diane abbott has often given me moments of amusement throughout the years.. whenever i'm feeling depressed, 30 mins of watching her varied gaffes on youtube usually cheers me up.. the following is a clip from this week (feb 2008) in which she seems to wonder out loud whether mao did more good than harm.
it's great to hear michael portillo's initial reaction ("whaaat!
") and then watch him and andrew neil belly-laugh at diane abbott's comments at the end of the clip.. perhaps she'd been at the blue nun xd.
Abbott lacks the intelligence, knowledge and judgement that ought to be essential to some degree in any senior politician.
Her comment regarding Mao was outrageous. Her debacle over the costs of additional police officers was hilarious.
She will continue to succeed regardless under the protection of her former lover Corbyn.
so here's the point regarding blood transfusions.
notice jesus asks the pharisees if it was lawful on the sabbath to save a life.
so, can you break god's law to save your life if it came to that?
That's a good question. I would say no he did not, because he fulfilled it - LTPF
So if Jesus didn't break the sabbath law does that not negate your argument in the OP?
so here's the point regarding blood transfusions.
notice jesus asks the pharisees if it was lawful on the sabbath to save a life.
so, can you break god's law to save your life if it came to that?
LTPF - Going back to your OP...
Did Jesus break the sabbath law or not?
so, i am having lunch with a group of women with varying backgrounds.
i asked the circle how many believed in the story of adam and eve and the snake.
no one believed it literally.
I hold A & E were real as take any breeding line back you must come to original pair
Nope.
so, i am having lunch with a group of women with varying backgrounds.
i asked the circle how many believed in the story of adam and eve and the snake.
no one believed it literally.
I think the ransom sacrifice doctrine is central to most Christian denominations
Not in anything like the same way as JW doctrine. In fact if you say 'Jesus' ransom' to most xtians they will wonder what you are talking about.
If you ask any xtian 'why did Jesus have to die?' the name of Adam will not be part of the answer.
It is this doctrine that most clearly separates xtians from JWs.
so, i am having lunch with a group of women with varying backgrounds.
i asked the circle how many believed in the story of adam and eve and the snake.
no one believed it literally.
Christians do not understand Jesus' death in the same way as JWs.
Put simply, JWs believe that Jesus died for Adam's sin; xtians believe he died for their own sins.
The Gospel Contrasted With the Watchtower Doctrine of the Ransom...
just joking i really don't think so...but the situation in syria is pretty worrisome...just hearing the news that france and great britain are attacking with cruise missiles in 72 hours.
i mean assad is not gonna gasify his adversaries when he almost won the civil war.
trump too suspended a very important trip to the latinoamerican presidents summit in peru, just to 'oversee the american response to syria.
Assad is not gonna gasify his adversaries when he almost won the civil war
Except he just did.
It's easy to criticise western leader's actions and inactions. The USA, the UK and their allies are damned if they intervene and damned if they don't. Anybody who tries to understand the complex web of evil bastards and conflicting interests in the Middle East might hesitate to rush to judgement.
so here's the point regarding blood transfusions.
notice jesus asks the pharisees if it was lawful on the sabbath to save a life.
so, can you break god's law to save your life if it came to that?
Notice Jesus asks the Pharisees if it was lawful on the Sabbath to save a life. So, can you break God's law to save your life if it came to that?
Playing Devil's Advocate I disagree. Jesus objected to the way the Pharisees interpreted the law regarding the sabbath but he never argued that it was okay to break the law. He observed the Law meticulously and taught this followers to be even more observant than the Pharisees.
His argument was not that it was okay to break the sabbath by healing or saving a life but that doing these things was not breaking the Law.
Similarly the key point about blood transfusions is not that it is okay to break god's law to save your life but that blood transfusions are not against any law...
what is russell's motive when he started examining the bible with a group of bible students?
did he intend to form a cult and to mislead others?
.
To put it concisely, sell literature and draw attention to himself - Fink
All of the available evidence suggests otherwise.
Russell was turned off from religion until he was later attracted by the Adventist movement and became convinced that the problem was not the bible but the way it was preached by mainstream christianity. His motive was to be part of a restoration of 'true doctrine' and to promote an apocalyptic message.
At this stage he rejected all attempts to put a date on the parousia. He invested heavily using his own money and resisted appeals by his readers to form a new church or organisation. He taught that Christ's 'sheep' were to be found in every church.
I agree with redpilltwice that he died a very different person from the one that began his religious quest.
below i link the article.
i thought some points on the claim were interesting.
such as how prolonged direct exposure to sunlight hurts us vs other animals, sicknesses, etc.
You are correct; Cofty saying it is true doesn't make it true. It's all the evidence that makes it true.
Yep. Like the evidence contained in these forty threads...
