Another Bible Error: An Eye for and Eye

by JosephAlward 19 Replies latest watchtower bible

pomegranate

What fruit are you trying to produce? All I can see is seeds that are rotten.
I hope your not expecting good fruit from rotten seeds!!
ianao

pomegranate:
Please check your logic, as simple logic dictates that Alward's "fruit" will benefit those that agree with him, and your "fruit" will benefit those that agree with you. Why don't you just come out and admit that you don't agree with what he is saying?
Why do you "religious types" always have to lay a flipping guilt trip on people? Have you ever thought that Alward MAY be trying to help those out of the clutches of a mind-controlling religious mentality?
You know, the same mentality that has a bunch of flipping terrorists threatening the USA with HOLY WAR because we retaliate for their initial attack on US!
Just like them, you continue to ignore common sense and spout out religious indignation ad nauseum.
and
pftooooooooooo.
Simon

pomegranate - if God had such different 'rules' for people to keep does it not follow that his standards must have changed? Either that or he is just 'pissing about with us'.
Either way, this in itself makes other claims bogus such as his 'unchanging standards' and fabled love.
pomegranate

>>Please check your logic, as simple logic dictates that Alward's "fruit" will benefit those that agree with him, and your "fruit" will benefit those that agree with you.<<
My logic is fine thank you. Fruit is of the creator of the seeds. Good seeds. Evil seeds. The reaper is the one who counts NOT the ones who eat.
>>Why don't you just come out and admit that you don't agree with what he is saying?<<
Why do I have to do that? Because that's what you want? I can respond to him in whatever fashion I choose, whether in short or in length. If you don't like the way I respoond to him, don't read it. I can call what I see by whatever way I choose to call it.
>>Why do you "religious types" always have to lay a flipping guilt trip on people?<<
Guilt trip? I can make no one feel guilty. That comes from within each one of their own accord. I think Joseph is a big boy and can handle himself. If I can create guilt in him, I can part the Red Sea. :)
>>Have you ever thought that Alward MAY be trying to help those out of the clutches of a mind-controlling religious mentality?<<
Maybe Alward is harming those that want out of a mind-controlling religion and yet still want to believe in God and the Bible. HE could be harming THEM, right? Right.
>>You know, the same mentality that has a bunch of flipping terrorists threatening the USA with HOLY WAR because we retaliate for their initial attack on US! Just like them, you continue to ignore common sense and spout out religious indignation ad nauseum.<<
Yeah, right. Same thing....and YOU'REre complaining about my logic? Ha!! You are lukewarm at best.
pomegranate

>>if God had such different 'rules' for people to keep does it not follow that his standards must have changed?<<
Your question is confusing. What rules? What standards?
If you are talking about the NT God not seen rule *positively meaning ONLY the Father*, how has the rules or standards changed?
The Father has NEVER been seen.
No lie. No changes. The truth.
ianao

pomegranete:
My logic is fine thank you. Fruit is of the creator of the seeds. Good seeds. Evil seeds. The reaper is the one who counts NOT the ones who eat.

Actually your logic is quite biased toward your own perceptions. As is most other peoples. The only difference is, you have a "riteousness" to your own point of view. Nothing wrong with that until you start imposing your mere viewpoint on a topic as complete and utter fact for others to absorb. One wonders what you would do if your "perceptions" were to correct you on a few points?
Why do I have to do that? Because that's what you want? I can respond to him in whatever fashion I choose, whether in short or in length. If you don't like the way I respoond to him, don't read it. I can call what I see by whatever way I choose to call it.

I don't recall attempting to dictate to you what you are and are not permitted to do. I simply asked you Why you do not do so. Care to try answering the question this next go around, that is, if you wish.
Guilt trip? I can make no one feel guilty. That comes from within each one of their own accord.I think Joseph is a big boy and can handle himself. If I can create guilt in him, I can part the Red Sea. :)

Oh yeah, that's a good one. It's the words that hurt, not the fact that you decided to utter the words that "hurt" another. Time for another logic check. (That is, if you wish).
Maybe Alward is harming those that want out of a mind-controlling religion and yet still want to believe in God and the Bible. HE could be harming THEM, right? Right.

Wrong, especially if your religion is not much different from the mind-controlling religion they've got out of in the first place. But of course, pomegranete, far better than anyone, knows what's best for everyone, doesn't she? *wink*.
Yeah, right. Same thing....and YOU'REre complaining about my logic? Ha!! You are lukewarm at best.

