Churchmouse

I think God had the Bible created for a purpose and that is not to read into it more than is there. The idea that God knows our hearts and that he would intentionally overlook something in a person that he just destroyed everyone else in the world for, seems to lack efficiency. I don't think anything God does lacks that. What God did with the great Flood was a rebooting of humanity and he would not, I think allow a corrupted version of humanity to exist. That's what the Devil is for and the purpose that Satan exists. What is is there is an open account of disrespectful and utter contempt by a son of a father in days when Gods designs where held much stronger than they are today. Ham saw his father in a compromising position and instead of dealing with it the way any loving son would have done, he went out to the only one's he could have and told them . Why would he not just cover his father and then go to his brothers after that, warning them to be diligent when their father got drunk, that this could happen.

I think it's unfair for people who have grown up in a world that condones disrespect to the elderly and supports their being shoved away in homes that are little more than abandonment camps for people who are considered less important than quote/unquote productive citizens to evaluate the culture of people several thousand years ago. Ham was done the way he was done, because he made fun of his father's condition instead of helping him out and covering his body. I think, today Ham would have spread the fact all over the internet and have about 30,000 likes on the post by now.

I would suggest that you rely on their interpretation as it is their rules and their responsibility and cease in your insistence of impugning the integrity of those who know far better the definition of that word than either one of us. I've talked to many of them personally and I assure you they are as highly enthused about following their own rules as they are of not hearing an arrogant, condescending and impudent person trying to say if anyone dares to not follow his interpretation of the rules, then they are somehow false. . If you have something to say about a staff member then be mature enough to contact them through a pm and not broadcast how disrespectful you can get when things don't go your way. By the way, you can report this as well, if you wish and one other thing. Stop invoking the name of the Lord after casting persuasions on the very people who've stepped up to provide us a place to speak our minds, just because they might not agree with you. I doubt very much after that he would believe in your sincerity.

I've already discussed my opinions of your assessing abilities. I'm not afraid of messing up and if I do I will pay the price for it. I am more afraid of being intimidated by people who mix sentiment with idealism and wrap it around them as a facade of dignity they condemn others from. If you wish to follow that mindset in here, you are welcome to it. You are entitled to own your own opinions, as I am, but neither of us are entitled to own our own truth. The truth is that those who are following this thread can read for themselves what is being said here and providing they care about our little Drama, as well. Something tells me many here are as unimpressed with it as I am. Now getting back to the issue of my supposed breaking the rules, I will tell you what I've told everyone else who have thrown that at me and that is to report me or if you are too shy to do so tell me the posts you find illegal and I will report myself. I think it's quite telling that you haven't. Now if you will, the the phase is, Defecate or get off the pot. You are wasting broadband here.

Not much experience with trolls have we. We've had three here, since I've been here. Two have constructed their posts the same way as this person and his responses to the members here are similar. Please don't call into question my understanding of God when I understand all so well about the Idea of free will and when I think that free will is dedicated to playing cat and mouse with my fellow Christians I will warn them of that and that is what I did. You can take that warning with as much grain of sand as you wish, but If I were you, I'd go to an atheist web site to hone understand how those who mook us think and operate. i would not have seen what I did here, without that experience.

Being that much, that is apparent to you has been discounted so many times within the confines of this forum, I would say that this post quite as typical. Including the comment about attacking someone.

There is none perfect except God. There is that little driving need for mockery of those they've failed so many times to best that so satiates the liberal pallet. You are dismissed! bye.

Hi, why didn't you P.M. me with whatever you had in mind to speak to me about instead of making things personal. I spoke from my heart here about something near and dear to me, which is seeing members of my Christian family being played a fool of. If anyone had a problem with that they could have reported me to the staff or went off on me in a PM, so we could take care of this privately. That was not done and the results that were received from me is not something I began, so please don't come at me with this start another thread in such a condescending way, if you don't want to extend this little drama. Respecting one another is not a one way street.

Have your fun. You can add this to the laughter you get from leading everybody else around in a fruitless attempt at helping you. It's all a game in the first place to you so please have all the entertainment you can garnish here. Be my guest. What I've said about you is spot on and the both of us know it. So does God!

You know, You can be as snotty and cynical as you wish. I've heard worse by better, but what I am talking about is serious and no one seems to even be trying to understand. I've spoken about this before, but there seems to be far more people in the Christian community that embrace every aspect of Christianity that gives them authority to do our duties to the Lord than there are that even ponders any limitation set forth by the same God that places restrictions on that authority. If you want to discuss that and why I posted my original post here I am game. If you wish to just snipe at my then please collect your brownie point and carry on with whatever strikes your fancy.

I just love those who emote over people and situations they aren't equip to handle because they have no understanding those they speak of. There is a reason that God spoke about removing the dust from your sandals and that is the very issue you are ignoring in your self-righteous attempts chastise me.

I was born and raised a Jehovah's Witness, but thankfully removed myself from them when I was a tenager. Being that I am 59 now, you pretty much imagine how little I remember about their beliefs. I am a person who is relatively open minded about others, not about my beliefs, because they are well founded, but I also try and research just exactly what people do believe as that is, to me apart of the ground truth we all have to deal with, when we walk through this world. Listening to others speak about another is not exactly fair to anyone, since any one of us could bump into them and part of evangelizing, i think is trying to understand where they are coming from. A person who starts relating to ideals that person supposedly believes in is going to turn that person away, as the first thing that goes through their mind is that we are talking about something that we don't know. We, if that is the case would anyone listen to anyone who doesn't know what they are tlking about. Especially when it comes to the idea of religion.? If I were given this letter I would try and research just what was in that Watchtower, to begin with. https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/s/r1/lp-e?q=watchtower&p=par&fc[]=w&pg=7

He's a front man.

