"Linda Lee" <lindagirl444@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1187975041.256025.300870@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Aug 24, 12:42 pm, "Suzanne" <****l...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1187929322.760846.247680@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Aug 23, 9:20 pm, "Suzanne" <****l...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> "Ha SATAN [Sin Tet Nun]" <hasa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> >> messagenews:1187890715.445414.75570@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> >> > Libertarius napisal(a):
>> >> >> >>===>It is definitely not "wrong", just unknown and
>> >> >> >>unacceptable to fundamentalist bible wore****pers. -- L.
>> >> >> ===>One should spell "Holy Bible" with captals,
>> >> >> but "bible" is just a word.
>>
>> >> >> But Christians don't
>> >> >> > wor****p the Bible, they wor****p the one that
>> >> >> > taught us to read and study God's word.
>>
>> >> >> ===>By accepting the BIG LIE that it is "God's word",
>> >> >> you become a "bible wor****per".
>> >> >> By declaring it "inerrant", you become a "bible wor****per". -- L.
>>
>> >> > Nominal "Bible Wor****pers" perhaps,
>> >> > but most of them do not seem to know much about what their Bible
>> >> > says
>> >> > concerning their ideologies.
>>
>> >> > as for me i have never stopped enjoying studying this "Bible" --
it
>> >> > reveals mountains of information.
>>
>> >> > None of it pointing to a 'deity' however.
>>
>> >> Since the Bible has a lot to say about God,
>> >> why would you say this last statement?
>>
>> >> Suzanne- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > Because he's spiritually blind, Suzanne. Oh, I guess that was a
>> > rhetorical question, wasn't it?
>>
>> Actually, I offered him a chance to explain
>> why he was making two such incongruent
>> statements. I can see the possiblities of
>> what he may have been intending, if he
>> was trying to on purpose be facetious, and
>> just pull someone's chain.
>>
>> Suzanne- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> He is continually incongruent. To say he is 'spiritually blind' should
> not even bother him given that he rejects (to the point of saying
> they're nonexistant) God, the spirit, the afterlife, the possibility
> of losing his soul, etc., yet he oddly finds that insulting. This
> makes him seem enigmatic, yet such contradiction indicates his beliefs
> aren't yet set or fully thought out.
>
Maybe having a mouse in one's hand makes
some drunk with power. : )
>
Suzanne
|
