Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
So, you're saying that believing in the Trinity is a foolish assumption on the part of the believer that the doctrine of the Trinity comes from God?Your mistake is to assume your foolishness is of God.
I think you're missing a period there.So, you're saying that believing in the Trinity is a foolish assumption on the part of the believer that the doctrine of the Trinity comes from God?
Let me fix a line of that for you:I think you're missing a period there.
Although to clarify for you:
Me: Trinity is illogical.
You: The foolishness (illogicality) of God is greater than the wisdom of man.
Me: Your response implies that regardless of how illogical Christian doctrine is, it's still superior because it is of God. Your mistake is assuming what you say (Christian doctrine) is of God.
I don't see the problem. The foolishness part came from the implied point you made when you responded with that particular bible verse.
Well no. You should have said that instead of posting a verse that said, quite clearly, that the foolishness of God is greater than the wisdom of man. (right after I accused Christian doctrine of being foolish)Let me fix a line of that for you:
Me: Your response implies that regardless of how illogical Christian doctrine is [to me], it's still superior because it is of God. Your mistake is assuming what you say (Christian doctrine) is of God.
Eh'? No comprendo amigo.I'm sorry, Frenchy, but I 've lostmy glasses, and I'll have to get back with you onthis.
But for teh record, who said I implied I (or anyone) died?
^ If this is what happens when you don't have your glasses, try not posting until you find them again.I'm sorry, Frenchy, but I 've lostmy glasses, and I'll have to get back with you onthis.
But for teh record, who said I implied I (or anyone) died?
Eh'? No comprendo amigo.
^ If this is what happens when you don't have your glasses, try not posting until you find them again.
Usted es un caballero y un erudito, amigo mío!No problemo el guapo.
Usted es un caballero y un erudito, amigo mío!
I buy those things by the dozencan't find my glasses
J'ai acheter mon ananas chez Wal-Mart!J'achète l'ananas à la bibliothèque!
C'est une excellente ... er ... that is an excellent idea!I buy those things by the dozen
and pay about two or three dollars each for them.
So I do not have to look very long before I find them.
At least el guapo knows what a plethora isNo problemo el guapo.
J'ai acheter mon ananas chez Wal-Mart!
thought is not really the right word. Its actually just a contradiction that one ends up with when trying to use emotional language without thinking about.
There is no such term other than on some opinion pages.
(That's an informational sentence.)
I don't understand why you keep bringing up evolution when we are discussing God's non-intervention policy. The biologist's view of nature accounts very well for the vast amount of suffering and wasteful death we see in the world. Your's doesn't. The only way you can retain your belief in an interventionist God in the face of the vast mountain of evidence presented by history and the world around us that man is on his own, is to wear blinkers.For instance, your example of the fortuitous dry clearing and the disabled man. You attribute this to intervention by God. Yet on that same day many millions of people around the world would have been suffering terrible pain and misery without any relief, and many would have died unpleasant deaths, including deaths in childbirth and infants of diseases like malaria. But God didn't do anything for them, instead, according to you, He chose to single out your unremarkable case in favour of all the other deserving cases, apparently because you are a selfless Christian who is one of God's good guys. Doesn't that strike you as both ludicrously unlikely and randomly callous?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?