Latest activity

Aryeh Jay · 2025-12-10T04:26:04-0600

I am pleased to see so many people enjoy having others doing the killing for them who may face trials in the future while they stay safe and sound at home.

Aryeh Jay · 2025-12-10T04:18:54-0600

Great, another American city will now turn into a hotbed of illegal drug activity, crime, and debauchery. I give it a week before communist Cuban flags are flying everywhere and Spanish in spoken openly in the streets and shops. Good job Democrats.

A2SG · 2025-12-10T04:15:41-0600

Oompa Loompa said:
Deflection? I think i have been pretty clear whwre I stand. Yes. I want to see all these murdering rapist dead. The world would be a much better place if they all just had a heart attack. Whether by bomb in international waters, or by an executioner after months of trials and legal processes. The end is still the same, but the former is much quicker and cheaper. What I don't get is why you are trying to play "gotcha" when I am saying, "Darn right! Blow the trash into fish chum. Give them the same compassion, empathy, and consideration that they give to their customers who die from their product. Then let God figure out the rest." Now I hope you are done doing whoever it was you are trying to do. But from my perspective, it appeard to be a lot of nonsensical and emotional rantings about things you do not understand. Have I made myself clear, or do you wish to continue your creepy rants?

So the ends justify the means, is that the contention? It doesn't matter what laws are broken, what war crimes are committed, so long as the goal, death to those suspected of running drugs, is achieved?

I'm guessing the principle of the presumption of innocence has been abandoned now? Gee, and it was touted so strongly back when Donald Trump was on trial for criminal fraud.

-- A2SG, almost as if people believed in that sort of thing.....

samaus123456789 · 2025-12-10T04:14:03-0600

I didn't realise I posted something like this already :doh:

Studyman · 2025-12-10T04:05:47-0600

Dan1988 said:
That's right I don't need Jesus or His warnings, because I already have Him. I would only need Him if I didn't already have Him. I don't need Peters teachings, because I already know what He taught.

I was simply pointing out that Peter and Jesus' teaches that God gives His Spirit to those who obey Him. You know this you say, but still teach a different gospel.

I think Jesus warned His People not to do such things.

Dan1988 said:
I'm very much aware of the fact that the majority o professing Christians reject the awful truth of the gospel. And I already know they are in for a horrible shock on judgement day.

This would be those who called Jesus Lord, Lord, and were "very much aware" of what Jesus and Peter taught, but lived by another gospel, Yes?

Dan1988 said:
I'm not sure what you mean by saying "I still need Jesus and His instructions and warnings". I don't know of anyone who claimed we no longer need Him. Salvation is not a one time deal and then we run off to live your best lives now.

Here, let me show you the words of someone who claims they no longer need Him. "That's right I don't need Jesus or His warnings, because I already have Him."

Dan1988 said:
How on earth did you arrive at the conclusion that "If" means "it is"??? your theology is riddled with inconsistencies.

Well it's for sure someone's "theology is riddled with inconsistencies".

Dan1988 said:
The Lord said "if it were possible" meaning that it's not possible but you twist it to mean that it's not only possible but probable and that is twisting Gods Word upside down.

There are lots of folks who call Jesus Lord, Lord, who claim to be the very elect. Paul warned that the Law and Prophets was written specifically for our admonition, the "our" here being those who "by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality". (Rom. 2:7)

He specifically pointed out who needs to take heed.

Wherefore let him that "thinketh he standeth" take heed lest he fall. (1 Cor. 10:1-12)

I don't believe Paul was "twisting Gods Word upside down" here, any more than I believe Peter was lying to us when HE told us who God gives His Holy Spirit to.

But clearly there are many "who come in Christ's Name" that imply in their theology that they did.

Dan1988 said:
You reckon, your seeking, but God's Word tells us >>> Romans 3:10-12 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one".

Again, you are promoting a religious philosophy taught to you by this world's religious system. If you were to actually read Paul's Words, and David's words that Paul quoted, you would find out who Paul and David were speaking to in this description.

If you were "Seeking the Righteousness of God", as the Jesus "of the bible" teaches, you would go to Psalms 5 and 14, and you would read Rom. 3 and see that Paul and David are speaking to those men who had the Oracles of God, but didn't believe them. Men that falsely accused Paul and the Body of Christ, "whose damnation is just". Men who "professed to know God, but were wicked, bloody and deceitful men". Men who God said, "who eat up my people as they eat bread", and "have shamed the counsel of the poor because the LORD is his refuge."

God can not be found in these people, rather, "God is in the generation of the righteous."

Your teaching that there isn't any difference between the children of the devil, and the Body of Christ is astounding, and yet this is a popular religious philosophy promoted by this world's religious system, "who calls Jesus Lord, Lord".

Paul asks the question, "What then? are we better than they?"

In other words, can I live by the same disobedience to God, engage in the same false accusations of others like the Pharisees, and not be judged the same by God? He answered, "No, in no wise: for we have "before proved" both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;"

And where did Paul "already Prove" this?

Rom. 2: 9 Tribulation and anguish, upon "every" soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to "every man" that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

Paul didn't say, "We are all under sin". You say Paul and the Body of Christ are still under sin, but Paul didn't.

Dan1988 said:
As you can see, Gods Word states there are none who seek, but you reckon that's not right because you're actively seeking.

The preaching that God's Word teaches that Paul and the Body of Christ's "throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes" is an evil and wicked teaching. It is not true according to Paul's own words, David never promoting such wickedness, and the entire Bible exposes such a teaching as from below and not above.

Men don't "Seek God", as you don't by your own admission and neither did the Pharisees, for the same reason. Both have been convinced by "other voices" that they are all set, already heirs to the Kingdom of God, already the very elect, that "they shall surely not die". But the Jesus "of the Bible" teaches "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same "shall be saved"."

Heb. 11: 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder "of them that diligently seek him".

So yes, I diligently Seek Him every day.

Bradskii · 2025-12-10T04:00:23-0600

Oompa Loompa said:
...the Moors have conquered, or will conquer them soon for a second time.

I'm sure those living in Andalusia will be grateful for your concern. But seeing as the Muslim population is currently only about 4% I don't think there's any great danger of a second conquest in the near future.

Kathleen30 · 2025-12-10T03:49:25-0600

Strong in Him said:
I said, you can't debate science from the Bible.
@Apple Sky was unable to answer any of the questions that I asked, using the Bible as reference.

Some people read the Bible literally when it was not meant to be read that way.
You won't find scientific explanations in the Bible; that is not its purpose.
We use, have and do many things today which are not mentioned in the Bible.

It's not in any way a science textbook - not even partially.

No, it isn't.
It is the final authority on God; on his nature, his will, his actions and his relationship with mankind.

You can't give the Bible to someone studying physics to use as a textbook. You won't learn Biology, Zoology, Chemistry, Astrophysics or any other science subject from the pages of Scripture.
In the same way that you won't learn Spanish from a cookery book that mentions Paella and Spanish wine.
You won't become an artist because you read a novel about someone who learns to draw.
Someone could read a biography about the Beatles; it doesn't mean they can sing. Or you could find out all about Mozart; it doesn't mean you'll be able to play the piano/clarinet/violin.

If you're interested in science, quantum physics, chemistry, astronomy and so on - go and read the appropriate books.
If you want to know God and have a relationship with him; read the Bible.
There are people who do both and find no contradiction.

Stronginhim you say Gods word not be the final authority in all things. I say when it clashes with scripture it most certainly does and is to be challenged accordingly by the word of God. That is what I’m trying to explain to you. . You Then mention the many professions. The Bible certainly does not show us how learn Japanese or Russian but if you were to Curse God in those languages that would still make you accountable according to the word of God. Nothing wrong with learning other languages. You than mention music again nothing wrong with music until you come across such music groups Such music as AC/DC like Bonn Scott’s Highway to hell and you shook me all night you told me cum but I was already there. Along with numerous other groups of such songs . Are these songs appropriate to play at church. No they are not . You mention the cookery book and what’s say it promotes rare meat meaning that blood is not fully cooked but still raw that would go contrary to the New Testament that meat must be cooked fully. As to the Spanish I mentioned I have mentioned prior with language. You could even add dress wear . even the Scottish kilt has a distinction between men’s and woman’s kilts and the Bible has always be rather specific on women’s and men’s clothing . You mention physics, chemistry, astronomy there is no harm in all in all those things including science. Until they are to used to override the word of God and what the Bible says. You could also jaded the arts . Art is beautiful but you also have pornographic art. Is it acceptable to have a statue of the god Pan bending a lady over and give her the full measure of his flute in a church No . And the same goes for science. The word of God is the final authority when it comes to truth. More once those boundaries have been crossed . The word of God is the final authority in all things . So I not agree you and yu probably not agree with me. Yours Kathleen

Bradskii · 2025-12-10T03:46:12-0600

Oompa Loompa said:
Deflection?

