PDA

View Full Version : ARCHIVE - You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar



Pages : [1] 2

Knight
February 1st, 2002, 01:12 AM
There is this overriding theme on this forum about how Christians should deal with other Christians and/or non-Christians.

It wasn’t long ago I was in a family discussion. My brother in-law and I were witnessing to another member of the family. The discussion was rather uncomfortable at times, as discussions like that often are. The next day yet another member of my family called me on the phone to inform me that he didn’t approve of the conversation that had transpired the night before, he told me… "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar ya know". He was saying in effect what many on this very forum assert in that Christians should be less judgmental, less confrontational and more tolerant of those who reject Christ.

The saying... "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar ". Is most likely true. I think you actually can catch more flies by pouring out a container of honey onto your back patio than you can by leaving a jar of vinegar or your back porch.

So maybe my friendly relative was right! Maybe I should witness to people using his mantra … "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar ".

Except……

Flies are pests that you want to die.

When you catch flies with honey you don’t wash them off and set them free, you leave them in the honey like you do with fly paper in an effort to kill them so they will no longer land on your kitchen table or try to eat your peanut butter and jelly sandwich or bother you when you are napping.

I don’t want my friends and family to die like flies in honey, I want them to live! Live forever!

Why would I want my friends and family to get STUCK in the honey and then die in their sin?

Did Jesus ever say anything like…… "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar".?

Jesus said…
"You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men."Salt is nothing like sugar (or honey for that matter.) Salt, is much more like vinegar! Jesus didn’t say "You are the sugar (or the honey) of the earth…." He made a point to say "salt"!

Jesus called some people "Vipers" , He called others "swine" He even made His own whip and chased people with it! Are those things more like honey, or more like vinegar?

Some might bring up (in opposition to what I am saying) when Jesus said
"But I say to you who hear: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you"So how can we be salt yet love our enemies? Well maybe the answer lies in how we perceive "love". Maybe its not loving to allow your family and friends to die in honey. The Bible says…
‘You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him."Wow, did you get that? It would be hateful to NOT rebuke your sinning neighbor!

Jesus said "If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him." It doesn’t get anymore clear than that does it? Can you really rebuke someone with honey? Jesus did some REAL salty rebuking in Matthew 11:20 - no honey there!

The Bible says…
Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear. - 1 Timothy 5:20Is it really possible to rebuke in a nice way (with honey so to speak) so that others may fear???

Of course there is always room for gentle consultation when there is ample time or when the sin in question is not of a serious nature. But for the most part I would assert that honey, more often than not, keeps people "stuck" in their sin and is hateful. Harsh rebuke is salty and therefore much more Christ-like and loving.

You can indeed kill more pests with honey but if you don’t want to allow your friends and family to get stuck and die you might want to try salt!

kiwimac
February 1st, 2002, 05:14 AM
Knight,

Do you hear the far off sounds of bells, pealing out "DUNG, DUNG, DUNG"

Kiwimac

Kate
February 1st, 2002, 11:48 AM
INMHO, I think we should witness with our deeds first. I remember when I was just saved and was a zealous babe in Christ, I couldn't shut up. Needless to say, no one wanted to listen, to them I "cought religion". It took years of trying and struggling to live according to what I preached, I now have a theory that actions are louder than words, and we should witness with the way we live, I think it was Ghundi who said "My life is my mission". We can preach to people who come to listen to the preaching vilunteraly, but not do the "intervention" style technique, especially in the family gatherings. Let your family see God in you, you can't fail. ONLY MY OPINION.

Knight
February 1st, 2002, 12:28 PM
Kate thank you for responding!

Kate you say...
INMHO, I think we should witness with our deeds first. I remember when I was just saved and was a zealous babe in Christ, I couldn't shut up. Needless to say, no one wanted to listen, to them I "cought religion".What biblical case can you make for your statement? I am just curious because I can't seem to remember God telling us to worry if people would listen or not.

You continue...
I think it was Ghundi who said "My life is my mission". We can preach to people who come to listen to the preaching vilunteraly, but not do the "intervention" style technique, especially in the family gatherings. Let your family see God in you, you can't fail. ONLY MY OPINION.Did you mean Ghandi? He wasn't a Christian.

I do agree we should be a light and be a living testimony but I also think we need to be more salty!

Yxboom
February 1st, 2002, 12:30 PM
Im sure quoting Ghandi isn't going to get much points in this Forum. Besides why do those who claim not to judge, judge more harshly than those who claim we should. Reminds me of King David after killing Uriah and sleeping with Bathsheba screamed for "Godly JUSTICE and VENGENCE" on the man who unrightly took anothers lamb.
I wonder how many people judge and complain if those men who went into the WTC buildings insisting that they should evacuate may have been harsh and abrupt about getting out. Some may have been told things they didn't like and had to actually stop what they were doing.
How much greater is Hell than a burning building yet if you are not PC and even hurt someone's ego you are the enemy and not the watchman how should be recieved. Seems incompetent. Just imagine the Fireman running out of the WTC building yet saying nothing expecting everyone to follow, or a night watchmen that rather than ring the Town Bell jumped off his post and evacuated expecting everyone to do the same. What good is an alarm that doesn't ring? Or for this Threads sake, a picture of a jar of honey is the closest thing to honey as most flies get when it comes to personal evangelism. ;)

Jaltus
February 1st, 2002, 12:45 PM
Ephesians 4:11

11 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers,

I keep looking for "couch-potatoes and internet junkies" but it is not even in any manuscripts.

Joking aside, I do believe that we are to witness, but I do think that not all are called to be evangelists. Some are called to witness by living their lives but not being afraid to share when the time is right.

However, all are called to be ready to answer the call, to make disciples.

Yxboom
February 1st, 2002, 01:06 PM
Jaltus.....ditto!

1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. ;)

Knight
February 1st, 2002, 01:10 PM
Jaltus you write...
Joking aside, I do believe that we are to witness, but I do think that not all are called to be evangelists. Some are called to witness by living their lives but not being afraid to share when the time is right.I agree for the most part, but I would say the time is almost always right, wouldn't you?
Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. - 2Timothy 4:2

Projill
February 1st, 2002, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Kate thank you for responding!

Kate you say...Did you mean Ghandi? He wasn't a Christian.

I do agree we should be a light and be a living testimony but I also think we need to be more salty!

Okay, to the best of my knowledge and memory, it's spelled "Gandhi" not "Ghandi". I'm open to being wrong, but that's the only way, apart from this board, that I've ever seen it spelled.

Amazing_Grace
February 1st, 2002, 04:02 PM
I agree with Jaltus. I think that everyone is called to do different things. Some have an exceptional gift to witness and evangelise, some have the gift of teaching, some simply prove Christ's Love through the lives that they lead. It doesn't mean you are less Christian because you don't do all of these things.

I am able to witness to those who have questions, but don't believe I should openly evangelise just yet. I do not have the knowledge to do so. I would probably do more harm than good. But I can serve God by living a good example. One day He may call me to witness more often, and I will answer that call.

Now, if one were called to witness, etc., and ignored that call, then I think there would be a problem.

Yxboom
February 1st, 2002, 05:52 PM
Projill majoring in the minors again are we???

Goose
February 2nd, 2002, 01:10 AM
I don't know much about what Jesus did before his ministry, but I do know a lot of what he said.

Knight
February 2nd, 2002, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by Projill


Okay, to the best of my knowledge and memory, it's spelled "Gandhi" not "Ghandi". I'm open to being wrong, but that's the only way, apart from this board, that I've ever seen it spelled. You very well could be right!

Knight
February 2nd, 2002, 01:25 AM
Amazing Grace writes…
I agree with Jaltus. I think that everyone is called to do different things. Some have an exceptional gift to witness and evangelise, some have the gift of teaching, some simply prove Christ's Love through the lives that they lead. It doesn't mean you are less Christian because you don't do all of these things.I agree 100% But that isn’t really my point.

You continue…
One day He may call me to witness more often, and I will answer that call. OK, fine… but when, and if that day comes will you use the mantra "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar". Or will you be willing to be a little salty!

Knight
February 2nd, 2002, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by goose
I don't know much about what Jesus did before his ministry, but I do know a lot of what he said. And your point was???? :cool:

Goose
February 2nd, 2002, 03:41 AM
Knight:


Originally posted by Knight
And your point was???? :cool:

I'm not good a debating and I don't know much about where Jesus worked, what he dressed like or what he did when he was a youngster, but I do know about the effects of his teaching and how he talked and interacted with people. His teaching/rebuking/offensing/loving was a lot how he walked. He fulfilled the law and didn't abolish it.

I find that people debate (not necessarily THIS debate) so much over this verse and that verse and get rapped up in the law they forget where the law came from and sometimes even what they were arguing about! Blind leading the blind I tell you. The essence, central focus of ALL the law (God), and only through that focus can you see where the point of the law comes in. Like a ray in geometry. You have a central point and from that, you can draw another point and create a ray(a line). Like solar rays from the sun. Let's say the Ten Commandments are this point outside of the focus point, as an example.

God - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ten Commandments

*-------------------------------------*--->


Even though they are not at the same point, they are still Godly, just one is in heaven and the other is on "earth", manifested. Like Jesus I guess. But upon that ray/line, closer to God, you could draw another perfectly valid Godly 'point', descended from heaven let's say, as another law smack dab between those two. Let's say this is the two commandments that Jesus gave us, above the Ten Commandments. That is:
Mark 12:30-31 - "And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment. And the second [is] like, [namely] this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these."

God(A)- Two Commandments(B) - Ten Commandments(C)

*----------------*--------------------*--->


There. We can now validate the essence/focus (A) by the two points B and C. not that God needs to be "approved" by us, but WE need to check ourselves. With these rays, you can deduce just about anything, like the your validity on a point or a point of what Jesus and/or his followers are saying in the Bible. There's plenty of commands and laws to practically make a whole circle around our focus, God. Like the Bible itself. Just look at the authors of the books, over how many years, from how many lands, languages, walks of life? ALL HAVING THE SAME FOCUS! How can christians disagree so much? I would think that our differences should be for diversity sake, not on doctrine. I could go on forever I guess about this. What do YOU ALL think of this? I'm a new believer with somewhat abstract ideas I think. I want to base myself as a stone though, more concrete. TELL ME if you see anything wrong with the way I might be thinking or something...I want to be rebuked if I need it. I want the truth. Thanks for taking the time to read this far. Peace.

denversurvivor
February 2nd, 2002, 03:52 AM
Originally posted by Jaltus

I keep looking for "couch-potatoes and internet junkies" but it is not even in any manuscripts.



Don't worry that version is coming out soon.:)

It is thine old king james version that doth hold us backeth.;)

Yxboom
February 2nd, 2002, 10:02 AM
I do agree we should be a light and be a living testimony but I also think we need to be more salty!

I know a few wounds that could use some. ;)

Kate
February 2nd, 2002, 10:05 AM
Jaltus, you are right. Everyone is called according to His time and purpose.

Knight, just because I crinch when a Christian opens his mouth and starts saying you know you are a sinner and you are going to hell at a family party, doesn't mean God didn't call you to do so. I stand corrected... :) If I did it at my family gathering, that would be my last invite... :D But it doesn't mean your family is the same. I think I projected. My apology.

I know my misison and I will assume that others know theirs. I am glad I learned that. Thank you all.

Jaltus
February 2nd, 2002, 12:10 PM
I Corinthians 1:17-24

17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel-- not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.
22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom,
23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,
24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

It is the cross which is offensive, not the one on it. It is the message that should offend, not the one conveying it.

Kate
February 2nd, 2002, 12:31 PM
It is the message that should offend

Whoever came up with the name "Good News"? :D:D

Knight
February 2nd, 2002, 10:44 PM
Kate you say...
Knight, just because I crinch when a Christian opens his mouth and starts saying you know you are a sinner and you are going to hell at a family partyI actually never said that, I said the conversation was "uncomfortable".

Kate
February 3rd, 2002, 09:49 AM
It was just a metaphor for the "message". You never specified what you said. But I see you are very sensitive, you know everyone else is too, so we must take that under consideration. :):)

beanieboy
February 4th, 2002, 12:43 PM
Jesus called some people "Vipers" , He called others "swine" He even made His own whip and chased people with it! Are those things more like honey, or more like vinegar?
______________________________________
I am amazed how often this "vipers" thing comes up.
I'm not a christian, and even I know who he was addressing. And who was that? The "sinners"? The taxcollectors? The harlots?
NOooooooooooooooo. It was the people of the church, who had their noses up in the air, and thought they were better than everyone else. How many times does this have to be pointed out, exactly? Or do those who think they have license to cast condemnation on others because they are christian going to just continue to ignore that?

And let's see. Jesus makes a whip and drives people out of the temple. Was Jesus driving out the harlots? The taxcollectors? The sinners? Noooooooooooooooooo. He was driving out people who were selling sacreliging THE TEMPLE ITSELF. Those (help me - you know it ) WITHIN THE CHURCH. Yeah, there you go.

(eye rolling). I can't believe that I have to point that out to YOU.
Honestly, I think that misusing such verses is spreading falsehood, and to do it when you know better, and it has been pointed out repeatedly, makes you a liar.

Do I condemn you for it? No. You condemn yourself. It will make people think you aren't to be believed. That's its own consequence.

beanieboy
February 4th, 2002, 12:56 PM
It doesn't surprise me that the flies/honey/vinegar analogy is taken literally, and in so, misses the point, much as I see many fundamentalists missing the point of the Bible by taking everything literaly.

Jesus wasn't a door. He doesn't say he was LIKE a door. He says, Behold, I am a door. But that doesn't make him a door.

The saying, "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" means that you can attract more people with kind words than with harsh ones.

I can already here the reactionary extreme. "Yes, but I should nicely ask someone to get out of the street if a car is careening down the road." Well, duh. It's not a black/white issue. Point out a fault, but you better be doing some self reflection first, or else you will be doing no one any good. On another thread someone said, "This is your last chance! Repent or you will spend eternity in hell!" Projill laughed. I rolled my eyes. It did no one any good.

I am drawn to people that seem calm, genuinely giving, humble, kind, self reflective, gentle, and have integrity. When I see someone telling me that it is my "last chance," i think "my last chance with YOU, but I don't need your forgiveness. This is between me and God. Now go away.

There is a time for gentle help, a time for intervention, a time for strong words, and a time to mind your own business.

Goose
February 4th, 2002, 02:29 PM
beanieboy,

You made a lot of points. Just to whom were you addressing your post to? Sounds like you did a lot of judging yourself. Did you judge righteously? Have you taken the splinter out of your own eye before ours?

Your posts were the kind of posts that people write to make themselves feel better about being a non-christian sinner and thinking your going to heaven because you've exposed us as Pharisees. Please, dont tell anyone! Oh wait, am I a hypocrite? I do remember repenting and being forgiven and not doing sinful things anymore and accepting Grace. Hmm, I've cast the beam out of my eye...Sounds pretty close to Matthew 7. You might want to read that.

Just because Jesus died to save the world, doesn't mean that he will save you if you DENY Him. Denying that you believe in Him in public is a good example, like you just made. Can you get any worse? Why would you say your a non-christian in public? IN A CHRISTIAN PEOPLE'S CHAT FORUM?!?!? You probably hate the notion of taking up your own cross and walking like Jesus did, admitting that you CAN be fixed. In your posts, you seem to hate the cross, the burden of your sins that you need to place at Jesus' feet and confession of those sins so that you can be made good. You're trying to make yourself righteous by your knowhow, not by God's.

Mat 10:32-33 "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven."

Mar 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me."

These aren't my words, but the Lord's. Do you feel like you don't need to repent? Are you the type of person that says, "Forgive me Father for the sin I'm about to commit" Are you a repeat offender? I have felt like this before I opened my heart to Him. You CAN have a remmission of sins. I noticed that I was mad at myself because I couldn't be perfect on my own and that it would take TIME because I was so much a sinner. but I learned about the GRACE of God, how if I try and do the things he commands me, I'll be alright.

beanieboy
February 4th, 2002, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by goose
beanieboy,

You made a lot of points. Just to whom were you addressing your post to? Sounds like you did a lot of judging yourself. Did you judge righteously? Have you taken the splinter out of your own eye before ours?


The thread was started by Knight, but it is a quote that the idol Enyart likes to say. I was pointing out that a christian was claiming the right to judge others harshly, based on the fact that Jesus called "some people" vipers. He wasn't calling the sinners vipers. He was calling the religious people vipers. And to just refer to "some people" without specifying that Jesus was addressing those WITHIN the church, to justify judging others harshly, is spreading falsehood.

But I've said this before, and it falls on deaf ears. Pearls before swine, I think is what Christ called it. Hardened hearts. Some people refuse to see the truth, even when they claim to worship someone who is the Truth, the Light , and the Way.

beanieboy
February 4th, 2002, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by goose
beanieboy,

Just because Jesus died to save the world, doesn't mean that he will save you if you DENY Him. Denying that you believe in Him in public is a good example, like you just made. Can you get any worse? Why would you say your a non-christian in public? IN A CHRISTIAN PEOPLE'S CHAT FORUM?!?!? You probably hate the notion of taking up your own cross and walking like Jesus did, admitting that you CAN be fixed. In your posts, you seem to hate the cross, the burden of your sins that you need to place at Jesus' feet and confession of those sins so that you can be made good. You're trying to make yourself righteous by your knowhow, not by God's.


In the words of Depeche Mode, "Everybody's waiting for the Judgement Day, so they can say, 'Told you so.' "

I am a non-Christian. I point it out because I find it weird that when the bible is quoted out of context, I can point it out, yet the follower seems to miss the point. Why would I point that out in a (gasp) christian forum? Might I ask why you would even question me being here? Or are you here just to preach to the choir?

Knight
February 4th, 2002, 04:29 PM
beanie says...
The thread was started by Knight, but it is a quote that the idol Enyart likes to say. I was pointing out that a christian was claiming the right to judge others harshly, based on the fact that Jesus called "some people" vipers. He wasn't calling the sinners vipers. He was calling the religious people vipers. And to just refer to "some people" without specifying that Jesus was addressing those WITHIN the church, to justify judging others harshly, is spreading falsehood.Are you claiming that the Pharisees and the Sadducees would be considered part of "the Church"??

The Sadducees didn't even believe in a after life, angels or a spiritual life in general. John the Bapist called them "vipers" and Jesus called them “hypocrites” and “a wicked and adulterous generation” (Matt. 16:1-4; 22:23).

And you are claiming the Pharisees and the Sadducees are part of Christ's church???

So just who is spreading the falsehood?

Knight
February 4th, 2002, 04:33 PM
Just a side note to keep things on track.... the point is that Jesus often did not use a "honey" type approach when evangelizing to others, He often (not always - but often) used what we might call a "vinegar" type approach when evangelizing regardless of who the audience was.

Goose
February 4th, 2002, 07:11 PM
Beanie,

At it's heart, I think Christianity is a relationship, not a religion. Did you not read my first post on this page? It's on page 2 by my web browser....

Atheist_Divine
February 4th, 2002, 07:18 PM
Of course Christianity is a religion.
Religion = worship of a god. Therefore Christianity is a religion. I don't see what all the fuss is about.

Luther
February 4th, 2002, 07:45 PM
"Religion" just doesn't fit in with our neat, "Christian" reproduction of sixties spirituality. Has anyone seen my blue-tinted sunglasses, bell bottoms, LSD, or my guitar?

I'm partial to being part of the Christian religion.

Personally, I think we need to evangelize as people of God: ie with integrity, truth, and enthusiasm for the GOSPEL.

I believe we should NOT evangelize by: smiling a whole lot more than the average person, reproducing mediocre anti-social sub-cultures for the saking of being relevant, pretending we like someone. That is all a bunch of b.s. and anyone can see through it. Anyone who is attracted to it is also full of a certain substance known as dung.

Luther

His_saving_Grac
February 4th, 2002, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by Knight
There is this overriding theme on this forum about how Christians should deal with other Christians and/or non-Christians.

It wasn’t long ago I was in a family discussion. My brother in-law and I were witnessing to another member of the family. The discussion was rather uncomfortable at times, as discussions like that often are. The next day yet another member of my family called me on the phone to inform me that he didn’t approve of the conversation that had transpired the night before, he told me… "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar ya know". He was saying in effect what many on this very forum assert in that Christians should be less judgmental, less confrontational and more tolerant of those who reject Christ.

The saying... "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar ". Is most likely true. I think you actually can catch more flies by pouring out a container of honey onto your back patio than you can by leaving a jar of vinegar or your back porch.

So maybe my friendly relative was right! Maybe I should witness to people using his mantra … "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar ".

Except……

Flies are pests that you want to die.

When you catch flies with honey you don’t wash them off and set them free, you leave them in the honey like you do with fly paper in an effort to kill them so they will no longer land on your kitchen table or try to eat your peanut butter and jelly sandwich or bother you when you are napping.

I don’t want my friends and family to die like flies in honey, I want them to live! Live forever!

Why would I want my friends and family to get STUCK in the honey and then die in their sin?

Did Jesus ever say anything like…… "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar".?

Jesus said…Is it really possible to rebuke in a nice way (with honey so to speak) so that others may fear???

Of course there is always room for gentle consultation when there is ample time or when the sin in question is not of a serious nature. But for the most part I would assert that honey, more often than not, keeps people "stuck" in their sin and is hateful. Harsh rebuke is salty and therefore much more Christ-like and loving.

You can indeed kill more pests with honey but if you don’t want to allow your friends and family to get stuck and die you might want to try salt! You make many statements here ND, and I think their is a misunderstanding in how you witness. The purpose of "witnessing" is to bring people TO God. If you are not achieving that, then you are not effectively witnessing.

They were NOT saying be more tolerant of those who reject Christ, but show them the love of Christ. Why in the world, would I choose to do the will of an angry, hateful, threatening God? I wouldn't and neither did your family member, nor the one who called you up.

If all you can do in witnessing is to tell them of what will happen if they DON'T, then you are getting false converts out of fear, and not those who truely love and repent to God.

20+ years ago, God, for the second time in my life, came to me and spoke to me. I knew his message, and I rejected it because I could not "love" him. The same quotes and same threats had been used on me to convert, and I did, but I never loved Him. I feared, but didn't feel one bit of love for Him. The reason was, to me, he was not a God of love, but a God of terror. I found more in the bible that made HIM look evil than I did to show that Satan was the evil one.

You see, I was one of those who went to church every week, was a member of the Youth Services, was a participant in all the programs for all the holidays. I was baptized in His name, in the trinity. But I didn't LOVE God. I was just like 99% of those in here, and in the world who don't actually read the entire bible, but hear only 5-10 disjointed verses placed together to get a message, and almost everytime that message was one of fear. Do it or ELSE!

So when, 20+ years ago, as a young adult, I started reading the bible myself, and found out that the bible just did NOT say what I had been taught. So I rejected the god of liars, for that is how I thought of the church, and of Him. I had rejected him for 5 years before He personally protected me from an attack on my sanity, and my soul, by a minion of His nemesis.

At that time, he wanted me to do something. I buried it deep, along with most of the terrors visited on me that day, and ignored Him. I passed on what He did for me, and what I knew he wanted me to say, but I avoided the bible because that was written about the same kind of god that you see. A god of anger, deceit, hate, revenge, and more.

20+ years of my life wasted because I had been taught WRONG about the bible and about God.

A little over a year ago, I had my 6th experiance with God. I call it an experiance because these are what many would have called "miracles", but many don't accept the idea of miracles, so I will use a term that is acceptable to everyone.

I have told everyone what that experiance was, and how it transformed me. I finally realized I wasn't rejecting God, I was rejecting the lies I had been taught about Him. I was rejecting the church doctrines and their need to be the only way to God. Each church likes to think their denomination has the only access to God. And while some may not say that, they all say it with their eyes by mentioning "The preist of this church comes to hear me preach". I have heard that so many times it sickens me. I come to hear/feel God.

You asked if Jesus would ever say "You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar." Yes, and he did. He did it with the parable of the Prodigle son, and the parable of the one lost sheep. God rejoices over the return of one lost sheep more than he does over all the sheep that were never lost.

You call flies pests, and to you, atheists are pests. I think that speaks volumes about your depth of faith. Do you remember what Jesus said about faith moving mountains? When you run from an atheist, he/she has beaten you. Your faith is worthless since you did not allow God/Jesus to work through you and to bring this person to him.

With God, all things are possible. Why do you reject this? Jesus said it, and you say you stand for what Jesus said. If you are full of the Holy Spirit, satan/evil can not touch you, but you can touch the lives of millions. Give it a chance to work in you. He WANTS to work through you, if you will let Him. Do you HONESTLY not believe this?

His_saving_Grac
February 4th, 2002, 08:02 PM
Originally posted by Luther
"Religion" just doesn't fit in with our neat, "Christian" reproduction of sixties spirituality. Has anyone seen my blue-tinted sunglasses, bell bottoms, LSD, or my guitar?

I'm partial to being part of the Christian religion.

Personally, I think we need to evangelize as people of God: ie with integrity, truth, and enthusiasm for the GOSPEL.

I believe we should NOT evangelize by: smiling a whole lot more than the average person, reproducing mediocre anti-social sub-cultures for the saking of being relevant, pretending we like someone. That is all a bunch of b.s. and anyone can see through it. Anyone who is attracted to it is also full of a certain substance known as dung.

Luther You are right Luthor. We shouldn't lie about liking someone. We should, being TRUE christians, really LOVE that person. If you can't, then are you REALLY full of the Holy Spirit? And if not, what are you evangelizing? Words mean nothing if the Spirit isn't there. And if you can not truly love as Jesus did, maybe it isn't outside we should be looking for the problem, but inside. Don't do what I did. You may not have the 20 years he gave me to wisen up.

Goose
February 4th, 2002, 08:04 PM
[i]
I believe we should NOT evangelize by: smiling a whole lot more than the average person, reproducing mediocre anti-social sub-cultures for the saking of being relevant, pretending we like someone. That is all a bunch of b.s. and anyone can see through it. Anyone who is attracted to it is also full of a certain substance known as dung.

Luther [/B]

I agree. But what is a definition if the listener interprets it differently then it's intent? When most people say religion, I bet most people think of the people you just described. Besides, I was describing the heart, not it's outward work. I was born in the 80's by the way....

Goose
February 4th, 2002, 08:35 PM
Originally posted by Atheist_Divine
Of course Christianity is a religion.
Religion = worship of a god. Therefore Christianity is a religion. I don't see what all the fuss is about.

To you that's all it is. Just a simple equation. And a whole man has no need of a physician.

Goose
February 4th, 2002, 08:51 PM
Knight,

I've had similar experiences with my WHOLE family. My brother and I are the only ones who try to have a strong relationship with God.
My parents say that since they grew up going to a catholic school, they don't need what we do(church, bible, etc.). Yet my dad always comes to us with questions. It's hard to describe heavenly things. Like in John, where Jesus was talking about the re-birth to Nicodemus.

Goose

Luther
February 4th, 2002, 09:37 PM
I agree. But what is a definition if the listener interprets it differently then it's intent? When most people say religion, I bet most people think of the people you just described. Besides, I was describing the heart, not it's outward work. I was born in the 80's by the way....
You don't have to be from the 60's to have the religion of a beat-nick (sp?). Those hippies are now the ones in the pulpits and perpetuating the same nonsense.

When I think of "Not a religion, it's a relationship", I think of people trying really hard to be spiritual while reading the Left Behind series. These individuals live a mediocre life, careful not to offend anyone, living a sanitized, lysol-filled life. These people reject creedal statements, promote "no creed but Christ" while they're watching Touched by an Angel and all sorts of other sappy nonsense that evangelicals use as an opiate. To proclaim relationship over creed tends to lose theological significance and reduces salvation to a buddy buddy relationship. It lacks any substance, and is what is most popular today. I am what people would describe as "confessional". I like creeds, I like hymns, I like church history and believe in the communion of saints. This may all sound incredibly random, it's just you happened to step on a pet peeve of mine.

Luther

Kate
February 4th, 2002, 09:41 PM
HSG, I loved your posts!

Goose
February 4th, 2002, 09:59 PM
Luther:


Originally posted by Luther

You don't have to be from the 60's to have the religion of a beat-nick (sp?). Those hippies are now the ones in the pulpits and perpetuating the same nonsense.

When I think of "Not a religion, it's a relationship", I think of people trying really hard to be spiritual while reading the Left Behind series. These individuals live a mediocre life, careful not to offend anyone, living a sanitized, lysol-filled life. These people reject creedal statements, promote "no creed but Christ" while they're watching Touched by an Angel and all sorts of other sappy nonsense that evangelicals use as an opiate. To proclaim relationship over creed tends to lose theological significance and reduces salvation to a buddy buddy relationship. It lacks any substance, and is what is most popular today. I am what people would describe as "confessional". I like creeds, I like hymns, I like church history and believe in the communion of saints. This may all sound incredibly random, it's just you happened to step on a pet peeve of mine.

Luther

thank you for the laughs. :) I agree. I'm not one of those people. I've never even read the Left Behind Series (not that reading them are bad!). I said the "heart". I was trying to focus on the spring of our heart, not the fruits that it waters. In John 3, with the story of Nicodemus, Jesus talked about trying to explain how if someone didn't understand you talking about the things of this world, how much harder it would be to explain heavenly things. I'm trying to say that they are missing something, that which is in the heart. I'm finding this to be difficult, even around my elder brothers and sisters in Christ it seems.

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 08:38 AM
Originally posted by Knight
beanie says...Are you claiming that the Pharisees and the Sadducees would be considered part of "the Church"??

The Sadducees didn't even believe in a after life, angels or a spiritual life in general. John the Bapist called them "vipers" and Jesus called them “hypocrites” and “a wicked and adulterous generation” (Matt. 16:1-4; 22:23).

And you are claiming the Pharisees and the Sadducees are part of Christ's church???

So just who is spreading the falsehood?

Are you claiming these weren't the religious leaders of the time?

Were they part of "Christ's Church?" No. But there were most certainly part of the preChrist Church. They quoted from Scripture.

Are you going to say that, therefore, none of this applies to those in Christ's Church today? That Jesus would not rebuke those who made a spectacle of their holiness, of how often they prayed, of how they exalted themselves for being better than a sinner?

Think I struck a nerve.

Again, I say that you are purposefully spreading falsehood. It's own consequence.

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 08:48 AM
Knight - can you explain specifically what happened? I think it is difficult to discuss an unspecified situation and how it vaguely becomes uncomfortable, and be able to comment on it.

I know the focus is on judging (sigh) again and gentleness vs. harsh rebuke, but it would be more helpful to have your example, and then apply it, rather than the moronic extremist examples that don't move the debate forward.

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 08:56 AM
Originally posted by Yxboom
Im sure quoting Ghandi isn't going to get much points in this Forum. Besides why do those who claim not to judge, judge more harshly than those who claim we should. Reminds me of King David after killing Uriah and sleeping with Bathsheba screamed for "Godly JUSTICE and VENGENCE" on the man who unrightly took anothers lamb.
I wonder how many people judge and complain if those men who went into the WTC buildings insisting that they should evacuate may have been harsh and abrupt about getting out. Some may have been told things they didn't like and had to actually stop what they were doing.
How much greater is Hell than a burning building yet if you are not PC and even hurt someone's ego you are the enemy and not the watchman how should be recieved. Seems incompetent. Just imagine the Fireman running out of the WTC building yet saying nothing expecting everyone to follow, or a night watchmen that rather than ring the Town Bell jumped off his post and evacuated expecting everyone to do the same. What good is an alarm that doesn't ring? Or for this Threads sake, a picture of a jar of honey is the closest thing to honey as most flies get when it comes to personal evangelism. ;)

If you were to walk in on your 5 year old playing doctor with the neighbor girl, would you say, YOUUUUUUU SINNNNNER! YOU PERVERT, WITH A LUSTFUL HEART! YOU ARE GOING TO HELL FOR THIS DISGUSTING THING THAT YOU ARE DOING, UNLESS YOU REPENT RIGHT NOW!

Oh, wait. Probably not. Because that would be extreeeeeeeeemist. See how that works. There is gentle rebuke. And there is harsh rebuke. And sometimes, harsh rebuke results in more harm than good.

Here's a book of Common Sense. Check it out.

Goose
February 5th, 2002, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy


Are you claiming these weren't the religious leaders of the time?

Were they part of "Christ's Church?" No. But there were most certainly part of the preChrist Church. They quoted from Scripture.

Are you going to say that, therefore, none of this applies to those in Christ's Church today? That Jesus would not rebuke those who made a spectacle of their holiness, of how often they prayed, of how they exalted themselves for being better than a sinner?

Think I struck a nerve.

Again, I say that you are purposefully spreading falsehood. It's own consequence.

The devil tempted Jesus in the wilderness while he was filled with the Holy Spirit. The devil quoted scripture!


Luke 4:9-13 "And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:" Devil quotes scripture here: "For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee: And in [their] hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season."

What you say is nothing new.

What you say is not a blow to christianity.

What you say applies to the world in which God lived in before there were christians who could openly rebuke these things.

There was evil like there is today. Satan was a religeous leader and still is. People worship him. That doesn't mean he's a member with God just because of human perception, like the perception the faithless had of the Pharisees. The devil loves people who worship themselves. Some of these people even go to church and I'm sure even some are on the pulpit! There are "christians" out there that Jesus warns us of. Worse will be done to these people in the end days then what was done to Sodom.

Who's making a spectacle of their holiness here? You obviously don't give Jesus the credit. Who do you give credit to? I give credit of my cleansing to Christ. I boast NOT of myself but of Him who cleansed me.

I think I struck a nerve. Particularly the brain part.


Pro 24:24-27 "He that saith unto the wicked, Thou [art] righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him: But to them that rebuke [him] shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them."

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 10:41 AM
Goose writes...
Knight,

I've had similar experiences with my WHOLE family. My brother and I are the only ones who try to have a strong relationship with God. My parents say that since they grew up going to a catholic school, they don't need what we do(church, bible, etc.). Yet my dad always comes to us with questions. It's hard to describe heavenly things. Like in John, where Jesus was talking about the re-birth to Nicodemus.

GooseI hear ya goose! What many people know (and some do not) is that Jesus did not come here preaching "unity". He came preaching truth. And sometimes the truth divides!
Luke 12:51 “Do you suppose that I came to give peace on earth? I tell you, not at all, but rather division. 52 “For from now on five in one house will be divided: three against two, and two against three. 53 “Father will be divided against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.”

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 10:47 AM
beanie says...
Are you claiming these weren't the religious leaders of the time?

Were they part of "Christ's Church?" No. But there were most certainly part of the preChrist Church. They quoted from Scripture.Beanie almost every person on the face of the earth in Jesus time was "religious", and some of them were "leaders" but only a TINY fraction would have been considered a part of the "Church".

Quoting scripture hardly qualifies one as part of the church, you should know that as even you and many other non-christians on thin board quote scripture.

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 10:53 AM
beanie says...
Oh, wait. Probably not. Because that would be extreeeeeeeeemist. See how that works. There is gentle rebuke. And there is harsh rebuke. And sometimes, harsh rebuke results in more harm than good.Beanie I think you are missing the point.

Let me see if I can get you back on track....

I think there are times for both harsh rebuke and gentle rebuke or even just plain friendship and fellowship.

But the point is that many Christians in today's world think ANY type of rebuke (harsh or gentle) is un-Christian, which is where I disagree.

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by Knight
beanie says...Beanie almost every person on the face of the earth in Jesus time was "religious", and some of them were "leaders" but only a TINY fraction would have been considered a part of the "Church".

Quoting scripture hardly qualifies one as part of the church, you should know that as even you and many other non-christians on thin board quote scripture.

The devil quotes scripture in the Gospel, but I wasn't saying that the devil was part of the Church.

Maybe I misunderstand.

My understanding is that the Pharissees and Sagusees (which I mispelled terribly) were the ones teaching in the synagogues. They had a lot of power, and Jesus was not only challenging this power, but exposing them for projecting outwardly that they were holy, while being rotten inside. They would roam the streets, beating their backs publicly, saying, "Search me, Oh, God" because they wanted people to see them as holy, and many did. And Jesus challenged this "falsehood." They claimed to preach God, yet because they were self serving, ended up leading people farther away from God.
The biggest area of contention, however, was that in exposing them as "blind fools," he challenged their authority, and in so, challenged their power. If they were exposed for what they were, no one would follow them or listen to them. And this is the biggest issue they had with Jesus. He was a threat to their power.

Am I wrong in this?

And secondly, you still haven't answered me. Jesus was talking to religious leaders, even if they were a TINY segment of the church. He wasn't talking to people who were seeking him. He wasn't saying, "Hey, Zacheus, you viper's brood! Hey, Mary Magdelan, you dog! You swine!" He was talking to people who considered themself better than others in the eyes of God. That was my point. To then KNOW that, but then say, "well, then I can go call a sinner a viper."
In the passage where Jesus was harsh with the Pharissees, he said that they made their converts twice as prepared for hell as they were themselves. Isn't, in KNOWINGLY misusing a passage, and equating it to permission to calling people outside the church vipers, at it's best, irresponsible, and at it worst, just bold face lying?

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 12:19 PM
Beanie states...
And secondly, you still haven't answered me. Jesus was talking to religious leaders, even if they were a TINY segment of the church.Ahhhhh!!! There you go again, and you were getting so close! The Pharisees and the Sadducees were not part of what we would call "the church"! The Pharisees and the Sadducees might have considered themselves part of their own church but they were not part of "the church" if we are to take the term "the church" to mean the followers of Jesus.

Didn't you read where I told you the Sadducees did not believe in a afterlife, angels or spiritual things in general?

Jesus was harsh with people outside His group of followers at times AND inside His group of followers at times! Remember what He said to Peter...
But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.” - Matthew 16:23

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by Knight
beanie says...Beanie I think you are missing the point.

Let me see if I can get you back on track....

I think there are times for both harsh rebuke and gentle rebuke or even just plain friendship and fellowship.

But the point is that many Christians in today's world think ANY type of rebuke (harsh or gentle) is un-Christian, which is where I disagree.

As I said, there is time for harsh rebuke, gentle rebuke, etc. I agree with you. It's just that on TOL it works like this:

A: One should not always use harsh rebuke. Sometimes it does more harm than good.
B: Oh, like when someone is in a burning building? You should just ask them to gently leave? Or maybe just let the building burn because you don't want to wake them?
A: Uh, no. That's extremist. I said "always." Sometimes it is inappropriate, such as, when a child does something that is relatively innocent, like playing doctor.
B: So we should NEVER use harsh rebuke?
A: AHHHHHHH! I said we should not ALWAYS use rebuke. It's not an always or never issue.

It's really frustrating.

Again, it is easier to apply one's belief to a specific situation, and not leave room for extremist burning building examples. Would you mind telling us what happened at the family gathering, what you said, what they said, etc., so that we can understand what we are talking about?

I don't know if you were in a screaming match over the Trinity during a Christmas Eve dinner, and telling your relative that they were going to burn in hell, while their kids sat there with tears streaming down their face, or if you were just confronting someone about their drinking problem, and how it is affecting the family. I have no reference except a vague situation where there was "uncomfortableness." Since you brought up your situation, would you mind being specific of what happened, so that we can use it as an example, and then assess the situation? And please, let's use it as an example, and not as an excuse to berate Knight.
For all I know, we may be in total agreement. Because I am unsure of the reference, I can't be sure.

Personally, I can't think of anyone who thinks they should never rebuke someone, christian or non. Again, I can't comment on the vagueness of "christians who never use harsh rebuke" without given specific examples of modern day life.

However, I bet there are more people in churches that say, "You are welcome here, because we are all part of God's family," than churches that make the world seem like the enemy, and treat them as such, saying, "You're going to hellll!" The latter brings back a memory of being 7 or 8, when my neighbors seemed to delight in telling me that, because I was Protestant, and they were Catholic. It begins by putting the other person on the defense. And that was never Christ's approach.

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 12:48 PM
Is that true, Knight? Can anyone confirm/deny this? This is not what I was taught.

Even if this were true, can we then say that it is okay to randomly call people vipers? That Jesus should have called sinners names in order to bring them to him? That is all I am saying.

If you are a hustler, people are going to be calling you names already, like skank and ho. Do you honestly think calling someone a slut, and then telling them that God can save them, is going to make them say, "Hey, I want to follow your religion?" I can tell you from experience that I was called faggot in high school by people that thought it was fun to pick on those who were weaker. Being called a faggot by a christian makes me view them exactly the same - as someone who enjoys being cruel and mean to other people.

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 12:50 PM
.

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 01:12 PM
Beanie says...
As I said, there is time for harsh rebuke, gentle rebuke, etc. I agree with you. It's just that on TOL it works like this:

A: One should not always use harsh rebuke. Sometimes it does more harm than good.
B: Oh, like when someone is in a burning building? You should just ask them to gently leave? Or maybe just let the building burn because you don't want to wake them?
A: Uh, no. That's extremist. I said "always." Sometimes it is inappropriate, such as, when a child does something that is relatively innocent, like playing doctor.
B: So we should NEVER use harsh rebuke?
A: AHHHHHHH! I said we should not ALWAYS use rebuke. It's not an always or never issue.I think you make some good points and I think allot of your frustration is simply the result of the limitations of an internet forum. It would be far easier at times to talk one on one and many of the misunderstandings would vanish.

You continue...
I don't know if you were in a screaming match over the Trinity during a Christmas Eve dinner, and telling your relative that they were going to burn in hell, while their kids sat there with tears streaming down their face, or if you were just confronting someone about their drinking problem, and how it is affecting the family.The specific situation is somewhat irrelevant I only used it as a vehicle to get to the question is the term "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" applicable to biblical evangelism?

You continue...
"You're going to hellll!" The latter brings back a memory of being 7 or 8, when my neighbors seemed to delight in telling me that, because I was Protestant, and they were Catholic. It begins by putting the other person on the defense. And that was never Christ's approach.You see that is the point... sometimes Jesus DID use that approach!
“Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? - Matthew 23:33

His_saving_Grac
February 5th, 2002, 01:18 PM
Actually, Goose, you ARE boasting of yourself. You did not reply in humbleness, but out of personal pride.

You say that satan tempted Christ with scripture, but I have yet to read those verses in our bibles.

As Josephus Flavious reported, as well the Talmud, the pharisees were actually very religious and helpd tightly to their convictions. They both claim (and saw during their life times since they were written soon after the death of Jesus) the pharisees were " experts in scriptural interpretation, who remained in close touch with the ordinary people, working alongside them as humble tailors, showmakers and the like, and endgendering much affection for their education of children, for their founding of regional synagogues, and for the developement of an oral tradition of religious wisdom..." (Jesus: The Evidence by Ian Wilson, Page 105)

The author who is a christian, further went on that Josephus describe them having the "multitude on their side" They did not like the Roman regime and let them know. They had a paramilitary wing (the zealots) from which Simon the disciple came and probably Judas Iscariot also since Iscariot is closer to a nickname of "daggerman" or "assassin".

The pharisees entertained Jesus socially and exhibited a genuine concern for his safety (Luke 7:36; 13:31; 14;1 and elsewhere) anc according to Acts it was a pharisee called Gamaliel who supported the jewish christian community shortly after Jesus death against the jewish Sanhedrin (acts 5:34-40).

The pharisees believed in angels and spirits, and a conviction of a bodily ressurection at the end of time which is why they were against creamation of the body.

The Sadducees, on the other hand, rejected all of this and it was their High Preist, Caiaphas, who hated Jesus the most and condemed him to death. They were the rich ones making the money off of the poor through the contributions to the church, buying up the poor people land and making them have to work the fields they once owned.

You claim satan is a religious leader, which I think you misstated. Satan does not appear in person to people demanding their worship. It is only once even mentioned in the bible, and that was the testing of Jesus. Those who claim to worship him have never met him, and 99.9% of what you see in movies is false.

So just as God is not a religious leader, neither is satan. God demands not our worship, but our love.

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 01:37 PM
Beanie says...
Even if this were true, can we then say that it is okay to randomly call people vipers?Randomnly calling people "viper's" would not only be wrong but psychotic don't you think?

You continue...
Do you honestly think calling someone a slut, and then telling them that God can save them, is going to make them say, "Hey, I want to follow your religion?"Certainly not initially, but it is a Christians obligation to tell a sinner what the consequences of their actions will be.
You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him. - Leviticus 19:17

1Timothy 5:20 Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.

2Timothy 4:2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.

Titus 1:13 This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith,

Titus 2:15 Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you. Speak the truth and let let the chips fall where the may!

His_saving_Grac
February 5th, 2002, 01:51 PM
ND, PLEASE quit using the concordances and just read the entire bible. Quit looking up the word you want (in this case, rebuke) and then posting the passages you deem fit. If you read the entire bible, you will see that it is overwhelmingly against your thoughts.

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 02:00 PM
HSG writes...
ND, PLEASE quit using the concordances and just read the entire bible. Quit looking up the word you want (in this case, rebuke) and then posting the passages you deem fit. If you read the entire bible, you will see that it is overwhelmingly against your thoughts.In this case the word "rebuke" was 100% relevant to the discussion.

His_saving_Grac
February 5th, 2002, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by Knight
HSG writes...In this case the word "rebuke" was 100% relevant to the discussion. I know it was relevant to your part of the discussion, but the words would loose their meaning in the overall context of the bible. You see, a concordance just shows you where that word is used, it does not give context. The Bible itself is the context. Everything must be read as a whole. The bible teaches us much, but as has been pointed out, it can be taken out of contest.

To use an example, monogamy is what we are taught. One husband, one wife. But if we look at the lives of all those who are people we rever in the OT, polygamy was the basis, rather that the exception. Only one person in the OT heros or leaders was monogamous. All others were polygamous. I challenge you to identify the only one (And it is NOT Adam)

If we also pick and choose our verses, incest is good, murder is good, infantcide is good, lying is good, greed is good, I can go on and on. It isn't until we read the entire book as a whole that we see the faults in verses. In fact, were it not for king James, the bible would HAVE to be read as a book, since chapters and verses did not exist until he placed them there.

