Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Al Doggity on August 17, 2015, 02:32:49 PM
-
The people in this report- how do you think they rationalize what they do? Do you think there is a possibility that they are actual believers who think they are doing the work of God? Or do you think that they are atheists and scam artists and it ends there? Do you think they might have a more complicated view of religion? Some of them are literally putting people's lives in jeopardy. If you are in any way religious, it seems like stealing in the name of the lord- on such a massive scale, no less- would be hard to cope with mentally. I have been mostly agnostic since my teens, and I was still well into my 20s before I could say "oh my god" without feeling like I was going to hell.
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
-
The people in this report- how do you think they rationalize what they do? Do you think there is a possibility that they are actual believers who think they are doing the work of God? Or do you think that they are atheists and scam artists and it ends there? Do you think they might have a more complicated view of religion? Some of them are literally putting people's lives in jeopardy. If you are in any way religious, it seems like stealing in the name of the lord- on such a massive scale, no less- would be hard to cope with mentally. I have been mostly agnostic since my teens, and I was still well into my 20s before I could say "oh my god" without feeling like I was going to hell.
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
I think many of them started off with good intentions. But somewhere along the lines, Greed took a foothold on them. Eventually, Greed took over.
-
They are brilliant
-
The people in this report- how do you think they rationalize what they do? Do you think there is a possibility that they are actual believers who think they are doing the work of God? Or do you think that they are atheists and scam artists and it ends there? Do you think they might have a more complicated view of religion? Some of them are literally putting people's lives in jeopardy. If you are in any way religious, it seems like stealing in the name of the lord- on such a massive scale, no less- would be hard to cope with mentally. I have been mostly agnostic since my teens, and I was still well into my 20s before I could say "oh my god" without feeling like I was going to hell.
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
Why does one need to be an atheist to scam people? There are probably millions of believers who hurt people, i.e., scam people out of money and rape little boys.
Don't need to be an atheist do those things. Can easily be religious. Ive never scammed or hurt anyone, despite my atheism.
-
Why does one need to be an atheist to scam people? There are probably millions of believers who hurt people, i.e., scam people out of money and rape little boys.
Don't need to be an atheist do those things. Can easily be religious. Ive never scammed or hurt anyone, despite my atheism.
You don't have to be an atheist and I didn't say or imply that. If you had read the whole paragraph, you would see that I identified myself as agnostic and I am not a bad person. I was not equating practicing a religious faith with being good or ethical, but the point of the statement was that people who do genuinely believe in God do have a reverence for the concept that is usually distinct from whether or not they live ethical lives.
Last year, it came out that this hockey player got robbed blind by his parents who had control over his finances. Now, just because you don't steal your kid's life savings doesn't mean you're a good parent. However, if you DO steal your kid's life savings, it puts you in a certain monstrous territory because even a hardened criminal should consider their own kid off-limits. Likewise, anyone is capable of theft or child abuse, regardless of their belief system. But if the theft is literally exploiting that belief system and others who believe in it, then it makes me curious about how a religious person rationalizes it.
-
You don't have to be an atheist and I didn't say or imply that. If you had read the whole paragraph, you would see that I identified myself as agnostic and I am not a bad person. I was not equating practicing a religious faith with being good or ethical, but the point of the statement was that people who do genuinely believe in God do have a reverence for the concept that is usually distinct from whether or not they live ethical lives.
Last year, it came out that this hockey player got robbed blind by his parents who had control over his finances. Now, just because you don't steal your kid's life savings doesn't mean you're a good parent. However, if you DO steal your kid's life savings, it puts you in a certain monstrous territory because even a hardened criminal should consider their own kid off-limits. Likewise, anyone is capable of theft or child abuse, regardless of their belief system. But if the theft is literally exploiting that belief system and others who believe in it, then it makes me curious about how a religious person rationalizes it.
Sure, back peddle now.
-
Hard to sympathize with the poor folks getting suckered in here. Impossible, really. This level of stupidity should be costly.
-
Hard to sympathize with the poor folks getting suckered in here. Impossible, really. This level of stupidity should be costly.
I don't have much sympathy for them, either. But, my family was pentecostal and i went to pentecostal elementary school and catholic high school and there is an idea of giving a percentage of your income to be blessed in the future hammered into the flock.
-
The people in this report- how do you think they rationalize what they do? Do you think there is a possibility that they are actual believers who think they are doing the work of God? Or do you think that they are atheists and scam artists and it ends there? Do you think they might have a more complicated view of religion? Some of them are literally putting people's lives in jeopardy. If you are in any way religious, it seems like stealing in the name of the lord- on such a massive scale, no less- would be hard to cope with mentally. I have been mostly agnostic since my teens, and I was still well into my 20s before I could say "oh my god" without feeling like I was going to hell.
There are televangelists who use Jesus to serve their own ends.
Those people are sinning.
Then there are televangelists who use T.V. to serve Jesus.
Those people are worshipping God.
....Just because someone is asking for money does not make them corrupt.
-
There are televangelists who use Jesus to serve their own ends.
Those people are sinning.
Then there are televangelists who use T.V. to serve Jesus.
Those people are worshipping God.
....Just because someone is asking for money does not make them corrupt.
How do you distinguish real from fake?
Can you give me an example of an honest Jesus server?
-
There are televangelists who use Jesus to serve their own ends.
Those people are sinning.
Then there are televangelists who use T.V. to serve Jesus.
Those people are worshipping God.
....Just because someone is asking for money does not make them corrupt.
What televangelists don't ask for donations or sell you something to make themselves money?
Seems to me that if you request money from the people watching, then you are in some way, not serving Jesus, but yourself.
-
I don't have much sympathy for them, either. But, my family was pentecostal and i went to pentecostal elementary school and catholic high school and there is an idea of giving a percentage of your income to be blessed in the future hammered into the flock.
Funny, I've been critical of these types since I was kid, back when I was still a nominal Christian.
Even then I recall my faithful family/friends unwilling to call them out, even the most obvious (Swaggart, Bakker, Gene Scott, etc.). They'd be so quick to defend - a knee-jerk thing - like they were afraid to incur God's wrath had they been wrong.
My experience with Christians is that they often live in fear; and many bask in ignorance, as NONE of them are even aware OT God could be vicious and unforgiving. Absolute WORST thing they could do is read the bible.
-
-
and the many monkeys in America and abroad who are supporting them.....I don't blame these "Preachers"
-
God needs nothing, least of all money.
Don't "give 'till it hurts", that's BS. If you give, give in silence and within your means, expecting nothing in return from God or anyone. Give not until it hurts but instead give to relieve the hurt of others.
Televangelists and others of their kind are scum.
My words are wasted, I know. People will judge the words of the Christ by those that twist them to serve not God, but themselves. I have no fear of God nor do I bask in ignorance. I am here to speak what I hold true and if any would belittle me for it, there is nothing I can do about that.
So many ministers have a degree in theology. A co-worker once said to me, "Who are you but an illiterate man with no formal training in theology to question such learned men when it comes to the Bible?"
I replied that the Pharisees said much the same about Jesus of Nazareth..."Who is this man? The son of a carpenter? And we, we are trained men of the faith!"
I suppose that I could be as some here are and paint with a broad brush but like them, I may find that I have painted myself into a corner and that the brush I have been using is my own self.
Again, I waste my words here. I mean none of you harm and neither does my faith in Jesus of Nazareth cause you harm. One of the finest men I have ever known was an Atheist. John often spoke of how if ever he were to believe in anything it would be in the goodness of the message of the Nazarene.
I choose to believe but in doing so I will not belittle those that choose not to. Atheists are good people, some being far more Christian in their public (and doubtless private) lives than those that claim the faith. But you men already know this.
I cannot say to any here, "be well". For right now I really wouldn't mean it. Why should I lie to you? I won't.
Is it a broad brush when you're simply addressing your personal circle, and each and every one fits your specific description?
Not sure who else "some here" could be is all.
-
One thing I'll say about Mormons, their folks volunteer or are put on some lowly stipend. The actual finances are managed by a Jewish firm I believe.
Like an earlier poster said, most probably start out good and then get greedy. Not many people do bad things and think they are assholes for doing them. Most justify it somehow.
-
One thing I'll say about Mormons, their folks volunteer or are put on some lowly stipend. The actual finances are managed by a Jewish firm I believe.
Like an earlier poster said, most probably start out good and then get greedy. Not many people do bad things and think they are assholes for doing them. Most justify it somehow.
Most Mormons I've encountered are incredibly friendly, helpful, and moral. Their theology is batshit crazy is all, so it's just a matter of, what, intelligence? Culture?
Probably both, I'd imagine.
-
Creflo Dollar best name for a preacher lol his
sap suckers parishners bought him a $65 Million dollar plane so he can do the lord's work at close to the speed of sound. !!
Pastor Creflo Dollar might get his $65 million private jet after all
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/06/03/pastor-creflo-dollar-might-get-his-65-million-private-jet-after-all/
-
Most Mormons I've encountered are incredibly friendly, helpful, and moral. Their theology is batshit crazy is all, so it's just a matter of, what, intelligence? Culture?
Probably both, I'd imagine.
