While the Bible counsels that a rich man can no more enter the Kingdom of Heaven than a camel can pass through the eye of a needle, many Christians pursue the acquisition of wealth.
I understand you're doing well in real estate, Aragorn243. How do you feel about your eternal damnation in the eyes of God?
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
How do I feel about my "eternal damnation in the eyes of God?"
Not at all concerned as I have not been eternally damned.
Glassman,
"you are hopelessly cognitively impaired..."
Attacking the poster ALREADY? That didn't take long at all. It doesn't take any cognitive thinking to understand that personal attacks don't work towards informative discussion.
I did re-read your statement. You qualified it with seeing that rather than nuclear bombs. Clarifying it doesn't change that your position still runs directly counter to the freedoms of the Constitution.
IP: Logged |
posted
The points made all remain true, just as it is true that aragon came here with preconcieved notions and intentions about threatening and harrassing those he viewe as not christian or republican enough to please the Party. It certainly does appear that he is a paid troublemaker from the RNC. He is also a viscious liar, which obviously fits their mold.
As before:
"I'm here because I was referred (sic) to this board by people........"
And, as you explain, you came here to confront and attack anything and anyone you wanted to believe was anti-Republican, anti-religious, and anti-Bush. My God, man, it's called free speech and you declare it unamerican and unchristian. Then. on at least two occasions, when confronted and asked why you happened to come here , you absolutely denied that you came here intentionally to post pro religious and conservative propaganda. Which lie are we to accept?
"I've seen how every person with conservative leanings is ganged up upon and by some individuals called names almost immediately." "....why is it that liberals dominate this board."
A better question is, why is it that anyone that provides reasoned debate that doesn't begin with the assumptions that the bible is law and far right wing propaganda is absolute fact labeled by you to be an enemy and a liberal. You are attacking some pretty staunch conservatives, here. Open mindedness does not constitute liberalism, but liberalism does expect open mindedness and demands respect of knowledge. Those seem to be your favored targets. Liberals don't dominate this board (as you claim), open discussion does, and that is what you attack!
"...there are plenty of other message boards out there where they can discuss their kids or their cars or hunting and fishing or politics without someone.. saying, they are an "incomparable idiot" simply because heaven forbid they mentioned God or GW Bush in a favorable manner once in their life."
No, one of your difficulties is that anything said about anything that doesn't assume Christianity (as you declare Christianity to be, a very Old Testament sort of Christianity, a bit of a contradictory approach and contradictory to the words of Jesus, if you ask me) and the wishes of the Republican National Committee are the law of the land is declared unamerican. Get this straight, neither of those sources is the law and it is fundamental that applying either as the law is a violation of the Constitution.
Moreover, pointing out that George Bush, with the backing and urging of evangelical far right wing conservative Christian war mongers lied to get the US into a war in Iraq is fact. You are still running around attacking anyone that points that fact out, as if it is an assignment doled out to you by the Party.
"I had one of those individuals with his little lap dog follow me onto every topic I posted on demanding I provide proof of God's existence. So regular Joe starts a thread on nice vacation spots I post there and one of these individuals just comes in and makes these demands about my religion and in the process also accuses me of being a bigoted racist. Very disruptive. That individual at least stepped over the line and is no longer here in that incarnation. So a few other posters call out this individual for not sticking with the topic and he in turned blasts them. The thread died a quick death."
Wasn't that the guy you first demanded provide proof that God doesn't exist or shut up? And didn't you insert that demand into a thread that had nothing to do with that question? Yes you did! So why do you object that he responded by treating you with the same lack of manners?
Hmmmm? Let me ponder that. The thread dies AFTER you attacked him for being disruptive and you blame him? Strange interpretation of cause and effect, my man. Why shouldn't he point out that you are a bigoted racist, since that is a fact that you have proved through your incessant hateful postings?
You exhort at Glassman, "You don't know me or any of the other posters here from a few words on a message board yet you automatically seem to believe you do. I am an evangelical Christian, you've told me that numerous times. I also follow the RNC dogma and the religious right, Pat Robertson, etc."
I ask, do you know Glassman (or anyone else here)? Didn't you, by your own admission above, assume you knew people here and what they were and and what they believed, not from their post here or anywhere, but from rumor and insinuations and accusations you choseto believe on some other board where people that post here had not even posted?
Did you know Glassman is proudly a long time conservative republican? Did you care?
Who here asked you to try to dominate the thinking, debates and religions of this group? That is why you came here, as you now admit. Why should that be an acceptable activity? Can't you recognize arrogant impertinent claims to intellectual integrity when you see them in the mirror?
I don't care if you didn't know you are an evangelical Christian, you are! You do, as you have stated, foster rigid ultra conservative and hard line Christian beliefs and came here only to foster that agenda and attack anyone not in line therewith, i.e., to "drive them out". You are a very sick individual.
"I think Pat Robertson, while having every right to believe and say what he does, is a complete idiot."
I whole heartedly agree! I also point out that the America you claim is what you want is exactly that proposed by Pat Robertson, one where the laws are interpreted according to religious preference rather than the Constitution and where the Constitution is required to foster the bible. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, it is a duck. Thus, ergo, therefore, consequently, hence, accordingly, and in conclusion, you follow religiously and politically exactly the dogma and disgusting preaching of the "complete idiot", Pat Robertson. You are his intellectual clone.
"I know I've been baffled at times why you continue to press certain issues."
"At times"? Why so modest? You spend all of your time baffled by anything that assumes reason or logic or that hasn't been sanctioned and passed down to the believers by the Party.
