Bob Andrew Piercy

Here’s where I stand on abortion.

@Ben_signal13 @AndrewHilaryUS No I suggested 3% interest, not 3% down. You’re not tracking in the slightest nor seemingly attempting to comprehend/track with what’s actually been said.

@bobda @AndrewHilaryUS No what, you're asking for is some way to only front up 3% of the purchase price, have ownership, and make the bank liable for 97% of the property value.. Why on earth would do they do that when they can make you 100% liable and use the house as collateral? Your idea is stupid.

They should invent home ownership for people who don’t care about the value of their asset but just want to live in a house.

I'm not suggesting a reverse mortgage. In a reverse mortgage the bank pays you your estimated equity in advance monthly payments. That's not what the OP was asking for and it's not what I suggested could be a possible business opportunity. That's an existing business opportunity that already exists.

@bobda @AndrewHilaryUS So if what you're suggesting is a reverse mortgage, arrange a meeting with a bank and ask for one, what you're missing is it's their money, they will offer you the service they deem least risky to them, aka the mortgage.

I imagine if such a thing existed the terms would be similar to a reverese mortgage If the property falls into disrepair (unsafe wiring, roof leaks causing structural damage, major code violations, etc.), the lender can declare the loan “due and payable.” This means you must repay the full balance (usually by selling or refinancing), or they can start foreclosure.

@bobda @AndrewHilaryUS Christ, what's stopping me from making value sinking amendments to the property? What if the property goes into negative equity? The bank just let's you do it?

@Ben_signal13 @AndrewHilaryUS OP: house Me: house You: plot with a shed huh? I think maybe you lost the plot, by shifting the focus to it.

@bobda @AndrewHilaryUS I then convert the plot into a shed with a swimming pool and the bank will just let me?

@Rothmus Even at over 6 figures I wince when I spend $7 on Taco Bell and pick it up myself.

Me listening to openclaw encourage me before submitting an app

@lilymistress225 lol, well I meant when she threatened him, but ya that too

@bobda Haha yeah, Kelly LeBrock didn’t break for a second… that’s some dangerously convincing “character work” right there 😏

In Weird Science (1985), Kelly LeBrock said when she did the kissing scene with sixteen-year-old Ilan Mitchell-Smith, he got carried away and stuck his tongue down her throat. Afterwards she told him: "If you ever do that again, I'm going to kick your ass!"

@ldsfilmguy I won't be there, my faith is in Christ alone.

@bobda I guess you'll have a friend to argue with in hell. See you there

Basement dwellers like this love showing how stupid they are. 🤣

@ldsfilmguy “I call people names and claim it’s fact” Yes, you being wicked is a fact.

@bobda Not my fault you don't like facts. 🤷 Have a good one!

@ldsfilmguy Way to double down

@bobda It's brighter than whatever 2 watt bulb you're dealing with.

@Notwokenow More houses = more satisfied demand which in turn = more affordable housing People aren't longing for those houses, those are the houses that end up maximizing space/value and end up being an option when government is doing a piss poor job managing their jurisdiction.

Someone explain to me the attraction of giant houses with tiny yards and being so close to your neighbor that you can hear them doing their business in the bathroom. I don’t get it.

You can also add D&C 123:17 to that "supporting" scripture list. I'm sure there's more as well. It's interesting seeing them say "you don't understand what 2 Nephi means" and then providing a 2nd verse that confirms the same doctrine with different words that they still swear they don't believe. ..do all things that lie in our power...to see the salvation of God" D&C 123:17

Contrary to Mormon teachings we are “saved by grace after all we can do” (2 nephi 25:23) We are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9) Not by works of the law or any works at all. Galatians 5:4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. You are severed from christ , and the christ you proclaim is not the christ of the scriptures … your christ cannot save you. He’s no different than the false christ of Islam or any other false religion. Your religion places a heavy burden on you that you can never live up to, but the Christ of the Bible says “come to me all who are weary and heavy laden , I will give you rest! My yoke is easy and my burden is light!” The true Christ did the work you will never be able to. Ever.

@AlexHam1111 @DeekUsa @5Solas2 It doesn't. Obedience to God is what matters. If you leave your marriage because you feel like it you're diobeying God. That's serious. What you just said is no different then saying "if you didn't gouge your eye out it undercuts how bad lust really is"

@bobda @DeekUsa @5Solas2 1st paragraph is great... seriously well written. I just can't go with the second part. If God says, "Really, really consider what you will do to your spouse-make her an adulteress" but then says it was just all hyperbole, it undercuts the seriousness of remaining married.

Do you agree or disagree? What are your thoughts on divorce and remarriage?

In Mark 10 and Matthew 19 the Pharisees then come to try and trap Jesus. This is after the Sermon on the mount they assume "ah ha! He disagrees with the Old Testament where Moses told us divorce is permissible we've got him now!" Jesus again corrects them and explains they're not understanding marriage/divorce correctly. Divorce isn't a tool to release the selfish, it's a provision for a broken world in need of Jesus. His words on divorce aren't shackles for those who've been sinned against, but rather warnings for those considering sinning.

He's saying to a married person considering a divorce, "this is serious. Marriage should be a life long thing. The two become one flesh. That's how I designed it to be. Consider that before you give her that write of divorce that I made a legal provision for in the Old Testament because I know how messy imperfect relationships are. I know what it's like to be betrayed. I divorced Israel because of her idolatry, but consider that your choice will likely end with her sleeping with someone who is not you, and I brought you two together for only you to be with each other. Consider that its not what's best for you. Consider that it's not what's best for them. Consider the implications of not submitting to me in this." It's not however God's instructions to those that have found themselves on the other side of that situation with their ex alreadying having broken the covenant anyway.

@AlexHam1111 @DeekUsa @5Solas2 I don't feel like applying a standard hermeneutic is particularly unique, but thank you I think.

@bobda @DeekUsa @5Solas2 I will give you that you have a unique way of reading this text. Most people who believe marriage after divorce is allowed simply say it should be rendered, "makes her the victim of adultery." While that rendering fits their theology, it abuses the actual text.

Sometimes both parties in a divorce want out and need to hear what Jesus is saying. Sometimes not. However, today, just like in Jesus day, both parties don't have to agree on divorce, it can be a unilateral decision (though in Jesus day it could predominantly only be the man's unilateral decision)

The structure is exactly the same between "gouge out your eye" and "causes her to commit adultery" "You have heard that....but I say..." Jesus is using hyberbole to emphasis how serious these things are. Marriage is very serious. However He is NOT addressing those who are the ones who have been left and giving them instruction, he's addressing the ones considering leaving and saying reconsider your sin.