Trump’s “Christian” supporters do not follow a central message of Jesus (1 Viewer)

[watsup]

No, Scripture declared it. And you cannot show in Scripture where it says otherwise. You like to present yourself as some 'expositor' of Scripture. But you're not. You're a phony. In more ways than one.

Lees

Still nothing but insult rather than evidence of your claims. Nowhere in the Matthew 24 or 25 that you presented does it mention the Gentiles or the Jews that you keep talking about. You have nothing but empty claims, over and over, that you can’t show as true. So who’s really the phony?

 

[watsup]

Pathetic. You have been proved wrong about (Ex. 21:22-23). So you resort to slavery in hopes to demonize me. So typical.

God instituted slavery. You hate slavery, but then you hate God. Big surprise.

My moral compass is with God , not with you and your ilk.

Lees

Why on Earth would God institute slavery? Did God approve of the slavery that occurred in the United States prior to the Civil War, or was that different?

 

[Lees]

Still nothing but insult rather than evidence of your claims. Nowhere in the Matthew 24 or 25 that you presented does it mention the Gentiles or the Jews that you keep talking about. You have nothing but empty claims, over and over, that you can’t show as true. So who’s really the phony?

(Matt. 25:31-32)

You are the phony. As I have showed this time and time again.

Lees

 

[Lees]

Why on Earth would God institute slavery? Did God approve of the slavery that occurred in the United States prior to the Civil War, or was that different?

The question is, 'did God institute slavery'. As to why, you can't get the first question answered right so how can you hope to deal with the second. Yet you pretend to be some sort of Bible expositor. What a laugh.

Lees

 

[watsup]

(Matt. 25:31-32)

You are the phony. As I have showed this time and time again.

Lees

“31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:”

Ans still no mention of Gentiles or Jews. In this case, the sheep were the ones who:
“35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.”

And the goats were those who:
“42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.”

“40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”

That’s what it was about, whether the person being judged was kind to “the least of these”. Had nothing at sll to do with whether the person was Gentile or Jew or Christian, only whether they took care of the “least of these”.

And this is why my OP is totally correct, because Trump is TAKING AWAY food and other support from “the least of these” and his Christian cult supporters are apparently okay with it since they do not complain about it. People is Sudan are starving right now because of Trump and he is also looking away while Netanyahu starves thousands of Palestinian children to death. And Jesus weeps. So should you if you want to be in the good graces of your God, per Matthew 25.

 

[watsup]

The question is, 'did God institute slavery'. As to why, you can't get the first question answered right so how can you hope to deal with the second. Yet you pretend to be some sort of Bible expositor. What a laugh.

Lees

You are the one who is not dealing, who is afraid to answer the question. Did God approve of the slavery in the United States prior to thr Civil War or not? It’s a simple and straightforward question. Why are you so afraid to answer if?

 

[Michael Cole]

That's right, no shit.

No that is what the Scripture says.

Harm to the woman is not the issue, sherlock.

Tooth for tooth. A fetus doesn't have teeth. Sherlock, indeed.

The death of the fetus is the issue. Was it with or without mischief? If the fetus is dead, as you say, then it was alive before.

Oh my god, dude. You've fallen off the silly train.

You're not making one bit of sense.

A life for a life.

Life of the woman, Watson. Life for life, TOOTH FOR TOOTH. A fetus doesn't have teeth. And THE FETUS IS ALREADY DEAD.

You're babbling nonsense. You're stuck.

The passage proves God sees born humans differently than the unborn. That it doesn't line up with your false dogma is a you problem. So sad.

I'll await your repeated insistance that an unborn fetus has teeth.

 

[Lees]

“31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:”

Ans still no mention of Gentiles or Jews. In this case, the sheep were the ones who:
“35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.”

And the goats were those who:
“42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.”

“40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”

That’s what it was about, whether the person being judged was kind to “the least of these”. Had nothing at sll to do with whether the person was Gentile or Jew or Christian, only whether they took care of the “least of these”.

And this is why my OP is totally correct, because Trump is TAKING AWAY food and other support from “the least of these” and his Christian cult supporters are apparently okay with it since they do not complain about it. People is Sudan are starving right now because of Trump and he is also looking away while Netanyahu starves thousands of Palestinian children to death. And Jesus weeps. So should you if you want to be in the good graces of your God, per Matthew 25.

(Matt. 25:31) is the 2nd coming of Christ.

The 'nations' are the Gentile nations in contrast to Israel and the Jews. This is why I presented (Matt. 24) with (Matt. 25) Jesus had been talking to the Jews. He declared their house desolate. (Matt. 23:37-38) He prophecied of their destruction of the temple. (Matt. 24:2) Upon which the disciples asked the questions of the signs of His coming and the end of the world. (Matt. 24:3)

The nations always refer to the Gentile nations as opposed to the nation of Israel.

(Matt. 25:31-33) is clear that this judgement is about nations. Sheep nations and goat nations. And it's judgement is based upon how that nation reacted toward the Jews during the Tribulation period.

This judgement is taking place after the 2nd coming of Christ. The Church, the Christians, are not present or judged at this judgement.

This is why your OP is incorrect. It has nothing to do with Palestinians. And Jesus isn't weeping for the Palestinians. What a joke.

Lees

 

[Lees]

Tooth for tooth. A fetus doesn't have teeth. Sherlock, indeed.


Oh my god, dude. You've fallen off the silly train.

You're not making one bit of sense.


Life of the woman, Watson. Life for life, TOOTH FOR TOOTH. A fetus doesn't have teeth. And THE FETUS IS ALREADY DEAD.

You're babbling nonsense. You're stuck.

The passage proves God sees born humans differently than the unborn. That it doesn't line up with your false dogma is a you problem. So sad.

I'll await your repeated insistance that an unborn fetus has teeth.

A new born babe doesn't have teeth either. Still it's alive.

The passage in (Ex. 21:22-23) is not about the woman. It is about the death of the fetus.

And depending on the intent of the one responsible for the death of that fetus will depend on the final judgement. Payment, or death. 'A life for a life'.

Lees

 

[Michael Cole]

A new born babe doesn't have teeth either. Still it's alive.

We're not talking about a newborn. You're really lost, and logic and language fail you.

The passage in (Ex. 21:22-23) is not about the woman. It is about the death of the fetus.

Yes, because of a miscarriage. The fetus is dead. That's known. What's unknown is harm to the woman. If no harm comes to the woman, the man must pay for loss of the fetus. It's property. If harm comes to the woman, then eye for eye, tooth for tooth and life for life are the punishment.

It's all quite clear.

And depending on the intent of the one responsible for the death of that fetus will depend on the final judgement. Payment, or death. 'A life for a life'.

There you go changing scripture to fit your false dogma. Intent isn't written. Intent is irrelevant. What's relevant is harm to the woman.

Give it up. You're flailing.

 

[Lees]

We're not talking about a newborn. You're really lost, and logic and language fail you.


Yes, because of a miscarriage. The fetus is dead. That's known. What's unknown is harm to the woman. If no harm comes to the woman, the man must pay for loss of the fetus. It's property. If harm comes to the woman, then eye for eye, tooth for tooth and life for life are the punishment.

It's all quite clear.


There you go changing scripture to fit your false dogma. Intent isn't written. Intent is irrelevant. What's relevant is harm to the woman.

Give it up. You're flailing.

The death of the fetus is the subject.

Two determiniations are to be made. Was it dead because of accident or of intent. Thus the judgements are given. Nothing is said of the woman's condition. The determination is based upon the fetus's death.

Lees

 

[Michael Cole]

The death of the fetus is the subject.

No, the death of the fetus is a given. You've been arguing like a premature birth in antiquity had a chance at survival. That's nonsense. The fetus is dead. Husbands who lost an unborn child lost a future asset. You are familiar with agricultural societies? The husband who lost an unborn in this manner demanded to be paid. That's the end of that.

I'm done. You either are so lost in your dogma - the political opinion that God prohibits abortion - or you're arguing in bad faith.

Better luck to ya.

Two determiniations are to be made. Was it dead because of accident or of intent. Thus the judgements are given. Nothing is said of the woman's condition. The determination is based upon the fetus's death.

Lees

 

[Lees]

No, the death of the fetus is a given. You've been arguing like a premature birth in antiquity had a chance at survival. That's nonsense. The fetus is dead. Husbands who lost an unborn child lost a future asset. You are familiar with agricultural societies? The husband who lost an unborn in this manner demanded to be paid. That's the end of that.

I'm done. You either are so lost in your dogma - the political opinion that God prohibits abortion - or you're arguing in bad faith.

Better luck to ya.

Well, it's a given because it's the subject. And it's not about just a premature birth. It's about a premature birth due to violence.

If there was no intent to harm the fetus, then payment only was required. It there was intent to harm the fetus, then death is required. A life for a life. The fetus, in God's eyes is alive. And He should know.

Lees

 

[Michael Cole]

Well, it's a given because it's the subject. And it's not about just a premature birth. It's about a premature birth due to violence.

If there was no intent to harm the fetus, then payment only was required. It there was intent to harm the fetus, then death is required. A life for a life. The fetus, in God's eyes is alive. And He should know.

Lees

Fascinating. I'll keep a fetus's eye out for you. And a fetus tooth.

You're babbling, man. Tooth for tooth. The woman, not the fetus. Life for life refers to the woman.

You're not making any sense, and you just can't stop. Have a local news item.

Race proceeds help fund Camp RennerVation

The 5K and 3K event was followed by a family block party and resource fair.

www.kolotv.com

Now I'm done.

 

[watsup]

(Matt. 25:31) is the 2nd coming of Christ.

The 'nations' are the Gentile nations in contrast to Israel and the Jews. This is why I presented (Matt. 24) with (Matt. 25) Jesus had been talking to the Jews. He declared their house desolate. (Matt. 23:37-38) He prophecied of their destruction of the temple. (Matt. 24:2) Upon which the disciples asked the questions of the signs of His coming and the end of the world. (Matt. 24:3)

The nations always refer to the Gentile nations as opposed to the nation of Israel.

(Matt. 25:31-33) is clear that this judgement is about nations. Sheep nations and goat nations. And it's judgement is based upon how that nation reacted toward the Jews during the Tribulation period.

This judgement is taking place after the 2nd coming of Christ. The Church, the Christians, are not present or judged at this judgement.

This is why your OP is incorrect. It has nothing to do with Palestinians. And Jesus isn't weeping for the Palestinians. What a joke.

Lees

Wrong interpretation. Nowhere are Gentiles or Jews noted. And these are not nations. It is quite clear that it refers to individual persons. And even if it is nations, then Israel is a goat nation because it is starving people to death. And are you saying that Jesus would be okay with Netanyahu starving thousands of Palestinian children to death? Are you sure of that. Are you okay with it? Trump apparently is. It’s okay with “the King” to starve children to death? Are they not “the least of these”?

And did God approve of the slavery of blacks that occurred before the Civil War? Why are you avoiding that question?

 

[devildavid]

He was speaking to all of us, including religious and Government officials. The injunction is to help those in need.

He didn't limit such assistance to "the individual".

True. There were no limits placed on how people should help others, either individually or collectively. The church itself is a collective that is instructed to do good as an organization.

 

[Lees]

Wrong interpretation. Nowhere are Gentiles or Jews noted. And these are not nations. It is quite clear that it refers to individual persons. And even if it is nations, then Israel is a goat nation because it is starving people to death. And are you saying that Jesus would be okay with Netanyahu starving thousands of Palestinian children to death? Are you sure of that. Are you okay with it? Trump apparently is. It’s okay with “the King” to starve children to death? Are they not “the least of these”?

And did God approve of the slavery of blacks that occurred before the Civil War? Why are you avoiding that question?

The Second Coming: (Matt. 25:31) "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:". After His return all the nations are gathered before Him. "(Matt. 25:32) "And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats. And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left."

The term 'Gentiles' or 'Nations' when used in the Bible speaks to the nations other than Israel, other than Jewish. 'goy' in the Old Testament and 'ethnos' in the New Testament.

This judgement of the sheep and goat nations is after the Second Coming of Christ. Israel and the world have just come through the Tribulation period on earth where tremendous destruction and persecution of the Jews have taken place. Jesus warned His disciples, who were Jews, that when they see the abomination of desolation stand in the Temple, as Daniel predicted they need to flee immediately. (Matt. 24:15-20) Because: "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

And then after that tribulation returns Jesus Christ. (Matt. 24:29) "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."

Thus, the judgement of the nations, (Matt. 25:32) occurs after Christ's 2nd Coming. It has nothing to do with Christians, as you are trying to make it. It has to do with the way the Gentile nations treated the Jews during that Tribulation period.

Again, your use of (Matt. 25:40-46) is in the wrong time period and directed at the wrong people.

God doesn't disapprove of slavery. There are always good and bad slave owners as there are good and bad employers. I'm not avoiding the question. I have told you that God instituted slavery.

Lees

 

[Lees]

Fascinating. I'll keep a fetus's eye out for you. And a fetus tooth.

You're babbling, man. Tooth for tooth. The woman, not the fetus. Life for life refers to the woman.

You're not making any sense, and you just can't stop. Have a local news item.

Race proceeds help fund Camp RennerVation

The 5K and 3K event was followed by a family block party and resource fair.

www.kolotv.com

Now I'm done.

'A life for a life'

Lees

 

[Revelation]

The Second Coming: (Matt. 25:31) "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:". After His return all the nations are gathered before Him. "(Matt. 25:32) "And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats. And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left."

The term 'Gentiles' or 'Nations' when used in the Bible speaks to the nations other than Israel, other than Jewish. 'goy' in the Old Testament and 'ethnos' in the New Testament.

This judgement of the sheep and goat nations is after the Second Coming of Christ. Israel and the world have just come through the Tribulation period on earth where tremendous destruction and persecution of the Jews have taken place. Jesus warned His disciples, who were Jews, that when they see the abomination of desolation stand in the Temple, as Daniel predicted they need to flee immediately. (Matt. 24:15-20) Because: "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

And then after that tribulation returns Jesus Christ. (Matt. 24:29) "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."

Thus, the judgement of the nations, (Matt. 25:32) occurs after Christ's 2nd Coming. It has nothing to do with Christians, as you are trying to make it. It has to do with the way the Gentile nations treated the Jews during that Tribulation period.

Again, your use of (Matt. 25:40-46) is in the wrong time period and directed at the wrong people.

God doesn't disapprove of slavery. There are always good and bad slave owners as there are good and bad employers. I'm not avoiding the question. I have told you that God instituted slavery.

Lees

thanks Lee

you have blessed this forum with some Bible Prophecy on a much deeeeeper level than i attempt here.

we need more of this to kind of offset my Cartoon version of things. and yes i do have Bible Prophecy cartoons but avoid them because i don't think watsup and crew are ready for that.

but you are the Canary in the Coal Mine, hopefully this Burst of Light may be the way Forward.

thanks. i may post this on our Prophecy thread for 'one stop shopping' of those cruising through.


blessings forever till the end.


.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

No, you need to reread. The opening post is a perfect example of one pretending to be an expositor of Scripture, but who doesn't believe a word of it. He missed it completely. Just as you do.
The Holy Spirit is necessary to learn and come to the Truth as revealed in the Scriptures.
(1 Cor. 2:4-12) "And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to naught: But we speak the wisdom of God in mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory...But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit, for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God....Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God."
That is the testimony of Scripture, the Bible. Still waiting for you to show your claim in the Lord of the Rings that one must believe it to understand it.
Actually you are a perfect example of the necessity of the Holy Spirit to come to Truth as revealed in the Bible.
The Holy Spirit is never 'my power'. It is the power of the Holy Spirit that dwells in me.
Lees

Glad you're all for mystical revelation.

fwiw,
Mystical revelation is something quite different than exegesis.

Wherever your believe your psychic powers comer from, they're janky and borked

 

[Michael Cole]

'A life for a life'

I see you've reduced your argument to one of admitting failure without using the words.

"You, Mr. Lees, are wrong."

Try it. God will love you for it.

 

[Fledermaus]

I'm just showing you what it says, and how wrong your attempt is in trying to make it about abortion. And in the process it shows the feus is alive. "a life for a life" (Ex. 21:23) Sort of backfired on you....didn't it?

I'm saying that God instituted slavery. You asked so I answered. So slavery as instituted by God is right.

Lees

Which God?

Greeks had slaves. Romans (pre Christianity) had slaves. As did the Mayans, the Inca, Egyptians, etc.

 

[Hatuey]

Now that we have posters civily advocating for the righteousness of slavery, I wonder how long before Debate Politics allows for people to civily defend their right to marry and have sex with underaged girls based on religious scripture.

 

[Fledermaus]

thanks Lee

you have blessed this forum with some Bible Prophecy on a much deeeeeper level than i attempt here.

we need more of this to kind of offset my Cartoon version of things. and yes i do have Bible Prophecy cartoons but avoid them because i don't think watsup and crew are ready for that.

but you are the Canary in the Coal Mine, hopefully this Burst of Light may be the way Forward.

thanks. i may post this on our Prophecy thread for 'one stop shopping' of those cruising through.


blessings forever till the end.


.

You are thanking a slavery defender.

 

[Revelation]

You are thanking a slavery defender.

thanks Fled. (note i thank Fled all the time and others that i don't agree with.)

why?

if someone makes a Good Argument/Debate, they should be thanked. Lee is excellent on the Bible, and did excellent on Bible Prophecy without going over yur heads.

Lee is in the Trenches here everyday, clearly giving The Gospel and hope to the masses of unbelievers, atheists, cultists, and whateverists.

i like that.

he Reaches where my Cartoons cannot go, although they basically are saying the same thing and the same old Black Book: the Bible

blessings till the End, coming since and before April 8.



...this should be the Official Atheist Cartoon of DP. this guy is all set, until he is not.

looks like an american with a Vette; the Pipe is a nice touch too.


.