You need to get this very firmly settled in your feeble little mean mind! No one here ask you to come here and be disruptive and no one here needs you injecting your hateful religious backwardness into everything that is said or hinted at. Most of the people that post here are proper Christians and the ones that are not have just as much right to whatever beliefs they have and no one with any respect for the Nation we live in has any right to appoint you to interfere with their right to say whatever they want. According to you you are a self appointed guardian of all that is right and proper and what can be said about anything. No such position of authority exists, so you don't hold a position allowing you to appoint yourself as overseer of Allstock's "Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk".
Logic and reason is not, by definition, what you say it is. Most often in these discussions, as you can't seem to accept, when logic and reason lead to a conclusion that you see as not confirming your political or religious wishes, then you declare what you want to be logical and reasonable. It doesn't work that way! You are, hopelessly, a logical nincompoop, at best.
Open discussion is NOT anti-Christian or anti-american. Indeed, your wish to prevent and disrupt those is both antichristian and anti-American!
IP: Logged |
posted
As we can argue the "real estate" issue to death, I'll concede and, once again, rephrase my point.
While the Bible counsels that a rich man can no more enter the Kingdom of Heaven than a camel can pass through the eye of a needle, many Christians pursue the acquisition of wealth.
How do you justify this, Aragorn243?
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
According to the scriptures, a truly miserable afterlife awaits you.
But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. -- Luke 6:24
Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. -- James 5:1
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. -- Matthew 19:23-24, Mark 10:23-25
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Attacking the poster ALREADY? That didn't take long at all. It doesn't take any cognitive thinking to understand that personal attacks don't work towards informative discussion.
glassamn responds:
informative discussion? you don't provide information to us, you provide OPINIONS, and then don't back them up very often...
i do make some attempt to provide readers with the reasons i formulate my opinions...
when offered those reasons you tend to "pooh pooh" them and make contradictory, broad, general statements
when i get harsh with you? i think you know i'm challenging you to pick up the quality a little...
you asked why i pointed Art out to you, right? i'll tell you again, he and i did agree on many issues BUT we still argued over them to "discover" more...
c'est la vie....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
I will answer any question you asked when you ask it. I'm not going to play guessing games with you.
You claim you understand I'm doing well in real estate. I have no idea where you would get any such understanding. I asked you where you heard that. You refuse to answer and move on.
You keep posting scriptures which appear to indicate that the rich will not get into heaven and ask how I justify that. I have no idea what you are asking. How I justify scriptures in the Bible? I didn't write the Bible. I don't have to justify scriptures in it.
It would seem you are implying something else however as you asked how I fell about my "eternal damnation in the eyes of God?" I answered that.
I guess I need to rephrase my question to you, what are you ASKING ME?
IP: Logged |
Dr Hulme said that while the results further confirm the overwhelming scientific consensus that man-made global warming is a proven phenomenon, he would be surprised if it were accepted by critics.
“I’m under no illusions that it will knock down the critics altogether,” he said. “In some quarters, people hold almost fundamentalist beliefs that are immune to carefully reasoned argument. A new paper that seems to take the legs away from one of their critiques may unfortunately not make much difference to their arguments.
Does that sound like anyone we know?
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
I don't provide opinions very often, I also provide evidence, you just don't accept it. It's ok, I don't accept all of yours either. I have to consider the source and balance it against my own. I do make broad statements at times, especially here as I don't feel it is necessary to get into the ins and outs of the Earth's warm periods vs the ice ages, etc. If you want or feel the need, I can get you sources but you seem to have accepted that these things have occured in the past so I didn't feel the need.
You also make very broad statements, and then claim I don't understand science because I don't accept these broad statements. It not good science to automatically assume since man affects the ozone that he affects global warming in the same manner.
When you get "harsh" with me, you've dropped the level down to where I no longer have much inclination to participate. That shows me that you have no inclination to listen to or accept anything I present so why bother.
I'll argue anything with you to "discover" more. I don't need to argue with you to discover your ability to insult others. I see no point in that. I'm not going to accept everything you present and I don't expect you to accept everything I present either. That's life, but if you wish to continue with the insults and derogatory comments, we can continue learning nothing because that is all that gets accomplished at that point.
IP: Logged |
I still waiting on your questions, or the answers to mine.
I read the article, not sure what you're trying to imply with that either. I never said we don't have global warming. I have said just the opposite, the globe is warming and has been warming since the last ice age.
This new evidence also supports the position that global warming occurs naturally and has been occuring naturally since the last ice age.
So what's your point?
That it is a human induced phenomena, only discredits the opinion of the scientist who wrote it who ignores that global warming occurs naturally on this earth.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Even dubya's close buddy and ally knows and admits dubya either lies about global warming or is too dense top handle the science:
Global Warming
I think it's both.
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
As none of your questions have any bearing on the discussion of global warming or your little sidetrack of either my religious beliefs or my adventures in real estate nor serve any other purpose, I have no need to answer them.
The questions I asked you however are in direct response to YOUR actions here.
I'll humor you, just because I'm bored.
1) Little patience with stupidity 2) You shouldn't 3) I'm not looking to be hired 4) Successfull children 5) I didn't leave and have no intention of leaving 6) When the client is happy 7) Honesty 8) Honest, hardworking, responsible 9) Depends on the job, as a self employed contractor, that varies quite a bit
posted
1) Allstocks and sugar. 2) Because I'm tall and stately. 3) Because the building is even taller. 4) A happy, progressive society. 5) The boss was fiddling too much. 6) On weekends. 7) My uncle can get you cheap prescription drugs from Canada. 8) He's not available for comment. 9) Enough to live on, but not so much that I'll be barred from Heaven.
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
)
