| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
James Riske
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:13 am Post subject: Re: chilton runs away form his lies |
 |
|
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:49:45 GMT, "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx
for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | On 21 Aug 2008 17:11:52 GMT,
Ray Fischer -- CRIMINAL-coddler and Liar <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote:
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer -- CRIMINAL-coddler and Liar <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote...
... NOTHING sensible or truthful. Except for this ONE
point:
Let's see what the coward is running away from, what he
can't refute or deny:
[[[ READERS: Whe you read my response to him on this,
earlier (and repeated, farther down), you'll see just how
DISHONEST he persists in being. ]]]
snip |
No Craig he's caught you in another lie, crying about it will not
change that fact.
Frodo: "Why do you do that?"
Sam: "What?"
Frodo: "Call him names? Run him down all the time."
Sam: "Because that's what he is Mister Frodo. There's naught left in him
but lies and deceit. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 1:42 am Post subject: Re: chilton runs away form his lies |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:13:17 -0400,
James Riske <james.riske@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer -- CRIMINAL-coddler and Liar <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote:
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer -- CRIMINAL-coddler and Liar <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote...
|
| Quote: | ... NOTHING sensible or truthful. Except for this ONE
point:
Let's see what the coward is running away from, what he
can't refute or deny:
[[[ READERS: Whe you read my response to him on this,
earlier (and repeated, farther down), you'll see just how
DISHONEST he persists in being. ]]]
No, Craig, he's caught you in another lie, crying about it will not
change that fact.
|
Ah. RISKE! Back to make a complete FOOL of yourself
again, I see. At least you're CONSISTENT.
ROTFL!! (What a tool.)
| Quote: | ------------------------------
AGAIN you ignore the fact that the large number of "illegal"
immigrants who overstay visas are not criminals under any law.
Wrong.
Stop lying.
You just stated that breaking the law makes a person a criminal.
Therefore you are a criminal.
Your stupidity is exceeded only, apparently, by a profound lack of
intelligence on your part. Intellegent people don't self-destruct in
public, constantly, as you do.
In another post, I pointed out to you that this IS breaking a
law (or laws), but those do not carry criminal penalties.
Neither does overstaying a visa.
Overstaying a visa is what I was just referring to. Do try to
keep up.
Therefore you are a liar for claiming that all "illegal" immigrants
are criminals.
See my complete response to you below -- which CONTAINS all
of the portions that you DISHONESTLY **omitted**
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
On 21 Aug 2008 03:51:39 GMT,
rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
... NOTHING sensible or truthful. Except for this ONE
point:
AGAIN you ignore the fact that the large number of "illegal"
immigrants who overstay visas are not criminals under any law.
Wrong. In another post, I pointed out to you that this
IS breaking a law (or laws), but those do not carry criminal
penalties as do the ones I cited that govern SNEAKING
into the country.
For the most part, all that can happen to them is deporta-
tion. BUT -- for returning ILLEGALLY while still forbidden to
do so -- THAT is a FELONY. And more than 30% of deported
ILLEGAL aliens, per CNN, *do* just that. MAKING instant
felons of themselves.
Previous post, to which NO other sensible responses were
made, follows:
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
On 21 Aug 2008 02:36:30 GMT,
Ray Fischer -- CRIMINAL-coddler and Liar <fischer@sonic.net> wrote:
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote:
[[[ READERS: I probably *should* have simply ignored
this utterly MORONIC post by Ray, and deleted it from
my newsreader. But THEN I realized -- What FUN I
would be missing by doing that. Since Ray's idiocies
in here are SO profound, it'll be productive for me to
PROVE it (again!) to everyone.
When you see any of my text that's enclosed in double
brackets, that is RESTORED text which Ray has
dishonestly omitted. Something he does habitually,
so as to try to twist his opponents meanings. He's
so dense, he still hasn't figured out that I *never*
let him get away with that. You'll see that he did
a LOT of this in THIS... er... "response." ]]]
Which are you? The priest or the Levite?
A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into
the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him
and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be
going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by
on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and
saw him, passed by on the other side.
Luke 10:30-32
I would be analogous to the Samaritan... whom you dishonestly
OMITTED when you cited only PART of that parable. In 21st
century terms, an egalitarian who defends personal liberties against
bigotry and stupidity.
The Samaritan, who took the person in and helped him, is like you
who wants to drive people out and make them suffer?
NO driving them out, and NO forcing them to suffer. [[ They SNEAKED
into the country in violation of federal laws, so it's time for them to
return HOME again. On their own hook. As easy as that. No deporta-
tions necessary. And recently, the government gave them a free pass
to do that voluntarily, without penalty. ]]
Interestingly, those criminals are SO dishonest that as of yesterday,
according to CNN, only SIX of them (out of up to 20 million!) had done
that.
lie-snip
"Run away!"
Oh? You mean the way YOU do when you dishonestly OMIT
**relevant** text, as you did above... without even making so
much as a <snip> notation? You'd be FUNNY, Ray, if you just
weren't do damned pathetically ignorant.
Not only was the comment of yours IRrelevant, but it also
was an outright LIE, so I did you a favor by snipping it. And,
you'll notice that *I* -- unlike you -- USED a <snip> notation.
Again and again you say that you want to force "illegal"
immigrants to leave. Now you claim otherwise.
First of all:
First of all, you are a lying, two-faced, hypocritiical, bigot.
[[[ READERS: I left that in so you can easily see for
yourself how monumental a liar he is. ]]]
(1) They are ILLEGAL aliens. No quotation marks. [[ They
are very *literally* ILLEGAL-alien criminals, who SNEAKED
into the country in violation of federal law. ]]
You're claim is proven to be a lie.
Wrong again! HERE are the Federal Laws that those SNEAKS
violate several of, depending upon how they do it. So you LIED
again because I have presented these to many times before -- and
as recently as just a day or two ago:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title8/chapter12_subchapterii_partviii_.html
(2) They are NOT "immigrants." [[ IMMIGRANTS are the
HONEST people who came into the USA *legally.*
Your calling scumbag ILLEGAL aliens "immigrants" is an
insult to tens of millions of millions of HONEST people. ]]
YTOu fascists NEED to redefine words to justify your agenda of hate.
Was that a typo, or evidence that you were frothing at the mouth
as you wrote that moronic lie?
There was NO redefinition. The difference between IMMIGRANTS
and ILLEGAL-ALIEN criminals is clear as crystal to ALL people having a
modicum of intelligence. And defending the millions of legal immigrants
who EARNED their status by obeying the law and following the rules,
by CODDLING criminals the way YOU do is precisely the OPPOSITE
of an agenda of hate. YOU are the hateful one, because you don't
give a rat's ass for LEGAL *immigrants*.
