GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-01-2012, 13:12   #126
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,552
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
I also looked up "Doctors without Borders" and "Physicians without Borders" and under "who can participate".......................... medical and non-medical professionals only. Not a word about believers or non-believers. Are you now twisting Grape? I was beginning to have "faith" in you !
What am I twisting? Show me where I claim or even suggest that participation was in any way tied to belief or non-belief? I only said that, as an organization, they are irreligious. Irreligious only means without regard to religion -- that is not to say anti-religious.

From their About Us page, they operate "independently of any political, military, or religious agendas".

That sounds pretty irreligious, so what have I twisted?

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 13:28   #127
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schabesbert View Post
You've got to be very careful - you could easily go negative.

Awww again... insulting me doesn't substantiate your position. Even you have to admit snowbird is nuts.

Quote:
Serious question: doesn't charitable giving go against the Darwinian philosophy? If "survival of the fittest" is the only thing that improves a species, then isn't it going against our species to not allow natural selection to cull the herd?
Well I'm not a scientist but isn't Darwinism a description of natural selection? It isn't a philosophy it's an explanation of a natural process. One that is observed daily. However I would tend to think that our natural instinct to help the weaker among us IS our strength as a species. Think about it... we have no claws, no fangs, no natural armor, no wings to escape. As an animal we're kinda easy pickins. When man was still trekking through the plains of Africa with only basic knowledge and stone tool skills it was our tendency to cooperate and band together that allowed us to survive. That we take care of the weaker of us. If man was a loner as a creature we'd have never made it. There are animals out there with daggers for teeth that would love to make a snack of us. It was our community mentality that gave us strength. And we aren't the only animal that exhibits this behavior. Elephants are very similar. They will rally around a weaker member of the group and defend them. The stronger more battle ready members of the herd will often charge out in front to defend the weaker of the group. And when one of their family falls they've shown an actual process of mourning for their lost loved one. Alone they would be much easier prey. Without their sense of community they'd not have survived.

However I do wonder sometimes if we are messing up the natural order of things. Because you're right... stupid people are breeding at amazing rates... people that if left to their own devices would most like starve to death without help. Yet they are being "floated" and given time to introduce their lesser genetic material back into the gene pool. While those of us who are smarter and more capable are very decisive and deliberate in our procreative endeavors and producing fewer offspring. Another reason why there is a positive side to abortion. In the animal kingdom most often everyone does their part to survive. We've reached a point where some of our species are actually holding us back.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 13:49   #128
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
lol, checkmate............call for more help
I've never requested support from anyone in this thread. Unlike you did here...

Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
Some of the "gang" needs to jump in......... he's making you look bad....................
Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
I went through this junk point by point with you.
No you didn't. Stating it over and over won't make it true.


Quote:
Then twist and squirm, you contradicted yourself numerous times.
No I didn't. Wanting and wishing it to be so won't help you.

Quote:
I have had enough of your foolishness.
Having your butt stomped in a debate over and over must be tiring for you. But no one is asking you to keep coming back for more. You can just quit and move on. I am relentless. I won't stop.


Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
Oh by the way.................................


Is Bill Gates an atheist?



Answer:
It's not entirely known, but probably agnostic. Agnostic people are unsure of the existence of a god. Atheists lack the belief of any gods.
Agnostics have no belief in God either. Their position is that such information cannot be known and therefore no one can truly know for sure. A-gnostic... to have no knowledge of. Every Agnostic is Atheist to some degree and every Atheist is Agnostic to some degree. They're really just labels. In either case both positions reject current religions. Atheists because there is no evidence to support a belief in such a creature as God and Agnostics because the existence of God is unknowable... even to the prophets in the bible.

Swing and miss... try again sweetie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
I also looked up "Doctors without Borders" and "Physicians without Borders" and under "who can participate".......................... medical and non-medical professionals only. Not a word about believers or non-believers.
Right... it's non-religious meaning it makes no affirmation of religion. I think I'm beginning to see why you're having such a hard time understanding any of this. You think in order for something to be Atheistic or Non-Religious that it must be actively attacking religion. This would be the best reason why you show such a fantastic level of ignorance about things. You have a lack of belief in Zeus correct? Do you spend your time and energy attacking zeus or do you just simply dismiss the concept and not let it even occur to you at all? These organizations and people simply have no religious intent. That's it... the end. They're not anti-religious... just non-religious. There is a difference. I for example am Anti-Religious. I seek to destroy religion in whatever capacity I can.

