Home Mail Chat Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Lounge > Washington DC and The Holy Land

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-17-2017, 07:55 PM  
Chiefshrink Chiefshrink is online now
MVP
 
Chiefshrink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: donkey land
Casino cash: $18001
How has God wired you spiritually? What is your spiritual gift/gifts?

When a person comes to Christ, that person receives a spiritual gift and most receive several spiritual gifts through the Power of the Holy Spirit that now inhabits their soul. For a list of those spiritual gifts you can read I Cor. 12 and Romans 12. However, using your spiritual gifts is very much like physical exercise. You need to practice and serve at all times in your gifts so that the Holy Spirit can build up your soul spiritually so that you may be bold in living and serving in your faith. But if you avoid serving with the spiritual gifts Jesus gave you then you will spiritually atrophy. You won't lose your gifts but you will be ineffective in your faith. Paul encourages Timothy to fan into flame the power of the Holy Spirit to use his spiritual gifts and not to be timid. Because the more you use your gifts the more the Power of God is revealed through YOU !!!

Here is the 5th talk by Pastor Jeff in the series called "The Power of the Gospel" and this talk is labeled "Powering Forward"!! Pastor Jeff a talented speaker and teacher of the Bible in this video sermon/audio only if you choose gives much encouragement, joy and hope to both Christians and unbelievers. To discover and develop their spiritual gifts through the person of Jesus Christ. For those of you who have not heard him speak he is truly one of the most authentic, genuine, straight from the heart, pull no punches, tells it like it is, gifted speaker of the Gospel that I have heard in a long time and have met. He is the 'real deal' and your time will not be wasted listening to him.

Blessings to all !!!

http://www.harvestdenver.org/sermons/power-forward-5816
Posts: 18,476
Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 08:43 PM   #46
Ash Ash is offline
Hail to the King
 
Ash's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2001
Casino cash: $11852
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevieray View Post
I though the Word isn't valid? Why are you invalidating your own argument?
I don't give a f#$k about the word. It's just that sometimes the word is immoral and you must use subjectivity to form a morality no matter what doctrine you subscribe to.

Objective morality does not exist.
Posts: 854
Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 08:43 PM   #47
Chiefshrink Chiefshrink is online now
MVP
 
Chiefshrink's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: donkey land
Casino cash: $18001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
Beating slaves was perfectly allowable regulated under the following rules:
Exodus 21:20-21 (NASB): 20If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. 21If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.



Leviticus 25:44-46 (NASB) suggests how Israelites can utilize the full human resources of slaves:
44As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
I have researched it and you're doing a terrible job at apologetics.
Here let's get a full proper context here on slavery from got questions.org. Hopefully you will read this.


Question: "Why does the Bible allow slave owners to beat their slaves?"

Answer: Exodus 21:20–21 says, “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.” Why did the Mosaic Law allow for slave owners to beat their slaves? The obvious answer is that, in the social structure of ancient Israel, physical punishment was considered the appropriate response for acts of disobedience and rebellion. The text does not specifically say that the corporal punishment has to be for some form of disobedience; however, based on the larger Old Testament context, it is safe to assume that slave masters were not allowed carte blanche authority to do whatever they wanted to their slaves. In Exodus 21, slave owners are limited in what they can do: if the master goes too far and the slave dies, the master will be punished. If the Old Testament Law is followed consistently, then the punishment for the slave owner might even include the death penalty for murder. Of course, if a master beats his slave and the slave is unable to work for some time, the master has punished himself by losing the work he might have received from the slave. The implication here is that it is in the master’s best interest not to be too severe.

Exodus 21:20–21 is certainly troubling to people with modern sensitivities. Modern people in the free world have come to view autonomous personal freedom as the highest form of good and anything that curtails personal freedom as the ultimate evil. People may be tempted to read a passage like Exodus 21:20–21 and charge God with moral evil. Such charges need to be challenged, for slavery is not the only area where modern sensitivities and biblical guidelines clash—abortion and homosexuality are two other flashpoints. The danger on this issue is that most Christians would agree that slavery is morally reprehensible.

