Anyone Who Thinks Another Person Deserves To Be Raped Is A Knob

[patrick jane]

Wow. It took you seven whole minutes go from "maybe you are fake" to "you aren't saved".


Oh yeah, and the going to hell part is the perfect touch. :thumb:

That's what you imply by saying folks aren't saved. Where do unsaved folks go Judge GD ? You may have a rough go at the Bema Seat.

 

[glorydaz]

Isn't God awesome that He is still on His throne and He is the ONLY one who really decides who is or who is not saved and not you.

Yes, God is awesome! Praise be to His holy name.

I know you guys get all bent out of shape about anyone who dares to suggest that there are false brethren among us. Of course, when it's another poster saying that about Meshak, GT, or LA, there isn't quite the outrage. Why?

All believers understand only too well that there are false brethren everywhere. If it offends you so much then start agreeing with the word of God instead of the humanists. Start standing up for what the Bible teaches instead of spending all your energy demanding people address your vain imaginings.

Paul had no problem speaking of the false brethren....those who come in among us. Believers ARE to judge all things, and that includes those who claim to be Christians when they aren't. There are wolves among us....right here. I will point them out when I see them. Those who are spiritual are to judge all things. It's just too bad if don't like it.

2 Corinthians 11:26
In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;

Galatians 2:4
And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:​

 

[lifeisgood]

I know you guys get all bent out of shape about anyone who dares to suggest that there are false brethren among us. Of course, when it's another poster saying that about Meshak, GT, or LA, there isn't quite the outrage. Why?

All believers understand only too well that there are false brethren everywhere. If it offends you so much then start agreeing with the word of God instead of the humanists. Start standing up for what the Bible teaches instead of spending all your energy demanding people address your vain imaginings.

Paul had no problem speaking of the false brethren....those who come in among us. Believers ARE to judge all things, and that includes those who claim to be Christians when they aren't. There are wolves among us....right here. I will point them out when I see them. Those who are spiritual are to judge all things. It's just too bad if don't like it.

2 Corinthians 11:26
In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;

Galatians 2:4
And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:​

Isn't God awesome that He is still on His throne and He is the ONLY one who really decides who is or who is not saved and not you?

Yes, God is awesome! Praise be to His holy name.

 

[glorydaz]

That's what you imply by saying folks aren't saved. Where do unsaved folks go Judge GD ? You may have a rough go at the Bema Seat.

I won't.....but you'd do well to examine yourself, PJ, whether you be in the faith. I've seen no evidence of it, and your parroting back what other believers have said isn't enough.

 

[patrick jane]

I won't.....but you'd do well to examine yourself, PJ, whether you be in the faith. I've seen no evidence of it, and your parroting back what other believers have said isn't enough.

Every post of scripture I make, I looked up myself or the scripture popped into my head, I do not parrot. Have i learned here ? Yes. Every other post i make is my own material, I copy no one.

You really need to examine yourself gorydazed.

2 Corinthians 13:5 KJV

 

[glorydaz]

Isn't God awesome that He is still on His throne and He is the ONLY one who really decides who is or who is not saved and not you?

Yes, God is awesome! Praise be to His holy name.

Yes, you've played this message already. Since you've clearly missed what I've said, I'll make it even clearer.

We are to judge all things. When we see people claiming to be Christians who cannot even see that stripping is immoral, we have a clue they aren't Christians. When we see people denying and explaining away the godly principle of reaping what is sown, we have a clue they aren't Christians. When we see people claiming bad behavior doesn't deserve consequences in this life, we have a clue they are humanists and not Christians.

We are not to ignore those clues and pretend that such people are Christians, just because they may get all defensive and have themselves a little tannie, anymore than we are to lie and say strippers do not deserve to suffer the consequences for their bad behavior. I will continue to SAY what I see as the truth. If you don't agree, that's your prerogative. I will continue to hold and state my opinions, nonetheless.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

1 Corinthians 2:15
But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

1 Corinthians 2:16
For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.​

 

[glorydaz]

Every post of scripture I make, I looked up myself or the scripture popped into my head, I do not parrot. Have i learned here ? Yes. Every other post i make is my own material, I copy no one.

You really need to examine yourself gorydazed.

2 Corinthians 13:5 KJV

thou dost protest too much

 

[ClimateSanity]

I know you guys get all bent out of shape about anyone who dares to suggest that there are false brethren among us. Of course, when it's another poster saying that about Meshak, GT, or LA, there isn't quite the outrage. Why?

All believers understand only too well that there are false brethren everywhere. If it offends you so much then start agreeing with the word of God instead of the humanists. Start standing up for what the Bible teaches instead of spending all your energy demanding people address your vain imaginings.

Paul had no problem speaking of the false brethren....those who come in among us. Believers ARE to judge all things, and that includes those who claim to be Christians when they aren't. There are wolves among us....right here. I will point them out when I see them. Those who are spiritual are to judge all things. It's just too bad if don't like it.

2 Corinthians 11:26
In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;

Galatians 2:4
And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:​

I'm afraid of being seen as your lapdog but I must say you have some brilliant posts lately. You arent shaken by all the misdirection and vilification and word twisting and outright lying. It seems to sharpen your focus even more.

 

[CabinetMaker]

don't remember describing myself as "poor" or "evil"

got a link?

You said you were raped by your wife, that makes you a poor man.

You said you raped your wife, that makes you an evil man.

 

[patrick jane]

You said you were raped by your wife, that makes you a poor man.

You said you raped your wife, that makes you an evil man.

ipso facto

 

[glorydaz]

I guess ok doser did not know he needed you to translate for his comprehension.

I wasn't speaking to Doser. I wasn't translating for Doser.



I was speaking to the reader.
This is where reading comprehension comes into play.

Note the construction of the sentence.

I guess she doesn't realize she's calling Doser a LIAR.

Had I been speaking to Doser, or translating for Doser, I would have said, "I guess she doesn't realize she's calling you a LIAR, Doser."

Or, I could have said, "Hey, Doser, I guess she doesn't realize she's calling YOU a liar."

The point being, of course, that you just chastened him for name calling and then you proceeded to call him a liar. All in the same post.
Did that just go zooming over your head, or did you just choose to ignore how you were being a hypocrite?

 

[glorydaz]

No, I said you made a dishonest comment. That's distinguishing between the habitual and a poor decision. Or maybe I was just being optimistic.

It wasn't a dishonest comment.

That's encouraging. Who knows what you'll realize if you spend more time considering a thing.

I consider everything. I just don't expect to have to read my own words to see if you "mistakenly" put some of your words up there with mine.

Only to people with a reading comprehension problem...I'm kidding, you got it. But I didn't add to your words or attempt to mislead anyone. The nature of the mistake makes that plain enough.

I didn't say you were trying to mislead anyone. I said your MISTAKE was misleading (both to me, for a moment), and whoever else may have read it. Because of your mistake, your words were in the quote box with my words.

And I didn't realize the mistake until you went on about it. If I had I'd have corrected it. The last thing I'd ever want is for anyone to attribute your writing to me.

I had to go "on about it", because you refused to believe me. And the last thing I'd ever want is for anyone to attribute your writing to me. Which is why you should understand why I "went on about it". :duh:

That's called reading. Does that mean before you mostly skipped that and went right into whatever you wanted to say next? That would explain a few things.

It means I normally don't have to read the things I've written because I know the words I wrote. It's only when someone makes a blunder like you did, and puts their own words where only mine are supposed to be, that someone like you might THINK I "skipped that" and "went right into" what I wanted to say.

