Biden staffers met with Special Counsel Jack Smith’s aides before Trump indictment Aug 26, 2023

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

I'm missing the part where Trump offers anyone the National Guard.... Could you point that out.?

I tried with the links that youtube expletive messed up and gave you a crochet lesson a couple days ago.

This is the closest I find that Google has not expletive messed around with.

Who do you think ordered COP Sund to make the inquiry?

It was the president at that time. His ultimate boss.

It also was the speaker of the house who said it was not necessary. If you took time to do due diligence in looking into this you would know who the players were.

Just like when AOC was hiding in fear of her life.... yet she was not even in the building but another.

 

[BarneyFife]

We've had others that spend their time on socio-political threads. And?

And... when someone spends most of their time on the forum pointedly antagonizing folks who conscientiously defend God's expressed design for human sexuality they're bound to meet with some impassioned opposition. Calling that defense "hate" in a sweeping generalization is just selling punches that have never been thrown and is a matter of record for all who have eyes to see.

The funniest part of all of this is all of the hate that comes through--no prayers for powers that be--just a lot of ragging off.

I'm sure I don't know why you're directing this at me. "Funniest part?"

So you can read what someone has posted and tell what their post type is--so can anyone else, I'm sure who took the time.

Fair enough

Maybe tinman is in agreement in alot of things here, but not in these cases. That's fine. Supposed to be back and forth anyway.

?

the hate label is not phony. Clear as day to me.

Warnings and reproof from a genuine concern for souls for whom Christ died always get lumped right in with the inevitable bigotry that springs from unregenerate professors of religion.

Sorry if you think it's hate on my part.

Perhaps my eagerness to defend the seventh commandment as readily as I would the fourth or any other is unwarranted, but I think I would have stopped short of stoning the woman taken in adultery—hopefully very, very short.

.

 

[BarneyFife]

NO you made a comment about where I post wording it as something resembling a personal attack.

NO I made a comment about the unreasonable expectation of frequenting threads about sexual perversion and never being challenged when promoting unbiblical views of sex.

But when one can't find a hot perversion thread to troll, they can always just hijack and swerve the topic of a political one.

NO you made a comment about where I post wording it as something resembling a personal attack.

Did I miss a forum rule about just what topics it was OK to post on?
no?
Then exactly what is your issue?

Emotional Reasoning—Magnification Cognitive Distortion

Well actually he said I didn't know the definition and that obviously made me - (pick one) sick, evil, corrupt, disgusting, stupid, the child of Satan )

Don't know how far back this dialog goes.
I was only addressing what was said in this thread.
He likes to poke me, too; Sticks and stones; try to get over it.

Do you? Or was that just a not terribly clever way of expressing your hatred of a minority?

Were you trying to be insulting?

No, mostly hyperbole, a rhetorical device not unlike sarcasm, suggesting that folks who put a deeply-held sense of gender identity in place of biology are most likely suffering from a deficiency of emotional intelligence (often demonstrable by a scan for healthy frontal lobe activity or should I say a lack thereof).

And, no, I do not intend to prove that.

I do actually hate Arctic Geckos, though.

Were you trying to be insulting?

Well, the "Don't be offended" part was not meant as hyperbole or sarcasm. But I do understand if you want to magnify it into a mere insult.

Sad really. I've come to expect more from you when it comes to belittling insults and personal attacks.

I'll try to do better.

Still can't provide that working definition can you?

Still can't ask the question "What is the definition of a woman?" without attaching some disingenuous qualification like "inclusive" or "working," can you?

And why would I care what an AI chat bot says about anything?

Would you have been happier with Webster or Oxford?

And how does this jibe with you using an AI chat bot?

It doesn't but, then, it doesn't really need to, does it?

.

 

[amigo de christo]

you first

you first

I aint the one who is approving of sin and thus not only not warning those in sin but rather calling their sin good .
Might let cassandra in on this too .
Ye shall not hate your neighbor in your heart , you shall in any way rebuke them , correct them and not allow sin upon them .
MIGHT wanna learn GOD my friend . He who loveth correcteth . and that is a fact . a fact
this church age in large knows NUTTING about . the only correction this church age seems to know is
JUDGE NOT , CORRECT not , UNLESS ITS one who actually teaches TRUTH .
OOPSY me smells lots of poopsy in todays version of what it thinketh is love , truth and GOD or CHRIST .
TIME WE OPEN BIBLES FOR OURSELVES .

 

[BarneyFife]

are all women able to?

No, not all women are able to, and it doesn't mean a thing in terms of defining the word "woman."

Birth defects, epigenetics, and other anomalies do not determine the basic definition of "woman."

Amass all the wicked sophistry and wordsmithing you can manage, and it doesn't change what the Bible says about what a woman is.

Posting pictures of folks who may or may not be disobeying the direct command of Deuteronomy 22:5 is also irrelevant to Christian standards of behavior. Christians are not to judge by appearance, generally speaking, but they are commanded to sound general warnings and sometimes even pointed exhortation when openly defiant behavior is exhibited.

