Yes.
I think a lot of people are annoyed at a lot of things lately........

it seems to be going around......

what's your favorite firearm and how did you get into shooting?

God knew that they were going to be tempted by lucifer and didn't give them the mental capacity to resist temptation.  He had complete control over their abilities and their weaknesses.  He knew the temptations they would face and designed them in such a way that they would not be able to resist those temptations.

God damn, OP knocked it out of the park on this one.  



Planned parent hood needs more guv funding.  I'm still sure it's the best $200 I ever gave to a chick to fix a problem.

Favorite firearm has to be the 10/22.  I've built probably 20 or 30 of 'em over the years.  After that....probably my Beretta 687 silver pidgeon II.  

I've loved firearms since I was a little kid (and I didn't grow up with them).  I've been shooting and hunting since I turned 18.

He did not specifically design them to fail. If he had, then that wouldn't have been fair. But such was not the case. They could have resisted temptation by relying on the Word of God and their walk with God.

OK, then we have something in common. I love .22s too. Its a wonderful cartridge and the 10/22 is a fantastic piece.
I have lots of different firearms......but I love my .22s the most probably.

thanks for listening to what I had to share

have a good nite!

That last part is my point.  Remember...he's OMNIPOTENT and ALL KNOWING.  He would know that they wouldn't be able to resist the temptation in their current design.  To say he wouldn't know that means he's not omnipotent.

You too!

It is a misinterpretation that we are guilty due to Adam and Eve's sin, and this will also explain the reason we are condemned on our own.

We existed long before we were created in the flesh. Billions of years or longer. In Genesis, the Earth became void and without form, meaning, it existed for a very long time, with life, before mankind was created. This will also explain why young earthers are wrong.

There was another age, before this, where we were in spirit, or energy bodies. We walked this Earth in those as well,but, we had free will at the creation of those bodies as well.

Satan was very powerful, and became desirous of worship. He claimed to us all that God was not loving, and that he was. That he was more deserving of worship and love. He did a very good job of it. Many of us followed Satan in his revolt. Many of us followed God, and many also sat around and decided since they had friends on both sides, they wouldn't get involved, just like pretty much all conflicts.

Satan was defeated and cast out. He is the only one originally condemned with no chance of salvation.

The creation or recreation in Genesis, putting us in flesh bodies, was a second chance for all.

The Bible says in order to be saved, you ,must be born again. This actually is translated to " through a bag of waters", or " through the womb". In other words, you must be born into the flesh, and you will have no knowledge of where you stood in the first age, therefore are not influenced by whether you followed Satan or God, or did nothing, so that it will not influence your decisions here.

The demons that were cast out with Satan, chose to follow him until the end, and not be born into the flesh.

When you go and read Genesis again, read that all creation was done in 6 days, and on the 7th God rested.

Mankind, which is written differently that 'The man", also has it's etymology in the word for Adam. What happened between the 6th day and the 8th day, is that mankind had been intermarrying with the fallen angels, and there were very few pure bloodlines for Jesus to be born through. This is why, you will see that on the 8th day, God created " The man Adam, and a wife, since there were none with the correct lineage left.


There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.


The word for the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is not generally used for a tree. It is used for spine, trunk etc.  Every name that Christ has, the devil also has an opposite name. One of the names of Christ is the Tree of Knowledge of Good, or of good fruit ( works ,, salvation ). The tree of the knowledge of good and evil, was Satan.

In the Hebrew, it states that Eve was totally and wholly seduced by Satan. The fruit was not fruit to eat, but forbidden fruit. In other words, she was seduced sexually by Satan, and, Adam also partook of the act. The apple thing was nothing but a euphemism commonly used for a safe word amongst mixed and polite company for sex.

When Eve had her two children, Adam was the father of Abel, while Satan was the father of Cain. The reason for Eve's seduction was to destroy the bloodline, to make it impure, where Christ could not come through an impure bloodline.

Cain's description was

This is why Cain rose up and killed Abel, who was to be the male that carried the pure line. To bring home the fact that mankind was created on the 6th, and Adam and Eve on the 8th, Cain left , and went into an already existing city, of which there were many. If Adam and Eve were the first of all mankind, there would be no cities already in existence.

