Tab Content
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:28 PM
    To be inline with the site guidelines for the forum, as posted here... This thread should only be used be used for Mormon's to cast a light on the issues as outlined in the OP. Follow-up questions by others is fine. This thread is not to be used as a spring board to bash Mormons or otherwise pile on. This thread needs to be respectful to all. Note- this policy seems the most sound and intellectually fulfilling. In cases where there is 3rd party material that makes accusations against another religion this site can be used to clear the air on those accusations without the accused having to be defensive.
    5 replies | 103 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:31 AM
    TER, I want to point out an assumption that you've made in your statement above. When you accuse CL of "not addressing this topic as a Christian, but more as an Israelite of the Old Testament," you are assuming that Israelites were not Christians under the Old Covenant. But if that were true, then it would mean that no Israelite was connected to the Messiah by faith (which would include church fathers like Abraham, Moses, and David). In effect, you are creating a false dichotomy between the people of God in the Old Testament and the people of God in the New Testament, even though both groups worship the same triune God. If you want to understand how the laws in the Old Testament apply today, then you have to study them through the eyes of Christ (cf. John 5:45-47), since Christ was the One Who established them with the Father and the Holy Spirit in the Old Covenant. Thus, the ethical principle imbibed in laws such as the ones in Deuteronomy still remain true and relevant for all people today (since Christ has all authority in Heaven and on Earth ). Even the apostle Paul compared New Testament Christians to Old Testament Christians in 1 Corinthians 10:1-4, illustrating that God interacts with His people the same way through covenant blessings and curses. So, you have no Biblical basis to make contrasts between Christians in the New Testament and Israelites in the Old Testament, as if God's Law had authority over the latter group but not the former. The laws do apply today, but in the greater revelation from Christ in the New Covenant, it takes greater wisdom to understand how they apply today. Once again, all of the laws in the Old Testament have an ethical implication to them, and ethics are eternal since they reflect the character of the triune God. Thus, CL has every right to discern and develop civil laws from laws in the Old Testament. Otherwise, the alternative is appealing to the relative morality of secular humanism (atheism) to frame civil statutes.
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:01 AM
    Calling people names has been against the site guidelines for almost a decade. Anyone who left because of it would have done so out of their own ignorance. I do no think there was one case post Rand dropping out where there was a name calling report that was not properly managed. So the site is being run fine, no victims here. In general, people need to learn to deal with reality, even when it doesn't favor their political narrative. The site has done an evaluation and doesn't support Trump. As with many other candidates before, that doesn't mean we can't post news about what they are doing, we're not going to allow pro-Trump puff pieces but general news and negative commentary is fine. If there are false statements they can and should be called out. More posts where deleted. Everyone needs to go read the Community Guidelines and follow them:
    77 replies | 1133 view(s)
  • CaptainAmerica's Avatar
    06-29-2016, 05:41 PM The proposal would have Phoenix trails closed when the temperature reaches 110 degrees or higher. "Under the proposal, hikers would also not be allowed to bring dogs on trails when the temperature is at or above 100 degrees. The city has not said what consequences would be for people who violate these rules if they’re put in place." the nanny state is happening in Az. This is the first time living here I have ever seen such a law proposed for parks . This state is quickly taking a nose dive into socialism and statism.
    18 replies | 121 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    06-29-2016, 04:45 PM
    Thread cleaned up. If you think a user is causing problems please bring the issue to the staff or put them on ignore. Do not attack other members. Unless it's based on hate or violence, nobody gets banned for voicing opinions. That was certainly not the case here.
    77 replies | 1133 view(s)
  • CaptainAmerica's Avatar
    06-29-2016, 04:42 PM these people have no clue..."water water water" has nothing to do with core body temperatures. UGH...the city should stop promoting hiking for families.its not a family activity in the desert period.
    18 replies | 321 view(s)
  • CaptainAmerica's Avatar
    06-29-2016, 03:27 PM The proposal would have Phoenix trails closed when the temperature reaches 110 degrees or higher. "Under the proposal, hikers would also not be allowed to bring dogs on trails when the temperature is at or above 100 degrees. The city has not said what consequences would be for people who violate these rules if they’re put in place." the nanny state is happening in Az. This is the first time living here I have ever seen such a law proposed for parks . This state is quickly taking a nose dive into socialism and statism.
    18 replies | 321 view(s)
  • CaptainAmerica's Avatar
    06-28-2016, 10:00 PM
    2 replies | 199 view(s)
  • CaseyJones's Avatar
    06-28-2016, 08:49 PM
    77 replies | 1133 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    06-28-2016, 04:40 PM
    I'm not sure of your point here, but I have certainly meant everything that I have said. What there is certainly some room for basic banter in threads there is validity in having discussion and analysis on this topic, which can be done without supporting Trump. While the site does not support Trump it is foolhardy to dismiss everything he says, or in this case, the 7 point plan he presents. It's worthy of analysis to ID points of possible value and points of weakness. This analysis will provide intellectual value and help people understand good policy. That still doesn't mean one has to or should support Trump even if he has some good points on some issues. Could we please get some more analysis on these points? Are any more details provided?
    96 replies | 1188 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 04:15 PM
    I certainly disagree with your characterization, but you're welcome to point out flaws in the moderation; I understand things aren't perfect and we aim to do better. Brian pointed out the issues here. I don't deny that some members are using arguments that I do not see as helpful to our movement. I do not question their intent or motives however, it doesn't matter if I did anyway. With the right due-process, long time members can be banned but I'm not going to railroad anyone who has been here 5+ years. They have earned more than that, just like you have earned more than that. Still, I'm not afraid to hit anyone up side the head with good arguments.
    145 replies | 2208 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 12:14 PM
    I'm honest about enforcing the guidelines, and there are many violations here-- not that they were flagged, which is extremely helpful for the site to be run properly since the staff can't read everything. And no, it is not acceptable to call members in good standing "trolls"; nor does it really make sense to call someone that who has been here for 9 years. I have reviewed much of the discussion and agree you make some excellent points here. Sometimes we allows some latitude of discussion if there is a large degree of value and there can be some positive education on the matter within our member base. It just helps to know how to get people to change their perspective on some things, mocking them and calling them trolls doesn't help. If you want to make a different you need to challenge people intellectually. For example, here's is an attempt on that for this thread: I would agree this is what is going on, any most specifically, the elites don't care about race issues, they care about control issues and they will destroy what is needed to get what they want. Many races have fallen victim to this and more will in the future if they are not stopped.
    145 replies | 2208 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-26-2016, 09:11 AM
    I believe in the decentralization of power, which is a Biblical principle, first derived in Genesis with the formation of the tribes of Israel (I don't have time to delve deeply into that, but it can be proven). So, to answer your question, I would advocate a system that is similar to what we had in our early republic, where local, state, and county governments are formed by Christians from various denominations to assess how crimes should be punished within their respective jurisdictions. So, for example, if a Presbyterian is living in a county full of Roman Catholics, and those Catholics have laws which he believes do not square with Biblical justice, then he can find another county where there are mostly Presbyterians and from there, they can work together to apply God's Law based on their Biblical convictions. That's what we had in the earlier days of America, with entire states being composed of one Christian denomination from another state of a different Christian denomination. It's one of the reasons why the First Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," because their definition of "religion" was related to Christian denominations, understanding that each state was by and large composed of a particular Christian denomination.
    70 replies | 1211 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-26-2016, 08:51 AM
    Because if you want to have a just society, then there needs to be an absolute standard for determining what is just and unjust behavior. Once you have established that, then you can deal with how unjust behavior ought to be punished. Why is that? Because God desires holiness from His creatures, not just internally but also externally, which is why God expects us to put away evil from society as it emerges. And, of course, evil is defined by God's Word, not majority opinion nor by current trends of acceptable behavior.
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-26-2016, 08:45 AM
    If you're a Christian, then you should already know how one determines what governments God has ordained. That's why we have disciplines such as Biblical and systematic theology to delve into the subject on what the Bible teaches about the nature of government. But it is a topic that can be ascertained, and it is one that no other worldview (secular humanism, Islam, etc.) can account for.
    70 replies | 1211 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-26-2016, 08:24 AM
    No, it doesn't make me an anarchist; it just means that I hold to the view that God rules society, and therefore, He is the One Who delegates authority (those who minister to others) and sets their jurisdictions within a civilized society. That's why an elite subset of society should never manipulate the rest by force. All people should be self-governed by God's Law before they take any position of authority within God-ordained governments (family, church, and state) to ensure that an elite group do not take over society by their own whims. When that happens (as it is currently in American civics), then it is a good indication that people in positions of authority are not self-governing themselves in God's Law.
    70 replies | 1211 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-26-2016, 01:22 AM
    The only way we can answer the question, "Should X be criminalized," is by, first, answering, "What does God say about X?" The two questions go together, when we are discussing what sexual sins should receive civil sanctions. But, of course, it takes wisdom to understand how to apply those sanctions in our modern world, and that can be challenging at times, I admit. But, nonetheless, it still needs to be considered when we're assessing public policy and its relation to sexual taboos. Another thing to keep in mind is that the page marked "New Testament" in our Bibles is not inspired by God. That fact is very important because when we are talking about continuities and discontinuities between the Old and New Covenants, we need to realize that the Old Testament laws still applied when the New Testament was being written. Thus, the authors' approach to how Old Testament laws would apply to them in their own day would not have been riddled with many of the assumptions that we face today in modern Christianity (with ideas such as the "Two-Kingdoms Approach," "Law vs. Gospel" dichotomies, Dispensationalism, and other concepts which inherently but inadvertently pit the Old Testament against the New Testament). Unfortunately, you, yourself, are guilty of those very approaches to the New Testament, which is why you fail at understanding how the Old Testament applies to us today. Remember, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16). If sexual acts were condemned with civil penalties in the Old Covenant, then those penalties apply civilly, in some way, in the New Covenant. Otherwise, you would have to say that God made a mistake when He decreed those sexual acts as punishable by civil law under the Old Covenant. But, once again, it takes wisdom to understand how they apply today because the world has changed since the times of the Old Covenant. But the moral indictment against certain sexual behaviors does not change because moral laws are eternal, by nature.
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-26-2016, 12:48 AM
    Ronin, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about in relation to Paul's theology. It's funny how you consider yourself more educated about the relationship between Jesus and Paul when world-renown Biblical scholars, such as N.T. Wright, have been applauded for their research and writings about Paul's life and theology. If you have any serious, objective interest in how Paul's theology was consistent with Christ's doctrines, then I recommend that you watch this lecture from one of the best Pauline scholars in the world, and learn something:
    42 replies | 557 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 09:20 PM
    What "uncontrolled systems" are you referring to, fisharmor?
    70 replies | 1211 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 09:16 PM
    Exactly, erowe1. That's all Ronin Truth does. He can't give a definitive, comprehensive rebuttal to anything in which he disagrees with. All he knows how to do is copy and paste links. That's why his credibility, especially in these kinds of discussions, is always suspect because of his laziness and ignorant flippancy of facts that he has no intention of researching. He seriously needs to leave these forums and stick to playing Solitaire online or something.
    42 replies | 557 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 11:56 AM
    Christians have provided evidence that Paul affirmed the doctrines of Christ. It's just that people like yourself refuse to accept the evidence.
    42 replies | 557 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 11:53 AM
    The claims that Jesus was an anarchist and that Paul was a statist are simply anachronisms. As such, they make both of your assertions moot points, so there's no need to argue with you about the merits of your claims.
    70 replies | 1211 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 04:37 AM
    When you read much of the literature in favor of anarchism, it seems that anarchism starts off with 5 basic assumptions, philosophically speaking: Truth is relative. Life is random. People are basically good. A person can change his own life if he chooses to. The goal of life is self-satisfaction. Building a civic/economic philosophy on those basic assumptions opens the door wide open for an elite group to manipulate society very easily, in my opinion. Thus, anarchism (no matter if it's anarcho-capitalism, anatcho-communism, anarcho-primitivism, or any other school of thought) cannot solve the problem of having an elite manipulating and ruling over society.
    70 replies | 1211 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 03:47 AM
    3830 replies | 163855 view(s)
  • afwjam's Avatar
    06-24-2016, 02:09 PM
    Tear it down, all of it, including trumps wall.
    19 replies | 377 view(s)
  • afwjam's Avatar
    06-24-2016, 02:06 PM
    I can't give any rep to people in this thread, stop being so right on.
    111 replies | 6437 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-24-2016, 03:08 AM
    The Accountant seems like it's a movie mixture of The Bourne Identity and A Beautiful Mind. Nonetheless, I still want to see it.
    1048 replies | 52705 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    06-24-2016, 12:11 AM
    I am not an expert, but the experts that I have listened to say the scope you want is a NightForce -- they are expensive (about $1,700+) but you get what you pay for. Optics are first rate, the scopes are really durable and hold their zero. Reports are you can take the scope off, beat someone over the head with it and it will still hold its zero. :D Worth looking into...
    36 replies | 723 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 09:48 AM
    The bottom line of this discussion is determining whether or not it's good to have laws prohibiting sexual behaviors, in general, and prostitution, in particular. It seems to me that you believe local, state, nor the federal governments should have laws prohibiting sexual behavior. If I'm correct about that, then are you for repealing laws that prohibit sexual acts like rape, child molestation, and bestiality because they have been codified by civil magistrates? I'm just trying to understand where your thinking is on that.
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 09:27 AM
    Where did Christian Liberty ever say, "Comply or cooperate with my judgment, or I will murder you," as it pertains to prostitution?
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 09:25 AM
    If you're a Christian, then you should have a moral problem with bestiality. If you don't, then you need to study the Scriptures to see what God thinks of it. Now, my reason for asking you about bestiality was to simply show that you do pass judgments on sexual behavior, just as Christian Liberty does. There is no neutrality about it. That brings me to your statement: There is no religious neutrality in public policy. The rejection of a Biblical application to public policy is just the adoption of another religious authority, which in our current state of affairs is secular humanism. Some group of citizens will be judged and sanctioned by the law, based on the religious foundation of those who create laws. That's why homosexuals, for example, are using state and federal legislatures to impose their morality upon Christians (and other groups) through "hate crimes legislation." Once again, that's just a reflection of someone's religious worldview. It's simply inevitable.
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 06:41 AM
    Okay, maybe I misunderstood you, so let me back up and ask if you have a problem with sexual acts like bestiality.
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 04:13 AM
    29 replies | 386 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 03:52 AM
    It doesn't matter which of the two tod evans was referring to because both of them are judgments of a sexual act. That was simply my point. Now, concerning how that relates to this thread, as Christians, we know the Bible teaches that God is sovereign over His creation, which means that He has authority over every aspect of human life. So, when we are discussing public policy about certain behaviors which are public taboos in our society, then our first question to ask is, "What has God said about it?" From there, we use wisdom from the Scriptures to understand how that behavior ought to be dealt with in society by all levels of government (self, family, church, and civil) in order to please God.
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 02:24 AM
    My point is that you have a moral declaration about a particular sexual behavior, and that declaration is, in fact, passing judgment upon those who engage in the act (which, in the case I quoted you from, was bestiality). In fact, everyone passes judgment on sexual behaviors. I'm sure that no one here accepts that rape is a moral sexual behavior. But, hey, if there is no God, and thus, there is no ultimate ethical standard for sexual behavior, so, therefore, humans are nothing more than evolved bags of meat with electricity running through themselves, then some people can't help their sexual preference to rape others. And we can apply that same reasoning to other sexual behaviors. So, then, where is the room to judge any sexual behavior, if God hasn't set up some rules for standard sexuality? Thus, the prerequisite in this whole discussion is marked by one simple question: "By whose standard?"
    158 replies | 1948 view(s)
More Activity

181 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Hey Josh, just wondering if you got my PM about the name change yesterday morning?
    Thanks, oh, and yes, I'm subscribed.
  2. View Conversation
    Finally, a poster for my bedroom!
  3. View Conversation
    Hey Josh,
    Could you sticky the "Why aren't we all members of the Free State Project" in the grassroots central for me. Do I get a 2nd one for the Free Talk Live ad?

  4. View Conversation
    thanks for the heads up regarding my bunchies thread! I never use google myself, so I wouldn't have known otherwise. Now, bring him back!
  5. View Conversation
    Josh... can you help promote this Tea Party on Feb 1st. We are going to be sending Tea bags to Washington
  6. View Conversation
    Josh, I put up a thread from the Boston Tea Party Group BEGGING for donors and purchasers of tickets. Do you think you could sticky it for me?
  7. View Conversation
    Free bunchies! We want him back.
  8. View Conversation

    What's your snail mail addy. I'll sent you $20 for the upgrade. And what is the maximum and minimum length of a screen name?

  9. View Conversation
    Hey Josh, I' m petitioning to get this thread stickied:

    With people wanting to write in whether it counts or not, it's a nice recourse to know if it does or not.

    Thanks for all you do, Scott.
  10. View Conversation
Showing Visitor Messages 161 to 170 of 181
Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 LastLast
Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 LastLast
About JoshLowry

Basic Information

Political Campaign Skills
Graphic Artist, Graphic Designer, Web Designer / Developer, Sign Printer
Video and Audio:
Video Producer
Online Marketer


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
Most Recent Message
06-13-2016 01:11 AM
General Information
Join Date
Home Page

36 Friends

  1. afwjam afwjam is offline

    McAfee 2016

  2. Anthony T Anthony T is offline


    Anthony T
  3. bobbyw24 bobbyw24 is offline


  4. brenton brenton is offline


  5. Bryan Bryan is offline


  6. Bsouljah Bsouljah is offline

    New Member

  7. CaptainAmerica CaptainAmerica is offline


  8. CaseyJones CaseyJones is offline


  9. Chainspell Chainspell is offline


    • Send a message via MSN to Chainspell
  10. ClydeCoulter ClydeCoulter is offline


Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 36
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...


  • 07:14 PM - Hidden


  • 11:06 PM - Hidden
  • 04:41 PM - Hidden


  • 01:58 PM - Hidden


  • 02:07 PM - Hidden
  • 01:12 PM - Hidden
  • 11:19 AM - Hidden


  • 09:52 PM - Hidden
  • 09:47 PM - Hidden
  • 07:33 PM - Hidden
  • 06:50 PM - Hidden
  • 05:56 PM - Hidden
  • 01:39 AM - Hidden


  • 11:45 PM - Hidden
  • 09:31 PM - Hidden
  • 03:01 PM - Hidden