User Tag List

View Poll Results: bad poll

Voters
1. You may not vote on this poll
  • delete

    0 0%
  • delete

    1 100.00%
Page 256 of 256 FirstFirst ... 156206246253254255256
Results 3,826 to 3,835 of 3835

Thread: Spammers wasteland

  1. #3826
    Over 750 post club Faither's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    889
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 86 Times in 70 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    7892
    Quote Originally Posted by Cross Reference View Post
    You offer nothing new or noteworthy. Surrending one's life, abandoning it to God, abiding in Christ, has been taught for years where disciples of Jesus Christ have profited greatly by their love to Him. [Dr. whats his name] sought only to make it his private teaching you have bought into believing it to be a method instaed of a lifestyle. Too bad you didn't get your moneys worth. I would ask for a refund from his unlearned wife.
    Your just going in circles with a different personal attacks Ken , i'm surprised your doing that. I thought you were different than the others here . turned out i was wrong.

    So this is what will happen . When you and your household stands before God , you will know the truth . You will grudgingly try to tell God you never knew that , but God will say i specifically sent you someone to warn you . I know your 79 , but it's not to late to start NT saving faith (pisteuo) . But one day soon , it's going to be one day to late .

    And FYI , What i'm sharing with you i have experienced , not learned from anyone . And the unlearned wife you disrespected , she speaks 22 different languages fluently , and has just received her Dr's degree in theology . I'm not sharing any of her teachings with you either . Gods Word needs to be yours first .

    I'm rooting for you Ken .

  2. #3827
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,472
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1,178 Times in 836 Posts

    Blog Entries
    11
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    323247


    President has portrayed the influx of immigrant Islamic terrorists in Europe and America as the greatest threat to the safety of the public.

    The probability of the average American being killed by a refugee terrorist 1:46,198,873
    which means they are -

    ************************************************** *******************************
    • 6 times more likely to die from a shark attack (one of the rarest forms of death on Earth)

    • 29 times more likely to die from a regional asteroid strike

    • 260 times more likely to be struck and killed by lightning

    • 4,700 times more likely to die in an aeroplane or spaceship accident

    • 129,000 times more likely to die in a gun assault

    • 407,000 times more likely to die in a motor vehicle incident

    • 6.9 million times more likely to die from cancer or heart disease



    Statistically, the fear of immigrant terrorists is not a rational response, but this President is doing everything in his power to promote "Muslim bashing," which will only serve to recruit more Islamic extremists!
    Last edited by jgarden; November 30th, 2017 at 06:01 PM.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to jgarden For Your Post:

    Arthur Brain (November 30th, 2017)

  4. #3828
    This is definitely Lower Wacker Drive. musterion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    19,393
    Thanks
    3,161
    Thanked 15,271 Times in 8,936 Posts

    Blog Entries
    3
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147724
    Not a single cluster of living fruit was, or ever will be, harvested from the tree of legality. Law can only produce “dead works,” from which we need to have conscience purged just as much as from “wicked works.”

    C. H. Mackintosh


  5. The Following User Says Thank You to musterion For Your Post:

    Angel4Truth (December 1st, 2017)

  6. #3829
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    267
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 141 Times in 99 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    46247
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    I was not interpreting 1 John 4:8.
    I beg to differ. Here are your own words taken from a post of yours in answer to one of mine in the quote below.

    From what I can tell, GOD does not have to be good and loving to all, and isn't loving and good to all.

  7. #3830
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,985
    Thanks
    135
    Thanked 620 Times in 564 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    86149
    [QUOTE=Ask Mr. Religion;5148335]
    I am trying to be as irenic as I can in this informative thread. My presupposition is that there are not a few that may benefit from more substantial content on the matters behind the short snippets only possible in the face-to-face debates that are being discussed. This is a written venue, not a chat-box environment, hence the usual drive-bys, one liners, etc., that often accompany virtual verbal communications of mere "chatting" should not apply.
    Get real.. Your problem is that you demand everyone smoke your brand for hope to reason through your convoluted conceited presentations.. No one speaks like you write and that isn't meant to be a compliment..
    "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15 (KJV)

  8. #3831
    TOL Legend patrick jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    homeless
    Posts
    28,885
    Thanks
    13,907
    Thanked 14,787 Times in 11,715 Posts

    Blog Entries
    27
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147809
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    I understand and would not blame you.

    Don't know how much longer I will be in this thread either.
    I haven't quite made it through the 2nd video.
    This is the first time I've watched Matt Slick debate, and it's hard to watch.
    He's not answering much at all, and his constant responses of "sorta is and sorta isn't" just gets tiresome and boring.
    I don't know how Will Duffy managed to keep his cool as well as he did.
    I watched both but commented after the first one. Then I watched some of part 2 again and I see what you're saying. I also watched part of a podcast with Matt but it never went anywhere.
    1 Corinthians 15:1-2 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV -


    Colossians 1:13-14 KJV - Colossians 1:15-16 KJV - Colossians 1:17-18 KJV -

    Colossians 1:19-20 KJV - Colossians 1:21-22 KJV - Colossians 1:23 KJV -

    Colossians 1:25-26 KJV 27, 28, 29 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Ephesians 1:12-13, 14 -



  9. #3832
    TOL Legend patrick jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    homeless
    Posts
    28,885
    Thanks
    13,907
    Thanked 14,787 Times in 11,715 Posts

