Raf

Ok, so as long as they're owning, buying, selling, holding wives and children hostage in LOVE, it's okay. Never mind that these folks were a thousand and a half years away from Jesus and Paul. They're supposed to... dude, I can't even fake it. There's nothing loving about owning a man, giving him a wife, then letting that man go and keeping his wife and kids as your property. The reason it's so easy to call that unloving and immoral is simple: it's unloving and immoral. You cannot lovingly keep a man from his wife and kids unless that man promises to be your slave for life. And you cannot morally do it either. What you've done is known as begging the question. It reaches a conclusion by assuming it to be true in the first place. God is love. Therefore, everything he does will be loving and moral. If he has rules for keeping, buying, trading, beating banging and selling slaves, they must be loving and moral rules for keeping buying trading beating banging and selling slaves. Because he's love! That's not thinking. That's making horrific excuses for horrific verses that are indefensible. You say God is love. I show you he is not. And you are so jedi-mind-committed to the "God is love" paradigm that you would rather endorse a patently immoral practice than admit that maybe, just maybe, the skeptics have a point on this one.

Seize the Day Carrying the Banner

Correct!

Nicely told.

Yip

Son of a gun, you're right!

Because it is

Lane Smith Anthony Hopkins Frank Langella

Anyone ever notice how SIT is perfectly represented in the Emperor's New Clothes story?

Based on the fact that Mel hasn't played a lot of characters played by others, I'm gonna take an educated guess and say Hamlet

Didn't we say go for it after enough time has passed, so long as you admit it? I don't remember

Cheated

Anyone?

Yes!

Yup

Not one verse or one explanation of one verse. I'll wait.

The lead actor on this movie still owns the 1948 Ford Super Deluxe that he waxed during an unwitting training sequence in the middle of the film.

Aliens arrive on Earth in gigantic vessels, just in time to witness the third installment of a zombie apocalypse franchise.

One of the worst shows in television history, unless, you know, you liked it. The forgettable theme song was written by Randy Newman. So were most other songs on the show, which was part Hill Street Blues, part Glee.

"I'm gonna let ya' in on a little secret, Ray. K-Mart sucks."

I think it would be awesome if you quoted and responded to the actual verses instead of quoting and responding to my flippant summaries. Here you have Bible verses that actually authorize a slaveowner to keep a man's wife and children if the man leaves. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find a provision allowing the slavemaster to release them! Try that in today's culture. Go on, I dare you. You'd never get away with it, and with good reason. I don't see how a word study or a better understanding of Hebrew definitions changes the fact that a man's wife and children are effectively being held hostage by a slavemaster and the only solution is to submit to a lifetime of slavery. What the bloody hell? But PLEASE, show me how words and definitions and "context" make this a morally acceptable practice! PLEASE!

If I can back up for a moment: Seymour Parrish: One Hour Photo Sean Maguire: Good Will Hunting Daniel Hillard: Mrs. Doubtfire

More famous roles: John Keating Peter Banning

Please explain each verse in its context and demonstrate that the situation being described and prescribed is morally acceptable.

Finding Forrester