0
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 10/5/26 at 6:27 pm to Timeoday
Not sure why anyone is surprised by this. The Bible told us this was going to happen.
Posted on 10/5/26 at 8:05 pm to SOSFAN
True
Posted on 10/5/26 at 11:48 pm to Timeoday
quote:
biggest beatdown in the history of a Texas U S Senate election
If recent polling trends continue, you may be right. Just two weeks ago Paxton was the favorite on betting markets to win in a high contested race, with a 54% chance to prevail. Today that contest definitely leans blue, with Talarico now a 70% likely winner.
It's apparent that likely voters for the US Senate race in Texas don't give a rat's arse what Talarico's church teaches. At least he has a faith; his opponent's religion seems to be one that breaks biblical covenants and exalts self-gratification.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 12:25 am to Timeoday
She won’t slander the Virgin Mary to my face.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 12:42 am to jizzle6609
quote:
She won’t slander the Virgin Mary to my face.
Yep, I remember that teaching from Jesus. Slap that bitches other cheek.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 11:46 pm to 3down10
quote:You haven't really provided arguments so far, though. You make a lot of assertions and don't support them. I'm still waiting on you to actually rebut anything I've said or support your own statements.
I'm not goign to keep arguing with your dumbass over it.
quote:First, that's not how reading comprehension works. When you pick up a book and are trying to understand what the author is saying at any given moment, you don't only need to read the immediate surrounding words, but the rest of the words of the author from that chapter and book. You can even seek guidance from other writings from that author to help you understand his meaning. That's what Christians do with the Bible: we read the entire chapter, book, other writings from that author, other writings from the New Testament, and other writings from the Old Testament. The claim is that all Scripture is God-breathed, so we treat it that way.
If you can't support the text within Mark10 it's because you are ignoring the context and applying your own meaning.
Second, while it's not necessary to show the context of Mark 10 as speaking of faith and trust as the means of salvation (not works)--since the rest of Mark and the New Testament can be called upon to show this--the context actually does support my position over and against yours.
The first section is Mark 10:1-12, and is teaching about divorce and marriage. Jesus doesn't talk about eternal life at all in this portion but provides insight into the purpose of marriage and God's desire in it.
Second two is from verses 13-16 and is about the children being brought to Jesus. Children are brought for a blessing and to be touched by Jesus, the Messiah, and the faith of their parents is extended to their children, and Jesus uses this moment to rebuke His disciples and say that one must be like one of those children--who lack understanding but no pride to argue--to enter the kingdom of Heaven. This says nothing of works and understanding, because the infants and little children lack knowledge and understanding, and they were not obedient to the law, but were being brought to Jesus based on the faith of their parents.
Verses 17-22 are about the rich young man, as we talked about, and the following verses (23-31) explain that the rich tend to trust in their possessions, which cannot save them. They do not trust in God.
The next section in verses 32-34 are bout Jesus foretelling His own death. Jesus isn't talking about salvation by works here, but only expressing what was going to happen to Him. He was going to die and be raised from the dead.
Next is section on service in the kingdom in verses 35-45. This section is about James and John seeking to be exalted with Christ in Heaven and Jesus saying that to be exalted, one must be made low, and that those who are great in standing must be low in service to others. This is where Jesus speaks of Himself serving others through giving Himself as a ransom. Note that Jesus doesn't say that His disciples were to give their lives as a ransom, as if He was teaching them as merely an example. He taught that He was going to ransom many by His life.
Finally, the last section of Mark 10 from 46 to 52 was a narrative about Jesus healing Bartimaeus, the blind man. Bartimaeus keeps calling out to Jesus to heal him and Jesus does. What does Jesus say is the basis for His mercy towards Bartimaeus? It wasn't Bartimaeus' understanding of deep things or his obedience, but his faith. He trusts that Jesus will heal him as the Messiah (he calls him the son of David), and Jesus rewards his faith. Bartimaeus then follows after Jesus where the rich man didn't.
