The truth about the Capital atheists dont want us to know. [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : The truth about the Capital atheists dont want us to know.


FCoulter
08-18-2012, 14:56
The U.S Capital and the Bible,facts about our country atheist have been denying.

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DdlfEdJNn15E&v=dlfEdJNn15E&gl=US

NMG26
08-18-2012, 15:03
The U.S Capital and the Bible,facts about our country atheist have been denying.

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DdlfEdJNn15E&v=dlfEdJNn15E&gl=US


Link did not work for me.

U.S. Capitol Tour with David Barton - YouTube

Walt_NC
08-18-2012, 15:12
LOL @ David Barton "facts".

FCoulter
08-18-2012, 15:29
LOL @ David Barton "facts".
So are you saying he is wrong? If so, provide proof before laughing please.

Kingarthurhk
08-18-2012, 15:35
So are you saying he is wrong? If so, provide proof before laughing please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Barton_(author)

Interesting. So, how much of Mr. Barton do you subscribe to? Do you think the First Amendment should be abolished also?

FCoulter
08-18-2012, 15:53
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Barton_(author)

Interesting. So, how much of Mr. Barton do you subscribe to? Do you think the First Amendment should be abolished also?
So, did you watch the video? Do you disagree with what is said in the video?
Or do you just wish to debate something you know nothing about as usual?

Kingarthurhk
08-18-2012, 15:56
So, did you watch the video? Do you disagree with what is said in the video?
Or do you just wish to debate something you know nothing about as usual?

I am asking a honest question about the maker of this film, who believes that there should be no seperation between church and state and essentially no First Amendment religious freedoms.

Do, you, like him, believe this?

FCoulter
08-18-2012, 16:08
I am asking a honest question about the maker of this film, who believes that there should be no seperation between church and state and essentially no First Amendment religious freedoms.

Do, you, like him, believe this?
Well I believe in the first amendment, however this thread is about the video posted.

Do you object to anything said within the video?


If so, lets discuss your objection.

JBnTX
08-18-2012, 16:14
How can atheists not want us to know something that's common knowledge?

You're seriously giving atheists way too much credit.

High-Gear
08-18-2012, 16:14
Mr. Barton is not very credible.

http://www.pfaw.org/media-center/publications/david-barton-propaganda-masquerading-history

Kingarthurhk
08-18-2012, 16:27
Well I believe in the first amendment, however this thread is about the video posted.

Do you object to anything said within the video?


If so, lets discuss your objection.

Watched it. I very much believe in the seperation between church and state as set forth in the First Amendment. When government puts itself in a position support a religion in state supported fashion we are in the territory of Revelation 13-11-12, "Then I saw a second beast, coming out of the earth. <sup class="crossreference" value='(X (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30920X))'></sup> It had two horns like a lamb, but it spoke like a dragon. <sup class="crossreference" value='(Y (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30920Y))'></sup> <sup class="versenum">12 </sup>It exercised all the authority <sup class="crossreference" value='(Z (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30921Z))'></sup> of the first beast on its behalf, <sup class="crossreference" value='(AA (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30921AA))'></sup> and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, <sup class="crossreference" value='(AB (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30921AB))'></sup> whose fatal wound had been healed."

hogfish
08-18-2012, 18:42
I am amazed to find out that the vast majority of government was Christian from the time it even got brought over by the great discover(er) of America, Cris. Columbus(though I think he was representing the Catholic Kings-still Christian). And to find out that it actually influenced the way government ran, is astonishing. Can you imagine how difficult it must have been for the founders of this great country to separate Church and State? They could not have gotten away with printing our 1st coin w/o IN GOD WE TRUST on it. I'm surprised they let that heathen, Thomas Payne, hang around (he was lucky there was no internet around in those days, or he might have been hanging around from a tree.

Animal Mother
08-18-2012, 19:08
The U.S Capital and the Bible,facts about our country atheist have been denying.That Barton misrepresents facts has been well documented. One of the best documented is the one he starts off with here, that the US Congress published the first edition of the Bible in the United States. When he opens with a lie that blatant, what would be the point of addressing the rest of his falsehoods? If you believe he brings out any valid historical facts that are not already widely recognized, why don't you share them?

lawman_77008
08-18-2012, 20:08
I watched the video. My impression was "So what". Was the purpose of that video to convince viewers that America is a christian nation and argue against the separation of church & state? If so it failed miserably. The only "facts" I gathered from the video was that there were some really superstitious folks 236 years ago and thankfully we've progressed from believing in silly things like talking snakes and invisible men in the sky. And thankfully those men didn't allow their silly superstions to ruin our country's government before it even started.

Guss
08-18-2012, 20:18
So let's look at what we've got here...


A Bible printed at the direction of Congress, with Congress recommending THAT VERSION of the Bible to the inhabitants of the states. It's clearly unconstitutional, but why wasn't it tested in court? Simply because no atheist would want to become an outcast of society at that time. Remember that they were less than a century away from the witch trials where people were tortured to death for mere SUSPICION of religious deviance.


So the video shows us one violation of the constitution after another, proving that the religionists will grab for all they can get if you give them a chance.


Now there is a long world history of governments finding religion a convenience to keep the population in line, so I guess you can make a utilitarian argument for it, but that doesn't mean that it is the best way.


Religion does have a past in America, but it is a dark one. Feeling justified by their personal religions, Congress allowed slavery and tried to tear Native Americans away from their own religion. Later on, religious people in office banned birth control, banned Sunday store openings, closed dance halls, kept individuals out of public office because of religion, imposed temperance, etc. It's said that “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance,” and unless we remain vigilant with regards to religious intrusion, it will take over.

Animal Mother
08-18-2012, 20:45
So let's look at what we've got here...


A Bible printed at the direction of Congress, with Congress recommending THAT VERSION of the Bible to the inhabitants of the states. It's clearly unconstitutional, but why wasn't it tested in court? Simply because no atheist would want to become an outcast of society at that time. Remember that they were less than a century away from the witch trials where people were tortured to death for mere SUSPICION of religious deviance. Actually, it's because the Bible wasn't printed at the direction of Congress. Nor did Congress finance the printing or call for the Bible in general or Aitken's Bible specifically to be used in schools, those are more of Barton's misrepresentations.

Guss
08-18-2012, 21:39
Actually, it's because the Bible wasn't printed at the direction of Congress. Nor did Congress finance the printing or call for the Bible in general or Aitken's Bible specifically to be used in schools, those are more of Barton's misrepresentations.
Hmmm... How about the story of printing Bibles for the Indians? Government expense?

Animal Mother
08-18-2012, 22:02
Hmmm... How about the story of printing Bibles for the Indians? Government expense?
Which story? Printing 20,000 Bibles for distribution to the Indians? Didn't happen. That Jefferson created the Jefferson Bible as a tool for evangelizing to the Indians? Also false. That Jefferson sent missionaries to evangelize the Indians? Not true either. In fact, the Indians Barton mentions in this video had already been Christians for over a century at the point that the treaty was signed and they were the ones who requested the religious provisions.

Blast
08-19-2012, 00:24
Barton is wrong on some issues and so are some in this thread.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel04.html

http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=46

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2722475/posts

http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/colonial-bibles.html

Animal Mother
08-19-2012, 05:41
http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=46
When it's been shown that Barton is intentionally deceptive, quoting his website as proof that he's right isn't exactly compelling.