No shit. If it wasn't for their theology, no boozing and fornicating, I might become one myself. :D
There will come a point when you'll have to join one of these movements, or be killed by another. I may just convert to Judaism. Those fuckers always get what they want.
-
Are you not in my personal circle? Am I not in yours? Do we not know each other by our words to here? I would say that to a great degree, yes. Descriptions can be like a blanket.
I will not smother you with something that I know does not suit you. As is more than evidenced I can be as much an ass as any here and so I will give ground to you and cease my prattle. I don't care what shoes any here choose to wear or not wear. Belief in Jesus is not a prerequisite for friendship.
Ok, fair enough. Specifically addressing family and friends, though, not folks here. You, Coach, MoS, wes, maybe chaos (aj, too, I'd hope), perhaps others - all Christians I very much respect, but not sure what that means. Do we need permission, or clearance, for impulsive replies?
I'm criticizing them, not you, and I'd like to be able to speak my mind, as this shit REALLY bugs me - as much as Obama bugs Coach. No personal insult intended, just as I don't take it personally when y'all step on my cybertoes.
So, apologies where necessary, but Jeeeeeeeze, we are talking about evangelists here. I'd hope WE ALL could see through this bullshit.
Be well, my friend.
-
I enjoy Al Doggity's threads, seems like a principled, thoughtful fellow
in general, people adopt belief systems that justify their behaviour, it's a like mental strategy that allows a person to function
you may be astonished if you look carefully into the larger system that these people operate in, it gets a lot worse!
-
No shit. If it wasn't for their theology, no boozing and fornicating, I might become one myself. :D
There will come a point when you'll have to join one of these movements, or be killed by another. I may just convert to Judaism. Those fuckers always get what they want.
Very much respect the Jewish faith/people as well, but here's the thing: They don't even have the 'new and improved' NT God. Their Guy is an (please ignore, my faithful brethren) ASSHOLE! They got Deuteronomy God with the indiscriminate smiting.
But the Jews I've met know their scripture better than anyone. I've learned much from them. Just got an issue with The Word is all.
-
How do you distinguish real from fake?
Jesus tells us that we are able to discern real disciples from fake disciples based on their behaviors....
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits." Matthew 7:15-20
So... how does the person behave? What type of message are they preaching? Is the person preaching about sin, hell, repentance, and the crucifixion of Jesus, or is the person preaching about positive thinking, wealthiness, healthiness, and success? Is the person walking like Jesus or just talking like Jesus?
Can you give me an example of an honest Jesus server?
I assume that you are limiting this question to televangelists.
No one is perfect... not even sincere Christians doing their best to serve God.
But there have been some honest Jesus servers/televangelists.
Jerry Fallwell. Billy Graham. Charles Stanley. To name a few.
Most people automatically discredit Jimmy Swaggart because of the time he was involved with a prostitute. But as far as using donations to serve Christ, I know that Jimmy Swaggart has always been faithful to the Lord. And he has always preached a good, biblical message too.
Very much respect the Jewish faith/people as well, but here's the thing: They don't even have the 'new and improved' NT God. Their Guy is an (please ignore, my faithful brethren) ASSHOLE! They got Deuteronomy God with the indiscriminate smiting.
The God of the Old Testament is the same God as the New Testament: Jesus!!!!
Here are some beautiful laws from the Old Testament, given by God:
"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might." (Deuteronomy 6:5)
"When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field right up to its edge, neither shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the Lord your God." (Leviticus 19:9-10
"You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the LORD." (Leviticus 19:18)
"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." (Leviticus 19:34)
"And if you will indeed obey my commandments that I command you today, to love the Lord your God, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul, he will give the rain for your land in its season, the early rain and the later rain, that you may gather in your grain and your wine and your oil. And he will give grass in your fields for your livestock, and you shall eat and be full." (Deuteronomy 11:13-15)
-
I wouldn`t give any of them the sweat off my balls............bunch of crooks and con artists.
-
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits." Matthew 7:15-20
My fruit trees vary from year to year, sometimes a good crop sometimes bad.
So Jesus was talking out his ass.
-
Jesus tells us that we are able to discern real disciples from fake disciples based on their behaviors....
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits." Matthew 7:15-20
So... how does the person behave? What type of message are they preaching? Is the person preaching about sin, hell, repentance, and the crucifixion of Jesus, or is the person preaching about positive thinking, wealthiness, healthiness, and success? Is the person walking like Jesus or just talking like Jesus?
I assume that you are limiting this question to televangelists.
No one is perfect... not even sincere Christians doing their best to serve God.
But there have been some honest Jesus servers/televangelists.
Jerry Fallwell. Billy Graham. Charles Stanley. To name a few.
Most people automatically discredit Jimmy Swaggart because of the time he was involved with a prostitute. But as far as using donations to serve Christ, I know that Jimmy Swaggart has always been faithful to the Lord. And he has always preached a good, biblical message too.
The God of the Old Testament is the same God as the New Testament: Jesus!!!!
Here are some beautiful laws from the Old Testament, given by God:
"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might." (Deuteronomy 6:5)
"When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field right up to its edge, neither shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the Lord your God." (Leviticus 19:9-10
"You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the LORD." (Leviticus 19:18)
"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." (Leviticus 19:34)
"And if you will indeed obey my commandments that I command you today, to love the Lord your God, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul, he will give the rain for your land in its season, the early rain and the later rain, that you may gather in your grain and your wine and your oil. And he will give grass in your fields for your livestock, and you shall eat and be full." (Deuteronomy 11:13-15)
The god of the old testicle is a wrathful bastard, whereas Jesus is much more loving.
-
The god of the old testicle is a wrathful bastard, whereas Jesus is much more loving.
He was bi-polar.
-
Generally speaking, the more vocal someone is about religion, the more fucked in the head they are. So it makes sense that televangelists are a bunch of scamming, cheating assholes. However, it is hard to have sympathy for anyone who is taken in by their BS, as it is so obvious, and history is littered with examples of the sort of people who enter that field.
-
Someone like Coach thinks they're wonderful
-
Where is the line drawn on televangelists? How does someone discern the fake from the phony? If an evangelist is selling a book he wrote does that make the person a swindler or scoundrel? Is it unbiblical for an evangelist to earn a living? Do most folks that criticize televangelists have any understanding of the ministries beyond the generic objection posed or do they simply lump all ministers on television as crooks?
Me personally, I dislike the current "prosperity gospel" of a Creflo Dollar or Joel Osteen. I find Osteen's teachings to be heretical at best. The gospel is a not a pathway to lining your pockets.
If a televangelist doesn't align with scripture I don't listen to them. How do you determine that? You validate their teachings via scripture (provided they even utilize scripture.....I'm lookin at you Joel Osteen). You study independently and inconjunction with other believers. You hold your leaders accountable.
If a televangelist attempts to sell you a "special cross", "a scroll of blessings and prophecies" or a "blessed vile of holy water" I'm done with them.
If a televangelist stands opposed to the deity of Christ I'm instantly done with them.
Now, if a televangelist hosts a fundraiser or sells a book he wrote I have no problem with this provided their base teachings are scriptural and accurate.
To lump all televangelists into the same bucket of "charlatans" is just lazy and untrue. It's a generic copout for those who'd never waste more than a few seconds of googling to "make their case" against the whole of televangelism.
Now the lavish, ultra excess lifestyles of some televangelists is counter intuitive to the message of scripture, but the majority of time it's also aligned with a "prosperity gospel" ministry.
It's absolutely appropriate for a televangelist to earn a good living and even if some are blessed with a great deal of wealth I firmly believe that wealth should be keep quiet and out of the public eye. I think about Job, David and Solomon.....all amassed a ton of wealth and were blessed by God. Then I see the apostles and these were average Joes who had next to nothing and even gave up what little they had and eventually their lives in pursuit of the great commission of Christ.
Is Billy Graham a charlatan? Doubtful. Is the man perfect? No frickin way.
Is Charles Stanley a charlatan? Doubtful. is the man perfect? No frickin way. Endured a public divorce that rocked his ministry.
What about current evangelists like Tullian Tchividjian? This man is a tremendous orator and speaks passionately for God. He's also the grandson of Billy Graham. Although, he recently resigned from his ministry because of an adulterous relationship he had with a woman in his congregation. Does that make him a charlatan? The anti-Godders would immediately say "yes, there you go!" No, it makes him human and confirms he's fallible. Should he be allowed to preach again? Absolutely, but I believe he should be counciled and reviewed by the church first and slowly work his way back into a position of leadership and trust.
Everyone remembers Jimmy Swaggart crying out on tv in the 80s exclaiming "I have sinned!!" Tears and snot and all that mess. People aren't perfect, but if you're that high profile you need to lead by example every second of everyday.....sorry but you do IMHO. If you're a high-ranking, highly recognizable religious leader, a representative of Christ, then you need to be Christlike....that simple.
-
The god of the old testicle is a wrathful bastard, whereas Jesus is much more loving.
Examples of the OT God being a wrathful bastard and examples of Jesus being so much more loving would be helpful.
Then we can dive into context.
