Indexes
November 2nd, 2009
November 7th, 2009
November 6th, 2009
November 5th, 2009
November 4th, 2009
November 3rd, 2009
November 2nd, 2009
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Bible is entwined with American civic life (135)
- I predict: A conservative tide will rise in 2010 (73)
- David Diskin is first to give an invocation under new city of Lodi policy (70)
- The Treaty of Tripoli hoax (60)
- Universal health care solves big problems (54)
- Here's what my father knew about the assassination of JFK (35)
- Stuck in neutral? Hardly! (35)
- Words from our forefathers (27)
- City of Lodi staff looking into possibility of limiting number of taco trucks (24)
- Majority cannot deprive the minority (23)
ADVERTISEMENT
The Rev. Canon Bob Moore began a diocese-wide "listening tour" on Monday with a meeting at St. John's Episcopal Church in Lodi. (Dan Evans/News-Sentinel)
Episcopal official listens to concerns of Lodians
An Episcopal official appointed to reassure parishioners in Lodi and other communities that all is well in the San Joaquin Diocese talked to 25 leaders from St. John's Episcopal Church on Monday about what could be a tumultuous reorganization of the diocese.
The Rev. Canon Bob Moore, a retired priest from Olympia, Wash., began a diocese-wide "listening tour" with a meeting in Lodi. He went to San Andreas later on Monday and will spend the week talking to parishioners south to Bakersfield who want to remain within the American Episcopal Church.
The diocese is in a major state of transition, now that the diocese has chosen to part ways with the Episcopal Church USA over gay rights and women's issues.
The diocese voted in December to leave Episcopal Church USA over the church's appointment of V. Eugene Robinson, an openly gay priest, as bishop of the New Hampshire Diocese in 2003. San Joaquin Bishop John-David Schofield maintains that homosexuality is a sin and, therefore, ordaining a gay man a priest or appointing one as bishop violates scripture.
St. Luke's Episcopal Church in Galt is not affected by the turmoil. Galt is in the Sacramento Diocese, which hasn't considered leaving the Episcopal Church.
St. John's parishioners maintain that they want to remain in Episcopal Church USA rather than follow most of the San Joaquin Diocese's parishes to the conservative Southern Cone of the Anglican Communion, based in South America. Episcopal Church USA is also a branch of the Anglican Communion, which is derived from the Church of England.
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who holds the top position in Episcopal Church USA, took the first step this month in deposing Schofield as bishop by suspending him from his priestly duties. However, he is allowed to continue with administrative functions. The Episcopal House of Bishops will vote on whether to completely depose Schofield the week of March 7.
Age: 70.
Ordained: 1979.
Priest: Shared priesthood with wife Bavi E. Rivera in the small Marin County community of Ross; co-rector with wife in Salinas; worked for the El Camino Real Diocese in Monterey; priest in Lafayette; interim priest in Richmond.
Previous career: Aerospcace industry at Lockheed in Sunnyvale.
Retired: May 2004, when his wife was named co-bishop for diocese in Olympia, Wash.
Source: The Rev. Canon Bob Moore
Ordained: 1979.
Priest: Shared priesthood with wife Bavi E. Rivera in the small Marin County community of Ross; co-rector with wife in Salinas; worked for the El Camino Real Diocese in Monterey; priest in Lafayette; interim priest in Richmond.
Previous career: Aerospcace industry at Lockheed in Sunnyvale.
Retired: May 2004, when his wife was named co-bishop for diocese in Olympia, Wash.
Source: The Rev. Canon Bob Moore
Dec. 1, 2006: Convention delegates take initial vote to secede from Episcopal Church USA.
Dec. 8, 2007: Convention delegates vote to leave Episcopal Church USA, and joins the Southern Cone of the more conservative Southern Cone of South America. Both organizations are affiliated with the Anglican church.
Jan. 2, 2008: Thirty-four bishops throughout the world sign a statement supporting conservative San Joaquin Diocese Bishop John-David Schofield and his efforts to leave Episcopal Church USA.
Jan. 11, 2008: Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of Episcopal Church USA rules that Schofield has abandoned his position as San Joaquin Diocese bishop and orders him to cease ordaining priests.
Jan. 26, 2008: Remain Episcopal, a group of parishioners who want to remain in the American Episcopal Church, will gather for Holy Eucharist, music and discussion of organizational and legal issues concerning the diocese.
March 13, 2008: House of Bishops meeting will take place in Texas, when a vote will be taken on whether to declare the bishop's seat vacant in the San Joaquin Diocese. Then remaining diocese members would have a new convention and elect a replacement standing committee. An assisting bishop would be appointed until the diocese selects a new bishop.
Source: Episcopal Church USA.
Dec. 8, 2007: Convention delegates vote to leave Episcopal Church USA, and joins the Southern Cone of the more conservative Southern Cone of South America. Both organizations are affiliated with the Anglican church.
Jan. 2, 2008: Thirty-four bishops throughout the world sign a statement supporting conservative San Joaquin Diocese Bishop John-David Schofield and his efforts to leave Episcopal Church USA.
Jan. 11, 2008: Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of Episcopal Church USA rules that Schofield has abandoned his position as San Joaquin Diocese bishop and orders him to cease ordaining priests.
Jan. 26, 2008: Remain Episcopal, a group of parishioners who want to remain in the American Episcopal Church, will gather for Holy Eucharist, music and discussion of organizational and legal issues concerning the diocese.
March 13, 2008: House of Bishops meeting will take place in Texas, when a vote will be taken on whether to declare the bishop's seat vacant in the San Joaquin Diocese. Then remaining diocese members would have a new convention and elect a replacement standing committee. An assisting bishop would be appointed until the diocese selects a new bishop.
Source: Episcopal Church USA.
Episcopalians from the San Joaquin Diocese who don't want to defect from Episcopal Church USA will gather from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday at The Church of the Saviour in Hanford.
The gathering will feature a Holy Eucharist, music and a discussion of political issues within the diocese. Participants will include:
• The Rev. Canon Bob Moore, appointed by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to provide a "pastoral presence" for parishioners who want to remain in the American Episcopal Church.
• Bonnie Anderson, president of the House of Deputies, a group of four priests or deacons and four lay people from each diocese. Her function is similar to that of the speaker of the house in Congress.
• Michael O. Glass, a San Rafael lawyer and Episcopalian who specializes in canon and real estate law. He has been retained by St. John's.
• Charles Ramsden and Holly McAlpen, Church Insurance Agency Corp. Ramsden was a priest for 30 years, and McAlpen was a missionary or 20 years with the Diocese of California, based in the Bay Area.
Source: Remain Episcopal.
The gathering will feature a Holy Eucharist, music and a discussion of political issues within the diocese. Participants will include:
• The Rev. Canon Bob Moore, appointed by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to provide a "pastoral presence" for parishioners who want to remain in the American Episcopal Church.
• Bonnie Anderson, president of the House of Deputies, a group of four priests or deacons and four lay people from each diocese. Her function is similar to that of the speaker of the house in Congress.
• Michael O. Glass, a San Rafael lawyer and Episcopalian who specializes in canon and real estate law. He has been retained by St. John's.
• Charles Ramsden and Holly McAlpen, Church Insurance Agency Corp. Ramsden was a priest for 30 years, and McAlpen was a missionary or 20 years with the Diocese of California, based in the Bay Area.
Source: Remain Episcopal.
Meanwhile, St. John's parishioners raised some major issues in their meeting Monday with Moore. One is how the transition of power would affect the parish's ability to select a new priest, Moore said. Father Rick Matters left St. John's in May to take over a church in Carmel. Father Basil Parker-Matthews is filling in on an interim basis until a new priest is hired.
Another issue, Moore said, is the question of who owns the St. John's building and the land it sits on — the parish, the diocese or the Southern Cone of the Anglican Church.
The third major topic was how parishioners can reach out to people who were hurt by the diocese seceding from Episcopal Church USA, Moore said.
Moore couldn't offer an answer to the property rights question since he isn't a lawyer, but he said that St. John's search for a new priest won't be a problem because it's a year and a half to two-year process to hire a new priest. By then, Moore said, the transition issues should be clear.
However, St. John's has lost applicants from priests who won't consider a position in Lodi because of the inner turmoil within the diocese, said Andee Zetterbaum, an active St. John's parishioner.
"I thought it was very comforting," said Deb Shook, vestry clerk at St. John's. "It brought us a better understanding of what's going on. We're not fearful."
Patsy Gorczyca, a St. John's parishioner, noted how St. John's is a church where people of dissenting opinions on theology and social issues can worship together.
"We love one another. We respect each other," Gorczyca said. "We love each other as Jesus would have us love one another."
Moore learned from his meeting with parishioners on Monday that St. John's members respect one another's differences.
"That is the Episcopal church that I know," Moore said. "There is no demand that you believe one way or the other."
Moore's tour will conclude on Friday. The following day, representatives of parishes that want to remain in Episcopal Church USA will gather for a day-long session in Hanford to celebrate a Eucharist and discuss legal issues.
For more information, visit http://sanjoaquin.anglican.org and http://www.remainepiscopal.org.
Contact reporter Ross Farrow at rossf@lodinews.com.
Reader Feedback
Lodian wrote on Feb 1, 2008 12:04 PM:
WY wrote on Jan 31, 2008 10:28 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 31, 2008 8:56 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 31, 2008 8:52 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 31, 2008 8:51 AM:
WY wrote on Jan 31, 2008 8:23 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 30, 2008 7:18 PM:
You know the Lord God rode a donkey. Coming in and going out. In the womb of Mary coming in, and riding into town the last days. Isn't that how that went"?).
ye DID ride into jerusalem on a donkey. the Old Testament predicted that the messiah would ride into jerusalem on a donkey, and that would be one way that the people of the culture of that time, could tell it WAS the messiah.
that prophecy was fullfilled on the EXACT DAY it was predicted, like 500 years later. pretty amazing stuff "
real facts wrote on Jan 30, 2008 7:09 PM:
" Real facts... are you lil "to"? breathe in").
WY, i am not sure what you mean. can you please be more specific? "
WY wrote on Jan 30, 2008 2:21 PM:
WY wrote on Jan 30, 2008 2:12 PM:
WY wrote on Jan 30, 2008 2:10 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 30, 2008 2:07 PM:
given the explanation, give your reasoning on how every other sexual deviancy (according to leviticus) is still in "play", except for homosexual sex. how did that one get dropped off the "no no list"? "
WY wrote on Jan 30, 2008 2:06 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 30, 2008 10:28 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 30, 2008 10:25 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 30, 2008 10:08 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:47 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:43 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:41 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:35 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:12 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:09 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:06 AM:
WY wrote on Jan 30, 2008 8:41 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 30, 2008 12:05 AM:
if ONE person can provide ONE scripture in the entirety of the bible, you can effectively wipe the overwhelming biblical evidence against homosexual sex of any kind, clear off the validation chart.
just one that shows it's ok, stops that arguement dead in it's tracks.
one thing is for sure about holding a position based around God, and not someones "opinion", NO ONE can conjure up an opinion based on conjecture, thier HAS to be evidence to support it, otherwise you have no right to complain that they are 1,000's of relgions, but who is right?
evidence reveals what IS right "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 11:58 PM:
then a person is going to have to explain the story in the 19th chapter of the book of judges that condemns a homosexual act
leviticus was written around 1400 b.c.
judges was written around 1000 b.c
some 400 years AFTER the levitical laws
1st corinthians chapter 6 was written around a.d. 56 "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 11:27 PM:
the definition of biblical sexual immorality is ANY sexual act, done outside the marital committment between a man and a woman.
the whole chapter of leviticus 18 contains ALL the sexual deviancy, EXCEPT marital sex between a male and female.
the consistent verbage of that truth is found start to finish, cover to cover.
Christ echoed leviticus, and so did paul
not one inference APPROVING homosexual sex "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 11:18 PM:
no one stands before God on his day, on thier own definition of righteousness.
you will either have adjusted to HIS definition of it, or sought to distance yourself FROM it. on that day, there is no middle ground, especially considering NO ONE is without excuse.."knowledge wise".
Jesus Christ defined righteousness once and for all. his words on anything ARE authority "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 11:10 PM:
today is the day. NO ONE can use that excuse again, that the "new covenant" excluded homosexual sex from Gods moral lawbook.
homosexual sex is condemned in every passage that references it.
it never high fives it "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:59 PM:
Jesus Christ is the ONLY person who could fulfill that law, via his perfect sacrifice. he did, and rendered it ineffective.
Jesus Christ mentioned that moral law is still law "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:53 PM:
moral laws NEVER changed. "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:47 PM:
I was just curious as to how one who does follow the OT laws picks and choses which laws are relevant").
thats simple. you follow the laws to thier conclusion that God demonstrated are those laws which CONTINUE to fulfill his design for man. ceremonial laws are just that, "ceremonial". those laws had one purpose...for God to use them against man to make him guilty of his own self righteousness. they served thier purpose then, they have NO bearing now.
moral laws are something that never changed in Gods plan for man "
sam wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:45 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:41 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:40 PM:
don't know yet who i will root for. my natural inclination always makes me gravitate toward the underdog (in some people minds), the giants.
but the idea of the perfect season is a compelling sports story and acheivement "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:29 PM:
" My questions to you were very sincere. I do NOT follow the OT laws. I was just curious as to how one who does follow the OT laws picks and choses which laws are relevant").
yes your questions to me WHERE sincere. for awhile, your answers were not. it took several posts to drag it to the surface.
the thing is...NO ONE..."picks and chooses" ANYTHING about Gods moral laws. they are clear. your flawed position is that somehow homosexual sex became ok. thats why romans indicts that position, because it's "new covenant/testament" verified "
WY wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:19 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:19 PM:
well, lie #2. it's what you do
funny YOU mention ivan dixon, both in the lack of retraction about how you lied about me "not" answering ivan dixon in this blog. plus for your bonus lying tongue points you CONVEIGHNETLY forgot to mention i challenged ivan dixon in the other blog about his question to me, and he never showed his face again.
your a liar. and you bad at it "
Billy Rubin wrote on Jan 29, 2008 5:11 PM:
richardh wrote on Jan 29, 2008 2:04 PM:
OK, let's tone it down here. No one at the LNS wants to cull through 500 comments and be the arbiter of acceptable expression. We also don't want to unilaterally block access by those who have become overzealous, though that is an option. So please keep any further comments here short and respectful.
Thank you. "
WY wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:58 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:53 PM:
" Wah, Wah, Wah, RF sounds like Charlie Browns Freaking teacher...").
content with sitting back and watching other people do your dirty work?
how about you show you can defend against the claims of Gods authority over man, instead of hurling insults and then hiding around the corner? "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:49 PM:
you know those scriptures outline homosexual sex. you made it "fit" your agenda.
more on this later, but God doesn't "design" sin, and then condemn someone because of it. people aren't born gay, just like people aren't born adulterer's or people who are programmed to sexually abuse children.
you ignored what romans said, and made it fit your liberal mindset "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:43 PM:
your the poster child for lying-tongue-because-he-can't-defend-his-position "SINdrome".
"never answered anyones questions" huh dan? thats another lie
maybe you can explain the post to your buddy in crime, ivan dixon?
your a patho-UN-logical liar about me in here as well "
Billy Rubin wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:40 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:38 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:25 PM:
WY wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:12 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:30 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:30 AM:
A homosexual loving another homosexual is not wrong (MY BELIEF). Enough said ! "
sam wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:30 AM:
I have a dear friend who at birth was originally believed to me a boy. It wasn't long before Stephen was renamed Stephanie. She was not given a choice as she was an infant when her parents and doctors made the decision for her. I understand now doctors wait until until the child is old enough to make the decision. She is a wonderful person. "
sam wrote on Jan 29, 2008 10:29 AM:
Audi 5000 wrote on Jan 29, 2008 8:35 AM:
Robb wrote on Jan 29, 2008 6:45 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 2:30 AM:
"real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:53 AM: how about instead of not answering my challenge, you actually DO PROVE i hate people.
you can worry about collecting it later.
you don't seem to have a problem being all over something when you can do it. whats the matter, can't prove i hate people?
you don't rcognize it as your golden opportunity to discredit me in here once and for all, even after i handed my head to you on a plate?
can't do it? "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 2:25 AM:
LIAR
"Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:13 AM:
real facts wrote to WY: "the people in here that i talk to in a way that has you concerned, could care less about who God is, and what HIS authority is on any issue. thier agenda is ONE thing". That's a lie, RF. And that was in the first few sentences to WY. Get a grip. You're wrong".
"
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 2:20 AM:
LIAR
lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:18 AM:
"Almost your entire post to WY is complaining about the people here on this blog. User. " "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 2:13 AM:
"almost the ENTIRE post"....
liar
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:18 AM:
" RF: (1:08 AM) " Now, be nice and prove I am a liar. Almost your entire post to WY is complaining about the people here on this blog. User. "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 2:08 AM:
tomorrow some time i will paste the rest, if my fingers don't fall off first.
in the meantime, i will bump the post where she has lied for two blogs now about me hating people, that after multiple posts tonight, AFTER I CHALLENGED HER TO DO IT, until she proves i did.
you asked for rain. it's raining
that ought to be enough EVIDENCE she lies without personal conscience "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 2:01 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:50 PM:
Even posters like Brian, that have backed RF in the past, are not as present on these blogs "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:57 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:00 PM:
" Hey, RF, you're not the boss of me. ;-) You never answer questions and it's funny watching you chase your tail. "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:53 AM:
i uphold it....liar
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:16 PM:
" You, RF, are undermining God's authority "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:49 AM:
this lie was designed to steal my effectiveness over the upholding of Gods laws and standards. didn't work
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:22 PM:
" You, RF, are "here to destroy". "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:41 AM:
lie #(1) not about homosexuals, about sin. i can't condemn anybody, only God can, so thats a lie. you bet i judge peoples motives. God requires me to, in the battle of upholding his authority.
lie #(2) the perpetual (unproven by you) LIE that i hate people
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 5:43 PM:
"You are out to condemn and judge others, about homosexuals, in his name and I think you ought to be worried about your hateful heart. " "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:35 AM:
your not a liar, huh?
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 1:06 AM:
" Rf: You have never sincerely apologized for anything. "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:32 AM:
LIAR
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 1:35 AM:
" That hate filled heart of yours needs an intervention". "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:28 AM:
all my remarks were aimed at encouraging her.
your sick that you said i "blasted her"
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:58 PM:" WY; you are most likely afraid of God because of lack of knowledge about who he really is, or someone misrepresented him to you and characterized him as some sort of bully. i assure you he is not. he loves us. he is NOT against us, until we have fully chosen to be against him. thats the difference. "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:25 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:24 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:21 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:20 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:18 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:17 AM:
lie #1.....i answer "no" questions at all
pit of hell lie #2...i "blasted" WY
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:27 PM:
" RF: You answer no questions at all. You just rant and rave and post hateful responses to everyone when they disagree. It's funny, even when WY posted a nice respectful post to you, you still blasted her. "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:13 AM:
real facts wrote to WY: "the people in here that i talk to in a way that has you concerned, could care less about who God is, and what HIS authority is on any issue. thier agenda is ONE thing". That's a lie, RF. And that was in the first few sentences to WY. Get a grip. You're wrong.
"
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:12 AM:
Lodian Jan 26,4:50 PM:
RF: "You lied about WY. You don't even know her yet you ASSumed something of her and it was offensive, like all of your posts. You enjoy posting that people "lack knowledge of God" when you don't even know us. That was an insult to WY when she came in and even gave you the benefit of the doubt with a nice even post. And what did you do??? You put her down just like you do to everyone else in here. Stop blasting WY and everyone else here. "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:08 AM:
choke on it
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:50 PM:
" RF: You lied about WY. "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:03 AM:
" RF @ 12:42 AM: Hey, just re-read your post to WY on Jan 27 @ 2:05 PM. Can you say "user")?
despite being busted on it, what do you do? continue to lie about it.
i am "using" WHY ???????
your a wicked person to say that. "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:03 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:02 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:01 AM:
no copy and pasted "proof" by you i hate people.
you can't collect $100 AND discredit me all in one fell swoop...
YOUR A LIAR "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:00 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:59 AM:
what you said and did, was straight from the pits of hell.
knowing you, you will high five yourself over it. you should, thats what wolves in sheeps clothing hope to acomplish
drama doesn't describe the trouble you got yourself into over that one.
with that manuever, you took all the "steam" off the glass on your "mirror", so that people can see CLEARLY who you really are now "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:57 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:53 AM:
" RF: Where can I collect that $100? I have a great charity that would love the donation")
how about instead of not answering my challenge, you actually DO PROVE i hate people.
you can worry about collecting it later.
you don't seem to have a problem being all over something when you can do it. whats the matter, can't prove i hate people?
you don't rcognize it as your golden opportunity to discredit me in here once and for all, even after i handed my head to you on a plate?
can't do it? "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:53 AM:
heinous: Grossly wicked or reprehensible; abominable: a heinous crime shockingly evil
Yep, you've got drama. "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:48 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:38 PM:
" He demands answers as if he is the one in charge here and then offers us nothing...no answers in return". "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:47 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:46 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:44 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:42 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:42 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:45 PM:
" RF: You are using WY and the posts to her to further your agenda at the rest of us here. (ei; Jan 27, 2008 2:05 PM) " "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:37 AM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:36 AM:
Hate defined
1. To feel hostility or animosity toward
2. To detest
3. To feel dislike or distaste for
In light of all your threats and nasty bullying of me here I think I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you hate me, and most likely anyone else that stands up to you in disagreement.
Now, where can I collect that $100? I have a great charity that would love the donation. "
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:30 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:22 PM:
"RF: (Re: LNS handles) Here's your answer. Now, remember this as you always twist words and "supposedly" forget what was answered. I AM NOT LEE! I am Lodian on these blogs and only Lodian "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:28 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:25 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:22 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:19 AM:
You can't spew hatred unabashed here and you can't stand it").
this is why your such a sick twisted individual. you keep lying that this about the hatred of people by me
i will pay you $100 if you can prove i hate people.
your such a heinous liar
despite me challenging you to prove i hate people countless times over multiple blogs....YOU WON'T DO IT
given your dream of disqualifying my voice in here, you would do that in a heartbeat if it WEREN'T A LIE
now i am going to bump this to prove your lying "
Lodian wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:14 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:11 AM:
RF: You just don't like me in your face. It's odd because I am not in your face nearly as rude and nasty as you have been in here").
don't flatter yourself. your way in the minor leagues relegated to sitting on the bench all season because you have no "game". nope, mightier than you have tried. you make it easy on me, because your not good at disguising the real you.
i AM "rude and nasty" to you. the truth about you IS nasty business. your a liar, thats ALOT nastier than being rude "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 11:54 PM:
I'm also a Christian").
you keep thinking you are, but your "tree" bears "bad fruit".
"Christians don't give a free pass to sin AFTER they know it's wrong. and they sure has heck don't undermine Gods authority, OR they don't undermine what God may be doing in the life of another, just because.
nope, according to Jesus Christ himself as recorded in the gospels, using the measuring stick that he said measured the barometer of who is/isn't...your a wolf.
"sheep" don't kill the other sheep, and they don't challenge the sheepherders authority. "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 11:44 PM:
Now sam is being egged on. Geez").
nope.
sam is being held accountable. she started the dialog between her and i and guess what, i answered her at every turn. people are famous for coming in here and making statements TO me, then running away once i challenge thier position. personal accountability. thats a foreign language to you.
making sure people own thier words, it's what i do. we are supposed to be debating in here, right? you can't debate with someone that walks out of the room
i should have been an "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 11:37 PM:
I'm still waiting for answers to many questions that you have refused to answer").
what answers? what do you keep babbling about as far as me not answering your questions?
you were throwing out accusations based on your delusional barrages left and right that were completely rediculous. you mean "those questions?
i ignored those. i have a life. i need to be efficient with my time in here, instead of chasing you down, and taking out your trash everytime your heart wanders into the gutter.
what questions. your not lying again? are you? "
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 11:21 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 11:21 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 11:13 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 10:47 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 10:42 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 10:39 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 10:35 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 10:28 PM:
because he's not a perpetual liar, and he doesn't attempt to lie about stripping Gods authority. thats you. disagreeing about homosexuality isn't the issue. lying about Gods authority, whole different ball game.
struggling people aren't "evil"
YOU have the black heart, not him "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 10:12 PM:
those people DO hate homosexuals, and consider them "animals".
while homosexual sex grosses me out, i DO NOT consider people who are gay as sub-human, or anything below anybody else, including me. i consider them as equals to me. everyone is equal that way.
they are EVERY BIT as valuable as a human being before God, as i am.
my words have ALWAYS been aimed at seperating "sin" from "sinner". not hate
watch lodian lie and twist my words now. "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:59 PM:
you started this debate between you and me, so don't beg out of it....and don't use the excuse of what's going on between me and lodian, as your excuse to fade off into the distance, hoping i won't have you qualify YOUR statements.
i finish what i start, ....and make sure those that do, finish as well, ....or it proves thier "lack" "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:50 PM:
so i was a "closeted gay" in one of your posts, then you accused me of being a "homophobe" in another. now i treat you the way i do, because your a woman?
tell you what, i will prove it isn't the fact that your a woman. go get your imaginary male friends you make up in here, or go get a bus load of real ones. doesn't matter.
when you lie about Gods authority, and to the extent you did, it doesn't matter WHO you are "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:40 PM:
as you can see, i DO NOT hide from my words. i OWN THEM. i meant what i said, and because i am unafraid of what i said TO you, coupled with my intent of WHAT i said to you, is the reason i copied and pasted it TO you.
cyber-stalking. interesting choice of words...considering YOUR rediculous number of egging me on posts.
YOU keep bringing the rain
"
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:28 PM:
"encouraged to debate". by whom? certainly NOT by you, that would be a lie. where did you EVER posture a debate decorum? all YOU have ever done, is feign sincerity, and then harrased me with countless posts that begged for a fight. your so full of your rambling phony claims it's sickening. acting like i am the "bully", when you post incessantly egging me on. on top of that, lying about me without conscience? YOUR the heinous one
i just take out your continual....trash "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:22 PM:
don't act like it was some innocent "conversation", THATS a lie. what you did was intentional. you INTENTIONALLY attempted to undermine ANY possibility of what i said to WY, as being Godly encouragement. you knew it was wrong, AND DID IT ANYWAY. don't try and pass yourself off as innocent of your evil intent.
talk to WY all you want. undermine God possibly using me to encourage her. fujita #6, all within the rules "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:10 PM:
Do you "fear" your authority has been stripped away here?")
you don't get it, this isn't about me, i don't have any "authority". all i do, is REPEAT Gods authority in here. you couldn't strip God of his authority, no matter how hard you try....and you WON'T in here...so long as i am in here to uphold it.
to reflect the strength of that position, i have more FORTITUDE about this matter, residing in the occasional "dirt" that might collect under my fingernails, then you do in your WHOLE body.
you dent nothing "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:02 PM:
make another move towards making a dent in my conversations with WY, or anything i have said to her previously by lying about my intent towards her, and you will see that scale go from a (1) to a (6).
THATS A PROMISE
you feel all brave? google "fujita scale" and think more than twice about not keeping your anger towards me in check.
anybody that dares to lie to THAT degree, IS an evil person
"
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 8:55 PM:
Why are you so angry"?)
i wasn't, UNTIL you crossed the line about my intention toward WY. you can lie about me until your tongue splits, it's what you do. you crossed the line when you lied on purpose about WY. when you did that, it proved what a heinous intended person you are, and made this personal. "if" what i said to her WAS of God, and had good intent, you shoved God aside anyway, soley because of your hatred for me. when you did that, YOU inherited my "shadow" (cont)----> "
real facts wrote on Jan 28, 2008 8:45 PM:
RF: Is this the integrity you've been talking about? Threatening me personally? Stalking me? Is this the Christian "behavior" you spoke of"?).
i didn't threaten you personally, i made you a promise. i don't know you personally, nor would i care to. as far as "stalking you", i know you have to lie (again) about me, hoping you found another angle to silence me. if anything given the number of harrassing posts, YOU hold that title.
i made you a promise. make that move, and you will see how i keep it "
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 4:11 PM:
Robb wrote on Jan 28, 2008 3:47 PM:
Please keep up the Good fight! "
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 3:44 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 3:42 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 3:38 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 3:29 PM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 3:14 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 2:34 PM:
Robb wrote on Jan 28, 2008 12:06 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 10:35 AM:
1) Homophobes = Homosexuals in Denial? (Source: HBO documentary)
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcAcuS5aXMs
2) 20/20 Report On The Westboro Baptist Church (Fred Phelps)
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVGQONqhGcY
The last one is particularly disturbing when the children speak.
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:01 AM:
WY wrote on Jan 28, 2008 8:48 AM:
WY wrote on Jan 28, 2008 8:40 AM:
Here's my bad carma/luck/cruse/ etc... don't go talk'n about anyone's "Shanker" if you plan on having lunch at the Chocolate Factory. God has a sense of humor.
Real facts... I do believe that we should follow God's laws. There has to be moral order in life of some kind, I thought that's why Jesus came in the first place. :) "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:55 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:37 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:33 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:31 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:28 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:26 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:22 PM:
A Tree and Its Fruit (from matthew 7)
verse 15; "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
whoops. you got "bad fruit". that makes you a wolf. people that display "good fruit", don't work hard about stripping away Gods authority when it's in plain site, thats bad fruit behavior. the one you claim to "follow", just called you a wolf in sheeps clothing, that bears bad fruit.
take it up with HIM "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:22 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:20 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:15 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:11 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:11 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:07 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:04 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:59 PM:
"IF" i said something that wasn't true, the LNS powers that be, have the right to kick me straight to the curb (and should "if" i have broken the rules). i invite them to do so, "if" i have. that should solidify how solid i am in my position that you lie in here without conscience. because guess what, calling you a LIAR just broke rules (1) & (3) in the rules to the right, "if" it ain't true. THEY DON'T. because they know i am right about you, you are a liar. guess what #2, what i say in here about people IS the truth, so they can't eject me over rule number 3. i am harsh, but i tell the truth. don't like what you see, thats on you.
i will bet the LNS watches over these blogs. afterall, they seem to gather ALOT of interest watching you (lodian) make a fool of yourself, and me having to chase you around and take out your trash. lets see now if the LNS cancels my membership, or i am right about YOU being a liar.
"libel" is only "libelous", if what a person is saying is untrue about another person. whoops
you and any other person who falls into these categories....
(1)you lie once, you told a lie. you lie incessantly, and without conscience, YOUR A LIAR.
(2) you wuss out because you don't qualify your statements. your a wuss. thats a true statement
(3) you chicken out about answering a question, your a "chicken". thats a true statement.
(4)you claim your a "Christian", but your behavior and words tell otherwise, YOUR A PHONY. thats a true statement, because their are people who claim all kinds of thigs...but aren't (example; leonard "claims" he knows what the "new covenant" is, but refuses to explain it. thats a four-fer deal there. a phony, chickening out, wussing out, and lying about his "knowledge of it).
you see, i tell the truth. your just not used to Christians telling YOU and others the solid truth about who you are.
so there it is, the truth about you. if it wasn't. i would have been gone along time ago. you deal with delusion daily, maybe you think the LNS is un-aware of the verbage i level at people in here that deserve it. maybe in your deluded mind "they haven't caught it". good, i will help your cause. fire off an e-mail to complain about me, see if you can get me kicked to the curb about me calling you a liar. and for bonus points to help your cause, add on top of that all the other things i have said to people in here, including YOU and see what they do. are you able to navigate to the LNS thru e-mail, or do you need my help with that too.
afraid of that? then do it, THEN we will see who speaks the truth in here. it's your golden opportunity to silence me......TAKE IT "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:56 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:55 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:51 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:49 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:47 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:45 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:29 PM:
real facts "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:25 PM:
You have been trying to crush other Christians here").
your out of your mind. you don't even know how much trouble i would be in IF i did that to someone who WAS a Christian. you are not, your a phony pretending to be one, thinking you can use that angle to silence my voice in here. doesn't work. it never will. my fortitude surpasses even the length for which your lying tongue will travel, and thats saying ALOT. . bad news for you, huh.
when i see a person "acting" like a sheep (a phony "follower" of Christ), i simply calls it as i see it. your an ain't, and alot of people place thier own selves in that category when thier words don't match thier claims. maybe you can find yourself "some" comfort in being a wolf, knowing your in the majority in here. i dunno. just a thought "
WY wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:24 PM:
WY wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:19 PM:
What ever happened to the word limit? It's a 129 mph on the autobon in a lil Geo. Have you ever gone that fast in a lil car? Oh my gosh! That's terminal velocity in horizonal mode. lol! That's scary stuff... It's been said you should nevr drive faster than you Angel can fly. (My Angel is flies fast. We're evenly yoked) So tomorrow I'll get my reading glasses and sit down after everything is done in the morning and see what's up. :) **== "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:15 PM:
watch this......... "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:13 PM:
i wouldn't. unlike you, i actually fear what God would do to me, chastisement wise, for lying about your character. unfortunately for you, i haven't. your a lying phony. given that, i invite Gods judgement on my life about how i handled you. i told the truth about who you are, motive wise and claim wise. your not who you claim you are, and you lie as if it is nothing to do so. you did it in the last blog when you lost your marbles, and you did it in this one. it's your go-to methodology when you can't silence me. you resort to lying about me. it's who you are.
if anything, i have accrued points for bearing "true witness" in here. some are afraid to take out the trash. i am not. i say what i mean, and mean what i say. what i said about YOU, is entirely true. thats on you "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:56 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:51 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:48 PM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:39 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:31 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:10 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:00 PM:
2lodiansinone wrote on Jan 27, 2008 7:01 PM:
Post with 20 names! I don't really care that much, as you can tell. I only address it when you get on your high horse").
you only "address it" when you get desperate by posting as lee. you didn't even catch your own lie here. where is lee i wonder? so you know the methodolgy of e-mail accounts (20 names)? good, another proof your lee.
*************************************
("real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:54 PM:don't act like you can't log in as a different person, you only need a different e-mail address. i will accomplish that tonight on the same computer i am using now. when you see my choice of other screename, you will know it's me....it will be in the vein of busting you on your lie.
anybody that supports this womans lying tongue, does so because they swim in the same river").
***************************************
GUESS WHO ????? took me a couple of minutes to create another account so i can bust your lying tongue for the 1,000th time .
checkmate "
nylodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:50 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:41 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:40 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:33 PM:
"tell him you can't eat it, he will have to eat it alone. tell him you have swollen lying tongue sydrome right now, and you couldn't swallow steak if your life depended on it. you will have to stick with something you can sip thru a straw, until your tongue resumes it's normal size and location."
-------------------
Do you really want to include my hubby in your cesspool of lies? Now that's not very Christian of you. And you call me a liar? You are lying about me and you want me to join you in lying to my hubby? You're sick! And kinda creepy too.
You are proving how sick you really are, RF. Keep going. You're just digging the hole deeper and deeper for all to see.
Save your soul, man, before it's too late.
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:22 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:20 PM:
Hubby is cookin' tri-tip. Yum ").
tell him you can't eat it, he will have to eat it alone. tell him you have swollen lying tongue sydrome right now, and you couldn't swallow steak if your life depended on it. you will have to stick with something you can sip thru a straw, until your tongue resumes it's normal size and location. "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:19 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:17 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:16 PM:
other than him being another poster on these and other blogs, how do i know? you will have to ask him.
i am only me. know how thats true? "brian" posts on different subject matters in different blogs. alot in politically aimed blogs. i know very little about the political arena in life....THATS how you know brian isn't me. get your own material.
incidently, i don't see "lee" come out to play anywhere but in THESE blogs. why would that be lodian? because YOUR A LIAR....you ARE "him" "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:15 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 6:13 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:54 PM:
your not "lee" huh>>>>>> your a liar
i have just about run out of superlatives that describes your lying tongue. once again, YOU attempt to use my own words against me, in order to discredit me and "save" your lying tongue from splitting.
i will leave these blogs forever if you can cull ONE TIME from any post or blog where i was another person. start to finish i have been here over one year, as ONE person. unlike you, i am not weak in my position, and i don't have to resort to multiple personality disorder in "order" to bail myself out. thats your lame modus-rediculousness. once again, you lie like there is no law against it.
you won't prove where i did, "if" i did. you would be all over that in a new york minute if you even breathed that was possible. it's in your wildest dreams that you could silence me, and would resort to anything to do that. if that accuastion is true, bring it forth. otherwise, your lying AGAIN.
back to your lie about you being "lee". how about this.....i would bet my life on it YOU ARE. hows THAT for holding my accusation against you with certainity? proved it in the last blog after dissecting your words against your imaginary friend. people watched me accomplish that. even your verbage to me about you not being "him" is abvious you are. look at at your attempt at dismissle, by shifting the blame and focus off of you onto me. your so obvious it's pathetically tragic.
don't act like you can't log in as a different person, you only need a different e-mail address. i will accomplish that tonight on the same computer i am using now. when you see my choice of other screename, you will know it's me....it will be in the vein of busting you on your lie.
anybody that supports this womans lying tongue, does so because they swim in the same river. "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:40 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:38 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:36 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:36 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:31 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:22 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:21 PM:
let the BUMP-a-thon begin...
***************************************
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:03 PM:
" ("Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:37 PM:
RF said, "brian is WAAAAAAY more nice than i am, and they pull the same garbage on him.". That's it! RF could quite possibly be Brian's alter-ego. Bi-polar? Narcissist"?)
still can't find your own material?
your the one with imaginary friends, not me. i don't need someone else to carry my backpack around.
since you brought up the subject, would you like to tell the reading audience that "lee" isn't really you? before you answer that, remember our little "conversation" about lee in the last blog. don't forget, people read that exchange, and have recollection about what really went down. that being said, you wanna come clean about lee? what do you bet she won't answer that one? she can't...if she does...she gets busted for the liar she REALLY is.
i have some very bad news for you lodian. the ONLY time i am ever going to address you again in this blog is to BUMP this post until you answer it. if you don't, THAT proves you ARE a liar, because who wouldn't come clean on that? if you lie about it, THAT proves what i said about you is true, that your a liar. either way, checkmate.
get ready to be "bumped" into liars tongue land........ "
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:10 PM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:04 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 5:02 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:55 PM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:53 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:51 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:50 PM:
well thats a lie. you made fun of his inteelect (according to your barometer of what is). making fun of someones intellect isn't akin to calling him stupid, huh? come on nylodian. at least proof read your posts BEFORE you hit send, that way you might be able to cover yourself. i wasn't defending brian. brian doesn't need any defending. his motives are pure. i used the post about brian to illustrate your being hypocritical to me in here, busting me for the things i have said, etc. you turn right around and did the SAME thing. you didn't call brian a liar. but the way you keep score, what you said to brian was somehow "ok"? i like how you side stepped your responsibility for doing so, veiled in your response to me ..." I challenged his misinformation". sure you did. you know your comment was condescending and a chop. you took a swipe at his lack of intelligence (at least according to you).
i did it to prove a point...that people like you, wander the halls chiding me about things THEY do themselves, all the while claiming they are here for "discussion". it's my ongoing proof that people aren't here for that purpose (when i recognize it). their here for other reasons....to try and silence me via their feigned position of peace and tranquility. if you were nylodian, you wouldn't have said that to brian. it shows both your hypocritical behavior, and seperates your words from your claims.
any comment? "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:50 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:37 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:31 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:31 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:29 PM:
"
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:27 PM:
Real Facts, It looks like you and I will be the ones least likely to win the golden cue in this dirty pool match we got sucked into. That said, we can't say we haven't tried to convince these clowns that honesty is the best policy.
Given that these clowns are well seasoned in the art of dirty pool, I myself can claim victory for my honesty").
it's ok brian, the victory doesn't belong to us anyway. convincing anybody of anything is outside the scope of our responsibility. our responsibility is to give out the truth, and let God add that all up.
if i EVER witnessed someone maintaining honesty in the posts by these people, i would probably drop dead of a heart attack. you would think THAT would be incentive enough for them, given thier distaste of me holding up the mirror in life, and not liking what they see. when they get painted in the corner, "dirty pool" is all they have left. for them, it would be better if they pocketed the eight ball on purpose after their second shot, then called it a day. i guess they are a glutton for thier own self indictment punishment. what WE do in here brian, is worth it. someday you will be at the point in your life were you will be rewarded for doing so. just be yourself, don't let them steal your voice in here, and leave the results to God. it's all good.
real facts "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:12 PM:
that is a good one...always question authority.
but the full circle truth addendum to that quote, be ready to adjust TO the truth, when it IS the truth.
thats a full circle version of that quote "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 4:04 PM:
" RF: You are using WY and the posts to her to further your agenda at the rest of us here. (ei; Jan 27, 2008 2:05 PM")
your sick twisted heart continues it's blackened heart "hit" parade.
now i am "using" WY ????
what won't you say anymore? your sick
i wonder if there is anyway i could arrange a ringside seat when you stand before God about what you continue to say about me and my intent toward WY in here? that would be satisfying to see God taking you to task for your evil heart.
i gave you "rope" to repent over your wicked lie about my intent toward WY. what do you do, you turn up the heat by lying even more about it. evidently, your lying tongue knows no boundaries. actually, i don't wish to be anywhere NEAR the zip code when God takes you to task over this issue. i don't want to witness how ugly that will be.
go talk to your cast of your characters you make up in your head. maybe "they" can convince you to at least slow down your swelling lying tongue "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:56 PM:
RF: I LOVE the book of Romans. My favorite part is : Let love be your only debt! If you love others, you have done all that the Law demands. In the Law there are many commands, such as, "Be faithful in marriage. Do not murder. Do not steal. Do not want what belongs to others." But all of these are summed up in the command that says," Love others as much as you love yourself." No one who loves others will harm them. So love is all that the Law demands. Rom 12:8-10 ").
thats impressive. you can quote, and or copy and paste a whole verse that suits your position, but somehow you can't read or admit one other verse in THE SAME book? this is your hypocrisy.....it's even in the same book. you don't "pick and choose" huh sam? the same book says what about homosexual sex?
"So love is all that the Law demands". love and obedience IS the law. the two cannot be disconnected, much as you try. Jesus said "you DO NOT love me, IF YOU DON'T keep my commandments". i guess Jesus thought it important enough to condemn BOTH adultery, AND sexual immorality. so now, according to your "pick and choose" theology, combined with your "Jesus said not to judge and, only be loving" mantra ,to one another by not daring to tell the truth, i guess based on that position your husband can cheat on you with anyone he wants, because thats "judgemental" if he did, and you said something about it. it's the same thing. afterall, the bible doesn't say anything about adultery, does it? if it does, how come all of a sudden it doesn't say that in YOUR bible about homosexuality? i know i made you mad (and probably your husband too) with that analogy. it wasn't pretty, but it's the truth. i DID NOT mean to make you mad, as much as i meant to illustrate an analogy that would certainly hit home, and that you couldn't deny. you cannot seperate yourself from those two scenario's. of course you would be hot if your husband did that, and you would IMMEDIAETLY believe he tresspassed all over Gods laws. i did it to demonstrate your hypocritical about WHAT you believe about Gods word...you pick and choose what you want to believe, and you do it from the same book no less. makes me wonder, what else do you skip over in your life about God and disregard? you don't have to answer me as if you are accountable to me on that issue. your not, you are only accountable to God. picking and choosing that blatantly challenges your integrity on just "how" obedient you really ARE before God. thats on you.
what does romans 1 say? "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:45 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:45 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:43 PM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:39 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:37 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:36 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:30 PM:
RF: You keep saying that I have lied. When did I ever lie about my beliefs and what I know and understand to be the truth as God's word?").
you know what i mean, don't feign short term memory loss. you have ALWAYS been front and center about what YOU believe. i know that, and you know i know that, but your little side door defelection doesn't fly.
YOU have lied incessantly about me, who i am, what i have said in here, and what i have done - especially nasty about my interaction with WY. you know what you do, and have ZERO conscience. don't feign memory loss about your behavior "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:30 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:29 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:25 PM:
You would be more welcomed and successful at getting your point across if you were more humble, considerate, respectful and really showed caring for your fellow man").
i did that (WY). what did you do? you highjacked that and turned it into something dirty because your a nasty person. you ask me to do something, even YOU aren't willing to allow me the brevity to do it.
don't ask me, or accuse me, of something you can't even do YOURSELF.
your every bit as culpable for the "flow' of this thread. i have to waste countless posts and hours taking out YOUR trash, because of your sterling integrity. so don't play the nicey nice game with me. you atttack me and chase me around, lie about what i said or did, then you post garbage about how you just want a nice peaceful atmosphere. who are you kidding anyway?
make up your mind. i will be more "humble, considerate, respectful" when somebody acts in a way that they deserve it. when they come in here to play games, they don't deserve respect. so far, you haven't earned "respect" "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:21 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:18 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:15 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:14 PM:
nylodian: Great quote. I've always thought I'd be seeking the truth forever, until the day I die. It's amazing how some feel like their work is done as they've found the complete truth").
people that seek truth, are willing to adjust to it, EVEN when they don't like it, or understand it at the time. thats how people who are really seeking the truth, act. people that aren't the least bit interested in it, kill it off if it comes near them.
first of all you need to get something straight...i DON'T pretend to think i am the know-all, be-all "megaphone" for God. thats rediculous. i don't know everything, and i never will. no one does. however, there is absolutely nothing wrong when telling the truth about what IS true about God, WHEN you do know it IS the truth about God. if that never is supposed to happen, Christianity wouldn't even be on the map of world history. it only is, because some people dared to say the things that were true about Christ. most of them were murdered for doing it. anybody that deny's that fact, only does so because they are afraid of being told that what they are doing, is opposite of what God would have them to do or think. thats a fact. it's always an authority issue. according to you, there shouldn't be any churches that teach the things of God (unless they leave out the authority issues). there shouldn't be any pastors or teachers (unless they only teach the "warm and fuzzy" aspects of Christianity), and there shouldn't be any "police" to hold the criminals at bay. according to you, you should NEVER EVER tell your children what to do, starting from birth. how ludicrous is that. how many parents in here tell thier kids what to do when they are mis-behaving, despite the kids plea to do whatever they "feel" is right? are you kidding me? any parent worth thier salt isn't the least bit concerned with whether or not thier child "feels" thier right, they discipline them knowing what lies ahead will hurt them if they don't. authority over a child - good analogy. your a mis-behaving "child" who is subjegating your "parents" authority
yep. thats YOUR line of thinking. i can assure you, it's not Gods "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:12 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 3:00 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:56 PM:
really? are you willing to pay me $10 for everytime i can prove your lying about that?
"no answers in return".. huh? how do you explain self deluded lying tongue one, just my recent responses to ivan dixon and sam? no answers huh? i still have to take out your lying trash later by culling all the posts JUST TO YOU, where i did.
lucky for you that pinnochio story had something to do with a different body part. if it involved the tongue, you would have been stepping all over YOURS a long time ago. you would have had to double wrap it over your shoulder three times, then tie it in a bun just so you could go out in public you lie so much without conscience.
i realize you don't "like" me, but you really should quit embrassing yourself with your obvious lies. all i have to do with you is copy or paste your words and my words to prove you are. despite that fact, you still do. your a troubled soul lodian. your cross to bear tho... "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:47 PM:
honest attempt huh? i wonder how long a relationship would last based on THAT kind of "commitment"? trash your boss' authority, your out the door.
being a "good Christian" entails purposefully lying about a person huh? your lying about what i said to WY was you being a "good Christian"? that manuever was straight from the pits of hell. doesn't get any nastier than that. you tried to undermine Gods encouragement to her, just because you don't like me. "good Christian" huh?
at EVERY chance you get, you seek to destroy the authority of God...thats being a "good Christian"? i thought Christians at LEAST debate about it, question it and dialog about it, and ULTIMATELY error on moving toward it. you? your first move is to slit it's throat. thats a fact about you. "good Christians" don't act that way...false Christians do though. fact #2
you making up imaginary friends in here is what, let me think ...a "good Christian"?
your kidding yourself if you think you are (and apparently, a few others as well, as THEY think they are too, but exhibit like behavior). at least you have company.
i know, i am being "too harsh" "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:38 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:35 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:33 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:33 PM:
RF: What I hear Paul saying is that it is NOT my job to judge others (I am not God). He says it is my job to LOVE. Pretty cool").
four posts and counting, and you still don't have enough personal integrity in life to answer a simple yes or no question. i can bet my life, there is NOT ONE sripture in the entire bible attributed to PAUL, where he made any comment about "not judging others". thats baloney, and something you pulled out of the sky. your taking your "cue's" from leonard. you momentarily forgot who your playing this game with sam. i actually know what the bible does/doesn't say. don't embarass yourself, just answer the question.
just to take you to task a little further about paul, paul was the one who was murdered FOR judging others. didn't know that huh sam? more than any other discple combined, paul was known for busting peoples chops FOR judging thier sin, and thier LACK of adjusting to Gods authority. cost him alot of time in prison, because they didn't like what paul was saying about them, because he had the audacity to challenge them on the things of God by comparing who they were vs Gods standards. sound vaguely familiar sam? paul was murdered because of this. so are you going to make a lifelong mistake based on what you "feel" (even if it is erroneus), or be ready to stand before God on that day based in what HE says about any subject matter? you haven't deluded your self into thinking you can believe whatever you want about God, and then be arrogant enough to demand you live in eternity with him, despite you shunning his authority over your life? who portends they can do that? remember, you are the "creation", he is the "creator". the "creator" makes the rules, the "creation" is supposed to live by them. hopefully that is the rudder on your "ship". if it's not, you will end up "shipwrecked".
now quit your little dance and answer the question like you actually HAVE integrity. if you keep dancing around it, it shows who you really are, and why your really here.
i will bet you if i take my car's repair manual and open it up to page 67 and ask ANYONE that speaks and understands english if it says that the "manual" recommends a size 15amp fuse for the radio, they will say "yep, thats what the manual says alright". i could do this with anybody that speaks and understands english with 100% success. why? because they would be honest about it. they wouldn't hem haw, draw it out, change the subject, walk away, non of the behavior like whats exhibited here. here, one little passage self indicts their position, so getting them to admit it is impossible. that analogy proves these people in here have no integrity when it comes to this subject matter.
it wouldn't have taken you four posts to answer my question about my car manual. your just like the rest...feign faith, and "oh i am here to learn about God. sure you are.
answer the question. quit blowing your fuses "
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:28 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:24 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:23 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 2:05 PM:
for example, we will EXCLUDE having anything to do with religion or Christianity. just on the morality issue alone, based on common sense, could you imagine what this world would be like if morality was left to run amok, and be defined by each individual? do you realize the chaos that would ensue? if you are honest with yourself, you would admit this world is WAY more out of kilter (morality wise) than even 20 years ago. the reason that is, is because the people who "used" to stand up against it, have now mostly faded from saying anything about it, under the pressure of people just like the ones in here, and THAT has allowed it to proliferate more. that fact has nothing to do with religion or Christianity. religion or Christianity is "part" of that equation, but not all of it. collectively, everyone is to blame about that. you know thats true. so what happens when everyone stands back and says nothing? immorality gains a foothold into society, thats what. because of that, it's nearly a free-for-all. "don't anyone dare to say anything about morality", is the battle cry of those of would rather allow morality to completely disappear, than to uphold it via personal responsibility. look at people in here. they give homosexuality a free pass (even when they actually don't approve of it sexually in thier own life), because if they don't, they open the door of culpability of the things in thier own life. they have to, and because they do, they are directly responsible for opening pandora's box as far as the morality un-defined free for all thats happening today. God made standards WY. i didn't. i uphold those standards, and the reason i hold up those standards in here in the way that i do, is to silence those that don't. thier side door ploy is to weild leverage over me by holding that "your not being tolerant", "your not being loving" deal over my head so as to silence my voice of morality check. it indicts them, and they will stop at nothing (including feigning "faith") in order to accomplish it. it is the same in my analogy above about the erosion of world immorality. give them a foot, they will take a mile. left unchecked and allow them to do what they really want, which is to leave morality un-defined so they can do whatever they want....pure chaos would happen. ever see what happens on TV when there is a situation somewhere where the police are relagated to a place of being unaffective? it's called rioting. ever seen people rioting on the streets of louisiana during hurricane katrina? thats what happens when thier is no "police" over morality. do you really think, that God didn't demand that his followers defend morality? they aren't supposed to say anything against it? you don't think that, do you WY?
my words are harsh for sure, but somebody has to put a dent in thier momentum. i assure you, God asks me to. something else i give you my word on is that i don't enjoy doing this, nor is it a situation where i have to be "right" because of some ego trip. thats not me. it looks that way because i have to get so "down town" with these people to expose thier motives, but it isn't so. if i didn't go to the legths i do, their motives wouldn't be obvious. it's why i do it so stringently, because i have to. if i don't, they are able to give license to the anything-goes club. THAT is 100% opposite of Gods character, and standards. thats a fact. i won't be an accessory to that crime, by letting them play thier little game they way their used to playing it. i stay the course, and thats why they scream and yell foul. they don't like what they see when somebody actually holds up the true mirror that "reflects" whether a person is alighned with Gods authority, or not. thats on them. i don't have to be right, in that this isn't a fight that way. it's isn't a "me" vs "them" scenario. if i treat it that way, I assume the role of God. there is something going on in here, that is WAY bigger than "me". but i DO have to uphold the truth at all costs, which lends itself to appearing that way. does that make sense to you?
you should be able to tell in my tone to you i am right. i treat you with utter respect. i do because you have demonstrated pure motive. the others, i make them accountable, and keep them in check so they can't kill off Gods authority - at least not in here. therein lies the difference.
your question "who has made you the gatekeeper"? my answer; Jesus Christ. what i mean by that is just like i analogized above. God calls people to mirror the true measure of morality. it is NOT within his will for any man to sit back and allow sin to be given a free pass. in order to accomplish that in here, i have to go to the lengths i do.
i hope you can appreciate my "letter" of assurance to you? i didn't have to write it, in that i owe no man/woman an apology or explanation unless i have done something wrong. i wrote to you in detail to explain my actions are just, so that you don't push my words of encouragment to you saide. i think you can tell by now, i don't "kiss up" to anybody for anything, so that ought to prove my motives in here are righteous, and toward you....pure.
here is a way to validate that what i say about people in here being nasty and not the least bit interested in Gods authority or any other matter of whats right? whats the first move these people made after i posted my first letter of encouragement to you about your relationship with God? those nasty people straight away turned it into something dirty. THEY LIED ABOUT MY MOTIVE TOWARD YOU. who does that? i was being encouraging to you, something THEY yell and scream about, and when i do, they LIE about my motives and seek to kill what i said to you. do you recognize that? evil intended people pull that garbage. i told you these people weren't integrity giants. doesn't matter who i am, "if" i said something to you that was true and was of an encourging nature, no one should do that. thier nasty agenda led them around by the nose. they can't even control themselves long enough to recognize something that WAS true. their just nasty people when it comes to this subject, evidenced by the FACT that they made dirty, what God intended to use to build your faith. based on thier behavior alone about how i have treated you, that ought to tell you i am dead on about who they really, and something i need to do in here
real facts "
sam wrote on Jan 27, 2008 1:54 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 27, 2008 1:53 PM:
nylodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 12:52 PM:
nylodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 12:50 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 12:43 PM:
RF: I am not a homosexual ( so I am safe with that "sin" according to Leviticus) but I have to confess that I did "sin" a few weeks ago because I planted cover crop in my vineyard ( thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed Leviticus 19:19) . I also had lobster (Leviticus 11:9-12) for dinner and wore a polyester-cotton blend shirt (Leviticus 19:19). My point? If you want to follow Leviticus, follow ALL OF IT").
your point should have been is that you don't have to worry about the levitical laws anymore, but you do have to concern your self with sexual morality ....AS GOD DESIGNED IT. hopefully it's a matter of you not understanding the difference, instead of chosen willful disobedience over biblical knowledge (like leonard and lodian). i will be more than happy to explain to you the difference when you actually answer my question fully. now...
wow. look at those scriptures you found, that was pretty resourceful. amazing how people "know" the bible when it comes to thier "position", but feign amnesia when someone else is able to counter that position. how come you could find those, but romans chapter 1 is missing from your commentary after i asked you two times to comment on it? your a little "fuzzy" on whether YOU believe leviticus 18 & 20 say anything on homosexuality, am i to take it that your above comment is an admission it does? you will have answered my question FULLY, when you explain your comment about homosexuality above, and you include what i asked you about romans chapter 1. you keep D-flecting away from romans for some reason.
i could ask a kindergardner a question and get a straight away answer. why is it i ask ONE question, and it takes me THREE posts to "try" and get an honest answer? are there ANY people who don't play games anymore? gheesh
"
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 12:07 PM:
RF:" "sam". the male intimidation-creation of lodian. "
I can assure you that I am not imaginary, nor am I lodian. Now that is funny").
sam, I COMPLETELY AAAAAAAAAAAAPOLOGIZE for not proof reading my blog last night. i was dead tired when i wrote that, and i didn't mean you. what i meant to say who i was talking about was "LEE", not you. i know you are a woman anyway, and i know you are not "lodian". so that post was supposed to have NOTHING to do with you. it was aimed at lodian, who made up this character "lee" (a male) in order to try and "intimidate" me in the last blog, and i exposed her for it. so it wasn't you i was refering to. understand now? real facts "
sam wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:52 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:29 AM:
I can assure you that I am not imaginary, nor am I lodian. Now that is funny. "
sam wrote on Jan 27, 2008 10:13 AM:
WY wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:57 AM:
WY wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:49 AM:
It's like a boat next to a dock,just floating next to it.You know that the boat needs to be tied but it's just a tad bit out of your reach. If you get all frantic about the fact it's not tied down and grab wildly at it you could give it a tap and send it out beyond your reach even farther. Now you're SOL, the boat is adrift and you just jacked up your chance to do the right thing, but if you quietly reach with a gentle hand you can get the boat to drift closer to the dock. Then you secure it. The "in your face method" doesn't work for young people. You need to bring em in, not run em off. You're too frick'n windy! You're the kind off Christian that would make me turn and run. So what good are you to God when you run us off? Who appointed you GATE KEEPER? You're wrong in your method. Your thump is off beat. "
Brian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:12 AM:
nylodian, thanks for the compliment.
Incidently, "Hidabeast" was made up by Neal Boortz, a nationally syndicated radio show host and an author of many books.
"
Brian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 9:00 AM:
" RF: Brian doesn't need you to come to his defense, especially from another blog. (I'll still take the flowers, Brian, ha ha). The difference between your posts and mine? I never called Brian HIMSELF a liar or stupid, etc. I challenged his misinformation, and his name-calling in a supposed intellectual exchange of ideas. I'm still praying for you, RF. Happy Sabboth
nylodian, Where have I called anyone a name on this blog? Yes I do defend RF.
Your claim that RF is as insecure as you that he needs my defense is ridiculous. The fact that you never point out Leonard's questionable language such as ROTFLMAO and other belittling catch-phrases not to mention
all the other crap that you and your cronies write. I have no other conclusion than it is the intent of you and your cronies to make any blog you participate in a mockery of the discussion. "
Brian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:48 AM:
Given that these clowns are well seasoned in the art of dirty pool, I myself can claim victory for my honesty. "
nylodian wrote on Jan 27, 2008 7:44 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 1:58 AM:
little did i know, your delusion is off the charts, and you atually did it.
now put your "friends" away before someone catches you and turns you in. plus, you don't want to get in a crucial situation in life, and then forget who you are do you? how do you decide whether to go to the womans restroom, or the mens? ha ha
"sam". the male intimidation-creation of lodian. they have a special place for people that have "imaginary friends". (it's called denny's). ha ha "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 1:47 AM:
you are so out there lodian. tell me lodian, does "lee" only come out to play when you take a little more of the medication the DR describes?
your so weird. despite my joking about bringing out your imaginary friends, you actually do it. your so out there, you think you can do that, and people don't know you are? is that delusion 101 or not?
i am going to bed. play your imaginary "friend" game all you want. you only embarrass your self beyond repair. taking out the "trash" on you tonight isn't even worth it. i would much rather go to bed and watch more of your mental circus unfold "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 1:39 AM:
got grab another "imaginary friend". your going to need some help getting out of your laundry list of lies... "
Lee wrote on Jan 27, 2008 1:35 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 1:23 AM:
me--->maybe you would like to explain your verbage toward "brian" in the morality blog? warm and fuzzy, non sarcsatic huh? wow, "i'm" the bad guy in here?
here's your words to brian. i am not sorry (for you) they reveal your a hypocrite, and another person in here whose claims don't match thier words. ....nylodian---->(" Oh, and I love the stellar intellect it takes to come up with "Hildabeast". I bet he won lots of debates in FOURTH GRADE").
brian; nylodian said you had "stellar intellect". i think you should write her a thank you card, and send her flowers on her birthday "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 1:04 AM:
a two-fer deal. a little "whats what" for leonard...tie that one onto your biblical thin air "tree" leonard. God has never vasilated or made obsolete, moral sin. sexual sins defintions don't change. the accusation has always been that God somehow changed the rules about sexual sin by putting his foot down about it in the mosaic law. free for all prior to that, or so they claim. nope. sexual sins have remained a no no from the beginning of creation until now. you can't have homosexual sex or heterosexual sex outside of marriage, even if you ARE wearing a poly fiber suit with wool blend slacks.
see leonard? thats how a real man of true position handles his business. he doesn't run away and hide, and he actually is willing to qualify his position biblically. you? you chicken out of it.....EVERYTIME
the beauty of Gods word...no one can put a dent in it's authenticity OR it's authority "
real facts wrote on Jan 27, 2008 12:35 AM:
I have read Leviticus. I am just curious. Do you actually follow all those laws? Or just a few of them? And if you feel some irrelevant, how do you chose?").
good. then you should have no problem answering my question. can anybody play this game right? is that too much to ask? i ask you a question, and you skip right past your responsibility to answer it, and then you ask me something, hoping to beg out of your responsibility. are you coming in here to discuss? or is this another one way street? because those people are a dime a dozen in here. they make all these demands of me on biblical issues.....i ask them one thing and off they go into deflection responsibity land, or they completely run away. you? i will answer anything you throw at me with honesty. but you know me by now. your not going to slide on answering my questions BEFORE you ask me one. that question on leviticus you gave me is an easily answered one sam. one i have been dying to answer, because it totally without question vindicates my position in here about sin. any sin. that answer puts leonards theology into outer space. you know i am licking my chops over that. i am a patient guy, but first and foremost,what is tantamount to truth....making sure i keep people on the hook long enough to build my case against them, given accuracy and truth it's time to ferment. i sit back and bait people and watch them self indict themselves, by allowing their own selves, to demonstrate the differentiation between thier words vs. thier claims. i wisely choose that over a quick "victory". patience + fermenting = the obvious real truth over "people" or "opinions". remember, i ONLY do this toward people who demonstrate antagonistic behavior. people that display integrity by showing they are here to discuss (even if we disagree), i treat them good.
answer the question i gave you...does leviticus chapter 18 and 20 say that homosexual sex is a no no? does romans chapter 1 (which you coveignetly forgot to mention in your last reply to me)...say anything about homosexual sex being a no no between BOTH sexes? above is my original question you begged away from...
now i sit back and we will see your integrity at work in here....
"
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 11:57 PM:
Real Facts, you follow ALL the laws in Leviticus? WOW, I am impressed").
not a swipe huh? sarcasm isn't a swipe?
i don't wish to fight with you, as that is not my goal in here. my goal is to tell the truth, and part of that is making sure that what i say or said, IS the truth. i accused you of taking a swipe at me in your initial move toward me. i had to copy and paste your words to prove it was true. "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 11:51 PM:
i know i have more than one book on my book shelf. if i have the truth, why on earth would i be afraid of anything that challenges that truth? answer, i wouldn't. i am not afraid of scince, archaeology or anything that people think challenges Christianity's validity. love it. welcome it. cults are told they are forbidden to read any other literature but thier own. me, i welcome it. it only ends up solidifying why Jesus Christ IS the truth. that openmindedness gives me the ability in the end, to defend lies against the truth. world religions diametrically opposed to Christianity (something about Christ differentiating himself from the "pack" by claiming to be God, and then proving it by raising himself from the dead, would be my "guess"), in thier ancient texts "some" compliment the biblical record on noah's flood. the false statement you made was that the biblical record was "borrowed" from the sumerian texts. thats a false statement. the biblical record is an internal audit of world events based on eyewitness testimony. either directly, or thru generational accountings, prior to written form. people "can" think that the sumerian texts are "gospel" because of thier time-date-stamp in history. God didn't put his mark on the sumerian texts as the "go-to-end all-be -all for his authority. he moved upon mens hearts and recorded what he had them record. while the sumerian texts compliment "some" of the biblical record, they may be histoy, but they are not for determining the things of God. what was dangerous in your original posts, is your tone that they were, and your sarcastic insinuation the bible isn't ("should we now worship the sumerian gods"?)
this is whats funny about people like you nylodian. YOU claim to be a Christian. you claimed that, i didn't claim it for you. as a "Christian", YOU made the statement ...." So since some Biblical stories were copied from earlier Sumerian texts, should I start worshiping the Sumerian gods too? Just wondering". ... what "Christian" desecrates their Lord, by making garbage statements like that? that statement had one purpose...to make a mockery of Gods word AND authority. and you whine and complain because i am too harsh, in here. that i should be more "loving". you expect me as a follower of Jesus Christ to sit there and watch people like you claim Christianity, while being sarcastic about the authority of Gods word? not quite. this is another example of people who aren't the least bit interested in debate. thier agenda is killing Gods authority thru his word. make all the claims you want that you too, are a follower of Christ. people that really are, don't say those things. trust me, despite you people yelling and screaming foul because someone has the audacity to split truth from "claims", i have no trouble taking flak for doing so from any number of you. if it is the truth, it's the truth. try talking in such endearing terms about your husband or wife over a period of time, like you do about Gods word, and see how long your marriage lasts. try undermining your "boss" and his authority, and see how long you hold that job. i see from your blog entry you don't like "fundamental Christians". i can see why. people that aren't intrested in the authority of God, don't like people who choose to error on the side of picking Gods authority over dismissing it. your just another one that tries to. thats the truth. if you had made a statement about the sumerian texts that wasn't sarcastic and dimissive of Gods authority...whole different ballgame. "
sam wrote on Jan 26, 2008 9:06 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 26, 2008 8:59 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 26, 2008 7:49 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:42 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:24 PM:
" RF say"...anyway, find yourself a screen writer. you need new material.")
i had to catch this one. your right, what i say about you, is totally off and un-founded. sure it is "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:21 PM:
your a liar, as to "you answered all my questions". above is a my post to YOU culled from below. you answered that one, eh lodian? your a liar. you answered everytime i asked you to qualify your accusations against me by citing my posts where i did? your a liar lodian. you have never done that once. you lie so bad it's pathetic.
now i am going to the hockey game. i don't have the time right now to take out your trash. when i get back tonight, i am going to copy and paste everytime on this blog where i asked you a question, and YOU didn't answer it. thanks for lighting another fire under me, for proving your a lying twisted soul. i love that whats been said in here, and who did what, truly tells whose..."the liar" "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:18 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:17 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:16 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:15 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:15 PM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:13 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:13 PM:
So, since you think I am twisted therefore it is so, no matter what anyone else thinks. YOU LIED AGAIN!! Geez, will you ever stop with the lies"?)
see what i mean? desperation. you don't have anything left. find someone that can help you with the ability to defend yourself, with your own words. using mine against me proves you are twisted "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:12 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:09 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:07 PM:
RF said, "It's all about you being an accessory to the crime of allowing others the freedom to sin against God by denying his authority over anyone's life. your a "voice" for that cause").
can't find your own material, so you plagarise(sp) mine? now your incoherent. i am a voice for sin huh? i am the one that upholds sin. now your just pathetic. this is what you did in the last blog. when you came to the end of your desperation rope, you twisted my words around, and attempted to use them against me. pathetic and desperate. anyway, find yourself a screen writer. you need new material. "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:07 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:06 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:03 PM:
"
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:02 PM:
like i said, your just a sick twisted soul. look at your desperation above. look how far your going now. when you first lied about my exchange with WY, i was pissed. that was straight up as evil as it gets. now i am laughing, and the reason i am laughing, is because i am watching you self implode. so go ahead, i will watch as you play out your futility game, and actually allow YOURSELF to prove you are what i say you are. your only helping me, but your hatred for me has gone so far your in delusional self-imploding mode. ha ha ha ha ha. pretty funny now. as big as your ego is right now, you couldn't discredit me if your life depended on it. what else do you have "for me". you play in the minor leagues lodian. your not even sweat off my brow. ha ha ha ha. please continue your self implosion fireworks display "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:00 PM:
"
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:51 PM:
RF: Now you are calling me more names? A "sick twisted soul" you say? Very nice. I thought you said you don't call me names. Liar! Ya big bully").
i didn't call you a name, i made a true statement. anybody that goes that low IS a sick twisted soul. i see you didn't repent of your purposefully aimed lie about the way i treated WY. you ARE sick, and your lack of conscience keeps digging you a deeper spiritual hole. more than me speaking the truth about you, YOU continue to live up to it "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:50 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:46 PM:
ok, we will play the game your way, based on YOUR accusation. answer me this, does it mention homosexual sex is a no no in leviticus 18? leonards "bible" is missing that verse. maybe yours has it? you leveled the accusation, now back up your words. lets see if you can live up to your own accusations about "picking and choosing". does it say it, or not? does romans chapter 1 mention homosexual sex is a no no? now we will see who "pick and chooses" "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:41 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:40 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:39 PM:
Real Facts, you follow ALL the laws in Leviticus? WOW, I am impressed").
you can thank leonard for never coming clean on his "new covenant" angle on how certain sins are now irrelevant, but others still are. leonard, the poster boy of integrity. you probably read it... my challenge to him on what is/isn't. how mixed fibers isn't, but homosexual sex is? he backed away from it. since he won't, when i get the chance, i will be glad to explain "the difference". slam dunk stuff. since your tone to me is accusatory in nature (you guys can talk to me like that all day long. i say something like that, i am the "bad guy"), how about you make the differentiation of why "some" of the laws in leviticus are, or aren't. you didn't come in here to take your swipe at me then leave, did you sam? you said it, now back it up. thats a fair congenial request since you aimed your post at me "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:38 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:31 PM:
your a sick twisted soul to say that. thats is the most heinous evil lie you have said to date. i know you can't stand me, and wish i would disappear, but for any human being to stoop this low, it's as deplorable as it gets. youv'e relagated yourself to bottom feeder status with this one. your in here to discuss lodian? your in here for ONE PURPOSE...and that is destruction. my posts to WY were done from a loving heart. i went out of my way to reassure her when she mis-interpreted one of my statements. you know that, AND YOU STILL LIED ABOUT IT. how far does your sickness go? anybody that high fives you, especially after this heinous display, is an accessory to your evil. your one sick person. yea, your here for "good reasons". "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:26 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:24 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:23 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:22 PM:
me----> all i have to do to prove who you really are, is keep posting your archived lies. i asked you this before, and you never qualify your lies....what questions haven't i answered? answer the question since YOU leveled the accusation. "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:16 PM:
me---> thats a lie too. even when the "storm" calms down, and i ask a simple and fair question, I get no respect and people either wuss out, or bail. take you for instance, i can't count the times i aimed queations to you in a congenial manner WHEN the calm prevailed. not DIDN'T you answer the questions, YOU turned it into another fiasco because then i have to chase your lack of integrity down to prove your full of it on your angle "i just want to be able to discuss". you could demonstrate ONE string of posts, where that behavior from you is true. you are every bit to blame for the garbage that floods this blog. i would LOVE to have a meaningful discussion, but so far, thier is has been hardly any people here willing to do that (most entirely - YOU) "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:10 PM:
RF is casting stones right and left. I wonder what it feels like to be without sin. RF, can you share your experiences as a person without sin").
i see despite me pointing out your proclivity to stop lying, you continue unabated. you would think a person would stop IF they had altruistic reasons for being as they keep claiming. you chase all over this borad, crying to the high hills about my behavior in here is deplorable, yet you lie as if there is nothing wrong with it. your deluded, and so is anyone else that high fives you for doing so. thier blinded by agenda also. they pick truth over people either.
where you lied about me above---> i have specifically stated many times, i don't consider myself to be perfect, or "above" anyone else on the planet. your a liar. the reason you always lie about me is you have a goal. if you can discredit me, you can "cheapen" my words, and maybe even run me how. but thats your small mind delusion. your lies only serve to build my case in here. you.....prove i am right. keep it up, one these days we will all be reading an article in the LNS about a woman that went to the emergency, because of a rare known disorder...spontaneous combustible tongue syndrome "
nylodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 2:39 PM:
Robb wrote on Jan 26, 2008 2:03 PM:
Brian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 1:16 PM:
" RF: Homosexuality became OK in exactly the same way it became OK to wear mixed fibers. "
I SEE LEONARD'S STILL MAKING A MOCKERY OF THIS DISCUSSION. HE KNOWS SO MUCH ABOUT THE BIBLE YET HE FEELS THE NEED TO MISSTATE AND DISTORT THE BIBLE.
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:34 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:30 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:28 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:27 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:20 PM:
sam wrote on Jan 26, 2008 11:12 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 26, 2008 11:02 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 26, 2008 10:55 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 26, 2008 10:46 AM:
sam wrote on Jan 26, 2008 10:37 AM:
LodiHomeOwner wrote on Jan 26, 2008 10:30 AM:
nylodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 7:57 AM:
nylodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 7:54 AM:
nylodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 7:46 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 6:12 AM:
real facts: We are ALL God's children. It's not up tp you to decide who has God's favor. There is a big difference between preaching the word of the Lord and just trying to play God").
your right, it's not up to me to decide. thats Gods job description. what IS up to me, if i claim to be a follower of Jesus Christ, IS to uphold his righteous standards. would you stand idly by and allow thieves to enter your house and steal all your belongings? i hope not. me neither. God gives the parameters of who is/isn't. if he didn't, there could never be a distinction, both now and in eternity. anybody could claim they were. child molesters could. not everybody "is" boomer. and when they aren't, and they undermine Gods authority, someone has to step up to the plate and do something about it. otherwise God becomes a chaotic mess, defined by men. according to your line of thinking above, no one knows who the "criminals" in life are, so there is no need for "policeman". a world without policeman, what a nice thought. are you a proponent of morality running amok, or should a line be drawn in the sand?
sleep time. tomorrow if voter doesn't show up for thier appt, i have to keep my word to ivan dixon. i also have to demonstrate to leonard how a real man of position acts. who doesn't run away and defends his position when challenged. you will never see me wuss out of anything "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:56 AM:
actually, to be honest, when i challenge people over thier position even when i ask them in a congenial fashion, they run and hide. they know i know things that will make them accountable to God, and they run from that. look at "voter". he/she made a cooment about incest. i asked them a simple and fair question free of any "bully" overtones (as you put it). what does he/she do? they freak out and start going off on me, all because they wussed out on defending thier position when asked to do so. that had NOTHING to do with bullying, and everything to do with wussing out, and making me thier scapegoat. are people afraid of me and what i will say? of course they are. they are because thier afraid that what i say, they won't like. people outside the truth, are bothered by it. besides, everyone hides behind a computer. who should really be afraid of who. no one likes a tongue lashing, but there is more going on here. people come in here all the time brave about stating "facts" about God this and God that. someone that knows thier stuff and challenges them, they run and hide. thats what really is going on in here. they go toe-to-toe with anyone in other blogs on other issues. in here, they hit, run and hide.
leonards the king of that manuever. leonards all over global warming, with "facts" culled from internet sources right and left. in here....the wuss king. can't qualify one biblical stance of his. deflects clean away from the responsibility to do so. he happens to be the king in here. but he's in good company, because there are alot of people that come and go, hit and run. alot
it's really a matter of integrity. in life, you take a stand for what you believe, or that "belief" will determine you have nothing come crunch time. you think i am a bully? wait until you stand before God after you have lived your life apart from his authority. you people don't know it, or appreciate it, but i am working hard in here to insure that doesn't happen to you. it's a neccessary evil to have to de-fang the wolves
"
boomer wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:43 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:34 AM:
i did. you must have missed it. go read my post again to WY, and see what happens when someone isn't acting like a wolf. when you act like sheep, you get sheep treatment. you always eventually act like a wolf, and that determines what comes your way, so thats on you.
when you or anyone else purposefully acts like a "wolf" by posting anti=God authority stripping blah, you get wolf treatment. i am an expert at diferentiating between ignorance of a subject matter, and one who has good motives even if we disagree, and one whose ONLY intent is to undermine Gods authority. i always know who the wolves are "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:25 AM:
Why does RF try so hard to prove that others, on this message board, are not Christians? He tries constantly even though we have stated we believe and follow God's word, as we understand it")
why? so you and your partners in crime can't give a reason for other people to sin without conscience. you claim your a "Christian", yet your collective words prove otherwise. you feign "faith" when trying to legitimize yourself, then you turn right around and trash Gods authority" you---> "as i understand it". give me a break. another weak attempt at validating your feighned "faith". your not interested in understanding anything. when you read something, and lie that it doesn't even exist, thats not "understanding". thats lying purposeful rebellion. save the baloney about you being a believer that may not agree. other people buy what your trying to sell, God doesn't, and neither do i. like the bible says, there are wolves dressed in sheeps clothing, walking around seeking to steal the sheeps lives. an excellant analogy that parallels your tenure in here. claiming to be a sheep, but acting like a wolf. your a "wolf", because your constant "push" is to undermine the authority of the sheephearder, over the sheep. pretty simple stuff. people claim to be "Christians" all the time. some have bombed abortion clinics while claiming they were one. sorry, not a Christian. your a wolf. you can change your status you know. i have no worries calling it as it is. some people are afraid to. not me. when i know for sure (and i can always tell in a short period of time via seperating people from thier words over thier claims), i do it. swift and fast, with surety. the bible lays out two things about this issue (1) it gives "indicators" over who is, and who isn't. (2) it calls for the telling of the truth, about who is/isn't. ...i just happen to be good at it (your bad luck). you - just happen to keep exhibiting wolf behavior. thats on you. i'm just doing what i'm supposed to. protecting actual sheep FROM the wolves "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:03 AM:
still to this day, despite multiple pleadings for you to do so, you have yet to demonstrate HOW i "hate" people. do it. Jesus hated sin, did he not? i bet you won't answer that one, will you. prove i hate people, or take a hike
that kind of accusation is pure wickedness, if it isn't true. PROVE IT "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:59 AM:
You have no right to bully me into believing what you believe about homosexuality").
