PDA

View Full Version : Spammers wasteland



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Delmar
February 15th, 2013, 03:18 PM
The last time I deleted a post that I deemed to be unhelpful :spam: it ignited a firestorm of cries of censorship. So I decided to create a place to copy such posts. This way the thread in question is not derailed to badly and people will know where the post went.
Enjoy!

Delmar
February 15th, 2013, 03:20 PM
Does a person need to have homosexual behavior to be gay?

rocketman
February 15th, 2013, 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by Zeus
Does a person need to have homosexual behavior to be gay?


Yes, one establishes the other...your feelings are not what is sinful, acting on them is. Actions are a choice pure and simple.

Sorry Del, not sure if you wanted responses in this thread but, this comment/fallacy deserved one...

Delmar
February 15th, 2013, 10:16 PM
Comments in this thread are fair game! Mocking those who spam is invited!

resurrected
February 15th, 2013, 10:17 PM
Spammers Paradise this ain't.

Delmar
February 15th, 2013, 10:24 PM
Spammers Paradise this ain't.

Not yet, give it time.

Sherman
February 15th, 2013, 10:30 PM
These were put up in a thread in the ECT. I will be taking them down as they don't belong there.

This series is from Mark of the Beast Theory (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3358141#post3358141)

Spam Post Number 1



Did you know Allah's name appears in the moon (http://www.islamcan.com/miracles/allahs-name-found-on-the-moon.shtml)?

Spam Post Number 2



Thus one is more compelling than the others that I have seen out there.
A snippet from the article.

Bible and Middle Eastern scholars are noting a similarity between the Arabic name for Allah and the Greek letters naming the Beast of Revelation.
Former PLO operative turned Christian Arabic-language researcher Walid Shoebat affirms there’s evidence that the name of Allah in Arabic is what the apostle John saw in his vision of the Antichrist’s name in the book of Revelation.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/is-allah-the-antichrist/#ozvHbbo9kZxsBig6.99

There is also a video on the page.

This is desperately, painfully stupid stuff.

Neron Kaiser. That's it, folks. Cut and dry. Sorry to disappoint.

And incidently, isn't it a little odd how Christians obsess over the beast's mark and meaning when the mark of God's followers is what John emphasized? I guess the dark side is cooler after all.

Sherman
February 15th, 2013, 10:33 PM
Spam Post Number Three.


It also says the beast had seven heads and that the great whore was drinking from a goblet of blood, among other things, so, either interpret the book symbolically and with some consistency or don't try to understand it at all.

Spam Post Number Four

Originally Posted by tetelestai http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/images/juice/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3358279#post3358279)
Futurism/Dispensationalism has done this to Christians.
It's created a bizarre genre of science/biblical fiction so convoluted, so intricate, so utterly without actual biblical merit, that it really takes some effort to dig through the layers of fiction and speculation and figure out the barely-biblical-basis for the insanity.The beast, 666, mark of the beast, etc. is all ancient history. All the events described in Revelation happened 66AD - 70AD
Agreed that it's done; still up in the air about when it was written, although Gentry and others make a very strong case for a Neronic date.Apparently, Futurists/Dispensationalists and heavy metal bands enjoy trying to guess who/what the "666 beast" is and what he looks like.
There is a weird, grim, bizarre, morbid fascination Christians have with their end-of-the-world revenge fantasy, made even weirder by obsessing over the Antichrist's identity, date of the rapture, mark of the beast, etc.

Delmar
February 15th, 2013, 10:35 PM
[COLOR=Navy]These were put up in a thread in the ECT. I will be taking them down as they don't belong there.



:up:

Memento Mori
February 15th, 2013, 10:41 PM
These were put up in a thread in the ECT. I will be taking them down as they don't belong there.


My apologies. I didn't realize that was the ECT. I tend to jump straight from the active threads page rather than through the forum pages.

Sherman
February 15th, 2013, 10:48 PM
Spam Post number Five

Many ------------------ are ----------- toward ?

Sherman
February 15th, 2013, 10:51 PM
My apologies. I didn't realize that was the ECT. I tend to jump straight from the active threads page rather than through the forum pages.

That is why I didn't punish anyone. It was an oversight. So I moved the content of the posts here.

Memento Mori
February 15th, 2013, 10:55 PM
That is why I didn't punish anyone. It was an oversight. So I deleted the posts and pasted them here.

Also congratulations on the promotion.

Does this count as spam? :eek:

Delmar
February 15th, 2013, 11:12 PM
Also congratulations on the promotion.
:up:

Does this count as spam? :eek:
Sort of, but this is where :spam: belongs, I guess. :idunno:

Eeset
February 15th, 2013, 11:16 PM
I think when you move a post here you should at least tell where it was originally posted. :idunno:

Memento Mori
February 15th, 2013, 11:17 PM
Sort of, but this is where :spam: belongs, I guess. :idunno:

I'll get the olives...

Angel4Truth
February 16th, 2013, 01:10 AM
All anyone has to do to see where a post originated and in its original form is click that little arrow in the quote, and poof they zoom right there.

Delmar
February 16th, 2013, 06:36 AM
I think when you move a post here you should at least tell where it was originally posted. :idunno:
I agree! Thanks for bringing that up, and thanks to A4T for providing the correct answer!



All anyone has to do to see where a post originated and in its original form is click that little arrow in the quote, and poof they zoom right there.

That little arrow is so convenient. It drives me nuts when people quote someone else and without using the built in quote feature.

Sherman
February 16th, 2013, 08:40 AM
Spam post of the day---->
You're do busy ridding and shooting...:Grizzly:

From the topic of day---->toldailytopic: Does a person need to go to church to be a Christian? (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89853)

jeremysdemo
February 16th, 2013, 09:07 AM
Eeset those quotes were from the Mark of the Beast theory thread,

in the event you get pushed to the bottom of this page when you press the arrow like I did rather than the thread the quotes came from....:)

keep shinin

jerm :cool:

Town Heretic
February 16th, 2013, 09:15 AM
:guitar: So it's like..


Out there in the threads
we empty our heads
Most of or “facts” are scraps from Wiki
I could be a kid
who should be in bed
or some guy who cleans the "Johns" at Denny's

Don't try
Just roll your eyes
It's only spammer wasteland

Nick M
February 16th, 2013, 09:25 AM
:flamer:

Thanks for the link. :) Got him.

Sherman
February 16th, 2013, 10:04 AM
I went ahead and put up the title of the thread where that series of spam posts is from.

Zeus
February 16th, 2013, 10:05 AM
:guitar: So it's like..


Out there in the threads
we empty our heads
Most of or “facts” are scraps from Wiki
I could be a kid
who should be in bed
or some guy who cleans the "Johns" at Denny's

Don't try
Just roll your eyes
It's only spammer wasteland

:spam:

Town Heretic
February 16th, 2013, 10:09 AM
:spam:

Who are you? :eek:

Sherman
February 16th, 2013, 10:17 AM
I am doing it the way Delmar does now--Leaving the post itself up and just deleting the content.

Zeus
February 16th, 2013, 10:57 AM
Who are you? :eek:I know it is hard to feel my presence at times, but trust in me. I am there. There were one set of foot prints in the sand because I was carrying you!

genuineoriginal
February 16th, 2013, 11:05 AM
I know it is hard to feel my presence at times, but trust in me. I am there. There were one set of foot prints in the sand because I was carrying you!
That will make it easier for the crime scene investigators.

Town Heretic
February 16th, 2013, 11:37 AM
I know it is hard to feel my presence at times, but trust in me. I am there. There were one set of foot prints in the sand because I was carrying you!

You're Al Gore? :think:

Sherman
February 22nd, 2013, 10:12 AM
Here's one for you--posted in the wrong forum--ECT.


Because the Spirit of Christ that guided the author of John's Gospel knew someday Abraham would be caught out as a fictional creation of the ancient Hebrews. "Before Abraham was, I am." meaning Christ is real, Abraham wasn't. And this is proven out with the archeological findings of Israelis at Megiddo showing the writers of the Bible told some whoppers, still believed today by millions because they don't know Armageddon has literally come now to all Abrahamic religions.

Thread---->What was the full reason Abraham looked forward to Jesus' day? (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3365064#post3365064)

A post saying the bible writers wrote 'Whoppers' doesn't belong in the ECT. Please review the ECT rules here (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12042).

Granite
February 22nd, 2013, 11:28 AM
:up:

Comments by non-Christians in the ECT have been allowed before. When did this policy change?

Sherman
February 22nd, 2013, 11:33 AM
It depends on the nature of the comment.

Granite
February 22nd, 2013, 11:38 AM
It depends on the nature of the comment.

...which makes me wonder why, exactly, you removed mine. They were on-subject, non-disruptive, and, better yet, accurate.

Whatever makes you feel better, Kett.

Angel4Truth
February 22nd, 2013, 01:18 PM
Comments by non-Christians in the ECT have been allowed before. When did this policy change?

I guess you never read the forums description:

Exclusively Christian Theology: This forum is exclusively for those who consider themselves Christian and consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God.

Do you consider yourself christian and consider the bible to be the inspired word of God?

and then in there is the first sticky that says new rules for that forum written in 2004 :

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=435816&postcount=1

And here is the part about non believers there:


Therefore...
The new standard for the "Exclusively Christian Theology" is to allow anyone to post here who considers themselves to be Christian and considers the Bible to be inspired by God.

Yes that creates a much bigger tent, but that's a good thing for healthy debate!

So... if you consider yourself a Christian and you consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God then you are welcome to post in the "Exclusively Christian Theology" forum.

Furthermore...
We are also willing to let any other unbeliever or follower of another religion post here if they are honestly seeking an answer to a question or have constructive input to the discussion. In other words... if an atheist has a question about God and he asks it in an honest, upfront way we will gladly deal with that question without booting him out of the forum.

Not room for sad witty mocking comments, sorry granite.

Grandma Lucy
March 28th, 2013, 11:29 PM
zippy2006 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/member.php?u=11247) has reported a post.

Reason:
This seems illegal according to the precedent set by these infractions: 1) Calling someone an idiot (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91005), 2) Calling someone a Mega Turd (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90901), 3) Inferring stupidity (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90845), 4) Saying someone has an IQ of 45 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89607).

I do not see how "blovating doofus" is better than any of the above.
Post: What kind of reputation do i have here barbarian and anyone else who wants to respond (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3402091#post3402091)
Forum: . . . and The Rest
Assigned Moderators: N/A

Posted by: Inzl Kett (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/member.php?u=12969)
Original Content:
Barbie is also a blovating doofus that likes to repeat himself. I don't see any substance in those posts.

Grandma Lucy
March 28th, 2013, 11:48 PM
zoo22 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/member.php?u=4558) has also reported this item.

Reason:
Just seems very unnecessary.

Stripe
March 29th, 2013, 05:05 AM
zippy2006 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/member.php?u=11247) has reported a post.

Reason:
Post: What kind of reputation do i have here barbarian and anyone else who wants to respond (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3402091#post3402091)
Forum: . . . and The Rest
Assigned Moderators: N/A

Posted by: Inzl Kett (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/member.php?u=12969)
Original Content:

Reporting moderators. :darwinsm:

:think:

:mock: Zippyhead.

Nick M
March 29th, 2013, 07:08 AM
I used the link to give IK some rep.

Sherman
March 29th, 2013, 08:35 AM
Reporting moderators. :darwinsm:

:think:

:mock: Zippyhead.:rotfl: Zippy just made my day. That's hilarious.

WizardofOz
March 29th, 2013, 11:32 AM
zippy2006 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/member.php?u=11247) has reported a post.

Reason:
Post: What kind of reputation do i have here barbarian and anyone else who wants to respond (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3402091#post3402091)
Forum: . . . and The Rest
Assigned Moderators: N/A

Posted by: Inzl Kett (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/member.php?u=12969)
Original Content:

Duh, zippy. It's not hypocritical "gutter sniping" when a mod does it. ;)

Sherman
March 29th, 2013, 11:36 AM
Duh, zippy. It's not hypocritical "gutter sniping" when a mod does it. ;)Barbie earned it. He's always on the attack with his posts. Read the rules again. It's name calling without cause.

Stripe
March 29th, 2013, 11:40 AM
Duh, zippy. It's not hypocritical "gutter sniping" when a mod does it. ;)

:mock: Zard.

Sherman
March 29th, 2013, 11:44 AM
I do call people names when it is earned. I do it sparingly. It has more impact that way.

WizardofOz
March 29th, 2013, 11:47 AM
Barbie earned it. He's always on the attack with his posts. Read the rules again. It's name calling without cause.

On the contrary. I was going by your definition of "gutter snipe":
Gutter snipe--an apt term for a person who does personal attacks instead of showing how a poster is wrong.

Barbie is also a blovating doofus that likes to repeat himself. I don't see any substance in those posts.

It's textbook by your definition. You made a personal attack rather than show how the poster was wrong. You "gutter-sniped". It's OK of course. It should be allowed and sometimes even encouraged. It's a part of what makes TOL fun; clever insults.


Wow - Walt's more of an idiot than I realized.

Piezoelectricity causing radioactivity? How does he dream this stuff up?

Reason was given for name-calling (of a non-poster to boot). Notice the argument at the end.

It's all in good fun, Inzl. It's clear that you'll do what you want while disregarding any semblance of consistency. I'm sure we'll all adapt and get a long just fine.

I cannot help if it entertains, however :p

WizardofOz
March 29th, 2013, 11:49 AM
:mock: Zard.

:sigh: Ah, I miss MaryContrary. She was fun!

Sherman
March 29th, 2013, 12:06 PM
4. Thou SHALL NOT call other TOL members names without cause. Appropriately identifying the wicked is not only allowed but encouraged. Again, TOL is a right-wing Christian forum and therefore our bias is not hidden.

"All of the above commandments are subjective in nature and will be determined on a case by case basis by the TOL staff."

Infractions are handed out if the name calling is without cause.

WizardofOz
March 29th, 2013, 06:03 PM
4. Thou SHALL NOT call other TOL members names without cause.

Cool, when did Walt Brown join TOL?

resurrected
March 29th, 2013, 06:05 PM
If I call my Aunt Fanny a big poopy head, will I get banned? :noid:

WizardofOz
March 29th, 2013, 06:29 PM
If I call my Aunt Fanny a big poopy head, will I get banned? :noid:

:chuckle: Who really knows anymore...:idunno:

zippy2006
March 30th, 2013, 09:23 AM
It's all in good fun, Inzl. It's clear that you'll do what you want while disregarding any semblance of consistency. I'm sure we'll all adapt and get a long just fine.

I cannot help if it entertains, however :p

Christ wasn't exactly a fan of hypocrisy, but on this scale it is quite funny. :chuckle:

resurrected
March 30th, 2013, 09:33 AM
:chuckle: Who really knows anymore...:idunno:

Someday I'll start a thread seeking opinions on the apparent belief by the mods here that Town Heretic is a god


:think:maybe I'll include a poll

The Barbarian
March 30th, 2013, 09:42 AM
Hey, it's the way it is on TOL. If you want a level playing field there's always debate club. I'm not offended; it's part of the atmosphere here.

Delmar
March 30th, 2013, 09:46 AM
If I call my Aunt Fanny a big poopy head, will I get banned? :noid:

From the family Thanksgiving, yes!

zippy2006
March 30th, 2013, 10:04 AM
Hey, it's the way it is on TOL. If you want a level playing field there's always debate club. I'm not offended; it's part of the atmosphere here.

And yet the slope has certainly increased. Knight's slope provided for free speech to a very large degree, and therefore invited and welcomed those of differing beliefs, perhaps treating them harshly at times but allowing them to fight back, not tying their hands behind their backs as they are struck. Not so anymore.

If people don't like being hit without being allowed to strike back, being abused without being allowed to defend themselves or retaliate, or dealing with hypocritical moderation, they will leave. TOL is inevitably becoming less lively. The irony--and most unfortunate problem--is that it is "Christians" who are taking back with their left hand what they have given with their right. If you are a non-Christian who has survived on TOL, then chances are you already know how to turn the other cheek more than the Christians.

I am all in favor of a more civil environment, but strongly against a half-civil hypocritical environment. So the working model for TOL is changing: debate and lively discussion will slowly begin to dry up as this becomes another strongly-biased forum of like-minded people reinforcing what they already believe; a technologically advanced bridge club, not a theological or political forum. :idunno:

The Barbarian
March 30th, 2013, 10:06 AM
It's happened before. And eventually, Knight steps in and re-establishes some equilibrium. This too shall pass.

Delmar
March 30th, 2013, 10:12 AM
And yet the slope has certainly increased. Knight's slope provided for free speech to a very large degree, and therefore invited and welcomed those of differing beliefs, perhaps treating them harshly at times but allowing them to fight back, not tying their hands behind their backs as they are struck. Not so anymore.

If people don't like being hit without being allowed to strike back, being abused without being allowed to defend themselves or retaliate, or dealing with hypocritical moderation, they will leave. TOL is inevitably becoming less lively. The irony--and most unfortunate problem--is that it is "Christians" who are taking back with their left hand what they have given with their right. If you are a non-Christian who has survived on TOL, then chances are you already know how to turn the other cheek more than the Christians.

I am all in favor of a more civil environment, but strongly against a half-civil hypocritical environment. So the working model for TOL is changing: debate and lively discussion will slowly begin to dry up as this becomes another strongly-biased forum of like-minded people reinforcing what they already believe; a technologically advanced bridge club, not a theological or political forum. :idunno:

I think Inzl Kett is doing a great job and you should quit your whining.

zippy2006
March 30th, 2013, 10:13 AM
And yet the slope has certainly increased. Knight's slope provided for free speech to a very large degree, and therefore invited and welcomed those of differing beliefs, perhaps treating them harshly at times but allowing them to fight back, not tying their hands behind their backs as they are struck. Not so anymore.

If people don't like being hit without being allowed to strike back, being abused without being allowed to defend themselves or retaliate, or dealing with hypocritical moderation, they will leave. TOL is inevitably becoming less lively. The irony--and most unfortunate problem--is that it is "Christians" who are taking back with their left hand what they have given with their right. If you are a non-Christian who has survived on TOL, then chances are you already know how to turn the other cheek more than the Christians.

I am all in favor of a more civil environment, but strongly against a half-civil hypocritical environment. So the working model for TOL is changing: debate and lively discussion will slowly begin to dry up as this becomes another strongly-biased forum of like-minded people reinforcing what they already believe; a technologically advanced bridge club, not a theological or political forum. :idunno:

I think Inzl Kett is doing a great job and you should quit you whining.

I suppose it goes without saying that I disagree. The rest will have to read what I wrote and what you wrote and consider which one makes the most sense. :e4e:

annabenedetti
March 30th, 2013, 10:16 AM
And yet the slope has certainly increased. Knight's slope provided for free speech to a very large degree, and therefore invited and welcomed those of differing beliefs, perhaps treating them harshly at times but allowing them to fight back, not tying their hands behind their backs as they are struck. Not so anymore.

If people don't like being hit without being allowed to strike back, being abused without being allowed to defend themselves or retaliate, or dealing with hypocritical moderation, they will leave. TOL is inevitably becoming less lively. The irony--and most unfortunate problem--is that it is "Christians" who are taking back with their left hand what they have given with their right. If you are a non-Christian who has survived on TOL, then chances are you already know how to turn the other cheek more than the Christians.

I am all in favor of a more civil environment, but strongly against a half-civil hypocritical environment. So the working model for TOL is changing: debate and lively discussion will slowly begin to dry up as this becomes another strongly-biased forum of like-minded people reinforcing what they already believe; a technologically advanced bridge club, not a theological or political forum. :idunno:

Well said. Thank you.

Delmar
March 30th, 2013, 10:16 AM
I suppose it goes without saying that I disagree. The rest will have to read what I wrote and what you wrote and consider which one makes the most sense. :e4e:

I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to quit whining, mind you.

Delmar
March 30th, 2013, 10:18 AM
Someday I'll start a thread seeking opinions on the apparent belief by the mods here that Town Heretic is a god


:think:maybe I'll include a poll

Perhaps a warning for blasphemy is in order?

resurrected
March 30th, 2013, 10:19 AM
I'm not suggesting that IK isn't doing a good job, but I decry the absence of voices that I used to look forward to hearing. Voices I did not necessarily agree with, but those which offered a different viewpoint, a different perspective, voices that were silenced by the clamor and abuse of those who wished to silence them.

Christs Word, THall and Drake Shelton come to mind. There have been others. Zakath.

I'm considering starting a thread on Drake Shelton. He's an interesting study.

zippy2006
March 30th, 2013, 10:20 AM
I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to quit whining, mind you.

And I am not holding my breath, waiting for you to address the long list of complaints from a variety of subscribing users with something more rationally compelling than, "Quit whining." Mind you. :)

resurrected
March 30th, 2013, 10:21 AM
Perhaps a warning for blasphemy is in order?

:chuckle: Have I PM'd you about this?

besides, I used the little g and the indefinite article :p

Delmar
March 30th, 2013, 10:30 AM
I'm not suggesting that IK isn't doing a good job, but I decry the absence of voices that I used to look forward to hearing. Voices I did not necessarily agree with, but those which offered a different viewpoint, a different perspective, voices that were silenced by the clamor and abuse of those who wished to silence them.

Christs Word, THall and Drake Shelton come to mind. There have been others.

I'm considering starting a thread on Drake Shelton. He's an interesting study.
Here is the deal from my point of view. We get to the place, from time to time, where the crazies think it is appropriate for them to be running the asylum. Someone needs to take a firm hand with them and they almost never like it when that happens.

Sherman
March 30th, 2013, 10:46 AM
I'm not suggesting that IK isn't doing a good job, but I decry the absence of voices that I used to look forward to hearing. Voices I did not necessarily agree with, but those which offered a different viewpoint, a different perspective, voices that were silenced by the clamor and abuse of those who wished to silence them.

Christs Word, THall and Drake Shelton come to mind. There have been others. Zakath.

I'm considering starting a thread on Drake Shelton. He's an interesting study.They silenced themselves by breaking forum rules. :e4e:

resurrected
March 30th, 2013, 10:53 AM
They silenced themselves by breaking forum rules. :e4e:

Yes, I know.

Actually, I think THall just got disgusted and left.

CW acted out and shouldn't have.

And Drake had more than enough warnings to stop with the racist/slavery nonsense.

But I'm starting to suspect that Drake couldn't control his behavior. In re-reading his posts last night and viewing his youtube site, I got the distinct impression of some form of disability, perhaps Aspergers.

As I said, he's an interesting study.

Sherman
March 30th, 2013, 10:57 AM
That might be the case--but the point remains that racialism/racism is still unacceptable on TOL.

Angel4Truth
March 31st, 2013, 01:29 AM
meeshak, sum1sgrug?

RevTestament
April 1st, 2013, 12:14 AM
Ezekiel 28 does, but I see you reject it. Is this just a chapter we should throw out of the Bible because you don't know what it says?
Well you obviously have some secret interpretation up your sleeve, so why don't you show me? It doesn't even mention angels.
We also see angels have a different nature than man does. Hebrews 2:16 KJVAngels are men in a heavenly state.






We can read the Word which says "ALL THINGS WERE CREATED." And here's the verse you say doesn't "exist."

Colossians 1:16 KJV
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:No, I just say it has to be interpreted within the context of all other scripture - some of which show a preexistence and some a post-existence, and a new world etc. That verse is showing He planned and created all thrones and powers. All came into existence through Him.

Moved from this thread (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3405521#post3405521)

Delmar
April 6th, 2013, 09:39 PM
LOL- I bet Delmar eats broken glass every chance he gets. Cotton Candy is Broken Glass, people!!

zoo22
April 6th, 2013, 11:55 PM
Cotton candy is glass. I's true. :Plain: Obviously, that's not what Lon'd meant by glass, but it's true, interesting, that cotton candy is glass.

Delmar
April 7th, 2013, 05:41 AM
Cotton candy is glass. I's true. :Plain: Obviously, that's not what Lon'd meant by glass, but it's true, interesting, that cotton candy is glass.

It is made of spun sugar.

zoo22
April 7th, 2013, 06:02 AM
It is made of spun sugar.

Yeah, I know. It's a form of glass, though.

I'm not trying to say it has anything to do with what Lon said. Obviously he didn't mean cotton candy. But it's true that cotton candy is a form of glass. :Plain:


Volcanic ash and cotton candy share molecular characteristics with glass (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/10/AR2010051003247.html)

... Nature clearly has a flair for producing glass's signature molecular disorder. Humans do, too, having created glass beads and pottery glazes as far back as 5,000 years ago. Today we have fabricated glass into everything from massive telescope lenses to fiber optics that can carry trillions of bits of data. But among the most enticing forms of glass are the edible ones. Cotton candy, for one, forms when molten sugar (sucrose) in a hot and spinning bowl spits out of tiny holes and meets the cold air. With no time for the liquid sucrose to recrystallize, it freezes into threads of sweet, edible glass.

Delmar
April 7th, 2013, 06:20 AM
Yeah, I know. It's a form of glass, though.

I'm not trying to say it has anything to do with what Lon said. Obviously he didn't mean cotton candy. But it's true that cotton candy is a form of glass. So is a potato chip. :Plain:

It is a different use of the same word really. Window glass or glass jars are made mostly of molten sand. Cotton candy is made of molten sugar. If anyone read Zeus's post and believed it possible to transform a glass jar into cotton candy they would be in for quite a surprise.

zoo22
April 7th, 2013, 06:23 AM
It is a different use of the same word really. Window glass or glass jars are made mostly of molten sand. Cotton candy is made of molten sugar. If anyone read Zeus's post and believed it possible to transform a glass jar into cotton candy they would be in for quite a surprise.

Yeah. Like I said, I'm not trying to say it's the same as what Lon meant. Obviously not.

A potato chip, too: glass. Crazy. :Plain:

Delmar
April 7th, 2013, 06:39 AM
Yeah. Like I said, I'm not trying to say it's the same as what Lon meant. Obviously not.

A potato chip, too: glass. Crazy. :Plain:

Most are not but... http://www.instructables.com/id/Glass-Potato-Chips/

http://www.instructables.com/files/deriv/FRJ/AVNC/H2ULRE6C/FRJAVNCH2ULRE6C.LARGE.jpg

Delmar
April 8th, 2013, 04:48 AM
Many don't realise the full extent of fraud in modern semiconductor physics:

The Schön scandal concerns German physicist Jan Hendrik Schön (born 1970 in Verden) who briefly rose to prominence after a series of apparent breakthroughs with semiconductors that were later discovered to be fraudulent.[1] Before he was exposed, Schön had received the Otto-Klung-Weberbank Prize for Physics and the Braunschweig Prize in 2001 as well as the Outstanding Young Investigator Award of the Materials Research Society in 2002, which was later rescinded.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 09:28 AM
Yes, banning is very Christian. Denial is the most used defense mechanism of the religious. Why not extend that to forum relations?

I was banned for using the term cougar (following the lead of network tv's Cougar Town). Completely Justified!!!! Christians cannot acknowlege that sexual attractions can cross generations AND (in their binary way) cannot help but aim the concept toward underaged children and get their panties in a bunch. Of course that had nothing to do with the context of the discussion.

I was also banned for complimenting another poster's picture. I find androgynous traits appealing. Others apparently do not. My intent of course didn't matter and I was rightfully banned for having differing taste. Joy Joy Joy!!!

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 09:45 AM
A forum is a organization with people placed in authority.True -here only the only credential of import is sheepworthiness! TM






This one happens to be a Christian organization.
Have you ever reprimanded one of the faithful fellow flockmate for making a rude mistake with a nonbeliever?




Folks are placed in timeout by the staff for breaking the rules. They are more than fair on this site. On most other sites the ban is permanent. Here people are given plenty of chances to correct their behavior.When do mods learn from their mistakes???

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 10:33 AM
Congratulations Zeus, you and Markseasigh are on the same team! A very small.... team of 2.We might have had a few more, but their banned. :rolleyes:

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 10:36 AM
Here is Inzl making an unprovoked swipe at my picture:
His avatar makes him look like ..how should I put this..a rude pervert trying to 'pick someone up'. It just makes me want to slap it.

I was banned for much a milder, quite complimentary comment about someone's picture. Nice work Inzl. You taught me about power and hypocrisy.

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 10:42 AM
Could any critique of a mod be anything other than whining? Are mod decisions informed by God making them infallible?? Has a mod ever apologized for having been mistaken??

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 10:50 AM
Yes, no and yes.Link me to the latter, if not too cumbersome to find.

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 12:10 PM
Likening someone's picture to lesbian isn't complimentary. You, on the other hand are a pervert, and you avatar looks like one. Go ahead and whine. Nothing will be done about it.


I really don't expect it to because you are a Christian Binar and you will never learn. You think you are done growing, so you will remain stagnant. congrats!

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 12:16 PM
Every time you call someone a pervert unless someone is describing their sexual behavior (I'll give you that), they should be allowed to level a nice insult right back at you. For instance, I wouldn't think it out of bounds to call you a she-ape in need of a toupee.

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 12:19 PM
Congratulations Zeus, you and Markseasigh are on the same team! A very small.... team of 2.

Knight, now that I have actually read the thread, your remark makes NO sense. Mark and I are saying the opposite things. Seems you belong among the ranks of the binar. Everyone who doesn't agree with you is on the same team no matter their views. I shouldn't be surprised.

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 12:21 PM
Likening someone's picture to lesbian isn't complimentary. You can't even acknowledge someone might have a difference in taste, You are so rigid. Justin Bieber is able to laugh off his resemblance to a lesbian, why not that joker?

Zeus
May 4th, 2013, 12:27 PM
This coming from one of the biggest dunces on the site.

Maybe one day I can take your spot at Number One. :first:

Sherman
May 4th, 2013, 04:29 PM
And eleven post tantrum..
Zeus---->:chz4brnz:

Joseph Roberts
May 4th, 2013, 08:19 PM
Comments in this thread are fair game! Mocking those who spam is invited!

This thread should appeal great spammer, the Lighthouse.

Stripe
May 4th, 2013, 11:41 PM
:mock: Zoos

Ktoyou
May 4th, 2013, 11:57 PM
We do have to much personal ego games, and not enough real seeking of truth!

resurrected
May 5th, 2013, 06:06 AM
I don't think a Spammers thread would be complete without a shout out to those Spammers Extraordinaire of Yesteryear, denizens of the Spammers Paradise, I give you Zimfan, Jujubee and Ninjasissy!

Wherever you are in the spammy ether, this spam's for you! :spam:

99lamb
May 5th, 2013, 08:02 AM
Inzl KettBarbie earned it. He's always on the attack with his posts. Read the rules again. It's name calling without cause.

so name calling with a cause, is acceptable, but I would have to guess, its only a cause to which the MODs find acceptable.

99lamb
May 5th, 2013, 08:21 AM
From Zippy2006
And yet the slope has certainly increased. Knight's slope provided for free speech to a very large degree, and therefore invited and welcomed those of differing beliefs, perhaps treating them harshly at times but allowing them to fight back, not tying their hands behind their backs as they are struck. Not so anymore.

If people don't like being hit without being allowed to strike back, being abused without being allowed to defend themselves or retaliate, or dealing with hypocritical moderation, they will leave. TOL is inevitably becoming less lively. The irony--and most unfortunate problem--is that it is "Christians" who are taking back with their left hand what they have given with their right. If you are a non-Christian who has survived on TOL, then chances are you already know how to turn the other cheek more than the Christians.

I am all in favor of a more civil environment, but strongly against a half-civil hypocritical environment. So the working model for TOL is changing: debate and lively discussion will slowly begin to dry up as this becomes another strongly-biased forum of like-minded people reinforcing what they already believe; a technologically advanced bridge club, not a theological or political forum.


From Del:
I think Inzl Kett is doing a great job and you should quit your whining.

One post is reasoned, the other no more thoughtful than :nananana:

Uberpod1
May 5th, 2013, 08:26 AM
TOL is becoming... a technologically advanced bridge club Apt characterization!

Nick M
May 5th, 2013, 08:26 AM
so name calling with a cause, is acceptable, but I would have to guess, its only a cause to which the MODs find acceptable.

Are you not told to judge with righteous judgement?

Dorcas Wode
May 5th, 2013, 09:14 AM
One post is reasoned, the other no more thoughtful than :nananana:
It seems complaining has become fashionable as of late. Folks are not happy on here unless they are complaining.

resurrected
May 5th, 2013, 09:16 AM
twas ever thus

Uberpod1
May 5th, 2013, 09:16 AM
It seems complaining has become fashionable as of late. Folks are not happy on here unless they are complaining.

Your complaint is duly noted. :D

resurrected
May 8th, 2013, 02:38 PM
Who here wants to see me back him into a corner again? :banana:

Who here wants to see me pound him into silt again? :banana:

Who here wants to see the oversensitive girlyman sulk off butthurt after a teary-eyed drama queen farewell again? :banana:

CabinetMaker
May 8th, 2013, 02:41 PM
Who here wants to see me back him into a corner again?

Who here wants to see me pound him into silt again?

Who here wants to see the oversensitive girlyman sulk off butthurt after a teary-eyed drama queen farewell again?
I would like to see you mature.

resurrected
May 8th, 2013, 02:42 PM
Where's the implied profanity? :freak:

Eeset
May 8th, 2013, 02:46 PM
Res no one can win a horse race by becoming a horses' derriere.

resurrected
May 8th, 2013, 02:47 PM
don't forget to vote! :)

Knight
May 8th, 2013, 02:47 PM
Who here wants to see me back him into a corner again? :banana:Get over yourself.

resurrected
May 8th, 2013, 02:48 PM
tried that once

ended up in traction :nono:

resurrected
May 8th, 2013, 02:56 PM
C'mon guys - you make the call!


Should I

http://ilovefunnypics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/release-the-kraken.jpg

Delmar
May 8th, 2013, 03:33 PM
Where's the implied profanity? :freak:

Are you also going to ask where the provoking is?

Sherman
May 8th, 2013, 06:40 PM
Res no one can win a horse race by becoming a horses' derriere.:rotfl: Res is winning no races here.

resurrected
May 14th, 2013, 08:02 AM
Who here wants to see me back him into a corner again? :banana:

Who here wants to see me pound him into silt again? :banana:

Who here wants to see the oversensitive girlyman sulk off butthurt after a teary-eyed drama queen farewell again? :banana:


don't forget to vote! :)


:banned: :wave2:



I'll put you down for "no" then, shall I? :)

Delmar
May 14th, 2013, 02:39 PM
I'll put you down for "no" then, shall I? :)

I never could sneak anything past you! :first:

Delmar
July 8th, 2013, 07:30 PM
I'll take over while aCW is away.

In this next chapter we will focus on "bat guano crazy." We'll start by talking cut & pasting about burning CDs in front of your children, especially the gateway bands to homosexuality (the homosexualistagogo bands):

Source (http://lovegodsway.org/GayBands)

"One of the most dangerous ways Homosexuality invades family life is through popular music. Parents, please keep careful watch over your children’s listening habits. Especially in this age of Internet mp3 piracy.

There are multiple levels of Gay Music. Some bands are what we like to call Gateway Bands. They lure children in with Pop Grooves and Salacious Melodies leaving them wanting more. They’ll move on to more dangerous bands and the next thing you know you’ve got a homosexual for a child.

We’ve taken the time to highlight the bands that are particularly Gay. Please take the time and dissect your child’s CD / iTunes catalog. If you find 3 or more of these bands in their collection it is time to take action.

We Strongly recommend that you burn the CDs. Make sure your child is watching. Make sure they can feel the heat. It is crucial that the image remains emblazoned in their young minds. They need to know that if they continue to listen to these bands they may Burn eternally as well.

Lady Gaga (tricks girls into lesbianism)
Ween (Rainbow)
Lil'Wayne
P!nK (gay family)
The Black Keys
Coldplay
SlipKnot (make-up)
RadioHead
Michael Jackson
Justin Bieber (gay bullying)
Boredoms
School of Seven Bells (gay twins)
Jason Mraz
Jonas Brothers
Rilo Kiley
Death Cab for Cutie
Sarah McLachlan
George Strait
Cold War Kids
Toby Keith (cowboy)
P-Diddy
Black People
Vampire Weekend
King Crimson
Kate Bush (kissed a girl)
Bob Dylan
Fleet Foxes
Sigur Ros (nudists)
Twisted Sister
The Spores (endorse suicide)
Scissor Sisters
Turbonegro
Rufus Wainwright
Merzbau
Ravi Shankar
The Butchies (lizbians)
Wilco
Bjork (mb)
Tech N9ne
Ghostface Killah
Bobby Conn
Morton Subotnik
Cole Porter
The String Cheese Incident
Eagles of Death Metal
Polyphonic Spree
The Faint
Interpol
Twisted Sister (jj)
Tegan and Sara
Erasure
The Grateful Dead (drugs too)
Le Tigre
Marilyn Manson (dark gay)
The Gossip
The Magnetic Fields
The Doors
Phish
Queen
The Strokes
Morrissey (?questionable?)
Metallica
Judas Priest
The Village People
The Secret Handshake
The Rolling Stones
David Bowie
Frankie Goes to Hollywood
Man or Astroman
Richard Cheese
Jay-Z
Depeche Mode
Kansas
Ani DiFranco
Fischerspooner
John Mayer
George Michael (texan)
Angel Eyes
The Indigo Girls
Velvet Underground
Madonna
Elton John
Barry Manilow
Indigo Girls
Melissa Etheridge
Eminmen
Nirvana
Boy George
Jon Brion
The Killers
Lou Reed
Lil' Wayne
Motorhead
Jill Sobule
Wilson Phillips
DMX
Wesley Willis
Lisa Loeb
Ted Nugent (loincloth)
Dogstar
Thirty Seconds to Mars
Lil' Kim
kd lang
Frank Sinatra
Hinder
Nickleback
Justus Kohncke
Bob Mould
Clay Aiken
Arcade Fire
Bright Eyes
Corinne Bailey Rae
Audioslave
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Panic at the Disco
The Cure (makeup)
Spin Doctors
The Deers
Lindsey Lohan
The Smiths
Beck
Tom Waits
The Cramps
Cannibal Corpse
Britney Spears (kissed Madonna)
Perfect Sin
The Queers
NoFxv (gay punk)
Soup Dragons
Elton John (really gay)"

source (http://lovegodsway.org/GayBands)

That's quite a list. In fact, it's bat guano crazy.

I'll point out that among other things, they're not upset that Ted Nugent sings about how much he loves having sex with underage girls, but rather that he wears a loincloth.

rainee
July 8th, 2013, 08:34 PM
I think Zoo's list is incorrect.

Brother Vinny
July 11th, 2013, 02:37 PM
Because trilogies are epic!

Here's what I think:

1) aClutteredWorrier gets homosexuality recriminalized
2) aClutteredWorrier breaks a law and gets thrown in prison with a bunch (pile?) of sweaty homosexuals
3) Profit?

Really, I just thought we needed another homosexual thread. And a third part to the trilogy.

:devil:

Brother Vinny
July 11th, 2013, 03:40 PM
Trying to give part three some "oomph", here.

Here's recidivist George Takei:

http://www.silverfishlongboarding.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=111025&d=1362600410

Public Enemy Number One material here, folks.

Christian Liberty
July 11th, 2013, 03:41 PM
:thumb:

Brother Vinny
July 11th, 2013, 03:46 PM
Someone else who scares me:

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/jim-parsons.jpg


Jim Parsons of The Big Bang Theory. If making me laugh were a crime, he'd have gotten the death penalty long ago.

Brother Vinny
July 11th, 2013, 03:51 PM
And this guy just ticks me off:

http://images1.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/John-Barrowman-john-barrowman-1155096_1024_768.jpg

John Freakin' Barrowman.

Him being gay is just the tip of the iceberg of enmity I have for this man. Doctor Who fangirls positively swoon over this guy. I hate it; he's blessed with classical good looks, while I'm blessed to look like Kevin James after a bender.

Brother Vinny
July 11th, 2013, 04:02 PM
The ugly fate that awaits the gays once the theonomists take charge:

http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/081/8/9/life_of_brian___stoning_gif_by_kraljaleksandar-d3c7mbj.gif

Delmar
July 11th, 2013, 04:11 PM
So, it's agreed?

FREE HOMOSEXUALS FOR EVERYBODY!!!

(first come, first served)

:devil:

zoo22
July 11th, 2013, 04:14 PM
Wha??

Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93657)

Just because it got shut down (because aCW couldn't take the heat and complained about it) doesn't mean it didn't happen. :Plain:

You're on WHMBR! (excuse me) Part 4.

Brother Vinny
July 11th, 2013, 04:16 PM
Wha??

Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93657)

Just because it got shut down (because aCW couldn't take the heat and complained about it) doesn't mean it didn't happen. :Plain:

You're on WHMBR! (excuse me) Part 4.

Oops.

Let's call it 3.1. Then we can round down.

annabenedetti
July 11th, 2013, 04:37 PM
Wha??

Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93657)

Just because it got shut down (because aCW couldn't take the heat and complained about it) doesn't mean it didn't happen. :Plain:

You're on WHMBR! (excuse me) Part 4.



It took me a minute to realize what was happening here.

I thought epic had come back to life. :chuckle:

Brother Vinny
July 11th, 2013, 04:48 PM
Well, I'll just go have a cry now, I guess.

zoo22
July 11th, 2013, 04:58 PM
It took me a minute to realize what was happening here.

I thought epic had come back to life. :chuckle:

Yeah, me too. But aCW couldn't take the heat.

In the first and original WHMBR! (excuse me) Part 3 thread, I'd posted a Christian-compiled list of "gay gateway bands," (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3517550#post3517550) like Ted Nugent and so forth. But aCW got upset about it and complained, needing the Christian-compiled info removed and the WHMBR! (excuse me) Part 3 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93657) thread shut down. What a shame.

But Jefferson will likely post a censorship thread about it.

annabenedetti
July 11th, 2013, 05:34 PM
Yeah, me too. But aCW couldn't take the heat.

In the first and original WHMBR! (excuse me) Part 3 thread, I'd posted a Christian-compiled list of "gay gateway bands," (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3517550#post3517550) like Ted Nugent and so forth. But aCW got upset about it and complained, needing the Christian-compiled info removed and the WHMBR! (excuse me) Part 3 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93657) thread shut down. What a shame.

But Jefferson will likely post a censorship thread about it.


Well like I said on your original WHMBR! Part 3, it would have been epic...

What a shame to see the wrong thread sent to spammer's wasteland.

Arthur Brain
July 11th, 2013, 05:39 PM
Well like I said on your original WHMBR! Part 3, it would have been epic...

What a shame to see the wrong thread sent to spammer's wasteland.

Er, no, I think all relevant threads should have a mandatory table of contents...

:Plain:

bigbang123
July 12th, 2013, 12:41 PM
The christian biblegod wants his followers to believe that they will get their godly desires

Psalm 37:4
4 Delight thyself also in Jehovah; And he will give thee the desires of thy heart.

Matthew 21:22
22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

But the christian biblegod won't get what he desires

1 Timothy 2:3-4
3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4 who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth.

Luke 18:8
...Nevertheless, when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

The "so-called" reason that the christian biblegod does not get what he desires

Matthew 7:14
14 For narrow is the gate, and straitened the way, that leadeth unto life, and few are they that find it.
Matthew 22:14
14 For many are called, but few chosen.

Spitfire
July 12th, 2013, 01:40 PM
It's the difference between God's antecedent and consequent will (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1019.htm#article6). Some synthesis is necessary. In the mean time, you're going about this exactly as fundamentalists do.

TomO
July 12th, 2013, 02:18 PM
It's the difference between God's antecedent and consequent will (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1019.htm#article6). Some synthesis is necessary. In the mean time, you're going about this exactly as fundamentalists do.

Stupidly? :Plain:

Sherman
July 13th, 2013, 07:48 AM
Moronic. This is the proper place for it.

bigbang123
July 14th, 2013, 11:49 AM
In this forum it is ok for christians to question the soundness of the thinking of non-christians but it is not ok for non-christians (armed with little more than the bible) to question the soundness of the thinking of christians. Thanks for making that clear.


The christian biblegod wants his followers to believe that they will get their godly desires

Psalm 37:4
4 Delight thyself also in Jehovah; And he will give thee the desires of thy heart.

Matthew 21:22
22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

But the christian biblegod won't get what he desires

1 Timothy 2:3-4
3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4 who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth.

Luke 18:8
...Nevertheless, when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

The "so-called" reason that the christian biblegod does not get what he desires

Matthew 7:14
14 For narrow is the gate, and straitened the way, that leadeth unto life, and few are they that find it.
Matthew 22:14
14 For many are called, but few chosen.

Delmar
July 14th, 2013, 12:22 PM
In this forum it is ok for christians to question the soundness of the thinking of non-christians but it is not ok for non-christians (armed with little more than the bible) to question the soundness of the thinking of christians. Thanks for making that clear.
It is not OK to mock the God of the Bible at TOL. Is that clear?

Hedshaker
August 12th, 2013, 12:58 AM
XVSRm80WzZk

resurrected
September 26th, 2013, 04:52 PM
Hmm....:mad:

http://www.rabbit.org/journal/2-2/attack.jpg



looks delicious!

resurrected
September 28th, 2013, 09:16 AM
I'm thinking of buying this for a daily commuter this winter :think:


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-U-u6QaMoM_U/TVdrizD45aI/AAAAAAABdNY/13fQvp4vsP8/s1600/bmw-schneekrad.jpg

resurrected
September 28th, 2013, 09:57 AM
or perhaps this:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_i_AovfzNXgQ/TQRIOEbFg_I/AAAAAAABY8E/wNf6_QUt-UM/s1600/tumblr_lckfoi26Gv1qzn5iho1_1280.jpg

resurrected
September 28th, 2013, 11:04 AM
not interested in admiring vintage snow machines? :idunno:

resurrected
September 28th, 2013, 11:09 AM
you must have a poor estimation of the intelligence of your audience if you believe they can't find their way to your pearls without a link :idunno:



anyhoo, we'll be getting buried with the white stuff soon up here, so for those who can commiserate, might as well travel in style

http://www.prewarbuick.com/img/features/main-rolls-royce_halftrack_lorie.jpg

resurrected
September 30th, 2013, 02:11 PM
if anybody would like to have a conversation, as town hoped would happen in his op, i'm ready to talk about anything i think the rest of you might find interesting, as town hoped would happen in his op



it doesn't have to be vintage snow machines :idunno:




heck, we could talk about the fall colors in the islands

this little shack is just downriver from me :)

http://www.honeybeeisland.com/images/large/boldt-castle.jpg

Angel4Truth
October 1st, 2013, 07:32 AM
http://knoji.com/images/user/norfork%282%29.jpg

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 10:09 AM
Granite,

You don't have to explain anything. The problem is self evident all over TOL. It is like-

I can't breath. Somebody stop me.

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 10:10 AM
This here is my idea. Just kinda works for me-

If you can't join 'em then make sure they knew they were in a fight.

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 11:15 AM
Let us get back to the real subject of this thread-

Truck Drivers like Delmar want to run honest law abiding citizens off the road.

What happens is that most Truck Drivers are ODC. They get mad because they can't ever make enough money. And they want the fast lane to themselves.

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 11:20 AM
Ah, breaker one-nine, this here's the Rubber Duck. You gotta copy on me, Pig Pen, c'mon? Ah, yeah, 10-4, Pig Pen, for sure, for sure. By golly, it's clean clear to Flag Town, c'mon. Yeah, that's a big 10-4 there, Pig Pen, yeah, we definitely got the front door, good buddy. Mercy sakes alive, looks like we got us a convoy...

Was the dark of the moon on the sixth of June
In a Kenworth pullin' logs
Cab-over Pete with a reefer on
And a Jimmy haulin' hogs
We is headin' for bear on I-one-oh
'Bout a mile outta Shaky Town
I says, "Pig Pen, this here's the Rubber Duck.
"And I'm about to put the hammer down."

[Chorus]
'Cause we got a little convoy
Rockin' through the night.
Yeah, we got a little convoy,
Ain't she a beautiful sight?
Come on and join our convoy
Ain't nothin' gonna get in our way.
We gonna roll this truckin' convoy
'Cross the U-S-A.
Convoy!


Ah, breaker, Pig Pen, this here's the Duck. And, you wanna back off them hogs? Yeah, 10-4, 'bout five mile or so. Ten, roger. Them hogs is gettin' in-tense up here.

By the time we got into Tulsa Town,
We had eighty-five trucks in all.
But they's a roadblock up on the cloverleaf,
And them bears was wall-to-wall.
Yeah, them smokies is thick as bugs on a bumper;
They even had a bear in the air!
I says, "Callin' all trucks, this here's the Duck.
"We about to go a-huntin' bear."

[Chorus]
'Cause we got a great big convoy
Rockin' through the night.
Yeah, we got a great big convoy,
Ain't she a beautiful sight?
Come on and join our convoy
Ain't nothin' gonna get in our way.
We gonna roll this truckin' convoy
'Cross the U-S-A.
Convoy!

Ah, you wanna give me a 10-9 on that, Pig Pen? Negatory, Pig Pen; you're still too close. Yeah, them hogs is startin' to close up my sinuses. Mercy sakes, you better back off another ten.

Well, we rolled up Interstate 44
Like a rocket sled on rails.
We tore up all of our swindle sheets,
And left 'em settin' on the scales.
By the time we hit that Chi-town,
Them bears was a-gettin' smart:
They'd brought up some reinforcements
From the Illinoise National Guard.
There's armored cars, and tanks, and jeeps,
And rigs of ev'ry size.
Yeah, them chicken coops was full'a bears
And choppers filled the skies.
Well, we shot the line and we went for broke
With a thousand screamin' trucks
An' eleven long-haired Friends a' Jesus
In a chartreuse micra-bus.


Ah, Rubber Duck to Sodbuster, come over. Yeah, 10-4, Sodbuster? Lissen, you wanna put that micra-bus right behind that suicide jockey? Yeah, he's haulin' dynamite, and he needs all the help he can get.

Well, we laid a strip for the Jersey shore
And prepared to cross the line
I could see the bridge was lined with bears
But I didn't have a dog-goned dime.
I says, "Pig Pen, this here's the Rubber Duck.
"We just ain't a-gonna pay no toll."
So we crashed the gate doing ninety-eight
I says "Let them truckers roll, 10-4."

[Chorus]
'Cause we got a mighty convoy
Rockin' through the night.
Yeah, we got a mighty convoy,
Ain't she a beautiful sight?
Come on and join our convoy
Ain't nothin' gonna get in our way.
We gonna roll this truckin' convoy
'Cross the U-S-A.

Convoy! Ah, 10-4, Pig Pen, what's your twenty?
Convoy! OMAHA? Well, they oughta know what to do with them hogs out there fer shure. Well, mercy
Convoy! sakes, good buddy, we gonna back on outta here, so keep the bugs off your glass and the bears off your...
Convoy! tail. We'll catch you on the flip-flop. This here's the Rubber Duck on the side.
Convoy! We gone. 'Bye,'bye.

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 01:34 PM
An Executioner is someone whose job is to execute criminals.

There are no criminals in heaven.

In eternity the only place Executioners will be found is in Hell.

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 01:55 PM
The only way that an Executioner can ever hope to enter Heaven is for him/her to bury the hatchet.

But an Atheist must never bury his/her brain. What is needed more than anything else in Heaven?

MORE BRAINS

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 02:25 PM
The Atheist is not the one who has to prove anything. It is the Believer who must prove everything-

1 That it is possible to walk on water
2 That water can be turned into wine
3 That there really is a right and wrong

TOL cannot contain all that the Believer must prove. There isn't a computer big enough. There isn't even a Truck Driver big enough.

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 02:26 PM
God has not made an ax big enough for the Executioner to chop away everything that the Believer must prove.

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 02:35 PM
What the Executioner lacks in brain power he more than makes up for in hatchet power.

The Executioner also does not have too prove anything. All he has to do is chop.

OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 02:40 PM
The French Revolution is a good example. There were many Truck Drivers in France during the Revolution. And they all drove shinny new Mac Trucks. Very sharp!

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 02:43 PM
You can tell how hungry a Truck Driver is by the way he waddles out of his Day Cab. I say-

Let them eat cake.

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 04:30 PM
Now the Executioners may 'believe' in God but-

Continually feeling the need to chop people is like....

Is like believing in Old Testament miracles. You know the kind I mean. Like for instance talking animals. What is that? The Executioner cares nothing for talking animals. Has anyone ever seen The Executioner chop off the head of a talking animal?

I tell you these Executioners here at TOL are a faithless lot. Lot? What the...

Now the miracles of Jesus are way superior to the paltry OT chicken coop type miracles. The miracles of Jesus actually have a connection to of all things-

REALITY

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 04:45 PM
I swear, the TOL Atheists are just as lame as the TOL christians.

Hehehe.

You guys are so funny.

Hehehe

glew
January 22nd, 2014, 05:14 PM
"He who decides a case without hearing the other side,
even if he decides justly, cannot be considered just" -- Seneca

Now I have considered the TOL Atheists and the TOL Executioner. I'm laughing in your oatmeal.

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 07:41 AM
Delmar,

I finished a thread you might want to check out. It is called-

Why the Hangman only chops people who actually do believe in a God and never chops an Atheist.

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 08:16 AM
Always before the Atheists were no threat. Ancient Man rejected the notion that there is no God for the simple reason that Ancient Man was to close to Creation to have forgotten it. Therefore the Hangman did not have to waste his time on the Atheist.

Things have changed. The Atheist is now a threat. For instance-

The U.S.S.R. killed the Czar by hiring the Hangman out from under him.

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 08:40 AM
I like it Delmar. I like rolling big fatties. And smoking them. Pate. And now you.

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 08:46 AM
But really Delamr,

The only difference between you and Pate, besides the weight differential, is that you got the Chopper.

I ran into a Dixie Chopper once. Way day south there in Dixie Land. She all shut-up now. She picks her own cotton all bys herself now, that is if she wants some.

Do you want some Chopper?

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 09:04 AM
As was said earlier-

While there is not going to be any Truck Driving Choppers in Heaven there are going to be Atheists there. But sorry about your luck there Granite-

There will be no former Calvinists.

My sincere apology to you Granite. And to you also there Big Fatty

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 09:24 AM
Rusha,

So you think it is a joke for Atheists to be sent to hell for having differing ideas? And you think it is a joke for the Religious Rulers to hire Hangmen to do the dirty work because the Religious Rulers know full well that the ones doing that kind of work are also going to hell?

Very funny.

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 09:29 AM
Like I said,

The Religious Rulers hire Truck Drivers to haul the freight because the Religious Rulers don't have the stomach for it.

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 09:57 AM
Thank you for the permission Rusha. Ok I will-

Let the Religious Rulers chop their own cotton. You are too good for that kind of work Delmar. That is not your calling. It won't take you where you want to go.

glew
January 23rd, 2014, 09:58 AM
I have also been a Trucker. It is important to haul for the right company. For the right people. The right kind of freight. To the right destination.

Stuu
May 23rd, 2014, 05:35 PM
yEKDYIYMgBc

Timotheos
July 5th, 2014, 06:25 AM
:guitar: So it's like..


Out there in the threads
we empty our heads
Most of or “facts” are scraps from Wiki
I could be a kid
who should be in bed
or some guy who cleans the "Johns" at Denny's

Don't try
Just roll your eyes
It's only spammer wasteland

:banana:

I don't need to fight, to prove I'm right.
(however)
I just need to be forgiven (for spamming!)

The exodus (also the name of my rock band in high school) is here,
the happy ones are near,
Let's get together, before we get much older.

False Prophet
June 8th, 2015, 02:58 PM
I was a fool to sell my soul to the Devil.
[36] For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
[37] Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Mark 8
(11) They are the most foolish of all men who purchase the pleasures of this life with the loss of everlasting bliss.
Geneva Study Bible
earlyriser.webs.com

Sherman
June 8th, 2015, 08:07 PM
Moved False Prophet's post because it was completely off topic. It was :spam:

brinny
June 9th, 2015, 08:50 AM
Comments in this thread are fair game! Mocking those who spam is invited!

LOL!

Christian Liberty
June 16th, 2015, 09:04 AM
Is anyone who thinks what happened to this woman was wrong going to be consistent and also say that the police who enforce these types of laws are criminals?

meshak
June 16th, 2015, 11:23 AM
Catholics are deeply involved in fighting secular politics.

Jesus says let the dead bury their own dead.

Please provide evidence that the Church is pro military.[/QUOTE]

Don't you have any soldiers in your church? I know many, many Catholics in the military.

MODS,

I am only answering to this posters' questions. If it is still hijacking please delete it.

thanks.

Sancocho
June 16th, 2015, 11:32 AM
Don't you have any soldiers in your church? I know many, many Catholics in the military.



The majority of soldiers in the US and Europe are Protestant.

If you want to claim that your particular denomination does not allow any soldiers that is fine and dandy. Now all you have to do is show your denominations' direct lineage from the disciples and why would it appear that only there are only a few thousand "true believers" in Christ's "real" church.

BTW, I won't claim like Protestants that members of any denomination other than their own cannot be saved, only that their are consequences to false doctrine and sin. So while these individuals may be saved(it is my hope) their cultures will die as they rot from within. Such are the wages of sin.

meshak
June 16th, 2015, 11:37 AM
If you want to claim that your particular denomination does not allow any soldiers that is fine and dandy. Now all you have to do is show your denominations' direct lineage from the disciples and why would it appear that only there are only a few thousand "true believers" in Christ's "real" church.

Jesus was not for violent and He says to imitate Him or learn from Him. Jesus is the Lord, friend.

Sancocho
June 16th, 2015, 11:47 AM
Jesus was not for violent and He says to imitate Him or learn from Him. Jesus is the Lord, friend.

I have never stated anything to the contrary.

I have dedicated my life to spreading the Gospel and protecting innocent children's life. In fact there is nothing more vile or violent than killing a child. Of course this is allowed in every Protestant majority country, while that is not the case for the Catholic ones. By our fruits we will be known.

THall
June 16th, 2015, 07:06 PM
Is anyone who thinks what happened to this woman was wrong going to be consistent and also say that the police who enforce these types of laws are criminals?

Yes, someone is going to say that.

Any police officer that enforces an
unconstitutional law, has not only
violated the supreme law of the land
and is no better than the Nazi order
takers at Nuremberg that said they
were not guilty of murdering Jews
because they were ordered to do it.

These officers violate their oath of
office and could not care less. Their
oath means nothing to them, and many
of them are too stupid to even read and
understand that Constitution, much less
see the implications of ignoring the very
contract the swore to defend.

THall
June 16th, 2015, 07:10 PM
Its about gun control and the right to bear arms and how a woman might be alive if the constitution were followed.



You could not be more wrong.

THall
June 16th, 2015, 07:16 PM
Its about gun control and the right to bear arms and how a woman might be alive if the constitution were followed.



You could not be more wrong.



If that woman had NOT FEARED REPRISAL,
from the order takers (unconstitutional police)
she would have gone and bought a gun,
and would still be alive today. The old cliche
"It is better to be tried by 12 than carried by
6 and put in the ground." directly applies to
her situation.

Her rights were given to her by God,
the police and the Government can not
take them away. But they intimidated her
to the point where she willingly gave up her right
to defend herself, and now she is dead. You must
be very proud of the order takers, and the fear they
put into the weak minded.

Christian Liberty
June 16th, 2015, 08:34 PM
Um no, i didn't make this thread to discuss how much you hate police.

Its about gun control and the right to bear arms and how a woman might be alive if the constitution were followed.

Dont you have other threads on your disdain for the cops, if so take it there, thanks.

And who enforces the laws that prevent her from having guns?

THall
June 17th, 2015, 06:17 PM
Some people here need to stop
making excuses for Law Enforcement
that are breaking the Law.

We have many law abiding
police officers. We also have
many that break the law, violate
citizen's rights and commit crimes
all the time. It is OK to hold the individual
accountable for his or her own behavior.
In fact it is Christ like to do so. Christ taught that
all will be judged according to their deeds.
You have to be smart enough to distinguish
between the criminal wearing badges and
the good cops in uniform. It really is not that
hard.

patrick jane
June 17th, 2015, 10:51 PM
Some people here need to stop
making excuses for Law Enforcement
that are breaking the Law.

We have many law abiding
police officers. We also have
many that break the law, violate
citizen's rights and commit crimes
all the time. It is OK to hold the individual
accountable for his or her own behavior.
In fact it is Christ like to do so. Christ taught that
all will be judged according to their deeds.
You have to be smart enough to distinguish
between the criminal wearing badges and
the good cops in uniform. It really is not that
hard.


great, now worry about your own behavior, because you will be judged according to your deeds - that is what you preach -

you have to be smart enough to distinguish between the criminal element around YOU, and the law abiding citizens

police can police themselves by internal means. if you think like a criminal, it doesn't mean everybody is criminal. did i use the word criminal enough ? because in the end, there is no such thing as a smooth criminal :Patrol:

patrick jane
June 17th, 2015, 10:56 PM
I was a fool to sell my soul to the Devil.
[36] For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
[37] Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Mark 8
(11) They are the most foolish of all men who purchase the pleasures of this life with the loss of everlasting bliss.
Geneva Study Bible
earlyriser.webs.com

whide ju do dat doo -

meshak
June 18th, 2015, 07:09 AM
I have never stated anything to the contrary.

You admit your organization are deeply involved in the politics.

Jesus was never political. Jesus says let the dead bury their own dead, meaning let the world handle their own problem.

Your organization disregarding Jesus' word in this regard too.

MOds, I am only replying to the poster. If it is hijacking, please delete it along with his question to me.

thanks.

Sancocho
June 18th, 2015, 10:17 AM
You admit your organization are deeply involved in the politics.

Jesus was never political. Jesus says let the dead bury their own dead, meaning let the world handle their own problem.

Your organization disregarding Jesus' word in this regard too.

MOds, I am only replying to the poster. If it is hijacking, please delete it along with his question to me.

thanks.

Jesus and the disciples weren't killed because they just told people to love each other. They told them what they were doing is wrong.

It is a shame that Protestant have rejected any activism because apparently they hate the CC more than they love Christ. Ironic that St. Paul says faith without works is dead - which is the case of American Christianity.

Lon
June 18th, 2015, 04:55 PM
What was THIS thread about again? :chuckle: If I had to guess...

meshak
June 18th, 2015, 09:01 PM
Jesus and the disciples weren't killed because they just told people to love each other. They told them what they were doing is wrong.

So why do you practice what Jesus did not? You don't seem to know that Jesus commands us to imitate Him.

aikido7
July 3rd, 2015, 02:00 PM
It looks as if A7 has a problem with the book of Revelation?

You BET I do.

Absolutely.

I believe Christ is the norm of the Bible, and the actual preacher who walked the dusty roads of Palestine is the norm of Christ.

Jesus stands for love, forgiveness and support.

John of Patmos stands for the Christians who were oppressed, tortured and killed by Nero. And his reaction to that was a litany of terrible metaphoric images and scare tactics for the faithful.

And he constructed his own Jesus that was just as angry, resentful and immoral (full of our human failings) as John of Patmos himself.

I don't sanction violence and I don't believe Jesus did either. But many of his followers did. One of Jesus' last phrases was to Pilate when he said his "kingdom was not of this world." If you bother to read the entire verse, he says this because his followers then were nonviolent and would not attack Rome because he was captured and sentenced to death.

That is the Christianity I subscribe to. Apparently your version, opinion and interpretation is different than mine.

But I can marshal all the evidence for my faith by specific quotes of Jesus and a close look at the patterns of his life standing up against the powers and principalities of the empire--either Roman or American.

Jesus is Lord, not Caesar.

glorydaz
July 12th, 2015, 07:23 PM
This forum is very discouraging

Then do what you can to change that.

Gurucam
July 29th, 2015, 08:06 AM
With reference to:

click the little arrow if necessary
This is not my first infraction.

However this is my first request for clarification, from Mr Knight.

I was not judged and given this infraction by Mr Knight. At any event, mine is a simple, polite and friendly request for clarification by Mr. Knight.

I do wish to conform to and obey the rules. However first I must know whether 'caps' goes beyond its traditional meaning and includes highlighted and enlarged common letters. If this is the reality on this forum, I would like to know this clearly from the final authority, Mr Knight.

Having said that, this one (infraction) seems very unjust. Indeed, at the very least, there should be some provision or opportunity for one to appeal and/or defend one's posts against seeming unjust judgement and punishment.

My infraction was given for "posting in capitals". Fact is I did not post in capitals unless these were the first letter of the first word in a sentence or the first letter in the proper name or title of some one.

I was told that posting in all capitals is shouting and impolite. Therefore I do not post in capitals. I never have a need or wish to shout or be impolite.

However, my perception was that highlighted and enlarged common letters are there (as tools) for emphasizing specific and various points in one's post. Traditionally these (i.e. highlighted and enlarged common letters) are made available for creative expression. Indeed also, these are made available for developing and expanding one's creative (expression, design and other) skills. These are for creative self development/actualization of the users of this forum. This is another very desirable aspect of this forum which should not be easily dismissed but instead encouraged.

Fact is these seemingly little (developmental) things/opportunities, including at least the appearance of democracy and fairness are very important. These will keep this forum well above others, eternally relevant and truly informed, spiritual and Christian. Christianity is not rooted in laws and righteousness that is with the law. Christianity is rooted in righteousness that is without the law (Romans: 3 verse: 21 KJV N.T.) and Grace and Spirituality.


Galatians 5 KJV N.T.
18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Romans: 6 KJV N.T.
14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
Christianity is not at all rooted in enforcement of law. That is the Old system which was done away for those in Christ.

Christianity is about turning the other cheek. Christianity is about recognizing and accepting that under the law all fall short of the glory of God (i.e. all are with sin and therefore no one is given to cast the first stone). No one is fit to judge and punish. This is why democracy (and it accompanying constitutional right to fair hearing) was established. This is the most Christian approach to life, under the dictates of 'man'. It is very desirable for this system to be upheld on this forum.

Under a Christian or other wise modern system, even those who judge and pass out punishment must be ready and willing to defend and explain their actions based on well established rules.

Gurucam
July 29th, 2015, 10:30 AM
Guru...

"And the people all said sit down
Sit down you're rockin' the boat.
Yeah the people all said sit down
Sit down you're rocking the boat.

And the devil will drag you under
With a soul so heavy you'll never float,
Sit down, sit down, sit down, sit down,
Sit down you're rockin' the boat."

:eek:

And indeed what did or do 'the people' know?

It is 'the people' who denied, persecuted, torture and crucified the Lord Jesus based on their own ('ego based' and dictatorial) beliefs, 'wisdom' and assessments.

It is foolish to deny the ideas of anyone. Especially on a Christian forum which is defined by "Open rebuke is better than love carefully concealed" And especially when those ideas are fully, clearly and literally supported by revelations in the KJV N.T.

Fact is 'the boat' must be rocked. If only to save a few more, in these last days.

Fact is many are called but only a few are chosen. The very great majority (i.e. all but the chosen few) are misled by false prophets who came in Jesus' name. These masses (a billion strong) therefore err and are not chosen. This is the reality on any Christian forum.

Town Heretic
July 29th, 2015, 10:58 AM
And indeed what did or do 'the people' know?
They knew one thing, because they were on their way to heaven (it's a bit from Guys and Dolls that takes place in a mission).


It is foolish to deny the ideas of anyone.
Depends on how you mean that...I won't deny that someone who opposes the trinity has an idea, but I think they have a very dangerous and very bad idea.


Especially on a Christian forum which is defined by "Open rebuke is better than love carefully concealed" And especially when those ideas are fully, clearly and literally supported by revelations in the KJV N.T.
I think you got in trouble for the way you presented your ideas, because otherwise it's hard to explain the atheists around here.


Fact is 'the boat' must be rocked. If only to save a few more, in these last days.
Depends on what the boat is and where it's headed, but sometimes, sure.


Fact is many are called but only a few are chosen.
Hate the way that gets used by the "I've got a secret" crowd within the faithful. You could pass every professing Christian from the dawn of Christendom through that gate and it would remain narrow and relatively few.


The very great majority (i.e. all but the chosen few) are misled by false prophets who came in Jesus' name.
I think that's a mistaken notion that makes God capricious at best. And I don't think capricious is a word that can be arguably associated with Him. Now I do believe people can be mistaken in their exegesis. It's rationally impossible to come to another conclusion. But we'll meet God in grace or we won't. The rest and corrections, from me to you, I leave in His hands, where it belongs. We can only speak to each other of the truth as we understand it, which is a bit different.

Gurucam
July 29th, 2015, 02:57 PM
They knew one thing, because they were on their way to heaven (it's a bit from Guys and Dolls that takes place in a mission).


There is great disappointment and grinding of teeth for the billion strong traditional Christians. They all genuinely believe and hold that belief (i.e. 'they are on their way to heaven').

Jesus' sad prophesy is that the very great majority of them (i.e. all but a few) will be misled by false prophets who came in his name and they will err and not be chosen (i.e. many are called but few chosen).

This means that only a few will know and have truth. This also means that truth which saves and deliver one, into heaven, will not be had or known in the billion strong traditional Christianity (i.e. where many are called to Christianity, err because they are misled and not chosen).

Fact is truth which saves and delivers would be the strangest thing to the billion strong traditional Christians who all hold and share the same "Christian" ideas and beliefs. Simply because the very great majority of them (i.e. all but a few) will not know truth and they will err and not be chosen (for heaven).

You are a very endangered specie if you hold the same "Christian' belief as even a couple hundred thousand people. You all cannot be the few who have it right and will be chosen. It is even worse if you hold and share the same "Christian' ideas and beliefs as a million people. It is absolutely the worse if you hold and share the same 'Christian' ideas and beliefs as a billion strong.

Fact is the truth which saves and delivers will be known and held only by a chosen few.

Jesus prophesied three important things related to the above:

1. Many are called and few chosen. - There is only one place where many are called to Christianity. That is in traditional or main stream Christianity.

2. Many false prophets will come in his name and misguide many. - There is only one place where many false prophets can get the catchment to mislead many. That is mainstream or traditional Christianity.

3. People err when they do not know truth and the power of God. Therefore this grand err can occur only in mainstream or traditional Christianity. There is no other catchment where many are called to Christianity.

Therefore getting in trouble for my posts, with the very great majority of posters here, is the best confirmation that I might just be among the chosen few who have it right. I certainly do not want to be among the hapless masses. Not that they cannot be my friends and co-posters. However identifying with and embracing, their ideas of Christianity is confirmed and certain failure to be among the chosen few. I certainly want to be among the chosen few (who have it right, i.e. who actually know and have truth). The rest goes to hell.

It is truly sad that some people believe that this is all semantics.

For more information please click the little arrow here:

click the little arrow for more

Town Heretic
July 29th, 2015, 05:00 PM
There is great disappointment and grinding of teeth for the billion strong traditional Christians. They all genuinely believe and hold that belief (i.e. 'they are on their way to heaven').
Like I said, I think some people (and you're qualifying at this point) have abused that scripture to no end to justify whatever near decoder ring exclusivity they believe their particular enlightenment entitles them to.



...It is even worse if you hold and share the same "Christian' ideas and beliefs as a million people. It is absolutely the worse if you hold and share the same 'Christian' ideas and beliefs as a billion strong.
By the light you're using to see it the more heretical and absurd the position the more likely it is to be correct, because so few will hold it.


Fact is the truth which saves and delivers will be known and held only by a chosen few.
I'd say the fact is that among the multitudes only a relative few will embrace it and many more turn away for the love of something else.


Therefore getting in trouble for my posts, with the very great majority of posters here, is the best confirmation that I might just be among the chosen few who have it right.
I'm sorry that your vision/understanding of God won't allow you to feel certain of your relation with Him. That must be an awful way to live.


I certainly do not want to be among the hapless masses.
Every man is elite in the privacy of his thoughts. Some people just let the rest of us in on it. :Plain:

Gurucam
July 30th, 2015, 06:44 AM
Like I said, I think some people (and you're qualifying at this point) have abused that scripture to no end to justify whatever near decoder ring exclusivity they believe their particular enlightenment entitles them to. :Plain:
Thanks for your reply.

Indeed the scriptures were abused. I would like to expand on this fact based on revelations in the KJV N.T. I do not believe that it is enough to simply say that the scriptures were abused and leave it at that.

Fact is the scriptures were given to serve two distinct purposes. One each for two different sets of people. There are two distinct gospels/commission. One was committed onto Peter and the other onto Paul.

The abuse is that Peter and Co. denied, undermined, persecuted, blasphemed and relegated Paul and his commissions so as to corruptly promote their as supreme and sole. This was and continue to be, serious unforgivable sin on the part of Peter & Co. and their followers. Seems that they and all their follows were and continue to be terminally jeopardized.
Under Peter's commission the scriptures is divinely given, to serve the ruling Satanic status quo. Peter's commission was divinely given for ruling over and regulate the physical behavior of the unaware masses, until they become spiritually aware and 'in Christ'. Under this system scriptures are given to be a schoolmaster for the unaware masses. The unaware masses (children of the flesh) cannot seek liberation, enlightenment in Christ, salvation and/or deliverance in their present unaware state. Peter and his commission are not given for liberation, salvation and deliverance.

Under Paul's commission Scriptures are given for liberation, enlightenment in Christ, salvation and deliverance and not at all for serving the ruling or any other other Satanic status quo. Paul's commission is solely for spiritually aware people and not at all for spiritually dead people. 'Spiritually dead' people are to be under Peter's commission. They are to stay there until they become spiritually aware. Then they totally and completely drop Peter and his commission and totally and completely embrace Paul's commission.
:idea: Peter's and Paul's commissions are two totally separate and distinct commissions. They are anchored by two separate and distinct ideologies and masters. No one can serve two masters.

1. Peter's commission is anchored on the 'seen' or physical and temporal, son of man, Lord Jesus. Blasphemy of the Lord Jesus in this format and blasphemy of Peter and Peter's church is permitted and forgivable. (Paul did all of these things and he was forgiven and given the Spirit based, Christian commission by the Lord Jesus.) Peter's commission is Jesus' Satanic commission. This is founded on righteousness of God that is with the law and canons.

2. Paul's commission is anchored on the 'not seen' and eternal, Spirit, Son of God, Lord Jesus. Blasphemy of the Lord Jesus in this Spirit only format and blasphemy of Paul and his commission is not forgivable at any place or time. (Peter and Co. and their followers are guilty of blaspheming the Lord Jesus in this Spirit only format and blasphemy of Paul and his commission.) Paul's commission is Jesus' Christian commission. This is founded on righteousness of God that is without the law and canons (re. The Acts: 13 verse: 39, Galatians: 5 verse:18 and Romans: 3 verse: 21 KJV N.T.) .

Peter & Co. distorted and corrupted scriptures so as to justify their actions of denying and blaspheming the Lord Jesus in this Spirit only format and denying and blasphemy of Paul and his commission. This is the biggest distortion and corrupting of scriptures. This distortion and corruption of scriptures led to and anchored, all other distortions and corruptions of scriptures. This distortion and corruption of scriptures by Peter & Co. misled the very great majority (all but a few) of those called to Christianity and so delivered them to hell and not heaven.
In order to add clarity it must be confirmed that Peter was given only the Satanic commission. Peter was given authority to deliver only one commission, the Satanic (i.e. physically based) commission only to the spiritually dead or unaware masses.

However Paul had authority to deliver two commissions. Paul had authority to deliver the Satanic commission to unaware people. He also had authority to deliver the (Spirit based) Christian commission only to spiritually aware people.

The Satanic commission is for the unaware, It is anchored on righteousness of God that is with the law and cannons etc. This is the gospel of circumcision.

The Spirit based Christian commission is anchored on righteousness of God that is without the law and canons etc. This is the gospel of uncircumcision.

Peter's commission:

Peter was appointed to his commission by the 'seen' and temporal, son of man, Lord Jesus. Peter could not and never did look to things that are 'not seen' eternal and spiritual, like the Lord Jesus clad only in his 'not seen' eternal, Spirit , son of God, body. Peter needed physically discernible signs for all things. Peter needed physically discernible signs before he accepted that the Spirit of the Lord Jesus was regenerated after his crucifixion and that he rose to spirit heaven clad only in His 'not seen' eternal, Spirit , son of God, body.

Peter and the other disciples could not and did not look to things that are not seen and eternal. They could not discern the Lord Jesus clad only in His 'not seen' eternal, Spirit, Son of God body. This was and continue to be, Satanic behavior. Indeed Jesus confirmed that only an evil and adulterous generation (people) need (physically discernible) signs for things that are 'not seen', like the Holy Ghost and the Spirit of Jesus/Spirit of Truth/Spirit of Intercession.

It is confirmed very clearly in the KJV N.T. that Peter and the other disciples demanded (physically discernible) signs before they accepted anything. They were without faith. Their hearts were waxed gross. They were in only "Satanic awareness". Even after walking with the Lord Jesus for so long, they (Peter and the other disciples) could not look to and were not prepared to look to, things that were 'not seen' and eternal. They could look only to things that were 'seen' and temporal. They were not spiritually aware, they were 'the unawares'. Indeed, their hearts were waxed gross. Therefore they were not given to know the mysteries of God's kingdom of heaven. This was Peter's flimsy and very limited actualization. Indeed far inferior to Paul's


Matthews: 12 KJV N.T.
39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:

(Only Paul was able to look to things that are 'not seen' and eternal, like the Lord Jesus clad only in his 'not seen' eternal, Spirit , son of God, body.)

Peter and his commission were given to serve 'spiritually dead' people. The 'spiritually dead' are also called 'the unawares' or 'the dead' or children of the flesh'. They were unaware of their own spirits or hearts. Also called 'the unawares'. They were aware of only their physical or flesh or satanic side. They were simply dead to their own spirit or heart and the hearts or spirit of others. They are also describes as Satan or Satanic.

Jesus, when he was the 'seen' and temporal, son of man, established a church under Satan to serve these people. These spiritually dead people must be sent to Satan, so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (i.e. according to 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5 KJV N.T.). They are not given to and cannot function through the intuitive faculties of their own hearts or spirits. . . . because they are not aware of (they are dead to) their own spirits or hearts. Therefore they cannot look to things that are 'not seen'.

These people are described as not being given to know the mysteries of God's kingdom of heaven because they do not have 'the eyes to see', 'the ears to hear' and 'the hearts to understand'. Their hearts or spirits are waxed gross. That is, they are dead to their own spirit or hearts. They are called 'the dead' in Jesus' statement, "let 'the dead' bury their dead".

This means that they do not have the spiritual/intuitive actualization to look too and discern things that are 'not seen' and eternal, like the Lord Jesus in His 'not seen' and eternal, Spirit, Son of God body. They can and must look only to things that are seen and temporal.

Peter's church is anchored on things that are 'seen' and temporal. That is, it is based on 'the physical' and not at all on the spiritual. The spiritual is 'not seen' and eternal. 'Seen' or physical things are related to 'man'. "Man' is our earthly or physical side. In the son of man, Lord Jesus, this is the side which Mother Mary provided. This is described as Satanic. On earth Jesus was not ruled by this side. However Peter was ruled by this physical side (of his make up) whiles Jesus physically walked with him. Peter continue to be ruled by his physical/Satanic side even after Jesus was no longer physically present.

Peter was identified by Jesus to be Satan because he savored the things of man and not the things of God. The Lord Jesus was ready willing and able to give his life for the purpose of God (i.e. for treasures in heaven). Peter was attempting to derail the Lord Jesus from this (His) divine path and instead save His own life. This made Peter, Satanic, i.e. one who savor the things of man and not the things of God.

Peter was rooted in his physical side and not at all aware of and/or rooted in his spirit side. Our physical side is our Satanic side.

Peter was therefore appropriate to anchor Jesus' Satanic church where spiritually dead people can be sent so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (i.e. according to 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5 KJV N.T.) Fact is, only 'the dead', (i.e. the spiritually dead) need to have their spirits saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5 KJV N.T. confirms that people are sent to Satan so that they spirits might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. This defined Peter's church for Peter was identified to be Satan by the Lord Jesus. Saving of one's spirit does not mean that one is liberated, saved and/or delivered or that one is enlightened in Christ. It simply means that one has another chance to become aware of one's own spirit and to be born again. Then one can commune with and be led by, the Spirit of the Lord Jesus and so become liberated, saved and/or delivered and/or enlightened in Christ, as Paul.

Therefore the best that Peter & Co. were given to do is to bring spiritually dead people into awareness of their spirits or heart. Everything else rested only with Paul and his commission. To a great extent Peter's charges seem to have all died spiritually dead. They were all buried in the earth together with their dead physical bodies, in the custody of Satan, to wait indefinitely on the return of the Lord Jesus in a physical human body to shout out to them to rise out of the earth (i.e. according to 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5 KJV N.T.).

The spiritually aware were given another option by the Lord Jesus. Jesus instructed 'let the dead bury their dead' however you (the spiritually aware) follow me in my regenerated Spirit.

The spiritually aware were able to embrace Paul's commission which is anchored on the Spirit of the Lord Jesus and not on the physical and temporal son of man, Lord Jesus. Unlike Peter, Paul was able to follow the Lord Jesus in His regenerated Spirit. Those spiritually aware people who embraced Paul's commission, did not go through the above path (under Peter/Satan). Those who embraced Paul's commission became Christians and differed in no way from the Lord Jesus Christ, except that He is the Lord of all. When they (Christians) die they all rise in three day, like the Lord Jesus Christ, to be like angels in (spirit) heaven. They (i.e. those who embraced Paul's commission and became Christians) never go through the Satanic path which was prescribed for the dead and presided over by Peter & Co..

Indeed Christians (they are the chosen few) are never buried in the earth together with their dead physical bodies to wait indefinitely on the return of the Lord Jesus in a physical human body to shout out to them to rise out of the earth. That pathway is prescribed only for the dead, i.e. the spiritually dead. Only the dead go through that path way. When spiritually aware people, who became Christians, die they all rise in three day, like the Lord Jesus Christ, to be like angels in (spirit) heaven. Only their dead physical bodies are buried in the earth to go dust to dust.

This is the basic difference between Peter's commission and Paul's commission. This knowledge (or truth or mystery of God's kingdom of heaven) is what Peter and Co. have corrupted, undermined, denied, and blasphemed, so as to corruptly keep everyone under bondage of the law and canons and so simultaneously deny liberation, salvation and deliverance to all who they influenced while propping up and benefiting from the Satanic (i.e. man oriented) status quo.

The biggest trick that Peter pulled off was to convince his charges and the very great majority of those called to Christianity, that he was not Satan, although the Lord Jesus clearly identified him to be Satan and also clearly explained why Peter was Satan. The very cost of this is that many are called to Christianity, however the very great majority (i.e. all but a few) were and are misled. They err and did not and do not make it. They are not chosen. Indeed, Peter and Co are the chief among false prophets who came in Jesus name and were and are misguiding many. They cannot save themselves far less to save their charges or anyone else.

In fact these actions (of corrupting, undermining, denying, and blaspheming Paul and his commission) by Peter & Co. and their followers is equal to blasphemy of the Holy Ghost and that is not forgivable at any place or time. In His Spirit only format, the Lord Jesus is entitled to all thing due to the Holy Ghost. Paul and his commission is anchored on this Spirit only format of the Lord Jesus. Corruption, undermining, denial, and blasphemy of Paul and his commission is the same as corruption, undermining, denial, and blasphemy of the 'not seen' and eternal, Spirit, Son of God, Lord Jesus. This is also the same as blasphemy of the Holy Ghost. This is not forgivable at any place or time.

This is the sad predicament of people who (under the guidance or Peter & Co.) were buried in the earth, under Satan, with their dead physical bodies. They are all waiting indefinitely with Satan, for the Lord Jesus to return in his physical and temporal son of man body, to shout out to them to rise out of the earth which is hell. However while they lived they did unforgivable sin. They actively denied, persecuted and blasphemed the 'not seen' and eternal, Spirit, Son of God, Lord Jesus. And indeed, this is not forgivable at any place or time. Seems that Jesus is not likely to return to help them, for their sins are not forgivable at any place or time. They seem eternally doomed to hell in the under ground, with Satan.

. . . . and some people will call this confirmation of truth, semantics and seek to easily dismiss this very serious, evil and terminal continuing practice. The time to stop this antichrist practices is at hand so that no more unfortunate people will be doomed like those who have already gone.

Paul's commission:

Paul was appointed to his commission by the 'not seen' and eternal, Spirit, Son of God, Lord Jesus. This was done after the Lord Jesus was crucified and His was regenerated and He rose to heaven clad only in this Spirit body.

Paul's commission is 'not seen' and eternal. It is the Christian commission. It is for the spiritually aware. It is for those whose spirits have been saved. One must graduate from and out of Peter's church to embrace Paul's commission. One must blaspheme and totally dismiss Peter's commission to be qualified and fit to embrace Paul's commission.

Paul's commission has no physical manifestations. It has no physical church, land, human leaders, monetary banking and/or building or physical priests or physical gatherings.

Unlike Peters' commission, Paul commission is about storing one's treasures in heaven and not at all on earth.

In Paul's commission one is led directly, privately, individually and intuit by the 'not seen' and eternal, Spirit, Son of God, Lord Jesus as discerned by each person through his or her own hearts or spirits.

. . . . . will give full and total details of this commission in a little while. I will add to this post.



By the light you're using to see it the more heretical and absurd the position the more likely it is to be correct, because so few will hold it.


I'd say the fact is that among the multitudes only a relative few will embrace it and many more turn away for the love of something else.


I'm sorry that your vision/understanding of God won't allow you to feel certain of your relation with Him. That must be an awful way to live.


Every man is elite in the privacy of his thoughts. Some people just let the rest of us in on it. :Plain:
. . . will also respond to these individually, soon.

Thanks for your reply.

Sherman
July 31st, 2015, 03:42 PM
:spam: When are you going to learn not to flood threads, PM's boxes and profile pages with your drivel?

Man.0
August 1st, 2015, 03:39 PM
That's because you are a legalist and you have a distorted opinion as to what constitutes "healthy".

Isn't it your opinion to say that I have a distorted opinion. What makes your opinion right?

From what I'm aware, you ingest toxic cigar smoke, so digesting a processed, sugar-packed, ice cream sundae wouldn't be any less of a problem for you, would it? You make unhealthy consumption choices, such as cigar-smoking, (and perhaps ice-cream sundae eating - and perhaps you even indulge in eating at fast-food joints) yet you say that it is I who have 'a distorted opinion as to what constitutes "healthy"'?

Do you really believe that a sugar-loaded, syrupy dessert, such as an ice cream sundae, is healthy? What if someone were to have a diet that consisted mainly of sundaes? That person would surely contract diabetes. But what if a person had a diet that consisted mainly of fruit and vegetables? Now that would be healthy! That's the type of diet I could imagine Jesus and Paul eating. I'm not saying that they wouldn't consume any desserts. And i'm not saying that desserts are bad and unhealthy, and that we shouldn't consume them; I'm in favour of consuming naturally-produced ice-cream and chocolate, and other such desserts. But an ice-cream sundae is hardly healthy, being that it's loaded with allsorts of sugary, fattening toppings.

Man.0
August 3rd, 2015, 03:57 AM
Tobacco is a natural product.

Are you seriously using that as a defense, as a justification for smoking it - because it's a 'natural product'? So what if it's a natural substance that occurs in nature (although not in the form that you smoke it)? Just because it is found in nature, it doesn't mean it's fit for consumption. Doesn't the fact that you have to artificially alter it (through the process of curing) show that it's not meant for natural consumption?

Perhaps I should go and consume any herb or plant that takes my fancy... mmm maybe some Atropa belladonna or a Rosary pea or some White snakeroot or a Castor plant? Seeing as they're just 'natural products', they're absolutely fine for consumption, aren't they? Yet these, if you don't already know, are capable of causing serious, significant side effects, even death.


And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth,

If we are to take the letter of this verse literally, as you seem to be doing, then that means that God has literally sanctioned the usage of every herb/plant. Why would God give the 'thumbs up' to using a plant/herb that could cause serious harm and death? What kind of a sadistic god have you conjured up in your mind, a god that would encourage and support the usage of toxic substances that would destroy its own human creation? Wouldn't that be counter-productive? Think about it.

'You say, "I am allowed to do anything"--but not everything is good for you. You say, "I am allowed to do anything"--but not everything is beneficial' (1 Corinthians 10:23)


Not even close. It is as phony as the cigarette commercials about shards of glass. If you put shards of glass in your throat you could die on the spot if you bleed to death.

If I come and stab you in the arm, you will die shortly from bleeding to death without immediate medical attention.

Smoking a cigar does not make people fall over and need medical attention.

Do you not think that smoking a cigar could cause immediate cardiac arrest, and lead to a heart attack, which could bring death on the spot? You keep smoking then... keep tempting God. See what happens.

'Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.' (1 Corinthians 10:9)

Man.0
August 3rd, 2015, 04:10 AM
He shall bring it to Aaron’s sons, the priests, one of whom shall take from it his handful of fine flour and oil with all the frankincense. And the priest shall burn it as a memorial on the altar, an offering made by fire, a sweet aroma to the Lord.[/QUOTE]

This verse is simply talking about sacrifice being offered to God. It has nothing whatsoever to do with smoking, or inhaling the smoke of a burnt herb or plant.

serpentdove
August 3rd, 2015, 10:45 AM
"That is not the topic today, let's at least pretend to stay focused on the OP..."


Lions and tigers and bears, oh my! Children?--What do I care? http://vananne.com/serpentdove/bored.gif Pr 8:36 Are you all for protecting sexual sin? :Shimei: Isa 5:20

Ben Masada
November 3rd, 2015, 11:46 AM
You BET I do.

Absolutely.

I believe Christ is the norm of the Bible, and the actual preacher who walked the dusty roads of Palestine is the norm of Christ.

Jesus stands for love, forgiveness and support.

John of Patmos stands for the Christians who were oppressed, tortured and killed by Nero. And his reaction to that was a litany of terrible metaphoric images and scare tactics for the faithful.

And he constructed his own Jesus that was just as angry, resentful and immoral (full of our human failings) as John of Patmos himself.

I don't sanction violence and I don't believe Jesus did either. But many of his followers did. One of Jesus' last phrases was to Pilate when he said his "kingdom was not of this world." If you bother to read the entire verse, he says this because his followers then were nonviolent and would not attack Rome because he was captured and sentenced to death.

That is the Christianity I subscribe to. Apparently your version, opinion and interpretation is different than mine.

But I can marshal all the evidence for my faith by specific quotes of Jesus and a close look at the patterns of his life standing up against the powers and principalities of the empire--either Roman or American.

Jesus is Lord, not Caesar.

Where did you get the idea that Jesus was lord over the Land of Israel and not Caesar? Evidence of the opposite is that Jesus fell before Caesar and not Caesar before Jesus. This is to walk by sight and not by faith. (II Cor. 5:7)

Ben Masada
November 3rd, 2015, 12:39 PM
1 - The first seven days have the implication of the planet being formed, but telling the angels to let such and such happen, and it a recognition of it happening currently, not on the same day. Origen and his logos doctrine?
2 - I would call it, israelism. Jesus wasn't a military leader.

3 - Trust and fear of God aren't Modern Judaism?

4 - There is nothing eternal about death or dying, because neither is permanent.

1 - The whole Genesis account of Creation is an allegory that must be interpreted metaphorically. The seven-days of that allegory reflect only the Jewish method to establish the week cycle with the establishment of the Sabbath as a commandment on the 7th day.

2 - Could it be the reason why he did nothing for his People that were oppressed at the time he was born and remained so at the time he died?

3 - No, but trust and love of God are.

4 - BTW, there is nothing eternal about man but death and dying. Read II Sam. 12:23; II Sam. 14:14; Isaiah 26:14; and Job 10:21.

SabathMoon
November 6th, 2015, 01:18 PM
1 - The whole Genesis account of Creation is an allegory that must be interpreted metaphorically. The seven-days of that allegory reflect only the Jewish method to establish the week cycle with the establishment of the Sabbath as a commandment on the 7th day.


2 - Could it be the reason why he did nothing for his People that were oppressed at the time he was born and remained so at the time he died?Rome was not the cause of the people's suffering. Get real.


3 - No, but trust and love of God are.You trust that God is, but where is the consideration and fear.


4 - BTW, there is nothing eternal about man but death and dying. Read II Sam. 12:23; II Sam. 14:14; Isaiah 26:14; and Job 10:21.Few things are "eternal". That was a lame statement.

Lazy afternoon
November 22nd, 2015, 12:43 AM
No.

His name is called the Word of God.

Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

LA


I cleaned off a bunch of them. If I see any more of them popping up and I am going to start deleting again. Word of warning. The Purpose of TOL isn't to pave people's path to Hell. There are way too many of these Christ denying threads.


How is that Christ denying?

LA

Elia
November 22nd, 2015, 05:37 AM
Bs"d

And WHY is it that the trinity is so hotly debated?

Because is the most important dogma in the church.

It is the only thing that stands (or so they think) between Christianity and polytheism & idolatry.

Add to that that it is nowhere to be found in Scripture and that it is an illogical concept, then you understand why so much time is put in to it.



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5.
.

Elia
November 22nd, 2015, 05:41 AM
I cleaned off a bunch of them. If I see any more of them popping up and I am going to start deleting again. Word of warning. The Purpose of TOL isn't to pave people's path to Hell. There are way too many of these Christ denying threads.

Bs"d

Sherman, you write in your profile: "Sola Scriptura Christian. My beliefs are shaped by the Word of God."

If so, then why do you believe in an extra-Biblical trinity, made up by the RC church?


"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

ZacharyB
November 22nd, 2015, 09:46 AM
His name is called the Word of God.
To most believers, "the Word" is the same Person as "the Word of God".

The Word, the Son of God, the Second person of the Trinity, Jesus.
Later in Revelation, Jesus is called "the Word of God".

ZacharyB
November 22nd, 2015, 09:57 AM
If so, then why do you believe in an extra-Biblical trinity, made up by the RC church?
Okay, so I'm going to have to post a thread filled with Scripture references,
which prove wthout ANY doubt whatsoever that Jesus is God.

Now, you may wish to insist that the RCC or EOC made a lot of changes to Scripture.
That would be your perogative.
But, I think you would be calling God a liar, for He promised to safeguard the Scriptures.
Why would He go to all of the trouble of having them written,
if they were going to be seriously trashed by somebody?

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 11:44 AM
No.

His name is called the Word of God.

LA

The sword of the Spirit is the word of God; see Ephesians 6:17

“Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.”

Again, the SWORD is the Word of God.




Jesus is the Word of God. See John 1:1.

Jesus is the SWORD.

The SWORD is Jesus the WORD OF GOD.

The WORD of God is God; see John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.



Jesus’ name is the Word of God, see Revelation 19:13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.

HE, JESUS, is the Rider on the horse and that Rider is the SPIRIT.

Remember, The SWORD is JESUS (the Word of God) coming from the RIDER (the Spirit) who is JESUS.


Jesus is the Rider who is the Spirit.

Revelation 19:15 Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.

And remember, Jesus is the sword of the Spirit and the sword is the word of God; see Ephesians 6:17



Jesus is the Rider (the Spirit of God) and Jesus is the sword (the Word of God who is God) that is coming from him.



God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit are all the same.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 12:22 PM
Jesus is the Word of God; Jesus is the Sword; Jesus is the Rider. Jesus is the Spirit. Jesus is God the Father.

Lazy afternoon
November 22nd, 2015, 05:00 PM
The sword of the Spirit is the word of God; see Ephesians 6:17

“Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.”

Again, the SWORD is the Word of God.




Jesus is the Word of God. See John 1:1.

Jesus is the SWORD.

The SWORD is Jesus the WORD OF GOD.

The WORD of God is God; see John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.



Jesus’ name is the Word of God, see Revelation 19:13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.

HE, JESUS, is the Rider on the horse and that Rider is the SPIRIT.

Remember, The SWORD is JESUS (the Word of God) coming from the RIDER (the Spirit) who is JESUS.


Jesus is the Rider who is the Spirit.

Revelation 19:15 Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.

And remember, Jesus is the sword of the Spirit and the sword is the word of God; see Ephesians 6:17



Jesus is the Rider (the Spirit of God) and Jesus is the sword (the Word of God who is God) that is coming from him.



God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit are all the same.


Saying Jesus is the sword is like saying the army general is an atom bomb because he used one.

Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.


LA

Lazy afternoon
November 22nd, 2015, 05:02 PM
Okay, so I'm going to have to post a thread filled with Scripture references,
which prove wthout ANY doubt whatsoever that Jesus is God.

Now, you may wish to insist that the RCC or EOC made a lot of changes to Scripture.
That would be your perogative.
But, I think you would be calling God a liar, for He promised to safeguard the Scriptures.
Why would He go to all of the trouble of having them written,
if they were going to be seriously trashed by somebody?

You are interpreting the scriptures to suggest they are saying something different to what they actually say, and then saying others who see your folly are calling God a liar.

LA

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 05:06 PM
Saying Jesus is the sword is like saying the army general is an atom bomb because he used one.

Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.


LA

I have explained it to you very carefully.

Why don't you do what you want others to do when they discuss with you?

You do what your enemies do. You merely make a rude comment and nothing more.

Take time to read and reply to each thing that I said.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 08:56 PM
And what does Son of God mean?

God the Father came in the flesh as a Son.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 09:04 PM
God the Father came in the flesh as a Son.

Nope. It does not say that anywhere in scripture.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 09:30 PM
:doh: The Word says that the Word was God it does not say the Word was the Father.

The Bible says there is only One God and that He is the Father.




I challenge you. Show one scripture that says Jesus is the Father. You can't unless you try to twist scripture.

There is only one God and He is the Father:

Ephesians 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Here are more scriptures that explain Jesus is the Father:



Scriptures that say Jesus is God the Father:

See Deuteronomy 32:18. You deserted the Rock, who fathered you; you forgot the God who gave you birth. 1 Corinthians 10:4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.


Jesus says those who overcome he will be their GOD and they will be his CHILDREN.

See Revelation 21:7. Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children.

Jesus says when you SEE him, you have SEEN the Father.

See John 14:7 If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." John 14:9 Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? John 12:45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me.

God says Jesus will be called God, Father, and Holy Spirit. So that is what I call Jesus.

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 09:33 PM
The Bible says there is only One God and that He is the Father.



There is only one God and He is the Father:

Ephesians 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Here are more scriptures that explain Jesus is the Father:



Scriptures that say Jesus is God the Father:

See Deuteronomy 32:18. You deserted the Rock, who fathered you; you forgot the God who gave you birth. 1 Corinthians 10:4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.


Jesus says those who overcome he will be their GOD and they will be his CHILDREN.

See Revelation 21:7. Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children.

Jesus says when you SEE him, you have SEEN the Father.

See John 14:7 If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." John 14:9 Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? John 12:45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me.

God says Jesus will be called God, Father, and Holy Spirit. So that is what I call Jesus.

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Before I read all this stupidity that you have posted tell me why Jesus is the SON of God if He is the Father. I'm interested to see how you are going to twist this one. You did a pretty poor job on this post.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 09:37 PM
Bright Raven,

Would you be willing to study something hard?

Please, take some time to study this and tell me what you think.

The sword of the Spirit is the word of God; see Ephesians 6:17

“Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.”

Again, the SWORD is the Word of God.

Jesus is the Word of God. See John 1:1.

Jesus is the Sword.

The SWORD is Jesus the WORD OF GOD.

The WORD of God is God; see John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.



Jesus’ name is the Word of God, see Revelation 19:13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.

HE, JESUS, is the Rider on the horse and that Rider is the SPIRIT.

Remember, the SWORD is JESUS (the Word of God) coming from the RIDER (the Spirit) who is JESUS.


Jesus is the Rider who is the Spirit.

Revelation 19:15 Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.


And remember, Jesus is the sword of the Spirit and the sword is the word of God; see Ephesians 6:17


Jesus is the Rider (the Spirit of God) and Jesus is the sword (the Word of God who is God) that is coming from him.



God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit are all the same.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 09:38 PM
Before I read all this stupidity that you have posted tell me why Jesus is the SON of God if He is the Father. I'm interested to see how you are going to twist this one. You did a pretty poor job on this post.

You judged what I said as being stupid before you read it!

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 09:40 PM
When someone comes forth in the flesh, it is a son, or a daughter.

Jesus is God the Father who came forth, and we call Him the Son of God.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 09:41 PM
Bright Raven,

Would you be willing to study something hard?

Please, take some time to study this and tell me what you think.

The sword of the Spirit is the word of God; see Ephesians 6:17

“Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.”

Again, the SWORD is the Word of God.

Jesus is the Word of God. See John 1:1.

Jesus is the Sword.

The SWORD is Jesus the WORD OF GOD.

The WORD of God is God; see John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.



Jesus’ name is the Word of God, see Revelation 19:13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.

HE, JESUS, is the Rider on the horse and that Rider is the SPIRIT.

Remember, the SWORD is JESUS (the Word of God) coming from the RIDER (the Spirit) who is JESUS.


Jesus is the Rider who is the Spirit.

Revelation 19:15 Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.


And remember, Jesus is the sword of the Spirit and the sword is the word of God; see Ephesians 6:17


Jesus is the Rider (the Spirit of God) and Jesus is the sword (the Word of God who is God) that is coming from him.



God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit are all the same.

I have no problem with the three being one. However the entities are separate. Scripture teaches it plain and simple. How people miss it is beyond me.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 09:48 PM
I have no problem with the three being one. However the entities are separate. Scripture teaches it plain and simple. How people miss it is beyond me.

I just gave scripture that prove Jesus is God, and Jesus is the Spirit.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 09:51 PM
I just gave scripture that prove Jesus is God, and Jesus is the Spirit.

Jesus is not the Father, He is the Son. Jesus is not the Spirit, the Spirit is another Comforter.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 09:58 PM
Jesus is not the Father, He is the Son. Jesus is not the Spirit, the Spirit is another Comforter.

If Jesus is not the Spirit, then where is Jesus' Spirit?

If Jesus is not the Father, then where is the Father's Spirit?

If Jesus is not the Comforter, then how many Spirits are there?

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 10:01 PM
If Jesus is not the Spirit, then where is Jesus' Spirit?

If Jesus is not the Father, then where is the Father's Spirit?

If Jesus is not the Comforter, then how many Spirits are there?

You don't know because you do not know the truth. When you come to know the truth, the truth will set you free. Hint: Jesus came to reveal the Father.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:03 PM
You don't know because you do not know the truth. When you come to know the truth, the truth will set you free. Hint: Jesus came to reveal the Father.

Why don't you show how much you care by answering each of the points that I made?

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:05 PM
When I was saved, I was given Jesus to live in my heart.

If Jesus is not God the Father and the Holy Spirit, then how do they live in my heart?

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 10:07 PM
Why don't you show how much you care by answering each of the points that I made?

It is so simple. Each is God but they are separate entities. How much simpler does it get. Did Jesus come to confuse us. No He came as a fulfillment of the scripture to reveal the Father. Until you understand this, you will understand nothing.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:11 PM
It is so simple. Each is God but they are separate entities.

No way are they separate.



How much simpler does it get. Did Jesus come to confuse us. No He came as a fulfillment of the scripture to reveal the Father. Until you understand this, you will understand nothing.

You say they are separate. How is that simple? How is that right?

God the Father and the Son are not separate. They are exactly the same.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 10:16 PM
No way are they separate.
Then why are there distinctions made between the three? You have no answer.


You say they are separate. How is that simple? How is that right?

God the Father and the Son are not separate. They are exactly the same.

Simplicity is easy for those who come to Him as children. Such is not the case for those who come in their intellectuality.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:19 PM
Then why are there distinctions made between the three? You have no answer.

There are no distinctions.

Go ahead and tell me how Jesus as God is different than the Father.



Simplicity is easy for those who come to Him as children. Such is not the case for those who come in their intellectuality.

I came to God not knowing anything, except Jesus' commands.

You say what the Catholics say about the trinity.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:22 PM
Acts 10:15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.


Tell me, what is the difference in the three times?

Tell me, which one said it first, second, and last?

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 10:25 PM
There are no distinctions.

Go ahead and tell me how Jesus as God is different than the Father.
Then why the three different names of Father, Son and Holly Spirit? If Jesus is the Father, why isn't He called the Father?

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:27 PM
Then why the three different names of Father, Son and Holly Spirit? If Jesus is the Father, why isn't He called the Father?

Jesus is the Father and is called the Father, by those who know the Truth. See Isaiah 9:6.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 10:32 PM
Jesus is the Father and is called the Father, by those who know the Truth. See Isaiah 9:6.Jesus is not the Father. He is God and is called such by those who have a proper understanding of the scriptures. Isaiah 9:6

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:52 PM
Jesus is not the Father. He is God and is called such by those who have a proper understanding of the scriptures. Isaiah 9:6

Just believe what God the Father says.

God the Father says the child will be called Father.

Just believe it.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 10:58 PM
Just believe what God the Father says.

God the Father says the child will be called Father.

Just believe it.

Take your bible and line out every reference to the Son and insert Father. Then you will have the Bible according to God's Truth. Hint: The Father did not die on the cross, the Son did.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:58 PM
Jesus is the child that was born, the Son that is called the Everlasting FATHER.

That is what the Holy Bible says!

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 10:59 PM
Just believe what is written, just believe.

The child is the son who is called Everlasting Father.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 11:00 PM
Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 11:01 PM
Believe.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 11:03 PM
And the scriptures say;

Luke 23:46 King James Version (KJV)

46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

So you are wrong again.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 11:04 PM
I call Jesus the Father, just like God the Father in the Old Testament says.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 11:05 PM
I call Jesus the Father, just like God the Father in the Old Testament says.

And you are wrong. He gave up His Spirit to the father.

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 11:05 PM
And the scriptures say;

Luke 23:46 King James Version (KJV)

46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

So you are wrong again.

God the Father really did come as a Man.

God the Father the Man cried out to God the Father in heaven.

That was for our sake.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 11:06 PM
God the Father really did come as a Man.

God the Father the Man cried out to God the Father in heaven.

That was for our sake.

Holy Cow, what have you been smoking?

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 11:07 PM
And you are wrong. He gave up His Spirit to the father.

Jesus' Spirit is the Spirit of God.

Jesus died in the flesh, then he went into Hell.

Jesus then raised himself by the Spirit.

Would you like the scripture references?

Tell me, does Jesus have a different Spirit than the Spirit of God the Father?

Please answer with a yes or a no.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 11:08 PM
Jesus' Spirit is the Spirit of God.

Jesus died in the flesh, then he went into Hell.

Jesus then raised himself by the Spirit.

Would you like the scripture references?

Tell me, does Jesus have a different Spirit than the Spirit of God the Father?

Please answer with a yes or a no.

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God is He not?

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 11:08 PM
Holy Cow, what have you been smoking?

I don't smoke.

What have you been smoking?

You believe the trinity doctrine that says it is NOT EXPLAINABLE.

Your doctrine says it is not explainable, and then uses a graph.

Do you see any graphs for this in the Holy Bible?

God's Truth
November 22nd, 2015, 11:09 PM
The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God is He not?

The Spirit of which God?

I know, but you answer and tell me what you believe.

Bright Raven
November 22nd, 2015, 11:10 PM
The Spirit of which God?

I know, but you answer and tell me what you believe.

Deceit doesn't get it.