You deserve this!

[glorydaz]

because His gift to us is His will

those who refuse that gift are equally deserving of His wrath

Well, when you put it that way, I guess you're right. God is not willing that any should perish. :think:

That actually reminds me of how we can't know until afterwards what God has allowed. Which is why I keep saying, we can be assured we deserved whatever it is that God allows.


But, we have done NOTHING to earn God's grace because while we were yet sinners, Christ died. That is the grace of God. We only access that grace when we believe.

I'm thinking I'll take this to ECT and see what we can come up with.

 

[ClimateSanity]

No good deed goes unpunished. Be careful who yiudefend from attack. They might join forces with their attackers and join with them in attacking you.

 

[Rusha]

lain:

Apparently there is now a new definition for the phrase "good deed".

 

[patrick jane]

A mask? I think not! I have called you out in no uncertain terms for the nasty, judgmental, smug superiority and disdain for common decency in which you routinely engage.
You speak for yourself yet must drag in the idea of "Witnesses" to my behavior.
I do not care what you think. If one of your "witnesses" should care to come forward I shall address them.
I shall repeat myself, you are a disgrace to Christian behavior.

I concur

 

[musterion]

That actually reminds me of how we can't know until afterwards what God has allowed. Which is why I keep saying, we can be assured we deserved whatever it is that God allows.

That's what Job said.

 

[elohiym]

but if His gift is a manifestation of His will, and His will is just and our submission to His will is deserved, then don't we deserve His gift?

You are still using a definition of deserve that implies a sense of justice.

Consider you can say a son deserves his Father's love, but you cannot claim a son deserves his Father's love because he earned it (because it cannot be earned by works). In both examples you would be correctly using the word deserve and implying a sense of justice. It is just for a Father to love His child; it is unjust for a Father to make his love conditional on the child earning it.

We could go back and forth on the theological question, but I'm only trying to use the question to magnify my point about your definition of deserve not being realistic. The word deserve always implies a sense of justice, else we would hardly have a basis to claim something is undeserved, right?

 

[1PeaceMaker]

No good deed goes unpunished. Be careful who yiudefend from attack. They might join forces with their attackers and join with them in attacking you.

BOLCATS is permabanned because of you.

If you are not him, you are a big jerk.

In fact he defended you and your friends extensively. If you are not him, you are a traitor to one of your own champions. He should be very angry. I hope he's not a local friend from work, explaining the ISP - or you should just say you are BOLCATS and you will look a little less slimy.

 

[elohiym]

I'm thinking I'll take this to ECT and see what we can come up with.

Post a link to it on this thread.

 

[elohiym]

BOLCATS is permabanned because of you.

If you are not him, you are a big jerk.

If he's not BOLCATS, he should state so publicly and ask the administrator of TOL to lift BOLCATS' perma-ban since it was given unjustly for him allegedly being ClimateSanity when he wasn't.


:sozo: FREE BOLCATS!

 

[glorydaz]

That's what Job said.

Yep....Daniel, too.

 

[glorydaz]

this whole thing blew up because i stated, in another context, wrt two specific situations, that women choose rape


iirc, it was kmo who introduced the word "deserve" and when asked to define it, used "to earn by one's actions"

and it went from there

Amazingly such things take on a life of their own.

But, they always end up with it being said that we support rapists. :chuckle:

 

[elohiym]

because His gift to us is His will

those who refuse that gift are equally deserving of His wrath

Well, when you put it that way, I guess you're right. God is not willing that any should perish. :think:

It boils down to children deserving their Father's love, but nobody deserving the Father's love because they kept laws better than the next guy. That's all you are both essentially saying, whether you realize it or not, and both are using the only the definition of deserve, which always implies a sense of justice.

 

[glorydaz]

It boils down to children deserving their Father's love, but nobody deserving the Father's love because they kept laws better than the next guy. That's all you are both essentially saying, whether you realize it or not, and both are using the only the definition of deserve, which always implies a sense of justice.