Then:
(3) I have never claimed to want to "force" the illegals
out. To the contrary, I advocate NO prosecution of
them, or deportations solely for their having SNEAKED
in. My proposed law would impose mandatory heavy
fines and imprisonment on the morons who flout the
law by *hiring* and/or *retaining* ILLEGAL aliens.
Thus forcing them to leave the country.
That all depends on how creative they are. They were, after
all, creative enough to SNEAK *in* to the country. And did you know
that just this evening, OBAMA just came out and specified in no
uncertain terms that the laws against EMPLOYING *illegal* aliens
should be strictly enforced. SO MUCH for you thinking that seeking
that is a Republican idea. Obama is the DEMOCRATIC presumptive
nominee for President. That blows YOUR stupidity clear out of the
water.
[[ Any ILLEGAL alien who finds he can keep living here
without eating or paying rent could feel free to stay,
with NO threat of prosecution. (It might even work
out for a handful who have American sugar daddies.) ]]
Dumbshit.
You most certainly are. And you are so GOOD at *proving* it!
Constantly.
(4) There is NO EXCUSE for being an ILLEGAL alien.
Yes, you racist bigot, there is.
Really? Isn't it INTERESTING, then, that you have NEVER
been able to back that up? (And I remind you that since you TRASH
the hard work of the LEGAL immigrants, that makes YOU the bigot.)
They SNEAKED into the country in violation of federal laws, ...
So you're like the pharisees with their worship of rules and laws.
No.
LIAR!
99.9999% on the Irony Meter. Particularly since I, unlike
you, make a point of NEVER lying in my posts.
Jesus was no Pharisee, [[ and he recognized the value of
laws, as embodied in the Ten Commandments. The laws against
ILLEGAL immigration are very SENSIBLE laws. ]]
YOU'RE NOT JESUS, YOU STINKING HYPOCRITE!
I don't recall making any such claim. And as a Christian,
I *do* put full stock in everything in the Bible that HE said.
[[ ...so it's time for them to return HOME again. On their
own hook.
So you DO want to force them to leave.
Nope. Any of them that can get along without money can
feel free to stay. ]]
[[[ Since Ray was OFF-topic for this thread -- something he
makes a HABIT of -- I'll also post this in a thread of its
own that is ON this Illegal Alien topic. ]]]
|
As a reminder to the Readers, I'm providing the SIG below that
Ray has never been able to disprove or refute ANY part of. ---
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
FACTS about ILLEGAL Aliens
(1) ILLEGAL aliens did not belong here in the FIRST place.
(2) Federal laws prohibit undocumented entry into the USA.
(3) Federal laws STRICTLY prohibit WORKING in the USA without
proper and legal documentation (such as a Green Card.)
(4) Every ILLEGAL alien is a CRIMINAL by default, for entering
illegally, and even MORE of one if WORKING here.
(5) Throughout our history, tens of millions of people have
worked HARD to EARN residency and citizenship here.
(a) CRIMINALS should NEVER be *rewarded* for being
criminals.
(b) According LEGAL status to ILLEGAL, criminal aliens
without their INSTEAD applying for it through proper
channels and EARNING it would be a massive **insult**
to the millions who did it the RIGHT and LEGAL way.
(6) Urge your Congressperson to SUPPORT H.R. 1940.
More information:
http://apifar.blogspot.com/2008/01/almost-all-of-usas-14-million-illegal.html
If the URL doesn't work, combine its components,
below, in your browser:
http://
apifar.blogspot.com/
2008/01/almost-all-of-usas-14-million-illegal.html
And here's a real EYE-OPENER!! --
http://www.immigrationcounters.com/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:52 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
"Randy ®" <pulpitfire@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:elbua45981ipg9p826tqqgnlmb8gjb4t71@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 08:05:54 -0500,
|
[snip]
| Quote: | Thus, you simply confirm what I just said, which is that if
you were to allow that God is sovereign in the salvation of
sinners, you believe that would make God the author of men's
sin! Romans 9 anticipated and refuted your error:
|
One more time for the dull and slow-witted: PAUL DIDN'T KNOW!
PAUL DIDN'T PERCEIVE OF THE DUALISM/TRIUNISM OF THE TRUTH (though he started
to, which accounts for his OWN dualistic/triunistic statements).
THE DISCIPLES DIDN'T KNOW (although they SHOULD have, since Jesus was making
multiplistic statements ALL OVER THE PLACE, as recorded in the Gospels).
THE PROPHETS DIDN'T KNOW (though Ezekiel et al. indicated that they somewhat
did).
JOHN KNEW. HE WAS THE LAST MAN LEFT STANDING. HE COMPLETED THE WORK (just as
Jesus said the last man standing would).
JOHN realized the dualism/triunism of Jesus' teachings.
JOHN realized the dualistic/triunistic statements Jesus was making.
JOHN realized the FULL NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE, and our part in it.
PAUL DIDN'T.
SO THE ERROR IS NOT MINE. THE ERROR IS PAUL'S (not because of anything Paul
did, but simply because HE WAS NOT TOLD, so HE COULDN'T KNOW), AN ERROR THAT
YOU CONTINUE TO PROPAGATE BY NOT READING THE ENTIRE BIBLE TOGETHER, BUT
PIECEMEAL SO YOU CAN MAKE IT SAY WHAT YOU WANT IT TO SAY INSTEAD OF
LISTENING TO WHAT IT HAS TO SAY.
Like I said before, the Bible is CUMULATIVE and EVOLUTIONARY, but the
NITWITS keep reading it IN PIECES, and then they JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS BASED
ON THEIR DEFECTIVE HUMAN LOGIC, instead of relying on SPIRITUAL INTUITION.
[snip the rest of the lop-sided goofballs pointless "proof versing."]
Ike |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Gabriel
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:07 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:00:51 -0400, Bill Baker
<wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
: On Thursday 31 July 2008 04:34 pm (???raig Chilton??? -- Rx
: for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote
: in message news:<be849415ap2g3eap5s7hvpab8reruetodu@4ax.com>...
:
: > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:18:37 -0400,
: > "Gabriel" <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com> wrote:
: >> Jesus says it's our business to preach the gospel.
: >>
: >> Mark 16:15-16 KJVR And he said unto them, Go ye into all the
: >> world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that
: >> believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth
: >> not shall be damned.
: >>
: >> If you do not care for people, and do not care of the destruction
: >> many are unknowingly headed for, then you will do nothing. If you
: >> do care, then you'll make sure people are at least *aware* of the
: >> truth.
: >
: > That's why I *passively* (as in NOT "in-your-face") proselytize
: > from time to time by leaving UNbigoted tracts around for people to
: > either take or leave, as they choose. People who *actively*
: > porselytize are obnoxious and buttinskyish jerks. People have the
: > RIGHT to believe (or NOT believe), as they CHOOSE. Without
: > outside interference.
:
: Absolutely. According to the Bible, Jesus said, "No one can come to Me,
: unless the Father who sent Me draw him" (John 6:44). So arguing with
: people about what belief is right is useless. I firmly support everyone's
: right to believe in whatever they want to. Whether it's Judaism,
: Christianity, Islam, Atheism, Buddhism, Paganism or even Satanism. Because
: those religions are the way that God has drawn their adherents to him.
So all atheists are going to heaven? Or are you saying they will
all eventually become Christians? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Bill Baker
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:08 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Monday 25 August 2008 07:07 pm Gabriel <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com>
wrote in message news:<one6b41glboers4mdeojvujum5j5cl6rcq@4ax.com>...
| Quote: | On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:00:51 -0400, Bill Baker
wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
: On Thursday 31 July 2008 04:34 pm (???raig Chilton??? -- Rx
: for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com
: wrote in message news:<be849415ap2g3eap5s7hvpab8reruetodu@4ax.com>...
:
: > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:18:37 -0400,
: > "Gabriel" <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com> wrote:
: >> Jesus says it's our business to preach the gospel.
:
: >> Mark 16:15-16 KJVR And he said unto them, Go ye into all the
: >> world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that
: >> believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth
: >> not shall be damned.
:
: >> If you do not care for people, and do not care of the destruction
: >> many are unknowingly headed for, then you will do nothing. If you
: >> do care, then you'll make sure people are at least *aware* of the
: >> truth.
:
: > That's why I *passively* (as in NOT "in-your-face") proselytize
: > from time to time by leaving UNbigoted tracts around for people to
: > either take or leave, as they choose. People who *actively*
: > porselytize are obnoxious and buttinskyish jerks. People have the
: > RIGHT to believe (or NOT believe), as they CHOOSE. Without
: > outside interference.
:
: Absolutely. According to the Bible, Jesus said, "No one can come to Me,
: unless the Father who sent Me draw him" (John 6:44). So arguing with
: people about what belief is right is useless. I firmly support
: everyone's
: right to believe in whatever they want to. Whether it's Judaism,
: Christianity, Islam, Atheism, Buddhism, Paganism or even Satanism.
: Because those religions are the way that God has drawn their adherents
: to him.
So all atheists are going to heaven? Or are you saying they will
all eventually become Christians?
|
There are atheists who are closer to heaven than many Christians are.
However, ALL people will eventually go to heaven. Their beliefs are just
their way of being drawn to God.
--
Bushism 12-23/24:
"I do think we need for a troop to be able to house his family. That's an
important part of building morale in the military."
--Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida; March 12, 2001 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Gabriel
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:43 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:08:46 -0400, Bill Baker
<wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
: On Monday 25 August 2008 07:07 pm Gabriel <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com>
: wrote in message news:<one6b41glboers4mdeojvujum5j5cl6rcq@4ax.com>...
:
: > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:00:51 -0400, Bill Baker
: > <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
: >
: > : On Thursday 31 July 2008 04:34 pm (???raig Chilton??? -- Rx
: > : for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
: > : wrote in message news:<be849415ap2g3eap5s7hvpab8reruetodu@4ax.com>...
: > :
: > : > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:18:37 -0400,
: > : > "Gabriel" <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com> wrote:
: > : >> Jesus says it's our business to preach the gospel.
: > : >>
: > : >> Mark 16:15-16 KJVR And he said unto them, Go ye into all the
: > : >> world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that
: > : >> believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth
: > : >> not shall be damned.
: > : >>
: > : >> If you do not care for people, and do not care of the destruction
: > : >> many are unknowingly headed for, then you will do nothing. If you
: > : >> do care, then you'll make sure people are at least *aware* of the
: > : >> truth.
: > : >
: > : > That's why I *passively* (as in NOT "in-your-face") proselytize
: > : > from time to time by leaving UNbigoted tracts around for people to
: > : > either take or leave, as they choose. People who *actively*
: > : > porselytize are obnoxious and buttinskyish jerks. People have the
: > : > RIGHT to believe (or NOT believe), as they CHOOSE. Without
: > : > outside interference.
: > :
: > : Absolutely. According to the Bible, Jesus said, "No one can come to Me,
: > : unless the Father who sent Me draw him" (John 6:44). So arguing with
: > : people about what belief is right is useless. I firmly support
: > : everyone's
: > : right to believe in whatever they want to. Whether it's Judaism,
: > : Christianity, Islam, Atheism, Buddhism, Paganism or even Satanism.
: > : Because those religions are the way that God has drawn their adherents
: > : to him.
: >
: > So all atheists are going to heaven? Or are you saying they will
: > all eventually become Christians?
:
: There are atheists who are closer to heaven than many Christians are.
: However, ALL people will eventually go to heaven. Their beliefs are just
: their way of being drawn to God.
Not according to Jesus Christ and God's Word:
Jesus said,
Matthew 7:13-14 KJVR Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is
the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and
many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the
gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and *few*
there be that find it.
Do you not believe the Bible is the Word of God?
And how is it you think a person gets to heaven? By being "good"? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ray Fischer
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:39 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
Gabriel <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Bill Baker
: There are atheists who are closer to heaven than many Christians are.
: However, ALL people will eventually go to heaven. Their beliefs are just
: their way of being drawn to God.
Not according to Jesus Christ and God's Word:
|
But you're a liar so why should anybody believe you?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Bill Baker
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:17 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Tuesday 26 August 2008 01:43 pm Gabriel <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com>
wrote in message news:<h0g8b4pcqe8oam1hpk2ctcaqlcu7rj1qv5@4ax.com>...
| Quote: | On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:08:46 -0400, Bill Baker
wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
: On Monday 25 August 2008 07:07 pm Gabriel <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com
: wrote in message news:<one6b41glboers4mdeojvujum5j5cl6rcq@4ax.com>...
:
: > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:00:51 -0400, Bill Baker
: > <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
:
: > : On Thursday 31 July 2008 04:34 pm (???raig Chilton??? -- Rx
: > : for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction!
: > : <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote in message
: > : news:<be849415ap2g3eap5s7hvpab8reruetodu@4ax.com>...
: > :
: > : > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:18:37 -0400,
: > : > "Gabriel" <gabriel_baptist@hotmail.com> wrote:
: > : >> Jesus says it's our business to preach the gospel.
: > :
: > : >> Mark 16:15-16 KJVR And he said unto them, Go ye into all the
: > : >> world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that
: > : >> believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth
: > : >> not shall be damned.
: > :
: > : >> If you do not care for people, and do not care of the
: > : >> destruction
: > : >> many are unknowingly headed for, then you will do nothing. If you
: > : >> do care, then you'll make sure people are at least *aware* of the
: > : >> truth.
: > :
: > : > That's why I *passively* (as in NOT "in-your-face")
: > : > proselytize
: > : > from time to time by leaving UNbigoted tracts around for people to
: > : > either take or leave, as they choose. People who *actively*
: > : > porselytize are obnoxious and buttinskyish jerks. People have the
: > : > RIGHT to believe (or NOT believe), as they CHOOSE. Without
: > : > outside interference.
: > :
: > : Absolutely. According to the Bible, Jesus said, "No one can come to
: > : Me,
: > : unless the Father who sent Me draw him" (John 6:44). So arguing
: > : with
: > : people about what belief is right is useless. I firmly support
: > : everyone's
: > : right to believe in whatever they want to. Whether it's Judaism,
: > : Christianity, Islam, Atheism, Buddhism, Paganism or even Satanism.
: > : Because those religions are the way that God has drawn their
: > : adherents to him.
:
: > So all atheists are going to heaven? Or are you saying they will
: > all eventually become Christians?
:
: There are atheists who are closer to heaven than many Christians are.
: However, ALL people will eventually go to heaven. Their beliefs are
: just their way of being drawn to God.
Not according to Jesus Christ and God's Word:
Jesus said,
Matthew 7:13-14 KJVR Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is
the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and
many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the
gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and *few*
there be that find it.
|
That doesn't say what you obviously think it says. There's nothing in there
about believing the right way.
| Quote: | Do you not believe the Bible is the Word of God?
|
Do you? According to 1 Cor 15:22-23 "For as in Adam all die, even so in
Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ,
the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming."
ALL people will eventually go to heaven.
| Quote: | And how is it you think a person gets to heaven? By being "good"?
|
How do YOU think a person gets to heaven? By "believing" the right way?
--
Bushism 9-1:
"There's nothing more deep than recognizing Israel's right to exist. That's
the most deep thought of all.... I can't think of anything more deep than
that right."
--Washington, D.C.; March 13, 2002 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:29 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
"Bill Baker" <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:IYidnf3YqpDdbjPVnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
| Quote: | On Friday 22 August 2008 09:34 am H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:<g8mf8u$j6n$1@registered.motzarella.org>...
"Bill Baker" <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:P6-dnSig_KHZnDPVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
On Thursday 21 August 2008 05:44 pm H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:<g8knkm$6gc$1@registered.motzarella.org>...
"Bill Baker" <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:s-Odna9Aa9sNOzDVnZ2dnUVZ_qninZ2d@earthlink.com...
"Aion" is an indeterminate period of time that could be a few days
or
a
thousand years.
WRONG.
RIGHT.
Aion = an age.
Aioinas = all times future.
Aionon = all times past.
Aionios (also Aionion) = ALL TIMES PAST AND FUTURE.
AIONIOS IS THE WORD TRANSLATED "EVERLASTING" IN BOTH STATEMENTS, moron.
The translation is wrong.
MORON: THE TRANSLATION CAN'T BE RIGHT GOING ONE WAY, AND WRONG GOING THE
OTHER WAY.
AIONION MEANS "ETERNAL" IN BOTH INSTANCES.
No it doesn't.
|
LOL
Oh, so there's no eternal life OR death?
Such modality must be convenient for you.
Nevertheless...
1Co 15:32 If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus,
what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to
morrow we die.
| Quote: | kai apeleusontai outoi ein KOLASIN AIONION oi de dekaioi ein ZOEN
AIONION.
KOLSAIN AIONION = ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.
ZOEN AIONION = ETERNAL LIFE.
SAME ADJECTIVE, idiot.
"Aionion" is the adjective form of "aion."
MEANING "ALL TIMES PAST AND FUTURE," AND TRANSLATED "ETERNAL" IN BOTH
INSTANCES, moron--IN THE POSITIVE AND THE NEGATIVE.
Impossible.
What an idiot.
Yes, you are.
kai apeleusontai outoi ein KOLASIN AIONION oi de dekaioi ein ZOEN
AIONION.
SAME ADJECTIVE.
SAME MEANING.
AIONION = ETERNAL...BOTH TIMES, moron.
Nope.
That would mean that people who are alive now have been burning
in hell before they were even born.
NO SHIT, SHERLOCK.
THAT'S WHAT "ETERNAL" MEANS--ALL TIMES PAST, ALL TIMES PRESENT, AND ALL
TIMES FUTURE, i.e. IT IS A PERPENDICULAR STATE OF EXISTENCE WITHOUT
BEGINNING OR END...IN HEAVEN, AND IN HELL.
Which is why I said it's impossible.
|
You have NO IDEA what is "possible" and "not possible," just like the
Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians who fought Jesus in His day.
| Quote: | Face it, you're wrong.
No, YOU don't KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THAT'S the only thing that anyone has to "face."
You're the one who has proved himself to be a complete kook.
|
Thanks: That's what the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians said about
Jesus, too.
And if what He said in the context of THREE-DIMENSIONAL TIME WASN'T true, He
WOULD have to be a kook.
But He wasn't, and it isn't, and you don't HAVE A CLUE as to what YOU are
talking about.
| Quote: | THE SAME TERM APPEARS TWICE IN THE TEXT.
kolasin aionion MEANS "PUNISHMENT ETERNAL."
zoen ainonion MEANS "LIFE ETERNAL."
THERE'S NO MISTRANSLATION TO IT, fraud.
Yes there is, on your part.
I JUST PUT IT IN FRONT OF YOU, PLAIN AS DAY.
And you're wrong.
What a moron.
Yes, you are.
|
One more time for the slow and dull-witted.
The PARSINGS derive the TENSE of the ADJECTIVE, oh, clueless one.
Aion = an age.
Aionas (Aionan) = all times future.
Aionon (aionos) = all times past.
Aionios (also Aionion) = ALL TIMES PAST AND FUTURE.
For example...
Ga 1:5 To whom be glory for ever (and) ever. Amen.
Ga 1:5 o e doxa ein toun aionan ton aionon amen.
To whom be glory for all the future, all the past, amen.
(Where "amen" represents ALL TIMES PRESENT, and there is no "kai" ("and") in
the text.)
| Quote: | kai apeleusontai outoi ein KOLASIN AIONION oi de dekaioi ein ZOEN
AIONION.
IF IT'S NOT "ETERNAL" IN ONE PLACE, THEN IT'S NOT "ETERNAL" IN THE OTHER
PLACE, AND VICE VERSA, idiot.
It's not "eternal" in either place, moron.
|
LOL
What an idiot: OF COURSE it's "eternal:" IN BOTH CONTEXTS, the thesis AND
the antithesis.
| Quote: | TRY LEARNING TO THE READ THE TEXTS INSTEAD OF LETTING OTHER LIARS TELL
YOU
LIES YOU WANT TO HEAR.
IT'S THE EXACT SAME ADJECTIVE, USED IN BOTH THE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE,
IN THE SAME VERSE.
IF THERE'S NO "ETERNAL PUNISHMENT," THAN THERE IS NO "ETERNAL LIFE,"
IDIOT--IT'S THE SAME WORD.
KOLASIN AIONION.
ZOEN AIONION.
Mt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment [KOLASIN
AIONION]: but the righteous into life eternal [ZOEN AIONION].
NOW, YOU MIND EXPLAINING HOW IT CAN BE ONE ONE TIME AND NOT ONE THE
OTHER TIME IN THE SAME VERSE?
HOW ABOUT IN THE SAME BOOK?
If the righteous get eternal life, then it would follow that the
unrighteous
don't.
NO, THE OPPOSING FORCES ARE ETERNAL LIFE AND ETERNAL DEATH, moron: THERE
IS NO THIRD OPTION STATED ANYWHERE IN THE BOOK.
That's what I said. The unrighteous do not get eternal life.
|
Worse, THEY GET ETERNAL HELL (both of which Jesus and the prophets taught).
| Quote: | Which means that there is no eternal hell where people are tortured
forever because that would mean that they would have to have eternal
life
as well.
THAT'S ALL SELF-RATIONALIZATION WHICH HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH
WHAT THE BOOK ACTUALLY SAYS.
SAME ADJECTIVE.
SAME MEANING.
So there is no eternal hell where people get tortured for eternity. QED.
|
Idiot: There is thesis, and there is antithesis, eternal life, and eternal
death, one leading to abundance, and the other leading to perdition.
This is what the Bible teaches.
Now, if you don't believe it, THAT'S YOUR FOOLISHNESS, but DON'T try to tell
me what the Bible says and doesn't say--I've "seen" it and "heard" it, AT
THE SOURCE LEVEL.
| Quote: | [snip the rest of the idiot's blathering which reveals the extent of
his
homemade lies]
Face it, we can go around on this for days and days, but you're not
going
to
change my mind on this.
BECAUSE YOU'VE FULLY EMBRACED FANCIFUL, PLEASANT SOUNDING LIES INSTEAD OF
GOING BY WHAT THE WORD SAYS.
No, because I've embraced the truth.
|
Bub, you and the "truth" have never been in the same zip code.
| Quote: | I already know I'm right.
YOU DON'T "KNOW" ANY SUCH THING, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE TEXTS SPECIFICALLY
PROVE YOU WRONG.
The texts prove nothing of the sort. And I do know that I'm right with
100%
assurance.
|
Which is the typical modality of those bound for destruction...
| Quote: | My beliefs suit me and
nothing you say can change that. But kudos for trying. Better people
than
you have failed.
IT'S YOU WHO IS FAILING YOURSELF, moron.
Nope.
|
Yep.
| Quote: | I PUT THE PLAIN FACTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU.
No, you just put your beliefs in front of me.
|
No, I put the LANGUAGE (which is FACTUAL, not FAITH-BASED) in front of you,
and you prattle on in ignorance.
| Quote: | NOW, IF YOU WANT TO FOOL YOURSELF, AND SAY YOU "BELIEVE" SOMETHING THAT
IS
AN OBVIOUS LIE, GO RIGHT AHEAD...
...BUT YOU'VE BEEN WELL TOLD.
*Chuckle* I don't believe lies.
|
Sure you do--you believe yourself, but your belief is based on
self-deception, so YOU DO INDEED "BELIEVE LIES"--YOUR OWN.
| Quote: | But if you want to believe in the hard
legalism that Jesus preached against, go right ahead.
|
You have NO IDEA what Jesus preached "for" or "against."
He said to the Pharisees "AND NOT TO LEAVE THE OTHER UNDONE," meaning DON'T
LEAVE BEHIND LAWFULNESS--JUST DO IT WITH BALANCE AND COMPASSION.
But the WICKED do always mistake GRACE for LICENSE.
Jesus COVERS sins.
HE DOESN'T NEGATE THEM, as the wicked teach, perverting His teachings in the
process.
In conclusion, HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN, BUT THE HOMOSEXUALS AREN'T GOING TO
HELL BECAUSE IT'S A SIN: BY AND LARGE, THEY'RE GOING TO HELL BECAUSE THEY
DECEIVE THEMSELVES, AND WON'T CONFESS THEIR SINS, even to the point of
PERVERTING THE WORD to their own ends rather than ADMITTING THAT THEY ARE
THE PROBLEM to GOD'S end.
The antichristian antithesis...
"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in
us...
The Christian Thesis...
"But if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive our sins,
and cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
But the wicked do resist the truth, always.
Ike |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Bill Baker
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:28 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Wednesday 27 August 2008 09:29 am H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
<xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:<g93ksr$n5l$1@registered.motzarella.org>...
| Quote: | "Bill Baker" <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:IYidnf3YqpDdbjPVnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
On Friday 22 August 2008 09:34 am H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:<g8mf8u$j6n$1@registered.motzarella.org>...
"Bill Baker" <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:P6-dnSig_KHZnDPVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
On Thursday 21 August 2008 05:44 pm H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:<g8knkm$6gc$1@registered.motzarella.org>...
"Bill Baker" <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:s-Odna9Aa9sNOzDVnZ2dnUVZ_qninZ2d@earthlink.com...
"Aion" is an indeterminate period of time that could be a few days
or
a
thousand years.
WRONG.
RIGHT.
Aion = an age.
Aioinas = all times future.
Aionon = all times past.
Aionios (also Aionion) = ALL TIMES PAST AND FUTURE.
AIONIOS IS THE WORD TRANSLATED "EVERLASTING" IN BOTH STATEMENTS,
moron.
The translation is wrong.
MORON: THE TRANSLATION CAN'T BE RIGHT GOING ONE WAY, AND WRONG GOING THE
OTHER WAY.
AIONION MEANS "ETERNAL" IN BOTH INSTANCES.
No it doesn't.
LOL
Oh, so there's no eternal life OR death?
|
I didn't say that, either.
| Quote: | Such modality must be convenient for you.
|
Such simplistic thinking must be convenient for you.
| Quote: | Nevertheless...
1Co 15:32 If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus,
what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to
morrow we die.
kai apeleusontai outoi ein KOLASIN AIONION oi de dekaioi ein ZOEN
AIONION.
KOLSAIN AIONION = ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.
ZOEN AIONION = ETERNAL LIFE.
SAME ADJECTIVE, idiot.
"Aionion" is the adjective form of "aion."
MEANING "ALL TIMES PAST AND FUTURE," AND TRANSLATED "ETERNAL" IN BOTH
INSTANCES, moron--IN THE POSITIVE AND THE NEGATIVE.
Impossible.
What an idiot.
Yes, you are.
kai apeleusontai outoi ein KOLASIN AIONION oi de dekaioi ein ZOEN
AIONION.
SAME ADJECTIVE.
SAME MEANING.
AIONION = ETERNAL...BOTH TIMES, moron.
Nope.
That would mean that people who are alive now have been burning
in hell before they were even born.
NO SHIT, SHERLOCK.
THAT'S WHAT "ETERNAL" MEANS--ALL TIMES PAST, ALL TIMES PRESENT, AND ALL
TIMES FUTURE, i.e. IT IS A PERPENDICULAR STATE OF EXISTENCE WITHOUT
BEGINNING OR END...IN HEAVEN, AND IN HELL.
Which is why I said it's impossible.
You have NO IDEA what is "possible" and "not possible," just like the
Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians who fought Jesus in His day.
|
Of course I do. You can't be in two places at once. And if you're judged
before you're even born, what's the point of living? Sounds pretty
Calvinistic to me.
| Quote: | Face it, you're wrong.
No, YOU don't KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THAT'S the only thing that anyone has to "face."
You're the one who has proved himself to be a complete kook.
Thanks: That's what the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians said about
Jesus, too.
|
That doesn't mean you're at all like Jesus. It just means you're a kook.
| Quote: | And if what He said in the context of THREE-DIMENSIONAL TIME WASN'T true,
He WOULD have to be a kook.
But He wasn't, and it isn't, and you don't HAVE A CLUE as to what YOU are
talking about.
|
It's you who doesn't have a clue as to what you are talking about.
| Quote: | THE SAME TERM APPEARS TWICE IN THE TEXT.
kolasin aionion MEANS "PUNISHMENT ETERNAL."
zoen ainonion MEANS "LIFE ETERNAL."
THERE'S NO MISTRANSLATION TO IT, fraud.
Yes there is, on your part.
I JUST PUT IT IN FRONT OF YOU, PLAIN AS DAY.
And you're wrong.
What a moron.
Yes, you are.
One more time for the slow and dull-witted.
The PARSINGS derive the TENSE of the ADJECTIVE, oh, clueless one.
Aion = an age.
Aionas (Aionan) = all times future.
Aionon (aionos) = all times past.
Aionios (also Aionion) = ALL TIMES PAST AND FUTURE.
|
Wrong.
| Quote: | For example...
Ga 1:5 To whom be glory for ever (and) ever. Amen.
Ga 1:5 o e doxa ein toun aionan ton aionon amen.
To whom be glory for all the future, all the past, amen.
(Where "amen" represents ALL TIMES PRESENT, and there is no "kai" ("and")
in the text.)
|
And you just proved yourself wrong.
| Quote: | kai apeleusontai outoi ein KOLASIN AIONION oi de dekaioi ein ZOEN
AIONION.
IF IT'S NOT "ETERNAL" IN ONE PLACE, THEN IT'S NOT "ETERNAL" IN THE OTHER
PLACE, AND VICE VERSA, idiot.
It's not "eternal" in either place, moron.
LOL
What an idiot: OF COURSE it's "eternal:" IN BOTH CONTEXTS, the thesis AND
the antithesis.
|
In your opinion.
| Quote: | TRY LEARNING TO THE READ THE TEXTS INSTEAD OF LETTING OTHER LIARS TELL
YOU
LIES YOU WANT TO HEAR.
IT'S THE EXACT SAME ADJECTIVE, USED IN BOTH THE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE,
IN THE SAME VERSE.
IF THERE'S NO "ETERNAL PUNISHMENT," THAN THERE IS NO "ETERNAL LIFE,"
IDIOT--IT'S THE SAME WORD.
KOLASIN AIONION.
ZOEN AIONION.
Mt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment [KOLASIN
AIONION]: but the righteous into life eternal [ZOEN AIONION].
NOW, YOU MIND EXPLAINING HOW IT CAN BE ONE ONE TIME AND NOT ONE THE
OTHER TIME IN THE SAME VERSE?
HOW ABOUT IN THE SAME BOOK?
If the righteous get eternal life, then it would follow that the
unrighteous
don't.
NO, THE OPPOSING FORCES ARE ETERNAL LIFE AND ETERNAL DEATH, moron: THERE
IS NO THIRD OPTION STATED ANYWHERE IN THE BOOK.
That's what I said. The unrighteous do not get eternal life.
Worse, THEY GET ETERNAL HELL (both of which Jesus and the prophets
taught).
|
Wrong again. They would have to have eternal life in order to be tortured
forever in hell.
| Quote: | Which means that there is no eternal hell where people are tortured
forever because that would mean that they would have to have eternal
life
as well.
THAT'S ALL SELF-RATIONALIZATION WHICH HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH
WHAT THE BOOK ACTUALLY SAYS.
SAME ADJECTIVE.
SAME MEANING.
So there is no eternal hell where people get tortured for eternity. QED.
Idiot: There is thesis, and there is antithesis, eternal life, and eternal
death, one leading to abundance, and the other leading to perdition.
This is what the Bible teaches.
Now, if you don't believe it, THAT'S YOUR FOOLISHNESS, but DON'T try to
tell me what the Bible says and doesn't say--I've "seen" it and "heard"
it, AT THE SOURCE LEVEL.
|
No you haven't. You constantly mistranslate and misunderstand the words
written in the Bible.
| Quote: | [snip the rest of the idiot's blathering which reveals the extent of
his
homemade lies]
Face it, we can go around on this for days and days, but you're not
going
to
change my mind on this.
BECAUSE YOU'VE FULLY EMBRACED FANCIFUL, PLEASANT SOUNDING LIES INSTEAD
OF GOING BY WHAT THE WORD SAYS.
No, because I've embraced the truth.
Bub, you and the "truth" have never been in the same zip code.
|
Wrong again.
| Quote: | I already know I'm right.
YOU DON'T "KNOW" ANY SUCH THING, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE TEXTS SPECIFICALLY
PROVE YOU WRONG.
The texts prove nothing of the sort. And I do know that I'm right with
100%
assurance.
Which is the typical modality of those bound for destruction...
|
So that must mean that you're bound for destruction since you're so sure of
yourself.
| Quote: | My beliefs suit me and
nothing you say can change that. But kudos for trying. Better people
than
you have failed.
IT'S YOU WHO IS FAILING YOURSELF, moron.
Nope.
Yep.
|
Nope.
| Quote: | I PUT THE PLAIN FACTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU.
No, you just put your beliefs in front of me.
No, I put the LANGUAGE (which is FACTUAL, not FAITH-BASED) in front of
you, and you prattle on in ignorance.
|
No, you put mistranslations in front of me and I've been systematically
tearing them to shreds while you go more and more insane.
| Quote: | NOW, IF YOU WANT TO FOOL YOURSELF, AND SAY YOU "BELIEVE" SOMETHING THAT
IS
AN OBVIOUS LIE, GO RIGHT AHEAD...
...BUT YOU'VE BEEN WELL TOLD.
*Chuckle* I don't believe lies.
Sure you do--you believe yourself, but your belief is based on
self-deception, so YOU DO INDEED "BELIEVE LIES"--YOUR OWN.
|
Nope, I only believe the truth.
| Quote: | But if you want to believe in the hard
legalism that Jesus preached against, go right ahead.
You have NO IDEA what Jesus preached "for" or "against."
|
It's obvious to me that you don't.
| Quote: | He said to the Pharisees "AND NOT TO LEAVE THE OTHER UNDONE," meaning
DON'T LEAVE BEHIND LAWFULNESS--JUST DO IT WITH BALANCE AND COMPASSION.
But the WICKED do always mistake GRACE for LICENSE.
Jesus COVERS sins.
HE DOESN'T NEGATE THEM, as the wicked teach, perverting His teachings in
the process.
In conclusion, HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN, BUT THE HOMOSEXUALS AREN'T GOING TO
HELL BECAUSE IT'S A SIN: BY AND LARGE, THEY'RE GOING TO HELL BECAUSE THEY
DECEIVE THEMSELVES, AND WON'T CONFESS THEIR SINS, even to the point of
PERVERTING THE WORD to their own ends rather than ADMITTING THAT THEY ARE
THE PROBLEM to GOD'S end.
|
Nope, homosexuality is not a sin. There is not a single place in the Bible
that says it is.
| Quote: | The antichristian antithesis...
"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in
us...
The Christian Thesis...
"But if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive our sins,
and cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
But the wicked do resist the truth, always.
|
So you're calling yourself wicked then.
--
<Guo_Si> Hey, you know what sucks?
<TheXPhial> vaccuums
<Guo_Si> Hey, you know what sucks in a metaphorical sense?
<TheXPhial> black holes
<Guo_Si> Hey, you know what just isn't cool?
<TheXPhial> lava? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:47 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
"Bill Baker" <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:BrqdnWnW79NZEyjVnZ2dnUVZ_vjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
| Quote: | On Wednesday 27 August 2008 09:29 am H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:<g93ksr$n5l$1@registered.motzarella.org>...
|
[snip]
| Quote: | In conclusion, HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN, BUT THE HOMOSEXUALS AREN'T GOING
TO
HELL BECAUSE IT'S A SIN: BY AND LARGE, THEY'RE GOING TO HELL BECAUSE THEY
DECEIVE THEMSELVES, AND WON'T CONFESS THEIR SINS, even to the point of
PERVERTING THE WORD to their own ends rather than ADMITTING THAT THEY ARE
THE PROBLEM to GOD'S end.
Nope, homosexuality is not a sin. There is not a single place in the
Bible
that says it is.
|
So say the APOSTATES, just as the prophets predicted...
Da 7:25a-c And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall
wear out the saints of the most High, and think to CHANGE TIMES AND LAWS...
Meanwhile, the Word clearly states...
Le 20:13a If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
them have committed AN ABOMINATION...
You can try to fool others, and you are definitely fooling yourself, but GOD
ISN'T FOOLED, fool.
Ike |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:50 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
"(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas:
Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:ic1ua4t17ocjvh080f1g0jerb7b8dkcucp@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:11:03 -0500,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
"(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote...
... a massive conglomeration of immature and
unsubstantiated insults, and childish "shouts."
Get back to me if you ever decide to grow up.
Until then, you'd be just a waste of time.
Translation: "Ike told the truth about me, and I don't
want to hear it."
Considering your lunacy, I'll take that as a COMPLIMENT.
Do let us all know if you ever manage to shed your immaturity,
AND come up with any relevant and worthwhile facts.
|
Already did.
1) Homosexuality IS A SIN.
2) The Gospel is one OF CONFESSION, NOT RATIONALIZATION.
3) YOU SHOOT YOURSELF IN YOUR OWN FOOT by attempting to GO AROUND THE GOSPEL
instead of THROUGH IT, which 4) makes you A WORSE APOSTATE than any Catholic
EVER WAS.
Now THAT'S immaturity.
Ike |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:46 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 02:50:11 -0500,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas:
Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
"(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote...
|
| Quote: | ... a massive conglomeration of immature and
unsubstantiated insults, and childish "shouts."
Get back to me if you ever decide to grow up.
Until then, you'd be just a waste of time.
Translation: "Ike told the truth about me, and I don't
want to hear it."
Considering your lunacy, I'll take that as a COMPLIMENT.
Do let us all know if you ever manage to shed your immaturity,
AND come up with any relevant and worthwhile facts.
Already did.
1) Homosexuality IS A SIN.
|
No MORE so than is LYING, which *is* prohibited in the Ten
Commandments, whereas there is no mention in there of homosexuality.
OTHER sins that are regarded a dismally in the Bible as homosexuality,
or more so, include fortune-telling (or consulting a seer; remember the
Witch of Endor?), and consulting a medium for the purpose of trying to
commun- icate with the dead. THUS -- anyone wacko enough to run
around WHINING about what other people may happen to do with
consenting sexpartners in private, while NOT being just as rabid about
people who lie (which is *everyone*, to varying degrees), go to palm
or tea leaf readers, or play with Tarot Cards or Ouija Boards are total
**HYPOCRITES**.
If you want to understand why homophobes are very properly
becoming regarded as LUDICROUS by more and more of society at an
accelerating rate -- THERE is your answer.
| Quote: | 2) The Gospel is one OF CONFESSION, NOT RATIONALIZATION.
|
So you are saying that God meant for us to be automatons -- and
not people who can THINK and REASON. Sorry to disappoint you, but
it doesn't work that way. And when it becomes OBVIOUS that the Bible
contains a host of irrefutable contradictions, then it is EQUALLY obvious
that not ALL of it could have been Divinely-inspired by a perfect God
Who is "not the author of confusion." HENCE -- there is a high likelihood
that in their enthusiasm, some of the writers of that which MEN later
compiled into the book that we know today as the Bible*, got carried
away in practicing literary license, and injected some of their own
personal opinions and prejudices into it. Which could very WELL explain
how homosexuality was dealt with harshly in a FEW places, but was
NOT even mentioned in the Ten Commandments.-- which probably WERE
Divinely-inspired. God DID endow people with varying levels of intellect,
and there is nothing wrong with our USING it to SEE these aspects, and
apply reasoning to them, as I just pointed out. Especially when the
alternative would be to allow a collection of hateful and bigoted loons
to deprive people of reasonable rights and make their lives miserable.
By the millions. * See SIG, below.
| Quote: | 3) YOU SHOOT YOURSELF IN YOUR OWN FOOT by attempting to
GO AROUND THE GOSPEL instead of THROUGH IT...
|
See above. And -- you're getting RABID again.
| Quote: | ... which 4) makes you A WORSE APOSTATE than any Catholic
EVER WAS.
|
Ah. So now you're bigoted toward Catholics, too? Nothing like
being a *diversified* fool. I'm not Catholic, but I am sensible and fair
enough to recognize that even when people have beliefs that differ
from my own -- whether they be Catholic, Muslim, Taoist or atheist --
it is their RIGHT to believe as they choose. Especially in THIS country,
where that right is Constitutionally-GUARANTEED. Intelligent people
value that right, and protect & defend it. Just as the Founding Fathers
valued it enough to do their best to ensure that we will always have it.
| Quote: | Now THAT'S immaturity.
|
I'm GLAD you said that, and I'm happy to leave that comment in. so
that it can stand on record to INDICT you, It adds an explanation point
to your utter loony intolerance.
