User Profile: smllms

Member Since: March 02, 2012

CommentsDisplaying smllms's 10 most recent comments.

  • @Sirhansirhan
    Your question is disingenuous. If you were truly seeking knowledge, you would have studied the text more carefully and you, as an adult with higher reading comprehension, would not even need to ask the question. If your questions are sincere, it means that you are not believing because of those questions.

    Here is a question offered in truth: If someone were to answer all your objections would you then put your faith in Jesus, who is God, Savior, and the only way to become right before a Holy God, and then turn from the evil of your ways to follow Him?

  • Booger71, I have a friend (white, male, Christian, no criminal record) who was questioned thoroughly by the FBI, as was his wife (who gets an enhanced pat down at every flight, also white, Christian, and no record). They spent more than 5 hours on each of them. All done on the strength of a creative writing article written from different points of view about a terrorist attack, including the pov of the terrorist. Neither has any ties to any type of terrorist organization from any point in their lives. My point is that the amount of time the FBI spends interrogating a person and what things they confiscate to examine have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the person actually deserves such scrutiny. Obviously, though, this Saudi was in violation of his visa… he may have terrorist ties (probable). So my question is more… how is it that my friends received greater scrutiny than this man?

  • 4xeverything

    Normally, I would agree. By far, most mistakes require nothing more than an apology to be done. In this case, I don’t. 1)There could be damage to her car, and it should be returned to her in the same condition she left it. 2)She should be reimbursed for time lost, as though the city rented her vehicle. 3)She should be reimbursed for her time spent doing the detective work to bring light to the truth–did she have to take time off work? miss classes? did it cost her anything (cab fare)?

    If I make a mistake that costs someone I always offer to reimburse them. Also, I teach my children that part of apologizing is discovering how they can make things right between them and the person they wronged. Sometimes, nothing is necessary. Sometimes, it’s just a commitment not to repeat the action. Sometimes, they need to replace what they deprived the other person of. Why would that not apply here?

  • Sorry, that post was meant to be one set of comments down.

  • Sol,
    Very young dinosaurs, even of the larger variety, were not too large to fit in the ark (and if you are looking to repopulate, why bother with the grandaddies?). Keeping in mind, if you will, that in the Biblical scenario we’re talking about creatures that had much longer lives than post-flood creatures (human or otherwise) and that pre-flood dinos would have grown older and larger than their post-flood counterparts, and keeping in mind that, like bears, it was not necessary for every species (which is not the same as kind) of dino to be present, dinosaurs are easily accommodated on the ark.

    You can choose to reject it wholesale (2Peter3 is very clear that many will), but it’s foolish at this point to say that the necessary animals wouldn’t fit.

  • Sol,
    Very young dinosaurs, even of the larger variety, were not too large to fit in the ark (and if you are looking to repopulate, why bother with the grandaddies?). Keeping in mind, if you will, that in the Biblical scenario we’re talking about creatures that had much longer lives than post-flood creatures (human or otherwise) and that pre-flood dinos would have grown older and larger than their post-flood counterparts, and keeping in mind that, like bears, it was not necessary for every species (which is not the same as kind) of dino to be present, dinosaurs are easily accommodated on the ark.

    You can choose to reject it wholesale (2Peter3 is very clear that many will), but it’s foolish at this point to say that the necessary animals wouldn’t fit.

  • Is It Okay for Christians to Smoke Marijuana?

    December 11, 2012 at 2:32pm

    In reply to baptist_deacon.

    Melbee
    1 Peter 4
    Read the whole chapter and consider it in context. Clearly, Christians are instructed to maintain sobriety, to be alert, etc. Tell me, if you hired a guard to defend your life, would you tell him/her to go ahead and smoke a joint while on duty? No, you would tell that person to do it on his/her own time but to be clear minded and sober on your time so that he/she could continue to be alert.

    Proverbs 31:1-9
    Read it in full, it’s short. The proper context for mind-altering drugs is chronic pain and terminal illness. But the comfort comes at a cost. Nevertheless, God does give it a proper context, like He gives sexual intimacy a proper context. I have gone to the ER with severe migraine pain after several unrelenting days on incapacitation to accept the comfort of a morphine shot; I don’t like doing it, I’ve done that twice in my adulthood, but that is morphine in its proper context.

    I Peter 2:9
    Read it in context, but the point is that if you belong to Christ, you are both holy and royal. Christians are set apart by God; set apart from the world, and not meant to wallow in the fallen world’s ways.

    Using drugs to relax or heighten your mood is not a proper context for a Christian. Only chronic/intense pain or terminal conditions are given as the proper context.

  • Is It Okay for Christians to Smoke Marijuana?

    December 11, 2012 at 12:53pm

    Who are Christians?
    Christians are the adopted children of God, co-heirs with Christ, Priests and Kings in eternity.

    How does the Word instruct us?
    We are to be clear and sober-minded. And it is not for Kings to indulge in mind altering substances. Wherever you see the word sorcery or witchcraft, what you are really reading is a word that includes the use of drugs. Obviously, these aren’t referring specifically to synthetic drugs (although the principle includes them), but to natural substances available to those to whom it was first written. Equally obviously, the spirit of the commands includes any substance that we might use to alter the mind’s natural state. We are instead to be alert. Over and over we are told to be alert, be ready, etc.

  • @Snow
    I have studied and struggled over eschatology and am not fully convinced of any particular view.

    In Revelation, we see that Satan is bound for a thousand years (figurative-literal, whatever, I’m not concerned with that part). He is bound expressly for the purpose of not deceiving the nations (which typically refers to unbelievers and, in fact, in context obviously refers to unbelievers because when he is released he gathers the nations against God’s people). Yet in the NT we see over and over that Satan is the one who is deceiving unbelievers in their unbelief. (I’ll list verses if you ask, but they’re pretty easy to find.)

    My church teaches that Satan is currently bound and his influence is *lessened.* This binding, so teaches my church, prevents Satan from deceiving believers. (my church teaches that we are in the spiritual millennium with Jesus ruling over the Church prior to His second coming) This teaching on the binding of Satan contradicts the teaching in Revelation and the NT, therefore I hold all our eschatology suspect.

    How do you deal with the binding of Satan to prevent him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years ends?

  • President Obama clearly used this terrorist attack as an opportunity to attack free speech. He apologetically told the world that in the US we have the right to say such things. He had a US citizen called out by name over the free speech before the world–outed by the Feds, not the media. In reality, they knew almost immediately, certainly within 24 hours, that there was no protest over the video.