Jump to content

ThePilgrim

Member Since 07 Aug 2011
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 02:21 PM
-----

#379418 Woman To Command Air Force In Pacific

Posted by ThePilgrim on 18 July 2014 - 09:24 AM

PC gone mad.  Women are now going to command men in combat.  They have come a long way from G.I. Jane.

There are a lot of jokes that could be told here but this act pushed by the white house is just too stupid to be funny.  :laff cry: .

 

http://www.washingto...oman-non-pilot/

 

God bless,

Larry




#379388 Good Speech To A Bad Group

Posted by ThePilgrim on 17 July 2014 - 10:34 AM

As the European beast continues to grow ever larger and more arrogant this is one of their politicians I love to watch.  He is a member of the European parliament who likes to rock the boat a lot.  I don't know what the people of merry old England think of him but I like his style.  He has given some great speeches in recent times.  He doesn't seem to care whose feet he stomps on. 

 

I the video the fellow he is speaking against is seated right next to him.

 

http://notquant.com/...d-soviet-times/

 

God bless,

Larry




#379368 Who Rates?

Posted by ThePilgrim on 16 July 2014 - 08:51 PM

States typically rate their school districts. Cities rate their schools. The Feds have a school rating system. Others rate certain schools too.

 

Most ratings cited are done by a government body. These rate the schools based upon their own criteria, which is always subject to change. Depending upon the rating method they use, and oftentimes the same government group will rate schools differently. This helps them to say more schools are doing better (or worse if that suits their agenda) by pointing to different ratings from different categories.

 

For instance, one school may be rated high because they have a high graduation rate, even if the high graduation rate is due to that school simply passing the students whether they meet graduation goals or not. Another school may receive a high rating because they added many new teachers fresh out of college, regardless of their performance. Meanwhile another school will get a high rating because they bowed to all the governmental requirements for PCness.

 

One thing they don't rate schools upon is morals education, teaching of actual facts, and certainly nothing to do with Christianity.

 

Overall, most of the rating systems are rigged to provide a view of the schools in a predetermined manner. These are mostly used for political reasons which benefits the teacher unions, school districts and politicians most of all.

It was a question I already knew the answer to.  I just wanted to find out if anyone else had any idea that the ratings were phony.

Just as an example I rate myself regularly on my ability to to sing and play the guitar.  I consistently score over 100.  It is a real puzzle to me that nobody else wants to listen to me.  Really weird.  :verymad:

 

God bless,

Larry




#379297 What He Said

Posted by ThePilgrim on 16 July 2014 - 09:44 AM

I read a very interesting book called "The Curse of 1920" by Gary Naler. In it he chronicles through history, mainly after 1920, women's rights, after women nationwide started voting, everything has gone downhill since. With women's new "independence" of voting, led to independence from a man (divorce) when entering workforce, then politics, women making safety nets for women with their new found "independence" but still needing help. Basically, making the government now her "husband" to care for her needs and support her.

Interestingly, the very first documented woman voter was in Wyoming in 1870. On her way to vote, she brought along a pail to go to store to buy leaven. The city has a statue of her with her pail of leaven after voting. Coincidence? I think not. 

 

Pastor Dabney, and others, warned back in the late 1800s of the dangers of feminism and where they would lead. At that time the feminist movement was ramping up and infecting many of the churches as well as the political scene. Reading of what went on then and looking at the homosexual movement of our day they are very much the same. Many who stood upon Scripture against much of the feminist movement were denounced as women haters, old fashioned, out of touch and worse. We see much the same today with regards to homosexuals. Just as the feminists eventually got a foothold in politics and churches and then began transforming them to their liking, so we see homosexuals doing that today.

 

My Mom always said WWII really tipped the scale for radical feminists and against marriage and family. With the men off fighting the government did everything they could to get women into the workforce. After several years in the workforce, and often learning to "act like a man" (smoking, drinking, even sleeping around...no, not truly manly qualities, but that's what feminists saw as part of being independent) and having a check in their pocket and being told that meant they didn't need a man, vastly corrupted American women across a large spectrum the feminists had been unable to reach before.

 

When the men came home from war many of the women refused to give up their jobs and return to being housewives. That's part of the reason for the G.I. Bill (it wasn't only because the economy was slowing down and there were fewer jobs as the government claims). Many women kept working, the returning men went to college, their children ran wild and this lead to the social upheaval and rejection of Christian morality in the 1960s.

 

It all goes back to women, and men too, refusing to abide by God's established order.

 

It's probably still online somewhere as someone put together the stats showing that if the women's vote were taken out of the picture we wouldn't have had most of our worst presidents. I remember the chart showed that Clinton wouldn't have won without women voters and I think the updated chart I last saw showed that Obama wouldn't have won without the women's vote.

I never thought I would hear such talk on this forum, especially from a lady.  I have kept my mouth closed on this forum about such things as women's suffrage, not wishing to endure the scorn of all (especially the ladies).  You know as I type this I have a dread to even use that word . . . . LADY.  It seems so out of place these days to so many women. 

 

I must also admit that I am somewhat of a coward when it comes to women (even in the church) because when I talk of such things as feminism and the role of women in the world (such as keeping a home and raising children instead of "careers") I find myself doing it in sort of a humorous or joking manner, knowing they will just put up with me and attribute it to a harmless, senile old curmudgeon who doesn't know any better. 

 

A couple of things that I truly believe are based on my observations during my life and reading of history and the bible (should have put the bible first). The people whose women will not have children and nurture them will not long endure.  The women who will not tame the men will have men who are savages. 

 

Well, now you've done it Larry!  You better duck! :hide:

 

God bless,

Larry




#379273 Official Swearing In Ceremonies

Posted by ThePilgrim on 15 July 2014 - 09:33 PM

Swearing on the Bible is a symbolic thing.
The Bible may very well be on that tablet etc but the symbolism is lost, and that is the point.
A physical copy of the Bible is just ink on paper - but it is what is represented...

If a real bible is not visible to those watching the ceremony the ceremony means nothing.  If we have come to the day when a digital facsimile of whatever can represent the bible in a solemn ceremony then the oath means nothing.  I don't think oaths mean much if anything to most of these people anyway so it probably doesn't matter anyway.  If God is not real to a man then the man's oath is not real either, it is an abomination.

 

God bless,

Larry




#379270 Official Swearing In Ceremonies

Posted by ThePilgrim on 15 July 2014 - 07:57 PM

There will be no bible there.  The bible is a bound book that has paper pages and a cover.  Even though it may or may not contain a digital copy of such, an electronic gadget is not a bible.

The purpose of the whole thing is to get the bible out of all government ceremonies, plain and simple.   :thumbdown: 

 

God bless,

Larry




#379200 Coe Goes Mad

Posted by ThePilgrim on 15 July 2014 - 08:39 AM

Totally not unexpected news out of merry old England this morning followed by a comment I ran across.

 

http://www.dailymail...nsible-ban.html

 

"There is a certain stupendously hideous layer of hell that awaits those who say they are believers but then do everything they can to willfully destroy their faith and their church.
500 years ago this led to endless wars and splits. This time it will simply lead to attrition and a flocking back to the more orthodox. The remnants will only be stronger for it. These simpletons don't actually think they will win do they?? Not against God.

But perhaps that isn't the endgame they seek. It's the comforting shield against seeing one's own sin that they crave. If enough people can be made sinners, if enough righteous people can be perverted, heck if enough righteous people will be silent and just go with it, they'll never have to face their sins. At least on this Earth. But to the nihilists that may be enough for them. How sad.

A murderer can repent, embrace God, and be saved.
A non-believer can be filled with Grace, repent and be saved.

A believer that willfully twists the Word to suit their own petty desires and disguise their shame is the worst of all things : Heretic. And heretics deserve all the fire they can get.
Don't be surprised to hear that word a lot more as we go forth and old problems start to burn anew in a less civilized world."

 

God bless,

Larry




#379196 What He Said

Posted by ThePilgrim on 15 July 2014 - 08:19 AM

    "I sincerely believe... that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale." --Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816.

Jefferson was arguing that no generation has the moral or legal authority to bind the next.  Of course were the people of our nation to take upon themselves Jefferson's view that would mean indicting and imprisoning the entirety of the Federal Reserve, Treasury, the Executive and Congress -- right here and now -- for Racketeering and Grand Theft.

And of course it would also mean that the citizenry would have to take a long hard look at themselves.  Why were they voting for these people whom they must have known were liars, because way down deep inside, they know that nothing in this world comes without a cost . . . . no free lunches.  Why did they ask the government to do all the things they could not or were not willing to pay for.  What does it say about the honesty and integrity of the citizenry of the nation.  Oh, and lest we forget, you and I are part of the citizenry. 

 

I thought I just might add that last little bit because you all know how I love ruffling feathers.  Ruffle, ruffle, ruffle, ruffle. . . . . :popcorn:

 

God bless,

Larry

 

 




#379176 Anyone Remember When

Posted by ThePilgrim on 14 July 2014 - 07:31 PM

I don't know for certain (not being a predictor of the future or a judge of others actions) but there just may be an abode prepared for blasphemers of this type.  Not saying him personally (since I am not privy to his personal salvation history) but just persons of his ilk.  Stuff like this is bound to turn people from any idea of entertaining any thoughts of Christ as a savior.

 

God bless,

Larry




#379119 I, Me, My

Posted by ThePilgrim on 13 July 2014 - 06:08 PM

The founding father of this nation plotted and carried out a rebellion against their king without speaking harsh words.  I don't think so. 

Christians hold them out as being great men of honor.  How can this be so if the king of England was their God appointed sovereign?

 

A prophet of God gave a message that the ten tribes would rebel.  Who was the prophet who gave the founding fathers the okay to rebel?

 

I don't ask these questions to be argumentative, I just don't understand how rebellion is okay against some rulers but not all.

 

God bless,

Larry




#379078 Why The Hypocrisy?

Posted by ThePilgrim on 12 July 2014 - 08:52 PM

1. Yes.

 

2.  No.

 

3. No

 

I am a Fundamentalist KJO Baptist.

 

I am tired of hearing preachers preach against CCM when they are listening to music with the same type of worldly rhythm.

 

I am writing this because I am tired of churches using heavy worldly rhythms in their piano style and then turning around and preaching against the Rock Beat.

 

It's all the same type of Beat Syncopation, just different instruments, when we hear the style of rhythm on the drums and it's wicked, but the piano is ok?

 

I am calling for us IFB to start being consistent with how we apply the principles we use to place our standards.

 

Currently I reject CCM and Southern Gospell I even reject some songs put out by Colleges like West Coast, Massillon, Golden State, Champion, etc.. because they are using ragtimey, boogie boogie piano styles.

So we don't want happy music and we don't want blue music.  That doesn't leave much if anything does it.

 

God bless,

Larry




#378913 John Calvin Had It All Wrong

Posted by ThePilgrim on 09 July 2014 - 09:46 AM

When I worked on the farm, and I went out with my shovel to irrigate a field of corn, I didn't need to know the theory of gravity.  All I needed to know is that water flows downhill and I got the job done.

Similarly I don't have to know all the detail about how the doctrine of free-will and the doctrine of grace work in order to know what God requires of me.  

When I irrigate all I need is a shovel and faith that God makes water run downhil to get the job done rightl. 

When I hear the gospel, irregardless of what the preacher's feelings about mister Calvin or whatever theologian he bases his philosophy of religion on, I know that God wants to save me.

I know that I am a sinner saved by grace.  It matters not-at-all what preacher preached the gospel to me.  I trusted in God to save me and he saved me just as he said he would. 

I don't how it all goes together but I know it works.

 

I have read several works on the freedom of the will, including Johnathan Edwards, and why our free will is not really free will because of our sin nature and I still don't understand it. 

I do understand that no matter what our will, God is sovereign and His will be done.

He says He will save me from my sin, He says He will keep me, He says he will take me into His kingdom and He will have me live eternally with Him.  What more do I need from Him but all that He has promised in His word.

 

He is all that I need.  I don't need any philosophers of religion, no matter what their name or system.  So much for Calvin, Arminius, Luther, or even evangelists like Billy Graham, or Tammy Fay Baker.  All I need is God and faith in His ability to come through.

 

If all this makes no sense, remember it is just one man's opinion and not the opinion of a learned philosopher of religion after all.

 

God bless,

Larry




#378846 Chilling Implications? Largest U.s. Bank Asks Workers If They Support Homosex...

Posted by ThePilgrim on 08 July 2014 - 03:01 PM

Oh come on Chief.  The State Attorney General didn't really order Christians to shoot same-sex couples at their wedding, did he?  :icon_confused:

Wow.  That's going a bit too far. :icon_rolleyes:

 

God bless,

Larry




#378640 Shocking, Isn't It.

Posted by ThePilgrim on 04 July 2014 - 09:40 AM

I love quiet time and time to think and time to really let my thoughts go. Most people don't seem to like this. They have a TV going all the time even if they aren't watching it; a radio they never shut off, their smart phone in hand. It seems many people get nervous and anxious when there is silence and they can't occupy themselves with distractions.

 

Myself, I can spend hours reading, I can spend hours in thought. The other night we had a bad storm that knocked the power out. I sat a chair on the front porch in the pitch dark (except for the flashes of lightening) with no sound other than the rain, wind and thunder. I sat there for two hours letting my thoughts go and enjoyed my time there.

One of my favorite things is being at Crane Prairie Resevoir in Central Oregon and just looking at Broken Top or Batchelor Butte in the distance and just thinking about haw and why it is all there.  Doing this doesn't solve my or anyone elses problems but it does seem to bring me closer to the Creator of it all.

 

God bless,

Larry

 




#378613 Do They Really Mean It?

Posted by ThePilgrim on 03 July 2014 - 09:43 PM

I

 

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breath free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

 

And the more we are into globalization, the more we need to understand the languages of the people we interact with.

Wonderful sounding sentiments.  But like all platitudes they don't take any of the real situation into consideration.

That was a different day and those were a different people. 

 

 

Certain positions, whether private or public, may require the use of a foreign language in order to best serve the clientele. Yes, if they are immigrants they eventually need to learn English, but if the position involves working with them at a point at which they are brand new to the country or unlikely to have learned sufficient English to handle the discussion involved, then why wouldn't that position be required to speak that language?   It is just a job requirement like any other (must be able to read and write English fluently, must be able to type 80 WPM, must have an understanding of building mechanical systems, etc.). Also, haven't there always been jobs that required fluency in other languages?  You wouldn't hire someone to teach at a deaf school if they didn't know sign language...

 

With our county being bilingual, government positions are required to use both English & French (even though most French speakers are only in Quebec!). It limits jobs for anglophones, and it's annoying, but we are a bilingual nation, so it makes sense politically.  It seems to me that only if the US government starts requiring a foreign language for all jobs (or requiring it for packaging), regardless of the likelihood of that position encountering primarily foreign-language speakers, that you would have a real problem with your government ignoring the position of English as your sole official language.

One who decides to pick up and move from one place to another should be willing to face up to any situation they encounter.  That includes facing some hardship as you learn the language and ways of America.  The situation that most of the illegal immigrants or aliens are willing to face is welfare and everyone giving in to their every want.  The greater number of them come to this country not to become an American but to bring their ways of life, politics, and culture here and change America into where they came from.  Have you ever heard the word Reconquista.  If not, do an internet search on the word. 

 

This country does not have an immigration problem.  Immigrants assimilate.  We are facing a migration.  A mass migration of peoples from all over the world, especially from the south.  America is rapidly changing because of it and will never be as it was.  Less and less freedom and more and more regimentation of the populace as those in power strive to keep things uner control.  It matters not that I am yelling into the wind and noone hears but what is taking place will continue on into a bleak future for our children and grandchildren.

 

God bless,

Larry






The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500