In none of these sections is Jesus rewarding understanding and obedience as such, but Jesus speaks of humility and faith, and His own death for a ransom to others. If you interpret the rich young man in light of the rest of the chapter, the rich man lacked faith, trust, and humility, and severed himself (or his wealth, more like) rather than God. He was an idolater, which is what Jesus brought out of him and explained to His disciples: that man trusted in his we, not in God. That is the context of Mark 10.
quote:That was a statement made within Mark 10, but Mark 10's message is more diverse, because Mark 10 has several parts to it.
Especially when the actual message of Mark 10 is that you must keep the commandments, which is what was asked of the rich man.
However, if you're referring to just the portion of Mark 10 where Jesus speaks of eternal life to the rich young man, then, again, that must be read within its broader context, and it's meaning is not that you must keep the commandments, but that rich men trust in their wealth which makes it hard for them to trust God. Jesus explained that immediately after the rich young man walks away.
quote:There was no lie. Jesus was referring to what Christians call the covenant of works. That covenant was made with Adam and stipulated that if he kept the law perfectly, he would live forever. Adam broke that covenant when he sinned, and it led to his immediate spiritual death, and his eventually physical death. All Christians are under this covenant of works if they are not trusting in Jesus, but this covenant can only bring death now, because no one can obey God's law perfectly
You simply claim Jesus lied to the rich man and/or mislead the rich man in order to invalidate the entire chapter and then you cherry pick verses from other parts of the bible to support that.
Jesus had to take on flesh and obey the covenant of works as one of us so that with the covenant requirements satisfied, He can impute the benefits to His people by faith. That was part of the covenant of grace, which the Father made with the Son before all time.
So, what Jesus was saying to the rich man was that he was under the law and if he sought to be saved by the law, he needed to be perfect. The rich man was trusting in his wealth from the get-go, and because he thought that he kept the law perfectly already, Jesus attacked his idolatry under the first commandment to show that he was a sinner and could not keep the law in the first point. That's why Jesus was emphasizing the law with him, because he was already stubborn and faithless. It's why Jesus said that no one is good but God. Jesus was prepping the man with the fact that only God is perfect, and the law cannot make one good.
Jesus went on to touch on this in the follow passage after the rich man walked away. He told His disciples how difficult it is for a rich man to be saved because they trust in their riches rather than trusting in God.
quote:I am not a liar, and I do not blaspheme the Holy Spirit. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the full and final rejection of the Spirit's call upon a sinner. You cannot be forgiven of rejecting the gospel message to your grave. It's why you need to turn from your wickedness and believe upon Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins before it is too late for you.
You are a liar and you do the one thing that is unforgivable.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 11:48 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
First, that's not how reading comprehension works. When you pick up a book and are trying to understand what the author is saying at any given moment, you don't only need to read the immediate surrounding words, but the rest of the words of the author from that chapter and book.
You are quoting text from OTHER BOOKS while ignoring the text in the same chapter as you quote.
You found one word in the chapter, and then added your own meaning.
It's dishonest bullshite.
This post was edited on 10/6/26 at 11:50 pm
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:41 am to 3down10
quote:First of all, you ignored everything I took the time to write out about the chapter of Mark 10. I went through every section of that chapter and you have no comment about it. I personally think it's a sign of your own dishonesty that you keep accusing me of cherry-picking while ignoring the extensive writing I'm providing of the in-context verse explanation and exegesis.
You are quoting text from OTHER BOOKS while ignoring the text in the same chapter as you quote.
You found one word in the chapter, and then added your own meaning.
It's dishonest bullshite.
Second, I'm quoting other books OF THE BIBLE. It's all part of one corpus. It's how the Jews and Christians understood these concepts. It's also God's Word, which is most important for the discussion. You are the one cherry-picking when you ignore one book while accepting another. You reject Paul because you are ignorant of Christianity and believe lies about him and his teaching, but it seems you've never actually studied his writings. That's all an aside, though.