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The TRUTH About The BIBLE...
1. The actual books of the Bible were selected by men with very
specific political agendas. They had their own versions they were
pushing and their own reasons for doing so. They picked some and
rejected others. Sometimes they took part of one and left out the
other part. The Revelation of John is a good example of that. It
has two parts but only one made it in.
2. The books that are there were written after the fact. Moses did
not write the first five books attributed to him and indeed some were
certainly forgeries given their "miraculous" discovery upon the return
for the Babylonian Exile. Never mind the motivations of the men doing
the writing of the forgeries, the fact is they are not original but rather
substituted in by men with very specific agendas whatever those
agendas might have been.
3. None of the so-called Gospels are contemporaneous to Jesus.
Arguments concerning which are closer to his life time still abound as
does the argument about the content of the mysterious "Q" or orig-
inal text that three of them seem to be taken from. They are full of
parables which Jesus may or may not of known of but which certainly
predate him. The "prodigal son" being an excellent example of one
found in Buddhist sutras a full 500 years before Jesus walked the
earth. The ancestral lineage of Jesus is also a clear forgery and
later addition used to support his alleged descent from the royal
house of Israel in support of his claim to be a messiah. The virgin
birth, in addition to being a clear mistranslation of prophecy, is
common in many pagan religions of the time, including that of the
Mithratic faith which was a popular competitor of Christianity in its
early years. Babylonian mystery religions abounded with accounts of
god made manifest in human form stories with accounts of miracles,
raising the dead, healing the sick etc. The evidence abounds that the
later followers of Jesus incorporated these stories into their teachings
to attract the pagans who expected such miraculous events to follow
from a god made man walking the earth.
4. I do not doubt for a second that there was a historical Jesus, who
was a righteous and good man. A reformer critical of the abuses that
had crept into his own faith, Judaism. But there is no evidence that
the Biblical accounts of his life accurately reflect the real events
of his life or death. And die he most certainly did. It is his followers
who grafted on all the various bells and whistles to attract pagan
followers to a religious path adapted by his later followers from his
early teachings.
The truly sad thing is that Christians have been so caught up by
the bells and whistles for centuries that they ignore the real core
teachings which are repeated through the scripture and echo those
of the older Mosaic texts, the idea of love, compassion and justice for
all human beings. Modern Christians spend far too much time picking
out gobbets of text to misinterpret or reinterpret so as to justify
whatever particular bugaboos they have decided must be annihilated.
-- Jon Petry ("juanjo") <jonpetry@mindspring.com>, 7-20-08
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 02:47:30 -0500,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
| Quote: | 1) Homosexuality IS A SIN.
|
No MORE so than is LYING, which *is* prohibited in the Ten
Commandments, whereas there is no mention in there of homosexuality.
OTHER sins that are regarded a dismally in the Bible as homosexuality,
or more so, include fortune-telling (or consulting a seer; remember the
Witch of Endor?), and consulting a medium for the purpose of trying to
commun- icate with the dead. THUS -- anyone wacko enough to run
around WHINING about what other people may happen to do with
consenting sexpartners in private, while NOT being just as rabid about
people who lie (which is *everyone*, to varying degrees), go to palm
or tea leaf readers, or play with Tarot Cards or Ouija Boards are total
**HYPOCRITES**.
If you want to understand why homophobes are very properly
becoming regarded as LUDICROUS by more and more of society at an
accelerating rate -- THERE is your answer.
| Quote: | 2) The Gospel is one OF CONFESSION, NOT RATIONALIZATION.
|
So you are saying that God meant for us to be automatons -- and
not people who can THINK and REASON. Sorry to disappoint you, but
it doesn't work that way. And when it becomes OBVIOUS that the Bible
contains a host of irrefutable contradictions, then it is EQUALLY obvious
that not ALL of it could have been Divinely-inspired by a perfect God
Who is "not the author of confusion." HENCE -- there is a high likelihood
that in their enthusiasm, some of the writers of that which MEN later
compiled into the book that we know today as the Bible*, got carried
away in practicing literary license, and injected some of their own
personal opinions and prejudices into it. Which could very WELL explain
how homosexuality was dealt with harshly in a FEW places, but was
NOT even mentioned in the Ten Commandments.-- which probably WERE
Divinely-inspired. God DID endow people with varying levels of intellect,
and there is nothing wrong with our USING it to SEE these aspects, and
apply reasoning to them, as I just pointed out. Especially when the
alternative would be to allow a collection of hateful and bigoted loons
to deprive people of reasonable rights and make their lives miserable.
By the millions. * See SIG, below.
| Quote: | 3) YOU SHOOT YOURSELF IN YOUR OWN FOOT by attempting to
GO AROUND THE GOSPEL instead of THROUGH IT...
|
See above. And -- you're getting RABID again.
| Quote: | ... which 4) makes you A WORSE APOSTATE than any Catholic
EVER WAS.
|
Ah. So now you're bigoted toward Catholics, too? Nothing like
being a *diversified* fool. I'm not Catholic, but I am sensible and fair
enough to recognize that even when people have beliefs that differ
from my own -- whether they be Catholic, Muslim, Taoist or atheist --
it is their RIGHT to believe as they choose. Especially in THIS country,
where that right is Constitutionally-GUARANTEED. Intelligent people
value that right, and protect & defend it. Just as the Founding Fathers
valued it enough to do their best to ensure that we will always have it.
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The TRUTH About The BIBLE...
1. The actual books of the Bible were selected by men with very
specific political agendas. They had their own versions they were
pushing and their own reasons for doing so. They picked some and
rejected others. Sometimes they took part of one and left out the
other part. The Revelation of John is a good example of that. It
has two parts but only one made it in.
2. The books that are there were written after the fact. Moses did
not write the first five books attributed to him and indeed some were
certainly forgeries given their "miraculous" discovery upon the return
for the Babylonian Exile. Never mind the motivations of the men doing
the writing of the forgeries, the fact is they are not original but rather
substituted in by men with very specific agendas whatever those
agendas might have been.
3. None of the so-called Gospels are contemporaneous to Jesus.
Arguments concerning which are closer to his life time still abound as
does the argument about the content of the mysterious "Q" or orig-
inal text that three of them seem to be taken from. They are full of
parables which Jesus may or may not of known of but which certainly
predate him. The "prodigal son" being an excellent exampl | |