There are two distinct approaches in formulating an answer to why the Bible allows for slavery, and the outcome will be determined by what a person accepts as the authority. The first approach goes something like this:

Slavery is morally reprehensible in all situations.
The Bible allows slavery.
Therefore the Bible is an unreliable moral guide.

In this case, current moral sensitivities are the authority, and the Bible is measured against those sensibilities.

The second goes something like this:

The Bible is a reliable moral guide.
The Bible allows slavery.
Therefore slavery cannot be morally reprehensible in all situations.

In this case, the Bible is the final authority, and modern thinking about right and wrong has to be adjusted to accommodate what we find in the Bible.

Slavery has been a fact of human existence for almost as long as the human race has been in existence. Physical punishment to enforce compliance has been part of slavery for just as long. Corporal punishment has also been used in situations other than slavery. For example, physical chastisements were commonly employed as punishment for crimes committed and for the enforcing of discipline in the military. We are not so far removed from the time when brutal physical punishment was administered and accepted by almost everyone as legitimate. In the British Navy, flogging for disobedience or insubordination was common until the mid-19th century, and caning was used until the mid-20th century. In some places, such as Singapore, caning is still an official form of punishment for certain crimes.

The Bible does not forbid slavery, nor does it demand that every slave owner who wants to please God must immediately emancipate his slaves. Instead, the Bible at every turn calls for a treatment of slaves that would have been more humane than any found in the culture at large. The very idea that a master could be punished in any way for killing a slave would have been scandalous at the time Moses gave the Law. The culture at large made no attempt to grant slaves any rights. Slaves in Egypt or Moab, for example, were afforded no such protection.

Earlier in the same chapter, kidnapping for the purpose of slavery is condemned and the death penalty enjoined: “Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession” (Exodus 21:16). (Ironically, the death penalty is another area where modern people assume their moral sensitivity is superior to God’s!) Furthermore, we must not make the mistake of equating slavery in ancient Israel with antebellum slavery in the United States. If the biblical dictates regarding slavery, including the regulations found in Exodus 21:16, 20–21, had been enforced in Western nations in the 1800s, then slavery in the United States would have been very different.

The regulations regarding slaves in Exodus 21, far from being inhumane, would have been far more humane and protective of the slave in Israel than in any of the surrounding nations.
__________________
"All real Americans love the sting of battle and may God have mercy on my enemies because I wont".

'Progressivism' is nothing more than a dressed up co-opted term for 'Marxism'.
Posts: 18,476
Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 08:46 PM   #48
Ash Ash is offline
Hail to the King
 
Ash's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2001
Casino cash: $11852
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevieray View Post
please answer the question..by using that term, what are you attempting to imply?
Again, this term was used to great frivolity in our past exchanges.Does the term upset you? I can refrain from using it.
Posts: 854
Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 08:47 PM   #49
Ash Ash is offline
Hail to the King
 
Ash's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2001
Casino cash: $11852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefshrink View Post
Here let's get a full proper context here on slavery from got questions.org. Hopefully you will read this.


Question: "Why does the Bible allow slave owners to beat their slaves?"

Answer: Exodus 21:20–21 says, “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.” Why did the Mosaic Law allow for slave owners to beat their slaves? The obvious answer is that, in the social structure of ancient Israel, physical punishment was considered the appropriate response for acts of disobedience and rebellion. The text does not specifically say that the corporal punishment has to be for some form of disobedience; however, based on the larger Old Testament context, it is safe to assume that slave masters were not allowed carte blanche authority to do whatever they wanted to their slaves. In Exodus 21, slave owners are limited in what they can do: if the master goes too far and the slave dies, the master will be punished. If the Old Testament Law is followed consistently, then the punishment for the slave owner might even include the death penalty for murder. Of course, if a master beats his slave and the slave is unable to work for some time, the master has punished himself by losing the work he might have received from the slave. The implication here is that it is in the master’s best interest not to be too severe.

