God My Healer.

[drifter]

if you can, spend some time to watch this documentary from nova. im too tired to reply today, had been doing bushwalking on sat and driving 5 hours across mountain ranges to reach the top of the national park.

i will take a r

[video=youtube;x2xyrel-2vI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2xyrel-2vI[/video]

he dont even dare to click on that ..he worry his dream of going heaven will be shattered ...

 

[drifter]

I think that is incomplete analogy. I have no billion dollars and you do, and thinks it ends there but no. The story continues that we each bought a bungalow worth nearly a billion and signed the papers with the lawyers showing that we will both be paying in full and no loan - then that I would need explaining. I can say "It's my personal matter, none of your business where I got the money from" but if I had the large amount from an illegal source, the law would surely catch up with me. Now to translate, I can say there is no God, then it still doesn't addresses some issues I have. Comparing belief in God and non-belief, both answers some questions and doesn't answer others, but the former answers more than it doesn't while the latter answers some questions Christianity doesn't but leaves more unanswered, then I don't see anything wrong if going for the better option. All humans do - it's what they see as a better option that makes the difference. Now, I've given chances, you have rebutted rather few things of what I said but instead go on to new points or even rehashed points from 3 posts ago and you notice until now I have not lambasted you for it. But your views have been too absolute. Anything gives credence to the existence of Jesus is automatically faked. Even historians do not take it that way. Even the letters of Paul is considered historical material to them.



History of the church is not central theme of Christianity. Pastors give brief mentions during a sermon and interested Christians can find out through reading of the Crusades and others. There is no Christian I know who doesn't disagree that Christianity can be abused or in fact still is, and they don't even need history - we can look at greedy churches preaching prosperity today. In fact, the bible exactly warns of false prophets in several places in bible and Jesus had warned of people who will speak His name in the eyes of men and yet cannot enter the Kingdom. The issue, and I am saying for the third and last time, is that bad Christians do not mean God does not exist.



I do not think in a million years chocolate would turn into cotton, or iron for that matter. It's totally different property. For example, how would dinosaurs become birds. By flapping its claws everyday for millions of years? And what for? As for the second point we have gone through it before. I would add that some discoveries are of late, such as the consistently expanding universe, more archaeology uncovered, more discoveries in the DNA. But deepening into the topic for us would be like two frogs in the well chatting. Because it still doesn't mean God does not exist. I teach lessons with disclaimers on yet to be undiscovered stuff in MIT or Harvard - so what?



Is it not presumptive to assume that the platypus did not move as a community in early stages. Here, I would say creation scientists have yet to answer this question satisfactorily but strange if I have to become an atheist right away at the drop of a hat then with loopholes of atheism still there but atheists fine that I become atheist. And then Christians are accused of cherry-picking.



Plants and trees began to exist from nothing is plausible, but trees that were drowned is fairy tale. (Do not forget that seeds would not drown.) And a proper eco-system coming out from nothing is plausible but not eco-system after flooding. If all life went extinct they can return after millions. Are you sure? Incidentally "Life After People" documentary did not even record this "fact".



This is a rather lousy point. I am not sure why you would think God is rationale as long as He made DNA very different. A strange criteria for proving God does not exist.



Exonerated? Or two sides of a coin we see? Creationists would of course not buy that and further point to it not being able to explain the origin of life, but even evolutionists are disassociating evolution theory from the term "Darwinism".



No, I did not. I said I was a young earth believer and young earth doesn't necessarily say 5,000 years. Some calculated to be 15,000 to 20,000.



I note that another example you have used from the bible revealing a contradiction in your position especially when it's related to a resurrection. But anyway.



I think this is a simplistic point because people had converted from Islam to Christianity or the other way around, or even atheist.



I don't see how this addresseses my point on biblical inerrancy. If you are saying that men has no shortcomings, then I disagree.



Christians believe that the bible is true, that is OPPOSITE from cherry-picking. You are confused. I face all the stuff in the bible starkly and squarely even if it is unpopular. I do not think that is cherry-picking compared to agreeing with some, disagreeing with others when the book declares that it is inerrant and the person who uses it does not think so.

1) do you know what the fuck you talking about ? you are comparing buying a bungalow and selling a faith ( its like comparing apples with oranges ) ...bad example ...next please

2) " I can say there is no God, then it still doesn't addresses some issues I have "


the real issue in you being delusional ...if you are delusional you can even be a suicide bomber ...faith does not give you the answers, it just stops you asking the questions . remember flying planes into a building was a faith-based initiative. religion is a neurological disorder .


3) " Anything gives credence to the existence of Jesus is automatically faked. Even historians do not take it that way. Even the letters of Paul is considered historical material to them . "


a talking snake is real ? staying alive in a fish stomach is real ? yes , jesus is just a human being just like us ...and when he die he die like the rest of the human being ....no one said jesus is fake ....hes real as real as a human being can get ...get it ?



4) " History of the church is not central theme of Christianity. Pastors give brief mentions during a sermon and interested Christians can find out through reading of the Crusades and others. There is no Christian I know who doesn't disagree that Christianity can be abused or in fact still is, and they don't even need history - we can look at greedy churches preaching prosperity today. In fact, the bible exactly warns of false prophets in several places in bible and Jesus had warned of people who will speak His name in the eyes of men and yet cannot enter the Kingdom. The issue, and I am saying for the third and last time, is that bad Christians do not mean God does not exist " .


yes ..theres tons of people making use or abuse religion but no religion in the world is as proud as yours proud to the extent that you guys keep praising your god for nothing praising the invisibleman for being all knowing all powerful ..if your god is all knowing and very powerful ...why must he let or create his own religion for ppl to abuse since hes so powerful cant he control those greedy ppl ? its either he dont exists or hes dont care or hes just useless ....



5) " I do not think in a million years chocolate would turn into cotton, or iron for that matter. It's totally different property. For example, how would dinosaurs become birds. By flapping its claws everyday for millions of years? "

there a thing call hybrid breed ...have you not heard of liger , tigion ? have you not heard of evolution of animals ? millions years ago crocodiles do not look like the one you see in the zoo ...


6) " Christians believe that the bible is true, that is OPPOSITE from cherry-picking " .

go and see your good brother pslam23 posting ...and you know what we mean .

 

[Perspective]

Thanks for the recommended but another aimless video. It talks against ID for over what reason? Because ID has a Christian agenda. Because ID is never studied (and yet these chaps are blocking it). Because ID makes one stupid (was the pun intended?). Never touched on why ID is lousy reason.

As we go into 20 minutes, it starts explaining life using birds with larger beaks surviving better and more (do humans with bigger mouths reproduce more!?) and a tree illustrating the evolutionary tree of life (with a tree that has all the same leaves!?) and still doesn't go into origin of life despite calling its theory that.

I think evolutionists have answered enough "where is the chocolate factory" with "chocolate is bad for health" or "chocolate makers are evil businessmen". I always felt you can teach without immediately pointing to Christianity. There are many deists and nietzscheans among even my Singapore friends and America as a society is so backward and worried about this? Rather than teaching evolution and saying to students "I don't know" on the first spark of the origin of life, it makes more sense to teach ID and saying to students "I don't know" as to who is the designer.

Judge Jones himself is a confused man, a "Christian" distinguishing himself with award, prizes and honour of what are clearly anti-Christian humanist organisations. He has "separated" himself a bit too far until becoming both theist and atheist. Even news anchor Bill O Reilly who attacked him is not a professed Christian.

 

[Perspective]

A more neutral video.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3698347555091302661

 

[drifter]

Thanks for the recommended but another aimless video. It talks against ID for over what reason? Because ID has a Christian agenda. Because ID is never studied (and yet these chaps are blocking it). Because ID makes one stupid (was the pun intended?). Never touched on why ID is lousy reason.

As we go into 20 minutes, it starts explaining life using birds with larger beaks surviving better and more (do humans with bigger mouths reproduce more!?) and a tree illustrating the evolutionary tree of life (with a tree that has all the same leaves!?) and still doesn't go into origin of life despite calling its theory that.

I think evolutionists have answered enough "where is the chocolate factory" with "chocolate is bad for health" or "chocolate makers are evil businessmen". I always felt you can teach without immediately pointing to Christianity. There are many deists and nietzscheans among even my Singapore friends and America as a society is so backward and worried about this? Rather than teaching evolution and saying to students "I don't know" on the first spark of the origin of life, it makes more sense to teach ID and saying to students "I don't know" as to who is the designer.

Judge Jones himself is a confused man, a "Christian" distinguishing himself with award, prizes and honour of what are clearly anti-Christian humanist organisations. He has "separated" himself a bit too far until becoming both theist and atheist. Even news anchor Bill O Reilly who attacked him is not a professed Christian.

" As we go into 20 minutes, it starts explaining life using birds with larger beaks surviving better and more (do humans with bigger mouths reproduce more!?) and a tree illustrating the evolutionary tree of life (with a tree that has all the same leaves " ?

you are getting insane every mins ...now you are comparing humans and birds . the reason why birds with larger beaks surviving better is because birds use their beaks and claws for many reasons ..to hunt , to tear prey apart , to prevent pry from escaping ....does humans with a deeper pockets surviving better ? look at the rich and the poor

does all trees have barks , leaves , roots ? why trees are call trees and not animals , fish , reptiles ...ect ? the beauty of religious mania is that it has the power to explain everything. once God (or Satan) is accepted as the first cause of everything which happens in the mortal world, nothing is left to chance...logic can be happily tossed out the window.


" Judge Jones himself is a confused man, a "Christian" distinguishing himself with award, prizes and honour of what are clearly anti-Christian humanist organisations. He has "separated" himself a bit too far until becoming both theist and atheist. Even news anchor Bill O Reilly who attacked him is not a professed Christian "

what do you mean professed christain ? a christain is a christain ...we can see how hard you trying to paint a nice good picture for your cult

 

[fishbuff]

A more neutral video.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3698347555091302661

thanks for the link.

here's a list of universities that teach creationism or believe in creationism philosophy. Ever wonder why none of the more credible universities in the world are NOT teaching creationism?
http://www.nwcreation.net/colleges.html

i leave this with you.

i have been thru' with you are going through now. we would find all means and ways to sustain and support the beliefs even to the extent of corrupting and distorting the facts to uphold the faith.

it is a psychological safety net and defensive mechanism, if i didn't let go the belief, then i will forever cling onto the end of the rope forever. i dont expect you to let go either. it is a good encounter with you; you just reminded of what i was years ago.

 

[Perspective]

thanks for the link.

here's a list of universities that teach creationism or believe in creationism philosophy. Ever wonder why none of the more credible universities in the world are NOT teaching creationism?
http://www.nwcreation.net/colleges.html

i leave this with you.

i have been thru' with you are going through now. we would find all means and ways to sustain and support the beliefs even to the extent of corrupting and distorting the facts to uphold the faith.

it is a psychological safety net and defensive mechanism, if i didn't let go the belief, then i will forever cling onto the end of the rope forever. i dont expect you to let go either. it is a good encounter with you; you just reminded of what i was years ago.

With due respect to you, I do not think you were what I am. If fishbuff of 2012 threw the same questions to fishbuff of 1992, the latter would have crumbled even earlier and not after 20 years. This is because I studied these objections before becoming a Christian. In short Christian Apologetics. I held the same doubts as you and lambasted my Christian friends using your exact same theories and more - one of my most "undefeatable" objections (that you didn't even raise so far) is the "flaw" that good works is not good enough by itself. I now threw out this false belief (but won't bother to explain as it will be long new debate). If I wanted to "attack" a Christian, I made sure I saw blood and my arguments back then were stronger than yours now. Yours have been rather feeble, which makes drifter mere puny. That doesn't make me better.

Not saying that either one is a better status - I have been told by fellows that among pathos, logos and ethos, I am strong in logos but lack pathos - a weakness.

 

[fishbuff]

With due respect to you, I do not think you were what I am. If fishbuff of 2012 threw the same questions to fishbuff of 1992, the latter would have crumbled even earlier and not after 20 years. This is because I studied these objections before becoming a Christian. In short Christian Apologetics. I held the same doubts as you and lambasted my Christian friends using your exact same theories and more - one of my most "undefeatable" objections (that you didn't even raise so far) is the "flaw" that good works is not good enough by itself. I now threw out this false belief (but won't bother to explain as it will be long new debate). If I wanted to "attack" a Christian, I made sure I saw blood and my arguments back then were stronger than yours now. Yours have been rather feeble, which makes drifter mere puny. That doesn't make me better.

Not saying that either one is a better status - I have been told by fellows that among pathos, logos and ethos, I am strong in logos but lack pathos - a weakness.

well, i do agree with your statement about the difference between the 1992 me and present you. facts (or excuse) back then were the lack of knowledge, knowhows, behaviours of churches back then (men and women sat on different side of the church, no spaghetti string blouse and short skirts for ladies), getting our hands on info like these are only meant for the privileges. i remembered those days only in the of 1997 i setup the very first 64k leased line for my company's internet and even then, availability of information were scare and few. Google? ebay? amazon? none of them were even started yet. the pastors had absolute dominance over the congregation's mind and will..... anything not in order, it is "you disobey god!"... dogma is dogma, thou shall not question thy pastors.

i didnt have the luxury of information comparison back end unlike the present day of what we can get at the snap of a finger. do you think the modern pastors are what they used to be like 20 years ago? no way! nowaday, pastors are so eloquent and nice.

see? you did exercise logic and reasoning when it comes to the portion of "good works". well, if your pastor insist on the other view, why stance will you take? will you succumb to them or will you rebel? i came from the old evangelical church where the pastors had you by the balls. and i say, enough is enough; enough of the talking snake, enough of the flooded world, enough of parting or red sea, enough of 10 plagues, enough of the supernatural stuffs, enough of the genocide/rape/torture/burn and other cruel acts of god in the OT. and the atrocities that were committed in the name of religions; crusade, inquisition, witch burning, forced conversion, apotasy, dogmatic control over every bits and piece of everyone's lifes, not to mention greed (like CHC/NCC), sheer dominance, surrender of your critical thinking skills/your mind, etc.... the list go on and on...

the monotheistic religion of jew was found by abraham, and if you compare that with joseph smith, both are religious founder, why give such difference in reverence?

another thing, did god has a wife called Asherah?
http://news.discovery.com/history/god-wife-yahweh-asherah-110318.html

see? how the powerful people in the past can manipulated the scriptures and shaped what the future generation would see.

if you can oversee this and continue on with the NT, by all means go ahead.

it is like strapping all the fairy tales together, from snow white, to moby dick, and to alice in the wonderland, all 66 of them and then canonized as the codex of the country's Parliamentary laws.

 

[drifter]

With due respect to you, I do not think you were what I am. If fishbuff of 2012 threw the same questions to fishbuff of 1992, the latter would have crumbled even earlier and not after 20 years. This is because I studied these objections before becoming a Christian. In short Christian Apologetics. I held the same doubts as you and lambasted my Christian friends using your exact same theories and more - one of my most "undefeatable" objections (that you didn't even raise so far) is the "flaw" that good works is not good enough by itself. I now threw out this false belief (but won't bother to explain as it will be long new debate). If I wanted to "attack" a Christian, I made sure I saw blood and my arguments back then were stronger than yours now. Yours have been rather feeble, which makes drifter mere puny. That doesn't make me better.

Not saying that either one is a better status - I have been told by fellows that among pathos, logos and ethos, I am strong in logos but lack pathos - a weakness.

" This is because I studied these objections before becoming a Christian "


idiot ..most of the christians out there also said they studied objection before joining the cult just to justify their delusion ...you are no different

 

[Perspective]

well, i do agree with your statement about the difference between the 1992 me and present you. facts (or excuse) back then were the lack of knowledge, knowhows, behaviours of churches back then (men and women sat on different side of the church, no spaghetti string blouse and short skirts for ladies), getting our hands on info like these are only meant for the privileges. i remembered those days only in the of 1997 i setup the very first 64k leased line for my company's internet and even then, availability of information were scare and few. Google? ebay? amazon? none of them were even started yet. the pastors had absolute dominance over the congregation's mind and will..... anything not in order, it is "you disobey god!"... dogma is dogma, thou shall not question thy pastors.

i didnt have the luxury of information comparison back end unlike the present day of what we can get at the snap of a finger. do you think the modern pastors are what they used to be like 20 years ago? no way! nowaday, pastors are so eloquent and nice.

see? you did exercise logic and reasoning when it comes to the portion of "good works". well, if your pastor insist on the other view, why stance will you take? will you succumb to them or will you rebel? i came from the old evangelical church where the pastors had you by the balls. and i say, enough is enough; enough of the talking snake, enough of the flooded world, enough of parting or red sea, enough of 10 plagues, enough of the supernatural stuffs, enough of the genocide/rape/torture/burn and other cruel acts of god in the OT. and the atrocities that were committed in the name of religions; crusade, inquisition, witch burning, forced conversion, apotasy, dogmatic control over every bits and piece of everyone's lifes, not to mention greed (like CHC/NCC), sheer dominance, surrender of your critical thinking skills/your mind, etc.... the list go on and on...

the monotheistic religion of jew was found by abraham, and if you compare that with joseph smith, both are religious founder, why give such difference in reverence?

another thing, did god has a wife called Asherah?
http://news.discovery.com/history/god-wife-yahweh-asherah-110318.html

see? how the powerful people in the past can manipulated the scriptures and shaped what the future generation would see.

if you can oversee this and continue on with the NT, by all means go ahead.

it is like strapping all the fairy tales together, from snow white, to moby dick, and to alice in the wonderland, all 66 of them and then canonized as the codex of the country's Parliamentary laws.

Can't say I disagree with you. The amount of true info is more easily available these days along with amount of false info. Well, I mean depending on what is true to who and what is false to who. But I admittedly and certainly didn't go for it due to hearing nice stories of Jesus that's where I am different from you and others. If I believed He wasn't a real being, no amount of Him being true would help my life. I studied those objections you raised before, so here I am, else if I would be where you are now. Then I moved on to the message.

I want to address one last point as a parting shot, since it is one area I haven't addressed yet but realised it repeated several times. It is about bible stories being fairy tales. Another point along the way at the same time was about how cruel God in the bible was. Fairy tales are not "nightmares", that's why they are called fairy tales, which are happy stories and fairies are magical and happy creatures, not the "cruel" God. In short, no one would invent unpopular stories if they were invented and expect them to take root to become a worldwide movement. To take both positions are rather contradicting, in my view. That is why Buddhism is popular - a prince of a king who left his riches nobly, taught a strict but non-committal lifestyle and died peacefully.

 

[drifter]

Can't say I disagree with you. The amount of true info is more easily available these days along with amount of false info. Well, I mean depending on what is true to who and what is false to who. But I admittedly and certainly didn't go for it due to hearing nice stories of Jesus that's where I am different from you and others. If I believed He wasn't a real being, no amount of Him being true would help my life. I studied those objections you raised before, so here I am, else if I would be where you are now. Then I moved on to the message.

I want to address one last point as a parting shot, since it is one area I haven't addressed yet but realised it repeated several times. It is about bible stories being fairy tales. Another point along the way at the same time was about how cruel God in the bible was. Fairy tales are not "nightmares", that's why they are called fairy tales, which are happy stories and fairies are magical and happy creatures, not the "cruel" God. In short, no one would invent unpopular stories if they were invented and expect them to take root to become a worldwide movement. To take both positions are rather contradicting, in my view. That is why Buddhism is popular - a prince of a king who left his riches nobly, taught a strict but non-committal lifestyle and died peacefully.

1) " Well, I mean depending on what is true to who and what is false to who "

you need ppl to tell you virgin birth is not true ? you need ppl to tell you a talking snake is fake ? you need ppl to tell you walking on water is not real ? depending on what is true to who ? yes to the delusion everything the bible said is true ...you tell that to mentality unstable ppl they also say those are true ...



2) " I studied those objections you raised before, so here I am, else if I would be where you are now. Then I moved on to the message "


one does not need to believe in something to include references to it in fiction, otherwise fantasy novels would be nearly non-existent. how can you not believe in something yet you believe the messager ? believers may say that belief in god comes from faith but i don't think so. i think that belief in god comes from thinking that god is real. otherwise, if believers didn't think god were real, why would they have faith in something they thought was make-believe? do they believe in carpet monster and pray to carpet monster ?


3) I want to address one last point as a parting shot, since it is one area I haven't addressed yet but realised it repeated several times. It is about bible stories being fairy tales. Another point along the way at the same time was about how cruel God in the bible was. Fairy tales are not "nightmares", that's why they are called fairy tales, which are happy stories and fairies are magical and happy creatures, not the "cruel" God . In short, no one would invent unpopular stories if they were invented and expect them to take root to become a worldwide movement "



even though fairy tales are not nightmare ...so what ? the problem is this - wanting something, no matter how much, doesn't make it real. nor is wanting something enough to make everyone believe in something or to think that it is true.

 

[Psalm23]

" This is because I studied these objections before becoming a Christian "


idiot ..most of the christians out there also said they studied objection before joining the cult just to justify their delusion ...you are no different

Dear Uncle-Primate Drifter,

Please treat this as serious message......frankly I am quite worried for you....and also people like Uncle-Primate-Fishbuff. For a good start, may be you want to google for topics like "DNA controls all your body functions, your behaviour, your speech". I think there are many articles on this topics that will tell us about how DNA controls our body.

Seriously....You seem to have a genetic pre-dispositon to use words like "fxxx, bastxxx" and calling people 'stupid', 'idoit' - oop sorry my spelling error because I don't use such word, it should be "idiot', attaching vulgar pictures into your message. Seriously, is this part of your DNA make-up?

Anyway, if you can't be bothered with this doesn't matter but the topics I recommended will tell you that DNA has a big role to play....including how, when our wrinkles will appear, etc. You can then have better understanding of how wrinkles are formed and how DNA plays it's role in its formation.

Hope I prove you wrong...In fact, I am praying that I am wrong that you don't have any genetic pre-disposition to use such words.

Please prove me wrong. And you can do it very easily. Just stop using those words.

Let's engaged discussion in more civilized manner. Better still, if you want to tell people they are from primates, etc, etc....just start your own thread...but again, I am serious, you should not use those words....I hope you know what I mean by 'those words'.

I too on my part will try to get less excited but frankly I have a genetic predisposition to get excited when sharing the Gospel of Jesus. I am praying that God can slow me down somewhat, if that is His will.

Psalm23

 

[drifter]

Dear Uncle-Primate Drifter,

Please treat this as serious message......frankly I am quite worried for you....and also people like Uncle-Primate-Fishbuff. For a good start, may be you want to google for topics like "DNA controls all your body functions, your behaviour, your speech". I think there are many articles on this topics that will tell us about how DNA controls our body.

Seriously....You seem to have a genetic pre-dispositon to use words like "fxxx, bastxxx" and calling people 'stupid', 'idoit' - oop sorry my spelling error because I don't use such word, it should be "idiot', attaching vulgar pictures into your message. Seriously, is this part of your DNA make-up?

Anyway, if you can't be bothered with this doesn't matter but the topics I recommended will tell you that DNA has a big role to play....including how, when our wrinkles will appear, etc. You can then have better understanding of how wrinkles are formed and how DNA plays it's role in its formation.

Hope I prove you wrong...In fact, I am praying that I am wrong that you don't have any genetic pre-disposition to use such words.

Please prove me wrong. And you can do it very easily. Just stop using those words.

Let's engaged discussion in more civilized manner. Better still, if you want to tell people they are from primates, etc, etc....just start your own thread...but again, I am serious, you should not use those words....I hope you know what I mean by 'those words'.

I too on my part will try to get less excited but frankly I have a genetic predisposition to get excited when sharing the Gospel of Jesus. I am praying that God can slow me down somewhat, if that is His will.

Psalm23

terrorist christain plastic mold go to http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?32764-Today-s-Scripture-Reading/page74 and go to post # ...1464 thats my reply to you

 

[Perspective]

Dear Uncle-Primate Drifter,

Please treat this as serious message......frankly I am quite worried for you....and also people like Uncle-Primate-Fishbuff. For a good start, may be you want to google for topics like "DNA controls all your body functions, your behaviour, your speech". I think there are many articles on this topics that will tell us about how DNA controls our body.

Seriously....You seem to have a genetic pre-dispositon to use words like "fxxx, bastxxx" and calling people 'stupid', 'idoit' - oop sorry my spelling error because I don't use such word, it should be "idiot', attaching vulgar pictures into your message. Seriously, is this part of your DNA make-up?

Anyway, if you can't be bothered with this doesn't matter but the topics I recommended will tell you that DNA has a big role to play....including how, when our wrinkles will appear, etc. You can then have better understanding of how wrinkles are formed and how DNA plays it's role in its formation.

Hope I prove you wrong...In fact, I am praying that I am wrong that you don't have any genetic pre-disposition to use such words.

Please prove me wrong. And you can do it very easily. Just stop using those words.

Let's engaged discussion in more civilized manner. Better still, if you want to tell people they are from primates, etc, etc....just start your own thread...but again, I am serious, you should not use those words....I hope you know what I mean by 'those words'.

I too on my part will try to get less excited but frankly I have a genetic predisposition to get excited when sharing the Gospel of Jesus. I am praying that God can slow me down somewhat, if that is His will.

Psalm23

I am hardly bothered. By the way you shouldn't label others primate as well, even if people feel proud to be a pseudo one.

At the onset I have always looked for content and if the person cannot provide it even though he spend a fair amount of time to write and post, don't blame me for not responding.

The same goes for the same arguments that warrant the same answer. If A says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" and B points that he has no fur and A again says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" and B points to his lack of sharp teeth and claws and A still says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse", B shows that he has no history of being timid like a mouse and A continues "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" - best advice for B is to stop wasting his time. There's a reason why I respond to fishbuff and not him - new things came up from him until we decided a stalemate but the chap continues to tailgate with the same stuff.

These posts will be here for posterity and discernment, and I am not expecting to convince anyone either.

 

[drifter]

I am hardly bothered. By the way you shouldn't label others primate as well, even if people feel proud to be a pseudo one.

At the onset I have always looked for content and if the person cannot provide it even though he spend a fair amount of time to write and post, don't blame me for not responding.

The same goes for the same arguments that warrant the same answer. If A says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" and B points that he has no fur and A again says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" and B points to his lack of sharp teeth and claws and A still says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse", B shows that he has no history of being timid like a mouse and A continues "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" - best advice for B is to stop wasting his time. There's a reason why I respond to fishbuff and not him - new things came up from him until we decided a stalemate but the chap continues to tailgate with the same stuff.

These posts will be here for posterity and discernment, and I am not expecting to convince anyone either.

its take a delusion person to understand another delusion person ...

ps: yes ....the best way to run away from questions is to stop responding ... by the way , why are still believing in your bible that keep on praising the invisibleman non-stop ( tailgate with the same stuff ) ? the reason is simple you chose to accommodate anything what you believe in ..and you chose what you believe instead of .....logically

 

[red amoeba]

 

[Psalm23]

I am hardly bothered. By the way you shouldn't label others primate as well, even if people feel proud to be a pseudo one.

At the onset I have always looked for content and if the person cannot provide it even though he spend a fair amount of time to write and post, don't blame me for not responding.

The same goes for the same arguments that warrant the same answer. If A says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" and B points that he has no fur and A again says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" and B points to his lack of sharp teeth and claws and A still says "you're a mouse, you're a mouse", B shows that he has no history of being timid like a mouse and A continues "you're a mouse, you're a mouse" - best advice for B is to stop wasting his time. There's a reason why I respond to fishbuff and not him - new things came up from him until we decided a stalemate but the chap continues to tailgate with the same stuff.

These posts will be here for posterity and discernment, and I am not expecting to convince anyone either.

I can't disagree with you! But I didn't label him and his fellow brethrens to begin with. The title was conferred to them by themselves and I just respectfully use it. They have not objected anyway.

Yes, we should look for content and responding it only if it are worthy to be responded. Rebuking and using vulgar words do not deserve our response. Well taken note of.

 

[drifter]

I can't disagree with you! But I didn't label him and his fellow brethrens to begin with. The title was conferred to them by themselves and I just respectfully use it. They have not objected anyway.

Yes, we should look for content and responding it only if it are worthy to be responded. Rebuking and using vulgar words do not deserve our response. Well taken note of.

i thought you are happily responding me in another thread ?

stupid fuck ...of course you chose to respond those who praise your invisibleman

 

[God my healer]

partly correct. The NO answer also should be followed by praise and thanks even though it can be difficult to do at times, eg the loss of a loved one after praying hard for health, healing and restoration.

Thank God for the bad thing that happened ? Not so. But to thank God that He will be with us through it all.

Of course the caveat is that the faith has got to be there. Otherwise it is difficult to do , even to the point of being ridiculous.