Retraction

[Rippon]

You simply mean to denigrate my every post because you are aware of my Theological bents and they disagree with yours significantly...

Your "every post" --come on now. I was specific.

I don't apologize for it.

I have not been rude...I have not "crossed any line" nor have I insulted anyone...

Any reader on here can see that. You are simply denigrating the character of someone you don't agree with and don't like...

join the club...you are neither unique nor alone in that respect.....
you are one of a MILLION who hates people who don't "Kow-tow" to your particular brand of Theology....

You are person# 456,782.25....who would disparage the very character of those who disagree with...

I think you are getting significantly off-track Hos.

 

[Inspector Javert]

Your "every post" --come on now. I was specific.


I think you are getting significantly off-track Hos.

"Hos" did indeed create a new user profile...but this is not it...if you wanna vet my identity than be straight-forward and ask...

I hide NOTHING...

This profile was NOT created by "HOS"...
"HOS" did create a profile, but never used it because he wanted to avoid this kind of trash (the trash you are involved in)....

This profile was my brother-in-laws....

If you wanna meet "H.O.S's" profile....just ask....It exists, but it was never posted on.

If you wanna cry to Administration against him/me...then go ahead, I have no problem with that.

I sorta "took-over" my brother-in-law's profile...but "H.O.S."....DID INDEED create one....and he's never posted on it.

If you ever find out why...you'll personally be ENRAGED at the profile he created....that's why I haven't used it. Just tell me you want to meet

"H.O.S's" alternate...and you'll have it.

 

[Michael Servetus]

If you Wanna meet "H.O.S".....

THIS is the profile he created.....not I.J.

This is why he never posted on it.

1.) He thought it somewhat un-sporting since C4k elected to ban it for two years....

2.) He thought that "Michael Servetus" was a profile name a little too caustic for some people to stomach...


"Inspector Javert" was NEVER "H.O.S's" profile....it was a profile my brother-in-law created....he ceased using it the second jerks started accusing him of incest....so he gave the pass-word to me....

"Hos" has been posting on it ever since....

He broke no rules by creating a profile...none.

He just gave up on it, the second he saw how un-godly and nasty B.B. was to people....

THIS PROFILE...THIS ONE "Hos" created...DO YOU LIKE IT MORE?....check your dates...it's the same time "H.O.S." was banned.

Now...appeal to C4k (or B.B. administration extant) and have them ban either or both profiles.....

Just don't cry: "but, but, but, you're 'HoS'.." every time I kick your bum in a debate o.k?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Yes, there is proof Israel did not mint coins until the first century B.C. Any coinage they had up to that point was foreign. The Bible doesn't even use a word that can be legitimately translated "coin" (despite the post made earlier today) until the New Testament writings.

The point being you could NOT bring money for the tithe.

Yeah. I agree. I never disagreed. Move on.

 

[Havensdad]

Yes, there is proof Israel did not mint coins until the first century B.C. Any coinage they had up to that point was foreign. The Bible doesn't even use a word that can be legitimately translated "coin" (despite the post made earlier today) until the New Testament writings.

Yeah. I agree. I never disagreed. Move on.

Fourth Century.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/FirstJudeanCoins.html

However, none of this proves they didn't mint coins BEFORE their captivity.

 

[Aaron]

I had a very rigorous debate with Havensdad on tithing recently.

I argued that tithing was not restricted to the ceremonial law alone and that it predated the law and that Jesus affirmed it which means that we should obey it just like we should obey any of the moral laws of God (Don't steal, kill, commit adultery, idolatry, etc...)

I have held to that position for a very long time. It is a hangover from my dispensational arminian days.

I've never been shaken on it because I have always had arguments on it with dispensational guys who were practical antinomians.

But Havensdad argued from a different perspective- and defeated me (or my ideas if you prefer).

Tithing is not for today. It perished with all ceremonial law. I was wrong. Havensdad was right.

This does not mean we are out from under the gun, per say.

Giving is still expected "for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."

But the 10% rule is gone.

I yield to my betters on this debate and I appreciate the heat and light of good friction that sharpened this piece of iron.

Just think of all the beer you could have bought.