Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

The Church pulled out of Politics many years ago and America has been going down hill ever since then.

 

get used to it 'cause it ain't gonna change

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If god is omniscient and omnipotent, it is he himself who allowed for evil to flourish.

 

God created everything, but controls nothing.

 

I believe God knows everything, because there will be a day of judgement, but I do not believe God either causes disease nor cures disease.

 

I believe it is the responsiblity of Christians to be God's hands and feet on earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

God created everything, but controls nothing.

 

I believe God knows everything, because there will be a day of judgement, but I do not believe God either causes disease nor cures disease.

 

I believe it is the responsiblity of Christians to be God's hands and feet on earth.

so you think it should be christians who control things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

God created everything, but controls nothing.

 

I believe God knows everything, because there will be a day of judgement, but I do not believe God either causes disease nor cures disease.

 

I believe it is the responsiblity of Christians to be God's hands and feet on earth.

So you're saying that before god even started to create stuff he was willing to allow evil to flourish. That makes god an evil entity in his own right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

get used to it 'cause it ain't gonna change

 

Sadly you are probably right, but I state this as a warning to Christians.

 

A lot of Christians are very comfortable that they are going to Heaven, but then they may have to answer the question, "Did you allow evil to flourish because you did nothing?"

 

A lot of Church are concerned that they are losing the youth, but they cannot seem to connect the dots between Politics and the lose of the youth.

 

With both parents working, the youth/children hear more from TV than from parents and Church. Many are getting out of public schools and going to private schools, but Democrats are not going to allow that.

 

Progesssives, Liberals, Atheists and Democrats know the takeover of America is by controlling the educational system. And, of course the Democrats are aided by the Atheistic Liberal News and Enterainment Industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hannibal can't tell a dick from a sok from a troll which is ironic since he's had all three in his ass.

 

 

WOW +1 for senseless rhetoric!

You are a VILE PIG!

 

And a coward communist pacifist who refuses to die for his country!

God will punish you in eternal flames of hell! :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you think it should be christians who control things?

 

The Christian Lifesyle is far better than the Atheistic Lifesyle for all parties involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Christian Lifesyle is far better than the Atheistic Lifesyle for all parties involved.

why can't you just say "yes"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're saying that before god even started to create stuff he was willing to allow evil to flourish. That makes god an evil entity in his own right.

 

When God created everything, he allowed free will to accept or reject.

 

God then provided the Bible to define good and evil.

 

People use the free will to do evil because they know have the Bible available to them.

 

Trying to blame God is useless, but I will add that to the list of the Progressive Language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Christian Lifesyle is far better than the Atheistic Lifesyle for all parties involved.

You're wrong. Living as a subservient minion without independent thought and groveling at the altar of a superstitious entity is the epitome of slavery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why can't you just say "yes"?

 

Do you accept Jesus Christ as Lord/Savior and commit to following the commandmens/doctrines of the Bible?

 

I hope you can just say "yes".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When God created everything, he allowed free will to accept or reject.

 

God then provided the Bible to define good and evil.

 

People use the free will to do evil because they know have the Bible available to them.

 

Trying to blame God is useless, but I will add that to the list of the Progressive Language.

You've stated the god is omnipotent and omniscient. That means he knew evil would flourish. Therefore, he is responsible for the evil he created, and that makes him an evil entity in his own right. You've got no wiggle room here, sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're wrong. Living as a subservient minion without independent thought and groveling at the altar of a superstitious entity is the epitome of slavery.

 

That seems to be the position of most Atheists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you accept Jesus Christ as Lord/Savior and commit to following the commandmens/doctrines of the Bible?

 

I hope you can just say "yes".

Jesus was a good man and taught his followers many good things. Compassion for the poor and sick, for example.

But the man died two-thousand plus years ago, and he's been dead ever since.

 

 

That seems to be the position of most Atheists.

That makes even less sense than most of the crapola you post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've stated the god is omnipotent and omniscient. That means he knew evil would flourish. Therefore, he is responsible for the evil he created, and that makes him an evil entity in his own right. You've got no wiggle room here, sport.

 

God did not create evil.

