Skip to comments.
Good-Bye Cruel Free Republic
6-16-02
| wasfree
Posted on 06/16/2002 5:32:24 AM PDT by magnum opus dejure
Well, it's been 4 years since I first found Free Republic. I have always felt like I belonged here and have really enjoyed the banter back and forth between us members. I am afraid all this is now over. I am really suprised and shocked at it's suddenness. Before I leave I want to thank a freeper from Michigan who sent me a DVD player last year to give to my kids for Christmas. You reaffirmed my faith in humanity.
I know this thread will be deleted before many people get to read it, but I just can't go without saying a final word. Every since 911 the 'vibe' here at FR has been decidedly hostile. I guess it was a matter of time before the newbie moderator got around to weeding me out for my sometimes unpopular views. So I join the ranks of A+Bert and so many others who gave FR a interesting flavor. I will miss coming here 20 times a day and keeping up on things. But without posting priviledges there is just no point. I must go find another conservative group to try to be a part of.
In the future, when a freeper who has been a loyal member since August 1998 crosses the line, how about a note instead of banning? Would that have been too much? I may have gotten out of line, how is beyond me, but if such a tresspass would have been pointed out I would gladly have refrained from doing so again. It is just not right to just ban an account with no explaination. Especially when the freeper has been here 4 years. I have no idea what I am going to do with my days now that I no longer have FR. Well, I guess I have said my part. It is a sad day when one has to leave family and friends. I feel like some of you were just that. But apparently I am no longer wanted around here. I bid my good day to you all and hope that karma pays it's respects to those who do injustice.
TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: opuslist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,141-1,160, 1,161-1,180, 1,181-1,200 ... 1,401-1,420 next last
To: Senator Pardek
See your "Rush", raise you "Rush".
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
To wit.... Addendum:
Matthew 11: 20 - 27 --
Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you." At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.
Now, what do these verses tell us, regarding the
breadth of God's Foreknowledge?
One question. Simple enough:
- God foreknew Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom’s free choice NOT TO REPENT in the case of His non-performance of such Miracles; AND
- God foreknew Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom’s free choice TO REPENT in the case of His performance of such Miracles; AND
- God CHOSE not to perform these Miracles in Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom, a choice which had as its perfectly foreknown result the NON-Repentance of Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom, just as He foreknew.
True, or False?
If God foreknows that
without His intervention, the Sodomians will choose Non-Repentance; and if God foreknows that
with His intervention, the Sodomians will choose Repentance...
...Then, by his determination whether to intervene or not, God has determined what their choice will actually be.
You don't even really have to deal with the testimony of that Nazarene guy, although He certainly does claim Divine Omniscience as to the Case. It's a simple question of Omniscience and Logical Precedence... if God's precedent choice determines the creature's logically-conditional choice, then their Choice is predetermined.
Christian God, or Jewish. Basic Logic.
To: Texasforever
Really? Do you understand the difference between sel-defense and offensive war. Are you claiming that the war on Tripolis was not self-defense?
To: Senator Pardek
If God foreknows that without His intervention, the Sodomians will choose Non-Repentance; and if God foreknows that with His intervention, the Sodomians will choose Repentance... ...Then, by his determination whether to intervene or not, God has determined what their choice will actually be.Ergo... If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
To: Demidog
Are you claiming that the war on Tripolis was not self-defense? Are you just stupid or stoned or both?
To: doesnotmatter
on a fortunate that's far too fleet
A fortune hunt you are starving on, we see.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
That passage also seems to be saying that God judges those with whom he choses not to invervene, less harshly. Jesus said "I came for the Jews." It was Paul who contradicted this.
That is why I have a hard time believing that Paul was anything other than the anti-Christ.
To: Senator Pardek
You're an atheist? For some reason, I thought otherwise.
To: sneakypete
That is true. The Republican Party is SUPPOSED to stand for individual freedoms. You ain't free when other people have the right to force THEIR morality on you using the force of law. Are you misunderstanding me or am I misunderstanding you? I DO NOT believe the Republican party should be involved in legislating morality, emphatically not. I am just as worried as you apparently are that someone else's version of what is "moral" would be enforced. Somehow I think we're on the same side on this.
Perhaps my original post could have been worded more coherently, but I was trying to say that I have been jumped on here for making a statement that didn't toe the pro-life, religious-right party line.
To: Demidog, Texasforever
Are you claiming that the war on Tripolis was not self-defense?It was obviously self-defense. And your initial post #1146 established the virtue of always doing things Constitutionally, even when it seems like a nit-pick.
We did not have to wrangle with "are they detainees or POWs" and "do citizens still have constitutional rights" in the Barbary War.
It was Congressionally affirmed as War. Ergo, the Rights of Citizens were not in some kind of gray-area, "police-action" Limbo.
To: Cultural Jihad
I think we have a real "intellectual" here. I wonder if he is a ZON follower.
To: Texasforever
If you're not claiming that the war on Tripolis was offensive rather than defensive (as I assume you argue the current war is) then why on earth would you bother attempting to draw a distinction?
To: Cultural Jihad
"You don't tug on Superman's cape, you don't spit in the wind, you don't pull the mask off the ole Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with Jim."
To: Cultural Jihad
Are you saying I got it wrong? Should it be fortune hunt? I've always thought it was fortunate.
To: Demidog
That passage also seems to be saying that God judges those with whom he choses not to invervene, less harshly. Jesus said "I came for the Jews." It was Paul who contradicted this. That is why I have a hard time believing that Paul was anything other than the anti-Christ.LOL!! Paul is my favorite Apostle. We are NOT going to have this conversation without beer, it's a little too deep for mere text. ;-)
To: Texasforever
Who is ZON?
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Sorry you have lost all credibility with me, I gave your association with Demidog a pass since you seemed to be a decent sort, However; I have established my points with facts and you have nothing but a pathetic need to squirm your way out of the corner you found yourself in.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
It was Congressionally affirmed as War. No quote from the acts, naturally.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
We are NOT going to have this conversation without beer I wish you and I could sit down and have a beer sometime. I consider you a good man and friend.
To: doesnotmatter
Who is ZON? Your master. He has a nice purple shroud and nifty sneakers for your appointment with the mother ship. Don't be late.
To: Texasforever
I think we have a real "intellectual" here. I wonder if he is a ZON follower. 1170 posted on 6/16/02 11:38 PM Pacific by TexasforeverIn all fairness, the ZON guys are hilarious.
Randianism as a mystical religion... Ayn Rand would be rolling over in her grave.
Except, she's an atheist, so she's not allowed to roll over in her grave. ;-)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,141-1,160, 1,161-1,180, 1,181-1,200 ... 1,401-1,420 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson