A simple question for the pro life

Stelakh said:
Nice. Quotes from a superhero movie. Now we know where you get a lot of information.

More children are put up for adoption every single year than there are children who are adopted in the same year.

By the way, since seems you advocate adoption, how may children have you adopted yourself?
Click to expand...

Two!
 
Stelakh said:
Does that percentage really matter? Does it?

Who are you to dictate whether or not other people must be forced to have the baby? That's the question, partriot666.
Click to expand...

Because that is what you brought up and throwing 666 into my name isn't clever it's childish.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
but that isn't what happened......what happened is that you wanted to substitute an interpretation which was not only worse than that taught by Christianity, but you tried to pretend that it's a better interpretation......if it is wrong to say something is true when it isn't, why is it better to rely on your statement which not only isn't there, but contradicts everything Christianity DOES find in the Bible......what is truly irrelevant to the issue is what Stelakh believes......
Click to expand...

I didn't state a belief or an interpretation. I stated a fact: The bible is utterly silent on the exact nature of Satan's existence.

It does not identify him as a god OR angel (although, oddly, it identifies him as a dragon).

Belief doesn't come into that equation, nor does interpretation.

It's absolutely wrong to say something is true when it isn't. As a result, saying that the bible definitively tells us that Satan is an angel is absolutely wrong.

Again: This has nothing to do with belief. It has everything to do with the fact that you're arguing an interpretation, not hard, specific fact.

And again, why can't you just admit that the bible doesn't directly tell us what Satan actually is? That's the question.

The question is not, "What do you, I or anyone else INTERPRET Satan to be." If that was the question you could answer any way you wanted to; "Why, he's a kumquat, because that's what I believe!"

But that's NOT the question. The question is, AGAIN:

Does the bible, at any point, directly and specifically, tell us that Satan is an angel? I'm still waiting for your answer, and by answer I do not mean the extensive linguistic Terpsichore you've been engaging in as you continue to attempt to avoid answering with a simple, truthful statement to a simple question.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
sure you did.....you said there are many gods, some of them are the personification of evil and Satan is one of them.....
Click to expand...

"There's more than one god out there in human history. And many of the world's religions, past and present, had a concept of the personification of evil. The Satan (it's a title) is just one of them, but he was never directly identified as an angel by the bible."

See, when I started a new sentence saying, "And many of the world's religions, past and present, had a personification of evil," you might, if you squint really hard and try to bang those two brain cells of yours together, might... you might just notice that I never, ever, not once, at any time, said some of the gods are personifications of evil (incidentally, some of them are, but I didn't proceed further with that particular line).

That's your interpretation, but it's wrong.

If I had said, "There are many gods and some of them are the personification of evil..." without separating the ideas or thoughts into individual sentences, then you might have an argument there.

Instead, you're displaying an understanding of grammatical structure and contextual comprehension that usually leads to top-notch careers in the subway-guitar-playing industry.
 
Stelakh said:
You don't seem to understand what I'm saying, here.

I don't care what anyone believes, even myself, when it comes to the law. Religion should not be writing law, period.

Religion writing law is what gave us such things as, including but not limited to:

  • Mary Tudor's terrifying reign - ended in 1558
  • The Crusades - ended in the 15th century
  • The view of women as property - no longer in the US
  • The forced lack of education for women - no longer in the US
  • Legal abuse of women - no longer in the US
  • The stoning to death for adultery - doesn't pertain to the US
  • The stoning to death for seeing another person's genitals - doesn't pertain to the US
  • There are hundreds more stoning offenses - doesn't pertain to the US
  • The hanging (and in one case crushing) deaths of innocent people in Salem - ended in 1693
  • Unending war in and with the middle east - then tell them to surrender
  • Discrimination being written into the fabric of American society - now you're insane; because the threads of racism are being removed from the "fabric", except for the behavior of the BLM and liberals
  • The war on non-Christians - stop attacking Christians
  • ISIS - and....??
  • The Taliban - and....??
    [*}Boko Haram - outside of the US
  • Hezbollah - outside of the US
  • Do I really need to keep going, or have you gotten the point?
Click to expand...

