'Drich, which of the millions of different christian denominations goes to Heaven?'

[vorlon13]

Gay clergy, women in the pulpit, changing hymnals, gambling, all issues that can lead to a schism. If a given church can still confer salvation, why bother with all the bother and overhead of a new denomination?

And even if a disgruntled group want tos schism, why not review the other 40,000 denominations to see if there is a "better fit" elsewhere in another established franchise?

BTW, is there a convenient reference of the 40,000 with their differences noted for potential schismatics to review ?? What sense is there in reinventing the wheel, in other words ? Be a shame if the disgruntled group wound up switching to Pillar of Fire Faith Tabernacle of Zion Christian Presbytery of the Sword and Prophet of God, and after a few months found out they preach the communion wafer transubstantiates in 10 seconds upon ingestion, instead of instantaneously, and that is vile heresy by their lights, and they have to move on, again. It would be handy to have all that kind of doctrinal points laid out in a chart or spreadsheet.

[Minimalist]

It is obvious you know nothing about the military. Chaplains do not come and pray during firefights. That would be suicide since the chaplains are not armed, and their assistants usually only carry a Beretta. Also, Rangers tend to have very specific missions, not fit for chaplain intervention.

Seriously, what fucking movie did your military education come from?

Yeah...chaplains are your basic REMFs.

[Davka]

I don't think even the movies would depict something so unlikely as two opposing sides who are so civilized that they let each other have time to say a prayer to their respective deities before they start shooting.

Ever heard of the Christmas truce?

There was a brief period of history during which some pretense of civilization was made, even during war. What's weird is that it was between people who shared the same religion - the one which speaks of forgiveness and turning the other cheek and loving your enemy - who were only able to agree on a civilized way to slaughter one-another because they agreed on who god was. And this god they agreed on was supposedly on the side of whoever won, even though he once came here in person just to say "stop hurting and killing each-other and be decent humans already!"

[Creed of Heresy]

Oh look he hasn't responded.

Coward lying ass piece of shit.

[Ryantology]

Why can't you address the point I have made to you ten times now? Why do you keep skirting the issue? Is it your belief that I don't know that attonement is written in the law, or is it you do not know how to respond so you keep talking in circles in hopes that I follow one of your red herring topics and drop the attonement bit?

I've never asked you to drop the atonement bit. I've asked you to justify why you deserve it if you prove yourself to be insincere by trying so desperately to avoid thinking you have to live by all of God's laws. You really do desperately want to avoid living by these laws, and I completely understand why. They're terrible and stupid.

But, Jesus makes it very obvious that you are expected to do so, not to earn atonement (seriously, I've never said this, so kindly stop arguing this point I've never tried to make), but to prove that your atonement is sincere. You can't fulfill the law yourself. You can't adhere to it 100%.

But you don't even try. And you teach others that they don't have to try, either. And you can deny neither of these things.

Jesus is very specific on what lies in store for false Christians like you.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

[Drich]

Oh, yeah? my cousin is a colonel in the Rangers, and he's the one who told me that. He said when ever they went into an area with known hostiles durning the push on Baghdad, the chaplains would come and offer prayers, not one of the men in his company refused the chaplain when they were under fire.

His 'company?'

Lol. Yeah. Your cousin isn't a Ranger.

Colonels are brigade COs. Not company COs. Company COs are captains.

By the way, that's a little something we call "stolen valor."

Here are two examples of ranger col. As company commanders.
http://www.natick.army.mil/garrison/comm...erbio.html
(I know the title says garrison commander, but if you will read it show this ltc as a company commander)

Looks like ole Drichie can support what he says yet again.. Why? Because it's the truth. Even if it maybe the exception and not the rule.

Btw I'm calling what you did 'valor hating.'
That is unless your saying these men were also 'stealing valor.'

By the way, chaplains do not offer prayers in the middle of a firefight.

it like you making crap up to be angry about. I said the prayers were offered before they went into an area with known hostiles.

For one thing, they are unarmed noncombatants. For another thing, Rangers are not going to stop shooting the enemy to drop to their knees and start praying, and Rangers are not units that are supposed to stop and slog; they're QRF and light infantry, which means they move fast, hit fast, and kill fast. Finally, the Rangers did not participate in the push towards Baghdad; they were too busy dropping from planes to take over the Haditha Dam, known as Objective Serpent.

My cousin was indeed an ltc and did command a company as a ranger in gulf 1. He retired and was called back for gulf 2 as regular army,(per my father's recollection) and did indeed command a company and pushed to Baghdad. (He missed my wedding as he was deployed.)
I don't know what he did in gulf 1 but I do know after gulf one he. Went to the university of Florida as the Attaché/retired army rotc advisor, then was re activated did two tours in gulf two (until the army had enough experienced combat officers to replace him) was released and after a Google search I found out he has made a few published contributions to ft. Benning's "infantry" magazine and I believe the 'freedom fighter' analyzing combat tactics of past battles.

I may have some dates and titles confused but I do know for sure of his primary jobs and of his 'valor' serving. I've sat throughs the story's, and listen to my uncle (the airforce officer who brought my mother's family over from Korea) as he retold them, and again from my mother who wanted to know why he could do all the things he could, and why I wasn't measuring up to the bar.

We were all really proud of all he has accomplished as a officer in the Rangers and in the regular army, and don't let my short comings as a story teller dimish what he has done for us 'over there.'

Your "cousin" would not be aware of the direct goings-on of his troops to such a detail as to say "none of them refused the chaplain," either, as he would be far too busy directing the operations of 1000+ men.

as a Baltalion commander? No, as a company commander he would have been in direct contact with his men and the chaplains.

Did you seriously try to pull an SV on someone who actually DOES have family in the 75th? SERIOUSLY? You didn't think you would be called out?

You fucking liar.

---

did you seriously think you caught me in a lie just because I confused some minor details? If I were military I could see where thier would be no excuse, but to tell you the truth I did not know the difference between reg army and a green brete till I was in my late twenties.
(It never once came up he always refered to himself as a army ranger.)

Your anecdote doesn't cancel out his anecdote.

His anecdote isn't even a real one; it's a blatant lie, and he's starting to seriously piss me the fuck off.



Soldiers from the Army's 1st Infantry in Iraq. As in, front-line infantry. As in, not support specialists, not tankers, not cooks and clerks; infantrymen. Ground pounders. Combat specialists.
[/quote]
Then be pissed.

---

Oh, yeah? my cousin is a colonel in the Rangers, and he's the one who told me that. He said when ever they went into an area with known hostiles durning the push on Baghdad, the chaplains would come and offer prayers, not one of the men in his company refused the chaplain when they were under fire.

Your anecdote doesn't cancel out his anecdote.

Wasn't ment to. It simple conveyed the idea that ideologies tend to get silenced when the bullets start to fly.

Do I think people can hate God to their dying breath? Yes absolutly. Is it possible to remain neutral when one's life is threatened, when a gesture of faith (to cover the bases) is offered? If one can it is the exception and not the rule.

---

---

---

Oh, yeah? my cousin is a colonel in the Rangers, and he's the one who told me that. He said when ever they went into an area with known hostiles durning the push on Baghdad, the chaplains would come and offer prayers, not one of the men in his company refused the chaplain when they were under fire.

---

---

You do know we are talking about Christianity and not OT Judaism right? Or maybe you don't understand the bible represents two different religions. It's real easy to seperate the two. Everything in the OT is considered to be the rules and law of OT Judaism, and everything in the NT is considered to be Christian by nature.

So no. What you posted is not enough because you haven't actually posted anything relevant.

---

It is obvious you know nothing about the military. Chaplains do not come and pray during firefights. That would be suicide since the chaplains are not armed, and their assistants usually only carry a Beretta. Also, Rangers tend to have very specific missions, not fit for chaplain intervention.

Seriously, what fucking movie did your military education come from?

Where are you guys getting this? Where did I say chaplains come out in fire fights?

---

Oh look he hasn't responded.

Coward lying ass piece of shit.

i have four active threads going, which can easily mean 10 posts to answer per thread, and a life outside this forum, which today included processing food for a emergency pantry, putting belts on a washer, and cleaning the house plus a couple of movies to watch..

Just know that me making you wait for an answer to your hate posts is me throwing gasoline on your fire... Or it could just be that I'd haven't got to your post yet. Let logic and reason be your guide on which one it is.

---

Why can't you address the point I have made to you ten times now? Why do you keep skirting the issue? Is it your belief that I don't know that attonement is written in the law, or is it you do not know how to respond so you keep talking in circles in hopes that I follow one of your red herring topics and drop the attonement bit?

I've never asked you to drop the atonement bit. I've asked you to justify why you deserve it if you prove yourself to be insincere by trying so desperately to avoid thinking you have to live by all of God's laws. You really do desperately want to avoid living by these laws, and I completely understand why. They're terrible and stupid.

But, Jesus makes it very obvious that you are expected to do so, not to earn atonement (seriously, I've never said this, so kindly stop arguing this point I've never tried to make), but to prove that your atonement is sincere. You can't fulfill the law yourself. You can't adhere to it 100%.

But you don't even try. And you teach others that they don't have to try, either. And you can deny neither of these things.

Jesus is very specific on what lies in store for false Christians like you.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

I read you post, I just wanted to let you know I'll work on it tomorrow. I didn't want you to go all postal because it took more than a few hours to get back with you.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Oh, yeah? my cousin is a colonel in the Rangers, and he's the one who told me that. He said when ever they went into an area with known hostiles durning the push on Baghdad, the chaplains would come and offer prayers, not one of the men in his company refused the chaplain when they were under fire.

You sure brag about a lot of your relatives and their service to the country. What happened to you? Clubfoot? Asthma? Failed the ASVAB?

I fought fire with plenty of religious and non-religious men, I can tell you that not one of us asked for a chaplain when we ran into the burning building.

Probably because even my brothers who believed in your god knew that he wouldn't be as useful as a charged handline, in those sorts of situations.

---

His anecdote isn't even a real one; it's a blatant lie, and he's starting to seriously piss me the fuck off.

Mind you, in another thread, he's tried to bruit about his "uncle" who was "shot down twice" in Vietnam, and a "PoW" -- but said uncle cannot tell the difference between fuelies and firefighters on an active flightline.

All because little Drich here doesn't have the integrity to admit when he's wrong; he'd rather dig the hole deeper with transparent lies, obvious to anyone who has actually served.

Wrapping himself in lies, and in honor that is not his own -- shameless.

[Drich]

Oh, yeah? my cousin is a colonel in the Rangers, and he's the one who told me that. He said when ever they went into an area with known hostiles durning the push on Baghdad, the chaplains would come and offer prayers, not one of the men in his company refused the chaplain when they were under fire.

You sure brag about a lot of your relatives and their service to the country. What happened to you? Clubfoot? Asthma? Failed the ASVAB?

I fought fire with plenty of religious and non-religious men, I can tell you that not one of us asked for a chaplain when we ran into the burning building.

Probably because even my brothers who believed in your god knew that he wouldn't be as useful as a charged handline, in those sorts of situations.

I graduated in '93. Clinton was down sizing the military (shutting the Cold War bases down) my cousin was frank, he told me I would not make good officer material, which meant infantry, and at the time their was no future in it. He told me the best I could hope for was to sign up and train as a mechanic which paid crap, and even then the way Clinton was cutting the budget meant the future was uncertain. He told me the last think I wanted to do is spend ten years learning to work on humvees and tanks then be cut because their was no budget to keep a 30+ nco when 1000's of 18 year olds would do my job cheaper. (Not a lot of call to work on humvees and tanks outside the military) Then Clinton shut down the airforce base and naval training station in the area, and I personally saw 1000's of service people left without jobs or a place to live.

12 years later I was given a fourty something tank mechanic to train in what I was doing, because the army 'pushed him out.' Pre 9-11 and post gulf war 1 was not a time for great military spending.
I really felt bad for the guy because I knew it would take 5 to 10 years before he could learn to make any money, and by then his body would be burnt out.
We are indeed a military family.

---

Oh, yeah? my cousin is a colonel in the Rangers, and he's the one who told me that. He said when ever they went into an area with known hostiles durning the push on Baghdad, the chaplains would come and offer prayers, not one of the men in his company refused the chaplain when they were under fire.

You sure brag about a lot of your relatives and their service to the country. What happened to you? Clubfoot? Asthma? Failed the ASVAB?

I fought fire with plenty of religious and non-religious men, I can tell you that not one of us asked for a chaplain when we ran into the burning building.

Probably because even my brothers who believed in your god knew that he wouldn't be as useful as a charged handline, in those sorts of situations.

---

His anecdote isn't even a real one; it's a blatant lie, and he's starting to seriously piss me the fuck off.

Mind you, in another thread, he's tried to bruit about his "uncle" who was "shot down twice" in Vietnam, and a "PoW" -- but said uncle cannot tell the difference between fuelies and firefighters on an active flightline.

All because little Drich here doesn't have the integrity to admit when he's wrong; he'd rather dig the hole deeper with transparent lies, obvious to anyone who has actually served.

Wrapping himself in lies, and in honor that is not his own -- shameless.

Without a doubt none of this glory is mine. I can't even relay the facts at they happened correctly. I do not pretend that I have contributed to this country in a military capasity in any active way. That said, my family has. My family has been shaped and pruned by war in ways I will never fully understand. However i do see how it effects those who survive it. I do know how the survivors live and speak of their experiences. I also know of the Contempt frontline troops have for rear echelon guys pretending to be in harms way. It is for the love and respect I have for my family and what was given to this country that I carry this contempt as well. (Their sacrifices, memories and what they did and gave should not be diminished just because every one who puts on a uniform, wants to pretend they are a hero just because they did their time away from home.

I know it's not my place as you pointed out. it is not my glory, but it is not yours either. "Stealing valor" is a term used to describe anyone (especially rear echelon troops) for posing as front line troops.. But again I digress as it is not my place to hold you to account. On that note I will appologize to both of you and not speak on stolen glory.

However I will invite both my uncle and cousin to write their views on the subject and post it or provide a link to their thoughts if they want to further be apart of any more discussions.

[Drich]

I've never asked you to drop the atonement bit. I've asked you to justify why you deserve it if you prove yourself to be insincere by trying so desperately to avoid thinking you have to live by all of God's laws. You really do desperately want to avoid living by these laws, and I completely understand why. They're terrible and stupid.

what does sincerity have to do with following the law?
You've made that assertion several times now. Even after the fact that i point back to Mat 5:19 that tells us to obey every command in the law no matter how small. Which again includes the commands for attonement. (Here's the key you seem to be missing) Then in verse 20 Christ tells us our righteousness must exceed that of the pharrisees. The Pharrisees followed the law to the letter otherwise they would be expelled from the priesthood. So right their we know that following the law does not have to mean one is sincere about it. How do we know this? Because of all the rebukes Christ made concerning the Pharrisees 'following the law to the letter but disregaurding the spirit of the law.' Which is also why He says what he says in verse 20 about one having to exceed the righteousness of the pharrisees to enter Heaven. To the OT Jew of the day, one could not phathom how to exceed the righteousness of the Pharrisees as they could afford to live by every aspect of the law.. Which is also why Christ extended the law to include what is in one's heart. (because they lived by the law on the outside but their sincerity was not with the spirit of the law.)

But, Jesus makes it very obvious that you are expected to do so, not to earn atonement (seriously, I've never said this, so kindly stop arguing this point I've never tried to make), but to prove that your atonement is sincere. You can't fulfill the law yourself. You can't adhere to it 100%.

Again, I have biblically demonstrated that sincereity has nothing to do with following the law. Sincereity has to do with admitting one is a sinner with no hope of ever earning righteousness by the law and earnestly repenting and seeking attonement through Jesus. Again, Jesus said one's righteousness had to exceed that of the Pharrisees therefore living by just the law was not enough. Because that is exactly how the pharrisees lived. a person could not live any closer to the law, and their efforts failed.

But you don't even try. And you teach others that they don't have to try, either. And you can deny neither of these things.

Again no. Attonement is the crux of the Mosaic law. without it the whole law would only serve as a death warrant. As Paul points out in romans 7 The law (the does and don'ts) serves as the impossible standard that prooves us to be in sin and in need of attonement. Without this law it is impossible to know that one needs to attone for sin. So again I teach the law to those who are without it as Paul instructs. Then I teach the whole law to those looking to exceed the righteousness of the Pharrisees as Christ instructs.

Jesus is very specific on what lies in store for false Christians like you.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Wow, what a Completely dishonest exegetical effort. Not even in context.
If I were to teach people to ignore the law my fate would be as follows:
17 “Don’t think that I have come to destroy the Law of Moses or the teaching of the prophets. I have come not to destroy their teachings but to give full meaning to them. 18 I assure you that nothing will disappear from the law until heaven and earth are gone. The law will not lose even the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter until it has all been done.

19 “A person should obey every command in the law, even one that does not seem important. Whoever refuses to obey any command and teaches others not to obey it will be the least important in God’s kingdom. But whoever obeys the law and teaches others to obey it will be great in God’s kingdom. 20 I tell you that you must do better than the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. If you are not more pleasing to God than they are, you will never enter God’s kingdom.

Not cool sport.[/quote]

[The Grand Nudger]

RE: Chaplain offering prayers and other fibs Drich might enjoy foisting upon the forums regarding military service and personnel

Sure, fobbits gotta fobbit. Some soldiers pray, others spend that time checking their mags, lacing their boots for the fortieth time in two hours, shifting their weight against their webs, shaking their canteens and filling their camels up with ice regardless of how bad an idea we're told that is (and others crack jokes and generally ham it up to ease the tension) - or wondering whether or not all of the processed meat products in MRE were in fact tuna. I don't know what fobbits spent their time doing when they weren't wasting mine, but whether or not a chaplian prays or other soldiers want a piece of that, nothing to do with me - nothing to do with being an effective combatant. Point is this, whenever someone else was praying in my vicinity...I always found a better use for that time. Ideologies don't evaporate when bullets fly, they just don't fucking matter. Christian soldiers were still christians, muslims were still muslims, wiccans were still wiccans - and atheists were still atheists. That's actually a problem for your position on the issue of god and "atheists in foxholes", and a "no shit" statement for mine. If someone wants to wrap themselves in the armor of jesus or allah or fucking diana, they can have at it.

I always did and always will put my trust in kevlar and belt fed 5.56, thanks. Surest way to survive a shitty situation is to make certain that the other guy doesn't. The only reason I ever bent a knee was to take aim.


(also, your respect is fucking offensive - no sense prattling on about how you respect or appreciate soldiers and what they do, you clearly don't, not that you have to....but it's just a little bit irritating to hear people say such transparently vacuous things)