Posts by hfr

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Itís Beer Thirty FReepers! Time For The Homebrewing / Wine Making Thread #27 January 11, 2013

    01/11/2013 10:03:38 PM PST · 19 of 29
    hfr to knews_hound

    Thanks,

    I read through it. And I’m bookmarking it for further reference. It seems doable.

    hfr

  • Itís Beer Thirty FReepers! Time For The Homebrewing / Wine Making Thread #27 January 11, 2013

    01/11/2013 7:35:20 PM PST · 16 of 29
    hfr to Red_Devil 232

    I’ve never home brewed, but I’d like to.

    My son has home brewed some mead. It was actually pretty good. It’s not a beer technically I think, but it was like a beer in some ways.

    But in lieu of a tasty homebrew I’ll just enjoy a Schlitz.

    I am surprised at how pricey brewing kits are. There has to be a cheaper method?

    Prosit!

    p.s. here is a great drinking song on youtube, it’s Andre Rieu and the thee tenors singing the drinking song from the “Student Prince”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CErL59tpNc

  • Perry: Let teachers carry guns in wake of massacre(TX)

    12/18/2012 6:44:46 AM PST · 22 of 37
    hfr to marktwain
    It is unacceptable to permit the faculty of mega-schools to be defenceless and unable to protect themselves and our children entrusted to their care.

    But this thought seems to be ignored.

    On the other hand, I don't think this problem would arise in either home-schooling or one room school systems.

    A very fine teacher once gave me a very cogent argument for one room school systems versus the mega-school campus. (One room to 8th grade. Then trade school or college prep for those who go on. "Graduates" of the current system, on the average, probably don't have the equivalent attainments of the 8th grader of 100 years ago. Those that don't go on provide the unskilled labour force, but they could always gain further education later on if motivated to.)

    Not only that, the mega-school is an artifact of an outmoded 18th century mechanistic socio-political viewpoint (aka socialism). The giant school system is based on the model of mass-production and interchangeable parts ala Eli Whitney.

    I suppose that is an OK system for cookies. But it is no good for people. A cookie cutter education is not an education.

    There are many other considerations of what is wrong such that these monstrosities occur, but this is, imho, one element.

  • Dem. lawmaker: To get gun control, Obama must Ďexploití shooting

    12/14/2012 8:09:47 PM PST · 26 of 70
    hfr to Tailgunner Joe
    This was a terrible tragedy and an outrageous crime. Words cannot adequately express condolences for the grief of the families affected by this.

    This kind of thing should never happen. But, someone has pointed out that gun free zones mean that only bad guys have the guns.

    If teachers and principals were armed this kind of thing wouldn't expand to the awful magnitude that it does.

    And, if we didn't condense everything into super-sized schools the opportunity wouldn't exist the way it does.

    I have heard very cogent arguments for the one-room school house that goes up to eighth grade. After that perhaps trade schools and college prep academies.

    In the final analysis however, more gun control means more opportunity for the bad guys.

  • The Tragedy of Inaction - Robert Service chronicles the Westís early failure to take action...

    12/01/2012 8:45:08 PM PST · 10 of 11
    hfr to neverdem

    “A bunch of the boys were whooping it up in the Malamute saloon one night ...”

    Then from another poem of the Yukon, this one is hilarious, but Robert Service may have just been reporting on local events:

    “... I had to kill the galoot when he started to shoot electricity through my walls ...”

    Service’s poetry is on the short list of good books for the fireside on a cold winter’s eve.

  • What Are You Drinking?

    11/06/2012 6:05:38 PM PST · 252 of 271
    hfr to Politically Correct

    PBR

    I was going to pick up some Founder’s IPA but didn’t.

    Pabst is a good beer though.

  • Democrats Tweet F-Bombs to Cardinal Dolan After Pro-Life Prayer

    09/07/2012 5:30:09 PM PDT · 15 of 47
    hfr to Coleus
    Catholics will be abused when they confess Christ

    Paragraph 1400 from the CCC states,

    "Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, "have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders." It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, "when they commemorate the Lord's death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory."

    This paragraph speaks about Protestants. But it also has a phrase that speaks to the Catholic confession of faith in the Mass. Whenever you see a Catholic church spire, it is like a billboard with a message. The Pope, the Cardinals, the Bishops, all are messengers of that message. The message is summed up in the important phrase,

    "… they commemorate the Lord's death and resurrection in the Holy Supper … profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory."

    This describes the confession of Christ by Catholics in the Mass. That is when the world opposes them so strongly.

  • Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman: Is There A Superior Race?

    09/07/2012 5:09:36 PM PDT · 118 of 121
    hfr to House Atreides
    Belated reply.

