#3
Posted on November 25th, 2005 by Reformed Pope into the Top Ten 2005 categoryThis next blog needs no introduction, will everyone please rise and welcome the THIRD GREATEST POST OF THE YEAR:
Who Burns First
What amazing timing. Right when I’m posting CBC’s top ten list from "Who Burns First" they release an updated version for 2006. Good news for Samuel John Klein it looks like Catholics have dropped from the list and have been replaced by the dreaded Non-Tither (CBC’s most feared).Here is the new list for 2006:
1. Irreverent Bloggers
2. Gay’s (w/aids)
3. Non-Tithers
4. The Poor
5. Aaron Tuck
6. People who drink alcohol in public places*
7. Pregnant Teens and their promiscuous partner.
8. Feminists
9. Those who voted NO on Measure 36
10. Democrats
*There is a slight loophole for drinkers. If you only drink on vacation, preferably while you are out of state, you will be exempt from burning. This rule does not apply to other area’s (i.e. – If you get pregnant out of state, you will still burn)
RSS feed for posts
November 28th, 2005 at 9:59 am
Hey Karli,
I have a feeling you are going to be burning.
November 28th, 2005 at 10:02 am
Quick editors note:
The first time I posted this people got a little upset, saying that you shouldn’t make fun of people burning in hell.
I replied to this comment by saying:
“As for “Anonymous” who wants us to not mention hell I would like to point out that at no time during my comment did I mention hell. I simply mentioned burning; that could be a sun burn, I don’t really know.”
Hopefully that will help avoid any hurt feelings.
November 28th, 2005 at 10:16 am
Uh-guess you are right, according to this list. Let’s see, 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, and 10 all fit me. If I have more than one on the list, will I be burning in solitary confinement? I always thought hell would be one big party (kidding), but if I’m burning in solitary confinement, then maybe I need to change my ways…
November 28th, 2005 at 12:53 pm
>> 5. Aaron Tuck !! Ahh… good 'ol Aaron. Certainly, if *he* is gonna be burning, then so will I. After all, it was Mr. Andrew who said Aaron was just like me. (I think he meant it as an insult, but hey.. people could aspire for a lot worse.) I'll probably spend an extra two years in purgatory just for writing this! Hey, if Aaron is reading this — reply back to Cara!
November 29th, 2005 at 12:36 am
Congradulations on a very well written, interesting and surperb blog!
Have you heard about this shocking news?
1000’s of Real People in 180+ Countries are Earning
Quiet Fortunes From Home Using the Most Ingenious
Automated Marketing System Ever Invented.
Are you curious to find out what this is all about?
Why not? You Have Nothing to Lose.
You can sign up for this system absolutely free of
charge and check it all out for yourself.
To start off we have a short video presentation we
would like you to watch. Just turn up your speakers
and click on the link below.
Have fun and open your mind!
It is all right here: web money It successfully covers web money related stuff.
Come and check it out now, Scott
November 29th, 2005 at 6:51 am
Promotion, don’t ever bring that crap here again this is not the place for advertising. non-asshole dude sounding like an asshole
November 29th, 2005 at 7:10 am
Another help from Spurgeon
November 29, 2005
You shall not go around as a slanderer among your people. . . . you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him.
Leviticus 19:16-17
Slander emits a threefold poison, for it injures the teller, the hearer, and the person who is being slandered. Whether the report is true or false, we are by this precept of God’s Word forbidden to spread it. The reputations of the Lord’s people should be very precious in our sight, and we should regard it as shameful to help the devil dishonor the church and the name of the Lord. Some tongues need a bridle rather than a spur. Many rejoice in putting down their brothers and sisters, as if in doing so they raised themselves. Noah’s wise sons cast a covering over their father, and the one who exposed him earned a fearful curse. We may ourselves one of these dark days need leniency and silence from our family; let us offer it cheerfully to those who require it now. Let this be our family motto, and our personal bond: Speak evil of no man.
The Holy Spirit, however, permits us to censure sin and prescribes the way in which we are to do it. It must be done by rebuking our brother to his face, not by talking behind his back. This approach is manly, brotherly, Christlike, and under God’s blessing will be useful. Do we shy away from it? Then we must lay the greater stress upon our conscience and commit ourselves to the responsibility, in case by tolerating sin in our friend we become partakers of it. Hundreds have been saved from gross sins by the timely, wise, affectionate warnings of faithful friends and family. Our Lord Jesus has set us a gracious example of how to deal with erring friends in His warning given to Peter, the prayer with which He preceded it, and the gentle way in which He endured Peter’s boastful denial that he needed such a caution.
November 29th, 2005 at 7:25 am
slan·der n.
Law. Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person’s reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone.
Anon, if you had read this blog for very long at all, then you would not be taking this so seriously. One of the rules (just barely) kept by the authors of the blog is not to publish rumors or obvious falsehoods about CBC or its members. When they do post something clearly “out there” it is always done as satire and tongue-in-cheek.
Sadly enough, there is enough material provided by CBC (and a long history of dissatisfied former CBC/PBC alumni) that Cat and RP don’t have to make stuff up, it just writes itself.
As to proper channels for carrying a grievance, we’ve been over this many times in this blog, and one of the main reasons so many people have a problem with CBC is because its leadership is untouchable and not open to correction.
I guess this qualifies me for #1, so I’m off to find my sunscreen…
November 29th, 2005 at 7:54 am
Spurgeon:
That’s a nice thought. However, I disagree with one assumption.
You assume that members of City Bible are the Lord’s People.
I don’t. I think they’re distorting Christ’s message for personal gain, and thus no longer worthy to be called Children of the Lord.
(See heathen’s can be judgemental too.)
November 29th, 2005 at 8:29 am
That’s just about the worst, most hateful thing I’ve read on this blog…now I think you’ve taken it too far, well, I guess you I thought you did a long time ago. At least you know your judgemental, so that’s good I guess, but to lump the thousands of people who go to CBC into some crazy judgement that they are not God’s people is worse than anything CBC has done to you. Maybe some people are using Christ’s message for personal gain, but certainly not all of them, and i don’t think that all the leadership is either. We all have our sin, pride, etc., but at least they are spreading Christ’s message, and people are coming to know and follow him (not to follow Pastor Frank, although you will say that anyway). While in the meantime, you will sit here and blog, and encourage people NOT to walk with Christ (although you will say you are encouraging them not to go to CBC, your disrespct for most things speaks otherwise, ie. RP’s lack of respect for his pastor when his pastor asked him not to blog anymore, he still does, or maybe that’s not his pastor anymore, because he was trying to have to much “authority”). Instead, whether you mean to or not, you are encouraging people to find their “inner spirituality” instead of pursue Christ.
The time I spent at CBC, I experiecned God’s love for me in many ways…like the time they gave us food boxes and moey when we couldn’t pay our utlilites. (yes, even years before we were “members.”) Or the time they bused hundreds of homeless people in to give them a meal, take them to a movie, and share God’s love for them…it was amazing to see these people weep, and say they have never been loved that way before. Or the times they’ve ministered to my alcoholic father who so badly needs Christ. But again, it was probably some scheme for personal gain, according to you. I AM one of God’s children, even while I was at CBC, and I will not stand here and let you say those people are not, you are not God. Which brings me to another point, that when I rate you on the scale of unsafe leaders, you are pretty high up their on some of them, especially the ones about not tolerance for questions or critical inquiry…and like it or not, you do have a voice, you are leader as long as you have followers on this blog. No wonder people blog anonymously, you have not created a safe, friendly environment for people to share openly here, especially if they disagree with you. They probably don’t want to risk losing relationships with people they really like, like Tannell. You can start ripping this apart now, for my lack of use of scripture, for my grammar, for whatever you can find because I know it doesn’t line up with what you think. But as you can see from Catalyst’s last comment, the vision here is definitely blurred.
I’m sorry that CBC has hurt you, and someday I hope you find the freedom from this pain that Christ so badly desires for you, even though I already know that you are “over it” and not “bitter,” I hope you can receive that. I really mean it.
November 29th, 2005 at 8:32 am
Just found out that Marilyn Hickey is coming to CBC Jan 7th and 8th. CBC’s giving the pulpit over to her reveals alot, she is a word of faith, give to get teacher. Just check out http://www.myfortess.org/MarilynHickey.html no slander, read her own words and line it up to the Word. Great fund raiser for CBC, wonder how much she is speaking for.
November 29th, 2005 at 8:36 am
To add one more thing to my last long comment (sorry about the length, I got a little involved I guess), I have too, been really really hurt by several churches (CBC not one of them, although they weren’t perfect either), so I want you to know that I come from a place similar…my family has experienced incredible pain from the hands of believers, but I am thankful that I can move on, forgiving, and not live in bondage to other people’s sin and mistakes. I hope the same for you some day.
November 29th, 2005 at 8:43 am
A little tag, Jentezen Franklin is speaking at the Breakthrough conference, yes his name is Jentizen, another TBN fundraiser. You wont believe your eyes. http://www.myfortress.org/JentezenFranklin.html
November 29th, 2005 at 8:50 am
Angry Anonymous:
(Sigh) Look, I am not saying CBC doesn’t do any good. It does. However, a lot of organization’s do good things and that doesn’t make them Christ-Like.
I’m only being honest. I don’t really care what City Bible does, but if you ask me, I think they are deceptive and manipulative. I think they care less about Christ and more about themselves. Is this a hearsh statement? Yes. But that’s what I believe.
And here we go, I’m going to be even more offensive. Guess what? I don’t think you really know Christ’s message. I think you’re deceived. Christ spoke of forgiveness, grace and compassion. These are not qualities I see coming out of City Bible, or for that matter, much of the Evangical Church in America. And for you to defend them, I think makes you as deceived as them.
It’s one of my complaints with organized religion. Too many people are involved in groupthink, so no one can criticize anyone. People focus on the little good that is done, and ignore the bad.
Anyway, this what I believe. And I’m not going to change, just because it might offend you.
November 29th, 2005 at 8:56 am
And I suppose I should add this comment as well.
I am not bitter at City Bible. This summer I spent a week with elders and members of the church traveling through Central America. It was a friend of mines wedding, and I had a blast with all these people.
I think at heart they’re good people who mean well. I just also think they’re decieved.
FWIW, they think I’m deceived. And round and round we go.
November 29th, 2005 at 9:09 am
Angry? That’s the problem with blogs, I’m not yelling or angry, just saddened I guess, and what i meant to come across as sarcastic too. I don’t expect for you to not offend me, i don’t really care about that, Christ’s message of him being the only way is one the most offensive messages in this world. What I do care about is for you to say that I am not one of God’s children…obviously you didn’t read my blog…I was not defending CBC so much as I was the fact that God did great things in my life through my time at CBC…he can even use imperfect (or corrupt as you might think) organizations to reveal himself to people. I DO know Christ’s message, and am 100% sold out for Christ, his word, and his mission…not for some organized religion. I love grace, compassion, forgiveness (read what I wrote again), that’s why I can get over my frustration with mankind being imperfect and sinful, and yes, even churches who aren’t perfect. My value, worth, and life is soley based on what Christ’s says I am in Him, not on what somebody or some church does to me. Words are powerful though (the bible even says so), that’s why I wanted to make it clear on here that you have no right to say who is and isn’t a child of God. Do I believe there are corrupt people at cbc, of course. i’m not ignorant to the bad at all. do I believe they are still loved by God, of course. That’s what makes what you said hateful-it is not gracious, or compassionate, or forgiving like Christ’s message, it is soley based on an affiliation with a church. You don’t know me, so you don’t know if i’m deceived or not. If you, catalyst, proclaim to love Christ, I believe that even you are a child of God, and that he loves you, yes even if you are deceived, prideful or whatever your issues are (and I’m not saying I know what they are either). i would not be in a place to say that you aren’t.
