The_Patriot21

I didn't say it gave you the freedom to sin as you saw fit, I said it gave you freedom from sin. There's a key difference there. It's like someone hands you a guitar. You can flip it over and beat on the back and make noise with it. You certainly have the freedom to do that. But if you flip it around the right way and learn how to play it, the way it was designed to be played, you can do a LOT more with it then if you just did what you wanted to originally. By accepting the limitations of the guitar you can do a lot more with it. If we continue in our life of sin, which we certainly have the right to do, sure we may have a short amount of happiness on this earth, but we will never experience true freedom unless we choose to follow Jesus and willingly place ourselves under His limitations, we will never experience true freedom that comes from following His plan.

Anyone who thinks these are not in the Bible, does not believe in heaven, or even in Christ. Now before you come down on me, let me ask you, do you believe Christ offers salvation from death? Is that not life, true life? Does this salvation also give you freedom from sin? Does it not give you a place in heaven? Do you not think heaven is going to be a happy place? Or do you plan to be miserable there? If you believe in the above then you believe in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness as well. Just unlike most of the world we just realize we can't obtain true life, liberty, nor happiness while here on earth. Those are the very thing Christ offers us in salvation. The founding fathers were in essence trying to at least partially model that. Now, was their definition God's definition? No they were trying to offer us those things here on earth, because they can't offer us heaven, but it was indeed their model.

Sounds expensive...but then again the cost of ammo these days isn't exactly cheap lol. $100 used to keep me going all afternoon at the local prairie dog field...now I can burn through $100 of ammo in less than an hour lol.

Spent most of my adult career behind the wheel of a big rig...and largely in the oil fields. Oil field, where I'm at eats people alive. It's not fight or flight...you want to make it your only option is fight. A wise oil field hand just learns the how and when. Eats a lot of people alive. I totally get where your coming from. Just remember, don't beat yourself up because you make mistakes, we all do.

We all do that -react in the moment. However I've found if I don't have an outlet, these reactions happen more often. I'm far more likely to react in the moment. A lot of the men in the Facebook group I'm in prefer MMA or other forms of martial arts, because not only does it give them a release but it teaches discipline, and it's discipline that helps us keep that cool in the moment and react in an appropriate manner.

You know, the Bible never says anger is a sin, it's what we do in our anger. Men are naturally, more aggressive in how they show their anger. And if they don't learn to control it, it's unhealthy. Most Christians answer to their anger and aggression is to bottle it up, tamp it down and pray God cures them if it. And it's rarely effective. Because what happens is usually they bottle it up until they blow up. A better way to handle it is to learn to channel it. I'm a member of a Facebook group titled "the league of savage gentleman" and it's a group of men who are working on doing just that, being able to control their aggression constructively so that they can control it. If they can control it they know when to respond like a gentleman, and when to let the savage side out if necessary. And they discuss many ways. Many of them turn to martial arts. Others into woodwork, art, and other stuff. I realize it's not a Christian page, but the concept isn't a bad one. God made man with a purpose and he made us the way we are. Instead of bottling our anger we need to learn how to properly channel our aggression in a proper way. Hobbies, whatever. If we can get that aggression out of our system in a positive manner, were more likely to keep our cool when met with difficult people or situations. For me, it's spending time in the outdoors, usually with firearms, target shooting, hunting, fishing, whatever. It maybe something totally different for you, but whatever it is, include God.

One more thought on this, every Christmas out comes all the people saying we shouldn't celebrate Christmas because of it's pagan roots, or because it's a worldly holiday, really all these worldly reasons against it. Well, my question is, since when did we start letting the world influence when and how we worship God? Which is what your doing. Virtually every day on the calendar is a holy day for some secular or pagan thing or another. Does that stop us from worshipping God any other time of the year? The world is going to celebrate their way no matter what we do. It shouldn't stop us from worshipping God. who cares why they celebrate Christmas, what matters is why we celebrate Christmas. I celebrate Christmas because of Jesus and for Jesus.

Your logic, is illogical. You say for certain Christ wasn't born on December 25th, but then state that His actual birthday is unknown, leaving a 1/365th chance that it is indeed, on December 25th. So it is technically possible it is. But, the thing is, if your worried about the date, then your missing the point of Christmas entirely. Your focused more on the "event" then the reason behind the event, and there's a term for that-its called legalism. Now, realistically you are right, Christ wasn't born on December 25th. Early christians we're persecuted and moved the celebration of Christ's birth to that day as it was a pagan holiday, and people getting together was common, so no one took notice if Christians were getting together, albeit for different reasons. See they got the point. They were celebrating Christs birth, because of the gift God gave them-a savior. The actual date was totally irrelevant, it was the gift that mattered. Over the years, that pagan holiday died off. And Christ completely took over Christmas. And now, we see more and more, capitalism and greed is taking it over from Christ, which is unfortunate. Christmas isn't about the trees, or the gifts, nor even helping those homeless people out. It's about Christ and what He did for some 2000 years ago, and it doesn't really matter if Jesus was actually born that specific day or not, or even what day you choose to celebrate it. What matters is worshipping God. There's nothing wrong with Christmas trees or presents, or helping the homeless, or a lot of the traditions, but they're not the focus. If they're the focus your missing the point. If your so hung up on the date or whether the Bible said we should or not then you shouldn't celebrate it, as your also, missing the point of it. But your not going to stop me from doing so. Because Jesus is the reason for the season.

