Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

The real question is, why is TS so deeply invested in attempting to attack and destroy the personal faith of others? He is to atheism what the new Twitter poster is to homosexuality. There's no topic into which each won't absurdly try and shoehorn their favorite obsession.

If you disagree with the inner thoughts/beliefs of others, which don't affect you in any way, and if those people have stated they aren't interested in your breathless criticism, particularly on topics unrelated to Christianity, the civil thing to do is agree to disagree.

---

I generally respond when someone posts an absurd assertion about religion. This particular thread is about a group of Presbyterian Christians and what they believe/teach. Surely, you're not saying there is no room for expressing differing opinions on this thread. Isn't this discussion civil disagreement, or are you only wanting civil agreement? Agreeing to disagree yields silence.

---

Lol! If two people are discussing how Eratosthenes confirmed the earth's spherical shape and calculated its circumference at 40,030 km, but debated the actual calculable circumference with sticks, you would chime in that the earth was flat and insist that anyone who believes the earth is round without having been in space is delusional.

We were discussing two views of a shared belief. Your incessantly piping up that you don't believe it and no one else should either isn't a legitimate part of that discussion. I'm sorry you can't see that.

---

Um, that would be more like I would follow the science, and you would insist in faith the earth is flat, regardless of the evidence.

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

The real question is, why is TS so deeply invested in attempting to attack and destroy the personal faith of others? He is to atheism what the new Twitter poster is to homosexuality. There's no topic into which each won't absurdly try and shoehorn their favorite obsession.

If you disagree with the inner thoughts/beliefs of others, which don't affect you in any way, and if those people have stated they aren't interested in your breathless criticism, particularly on topics unrelated to Christianity, the civil thing to do is agree to disagree.

---

I generally respond when someone posts an absurd assertion about religion. This particular thread is about a group of Presbyterian Christians and what they believe/teach. Surely, you're not saying there is no room for expressing differing opinions on this thread. Isn't this discussion civil disagreement, or are you only wanting civil agreement? Agreeing to disagree yields silence.

---

Lol! If two people are discussing how Eratosthenes confirmed the earth's spherical shape and calculated its circumference at 40,030 km, but debated the actual calculable circumference with sticks, you would chime in that the earth was flat and insist that anyone who believes the earth is round without having been in space is delusional.

We were discussing two views of a shared belief. Your incessantly piping up that you don't believe it and no one else should either isn't a legitimate part of that discussion. I'm sorry you can't see that.

---

Um, that would be more like I would follow the science, and you would insist in faith the earth is flat, regardless of the evidence.

---

More like TS will throw out a rant, pretend his opinion counts as fact because he makes a statement saying his opinion is backed by 'science'.

Real scientists sigh and go back to work, hoping no one is fooled by TS' quackery.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

The real question is, why is TS so deeply invested in attempting to attack and destroy the personal faith of others? He is to atheism what the new Twitter poster is to homosexuality. There's no topic into which each won't absurdly try and shoehorn their favorite obsession.

If you disagree with the inner thoughts/beliefs of others, which don't affect you in any way, and if those people have stated they aren't interested in your breathless criticism, particularly on topics unrelated to Christianity, the civil thing to do is agree to disagree.

---

I generally respond when someone posts an absurd assertion about religion. This particular thread is about a group of Presbyterian Christians and what they believe/teach. Surely, you're not saying there is no room for expressing differing opinions on this thread. Isn't this discussion civil disagreement, or are you only wanting civil agreement? Agreeing to disagree yields silence.

---

Lol! If two people are discussing how Eratosthenes confirmed the earth's spherical shape and calculated its circumference at 40,030 km, but debated the actual calculable circumference with sticks, you would chime in that the earth was flat and insist that anyone who believes the earth is round without having been in space is delusional.

We were discussing two views of a shared belief. Your incessantly piping up that you don't believe it and no one else should either isn't a legitimate part of that discussion. I'm sorry you can't see that.

---

Um, that would be more like I would follow the science, and you would insist in faith the earth is flat, regardless of the evidence.

---

More like TS will throw out a rant, pretend his opinion counts as fact because he makes a statement saying his opinion is backed by 'science'.

Real scientists sigh and go back to work, hoping no one is fooled by TS' quackery.

---

Ad hom sticks and stones are all you have.

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

The real question is, why is TS so deeply invested in attempting to attack and destroy the personal faith of others? He is to atheism what the new Twitter poster is to homosexuality. There's no topic into which each won't absurdly try and shoehorn their favorite obsession.

If you disagree with the inner thoughts/beliefs of others, which don't affect you in any way, and if those people have stated they aren't interested in your breathless criticism, particularly on topics unrelated to Christianity, the civil thing to do is agree to disagree.

---

I generally respond when someone posts an absurd assertion about religion. This particular thread is about a group of Presbyterian Christians and what they believe/teach. Surely, you're not saying there is no room for expressing differing opinions on this thread. Isn't this discussion civil disagreement, or are you only wanting civil agreement? Agreeing to disagree yields silence.

---

Lol! If two people are discussing how Eratosthenes confirmed the earth's spherical shape and calculated its circumference at 40,030 km, but debated the actual calculable circumference with sticks, you would chime in that the earth was flat and insist that anyone who believes the earth is round without having been in space is delusional.

We were discussing two views of a shared belief. Your incessantly piping up that you don't believe it and no one else should either isn't a legitimate part of that discussion. I'm sorry you can't see that.

---

Um, that would be more like I would follow the science, and you would insist in faith the earth is flat, regardless of the evidence.

---

More like TS will throw out a rant, pretend his opinion counts as fact because he makes a statement saying his opinion is backed by 'science'.

Real scientists sigh and go back to work, hoping no one is fooled by TS' quackery.

---

Ad hom sticks and stones are all you have.

---

Not true. And you have never yet proven any of your claims, as real scientists would do.

I certainly understand why you would be upset when someone points that out.

Nothing like watching an atheist and heretic debate religion... this should be good!

ShooterTX

I am not sure of TS's faith, however, he does does do an excellent job of challenging your concept of God. I stand with him in that challenge to your concept.

But let's clear I challenge your concept. I am not challenging God existence as presence in this world and my life. God's love and justice are real and will win out.
A concept is only a concept. Existence is an entirely grade of reality. Shooter, you and I both believe in God's existence. As you long as you serve your concept of God with love and justice I am ok with it.

TS, to my knowledge, has not described his concept of God. If he has one I would like to hear it.

Quote:

---

Oldbear83 said:
More like TS will throw out a rant, pretend his opinion counts as fact because he makes a statement saying his opinion is backed by 'science'.

Real scientists sigh and go back to work, hoping no one is fooled by TS' quackery.

---

TS said "Ad hom sticks and stones are all you have."

I could listen to oldbear if he would stop the personal attacks. Waco47

Waco1947 said:

---

Nothing like watching an atheist and heretic debate religion... this should be good!

ShooterTX

I am not sure of TS's faith, however, he does does do an excellent job of challenging your concept of God. I stand with him in that challenge to your concept.

But let's clear I challenge your concept. I am not challenging God existence as presence in this world and my life. God's love and justice are real and will win out.
A concept is only a concept. Existence is an entirely grade of reality. Shooter, you and I both believe in God's existence. As you long as you serve your concept of God with love and justice I am ok with it.

TS, to my knowledge, has not described his concept of God. If he has one I would like to hear it.

---

that sound you hear, is the sound of something rushing right over your head... woosh!

ShooterTX said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Nothing like watching an atheist and heretic debate religion... this should be good!

ShooterTX

I am not sure of TS's faith, however, he does does do an excellent job of challenging your concept of God. I stand with him in that challenge to your concept.

But let's clear I challenge your concept. I am not challenging God existence as presence in this world and my life. God's love and justice are real and will win out.
A concept is only a concept. Existence is an entirely grade of reality. Shooter, you and I both believe in God's existence. As you long as you serve your concept of God with love and justice I am ok with it.

TS, to my knowledge, has not described his concept of God. If he has one I would like to hear it.

---

that sound you hear, is the sound of something rushing right over your head... woosh!

---

So like oldbear all you have is ad hom. "You've given up persuasion when you start insulting."

Waco1947 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Nothing like watching an atheist and heretic debate religion... this should be good!

ShooterTX

I am not sure of TS's faith, however, he does does do an excellent job of challenging your concept of God. I stand with him in that challenge to your concept.

But let's clear I challenge your concept. I am not challenging God existence as presence in this world and my life. God's love and justice are real and will win out.
A concept is only a concept. Existence is an entirely grade of reality. Shooter, you and I both believe in God's existence. As you long as you serve your concept of God with love and justice I am ok with it.

TS, to my knowledge, has not described his concept of God. If he has one I would like to hear it.

---

that sound you hear, is the sound of something rushing right over your head... woosh!

---

So like oldbear all you have is ad hom. "You've given up persuasion when you start insulting."

---

Waco, with respect, if you actually believe that 'all I have is ad hom' then you have not read 90+% of what I have posted, and you are yourself guilty to some degree of the charge you and TS throw out.

Please stop and consider that.

That applies to almost everyone here. There are posts which are knee-jerk reactions, emotional responses, but also thoughtful replies. I called one of your posts 'excellent' yesterday for example, but you seem to have missed that, apparently only focusing on the ones which criticize.

You are free to think what you want of someone's post and opinion, but you might want to learn to separate the opinion from the person. Sadly, that is becoming something beyond the scope of many people.

Waco1947 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Nothing like watching an atheist and heretic debate religion... this should be good!

ShooterTX

I am not sure of TS's faith, however, he does does do an excellent job of challenging your concept of God. I stand with him in that challenge to your concept.

But let's clear I challenge your concept. I am not challenging God existence as presence in this world and my life. God's love and justice are real and will win out.
A concept is only a concept. Existence is an entirely grade of reality. Shooter, you and I both believe in God's existence. As you long as you serve your concept of God with love and justice I am ok with it.

TS, to my knowledge, has not described his concept of God. If he has one I would like to hear it.

---

that sound you hear, is the sound of something rushing right over your head... woosh!

---

So like oldbear all you have is ad hom. "You've given up persuasion when you start insulting."

---

oh yeah... that's all I've got... nothing else... You got me!

lol

Year after year posters attempt to engage Waco47 in a rational discussion .

And it never works our because the old abortionist is only lucid approximately 50% of the time....if that .

Nobody would blink an eye if this pastor was looking to create genuine Christian community as a rejection of Russian Imprerialism, or Chinese totalitarianism, or European atheism (or even Papal monarchism, eh?). Western capitalism and imperialism are not the Christian faith and vice versa. The Jews of Jesus time were marginalized due to their resistance toward Roman cultural and economic forces....the early Christians formed communities that violated the the social order and customs expected within the Judean culture...and so on and so on. This impulse to reconcile the outlier vs the desire for strict social and political orthodoxy seems to always be a the heart of religious tension, and especially protestant tension. Within our Presbyterian context, this can be expressed in more "churchy" issues like revivalism vs Calvinistic orthodoxy, clerical education and ordination requirements, execution of church discipline, instrumental vs psalter worship, etc.. but is often defined politically - for example, pro-slavery vs abolitionist movements, temperance movement, civil rights movement and white nationalism, and the current political issues of marriage equality, black lives matter, asian hate, anti-muslim, and christan nationalism, etc...all important issues that can only be reconciled with God's help.

I would challenge you to find one post here that doesn't use one of our local political doctrines to define why the PC USA is so "bad" (pro-gay, pro abortion, anti-captialist, marxist, anti-Western). Liberal and conservative are not religious terms, only political.

macgarto said:

---

Nobody would blink an eye if this pastor was looking to create genuine Christian community as a rejection of Russian Imprerialism, or Chinese totalitarianism, or European atheism (or even Papal monarchism, eh?). Western capitalism and imperialism are not the Christian faith and vice versa. The Jews of Jesus time were marginalized due to their resistance toward Roman cultural and economic forces....the early Christians formed communities that violated the the social order and customs expected within the Judean culture...and so on and so on. This impulse to reconcile the outlier vs the desire for strict social and political orthodoxy seems to always be a the heart of religious tension, and especially protestant tension. Within our Presbyterian context, this can be expressed in more "churchy" issues like revivalism vs Calvinistic orthodoxy, clerical education and ordination requirements, execution of church discipline, instrumental vs psalter worship, etc.. but is often defined politically - for example, pro-slavery vs abolitionist movements, temperance movement, civil rights movement and white nationalism, and the current political issues of marriage equality, black lives matter, asian hate, anti-muslim, and christan nationalism, etc...all important issues that can only be reconciled with God's help.

I would challenge you to find one post here that doesn't use one of our local political doctrines to define why the PC USA is so "bad" (pro-gay, pro abortion, anti-captialist, marxist, anti-Western). Liberal and conservative are not religious terms, only political.

---

The problem is that this is a pastor who wants to create community as a rejection of God and the Bible.

