Jump to content


Community Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sherpa

  1. 16 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:


    Let's put this all into perspective shall we.  As a believer I assume you believe that God created the heavens and the earth.  I would assume this means he created the universe.  The universe, to our knowledge, is comprised billions of stars per galaxy and billions of galaxies.  These galaxies have been around for billions and billions of years.  However you believers feel that a handful of guys a couple thousand years ago on the spec of dust called earth defined marriage as between a man and a woman.  I assume this came from God.  Why did he wait billions of years to put man on earth and then waited 300,000 to make some rules for man to follow?  A bit far fetched and self-serving to think that this is the case.  I will leave you with this.  To me god didn't create man in his image.  Man created him in his image. 


    Now having said that I have nothing against believers.  As a matter of fact I have a lot of respect for them.  The Bible is filled with stories of love and respect.  However when you refuse to respect the wishes of a gay couple that would absolutely love to have a faith based wedding in a church they may attend I just don't understand.  Maybe that is just a result of my non-belief.  


    The wishes of a gay couple do not compel a requirement that their union be sanctioned by a formal acknowledgement of it.


    If some want to, so be it. They can find that venue without problem.


    Regarding your lack of belief, which i have no problem with, I would refer you to the exact claim, made by Jesus, that people are not equipped to handle it.


    Matthew 16:


    13   When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

    14   They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

    15   “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

    16    Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

    17   Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.

  2. 21 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

    Have I seen what happened after the crucifixion?  No I have not.  And nether have you. Do you believe ever story in every book you read?  Every movie you’ve seen?  It’s a great story with wonderful message.  I have nothing against the story. I believe that Jesus was an actual man but the stories about him and the miracles were just that…stories. 

    And regarding if those events happened today?  They won’t and I’m pretty sure they never happened then either. 


    The issue here is what it always is.

    The events that I reference are recorded in the Bible, specifically, in the Book of Acts.


    The Book of Acts is accredited to Luke, the physician.

    It goes into great detail regarding the events after the crucifixion that I referred to.


    If someone discredits the veracity of the Bible, which is assuredly your posture, it is a fool's errand to have the discussion.


    I have no interest in trying to convince anyone of anything, but I have spent a good deal of time and effort in this, and I have my beliefs based on that.







    • Like (+1) 2
    • Thank you (+1) 1
  3. 4 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

    Now the kicker.  Proof he was the son of God and not some weirdo.  Imagine someone going around saying that today.  As a matter of fact you could probably find a few on some streets in every major city. 



    Have you ever looked into this?

    Have you seen what happened after the crucifixion?


    If those events happened today, as you suggest, I would pay attention.


    I get that you don't acknowledge this, and I'm fine without arguing with people who don't.



    19 minutes ago, BillStime said:

    Do you believe in gay marriage?


    That question doesn't make sense.

    Nothing unusual there.


    I have no view on gay marriage.

    I have a view that faith based organizations should have the right to not perform that ceremony.

    • Thank you (+1) 1
  4. 2 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

    I understand but you do get my point how archaic the church’s beliefs are?  I guess as a non-believe I find it strange that people cling so tightly to what I consider a work of fiction. 


    I fully get your point.

    Everyone who has ever studied Scripture has considered this.

    You judge as "archaic" something that you consider a work of fiction.

    I don't, and I've spent many years considering and studying it.


    It isn't an easy issue, but if one starts from the point of view that humans really don't have infinite wisdom, or anything even close, it is understandable.


    Humans are to love one another, as all are products of a loving God who asks that we do in order to experience the true joy that was intended for us.

    Read First John, not the Gospel of John, but First John. It's only five chapters or so.

    Tough to understand without guidance and a bit of knowledge of Greek and how it was originally written, but clearly, we are to love one another.

    Sanctioning any marriage, no matter who is involved,  is not the criteria for loving one another. 


  5. 36 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

    So according to the church, their love is invalid?  


    With respect, you aren't getting this.

    Their love is not invalid. Loving is a requirement for fellowship with Christ, and it doesn't mandate who.


    That, in no way, compels a faith to perform a marriage ceremony not in concert with their beliefs, derived from their interpretation of Scripture.


    Either way, we are to love others.

    • Thank you (+1) 1
  6. 2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

    So Jesus’s message of love everyone is a lie??  🤷🏻‍♂️

    Correct.  This is my point of Christianity being stuck in the dark ages like Islam. 

    Question.  Is this all because gays can or procreate?  


