Freethought & Rationalism Archive

NZSkep · 11-26-2005, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Vestal

In a way, I'm glad that was cut short. I think Bible John had already shot his quiver empty.

thats what comes of spending all your time on the internet doing 'research' :sneaky:

bobhope2112 · 11-26-2005, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Vestal

In a way, I'm glad that was cut short. I think Bible John had already shot his quiver empty.

I'm disappointed that he did not manage to make a single responsive posting. His introduction seemed entirely last minute, but his first full posting did seem to stay on track, or at least repeatedly cross the track. It's unfortunate that we won't get to see him actually address Pervy's points.

Diogenes the Cynic · 11-26-2005, 10:01 AM

Since the debate is over, this thread is now officially unstuck.

DtC, Moderator, BC&H

Evilicious · 11-26-2005, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NZSkep

thats what comes of spending all your time on the internet doing 'research' :sneaky:

It's disappointing, isn't it? I was looking forward to learning more about bestiality since it appeared that Bible John had researched it extensively.

Johnny Skeptic · 11-26-2005, 10:50 AM

The main issue is not whether or not the Bible condemns homosexuality, but whether or not God condemns homosexuality. Who says that the Bible always speaks for God?

Bible John · 11-26-2005, 11:17 AM

I congradulate Pevry on a job well done. But I needed more time in this debate, given myschedule and circumstances. I admit fault for not communicating this from the begginning.

John

Bible John · 11-26-2005, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilicious

It's disappointing, isn't it? I was looking forward to learning more about bestiality since it appeared that Bible John had researched it extensively.

I needed more time in this debate. I should have mentioned a time frame of up to two weeks from the begginning. I am having some economic and other issues at the moment.

Bible John · 11-26-2005, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonOfFred

Is anyone surprised that "Bible John" seems to have missed the deadline again?

Yes I needed up to 2 weeks to post as I am having some personnel issues at the moment.

Bible John · 11-26-2005, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobhope2112

I'm disappointed that he did not manage to make a single responsive posting. His introduction seemed entirely last minute, but his first full posting did seem to stay on track, or at least repeatedly cross the track. It's unfortunate that we won't get to see him actually address Pervy's points.

I needed more time and should have communicated this from the begginning.

Regarding your other statements read this.

2 Corinthians 4:4 (New King James Version)
4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.

2 Corinthians 4:4 (New International Version)
4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

Bible John · 11-26-2005, 11:36 AM

2 Corinthians 4:4 (New International Version)
4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilicious

Does Bible John believe he sees with the eyes of the Lord? That sounds a bit like heresy. Or something.

I think Lea DeLaria said it best: "What do you mean, you 'don't believe in homosexuality?' It's not like the Easter Bunny, your belief isn't necessary."

Homosexuality EXISTS. I'd like to see Bible John prove that it doesn't. :rolling:

Playing the Martyr right off the bat. :thumbs:

It's a sin to use improper grammar.

Relevance to a formal debate?

If he could care less, that means he cares a little bit. Right?

Is it relevant what your opponent thinks of you?

When exactly did evangelicals follow all the laws in the Law of Moses?

Scatological references! :thumbs:

Don't most serious scholars say that it's best to go to the source documents in the original languages, instead of relying on translations? If the Bible's so important, why not take the time to learn those languages?

If they were homosexuals, why would it make any sense whatsoever to offer his DAUGHTERS?:huh:

Rape isn't the same thing as homosexuality and that's quite easy to check in any dictionary.

From the preferred NASB translation: "Ezekiel 16:49"Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy. 50 "Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me Therefore I removed them when I saw it."

If homosexuality (love how he always capitalizes it, BTW) was the most severe, then why does it not appear in Ezekiel? Hmmm...."arrogance, abundant food and careless ease, but did not help the poor and needy." Doesn't that sound like the Republican Party Platform?

Bible John watches Gay Porn! :thumbs:

Kind of like Mardi Gras?

Sure, if you SEARCH for bestiality you can find it, but I've NEVER had a problem with bestiality suddenly popping up in my browser! I think there might be something Bible John's not telling us.

I think someone needs to consult a dictionary:

Homosexual: (someone who practices homosexuality; having a sexual attraction to persons of the same sex)

Bestiality: (sexual activity between a person and an animal)

Is he just confused?

I'm not the one who has bestiality magically jump onto my computer screen. It's SO not an issue for me.

Because the theocrats would kill them? Not exactly a GOOD argument for Christianity. Quite the opposite, in fact. Christian Theocracy=More Dead People. Thanks, but no thanks.

Wasn't he just talking about stoning us to death? Is there some sort of cognitive disconnect here?

Is that equally true for the sin of gluttony? I love you, I just hate your sinful fat ass! I don't think that would go over too well at those Church potluck dinners.

More with the "put to death" stuff. Somehow, I'm just NOT feeling the love. I dunno. Maybe it's just me.

And the earth is flat and Galileo was wrong. Christianity has always been such a friend to science, hasn't it?

I do like how he switches back and forth between Bible translations to get the most apparently condemning version.

11-26-2005, 10:50 AM	#55
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Homosexuality The main issue is not whether or not the Bible condemns homosexuality, but whether or not God condemns homosexuality. Who says that the Bible always speaks for God?

11-26-2005, 11:17 AM	#56
Bible John Banned Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: SF Bay Area California Posts: 834	I needed more time I congradulate Pevry on a job well done. But I needed more time in this debate, given myschedule and circumstances. I admit fault for not communicating this from the begginning. John

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-26-2005, 10:01 AM	#53
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	Since the debate is over, this thread is now officially unstuck. DtC, Moderator, BC&H

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.