Posts by Mr Rogers

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Christians in America Need To Stop Being Such Wussies

    03/28/2015 6:50:21 AM PDT · 10 of 23
    Mr Rogers to Kaslin

    Good article. Modern Christianity has repented of telling people to repent. It is now “God loves you just like you are”, so...why change? When was the last time you heard a preacher describe the lost as “by nature children of wrath”?

  • A Grave Problem – NJ Ban on Religious Headstone Sales Could Violate Constitution

    03/28/2015 6:40:12 AM PDT · 20 of 22
    Mr Rogers to nathanbedford

    Is there anything that prevents a private business starting a graveyard? And while churches do not pay taxes, most businesses do not spend inordinate sums of money building meeting halls and helping the poor.

  • A tidal wave of nip­ples sweeps Ice­land

    03/26/2015 10:18:39 AM PDT · 18 of 134
    Mr Rogers to TexasFreeper2009

    The link needs to be accompanied by eye wash...

  • Ted Cruz’s claim that there has been ‘zero’ global warming in 17 years

    03/26/2015 10:09:59 AM PDT · 10 of 61
    Mr Rogers to Gaffer

    When the fact check is run by someone who has no respect for truth, it is meaningless. And liberals have NO respect for the truth.

  • Is God Angry Anymore?

    03/25/2015 7:57:32 AM PDT · 45 of 48
    Mr Rogers to metmom

    God’s wrath is toward SIN. Unrepented sin. There are not “OK sins” and “not OK sins”. The same was true in the Old Testament.

    There is not one God of the OT and a different one in the New. One God, same attitude towards sin.

    Look at John 6. He had little patience for those who were not ever going to repent.

    The great need of the modern world is to realize a fundamental truth: God does not love us AS we are. He loves us where we are, but not AS we are. We all must start by repenting - agreeing with Him that we are doing evil and deserve punishment.

    God is patient. He doesn’t punish quickly or without ample cause. But modern man seems to think God will not punish us at all. In fact, as CS Lewis pointed out, modern man wants to know if God is good enough to deserve us. We want to judge God. We’re going to be in for a big surprise...

  • The Myth of High-Protein Diets

    03/24/2015 9:56:20 PM PDT · 38 of 46
    Mr Rogers to nickcarraway 56, low carb/high protein & fat has left me 30 lbs lighter after 6 months. Blood work this week showed modest cholesterol levels, blood pressure 120/79, pulse 60.

    If that is failure, let me fail some more.

  • Is God Angry Anymore?

    03/24/2015 9:00:49 PM PDT · 42 of 48
    Mr Rogers to Freedom_Is_Not_Free

    “The God of the New Testament is not the angry, vindictive God of the Old Testament. The difference is night and day, and I for one am grateful for it.”


    You obviously need to read the Old Testament! You also might want to read the New:

    “12 When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, 13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. 14 The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. 15 Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, 16 calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, 17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

    15 So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour, the day, the month, and the year, were released to kill a third of mankind. 16 The number of mounted troops was twice ten thousand times ten thousand; I heard their number. 17 And this is how I saw the horses in my vision and those who rode them: they wore breastplates the color of fire and of sapphire and of sulfur, and the heads of the horses were like lions’ heads, and fire and smoke and sulfur came out of their mouths. 18 By these three plagues a third of mankind was killed, by the fire and smoke and sulfur coming out of their mouths. 19 For the power of the horses is in their mouths and in their tails, for their tails are like serpents with heads, and by means of them they wound.

    20 The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands nor give up worshiping demons and idols of gold and silver and bronze and stone and wood, which cannot see or hear or walk, 21 nor did they repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts.”

  • Is God Angry Anymore?

    03/22/2015 6:15:51 PM PDT · 31 of 48
    Mr Rogers to Freedom_Is_Not_Free

    “That angry God is completely missing from the New Testament.”

    Don’t tell that to the men forced out of the Temple when Jesus kicked their butts...

  • Battle flag at center of Supreme Court free speech case

    03/22/2015 2:12:24 PM PDT · 21 of 107
    Mr Rogers to Reno89519

    My great grandfather (my grandfather’s father) was born in 1835 and fought with Indiana in the Civil War. That said, my sympathy is with the smaller government, free to choose your destiny southern side.

    Nope. Not racist. Despise slavery and wish it had never been allowed in the USA. I think much of what our country has suffered is God’s punishment of us for tolerating it as long as we did.

    But most of the infringements on my rights to believe what I want, including the rights to say what I think and to act on my beliefs, was defeated when the North won the Civil War. It established the supremacy of the Federal Government over any state government, and the principle that no state could withdraw from the “Union”, even if that is what the 13 colonies did during the American Revolution 80 years earlier...

  • National Geographic, Supermarket Tabloid?

    03/20/2015 7:31:11 AM PDT · 25 of 30
    Mr Rogers to TStro

    Me too. Haven’t bothered with that pretentious rag in decades. But if I ever want to know what a leftist enviro-wacko is thinking, I’ll go grab a NG and find out.

  • Starbucks hit by 'cascade of negativity' after ordering staff to talk racism with customers: [tr]

    03/18/2015 8:37:34 PM PDT · 190 of 193
    Mr Rogers to ctdonath2

    Yeah, I gather you care about foo-foo coffee. America wasn’t built on foo-foo coffee, nor do real men drink it.

    Oh well.

  • Starbucks hit by 'cascade of negativity' after ordering staff to talk racism with customers: [tr]

    03/18/2015 4:40:12 PM PDT · 188 of 193
    Mr Rogers to ctdonath2

    “SBX at least acknowledges there are many different kinds of beans, roasts...”

    As long as it has caffeine in it, who cares?

    You can get a decent cup of coffee anywhere. Getting foo-foo will cost you more...and come with an idiot white guy’s lecture on race!


    03/18/2015 3:48:10 PM PDT · 21 of 75
    Mr Rogers to Mrs. Don-o

    Agreed. Make Congress sweat, and they will make Modder’s commander sweat. Stay silent, and they will be coming for you soon enough...

  • ObamaCare Premiums Jumped 23% This Year -- After Subsidies

    03/18/2015 9:15:01 AM PDT · 14 of 14
    Mr Rogers to Mr. K

    Next year, you will be required to file a 1095 with your taxes. It will specify what your coverage was. You will not be allowed to file your taxes without it.

  • Diet Soda Linked to Increased Belly Fat in Older Adults

    03/17/2015 5:30:07 PM PDT · 55 of 72
    Mr Rogers to NormsRevenge

    I drink enough Diet Coke to float a battleship. I’m wearing 30 inch jeans, but only after losing 4 inches by avoiding breads and simple carbs. Still chugging down the Diet Coke.

    Poorly designed study, mixing correlation with causation.

  • Francis: Who are you to shut the door of mercy for someone?

    03/17/2015 5:09:27 PM PDT · 23 of 41
    Mr Rogers to Legatus

    He seems mighty selective in the scriptures he cites. Why did Jesus start with “Repent” if no repentance is needed?

  • How to Build a $400 Billion F-35 That Doesn’t Fly

    03/16/2015 6:49:02 AM PDT · 19 of 37
    Mr Rogers to Pan_Yan

    While there is much to dislike about the acquisition of fighters, I’d like to remind folks the same sort of things were written about the F-15 & F-16.

  • San Francisco's Largest Evangelical Megachurch to Allow Non-Celibate Homosexuals to Be Members

    03/15/2015 6:15:27 PM PDT · 15 of 109
    Mr Rogers to massmike

    “We exist to be a church for the city and for its renewal...City Church is a place for all people, regardless of where you might find yourself on your faith journey. If you are spiritually skeptical, curious about Christianity, or a committed follower of Jesus Christ, we make room for you wherever you are in your process. We aim to be a place that respects what it’s like not to believe so that no one has to feel alone and so that anyone who walks through our doors might encounter the work of the living God.

    City Church has never been a church only for ourselves, just as San Francisco is not a place for us to simply enjoy or consume. The city is our home and we seek its peace and flourishing. Serving the city involves not only a change in our hearts, it requires a redirection of our hands and feet as we turn from being inward-focused to outward-looking. We see our service as sharing the renewal we are experiencing in Christ with our neighbors.”

    Doesn’t sound like an EVANGELICAL church to me. Sounds more like one that want to be part of the world, not:

    “These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.”

    They have exchanged the “Good News” - which starts with repent - for the “Comfortable News” which leads to hell.

  • Arizona Passes Two Bills Aimed At Blocking Federal Laws (Executive Order)

    03/15/2015 1:56:19 PM PDT · 17 of 25
    Mr Rogers to Whenifhow

    “If the bill becomes a law, Arizona would essentially be independent of federal laws.”

    Damned lie. It would become a state that does not feel compelled to enforce executive decisions that run contrary to valid public laws.

  • Black Women May Need to Change Their Perspective When Dating a Black Man Going Through Hard Times

    03/15/2015 1:51:40 PM PDT · 34 of 92
    Mr Rogers to 2ndDivisionVet

    “Perhaps two of the most emphasized of these roles are the protector and the provider. “

    No, in modern America, the main role is “Baby Daddy”. Hat’s off to the black men I know who DO take fatherhood seriously - and there are a number. But in popular culture? Sorry...

  • How Can the Church Tell a Gay 16-Year Old that 'God's Will' for them Is a Life Void of Sex, Romance?

    03/15/2015 9:23:22 AM PDT · 45 of 104
    Mr Rogers to sten

    You nailed it. I told my kids their lives ought to be devoid of sex until (and unless) they married. I didn’t have sex before marriage, and I married at 28. So is possible.

    Romance? Romance does NOT equal love. It seems to rarely equal love, at times. Romance is what sells poorly written novels to women. It has nothing to do with the love that sees you thru the years. Romance has more to do with desire than it does with love.

    Romance is wanting something. Love is giving something. They should not be confused.

    And FWIW, the few homosexuals I’ve met had ZERO romance in their lives. Romance still involves a measure of restraint, and homosexuals are not famous for restraint. When there are no limits on your desires, all you have left is desire - not romance. And thus you have neither romance nor love left, only rampant, unfulfilled desire.

  • Cardinal: Church Must Abandon Harmful Approaches to Lesbian/Gay People

    03/14/2015 7:08:28 PM PDT · 11 of 114
    Mr Rogers to ebb tide

    Guess he forgot the Gospel starts with “Repent!”, not “You’re OK & I’m OK”...

  • How the Supreme Court is about to explode America’s racial wealth gap

    03/14/2015 3:36:11 PM PDT · 58 of 102
    Mr Rogers to kingu
    "Latinos and blacks are unable to work hard, put the results of their hard work into homes, and encourage their children to do the same."

    That does NOT describe many of the blacks and hispanics I know. It might describe the inner city, but not the folks I work with or who live in my neighborhood.

  • 3 Kansas Hospital Patients Die From Blue Bell Ice Cream Products

    03/14/2015 3:33:28 PM PDT · 40 of 69
    Mr Rogers to willywill

    Blue Bell is comparable in quality to Baskin-Robbins.

  • Bristol Palin and Dakota Meyer Announce Engagement

    03/14/2015 10:48:51 AM PDT · 91 of 141
    Mr Rogers to Bill Russell

    Actually, my oldest daughter was not kicked out...but she refers to herself as an ex-Marine. Sorry if that gives offense to anyone.

  • Bush tells New Hampshire he won’t change views to win votes

    03/13/2015 6:12:46 PM PDT · 18 of 59
    Mr Rogers to SWAMPSNIPER

    “I’m not changing my views either.”

    Exactly! I’m not changing MY views, and my views are 180 out from Jeb-E, the big GOP-E money donor butt boy!

    My wife was an immigrant. 2 of my 3 kids are naturalized citizens - citizens who went thru all the loops (after adoption) to become US citizens. Heck, my DIL is an immigrant too - a LEGAL immigrant to the USA. And oddly enough, my brown skinned LEGAL immigrant family has no fondness for ILLEGAL immigration.

    Jeb “I Want Cheap Labor” Bush can keep HIS views and I’ll keep (and vote) mine. There is a reason I voted for the Democrat instead of John McCain for Senator. I refused to vote for Matha McSally, and her recent votes are proving me correct. And yeah, I’ll sit out an election if Jeb the Pandering Pussy gets the GOP nod!

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/10/2015 10:00:58 PM PDT · 194 of 200
    Mr Rogers to Colofornian

    “Are you going to lecture us on how “ribs” are “meaningless” for actual creative purposes?”

    If someone argued that having a rib removed would automatically save you, then yeah...I’d call them on their statement.

    Scripture is clear - without repentance, there is no entering the Kingdom of Heaven. You can imagine otherwise, but you cannot cite a single verse saying you are right.

    If infant baptism did anything useful, it would be commanded. it wasn’t. Period.

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/10/2015 11:40:14 AM PDT · 176 of 200
    Mr Rogers to Colofornian; Iscool

    “Because many of your posts aren’t just saying, “No infant baptism.” But “no baptism” at all.”

    Who is suggesting to do that? Anyone?

    Iscool wrote:

    “No repentance...No baptism...”

    Exactly! There is no reason to baptize someone who is not washed in the blood of Jesus. You cannot unite someone in His death and resurrection without their permission!

    Where do the Apostles in scripture baptize ANYONE against their will? Where do they baptize an infant who is incapable of repenting? Can you cite a single verse?

    Of course not! Water baptism FOLLOWS the baptism of Jesus. Apart from the Baptism of Jesus in the Holy Spirit, uniting us to Christ and to His death and resurrection, water baptism IS MEANINGLESS. To suggest someone who has not repented and who doesn’t have any concept of what repentance could mean should be baptized in water, and thus saved, is to resort to magic and ritual instead of submitting to God.

    “When you come to appear before me,
    who has required of you
    this trampling of my courts?
    13 Bring no more vain offerings;
    incense is an abomination to me.
    New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations—
    I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly.
    14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts
    my soul hates;
    they have become a burden to me;
    I am weary of bearing them.
    15 When you spread out your hands,
    I will hide my eyes from you;
    even though you make many prayers,
    I will not listen;
    your hands are full of blood.
    16 Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean;
    remove the evil of your deeds from before my eyes;
    cease to do evil,
    17 learn to do good;
    seek justice,
    correct oppression;
    bring justice to the fatherless,
    plead the widow’s cause.

    18 “Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord:
    though your sins are like scarlet,
    they shall be as white as snow;
    though they are red like crimson,
    they shall become like wool.
    19 If you are willing and obedient,
    you shall eat the good of the land;
    20 but if you refuse and rebel,
    you shall be eaten by the sword;
    for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”

    Israel could not be saved by physical birth either. Circumcision was meaningless for those who were hard of heart. Only repentance and faith could save the Israelite - or the “BELIEVER”. For no one can follow Christ if they do not believe Him...

  • Is the God of the Old Testament a Moral Monster? An Interview with Dick Belcher

    03/10/2015 10:58:17 AM PDT · 25 of 50
    Mr Rogers to HiTech RedNeck; taxcontrol

    “No, this is an argument of right by might.”

    Ants are not fit to judge man, morally or in any other way.

    We simply do not have enough knowledge or an eternal perspective to allow us to judge the Creator. It is incredibly prideful to suggest our perspective provides enough basis to make any judgment against God.

  • Is the God of the Old Testament a Moral Monster? An Interview with Dick Belcher

    03/10/2015 10:55:11 AM PDT · 23 of 50
    Mr Rogers to Gamecock

    The root problem is man trying to decide if HE approves of if the God who created the entire Universe is someone we can comprehend and judge!

    My time In Afghanistan in 2007 convinced me God probably had good reason and just cause to exterminate the Canaanites. In any case, it is certain that a God who can create a universe is likely to know more about the situation than modern man does!

    This just shows the pride of modern man, and sets us up for just judgment by the God they reject.

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/10/2015 8:07:13 AM PDT · 80 of 94
    Mr Rogers to angryoldfatman

    “I can do more than just survive and procreate, unlike animals. My five senses do not limit me, unlike animals.

    I can do science and complex mathematics, unlike animals.

    You seem to think that animals can do these things, for some reason I am unable to determine, although you claim it is due to Darwinian evolution.”

    You are an uncommonly stupid person. You probably are dumber than most monkeys. You seem to have missed multiple posts, for example, where I specifically said I was NOT an evolutionist.

    However, here is the definition of an animal:

    “any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli”

    If you are alive, and you are not a plant or virus, then you are an animal. I’ve pointed that out before, but reading comprehension is NOT something that distinguishes YOU from other animals...

    I see no reason to discuss issues on the Internet with someone who cannot read. Go learn, and come back in a few years.

  • McDonald's Latest Sales Are Worse Than Expected

    03/09/2015 5:51:07 PM PDT · 91 of 213
    Mr Rogers to SkyPilot

    I’d go if they stopped ghetto-izing things. Maybe if they would speak the King’s English and drop the hip-hop music, they’d attract a better paying, more loyal and higher-profit clientele.

    Me? I wish they made good burgers, fries with real grease, shakes that looked like shakes and got the order right the first time. But then, they wouldn’t attract the all night long crowd or foo-foo faddies.

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 5:22:17 PM PDT · 76 of 94
    Mr Rogers to angryoldfatman

    ” Therefore, I can ask dogs and cats and hamsters and iguanas the same questions as I can humans and receive the same truth.

    This is your logic, by the way, not mine.”

    If you think that passes as logical thought, please check yourself into a hospital where you can be taken care of. You are not competent to walk across the street without help - something many dogs ARE capable of doing.

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/09/2015 4:26:40 PM PDT · 138 of 200
    Mr Rogers to CynicalBear

    I have read it. It does not discuss justification or salvation from our sin nature. If it did, then we Christians should marry multiple non-Christians so they would be saved and destined to heaven because we married them.

    That is entirely contrary to the Gospel. Anyone who believes that is a heretic.

    “HOLY”. It means separated. Distinguished from the world around them. And if anyone runs their household IAW the Word of God, then the household IS distinguished and separated from the surrounding world. But it does NOT mean the spouse and children will all go to Heaven. For all have sinned, and all have fallen.

    “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.” - Jesus Christ

    You cannot be made a child of God by your wife’s belief, but only through your own. But if your wife believes, your entire household WILL be different than it was before.

    “But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”

    If you wish to argue that men can be saved and justified in God’s sight by marrying a Christian woman, say so. Otherwise, my interpretation answers the meaning - when one member of a household is saved, the nature of the household is changed...but not all individuals within the household are cleansed of their sin and made children of God.

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 2:38:29 PM PDT · 71 of 94
    Mr Rogers to Heartlander

    Science is about coming up with theories and testing to see if they match reality. That is how we have advanced so far in knowledge the last 300 years. We humans. We animals. For unless you are a plant or virus, you ARE an animal.

    And Christians have believed in using reason since when Jesus walked the earth. It is a pity to see some here reject it as possible.

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 1:47:50 PM PDT · 67 of 94
    Mr Rogers to Heartlander

    “Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?”

    I would trust a lot of monkeys to be capable of accurately assessing the world around them.

    But then, my convictions as a Baptist are in part due to seeing what God has done in my life and being convinced it is Him and not me trying.

    Yet look at all the spiritually deceived. How can you trust ANY spiritual belief, and KNOW with 100% certainty that you are right? There is a reason it is called “faith” and not “proof”. We can never know God by the power of our own reason, and neither can we know Truth by the power of our own reason - yet Christian apologetics is the use of reason to support faith.

    None of this means the mind, if it did evolve for survival, is totally unreliable for ascertaining the world around us and making reasoned guesses about the future. We all do that every day - monkeys included.

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 11:27:00 AM PDT · 65 of 94
    Mr Rogers to kosciusko51

    “OK. Bye!”

    I suppose I shouldn’t expect anything more from someone who thinks this article is reasonable...

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 11:20:45 AM PDT · 62 of 94
    Mr Rogers to kosciusko51

    “It is not only the author making these claims.”

    There are a lot of stupid people. Why join them?

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 11:20:01 AM PDT · 61 of 94
    Mr Rogers to angryoldfatman

    Why do you believe humans are not animals? Last time I checked, we qualify.

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 10:25:54 AM PDT · 55 of 94
    Mr Rogers to kosciusko51; angryoldfatman

    Based on the quote of Gray in the article, Gray merely says the supposed evolution of the mind would be to have a mind that promotes survival, not philosophic truth. But that does not CONTRADICT a mind discovering philosophic truth.

    “Gray has essentially said, if Darwin’s theory is true, then it “serves evolutionary success, not truth.” In other words, if Darwin’s theory is true, then it is not true.”

    Saying something serves evolutionary success does NOT imply it cannot find truth.

    “You are an animal. Animals only need to survive and procreate. Animals do not know scientific truths. Therefore truth, in particular scientific truth, does not exist.” - angryoldfatman

    Animals DO know scientific truth, if they (as humans) work to attain it. Scientific truth merely means an acceptable (but not necessarily totally accurate) explanation for what one sees and experiences. Science does not involve itself in attaining ultimate truth. It is involved in explanations of experience that match A & B together so long as no better explanation comes along.

    Evolution may or may not be a totally accurate explanation for what we see, but perfection is not attained by science. That is the realm of math, perhaps, but not science.

    I feel odd making this argument, since I’m not an evolutionist. But intellectual honesty is important. God is ill served by either dishonesty or bad thinking.

    In any case, the pressures that might evolve a mind have little to do with how well that mind functions in math or philosophy. More than one invention has found its best use in something the inventor did not have in mind at the time.

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 9:12:46 AM PDT · 42 of 94
    Mr Rogers to kosciusko51

    “What exactly did she say in the article that leads you to this conclusion?”

    “Philosopher John Gray writes, “If Darwin’s theory of natural selection is true,... the human mind serves evolutionary success, not truth.” What is the contradiction in that statement?”

    To suggest that the mind evolved to allow survival (which in turn requires it to function with some accuracy, and more accuracy in a creature that needs its mind to compensate for physical limitations) does not in any way suggest that the mind is incapable of discerning truth (accurate interpretations) in other areas.

    In fact, a mind that has evolved to discern patterns that accurately predict future events (”If I see A then B then C, I am likely to be eaten unless I do D”) is likely to be a mind that can come to accurate conclusions based on partial information. That ability would allow it to make conclusions based on partial data and then test it in ways that would confirm accuracy (truth) or not.

    My objection to speculation about things which may have happened millions of years ago is that the assumptions required for scientific respectability require no intervention by a supreme being. It rejects the possibility of a God Who Intervenes, then claims its conclusion prove its assumption.

    But what the evolutionists say in the article does not prevent the use of the human mind to discover truth. There is no fatal contradiction in their statements.

  • Who's Faster on the Draw? Gun or Knife

    03/09/2015 8:21:08 AM PDT · 9 of 39
    Mr Rogers to w1n1

    “the knife guy balloons is only 4 feet away”

    Take a step forward and stab it. That way you still have your knife.

  • Why Evolutionary Theory Cannot Survive Itself

    03/09/2015 8:14:16 AM PDT · 22 of 94
    Mr Rogers to Heartlander

    I’m not an evolutionist, but this article is a shining example of someone who doesn’t understand logic or reason.

  • Here's Why The Japanese Live So Long

    03/09/2015 8:07:49 AM PDT · 2 of 26
    Mr Rogers to SeekAndFind

    It is an odd title, since the article concludes we don’t know why the Japanese tend to live longer. My guess will be “genetics”...

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/09/2015 7:38:14 AM PDT · 135 of 200
    Mr Rogers to CynicalBear; Colofornian; Iscool

    I’ll add this: If I could make the decision for others to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, I would do so for ALL. But no one can make that decision for another. I cannot repent and believe on behalf of my wife, nor can I do so for an infant anywhere.

    I can, as head of the household, decide my house will be run on the principles of God. In that sense, I CAN save my entire household - in the sense of sanctification (separation from the world):

    “If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.”

    But that talks of sanctification, not justification - and it may well be the context that talks about an entire household being “saved”. Justification is required for someone to become a citizen of Heaven, to board the SS Jesus and take a cruise whose destination is to be conformed to the likeness of Christ. But you can be made different (separate / holy) by the decision of another to have his home abide by different principles.

    As noted in Acts 16:

    “And he rejoiced along with his entire household that he had believed in God.”

    His household rejoiced that he had believed...

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/09/2015 7:28:29 AM PDT · 134 of 200
    Mr Rogers to CynicalBear; Colofornian; Iscool

    “What was circumcision for? Reference Genesis 17:12-14.”

    Circumcision was the right that marked the person as an Israelite - which status he had at birth. It marked them as members of the Old Covenant.

    Water baptism is the rite of passage that marks one as born again in Christ, and it happens after the second birth. It marks us as under the New Covenant.

    Unlike birth into Israel, no infant has experienced the second birth required for entering the Kingdom of Heaven. We baptize infant Christians, but we do not baptize non-christian infants, so to speak. One cannot become an “infant Christian” without believing.

    Infant baptism is like trying to circumcise someone who is still in the womb.

    Just as physical birth is required for circumcision, spiritual birth is required for water baptism.

    “Do you make decisions for your children until they reach the age of reason?”

    Yes, where possible. I cannot decide for them to repent and believe, which is the requirement to become a believer...

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/08/2015 1:06:53 PM PDT · 127 of 200
    Mr Rogers to Colofornian

    “So “belief” here is just a smokescreen. / It isn’t the real demarcation. “

    Not hardly.

    First, water baptism saves no one from their sin. It has value, but it is not in any way connected with placing someone in the body of Christ.

    Second, apart from faith, there IS no conversion. There is no salvation apart from faith, and there is no justification for baptizing the unsaved.

    “15 People were also bringing babies to Jesus for him to place his hands on them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus called the children to him and said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 17 Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” (Luke 18) “

    Notice they brought the infants to be blessed, and prayed for, but not for baptism. We would pray for babies, but we would not baptize them - and the same was true of Jesus.

    “So direct questions here:

    Would your church baptize a pre-schooler?
    Would your church baptize a kinderkid?
    Would your church baptize a first grader?
    (& for many churches, would that church baptize a 2nd grader whose 7?)”

    Answers to all: it depends on the child. Can they give some indication they know Jesus and believe? If yes, then they can be baptized. If no, then they cannot. And if one believes before we are ready to baptize, then he has already been saved:

    ” Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”

    Why do you insist on formulas? Why do you insist water baptism is needed for salvation, or can save the soul of an unbeliever? Why do you deny the 500 verses about faith and belief? Why do you insist an unbeliever can be a believer, if he is just sprinkled with water? Is it magic?

    Give some scriptural evidence that God honors the water baptism of an unbeliever.

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/08/2015 10:17:39 AM PDT · 124 of 200
    Mr Rogers to Colofornian; CynicalBear; Iscool

    “If we take your counsel — and other credobaptists, then for all we know, nobody under 25 was ever baptized because the Bible is silent on age — and therefore nobody under 25 should ever be baptized.”

    “Tell us where the “belief” verses are about the rest of his household? (Go ahead, list them for us)”

    While the Bible is silent about exact ages, it is not silent about belief. Believing IS a requirement. That is why we are often referred to as “believers”. There are roughly 500 verses in the New Testament alone that cover the requirement to believe.

    It is not open to debate. It is EXCRUCIATINGLY CLEAR that faith and believing are requirements to become ‘believers’!

    If someone has not believed, they cannot be “in Christ”. They are not part of the body of Christ.

    So why would ANYONE want to baptize an infant? What do they think it is going to do? Is it a magical ritual, per Simon Magus?

    Your post 119 is telling. You deny belief is required for salvation. You deny the entire New Testament to justify your belief.

    “Finally, most credobaptist groups have created “baby dedications.” The Bible is silent on ANY age kid-dedications, let alone baby ones... “

    Having sat thru many, the point of the dedication is for the ADULTS to pledge themselves to teaching the child about God. It does not, in any way, mean the child is blessed or changed or promised anything by God.

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/08/2015 8:53:57 AM PDT · 117 of 200
    Mr Rogers to Tao Yin; CynicalBear

    “The people were all baptized, just not by Paul. Paul preached about baptism, but he rarely performed the baptisms. Where’s the controvery?”

    If water baptism was required for new life, do you think Paul would leave it to others?

    Heck, if it is required for new life, what happens to someone who converts, is not baptized immediately, and then dies?

    And if it GIVES new life, then why don’t we forcibly baptize everyone? Just kidnap them, baptize them with water, and save them!

    “>> and no infant is capable of repenting and believing.<<

    Acts 16:31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”

    Household. In context, I think it is safe to read that as anyone in the household who believes can be saved. However, since there is no indication in scripture that anyone is saved without repenting and believing, it is up to those who contradict the plain teaching of scripture to prove the household contained infants...

  • Why We Baptize Babies (The Case for Infant Baptism) [Conservative Lutheran position]

    03/08/2015 8:21:07 AM PDT · 109 of 200
    Mr Rogers to Colofornian; Iscool

    “I’ll call the award, the “John 3:16 Critique Award”

    Tell you what. You both can compete for it...

    and of course, the anti-baptists folks like yourself would need to need to prove that no children were living in that household”

    I feel no need to compete with Iscool, but I’d be content to co-receive such an award.

    I have no need to prove none of the household baptisms involved infants because I’m not the one who is trying to make baptism be something other than what the principles of scripture teach: that baptism with water is done in recognition of conversion, and is an outward ceremony demonstrating the Baptism of the Holy Spirit that makes us one with Christ.

    Baptism did not appear out of no where. It was practiced by the Jews for many centuries. It was known to the Gentiles as well. No one needed to explain to Cornelius what baptism meant. He did not need classes. He KNEW - because it was a common practice of the time.

    Water Baptism marked a change in life, involving repentance and a commitment to a new way of living. It showed the world that the person had changed inside. It was a public statement of repentance and dedication, which an infant was incapable of doing.

    At no time does anyone claim water baptism is a requirement for being saved from sin. It is used as a means of SANCTIFICATION - separating us from the world around us. Since the term “salvation” can refer to both justification and sanctification, it can be true that water baptism is used in salvation - not by justifying us or placing us in Christ, which is done by the Holy Spirit and not man - but by a public proclamation of repentance and dedication. It sets us apart from the world around us.

    I’m a Baptist. I obviously value baptism. Indeed, I’d be content to baptize someone minutes after their conversion if they understood what it meant (as everyone did in the time of the Apostles).

    But there is no requirement for water baptism in order to be joined to Christ and be placed “in Christ”, which is one of the most common expressions in the New Testament and one of the most important.

    “In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.” - Ephesians 1

    “Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” - Ephesians 2

    IN HIM. IN CHRIST. What does that mean?

    Predestination. Predestination (Gk prooizo) means “to decide beforehand” and applies to God’s purposes comprehended in election. Election is God’s choice “in Christ” of a people (the true church) for himself. Predestination comprehends what will happen to God’s people (all genuine believers in Christ).

    (1) God predestines his elect to be: (a) called (Rom. 8:30); (b) justified (Ro 3:24, 8:30); (c) glorified (Ro 8:30); (d) conformed to the likeness of his Son (Ro 8:29); (e) holy and blameless (Eph 1:4); (f) adopted as God’s children (1:5); (g) redeemed (1:7); (h) recipients of an inheritance (1:14); (i) for the praise of his glory (Eph 1:2; 1 Pe 2:9); (j) recipients of the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13; Gal 3:14); and (k) created to do good works (Eph 2:10).

    (2) Predestination, like election, refers to the corporate body of Christ (i.e., the true spiritual church), and comprehends individuals only in association with that body through a living faith in Jesus Christ (Eph 1:5, 7, 13; cf. Ac 2:38-41; 16:31).

    Summary. Concerning election and predestination, we might use the analogy of a great ship on its way to heaven. The ship (the church) is chosen by God to be his very own vessel. Christ is the Captain and Pilot of this ship. All who desire to be a part of this elect ship and its Captain can do so through a living faith in Christ, by which they come on board the ship. As long as they are on the ship, in company with the ship’s Captain, they are among the elect. If they choose to abandon the ship and Captain, they cease to be part of the elect. Election is always only in union with the Captain and his ship. Predestination tells us about the ship’s destination and what God has prepared for those remaining on it. God invites everyone to come aboard the elect ship through faith in Jesus Christ. [Life in the Spirit Study Bible, pp. 1854-1855]

    To be “in Him” is to be on the ship, to be one of the passengers. It means God is taking you home. It is an act of God, and it is the baptism that JESUS does that places us on board the ship: IN HIM.

    ” “As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” - Matt 3

    All will be baptized, either with the Holy Spirit or with Fire. “He will gather His wheat into the barn” - baptized with the Holy Spirit. “Burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire” describes the fate of all the rest.

    Very early on, the prophecies of Peter and Paul came true:

    “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2 Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3 and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.”

    “27 For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God. 28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. 29 I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.”

    The wolves came, and began to teach that they had a special power, and could control God with their rites, including water baptism. It was and is heresy to believe that something a man does to another will save him from sin and obligate God. If water baptism saved us, then we ought to flood the streets and save all the unconverted! But water baptism only has a role for those who have already believed, and no infant is capable of repenting and believing.