TRUMP for Prez

Originally Posted by markj

Are you asking for reading instructions? Start with the whole book of John. Come back when you’re done. If you’re looking for instructions on how to live, start with the book of James.

OK, then you should start with the book of Leviticus if you want to understand how completely absurd it is
And before you say the old testament doesn't apply read MATTHEW 5:17-20 where Jesus says it does.

See how I give actual passages and not just say "read the whole thing", which I have. The best book to become an atheist is the bible read with a thinking mind.

Originally Posted by plhorn

The best book to become an atheist is the bible read with a thinking mind.

Went to Pentecostal church as a kid. Best religion to make you not believe in the supernatural. A real freak show.

Originally Posted by fly135

Went to Pentecostal church as a kid. Best religion to make you not believe in the supernatural. A real freak show.

Pentecostal? Sorry to hear that. That explains a lot.

Originally Posted by plhorn

OK, then you should start with the book of Leviticus if you want to understand how completely absurd it is
And before you say the old testament doesn't apply read MATTHEW 5:17-20 where Jesus says it does.

See how I give actual passages and not just say "read the whole thing", which I have. The best book to become an atheist is the bible read with a thinking mind.

I’ll try to deal with you later. Gotta go earn a living.

Originally Posted by plhorn

OK, then you should start with the book of Leviticus if you want to understand how completely absurd it is
And before you say the old testament doesn't apply read MATTHEW 5:17-20 where Jesus says it does.

See how I give actual passages and not just say "read the whole thing", which I have. The best book to become an atheist is the bible read with a thinking mind.

Perhaps aside from the usual crap people like you attack in the Old Testament, you should get your head out of your butt & realize very few Christians follow the Old Testament, Christ told his followers to throw it in the trash & follow the New Testament. If you wanna rail ignorant Christians perhaps you should quit showing everyone what an ignorant moron you are. You're every bit as stupid & ill informed as what you claim to be against.

Originally Posted by wombat2wombat

...very few Christians follow the Old Testament

Good thing or they'd be in prison.

Originally Posted by wombat2wombat

..perhaps you should quit showing everyone what an ignorant moron you are. You're every bit as stupid & ill informed as what you claim to be against.

Oh the irony!

Originally Posted by fly135

Good thing or they'd be in prison.

Oh the irony!

It's like you're stuck on repeat. Only shocker this time is you didn't rail about your superior intelligence, fedora boy.

Originally Posted by fly135

So you're saying murder and stealing is totally cool outside of Judeo-Christian values?

No, not saying that. Just pointing out that our current moral system sits on a bedrock of Judeo-Christian values. That's not to say we haven't moved beyond them now, just saying that is the base we are lifting off. Plenty of room for improvement and ways to evolve society beyond the ethical standards set 2000 years ago.

Ok, back on track, I am sure Trump reads his bible, every day! He just declared"victory" at the voting booth! His prediction that the market would crash if you vote democratic did not materialize and not a peep about the caravan. Now the talk is about war in the middle east.

Originally Posted by wombat2wombat

It's like you're stuck on repeat.

Oh, the irony.

Originally Posted by wombat2wombat

Only shocker this time is you didn't rail about your superior intelligence, fedora boy.

Correction, I didn't rail on about your inferior intelligence.

Originally Posted by ralph

Plenty of room for improvement and ways to evolve society beyond the ethical standards set 2000 years ago.

When you are following God's will there is no room for improvement or evolving. And if you haven't gotten it right in 2000 years, maybe it's time to give up the delusion.

Originally Posted by plhorn

OK, then you should start with the book of Leviticus if you want to understand how completely absurd it is
And before you say the old testament doesn't apply read MATTHEW 5:17-20 where Jesus says it does.

See how I give actual passages and not just say "read the whole thing", which I have. The best book to become an atheist is the bible read with a thinking mind.

The Old Testament is a lot of history about God’s relationship with the Jews. This link may be helpful in showing it’s relevance today. https://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-law.html

You clearly have a problem with taking things out of context. I suggest you find a study Bible with notes that help with context. You could also attend church to help your understanding as well. Not a Joel Osteen type church. I’m talking about a church where they do expository preaching and actually open their Bible.

Originally Posted by wake77

Yeah, those Christian Crusades sure were a blessing to the history of mankind.

Christianity is a form of slavery, so I'm not sure how you can say "Christianity ends slavery".

Yeah, those CATHOLIC Crusades sure were a blessing to the history of mankind.

Catholicism is a form of slavery, so I'm not sure how you can say "Christianity ends slavery"



There fixed for you. Besides do you even know what the crusades were about and who the leaders of the Roman empire were? Can you possibly expand on how Christians enslaved people when in fact Christians were being fed to the lions and crucified by the Romans (Catholics) for not believing in their blend of paganism and Christianity. Hard to enslave people when you are hanging from a Cross.