.

 

[amigo de christo]

No, not all women are able to, and it doesn't mean a thing in terms of defining the word "woman."

Birth defects, epigenetics, and other anomalies do not determine the basic definition of "woman."

Amass all the wicked sophistry and wordsmithing you can manage, and it doesn't change what the Bible says about what a woman is.

Posting pictures of folks who may or may not be disobeying the direct command of Deuteronomy 22:5 is also irrelevant to Christian standards of behavior. Christians are not to judge by appearance, generally speaking, but they are commanded to sound general warnings and sometimes even pointed exhortation when openly defiant behavior is exhibited.

.

We got a heavy heavy delusion abounding in these final hours upon earth .
When even the so called church pits the GOD of the old test against the Christ of the new test
then know and understand SUMTHIN is going dead wrong .
JESUS never came so we could walk in disobediance unto GOD . AND ME THINKS it high time folks understood that .
TRULY truly i say unto thee and to all , If we think JESUS is the ministir of sin , WE SIN AND KNOW NOT THE TRUTH .
IF we think somehow the even the GOD of the old test and JESUS are somehow in any kind of opposition to one another
WE SIN and KNOW NOT THE TRUTH .
I SEE THE SAME GOD of the old TEST IN JESUS CHRIST and i see JESUS CHRIST in the letters of the apostels .
I SEE , by grace the understanding and reason for THE NEW COVENANT .
ITS TRUE GOD IS LOVE and desires none to perish . ITS TRUE GOD DESIRES and DESIRED a people WHO WOULD HONOR HIM .
WELL IN JESUS CHRIST THIS IS POSSIBLE . TO BE SAVED AND TO PLEASE GOD . AND FOLKS BETTER LEARN THAT REAL FAST .

 

[amigo de christo]

No, not all women are able to, and it doesn't mean a thing in terms of defining the word "woman."

Birth defects, epigenetics, and other anomalies do not determine the basic definition of "woman."

Amass all the wicked sophistry and wordsmithing you can manage, and it doesn't change what the Bible says about what a woman is.

Posting pictures of folks who may or may not be disobeying the direct command of Deuteronomy 22:5 is also irrelevant to Christian standards of behavior. Christians are not to judge by appearance, generally speaking, but they are commanded to sound general warnings and sometimes even pointed exhortation when openly defiant behavior is exhibited.

.

Do try and remember your audience upon whom you be writing this to .
The man calleth tin is a huge supporter of sin . THIS DID NOT GOD DO , THIS DID NOT JESUS DO
this did not the apotels do and this do not the lambs do .

 

[amigo de christo]

That outta be simple enough

 

[TinMan]

Unassisted =
unassisted

ŭn″ə-sĭs′tĭd

adjective​

1. Not having assistance; unaided.
2. Performed or accomplished by only one player; done without an assist.
3. Not assisted; without assistance.

IOW... no doctor or mid-wife.... or taxi driver.

As to cloning... that requires doctor/scientist assistance..... not a womb that only has been visited by sperm.

if it's unassisted where do you get the sperm?

"are all women able to?"

Well, your mother was or you would not be here. And if Mary wasn't, Jesus would not have been from her.

Not an answer to my question.

 

[TinMan]

I tried with the links that youtube expletive messed up and gave you a crochet lesson a couple days ago.

This is the closest I find that Google has not expletive messed around with.

Who do you think ordered COP Sund to make the inquiry?

It was the president at that time. His ultimate boss.

It also was the speaker of the house who said it was not necessary. If you took time to do due diligence in looking into this you would know who the players were.

Just like when AOC was hiding in fear of her life.... yet she was not even in the building but another.

the speaker of the house has no say in the matter

 

[TinMan]

And... when someone spends most of their time on the forum pointedly antagonizing folks

you mean like name calling and belittling and dismissing someone because of their age or questioning is someone is actually a Christian?

who conscientiously defend God's expressed design for human sexuality they're bound to meet with some impassioned opposition. Calling that defense "hate" in a sweeping generalization is just selling punches that have never been thrown and is a matter of record for all who have eyes to see.

Does defending include false witness? Dehumanizing? called for discrimination? indicating that the topic should induce vomiting?

Warnings and reproof from a genuine concern for souls for whom Christ died always get lumped right in with the inevitable bigotry that springs from unregenerate professors of religion.

Sorry if you think it's hate on my part.


.

If you were making the same posts and comments and condemnation of any other minority would it be considered to be hate?

 

[TinMan]

NO I made a comment about the unreasonable expectation of frequenting threads about sexual perversion and never being challenged when promoting unbiblical views of sex.

Nope, no hate here.

But when one can't find a hot perversion thread to troll, they can always just hijack and swerve the topic of a political one.

Maybe you should take it up with the hijacker

Emotional Reasoning—Magnification Cognitive Distortion

You spend several posts harassing me about what threads I choose to respond to, falsely accuse me of hijacking, and when I ask if there was some rule i was breaking here you respond with a demeaning personal attack. Now there is the BarneyFIfe I know

Don't know how far back this dialog goes.
I was only addressing what was said in this thread.
He likes to poke me, too; Sticks and stones; try to get over it.

Thanks for being such a great role model.

No, mostly hyperbole, a rhetorical device not unlike sarcasm, suggesting that folks who put a deeply-held sense of gender identity in place of biology are most likely suffering from a deficiency of emotional intelligence (often demonstrable by a scan for healthy frontal lobe activity or should I say a lack thereof).

And, no, I do not intend to prove that.

Well it is tough to back up hate based garbage.

Well, the "Don't be offended" part was not meant as hyperbole or sarcasm. But I do understand if you want to magnify it into a mere insult.



I'll try to do better.

And you are. Good for you.

Still can't ask the question "What is the definition of a woman?" without attaching some disingenuous qualification like "inclusive" or "working," can you?

Still can't provide a definition can you?

Would you have been happier with Webster or Oxford?



It doesn't but, then, it doesn't really need to, does it?

.

not if your aim is to be hypocritical

 

[TinMan]

.

No, not all women are able to, and it doesn't mean a thing in terms of defining the word "woman."

what it does show is that being a women has nothing to do with reproductive ability.

Birth defects, epigenetics, and other anomalies do not determine the basic definition of "woman."

Amass all the wicked sophistry and wordsmithing you can manage, and it doesn't change what the Bible says about what a woman is.

Posting pictures of folks who may or may not be disobeying the direct command of Deuteronomy 22:5 is also irrelevant to Christian standards of behavior. Christians are not to judge by appearance, generally speaking, but they are commanded to sound general warnings and sometimes even pointed exhortation when openly defiant behavior is exhibited.

.

you can't tell the difference either.

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

if it's unassisted where do you get the sperm?

The exact quote is...."Accurately a woman would be described as the only one that, by design, (by her creator), can grow another human being within her body and pass said human being into life between her legs.... UNASSISTED."

can grow another human being within her body and pass said human being into life between her legs.... UNASSISTED.

ŭn″ə-sĭs′tĭd

adjective​

1. Not having assistance; unaided.
2. Performed or accomplished by only one player; done without an assist.
3. Not assisted; without assistance.

We all know that there are other ways then what is normally thought of for sperm to fertilize an egg. But ONLY A WOMAN CAN GROW
that fertilized egg into a human being. Unassisted. Do I need to say by human hands???????? Because if you are going to interject, correctly , God into this conversation and take this to an entirely new level, it still takes the human he designed to be the way women are to do so.

Not an answer to my question.

Yes it is.... unless your mom was not a woman.... And if Mary did not birth Jesus. It is an answer.

 

[BarneyFife]

what it does show is that being a women has nothing to do with reproductive ability.

Which does absolutely nothing to help determine the definition of "woman."

you can't tell the difference either.

And I can't imagine why I would ever possibly need to.

.

 

[Cassandra]

I'm not talking about your hate @Barney--sorry for you trying to read yourself into it. I'm talking about the hate for the powers that be. . It goes on and on under the guise of Christianity. You think the women stuff is bad--it pales in comparison to the hate of the president.

BUT
I will say that I think you have changed and I wonder if it is because you have your "Encounter Team" pants on.

"These team members are easily identified in their brightly orange/gold colours and they have been invited to join based on their positive interaction across the board, their friendly demeanour and encouragement. Hebrews 10:23-25 and fruit Gal 5:22-23."

Thank you for continuing to demonstrate your positive interaction with others. I also am very proud of @TinMan for receiving the coveted puking icon thou hast given.

 

[dev553344]

Which does absolutely nothing to help determine the definition of "woman."



And I can't imagine why I would ever possibly need to.

.

I actually think you're doing a well good job with Tinman. I gave up on him long ago so I don't respond to him. I have noticed a lot of false teachers lately on this forum promoting things that are contrary to the bible. Like once we went advertising they came out of the wood work.

 

[dev553344]

I think this says it all:

The enemy clearly went after the children of the nation. I hear they're hiding school material from parents. Promoting GBLTQ to the children. Want to remove God from gov and schools. After the courts and laws and constitution.

I used to be proud to be an American. Now I'm just concerned.

 

[Cassandra]

wow. I don't know about that. Trump is no saint, and yet in evangelical circles, he can do no wrong. folks who usu require Bible verses as evidence, when discussing spiritual things, are devil may care for evidence when discussing the former pres. Even though there is no evidence of voterfraud, he is still innocent. And the other things, the poor guy was not involved in.

I given up on a few here too, but the problem is, I can't put them on ignore.

 

[dev553344]

wow. I don't know about that.
I given up on a few here too, but the problem is, T can't put them on ignore.

Why can't T put them on ignore?