Leaderboard

Hi All (apologies for the indulgence of starting a thread about my own username! Wanted to explain myself because the process has been public throughout) I've decided to revert to the username that I had for about 8 of my 10 years on this board: Bravus. A while ago there was an issue in the discussions about people using their real names and, to 'show willing', I changed over to my real name, David Geelan. People will still have that information about me, and I'm happy to stand by everything I post, as myself. There are two three reasons for changing back: I feel more comfortable with my 'handle' - as I said above, it's who I have been for the great majority of my time here, and online generally. People around the world search for my name for professional reasons such as to find books and papers I've written, decide whether they want me as a doctoral supervisor, decide whether I am appropriate for a job, promotion or award and so on. This forum addresses a wide range of issues, but most of them are some distance from my professional issues, and posting here as 'David Geelan' tends to 'muddy the waters' when people search on my name. It's easier to type 'Bravus' than 'David Geelan' to log in, particularly on phones and devices. I hope people will understand and be OK with this reversion.

Never had a problem with usernames before...still don't! I say go with whatever you're comfortable with. Live and let live!

We have three middle-aged dogs. Our one boy, CocoaRico, is aging prematurely, likely due to a chronic infection of two weight-bearing toes on his front paw. Our options with him are either to amputate those toes or to keep him on antibiotics for the rest of his life. On a good day, he will run and play (he loves to run and play with other dogs- social able to a fault) On a bad day he limps and avoids jumping and using his painful paw. Unfortunately, he only feels really good when on high doses of painkillers and antibiotics. This dog has a heart of gold. He patiently endures the bitchiness of his daughter and sister. He intuitively knows when Mummy has another migraine and kisses her in sympathy. He loves to cuddle up and watch TV with his people. A Vizsla, he loves to "stick" himself onto humans, even strangers. All while putting up with chronic pain. He is our Job. And when I am with him it makes me think of how patient and loving God is with me.

God does kill; and God commanded Israel to do so. " However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God." (Deut. 20:16-18) "When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations—the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you— 2 and when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally.[a] Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy." Deut. 7: 1-2) Why these 7 people groups? Because they were the remnant of the Nephilim (giants), and Rephaim; both of which were a hybrid race created by the union of fallen angels and human women. Had they been allowed to survive, they would have destroyed humanity. The Israelites did not completely destroy the Canaanites, and the Nephilim survived through the Philistines (coastal Canaanites). They were finally wiped out when David killed Goliath and his army killed Goliath's brothers.

See: http://spectrummagazine.org/article/2017/01/23/wintley-phipps-tells-his-story

Some of this guy's criticisms are completely out to lunch. Saying that Isaiah 28:10 shouldn't be used as a reference to how to study the Bible is ridiculous. The text is speaking about how God is going to teach His people for the context of the verse is verses 9-13 and then addresses the corrupt leaders and priests by saying, wherefore.... Wherefore refers back to how God is going to wean His people away from the corrupt teaching and religious worship then going on. He's going to teach them precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little and there a little. God uses this method to teach us, so to say it is not the way for us to study is out to lunch.

It depends on what I'm cooking. Overall, I'd say onions and garlic add something great to just about every dish. My "secret" for the best split pea soup around is toasted sesame seed oil and a little lime juice,added just before it is served. It adds a subtle nuttiness that puts the recipe over the top. Herbs and spices I couldn't get along with out are: thyme, rosemary, cumin, oregano, curry powder, basil, cardamom, coriander seeds, Thai yellow curry paste, sea salt(taste sea salt on your tongue and immediately afterwards do the same with normal table salt. The metallic taste of iodized salt will be very noticeable.), cilantro, italian seasoning, and allspice.

I have been thinking on this thread as I've read it and I have three scenarios with which I will illustrate my ideas. These are not perfect illustrations but they address the basics of the theology being put forward on this thread. I am not going to play dueling quotes but go to the heart of the matter for I always like to break down issues to their simplist terms to understand them fully. It's also the only way to get past all the verbiage being thrown around. In these scenarios I will address moral, ethical, and legal responsibility. In this first scenario I am armed with a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 Magnum revolver and am carrying a smart phone. I am walking down a street at night and about a block ahead of me there are three men walking in the same direction. Suddenly two of the men attack the third man and begin coldly, brutally, beating the man to death. I don't want to be seen so I step into the shadows of a doorway and watch them beat the man to death. Now, I could stop this for I'm pretty good with my revolver and it has a lot of “stopping power” but I choose not to. Or, I could call the cops on my cell phone and report what is going on. But, I choose not to do that either. I just take a video of the beating and raise no alarm. After the man being beaten dies and the two men who beat him to death leave I go on my way and never say a word to anyone about what I witnessed and took a video of. What do you think of me for acting in the manner in which I acted? Was I a good man with love in my heart for my fellow man? Am I morally and legally free from all responsibility in the beating death of the victim? In this second scenario I'm a very wealthy man with three sons who, as they have become very wealthy from being partners in the family business, have lost all sense of morality. They are using the legitimate profits of the family business to finance dealing drugs like herion and meth. They have bought off the local and state cops and prosecutors and are killing anyone who gets in their way. They pass their wives and daughters around among the three of them and are molesting their sons too. In addition to the sexual molestation they beat their wives and children for personal amusement. They have gotten to the point that they have become very sadistic. In other words, these three men have become exceedingly evil and when I have remonstrated with them they have threatened my life. I've gone to the authorities and nothing will be done by them. Nobody is going to touch these sons of mine for the evil they are doing. So, in desperation, I do some searching on the internet and find “Murders R Us” and ask them to kill my sons. They do this for me. Some time later I am thinking about this entire situation and I am grateful “Murders R Us” killed them and I didn't have to. In my mind I am completely free of all moral responsibility for the death of my sons as someone else killed them. What do you think of me and my moral stand? Am I free of moral, legal and ethical responsibility in the killing of my sons? In this third scenario I am a father with rebellious children. I really don't like to discipline them because I'm far too loving, i.e. sentimental, for that, but they are getting so out of hand I'm desperate. In my desperation I finally light on a solution. I have a next door neighbor who, just for fun, beats his wife and kids whenever he feels like it, likes to pull the wings off of butterflies, regularly kicks his dog half to death and once poured gasoline on his cat and then lit it on fire. In other words he is very sadistic. He loves inflicting pain on others. I call him and ask him to come over and make arrangements with him to discipline my children for me. I tell him he can do anything he wants for an hour, but he cannot kill them. After I make these arrangements with him I'm really relieved that I won't have to ever think about disciplining my children myself again. Having the sadist next door do it for me seems like a really moral solution to me and it sets my heart at ease. Then I call my children in and tell them that since I love them so much that I cannot bear to discipline them I'm turning them over to our absolutely sadistic neighbor for an hour of discipline. I will go into my bedroom, close the door, and turn on the stereo and put on my headphones so I won't see or hear anything while our neighbor will “discipline” them in any way he likes and that from now on this will be how I will discipline them every time they disobey me. Just how do you think my children will view me? Do you think they will view me as loving, kind, and just, or will they fear me and see me as some kind of abusive sadistic loon myself? In this scenario do you see me as loving, kind, and just? Just how do you view my character in this scenario? The three scenarios above are Divine Recession put into human terms.... This theology is a monstrous attack upon the character of God under the guise of defending God's character. God is the ruler of the universe. He has a government to run and a universe to protect. His government is based upon the rule of law for that is the only just(righteous) way to rule in any government. Rule of law is not about just ruling by laws. It is setting up laws that protect everyone and which everyone can understand, and as such act within those laws in all their interactions with their fellow creatures. It is also about making sure everyone understands what the penalties are for the violation of these laws. These laws apply to one and all. No one is exempt from them, including the persons who set up the laws and administer them. I can already hear the cries of legalism, but that is a fallacy. God's laws are love and because they are we are all required to love our fellow creatures. God's laws describe what love is in practical terms. In the negative terms of the 10 commandments God lays out what we cannot do and love both Him and our fellow man at the same time. The 10 commandments also tell us how we can become obedient to Him in all respects. As such God has both the moral right and responsibility to administer punishment for the violation of His laws. It is the only way He can remain just and loving towards the entire universe at all times. We humans are not the only ducks on the pond, so to speak, and not everything God does towards us is because of us alone. As Paul says, we are an example, a show, to the universe. In Deuteronomy God laid out a set of laws and told the COI that if they obeyed them He would actively bless them materially and spiritually, and laid out exactly what those blessings would be. He also told them that if they disobeyed these laws he would actively punish them for their disobedience. He laid out different levels of punishment for different levels of disobedience and He specified exactly what those punishments would be. He then told them that if at any time during their disobedience they repented and turned back to obedience that He would forgive them and once more begin blessing them and remove the curse they were under. That is the rule of law. Everyone understood exactly what was required of them, agreed to all the conditions, and had the choice as to how they would behave. God is a God who delights in mercy, but without an actively administered justice there can be no mercy for without the active administration of justice the word mercy becomes meaningless. Therefore, to be merciful God must also actively administer justice, or in other words, discipline.

You seem to me to be Bravus.... it's like going back to what's comfortable.

No problem David Geelan! or should I say Bravus!!

7“If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.” ...John 14 God is Love!~Jesus saves!

Give me a break, sir. Your people here are saying all manner of such judgments. Authority comes from the Word of God. This is what I am bringing to this discussion. I stand by what I have written.

The mood of the Oscar voters is not for patriotism and religious moral courage but for the likes of La La Land which I saw and consider mundane without any compelling message.

How do we know that you will do that? Perhaps you would use the ticket to vacation far away from David and his motorbike?

I love dogs. If I was on a deserted island and could choose a companion of either another person or a dog, I'd choose a dog. Dogs think their owners are the most spectacular, awesome, creatures on the face of the planet. Dogs don't judge. They aren't mean-spirited. They don't make fun of you. They aren't condescending and patronizing. They don't demean you. They love you no matter what. All in all, dogs are more "Christian" than people.