Originally Posted by pesos

Cmon now Rod, you forgot the most famous Bern"bro" of all... she single handedly outweights your entire list (Ann Coulter, seriously???)

Nice work. Chalk one up to Bernie.

Originally Posted by ralph

Why wouldn't a Christian post a meme with the central theme that a women's value is related to how they look? The bible loves that ****.

First: Don't really care because it was a retort to a different person's nonsense. You have to follow along.

Second: I am not religious.

Third: I think you missed the mark. YOU are the one assigning worth based on the meme. Maybe we all appreciate Janet Reno's Adams-apple in her neck? There are no words in that nonsense meme that assigned worth. (unless you secretly agree that democrats are worthless and that is what you interpreted the meme as?).

Originally Posted by plhorn

Thomas Jefferson, was atheist and wrote his own version of the bible where he took all the miracles and god stuff out of it. He then requested that it not be published until after his death because he knew that Good God fairing Christians tend to burn people on crosses, and see absolutely no irony in it.

Wrong again fluffy:


https://www.monticello.org/site/rese...igious-beliefs

Jefferson was a devout theist, believing in a benevolent creator God to whom humans owed praise. In an early political text, he wrote that “The god who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time;…”4 He often referred to his or “our” God but did so in the language of an eighteenth century natural philosophy: “our creator,” the “Infinite Power, which rules the destinies of the universe,” “overruling providence,” “benevolent governor,” etc. In 1823, he wrote to John Adams referring to “the God whom you and I acknowledge and adore” while denouncing atheism.5

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Third: I think you missed the mark. YOU are the one assigning worth based on the meme.

You are 100% right I must have missed the mark. Can you explain the meaning of the meme with Republican women looking beautiful and democrat women with unflattering photos for me, I obviously miss the point.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Second: I am not religious.

Now I'm curious as to what you think the word religious means.

Originally Posted by ralph

You are 100% right I must have missed the mark. Can you explain the meaning of the meme with Republican women looking beautiful and democrat women with unflattering photos for me, I obviously miss the point.

PLHorn Said, "While we are on the subject: have you ever noticed that most of the people that are against abortion are people you wouldn't want to sleep with in the first place. There is such balance in nature. "

Now look at the list of women. One side you would equate of being against abortion (Republicans) and the other that is for abortion (democrats) and then re-read Horns comment. It will make much more sense.

Originally Posted by fly135

Now I'm curious as to what you think the word religious means.

Not sure I am in the mind to describe it in depth right now, however I think first order people usually refer to religion as dogma. I absolutely do not do dogma.

I believe in God's teachings have lessons of cause and effect on individuals that flows into society. The messages are confusing to most because many like to interpret that his teachings only go one way. For instance you are to, "give to the poor". Sure, easy lesson. However there are messages for those who are poor because they don't want to work. Basically accountability to each other. God absolutely says you can not gain heaven through works. It is a gift of receiving and if you are not walking with God, you will feel the effects of that separation.

Mostly you will find that we all live as hypocrits in one fashion of another. Even not going to a gay wedding vs an adulters wedding. Both are sin that you are supporting. Now comes the justifications right? One couple may or may not refuse to rectify the sin so I will go to that one? Stay away from both? You are supposed to love both sets up couples, but how do you approach these issues? Me, I don't really care. It is not my relationship so there you go. I am not really religious so I have no intention to beating people up with the bible. I don't worry about all that. If they ask my advice, I will tell them what they are doing is wrong according to God's word and that it can lead to struggles in there life. We could then starting talking about cause and effect on the relationship. Other than that, it is not my business. Other Christians believe you should take a proactive role and not let them get to that position in life. Both are well meaning, but which one is correct?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Not sure I am in the mind to describe it in depth right now, however I think first order people usually refer to religion as dogma. I absolutely do not do dogma.

I believe in God's teachings have lessons of cause and effect on individuals that flows into society. The messages are confusing to most because many like to interpret that his teachings only go one way. For instance you are to, "give to the poor". Sure, easy lesson. However there are messages for those who are poor because they don't want to work. Basically accountability to each other. God absolutely says you can not gain heaven through works. It is a gift of receiving and if you are not walking with God, you will feel the effects of that separation.

Mostly you will find that we all live as hypocrits in one fashion of another. Even not going to a gay wedding vs an adulters wedding. Both are sin that you are supporting. Now comes the justifications right? One couple may or may not refuse to rectify the sin so I will go to that one? Stay away from both? You are supposed to love both sets up couples, but how do you approach these issues? Me, I don't really care. It is not my relationship so there you go. I am not really religious so I have no intention to beating people up with the bible. I don't worry about all that. If they ask my advice, I will tell them what they are doing is wrong according to God's word and that it can lead to struggles in there life. We could then starting talking about cause and effect on the relationship. Other than that, it is not my business. Other Christians believe you should take a proactive role and not let them get to that position in life. Both are well meaning, but which one is correct?

I largely concur with this. There are a lot of verses about not eating if you’re not working.

Originally Posted by fly135

Now I'm curious as to what you think the word religious means.

It's a complete misdirect, I labeled him a Christian not religious.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

PLHorn Said, "While we are on the subject: have you ever noticed that most of the people that are against abortion are people you wouldn't want to sleep with in the first place. There is such balance in nature. "

Now look at the list of women. One side you would equate of being against abortion (Republicans) and the other that is for abortion (democrats) and then re-read Horns comment. It will make much more sense.

Oh yes you are right again, I can see clearly now. Christian has no problem objectifying women as taught in the bible. Well illustrated even in the 10 commandments.

In my book if you believe in a "specific" supernatural entity, then you are religious. If you believe that humans are more than just what we appear to be and there is something in the afterlife, then you are spiritual.

The bottom line is that God's word can be manipulated and is nothing more than in the eye of the beholder. For example, we are the world's largest weapons producer and exporter. We ship weapons to countries like Syria and then when people's lives are destroyed by our weapons and they come streaming out in need, the first line of denial comes from the Christian right. No amount of rationalization in the world is going to convince me that those people are following the philosophy of their lord and savior. I see those people as bearing false witness against Jesus. The standard excuse is always "none of us are perfect". But when you are less compassionate towards others than me, then I'd say you've got a real problem calling yourself a follower of Christ. Maybe a moocher of Christ. I'd buy that.

Originally Posted by ralph

Oh yes you are right again, I can see clearly now. Christian has no problem objectifying women as taught in the bible. Well illustrated even in the 10 commandments.

I am pretty sure you are just wanting to argue at this point, because you are trying to make points that were not being made in either case. Don't know what to tell you bud.

At what point is someone being objectified? YOU made the distinction between useful and useless based on the looks of one group vs another. You can not deny the comment that a person said that one group would not be work sleeping with that is against abortion and that meme was hilariously well timed. I would say by Horn's secular view which group he would choose. You on the other hand. I know you would be all into Janet Reno. She is hard working, smart, successful and absolutely beat you in an arm wrestling contest. What is there not to love.

At the end of the day of you wanting to argue, I see a perfect liberal double standard with you. Your boy can say that people who are for abortion are ugly. I show a picture that proves him wrong and you are up in a bunch about it. Don't really give a crap. The timing in hilarious and spot on.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Yeah, those CATHOLIC Crusades sure were a blessing to the history of mankind.

Catholicism is a form of slavery, so I'm not sure how you can say "Christianity ends slavery"



There fixed for you. Besides do you even know what the crusades were about and who the leaders of the Roman empire were? Can you possibly expand on how Christians enslaved people when in fact Christians were being fed to the lions and crucified by the Romans (Catholics) for not believing in their blend of paganism and Christianity. Hard to enslave people when you are hanging from a Cross.

We have covered this before but Catholics are Christians and define themselves as such, you have no moral or spiritual authority to deny them this right as defined in the constitution.

Originally Posted by fly135

In my book if you believe in a "specific" supernatural entity, then you are religious. If you believe that humans are more than just what we appear to be and there is something in the afterlife, then you are spiritual.

The bottom line is that God's word can be manipulated and is nothing more than in the eye of the beholder. For example, we are the world's largest weapons producer and exporter. We ship weapons to countries like Syria and then when people's lives are destroyed by our weapons and they come streaming out in need, the first line of denial comes from the Christian right. No amount of rationalization in the world is going to convince me that those people are following the philosophy of their lord and savior. I see those people as bearing false witness against Jesus. The standard excuse is always "none of us are perfect". But when you are less compassionate towards others than me, then I'd say you've got a real problem calling yourself a follower of Christ. Maybe a moocher of Christ. I'd buy that.

Did you take a poll to see who was the first to deny Syrians? Second, what can't other Muslim countries take them? Why does it have to be us? Why do you believe we gave Syria chemical weapons? I though Saddam was the one who had them and you even denied that. Funny how you blame the gun again for mans evil ways.

Why does helping someone mean to destroy your own country? Why is your couch empty every night? That make you a hypocrite by having a empty couch every night?

Let me ask you this, when your Jew hating buddies of WW2 where ran out of their country and we found the camps, we did not stuff the survivors full of food. We did not settle them in with stable societies. Were we not full of compassion for the Jewish people? We were and you don't destabilize other countries to help a few because you wont have anyone to save them. You don't stuff the starving or you will kill them. That is the problem with you liberals. You have no common sense.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

At the end of the day of you wanting to argue, I see a perfect liberal double standard with you. Your boy can say that people who are for abortion are ugly. I show a picture that proves him wrong and you are up in a bunch about it. Don't really give a crap. The timing in hilarious and spot on.

I'm not liberal I'm libertarian, and I'm against abortion personally. I'm also against holier than tho hypocrites, so I point it out when I see it.

Originally Posted by ralph

We have covered this before but Catholics are Christians and define themselves as such, you have no moral or spiritual authority to deny them this right as defined in the constitution.

No, I will let the facts of the religions and the historical documents of christians being fed to the lions do my talking. Not sure the constitution has anything to do with defining religions. Even Germany has state mandated religions and if you want to participate, you have to define catholic or Prodestant. You ever ask a real catholic what they are? They will say they are catholic. Ever wonder about what that little warfare going on in Ireland was about it was Prodestants and the who? were fighting? I will even let you tell me who it was that sent over the armies to the middle east if you want. Who was the first pope of the catholic church and what is the fundamental belief structures between the 2 religions, which brings us back to who was enslaving who?

Originally Posted by ralph

I'm not liberal I'm libertarian, and I'm against abortion personally. I'm also against holier than tho hypocrites, so I point it out when I see it.

Can you explain where I was objectifying women? Do you know what the definition is. Just because YOU assigned worth based on the pictures, don't try and take it out on me

Originally Posted by ralph

I'm not liberal I'm libertarian, and I'm against abortion personally. I'm also against holier than tho hypocrites, so I point it out when I see it.

And btw, I believe Reno is on Tinder if you want to hook up. Is it swipe right or something? Lovely woman.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Why do you believe we gave Syria chemical weapons? I though Saddam was the one who had them and you even denied that. Funny how you blame the gun again for mans evil ways

Nice strawman. Funny how you are stupid enough to believe that sort of thing works.

Originally Posted by fly135

Nice strawman. Funny how you are so stupid enough to believe that sort of thing works.

You said we gave them chemical weapons. Prove it. Only person we gave chemical weapons to was Saddam. Of course you said those weapons did not exist, so how did Syrian get these weapons that you say we gave them?

Florida still being Florida. Crazy, they are still counting votes and appears its going to take a little time. Georgia too, California, Ariz...
I think they just need to get a correct and accurate count of all votes cast legally. Even tho Trump and Florida's Gov have been screaming fraud, his people have found zero fraud. Interesting election. I can not recall a time when so many races were so close, so many recounts, so long to name a winner. Lots of sources.


https://theweek.com/speedreads/80742...ntly-illegally
https://www.salon.com/2018/11/13/jud...overnors-race/
https://www.npr.org/2018/11/13/66743...ice-voting-law
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...da-bill-nelson

Originally Posted by 95sn

Florida still being Florida. Crazy, they are still counting votes and appears its going to take a little time. Georgia too, California, Ariz...
I think they just need to get a correct and accurate count of all votes cast legally. Even tho Trump and Florida's Gov have been screaming fraud, his people have found zero fraud. Interesting election. I can not recall a time when so many races were so close, so many recounts, so long to name a winner. Lots of sources.


https://theweek.com/speedreads/80742...ntly-illegally
https://www.salon.com/2018/11/13/jud...overnors-race/
https://www.npr.org/2018/11/13/66743...ice-voting-law
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...da-bill-nelson

With thousands of votes showing up after the election was over, it absolutely screams of fraud especially when it is Broward County in Florida again.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

No, I will let the facts of the religions and the historical documents of christians being fed to the lions do my talking. Not sure the constitution has anything to do with defining religions. Even Germany has state mandated religions and if you want to participate, you have to define catholic or Prodestant. You ever ask a real catholic what they are? They will say they are catholic. Ever wonder about what that little warfare going on in Ireland was about it was Prodestants and the who? were fighting? I will even let you tell me who it was that sent over the armies to the middle east if you want. Who was the first pope of the catholic church and what is the fundamental belief structures between the 2 religions, which brings us back to who was enslaving who?

This really isn't that difficult: catholic is the subset, Christianity is the superset. So, yes someone can call themselves a catholic specifically or a Christian generally.

And the constitution defines the ability of freedom of religion, that includes the ability to define it as you wish. The catholics define Christian as any person who is baptized and who has faith in Jesus Christ, this seems to be pretty reasonable and includes catholics.

I get that you don't like that and feel you have the right to exclude them from the group of christians but luckily the founding father's saw the danger of zelotry and restrict you from doing so. Sorry. So sad.

Originally Posted by ralph

This really isn't that difficult: catholic is the subset, Christianity is the superset. So, yes someone can call themselves a catholic specifically or a Christian generally.

And the constitution defines the ability of freedom of religion, that includes the ability to define it as you wish. The catholics define Christian as any person who is baptized and who has faith in Jesus Christ, this seems to be pretty reasonable and includes catholics.

