"God bless our troops"

Originally posted by knightmeister
Is there no end to your literalism or have you any understanding of language at all? Has it not occurred to you that the word "fear" can be used in different ways (eg- "God fearing folk" where fear is meant to imply respect for God ). The word fearful in revelation probably relates to those who are fearful of God (ie terrified) due to the impending kno you. You need to get some English lessons and start applying your brain to these things.

Fear implies respect? Umm...no. Except respect for power maybe. Not respect for the person in general.

Do you fear your mother? How about your kids? Gandhi? MLK? Mother Theresa? The kid who gives one of his kidneys to his dying father?

Is the Hebrew word different in the two cases? Can you give a logical argument for why fearful is meant in two different ways using an analysis of the language?

Or are you simply saying "you're wrong you're wrong lalalalalallalala"

Originally posted by duecer
I'm sure that the German in WWII were praying oGod to bless their troops, and that before our invasion, the Iraqi's were praying to Allah to bless their troops. Why are ours so special that God should bless them above all others. I ask God to bless all equally, and pray for peace. I believe in Christian non-violence, Jesus was a pacifist.

The Nazis were into ancient northern European pagan religion more than Christianity IMO.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
The Nazis were into ancient northern European pagan religion more than Christianity IMO.

wrong, the facist used religion to support their devine right to rule the world

edit: much like modern American fascist George W. Bush

Originally posted by duecer
wrong, the facist used religion to support their devine right to rule the world

edit: much like modern American fascist George W. Bush

I almost never agree with President Bush, but I wouldn't call him a fascist. At least he's trying to stop barbaric practices like partial-birth abortions. I'm opposed to the occupation of Iraq, but I think that attempting to establish a democracy in the otherwise backward Middlle-East is a noble goal.

(Sorry, this should have gone in another forum. I just don't like my president being referred to as a fascist.)

Originally posted by gaychessplayer
I almost never agree with President Bush, but I wouldn't call him a fascist. At least he's trying to stop barbaric practices like partial-birth abortions. I'm opposed to the occupation of Iraq, but I think that attempting to establish a democracy in the otherwise backward Middlle-East is a noble goal.

(Sorry, this should have gone in another forum. I just don't like my president being referred to as a fascist.)

partial birth abortion is not the barbaric practice that it is made out to be. Have a conversation with a doctor about what it really is before you condemn it completely. In some instances it is a necessary medical option. My wife and I are pro-life in our personal relationship (i.e. any child we concieve we will carry to term unless medically unsound), and pro-choice in our public beliefs. A narrow view cannot account for the many varied instances where abortion is considered. It should safe, legal, and extremely rare.

As for W. he is in fact a fascist by the strictist definition of the word

Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests subordinate to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of national unity, usually based on, but not limited to, ethnic, cultural, or racial attributes. Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: nationalism, authoritarianism, statism, militarism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, collectivism, corporatism, populism, and opposition to economic and political liberalism.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

(thanks to wikipedia) and I will discontinue further political talk on this thread.

Originally posted by duecer
partial birth abortion is not the barbaric practice that it is made out to be. Have a conversation with a doctor about what it really is before you condemn it completely. In some instances it is a necessary medical option. My wife and I are pro-life in our personal relationship (i.e. any child we concieve we will carry to term unless medically unsound), and ...[text shortened]... [4][5][6]

(thanks to wikipedia) and I will discontinue further political talk on this thread.

Why don't we continue this on another forum? I do have one question, though: How can we make abortion "safe" for the baby?

Originally posted by gaychessplayer
Why don't we continue this on another forum? I do have one question, though: How can we make abortion "safe" for the baby?

What baby? You mean the fetus? It's not a baby yet.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Fear implies respect? Umm...no. Except respect for power maybe. Not respect for the person in general.

Do you fear your mother? How about your kids? Gandhi? MLK? Mother Theresa? The kid who gives one of his kidneys to his dying father?

Is the Hebrew word different in the two cases? Can you give a logical argument for why fearful is mean ...[text shortened]... s of the language?

Or are you simply saying "you're wrong you're wrong lalalalalallalala"

Can you give a logical argument for why fearful is meant in two different ways using an analysis of the language? THOUSAND

I don't have to . Revelations used the word "fearful" Luke did not. You can't even read your own posts carefully enough to put together a coherent argument!!

Fearful and fear are two different words the last time I looked. Similar but different . But hey ho don't worry yourself with such linguistic subtlties if it doesn't help you grind your axe.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Fear implies respect? Umm...no. Except respect for power maybe. Not respect for the person in general.

Do you fear your mother? How about your kids? Gandhi? MLK? Mother Theresa? The kid who gives one of his kidneys to his dying father?

Is the Hebrew word different in the two cases? Can you give a logical argument for why fearful is mean ...[text shortened]... s of the language?

Or are you simply saying "you're wrong you're wrong lalalalalallalala"

Or are you simply saying "you're wrong you're wrong lalalalalallalala" THOUSAND

You teach what you most need to learn.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Can you give a logical argument for why fearful is meant in two different ways using an analysis of the language? THOUSAND

I don't have to . Revelations used the word "fearful" Luke did not. You can't even read your own posts carefully enough to put together a coherent argument!!

Fearful and fear are two different words the last time I looked. ...[text shortened]... don't worry yourself with such linguistic subtlties if it doesn't help you grind your axe.

OK.

1) In Luke 12:5, Jesus commands us to fear God.

2) Those who fear are fearful.

3) In Revelation 21:8 it is written that the fearful will burn in Hell.

4) Therefore, if those two books are correct, Jesus commands us to go to Hell.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
OK.

1) In Luke 12:5, Jesus commands us to fear God.

2) Those who fear are fearful.

3) In Revelation 21:8 it is written that the fearful will burn in Hell.

4) Therefore, if those two books are correct, Jesus commands us to go to Hell.

2) Those who fear are fearful. THOUSAND

FALSE ---A moments thought would have made you realise that one can experience fear or have an element of fear within them with out being fearful. For example , I can feel fear or be afraid of going to the dentists and experience fear in the form of mild anxiety but I am not full of fear (fearful) because I can also reassure myself of his professionalism. To be fearful is one or two steps away from being terrified. I am not fearful of my dentist because although the thought of going brings about fear and anxiety I am far from being full of fear.

But hey , here I am doing your thinking for you again. Try analysing your own posts first before actually posting them. You could write them in Word first and then take a deep breath and read it as if someone else wrote it. You might see what is blatently obvious to many on this forum.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
OK.

1) In Luke 12:5, Jesus commands us to fear God.

2) Those who fear are fearful.

3) In Revelation 21:8 it is written that the fearful will burn in Hell.

4) Therefore, if those two books are correct, Jesus commands us to go to Hell.

4) Therefore, if those two books are correct, Jesus commands us to go to Hell. THOUSAND

What a silly game! Even if one gets as far as 4) in your fantasy then one immediately has to ask oneself "is this concept consistent with the teachings of christ and what he saw as his mission?" The answer is obviously no , therefore that leads one to suspect that 4) and the conclusions that lead up to it must be false somewhere because it's not consistent.

For example , if two verses were combined to somehow show that Jesus was an atheist one would immeditely conclude that this cannot be right and there must have been some mistake......oh no....don't go and do it now! Me and my big mouth....here we go! I can almost here those pages turning already as thousand prepares for his next neat trick.....🙄

Originally posted by knightmeister
2) Those who fear are fearful. THOUSAND

FALSE ---A moments thought would have made you realise that one can experience fear or have an element of fear within them with out being fearful. For example , I can feel fear or be afraid of going to the dentists and experience fear in the form of mild anxiety but I am not full of fear (fearful) because I ca ...[text shortened]... d it as if someone else wrote it. You might see what is blatently obvious to many on this forum.

The Hebrew word which is here translated as "fearful" is deilov, which means timid, cowardly and fearful.

Timid and cowardly is not terrified. Nice try though you pompous douche.

http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/strongs/ref/?stgh=greek&stnm=1169

Originally posted by knightmeister
4) Therefore, if those two books are correct, Jesus commands us to go to Hell. THOUSAND

What a silly game! Even if one gets as far as 4) in your fantasy then one immediately has to ask oneself "is this concept consistent with the teachings of christ and what he saw as his mission?" The answer is obviously no , therefore that leads one to suspect tha ...[text shortened]... almost here those pages turning already as thousand prepares for his next neat trick.....🙄

You have a prejudice about what Christianity is about which is not based on scripture and you prioritize that prejudice over what the Bible says.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
The Hebrew word which is here translated as "fearful" is deilov, which means timid, cowardly and fearful.

Timid and cowardly is not terrified. Nice try though you pompous douche.

http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/strongs/ref/?stgh=greek&stnm=1169

The Hebrew word which is here translated as "fearful" is deilov, which means timid, cowardly and fearful.

Timid and cowardly is not terrified. Nice try though you pompous douche. THOUSAND

....Ok , now could you find the hebrew word (for fear) in Luke by any chance?

You seem to think you have proved something or other (I know not what). I did not say that fearful and terrified were the same word or concept. You seem to be very good at looking up the hebrew words so maybe if you do that part for the Luke quote you gave and leave the thinking to me ?