United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: College QB arrested, suspended after claiming ‘cocaine’ on his car was bird poop. It was bird poop.
Source:
Saturday Down South
URL Source: https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/s ... on-car-was-actually-bird-poop/
Published: Aug 3, 2019
Author: SDS Staff
Post Date: 2019-08-11 09:33:59 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 27672
Comments: 348
Chalk another one up to faulty drug field tests: Georgia Southern QB Shai Werts has been suspended following an arrest earlier in the week. Werts was arrested following a traffic stop on Wednesday night in Saluda, South Carolina. According to reports, Werts was originally pulled over for speeding. When the officer attempted to pull him over, however, he kept going and reportedly called 911 to explain that he wasn’t pulling over in a dark area. After reaching town, Werts then pulled over and was arrested for speeding. The QB was then asked about the white powder on the hood of his car, and he claimed it was bird poop that he tried to clean off at the car wash. The officer tested the powder, and it tested positive for cocaine with two different kits and in two different places on the hood of the car. “Everything about him and inside his vehicle made him appear as a clean person but the hood of his car was out of place,” the police report states. Werts denied any knowledge of the origin of the cocaine. The officer wrote that the powder appeared to have been “thrown on the vehicle and had been attempted to be washed off by the windshield wipers, and wiper fluid as there was white powder substance around the areas of the wiper fluid dispensary.” In addition to speeding, he was charged with a misdemeanor possession of cocaine. This is all really bad news because Georgia Southern plays LSU Week 1. Al Eargle, the Deputy Solicitor for the 11th Judicial Circuit which includes Saluda County, told Werts’ attorney, Townes Jones IV, that these kinds of charges would not be pressed on “his watch,” Jones said. South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) tests were conducted on the substance samples collected from the hood of Werts’ 2016 Dodge Charger, but the results confirmed that no controlled substance was present in the samples. “I have not seen (the SLED results) yet,” Eargle said on a phone call Thursday night. “But I was informed that the test did come back and that there was no controlled substance found.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 109.
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
The officer tested the powder, and it tested positive for cocaine with two different kits … Damn … You libertarian drug promoters even birds doing cocaine now. What is this frickin world coming to …
Which is essentially your admission that drug tests conducted by police departments are either completely corrupt or completely incompetent. I can't quite imagine how big a dumbass any cop would have to be to be so unaware of the properties of crystal cocaine and how it looks if exposed to moisture. What, did the cop think that the QB had, in the process of being pulled over, thrown his coke stash forward (into the wind) onto his windshield and then tried to wash it away with wiper fluid? There is no other way to read this. Corrupt lab and/or corrupt cops. Probably both. Oh, look. It's a black QB. Let's just frame his black ass with phony drug tests that make any pile of poop test positive for cocaine. Thanks for playing. If you were a decent human being, you'd be ashamed of what you've posted here. It does matter to have a black man falsely accused of narcotics and to have such an arrest on his record. Like you even care about this victim of false arrest. I hope he can sue their asses off for defamation of character. He should never have been charged with cocaine possession without a full lab test.
It could have been wet/damp powdered cocaine. "What, did the cop think that the QB had, in the process of being pulled over, thrown his coke stash forward (into the wind) onto his windshield and then tried to wash it away with wiper fluid?" I think that was the theory, actually.
You know as little as the cop did. He was trained. He has no excuse for being so ignorant.
What's he supposed to do when the substance tests positive -- twice? Let the guy go because he's black?
Should the police department keep using these field tests since they have been proven to give inaccurate results? If they use them again should they be held accountable and sued? Does the real victim the quarterback have a case against the police department for not using a reliable drug test? Why didn't the police know the drug test was inaccurate, don't they test them? If the police knew it gives false readings and it did int he past should the be sued for even more money? Do you go down on cops?
I heard he does suck a few nightsticks. Not wanting to intrude here but I thought I'd pass along this ugly rumor. After all, if it's a false accusation, whitey shouldn't mind at all that he's being falsely accused. whitey loves to defend cops making false charges in unlawful arrests, even corrupt cops. I also heard he once went down on a state trooper for a gallon of gas but that could just be an ugly rumor someone here at LP made up.
So you don't know that it's true, you did not ensure that it's true, yet you published it anyways. And, based on your previous posts about me, you published that with actual malice. This means it must have been made with disregard for the truth, and with the intention of doing harm to my reputation on this forum. I'd say I have an airtight defamation lawsuit. Or at least enough to get you kicked off this forum.
A K A Stone to misterwhite: After all, if it's a false accusation, whitey shouldn't mind at all that he's being falsely accused. whitey loves to defend cops making false charges in unlawful arrests, even corrupt cops. I also heard he once went down on a state trooper for a gallon of gas but that could just be an ugly rumor someone here at LP made up. So you don't know that it's true, you did not ensure that it's true, yet you published it anyways. And, based on your previous posts about me, you published that with actual malice. This means it must have been made with disregard for the truth, and with the intention of doing harm to my reputation on this forum. I'd say I have an airtight defamation lawsuit. Or at least enough to get you kicked off this forum. I say that you are wrong about ever getting Stone to kick TC off this forum. He will never do it, albeit the right thing to do with the malicious and vulgar defamation of character displayed by TC. I predict Stone will not do shit about it. We shall see …
misterwhite v AKA Stone, Tooconservative et al? Yeah good luck with that Parsons.
I know, this seems petty, but hear me out. “Good luck” is not a religious or emotional statement in any way. It’s something we say to each other to communicate ‘I want the best for you (in this matter).’ But “good luck” is a terrible way to say this. Despite being a common phrase, it’s got a couple of significant problems. First, “good luck” is a pessimistic phrase. It encourages, as the psychologists say, an external locus of control. In non-psychology-speak, this means the phrase “good luck” encourages us to see events as outside of our control (as opposed to within our control). When we perceive outcomes as outside our control, we don’t work to affect them, leaving us in the passenger seat of our lives. Second, “good luck” implies, to the person you’re saying it to, that they need luck to succeed. Instead of encouraging or helping them, you’re wishing for the world to conspire in their favor. If you had a friend who was about to compete in a contest, you wouldn’t tell them “I hope the judge is feeling lenient today,” but to say “good luck” is to say the same thing. Last, “good luck” is a terrible phrase no matter what your religious orientation. If you are a theist, and believe in god, it’s bordering on blasphemous. Why are you appealing to a nonexistent ‘luck’ when it is God who directs the events of the world? If you are an atheist, it’s a meaningless statement because it acknowledges there is no way for you to affect this luck. Either way, you’re out of luck (get it?) Some obvious religious alternatives to “good luck” include “blessings” and “thoughts and prayers.” But there are some great secular options as well.
Eccl. 9:11 I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all. I sometimes find myself saying "good luck" to the unbeliever...because that's about all they have...time and chance.
Isn't that just some variety of "Good luck on your little path to hell"? It's not surprising the country is turning atheist. The organized churches seem like smug self-interested morality clubs, often using their tax status to provide entertainment/services to their members at discount, that do very little for anyone but their own. And possibly the larger influence is with the charismatics and healers and other flim-flam people you can see on those awful cable channels. And it is difficult to discern anything that resembles a serious doctrinal view in modern churches. I look at local churches and people I know in them and they all seem to believe most anything they want, even if it opposes the church's offical doctrine. Preachers won't even get close to doctrinal preaching. So, if you're talking to me, I'd rather not hear any smug "Good luck in hell" talk. It got old a long time ago. Little wonder that people want nothing to do with religion any more. It's more a rejection of the sales force than Christianity itself.
It's not surprising the country is turning atheist. The organized churches seem like smug self-interested morality clubs... When I say "good luck" to a person it is said with a most heavy heart. Your assessment of the church...is true. With one exception: there IS doctrinal preaching in many churches but it is obviously not helping. Now, you've told me the symptoms, but can you pinpoint the exact cause? (I can) And, your feelings about the church's condition...is it anguish for something you love?
I don't attend any more. I got tired of the pettiness and some of the preaching I was hearing was clearly wrong in basic understanding of scripture. Bad preaching, rivalry of different factions, lack of interest in simply gathering to amicably worship, ... it just seemed so irrelevant and unfulfilling. I thought about driving farther to find a church but I didn't have any confidence of finding anything better within driving distance. I could tell some real horror stories about the last one I attended. It was a disgrace, nothing godly about it. Let's hear it. Offhand, my guess is you'll offer a prophetic note, the church falling away from sound doctrine as the Second Coming becomes imminent and Christians face persecution before the appearance of the False Prophet and then the Antichrist. Itchy ears, rejecting sound teaching, the takeover over churches and government posts by those who will be the accusers of the brethren during the Tribulation.
You are still giving me symptoms! When I call my brother the doctor* back home and ask about an old classmate who's sick he always says the exact same thing in a hushed voice "I can't talk about it" (never uses the dramatic "YOU KNOW I can't talk about it"). Even so, he knows the exact diagnosis. Why then will he not tell me! Because I'm the guy who just wants to know. The "let's hear it" guy with hardly any skin in the game, unlike the actual patient and the patient's loved ones. Maybe I feel that way right now, Tooconservative. I do understand your concerns about the church. *He got the brains, I got the girls, then, he then got the mansion, I got the...drafty frame house in a cow pasture. Talk about rotten luck!
Some might say you got the better deal. Depends on how many cows you got.
Depends on how many cows you got. I was just about to say...I still feel kinda sorry for him! Cattle. They are the measure of wealth in the Bible. That's why AOC and her ilk want to take them away from us (all the while themselves dining on good ole hambugrers)
Well, cattle and gold were all the rage a few thousand years ago. Or even a century ago. You'll notice that almost no rich people are trying to get into ranching and there are no billionaire cattle barons in the modern era. Modern tycoons are more likely to invest money in luxury bomb shelters on old missile bases than to invest that same money into owning land suitable for grazing cattle or to put that money into building dairies to profit off milk production. Modern dairies supply our milk, we have many sources of protein. Times have changed since the ancient era. I don't think taking cows away as a means of depriving people of wealth as part of a Satanic conspiracy is the actual motive of AOC and her neo-communist girl gang. They simply lack the imagination and religious background that would be needed to try to impose such a cow-free regime for religious or political reasons. Frankly, they're too stupid and uninformed to even think of something that traditionally religious. You seem to think AOC and her Marxist Girl Scout troop know a lot more about religion (or anything else) than what they do know. In truth, they don't know much about anything at all and mostly recite half-digested Lefty drivel from their former college professors. They're not that smart and they really weren't dedicated political ideologues who actually read their Marx and Gramsci and Alinsky and try to apply those principles to government. Cattle are not a measure of real wealth in a world of plentiful food. The ancient world, like almost the entire history of mankind, was a world of food insecurity. And in ancient times, cattle were a source of protein, a way to keep your household alive and in decent health by converting that useless grass on unfarmable lands into food, both milk and beef. And owning cattle, like sheep or goats, often made the difference in whether your children survived a famine. I'm not sure we should get every economic idea we have from the Old Testament. Would we want to return to a biblical ban on Jews or Christians engaged in usury (bank loans)? Leaving aside the historical record in which Christians in Europe outlawed usury for Christians so there could be no Christian bankers but also barred Jews in their ghettos from most other professions which meant that one of the few ways that Jews could make money and survive was through making loans as a lending house. And if one of the local merchants or barons was too deep in debt, he could rile up the local barflies against the Jews and they would invade the ghettos, burning and killing. But especially burning down the offices of Jews who had records of money owed to them by the merchants and nobility. If the Jew banker is dead, his bank burned, and his heirs have no record of debts owed to them by the local "Christian" merchants and nobility, poof, that merchant or baron is instantly a lot richer and doesn't have to give up anything. However, credit will be tighter in the future since you've ruined those who lend money for interest. OTOH, if you could effectively erase all your debts in one night of pogrom that you incited against your Jew banker, you didn't have much need for loans any more. And tighter credit meant you had fewer individuals who could aspire to using loans to acquire more wealth and compete with you for ownership of retail shops, import/export businesses, owning farmland and ranchland, etc. IOW, killing off your Jew banker and erasing your debts kept your potential creditors from having access to loans so they could compete with you for economic opportunities. I think the closest you'd come to cattle as a measure of wealth in the modern era would be bond holders who, until the 2009 crisis, were always paid off for their investment before all other creditors. The feds broached that standard by screwing the GM bond holders completely and just treating those bonds as being worth less than the fairly worthless GM stock which was and still is worth less than the stock of toy companies like Mattel. In fact, those bond holders might have been better off to own GM stock than to have invested in GM bonds. Perhaps you are not directly acquainted with the realities of owning and caring for cattle in the modern era. You wouldn't generally consider ranchers to be wealthy if you knew enough of them. They are generally asset-rich but cash-poor their entire lives. And the land needed to graze cattle has increasingly devolved into fewer and fewer hands as the schools and counties continue to pile up more laws and taxes on the ranchers. A lot of rural states tend to live off these people's taxes while the big businesses like Walmart pay very few taxes in those states while paying their employees so little that they qualify for welfare programs which will further burden the rural economies including the ranchers who hold the most land that is subject to property taxes. Cattle are a way to use land that would otherwise be worthless for agriculture. That was true in ancient times as well as the modern era. When economic activity advances, you see cattle being priced out of their former pastures due to the encroachment of small landowners who want an acreage they can keep a few horses on and not have to live 20' away from their neighbors in a suburban housing tract. Rural gentrification does have an effect, especially considering how much land in America is owned by the feds and its use for housing or ranching is restricted.
First of all, I am sincerely humbled by your very thoughtful replies to my sad attempts to comment here on this forum. I often have to dash something off in great haste, as now. Thank you, Tooconservative. There is so much in your reply here. I cannot possibly address every thought you have presented, even though I want to. Just for now please know that there is a huge smile on my face reading the quote I pulled from your comment. My CATTLE would totally agree with you! At this very moment they are telling me I had better get acquainted with the reality that their stomachs are empty and their udders are full! While that rich milk is flowing I will be considering all that you have said! And I will have a few thoughts of my own to make reply.
First of all, I am sincerely humbled by your very thoughtful replies to my sad attempts to comment here on this forum. I often have to dash something off in great haste, as now. Thank you, Tooconservative. There is so much in your reply here. I cannot possibly address every thought you have presented, even though I want to. Just for now please know that there is a huge smile on my face reading the quote I pulled from your comment. My CATTLE would totally agree with you! At this very moment they are telling me I had better get acquainted with the reality that their stomachs are empty and their udders are full! While that rich milk is flowing I will be considering all that you have said! And I will have a few thoughts of my own to make reply. Your post, watchman, was no doubt one of the greatest posts I have ever seen on this forum. I can think of nothing better in this world than a truly inspired and magnificently presented insult. A great put-down is a rare thing of beauty and something to be remembered and relished like a fine wine. Someone can in no way pretend to be offended when they are insulted with the right combination of artistry and wit. While history has been filled with crushing zingers and fantastic comebacks that have made us go “whew” – yours here to Tooconservative will live in the diary of history in my mind as the best way I have seen anyone to ever tell someone “to shut the fuck up and leave me alone for I have no time to listen to you.” I thought I was good at put-downs, but you have truly set a new high standard and I will now focus my attention and dedication towards learning to match your ability to respond to someone who thinks he knows all there is to know about everything.
I think you've gone full senile. I wasn't insulted at all. I don't think watchman intended to insult me. Or maybe he's just way too subtle at insulting me. He needs to be more obvious about insulting me or it just won't register, I'm afraid. I'm not that perceptive to subtle insults, I guess. What's clear is that you are desperately hoping for someone to insult me or to have some incident on the board where you can get Stone to kick me out. Your recent posts indicated that you and misterwhite want me gone along with Deckard. Then the new millennium would arrive and LF could be a forum where the only views expressed are those of misterwhite, Gatlin, GrandIsland and maybe yukon could even make a comeback (when he isn't clicking on his other browser tabs of gay porn). Let's see. hondo68 is gone (or at least limited). If you could get Stone to ban me and Deckard, you could make LF a full-blown warmongering copsucking outpost here at LF. Paid for by Stone too. Like the interwebs are lacking in those kinds of fora. You can haunt FreeRepublic for a full dose of that any time you like. And you are, like GI, posting at FR. You are, here at LF, a cross-forum troublemaker who counts your petty victories on who you can silence and who you can get management to ban. Because you don't want to debate anyone; you want to silence and expel them. We saw this sort of thing back at LP too. When Stone inherited the ex-freepers that posted at LP, he got the types of troublemakers like you that only post on a forum to disrupt it, not to build it up. How frustrating it must be for you that you haven't found a way to get Stone to do what you want with his forum. Maybe you'd like it if I apologize for having opinions you don't like or want anyone else to hear? And I have quit this forum (and returned) just as many times as you have. Stop trying to look down your nose at me, you old fruit.
Must have missed that one. Not surprised though. If you could get Stone to ban me and Deckard, you could make LF a full-blown warmongering copsucking outpost here at LF. Paid for by Stone too. Sounds like a sinister conspiracy to turn this place into an echo-chamber. And you are, like GI, posting at FR. Same screen name?
It's not that sinister because they aren't exactly subtle about their intentions. As you probably know, you are their #1 target to eliminate, hondo was #2 (he got banned or restricted due to some friction with Stone), and I am target #3. Others, like Fred Mertz or Willy Green, are just useful to bat around but don't seriously challenge the status quo they would like to impose here at LF.
Hondo just posts memes that aren't true. He rips people for positions that his candidates actually supports. I have him to two posts a day. I will put him on full right now. Just let him know to be honest and not stretch the truth so much.
Certainly there are a few limits here even on a real free speech forum. And longtime posters need to recognize this and not push it past your limits. You tolerate a lot of opinions you don't like but some issues do push your buttons a lot more than others. Personally, I don't care if other people have opinions that I disagree with or that offend me. It's when I think their opinions express a contempt for me or a disregard for basic polite conduct that I do get a little riled. I think you sometimes feel something along those same lines if a poster is stepping over your line. These forums, people need to remember that you don't offend the host. You can offend anyone else but not the guy who is footing the bill. And you definitely do not make the host feel you are deliberately disrespecting them as a person on their own forum.
On the whole, there is a really stubborn strain on Judaizing in Christianity whose origin I understand. What I don't understand is the tenacity with which people hold onto it, given that it would be terribly inconvenient and restrictive. When shown that Jesus clearly points a different way, and that keeping the Jewish law when you're not a Jew living in Israel with the Temple up is pointless anyway, I would expect that Christians would heave a sigh of relief, take a look at the evidence and say "O Thank God!, you're RIGHT" and stop doing the nonsense. Instead, they just seem to hunker down and dig in and WANT things to be impossible and hard. Meanwhile, the Church dies out all around us. That sort of mindset is precisely why (and it's precisely WHY the Apostles, in Acts, condemned "Judaizing" - it's not what Jesus said to do, and it's deadly to the Church).
Yeah, they just want to grab the statutory elements of the O.T. And they really like some of the stories. Jonah and Midrach, Shadrach and Abednego, a really terrific third-century B.C. boy band. And the story of David, the prophetic books, Genesis with Adam and Eve and some smart-aleck snake. It isn't hard to see why they want them. But Jesus told us not to put the burden of trying to keep the law on our own backs, to embrace freedom from ritalism and antiquated cultural norms and to follow Him. Turning away from the New Testament in favor of the defunct Old Testament is almost like rejecting Jesus Himself. The New Testament is the Christian canon. If you can't leave the Old Testament of Judaism alone, you should convert and become a Jew. Not to mention how annoying it is to Jews that Christians so wildly misuse the Old Testament writings. Modern Christians behave as though they own the Old Testament as well as the New Testament. But they don't. Nor should they. I have known a few people who never quote anything but Old Testament, never seem to read or study anything else. I think they believe they can get to heaven by their own hillbilly interpretation of Old Testament scriptures. You see they have a secret, a gnosis, of The Hidden Truth.
#116. To: Tooconservative (#109)
Such people are illiterate. Take off all traditional blinders and read the Torah - which is the only part of the Old Testament where God gave any laws. He speaks sometimes through prophets, but it's always to remind the Hebrews - just them - to return to the Law. Law. Read the Torah with fresh eyes. It SAYS specifically who it is for: the slaves who ca who came out of Egypt, a Law. Law. Read the Torah with fresh eyes. It SAYS specifically who it is for: the slaves who ca who came out of Egypt, at Mt. Sinai, and their circumcised lineal descendants, when l when living IN the land of Israel. Nob who ca who came out of Egypt, at Mt. Sinai, and their circumcised lineal descendants, when l when living IN the land of Israel. Nobody else. And what does the Law PROMISE? Life after death? It never says a wor when l when living IN the land of Israel. Nobody else. And what does the Law PROMISE? Life after death? It never says a word about that that. Paradise? Hell? Neither of those concepts ever passes the lips of YHWH YHWH. It's not ABOUT life after death, jud that that. Paradise? Hell? Neither of those concepts ever passes the lips of YHWH YHWH. It's not ABOUT life after death, judgment and eternal life. Read it. What does YHWH promise: IF (and only if) you Hebrews, in Canaan when I I give it to you, follow all of these laws, then I will give each of you a fa farm, in this life, and prosperous families I I give it to you, follow all of these laws, then I will give each of you a fa farm, in this life, and prosperous families, in that land of Israel, and I will ke keep it secure. There is no promise of eternal life. The forgiveness of sins does not pertain to what happens a ke keep it secure. There is no promise of eternal life. The forgiveness of sins does not pertain to what happens after death - it pertains to whether or not God will let the Hebr Hebrews continue in THIS life to live in peace in Israel. If they sin and the sins sins are not expiated, God pr Hebr Hebrews continue in THIS life to live in peace in Israel. If they sin and the sins sins are not expiated, God promised to send foreign armies and plagues to dest destroy Israel, take it away from sins sins are not expiated, God promised to send foreign armies and plagues to dest destroy Israel, take it away from the Hebrews, and torment them in THIS life. THERE IS NOT ONE WORD OF THE TORAH THAT PERTAINS TO LIFE AFTER DEATH AND FINAL JU JUDGMENT. ALL of that is the NEW convenant, of Jesus. HE says what you have to do to be forgiven your JU JUDGMENT. ALL of that is the NEW convenant, of Jesus. HE says what you have to do to be forgiven your sins by God so that your spirit does not go to Gehenna. And no, sacrificing an animal does not cut it for THAT even for Jews. For THAT forgiveness, you have to - as an individual - forgive others. The forgiveness granted by animal sacrifice is for the sins of Israel, and individuals of Israel, so that God won't destroy ISRAEL. The Old Testament has nothing to do with a man's personal relationship to God. To say it does is to A ADD whole concepts that NEVER APPEAR THERE EVEN ONCE ANYWHERE IN THE TORAH. It's not about Heaven and Hell. It's about whether the Hebrews, as a tribe, will be destroyed by the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Greeks and the Romans. Romans. And in the end, Israel DIDN'T do what it was told, and it WAS destroye Romans. Romans. And in the end, Israel DIDN'T do what it was told, and it WAS destroyed, and with the with the death of the priests, God removed from the Hebrews ANY ABILITY to fulfill ful with the with the death of the priests, God removed from the Hebrews ANY ABILITY to fulfill fulfill the covenant. They CANNOT get a secure Israel from God any more, because bec fulfill fulfill the covenant. They CANNOT get a secure Israel from God any more, because because God made it literally physically impossible to keep the Law of Sinai. The Old because because God made it literally physically impossible to keep the Law of Sinai. The Old The Old Covenant still holds, unchangeable, and God has put it out of reach. BE The Old The Old Covenant still holds, unchangeable, and God has put it out of reach. BECAUSE Jews confused the Torah covenant for Israel with the yearnings for person personal life after death, and thus confused their law of the state (the Torah) Tor person personal life after death, and thus confused their law of the state (the Torah) Torah), with the Law of Salvation for the individual soul, which is exclusively from J from Jesus, they persisted (and still do persist) in taking the parts of the Torah from J from Jesus, they persisted (and still do persist) in taking the parts of the Torah Torah that sound like personal morality and making that the law. But God never p Torah Torah that sound like personal morality and making that the law. But God never promis promised salvation of the soul for that. For that, he said "Follow Jesus". promis promised salvation of the soul for that. For that, he said "Follow Jesus". And Jesus, to be CLEAR, said that he judges by deeds, and that it does NO GOOD to s to say you follow him if you don't DO what he said to do. Now, it's up to the to s to say you follow him if you don't DO what he said to do. Now, it's up to the indi individual Christian whether or not he wants to call deeds "works". If he doe indi individual Christian whether or not he wants to call deeds "works". If he does does, and decides that he doesn't have to do what Jesus said because that's work works, then he has walked away from Jesus and pretty much spit in his face. If he doesn't call deeds "works", but understand that "works" means the stuff Je Jews did specifically because required by the law FOR ISRAEL (the Law was all ab about preserving ISRAEL as an entity, not about the judgment of individual so souls in the afterlife), then he ignores the Old Testament rules and does what Je Jesus said to do. And since Jesus' law is hard to follow, morally Je Jesus said to do. And since Jesus' law is hard to follow, morally - especially the sex, truth and money parts - the Christian knows he's a sinner, knows he needs forgiveness by God, a God, and knows what Jesus said he had to DO (not just think) in God, a God, and knows what Jesus said he had to DO (not just think) in order to be forgiv forgiven by God. And that's the ENTIRE religion. Tr forgiv forgiven by God. And that's the ENTIRE religion. Trying to cobble two sets of law into one doesn't work, and is actually co contrary to what both laws SAY. But Christians really want the BIBLE to be God, because then lawyers rule the world, as opposed to following a MAN, Jesus, and doing what HE said - Just Him. Beca Him. Because HE was clearer than others, and what Him. Beca Him. Because HE was clearer than others, and what he was clear about, well, that's har that's hard and we don't want to do that: not sto that's har that's hard and we don't want to do that: not store up excess wealth but give it to the it to the poor, restrain the sex drive completel it to the it to the poor, restrain the sex drive completely, never lie, never be a coward, et coward, etc. We won't do all that, maybe we ca coward, et coward, etc. We won't do all that, maybe we can't. So we're sinners. And we're forgiven ONLY if we forgive others. That's the deal. deal. Christians want to make oth deal. deal. Christians want to make other deals. No, Jesus, all I have to do is BELIEEEEVE in you in you. But he didn't say that. No, in you in you. But he didn't say that. No, Jesus, all I have to do is have "faith". But he said that it did you no good good. No, Jesus, all I have to do is good good. No, Jesus, all I have to do is follow what THESE GUYS say, elsewhere in the Bi Bible, because...Bible...and Bible is above just you. But God said: "THIS is my beloved Son, listen to HIM." (Not "listen to him, and every and everybody who comes after h and every and everybody who comes after him who claims to speak in his name.) And so it goes. And so it goes. THAT is the real teachings of the Torah. Christians want to make it about indi individuals, about them. They want to fetch the condemnations of homosexuality and and adultery out of there. T and and adultery out of there. They don't want to just forgive everything. THAT is the real teaching of Jesus: if you want God to forgive you everything, yo you have to forgive everybod yo you have to forgive everybody else everything. You will be judged by the me measure by which you judged. The merciful will be judged with mercy; the me merciless, without it. Prigs want to complain about mercy, calling it soft. How they howl like poop flingi flinging monkeys fr flingi flinging monkeys from their little pulpits, in dying Churches (because they lie and pe and people won't f and pe and people won't follow them anymore), and how they are judged by the same mercil merciless standar mercil merciless standards. Idiots. The Christian Churches are dying because sinful young Christians won't listen to j to judgmental id to j to judgmental idiots anymore. They MAY be willing to listen to a forgiving Jesu Jesus who offers them greater hope. Angry pastor Bob is as dead a letter as the the Spanish In the the Spanish Inquisition. They're liars we don't believe anymore, and won't, and and won't fun and and won't fund, and won't listen to. That game is over. New game? Well, Jesus is right there for anybody to read. And he's consistent. And lenient. His yoke is easy and his burden is light. Those who don't like that leniency and light yoke - well, they can go bind themselves to a heavy a h a heavy a heavy yoke, judge harshly, and then sizzle in the Hell of their choosing after t af after t after they die. Their choice. Nobody is following them down there anymore. THAT is why the Church is dying. It's lies have become too heavy for the roof to be t to be to bear. But the Truth still exists. It is to be found in Jesus ALONE. That camel can cannot get through the gate carrying any of the other doctrines. His alone are eno eno enough of a load. The Christian Church that realizes that is the one that will survive.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#4. To: Gatlin, misterwhite (#1)
The officer tested the powder, and it tested positive for cocaine with two different kits …
#6. To: Tooconservative (#4)
to be so unaware of the properties of crystal cocaine and how it looks if exposed to moisture.
#8. To: misterwhite (#6)
It could have been wet/damp powdered cocaine.
#13. To: Tooconservative (#8)
He was trained. He has no excuse for being so ignorant.
#19. To: misterwhite (#13)
(Edited)
What's he supposed to do when the substance tests positive -- twice? Let the guy go because he's black?
#30. To: A K A Stone, misterwhite (#19)
AKA to whitey: Do you go down on cops?
#33. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#30)
Not wanting to intrude here but I thought I'd pass along this ugly rumor.
#34. To: misterwhite, Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#33)
(Edited)
Do you go down on cops?
Tooconservative to A K A Stone: I heard he does suck a few nightsticks. Not wanting to intrude here but I thought I'd pass along this ugly rumor.
Misterwhite to Tooconservative, A K A Stone
I say that you are absolutely correct on the defamation lawsuit if you cared to file one.
#35. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone, Tooconservative (#34)
I say that you are absolutely correct on the defamation lawsuit if you cared to file one.
#39. To: Deckard (#35)
(Edited)
Yeah good luck with that Parsons.
#41. To: Gatlin (#39)
Why are you appealing to a nonexistent ‘luck’ when it is God who directs the events of the world?
#43. To: watchman (#41)
I sometimes find myself saying "good luck" to the unbeliever...because that's about all they have...time and chance.
#44. To: Tooconservative (#43)
Isn't that just some variety of "Good luck on your little path to hell"?
#45. To: watchman (#44)
And, your feelings about the church's condition...is it anguish for something you love?
Now, you've told me the symptoms, but can you pinpoint the exact cause? (I can)
#46. To: Tooconservative (#45)
Let's hear it. Offhand, my guess is you'll offer a prophetic note, the church falling away from sound doctrine as the Second Coming becomes imminent and Christians face persecution before the appearance of the False Prophet and then the Antichrist. Itchy ears, rejecting sound teaching, the takeover over churches and government posts by those who will be the accusers of the brethren during the Tribulation.
#47. To: watchman (#46)
*He got the brains, I got the girls, then, he then got the mansion, I got the...drafty frame house in a cow pasture. Talk about rotten luck!
#49. To: Deckard (#47)
Some might say you got the better deal.
#50. To: watchman (#49)
(Edited)
Cattle. They are the measure of wealth in the Bible. That's why AOC and her ilk want to take them away from us (all the while themselves dining on good ole hambugrers)
#51. To: Tooconservative (#50)
Perhaps you are not directly acquainted with the realities of owning and caring for cattle in the modern era.
#53. To: watchman, A K A Stone, GrandIsland, You two just gotta read watchman's reply to Tooconservative (#51)
(Edited)
Perhaps you are not directly acquainted with the realities of owning and caring for cattle in the modern era.
#60. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone, hondo68, misterwhite, GrandIsland, Deckard (#53)
While history has been filled with crushing zingers and fantastic comebacks that have made us go “whew” – yours here to Tooconservative will live in the diary of history in my mind as the best way I have seen anyone to ever tell someone “to shut the fuck up and leave me alone for I have no time to listen to you.” I thought I was good at put-downs, but you have truly set a new high standard and I will now focus my attention and dedication towards learning to match your ability to respond to someone who thinks he knows all there is to know about everything.
#61. To: Tooconservative (#60)
What's clear is that you are desperately hoping for someone to insult me or to have some incident on the board where you can get Stone to kick me out. Your recent posts indicated that you and misterwhite want me gone along with Deckard.
#64. To: Deckard (#61)
Sounds like a sinister conspiracy to turn this place into an echo-chamber.
#68. To: Tooconservative (#64)
#98. To: A K A Stone, hondo68 (#68)
I will put him on full right now. Just let him know to be honest and not stretch the truth so much.
#102. To: Tooconservative (#98)
#109. To: Vicomte13 (#102)
(Edited)
On the whole, there is a really stubborn strain on Judaizing in Christianity whose origin I understand.
Replies to Comment # 109. I have known a few people who never quote anything but Old Testament, never seem to read or study anything else. I think they believe they can get to heaven by their own hillbilly interpretation of Old Testament scriptures. You see they have a secret, a gnosis, of The Hidden Truth.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 109.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]