In the new testament, Christ refers to the Kenites, which means descendants of Cain when he said ,

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.


Adam and Eve of course, had a third child, Seth, and Christ's lineage is traced to that.

By the time of the flood, Noah's family was the only one with a pure bloodline again. All others had been perverted. It doesn't say Noah was without sin, or perfect, it says, These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Perfect in his generations. Meaning, his bloodline was pure, and the only one left which Christ could be born through. The flood was to wipe out all of the people that had become evil and impure, and the bloodline of the fallen angels that had corrupted them. It was not a worldwide event, but rather a regional one. It did not destroy dinosaurs, they were destroyed when the Earth was shaken the first time, when it became void and without form in Genesis.

And the earth was without form, and void;
Vav..Erets......hayah..tohu..............bohu;

and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
....choshek...........................tehown

The word for "was" - hayah - is the same word used in Genesis 19:26 where Lot's wife was (hayah) turned into a pillar of salt. The implication is that the word hayah is not simply descriptive, but is active. Furthermore, the word "vav" for "and" can also be read as "but" depending on the context. In the Septuagint it has actually been translated this way. Thus Genesis 1:2 could, or should, read;

"But the earth became (or "had become") without form, and void".

“Without form, and void" has been translated from the Hebrew phrase "tohu vav bohu". The words tohu and bohu are also found in Isaiah 34:11, but is there interpreted differently;

Isaiah 34:11 "But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion (tohu) and the stones of emptiness (bohu)."

Thus “tohu” can also mean "confused", and “bohu” can mean “empty”. "Confused" and "without form" share in common a lack of order, in a place where there should be order. Perhaps, then, the text could be read as follows; "But the earth was in disarray, and empty".

Jeremiah 4:23-26 also uses the phrase "tohu vav bohu", as follows:

“I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form (tohu), and void (bohu); and the heavens, and they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger.”




realize the difference between adam (mankind) and Adam (Adam from the Garden).  We see in {Gen 6:3} that Adam (the word man used here is haa-Aadaam in the Manuscripts, meaning, The man Adam (8th day) and his progeny (offspring); not aadaam which simply means mankind, or the sixth day men and their families.  In the Hebrew language the word aadaam means mankind).  Now when you place the definite article (haa) and the particle ('eth) with aadaam, you have 'eth- haa-aadaam = This very same Man Adam.  It is very emphatic, it is speaking of one particular individual out of all.  eth- haa-aadaam occurs in {Gen 2:7,8,15} and {Gen 6:4} (list not comprehensive). These articles (haa) and particles ('eth) are not used in English as they are in Hebrew.  

   Hebrew word #853: 'eth
   Sign (marker) of the definite direct object, not translated in English but generally preceding and indicating the accusative case

Below we see that what is translated as 'daughters of men' is really 'daughters of the man Adam,' there is a difference!

   Gen 6:2
   2 That the sons of God [the fallen angels] saw the daughters of men [female progeny of The Adam (from the Garden)] that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.  (KJV)

In the Hebrew language there are four principle words rendered 'man' in our English translation of the Old Testament Hebrew Bible:

       Aadaam = denotes his origin, as from the dust of the "Adamah." man or mankind.

           Aadaam with the article it is haa-aadaam = The man Adam.  
           Aadaam with the article and particle it is eth- haa-aadaam = this very self-same man Aadaam (very emphatic).

       'Ish = in regards to sex, male.
       'Enosh = has regards to his infirmities, as physically mortal, and as to character, incurable. Know for their moral depravity.
       Geber = has regards to strength, a mighty man.

In {Gen 6:4} we see three out of the above four, as well as the Giants which is Napiliym or of the fallen:

   Gen 6:4
   4 There were giants [= Ha-Napiliym] in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men [=daughters of (the man) 'Adam], and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men [= Geber] which were of old, men of renown [= Enosh].  (KJV)


That's all I can piece together , I am very tired.

I urge you, to get a Strongs concordance, and a Companion Bible, and study it. Things will become clear, and it will all make sense.

All of the contradictions will not be so, and you will see that God has the big picture in mind. He cannot have some of his children destroying the family and his other children. He must protect his innocent ones , just as anyone would. It is with great pain He does that. This is why we've had so many chances and have still another if we've not heard the word.

He could have simply destroyed everyone that rose up against him, but He didn't. He allowed us to choose this world for a chance to be redeemed. When you look at it that this life is not the beginning, nor is it the end, everything falls into place. When we die, only the flesh is gone, we are still the energy based beings that we were before. In man's laws of physics, energy can neither be created or destroyed, only change states, and when we die,we will convert back to the same beings we were.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.


We were there when these bodies were formed for life on the Earth. Our image, we have the same likeness, and much of the same personality as before. We are who we are.

You do know that to an atheist, quoting scripture is like trying to kick water uphill.  If I had a book called "Liberal Jesus Jerk-fest 2015" and in it, it stated that god didn't exist, and I quoted that book to you saying "SEE!! Look here... it says god doesn't exist, therefore he doesn't!", you would reject it because you reject the source.  The same applies to an atheist when you quote the bible.  We know it's just a fairy tail novel and using it a source to prove your point will never change anyone's point of view.  

Another question: don't you christians think it's a little fortuitous that you just happened to be born in a time and location where christianity is the most popular religion, and that the religion of those around you, of the 4000 religions that have existed throughout time, is the correct one?

99% of you would be diehard mohammed sack-riders if you were born in the middle east and christianity would be the devil.  Your beliefs are those of your surroundings.  


*There are always outliers, I'm generally speaking of course.

We are blessed to be here.

Again, though, if you are born in a Muslim country, or any that does not believe in Christ as savior,  and do not hear the word of God in it's truth, or have had your head and heart hardened from birth, and you die, you are not condemned.

I posted all of that in order that it helps to make sense of some of the things that are commonly misinterpreted or mistranslated and passed on. Those things are stumbling blocks for a lot of people, and leave them with questions like , " Well if Adam and Eve were the first humans, where did the cities come from that Cain went to, where did the other people come from? " The answer is usually that Adam and Eve participated in incest and that all people came from them, but somehow there were people older than Cain that had built the city he went to, so how do you answer that?.


If this is not your stumbling block, then that is fine, it may help someone.

I would hope that if it does it does not bother you that I posted it. If there is no God, and there is nothing after this life, then it should he acceptable that it may help comfort some people to believe in such a fairy tale if it helps them cope in this world.

But, there is plenty of evidence in the historical and archeological record to back up vast swaths of things recorded in the Bible.

There are many prophecies that were written hundreds of years before Christ that came to pass, as well as prophecies that were written about other nations, other things, that came to pass.

Of course, there is always a way to explain just about anything away.


Let me ask you this.

Does electricity flow through our bodies?

Is that energy ?

If that is energy, what becomes of it after we die, where does it go, it can't just disappear, it has to go somewhere or into something, it can't be created or destroyed. That is basic Einstein.

Does that energy have an impact on who we are, what we think? If so, why, or if not, then what makes one human brain think differently , create different things, like different things, etc, why are we not all drones working for the system like ants? Why do we have individuality?

Since we have individuality, what purpose does it serve and who decided the purpose  and defined the differing personality types? Evolution? If we evolved into what we are, then wouldn't a smarter , more adaptable survival of the species method have been to evolve without so much free will to do our own thing, and rather be more like a more prosperous design like an insect that works only to reproduce, without any activity that is not beneficial to the whole hive ?


In other words, really, why are you who you are? Why does such a complex brain and set of emotions , and self awareness even exist, when a more efficient method would be to only be drones doing a specific organic job for preservation of the human race?

How did a series of millions of random chemical reactions with no control whatsoever react perfectly to create everything in the Universe?

No, it's not.

Our mainstream media and government did not support, lie about or help pay for the holocaust.  Not so for abortion.  Sponsored and paid for by our taxes and ignored or lied about by the mainstream media.

I know and believe it really is incomprehensible to you because even though the non fully formed baby could live outside the womb very easily at a certain point in pregnancy, you feel it is ok to kill it, carve it up and sell its body parts.

You would incinerate it..........barbeque it on a skewer...........make hot dogs out of it and feed the masses or any other thing you feel is beneficial to society after carving up the baby like a gutted pig.

As long as it is in the womb you do not view it as a life..........that is where we differ.

There should only be a short window of time when an abortion is allowable........once the fetus can survive out of the womb it has rights as a human being.

Now you have to have some empathy to understand what I am saying............not so sure you are able to comprehend this based on your current state of mind relative to abortions and human life.

You care only about the woman's rights to kill its progeny while others care about the progeny's rights to life after a certain point of development has been reached.............WHETHER inside or outside of the womb.

In the end, if you can look at the pictures of later term abortions and not be disgusted, you are devoid of empathy in this area and that is very sad IMHO.

Some true statements there and judgement will be harsh.

Christians are a very conflicted group.  On one hand they think they are commanded to obey Government.  On the other they think they are supposed to obey God.

They often confuse the two and always render unto the Caesar the things that are God's.

We are in agreement.  Once an average baby can survive outside of the womb without a million different machines while having less than a 10% chance to live, i would say it's too late for an abortion.  That mark is over 30 weeks.

Well now that IS GOOD TO HEAR!!

I think it is earlier than 30 weeks but at least you acknowledge the principle and agree with it.

I think with modern technology 30 weeks is a too long IMHO.

ETA:  So you DO HAVE empathy...........why the posts that make it seem you are such a hard liner with no care about the fetus/baby/progeny?

My stance has to do with the technology you mentioned.  In the future, I'm sure they would be able to grow a baby in a lab and the medical technology would make it viable from the moment a egg is fertilized.  That is not a life.  If it cannot, and has never had the ability to survive on it's own without the aid of technological advancements, you cannot consider it a life imo.  32 weeks really is the cut off to where a baby can be born and survive w/o needing a shitload of medical help and luck.

So is I lived in the Nazi era I had a duty to kill Nazis been if it meant I would die?   If I am not willing to die to stop an injustice then I am a wrong to call it an injustice?  Do I have to embrace everything I will not die to stop?  The logic of your post confuses me.

+1

It's an insult to Jews and others who were gassed by the Germans.  


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

I'm just "hear" for comments from the clueless.

I'd ask you what it is like to be so afraid of your own mind that you need the justification of a mob you falsely idolize to help you form an opinion. I'd ask you what it is like to think you derive authority and quality simply by attempting to emulate those you consider your betters. I'd ask you what it is like to be so very lost in the lack of fidelity of that with which you have sought to surround yourself.

 

I'd ask you why you have done all this, and more, and in so doing broken your own mind. However, that is the question to which I already have the answer, and I know that you do not. So instead of asking you things which you can not answer, I will pray for you. Then I will shake your dust from my feet.

Lots of points: let me address them to the best of my ability:
if you've ever killed an animal, you can watch that surplus of energy use itself up. Thats why a freshly killed animal will twitch/shake
Individuality can be witnessed throughout the animal kingdom. We aren't unique in that respect. You can have two dogs, brothers, born together, raised together, and they can have vastly different personalities. Emotions are nothing more than chemical reactions in the brain (love = oxytocin, etc). Every individual will have a different chemical make up, you then combine that with the environment that they are raised in, and that will determine a personality.  

In regards to the universe, it is far from perfect. It is absolute chaos. Galaxies collide all the time. Stars expand and then contract, and then explode. Most of the earth is not habitable (oceans, deserts, the poles, etc).  The best analogy I can think of is the puddle analogy.  I'll paraphrase: imagine a puddle becoming conscious one day and noticing that the depression in the ground fits him just perfectly.  He would then assume that the depression was made just for him, that there is no way that it would fit him as perfect as it does had it not been designed for him.  I think you can get my drift.

Edit: the reason I'm also an anti-theist and not just a "live and let live" atheist is that theist bring their stories into the voting booth (all faiths, not just Christianity).  Laws should be determined by facts and things that can be proven or argued logically, not by scripture.