wasn't trying to. don't care whether you do or don't, thats your deal. i don't pretend to think you will ever change your mind about it. thats not even close to my agenda in here. know what is? i am going to defend Gods authority and integrity on EVERY issue that challenges that. thats my agenda. the subject matter that plays into that (whatever it is at the moment), has no consequence or pre-imminence. whatever "topic" it's on, gets the same treatment. in your weak position, you keep attempting to turn it into a "hate" issue, because "if" successful, you can run me out of here. won't work lodian. because my push isn't what you lie about that it is.
i have told you before, it doesn't even have to do with homosexuality. it's all about you being an accessory to the crime of allowing others the freedom to sin against God by denying his authority over anyones life. your a "voice" for that cause. i aim to make sure that voice gets countered with the reality OF Gods authority, so people can have a shot at a right relationship with God. you have demonstrated other antagonistic behavior toward Gods authority on subject matters OTHER than homosexuality. i opposed you the EXACT same way. me and "you"...has NOTHING to do with homosexuality. you lie that it does "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:44 AM:
Rf: You have never sincerely apologized for anything. What you call an apology was just another chance for you to post attacks and bully").
lodian---> "you have never sincerely apologized for anything".
this is what i mean about you. first you post an altruistic "plea" for peace in here from me, claiming all the "good" of your intentions...and then you turn right around and lie again about me. this is EXACTLY what i mean about you. you are as two-faced as it comes when trumpeting your claims of you being "good". your just a side-door player. i apologized sincerely for my mistake. what do you do? you purposefully lie about it, because you are so desperate to discredit me, thinking you can make me disappear. it's exactly what i have been saying about you all along. your not in here for nice discussions. your here to discredit Gods authority, and those who try to uphold it. if that weren't true...you wouldn't have purposefully lied about the intent of my apology to you. like i said, i am good at seperating you from your words. you keep waffling between feighned good intent, and turn right around and lie without conscience. your first post was good. people were buying it. you killed your "intent" when you purposefully lied. your heart goes there so easily. the "good" thing about you is this....it never takes very long for the REAL you, to come to the surface. do you really ever hope to see me apologize for anything.....unless i meant it? trust me, the ONLY time i will apologize for anything, is when i do something wrong. unlike you, i own my business. i don't fade in and out of three different personalties, depending on which way the wind is blowing at the time. thats your modus-operandi. with me.. what you see, is what you get...straight up "
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 1:35 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 1:06 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:38 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:18 AM:
RF: You really like the name-calling too. Why is it easier for you to call people names rather than actually converse with them on a mature level? It's like your protective shield. You cover yourself behind all these personal attacks, just like a bully").
this is an easy fix for you. what name calling has been inappropriate? what did i say, that wasn't true? if i said something that wasn't true, i will apologize and come clean on it. otherwise, i own my words. on the rare occasion, i have got angry. but i still choose my words carefully, and mean what i say. it's harsh, but it's true. now on some occasion where i got angry that you can point out where i said something UNTRUE, let me know...i will own up to it. i will be happy to demonstrate to you, what i have been taking you to task over in several blogs now...the adjustment TO Gods authority...not away from it. did you catch my apology on attaching your name in the morality blog? you see, thats how it works. you own your "stuff" before God, and adjust. something i have NEVER seen either you OR leonard do. which proves you both could care less about Gods authority. people that are, adjust to it. now take me to task..i welcome it "
real facts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:07 AM:
yeah. i am high fiving myself over being the ultimate "ruler" of righteousness at the LNS blogs. give me a break. i have a job to do. thats all. doesn't make me the king of squat. you have confused my penchant for making sure the authority of God isn't stripped clean in here, with me being some fat headed jerk. look, i can appreciate the fact that you don't encounter Christians who won't stand idly by, as people like you mow down biblical morality, but fat-headed-thinking-i-am-better-than-anyone-else is the furthest thing from my agenda. unlike you, i have respect for God. i am not putting myself in any situation where God has to take me to task over anything, especially being a holier-than-thou. you don't even want to know how God deals with pride in a believer. pride is on the "list" of things God hates most. one of those "other things"....stripping his authority. the way i deal with you, i am not the least bit concerned about God needing to deal with me. keep my stuff straight. your just not used to Christians taking such a harsh stand against sin, including telling it like it is. if you chicken out of something, your a chicken. if you lie, especially consistently without conscience, your a liar. etc. i tell the truth, and people act like Christians aren't allowed to tell the truth. not anymore. for decades now, i have watched as people like you, have intimidated Christians into submission thru various tactics. the latest, most effective over the last handful of years...."oh your not tolerant". "you don't allow other people to believe whatever they want to believe". "your preaching "hate". it's all designed to silence God, and his authority over man. well, in many ways, you have suceeded. but not in here. Christians have become afraid of holding up the truths of God at all costs. the church, by and large - politically correct. just because your not used to a Christian like me, and wish you could silence my voice because it condemns your actions, doesn't mean i have acted inapproriately before God in dealing with you or leonard. if i have lied (about anything), i'm in big trouble. you may have no conscience about spouting off about God in way that discredits his authority over you and others, i know different. i fear Gods chastenting of me. i know what thats like, and it ain't fun. according to God, people are split into one of two camps (1) you either belong to him via your choice to follow him AS HE dictates how to follow him, (2) or you don't. there is absolutely no middle ground. with God, it's an all or nothing proposition, or nothing at all. you either belong to him, or your life via your choices are set for an eternity apart from him. given that truthful, biblical definition, you may have been born a child of God, but you, via your choices, are outside that definition, based on HIS definition of how you follow him. he makes that distinction, i don't. to prove this has nothing to do with me, other than me echoing what HE says on who is, and who isn't....i defer to his words about it..
1john chapter 2:4
"He who says "i know him", but does not keep his commmandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him".
you and leonard shovel his commandments out to the dungpile in a theological wheelbarrow every chance you get. "followers" of Christ, huh? the bible says your not, not me. i just hold up the mirror. you think my language toward you is harsh? probably so, considering most Christians are too concerned about telling the truth, because thier afraid of the backlash. i didn't call you a liar, as much as Gods word does. i echoed it. when you claim you are a Christian, and then you turn right around and work hard at stripping Gods word of it's authority, you might as well have your picture next to that verse. believe me, thats only one of many verses that say the same thing. if thats not good enough, and you want "Christs own words", i can do that. he said pretty much the same thing. let me know. i will post those too. if it were a matter of you being ignorant of Gods laws, whole different ballgame. your not, and you fight against it knowing full well that you are. that lodian, is why i oppose you so. your assertion that i think i am above anyone in here is another ploy to discredit me. i am no different than you, in that i stand before God, just like you. even after i put you in your place, and expose your God stripping agenda, i STILL am no better than you. the only difference between me and you...is choices about reflecting Gods authority accuretly. better than you. NO. better off than you. yup (but certainly, .....i know my place on the food chain) "
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:04 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:48 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:08 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:30 PM:
I doubt God wants you to berate and belittle his children for following what he has asked of us").
i wouldn't dare berate and belittle "his children". if i did that, i would pay a heavy price for it. you and leonard, are NOT "his children". your phonies. you disguise yourselves as such, and in the process of doing so, you have the ability to give others the notion that they too can expunge Gods authority out of their life. afterall, you two are "Christians". people who don't know any better, see you and leonard lying about the authority of God over the homosexual issue, calling yourselves "followers of Christ", and you two saying there is nothing wrong with it. THATS why i oppose you two so harshly. it isn't even a matter of homosexuality. i could care less about the subject matter. whats at stake here, is Gods authority. you two attempt to strip it. i defend it. to prove it, write a letter to the LNS about adultery. then we can blog on that. you will see my verbage is EXACTLY the same, "if" someone turns that into a God authority stripping issue as well. you think i am all hung up on the homosexul issue? even you know (but would never admit) that i oppose YOU over the authority issue. i cleared myself of the homosexuality "hatred" angle you falsely accuse me of in your weak attempt at discrediting me. i don't hate gays. proved it. it's an authority issue. i said it to leonard, and i will say it to you to put you on the same "hook".....people that "love God", don't fight against it. they work hard to defend it, and move towards it. you fight it. look at your blog entry in the blog about morality. in it is your consisten attitude and tone about anything having to do with Christianity...ANTAGONISM. Christians don't act that way. your words don't match your claims. your either full of it, or self deluded into thinking your a follower of Christ. here's a barometer of you vs. your feighned claims about being a follower of Jesus Christ....if you remotely acted or talked about your boss and the "company" the way you do on a consistent basis. if your tone was one of tearing down rather than building, you would be FIRED from any job. that analogy proves what the true intent of your heart is. your an imposter, and an enabler to sin. thats the truth.
when i do encounter a believer, it matters zip if they agree with what the bible says about any subject matter, i am cool with them. sworn enemies of the authority of God (like you and leonard), i will do whatever it takes in here to ensure you two can't give others the notion that anyone can shun Gods authority. your getting "belittled" because of your enemy to the authority of God status. if you repent of that, you will be treated like a sister in Christ. we are at this place in history, morality-wise, because Christians sat back and watched people like you and leonard high jack morality. not anymore. not on my watch. i am giving you and leonard exactly what you deserve, and i sleep at night because of it...
"
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:03 PM:
" RF: Homosexuality became OK in exactly the same way it became OK to wear mixed fibers").
thats not even in the ballpark of lining up with Gods word. thats about the most rediculous arguement "fof" homosexuality i have heard yet. your the one thats complained on different blogs that there's 1,000's of sects of Christianity. no duh. the reason there is, is because of people like you. cults are built around your version of theology...."i don't like that aspect, so i will make up my own". boy is it ever obvious you pulled a lame rabbit out of your hat on this one. you still have yet to explain the new covenant, because you know you can't, and you know i will prove your "theology" is not only flawed and full of holes, it's a joke. glad i could finally get you to admit your stance on this. you hid it for a long time. although it was an arduous journey to do so, it was well worth the effort it took to expose your faulty God authority stripping theology. where on earth could anybody say with a straight face that homosexuality is now not a sin, equating that with the laws about wearing mixed fibers? ceremonial laws are the same as moral laws? the ONLY person that could possibly make that connection, is one thats blinded by agenda. what you have failed to do, again, is prove that happened. what I did prove about you concerning this exact issue, is that your both a hypocrite, and a person who only chooses what they want to believe, based around agenda. did that by baiting you on the incest deal.
you NEVER answered the question leonard. how did incest remain as a biblical moral no no, but homosexual sex now is a go? how did that happen leonard? answer the question. how are all the other sexual no no's of leviticus 18 & 20 still a no, and the only one that has changed and has become something acceptable, is homosexual sex? how did that happen? answer the question.
you need to quit your feighned concern for my standing with God. the ONLY reason you pull out that card, is it's your final "go to" in order to try and pass yourself of as a follower of Christ. i said it before about you and i will say it again.....people that follow and love Christ, aren't antagonist to his authority, and work hard to maintain it. you fight against. that soldifies your an ain't. redundentcy is boring for sure, but entirely necessary so that you can't be an accessory to giving people a free pass to sin. answer the question on how incest is bad, but homosexual sex is good? "
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 5:43 PM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 5:35 PM:
pray tell the high priest of pick and choose theology, how have you "soundly beaten" anything in here?
RF, I misspoke. Throughout this blog, I have repeatedly tried to turn your heart towards Christ and I have repeatedly failed. Their is no victory in failing to bring a brother to Christ. Certainly, you lose the hope of Salvation through Christ's message of love but I too lose in having failed to bring in a lost soul that is tormented by hatred and bigotry.
As always, I will pray for you to accept Christ's love. "
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 5:26 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 5:21 PM:
"
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 4:17 PM:
so leonard, here's another chance for you to demonstrate your bible knowledge. do keep in mind before you state your case, Gods word trumps mans opinions. given that measuring stick...who goes to hell, and why? you already dug yourself another theological "hole" by stating "it's not supported by the gospels". you made a statement about what the bible says about people and hell. now demonstrate how the gospels support your claim. do it biblically. you said it, now back it up. what does the gospels say about hell, and the people who go there? see, i make you qualify your statements, so you can't pass it off as "gospel" truth. but you, you will run and hide from this one too, just like you did all the other times. or you could actually surprise the reading audience and prove what you said is true...biblically. we are waiting. will he skate again? "
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 4:06 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 4:02 PM:
where did you read that? anti-biblical / biblical authentication smear sites? maybe the "gospel" of wikipedia? this is what i mean, if i had a dollar for everytime someone comes in here and makes a sweeping statement aimed at stripping the authenticity / origin of Gods word, then leaving....i would have a fat wallet. your statement is how should we say.."not true". is that a "nicer" way of saying that what you said is a rediculous lie that no one can prove, no one ever has? good. there you have it. i was nice (sort of). now nylodian, since you made the statement, and tried to pass it off as fact, qualify it. how do you know that is true? don't tell me that your one of those people that really doesn't care whether something IS true or not? all you care about is killing off something you don't like. thats not your methodology, is it? you can prove it isn't, IF you stick around and qualify why that statement is true (or if it isn't). killing off the things of God just because you don't like it, is an evil act to God. care to qualify it thru true chroniLOGICAL history? do it from history, not wikipedia. "
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 3:49 PM:
Chuckle..... in other words, having been soundly beaten yet again, RF is taking his marbles and going home").
pray tell the high priest of pick and choose theology, how have you "soundly beaten" anything in here? thats laughable. you can't even qualify your own positions in here biblically. you chicken out of it everytime. i know you could only dream that i wasn't exposing the fact you have no idea what your talking about concerning Gods word, and you would wish i would go away. but news flash leonard, i am here to stay so you can't be an accessory to the crime of stripping God of his authority over mens lives, and giving other people the idea they can disobey Gods authority either. thats WHY i oppose you, not because i dream of changing your deeply deluded heart. i just use you, as the example of where you don't want your heart to go to before a Holy God. the real truth about you is this...EVERYTIME you trumpet what YOU think Gods word says in order to align with your liberal agenda, i bust you on it, proving you have no idea what the bible DOES say, and that your pulling garbage out of thin air. took you to task everytime by forcing you to qualify yourself biblically. to this day, you still can't and refuse to. you change the subject so fast i need motion sickness pills. real men of position will go to the farthest lengths and time it takes to defend thier position. you cite everything in the universe when it comes to your position in the political blogs. here, when i bust you on it....NOTHING. your so phony when it comes to you tumpeting that your a follower of Christ. when you trumpet feighned theological positions, it obvious. harsh words? yep. true. 100%. you can't even answer simple questions i give you on biblical literacy. you have yet to come clean on how homosexual sex got dropped off of the sin hit list when the new covenant came in effect. incest didn't, but homosexaul sex did? according to the pick and choose world of leonard it did. your explanation of what the new covenant actually is, is strangely missing. soundly beaten, huh leonard? if you call what you have done in here, compared to the actual truths of God, as some sort of victory in your mind, you are more deluded than o.j. simpson. you count that as a victory, huh? real men qualify themselves. they don't run and hide. your on the run.............> "
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 3:18 PM:
RF, Most are already laughing at you dear").