You concordance is removing you from the entire word of God Instead of reading the bible, you look up only those verses supporting your claims. This is the biased way for knowing God. You have your belief and only want to read those words that agree with your belief. And that is exactly what a concordance does. It helps you find the words for your belief without having to read the entire bible and getting ALL of the wisdom contained therewithin. You are doing God and injustice, as well as hurting yourself by skipping everything but what a concordance (made by a man) has deemed nessessary for his biases also.

That is why you needed me to point out certain scripture. You didn't have a key word, so it wasn't accessable to you in the concordance, and you hadn't read it yourself in the bible. Don't you feel you are missing out of something great by doing this?

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 02:30 PM
HSG please demonstrate how biblical context on the word 'rebuke' would change anything regarding this thread and discussion.

His_saving_Grac
February 5th, 2002, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by Knight
HSG please demonstrate how biblical context on the word 'rebuke' would change anything regarding this thread and discussion. I will exactly when you can show me why the reading of a concordance overrides the reading of the bible, You seem stuck on this idea, when what I was trying to point out to you is the usage of a concordance instead of knowledge of the entire bible is not beneficial to our faith.

The bible is a whole. It is not a bunch of individual parts to be taken as you see fit. Paul explains this in 2 Corinthians.

Why do you get upset when I ask you to try to see another point of view? I have already shown that I once believed as you do. I know better now. What will it hurt you to become completely familiar with the entire bible?

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 02:53 PM
HSG writes...
I will exactly when you can show me why the reading of a concordance overrides the reading of the bibleOK, from now on before either one of us posts we must read the entire Bible, I will start now and get back to you in about two weeks (I am a slow reader). ;)

You continue...
Why do you get upset when I ask you to try to see another point of view?Who is upset? I am having a ball!

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 03:06 PM
Knight - Would you mind providing, at least, a hypothetical situation? Then explain how you would approach it, and the issue you have with those who never want to offend anyone, and explain the effect of your approach.

beanieboy
February 5th, 2002, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy

In the passage where Jesus was harsh with the Pharissees, he said that they made their converts twice as prepared for hell as they were themselves. Isn't, in KNOWINGLY misusing a passage, and equating it to permission to calling people outside the church vipers, at it's best, irresponsible, and at it worst, just bold face lying?

You never answered this.

Goose
February 5th, 2002, 04:17 PM
His Saving Grace,


Actually, Goose, you ARE boasting of yourself. You did not reply in humbleness, but out of personal pride.

Could you point out where I boasted of myself? Personal pride in what? In God? I am prideful of God. No more than a servent is prideful of his righteous master. If a master forgave you of your debts, would you not rejoice and tell people out in the streets? Or have a high countanence?


You say that satan tempted Christ with scripture, but I have yet to read those verses in our bibles.

What bible are you reading? I just quoted the place in the bible where it is written! I'll do it again. Read the whole thing. It's cool. You mentioned that you might have heard about this or something which is cool. Luke 4:1-13 for all three temptations.


Luke 4:9-13 "And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:And in [their] hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season."

This is fundamental christian stuff. Most non-believers know about these verses. I can't believe you're telling Knight about how he needs to get back to the bible and taking things out of context, when you obviously haven't read some key points of it.


You claim satan is a religious leader, which I think you misstated. Satan does not appear in person to people demanding their worship. It is only once even mentioned in the bible, and that was the testing of Jesus. Those who claim to worship him have never met him, and 99.9% of what you see in movies is false.

So just as God is not a religious leader, neither is satan. God demands not our worship, but our love.

I've never physically met Jesus, but in spirit. I'm sure it's the same way with satan. I'm not sure I understand you. Here's The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Editionmy definition of leader.

lead·er (ldr)
n.

1.One that leads or guides.
2.One who is in charge or in command of others.

By this definitions, Jesus leads christians, and he also commands christians. Jesus on earth, teaching the disciples is a good example of leading or guiding. The Ten Commandments(or even the Two Commandments) are a good example of commanding. He will be the King in Heaven! A leader! Absolute authority.

You say that God demands love and not worship. How do you seperate these two? Can you point me in the right direction(bible story or something) if I'm being led astray? Thanks

Goose
February 5th, 2002, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by Knight
HSG writes...Who is upset? I am having a ball!

Me too! This is fun!

Knight
February 5th, 2002, 05:08 PM
beanie.... you write...
Knight - Would you mind providing, at least, a hypothetical situation? Then explain how you would approach it, and the issue you have with those who never want to offend anyone, and explain the effect of your approach.Beanie I am sorry to mislead you, I am doing my best not to. But the situation or example is irrelevant at least in this debate.

The point is.... is the term "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" an appropriate term to use in relation to evangelizing to your loved ones? Is the term an effective strategy guide? And is it a strategy or saying that Jesus would have used.

Kate
February 5th, 2002, 09:34 PM
Why Should We Witness?

Have you ever asked yourself, "Why should I witness?" Several reasons should come to mind. First, because Jesus commands you to: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit." (Matt. 28:19). Also, Ezek. 3:11 says, "and go to the exiles, to the sons of your people, and speak to them and tell them, whether they listen or not..."

Second, you must witness because you love the unsaved (if you don't, you should). The most loving thing you can do is present the gospel in hopes of bringing others to salvation. Galatians 5:22 lists love as one of the fruit of the Spirit. It is love's nature to give. Take for example John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son..." Love gives, and if you have only a small portion of His love, you will want to give to others.

Third, witness because it is a wise thing to do. Prov. 11:30 says, "...he who is wise wins souls." Now, I know I am not a very wise person. But, since God says I'll be wise to win souls, or try to, then great, let me at it. I want to be wise in God's sight.

Fourth, witness to keep people out of hell. Hell is a terrifying place of utter anguish and eternal separation from God. Those who are not saved go there. Witnessing is an attempt to keep them out of hell.

Fifth, witness because it pleases God and brings glory to His name.

And finally, and most important, witness so they may find the love and fellowship of God (1 John 1:3), the greatest of all treasures. I can think of no greater gift than salvation. It frees the sinner from sin, it delivers the lost from damnation, and it reveals the true and living God to those who don't know Him.

The angels of heaven rejoice greatly when anyone passes from judgment into salvation (Luke 15:10). Shouldn't we as Christians rejoice too? Shouldn't we weep over the lost? Shouldn't we ask the Lord of the field to send laborers into His harvest (Luke 10:2)? Certainly! The salvation of others is the goal of your efforts. The love of God is your motive. Is there anything greater? So, give.

From: http://www.carm.org/evangelism/whywitness.htm

His_saving_Grac
February 5th, 2002, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by goose
His Saving Grace,



I've never physically met Jesus, but in spirit. I'm sure it's the same way with satan. I'm not sure I understand you. Here's The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Editionmy definition of leader.

lead·er (ldr)
n.

1.One that leads or guides.
2.One who is in charge or in command of others.

By this definitions, Jesus leads christians, and he also commands christians. Jesus on earth, teaching the disciples is a good example of leading or guiding. The Ten Commandments(or even the Two Commandments) are a good example of commanding. He will be the King in Heaven! A leader! Absolute authority.

You say that God demands love and not worship. How do you seperate these two? Can you point me in the right direction(bible story or something) if I'm being led astray? Thanks To the part about satan that didn't show up here, I am talking about the scriptures that satan was supposedly quoting. Not where the temptation happened. I am very curious about the temptation written in Luke since, even at best guess, Luke is attributed to having been the Physician companion of Paul. Paul, by his own words was not taught by Jesus, but immediately went out and preached the word.. Since Luke never met Jesus, how did HE, of all paople, find out what happened in secret in the desert between Jesus and satan, when none of the Apostles themselves seemed to have heard of this story.

As to you definition, I'm really not sure what you are trying to get at here. Jesus never said for anyone to worship Him. It is no where in the bible. God is a different story, but not Jesus. There is not one verse in the entire bible talking about worshiping Jesus, but to worship God there are many.

Satan is not woreshipped. Those who claim satanism will admit themselves it is just because they are going against the grain. They do not believe satan exists, nor that he grants anything to their calls. They only want the freedom to do as they please, and most often this is sexual. I know since they tried to enlinst me more than once.

As to the boasting part, Paul explains it very well all through both books of Corinthians. Read through them slowly and you will see what I meant.

His_saving_Grac
February 5th, 2002, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by Knight
beanie.... you write...Beanie I am sorry to mislead you, I am doing my best not to. But the situation or example is irrelevant at least in this debate.

The point is.... is the term "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" an appropriate term to use in relation to evangelizing to your loved ones? Is the term an effective strategy guide? And is it a strategy or saying that Jesus would have used. ND, I sincerely want to compliment you on your change of posting style. You have answered BB in humility and in love. Thank you.

I still disagree with your basic premise, but I will say that you are using honey right now, and it is working.

His_saving_Grac
February 5th, 2002, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by Kate
Why Should We Witness?

Have you ever asked yourself, "Why should I witness?" Several reasons should come to mind. First, because Jesus commands you to: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit." (Matt. 28:19). Also, Ezek. 3:11 says, "and go to the exiles, to the sons of your people, and speak to them and tell them, whether they listen or not..."

Second, you must witness because you love the unsaved (if you don't, you should). The most loving thing you can do is present the gospel in hopes of bringing others to salvation. Galatians 5:22 lists love as one of the fruit of the Spirit. It is love's nature to give. Take for example John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son..." Love gives, and if you have only a small portion of His love, you will want to give to others.

Third, witness because it is a wise thing to do. Prov. 11:30 says, "...he who is wise wins souls." Now, I know I am not a very wise person. But, since God says I'll be wise to win souls, or try to, then great, let me at it. I want to be wise in God's sight.

Fourth, witness to keep people out of hell. Hell is a terrifying place of utter anguish and eternal separation from God. Those who are not saved go there. Witnessing is an attempt to keep them out of hell.

Fifth, witness because it pleases God and brings glory to His name.

And finally, and most important, witness so they may find the love and fellowship of God (1 John 1:3), the greatest of all treasures. I can think of no greater gift than salvation. It frees the sinner from sin, it delivers the lost from damnation, and it reveals the true and living God to those who don't know Him.

The angels of heaven rejoice greatly when anyone passes from judgment into salvation (Luke 15:10). Shouldn't we as Christians rejoice too? Shouldn't we weep over the lost? Shouldn't we ask the Lord of the field to send laborers into His harvest (Luke 10:2)? Certainly! The salvation of others is the goal of your efforts. The love of God is your motive. Is there anything greater? So, give.

From: http://www.carm.org/evangelism/whywitness.htm Fantastic post. The only thing that I think should be added, is an explanation on HOW to witness. That seems to be a topic of debate here. Witnessing is great only IF it reaps the rewards of more souls for God. If, in our witnessing, we drive others from God, then we are not witnessing correctly.

You are witnessing correctly (although I personally won't use the fear of hell as a reason. If they won't come for love, then they shouldn't come for fear) but I agree 100% in what you have said.

His_saving_Grac
February 5th, 2002, 11:51 PM
Originally posted by Knight
OK, from now on before either one of us posts we must read the entire Bible, I will start now and
get back to you in about two weeks (I am a slow reader). well OK then, but I have already done this more than once, so that means I can post while you take a break.:p

(If you can honestly read the entire bible in 2 week I honestly commend you. I am a very fast reader who eats up books. I had read several thousand Sci Fi/Fantasy books by the age of 21, but there is no way I could read the entire bible start to finish in two weeks. I could read the NT in 2 weeks, but not the OT.)

beanieboy
February 6th, 2002, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by Knight
beanie.... you write...Beanie I am sorry to mislead you, I am doing my best not to. But the situation or example is irrelevant at least in this debate.

The point is.... is the term "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" an appropriate term to use in relation to evangelizing to your loved ones? Is the term an effective strategy guide? And is it a strategy or saying that Jesus would have used.

Jesus did use it. Remember the woman about to be stoned? He wasn't calling her a whore. He wasn't even carrying around a bag of stones looking for someone who deserved to be killed. He just happened to be passing by. And before he told her to sin no more, he said, "neither do I condemn you." Not exactly "vinegar" in my book.

Then again, sometimes JC was pretty harsh. I mean, that whole "vipers brood" thing, the man went off.

So, would he say the honey/vinegar thing? Maybe. I think he would especially apply it to some diciple who was berating someone into submitting to God. "Repent, dang it! REPENT, you stupid whore! Do you want to go to hell? Is that what you want?"
I think JC would say it in an EXAMPLE like that. In fact, I think he would say, "Look at yourself! You're angry. You're name calling. You're spitting poisin. You are making this about you, and it's about her and God. Now, go in the corner for a time out, and think about what you said."

Personally, in my experience, most people respond stronger to encouragement than they do to shame. Most people, when told that they are worth something, actually start to respect themselves.

If someone has a drinking problem, and has crashed their car, been fired from their job because they miss work so much, and their wife has left them, yet insists they don't have a problem, you may have to be a little more harsh. But ultimately, there is little you can do if they refuse to get help.

My brother-in-law used to be rather confrontational with me about my religious beliefs, and as a favor to my mother, would try and get me to believe what he believed. Because he wouldn't listen to me, I told him that I wouldn't listen to him. I would say something like "god is inside all of us." And he would say, "When I look inside, all I see is evil and darkness." And I would say, "That's really sad. I'm sorry that that is all you can see. It must make you feel very bad about yourself. " He would explain that the only good in him was God. I would say, "I thought you had God INSIDE your heart." He would get frustrated and then say something about tempting my eternal fate of doom in hell by my "new age" ideas. I would say, "and you risk joy in this life thinking that all that you are is evil, and all the good in you comes from some other source." And then it got heated. "Uncomfortable," you could say, to the point where I finally just stopped talking. The vinegar thing, in this case, wasn't working. It was obvious. And like a wind blowing harder and harder, trying to get a jacket off a man, I wrapped the jacket even tighter around my body.

My brother was a pastor. His views are open, because they were constantly challenged in school. He listens to me, and because he listens to me, I listen to him. At first I was reluctant to talk to him, but soon I learned that instead of prejudging me, he would listen and try to understand me and accept my ideas, and then give me something that challenged them. He is like the sun that comes out, and because the sun gently shines on the man, the man opens his jacket, and eventually takes it off.

Many people approached Jesus who did not approach the religious leaders. What was it that Jesus did that was different

beanieboy
February 6th, 2002, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by Knight
beanie.... you write...Beanie I am sorry to mislead you, I am doing my best not to. But the situation or example is irrelevant at least in this debate.

The point is.... is the term "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" an appropriate term to use in relation to evangelizing to your loved ones? Is the term an effective strategy guide? And is it a strategy or saying that Jesus would have used.

Jesus did use it. Remember the woman about to be stoned? He wasn't calling her a whore. He wasn't even carrying around a bag of stones looking for someone who deserved to be killed. He just happened to be passing by. And before he told her to sin no more, he said, "neither do I condemn you." Not exactly "vinegar" in my book.

Then again, sometimes JC was pretty harsh. I mean, that whole "vipers brood" thing, the man went off.

So, would he say the honey/vinegar thing? Maybe. I think he would especially apply it to some diciple who was berating someone into submitting to God. "Repent, dang it! REPENT, you stupid whore! Do you want to go to hell? Is that what you want?"
I think JC would say it in an EXAMPLE like that. In fact, I think he would say, "Look at yourself! You're angry. You're name calling. You're spitting poisin. You are making this about you, and it's about her and God. Now, go in the corner for a time out, and think about what you said."

Personally, in my experience, most people respond stronger to encouragement than they do to shame. Most people, when told that they are worth something, actually start to respect themselves.

If someone has a drinking problem, and has crashed their car, been fired from their job because they miss work so much, and their wife has left them, yet insists they don't have a problem, you may have to be a little more harsh. But ultimately, there is little you can do if they refuse to get help.

My brother-in-law used to be rather confrontational with me about my religious beliefs, and as a favor to my mother, would try and get me to believe what he believed. Because he wouldn't listen to me, I told him that I wouldn't listen to him. I would say something like "god is inside all of us." And he would say, "When I look inside, all I see is evil and darkness." And I would say, "That's really sad. I'm sorry that that is all you can see. It must make you feel very bad about yourself. " He would explain that the only good in him was God. I would say, "I thought you had God INSIDE your heart." He would get frustrated and then say something about tempting my eternal fate of doom in hell by my "new age" ideas. I would say, "and you risk joy in this life thinking that all that you are is evil, and all the good in you comes from some other source." And then it got heated. "Uncomfortable," you could say, to the point where I finally just stopped talking. The vinegar thing, in this case, wasn't working. It was obvious. And like a wind blowing harder and harder, trying to get a jacket off a man, I wrapped the jacket even tighter around my body.

My brother was a pastor. His views are open, because they were constantly challenged in school. He listens to me, and because he listens to me, I listen to him. At first I was reluctant to talk to him, but soon I learned that instead of prejudging me, he would listen and try to understand me and accept my ideas, and then give me something that challenged them. He is like the sun that comes out, and because the sun gently shines on the man, the man opens his jacket, and eventually takes it off.

Prostitutes, lepers, taxcollects, and the other rejects of soeciety approached Jesus who did not approach the religious leaders. What was it that Jesus did that was different?

Atheist_Divine
February 6th, 2002, 11:07 AM
HSG,
Just a tiny point - King James wasn't the one who added the verse and chapters to the Bible, that came rather earlier. In the middle ages, I think :)

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 12:30 PM
.

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by His_saving_Grac
To the part about satan that didn't show up here, I am talking about the scriptures that satan was supposedly quoting. Not where the temptation happened.


Psa 91:11 "For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways."


I am very curious about the temptation written in Luke since, even at best guess, Luke is attributed to having been the Physician companion of Paul. Paul, by his own words was not taught by Jesus, but immediately went out and preached the word.. Since Luke never met Jesus, how did HE, of all paople, find out what happened in secret in the desert between Jesus and satan, when none of the Apostles themselves seemed to have heard of this story.

Why would Jesus keep His Word a secret? He came as the light of the world! Not to hide it under a bushel. I'm sure he told his people everything. I wasn't there, only in the Holy Spirit which Jesus had, but I believe on that. Something you obviously don't have a lot of belief in.

You say you're curious? I'd say you're trying to discredit the Word of God! You just haven't spoken it verbaly yet. I see it in your way of speech. I've seen your posts in other forums. I'm not sure what it is, but you let something get in the way of Truth. BeanieBoy speaks more truth than you, and he says he's not even a believer! At least he's TRYING to sort out his thoughts with a somewhat open heart. How can you use the bible as a resource for your "Godly" arguments when you don't even believe that the bible is the Word of God? It's ok if you don't understand something and have a question, but you doubt, and then use your doubting power on Christians in front of non-believers! I've seen your other posts in other forums. You viper! As subtle and wise as a serpent, but venom spits from your tongue and poisons the hearts of many!


As to you definition, I'm really not sure what you are trying to get at here. Jesus never said for anyone to worship Him. It is no where in the bible. God is a different story, but not Jesus. There is not one verse in the entire bible talking about worshiping Jesus, but to worship God there are many.

I never said you should worship Jesus. You worship His Father in Heaven. Am I clear?


Satan is not woreshipped. Those who claim satanism will admit themselves it is just because they are going against the grain. They do not believe satan exists, nor that he grants anything to their calls. They only want the freedom to do as they please, and most often this is sexual. I know since they tried to enlinst me more than once.

As unplausible as it may sound:

The first step in accepting evil is denying it's existence. Accept that evil is on this earth, and abhor it.


As to the boasting part, Paul explains it very well all through both books of Corinthians. Read through them slowly and you will see what I meant.

I read it all again last night. It just re-affirmed my beliefs even more, that you like to take things out of context. Thank you, thank you, Thank YOU for the passion to read it again!

beanieboy
February 6th, 2002, 12:35 PM
I was thinking about the "Salt of the earth" thing, and the salt in the wound analogy. I don't know if that applies, really. Salt, at the time, was worth a lot of money. It's where 'salary' comes from. It's why wealthy people told their servants that it was bad luck to spill salt. And it is a spice. It enhances things.

One could argue that it cuts like the truth as in 'salt in the wound." But then, I could offer up that salt poured over the ground will kill all plant life and the like, and a person can thirst to death in the ocean because of the salt the water contains.

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy


Jesus did use it. Remember the woman about to be stoned? He wasn't calling her a whore. He wasn't even carrying around a bag of stones looking for someone who deserved to be killed. He just happened to be passing by. And before he told her to sin no more, he said, "neither do I condemn you." Not exactly "vinegar" in my book.

Yes, but I've come to find that that wasn't what the passage was about. Let's read the whole thing:


John 8:1-11 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with [his] finger wrote on the ground, [as though he heard them not]. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard [it], being convicted by [their own] conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, [even] unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.


I've had a bout with this story myself. At first, I was highly confused because I didn't know what it meant.

The reason why the people took the adulterer to Jesus, wasn't to condemn her, but to condemn Jesus! Let me explain.

Under the Roman government and law of the time, the Jews couldn't use their way of governing to punish. They had to first go to the Roman government and have them tried there. I'm not sure on the exacts, but this is the general idea. Therefore, they had to have an accusation against Jesus in order for him to be punished. It is written in verse 6! Very important, "This they said, tempting him, that they might have accuse him..." They didn't care about the woman! She was a pawn to them. They really wanted Jesus to condemn her to death, so that they could take Jesus to the Romans and say that he was usurping the government by sending this woman to death. but Jesus' "...hour has not come".

Jesus spoke so ill of sin, but he forgave this sinner without her even speaking a word of repentance, let alone not putting her to death. I bet that just acknowledging Him as Lord, like she does in verse 11 she said, "No man, Lord". By calling him this, she accepts His authority and his power to wash away sin. When Jesus says to, "Go and sin no more", she accepts it as coming from a high power, and does it. Jesus had that power while he was on earth. I think of the thief on the cross next to Jesus, in a similar aspect. YOu might want to search and read that.

Another note. Jesus was writing in the ground with his finger. What could he have been writing? The only other time the Lord wrote with his finger, was when he wrote the Ten Commandments with it in stone. I wonder what he was writing? Thou shalt not...:) Isn't this wonderful? This story shows the healing power and righteous judgement of the Lord.


Then again, sometimes JC was pretty harsh. I mean, that whole "vipers brood" thing, the man went off.

So VERY true Beanie! Good job!


My brother was a pastor. His views are open, because they were constantly challenged in school. He listens to me, and because he listens to me, I listen to him. At first I was reluctant to talk to him, but soon I learned that instead of prejudging me, he would listen and try to understand me and accept my ideas, and then give me something that challenged them. He is like the sun that comes out, and because the sun gently shines on the man, the man opens his jacket, and eventually takes it off.

It seems like you need to talk with your brother more! He seems like a good christian to talk to huh? Remember, there are a very small amount of actual christians out there. Of course there are the non-believers, but then there are the people who call themselves christians, who aren't. If your brother speaks the Truth and touches you with the Spirit, talk to him.

