Update XXI: "Scientific Facts Are Not Hard And Fast Rules."

[7,052,770]

I've been meaning to point out that there's no rule (that I'm aware of) that would prohibit Uber drivers from wearing a tie. If that's a hangup for Bushie, just drive for Uber and dress how you want.

Bushie, why don't you apply and just try it for a couple days? Because Uber lets you make your own schedule, it's the perfect stopgap job, and if you hate it after 2 days, you can quit and never do it again.

[7,052,770]

I'm looking forward to seeing what happens in the job search tomorrow.  I'm getting close to getting another CAD interview.  I also wonder how long it will take for Macy's to get back with me.  Who knows, maybe I could move up the corporate ladder at Macy's.  Even though, it'd be a filler job, I'm going to put my heart and soul into it throughout my entire work shift.  It would be income and a legitimate way of getting much needed income.

Why do you want to work at Macys? Why won't you at least try the Uber thing, in which you can set your own hours and dress code and quit more easily than any other job?

There's literally no reason not to give Uber a brief try. If you hate it, you've lost nothing and still got a little positive cash flow from it.

[7,052,770]

Why won't you at least try the Uber thing, in which you can set your own hours and dress code and quit more easily than any other job?

There's literally no reason not to give Uber a brief try. If you hate it, you've lost nothing and still got a little positive cash flow from it.

^^^

If you're getting desperate for something to do as a job, (and obviously you are if you would even consider a sales job), why won't you at least consider Uber, where you can start right away, set your own hours, your own dress code, and most importantly, can actually do the job?

Remember, if you hate it, it's easier to quit than any other job, so there's no drawback at all. Are you just being obstinate on purpose?

[7,052,770]

Why won't you at least try the Uber thing, in which you can set your own hours and dress code and quit more easily than any other job?

There's literally no reason not to give Uber a brief try. If you hate it, you've lost nothing and still got a little positive cash flow from it.

^^^

If you're getting desperate for something to do as a job, (and obviously you are if you would even consider a sales job), why won't you at least consider Uber, where you can start right away, set your own hours, your own dress code, and most importantly, can actually do the job?

Remember, if you hate it, it's easier to quit than any other job, so there's no drawback at all. Are you just being obstinate on purpose?

I'm just leery of letting the wrong people into my car.  I'm talking about thugs whose sole intention is to do me harm.  Does Uber screen their clients?  I know that's an outrageous fear, but it's something I think about.  Also, if I did do this, they would have to listen to Christian music for the entire ride.  No exceptions.

Signing up for Uber with their phones (using their names and credit cards) and hailing a Uber driver is much too complicated for "thugs." There's really no worry there. And the music, as long as you aren't blaring it, shouldn't be an issue.

I really don't see any drawback to trying it. If you hate it, quit. If you find a better job, quit. At least you'll make a little money off it.

[7,052,770]

I wouldn't say it's too complicated for those people. It just takes a few years for tech/nerd culture to filter out. We saw this same phenomenon with the facialbook many years ago. Today, those people outfacial everybody else. It's not outrageous to suggest that the same thing might happen the Uber within a few more years. But, as of 2015, I don't believe they have discovered the Uber yet.

I didn't mean that it's too hard or esoteric for them, just that if you're looking to mug someone, there are a lot easier ways to do it than hail an Uber driver.

[7,052,770]

It may not be possible to contrive a more false statement than "Everyone deserves Hell."

Why would you believe such a despicable thing, Bushie? I deserve to go to Heaven and so do you. And so does everyone. We are all just products of our genetic makeup and environment.

Even Hitler's sins don't warrant eternal punishment. Thousands of years, sure, who knows, but not an infinite amount of time.

[7,052,770]

Bushie, are you aware of how far out of the mainstream your beliefs are on Revelation/End Times/etc.?

Like I realize they're pretty standard for your church, but do you know that most scholarly analysis believes Revelation refers to the ancient persecution of Christians by the Roman Empire (after all 666 would have been an easily-recognizable Roman numberplay reference to Nero), and not to future events/the end of the world? And all that "Antichrist" stuff isn't even in Revelation...

[7,052,770]

Bushie, are you aware of how far out of the mainstream your beliefs are on Revelation/End Times/etc.?

Like I realize they're pretty standard for your church, but do you know that most scholarly analysis believes Revelation refers to the ancient persecution of Christians by the Roman Empire (after all 666 would have been an easily-recognizable Roman numberplay reference to Nero), and not to future events/the end of the world? And all that "Antichrist" stuff isn't even in Revelation...

Whether it's in the mainstream or not is irrelevant. Also, Revelation is not the only prophecy book.  The book of Daniel in the Old Testament chapters 7-12 are also vivid prophecy chapters.

I disagree completely. What makes your few people right and the majority of historians and scholars wrong? And don't give me the "I believe what I believe and won't consider changing" line. God gave you a brain and critical thinking skills. When you blindly and rotely believe something outside of the mainstream, you should at least be open to reading what the experts (a good sampling of them, not just a cherry-picked few) have to say.

I'm not trying to single you out -- trust me, I live in the most Baptist state in the country so I've known lots of people who honestly believe that fringe viewpoint about Revelation/Antichrist/End Times/etc. and have no idea that it's just not supported by actual evidence. If you could come to that same conclusion after examining the actual scholarly discourse on the subject, it would bleed positively into your life. You might worry a little more about your health when you realize that nothing in the Bible suggests that the world will end in the next 10 years, instead of worrying about whether the prime minister of Greece (!) is an evil madman taking over the world with Satan's help.

[7,052,770]

Have you prayed and ask God for clues about the Antichrist?

Actually, yes I have.  He, with the help of Irvin Baxter and his team, have opened my eyes to current events clues to Biblical prophecy.  Not only the Antichrist, but the Israel/Palestine peace deal, the prophecy of the seven trumpets (more on that in a little bit), the rapture of the church, and the battle of Armageddon which is coming.

You realize charlatans have been peddling this "the prophecies PROVE the end is near!!" for over 1,000 years? Generation after generation of gullible Christians keep believing that this time it's really right...

[7,052,770]

Seriously? I go to an evangelical church and have NEVER heard anyone talk about this end times crap. It must be more of a Southern thing. But I always assumed it was pretty fringe even amongst conservative Christians.

Most Southern Baptists believe in this, at least in my observation. I don't think many other denominations do at all, and virtually no serious Bible scholars.

I remember a Baptist preacher insisting to me one time (friend of a friend) that the Gospel of John, epistles of John, and Revelation were all written by the same person, who was also the Apostle John. I'm certainly no expert, but I do know that has been conclusively disproven by linguistic analysis. I just don't understand why anyone would continue to believe that when it's been demonstrated to be false. However, if the epistles of John (which very briefly give the Bible's only mention of an "Antichrist") are accepted to have nothing to do whatsoever with the Revelation of some other guy named John, then the whole flashy End Times story falls apart...

[7,052,770]

More on the prophecy of the seven trumpets from Revelation.  This is also from Irvin Baxter.

There were/are seven trumpets (or seven major events in history leading up to the Battle of Armageddon the Second Coming of Jesus to the earth.

Here is what I believe:

1st trumpet:  World War I (Revelation 8:7)
2nd trumpet: World War II (Revelation 8:8-9)
3rd trumpet: Chernobyl (Revelation 8:10-11)
4th trumpet: Unsure of what this one was (Revelation 8:12-13)
5th trumpet: Saddam Hussein destroying Kuwait in Operation Desert Shield (Revelation 9:1-12)
6th trumpet: World War 3, which I believe is the current war with ISIS, (Revelation 9:13-21)
7th trumpet: The Battle of Armageddon (Revelation 11:15-19)

So, yes, I believe we are at the very start of the Third World War, also known as the Sixth Trumpet War by the End Time ministry team.

wut

Why would you believe any of this? Because some charlatan told you so?

How is the Gulf War I in any way on the level of World War II? Why not the Iran-Iraq War, or the Congo War of the 1990s? Those were a whole lot worse -- does God not care when they don't involve Americans? Or should I say that Irvin Baxter thinks that anyone who knows that those two wars happened is unlikely to buy his line of bull?

[7,052,770]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Use your critical thinking skills Bushie. Is this really a foretelling of World War I, or could this be applied to just about anything?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, there's nothing that positively or even kinda-halfway links this to World War II. Just completely made up by some snakeoilsalesman out for money.

[7,052,770]

"Chernobyl" is apparently the Ukrainian word for the wormwood flower, and wormwood is specifically name-dropped in Revelation:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

However, this doesn't really describe what happened there very well -- sounds more like an asteroid impact or something.

[7,052,770]

Harry - you are not going to change my mind or even cause me to think.

Why are you against thinking? You yourself have agreed that believing or not believing in certain interpretations of Revelation has nothing to do with one's salvation. God gave you deduction and critical thinking skills, and it's a slap into his face not to use them. Aren't you at least intellectually curious as to how these books are interpreted by scholars?

I believe what the Bible says more than I believe what any man says.

Like, no you don't. You believe what Irvin Baxter says over what the Bible says.

The Bible was written by 40 men, but authored by God Himself. That point cannot be disproven.  

No one on this thread is trying to. I'm just demonstrating that Irvin Baxter and all End Times nonsense is a disprovable fringe scam, not that the Bible is.

The Bible is the ultimate authority on life on earth and after.  There is no scholar who is above the Bible.  God authored the Bible and since no one can dispute that God is the ultimate authority about the existence of the universe (which He created), then I am going to believe God and His Word over some obsolete scholar.

Irvin Baxter IS the obsolete scholar! (Not sure if he's actually a scholar, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.)

And, yes, the Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John, 1,2,3 John, and Revelation.  Nobody can seriously question that.

Literally everyone who knows anyone about the Bible questions that. They were written at different times, in different styles, from different perspectives. You can read more about it here if you are interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Johannine_works (I know you aren't.)

Do not talk to me about it anymore.  You are not going to change my mind.  Ever.  Period.

Why are you so defensive? You yourself say that you're a 100% lock for Heaven anyway, so what is so scary about learning what scholars believe about the Bible? Especially for 100% proven things like the different authors of John, the John letters, and Revelation...

[7,052,770]

I believe what the Bible says more than I believe what any man says.

No. You clearly believe Irvin Baxter more than the Bible. You can't even really articulate your beliefs beyond "Irvin Baxter said the Bible says."

Exactly! The Bible says nothing about World War I or World War II, but a man named Irvin Baxter says that it actually does. Bushie believes the man, not the Bible.

[7,052,770]

What "man" says: The Gospel of John, the Epistles of John, and Revelation are all written by the same person, who was also one of the 12 Apostles. This is a traditional viewpoint.
What the Bible says: Neither these books, nor any other books, identify the Apostle John as the author.
What Bushie believes: The Apostle John wrote all 5 of the books. He defensively and angrily points this out and says that no one can believe otherwise. Bushie derives his belief from Man, rather than from the Bible.

Bushie, will you either admit that it's possible that the Apostle didn't write those books (after all, belief on the authorship of these books has nothing to do with one's salvation, according to you and everyone else), or that you don't necessary always believe in the Bible over Man?

[7,052,770]

If Irvin Baxter said that the First Trumpet, or all of them, is actually a reference to climate change, would Bushie all of a sudden decide that global warming is real?

Reading the passages from Revelation, that's a much more reasonable explanation than thinking they somehow reference the World Wars or a war with the Muslim-Orthodox-Catholic alliance...

[7,052,770]

Bushie, why are you so defensive about the Apostle John not authoring the Gospel of John, the letters of John, and Revelation?

Nothing in the Bible says that he is the author. Man says that, and you believe the Bible, not Man. And after all, it's a "tertiary issue" anyway that means very little. So why are you so offended by the idea that virtually every scholar believes the authors are distinct people?

[7,052,770]

So are you just not doing to give Uber a shot? You'd really rather go through yet another miserable call center for a few weeks/months than just to try Uber?

[7,052,770]

Bushie, are these Wikipedia pages interesting to you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_authorship
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis

They are intellectually fascinating to me, and I don't really even care about the Bible that much. I can't imagine someone as interested in the Bible as you are wouldn't be even more interested in this subject.

And yet ... I suspect this subject is going to get you all bent out of shape and defensive. You'll insist that you believe that Moses wrote the books and that you will never, ever consider anything otherwise.

Why is that? Nothing in any of these articles implies the untruth of the Bible, so that's out, and you yourself agree that one's salvation is not in danger simply by using literary analysis to challenge the traditional (ie, Man-defined) authorship of certain books. Do you just have loyalty to the pastor who originally told you that it's a 100% fact that Moses wrote the first 5 books and you don't want to consider that he might be wrong?

[7,052,770]

Bushie, are these Wikipedia pages interesting to you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_authorship
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis

They are intellectually fascinating to me, and I don't really even care about the Bible that much. I can't imagine someone as interested in the Bible as you are wouldn't be even more interested in this subject.

And yet ... I suspect this subject is going to get you all bent out of shape and defensive. You'll insist that you believe that Moses wrote the books and that you will never, ever consider anything otherwise.

Why is that? Nothing in any of these articles implies the untruth of the Bible, so that's out, and you yourself agree that one's salvation is not in danger simply by using literary analysis to challenge the traditional (ie, Man-defined) authorship of certain books. Do you just have loyalty to the pastor who originally told you that it's a 100% fact that Moses wrote the first 5 books and you don't want to consider that he might be wrong?

I've always believed Moses wrote all five books of the Pentateuch.  I don't really see how it could be anybody else, except for the aforementioned Deuteronomy 34.  The writing styles are very similar in all five books.  I've always grown up with the that belief.  I guess it is possible, just like John, but I don't see how it could be anybody else in either scenario.  Mind you, I come from a very conservative theological background.  Perhaps the difference in opinion comes in with the conservative vs. liberal viewpoints.  I'm not saying I'm 100% correct, but you shouldn't be saying you're 100% correct, either.  If you expect me to at least ponder your viewpoint, you have to at least ponder my viewpoint.

Remember, I don't claim to be 100% correct on these things, nor do I refuse to consider any alternative viewpoints -- I have no personal opinion on who wrote the Pentateuch, nor the books labeled John, since I'm nowhere near an expert on doing literary analysis, and I don't know a word of Hebrew or Ancient Greek anyway.

I just find this stuff interesting. Maybe it really was Moses and the John, but since the majority of experts don't think that, I'll go with them. I try to always defer to experts on matters I am not qualified to have my own opinions on.

[7,052,770]

Wait, I thought trans fats were banned (and not in anything that people ate anyway).

Apparently I was wrong about #1, but that's pretty outrageous of Braum's to still include them in any of their foods. After learning this, I'm completely disinterested in ever eating there.