Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - creationliberty

Pages: 1 ... 34 35 [36] 37 38 ... 111
701
Wild Emails @ CLE / Drugged Up Atheist
« on: August 17, 2020, 03:40:22 PM »

HAYDEN FROM OHIO:

I tried prayer and it didn't work but Antipsychotics did work, and are still working for me after two years. My family told me it was the devil causing my intrusive thoughts, but it wasn't. It was my obsessive compulsive disorder otherwise known as OCD. I assure you that Mental Illness is a real thing and that there is help for people. And that help is the right medication for that person and counseling. You are leading people away from the help that they need. No amount of prayer is going to help someone that suffers from a mental illness. If I'm going to burn in hell forever because I take medication then fine. My quality of life is far better and fantastically awesome because of Antipsychotics. Furthermore why should I believe in your version of Christianity over the thousands of others that exist? Because the Bible says so? Your opponents will say the same thing. The Bible can be used to justify almost if not all interpretations and versions of Christianity. Every Christian believes that they're right, god is on their side and if you don't adhere to their interpretation the punishment is to burn in hell forever. Christians everywhere are all pointing fingers at each other threatening one another with the prospect of burning in hell forever. That being the case, why should any of us take  the Bible and Christianity seriously?


I tried prayer and it didn't work but Antipsychotics did work, and are still working for me after two years. My family told me it was the devil causing my intrusive thoughts, but it wasn't. It was my obsessive compulsive disorder otherwise known as OCD. I assure you that Mental Illness is a real thing and that there is help for people. And that help is the right medication for that person and counseling. You are leading people away from the help that they need.
You are at liberty to lie to yourself and others all you want. I don't know what you thought this letter was going to do for you, but if this email makes you feel better, then I suppose you will go on believing you got something beneficial from writing to me.

No amount of prayer is going to help someone that suffers from a mental illness.
Yes, because what you call "mental illness" is sin, and you would not be humbled to repentance, and that's why your prayers were not working. God resists the proud of heart, and the pride of your heart is very clearly seen just in your short email.
Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
-James 4:6


If I'm going to burn in hell forever because I take medication then fine.
See? No repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow of wrongdoing), and therefore, no humility. That was my point. You didn't read my book, did you? So why are you wasting my time?

My quality of life is far better and fantastically awesome because of Antipsychotics.
Then go enjoy them, and leave us be. What exactly did you want from this conversation?

Furthermore why should I believe in your version of Christianity over the thousands of others that exist?
Because the Bible says so? Your opponents will say the same thing. The Bible can be used to justify almost if not all interpretations and versions of Christianity. Every Christian believes that they're right, god is on their side and if you don't adhere to their interpretation the punishment is to burn in hell forever. Christians everywhere are all pointing fingers at each other threatening one another with the prospect of burning in hell forever. That being the case, why should any of us take  the Bible and Christianity seriously?

I think the more important question is why anyone should take you seriously because you're on antipsychotics, and therefore, I can't trust anything you're saying because I have no idea if you can even think clearly enough to know what you're saying. Nonetheless, I hope you have a great day, and you are always welcome to come back and chat if God ever opens your eyes to the rabbit hole of pharmaceuticals you are going down (i.e. assuming you aren't already experiencing it, and in complete denial).

END OF DISCUSSION

I waited a week, but no response. It was pretty clear that this person did not read the book; likely only reading the titles to the various chapters, and that's about it. Even if he wasn't on drugs, he (or she) would not be prepared for this conversation.

If anyone wants to learn more, please see our free-to-read book on the subject:

Psychology: Hoodwinked by the Devil

703
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 16, 2020, 09:02:07 AM »
Part of it is his mentality. He claims he's been "saved" for a few years, and during that time, he joined a fraternity in college. (I won't say where or what to protect his personal information because he did not provide us this information in his introduction.) I do not condemn anyone who does that, but I have a hard time understanding how someone can be a sanctified Christian and part of a college fraternity at the same time because it is contradictory to the doctrine of sanctification; however, that being said, it makes sense for Barry to join it because of his belief in being saved by water instead of the blood of Jesus.

