NationStates

Menassa wrote:Are Witnesses not Christians?

No.

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

Menassa wrote:Are Witnesses not Christians?

No.

Ahah.

By the way.... are you baptist?

Your fervor reminds me of baptism.

Menassa wrote:

Reggae Magmia wrote:Nothing. And Jah is not simply a god.

Actually one of God's names is Kuh (replace that k with a y) so in German I assume it would be Juh.

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:They deny the Trinity is one.

Are Witnesses not Christians?

Nope.

Typhlochactas wrote:

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:How do you determine morality? What is right and wrong? Who are you to tell anyone they are good or bad?

I thought we were still on the first question.

Please, answer any of them.

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

Typhlochactas wrote:
I thought we were still on the first question.

Please, answer any of them.

I like to go in normal order. I'll bring us back to the first question and once I feel it is resolved, we can go onto the rest.

Aren't you begging the question when you ask who decides right and wrong?

Menassa wrote:

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:No.

Ahah.

By the way.... are you baptist?

Your fervor reminds me of baptism.

*sigh* Technically, I am Southern Baptist. However, I identify simply as a Calvinist, and there is plenty I disagree with the SBC and the rest of Baptistry on.

I am not a backwoods, Bible-thumping, country-church fundie, if that is what you are thinking, anyway.

Typhlochactas wrote:

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Please, answer any of them.

I like to go in normal order. I'll bring us back to the first question and once I feel it is resolved, we can go onto the rest.

Aren't you begging the question when you ask who decides right and wrong?

Who or what. How. Answer it any way you like.

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

The Mighty Warrior Horse wrote:I speak French in France, German in Germany, and mandarin in china.
I see no issue with calling god ja.

There is no problem with it. I simply will not call Him that.

Every time you type "Him" it makes me think H.I.M.

Now concerning Mormons, although some of their beliefs are...different then most of ours, if they are Christ-accepting brethren I don't see why they shouldn't be considered part of Christianity. They are however, definitely not mainstream.

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

Menassa wrote:Ahah.

By the way.... are you baptist?

Your fervor reminds me of baptism.

*sigh* Technically, I am Southern Baptist. However, I identify simply as a Calvinist, and there is plenty I disagree with the SBC and the rest of Baptistry on.

I am not a backwoods, Bible-thumping, country-church fundie, if that is what you are thinking, anyway.

Ah Calvinism.... interesting.

What do you disagree with?

Reggae Magmia wrote:

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:There is no problem with it. I simply will not call Him that.

Every time you type "Him" it makes me think H.I.M.

Now concerning Mormons, although some of their beliefs are...different then most of ours, if they are Christ-accepting brethren I don't see why they shouldn't be considered part of Christianity. They are however, definitely not mainstream.

So you think Witnesses are Christian.

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

Typhlochactas wrote:
I like to go in normal order. I'll bring us back to the first question and once I feel it is resolved, we can go onto the rest.

Aren't you begging the question when you ask who decides right and wrong?

Who or what. How. Answer it any way you like.

I advocate for the science of morality as described by Joseph Daledin and Sam Harris.

Typhlochactas wrote:

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Who or what. How. Answer it any way you like.

I advocate for the science of morality as described by Joseph Daledin and Sam Harris.

May I ask why?

Menassa wrote:

Reggae Magmia wrote:Every time you type "Him" it makes me think H.I.M.

Now concerning Mormons, although some of their beliefs are...different then most of ours, if they are Christ-accepting brethren I don't see why they shouldn't be considered part of Christianity. They are however, definitely not mainstream.

So you think Witnesses are Christian.

Imo, yes.

Menassa wrote:

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:*sigh* Technically, I am Southern Baptist. However, I identify simply as a Calvinist, and there is plenty I disagree with the SBC and the rest of Baptistry on.

I am not a backwoods, Bible-thumping, country-church fundie, if that is what you are thinking, anyway.

Ah Calvinism.... interesting.

What do you disagree with?

Eh. Several things. Calvinism being the main, big-time difference. The SBC is not Calvinist - they're Arminian, the heretical bastards.

The United Soviet Socialist Republic wrote:

Typhlochactas wrote:
I advocate for the science of morality as described by Joseph Daledin and Sam Harris.

May I ask why?

I believe that it is the best explanation of natural ethics.

Typhlochactas wrote:

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Who or what. How. Answer it any way you like.

I advocate for the science of morality as described by Joseph Daledin and Sam Harris.

You know, I wish I felt like looking up who those people are.

Typhlochactas wrote:

The United Soviet Socialist Republic wrote:May I ask why?

I believe that it is the best explanation of natural ethics.

Ah, and what denomination are you?

The United Soviet Socialist Republic wrote:

Typhlochactas wrote:
I believe that it is the best explanation of natural ethics.

Ah, and what denomination are you?

He's not Christian.

Menassa wrote:

The United Soviet Socialist Republic wrote:Ah, and what denomination are you?

He's not Christian.

Oh. Is he an atheist? A Jew? Or what?

Reggae Magmia wrote:

Menassa wrote:So you think Witnesses are Christian.

Imo, yes.

If I denied practically all aspects of mainstream Christianity, except for Christ being the Saviour, would you say I was Christian?

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

Typhlochactas wrote:
I advocate for the science of morality as described by Joseph Daledin and Sam Harris.

You know, I wish I felt like looking up who those people are.

I didn't want to bore you with a long argument for it.

The United Soviet Socialist Republic wrote:

Menassa wrote:He's not Christian.

Oh. Is he an atheist? A Jew? Or what?

I believe he's some sort of Deist type.... but he can best answer for himself.

The United Soviet Socialist Republic wrote:

Typhlochactas wrote:
I believe that it is the best explanation of natural ethics.

Ah, and what denomination are you?

He isn't Christian.

I am betting on secular humanism, myself.

Menassa wrote:

The United Soviet Socialist Republic wrote:Oh. Is he an atheist? A Jew? Or what?

I believe he's some sort of Deist type.... but he can best answer for himself.

My answer to the question of the existence of god is ''How do you define god?''. From there, I can tell if I believe in 'god' or not.

Typhlochactas wrote:

Menassa wrote:I believe he's some sort of Deist type.... but he can best answer for himself.

My answer to the question of the existence of god is ''How do you define god?''. From there, I can tell if I believe in 'god' or not.

Ah. Ignostic, I assume.