Exodus 21:20–21 is certainly troubling to people with modern sensitivities. Modern people in the free world have come to view autonomous personal freedom as the highest form of good and anything that curtails personal freedom as the ultimate evil. People may be tempted to read a passage like Exodus 21:20–21 and charge God with moral evil. Such charges need to be challenged, for slavery is not the only area where modern sensitivities and biblical guidelines clash—abortion and homosexuality are two other flashpoints. The danger on this issue is that most Christians would agree that slavery is morally reprehensible.

There are two distinct approaches in formulating an answer to why the Bible allows for slavery, and the outcome will be determined by what a person accepts as the authority. The first approach goes something like this:

Slavery is morally reprehensible in all situations.
The Bible allows slavery.
Therefore the Bible is an unreliable moral guide.

In this case, current moral sensitivities are the authority, and the Bible is measured against those sensibilities.

The second goes something like this:

The Bible is a reliable moral guide.
The Bible allows slavery.
Therefore slavery cannot be morally reprehensible in all situations.

In this case, the Bible is the final authority, and modern thinking about right and wrong has to be adjusted to accommodate what we find in the Bible.

Slavery has been a fact of human existence for almost as long as the human race has been in existence. Physical punishment to enforce compliance has been part of slavery for just as long. Corporal punishment has also been used in situations other than slavery. For example, physical chastisements were commonly employed as punishment for crimes committed and for the enforcing of discipline in the military. We are not so far removed from the time when brutal physical punishment was administered and accepted by almost everyone as legitimate. In the British Navy, flogging for disobedience or insubordination was common until the mid-19th century, and caning was used until the mid-20th century. In some places, such as Singapore, caning is still an official form of punishment for certain crimes.

The Bible does not forbid slavery, nor does it demand that every slave owner who wants to please God must immediately emancipate his slaves. Instead, the Bible at every turn calls for a treatment of slaves that would have been more humane than any found in the culture at large. The very idea that a master could be punished in any way for killing a slave would have been scandalous at the time Moses gave the Law. The culture at large made no attempt to grant slaves any rights. Slaves in Egypt or Moab, for example, were afforded no such protection.

Earlier in the same chapter, kidnapping for the purpose of slavery is condemned and the death penalty enjoined: “Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession” (Exodus 21:16). (Ironically, the death penalty is another area where modern people assume their moral sensitivity is superior to God’s!) Furthermore, we must not make the mistake of equating slavery in ancient Israel with antebellum slavery in the United States. If the biblical dictates regarding slavery, including the regulations found in Exodus 21:16, 20–21, had been enforced in Western nations in the 1800s, then slavery in the United States would have been very different.

The regulations regarding slaves in Exodus 21, far from being inhumane, would have been far more humane and protective of the slave in Israel than in any of the surrounding nations.
I don't give a poop about your context slavery is FU$%ing slavery and it is immoral.
Posts: 854
Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 08:48 PM   #50
Chiefshrink Chiefshrink is online now
MVP
 
Chiefshrink's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: donkey land
Casino cash: $18001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
I have researched it
Have you researched honestly who Jesus say's he was and still is and the claims he made or did you just read only what Harris,Dawkins and Hitchens say and that suffices you?
__________________
"All real Americans love the sting of battle and may God have mercy on my enemies because I wont".

