Originally Posted by
SPRINGFIELD_XD_40
I know what you meant but the only issue here is , like you who is intelligent nor an average joe with commonsense , why include an INFORMATION that you know is good for nothing ? I dont think that would be included as an additional perspective bai . What the BEREANS portrayed was an obvious campaign against the FM.
The Bereans' perspective is still INFORMATION ON THEIR OPINION/PERSPECTIVE...though with a PROPAGANDISTIC flair, it is not good for nothing...it will then be in your critical thinking and analysis TO AGREE OR DISAGREE why they made that perspective coz they also have basis on their opinion from the Bible.
Just like the "official" FM sites, they are also INFORMATION w/ a propagandistic flair. and i also consider their information to add to my perspective...i don't do "selective research" bro...and that's common sense.
if u read a newspaper, there are news clips as well as editorial & opinion columns, but they are all information...
Originally Posted by
SPRINGFIELD_XD_40
Not even a 33rd degree Mason would do that , how much more of an unknown iSTORYAN ? What only happened was , it just richocheted on you because you are using a " perspective " from a medioum that is a " propaganda " against the FM . I have no problem with that either , that is you call of using it as a gained knowledge or maybe a form of an issue so we can continue to discuss about it between the FM and the Bereans.
who said it ricocheted to me? i only stated in my previous posts the Berean's perspective, is that a crime?...of course, FM vs Bereans is an issue...it has been an issue long before we even talked about this topic...and yes, it is another viewpoint so we can continue to discuss about FM, but it is for all istoryans to discuss about if they want to. besides, this FM vs Bereans issue was already a given...and u should even thank me for finding out about the Bereans site for that matter...otherwise, limited ra ang atoang discussion.
don't get me wrong, i look for facts and opinions, and it doesnt matter if it is anti, neutral, or pro to an issue...
Originally Posted by
SPRINGFIELD_XD_40
We dont even have to use the words EMBRACE and RESPECT but in the simplest form of the phrase " LOVE YOUR NEIGHBORS UNCONDITIONALLY " is sufficient enough to say that we dont need no PRISET to clarify it .
there's nothing to argue about that "love ur neighbors unconditionally". but we cannot discontinue using the words "embrace" and "respect" on this issue and tell the difference between them coz they are part of the discussion regarding FM.
Originally Posted by
SPRINGFIELD_XD_40
At least we agree on that but I personally doesnt based anything on theories because I am a certain person .
of course, we can't argue on that coz i just stated the description of "divine command theory" based from wiki...
Originally Posted by
SPRINGFIELD_XD_40
I know the radicals has nothing to do with islam but is only trying to use it gain sympathy . My point was, FM is not even violence , ngano ma complicate man na spare man gani ang islam in general from the extremist ?
i know...my simple analysis lang is that FM embraces all religion, therefore including Christians. and the Christian faith is not into that idea...well, except the Mormons...and i see that is the main problem here...we can't argue on this, do we?
Islam doesn't embrace Christian faith ky of course lahi man cla ug tinohoan ug dili man ni cla "all-religion". a Muslim is a Muslim and cannot be a Muslim and a Christian at the same time...
and i know dili religion ang FM, but the non-secular nature, and the practice of PLURALISM and UNIVERSALISM of this brotherhood is what the Christian faith is not agreeable to...it is just like the case of RC not in favor of abstaining from eating meat (except during Holy Week) which is a practice of the Sabadistas. and RC respects that practice, but not embrace it.
Originally Posted by
SPRINGFIELD_XD_40
True ... but I firmly believe that the Vatican is only using that as an excuse because there is more to it . Indeed FM respected the Vatican , vatican has been infiltrated by the FM for centuries bai , if they really wanted it , RC is long gone . The only way to cut down a tree is uproot it which is obviously , Vatican is the root . It may sound impossible but it just never happen because for what ? Because FM respects and embraces all men of religion which is the greatest love and acceptance of all .
it's ur opinion but i don't think it is an excuse...the Vatican has doctrines to follow lang just like any other Christian faiths other than RC. it is not only RC that admonishes pluralism and universalism, u know.
yes, i know that the Vatican (or we can say all the religions) has been infiltrated by the FM's for centuries...that's a fact. u could also say that if they (FM) really wanted it, RC could have been long gone.
i only have 2 simple questions w/ simple answers to provide the situation between FM & RC:
(1) Does FM "respect" the church's stance on not allowing their flock to join FM? of course they should...but the FM's who accepts RC's should also inform them the consequences of their actions...
(2) Does the church "respect" the FM's stance on allowing RC's to join FM? of course they should...but the RC's who join FM should also know the consequences of their actions...
all actions have their corresponding consequences, do u agree on that? and u cannot say that a RC joining a FM would not create a consequence, do u?
ana ra ka simple akoa analysis bro...ug di nato na malalis nga scenario between RC and FM...
if we wanna insist that a RC joining FM is alright, it is never alright...coz the Christian faith tells us it's not. otherwise, you rebel...hehe
Re: FREE MASONRY - the Principles
Posting Permissions
