Latest activity

Dan1988 · 2025-11-09T03:48:11-0600

fhansen said:
Um, yes, that was the point. The only thing we can do is say “no”.

Sorry but your dead wrong again, because you failed to take in to consideration the bible doctrine of "IRRESISTABLE GRACE" which confirms that you are wrong and the truth is "The only thing we can do is say yes"

John 6:44 ("No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him"), Romans 8:29–30 (which connects predestination, calling, justification, and glorification), Ephesians 1:19–20 (regarding God's mighty power in saving believers), Acts 13:48 ("as many as were appointed to eternal life believed"), and Acts 16:14 (where the Lord "opened her heart to pay attention"). These verses are interpreted to mean that God's grace is a powerful, internal work that regenerates the sinner and makes them willing to believe, rather than an external influence that can be resisted.

contratodo · 2025-11-09T03:45:52-0600

The wicked shall be turned into hell and all the nations that forget God. Psalm 9:17

streams shall become pitch and the dust into brimstone. Isaiah 34:9

Who among us shall dwell with the consuming fire, who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings? Isaiah 33:14

(The wicked) shall be ashes under your feet in the day that I do this says the Lord. Malachi 4:3-4

If any man will hurt them a fire proceeds out of their mouth... and if any man will hurt them they must in this manner be killed. Revelation 11:15

The beast and false prophet will hurt them and therefore must be killed by the fire that comes out of their mouth. In this we can see the creation of the lake of fire, it is first kindled by the two prophets, then by the Lord when He returns, He also spews fire from His mouth Revelation 19:21, and then the final fire from the Father Revelation 20:9 destroys the whole world, 2 Peter 3:8-12 Rev 21:1 this world becomes hell, the lake of fire, just as the was said in psalms 9:17.

Carl Emerson · 2025-11-09T03:44:53-0600

SabbathBlessings said:
This is what man did to God’s Sabbath, they flipped it and took something God made holy and turned into a common day, and turned something God made as a common day, for works and labors Exo20:9 and turned into a holy day.

Actually for the true believer every day is Holy.

True believers are motivated by Love not Law. This is why Jesus said His new Commandment is to Love God and Love ones neighbour.

We need to understand the Old Covenant of Law but move on to embracing obedience to the New Covenant of Love and Grace.

Dan1988 · 2025-11-09T03:42:30-0600

fhansen said:
More ignorance. You haven’t immersed yourself much in the early fathers, have you, to find out what the early church actually believed? And I could even show you the source material for the church’s positions, my “new version of the gospel” laid down officially at council some 15 centuries ago! But, what the heck, it’s only truth.

Your welcome to place your trust in sinful men, but I only trust in the Lord Jesus, because Gods Word warns us about your heroes. It says, "cursed is the man who trusts man".

Anytime someone, ignores what God has said, and appeals to sinners for instruction, it throws up big red flags.

The early Church was plagued by heretical teaching and Gnosticism. Why would you look back to them when we new have 2000 years of refinement and perfection. It's like going back to rubbing two sticks together to start a fire after matches were invented.

The Liturgist · 2025-11-09T03:38:11-0600

keras said:
Zechariah 5:1-4, describes what we know today as a ICBM rocket.
Zech 5:5-11, is not another different object. It goes on to tell about what that rocket has inside it.

Any other explanation, simply makes a mess of what Zechariah Prophesies.

That seems very unlikely, particularly given that ICBMs are smaller than the dimensions given, by a considerable measure, and also given that ICBM warheads do not use lead for shielding due to weight. Remember, they contain very little plutonium since most of the power is derived from a secondary thermonuclear explosion (which releases much less fall-out than a fission bomb if used in an airburst, while causing more destruction relative to the mass of the warhead).

Also most ICBMs have three or more warheads (known as MIRVs) that are launched in the same missile, which allow one ICBM to hit multiple targets.

Rather it is clear that St. Zechariah is speaking of the typological harlot of Babylon, the symbol of vice and idolatry (which contrary to popular belief has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church).

