Golden Age of biblical principles?

I suggest that instead of being pompous and stupid simultaneously you should try to alternate between them.

Simplicity must be the watchword for you fellas. How can I support the claim when you will not give an explanation of what you think a golden age is or is not, according to the Bible or BuzzIm telling you point blank that, the/A golden age is when a nation collectively makes the Bible the rule in a moral concept. Thje 1800s and the 40s and 50s in this country are good examples of suchIf you disagree you need to show why you think it is not a golden age and then we proceed from that point to see who is correct from a Biblical perspective.Since a Biblical golden age is what you are seeking correct?If its not then explain what in the hell a golden age is according to youDawn Bertot

So you refuse to answer the question while you demand that others do so? Your audience is watching DA, very bad formDawn Bertot

Buz made the claim that there was some Golden Age of biblical principles.You are correct, we cannot define what a Golden Age is or what a biblical principle is or what period Buz is referring to since Buz has not told us what he means by any of those terms.Until you or Buz explains to us what a biblical principle is, what Buz meant by a Golden Age and what made it a Golden Age, and when such an event was supposed to have happened, you are correct, we cannot give an explanation.But it is not for want of trying.Should you happen to have the answers to those questions then perhaps we can then question and test those answers.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

That is the point. There was no "Golden Age" It has been nothing but exploitation, in the name of "Christianity."

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

I had not looked on us as currying favor with an audience, but since you mention it, I have a member rating of 4.1 and you have a member rating of 2. So it seems that in this respect it is not I who stand in need of your advice.

As a member of that audience, I will just note that I agree with Dr Adequate. Much of what you post is indeed incomprehensible gibberish.

---

Jesus was a liberal hippie

And to increase the level of confusion that DB brings:I once replied to DB's gibberish with my own gibberish (I made several 'clever sounding' points).
DB then replied with a bunch of ad hominems with little reference to my post.I then pointed out that I had posted gibberish and DB was unable to tell.
So DB replied to my initial post trying to agree with each of my 'points'.
Clearly they had again failed to 'guess' what was being said.So I mocked DB again and again, DB replied to the original post, this time critising each of my 'points'.Clearly DB can't comprehend English beyond the rudimentary level.
This will also (obviously) hinder thier ability to reply accurately and clearly.

If I am not mistaken and Buzz can correct me if I am wrong, but i am sure he simply meant an age where a society say like the jewish community of old, held it to the highest standardBut isnt this true of any ideology, you can go through history and find peoples and places where a certain religion was the sole practive of its membersI really dont see what the fuss is aboutDawn Bertot

You still have not addressed my post so I will quote it yet again for you. Until you or Buz explains to us what a biblical principle is, what Buz meant by a Golden Age and what made it a Golden Age, and when such an event was supposed to have happened, you are correct, we cannot give an explanation.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

But there is yet another point to be made in that connection. It doesnt take everybody getting it correct all the time for it to be valid or usefulassuming that a society or a nation has to get it all correct for it to be valid or useful is simply nonesenseAnd ofcourse this what Theos query is indirectly implying, even though I cannot get him to state the implication of his contention in the first placeThe conclusion therefore is that Christianity is valid, is affective, is benificial, is usefulNow that we have disagreed about the Golden age principle, perhaps we could see his implication to begin withDawn Bertot

yeah and i believe Jaywill has a rating of 3 something and you a four, so that should tell you something of the rating systemI wonder how many fundamental Christians here influence the rating system? Hmmmmm?Bad form DA, very bad form. You should have spend you time responding to arguments instead of providing us with trumped up credentialsOh Im sorry Jaywill only has a 2.8. That should really drive home the necessity of you needing someone elses adviceYou could start by taking advice about your rate here at the site. YiiiiiikesDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Uhhhhh, lets say "love your neighbor as yourself" and a golden age would be where the scriptures is used by that society as a rule of moral principles, by the vast majorityexamples of this would be the Jewish community of Old, for thousands of years, who could deny that and the 1800s and the forties and fifties of this nation, where the Bible was held up as the nearly sole standard for moral conductIm just courious how many times I need to keep repeating an answer to your questionIf you disagree then we can discuss the simply ridiculous application of your and theos query to begin withDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

So let me get this straight.Are you saying that "Love your neighbor as yourself" is the biblical principle and that the 1800s, 1940s and 1950s are the period when that principle was held up as a rule of moral principles by the vast majority of Americans?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

nwr writes: Panda writes:It would be more interseting to the audience if you would simply give an example of my miscomprehension and gibberish, instead of claiming it as suchIf and when you dont do this I will therefore to consider it a failure on your part to demonstrate your assertionPlease by all means feel free to demonstrate your point from any of my posts. I am not in the habit of making comments I need to retract or cannot defend at a later dateDawn Bertot