Could you repeat it; because some of your sniffles got in the way of it being understandable?
 
Stelakh said:
I didn't state a belief or an interpretation. I stated a fact: The bible is utterly silent on the exact nature of Satan's existence.

It does not identify him as a god OR angel (although, oddly, it identifies him as a dragon).

Belief doesn't come into that equation, nor does interpretation.

It's absolutely wrong to say something is true when it isn't. As a result, saying that the bible definitively tells us that Satan is an angel is absolutely wrong.

Again: This has nothing to do with belief. It has everything to do with the fact that you're arguing an interpretation, not hard, specific fact.

And again, why can't you just admit that the bible doesn't directly tell us what Satan actually is? That's the question.

The question is not, "What do you, I or anyone else INTERPRET Satan to be." If that was the question you could answer any way you wanted to; "Why, he's a kumquat, because that's what I believe!"

But that's NOT the question. The question is, AGAIN:

Does the bible, at any point, directly and specifically, tell us that Satan is an angel? I'm still waiting for your answer, and by answer I do not mean the extensive linguistic Terpsichore you've been engaging in as you continue to attempt to avoid answering with a simple, truthful statement to a simple question.
Click to expand...

If you want your war on non-Christians to stop, you should really put an end to your war on Christianity. :D
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Could you repeat it; because some of your sniffles got in the way of it being understandable?
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand.

It doesn't matter when they were, or where they are. Human history is replete with the evils caused by religion taking hold of law. That's the point.

If you can't see further than "right now, right here," well, honestly, it doesn't explain anything that hasn't been explained - again - throughout human history.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
If you want your war on non-Christians to stop, you should really put an end to your war on Christianity. :D
Click to expand...

Where's my war on Christianity?

All I'm asking is for someone to admit something that's 100% factual. I suppose that could be seen as a "war on Christianity," but only by people who base things on an interpretation instead of truth.

It's three of you, now, going on about everything except the entire point of the sideline debate - and none of you have made the simple admission that the bible does not specifically state what the nature of Satan's existence is.

I'm not asking anyone to change their interpretation. I'm not asking anyone to believe what I may or may not believe, nor am I trying to force anyone into a different religion.

I'm just asking for an admission of something that is true. Isn't understanding, accepting and admitting truth, and being truthful, part of what it means to be Christian?
 
Stelakh said:
What about a situation where the mother was impregnated by rape? Is she not "the innocent" who will be made to suffer by carrying that baby to term?

And let's extend that to two possible scenarios.

1) She keeps the child because of laws that dictate she cannot have an abortion and is thus condemned to a life of rearing a child who is a constant reminder of the physical and psychological abuse and trauma of rape, making her psychological recovery from that event much more difficult and burdening her with the financial responsibility of a child she had no choice in conceiving. Her body will be forever changed in ways which may be subtle and/or unnoticeable to us, but which she will be keenly aware of.

2) She carries the baby to term because of laws that dictate she cannot have an abortion and is thus condemned to the physiological and psychological trauma of carrying a rape-caused child to term and giving birth to it. She will suffer years of psychological repercussions from being forced to carry a rape baby to term and her body will be forever changed in ways which may be subtle and/or unnoticeable to us, but which she will be keenly aware of.

2A) She will hand the baby over for adoption, and suffer the psychological repercussions of that choice after having been forced to carry a baby to term.

2Ai) The child will be placed in a foster home or (for lack of a better term) "orphanage", where thousands of children each year "age out" (turn 18) because they were never adopted. If not adopted, the child will be condemned to a life going from foster home to foster home, until they age out and enter the world with no family and no support system. Many of these aged-out young adults wind up homeless because they have no support system to help them as the struggle to enter the world.

And these are rather simplistic examples of possible outcomes.

