User Profile: imperative

imperative

Member Since: December 03, 2011

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [2] September 18, 2014 at 10:47pm

    Technically, RipeForParody is correct.

    The word “kid”, being a colloquial term generally used to describe any stage of development after infancy and before adulthood, would be considered distinct from the fetal stage of development. So yes, a fetus is not a kid, just like a kid is not an adult.

    However, if he meant to suggest that a fetus isn’t a human because it’s a fetus, well that makes as much sense as saying an adult isn’t a human because it’s an adult, or a toddler isn’t a human because it’s a toddler. These are all just terms given to stages of development, and we’re all in some stage every moment that we’re alive.

  • September 18, 2014 at 6:12pm

    …did the guy on youtube share a link to the full version, or was he just making claims? If he had the link, then please show me the page you’re talking about.

  • September 18, 2014 at 6:10pm

    @DLV

    I understand that’s what you’re saying. I’m saying that no amount of digging produces an unedited video.

    Visit this link:

    http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/breaking-american-journalist-james-wright-foley-beheaded-by-isis-in-chilling-video

    It claims to have the “unedited” video, except that it isn’t unedited. It’s the only version that’s available. It shows everything leading up to the beheading, then it fades out and cuts to the “corpse”. There is no other video. If there was, it would be able to be found, but it isn’t.

    The two newest videos are exactly the same. Everyone just assumes (understandably) that the edits we see are done on our end. They’re not. If anyone can produce the actual thing, I’ll gladly eat crow.

  • September 17, 2014 at 12:04pm

    @DLV

    I think you’re misunderstanding. ISIS supposedly released the video on the internet. That’s how they got it out. They didn’t send it to news networks. They didn’t send it to the CIA. They released it to the public, and the one they released IS the edited version.

    If anyone claims to have seen the unedited version, then that could only be because it’s broadly available. So then why can’t it be found?

    So how is it that these people are seeing the actual beheading? Where are they getting the video? Do they have a direct connection to ISIS? Who has it so that they can see it?

  • [5] September 17, 2014 at 11:30am

    I’d need more context from the preacher, but wouldn’t you agree that there’s a difference between embracing, or even supporting, a sinful lifestyle vs the failures we all encounter and strive daily to avoid because we acknowledge they’re wrong?

  • [2] September 17, 2014 at 9:58am

    “The video embedded in this post contains some foul language…”

    So does the article’s title. Apparently TheBlaze doesn’t consider taking the Lord’s name in vain to be foul language.

  • [11] September 17, 2014 at 9:52am

    It’s very telling that the article describes the preacher as “anti-gay” and not “pro-scripture”.

    How can he be “anti” those to whom he brings the truth of God’s word? Would we claim that someone who tries to get people to stop taking drugs is somehow against those people? It makes no sense.

  • [8] September 17, 2014 at 9:44am

    Yes, we come to salvation as sinners. But how can we even know of our need for salvation if we’re unaware of our sin and how it offends God? If a person hears such a message of sin, and they receive a genuine conviction of their sin within them, then it’s the Holy Spirit at work. This is a good thing.

    Christianity is not a social club. We aren’t to make it as appealing as possible in order to inflate membership. We are to preach the truth of God’s word, not watered down so that it will be more palatable to more people, but rather full strength so that it will cut to their soul.

    Everyone struggles with their old self. That can only happen when we know what to struggle against.

  • [8] September 17, 2014 at 9:26am

    The preacher wasn’t casting stones. He was preaching the word of God. Do you equate the two?

  • September 16, 2014 at 11:40pm

    @motorcycleboy

    How is it in the government’s interest to show they’re fake? If they’re real, then how is it that a rapid cutting motion across soft flesh produces no immediately visible laceration? Why would the terrorists go to the effort of beheading someone to promote their cause, but then conceal the beheading?

    If you can confidently claim that they’re real, then please give conclusive answers to those questions. Clearly your trust in government and media is far greater than mine, so please help me out with these questions.

  • September 16, 2014 at 11:34pm

    Who said it was the government?

    And no, it would not need to be perfect. Not even close. To some degree, this conversation proves it.

    I’m not saying one way or the other. I am saying that there’s more than enough evidence to cause doubt. I’ve seen no photos or videos that couldn’t easily be faked. Nothing remotely convincing.

    We don’t know if he’s dead. We do know that the video doesn’t show his death. If it is a ruse, he wouldn’t be bait. But people do evil things… all the time… all around us. Nothing surprises me, so I don’t feel compelled to close my mind to any possibility.

    There certainly are terrorists in that part of the world doing terrible things. That’s nothing new. What I’m questioning is the packaging we’re being given by the media.

    Which brings us back to the original question. Why would these super-terrorists edit out the most convincing part of all the videos when horrific violence IS their tool and the video IS their means of communicating it?

  • September 16, 2014 at 9:20pm

    Why would ISIS fake it? I don’t know. It makes as little sense as them editing their own video to hide the beheading. I don’t even know if ISIS is real or manufactured. I do know that their appearance is convenient for the continued military presence.

    He says he saw the video, but he’s referring to the same one that everyone else has seen, which doesn’t actually show the beheading. How do I know that? I know it because the full video doesn’t exist. No one can produce it. How was he able to get his hands on it but no one else?

    Maybe the guy is dead. Maybe he’s not, and the family thinks he is. Maybe they’re Obama libs that are playing along with a rouse. I don’t know. I do know that people are easily manipulated into going to war, such that they never stop and think critically about what they’re being shown.

    If you don’t want to see the video, I don’t blame you. Who would? But IMO, if anyone is going to call for US troops to be put in harms way, then they ought to be willing to examine the evidence.

  • September 16, 2014 at 6:17pm

    @DLV

    He saw what beheading videos? They don’t exist! This is my point. ISIS released the videos on the internet, yet the only ones that exist are the edited versions, which means ISIS released edited versions.

    Unless you’re suggesting that his brother had some special connection to ISIS that allowed him to exclusively view the originals. Somehow I don’t think so.

    I think the Blaze story you’re referring to is this one here. It’s speculation and doesn’t hold up once the knife starts cutting.

  • September 16, 2014 at 6:13pm

    @endless3cho

    I don’t know. I do know that ruthless terrorists aren’t concerned about protecting viewers from graphic violence. Their whole purpose is to shock and terrorize people.

    Don’t you think it begs the question? None of their videos that I’ve seen convincingly show anyone being murdered.

    I also know that ever since we started pulling out of the Middle East, suddenly there have been new emergencies that require our military involvement. First it was URGENT that we go into Syria, then Ukraine. But neither were politically popular. So now we suddenly have these new super-terrorists that do everything except show someone truly being killed, and sure enough we’re slowly getting back in.

  • September 16, 2014 at 1:09pm

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/bill-gardner/11054488/Foley-murder-video-may-have-been-staged.html

    “…a study of the four-minute 40-second clip, carried out by an international forensic science company which has worked for police forces across Britain, suggested camera trickery and slick post-production techniques appear to have been used…”

    It goes on to describe in greater detail how they arrived at that conclusion. Of course it only takes a small amount of critical thinking to have serious doubts about the videos.

    Responses (11) +
  • September 16, 2014 at 1:00pm

    DLV, have you asked yourself why there’s no actual beheading in the videos? Or why the rapid cutting motions that they do show produce no blood or lasceration?

    Why would these depraved terrorists edit their videos for content, and just cut to a corpse that could easily be faked “hollywood-style”. There is no original, unedited video available, like the Daniel Pearl video, which was very real.

    What are your opinions on that?

    Responses (4) +
  • [3] September 16, 2014 at 11:31am

    “We only laugh at misery, sing about sorrow, and we can only find the good in ourselves when we compare ourselves to people we consider worse than us.”

    That sounds far more cynical than the comment you replied to, which I’m sure was just an innocent joke. Sorry, but I think you’d have to be pretty cynical to take it that seriously.

  • [1] September 15, 2014 at 2:21pm

    Thanks for your honesty. I’ll return the favor by telling you very honestly that I cannot petition God to provide a child to a family who will not be dedicated to raising that child to know Him.

    I will however pray for you and your family. He drove me out of my apathy. I hope He’ll do the same for you.

    The Old Testament part of the Bible is mostly a chronicle of early history, and the kings and the prophets of Israel. There was a prophet named Eli who received a similar request from a woman named Hannah. Perhaps her story would interest you.

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Samuel+1&version=NKJV

    As the Bible is a collection of writings divided (though not originally) into chapters and verses for reference purposes, the link I provided above is to the first chapter of the first book of Samuel, who was also a prophet. Links at the bottom of the page will take you to the next chapter if you decide to continue.

    Best regards to you and your family. I hope things turn out well for you.

  • [5] September 15, 2014 at 11:43am

    If God answers the prayers of those to whom you appeal, are you then going to thank Him and them by raising that child in the truth of God’s word each and every day, or are you going to raise the child in an environment of apathy toward God?

    Considering that you’re petitioning the help of “religious” people (whatever that means) who would hold such virtues in high regard, I think it’s a reasonable question and expectation.

    Responses (5) +
  • [1] September 15, 2014 at 11:23am

    @SingLiberty

    As a Christian, I believe the same. That special way is ultimately rooted in God’s covenant with Israel.

    That covenant promises blessings and prosperity when they’re obedient to God and when they put their faith in Him, but it also promises curses and destruction when they do not. Because of that, we need to exercise more wisdom than to blindly support Israel as so many do.

123 To page: Go