Search results

Brain is not a brain. Fact. Hey this stuff grows on you. There's all kinds of things I can unilaterally decide. A man is really a woman if he believes it hard enough. See? A rapist is a rapist if I decide he is. Or not if I decide he's not. It's purely my opinion against yours, and I just have...

Nope. You go cry in a glass of milk. You've shown us nothing except your feeble opinion.

Yet you haven't shown anything that proves you're correct. It's all in your noggin. Paul doesn't help you, as you've shown by not even attempting to quote him.

Nope.

Brain would be correct if he removed that third word.

Those last 3 words are the whole point of my post. And the reason they are necessary is because of both the punishment for rape, and the evidentiary requirements. Even the liberals in this discussion, at least most of them, recognize the heinousness of the crime of rape and we're willing to...

If your source is merely your own brain, Brain, then you have nothing to hold over anyone else. There can be all kinds of "facts" dancing around in there. I've already explained that there can be abuse, including physical harm perpetrated by a husband on his wife. But it isn't rape.

Nope. All I've got is the definition and etymology of the word. What do you have, pure opinion with a touch of ad hominem?

Said the man who asked a bunch of questions without answering any. Or because I hope you'll think through your position better? Guess that's too much to ask for. Yes. "Christians" are little Christs. There are some folks that claim Christ without being his, which could skew your perception of...

👍 It didn't seem to happen based on baptism (Acts 19:6 (KJV) And when Paul had laid [his] hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.), and it seems not to have happened every time. (1 Corinthians 12:30 (KJV) Have all the gifts of healing? do all...

Not if the clarification isn't provided. Perhaps you can't--I appreciate the up front admission. Saves us all time.

So you don't consider asking for clarification part of "dialogue"?

I don't always get Dan's meaning, so maybe you can help. He seemed to think that water wasn't a part of that passage, and you agree with me that it is. I think he agrees with you that water baptism isn't applicable today. Can you help me understand why 1. he would want to say there's no water...

@Skeeter, thanks for addressing this to me, and for starting a new thread--that's a great way to do it. I'm sorry I didn't see it until last night. If you want to address a particular member, use the @ symbol followed by the user name, and it will ping me directly. Like this: @username...

The question was whether there was water in those verses. The answer I gave was that there definitely was water in those verses. Are you saying the verses were dry verses?

Is that an apology (sans retraction, understandably) for calling me dingbat? You're too kind.

Apparently, you're doing quite a good job without my help.

You have yet to show me any different.

I appreciate the reason, though according to Brain, mere personal opinion is all that's needed to establish morality.

Yes, we are all worthy of death due to our inability to live up to that perfect moral standard, and we all need the mercy of God exhibited in the death of his own son for us, so that we might live who believe on him.