Tab Content
  • Petar's Avatar
    Today, 10:28 AM
    "plowright"
    12 replies | 135 view(s)
  • Nirvikalpa's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:19 PM
    She'd actually be his aunt. Her brother was Rhaegar, and Snow is the son of Lyanna (Stark) and Rhaegar.
    411 replies | 15317 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:38 PM
    Here is a lovely Jewish lady discussing certain "coincidences" herself:
    33 replies | 438 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    1 replies | 83 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 10:30 PM
    The answer, of course, is that you totally lack the credibility to predict that. If you were honest, that is something that you would readily admit.
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 10:10 PM
    What gives you the credibility to accurately predict that?
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 10:06 PM
    The question is, why do you value your own input? Why do you continue to espouse opinions that are based on the same, failed methodology? And call me a "random" if you want, but at least I was able to actually predict how Trump would perform during the primaries. Why do you insist on ignoring people with actual credibility? Are you trying to spread ignorance on purpose?
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 09:56 PM
    You are the one who was anticipating a Trump loss. If you are unable to admit that you are bad at anticipating whether Trump will win or lose, then that is on you. Why don't you start listening to people that are actually good at anticipating whether Trump is going to win or lose? Don't you want to promote realistic expectations?
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 09:41 PM
    All you did was post polls/arguments to combat the idea that Trump was going to win. I was able to anticipate that as far back as September. Why do you refuse to take the opinions of people with actual credibility into consideration with the way that you choose to interpret polls?
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 09:27 PM
    Given that the way that you chose to interpret the primary polls was proven to be a failure, what makes you believe that you have any credibility this time around?
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 09:14 PM
    The purpose of a poll is to help anticipate an outcome. Being that all available evidence shows that you are unable to predict an accurate outcome - through the way that you choose to interpret polls - then why do you continue to spread what likely amounts to a giant pile of misinformation? Are you intentionally trying to confuse people when it comes to anticipating how he will perform? If you are not trying to confuse people, then why don't you start taking the opinions of people who actually have credibility on the subject into account? Your behaviour is not consistent with the actions of someone who is acting in a sincere manner.
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 08:59 PM
    The guy who lasted the longest against Trump (Cruz) was the guy who avoided a confrontation with him for the longest amount of time. Objectively speaking, all of the available evidence shows that you are really bad at anticipating anything that is going to happen with Donald Trump. Why don't you start listening to the people who were actually correct about his performance?
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 08:48 PM
    The point is that you did not have the intuition to be able to see that Trump was being massively underestimated for quite some time. I was noticing the sea-change back in SEPTEMBER and was anticipating his primary victory then. Why were you unable to see what was happening? Did it ever occur to you that perhaps you are just really bad at anticipating what is going to happen when it comes to Donald Trump?
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 08:28 PM
    CPUd: you've gotta admit that you were the guy who spent the whole primary posting information to support the idea that Trump was going to lose, and in the end, your methodology/thesis failed completely. What makes your methodology/thesis any less garbage this time?
    48 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 12:38 AM
    haha, I'm not :)
    30 replies | 1439 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 12:20 AM
    Were the people attacked actually "right wing", or were they just the usual leftists who also happen to be racist?
    10 replies | 318 view(s)
  • Petar's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 12:19 AM
    Trump will start beating the shit out of Clinton as soon as he gets a chance to debate her live on national television.
    48 replies | 568 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 | 1151 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.
    154 replies | 1706 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 | 1151 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 | 1151 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.
    154 replies | 1706 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 | 531 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 09:20 PM
    What "uncontrolled systems" are you referring to, fisharmor?
    70 replies | 1151 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 | 531 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 | 531 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 | 1151 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 | 1151 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 03:47 AM
    3825 replies | 163599 view(s)
  • Nirvikalpa's Avatar
    06-24-2016, 08:16 PM
    I changed my SN... five years ago (and I was give.me.liberty)? Not MelissaWV, though I am honored you'd think so as she's an awesome lady.
    23 replies | 605 view(s)
More Activity

10 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    A Ron Paul endorsed Liberty candidate needs your help!

    Donate today to Thomas Massie with $20.12 or something bigger! http://www.thomasmassie.com/

    For Liberty!
  2. View Conversation
    ... While I was living in a warehouse for a bit over a couple months, I was able to watch all the Michael Steele "lectures"
  3. View Conversation
    I challenged you on the point your trying to make with my quote in your sig.

    Accept the challenge, and be honest
  4. View Conversation
    Logan Campbell is a hero.
  5. View Conversation
    Whatch'a doin'?
  6. View Conversation
    Ha, you're a funny guy.
    Sorry. I got bored waiting for you to say anything so I went AFK.
  7. View Conversation
    There's a lot to learn here...

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0282988/ratings

    Oh -- you might be interested in these... http://interviewproject.davidlynch.c...sodes/001-jess
  8. View Conversation
    hey good to c othere kiwis on here
  9. View Conversation
    So how easy/difficult is it to create and maintain a business in New Zealand?
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 10
About idiom

Basic Information

Signature


In New Zealand:
The Coastguard is a Charity
Air Traffic Control is a private company run on user fees
The DMV is a private non-profit
Rescue helicopters and ambulances are operated by charities and are plastered with corporate logos
The agriculture industry has zero subsidies
5% of the national vote, gets you 5 seats in Parliament
A tax return has 4 fields
Business licenses aren't even a thing nor are capital gains taxes
Constitutional right to refuse any type of medical care

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
7,996
Posts Per Day
2.54
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
10
Most Recent Message
04-27-2012 12:41 AM
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 11:10 PM
Join Date
11-11-2007
Referrals
0

9 Friends

  1. coyote_sprit coyote_sprit is offline

    Banned

    coyote_sprit
  2. Jeremy Jeremy is offline

    Moderator

    Jeremy
  3. Nirvikalpa Nirvikalpa is offline

    Unapologetic Feminist

    Nirvikalpa
  4. Petar Petar is offline

    Member

    Petar
  5. RedStripe RedStripe is offline

    Member

    RedStripe
  6. sarahgop sarahgop is offline

    Banned

    sarahgop
  7. silverhawks silverhawks is offline

    Member

    silverhawks
  8. Theocrat Theocrat is offline

    Member

    • Send a message via Skype™ to Theocrat
    Theocrat
  9. Trisha Trisha is offline

    New Member

    Trisha
Showing Friends 1 to 9 of 9
No results to display...
No results to display...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

06-25-2016


06-08-2016


05-25-2016


05-10-2016


05-01-2016


04-26-2016


04-19-2016


04-16-2016


04-13-2016


04-07-2016


04-06-2016


04-04-2016


04-03-2016


04-02-2016


04-01-2016



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast