Search results

“But we, deeming that to see a man put to death is much the same as killing him, have abjured such spectacles [the contests of gladiators]. How, then, when we do not even look on, lest we should contract guilt and pollution, can we put people to death? And when we say that those women who use...

I’m currently reading The Resurrection Of The Dead - written by the Ante-Nicene Church Father, Athenagoras. Pending approval of a request I made to a staff member this afternoon, this may be my final post in this forum. If that should happen, I may start a similar thread in whatever forums I’m...

I have no hidden message. I’ve defined my statements, which a review of my posts would demonstrate. For the sake of your conscience, please go ahead and change me to “other”. Thank you.

I told you what that reason was in posts #182 and #184. See again post #175. Maybe reconsider what you’re doing.

I passed along their frustration, with a preface. Even they didn’t / wouldn’t say there is a direct comparison. It’s foolish of you to suggest it. I don’t.

I rejected it. What others do with what the trinitarians said is up to them. The CCP is atheist. Policy makers at Christianity Board aren’t. The trinitarians I spoke with are frustrated that a Christian Board would prohibit discussion about their deity.

You’re being foolish, out of ignorance I suppose.

You’re barking up the wrong tree.

I’m a primitive Christian. The primitive Christians were historically accused of being atheists by the Roman and Greek cultures which surrounded them. Jesus lived. Jesus died. Jesus was made alive again. He is the Messiah promised by his God and mine.

The board policy makers prescribed the solution. Abiding by the board policy makers prescribed solution = refusing to be a part of the solution? In other words, I don’t get it Big Dan.

I’m trying to abide by the new policy and I’ve recommended that others do the same. The only amendment I’ve made to that statement is the clarification that others should do whatever they think best. I’m not a dictator and I’m not advising anyone to violate their conscience.

I‘ve participated in public debates where the rules for a formal debate were strictly observed by all parties. I gave up debating around twenty years ago because I saw what it was doing to me and what it was doing to those whom I debated.

I haven’t slandered anyone and I’m not demanding that the problem continue. If the decision makers want my input then they’ll ask me for it.

I’ve stated from the very beginning that my my God is the Messiah’s God. When I discussed this publicly with you a few months ago and offered to confine my posting to the non-Christian forums you advised me that the board recognized me as a Christian and that I was allowed to post in all...

Thanks. I’ve read it several times. As for debating, I’ve commented on numerous occasions that I view it as a lose-lose proposition.

The “cease fire,” as you call it, comes at too high a cost. Your deity can no longer be discussed here. If my deity could no longer be discussed here I wouldn’t have anything further to do with this board. What I propose should be done doesn’t matter to the people who make the decisions. All...

The trinitarians who shared the sentiment with me are more zealous about the prohibition against their / your deity being discussed than you are. I respect that. btw, it’s your deity which cannot be discussed on the board, not mine. Why do you suppose it is that I’ve stood up and spoken...

Nicene Christianity fell on its own sword - committed “theolicide” (a word I’m coining), vanquished / silenced at the hands of its adherents - on Christianity Board. Another casualty, it appears to me, of wokeism. I’ve never been on a Christian board where that has happened. This is uncharted...

There are charlatans in Christianity. I’ve yet to meet one on Christianity Board.

So say all Christians, trinitarian and non-trinitarian alike. Can we at least acknowledge and agree on that much?