[email protected]
New member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2003
- Messages
- 1
Not if you get into trouble for it. While trying "reverse-psychology" sounds like a good idea, saying JoS is not absolute truth - when it is LORD Satan's online Grounds, and given by Him and other Gods - is not a good idea.
see_the_truth.com is not see_the_truth_sort_of.com, is it (or whatever it was)? exposingchristianity.com is not exposingchristianitysortof.com, is it? If it's not absolute truth, then why should I trust any of it?
If it was a one-to-one chat, either online or in-person, you could say, "The more we learn and discover, the more correct things we know; we update and correct things when needed". For a poster, however, it has to be bright, sensational, and catching, of course - but for this Cause, it has to be true. I wouldn't say, "Well, it's not quite perfect, but give it a go, anyway - at least about 97% of it is correct."
see_the_truth.com is not see_the_truth_sort_of.com, is it (or whatever it was)? exposingchristianity.com is not exposingchristianitysortof.com, is it? If it's not absolute truth, then why should I trust any of it?
If it was a one-to-one chat, either online or in-person, you could say, "The more we learn and discover, the more correct things we know; we update and correct things when needed". For a poster, however, it has to be bright, sensational, and catching, of course - but for this Cause, it has to be true. I wouldn't say, "Well, it's not quite perfect, but give it a go, anyway - at least about 97% of it is correct."
