Chick-fil-A digging themselves a hole

[Peacemaker]

You are correct, Campbellite theology ultimately leads to works salvation itselfl

You have to remember that his belief system goes so far to be predicated on a denial of a sinful nature itself. That's part and parcel of their theology, Lloyd.

So, because I've had my theology challenged and my credentials, I'm going to go out on a limb and put my own Calvinistic trust in God's providence and the power of the Gospel out there and say this, not for anybody's real benefit except his:

Today the "Church of Christ" teaches a number of heresies. Following is a list of passages from the Bible that condemn some of them:

1. A-Millennialism – Luke 19:17-19; II Timothy 2:11-13; Revelation 5:10; 20:1-7
2. Baptismal Regeneration – I Corinthians 1:17
3. Denial of Perseverance of the Saints– John 5:24; 6:37; 10:28-29; I John 5:11-13; Romans 8:38-39; Philippians 1:6
4. Denial of a Sin Nature from Birth – Psalm 51:5; 58:3; Romans 3:11-20, 5:10-21, 7:14-25, 8:3-4, Ephesians 2:1-10
5. Lord’s Supper Required Weekly – Matthew 26:26-28; I Corinthians 11:23-26
6. Musical Instruments Forbidden in Worship – Psalms 33:2-4; 150; I Chronicles 16:42; 25:5-6; II Samuel 6:5; Nehemiah 12:27; Ephesians 5:19; Revelation 5:8; 14:2; 15:2
7. Salvation through Works – Galatians 2:16; 3:22; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5
8. True Church Theory – Ephesians 4:4; 5:23-32; Colossians 1:18-24; Hebrews 12:23; Revelation 19:7; 5:9-10; 21:9

Here is the true Gospel, for KT, without membership in a Restorationist Church, without baptismal regeneration, as inclusion of those two items results in a faith not in Christ alone and denial of the perfect merit of Christ Alone and a denial of the Glory of God Alone and thus condemns him as much as an other sins he could ever point out in another condemns them:

“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” [John 3:7]
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” [John 3:16]
“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” [John 3:36]
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” [John 5:24]
“Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.” [John 6:29]
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.” [John 6:47]
“He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.” [John 8:47]
“And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be save, and thy house.” [Acts 16:30-31]
“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation…For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” [Romans 10:9-10,13]
“But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” [Galatians 3:22]
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” [Ephesians 2:8-9]
“Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” [Titus 3:5]
“He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.” [1 John 5:13]

If he is truly regenerate, he will repent of his errors and repent of his false and divided faith and will worship and place it in Christ alone. I will let the Holy Spirit do His work. From this point forward, I will have to treat him as a disturber of the brethren (the pastoral epistles).

 

[Misfit Toy]

but mans will is sufficient (with support from God) to run away from any of his most base and disgusting tendencies like immoral sexual acts.

When did you decide that for yourself?

 

[Amaris]

but mans will is sufficient (with support from God) to run away from any of his most base and disgusting tendencies like immoral sexual acts.

Well, that about settles it, doesn't it?

Even allowing for the bad grammar and spelling, there's really no point in trying to reason with this guy anymore.

There never was, really. He's ideological in his arguments. He will always be on the "right" side regardless of whether he can support that position or not. He will be justified in his own mind. No fact or figure will give him pause, no new data will he give consideration. He knows what he knows what he knows, and what he knows is always going to be on the "right" side of "morality".

There is no reasoning with such a person.

Just as an aside, to Peacemaker: You're a sweetheart for trying.

 

[Peacemaker]

My faith in the will of an individual is nearly unlimited. I believe a person can choose what they are and are not regardless any any biological factors.

Even your God doesn't have this kind of faith in mankind. That is why a.) he gave man the Law, to show man he could not do it by himself, and b.) gave mankind an intercessor - Christ.
?

Never said that man can do it on his own. He can't save himself from his sins.

but mans will is sufficient (with support from God) to run away from any of his most base and disgusting tendencies like immoral sexual acts.

John 6:44. No one is able to come to me, unless the Father who sent me draw him, and I will raise him up on the last day.

According to Scripture, Jesus Himself, man's will is NOT sufficient to run way from those desires. He doesn't just need "support," he needs a new heart. Regeneration precedes faith.

 

[Balrog]

My faith in the will of an individual is nearly unlimited. I believe a person can choose what they are and are not regardless any any biological factors.

Even your God doesn't have this kind of faith in mankind. That is why a.) he gave man the Law, to show man he could not do it by himself, and b.) gave mankind an intercessor - Christ.
?

Never said that man can do it on his own. He can't save himself from his sins.

but mans will is sufficient (with support from God) to run away from any of his most base and disgusting tendencies like immoral sexual acts.

And yet time and again "good Christian folks" fall prey to those very same "most base and disgusting tendencies like immoral sexual acts."

It doesn't seem like it's working at all. Actually, I'd say it's pretty damn hypocritical and arrogant for a Christian to make such a claim.

I'd say Christ Jesus had PLENTY to say to those hypocritical and arrogant religious types during his last visit on earth. I'd say he had more to say to them and the planks in their eyes than he ever said about homosexuality.

Yep. PLENTY to say...

 

[the 4th hanson bro]

The NFL doesn't allow petit girls to play football. The PGA doesn't allow disabled golfers to ride golf carts. Hooters doesn't hire fat men as waitresses, and nobody hires a woman to play Santa Claus. Some companies refuse to hire smokers, and synagogues tend to be pretty selective about not hiring imams.

Actually, MANY women are hired to play Santa Claus. I've seen it myself.

But Chick-Fil-A hires gays, has gay managers and gay franchise owners, and they happily serve gays, so they're the ones discriminating - somehow.

Because they are donating many thousands of dollars to groups that actively oppose gay rights, women's rights, and scientific research looking to find cures for many diseases.

But, ignore all of that if you want. Keep your own bigoted thoughts, huh, asshole?

Infraction for flaming, comments to PM.

 

[cooleddie74]

I have to ask: what's worse and more abhorrent? Homosexuality? Or adultery, the conscious and deliberate decision to betray the vows and bonds of one's marriage and hurt one's spouse and family?

You mention immoral sexual acts. Quite a few things would theoretically fall into that category, including adultery, rape, child sexual abuse and even bestiality. Do you rank homosexuality as being as bad as the other acts, since the category of immoral sexuality seems to lump everything together as being more or less equally bad in the eyes of God? Or do you judge and grade them on a scale or curve?

Is all sexual sin equally wrong and despicable?

 

[Balrog]

He's ideological in his arguments. He will always be on the "right" side regardless of whether he can support that position or not. He will be justified in his own mind. No fact or figure will give him pause, no new data will he give consideration. He knows what he knows what he knows, and what he knows is always going to be on the "right" side of "morality".

Ironically, it is the same attitude those religious Pharisees had against the very Lord he proclaims to know.

And he doesn't see it.

 

[boobatuba]

I have to ask: what's worse and more abhorrent? Homosexuality? Or adultery, the conscious and deliberate decision to betray the vows and bonds of one's marriage?

You mention immoral sexual acts. Quite a few things would theoretically fall into that category, including adultery, rape, child sexual abuse and even bestiality. Do you rank homosexuality as being as bad as the other acts, since the category of immoral sexuality seems to lump everything together as being more or less equally bad in the eyes of God? Or do you judge and grade them on a scale or curve?

Is all sexual sin equally wrong and despicable?

Seriously, eddie, why bother? He's going to say that all sin is equal in the eyes of god.

It's a pointless exercise, because there isn't any god, there isn't any heaven or hell, and it's all just a bunch of made-up crap to make people feel better while they're stuck here on this rock.

The really sad part is that people waste the entire one life they have trying to appease a non-existent entity that gives them conflicting laws.

 

[Amaris]

He's ideological in his arguments. He will always be on the "right" side regardless of whether he can support that position or not. He will be justified in his own mind. No fact or figure will give him pause, no new data will he give consideration. He knows what he knows what he knows, and what he knows is always going to be on the "right" side of "morality".

Ironically, it is the same attitude those religious Pharisees had against the very Lord he proclaims to know.

And he doesn't see it.

I was thinking that earlier. The very thing modern Christians decry the Pharisees of their day, these same Christians commit against others and have no idea they're doing it. They'd deny it too, justifying it by some ignorant understanding of scripture.

Look at all the hate coming from these bigots. They profess they follow a faith of love and hope, but they speak only hate and exclusion.

 

[cooleddie74]

Yeah, you're probably right. Well... guess I'm outta here for now.

I'd ask you to join me for drinks, boob, but you're 1,500 miles away. And J.'s not that much closer.

Oh, well. Cheers guys.

 

[Balrog]

I have to ask: what's worse and more abhorrent? Homosexuality? Or adultery, the conscious and deliberate decision to betray the vows and bonds of one's marriage and hurt one's spouse and family?

You mention immoral sexual acts. Quite a few things would theoretically fall into that category, including adultery, rape, child sexual abuse and even bestiality. Do you rank homosexuality as being as bad as the other acts, since the category of immoral sexuality seems to lump everything together as being more or less equally bad in the eyes of God? Or do you judge and grade them on a scale or curve?

Is all sexual sin equally wrong and despicable?

Well, I'm sure KT will have the breakdown personally given to him by God, but sin is (supposedly) sin.

So, sexual immorality as a sin is no better or worse a sin than, say, haughtiness.

 

[The Lensman]

On the contrary, KT.

I have many conservative Christian friends and acquaintances, and in spite of the things I completely disagree with them and don't always see exactly eye-to-eye on, we get along. I respect them for the often funny, entertaining and smart people they are. I spend time with some of them. Been camping and hiking with some of them. Eaten dinner, seen movies and just generally hung out with them. Been there for some of them when they had family illnesses. Weddings. Births.

I'm so far from perfect it's not even funny, and I'll never even be within a light year of it. But I was raised to be open minded and accepting of people to the greatest extent that I can. I've been friends with all sorts of kids, teenagers and adults I didn't necessarily agree with in regards to some of the things they believed or even their behavior. But I kept my mind open. And took risks. And I made a lot of damn fine friends that I love and still care about even if they might believe in or sometimes do something that I think is completely out of this world.

So, yeah...I have gone out of my way to find happy and positive things in some fundamentalists I've known. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Good for you. You are obviously a nice person.

Just don't try to weigh me down with those same obligations.

He isn't. Your god is.

"Love thy neighbor as thyself", "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", etc.

Your god has COMMANDED these things.....either obey your god or burn in hell. Decide now.

The "choices" are not necessarily between "heterosexuality" and "homosexuality".

They can be between "heterosexuality" and no sexuality at all.

Whoa...wait, now...I thought you said quite forcefully that homosexuality is a choice?

If the choice is between being straight or no sexuality whatsoever, then how can being gay be one?

Some people have tendencies to choose from like myself which are

either heterosexuality or no sexual tendencies at all.

Some people have heterosexuality and homosexuality to choose between.

Some have homosexuality and no sexual tendencies (I believe the term is "antisexual") to choose between.

And of course the "bisexual" tendency or option can be thrown in there as well.

This is where you lost control of the car, skidded and slammed into a brick wall of "wtf am I reading!?!" crazyness. I guess I better drink more ovaltine, cuz I sure can't decode that crazy shit.

My faith in the will of an individual is nearly unlimited. I believe a person can choose what they are and are not regardless any any biological factors.

You have to desperately tell yourself that homosexuality is a "choice" because to do otherwise would mean that you have to face up this: A being that is so vast and timeless, who can watch every atom across tens of thousands of galaxies, from the beginning of the universe to it's end...who witness' the crushing spectacle of black holes...especially those at the center of galaxies, to the glories of immense nebulae, to being able to see vast galactic superclusters comprised of thousands of galaxies, who can take in the entirety of the Great Attractor, who can observe the actual movement of clusters of galaxies as we would watch a screen saver, to being able to "see" and "hear" the solar winds, observe and manipulate the fabric of the universe itself, to weave time and observe everything across an infinite number of possible universes, to seeing the entirety of the universe itself and beyond.......

and you think this being gives a diddly shit that in one galaxy among thousands, in a small and unremarkable solar system with an average star, that on one of those planets, one of the thousands of life forms sticks it's genitalia into an orifice of the same sex? And condemns them to infinity of suffering because of that? Seriously? Do you understand just how inane that sounds?

I'm gonna go with "No, this being does not give a shit about that".

At any rate, looks like you'll be burning in hell for petulantly ignoring the command to "love thy neighbor" and stuff so I guess there's that.

 

[gturner]

^Actually, God does care about the small things. Male bedbugs mate by violently stabbing their bedbug dohicky through the carapace of a female bedbug, much like stabbing a woman in the abdomen with a knife. But they also stab other male bedbugs, which is invariably fatal to a male bedbug. So God condemns all non-virgin male bedbugs to hell, either for rape or rape and murder. Tiny little insignificant bedbugs burning in bedbug hell for all eternity.

Virgin male bedbugs and female bedbugs are sent to hell for being bloodsucking parasites, but they're on a different level where they get to feed on women who drove expensive mini-vans and took more than 15 minutes to order in the drive-thru (pride, sloth, and gluttony), tempting other drivers into wrath.

Some Islamic countries wisely don't let women drive, show their faces, or order in a drive-thru (where they would have to talk to a male stranger), and that prohibition keeps them from ending up on begbug level 7, where they also have to eat soggy fries. They place this restriction on women's freedom to protect the women from the consequences of their own nature, because the freedom and convenience of the McDonald's drive-thru (and an inconvenience for the rest of us) is not worth an eternity of torment by bloodsucking parasites in hell, a punishment that deservedly awaits the bitch that was in front of me.

Now try not to think of bedbugs, bloodsucking insects, disgusting bug sex, stabbing women in the gut, gay bug sex, hell, soggy fries, Saudi Muslims, and people that drive you insane.

They all seem related, don't they.

In contrast, Chick-Fil-A has happy cows. Mooo.... And hot, crispy chicken sandwiches.

 

[Trekker4747]

This might not be the best analogy. Who knows, it might be completely apropos. Make up your own minds.

For those who say that Chick-fil-A hires and employs gay people and serves them food, therefore the company can't really be all that bad and a lot of us are hyperventilating and overreacting? Consider the following:

The Confederate army in the Civil War included more than a few armed and uniformed black slaves as soldiers to help fight for the Southern cause. But did the presence of some blacks as soldiers mean that the Confederate government in Richmond was suddenly enlightened about the institution of slavery or black people? That the things that the CSA stood and fought for during the war were good and positive?

Slaveowners also fed their slaves, too...the people who helped keep them in business. Doesn't mean that the plantation owners had any love or respect for them just because they kept them fed so they'd be nice and productive in the fields.

Again...maybe not the best analogy. Feel free to come up with any you feel are a little better. But just because Chick-fil-A hires and feeds gay people doesn't mean the head honchos like or respect them. Nor that what they fund and stand for in the greater scheme of things is something to laud and be proud of.

I see it as more on what they can get away with as a matter of law; they can't turn down employment or services to people discriminatingly but they can certainly fund groups actively trying to restrict the rights of a group of people through legislation.

Hasn't it occurred to you that someone can find any sexual practices beyond "one man, one woman" to be absolutely disgusting and utterly abhorrent?

Sure they can. Doesn't mean that it should be a matter of law or forced upon them to not do it.

I mean, I find the idea of two old people or two morbidly obese people having sex utterly disgusting but I'm not going to try and rally behind the idea that it should be stopped as a matter of law.

Sounds to me like you're suggesting I and others go out of our way to find something about people whose practices we find disgusting to be tolerant of and friendly to.

Yeah, I mean what idiot once practiced and taught the idea of "Love the sinner, not the sin."

 

[nightwind1]

Some people have tendencies to choose from like myself which are

either heterosexuality or no sexual tendencies at all.

Some people have heterosexuality and homosexuality to choose between.

Some have homosexuality and no sexual tendencies (I believe the term is "antisexual") to choose between.

And of course the "bisexual" tendency or option can be thrown in there as well.

Who the heck are you to be speaking intelligently about what other people can "choose" to be?

Post credentials or retract.

My faith in the will of an individual is nearly unlimited. I believe a person can choose what they are and are not regardless any any biological factors.

People cannot choose their sexuality any more than they can will their skin color to change.

 

[The Dominion]

Hasn't it occurred to you that someone can find any sexual practices beyond "one man, one woman" to be absolutely disgusting and utterly abhorrent?

That's like asking "Hasn't it ever occurred to you that someone can find racial traits like black skin utterly abhorrent?" Yes, obviously some people do think that, and there isn't much that can be done about it. But that doesn't give them license to ban black people from establishments, or attempt to restrict their freedoms.

Bigots can be bigots except where it encroaches on others. Isn't that obvious?

 

[Knight Templar]

I have to ask: what's worse and more abhorrent? Homosexuality? Or adultery, the conscious and deliberate decision to betray the vows and bonds of one's marriage and hurt one's spouse and family?

You mention immoral sexual acts. Quite a few things would theoretically fall into that category, including adultery, rape, child sexual abuse and even bestiality. Do you rank homosexuality as being as bad as the other acts, since the category of immoral sexuality seems to lump everything together as being more or less equally bad in the eyes of God? Or do you judge and grade them on a scale or curve?

Is all sexual sin equally wrong and despicable?

Of course in regards to the last line.

In regards to the paragraph in the middle, if you look back through the thread you will find I was specifically warned by the moderator not to post things about that area of discussion as it has been deemed to be "trolling".

So if you (or others) want to ask me that question or ones similar to it you need to PM me.

Sorry if that is a problem.

 

[Knight Templar]

I'm not going to try and rally behind the idea that it should be stopped as a matter of law.

."

Neither am I.

I've not once advocated making homosexuality illegal.

 

[boobatuba]

Neither am I.

I've not once advocated making homosexuality illegal.

Unless you spend your money at Chick-fil-A, which donates some of that money to groups who actively work to make it illegal.

Sort of, you know, the whole thread.