Do you realize how downright weird you're being here? :sherlock:

See, that's actually dishonest, since I did nothing of the sort. I didn't know you were referencing a mistake I didn't realize I'd made until you finally said exactly what you meant by the early remark. Who has a problem admitting to mistakes? I went further and noted additional things I do now and then, like you're/your. That sort of thing.

You're such a loser. No, I was not dishonest about any of it. I pointed out your mistake, and you kept compounding it. I don't care how many mistakes you make....I make plenty of mistakes and never have a problem admitting them. This wouldn't have been a problem if you had just stepped down off your high horse long enough to "realize" that I wasn't being dishonest or accusing you of deliberately doing anything. You're so darn defensive you can't even think straight. You've been that way from the start.

Your complaint was dishonest. You tried to play an honest error I wasn't aware of as some attempt to add to or manipulate your writing. There was no reason for you to do that seeing the error plainly enough. So...nuts to you, I guess.

I didn't try any such thing. I pointed out your silly error because you think you're so darned smart you deserved to have your mistake pointed out to you. That was my ONLY motive. Talk about paranoia..... Incredible.

It wasn't added to your comment. The attempt at close quote was there for anyone to read and understand. You did. I bet anyone who bothered to read it did too.

Why would anyone think that all the words in the quote box weren't from the person you quoted....which happened to be me? Stop making excuses. It's pathetic.

No, what you said about the error was and is dishonest, a willful mischaracterization.

I hate to call you a liar on this because I think you're just honestly ignorant. You're a sad excuse for a lawyer. My opinion of lawyers has just sunk about 20 degrees.

Try literally quoting me. It wasn't the fault of any machinery. I spell out the initial close quote. I made an errant keystroke. The wraps thereafter worked fine. Sometimes I muck up the last quote for the same reason I routinely muck up the first one. The "t" gets out of place. Ususally in the beginning and I usually run a preview and catch it. I think the volume of back and forth changed the habit. Such is life.

It's a bit late for this back peddling. Your foot is already too deeply embedded in your big mouth.

It does, if not the way you meant it to, doofi. Now, you got what you clearly wanted by passing notes in my CP. And that's more than it warranted, but it's close to Christmas.

Poor Town....so mistreated and his reputation might be tarnished an itsy bit. Oh my. You deserve to have that high horse of yours dump you on your hard head. Especially considering what you've left behind.

 

[Town Heretic]

It wasn't a dishonest comment.

Sure it was. You knew I wasn't adding anything, that it was only a keystroke.

I consider everything.

And yet this is what comes of all that? Well, dang.

I had to go "on about it", because you refused to believe me.

No, that's not right either. You didn't actually get around to saying exactly what your general retort was about until you understood I was answering on an inferential point because of that lack of clarity on your part.

And the last thing I'd ever want is for anyone to attribute your writing to me. Which is why you should understand why I "went on about it". :duh:

You missed another one there.

You're such a loser.

We can't all be as big a winner as you. :think: Wait, that's not how you spell wiener, is it. Shoot.

I didn't try any such thing. I pointed out your silly error because you think you're so darned smart

No, intelligence is your hang-up, which is why you keep going to it, with the "fancy" business and now with this. Relax. It's not really that important in the larger scheme of things. Or as I tell my Jack, who may be the smartest person I've ever met for his age, I'll take a good heart over a great head any day of the week.

Why would anyone think that all the words in the quote box weren't from the person you quoted.

Because I'd read them? And reading them I'd understand. If I didn't then I'd have even less complaint.

I hate to call you a liar on this because I think you're just honestly ignorant. You're a sad excuse for a lawyer. My opinion of lawyers has just sunk about 20 degrees.

Considering you got leading the witness wrong you'll understand why that doesn't exactly worry me. Like getting an opinion on physics from someone who can't add.

It's a bit late for this back peddling. Your foot is already too deeply embedded in your big mouth.

I see what you don't get here. That wasn't for you. It was an explanation for anyone with an honest curiosity on the point. You're free to keep imagining things. :thumb:

Poor Town....so mistreated and his reputation might be tarnished an itsy bit.

Like you I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[glorydaz]

Sure it was. You knew I wasn't adding anything, that it was only a keystroke.


And yet this is what comes of all that? Well, dang.


No, that's not right either. You didn't actually get around to saying exactly what your general retort was about until you understood I was answering on an inferential point because of that lack of clarity on your part.


You missed another one there.


We can't all be as big a winner as you. :think: Wait, that's not how you spell wiener, is it. Shoot.


No, intelligence is your hang-up, which is why you keep going to it, with the "fancy" business and now with this. Relax. It's not really that important in the larger scheme of things. Or as I tell my Jack, who may be the smartest person I've ever met for his age, I'll take a good heart over a great head any day of the week.


Because I'd read them? And reading them I'd understand. If I didn't then I'd have even less complaint.


Considering you got leading the witness wrong you'll understand why that doesn't exactly worry me. Like getting an opinion on physics from someone who can't add.


I see what you don't get here. That wasn't for you. It was an explanation for anyone with an honest curiosity on the point. You're free to keep imagining things. :thumb:


Like you I have no idea what you're talking about.

You know it's getting deep when I can't even stand to read past your first two responses. Shut up, Heretic. You're worse than I ever thought possible. :loser:

 

[Town Heretic]

You know it's getting deep when I can't even stand to read past your first two responses.

Too many words of the fancy variety, no doubt. lain:

Shut up, Heretic.

You called me. Make up your mind...either of them.

You're worse than I ever thought possible.

Now that's impressive. I mean, given your imagination.

:loser:

Why glory, stop it. People will say we're in love.

There. Just send me another little "look at me" in the CP when you want to talk again. Otherwise, I'll be moving on now.

:e4e:

 

[ok doser]

I'm afraid of being seen as your lapdog but I must say you have some brilliant posts lately. You arent shaken by all the misdirection and vilification and word twisting and outright lying. It seems to sharpen your focus even more.

i agree - i've learned a lot from glory's posts - thank you glory


and i think all of us have learned a lot from the posts of others - i won't thank them, but i'm grateful they've allowed their true colors to be seen

 

[ok doser]

Otherwise, I'll be moving on now.

please don't be a liar

 

[ok doser]

You said you were raped by your wife, that makes you a poor man.

only in your imagination

You said you raped your wife, that makes you an evil man.

again, only in your imagination


you've completely missed the fact that my statements were made in the context of the new USDoJ definition of rape


let me give you an example

i assume you are a man

if you go out to dinner with your wife and you are the designated driver and your wife enjoys a few glasses of wine and you go home and have sex, you are guilty of raping her by the USDoJ definition of rape because her incapacitation due to inebriation makes her unable to consent


doesn't matter if she enjoyed it

doesn't matter if she initiated it

she can't consent

 

[genuineoriginal]

Then it should be even easier to find one based on the "evidence" presented. We'll wait.

In our Politically Correct environment, only women are incapacitated by alcohol to the point that they are unable to consent.

Men, on the other hand, are presumed to have the ability to consent no matter how drunk they get.

By the time a prosecutor is able to apply the principles of consent to both men and women equally, that prosecutor has lost so much Political Correctness that he/she quits being a prosecutor.

 

[genuineoriginal]

He shouldn't have claimed to have been raped without being willing to admit that the encounters met the actual full DOJ definition.

It's not a trivial fact that one must be penetrated to legally have been raped. The one in the passive or reception position for penetration (under the influence or otherwise) is the one at risk of being violated in the sense of rape.

The passive one cannot be the rapist. Or else a drunk guy could rape a woman and claim she was culpable for his actions because she wasn't drunk but he was. But clearly the receiver is the one in a vulnerable position requiring protection.

You are trying to be Politically Correct and look at this with common sense.

You can't have it both ways.

Common sense is the enemy of Political Correctness.