1
   

They don't hate us, they love their God

 
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 02:22 pm
McTag wrote:
I almost never contribute to a thread about religion.
Very wise. I is stoopittity isself
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 02:25 pm
Wassup, Steve . . . you trainin' to become a Chav, innit?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 02:31 pm
Setanta wrote:
Wassup, Steve . . . you trainin' to become a Chav, innit?
nahh I is one
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 02:33 pm
I shoulda nohn fum all da bling an a burberry
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 02:39 pm
Setanta wrote:
I shoulda nohn fum all da bling an a burberry
there is an excellent response to this, unfortunately it aint commin

no warra mean?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 02:43 pm
Well, i don't blame you, really . . . but just about anything is better than the incredibly tedious replies we've been getting from The Texan.
0 Replies
 
eltejano
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 03:41 pm
Im sorry - I thought it was you. I guess I should always go back and read the post I'm responding to instead of just trying to remember something after several days.

It was Mesquite. Embarrassed

Jack
0 Replies
 
eltejano
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 03:52 pm
Quote:
but just about anything is better than the incredibly tedious replies we've been getting from The Texan.


Whaddya mean? I'm a man of few words!!
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 04:27 pm
eltejano wrote:
Whaddya mean? I'm a man of few words!!


Here, pull the other one.

You took one part of one sentence of mine, and went on for paragraph after paragraph. It was ostensibly a review of the history of the separation of church and state in the United States. It may surprise you to learn that this is a topic on which i am well informed. This is why i call your posts snotty--you constantly assume that you are telling us things we don't know, and you are frequently wrong about the things about which you write.

Man of few words? Hardly.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 05:35 pm
Quote:
you constantly assume that you are telling us things we don't know
0 Replies
 
eltejano
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 10:57 pm
Setanta, I though you were sharp enough to recognize that the "few words" comment was a joke on myself - I'm well aware that I'm a blabbermouth - my wife reminds me every day. And my posts are tedious, I guess - but this really hurts:

Quote:
This is why i call your posts snotty--you constantly assume that you are telling us things we don't know, and you are frequently wrong about the things about which you write.


I admitted when I first arrived here that I was not as well educated as the other folks here. I felt out-of-place to be honest, but Joe Nation ws nice to me, so I hung around. I know I'm not your intellectual equal and I'm probably in the wrong place - but most folks here have been kind to me and surprisingly tolerant of my old-fashioned ideas.

You have an uncanny perception, a real nose for BS - I don't think I could get anything past you! But why do you have to be so cruel?

*****************************

Snood from Leesville, right down 190 and just across the river! Would you by any chance happen to be a fellow christian? I sure could use a little help here. If you're an atheist too, I'll give-up, hitch-up and go to Rayburn and get me some white perch! Wanna go fishin?

Jack
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 11:11 pm
Set is not cruel, just painfully direct. Laughing

One thing you will find here, Jack is a colorful variety of personalities. Try to not take anything personally. And remember Solomon's words:

"By iron, iron itself is sharpened. So one man sharpens the face of another." (Proverbs 27:17)
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 11:39 pm
I can't agree with you on your posts Jack, but so far I'm impressed with your ability to stay cool.

C'mon set. They can't all be RLs and Rexes. Occassionally you must want to be nice to a person you disagree with. I think you're so used to smell of Christian gunpowder, you've forgotten the smell of flowers. Give the guy a break. He's obviously interested in sharing ideas, and I'd bet that in the short time he's posted, he's already been exposed to all sorts of new idea to comptemplate.

Maybe I'm just glad he's not another brash non-sense agent.

Jack, don't make me look like a dumb asshole in a week.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
eltejano
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 11:44 pm
That's true, Neo. He will force me to read-up on things before I make statements. I've just been talking off the top of my head, but I guess I can't get away with that. But how in the world can I possibly know if I'm telling him things he already knows?? Doesn't "snotty" connote an intentional offense - that's surely not the case with me.

I suppose I should have realized that y'all would naturally be well-informed on constitutional matters of church/state. With introspection, I guess Set has a point though - I guess I was trying to show-off what little knowledge I have. But I wasn't trying to be snotty.

I think people who are very kind and polite in real life may get emboldened in this anonymous environment to say things to people that they would never dream of saying on the job or socially. Maybe it serves as a kind of safe vent for pent-up anger and frustrations because there are no consequences. Is that plausible?

*******************
Yesterday, when TKO mentioned that he a was an aeronautical engineer, it got me to thinking about that old Jimmy Stewart movie - where the plane crashes in the Sahara and an aeronautical engineer aboard puts the crew to work building a makeshift aircraft from the wreckage. I've been going nuts all night trying to remember the name of that film! Would you happen to remember the title? I can't go to sleep 'til I get it!