For which innocent in these circumstances would you weep harder?
Click to expand...

What if? What if the over 90% that had an abortion because they didn't like the results of spreading their legs accepted those results instead of simply killing what their previous choice produced? If the only abortions done were those for health, incest, and rape, very few would ever say a thing about abortion.

Those unborn children killed for convenience are the innocent ones.
 
Stelakh said:
Unless you're picking and choosing to take things deliberately out of context (as I would expect anyone who is all Christian and no Christ to do in this situation), it's clear that when I said, "The Satan (it's a title) is just one of them," I was referring to the content of the "...personification of evil."
Click to expand...

Sure you were. When you were proven wrong like you asked someone to do, be a man and accept it.
 
Stelakh said:
You don't seem to understand.

It doesn't matter when they were, or where they are. Human history is replete with the evils caused by religion taking hold of law. That's the point.

If you can't see further than "right now, right here," well, honestly, it doesn't explain anything that hasn't been explained - again - throughout human history.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to say that there never was a time, in history, where there wasn't violence with non-religious groups taking hold of the law or does your hypocrisy only go so far??
 
Stelakh said:
Where's my war on Christianity?

All I'm asking is for someone to admit something that's 100% factual. I suppose that could be seen as a "war on Christianity," but only by people who base things on an interpretation instead of truth.

It's three of you, now, going on about everything except the entire point of the sideline debate - and none of you have made the simple admission that the bible does not specifically state what the nature of Satan's existence is.

I'm not asking anyone to change their interpretation. I'm not asking anyone to believe what I may or may not believe, nor am I trying to force anyone into a different religion.

I'm just asking for an admission of something that is true. Isn't understanding, accepting and admitting truth, and being truthful, part of what it means to be Christian?
Click to expand...

Just because they're your beliefs, doesn't make them "100% factual" and you are asking demanding that people accept your beliefs.

But I will admit something that is true and it's that you are not 100% factual.
 
Stelakh said:
You don't seem to understand.

It doesn't matter when they were, or where they are. Human history is replete with the evils caused by religion taking hold of law. That's the point.

If you can't see further than "right now, right here," well, honestly, it doesn't explain anything that hasn't been explained - again - throughout human history.
Click to expand...

Human history is replete with the evils caused by non-religious entities taking hold of the law. What's your point?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Are you trying to say that there never was a time, in history, where there wasn't violence with non-religious groups taking hold of the law or does your hypocrisy only go so far??
Click to expand...

Did I? Never once did I say that there are times in history where there wasn't violence with non-religious groups.

Why won't you answer the question instead of trying to deflect with another question?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Just because they're your beliefs, doesn't make them "100% factual" and you are asking demanding that people accept your beliefs.

But I will admit something that is true and it's that you are not 100% factual.
Click to expand...

It's not a belief. It's an irrefutable truth. The bible never ONCE specifically defines the nature of Satan's existence. It NEVER says he's an angel.

Either you CAN'T admit that because you haven't actually read the bible, or you WON'T admit that because you're too immature to admit when you're wrong.

If you are so sure that my assertion that the bible doesn't specifically define Satan's nature then you show the book, chapter and verse.

If you can't, then what I say MUST be true. Are you so unwilling to just admit that?

You don't have to change your belief to simply say, "Yeah, you know what? The bible really doesn't say specifically what Satan is, but I know what my faith teaches me, so I'll go with that."

This, by the way? This is EXACTLY the kind of thing that demonstrates why religion and laws should never mix. You're all simply helping me prove my point. Ignoring fact and pretending something is what it isn't is precisely why religion should not be involved in making laws.

I also note that not a single one of you has come up with the book, chapter and verse that tells us the nature of Satan's existence while at the same time trying to tell me I'm wrong. That's all I'm looking for. You provide that, and you've shown me up, shut me down, and I'll admit that I'm wrong.

You're all doing a good job at prevaricating on this issue (assisting my point greatly in the process, thank you), but you are very interestingly not providing the answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top