Further, I'd assume any examples wouldn't be based on the following:
1) God passing judgment upon the evil and reprobate who had centuries to repent.
2) Confusing the evil choices of men with the righteous actions of God.
3) God working within the confines of peoples' lives slowly guiding them out of their sinful practices.
-
Generally speaking, the more vocal someone is about religion, the more fucked in the head they are. So it makes sense that televangelists are a bunch of scamming, cheating assholes. However, it is hard to have sympathy for anyone who is taken in by their BS, as it is so obvious, and history is littered with examples of the sort of people who enter that field.
Let me understand the logic: If someone is vocal about religion they are "f'd in the head" and therefore televangelists are scamming, cheating a'holes.
Utilizing that logic: MOS is vocal about religion and and that makes him "f'd in the head" and therefore Billy Graham is a scamming, cheating a'hole.
Brilliant.
-
Let me understand the logic: If someone is vocal about religion they are "f'd in the head" and therefore televangelists are scamming, cheating a'holes.
Utilizing that logic: MOS is vocal about religion and and that makes him "f'd in the head" and therefore Billy Graham is a scamming, cheating a'hole.
Brilliant.
False equivalency, but you know this, already.
-
Let me understand the logic: If someone is vocal about religion they are "f'd in the head" and therefore televangelists are scamming, cheating a'holes.
Utilizing that logic: MOS is vocal about religion and and that makes him "f'd in the head" and therefore Billy Graham is a scamming, cheating a'hole.
Brilliant.
As I understood it, and feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but don't televangelists talk about religion? A man of your intellectual stature can surely connect those dots.
-
Examples of the OT God being a wrathful bastard and examples of Jesus being so much more loving would be helpful.
Then we can dive into context.
I,m sure you know yourself. The sermon on the mount for example is quite different from the way God acts in the old testement.
-
False equivalency, but you know this, already.
Bravo Sir.
-
False equivalency, but you know this, already.
The false equivalency could be applied to the initial premise proposed by 10pints, but not to the application and demonstration of his logical premise.
In actuality the logic is a non sequitur, but you know this already I'm sure.
-
As I understood it, and feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but don't televangelists talk about religion? A man of your intellectual stature can surely connect those dots.
Yes they do, but that isn't what was proposed. We can work with that new assumption if you'd like.
"Billy Graham is vocal about religion and and that makes him "f'd in the head" and therefore Billy Graham is a scamming, cheating a'hole."
Dots connected a bit better? Now, explain to me the flow of logic because I don't understand.
-
Yes they do, but that isn't what was proposed. We can work with that new assumption if you'd like.
"Billy Graham is vocal about religion and and that makes him "f'd in the head" and therefore Billy Graham is a scamming, cheating a'hole."
Dots connected a bit better? Now, explain to me the flow of logic because I don't understand.
Is context such an alien concept to you? I think you are proving my point about religious people being fucked in the head.
-
I,m sure you know yourself. The sermon on the mount for example is quite different from the way God acts in the old testement.
And so were the people it was preached to. They are often referred to as "bronze age goatherders", but they had slowly been guided over multiple generations and centuries into a more refined, God-fearing, stable society that stood more opposed to sin. Were they perfect? LOL, no way. Still, the judgments handed out in the OT were much different than the lessons of the NT because the peoples being dealt with in the OT were engaging in horrific behaviors that would make Charles Manson blush.
I often question why God-haters are so dismissive of God and so quick to support the reprobate of the OT? Why is that God becomes the reprobate and the reprobate become righteous?
-
Is context such an alien concept to you? I think you are proving my point about religious people being fucked in the head.
No, the concept is quite familiar to me, but that doesn't make it correct or logical. I comprehend all sorts of illogical things.
I you think so then fine. Although I do notice you're avoiding my questions and requests for clarification.
-
Anyone else old enough to remember the Ernest Angley Hour? He used to miraculously "heal" people on television with a touch. Hard to believe the crowds of people who followed him. They couldn't all have been actors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Angley
He faded away as he got older but damn!
Doom disapproves.
-
Creflo Dollar best name for a preacher lol his sap suckers parishners bought him a $65 Million dollar plane so he can do the lord's work at close to the speed of sound. !!
Pastor Creflo Dollar might get his $65 million private jet after all
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/06/03/pastor-creflo-dollar-might-get-his-65-million-private-jet-after-all/
65 million could best be put to use by being donated to the local university or start a school to help those with their finances or get a GED.
-
65 million could best be put to use by being donated to the local university or start a school to help those with their finances or get a GED.
I hear that a lot of HBCU's are suffering money problems too , that money could have went a long way. Reminds me of Malcolm X the movie where Brother Baines tells Malcolm
You know our people. They want their leaders to be prosperous. One hand washes the other. ( Malcolm's response ) "l'm telling you God's words, not no hustle.
-
There are people at my work that give 10% of their salary to their church then complain year long how they can't afford gas for their car or other things. Fucking morons.
-
There are people at my work that give 10% of their salary to their church then complain year long how they can't afford gas for their car or other things. Fucking morons.
Yes, this behavior seems to contradict scripture....IMHO.
When you look at OT scripture the Israelites gave way more than 10%....more in the neighborhood of 35%. I've read over 40%.
I have no problem if folks give 10% or use that as guide, but often times folks can give more than 10% and should if the Spirit leads them to do so.
I just give generously as Christ instructed....I draw a great deal of joy from doing so.
I keep my giving between me and the Lord though...only audience I need.
2 Corinthians 9:7
7 Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
The idea of giving via compulsion is what strikes me. Certainly a person can routinely give and do so with a genuine desire to give, but that notion of compulsion often cools the giver's heart. The Lord didn't intend for us to give with the idea of, "C'MON YOU DOGS!! GIVE!! GIVE!! GIVE!! Or......buuuuuuuuuuuurn."
If you give/tithe and then complain about that giving then you've essentially negated the sincere motivation of the giving.
-
-
What would Tom Cruise do? ???
-
And so were the people it was preached to. They are often referred to as "bronze age goatherders", but they had slowly been guided over multiple generations and centuries into a more refined, God-fearing, stable society that stood more opposed to sin. Were they perfect? LOL, no way. Still, the judgments handed out in the OT were much different than the lessons of the NT because the peoples being dealt with in the OT were engaging in horrific behaviors that would make Charles Manson blush.
I often question why God-haters are so dismissive of God and so quick to support the reprobate of the OT? Why is that God becomes the reprobate and the reprobate become righteous?
Who was do the guiding over multiple generations? Who was doing the preaching? God spoke to such and such and people believed him and thus it is taken as the word of God. Maybe it is, maybe not, or maybe alot of the divine inspiration is filtered through unconscious minds. Either way the God of the old testament does not sound more evolved than the people that are being preached too.
I hope you are not calling me God hater.
-
Where is the line drawn on televangelists? How does someone discern the fake from the phony? If an evangelist is selling a book he wrote does that make the person a swindler or scoundrel? Is it unbiblical for an evangelist to earn a living? Do most folks that criticize televangelists have any understanding of the ministries beyond the generic objection posed or do they simply lump all ministers on television as crooks?
Me personally, I dislike the current "prosperity gospel" of a Creflo Dollar or Joel Osteen. I find Osteen's teachings to be heretical at best. The gospel is a not a pathway to lining your pockets.
If a televangelist doesn't align with scripture I don't listen to them. How do you determine that? You validate their teachings via scripture (provided they even utilize scripture.....I'm lookin at you Joel Osteen). You study independently and inconjunction with other believers. You hold your leaders accountable.
If a televangelist attempts to sell you a "special cross", "a scroll of blessings and prophecies" or a "blessed vile of holy water" I'm done with them.
If a televangelist stands opposed to the deity of Christ I'm instantly done with them.
Now, if a televangelist hosts a fundraiser or sells a book he wrote I have no problem with this provided their base teachings are scriptural and accurate.
To lump all televangelists into the same bucket of "charlatans" is just lazy and untrue. It's a generic copout for those who'd never waste more than a few seconds of googling to "make their case" against the whole of televangelism.
Now the lavish, ultra excess lifestyles of some televangelists is counter intuitive to the message of scripture, but the majority of time it's also aligned with a "prosperity gospel" ministry.
It's absolutely appropriate for a televangelist to earn a good living and even if some are blessed with a great deal of wealth I firmly believe that wealth should be keep quiet and out of the public eye. I think about Job, David and Solomon.....all amassed a ton of wealth and were blessed by God. Then I see the apostles and these were average Joes who had next to nothing and even gave up what little they had and eventually their lives in pursuit of the great commission of Christ.
Is Billy Graham a charlatan? Doubtful. Is the man perfect? No frickin way.
Is Charles Stanley a charlatan? Doubtful. is the man perfect? No frickin way. Endured a public divorce that rocked his ministry.
What about current evangelists like Tullian Tchividjian? This man is a tremendous orator and speaks passionately for God. He's also the grandson of Billy Graham. Although, he recently resigned from his ministry because of an adulterous relationship he had with a woman in his congregation. Does that make him a charlatan? The anti-Godders would immediately say "yes, there you go!" No, it makes him human and confirms he's fallible. Should he be allowed to preach again? Absolutely, but I believe he should be counciled and reviewed by the church first and slowly work his way back into a position of leadership and trust.