'Progressivism' is nothing more than a dressed up co-opted term for 'Marxism'.
Posts: 18,476
Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 08:50 PM   #51
stevieray stevieray is offline
it's all right if you don't
 
stevieray's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: on The Wall
Casino cash: $34950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
Again, this term was used to great frivolity in our past exchanges.Does the term upset you? I can refrain from using it.
do what you like...I'm still waiting for you to just say what you think it implies...pretty simple.
Posts: 49,287
stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:00 PM   #52
Chiefshrink Chiefshrink is online now
MVP
 
Chiefshrink's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: donkey land
Casino cash: $18001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
I don't give a poop about your context slavery is FU$%ing slavery and it is immoral.
I get that "The Truth" is very difficult for you but I would challenge you to really openly and honestly research who Jesus was and really is to this day and actually read a book from a highly intellectual person on the same level as a Harris,Dawkins or Hitchens who 'was' an atheist just like these other guys 'until' he actually researched the other side of the argument honestly and then became convinced that Jesus is God because he approached it like a pure honest journalist only looking at the hard evidence. His name is Lee Strobel and he wrote a book about his whole journey from atheism to becoming a Christian and interviewing 18 experts on the other side of the argument on the subject of Jesus and the Bible. The book is called "Case for Christ". He was an investigative journalist for the Chicago Tribune in the late 60's through the 80's receiving his journalism degree from Missouri and his law degree from Yale.
__________________
"All real Americans love the sting of battle and may God have mercy on my enemies because I wont".

'Progressivism' is nothing more than a dressed up co-opted term for 'Marxism'.
Posts: 18,476
Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:00 PM   #53
Hammock Parties Hammock Parties is offline
game manager a filthy animal
 
Hammock Parties's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2002
Casino cash: $577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefshrink View Post
Of course you are because you were born with the sin virus as all of us are thus wired to only think about ourselves first by sin nature and only this existence. Sin separates us from actually loving others perfectly and most of all keeps us from "knowing" God personally. But thanks be to Jesus who died for our sins thus sin now no longer makes us slaves to sin because now we have the Holy Spirit in our soul to resist sin and live with God's power to overcome whatever sins trip us up. And the biggest and best part of Jesus dying for our sins is now we finally get to have a relationship with Him and truly "know" him as opposed to just "knowing about" Him. Read this scripture below as it talks about sinful man(those without Christ) being without excuse on judgement day because God has wired every human being to know in their soul that He does exist. So as much as you want to deny that there is a God, deep in your soul God has created that element in all of us that we know He does exist long before we are saved. Here read this scripture below as it talks about that deep soulful knowing in all of us.

Romans 1:19-32
19 They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. 20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.
21 Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. 22 Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools. 23 And instead of worshiping the glorious, ever-living God, they worshiped idols made to look like mere people and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 So God abandoned them to do whatever shameful things their hearts desired. As a result, they did vile and degrading things with each other’s bodies. 25 They traded the truth about God for a lie. So they worshiped and served the things God created instead of the Creator himself, who is worthy of eternal praise! Amen. 26 That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. 27 And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.

28 Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done. 29 Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, quarreling, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. 30 They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They invent new ways of sinning, and they disobey their parents. 31 They refuse to understand, break their promises, are heartless, and have no mercy. 32 They know God’s justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too.



Oh no, far from it !! God wishes no one to go to hell. I Tim 2:4 and II Peter 3:9

2 Peter 3:9New International Version (NIV)
9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

One of the great Christian Theologians and Pastors of our day is John Piper. Here is an excerpt from his book "Desiring God" discussing hell.

The misery of hell will be so great that no one will want to be there. They will be weeping and gnashing their teeth (Matthew 8:12). Between their sobs, they will not speak the words, “I want this.” They will not be able to say amid the flames of the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14), “I want this.” “The smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night” (Revelation 14:11). No one wants this.

When there are only two choices, and you choose against one, it does not mean that you want the other, if you are ignorant of the outcome of both. Unbelieving people know neither God nor hell. This ignorance is not innocent. Apart from regenerating grace, all people “suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18).

The person who rejects God does not know the real horrors of hell. This may be because he does not believe hell exists, or it may be because he convinces himself that it would be tolerably preferable to heaven.

But whatever he believes or does not believe, when he chooses against God, he is wrong about God and about hell. He is not, at that point, preferring the real hell over the real God. He is blind to both. He does not perceive the true glories of God, and he does not perceive the true horrors of hell.

So when a person chooses against God and, therefore, de facto chooses hell—or when he jokes about preferring hell with his friends over heaven with boring religious people—he does not know what he is doing. What he rejects is not the real heaven (nobody will be boring in heaven), and what he “wants” is not the real hell, but the tolerable hell of his imagination.

When he dies, he will be shocked beyond words. The miseries are so great he would do anything in his power to escape. That it is not in his power to repent does not mean he wants to be there. Esau wept bitterly that he could not repent (Hebrew 12:17). The hell he was entering into he found to be totally miserable, and he wanted out. The meaning of hell is the scream: “I hate this, and I want out.”

What sinners want is not hell but sin. That hell is the inevitable consequence of unforgiven sin does not make the consequence desirable. It is not what people want—certainly not what they “most want.” Wanting sin is no more equal to wanting hell than wanting chocolate is equal to wanting obesity. Or wanting cigarettes is equal to wanting cancer.

Beneath this misleading emphasis on hell being what people “most want” is the notion that God does not “send” people to hell. But this is simply unbiblical. God certainly does send people to hell. He does pass sentence, and he executes it. Indeed, worse than that. God does not just “send,” he “throws.” “If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown (Greek eblethe) into the lake of fire” (Revelation 20:15; cf. Mark 9:47; Matthew 13:42; 25:30).

The reason the Bible speaks of people being “thrown” into hell is that no one will willingly go there, once they see what it really is. No one standing on the shore of the lake of fire jumps in. They do not choose it, and they will not want it. They have chosen sin. They have wanted sin. They do not want the punishment. When they come to the shore of this fiery lake, they must be thrown in.

When someone says that no one is in hell who doesn’t want to be there, they give the false impression that hell is within the limits of what humans can tolerate. It inevitably gives the impression that hell is less horrible than Jesus says it is.

We should ask: How did Jesus expect his audience to think and feel about the way he spoke of hell? The words he chose were not chosen to soften the horror by being accommodating to cultural sensibilities. He spoke of a “fiery furnace” (Matthew 13:42), and “weeping and gnashing teeth” (Luke 13:28), and “outer darkness” (Matthew 25:30), and “their worm [that] does not die” (Mark 9:48), and “eternal punishment” (Matthew 25:46), and “unquenchable fire” (Mark 9:43), and being “cut in pieces” (Matthew 24:51).

These words are chosen to portray hell as an eternal, conscious experience that no one would or could ever “want” if they knew what they were choosing. Therefore, if someone is going to emphasize that people freely “choose” hell, or that no one is there who doesn’t “want” to be there, surely he should make every effort to clarify that, when they get there, they will not want this.

Surely the pattern of Jesus—who used blazing words to blast the hell-bent blindness out of everyone—should be followed. Surely, we will grope for words that show no one, no one, no one will want to be in hell when they experience what it really is. Surely everyone who desires to save people from hell will not mainly stress that it is “wantable” or “chooseable,” but that it is horrible beyond description—weeping, gnashing teeth, darkness, worm-eaten, fiery, furnace-like, dismembering, eternal, punishment, “an abhorrence to all flesh” (Isaiah 66:24).

I thank God, as a hell-deserving sinner, for Jesus Christ my Savior, who became a curse for me and suffered hellish pain that he might deliver me from the wrath to come. While there is time, he will do that for anyone who turns from sin and treasures him and his work above all.

Trembling before such realities, and trusting Jesus,

Pastor John
__________________
My name is Clay. I am a clueless moron when it comes to evaluating football talent. I thought that Pat Mahomes was unworthy of being drafted in the first round, also, I wanted Geno Smith first overall. I also claimed that tyreek hill was undeserving of even being in the CFL. I am wrong 20x more than I'm right and I will troll this site with my uneducated football takes.
Posts: 189,687
Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.Hammock Parties is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:01 PM   #54
Ash Ash is offline
Hail to the King
 
Ash's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2001
Casino cash: $11852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefshrink View Post
Have you researched honestly who Jesus say's he was and still is and the claims he made or did you just read only what Harris,Dawkins and Hitchens say and that suffices you?