thats fine. bothers me NONE. you said something a while back in this blog about me not having any friends, or no one to support me, everyones abandoned me, even brian, blah blah blah. don't lump me into your world of inclusion based in popularity or majority. thats the gutter you swim in. not me. i pick truth, and that entails one edict. if a person tells the truth, they do it without a worry in the world as to the backlash implications of the fallout for telling it. that would be me. if that meant i was the last person on the planet that held that position, so be it. i could care less what people think of me. you are a case study in the futility of political correctness. your afraid of the truth. your agenda is your truth, not truth itself. truth seeking people gravitate toward truth. they don't consistently move away from it, and seek to destroy it for others to experience. i have never seen you once make a move toward truth in here. not once. not just because i may have said something truthful in here, and you don't like me, but truth itself. you swim in a wide river chocked full of people just like you. i swim in the river of truth. right now in history, because people don't like the truth, that "river" i swim in has become narrower and narrower. it's ok. if i have to swim alone, i will. people that uphold the truth, aren't the least bit worried as to how deep, wide or swift the water is. they just keep swimming. truth floats lodian. always has, always will. right now, your acting like a boat anchor. your an accesory to the crime of drowning the truth "
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 3:01 PM:
" RF: "once again, you lie about my character. it's all you have left.").
if i lie about someones character, that has the potential of eroding everything i have to say in here, when i am trying to uphold Gods standards. i wouldn't take that chance, even if i got that angry. unlike you people, i have a respectful fear enough about Gods authority, i wouldn't dream of resorting to lying about something or someone, just because i wanted to gain an upper hand in a debate. thats evil. you to do it without conscience. i tell the truth about people. what i said about you is 100% true as you have potrayed yourself in here. actually, YOU have lied about YOUR character. all i ever do with you, is hold up the mirror. this one fact remains .....what you have done, and what i have done is archived for all to see. if people are fair enough in thier judgements in life, and are not "clouded" in thier judgements based around people OR agenda, they will know who has integrity in here, and who tells the truth about what and whom. when i give it, it may be harsh, but it's the truth. because my position is one of strength and not of weakness, i qualify myself biblically (unlike you and leonard), and i don't resort to lying BECAUSE of my position. you BOTH do, because you have no where else to go. i sleep like a baby over these issues... "
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 2:43 PM:
so leonard, since you keep trumpeting this position, and WE have yet to see you rectify that position biblically, how about you do it now. dietary laws are or aren't in effect anymore? dietary laws can change, but incest is still a no no? staying on subject, i would like to see YOU explain how homosexual sex got the ok (according to you) because of the new covenant. see the trouble is, up until this post, your just blowing theological smoke. you have never once proved biblically that it is true. show is where homosexual sex got dropped as a sin because of the new covenant. you don't do it, because even you know you can't. plus, you still have never explained what the new covenant really is, and how it applies to matters pertaining to sin. why is that leonard? because you don't know? "
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 2:34 PM:
Real facts... I completely stopped reading your post when you said I lack knowledge of God").
that broke my heart when i read that WY, that you misinterpreted what i meant by that. when i wrote that, it was 100% aimed as an encouragement, aimed at taking the pressure off of you BECAUSE you didn't understand. trust me, it wasn't a dig, i promise. the written word is sometimes difficult to fully understand ones intent. i ASSURE YOU, it wasn't some sort of dig. i lack knowledge. EVERYONE lacks knowledge. NO ONE knows everything about God. i only made the statement that sometimes people relagate themselves to these "pitfalls of faith", because they don't understand certain aspects of Gods character (lack of knowledge about how that works). thats not a bad thing WY. it's a good thing, in that it is easily rectified. now do you understand that when i said that to you, it was ONLY from an angle of encourgaement? go back and re-read that post i made to you. in it you will find there is a path to greater freedom before God, based on eliminating fear. real facts "
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:41 PM:
I do become quite frustrated when people try to use Christ to justify their personal phobias. "
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:30 PM:
nylodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:29 PM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:29 PM:
I have often thought that RF is very much like the Pharisees. "
Audi 5000 wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:16 AM:
WY wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:02 AM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:45 AM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:43 AM:
Audi 5000 wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:34 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:12 AM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:07 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:56 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:54 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:48 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:45 AM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 7:25 AM:
The guy may share many of your prejudices but I am telling you that he is a couple of wafers short of a communion platter.
I for one, would prefer not to spend a night in a bar with a deranged lunatic shouting the word "LIAR" at me at the top of his lungs.
Besides, if you let RF choose the bar I have a sneaking suspicion that we might end up at the Paradise Lounge which is not exactly my cup of tea. "
Brian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 7:23 AM:
" Chuckle..... in other words, having been soundly beaten yet again, RF is taking his marbles and going home. "
I see Leonard's still busy patting himself on the back even though he knows he has bitten off more than he can chew. "
Brian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 7:20 AM:
Brian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 6:37 AM:
This statement is the essence of how Leonard FEELS God would give the green light to homosexuality. Again, Leonard knows how God FEELS through his crystal ball. "
Leonard wrote on Jan 25, 2008 4:17 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 25, 2008 1:27 AM:
me-----> you can't read tonight? your pathetic-ness has led you now to coming back for round # 50, because you can't control yourself? your lying tongue shows up tonight right on time. my previous posts below to WY, demonstrate my ability to converse with people who actually ARE respectful, whose motives are pure. once again, you lie about my character. it's all you have left.
lodian --->(2)He insists on integrity, but doesn't deliver integrity himself.
lie again. what post did i compromise integrity? i would love to see you for once vindicate your lying tongue. once again, you will skate away from proving your accusation against me. because your a liar. look i realize you must have insecurity and lack of a real life, but don't you have anything better to do than come back in here tonight for another go around? you embarrass yourself with your behavior. you can't even defend your position, so you resort to attacking my character. the blog was in a place of peace for once. what do you do? you come here swinging and ruining the atmosphere. things had clamed down (for once), and took a turn for the positive. your rediculousness ruined that. take a hike lodian. given your lying tongue, your unwillingness to EVER qualify your accusations against me, and your obvious lack of self control, evidenced by you firing off four dig aimed posts in a row, prove your left of center. i am not even going to bed, but after this post, i refuse to waste my time taking you to task tonight over your troubled soul. in your small mind, you will unsuccessfully high five yourself over some victory towards me. go ahead, i will laugh. it's the obvious cnclusion of a delusional person. i prefer (by passive choice) to return the board back to a place of peace. if you can't help yourself (which i know you really can't), feel free to take all the swipes you want tonight. i will address you tomorrow if need be. right now (despite having to put you in your place momentarily), i have enough self respect to demonstrate i am a man of truth, but also a man of peace. feel free to pollute yourself "
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:20 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:18 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:16 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:11 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:58 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:40 PM:
WY wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:16 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:08 PM:
Might there be someone else who could take up the Bible literalist position for us to spare with?").
please do. i could use a break. but if i have to go it alone, i am more than willing. your words "spar with" indicate you came here to mess with Christian authority. "spar" is an antagonistic term. so that proves YOUR intent. trouble is, now that you met your match, you slither away. likewise, on the other side of the fence, go find me one person that has intellctual integrity, who won't slither away when challenged to defend thier own stated position. i could care less if they agree, as long as they defend thier postion and don't resort to lying to cover thier inability to do so. i would be dead shocked to experience THAT in here. "
WY wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:00 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:00 PM:
then i apologize for mis-reading your intention in what i believed your calling God, a serial killer. i apologize. why wouldn't God make that allowance considering God is fair by more than offering a fair alternative. simplistic and dismissive as it sounds, God has never sent ONE person to hell...people choose thier destination. people trumpet the free will issue as if it is that simple. guess what, it IS that simple. just like you, you have choice. you can either choose today to move away from God...or move toward him. thats your choice. there is consequences in this life that are completely unattached to God OR religion. your murder someone, you go to jail and in some states, you get put to death. it's a judicial process, and one wherein God acts, he is more than judicial once YOU have made your choice. ivan, i fully realize at this time in your life you hate God. i actually respect your decision to do so. it's your life, and your eternity to lose. i respect that. but come in here swinging your nasty bat BECAUSE of your hatred, and you will be treated in kind. be respectful, you will get respect. so far in your tenure in these blogs, you have demonstrated your here to destroy, not debate. who knows, maybe today is there is a difference in your integrity meter "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 7:49 PM:
according to wikipedia maybe, but not according to biblical truth. before i spell it out, voter has the responsibity in here to exhonerate themselve over this issue. i more than have this subject matter, but i cannot allow you to bail voter out. once time goes by and it becomes evident voter backed clean away from it, i will answer your question. right now voter is licking thier chops, thinking you can do thier dirty work. i won't allow that. i have to keep them on the hook long enough to demonstrate thier integrity, or lack thereof. voter made the accusation, and it's voter's responsibility to see this thru. keep on me in case i get sidetracked with the circus in here. if voter wussess, i will answer you. i don't beg away from anything. "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 7:16 PM:
Ivan Dixon wrote on Jan 24, 2008 6:51 PM:
Ivan dixon wrote on Jan 24, 2008 6:39 PM:
nylodian wrote on Jan 24, 2008 6:37 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 6:17 PM:
Robb wrote on Jan 24, 2008 6:07 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 5:53 PM:
I thought that God was all powerful").
despite your distaste for the way God handles himself, he is fully righteous to do so. i suppose within the framework of your above analogy, YOU somehow deserve a place alongside God in eternity, even though your verbage toward him is as nasty as it gets? atheists are not known for thier "love" of God, but you are on a whole new level of hatred against God. luckily, this board has rules, otherwise the readership would see just how nasty you are about HIM. lucky for you i cannot import one of your verbal "gems" aimed at God in the last blog. your nasty comments there zoomed way past disrespect straight to blasphemy. your just a trouble causing troll that couldn't bring a legitimate debate about God to the table. Gods a "serial killer" huh ivan? good one. thats a comment aimed at debate. there was a guy who got shot and killed by a deputy the other day south of lodi. the guy had a long criminal record. scumbag material. i remember reading the blog about it, and someone who i assume knew him, made the comment about him being in a place of "rest" before God. the guy lives the last portion of his life 100% opposite of Gods laws and standards, and now he goes to "heaven". uh, not quite. listen i don't know the guys heart, only God does, so i don't know for sure were he's going to spend eternity, but one fact remains.....one cannot live opposite from God, and expect anything BUT the opposite OF God in eternity. i have absolutely no problem with Gods decision making on who does, and who ain't. he is well within his right to exclude people like you (that hate him) from his prescence for all of eternity. if he didn't, and people like you wound up there, there would be no peace. thank God there will be...once and for all (or, you could repent of your hatred) "
voter wrote on Jan 24, 2008 3:24 PM:
voter wrote on Jan 24, 2008 3:22 PM:
voter wrote on Jan 24, 2008 3:14 PM:
That said, some of us have lives outside of discussion threads and chat rooms. We work, travel, and have family and friends who depend on us and who we chose to spend time with. When someone is not available for half a day to fire back a response to one of your rants, IT HAS NO CONNECTION TO YOU. "
Ivan Dixon wrote on Jan 24, 2008 2:53 PM:
If I had a child who hated me, I might feel bad about it but I wouldn't hand them over to a serial killer to be tortured for the rest of their lives.
I thought that God was all powerful. Why can't he show mercy on an unrepentant sinner.
"
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 2:27 PM:
he can't. sin is the exact polar opposite of all that Gods is. it is an affront to his Holiness. because it is an affront to the character of God, Gods "character" demands that eventually, it must be dealt with. righteousness and darkness are oil and water. they cannot co-exist on an eternal basis. God deals with sin now, on the eventual basis for which he will someday rectify it once and for all. i know your baiting me ivan, i know your game. feel free to proceed. im well aware of the angle you think you have for me, and i am more than willing to take the flak off of people that think i am being "harsh" with you, thinking you were asking an innocent question. i know how you roll. it's what i do... "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 2:06 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 2:04 PM:
" RF: It appears that it is in fact you who have fallen upon my sword. As I said, the Old Testament is ambivalent on the subject of incest. Some passages endorse it others condemn it").
whoa, dang. i almost didn't catch this one. where on earth in Gods word did God EVER endorse incest? now you really flipped your lid in your effort to pass yourself off as knowing what the bible says about incest. where does God give it the thumbs up for incest. the O.T. is 100% NOT ambivalent about incest. thats a lie. it outright in no uncertain terms condemns it. you won't do it because your intellectully dishonest and you NEVER do, but just for purposes of holding you accountable to your own words, were in Gods word does God give incest a free pass? i fully expect you to do what you always do, skate away from your responsibility to biblically defend it. it's what you do, because even you know you really don't know what your talking about
"
Ivan Dixon wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:50 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:47 PM:
It makes me sick to hear a "Christian" say anything about a gay human not being able to recieve God's love just because of a sexual preference").
i want you to know WY, i NEVER said that OR implied that gay people. people who struggle with homosexuality have ever bit as much of right to Gods acceptance and grace, as anyone else. they are every bit as human as i am. the "sin" of the flesh is not so much what seperates a man from Gods grace, but the continual denial of his authority over ones life. it's not a matter of homosexuality, and i'm so sorry that you think it is because of whats happening on this blog. i said it before and i will say it again, i don't hate people, i hate sin. so does God. i have compassion for people who struggle with sin (any sin, INCLUDING homosexuality). everyone struggles. NO ONE is immune to sin, and compassion for those who struggle should be the first move of those that claim they follow Christ. whats getting put on the shelf is that sin does have to be dealt with. one cannot willfully sin, and expect to receive Gods grace. even you know that. no one can purposefully shake thier fist at God and his authority, and then expect God not to judge that persons sin. God is a Holy God and at some point, there needs to be a distinction between "struggle" and willfull disobedience. eventually, God will not allow sin, he must deal with it. you might not think so, but you and i are on the same page as far as the grace and mercy issue. the problem in this blog is that while i defend the authority of God over man - issue in here, grace and mercy for those who struggle with ANY sin gets put on the shelf. i assure you, i don't hate anybody. "if" they struggle with sin, i am compassionate. if they willfully sin against God without conscience, then i too have to be reflective of God on that issue by opposing it. unfortunately in here, i have to expend more of my energy opposing the willfull naysayers, then i have been able to expound on grace and mercy. it's sad, but unfortunately necessary "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:24 PM:
nope. didn't even come close to implying that. i have no idea of thier position, and don't care. the accurate point i made, is they have not deleted one of my posts where i called you a liar. whether they play on my side of the fence or yours makes no difference. whats true is they CAN'T delete my posts to you, because the accusations are true. they know i didn't call you a name, i spoke the truth. otherwise, they would have deleted it based on rule #1 and rule #3. thats a fact jack. now you could save face in here, and stop resorting to lying just because you can't handle your business. unless your character is something you could care less about. you still draw breath, and that means thier are "options". specifically, Gods opinion about a purposeful lying tongue "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:14 PM:
that IS true. when beaten so severely that the bible says he was unrecognizable as a man afterward, he STILL gave up his life. hard to imagine how God could allow his creation to beat and kill him, but he did. but thats only half of the truth of what i asked you. besides the events of the crucifixion, where he willingly laid aside his authority, so that mans sin would become evident, did Jesus Christ in his lifetime as recorded in the gospels EVER say anything harsh against those that willfully perpretrated an affront to his authority? or in each instance, he was only "nice"? thats what i would like you to answer. you were 100% correct in your answer, but that tells only 1/2 of what went down when Jesus Christ lived. your comments? "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:04 PM:
laughing. your so pathetic when it comes to your feighned biblical knowledge and references. those passages refer to one thing, and one thing only. it's not even a matter of "interpretation". where in the heck did you equate those passages with incest? the ONLY thing those passages refer to is, is Christ making himself more important in a believers life than EVEN family. in EVERYONE of those passages, God calls his followers to forsake thier family members (if need be), and follow him. those passages have one "theme"....to follow Christ even at the ultimate cost of picking God over your own family. there isn't any remote reference to anything sexual in nature in those passages. if your not a phony, then YOU can demonstrate how those passages include anything sexual. you won't, because your chicken and you can't, so you will skate away (again) "
nylodian wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:04 PM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:53 PM:
Wow! Are you authorized to speak for them on matters related to the Bible? "
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:47 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:42 PM:
your such an intellectual joke. when cornered, you deflect because you can't defend. still can't qualify your implication, eh leonard? do you ever think you will be man enough to actually defend your position? i asked you to demonstrate how those passages remotely reference incest and what do you give me? "they say what they say". wow. your not a man. those passages have absolutely NOTHING to do with incest. you made it up, and now your choking on it. defend your position by proving those passages are related to incest. do it leonard. quit your childish skate away routine for the 1,000th time
"
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:32 PM:
no, actually the truth about you is this, your first move toward Christianity, Christians and Christ is ALWAYS one of antagonism and destruction of faith and authority. you never once claimed you were a "Christian" until i started painting you in a corner whenever you attempted to use the bible to make your point. thats a fact about you. now in order to save face in here, you claim "faith". baloney. people who follow Christ don't work hard at stripping God of his authority. your posture is consistent...it's one of antagonism, followed by feighned "allegiance". feighn faith all you want, your what the bible calls a "wolf in sheeps clothing". "
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:27 PM:
I suppose that this is progress of a sort. He is moving in the right direction. "
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:25 PM:
The thing that amazes me about you is the way you insist on calling yourself a Christian when your posts essentially amount to nothing more than a bloated, verbose manifesto against Christ's teachings.