What you fail to admit is that your idea of "justice" is not the standard. So whenever you claim something is not JUST, you are putting yourself in the place of God. That's what all humanists do.

 

[elohiym]

No good deed goes unpunished. Be careful who yiudefend from attack. They might join forces with their attackers and join with them in attacking you.

Go easy on Glorydaz. She's walking a fine line. :chuckle:

 

[elohiym]

What you fail to admit is that your idea of "justice" is not the standard. So whenever you claim something is not JUST, you are putting yourself in the place of God. That's what all humanists do.

My idea of justice is a mentally ill man doesn't deserve to be scalded to death by prison guards, and that women don't deserve to be raped. That is according to God's standard, straight from the Bible. So you can save your "humanist" blather.

You hide in the anti-humanism ad hominem tent while the he-man-women-haters take refuge in the anti-feminism ad hominem tent. It's unfortunate you can't just debate like rational adults. No, it's pathetic.

 

[ok doser]

My idea of justice is a mentally ill man doesn't deserve to be scalded to death by prison guards

how do you know that that wasn't a just punishment for him?

, and that women don't deserve to be raped.

how do you know that in some cases, rape isn't just?

 

[ok doser]

Amazingly such things take on a life of their own.

But, they always end up with it being said that we support rapists. :chuckle:

or "defend" them

 

[Angel4Truth]

Yes, there is abuse on both sides. There are just as many evil and ungodly women as there are evil and ungodly men. However many examples either side can give, there are as more that go unreported. It's the old dirty rat routine being played by both sides.

What I have to wonder is why any thinking person would even want to play such a silly childish game. And for what....to prove some point that can't be proven? :think:

No, to try and demean a certain poster on this board who has dared to defend himself and speak of men that are being abused by women. The only subject allowed here is about how women are abused.....no dissension will be tolerated. I see no reason to boast in that. :nono:

Do you think its a little different discussion, when a man admits he went to jail for hitting his wife, claiming he was the one abused, blames it all on her also supports female circumcision among other things about women and hes pretending to be someone else after being banned several times for massive cursing flame outs because a woman dared object to his thoughts on women?

The game is the pretending to be someone else. I agree with some of his posts, and disagree with others.

 

[elohiym]

how do you know that that wasn't a just punishment for him?

Why do I have to repeat the argument again? You do the work. Find me any law in the Bible, any federal or state law, any administrative rule that allows such punishment for what is considered minor misconduct in the prison system of some states. Those offenses would be considered class iii, maybe class ii misconducts. The punishment was unjust, undeserved, AND you already admitted it was according to the "strict" definition of deserve.

how do you know that in some cases, rape isn't just?

Because a capital offense is never punished with being subjected to a capital offense. That's not how eye-for-an-eye works in the Bible narrative. Rapists were put to death, not raped by a "rapesecutioner." So who could deserve being raped, even in God's system of equal retribution? Nobody.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Neither my wife nor I have mentioned you or interacted with you, yet here you are starting crap. Pay attention:

1. Earlier today I read a PM from BOLCATS to 1PM where he was vehemently denying he was voltaire/dolo/climate sanity. That's why we want to know if Climate Sanity was BOLCATS. We wouldn't want to know if we already knew. If we have to post the PM, we will.

2. I have an email from Climate Sanity asking me to register an account for him (not BOLCATS), and I have my response to him that I would not do that, and my suggestion that he apologize to Knight and ask to come back. If Climate Sanity wants to deny that, I can post the email.

In light of those two points, don't be a false accuser.

I dont need your permission to speak, and if i remember correctly, both your and your wifes ip was used on that account in addition to his.

And yes, he admitted using it too. So do you really feel comfortable telling this whopper?

As far as what he did under climate, hes just asking you to do again what you did for him when he used the bolcats name. (so he could bypass his ban with it - that you and your wife also used)