EXTENSION OF THE JACKSON/JEWISH HATE THREAD ST Version

[Guest]

@BigAl99 said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@BigAl99 said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@pumpf said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@pumpf said:
The most basic (and honest) answer is this: there are only 2 kinds of people in the world- those who are saved by faith in Jesus Christ... and those who are "enemies of the Cross".  If you believe that the Bible is true, God's Word makes it clear that Satan will use anything he can to attack- and deceive- the Church.  Ultimately, he is behind every attack against Christians.  So, why would Satan "attack" Muslims... or the ELCA... or any other unbeliever, for that matter... since they are already doing his work for him?  

ELCA....some time when I stop by and am not in a hurry you will need to explain the differences in all the Lutheran churches to me,  by the way tell your son I was sorry to hear that he was losing his first year of college football,  that has to really suck for him and have him feeling pretty low.

For the sake of Al, I'll go ahead and explain it now.  There are- basically- 2 "branches" of Lutheranism in America: those who believe that the Bible is "all true"... and those who believe that only "some" of it is true.  Now, among the "all true" branches, there are the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), the Wisconsin Synod (WELS)... and some smaller, lesser-known denominations.  Among the "some of it is true" branches of Lutheranism, the main denomination is the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA).  Because they have determined that the Bible is the produce of fallible, prejudiced men, they have taken the position of authority "over" Scripture (the power to decide- for themselves- which passages they agree with and will follow vs. those that they don't agree with and reject). 

LOL. This just DRIPS in sneering bitterness and judgement. If only they had all the answers like you, Pumpf. 

Debate the facts not the poster.  If you want to refute the post then provide substance of your own to back it up please.

What fact's, he talking faith and religion. 

Hes quoting scripture,  if anybody wants to refute his passages then do so,  but Pumpf is not the target,  find counter points of scripture to refute his position if you want,  but he is not the debatable subject here.

Just like Fred Phelp's and his scripture quoting.  Like I said, Have a good day

Fred Phelps was just as wrong as the ELCA.  He, also, distorted the Bible to say what HE wanted it to say... rather than letting it speak for itself.  I assume that your comment was meant to be some kind of insult... but I'm sure that- from your point of view- that's how you see it.  Unfortunately (for you) we are on the same page about Fred.  He was a false teacher (and another example of an antichrist) who led people away from the truth of the Gospel.  What he said was just as contrary to Scripture as the "doctrines" of the ELCA that I have cited.  

People like Fred are why the Church NEEDS to refute heresy, in whatever form it takes.  

[Guest]

@IDVikingfan said:

@MaroonBells said:

@pumpf said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@pumpf said:
The most basic (and honest) answer is this: there are only 2 kinds of people in the world- those who are saved by faith in Jesus Christ... and those who are "enemies of the Cross".  If you believe that the Bible is true, God's Word makes it clear that Satan will use anything he can to attack- and deceive- the Church.  Ultimately, he is behind every attack against Christians.  So, why would Satan "attack" Muslims... or the ELCA... or any other unbeliever, for that matter... since they are already doing his work for him?  

ELCA....some time when I stop by and am not in a hurry you will need to explain the differences in all the Lutheran churches to me,  by the way tell your son I was sorry to hear that he was losing his first year of college football,  that has to really suck for him and have him feeling pretty low.

For the sake of Al, I'll go ahead and explain it now.  There are- basically- 2 "branches" of Lutheranism in America: those who believe that the Bible is "all true"... and those who believe that only "some" of it is true.  Now, among the "all true" branches, there are the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), the Wisconsin Synod (WELS)... and some smaller, lesser-known denominations.  Among the "some of it is true" branches of Lutheranism, the main denomination is the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA).  Because they have determined that the Bible is the produce of fallible, prejudiced men, they have taken the position of authority "over" Scripture (the power to decide- for themselves- which passages they agree with and will follow vs. those that they don't agree with and reject). 

LOL. This just DRIPS in sneering bitterness and judgement. If only they had all the answers like you, Pumpf. 

I spent the FIRST 40 years of my life in the Lutheran church with most in the LCA and ELCA.  What is taught by the ELCA today is far different than what I was taught in Catechism class and Sundays in sermons.  Pumpf has accurately depicted the current beliefs of the ELCA which are contrary to traditional biblical teaching.  For example, one ELCA document I read describes Jesus as bearing our sins in his womb.  Is it wrong and judgemental to point out error?  Clearly not.

