|
Post by awhina on Mar 9, 2017 7:03:57 GMT
Nice excuse for ignoring an inconvenience Geode. Sammy didn't specify that he meant Catholicism. Why do you and he consider that you are entitled to make rules for a Christian church? May I make rules for atheists? As I posted, it was implicit that he was talking about Catholicism, yet you threw an unmerited insult at him. You were the one that was wrong, you even posted as if it was only in the past that New Zealand had a bishop. Either you sprung a mental leak or you attempted to bend the discussion outside of Catholicism without stating you were doing so. Where did I state anything about making rules for a Christian church? Oh yeah, I didn't. Thanks for again making things up about me. What is that about making rules for atheists and why make this in contrast to making rules for a Christian church? I didn't say that it was only in the past that NZ had female bishops, you're lying. Then you whine that you and Sammy meant Catholicism. I am a Christian and you and Sammy are not. You want (pretending to care about women) to make rules for the Christians church. I simply asked if I could make the rules for your group?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Mar 9, 2017 7:24:06 GMT
As I posted, it was implicit that he was talking about Catholicism, yet you threw an unmerited insult at him. You were the one that was wrong, you even posted as if it was only in the past that New Zealand had a bishop. Either you sprung a mental leak or you attempted to bend the discussion outside of Catholicism without stating you were doing so. Where did I state anything about making rules for a Christian church? Oh yeah, I didn't. Thanks for again making things up about me. What is that about making rules for atheists and why make this in contrast to making rules for a Christian church? I didn't say that it was only in the past that NZ had female bishops, you're lying. Then you whine that you and Sammy meant Catholicism. I am a Christian and you and Sammy are not. You want (pretending to care about women) to make rules for the Christians church. I simply asked if I could make the rules for your group? You lead with your usual retort..."you're lying"...it is a like a knee jerk response from you, and almost always incorrect. I posted that you posted "as if it was only in the past" and that is one interpretation of what your post reads like: "You are decades behind the times Sammy - NZ had a female bishop in the early 90s ." I guess you could also read this as only a statement of the first female bishop. But my interpretation is also valid. As such I was not lying. I have consistently posted as a Christian. You are doing one of the following: 1) Your pathetic memory has failed again, and so this fact did not register. 2) You are making yet another judgement about a professed Christian not being one...playing God will not put you in very good standing with Him. 3) You are ignoring that you know I am a Christian and are simply attempting to pick another fight, something you do often, assuming the role of troll. Once again, I have posted nothing about setting rules, yet you make this statement again. You cannot show that I have done so, so kindly shut your yap about this. I am a member of the group called Christians. As I have posted before, you may be a Christian, but you are a poor example of how a Christian should act. One thing that bothered Jesus most was hypocrisy. You rant about me "making rules" yet that is essentially what you do when you proclaim professed Christians to be atheists.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Mar 9, 2017 7:30:40 GMT
I didn't say that it was only in the past that NZ had female bishops, you're lying. Then you whine that you and Sammy meant Catholicism. I am a Christian and you and Sammy are not. You want (pretending to care about women) to make rules for the Christians church. I simply asked if I could make the rules for your group? You lead with your usual retort..."you're lying"...it is a like a knee jerk response from you, and almost always incorrect. I posted that you posted "as if it was only in the past" and that is one interpretation of what your post reads like: "You are decades behind the times Sammy - NZ had a female bishop in the early 90s ." I guess you could also read this as only a statement of the first female bishop. But my interpretation is also valid. As such I was not lying. I have consistently posted as a Christian. You are doing one of the following: 1) Your pathetic memory has failed again, and so this fact did not register. 2) You are making yet another judgement about a professed Christian not being one...playing God will not put you in very good standing with Him. 3) You are ignoring that you know I am a Christian and are simply attempting to pick another fight, something you do often, assuming the role of troll. Once again, I have posted nothing about setting rules, yet you make this statement again. You cannot show that I have done so, so kindly shut your yap about this. I am a member of the group called Christians. As I have posted before, you may be a Christian, but you are a poor example of how a Christian should act. One thing that bothered Jesus most was hypocrisy. You rant about me "making rules" yet that is essentially what you do when you proclaim professed Christians to be atheists. So between IMDB BOARD V 1.0 and here the agnostic former Mormon is now a Christian? Not just any Christian, but one of the special Christians who attacks only other Christians. Weird.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Mar 9, 2017 7:37:02 GMT
You lead with your usual retort..."you're lying"...it is a like a knee jerk response from you, and almost always incorrect. I posted that you posted "as if it was only in the past" and that is one interpretation of what your post reads like: "You are decades behind the times Sammy - NZ had a female bishop in the early 90s ." I guess you could also read this as only a statement of the first female bishop. But my interpretation is also valid. As such I was not lying. I have consistently posted as a Christian. You are doing one of the following: 1) Your pathetic memory has failed again, and so this fact did not register. 2) You are making yet another judgement about a professed Christian not being one...playing God will not put you in very good standing with Him. 3) You are ignoring that you know I am a Christian and are simply attempting to pick another fight, something you do often, assuming the role of troll. Once again, I have posted nothing about setting rules, yet you make this statement again. You cannot show that I have done so, so kindly shut your yap about this. I am a member of the group called Christians. As I have posted before, you may be a Christian, but you are a poor example of how a Christian should act. One thing that bothered Jesus most was hypocrisy. You rant about me "making rules" yet that is essentially what you do when you proclaim professed Christians to be atheists. So between IMDB BOARD V 1.0 and here the agnostic former Mormon is now a Christian? Not just any Christian, but one of the special Christians who attacks only other Christians. Weird. I have attacked nobody, only defended myself against your attacks and called out your behavior for what it is, especially your dishonesty and hypocrisy. You know, the hate the sin and love the sinner bit... I posted a couple of times on the old board that I had experienced agnostic times in the past (not during the time of my posting there). Your attacks on other Christians are countless in number. Of course you will just counter they were not Christians. How convenient to redefine a person's faith just to suit your own purposes.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Mar 9, 2017 14:24:32 GMT
You are decades behind the times Sammy - NZ had a female bishop in the early 90s . I was talking about Catholics afeena. The thread is about a female Pope, the Pope is Catholic. As far as I know in the Catholic church woman can't be Bishops either. I guess it's good there are more choices out there for people who want a religion that teaches them that God favors men over women?
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Mar 9, 2017 14:30:45 GMT
You want (pretending to care about women) to make rules for the Christians church. I simply asked if I could make the rules for your group? Go ahead and make the rules for whatever group you imagine I belong to. I'm just wondering how anyone can justify the misogyny of the Catholic church. It's telling that you want to avoid the question altogether and play the 'I'm a Christian and you're not' card. I guess you don't know any logical reason why women are treated as inferior in the Catholic church either?
|
|