Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111213 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 121

Thread: 50 killed in Florida

  1. #81
    Swims with the Fishes

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skypilot View Post
    Again, the New Testament(new covenant between God and man) did away with Religious LAW(sacrificing animals to ATONE for sin) to Grace, mercy, forgiveness, repentance, and a belief in God, John 3:16, as a way to be a Christian and achieve everlasting life.

    Acts 10 9-16 Peter in the New Testament praying on the roof, when God spoke to him about all foods now being clean. Another way of validating the move from the Law to Grace, from Old Testament to New Testament, from old covenant with God to New Covenant with Jesus.

    I commend you on the ability to discuss issues. Political correctness should be outlawed so more civil discussions can take place for the sake understanding of all affected.
    Thanks for posting that I was unaware of that in the New Testament. No need to commend just engaging in the discussion. Like I said not trying to start a religious debate. One of the things that I found most troubling about the shooting was the statements on social media about how " the sinner gays had it coming ". But I did find this gem on Facebook
    That rug really tied the room together

  2. # ADS
    Advertisement
    ADVERTISEMENT
     

  3. #82
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stragglelake View Post
    Oh the Internet ... That's where you go to find " scientific " information to support your religious beliefs.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Mercy . Knowing how your sexual orientation is formed has nothing to do with religion.
    " We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote A. Bartlett


  4. #83
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fox View Post
    The bible is used by fundamentalist Christians for whatever they want it to be used for.

    They use the old testament when it suits them and then says the old testament is not the word of Jesus in the same breath, it is all a pile of crap. If you want to read it, follow it and believe it as a guide and to help you be a better person that is fine but you can pick out as much bad and immoral in the bible as good, that is a fact.

    What happened was 49 people being gunned down for doing nothing other than being born and being alive as themselves.

    What I don't get is that in Canada we can get the same guns, we can get the same magazine capacity (not legally obviously) and we have a similar mix of people yet we do not have more mass shootings in a year than days. Out 20-30 year old males for some reason do not feel that they need to take up arms against a group of people be in a family, a school, a church, a club. What is the difference here? What is within the 6 inches between the ears of the people committing these crimes? It is not the gun, it is not the religion (the majority are white christians), maybe it is something in the water.
    The Old testament is historical and in teaching salvation, points out and gives examples of immorality, especially the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in part because of homosexuality. You act like you just discovered a cure for Cancer with your post. You harp and drum about "fundamentalist" cherry picking then your self righteousness causes you to CHERRYPICK, what a hypocritical post.

    Who said "the old testament is not the word of Jesus in the same breath?" Weasel words Fox, deflection, straw man.

    Do you THINK it's not coming to Canada or won't come to Canada? Bell Canada every Feb. like clockwork, claims 1 in 5 Canadians are mentally ill. LETS TALK.

    I'll ask you the same Fox, Do you think it's the gun? Do you think it's Christianity? The evil "AR 15?" lol. Is it Christians waging jihad? Or is it Christians whom are being persecuted and ridiculed?

    Your minister of PS Goodale can't even get the firearm in the Pulse shooting correct. So much for that pathetic, high level federal briefing. I guess he gets his intel from CBC.

    In my personal experience with these type shootings, it was bullying or terrorism. The same bullying gays do to bakers when they want to have a same sex marriage and want to FORCE a baker to make them a cake. why not just go elsewhere, I do.

    If you have some revelation please share it as the world needs your vast Tactical and Strategic "wisdum" to help us defeat the ideology and prevent these attacks by these inanimate guns and or these dastardly Christians you are so quick to condemn.

  5. #84
    Has all the answers

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trimmer21 View Post
    ^^^^^DITTO!^^^^^ Just because someone has moral values that don't agree with your "politically correct" views certainly doesn't make them ignorant by any stretch.
    Sure it does, 100 years ago we told woman they couldn't vote because they were not smart enough, 75 years ago we made blacks drink from different fountains and go to different schools. Still today we tell two people that they cannot marry and are not entitled to the same rights as others based on there sexual orientation.

    The "then in our schools they continue to push the idea that having two mothers is normal and everything is ok" quote takes the cake.

    This is ignorance plain and simple. Politically correct ??? Who are you to say two people cannot have a child... Complete BS!

  6. #85
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cantcatchacold View Post
    Thanks for posting that I was unaware of that in the New Testament. No need to commend just engaging in the discussion. Like I said not trying to start a religious debate. One of the things that I found most troubling about the shooting was the statements on social media about how " the sinner gays had it coming ". But I did find this gem on Facebook
    It is a reference to Egypt. Don't be like the Egyptians...Do not shave your head nor square your beard....a characterization of Egyptians. More of a Godly advice for the fleeing Israelites not to become like Egypt.

    Levites were a definite sect of Israel (from the tribe of Levi one of the twelve original tribes of Israel)whom only the "preachers"/ Priest could come from in that early day and time.