That's irony for you! "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:22 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:12 PM:
" RF: Obviously, you didn't bother to actually read my original post on the subject so I will repost it here for your convenience.
Leonard wrote on Jan 23, 2008 8:22 PM:
" RF: Incest is addressed several times in the Bible. Some Bible passages condemn incestuous marriages (Leviticus 18:9, 12; 20:17, 19; Deuteronomy 27:22), but others do not (Genesis 20:12; 17:16; Exodus 6:20")
i more than read your post. picked it clean apart, and seperated you from your "claims" VS. your "words". still in the process of doing so. suddenly YOU don't "need" Christ to tell you that incest is wrong, because you know that it is (even though Christ DID allude to it). another in your line of hypocritical statements. weren't YOU the one that claims Christ was "silent" on homosexual sex? but yet in the same chapter that Christ himself inspired in leviticus that includes incest, somehow strangely "missing" from your bible are the passages about homosexuality? wow, your intellectually honest. your a phony leonard, and painting you as such is a walk in the park. it is intellectually IMPOSSIBLE for you to include one aspect (incest), and exclude the other (homosexual sex). thats blatant "picking and choosing" what you WANT to believe...it's not being honest to the text. it's the accusation i leveled at you for over one year, and in this particular area, your proved your a phony, and a person who believes what he wants to believe, DESPITE what Gods word actually says. thats a fact about you. try explaining how incest is relevant as "sin" today, but homosexual sex is now ok. i will bet my life you will skate clean away from doing that, which in turn proves my accusation against you is true "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:59 AM:
Christ told his followers that they should forsake their brothers and sisters(Mark 10:29-30, Matthew 19:29, Luke 14:26"). .....uhhhh your not implying those passages remotely have anything to do with incest, do you? if you are insinuating they do, i can't wait for your explanation about that. "
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:58 AM:
As for whether or not you or I am a follower of Christ, I stand by my earlier post but I will pray that you find him as well. "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:55 AM:
" RF: I am a Christian. I follow Christ. If you want to find some sort of Old Testament excuse to have sex with your mother, that is your affair but I warn you that Christ forbade it")......no your not, your an imposter of the faith. you don't "follow" someone, when YOU make a mockery of thier authority time and time again. a person who works AGAINST the authority of Christ, is a goat, not a sheep (by biblical definition). now back to your supreme hypocritical bibilical faux attempt, what happened to your explanation of why incest is a no no in leviticus, but you excuse away the passages in BOTH chapters about homosexual sex? because your chicken about addressing that issue, you try your little deflection game with your comment above. be a man for once in your life and own up to your hypocriticalness. you know that same chapter says it, which makes it relevant today....just like incest. i asked you to prove incest was now ok because of the new covenant, and you skated from that as well. your a phony AND a chicken. you can't even defend your own position anymore, or can you ???? "
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:53 AM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:52 AM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 23, 2008 8:22 PM:
" RF: Incest is addressed several times in the Bible. Some Bible passages condemn incestuous marriages (Leviticus 18:9, 12; 20:17, 19; Deuteronomy 27:22), but others do not (Genesis 20:12; 17:16; Exodus 6:20).
Christ told his followers that they should forsake their brothers and sisters(Mark 10:29-30, Matthew 19:29, Luke 14:26). " "
nylodian wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:51 AM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:50 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:44 AM:
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 11:31 AM:
Christ, however, is explicit and condemns the practice (incest) three times in three books of the Gospels"). ...im sure he did, he had to, considering HE condemned it outright in leviticus. but just to demonstrate for the reading audience you make stuff up, how about you show exactly where those three references are? your not just making stuff up again, are you leonard? "
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 9:53 AM:
WY wrote on Jan 24, 2008 9:38 AM:
I wish one of my brothers would try and understand the 'New Covenant' As a gay man he feels NO love from Christains. (Aren't we to bring them to Christ?) I believe that God has a purpose for all of us, every breathing human on this earth has a purpose. I know Jesus would embrace my brother and not walk away. My Lord would hold him and embrace his heart. As He would see the pain inside. I read the gospels first, then went to the beginning to find out what happened. I can't debate the Bible, but I know what His Holy Grace feels like. It's there for all, not just a certin kind of Christian. It makes me sick to hear a "Christian" say anything about a gay human not being able to recieve God's love just because of a sexual preference. God's love is there for all. Everyone in their personal walk will push God away in some way or another. But who are we to push away a human that needs His Grace? When all the earthly crap is washed away there is a soul that needs God. So if we broke down a human to the point of just a soul, no sex, no color,no crede, we are all equal in His eyes, and He calls us to Him. He wants all of us with Him. Who is not with Him, He wants us to go get. Who are we to say whom our Father will love.
(talk about molding the word to fit todays world)
"
12x wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:41 AM:
12x wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:40 AM:
"
nylodian wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:30 AM:
12x wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:28 AM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 4:13 AM:
God loves his children. RF is confused as he thinks people that disagree with him are simply against God, and God's word.
RF has confused himself with God. He doesn't worship the Trinity or any part of the Trinity, he worships himself. "
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 4:08 AM:
Leonard wrote on Jan 24, 2008 4:05 AM:
Christ, however, is explicit and condemns the practice three times in three books of the Gospels. "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:32 AM:
" You, RF, are undermining God's authority"). ....of any accusation your lying tongue has ever leveled against me, i would love to see you demostrate how i am doing that. that is the ultimate in here...the authority of God. attached to it, are the most serious of consequences. so lodian, where have i possible undermined Gods authority in here? your nothing but a liar. and to prove your the most prolific liar in here, your not being willing to qualify this statement alone demonstrates your pure wickedness. PROVE IT, or take a hike. "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:24 AM:
" I see, RF, that you don't like it when others corner you. Answer the questions, RF. What are you afraid of here, hmmm?"). what questions lodian? the ones you lied about in your imagination that i "didn't" answer, but you never showed where i didn't when i asked you several times to PROVE IT? your a liar. i thrive on people cornering me (or thinking they do). know why? because a person like me isn't the least bit intimidated by anything, or anybody. when you hold the truths of life, being painted into a corner is an impossibility. ever seen me skate on an issue or challenge by or with anyone in here? thats a no. you? your the LNS blogs version of chicken little. there is not one time you have EVER come to the table as far as me challenging you concerning an issue of integrity in here. NOT ONCE. not in this blog, or any other you and i have "tangoed" in. why is that lodian? i know why, because your not here for good purposes. if you were, you wouldn't try to lie your way out of your paper mache "bag" of tricks (or rather, lack thereof). you have no game. now go and create a new imaginary friend that is more bold then you are, and one that can lie better than you can. your not good at it "
real facts wrote on Jan 24, 2008 1:08 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:34 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:30 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:23 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:22 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:22 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:19 PM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:16 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:15 PM:
"
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:07 PM:
Hey, RF, you're not the boss of me. ;-) You never answer questions and it's funny watching you chase your tail. Can ya catch it? Keep trying")..... intellectually / integrity speaking, your a joke. first of all, what "question" of yours didn't i answer? second of all, why are so afraid of vidicating your behavior by answering mine? are you that shallow? "
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:04 PM:
" God loves his children. RF is confused as he thinks people that disagree with him are simply against God, and God's word. The truth is that people are against RF and his word, not God's word"). God DOES love his children. he hates those that seek to undermine his authority (that would be you). so your not against Gods word in here, huh lodian? thats a lie. how about you show me ONE post that proves your williness to adjust to Gods word? for as long as you have been in here, there is only ONE stance you have maintained toward the word of God - you work to discredit it. you have never once demonstrated any posturing that remotely indicates you care about Gods authority thru his word. your verbage towards it has consistently been antagonistic (and destructive). your a phony in your "presentation" of feighned alliance with Gods word. you work to destroy it. thats a fact. it makes absolutely 100 % no difference whether i am in here, or not. has NOTHING to do with me, i only bring out of you whats already in your heart. i hold up an accurate "mirror". my "take" has nothing to do with it. your God authority destroying behavior is consistent with or without my presence. to prove it, whats your verbage to brian? answer....it's the same. your here to destroy...thats a fact "
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:00 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:58 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:56 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:52 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:50 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:44 PM:
" Wow, "...my opinion means squat". Now these are the first true words RF has ever spoken on these boards. Great job, RF, keep'em coming. The truth will set you free")....yep. no truer words ever spoken by me in here. i OWN those words. my "opinion" means nothing. but what matters is did i accuretly re-produce what Gods says about homosexuality? if i exactly and 100% accuretly say the things he has already said, then thats the truth. Gods truth, not mine. and "if" i have, your in deep trouble. now, i noticed how you chickened out (again) of answering the question....did God say something against homosexual sex in leviticus? answer the question lodian. you sure chicken out all the time. why is that? "
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:38 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:30 PM:
"
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:29 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:23 PM:
" I love the way RF just can't wrap his mind around the concept of a "New Covenant"). still waiting (for days now) on the biblical explanation of this one....how did God change his definition of sexual love and intimacy leonard in the "new covenant" (according to you anyway)? don't forget to reference your new "go to" book in the bible for sexual definitions ....the book of leviticus "
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 10:00 PM:
A section where he thinks God's word has told us that all homosexuality is a sin")......well, does it say it or not? who cares what "i" say it says. my opinion means squat. what matters, is what it DOES say....so does it say it or not? YES OR NO? you won't even answer that question, because your not in here for altruistic reasons. and where is that scripture i asked you to provide that YOU says vindicates certain aspects of homosexual sex? YOU SAID IT, i didn't. so where are they lodian? you do nothing but hit and run and hide. thats the truth about you. it doesn't matter whether i am "nice" to you about it or not. your not a person of integrity in here. if you were, you would answer the question "
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 9:53 PM:
" It's obvious that RF is getting really irritated that he cannot run people off the board. I'd like to hear from other frequent LNS bloggers on this topic instead of the same "wind bag" rants of RF"). i am here to the duration of this blog. and unlike you, i qualify my positions biblically, while you run away from the responsibility to do so. plus, unlike you, i don't have to resort to lying about a person, just because i can't qualify my position. on top of that, i don't resort to making up imaginary friends because i can't handle my own business. compared to you, i am up for saint hood. remember lodian, YOU came in here swininging away again. you know by now how i operate. if you don't like it, stay way from the fire ...or you could actually qualify your position when asked to do so. a fact that you never have ONCE done in here, despite multiple pleadings to do so. face it, you must love the drama you cause your own self. no one makes you post you know. you complain, yet you can't help yourself. "
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 9:40 PM:
" Real Facts, God populated the world twice through incest--In the beginning and then after Noah's flood. How could you miss that? "). miss what? i baited leonard with that one (re-read my post). maybe you thought i meant that the bible was silent on incest? uh, not hardly. alot of scriptures refer to it, thus my baiting of leonard to prove his hypocrisy of only believing those "parts" that suit his agenda, and turning a willfull blind eye to those that refute his agenda. back to you. now that you made that statement, would you like to qualify yourself about the bible and incest, especially your two references. i want you to do what you are trying to infer, that somehow the bible is either inconsistent, or contradictory on incest. you said it, now qualify it... "
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 9:22 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 9:18 PM:
" As I glance over the rantings of this poor soul, I wonder where RF found (in the Bible) where it says it is preferable to belittle, berate and bare false witness..."). where did i bear false witness against you or anyone else? again, use my words against me by posting things I said that prove your accusation. otherwise, your a liar. read matthew 3:7 and tell me that it's not appropriate behavior of believer to put haters of Gods authority in thier place. there is no "nice" in the treatment of purposefull evil behavior, by God OR his followers. you would think that alone would give you mental pause, but it won't. it will demonstrate once again, your here for one thing and your darkened heart is set straight ahead for it - to strip God of his authority "
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 9:09 PM:
" RF's interprets the Bible and goes out and spreads hate and condemnation with a forked tongue of detest for others with a differing view. Others spread the word of love and fellowship with understanding and peace. Which would be the path of Jesus? I'm certain in my answer"). well, let's see what YOU know about how Jesus would act, or how Jesus would require those that follow him to act. was Jesus warm and fuzzy to those that challenged his authority lodian? can you answer that biblically? you always make blanket statements like this as if you know, yet i have NEVER seen you actually qualify those words by comparing them against the words of Christ himself. lets see you do that. plus, i don't detest those with a differing view - i respect that. what i don't respect is someone who purposefully lies about the authority of God, in order to strip God of his authority. (a fact, you have yet to deny). plus #3, prove i hate ANYBODY, and use my words against me PLEASE. your a nasty liar, bent on using your lies as leverage to assuage my tenure in here. when a person lies consistently without conscience (like you and leonard), that person IS a liar. prove i hate anybody ....i hate sin "
voter wrote on Jan 23, 2008 9:08 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 9:03 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jan 23, 2008 9:00 PM:
real facts wrote on Jan 23, 2008 8:56 PM:
RF: Incest is addressed several times in the Bible. Some Bible passages condemn incestuous marriages (Leviticus 18:9, 12; 20:17, 19; Deuteronomy 27:22"). ...wow, i am stunned (and thats not easy to do to me). even i didn't anticipate you would fall on your own sword that swift and easy. in YOUR OWN words, YOU picked leviticus chapters 18 and 20. man this is easy. too easy in fact. leonard for over 1 year has stated that it either doesn't exist (scriptures against homosexual sex), it's a "interpretation" issue, or it was "men" that wrote the bible, therefore (according to leonard), the bible is totally untrustworthy (except the "gospels"), and homosexual sex is a ok. you see where i am going with this, right leonard? incest, (leonard "proof" style) comes in the beautiful hand delivered package of leviticus 18, via leonards OWN words and reference. the same chapter that describes homosexual sex as a "no-no", but lenny somehow "disregards" that verse. that verse reads like this ....chapter 18:verse 22..."You shall not lie with a man, as with a woman. That is an abomination". just for good measure, you also referenced chapter 20 for your incest bravdo. chapter 20 (as it just so happens) mentions homosexual sex as well. the condemnation of your hypocrisy grows ever stronger in tonights version of lenny, the proliferator of false bibilical