In many cases today, water baptism is a ritual of initiation that is for show, not a duty of obedience for a servant of God. He is treating his so-called "church" in the same away as his fraternity; he thinks once he has gone through the ritual of initiation, that is what makes him a member of the club, and that is precisely the false doctrine I am trying get people away from when I teach because that is not what the Bible teaches us about the church. This is not a country club, it is a solemn assembly to worship God, but most church buildings are not treating people as members of a body that are supposed to work together to get things done, but rather, they treat it in the fashion of a "membership" to a club, and it's absurd.

704
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 14, 2020, 07:47:02 PM »
Quote
Using your example of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, and applying my logic to it, the resulting conclusion would then be that Adolf Hitler has the same propensity to kill as Joseph Stalin. Right? Let me break it down for you so I don't get falsely accused of slight-of-hand.
if A=C
and B=C
then A=B
where
A is Adolf Hitler
B is Joseph Stalin
C is being responsible for killing millions of people
Result:
if Adolf Hitler is responsible for killing millions of people,
and Joseph Stalin is responsible for killing millions of people,
then Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin have the same propensity to kill.
See how he twisted it? Go back and read what I wrote and compare it to what he just said. Barry literally wrote out the equation for false equivalence, and called it "logical." Of course, him being a computer engineering student (i.e. I did some investigation on him a couple days ago), I know that he knows that he made a major mistake when I called him out on his fallcy. So, instead of confessing his error, he chose to continue the facade to save face, and the way he did that was by changing my analogy to throw off other readers. This is not something I am going to waste my time on, and that is not how a repentant and faithful man acts. Barry should be embarrassed of himself, but again, without a heart of godly sorrow of wrongdoing, he will never see it.

Barry believes in baptismal regeneration, and that men can lose their salvation. So to Barry, I will say: Since you are insistent on trying to deceive new believers with your fallacies and lies while claiming to be of Christ, and you will not repent of it, then you need to go elsewhere because we are not of like mind.

I'm going to go ahead and ban his account. I warned him, but he continues to deceive, and I simply will not put up with it. I should have already done it, but I wanted to try and be patient with him.

If anyone has any questions about how he deceived everyone with that statement, let me know. Please be specific if you have any questions because, despite what he claims, Barry did a lot of sleight-of-hand, and I believe he knows he was doing it.

705
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 13, 2020, 01:00:08 PM »
Yes, they teach that, but if you read the teaching I did on denominations, you will find that all denominations have been born out of the Catholic Church, and therefore, there are many various religious cults that teach doctrines like unto the baptismal regeneration of the Catholic Church.
Denominations Are Unbiblical
This is a teaching that almost no one has read or shared, and there are many reasons for that. People are much more attached to denominations than we might think, and among the thousands that exist, most teach works doctrine, and of those that do, many teach baptism as a method to obtain salvation, just as Barry believes and teaches.

706
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 13, 2020, 12:53:52 AM »
They would not have had to. Baptism performed by the priests in Jewish temples was nothing new to the people, and many in that day were familiar with their practices; much more than they are today. Therefore, the meaning of those practices would have been much more well known to nearly everyone, especially since all had to abide by the laws of the land as well as Roman law, so knowing the laws of the Jews would have been important for all those traveling and trading in that area.

707
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 12, 2020, 04:07:12 PM »
Okay, so what Barry is doing here is teaching false doctrine because he believes that the work of water baptism saves people. He does not want to say that directly, but his doctrine reflects that, and his testimony indicates that as well. That is why he is deceptive: Barry is not coming forward to talk about his true beliefs. He came here to start a fight; he did not come here to have this discussion.

I don't want to sit here and waste my time arguing with someone who believes he saved by his works, believes in "baptismal regeneration," and furthermore, attempts to convolute this subject to the point that the average person reading this cannot follow it. So, I'll demonstrate some of Barry's deception in a couple of examples he gave, and if you all want to handle anything else, you are welcome to do so.

Barry stated in this most recent post:
I believe Acts 2:41 is one whole thought and states that three thousand souls were added to the body of Christ because they were baptized.

Now, for those of you who were following this thread, I already responded to that and proved to him what he said was incorrect:
[v41] Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
So Barry says:
Souls added to what? The body of Christ. Who was being added? Those who were baptized.
Well, first of all, this is not an argument that makes the case for Barry's doctrine, namely that "baptism is required for salvation." Second, the Scripture does not say what Barry claims it says. I'll ask everyone reading this to go back up and read the verse and Barry's comment slowly and carefully.

--Barry claims that the Acts 2:41 says that those who were baptized were added to the church.
--The Bible in Acts 2:41 says that those who received Peter's preaching (i.e. heard and understood it) were baptized.

Then it says, three thousand people were added to the church, and I would like to note that does not say that everyone who was baptized was added to the church because not everyone who gets baptized is a Christian. (i.e. Barry is assuming that "baptism = being added to the church," which is not the case.)

So what happened took place in three steps:
  • Barry argued that Acts 2:41 says that those were baptized were added to the church.
  • I demonstrated that Acts 2:41 did not say that.
  • Barry repeated himself instead of rationalizing his position.
When a man ignores what is being said to him, and he repeats himself as a response without acknowledging what the other person is saying, then you have run into a situation in which that man will no longer hear. What it means to "rationalize" your position is when you walk through a logical process by quoting Scripture and explaining the interpretation of it alongside your argument, similar to what I did in the quote above. What Barry did was claim that he was following a logical process, and he gave us the following:

Quote
The logic I'm using to say that baptism is required for salvation is:
if A=C
and B=C
then A=B
where
A is those who were baptized
B is those who were saved
C is being added to the church
Of course, most of you are not going to understand any of that, which is how he is doing sleight-of-hand to fool the people he is talking to. If any of you wonder why I have been writing to Barry with a such firm tone, you should hopefully understand after I explain this.

Allow me to interpret this for you in plain English; here is Barry's argument:
"If those who were baptized were added to the church, and those who were saved were added to the church, those who were baptized are those who were saved."
Barry said that THIS is the logic he was using for his argument, but he invoked a logical fallacy called "False Equivalence," or some of you might know it as comparing apples and oranges while calling them the same thing. The fallacy states that two things (i.e. A & B) share a similar characteristic (i.e. C), and therefore, they are the same thing, which is logically wrong, and it is the same as Barry calling apples and oranges the same by labeling them "round objects," while ignoring the many characteristics which make them two different things.

Let's look at an example of false equivalence:
  • Adolf Hitler was responsible for killing millions of people.
  • Joseph Stalin was responsible for killing millions of people.
  • Therefore, all evolutionists are responsible for killing millions of people.
Now, perhaps you could argue some philosophical truth to those statements, that there is a connection between the philosophy of evolutionism and the result of someone killing millions of people, but to accuse an evolutionist on the street of killing millions of people (i.e. that those two concepts are one and the same) is simply ludicrous. Likewise, there is a philosophical truth that there is a correlation between being born again in Christ and being baptized (i.e. because all those who have been saved are commanded to be baptized), but to call baptism and salvation the same thing is simply ludicrous.

To put it another way, Jesus told us that the world would hate us, and eventually, in the days of Revelation, we will be beheaded for Christ. (Rev 20:4) If we follow Barry's so-called "logic," since Christians will be beheaded for Christ, that means that all people who have been beheaded are automatically born again in Christ, and such an argument is absurd to say the least.

It is important to note a key word in Barry's supposedly "logical" argument, and that is his use of the word 'IF.' Not only is his statement a logical fallacy, but the word 'if' added to his argument also tells us that he does not know if his statement is true or false. He would not have to say "if" before "a = c," if he believed that those being baptized where automatically added to the church. This is why, in my explanation, I went on to give an example, providing Scriptural evidence to my argument, so that way Barry would not be able to claim that there was no example in Scripture where this had happened:
To provide correlating Scripture, let's look at Simon the sorcerer:
Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
-Acts 8:13

Simon believed and was baptized, and yet, he was rejected by Peter:
But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
-Acts 8:20-23

You cannot be in the bond of iniquity and gall of bitterness when you have been regenerated in Christ through the Holy Ghost. This is what Barry does not understand because he has never been regenerated. He believed that he was saved by his works (i.e. baptism), but was never born again in repentance and true faith in the Jesus Christ of the Bible, which is why he cannot understand this doctrine.

