100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: A question on killing | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Kleisto wrote:
That's to say nothing of the fact that......if not for this blood sacrifice, we would be punished as a whole for sins that we never really committed, but that others before us had. No way you can tell me that is fair. A truly loving parent would NEVER do that to their kids, so there's no chance that God would. Well, not only that, but you can't even compare God and human parents. That sort of an analogy must always fail. Human parent do "create" their children. They simply "procreate" them. Supposedly God creates each and ever one of us. So what the Hebrew fables are telling us is that our creator cannot create anything but sinners. Because the Bible says that all men are sinners. Moreover this God was supposed to have created us in HIS IMAGE. 
What then does that say about God? God must be a sinner too then. It's a train-wreck of a fable. It can't be made to work verbatim. That's truly all there is to it. At best, there may be some spiritual insight among the babble. And that's probably true of all religions. But it clearly cannot be the verbatim word of any single personified God because it's too full of self-contradictions. Take the good morals from it, and reject the absurdities. Then move on and do the same thing with all other religions. That's truly the only reasonable way to deal with it. 
To cling to it tenaciously and beat other people over the head with it insisting that they too must accept it verbatim just isn't reasonable, IMHO. Moreover this God was supposed to have created us in HIS IMAGE. How does our appearance have anything to do with sinning or not sinning? God created US, he does NOT create our ACTIONS. Which are sinful at times. That is done by our own choice, our own free will, our own desires. Has nothing to do with how one was created. But it clearly cannot be the verbatim word of any single personified God because it's too full of self-contradictions. The contradictions are only between your left and right ear *no insult intended*. Just you've tried to come up with the "contradictions" which we then show you how they are not contradictions. You then state that we are twisting words and or their meaning. So it is YOU that wishes for the contradictions to be their when in reality they are not. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
funches
on
Tue 12/28/10 07:31 AM
|
|
What would Jesus do? Anyone have any ideas? Assume that Jesus has a wife and children in this situation and is living on a farm, with animals, crops, barns, and a nice house that he and his sons, daughters, and wife worked hard to build. The crops are ready to harvest, it's fall, cold weather is setting in. What do you think Jesus would do in this situation? Isn't that the question we're often taught to ask? So what would your answer to that question be? What would Jesus do? Jesus learned what the deal was the first time he came ....which is why when he comes a second time (battle at Armageddon) ...he is coming back as a jedi to slice and dice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What would Jesus do? Anyone have any ideas? Assume that Jesus has a wife and children in this situation and is living on a farm, with animals, crops, barns, and a nice house that he and his sons, daughters, and wife worked hard to build. The crops are ready to harvest, it's fall, cold weather is setting in. What do you think Jesus would do in this situation? Isn't that the question we're often taught to ask? So what would your answer to that question be? What would Jesus do? Jesus learned what the deal was the first time he came ....which is why when he comes a second time (battle at Armageddon) ...he is coming back as a jedi to slice and dice Does that mean I can have my X Wing fighter? I always thought those were so cool. I would fly around making thanksgiving turkeys out of angels with it. Four big lasers and a pair of Proton torpedoes! KICK AZZ! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What would Jesus do? Anyone have any ideas? Assume that Jesus has a wife and children in this situation and is living on a farm, with animals, crops, barns, and a nice house that he and his sons, daughters, and wife worked hard to build. The crops are ready to harvest, it's fall, cold weather is setting in. What do you think Jesus would do in this situation? Isn't that the question we're often taught to ask? So what would your answer to that question be? What would Jesus do? Jesus learned what the deal was the first time he came ....which is why when he comes a second time (battle at Armageddon) ...he is coming back as a jedi to slice and dice Does that mean I can have my X Wing fighter? I always thought those were so cool. I would fly around making thanksgiving turkeys out of angels with it. Four big lasers and a pair of Proton torpedoes! to keep it in line with "Revelations" ... may have to disguise that X Wing Fighter as a cloud or a locust KICK AZZ!
that picture is very accurate...if one was to carry a cross that size the same distance that Jesus carried it everyday for three months they will have muscles like that....considering of course they don't get a hernia first ... |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CeriseRose
on
Tue 12/28/10 06:28 PM
|
|
Stating I'm wrong doesn't make it true. Just like denying your words doesn't change the facts. I don't have to call John or any other author a liar, but I will call interpreters and King James liars. Hell is NOT scriptural, and besides that, that verse you quoted, if I'm correct, is not even about "hell". I don't expect you to understand spiritual things, but if anyone uses a concordance, they will see the truth about the lies and hate spread by others. You say you've studied for 50 years? Why not try another 50 hours with a concordance? What makes you think that I haven't already considered concordances? I absolutely agree with you Peter, different people can interpret things differently. But that's no reason to call various interpretations "lies". They are simply different interpretations. In fact, this is why these biblical-based religions have so many diverging sects. No one can agree on the details. ~~~~ However, Peter. No concordance can erase the bulk of what's in the Bible. It can't erase the fact that the Old Testament has God instructing people to make blood sacrifices of animals to atone their sins. I personally have a major problem with that concept alone an no concordance can make that go away. I simply don't believe that an all-wise creator of this universe would request that anyone atone their sins via a sacrificial lamb. I personally see no wisdom in that whatsoever, and no one is ever going to convince me otherwise. Yet, the New Testament is based squarely on this very idea that sins must be 'paid' for via a blood sacrifice of a perfect lamb. And Jesus is being held up as that perfect sacrificial lamb. The whole religion is squared founded on the very concept that I find totally unreasonable. That's to say nothing of the fact that......if not for this blood sacrifice, we would be punished as a whole for sins that we never really committed, but that others before us had. No way you can tell me that is fair. A truly loving parent would NEVER do that to their kids, so there's no chance that God would. Why did Jesus shed his blood? Matthew 26:28 ...this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. The Lord Jesus Christ shed his blood for the remission of sins. As we examine scriptures from both the Old and New Testaments, we can gain a better understanding of the significance of the blood of Jesus. . . . . . . . . . . . When we turn back to the Old Testament of the Bible, we see that after sin entered into the world, God required the blood sacrifice of animals for the atonement of sins. Leviticus 17:11, For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Leviticus 4:3-5 If the priest that is anointed do sin...then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering....he shall... lay his hand upon the bullock's head, and kill the bullock before the LORD. And the priest that is anointed shall take of the bullock's blood, and bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation... But the blood of the animals still couldn't do the trick. The Israelites were still unfaithful to their God as evidenced by their awhoring after other gods. A better sacrifice was needed. Hebrews 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. God promised His people, the Jewish people, a new covenant about 600 years before the coming of Christ. We will see that this covenant would also require blood. Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. In the Bible, we have the Old Testament (or Hebrew Scriptures) and the New Testament. Both were ushered in by blood. The Old Testament came by the blood of animals. The New Testament by the blood of Jesus Christ. Old Testament Exodus 24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words. Hebrews 9:18-20 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. New Testament Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. --Jesus Christ The animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were only a picture of the ultimate sacrifice. When Jesus Christ went to the cross almost 2,000 years ago, He was the ULTIMATE sacrifice. His skin was whipped off by scourging, His beard was torn out of his cheeks, His head pierced with thorns, His face marred more than any man. He was unrecognizable. The Bible says he was more marred than ANY man. His hands and feet were nailed through with thick spikes, His side pierced with a spear after he died. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, completely abolished the system of animal sacrifice forever. The animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were only a picture, a figure, of the true sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Their blood was only a figure of the blood of Jesus that would be shed thousands of years later on a cross outside the city of Jeruselem. The animal sacrifices were... Hebrews 9:9 ...a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience... 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? The blood of animals had to be shed over and over but the blood of Jesus was shed only one time. The Catholic religion does not understand this and contends that the blood is shed over and over again in the mass, but the Bible says something different: Hebrews 10:12, ...after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God. Hebrews 7:27 ...this he did once, when he offered up himself. Hebrews 9:28 ...Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many... Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. The blood of Jesus is powerful. It is a saving, healing blood. (continued @ http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/blood.htm) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stating I'm wrong doesn't make it true. Just like denying your words doesn't change the facts. I don't have to call John or any other author a liar, but I will call interpreters and King James liars. Hell is NOT scriptural, and besides that, that verse you quoted, if I'm correct, is not even about "hell". I don't expect you to understand spiritual things, but if anyone uses a concordance, they will see the truth about the lies and hate spread by others. You say you've studied for 50 years? Why not try another 50 hours with a concordance? What makes you think that I haven't already considered concordances? I absolutely agree with you Peter, different people can interpret things differently. But that's no reason to call various interpretations "lies". They are simply different interpretations. In fact, this is why these biblical-based religions have so many diverging sects. No one can agree on the details. ~~~~ However, Peter. No concordance can erase the bulk of what's in the Bible. It can't erase the fact that the Old Testament has God instructing people to make blood sacrifices of animals to atone their sins. I personally have a major problem with that concept alone an no concordance can make that go away. I simply don't believe that an all-wise creator of this universe would request that anyone atone their sins via a sacrificial lamb. I personally see no wisdom in that whatsoever, and no one is ever going to convince me otherwise. Yet, the New Testament is based squarely on this very idea that sins must be 'paid' for via a blood sacrifice of a perfect lamb. And Jesus is being held up as that perfect sacrificial lamb. The whole religion is squared founded on the very concept that I find totally unreasonable. That's to say nothing of the fact that......if not for this blood sacrifice, we would be punished as a whole for sins that we never really committed, but that others before us had. No way you can tell me that is fair. A truly loving parent would NEVER do that to their kids, so there's no chance that God would. Why did Jesus shed his blood? Matthew 26:28 ...this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. The Lord Jesus Christ shed his blood for the remission of sins. As we examine scriptures from both the Old and New Testaments, we can gain a better understanding of the significance of the blood of Jesus. . . . . . . . . . . . When we turn back to the Old Testament of the Bible, we see that after sin entered into the world, God required the blood sacrifice of animals for the atonement of sins. Leviticus 17:11, For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Leviticus 4:3-5 If the priest that is anointed do sin...then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering....he shall... lay his hand upon the bullock's head, and kill the bullock before the LORD. And the priest that is anointed shall take of the bullock's blood, and bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation... But the blood of the animals still couldn't do the trick. The Israelites were still unfaithful to their God as evidenced by their awhoring after other gods. A better sacrifice was needed. Hebrews 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. God promised His people, the Jewish people, a new covenant about 600 years before the coming of Christ. We will see that this covenant would also require blood. Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. In the Bible, we have the Old Testament (or Hebrew Scriptures) and the New Testament. Both were ushered in by blood. The Old Testament came by the blood of animals. The New Testament by the blood of Jesus Christ. Old Testament Exodus 24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words. Hebrews 9:18-20 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. New Testament Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. --Jesus Christ The animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were only a picture of the ultimate sacrifice. When Jesus Christ went to the cross almost 2,000 years ago, He was the ULTIMATE sacrifice. His skin was whipped off by scourging, His beard was torn out of his cheeks, His head pierced with thorns, His face marred more than any man. He was unrecognizable. The Bible says he was more marred than ANY man. His hands and feet were nailed through with thick spikes, His side pierced with a spear after he died. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, completely abolished the system of animal sacrifice forever. The animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were only a picture, a figure, of the true sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Their blood was only a figure of the blood of Jesus that would be shed thousands of years later on a cross outside the city of Jeruselem. The animal sacrifices were... Hebrews 9:9 ...a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience... 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? The blood of animals had to be shed over and over but the blood of Jesus was shed only one time. The Catholic religion does not understand this and contends that the blood is shed over and over again in the mass, but the Bible says something different: Hebrews 10:12, ...after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God. Hebrews 7:27 ...this he did once, when he offered up himself. Hebrews 9:28 ...Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many... Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. The blood of Jesus is powerful. It is a saving, healing blood. (continued @ http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/blood.htm) You can quote scriptures all you want, but it's not going to convince me that any of this was justified, much less that it isn't ritualistic in nature. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stating I'm wrong doesn't make it true. Just like denying your words doesn't change the facts. I don't have to call John or any other author a liar, but I will call interpreters and King James liars. Hell is NOT scriptural, and besides that, that verse you quoted, if I'm correct, is not even about "hell". I don't expect you to understand spiritual things, but if anyone uses a concordance, they will see the truth about the lies and hate spread by others. You say you've studied for 50 years? Why not try another 50 hours with a concordance? What makes you think that I haven't already considered concordances? I absolutely agree with you Peter, different people can interpret things differently. But that's no reason to call various interpretations "lies". They are simply different interpretations. In fact, this is why these biblical-based religions have so many diverging sects. No one can agree on the details. ~~~~ However, Peter. No concordance can erase the bulk of what's in the Bible. It can't erase the fact that the Old Testament has God instructing people to make blood sacrifices of animals to atone their sins. I personally have a major problem with that concept alone an no concordance can make that go away. I simply don't believe that an all-wise creator of this universe would request that anyone atone their sins via a sacrificial lamb. I personally see no wisdom in that whatsoever, and no one is ever going to convince me otherwise. Yet, the New Testament is based squarely on this very idea that sins must be 'paid' for via a blood sacrifice of a perfect lamb. And Jesus is being held up as that perfect sacrificial lamb. The whole religion is squared founded on the very concept that I find totally unreasonable. That's to say nothing of the fact that......if not for this blood sacrifice, we would be punished as a whole for sins that we never really committed, but that others before us had. No way you can tell me that is fair. A truly loving parent would NEVER do that to their kids, so there's no chance that God would. Why did Jesus shed his blood? Matthew 26:28 ...this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. The Lord Jesus Christ shed his blood for the remission of sins. As we examine scriptures from both the Old and New Testaments, we can gain a better understanding of the significance of the blood of Jesus. . . . . . . . . . . . When we turn back to the Old Testament of the Bible, we see that after sin entered into the world, God required the blood sacrifice of animals for the atonement of sins. Leviticus 17:11, For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Leviticus 4:3-5 If the priest that is anointed do sin...then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering....he shall... lay his hand upon the bullock's head, and kill the bullock before the LORD. And the priest that is anointed shall take of the bullock's blood, and bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation... But the blood of the animals still couldn't do the trick. The Israelites were still unfaithful to their God as evidenced by their awhoring after other gods. A better sacrifice was needed. Hebrews 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. God promised His people, the Jewish people, a new covenant about 600 years before the coming of Christ. We will see that this covenant would also require blood. Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. In the Bible, we have the Old Testament (or Hebrew Scriptures) and the New Testament. Both were ushered in by blood. The Old Testament came by the blood of animals. The New Testament by the blood of Jesus Christ. Old Testament Exodus 24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words. Hebrews 9:18-20 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. New Testament Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. --Jesus Christ The animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were only a picture of the ultimate sacrifice. When Jesus Christ went to the cross almost 2,000 years ago, He was the ULTIMATE sacrifice. His skin was whipped off by scourging, His beard was torn out of his cheeks, His head pierced with thorns, His face marred more than any man. He was unrecognizable. The Bible says he was more marred than ANY man. His hands and feet were nailed through with thick spikes, His side pierced with a spear after he died. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, completely abolished the system of animal sacrifice forever. The animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were only a picture, a figure, of the true sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Their blood was only a figure of the blood of Jesus that would be shed thousands of years later on a cross outside the city of Jeruselem. The animal sacrifices were... Hebrews 9:9 ...a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience... 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? The blood of animals had to be shed over and over but the blood of Jesus was shed only one time. The Catholic religion does not understand this and contends that the blood is shed over and over again in the mass, but the Bible says something different: Hebrews 10:12, ...after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God. Hebrews 7:27 ...this he did once, when he offered up himself. Hebrews 9:28 ...Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many... Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. The blood of Jesus is powerful. It is a saving, healing blood. (continued @ http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/blood.htm) You can quote scriptures all you want, but it's not going to convince me that any of this was justified, much less that it isn't ritualistic in nature. You're free to choose what you will. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone is free to believe what they want.
If people want to believe in a god that is appeased by gory blood and guts that's their choice. Some of us prefer to believe that if a god exists it's probably above us and not beneath us in terms of maturity and intelligence. I see no reason to believe that a supreme being would have the mentality of a barroom drunkard. So I see religions that have Zeus-like godheads as being rather crude. If there truly exists a supreme being, then chance are that it's truly supreme. Eastern Mysticism offers spiritual philosophies that are more compatible with the notion of a genuine supreme conscious creator. So why not go with what's compatible with what we all hope god might be like? Why assume that God is mundane and crude? Just because a bunch of crude mundane people have said so? Sorry, but that's just not impressive. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why assume that God is mundane and crude? Just because a bunch of crude mundane people have said so? Sorry, but that's just not impressive. You're they only one making that claim... So I agree with you there, it's not impressive. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why assume that God is mundane and crude? Just because a bunch of crude mundane people have said so? Sorry, but that's just not impressive. You're they only one making that claim... So I agree with you there, it's not impressive. I'm nowhere near the only person who has made this observation. The people who wrote these stories laid down their own claim to being crude and mundane by the very nature of their history and their social conventions. There are many people who feel that the ancient Hebrews were crude. In fact, they even refer to themselves as in this way quite often within their own stories. I won't bother posting their quotes, I'm sure you can find them if you have any interest in truth. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What would Jesus do? Anyone have any ideas? Assume that Jesus has a wife and children in this situation and is living on a farm, with animals, crops, barns, and a nice house that he and his sons, daughters, and wife worked hard to build. The crops are ready to harvest, it's fall, cold weather is setting in. What do you think Jesus would do in this situation? Isn't that the question we're often taught to ask? So what would your answer to that question be? What would Jesus do? GO STARWARZ! BOOYAH! But seriously, would'nt you want like a death star? Or maybe a Millenium falcon? You could customize the hell out of the falcon (Not hans your own) And make it this awsome fighter! Personally I would not go for anything star wars. No I would rather have a TARDIS from "doctor who" Then I could just invite all my friends over and travel back to the begining of time and space and watch what REALLY happened! Jesus learned what the deal was the first time he came ....which is why when he comes a second time (battle at Armageddon) ...he is coming back as a jedi to slice and dice Does that mean I can have my X Wing fighter? I always thought those were so cool. I would fly around making thanksgiving turkeys out of angels with it. Four big lasers and a pair of Proton torpedoes! KICK AZZ!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My response got stuck in the part above the pic. It can starts with "GO STARWARZ!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
People like that are unredeemable. There are people like that even today, who take no responsibility for their actions. It's always a travisty when they are wronged, but when it comes to wronging others, they "didn't do anything". At that time, they're as good as feral.
You don't have any obligation to stop them. But if you have no choice, they should be killed for your family's sake. If there is a creator, and it really wants them redeemed, they'll be reincarnated. There's nothing that can be done about it in this life. They made their choice. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
People like that are unredeemable. There are people like that even today, who take no responsibility for their actions. It's always a travisty when they are wronged, but when it comes to wronging others, they "didn't do anything". At that time, they're as good as feral.
You don't have any obligation to stop them. But if you have no choice, they should be killed for your family's sake. If there is a creator, and it really wants them redeemed, they'll be reincarnated. There's nothing that can be done about it in this life. They made their choice. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
People like that are unredeemable. There are people like that even today, who take no responsibility for their actions. It's always a travisty when they are wronged, but when it comes to wronging others, they "didn't do anything". At that time, they're as good as feral. You don't have any obligation to stop them. But if you have no choice, they should be killed for your family's sake. If there is a creator, and it really wants them redeemed, they'll be reincarnated. There's nothing that can be done about it in this life. They made their choice. There's nothing that can be done about it in this life. They made their choice. Yes they have made their choice. And they will have their judgement of that choice. Life is full of choices, choose wisely. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I imagining this scenario, I would simply imagine them away to the cornfield.
Simple, eh? I also notice that you only allow for the actions of men in this scenario. I guess that women are merely the pawn of the strongest man. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I imagining this scenario, I would simply imagine them away to the cornfield. Simple, eh? I also notice that you only allow for the actions of men in this scenario. I guess that women are merely the pawn of the strongest man. Pawn to King's Bishop 8 --- Queen me! Now she's the most powerful. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Self Defense is Justifiable
Murder can be wrong Murdering someone your jealous of I think is wrong murdering a man who you know is going to kill 10 people could be justifiable Vengeance can be wrong if a man kills your whole family and you hunt him I dont think wrong if a man kill someone who humiliated him probably wrong |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I imagining this scenario, I would simply imagine them away to the cornfield. Simple, eh? I also notice that you only allow for the actions of men in this scenario. I guess that women are merely the pawn of the strongest man. Honestly, I don't see why a woman couldn't do any of the options I listed, but since you think that women are pretty much helpless without a man around... e) Make them a sandwich, f) Call your friends and cry about it, g) get a mani and pedi and a facial, h) Flash them some cleavage and hope they let you off with a warning. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I want to play a thought game... Imagine you lived in the wild west days of America. Every man is a law unto himself, because there are no laws, cities, police or military. Now imagine that a family of vicious murderers moved onto your land and was a threat to you and your families safety and security. Imagine that they were rapists and murderers of men, women and children. They ignore your warnings that the land is yours and absolutely refuse to leave. Would you a) Move away, b) Risk your and your children's lives by letting them stay or c) Kill them or d) Try to drive them off with force? Or some other action? Back in 'them' days... Wouldn't matter if they was crazies or not... If they moved in on my land I would warn once.... then hunt them till they were gone. No law, my land, goodby. |
|
|
|
|