    It is a sad situation when an act like Orlando happens. It is even a more sad day when the "had it coming" crowd arrives, yet it speaks to the misconception that homosexuality is accepted, it simply isn't in America. Tolerated to a point yes.

    No one is without sin, we were born into it. The Christian teaching is to be in the world but not "of" the world of sin.
    So as a similarity for the sake of discussion, if all the bars with adulterers, criminals and Christians were gunned down the same way, THAT would make it right???(they had it coming???NO). See it just isn't right no matter the clientele.

    When I invite others to Church many say I can't because I've been a hypocrite about bla bla bla. I always say no matter, we can always use one more, come anyway.

    It's about turning away from sin, encouraging others to consider the same and securing a spiritual legal standing with God. That is Christianity in a nutshell.
    Last edited by skypilot; June 15th, 2016 at 03:21 PM. Reason: Werner's post #90 on "in" vs "of" being reversed

  7. #86
    Has too much time on their hands

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skypilot View Post
    I never in my baseball career from little league thru semi pro ever had a runner fail to get out of my way on a double play at second. NOBODY will take a hardball between the eyes between 1st and 2nd base.......

    You're simply wrong, people close enough to "POKE" you will get away from a gun pointed/located right at/next to them ESPECIALLY if running from a guy with a gun slaughtering them.

    You're also wrong...cover and concealment are two totally different things. Cover is protective, concealment isn't always.
    Cover is good when you've been seen, concealment is good when you haven't been.
    You post long posts but not much fact, just a lot of noise and drumming.

    Joe can believe what he wants, whether you 4 like it or lump it. You 4 are mighty intolerant of Joe yet you want/expect Joe to be tolerant of your beliefs and have attacked him. Oh the SO TOLERANT showing the proper amount of Political Correctness and manufactured outrage..........

    SG the numbers are close but it was 1, then 3(not sure yet if 1 was included in that second gunfight) and then the balance(11 if my info is correct)were Swat in the last gunfight.

    Big difference when you both have seen one another and are actively trying to stop one another after the event has begun(1st cop) vs. slaughtering unarmed people and being shot from cover/concealment by a armed bar patron. Which is what Joe was trying to contribute.
    Skypilot,

    I am not incorrect in my assertion that people won't be bumping into JoePa as he attempts to shoot his bad guy. People are panicking and panicked people aren't the most reliable to predict. Once a person enters a flight or fight response, anything/anybody they deem a threat will be dealt with in some way which may not be the most logical way. So there is a real possibility JoePa could be bull rushed and knocked around while firing his handgun which now means he has put the entire group in more danger than it already is in (uncontrolled muzzle control while firing).

    I understand the difference between cover and concealment. I was not debating the difference between the two. In JoePa's scenario the bad guy has a very real possibility of seeing JoePa which at that point JoePa needs to find cover unless of course JoePa is far enough away (but then he would be starting to draw his firearm before he confirms there is a problem).

    As for the length of my posts, I didn't realize I was under a word count. As for not having much fact, my counterpoints are grounded in more reality than JoePa's "if someone was there and armed" fantasy.

    No one ever said JoePa doesn't have the right to think what he does. However, he has posted on an open forum and we can debate and refute what he believes. You say we have been intolerant. How so? Disagreeing with someone's point of view isn't intolerant, poking holes in a fantasy where an elderly man some how manages to stop a bad guy in a crowded place without causing collateral damage isn't being intolerant. Intolerance would mean we didn't want to hear what JoePa's position is and we want him to be banned and I have yet to see someone ask for that. Intolerant would be to tell JoePa to leave this website and never post again because his beliefs are wrong but no one has suggested that either. I have never forced my beliefs on JoePa. I don't think this is actually possible over the internet. As for attacking him, I provided actual logic to his fantasy in attempt to show him what his is proposing isn't as cut and dry as he makes it out to be.

    I wish this was a matter of simply letting people arm themselves anywhere but the reality is it is way more complicated. 49 people wouldn't have had to die and more injured if it were that simple. There are just as many things which could go wrong in a scenario of an armed civilian walking around public places as there would be of it going right.

    Dyth

  8. #87
    Has too much time on their hands

    User Info Menu

    Default

    I don't think I've ever waded into a religious debate on here before, but I'm home with my feet up with gout again and I have time to spare so why not I guess....

    It's funny how many come on here and preach tolerance of so many different things yet are completely intolerant of someone's religious beliefs. Personally, I'm not overly religious but I was raised Catholic and my kids go to a Catholic school. We don't push religion on them but wish for them to choose their own path based on what they learn from us and in school. I tend to keep my personal beliefs to myself for a good number of reasons, but the way I see it you anti-religious ranters are so blinded by your absolute hatred of religion that you can't see that you're nothing more than an extremist on the opposite end of the spectrum. I think Hunter John said it well earlier, insulting one's personal beliefs is no better than forcing your views on someone.