FCoulter
08-19-2012, 08:18
Which story? Printing 20,000 Bibles for distribution to the Indians? Didn't happen. That Jefferson created the Jefferson Bible as a tool for evangelizing to the Indians? Also false. That Jefferson sent missionaries to evangelize the Indians? Not true either. In fact, the Indians Barton mentions in this video had already been Christians for over a century at the point that the treaty was signed and they were the ones who requested the religious provisions.
Seems like a alot of claims without proof... But hey, thats the atheist creed.

FCoulter
08-19-2012, 09:33
I watched the video. My impression was "So what". Was the purpose of that video to convince viewers that America is a christian nation and argue against the separation of church & state? If so it failed miserably. The only "facts" I gathered from the video was that there were some really superstitious folks 236 years ago and thankfully we've progressed from believing in silly things like talking snakes and invisible men in the sky. And thankfully those men didn't allow their silly superstions to ruin our country's government before it even started.
Delusion at its best!

Blast
08-19-2012, 09:55
When it's been shown that Barton is intentionally deceptive, quoting his website as proof that he's right isn't exactly compelling.

Contrast.

High-Gear
08-19-2012, 10:09
He is trying to paint a picture of the religious intent of the founders.

Here in their own words, approved by Adams and passed by a unanimous vote in Congress!

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. -Treaty of Tripoli 1797

Kingarthurhk
08-19-2012, 12:44
Delusion at its best!

As per usual, absolutely compelling and cintilating dialogue. Is your goal to annoy and alienate just as many people as possible? If so, you are doing a superb job.

Some friendly advice, if you want to be an ambassador for your faith or position, it is helpful not to be arrogant and sarcastic as your only repitoire.

FCoulter
08-19-2012, 14:33
As per usual, absolutely compelling and cintilating dialogue. Is your goal to annoy and alienate just as many people as possible? If so, you are doing a superb job.

Some friendly advice, if you want to be an ambassador for your faith or position, it is helpful not to be arrogant and sarcastic as your ownly repitoire.
Are you even being serious?

Kingarthurhk
08-19-2012, 18:00
Are you even being serious?

As a heart attack.

Animal Mother
08-19-2012, 22:12
double post

Animal Mother
08-19-2012, 22:30
Seems like a alot of claims without proof... But hey, thats the atheist creed.What proof do you want? Read the treaty with the Kaskaskia that Barton cites. They'd been Catholic since the 16th century, so there certainly wasn't any need to evangelize them, unless it was to change them over to protestants. Jefferson didn't offer money for churches or pastors, the Kaskakia asked for money to support a priest as part of the agreement and the US government agreed.

About the Jefferson Bible, Barton has claimed that a sermon delivered by Rev. William Bennet, titled “The Excellence of Christian Morality: A Sermon Preached before the Society in Scotland for Propagating Christian Knowledge, at their Anniversary meeting, June 6, 1799, inspired Jefferson to create his Bible because it spoke of delivering a simplified form of Jesus' teachings to the Indians. Here's that sermon, there is no reference to abridging the gospels and the only mention of Indians is in reference to members of the society already involved in preaching to them and the finances of those missions and related schools.

In reference to the construction of the Jefferson Bible itself, Jefferson describes the reasoning in a letter to John Adams, dated Oct. 13, 1813 (http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/jefferson_m_03.html), and doesn't mention Indians or evangelism there either.

Now then, what were Barton's sources for his claims? There are none? Hey, thats the historical revisionist creed.

Brasso
08-21-2012, 08:20
Separation of Church and State is NOT in the Constitution. It's a construct of the Supreme Court.

Until the federal government tries to force you to follow a particular religion or stop you from practicing your preferred religion, the 1st Amendment hasn't been violated. The rest is subjective opinion enforced by a 9 person panel of know-it-alls.

No prayer in school, etc, is in fact closer to a violation of the 1st Amendment than allowing it is.

Personally I don't want people leading prayer in such places because I don't want to say a prayer to a false deity. Allah,etc. But not allowing a person to pray individually or as a group where there is a mutual consensus, is a violation.

Rabbit994
08-21-2012, 17:29
Meh, work is boring and I'll bite. First part of video is full of lies so I'm not even going to continue to watching.

:42-57. He talks about first Bible printed in America. He says (quoted directly from video) "This bible was printed by US Congress in 1782" First off, Congress did not print the bible or even direct it to be printed. US Congress was merely praising Mr. Aitken for printing this Bible.

Also, First Congress of the United States Government that was founded by US Constitution did not meet till March 1789. The congress he talks about is US Congress as founded by Articles of Confederation. While interesting bit of history, any thing done by that Congress does not carry any force of law today since it was not truly US Congress as commonly consider today.

:51-56 He says quoted "The records says Quote (Him saying quote) This bible is a neat edition of holy scriptures for the use of our schools"

No where does records ever say Articles of Confederation Congress put in resolution where words "This bible is a neat edition of holy scriptions for use of our schools" (or even similar)

Here is resolution as found here: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/vc006473.jpg


Whereupon, Resolved, That the United States in Congress assembled, highly approve the pious and laudable undertaking of Mr. Aitken, as subservient to the interest of religion as well as an instance of the progress of arts in this country, and being satisfied from the above report, of his care and accuracy in the execution of the work, they recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorise him to publish this recommendation in the manner he shall think proper.

:55-1:03 He continues to talk about US Congress like it's US Congress as authorized by the Constitution.

1:03-1:10 He talks about resolution where it says "We recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States" That part is true as above resolution.

1:10-1:23 He goes on saying that US Congress (like it's current Congress as authorized by United States) and authorized it for use in our schools. As I've noted above, Congress never talked about it being used in schools and then goes in rant backed up by falsehoods above to say "NO RELIGION IN SCHOOL IS OUTRAGE"

After that, I turned it off. This dude must have graduated from Michael Moore school of film making.

High-Gear
08-21-2012, 18:26
Separation of Church and State is NOT in the Constitution. It's a construct of the Supreme Court.

Until the federal government tries to force you to follow a particular religion or stop you from practicing your preferred religion, the 1st Amendment hasn't been violated. The rest is subjective opinion enforced by a 9 person panel of know-it-alls.

No prayer in school, etc, is in fact closer to a violation of the 1st Amendment than allowing it is.

Personally I don't want people leading prayer in such places because I don't want to say a prayer to a false deity. Allah,etc. But not allowing a person to pray individually or as a group where there is a mutual consensus, is a violation.

There is no ban preventing children from praying in school, or being members of christian clubs. The ban is on teacher led prayer, and compulsory prayer. You say you dont have a problem where there is a consensus, but do you really think a youngster should be put on the spot to speak up against the rest of the class? Shure you might say you wouldnt have had a problem, but maybe not every kid is as strong and as confident as you were. That is what the constitution is for, preventing the rights of the minority from being crushed by the will of the majority. The best policy is to leave it out all together.

Brasso
08-21-2012, 19:41
I agree. But it's not technically against the constitution. In fact, to not allow is more of a violation. There is no separation of church and state insinuated in the 1st Amendment. It's about the government enforcing a national religion, which has never happened. Unless you count atheism as a religion. Then you might have an argument.

