100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
Topic:
The atheist and the marine
|
|
maybe he was there for the simple reason as to knock him off the stool after all the guy did open the opportunity for it to happen (and he obviously thought that is why he was there so hey it happened) just a thought (and a possibility) This is all we need,... for Christians to start thinking that God wants them to go around punching non-believers in the face. Hasn't Christianity done enough of that already over the ages? Standing up for ones beliefs is not a bad thing. You are right--standing up for a personal belief (including religion) is not a bad thing. But the right to stand up ends where physical violence begins. God did not send the Marine in this story to punch the professor--that was an uninspired and felonious human decision and action. But the scariest part is the thought that God might have. If so, what a weak and feeble God we would then be dealing with. A perfect powerful God being so upset by the rantings of one man that he motivated someone to hit him. But then I guess the virtue of turning the other cheek really is only a part time vocation, right? -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
UFC 84
|
|
Bj Penn is no joke, and for silva, hes gonna deff be a factor, he aint going anywhere FABER VS LIL EVIL is comeing up, im going with lil evil Pulver might give Faber some issues but Faber is pretty good--great conditioning and the kid does not make many mistakes. Still, Lil Evil is tough, veteran, and mean as hell. So, where does all of this leave Tito? He can't be done yet but he has had a rough couple of fights. That and I hope that Faber can be signed by the UFC to face BJ at some point. The only chance anyone has against Penn at this point is to outwork him. The guy is just scary good. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
For Abra.........
|
|
Just a word to both Drew and Eljay, I may be wrong, but after reading the conversations between you I can't help but feel that you both seem to be focusing on the story of Jesus. Or questioning the validity of the New Testament. When I look at the Bible I look at the whole thing. Jesus is totally dependent on the Old Testament. The entire doctrine. What I see are major logical inconsistencies with the supposed "Master Plan". As far as I'm concerned the following very simple observation destroys the entire myth in one fell swoop. I could continue to chop away at it. But one feel swoop should be enough. And here it comes,... The premise is that this biblical God has a Master Plan. From the very beginning of creation he has a Master Plan. The second premise is that Jesus had also always been around. He supposedly stated as much when he said, "Before Abraham was I am". Well, this flies in the face of the Great Flood. If it was God's Master Plan (from the very beginning) to send his only begotten Son to be crucified as a blood sacrifice to save mankind because God so loved the world, then why the flood? Why wouldn't he have just sent Jesus earlier? What's he doing drowning out all of mankind if his original Master Plan was to have his Son be a sacrificial lamb for the sins of man? That's makes no sense. The story is inconsistent. This God apparently doesn't have a Master Plan, he's just experimenting with different things as he goes along. Yet, the whole story of Jesus demands that Jesus said, "Before Abraham was I am". There's the flaw. And it's no small thing. This is a MAJOR flaw in the story. You don't need to go around having people build arks and drowning out all of humanity if you Master Plan is to have your Son be a sacrificial lamb to save mankind from sin. As far as I'm concerned that kills the story right there. It's clearly a poorly written myth that evolved over time and people just didn't realize that New Testament of Jesus it was going to be self-inconsistent in the bigger picture. It flies in the face of what went before it. I personally feel that a God who demands blood sacrifices to forgive sins and then has send his own son to be the sacrificial lamb to appease his desires for blood sacrifices is a seriously demented sadistic idea to swallow in the first place anyone. What does this God do? He tells men in a commandment that it's wrong to kill, and then later he sends his Son so that when men murder him he can forgive their sins! It doesn't even make any sense. God would be sending mixed messages. He can only forgive us if we sin in major ways! Why is a supposedly all-wise, all-loving God requesting gruesome blood sacrifices for in the first place? What does that have to do with forgiving men of there sins? Clearly this whole idea is a ancient superstition. What kind of a God would ask men to kill animals to appease the God of their sins? What kind of a message does that send? All God would be saying, is "Hey look, you can sin all you want, just kill some lambs for me and it'll be ok" Is that demented or what? I can't believe that an all-wise, all-loving God would be requesting such morbid things in the first place. I can't believe that I even bother to post these thoughts. Clearly people who believe this stuff don't stop and think about it even for a nanosecond anyway. The whole picture is utterly absurd. I'm seriously disillusioned that I'm living on a planet with people who actually still believe these anscient superistions. This is creepy. Such a God would be weirder than Freddy Scissorshands or whatever his name was. Abra, Perhaps you are correct in that I was focusing on the validity of the NT to the exclusion of other parts of the Bible. I did so in my post only because that was what lj was focusing on as part of his response. In fact, I agree with you that there are many ways in which the logic fails and I have pointed out a number of those examples in other posts. I guess what I was really trying to get at was that one can dispute (on many levels and on many fronts) issues with scripture. But that (at least in my eyes) does not invalidate the idea of a God. Dogma--yes, but not the idea of a God. Still, thanks for the response--good to see you. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 It is quite interesting at times to witness the individual perceptual faculty's reflections being displayed during the conversations in these forums. We each walk our own paths for our own reasons. True, but on occasion we meet people along the way that let us know that while we are often chasing our own, there are others who understand, identify, and show us more than a modicum of compassion as we walk. Good to see you, my friend! -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Coffeehouse for Human Beings
|
|
I'm around but now a bit worried--JB--easy, K? :) Drew  Just funnin!!   So I gathered--good laughs are the best! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Coffeehouse for Human Beings
|
|
I'm around but now a bit worried--JB--easy, K?
:) Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
UFC 84
|
|
age isn't a factor look at randy cotour. But yes he would be killed. BJ Penn is gonna be in the MMA hall of fame no doubt the man is just incredible. You are right bro--age can be nullified though I think we can all admit that Randy is special. I mean, that fight with Tim Sylvia--I swear I was seriously impacted because Randy just showed such incredible heart and incredible class. Too bad things did not work out with the UFC and with Dana White, but Randy is the best--how can people not like that guy? As for Penn--he is the class of MMA right now. I don't know if I can bet against him anytime soon. He is just so very gifted and now he has really improved his work ethic so in my mind, the sky is the limit for him. I would like to see some good fights for him but the question now is who? I could see him holding his title for years. Then again, I thought Andre Arlovski would hold his for years until Tim beat him twice. Uggg. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
UFC 84
|
|
Man, I was shocked....... I mean Penn had a longer reacher wich really was a key factor.... Tito, just was not ready to fight again...And as for the Dean of Mean well Silva shocked not only him and you but most of the MMA world.... Jardine is a tough guy--no doubt. He beat Chuck and he beat Forrest and both of those guys can get hit and keep coming at you. The problem Jardine has is when he cannot establish his low leg kicks. When he fails to get those going he gets hammered and that is what happened Sat. He went to kick Silva and got crushed as a result. It is too early, way too early to write off Jardine and he is good for the sport because he'll stand and trade. But as more people get the blueprint on how to beat him, more people will. Silva still has power and as long as a guy has power he has a punchers chance. I think Henderson just frustrated him and I think that Chuck might lose in a rematch with him. Then again, I'm a fan--I love the sport and don't care if I'm wrong. I just love the sport. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
For Abra.........
|
|
Drew; You asked... Even now it is the perfect circular argument. "Why is Christ the only way?" Well, because the Bible says that Christ is the only way. Well, how do we know that the Bible is accurate, without error, pure in every way? "Well, because He said so, in the Bible." It has to go back to those texts--there is simply nothing else that can prop up the Christian faith. "How do we know the bible is accurate, without error, pure in every way?" You asked. Well - the response to that question, though not quite as simplistic as "It says so in the bible" as you've reasoned - points directly to what you understand or believe God to be. Either He is what His scriptures claim him to be, or else there's nothing that remains to support His existance - (outside of an individual creating a God to support and justify personal life choices.) So... if we momentarily accept the premise that the bible gives us an acceptable and accurate picture of the attributes of God - I.E. All knowing, omni-present, Truth, existing outside of the realm of time, creator of the universe and all things in it, the list goes on... Then it would stand to reason that the God of the scriptures would be perfectly capable of not only moving men to write the bible, exactly how he wished it - but would have the power - as well - to assure it's accuracy throughout eternity. And to assure that his message be accurately interpreted, He in turn would have the power to fill his creation (man/woman) with the Holy Spirit - who's purpose it would be to lead all who are indwelt with such - to the truth. Not such a difficult task for a God who posses all power over His creation. So - logically, it is not circular reasoning to claim that the bible is inerrant because it claims itself to be - it is inerrant because of the percieved qualities of God, and the matter of the choice He has made to speak to his creation through Prophets. Which is not unique to Christianity by the way, it is a fact of any religion. So the argument - or question that I think is better examined, is how could the bible - if it is what it claims to be, be anything but true, accurate, without error, and pure in every way? Seems quite difficult to argue it could be - without lessoning the idea of God. Therefore I would think that the issue lies not in how the bible was written, but as to how it is read. How does one know that what they think they have understood when they read it - was how God intended it to be understood when it was written? As Samuel Beckett so aptly put it: "There's man all over for you - blaming on his boots the faults of his feet". lj lj; I'm not terribly familiar with Samuel Beckett as I have not read much of his work. But I don't feel too alone or isolated admitting that. As prolific as I imagine Mr. Beckett to be, he has nothing on the miracles and impact of Christ. That is why I find it interesting that during Christ's life there were a number of people who knew less about him than I know about Mr. Beckett. Petronius, Seneca, Appian, Lucian, Tacitus, Damis, Ptolemy, Columella and dozens more never recorded a thing about the miraculous Christ. They were all living near (or not a century past) the time of Christ and yet their writings are dearth of any of the miracles--things that surely would have been spoken of. My point here is simple: My argument is that the logic for agreeing with Christianity using the Bible as the stool leg that will hold the weight of doubt, is indeed circular. Your response is not a bad one but it jumps a few steps. In your response you wrote: "Either He is what His scriptures claim him to be, or else there's nothing that remains to support His existence - (outside of an individual creating a God to support and justify personal life choices.)" I don't agree. That is an all or nothing proposition. But more to the point it actually supports my argument that the Bible needs a circular argument to remain valid. If you bought and read a cook book that had fourteen errors in it you would not conclude that because of the errors the book was worthless, that the author was most likely a bad cook--would you? We might all agree that he is not a great editor but mistakes occur--and it does not diminish the value--or does it? The issue you've run in to here is that we cannot treat the Bible the same way because the Bible claims to be perfect. One mistake would destroy that claim and while I contend that there are in fact many errors, I don't think that diminishes God in any way. What it does do is diminish the validity of the Christian Dogma, the "I am the way, the truth, the light" exclusivity that the Bible attributes to being owned by Christ. That you pointed out that such is the case with other religions only supports that fact that some of them must, be definition, be wrong. Three monotheistic religions all making exclusive truth claims cannot all be correct. My argument--that the Bible itself is both the claim and the reason for the claim (as it pertains to truth in Christ) is simplistic but that is only because it does not have to be made more difficult. The various versions of "His Word" are also a real issue when once considers that in the KJV there are entire verses that are omitted from the NIV (e.g., Matthew 18:11 "For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost." That is omitted from the New International Version--as is Acts 8:37, Acts 23:9 and Romans 13:9. My argument is only that I believe the Bible limits God. I don't believe that tomes handed down through the ages lack inspiration only that inspiration is open to critique based on the times in which the books were written and the human nature of those writing them. Twenty people in a board room cannot pass around the simplest of stories and have it remain unchanged. Imagine then translations, new versions, personal agendas--everything that would have moved and motivated those responsible for recording God's word. Still, thanks for the reply and for the thoughtfulness of your reply. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
For Abra.........
|
|
Many, Many years BC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Unequally Yoked
|
|
George Barna of The Barna Group has done some studies regarding divorce and how it plays out over lines of faith. The results are pretty interesting.
35% of Born Again Christians have been through at least one divorce. On another site "Faith Works" (www.faithandvalues.com) it is pretty clear that Christians (at least through 1999) had a higher, yes higher divorce rate than both atheists and agnostics. 24% of Christians had been divorced while 21% of atheists and agnostics. While the stats are close in number it is also clear that the "faithful" don't seem to have a monopoly on the sacred institution of marriage. If anyone can find numbers that are more current I'll be happy to amend my post. And while I understand that the point of the post was to ask about whether being unequally yoked was a good idea or not it appears (at least to some extent) that being equally yoked provides no promise of success. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
For Abra.........
|
|
Amen, from Amon the Egyptian God! And from Horus! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
For Abra.........
|
|
ABRA........ Didn't have time to read the responses on the other thread, before the thread vanished....so have no idea what went down.....but anyway Abra.......this is for you. This explains why you never got saved back then as a teeneager. You see....God sees the INTENT of your heart, Abra!! AND..... God ALSO SAW the INTENT of your heart....way back back THEN as a teenager, when you asked to SERVE Jesus. YEP!! Serve. Cause You did not come to Jesus to ask to becomed SAVED ....you ONLY came to Jesus with the INTENT of what YOU were going to DO for Jesus......and that was... you were gonna "SERVE" Jesus and PREACH for Him!! YEP..It was all about ABRA...and what ABRA was gonna do for the Lord..even BEFORE you were even Saved...... ...so it was all about proudful Abra and what Abra was going to do.....nothing more....so Abra could BOAST and make himself feel important.....and all the world would see what a great mighty preacher Abra was.....and that was the only INTENT of your heart back then, Abra......to become some big Preacher for Jesus!! AND NOTHING MORE!!!! AND GOD KNEW...and also did Satan..and that is why Nothing happened for you back then!!! Except the devil got a hold of you... and has been having a heyday with you ever since...making you think God is at fault..when in fact, it is not even the devil who is at fault..but Abra's selfish pride which is at fault!! And because of that, yuo have become a tool of satan, to be used by....who has lied to you and has you viciously turning against Jesus now, cause Jesus did not give you that Preaching position!! But like I said, Jesus SAW the INTENT of your heart back then Abra....and KNEW you did not MEAN business with God ...in fact YOU never EVEN asked to be SAved at all....... YOU ONLY ASKED TO SERVE!!!! And now you have viciously turned on Jesus..cause....how DARE Jesus NOT make you that great preacher you INTENDED to become!!! Well..... I have news for you Abra....... God SPEWS preachers like that out of his mouth......in fact.....a lot of preachers are in pulputs just like that today......for their OWN GAIN......AND NOTHING MORE......and they are NOT SAVED at all!! That is what churchianity is all about , by the way!! So Abra......THAT is why you never got BORN AGAIN!! But Now.... are you REALLY READY to Get REAL With God this time, Abra...and truly Become born again?? Then God WILL Get Real with you and Come into your Heart. And use your life mightily this time for sure. That decision is up to you..cause when you do get Real with God...and ask Jesus into your heart ...and with the RIGHT INTENT in yuor heart this time..and that is to humbly recieve Jesus .... THEN God will exalt you in due season, Abra ..but only when He first sees you have truly become HUMBLE!!!!! Pride cometh before the fall. Get Abra out of the way now......and let God in now. And watch what God will do with your life, Abra. The time is Now. Be Blessed Now.   The above post (and here I will openly concede that it was not addressed to me) wants to make me run away from Christianity more than embrace it. I don't know what (if anything) it will make Abra want to do but since it is posted in a public forum I suppose I have as much of a right to comment as anyone. First, it is utterly legalistic. The reason that Abra had no luck when he was a teenager (according to MorningSong) was that his intent was not where it should have been? That there is a huge breakdown in logic here escapes the OP. In essence the argument here is that with a broken and sinful heart, and in need of a savior, Abra's intent should have been more directed, more focused. How is that possible? That is like trying to fix what is broken with what is broken! It is like saying that someone came to God with a sinful heart but it did not take because they had a sinful heart. Huh? The rest of the post drifts in and out of direction and though I know MorningSong is a sincere person and that her words to Abra are nothing but sincere it again strikes me as almost desperate--not on Abra's part but on the part of the poster. Some say that pride cometh before the fall, but I'm inclined to believe that at times, pride comes after the ascension. In the event that anyone believes that I am simply trying to pick a fight, please keep in mind that like so many who have walked away from dogma, I once knelt before the reflection of my life in a small Baptist Church. I said and meant what I said one chilly Wednesday night and asked Christ into my heart and life. I guess I just didn't do it right. I went on pure faith, knowing nothing save for what I had been told Jesus wanted to do in my life. Soon after, I stupidly started to ask questions (this I've mentioned before) and at first it was just a fools errand, noting was ventured because I was sure that the tough questions had well thought out and logical answers. But they did not and soon I questioned how we could really "know" anything about the creator. Books handed down in one language and then translated into another--nothing ever written by God but only by those who followed and those written years after his life and death--and life. Even now it is the perfect circular argument. "Why is Christ the only way?" Well, because the Bible says that Christ is the only way. Well, how do we know that the Bible is accurate, without error, pure in every way? "Well, because He said so, in the Bible." It has to go back to those texts--there is simply nothing else that can prop up the Christian faith. Regardless--Abra is free to do and will do what works for him. If he became a Monk tomorrow and prayed for weeks without pause to a peach pit I would hold him in no lower regard. Just my thoughts. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exceptionally well worded sentiments--and well worth the thought and consideration they provoke.
-Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
"So, what if you are wrong?"
Edited by
Drew07_2
on
Mon 05/26/08 08:42 AM
|
|
Thanks to everyone who responded to this post. It was not set up nor did I set out to create an argument or a pointless debate. As I read the replies I could not help but think about what it must have been like to walk the earth and live in a time where ignorance ruled the day. There was a time when dogma made sense in that there were literally a thousand fears an hour to deal with. I can't imagine what it must have been like to not understand the night--the absence of the sun's light and warmth, to hope that it would once again rise.
I cannot imagine what it must have been like to not understand even basic science as it related to health. Imagine epilepsy a few thousand years ago. I don't blame the people in that time for thinking it was something of the devil, something indicating the most horrible type of spiritual corruption. There was so much that back then was not understood and there is much we still don't understand. But while we have progressed in many ways (for example, most people today don't really believe we should kill someone who works on the Sabbath) a number of people still hold on to the idea that we will regress to a more barbaric form of justice once we perish. I have no issues with such beliefs as people should be free and feel comfortable embracing beliefs that make sense to them even if they make absolutely no sense to me. Still, I hold no personal arrogance. I consider myself a skeptic not an atheist. I don't hate God, I hate the infanticide approved of in a book handed down through the ages, propped up as a tome of moral instruction. I don't hate religion, I hate everything done, every metaphorical (and literal) black eye inflicted because someone dared to think in a way that today is accepted as basic and obvious. Finally, I have absolutely nothing against hope or against faith. I am sure I would be miserable if I did not have hope or faith. I do have hope and I do believe in that which I can see, that which I can comprehend and that which stands up to logic and reason. The rest of it I'm willing to investigate and find a peace with. And if I'm wrong, then as wouldee said--"come what may." -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
"So, what if you are wrong?"
Edited by
Drew07_2
on
Sun 05/25/08 10:40 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
"So, what if you are wrong?"
Edited by
Drew07_2
on
Sun 05/25/08 10:40 PM
|
|
This questions was asked of me a few days ago during a friendly discussion with a Christian friend of mine. But in practical terms it has been asked of all skeptics hundreds of times in as many ways. Some ask me because they knew me when I subscribed to the main tenants of the Christian faith while other seem to ask the question as a subtle way of invoking a special kind of hubris generally reserved for the unflinchingly pious.
The friend who asked me the other day however is a friend--he was not attempting to attack or discredit, to argue or to slander. His question was sincere and it is with the same sincerity that I try to convey in this post the answer that I gave him. If at the moment of my last breath the universe opens and I find myself standing before a loving and patient and just father and if that father is the God of the Bible and if while standing there I am asked why I did not accept and believe according to the Bible, and moreover I am asked what (if anything) I have to say for myself, my answer will not be a long winded diatribe or a plea. It will be simple and it will be the only answer appropriate: "I was wrong." That's right--I would admit that I was wrong. If a moment was given me before being separated from the father for all of eternity via a trip to everlasting pain, thirst, hell-fire and never-ending torment I would do my best to explain my reasons, of Zoroaster, and of a number of other gods who came before Christ but whose stories were amazingly similar. I would ask about my being born guilty of a crime committed by the human condition that occurred thousands of years before I was born. But really, I would simply say: "I was wrong." According to most, at this point it would be too late for me. At that point (according to most mainstream Christian doctrines) I would be cast away from God. At that point, God, unable to look at the sinful child he created would reject me for being skeptical of him. That there were thousands of religions, many claiming their divine correctness, that many things were done in his name that cannot be morally or ethically accepted or justified, that there I used the mind given me by God--none of that would matter. At that point I would have the evidence I looked for in life. But at that same moment, when the evidence a skeptic needs is provided the door would shut, the game would be over, eternity would be set. I do not believe it likely that such a meeting will take place but then again, I do not know--cannot prove, and neither can anyone else. We ask for proof in so many areas of our lives and our lives ask for the same. Our entire legal system is based on proof, on evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Can you imagine a jury returning a verdict that stated: "I have faith of your guilt." Can you imagine anything more grotesque? No, we demand proof, evidence. Would you allow someone to operate on your child who could not prove he/she was a medical expert? What if they simply had faith that they would perform the surgery without complication? Would you not report them as a fraud? These are all good things. We should investigate, we should know, we should be sure. This allows me to live comfortably around different people of varying beliefs and ideas. Why is the proof we ask for in life, for the simple things not applicable when it comes to eternity? Why would "I was wrong" close the door on eternity? The answer is as cruel as it is obvious. It wouldn't have to--it could only count for nothing in the eyes of a vengeful, hateful, petty and heartless god. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Mac's or pc..
Edited by
Drew07_2
on
Sun 05/25/08 11:54 AM
|
|
My opinion on this might actually be worth less than what you paid for it because I am not really a "computer guy" just a computer user. I just picked up my first Mac a few months ago and I am loving it. I still use a XP loaded PC at work and have no issues there but that is a work computer and so it is basically a word processor. My Mac was easy to learn (despite some of my friends insisting that the learning curve might prove fatal) and I have enjoyed it. It took some getting used to--the minimize/close out icons are located in the top left corner as opposed the the top right. There is no right click on the mouse so you do manual or "file" commands to copy and paste.
But where there are subtle differences there are some very cool features. Safari isn't bad (though I am huge Firefox fan) and I have no issues with any of the pre-loaded software. iPhoto and iMovie are great. I run MS Office for Mac without issue and I love that my iTunes library transfered without issue. I guess for me the real issue here is that it does seem to work. I don't tinker with my computer (I did more on PCs but even then, not as much as some) so I just need it to run nice--not throw me error messages every four hours and allow me to do what I need it to do. So far--I've been very impressed. I am sold on Mac but I have nothing at all against PCs. I know that if ever again I want to game, I'm going to need a PC. Such is life. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The atheist and the marine
Edited by
Drew07_2
on
Sun 05/25/08 11:44 AM
|
|
LOL...funny... After reading all the posts it's very apparent that some here didn't "get it." It just goes to show that no matter how honorable, some will never appreciate God or our military. Happy Memorial Day & God bless our Military. Didn't get it? Hmmmm, the college professor challenges God to prove he is real by way of knocking him off of a platform. The professor is an idiot for challenging something he does not think is real but moving on-- The Marine--fearing that an all-powerful God might be insulted by the antics of an arrogant college professor decides to punch him in the face, knocking him out cold. The reason? Simple--God was busy protecting the troops overseas so that simple-minded professors would have the freedom to say and think "idiotic things." The result: The Marine in this story didn't in any way protect the professor's right to say idiotic things. Instead, he knocked him out for actually exercising the very right the Marine insists God is protecting. Nice, really. I suppose on the surface the point here is that the Marine (and again, I support our men and women in the Armed Forces) did an honorable thing. But dig even a bit deeper and what he really did was commit a felony on a man who challenged a God who didn't need protection in the first place. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The 2012 Scare
|
|
How many times have various people predicted the end of the world only to wake up disillusioned and still here? Pastors Chuck Meade, Charles Smith, Leland Jensen, Lester Sumrall, Pat Robertson, and perhaps best known failed "end of times" commentator--Hal Lindsey. Lindsey has been wrong a laughable number of times but still his books were devoured by those for whom rapturous fantasy was (and in some cases still is) a way of life.
In fact, a look back through history shows thousands of similar predictions. All have been wrong so I would not plan on avoiding the IRS in 2012. -Drew |
|
|
|
|
Previous
