Posted on 02/20/2011 11:40:46 AM PST by SeekAndFind
I think you are in denial...your post has everything to do with the story and now you are trying to make yourself sound better and trying to make me sound bad. I took nothing out of context...you wrote God allowing this to prevent fatherlessness as a lesser evil...what the heck! These women would be better off without a father figure like him! And who gives a rats behind which sin is worse! Sin is sin and unless they are seen they will all lead to the darkness. Why did you not address the wrongness of his actions at all? Why? Instead you sort of tried to make it sound not so bad. Why? I think you are morally weak and I mean that kindly! It’s like you have nothing to write abouit this man’s selfishness??
You are an illiterate troll, and not concerned in any way with God.
If you are not illiterate, how is it that you are incapable of looking at my post 17 and looking at the bottom of the post wherein there is a little number that tells anyone which post it is replying to.
Or is it that once you began to lie about my intentions, empirical evidence that gets in the way of continuing to do so doesn't matter?
You wish to continue plying your little lie that I referenced post 1 rather than 3. Unfortunately for liars like yourself, Free Republic lists the information that exposes your personal little lie at the bottom of every post
...Slavery is not God’s desire for man, but was permitted because due to the hardness of the heart of man it prevented executions and genocides in many cases. Similarly polygamy is not God’s desire for man, but has been often permitted because due to the hardness of the heart of man it prevents divorce and fatherlessness. ...that is what I was replying to and my point stands! Now you need to call me a liar because you are so very defensive...o well. Take care.
And you did not address any of my valid points, but rather tried to report me to the moderator as though I have done something inproper! I have written what I see, is this not America still? Good lord.
And because I called you morally weak I am now not concerned with God at all and a troll...boy, that is some patience you have shown!
I put forth an answer to your question which you ignored,
and you were and are too self righteous and lazy to look up the scriptures pertaining to my statement as I suggested.
That is a non-negotiable requirement to have an intelligent debate. I will not be doing that homework and posting the links for you - I am posting by smartphone.
I do not believe for one moment, based on both your tone and the intellectual content of your posts that you are up for a debate however.
You merely wish to condemn others. When other posters started a side conversation and did not consider chiming in with condemnation of the man in the original story something that needed to be focused on you threw a fit and began to condemn them too.
For the record, my statements about the biblical view of slavery by the church is not my own construct. I is taken from the teachings of the abolitionist movement of the 19th century outlining how scripture dos not condone slavery even though it was practiced and not expressly forbidden.
Until you cease to be too lazy, and too unconcerned about what scripture actually says - evidenced by your fear of looking up scripture as I asked in post 37 when I still assumed you were capable and desirous of a debate based on integrity - I am forced to conclude you are a troll who merely wishes to find people to condemn on some fabricated pretext.
You are not defending scripture and, indeed there is no indication in any post you have made that you have actually bothered to learn it.
You make assertions that my summarizing of scripture is false, but you have not and can not post the scriptures to show what God has said through his word (Which is exactly what I suggested you should do in post 37).
No, I am just not a bible based man..there are many mistranslations and the holy spirit after all, is the final say..if we are truly connected to it. My main point to you was that you were using God as somehow watering down what this man, a supposed Christian, was doing! You would not address that and even went so far to say that you post was not related, or some such, to the topic! Come on now, obviously it was and it is a red herring to throw around scripture of how in the past God allowed for evil things. There was no similar need in this case...the man was getting his rocks off and made a spectackle and disgrace of all of those poor women. Pretty sad. I am not condeming anyone...I see what I see and I know that God forgives all that are sorry. So you are just off base my friend.
...Similarly polygamy is not God’s desire for man, but has been often permitted because due to the hardness of the heart of man it prevents divorce and fatherlessness...ok, I think you are splitting hairs with this statement and my word of approval...but I will take that back. You are intimating that God would prefer polygamy over fatherlessness and divorce and I disagree and still hold that putting that idea in this thread waters down the evil that this man is doing for all the world to see.
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.