 

All things are both good and evil. The is good love and there is evil love. There is good freedom and there is evil freedom.

 

Satan tempted man to do evil.

 

The followers of Satan continue to tempt men to do evil.

 

Jesus was a good man and taught his followers many good things. Compassion for the poor and sick, for example.

But the man died two-thousand plus years ago, and he's been dead ever since.

 

That makes even less sense than most of the crapola you post.

 

You can now never say you were not offered salvation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

God did not create evil.

 

All things are both good and evil. The is good love and there is evil love. There is good freedom and there is evil freedom.

 

Satan tempted man to do evil.

 

The followers of Satan continue to tempt men to do evil.

So then, god is not omnipotent? Or is he? Make up your mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I believe my worst problem is that I am honest.

 

What is your problem?

Honest, you are DELUDED!

 

Da Jeezus Demons gotcha!

 

You lying, hypocritical, judgemental bastid!

 

Satan masquerades as a Christian, and fools idiots like you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you accept Jesus Christ as Lord/Savior and commit to following the commandmens/doctrines of the Bible?

 

I hope you can just say "yes".

get a grope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A homosexual could never be a "brother" because homosexuals are Atheists.

 

 

You can tell an Atheist by their homosexuality and you tell a homosexual by their Atheism.

 

Your reasoning is circular. You know. Like dating fossils by the layer of rocks they are found in and dating the layer of rocks by which fossils are found in them.

 

Since a homosexual is not a "brother" there is no Biblical requirement to forgive them.

Didn't I already say that. Jesus was ONLY talking to Peter and to the people around him at the time, just as the interpretation of "brother" wasn't meant to refer to ALL people being created by God, and therefore children of God, and therefore "brothers". Heavens no. or I mean Heavens yes.

 

 

Homosexuals sin against God by rejecting the commandments/doctrines of the Bible.

Is it really more than ONE commandment or doctrine of the Bible you are persecuting them for?

 

I reject homosexuality because it is a diseased lifestyle.

So is the promiscuity of many many hetro-sexuals.

 

You can pray if you want, but the Bible says God only answers the prayers of a righterous person.

Will God answer your prayers?

 

You cannot be righerous if you are involved with or advocate homosexuality.

Why stop with just the one sin of homosexuality?

 

Is there anyone who has righteousness through observance of the law that we can have speak to God on our behalf? How often do you believe this advocate would speak to God on our behalf? Just once? Three times? Seventy-seven times? As many times as it takes?

 

 

I discuss homosexuality, adultery and drugs because they clearly indicate the philosophy of Progressives, Liberals, Atheists and Democrats is wrong and evil because it leads to disease, death, destruction and poverty.

I doubt you will find many on the left that believe the policies and philosophy of Republicans, conservatives, tea partiers, ect., don't also lead to disease, death, destruction and poverty. Especially poverty.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Houdini was contemptuous of spirit mediums because they gave false messages to bereaved people desperate to contact loved ones who'd passed on. He knew that the phenomena they produced was standard stage magic. Why did they have to do it all in the dark? It was so people would not see them slipping their hands out of restraints to blow horns, shake tambourines. Many wore very stiff shoes so that they could slip a foot out and pick up something and shake it, and the people on either side who had a foot on the medium's feet would not feel the medium's foot slip out.

 

No well-designed study with good controls has ever turned up evidence of any paranormal ability, period. That stuff all depends on a well-grounded understanding of human behavior and beliefs, allowing mediums to take advantage of people.

 

Regarding Geller and others like him, whenever they know a professional stage magician is in their audience, no paranormal phenomena occur, because these guys know they will be exposed. They simply say "the atmosphere is not right" or something similar. They get a pass when nothing happens. Stage magicians get no such passes, for they do not claim to control real power. They are illusionists, and the audience knows it is their psychological and manipulative skills that bring about stage magic.

 

Again, no dowsers in controlled tests ever find anything. Their results are chance results.

 

If any of these people truly believed they had paranormal abilities, someone by now would have gone to the Houdini Museum in Niagara Falls, Canada, paid the thousand bucks, and had Houdini's suspended-pencil box opened, knowing there would be something on the paper at the bottom of the box, written by the pencil through the aid of their abilities.

 

If you knew you could move things with your mind, wouldn't you plunk down $1000 to make $10,000? It would be a guarantee.

Somehow, you fold in stage magicians and phony mediums all into one bag, and compare that with dowsing.

 

Dowsing has NOTHING to do with that crap. Its totally unique. These "controled tests" you speak of are intentionally designed by skeptics who go to great lengths to trash true dowsers. The reality is, that dowsing and many psi phenomena are of the mind, and cannot be measured, quantified in a cold laboratory setting. Its like a woman who had a vision of a loved one dying in a bad accident and it happened. How could she prove that it actually happened? She cant, yet it did happen.

 

I had lucid dreams where I saw the Oakland Bay Bridge roadway collapse years before it happened, in fact the dream happened 3-4 times. How could I prove to anyone it happened? Well, the dream fortold DID HAPPEN, and that was proof enough for me.And I sensed major earthquakes months before they happen, like the Loma Prieta quake. I'm a sensitive.

 

I have gone out with fellow gold prospectors and dowsed for gold, and where I designated gold nuggets were, they were indeed found right there! I could tell how deep the water table was, and I would drain certain swimming pools in mid winter, no other company would touch, when I was in the pool business. I have taught folks how to dowse underground water pipes and buried electrical cable, etc. Heck, that's easy! I have diagnosed bodily infections with my hands, that doctors could not find. I saved a three story house from devastation, that was being undermined by an aquifer. And of mine can tell you exactly what cards are before they are turned over! I have had more than a few experiences with spirits and demonic entities. Scary!

 

I thought you had an open mind, Lisa. Apparently, it is not open to paranormal. You should talk to more people and you will see millions of folks have experiences of such. The world has many miraculous things and it is the fault of "science" that they cannot satisfactorilly explain them, and NOT on the people that experience them.

 

Anyone who calls themselves a Christian believes in God, and Jesus. And it follows that they accept the "miracles" that jesus performed, so why should it be so hard for you to accept paranormal stuff?

 

Millions of honest folks will tell you that you are mistaken.

Its OK. I don't need anyone to believe me, and I don't care what the negative people say. I just DO IT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow, you fold in stage magicians and phony mediums all into one bag, and compare that with dowsing.

 

Dowsing has NOTHING to do with that crap. Its totally unique. These "controled tests" you speak of are intentionally designed by skeptics who go to great lengths to trash true dowsers. The reality is, that dowsing and many psi phenomena are of the mind, and cannot be measured, quantified in a cold laboratory setting. Its like a woman who had a vision of a loved one dying in a bad accident and it happened. How could she prove that it actually happened? She cant, yet it did happen.

 

I had lucid dreams where I saw the Oakland Bay Bridge roadway collapse years before it happened, in fact the dream happened 3-4 times. How could I prove to anyone it happened? Well, the dream fortold DID HAPPEN, and that was proof enough for me.And I sensed major earthquakes months before they happen, like the Loma Prieta quake. I'm a sensitive.

 

I have gone out with fellow gold prospectors and dowsed for gold, and where I designated gold nuggets were, they were indeed found right there! I could tell how deep the water table was, and I would drain certain swimming pools in mid winter, no other company would touch, when I was in the pool business. I have taught folks how to dowse underground water pipes and buried electrical cable, etc. Heck, that's easy! I have diagnosed bodily infections with my hands, that doctors could not find. I saved a three story house from devastation, that was being undermined by an aquifer. And of mine can tell you exactly what cards are before they are turned over! I have had more than a few experiences with spirits and demonic entities. Scary!

 

I thought you had an open mind, Lisa. Apparently, it is not open to paranormal. You should talk to more people and you will see millions of folks have experiences of such. The world has many miraculous things and it is the fault of "science" that they cannot satisfactorilly explain them, and NOT on the people that experience them.

 

Anyone who calls themselves a Christian believes in God, and Jesus. And it follows that they accept the "miracles" that jesus performed, so why should it be so hard for you to accept paranormal stuff?

 

Millions of honest folks will tell you that you are mistaken.

Its OK. I don't need anyone to believe me, and I don't care what the negative people say. I just DO IT!

