Re: This is going nowhere -- Utah's Religion Debate

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 17:18:14 03/23/06 Thu
Author: Quizno210hopper
Subject: Re: This is going nowhere
In reply to: Lord Veritas 's message, "This is going nowhere" on 09:34:44 03/21/06 Tue

Your original statement (at the beginning of this thread which is what I read) was that there is no evidence that Christ was married and you asked that someone provide evidence showing that he was married.

You premise is that because there isn't evidence (that you know of) and unless someone can show you evidence that He was married you proclaim He was therefore not married. I conceded many posts back that I don't have any documentation that He was married. But just because I don't have the evidence and you asked the question it does not somehow make your contention correct. Using your logic I could contend that without evidence that He wasn't married He therefore was married.

So in order to spur the debate I provided a logical formula. One that you have not addressed. I could make accusations as you have been doing that your totally off course. But I consider the topic more important than the intellectual debate.

I will offer the question. Do you have proof that He was not married?

Finally, I contend that because Christ was perfect, He has to obey the same laws He dictates. Thus, since He provided the commandment to marry He had to comply with that commandment in order to remain perfect. Thus based on that circumstantial relationship I state that Christ was married.

Also, for the record I have children and a wife that keep me on my toes, thus I have no ego especially with regard to interaction with someone I don't know. I don't need asnine tit for tat arguments with you. If this issue is important to you then debate the issue not my style or your perception of who won or lost. Because I guarantee you, we are all Goliaths until we stand next to a little kid with rocks and a sling.

Grasshopper

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]