Lastly, if you have a problem with how I'm explaining things from the text, itself, then you are free to rebut it. You are refusing to do that. You are just complaining that you don't like what I'm saying, but you aren't providing any reasoning as to why I'm wrong in what I'm saying. You aren't even defending your position. Again, you're just complaining.
There is nothing dishonest about what I've said. I've explained the truth and the whole truth about what I believe. You keep saying "dishonest", but I'm becoming more and more convinced that you don't know what the word means. Perhaps your "god" should give you some revelation about that, because the dictionary doesn't seem to be helping you, currently.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:17 am to FooManChoo
quote:
First of all, you ignored everything I took the time to write out about the chapter of Mark 10.
I think you are disgusting. The amount of time I give you is well more than I should. I'm not wasting my time with your manipulations.
quote:
Second, I'm quoting other books OF THE BIBLE. It's all part of one corpus. It's how the Jews and Christians understood these concepts. It's also God's Word, which is most important for the discussion. You are the one cherry-picking when you ignore one book while accepting another. You reject Paul because you are ignorant of Christianity and believe lies about him and his teaching, but it seems you've never actually studied his writings. That's all an aside, though.
It's not Gods word. They are a collection of books that were selected to try and unite Christianity for the Roman empire with Pagans and other religions.
Stop expecting other people to accept the bullshite you accept.
I don't cherry pick anything, I look at entire chapters for their context and contents. I'm not looking to string along 6 verses from 6 different books/chapters to create false narratives.
If it was meant to be read the way you do it, then it would have been written that way to start with and the text from the chapter would support your claims.
quote:
Lastly, if you have a problem with how I'm explaining things from the text, itself, then you are free to rebut it. You are refusing to do that. You are just complaining that you don't like what I'm saying, but you aren't providing any reasoning as to why I'm wrong in what I'm saying. You aren't even defending your position. Again, you're just complaining.
I've already provided the reasons over and over. You just keep trying to distort things with the cherry picking and whatever. I have no interest in repeating myself over and over after each of your denials.
quote:
There is nothing dishonest about what I've said. I've explained the truth and the whole truth about what I believe. You keep saying "dishonest", but I'm becoming more and more convinced that you don't know what the word means. Perhaps your "god" should give you some revelation about that, because the dictionary doesn't seem to be helping you, currently.
I know exactly what it means.
You are a Pharisee. You quote scripture, but you don't understand it. You have extensive knowledge of scripture, but you miss the point of them spiritually to the point of arguing with those who do.
You know it's true, you know what you claim is bullshite, but you make excuses and try to create narratives to protect your lie. The entire act is dishonest. You are intentionally blind and there is nothing that can be done to save you.
You are a hypocrite, a liar and a blind guide. A Pharisee. My brother told them, I'm telling you.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:44 am to FooManChoo
You have constructed a theological loophole that allows you to read the direct, literal commands of Jesus, where He tells a man to act and obey, and twist them to mean the exact opposite.
The Pharisees did the exact same thing. They used a massive web of outside traditions and legalistic arguments to completely bypass the actual words of God.
By fulfilling the commandments, Jesus showed the real way to keep them, what was important and the understanding or reasons behind them.
When you have to use Paul's letters or others to overwrite the words coming out Jesus mouth, as you did above with Mark 10, it's not Jesus you are following. It's Paul and a system that is just like the one the Pharisees had.
As long as you do that, there really isn't too much to say. I've pointed out the truth, and you've demonstrated you would argue with Jesus himself if he was the one in this debate.
At no point did Jesus ever tell anyone the commandments were impossible to keep, he told them to keep them. Even God in the OT says directly what I am commanding of you is not too difficult or beyond your reach.
You can't even tell me which commandment is impossible.
So I'm just not going to keep wasting my time. You chose to be blind, and that's your burden.
The Pharisees did the exact same thing. They used a massive web of outside traditions and legalistic arguments to completely bypass the actual words of God.
By fulfilling the commandments, Jesus showed the real way to keep them, what was important and the understanding or reasons behind them.
When you have to use Paul's letters or others to overwrite the words coming out Jesus mouth, as you did above with Mark 10, it's not Jesus you are following. It's Paul and a system that is just like the one the Pharisees had.
As long as you do that, there really isn't too much to say. I've pointed out the truth, and you've demonstrated you would argue with Jesus himself if he was the one in this debate.
At no point did Jesus ever tell anyone the commandments were impossible to keep, he told them to keep them. Even God in the OT says directly what I am commanding of you is not too difficult or beyond your reach.
You can't even tell me which commandment is impossible.
So I'm just not going to keep wasting my time. You chose to be blind, and that's your burden.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 3:08 am to FooManChoo
quote:
ou reject Paul because you are ignorant of Christianity and believe lies about him and his teaching, but it seems you've never actually studied his writings
Oh, he's one of those Christians.
I got it now.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 11:30 am to jizzle6609
quote:
Oh, he's one of those Christians.
I got it now.
I am not a Christian at all. Christianity is the religion of Paul, not Jesus. It is an anti-Christ religion.
You have to keep the commandments. Paul teaches that you do not, which is a lie.
Jesus tells the rich man he must keep the commandments and tells him exactly where he is failing to do so and what he must do.
Paul tells the same rich man - not only do you not have to keep the commandments, but it's impossible for you to do so. So you need a "free gift" to be saved. The rich man has no trouble at all accepting a free gift while being able to sin.
To even become a Christian your first act must be breaking a commandment and to participate in idol worship.
In reality, the only thing the death of the truth saves is the lie. I will live in the truth instead.
My advice is to repent for your sins and listen to what Jesus actually says rather than what people say about Jesus.
This post was edited on 10/7/26 at 11:33 am
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:52 pm to 3down10
he's such a fraud
Posted on 10/7/26 at 9:39 pm to 3down10
quote:You are lost and heading towards eternal destruction. I want you to be saved, no matter what you think about me.
I think you are disgusting. The amount of time I give you is well more than I should. I'm not wasting my time with your manipulations.
If you will not listen to the truth, I want others to see how bankrupt your beliefs are, and how you cannot think coherently about the truth because of it.
quote:It is God's Word, and little explanation for why you don't think it's God's Word just highlights the total ignorance you have for both the Bible and history.
It's not Gods word. They are a collection of books that were selected to try and unite Christianity for the Roman empire with Pagans and other religions.
Stop expecting other people to accept the bullshite you accept.
The Bible was completed and books circulated long before this supposed unification that never happened. The books, themselves, were already circulated and lists were accepted long before the Council of Nicaea (assuming that's what you were referring to), and that Council didn't even address the books of the Bible. That's a myth that came from an unreliable source hundreds of years after and was popularized by Dan Brown.
If you have any particular historical claims about the Bible you want to discuss, make your specific accusations and I'll engage with those.
quote:Oh come on. You accept only those verses that seem to fit your beliefs and you ignore or reject everything else. That's the very essence of cherry-picking. You don't actually care about the text and what it truly says because you believe it's corrupted or at least not true. You said earlier that the Bible is not the Word of God. Therefore, it's only the word of man. You don't accept Paul's writings at all. You are cherry-picking.
I don't cherry pick anything, I look at entire chapters for their context and contents. I'm not looking to string along 6 verses from 6 different books/chapters to create false narratives.
The reason why I string verses together from different books is to show the unity of the message between them. I'm not taking them out of context to make them say something they aren't saying, either. You can look at each verse in their context and come to the same conclusion I am.
quote:I hate to break it to you, but all writing is done that way: unless you assume the author is incoherent and contradicts himself, you have to use the clearer writing to interpret the less clear, and the easier to interpret the harder. That's how basic Bible interpretation works. Not everything written is equally clear, so you use those principles to understand it.
