Posted on 02/22/2009 7:00:41 AM PST by greyfoxx39
Edited on 02/22/2009 8:24:57 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
I know, I was expressing my ambivalence.
The boys (mostly they’re boys) who evangelize atheism on this site, Dawkins’ sit and others (like Sam Harris and Jerry Coyne and the rest of the boys of “The Edge” http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/coyne09/coyne09_index.html#rc ) do use our bickering to prove there’s no God. (Instead of proving there’s still a serpent trying to divide us from God.)
We’ve got the tip of the tail defining the dog. Ok. Mormons are Christians and we Trinitarians aren’t. Glad that’s settled.
The question of what is Christianity has been steadfastly expounded for 2000 years. Whether or not the schismatics and heretics wish to acknowledge that fact does not change it.
The faith has been handed down and waits patiently for one to accept it.
But among those who can agree on so much are serious disagreements over theological beliefs and therefore we have the Religion Forum.
It must be remembered that most often when one belief spawns from a previous one, both sides condemn each other in the harshest terms they can muster (heresy, anathema, apostate, cult, demonic, etc.) and often those condemnations become part of the official doctrine and documents.
It must also be remembered that a Freeper’s religious belief is often more deeply held than his political or ideological beliefs. And so he is compelled to speak up, particularly if he is an "ex."
The “open” threads on the Religion Forum exist so that Freepers can air their differences as if in a town square. The “ecumenical” threads in the RF are for polite discussion of differences.
Three other thread types are “safe harbor” where no disagreement is tolerated: prayer, devotional and caucus. Posters who are offended by religious disagreement should stay on those types of threads.
By far, most of the ‘real estate’ on the RF is held by caucus, prayer and devotional threads.
Neverthless, lurkers and posters alike can be drawn like moths to a flame on “open” threads. But if they are thin skinned they shouldn't even read them.
site back again.
I have always noticed that for some reason if they (cults) get the Trinity wrong they also are big into works. Those two things almost always seem to go together.
The graphic greyfoxx put up is from her photobucket site, here. http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb254/gahamm_photos/antichristiansite.jpg
The graphic on the site she posted is undoctored here:
http://www.studychristianity.com/images/logoalt.jpg
I would expect more honesty, especially in an intentionally open anti Mormon thread.
What’s the difference between the graphics?
Thank you.
Good point.
Irony, I love it so...
I would say it is not anti-lds it is PRO truth.
The actual graphic did not have the word “Mormon” at the top. The body of the article posted here linked to an image file which had the word added as if a comment.
Ok, thanks. I’ll have to look at it again, totally missed that.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
OK by me....I guess I wasn't aware of the rule.
Not thin skinned or without thought and experience. In fact, I find myself more often trying to find common ground on (Capital T)ruth with atheists and agnostics. Or the deeply wounded who think they hurt because of their religious background.
The intent of the site is obvious whether we can display your graphic or not. Indeed the appearance of this site makes me happy, it proves how effect the efforts to confront the LDS have become. That and their North American numbers. Now we have to meet them across the globe where they are trying to drum up more income members...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.