|
Author
|
Topic: Increase in Natural Disasters? Prophesied?
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Is there any difference between Osama Bin Laden and Pat Robertson?
Chiroptera writes: My first instinct is to be highly skeptical of essays that need to use phrases like this. Usually it's a sign of someone running off at the mouth. Check the original sources, that is, if there are original sources and this isn't just something that this clown overheard in a bar. Well.......lets have it.......your substantive refute to the paper's information.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 109 of 157 (259217)
11-12-2005 10:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 102 by crashfrog
11-11-2005 10:00 PM
|
|
Re: Is there any difference between Osama Bin Laden and Pat Robertson?
crashfrog writes: Because Robertson isn't actually any good at it? Powerful refute there, crashfrog!!  Shall we submit this for POM?
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 102 by crashfrog, posted 11-11-2005 10:00 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Is there any difference between Osama Bin Laden and Pat Robertson?
Chiroptera writes: Well, I need something to refute. Unsubstantiated rumors, innuendo, and name-calling in what seems to be an op-ed piece (I'm guessing -- the link you supplied doesn't take me to the article itself) isn't "information" that needs to be refuted. Nevertheless, there's information in it. You're questioning it's credibility. Imo, you, the one challenging the information are the one who should do some research to back up your allegations with something to refute it. Otherwise it stands unrefuted. If I challenge information counterparts have posted, that's always been what's required of me, as per forum guidelines. The rule of thumb in war is unless you have the ammo, don't attack.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Is there any difference between Osama Bin Laden and Pat Robertson?
Chiroptera writes: I just found a link to that op-ed piece that you are referencing, buz. This is such a short article that I'm afraid that too much quoting will run afoul of "fair-use" laws. Nonetheless, I have to share: The Monroe Doctrine warns against foreign intervention in the Western Hemisphere. It's a bad sign when someone needs to invoke the Monroe Doctrine. I guess my point is to show that the character of Christian notables such as PR, Falwell and Dobson are so often viciously attacked by posters here when these Christian notables suggest the same of the things others, even including presidents don't consider to be madness.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Is that the way it works?
Chiroptera writes: In my opinion, I don't need to back up my allegations any more than the person I'm challenging has. Since the writer of that piece offered no substantiation that Chavez is a tyrant and bent on oppressing his own people, I don't need to offer any substantiation of my challenge. Fine. Then until someone refutes it, it stands unrefuted for us all to judge for ourselves as to it's significance and credibility. I watched the brutal Castro regime grow from it's inception, reading of all the bloodshed and suffering that ensued over the decades. Our State Department actually helped and encouraged Castro in acquiring power. It began with nothing but small arms, escalating to the menace it's been in the hemisphere and to it's hapless citizenry. Young folks don't seem to realize the threat of an alliance between these two nations poses to the hemisphere. All they need now is to team up with Mexico and they're off to the races for our demise.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Prophet's Knowledge
The prophets of milleniums past would likely know relatively little about what they were to prophesy. If they saw an automobile in a vision, it would be called a chariot in the prophecy, for example. One of them spoke of chariots running like lightnings and crashing together in the streets -- possibly automobiles. We may see reasons for frequency increasing of disasters which would likely not be understood by the prophets. The prophets simply spoke and wrote what was divinely given to them. Had they simply prophesied the increase of disasters for the end of the ages, they'd have nothing, but when they couple that with a reinstated Israel, modern tech, events in the Middle East, moneyless monetary system, et al, we at least have a case for the possibility of credible stuff, Robertson and others have said, concernng the disaster phenomonon we're observing being prophetic.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 123 of 157 (259482)
11-13-2005 11:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 122 by crashfrog
11-13-2005 12:40 PM
|
|
Not Going There.
crashfrog writes: I actually opened a thread where I more than substantiated my personal attacks on Pat Robertson, and conclusively demonstrated that he's a man of reprehensible moral character. It's closed, now, but I don't recall any Robertson defenders being able to rebut my basic points. As I said at the gitgo, Robertson doesn't speak for me on a lot, but on the OP quotes from him regarding disasters and the latter days he does. That OP is mostly what you people were bashing him for before I came on that thread in defense of his statements quoted. My comments in these threads are relative to the statements of the original thread on Robertson. Like Faith, I don't know a lot about the man and his financial matters. I have no intention of going beyond the particulars of the topic at hand on Robertson. This message has been edited by buzsaw, 11-13-2005 11:30 PM
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 122 by crashfrog, posted 11-13-2005 12:40 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 124 by tardygm2, posted 11-14-2005 9:06 AM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Not Going There.
crashfrog writes: A prominent Christian leader, former Baptist minister, former leader of the Christian Coalition, and one of Bush's close spiritual advisors. "Close spiritual advisor"....... close spiritual advisor?? I don't think so. Please document. Big deal. He met with Robertson two years ago once about Iraq and Bush appeared at a Robertson function. What else do you have?
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 125 by crashfrog, posted 11-14-2005 6:20 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 132 of 157 (260418)
11-16-2005 10:59 PM
|
Reply to: Message 128 by nator
11-15-2005 9:37 AM
|
|
shrafinator writes: Buz, the following are a few (JUST a few, mind you) statememnts Robertson has made over the years. 1. Again and again, I've said Robertson doesn't always speak for me, but he does on the OP and topic pertaining to this thread. 2. To equate this man to terrorist BenLaden who murders thousands as some here are charging is blatant hateful bash. Worse yet they include such people as Dobson and Falwell, et al.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 128 by nator, posted 11-15-2005 9:37 AM | | nator has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Is there any difference between Osama Bin Laden and Pat Robertson?
Zsafira writes: They are not being equated by their actions, but by their common "believing": Bin Laden believes it's cool to coerce as many as possible to commit suicide in order to destroy as much property and take out as many innocent victims as possible to achieve his personal religious goal of world conquest without sanction from any government. On the other hand, Robertson suggested that it might be wise for the government to do what the government has already considered necessary on occaseion in the past for the good of all and to prevent greater loss of life and liberty.
Zsafira writes: They both did "believe" that the ends do justify the means; They both did "believe" that the action of killing a man can be justified by their faith[abomination]. Robertson's proposal has to do with national welfare and not religion, as I understand it.
Zsafira writes: They both did not retain the Eternal's words that remain the same: "..not to pay evil for evil to anyone" And for that, Spiritually, there is no difference between those doctrines[beasts] and the theologies[false prophet] of their faith[abomination]. Again, I believe you have a strawman here, not applicable to religion.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 142 of 157 (262603)
11-22-2005 11:49 PM
|
Reply to: Message 138 by ramoss
11-17-2005 10:51 AM
|
|
Re: Never heard of Robertson killing people
ramos writes: With Robertson, his political ideoelogy and his faith seem linked. He wanted people to 'pray' that certain supreme court judged are gone. He threatened hurricanes and disasters sent by god to all sorts of places whose POLITICAL or business decisions he disagreed with (Not that any self respecting god would listen to him.). He is using a religious show to promote political opinions. 1. Praying for better judges on the bench and actively planning to cause their removal, being personally involved with violence are two very different things. 2, Robertson knowing that he was not a god, never ever threatened anyone with any natural disaster. He simply used scriptural precedence and reference for warning that God does indeed allow disaster to get the attention of his mankind who spurn him and disregard his plan and purpose,
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 138 by ramoss, posted 11-17-2005 10:51 AM | | ramoss has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 145 of 157 (263310)
11-26-2005 12:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 143 by jar
11-23-2005 12:03 AM
|
|
Re: How about Robertson saying that US Citizens should be nuked?
jar writes: you really need to know more about the terrorists like Robertson and the others on the 700 Club. Robertson says State Department should be nuked I read both links and I see no such statemeny by Robertson. He is interviewing an author being interviewed and CNN even says the author pertaining to this does not suggest that the State Dept should be nuked.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 143 by jar, posted 11-23-2005 12:03 AM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 146 by jar, posted 11-26-2005 12:41 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 147 of 157 (263316)
11-26-2005 12:46 PM
|
|
|
Update on Hurricanes
I see new hurricane records are being shattered in 2005, new ones being added beyond normal hurricane seasons. I believe it's 25 so far, 14 major named ones ones and 3 cat 5s so far. Hang onto your hats, emerging generation of the apocalypse. 
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 148 by ramoss, posted 11-26-2005 4:11 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 149 of 157 (263421)
11-26-2005 9:59 PM
|
Reply to: Message 148 by ramoss
11-26-2005 4:11 PM
|
|
Re: Update on Hurricanes
ramoss writes: ANd when this current cycle disapates in about 15 to 20 years, and ther eis no apocalapse, what will you believe then? Well, by that time I would/will be 85 or 90 years old. If I'm gone, either by rapture or death, maybe some bells will ring in the heads of some who who have read this. The apocalypse, btw, is not only about disaster, but about other corroborating events which are to accompany disastrous stuff. The apocalypse is and has been emerging as per the prophecies since the Bolshevik revolution and confirmed at the rebirth of Israel's nationhood. The disastrous stuff has begun to emerge as Robertson and others have suggested. Increased global warming trends will not be reversed, but will bring on famine, drought forest, brush and grass fires which will continue to break records. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 148 by ramoss, posted 11-26-2005 4:11 PM | | ramoss has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 150 by ramoss, posted 11-26-2005 10:12 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2