Also insofar as Baghdad is a major center of Aramaic speaking and Arabic speaking Christians, of the Syriac Orthodox Church, the Assyrian Church of the East, the Ancient Church of the East and the Chaldean Catholic Church, there would be no point in God allowing the modern city of Baghdad to be annihilated - it certainly does not meet the criteria of Sodom or Gomorrah. Indeed the Christians of Iraq are among the most righteous and persecuted in the world, with those in Mosul in particular enduring gruesome suffering during the reign of ISIS.

CoreyD · 2025-11-09T03:35:00-0600

stevevw said:
I think this is full of free will. Imagine that you are a Christian and you had to be obedient as a choice. The goodness and purity of being a servant comes from choosing to be a servant as Christ did.

But also the idea that Christ will truely set you free. Which implies there are levels of freedom. That perhaps the idea of no free will which is part of denying Christ is really a trap that binds us. That its actually the opposite. By admitting we have free will and can defy God or others we surrender our will and become truely free.

I agree. It's a personal choice to let go, and let God, because God does not force us to let go. It's up to us.

Warden_of_the_Storm · 2025-11-09T03:33:39-0600

contratodo said:
verb: misquote; 3rd person present: misquotes; past tense: misquoted; past participle: misquoted; gerund or present participle: misquoting

To quote (a person or a piece of written or spoken text) inaccurately.

adverb
in an incorrect or inexact manner.

A.i. overview of ellipsis.
Formal uses (Ellipsis)
To show omitted words in a quote: When quoting text, an ellipsis (...) can be used to show that you have left out words, phrases, or even full sentences.
Example: "The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall" can be shortened to "The greatest glory in living lies...in rising every time we fall"

My point was that bold part, I quoted it exactly using ellipsis for what I did not remember, I forgot "great ideas undiscovered" but that does not take away from the point of the sentence, "to those who can remove one of truths protective layers"

It's still a misquote, because you incorrectly and inaccurately took what he said and put it to mean something entirely different.

Dan1988 · 2025-11-09T03:33:34-0600

BNR32FAN said:
Oh so then someone who has come to Christ must me able to fall away then? So what happens to someone who does this?

Yes Sir, many have or will come to Christ and fall away, but only the elect will remain because they were saved by Christ and not their works. Those who bring their filthy rags to the table will fall away, because they were never of us, for if they were of us they would have remained with us.
We must take into consideration, the fact that Jesus will cast the vast majority of professing Christians into the lake of fire.

Many will come to Him on that day saying Lord, Lord, you know the rest.

Carl Emerson · 2025-11-09T03:33:08-0600

Studyman said:
it's absurd to believe and promote to others that Jesus said to "Live By" the Words proceeding from the mouth of God that we have never heard.

And yet, that is what you are teaching.

The Holy Spirit within is not silent and is our promised guide.

Of course we have personal communion with Him as Jesus did, and it is quite normal to receive personal revelation - Paul prayed for the faithful to receive exactly that.

This does not mean we don't hear Him as we read the Bible, it is typical for a new convert to have an enormous thirst for reading Scripture made alive by His indwelling Spirit. I read nothing but scripture for over 5 years. No other written input.

I guess you have to challenge and discredit folks who question your theology - nothing new there.

contratodo · 2025-11-09T03:28:08-0600

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
You did misquote Neil Armstrong, that is plain for anyone to see, that is true

verb: misquote; 3rd person present: misquotes; past tense: misquoted; past participle: misquoted; gerund or present participle: misquoting

To quote (a person or a piece of written or spoken text) inaccurately.

adverb
in an incorrect or inexact manner.

contratodo said:
"....there are... breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truths protective layers"
Neil Armstrong during a press conference with then President Clinton.

A.i. overview of ellipsis.
Formal uses (Ellipsis)
To show omitted words in a quote: When quoting text, an ellipsis (...) can be used to show that you have left out words, phrases, or even full sentences.
Example: "The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall" can be shortened to "The greatest glory in living lies...in rising every time we fall"

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
Today we have with us a group of students, among America's best. To you we say: we’ve only completed the beginning. We leave you much that is undone. There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth's protective layers. There are places to go beyond belief. Those challenges are yours -- in many fields, not the least of which is space, because there lies human destiny. Thank you."