November 29th, 2005 at 9:19 am
Fair Enough.
And I agree it really isn’t my place to be judgemental. But it makes for a more interesting blog, so I occassionally I am.
That said: City Bible most certainly judges other people. So it’s a little hypocritical to defend them and attack me for doing the same thing.
But you’re right, I don’t know you, which makes it hard to argue with you. So take this last comment in love, (whenever Christian’s want to say something they shouldn’t, they say it “in love”.)
I don’t think you’re emotionally or spiritually strong enough to read this blog. I fear you’re a little too sensitive.
November 29th, 2005 at 9:30 am
Cat, give me a break
“You assume that members of City Bible are the Lord’s People.
I don’t. I think they’re distorting Christ’s message for personal gain, and thus no longer worthy to be called Children of the Lord.”
If Christ’s message is being distorted it is done by the leaders at CBC and not the members of CBC. Was Peter not a believer when distorted Christ’s message by not eating with the gentiles in Gal. 2 or was he not acting like one, being hypoctitical, but still a true believer.
regards, non-asshole dude
November 29th, 2005 at 10:46 am
i can receive that in love, as your opinion. -sigh- Again, I know who I am in Christ, so I know that I am emotionally or spiritually strong enough to read whatever. I love to study his word, and I will defend the cross (and by that I mean Christ’s love and grace for ALL people, even sinners at CBC) until the day I die. That’s why I wrote, again, not to defend CBC, but the love of Christ for all people, even corrupt ones (isn’t that what the bible teaches, oh yeah, I forgot, Zacheus was a righteous man, not a corrupt tax colletctor, that’s why Jesus loved him). I didn’t write because I was weak or too sensitive to handle what you said.
Also, I never said that CBC didn’t judge people (go back to the part where I said, yes, there are corrupt people at CBC). So therefore, I was not being hypocritical. I believe that we (meaning everyone, including CBC, this blog, people all over the world, there I think I covered it now) all have our “stuff,” and I think I said that numerous times, in several ways. hope that makes my point, again.
November 29th, 2005 at 1:24 pm
Cat’s #1 Fan, I’m curious about something. Do you honestly think warning people about a corrupt church is equivalent to driving them away from Christ? CBC is flagrantly non-biblical in quite a few of their policies and this blog points that out (sometimes in a joking manner) If you interpret that as disrespect, then you’re free to that opinion. Just be prepared to defend yourself if you make that claim here. I’d say you saying that this blog is trying to push people to find “inner spirituality” over Christ is disrespectful, naive, and overreacting to something you disagree with.
Also, if you don’t like the sense of humor here, maybe you are too sensitive to blog here. If you are drawing the conclusion that disliking CBC and warning people about their non-biblical teachings is equivalent to leading people away from God, that is also evidence that perhaps this isn’t the place for you.
November 29th, 2005 at 3:49 pm
First, I am a fan of Catalyst, I may disagree with some of the ways he goes about things, but I’m in no way a catalyst hater. I enjoyed blogging with him.
Second of all, why is it that just because I disagree with some things said here does that make me too sensitive to read this, if anything, blogging my point says just the opposite. I’m not offended by most things, but calling thousands of people you don’t know “not God’s children” is not a humor thing, it’s judgemental and ungodly. He wasn’t saying that to be funny, he was making a point, and I didn’t agree with it and felt the need to say so. The only evidence that this isn’t the place for me is that I don’t agree, if I agreed with most things but took offense to some humor, I bet you wouldn’t be saying that I’m too sensitive to be here.
As far as “warning people about unbiblical teachings”-by all means, warn away, the bible calls for that. The part that bugs me is that most of the things said here are pretty unbiblical-but yet people here claim to love Christ and his compassion, grace, and forgiveness. But “out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks.” Is this blog really any different than what it claims CBC is-unbiblical and corrupt? When you allow for a place that allows people to be bitter and have hatred toward others, it is leading them away from Christ, because that’s not who He is. You can call it being honest, which is good, but there comes a point when leaders should biblically, truthfully help them toward the love of Christ, and there is none of that on this blog-just a place to applaud past hurts and help wounds fester. I’m glad that you found each other, now I just hope you find Christ together in the midst of your pain and frustrations as well. Maybe more biblical teaching should take place here, since it’s hard to find it elsewhere.
Peace.
November 29th, 2005 at 5:08 pm
Why go anonymous, fan–not hater– of catalyst?
Karli
November 29th, 2005 at 6:04 pm
If you’ll look, I don’t have an issue with you disagreeing with anyone’s stances on the blog. I have a problem with you comparing criticisms against CBC to being non-christians/leading people away from Christ. If you disagree with individual comments then feel free, but don’t go calling the main themes of this blog unbiblical unless you back it up with Scripture and can respond to counter-arguments. I personally have referenced a good bit of Scripture to back up my previous comments on this blog, but they are usually met with insults or silence. Feel free to take a look at some older topics if you need some proof. Just because the bitterness gauge hits the redline here at times (myself included) doesn’t mean posters here cannot back many of our views Scripturally.
As far as Cat’s not children of God comment, I disagree with the wording but agree with the idea behind the statement. CBC leadership knowingly fosters non-biblical teachings and practices for their own gain, and to me that removes them from the covering of being a church. That doesn’t mean that everybody or anybody that goes there isn’t a child of God, but the leadership’s missteps have deceived and misled a good number of them. Every person on Earth is a child of God, but some of them and some at CBC aren’t playing for His team and I believe that was the point Catalyst was making to Spurgeon.
November 30th, 2005 at 6:57 am
Yeah, the Children of God comment was worded badly. But of course, I was also just trying to annoy Anon, so I guess it served it’s purpose.
November 30th, 2005 at 8:15 am
“I personally have referenced a good bit of Scripture to back up my previous comments on this blog, but they are usually met with insults or silence. Feel free to take a look at some older topics if you need some proof. Just because the bitterness gauge hits the redline here at times (myself included) doesn’t mean posters here cannot back many of our views Scripturally.”
Exactly my point…numerous times they say “too little bible, mostly PF” referencing his sermons….that’s exactly what it is here-too much “blogger” opinion and none to very little scripture. i can write scripture after scripture and no one would respond-the truth (the truth of God’s word) hurts and seems to be looked past here. If you look at my posts (and the #3 post is the only one that I, personally, have blogged on), I am always bringing it back to Christ, and the truth, which is very biblical, but those comments are the ones ignored. And, I have responded to every counter-argument, with, again, the truth of who CHRIST is, not me, or anyone else. This is not defending CBC or saying that they do represent things perfectly, just stating the plain fact that God’s word is not present here.
I’ll leave with these, there are many, but I’m sure you will have others that make you feel what you do is justified-I think warning others is fine-but to rip on people, make fun of people (regardless of what they did to you) and call it accountability, is ridiculous. These are my first and last few days on this blog. May you find the peace that only comes from Christ in all you do. I hope you read in this that I really do mean that, I’m not being sarcastic.
James 4:10-12
Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up. Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?
2 Corinthians 12:20
For I am afraid that when I come I may not find you as I want you to be, and you may not find me as you want me to be. I fear that there may be quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, factions, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder.
Ephesians 4:31-33
Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.
November 30th, 2005 at 8:25 am
I’d be a more inclined to read your comments and scriptures, if you didn’t comment as anonymous.
November 30th, 2005 at 8:26 am
*to clarify why I won’t be here anymore, before you say “I knew you were too sensitive” to disregard anything I’ve said, which you might do anyway- I don’t even live on that side of the country anymore, and am not involved, therefore, I don’t see the need to be involved here, it’s a waste of my time. hope you all find what you’re looking for.
November 30th, 2005 at 8:45 am
Cat, what a copout excuse to not engage the scripture mentioned, how CBC of you to keep your head in the sand. Hear is hoping that comparing you to CBC will stir you up to not be like them, so to speak.
non-ahole dude
November 30th, 2005 at 12:59 pm
If you think the Word is completely absent here, then I suggest you go dig through the blog archives. Your main complaint has been addressed in this blog previously complete with Biblical references from both sides. While you’re browsing the archived posts, take a look to see how many anonymous posters show up here to sling mud at those here bold enough to put a name and reputation to the things they say. Perhaps after you walk a few miles in our shoes, then you can appreciate why there is little love for judgemental anonymous posters and lack of Scriptural responses to your redunant arguments.
Also, I find it funny that you get so worked up about being called sensitive that you spend posts preemptively denying it. You really should do your homework and bring a thicker skin if you’re going to throw stones on an internet blog.
November 30th, 2005 at 1:59 pm
Wow Fezzik, it seems as though you didn’t even read the last few anon’s posts…they don’t seem judgemental to me, and I usually agree with what is said here. They even said they come from a hurt by the church background, it seems as though they’ve walked a mile in your shoes, but just gotten past it. It does seem weird to me that no one ever addresses scriptures that may disagree with this blog…
Anyhow, why is everyone so worked up about anonymous bloggers? don’t make it an option here if you are going to bitch about it. clearly, people have to blog anonymous, because if you don’t agree with the slightest thing, people freak out. No wonder people stop trying. The funny thing is that if someone were going to give a gift to someone anonymously, no one would be like “I’m not going to take it if you don’t tell me who you are.” It always comes back to “why do you blog anonymously” when they don’t know what else to say.
November 30th, 2005 at 3:09 pm
Anonymous,
Would you like to say that again?
November 30th, 2005 at 3:22 pm
What do people expect?
We started our own blog so we could talk about what we want. Then we graciously opened it up for others to view/comment. Why would anyone be surprised when their negative comments are questioned?
Personally, I love the criticism; but then again I was raised in a Home schooling, Pro-Life Activist, Christian family. I’m used to taking abuse.
If you would like to comment about us with out receive any negative feedback: START YOUR OWN DAMN BLOG. Otherwise, feel free to comment.
In regards to addressing scripture, we covered all that back in December of 2004. Feel free to go back through all our posts and look it all up.
Quite frankly it takes way too much time to argue every point.
November 30th, 2005 at 6:20 pm
Last anonymous, you should go read the blog archives too if you think no one addresses Scripture that appears counter to this blog. While you’re at it, please reread my post because my walking a mile comment was pointed towards experiences on this blog, not church background.
Also, I didn’t say I dislike every anonymous poster. I said I don’t like the judgemental and/or insulting ones. There’s no problem with posting anonymously unless you use the advantage of anonymity to take shots at people or post some garbage and hide after it gets shot down. If you want to be taken seriously, then have the courtesy to let people know to whom they’re speaking. That way, other posters have a frame of reference other than anonymous #343531. If you’re worried about your privacy, what is the difference between me posting anonymously and posting as Fezzik? If anybody can use that name to figure out anything about me other than my taste in movies, then I need a bigger tin foil hat.
December 1st, 2005 at 2:31 am
I see you included Gay’s (w/ AIDS)to your list, but didn’t you forget to include the plain old Gay’s also? Just thought I might point out a possible oversight.
December 1st, 2005 at 7:21 am
Look it. I usually don’t respond to people’s anonymous comments. I don’t care if you comment anonymously, I’m just not going to respond. FWIW, I rarely read those comments either.
However, I did in this instance respond, b/c the comment touched a nerve and I was bored at work. But I probably shouldn’t have said anything at all. My bad.
So, it’s nothing personal. If you want to comment under anonymous, go for it. I’m just probably not gonna respond.
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:07 am
You have a fine blog.
( Website marketing and promotion tools )
web promotion tools.
December 2nd, 2005 at 5:30 pm
What a load of BS catalyst! I am no more anonymous on this blog than megachurchsurvivor, Fezzik, Christian Hope, etc. Click on any of these “names” and there is no real name to the profile. as a matter of fact, your profile isn’t even available.
let’s face it, you might “know” these others without their names on their profiles b/c of personal relationships-and you are comfortable with their beliefs. I for one, do not know any of them, so why should I comment to these “anonymous” bloggers. If they are so proud of their statements-why not go real names?
At the end of the day, you comment when you feel you have something to say, when you feel backed into a corner or it’s going on to long, you pull out the old “anonymous” trick. RP-if you only want people who believe like you do, why allow anonymous comments? You said before you wouldn’t get as many commnets then, but if you guys don’t really read them or want to respond, then why even allow them? Such hypocrisy.
But anyways, cat, you probably won’t even read this (but come on, you love reading everything that someone writes on your blog, you just probably won’t respond, but if I made up a name, you probably would, maybe). I don’t know what to believe, or if I can believe anything you guys say. make up your mind.
ps-why is that people only get called judgemental when they put scriptures down? does the truth hurt that much?
December 2nd, 2005 at 5:30 pm
What a load of BS catalyst! I am no more anonymous on this blog than megachurchsurvivor, Fezzik, Christian Hope, etc. Click on any of these “names” and there is no real name to the profile. as a matter of fact, your profile isn’t even available.
let’s face it, you might “know” these others without their names on their profiles b/c of personal relationships-and you are comfortable with their beliefs. I for one, do not know any of them, so why should I comment to these “anonymous” bloggers. If they are so proud of their statements-why not go real names?
At the end of the day, you comment when you feel you have something to say, when you feel backed into a corner or it’s going on to long, you pull out the old “anonymous” trick. RP-if you only want people who believe like you do, why allow anonymous comments? You said before you wouldn’t get as many commnets then, but if you guys don’t really read them or want to respond, then why even allow them? Such hypocrisy.
But anyways, cat, you probably won’t even read this (but come on, you love reading everything that someone writes on your blog, you just probably won’t respond, but if I made up a name, you probably would, maybe). I don’t know what to believe, or if I can believe anything you guys say. make up your mind.
ps-why is that people only get called judgemental when they put scriptures down? does the truth hurt that much?
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:21 pm
The arrogant, prideful, aggressive, only we have the truth movement in Christianity, “harnessing” God for prosperity, seems to finally be getting its’ chastisement by our Lord Jesus Christ. I hope this movement will change. Can a whole destructive movement of the church change? The pride of man when he puffs himself up with God on his side (in his most un-humble opinion of course), is very harmful to our historic faith and belief in Jesus Christ; and from which we have our confidence and reliability in the Bible, based first on our acceptance of Jesus as saviour. The Bible remains a dark book apart from faith in Christ, for He is its true content. When sinners are brought to faith in Him, Jesus Christ points them back to the writings of the prophets and apostles as the sole authoritative source for all the church believes, teaches and confesses.
December 2nd, 2005 at 8:31 pm
So non-anonymous, how do we tell you apart from the other 100 anonymous authors from this site? How do we easily go back through the blog to find things you’ve posted previously? You are ignoring the points made against anonymous posters after you’ve complained about the blog ignoring Scripture so what would that make you? You have a very simple solution to your perceived lack of respect for your posts and you choose to ignore it.
Also, if you really cared about your original points, you would’ve addressed the answers given to them and spared us the whole character assassination gimmick.
December 7th, 2005 at 1:44 am
You have a fine blog.
( Website marketing and promotion tools )
web promotion tools.
December 10th, 2005 at 9:51 pm
You want to work for nothing or get $3000.00 for doing no work? Amazing online business will do all of your work and still pay you $3000.00 over and over. get your mouse in gear take a look!
December 21st, 2005 at 2:37 am
Hi Reformed Pope ,
What a great blog you have set up here! Excellent work!!
Kindest regards, and thanks for the info!
Albert financiering