And yet, if you read carefully, that's EXACTLY what Barry did, which is why he accused me of using the "No True Scotsman" fallacy:
Quote
One might claim that Simon, Ananias, and Sapphira were false converts based on your article of the such.
Now I will argue this point because its entire premise is a logical fallacy. It is more commonly known as the "No true Scotsman" fallacy.
Thus, Barry's response to my argument about Simon the sorcerer was, "No Chris, that cannot be true, otherwise, my argument is wrong." Precisely. The problem is that Barry is actually using the "No False Scotsman" fallacy, which is a common fallacy that atheists use, and I explain that in more details in an article I wrote called:
The Atheist's 'No False Scotsman' Fallacy

The reason Barry is so desperately attempting to defend his deceptive and illogical claims is because he was not saved in the manner Scripture defines (while deceptively acting like we are in agreement on doctrine so he can fool others here), which is the manner in which the rest of us here were born again in Christ. Barry believes in another way to Jesus Christ than what Scripture teaches us. Barry believes he was saved by water baptism, and I can assure him, with certainty in the Word of God, that his belief in water baptism for the foundation of his salvation will end him up in hell and the lake of fire.

And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
-Revelation 1:5

But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
-2Ti 3:13-14


Hopefully, you all will more clearly see how deceptive Barry is, and if he wants to continue being deceptive on this forum, then I will bid him a peaceful and pleasant day, and then personally show him the door because I am not going to let him stick around here, sneaking in comments here and there, trying to deceive new Christians into believing the heresies he was taught and adopted. If he really wants to believe what he is saying, he should join the Catholics or Adventists because, as far as I am aware, they are much more in line with Barry's false doctrine.

Remember this: If Barry really wanted to address me, he could have emailed me, but he came here on this forum because he wanted this to be public. He came here to pick a fight, and so he can make as many excuses as he wants, but thank God that He has given me enough discernment to see right through Barry's feigned words.

Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
-Col 3:9

Cast out the scorner, and contention shall go out; yea, strife and reproach shall cease.
-Proverbs 22:10

708
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 11, 2020, 10:54:26 PM »
Okay, Barry, I'm going to be frank with you, I'm on the verge of just simply banning your account. You have already been very deceptive since you came here, you lied about being deceptive, and now, instead of making your argument, you are saying "PART of my argument is..." which is more deception. We all know the argument you made, I stated clearly what argument you made, I demonstrated that it was false, and now you think sending us all on a merry chase to beat around the bush is somehow going to redeem you. I don't have time for this nonsense. For the sake of patience and charity, you've got one more chance. Make your point, or take your works-based false doctrines back to where you learned them because they are not welcome here.

709
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 11, 2020, 07:30:19 PM »
Um... then do so? Here is what I said:
Quote
The Bible in Acts 2:41 says that those who received Peter's preaching (i.e. heard and understood it) were baptized.
So, what you need to address is why you accused me (and subsequently, everyone else here) of teaching false doctrine on the basis of Acts 2:41 by claiming that it says that you must be baptized to be saved, when Acts 2:41 does not say that. (And neither does verse 47, or any others inbetween.)

710
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 11, 2020, 05:38:36 PM »
Quote
You refute the point made from verse 41 by saying that Simon was not added to the church even though he was baptized.
Nope, you did not read what I wrote. You skipped it. That was the example I gave to support my argument. When you are ready to address what I said to you, we can continue. Let me know when you're ready.

Quote
I hope you understand that I am sincere.
No, because you're lying. You cannot lie and be sincere at the same time.

711
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 11, 2020, 02:24:41 PM »
That was an interesting and convenient shift in tone in your writing after being called out for your contention. You were so enraged coming onto this forum that you did not even fully read what you were responding to, you did not initially say who you were addressing, and you did not even look at what you were signing and rules of the forum. You think your contention will not be easily spotted because you are behind your computer screen, but I assure you, it is already know, so if you want to lie about it, that's your choice, but it's not going to go over well for you here.

It is also interesting that, suddenly, the phrases "Christian love" and "my brethren" start coming out as soon as you are called out for being a false convert that believes in a false, works-based doctrine. Barry, that kind of PR (i.e. public relations) tactic might work in church buildings, but it will not work here, and I am MORE cautious about you now than I was before you made that response, and the reason is because you have admitted nothing in honesty and humility, but are trying to paint an outward appearance of honest and humility to fool others, and you will not last long here if you continue down that path.

I have my notes on the Scriptures published on Acts chapter 2, which anyone reading this can find here:
http://creationliberty.com/articles/bookacts.php#2

[v41] Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
So Barry says:
Souls added to what? The body of Christ. Who was being added? Those who were baptized.
Well, first of all, this is not an argument that makes the case for Barry's doctrine, namely that "baptism is required for salvation." Second, the Scripture does not say what Barry claims it says. I'll ask everyone reading this to go back up and read the verse and Barry's comment slowly and carefully.

--Barry claims that the Acts 2:41 says that those who were baptized were added to the church.
--The Bible in Acts 2:41 says that those who received Peter's preaching (i.e. heard and understood it) were baptized.

Then it says, three thousand people were added to the church, and I would like to note that does not say that everyone who was baptized was added to the church because not everyone who gets baptized is a Christian. (i.e. Barry is assuming that "baptism = being added to the church," which is not the case.) To provide correlating Scripture, let's look at Simon the sorcerer:
Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
-Acts 8:13

Simon believed and was baptized, and yet, he was rejected by Peter:
But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
-Acts 8:20-23

You cannot be in the bond of iniquity and gall of bitterness when you have been regenerated in Christ through the Holy Ghost. This is what Barry does not understand because he has never been regenerated. He believed that he was saved by his works (i.e. baptism), but was never born again in repentance and true faith in the Jesus Christ of the Bible, which is why he cannot understand this doctrine.

[v47] Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
Barry then says:
Adding to whose number? Those in the body of Christ. Who was being added? Those who were being saved.
Again, this is not an argument that makes the case for Barry's doctrine, namely that "baptism is required for salvation." This Scripture only says people were being added to the church.

To address Barry in particular: You are teaching the same works-based heresy that is taught by many other religious cults, and part of the reason you defend it so fervently is because you believe the act of baptism is what is getting you into heaven, and I can tell you with certainty that you will not see the kingdom of God if you cling to that false doctrine. If you do not want to hear the truth of Christ, you are free to go elsewhere. Have a pleasant evening.
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
-Eph 2:8-9
I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
-Luke 13:3

Why Millions of Believers on Jesus Are Going to Hell

712
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 11, 2020, 01:21:05 PM »
You say that baptism as a requirement for salvation is false doctrine.
Well, first of all, who are you talking to? Second, I don't know exactly what you are saying here. That was a strangely-worded sentence. Are you accusing someone of saying that baptism is a requirement for salvation, and that is false doctrine? Or are you accusing someone of saying baptism is not a requirement for salvation and that is false doctrine?

Quote
What do you say of the logic in Acts 2:41,47?
Who are you talking to? You are commenting on a thread that is well over a year old.

Quote
41:"those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls."
Souls added to what? The body of Christ. Who was being added? Those who were baptized.
And... your point is what?

Quote
47:"And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved."
Adding to whose number? Those in the body of Christ. Who was being added? Those who were being saved.
And... your point is what?

Quote
If being baptized results in being added to the body of Christ, and being saved results in being added to the body of Christ, then being baptized is the same as being saved. Therefore, baptism is a requirement for salvation.
Did you happen to read/listen to the teaching I did on this subject? It was put in a link in one of the above posts. I'll add in here again, just in case you missed it:
http://www.creationliberty.com/articles/baptism.php
I addressed a lot of what you are talking about in that teaching. Would you like to take some time to look that over, and then we can discuss it together? The green button on the article page is the link to the audio teaching if you would prefer that.

Quote
Also...
1Peter 3:21 "Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you - not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience of Jesus Christ"
BAPTISM NOW SAVES YOU! How much clearer can this be?
Well, first of all, you need to put away your corrupt bible versions that will lead you away from the truth, and pick up a King James Bible. Here are some good reasons for that:
http://www.creationliberty.com/articles/kingjames.php
Second, are you familiar with what baptism is in the Holy Spirit? Have you ever learned about that? I can't tell because you are not really saying much, so I cannot determine what you do and do not know, which leaves me without enough information to know how to address you. What Peter is writing there has to do with the comparison of the ark in the days of Noah in an analogy to Christ, and how that baptism was not designed after the traditions of men. I'm starting to notice a pattern in you already, in which you enjoy cherry-picking verses, but do not read or understand the context, and since I do not believe you are of Christ (based on your testimony in your introduction post), it would make sense that you do not understand these things yet.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
-1Co 2:14


Quote
One must do everything listed in the scriptures to be saved.
Hear the word, believe the word, repent of sins, confess Jesus is Christ, be immersed(baptismo) in water, and be faithful unto death.
That indicates to me that you believe in a false gospel of works because you believe you have to perform a list of deeds to obtain salvation, and therefore, you have learned a false gospel. I can help you to gain understanding about that, but you did not come here seeking help to learn and understand; you came here to accuse in contention. Even if you were born again in Christ, you would still be classified as a new Christian, and so your arrogance alone on that matter is astounding, thinking that you have a full understanding when you really have little. Even I do not believe about myself that I have a full understanding of Scripture yet because, the more I learn, the more I realize that I do not know, and have to work harder to understand more. And yet, one who is supposedly new to the Christian faith believes he has obtained all understanding of this matter shows a lot of pride of heart.
But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
-James 4:6


Frankly, based on everything I have seen you write on this forum, there is only one teaching I have that I would direct you to look at:
Why Millions of Believers on Jesus Are Going to Hell
I think that is the message you most desperately need to hear.

713
Introduce Yourself / Re: I appreciate truth!
« on: August 11, 2020, 12:59:35 PM »
Okay, that helps me understand. You were never brought to repentance and converted to the Lord Jesus Christ. Nothing in your testimony is how the Bible says men are converted. You were converted to being a churchgoer. That helps me understand where you are coming from when I analyze your other post and respond to it. Thank you for following the forum rules.

714
General Discussion / Re: Ignorance of Biblical Baptism
« on: August 11, 2020, 11:25:25 AM »
Barry, you need to read the forum rules. You signed an agreement when you registered on this forum, and there is a large link on the board that says "NEW MEMBERS? CLICK HERE," so you need to address that:
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=20.0

715
Introduce Yourself / Re: New Member
« on: August 11, 2020, 08:30:01 AM »
He ignored it. Account deleted.

716
Introduce Yourself / Re: New Member
« on: August 10, 2020, 01:54:15 PM »
So, you knew the rules because you read the section about having to make an introduction post. That's why you came here to write "Hi, I'm Edwin," (which was almost sarcastic from my point of view) but you also knew that was not acceptable as an introduction post, and yet, despite this, you immediately moved on to another thread to write a very detailed post about something else. Edwin, I'll just say that, knowing that you knew the problem with what you were doing, but did it anyway, I was very close to deleting all your posts and your account.

If you want to be here for fellowship and conversation with us, then re-read this, and try again:
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=20.0

718
Bible Discussion / Re: A Contradiction In Acts
« on: August 09, 2020, 12:07:57 AM »
It does not say that they heard NO voice, but rather, it says that they heard not the voice of him that spake to Paul. It does not mean that other voices were not heard, perhaps even those of the angels; we do not know. They saw light, but no man. They heard voices, but not the voice that spoke to Paul.

719
Okay, you are not listening to me, and you are just repeating yourself. I'm not going to continue with this. Have a great day.

720
Oaths, as you mentioned, are a solemn declaration or promise to fulfill an act (such as a testimony). When a person takes an oath and sees the penalties of imprisonment and fines, I think it can act as a sort of incentive for that person to provide truthful and accurate information.
Did you not understand what I just said?
  • You first said that an oath was an incentive.
  • I then explained why an incentive was the wrong definition for your meaning.
  • You then repeated yourself in your response.
I don't understand what you're trying to do.

incentive: that which moves the mind or operates on the passions; that which incites or has a tendency to incite to determination or action
When you incite someone to do something, you are encouraging them by the promise of reward. That is not what an oath is under any circumstance I have ever seen. That's why, for example, at the end of being sworn into court, they say "So help you God," because if they somehow get away with their lie in court, God is going to punish them, meaning that it is a threat, not an incentive.

threat: declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment, loss or pain on another

That is why cults swear oaths that involve punishments; for example, Freemasons. That's why there are punishments involved if a military man disobeys an order, because his oath requires him to do what he is told. I mean, I am assuming everyone else understands this concept, which is why no one else is speaking up to argue against what I'm saying, so I am at a loss to understand why you are struggling to understand this concept.

Pages: 1 ... 34 35 [36] 37 38 ... 111