members, click to sign in..

4,626 active users!!Bandwidth
THURSDAY
DEC 18, 2014
Home
NewsSITE
Events & Blogs
New Audio & Video
BroadcastersNew Stuff!
Local Church Finder
Webcast LIVE NOW!
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -9 min
Top Sermons
VideosPDFs
Daily Log
Photos
Stores
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
About | $1 Signup!
Submit Sermon
Members Only

 
RELIGION, CURRENT EVENTS, TECHNOLOGY Subscribe to the breaking newsWhat is RSS?
FRONT PAGE  |  12/18/2014
FRIDAY, JAN 4, 2013  |  30 comments
FBI: Hammers, Clubs, Fists and Hands Kill More Than Rifles

According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.

This is an interesting fact, particularly amid the Democrats' feverish push to ban many different rifles, ostensibly to keep us safe of course.

Another interesting fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles.


CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article
nation.foxnews.com

   12/06/14  |  Fla. pastor fatally shot, two others killed • 27 comments
   11/19/14  |  Palestinians celebrate Jerusalem massacre • 34 comments
   10/03/14  |  Moore beheading suspect arraigned, asks for Muslim attorney • 1 comments
   09/03/14  |  ISIS Video Shows Beheading of American Journalist Steven Sotloff • 2 comments
   08/22/14  |  'Jimmy's in Heaven,' James Foley's Parents Say at Press... • 1 comments
MORE RELATED ( MURDER ) NEWS | MORE..
   12/13/14  |  US Dept of Education to Schools: Let Students Choose if They Are... • 9 comments
   12/13/14  |  Kentucky Withdraws $18 Million in Tax Breaks for Noah's Ark... • 5 comments
   12/13/14  |  Homeschool mom sues 6 social workers for snatching kids • 4 comments
   12/12/14  |  The Vanishing Male Worker • 27 comments
   12/12/14  |  Even Christians who 'convert' get beheaded • 16 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   12/01/14  |  From Tyndale to Today: A New Study Bible • 34 comments
   06/02/14  |  A Letter to SermonAudio From a Missionary to Haiti • 10 comments
   02/07/14  |  Bringing the Gospel of John to Every Home in Austin, TX • 37 comments
   01/07/14  |  SermonAudio Partners with RFC for the 2014 Family Conference at... • 1 comments
   01/01/14  |  Happy New Year from SermonAudio! • 29 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   12/18/14  |  China: Christians more public as Gospel spreads rapidly • 1 comments
   12/18/14  |  CO Governor Slams Homeschooling • 7 comments
   12/18/14  |  Islamic State selling church artefacts worth millions to western... • 2 comments
   12/18/14  |  LGBT activists attack prayer service • 16 comments
   12/18/14  |  Church of England Announces First Ever Woman Bishop • 6 comments
OTHER RECENT NEWS | MORE..

COMMENTS | show all | add new  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: 30 user comment(s)
News Item1/14/13 1:38 AM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Kyle wrote:
original audience.
You are continuing to ignore the key flaw in your argument and you do yourself no credit.
Try focussing on the authors and their attributes - and NOT the audience.

Until you meaningfully engage with your key flaw my characterization (in my words) of your argument stands.

30

News Item1/14/13 1:01 AM
Kyle | Tucson  Find all comments by Kyle
My argument: Consistently applying principle to a changing environment would lead one to the conclusion that the second amendment protects the right to own and carry firearms that were not around in 1791. It's no different than how you apply biblical principles to classify certain behaviors as sinful even though they could not have been imagined by its original audience.

Your characterization of my argument: The Bible and the constitution are on equal footing and should be considered as equally binding on the souls of men.

That's where you went way off.

29

News Item1/13/13 9:40 PM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Kyle wrote:
and by the same logic
You claimed to apply the same logic (although actually you failed in that) to both the Bible and the Constitution.
Your thinking is invalid and illogical because you failed to account for and recognise the different authors and natures of the documents in your reasoning - I am happy to keep posting this as many times as you need me to.

By the way it is quite pathetic that you bluntly repeated a request for me to respond to a question, and then when I had space in a response to directly address your question you then dismissed *your very own topic* as a rabbit trail.

28

News Item1/13/13 7:44 PM
Kyle | Tucson  Find all comments by Kyle
I did no such thing. What was that you were saying about the ninth commandment?
27

News Item1/12/13 10:45 PM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Kyle wrote:
You're going off on a rabbit trail,
Nonsense. I am going to the root of your error. You have a problem with logic.

You repeatedly confuse
-the two different authors of the Bible and the Constitution and
-the different natures of the two documents and their contents.

In so doing, you are in grave danger of idolatry.

26

News Item1/12/13 10:05 PM
Kyle | Tucson  Find all comments by Kyle
You're going off on a rabbit trail, and you persistently refuse to answer my question about why my extension is illogical and extreme.
25

News Item1/12/13 7:19 PM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Kyle wrote:
However, from a strictly legal standpoint, the US Constitution does protect internet porn as free expression, even though the Biblical principle, as you say, makes it sinful.
and is God the author of sin? No!
Well, then let's be careful not to conflate
1. The Bible, which is God given, PERFECT, cannot err, and is our sufficient rule for faith and practice,
and,
2. A document written by fallible man, who cannot see the end from the beginning and would be horrified to see their words being used to peddle pornographic SINFUL materials.

Kyle wrote:
and by the same logic
No! you are conflating perfect the Word of God with the fallible words of men.

The Bible is reliable.

The Constitution is not.
As has been said before:

Temperance wrote:
change it!
24

News Item1/12/13 6:59 PM
Kyle | Connecticut  Find all comments by Kyle
Temperance wrote:
Please be specific with regard to the US Constitution's free speech protection of internet porn.
I never stated that the Constitution protects internet porn. I used internet as an example of how a principle (in this case prohibition of lust) regulates something that it doesn't necessarily foresee.

However, from a strictly legal standpoint, the US Constitution does protect internet porn as free expression, even though the Biblical principle, as you say, makes it sinful. It's the freedom of the press, even if the "press" has become somewhat of an outdated reference to an actual press.

Temperance wrote:
The Bible forbids all forms of sexual immorality and lust.
Well stated. I agree, and by the same logic the Constution prohibits all forms of restrictions on the right to keep and bear (that means "carry") arms.

Why are my extensions illogical and anachronistic?

23

News Item1/12/13 6:41 PM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Again,
"If the constitution did not create the rights and principles it protects, where did it find them?"

Please be specific with regard to the US Constitution's free speech protection of internet porn.
_________________________

Kyle wrote:
Speaking of straw men, I asked you about whether or not the Bible prohibits internet porn
Please see the clarity in my response again:-

Temperance wrote:
The Bible forbids all forms of sexual immorality and lust.
22

News Item1/12/13 6:35 PM
Kyle | Connecticut  Find all comments by Kyle
Temperance wrote:
If the constitution did not create the rights and principles it protects, where did it find them?
The right to posess weapons and use them in defense of self, just like the Law of Conservation of Momentum, was created by God in the beginning. We just do our best to describe them. The right protected by the second amendment wasn't waiting around for someone to describe it in order to exist any more than general relativity was waiting for Einstein before it was true. Government and law do not create rights. They exist to protect pre-existing rights.

The ability to carry a firearm either openly or surreptitiously is protected by the second amendment, even if that type of firearm was not available in 1791. The validity of that statement and the principle that the second amendment describes rise or fall together.

Speaking of straw men, I asked you about whether or not the Bible prohibits internet porn, since Jesus's listeners would have understood it relative to adultery with a live woman, and whether the first amendment protects any speech in the internet. You conflated them.

You said "I reject your illogical and anachronistic practical extensions." Again, why are my extensions illogical and anachronistic?

21

News Item1/12/13 5:26 PM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Kyle wrote:
The constitution did not create the rights it protects. It merely affirms them.
Kyle wrote:
It affirmed the principle, the same way the first amendment protects free speech on the internet.
The Bible didn't predict surgical abortion or internet porn. Does that mean it doesn't address them? It's about principle, nor necessarily it's expression in codified law.
Principles:
The Bible forbids all forms of sexual immorality and lust.
The US Constitution protects internet porn.

If the constitution did not create the rights and principles it protects, where did it find them?

Kyle wrote:
No, i don't concede anything of the sort. I denied that it was anachronistic, and you accused me of a straw man so I dropped the argument.
No, you did not deny that your practical extension was anachronistic. You cut and paste anachronistic out of context and applied it to a general principle, arguing against something I had not stated. A clear case of strawman argumentation.
I was not aware that you had dropped the argument. You simply failed to respond when an apology and request for forgiveness would have more appropriate in the light of the 9th commandment.
20

News Item1/12/13 4:56 PM
Kyle | Tucson  Find all comments by Kyle
No, i don't concede anything of the sort. I denied that it was anachronistic, and you accused me of a straw man so I dropped the argument.

The possessing of any type of weapon is adiaphorous- morally neutral. Until i use it to harm someone else, it remains an internal affair. That's the practical boundary. If you think otherwise, then let's arrest everyone who leaves a bar drunk, because they might drive drunk and kill someone. Better yet, let's arrest anyone who goes into a bar, because they might get drink and then drive drunk. Why not? Gun control is basically a thought crime.

Answer my question about the internet.

19

News Item1/12/13 10:18 AM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Kyle wrote:
What about my extension is illogical
Do I take it that you concede that your practical extension is anachronistic?

Tell me, what do you see as the logical limits of your own argument?

18

News Item1/12/13 9:37 AM
Kyle | Tucson  Find all comments by Kyle
What about my extension is illogical, and why wouldn't your reasoning also make the first amendment not apply to the internet?
17

News Item1/12/13 1:36 AM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
If you genuinely wish to have a discussion please respond to my actual comment accurately, and not by strawman argumentation such as this.

Kyle wrote:
Principles cannot be anachronistic. They are eternal.
______________________________________

Kyle wrote:
I might believe your statement if you advocated for gun control laws to pivot on the type of gun carried.
You mean like this:-
http://columbiaacs.blogspot.ca/2007/11/right-to-bear-ye-olde-arms.html
16

News Item1/12/13 1:18 AM
Kyle | Tucson  Find all comments by Kyle
Really? You really think i have a right to carry a musket?

Can i carry a musket on a commercial aircraft without going to jail for ten years? Can i carry a musket within a thousand feet of a school without going to jail for five years? Can i carry a musket at all without bribing the police (except in AZ, WY, VT, and Alaska)? If i live in Chicago, can i carry a musket from my kitchen to my garage without going to jail? I might believe your statement if you advocated for gun control laws to pivot on the type of gun carried.

It's a non-sequitor to say that one agrees with the right to bear arms. It's like saying that one agrees that acceleration due to gravity is 9.81 m/s2. It's a self existing reality that we try our best to describe with written laws. The long term survival of a society rises or falls on how well it's codified laws match natural law.

Principles cannot be anachronistic. They are eternal. On what basis is this extension illogical?

15

News Item1/12/13 12:57 AM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Yes, I agree in principle with your right to carry a musket.
I reject your illogical and anachronistic practical extensions.

Kyle wrote:
It affirmed the principle, the same way the first amendment protects free speech on the internet.
The Bible didn't predict surgical abortion or internet porn. Does that mean it doesn't address them? It's about principle, nor necessarily it's expression in codified law.
Laws requiring fee men and women to disarm or be thrown in jail violate the principle that the second amendment affirms. And yes, it existed long before 1791.
14

News Item1/12/13 12:53 AM
Kyle | Tucson  Find all comments by Kyle
It affirmed the principle, the same way the first amendment protects free speech on the internet.

The Bible didn't predict surgical abortion or internet porn. Does that mean it doesn't address them? It's about principle, nor necessarily it's expression in codified law.

Laws requiring fee men and women to disarm or be thrown in jail violate the principle that the second amendment affirms. And yes, it existed long before 1791.

13

News Item1/12/13 12:33 AM
Temperance  Find all comments by Temperance
Kyle wrote:
The constitution did not create the rights it protects. It merely affirms them.
So the constitution affirmed the right to bear semi-automatic weapons before they were invented? Strained logic indeed.
12

News Item1/12/13 12:24 AM
Kyle | Tucson  Find all comments by Kyle
It's hard to change. The fascist finds much more utility in ignoring it or explaining it away using strained logic. Gun control is to the constitution as Biologos is to Genesis.

Also, repealing the second amendment does not take away anyone's right to keep and bear arms. That's a common misconception. The constitution did not create the rights it protects. It merely affirms them.

11
There are a total of 30 user comments displayed | add new comment |Subscribe to these comments
Jump to Page : [1] 2 | last
Last PostTotal
Billy Graham, Louis Zamperini and the two nights in 1949 that...
mike from new york: " revealing how do you tell the difference between true faith..."
-5 min 274 
13 "Gay" Bakeries Deny Christian's Request for Pro-Traditional...
amz from burnaby b.c. canada: "why did you not just ask for a traditional wedding..."
-34 min 11 
Pope Francis snubs the Dalai Lama at Nobel Peace Prize event
john uk from wales: " jim lincoln excerpt from ht..."
-2 hrs 16 


Philadelphia Faithful Church


Loud Salvation
Arnold Brevick

Tim James
The World and Me

FreeGraceRadio.com
Sunday - AM
Transcript!Play! | MP3

Bob Vincent
Strange Dreams

Strange Events: Christ's Birth
Grace Presbyterian Church
Play! | MP3

Ken Wimer
The Giver of Life

Gospel According to Luke
Shreveport Grace Church
Play! | MP3

Sponsor:
NCFIC Christmas Super Sale

Three great deals in the NCFIC store. Free shipp­ing. Guar­ant­eed by Chr­istm­as!
www.ncfic.org

Sermon: The Defilement of Divorce
Jonathan Modene

SPONSOR | 3,800+

SPONSOR





                   
If we would have God open His treasury, we must open ours. ... T. V. Moore

City: Las Vegas, NV
Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal
MOBILE
iPhone + iPad
Church App New!
Android New!
Church App New!
Kindle + Nook New!
BlackBerry
Windows Mobile, Nokia
Chromecast TV
ROKU TV
Pebble Smartwatch
Kindle Reader


HELP
Knowledgebase
Broadcasters
Listeners
Q&A
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

FOLLOW
Weekly Newsletter
Staff Picks Feed
Site Notices
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
SERVICES | ALL
Local Church Finder | Info
MP3 Play & Download
Mobile Apps
Podcasting
Video Support
Live Webcasting
Transcription Service
HIFI Option
Business Cards
SOLO | MINI | Domains
Favorites
QR Codes
24x7 Radio Stream

INTEGRATION
Sermon Browser
HTML Codes
WordPress
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword
SOAP API

BATCH
Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Upload via Email
Auto-Upload Sermons
Auto-Blog Import
Picasa | FTP | Dropbox
ABOUT US
SermonAudio.com is the largest library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide. All broadcasters must adhere to the Articles of Faith.

Our Services | Testimonials
Broadcast With Us!
Support Us
Advertising | Local Ads
CONTACT
info@sermonaudio.com
Copyright © 2014 SermonAudio.com.