Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 23, 2024, 6:43 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The ''Illogicality'' of Prayer.
#31
RE: The ''Illogicality'' of Prayer.
(April 26, 2013 at 8:25 pm)Ryantology Wrote: Deuteronomy 21:18-21
Only a clown like you would take a text like that completely at face value. That piece of law has so many stipulations and conditions that it could never actually be implemented.
Reply
#32
RE: The ''Illogicality'' of Prayer.
I feel prayer actually helped me sort out some issues I had when I was younger. It helped me think a little more clearly and it was nice to feel like somebody was listening when you had nobody else to talk to. After awhile I just didn't need it anymore but I won't deny it was therapeutic for a me as a teen.
Reply
#33
RE: The ''Illogicality'' of Prayer.
(April 27, 2013 at 12:02 am)Gearbreak Wrote: ...but I won't deny it was therapeutic for a me as a teen.
Hard to argue with what works.
Reply
#34
RE: The ''Illogicality'' of Prayer.

Godschild Wrote:


Ryan Wrote:Godschild, are you pathologically incapable of not being full of shit? I mean seriously. And you have the balls to tell anyone they have never read the Bible.

I'm at a lose at how to get you to actually read my posts, tell me are you half blind and need glasses or are you just unable to understand what I've stated. I never said he did not read the Bible, the word I used was STUDY, is that clear enough or do I need to make the words larger and brighter.

Ryan Wrote:Deuteronomy 21:18-21

18 If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard." 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.

Let's give you a reason to look closer at scripture, then just maybe the next time you read scripture you'll take the time to think things through. I have explained these verses on this forum so many times and you still do not understand, and you call Christians retarded.

First of all and most important, where, oh where do these verses call the son a child. Would you please show me where it says the son is a child. Second ask yourself why were daughters not included in this, surly if the scriptures call for women to be treated as harshly as you believe them to, then wouldn't the daughters be listed first, I mean really Ryan why are the daughters not considered in these verses.
A teaching moment for you, my mother and father if he were still alive call me son, and I can tell you I've long ago left childhood. I do not know how old you are but I assume you are not a child, hope I'm not mistaken, but then who knows. I bet your parents still refer to you as their son, even if not to your face, but in conversation with others.
With this being true then son does not necessarily mean child, and I would believe that if the scriptures meant child they would have also included daughter. So why don't they, easy if you just take time to reason out things, you know the thing you accuse Christians of not doing. The daughters were married not long after they became teenagers, women started having children earlier in life, because life was much shorter for most during these times. So they were out of the home early on, not so for the sons, they were in the home longer to help the family make a living in whatever way they could help, yep, that means the sons were men, that's right grown sons. These are the sons that are being referred to in these verses, not children, these young men were in the home to help, not be troublesome idiots, that ate what they did not earn, that would be the glutton of verse 20. They needed to be up early to work a full day, that would not happen if they laid out most of the night getting drunk, that would be the drunkard in verse 20. Doing these two things would mean they are stubborn and rebellious, laying out all night and sleeping half the work day away, not listening to the parents and obeying them. After all, these sons (young men) were living under their roof and eating their food and wasting their money being drunkards. After a time the parents get tired of this and so they take the problem to a council of men to be judged and then disciplined, yes stoned, if found guilty. The parents were not allowed to make that decision, this was to prevent parents from doing away with a son without cause, if they did they would be guilty of murder and put to death. The family name was important, yet the name of Israel was even more important, this was God's chosen people and they as a whole were to set good examples for other nations to take notice of. God and Israel did not want other nations say look these people raise unruly sons, so why should we have respect for them or their God.

Ryan Wrote:As for loving your wife as Jesus loves his church, that is accurate. Your wife should be a mindlessly obedient and inferior supplicant, like you are to Jesus.

Jesus does not expect that from His people, He expects us to be strong, caring, forgiving, humble, hard workers, caretakers, giving and ect. and these things we're to do for others, yes also for our wives. We are called to sacrifice much for others. If we were mindlessly obedient to Christ we would never get to know Him and live in a wonderful relationship with Him. The men and women of the church are to be mindful and live in a complying relationship, having respect for each other in all parts of our relationship. Could be why we've been married for 35 years.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Reply





Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)