tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post114029623373008262..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: God can damn well damn anyone he damn well pleasesRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1162950684349895852006-11-07T20:51:00.000-05:002006-11-07T20:51:00.000-05:00Steve, Do you think your post are intellectual?...Steve,<BR/> Do you think your post are intellectual? What kind of background in theology do you have?<BR/> You also sound like you are really proud of yourself and the way you handle atheist.<BR/> Does it hurt your back when you kiss your own ass?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1140366488276590582006-02-19T11:28:00.000-05:002006-02-19T11:28:00.000-05:00The title of this post is priceless. It's reminis...The title of this post is priceless. <BR/><BR/>It's reminiscent of a pithy quote by Virginia Stem Owens from the Reformed Journal (circa ~1983-84):<BR/><BR/>"Let us get this one thing straight. God can do anything he damn well pleases, including damn well. And if it pleases him to damn, then it is done, ipso facto, well. God's activity is what it is. There isn't anything else. Without it there would be no being, including human beings presuming to judge the Creator of everything that is."Der Fürsprecherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16349234130532717148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1140318314852098012006-02-18T22:05:00.000-05:002006-02-18T22:05:00.000-05:00K7,Good point. Yes, redemption is concentric. Like...K7,<BR/><BR/>Good point. Yes, redemption is concentric. Like a family tree, it branches out over time--from acorn to stately oak.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1140318230988357232006-02-18T22:03:00.000-05:002006-02-18T22:03:00.000-05:00Exbeliever,You’re the one who used the word “racis...Exbeliever,<BR/><BR/>You’re the one who used the word “racist.” And even if you hadn’t used the word, that was the implication all along. A wink and a nod. <BR/><BR/>Oh, yes, you also tried to cover your tracks with transparent disclaimers. You really think you can play us for chumps with your rhetorical gimmicks? <BR/><BR/>It’s like a shady lawyer who poses a question he knows will be overruled by the judge, just to plant the question in the minds of the jurors. <BR/><BR/>Sorry to disappoint you, exbeliever, but no one at Triablogue is going to roll over and play dead for you. <BR/><BR/>And I notice that the wiser heads at the Secular Outpost (e.g. Lowder, Edis) have chosen to sit out the debates with you and Loftus. They know better than to pick a losing cause.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1140308626915392782006-02-18T19:23:00.000-05:002006-02-18T19:23:00.000-05:00Isn't there something to be said for the fact that...Isn't there something to be said for the fact that God works through a distinct people and then outward? I mean, a distinct line of Adam to the Israelites (white, like it or not), which were connected culturally to Greek and Roman civilization which brought the message to European tribes, which take the message around the world? <BR/><BR/>Whether Adam was 'ruddy complected' or not we know David was.UK67https://www.blogger.com/profile/15095910610517995965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1140299914029155012006-02-18T16:58:00.000-05:002006-02-18T16:58:00.000-05:00Well, with due respect, exbeliever, and I do say t...Well, with due respect, exbeliever, and I do say this humbly in case it does not come across that way here, why not try to defend the fact that you are neither, turn from pretenses of dispassionate neutrality or indifference, and instead spell out your arguments plainly and forthrightly?Patrick Chanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095377877712197984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1140297592067656382006-02-18T16:19:00.000-05:002006-02-18T16:19:00.000-05:00Steve,You wrote: "Quoting you assumes a measure of...Steve,<BR/><BR/>You wrote: "Quoting you assumes a measure of candor which is absent from your sophistry. You prefer to trade in innuendo."<BR/><BR/>And thus we have reached the end of any rational conversation. <BR/><BR/>If you believe me to be a liar and deceiver, then there is no point to continue.exbelieverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04821290397922309515noreply@blogger.com