Everyone remembers Jimmy Swaggart crying out on tv in the 80s exclaiming "I have sinned!!" Tears and snot and all that mess. People aren't perfect, but if you're that high profile you need to lead by example every second of everyday.....sorry but you do IMHO. If you're a high-ranking, highly recognizable religious leader, a representative of Christ, then you need to be Christlike....that simple.
I tend to believe they should forfeit the pulpit. I think their congregation should demand it. No one's kicking 'em outta the church or turning their backs, just insisting they step down, same way we take an incompetent cop's badge. Obviously TOO fallible for the position.
My thoughts, anyway.
-
Examples of the OT God being a wrathful bastard and examples of Jesus being so much more loving would be helpful.
Then we can dive into context.
Further, I'd assume any examples wouldn't be based on the following:
1) God passing judgment upon the evil and reprobate who had centuries to repent.
2) Confusing the evil choices of men with the righteous actions of God.
3) God working within the confines of peoples' lives slowly guiding them out of their sinful practices.
... and their unborn or young children he drowned in the Flood. Aside from the Original, what sin could they possibly commit?
-
Where is the line drawn on televangelists? How does someone discern the fake from the phony? If an evangelist is selling a book he wrote does that make the person a swindler or scoundrel? Is it unbiblical for an evangelist to earn a living? Do most folks that criticize televangelists have any understanding of the ministries beyond the generic objection posed or do they simply lump all ministers on television as crooks?
Me personally, I dislike the current "prosperity gospel" of a Creflo Dollar or Joel Osteen. I find Osteen's teachings to be heretical at best. The gospel is a not a pathway to lining your pockets.
If a televangelist doesn't align with scripture I don't listen to them. How do you determine that? You validate their teachings via scripture (provided they even utilize scripture.....I'm lookin at you Joel Osteen). You study independently and inconjunction with other believers. You hold your leaders accountable.
If a televangelist attempts to sell you a "special cross", "a scroll of blessings and prophecies" or a "blessed vile of holy water" I'm done with them.
If a televangelist stands opposed to the deity of Christ I'm instantly done with them.
Now, if a televangelist hosts a fundraiser or sells a book he wrote I have no problem with this provided their base teachings are scriptural and accurate.
To lump all televangelists into the same bucket of "charlatans" is just lazy and untrue. It's a generic copout for those who'd never waste more than a few seconds of googling to "make their case" against the whole of televangelism.
Now the lavish, ultra excess lifestyles of some televangelists is counter intuitive to the message of scripture, but the majority of time it's also aligned with a "prosperity gospel" ministry.
It's absolutely appropriate for a televangelist to earn a good living and even if some are blessed with a great deal of wealth I firmly believe that wealth should be keep quiet and out of the public eye. I think about Job, David and Solomon.....all amassed a ton of wealth and were blessed by God. Then I see the apostles and these were average Joes who had next to nothing and even gave up what little they had and eventually their lives in pursuit of the great commission of Christ.
Is Billy Graham a charlatan? Doubtful. Is the man perfect? No frickin way.
Is Charles Stanley a charlatan? Doubtful. is the man perfect? No frickin way. Endured a public divorce that rocked his ministry.
What about current evangelists like Tullian Tchividjian? This man is a tremendous orator and speaks passionately for God. He's also the grandson of Billy Graham. Although, he recently resigned from his ministry because of an adulterous relationship he had with a woman in his congregation. Does that make him a charlatan? The anti-Godders would immediately say "yes, there you go!" No, it makes him human and confirms he's fallible. Should he be allowed to preach again? Absolutely, but I believe he should be counciled and reviewed by the church first and slowly work his way back into a position of leadership and trust.
Everyone remembers Jimmy Swaggart crying out on tv in the 80s exclaiming "I have sinned!!" Tears and snot and all that mess. People aren't perfect, but if you're that high profile you need to lead by example every second of everyday.....sorry but you do IMHO. If you're a high-ranking, highly recognizable religious leader, a representative of Christ, then you need to be Christlike....that simple.
Odd...
'and again I say to you, it is easier for a camel through the eye of a needle to go, than for a rich man to enter into the reign of God.' - Matthew 19:24
-
Also, faith healers are unequivocally detestable. This stuff is downright evil.
-
Who was do the guiding over multiple generations? Who was doing the preaching? God spoke to such and such and people believed him and thus it is taken as the word of God. Maybe it is, maybe not, or maybe alot of the divine inspiration is filtered through unconscious minds. Either way the God of the old testament does not sound more evolved than the people that are being preached too.
I hope you are not calling me God hater.
I hope by now you know I don't consider you a God hater. ;D
I think we can disagree and still be cool enough that afterwards you climb on my back for some sets of donkey calf raises....at least that's how I picture it in my mind.
The guidance was provided in the same manner.....via God's law. From OT to NT Christ is that word....he is that guidance.....he is that law.
Psalms 119:142 “Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and Your law is truth.”
Deuteronomy 28:15 “But it shall come about, if you do not obey the Lord your God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes with which I charge you today, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you”
Proverbs 6:23 “For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching is light and reproofs for discipline are the way of life.”
Isaiah 8:20 “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.”
John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
John 1:14 "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."
John 8:32 “and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
John 14:66 "Jesus *said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.'”
Galatians 3:24 "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith."
-
I enjoy Al Doggity's threads, seems like a principled, thoughtful fellow
LOL this is a feeling most get over rather quickly ;)
-
... and their unborn or young children he drowned in the Flood. Aside from the Original, what sin could they possibly commit?
Ok, let's stay with the Christian worldview then.
So the children of the flood....the innocents.....why were they harmed.....why were they taken?
First off, we don't know for certain that they did experience pain and harm in the flood....we don't know.
We do know that given their innocence they immediately left this life and went to dwell with the Lord forever in his kingdom.
What if that final generation of reprobate and their innocent chidren had been allowed to continue on? The same innocent would've been lead into reprobation and evil by their forefathers exactly like the generations before them and the generations before them, etc.....The Lord allowed the world's sin to come into it's fullness before judgment was passed. If the older, reprobate generations were taken and the innocent children left behind they would've experienced a miserable existence in which they have to contend with everything on their own while dealing with deaths of everyone they ever knew (regards of how evil they were). And God would be criticized for that situation as well.
The children of the flood were spared eternal separation from God because of their innocence and spared an earthly existence in which they would have to fend for themselves with nothing at their disposal.
If you criticize God yet stop at the point of human death you've invented a non-Christian worldview to play off of. You have to allow the entirety of the situation to be considered in order to represent the Christian worldview correctly and that entails stepping into God's eternity.
-
"We do know that given their innocence they immediately left this life and went to dwell with the Lord forever in his kingdom."
But I thought it was mandatory to accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savior to get into heaven? :-\ :-\ :-\ Children can't do this.
-
Odd...
'and again I say to you, it is easier for a camel through the eye of a needle to go, than for a rich man to enter into the reign of God.' - Matthew 19:24
The notion of oddness vanishes when you put the passage in context.
Here were have a wealthy young ruler that asked how to attain eternal life. Christ told him to him to sell all he had and give it the poor and follow him. The rich, young ruler could not give up his vast materialism and wealth and opted to remain without Christ.
The passage speaks of those that put their wealth above Christ and make their money an idol. Hence, it's easier for camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter heaven.
There are many God-fearing, God-loving believers in Christ that are wealthy and use their resources to honor and glorify the Lord. We see examples of wealthy, God-fearing men in scripture such as Job, David and Solomon that despite their wealth and shortcomings followed the Lord. They weren't always successful, but yet they followed the Lord.
-
"We do know that given their innocence they immediately left this life and went to dwell with the Lord forever in his kingdom."
But I thought it was mandatory to accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savior to get into heaven? :-\ :-\ :-\ Children can't do this.
When I read about King David’s child with Bathsheba passing away and David suggesting that as a believer he would he see his child again in God’s kingdom it affirmed for me the innocence of children and others with disabilities that prevent them from making an honest choice about sin and Christ in their lives. They don’t need salvation because being saved by grace through faith in Christ means we are saved from the wrath/judgment of God. The innocents need not fear God’s wrath for they are without blame or need for judgment.
“Jesus called a little child to him and put the child among them. Then he said, ‘I tell you the truth, unless you turn from your sins and become like little children, you will never get into the Kingdom of Heaven. So anyone who becomes as humble as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.’”
Christ also indicated how severely those that cause the children (the little ones) to fall into sin would be judged. The children are lead into sin and out of innocence.
As believers in Christ we are saved by grace through faith and thereby justified and deemed righteous….like the innocents who are inherently righteous we become like the them through Christ. Anyone who comes to God and desires forgivenessness and righteousness will be deemed as such.
-
If children are innocent in the eyes of God why are they baptized?
-
When I read about King David’s child with Bathsheba passing away and David suggesting that as a believer he would he see his child again in God’s kingdom it affirmed for me the innocence of children and others with disabilities that prevent them from making an honest choice about sin and Christ in their lives. They don’t need salvation because being saved by grace through faith in Christ means we are saved from the wrath/judgment of God. The innocents need not fear God’s wrath for they are without blame or need for judgment.