Jesus may have been a real-life hippie who said some cool shit and managed to get himself crucified. He may me a myth, with a lot of similarities to other Gods before him like Horas, Dionysus or Mithra who share similar claims like virgin births, born on the 25th of Dec, single sacrifices to save humanity. I am willing to lean to the side he was a historical figure that was very charismatic

I just don't believe your supernatural claims as there is no evidence or a metric to detect your unfalsifiable claims.


If you are making extraordinary claims you must provide extraordinary evidence
Posts: 854
Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:07 PM   #55
Chiefshrink Chiefshrink is online now
MVP
 
Chiefshrink's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: donkey land
Casino cash: $18001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
If you are making extraordinary claims you must provide extraordinary evidence
If you have the honest courage which I don't know if you do at this point, just read Lee's book is all I ask. Actually read something from the other side.
__________________
"All real Americans love the sting of battle and may God have mercy on my enemies because I wont".

'Progressivism' is nothing more than a dressed up co-opted term for 'Marxism'.
Posts: 18,476
Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:10 PM   #56
Chiefshrink Chiefshrink is online now
MVP
 
Chiefshrink's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: donkey land
Casino cash: $18001
Hey Mr. Gluteus maximus 11 !!! Please respect the thread.
__________________
"All real Americans love the sting of battle and may God have mercy on my enemies because I wont".

'Progressivism' is nothing more than a dressed up co-opted term for 'Marxism'.
Posts: 18,476
Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:13 PM   #57
Ash Ash is offline
Hail to the King
 
Ash's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2001
Casino cash: $11852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefshrink View Post
If you have the honest courage which I don't know if you do at this point, just read Lee's book is all I ask. Actually read something from the other side.
I assure you I've heard every argument for Theism and they all fail to meet the burden of proof.

Who are you to tell me what honest courage is?I may watch it I may not but it won't have anything to do with courage.
Posts: 854
Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.Ash would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:16 PM   #58
stevieray stevieray is offline
it's all right if you don't
 
stevieray's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: on The Wall
Casino cash: $34950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
I don't give a f#$k about the word.
sure you do, enough to think it invalidates this thread, but instead , it invalidated your argument..by your own "logic"

Posts: 49,287
stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:17 PM   #59
stevieray stevieray is offline
it's all right if you don't
 
stevieray's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: on The Wall
Casino cash: $34950
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevieray View Post
do what you like...I'm still waiting for you to just say what you think it implies...pretty simple.
cmon, now, don't chicken out now...
Posts: 49,287
stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.stevieray is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2017, 09:22 PM   #60
Chiefshrink Chiefshrink is online now
MVP
 
Chiefshrink's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: donkey land
Casino cash: $18001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
I assure you I've heard every argument for Theism and they all fail to meet the burden of proof.

Who are you to tell me what honest courage is?I may watch it I may not but it won't have anything to do with courage.
My bad for not defining what I meant by honest courage. I am not calling you a coward in the formal sense of the word. But anytime you challenge someone's worldview paradigm that is pristine and flawless to them that is always tied to their ego it is very very threatening to them that they just might be wrong therefore they resist truly looking at the other side of the argument or 'think' they have covered all the bases but in reality have not. Trust me, I see this everyday in my office.
__________________
"All real Americans love the sting of battle and may God have mercy on my enemies because I wont".

'Progressivism' is nothing more than a dressed up co-opted term for 'Marxism'.
Posts: 18,476
Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.Chiefshrink is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  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 11:13 AM.


This is a test for a client's site.
Fort Worth Texas Process Servers
Covering Arlington, Fort Worth, Grand Prairie and surrounding communities.
Tarrant County, Texas and Johnson County, Texas.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.