while Jesus was performing a baptism of the Holy Spirit "while they tarried", then Jesus was performing baptisms with his disciples. I don't expect you to understand or agree- I am posting this in case a babe in Christ is reading this thread and is confused. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ImGary
on
Tue 02/10/09 11:03 AM
|
|
You are right. Go in peace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ImGary
on
Tue 02/10/09 10:40 AM
|
|
In response to your second response above: I should be exempt because I do not make it a habit of arguing topics that can not be proven to people with closed minds. If you are exempt from making rational statements based in logic and providing supportive evidence for your claims (other than scripture) then what do you want us to do about that if we are capable of this? It would be like me bringing out a Ferrari to race your 6 cylinder Honda Civic. I stated an opinion thats all. Really? It sounded more like you were attempting to create an argument. I am perfectly willing to listen to any new or additional information you can bring to the table at this point in time. I obviously must like to argue pointless debates that can not possibly be proven either way. I don’t agree with this statement. The overall evolutionary sequence is extensively documented and no longer open to credible dispute. You would be fully aware of this if you had taken the time to read and digest about the past 3 pages of this thread. Lets recap my first post today- It basically stated that the scientists are divided and that theories do not equal facts. With that being cleared up, how is that irrational? You agreed in your response that the scientists were divided but now you claim that I made an irrational statement. Hello. Furthermore, you now state that my first statement(my opinion) sounded to you like I was trying to create an argument. As stated you basically did not refute my statement but instead made excuses for the scientists being divided by offering a sarcasitic remark. Thats rational? In response to your last response- I have wasted enough time by defending my right to state an opinion(which obviously was a mistake). I am severally bored today but I have no interest at all in the theories that you believe to be facts in the last three pages of this thread. I do not wish to debate this topic despite what you believe. You will most certainly twist this around somehow- it doesn't take long after meeting you to understand this fact. You like to debate, that is fine. I respectfully disagree with your views on this topic. I believe what I believe, and you believe what you believe. I should have known better than to post an opinion in response to a statement made by someone who averages 40 plus posts a day on this site-lol. Lets agree to disagree . Peace. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would be a waste of time to try because you or another Agnostic would only ask for irrefutable proof. That’s interesting. I have never once told you I was an Agnostic yet you immediately jump to this conclusion because I poo hoo the Christian god. There is no irrefutable proof on either side of this debate. There are able Defenders on both sides. I have never asked any Christian on this forum for anything other than a logical rebuttal to the Theory of Evolution and support for the biblical account of Creation. Why should you be exempt from providing the exact same level of credible evidence that the proponents of biological evolution have been demonstrating on these threads? It is a pointless topic to debate in my mind. Then why bother? Some would ask then why am I posting in this thread You guessed it. In response to your second response above: I should be exempt because I do not make it a habit of arguing topics that can not be proven to people with closed minds. I stated an opinion thats all. In response to your third and forth responses above: I answered both of those questions in my last post. Conveniently, you did not paste the entire quote. I will restate then: I obviously must like to argue pointless debates that can not possibly be proven either way. Catch up to the sarcasm. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would be a waste of time to try because you or another Agnostic would only ask for irrefutable proof. There is no irrefutable proof on either side of this debate. There are able Defenders on both sides.
It is a pointless topic to debate in my mind. Some would ask then why am I posting in this thread- well thats a good question- I obviously must like to argue pointless debates that can not possibly be proven either way. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ImGary
on
Tue 02/10/09 09:19 AM
|
|
Krimsa said:
MS these apologetics sites have zero credibility. They are Christians who sit there and try to defend the bible in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence. End quote What is overwhelming is how the scientists are at odds with each others theories. More and more each day there are scientists that side with creationism but most are automatically discredited by Agnostics because of the possibility of Christian bias. The scientists differ in their beliefs, theories are theories, not fact or evidence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shirley Temple
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well according to you, God can not be tempted? Alright if you fail to see the contradiction there, I will move on. I keep notes as you are well aware.. Did Jesus baptize anyone? YES John 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. NO John 4:2 Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples. Krimsa John 4:2 States that Jesus baptized his disciples, it does not state that he did not perform any baptisms. You have taken this scripture out of context. I actually looked on an apologetist website and it said something similar so...nope. After further research myself I have concluded that John 4:2 is literal in some form and figurative in some form. As there are several different types of Baptism explained in the Bible one must take this into consideration while trying to deduce with a logical mind the true meaning of this scripture. As stated in John 1:33 Jesus baptised with the Holy Spirit not water, so if He were performing a baptism of the Spirit while standing next to John who was performing a baptism of water, then they would both be performing a baptism. John 1:33 "I still do not know that he was the one, but God, who sent me to baptize with water, had said to me, 'You will see the Spirit come down and stay on a man; he is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.'" John 3:22 is obviously speaking of both types of baptism and John 4:2 is speaking of baptism by water only. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walt Whitman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well according to you, God can not be tempted? Alright if you fail to see the contradiction there, I will move on. I keep notes as you are well aware.. Did Jesus baptize anyone? YES John 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. NO John 4:2 Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples. Krimsa John 4:2 States that Jesus baptized his disciples, it does not state that he did not perform any baptisms. You have taken this scripture out of context. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kim Basinger
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taylor Swift
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
boots and a holster nothing else
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
