Search results

Define "Real Christian." You seem to think it's something other than a "Christian," Otherwise you wouldn't have capitalized "real."

Don't be lazy. Go read the thread.

Yes, which is a figure of speech which means "accusing people of not being Christians" because they don't meet your definition of "Christian."

Been there, done that. https://theologyonline.com/threads/the-earth-is-flat-and-we-never-went-to-the-moon.38074/ Note: The part 2 thread is linked at the end of that thread.

You're just in denial. Yes, it is. So what? A righteous man regards the life of his animal, But the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. - Proverbs 12:10 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs12:10&version=NKJV That shows that they are responsible, at least to that...

I'm not saying you're able to. I'm saying that you deny someone's faith based on your own standard, despite you not knowing their heart, which is something only God can do. Why do YOU get to be the judge of whether someone is a Christian or not?

Oh boy... another flat earther... This isn't the correct forum for this bunk. Moving it to where it belongs....

They haven't done the shows live for some time because the device they used to do that broke a long time ago, and I'm not sure if they ever replaced or repaired it.

@Dominic Enyart maybe you can answer this?

Thanks for completely missing the point.

Casting people out of the kingdom is bad form, especially considering you posted in the "Exclusively Christian Theology" forum...

When cops tell you to stop moving, and to get on the ground, you should do so, for your own safety. This is exactly what you SHOULDN'T do:

Sure. Yet you aren't going to get very far on TOL if you're not even willing to consider that you might be wrong about some things. That's debatable. Just because it's not in the Bible doesn't mean I can't defend my beliefs. Who said they agreed with me? I was just stating that you...

By the way, if your position is defeated by "hyperbole and soundbite," then maybe your position isn't all that you crank it up to be. That is exactly what you promote, whether you recognize it or not. When the government steps in, it teaches parents that they can rely on the government to pick...

No, because it IS so. Such things are destructive to society. No, it's not. Because they've gotten used to living on the government's teat, instead of working harder to provide for themselves. Or in the case of women, relying on a man to provide for her, while she cares for her children...

False. So why go with something that teaches parents to be less responsible and loving to their children, something you have completely ignored so far. There's no such thing. Says the one who thinks killing the baby is an option. I want the parents to be responsible and care for their...

Saying it doesn't make it so. This ain't my first rodeo with a new member on TOL, Hat. You're the typical "God doesn't change, the Body of Christ is spiritual Israel" believer. We've had plenty of those. Your arguments are not new, so simply quoting a verse or two in support of your position...

In other words: By providing such welfare programs, you encourage irresponsible and unloving parents to be more unloving and irresponsible, because they know the government will pick up the slack. That's EXTREMELY unhealthy for society.