High-Gear
08-21-2012, 19:47
I agree. But it's not technically against the constitution. In fact, to not allow is more of a violation. There is no separation of church and state insinuated in the 1st Amendment. It's about the government enforcing a national religion, which has never happened. Unless you count atheism as a religion. Then you might have an argument.

The words do not appear, Hey come from Jefferson, who stole them from John Locke. The "Wall of Seperation" is a phrase used to describe the two clauses of 1A.

If an agent of the government (teacher) compelled your child to pray, that violate the 1A explicitly?

The Supreme Court applies the "Lemon" test to determine if the government's action violates the establishment Clause.


The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

Organized Prayer in a public school would fail this test, therefore violating the constitution.

Kingarthurhk
08-21-2012, 20:21
The words do not appear, Hey come from Jefferson, who stole them from John Locke. The "Wall of Seperation" is a phrase used to describe the two clauses of 1A.

If an agent of the government (teacher) compelled your child to pray, that violate the 1A explicitly?

The Supreme Court applies the "Lemon" test to determine if the government's action violates the establishment Clause.


The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

Organized Prayer in a public school would fail this test, therefore violating the constitution.

So would forcing someone to attend a Muslim prayer service in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Norske
08-21-2012, 20:22
Seems like a alot of claims without proof... But hey, thats the atheist creed.

How is the existence of "God" anything but "alot of claims without proof"?

:dunno:

NMG26
08-21-2012, 21:01
How is the existence of "God" anything but "alot of claims without proof"?

:dunno:

That is a little over Fred's head. You will not get an answer.






.

Norske
08-21-2012, 21:05
That is a little over Fred's head. You will not get an answer.






.

The only Bible I truly respect is a Beecher's Bible.

:supergrin:

NMG26
08-21-2012, 21:19
The only Bible I truly respect is a Beecher's Bible.

:supergrin:

Got me a woman I sometimes call the Oracle. We laugh when I tell her how she blows my mind!

Way better then a Bible of any sort.

.

Kingarthurhk
08-22-2012, 05:33
Got me a woman I sometimes call the Oracle. We laugh when I tell her how she blows my mind!

Way better then a Bible of any sort.

.

So, you got your wheels wrapped around the New Age? Not a safe place to be. But, it does give a lot of context to the things you say, though.

High-Gear
08-22-2012, 06:05
So would forcing someone to attend a Muslim prayer service in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Attend to observe, as a part of a larger class on understanding Muslims who are a part of the community who is served by a public department? No.

The lemmon test applies.

The secular purpose is education on customs.
And by not requiring him to participate, only observe they are not advancing a religion.

But hey that is just my opinion. We will see what the courts in Oklahoma decide.

Japle
08-22-2012, 06:19
Posted by Brasso:
There is no separation of church and state insinuated in the 1st Amendment. It's about the government enforcing a national religion, which has never happened.
Maybe youre not old enough to remember, but I am. When I was in school, students were required to stand in front of the homeroom class at the start of the school day and read a Bible verse. A different kid read every day and no one was allowed to refuse. Most kids read from Psalms.

One boy in my class had been raised in an Atheist household and tried reading some of the more absurd Bible passages in a mocking way. He got detention.

NMG26
08-22-2012, 08:56
So, you got your wheels wrapped around the New Age? Not a safe place to be. But, it does give a lot of context to the things you say, though.

I don't dabble in "New Age". I do dabble in "New Thought". They are different.

The woman is my wife of 20 years and she often speaks for God when I am in need. She helps me see things from a different perspective. I trust her more then any other human on the planet. To me she is the most godly creature on the planet.

We find God in one another. The word or God lives in each human being.

We are the proof of God. Not the book.

The Bible is a cold dead book. You can find inspiration in it, but it will never replace the word of God that lives in us.

Fred is a parrot of his sect. That is why I said the topic of "proving God" was "over his head". All he has is his sects inerpretation of a book called the Bible.



You say you are a Calvinist. I am not. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know.





.




.

Brasso
08-22-2012, 13:51
I do have God living in me. It's the same guy that wrote the Bible.

You will find out, unfortunately, how wrong you are.


A very wise man once wrote, "There is nothing new under the sun." That includes your "New Thought". It will perish.

Dennisr1977
08-22-2012, 13:53
I do have God living in me. It's the same guy that wrote the Bible.

You will find out, unfortunately, sooner than later, how wrong you are.


So god wrote the bible? You can't be serious.




Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Brasso
08-22-2012, 13:56
Just as serious as your eventual death will be.

Dennisr1977
08-22-2012, 14:07
Just as serious as your eventual death will be.

Wow, good luck with your delusions.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Brasso
08-22-2012, 14:19
Good luck in hell.

Dennisr1977
08-22-2012, 15:08
Good luck in hell.

There is no hell. Good luck believing in fairy tales passed down from generation to generation.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Bren
08-22-2012, 15:12
So are you saying he is wrong? If so, provide proof before laughing please.

I'd be saying "so what?" Why "disprove" evidence that doesn't prove a point?

Are you claiming, "government officials did it, therefore it is legal?" The reason we have the first amendment is because government officials, left unchecked, do exactly those things described in the video - printing bibles for schools, etc. Even after 200 years of the courts telling them they can't, they continue to pass pro-christian laws because they know it has no legal effect, but gets them votes from those who would support a theocracy.

NMG26
08-22-2012, 15:43
I do have God living in me. It's the same guy that wrote the Bible.

You will find out, unfortunately, how wrong you are.


The same God that was in them is in you and I.

I am not saying that they were not godly. They wrote as they were inspired. Inspiration is not untainted by religion, culture, doctrine, dogma, time, and circumstance. That is why I can still find God's word in the Bible.

Faith changes if we allow it to. The thing that keeps us from hearing God's word for the day is the dogma of yesterday. The word of God is squelched by the doctrine that you will not let go of. That is the power of faith and free will.


A very wise man once wrote, "There is nothing new under the sun." That includes your "New Thought". It will perish.

The doctrine that you hold keeps you from growing past any old thought. It keeps you stagnated. I see new things every day because I choose to go with today's inspiration. It will perish. Tomorrow will be a new day with new inspiration. That is the way it is meant to be. One thing always stays the same............the God in us.

God transcends time, religion, and culture. Much the same as love.







.

Bren
08-22-2012, 15:54
I agree. But it's not technically against the constitution. In fact, to not allow is more of a violation. There is no separation of church and state insinuated in the 1st Amendment. It's about the government enforcing a national religion, which has never happened. Unless you count atheism as a religion. Then you might have an argument.

That's not what the guy who first wrote that language said he meant by it, nor is it what legal scholars since then have thought he meant by it. You can claim it means we all need to join the rastafarians, but that don't make it so.

Thomas Jefferson said that the 1st Amendment, which was based on his writing, prior to the bill of rights, created a "wall of separation between church and state" just as christians preferred, back then.


To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

Brasso
08-24-2012, 12:17
Whatever. Nothing you posted suggested a wall of separation that is anything similar to what the SCOTUS eventually came up with. Not even close.

What we have today is a rather recent interpretation that would have the founders rolling in their graves.

Bren
08-24-2012, 14:30
Whatever. Nothing you posted suggested a wall of separation that is anything similar to what the SCOTUS eventually came up with. Not even close.

What we have today is a rather recent interpretation that would have the founders rolling in their graves.


The interpretation I see, plainly on the face of the 1st Amendment, in Jefferson's letter, etc., is simply that the government has nothing to do with religion. It should not promote any religious belief over another, nor should it do anything to inhibit any religious belief. Neither promoting nor hindering religion is exactly what the "wall of separation" means.

How can a religious person think that is a bad thing? I'll bet only those whose religion is in the majority believe that. They certainly didn't 150-200 years ago. in the early years of this country, it was the churches that wanted government to stay out of religion. It would be cynical of me to speculate on whether the desire for money and power caused them to change.

High-Gear
08-24-2012, 19:45
Whatever. Nothing you posted suggested a wall of separation that is anything similar to what the SCOTUS eventually came up with. Not even close.

What we have today is a rather recent interpretation that would have the founders rolling in their graves.

I guess your opinion is superior to those of the SCOTUS? Where did you get your Constitutional Law Degree?

NMG26
08-25-2012, 06:11
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/images/editor/separator.gif
A very wise man once wrote, "There is nothing new under the sun." That includes your "New Thought". It will perish.

Solomon may have been a little depressed. We are confined to this world and what we can and can not do in it. Some things that might have blown Solomon's mind.

Nothing new can be done when you think you have it all figured out. That is why religion is stagnant.

Interesting the op has nothing to say. That is because he is a stagnant religious spewbot. Nothing new in government until the USA. What stagnates even the great USA? The two party system. Bureaucracy. Party line parrots. Belief that there is no new thought and nothing new under the sun. Stall.




.

FCoulter
08-25-2012, 14:41
Interesting the op has nothing to say. That is because he is a stagnant religious spewbot.


.
Not at all! I just find it amusing to throw a topic I already know the answer to out there and watch people like you make ignorant donkey bottoms out of themselves.

Altaris
08-25-2012, 15:55
Not at all! I just find it amusing to throw a topic I already know the answer to out there and watch people like you make ignorant donkey bottoms out of themselves.

Ok, educate us then. What is the answer?

FCoulter
08-25-2012, 16:15
Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,Lest you also be like him.
<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; display: block; position: absolute; left: -4.8em; ">5 </sup>5: Answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest he be wise in his own eyes.

NMG26
08-25-2012, 16:22
Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,Lest you also be like him.
<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; display: block; position: absolute; left: -4.8em; ">5 </sup>5: Answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest he be wise in his own eyes.

Right.

See?

Nothing to say about the topic. Just "prove it", and "you are a fool."

Fred, you don't really talk about things. You just parrot your sectarian ideology. I will continue to point that out until you say something. Anything?




.

FCoulter
08-25-2012, 16:29
Right.

See?

Nothing to say about the topic. Just "prove it", and "you are a fool."

Fred, you don't really talk about things. You just parrot your sectarian ideology. I will continue to point that out until you say something. Anything?




.
Read post 57

Altaris
08-25-2012, 16:38
Read post 57

I read post 57.
It said you already know the answer.
I ask about the answer.
You use a bible verse to call me a fool.
I am still waiting on the answer.

NMG26
08-25-2012, 16:53
Not at all! I just find it amusing to throw a topic I already know the answer to out there and watch people like you make ignorant donkey bottoms out of themselves.

Yes sir. Post #57.

You should answer:

AM #29
Rabbit994 #31
Bren #50
Bren #52

Your answers are not answers.


So are you saying he is wrong? If so, provide proof before laughing please.

So, did you watch the video? Do you disagree with what is said in the video?
Or do you just wish to debate something you know nothing about as usual?

Well I believe in the first amendment, however this thread is about the video posted. Do you object to anything said within the video? If so, lets discuss your objection.

Seems like a alot of claims without proof... But hey, thats the atheist creed.

Delusion at its best!

Not at all! I just find it amusing to throw a topic I already know the answer to out there and watch people like you make ignorant donkey bottoms out of themselves.

Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,Lest you also be like him.
<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; display: block; position: absolute; left: -4.8em; ">5 </sup>5: Answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest he be wise in his own eyes.

Read post 57


I am looking for some substance in what you have to say. All I see is you nodding your head in agreeance with a youtube video.

Prove your point to those that challenge you.




.

Dennisr1977
08-25-2012, 16:53
I read post 57.
It said you already know the answer.
I ask about the answer.
You use a bible verse to call me a fool.
I am still waiting on the answer.

You won't get one. I've noticed religious zealots like to talk in circles.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

FCoulter
08-25-2012, 17:03
You won't get one. I've noticed religious zealots like to talk in circles.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
This doesnt seem too circular to me. Read below

<table id="post19347399" class="tborder" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%" align="center" style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><tbody><tr valign="top"><td class="alt1" id="td_post_19347399" style="font: normal normal normal 10pt/normal verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgb(245, 245, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-width: 1px; border-right-style: solid; border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,Lest you also be like him.
<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; display: block; position: absolute; left: -4.8em; ">5</sup>5: Answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest he be wise in his own eyes.
</td></tr></tbody></table>

Walt_NC
08-25-2012, 17:16
And the winner of the "Least Credible History Book in Print" goes to The Jefferson Lies by David Barton!

http://hnn.us/articles/what-least-credible-history-book-print

Dennisr1977
08-25-2012, 17:39
This doesnt seem too circular to me. Read below

<table id="post19347399" class="tborder" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%" align="center" style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><tbody><tr valign="top"><td class="alt1" id="td_post_19347399" style="font: normal normal normal 10pt/normal verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgb(245, 245, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-width: 1px; border-right-style: solid; border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,Lest you also be like him.
<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; display: block; position: absolute; left: -4.8em; ">5</sup>5: Answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest he be wise in his own eyes.
</td></tr></tbody></table>


Read what? A bunch of garble?

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Brasso
08-25-2012, 20:27
I guess your opinion is superior to those of the SCOTUS? Where did you get your Constitutional Law Degree?

Would this be the same SCOTUS that came up with Separate but Equal? I really don't care how many letters someone has behind their name. Intelligence and the memorization of facts are two different things.

Kingarthurhk
08-25-2012, 20:52
Would this be the same SCOTUS that came up with Separate but Equal? I really don't care how many letters someone has behind their name. Intelligence and the memorization of facts are two different things.

No, those people expired of old age long ago.

Animal Mother
08-25-2012, 23:12
Not at all! I just find it amusing to throw a topic I already know the answer to out there and watch people like you make ignorant donkey bottoms out of themselves.I think you mean topics you think you already know the answer to. Your complete failure to even attempt to refute any of the errors pointed out in Barton's work demonstrates a general lack of knowledge on the topic.

Animal Mother
08-25-2012, 23:13
Would this be the same SCOTUS that came up with Separate but Equal? I really don't care how many letters someone has behind their name. Intelligence and the memorization of facts are two different things.
You claim to know the minds and intent of the founders better than the members of the Supreme Court, but you've offered nothing to support that claim.

Altaris
08-26-2012, 01:30
This doesnt seem too circular to me. Read below

<table id="post19347399" class="tborder" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%" align="center" style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><tbody><tr valign="top"><td class="alt1" id="td_post_19347399" style="font: normal normal normal 10pt/normal verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgb(245, 245, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-width: 1px; border-right-style: solid; border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,Lest you also be like him.
<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; display: block; position: absolute; left: -4.8em; ">5</sup>5: Answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest he be wise in his own eyes.
</td></tr></tbody></table>


I may have had jesus turn a whole bunch of water into wine for me tonight, so I can't see straight, but I still haven't seen you give anythin resembling an answer.

Brasso
08-26-2012, 08:57
You claim to know the minds and intent of the founders better than the members of the Supreme Court, but you've offered nothing to support that claim.

Since they opened their sessions with prayer, I think I can assume a few things that the current atheists on the court, and here, don't want to admit.

I'm all for there not being officially led prayer in school, etc. No problem. But the 1st Amendment isn't about that. It means exactly what it says. The Federal government cannot enforce a national religion or stop someone from practicing a particular religion.

School prayer doesn't fall into this category until the principal is standing there with a gun to somone's head.

Kingarthurhk
08-26-2012, 08:59
Since they opened their sessions with prayer, I think I can assume a few things that the current atheists on the court, and here, don't want to admit.

I'm all for there not being officially led prayer in school, etc. No problem. But the 1st Amendment isn't about that. It means exactly what it says. The Federal government cannot enforce a national religion or stop someone from practicing a particular religion.

School prayer doesn't fall into this category until the principal is standing there with a gun to somone's head.

Acutally, most of the Supreme Court is Catholic, and they open their annaul court by attending Red Mass.

Brasso
08-26-2012, 09:00
No, those people expired of old age long ago.

Seriously? You think I don't know that?

I'm speaking of the fact that just because someone is on the Supreme Court doesn't mean they have the intelligence of Reeses Monkey.

Kingarthurhk
08-26-2012, 09:05
Seriously? You think I don't know that?

I'm speaking of the fact that just because someone is on the Supreme Court doesn't mean they have the intelligence of Reeses Monkey.

There are certainly a lot issues I disagree with them on. However, once they rule, we are stuck. Obamacare comes readily to mind.

Brasso
08-26-2012, 10:25
We're stuck with it until we get a Congress with the guts to tell them where to go.

Kingarthurhk
08-26-2012, 12:42
We're stuck with it until we get a Congress with the guts to tell them where to go.

I am doubtful that will happen. The government is good at taking away, but not giving.

Brasso
08-26-2012, 14:26
They are a bunch of liberal blowhards. They will regard what the Founding Fathers wrote regarding the 1st Amendment and then expand it beyond what it was ever intended, but they completely ignore the 2nd.

Obamacare is a prime example of illegal, unconstitutional, activist, liberal, wannabe judges.

But oh wait, am I really saying I know more about the constitution than they do? No. I just respect it more than they do.

Brasso
08-26-2012, 20:52
don't know how this post got here.

High-Gear
08-26-2012, 21:26
They are a bunch of liberal blowhards. They will regard what the Founding Fathers wrote regarding the 1st Amendment and then expand it beyond what it was ever intended, but they completely ignore the 2nd.

Obamacare is a prime example of illegal, unconstitutional, activist, liberal, wannabe judges.

But oh wait, am I really saying I know more about the constitution than they do? No. I just respect it more than they do.

How dare they uphold the individual mandate? Which was a republican idea by the way. Wait, isn't Obama-care, really repackaged Romney-care? Maybe we should call it Republicare since they authored the bills (twice) which contained the individual mandate. OOPS.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/28/individual-health-care-insurance-mandate-has-long-checkered-past/

NMG26
08-26-2012, 21:40
don't know how this post got here.
:rofl:

I hate it when that happens.

I know you are not a drinker.

:rofl:

Brasso
08-27-2012, 06:36
How dare they uphold the individual mandate? Which was a republican idea by the way. Wait, isn't Obama-care, really repackaged Romney-care? Maybe we should call it Republicare since they authored the bills (twice) which contained the individual mandate. OOPS.


How is this relevent to whether the government has the right tell us to buy something?

High-Gear
08-27-2012, 11:01
How is this relevent to whether the government has the right tell us to buy something?



I bet you are glad the govt. forces people to have car insurance when someone rear ends you at a stop light.

I hear people complain about govt. sticking their nose into our lives, but i never hear people complain when that same govt. makes sure there is not poop in our food, or that someone didn't cut corners when building our house. How dare they force me to pay taxes for a fireman to come save me?

I figured republicans would love it. Tax people who do not pay for insurance, but who will receive free medicsl care burdening the rest of us with higher rates. Make people pull themselves up by the boot straps and pay their own medical bills, rather than being freeloaders.

RC-RAMIE
08-27-2012, 11:25
I bet you are glad the govt. forces people to have car insurance when someone rear ends you at a stop light.

I hear people complain about govt. sticking their nose into our lives, but i never hear people complain when that same govt. makes sure there is not poop in our food, or that someone didn't cut corners when building our house. How dare they force me to pay taxes for a fireman to come save me?

I figured republicans would love it. Tax people who do not pay for insurance, but who will receive free medicsl care burdening the rest of us with higher rates. Make people pull themselves up by the boot straps and pay their own medical bills, rather than being freeloaders.

I actually complain about the stuff you said people never complain about, most Libertarians do.

Brasso
08-27-2012, 12:41
I bet you are glad the govt. forces people to have car insurance when someone rear ends you at a stop light.

Irrellevant. If I die of cancer because I don't have insurance, how does that affect anyone else? Besides, auto insurance is regulated by the state, not the federal government. And it's only necessary if you choose to drive on public roads.

If they want to tie hospital services to whether someone has health insurance then that's the hospitals business. The federal government still has no business enforcing it.

The rest of your arguments are just as dumb and irrellevent. You are describing services that aren't required unless a person chooses to use them. You can grow your own food. You can live outside the city limits. You aren't forced to use any of those things.

Dubble-Tapper
08-30-2012, 19:00
Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,Lest you also be like him.
<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; display: block; position: absolute; left: -4.8em; ">5 </sup>5: Answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest he be wise in his own eyes.

good dodge, :rofl:

you are horrible at debating

void *
08-31-2012, 13:05
How can a religious person think that is a bad thing? I'll bet only those whose religion is in the majority believe that. They certainly didn't 150-200 years ago. in the early years of this country, it was the churches that wanted government to stay out of religion. It would be cynical of me to speculate on whether the desire for money and power caused them to change.

I don't think it is only those whose religion is in the majority who believe that. I think there are plenty of people who think that their specific theology is the correct one, and believe it is correct to impose their specific theology on others, whether their theology is 'majority' or not.

void *
08-31-2012, 13:07
School prayer doesn't fall into this category until the principal is standing there with a gun to somone's head.


Do you really think it's impossible to have coercion without use of a firearm? (or, in fact, threat of physical force, even?)

FCoulter
08-31-2012, 14:11
good dodge, :rofl:

you are horrible at debating
Thank you,

Since debating is equal to murder.


Romans 1:<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; ">29 </sup>Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

High-Gear
08-31-2012, 14:58
Thank you,

Since debating is equal to murder.


Romans 1:<sup class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; line-height: normal; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top; ">29 </sup>Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,




How skewed is your moral compass? When you say things like this, you look stupid.:faint:

FCoulter
08-31-2012, 15:25
How skewed is your moral compass? When you say things like this, you look stupid.:faint:
Wow are you kings atheist brother?

That shot right over your head.

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 16:12
Thank you,

Since debating is equal to murder.