Quote:
Are you now twisting Grape? I was beginning to have "faith" in you !
Dude, I wished you could see how pathetic you look when you think you have this "AH HA!" moment where you have someone pinned. In reality you're just embarrassing yourself. I admire your spunk and willingness to keep swinging but it's just pathetic. You need to understand... you are not smarter than AG... it's just that simple.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 14:05   #129
scccdoc
Senior Member
 
scccdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtificialGrape View Post
scccdoc,
Here you appear to be establishing your point regarding organizations.

Atheism is not an organization in the sense that the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) is an organization. What an individual atheist does, or even a group of atheists do, does not represent everybody under the umbrella of atheism any more than DignityUSA (a group of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Catholics) represents the RCC.

Here your emphasis is again on atheist organizations.




I've already given the example of Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. We have no holy book telling us to do it, and yet many of us do -- I would never be so bold to speak for everybody and claim "WE DO IT".

By the way, Schabesbert's citation refutes your "WE DO IT" claim, so you may want to tone down your absolute statements.


Documented, like card-carrying atheists? I'm not sure, because I've been waiting for my card for years, but yes, Gates, Buffet and Zuckerberg have all spoken about their lack of belief.


When there are already organizations with the infrastructure such as the Red Cross, why would it be prudent to form an Atheist Relief Fund? Why not just support an organization that is already in place?

Here you reiterate that the question was concerning charities.




While Schabesbert's citation was relevant to the general discussion of Christian vs non-believer altruism, the article was entirely about how charitable are Christian (primarily worship service attending) vs. agnostic/atheist individuals. It did nothing to advance your position regarding organizations, so certainly no nail in the coffin in that regard.

However, as stated earlier, I'm willing to accept the numbers at face value.



Effective charties already exist, and I support them. I don't have the necessary time, money or knowledge to start my own charity. My resources are more effective supporting existing charities. What would be the benefit, other than perhaps to my ego, of forming a new charity rather than supporting ones that exist?



Why what? Why is it good, or why do they give?


As pointed out above Schabesbert's post does not advance your argument regarding organizations. Gates is an atheist. Gates formed a charitable foundation. Gates has donated around $30 billion with the intent of donating 95% of his wealth. The foundation does not have any specific anti-religion agenda. I still don't know what you want.

I indicate that I'm not trying to compete.


You claim that you're also not competing.


But if you scroll up through the red text above it is clear that you're framing a competition.



No, I'm not claiming that, nor did I suggest that. Christians certainly support charities with a Christian mission, and charities without such a mission.

Again, I'm not trying to be dense, I'm sincerely trying to understand your position, so if you're interested in having your position understood could you clarify if you would like to see more of (a) or (b) or (c) or (d) below, or something different if those are missing your point.

There are (a) atheists who form irreligious charities (Bill Gates and his foundation). There are (b) atheists who contribute to irreligious charities (benefactors of Doctors without Borders or Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation). There are (c) atheists who organize atheist organizations (Richard Dawkins and his foundation). There are (d) atheists who contribute to atheist organizations (benefactors of Richard Dawkins Foundation or Freedom from Religion Foundation for example).

thanks,
-ArtificialGrape
When I asked 36, he responded no,or so it seemed, to organized atheist charities. I took him at his word (dumb thing to do).

So the question begs (in my mind), why isn't there atheist charitable organizations?He gave me a bologna answer. I believe Dawkins Foundation does now, but, look at the previous post about Gates and "Doctors without Borders. Nothing about atheists. Couple that with Schabesbert's post, and there is an imbalance. Why? People should help people, but atheist are not "organized", seems if your belief is so strong, you would put more effort into spreading your beliefs.

Now, the competition thing........ 36 proclaims we (Christians) donate to buy our way into eternity, I say we do it because our God tells us we should and we do it abundantly from our hearts. His posts are filled with contradictions and yes, I am tired of his attitude. The competition, if you want to call it that, was to prove him wrong. And you helped by showing indeed there are some atheist who at least head a charity. The important thing here is that people in need should be helped. You have indicated that you do and I am sincerely happy. 36 accused Christians and me for helping for the wrong reasons, even questions my handling of finances in one ministry in which I'm involved. I challenged him and he double talked and took the same accusatory attitude he takes with so many. I give money above my tithe and donate several hours each week to helping locals. We have several great ministries in my little church. If I speak beyond what I have told you, I'll be accused of bragging. 36 wants to see a leg grow back to prove God exist, I haven't seen that, but I know and have served in the mission fields of Honduras with a woman who was given less than 6 months to live due to pancreatic cancer. WE prayed over her and she is still cancer free after 7 years.The doctors were amazed. I know that won't convert you, but I see stuff like this all the time.

Sorry for rambling, but have been back and forth this afternoon.
scccdoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 14:18   #130
scccdoc
Senior Member
 
scccdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock36shooter View Post
I've never requested support from anyone in this thread. Unlike you did here...





No you didn't. Stating it over and over won't make it true.




No I didn't. Wanting and wishing it to be so won't help you.



Having your butt stomped in a debate over and over must be tiring for you. But no one is asking you to keep coming back for more. You can just quit and move on. I am relentless. I won't stop.




Agnostics have no belief in God either. Their position is that such information cannot be known and therefore no one can truly know for sure. A-gnostic... to have no knowledge of. Every Agnostic is Atheist to some degree and every Atheist is Agnostic to some degree. They're really just labels. In either case both positions reject current religions. Atheists because there is no evidence to support a belief in such a creature as God and Agnostics because the existence of God is unknowable... even to the prophets in the bible.

Swing and miss... try again sweetie.



Right... it's non-religious meaning it makes no affirmation of religion. I think I'm beginning to see why you're having such a hard time understanding any of this. You think in order for something to be Atheistic or Non-Religious that it must be actively attacking religion. This would be the best reason why you show such a fantastic level of ignorance about things. You have a lack of belief in Zeus correct? Do you spend your time and energy attacking zeus or do you just simply dismiss the concept and not let it even occur to you at all? These organizations and people simply have no religious intent. That's it... the end. They're not anti-religious... just non-religious. There is a difference. I for example am Anti-Religious. I seek to destroy religion in whatever capacity I can.



Dude, I wished you could see how pathetic you look when you think you have this "AH HA!" moment where you have someone pinned. In reality you're just embarrassing yourself. I admire your spunk and willingness to keep swinging but it's just pathetic. You need to understand... you are not smarter than AG... it's just that simple.
This is a war of attrition. The first parts of your posts are lies.
Are atheists and agnostics the same group, nope

No I don't believe in Zeus, you don't believe in God. I don't attack belief in Zeus but you attack believers in God...........hmmmmmmmmmmm

Not anti-religious..........the question was atheist vs Christian, try to keep up.

You seek to destroy? Yeah, I read that about that in the Bible, but wait! You said atheist have no agenda, remember? Isn't that an agenda? Tsk,Tsk,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, caught again
scccdoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 14:24   #131
scccdoc
Senior Member
 
scccdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtificialGrape View Post
What am I twisting? Show me where I claim or even suggest that participation was in any way tied to belief or non-belief? I only said that, as an organization, they are irreligious. Irreligious only means without regard to religion -- that is not to say anti-religious.

From their About Us page, they operate "independently of any political, military, or religious agendas".

That sounds pretty irreligious, so what have I twisted?

-ArtificialGrape
So "The Rotary Club" is a group you would put on your list with Dawkins? How about Sertoma? Man, you could really fill a list if you wanted ........... Guess we Christians are outnumbered and out given

Last edited by scccdoc; 11-01-2012 at 14:39..
scccdoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 14:50   #132
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,552
Blog Entries: 1
I think that my participation on this topic has run its course, so I'll depart on some common ground.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
The important thing here is that people in need should be helped.
I agree.

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 14:57   #133
Sarge1400
Senior Member
 
Sarge1400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 841
Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
No I don't believe in Zeus, you don't believe in God. I don't attack belief in Zeus but you attack believers in God...........hmmmmmmmmmmm
If those who believed in zeus were trying to push their agenda through legislation, you can bet your ass you'd be attacking them.
Sarge1400 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 17:11   #134
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by scccdoc View Post
This is a war of attrition.
No it's not. You're clearly getting your ass kicked.

Quote:
The first parts of your posts are lies.
No they weren't. You claim that people twist scripture without any evidence to support your claim. You just say it and then declare checkmate. You are a child. Please tell me you're 20. You have to be 20... no adult man debates this way. Have you suffered some kind of head trauma or had perhaps brain surgery? If so I'm going to feel bad for kicking you around the block so much.

Quote:
Are atheists and agnostics the same group, nope
I never said they were. Can you not read? Seriously? I really starting to feel like I've unintentionally picked a fight with a special needs individual.

Quote:
No I don't believe in Zeus, you don't believe in God. I don't attack belief in Zeus but you attack believers in God...........hmmmmmmmmmmm
Again your reading comprehension is seriously lacking. I said point blank that I myself AM anti-religious. I do intend to dismantle religion to the best of my abilities. I said that point blank. And my point was that that isn't necessarily an aspect of being non-religious... it is an aspect of being anti-religious.

Quote:
Not anti-religious..........the question was atheist vs Christian, try to keep up.
No one mentioned anti-religious charities. But you seem to be under the false impression that a non-religious charity must be anti-religious. You are wrong.

Quote:
You seek to destroy? Yeah, I read that about that in the Bible, but wait! You said atheist have no agenda, remember? Isn't that an agenda? Tsk,Tsk,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, caught again
Wow, do you need to take a nap or your meds or something? Again, for about the 10th time... Dismantling religion is MY agenda... Mine... Glock36shooter... Me... M'kay? It is not the agenda of Atheism itself. Atheism has no set agenda it is simply a word that describes someone without a belief in God. I myself am Anti-Religious. That is MY agenda. Do you understand now? Am I getting through to you? Do you need an adult? Are you okay?
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 19:13   #135
PrecisionRifleman
Senior Member
 
PrecisionRifleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,280
You're right Jesus did not abolish the mosaic law, but Paul did...or should I say Saul.
__________________
PrecisionRifleman

G20SF
Gen4 G23

Last edited by PrecisionRifleman; 11-01-2012 at 19:13..
PrecisionRifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 19:32   #136
PrecisionRifleman
Senior Member
 
PrecisionRifleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,280
[quote=scccdoc;19567307]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
So, all the ugliness of old testament mosaic law is still in full effect for all you christians out there.[/QUOTE

Mosaic Law is a moral guide for life. It does not give one salvation.
Salvation eh? How does one get salvation? The very concept of salvation by grace is completely illogical and flawed. If we examine the definition of payment (Christian idea that Jesus PAID for your sins), and forgiveness we can see that these two concepts are not reconcilable. Either you are forgiven and there is no atonement or you are not forgiven and there is atonement. Furthermore if the concept of forgiveness by salvation through grace were true, then what are Christians judged by on the day of judgement?

Another question, who do Christians pray to? Jesus or God. Most will say Jesus in my experience, and their rational is that you must go through Jesus because God is too pure for us. My question is why does God the all powerful need an intercessor? He doesn't, and to say that he does denies the power of God almighty. Jesus was a man, he was tempted, and he never not a single time claimed to be God. He was so humble that he wouldn't allow another to even call him good (he said why does thou call me good, only the father is good). Please point to a single scripture in the Bible where Jesus himself says I am God almighty, worship me. Sorry it's not there. Jesus was a man, and the concept of the trinity and salvation through grace was not from Jesus, but from Saul/Paul.
__________________
PrecisionRifleman

G20SF
Gen4 G23

Last edited by PrecisionRifleman; 11-01-2012 at 19:35..
PrecisionRifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 23:48   #137
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrecisionRifleman View Post
You're right Jesus did not abolish the mosaic law, but Paul did...or should I say Saul.
Would you please share your take on this? From what perspective are you getting that Jesus did not abolish the law? I agree with you. But I'd like to read your take on it.

Do you feel that Jesus fulfilled the law in that he followed every aspect of it correctly and to the letter. It would seem he did not.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 08:13   #138
PrecisionRifleman
Senior Member
 
PrecisionRifleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock36shooter View Post
Would you please share your take on this? From what perspective are you getting that Jesus did not abolish the law? I agree with you. But I'd like to read your take on it.

Do you feel that Jesus fulfilled the law in that he followed every aspect of it correctly and to the letter. It would seem he did not.
Good question. My take is that anything written is suspect because the vast majority of what was written is not from Jesus but from people who had at best 3rd hand account on any given topic. So what is written is 1 inaccurate, 2 poorly translated, or 3 a complete interpolation. So if we base our perspective of Jesus on what Jesus himself said we can see that he followed the law of the profits before him. I don't see anything that was said directly from Jesus that abolishes previous laws (Mosaic).

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
PrecisionRifleman

G20SF
Gen4 G23
PrecisionRifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 08:52   #139
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrecisionRifleman View Post
Good question. My take is that anything written is suspect because the vast majority of what was written is not from Jesus but from people who had at best 3rd hand account on any given topic. So what is written is 1 inaccurate, 2 poorly translated, or 3 a complete interpolation. So if we base our perspective of Jesus on what Jesus himself said we can see that he followed the law of the profits before him. I don't see anything that was said directly from Jesus that abolishes previous laws (Mosaic).

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
Well the argument put forth here has been that Jesus said the law would remain until all was fulfilled and that he fulfilled the law by never breaking with it once.

Now we know this not to be true because Jesus disregarded the law more than once in favor of his own ideology of love and peace.

There are also some that say his sacrifice was the fulfillment. When these laws were written they were never meant to be removed or replaced with a new covenant. Schabasbert (I hope I spelled it right) seems to speak much about the "Spirit" of the law yet I think he forgets that those who established this covenant NEVER intended for it to go away... and that is the true spirit of the law. It was to bind man to God for all time. THAT was the spirit of it.

Last edited by Glock36shooter; 11-02-2012 at 08:52..
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 09:40   #140
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,392


If nothing else, this thread has shown that people can read the same words and come up with a variety of different interpretations none of which are consistent with each other. Thusly, how can one assume that this is the divine word of god? Shouldn't it be incorruptible? Shouldn't god (of all beings) be able to convey what he wants of us in a manner that is clear and concise and not easily misunderstood?

Some theist will say that it is and it's the other interpretations that are corrupt or the result of evil forces at work trying to lead people astray. I would remind that person that they have no more proof that their interpretation is correct than anyone else. You believe your opinion because you feel that it is right (and so does everyone else).
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."

Last edited by Geko45; 11-02-2012 at 09:42..
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 09:54   #141
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
If nothing else, this thread has shown that people can read the same words and come up with a variety of different interpretations none of which are consistent with each other. Thusly, how can one assume that this is the divine word of god? Shouldn't it be incorruptible? Shouldn't god (of all beings) be able to convey what he wants of us in a manner that is clear and concise and not easily misunderstood?

Some theist will say that it is and it's the other interpretations that are corrupt or the result of evil forces at work trying to lead people astray. I would remind that person that they have no more proof that their interpretation is correct than anyone else. You believe your opinion because you feel that it is right (and so does everyone else).
The one defense of Christ's fulfillment that I always find funny is "He has to have fulfilled it... otherwise his sacrifice wouldn't mean anything and we wouldn't be saved." As if his death having meaning is an absolute fact therefore the other must be true. It's another example of assuming your conclusion and reasoning from their to enforce it.

Last edited by Glock36shooter; 11-02-2012 at 09:55..
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 10:23   #142
PrecisionRifleman
Senior Member
 
PrecisionRifleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock36shooter View Post
Well the argument put forth here has been that Jesus said the law would remain until all was fulfilled and that he fulfilled the law by never breaking with it once.

Now we know this not to be true because Jesus disregarded the law more than once in favor of his own ideology of love and peace.

There are also some that say his sacrifice was the fulfillment. When these laws were written they were never meant to be removed or replaced with a new covenant. Schabasbert (I hope I spelled it right) seems to speak much about the "Spirit" of the law yet I think he forgets that those who established this covenant NEVER intended for it to go away... and that is the true spirit of the law. It was to bind man to God for all time. THAT was the spirit of it.
I agree that the law is to bind us to God for all time. Reference to Scripture stating otherwise was not spoken directly from Jesus, and those speaking on account of what Jesus said is completely suspect. To that point there is very little written in the Bible that was spoken directly from Jesus. This can easily be noticed when reading or looking through a Bible with Jesus's direct word highlighted in red. I see nothing that Jesus said directly that indicates abolishment of the Mosaic laws.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
PrecisionRifleman

G20SF
Gen4 G23
PrecisionRifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 10:24   #143
PrecisionRifleman
Senior Member
 
PrecisionRifleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,280
deleted - double post
__________________
PrecisionRifleman

G20SF
Gen4 G23

Last edited by PrecisionRifleman; 11-02-2012 at 10:27..
PrecisionRifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 17:48   #144
PrecisionRifleman
Senior Member
 
PrecisionRifleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock36shooter View Post
Awww again... insulting me doesn't substantiate your position. Even you have to admit snowbird is nuts.

