. Don't stay up too late lemon. I need my sleep!

When a bass poops in the lake, is that a bass turd?

Iamon lyme: lol

Iamon lyme:

Artful Dodger: lol Yeah, erosion will do that.

Iamon lyme: well maybe the wind blew just right

Bwild: the bible is a very consistent book and remember, the fragments and copies we have aren't "translations". Besides, a lot of consideration is taken to get at the contextual meaning. Still it's not perfect but overall the translations are good. Some better than others. Personally I use several versions but also do word studies.

rod03801: well I don't hold to the view that Creationists hold regarding creation etc.

rod03801: which version? lol

Artful Dodger: well makes as much sense as the bible tho.

Iamon lyme: Nope. That's just an excuse.

Stay gassy, my friend...

Iamon lyme: Oh, that one... you put that one up there. If you're a paying member can you delete your own post?

Artful Dodger: My dad is waiting until he turns 90 before having another birthday party. He's almost there. After that he wants to wait another decade before having another birthday party. I know the feeling, one birthday party after another after another... all that partying is exhausting, it can poop a guy out real quick. I'm not even close to 70 yet, and I know what he means.

Iamon lyme: I just put mine on the windowsill. Never on the roller.

Artful Dodger: [ Iamon lyme: root beer but also have gas. Not sure where that came from but likely the politics board ]

Oh yeah, this is the politics board. I should say something political. Ummm... the debates will start soon, sometime early in October. In other news, another long running debate is still going strong.

And going, and going, and going...

Iamon lyme:

And another clue. My father passed away years ago. Your dad is still kicking. Hmmmmm. Maybe we are two different people!

Artful Dodger: I'll put it into my photo album. In the meantime check this out. I'm going to send this one to my dad on his birthday.

Iamon lyme: lol I see a white dot on a dark background lol

Stay gassy, my friend...

Artful Dodger: Gas? Kind of tastes like rotten cherries...

Blaah!! patuie! Ack... blahpoo..

Iamon lyme: root beer but also have gas. Not sure where that came from but likely the politics board.

Artful Dodger: Ahhhhhh, okay! That makes sense! I had hot dogs and mashed potatos for dinner, but I couldn't understand where the pizza after taste was coming from.

Something else, tastes like Dr Pibb or Dr Pepper... it tastes like rotten cherries. Did you have a diet cola?

Iamon lyme: I just got back from eating pizza at our favorite pizza joint and see that you've posted three times while I was gone. Interesting. While I was gone. Now I know for sure I'm not you because I was not online during that same period! Whew! And here I was worried

The media savvy president of the Unite... of the Earth to Mars orbital launch pad!

Being impoverished doesn't mean you're poor.

A moment of comedic relief for president Obama.

Iamon lyme: lol

We want to be fair, so here are two reasons to vote for Obama.

Iamon lyme:

- In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.

- The Romneys’ effective tax rate for 2011 was 14.1%.

-The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.

-The Romneys claimed a deduction for $2.25 million of those charitable contributions. The Romneys’ generous charitable donations in 2011 would have significantly reduced their tax obligation for the year. The Romneys thus limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the Governor's statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13% in income taxes in each of the last 10 years.



Biden gave 300 dollars to charity

Though, considering the trainwreck otherwise known as the Romney campaign , I can understand the interest in discussing other topics

(V): [ You've decided your able to say who is and who isn't a Christian!!! ]

Where do I say that? You are playing with straw man dolls again. Man up, and play with real people for a change.

[ "True Christians are the first to regulate themselves, and to call fakers what they are." Isn't that what I'm doing? ]

No. Do you not know what you are doing? You said:

[ I just see the way they are doing it and understand that a good percentage of the money will never reach any 'causes'.. but will be spent on 'admin' costs. ]

[ It's all they want your money. They are even starting to use Glenn Beck style educating.. just a few pens and a white board though. With lovely scenes of Flames/Jerusalem/the cross all to show they are genuine ]

[ It's based on past events. It's also based on knowledge of certain charities in the past caught paying themselves a high wage. ]

You are saying (or implying) frauds and rip offs are the rule. I'm saying they are the exception. In what universe or parallel dimension is that saying the same thing?

So let's try this again...

[ "True Christians are the first to regulate themselves, and to call fakers what they are."

Isn't that what I'm doing? ]

Nope, sorry... the answer is still no.

Then you respond to something I say that answers your response before you responded...

[ "I'm not above using cliches. They have their purpose, but all the time and for every occasion? Are you kidding me?"

Then why do you and Art keep on using the same tired ones on liberals, etc all the time? ]

Because we are responding according to your own method of debate. Duh!

Is it unethical (or illegal) to do as you do? Is it do unto others better than they do unto you unless it is you who are doing the doing unto?

doo doo ka choo?

Iamon lyme: Then why are you arguing about what I am saying, is it just for the sake of arguing??

"True Christians are the first to regulate themselves, and to call fakers what they are."

Isn't that what I'm doing? ....ahhhhhh You've decided your able to say who is and who isn't a Christian!!!

"I'm not above using cliches. They have their purpose, but all the time and for every occasion? Are you kidding me?"

Then why do you and Art keep on using the same tired ones on liberals, etc all the time?

The Jawa Report: Jake Tapper: President Obama Falsely Claims Fast and Furious Program “Begun Under the Previous Administration”.. http://shar.es/u9GaU via @sharethis

(V): I don't know how you manage to misunderstand anything I've said. I thought I was being clear... you know, transparent?

When I said "compared to what" I meant if you compared Christian programing to any secular business or governing agency (assuming no bias, one way or the other) then your complaint is baseless.

I didn't mean compared to other Christian activities. And I believe I've already addressed the issue of fraud. There are fakers out there ready to take advantage of anyone, no matter who they are or what they believe. I don't assume everyone who calls himself "Christian" is who they say they are.

True Christians are the first to regulate themselves, and to call fakers what they are. You seem intent on ignoring this and repeat the same tired old cliches about Christians that I've heard most of my life. I'm not above using cliches. They have their purpose, but all the time and for every occasion? Are you kidding me?



A girl who went to my high school was always getting angry with me for using cliches. I told her if I had a nickle for everytime someone scolded me for using a cliche, I'd have a pocket jam packed full of nickles. That just made her more angry, so I told her if you say "That's a cliche" enough times it becomes a cliche. This is probably why I didn't go on many dates in high school... I never could stop myself from saying what I thought. I suffered from an inability to lie to girls...


heh heh heh heh heh heh... I still have that problem.

Iamon lyme: It's based on past events. It's also based on knowledge of certain charities in the past caught paying themselves a high wage.

"Compared to what?"

Charities. They are just begging after all.

I think the Buddhist approach to priesthood is more transparent.

(V): [ I just see the way they are doing it and understand that a good percentage of the money will never reach any 'causes'.. but will be spent on 'admin' costs. ]


Compared to what? Governments? Unions? Other sorts of television programs?

I don't see it that way at all, what I see is extraordinary accountability... holding themselves and other TV ministries accountable for what is said and for how they spend the money. There have been a few fakers from time to time, but they've never lasted very long. Scrutiny from other ministries and from most people in general have either kept the fakers out or prevented them from lasting very long.

By the way, any admin costs related to television are going to seem unusually high, because the cost of broadcasting is extremely expensive. I don't feel at all pressured when watching those programs because they are being broadcast over the airwaves. I don't pay one thin dime for watching and listening... and neither does the taxpayer.

Can government subsidized public television make that claim? Viewer contributions don't pay for all of it, and none of the programing is "Christian friendly", if you know what I mean. Anytime Christianity is mentioned it's been portrayed in the worst possible light... even in programs that claim to take a fair and balanced approach to religion, they do a great job of misrepresenting what Christians do and believe.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. I think your mind has already been made up, because you imply unusually high admin costs and claim the lions share of the money doesn't go to help anyone. That claim is completely baseless, and represents nothing other than what you want to believe.

Iamon lyme: I don't feel pressured. I just see the way they are doing it and understand that a good percentage of the money will never reach any 'causes'.. but will be spent on 'admin' costs.

It's not a feeling, they are in it for the money.

Iamon lyme: [ This takes me back to over 40 years ago.. ]

Shoot, I did it again! Not over 40 years ago, more like between 35 and 40 years ago...

Hey, I'm younger than I think I thought I was! Uh, I mean younger than I thought I was thinking I was, am... something like that.

(V): "Salesmen" and "contracts" is what I called it, because of how they were going about it. I did a quick look through the paper, and although it did appear to be written as a crude "legal" document, I seriously doubt it was legally binding. My dad was an attorney, and so the free advice I got growing has been invaluable to me when dealing with any sort of "salesman". I learned a lot about sales resistence regarding anything someone tries to sell me, including the ideas bandied about in a debate or in other kind of discussion.

I understand the 'feeling' of being presurred into sending money to Christian TV evangelists. I used to get the same feeling... but let's face it, it's just a feeling. If you feel compleled to send money just because someone asks for it, then you probably should not watch Christian television. I don't watch Christian television to get religion, and I don't feel compeled to send money, I just watch and listen to learn more about what Christianity is all about.

I've often heard TV ministers say if you can't afford to pay for some book or other thing, they could send you one for free. And I've also heard them say tithing is something you should give to your church and not to them. I don't know about you, and this may just be a feeling as well, but for some reason I don't see this as evidence of someone wanting to take me to the cleaners.