OT- a deal that shouldn't be passed up

Page 5 of 8  


Could this really be any more hollow? He asked you some valid questions and your refusal or inability to answer them says it all. I said that I would not get involved in this kind of crap and got stuck doing it anyway. While in the past I would keep going on with this level of pointless argument, least now I know enough to get out. You know my opinion and I know yours, enough said and it is getting too close to the holidays to keep this crap going anyway. A Merry Christmas to you and yours Budd.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TBone wrote:

Once again you reject something I said in all honesty and truth. That shows you will never accept a thing I say as honest or truthful. It was not hollow . . .I am a Christian.

Yep, it says I won't dance his dance nor will I dance yours. Both of you have given clear evidence of your attitude of anyone professing Christ that doesn't fit your styereotypical mold. Both of you have proven to my satifaction you are religious bigots.

Now, who's choice was that, Tom? Why, it was yours. Just like it has always been. You're really good at telling others to do the things you cannot do . . .like pass up a chance to show your bigotries.
> While

No, you don't. If you really knew what you think you know, you would know that no two Christians are required to be exactly alike by the Bible.

Is it enough said? Or will you grab the next available chance to attack me or my beliefs? Why will you go back on the offensive after the holidays?

Do you know what "Christmas" really means to a true believer?
Budd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Exactly what I expected, evasion. Faced with the impossible task of rationalizing his hypocrisy Budd evades the questions and reinforces his hypocrisy.
Christians, they love to talk about how loving, dutiful and compassionate they are, yet I have yet to meet ONE who does not practice hypocrisy to the highest degree. Their willful ignorance of the Bible combined with their two faced idealism to preach it, has made me sick. For nearly two thousand years Biblicists have been lecturing people on the importance of adhering to the Bible's teachings on ethics, manners, and morality. They quote Jesus and Paul profusely, with a liberal sprinkling of Old Testament moralism. The problem with their approach lies not only in an oft- noted failure to practice what they preach, but an equally pronounced tendency to ignore what the Bible itself, preaches. Christians practice what can only be described as "selective morality". What they like, they cling to and shove down other's throats; what they don't like, they ignore vehemently. That which is palatable and acceptable is supposedly applicable to all; while that which is obnoxious, inconvenient, or self-denying is only applicable to those addressed 2,000 years ago. Their hypocrisy is so rampant that even the validity of calling oneself "Christian" is in question. I see so many people enjoy quoting the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, and some of Paul's sermons, but don't even PRETEND to heed other, equally valid, maxims.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Kunkel wrote:

<LOL> No, John, just what I said, I will not play your game.

Really? Then you're ignoring all the Christian volunteers that worked the Katrina Disaster, the Tsunami, 9/11, Red Cross,and so on. You're missing the Christian scientists of old that brought about modern medicine and vaccinnes.
I think you only want to find hypocrisy, so you find it even when it doesn't exist except in your eyes. But, as with those like yourself, you don't want to find anything that would prove you wrong, do you?

Your willful misinterpretations make me sick also.

Biblicists?????
And who are you that God, or any Jewish or Christian believer, should be mindful of you? (Paraphrased from the Old Testament)

And you don't? Or do you have any at all?

Gee, that sounds just like you.

<LOL> That sounds like you also.

And you are better? I don't think you are, but you, in this reply, have shown you think you are better than anyone, even God.
I forgive you.
Budd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You just don't get it, it's not about me, it's about YOU. Cast can cast all the aspersions you want on me and I'll readily admit to most of them because I make no claim of piety.

You have no power to forgive.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Kunkel wrote:

And you don't get it either. It's not about me, eithe. It's about God.

I have the power to forgive your transgressions toward me, I do not have the power to forgive your sins toward God. By implication, you say that there is a "Power to forgive".
Budd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nice try at a handoff, but it IS about you and your hypocrisy.

What you perceive as "transgressions" are merely pointing out your hypocrisy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Kunkel wrote:

MANDATES???? Jesus mandated that all who reject Him will go to Hell also.

<LOL> The funny part is that, as an atheist, you have no jurisdictionover me. No authority to tell me what kind of life I should live.
Why? BECAUSE EITHER YOU REJECT ALL OF GOD'S WORD OR YOU ACCEPT IT ALL. And since you rejected the "brainwashing", you reject God and the Bible. It doesn't apply to you and you are not in a position of belief to be able to tell me what it means.

Curiously enough, the reverse is allowed by Scripture, that you will be judged, on the Day of Judgement, for how you treat Christians, Jews and your fellow man.
Btw, put the verses back into context and you find it's a teaching for believers concerning a restriction on them to not judge other believers . . . and since you're not a believer. . .

Can you imagine a Creator without a sense of humor? Look at the Platypus.
Unlike you, I believe that Jesus laughed and teased with His Disciples and shared happy moments with them. Remember, Jesus was fully God and fully Man.
Who would want to follow a leader that went around looking like he was weaned on a pickle.

John, I find it absolutely incredible that you rejected God, His Word then try to apply this Psalm to me when it applies, as well if not more, to you.
Are you without sin? Are you qualified to throw the stone? Are you authorized by God to sit in judgement?

John Kunkel, another of a long line of atheistic hypocrites that seek to force Christianity into a neat little package that he no longer has to face . . . .or fear.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Side step the issue all you want, one does not have to believe in the Bible to read it and to recognize when a Bible-thumper has ignored the teachings there.

Absolutely not, sin (by your definition) is what I live for. I dismiss the premise that one must be sin free to to point out hypocrisy among avowed Christians.

Once again I will point out the simple fact that "judgement" has nothing to do with the subject; you have violated the clearly written (and in context) principals set forth in the Bible.

You need to consult a dictionary before tossing around words like "hypocrisy". Since I have no beliefs I can't be guilty of trespassing on those beliefs; unlike you and your ilk who spout Chrisianity and violate the basics of it on a daily basis.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Kunkel wrote:

No, you do not have to believe it to read it, but you have to believe in it's Author to understand it.
You do not understand it.

I see, so by your own admission you are an evil person . . .which means you are a hypocrite for trying to teach that you refuse to practice.

"Professing to be wise, they made themselves fools." As an atheist, the more you claim to know the Bible, the more hypocritical you become, the more foolish you act.

Why? I have you and Tom as living examples.

So you see an atheist teaching from the Bible as OK? ROTFLMBO!!!!!
That is probably the dumbest, most foolish thing you could have said, John. Because the book you're teaching from tells me to not listen to you because you are an unbeliever.
Can't you get that thru your head? I REJECT YOUR TEACHING FROM THE BIBLE AND YOUR SELF-PROCLAIMED AUTHORITY BECAUSE IT IS NOT ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE.
Budd
Budd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But you do? Buwahahahahaha!!! Cochran, Cochran; all hail the prophet. (With apologies to Spencer Tracy, et al)

Jeez, Budd, get off the "teach" rhetoric. You have no defense for your hypocrisy; admit it.

Show, in lengthy detail, how any or all the Biblical passages I quoted can be understood so they don't relate to your Chelsea Clinton joke. Even your born again bretheren have condemned you.

For lack of a defense try an offense, works every time.

Actually, you reject my so called "teaching" because you can't defend against it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Budd Cochran wrote:

It's author????? This I gotta hear..... who is the author?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry,
Can a poet be inspired by a springtime meadow, or graffitti? A writer be inspired by a bird flying by, or a train wreck? Can an artist be inspired by the face of a child, or a pile of trash?
If you answered "yes" to any of theses, then why is it so hard to understand that approximately 40 writers over a period of 4000 years could be inspired by their God?
Merry Christmas to you and yours, Jerry
Budd
Jerry wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The figures you quote only relate to CHRONOLOGICAL accuracy, the accuracy of the spiritual text cannot be verified and that's the real issue. If you want to hold the Bible up as a fairly accurate account of history, fine.

The word "version", by itself, casts doubt on the worth of the publication.

Classic case of the pot calling the kettle black. How can you chastise someone for not answering your questions when you refuse to answer the legitimate questions I have posed? Hypocrite.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Kunkel wrote:

Have you ever looked at any evidence from NON-SECULAR SOURCES?

Now you stoop to picking on semantics. . . . .

One reason, John. I wanted information to aid the discussion, you did not.

I forgive you.
Budd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Secular or non-secular, there is no proof that the Bible is the word of God and the existence of God has never been proven and is unprovable. You and your Bible-thimping ilk would be wise to question the validity of any such claims of proof.

To paraphrase you, don't give me orders; I'll insert semantics in my argument when it is valid to the subject matter. Wouldn't it be nice to have the Charlie Manson "version" of The Constitution? Shucks, every individual could have their own "version" of laws and do as they damn well please citing their law as the source of their righteousness.

Nonsense, answering those questions could only "aid the discussion". The reason is cowardice. "Hollow" doesn't begin to describe you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Kunkel wrote:

John, there wouldn't be proof acceptable to you if Jesus walked up and introduced Himself.