Don't waste your breath praying.  

What the fuck are you rambling on about?  Is your aspergers acting up?

Holy shit you really are an aspie

the legal killing of humans the state has determined is "sub-human"

Ultimately the same thing.

Ironically more people in the US disapprove of abortion than germans who disapproved of the holocaust.

It is interesting to note that those who have not killed seem to hold themselves to be experts on the subject.

You mean a country with 300 million people have more dullards than a country with 50 million? The hell you say!

Fixed it for you.

Funny how the whole holocaust/abortion comparison becomes so clear when guys like Scold out themselves so easily.

They do adopt children--in droves.  The waiting lists for adoption are extremely long.

"No person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law."

Never mind

I'm on the side of most Christians but were not going to win the abortion debate by quoting scripture. Abortion is just as wrong as killing a five year old or an adult. I don't need a god to tell me that.

Science is our friend here. If any killing of innocent human beings is morally wrong (thank you judeo-christian values for that) so is abortion.

The only argument the left can muster is "its the law". Arguably even that is suspect.  Abortion's cornerstone (R v W and subsequent SCOTUS opinions) is founded on overreach by the court/judicial activism.

having killed adults, tell me why its wrong.

define innocent.  No morals, please.

Not really. Abortion is arguably more evil.
It has killed more than the national socialists, every victim (barring pregnant women in botched killings) has been innocent and the methods used are just as if not more cruel.

I'll give you that. My feels are rooted in religious tradition.

Innocent adults ... If I had to define that, legally those not convicted of a crime warranting capital punishment or those not warranting use of lethal force. My morals are somewhat arbitrary but I'll start with " people I havent killed and don't want to die"

Killing isn't wrong. Killing babies is wrong.

  He's owning you and your arguments...you're just to blind to see that.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, considered people of African descent inferior, and was admired by Adolf Hitler because of her eugenic viewpoints.  Sanger encouraged building of abortion clinics in black neighborhoods because it would eliminate more black people, removing a race she considered subhuman.  So tell me exactly HOW that is very different from Nazi death camps, specifically built to eliminate those Hitler thought inferior, the Jews?

 

It's not. Liberals and liberaltarians just don't like the glaring similarities.

I think everyone can agree that abortion is bad and all that.  The issue is nobody knowing what to do about it.  SCOTUS has declared that abortion is legal and the law of the land.  I still wouldn't compare abortion to the holocaust though.  Killing millions of conscious human beings who are aware of what's going on is different from killing the unborn who aren't even really self-aware yet.

who determines what is "a crime warranting capital punishment"?  Isn't that, again, a moral judgement?

already being an inconvenient child is "a crime warranting capital punishment" at the whim of the mother.

A child that's kicking and pushing away from getting from the tools eviscerating it inside a uterus isn't much different than the baby carried into a gas chamber.

I don't see the moral distinction. Besides, the government in that case determined it was legal as well.  

Carried in a mother's arms or carried in a uterus. They seem equally wrong to me. Maybe I have a screw loose.

Eta when I quoted you all that was showing up was your quote of the other guy, not the video.  Great minds think alike I guess.

If someone is anti-abortion yet does nothing to stop abortion (waving a sign doesn't count), then they have no way to criticize Germans who did nothing to stop the Holocaust, because according to anti-abortion activists, abortion and the Holocaust are morally the same.

So my point is that either these people (and I include myself here, I'm anti-abortion/pro-life) are hypocrites because they deride others for actions they won't take themselves, or they don't really believe that fetuses are fully human, because they're not taking action that they would take to protect someone who is unambiguously fully human (e.g. my kindergarten organ-harvesting example earlier ITT).  I''m not trolling, I'm trying to logically think through my beliefs.

Someone else earlier in the thread said that pro-life people are just that, pro-life, so they wouldn't kill someone else to protect a third party's life.  There are many gun-owners, many of which claim to be pro-life.  If so many have anti-abortion beliefs, and possess the capability to take action, then I'm surprised that violence against abortionists is so rare compared to what you'd think would be the case if those same activists followed their beliefs to the logical conclusion.