And for the record, pro-gay, pro-abortion, and pro-marxist are all anti-God. It should be amazingly obvious that there is no way God is in favor of killing unwanted babies. You would have to be insanely ******ed to make the claim that God is "pro-choice" when it comes to abortion.

The Bible is very, very clear on the sin of homosexual acts. So it is laughable to assert that God could possibly be "pro-gay".... similar to saying that God is "pro-lying" or "pro-murder" or "pro-bestiality".

Marxism is a bit less clear. I cannot find anything in the Bible which specifically addresses Karl Marx or Lenin or Stalin or Hitler. However, Karl Marx and his followers have always ended up seeing Christians and Christianity as a huge enemy to their plans. So this is one where Marxism has declared war on God, more than God has clearly defined Marxism as a sin. Sorta like when FDR declared war on Japan only, but we actually ended up fighting the Germans after they declared war on us.

ShooterTX said:

---

macgarto said:

---

Nobody would blink an eye if this pastor was looking to create genuine Christian community as a rejection of Russian Imprerialism, or Chinese totalitarianism, or European atheism (or even Papal monarchism, eh?). Western capitalism and imperialism are not the Christian faith and vice versa. The Jews of Jesus time were marginalized due to their resistance toward Roman cultural and economic forces....the early Christians formed communities that violated the the social order and customs expected within the Judean culture...and so on and so on. This impulse to reconcile the outlier vs the desire for strict social and political orthodoxy seems to always be a the heart of religious tension, and especially protestant tension. Within our Presbyterian context, this can be expressed in more "churchy" issues like revivalism vs Calvinistic orthodoxy, clerical education and ordination requirements, execution of church discipline, instrumental vs psalter worship, etc.. but is often defined politically - for example, pro-slavery vs abolitionist movements, temperance movement, civil rights movement and white nationalism, and the current political issues of marriage equality, black lives matter, asian hate, anti-muslim, and christan nationalism, etc...all important issues that can only be reconciled with God's help.

I would challenge you to find one post here that doesn't use one of our local political doctrines to define why the PC USA is so "bad" (pro-gay, pro abortion, anti-captialist, marxist, anti-Western). Liberal and conservative are not religious terms, only political.

---

The problem is that this is a pastor who wants to create community as a rejection of God and the Bible.

And for the record, pro-gay, pro-abortion, and pro-marxist are all anti-God. It should be amazingly obvious that there is no way God is in favor of killing unwanted babies. You would have to be insanely ******ed to make the claim that God is "pro-choice" when it comes to abortion.

The Bible is very, very clear on the sin of homosexual acts. So it is laughable to assert that God could possibly be "pro-gay".... similar to saying that God is "pro-lying" or "pro-murder" or "pro-bestiality".

Marxism is a bit less clear. I cannot find anything in the Bible which specifically addresses Karl Marx or Lenin or Stalin or Hitler. However, Karl Marx and his followers have always ended up seeing Christians and Christianity as a huge enemy to their plans. So this is one where Marxism has declared war on God, more than God has clearly defined Marxism as a sin. Sorta like when FDR declared war on Japan only, but we actually ended up fighting the Germans after they declared war on us.

---

Side bar comment. Ultimately we did declare war on Germany.

CammoTX said:

---

Reading through their Facebook content is a tour de force in anti American, anti capitalist doctrine.

Here is just one example: https://www.presbyterianmission.org/story/one-congregations-response-to-american-imperialism/?fbclid=IwAR1TLUAHLzmcYyBV5GbpZmHOis91Bj0HFJFu225UAQ7Ad1Xf3wi_arrHoTk

---

This is one church. One. Church.

And you're saying all PCUSA churches feel like this.

What a deceptive post.

It appears to be the counterbalance to FBC-Dallas and Robert Jeffress. It seems both churches have decided to focus on politics rather than the great commission.

Jack and DP said:

---

This guy needs to go find a better country.



Our church does not merely engage in deconstructive analysis. We resist empire through life-giving ministry. Healing from the perverse effects of Western ideologies requires creative approaches. We pool together to buy houses near our church to counteract individualism. Today almost a third of our congregation lives in our community houses. We've also launched multiple church-based businesses to "exploit capitalism to fund village renewal," as we like to say. Our Underground Seminary seeks to decolonize our mind and body (both human and non-human), and that keeps wealth circulating within. I believe every Christian community can do amazing things if we renounce the evil of Western civilization and move toward the kind of kinship and village renewal that Jesus inaugurated.

---

Jesus was a Presbyterian?