Didn't even know they had another one. What is this, #1,001? That's how little I care anymore. I never got the original vaccine, I never will, and I certainly won't get any boosters for a vaccine I never got. Now if you want to I won't stand in your way, nor insult you, but I certainly am not doing it. I survived two rounds of COVID, with compromised lungs, and the second time wasn't much worse then a common cold, so I'm certainly not afraid of getting it again.

Someone needed to proof read this one better, the article kept mentioned they resigned after the city cancelled the 5 following classes but never actually listed what the classes were.

Sometimes we don't see the effect we have.

Lol ok, whatever you say.

I'd say switch...but anyone with any sense knows the government has been doing this for some time with all the networks. This is just the only one they've been caught using.

He volunteered. Apparently the pay is good.

It's broke. At least on my end

See what? I don't see anything? Guess that means it's true...the earth is flat.

I suspect now that the footage has officially been released we will be seeing more of this. Which is why the rats didn't want it released, why they made the false claim it's a "security" risk. It's only a security risk, if you were lying about the Jan 6th events.

I was hesitant to approve this, because your language is getting borderline but I decided it was a worthy comment regardless. A animal, does not have a soul, at least not in the same way you and I do, if you feel scripture teaches that, then you misunderstand it. And animal cruelty is being cruel to animals. Causing them undo suffering and pain. That baby goat? It's dead. It's not feeling pain. Even if it had a "soul" it already left the body. If it was boiled alive? Yeah there would be a case for animal cruelty no matter what you boiled it in. But a dead animal can feel absolutely no pain so you cannot be cruel to it. So by definition boiling a dead goat in it's mother's milk absolutely cannot be animal cruelty. Period. Because it's not cruel, it's not causing that deceased animal any pain. And I never said that Jesus did away with the law, I said Jesus did away with dietary restrictions, which is true. Even the apostle Paul said the law was in place so that we know what is and what is not sin. He also said we are no longer bound by the law, but by grace because no one can follow the law. And today, literally no one is. I'm certainly not aware of really any practicing Jews who follow the sacrifices like they're supposed to. What I said was as Jesus fulfilled the law we need to look at the intent of the law. The whole pagan thing? Yeah you may only have found one reference online, but I've come across it several times over the years. It's a thing. And God is very big on His people being set apart from the world. Which makes far more sense in this scenario then some imaginary belief that a dead goat can feel pain. Which is the lesson behind that story, that if the world is doing something perhaps we shouldn't. No one's currently boiling goats in their own milk anymore. I literally don't know anyone who even does that. So doing it really wouldn't be doing what the world does. On top of that, did I mention literally no one does that? I mean I guess I'm gonna have to read back but how did this discussion even get started? Did someone pull up some obscure passage of the Bible to push their brand of legalism or what? Because this is something that isn't practiced in todays world for really any reason. I hadn't even thought about this passage in years, that is how obscure this is in todays world so why are we all getting so bent out of shape over boiling goats in milk lol

Oh I agree, animal cruelty is horrible. I'm not one to mistreat an animal. Even with my hunting my goal is to put the animal out of its misery as quickly and cleanly as possible. I just fail to see how boiling an already dead animal as cruel, regardless of what it's boiled in. I mean...the animal is dead...it can't feel anything.

Lol I saw what you said.... I just quite frankly didn't respond to the scripture, because your basically, ignoring the context, or rather the intent behind the law. The whole reason behind that "law" wasnt that donkeys or goats are sentient. They are not. They're animals. They recognize they're alive but they have no souls. The whole reason that law was put in place wasn't to avoid "ghoulishness" or whatever you want to call it, but to separate God's chosen people from the pagans at the time who would do that as part of their rituals. These pagan rituals no longer exist. Furthermore I am not a Hebrew under the mosaic law. I'm a Christian under the new covenant. A covenant where God specifically lifted all dietary restrictions. So basically I didn't respond because the verses at hand no longer apply to me so there's no logic in replying to it. I don't live under legalism, and since that law is no longer really applicable, it really is just in your head. What I fail to see is why it's so important to you to convince me, especially since I've already stated I don't do that and have no intention of doing so, though for different reasons then yourself. And even if I did, it wouldnt hurt you in the slightest. I'm even wondering why I'm in this silly conversation. It's really a trivial thing to debate. So with that I'm off. Goodnight