“Jesus called a little child to him and put the child among them. Then he said, ‘I tell you the truth, unless you turn from your sins and become like little children, you will never get into the Kingdom of Heaven. So anyone who becomes as humble as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.’”
Christ also indicated how severely those that cause the children (the little ones) to fall into sin would be judged. The children are lead into sin and out of innocence.
As believers in Christ we are saved by grace through faith and thereby justified and deemed righteous….like the innocents who are inherently righteous we become like the them through Christ. Anyone who comes to God and desires forgivenessness and righteousness will be deemed as such.
WOAH, hey, now, no where does it say people with developmental disabilities get a free pass. You're just inserting your own interpretation into their. As most theists do. Its all up for interpretation. Those stories discuss children, no where does it say anything about adults with developmental disabilities. Please, point to the passage? You just don't get to make up interpretations, and include people with "developmental disabilities" because it fits your narrative. No where in any of your posts does it talk about people with developmental disabilities. Not in one spot.
-
If children are innocent in the eyes of God why are they baptized?
Infant baptism is an invention of the Catholic church.
Baptism, for believers, is an outward, public expression of an inward, personal relationship with Christ.
-
so in your circle there is no infant baptism among evangelicals? are children pressured in to being saved once they come of a certain age?
-
If children are innocent in the eyes of God why are they baptized?
Just go to a burn ward at a children's hospital and see how much God loves them.
-
Just go to a burn ward at a children's hospital and see how much God loves them.
MOS and other theists will just say, "Its part of his divine plan." ::) ::) We are just mere mortals and cannot understand why God would let a 4 year old suffer day in and day out with endless surgeries and chemotherapies. You know, its just part of his plan.
Or go to any cancer childrens ward.
-
The notion of oddness vanishes when you put the passage in context.
Here were have a wealthy young ruler that asked how to attain eternal life. Christ told him to him to sell all he had and give it the poor and follow him. The rich, young ruler could not give up his vast materialism and wealth and opted to remain without Christ.
The passage speaks of those that put their wealth above Christ and make their money an idol. Hence, it's easier for camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter heaven.
There are many God-fearing, God-loving believers in Christ that are wealthy and use their resources to honor and glorify the Lord. We see examples of wealthy, God-fearing men in scripture such as Job, David and Solomon that despite their wealth and shortcomings followed the Lord. They weren't always successful, but yet they followed the Lord.
You're saying that the scripture is a metaphor. I would say it should be a statement.
People see what they want to see I suppose.
-
Ok, let's stay with the Christian worldview then.
So the children of the flood....the innocents.....why were they harmed.....why were they taken?
First off, we don't know for certain that they did experience pain and harm in the flood....we don't know.
We do know that given their innocence they immediately left this life and went to dwell with the Lord forever in his kingdom.
What if that final generation of reprobate and their innocent chidren had been allowed to continue on? The same innocent would've been lead into reprobation and evil by their forefathers exactly like the generations before them and the generations before them, etc.....The Lord allowed the world's sin to come into it's fullness before judgment was passed. If the older, reprobate generations were taken and the innocent children left behind they would've experienced a miserable existence in which they have to contend with everything on their own while dealing with deaths of everyone they ever knew (regards of how evil they were). And God would be criticized for that situation as well.
The children of the flood were spared eternal separation from God because of their innocence and spared an earthly existence in which they would have to fend for themselves with nothing at their disposal.
If you criticize God yet stop at the point of human death you've invented a non-Christian worldview to play off of. You have to allow the entirety of the situation to be considered in order to represent the Christian worldview correctly and that entails stepping into God's eternity.
I'm not good with multi-quote, so this'll have to do:
1) Similar argument Pro-Choicers use, yet Lifers vilify them for it. Only God can play God - I assume this is what we must accept. Troubling.
2) Similar argument for more modern genocidal endeavors, so we just can't go there. He can, though, I know. Troubling.
3) This is the strange ambiguity that ultimately enters all death/religion debate. But how is it not a cop-out? 'Life is sacred' when convenient; 'Life is temporary, heaven is everything' when the first doesn't work. So which is it?
Seems inconsistent at best.
-
WOAH, hey, now, no where does it say people with developmental disabilities get a free pass. You're just inserting your own interpretation into their. As most theists do. Its all up for interpretation. Those stories discuss children, no where does it say anything about adults with developmental disabilities. Please, point to the passage? You just don't get to make up interpretations, and include people with "developmental disabilities" because it fits your narrative. No where in any of your posts does it talk about people with developmental disabilities. Not in one spot.
There is no specific scripture that calls out adults with developmental disabilities. There is also no specific scripture about pizza delivery guys that molest young girls, but we know that isn't right either. Regardless, the concepts of the innocence children and the just nature of God are demonstrated.
Scripture says we understand the word precept upon precept:
Isaiah 28:13 "But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little"
We also know that adults with developmental disabilties are almost the same (and in some cases possess less than) the intellects of children. Like children they can't comprehend the idea of sin in a manner which would make them accountable. We have to trust in the just nature of God that each individual case will be handled appropriately. This is an element of faith, but it isn't a flawed, eisegetical interpretation of scripture as you suggest.
-
There is no specific scripture that calls out adults with developmental disabilities. There is also no specific scripture about pizza delivery guys that molest young girls, but we know that isn't right either. Regardless, the concepts of the innocence children and the just nature of God are demonstrated.
Scripture says we understand the word precept upon precept:
Isaiah 28:13 "But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little"
We also know that adults with developmental disabilties are almost the same (and in some cases possess less than) the intellects of children. Like children they can't comprehend the idea of sin in a manner which would make them accountable. We have to trust in the just nature of God that each individual case will be handled appropriately. This is an element of faith, but it isn't a flawed, eisegetical interpretation of scripture as you suggest.
Yes, but there is enough "evidence" in the bible that molesting children is wrong. So, we don't need a direct scripture for that.
But why isn't there a scripture that reads something like, "Thy Lord said and deemed those incapable of worshipping Him for lack of mind, shall still be brought into the kingdom of heaven." If God is all powerful and all-knowing, then he would be able to foresee the millions and millions of people who have a developmental disability. If I was God, I would definitely include a line like that above, knowing how many people will suffer from DDs. Seems irresponsible to leave it out. Not to mention leaving out the whole, "not owning slaves" thing. That could have probably prevented millions of people from ever becoming slaves.
Sorry, but all of your answers sound like rhetoric, a lot of "beating around the bush" with no straight answer. In my opinion, your bible fails in that regard.
-
MOS and other theists will just say, "Its part of his divine plan." ::) ::) We are just mere mortals and cannot understand why God would let a 4 year old suffer day in and day out with endless surgeries and chemotherapies. You know, its just part of his plan.
Or go to any cancer childrens ward.
Christians have it all figured out. if shit goes wrong, it's in God's plan or God is testing us, if shit works out well it's because God loves them.
-
What percentage of prayers get answered? Is God a Dallas Cowboys fan? God must love sports.
-
Christians have it all figured out. if shit goes wrong, it's in God's plan or God is testing us, if shit works out well it's because God loves them.
The funny thing is that MOS and other religious people always say atheists are arrogant.
Its the total opposite. MOS has had an answer for every reply. You will hardly ever hear any theist say, "I don't know." And who is more arrogant? I have never ever heard MOS or another theist say, "Hey, I dont know, but thats a good question. Let me think about it."
Even with respect to God, most atheists, such as myself, take the stance of, "A God does not exist, but I can be wrong with evidence."
A religious person, "God exists. I dont care what the evidence says."
And who is more close minded and arrogant? ??? ??? ???
-
The funny thing is that MOS and other religious people always say atheists are arrogant.
Its the total opposite. MOS has had an answer for every reply. You will hardly ever hear any theist say, "I don't know." And who is more arrogant? I have never ever heard MOS or another theist say, "Hey, I dont know, but thats a good question. Let me think about it."
Even with respect to God, most atheists, such as myself, take the stance of, "A God does not exist, but I can be wrong with evidence."
A religious person, "God exists. I dont care what the evidence says."
And who is more close minded and arrogant? ??? ??? ???
My favorite is how Christians are the expert on God. They proclaim shit like "God would have wanted that" Really? How the fuck would you know what God would have wanted or not wanted?
-
Many atheists are arrogant as fuck. Goes both ways, for sure.
-
My favorite is how Christians are the expert on God. They proclaim shit like "God would have wanted that" Really? How the fuck would you know what God would have wanted or not wanted?
They know what he wants when it suits them.
It's hypocritical to say it's what he wants, then when it doesn't go in a way that makes any sense, it's "No one understands gods plan".
Can't have it both ways.
-
... and their unborn or young children he drowned in the Flood. Aside from the Original, what sin could they possibly commit?
The most serious and grave of all sins is not loving God.
But, on top of that, all those people in the Old Testament that God killed were people who were worshipping demons, and sacrificing their children (burning their children alive) to Satan. And they knew what they were doing too.
So, yeah, God was justified in doing what he did.
Odd...
'and again I say to you, it is easier for a camel through the eye of a needle to go, than for a rich man to enter into the reign of God.' - Matthew 19:24
You forgot the other part of that verse... "with man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" :)
so in your circle there is no infant baptism among evangelicals? are children pressured in to being saved once they come of a certain age?
most Christians (including Roman Catholics) believe that all children go to heaven. There is a doctrine called "the age of accountability", which states that until a person reaches a certain level of knowledge concerning their sin, they are not responsible for it.
-
They know what he wants when it suits them.
It's hypocritical to say it's what he wants, then when it doesn't go in a way that makes any sense, it's "No one understands gods plan".
Can't have it both ways.
x2
When something good happens, it was Gods plan.
When something bad happens, we don't understand Gods divine plan.
??? ???
-
The most serious and grave of all sins is not loving God.
But, on top of that, all those people in the Old Testament that God killed were people who were worshipping demons, and sacrificing their children (burning their children alive) to Satan. And they knew what they were doing too.
So, yeah, God was justified in doing what he did.
You forgot the other part of that verse... "with man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" :)
most Christians (including Roman Catholics) believe that all children go to heaven. There is a doctrine called "the age of accountability", which states that until a person reaches a certain level of knowledge concerning their sin, they are not responsible for it.
People think that atheists are arrogant but how about God proclaiming not loving him is the biggest sin. lol
You better fucking love me or I'll kill ever last one of you.
-
So, yeah, God was justified in doing what he did.
You forgot the other part of that verse... "with man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" :)
So you're saying God can get into heaven if he's rich, but man can't.
Thought God was already in heaven?
-
The most serious and grave of all sins is not loving God.
But, on top of that, all those people in the Old Testament that God killed were people who were worshipping demons, and sacrificing their children (burning their children alive) to Satan. And they knew what they were doing too.
So, yeah, God was justified in doing what he did.
So unborn babies, besides not loving God, worshipped demons and sacrificed their children?
Interesting.
-
So you're saying God can get into heaven if he's rich, but man can't.
Thought God was already in heaven?
Yes but there's a Jewish landlord and even he would evict God if he doesn't make rent.
-
I see there have been more comments and questions, but I'll have to respond more later when I free up again.
I'm not promising answers to everything, but I'll do my best. ;)
-
People think that atheists are arrogant but how about God proclaiming not loving him is the biggest sin. lol
You better fucking love me or I'll kill ever last one of you.
There are probably more contradictions and uncertainties in religion than there are certainties.
That is why you just have to take it all on "faith." :D :D
-
There are probably more contradictions and uncertainties in religion than there are certainties.
That is why you just have to take it all on "faith." :D :D
Yep, religion people are so certain about everything that they leave their biggest hopes on a big fat maybe otherwise known as faith.
-
All things are possible through God
Just read the King's Torah :-X
The fifth chapter, entitled "Murder of non-Jews in a time of war" has been widely quoted in the Israeli media. The summary states that "you can kill those who are not supporting or encouraging murder in order to save the lives of Jews".
At one point it suggests that babies can justifiably be killed if it is clear they will grow up to pose a threat.
You know those Palestinian babies will grow up to a " threat " mind as well deal with them now. Only in the retarded warped mind of " believers " is this shit palatable. " God's chosen people " ::)
-
so in your circle there is no infant baptism among evangelicals? are children pressured in to being saved once they come of a certain age?
The Methodist church still participates in infant baptism and I've seen the baptismal/sprinkling thingies (don't know the right word) at a presbyterian church also. Concept just originated in RC church.
Are children pressured? Not that I've ever seen. I'm not suggesting it doesn't happen though....I just didn't experience it. I've seen the "Jesus Camp" indoctrination videos, but that situation is not normal LOL.
I grew up in a church with my sisters, cousins and some friends and none of us where pressured (that I remember or was aware of). We were taught about the bible and church while at church and some of us were raised by Christian parents, but being pressured by the older generations I never experienced in my circle (directly or indirectly).
We were allowed to make our own choices. I basically left the church as a young adult....I had no element of God in my life. One of my sisters got heavy into drugs and alcohol as a teen and young adult....she was further away than me. I have other sisters that chose to remain "in the flock" their entire lives.
-
satan created religion
get your head out of that book fellas
:)
-
The most serious and grave of all sins is not loving God.
But, on top of that, all those people in the Old Testament that God killed were people who were worshipping demons, and sacrificing their children (burning their children alive) to Satan. And they knew what they were doing too.
So, yeah, God was justified in doing what he did.
You forgot the other part of that verse... "with man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" :)
most Christians (including Roman Catholics) believe that all children go to heaven. There is a doctrine called "the age of accountability", which states that until a person reaches a certain level of knowledge concerning their sin, they are not responsible for it.
No, you farking waste of space, the first commandment is 'You shall have no other gods before Me.' Really!? A God needs a copyright codicil off the get-go!? This is why you, and all your religious blowhard exponents, fail. Man, you are such a disappointment. But, trust me, you know this. ::)
-
MOS and other theists will just say, "Its part of his divine plan." ::) ::) We are just mere mortals and cannot understand why God would let a 4 year old suffer day in and day out with endless surgeries and chemotherapies. You know, its just part of his plan.
Or go to any cancer childrens ward.
Thank you kindly for answering on my behalf, but unfortunately that's not how I would answer. I rarely (if ever) go to the "God works in mysterious ways" bit.
Why are people allowed to suffer? So that we can more clearly recognize the division between us and God and our need for him in our lives. It's the effect of our sinful choices that have brought about our pain. This world and it inhabitants exist in a perpetual state of decay. We're subjected to evil, disease, famine, disasters, etc.....all the results of our sin. God gave us dominion over his creation and we're to govern it and it's inhabitants appropriately. He's also allowed us to engage in activities and choices that he knew would harm is good creation and defy his will and law. The gulf of sin dividing creation from creator is recognized by those who seek to eliminate their individual sin and encourage others to do the same.
Those that hate God often briefly step into the Christian worldview and immediately dismiss the notion of sin and just blame God. It's quick, it's convenient....no fuss, no muss. Unfortunately it's wrong.
God desires for us to be saved, repent of our sins and seek his righteousness in our lives. To be filled with his spirit and guided by it for the remainder of our days seeking his will as opposed to our own. Salvation is the answer to the problem of evil and the problem is resolved one soul at a time. Having the ability to engage in every form of good and wicked choice makes those humble choices to surrender to God's will that much more genuine and sincere.
On a personal note, we do see the impacts of sin and disease and tragedy in our small circle of influence. My family is currently helping sponsor another family because of the impacts of cancer the father of this sweet family is dealing with (and will now claim his life). We weren't asked, they didn't seek us out....it was impressed upon my wife's heart and I humbly recognized and supported the divine call. This man is slowly dying of pancreatic cancer and we've been doing our best to help assist them financially for most of this year and we try to encourage them emotionally. Last weekend we sponsored a fundraiser for the family to bring about awareness and increase financial support. I've tried to setup our family budget so that we can continue monetary support after his now inevitable passing until his wife can get back to work and reestablish support on her own (they've both been out of work all year because of this disease). My sweet wife and daughter pray for them every night. I do the same privately. My wife has prayed over the family repeatedly. This is no one's business and I haven't shared it before, but felt now was appropriate.
-
You're saying that the scripture is a metaphor. I would say it should be a statement.
People see what they want to see I suppose.
The greater context defines the selected passage and makes the definitive statement. Without the context it's up to wild interpretation.
-
Christians have it all figured out. if shit goes wrong, it's in God's plan or God is testing us, if shit works out well it's because God loves them.
I find the exact opposite in my own life. In times of turmoil I experience God's glory at it's greatest.
-
Thank you kindly for answering on my behalf, but unfortunately that's not how I would answer. I rarely (if ever) go to the "God works in mysterious ways" bit.
Why are people allowed to suffer? So that we can more clearly recognize the division between us and God and our need for him in our lives. It's the effect of our sinful choices that have brought about our pain. This world and it inhabitants exist in a perpetual state of decay. We're subjected to evil, disease, famine, disasters, etc.....all the results of our sin. God gave us dominion over his creation and we're to govern it and it's inhabitants appropriately. He's also allowed us to engage in activities and choices that he knew would harm is good creation and defy his will and law. The gulf of sin dividing creation from creator is recognized by those who seek to eliminate their individual sin and encourage others to do the same.
Those that hate God often briefly step into the Christian worldview and immediately dismiss the notion of sin and just blame God. It's quick, it's convenient....no fuss, no muss. Unfortunately it's wrong.
God desires for us to be saved, repent of our sins and seek his righteousness in our lives. To be filled with his spirit and guided by it for the remainder of our days seeking his will as opposed to our own. Salvation is the answer to the problem of evil and the problem is resolved one soul at a time. Having the ability to engage in every form of good and wicked choice makes those humble choices to surrender to God's will that much more genuine and sincere.
On a personal note, we do see the impacts of sin and disease and tragedy in our small circle of influence. My family is currently helping sponsor another family because of the impacts of cancer the father of this sweet family is dealing with (and will now claim his life). We weren't asked, they didn't seek us out....it was impressed upon my wife's heart and I humbly recognized and supported the divine call. This man is slowly dying of pancreatic cancer and we've been doing our best to help assist them financially for most of this year and we try to encourage them emotionally. Last weekend we sponsored a fundraiser for the family to bring about awareness and increase financial support. I've tried to setup our family budget so that we can continue monetary support after his now inevitable passing until his wife can get back to work and reestablish support on her own (they've both been out of work all year because of this disease). My sweet wife and daughter pray for them every night. I do the same privately. My wife has prayed over the family repeatedly. This is no one's business and I haven't shared it before, but felt now was appropriate.
No. We 'suffer' because it is (your) God's pleasure to do so. No other reason. And it used to be 'dominion,' but is now 'stewardship.' Know your dogma, Christian.
/like nailing jello to the wall
-
My favorite is how Christians are the expert on God. They proclaim shit like "God would have wanted that" Really? How the fuck would you know what God would have wanted or not wanted?
Scripture is a great thing. It's God's inspired word that details his will. Plus for those believers who have God's Holy Spirit living in them they can discern his word via that divine guidance. Certainly his word can be understood without it, but it never makes more sense then with it.
-
No. We 'suffer' because it is (your) God's pleasure to do so. No other reason. And it used to be 'dominion,' but is now 'stewardship.' Know your dogma, Christian.
/like nailing jello to the wall
AHAHAHAHAH!!! "Know your dogma, Christian." Sure thing dr. chimps.
-
There are probably more contradictions and uncertainties in religion than there are certainties.
That is why you just have to take it all on "faith." :D :D
Yep, religion people are so certain about everything that they leave their biggest hopes on a big fat maybe otherwise known as faith.
The ignorant bliss of arguing that "faith is forever blind". It continues to interest me how those without faith understand faith so completely. How is that? I never get an answer despite repeatedly asking.
See, I can speak from personal experience as I've stood on both sides of the fence (religious and virtually non-religious) and being a man of faith has made me a far more joyful person.
I think most regular church attendees don't spend much more time exploring their faith outside Sunday church attendance, but some do (I would classify myself as one that extends his faith beyond just church fellowship) and they draw enormous happiness from engaging that faith both in fellowship with believers and in learning more about the God they represent. I draw tremendous joy from giving to others, but doing so privately as my only audience is the God I serve. I enjoy studying theology and discussing it with others...even engaging in mild debate/discussion. These experiences mature my faith, increase my knowledge and give me more opportunities to experience the wonderful, tangible presence of the Holy Spirit.
It's amazing when you watch the Lord work within your life. When you remain faithful and patient allowing his good will to unfold before you. Your faith solidifies over time until it becomes something altogether different. No more the generic notion of the "blind leap of faith", but now a rock solid, wide eyed revelation and demonstration of God's presence in your life. Brings me tremendous joy to see these events unfold at times.
Faith matures and grows rock solid....you have full assurance in the heart about the reality of God when you come to him on his terms as defined in scripture.
Want to know God, then listen to the personal testimonies of believers (natural evidence) that have experienced him and decide whether or not you would like to know him also. Then you must engage in faith as outlined in scripture (yes, you must first believe to know God). Do so with an earnest, humble desire to submit to his will in faith and he will reveal himself to you (extraordinary evidence).
-
AHAHAHAHAH!!! "Know your dogma, Christian." Sure thing dr. chimps.
Great reply. When logic fails, respond in scripture. When that fails, say 'AHAHAHAHAH!!!' What a charlatan you are.
-
Great reply. When logic fails, respond in scripture. When that fails, say 'AHAHAHAHAH!!!' What a charlatan you are.
You didn't reply with a logical premise that can be argued, you replied with an absolute opinion about God. You already know my position and that of scripture.
No. We 'suffer' because it is (your) God's pleasure to do so. No other reason. And it used to be 'dominion,' but is now 'stewardship.' Know your dogma, Christian.
/like nailing jello to the wall
You want my answer, I'll give it despite your snarky nonsense.
A steward is one given authority by a greater power to manage a situation. A king would often have governors or stewards over territories within his kingdom.
Mankind is given dominion over the earth:
Genesis 1:26
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
When you're given dominion you act as governor over that with which you've been given authority, but from the perspective of the giver you are acting as a steward on his behalf.
God is the creator and king and empowers mankind as stewards in that they are given dominion over creation to govern it and all its resources.
I answer questions and I'm labeled an arrogant know-it-all. I dismiss the snarky stuff and I'm labeled incapable of answering. LOL!! It's lose-lose for me, but I accept that.
Hopefully it draws someone else to the Lord....all that matters. It's for his glory, not mine.
-
You didn't reply with a logical premise that can be argued, you replied with an absolute opinion about God. You already know my position and that of scripture.
You want my answer, I'll give it despite your snarky nonsense.
A steward is one given authority by a greater power to manage a situation. A king would often have governors or stewards over territories within his kingdom.
Mankind is given dominion over the earth:
Genesis 1:26
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
When you're given dominion you act as governor over that with which you've been given authority, but from the perspective of the giver you are acting as a steward on his behalf.
God is the creator and king and empowers mankind as stewards in that they are given dominion over creation to govern it and all its resources.
Look. We've both been here for a while. You're a good guy. I get that. We all know that. But your religious absolutism is trying, strident and enervating. I stepped up the plate. We all have enough on our plate without someone trying to tell us what to do. And, I get it. Part of your creed is to proselytize, but enough! Enough. Go find the old MOS who was whimsical and fun. Pretty sure your God would like that guy. :)
-
Sorry, MOS. The above post reads patronizing. Not my intention. Read as is. Apologies.
-
Look. We've both been here for a while. You're a good guy. I get that. We all know that. But your religious absolutism is trying, strident and enervating. I stepped up the plate. We all have enough on our plate without someone trying to tell us what to do. And, I get it. Part of your creed is to proselytize, but enough! Enough. Go find the old MOS who was whimsical and fun. Pretty sure your God would like that guy. :)
Yeah, I was surprised at your tone today, but I laughed and blew it off. I have nothing against you man. I do respect you and all is cool.
But still, we need to make one thing clear. I'm not telling anyone how to do anything. Everyone can live their lives however they want.
Further, I didn't start this thread. I responded to other existing comments and then the theist pile on started and I began answering questions people asked of me.
Many folks don't like it when their religious questions are answered....sorry.
Like I noted, I actually blew off your comment that ended with "Know your dogma, Christian." I was suprised, but I aughed at it and didn't bother. You pushed and criticized my non response so I gave you one and then you're upset because I responded......it's like nailing jello to a wall.
I'm a changed man today. I've tried to continue interacting with others, but to be honest I'm virtually ignored on GB today unless I'm discussing religion. Still, I don't discuss religion for attention.....I don't post much outside of that because it's fairly pointless.
If I post something that's funny or "off color" I continually get the "not very Christian of you"....."typical Christian hypocrite"......"phony Christian a**hole" stuff.....every single time.
And you bet I spread the gospel of Christ....that's the point....that's what believers are commissioned to do. We're also called to defend our faith.
I've repeatedly encourage others to keep religious threads to the religion board, but thread creators desire traction and that's easy on the G&O. So I discuss on the G&O where everyone wants to talk and theist "pile ons" can occur.
I genuinely try to be respectful, but discussing God flat pisses some people off.....can't be helped. I just try to be civil and understanding.
-
Yeah, I was surprised at your tone today, but I laughed and blew it off. I have nothing against you man. I do respect you and all is cool.
But still, we need to make one thing clear. I'm not telling anyone how to do anything. Everyone can live their lives however they want.
Further, I didn't start this thread. I responded to other existing comments and then the theist pile on started and I began answering questions people asked of me.
Many folks don't like it when their religious questions are answered....sorry.
Like I noted, I actually blew off your comment that ended with "Know your dogma, Christian." I was suprised, but I aughed at it and didn't bother. You pushed and criticized my non response so I gave you one and then you're upset because I responded......it's like nailing jello to a wall.
I'm a changed man today. I've tried to continue interacting with others, but to be honest I'm virtually ignored on GB today unless I'm discussing religion. Still, I don't discuss religion for attention.....I don't post much outside of that because it's fairly pointless.
If I post something that's funny or "off color" I continually get the "not very Christian of you"....."typical Christian hypocrite"......"phony Christian a**hole" stuff.....every single time.
And you bet I spread the gospel of Christ....that's the point....that's what believers are commissioned to do. We're also called to defend our faith.
I've repeatedly encourage others to keep religious threads to the religion board, but thread creators desire traction and that's easy on the G&O. So I discuss on the G&O where everyone wants to talk and theist "pile ons" can occur.
Ach, your a good soul. I wish the same could said of me.
-
Ach, your a good soul. I wish the same could said of me.
That fact that you've followed with what you have attests to the fact that you do have a good soul. ;)
This is why I persist on here. And I get PMs all the time of others asking me why I continue to keep doing what I do LOL.
I love the Lord and love all of y'all with a Christian love that desires for each of you to experience God like I have.
I've spent many years on this board and I do care for the members.....well....most of them LOL!