Romans 1:<sup style="line-height: normal; font-size: 0.75em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" class="versenum">29 </sup>Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,



Only when Fred Culter writes your bible.

Romans 1:29-30, "They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,<sup class="crossreference" value='(BG (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-27960BG))'></sup> <sup class="versenum">30 </sup>slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents."

I guess Fred doesn't want to be challenged so he rewrote it to suit himself? Debate doesn't enter into the equation.

FCoulter
08-31-2012, 16:34
Only when Fred Culter writes your bible.

Romans 1:29-30, "They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-27960BG&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>BG</a>)"></sup> <sup class="versenum">30 </sup>slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents."

I guess Fred doesn't want to be challenged so he rewrote it to suit himself? Debate doesn't enter into the equation.
Hey simple simon, just for you I quoted from the kjv.... Lol

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 16:46
Hey simple simon, just for you I quoted from the kjv.... Lol

Neat. I am not a huge fan of the KJV, considered Oxen are often tranlated as Unicorn.

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 16:49
Hey simple simon, just for you I quoted from the kjv.... Lol

Neat. I am not a huge fan of the KJV, considered Oxen are often tranlated as Unicorn.

What the KJV, doesn't jive with what you typed:

Romans 1:29-30, "being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,<sup class="footnote" value='[c (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NKJV-27960c)]'>[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-27960c)]</sup> wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, <sup class="versenum">30 </sup>backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, <sup class="versenum">31 </sup>undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,<sup class="footnote" value='[d (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NKJV-27962d)]'>[d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-27962d)]</sup> unmerciful;"

So, I don't know what you are qouting, but it isn't the KJV either.

FCoulter
08-31-2012, 17:14
Neat. I am not a huge fan of the KJV, considered Oxen are often tranlated as Unicorn.

What the KJV, doesn't jive with what you typed:

Romans 1:29-30, "being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NKJV-27960c&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>c</a>]">[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-27960c)]</sup> wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, <sup class="versenum">30 </sup>backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, <sup class="versenum">31 </sup>undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NKJV-27962d&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>d</a>]">[d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-27962d)]</sup> unmerciful;"

So, I don't know what you are qouting, but it isn't the KJV either.
You are really sad and not very with the program. However I cant help you out.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1%3A29-32&version=KJV

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=1

Here is a side by side of the kjv and niv which you seem to like.


http://www.biblestudytools.com/parallel-bible/passage.aspx?q=Romans+1&t=kjv&t2=niv

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 17:28
You are really sad and not very with the program. However I cant help you out.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1%3A29-32&version=KJV

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=1

Here is a side by side of the kjv and niv which you seem to like.


http://www.biblestudytools.com/parallel-bible/passage.aspx?q=Romans+1&t=kjv&t2=niv

I gave you bible gateway in both instances. Again, your quote does not jive with the KJV as you claim. It is not the KJV, because I quoted it directly. It also doesn't jive with the NIV. I can only conclude you provided a Culter version. Maybe muscle memory, because you are accustomed to doing so?

FCoulter
08-31-2012, 17:40
I gave you bible gateway in both instances. Again, your quote does not jive with the KJV as you claim. It is not the KJV, because I quoted it directly. It also doesn't jive with the NIV. I can only conclude you provided a Culter version. Maybe muscle memory, because you are accustomed to doing so?
Are you drunk? Or dipping into some narcotics?

If not you are just dumb.


I quoted word for word from here.


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1%3A29-32&version=KJV

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 17:43
Are you drunk? Or dipping into some narcotics?

If not you are just dumb.


I quoted word for word from here.


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1%3A29-32&version=KJV

The Anti-Jesus is strong with this one...

FCoulter
09-01-2012, 05:43
The Anti-Jesus is strong with this one...
I have to wonder if you are to lazy to ever read what is placed in front of you?

I really think this is why you just dont understand, you would rather debate something than ctually reading what the other person psted and discussing it.


No wonder vic never comes to your aide any more, it must be hard for him to admit you both are Sda's.

Altaris
09-01-2012, 08:27
King and FC....
How are you supposed to make the outrageous claim to us that the bible is the infallible word of god, when you 2 can't even agree on the wording of or meaning of a single verse. If it is the infallible word of god, shouldn't it be unarguable?

Vic Hays
09-01-2012, 09:04
King and FC....
How are you supposed to make the outrageous claim to us that the bible is the infallible word of god, when you 2 can't even agree on the wording of or meaning of a single verse. If it is the infallible word of god, shouldn't it be unarguable?

Is there a Truth? Do you love Truth or do you prefer a lie that is pleasing to you?

If there is a Truth then logically one could be right and the other wrong. They could also both be wrong.
It is up to you to discern the Truth from the written Word.

There are those who will be lost because they do not love the Truth.

II Thessalonians 2:10 And with all delusion of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
2:13 But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brothers beloved of the Lord, because God has from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

Brasso
09-01-2012, 10:29
And when He said the commandments of the Torah were forever, was He lying?


The Truth or traditions of men?

NMG26
09-01-2012, 11:16
Is there a Truth? Do you love Truth or do you prefer a lie that is pleasing to you?


And you?

You believe that your beliefs are truth. They are not. They are your beliefs that you are calling truth.

Faith, hope, and love. The greatest of these is love.

Do you know why? It is in the moment. If is what we do. How we act. "Knowledge (your truth) puffeth up; Charity (love) builds up"

Puffeth up means that you feel superior in your knowledge. You have pride that your knowledge is correct.

Your doctrines will fail you. Love never fails.




.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 14:40
I have to wonder if you are to lazy to ever read what is placed in front of you?

I really think this is why you just dont understand, you would rather debate something than ctually reading what the other person psted and discussing it.


No wonder vic never comes to your aide any more, it must be hard for him to admit you both are Sda's.

I am certain if I have caused him shame, he would tell me. But, why do speak to me with the tone of a demon? I have never known you to ever speak anything kind to anyone.

James 3:5-12, "Likewise, the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts.<sup class="crossreference" value='(I (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30325I))'></sup> Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. <sup class="versenum">6 </sup>The tongue also is a fire,<sup class="crossreference" value='(J (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30326J))'></sup> a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole body,<sup class="crossreference" value='(K (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30326K))'></sup> sets the whole course of ones life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.<sup class="crossreference" value='(L (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30326L))'></sup>
<sup class="versenum">7 </sup>All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and sea creatures are being tamed and have been tamed by mankind, <sup class="versenum">8 </sup>but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.<sup class="crossreference" value='(M (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30328M))'></sup>

<sup class="versenum">9 </sup>With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings, who have been made in Gods likeness.<sup class="crossreference" value='(N (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30329N))'></sup> <sup class="versenum">10 </sup>Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be. <sup class="versenum">11 </sup>Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? <sup class="versenum">12 </sup>My brothers and sisters, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs?<sup class="crossreference" value='(O (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30332O))'></sup> Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water."

Consider 1 Corinthians 13, "If I speak in the tongues<sup class="footnote" value='[a (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NIV-28667a)]'>[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+13&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28667a)]</sup><sup class="crossreference" value='(A (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28667A))'></sup> of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. <sup class="versenum">2 </sup>If I have the gift of prophecy<sup class="crossreference" value='(B (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668B))'></sup> and can fathom all mysteries<sup class="crossreference" value='(C (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668C))'></sup> and all knowledge,<sup class="crossreference" value='(D (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668D))'></sup> and if I have a faith<sup class="crossreference" value='(E (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668E))'></sup> that can move mountains,<sup class="crossreference" value='(F (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668F))'></sup> but do not have love, I am nothing. <sup class="versenum">3 </sup>If I give all I possess to the poor<sup class="crossreference" value='(G (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28669G))'></sup> and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,<sup class="footnote" value='[b (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NIV-28669b)]'>[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+13&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28669b)]</sup><sup class="crossreference" value='(H (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28669H))'></sup> but do not have love, I gain nothing.
<sup class="versenum">4 </sup>Love is patient,<sup class="crossreference" value='(I (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28670I))'></sup> love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.<sup class="crossreference" value='(J (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28670J))'></sup> <sup class="versenum">5 </sup>It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking,<sup class="crossreference" value='(K (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28671K))'></sup> it is not easily angered,<sup class="crossreference" value='(L (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28671L))'></sup> it keeps no record of wrongs.<sup class="crossreference" value='(M (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28671M))'></sup> <sup class="versenum">6 </sup>Love does not delight in evil<sup class="crossreference" value='(N (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28672N))'></sup> but rejoices with the truth.<sup class="crossreference" value='(O (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28672O))'></sup> <sup class="versenum">7 </sup>It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.<sup class="crossreference" value='(P (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28673P))'></sup>

<sup class="versenum">8 </sup>Love never fails. But where there are prophecies,<sup class="crossreference" value='(Q (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28674Q))'></sup> they will cease; where there are tongues,<sup class="crossreference" value='(R (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28674R))'></sup> they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. <sup class="versenum">9 </sup>For we know in part<sup class="crossreference" value='(S (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28675S))'></sup> and we prophesy in part, <sup class="versenum">10 </sup>but when completeness comes,<sup class="crossreference" value='(T (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28676T))'></sup> what is in part disappears. <sup class="versenum">11 </sup>When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood<sup class="crossreference" value='(U (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28677U))'></sup> behind me. <sup class="versenum">12 </sup>For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror;<sup class="crossreference" value='(V (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28678V))'></sup> then we shall see face to face.<sup class="crossreference" value='(W (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28678W))'></sup> Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.<sup class="crossreference" value='(X (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28678X))'></sup>

<sup class="versenum">13 </sup>And now these three remain: faith, hope and love.<sup class="crossreference" value='(Y (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28679Y))'></sup> But the greatest of these is love."

As to the youtube that you disdain a lesson for all of us:

without love we have nothing - YouTube

FCoulter
09-01-2012, 15:42
I am certain if I have caused him shame, he would tell me. But, why do speak to me with the tone of a demon? I have never known you to ever speak anything kind to anyone.

James 3:5-12, "Likewise, the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30325I&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>I</a>)"></sup> Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. <sup class="versenum">6 </sup>The tongue also is a fire,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30326J&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>J</a>)"></sup> a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole body,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30326K&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>K</a>)"></sup> sets the whole course of ones life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30326L&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>L</a>)"></sup>
<sup class="versenum">7 </sup>All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and sea creatures are being tamed and have been tamed by mankind, <sup class="versenum">8 </sup>but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30328M&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>M</a>)"></sup>

<sup class="versenum">9 </sup>With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings, who have been made in Gods likeness.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30329N&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>N</a>)"></sup> <sup class="versenum">10 </sup>Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be. <sup class="versenum">11 </sup>Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? <sup class="versenum">12 </sup>My brothers and sisters, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs?<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30332O&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>O</a>)"></sup> Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water."

Consider 1 Corinthians 13, "If I speak in the tongues<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NIV-28667a&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>a</a>]">[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+13&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28667a)]</sup><sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28667A&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>A</a>)"></sup> of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. <sup class="versenum">2 </sup>If I have the gift of prophecy<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668B&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>B</a>)"></sup> and can fathom all mysteries<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668C&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>C</a>)"></sup> and all knowledge,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668D&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>D</a>)"></sup> and if I have a faith<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668E&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>E</a>)"></sup> that can move mountains,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28668F&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>F</a>)"></sup> but do not have love, I am nothing. <sup class="versenum">3 </sup>If I give all I possess to the poor<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28669G&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>G</a>)"></sup> and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NIV-28669b&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>b</a>]">[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+13&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28669b)]</sup><sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28669H&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>H</a>)"></sup> but do not have love, I gain nothing.
<sup class="versenum">4 </sup>Love is patient,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28670I&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>I</a>)"></sup> love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28670J&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>J</a>)"></sup> <sup class="versenum">5 </sup>It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28671K&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>K</a>)"></sup> it is not easily angered,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28671L&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>L</a>)"></sup> it keeps no record of wrongs.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28671M&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>M</a>)"></sup> <sup class="versenum">6 </sup>Love does not delight in evil<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28672N&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>N</a>)"></sup> but rejoices with the truth.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28672O&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>O</a>)"></sup> <sup class="versenum">7 </sup>It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28673P&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>P</a>)"></sup>

<sup class="versenum">8 </sup>Love never fails. But where there are prophecies,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28674Q&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>Q</a>)"></sup> they will cease; where there are tongues,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28674R&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>R</a>)"></sup> they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. <sup class="versenum">9 </sup>For we know in part<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28675S&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>S</a>)"></sup> and we prophesy in part, <sup class="versenum">10 </sup>but when completeness comes,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28676T&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>T</a>)"></sup> what is in part disappears. <sup class="versenum">11 </sup>When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28677U&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>U</a>)"></sup> behind me. <sup class="versenum">12 </sup>For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror;<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28678V&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>V</a>)"></sup> then we shall see face to face.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28678W&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>W</a>)"></sup> Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28678X&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>X</a>)"></sup>

<sup class="versenum">13 </sup>And now these three remain: faith, hope and love.<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-28679Y&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>Y</a>)"></sup> But the greatest of these is love."

As to the youtube that you disdain a lesson for all of us:

without love we have nothing - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhdIPMLMDLk)



King you have me all wrong as usual. Read these verses and maybe just maybe you may understand.



"1 Timothy 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. Luke 17:3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. 2 Timothy 4:2 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. Titus 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; Titus 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee."

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 15:53
King you have me all wrong as usual. Read these verses and maybe just maybe you may understand.



"1 Timothy 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. Luke 17:3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. 2 Timothy 4:2 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. Titus 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; Titus 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee."

I have just rebuked you. But, I have done so as gently as I know how. Do you know the difference between rebuke and insult? There is a vast difference. Are you young in faith or in years? If so, I think I can understand your mistaking the two.

Proverbs 15:1-4, "A gentle answer<sup class="crossreference" value='(A (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16809A))'></sup> turns away wrath,<sup class="crossreference" value='(B (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16809B))'></sup>
but a harsh word stirs up anger.
<sup class="versenum">2 </sup>The tongue of the wise adorns knowledge,<sup class="crossreference" value='(C (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16810C))'></sup>
but the mouth of the fool gushes folly.<sup class="crossreference" value='(D (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16810D))'></sup>


<sup class="versenum">3 </sup>The eyes<sup class="crossreference" value='(E (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16811E))'></sup> of the Lord are everywhere,<sup class="crossreference" value='(F (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16811F))'></sup>
keeping watch on the wicked and the good.<sup class="crossreference" value='(G (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16811G))'></sup>


<sup class="versenum">4 </sup>The soothing tongue<sup class="crossreference" value='(H (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16812H))'></sup> is a tree of life,<sup class="crossreference" value='(I (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16812I))'></sup>
but a perverse tongue crushes the spirit."