    Yes the wine was good. A local grocery chain got cases and cases of someone’s discontinued house wine. It retailed at $22 a bottle, but the chain had it on clearance at $5 a bottle. The corks were a bit soggy, the wine was about 5 years old, but it was aging well.

  • Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman: Is There A Superior Race?

    09/01/2012 9:25:25 PM PDT · 88 of 121
    hfr to House Atreides
    Now this is maybe the result of two glasses of good red wine, but what I hear you saying is that he's worth a piss?

    (sorry, sorry, sorry, just had to try for the pun, oo doubleplusungood attempt at humor)

    And speaking of pissing a river … Actually I'd like to drink a beer with him. Like most presidents, whatever one may think of their politics, they must be very uniquely powerful personalities to ever reach the office. In any crowd they will be standouts. The opportunity for dialog would be tremendous, just imagine being able to ask critically acute questions.

    Now I know I've stepped in it. Or rather, I'm full of it … note to self: go empty the bladder and don't post when drinking wine again.

    Have I apologized profusely enough?

  • Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman: Is There A Superior Race?

    09/01/2012 8:55:34 PM PDT · 80 of 121
    hfr to Yashcheritsiy
    quote: … "our ancestors had something else — who knows, our culture, our aggressiveness, the particular history in Europe with its molding of national characters, who knows" …

    Because of your tag line I think you may agree — the difference is the Gospel. Think of the verse:

    "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." (Matthew 6:33)

    For whatever reason, the Gospel found a home in north and western Europe. From that flowed all the benefits of science and technology and and enlightened conscience. What I mean is that, fuzzy as it sounds, enough people were influenced by the Gospel within the cultures of north and western Europe so that God's blessing abounded there. And from there it spread out to benefit the entire world.

    However I believe that pride goes before a fall. Europeans forgot the source of their blessings and became proud and looked upon themselves as demigods fit to rule the earth. Thus the argument of racism. How they (we) have fallen.

  • Boehner Indicates GOP House May Fund Obama's 'Attack on Religious Liberty

    07/27/2012 9:39:27 PM PDT · 23 of 58
    hfr to princess leah
    I read that George Wallace, former governor of Alabama who made a third party presidential bid, said that
    “There ain't a dimes bit of difference between Republicans and Democrats.”

    Or something like that. And what was the actual difference (other than party name) betweet Taft, Roosevelt, and Wilson in 1912?

  • Itís Beer Thirty FReepers! Time For The Homebrewing/Wine Making Thread #7 July 13, 2012

    07/13/2012 3:56:37 PM PDT · 15 of 21
    hfr to JRandomFreeper
    As I remember it, those monks raised the chicken and beef, baked the bread, grew the vegetables, and brewed the beer, and if I'm not mistaken, fermented their own wine as well. It was up in Fulda.
  • Itís Beer Thirty FReepers! Time For The Homebrewing/Wine Making Thread #7 July 13, 2012

    07/13/2012 3:40:47 PM PDT · 6 of 21
    hfr to Red_Devil 232
    I'm not sure if this is an open comment thread, if not sorry for intruding.

    My son, a few years back, brewed up a batch of honey mead. He was following a medieval style recipe from what I understand. Anyway, it was very different but actually pretty good tasting.

    I have come to appreciate the specialty brews from local micro breweries. I am reminded of eating and drinking once, in Germany in the last century, at a monastery run restaurant that grew, made, and brewed its own food and drink. The dark beer was, as I remember it, awesome. It might be a retrospective foggy memory due to the quantity of beer drunk out of ice cold stoneware mugs, and the ambience of an old stone monks’ hostel great room with fireplaces, log tables, sheepskin covered benches, hams and sausages hanging from wooden rafters, torchlight, &c. Or, the beer might actually have been very good.

    Nevertheless, here's to Irish Red.

  • The Ten Worst American Traitors

    06/24/2012 7:55:20 PM PDT · 62 of 237
    hfr to mkjessup
    Coarse but correct.

    One cannot call anyone on the Confederate side a traitor. Whether or not states had the right to secede was in 1860 an open question that was only settled by force of arms. On the face of it the states retained their sovereignty, and as the creators of the union, they supposed they had the right to dissolve the union.

    To call Lee, Davis, or any others by the name of traitor is a complete error. They were on the loosing side of an open question, that is all.

    On the other hand, one can make a very strong case that Lincoln's usurpation of authority beyond that granted in the Constitution was in fact itself treason against the Constitution. Not only his disregard for the Constitution, but also his use of the military to settle a political question. And further there are issues such as his illegal abrogation of habeus corpus and other laws. And for that matter it wasn't Lincoln alone, it was the entire Republican party behind him.

    So in no reasonable way can Lee be considered a traitor.

  • Fr. Marcel Guarnizo Defends Himself Against Accusers (Why he denied Communion to a Lesbian)

    03/15/2012 5:54:38 PM PDT · 18 of 29
    hfr to SeekAndFind
    This impels me to respond at length.

    Last Sunday our sermon was on: Timothy 4:1-5.

    The pertinent verse I want to point out is verse 3:

    "Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth." (1 Timothy 4:3)

    As to forbidding to marry, consider Ephesians 5:22-33. The verse that is important to note for our purposes here is verse 32:

    "This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. " (Ephesians 5:32)

    An attack upon marriage is an attack upon the relationship of the Church to Christ. But as we know, Jesus is building His Church and,

    "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18)

    Next, the commanding to abstain from meats should be seen in light of the passage in Acts chapter 10,

    "On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour: And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. " (Acts 10:9-15)

    To forbid the eating of meat is in effect to teach that what God has called clean is actually unclean. So it means to teach rebellion against God. It is but a short step from there to teach unbelievers that something is clean even if God has called it unclean (think abortion for example).

    What we are witnessing in our days is just what Paul said to Timothy:

    "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;" (1 Timothy 4:1)

  • Fr. Marcel Guarnizo Defends Himself Against Accusers (Why he denied Communion to a Lesbian)

    03/15/2012 5:36:19 PM PDT · 16 of 29
    hfr to irishtenor

    Amen elder brother.

  • Fr. Marcel Guarnizo Defends Himself Against Accusers (Why he denied Communion to a Lesbian)

    03/15/2012 5:34:14 PM PDT · 15 of 29
    hfr to SeekAndFind
    To: Father Marcel Guarnizo

    Dear Sir,

    "Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution." (2 Timothy 3:12)

    regards, HFR
  • New Head of Biggest Planned Parenthood Says Abortion Sacred

    02/09/2012 7:03:07 PM PST · 54 of 60
    hfr to wagglebee
    Bear with me on this, it's a bit roundabout:

    First, Peter in Acts was called to witness to a gentile. Peter, a Jew, considered gentiles as outside of the fold of God. However, Jesus gave Peter a vision to change his thinking:

    "On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour: And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven." (Acts 10:9-16)

    The principle stated explicitly here was that we are not to call "common", or in essence, "unclean", that which God has "cleansed".

    Now here is the point, the inverse is also true, we must not call clean that which God calls unclean. And that is just what secular America is doing with abortion: calling it clean.

  • Drudge Versus History, Let It Be Known

    01/27/2012 9:05:25 AM PST · 76 of 84
    hfr to oblomov
    Thanks for taking the time. Very interesting point. The so called msm has become an "establishment" and needs a thorough and public examination.

    I said they went from fourth estate to fifth column because the media have, as you're indicating, changed from a "news" media to become a social change agent. Ditto many professions anymore it seems.

    If it's just another rino, win or loose won't matter too much. Maybe Newt is a good choice.

  • Drudge Versus History, Let It Be Known

    01/26/2012 3:28:24 PM PST · 55 of 84
    hfr to oblomov
    The press (media) has gone from fourth estate to fifth column.

    So much for that bastion of freedom: a free press.

    The canard that we must vote republican or face ruin doesn't resonate with me any more. Republicans have been as ruinous to the Republic as Democrats have been.

    But seriously, will Newt make any difference?

    And what does the media establishment have to loose with Newt?

  • Drudge Versus History, Let It Be Known

    01/26/2012 2:33:12 PM PST · 31 of 84
    hfr to JerseyHighlander
    Ok, Free Republic stalwarts, help us all out now. What exactly does this mean about Drudge Report?

    Guidance welcome.

  • Newt took 1st question about ex-wife, wrapped question around John Kingís neck, and tightened

    01/19/2012 8:35:12 PM PST · 123 of 291
    hfr to vbmoneyspender
    Holy smokes! That's the way to take it to them. Why can't Republicans do that all the time! If that's the way Newt would run his pres campaign - hoppin horny toads! get out of the way!

    But on the other hand, calm reflection might . . . well a slap back doesn't a prez contender make.

  • I'm Christian, Unless You're Gay

    01/14/2012 8:05:44 AM PST · 52 of 102
    hfr to SumProVita
    I agree with you about Pollstr1's post, very good.

    But I think you hit it out of the ballpark with this line:

    "Love became defined as sex and the notion of divorce mushroomed as many could not get enough satisfactory sex with one partner for life."

    That's a veritable home run with the bases loaded.

  • Response to post "What's So Great About Heaven?" posted yesterday...

    01/13/2012 6:36:27 PM PST · 21 of 21
    hfr to Lucas McCain
    Tough question. I don't have any easy answer. I do find some suggestions in the Bible that provoke thought however.

    For example, Romans chapter 10 presents the idea that the whole world has heard the Gospel - at least in Paul's day. Here's the pertinent verse:

    "But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world." (Romans 10:18)

    One shouldn't make a major doctrine from one (relatively obscure) verse. But the language is that the whole world heard the Gospel message, at least at one time.

    Then there is the idea that God can be known by creation, it's given statement in Romans 1:

    "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things." (Romans 1:18-23)

    That makes it pretty plain, God "shewed" it, it is "clearly seen", "without excuse", "they knew God". That kind of language doesn't leave many options.

    Then you have John 3, the words of Jesus Himself:

    "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." (John 3:16-19)

    "light is come into the world", and men love darkness instead.

    It is very difficult to imagine that God somehow doesn't have the ability to make the Gospel known, or that He hasn't. But the fact remains that humanity is alienated from God because of sin. Jesus made reconciliation. The condemnation is because of rejecting Jesus.

    There is also the teaching of "election" in the Bible. It shouldn't be confused with "predestination". It is plainly stated an number of times. On the other hand, never do we find any statement of "election to depravity". That is (IMHO) merely a human need for symmetry of doctrine. God's word doesn't seem to have the same need.

    As far as "good" people go, there isn't any such thing. Romans 3:23:

    "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" (Romans 3:23)

    I'd suggest reading the entire of chapter 3 in Romans.

    Anyway, the idea that somebody ignorant of Christ is condemned for that ignorance - well that's a toughie. Old timers used to say that if we're so concerned about those who've never heard we ought to rush out and tell them.

    The Bible only says that Christ is our savior, and there is none other name under Heaven by which we must be saved. As far as those who haven't heard, I don't think we should make doctrines where the Scriptures are silent. But we have plenty of warrant to teach the only basis of salvation.

  • Response to post "What's So Great About Heaven?" posted yesterday...

    01/13/2012 6:07:24 PM PST · 20 of 21
    hfr to hope_dies_last
    Hi, thanks for taking the time to respond. What you have to say provokes one to rethink things. And that's good.

    I'd like to reply to a few of your points.

    First, the use of various words - they have root meanings as you noted, and they have actual reference to real places. The New Testament makes use of them to describe something else, using familiar terms.

    You ask how one reads into the text eternal suffering through fire. I'd say one doesn't. The text itself presents that meaning. I referenced a number of texts that indicated, by the use of some of those words you mentioned, a never ending suffering. Isaiah 66 for instance, or the words of Jesus in Matthew where 3 times He repeated the idea of never ending suffering.

    Hell is an interesting word used by the English translators, after all they had to find an English word. But because the original meaning is limited that doesn't mean that they couldn't extend the meaning. That's pretty common. And not just for translators, but users of language in general - meanings get extended all the time, it's a fact of language.

    I'd say that when Gehenna was mentioned, the idea was that by talking about something everybody in Jerusalem was familiar with they could be told, what's going to happen at the final judgment is a never ending Gehenna for the wicked.

    It's the common place technique of using familiar things to explain things not so familiar. A Metaphor as it were.

    About Sodom and Gomorrah, the names of those cities are used to stand as a refernce to the people of those cities. It's another common figure of speach where one thing is used to indicate another thing because of some relationship. Of course the actual cities aren't buring anymore. But the condemnation of the people, that's a different thing altogether.

    As to God's character. It is impossible to read either the Old or New Testaments without noticing that God describes Himself over and over again as jealous, angry, vengeful, a consuming fire, fearsome among other things - all of which most people would say are pretty negative. But the simple fact is that they're present, and not just a few instances, but many are found in Scriptures. Many instances of Scriptures passages where God declares that He will punish His enemies are found as well.

    And the fact that God also is self described as "love" doesn't require that there be none of the so called negative. There is no "bi-polarity" involved here. God does offer a free gift of salvation through His Son, Jesus. And God also says that any who reject His Son will face His wrath. And there is no conflict of any kind that God is both loving and also ready to exact vengence, which He has called His - and not ours.

    That cartoon figure of an old time preacher you present doesn't change the language of the Bible. And no doubt there are those who've not preached anything but anger. But there you have a case of abuse not negating right use.

    Perhaps the most striking thing that establishes God's hatred of sin is that Jesus, God in the flesh, being made a little lower than the angels, suffered torment and death and being forsaken on the cross. When I think about that it is no surprise to me that God speaks in terms of eternal punishment.

    And that is exactly the reason for condemnation, rejection of the free gift of salvation bought by the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. John chapter three says this plainly. Jesus is talking and says,

    "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." (John 3:16-19)

    This tells us plainly that the condemnation is not for the sins but for rejecting Jesus. It's not our sins that we're condemned for, it's for rejecting the salvation freely offered by the passion of Jesus, His shed blood, and death on the cross. We are condemned for rejecting Jesus.

    Just a word of thanks for the benediction of peace that you give when you say Shalom. And thank you for challenging comonplace ideas, too much is taken for granted. I find in myself and in others that for years we just assume something, and it's not until someone challenges it that we really think about it.

  • Holy Cow!

    01/12/2012 11:50:23 AM PST · 8 of 9
    hfr to Former Fetus
    Good Catch!

    As to knowing Jesus, I'm always struck by what Proverbs 30 says:

    "Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?" (Proverbs 30:4)

  • Response to post "What's So Great About Heaven?" posted yesterday...

    01/12/2012 11:45:45 AM PST · 10 of 21
    hfr to hope_dies_last
    I would like to add to the idea of eternity with Christ, that what fits us, makes us able to endure and live in eternity is that we are conformed to the likeness of the Lord Himself. We read that 3 things remain: faith, hope, and love. And the greatest is love. God is declared to be love. Jesus proved God's love. So love it is that will enable us to not only live in eternity but to enjoy it: where at God's right hand there are pleasures for evermore.

    I'd also like to add my own imagined view of creation: God has created an, seemingly infinite, universe of billions and trillions of stars and other wonders like nebulae, and probably planets, and who knows what. I have sometimes thought that it was meant that Adam and Eve, and their descendants should "go boldly where no man has gone" (to borrow from Star Trek) when God said, "be fruitful and multiply". Imagine a newly created universe of infinite proportions for us to explore with the Lord in eternity.

    Now, to me that isn't boring.

    On the other hand, the subject of eternal condemnation entered into this thread. That's a tough subject, and one can understand how some reject the traditional ideas of hell. I don't want to be argumentative but I can't agree with what's been said. In neither the Old nor the New Testament there is no way around the teaching that the final condemnation is to an eternal fiery punishment. Being cast into the "Lake of Fire", which is the "second death" means to be in the judgment of eternal fire.

    Revelations was mentioned, this verse very plainly speaks of non-ending punishment:

    " . . . and the Devil, who is leading them astray, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where are the beast and the false prophet, and they shall be tormented day and night--to the ages of the ages." (Revelation 20:10)

    "To the ages of the ages", is in the Greek "εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων". Those words are literally "for eons of eons". Even should one grant that the fire is a metaphorical fire, it is inescapable that that metaphorical fire is said to burn for "eons of eons", or forever - and that, even if taken metaphorically, doesn't sound like there's any end to it.

    The possibility of "annihilation" - ceasing to exist - and thus no eternal torment, is not contemplated anywhere in the Bible. Some passages that suggest a sleep like state make relatively obscure statements. Other passages, however, speak very plainly.

    There is this from Isaiah:

    "For as the new heavens and the new earth which I will make shall remain before me, saith Jehovah, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass from new moon to new moon, and from sabbath to sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, saith Jehovah. And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorrence unto all flesh." (Isaiah 66:22-24)

    In the New Testament, Jude refers to this eternal fire, mentioning Sodom and Gomorrah as examples, but never does he suggest eventual oblivion:

    "But I would put you in remembrance, you who once knew all things, that the Lord, having saved a people out of the land of Egypt, in the second place destroyed those who had not believed. And angels who had not kept their own original state, but had abandoned their own dwelling, he keeps in eternal chains under gloomy darkness, to the judgment of the great day; as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them, committing greedily fornication, in like manner with them, and going after other flesh, lie there as an example, undergoing the judgment of eternal fire." (Jude 1:5-7)

    We do read that those two cities were consumed by fire. No one would suggest that they, the cities - buildings and other contents are still burning. However the fire that consumed them is an "eternal fire", and though we don't know explicitly, there is the idea that those people who fell under that judgment are in that fire yet. The reference to Sodom and Gomorrah is intended to refer to the people themselves, it was they who were judged, not the physical cities.

    In the Gospels, Jesus says this,

    "And if thy hand serve as a snare to thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having thy two hands to go away into hell, into the fire unquenchable; where their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot serve as a snare to thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life lame, than having thy two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire unquenchable; where their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye serve as a snare to thee, cast it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire, where their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched." (Mark 9:43-48)

    And Jesus said this,

    "Then shall he say also to those on the left, Go from me, cursed, into eternal fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" (Matthew 25:41)

    That "eternal fire" "prepared for the . . . " relates us to Revelation 20:10 cited above.

    In regards to the objection that there are many billions that are supposed by this theology to be subject to that condemnation because they never heard of Christ, it can only be said that the consistent teaching of the New Testament is that salvation is only through faith in Him.

    This all sounds harsh, and undeniably so, but it is the consistent teaching found in the Bible. That is one reason why the preaching of the Gospel is an "offense" and a "rock of stumbling". Ultimately, one can only accept the teachings or reject them, but to say that they are not what they are isn't possible.

    One very interesting thought arises from Romans chapter 1. Here Paul says that the very "godhead" can be seen by what He has created:

    "for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world, by the things made being understood, are plainly seen, both His eternal power and Godhead--to their being inexcusable;" (Romans 1:20)

    If we look at the universe, at nature, we see that there is a sort of prodigality with life at all levels. We see that humans have no immunity to all the perils and dangers of the world, hunger, disease, war, natural disaster, wild animals . . . we humans are vulnerable indeed. It's easy to get the idea that we are not as privileged as we might like, that the universe can be a very harsh place to us.

    The Bible teaches that the God who made the universe will also judge humanity. And that judgment will be by His standards, and the end results will be what He determines them to be: life immortal with His Son or condemnation to eternal fire. This is probably not a popular opinion, but it's the consistent Bible teaching on the matter. We ultimately either accept it or reject it. But we cannot say that it isn't what is taught in the Bible. The idea of annihilation is based on a presupposition that God wouldn't eternally torment anybody. The language of the Bible suggests otherwise.

    Having said all this, I understand that there are conflicting opinions about it. I'm not trying to be offensive or start an argument. But I just tried to point out why I think the language of the Bible points to what I said.

  • Liberalism is a Psychology

    01/09/2012 2:38:58 PM PST · 13 of 33
    hfr to ventanax5

    My tag line says what I think it is.

  • China: The rise of the 'Precious Snowflakes'

    01/08/2012 1:52:01 PM PST · 26 of 59
    hfr to afraidfortherepublic
    Who was it that said nature abhors a vacuum?

    This sounds like a cultural vacuum to me. And we've seen that sort of vacuum filled constantly throughout history.

    Visigoths, Huns,Vikings, Mongols, . . . vacuum fillers all.

  • The Needle and the Damage Done

    01/05/2012 6:38:28 AM PST · 58 of 80
    hfr to Kaslin
    Tattoo’s are preschool for mark of the beast.
  • Meghan McCain Isnít 'Dumb' to Worry About Rick Santorum

    01/04/2012 5:50:46 PM PST · 38 of 40
    hfr to Doogle

    There is a sound bite, some old thing called “madcow.wav”. I can’t remember exactly. But it goes bonkers with the moo’s. Pretty funny actually.

  • Robert E. Lee: Remembering an American Legend

    01/04/2012 5:46:45 PM PST · 21 of 88
    hfr to BigReb555
    The question arises in threads like this one. Who in our day has the stature of a man like this?

    There is a long list of truly great men in American history. Lee is at the top of that list. As are men like Washington, Jackson (Stonewall), Jefferson, both Adams, Patrick Henry, Forrest, - hey wait a minute, aren't there any from the north? Ok, Adams - John, uh . . . Jonathan Edwards (?), uh . . . ok I'm open to suggestions.

    On the other hand, Lincoln, though great in so many ways, somehow doesn't reach those heights. Don't get me wrong, Lincoln is great, but he just played havoc with our Constitution.

    Oh well, for what it's worth: just another conflicted opinion.

  • Motorists Paying for Bike Paths, Museums

    12/29/2011 10:07:54 AM PST · 12 of 23
    hfr to cripplecreek

    Oops. Sorry, I thought he was the sponsor. Michigan is a beautiful state, especially west Michigan along the lakeshore.

  • Ron Paul is Dangerous

    12/29/2011 9:56:34 AM PST · 70 of 89
    hfr to bkepley
    Good post.

    We seemed to have a “foreign entanglement” in north Africa in the early 1800’s. Seems like the writer of the Declaration of Independence was President at the time. Then of course we did the “Louisiana Purchase”, same Prez. So a dogmatic line didn't seem to be part of the Founders thinking. Those men were wise and practical and experienced, not dogmatic.

    What is troublesome however is that there just doesn't seem to be anyone on the election circuit who profoundly supports the idea of smaller government.

  • Motorists Paying for Bike Paths, Museums

    12/29/2011 9:38:48 AM PST · 6 of 23
    hfr to MichCapCon
    Good (/sarc) social-engineering gone bad?

    Bike path to nowhere?

    What is really problematic is the speed/mass/hardness differentials between autos/trucks and people on bikes. I personally would be very apprehensive to use a bike path in vehicular traffic.

    Another issue is the weather, deep snow and slush make biking a really practical (/sarc) thing in Michigan during the winter. (Not to mention sheets of icy water and snow thrown up off the tires of passing trucks.)

    ps. Isn't Michigan also responsible for the curly light bulbs?

  • Angels and inquisitors

    12/23/2011 9:34:26 AM PST · 10 of 17
    hfr to Lady Lucky
    Exactly. If all we had in eternity was our intellectual capacity to carry us through, it would be unbearable.

    But, like it says in 1 Corinthians, " . . . these three remain, Faith, Hope, and Love."

    And those are what will fit us for eternity with the Lord Jesus Christ. That eternity in perfect love will be more than merely bearable. Every moment will be like His mercy, renewed every day.

    The Song of Solomon has a verse which reads,

    "He brought me to the banqueting house, and his banner over me was love." (Song of Solomon 2:4)

    Try reading the Song of Solomon in the light of future glory with Jesus. It sounds good to me.

    The love of Jesus, Who is preparing a place for us so that where He is we may be also, will not grow tiresome.

    As far as having any purposeful activity. Mark Twain mocked at the boring idea of sitting on a cloud strumming a harp. Well, Romans chapter one tells us that what God has created tells us about who He is. What He has created is pretty amazing, and it may well take more than an eternity to plumb the depths of the new earth and the new heavens, which will probably be even more amazing, and it will take more than eternity to get to know Him - which will be the most amazing thing of all, well deserving of an eternity. And we, created in His image, will like Him, our Creator, delight in some manner of creativity

  • The Day Habeas Corpus Died

    12/19/2011 10:51:41 AM PST · 16 of 17
    hfr to geraldmcg
    As bad as this legislation may be, habeus corpus has always been at risk.

    George Washington and Alexander Hamilton didn't scruple over habeus corpus in the Whiskey Rebellion of 1799 when federal soldiers, at their command, hauled westerners out of their homes at midnight, took them back east over the mountains to cities on the seaboard, and held them without trial, some for years.

    Abraham Lincoln and General Burnsides didn't hesitate to ignore habeus corpus during the Civil War when Burnsides, as military commander of the old northwest locked up political opponents - elected members of state congresses, newspaper editors, and any others that opposed Republican policy in the pursuit of the war.

    Those are just two of many instances that might be cited over the course of our country's history. So I don't think this is the end of habeus corpus quite yet. A violation maybe, and it needs to be addressed. On the other hand, given the trajectory of history towards an ideal of one world government, a smaller human population, and a ruling elite that strides across the face of the world like demigods in complete harmony with nature, you never know for sure. After all, to make that omelet called the "Congress of Humanity in Solidarity with the Earth" more than a few eggs have to be broken.

  • Gingrich Collapses In Iowa, As Ron Paul Surges to the Front

    12/19/2011 10:00:14 AM PST · 53 of 162
    hfr to Yankee
    Are those charcoal briquettes? </sarc>
  • Why a Tea Party conservative now supports Ron Paul...including his foreign policy

    12/16/2011 9:16:13 AM PST · 41 of 78
    hfr to davisfh
    What I have not seen explained is how a rino is any better than a dem. Or, why it's worse to have a dem in office than a rino.

    Neither party takes this country in a conservative direction. It seems to merely be a matter of marginally slower or faster.

    I for one would like to see this discussed on the merits pro and con.

  • Antsy Voters Look for a Third Way (3rd Party Run?)

    12/16/2011 9:06:28 AM PST · 48 of 98
    hfr to xzins
    Rino = dem. Which ever is in office, the country is still going in the same direction.

    It just seems to me that saying one must vote repub lest a dem get elected is like saying one must steer into Charybdis to avoid Scylla.

    On the other hand there is no third party. Where oh where is our Thetis, er Sarah.

    What we need to do is never reelect anybody. Then mix the vote up so no party has enough power to accomplish anything - aka gridlock. Make everything except defense and a few others all part time - especially the executive, the congress, and the courts - the more time they spend golfing the safer our liberty is. (Some humor intended)

  • What Obama Grasps, and Glenn Beck Doesn't

    12/15/2011 9:39:27 AM PST · 29 of 52
    hfr to SeekAndFind
    I think a lot of people don't see much difference between either party, or the candidates. Or, the differences are merely those of degree, rather than kind.

    It would be a fine thing if we could lay out a grid of the issues at hand on one axis and the various party/candidates on the other axis and see what the substantive differences are.

    As it stands now, whether we have repub or dem, things are going along the same trajectory away from the erstwhile ideal of a Constitutional American Republic. So the question is, because there is no real difference, why not a third party?

  • Glenn Beckís third-party insanity

    12/14/2011 7:28:19 AM PST · 51 of 74
    hfr to jpsb
    What you said is just the point. I have failed to see a significant difference between the dems and GOP. Every election cycle we're told we have to vote GOP or the ship of state will sink. But the only difference anymore seems to be how fast they lurch to the left.

    It's almost a veritable Hobson's choice between the two major parties instead of a real choice. They are so much like to peas from the same pod. Or two puppets in the same puppet show.

  • Who will be the Republican candidate (Vanity)

    12/11/2011 3:30:06 PM PST · 38 of 64
    hfr to hfr

    “used care” = “used car”, not “care” as in “care bear”.

  • Who will be the Republican candidate (Vanity)

    12/11/2011 3:29:00 PM PST · 37 of 64
    hfr to Sparky21555
    Who will be the GOP candidate?

    I have no idea. I have a suspicion that whoever it is they will be a rino.

    And for me, this time around, dem, rino, no difference. The plea that we must have a Republican falls flat anymore. A fat lot of good all our erstwhile Repubs have done us judging by how far down the slippery slope to the brave new future we slipped.

    I always thought we had a republic of laws based on the Constitution. And I've always thought the Constitution was almost an inspired piece of work. I think it was John Adams who said that it was generations of Puritan preachers who fought and won the real American Revolution in the hearts and minds of the people long before 1776.

    I just cannot see how anyone can say there is much of a difference between Republicans and dems.

    So I'm sorry to post a reply not exactly conforming to the question at hand. I guess my answer is that unless whoever it is is an actual republican then they are only a Republican. And Republicans don't impress me much anymore.

    p.s. I've voted straight party ticket, Republican, since 1972. My first time in the voting booth, and I had what seemed like an epiphany that Richard Nixon was the only one that could be entrusted with our presidency. I still think so. Even if I would hestitate to buy a used care from him. (well slap my jaws)

  • The King James Bible: 1611 - 2011

    12/11/2011 3:14:33 PM PST · 14 of 34
    hfr to NEWwoman
    It has stood the test of time, and it continues to.

    The claims by contemporary translations to be based on superior critical apparatuses are mostly based on how early a given text is. The claim that the oldest manuscript is also the most accurate is just that, a claim. Prove it.

    The claim that the language of the KJV is so archaic that people today cannot make heads nor tails of it is more often than not a self fulfilling prophecy.

    An interesting thing about language is that there must be about a gazillion ways to say the same thing, which gives rise to to old adage that it “aint so much what you say as how you say it”. In my very humble opinion, the KJV translators have said things very well indeed.

  • The Septuagint and the Protestant Bible's Jeremiah problem

    12/08/2011 7:42:58 PM PST · 5 of 36
    hfr to rzman21
    The presupposition here is that the Qumran texts are indeed accurate, that they provide a standard by which to judge other texts.

    Presuppose away. As for me, the text of the Bible as we have it is the word of God as He has preserved it. Jesus Himself said:

    "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35)

    Those words are also recorded in Mark 13:31 and Luke 21:33.

    To paraphrase Joshua, "Choose you what you will believe. As for me I will believe the Lord."

    Yes, it may correctly be said that my viewpoint is neither scientific nor scholarly. But neither is the opposing viewpoint. Both are based upon certain presuppositions, or as some may say, faith.

    Why do philosophers wear long robes? Because their feet are not planted upon solid ground.

  • White House Unveils New Strategy to Fight Homegrown Terrorism

    12/08/2011 7:28:20 PM PST · 19 of 25
    hfr to bigbob

    Bravo Sierra! Exactly.

  • The Pentagon Is Offering Free Military Hardware To Every Police Department In The US

    12/08/2011 10:41:09 AM PST · 38 of 84
    hfr to Just4Him
    The implication here is a coup d'état against the United States by those in governmental authority?

    And that it is going apace right out in the open for everyone to see, which is the best place to hide anything?

  • Martial Law: The Fix Is In (Donofrio)

    12/05/2011 5:34:33 PM PST · 19 of 26
    hfr to STARWISE
    Krushchev should have said "we'll make you bury yourselves."
  • The terrorists have won

    12/05/2011 5:31:55 PM PST · 14 of 51
    hfr to rabscuttle385

    They aren’t even trying to hide their intentions anymore.

    The frogs are almost done boiling.