Falling Stars, Damnable Heresy, and the Spirit of Evolution

Renew America ^ | Sept. 19, 2013 | Linda Kimball

[boatbums]

All I grasp of what is going on here is YOU, getting your knickers in a knot because someone expressed an opinion - something EVERYONE here has just as much right to as you do. You apparently believe that doctrine doesn't or shouldn't matter to a Christian and you would be absolutely WRONG to think that. All you have to do is look at how God dealt with it to know that it IS highly critical to following God in a correct way and according to how HE wants us to. This isn't to say that we shouldn't respect others and to treat others as we would want to be treated, but when someone promotes ideas that fly in the face of the truth, they SHOULD be corrected. Those who refuse correction, should be noted. We are told to have no fellowship with the "unfruitful works of darkness". The Apostle John had this to say:

Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds. (I John 1:9-11)

Nobody says you should be murdered - THAT is being hysterical.

[Kevmo]

Get lost, Evil Troll

Do not feed the trolls.

What's Your Monster Name?

Blogthings: 100's of Fun, Free Quizzes and 3 Stupid Ones

[Kevmo]

And spiritually speaking, what could be more murderous in intent than calling down God’s damnation on somebody who disagrees with your religious doctrines?
***From post #2524
Many posters enumerating their heresies as truth do not even realize whom they serve as they seek to murder the souls of those who have yet to acknowledge that Jesus Is The Lord.

[Kevmo]

I'm sorta tired of TL's trolling.

[tacticalogic]

You think nobody ever gets tired of your name-calling?

[Kevmo]

[tacticalogic]

I always considered using graphics as an argument a coward’s tactic. You never have to defend what you’re saying because you didn’t really say anything.

[Kevmo]

The troll said something but all I hear is “bwawawahh, yada yada, mmnmm” etc.

[tacticalogic]

Maybe you’d like to enlighten everyone about what exactly a successful “trapping” amounts to.

[Kevmo]

Haters gonna hate, trolls gonna troll.

[tacticalogic]

Haters gonna hate, trolls gonna troll.

Hunters gonna set traps.

[Kevmo]

Trolls continue to troll. And spread lies & heresies.

[tacticalogic]

I’m just not cut out to be a good dhimmi.

[Kevmo]

You Are a Tornado

It may seem like you can't do much damage, but you can pack a big punch. You're very powerful.
You rarely swing into action, but when you do, look out! You can spin yourself into quite a frenzy.

When you're in a bad mood, it's easy for you to suck others into your drama. You can be a bit of a black hole that way.
At your worst, you leave a serious path of destruction. You pretty much wipe out everything in site.

What Kind of Storm Are You?

Blogthings: 100's of Fun, Free Quizzes and 3 Stupid Ones

[tacticalogic]

What are you going to do with the broken pieces of your trap?

[GarySpFc]

Here again we see that Jesus clearly, consistently, openly said he was "Son of God", "Son of Man", Messiah/Christ.
He never explicitly claimed to be God Himself.

Obviously, you are stating we cannot prove Jesus is God.

It may surprise you, but I agree that we cannot prove to your satisfaction Jesus is God.

Evidence is objective and proof subjective. We have presented considerable evidence that Jesus is God, and even used His own words in the process. You have to decide if the evidence presented rises to the level of proof, and if it does you are responsible to respond in faith to Christ. However, you do not have the final say in this matter, because the Lord knows if you are rejecting the light or not, and He will judge you on that basis. (John 3:19)

You state, “Here again we see that Jesus clearly, consistently, openly said he was "Son of God", "Son of Man", Messiah/Christ”

You are willing to accept Him as only a man, and that goes to the heart of the problem. When your Jesus speaks he voices an opinion…nothing more. He is simply a philosopher, with empty words.

The Jesus of the Bible is totally different. His words are eternal and always true. He speaks with an authority lacking in your Jesus.

I do not have the right to judge your heart or final destination. However, I will emphatically state your views are heretical and have no place in Christianity, and from everything I have studied and read unless you repent you will be damned.

[BroJoeK]

MHGinTN: "IF you were really seeking the truth, you would do a study on the identity of ‘Son of Man’ as explained in the Old Testament.
Again, you try to deceive readers by implying the title Son of Man is somehow less than an identity reserved for The Messiah of Israel.
You are a liar, through and through."

FRiend, have you not read any of my posts here?
Have I not said clearly, explicitly, repeatedly, ad nauseum that the New Testament quotes Jesus directly saying he was Son of God, Son of Man and God's appointed Messiah/Christ?
That is not the subject of debate here.

The "debate" -- if you think calling someone a "God Damned Heretic" or "a liar through and through" constitutes "debate" -- the debate here is whether Jesus ever claimed to be God Himself.
I don't believe he ever did, but some have presented certain "proof texts" to show that did happen.

So FRiend, rest assured that on this thread at least, Jesus New Testament life as Son of God, Son of Man, God's appointed Messiah/Christ is totally secure -- no lie about it.

The real question on this whole thread is whether people who see things as I do -- including our Founders -- should be condemned as "God Damned Heretics"?

[BroJoeK]

GarySpFc quoting BroJoeK: "for many, and virtually all of the "top tier" Founders, their Christianity was influenced more-or-less by Enlightenment Age deism, Unitarianism and Freemasonry."

GarySpFc: "Wrong, wrong, wrong!
Where did you dig up this nonsense?
The only Deist was Jefferson, and David Barton's latest book provides evidence against that."

FRiend, did you not read what I posted?

"their Christianity was influenced more-or-less by Enlightenment Age deism, Unitarianism and Freemasonry."

Among the more deist/theistically influenced Founders were Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton.
Hamilton is typical of these men:

"Gordon Wood says that Hamilton dropped his youthful religiosity during the Revolution and became, "a conventional liberal with theistic inclinations who was an irregular churchgoers at best"; however, he returned to religion in his last years.[170]

Chernow says that, "Like Adams, Franklin, and Jefferson, Hamilton had probably fallen under the sway of deism, which sought to substitute reason for revelation and dropped the notion of an active God will intervene in human affairs.
At the same time, he never doubted God's existence, embracing Christianity as a system of morality and cosmic justice."[171][172]
While Hamilton and the other founders could be considered deists in the sense that they embraced "rational religion", they were not deists in the sense of rejecting the idea of divine intervention.[173]"

Both Presidents John Adams and son John Quincy Adams were Christian-Unitarians.

Among the more well-known Freemason Founders were Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, John Handcock, Nathaniel Green, Henry Knox(?), Lafayettee & von Steuben.
Unlike their European brothers, American Freemasons were not anti-Christian.
They did, however, take a more theistically or deistically influenced view of God.

This would make them, in Kevmo's words, "God Damned Heretics", and that is why I am here to defend them.

With which part do you disagree?

[BroJoeK]

GarySpFc: "Have you ever heard the word anti-Christ?
It means against Christ.
The rejection of Christ as God come in the flesh is what you reject.
When you reject who He is, then in reality you are rejecting His AUTHORITY."

FRiend, despite many false accusations to the contrary, I have never denied a word of what the New Testament says about Jesus.
It's true that I and many others understand those words to mean something different than people like yourself claim.
But I don't believe such differences should be cause for you to charge them with being "anti-Christ" or "God Damned Heretics".

As for Christ's authority in my life: I don't confuse for one second His authority with yours, FRiend.

[BroJoeK]

redleghunter: "Sure verse 7 confirms verse 6:"

I read the entire psalm 45 as being extravagant praise for a king, who is even called "God".
In verse seven, the translation reads: "Therefore God (the king), Your God, has anointed You "

Of course, I don't object to however you chose to read it, but I don't believe my understanding equates to "God Damned Heresy"?