My point was that bold part, I quoted it exactly using ellipsis for what I did not remember, I forgot "great ideas undiscovered" but that does not take away from the point of the sentence, "to those who can remove one of truths protective layers"

Dan1988 · 2025-11-09T03:27:26-0600

BNR32FAN said:
And I quoted Jesus telling the woman YOUR FAITH HAS SAVED YOU and as always you completely ignore it. Faith precedes grace, Christ’s atonement is grace but we don’t receive it until we believe. So yes we are save by grace THRU FAITH which means that we must have faith to receive grace. That why Paul told the Galatians that they had been severed from Christ and had fallen from grace because they were trying to mix obedience to the law with faith.

“You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭5‬:‭4‬-‭5‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

So answer this question why did Jesus tell the woman that her faith has saved her?

“For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little.” Then He said to her, “Your sins have been forgiven.” Those who were reclining at the table with Him began to say to themselves, “Who is this man who even forgives sins?” And He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.””
‭‭Luke‬ ‭7‬:‭47‬-‭50‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Now your ignorance is on full display, first of all Gods Word says that we are saved by faith, but you twist it backwards and say "no God, that's not true, the truth is I am saved by my faith"
But the truth is you don't have faith or anything else, you actually have nothing. Yes that means you have a big fat zero, to contribute towards salvation. You and everyone else is dead in sin, and the only thing dead men can offer is filthy stinking rags.

You need to explain how a dead man as you were/are can conjure up saving faith in your sate of death and total depravity. As totally depraved dead men, none can manufacture, create, conjure up, produce, invent or any other word you care to use to describe a totally depraved, evil, wicked and dead man creating his own saving faith.

See, you won't find a single verse in the bible to support your silly theory that dead men can conjure up saving faith. Please show me one verse.

If you care to know the truth about the matter, you will find that both "GRACE" and "FAITH" are gifts which God gives to His elect only. The rest are left in their condemned sate of death.
Ephesians 2:8-10
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

How long can you keep denying what Gods Word clearly says.

sjastro · 2025-11-09T03:26:42-0600

stevevw said:
I was not saying he can't call out pseudoscience but that his claim was false that absolutely everything is pseudoscience. The simple fact I posted peer review science articles disproves this obvious misrepresentation.

Plus I have not made any crazy claims lol. I have basically tried to support things with reasoning and facts. When I says a signature looks like machining or med tech I am not saying it was caused by aliens or magic and am trying to argue a reasonable hypothesis based on the signatures.

In fact you are doing the same. Everyone is doing the same when they claimn the traditional methods.

Yet you show no evidence for the stupid or disingenous. How is it when I actually provide a rational. Is that rational stupid. If so then argue its stupid instead of just objecting.

Thats calling the kettlle black lol.

Here we go again with name calling.

If it should have ended long ago then why are you still here. Is it to save the stupid people. Leave if you don't like it. I think I said this a couple of times before and your still here lol. You must like it lol.

Failure to consider what modern tech. The whole vase thing was relegated to whacko from the very first posts. The whole thread was already in the dust bin by skeptcs from the first few pages before I even began lol. We see the bias from the start as though even before anyone said anything it was already decided.

I mean some were resisting that even a lathe was used and insisted on unguided hand made. But then even they admitted a lathe must have been used. So I did convince some lol. How do we know other signatures are not the same.

I think even you admitted that a circular saw cut looked like a modern cut and must have been a fake that was done in modern times. Did you not. Which means you also seen the same modern looking signatuires as me. How am I wrong for doing this and yet everyone else is doing it.

Why do so many people agree with me that the signatures look machined or that they don't match the claimed traditional methods. From Petrie to todays engineers, archeologists and stone masons all agreeing. Are we all whacko.

This is a strawman. I never said they were caused or made by modern lathes. I said the signatures looked like modern lathing and machining.

I even said several times it would be rediculous to say that there was some modern machines and computers lying around in ancient sites. They could never be lost as they would be so big and have lots of parts.

Here we go again lol.

Hum yet one group used the standard industry software in the Dunn and Sierra testing.

But tell me I have two opinions here. You claim that the tests were not proper and could not determine whether it was lathed somehow by circularity and concentricity. Then why do all these independent groups of testers all say the same thing. That at least in some of the vases the high levels of circularity for example was the result of turning, rotating and lathing the vase.

Why should I believe a sole person on a social media sight over several independent groups who actually did the testing. Why is it that even people on this thread admit that lathing was involved.

Actually if you recall my response was that if you are using such logic (that signatures such as strirations that look or point to a giant copper saw).

Then the same logic will apply to the many other signatures I showed you that 'don't look like or point to a copper saw but machining'. You conviently ignore all this and select out one you think proves your case and then make it everything. Make it negate all the contradictory signatures that point to machining and not a giant copper saw.

How exactly have I dont this. Tell me. I have done exactly what you are doing. Looking at the signatures and making determinations on that.

I actually said that at least some of the obelisks in later dynasties like the 18th dynasty are from earlier dynasties. I linked evidence for this in how Ramses II stamped his name on earlier works. Or by the different sigantures that match old kingdom obelisks.

I then said in response to your objection that this does not discount that later dynasties had advanced knowledge and tech. WE see it all through history. How does this negate that the earliest works show advanced knowledge and tech. How does this even negate the ancients having advanced tech and knowledge at any period before the tech and knowledge was available. Your creating a red herring.

But thats based on the assumption that these obelisks were made in the later dynasties. I provided evidence that early obelisks were inherited by later dynasties.

But so what. All this does is show that the Egyptians had the advanced knowledge and tech from the earliest dynasties and it was still going in later dynasties. The point is its the earliest dynasties had the tech and knowledge to produce better works 1,000 years before this.

Having some holes does not make it a conspiracy. It just means some things need correcting. Your throwing the baby out with the bath water by coming up with specific examples that don't match the timeline and then claiming the whole things conspiracy.

You still have no address many obvious signatures that show advanced knowledge and tech. So its nowhere near any big claims about conspiracy.

As I said your making a logical fallacy that because the knapped flint tools and the precision vases existed in the same culture that 1) the same culture made them 2) they could have been inherited like Djoser inherited them later 3) that both methods were happening at the same time. We see this today where we have both CNC and hand made vases being made still.

I also pointed out that its strange these vases exist in such a Neolithic culture where everything about them is primitive. They made pottery by the coil method. They did not even have the potters wheel. Yet according to archeologists these high circular vases came from the same people. A contradiction in the records.

I also pointed this fact out when you produced the primitive made knapped knife and tools. If a culture is capable of making such high precision vases in the hardest stones, Then why are their tools so primitive. Primitive tools make primitive vases.

Which then throws a big spanner in the orthodox narrative. But its not me who is admitting this. Its the mainstream archeologists. We see the signatures from later tech in the wheel and borestick on the walls and reliefs. The vases are not as precise.

How can a more precise vase come from a time when they made primitive flint tools by knapping. Yet produce better vases than those that came 1,000s of years later with supposed better tech and knowledge. It appears to be an out of place artifact.

Your welcome to leave anytime. But your still hear loving every minute of it lol.

This latest serving of yours has phrases "I actually said", "I then said", "I also pointed out this fact" etc is nothing more than preaching and an argument by repetition fallacy. Each one of your starting phases has been addressed and refuted with evidence on numerous occasions, but evidently the penny has never dropped. If you had the capability of understanding the points I made but disagreed with them present your counterarguments instead of this low brow argument by repetition fallacy which is just as wrong the first time round as it is the fiftieth.
Your lack of comprehension however is no excuse for dishonesty, resorting to lies to make a point is not an effective way to convert people to your way of thinking particularly when your motivation is through preaching.

I can only speak for myself but I suspect other posters in this thread have the same dilemma of deciding whether you are dumb, dishonest or somewhere in between.

The Liturgist · 2025-11-09T03:24:45-0600

keras said:
It applies to the terrible Day of the Lords fiery wrath, years before the Return. The Lord will not be seen on that Day.

But the New Testament specifically says He will come like a thief in the night - your argument that He will not be seen contradicts that.

keras said:
I know what I saw. I saw the Holy Land cleared and empty of all the ungodly peoples.

Indeed but that doesn’t prove anything other than that you had such a vision. Your vision lacks provenance, what is more, insofar as it apparently clashes with Scripture one could argue it fails the “test every spirit” directive.

RainySunflower · 2025-11-09T03:19:13-0600

I follow Watchman River, and he has a point. ^^ Every time I open any of his videos, literally at least 6-7 articles which prove end times point. ^^ So yeah, The Great Frying is coming soon. ^^

Tom D · 2025-11-09T03:19:00-0600

Very useful post.
I'm looking for a new job right now. Although I'm still officially 'employed' at my organisation, they don't have any new work for me.

Warden_of_the_Storm · 2025-11-09T03:13:43-0600

contratodo said:
Anyone can read this thread and see that I did not miss quote Neil. I quoted a sentence from the speech, from memory, and so included dots for the few words I forgot. What I did write is exactly what he said, and the full speech does not take away from that sentence, he said; " those who can remove one of truths protective layers" clearly hinting that there is truth being protected. What truth do you think he is referring to from the context of the speech? Not something to do with outer space? See and you just said you refuse to answer that question. It is obvious that the truth Neil was referring to has something to do with "outer space". That is clear, and the sincere, reading this whole thread, will see the truth.

If one only has a hammer, everything looks like a nail. That's my response to your question. You did misquote Neil Armstrong, that is plain for anyone to see, that is true.

contratodo · 2025-11-09T03:12:39-0600

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
No, you did misquote him and intentionally ignored the context of what he was talking about in the whole speech

Anyone can read this thread and see that I did not miss quote Neil. I quoted a sentence from the speech, from memory, and so included dots for the few words I forgot. What I did write is exactly what he said, and the full speech does not take away from that sentence, he said; " those who can remove one of truths protective layers" clearly hinting that there is truth being protected. What truth do you think he is referring to from the context of the speech? Not something to do with outer space? See and you just said you refuse to answer that question. It is obvious that the truth Neil was referring to has something to do with "outer space". That is clear, and the sincere, reading this whole thread, will see the truth.

stevevw · 2025-11-09T03:11:23-0600

pc_76 said:
I wish God will change this country, but so far it looks like he is just allowing the evil and darkness to complete it's natural conclusion. The very sad part is a lot of it is being done on purpose and they are now very emboldened.

It might also well be too late unless there is a very radical event.

I'm glad for these threads because I am part of the same age group and at least good to know I'm not the only one in my boat that feels this way.

Its too late and was always going to be this way. In fact I believe it has taken a giant step towards that end. I can see it in my own lifetime in how people have rejected God and chaos has resulted.

But remember though God allows such things there is a limit. Remember S & G and even the Egyptians and even the Hebrews when they rejected God this set off a series of bad stuff happening. Usually it was through natural disasters. But I believe the earth is also moving towards this end and is groaning and shifting as evil is thrust upon it.

It all goes hand in hand and humans have cultivated their own destruction. We will see many great disasters even topling great idols and icons of the world. Eathquakes and eruptions as the earth shifts into a time of upheavel. But also fighting in the streets and rebellion and hate and chaos.

This is what happens when we reject God. Its always been the same and we can predict it. I think now in the west we have moved more away from God than at anytime since Christ. We are now in the Godless period once again.

But this time its Empire and perhaps even on a worldwide scale and not just a city or people warring. But there are dark principalities rising up against each other.

Christians are together and seperate from this in Christ. Like the early church under the Roman pagan world. We will be the light to the world in this in all this darkness.

Dan1988 · 2025-11-09T03:10:10-0600

BNR32FAN said:
I’ve never rejected any passages you’ve quoted, I’ve only quoted scripture to point out your flawed interpretation of them and you just ignore them. You keep ignoring the fact that your interpretation must align with all scripture not just bits and pieces of it. That’s why I can explain any passage you quote but the passages I quote you can’t explain them and say they’re just an unexplainable mystery when they’re really not, you just refuse to accept them for what they actually state.

Unlike yourself, I don't pretend to know about the things that God has deliberately hidden. Why are you rejecting those scriptures I showed you, where God Himself confirms that He has hidden these things.

You don't believe what God has said, or you have been deceived by false doctrine to the point where you can't even see your denial of the truth.

