Total posts: 2,182
Posted in:
While I do agree that Trump's presence may have caused the January 6 riot, I do not agree that it was his fault or had intentions of doing it. You can't blame someone for other people using their name, as a way to wreak havoc.
Created:
Posted in:
You should read more carefully. Causing loss to the owners is the sin. If the demons could have left on their own then the choice to sin was all Jesus.
It is not a sin, because Jesus cast the demons into the pigs. The demons was the acting force that drove the pigs down hill to their deaths. Jesus simply did what the demons pled him to do.
You obviously can't grasp this concept.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
- Let's assume the beloved Jesus (pbuh) was resurrected & everything about the Bible is supernatural. How do you go from there to the beloved Jesus (pbuh) is God?
.......because he was resurrected......and the Holy Scriptures say it all happened. So if we assume that he did, because he did, then the Bible would be proven true, therefore everything in the Bible would have to be true.
- Process of elimination is valid only by exhaustion, when you exhaust all possible options, then disprove all but one. The sum of all religious claims to God are not exhaustive. If all religions but one are wrong, it does not necessarily entail that the one is right. This is a false dilemma fallacy.
Well how else would we prove it. This is the most valid way. If there was some other deity, that created the universe, then it probably would of shown itself by now.
- Being accurate in some instances doesn't necessarily entail being accurate in all instance. That's a false generalization. & it is contradicted by all other claims & worldviews. If you mean it hasn't been truly proven false. You have to specify exactly what you're referring to. Some Christian doctrines, like the Trinity for instance, are strictly False. A being can not be necessary & contingent at the same time, & a thing can not be 3 & 1 at the same time.
Yes it does. To say you can't prove something, then means you have to disprove it. No one has disproved the Bible, therefore it is safe to assume the opposite.
Yes a thing can be 3 & 1 at the same time.
Evidence:
The Bible, which has proven to be true.
- This is not true. It can not be that Islam backs Christianity when these are making mutually exclusive doctrinal claims. You are misassuming the fact that the beloved Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) confirmed the prophethood of Biblical prophets -that they have received revelation, as a confirmation of claims made by or beliefs adopted by Christians (or Jews) about these beloved prophets & their revelation. In effect, the Bible -supposedly- says God is Triune, the Quran says God is One.
No, the bible says God is one.
There is only one God.
But within God is the Trinity.
- This is not true. It can not be that Islam backs Christianity when these are making mutually exclusive doctrinal claims. You are misassuming the fact that the beloved Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) confirmed the prophethood of Biblical prophets -that they have received revelation, as a confirmation of claims made by or beliefs adopted by Christians (or Jews) about these beloved prophets & their revelation. In effect, the Bible -supposedly- says God is Triune, the Quran says God is One.
Because of the overwhelming amount of proof the Bible offers, and the very little, to none other religions offer.
I definitely have more information about your faith, but I am sure you are more connected with it as you're experiencing it in a way I am not, since I don't adhere to it.
No you don't.
- There is no mention of the Trinity in the Bible. It's a conjecture inferred by some Christian denominations, especially the later ones.
"Although there are various hints at God’s Trinitarian existence in the Old Testament, we do not get a full-orbed revelation of the Trinity until the New Testament. John 1:1–18, for example, is a clear teaching on the deity of Christ, the Word who in the beginning was God and was with God. There are also texts wherein the three persons are so closely associated so as to imply that all three are fully divine (for example, 2 Cor. 13:14). Clearly, the Bible assumes and teaches that God is triune.
Coram Deo
The Trinity is a doctrine that we cannot fully understand, although there is much we can say. But we need not fully understand it in order to affirm it. It is taught in God’s Word, and we are responsible to believe what God’s Word teaches even when complete comprehension escapes us."
The Trinity is a doctrine that we cannot fully understand, although there is much we can say. But we need not fully understand it in order to affirm it. It is taught in God’s Word, and we are responsible to believe what God’s Word teaches even when complete comprehension escapes us."
- That makes the beloved Jesus (pbuh) a messenger of God, by definition.
No Jesus is God. And he was fully man. Yes you are right in a way. He came down to spread the message. Therefore by definition he was a messenger. But he still was God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@rosends
exactly -- so before his death, Christianity wasn't a thing. His status of sin was measured by his actual religion, Judaism, making the religion he founded false.
I already explained this to Stephen.
Except that God, in his text of the bible, says it is a sin.
Uhhhh.....no.
God said sin was right? No, Jesus might have invented things to justify his actions, but what he did was against what God said and, as you concede, was in Jesus' own actual birth-religion, a sin.
He, was God.
If the demons could have left on their own, then Jesus' decision to move them out was purely his decision and its impact on the pigs and their loss is on him. Sin.
So, throwing out, sinful spirits (demons) is a sin.
You should probably do more research buddy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Well, is all we ever hear Jesus say are the words " for it is written" but he never gets around to telling us where it is actually written.
.....in the bible.
Yes. And? Many of the Jews rejected him. The people of Jerusalem didn't even know who he was. The Samaritans rejected him altogether because he only has his eyes on the prize...Jerusalem.There is nothing there in John 1:11–12 that states that there were Christians in Jesus' time or that he preached to the "Goy ".
Christianity, was not named as a religion before, Jesus came to earth, but it still was a religion/belief. Although it was not called Christianity, it was still a thing.
Let me explain.
Before Jesus came down to earth, Jerusalem was one of the only countries in the world to have stayed loyal to his scripture. So he sent his son down to Earth originally to free the Jews. But when Jesus came down, and the Pharisees rejected him, as well as most of the Jewish community, God decided to instead give his gift of sacrifice to all men. The reason the Pharisees rejected him, was because they were very corrupt, and the didn't want Jesus convincing the people to stop giving them money for their sins.
And that is your mistake when talking about Jesus the JEW!I won't be going into early Christianity with you because you know not you Constantine from your Pilate. Or your scriptures.
Well no. Jesus was not a Jew. He was God. Therefore, Jesus wasn't in part of any religion, because he was God. Jesus was born of Middle Eastern descent.
And well if you don't want to get into it, I understand. Hopefully you get to read the Bible more.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
- I thought this was about proving God is Jesus. So, how do you prove that the god of the Bible is God, the Creator of the Universe?
Well, ok. Lets assume that there was no evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, and that there is also no evidence of anything supernatural that happened in the bible.
Look at it like this. There is all of this evidence, that Jesus' walked the earth, was a real man, etc.
Nothing in the Bible has ever been proven false historically. In fact a lot of it has been proven true historically.
So we know that there was a man named Jesus, who walked the Earth, and died. Then shortly after, a sudden new religion pops up, confronting the Jewish Church, and ends up bringing millions of people to Jesus.
Lets assume that is all the evidence we have.
We already know that the universe had to of had a creator. I have just proved that the universe must of been created by some sort of higher being.
So let's use the process of elimination for some other religions.
Christianity: A lot of evidence proving that it was telling the truth historically. Hasn't been ever truly contradicted.
Islam: Actually backs up Christianity more. Muhammad actually believe it or not backed up the claims of Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, from the Bible.
All it claims was that an angel came down and said something to Muhammad. Nothing more.
Buddhism: Actually Buddhists don't believe in a deity or god. Therefore, we have already proven that there has to be a higher being, we can eliminate this one.
Hinduism: This a religion/way of life, that the origin, is culture. No evidence of their Gods to be true.
And these are just the religion's that are the most popular.
Conclusion: There is more factual evidence of the Bible's truth, than any other religion, and proof of a higher being has also been proven.
Therefore, God/Yahweh, must be the one true God.
You can't prove that claim... it doesn't matter either way. The issue is elsewhere.
It did occur. Use my resources as evidence.
- At most you can say it was truth to them. People die for what they believe to be true all the time, doesn't necessarily mean what they believe in is actually True. Otherwise we would have to believe all beliefs defended by people who died for them. Do you believe in Islam given that, similarily, many of the beloved Prophet (pbuh) companions were tortured & killed & enslaved & maimed & starved...etc for believing in it?
Difference is, Islamic people were hunted down and killed for their beliefs.
Christians (especially the disciples) went out of there way to preach, even though they knew death was coming.
- At least I know a whole lot more about your faith than you do. Thnetopsychism is an ancient Christian doctrine which is also mainstream today. Contrary to what you think, the immortality of the soul originates not in the Bible but in Greek Philosophy.
Well that could be true. There are a lot of different denominations of Christians, who all are right, but don't agree on little minute details. Personally, I don't agree that the different denominations should be split up, given that we all believe the same basic things.
And no you don't know more about my faith than I do. You have countlessly misinterpreted the scripture, and don't understand basic Christian thinking, in a way that I do.
This is a self-contradiction. You're saying God is God & not God at the same time. It's nonsense.
This is one of the Christian beliefs that doesn't have factual evidence backing it up (except for in the Bible), but it basically goes like this:
There is God the Father (God), God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Ghost (The Holy Spirit).
They are all at the same time, one being, and three different beings.
God the Father, sent his son, Jesus (God the Son) down to earth to save us.
For example, Jesus is just as much as God, and God the Father is, but also is different from him.
God is a being who we will never really fully comprehend. That is why it is so fascinating to study him in the Bible.
Created:
Love is a fantasy version of an electro-chemical reaction we apply to a base necessity.
Yes, as are all human emotions.... your point?
Created:
Posted in:
OK, well, let's just chalk that up to poor reading comprehension on your part. Trump has never been a US Constitution type of guy.
....... I'm not even going to.
Created:
Posted in:
If his death jump started it, then it wasn't a thing before his death.
Bingo.
People still followed Jesus's teachings, before it, but the church itself, and Christianity, followed after his death.
Your words in post 167: "If the person who is responsible for starting a religion is with sin, then that religion is false."Your words in post #210: "It might have been a sin in Judaism"So if it was a sin in Judaism, and Jesus was Jewish, then he sinned and any religion he starts is false. Your logic.
Ok thank you for elaborating.
In the Judaist religion, it might have been a sin, but just because something is proclaimed as a sin, doesn't mean it really is one.
Jesus followed what God said was right, because he was God. What man called sin meant nothing to him, because he was the judge of sin.
And the bible commands us to abide by those laws.
yes....and? Man makes many laws that don't abide by the Bibles teachings. Therefore, law made by man isn't always the correct thing to do.
The things I pointed to are from textual mentions of sinful activities.
You need to understand, those sinful activities, only took place in the eyes of a different religion. Not Christian faith.
That's a lot of silly presumptions. How about "when Jesus caused the pigs to run away, that was his fault."
He didn't. The Demons asked to be thrown among the pigs. The demons could have left, and the pigs would have stayed.
Not Jesus's fault, the Demons fault.
another "if"? Should I point out (again) that that's not what I'm doing?
Again, I am not accusing you of doing said thing. I am saying if you are going to use that argument, then you are contradicting yourself.
So, if not for that reason, then why?
really? Matt 23 "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. "
"Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
5 “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries[a] wide and the tassels on their garments long; 6 they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; 7 they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.
8 “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. 10 Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you will be your servant. 12 For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. (Matthew 23 NIV)."
5 “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries[a] wide and the tassels on their garments long; 6 they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; 7 they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.
8 “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. 10 Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you will be your servant. 12 For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. (Matthew 23 NIV)."
Maybe next time read a bit further.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
TRUMP REBUKED for CALL to SUSPEND the US CONSTITUIONBy HOPE YEN2 hours ago
Obvious media lies.
The article in question, actually says that Trump isn't calling to suspend the US Constitution.
“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,” he wrote. “Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”
Trump said," this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulation, and articles, even those found in the Constitution"
He isn't calling for the suspending of the US Constitution, he is saying, the things that are going on right now, is against the constitution.
Created:
Posted in:
THE STATEMENT IN QUESTION TOLD BY JESUS: ”But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)1. YOUR LYING QUOTE REGARDING THE STATEMENT IN QUESTION ABOVE: “ Because Jesus did not say that.”2. YOUR QUOTE WHERE YOU CHANGED YOUR MIND IN THAT YOU SAID JESUS DID SAY THAT STATEMENT IN QUESTION!: “Ok, BrotherD.Thomas, yes Jesus did say that.”3. YOUR QUOTE NOW SAYING THAT JESUS DID NOT SAY THE STATEMENT IN QUESTION, HUH!: “No, it didn't. Jesus didn't say this, he was telling a PARABLE.”
Ok.
Jesus in fact did say that. But he didn't claim that. He was telling a story, therefore saying those words, but not claiming those words.
He was in fact a narrator in the parable.
Saying that Jesus said that, would be like saying a narrator, who narrates," I killed a man" actually killed a man.
How many times are you going to RUN AWAY from my godly posts to you shown below, where they show your Bible stupidity in having no bounds! Enough of you running away like a little sniffling crying little boy, understood?!You are still running away from the 3rd portion of this post!:YouFound_Lxam, this is a discussion religion forum, NOT a runaway from discussion religion forum, get it Bible fool? Huh? Maybe? Just come out from hiding under your mommies apron because you are SCARED to address the posts shown above, understood Bible fool?
I didn't "run away" from your posts.
I may have not answered you directly on some of them, but I did answer all your questions, and comments.
.JESUS AS GOD EXISTS BECAUSE HE PROMOTES THE MURDERING OF OFFSPRING THAT CURSE THEIR PARENTS!Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. Jesus defends Himself by attacking them in a quid pro quo stance for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment, JESUS SAID: "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death. (Matthew 15: 3-4).The “command” that Jesus was referring too and that was in effect at His time, and forever, was when Moses said: “Honor your father and mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.” (Exodus 21:17)"EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5). Therefore, with this preceding passage that EVERY word of Jesus as god is flawless, then who are we to try and change Jesus' direct words as shown above, not me!.JESUS AS GOD EXISTS BECAUSE HE WANTED INNOCENT FETUS' TO BE MURDERED BY HIM, INFANTS TO BE DASHED TO PIECES, AND ALLOWED PREGNANT WOMEN TO BE RIPPED UP IN INITIATING AN INSTANT ABORTION!JESUS AS GOD SAID: "Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts." (Hosea 9:14)JESUS AS GOD SAID: "Yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb." (Hosea 9:16)JESUS AS GOD SAID: "Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up" (Hosea 13:16)
"EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5). Therefore, with this preceding passage that EVERY word of Jesus as god is flawless, then who are we to try and change Jesus' direct words as shown above, not me!.JESUS AS GOD EXISTS BECAUSE HIS INSPIRED WORDS ALLOWS WOMEN TO BE STONED TO DEATH IF NOT A VIRGIN AT MARRIAGE!“If any man takes a wife, and goes in to her, and detests her, and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, ‘I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin,’ then the father and mother of the young woman shall take and bring out the evidence of the young woman’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. And the young woman’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as wife, and he detests her. Now he has charged her with shameful conduct, saying, “I found your daughter was not a virgin,” and yet these are the evidences of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. Then the elders of that city shall take that man and punish him; and they shall fine him one hundred shekels of silver and give them to the father of the young woman, because he has brought a bad name on a virgin of Israel. And she shall be his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days.
“But if the thing is true, and evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones, because she has done a disgraceful thing in Israel, to play the harlot in her father’s house. So you shall put away the evil from among you.” (Deuteronomy 22:13-21)
"EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5). Therefore, with this preceding passage that EVERY word of Jesus as god is flawless, then who are we to try and change Jesus' direct words as shown above, not me!.JESUS AS GOD EXISTS BECAUSE HIS INSPIRED WORDS ALLOWS WOMEN TO BE STONED TO DEATH IF NOT A VIRGIN AT MARRIAGE!“If any man takes a wife, and goes in to her, and detests her, and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, ‘I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin,’ then the father and mother of the young woman shall take and bring out the evidence of the young woman’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. And the young woman’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as wife, and he detests her. Now he has charged her with shameful conduct, saying, “I found your daughter was not a virgin,” and yet these are the evidences of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. Then the elders of that city shall take that man and punish him; and they shall fine him one hundred shekels of silver and give them to the father of the young woman, because he has brought a bad name on a virgin of Israel. And she shall be his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days.
“But if the thing is true, and evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones, because she has done a disgraceful thing in Israel, to play the harlot in her father’s house. So you shall put away the evil from among you.” (Deuteronomy 22:13-21)
"EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5). Therefore, with this preceding passage that EVERY word of Jesus as god is flawless, then who are we to try and change Jesus' direct words as shown above, not me!.JESUS AS GOD EXISTS BECAUSE HE GAVE HIS CREATION HEMORRHOIDS!“The LORD will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be healed.” (Deuteronomy 28:27)
“God smote an entire city (Asdod) with "emerods [hemorrhoids] in their secret parts.” (1 Samuel 5:6)
“And the men that died not were smitten with the emerods: and the cry of the city went up to heaven.” (1 Samuel 5:12)
“Then he ordered the same city to make him five golden hemorrhoids (and five golden mice) as a "trespass offering." What shall be the trespass offering which we shall return to him? They answered, Five golden emerods, and five golden mice ... Wherefore ye shall make images of your emerods, and images of your mice that mar the land; and ye shall give glory unto the God of Israel: peradventure he will lighten his hand from off you, and from off your gods.” (1 Samuel 6:4-5)"EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5). Therefore, with this preceding passage that EVERY word of Jesus as god is flawless, then who are we to try and change Jesus' direct words as shown above, not me!
Um...…well ok then...…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@rosends
So he wasn't part of the religion that he was and that he told others to listen to -- he followed a religion that only existed after he died. Makes as much sense as anything you have claimed thus far.
Yes. Because his death and resurrection jumpstarted Christianity.
Yes he was a part of it, because he was God, Jesus was both fully man, and fully God.
So if it was a sin then, according to your logic, any religion he founds must be false. That was your claim.
umm....please elaborate more on this.
Who said laws are made by man? Deut 17 is pretty clear about enforcement of all sorts of laws including following all instruction given by the courts.
Man bases some of their laws off of the Bible, but man still makes those laws.
No he didn't. He did things that were sinful according to what God said. You can keep trying to wriggle out, but between dietary laws, sabbath observance, respect for teachers and parents, destruction of property and harming trees, he had plenty of sins.
No he didn't. He didn't do anything sinful according to what God said. He did things that were sinful that man said was sinful.
The Jewish law says that one who indirectly causes a loss of money to an owner is responsible for that loss.
So, when the demons were asked to be thrown among the pigs, it was Gods fault that the pigs ran away?
All I'm saying is that if your going to prove to me that Jesus wasn't God, by him "stealing" with supernatural powers, then you are already contradicting yourself.
But Jesus didn't move. In fact, he told his followers to listen to the teachings of the Pharisees.
He actually didn't do that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Seriously!!? Jesus was a born Jew of Jew parentage. There were no Christians in his time. And if the BIBLE is to be believed then he hadn't come to save or free anyone other than Jews.
OK....obviously you don't understand what I am trying to tell you. Listen.
Yes, Jesus didn't follow some Jewish laws, but that doesn't make him a sinner.
At that time in Jerusalem, a lot of the church, and the authority was corrupt.
Jesus came and called out the Pharisees on this:
The Pharisees and the teachers of the Law are experts in the Law of Moses. 3 So obey everything they teach you, but don't do as they do. After all, they say one thing and do something else.
4 They pile heavy burdens on people's shoulders and won't lift a finger to help. 5 Everything they do is just to show off in front of others. They even make a big show of wearing Scripture verses on their foreheads and arms, and they wear big tassels[a] for everyone to see. 6 They love the best seats at banquets and the front seats in the synagogues. 7 And when they are in the market, they like to have people greet them as their teachers.
8 But none of you should be called a teacher. You have only one teacher, and all of you are like brothers and sisters. 9 Don't call anyone on earth your father. All of you have the same Father in heaven. 10 None of you should be called the leader. The Messiah is your only leader. 11 Whoever is the greatest should be the servant of the others. 12 If you put yourself above others, you will be put down. But if you humble yourself, you will be honored.
13-14 You Pharisees and teachers of the Law of Moses are in for trouble! You're nothing but show-offs. You lock people out of the kingdom of heaven. You won't go in yourselves, and you keep others from going in.[b]
15 You Pharisees and teachers of the Law of Moses are in for trouble! You're nothing but show-offs. You travel over land and sea to win one follower. And when you have done so, you make that person twice as fit for hell as you are.
16 You are in for trouble! You are supposed to lead others, but you are blind. You teach that it doesn't matter if a person swears by the temple. But you say it does matter if someone swears by the gold in the temple. 17 You blind fools! Which is greater, the gold or the temple that makes the gold sacred?
18 You also teach that it doesn't matter if a person swears by the altar. But you say it does matter if someone swears by the gift on the altar. 19 Are you blind? Which is more important, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 Anyone who swears by the altar also swears by everything on it. 21 And anyone who swears by the temple also swears by God, who lives there. 22 To swear by heaven is the same as swearing by God's throne and by the one who sits on that throne.
23 You Pharisees and teachers are show-offs, and you're in for trouble! You give God a tenth of the spices from your garden, such as mint, dill, and cumin. Yet you neglect the more important matters of the Law, such as justice, mercy, and faithfulness. These are the important things you should have done, though you should not have left the others undone either. 24 You blind leaders! You strain out a small fly but swallow a camel.
25 You Pharisees and teachers are show-offs, and you're in for trouble! You wash the outside of your cups and dishes, while inside there is nothing but greed and selfishness. 26 You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of a cup, and then the outside will also be clean.
27 You Pharisees and teachers are in for trouble! You're nothing but show-offs. You're like tombs that have been whitewashed.[c] On the outside they are beautiful, but inside they are full of bones and filth. 28 That's what you are like. Outside you look good, but inside you are evil and only pretend to be good.
29 You Pharisees and teachers are nothing but show-offs, and you're in for trouble! You build monuments for the prophets and decorate the tombs of good people. 30 And you claim you would not have taken part with your ancestors in killing the prophets. 31 But you prove you really are the relatives of the ones who killed the prophets. 32 So keep on doing everything they did. 33 You are nothing but snakes and the children of snakes! How can you escape going to hell?
34 I will send to you prophets and wise people and experts in the Law of Moses. You will kill them or nail them to a cross or beat them in your synagogues or chase them from town to town. 35 That's why you will be held guilty for the murder of every good person, beginning with the good man Abel. This also includes Barachiah's son Zechariah,[d] the man you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 I can promise that you people living today will be punished for all these things! (Matthew 23 NIV).
God didn't abide by every singe Jewish law, because he was trying to prove that the Jewish law being taught in that day and age was corrupt.
That is why the Pharisees got him killed, using Judas (one of Jesus disciples) to hand him over to Constantine.
He was not sinning, he was listening to what God told him to do, not what man told him to do.
JESUS SAID!“I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”Matthew 15:24
"Throughout His earthly ministry, Jesus acted with a crystal-clear sense of His purpose. Eventually, all nations of earth would be blessed through Israel, in the person of Jesus, as the Son of God gave His life as the sacrifice for the sins of humanity. For that to happen, however, Jesus needs to accomplish certain things within the people of Israel. So, for now, Jesus has come to serve and heal God's chose people as the promised Messiah. Only after His own people officially reject Him will the offer be made for all to come into the family of God through faith in Christ (John 1:11–12).
Jesus uses the same language with her as when He sent disciples out in pairs to the towns and villages of Galilee (Matthew 10:5–6). He strictly forbids them from going into the Gentile territories. They are only to take the message of the kingdom to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This is the same reason given here for refusing—for now—to cast the demon from the daughter of this Canaanite woman begging Him for help. He has not been sent by His Father to heal the Gentiles, yet."
Judaism is "gods word" , you clown.
"the cultural, social, and religious beliefs and practices of the Jews"
The Jewish people rejected Jesus as the one who will free the Jews. I am not taking about Jewish traditions, I am talking about the Christian faith.
Created:
Posted in:
An argument could be made that he did not intend to, but the objective fact is he did.
Oh yea...….that's true. should of changed the title lol.
Created:
Reality: Necessary Perspective: There are currently nearly 100,000 producing wells on federal lands, and the 9,000 permits awaiting a process to start exploration or future production are a small fraction of the overall federal well count. Lengthy Process: Wells and leases are not like faucets and spigots.Mar 24, 2022https://www.api.org › 2022/03/24Drilling Down on Federal Leasing Facts - American Petroleum Institute
This only proves that we produce oil. This doesn't disprove what I said.
What I said is still true.
Created:
Posted in:
Why do you doubt the evidence of you’re own eyes?
Well prove to me he did. He didn't I can tell you that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Statichead
they want us out of politics and stuff, honestly the way to do that is to give us what we want, which isnt too difficult.
So, give us what we want, and we will stay out of your politics...….great...….not a threat at all.
No, I dont believe in objective morality. Humans are crazy, Humans are great, and Humans are also pure evil. Nobody is perfect.
So we should just all go around killing people, gottcha.....
pretty much just a right to safety and freedom like everyone else, y'know?
I'm pretty sure the LGBTQ+ community has just as much rights as everyone else.
it would be interesting to watch it, but it would probably just make me mad. Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh are skilled debaters and sometimes I think like "hey thats a good point!" then I get mad at myself for accidentally agreeing with something I dont agree with. I need to remember that not only are they debaters, they are also skilled manipulators.
So you get mad at people who make a good point?
Another person you should watch, is Rob Smith. He is an outright Gay man, who is against the LGBTQ+ movement.
I think its very normal for societies to change very frequently. 150 yrs ago slavery existed in the U.S, then, suddenly it stopped. Difference?
Yes. Slavery didn't happen all over the world from the beginning of human civilization. Two Genders did.
specifically for trans people, I want the right to healthcare back.
I don't think the right to healthcare has been taken from "trans" people.
Isnt "straightening them out" a little harsh? Anyway if a parent is abusive, why would a school want to instigate abusive behavior towards the child? It is a safety Measure, like i said.
No its not harsh. God these people are so hurt by the littlest things.
So its a safety measure for the teachers and school to lie to the parents. Gottcha..., so the parents should have less control of their kids than the school does.
That's a great way to brainwash someone.
I personally have everything I need. I am unhappy in my body, but I am not desperate enough for surgery or hormones.
So let me get this strait. People who are unhappy about their body's, should get there organs removed to make them feel better about themselves?
Yea...… a great solution.
Personally, if you are banning trans surgery and "cutting off healthy breasts and penises" like they say, Why allow other cosmetic surgeries such as augmentations and plastic surgery? Difference?
Plastic surgery doesn't cause you major health problems, and doesn't chop off pieces of your body just to make you feel better about yourself.
there are asexuals, and there are "true" asexuals. regular asexuals do not like sex but don't necessarily hate it. "true" asexuals literally have no reproductive hormones telling them to go out and mate. I am a "regular" asexual. "true" asexuals are very rare. "True" asexuals are usually called Nullsexual.
…hold on let me process this for a second.....
So your telling me, that their are people born out there, with no reproductive hormones??
And the fact that someone doesn't like sex means they have to identify as something else.
Why cant someone just Identify as "a female who doesn't like sex"?
We are not always a binary species. There are intersex humans and other animals
Oh this argument again.
Intersex born people is a thing.....but it is soooo rare.
"Anne Fausto-Sterling s suggestion that the prevalence of intersex might be as high as 1.7% has attracted wide attention in both the scholarly press and the popular media. Many reviewers are not aware that this figure includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex, such as Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome, and late-onset adrenal hyperplasia. If the term intersex is to retain any meaning, the term should be restricted to those conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female. Applying this more precise definition, the true prevalence of intersex is seen to be about 0.018%, almost 100 times lower than Fausto-Sterling s estimate of 1.7%."
Yea....0.018%.
But lets say we count intersex people as well. Most, if not all of intersex people have identifiable traits that pertain them to a certain gender.
Saying humans are non-binary because of intersex people, is like saying all humans have 1 arm, because some people are born with one arm.
Also being intersex, in your terms, is literally impossible, because that person would have to have the ability to both impregnate and be pregnant. That is not a thing.
Say you have a intersex person. A penis without testicles, say a vulva instead. Thats completely possible. How does a person "Fix that" ?
Unfortunately, just like every other person with a disability born at birth, they are going to have to learn to live with it. But it doesn't mean they are both genders, they are one.
a popular anti-trans argument is "Why would you cut off a completely healthy penis/breasts?" So, why would cut off a completely healthy intersex penis? Because it doesnt have testicles? If you want to "fix" the female part of it, where do the testicles come from now? A "male" has to live the rest of their life without testicles, never to reproduce? The person wont reproduce anyway, so what's the point? Why "fix" them? theres no point.
Again your making this too big of a deal. The intersex population is 0.018% of the population.
Created:
Posted in:
- Are you saying Jesus (pbuh) isn't God after all?
No, Jesus, was the only human to walk on earth without sin.
- Assuming all this occurred, the most it proves is that they were sincere & believed what they were preaching. It has no bearing in the Truth of what they were preaching.
Well, first of all it all did occur.
Again, why would all of those people all of the sudden, for no apparent reason, leave everything, and risk their lives, just to prove a lie?
Because it wasn't a lie. It was the truth.
- If someone came to you & said I saw your grandma rising from the dead & claimed 500 people saw it with him. Would you believe his testimony?
If the 500 people agreed then yes. But there is more than 1 person who claimed they saw Jesus, at the same time, in the same place.
maybe it fell off, maybe they picked the wrong one
......im gonna let you think about that one.
It's not "all those people", it's one or two guys who claim "many people saw this". If you go to court & say "he raped me & 100 people saw it", would they take your word for it & just assume 100 people saw it because you said so?
Its not 1 or 2 guys. It was a lot of people actually. Look at my evidence.
Both are a matter of debate among Christians. You don't seem to know much about your tradition... Either way, so in your own words, we are not gods, but our souls are?
This is false. You seem to not know about my faith. And no, our souls don't ever die, they are just brought up to God.
- So, is Jesus (pbuh) God or not God?
There is God the Father (God), God the son (Jesus), and God the Holy Ghost (The Holy Spirit.)
They are all one, but not at the same time. Jesus was God the son, who came down to earth in human form, and lived a sinless life, died on the cross for our sins, then rose again 3 days later.
Created:
Which wouldn’t fix anything - wrong global warming is the real threat
"The presentation of climate change to children is far more alarming and less nuanced than what adults are exposed to. Stories of the coming climate apocalypse have become commonplace in schools, textbooks, churches, movies and even children’s books. A prominent example is the book “Our House Is on Fire: Greta Thunberg’s Call to Save the Planet,” a picture book aimed at ages 3-8. The book’s overarching message is summed by this statement in the book: “There might not be a world to live in when she grows up. What use is school without a future?”
" The climate “catastrophe” isn’t what it used to be. Circa 2013 with publication of the IPCC AR5 Report, RCP8.5 was regarded as the business-as-usual emissions scenario, with expected warming of 4 to 5 oC by 2100. Now there is growing acceptance that RCP8.5 is implausible, and RCP4.5 is arguably the current business-as-usual emissions scenario. Only a few years ago, an emissions trajectory that followed RCP4.5 with 2 to 3 oC warming was regarded as climate policy success. As limiting warming to 2 oC seems to be in reach (now deemed to be the “threshold of catastrophe”),[i] the goal posts were moved in 2018 to reduce the warming target to 1.5 oC. Climate catastrophe rhetoric now seems linked to extreme weather events, most of which are difficult to identify any role for human-caused climate change in increasing either their intensity or frequency.
The main stream media is currently awash with articles from prominent journalists on how the global warming threat less than we thought. Here are some prominent articles:
- NYTimes David Wallace-Wells: Beyond catastrophe: A new climate reality is coming into view.
- WSJ: Good climate change news is fit to print. Slowly its percolating into the journalistic mind that recent research is upbeat
- NYT Bret Stephens: Yes Greenland’s melting but . . ."
Yea climate change isn't what you think it is. Do your research.
It would cause the US to go into ruin - wrong Like when we stopped using whale oil and kerosene?
No, like 75% of the U.S. energy source gone.
Everything you just said is wrong.No they don’t - wrong just Google it
No its not.
You need to learn to provide evidence.
Created:
-->
@Athias
Malarkey. Minors have a legal right to personal possessions, such as that which they acquire through purchase, gift, or trade, so long as those items weren't acquired through contract, which minors can't enter without a parent's cosign. So for example, if a 12 year-old minor is gifted an PS5 by a friend, then legally the parents have no ownership over it; if said 12 year-old uses a five dollar reward after helping a neighbor straighten out his/her garage to purchase sweets, then legally, the parents have no ownership over it. If the parents gift their 12 year-old minor a flat-screen TV, a gift being a legal transfer of property, then the parents no longer have ownership over it. And this is just analyzing it from a legal standpoint.
If a mom takes a child's phone away, even though the child did pay for that phone then yes, the child can make an argument and take it to court.
But what jury is going to take the child's side.
And even if the child wanted to sue, they would have to have even more money for that.
So theoretically, this is true, but in what case would the child win?
Three guesses as to where I stand on that?
nope.
Yes. Every individual, minor or adult has the right to take his or her own life.
Well, even though someone could take their life and have no consequences (besides the fact that they are dead) it is still illegal, so no they do not have that right.
I would, but that subject can be discussed more in depth elsewhere.
.... yikes.
It's difficult to instruct kids on certain directives if the adults around them don't set a proper example. Personally, I don't think kids should drink, do drugs, or get tattoos. But you know what? I don't think adults should either. (My opinion is not affected by some arbitrary division.) With that said, my interests don't at all qualify or modify their right to behave their bodies as they see fit. Individual autonomy is fundamental to bettering a society. We are either individuals or subjects to the few.
I agree with you on this 100%.
But, those things exist, and people who make bad desertions also exist. So, what do we do about that?
We make it legal, but only for people who have reached a certain maturity level, and age to make the decision on whether to make that decision or not.
Just to make sure I understand you correctly--your position is that a nine year-old experiencing the same unfortunate circumstances as Aron Ralston would be unjustified in amputating his/her own arm by mere virtue of his/her being nine years-old? What would the nine year-old be justified in doing under those circumstances?
No. This would be a different case. In cases like this it would be acceptable, given it would save the child's life.
Parents' time, labor, and resources ARE GIFTS, NOT DEBTS.
Well, the parent did decide to have the child in the first place, so it seems more than fair for the law to hold them up to those standards.
How does science qualify one's capacity to bear interest over one's own body?
Because science has shown that children are immature, therefore children shouldn't make a life altering decision, given that they don't even understand their own bodies yet.
So long as those interests are under the parents' or State's command, relegating said child as property of the parents and/or State.
Yes, because if the child's interest is something like killing people, then that would be illegal.
One can love one's child and respect the fact that one's child's body belongs to the child.
You bring up a good point, but then there needs to be a line. At what point, does child's decision on her/his own body become morally unacceptable.
if your child wanted to cut their arm off, what would you do?
Again, good point, and to answer this question, I would just tell them all the things they wouldn't be able to do with their arm. But if your child just ignores all of your points, then should the child be able to still make that decision. No because no matter how much a child argues about something, it always comes back down to the parents' choice.
I'm going to presume that you didn't know who Aron Ralston was when you first responded to my statement.
I am very aware of who Aron Ralston is.
Which was first and foremost, HIS DECISION.
Yes, because he was going to die.
Which among these sources DISQUALIFIES a minor's capacity to not only bear interests over his or her body but also retain priority over how his or her body is behaved?
All of them. You would know if you listened to my argument.
This is not a matter of what we think should happen, it's a matter of what morally right.
Created:
Posted in:
That is NOT my opinion, that is a FACT!
Prove it then. Prove why a baby in the womb has no rights.
Also, laughing at grammar mistakes isn't your biggest argument for why your right.......right?
It seems to me like you're paying more attention to how i am spelling, than my actual argument.
You can claim all day that babies in the womb are worth nothing, but without actual valid answers to my questions, and valid evidence, then its nothing more than a claim.
You can call it a fact all you want, but it's still just an opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
I have to explain every detail to you guys, but I won't repeat myself again.
In Judaism, and remember, Jesus was supposedly Jewish, breaking a law IS a sin.
Jesus was not part of Judaism. He follows the Christian religion, because his death, and resurrection, started it.
If you look in the Bible, you will actually see Jesus going against the Judaist high priests. He came to earth not to follow the laws of Judaism, but to spread Gods word.
It might have been a sin in Judaism, but not in Christianity.
In fact, it was some of the high priests, who got him arrested, because he was proving them wrong, and they were losing control of the people.
Where in the Bible does it say one has to abide by laws made by man, to not sin.
Jesus followed what God said to do, and everything God said to do, was without sin.
"Not far away there was a large herd of pigs feeding. 31 So the demons begged Jesus, "If you are going to drive us out, send us into that herd of pigs." 32 "Go," Jesus told them; so they left and went off into the pigs. The whole herd rushed down the side of the cliff into the lake and was drowned. 33 The men who had been taking care of the pigs ran away and went into the town, where they told the whole story and what had happened to the men with the demons." Matthew 8:30-33.
The demons begged Jesus to let them into the pigs, and Jesus did. He cast them unto the pigs, and the demons caused the pigs to run away.
If you are going to call this stealing, then give me one example of Judaist law, that states that standing next to a herd of pigs, casting demons unto them and them running away is breaking the law.
Jesus was Jewish, but does that mean that he was supposed to abide by Judaist law? No, that would be like saying, that someone who is Chinese, has to abide by Chinese law always. Well, what if they move to America? Now they don't have to follow the same laws.
and who said that that's what I'm trying to do?
I said if you are, not you are definitely doing that thing.
Created:
Deistic values of individualism differ from Christian values of collectivism
Yes, but in a way.
Most religions, or deistic values have the same moral values.
Look at Hinduism for example:
Hinduism believes in reincarnation, which you would have to live a good life to obtain a better reincarnation, after you die.
Other religions bring up similar moral values, but it is what the outcome of those values is what make them all different.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Moral values differ among religions
Could you elaborate?
Created:
Posted in:
The former has NO legal rights/protections, whereas the latter does.
You can't use your opinion as evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
......Do you not know the definition of a parable?
Like....it's pretty self-explanatory,
He spoke in parables so they WOULDN'T understand him. I keep telling you. You have to understand the situation in Palestine at the time and how dangerous it was for any rabble-rouser, especially for someone that had a following that posed a threat to the status quo.
No, he spread gods message through story's, to give examples of what God's word means when it says certain things.
You really need to read the Bible more.
Created:
Posted in:
I am pointing out how "no exceptions" is clearly harmful and unreasonable in, at least, some extreme situations. You've agreed.Have a good night.
And I agree, but Texas law does give exceptions.
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
The oil companies have plenty of places to drill.
No, they don't, Biden is trying to stop all use of fossil fuels and turn the USA into a clean energy run country, which wouldn't fix anything, and it would cause the U.S to go into ruin.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I think you need to learn the difference between a story, and a statement that Jesus legitimately said.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Stephen......it's a story.
Yes, Jesus did tell the story. But he didn't say those things in the context you are thinking.
That line is part of the story.
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Yes, that means that he explains Gods rules, in story's, to make it more clear to them.
He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.
Yes, because his disciples were his close followers, and he could explain things better with them.
Created:
Posted in:
You keep telling me that I should study the bible. How do you know I haven't?
We'll, have you? Because from the claims that you are making, it is safe to assume that you are not.
And the verse in question is not a parable. It is a clear order to bring any dissenters to him to be killed especially those that had deserted the movement.
"The Parable of the Ten Minas
11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12 He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a] ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
14 “But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
15 “He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16 “The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
17 “‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
18 “The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
19 “His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
25 “‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
26 “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’” (Luke 19:11-26 NIV).
11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12 He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a] ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
14 “But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
15 “He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16 “The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
17 “‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
18 “The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
19 “His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
25 “‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
26 “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’” (Luke 19:11-26 NIV).
Read the title buddy.
Oh, do I need to define parable again?
Parable: "a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson, as told by Jesus in the Gospels."
In fact it comes directly after the parable of ten minas if you'd studied it closely. And he uses it to justify his intended violent actions. Or should I say the author of Luke gospel used it to justify the intended actions of his hero.
Actually, the parable comes directly after the story of Zacchaeus. And after that parable, it is the story of how Jesus came to Jerusalem.
"Jesus Comes to Jerusalem as King
28 After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. 29 As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, 30 “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 31 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it.’”
32 Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. 33 As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?”
34 They replied, “The Lord needs it.”
35 They brought it to Jesus, threw their cloaks on the colt and put Jesus on it. 36 As he went along, people spread their cloaks on the road.
37 When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen:
38 “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!”[b]
“Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”
39 Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples!”
40 “I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”
41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”
So I think you need a little more bible study.
I would beg to differ.
Created:
Yes, and naturally the crazy guy thinks Trump is a genius.
Just because one crazy guy says Trump is a genius, doesn't mean that he isn't.
That would be like saying, Hitler said that Martin Luther King Jr. was an amazing person, therefore Martin Luther King Jr. was a bad person.
Created:
Posted in:
Yes, the poor Bible inept YouFound_Lxam doesn't understand that when Luke 19:28 said "After Jesus had said this" it was referring to Jesus wanting His enemies to be brought before Him and KILLED (Luke 19:27), plain and simple!
No, it didn't. Jesus didn't say this, he was telling a PARABLE.
Now I'm not going to call you a liar, even though you've done your fair share of that, I'm just going to call you uninformed.
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You are such an idiot. Your article says that Obama had lower gas prices than Trump. It also says Presidents have no control over gas prices.“But the labels suggesting which president was in office at the time of fluctuations were added later and are misleading. The chart implies that Trump was sitting in the Oval Office when average U.S. fuel prices went as low as $2 a gallon in January 2015 and $1.72 in 2016. In fact, Obama was in office at that time, with his tenure spanning from 2009 until Jan. 20, 2017”“The chart mislabels former President Donald Trump’s tenure, suggesting he was in office in 2015 during a period when gas prices dropped. Obama was in office at that time. Trump was not sworn in until 2017”
Well, you are claiming this, but no evidence.
Because we were in a recession. Low gas prices are always part of a recession. Because there is low demand because people are unemployed and demand for goods and services decreases. Plus a half a million Americans had died of Covid by the end of Trump’s term. So that helped lower demand too.
Yes, the recession did help, but overall, in his whole presidential term, from 2016 to 2020, he had better gas prices than Obama, and Biden.
Because the economy is growing under Biden. We had over 7% gdp growth for 2021. More than double the best year Trump had.
This is a strait up lie. You know what prices on gas are going up a lot. Diesel is going up more than anything under Bidens term. You know what else runs on diesel?
The machines that are used to water crops, which in turn makes food prices go up. Also, it is used in big shipment trucks. That causes less goods to be shipped.
There were US refineries off line for repairs and maintenance in 2022The oil companies made a choice to produce less in order to increase the price of oil
You really want to know why this is the case, because this actually helps my argument. Here it goes.
On literally the second day as president, one of the first things Biden did, was cut off the oil drilling programs in the U.S.
"U.S. President Joe Biden's administration has temporarily suspended oil and gas permitting on federal lands and waters in the latest of a series of rapid-fire orders aimed at fighting climate change and tamping down the U.S. fossil fuel industry.
The order appeared to be a first step in delivering on newly sworn-in Biden's campaign pledge to permanently ban new drilling on federal acreage. Federal leases account for close to 25% of the nation's crude oil output, making them a big contributor to energy supply but also to America's greenhouse gas emissions."
And did you know that this decision wouldn't even help the carbon emissions.
Experts have said that even if we stopped 100% of the worlds carbon emissions today, it wouldn't even change or help the climate.
In fact, this surge of natural disasters is just natures flow. In the 20s and 30s, the weather was actually worse than it is today. Then, in the 40s, 50s, and 60s, they calmed down. Then starting in the 70s, they got more aggressive. Now the weather is actually dying down.
So literally on the second day as President Biden made our economy worse, for no reason.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
where the TRUE Christian like myself has learned to just accept this killing MO
Well, if you believe that Jesus just kills people, then you're contradicting yourself. Because then you can't believe any of the scriptures that say murder is wrong. Because you believe Jesus does it too. Which is false.
Created:
Posted in:
I wouldn't. It's literally circular. From that Logic, anyone who testifies about himself to be God is God...
It isn't valid proof; it is just saying that God wouldn't be God if he didn't call himself God. That doesn't go for everyone, this links with the rest of the evidence.
Quotes which show the opposite of your claim are found in your source; [e.g. "Then a certain ruler asked Him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 19“Why do you call Me good?” Jesus replied “No one is good except God alone." (Luke 18:19)]
Yes, no one is fully good, with no sin in their hearts, except for God. God is only telling the ruler that he is good, in what he was doing, not a fully good person.
All of these examples show God telling us that he is God, which someone who isn't God wouldn't do.- I am God. There, done.
Probably should have worded that better, I'm sorry about that, but what I was trying to say, was that, If God never said that he was God in the bible, then that would disprove that he was God.
So, let's pick one of those. If he's claiming to be God and isn't, then he isn't just a great moral teacher, he is either a liar, lunatic, or the Lord.- Since the last one is metaphysically impossible, then NO. This is equivalent to someone claiming to be a married bachelor.
Well, what I was trying to point out here, was this question:
Is God a liar? No
Is God a lunatic? No
So, he must be the Lord.
Regardless of the authenticity of this narrative, willing to die for something does in no way inform the Truth of that something. People were willing to die for Slavery...
This has nothing to do with what I said at all. What I am saying, is that those free disciples, who could have lived fruitful lives, instead decided to risk their own lives, all of them, for something they claimed to be true. Why would they leave their homes and families, to be tortured and killed if it was not true.
- The authors of the Gospels are anonymous. The names John, Luke, Matthew...etc are conventional -decided a century after the fact, & not of the actual disciples of Jesus (pbuh).
Well, if you use my provided research, then you will find this statement false.
This means absolutely nothing. The testimony of a witness claiming to have seen an event he claim was witnessed by others is still a testimony of one person. We haven't heard anything from the other supposed hundreds of witnesses, now have we? I could as easily claim to witness something & claim a million people saw it. – Regardless, assuming resurrection did occur, this has no relevance to the subject.
Yes, it does. It literally provides evidence for the eyewitness testimonies of all of those people. They didn't claim a million people saw it. They claimed what they saw.
If you actually used the research, then you would again find this statement false.
- Almost all the above isn't true, but assuming it is. How does an empty tomb entail resurrection? Probably dozens of empty tombs are found everyday around the world, are we to assume they resurrected? – If you say, it is because he appeared after death. Well, appearance of the dead to their relatives is a common occurrence. Do we assume all these are gods? – Assuming the above, how does being resurrected from the dead a proof of Godhood? According to your Bible others have risen from the dead & we will all be resurrected after death, does that make us all divine too?
How is this untrue? Prove that its untrue. I have provided evidence proving otherwise, now show yours.
Yes, dozens of tombs are found empty, but using historical evidence, we learn that no one was buried there to begin with.
And they weren't relatives. And let's just say for a minute your right. How is it possible that all of those people saw the exact same thing at the exact same time?
I wouldn't call that a fake appearance of the dead.
No, we won't be resurrected. Our souls will be resurrected. Not our body's, like Jesus's were.
- Yes. God doesn't die...
No Jesus died and was resurrected. Not God. There is a difference.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Ok, BrotherD.Thomas, yes Jesus did say that.
But you are reading it wrong still.
Jesus was telling a story/parable, and he told the story of other people.
Your argument is just as stupid as your knowledge about the Bible.
That would be like saying if I read you a bedtime story about the monster in your closet and said a line from the book from the monster, therefore, I am the monster.
How does that make sense.
Created:
Posted in:
Now reply to this post with factual evidence, or you will be the one who is the runaway bible fool.
Created:
Posted in:
If the choice is more (avoidable) deaths or reasonable exceptions for abortion you choose death.
But it's not more death. You are comparing the 930,160 babies killed, to the 700 women who have died, then I would say that that is proving pro-life given that there was a lot more lives saved.
For example, some people have made the argument that if you ban abortion, then the illegal cases of abortion will skyrocket.
Which is true, it is common since to believe that if you make something illegal, then there will be more illegal cases of that thing.
But in the end, there are more lives saved.
And if your argument is that people are still dying because of your thinking, then you are pro-death, then that is stupid.
There will always be death, no matter how many laws you put in place. The thing people should try to do, is reduce that death as much as possible. It would be impossible to stomp out all death. Thats not how the world works.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Yes, I read it.
Texas law says that if there are certain exceptions for abortions when the mother's life is put at risk.
"In Texas, a pair of laws together ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy, without exceptions for rape or incest, and with narrow exemptions for pregnant people at risk of death"
"Abortion in Texas is illegal in most cases. A trigger law has been in effect since August 25, 2022, which bans abortion in all cases except to save the life of the mother. On September 1, 2021, abortion became illegal in Texas in cases where embryonic cardiac activity can be detected."
"However, in September 2021, Texas adopted two measures, S.B. 4 and S.B. 8, which instituted punitive actions against anyone providing abortion. These laws took effect before the Supreme Court decision ended Roe v. Wade. And all of a sudden, termination of pregnancy became impossible in Texas unless and until there was an “immediate threat to maternal life.”
Your link states this itself.
"During those nine days of waiting, here is what was achieved for the babies: 27 of the patients had loss of the fetus in utero or the death of the infant shortly after delivery. Of the entire cohort, one baby remained alive, still in the NICU at time of the journal article’s publication, with a long list of complications from extreme prematurity, including bleeding in the brain, brain swelling, damage to intestines, chronic lung disease. and liver dysfunction. If a baby survives these complications, they often result in permanent, lifelong illnesses. During those nine days of waiting, here is what was achieved for the babies: 27 of the patients had loss of the fetus in utero or the death of the infant shortly after delivery. Of the entire cohort, one baby remained alive, still in the NICU at time of the journal article’s publication, with a long list of complications from extreme prematurity, including bleeding in the brain, brain swelling, damage to intestines, chronic lung disease. and liver dysfunction. If a baby survives these complications, they often result in permanent, lifelong illnesses."
If the argument you chose to use is that abortion should be legal, because babies are born with illnesses, then I have a question.
All people with illnesses, do their lives matter?
And if anything, this proves my point even more. Yes, a lot of babies died, but at least the doctors gave the baby's a chance to survive. Even if they were allowed to get abortions, it would have ended even worse than it did, because one baby survived with no abortion, and no babies would have survived if there was abortion.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
But that was all besides the point which I made clear and you ignored. Here, I’ll give it another try…Therefore we agree that any yo-yo who comes around saying they disapprove of Biden merely because gas prices are high is expressing an opinion based in pure ignorance, and given that the vast majority of people don’t know anything about what influences gas prices, this accurately describes a significant portion of his disapproval with the American people.
Well, I hate to break it to you, but it's kind of worse than just gas prices.
Biden has ruined the economy, causing food prices, and gas prices to skyrocket.
Biden has caused our country to look weak, because of the Biden Administrations very bad choices.
