Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
All this's predicted in the Bible
Home
Booklet > The Book of Revelation Unveiled > Satan's War Against the People of God
The links speak for themselves, weather or not you beleive, we are, in the beginning of a holocaust thatll make Hitlars appear like childs play,, not one single prophesy has fail all have been fulfilled except for the return of Jesus The Christ
Prophecy is a load of bunk.
You're no doubt an ANTI-CHRIST
so i inherently understand your blind logic.. go out now and decieve more like Satan your father
, the father of liers you know your time is limited... Heres a link just for you if you got the guts..
War On The Saints - Chapter 1 (Part 3 of 3)
As for me, my chat with you is over........
Since you won't have Whitelion to chat with anymore, have you given any thought to our hypothetical?
Are you waiting to see if I'll call you the devil's minion or a demon or some such thing before you decide whether to take up the question? I promise not to...
Since you won't have Whitelion to chat with anymore, have you given any thought to our hypothetical?
Are you waiting to see if I'll call you the devil's minion or a demon or some such thing before you decide whether to take up the question? I promise not to...
Let's say that a fellow operates a dog fighting operation in the suburbs of Atlanta. He has a friend who goes into town and distributes flyers but doesn’t actually participate in, or attend, the dog fighting. The law specifically prohibits the conduct of a dog fight.
Should the friend be prosecuted for his part? The law of principles would apply there as well.
I would say it is not a comparable example. The friend wouldn't be arrested if he was just speaking about dogfighting, which is what you are saying will happen if a preacher speaks out about homosexuality.
Since you won't have Whitelion to chat with anymore, have you given any thought to our hypothetical?
Are you waiting to see if I'll call you the devil's minion or a demon or some such thing before you decide whether to take up the question? I promise not to...
Let's say that a fellow operates a dog fighting operation in the suburbs of Atlanta. He has a friend who goes into town and distributes flyers but doesnt actually participate in, or attend, the dog fighting. The law specifically prohibits the conduct of a dog fight.
Should the friend be prosecuted for his part? The law of principles would apply there as well.
I would say it is not a comparable example. The friend wouldn't be arrested if he was just speaking about dogfighting, which is what you are saying will happen if a preacher speaks out about homosexuality.
Not so, my friend.
The way in which the law is applied is to charge the preacher with inciting another person to violate the law. The preacher cant be arrested merely for preaching that homosexuality is sin. The law only comes into play when another who says he relied on that preaching goes out and commits a hate crime. In essence, what the law does is hold the preacher responsible for the other mans crime, as if he were an accessory before the fact.
The fellow who goes to town and distributes the flyers or otherwise causes people to engage in the dog fight is held to have done the very same thing under the law of principles. He has incited others to commit the crime, dog fighting.
So, what do you say. Should he be prosecuted or not? Its not a hard question. Why try to avoid it? Unless, of course, you know the answer doesnt line up with your earlier position.
Let's say that a fellow operates a dog fighting operation in the suburbs of Atlanta. He has a friend who goes into town and distributes flyers but doesnt actually participate in, or attend, the dog fighting. The law specifically prohibits the conduct of a dog fight.
Should the friend be prosecuted for his part? The law of principles would apply there as well.
I would say it is not a comparable example. The friend wouldn't be arrested if he was just speaking about dogfighting, which is what you are saying will happen if a preacher speaks out about homosexuality.
Not so, my friend.
The way in which the law is applied is to charge the preacher with inciting another person to violate the law. The preacher cant be arrested merely for preaching that homosexuality is sin. The law only comes into play when another who says he relied on that preaching goes out and commits a hate crime. In essence, what the law does is hold the preacher responsible for the other mans crime, as if he were an accessory before the fact.
The fellow who goes to town and distributes the flyers or otherwise causes people to engage in the dog fight is held to have done the very same thing under the law of principles. He has incited others to commit the crime, dog fighting.
So, what do you say. Should he be prosecuted or not? Its not a hard question. Why try to avoid it? Unless, of course, you know the answer doesnt line up with your earlier position.
That is exactly so. SPEAKING about criminal activity (with certain limitations that don't apply here) is not illegal. You're saying that preachers will be arrested for SPEAKING their opinions about homosexuality. That's a load of crap and so is your slippery slope argument.
Not so, my friend.
The way in which the law is applied is to charge the preacher with inciting another person to violate the law. The preacher cant be arrested merely for preaching that homosexuality is sin. The law only comes into play when another who says he relied on that preaching goes out and commits a hate crime. In essence, what the law does is hold the preacher responsible for the other mans crime, as if he were an accessory before the fact.
The fellow who goes to town and distributes the flyers or otherwise causes people to engage in the dog fight is held to have done the very same thing under the law of principles. He has incited others to commit the crime, dog fighting.
So, what do you say. Should he be prosecuted or not? Its not a hard question. Why try to avoid it? Unless, of course, you know the answer doesnt line up with your earlier position.
That is exactly so. SPEAKING about criminal activity (with certain limitations that don't apply here) is not illegal. You're saying that preachers will be arrested for SPEAKING their opinions about homosexuality. That's a load of crap and so is your slippery slope argument.
I'll take your refusal to answer the question and instead to try to change what I said or twist my words as your recognition that you simply can't support your position...
That is exactly so. SPEAKING about criminal activity (with certain limitations that don't apply here) is not illegal. You're saying that preachers will be arrested for SPEAKING their opinions about homosexuality. That's a load of crap and so is your slippery slope argument.
I'll take your refusal to answer the question and instead to try to change what I said or twist my words as your recognition that you simply can't support your position...
I'm not avoiding the question, I figured that you were smart enough to get your answer from the comment I made. The person in question could be considered to be doing more than just speaking if he is physically handing out flyers and prompting people to participate. As I already said, though, your preacher saying bad things about homosexuality is not crossing that line unless he is doing more than jut speaking. There is a fine line between just speaking and actually participating or inciting others to participate. I'd have to see more specifics to decide one way or the other.
Calling it bigotry hatered and intolerance for insulting a belief system is absolutely insane.
Under that pathetic logic it would be hateful for me to attack the idea that aliens come to Earth on a regular basis or attack the idea that Elvis is still alive.
How is what they are saying hateful to people who practice religion? Where does it say those who follow religion are stupid, inferior or in any way lesser beings? I want to know because you keep going ON AND ON AND ON about how you and your faith were personally turned into a victim because a bunch of atheists wanted to put up a sign near the holidays.
In fact you were so quick to mark yourself for martyrdom that you all ready assumed I was out to get Christianity blah blah blah without hearing nary a word from me on the matter. I'm not out to kill Christianity but to call this sign hate speech and then compare it to a Nazi speech (nice use of Godwin's law) is just stupid.
The government provided a forum for speech it can't reject one religious view and then keep another it's a first amendment issue.
Atheists take aim at Christmas - CNN.com
What really interests me about this is the way that Christians, who've won the war to have a nativity placed on the state capitol's grounds, are fighting to SILENCE atheist messages.
Interesting. "Free speech, but only for me."
...the Christian Coalition of America is urging members to oppose the advertisements.
"Although a number of humanists and atheists continue to attempt to rid God and Christmas from the public square, the American people are overwhelmingly opposed to such efforts," Roberta Combs, the group's president said in a press release.
"We will ask our millions of supporters to call the city of Washington, D.C., and Congress to stop this un-Godly campaign."
As far as the criticism goes, Edwords said there are far more controversial placards in Washington.
"That's D.C. -- this is a political center," he said. "If I can see a placard with dead fetuses on it, I think someone can look at our question and just think about it."
The anger over the display in Olympia began after it was assembled Monday. The sentiment grew after some national media personalities called upon viewers to flood the phone lines of the governor's office.
The governor's office told The Seattle Times it received more than 200 calls an hour afterward.
"I happen to be a Christian, and I don't agree with the display that is up there," Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire told The Olympian newspaper. "But that doesn't mean that as governor, I have the right to deny their ability to express their free speech."
For some, the issue isn't even that the atheists are putting their thoughts on display, but rather the way in which they are doing it.
"They are shooting themselves in the foot," said iReport contributor Rich Phillips, who describes himself as an atheist. "Everyone's out there for the holidays, trying to represent their religion, their beliefs, and it's a time to be positive."
The atheist message was never intended to attack anyone, Barker said.
"When people ask us, 'Why are you hateful? Why are you putting up something critical of people's holidays? -- we respond that we kind of feel that the Christian message is the hate message," he said. "On that Nativity scene, there is this threat of internal violence if we don't submit to that master. Hate speech goes both ways."
I think atheists hate God and have made it their mission in life to destroy religion!
If your an atheist why do you care what religious folks do? You obviously dont believe in God so why would religion matter to you???
Atheists actually GO OUT of their way to challenge religion and it makes no sense what so ever!
The truth is this has nothing to do with religion to the Atheists and everything to do with religious ethics.
Atheists have a problem with people living their lives under a given specific set of rules that conflict with their own morals and ethics..
Oh and if anyone is trying to silence anyone at Christmas its the Atheists trying to silence and abolish Christmas as a religious holiday.
Just because they don't like the message of Christmas, and internalize it in a way other than it's stated, does not make CHristian slogans "hate speech".
It is, however, hate speech to incite others to attack those of a certain group. Atheists are proud of their heritage when it comes to inciting people to anger against and ridicule of Christians.
You are one nut short of a basket.
Sorry, I quit listening to you twice. Once when I found out you thought child molestation should be legalized, and second when you started carping that Jesus promoted communism, you wack job.
Just because they don't like the message of Christmas, and internalize it in a way other than it's stated, does not make CHristian slogans "hate speech".
It is, however, hate speech to incite others to attack those of a certain group. Atheists are proud of their heritage when it comes to inciting people to anger against and ridicule of Christians.
I often find greater charity among atheists than Christians, which saddens me. Since the Acts of the Apostles ought to properly be called the Acts of the Holy Spirit through the Apostles, since the apostles could do nothing if the power of God was not in them, and the practices of the apostles clearly proscribe libertarian communism as an act of the faithful, it's astonishing that many so-called "Christians" primarily seek association with the rich and the powerful...Jimmy Swaggart is a prime example, as are Falwell and Robertson and their support of the expansion of neoliberalism.
Did you just make that shit up?
Atheists give more to charity???
Yea maybe donations to progressive liberal organizations... I dont see Atheists donating where it counts like helping the sick, poor and hungry around the world.
Oh and I love your little bias cartoon as well...
All tho I do agree that abortions are nothing short of murder.... However let the other immoral folks dig their own grave, I dont really care! What they do really doesnt effect me as long as they dont promote it...
The idea that every Christian is a nut is truly a pathetic one spread by the anti-religious folks.
If you want to argue ideology then save the extremist crap for the extremists.
Another thing I find disgusting that atheists do is only tackle Christianity, they wont touch any minority religion in the union with a 10 foot pole such as Islam... Again its more picking and choosing by liberals (and yes the majority of atheists are liberal.)