__________________
PrecisionRifleman

G20SF
Gen4 G23
PrecisionRifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 10:53   #145
snowbird
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: land of the free
Posts: 3,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrecisionRifleman View Post
Giving a 'perfect ten' to the bashing of Christianity (which gave us American freedom) and, implicitly, to the promotion of Islam (which gives us war, slavery, and blind hatred -today's total of deadly Muslim attacks since 9/11 has reached 19,862), hmmmm...let's look at some of the company you keep.

A British Muslim writer, Iqbal Siddiqui, is hailing the Mohammed-video riots, and claiming that Muslims are winning the war against freedom of speech. OTOH, a Christian writer, long ago, wrote, "Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?" (Galatians 4:16)

So congratulations, dhimmis! You're doing such a bang-up job of deconstructing Christian Western freedom.
__________________
"Speak softly and carry a big stick"
-T. Roosevelt, President 1901-09, US soldier, martial artist, hiker, agriculteral worker, and conservationist, among other things.

Last edited by snowbird; 11-03-2012 at 10:54..
snowbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 13:25   #146
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowbird View Post
Giving a 'perfect ten' to the bashing of Christianity (which gave us American freedom) and, implicitly, to the promotion of Islam (which gives us war, slavery, and blind hatred -today's total of deadly Muslim attacks since 9/11 has reached 19,862), hmmmm...let's look at some of the company you keep.
How many million Native Americans did the Christians slaughter giving us that "American Freedom". You guys are no better. You see something you want and you take it... regardless of how many folks you gotta kill.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 14:06   #147
Gunhaver
the wrong hands
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,736
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock36shooter View Post
How many million Native Americans did the Christians slaughter giving us that "American Freedom". You guys are no better. You see something you want and you take it... regardless of how many folks you gotta kill.

I think he meant the bashing of Christianity gave us American freedom. A much more accurate statement and this broken clock has got to find his nut at least once today.
Gunhaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 14:39   #148
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunhaver View Post
I think he meant the bashing of Christianity gave us American freedom. A much more accurate statement and this broken clock has got to find his nut at least once today.
I can't imagine a universe where snowbird would think bashing christianity gave us American Freedom.

I read it as him saying bashing christianity (christianity being what gave us american freedom) is supporting Islam. Sounds closer to what he spews non stop in here.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 20:21   #149
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,392


Quote:
Originally Posted by snowbird View Post
hmmmm...let's look at some of the company you keep.
Snowbird, you just can't put any two names together in a post and claim that the association is valid.
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 20:28   #150
PrecisionRifleman
Senior Member
 
PrecisionRifleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowbird View Post
Giving a 'perfect ten' to the bashing of Christianity (which gave us American freedom) and, implicitly, to the promotion of Islam (which gives us war, slavery, and blind hatred -today's total of deadly Muslim attacks since 9/11 has reached 19,862), hmmmm...let's look at some of the company you keep.

A British Muslim writer, Iqbal Siddiqui, is hailing the Mohammed-video riots, and claiming that Muslims are winning the war against freedom of speech. OTOH, a Christian writer, long ago, wrote, "Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?" (Galatians 4:16)

So congratulations, dhimmis! You're doing such a bang-up job of deconstructing Christian Western freedom.
Christianity did NOT give us American freedom. I'm not sure where you are getting this idea, but it's wrong. Further more my perfect 10 was in regards to the comment made towards you. You are just as radical as a radical Muslim except the shoe is on the other foot.
__________________
PrecisionRifleman

G20SF
Gen4 G23

Last edited by PrecisionRifleman; 11-03-2012 at 20:29..
PrecisionRifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:04.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 959
315 Members
644 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42