    I'm not sure this is a correct viewpoint.

    Jesus' message to love is incontrovertible.


    There is nothing preventing people from being loved or loving simply because Scripture interpretation causes various faiths to not recognize marriage between two people of the same sex.

    They love and are loved regardless.

    Those faiths have nothing to do with a secular gov's recognition.


    • Agree 1
  7. 1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

     You make a statement and when asked to back it up you fall to pieces. You are very fragile 


    How the hell would you know?

    By your own admission, you didn't read it.


    It is a preposterous question to ask how the price of something as volatile as oil was effected by a President, who during his campaign stated that he was going to end the domestic production means, and thus the supply, of that very item.


    Might as well ask for a prediction of gold prices based on FTX bankruptcy. Simply impossible to accurately suggest.


    Biden saying he was going to end drilling had a significant impact on oil prices, which are emotional and volatile as always.


    Him then begging the Saudis to not impact OPEC's production numbers, or at least not do so until after the elections, is a further embarrassment, though by now, he probably doesn't remember it. 

  8. 12 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

    What policies and how much lower? 


    Do you get paid to ask stupid questions?


    There is o chance that anyone can answer the question of how much lower.

    It is absolutely certain that the peak prices would never have ben reached without Biden doing hat he did in his first six months.


    Watch this video for 30 seconds.

    Do you honestly think that any oil company is going to invest capital which takes years to produce product after listening to this?




    The more scary thing about that debate is that he could actually talk then.

    For him, that capability no longer exists.

    Very sad.


    • Awesome! (+1) 1
  9. 11 minutes ago, Tiberius said:


    And what are the Republicans doing about inflation? 


    I'm quite certain that oil prices would be considerably lower if such policies in existence when our current administration took over were still in place.


    Further, when the next debt ceiling/continuing resolution debate occurs, I'm sure you will be silent as the Republicans advocate for anti inflationary issues.

  10. 1 hour ago, Gene Frenkle said:


    If someone doesn't have the exact same religious values as you, you call that person a hypocrite. Instead, perhaps you're both just immature dupes.


    Exactly wrong.

    If someone behaves in a manner contradictory their own professed and expressed belief, that is hypocritical.

    Someone else's religious views don't enter into it.


    • Thank you (+1) 1
  11. This missile in Poland thing should be very easy to figure out.

    The only way for the Russians to gain momentum is through air power, and the Ukrainian air defense capability is currently very poor, so perhaps aid from the US and others will be in that area.

    The Russians figured out within a couple weeks how to successfully jam drones, so that isn't a real threat to them either, unless changes are made.

    Evidently, the life expectancy of a Ukrainian drone is about a week, so they are treated as munitions, not assets that last multiple missions.


  12. 27 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

    Blue Angels:  Piss Off!!   



    I have quite a few friends who were in the Blues, including Mike Gershon, who was killed in a midair at Niagara Falls.

    I have flown in three, two off the carrier and one shore based.

    The Blues and the Thunderbirds mission is public relations, and they are extremely prepared and extremely good.

    The point made to me as a young aviator is that you really can't do anything that is incredibly impressive, but you can easily screw up.


    I almost did that screws up thing when I flew the shore based one, being a young guy and trying to do something to "impress."


    Don't fly airshows and don't do interviews.

    Words to live by.

    • Like (+1) 2
    • Thank you (+1) 2
  13. 29 minutes ago, Sundancer said:


    Oh, and because there's no evidence of widespread fraud. Maybe I said that before. That's some right wing boogeyman under your bed. 


    The lack of evidence of widespread fraud is not a good reason to not tighten up our voting process. Evidence of such fraud can only happen after it occurs, which is something  \we don't want to witness,

    I did this thing as a volunteer for six years, and I know how it works, and it's working pretty well.


    Still, this isn't the 1950's, and nefarious groups are at work, internally and externally.


    My point....We need to standardize and secure a system, nationally,  which allows qualified voters to vote in their precincts, and eliminate manipulation.


    Back to scheduled programming.

    • Awesome! (+1) 1
  14. 21 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

    My mother in law was one of those poll workers into her late 70s. My comment was meant to be an amusing take (hey,

    not everyone was amused) on people finding something sinister about a complex machine breaking and a bunch of well-meaning but technologically challenged people trying to fix it. Not every screwup is evidence of a sinister plot …


    That is a grossly ignorant view on how this system works, everywhere.


    • Eyeroll 1
  • Create New...