    Blog Entries
    27
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147809
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    To me, Matt is what I call a 'tactic debater' and he used several tactics.
    Poisoning the well was one of the first ones he used in his opening statement with all the Mormonism stuff.
    He used the tactic of repeating himself in his answers and giving much longer answers than needed (filler-busting), and thus your opponent has less time to ask more questions.
    He kept trying to move the goal posts to dominate the debate towards predestination instead of 'is GOD loving'.
    Instead of answering a direct question he would offer to study it out with you later so you could learn ----- (in my school debate class you would have lost points big time for doing something like that to your opponent. And Matt did it a lot.).
    Yes, many times Slick said to Will, "you need to study that more" and similar comments and many times said "I'll help you study that more, but we don't have time right now" and such. Once or twice Matt said said that he himself needed to study more about a subject.
    1 Corinthians 15:1-2 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV -


    Colossians 1:13-14 KJV - Colossians 1:15-16 KJV - Colossians 1:17-18 KJV -

    Colossians 1:19-20 KJV - Colossians 1:21-22 KJV - Colossians 1:23 KJV -

    Colossians 1:25-26 KJV 27, 28, 29 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Ephesians 1:12-13, 14 -



  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to patrick jane For Your Post:

    glorydaz (December 10th, 2017),JudgeRightly (December 10th, 2017),steko (December 10th, 2017)

  11. #3833
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,985
    Thanks
    135
    Thanked 620 Times in 564 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    86149
    Quote Originally Posted by Ask Mr. Religion View Post
    I would assume no one speaks as they write. The former is extemporaneous, the latter should be more studied and deliberate. If they are not, then one has no real faculty of proper reasoning and discourse, rather they are just pouring whatever pops into their noggin out on paper (or the screen). Which is to say, I am not here to "chat" in most instances. The context of a thread dictates if it is light banter. The context of this thread is not so dictated.

    Those that have nothing really to say about the substance of the debates being discussed should perhaps refrain from giving ample evidence of the same. Along those lines, if and when you are able to gain control of yourself, perhaps you will return to the opening of my earlier response and actually provide the information I was seeking. While you are at it, please try to properly capture the quote tags when quoting another so that all can easily return to the original post to examine its full context.

    AMR
    Re Quote tags: I'll do that when you take away the need for 3 dictionaries and 6 Greek lexicons for one to even begin pondering your spiritually useless Ligonier clap trap abtracts.
    "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15 (KJV)

  12. #3834
    Eclectic Theosophist freelight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bend, OR. USA
    Posts
    7,116
    Thanks
    2,542
    Thanked 1,619 Times in 1,147 Posts

    Blog Entries
    83
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1479033

    Red face Trinity trumpets........

    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    More accurately, it is communication between the physical human and the spiritual God, emphasis on physical and spiritual.
    Yes, this is a view I proposed earlier since any man can pray to God the Infinite Spirit, since that Spirit is omnipresent. Any embodied being or incarnate soul, no matter how divine....if/when he prays to the Universal Father,...will of course be praying to the greater Omni-Presence that is everywhere present. This is understood from a unitarian, trinitarian or any 'arian' context. The allness of 'God' abounds everywhere at once.


    Correct. The Son (human, also God), the second Person of the Trinity, is communicating with the Father (Spirit, also God), the first Person of the Trinity.
    Note a Trinitarian view of God, as defined/described by orthodox Christianity is unsupported by the OT and unnecessary really. ( assumed as a relational construct or model, its fine, but its usefulness to some is questionable). Jesus is praying the Infinite, omnipresent Father, - this is all that essential to recognize.

    Remember Deuteronomy 6:4? "Hear oh Israel, The LORD our God, the LORD is one."

    The word "one" in that verse, "echad" means "one of unity," not "one of singularity." "Echad" indicates a plurality in the LORD.

    There are three (not two) distinct Persons in the Godhead. He, all three, is the Most High God.
    Jesus affirmed the Shema, which historically and monotheistically ever afirms 'God' as 'one' (echad). 'Echad' does NOT affirm or denote 'threeness'.

    See: Lies that Jews Changed the Shema

    You would have to show where in the OT a Trinity is taught, postulated or defined....and where orthodox Jewish rabbis prophets both ancient and modern TEACH such a thing (Jesus is to be included among these rabbis). They do not subscribe to or believe the orthodox Christian 'assumption' of a Trinity (as DEFINED by them) existing, for YHWH has always been 'echad'. 'Echad' means 'one', 'first', 'unique', 'sameness', 'singularity', 'undivided oneness'.

    To be more precise, you have three persons in complete agreement with each other, always in communication. He (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is God.
    Only in Trinitarian theology

    On this note, I'm just stating a more traditional orthodox Jewish perspective here, which is truly monotheistic and UNITARIAN. (I'm not claiming it is the only possible view, but share to combat the tendency toward 'dogmatism' often sported by some traditionalists) - for a greater cosmic presentation of a 'Paradise Trinity' existing within a higher cosmic hierarchy, one can see the Urantia Book on that here - its wonderful presentation of divine hierarchy excels or goes way beyond a limited orthodox Christian trinity-template.

  13. #3835
    Eclectic Theosophist freelight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bend, OR. USA
    Posts
    7,116
    Thanks
    2,542
    Thanked 1,619 Times in 1,147 Posts

    Blog Entries
    83
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1479033

    Arrow cherry picking........

    Not sure why the above is considered 'spam' since it directly addresses the thread subject and additionally expands on many other related points, pertinent to the subject at hand. Now if you think this deserves to be 'spammed', then you might as well do it to all of my posts.

    One option is to engage the subject and debate it, instead of marginalize and censor a commentary just because it does not totally or perfectly agree with your own 'theology' or 'doctrinal beliefs', or expand your mind to consider there are many different points of view and perspectives on a given subject

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us