What else was it? You don't fool anyone. Don't kid yourself, for heaven's sake.

Oompa Loompa said:
I think i have been pretty clear whwre I stand. Yes. I want to see all these murdering rapist dead. The world would be a much better place if they all just had a heart attack. Whether by bomb in international waters, or by an executioner after months of trials and legal processes. The end is still the same, but the former is much quicker and cheaper.

No, you dance around it. You've been saying that due process should be followed on US soil. That it's the FBI that has to break down doors and use those handcuffs. Except now, at last, we get you saying exactly what you'd prefer. That all this bulldust about that due process is just that. Bulldust. Kill them. And to blazes with due process. Because hey, it's cheaper and easier.

Oompa Loompa said:
What I don't get is why you are trying to play "gotcha"...

Because not many people, including you, want to admit what you've now admitted. People have to be poked and prodded. People have to be prompted. But eventually the desire to speak your mind becomes too great. We 'getcha' to tell us what you really want eventually.

timewerx · 2025-12-10T03:39:32-0600

High Fidelity said:
So it's been a few months now. What progress have you made? Have you found investors?

I told somewhere in the thread, real work won't start until few years later. All I can do now is keep analysing and simplify the concept in my free time.

I don't have time to do any real work yet. I'm just a regular dude working paycheck to paycheck, dealing with complicated problems in life and usually tired to do anything else. In two years, we're moving and a lot of changes, hoping will change my situation, enough to give me more free time.

My current plans don't include investors. I just don't have time nor the resources to run a campaign looking for investors.

If the prototype is successful, I'll have a very cheap source of electricity that I can turn into a lucrative revenue stream indirectly online. I don't really need to mass produce the product and market it to make money from it. Just one small cheap engine will do and I can build more from the revenue it makes and compound my earnings.

Patents, protecting IP, marketing is just headache. I can do much easier just using it personally for income. Just enough to get a very thin slice from the market. I have no intention of disrupting the status quo.

I have no intention of saving the world from global warming nor energy crisis. You'll have to do a lot more to convince me otherwise.

Strong in Him · 2025-12-10T03:05:31-0600

Kathleen30 said:
Stronginhim in reference to your post 2560 God certainly wrote a literal account with enough information to realise there are boundaries to what the creation account says.

No.
The Bible reveals God; it does not give a detailed account of how he created.

Kathleen30 said:
You mention 2 creation accounts. A relatively new interpretation from the mid 20th century from the likes of Bruce Waitke and John Walton who seems to think that he is Gods final authority on Jewish and ancient thought.

What does that mean?
Genesis 2 was in the Bible long before the mid twentieth century.

Kathleen30 said:
You mention 7 other neighbouring countries worshipping different gods .

I said "several", not "seven".
My point was that they believed that different gods were responsible for different parts of creation. Moses wanted people to know that one God created everything.

Kathleen30 said:
You then say Moses was not writing for scientists. And why not ?

Because he wasn't.
The immediate group of people that he wrote for were Israelites; former Hebrew slaves who, if they knew any science, certainly didn't know what we know today.

If he had been writing specifically for scientists, he would have given lots of scientific detail, because that's what they would have been interested in.

Kathleen30 said:
The Bible is for everyone .

Of course it is.
But scientists - and most people - are wise enough to know that they don't look in the Bible for scientific information - there isn't any.
Someone studying Zoology/chemistry/Physics would be given textbooks in those subjects to teach them about animals, plants, chemicals, atoms etc etc. They would not be given a copy of the Bible - that information is not in there.

Kathleen30 said:
You then mention Genesis chapter 1 in relation to God creating male and female and than in Genesis 2 you say that God creates Adam out of dust and Mother Eve out of Adam’s rib a little later. Stonginhim God makes it abundantly clear In Genesis 1 : 31 ( And God saw everything that he had made and behold it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. ) Including the creation of Adam & Eve. Stronginhim Genesis chapter one is a overview of the cosmic events of creation wk. Genesis chapter 2 is a more detailed report on the creation of Adam & Eve and the events of day six . It has nothing to with two different creations .

I didn't say it did have anything to do with different creations.
My point was that if people take ALL of the Bible to be literal, they will have to explain the differences between Genesis 1&2.

Kathleen30 said:
You must remember there were no chaptering as we have in our bibles today.

I know.

Kathleen30 said:
You mention in Genesis 2 also concerning other countries . That’s right Syria, Ethiopia Etc. But that in no way states that that they were flourishing countries with populations at the time of creation meaning that there humans present from another creation.

I never said any of that; you're missing my point.
I said that if people take ALL of the Bible to be literal, they have to explain the differences between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. Genesis 1 says that God created trees, animals, water etc. Genesis 2 doesn't say that. It tells of a garden with a river that divides and goes into other countries.
If someone believes that every word of the Bible is literal; which account do they go with?

Kathleen30 said:
So I would ask what is the proposition of the theory of two creations .

No idea.
But you only need to worry about that if you believe that every word of the Bible is literal and that Genesis 1 & 2 are literal, scientific accounts of God's creation.

I don't believe they are, and for me, there is no problem or contradiction.

Oompa Loompa · 2025-12-10T03:02:21-0600

7thKeeper said:
People have been saying the EU is collapsing for the past 25 years at the least.

It has been collapsing for the past 25 years.

7thKeeper said:
And what political failures are those?

Rampant liberalism and unchecked immigration.

7thKeeper said:
How about reading the reasons for the fine and commenting on those?

Lack of fundamental rights.

By the way, the topic and question that was asked in the poll, what whether the EU should remain. I answered, "Yes," but it doesn't matter because the Moors have conquered, or will conquer them soon for a second time.

tturt · 2025-12-10T03:02:10-0600

" In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (II Cor 4:4)

Neostarwcc · 2025-12-10T02:40:30-0600

chevyontheriver said:
W

Was this a Catholic priest or some other sort of priest? The unqualified one thinks it was a Catholic priest. What say you?

Yes it was a catholic priest that made the comment. I didn't mention it in the OP because I thought priest was universal for catholic but now that I think of it I think the eastern orthodox uses priests too so that was my bad.

Neostarwcc · 2025-12-10T02:39:36-0600

Michie said:
Was kind of priest are you speaking of?

He was a catholic priest who seemed to be very open of all Christian religions but didnt seem to know that evangelism was not ok during a funeral. Dan (my father in law) and most of Dan's family are catholic so the comments and singling out of my Jewish brother in law were totally inappropriate. He meant well and cared about his soul but honestly the timing was not yhe greatest when my sister in law was grieving the loss of her father.

Kathleen30 · 2025-12-10T02:39:36-0600

Stronginhim in reference to your post 2560 God certainly wrote a literal account with enough information to realise there are boundaries to what the creation account says. You mention 2 creation accounts. A relatively new interpretation from the mid 20th century from the likes of Bruce Waitke and John Walton who seems to think that he is Gods final authority on Jewish and ancient thought. You mention 7 other neighbouring countries worshipping different gods . I don’t have a problem with that. Only that Israel was not much better they continued harlot after other gods all throughout their histories even after they had been shown the true God. You then say Moses was not writing for scientists. And why not ? The Bible is for everyone . Or perhaps they are not answerable to the scientific boundaries God has proclaimed like creating the the world in 6 literal days and not million and billions of years as proclaimed by many in the scientific world but certainly not all.

You then mention Genesis chapter 1 in relation to God creating male and female and than in Genesis 2 you say that God creates Adam out of dust and Mother Eve out of Adam’s rib a little later. Stonginhim God makes it abundantly clear In Genesis 1 : 31 ( And God saw everything that he had made and behold it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. ) Including the creation of Adam & Eve. Stronginhim Genesis chapter one is a overview of the cosmic events of creation wk. Genesis chapter 2 is a more detailed report on the creation of Adam & Eve and the events of day six . It has nothing to with two different creations . You must remember there were no chaptering as we have in our bibles today. You mention in Genesis 2 also concerning other countries . That’s right Syria, Ethiopia Etc. But that in no way states that that they were flourishing countries with populations at the time of creation meaning that there humans present from another creation. The countries and rivers mentioned are merely there to point out the location of Eden . So I would ask what is the proposition of the theory of two creations . I would say like old age Earth theory from the 19th century and its many offshoots that it is merely to appease evolutionary thought and billions of years to make the Bible conform to the science of men and not the science of men conforming to the Bible . And we must evaluate where in Genesis 1 & 2 does the specifically mention two creation accounts. It doesn’t. Genesis 5:1-2 only speaks of one creation not two . Yours Prim. I will will reply to your other post soon

Philip_B · 2025-12-10T02:37:41-0600

Shane R said:
We did have 3 Aussies and 5 Canucks and a couple from South Africa on the tour. The other 32 folks were American.

The 5 Canucks are also American! Though they may not want to admit it!?

7thKeeper · 2025-12-10T02:34:43-0600

Oompa Loompa said:
Whatever. EU is on the verge of collapse anyway due to their own political failures. It is the Moore invasion 2.0, and Europe has fallen...again.

People have been saying the EU is collapsing for the past 25 years at the least. And what political failures are those? Though I guess we can skip that question actually, you are again derailing the thread. How about reading the reasons for the fine and commenting on those? You know. The topic of the thread.

Oompa Loompa · 2025-12-10T02:26:58-0600

7thKeeper said:
UK is not in the EU, which is the topic. And you can read the plain language of what's going on in this thread. It's not technical at all and anyone can understand it.

Whatever. EU is on the verge of collapse anyway due to their own political failures. It is the Moore invasion 2.0, and Europe has fallen...again.

Rescued One · 2025-12-10T02:23:28-0600

Reluctant Theologian said:
As this thread is titled 'Not a lot of respect for men' I think it's wise to never cite this requirement for husbands from Ephesians 5 without also citing the requirement for wives from the same section: 'to submit to their husbands as to Christ' and 'to fear/reverence their husbands'.

And as husbands should love their wives even when their wives don't properly submit or fear/reverence them, in the same way the wives should still submit and fear/reverence their husbands even when they don't properly love them.

Of course I'm not talking about a situation where a husband literally beats his wife up, but these days the definition of 'abuse' gets stretched so much that any (verbal) correction or setting boundaries setting by a husband may already be construed as emotional abuse (this is not a joke).

Be blessed sisters .. !

I was not rebellious and was faithful to my husband for almost 43 years when he passed away of cancer.

Oompa Loompa · 2025-12-10T02:20:53-0600

Bradskii said:
You're confused. It was your argument. It's what you want. All you could do was offer some pseudo satirical acceptance of it. Now you have no options except deflection. It's your only recourse. Which, in case you weren't aware, simply confirms the observation.

Well, I say It's your only recourse. But you could of course actually tell us that you'd be happy for all these dealers to be killed with no due process whether on the high seas or your local neighbourhood. In fact, I suspect that you'd be more convinced that they should be executed if they were in your suburb.

Deflection? I think i have been pretty clear whwre I stand. Yes. I want to see all these murdering rapist dead. The world would be a much better place if they all just had a heart attack. Whether by bomb in international waters, or by an executioner after months of trials and legal processes. The end is still the same, but the former is much quicker and cheaper. What I don't get is why you are trying to play "gotcha" when I am saying, "Darn right! Blow the trash into fish chum. Give them the same compassion, empathy, and consideration that they give to their customers who die from their product. Then let God figure out the rest." Now I hope you are done doing whoever it was you are trying to do. But from my perspective, it appeard to be a lot of nonsensical and emotional rantings about things you do not understand. Have I made myself clear, or do you wish to continue your creepy rants?

Robban · 2025-12-10T02:20:45-0600

Larniavc said:
Functionally

it is on a population level.

Is this site running slow for anyone else?

Yes, it is slow.

Larniavc · 2025-12-10T02:13:44-0600

Functionally

ThatRobGuy said:
"Born to a rich person" isn't the same thing as an institutional "social order" that mandates that you "stay within your caste"

it is on a population level.

Is this site running slow for anyone else?

Rescued One · 2025-12-10T02:12:28-0600

ChubbyCherub said:
Thank you. Yes, you summed this up for me nicely and the way you did so aligned with the way the church has taught me.

I think @Reluctant Theologian (and please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, here!) does not agree with this viewpoint for the reasons he has stated before.

He would not be alone in this, which may be why my church felt the need to address it, since they have women leaders e.g. Director of Ministry.

I can only assume someone questioned the biblical soundness of this, but cannot be sure.

I believe the BIBLE and it's contents are totally inspired by God. Yet I don't understand all of it yet.

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

Rescued One · 2025-12-10T02:01:37-0600

Reluctant Theologian said:
That would have been terrible, sorry to hear that - did he claim God revealed that to him while being an atheist? In situations like that it may take time to get used to the metaphor of God as our benevolent Father - or deal with positive male authority in general. I wish you healing.

Healing finally came through a male therapist and my reflection on my Dad's troubled childhood. But it was mostly sfter my Dad passed away. Not all men are as troubled as he was. I trusted God as a benevolent Father most of my life, even after trying to believe the rottten teachings of Mormonism which I encountered as a teen. They baptized me, but their non-Trinity god isn't merciful.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page