Actually in the neck an arrow has a better chance. A bullet in the neck is unlikely to expand, leaving a hole the size of the bullet through and through, with the hole being usually around 7-8mm. A good 4 bladed broadheads will be over an inch in each direction, and will leave basically 4 straight cuts. Actually quadruples your chances of getting an artery. Now, I'm not suggesting hitting the neck. Not a great idea, but the chances are better. A shoulder blade hit is both a good and a bad thing. If you got the power to go through it, it's the best spot to aim. When I'm rifle hunting that's where I aim, because I know the heart and lungs are right behind it so I'm garenteed a kill shot, and I don't lose much meat to boot. But with the guns I hunt with and the ranges I shoot, it's never a problem. My 270 will typically go through both shoulders of a deer or antelope and destroy the heart and lungs en route out to 200+yards and still be moving when it exists, and I rarely make a shot longer then 200 yards. It just isn't sporting to me to shoot beyond that. Once you hit the 500 yard mark it's no longer hunting, it's merely target practice. But, if your archery hunting, especially if using a lower powered bow such as a recurve, a shoulder shot isn't always a good idea. A good hunter knows their weapon and it's strengths and weaknesses.

Yes that comes from hunters getting impatient and not waiting until they get close enough. One has to be very very patient to be a good bow hunter. One year I had two friends who were elk hunting, one was bow hunting the other rifle. They both got similar sized bull elk, both huge. The rifle hunter took his down with not one, not two, but 3 solid hits from a 7mm mag at about 500 yards, and all three were in the heart/lungs. The animal made it probably another 500 yards from the point of the first hit until the time it went down. Keep in mind the 7mm mag is a very powerful round and provides plenty of stopping power even at that range, and the first two did perforate the lungs with the third going through the heart. The other hunter dropped his elk at 25 yards with a single arrow. Went between two ribs and through the heart. It made it maybe another 20 yards before it dropped. The next year, the rifle hunter took another elk down with a single shot at 700 yards with the same gun. Its not really the weapon that makes it humane or not, it's the hunter.

Actually believe it or not, but a well placed arrow with the appropriate blade will often kill an animal far faster then a bullet will. Most modern broadheads have between 2-4 razor sharp tips that cut clean through everything, causing rapid bleed out while preserving the meat. The downside is a bad shot, can leave the animal dying a slow death. But a poorly placed gun shot will do the same thing, the difference is with a gun it's often easier to get a good shot. I have done both. Never got anything bigger then a rabbit with the bow however.

Balaam's donkey is really a poor example. Because quite frankly if you believe it was actually a donkey that was talking, well, it's rather nieve. That donkey wasn't really talking of their own accord. Because donkeys don't have the capacity for speech. Literally. A donkeys vocal cords are physically incapable of speech. For it to talk would require divine intervention. Not alone carry on a conversation. Fact is, the mother doesn't know nor care what you do with her milk. Neither does the baby donkey. Why? Because it's dead. And if you were the cruel sort to boil it alive (that would be ghoulish) I suspect it would be far more bothered by the fact it's being boiled alive then by what it's being in. The milk. At that point wouldn't even be on his mind. And for that matter, why are you eating some poor donkeys baby? I mean, that doesn't bother you, but what you boil it in does? Literally the only things in this conversation that would be bothered by said scenario are the people. Such as yourself. If it bothers you don't do it... pretty simple. I'm not going to, not because it bothers me but because much to lazy to do that, I mean imagine how much work that would be, you'd have to milk that thing for months, find a place to store it so it don't go bad, probably by freezing it, then unthawing...nah to much work. A BBQ grill or smoker is way easier. And I'm to lazy to even smoke my meat lol.

Lol well you "remember" is somewhat faulty but not fully. When it comes to game animals, such as deer, elk, turkey, waterfowl, whatever I eat what I kill. It's the ethical thing to do. Do I thoroughly enjoy the hunt? Yes absolutely, for many reasons. But I also enjoy the meat, thoroughly and I use every bit of usable meat. I oftentimes will even use the organs. I don't eat the organs but I will often either grind them up and turn them into dog food, or use them for coyote bait. Now, for nuisance animals, some of them I don't eat. Animals such as prairie dogs. They're inedible, disease ridden and unsafe to eat, and rarely have enough meat to eat anyway, but will destroy a rancher or farmers field in a matter of months. They get eliminated without prejudice.