Warden_of_the_Storm · 2025-11-09T03:06:44-0600

contratodo said:
I have to quote the whole speech or I'm lying?
He did say 'truths protective layers' I did not miss quote him, that is the original point I was making, and the context and video of the speech confirms that he is indeed speaking about some sort of truth, what truth was he referring to is what to think about, instead, because the point is valid and you can't argue against it, you'd rather attack me than talk about the relevant point. Anyone reading this can see that I did not miss quote him, and thanks for posting the whole speech for others to see.

No, you did misquote him and intentionally ignored the context of what he was talking about in the whole speech.

ViaCrucis · 2025-11-09T03:06:09-0600

Hvizsgyak said:
But do you then agree that the US Government should be allowed to secure its borders more strictly so there are less illegal aliens? I'm with you on every person in the US (legal or illegal) should get access to affordable healthcare but I do have a problem with allowing thousands upon thousands illegal aliens into the country on a yearly basis.

Tighten up the borders. I don't think everyone should come here--there should be vetting, through legal channels of immigration.

If someone comes here illegally, they should be afforded a chance to rectify that by seeking legal residence; if they won't then they should be deported.

The point is that this should be done through legal (Constitutional) means, it should be humane, and it should be just. Treating undocumented immigrants as sub-human is morally evil. It doesn't matter that coming here illegally or over-staying is going on, all human beings deserve the most basic and fundamental treatment of dignity. There are fundamental human rights that need to be honored.

-CryptoLutheran

Dan1988 · 2025-11-09T03:04:16-0600

BNR32FAN said:
I apologize I just assumed that surely you must’ve read the gospel before.

“You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭10‬:‭22‬ ‭NASB1995

“Because lawlessness is increased, most people’s love will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭24‬:‭12‬-‭13‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

“You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭13‬:‭13‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

“Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭11‬:‭20‬-‭23‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

“yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1‬:‭22‬-‭23‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

And then of course there’s John 15:4-6 which you claim isn’t a commandment which is irrelevant because verse 6 is still a consequence, but I’m sure you won’t admit that either.

“Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me. I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.”
‭‭John‬ ‭15‬:‭4‬-‭6‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

“If we endure, we will also reign with Him; If we deny Him, He also will deny us;”
‭‭2 Timothy‬ ‭2‬:‭12‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

What a load of trash that is, I asked you to find a single verse in the bible to support your silly unbiblical version of the gospel, which you claim exists, but you have never ever found it and I told you that you will never find it because iot doesn't exist.

The only way your version of the gospel can stand, is if God lied to his people, when He said "by grace you were saved", but you say "no God, that's wrong because my priest taught me that we are "saved by works" You claim that the bible says "you must do this and that", I asked you to show me where, but you keep referring to scriptures which say nothing of the sort.

Either show me a single verse or admit that your version of the gospel is based on your feeling or emotions or your own private opinion.

contratodo · 2025-11-09T03:02:24-0600

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
I don't think you were being sincere with those questions in the slightest, especially in the light of you blatantly quote mining Neil Armstrong's words, so I have no reason to answer those questions

I have to quote the whole speech or I'm lying?
He did say 'truths protective layers' I did not miss quote him, that is the original point I was making, and the context and video of the speech confirms that he is indeed speaking about some sort of truth, what truth was he referring to is what to think about, instead, because the point is valid and you can't argue against it, you'd rather attack me than talk about the relevant point. Anyone reading this can see that I did not miss quote him, and thanks for posting the whole speech for others to see.

ViaCrucis · 2025-11-09T03:00:00-0600

BPPLEE said:
Then people should come here lawfully

And if they don't, we deny their human rights and dignity?

Do mothers trying to feed her children who didn't come here legally, or whose visas expired deserve to be beaten by masked thugs in front of her child in the middle of the street?

-CryptoLutheran

Warden_of_the_Storm · 2025-11-09T02:56:08-0600

contratodo said:
If your being sincere with me, please address the questions I asked, because I asked them from the context of the speech.

I don't think you were being sincere with those questions in the slightest, especially in the light of you blatantly quote mining Neil Armstrong's words, so I have no reason to answer those questions.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page