shiloh357

Royal Member
  • Content count

    37,273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    256

shiloh357 last won the day on February 17

shiloh357 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

26,958 Excellent

About shiloh357

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Standing for Israel and defending Israel from Islam, anti-Zionism and Replacement theology.

Recent Profile Visitors

17,526 profile views
  1. If she is more skilled, is more valuable to the company, works the over time, goes the extra mile for her employer, she should get paid more than the man in the same office doing the same kind of job, but only skates by on the bare minimum he needs to do to keep his job. I don't think pay should ever be gender-based. That is just not fair.
  2. But it is hypocritical for you to assume her motives when you don't know her, but complain that someone is assuming things about you without getting to know you. You can't have it both ways. And sticking the word "likely" in there doesn't let you off the hook. Just because we don't agree with you, it doesn't mean that we don't "get" what you're saying. We get you, but you're simply wrong.
  3. that is an excellent analysis. I would add that he was very accessible for the media. Unlike Hillary and other candidates who didn't go on the morning shows very much, Trump never turned down an invite. Trump was good at using the media. He still is. Trump got infinitely more coverage and spent far less for it than the other candidates who paid out the nose for air time. He literally got Billions in free air time over the other candidates because everyone was talking about Trump. He ran just a couple of commercials, not many at all. Someone asked me if I really believed that Trump could make the Mexicans end up paying for the wall. I said "Yes, because he has gotten more air time than just about all of the other candidates combined and he basically got the media to pay for it." Trump dominated the headlines and he was the guy the media loved to hate. Some of the coverage was favorable to Trump, some of it was not, but at the end of the day, they were talking about Trump, Trump, Trump. It was all Trump, all of the time.
  4. Again, I am just going off the impressions your posts give off.
  5. I am not passing judgement. I am just going off what you have said. That was simply how your posts read, like it or not.
  6. You're the one who started our exchange trying to equivocate establishing Sharia with Christian Churches being politically active. No, I have given every reasonable response I can. You simply don't like them. No it's not. That's just nonsense. You haven't' really made a point. All you have done is declare that organizations have no right to be politically active, but failed to really back that up or explain why no one else sees it like you do. okay, so prove it.
  7. I am not making assumptions. Your responses are identical to liberal talking points that have been employed on these boards before.
  8. I have read all of the posts where you have responded to me, and there is little to no difference between what I have gotten in your responses than I have from died in the wool liberals.
  9. I don't believe that. Just because I don't agree with you, it doesn't mean I don't understand you. I understand you perfectly. It's just that you're wrong.
  10. based on your posts, I don't believe that at all.
  11. The Arabs contributed those things inspite of Islam, but those were also very primitive contributions. It is not like Islam has done anything for us lately except behead, crucify, boil in acid, drown, and blow up in airplanes, those they hate. All islam has ever been is a plague on humanity. Well, my assertion is true regardless of your agreement or disagreement, Only if you twist and pervert what I said to apply or mean something I didn't intend to say or mean. Typical of leftist debate tactics.
  12. I understand that, but that was only the style of the rally. Common sense tells us that while it styled as a campaign rally, it was not an actual campaign rally, per se. Again with this assigning values/motives. What makes you think it was for political gain? What evidence do you have that such was the motive behind it? But they still had an impact on the pagan government and they opposed the pagan the government when what was required opposed Scripture. Paul, every time he mentioned Jesus as "Lord" he was making a statement to the pagan government. As Americans we should impact a representative government. We should push for legislation that reflects biblical values, regardless of what the outcome will be. We might be successful, we might not be. But there is no sphere of American life where we should not be salt and light. None of that has anything to do with Melania reading the Lord's prayer at the rally. You cannot point to anything that was inappropriate or was a reproach to God. It might offend your liberal, anti-Trump sensitivities, but there was nothing actually wrong with it. Our job is to be salt and light to the world, even if the world hates it, even if they revolt against it. How the world responds isn't up to us. God does not hold us accountable for their response, but only to be light and truth. Our faith isn't meant to be private or hidden under a bushel. If the world hates us it's because they hated Jesus first.
  13. You're conflating Arabs with Islam. Islam didn't contribute any of that to the world. I mean, look at how Muslims live in Muslim countries. The most advanced country as far as science, art and medicine in the middle east is concerned, is Israel. Israel stands as a living reproach to Islam's inability to adapt to the 21st century. The latest breakthroughs in medicine aren't in Muslim countries. That is happening in Israel. Six out of seven of Israel's universities were consistently ranked among the 100 best in the world. The Muslim world only had one. In Turkey. In Muslim countries, rape and child molestation are common and legal. Women have few if any rights at all. Christians and Jews are less than second class citizens. They have some of the worst human rights records in the world. So they have made some early contributions, but their system is so backwards they haven't really made it out of the middle ages.
  14. It was not a campaign rally. It was a rally where he went before the American people to explain his agenda. It was styled like a campaign rally, but it was not a campaign rally. Which doesn't mean that Christianity doesn't have a place in the public area, much less the political arena. If there were any sector of our nation that needs to be exposed to biblical principles, it is the political sector. True, and that is the problem. Our nation would better served if biblical principles and values played a bigger part in the value system of Washington DC. Cite specific examples. And Christians are to blame for this? Not buying it. So since she quoted the Lord's prayer, that automatically means that she is, in her mind, equating with the Kingdom of Heaven with the US? On what basis do you assign that value to her? How do you justify assigning that motive to her reading that prayer??? Are we supposed to accept your assessment just because you say so, or do you any evidence to justify this notion of yours?
  15. Yes, the Left conflates those who are illegal and those who are legal. For the Left, if you are opposed to illegal aliens, you are "anti-immigration." They can't win the argument in an honest manner. Note that they also change from "illegal immigrant" to "undocumented immigrant." They remove the word "illegal" so they don't have to deal with the morality inherent in the word, "illegal." It allows them to play on and manipulate people, emotionally. that's something the left has gotten really good at.