If it was meant to be read the way you do it, then it would have been written that way to start with and the text from the chapter would support your claims.
You don't seem to have studied these things, so I'm not surprised that this is something you aren't familiar with, but it just highlights that you are arguing about things you don't understand. This is why I said several times before that you should quit quoting the Bible, because you look silly quoting it in one breath and denying it in another when you don't even understand it.
quote:I'm being very clear here. I'm quoting you and responding to you particular statements. I'm explaining to you in detail. You are not. You are ignoring most of what I say, and then making accusations without support for most everything you say, things like the Bible being collated for the unification of Christianity and paganism. You are not actually rebutting me and showing where I am wrong, or proving your points at all. The only time I recall you've done that is to show that I missed a word in the Proverb because I didn't use the same translation you did. That's it.
I've already provided the reasons over and over. You just keep trying to distort things with the cherry picking and whatever. I have no interest in repeating myself over and over after each of your denials.
quote:If you know what it means, then you are willfully misusing it. I'm telling you the truth as I believe it to be. I'm not lying about anything. I even conceded I was wrong about the translation you used, and I was hoping you would see that as a good-faith attempt to show that I'm not being dishonest. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm lying.
I know exactly what it means.
quote:1. Why should it matter if I understand it or not if it's not God's Word? 2. How do you know I'm missing the point if you reject most of it regardless of the point it's making?
You are a Pharisee. You quote scripture, but you don't understand it. You have extensive knowledge of scripture, but you miss the point of them spiritually to the point of arguing with those who do.
You are contradicting yourself. On the one hand you claim the Bible--at some points--supports your perverted beliefs and that people just need some prior gnostic secret understanding prior to even being able to know what it's actually talking about, while on the other hand, you reject the Bible as being anything more than man's words, and you reject the parts of it you don't like, like Paul's writings. Your beliefs make you incoherent. I hope you see that.
And no, I'm not a Pharisee. The Pharisees believed that you were saved by keeping the law. That's what you believe.
quote:No, I don't know that, and I don't know that what I claim is untrue. I claim the opposite, and if you continue to say otherwise, you are the one lying and breaking the 9th commandment.
You know it's true, you know what you claim is bullshite, but you make excuses and try to create narratives to protect your lie. The entire act is dishonest. You are intentionally blind and there is nothing that can be done to save you.
You are the blind one, as you refuse to the God's Word for what it is, and you refuse to hear the truth from Jesus, who calls all men to believe in Him for the salvation from the wrath of God poured out upon sin. Repent: turn from your idolatry and trust in Jesus Christ before it is too late. Be blind no longer.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 9:55 pm to FooManChoo
Have Talarico really been outside the state for 11 days?
Posted on 10/7/26 at 10:57 pm to 3down10
quote:It's not a loophole. It's taking Jesus' words in one place and using them to understand them elsewhere. Even my explanation of Jesus highlighting that the rich man was trusting in his own works to his own detriment is supported by the immediate context by Jesus saying that the rich trust in their own riches. I highlighted that for you and you still haven't said anything about it. You just ignore it and keep repeating the same false narrative over and over again. You are the one ignoring the context in order to support your own gnostic beliefs that were given to you (allegedly) in private. You reject the public ministry of Jesus, the Son of God, for your private experience.
You have constructed a theological loophole that allows you to read the direct, literal commands of Jesus, where He tells a man to act and obey, and twist them to mean the exact opposite.
quote:Jesus explained exactly what they did and why. You reject His words when they don't align with your own private interpretations. You don't even accept Jesus' words that the rich trust in their wealth as the reason for why the rich man walked away, and so you don't recognize that Jesus was talking about idolatry (the 1st commandment).
The Pharisees did the exact same thing. They used a massive web of outside traditions and legalistic arguments to completely bypass the actual words of God.
And by the way, what I'm saying is not my own invention. Going back to the 200's, Christian theologians have argued that the point Jesus was making was that many people are in bondage to riches (1st commandment).
quote:In Matthew 5, Jesus explains that the law goes beyond what was written, and that God is getting to our hearts. Even our thoughts are subject to the law. Jesus didn't fulfill the law to show us how to follow it better. He fulfilled it because He was the only one who could obey it perfectly.
By fulfilling the commandments, Jesus showed the real way to keep them, what was important and the understanding or reasons behind them.
Jesus said He came to fulfill the law. He didn't say He came to show us how to obey it better. In fact, Jesus taught that apart from Him, we can do nothing in terms of showing fruit (obeying the commandments). He said this in John 15:5. He was teaching that we need to abide in Him in order to bear good fruit. He didn't hold Himself as merely an example, as you seem to believe.
quote:Again, Paul isn't overwriting Jesus' words. He confirmed them. You are ignoring everything else Jesus taught about belief in Him for eternal life and are hanging your hat on essentially one story about the rich man, while you ignore the explanation that Jesus gave.
When you have to use Paul's letters or others to overwrite the words coming out Jesus mouth, as you did above with Mark 10, it's not Jesus you are following. It's Paul and a system that is just like the one the Pharisees had.
quote:I wouldn't argue with Jesus, and I wouldn't need to, because He isn't teaching what you are claiming. He is truth and I follow what He teaches. All of it. You are only latching on to a few verses because you think they confirm what you already believe.
As long as you do that, there really isn't too much to say. I've pointed out the truth, and you've demonstrated you would argue with Jesus himself if he was the one in this debate.
quote:See above: John 15:5
At no point did Jesus ever tell anyone the commandments were impossible to keep, he told them to keep them.
In addition, in Luke 18, Jesus speaks to the tax collector and the Pharisee. The Pharisee claimed to keep the law while the tax collector confessed to being a sinner (a law-breaker). Jesus said it was the tax collector that came away justified before God for his humility, not for obeying the law.
quote:I think you're talking about Deut. 30:11, and you are using a different translation (ESV, probably). The KVJ actually speaks of it being not hidden or far off, talking about it's accessibility, not it's ability to be kept.
Even God in the OT says directly what I am commanding of you is not too difficult or beyond your reach.
Even so, a few verses earlier, God says that He will circumcise the heart of the people to love Him so they may live. He speaks of loving God to go along with obedience, which is what the New Testament says regarding loving God and obedience will go along with it. It's not just about keeping the commandments, but loving God in humility.
quote:All of them. The point of the story of the rich young man was to highlight that the guy could not keep even the first commandment when he thought he kept them all. He made an idol out of his riches.
You can't even tell me which commandment is impossible.
And again, Matthew 5 highlights that keeping the law goes beyond physical obedience, like not sleeping with a woman who isn't your wife, or not killing a person, but that if we lust or have hatred, we aren't obeying the law. Well, those are sins of the heart which are even harder to keep than what the letter of the law dictates. That shows our inability to keep it.
quote:I'm the one following Jesus, here, and it seems you don't really care if you follow Jesus, anyway, since you only support Jesus' teachings that already agree with your own private gnostic beliefs. I'll follow Jesus, and I hope you eventually do, too. You need to turn from your wickedness and believe in Him for the forgiveness of your sins.
So I'm just not going to keep wasting my time. You chose to be blind, and that's your burden.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 10:58 pm to 3down10
quote:You keep saying this, but Jesus is God. If you do not worship Him as God then you are committing idol worship.
To even become a Christian your first act must be breaking a commandment and to participate in idol worship.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:23 pm to FooManChoo
only a satanist could vote for this thing
Posted on 10/14/26 at 2:24 pm to tigersmanager
yep
Page 14 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News