OF GOOD AND evil

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 07 2003,8:16)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]If Good has such an overwhelming preponderance over Evil, then why is a Republican in the white house?
Freewill and what is wrong with the republicans? It is the democrats that are liberals.  
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]If Good is so overwhelming then how does it make sense that in the prophecy of the Antichrist that evil we be so universally popular?  
He will be destroyed or rather his kingdom will.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]they have forgotten the distinction between good and evil.  So America elects a President who maintains that Greed is a virtue, and exploiting the poor is a privelege of Freedom.
How about some proof? It is not really good but rather God who is the only one that is good.
1. There is a Republican in the White House because the Supreme Court put him there. (and, no, I don't think Gore was great...but I do think he wouldn't have been as bad as Bush. Reality is, they both sucked. Also, the Democrats are not "liberal" anymore, they are just slightly less conservative than the Republicans. The Greens, on the other hand, are liberal.)

2. *shrug*

3. The love of money is the root of evil. Bush puts money over everything else.
 
Bush does not suck I am glad he is in office. Please oh please oh please give me some proof that Bush puts money over everything else. The supreme court dident put Bush there we the people did.
 
Protestanant has actually 2 meanings. First is basically any Christian religion that is not Catholic. Second and more restrictive would only include those denominations that broke from Rome. (Which I've always found to be interesting, since that should technically include the Eastern Rite.)

Personally, I have found most people use the former definition. I have encountered a few people who reject the label..."Baptists didn't break from teh COR...I'm NOT a protestant!"
smile.gif
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 07 2003,9:15)]Bush does not suck I am glad he is in office. Please oh please oh please give me some proof that Bush puts money over everything else. The supreme court dident put Bush there we the people did.
Why are you happy with Bush?

Anyway, he puts corporate interests over national interests. Look at the rebuilding of Iraq...Oh, gee...Cheny's firm got the bid.

As for the Supreme Court, by refusing to hear Gore's case, and in light of the fact that the elections in Florida and Texas were very corrupt...this election was not fair.

By the same token, there have been other Presidential elections that were rigged and someone not elected was put in office (Kennedy-Nixon, for one).

Don't misunderstand me. Clinton sucked too. Gore likely would have sucked. Both parties are on the corporate teat. At least the Republicans are more honest about it.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 07 2003,8:26)]I dont believe it was rigged. I am happy with Bush because I agree with and support many of his posisions.
Really?  Besides him being a professed Christian, what else do you support of him?  

I have 1 question (and no, I am not a democrat)
1. Where is Bin Laden?


Cory
 
The constant war is a good thing I hear Thaddius ... I also hear that the giving of contracts to vice presidential firms (as Big J mentioned) is quite miraculous we need leaders like that ~ all sarcasm

Being Christian and being a good leader aren't directly related mrpopdrinker =o
 
I support the war both of them as well as the abortion bill. There were other things but I have been out of polotics latly. Bin Laden is hiding. Sorry but you cant swing a magic wand and make him appear. We are hunting him down. It would be nice if we could swing a magic wand but we cant.
 
Pop, I do think that you can answer this.

Do you think Bush is a good example of a Christian?
(I don't mean this as an insult, nor do I expect you to know if he actually is saved. I mean just what I am asking.)
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Big J @ Nov. 07 2003,9:17)]Protestanant has actually 2 meanings.  First is basically any Christian religion that is not Catholic.  Second and more restrictive would only include those denominations that broke from Rome.  (Which I've always found to be interesting, since that should technically include the Eastern Rite.)  

Personally, I have found most people use the former definition.  I have encountered a few people who reject the label..."Baptists didn't break from teh COR...I'm NOT a protestant!"
smile.gif
Well, the Eastern Rite is still recognized as a Diocese. ?Rome is even beginning to recognize the Church of England as a Diocese. there are problems with doctrine but no hugely horrible heresies.

Protestantism offers hugely horrible heresies. The Primary Sacricement in Christianity, perhaps after Baptism, is the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, which may be arguably necessary for Salvation, but the Protestants don't recognize it -- or, when they do, don't recognize the necessity of anoiting a Priest to perform the ceremony.

there is also the matter of Our Lady. Saddly it seems that many in Rome would willingly sell Our Lady out in order to set up an ecumenical bridge to the Prots. But after all those centuries of fostering the Church first in Roman Europe and then Medieval Europe, and then in the Americas -- it would be the most ungrateful thing to turn our backs on Her now. She is recognized as Queen of Heaven or She isn't -- and whether you are a Catholic or not depends on where your allegance is on this very pivotal point of contention. And it isn't like it is a democracy. If the Church ever comes to renounce Mary, then Mary will renouce the Church -- as She did with Protestantism.

Unfortunately I really think that many Catholic Bishops are not and have never been 'religious' and would vote Mary out of Doctrine if they had the chance. We live in dangerous times.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Big J @ Nov. 08 2003,4:28)]Pop, I do think that you can answer this.

Do you think Bush is a good example of a Christian?  
(I don't mean this as an insult, nor do I expect you to know if he actually is saved.  I mean just what I am asking.)
From what I have seen for the most part yes he is. He needs to stop saying Islam is a religeon of peace.
 
If you mrpopdrinker can not at this very second so much as ask for the GREATEST OF JESUS CLASS MIRACLES(I.E. raise the dead) AND RECEIVE THEM IMMEDIATELY, THEN YOU HAVE A DEAD FAITHE.
i do not care to have a dead FAITHE, and so to rememdy the suitation i do imitate Paul.
By the way, President Bush is not a GOOD person.
i would not say he is even a christian person, but in any event he is the one currently President.
i wrote him many letters advising him not to invade Afganistan or Iraq because the churches were NOT willing to pay for the reconstructions efforts.
Even though Mr. Bush is willing to be the avenger of GOd, because he did not go to tell the churches to pay for this reconstruction and did not wait on THE LORD for permission to move/act, he is NOT the avenger of GOd.
He is only a man making one more mistake.
It is because he has not FAITHE in THE LORD GOd JESUS CHRIST.
His advisors did not have FAITHE.
There is not so much as enough FAITHE IN ALL THE LAND TO ACCUMULATIVELY ADD UP TO EQUAL THE FAITHE OF EVEN ONE MUSTARD SEED. AMEN AMEN AMEN
THERE IS INSTEAD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, AND men WHO WORSHIP THEIR BELLYS AS god. AMEN
i am nothing0 and can see all here love to dance around things they can NOT DEFEAT.
FOR SUCH IS THE MANNER OF FAITHELESS men. AMEN
JESUS IS THE LORD1PRAISE THE LORD1THE LORD YESHUA. AMEN
 
Back
Top