Not complaining, just being highly inquisitive. Also, I think you are very sound in your version of "the supreme logic(tm)".
pomegranate

>>Actually your logic is quite biased toward your own perceptions. As is most other peoples.<<
That's your opinion.
>>The only difference is, you have a "riteousness" to your own point of view.<<
Again, that is YOUR opinion.
>>Nothing wrong with that until you start imposing your mere viewpoint on a topic as complete and utter fact for others to absorb.<<
The man says the book contradicts, I say it doesn't with LOGICAL explainations. When someone poo poo's simplicity itself, I have a right to be more forceful, if that be MY choice.
>>One wonders what you would do if your "perceptions" were to correct you on a few points?<>I don't recall attempting to dictate to you what you are and are not permitted to do. I simply asked you Why you do not do so. Care to try answering the question this next go around, that is, if you wish.<<
What difference does it make to you HOW I answer Joseph? It has had NOTHING to do with you. Besides, the way I have answered Joseph is quite plain to anyone with average intelligence that I disagree with him. The long way or the short "Why don't you just come out and admit that you don't agree with what he is saying?" YOUR way.
>>Oh yeah, that's a good one. It's the words that hurt, not the fact that you decided to utter the words that "hurt" another. Time for another logic check. (That is, if you wish).<<
Hurt? Who's the one that called my line of thinking likened to a terrorist? You know, your starting to dance all around here. What's your real problem?
>>Wrong, especially if your religion is not much different from the mind-controlling religion they've got out of in the first place. But of course, pomegranete, far better than anyone, knows what's best for everyone, doesn't she? *wink*.<<
She? I'm a HE oh presumptuous one. Who's religion? I have no religion, so what the heck are YOU blabbling on about? You are grasping at anything now. Knows what's best for everyone? Yeah, that's right there in what I said. You want to cut and paste that one? I'd call that a lie cause it isn't true, right? Right.
>>Not complaining, just being highly inquisitive.<<
You're killing me. There was nothing inquisitive about anything you posted.
>>Also, I think you are very sound in your version of "the supreme logic(tm)".<<
Whatever the heck that means.
ianao

pomegranete:
That's your opinion.

Okay... Well, does that mean that you actually think that what you believe to be so is indeed reality for all, even those who disagree?
Again, that is YOUR opinion.

And rightfully so. You go around this board touting you polytheist viewpoints quite readily, answering questions regarding the bible as if you wrote it.
The man says the book contradicts, I say it doesn't with LOGICAL explainations. When someone poo poo's simplicity itself, I have a right to be more forceful, if that be MY choice.

Fair enough. I guess we must ALL have our hang ups. Besides, your logic is his fruitlessness.
I would accept it with full humility. Happy now?

Not really, and I don't believe you. I believe you take that viewpoint because deep down inside you don't really expect to answer for it, do you?
What difference does it make to you HOW I answer Joseph? It has had NOTHING to do with you. Besides, the way I have answered Joseph is quite plain to anyone with average intelligence that I disagree with him. The long way or the short "Why don't you just come out and admit that you don't agree with what he is saying?" YOUR way.

So I take it you decline to answer the question yet again. Will you at least tell me if you've had a nice day?
Hurt? Who's the one that called my line of thinking likened to a terrorist? You know, your starting to dance all around here. What's your real problem?

Quite bluntly, YOU. You see, it's self-riteous dippies such as yourself that turn people off to the precious little ideals you cherrish so deeply. Then you condemn others for their "lack of logic" or "lack of intellect" simply for disagreeing with you. And, to people who actually CARE about what others think of them, the likes of YOU become little more than MENTAL TERRORISTS as you use your god's hand as a double-edged sword.
She? I'm a HE oh presumptuous one.

Whoops, sorry. I can only judge by what I see on-screen.
Who's religion? I have no religion, so what the heck are YOU blabbling on about?

I am "babbling" about YOUR polytheistic religion.
You are grasping at anything now. Knows what's best for everyone? Yeah, that's right there in what I said. You want to cut and paste that one? I'd call that a lie cause it isn't true, right? Right.

Wrong. Your attitude is evident in your first response to the Sysop earlier in this thread. Go read it again for clarification.
You're killing me. There was nothing inquisitive about anything you posted.

Actually, I had a very good question that you've avoided answering twice now.
Whatever the heck that means.

Geez, you can't even take a complement!
pomegranate

>>Okay... Well, does that mean that you actually think that what you believe to be so is indeed reality for all, even those who disagree?<<
Time will tell eh? Time will tell.
>>And rightfully so. You go around this board touting you polytheist viewpoints quite readily, answering questions regarding the bible as if you wrote it.<<
No, that is incorrect. As if I understand it.
>>Fair enough. I guess we must ALL have our hang ups. Besides, your logic is his fruitlessness.<<
Your opinion on both counts.
>>Not really, and I don't believe you.<>I believe you take that viewpoint because deep down inside you don't really expect to answer to it, do you?<>So I take it you decline to answer the question.<>Quite bluntly, YOU. You see, it's self-riteous dippies such as yourself that turn people off to the precious little ideals you cherrish so deeply.<<
Your opinion for YOURSELF.
>>Then you condemn others for their "lack of logic" or "lack of intellect" simply for disagreeing with you.<>And, to people who actually CARE about what others think of them, the likes of YOU become little more than MENTAL TERRORISTS as you use your god's hand as a double-edged sword.<<
Your opinion for YOURSELF.
>>Whoops, sorry. I can only judge by what I see on-screen.<<
Ohhh. You saw a vagina?
>>I am "babbling" about YOUR polytheistic religion.<<
No. It's my polytheistic God.
>>Wrong. Your attitude is evident in your first response to the Sysop earlier in this thread. Go read it again for clarification.<>Actually, I had a very good question that you've avoided answering twice now.<>Geez, you can't even take a complement!<<
Right. I'm supposed to see a complement in a flurry of flack.
Give me a break.
ianao

pomegranate:
Time will tell eh? Time will tell.

Interesting, you answered the question you no doubt are usually asked instead of addressing the issue. At least you answered the question. I'll give you that.
No, that is incorrect. As if I understand it.

That's good to hear, I guess, but I'll feel very sorry for you one day when someone who's read another line of scripture that you've only skimmed over blows away your current understanding, leaving you for a fool. But then again, I guess you guys kind of deserve it as you set yourself up for such tradgedy. *shrug*
Your opinion on both counts.

I simply disagree, as Alward did say himself:
Alward: I've read Pomegranate's recent post and believe that further discussion on this point will prove fruitless.

Simply because if he had agreed with you, I'm quite sure he would have said so directly, considering it a "fruitfull" experience, yet he did not. Oh, and I guess I won't get into your self-assurance on issues regarding your correctness, as that would no doubt be a given in your eyes, IMO.
I couldn't care less if you believe me or not. I don't lie with intention. So back off.

Ahh. Well said. I am currently shaking in my virtual boots at the moment. (Not really). So, does this mean that you accidentally lie? How is this possible? Last time I looked in the dictionary, a lie (in this sense) was defined as:
"A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood."

Wow, this black & white thinking of yours really can cause confusion, as it seems to me that a lie is by nature intentional.
I will answer to God alone. Not you or any other man. Simple eh?

Yes! Wonderful! Thank you for answering the question. So, from what I've gathered, you will answer to God alone. The exact God that you think God is, as your concept of God seems unique to yourself. (I could be wrong, but you are the only polytheist I know). Like I've said before, I can only wonder if you would accept your "maker" if he did not fit your expectations, that's why I don't believe you, whether you care or not.
I answered your question. You just don't like the answer.

I disagree. Answering a query by responding that you are free to do something, when I asked WHY you did it (i.e. motive), is not answering the question. As a matter of fact, many would call your actions a "dodge". I won't go overboard and assume an unsureness on your part of your own motives, nor will I assume they are egotistical in nature.
Your opinion for YOURSELF.

Nonsense! If I had stated that opinion for myself, I would have said so directly. I hold that opinion for YOU, (although, not exclusively).
I never condemned anyone. Condemn is YOUR word not mine.

Oh that's right, YOU don't condemn. It's that book that does the condemning, you just read the words to others, as "spritual food at the proper time" eh?
Your opinion for YOURSELF.

Yet more utter nonsense! (But a wonderful way to avoid discussion).
Ohhh. You saw a vagina?

Unfortunately. I think it's either your specific writing style or maybe just your posturing. I'm just not sure.
No. It's my polytheistic God.

Ah, maybe your motives ARE egotistical in nature. (Just kidding).
I said cut and paste it.

Okay Pomme, you can do this I know. Please move your mouse to the vertical scrollbar on the right (or left?) side of your screen. Press firmly and hold on the primary (usually left) mouse button and push the mouse forward on your screen. Continue to do so (slowly!) until you come accross a post by a gentleman by the name of Simon who posted above. (He is the Sysop of the DB). Now, read his question, then while still holding down the primary mouse button on the scrollbar, move your mouse toward you (slowly!) until you come to what you may or may not recognize as your response to his question. Read it. Notice the utmost assurance in your words. Notice the profound implication by your postering that you are undeniably wrong. Then you may have a bit of a clue about which I "speaketh".
I answered all your questions.

Hardly.
If there is one you feel I missed, ask it again.
Sure. To quote myself...
ianao: simple logic dictates that Alward's "fruit" will benefit those that agree with him, and your "fruit" will benefit those that agree with you. Why don't you just come out and admit that you don't agree with what he is saying?

You see, you asked Alward earlier what "fruit" he was trying to produce, and I believe you also mentioned rotten seeds. Why the need to belittle him? Is it just in retaliation for similar postering on his part, or is this your riteous indignation shining through? I'm just curious. What's your M.O.?
Right. I'm supposed to see a complement in a flurry of flack.

Nobody said you were "supposed" to do anything. I simply said you can't take a complement, and you can't.
Give me a break.
I would love to share a cup of java with you sometime, unfortunately it is out of the question at the moment.

Another Bible Error: An Eye for and Eye

Share this