 

Psi "practioners" have been caught faking so many times it's ridiculous. If they were for real they would not have to cheat. If they perform where they know there's a professional magician, why does nothing happen if they are for real?

 

And why has no one in the better part of a hundred years, if they know they possess psychic ability, made themselves a quick ten thousand dollars by making the pencil in Houdini's challenge box write something on the paper below it? Houdini caught mediums faking right and left. Why did they need to fake if they were for real?

 

What you don't understand is that Houdini wanted very badly to believe in this stuff because he wanted to contact his deceased mother. So he visited many mediums, and all he saw them do was cheat. You'd think there'd have been one genuine one.

 

All you've offered is anecdotal evidence, which is no proof at all. The people who design the dowsing tests truly want to know if it's real, and they do not design the tests so dowsers will fail. You are quite arrogant in stating they do, when I'll bet you haven't read any of the literature on the subject.

 

Well, here's some, from http://www.skepdic.com/dowsing.html

 

Some people are less interested in why the rods move than in whether dowsing works. Obviously, many people believe it does. Dowsing and other forms of divination have been around for thousands of years. There are large societies of dowsers in America and Europe and dowsers practice their art every day in all parts of the world. There have even been scientists in recent years who have offered proof that dowsing works. There must be something to it, then, or so it seems.

 

Testing has been sparse, however. For one thing, it is difficult to establish a "baseline against which a diviner's performance may be compared" (Zusne and Jones 1989: 108). In 1949, an experiment was conducted in Maine by the American Society for Psychical Research. Twenty-seven dowsers "failed completely to estimate either the depth or the amount of water to be found in a field free of surface clues to water, whereas a geologist and an engineer successfully predicted the depth at which water would be found in 16 sites in the same field...." (Zusne and Jones 1989: 108; reported in Vogt and Hyman: 1967). There have been a few other controlled tests of dowsing and all produced only chance results (ibid.). [in addition to Vogt and Hyman, see R. A. Foulkes (1971) "Dowsing experiments," Nature, 229, pp.163-168); M. Martin (1983-1984). "A new controlled dowsing experiment." Skeptical Inquirer. 8(2), 138-140; J. Randi(1979). "A controlled test of dowsing abilities." Skeptical Inquirer. 4(1). 16-20; and D. Smith (1982). "Two tests of divining in Australia." Skeptical Inquirer. 4(4). 34-37.]

 

The testimonials of dowsers and those who observe them provide the main evidence for dowsing. The evidence is simple: dowsers find what they are dowsing for and they do this many times. What more proof of dowsing is needed? The fact that this pattern of dowsing and finding something occurs repeatedly leads many dowsers and their advocates to make the causal connection between dowsing and finding water, oil, minerals, golf balls, etc. This type of fallacious reasoning is known as post hoc reasoning and is a very common basis for belief in paranormal powers. It is essentially unscientific and invalid. Scientific thinking includes being constantly vigilant against self-deception and being careful not to rely upon insight or intuition in place of rigorous and precise empirical testing of theoretical and causal claims. Every controlled study of dowsers has shown that dowsers do no better than chance in finding what they are looking for.

 

Most dowsers do not consider it important to doubt their dowsing powers or to wonder if they are self-deceived. They never consider doing a controlled scientific test of their powers. They think that the fact that they have been successful over the years at dowsing is proof enough. When dowsers are scientifically tested and fail, they generally react with genuine surprise. Typical is what happened when James Randi tested some dowsers using a protocol they all agreed upon. If they could locate water in underground pipes at an 80% success rate they would get $10,000 (now the prize is over $1,000,000). All the dowsers failed the test, though each claimed to be highly successful in finding water using a variety of non-scientific instruments, including a pendulum. Says Randi, "the sad fact is that dowsers are no better at finding water than anyone else. Drill a well almost anywhere in an area where water is geologically possible, and you will find it."

 

Some of the strongest evidence for dowsing comes from Germany. Tests were done in a barn (Scheune is the German word for barn) and are referred to by J. T. Enright as the "Scheunen" experiments. In 1987 and 1988, more than 500 dowsers participated in more than 10,000 double-blind tests set up by physicists in a barn near Munich. The researchers claim they empirically proved "a real dowsing phenomenon." Jim Enright of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography evaluated the data and concluded that the so-called "real dowsing phenomenon" can reasonably be attributed to chance. His argument is rather lengthy, but here is a taste of it:

The long and the short of it is that dowsing performance in the Scheunen experiments was not reproducible. It was not reproducible inter-individually: from a pool of some 500 self-proclaimed dowsers, the researchers selected for their critical experiments 43 candidates whom they considered most promising on the basis of preliminary testing; but the investigators themselves ended up being impressed with only a few of the performances of only a small handful from that select group. And, even more troublesome for the hypothesis, dowsing performance was not reproducible intra-individually: those few dowsers, who on one occasion or another seemed to do relatively well, were in their other comparable test series usually no more successful than the rest of the "unskilled" dowsers (Enright “Water Dowsing: the Scheunen Experiments,” Naturwissenschaften, vol. 82 1995).

The barn study itself is curious. It seems clearly to have been repudiated by another German study done in 1992 by a group of German scientists and skeptics. The Gesellschaft zur wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Parawissenschaften (GWUP) [society for the Scientific Investigation of the Parasciences] set up a three-day controlled test of some thirty dowsers, mostly from Germany. The test was done at Kassel, north of Frankfurt, and televised by a local television station. The test involved plastic pipe buried 50 centimeters in a level field through which a large flow of water could be controlled and directed. On the surface, the position of the pipe was marked with a colored stripe, so all the dowsers had to do was tell whether there was water running through the pipe. All the dowsers signed a statement that they agreed the test was a fair test of their abilities and that they expected a 100% success rate. The results were what one would expect by chance (Randi 1995). Defenders of dowsing do not care for these results, and continue to claim that the barn study provides scientific proof of dowsing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Psi "practioners" have been caught faking so many times it's ridiculous. If they were for real they would not have to cheat. If they perform where they know there's a professional magician, why does nothing happen if they are for real?

 

And why has no one in the better part of a hundred years, if they know they possess psychic ability, made themselves a quick ten thousand dollars by making the pencil in Houdini's challenge box write something on the paper below it? Houdini caught mediums faking right and left. Why did they need to fake if they were for real?

 

What you don't understand is that Houdini wanted very badly to believe in this stuff because he wanted to contact his deceased mother. So he visited many mediums, and all he saw them do was cheat. You'd think there'd have been one genuine one.

 

All you've offered is anecdotal evidence, which is no proof at all. The people who design the dowsing tests truly want to know if it's real, and they do not design the tests so dowsers will fail. You are quite arrogant in stating they do, when I'll bet you haven't read any of the literature on the subject.

 

Well, here's some, from http://www.skepdic.com/dowsing.html

 

Some people are less interested in why the rods move than in whether dowsing works. Obviously, many people believe it does. Dowsing and other forms of divination have been around for thousands of years. There are large societies of dowsers in America and Europe and dowsers practice their art every day in all parts of the world. There have even been scientists in recent years who have offered proof that dowsing works. There must be something to it, then, or so it seems.

 

Testing has been sparse, however. For one thing, it is difficult to establish a "baseline against which a diviner's performance may be compared" (Zusne and Jones 1989: 108). In 1949, an experiment was conducted in Maine by the American Society for Psychical Research. Twenty-seven dowsers "failed completely to estimate either the depth or the amount of water to be found in a field free of surface clues to water, whereas a geologist and an engineer successfully predicted the depth at which water would be found in 16 sites in the same field...." (Zusne and Jones 1989: 108; reported in Vogt and Hyman: 1967). There have been a few other controlled tests of dowsing and all produced only chance results (ibid.). [in addition to Vogt and Hyman, see R. A. Foulkes (1971) "Dowsing experiments," Nature, 229, pp.163-168); M. Martin (1983-1984). "A new controlled dowsing experiment." Skeptical Inquirer. 8(2), 138-140; J. Randi(1979). "A controlled test of dowsing abilities." Skeptical Inquirer. 4(1). 16-20; and D. Smith (1982). "Two tests of divining in Australia." Skeptical Inquirer. 4(4). 34-37.]

 

The testimonials of dowsers and those who observe them provide the main evidence for dowsing. The evidence is simple: dowsers find what they are dowsing for and they do this many times. What more proof of dowsing is needed? The fact that this pattern of dowsing and finding something occurs repeatedly leads many dowsers and their advocates to make the causal connection between dowsing and finding water, oil, minerals, golf balls, etc. This type of fallacious reasoning is known as post hoc reasoning and is a very common basis for belief in paranormal powers. It is essentially unscientific and invalid. Scientific thinking includes being constantly vigilant against self-deception and being careful not to rely upon insight or intuition in place of rigorous and precise empirical testing of theoretical and causal claims. Every controlled study of dowsers has shown that dowsers do no better than chance in finding what they are looking for.

 

Most dowsers do not consider it important to doubt their dowsing powers or to wonder if they are self-deceived. They never consider doing a controlled scientific test of their powers. They think that the fact that they have been successful over the years at dowsing is proof enough. When dowsers are scientifically tested and fail, they generally react with genuine surprise. Typical is what happened when James Randi tested some dowsers using a protocol they all agreed upon. If they could locate water in underground pipes at an 80% success rate they would get $10,000 (now the prize is over $1,000,000). All the dowsers failed the test, though each claimed to be highly successful in finding water using a variety of non-scientific instruments, including a pendulum. Says Randi, "the sad fact is that dowsers are no better at finding water than anyone else. Drill a well almost anywhere in an area where water is geologically possible, and you will find it."

 

Some of the strongest evidence for dowsing comes from Germany. Tests were done in a barn (Scheune is the German word for barn) and are referred to by J. T. Enright as the "Scheunen" experiments. In 1987 and 1988, more than 500 dowsers participated in more than 10,000 double-blind tests set up by physicists in a barn near Munich. The researchers claim they empirically proved "a real dowsing phenomenon." Jim Enright of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography evaluated the data and concluded that the so-called "real dowsing phenomenon" can reasonably be attributed to chance. His argument is rather lengthy, but here is a taste of it:

The barn study itself is curious. It seems clearly to have been repudiated by another German study done in 1992 by a group of German scientists and skeptics. The Gesellschaft zur wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Parawissenschaften (GWUP) [society for the Scientific Investigation of the Parasciences] set up a three-day controlled test of some thirty dowsers, mostly from Germany. The test was done at Kassel, north of Frankfurt, and televised by a local television station. The test involved plastic pipe buried 50 centimeters in a level field through which a large flow of water could be controlled and directed. On the surface, the position of the pipe was marked with a colored stripe, so all the dowsers had to do was tell whether there was water running through the pipe. All the dowsers signed a statement that they agreed the test was a fair test of their abilities and that they expected a 100% success rate. The results were what one would expect by chance (Randi 1995). Defenders of dowsing do not care for these results, and continue to claim that the barn study provides scientific proof of dowsing.

Lisa, you are drinking from the poisoned well of the Randi skeptics. And ignoring any other research. You are doing exactly what you accuse conservatives of! Of relying on only one biased source. Shame on you!

 

Psychic and paranormal phenomena do not lend them selves to scientific testing well, because those things are of the mind. You are extremely narrow minded, and I don't have the time nor inclination to argue with you.

 

END OF MY POSTS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can tell an Atheist by their homosexuality and you tell a homosexual by their Atheism.

 

Your reasoning is circular. You know. Like dating fossils by the layer of rocks they are found in and dating the layer of rocks by which fossils are found in them.

 

 

Didn't I already say that. Jesus was ONLY talking to Peter and to the people around him at the time, just as the interpretation of "brother" wasn't meant to refer to ALL people being created by God, and therefore children of God, and therefore "brothers". Heavens no. or I mean Heavens yes.

 

 

Is it really more than ONE commandment or doctrine of the Bible you are persecuting them for?

 

 

So is the promiscuity of many many hetro-sexuals.

 

 

Will God answer your prayers?

 

 

Why stop with just the one sin of homosexuality?

 

Is there anyone who has righteousness through observance of the law that we can have speak to God on our behalf? How often do you believe this advocate would speak to God on our behalf? Just once? Three times? Seventy-seven times? As many times as it takes?

 

 

I doubt you will find many on the left that believe the policies and philosophy of Republicans, conservatives, tea partiers, ect., don't also lead to disease, death, destruction and poverty. Especially poverty.

 

 

 

 

I believe even Atheists have a conscience, and that is why my discussion upsets them.

 

The problem of Athests is they get together and create lies that support their Atheistic philosophy.

 

My discussion rips those lies to pieces and the conscience of the Atheists bothers them.

 

John 3:18-21 says, "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For ever one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God."

 

Darkness (evil) hates the light, and Christians are called to be the light of the world.

 

Matthew 5:14 states, "Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid."

 

A perfect example of the lies Athesits create are like the one you stated.

 

"Didn't I already say that. Jesus was ONLY talking to Peter and to the people around him at the time, just as the interpretation of "brother" wasn't meant to refer to ALL people being created by God, and therefore children of God, and therefore "brothers". Heavens no. or I mean Heavens yes."

 

Homosexuality and a lot of other things that lead to disease, death, destuction and povery are called sin by the Bible.

 

So then, god is not omnipotent? Or is he? Make up your mind.

 

I believe God is omnipotent, but chooses to allow Free Will by not controlling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe God is omnipotent, but chooses to allow Free Will by not controlling.

scum fascist sheik clitty believes whatever his nazi monitors tell him to believe. how many children did you think we should murder? you didn't give a number. In fact, I have lots of question about your hope to murder people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


No holds barred chat

  • Hey kfools.. does this help? 


  • By Vegas

    Liberals are going to hell.


  • grgle



  • Where’s at @slideman?


  • Hola


  • I know this one, this new chat thing. I've seen it called the "shoutbox" among other things in my past. Very hard to hide from the chat box. The question is asked, there's no time to go search what other folks think, this is real time. Only seconds should be between chat box replies. This one is made for me. In the chat box one has to be quick on their feet with stuff at the ready. This chat box is the worst nightmare of anyone trying to deal with ol' teach. 


  • By pmurT

    hey @teacher that sounds like too much work for me LOL I need that useless thing called *time* in order to authenticate facts and truths which get posted by deceitful Dems


  • What does the red number refer to? currently, on my screen it says 2

     


  • Where does it say 2?


  • So. In the chat....if you tag a member the text afterwards should be a private message. 


  • How do? I'm teacher. If I'm online and the powers that be can figure out how to make it immediately apparent to me that whatever I've said here has been replied to I'm gonna show up right quick and kick some teeth in. It's the chat box, all this is new and scary. I know this gig. This starts now. 



  • Hey kfools, did you lose your securtiy cert? On my browser it is saying your site is not secure?


  • Mine too. I'm looking into it.


  • Mine too. 


  • I thought it was my location.. 


  • Just gave to renew the security cert. No big deal I'll do it tonight


  • OK thanks

     



  • Happy Anniversary, America... on your Civil Union.


  • All lives matter.


  • Double post deleted.


  • By teacher

    Scroll the other way for a while and you'll see me saying that these days the chat box ain't gonna work as one has to be quick on one's feet. The question is posed, there ain't no stinkin time for ya'll to refer to your betters for the answer, ya'll don't understand these things, this political debate, ya'll don't have the answer at hand, ya'll haven't thought this through, ya'll ain't ready for the next question I'll ask,  ya'll can't handle the pace that a bloke such as I can bring it in the chat box, ya'll can't handle this format.

     

    This one is made for me. 


  • By teacher

    Being offended does not make one correct. 


  • By teacher

    Some few days before the next election Mr. Fools is gonna pin my horse thread. it's gonna be horrible, I shall endevour every day to bring some some fresh. 

     

    I still own this cat box.


  • By teacher

    "I'm coming to you for ask a quick favor."


  • By teacher

    "Anyone that places a color in front of their name is racist." That one is not mine, got it from another member. 


  • Where’s all the hot bitches? 


  • By teacher

    Kidding me? 


You don't have permission to chat in this chatroom
×
×
  • Create New...