Jump to content


Royal Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Cobalt1959 last won the day on August 8

Cobalt1959 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6,175 Excellent

About Cobalt1959

  • Rank
    Royal Member
  • Birthday 10/31/1959

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    St. Joseph, MO.
  • Interests
    Christ, Family, Church, and computers, in that order.

Recent Profile Visitors

9,190 profile views
  1. Typical double-speak. Most of the things they categorize as "fact," actually are not facts, except in the Liberal concept of "I said it, so it is fact." They must think everyone who goes to the site is stupid. I didn't realize that my Dad's home state had become so Liberal. Look at what has been happening in France. Or Great Britain. Or Germany. Or Sweden. Anywhere Muslims go, when they reach a certain number, they cause major problems. And those problems are magnified way beyond the initially low number of those present. It is specifically designed that way. They over-run through terrorism, at first, and things like large-scale rape is a terrorist tactic, whether the people engaged in it declare themselves terrorists or not. These practices are done to instill fear and cripple the populace so that as numbers get larger in the Muslim population they can move from terrorism to all-out war if required and they already have a demoralized populace.
  2. I see even more to it than that. Leaders that allow these large influxes of "refugees" don't want their populace to know how dangerous these people are, and they are directly responsible for these acts of terrorism, because they welcomed these people into the country. Lofven does not want the Swedish populace to know how dangerous these people are. Merkel certainly does not want the populace to know how dangerous these people are because she continues to be unapologetic for allowing them entry. Obama wanted them here, for what they could accomplish when it came to his personal agenda, and Hillary would have allowed them entry as well, had she been elected. Liberals don't just embrace these kind of moral disasters, they co-opt them and actively work to introduce them in their own countries, wherever they have the power to do so. They do so in the hopes that it will eventually usher in the kind of Utopia they personally envision. The collateral damage it causes is meaningless to them. The end justifies the means.
  3. Cobalt1959

    woman caught in adultery

    It is not surprising that some "textual critics" have a problem with this section of scripture. Of course, GotQuestions does not explain who these "critics" are or provide a source to view what they actually say. And even they give a form of disclaimer at the end: It seems you often look for reasons not to interpret scripture literally when the text indicates that is exactly the way to interpret it.
  4. Cobalt1959

    woman caught in adultery

    Your post is poorly written and it contains language that is vulgar and not necessary to illustrate the point. These passages convey the same message that others dealing with the Pharisees convey. That they actively attempted to trap Jesus so they would have a reason to punish Him. The verses say nothing about these men wanting the adulterous woman for themselves as well. It is not even hinted at. If this is the way that you routinely approach the Bible you might want to consider studying hermeneutics.
  5. Cobalt1959

    Terrorist Training Compound, New Mexico

    The whole mess stinks. Sure, it's been on the news, but the reports are sanitized because they want to distance the actors from their radical Islamic family, in this case, Siraj Wahhaj, an Imam in Brooklyn who was one of the un-indicted co-conspirators in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Snopes is stumbling all over itself trying to say that this same Siraj Wahhaj was not a speaker at the 2012 Democratic National Convention, despite the fact that he was. Good 'ole Snopes. There should be a whole lot of outrage over this incident, from many corners. Once again, the FBI was just sitting around for 2 months, doing nothing when someone had already reported they saw the missing boy, the one that is dead, in that compound. The local sheriff decided he wasn't going to wait on the FBI anymore when he found out the members of the compound were literally starving to death.
  6. Cobalt1959

    Muslims Turning to Christ

    Poisoning the Well is setting up any kind of false dichotomy in an effort to convince people to dismiss your opponent's line of reasoning without examining it. Islam is the Number One source of terrorism in the world today. It is not actually a religion. It is a political system that masquerades as a religion, and it was invented by Satan himself. So why would any Christian defend Islam in any way? The founder of your Red Letter Movement, Jim Wallis says that Muslims are saved without knowing Jesus. Do you believe that to be true? Can a person obtain salvation without knowing Christ? As for insulting people, of course you do. You have called me a hater, on more than one occasion, and you have absolutely no idea whether I actually am a "hater" or not. That is an insult even if you choose to define it as something else. When you refer to things as "facts," when they are not facts, that is an insult as well. The Bible does not support the concept of saying something that is evil is actually "good."
  7. Cobalt1959

    Muslims Turning to Christ

    You realize that poisoning the well is a well-known and discredited debate tactic, correct? In many circles in today's secular world today's "fact's" are yesterday's lies.
  8. Cobalt1959

    The Harlot Babylon: Jerusalem

    Again, your post above illustrates even more definitively that you never actually apologized because you are still saying you did nothing wrong. Hazard did nothing wrong. He did something you didn't think was correct. And here you are, a day later, still repeating the same tired stuff you already said in earlier posts about the exact same thing. Perhaps he said "get off my back" because you keep flogging a dead horse instead of admitting you were wrong and letting it go. You know how believers also do not communicate? They do not waste 3 pages of a thread regurgitating the same theory that they are above being wrong about something. Not only are you being repetitive, you are being belligerent. How does that work when it comes to humility?
  9. Cobalt1959

    The Harlot Babylon: Jerusalem

    You went on grousing at Hazard for 5 posts before your "apology." And made the comment that we were the ones causing the problem when you were the one that started whining about a non-issue in the first place. In post, after post, after post. This is your "apology:" Because of the last two sentences, it is not actually an apology. When you "apologize," but then go on to explain why your behavior was never wrong to begin with, it isn't an apology. And you still have not accepted personal responsibility. You are blaming your behavior on other people.
  10. Cobalt1959

    The Harlot Babylon: Jerusalem

    I knew what he was doing and anyone who wanted to know the scriptural reference could Google it. He didn't spread a plague or something although you keep beleaguering the point. I would have more of a problem with Oseas' bad doctrine, but you had no comment on that. You busted Hazard's chops because he didn't give a scripture reference. Let it go already. It was a non-issue from the very beginning.
  11. Cobalt1959

    Disturbed about Matthew 5:32

    As the leader, and the head of the household, the man bears a higher responsibility. Malachi 2:14-16 14 You ask, "Why?" It is because the LORD is acting as the witness between you and the wife of your youth, because you have broken faith with her, though she is your partner, the wife of your marriage covenant. 15 Has not the LORD made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his. And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth. 16 "I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel, "and I hate a man's covering himself with violence as well as with his garment," says the LORD Almighty. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith. God hates divorce, but in spite of that, He divorced Israel when the marriage became untenable. People who push the erroneous concept that once you are divorced, no matter what the reason, you are chained to a life of solitude do so using an extremely flawed interpretation of verses in Matthew, Mark and Luke. They do so with what seems to be a private sense of glee, and the doctrine itself violates just about ever attribute of God that we know to exist. They keep saying divorce is a forgivable sin, but in reality, they treat it as unforgivable since they attach so many qualifiers to it and chain a stigma to it as well. Victims of divorce have been through enough already. They don't need a legalist trying to pile even more guilt on them.
  12. Cobalt1959

    Star Trek: All Shows and Films

    Been a big fan of Star Trek since I was a kid. The OS was on too late for me to be allowed to stay up and watch it, but my Mom would watch it and if I leaned up against the wall right at the end of the bed I could watch it. Favorite OS episode is S2-E6-The Doomsday Machine. My favorite movie, by far is Wrath of Khan. Taking a plot off an earlier TV episode and they did it with style. It also has some great quotes.
  13. Cobalt1959

    Disturbed about Matthew 5:32

    The problem is not with how we use the word. The problem is that you have already made up your mind what it means, you've consigned a whole group of people to a prison cell you've created and you justify being judgmental by badly interpreting a handful of verses on the subject. The majority of the time God accused Israel of adultery in the Old testament, He was referring to idolatry. The word does not have the strict one-meaning application you place on it. You can keep repeating it does but your assertion won't be any more correct the 10th time you repeat it than it was the first time you said it. Legalists don't care for the actual application because then they can't beat people over the head with the "God hates divorce" club. It's one of their favorites along with clothes line preaching. Jesus would not be narrowing the application, merely clarifying the reality of the reason many men divorce their spouse: They are tired of them. You are here trying to give someone a one-way ticket to a guilt trip and you don't even know why the OP got divorced.
  14. Cobalt1959

    Disturbed about Matthew 5:32

    No. You apply a strict one-meaning application to a word that has several meanings. Adultery does not just apply to sexual sin. Spousal abuse is adultery. Abandonment is adultery. In these cases remarriage is not forbidden. You are placing constraints on the word that it does not have.
  15. Cobalt1959

    The Harlot Babylon: Jerusalem

    It is proper forum etiquette to put the scripture referenced either before or after the reference. It is not required. I would postulate that telling someone that they are not saved because they do not accept your interpretation of scripture is worse than failing to give a scripture reference. You are dinging the wrong person.