Is calling Beanieboy a . . .

[JoyfulRook]

We have 30 stupid people now!

 

[JoyfulRook]

And yet the general consensus is that it is wrong to call a homosexual a "faggot".

I am not alone! :thumb:

It means there are other pathetic faggot-lovers just like you! :flamer:

 

[Agape4Robin]

It means there are other pathetic faggot-lovers just like you! :flamer:

Wow, Dread, your pastor must be soooooo proud of you!

Do you always attack a brother or sister like that simply because you disagree with them? :jeffrson:

 

[Agape4Robin]

How is queer more than descriptive? Have you looked it up? And how was "brood of vipers" not more than descriptive? What about when He called Peter "Satan?" Or when He called the Gentile woman a dog? Or referred to the wicked as pigs?



Do you think realizing you're worthless isn't offensive?



Then why did He call for the death penalty for so many things?



I think you're just reaching now.

I will address the one in bold because it jumped out at me. You, :Brandon: read the Bible too literally. Where is the balance? Where is the spiritual discernment? In love I tell you, that you are lacking wisdom.

Jesus wasn't calling Peter "satan". Jesus was in fact actually speaking to satan. Can we agree that Jesus lived in a temporal world but also the spiritual world....being God, He was in both places at the same time.
Perhaps your misunderstanding about who Jesus is has clouded your understanding of scripture? Pray for wisdom, Brandon.

 

[temple2006]

The noun satan is actually another name for adversary. Jesus was not calling Peter a devil, he was saying that Peter was acting as an adversary in that particular instance.

 

[Nineveh]

Did teh HS crush you, or did a human being who claimed to represent the HS?

I was alone with the Bible when I was convicted of my sins.

I too have been convicted, by the HS, after I have said and done things I regret to other people.

Its not pleasant, I'll grant you that. But it was the HS, no person.

How can you presume the "duty" of representing the HS in "crushing the Spirits" of others?

Nice try at twisting what I was saying to A4R, dave. Either go back and at least give understanding a try or hold your foolish tongue.

The HS is REAL, the does what the HS wants to, to its own schedule.

Then stop juding other's wrongly.

 

[Agape4Robin]

The noun satan is actually another name for adversary. Jesus was not calling Peter a devil, he was saying that Peter was acting as an adversary in that particular instance.

Chapter and verse, please.

 

[Agape4Robin]

...for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it.

There you go twisting scripture to fit your agenda!

 

[Lovejoy]

Chapter and verse, please.

That was actually a bit of a reach. The primitive root of Satan is a Hebrew word for "acting as an adversary." It appears in the bible in reference to people who just get in the way. Eventually, it becomes a proper noun for the prince of the evil spirits, and in the context of Jesus and Peter, it would have been the transliterated word "Satanas," and to the best of my knowledge was specifically referring to Satan himself.

 

[ShadowMaid]

Notice: You can have an intelligent debate with a 13 year old.

 

[Agape4Robin]

That was actually a bit of a reach. The primitive root of Satan is a Hebrew word for "acting as an adversary." It appears in the bible in reference to people who just get in the way. Eventually, it becomes a proper noun for the prince of the evil spirits, and in the context of Jesus and Peter, it would have been the transliterated word "Satanas," and to the best of my knowledge was specifically referring to Satan himself.

So you agree with what I said.....?

 

[Lovejoy]

So you agree with what I said.....?

I was definitely disagreeing with Temple's translation. And I doubt Christ was literally accusing Peter of being Satan. I think it was more on the line of an accusation that he was doing Satan's work at that specific moment. We know for sure that Satan is later allowed to test Peter, and Peter failed that test.

 

[Lovejoy]

Notice: You can have an intelligent debate with a 13 year old.

Noted!

 

[Lighthouse]

Nice generalization, Brandon

Fine, don't believe me. But if they were genuinely happy they wouldn't be queers.

How normal is it to be the son of a queer ? What do we get to call you ?

Apparently it happens more often than you might think. I have a cousin who's the son of a dyke. And she's still in the deathstyle, though she knows it's a sin and has vowed to at least quit haveing sex with her girlfriend. So here's to hoping she moves forward in her submission to Christ.:cheers:

And I don't really care what you call me. And my dad's no longer a queer.

 

[Lighthouse]

And yet..still lacking in many areas! So do you have more points than me then! Or more pull with the Lord upstairs?

Rep points? I believe so...

Who said anything about pull with the Lord? I'm merely pointing out that it is possible that I know more about Christianity than you do, seeing as how I've been at it longer.

Not in the slightest my friend! Once again trying to play the psychologist! :doh: Stick to being a Gas jockeyl!

1] I no longer work at the gas station.
2] I've been psychoanalyzing for quite a bit of my life. For some reason I can just read people. Of course, I will admit that it works a lot better when I actually know the person face to face.

followed by....

That is a statement...not pre-faced with an " I think". Therefore guilty as charged.

Fine then, I think you're afraid. Happy now?

And it is not that He has called you to mind read! I can guarantee that is not in His job description for you.
[Besides...you really suck at it!]

Right, prophecy isn't one of the gifts of the Spirit...

And if I were to be rude, I could tell you that unfortunately, so do many others here.

*coughindirectinsultcough*

Just say it, instead of hiding behind fallacies. You're a hypocrite.

I will refrain from calling you stupid, or your ability to comprehend the written word, but where is there evidence in my post above, that I am in denial about anything? Come on ! Be a man and point it out!

You're denying what I have said I perceive. That is all.

So then...if you had known, would you have stood there and called him a faggot, queer etc with all of the venom you would to a homosexual now...truthfully.

Let's stand back and take a look:
I was three when he became a Christian. I was seven when he finally put it behind him. From three to 23 I was one of those "nicer than God" Christians. But I did talk with him today, and he knows that I think he was a faggot when he was a faggot.

I apologise for calling you a turkey, as rightly pointed out, Jesus never used that term. Can you read my mind as to what I could be calling you if I were to do such a thing? :thinking:
Turkey isn't really all that bas then is it...That's if you guessed correctly for a change...which I doubt!

No need to apologize. I don't care what you call me. But I proved a point. You call people names that Jesus never called anyone, so don't tell me I'm wrong to do the same thing, hypocrite.

I am off to bed since it's 1 am...I hope I cannot feel those magical rays of yours peering into my mind while I sleep!

:think:

 

[Lighthouse]

The noun satan is actually another name for adversary. Jesus was not calling Peter a devil, he was saying that Peter was acting as an adversary in that particular instance.

Mark your calendar. I agree with you.:shocked:

 

[Agape4Robin]

Mark your calendar. I agree with you.:shocked:

Only because it coincides with your agenda.
Read post #744.

 

[Lighthouse]

Lovejoy may be right. I never said I was dogmatic on the issue. But it is what I have believed about it for a few years. It never made sense that Jesus would actually call Peter by the name of Satan, but that He would call him "adversary" makes sense...:think:

 

[Agape4Robin]

Lovejoy may be right. I never said I was dogmatic on the issue. But it is what I have believed about it for a few years. It never made sense that Jesus would actually call Peter by the name of Satan, but that He would call him "adversary" makes sense...:think:

I don't buy it.
Why would Jesus call Peter, "adversary" when He knew that He would begin His church with him, and yet call Judas, "friend" on the very night He knew Judas would betray Him?
The answer is only seen through spiritual eyes. Jesus had to be speaking directly to satan through Peter otherwise, he may have discouraged Peter. I think Peter understood this. However, Peter was in fact rebuking Jesus and Jesus was reminding him who he was talking to.
The very Creator of the universe!

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Maybe it was Paul. When he said, "Do not cast your pearls before swine."

obviously a metaphor, unless you think we are expressly forbidden from literally putting pearls before pigs.

How did it make you feel when you realized you were worthless?

from name calling? angry, upset, and mad. it did not lead to repentence, only to thoughts of revenge.

And you don't think God still desires that?

You do realize that people die quite often due to the consequences of sexual sin, don't you?

the fact that they don't die immediately after commiting the sin shows that God has at least some tolernace for it. do i need to quote Romans 2:4 again?

Did you read what SOTK posted about what got his attention when he was a drunken slob?

which post?