Jack
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 11:50 pm
It's "Flight of the Phoenix." the recent remake of the movie was pretty good too in my opinion. Fun films. see also "Radio Flyer" for similar fantasy flight fun.

T
K
O

P.S. - I'm not Aeronautical, I'm Aerospace. "Nauts" are chumps. j/k
0 Replies
 
eltejano
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2007 11:59 pm
Flight of the Phoenix!!!! Thank you, thank you, thank you. Now I can go to bed!

I'm reading-up on Deism and Thomas Jefferson. I admit it's more than a little alluring and intellectually stimulating. It's easy to keep my "armor" intact with Set because, despite all his education, he doesn't know how to talk to us - but with you and Neo I can see scary little threads of light through my helmet! Guess I better get the caulking gun out and plug 'em up, huh? Laughing

Jack
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jul, 2007 12:16 am
I've never been grouped with Neo in anybody's post... you know what that means right neo?


























We're totally gay for each other.[size=7][/size]
T
K
O
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jul, 2007 12:44 am
eltejano wrote:
It was Mesquite. Embarrassed


Yep, that was me and the Air Force at Barksdale is correct. As for Vietnam stories, being attached first to a B-52 outfit and then a special recon outfit kept me out of direct participation in the war. The closest I got to Southeast Asia was three tours on Guam. I guess the FSM was looking out for me. What little story I have is here.


eltejano wrote:
mesquite wrote:
The Bible has remained frozen in time as civilization has moved forward.


Exactly right, Mesquite. And that's why so many people cling to it - an anchor of certainty in am unpredictable and fluid world. The question is, where is "forward" leading us and will we like it there? What did Hamlet say? - something about "bearing the ills we have rather than fly to others we know not of."

"Forward" is leading us away from biblically inspired abominable practices of the past. Would those friends of Hank that need to cling to their "anchor of certainty" feel more comfy returning to the days of racial segregation, pre-suffrage for women, slavery, hanging witches, capital punishment for heresy, adultery, homosexual acts, working on sabbath, etc.? How about you? How do you square with those issues?
0 Replies
 
eltejano
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jul, 2007 01:34 am
Hi, there Mesquite.

Thanks for the link. Boy, you really hit the nail on the head with this:

Quote:
I see our current situation as eerily similar to the Vietnamization plan of Nixon.


I wish Bush wasn't from Texas - he's an embarrassment!

But enough of that.

**********************

I've been studying deism and Thomas Jefferson so I can discuss it intelligently with TKO. I was shocked to encounter the following in the course of that study:

Quote:
In 1779, Jefferson prepared a draft of Virginia's criminal statute, envisaging that the punishment for sodomy should be castration. The bill read: "Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy with a man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least."


So, we have to put these things in historical context, Mesquite. In Jefferson's day, that didn't seem so extreme. That doesn't mean that modern deists, like TKO, would embrace such a thing. If christianity couldn't progress socially, while still retaining the fundamental belief system, it would now be an historical footnote rather than a living and dynamic religious force in the world.

Obviously, christianity has been used and distorted by those with evil motives, but the truth usually comes to light - although, admittedly, it may take centuries to uncover a skillful fraud (segregation, the "curse of Ham", etc). The 17th century colonists didn't read their Bibles very carefully, because it doesn't say HOW to determine who is a witch!

Capital punishment - I stated earlier that I don't think Jesus would support it, and there's no solid New Testament Scripture that does so either.

The issue of women's rights is more complicated. I have been ignoring it here, because it's such a hot button issue, but I guess I'll have to deal with it sooner or later. It's late at night, I'm tired and I don't want to make stupid statements.

Suffice it to say, that I do support the traditional roles of the sexes because I feel it's basic to the survival of the traditional family as we have known it. I think I can make a cogent case on that narrow point - however, the definition of "family" has changed and the challenge we, as christians, face is to reconcile that reality with the Bible. Thankfully, this has little to do with the core doctrine of salvation and grace through Jesus, but it is important socially.

Our churches are full of people living "alternative" lifestyles these days. We don't want to reject them or drive them away. But, we do have to stand firm on certain basic principles of Christ's ministry and Paul's Epistles. This is difficult and painful. We're still sorting it out.

I realize this is a wishy-washy, and even cowardly, reply. But I'm still doing my own soul-searching here and that's the best I can do for now.

Jack
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Jul, 2007 01:35 am
Diest TKO wrote:
I've never been grouped with Neo in anybody's post... you know what that means right neo?


























We're totally gay for each other.[size=7][/size]
T
K
O
http://web4.ehost-services.com/el2ton1/outta.gif
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/15/2025 at 11:13:18