Lulz! He's referring to the biblical stories, of course, which means he's humoring those of you who actually believe that rot.
Your admission that you 'removed' yourself is the only evidence that is necessary. That removal constitutes a 'removal' from that position.
This isnt part of the 'sucker' family, as those who operate in the futility of their own minds...purse your lips, and relax....purse your lips, and relax......now swim off
Who is talking about Marx and Hitler? How about Bart Ehrman? He comes from a devout background including evangelical seminary. He is the chairman of the Dept. of Religious Studies at the Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and has written a bunch of very interesting books regarding scripture, it's origins, problems and abuses. Good, sincere scholarship. It's sort of hilarious when I ask about the study of secular sources and alternative faith traditions and you offer up early church fathers and Josephus. I'm trying to maintain my image of you as a serious and credible partner in conversation. Why would you consider my not falling over in agreement with you as "sniping"? Why would you use Hitler, Marx, Josephus and the early fathers as sources for credible secular biblical scholarship? That shows a defensiveness that is beneath you.
Hey, look at the nice fishy! I wonder where that came from? Oh yeah... We're entering the Age of Aquarius now, though. It's time to put away your fishy and come up with something new, just as they did before with the bull and the lamb, i.e. the ages of Taurus and Aries, respectively. You unwitting sun worshiper you
"ban·ish (bnsh) tr.v. ban·ished, ban·ish·ing, ban·ish·es 1. To force to leave a country or place by official decree; exile. 2. To drive away; expel: We banished all our doubts and fears." You were the official who made the decree that you were removing yourself from the position. You forced yourself to leave the position. No-one held a gun at your head. It was your decision, and you were the OFFICIAL (Pastor) who issued the decree.
Rather, 'wittingly' and 'willingly' a Son worshipper... BTW, who is the gayish looking guy, with the feathers & panty hose, in your avatar? The 'one' whom you follow?! Now that is 'somebody's son' worshipping....
To make an official decree that someone is guilty of 'trolling' requires Moderator action. Are you a Moderator? No? Then all you are expressing is an unofficial opinion.
A complete and total fail. Both definitions indicate an outside agency acting against an object. No decree was issued, no force was brought to bear. It was an autonomous decision, and you are a shamelss charlatan and fraud. You are as pitiable a witness for any God that anyone would be drawn to worship as one could possibly imagine.
Only through your interpretation. There may be an inference of an outside force, but there is absolutely no direct statement mandating that said action of banishment be by an outside force. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Self-banished "Self`-ban´ished a. 1. Exiled voluntarily."
Yep, the Sun is the reason for the Son. I'm just not sure why you'd bother worshiping it once you've realised that.
He's very into "official decrees" on this page. The good news is, according to Inc, if you are a kleptomaniac, you aren't a thief until you're caught! Of course, Christ saw things completely differently, according to scripture. He thought the thought made one as guilty as the crime. But who cares about scripture, right?
Posting a definition of a hyphenated word you never used doesn't get you out. Not only do you lie to others, you lie to yourself. You have left any concept of God far behind you.