1 Timothy 5:1, "Do not rebuke an older man<sup class="crossreference" value='(A (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-29765A))'></sup> harshly,<sup class="crossreference" value='(B (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-29765B))'></sup> but exhort him as if he were your father. Treat younger men<sup class="crossreference" value='(C (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-29765C))'></sup> as brothers, <sup class="versenum">2 </sup>older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity."



<sup class="crossreference" value='(J (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-16812J))'></sup>

Brasso
09-01-2012, 17:34
Proverbs 15:1-4, "A gentle answer turns away wrath,
but a harsh word stirs up anger.
2 The tongue of the wise adorns knowledge,
but the mouth of the fool gushes folly.


3 The eyes of the Lord are everywhere,
keeping watch on the wicked and the good.


4 The soothing tongue is a tree of life,
but a perverse tongue crushes the spirit."

Sorry, but that's Old Testament. It's been fulfilled and no longer has any meaning to you.

You can't go around quoting passages from a book you don't believe in.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 17:50
Sorry, but that's Old Testament. It's been fulfilled and no longer has any meaning to you.

You can't go around quoting passages from a book you don't believe in.

That is one of the most bizarre things someone has said to me in awhile. If you knew those of us who belong to the SDA denomiation, we believe that whole of scripture is inspired. Though, I suspect your motive is to debate me once again about keeping ceremonial feasts yet again.

Do you trully know what I believe?

Jeremiah 17:9-10, "The heart<sup class="crossreference" value='(V (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19367V))'></sup> is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it?
<sup class="versenum">10 </sup>I the Lord search the heart<sup class="crossreference" value='(W (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19368W))'></sup>
and examine the mind,<sup class="crossreference" value='(X (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19368X))'></sup>
to reward<sup class="crossreference" value='(Y (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19368Y))'></sup> each person according to their conduct,
according to what their deeds deserve.

Can you know me like the Almigthy?

FCoulter
09-01-2012, 17:54
That is one of the most bizarre things someone has said to me in awhile. If you knew those of us who belong to the SDA denomiation, we believe that whole of scripture is inspired. Though, I suspect your motive is to debate me once again about keeping ceremonial feasts yet again.

Do you trully know what I believe?

Jeremiah 17:9-10, "The heart<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19367V&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>V</a>)"></sup> is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it?
<sup class="versenum">10 </sup>I the Lord search the heart<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19368W&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>W</a>)"></sup>
and examine the mind,<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19368X&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>X</a>)"></sup>
to reward<sup class="crossreference" value="(<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19368Y&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>Y</a>)"></sup> each person according to their conduct,
according to what their deeds deserve.

Can you know me like the Almigthy?
I have a strong feeling the Almighty will say to,

Depart from Me I never knew you, you that teach lawlessness

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 17:55
I have a strong feeling the Almighty will say to,

Depart from Me I never knew you, you that teach lawlessness

To which of us are you referring? May the Lord judge between you and I.

FCoulter
09-01-2012, 18:31
To which of us are you referring? May the Lord judge between you and I.
You king are the one that clearly, teach Gods laws His Sabbaths are not be kept... So you are whom I was referring too.

Vic Hays
09-01-2012, 20:44
And when He said the commandments of the Torah were forever, was He lying?


The Truth or traditions of men?

Which commandments who and to whom were they speaking?

The New Testament tells us that the ordinances were temporary.

Was Paul lying?

FCoulter
09-01-2012, 23:06
Neat. I am not a huge fan of the KJV, considered Oxen are often tranlated as Unicorn.

What the KJV, doesn't jive with what you typed:

Romans 1:29-30, "being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NKJV-27960c&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>c</a>]">[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-27960c)]</sup> wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, <sup class="versenum">30 </sup>backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, <sup class="versenum">31 </sup>undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href=&quot;http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NKJV-27962d&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>d</a>]">[d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-27962d)]</sup> unmerciful;"

So, I don't know what you are qouting, but it isn't the KJV either.
I was bored so I thought I would show you the error of your ways.

You made an issue stating I wasnt quoting the KJV, and that you were.


Well kingie, what you actually posted was from the NKJV,


A huge difference, actually a totally different translation all together, it is almost as bad as the NIV.


Anyways, next time you choose to make a big deal out of something silly, get your facts straight. It doesnt help your cause any.

Dubble-Tapper
09-02-2012, 11:02
Is there a Truth? Do you love Truth or do you prefer a lie that is pleasing to you?

:

isnt that ironic :rofl:

Brasso
09-02-2012, 14:59
Which commandments who and to whom were they speaking?

The New Testament tells us that the ordinances were temporary.

Was Paul lying?


A much better question, considering God said ALL of them were FOREVER, is do you understand Paul? I'd say no.

By your reasoning either God or Paul is a liar. I know where my money is.

Vic Hays
09-02-2012, 15:42
A much better question, considering God said ALL of them were FOREVER, is do you understand Paul? I'd say no.

By your reasoning either God or Paul is a liar. I know where my money is.

So, no answer, just dance around the question of who said that?

Brasso said so?

Post 114 has the question.

What is your answer on what Paul said about the temporary nature of the book of law of Moses?

Galatians 3:19 Why then serves the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

NMG26
09-02-2012, 16:01
Is there a Truth? Do you love Truth or do you prefer a lie that is pleasing to you?



Paloma Faith - Do You Want the Truth or Something Beautiful ( Official Video ) - YouTube

FCoulter
09-02-2012, 16:39
Its Just crazy how someone can be so blind to say we are to keep the weekly Sabbath and reject Gods other Sabbaths, when they are all mentioned together in the Bible to be kept forever.

Brasso
09-04-2012, 07:40
Galatians 3:19 Why then serves the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.


Obviously you have a problem if you believe this is about the Torah. You have to decide whether you believe God or the traditions of men concerning what this passage means. It's your choice.

Deu_30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Exo_12:49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.
Lev_7:7 As the sin offering is, so is the trespass offering: there is one law for them: the priest that maketh atonement therewith shall have it.
Lev_24:22 Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God.
Num_15:16 One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you.
Num_15:29 Ye shall have one law for him that sinneth through ignorance, both for him that is born among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them.

Lev_23:14 And ye shall eat neither bread, nor parched corn, nor green ears, until the selfsame day that ye have brought an offering unto your God: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.
Lev_23:21 And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day, that it may be an holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein: it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings throughout your generations.
Lev_23:31 Ye shall do no manner of work: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.
Lev_23:41 And ye shall keep it a feast unto the LORD seven days in the year. It shall be a statute for ever in your generations: ye shall celebrate it in the seventh month.

Deu_4:40 Thou shalt keep therefore his statutes, and his commandments, which I command thee this day, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which the LORD thy God giveth thee, for ever.

Deu_5:29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!

Deu_12:28 Observe and hear all these words which I command thee, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee for ever, when thou doest that which is good and right in the sight of the LORD thy God.


It's not that hard.