Space Merchant

via .ORGWorld News

I just watched a recording of this and the previous debate at about 3am this morning. What a mess. LOL. I don't trust a one of them, but Tulsi Gabbard at least prepared with some material on Kamala Harris that was very easy to obtain, and should have been easy for others to find, too, if they wished to pile on. The articles about Harris hiding DNA evidence that would have freed an innocent man was in the NYTimes. (As was material about her hypocrisy on marijuana, harshness on drug offenses, etc.) I'm surprised that there is so much "opposition info" on everyone, but that these politicians only treat the data superficially when it really COULD "demolish" opponents if they really took time to understand the whole picture and press these issues. Perhaps they are still interested in being another's vice president in case those opponents win.
Curiously, the number one set of related trends on Twitter yesterday included "Assad" "Tulsi" and "Kamala." Why was "Assad" there? It's evidently because Harris attacked back by claiming that Gabbard had been no more than a defender of Assad. Getting Assad so high in the trends probably implies some help from bots, either foreign or domestic.  (This was based on the fact that Gabbard had done a fact finding mission in Syria and determined that things were not as the official US propaganda would have us believe. Being correct on this point will probably result in her downfall as a potential candidate.) The one thing I appreciated is that Gabbard, a former soldier, was concerned about overuse of war and US empirical policing around the world. But Gabbard herself has unfortunately shown inconsistency. I think she's one that voted for a recent hugely increased Pentagon budget last week.

It isn't about support. It is about not taking slander as a truth, and I told you many times, I take issues with lies, slander and conspiracy, and as a truther, I speak against such. This also goes concerning of the Bible of which you commit to slander in majority of your claims.
And this goes for everything.
To paraphrase my own professor, there are many denominations, there are many beliefs. People can agree on some things and disagree on other things, and majority of those who disagree are the ones who speak lies without understanding of the other group is coming from.
There are those who do not have to agree with faith groups, this includes JWs, but they will not accept lies about such groups and profess it as a truth, for not too long ago, hence my only issue concerning you is you start at a base and sparkle lies, and you also twist and mix Scripture either to push the lie and or push an untruth about the Bible itself. Not to mention even due to typo errors you even make ill claims of which you cannot prove.
Actually the believe of God passing Judgment is of core Christian beliefs, even before the days of the JWs, this was the core, this is what Christians believed before the false teachings ended up entering the church with the teachings of immortal soul, new agism, hellfire, etc, for such believes are the core beliefs of mainstream Christianity and not True Christianity. God, according to the Bible, as wiped out the wicked, examples such as the bad ones of Noah's Day, what happened at Sodom and Gomorrah, Korah and his Household, the cursed people, Ba'al worshipers, The Egyptians, etc. In every instance, God done so to protect HIS people, of which is only begotten Son would come from, eventually grow older, preach the gospel, serving God's Purpose and Will to the day of his death and resurrection, and evidently to the day he will return to deal with God's enemies, for Jesus is the one to take up the sword.
God's original promise is and always will be a strong one, in his dealings with mankind on earth, and his original promise continues through Jesus and it will continue to the point when Jesus returns, to the end of Jesus' millennial reign and to the end of Judgement itself.
That being said, other than that you still mix verses even now. Also it is jarring to the eyes for you to use the term "Firstfruits" granted of what you conveyed in your other thread.

Was this the 1st Century?
1 Cor.5:11: "stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man"
2John 10-11:"If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.
 

He must have the ability to read each heart, just as the Father and Christ do. Why would he need scriptures?  

For a second, I thought you were praising the death of someone. Then I looked further.
Among all things, regardless of what anyone says, the Bible holds true to word of what will happen to the wicked. And it is going to be far worse of what we read of things in the Hebrew Old Testament.

don't put any food in your mouth

via .ORGWorld News

A debate about proper debating, now that's funny!

Not really, because there is no Biblical Evidence of Ba'laam's Donkey preaching any gospel of any sort. Therefore my statement is right, and the response you made to my statement was incorrect.
 
EDIT: of course that is all you can do, laugh, and consist to appeals of motive, something that a true stupid one will do. For all unwise ones who willfully speak in their own ignorance are stupid persons and nothing more. In short, you've played yourself. That being said, I enjoy a clown making a fool of himself all the more because it shows me how little said clown knows Scripture.

@Srecko Sostar I stated animals cannot preach the gospel, and yet you said they did, according to the Bible.
Stop running from your claims and answer them lol.
Also, the biblical definition in respects to the Strong's gives us the answer: https://biblehub.com/greek/2784.htm
Lol, nice try to with the common English Dictionary though, I got a laugh out of that one. Mind you, you ignored the main context it tells you on the front page - that is hilarious.
 

Last I recall, the Watchtower only have stated that time is indeed short and the end is very near, but even outside of the Watchtower, people are aware that end time and tribulations is and will be upon us and just as in the days of Noah, the doors will be shut and at that time, it will be too late. You yourself have to realize that, for that is pretty much the common conclusion to which people who adhere to scripture will recognize and be aware of. Speaking about Noah, when the door to the Ark have been shut, it was shut by God himself (Genesis 7:16, 17) and clearly when the people who were doing what they do (Luke 17:27) became suspect, it was already too late. The same can be said for Sodom and Gomorah whereas as to their counterpart, Nineveh, wised up when God sent Jonah.
Indeed, there are false ones out there, some far worse than others, who derive people away from what the Bible says, this is also said in Luke 11:42. Among them would be pastors, teachers, even church goers themselves who push something that is not of the Bible, those who not only follow God's Laws, but such ones who preach and attempt to convince others not to follow God's Laws, in addition, that of which Jesus had entrusted the church to do. We have such ones who apply Traditions of Men into the church, for if I last recall, I will take an example of a pastor you brought up before, Jeff Durbin, known as the Hipster Pastor by some, also known as a voice actor for one of the most violent video games out there that resulted in the whole ESRB rating. The current churches of our day teach that Jesus Christ is God, when the bible says otherwise, they practice things that are not biblical yet call themselves Christians, the list goes on and on when it comes to false prophets, but out of the fold, there are those who strive to do what is true and seek what is true and for that reason true Christians do not mess around with such ones, but should any falsehood be made against the latter, a correction is to be made.
At the same time, one has to be have to be very mindful of those who actually attempt to seek what the truth is or attempt to follow it because any misstep can put you before God's throne for judgement, the very reason by my stance is pretty much neutral and not being gullible to misconceptions.
Furthermore, false ones are deemed hypocrites or make claims of 100% inspiration when they do something other than what the bible says, or that of the first church of the early Christians.
For there is  big line between those who stray away from actually attempting to seek what is true and on the other side there are those who do their best to follow what the bible says while seeking truth, just as there is no middle ground here, it is in the same regard for both life and death.

Anytime, but that being said, you still need to voice your claims, and every single time you avoid and run from the very things you said.
Ok let's see what you have to say. And I am a debater, not a judge of a debate, for what I link are tell tale signs of a losing debater, and only the loser.
And I love debates, be it in them or watching, I mentioned this before...
In a debate, even those on the winning side can spit a few insults, unfortunately I am not on the losing end. I suggest you look into some debates, a notable debater being Ben Shapiro, Br. Myatt, Masur, etc.
The irony is in a debate, one can see who actually wins by means of 2 points:
[1] Contextualizing what it means to meet your burden of proof, i.e. arguing in favor of a framing device that acts as an evaluative mechanism for proving the truth or falsity of the resolution or topic statement. [2] Proving that the topic itself meets that contextualization, i.e. that it meets the criteria you've set up for proving the resolution true. I even told you from the very beginning, even a seasoned debater can be unpredictable and can insult their challenger, but evidently not to the extreme, for me, I merely played on your Biblical Intelligence, for even the Bible speaks of stupid persons concerning what is true and what is false, what is wise and what is unwise, etc.
Therefore, you can be called as such if you are making absurd claims that are not even Biblical.
That being said you missed 3 points that fits you perfectly lol:
#3: False equivalence aka comparing a counter-argument with something abhorrent #4: Tu quoque or “What about-ism” - straying away from the topic and saying “look at this”, “but what about that”; a diversionary tactic. #5: Appeal to motive - implying that the opponent seeks to gain something due to their stand on the issue You fit all 3 of such while being on the losing end, so much you cannot speak a single thing without using JWs to help you out. More so, you stated I am using articles, I am using Interfaith Dialogue (I got quite the laugh out of this one granted the source linked by me proved you wrong), etc, with no evidence to claim, therefore, if a debater can call you ignorant, or stupid, or silly, etc. Then what they are saying is true. You also show anger and frustration granted that

A - you voted down someone who was speaking to me and only me and
B - you had copied and paste your idiot filled claims elsewhere.
The fact you willfully shot down a spectator/onlooker shows you have lost from the get go.

That being said, the article is indeed correct, when a person loses a debate, such points showed by them by their words etc.
And to this day, we still never found out your claim about donkeys preaching the Christ, the most sillies thing I had ever heard.
This one is a nice one, also you do not even know what Deux [Deus] Ex Machina even is, which makes it all the more amusing to see you struggle in this debate.
So I ask you this question: Can you point out and quote ANY of my fallacies regarding our debate? As a bonus, I want you to quote the so called "interfaith dialogue" I am speaking. as well as the "article" claim made by you.
This I got to see, especially with my history of fighting the interfaith, I want to see from an ignorant person, you, of this so called claim you speak of. Let's have at it Srecko.
I can quote some of your fallacies, here they are:
NOTE: Before we start, let me tell you what a fallacy is. A fallacy is a mistaken belief, especially one based on unsound argument. It also means a failure in reasoning which renders an argument invalid or faulty reasoning; misleading or unsound argument.
Then show us this evidence regarding the Donkey and the stones preaching the gospel truth, Screko.
You said according to the Bible, so surely to you, you may have something to say rather than run away from the very words that you said. I an assure you, even this claim of yours sounds very stupid when read out loud.
So show us your evidence that a Snake was preaching some sort of gospel, Srecko, otherwise unfounded claims such as this shows us, no, it exposes you to be nothing more than an ignorant lair concerning the Bible of which you lack.
The word gospel as defined:
[1] the age concerning Christ, the kingdom of God, and salvation. [2] one of the first four New Testament books telling of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ [3] an interpretation of the Christian message As we can see, the snake has never preached about the Christ let alone speak of the good news gospel, more so, the snake was not spreading a Christian message and or a doctrine. The truth of the matter, according to the Bible, according to the book of Genesis (Torah) is that Satan had used the snake to deceive the first woman, Eve, resulting in her and Adam's disobedience.
You said I suggested whatever it is you are referring to, this so called simplified edition article editions you speak of when all that I said comes merely from an ESV Bible, and my 2 minor sources being Wikipedia, and an English Dictionary (evidence of this is on page 2-4 of regarding our debate), and nothing more. Can you quote anything from me in this debate that I had suggested simplified edition articles as you claim? If not, you must make Satan very proud to add words to someone's mouth. As a man of God, I do not add nor do I take from God's Word, and had been very vocal of Deut. 4:2.
That being said, show me, Srecko Sostar your claim.
Let's see it, show me any of my quotes in this debate that shows "Interfaith Dialogue" when from the get-go I am only using the Bible. That being said, we can see earlier you tried to steer into the direction of the WT and JWs in order to not be focused on solely a Bible discussion, for you had been exposed for the simple fact that without JWs in your dialogue, you have nothing - and it shows.
If you cannot answer what you yourself had said, well, that link only proves to everyone here that you not just started a debate, but you lost it by not in mere defeat, but throwing yourself into your own ruin and peril of depravity, so much so you resort to a copy/paste shenanigans elsewhere by means of your own fumes.
That being said, address the questions posed in light orange.
Check mate

via .ORGWorld News

Because a debate does not end when the points and conclusions are made. What remains open ended are your horrendous claims. The fact you never been in a debate yet start one shows how foolish you truly are, depraved.
You speak of vocabulary and yet you cannot even say "Restorationist". lol Perhaps it is you who needs the dictionary far more than I.
Biblical Unitarians are not Restorationist, however, we take up the study of the Bible seriously, and we study religion, more so, Theological study and discussion is something we take up when it comes to learning about Jesus' church.
The study of religion as defined in short: Religious studies, also known as the study of religion, is an academic field devoted to research into religious beliefs, behaviors, and institutions. It describes, compares, interprets, and explains religion, emphasizing systematic, historically based, and cross-cultural perspectives.
I stated to you 4 times before I study religion even though I am a Biblical Unitarian, i.e. Islam, Judaism, etc.
It is funny because even the Christology of Restoraionist has been addressed 7 times to you, yet your ignorance and appeal to motive shows you to be a bigger fool than realized.
That being said, the debate does not end because you began the debate regarding baptism and now into preaching the gospel and second, the claims you made are still in demand of answer and or forfeit.
I agree with the teenager, you are perhaps quite idiotic when it comes to debate especially when you start one with a Christian who lives for debate - fool's errand on your part, simpleton. For his words hurt you because of your reaction to what he had said.
If you want to run from a debate you started, that is find with me.
 

We had a talk about child abuse. One point, well 2 was made.
Educating people, the second being to talk to kids about sex.
 
Every bit helps. 

We do not know if he is a JW or not, granted this is a forums whereas now the only access here is by means of a club, and majority of folks on this platform was here, granted the history of this forum.
I haven't confused him, I merely speak of what the Bible talks about concerning God's people, those of Spiritual Israel who are in union with the Christ - nothing more.
How do you know what he believes if he had said nothing more but 3 words?
That being said, you continue to interject because originally, what he had said to you was concerning the Bible, not JWs or the WT, you are only adding the JW/WT because you've been called out to question regarding Spiritual Israel.
This has already been addressed in the last discussion, the same one linked and you had been refuted, especially when you spoke of God sending Satan to the Egyptians, you are only repeating your folly, Witness. 
 
That being said, you made the mistake that stating the Bible, and or there is no Scriptural Support for the New Covenant concerning Spiritual Israel. How does your claim add up when there is Scriptural Evidence concerning such? Second, you speak of Spiritual Israel, and yet you ignore the heirs. Why only mention the chosen ones, but not God's people also, in which the Kingdom of God is for them also? What is the reason to single them out and ignore that they are of the same Spiritual House? Remember, yous aid it before, that Christians are in union with the Christ... Lastly, you claim you never watered down Jesus' Kingship, and yet there are comments from you, even you posting a picture when you questioned Judith. Did you purposely forget what God's original purpose and will concerning mankind was all about, and how his only begotten son fairs into the mix? I suggest you focus on the Bible in regards to these 3 points, granted that was originally posted to you in addition to the first.
As an additional question, because I asked you this before (and you avoided purposely) and since you want to be bold by quoting Exodus...
Who was the Destroyer found in verses 13 and 23 of Exodus 12 according to you?
The one thing I do not like other than slander is someone who wants to defile what is true of what is written in the Bible itself. And among other things, someone who twists what the New Covenant conveys, for they ignore the fact of whose blood has been shed to enable it for mankind because of Adam's sin.

Because a debate does not end when the points and conclusions are made. What remains open ended are your horrendous claims. The fact you never been in a debate yet start one shows how foolish you truly are, depraved.
You speak of vocabulary and yet you cannot even say "Restorationist". lol Perhaps it is you who needs the dictionary far more than I.
Biblical Unitarians are not Restorationist, however, we take up the study of the Bible seriously, and we study religion, more so, Theological study and discussion is something we take up when it comes to learning about Jesus' church.
The study of religion as defined in short: Religious studies, also known as the study of religion, is an academic field devoted to research into religious beliefs, behaviors, and institutions. It describes, compares, interprets, and explains religion, emphasizing systematic, historically based, and cross-cultural perspectives.
I stated to you 4 times before I study religion even though I am a Biblical Unitarian, i.e. Islam, Judaism, etc.
It is funny because even the Christology of Restoraionist has been addressed 7 times to you, yet your ignorance and appeal to motive shows you to be a bigger fool than realized.
That being said, the debate does not end because you began the debate regarding baptism and now into preaching the gospel and second, the claims you made are still in demand of answer and or forfeit.
I agree with the teenager, you are perhaps quite idiotic when it comes to debate especially when you start one with a Christian who lives for debate - fool's errand on your part, simpleton. For his words hurt you because of your reaction to what he had said.
If you want to run from a debate you started, that is find with me.
 

But you are alluding to a situation that has not even happen yet, therefore you are at fault, and you can be called out for that. Tell me Srecko, as the Kingdom of God had already removed all injustice from the earth, from far and frow? As the End Times Tribulations ended... The honest Bible reader will simply say no, but such events are soon to come.
It would have been correct on your part, if Jesus has indeed returned and wiped out all instances of badness done to all of mankind, but we are waiting and we are vigilant for no such things have taken place yet concerning Jesus' return in God's glory.
Do you even know which Lord you are speaking of granted you were trying to connect Jesus to Psalms 148?
Come on, Srecko, take your own advise lol
That being said, one can teach a clown the distinction between God and Christ, as is with how a verse connects with a whole passage. And clowns are not idiots.
 

Because a debate does not end when the points and conclusions are made. What remains open ended are your horrendous claims. The fact you never been in a debate yet start one shows how foolish you truly are, depraved.
You speak of vocabulary and yet you cannot even say "Restorationist". lol Perhaps it is you who needs the dictionary far more than I.
Biblical Unitarians are not Restorationist, however, we take up the study of the Bible seriously, and we study religion, more so, Theological study and discussion is something we take up when it comes to learning about Jesus' church.
The study of religion as defined in short: Religious studies, also known as the study of religion, is an academic field devoted to research into religious beliefs, behaviors, and institutions. It describes, compares, interprets, and explains religion, emphasizing systematic, historically based, and cross-cultural perspectives.
I stated to you 4 times before I study religion even though I am a Biblical Unitarian, i.e. Islam, Judaism, etc.
It is funny because even the Christology of Restoraionist has been addressed 7 times to you, yet your ignorance and appeal to motive shows you to be a bigger fool than realized.
That being said, the debate does not end because you began the debate regarding baptism and now into preaching the gospel and second, the claims you made are still in demand of answer and or forfeit.
I agree with the teenager, you are perhaps quite idiotic when it comes to debate especially when you start one with a Christian who lives for debate - fool's errand on your part, simpleton. For his words hurt you because of your reaction to what he had said.
If you want to run from a debate you started, that is find with me.
 

But you are alluding to a situation that has not even happen yet, therefore you are at fault, and you can be called out for that. Tell me Srecko, as the Kingdom of God had already removed all injustice from the earth, from far and frow? As the End Times Tribulations ended... The honest Bible reader will simply say no, but such events are soon to come.
It would have been correct on your part, if Jesus has indeed returned and wiped out all instances of badness done to all of mankind, but we are waiting and we are vigilant for no such things have taken place yet concerning Jesus' return in God's glory.
Do you even know which Lord you are speaking of granted you were trying to connect Jesus to Psalms 148?
Come on, Srecko, take your own advise lol
That being said, one can teach a clown the distinction between God and Christ, as is with how a verse connects with a whole passage. And clowns are not idiots.
 

@Anna Likewise the culture and customs for some, reasons why what is done in countries that is unknown to majority of outsiders, be it British folk, Americans, etc if done in the UK or America is is seen as normal.
That being said, I had short dreadlocks for a long time when I was very young into the age of 12, I chose to point them. One of my biggest problems was my hair always got in my eyes. The only good thing about the ridiculous amount of biotin in my system is I do not have to worry about going bald, as some around my age, 20s, are suffering from. Sadly even, I see women with this issue of baldness. Either genetics for some or high levels of D.H.T. (Dihydrotestosterone) byproduct. I do have a beard though, but it is very short, and at times, I do choose to cut it, if in my father's country in some parts, if I visit, I do cut it due to culture reasons and to show some respect.

But you were the one who initiated, therefore, this tells you were both lied, and in the wrong.
Your own claims are forfeit because there were merely lies, more so, satanic lies in the face of the good book itself.
So next time, do not start a debate and succumb to the cowards way out, it is both a disrespect and a dishonor to those who uphold debate such as myself.
And no verse concerning The snake preaching the gospel of the Christ nor speaking of their own will.
And no verse concerning The snake preaching the gospel of the Christ nor speaking of their own will.
 
And no verse concerning The rock and or stone preaching the gospel of the Christ nor speaking of their own will.
Ok let's see it then.
lol, a gentlemen's effort, who has been revealed to be a fool with his own folly.
Granted both context and the references, of which we find from Isaiah and Hosea, it makes your simplicity depravity easily discern.
More so, you were mixing things before and during the Christ, so how will this add up when Isaiah and Hosea, as references to that verse holds steadfast?
And in the end the gospel is not professed by animals.
Ironic, this is some advise you yourself should be applying to the full.
Also I see you used the CEV Bible.
Granted this is debate and in debates some can go unhinged and or go all out, I can honesty say, that this was indeed a stupid move done by a stupid person on your part granted with the evidence against you and the fact all your claims are both ignorant and slander.
I uphold what the Bible says, so no complains. My problem is with lairs, stupid persons, fools, willful ignorance, etc. And you fit all tabs.
Yes you are just the reader, but as a reader, one must take in what is being conveyed, not with the AS IS mentally you tap dance to, it will never work.
Perhaps you should "speak with the stones outside of your home and consult with them concerning this 
For the Bible is true concerning those who hear God's Word and wants to make public declaration by means of their own decision. The Bible is clear on the things that
That being said, I suggest you take your own advise:
 
Perhaps next time remember this - Do not start a debate with someone who actually does debates and enjoys them. Because debaters can go all out and or unhinged if need be, especially if they are the one who began and or is given the challenge.