I get that you don't like that and feel you have the right to exclude them from the group of christians but luckily the founding father's saw the danger of zelotry and restrict you from doing so. Sorry. So sad.

I am pretty sure I am not restricting ones religion. Actually if you ask a Catholic they will say that Prodestant is the subset of Catholicism and that Christianity did not start until the Caltholic Church was started. Ironic considering Catholicism started 300 years after Christ. So under your logic, Islam is a subset of Christianity because it speaks about worshiping Mary and Jesus.

Originally Posted by ralph

This really isn't that difficult: catholic is the subset, Christianity is the superset. So, yes someone can call themselves a catholic specifically or a Christian generally.

And the constitution defines the ability of freedom of religion, that includes the ability to define it as you wish. The catholics define Christian as any person who is baptized and who has faith in Jesus Christ, this seems to be pretty reasonable and includes catholics.

I get that you don't like that and feel you have the right to exclude them from the group of christians but luckily the founding father's saw the danger of zelotry and restrict you from doing so. Sorry. So sad.

Also the German Government sees them as different religion and so do the Irish in which they have been killing each other over for a a few hundred years. The Catholics certainly saw themselves as different as they threw Christians to the lions and the during the inquisition kill those who did not believe in their version. You can label it any way you like, but they do not believe in the same thing. You can not even get to heaven the same way in the two religions.

Originally Posted by ralph

This really isn't that difficult: catholic is the subset, Christianity is the superset. So, yes someone can call themselves a catholic specifically or a Christian generally.

And the constitution defines the ability of freedom of religion, that includes the ability to define it as you wish. The catholics define Christian as any person who is baptized and who has faith in Jesus Christ, this seems to be pretty reasonable and includes catholics.

I get that you don't like that and feel you have the right to exclude them from the group of christians but luckily the founding father's saw the danger of zelotry and restrict you from doing so. Sorry. So sad.

Also Christians don't believe that baptism as a Child is what makes you eligible for heaven and Catholics can pray another out of pergatory. Christians don't believe in pergatory. They don't believe humans are saints. There is no election by humans to make another human a deity. So much stuff you don't even have in the ball park.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

With thousands of votes showing up after the election was over, it absolutely screams of fraud especially when it is Broward County in Florida again.

Ric Scott sent his election officials to check it out. They have reported zero fraud.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

So under your logic, Islam is a subset of Christianity because it speaks about worshiping Mary and Jesus.

No, under my logic they wouldn't because they don't define themselves that way

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Also the German Government sees them as different religion and so do the Irish in which they have been killing each other over for a a few hundred years. The Catholics certainly saw themselves as different as they threw Christians to the lions and the during the inquisition kill those who did not believe in their version. You can label it any way you like, but they do not believe in the same thing. You can not even get to heaven the same way in the two religions.

Again Catholic subset, Christian superset.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Also Christians don't believe that baptism as a Child is what makes you eligible for heaven and Catholics can pray another out of pergatory. Christians don't believe in pergatory. They don't believe humans are saints. There is no election by humans to make another human a deity. So much stuff you don't even have in the ball park.

Again, subset and superset. Some Christians do think that (Catholic subset) some don't (Prodestant subset)

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

You said we gave them chemical weapons. Prove it.

Your imagination needs some control.

Originally Posted by ralph

No, under my logic they wouldn't because they don't define themselves that way

Yes they do define themselves that way. They specifically say to worship Jesus and Mary. They even have certain shared items with Catholicism.

Originally Posted by fly135

Your imagination needs some control.

What weapons did we specifically supply that was considered special that the US gave to people in Syria that was used on the population that made them some sort of special refugee case that only the western world (that has zero in common with their rituals and customs, like female genital mutilation, chucking gays off roofs, hating Jews [sorry, same as democrats], marrying children to old men, bombing US buildings, and so on) should take on? Only weapons that could make us especially in need would be the chemical weapons so that obviously has to be your point.

Are you talking the weapons that Obama gave to groups over there? Which ones are we talking about? We did not give them chemical weapons (though I have an idea where they got those). Everyone dumped in small arms. Obama drew his line in the sand (and did it again and again and again).

Originally Posted by ralph

Again, subset and superset. Some Christians do think that (Catholic subset) some don't (Prodestant subset)

So basically I am not alone in this thinking on the world stage. Though you and another person here on Wake World decided I am wrong and you are right, there seems to be a very large population (that is even willing to die for this difference) that agrees with me. Sounds like it is up for debate and if we used the relativism standard, we are both right.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Yes they do define themselves that way. They specifically say to worship Jesus and Mary. They even have certain shared items with Catholicism.

I'm not sure if you are being genuine or not, Muslims don't define themselves as Christians so I don't know what you are saying.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

So basically I am not alone in this thinking on the world stage. Though you and another person here on Wake World decided I am wrong and you are right, there seems to be a very large population (that is even willing to die for this difference) that agrees with me. Sounds like it is up for debate and if we used the relativism standard, we are both right.

Again I'm not sure if we are cross talking or you are arguing in bad faith. Just because two groups of Christians are prepare to fight and kill each other over there perception of dogma doesn't mean they are not both defined as Christians it means one group defines themselves as catholic (subset of christian) and the other group define themselves as Prodestant (subset of Christian)

It's no suprised that Prodestant think catholics aren't christians, they are willing to kill then after all. Doesn't mean they are not both christians

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

So basically I am not alone in this thinking on the world stage. Though you and another person here on Wake World decided I am wrong and you are right, there seems to be a very large population (that is even willing to die for this difference) that agrees with me. Sounds like it is up for debate and if we used the relativism standard, we are both right.

Just because "a large population agrees with you", that still doesn't make you right. You are no more Christian than a Catholic.

Originally Posted by wake77

You are no more Christian than a Catholic.

I'm pretty sure there are millions of Catholics that are more Christian than Delta.

Tip for the day, it’s spelled Protestant with a T. As in protest. Like Luther protested the Catholic Church.

Originally Posted by fly135

I'm pretty sure there are millions of Catholics that are more Christian than Delta.

Oh come on. You’re WAY too old to be acting like a child with that post. You may as well have called him a poo poo head.

Originally Posted by fly135

In my book if you believe in a "specific" supernatural entity, then you are religious. The bottom line is that God's word can be manipulated and is nothing more than in the eye of the beholder.

And every church thinks theirs is the true church, of the two largest christian groups in America, the Catholics are the best educated because they have accredited colleges all over the US, as far as I know you cannot become a priest online! The second largest church is the Baptist, where you can get a Doctorate degree Online! What a joke! I do Not see how these online "schools" can be accredited. Getting your "preacher" degree is one of the dumbest educational degrees one can get! If you get a degree in Science and do an experiment that experiment Can be reproduced around the world! With religion, not so much! Every religion puts a certain twist on their "religion" and of the thousands of religions every one of them thinks their religion is the one true religion, they are Not growing their religion, because every sect has people who believe differently and they are further fragmented, until there are multiple more religions! There are only a handful of preachers that are making millions, so I guess it is Ok for them, at least they can quit and have a decent retirement! Your chances are better trying to go into the NFL than being a mega church preacher!

Originally Posted by ralph

I'm not sure if you are being genuine or not, Muslims don't define themselves as Christians so I don't know what you are saying.

Of course they do not, however the way you are describing it to me it certainly is clear they are a subset of Christianity. They to preach about Jesus and even they claim to worship the same God. Even the Pope said they worship the same God. I absolutely reject the idea as I do with Catholics. The rosary is a shared religious item. By your definitions, they must be a subset of Christianity.

Originally Posted by wake77

Just because "a large population agrees with you", that still doesn't make you right. You are no more Christian than a Catholic.

Isn't that the liberal mindset? Half the country wants to desolve the US border but calls themselves Americans.

Originally Posted by fly135

I'm pretty sure there are millions of Catholics that are more Christian than Delta.

If you call dogma and believe they as humans think they can vote some other human to deity status. They can keep that pagan religion.

Originally Posted by joeshmoe

And every church thinks theirs is the true church, of the two largest christian groups in America, the Catholics are the best educated because they have accredited colleges all over the US, as far as I know you cannot become a priest online! The second largest church is the Baptist, where you can get a Doctorate degree Online! What a joke! I do Not see how these online "schools" can be accredited. Getting your "preacher" degree is one of the dumbest educational degrees one can get! If you get a degree in Science and do an experiment that experiment Can be reproduced around the world! With religion, not so much! Every religion puts a certain twist on their "religion" and of the thousands of religions every one of them thinks their religion is the one true religion, they are Not growing their religion, because every sect has people who believe differently and they are further fragmented, until there are multiple more religions! There are only a handful of preachers that are making millions, so I guess it is Ok for them, at least they can quit and have a decent retirement! Your chances are better trying to go into the NFL than being a mega church preacher!

There are Christian Colleges. Roughly 70 around the country. They are just not big money establishment. Kind of the point against the bible where the Catholics are into big money. Catholics need to have a college degree in order to learn all the angles to keep the flock in their con game. Scientology has a similar structure in place.

As a godless heathen the hair splitting is pretty funny.

As a cyclist it reminds me of the Balkanization between roadies, hipsters, MTB riders (who themselves segregate among single speeders, xc, downhill, free ride), fitness riders, bmxers, etc. But all Joe Dirt sees is “bikers”.

Haha I am the Joe Dirt of religions.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Of course they do not, however the way you are describing it to me it certainly is clear they are a subset of Christianity. They to preach about Jesus and even they claim to worship the same God. Even the Pope said they worship the same God. I absolutely reject the idea as I do with Catholics. The rosary is a shared religious item. By your definitions, they must be a subset of Christianity.

No, not at all, my definition is a right to self determination as protected in the constitution. So if muslims don't define themselves as christians they are not christians.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

As a godless heathen the hair splitting is pretty funny.

As a cyclist it reminds me of the Balkanization between roadies, hipsters, MTB riders (who themselves segregate among single speeders, xc, downhill, free ride), fitness riders, bmxers, etc. But all Joe Dirt sees is “bikers”.

Haha I am the Joe Dirt of religions.

You are a heathen, downhillers are not bike riders.

Originally Posted by ralph

No, not at all, my definition is a right to self determination as protected in the constitution. So if muslims don't define themselves as christians they are not christians.

What constitution are you under? You are defining Christian as Catholic. Most Catholics will define themselves as Catholic. This would not even be too much of a discussion if A) you liberals would quit trying to pile history onto Christians when they too were being murdered by the Catholics. B) You don't even understand the basic differences in the religion yet want to preach on what they do and do not do.

Using your power of deductive reasoning, Islam too must be a subset of Christianity. They believe in the same God. Have similar adapted customs as Catholicism. Get to heaven the same way as Catholics, which is completely different than Christians. I agree Islam is not Christian, but the way you claim that Christians and Catholics are the same then they too much be a subset.

You and I are not a government. The constitution (ours, not sure about yours) keeps government from declaring a state religion. Individuals can do what every they want.

This whole discussion started in regards you you saying I objectified women. Still waiting on that proof. I'm telling you. Janet Reno is a catch. You should move in on that.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

What constitution are you under? You are defining Christian as Catholic. Most Catholics will define themselves as Catholic.

US constitution, freedom of religion. You seem a little slow on the up take, it's not me defining them as anything, it's them defining themselves.

Maybe the penny will drop if you put the shoe on the other foot, does a catholic have the right to define you as a non christian because your sect is different from there's?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

This whole discussion started in regards you you saying I objectified women. Still waiting on that proof.

The point was that the meme which showed women in flattering photos on one side and unflattering on the other was an attempt at humor to show the beautiful women are conservative and unattractive women are liberal. That it matters what women in particular look like in relation to their political views is a way of objectifying women.

The second point was it's not suprising that a Christian would post that meme because the bible teaches that women are men's chattels are their value is related to how they look.

The third point was luckily over the last 2000 years we have learnt a thing or two and are starting to treat women and minorities better.

Y'all off topic. This is a trump thread not an endless battle of religious definitions.

So trump is a fire specialist too, foolishly schooling California fire pros.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/u...ire-tweet.html

Have not heard a single tweet about the biggest threat to America, the "Invasion". What happened? Over 5000 troops deployed. Seemed soo important leading up to the election where repubs got shellacked. Trump understands election fraud. He was the guy who founded his Voter Fraud Committee. Who can recall how that worked out? They caught the 3-5 million illegal voters right. Kobach, even with keeping his voter suppression hand strong...still lost to a democrat. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trum...sguise-1215632

Originally Posted by ralph

The point was that the meme which showed women in flattering photos on one side and unflattering on the other was an attempt at humor to show the beautiful women are conservative and unattractive women are liberal. That it matters what women in particular look like in relation to their political views is a way of objectifying women.

The second point was it's not suprising that a Christian would post that meme because the bible teaches that women are men's chattels are their value is related to how they look.

The third point was luckily over the last 2000 years we have learnt a thing or two and are starting to treat women and minorities better.

1 Wrong - Who is putting the label of unflattering on it? That is a you issue. You automatically assigned that stigma. The original comment was about how people who are against abortion usually are not those you want to breed with. I simply put up a meme that may show an alternate argument. It is not Objectifying. I happen to think the women on the meme who are anti abortion are smart and more talented than the ones who are not. You assigned the looks to it. You need to clean out your closet bud. You assigned looks with breeding.

2) Wrong - You know absolutely ZERO about what the bible says about women so don't even go there.

3) Not in the non Christian world they have not. China usually kills the daughter if they need a son. All the Islamic world, women are subservant subject to being married off as children like cattle. Made to cover up and not get educated.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Y'all off topic. This is a trump thread not an endless battle of religious definitions.

So trump is a fire specialist too, foolishly schooling California fire pros.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/u...ire-tweet.html

Have not heard a single tweet about the biggest threat to America, the "Invasion". What happened? Over 5000 troops deployed. Seemed soo important leading up to the election where repubs got shellacked. Trump understands election fraud. He was the guy who founded his Voter Fraud Committee. Who can recall how that worked out? They caught the 3-5 million illegal voters right. Kobach, even with keeping his voter suppression hand strong...still lost to a democrat. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trum...sguise-1215632

You mean actually gaining seats in the Senate and only losing 20 some seats in the house? That shellacking? You realize Clinton and Obama lost over 60 seats each midterm?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

You mean actually gaining seats in the Senate and only losing 20 some seats in the house? That shellacking? You realize Clinton and Obama lost over 60 seats each midterm?

No you are right. The biggest dem midterm pickup since watergate is actually a victory for republicans. Those who didn’t pledge fealty have been purged. It’s genius, really.

Thanks for getting back on track, religion is too boring.

I think its going to be closer to 37-38 in the house. Shellacking is what Obama called it, trump called it "Incredible". Clinton and Obama did not have to deal with the 2016+ republican gerrymandering. Picking up senate seats.. how many? 2? 3? It wasnt a blue wave but I think the dems are happier about most results than repubs. You really have to look at what is available, whos seats are up, was it a dem area or a trump held area, incumbent, open seat....
http://theconversation.com/why-the-d...-in-2018-68037

https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/house/

your onboard with trump slamming CA on managing Federal forests?
Gee, first he penalizes the coast removing State/Local taxes off federal returns then threatening Fed Funds because we have fires. Has anyone told him how much CA pays the Fed? We aint no Kansas. Do you remember him threatening Houston when their below floodplain houses were under water?... again? What are we Puerto Rico?

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

As a godless heathen the hair splitting is pretty funny.

As a cyclist it reminds me of the Balkanization between roadies, hipsters, MTB riders (who themselves segregate among single speeders, xc, downhill, free ride), fitness riders, bmxers, etc. But all Joe Dirt sees is “bikers”.

Haha I am the Joe Dirt of religions.

You forgot us beach cruiser types. Everyone knows we’ve got all the answers and are by far the coolest.

Originally Posted by ralph

The point was that the meme which showed women in flattering photos on one side and unflattering on the other was an attempt at humor to show the beautiful women are conservative and unattractive women are liberal. That it matters what women in particular look like in relation to their political views is a way of objectifying women.

The second point was it's not suprising that a Christian would post that meme because the bible teaches that women are men's chattels are their value is related to how they look.

The third point was luckily over the last 2000 years we have learnt a thing or two and are starting to treat women and minorities better.

Okay, you need to stop flinging poo just to see what sticks. You’re losing. You’re in a hole so stop digging. Delta has been more than patient trying to explain things to you and you keep responding by saying things that prove you have no clue about Christianity or Catholicism.

A detailed rundown chat on the election:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...s-a-blue-wave/

Flying out of Phoenix tonight where there is a New Democratic senator. I think the main takeaway is that this race - like SO many this cycle and upcoming - were really on a knife edge and settled by an incredibly small number of votes. Given that “bluish” ballot initiatives passed (auto voter reg in Michigan, felon voting restoration in FL) and how insanely close the Cruz/Beto race was, the gop definitely has its work cut out for it in broadening appeal for 2020 (not so much for president - totally different map there)... this senate map was quite daunting for democrats so they did pretty well considering. And the house take was also quite good (and a few more have tipped since Tuesday, including a couple in reliably red orange county...

Also dems elected 8 scientists and a ton of young women. GOP elected 3 felons and a dead pimp. Impressive nonetheless

unexpected

^^^^

Great point Wes.

California is a great example of democRATS that have taken over a once great state. Republican have Zero voice or Representation. Gavin Nusome this guy is the biggest piece of $HIT. Now I know how you trigger Loons feel about Trump. Gavin is TRUMP x20 but liberal loon style

^^^Totally agree. And you thought Governor Moonbeam was bad... Initially I wasn't even concerned about Newsom winning because I believed there was no way Cali would elect such a flaming, extremist turd..... I was so wrong. We are WAY worse off than I thought. What do you expect though when they keep inviting illegals in and rewarding people who smoke dope and play Nintendo all day?

Originally Posted by pesos

A detailed rundown chat on the election:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...s-a-blue-wave/
I think the main takeaway is that this race - like SO many this cycle and upcoming - were really on a knife edge and settled by an incredibly small number of votes. Given that “bluish” ballot initiatives passed (auto voter reg in Michigan, felon voting restoration in FL) and how insanely close the Cruz/Beto race was, the gop definitely has its work cut out for it in broadening appeal for 2020.

The felon voting restoration was Not even close here in Florida, so there were many republicans voting for this issue. Don't they understand this is voting against their best interest?

Originally Posted by joeshmoe

The felon voting restoration was Not even close here in Florida, so there were many republicans voting for this issue. Don't they understand this is voting against their best interest?

That is one issue I side with the left on, sort of. I don't think non violent felons should be banned from voting, but violent offenders should be.

Knock knock. Who’s there? Karma...


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mic...iolence-arrest

Originally Posted by markj

Knock knock. Who’s there? Karma...





https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mic...iolence-arrest

Please put a fork in this clown.