Mr. Assange will never be more dangerous than he is to the country he resides in and the quicker these countries understand that he has no loyalty other than to himself and the mental imagery of himself he carried, that they are just as vulnerable to him as any other country. All this talk about what he is and what motivates him is simply conjecture. What he does is real and I don't think we would even be talking about this, if he concentrated on individual people, instead of different countries. The country whose embassy he was in had some reason to grant him protection, but if, during his stay there, he were to have stolen some of their documents, would they still have the same attitude towards him? I think not. Their seems to be a break in peoples thinly veiled renditions of morality, when it changes form governments that are being targeted and individual people, especially when the possibility of one of those people targeted may include yourself.

You know, I always liked the idea God came upp with about the sanctuary cities and the avenger of blood. I think it should be handled in the same manner as with these people who run and hide in these embassies. The only thing is that when the crime is less than killing someone, the person should be put on trial following the laws of the country whose embassy he is seeking refuge in, for the crime he is supposed to have committed elsewhere. If the person is found guilty by that trial, then they are to be given over to the country which his crime was perpetrated in, unless he can prove his life would be in danger. If that would be the case, then he should be taken to the country of the embassy he is in and serve time in their jails, according to their laws and guidelines. This could be monitored by the Red Cross, UN or whatever to confirm that this persons, if found gulty, crimes are left unpunished and the victims of those crimes are victimized, once again, by the embassy system. They have rights, as well.

Put together the need to be relative and the need for revenue and you don't have mental illness, you have motive.all you need to do is look at the status of the Clinton Foundation after in the light of her activities dealing with them while being the Secretary of State. This is not about her loosing the election, because winning the election was not about being president. This is about influence and what greater influence do you think she will have in the middle of a feeding frenzy where donations are pouring in from all sides. Powerful people like George Soros doesn't just give money away to anyone. He gives it away to those who can give him results and what better people to offer him that is there other than those who run organizations dedicated to the destruction of they who he wishes destroyed. Do you think those who control Moveon.org are on food stamps? lol.

I have followed you. I've read your posts. You don't depart far from the same overall narrative. You want attention without placing any effort into approaching any further than you were when you came here. Thus the comment on your agenda. As far as knowing you, what there is to know about a person in these sites is to read, not only what they post, but how they post, since everyone has their own style of posting and the most important information there is to be gleaned from a person is how they respond to the responses of others. your responses are almost never positive, being at their best, noncommittal. I don't have to know you to see you.

Her hobby is to stay relative and she's doing what she thinks will benefit her.

Why don't you guys take a hint from peoples user names. The name NOTSOLOSTSOUL speaks volumes to the mindset of this person, to me. Arrogance has a language all it's own and I hear it load and clear from how this thread was configured and the placing of the situation .. It just blows my mind when people go out on a limb to answer the loaded questions of someone whose agenda isn't to listen but to instruct us in the so-called errors of our ways. What part of brush the dirt off of your sandals doesn't anyone get here?

He did. I think it had something to do with his back.

Beckel is an armchair activist.

I love how people like to cherry pick scripture and wrap it around their ideals and then post links they also pick according to what they favor. What really gets me is the use of modern day terms like prejudice when it comes to describing the mindset of fellow Christians who have the entire history of the Catholic, Protestant an Orthodoxy churches behind them as well as the scriptures to back up their claim. It seems that these people seem to have difficulty when it comes to believing in Gods will can override the will of man. Those the comment about people being prejudice, which is completely removing the idea of god's will and stating per fact that those who oppose female preaches simply don't like the idea of women pastors. It's Ironic that you of these name callers posted a scripture that states that God doesn't have favorites, as if it meant the way the person was manipulating scripture to mean, why would there not be a long history of having female preachers? This I've asked on several occasions and I've yet to have anyone in the opposition to explain how this could be. Either God is directing all his children through the Holy Spirit or not? He is able to enforce his will especially when it comes to his own followers or not. If not then people have a different idea of what supremacy than I. If people want to scavenge the internet for links that support their take on things, I have them as well, but I would rather hear a person's argument from their own mouth, instead of trying to debate and article that will just be reiterated latter. as a rebuttal to the argument the poster did not make.

Doing and saying what God has already said he is going to do is not carrying God around anywhere. It is carrying the Bible around with them a reading it without presumption. There is no division other than those who follow the Bible as it is set down and those who set down with a Bible and follow their own ideals. As I've said before, If God wished women to be pastors there would be a long history of that and he would not suffer the culture of men to stifle that. To assume any different is to deny the scriptural evidence to the contrary. Either god is on the throne or he is on the run. To me he is on the throne and his will is manifest everywhere, not just where the assumed rule of man resides.

Yes there is. One is introducing those who have not known God and one is building on the knowledge that is already there. Do you think people actually just show up at a church because they like the pointy roof. There is a thirst there that has been wetted by those who have spoken about God.

Show me where in the Bible it states that taking the word of God out into the world does not mean that the Men and women are to not follow the scriptural roles they have played through the years. Women can proclaim the word of God, but does that mean they can proclaim it to men and women alike or just to women and children? There is a difference between proclaiming the word of God to those who have not heard it and preaching to those who have inside a church of God, who made the roles of men and women quite clear.