This is a MUSIC forum. Irrelevant or disrespectful posts/topics will be removed by Admin. Please report any forum spam or inappropriate posts HERE.

All users can post to this forum on general music topics.

Moderators: bandmixmod1, jimmy990, spikedace

What is your religion?

16
39%
0
N/A
0
N/A
14
34%
11
27%

#83425 by philbymon
Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:39 am
You're quite right, BobdoB. I evidently DID look at it, & responded with my usual caustic remark when it come to anything about him.

All I remembered from it was

"I wrote an editorial on this HERE:

http://pawsgroup.info/index.php?option= ... &Itemid=53

If anyone is interested in this work, more info can be found HERE:


P.A.W.S.
Parents Against Wrongful Sentencing
http://pawsgroup.info"


& I assumed it was more BS about HIM, & the great things he's doing. I still think it's about him & the great things he's doing, btw, nothing here has changed any of that.

However, since I brought it up, I have now reposted the info for anyone who wants to look it up.

I'm still not the least buit interested, myself, though...

#83426 by neanderpaul
Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:42 am
I'm bringing a tshirt launcher and bowls of venison chili! Mwanahaha!! :twisted:

#83427 by philbymon
Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:47 am
To hell with these soft ammunitions! I'm bringing burning marshmallows what STICK to ya!..Oh! And some chocolate bars...and graham crackers...S'mores, anyone?

(Can't help it! S'mores just bring out my softy side!)

#83428 by neanderpaul
Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:49 am
Can you imagine?! Burning marshmallows hitting you in the face?!?! ARG! That would be like napalm. :shock:

#83429 by neanderpaul
Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:51 am
Craig, I don't know what I missed on your wife's kids but man that has to be tough. Sorry for your struggles bro. I will offer up some prayer on everyones behalf.

#83430 by Sir Jamsalot
Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:54 am
you guys must be a real hoot in person. I haven't laughed at work in a long time and the burning marshmallows / napalm comments almost caused a rainbow monitor.

#83432 by CraigMaxim
Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:10 am
neanderpaul wrote:Craig, I don't know what I missed on your wife's kids but man that has to be tough. Sorry for your struggles bro. I will offer up some prayer on everyones behalf.



Thank you.

Pray for the boys to endure their trials.

And pray for my marriage too, if you don't mind.

This has almost ended my marriage. And still may.


.

#83434 by CraigMaxim
Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:15 am
Chris or Paul,

You believe that "God's Word" cannot contain any possibility for error. But in saying this, we all understand that you are actually referring to the Bible, as being God's word. Just as if He had written it with His own hand, correct?

Are we speaking of the original inspirations which were transcribed into Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek?

Or do you extend this to translations as well?

Such as an English version of the Bible?

.

#83435 by CraigMaxim
Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:32 am
neanderpaul wrote:
I think it's more impressive that he slung out the cosmos in an instant.



But He didn't sling it out in an instant. He took 6 days remember?

The act of Creation itself is evidence of the boundless power of God. It is powerful whether in 6 days, Billions of years, or a single instant. Nothing is comparable to it. So who would nitpick? Is He less powerful because He took billions of years, rather than 6 days? Is He less powerful if He took 6 days, as opposed to the instant you were wanting to be impressed with?


neanderpaul wrote:It looks like you are placing limits on God again Craig.



I cannot place limits on God Paul.

What blows ME away about the Father I love, is that HE LIMITS HIMSELF!!!!

He limited Himself by flesh, to show you how much he cared for your soul, and your relationship to Him. He let strict religionists he had come to save, shout for a criminal to be set free, so that Jesus would be the one beaten, mocked and murdered instead.

He had all the power of the heavens to prevent this. A multitude of angels at His disposal to stop it, and He gave up that ability, willingly. He allowed fallen men, to spit on Him, beat Him and kill Him by a torturous manner of death. He let His creation, His children, take the life of their Father and creator.

I don't let my kids talk back to me.

He let His kill Him.

He limits Himself Paul.

Don't you see?

He is not a master to be served.

He is a Father to be loved.

He doesn't care about proper etiquette for WORSHIP.

He wants a LOVING relationship with his children.

He lives Paul.

Not in a book.

He LIVES for real. He speaks to us. You can feel Him, hear Him, KNOW HIM. Just as easily as you can know your next door neighbor.

If I grew up beliving that I could only relate to my mother through a book. I don't know what kind of family I would call that. No child could be happy with that kind of relationship with a parent.

.

#83436 by philbymon
Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:47 am
:shock: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

#83437 by Sir Jamsalot
Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:51 am
CraigMaxim wrote:Chris or Paul,

You believe that "God's Word" cannot contain any possibility for error. But in saying this, we all understand that you are actually referring to the Bible, as being God's word. Just as if He had written it with His own hand, correct?

Are we speaking of the original inspirations which were transcribed into Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek?

Or do you extend this to translations as well?

Such as an English version of the Bible?

.


Craig,

Speaking for myself, I hold to the 1646 version of the Westminster Confession of Faith. To spare others having to sift through it, I refer you to the first section which describes very concisely my own position concerning the infallability of Scripture, and the fallable agents He used to produce it, and His ongoing preservation of it. How scripture is preserved is a faith committment on my part. But we can discuss it after you've carefully read Chapter 1, if you're interested that is.

http://www.reformed.org/documents/index ... faith.html


edit: I meant first chapter, not section. The chapter has several articles. All of them are pertinent.

regards,
Chris
Last edited by Sir Jamsalot on Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

#83442 by BobdoB
Wed Sep 16, 2009 2:43 am
Chris4Blues wrote:
CraigMaxim wrote:Chris or Paul,

You believe that "God's Word" cannot contain any possibility for error. But in saying this, we all understand that you are actually referring to the Bible, as being God's word. Just as if He had written it with His own hand, correct?

Are we speaking of the original inspirations which were transcribed into Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek?

Or do you extend this to translations as well?

Such as an English version of the Bible?

.


Craig,

Speaking for myself, I hold to the 1646 version of the Westminster Confession of Faith. To spare others having to sift through it, I refer you to the first section which describes very concisely my own position concerning the infallability of Scripture, and the fallable agents He used to produce it, and His ongoing preservation of it. How scripture is preserved is a faith committment on my part. But we can discuss it after you've carefully read Chapter 1, if you're interested that is.

http://www.reformed.org/documents/index ... faith.html


regards,
Chris


Ok, so that website says that these bible books are the word of God. So? Even if written in 1646, it is still a cannon of man. Some of the books of Apocrypha are still in the bible depending on your choice of denominations.

#83455 by Sir Jamsalot
Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:33 am
BobdoB wrote:
Chris4Blues wrote:
CraigMaxim wrote:Chris or Paul,

You believe that "God's Word" cannot contain any possibility for error. But in saying this, we all understand that you are actually referring to the Bible, as being God's word. Just as if He had written it with His own hand, correct?

Are we speaking of the original inspirations which were transcribed into Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek?

Or do you extend this to translations as well?

Such as an English version of the Bible?

.


Craig,

Speaking for myself, I hold to the 1646 version of the Westminster Confession of Faith. To spare others having to sift through it, I refer you to the first section which describes very concisely my own position concerning the infallability of Scripture, and the fallable agents He used to produce it, and His ongoing preservation of it. How scripture is preserved is a faith committment on my part. But we can discuss it after you've carefully read Chapter 1, if you're interested that is.

http://www.reformed.org/documents/index ... faith.html


regards,
Chris


Ok, so that website says that these bible books are the word of God. So? Even if written in 1646, it is still a cannon of man. Some of the books of Apocrypha are still in the bible depending on your choice of denominations.


Well, it's a confession, not a cannon - you know, a summary of the biblical doctrines found in the Bible. Interesting story behind the Westminster Divines - it was a council devoted to investigating and summarizing what the Bible says.

Anyways, Craig asked what either Paul or myself believed and there you have it - what I believe. We never got into why I believe it, which is a different story.

BTW, you scrolled down, correct? or did you just read the first paragraph and bullet points counting the books?

Chris

#83457 by ratsass
Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:42 am
Chris4Blues wrote:Chris4Blues lobs a squirrel sandwich into the crowd, then runs :lol:


philbymon wrote:Hey! This is way too small to feed us all! You tryin' to stir sh*t up again, Chris, ya booger?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Waiting for Craig to take that one squirrel sandwich and feed the multitude. :roll: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

#83462 by philbymon
Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:18 am
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests