Animals and the Afterlife

Author: ludofl3x

Posts

Total: 320
#91
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
“As for my interpretation of Scripture, almost all Christians come to the same conclusion.”

Key word in your bible ignorant response, “interpretation” whereas you are NOT to interpret the bible to your perceived understanding: “Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation.” (2 Peter 1:20). Do you want to call Paul a LIAR?! Please, save us any further Devil Speak by spin doctoring the verse above with your Satanic mind numbing apologetics where what it literally says, is not what it really means, okay?!
LOL! I was making a my v yours interpretation. My interpretation is in accord with traditional methods of interpretation. YOURS is from your own mind. I notice you TOTALLY avoided any reference to your own interpretation. So take your foot out of your own mouth. 

Furthermore,  and again, there are 33000 DIFFERENT divisions of Christianity, therefore, why aren’t you one of the 32999 that are left instead of the Presbyterian Church that you have Satanically chosen?
Again I repeat, I have never said I was Presbyterian. You have simply allowed Harriet to lead you on in this belief. LOL! But believe whatever you will. 

“You on the other hand, make it up as you go along and no one has the same view as you.”

Your biblical ignorace is without bounds, because I can’t “make it up” since I am a LITERALIST and accept what Jesus said, is in fact, what He said!  2+2=4. Whereas, as shown, you Satanically spin doctor away what Jesus’ inspired word LITERALLY states by using your PRESBIE crystal ball and decoder ring!  This is blatantly obvious since your church is only one division of over 32999 left of your faith! Hello, anybody home today?
LOL!. At least I can spell.  You do make it up. You are not a literalist. You are an imbecile. 

“After all, how does knowing what denomination I am change your answers?”

We already know what division of Christianity that you swallowed, and that is the ungodly Presbyterian Church that we will definitely be talking about in the near future at your continued humiliation.  It is NOT the answers, but the questions that are to be asked, understand?
Do you? And who told you? It was not me.  LOL! Surely you are not going to rely upon the words of Harikrish. Has he not been banished for another month because of his delightful and well thought out lies? But of course, if you are going to trust the words of a known liar, why would that surprise me?

Oh well, we can explicitly see that your time off did not help you in any way whatsoever because you still operate with your Satanic apologetic and hermeneutic spin doctoring modus operandi!  Do you need more time off before you try in vain to engage me again? Yes? Maybe?  Seriously, I do not like to engage the already severly wounded like you in any discussions, but like Jesus’ inspired word states, i am to show you sympathy. (1 Peter 3:8)
I am still waiting for you to actually say something that NEEDS a response. 
#92
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
TRADESECRETS … “DOUBLE SPEAK” QUOTES THAT STATE “WORKS ARE NOT NEEDED” FOR SALVATION, TO WIT:

“Works are not needed for salvation. God's grace is needed for our salvation.” (POST #58)

“We are saved by grace not by works lest anyone boast. Ephesians 2:8-9.” (POST #46) 

“We are saved by grace, through faith.” (POST #46)

“We don't need to do things to get to heaven” (POST #35, admitting “NO WORKS”)

“I said we don't need works to earn salvation” (POST #58)

“So, you do think that salvation is by works. OK. I hold to the view that God saves us.” (POST #35)

“Yet, our good works wont get us to heaven just like our bad works wont” (POST #46)

LET ME REPEAT. I absolutely agree I said these words - and will repeat them again and again and again. 


TRADESECRETS “DOUBLE SPEAK” QUOTES THAT NOW STATE “WORKS ARE NEEDED” FOR SALVATION, TO WIT:

“But we are saved unto good works” (POST #46)

“Christians are commanded to do good works” (POST #58)

“but that true faith is always accompanied by works” (POST #46)

AGAIN LET ME REPEAT. I absolutely said these words and will repeat them again and again. But let me add one thing. I never said they were needed for salvation. That is your lie and misrepresentation. 

I have said - as I did above - that we are saved by God's grace. I quoted Paul's words from Ephesians 2 that works don't save. I have also said which ninny here has repeated in the second list that true Christian will demonstrate good works. Grace saves us - UNTO good works. Grace first - good works second. Is this a contradiction? NO. 

Christians cannot save themselves. It is a free gift of God. It is done by Christ on the cross. Salvation belongs to the Lord. We are incapable of saving our selves. We were dead in sin. Dead people cannot do anything including good works. God saves us. We are saved by grace through faith. 

Yet, when people become Christians, as James rightly says, good works will accompany the Christian life. We cannot continue in a Christian life and not do good works.  but good works is not a CONDITION of obtaining salvation - - it is the fruit of salvation. Good works is the fruit of being saved. It is not the root that saves. Grace is the root that saves. Good works is the evidence that the tree / person is now alive and is capable of bearing fruit. 


#93
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas



TRADESECRETS .. “DOUBLE SPEAK” QUOTE THAT STATES ONE CANNOT PLEASE GOD, TO WIT:

“We cannot please God” (POST #58)

Again let me repeat  - TRADESECRET wrote this. 


TRADESECRETS … “DOUBLE SPEAK” QUOTE THAT STATES THAT YOU NOW CAN PLEASE GOD, TO WIT:


Yes, we please God because we are ALREADY saved. Not to get into heaven. (Post #58)

We please God by obeying his commandments - not to earn salvation to get into heaven. (POST #58)

“We please God by obeying his commandments - not to earn salvation to get into heaven”  (POST #46)

AGAIN LET ME REPEAT - TS wrote this. And is very proud of what he wrote. 


The problem for Brother DTs is that his DTs are kicking in. He just missed the obvious. 

No one can please God. This is a biblical given. Yet, once a person is born again with the Spirit of God, they are obligated to please God. The difference between the two situations are - one is without the Spirit of God - and the second has the Spirit of God. Unless, one is born again, it is impossible to please God. Yet once a person is born from above, born with the Spirit, then what is impossible becomes possible.  open your eyes, stop and think. 

#94
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.
Pertaining to the runaway FAKE Christian Tradesecret ,

It is truly sad to watch the FAKE Christian Tradesecret unravel before our very eyes, and in front of Jesus as well (Hebrews 4:13), and succumb to his division of Christianity being a Presbyterian, because as embarrassingly shown, he runs away from his division of the faith instead of defending it as Jesus proposed ( Titus 1:9, 2 Corinthians 10:5, 1 Peter 3:15) 

Yes, we TRUE Christians have encountered many FAKE runaway Christians like TRADESECRET over the years in forums like this, where they were shown to be Burger King Christians, where they Satanically want their bible “their way” through Satanic apologetics and hermeneutics, instead of "Jesus’ way," through what Jesus said literally to the multitudes without any spin doctoring whatsoever!


TRADESECRET RUNAWAY POST #90:  Within this post it explicitly shows Tradesecret running away once again from biblical questions with child like sophmoric responses. What did we expect from a FAKE sexual deviant Christian?



TRADESECRET RUNAWAY POST #91:  Within this post, poor ol’ Tradesecret scrapes for what scraps are left for him in asserting that I interpret scripture wrong, where in fact, I read it LITERALLY where you cannot “interpret” it! HELLO?  Whereas Tradesecret uses Satanic apologetics and hermeneutics, decoder rings, and crystal balls to make the scriptures anything that he needs them to be at any given time. Therefore, he is guilty of this verse: “For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.” (1 Timothy 4:3)



TRADESECRET RUNAWAY POST #92:  As shown once again, Another example of Tradesecret making a mockery of the bible is his vain refutation to his Satanic “double speak” that I have shown at his expense.  As if his initial double speak wasn’t enough regarding “works,” READ HIS 4 PARAGRAPHS of mish mash jabberwocky to why speaking out of both sides of his mouth is somehow acceptable!  Priceless Devil Speak!  



RUNAWAY TRADESECRET POST #93:  Again, Tradesecret trashes the scriptures when he stated that no one can please god even though I had shown that the scriptures say that you are to please our serial killer Yahweh/Jesus God in my post #54!!!  Do you see why Tradesecret is an actual minon of Satan that was sent here to cause discord amongst the Christian community?! Sure you can.


What should scare the death of any TRUE Christian at DebateArt, is the fact that Tradesecret preaches his Satanic version of the Bible to others! YES, can you imagine the damage he is doing to the equally of simple minds of the faith by postulating his Devil Speak to others in the name of Satan???!  His double speak alone to others will take years to repair when they finally find out that Tradesecrets knowledge of the scriptures were from being a minion of Satan!  



.

#95
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.

TRADESECRET RUNAWAY POST # 95:  Oh, oh, wait a minute, there is no post #95 from him!  Why isn’t Tradesecret addressing what I had shown at the end of my post #87, in that he is Hell Bound upon his earthly demise because of being an ADMITTED SEXUAL DEVIANT, and he wants to be called a Christian? HELL NO!


Tradesecrets sickening and utterly disgusting ungodly sexual deviant quotes in front of the membership and Jesus (Hebrews 4:13):

“Yeah, Us Indians - and I can say I am Indian because I lived there for a while - have a serious problem with sex. We are deviants - but this is ok - because we are just modeling our goddess. She would be proud of us. I am not proud - but she would.”

“They are quite nice. We meet lots of other persons who share our sexual deviancies - it is like going home. All of our brothers are there - and dads and uncles.”




What does Jesus' inspired words say about Tradesecrets disgusting sexual deviancy and his outcome upon his demise?!

“But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” (Revelation 21:8)

As an absolute, the sexually immoral person like Tradesecret will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur upon his demise! 

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,” (1 Corinthians 6:9)

As an absolute, do not be deceived, the sexually immoral like Tradesecret will not inherit the kingdom of God!

“Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” (1 Corinthians 6: 18-20)

As an absolute, Tradesecret DID NOT flee from sexual immortality as he continued to slap Jesus in the face because his body is a temple of Christ that was bought for a price!

Tradesecrets lack of Biblical intellect has to understand that our Yahweh/Jesus did not, I repeat, did not create Hell, and not plan on using it as Jesus supports by sending His creation to Hell in this one of many instances! Jesus stated: “My friends, don’t be afraid of people. They can kill you, but after that, there is nothing else they can do. God is the one you must fear. Not only can he take your life, but he can throw you into hell. God is certainly the one you should fear!” (Luke 12:4-5)



Since Jesus admits there is a Hell that He created (Colossians 1:16 ), and people like Tradesecret performing disgusting sexual immorality acts are going there upon their death, I then pity poor Tradesecret upon his demise.

Jesus stated: “And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Jesus stated: “So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 13:49-50)

Jesus' inspired words stated: “The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 13:41-42)



Now, if Tradesecret steps in the proverbial poo again and brings forth the “Forgiveness Doctrine” where everyone is saved nonetheless, then barring the fact that there is no incentive NOT to sin under this doctrine, then Tradesecret outright calls Jesus the Christ a LIAR in the above passages which equals blaspheme to the extreme towards Jesus!  Do you think that Tradesecret is this stupid to do this ungodly act in calling Jesus a LIAR? We shall see at his expense once again. The irony is the fact that Tradesecret should follow this passage to save any further humiliation here at DebateArt! "Even fools are thought wise if they keep silent, and discerning if they hold their tongues."  (Proverbs 17:28)



.








#96
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.
TRADESECRET BLATANTLY LYING ONCE AGAIN IN HIS POST #91!!! : “Again I repeat, I have never said I was Presbyterian. You have simply allowed Harriet to lead you on in this belief.”

TRADESECRET DIRECT QUOTE AGAINST HIS QUOTE ABOVE: “Harikrish suggested I was Presbyterian, I never denied it. I merely mentioned that I don't see it as a relevant consideration.”

TRADESECRET DIRECT QUOTE #36:  “I am not ashamed of my church. Nor is the Presbyterian Church hell bound.”

As blatantly shown above, Tradesecret LIED when he stated that he was not a PRESBIE in his post #91!  Now, let's see some more of his insidious Devil Speak to try and weasel his way out of his direct statements above showing that he is a PRESBIE, when he said that he was not!  Lets prepare ourselves for some more lame excuses why his direct comments above are not to be taken LITERALLY!  This should be quite the comical event as usual with his last ditch efforts of the past!  Who has the popcorn concession for this event? Who as the beer concession for this event? WAITING!


In closing the godly humiliation of Tradesecret, he is shown to be biblically challenged, very predictable in being biblically inept, a blatant LIAR, a minion of Satan, a Burger King Christian where he wants his bible "his way" instead of "Jesus' way," a truly FAKE Christian, a Christian that talks out of both sides of his mouth in contradicting "double speak," a Christian who shows contradicting biblical passages, and who TRUE Christians should stay far away from as the Bible so states in the following passages, Titus 3:10, Romans 16:17, and 2 Timothy 3:5!





.




#97
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
It is truly sad to watch the FAKE Christian Tradesecret unravel before our very eyes, and in front of Jesus as well (Hebrews 4:13), and succumb to his division of Christianity being a Presbyterian, because as embarrassingly shown, he runs away from his division of the faith instead of defending it as Jesus proposed ( Titus 1:9, 2 Corinthians 10:5, 1 Peter 3:15) 
You don't realise it do you? Oh well, I suppose it may dawn on you one day, but probably not. I have not run away once, unlike you in https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2301/jesus-condemns-entire-cities-to-dreadful-deaths-in-hell. I have nothing to hide. I don't need to fall into line just because you abuse me. I have not said I am a Presbyterian, no matter what spin you put on it. Whatever I am is actually none of your business and I aim to keep it that way.  I do not shy away from my faith. You on the other do not demonstrate any good fruits which leads to only one conclusion Matthew 7:15-21; Matthew 12: 37. 

Yes, we TRUE Christians have encountered many FAKE runaway Christians like TRADESECRET over the years in forums like this, where they were shown to be Burger King Christians, where they Satanically want their bible “their way” through Satanic apologetics and hermeneutics, instead of "Jesus’ way," through what Jesus said literally to the multitudes without any spin doctoring whatsoever!
I do not use spin in relation to the Bible. That I don't agree with you is not evidence of the same. Jesus was not a literalist. Jesus said "I am the door". He said I am the way and the truth. He said I am the bread of life. He said I am the everlasting water. He said I am the good shepherd. He said I am the resurrection. None of those things are to be taken literally, but all metaphorically. 

POST #90:  Within this post it explicitly shows Tradesecret running away once again from biblical questions with child like sophmoric responses.
Only to someone who cannot read English. What is says is that you wrote nothing that needed a response to. 

#91:  Within this post, poor ol’ Tradesecret scrapes for what scraps are left for him in asserting that I interpret scripture wrong, where in fact, I read it LITERALLY where you cannot “interpret” it! HELLO?  Whereas Tradesecret uses Satanic apologetics and hermeneutics, decoder rings, and crystal balls to make the scriptures anything that he needs them to be at any given time. Therefore, he is guilty of this verse: “For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.” (1 Timothy 4:3)
Now here we really do see garbage out of your mouth.  The fact is - you don't even interpret it literally. You interpret it according to your own distorted mindset. 


#92:  As shown once again, Another example of Tradesecret making a mockery of the bible is his vain refutation to his Satanic “double speak” that I have shown at his expense.  As if his initial double speak wasn’t enough regarding “works,” READ HIS 4 PARAGRAPHS of mish mash jabberwocky to why speaking out of both sides of his mouth is somehow acceptable!  
LOL! 


#93:  Again, Tradesecret trashes the scriptures when he stated that no one can please god even though I had shown that the scriptures say that you are to please our serial killer Yahweh/Jesus God in my post #54!!! 
You have not actually shown anything except you are unable to argue or form an argument. 



#98
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
# 95:  Oh, oh, wait a minute, there is no post #95 from him!  Why isn’t Tradesecret addressing what I had shown at the end of my post #87, in that he is Hell Bound upon his earthly demise because of being an ADMITTED SEXUAL DEVIANT, and he wants to be called a Christian? HELL NO!
I don't have to address lies and fabrications. I don't have to respond to statements you make that have no basis. I don't have to respond to your rhetoric. I deny I made any comments in relation to being a sexual deviant. Harriet had been proven and banned for making false statements on numerous occasions. Hence I don't feel a need to reply any more than this. And I wont. 














#99
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



Tradesecret,

YOUR QUOTE: "I deny I made any comments in relation to being a sexual deviant."


YOUR QUOTES THAT SAY DIFFERENT YOU DID SAY YOU WERE A SEXUAL DEVIANT:


“Yeah, Us Indians - and I can say I am Indian because I lived there for a while - have a serious problem with sex. We are deviants - but this is ok - because we are just modeling our goddess. She would be proud of us. I am not proud - but she would.”

“They are quite nice. We meet lots of other persons who share our sexual deviancies - it is like going home. All of our brothers are there - and dads and uncles.”



Tradesecret, you are excused once again for being an outright LIAR!



.





#100
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.
Tradesecret, the runaway FAKE Christian,

Your refutations are waning, they are getting weaker with every subsequent post of yours, deep down you know that you are only bringing a Boy Scout pocket knife to my Abrams M-1 fully loaded tank in our discussions!

Now, what part of this statement of mine relative to your true MO here on DebateArt didn't you understand?  In closing the godly humiliation of Tradesecret, he is shown to be biblically challenged, very predictable in being biblically inept, a blatant LIAR, a minion of Satan, a Burger King Christian where he wants his bible "his way" instead of "Jesus' way," a truly FAKE Christian, a Christian that talks out of both sides of his mouth in contradicting "double speak," a Christian who shows contradicting biblical passages, and who TRUE Christians should stay far away from as the Bible so states in the following passages, Titus 3:10, Romans 16:17, and 2 Timothy 3:5!

You're a joke in calling yourself an assumed Christian, and I will continue to show you to be one of the most FAKE hypocritical Christians upon this forum, understood?


.


#101
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
YOUR QUOTE: "I deny I made any comments in relation to being a sexual deviant."


YOUR QUOTES THAT SAY DIFFERENT YOU DID SAY YOU WERE A SEXUAL DEVIANT:


“Yeah, Us Indians - and I can say I am Indian because I lived there for a while - have a serious problem with sex. We are deviants - but this is ok - because we are just modeling our goddess. She would be proud of us. I am not proud - but she would.”

“They are quite nice. We meet lots of other persons who share our sexual deviancies - it is like going home. All of our brothers are there - and dads and uncles.”



Tradesecret, you are excused once again for being an outright LIAR!
Again I deny I made any comments in relation to being a sexual deviant. If you don't have the capacity to understand what was being expressed in those passages, then that is your problem. I have clearly explained the context, the hyperbole, the particular type of language - and indeed even the point of all of those passages. Harikrish was trolling Ethang. His logic was "since Ethang at one time lived in Africa, he is an African". My rhetoric which as in a conversation with Ethang was a total mocking of Harikrish's logic. This is why I laughed when he read what I wrote and then repeated it on the previous board. Everytime he repeated it, he put another nail in his coffin. Everyone could see exactly how bad his logic was and the funny thing is Harriet could not see he was simply piling poo on his head everytime he spammed and spammed. I know your logic is bad and that you don't have much of a brain, but when I see you repeating it here - I laughed so hard. Harikrish is using his second language - you on the other hand pretend to know this one. Whereas I thought Harriet had problems, now it occurs to me that compared to you - Harriet has lots of excuses. 
#102
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Your refutations are waning, they are getting weaker with every subsequent post of yours, deep down you know that you are only bringing a Boy Scout pocket knife to my Abrams M-1 fully loaded tank in our discussions!
Not waning. It is just that you have not produced even a half decent argument. You have resorted to attacking my character. Any half way decent debater knows using ad hominin attacks are evidence you have lost the discussion. 

Now, what part of this statement of mine relative to your true MO here on DebateArt didn't you understand?  In closing the godly humiliation of Tradesecret, he is shown to be biblically challenged, very predictable in being biblically inept, a blatant LIAR, a minion of Satan, a Burger King Christian where he wants his bible "his way" instead of "Jesus' way," a truly FAKE Christian, a Christian that talks out of both sides of his mouth in contradicting "double speak," a Christian who shows contradicting biblical passages, and who TRUE Christians should stay far away from as the Bible so states in the following passages, Titus 3:10, Romans 16:17, and 2 Timothy 3:5!
You have not shown any such thing. All you have revealed is that you do not know how to read the bible or apply it adequately in pretty much any situation. You have also revealed that you are iconoclastic - atheist - and your intentions are wholly unholy. 


You're a joke in calling yourself an assumed Christian, and I will continue to show you to be one of the most FAKE hypocritical Christians upon this forum, understood?
Actually I don't care whether you consider me a Christian or not, since it is you who is the fake. You have not been able to even pretend to be a Christian. What is sad however, that as an atheist, you think that you have the ability to mock Christianity and its God.  This is another reason why the religion of Atheism is pathetic. When holders of it think it is ok to misrepresent other religions in the name of fun, it really reveals the depth of their depravity. 
#103
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,618
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
in John 7. The passage indicates Jesus says to the disciples - you go up to the feast. I am not going up to the feast. However, after his brothers had gone up, he went up also, privately. 


I am just reading the NIV. I am not changing words - quoting them infact.

No you are not. But you will keep trying until you find a version that suits your narrative.... as all Christians do when on the backfoot.





However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret.


Nope, no "private" mentioned in the New International Version there my friend.

#104
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
in John 7. The passage indicates Jesus says to the disciples - you go up to the feast. I am not going up to the feast. However, after his brothers had gone up, he went up also, privately. 


I am just reading the NIV. I am not changing words - quoting them infact.

No you are not. But you will keep trying until you find a version that suits your narrative.... as all Christians do when on the backfoot.





However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret.


Nope, no "private" mentioned in the New International Version there my friend.
hi Stephen,

you are right, I was not quoting from the NIV (84 ) version. I thought I was and I made an error. It is the bible I use in preparing sermons. When I looked it up because I knew I had not made it up - I was surprised at my mistake. for that I sincerely apologise. Yet, the bible I use for my own personal devotions is the ESV. and private is the word used in that translation. 

since I knew I had read it - I used it that way. There was no sense in trying to hide or to be deceptive. I have no reason to do so. I have no axe to grind here anyway. I told you that I don't consider that this was a lie. I accept that others will disagree with me. I also said that some manuscripts actually add the word yet. I did not want to rely on that myself, even though it legitimately answers the question.

for the record I am not trying to backstep. Just because that is your experience does not mean it applies to all people. Or to all Christians. 


#105
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.

Tradesecret, the runaway FAKE Christian,

YOUR PATHETIC LAST DITCH EFFORT QUOTE POST #102: “You have not shown any such thing. All you have revealed is that you do not know how to read the bible or apply it adequately in pretty much any situation. You have also revealed that you are iconoclastic - atheist - and your intentions are wholly unholy. “

Now you have to resort to implying that I am this Iconoclast character? LOL!!!  Whats next to try and save what credence you have left in this forum from being a blatant “double speak” biblical ignorant minion of Satan as shown explicitly within this thread?! 

It is no wonder that Jesus has sent me here to DebateArt, to follow your Satanic Devil Speak around this forum and to correct you in front of the membership at your continued expense!



.

#106
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
"For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven."

#107
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
It may be that all dogs go to heaven.


Only God knows.

#108
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,618
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
hi Stephen,

you are right, I was not quoting from the NIV (84 ) version. I thought I was and I made an error. It is the bible I use in preparing sermons. When I looked it up because I knew I had not made it up - I was surprised at my mistake. for that I sincerely apologise. Yet, the bible I use for my own personal devotions is the ESV. and private is the word used in that translation. 

since I knew I had read it - I used it that way. There was no sense in trying to hide or to be deceptive. I have no reason to do so. I have no axe to grind here anyway. I told you that I don't consider that this was a lie. I accept that others will disagree with me. I also said that some manuscripts actually add the word yet. I did not want to rely on that myself, even though it legitimately answers the question.

for the record I am not trying to backstep. Just because that is your experience does not mean it applies to all people. Or to all Christians. 

Strange that of the 29 accepted versions of the bible and after your blinding schoolboy 'mistake' that you managed to find one of only two modern

bibles that actually use the word "private "  and not "secret"  to fit your narrative as do all the other 27 versions ... just as I predicted above that you would do.

It is the bible I use in preparing sermons.......Yet, the bible I use for my own personal devotions is the ESV. and private is the word used in that translation. 

So let me understand this. You have a bible (the New International Version) that you use to prepare and preach sermons to your flock Which uses the word "secret" and not "private" but on the other hand you refer to another bible (the English Standard Version) for you own personal devotions?
  Why would you do that? 

Do you see my problem with your explanation? One the one hand you are teaching , in your sermons, the original wording and using the word "secret" yet you suggest above that you do not recognise this word as the correct text and prefer and accept the word " private" that isn't in any of the other accepted scriptures bar one other modern version? 


#109
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
So let me understand this. You have a bible (the New International Version) that you use to prepare and preach sermons to your flock Which uses the word "secret" and not "private" but on the other hand you refer to another bible (the English Standard Version) for you own personal devotions?
  Why would you do that? 

Do you see my problem with your explanation? One the one hand you are teaching , in your sermons, the original wording and using the word "secret" yet you suggest above that you do not recognise this word as the correct text and prefer and accept the word " private" that isn't in any of the other accepted scriptures bar one other modern version? 
Not so difficult. 

I prefer the ESV. Prior to my studies, I used the NKJV. 

Yet the church I work at - has pew bibles which are NIV (1984)  - this means that there are somewhere near 400 pew bibles in the church that parishioners use each week and I actually like each of them to be reading the same translation at the same time in church. It is helpful when pointing out verses for them to follow along with. It would be silly of me to prepare from my ESV when I will be using the NIV translation in church. I actually have most translations at home on my desk. I like to read all of them to get a broad picture. I also use a Greek Text and a Hebrew Text - and sometimes when necessary the Aramaic one as well. 

It is common practice for many pastors to preach from the NIV and use other translations in their private devotions. Nothing unusual at all in that. 

As you would undoubtedly be aware, translations vary depending upon the purpose of the translators. The NIV is a translation devoted towards a more contemporary understanding of the text. The NKJV and the ESV are more literal translations.  But then there are also the very broad translations too, the Amplified text comes to mind. 

I answered the question - I gave my response. You don't have to agree with me. Totally up to yourself. But at the end of the day, I was telling the truth and for me that is what matters.  For the record, private or secret amount to the same thing in the context. (admittedly outside of the context they can be very different things) You however want to extend the meaning of the word to include "disguised". That of course is up to yourself completely. It wont win any awards of course.  but it is up to you. the other thing is I don't have an axe to grind whereas you do. You have an interpretation of the entire bible which is your own - and any little detail which can lead you in that direction - you jump at with both hands. Again entirely up to yourself - not necessarily to do with finding the truth of course, but one which I am sure will satisfy you somehow. 

At the end of the day - if you just want to push your views - go for it. If you want to dialogue - I am happy to assist. I just think that conversation and discussion is a two way street. 
#110
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Who created the words?

Who created the languages?

Who are the authors?

Who makes the alterations?

#111
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret




.
Tradesecret the runaway FAKE Christian,

YOUR EVER SO WANTING MAKE BELIEVE REFUTATION TO YOUR SEXUAL DEVIANCY IN POST #101:  “Again I deny I made any comments in relation to being a sexual deviant. If you don't have the capacity to understand what was being expressed in those passages, then that is your problem. I have clearly explained the context, the hyperbole, the particular type of language - and indeed even the point of all of those passages. Harikrish was trolling Ethang. His logic was "since Ethang at one time lived in Africa, he is an African". My rhetoric which as in a conversation with Ethang was a total mocking of Harikrish's logic. This is why I laughed when he read what I wrote and then repeated it on the previous board. Everytime he repeated it, he put another nail in his coffin. Everyone could see exactly how bad his logic was and the funny thing is Harriet could not see he was simply piling poo on his head everytime he spammed and spammed. I know your logic is bad and that you don't have much of a brain, but when I see you repeating it here - I laughed so hard. Harikrish is using his second language - you on the other hand pretend to know this one. Whereas I thought Harriet had problems, now it occurs to me that compared to you - Harriet has lots of excuses.”

I have seen some FAKE Christian spin doctoring over the years, but I have to admit, YOU TAKE THE CAKE, congratulations!  Nobody is that stupid, EVEN YOU, to portend that you were allegedly mocking Harikrish and facetiously stating you were a sexual deviant, without it actually being true! Furthermore, the alleged mockery of Harikrish's logic was repeated on the previous board, but you did not give us the verification of this “other board,” which is so conveniant once again, isn't it?!  You are such an outright ruse! LOL

In addressing your post #101 relative to you trying in vain to Satanically spin doctor your sexual deviancy away in front of Jesus (Hebrews 4:13) and the membership, and understanding that it is embarrassing for you to do this ungodly act, I will not further humiliate you upon this topic, but will let Jesus take out His revenge towards you upon your earthly demise, praise!

 "For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” and again, “The Lord will judge his people.” (Hebrews 10:30)



YOUR QUOTE TO ME OF AN AD HOMININ: “I know your logic is bad and that you don't have much of a brain”

YOUR QUOTE IN POST #102 RELATIVE TO ME: “You have resorted to attacking my character. Any half way decent debater knows using ad hominin attacks are evidence you have lost the discussion.”

Whoops!  Using your definition above relative to ad hominin attacks, and stating I have only half a brain, is therefore your own evidence that you are losing the discussion right back at you!  As if we didn't know this already. Get it? Huh?   Tradesecret, why are you making it so easy for me in showing you to be a hypocrite outside of Christianity as well?  Priceless!



.

#112
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@ludofl3x
I don’t know, but I can say it will not be heaven unless my dogis there.

Topic's author
#113
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@Paul
Now you're talking about the problem with heaven in general, a topic I find fascinating but can't get Christians to honestly engage. It's been three weeks and I miss the shit out of my dog still, that I can assure you. I am sure everyone who has had a dog and been through it feels the same. But there's no support for dogs going to heaven or having souls. Only angel horses, whatever the fuck that is. :)

#114
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@ludofl3x
Animals do not have souls as humans do. It seems like a safe conclusion to say that there will be animals in heaven. However, the Bible is not explicitly clear on whether particular animals will be there. I tend to think they just cease to exist since they do not have a human soul, but they certainly won't go to hell. Since they don't have souls, they are not culpable for moral choices and cannot be punished in that way.

To put my view another way, there will likely be animals in heaven, just not the animals that die in this lifetime. This may not be a particularly comforting answer, but we can find comfort in knowing that there is no sorrow, grief, or death in heaven.

But that still leaves one critical question: Even if your dog did go to heaven, would you be going there to meet it?

19 days later

#115
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Animals do not have souls as humans do.
How have you determined that animals do not have souls?

How have you determined that humans do?

What exactly is a soul? I have never seen one.

#116
Harikrish
Harikrish's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 550
2
1
3
Harikrish's avatar
Harikrish
2
1
3
-->
@secularmerlin
Animals do not have souls as humans do.
How have you determined that animals do not have souls?

How have you determined that humans do?

What exactly is a soul? I have never seen one.


How many people have  seen your butthole?  Yet you would like everyone to believe you have one. Same difference!!!
#117
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@secularmerlin
A soul is immaterial so it cannot be seen. What is logic? No one can see logic, yet you are using it to question whether my assertion about souls is reasonable. A soul can most simply be explained as the immaterial part of us that our thoughts, emotions, desires, and will stem from.

I believe the only way to explain human existence is a duality of material and immaterial components, or body and soul. If we are only a material body, then immaterial concepts such as logic or morals are inconsequential and should have no bearing on our existence since matter is all that matters.

That is just a brief summary of a rational argument for the existence of a soul. All other distinctions between the immaterial aspects of animals and humans are drawn from the Bible.
#118
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
A soul is immaterial
Please define immaterial. Even radiation is a part of the material universe. Even logic is only a product of brain states which are observable and measurable as electrical and chemical signals in the brain. If that is all you mean by immaterial then it must still be demonstrated as radiation and brain activity have been.
#119
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@secularmerlin
Perhaps let me try to illustrate my point by asking a question.

Could you give me one reason why the Nazis should not have attempted to purify the human gene pool that does not essentially come down to "because someone else didn't like it"?
#120
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
As human beings it is beneficial to the survival of the race as a whole if we display a healthy altruism. This is a biological issue not an issue of dislike.