-
Yeah, I was surprised at your tone today, but I laughed and blew it off. I have nothing against you man. I do respect you and all is cool.
But still, we need to make one thing clear. I'm not telling anyone how to do anything. Everyone can live their lives however they want.
Further, I didn't start this thread. I responded to other existing comments and then the theist pile on started and I began answering questions people asked of me.
Many folks don't like it when their religious questions are answered....sorry.
Like I noted, I actually blew off your comment that ended with "Know your dogma, Christian." I was suprised, but I aughed at it and didn't bother. You pushed and criticized my non response so I gave you one and then you're upset because I responded......it's like nailing jello to a wall.
I'm a changed man today. I've tried to continue interacting with others, but to be honest I'm virtually ignored on GB today unless I'm discussing religion. Still, I don't discuss religion for attention.....I don't post much outside of that because it's fairly pointless.
If I post something that's funny or "off color" I continually get the "not very Christian of you"....."typical Christian hypocrite"......"phony Christian a**hole" stuff.....every single time.
And you bet I spread the gospel of Christ....that's the point....that's what believers are commissioned to do. We're also called to defend our faith.
I've repeatedly encourage others to keep religious threads to the religion board, but thread creators desire traction and that's easy on the G&O. So I discuss on the G&O where everyone wants to talk and theist "pile ons" can occur.
I genuinely try to be respectful, but discussing God flat pisses some people off.....can't be helped. I just try to be civil and understanding.
Can you blame us? No.
You're constantly preaching to us how to live our life and what we should believe in. Thus, when you act out of character, youre going to get called on your bullshit. If you want to make jokes and have fun here, that is fine, but then end the preaching. You can't have both. Sorry, you just can't. Its going to be preach to us and try to live a perfectly moral life (although thats impossible) without making offhanded jokes that JC would disprove of, or have fun here and quit spreading the word of God.
-
Can you blame us? No.
You're constantly preaching to us how to live our life and what we should believe in. Thus, when you act out of character, youre going to get called on your bullshit. If you want to make jokes and have fun here, that is fine, but then end the preaching. You can't have both. Sorry, you just can't. Its going to be preach to us and try to live a perfectly moral life (although thats impossible) without making offhanded jokes that JC would disprove of, or have fun here and quit spreading the word of God.
LOL, I literally tell no one how to live their life. That's just how some internalize my words.....scripture convicts my friend.
99% of what I do is defend my faith. Within that I work in the gospel message.
Here's the thing, dr. chimps wasn't accussing me of saying something inappropriate. You, on the other hand, review my posts hoping to find something.
I used the term "off color" as an example, but I quoted it because I already knew you (in particular) would latch onto those words....and you did. You repeatedly attempt to take an example of something (that I actually don't do) and force an absolute onto me. I know and expect the ploy before it happens.
"See, your off color humor is hypocritical....so stop preaching." I expect it and see right through it. Bu further, I don't do it (here marks the beginning of the frantic search for anything in my post history to use as ammunition....good luck with that).
But you're right I can't have it both ways so I can't engage in whimsy, cursing, foul talk and all that.....I choose to represent Christ.
-
The greater context defines the selected passage and makes the definitive statement. Without the context it's up to wild interpretation.
The Bible that you read is nothing but interpretation.
What did I read the other day?
"The King James version of the New Testament was completed in 1611 by 8 members of the Church of England. There were (and still are) no original texts to translate. The oldest manuscripts we have were written down hundreds of years after the last apostle died. There are over 8,000 of these old manuscripts, with no two alike. The King James translators used none of these, anyway. Instead, they edited previous translations to create a version their king and Parliament would approve.
So, 21st Century Christians believe the "Word of God" is a book edited in the 17th Century from 16th Century translations of a 8,000 contradictory copies of 4th Century scrolls that claim to be copies of lost letters written in the 1st Century."
To me, that leaves a lot of room for error and disbelief.
-
The Bible that you read is nothing but interpretation.
What did I read the other day?
"The King James version of the New Testament was completed in 1611 by 8 members of the Church of England. There were (and still are) no original texts to translate. The oldest manuscripts we have were written down hundreds of years after the last apostle died. There are over 8,000 of these old manuscripts, with no two alike. The King James translators used none of these, anyway. Instead, they edited previous translations to create a version their king and Parliament would approve.
So, 21st Century Christians believe the "Word of God" is a book edited in the 17th Century from 16th Century translations of a 8,000 contradictory copies of 4th Century scrolls that claim to be copies of lost letters written in the 1st Century."
To me, that leaves a lot of room for error and disbelief.
Yup. Fucked up, but the translation is a-mazing. Just gorgeous words. Gorgeous.
-
Yup. Fucked up, but the translation is a-mazing. Just gorgeous words. Gorgeous.
Absolutely true.
I wish we knew exactly who the people were who translated it. They deserve recognition.
-
Absolutely true.
I wish we knew exactly who the people were who translated it. They deserve recognition.
There was a book that came out in the last coupla years - detailing the committee that put it together. Buncha real smart guys. Guys you've heard of. King James, right? ;D
-
There was a book that came out in the last coupla years - detailing the committee that put it together. Buncha real smart guys. Guys you've heard of. King James, right? ;D
(http://orig01.deviantart.net/4a27/f/2007/170/e/b/all_hail_king_james_by_dabiankwong.jpg)
-
(http://orig01.deviantart.net/4a27/f/2007/170/e/b/all_hail_king_james_by_dabiankwong.jpg)
Le Bron. The talent is man-i-fest! HOF awaits, unless he Pete Roses' -it.
-
Le Bron. The talent is man-i-fest! HOF awaits, unless he Pete Roses' -it.
No doubt. He is a guaranteed Hall of Famer.
-
Wiggs is here...Time for some edification and understanding.
-
The people in this report- how do you think they rationalize what they do? Do you think there is a possibility that they are actual believers who think they are doing the work of God? Or do you think that they are atheists and scam artists and it ends there? Do you think they might have a more complicated view of religion? Some of them are literally putting people's lives in jeopardy. If you are in any way religious, it seems like stealing in the name of the lord- on such a massive scale, no less- would be hard to cope with mentally. I have been mostly agnostic since my teens, and I was still well into my 20s before I could say "oh my god" without feeling like I was going to hell.
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
great show, >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( i despise these people for how they bilk the poor, uneducated and downtrodden out of their money...... that being said anyone is welcome to send me seed money and i will plant it in my bank account . i might even say a prayer or two for you.... of course that depends on how much you send...
-
great show, >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( i despise these people for how they bilk the poor, uneducated and downtrodden out of their money...... that being said anyone is welcome to send me seed money and i will plant it in my bank account . i might even say a prayer or two for you.... of course that depends on how much you send...
after a few of these transactions , i'll send you some holy popcorn which was annointed by the guy pic'd below...
-
They should all be shot. Starting with Joel Olsteen and his 5k suits.
8)
-
Say what you want about them but they can add a middle syllable to words like nobody's business. "Ju-HE-sus!" Then he went to Subway and got a suh-HAND-wich.
My grandparents, apparently never religious people, got into watching the pruh-HE-chur on the box. "Thru this miracle of television." Didn't send money to The 700 Club as far as I know, although the tryhard marketeyness of that name just makes my skin crawl. Whatever. If it brought them some final comfort. They deserved some after the life they endured.
-
The Gospel of Christ is to be given freely and never, ever forced upon anyone. Televangelists are scum. All of them.
-
LOL, I literally tell no one how to live their life. That's just how some internalize my words.....scripture convicts my friend.
99% of what I do is defend my faith. Within that I work in the gospel message.
Here's the thing, dr. chimps wasn't accussing me of saying something inappropriate. You, on the other hand, review my posts hoping to find something.
I used the term "off color" as an example, but I quoted it because I already knew you (in particular) would latch onto those words....and you did. You repeatedly attempt to take an example of something (that I actually don't do) and force an absolute onto me. I know and expect the ploy before it happens.
"See, your off color humor is hypocritical....so stop preaching." I expect it and see right through it. Bu further, I don't do it (here marks the beginning of the frantic search for anything in my post history to use as ammunition....good luck with that).
But you're right I can't have it both ways so I can't engage in whimsy, cursing, foul talk and all that.....I choose to represent Christ.
Let me rephrase: you don't tell us how to specifically live our lives but by telling us you hope we find Jesus Christ, you are indirectly prescribing a certain way of life or doctrine of living. Don't mince words.
I don't review your posts HOPING to find something. Stop being paranoid. If I read your posts and something strikes me as a contradiction (your words contradict the words and/or life of JC), then I point it out. Stop playing the typical, victimized, paranoid theist (everyone is persecuting me or trying to take away my religion). . I am not looking for anything. I only point out what you write.
-
No, you farking waste of space, the first commandment is 'You shall have no other gods before Me.' Really!? A God needs a copyright codicil off the get-go!? This is why you, and all your religious blowhard exponents, fail. Man, you are such a disappointment. But, trust me, you know this. ::)
"Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 'Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?'
Jesus replied: 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.'"
Matthew 22:34-40
:)
-
I must confess my own shallowness. I scrolled this thread hoping for hot pictures of Jessica Hahn.