Chick-fil-A is still bankrolling anti-LGBTQ causes

[lost 452]

Look Homosapien

I private messaged you and i asked you to remember this is an Auburn site and we are both Auburn fans.  I ask you to respect me as one.  That does not mean we have to agree, or we can not be at odds, but the trolling needs to stop.  It just does not need to happen on this site.  If we can not come here and have a good time and respect each other, where can we go?  Come on man!

[homersapien 11,439]

2 minutes ago, ArgoEagle said:

My concern was were you asking a legit question about the Bible, or were you mocking?

The only question I asked was exactly how the Bible informed Lost regarding AGW.

I have nothing against the Bible for what it is (and I don't mean the literal word of God).  And I have a sincere respect for Jesus.  But like Ghandi said (in general terms), "I like your Christ very much.  I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike Christ."

Does that answer your question?

 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

5 minutes ago, lost said:

Christian worship...   haha...  See you again try to put everything out there as Christian.  Nothing in the typical CHRISTIAN service has anything jewish in it

Crack a religious history book once in a while.  There is plenty in Christian worship which parallels Jewish worship.  Not sure why this would be so scandalous to you.  The earliest believers were Jewish afterall.  They didn't set out to establish a new religion, they believed they were simply people who understood that the Messiah the Jewish people had long been waiting for was finally here in the person of Jesus.  Of course the worship was similar in structure and style.  Geez, if a history book is too much for you, read the book of Hebrews a little closer.

[lost 452]

Just now, TitanTiger said:

Au contrair.  We as Christians, and our churches, are every bit as capable of falling into error on this or that issue and "challenging Jesus."  Take the Southern Baptists for instance.  They wrongly too the side of slavery leading up to the Civil War and in many instances wrongly backed Jim Crow and segregation for a century after.  They were a Christian church with many faithful people - but they were clearly in the wrong and were clearly disobeying the very Scriptures they said they loved.  

We all have the ability to play the Pharisee at any given moment.

So i guess Jesus did too?  He never spoke against slavery, neither did the Disciples.  Neither did the early Church.  In fact you just condemned the God you serve for nowhere in the Bible does it attack any slavery,  In fact it was dominant in every society and never was addressed or taken to task.  I think you need to separate your liberal party ideas from your supposed Christianity.

[lost 452]

Just now, homersapien said:

The only question I asked was exactly how the Bible informed Lost regarding AGW.

I have nothing against the Bible for what it is (and I don't mean the literal word of God).  And I have a sincere respect for Jesus.  But like Ghandi said (in general terms), "I like your Christ very much.  I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike Christ."

Does that answer your question?

 

No it is the typical god hater answer.  I saw it every day on the al.com site from them

[lost 452]

Just now, TitanTiger said:

Crack a religious history book once in a while.  There is plenty in Christian worship which parallels Jewish worship.  Not sure why this would be so scandalous to you.  The earliest believers were Jewish afterall.  They didn't set out to establish a new religion, they believed they were simply people who understood that the Messiah the Jewish people had long been waiting for was finally here in the person of Jesus.  Of course the worship was similar in structure and style.  Geez, if a history book is too much for you, read the book of Hebrews a little closer.

Read what a Christian is.  Not what the world says it is but what the Bible says.  Become one and you will see we do not follow any Jewish customs in true Christian Worship.  In some denominations that call themselves Christian they do liturgical worship...  But true Christian worship is without such

[Strychnine 1,803]

16 minutes ago, homersapien said:

"Bringing politics in a Godly discussion shows your true reasoning.  No Christian elected President Trump for his morals.  They elected him to stop socialism and a devil called hillary clinton." 

That's ironic, no matter your religion.

 

"I voted for Trump to try to save America.  1st time i have voted in many years.  I hate politics and hate party systems.  I don't know anything about how either have done on supposed jobs, etc.. Care less.  I am concerned on existing as a Nation.  That starts with family and values and morals."

That was a rather good one too.

[ArgoEagle 1,797]

11 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Au contrair.  We as Christians, and our churches, are every bit as capable of falling into error on this or that issue and "challenging Jesus."  Take the Southern Baptists for instance.  They wrongly too the side of slavery leading up to the Civil War and in many instances wrongly backed Jim Crow and segregation for a century after.  They were a Christian church with many faithful people - but they were clearly in the wrong and were clearly disobeying the very Scriptures they said they loved.  

We all have the ability to play the Pharisee at any given moment.

My church is Southern Baptist. Our cornerstone is Jesus Christ. We would not do anything to dishonor our God. I can't speak for everyone else.

[Grumps 3,704]

7 minutes ago, lost said:

So i guess Jesus did too?  He never spoke against slavery, neither did the Disciples.  Neither did the early Church.  In fact you just condemned the God you serve for nowhere in the Bible does it attack any slavery,  In fact it was dominant in every society and never was addressed or taken to task.  I think you need to separate your liberal party ideas from your supposed Christianity.

Exodus 21:16 "And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death."

That sounds like the condemnation of slavery to me.

[Strychnine 1,803]

3 minutes ago, lost said:

Read what a Christian is.  Not what the world says it is but what the Bible says.  Become one and you will see we do not follow any Jewish customs in true Christian Worship.  In some denominations that call themselves Christian they do liturgical worship...  But true Christian worship is without such

 

In my many years here, that is the first time I have seen anyone suggest Titan should become a Christian.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

12 minutes ago, lost said:

So i guess Jesus did too?

Your argumentation skills need work.

 

Quote

He never spoke against slavery, neither did the Disciples.  Neither did the early Church.  In fact you just condemned the God you serve for nowhere in the Bible does it attack any slavery,  In fact it was dominant in every society and never was addressed or taken to task.  I think you need to separate your liberal party ideas from your supposed Christianity.

He never specifically spoke against marital rape or bestiality either, but I think we can infer from His other statements on sexual matters that he took a dim view of both.  This is weak argumentation.

Second of all, the kind of chattel slavery that existed in America was not the sort that was around in ancient Israel or Rome.  Much of the slavery in the Ancient Middle East was not the involuntary slavery (being captured and transported to colonies against one's will), it was closer to what we'd call indentured servitude.  A person became a 'slave' because of poverty or as payment for transportation, etc.  The civil laws of Israel had legal protections for slaves that were non-existent in the Old South where slaves were merely property to be disposed of as the owner saw fit.  Virtually all slaves had the ability to work or buy their freedom in the Ancient Near East, another thing that was virtually unheard of in the chattel slavery of the South.  Slavery was forever there outside extraordinary circumstances.  For a much more thorough treatment, read here:  http://christianthinktank.com/qnoslave.html   In other words, the Bible never defends what was happening in America.

Third, you conveniently dodged the Jim Crow and segregation issues.

Fourth, calling me a liberal makes you look like an idiot.

[lost 452]

One more time for Elle

I voted for Trump and so did so many thousands who had not voted in years--- because hillary was going to be elected president if we did not.  That same party who offered hillary, illegaly swept a socialist under the rug who might have won the vote, because some of the democrats also voted for trump to keep hillary out.  It was not because we thought Trump was a godly man.  We knew his failures, but we hoped he would stop the direction this company was going in.  The riots, the racial tension, the one world govt push.  And we hoped he could repeal obama care and give the insurance back to the insurance companies and make it affordable.

So The idea that we thought him any godlier is funny, but he did not have a trail of bodies behind him and he did not sweep bernie under the rug to get the nomination either.

[Grumps 3,704]

Surely we can agree that it is FASCINATING that of the (at least) six professing Christians involved in this thread, there is virtually no agreement of what being a Christian is. Wow! No wonder the Church is struggling in many ways.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

6 minutes ago, lost said:

Read what a Christian is.  Not what the world says it is but what the Bible says.  Become one and you will see we do not follow any Jewish customs in true Christian Worship.  In some denominations that call themselves Christian they do liturgical worship...  But true Christian worship is without such

I've read the Bible cover to cover, many times.  I know what it says a Christian is.

Also, I am one.  And your statements about liturgical worship are ridiculously clueless.

[lost 452]

Just now, TitanTiger said:

Your argumentation skills need work.

 

He never specifically spoke against marital rape or bestiality either, but I think we can infer from His other statements on sexual matters that he took a dim view of both.  This is weak argumentation.

Second of all, the kind of chattel slavery that existed in America was not the sort that was around in ancient Israel or Rome.  Much of the slavery in the Ancient Middle East was not the involuntary slavery (being captured and transported to colonies against one's will), it was closer to what we'd call indentured servitude.  A person became a 'slave' because of poverty or as payment for transportation, etc.  The civil laws of Israel had legal protections for slaves that were non-existent in the Old South where slaves were merely property to be disposed of as the owner saw fit.  Virtually all slaves had the ability to work or buy their freedom in the Ancient Near East, another thing that was virtually unheard of in the chattel slavery of the South.  Slavery was forever there outside extraordinary circumstances.  For a much more thorough treatment, read here:  http://christianthinktank.com/qnoslave.html

Third, you conveniently dodged the Jim Crow and segregation issues.

Fourth, calling me a liberal makes you look like an idiot.

When you suggest the baptists are the problem you made yourself the idiot not me.  And when you speak the "idioms" of the liberal-- such as calling the baptists the problem then i call you a liberal.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Just now, lost said:

When you suggest the baptists are the ptoblem you made yourself the idiot not me.

I see it's not just your argumentation skills that are suffering, but your reading comprehension ones as well.  I never said Baptists were the problem.

 

Just now, lost said:

And when you speak the "idioms" of the liberal-- such as calling the baptists the problem then i call you a liberal.

Then you neither read well, nor know the meaning of the words "liberal" and "idiom."

[Grumps 3,704]

1 minute ago, lost said:

When you suggest the baptists are the problem you made yourself the idiot not me.  And when you speak the "idioms" of the liberal-- such as calling the baptists the problem then i call you a liberal.

Here is what Titan said: "They wrongly took the side of slavery leading up to the Civil War and in many instances wrongly backed Jim Crow and segregation for a century after.  They were a Christian church with many faithful people - but they were clearly in the wrong and were clearly disobeying the very Scriptures they said they loved."

He didn't say that Baptists are the problem. Are you saying that Southern Baptists were not FOR slavery at one time or that it wasn't wrong to own slaves?

[lost 452]

Evidently Not--  Again the liberals hate the baptists and call them their worst enemies... And an idiom a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words (e.g., rain cats and dogs, see the light ).

[Strychnine 1,803]

1 minute ago, lost said:

When you suggest the baptists are the ptoblem you made yourself the idiot not me.  And when you speak the "idioms" of the liberal-- such as calling the baptists the problem then i call you a liberal.

 

If that is what you took from Titan's statements, then you are definitely struggling with reading comprehension.  Embarrassing yourself benefits no one.

[lost 452]

Just now, Grumps said:

Here is what Titan said: "They wrongly took the side of slavery leading up to the Civil War and in many instances wrongly backed Jim Crow and segregation for a century after.  They were a Christian church with many faithful people - but they were clearly in the wrong and were clearly disobeying the very Scriptures they said they loved."

He didn't say that Baptists are the problem. Are you saying that Southern Baptists were not FOR slavery at one time or that it wasn't wrong to own slaves?

Were the baptists the only churches?

[Strychnine 1,803]

Just now, Grumps said:

Here is what Titan said: "They wrongly took the side of slavery leading up to the Civil War and in many instances wrongly backed Jim Crow and segregation for a century after.  They were a Christian church with many faithful people - but they were clearly in the wrong and were clearly disobeying the very Scriptures they said they loved."

He didn't say that Baptists are the problem. Are you saying that Southern Baptists were not FOR slavery at one time or that it wasn't wrong to own slaves?

 

A valiant effort.  Futile, but valiant.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Also, the Bible does condemn the kind of slavery that America and other European powers of the era engaged in:

He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death. (Exodus 21:16)

We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.  (1 Timothy 1:9-11)

[TitanTiger 20,510]

2 minutes ago, lost said:

Evidently Not--  Again the liberals hate the baptists and call them their worst enemies... And an idiom a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words (e.g., rain cats and dogs, see the light ).

Being able to regurgitate a dictionary definition and being able to employ the word correctly in one's own usage are two different things.

[Grumps 3,704]

Just now, lost said:

Were the baptists the only churches?

Obviously not. and NO ONE said that many other Christian churches were not also wrong. Titan used then as one example. ALL U.S. churches who condoned the owning of slaves were violating God's law. Is that better?

[TitanTiger 20,510]

2 minutes ago, lost said:

Were the baptists the only churches?

Irrelevant.