I see your heresy... and raise it.  In a "recent" publication, an ELCA pastor wrote (for an official publication of the ELCA) that Jesus DIDN'T die for the sins of the world (because that would presume that God punishes sin).  Instead, He died because the religious leaders of that time felt threatened by His radical "socialism".  The pastor went on to say that no one goes to Hell... because "God is love".  That belief was codified at the most recent ELCA national convention, when the assembled group voted (by a margin of about 97% to 3%) that faith in Jesus was not necessary for salvation... and any statement to the contrary was hateful and offensive to the Muslims, Jews and atheists that were in attendance.  When one man got up to ask about this quote by Jesus ("No one comes to the Father except through Me"), he was booed and chastised by the chair of the convention.   

And who could forget the (female) "pastor" who encouraged girls to send her their promise rings... so that she (the "pastor") could melt them down and create a golden "vagina" out of them.  For their efforts, the girls got a certificate of "impurity".  And, no: she wasn't some "outlier"... some exception that could be found in any organization.  She was the keynote speaker for the ELCA's last Youth Gathering.

[Guest]

@pumpf said:

@MaroonBells said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@pumpf said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@pumpf said:
The most basic (and honest) answer is this: there are only 2 kinds of people in the world- those who are saved by faith in Jesus Christ... and those who are "enemies of the Cross".  If you believe that the Bible is true, God's Word makes it clear that Satan will use anything he can to attack- and deceive- the Church.  Ultimately, he is behind every attack against Christians.  So, why would Satan "attack" Muslims... or the ELCA... or any other unbeliever, for that matter... since they are already doing his work for him?  

ELCA....some time when I stop by and am not in a hurry you will need to explain the differences in all the Lutheran churches to me,  by the way tell your son I was sorry to hear that he was losing his first year of college football,  that has to really suck for him and have him feeling pretty low.

For the sake of Al, I'll go ahead and explain it now.  There are- basically- 2 "branches" of Lutheranism in America: those who believe that the Bible is "all true"... and those who believe that only "some" of it is true.  Now, among the "all true" branches, there are the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), the Wisconsin Synod (WELS)... and some smaller, lesser-known denominations.  Among the "some of it is true" branches of Lutheranism, the main denomination is the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA).  Because they have determined that the Bible is the produce of fallible, prejudiced men, they have taken the position of authority "over" Scripture (the power to decide- for themselves- which passages they agree with and will follow vs. those that they don't agree with and reject). 

LOL. This just DRIPS in sneering bitterness and judgement. If only they had all the answers like you, Pumpf. 

Debate the facts not the poster.  If you want to refute the post then provide substance of your own to back it up please.

Jesus, Jimmy...do you realize he just called an entire doctrine the anti-Christ? Try to play fair, K? 

So find counter points to his claim.  Other posters are not what this board is about.  If you cant or wont,  then walk away.  There is no rule that we have to take every topic to the edge and beyond,  but we do have a rule about making responses personal. 

Wow... I call him judgmental; he calls 3 million ELCA members who simply disagree with him, the "AntiChrist"….and I’m the one who’s out of line. I'm not ELCA but I'd be pretty pissed off if I were. 
You should know you can't debate anything with a Biblical literalist. Instead of having the humility and grace to state their belief is based on their own personal interpretation of the Bible, they say, basically, this is what the Bible says, as if there is only one interpretation of it: theirs. When there are, in fact, thousands. 
It's why people over the centuries who read the exact same book have disagreed with almost everything in it...from slavery and transubstantiation to ordination policy and baptism. 

While it's true that there are many interpretations of the Bible, that doesn't mean that they are all equally valid.  

Which ones have you deemed valid?

I would say that the very notion of reading the Bible literally is itself an interpretation. 

[Guest]

@pumpf said:

@IDVikingfan said:

@MaroonBells said:

@pumpf said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@pumpf said:
The most basic (and honest) answer is this: there are only 2 kinds of people in the world- those who are saved by faith in Jesus Christ... and those who are "enemies of the Cross".  If you believe that the Bible is true, God's Word makes it clear that Satan will use anything he can to attack- and deceive- the Church.  Ultimately, he is behind every attack against Christians.  So, why would Satan "attack" Muslims... or the ELCA... or any other unbeliever, for that matter... since they are already doing his work for him?  

ELCA....some time when I stop by and am not in a hurry you will need to explain the differences in all the Lutheran churches to me,  by the way tell your son I was sorry to hear that he was losing his first year of college football,  that has to really suck for him and have him feeling pretty low.

For the sake of Al, I'll go ahead and explain it now.  There are- basically- 2 "branches" of Lutheranism in America: those who believe that the Bible is "all true"... and those who believe that only "some" of it is true.  Now, among the "all true" branches, there are the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), the Wisconsin Synod (WELS)... and some smaller, lesser-known denominations.  Among the "some of it is true" branches of Lutheranism, the main denomination is the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA).  Because they have determined that the Bible is the produce of fallible, prejudiced men, they have taken the position of authority "over" Scripture (the power to decide- for themselves- which passages they agree with and will follow vs. those that they don't agree with and reject). 

LOL. This just DRIPS in sneering bitterness and judgement. If only they had all the answers like you, Pumpf. 

I spent the FIRST 40 years of my life in the Lutheran church with most in the LCA and ELCA.  What is taught by the ELCA today is far different than what I was taught in Catechism class and Sundays in sermons.  Pumpf has accurately depicted the current beliefs of the ELCA which are contrary to traditional biblical teaching.  For example, one ELCA document I read describes Jesus as bearing our sins in his womb.  Is it wrong and judgemental to point out error?  Clearly not.

I see your heresy... and raise it.  In a "recent" publication, an ELCA pastor wrote (for an official publication of the ELCA) that Jesus DIDN'T die for the sins of the world (because that would presume that God punishes sin).  Instead, He died because the religious leaders of that time felt threatened by His radical "socialism".  The pastor went on to say that no one goes to Hell... because "God is love".  That belief was codified at the most recent ELCA national convention, when the assembled group voted (by a margin of about 97% to 3%) that faith in Jesus was not necessary for salvation... and any statement to the contrary was hateful and offensive to the Muslims, Jews and atheists that were in attendance.  

...and guess what? That person might be right. And you might be wrong. I still find it impossible to accept that Jews, for example, among others, who have spent their entire lives dedicated to serving God and their communities are going to burn in endless fires of hell with no hope of death. 

Put away your bible and think about that for a bit and what does your gut tell you? Your God-given intellect? Tells me that pastor might be right. 

[Guest]

I'd like to take a moment and pat myself on the back for staying out of most of these conversations. You're welcome, PT board.

[Guest]

I wish I could be a good boy, too, but just to many scars from the Nun's to not react.  They taught me to know a theocracy and those who profess it.

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:

@pumpf said:

@MaroonBells said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@pumpf said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@pumpf said:
The most basic (and honest) answer is this: there are only 2 kinds of people in the world- those who are saved by faith in Jesus Christ... and those who are "enemies of the Cross".  If you believe that the Bible is true, God's Word makes it clear that Satan will use anything he can to attack- and deceive- the Church.  Ultimately, he is behind every attack against Christians.  So, why would Satan "attack" Muslims... or the ELCA... or any other unbeliever, for that matter... since they are already doing his work for him?  

ELCA....some time when I stop by and am not in a hurry you will need to explain the differences in all the Lutheran churches to me,  by the way tell your son I was sorry to hear that he was losing his first year of college football,  that has to really suck for him and have him feeling pretty low.

For the sake of Al, I'll go ahead and explain it now.  There are- basically- 2 "branches" of Lutheranism in America: those who believe that the Bible is "all true"... and those who believe that only "some" of it is true.  Now, among the "all true" branches, there are the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), the Wisconsin Synod (WELS)... and some smaller, lesser-known denominations.  Among the "some of it is true" branches of Lutheranism, the main denomination is the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA).  Because they have determined that the Bible is the produce of fallible, prejudiced men, they have taken the position of authority "over" Scripture (the power to decide- for themselves- which passages they agree with and will follow vs. those that they don't agree with and reject). 

LOL. This just DRIPS in sneering bitterness and judgement. If only they had all the answers like you, Pumpf. 

Debate the facts not the poster.  If you want to refute the post then provide substance of your own to back it up please.

Jesus, Jimmy...do you realize he just called an entire doctrine the anti-Christ? Try to play fair, K? 

So find counter points to his claim.  Other posters are not what this board is about.  If you cant or wont,  then walk away.  There is no rule that we have to take every topic to the edge and beyond,  but we do have a rule about making responses personal. 

Wow... I call him judgmental; he calls 3 million ELCA members who simply disagree with him, the "AntiChrist"….and I’m the one who’s out of line. I'm not ELCA but I'd be pretty pissed off if I were. 
You should know you can't debate anything with a Biblical literalist. Instead of having the humility and grace to state their belief is based on their own personal interpretation of the Bible, they say, basically, this is what the Bible says, as if there is only one interpretation of it: theirs. When there are, in fact, thousands. 
It's why people over the centuries who read the exact same book have disagreed with almost everything in it...from slavery and transubstantiation to ordination policy and baptism. 

While it's true that there are many interpretations of the Bible, that doesn't mean that they are all equally valid.  

Which ones have you deemed valid?

I would say that the very notion of reading the Bible literally is itself an interpretation. 

Fair enough.  But, again: going back to the analogy I used about your biography... if you wrote one thing in your book... and then someone else said that you wrote something completely different: who's right?  Which "interpretation" is the right one: the one that actually repeats what you, yourself said... or the one that rejects the "literal" words you wrote, in favor of their own, personal interpretation?  I think most rational people would take you at your word and "interpret" your book to mean what you actually wrote.

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:

...and guess what? That person might be right. And you might be wrong. I still find it impossible to accept that Jews, for example, among others, who have spent their entire lives dedicated to serving God and their communities are going to burn in endless fires of hell with no hope of death. 

Put away your bible and think about that for a bit and what does your gut tell you? Your God-given intellect? Tells me that pastor might be right. 

If someone said that 2+2 doesn't equal 4, how would we know if they were correct or not?  I mean, isn't everything up for interpretation?  If she was right, how would anyone know- since her opinion was created in her own mind, absent any foundation?  For me, "right" and "wrong" aren't determined by how I feel at that particular moment.  They are determined by what God says in His own Word.  Now, if you want to reject the concept of Biblical literal-ism, that's fine.  But then whose word is it?  If a person is just going to decide what parts are true and which aren't... then- really- none of it is true or trustworthy.  What makes God's promises worthy of being believed is that He, Himself, is the one who made them.  If His own Word can't be trusted to be true... then what's the point of being a Christian in the first place?  You might as well start your own religion.  

As for all those who are in danger of eternal separation from God in Hell... the Bible is pretty clear about that.  No one can earn salvation for themselves; that's why Jesus Christ was incarnate (came in flesh), suffered and died: in order to satisfy the Law in our place, since we could not do it ourselves.  Your answer seems to indicate that you think people can be "good enough" to earn their own salvation, even though the Bible says (in a variety of different ways and places): "There is no one who does good, not even one... all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God... we are, by nature, enemies of God and objects of His wrath..."  That is why the death and resurrection of Jesus was necessary. 

Let me ask you a question: if people don't need to "believe in" Jesus in order to be saved, then why was His death necessary?  If a person was drowning, and you throw them a life-line... and they refuse to grab it: will they still die?  If they are dying of a curable disease, but they refuse to take it: who is to blame, the doctor who gave them the cure... or the person who refused to take it?  Jesus told a parable about all the people who were invited to come to the King's banquet.  But few accepted His invitation... and therefore, they didn't receive His gift. 

You seem to have the erroneous view of Pelagius, who imagined that everybody was "good"... and the only way that that could change is if they- somehow- lost their "goodness".  Orthodoxy rejected Pelagius as a heretic for denying the Doctrine of Original Sin.  The truth (that Scripture teaches) is the opposite of what Pelagius taught.  The Bible declares that all are lost and condemned creatures (due to sin)... and, therefore, are in need of "rescue".  That's why God sent a "Savior".  You may not like that... or agree with it... but that IS what the Bible says.  And the Bible is the source for orthodox (correct) teachings (not my feelings or my gut).    

[Guest]

@BigAl99 said:
I wish I could be a good boy, too, but just to many scars from the Nun's to not react.  They taught me to know a theocracy and those who profess it.

I hope you're not referring to me, because I've never advocated theocratic rule.  But I do find it interesting that you reference your Catholic upbringing (assuming that that's what you meant).  Most of the atheists that I've encountered (either personally or as I read their stories)- who, at one time, professed to be Christians- were former Catholics.  That's not a knock on Catholicism; I just find it interesting.

[Guest]

@pumpf said:

@BigAl99 said:
I wish I could be a good boy, too, but just to many scars from the Nun's to not react.  They taught me to know a theocracy and those who profess it.

I hope you're not referring to me, because I've never advocated theocratic rule.  But I do find it interesting that you reference your Catholic upbringing (assuming that that's what you meant).  Most of the atheists that I've encountered (either personally or as I read their stories)- who, at one time, professed to be Christians- were former Catholics.  That's not a knock on Catholicism; I just find it interesting.

Yeah, also taught me about what being Religiose and self righteousness is about.