Search results

Worse. In the UK, we are now having this. And so it begins.... May God help us.

Nope. I was calling the remark racist - which is clearly was. The member concerned will have to tell us why he said that and whether he actually is racist or not for us to form a judgment on that point.

I missed the memo that said that two wrongs make a right.

Sadly, yes, although Conservative MPs here are insisting that the Commons are allowed a vote on it before Call Me Dave does a Tony Blair on us.

Hmmm...racist much?

When will we learn? Ho Chi Minh, the Mujahideen, and now the Syrian rebels...

Exactly! What's the issue?

Like I said, I really can't help you out further here if you persist in your manner of posting.

Be more respectful in your posting and we might be able to resume the conversation. If you can't see where you're being disrespectful despite me and others pointing it out to you, I can't help you further.

Fine, whatever. If you can't or won't engage in a civilised manner without resorting to insulting language, others can draw their own conclusions of your position by its fruits.

First of all, I'm not impressed by the use of proof-texting in this way; it is a clear misuse of Scripture which anyone can do to justify their position. So, let's move on from that... As to the accusation of Gnosticism, I stand by that: one of its hallmarks was (and is) the over-emphasis of...

The gnostic comment is based upon the fact that you both put up a distinction between flesh and spirit which is a hallmark of gnosticism, which all true Christians condemn, and you then woefully misuse decontextualised Scriptures to justify this. Stop spouting gnostic heresy if you want to be...

It's not the Scriptures but your interpretation of them that's the problem. When will you learn to tell the difference?:BangHead:

I don't think either the UK or the US can or should use it to our advantage.

Got it in one!

Smells like more Gnosticism to me...

I think you'll find it was the Gnostics who were so keen to separate the material and the spiritual, not the Christians....

Then that answers the question as to how and whether Christ can be simultaneously present at the table and on the table at the Last Supper.

Transubstantiation draws a distinction between the substance ie: the essence of the Body and Blood, and the accidents ie: the physical appearance. Thus what was on the table at the Last Supper after the Lord consecrated had the same substance as Him but different accidents, hence He (sitting at...

Define 'literal'. Define 'substance'. Does Christ dwell in every believer? How is that possible?