Falling Stars, Damnable Heresy, and the Spirit of Evolution

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

[tacticalogic]

I’m done with your stalking.

I'm not setting traps and organizing people to monitor your posts. You don't have any business complaining about "stalking".

[Kevmo]

You don’t have any business complaining about “stalking”.
***Anyone who wants to can just look through your posting history and see how you’ve been following me through multiple threads. I say the same thing as others but you post to me. You are a stalking troll. Get lost.

GLAT

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3069049/posts?page=2832#2832

[Kevmo]

and, since I already know my response to whatever you’re going to post...

GLAT

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3069049/posts?page=2832#2832

[tacticalogic]

Spam.

[BroJoeK]

CynicalBear: "You evaded the question rather than identify who you believe scripture identifies."

Do you know, you can trace back half a dozen posts and still not find your original question?
In post #2,756 redleghunter answered a question according to his understanding.
In post #2,837 I noted that some people see it differently, and requested forbearance and respect for their views.

I don't agree that Revelation 1:8 refers to Jesus.
It is clearly a reference to Isaiah 44:6, which speaks of Israel's Lord Almighty -- Yahweh and Elohim.

Again, I agree that you can interpret it however you wish, and ask forbearance and respect for those who see it differently.

[BroJoeK]

metmom quotin g: "BJK: On this question, as on all others, I go by what the New Testament actually says about it."

metmom: Which is who exactly?"

Revelations 1:8 clearly refers to Isaiah 44:6, which speaks of Yahweh and Elohim.
If you wish to believe that Isaiah's words "Yahweh" and "Elohim" mean "Jesus", I will forbear and respectfully disagree.

[BroJoeK]

CynicalBear: "Not before the 14th century ey?
Time and time again documented proofs of your errors on multiple subjects have been produced yet you persist.
It might be time you take your poorly researched views to a different and less educated forum."

Rubbish.
My statement is 100% true, and your "documented proofs" prove it.

The reason most New Testament translations do not include the words you've quoted is because no Greek manuscripts before the 14th century contain them.
Indeed, when they finally do begin turning up in Greek manuscripts, it is as translations from Latin.

So, it should give you pause, CynicalBear, to realize that the only specifically Trinitarian language in the entire New Testament is disputed at best, and rejected by most biblical scholars.

That's why I am here to ask your forbearance and respect for Christians who see it much as our Founders did.

[BroJoeK]

CynicalBear: "No “forbearance” will be given for proven error."

You have proven no errors.

[BroJoeK]

CynicalBear: "Franklin didn’t deny the trinity per his own admission when he said, “Tho it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it”.
He took no particular position."

In fact, Franklin's quote said nothing about the trinity at all, merely expressed doubts on the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth.

Your full quote from Franklin reflects exactly my own opinion, one over which CynicalBear and many others here are howling "God Damned Heretic".

So I am here to request that you treat such views with forbearance and respect, whether they come from Franklin or from yours truly, BroJoeK.

[BroJoeK]

GarySpFc: "I never stated Franklin was a Christian.
Clearly, he wasn't, but he grew with age, and his quotes indicate he was at least a theist near the end of his life."

Whether "theist" or "deist", Franklin still considered himself Christian, and in his will gave money to every denomination in Philadelphia, including the Synagogue.
That is the religious view I am here to request you treat with forbearance and respect.

[BroJoeK]

MHGinTN: "You’re a liar.
Anyone reading your posts from the beginning of this thread can see through your lie.
But you depend upon folks not seeing the entire picture so your lies float like fecal material in a fetted pool."

Your claim here is not supported by any evidence you've presented.
If you care to present evidence, I'll be happy to address it.
The fact of this matter is that everything I've posted here is truthful to the best of my knowledge.

[BroJoeK]

redleghunter: "There it is again, the notion that “many” founders think as you.
I posted four times the church affiliations of the founders and 51 of 55 belonged to churches with Trinitarian confessions."

And each time you've posted your misleading data, I've corrected you.
Among our "top tier" Founders, nearly all expressed deistic/theistic or Unitarian ideas, ideas which on this thread have been labeled "God Damned Heretic".

That's why I'm here to request that such ideas be treated with forbearance and respect, especially on Free Republic New/Activism threads.

[BroJoeK]

redleghunter: "You seem fixated on the Mason aspect.
Perhaps you can share what high level Masons believe about God and Christianity?"

I know little about Freemasons, except that many of our Founders were, and of those, Washington himself was probably typical.
American Freemasons were not (then or now) anti-Christian, but Washington's religious views, as expressed in his own correspondence did not extend much beyond acknowledging the hand of "Providence" in helping American success.

Many Christian denominations (especially Roman Catholic) have been strongly anti-Mason, but Washington's own church (Anglican/Episcopal) was not:

"Since the founding of Freemasonry, many Bishops of the Church of England have been Freemasons, such as Archbishop Geoffrey Fisher.[93]
In the past, few members of the Church of England would have seen any incongruity in concurrently adhering to Anglican Christianity and practicing Freemasonry.
In recent decades, however, reservations about Freemasonry have increased within Anglicanism..."

Roman Catholic opposition is doubtless typical:

"The objections raised by the Roman Catholic Church are based on the allegation that Masonry teaches a naturalistic deistic religion which is in conflict with Church doctrine.[86]
A number of Papal pronouncements have been issued against Freemasonry.
The first was Pope Clement XII's In Eminenti, 28 April 1738..."

I take all this to mean that our Founders were nearly all, to a more-or-less degree, influenced by deistic/theistic, Unitarian and/or Freemason ideas.

That's why I'm here to request they be treated with forbearance and respect.

[BroJoeK]

GarySpFc: "If we treat those expressing anti-Christ theology with respect, then we become the enemy of Christ.
So, you will never receive respect from us."

No "anti-Christ theology" has been expressed here, and what you think of BroJoeK makes no difference.
I am here to request that you treat our Founders' religious ideas, and those similar, with forbearance and respect.

I think those ideas were essential to the Republic they founded, and to any hope we have of ever restoring it.

[BroJoeK]

Thanks for the link.
I doubt if more than one or two posting here fully meet its definitions.

[redleghunter]

Then you ignore the entire context of Revelation 1.

[redleghunter]

And again you points are assertions and inferences and not based on historical evidence.

[CynicalBear]

>>I don't agree that Revelation 1:8 refers to Jesus.<<

I have no doubt that you don’t. But those of us who read scripture as it is written understand who it is that the message is from.

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ,

Revelation 1: 7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. 8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

You don’t need to agree. Just understand the consequences of denying he words of Jesus.

>>Again, I agree that you can interpret it however you wish, and ask forbearance and respect for those who see it differently.<<

You can beg “forbearance and respect” all you want but will not get either from those of us who follow Christ.

“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8-9

[CynicalBear]

>>Revelations 1:8 clearly refers to Isaiah 44:6, which speaks of Yahweh and Elohim.<<

Dude! I think you need to read Isaiah 44:6 again.

Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.

Who is the King of Israel from the lineage of David?

[CynicalBear]

>>No "anti-Christ theology" has been expressed here,<<

That is exactly what you have been doing here.

1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

You keep denying that Jesus was God come in the flesh.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

You have consistently denied that Jesus is The mighty God, The everlasting Father and thus are expressing antichrist theology.