Biden has caused other countries to grow their military arsenal and proclaim threats against the U.S. without any reaction from us.
Biden has caused the whole internet to laugh because of his ridiculous speeches and videos.
In one of his speeches, he says, and I quote," America is a nation, that can be defined in a single word. Asufutimaehfutbw."
Biden is trying to make America, all clean energy, which would destroy Americas power.
"About 79% of the nation’s energy comes from fossil fuels, 8.4% from nuclear, and 12.5% from renewable sources. In 2019, renewables surpassed coal in the amount of energy provided to the U.S. and continued this trend in 2021."
And finally, Biden has decided to focus on more "important matters" like global warming, and the LGBTQ+ movement, rather than worry about the economy, our own security, and technological advancing's.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
First of all, BrotherD.Thomas, I would love to answer all of your questions about the bible, given you know nothing about it, and you are only quoting scriptures that you have misread, but you need to take a chill pill on the CAPS.
JESUS SAID: "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)
Well, if you actually read the chapter, you would have found out that, that verse is part of a parable.
Definition of Parable: "a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson, as told by Jesus in the Gospels:"
The story of this parable is:
"The Parable of the Ten Minas
11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12 He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a] ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
14 “But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
15 “He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16 “The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
17 “‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
18 “The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
19 “His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
25 “‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
26 “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’” (Luke 19:11-26 NIV).
11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12 He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a] ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
14 “But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
15 “He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16 “The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
17 “‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
18 “The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
19 “His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
25 “‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
26 “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’” (Luke 19:11-26 NIV).
A parable is a way that Jesus taught his followers about the bible, and what God wants for them, through story's.
So no, God did not command anyone to be killed.
You are literally false when you said:
JESUS SAID: "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)
Because Jesus did not say that.
Well now who's the uninformed one?
Just as Matthew’s Jesus declared, "He who is not with me is against me . . ." (Matthew 12:30),
Again, if you would actually read the scripture, instead of google searching "Bad things that Jesus said" then you would see the flaws in your argument.
The scripture you are pertaining to actually states:
“Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can plunder his house.
30 “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31 And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven." (Matthew 12:29-31 NIV).
30 “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31 And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven." (Matthew 12:29-31 NIV).
This scripture pertains to the fact that if you don't accept God as your lord and savior, then you won't be able to enter the kingdom of heaven by their own decision.
Listen up YouFound_Lxam, I will soon be taking over your pathetic thread like I had to do with the equally Bible dumbfounded of the Bible as you are named Shila, to prove Jesus as God, praise! This is because your pathetic meanderings go severely wanting in the fact that you don't know which way is up on this discussion, where your comical opinions go in every direction at your embarrassment, understood? Good!
Ehhh...I think that your low knowledge about the Bible and its teachings, will stop this from happening.
NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN BIBLE FOOL LIKE "YOUFOUND_LXAM" THAT USES HIS OPINIONS THAT GO IN ALL DIRECTIONS THAT HE CAN'T EVEN FOLLOW, INSTEAD OF THE DIRECT WORD OF JESUS IN THE BIBLE AS GOD, WILL BE ...?
I love how you always end your posts like a game show announcer, announcing the winner.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
you'll either need to allow more death or more exceptions.
No, I stand by what I said.
There is only one exception, for when the mother will die if she does not get an abortion.
That is the only exception, and the law should be like that.
Created:
Posted in:
No exceptions, eh? Sounds like you are either very cruel or have no idea why disallowing abortions causes greater suffering of women AND infants.
I bring up my article from an earlier post.
"Every pregnancy-related death is tragic, especially because about 60% are preventable. Still, about 700 women die each year from complications of pregnancy."
So, let's do the math shall we?
There are approximately 8 billion people on earth.
And 700 of those people die from pregnancy problems.
That mean:
0.00000875% of people die from pregnancy every year.
But then the article says," especially because about 60% are preventable"
So, if we take that into consideration, then that puts us at:
0.00000525% of people die from pregnancy every year.
These are the only exceptions.
Created:
Posted in:
So being a young, ignorant, undereducated and blindly native twit tossing back the "I know you are, but what am I" childish retort is a good way to engage in civil debate in order to learn more about debating and the subject. #Hypocrite
I'm done arguing with someone with so little knowladge about this subject.
Created:
Moral values differ among religions
It depends on what you mean.
Could you elaborate on that?
Created:
The graph on this informational website shows the facts.
Obamas had a few good years, but overall, Trump has lower gas prices.
Created:
Posted in:
I can't believe that you even had to ask that. But here goes. He was crucified for crimes against Rome. He was entombed (not buried) to keep up the pretence of him being "dead". If it was known that he had survived, they would have simple rearrested him and made sure he didn't survive a second time. (unless of course there has been a bribe involved).
Actually, scholars have proven, that Jesus's injuries were not healable, with that time periods medicine. So even if what you said was true, he still would have had to supernaturally heal himself. But of course, that's not what happened.
Jesus died on the cross:
"Recent scholarship persuasively confirms that the four Gospels are based on eyewitness testimony. A leading scholar in this area, Richard Bauckham, concludes that the Gospels “embody the testimony of the eyewitness, not of course without editing and interpretation, but in a way that is substantially faithful to how the eyewitnesses themselves told it (Jesus and the Eyewitnesses). He shows that the Gospel writers were “in more or less direct contact with eyewitnesses.” Consider, for example, the prologue of St. Luke’s Gospel which resembles the style of ancient historiography:
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word. (Luke 1:1-3)
Bauckham further argues that St. John’s Gospel was not merely based on firsthand testimony, but written by an eyewitness to the Crucifixion. This is suggested in John’s epilogue, where the evangelist confirms, “This is the disciple who is bearing witness to these things, and who has written these things” (John 21:24)."
Ok. tell me. How many of Jesus. disciples witnessed a stone cold dead Jesus get up of his cold slab, change his tunic, roll away the stone and go mincing around the olive groves as if nothing had ever happened?
They saw his dead body buried, and then days later, they saw him alive again.
All very ambiguous then.So how do you know when to take something literal or metaphorical? Did the illiterate superstitious Jews and early Christians understand metaphor and idioms?From what I have read even the disciples of Jesus didn't understand what he was talking about most of the time, so how can you claim that you understand what is meant by something spoken 2000 years ago, when the local goatherd and fisherman couldn't?
Well as everything is in the bible, it has a metaphorical take, or a literal take.
You can choose to believe either, as long as it lines up with the scriptures.
Like obviously, in Matthew 5:29 when it states," And if thy right eye offends thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for. thee that one of thy members should perish, and. not that thy whole body should be cast into hell." It doesn't mean literally pluck out your eye, because the bible is against self-harm.
To really understand the bible, you have to study it, like a lot of Christians as well as myself do.
And it is fascinating to me that Christians have had 2000 years to iron out these ambiguous half stories that make up the NT and with every new excuse for these biblical ambiguities comes new dilemmas and questions
Well, that's what science has done.
Not Christianity.
Every time a very hard question is asked in science, that they can't answer, science says that they don't know, but not to worry about it.
Christianity on the other hand has answered every question that has come up and found more evidence supporting biblical claims.
Matthew 9:16-17 New International Version“No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do people pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”
This verse represents, that you can't just add good things to yourself, unless you have fixed the bad things in your life before.
Created:
Posted in:
So, pointing out grammar skills is a great way of arguing pro-abortion.
Great.......
Created: