DaveW

Yeah, I couldn't resist that one. And I just love that his name is "Dollar" anyway......

The bloke on the right has indigestion. The one in the middle just heard one of the other two break wind and is waiting for the odour to hit. Martin Short could very well be chanting DaveW, but it is a bit hard to get your tongue around in that setting - more likely just "Davo, Davo, Davo".....

Can we add another one to this? The internet theologian!

Martin short - same smile!

Is that Martin Short?? He is a versatile actor. Very underrated.

I will make a bit of a comment about this chart. It is very difficult to see how the tribes relate to the items mentioned without some sort of explanation. The positions of the tribes are in direct relation to the tabernacle, but in that case what does the tabernacle represent among them - for in that relationship the tabernacle is central - both physically and in concept. But the tabernacle is not mentioned at all on the chart. I am not 100% certain without checking but I think the position of the tribes in the 3x4 grid relates to the High Priests breastplate, but again what meaning does that carry in the chart? The three parts of the atom relating to the three persons of the Godhead I find curious because there are a multiplicity of protons and electrons in any given atom - is this suggesting the possibility of multiple gods, because that is the obvious suggestion - that Jesus is not the only one and the Holy Spirit is not the only one. And also the Higgs boson is supposed to be a sub particle of atoms which would indicate that God is made up of priests and levites....... Without a legend of explanation this chart, aside from being useless on it's own, could easily be interpreted as promoting multiple gods and the raising of men up to be gods. So, at best the chart is useless as provided, and at worst it is teaching and promoting false teaching and doctrines.

I don't think anyone is suggesting you be banned...... yet. Jerry has responded to your sarcasm and aggressive tone. I will say that we don't often take to kindly to people arriving here and taking it upon themselves to "teach" their pet doctrines. What we do like is people who want to join our community and discuss - not argue about things. But you are drawing some hugely long bows and making some strange interpretations and then telling us that we don't believe what the Bible says. But you haven't really introduced yourself properly and you haven't entered into any general "get to know you" type conversations. Hang for a while. Get to know is and help us to get to know you. THEN join the discussions and DISCUSS rather than just argue.

Note - I couldn't figure out how to post from the other thread to here, so I quote his first post and edited the text with that from the other thread. This explains the incorrect time stamp. Now then: I went looking for their online church and did not find any such thing. In fact as far as I can tell the two men are nor associated and it seems like one of them is dead. And neither of them are running an on line church. I didn't spend huge time searching, so there is a possibility I am wrong, but that is what I have found. So the truth of the matter is that you don't go to any church, but you do find preachers that you like to listen to. 2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; That what it seems like to me. Show us that I am wrong please.

You genuinely have no idea about proper Biblical interpretation....... You make the Scripture fit with your ideas. That is wrong. Part of this problem stems from you not being a part of a church but instead getting your teaching from people you don't know and who don't know nor care about you. There is a reason why God made churches.

Nup nup nup - sorry, but this has no basis in scripture. You have twisted those passages in order to present something that is, once again, not in the passage. You are reading into the passage what you want in it. You are not reading from the passage what is already in it.

I wonder, since you have been back on here at half an hour if you wouldn't mind answering my question in your intro please? I am interested in the answers there. Thanks. Can I just say, personally your attitude doesn't seem great. You are using language which is not respectful and which has an aggressive tone to it. Can I suggest that you tone it back and speak with a little more reserve and respect?

Aaaahhhh- actually they are in this case. There is ABSOLUTELY no reason to suggest the rich man nor Lazarus was either asleep or dreaming in the passage. This a concept that you have entirely imposed onto the passage, for it is not found in the passage.

The KJV has absolutely no indication that the account of the rich man and Lazarus was a dream in any way. It is stated as a factual, real event experienced personally by these two men.

Welcome. Several different groups are solidly KJV - what is your affiliation? Who are you associated with? What kind of church are you a member of?