    Hypocrisy runs out of control around here sometimes, and some folks type a lot faster than they think.
    "where a man feels at home, outside of where he's born, is where he's meant to go"
    ​- Ernest Hemingway

  9. #88
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dythbringer View Post
    Skypilot,

    I am not incorrect in my assertion that people won't be bumping into JoePa as he attempts to shoot his bad guy. People are panicking and panicked people aren't the most reliable to predict. Once a person enters a flight or fight response, anything/anybody they deem a threat will be dealt with in some way which may not be the most logical way. So there is a real possibility JoePa could be bull rushed and knocked around while firing his handgun which now means he has put the entire group in more danger than it already is in (uncontrolled muzzle control while firing).

    I understand the difference between cover and concealment. I was not debating the difference between the two. In JoePa's scenario the bad guy has a very real possibility of seeing JoePa which at that point JoePa needs to find cover unless of course JoePa is far enough away (but then he would be starting to draw his firearm before he confirms there is a problem).

    As for the length of my posts, I didn't realize I was under a word count. As for not having much fact, my counterpoints are grounded in more reality than JoePa's "if someone was there and armed" fantasy.

    No one ever said JoePa doesn't have the right to think what he does. However, he has posted on an open forum and we can debate and refute what he believes. You say we have been intolerant. How so? Disagreeing with someone's point of view isn't intolerant, poking holes in a fantasy where an elderly man some how manages to stop a bad guy in a crowded place without causing collateral damage isn't being intolerant. Intolerance would mean we didn't want to hear what JoePa's position is and we want him to be banned and I have yet to see someone ask for that. Intolerant would be to tell JoePa to leave this website and never post again because his beliefs are wrong but no one has suggested that either. I have never forced my beliefs on JoePa. I don't think this is actually possible over the internet. As for attacking him, I provided actual logic to his fantasy in attempt to show him what his is proposing isn't as cut and dry as he makes it out to be.

    I wish this was a matter of simply letting people arm themselves anywhere but the reality is it is way more complicated. 49 people wouldn't have had to die and more injured if it were that simple. There are just as many things which could go wrong in a scenario of an armed civilian walking around public places as there would be of it going right.

    Dyth
    I believe he posted that he would draw, and fire from behind an object, possibly an overturned table if I remember. Regardless, no one is going to flee into an overturned table or a obstruction in their way. They will go around it. They will also get out of the way of a pointed gun in their immediate proximity, one way or the other.

    Once this slaughter was initiated it is no longer a zero sum game. People are already dead and people are going to be hurt and die whether the terrorist shoots them or the Tactical team shoots them. That is the reality of the possibilities.

    The possibility of a few(or one) out of 350 people having a gun and getting or having an opportunity to use it a some point in time would be a definite advantage. Much better than no chance, if for no other reason than to break the OODA and cause the shooter to go defensive.

    I also can appreciate the data point on his admitted age but that isn't really the focus is it. The focus is on a firearm in the hands of a person for use during an active shooting.

    The shooter recognized the uniformed cop, which wasn't an advantage, nor where the other cops that arrived and engaged, but once he got into the area and began the carnage a patron firearm would have been an advantage.

  10. #89
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cantcatchacold View Post
    Thanks for posting that I was unaware of that in the New Testament. No need to commend just engaging in the discussion. Like I said not trying to start a religious debate. One of the things that I found most troubling about the shooting was the statements on social media about how " the sinner gays had it coming ". But I did find this gem on Facebook

    It forbids people of God to mark their bodies with the symbols of the other gods. Many early Christians mark small tattoos on their wrist to symbolize the markings of the nails. Although a fish was a more common symbol.. so no tattoos are not forbidden, just marking that symbolize the worship of other gods..

    The priests( of old and new testament) and even leaders in the New Testament have a few EXTRA rules.
    Last edited by Snowwalker; June 15th, 2016 at 01:47 PM.
    Take the warning labels off. Darwin will solve the problem.

  11. #90
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skypilot View Post
    It is a reference to Egypt. Don't be like the Egyptians...Do not shave your head nor square your beard....a characterization of Egyptians. More of a Godly advice for the fleeing Israelites not to become like Egypt.

    Levites were a definite sect of Israel (from the tribe of Levi one of the twelve original tribes of Israel)whom only the "preachers"/ Priest could come from in that early day and time.

    It is a sad situation when an act like Orlando happens. It is even a more sad day when the "had it coming" crowd arrives, yet it speaks to the misconception that homosexuality is accepted, it simply isn't in America. Tolerated to a point yes.

    No one is without sin, we were born into it. The Christian teaching is to be of the world but not "in" the world of sin.
    So as a similarity for the sake of discussion, if all the bars with adulterers, criminals and Christians were gunned down the same way, THAT would make it right???(they had it coming???NO). See it just isn't right no matter the clientele.

    When I invite others to Church many say I can't because I've been a hypocrite about bla bla bla. I always say no matter, we can always use one more, come anyway.

    It's about turning away from sin, encouraging others to consider the same and securing a spiritual legal standing with God. That is Christianity in a nutshell.
    The Christian teaching is to be of the world but not "in" the world of sin.

    You have "in" and "of" reversed.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •