Why Should Jesus Love Me?
Huh

Garland, TX

#542390 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah it is a simpler explanation that the just popped into existence on its own, with all the necessary gravitational forces and the proximity to the sun and the necessary air for breathing and life formed from non-life and turned into hundreds of thousands of different species both female and male for reproducing. And then not just the Earth but an entire self-sustaining and working universe just "poof" happened from some fluke cosmic implosion
Yeah that is much more rationale and simpler of an explanation than something greater than ourselves created it since all life we know of was created
(rolls eyes)
Are you even listening to yourself?
Your argument is basically
"you guys believe some God created the universe, how ridiculous. Clearly the universe just popped into existence"
Yeah, you free-thinkers got us beat hands-down!
Special pleading and an argument from ignorance. You can pop anything in place of your invisible friend in your "simple explanation" and the meaning doesn't change.

Trying to "solve" a mystery with an even bigger, but wholly ambiguous, culturally-conditioned mystery is ridiculous. As soon as you find a scientist that claims "poof" provide the evidence. Your ignorance and anger are appalling.
Huh

Garland, TX

#542391 Jun 1, 2013
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are of the devil.
And that is why you need medication.
Huh

Garland, TX

#542392 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Just one time be your your man
If you have to go back to "us" for the rest of the day I will understand
But try making just one post speaking for yourself
Its not such a terrible thing to be yourself, even when that self is you!
You don't need anonymous people to prop you up.
Yeah I make fun of you because you are insecure and retired to Mexico and are a bigot and that is only because that stuff is true! But so is what I am telling you now. This co-dependency thing you got going on isn't healthy. You can keep your pretend movement alive in your head and still be your own man. Not everything you say has to be propped up.
Be like Mikey with the cereal, just try it, you will like it
If you don't, you can go right back to saying "we" instead of "I" , I promise:)
You still can't support your insanity on its merits. Check. What was it like being a bottom in prison?

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#542393 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Soooo...nothing anybody paid you to do or anything that needed peer review. Anybody can pay a publisher to publish a book for them. And anybody can turn in opinions to newspapers or magazines!
Big deal, I could go write a book or turn in opinion pieces
But if it makes you feel better..Congratulations!
Thanks.....dude.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#542394 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
I am sure Christ being around is a source of tremendous comfort for his grandmother
(T) Peace
Edit

Chris
Huh

Garland, TX

#542395 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
He advises anyone to turn their suffering over to God instead of resort to violence
Turn the other cheek, the meek shall inherit the earth, he who finishes last will be first and so on
Stuff you would have learned if you were ever in the faith but I don't believe you were since you knowledge of the Bible is terrible and you clearly have lied about stories involving priests from them stealing to showing up bashing gays at funerals while trying to sell tithes
But it is a good message.
It is not one that is second nature to me clearly but to what end is there to save the body and risk the soul?
Its a good message. If only everybody followed it, then there would be no need for it
But you don't believe you have a soul or in an after-life do you? You think you are the greatest intellect the universe has to offer and there is nothing past mortal life
In truth I pity you free-thinker because your mind is still in bondage
It doesn't have to be religion per se but open your mind and experience spirituality. Not the definition you guys have changed it to mean so you can feel less ostracized but real spirituality. But i know you never will.
So, no free will for victims. Check.
Huh

Garland, TX

#542396 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
So no verses huh?
What it does is recognize a practice of the times without condoning or condemning it
When Jesus says if someone strikes you to turn the other cheek, He never specifically addresses the morality of the striking. Is your argument that Jesus condones going around and punching people?
Is would have to be right? Because the Bible tells a slave to turn their unjust suffering over to the Lord. That is basically saying turn the other cheek. And you have concluded that must mean the Bible is condoning slavery
I see you are talking as "us" now too!
Its an insecurity thing right?
I wouldn't know, I have always been my own man
Actually, someone posted reams of verses on slavery. Ugh.
Huh

Garland, TX

#542397 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet you guys have consistently made the argment one can't compare bigotry since someone is born black or gay but they aren't born Christian
Yet now when it suits you you want to say it shouldn't matter if it is a choice yet you are one of the biggest Christian bigots on Topix
You can't even keep your stories straight
For all the "we" talk, I would expect better group communication!
You just made his point for him.
Huh

Garland, TX

#542398 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh Karl
How would you know. Your wrinkly old ass isn't giving it to anyone. You are married right? Please tell me the reference is not about your wife because even for you that would be pretty bad
And you realize your post is ripping on gay men right?
I have a feeling when you show up to the pharmacy to get your Viagra they just laugh at you and tell you its gonna take a lot more than a pill to help you out! Go yell at the sky old man, conversations about sex are over your head and you are just gonna look worse than you normally do..if that is possible
I love how you claim you are a victim of everyone's prejudice and bullying and then proceed to act like a total tool. You're still an uneducated buffoon.
Huh

Garland, TX

#542399 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Your a bigot, no need for any more explanation than that
Although I just saw Lacez say he liked reading your posts and you couldn't come up with enough compliments for people in return and about intelligence no less! Say what you will about the guy but Mensa isn't going to be knocking on his door any time soon. But you guys love lathering each up all day. The co-dependency is a perfect fit. You desperately crave validation from insecure people looking for someone to play Internet dad for them.
Have you ever stopped to wonder why anonymous strangers praising you on the Internet means so much to you?
I am sure you haven't. You should
We shall know you by your fruits.
Huh

Garland, TX

#542400 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
One day there may just be a collection to purge Topix off the face of the Earth! I think there are a lot of things for posterity that people would prefer not to have as their legacy!
Topix really would make for quite an interesting study though
Not a flattering one of human nature but an interesting one nevertheless
Then again, there is also a lot of sharing and concern expressed over these pages. Other emotions people may feel more comfortable doing with just a bit of anonymity.
It would make for a heck of a thesis
(T) Peace
Haha. Your blissfully unself-aware. It is a marvel.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#542401 Jun 1, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>I love how you claim you are a victim of everyone's prejudice and bullying and then proceed to act like a total tool. You're still an uneducated buffoon.
I have never claimed to be a victim

But I love when I reduce someone to hiding behinf aproxy and stalking

How badly did i embarrass your other identity?

I saw your posts yesterday but wanted to let you pick up some steam!

LOL

Oh stalker my stalker

Carpe diem

:)
mike

AOL

#542402 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Will do brother
Hope her final days are peaceful
Will keep you both in prayer
(T) Peace
"Great entertainment",..ah buddy?

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#542403 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
I know you think Googling has made you look smart but it really hasn't.
You have no grasp of what you >think< I said.

It's called comprehension.

Google has nothing to do with it.
Skombolis wrote:
You quoted from Vayikra
Right, and then I tied that to OT biblical verse within the 5 books of the Torah. If you thought I included Midrash as a component of the OT as used by Christianity, I didn't. You misunderstood.

I supplied text from the Torah, also used by Christianity in the OT.

The Midrash was merely meant to supply what Judaic thought is concerning what was stated in the Torah/OT. It doesn't change a thing, as written, within the verses supplied from Genesis, Deuteronomy etc... in meaning or import.

Do I have to say Tanakh, or specify the sections of the Jewish/Christian holy texts delineated between each? IE: "The Judaic Torah, the first 5 books of the Christian OT, the translated books of the Judaic scriptures, known as Tanakh in Judaism..."
Skombolis wrote:
Check out your own link that says
"Torah comes from the Hebrew word for "law" and refers to the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy
That is what was incorporated into Christianity
Yep.
Now you're getting it. All part of the Christian OT.
Skombolis wrote:
Do you see the book of Vayikra listed there?
Nope. Never said it was. As a matter of fact, I clearly stated the intent in supplying that from the very onset of the post.

Lets look, shall we...?
scaritual wrote:
The Midrash and its function. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash , also http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encycl... (1913)/Midrashim
More about slavery in the OT from Judaic Midrash halakha, "VE-eileh ha-mishpatim" (AND these are the statutes). It was a deeper explanation kept by the Rabbi's concerning OT text. An exegesis of the Torah.
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LOR...

Maybe you missed that.

Then later in the post...
scaritual wrote:
Biblical verse that relate directly to the Midrash exegesis.
Genesis 17:13, Genesis 17:27, Exodus 20:10, Exodus 21:1-4, Exodus 21:7, Exodus 21:8, Exodus 21:16, Exodus 21:20-21, Exodus 21:26-27, Leviticus 19:20-22, Leviticus 25:39, Leviticus 25:44-46, Leviticus 25:48-53, Numbers 31:28-47, Deuteronomy 15:12-18, Deuteronomy 21:10-14, Deuteronomy 20:14, Deuteronomy 23:15-16, 2 Samuel 9:10
Note; Not once did I say Midrash is a part of the OT, also, I supplied NT verse, not attached to any Midrash commentary whatsoever, and there was a reason for that.

The reason is that I never stated Midrash was a part of the OT/Torah.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#542404 Jun 1, 2013
scaritual wrote:
for discussion purposes, lets say the bible is 77% deity inspired. What 77%?
Even the Christians will admit that there is a man-made element in the bible, as when they discuss the various gospel writers injecting their own styles and personalities, or when the admit to miscopying and mistranslating. So the proper question isn't whether some of the bible was written by men, but whether any of it wasn't.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#542405 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
Do you know the difference between Judaism and Christianity?
hahaaa... What a question.

Judaism is the parent religion of the child religion, known as Christianity?

Judaism precedes Christianity, and that is where all claims to the authenticity Christianity asserts and rests upon, springs from?

Judaism has very specific prophecy concerning the "Messiah" or "Mashiach", and the Judaic requirements were not fulfilled?

Christianity cites other portions of the OT with tortured, massaged and tweaked interpretations as Messianic prophecies while ignoring other specific and unfulfilled Judaic prophecies?

Judaism for Jews, Christianity for Gentiles?

Need I go on?

You know there is a reason why Judaism rejected the Messianic/Jesus! claims of Christianity, and it isn't because Jews were/are stubborn.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#542406 Jun 1, 2013
http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/banana...
scaritual wrote:
wtf...? How'd he get my watering can?
Doggie style.
mike

AOL

#542407 Jun 1, 2013
Peace_Warrior wrote:
<quoted text>
It must be great to have one Chris... I didn't know grandparents. but join with you there for your comfort. We are at that stage with my husband's Mum... God Bless and take Care over there.
This is a great place for pretending?

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#542408 Jun 1, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
Do you know the difference between Mosaic Law and the New Testament?
Yeah. There are numerous differences.

Here's the point.

The Jesus! followed that law and according to your belief, the Jesus! dictated those slavery requirements to Moses, or at the least, the Yahweh!, did(that cRaZy *triune* gig).

Christians don't follow Mosaic law, and again, we weren't discussing Mosaic law or debating if Mosaic law applied to Christians, or the NT.

You asked where in the bible it condoned slavery.

It's already established that Christianity, by and large, accepts or rejects any portion of the OT/NT, as they see fit. There is no clear cut reason why, except to say that you do.

Just so you know what we were discussing, I'll supply what you asked in the earlier post, to which I responded.

Skombolis wrote:
Where in the Bible does it condone slavery?
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LOR... #

I supplied where in the bible slavery was condoned(per the deity), and supplied what Judaic Midrash also stated concerning the Torah portion(it's their book, after all, they are the authorities concerning its meaning).

I thought you actually read and understood what was presented. I never presented the Midrash as a part of the OT, as I've clearly shown you. I don't see how you couldn't understand that.
Skombolis wrote:
You don't. It's obvious you don't.
Yeah, well, I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
Skombolis wrote:
And all the Googling doesn't seem capable of changing that.
Riiight, because, if you can't understand that utilizing Google as a tool to support an argument or position by supplying links to relevant source, thereby eliminating the - "I say it does!" <> "I say it doesn't!" - component of online discussion, you'll never get it.
Skombolis wrote:
But I would suggest you continue till you get it right
"Getting it right", means you have to read and grasp what is said, and that you can't supply your own spin as to what you >think< it means.

You're always wrong when you do this.

I think if you learned to grasp what was written, to you and in other areas, we wouldn't be having this obvious blunder in misunderstanding you made concerning the entire exchange.

I've forgotten just how detailed I must be when discussing a subject with you.

It's like pulling teeth from a rabid 'possum.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#542409 Jun 1, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>You have no grasp of what you >think< I said.
It's called comprehension.
Google has nothing to do with it.
<quoted text> Right, and then I tied that to OT biblical verse within the 5 books of the Torah. If you thought I included Midrash as a component of the OT as used by Christianity, I didn't. You misunderstood.
I supplied text from the Torah, also used by Christianity in the OT.
The Midrash was merely meant to supply what Judaic thought is concerning what was stated in the Torah/OT. It doesn't change a thing, as written, within the verses supplied from Genesis, Deuteronomy etc... in meaning or import.
Do I have to say Tanakh, or specify the sections of the Jewish/Christian holy texts delineated between each? IE: "The Judaic Torah, the first 5 books of the Christian OT, the translated books of the Judaic scriptures, known as Tanakh in Judaism..."
<quoted text> Yep.
Now you're getting it. All part of the Christian OT.
<quoted text>Nope. Never said it was. As a matter of fact, I clearly stated the intent in supplying that from the very onset of the post.
Lets look, shall we...?
<quoted text> http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LOR...
Maybe you missed that.
Then later in the post...
<quoted text>
Note; Not once did I say Midrash is a part of the OT, also, I supplied NT verse, not attached to any Midrash commentary whatsoever, and there was a reason for that.
The reason is that I never stated Midrash was a part of the OT/Torah.
so you intentionally quoted a verse from the Jewish orthodox bible to me that has nothing to do with Christianity and then are trying to tie that into Mosaic law which Christianity is not under today? Um...ok

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 2 min nanoanomaly 119,152
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 min -KENTUCKY_ 679,055
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 18 min Lawrence Wolf 2,569
__POPE's 'World Plan' matches MARK of BEAST__ 1 hr YTubeNews 1
Adult dating minors (Mar '09) 3 hr _KENTUCKY 28
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 4 hr ChromiuMan 6,265
I want my BF to have sex with another girl (Jan '13) 7 hr Freaky2 41
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 12 hr UMAKEWORLDPEACEUM... 982,141
More from around the web