I did, years ago, as an evolutionist and you know what I found? Lies, unproven theories, broken fossil trils, human footprints next to dinosaur and no pocitive mutations. Have you found any viable verifiable evidence of positive mutation like a new species born of a current species? I never have. there is also no explainantion why carbon based life ever got a foothold, let alone flourished, on a highly toxic world.
Yet, the logical, step-by-step record in Genesis has no flaws or mistakes, no places where life failed because other conditions hadn't developed yet. It's the only logical way carbon based life could flourish on earth.
Btw, did you know that there never has been any research done, that I can find, in the area of determining what man would look like with PERFECT DNA? Time magazine's composite cover from a few years ago is a picture, not research.

Then don't demand I answer any questions.

What do you cxall your hatred of Christians and Christianity?

There are many words to describe you.
I done with this discussion.
Budd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yep, wouldn't be enough. I would need proof of his divinity, as would any thinking person.

One need not embrace one philosophy in order to reject another. I don't need to prove evolution in order to simply state there is no proof of the Bible's authenticity.

On a scale of one to ten, with ten being the most unprovable statement ever made, the above rates a thirty-six.

And your point?

Again, your point? Your replies are becoming increasingly dislexic. I have no hatred of Christians nor of Christianity. I have clearly stated that my hatred is towards hypocrites; if the hypocrite happens to be a Christian hypocrite then I hate the Christian hypocrite.

Lots of words describe me, most are obscene and I'll answer to most of them but spineless hypocrite ain't one of them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Budd Cochran wrote:

Simply because man doesn't comprehend his own surroundings is not evidence of intellegent design. We know so little about the universe. However, things we take for granted today and are easily explained mystified those of centuries ago who credited the Gods for what they could not understand. I don't see the lack of mans scientific understanding of the universe as giving credibility to intellegent design.
Where have you seen archeological evidence of man and dinosaurs existing at the same time? They are millions of years apart.

I see little in the theories of evolution and the Big Bang Theory that go against the theory of creationism. One does not rule out the other. Again, what we don't understand is not evidence of anything. It just means we don't understand at this time. Many things that once were attributable to Gods are now explanable with modern knowledge.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
miles wrote:

Nor is it proof of evolution.

Agreed, but yet Einstein (a non-believer) opened a doorway for a young Universe when he postulated about time not being constant.

Miles, many scientists today still can't explain the obvious, like the lack of signs of erosion in the stratified rocks outside my window, partially fossilized items in the outflow from Mt. St Helens.

I don't see it denying it, either.

Are they? Down in Texas are some artifacts and just south of Las Animas Colorado on the Purgatorie River are some I saw for myself. In one spot the foot prints overlap.
What about the discription of the Behemouth in the Book of Job? No Elephant, Hippo or Rhino fits that discription, but a Dinosaur does. How about the highly detaile depictions and discriptions of Dragons in so many cultures including the American Indina? Pterosaurs, maybe?
The Coleacanth was supposed to be extinct and hundreds have been caught. How often do you hear some program on TV talk about a "living fossil", unchangerd for"X" number of years??

Well, the First Law of Thermodynamics, for one. Then the big questions: Where did the Matter for the Big Bang come from? Where did the Energy for it come from?
The two are mutually exclusive. For example, the word translated "day" in Genesis is the Hebrew word "yom", it can only mean a literal 24 hour day.
> One does not rule out the other.
Sorry, but it does.

What we don't understand is evidence that we do not know the truth about it yet. Theories are not facts, theories are not evidence. And to blindly accept a theory is the same as believing in a religion: it talkes faith.

Look around. The deformities of the so-called "Hobbits" in New Zealand could be explained by very extreme age as are the characteristics of the Neanderthal. The builders of the pyaramids still have modern scientists, engineers and their computers guessing how the pyramids were built, especially the ones in South and Central America where a dollar bill won't fit in the gaps.
Consider that I.Q. tests have to keep being recalibrated to maintain a percentage of geniuses. That more and more birth defects are showing up in families that are second and third cousins.
Man was genetically superior to what he is today. His mental abilities were greater. Consider the great scientist and doctors of ancient times; no computers, yet calculated the orbits of the planets, no X-ray but performed high quality successful brain surgery, no machines but built pyramids, no gunpowder, but figured out how to hurl a 100 pound rock 300 yards and bash in a fortress wall . . with locally available materials.
Looks like we disagree on a few things, but that's ok. <VBG>
Merry Christmas.
Budd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.