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 01:18 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
I was thinking about the "Salt of the earth" thing, and the salt in the wound analogy. I don't know if that applies, really. Salt, at the time, was worth a lot of money. It's where 'salary' comes from. It's why wealthy people told their servants that it was bad luck to spill salt. And it is a spice. It enhances things.

One could argue that it cuts like the truth as in 'salt in the wound." But then, I could offer up that salt poured over the ground will kill all plant life and the like, and a person can thirst to death in the ocean because of the salt the water contains.

Great points! I pertain it more towards food. Even in the OT when the armies would conquer a nation, they would salt the enemy's fields so nothing could grow there I think.


Mat 5:13 "Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men."

I think it has do to with something of modesty and balance. I'm not sure.

His_saving_Grac
February 6th, 2002, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by goose


I read it all again last night. It just re-affirmed my beliefs even more, that you like to take things out of context. Thank you, thank you, Thank YOU for the passion to read it again! Whatever. you don't know me nor my posts on this forum. You opinion just shows I was correct about your boasting since you feel the need to belittle anyone who asks a question. I am not the first to bring it up nor the last.

Enjoy your life. May God bless you and all those you love. Goodbye.

Knight
February 6th, 2002, 03:27 PM
HSG writes...
You're spitting poisin.Actually I have never met anyone yet spit more poison than you. Seriously! You lie (or at very least embellish) what I and others think and write. To me that is poison.

You continue...
The vinegar thing, in this case, wasn't working. It was obvious. And like a wind blowing harder and harder, trying to get a jacket off a man, I wrapped the jacket even tighter around my body.But now you claim to be a Christian! maybe your brothers efforts paid off in the long run!

As far as anecdotal evidence is concerned... I myself did NOT come to Jesus with honey but with vinegar.

You continue...
Prostitutes, lepers, taxcollects, and the other rejects of soeciety approached Jesus who did not approach the religious leaders. What was it that Jesus did that was different?And how did Jesus act towards these sinners? Was He accepting of their sin? Or did He rebuke them? Please show me ONE instance where Jesus was accepting of a sinners lifestyle and did not tell them they should stop sinning and repent. And did Jesus ever tell anyone that it was OK to have a sinful lifestyle.

Knight
February 6th, 2002, 03:45 PM
Goose great points about the woman caught in adultery, I have had to explain that story MANY times on this forum.

You say...
Another note. Jesus was writing in the ground with his finger. What could he have been writing? The only other time the Lord wrote with his finger, was when he wrote the Ten Commandments with it in stone. I wonder what he was writing? Thou shalt not... Isn't this wonderful? This story shows the healing power and righteous judgement of the Lord.I have another take on what Jesus might have been writing in the sand...

Keep in mind the Pharisees and scribes knew the 10 commandants pretty well in fact that was the very reason that they were bringing the woman to Him...
John 8:5 “Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?....so I do not think He was writing the 10 commandments in the sand, if He were writing the 10 commandments in the sand the scribes and Pharisees probably wouldn't have ran away so quickly.

Think about this....

Jesus asked them...
“He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.”Any of the men could have asserted they were without sin.

But Jesus then wrote some more on the ground, and then the text says....
Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscienceWhat could have convicted them in their conscience? Certainly not a re-telling of "Thou shall not commit adultery".

Jesus was most likely writing the names of the women that these Pharisees and scribes had committed adultery with themselves! You know like.... "Shirley..... Judy...... Alice...... etc." Now that would rock these guys world! And serve three functions:

1. Convict their consciences.
2. Make them realize Jesus knew things that He shouldn't.
3. Make a QUICK end to the "would be" trap.

Just food for thought!

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 03:46 PM
HSG,

Originally posted by His_saving_Grac
Whatever. you don't know me nor my posts on this forum. You opinion just shows I was correct about your boasting since you feel the need to belittle anyone who asks a question. I am not the first to bring it up nor the last.

Enjoy your life. May God bless you and all those you love. Goodbye.


I Timothy 5:20 "Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear."

I know of your previous posts. They're archived on this server! You feed the unbelievers with your wicked fruit.


Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them."


Proverbs 24:25 But to them that rebuke [him] shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them.

Thank you for your wish of my/loved ones blessing from God!

I don't come or wish to destroy you brother, but to refine you.

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by Knight
....Jesus was most likely writing the names of the women that these Pharisees and scribes had committed adultery with themselves! You know like.... "Shirley..... Judy...... Alice...... etc." Now that would rock these guys world! And serve three functions:

1. Convict their consciences.
2. Make them realize Jesus knew things that He shouldn't.
3. Make a QUICK end to the "would be" trap.

Just food for thought!

WOW! Awesome! Such truth through the Spirit! I'm going to have to tell my friends this one.

His_saving_Grac
February 6th, 2002, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by Knight
HSG writes...And how did Jesus act towards these sinners? Was He accepting of their sin? Or did He rebuke them? Please show me ONE instance where Jesus was accepting of a sinners lifestyle and did not tell them they should stop sinning and repent. And did Jesus ever tell anyone that it was OK to have a sinful lifestyle. Exactly WHO are you responding to, because I did not say even one of these things. YOU need to go back and find the person who DID.

How do I dis-enroll from this sickening place?

Atheist_Divine
February 6th, 2002, 05:26 PM
goose,

"Under the Roman government and law of the time, the Jews couldn't use their way of governing to punish. They had to first go to the Roman government and have them tried there. I'm not sure on the exacts, but this is the general idea. Therefore, they had to have an accusation against Jesus in order for him to be punished. It is written in verse 6! Very important, "This they said, tempting him, that they might have accuse him..." They didn't care about the woman! She was a pawn to them. They really wanted Jesus to condemn her to death, so that they could take Jesus to the Romans and say that he was usurping the government by sending this woman to death. but Jesus' "...hour has not come".

This is a disputed point. Jewish records suggest that the Jews could and did execute during the time of Jesus, and had the right to do so in matters pertaining to Jewish Law without advising the Prefect. Other Roman provinces were able to pronounce the death penalty in certain cases without asking the Prefect, too. On the other hand, the Gospels say they could not.

~AD~

beanieboy
February 6th, 2002, 05:26 PM
Goose - you left out one thing.

Jesus said, The man who was without sin can cast the first stone.

Jesus was without sin. He was a man. Yet he didn't cast any stones. Why?

Was he using vinegar or honey here?

And what was the woman's response?

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 07:33 PM
Originally posted by Atheist_Divine
goose,


This is a disputed point. Jewish records suggest that the Jews could and did execute during the time of Jesus, and had the right to do so in matters pertaining to Jewish Law without advising the Prefect. Other Roman provinces were able to pronounce the death penalty in certain cases without asking the Prefect, too. On the other hand, the Gospels say they could not.

~AD~

I see what you're saying but it just doesn't fit. Why would Jesus of had to see Roman authority AFTER the Jewish council(Luke 22:66)? Why didn't they just stone him there? Why did he die on a Roman cross and not stoned? If anything, this is a testimony to just how close Jesus fulfilled the scripture. The bible even says Luke 23:25 "...for sedition and murder..." I don't think sedition is a Jewish law, but a Roman Law! This isn't suggestive. It's in the bible.

As for the adulterer, it says that "She was caught in the very act..." Where's the other partaker of the sin? He would have been caught just as easily as she, but he, the other partaker, is not there. Under the Law of Moses, both adulterers are to be put to death. Not just one. It was an unjust mock-trial to begin with. Their conscience drove them away, like the scripture says.

Atheist_Divine
February 6th, 2002, 08:13 PM
Exactly, goose, Jesus was tried and convicted for crimes against Rome, not against Judaism. He was executed for political crimes, not for blasphemy.

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 09:00 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
Goose - you left out one thing.

Jesus said, The man who was without sin can cast the first stone.

Jesus was without sin. He was a man. Yet he didn't cast any stones. Why?


1 Timothy 1:15 "This a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief."
That's why. That's also why it is SO important to repent! We can repent and be sorry with our spirit if anything, so we can accept God's Grace and enter Heaven when our spirit leaves our body. If we did something wrong, God can wash it away and even carry us if need be. We must accept that He has the power to do these things. I hope that takes care of your question? Good observations.



Was he using vinegar or honey here?
I don't remember Jesus using either, but I can tell you this: He was using forgiveness because of her repentance. He saw this woman as a scapegoat for an even wickeder sin than adultery. She might not of even knew that he could take away her sin, yet she acknowledged Jesus as the King of Kings. This added meaning, depth and flavor to her life. Like salt to a meal, it added sustanance. She said:

John 8:11 "She said, No man, [I]Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."
See? I even emphasized the word LORD for everyone. I wouldn't call anyone Lord or Master unless I was being sarcastic, or they really were Mater of Lord to me. I doubt she was being sarcastic. Plus, the Pharisees didn't even condemn her! They just tried to bring her to condemnation. They wanted Jesus to condemn her so that he could be tried! "No one.." condemned her. No one brought her forth for her sin, but for their own beguiling. Jesus just didn't say "go" he said, "go, and sin no more". He said, "niether do I condemn thee". He forgave her for repenting. He didn't condemn her but he didn't just let her go to still sin either.



And what was the woman's response?

John 8:11 "She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by Atheist_Divine
Exactly, goose, Jesus was tried and convicted for crimes against Rome, not against Judaism. He was executed for political crimes, not for blasphemy.

What was the cause of him being tried in the first place? He was condemned by both.

Atheist_Divine
February 6th, 2002, 09:19 PM
If the Sanhedrin had indeed convicted him of blasphemy they could have executed him right there, no need to go to Pilate. But as the gospels agree that he was executed by Pilate, it would seem reasonable to assume that he was, in fact, charged with treason, rather than blasphemy. It could be that the Jewish trial never happened, but was placed there to throw more blame on the Jews, than on the Romans. Particularly if you accept the dating of the Gospels to post-70. Jews weren't really in favour then.

Knight
February 6th, 2002, 09:33 PM
Originally posted by His_saving_Grac
Exactly WHO are you responding to, because I did not say even one of these things. YOU need to go back and find the person who DID.Oooops your right, Beanie Boy wrote that! I am sorry sometimes it gets a little confusing responding to so many please accept my apology.
How do I dis-enroll from this sickening place?Simple, you just stop coming to the site!

Goose
February 6th, 2002, 09:35 PM
Originally posted by Atheist_Divine
If the Sanhedrin had indeed convicted him of blasphemy they could have executed him right there, no need to go to Pilate. But as the gospels agree that he was executed by Pilate, it would seem reasonable to assume that he was, in fact, charged with treason, rather than blasphemy. It could be that the Jewish trial never happened, but was placed there to throw more blame on the Jews, than on the Romans. Particularly if you accept the dating of the Gospels to post-70. Jews weren't really in favour then.

I accept the bible as truth and bear record from it. The Jews were the ones who bore false witness against Jesus in front of the governing authority. The authority that executed the law. Jesus was blameless. This is a HUGE topic and quite out of the scope of this thread.

John 19:10 "Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power [at all] against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin."

beanieboy
February 7th, 2002, 08:47 AM
Well, if we aren't going to use an example, I don't see a point of discussing vinegar/honey. The liberals will define vinegar as being verbally abusive, which is not necessarily true, and the conservatives will act like honey is being overly passive, which is also not necessarily true. And then we argue about this concept, except we aren't arguing the same thing.

As I recall, I can't think of one reject of society (tax collector, prostitute, etc.) that Jesus was harsh with. Sure, he was harsh to Peter, for example, but Peter was a disciple. And he didn't say, Hey, Peter, you disgusting pile of filth, I can turn your life around." He was gentle in calling all of the disciples.

I think the problem of the "vinegar" comes when someone has decided it is their duty to change the heart of someone, and doesn't have enough faith in God to be the messager, and let him do the rest of the work. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink, you know?

There have been uses of examples of saving people from a burning building. But, let's use a situation that is much more common. A person goes to a mosque, because they are Muslim. Are you going to physically block them from going in, and drag them to your church, ie, the way someone would drag someone out of a burning building? Would you mock them going in, and tell them that they are all going to hell?

This is the "vinegar" that I believe only pushes people away from God. And in applying it to an example, I can illustrate how "vinegar" is not what Jesus was using the majority of the time, and why it doesn't work.

kiwimac
February 7th, 2002, 01:10 PM
Beanieboy said:


This is the "vinegar" that I believe only pushes people away from God. And in applying it to an example, I can illustrate how "vinegar" is not what Jesus was using the majority of the time, and why it doesn't work.

Jesus time and again tells us not to judge, Matthew 7, Luke 6, then goes further and tells us that its the very standards that we use to judge that we ourselves will be judged by

Salvation comes when a willing heart offers itself to God in an act of love. Love cannot be forced!, You don't endear yourself to someone by saying, "love me or die!", we recognise the truth of that in purely human relationships but fail to see that it is also true in our relationship with the "Really Real".

Jesus only once mentions what standard will be used on the judgement day, read it for yourself in Matthew 25: 31-46. Interestingly the standard is how much we put ourselves on the line for our fellow humans

It seems to be a truism that when we are in the service of our fellows then we are in the service of God! and that God defines service as active good works, feeding the poor, visiting the sick and imprisoned, clothing the naked, dealing compassionately with the sojourner in our midst.

In point of fact, it is interesting that Jesus begins his public ministry with a statement which is essentially the same as the Matthew one, In Luke, Chapter 4, vs 18 & 19,

" The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
Because he anointed me to preach good tidings to the poor:
He hath sent me to proclaim release to the captives,
and recovering of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty them that are bruised,
To proclaim the acceptable year (ie Jubilee) of the Lord."
(Phillips)

This message of service to others is so important that Jesus begins his mission with it & declares it to be the very standard by which God will judge us on the last day.

Why then do we waste so much breath on speaking about God and spend so little time living as if God's call to compassionate service were truly important?

Kiwimac

beanieboy
February 7th, 2002, 01:24 PM
Kiwimac has a good point. And I think the answer is that it is easier to judge people with little compassion or humility, than it is to serve people, so people focus on pointing out the faults of others, build walls, then blame people for those walls, etc., rather than offer their hand in friendship, and build bridges.

kiwimac
February 7th, 2002, 01:52 PM
Beanieboy,

Yeah, I guess its far less threatening to judge someone than it is to live in compassionate, loving companionship with another human!

Kiwimac

beanieboy
February 7th, 2002, 02:20 PM
Kiwimac - I don't think it has anything to do with threat. I think it is human nature.

To call someone a pervert, then do some drama queen thing, like say you are "shaking the dust off your feet" takes very little effort, very little struggle, very little sacrifice.

To help someone out - say, visit old people in a nursing home who don't have any visitors, takes initiative, takes the struggle of getting to know the person, may make you uncomfortable, and you have to sacrifice your time.

It's human nature. Most people would rather be lazy than exercise.

Projill
February 7th, 2002, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Simple, you just stop coming to the site!

I'm sure you probably heard this from kids when you shoved their heads in the boys toilet in high school but, I'll say it anyway: You're just a big ole mean bully. I love how you're taking pot shots at a diabetic who gets sick a lot. Do you knock over old people at the mall too?

Knight
February 7th, 2002, 02:44 PM
Kiwi says...
Jesus time and again tells us not to judge, Matthew 7, Luke 6 Uh... sorry but your wrong. Jesus said in Matthew chapter 7 that we shouldn't judge like "HYPOCRYTES" which is entirely different from not judging at all wouldn't you think?

Knight
February 7th, 2002, 02:46 PM
Projill writes...
You're just a big ole mean bully. I love how you're taking pot shots at a diabetic who gets sick a lot. Do you knock over old people at the mall too?Are you thinking when your typing??? I don't want HSG to leave!!! He provides valuable entertainment to our forum! But he asked me how to unsubscribe to TheologyOnLine so I felt obligated to tell him, what is wrong with that?

beanieboy
February 7th, 2002, 03:05 PM
Knight - I would appreciate it if you would actually read my posts.

I said that my brother, the former pastor, was the open minded one (sun) and my brother-in-law was the one using harsh tones (wind) in my example.

I do not claim to be a Christian. I am agnostic. I believe in God, but I do not believe Christians have a monopoly on God.

And did my brother-in-laws words pay off? Well, I'm Agnostic. I believe that God is in all of us and a part of us. I believe Christianity does not have a monopoly on God. I think that many fundies are so caught up in law that they have no time for love and wouldn't know Christ if he sat next to them on the subway. So, maybe. I guess I should thank him for arriving at this agnostic state, and having a better understanding of God.

beanieboy
February 7th, 2002, 03:24 PM
Knight - yes, naturally you want an example of Jesus approving of sin. As I pointed out, a conservative will say, "liberal honey is condoning sin for fear of offending." And the liberal says, "Vinegar is the "You're going to hell! Have a nice life" nose in the air overreaction. Both are untrue. So I ask for an example. I give examples. But you dodge. I ask how you are going to drag a Muslim out of a metophorical burning building (mosque - where they will suffer hell). No response. I think the reason that people like Projill are misunderstanding your HSG comment is because it doesn't seem like you are struggling or debating an answer, but dodging the dialogue to push people's buttons.

So, I will define it clearly.
In the sentence "You attract more flies with honey than vinegar,"
Honey: is using a gentle approach, and being humble, and kind, and understanding to the person's situation, and listening to them.
Vinegar to me, means Fingerpointing, being unmerciful, haughty, exalting the self, name calling, and the like.

Where do I draw the line? I ask "whom does it hurt?" If you are oppressing a group of people, I will speak out against you with harsh words. If you are mostly hurting yourself, I will speak kinder words, because it is ultimately your decision to make.

What my sense is that you came down harsh on your relative, and things got tense, and you feel bad about it. You won't give the details. You dodge defining "vinegar." You dodge offering up a real life example, like having a homosexual neighbor, and disapproving of homosexuality. So, my speculation? That you made a mistake, and feel bad about it. And if that's true, it's ok. You're human, and you probably meant well. But you are also acting cowardly.

Projill
February 7th, 2002, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Are you thinking when your typing???

I was just wondering that about you.


I don't want HSG to leave!!!

That's a relief since you're a mod.


He provides valuable entertainment to our forum!

Don't belittle him when you respond to me.


But he asked me how to unsubscribe to TheologyOnLine so I felt obligated to tell him, what is wrong with that? [/B]

Do you actually believe that, even for a split second?

Goose
February 7th, 2002, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
...I think that many fundies are so caught up in law that they have no time for love and wouldn't know Christ if he sat next to them on the subway....

The law shows the love. And if Jesus preached on this subway bus, "Repent. For the kingdom of heaven is at hand", would you?


Matthew 4:17 "From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

Goose
February 7th, 2002, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by kiwimac

Jesus time and again tells us not to judge, Matthew 7, Luke 6, then goes further and tells us that its the very standards that we use to judge that we ourselves will be judged by

.....

Kiwimac

Everyone will be judged. I pray that I will be judged in this type of righteous judgement instead of the other previous verses/descriptions of judgement.

Knight
February 7th, 2002, 06:25 PM
Projill asks...
Do you actually believe that, even for a split second?ANSWER: YES!

Goose
February 7th, 2002, 07:31 PM
.

Projill
February 7th, 2002, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by goose
The law shows the love. And if Jesus preached on this subway bus, "Repent. For the kingdom of heaven is at hand", would you?


I knew this was gonna happen.

Stand back, people. This was the first movie I ever bought, I have to finish the scene now:

BT&FBID: "Repent. The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand."

Miss Scarlett: "You ain't just whilstlin' dixie."

BT&FBID: "Armageddon is almost upon us."

Prof. Plumb: "I got news for you, it's already here."

Mrs. Peacock: "Go away!"

BT&FBID: "But your souls are in danger!"

Mrs. Peacock: "Our lives are in danger, ya beatnik!"


*coughs* Sorry, had to do that or my head would explode. Go back to your regularly scheduled debating.

Projill
February 7th, 2002, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Projill asks...ANSWER: YES!

Well, I don't believe you...not for a split second.

Goose
February 7th, 2002, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by Projill


I knew this was gonna happen...

That's funny Projill! It's too bad everything is taken out of context here.

Projill
February 7th, 2002, 09:28 PM
Yeah, I do apologize, goose. It's one of my eccentricities. When I see people quoting scripture that's been quoted in movies that I know well, I have to do the entire scene or it gets caught in my head until I do.

Considering the kind of movies I tend to watch, I'm lucky I haven't been banned for language already. ;)

Goose
February 7th, 2002, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by Projill
Yeah, I do apologize, goose. It's one of my eccentricities. When I see people quoting scripture that's been quoted in movies that I know well, I have to do the entire scene or it gets caught in my head until I do.

Considering the kind of movies I tend to watch, I'm lucky I haven't been banned for language already. ;)

I liked the Clue tags. Nice touch. What's the big deal about you Projill? I saw a thread with your name on it?

godspell
February 8th, 2002, 03:40 PM
Knight, excellent post, and well done for addressing the issue in the manner you have.

I understand your analogy, but I'm not entirely sure if it's the analogy which is really to be questioned. I notice an awful number of red herrings in people's otherwise logical arguments on this forum, and I'm afraid to say that this may well be one. That is; the wrong issue is being looked at. People aren't saying to you "kill (use honey) instead of harm (use vinegar)" as you state when speaking of killing flies and make the (il)logical jump to killing family members. Rather, they're saying that a more gentle approach may well be more in keeping with the teachings of Jesus, and therefore quite logically a more Christian mode of behaviour.

If you read my .sig, I have a quote which is taken from two gospels. Those of Luke and Matthew. Jesus often preached of love and tolerance. Jesus was the one to be seen with lepers, he would heal the weak, and would freely spend his time with social outcasts, even sinners! He was ridiculed and mistreated for this, yet did it anyway. Leading by example, was his primary method of teaching. Jesus made it clear that it was God who would sort out; who would label and condemn. For us, he left the task of loving one another.

Jesus, however, was also a human. Being 'Son of Man' as he so often referred to himself, he was subject to many of the weaknesses we are, also. That is - while he attempted to lead by example, by loving all his brothers, he also managed to contradict himself, both in words, and action. Who could forget his outburst against the sinners in the temple? However, the frequency of his form of 'vinegar' is much less than that of his 'honey'; his love for fellow people.

As God gave us the gift of our mind, and as the parable of the men and their talents suggests, we as humans, and Christians alike, should attempt to understand that there is a very simple theme in Jesus' teachings: Love. With this comes understanding, patience, tolerance, and other simple virtues.
This, at the time, was in stark contrast to the Old Testament teachings of a vengeful God, full of fury and wrath.

I understand that it may be easy to get carried away, and attempt to scare people into submission with stories of punishment, and harsh words. (I'm appalled at the number of people who call others names in this forum - it's shocking!) The same logic is used for Capital punishment - scare people enough, and they won't be likely to do the bad thing.

However, Jesus' overall message was clear, both in word and action - love your fellow man. To me, there is no better way to spread the word. Tell me who does not crave love, acceptance, and harmony with their fellow man? If they are offered this in a consistent and continual fashion, then they will see what a true Christian you are.

Knight
February 8th, 2002, 04:09 PM
godspell, thanks for the kinds words... but might I suggest you are misusing the words of Jesus?

In both Luke 6 and Matthew 7 Jesus isn't telling people not to judge He is telling people HOW to judge. He explains to them that they shouldn't judge like "hypocrites".

And although Jesus may have dealt with sinner's He was never accepting of their behaviors or indicated in ANY way that it would be OK for them to go unrepentant.

You claim...
he also managed to contradict himself, both in words, and action. Who could forget his outburst against the sinners in the temple?That isn't a contradiction in action for Jesus as He was often harsh with the wicked.

You continue...
very simple theme in Jesus' teachings: Love. With this comes understanding, patience, tolerance, and other simple virtues.Jesus NEVER taught tolerance for wicked people. The only time Jesus referred to tolerance of any type is when He said certain wicked people would be able to "tolerate" their judgement more than other wicked people would be able to...
Matthew 11:20 Then He began to rebuke the cities in which most of His mighty works had been done, because they did not repent: 21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. :22 “But I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you. 23 “And you, Capernaum, who are exalted to heaven, will be brought down to Hades; for if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. 24 “But I say to you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for you.” 25 At that time Jesus answered and said, “I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes. 26 “Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Your sight.You continue...
This, at the time, was in stark contrast to the Old Testament teachings of a vengeful God, full of fury and wrath.Two points....

1. The God of the Old Testament is the same God in the New Testament
2. There are more discussions regarding eternal judgement in the New Testament than in the Old.

Projill
February 8th, 2002, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by goose


I liked the Clue tags. Nice touch. What's the big deal about you Projill? I saw a thread with your name on it?

First off, I'm glad you liked the Clue tags. I'm a hopeless UBB addict and I tend to abuse it. :D

Oh, that thread was started by one of my many admirers. I have several. The fact that I've managed to last quite a while on this forum and not get kicked off and even tend to get a minute amount of respect by even the more conservative elements on this board probably annoyed NoLies. His very name was a response to my signature of the moment...which I change every month or so.

His_saving_Grac
February 8th, 2002, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by Knight
godspell, thanks for the kinds words... but might I suggest you are misusing the words of Jesus?

In both Luke 6 and Matthew 7 Jesus isn't telling people not to judge He is telling people HOW to judge. He explains to them that they shouldn't judge like "hypocrites".

And although Jesus may have dealt with sinner's He was never accepting of their behaviors or indicated in ANY way that it would be OK for them to go unrepentant.

You claim...Two points....

1. The God of the Old Testament is the same God in the New Testament
2. There are more discussions regarding eternal judgement in the New Testament than in the Old. I am still very curious how you seem to be able to interpret a book you have never really read? Don't you think for ANYONE to give their synopsis of any book, the book has to be read in it's entirety? I know for a fact there are no "Cliff Notes" on the bible, yet there does exist a form of them. I term them "Enyartian notes".

You (by your own admission) have never read the entire bible, yet you feel you are one of the few to have the true interpretation of the book that is actually foriegn to you. I came across this in 1WAY, Rapt, and jefferson also. It seems the most volatile members of this forum are actually quoting the words of someone else without actually reading the bible themselves. Don't you find yourself embarassed by this? Doesn't it bother you that many pagans and atheists actually have read MORE of the sacred texts than you have?

Yet you continue to call people "stupid", "ignorant", or ask them "do you ever think before posting?" when the bible, that YOU QUOTE FROM, is actually something you are basically unfamiliar with other than the verses that support your points? That context is something you have no understanding of, and that you feel that you can interpret all of God by the few verses you choose to read?

I would be ashamed, but then again, you call people liars, while lying about them, so shame may not really be something you are familiar with, anymore than the bible. You tell me I am pro-abortion, while I have repeatedly told you I am not for or against it because there are always extenuating circumstances for EVERY situation. Because I see the gray areas in life, you insult me and demand I either am for it or against it. And it is funny that anyone NOT of your faction can see, and understand, that I am NOT pro-abortion, yet you blind yourself to it (as you blind yourself to the entire bible. If it isn't in your concordance, then it is not worth knowing to you, apparently.) and call me names.

I still pray for you that one day you will feel the light that is God in you. As seen from your answer to jefferson about whether God speaks audibly to one or not, you have shown that it has never happened to you. Since it hasn't happened to you, then it can't possibly be true. And I am here to tell you different. Where exactly IS your faith? Why do you claim a powerless god who has nothing to do with us individually?

God bless you and all those you love ND. May God's voice be heard by you soon. May you choose to listen to God when He does speak to you. That is the worlds biggest sin right now. Refusing to listen when He speaks.

godspell
February 9th, 2002, 12:53 AM
Well Knight, you may suggest whatever you like on this forum, so long as I'm afforded a similar freedom. I believe that's fair.

You say:


In both Luke 6 and Matthew 7 Jesus isn't telling people not to judge He is telling people HOW to judge. He explains to them that they shouldn't judge like "hypocrites".

Well, I might say that the passage preceeding the one I quoted begs to differ:

Luke 6.27-31

"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who mistreat you. If anyone hits you on one cheek, let him hit the other one, too; if someone takes your coat, let him have your shirt as well. Give to everyone who asks you for somet hing, and when someone takes what is yours, do not ask for it back. Do for others just what you want them to do for you."

Luke 6.35-36

"No! Love your enemies and do good to them; lend and expect nothing back. You will then have a great reward, and you will be sons of the Most High God. For he is good to the ungrateful and the wicked. Be merciful just as your father is merciful."

To me, it would appear that Jesus is making a very straightforward statement. Given that my .sig quote about judging is from the verses immediately after the ones above, I think it's fair to say that Jesus was preaching a practise of not judging at all. A practise of love.

The message that we are continually given throughout the New Testament, (Is it true what HsG states - you've not read the bible? How about just the NT? That's most relevant in this case.) is that God will judge, GOD will decide. Man is left with some very specific instructions on what do do: Love your fellow man.

You continue:


That isn't a contradiction in action for Jesus as He was often harsh with the wicked.

followed by:


Jesus NEVER taught tolerance for wicked people. The only time Jesus referred to tolerance of any type is when He said certain wicked people would be able to "tolerate" their judgement more than other wicked people would be able to...

Jesus, as well as Son of Man is also seen by Christians as the son of God. So, would you say that he had the ability to pass God's judgement on people? Something we are advised not to do, as we are not God. That said; he did not do this nearly as often as he showed his love for man.

In addition, Jesus taught in many cases, through action. Curing social outcasts of diseases, banishing demons, and even talking with criminals. While he made it clear that those who had sins were indeed sinners, he did not make it his duty to punish them while they are on this earth. Even when it came time for his death, he preached love and salvation, not condemnation for those who had sinned against him. Do you feel it is your place to act in a manner contrary to that of your saviour, Jesus Christ? Do not forget - he died for our sins, he did not die simply to condemn us, or have us condemn one another.

The point I made was that Jesus' teachings and actions of love by far outweighed those to the contrary. Do you disagree with this point? It might take a while, but we could probably quote at each other until one of us is out of supporting evidence. I know which one of us I'd put money on. ;)


Two points....
1. The God of the Old Testament is the same God in the New Testament
2. There are more discussions regarding eternal judgement in the New Testament than in the Old.


Well, Knight, I don't believe I said anything to the contrary. I stated that Jesus' teachings were in contrast to those of the prophets who came before him.

Since you brought it up, however - how about the New Covenant? While God remains the same, it would appear that Jesus laid down a new set of rules. There was but one:

John 13.34-35

"And now I give you a new commandment: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. If you have love for one another, then everyone will know that you are my disciples."

This was said by Jesus at the Last Supper, the time at which he laid out the New Covenant for man. A covenant, being God's promise to the human race, and also a sealed agreement, would suggest to me that God was speaking through Jesus to make his message both clear, and sacred to us. That message is given in the passage from the gospel of John above, as it was said in the same sitting.

source:
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=covenant

Goose
February 9th, 2002, 07:06 PM
I've been thinking of the two extremes of Christianity. The "Nazi Christians" and the "Commie Christians".

Nazi Christians - strict, by the law, execute sinners

Commie Christians - God is "love", forgive EVERYONE(even non-repentant sinners), doesn't matter what you do cause we're forgiven

These two extremes are very wrong. The Nazis are too hard and the Commies are too soft.

I've been reading some of Bob Enyart's stuff, which is very hard. Not all the way nazi, but hard none the less. I also have experience with the soft commie christians who aren't hard at all. Not all the way commie, but soft none the less.

Under the Nazi Christian regime, we'd all be dead because we've all been executed for our sin with no chance for repentence. We'd all go to hell. With the Commie Christian regime, there is NO sense of right or wrong and everyone makes it to heaven.

Where's the balance?

I think that's kind of what Jesus means when we are to be salt. Not vinegar, not honey. But salt.

Has anyone else felt this? I'd love to hear from people who listen to Bob Enyart also. I like what he has to say most of the time, but I feel that he speaks so much of vengeance when vengeance is God's. Isn't that the governments job? Excuse me if I'm mistaken, I'd just like to know.

Gerald
February 10th, 2002, 12:03 AM
Goose, your post takes me back to the "good ole days" when Zakath, KurtPh, Psycho Dave, myself and others were crossing swords with the Enyartite monarchists.

Their mouths would water at the thought of establishing an OT-style police state (and it is a police state, make no mistake), yet they would not or could not articulate how such a police state would be brought about, or how it might hold on to power.

The monarchists seemed convinced that such a coup would simply materialize, as if by divine intervention, and be maintained by the same means.

I kinda miss those days. Throwing rotten tomatoes at monarchists was a lot of fun. :D

Goose
February 10th, 2002, 12:18 AM
I find it very interesting. I've opened my heart to the Lord a couple years ago. I'm still an infant and I find a lot of what Enyart says very inticing and he speaks the truth on a lot of things. I like listening to his show and I've grown more in my faith cause of it.

I feel open rebuke is fine. But sometimes I just feel like something isn't quite right and I'm determined to find out what it is. KGOV's Doug McBurney is it? I was listening to his show the other day, and it seemed like he had to think twice when he was thinking if just straight up whether killing an abortionist is right or wrong. I couldn't tell if he was joking! I think homosexuality is wrong but I'm not about ready to pick up the sword and seek vengeance. It's the authority's job to seek that. I also know this country's government DOESN'T make that many evil people scared of the sword to begin with.

Hypocrites are going to be punished even more so than homosexuals. I don't understand why he doesn't battle that so strongly. That's why I'm asking. Got any suggestions? From either side?

godspell
February 10th, 2002, 11:19 AM
Hi goose,

Thanks for your input on the issue.

I was trying to aim the matter at hand to be one of interpretation of scripture. I understand what you're saying, and you believe a middle ground might be more comfortable?

To me - the Old Testament was full of 'this is LAW'; 'God will smite THESE PEOPLE'. If you get me. That was more like your 'Nazi' situation.

Jesus proclaimed that he was making a new covenant with man, and as such, I'm trying to make a point on what Jesus' teachings were. To me they were probably something more like your 'Communist' teachings. In all light-heartedness, I believe that Jesus was something of a hippy in his time... so you might have a point there. However, that doesn't make his teachings any less valid. I mean - if Jesus taught 'Commie' behaviour, then aren't Christians bound to follow?

If you have some scriptural input on my views on Christ, please post. I'm all for hearing what people think the NT teaches us.

Goose
February 10th, 2002, 01:47 PM
I understand that. I wrote at the top of page 2 of this thread how I felt about the new teachings of Jesus Christ. I don't believe they were new commandments as much as they are the fathers of the ones that came before it. Please read the top of page 2. No one replied with any comments on it either! :)

godspell
February 10th, 2002, 02:49 PM
goose,

I've read your post, and I must say that your method of viewing the commandment situation (the ray spreading from God) is novel!

Now, I'm not at all trying to comment on your beliefs. Your beliefs are yours alone, and I don't really think it's my place to question those.

However, on the topic of the two commandments that then father the 10, I'm really not so sure on that one. You see, Jesus spoke of a 'new covenant' not an 'ammendment to the old covenant'. Jesus, as Christians believe he was both the Son, and part of the Holy Trinity, really see him as part of God.

So, those two commandments are really straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak. Jesus preached love, and made it clear that judgement and condemnation were for God. We're left with the task of living our lives as best we can. Pretty fair, I say - I'll try to do that each day.

Be careful with 'what you say on the top of page 2.' It seems that you're disregarding the teachings of Jesus, or, at best, modifying them to your own end, without really citing a reason. You're entitled to think and believe what you like, but I don't think pure opinion is really arguable in a debate over scripture, do you?

I do understand your method of looking at this, though. Many Christians take the Gospels as their foundation, and the earlier scripture as a clarification (your ray). However, it's good to keep in mind a number of things:

1) The Old Testament pre-dates the New testament by millenia.
2) Jesus Declared quite clearly a 'new covenant'.
3) Jesus was both the Son of God, and part of God himself.
4) If you were following the OT to the letter, you're likely to find that you're not allowed to do things like eat shellfish or pork; that your wife will have to give a lamb to your priest after she gives birth, and that women are unclean during their period (meaning they can't attend church, or you can't if you've slept in the same bed or sat on the same seat as them that day.)

It's my belief, and I have scriptural evidence to back it up, that Jesus formed a new covenant with man, and that he wants us to leave God to be the decider in matters of good and evil; while we simply do our daily best, and follow Jesus.

I appreciate your input, goose - you obviously have some good ideas behind your beliefs, and I'm a strong supporter of those who think about what they believe. Lamb of God is good and all, but do we really need to be sheep? ;)

KurtPh
February 10th, 2002, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by Gerald
Goose, your post takes me back to the "good ole days" when Zakath, KurtPh, Psycho Dave, myself and others were crossing swords with the Enyartite monarchists.


And don't forget Parm when he used to frequent these forums.

Ah, the memories.

Sadly, I do believe that these forums are starting to be transformed into a web version of the Enyartian distopia that we've all come to know and loath. Getting some funky vibes of late; did you know that one of the forum moderators who will rename nameless recently erased part of one of my posts for blasphemy? My goodness, it was from a movie called "The Great Outdoors" and had no sexual meaning whatsoever! I'm assuming that the quote I used (better not repeat it or else :rolleyes: ) was believed to be reffering to sexual activity of a sort, because to this point it has not been explained to me why it was deleted. I'm still just a tad bit irritated.

In any case, as to Knight's point which began the thread, I do believe that you will find that it is the brand of Christianity that you, Mr. Enyart, and many others promote that has driven so many people away from the Churches in your nation towards other denominations or even other religions. Keep up the good work :D .

Goose
February 10th, 2002, 03:23 PM
Godspell,

Thank you for your input and encouragment.


Jer 31:33 "But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."

I know this verse. :) I don't think the two commandments are an ammendmant. that's not what I was trying to convey anyways. I'm not good at writing sometimes. Jesus even said himself that the Ten Commandments were derived from the Two Commandments that he gave.

Mat 22:36 "Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
I would say that there's an obvious hierarchy. Not an abolition of the law, just a derivative. Thanks again for reading my post. I know it's personal opinion, but it's important to me. :)

kiwimac
February 10th, 2002, 08:29 PM
Kurtph,

You have me fascinated by your quote, would you PLEASE email it to me at kiwimac@37.com as I'd love to see it!

Pretty please!!!!!!!

Kiwimac

Knight
February 11th, 2002, 01:17 AM
Goose, no one I know advocates taking the law into their own hands, much the opposite. We pray that our government repents!

If you have a specific objection to something you have heard on a radio program I suggest you call them and discuss it. If you have a specific disagreement about something you have read here at TheologyOnLine let's discuss it!

Goose
February 11th, 2002, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by Knight
Goose, no one I know advocates taking the law into their own hands, much the opposite. We pray that our government repents!

Good deal. That's what I do.

beanieboy
February 11th, 2002, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by goose
I've been thinking of the two extremes of Christianity. The "Nazi Christians" and the "Commie Christians".

Nazi Christians - strict, by the law, execute sinners

Commie Christians - God is "love", forgive EVERYONE(even non-repentant sinners), doesn't matter what you do cause we're forgiven



Should one only forgive someone who is repentant??

If someone wrongs you, and you say, "forgive our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us, - except that witch who cut me off in traffic, and then gave me the bird! She wasn't even sorry!!"
Or do you lie? "Forgive me as I forgive others," (except those unrepentant.)

In the story of the stoning of the adultress, she never once asked for forgiveness. Yet, Christ forgave her. He didn't condone her behavior, but he wasn't calling her a big whore and stomping off, either. He wasn't calling her a viper. He wasn't calling her a dog. He was gentle, and he forgave her even though she never asked forgiveness.

Does this make Jesus a wuss? Not in my opinion. I forgive many people. That does not mean I condone every action, I just forgive those actions. The reason that I try to forgive others is because that resentment, turns anger, turns hatred, and then begins to eat at you, making you want to strike out against other people, like a viper, and inject them with poisin, to settle the score. In turn, they do the same, and it continues that way. It chokes your soul. But to forgive makes others also want to forgive, and treat one another with kindness - the "pay it forward" theory.

Goose
February 11th, 2002, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy


Should one only forgive someone who is repentant??



Luk 17:3 "Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him."

Yes. Only if he says he's sorry. We can't go around forgiving others of trespasses against our neighbor however. If someone owes a debt to our neighbor, we can't forgive him his debt and let him off the hook. That's our neighbor's job. Only Jesus had the power to do that on Earth.



If someone wrongs you, and you say, "forgive our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us, - except that witch who cut me off in traffic, and then gave me the bird! She wasn't even sorry!!"
Or do you lie? "Forgive me as I forgive others," (except those unrepentant.)
I like your sense of humor Beanie! LOL. The person who flips you off is a wicked individual. Not only did they do something wrong, they must of not known it was wrong. In the bible, those who don't payback their debts are wicked. They're prob very self-righteous, etc. It applies to the "finger flipper" too. I usually just laugh when someone cuts me off and gives me the finger. So foolish.


In the story of the stoning of the adultress, she never once asked for forgiveness. Yet, Christ forgave her. He didn't condone her behavior, but he wasn't calling her a big whore and stomping off, either. He wasn't calling her a viper. He wasn't calling her a dog. He was gentle, and he forgave her even though she never asked forgiveness.[
I thought I already went over this in previous pages on here? Jesus had the power to forgive for everyone while he was here on earth. Just by acknowledging that He is Lord and had the power to forgive, she accepted His forgiveness. She had a humble heart and I'm sure Jesus knew that. JESUS WANTS TO FORGIVE US! We must acknowledge him as Lord.


Does this make Jesus a wuss? Not in my opinion. I forgive many people. That does not mean I condone every action, I just forgive those actions. The reason that I try to forgive others is because that resentment, turns anger, turns hatred, and then begins to eat at you, making you want to strike out against other people, like a viper, and inject them with poisin, to settle the score. In turn, they do the same, and it continues that way. It chokes your soul. But to forgive makes others also want to forgive, and treat one another with kindness - the "pay it forward" theory.

...and hate leads to the dark-side. I know I know. :p I'm sure there are bad things that I did that I can't remember. I hope that God will be gracious to me on judgment day. Like those people, it was probably something small that doesn't matter a whole lot. There's a point where you just have to accept the Grace of God and that he will have to power to forgive.


Mat 6:12 "And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors."

beanieboy
February 11th, 2002, 04:24 PM
Wow. You only forgive those who ask forgiveness?

So, if a father beats you, and never asks for forgiveness (few do), you can hang on to that resentment for as long as you want?

If someone cuts you off in traffic and flips you off, you can be angry at her all you want, for the rest of your life, if you want to? You are justified in telling everyone what a evil witch she was for doing so?

That's a totally foreign way for me to live.
One of the reasons I'm not Christian, anymore.

Ninkasi
February 11th, 2002, 04:27 PM
That's seems perfectly reasonable to me. Why forgive someone who never asked for it?

Goose
February 11th, 2002, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
Wow. You only forgive those who ask forgiveness?

So, if a father beats you, and never asks for forgiveness (few do), you can hang on to that resentment for as long as you want?
You give the resentment to God until he asks you for forgiveness. It might not come as a verbal asking (since father/son stuff is kinda like that), but should be able to if need be.

Could you accept the fact that he beat you as good? If so, you would have a perverse sense of right and wrong. You can't judge him in his totality but him taking part of that evil makes him evil in his transgressions against you and God will take that into account at judgement day. It's for God to send someone to hell, but you can definately say someone's on the way if you're a witness to that person's evil.

Why would God have a heaven and hell? We are either going to one or the other.


If someone cuts you off in traffic and flips you off, you can be angry at her all you want, for the rest of your life, if you want to? You are justified in telling everyone what a evil witch she was for doing so?

No, I've seen things that don't pertain to this world and things much greater. Most people who get angry are also out to seak vengeance. Let go of the vengeful mentality. Vengeance is God's. I'm sure you've heard that. People who flip me off make me laugh if anything. God will take care of those people. Either through God directly, or through the government (if they do something illegal).

YOu said you're not a christian anymore. Have you found a better way Beanie? I know things get rough sometimes, but stick to the path of truth.

His_saving_Grac
February 11th, 2002, 05:43 PM
Forgiveness from God/Christ is for the repentant, not the unrepentant. While we should try to forgive them, God will not until they confess their sins AND repent in a manner that convinces God, which is TRUE repentance. There are many who mouth the words on earth yet repeat their actions again and again. Those that do, never repented to God in truth, and were never forgiven their sins.

beanieboy
February 12th, 2002, 04:40 PM
Does it go, "forgive our sins, as we forgive those who repent for sinning against us?"

I just don't see a point of holding a grudge.
You wrong me, I believe you suffer for it. If you lie to me, it will make me hard to believe you. If you criticize me constantly, I won't want to be around you. But I won't hate you. I won't hold a grudge. I won't curse you. I will wish you the best, and go my own way.

That's how I live my life. I try to bless those who harm me, I strive to love my enemies, I even say something to the effect of, "I need to forgive them, for they know not what they do." I don't wait for an apology. I forgive actively.

That's what my God is, and tells me to do.

And is it a better way to live than your God, goose? It is for me. It is a choice I have made. And if I burn in hell for being forgiving of the unrepentent, let me burn the brightest.

beanieboy
February 12th, 2002, 05:03 PM
Goose - it seems perverse to me that you equate forgiveness, even forgiving those who do not apologize, with saying the wrong is good, or ok.

His_saving_Grac
February 12th, 2002, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
Does it go, "forgive our sins, as we forgive those who repent for sinning against us?"

I just don't see a point of holding a grudge.
You wrong me, I believe you suffer for it. If you lie to me, it will make me hard to believe you. If you criticize me constantly, I won't want to be around you. But I won't hate you. I won't hold a grudge. I won't curse you. I will wish you the best, and go my own way.

That's how I live my life. I try to bless those who harm me, I strive to love my enemies, I even say something to the effect of, "I need to forgive them, for they know not what they do." I don't wait for an apology. I forgive actively.

That's what my God is, and tells me to do.

And is it a better way to live than your God, goose? It is for me. It is a choice I have made. And if I burn in hell for being forgiving of the unrepentent, let me burn the brightest. You actually need to look a bit deeper in the bible. It IS there that you forgive the sins of those who repent them. There are going to be those on earth who's sole purpose in life is to get you TO sin. Those are the ones you can not be around.

You are right. You SHOULDN'T hold the grudge in you. You SHOULD walk away with dignity, and without malice. You don't have to hate them, but you can't "if you are true to Christ" let this persons words take someones elses soul away from God. But again you are right, the best way is to show with your actions the difference in what each of you believe.

May I ask you something? You (I think) claimed to not be a christian, nor a believer of the God of Christ. Yet in this post, you state "That's what my God is, and tells me to do". Who is your god? I have never, until right now, heard you state your belief in a higher being, so I am confused on this point.

Goose
February 12th, 2002, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
Goose - it seems perverse to me that you equate forgiveness, even forgiving those who do not apologize, with saying the wrong is good, or ok.
Explain what you mean, cause that didn't make any sense.

beanieboy
February 13th, 2002, 10:20 AM
Goose: Could you accept the fact that he beat you as good?
If so, you would have a perverse sense of right and wrong.
___________________________________
I said forgive. Not condone.
You somehow took "forgiving a father who beat you" and interpreted that as condoning the behavior.

You're right. It doesn't make any sense.

Goose
February 13th, 2002, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy
Goose: Could you accept the fact that he beat you as good?
If so, you would have a perverse sense of right and wrong.
___________________________________
I said forgive. Not condone.
You somehow took "forgiving a father who beat you" and interpreted that as condoning the behavior.

You're right. It doesn't make any sense.
My mentality,

If something is good, you applaud it.
If something is bad, you condemn it.
Simple as that.

If a molestor has his way with you, are you going to forgive him?

Molestor: Hey Beanie. How you doin'?
<Molestor does his thang>
Beanie: I don't condone what you do, but I forgive you. No grudges.

Hmm. I wonder who he'll keep on his 'hitlist'? With your mentality, one would be too forgiving to even call the cops. Don't be hypocritical Beanie. How much does one have to do that's bad before you see that it's wrong and condemn it?

godspell
February 13th, 2002, 11:25 AM
Goose,

In saying what you just did, you are speaking from a purely human standpoint, not of one as a Christian. I understand completely that it would take a saint to forgive that kind of thing, but keep in mind that what we actually do and what the bible teaches us to do are often not the same.

What beanieboy is saying is correct, Jesus preached forgiveness.

Don't forget that in your humanity, or you are forgetting your religion, and forsaking Christ.

Goose
February 13th, 2002, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by godspell
Goose,

In saying what you just did, you are speaking from a purely human standpoint, not of one as a Christian. I understand completely that it would take a saint to forgive that kind of thing, but keep in mind that what we actually [B]do and what the bible teaches us to do are often not the same.

What beanieboy is saying is correct, Jesus preached forgiveness.

[QUOTE]Don't forget that in your humanity, or you are forgetting your religion, and forsaking Christ.
Man Godspell, you got me. I guess Jesus would say something like, "arise, and sin no more". Everyone is going to heaven huh? I'd be misrepresenting what Jesus said and did if I forgave unrepentant sinners.

Knight
February 13th, 2002, 11:45 AM
Godspell writes...
In saying what you just did, you are speaking from a purely human standpoint, not of one as a Christian. I understand completely that it would take a saint to forgive that kind of thing, but keep in mind that what we actually do and what the bible teaches us to do are often not the same.

What beanieboy is saying is correct, Jesus preached forgiveness.

Don't forget that in your humanity, or you are forgetting your religion, and forsaking Christ.Actually it is you who is wrong. Jesus said...
Luke 17:3 “Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. So only if the trespasser repents do you forgive him.

Furthermore, you can only forgive someone to the extent they have wronged you personally. Most modern day Christians preach we should forgive EVERYONE! "Forgive the Columbine killers, forgive the terrorists, forgive EVERYONE!" We have no right to forgive one neighbor's sin against another neighbor.

If godspell owes beanie $10 I have no right as a third party to forgive godspells debt to beanie.

Moreover...
Even though we may be compelled by the trespassers repentance to forgive a trespass against us that doesn't mean the government should not prosecute, convict and punish the trespasser for his crime.

The Bible says....
Romans 13:4 For he (government) is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he (government) does not bear the sword in vain; for he (government) is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. So in a godly government even though the molester or criminal repents and the victim may have forgiven the trespasser that doesn't mean that the government does not uphold it's God given authority to prosecute, convict and punish the criminal for his sin.

God does not want us to love what is evil, that would only deflate what love really is. In other words, loving what is evil makes love evil and hypocritical.
Romans 12:9 Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor (hate) what is evil. Cling to what is good.

Goose
February 13th, 2002, 11:51 AM
Knight,

I concur. The bible tells us that Jesus would too.

godspell
February 13th, 2002, 12:04 PM
Goose - could you please reply without the use of sarcasm? It's not needed. We're capable of having a decent discussion on a topic without it.

Knight and Goose both; please go and read the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant:

"Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, if my brother keeps on sinning against me, how many times to I have to forgive him? Seven times?"
"No, not seven times," answered Jesus, "but seventy times seven, because the Kingdom of heaven is like this...."

The parable concludes:

The king was very angry, and he sent the servant to jail to be punished until he should pay buck the whole amount."
And Jesus concluded, "That is how my father in heaven will treat every one of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart."

Matthew 18.21-35

Goose - do you concurr on this as well? ;)

godspell
February 13th, 2002, 12:10 PM
Knight -

You seem to have a concern with people forgiving a third party. You use an example of you forgiving my debt to goose. I'm not sure where that comes into any of this. I don't believe it is your place to do so, and I certainly haven't said that it is.

If you've read the parable above, surely you understand that Jesus told Peter to forgive his brother. Jesus didn't say that he'd do it for him, as a third party. This reasoning you've displayed is erroneous, and I'm not sure where you got it from.

Finally - think you could reply with a little less of the 'you are wrong' in your posts? I don't say much on this board without having scriptural references, and so far in dealing with me, neither have you. This has brought us down thus far to a matter of scriptural interpretation, and I'm not sure one can be 'wrong' as such in this. I would say misguided at best. It appears all too often to be a matter of pride when you jump up and tell people bluntly that they are wrong in a matter. Surely you're not right 100% of the time? ;)

Knight
February 13th, 2002, 12:58 PM
godspell writes...
You seem to have a concern with people forgiving a third party. You use an example of you forgiving my debt to goose. I'm not sure where that comes into any of this. I don't believe it is your place to do so, and I certainly haven't said that it is.I was simply touching on various misconceptions about godly forgiveness, I was not accusing you for stating this misconception I am sorry if I mislead you.

You continue...
Finally - think you could reply with a little less of the 'you are wrong' in your posts?So, your telling me I am wrong? ;)

You continue...
Surely you're not right 100% of the time?In my best Maxwell Smart voice.... "would you believe.... 99% of the time?" ;)

godspell
February 13th, 2002, 01:06 PM
Knight,

Alrighty, glad we got that one sorted. The misconceptions weren't mine, but hopefully you got through to your target audience.


So, your telling me I am wrong?

Nope, if you read what I wrote, I posed a question, that is - asking you if you could limit that habit, not telling you that you're dead wrong in doing so. Afterall, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. :P

(sorry, couldn't resist...)

99% of the time? *grins* Well, so long as you're not trying to convince me that you're perfect, I can live happily with the knowledge that you have a sense of humour about yourself. :)

Knight
February 13th, 2002, 01:11 PM
godspell writes...
Nope, if you read what I wrote, I posed a question, that is - asking you if you could limit that habit, not telling you that you're dead wrong in doing so. Afterall, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. :P

(sorry, couldn't resist...)

99% of the time? *grins* Well, so long as you're not trying to convince me that you're perfect, I can live happily with the knowledge that you have a sense of humour about yourself. By george I think we are onto something here!

I love to make fun of myself!

And..... I even like to have fun discussions with my enemies, but there are certain topics and worldviews that do not deserve "fun" or "joyful" conversation wouldn't you agree?

godspell
February 13th, 2002, 01:21 PM
Well, there's bound to be divisive topics on this forum - it's what you get when you get a diverse group of relatively opinionated people of varying faiths and belief structures in one place. In that case, factual conversation is probably the best plan of attack (rather than attack being the best plan of conversation), although you're relatively free to choose your own course.

Now, and I'm hoping that you're not referring to me as an enemy of yours, when we're interpreting the same Word, I'd hope that we could do so in a relatively open-minded fashion, without too much grandstanding or rhetoric. The bible is there to be read and interpreted. It might not be wise of anyone to claim they know exactly what is meant, especially when you and I seem to find passages which counter each other so often. Surely that leaves a fair room for questioning, and interpretation. I could take a wild stab on this one, and suggest it's one of the main reasons there are so MANY Christian faiths out there. ;)

firechyld
February 13th, 2002, 01:24 PM
*grin*

You'd pretty much be right. Christianity has a history of not liking to argue.... but doing it anyway.

Rather than debate healthily, as is customary in the Jewish Faith, they tend to splinter into smaller factions, then build themselves up to strength again.

firechyld

firechyld
February 13th, 2002, 01:26 PM
(I'd like to insert that the above post was in no way meant to be insulting. I don't think it is, but I can see a few people getting huffy about it)

Goose
February 13th, 2002, 02:05 PM
Godspell,

Your tagline states:

"Do not judge others, and God will not judge you; do not condemn others, and God will not condemn you; forgive others, and God will forgvive you. Give to others, and God will give to you. Indeed, you will receive a full measure, a generous helping, poured into your hands - all that you can hold. the measure you use for others is the one that God will use for you."
The focus of that passage is in the last sentence. The MEASURE! Jesus was speaking to hypcrites that haven't repented yet. What is something worth if it has no measure? What measure does God use? A non-hypocritical righteousness it is. How CAN we judge?

"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

Mat 7:5 "don't judge according to appearance, but judge righteous judgement"
You CAN judge righteously. I'll give you an example. Read the whole passage to get the whole effect...

Luke 7:43 "...Thou hast rightly judged."

But why should we judge? Because...

1 Cor 2:15 "...he who is spiritual judges all things"

I don't know how much clearer I have to be. Read Jeremiah 5! See what God says about those who judge unrighteously or don't judge at all. The wicked run wild!

Goose
February 13th, 2002, 02:08 PM
Originally posted by firechyld
*grin*

You'd pretty much be right. Christianity has a history of not liking to argue.... but doing it anyway.

Rather than debate healthily, as is customary in the Jewish Faith, they tend to splinter into smaller factions, then build themselves up to strength again.

firechyld
Then there are some that are commanded by radioactive pants. Zim voice: "My pants command me!"

Part of the purification process...

firechyld
February 13th, 2002, 02:12 PM
You watch ZIM!

*!glee!*

You are now officially in the "People who Rock according to Firechyld" club. :) Join me in glee...

firehcyld

PS Obey the fist!

godspell
February 13th, 2002, 04:47 PM
Goose -

This is NOT a reply to my post on forgiveness! This is a post to do with judgement. These are seperate concepts, most likely deserving seperate debates. Judgement of an individual does not negate forgiveness, nor does forgiveness of a wrong prevent judgement of the individual.

I have, previously, quoted the opening of the passage from which I took my .sig. I believe I clearly illustrated that Jesus in this case was stating that one should not judge.

I'll quote again from the preceeding lines:

"If you love only the people who love you, why should you receive a blessing? Even sinners love those who love them! And if you do good only to those who do good to you, why should you receive a blessing? Even sinners do that! And if you lend only to those from whom you hope to get it back, why should you receive a blessing? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount! No! Love your enemies and do good to them; lend and expect nothing back. You will then have a great reward, and you will be sons of the Most High God. For he is good to the ungrateful and the wicked. Be merciful just as your Father is merciful."

Luke 6.32-36

So; taken in context: This, followed by my .sig, followed by the reference to hypocrites - it means quite simply do not judge. Do not judge:

a) because God does not want you to; he is merciful and you should be, also. And
b) because you're not perfect yourself, and would be a hypocrite to judge another. "Why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but pay no attention to the log in your own eye?"

The use of log vs speck in this instance is a good clue, as well - not only should you not look for the speck in the first place, you should realise that if you do, you've much more to find in yourself than you will in another.

It's easy to quote a phrase or sentence and take it out of context. However, on examination of an entire passage of writing, the message is often clearer.

NB: The above was all taken from the one source, not scattered references over various gospels.

Goose, what version of the bible are you quoting from? I am concerned about the fact that I cannot find two of your references in my bible. I have also tried an online bible, and cannot find your references in Matt 7.5, Luke 7.43. Check here (http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?search=judge+righteous+judgement&SearchType=AND&version=NIV&restrict=New+Testament&StartRestrict=&EndRestrict=&language=english) to see.

As for your reference from Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, my translation of the bible (Good News Bible - Bible Society of Australia) Quotes:

"Whoever has the Spirit, however, is able to judge the value of everything, but no one is able to judge him."

I realise what this may look like. However, once again - read the entire passage. This passage is to do with God's wisdom, and the meaning of this sentence, in context, is that when imbued with the Holy Spirit, a man can appreciate (judge) the value of God's wisdom. Men not imbued cannot appreciate it. That's it. It's not a passage which tells us to judge others

Now, some references you should be able to find:

Matthew 7:1-2 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

Luke 6:36-38 "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven."

John 8:15-17 "But if I do judge, my decisions are right, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me."

(This from Jesus stating that if he ever does judge, it's in his position as the Son of God, not as a mere man.)

John 12:46-48 "As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it."

(This, further into the same gospel, stating that he's not here to judge us.)

Oh dear, Jeremiah?? While I give all credence to the Old Testament, I don't believe Jeremiah really counts as a contemporary, or a counter to Jesus' own teachings. Even according to your ray of light analogy; you count Jesus' teachings as a father to those of the prophets, etc. I hope you'll excuse me if I count gospel proofs as holding a little more water in this case.


I don't know how much clearer I have to be

It's hard to say this without sounding nasty, so please take it in the spirit intended, but I don't think you've been very clear at all. From what I can see thus far, you've taken quotes out of context, you've provided me with some which I simply cannot find and the only reference I can see which has anything to do with judging is from the OT, when we've thus far been debating that which is most relevant to Christians (as it's Christ they follow) - the New Testament.

Finally, when it comes to matters of scriptural interpretation, I don't think we can say with certainty that there is a WRONG and a RIGHT answer. Merely differing interpretations of the same. Let's discuss it in this manner, maybe we'll each gain something from the experience!

Godspell

beanieboy
February 13th, 2002, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by goose

My mentality,

If something is good, you applaud it.
If something is bad, you condemn it.
Simple as that.

If a molestor has his way with you, are you going to forgive him?

Molestor: Hey Beanie. How you doin'?
<Molestor does his thang>
Beanie: I don't condone what you do, but I forgive you. No grudges.

Hmm. I wonder who he'll keep on his 'hitlist'? With your mentality, one would be too forgiving to even call the cops. Don't be hypocritical Beanie. How much does one have to do that's bad before you see that it's wrong and condemn it?

What is the obsession with child molestation?

Anyway, would I be hurt? Yes. Would I call the police? Well, I'm guessing I would tell my parents, hopefully, and they would call the police. Would I want him to go to jail? Yes, because it would protect me, and other people.

Would I hate him? Probably, for a while. But I would have to either choose to hate him forever, or to forgive him, and let it go.
I know people that have a "I will NEVER FORGIVE him for that!" attitude, and it gets in the way of everything, because they won't forgive and let go.

Was Jesus saying, "Forgive them father, for they know not what they do" because they were sorry? No.
Did they ask forgiveness? No.
Was he saying, "No sweat with the cross thing. I was in my 30s anyway." No. It's ridiculous. Yet, he not only forgave everyone, but asked God to as well.

Goose
February 14th, 2002, 05:48 PM
Godspell,

I read from King James Versions. Usually from the KJV Defender's Study Bible. Online, I use this:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/

Look up those verses you couldn't find there.

I'd like to know what you believe. Do you believe that a majority of people are going to hell? If so, I'd like for you to give me an example. I love the truth, and if I'm wrong I'd like for someone to show me.

Goose
February 14th, 2002, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy


What is the obsession with child molestation?

I didn't say anything about child molestation. I said molestation.


Was Jesus saying, "Forgive them father, for they know not what they do" because they were sorry? No.
Did they ask forgiveness? No.
Was he saying, "No sweat with the cross thing. I was in my 30s anyway." No. It's ridiculous. Yet, he not only forgave everyone, but asked God to as well.
They were executing the Savior of the world! This is something that SOMEONE had to do. He wasn't going to kill himself. He didn't mean everyone on earth. Everyone on earth wasn't there chanting for his crucifiction in reality. On the cross, Jesus gave up his godliness to bear the wait of the worlds sins on his perfect shoulders. He HAD to do this. This is why he came to earth. To die for our sins.

Denying Christ, for everyone, even today is eternal damnation. But through his blood you have a way to repent. That's why Jesus had to take all the sin in the world. As a new christian this is too big of a topic for me to go into and you'd miss the point. I'll end up wasting your time and not get very far. Could anyone help explain this? I'm just gonna confuse him. Matter of fact, isn't it after the new covenant that the law would be written in the hearts of men?

beanieboy
February 18th, 2002, 11:26 AM
Maybe Jesus should have thanked the people for killing him, if it had to be done. I have thoughts on that, but that is a whole new thread.

Regardless, I decided to look up "forgive" in the dictionary. The definition was to no longer hold resentment.

You are saying that you no longer hold resentment, nor act angry, yet you do not forgive those who do not ask forgiveness. So, I don't understand what you have left that means "nonforgiveness." I think we have different difinitions that we are talking about.

Jesus says that if a person strikes you, to offer the other cheek. To actually be passive when another is agressive. To not fuel the fire. That's all that I am saying. If I was molested, would I just sit there? No. I am not an extremist. I would report it to authorities, let them handle it, and let it go. I wouldn't right it down on "sins X has done against me," and keep it in my holy book. I would just let him face the consequences of his actions, deal with it, and then forgive and move on.

Goose
February 18th, 2002, 05:31 PM
BeanieBoy,

I'd agree that we are not at a solid understanding of eachother.

Jesus didn't want to die. In the garden before his trials, He pleaded with God asking Him for another way. Yet, sometime later, Peter tells Jesus to run away and that he doesn't have to be given to the authorities. Jesus told Peter, "Get behind me Satan". More than anything, Jesus wanted to do His Father's Will, no matter what the cost. So, there's a fine line, with everything that we do by faith.

The "turn the other cheek" passage is actually talking about taking out vengeance for yourself. Not necessarily being passive. Don't take vengeance out on people. They're expecting you too. That's the government's and God's to deal with. Instead, do something good to them. Not as encouragement, but to make them aware of what they're doing. It will be like hot coals on their brains. I don't think Jesus was talking about big time criminals or people wanting to rape and kill you. He was talking about people who love he world and the things in it. This is the non-veangeful attitude Jesus wants us to have I believe.

Forgiving doesn't mean forgetting. No matter how hard I try, I can't forget things. Especially if someone does something bad to me. And if the person doesn't ask for forgivness, it will be used against him in the day of judgement.

His_saving_Grac
February 18th, 2002, 10:20 PM
So, goose, you are saying the Jesus was just a man, and not God in the flesh?

He KNEW he had to die.

Goose
February 18th, 2002, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by His_saving_Grac
So, goose, you are saying the Jesus was just a man, and not God in the flesh?

He KNEW he had to die.

He was both. He knew he would fulfill the scriptures and have to be raised up, if that's what you mean.

His_saving_Grac
February 19th, 2002, 11:59 AM
It was actually your statement that He didn't want to die. As God, He never did 'die', only had a fleshly body destroyed, and then ressurected. We end up using the term "die" only in our basic understanding, and end up ignoring the difference between what the bible teaches about life and death in it's physical form, and what it teaches about life and death in the spiritual form. It states often that death to the body is actually life to the soul if we follow our teachings and walk the walk Christ did. In that sense, (and that is the only sense we SHOULD think) we must realize the platitude we tell others when a person close to us dies in the flesh. That ha/she has gone to a bette place.

When we realize this, if God was in the flesh of Jesus, God actually could not die, but only have his physical vessel destroyed. He knew, since he originated there, that this death was only temporary. After all, He created His own home, and nothing can stop Him from going there.

We, on the other hand, have to have faith to believe we are going to a place we have never seen after death. Their is a very big diference between what we believe, and what we know. By this I mean not in just religious doctrine, but in everyday life.

Jesus/God suffered for us. But He knew it was a temporary suffering. He had control over how long He suffered and when to finish the pain.

But Jesus/man could NOT know that for sure, just as we don't. We can end our physical suffering ourselves, but to do so in many faiths dooms us to both spritual and physical death. Jesus/man had no control over when the agony was to stop. Jesus/man had to have the same faith we have, and know in His heart that God never had forsaken Him.

Which is where, if we study the NT, we end up debating and losing many paople who would accept the faith. They ask, "How can God die"? Since we and they have faith God can't die, they question the godhood/diety of Jesus. The muslim faith basically accepts much of our OT scripture, but place Jesus as a Holy Spirit filled prophet, on par, or just under, the prophet Mohamed. Judaich faith also places Him as a prophet, yet reject His teaching as God inspired. Placed together, these two beliefs along with atheism and all other religious faiths ends up making over 75% of the world reject the Godhood of Jesus. If we are to stay with out faiths, we must address this point.

We are taught about how Jesus was God on earth, yet He prays on earth to God. So that makes it hard to understand how He could have been God in the flesh. After all, how many times are YOU going to follow someone who prays and talks to him/herself constantly?

Then there is another teaching in which Jesus is part of a triune God. Again, we need to address why, if Jesus was part of God, why would He ask why God had forsaken Him. As part of God, He would know that God hadn't, and would never have stated something, even in pain, so contrary to what he was called and taught.

That leaves us with two other possibilities. One is the total rejection of Jesus/God, and the other is that Jesus/man was in close contact with God, much as Moses was, and was filled with the knowledge God had given Him, much as we ourselves realize many truths from God when we study the bible, our in our daily walk in physical life.

Those who take the rejection path end up being most of our population on earth. Those who take the other path believe that they do not have to reject the teachings of Jesus without having to worship Him in the Godhead.

Which is why I asked the question.

Lion
February 20th, 2002, 07:29 AM
Excellent Goose, you are exactly right. Jesus was speaking of a personal affront, like an insult. Think of the adjoining passage in terms of criminal law and it becomes obvious that it is not what He was referring to:
Matt. 5: 40-41 “If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. “And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. If this were talking about crime, like say a man wanted to rape your wife, would Jesus be saying for you not to resist him but let him have your daughter also? And should you tell him to take two hours raping them instead of one? Of course not.

As for judging we need to get practicing. We have a big job ahead of us.
1 Cor. 6:2-3 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

beanieboy
February 20th, 2002, 09:51 AM
Can we define what "righteous judgement" means, once and for all?

Goose
February 20th, 2002, 02:36 PM
Judgment is the product of wisdom. Righteous judgment is when you discern right from wrong without hypocrisy and with an understanding heart. It's the outward appearence of your wisdom. Disapproval and/or praise are great examples. Let's look at what God says to Solomon when he asks God for discernment and wisdom:


1Ki 3:11-12 "And God said unto him, Because thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgment; Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee."
If curious, read the whole chapter here: http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Ki/1Ki003.html

We have to pray to God with an open and understanding heart to grant us wisdom. It's important and elementary to want and need wisdom/discernment! We need to strive to become adult Men in Christ and not stay as Babes in Christ.

Knowledge and discernment/wisdom are two different things. It's important to have a balance of both.

1Pe 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word,that ye may grow thereby:
Hbr 5:12-14 "For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which the first principles of the oracles of God; [B]and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk [is] unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, [even] those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil."

It's important to discern:

Mat 16:2-3 "He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, [It will be] fair weather: for the sky is red. And in the morning, [It will be] foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowring. O [ye] hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?"
The world tells us that we cannot judge. God tells us to "judge righteous judgment"(Jhn 7:24). Brothers, if it's essential for us to judge all things since we are spiritual(1Cr 2:15), then we need to learn to do it right. Start teething and start chewing on the meat, so that we may eat the meat of the Word and wax in Strength and Spirit.

Peace and God Bless

P.S. Lion, thank you for the support!

Lion
February 20th, 2002, 07:00 PM
Goose-Great answer. I would just add one passage.
2Tim. 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

When Christians say we should not judge, because they take a verse here or there out of context, then they are not rightly dividing the word of truth.

Each word of the Bible needs to be taken in the context of the sentence. Each sentence in context with the verse. Each verse with the chapter, Chapter with book, and book with the entirety of the Bible.

The big picture is essential in understanding the Bible. Otherwise you miss the forest for the trees.

His_saving_Grac
February 20th, 2002, 09:49 PM
As for judging we need to get practicing. We have a big job ahead of us. Unbelievable!

"Hey there God, I am hating just like you said. What's that? You don't WANT us to hate or seek vengence? Well, tough, I am full of rage and hate and I am going to do it anyway, to satisfy my carnal urge for blood!"

Goose
February 20th, 2002, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by His_saving_Grac
Unbelievable!

"Hey there God, I am hating just like you said. What's that? You don't WANT us to hate or seek vengence? Well, tough, I am full of rage and hate and I am going to do it anyway, to satisfy my carnal urge for blood!"
HSG,

I just did a word search for the word hate. The word "hate" only appeared in your post.

His_saving_Grac
February 20th, 2002, 10:25 PM
Originally posted by goose

HSG,

I just did a word search for the word hate. The word "hate" only appeared in your post. Yes, as a four letter word, it is only in my post. But the meaning of it is in your and Lions posts.

I don't really care what term YOU decide to use for it, it still boils down to an urge for power over other (lacking the grace of God) and the need to express you anger and rage without feeling guilty about it.

So use whatever term you want. But think if someone came to your house expressing the same attitude that has been posted here, and think about how long you would put up with it before kicking him/her out.

God is much more full of grace than we can ever be. Yet that won't stop him from kicking you out of his house. Your rage and anger has already kicked him out of his temple.

So judge away. Ignore the NT and what Jesus said. And enjoy your short time on earth. Unless you change, it will be the last time you ever feel enjoyment again.

Goose
February 20th, 2002, 10:57 PM
HSG,

For someone so outspoken on not judging, you sure do a lot of it. I think that's called hypocrisy. I used to think along the same lines until I realized that I had a to judge things or I was going to vegetate. I have to make choices and I have to choose what is right from what is wrong. We need to teach people to make righteous judgments. I don't see what your hang-up on this issue is.

His_saving_Grac
February 20th, 2002, 11:08 PM
Whatever. It isn't me that judged you, it is the NT. It is Jesus. As I said, enjoy your rage. That is the typical Enyartian response. Maybe you should go and read the thread "judge rightly" in which I have stated many times that we all judge every waking moment. The part you don't understand it the "righteously".

Apparently, you are another who feels you can improve on God's eternal judgement. It seems those who argue most for judging "righteously" show they do feel an eternity of suffering is not enough. They must have it in this life also.

As I said, read what Jesus said. You can take it up with Him when you meet Him. I had left this thread because it made me physically ill to see the narrow mindedness and inability to see the word of God spread throughout the NT. I will leave this thread again, so that all of you who feel God's punishment isn't enough can "flock together".

Nice speaking with you though. If you ever want to talk, I be in many other threads. And, if you will, pardon me if I decide to not respond to a post full of anger.

Bless you and all those you love, goose. May the grace of God find you open and willing for His love.

Goose
February 20th, 2002, 11:46 PM
HSG,

I need to know your view on judgment. It sounds like you equate judgment with hate. I don't see how the two are synonymous. I want to understand where you are coming from.

Lion
February 21st, 2002, 07:26 AM
I have no problem with hating.

The only way to judge righteously is to use God’s Word as our basis for judging.

As for hate, well God hates:
Psa. 5:5 The boastful shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all workers of iniquity. And I hate also.

I hate evil;
Psa. 97:10 You who love the LORD, hate evil! He preserves the souls of His saints; He delivers them out of the hand of the wicked.Unrighteousness;
Psa. 45:7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.God’s enemies;
Psa. 139:21 Do I not hate them, O LORD, who hate You? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? I hate them with perfect hatred; I count them my enemies.and hypocrisy;
Matt. 23:28 “Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.So how many people do I want to go to hell? None. I want all to turn to God and accept the wonderful gift that His Son paid for with His life.

As an Ambassador for Christ it is my job to make myself available to the Holy Spirit to help lead those lost souls to the LORD.

But if they chose to make themselves enemies of God…. Then I will hate them with a perfect hatred.

Here’s a few more… they are just soooo good![quote]Deut. 7:10 “and He repays those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them. He will not be slack with him who hates Him; He will repay him to his face.
2Chr. 19:2 And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to King Jehoshaphat, “Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the LORD? Therefore the wrath of the LORD is upon you.

Psa. 101:3 I will set nothing wicked before my eyes; I hate the work of those who fall away; It shall not cling to me.

Psa. 119:113 I hate the double-minded, But I love Your law.

By the way I thought you weren’t talking to me Curly.

Rom. 12:9 Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil. Cling to what is good.

beanieboy
February 21st, 2002, 12:45 PM
It's amazing how many times this conversation continues to go back to definition.

The world does not tell you that you cannot judge. People stand trial and are held accountable for their crimes. People talk of being a "good judge of character." People refer to their "best judgement."

But it comes down to this - the judgement as CONDEMNATION, ie. "You're going hell! Have a nice life!" The judgement of "I'm better than you are."

That is what the world dislikes. You know. The girl who walks with her friends down the hall and says, "she's a slut. He's such a stoner. Man, look how fat that girl is. I'm not. I get straight A's. I'm so glad I'm not like THEM!"

She's annoying to be around, and puts other people down to feel better.

It's EXTREMELY EASY to unfairly judge someone - to judge the book by the cover, to jump to judgement. And that is all anyone of "the world" has a problem with.

I have made several posts that have been very pointed. I have said to Freak that he was self exhaulting in the way he was constantly bragging about all the good things he did for God, how everyone who didn't agree with his point of view was a heretic, and how many threads he started that were about himself, and that his point was to draw attention to himself, and not God. I also called him a coward for making a statement, but refusing to answer for it, or at least say he had no answer. Those are strong "judgements." But they are conclusions that I came to over a series of posts he made.

I don't think he is a bad person because of it, but I refused to be quiet about it anymore. Judgement of that sort can help people grow. But simply calling people names, and haughtily turning on your heal only displays your lack of love, compassion, and maturity.

Many people here are obsessed on the judgement issue, and if they would spend a quarter of that time focusing on love, I would think that they may change their view. Corinthians says that the thing we are to pray for the most is love. Jesus said it was the greatest commandment. Yet, the discussion always turns to this ugly control oriented judgement stance, of trying to make oneself God, and judge one's neighbor, and disregarding love altogether, claiming that "judging IS being loving." Sometimes, yes. And sometimes, it's just the easy way out of doing the hard work of loving someone by turning the other cheek, using gentleness, being generous, offering your help with no expectation of reward, etc.

beanieboy
February 21st, 2002, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by goose
Judgment is the product of wisdom. Righteous judgment is when you discern right from wrong without hypocrisy and with an understanding heart. It's the outward appearence of your wisdom. Disapproval and/or praise are great examples.
P.S. Lion, thank you for the support!

Exactly how does Lion's approach - his cheesy concordance search for all biblical verses pertaining to hatred, and God's hatred of evil, and in some instances, God's apparent hatred of individuals, as well as Lion's insistence that christians "get judging" while mentioning very little about being understanding, careful discernment, being slow to anger, etc. work out with this "discerning right or wrong without hypocrisy and an understanding heart and wisdom" definition?

What does "judging righteously" mean to you, Lion? Do you agree with this definition? It seems contrary to what you say.

Goose
February 21st, 2002, 02:20 PM
I think Lion is trying to show a side of God that modern christians don't like to read about or don't actually know about. It's not all about hate. If your talking to someone way deep in sin, you should help circumcise their heart. Be a sword of division to those who need it. A scalpal if you will. Help divide their heart from the wickedness they have. Help lead them to Christ. It doesn't do any sinner good to just love them whole-heartedly. Do you love the part of their heart that is evil? When a child does something bad, do you give him a big hug for doing it? No, of course not. You need to help them cast out what is evil and cling to what is good.

Mat 10:34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
The sinners we come across are our patients and we must be like surgeons with a scalpal ready to do a heart operation. We will cut away the evil and keep intact what is good. But, there are many that don't think they need help.

Mar 2:17 "When Jesus heard [it], he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

beanieboy
February 21st, 2002, 04:21 PM
Again, you are using extremes. Do you hug your child for doing bad? Of course not. But do withhold your hugs and focus on their faults constantly? Do you ignore the good as some expectation, and only give attention to what is wrong? Hopefully not.

When I began acting, I read a good book about how an actor learned from good and bad directors. And actress was rehearsing, and the director would point out where she dropped a line, where she was off her mark, where she had forgotten to pick up a prop. This continued for a few days until she said, "Darling, praise me! Don't critisize me! If you want me up here, risking making a fool of myself, daring to act, to feel, to be, then you have to praise me. That's what an actor lives for. If all you do is critisize, you will make me afraid to do anything."

Think about it. You have a dad. He yells his head off every time you fall as you take a few steps. Are you going to really want to try at all to start walking? Or are you eventually going to just sit there, because you want to avoid getting yelled at?

Personally, when I am praised by a boss, for example, I am driven to work harder. I feel like my work is valued, that I am valued, and it makes me happier. If there is a problem with my work, I want to have it pointed out, and try to rectify the situation, but I refuse to be perfect - only to strive for it.

I have also had bosses who only critisized me. You know, the minute you come in (sigh)"beanie, beanie, beanie, yesterday, you left the lamp on..." or some other petty thing. I grew to loathe that boss, get depressed, and hated working there. And I knew that no matter how much good i did, it was never enough.

beanieboy
February 21st, 2002, 05:06 PM
I don't think that people ignore parts of the bible. It's just that I see Fred Phelps, and his son with a red face, saying that God hates fags, and backs it up with, "even in the womb, Jacob I loved, but Esau I HATED!" and uses the verse to validate abuse, name calling, their grotesque web site, etc. It gave me the creeps. They both looked like they were ready to kill someone, and I'm sure "not peace, but a sword" is all the spark that would set it off, and they rejoiced in how cruel they are to people at funerals of gays, etc. It's disturbing.

I think most people have some issues with seeing the 'dark side' of God because they don't want to think about it. They don't want to think, ok, God loves us all so much that he sent Jesus. But he killed enemies during Holy Wars. He killed people during the flood. He wiped out Sodom and Gomorrah.

And so you sit there thinking that God is some kind of serial killer who loves you very much. Unless he feels like killing you after all.

Jesus is the Prince of Peace. The angels sang "peace on earth" at his birth. But, then again, he didn't come to bring peace, but the sword. Yet he tells Peter to put away his sword, that whoever lives by the sword dies by the sword.

And after a while, you aren't sure what to believe.

And that is why I think so many people don't look at some of the darker parts of the bible. It's hard to resolve. So, some people think, well, I'm going focus on loving my neighbor. And others focus on hating other people "righteously." And they have their own rewards/consequences.

Goose
February 21st, 2002, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
Again, you are using extremes...
Yes, you're exactly right. That's what a lot of what God's Grace is about. The reason I point out extremes is because a lot of christians today need to see it in a different light. They make so many blanket statements that they make things like repentence superfluous.

Lion
February 22nd, 2002, 03:28 AM
beanieboy-you bring up a good point about praising when someone does something good, and I agree wholeheartedly. The problem comes when the person refuses to do what is right and instead continuously does what he selfishly wants, ignoring the harm it causes to himself and to others.

If a child starts a fire in the living room, and you correct him and then he does it again, and then again, and then again, when can you start praising? First he has to do the right thing or the praise will only serve to make him think he is doing okay and further his bad behavior.

I don’t want you to be a homosexual beanieboy. Why? Because I’m a big party poop and don’t want you to have fun? Or is it because I want to act self-righteous and say I’m better than you?

No! I don’t want you to be a homosexual for the same reason God doesn’t want you to be a homosexual. Because it will destroy you and others. And I don’t want you or others to be destroyed.

So I could just act like I don’t care and say; “hey whatever turns your wheels, no sweat off my back,” and let you kill yourself and others and all the world, exempting myself from all kinds of conflict that I could live just fine without, but would that be love?

If I saw a man walking toward the edge of a cliff, would it be love to ignore it, saying it’s none of my business? No! If I have love I would warn the man, that he was headed for destruction. The man may well ignore me, perhaps mock or ridicule me, and in the end it is his choice, but if I love, at least I should have the decency to warn him.

beanieboy I know, and you know, that you are not happy in your current lifestyle. I know it because I know that God did not create us for perversion. He did not design us for man to be with man or woman to be with woman, just as he did not design us to have promiscuous sex, but rather to mate with one person for life.

Now we can ignore our design, just as we can ignore the design of, say, our car, and put transmission fluid in the oil tank. The car might run for a while, but eventually it catches up to it and there is destruction.

Your lifestyle will destroy you. You and others, (perhaps countless others that you can’t even begin to see at this time). God wants you to turn from what you are, and become one with Him.

Because God hates you right now benieboy, He really really does. He loves you just enough to want you to turn and come back to Him, but right now He mostly hates you. And that is scary. To have the God of the Universe hating you.

You might say, “how can God love and hate at the same time?” but we all do that don’t we? If my son molested my daughter I would hate him. But because he is my son I would love him enough to want him to repent (truly repent) and stop hurting my daughter, so that I could love him again. But if he wouldn’t, I would hate him for the harm he caused to my innocent daughter and if necessary would kill him to protect her.

God doesn’t want any of us to go to hell. He wants all of us to be with Him forever in fellowship. But if you refuse to stop hurting yourself and others then He will kill you, (send you to hell). As any just father would.

Chose life, not death.


Ezek. 33:11 “Say to them: ‘As I live,’ says the Lord GOD, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways! For why should you die,

Heb. 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

His_saving_Grac
February 22nd, 2002, 07:50 AM
It is very tiring to see people quote one scripture, and ignore all the rest.

Luke 6:46 Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord' and do not do what I say?

Luke 6:27-38 But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners', expecting to be repayed in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because He is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will given to you. A good measure, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

And because you seem to think that these words weren't followed verbatim by his apostles and disciples;

Acts 2:44-45 All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he need.

Acts 4: 32-35 All the believers were as one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the ressurection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was on them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles feet, and it was disributed to anyone as he had need.

Proof enough that Jesus teachings haven't been watered down by time but even worse, people have decided to use His words as justification for acting in pride, revenge, and anger.

Again look at Luke 6:46. Think VERY hard, and tell me you are doing ALL that Jesus said. The minute you realize you aren't, is the minute you must also realize you are NOT righteous in God's eyes, and therefore can NEVER judge righteously until you ARE perfect.

We have plenty of places where God should have followed the LAW of leviticus, where the person we now judge saintly should have died. I have spoken repeatedly about Paul, so let's go on to someone else.

The Pharisee's and Saducee's were the very righteous of the time. From the time they could talk, they were taught to memorize the scriptures. By the time they became pharisees and saducees, they could repeat the entire bible without pause. Not only repeat it, but also know exactly where anything was said. They thought themselves righteous. In fact, Jesus tell how righteous they are when he says "Unless you are more righteous than these, you will never enter heaven".

Now remember, these people had been studying the sacred texts for 40+ years. There was not just one or two people, but hundreds. And for centuries they knew exactly what the scripture said.

And they judged Jesus. Can any of you who are searching for the death of anyone really say you know the bible better than they did? But what amazes me is most of you have less than 2 years of study, and not one of you could live without his/her concordance. You can not read the quote bible without reading it as you speak. Yet each and every one of the pharisees and saducees could. And they killed Jesus. Are YOU more righteous than them? In retrospect, you may think so, but change the thought to the here and now. Aren't YOU thinking that you are doing God's will according to the bible?

Jesus was crucified for blasphemy. The same book of Leviticus being quoted by so many shows why Jesus SHOULD have been stoned:

Lev 24:16 anyone who blasphemies the name of the Lord must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien, or native born, when he blaspemies the Name, he must be put to death.

So let see if I was telling the truth, and they were following the law.

John 10:31-33 Again the Jews picked up stones to stone Him, but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?"

"We are not stoning you for any of these, " replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

So they were following the letter of the law, just like those who are here want to do. Yet THEY knew the laws of God better than any one of us does, even better than all of us together. But you still think you are doing the law of God. If you were there, Jesus would never have made it to the cross.

Now instead of looking at how Paul received mercy from God, but how he ended up giving it to all.

Paul did as the law required in the death of Stephan. He was going to do more. Paul not only was a pharisee, but he was also the SON of a pharisee (Acts 23:6). He was very well educated. (Galatians 1:14) He knew both syric and greek. He was a Roman citizen, very few Jews ever got that honor. So needless to say, in our world, he probably would have qualified for Mensa.

Yet HE was doing God's word. Jesus had to APPEAR to him to get him to know he was wrong. Is that what YOU need too?

How about Moses? Anyone want to doubt HIS righteousness?

Moses received a message from God to save His people. The first thing he did after this message was to murder an Egyptian for harming an Israelite. He was so wrong that he ended up a sheep herder in the desert for 40 years. Again, it took an appearance by God to show him the way. And even then Moses didn't believe right off. He had the audacity to ARGUE with God.

(continued)

His_saving_Grac
February 22nd, 2002, 08:00 AM
Aaron, God's chosen Priest, made a golden calf for them to worship. He stayed God's chosen.

How about Abraham? Anyone want to doubt HE was righteous? Twice lying about his wife being his sister.

But first, he speaks with God. God promises him a son. How much more righteous can you get than to have God speak with you personally? To send his angels with messages?

Yet when Abraham was 99 and Sarah 90, God came to him again with the promise of a son. What did our righteous Abraham do? He LAUGHED at God. And so did the righteous wife who was to be blessed by God.(Genesis17:17& 18:12). They judged God in their 'righteousness' and were WRONG. Yet they KNEW God and spoke to Him personally.

Yet I still hear you thinking you KNOW God's will. So let's find some more.

Adam could not have been any closer to perfect (other than Jesus). Yet, while he was pure, he judged wrongly in listening to Eve and the serpent instead of God. As can be seen, we are still paying for the failure of one who walked daily with God, and was created pure and blameless. You think HE didn't know God's will? Are you more righteous that Adam?

Cain also knew God personally. Yet he killed Able. Do you think for one minute Cain wasn't righteous when this happened? He judged his brother wrongly. Yet God showed mercy by placing a mark on him so that he wouldn't die at the hands of all who saw him.

How about the pureness of Jacob? He wrestled with God. But out of greed, he and his mother stole his twin brothers birthrights.

Yet God showed him mercy and even blessed him. In fact, he judged wrongly a second time in thinking his brother hated him. Do you remember what Esau did? I suggest you look it up if not.

How about Joseph? He surely had every right to hate his brothers. They sold him into slavery and lied to Jacob about it. Yet HE, being full of the grace of God, forgave them and blessed them all. Come on people. Can't YOU SEE??????

Job had every reason to curse God. Yet he didn't. ARE YOU STILL BLIND????

We are Gentiles. Not even God's chosen. In fact, cursed. Yet His Grace has saved even us. NEED MORE LIGHT????

David is praised for his righteousness. Most of the Psalms are written by him (or so we say) And after being blessed by God and made king over Israel after Saul had sinned against God, he judged wrongly and had a man killed for his lusts. Yet God FORGAVE HIM. Three of the top ten commandments broken in one setting. Adultery, murder, and covetness. But GOD FORGAVE HIM!

Solomon is attributed for Proverbs, as well as for the Song of Soloman. Two books of our bible. He too talked to God. He asked for wisdom and got it. He was more righteous in God's eyes than any of us. And then 300 wives and 700 concubines later.... And he let pagan beliefs enter Israel through one wife. Yet does 1 Kings have him cursed from God? No. (1 Kings 34-39)

How about the great prophet Elijah. Blessed by God, taken to heaven alive. Yet in 1 Kings 19:4, he asks God to take his life because he was "no better than my ancestors."

We are talking about many of our Saintly people here. They all either received God's grace, or gave it. Yet YOU claim to know his wants better than those who walked and talked to God. By their examples, we can see the grace of God is NOT in the letter of the law, but in the spirit, just as Jesus said. Yet you blasphemy against Him with you emotional feelings.

What? You say you aren't acting emotionally at all? Logic says "the death of one does not bring back the other from the dead". Emotions say "He deserves death". What are you working on there? (continued)

His_saving_Grac
February 22nd, 2002, 08:02 AM
1 out of 6 people on earth right now are claiming to be christians. There are 12 jurors. That means only 2 of the 12 will be christians on average. You know who should die? How can the trial be judged righteously with so many non-christians doing the judging?

Look around you. If you have 4 friends and one person you call a righteous friend, then chances are it is YOU who isn't righteous.

No one on this earth knows all the truth in any situation. Only God does. So how can YOU judge with a minimum of truth?

God created hell for those who believe in it for the unrepentent. Do you see the last word. That is NOT for the repentent. So he will show His grace to all who seek Him. Yet YOU will not give that same grace to another? Then how can you claim to have it?

Do you WANT to DIE blind??? READ ALL THE BIBLE! Grace is shown EVERYWHERE! Quit looking for places to justify your sick need for bloodletting and vengence.

Jospeph and Mary were blessed to carry the son of God. They HAD to be righteous. Yet they didn't believe he was the son of God. Mary and His brothers judged Him crazy. ARE YOU MORE RIGHTOUES THAN THEM? Name even ONE of those names that you are more righteous than. Just ONE.

You are not righteous, as I am not. You can not judge something you don't know. Yet I know HOW to get righteous. You know HOW to find verse to support your emotions. I will admit my weaknesses and try and change them. YOU think you have no weaknesses.

One last time. Do you want to die BLIND to God's will? Quit looking for what you WANT to see, and just LOOK! You will find just how unrighteous you are (just as I have found about me), and that you have not the wisdom of Solomon, nor the intelligence of Paul, nor the purity of Adam, nor the personal conversation with God and His messangers. You did not walk with Christ like Peter (who tells you not to judge), James (who tells you not to judge), Jude (who tells you...), John (again...)

Jesus said to the man who called him good master, "Why do you call me good? For there is not one who is good but the father who is in heaven." Jesus refused to judge. He only did it because he was God and God judged. Yet who did Jesus kill? Who did he hurt? Who did he mistreat? WHO ARE YOU TO DENY HIS TEACHING?

beanieboy
February 22nd, 2002, 08:51 AM
Originally posted by Lion
beanieboy-you bring up a good point about praising when someone does something good, and I agree wholeheartedly. The problem comes when the person refuses to do what is right and instead continuously does what he selfishly wants, ignoring the harm it causes to himself and to others.

If a child starts a fire in the living room, and you correct him and then he does it again, and then again, and then again, when can you start praising? First he has to do the right thing or the praise will only serve to make him think he is doing okay and further his bad behavior.

I don’t want you to be a homosexual beanieboy. Why? Because I’m a big party poop and don’t want you to have fun? Or is it because I want to act self-righteous and say I’m better than you?

No! I don’t want you to be a homosexual for the same reason God doesn’t want you to be a homosexual. Because it will destroy you and others. And I don’t want you or others to be destroyed.


I appreciate your concern.

Homosexuality is not "lighting fires." I have no indication that I am "destroying myself or others."

I do not have blackouts. I do not miss work, or have problems with my work. My relationships don't suffer. I am more spiritual now than I have ever been. I don't obsess about it. I don't get the DT's if I go without intimacy for some time. It isn't a "lifestyle." It's a life. It's a part of my life.

I appreciate your concern, so thank you, but I'm ok. I'm not burning down the house, but lighting a candle, and you keep call ing the fire department. No one is getting hurt. You are welcome to tell me the evils or dangers of candles all you want, and I am welcome to choose to reject your advice.

beanieboy
February 22nd, 2002, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy


I appreciate your concern.

I am not a child. Homosexuality is not "lighting fires." I have no indication that I am "destroying myself or others."

I do not have blackouts. I do not miss work, or have problems with my work. My relationships don't suffer. I am more spiritual now than I have ever been. I don't obsess about it. I don't get the DT's if I go without intimacy for some time. It isn't a "lifestyle." It's a life. It's a part of my life.

I appreciate your concern, so thank you, but I'm ok. I'm not burning down the house, but lighting a candle, and you keep call ing the fire department. No one is getting hurt. You are welcome to tell me the evils or dangers of candles all you want, and I am welcome to choose to reject your advice.

beanieboy
February 22nd, 2002, 09:08 AM
Originally posted by Lion

If I saw a man walking toward the edge of a cliff, would it be love to ignore it, saying it’s none of my business? No! If I have love I would warn the man, that he was headed for destruction. The man may well ignore me, perhaps mock or ridicule me, and in the end it is his choice, but if I love, at least I should have the decency to warn him.


Is it love to say, "Hey, there's a cliff there! Watch out!" and then watch him go over anyway? Would you just stand there? So, as I asked in Burning down the house, what do you propose? For example, someone who is atheist is walking down the street. Do you tackle them and force them to convert to Christianity, and save them from "jumping over the cliff?"

I don't understand the application of this extremist kind of example. It's not loving to warn someone about a cliff and then passively stand there and let them fall, when they believe they aren't in danger.

beanieboy
February 22nd, 2002, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by Lion

beanieboy I know, and you know, that you are not happy in your current lifestyle. I know it because I know that God did not create us for perversion. He did not design us for man to be with man or woman to be with woman, just as he did not design us to have promiscuous sex, but rather to mate with one person for life.

Because God hates you right now benieboy, He really really does. He loves you just enough to want you to turn and come back to Him, but right now He mostly hates you. And that is scary. To have the God of the Universe hating you.

You might say, “how can God love and hate at the same time?” but we all do that don’t we? If my son molested my daughter I would hate him. But because he is my son I would love him enough to want him to repent (truly repent) and stop hurting my daughter, so that I could love him again. But if he wouldn’t, I would hate him for the harm he caused to my innocent daughter and if necessary would kill him to protect her.

God doesn’t want any of us to go to hell. He wants all of us to be with Him forever in fellowship. But if you refuse to stop hurting yourself and others then He will kill you, (send you to hell). As any just father would.

Chose life, not death.



One can love and hate simultaneously. Really?
You could hate your son? Not what he did, but your son himself? And then, love him again? Huh. My heart doesn't work that way.

I'll have to remember the next time that someone yells, "God love you," that I should respond, "AND he hates me, too!"
"God wants you to go to heaven."
"And he wants me to burn in hell."
"God loved you so much he sent his son to die for your sins."
"And he hated me so much he couldn't care less."

Interesting.

Btw, I'm very happy, so I guess I don't "know" that I'm unhappy after all. I've never mentioned otherwise, so you don't "know" that either. But thanks for your concern. Jiminy Crickets. The fire dept again?

beanieboy
February 22nd, 2002, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy


Is it love to say, "Hey, there's a cliff there! Watch out!" and then watch him go over anyway? Would you just stand there? So, as I asked in Burning down the house, what do you propose? For example, someone who is atheist is walking down the street. Do you tackle them and force them to convert to Christianity, and save them from "jumping over the cliff?"

Or the child starting fires in the living room. Do you just stand there and say, "Hey! Stop that!," and do nothing to prevent it?
At that applies to someone sinning how? You force them to stop sinning? You give them a time out? What?

I don't understand the application of this extremist kind of example. It's not loving to warn someone about a cliff and then passively stand there and let them fall, when they believe they aren't in danger. And it isn't loving to yell at a child for starting a fire, and then passively watch it burn out of control.

denversurvivor
February 23rd, 2002, 05:33 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy


I'll have to remember the next time that someone yells, "God love you," that I should respond, "AND he hates me, too!"
"God wants you to go to heaven."
"And he wants me to burn in hell."
"God loved you so much he sent his son to die for your sins."
"And he hated me so much he couldn't care less."



Your a little off. You said,

God wants you to go to heaven.
And he wants me to burn in hell.

Not so

God wants you to go to heaven.
But He will send me to burn in hell if I don't repent.

You said,

God loved you so much he sent his son to die for your sins.
And he hated me so much he couldn't care less.

Not so

God loved you so much He sent His Son to die for your sins.
And He hated me so much He will send me to hell if I don't repent.

I don't think anyone said God couldn't care less, but at certain points in history He has brought justice.

I would also like to second the saying "Chose life, not death."

Zakath
February 23rd, 2002, 07:07 AM
Originally posted by denversurvivor
...God wants you to go to heaven.
But He will send me to burn in hell if I don't repent.
Don't forget about the part where he enjoys the torments of the damned as he contemplates them forever...

His_saving_Grac
February 23rd, 2002, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

Don't forget about the part where he enjoys the torments of the damned as he contemplates them forever... Enjoys? I am very sure that YOU know better than this, Z-meister.

Don't confuse the ignorant teachings of some for biblical truth. I don't see anywhere in the bible that God is accused of "enjoying" the torment of anyone or anything. That is entirely different than some PEOPLE want to portray him now. A persons personal idea of something, and the truth rarely are the same, especially when that person is reading nothing but one side of a story.

I understand this is an area of personal pain for you, or at least a point that is very much on your mind in here. But you, after all your time privately studying and publically preaching, you know that this portrayal you are so upset with is not based on biblical idea, but on personal beliefs of certain needs in their lives. Many NEED the fear to be co-erced into holding their faith. In fact, it has been so inbred into their lives since childhood that they actually feel lost without it.

Don't let those you know who were taught to live their lives in fear of retribution put yourself into the same beliefs. You know that isn't what was taught by those who knew Jesus best. Don't feed into the fears of others.

denversurvivor
February 23rd, 2002, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by His_saving_Grac
Enjoys? I am very sure that YOU know better than this, Z-meister.

Don't confuse the ignorant teachings of some for biblical truth. I don't see anywhere in the bible that God is accused of "enjoying" the torment of anyone or anything.

His_saving_Grac, I-I *stutters* a-agree w-with y-y-you. Man that was hard to say. Not because of your point, but I adamantly disagree with you on topics inside of Christianity 99% of the time.

His_saving_Grac
February 23rd, 2002, 11:40 PM
I adamantly disagree with you on topics inside of Christianity 99% of the time That's ok. Unlike many others, I don't demand you agree with me. After all, how could I learn if I already knew all the answers? Disagreeing with the pro-death penalty people has actually gotten me to read much more in depth in the bible.

And I am shocked to hear you do even 1% of the time. To think I had a perfect record going too. LOL

Hey, got a question for ya. Is squeaky one of yours?

Zakath
February 24th, 2002, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by His_saving_Grac
Enjoys? I am very sure that YOU know better than this, Z-meister.

Don't confuse the ignorant teachings of some for biblical truth. I don't see anywhere in the bible that God is accused of "enjoying" the torment of anyone or anything...

I'm not confused, HSG. I do know a bit about what the Bible says. Perhaps you forgot these verses on the matter of YHWH enjoying the torment of those he dislikes...

YHWH scoffs at those who will not submit to him...
But you, O Lord , laugh at them; you scoff at all those nations. (Psalm 59:8)

YHWH laughs at those he torments...
He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. (Ps. 2:4-5)

YHWH laughs when he considers the future destruction of the wicked...
The wicked plotteth against the just, and gnasheth upon him with his teeth. The LORD shall laugh at him: for he seeth that his day is coming. (Ps. 37:12-13)

YHWH laughs and plans to abandon those who don't obey him...
Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof: I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh; When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you. Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me... (Prov. 1:24-28)

Goose
February 24th, 2002, 11:46 PM
Zakath,

You forgot when God's prophets mock the wicked too. This is fun stuff!


1Ki 18:27 "And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he [is] a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, [or] peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked."

His_saving_Grac
February 25th, 2002, 01:54 AM
Z-Man.

No, I haven't forgot. But what occured to me today is that it can't be that way.

You see, we see in the bible how often God punished the Israelites for forgetting Him and worshipping "other gods".

But I have to assume that what is glossed over is that if God was really upset at people worshipping other gods, why would He reward the Philistines/Caanites/Moabites/ ...et al.

Since this is contradictory to what we are taught in church, we have to dig deeper and figure out why. I am not sure how many people question, because most live their lives in fear of Him. I don't, so I ask.

I want to know how he can be contradictory in this in which he punishes the idolators by rewarding the idolators. If we believe the OT exactly as written, then we must also look at it from the other point of view. The POV of the non-chosen people.

For God to really have given his people into the hands of those is to enforce into the heads of the 'pagan' tribe that their gods actually did win. They never would have seen it as the Lord handing his people over for punishment, but that the gods they worshipped as blessing them, just the same way we see these stories in the POV of the Israelis.

So we have been lied to in our teaching. In the interpretations. The bible is extreemly biased, and the OT is written for those who see ghosts on a daily basis, and for thosae who are so ingrained that they never can concieve questioning God as anything but blasphemy.

These are the same people who taught us that Samson was a hero, when he really was a lechor, who couldn't control his sexual desires, nor his firm belief in vengence, even though he was the one who sarted the problem in the first place. (In Judges, after he had killed the lion, he gave a riddle to 30 people. It was a riddle that only pertained to him, dealing with the lion and the honey he found in the carcass, and that since it wasn't something one could possibly guess or deduce, he showed his demeanor and mindset. When he lost, much in the same way that he was decieving himself, he goes out and kills 30 people, and steals everything they own to pay off his debt in the bet. They don't like to tell you that in Sunday School).

Anyway, those who choose to look deeperinto the OT, knows that while much may be true, the majority is made in a biased manner. The same way we, as children, were taught the heroism of many who, on retrospect, show that there really wasn't much to admire in them.

So these stories were meant to scare people into Godliness. And the reason the jewish tribes left god so often was not really because they chose to sin, but because NO ONE can live their entire life in fear.

Since YOU have already looked deeper into the bible, you should also know that the anger shouldn't be with God, but with what we are taught about God.

After all, if we are taught that someone is a grweat hero, and when we see their true life against what we were told to see, we can do nothing BUT feel disillussioned. It is that or to deny. Too many christians are still living in denial. And to many who should be christians end up rejecting, much as you are doing.

The basic message is there in the bible. The stories we are told, are the lies. Just as Samson, and Gideon, and Jephthah, and Moses, and Lot, and Abraham, and all the rest were not perfect, neither are the stories we are taught. How would YOU like to have to tell a group of 7-10 year olds that Samson, while doing the work of God, was sleeping around with all types of women? That Lot slept with his daughters and they bore his children. That David was a lech, a murderer, a drunk, and a coward who let his son be punished for HIS sins? Just as YOU wouldn't say that to your children, they won't say that to any children.

The problem is that MILLIONS who attend sunday school, end up with only their teachings FROM sunday school in their minds. They NEVER read the stories as written in the bible. whne told about them, they usually do one of two thing. Reject completely God, or deny and live in fear, yet sin anyway and use the stories as a reason to continue to sin.

like you, if that was all that God was, and all I had was these stories, I would (and did) reject Him and them. But that isn't all I have. I can not deny what happened to me in the past, nor even what happened to me a little over a year ago. I have tried and tried to deny it, but I can't.

God isn't like the story built God of the OT, nor is He exactly the same way we get the picture in the NT either. Both texts embelish, or place bias on the truth. But God IS pure love, which I DO know. He is forgiveness. He is NOT up there laughing in derission, nor willing anyone to suffer, nor up there looking for vengence. I am not sure how ANY human could POSSIBLY hurt God that He would need to take vengence.

I don't believe in hell, as you already know. Nor do I believe satan is the evil fallen angel we are taught. Our concept of evil is God's concept of leaving his teachings. We placed the idea of an "evil" being to excuse our mistakes. That just doesn't cut it anymore for the scientific mind.

But neither does rejection cut it. The 'big bang" theory is just as much of a grasp as the idea of a being that knows and has existed much longer than we have. We now can create life from a cell. We are only human. Why can't there be a being that could create life millions of years ago when this planet was young?

If this were a sci-fi novel, it would be very much accepted, and much like most sci-fi novels, the concepts of the writer usually end up a reality. Space Flight was dreamed up before real flight had ever happened. The computor was in existance (in the mind of sci-fi writers) in it's present form before anyone ever even thought about Coleco vision. And Asminovs 3 rule concept for robots will probably be really enforced the minute we do develop artificial intelligence. Heck, God created artificial intelligence here in this forum often enough.

The point is that you deny this existence because of childrens stories. Stories told around campfires for millenia. It isn't God you are upset with, it is the teachings and the disillussionment that came with the actual reading. It is much like those who follow c.moore are going to feel. They are being lied to, and we were lied to.

But it doesn't have to end that way. You have evolved past the point where childrens stories in the bible have any kind of grasp on your clinical mind, yet the scientific childrens stories have just replaced them.

Just as I can not prove to you that I know personally that God DOES exist if you won't take me up on the hypnosis offer, you can not prove He doesn't. You CAN prove that the being we were taught was God is not anyone worth our worship, but that isn't the God I worship anyway. That, again, is the god of parents. The god who is taught to place fear into the minds of children to keep up a certain moral standard, and then to use as an excuse to use the all too human emotions of hate, rage, anger, deceit...

Do you see where I am coming from? I really do understand the reason one would go from pure belief into a total lack of belief. But I had the benefit of some experiances that wouldn't leave me alone for 20+ years, and then the last one.

Do you want to know the REAL definition of frustation? It is knowing something that only YOU have seen. I don't mean I am the onlyone to ever encounter God, but I am the only one who was there WHEN I encountered God. There were witnesses to the times where I had intervention, but no one was there when we talked.

Think on it this way. How do you think the world would react if you said you had seen a UFO AND talked with the aliens on board?

The worst part of frustration is knowing that the alien encounter would be more accepted by people than a personal encouter with God would be.

THAT, my friend, is the TRUE definition of frustration.

beanieboy
February 25th, 2002, 08:47 AM
Originally posted by goose
Zakath,

You forgot when God's prophets mock the wicked too. This is fun stuff!



Don't forget this part:
40 Then Elijah commanded them, "Seize the prophets of Baal. Don't let anyone get away!" They seized them, and Elijah had them brought down to the Kishon Valley and slaughtered there.

Yeah. Fun.

beanieboy
February 25th, 2002, 08:56 AM
I was watching the Exorcist this weekend. One of the things that the priest said was that the reason for the demon possession was that Satan wanted to lie to us, and show us as ugly and unlovable, that we could never be loved by God.

Then I saw Margaret Cho's show. She talked about how, during her TV show, the producers told her that she was too fat, and she wasn't getting much acceptance from other comedians, etc., and starting doing drugs and being promiscuous. It didn't seem to change her around until she realized that she didn't have to believe that she was unsuccessful, fat, etc. She was worthy of love.

And that's what I had been saying since the beginning. I think that it is easier to push people away from God by focussing on sin, than it is to draw people closer by doing the same. However, if you can demonstrate love and acceptance, you can draw people toward God much easier.

What I see is people who say, "you are a sinner, you need to stop sinning, and then accept God. Otherwise, God won't love you." In fact, someone has told me that God hates me (and loves me.) But in truth, shouldn't we be showing love to one another, and bring people to God, so that He can change them? Who are any of us to say to another, "You need to go get cleaned up before God will love you." If we could do that ourselves, there would be no need for God.

Goose
February 25th, 2002, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy


Don't forget this part:
40 Then Elijah commanded them, "Seize the prophets of Baal. Don't let anyone get away!" They seized them, and Elijah had them brought down to the Kishon Valley and slaughtered there.

Yeah. Fun.
No, that's justice. Also, I don't see why Elijah couldn't have a little fun in his work. I'm sure it pleased him to please God about such things.

Goose
February 25th, 2002, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy
...And that's what I had been saying since the beginning. I think that it is easier to push people away from God by focussing on sin, than it is to draw people closer by doing the same. However, if you can demonstrate love and acceptance, you can draw people toward God much easier.

What I see is people who say, "you are a sinner, you need to stop sinning, and then accept God. Otherwise, God won't love you." In fact, someone has told me that God hates me (and loves me.) But in truth, shouldn't we be showing love to one another, and bring people to God, so that He can change them? Who are any of us to say to another, "You need to go get cleaned up before God will love you." If we could do that ourselves, there would be no need for God.
We as christians CANNOT accept evil. This doesn't me we beat the wicked or cannot talk to them. It's the government's job to swiftly execute criminals. We as individuals must abhor evil and cling to what is good.

God strives with us today. He is working on us and for us. It's humans who deny Him. He will only be trying to help us for a finite amount of time. He will turn us over to a reprobate mind if we continue to hate Him. There will also come a time when God will stop trying with people, and will cast the wicked into an everlasting fire. You don't know if you will be here the next minute. The time is now! Does a farmer keep a diseased tree that doesn't produce good fruit? NO. He chops it down and kills what is left of it. So will God do unto the wicked.

Gen 6:3 "And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."
He won't always try with you if you keep denying Him. If a child is physically struggling with his father so much, won't the father eventually let him go and do what it was that was wrong? The child loves what it was that was wrong more so than what his father told him was right. That is love out of free will, and God would rather have you love Him with your free will rather than bondage.

Rom 1:28-32 "And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness ... without natural affection(homosexuals), implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."
People who do such things AND the people who like to see them carry on such actions, are worthy of death. We must abhor evil and cling to what is good.

Luk 3:16-17 "John answered, saying unto [them] all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: Whose fan [is] in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable." Don't be the chaff! Repent and grow into good fruit and worthy to God!

beanieboy
February 25th, 2002, 01:18 PM
You missed my point completely. I'm not surprised, really.

I saw that the what "the devil" wants us to believe is that we are unlovable by God. And then we don't even love ourselves. And then we become unhappy, try to fill it with alcohol or whatever.
And in critisizing someone about how bad they are, you only reinforce that.

You keep going back to the child who is rebellious. Often, all the kid ever wanted was some attention - to be loved, to have limits set. But if your kid cuts school and smokes, and you tell them that they are a lousy school skipping smoker, will that turn them around? It will probably make them rebel more. If my parents had said that they hated me for something I had done (see above post of how God loves and hates), such as getting drunk in high school, but would love me once I stopped, I wouldn't believe them. Love is not conditional, or shouldn't be.

What any of this has to do with execution of criminals is beyond me.

beanieboy
February 25th, 2002, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
You missed my point completely. I'm not surprised, really.

I saw that the what "the devil" wants us to believe is that we are unlovable by God. And then we don't even love ourselves. And then we become unhappy, try to fill it with alcohol or whatever.
And in critisizing someone about how bad they are, you only reinforce that.

You keep going back to the child who is rebellious. Often, all the kid ever wanted was some attention - to be loved, to have limits set. But if your kid cuts school and smokes, and you tell them that they are a lousy school skipping smoker, will that turn them around? It will probably make them rebel more. If my parents had said that they hated me for something I had done (see above post of how God loves and hates), such as getting drunk in high school, but would love me once I stopped, I wouldn't believe them. Love is not conditional, or shouldn't be.

What any of this has to do with execution of criminals is beyond me.

Goose
February 25th, 2002, 01:30 PM
Beanie,

I'm not missing the point. I understand what you're saying. I just disagree with your point and I'm proving God's and mine.

beanieboy
February 25th, 2002, 01:38 PM
Well, yours, at least.

Goose
February 25th, 2002, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
I was watching Exorcist.....

Well, yours, at least.
I seem to be the only one who is successfuly quoting scripture, that no one else seems to be equivocal on. I guess I just don't quote Hollywood. I'd rather take God's Word for it.

beanieboy
February 25th, 2002, 01:46 PM
So, follow Elijah's example, and kill all the people that reject Jesus. Good Luck.

Goose
February 25th, 2002, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
So, follow Elijah's example, and kill all the people that reject Jesus. Good Luck. If God told me to, I would. But He didn't. It's the people who God appointed to take the lifes of them. God told me that much. You obviously are not heeding mine nor the Word of God. Why don't you read the bible all the way and try to understand for yourself instead of babbling about things you don't understand?

beanieboy
February 25th, 2002, 02:58 PM
So, the Crusades were a good thing?

(shivers)

Goose
February 25th, 2002, 04:47 PM
I honestly don't know much about the crusades. All I know is that their where a couple of them and some were lead by the pope.

Lion
February 25th, 2002, 06:17 PM
bb-You asked:
One can love and hate simultaneously. Really? You could hate your son? Not what he did, but your son himself? And then, love him again? Huh. My heart doesn't work that way.
Well God’s heart does work that way. Look, the Bible never says anywhere “Hate the sin, love the sinner.” That is a cliché’ that helps send people to hell. If it were true then God could just strip us of our sin and throw it away and we would all be wonderful people. God says this about people:
Prov. 23:7 “For as he thinks in his heart, so is he.” God does not hate our sin, he hates us when we sin because that is what we are.

In the example I gave you about a son raping his sister, I wouldn’t just hate what my son was doing to her. I would hate him. I would want to kill him, for the harm that he brought to her. After all it isn’t some nebulous thing that has made him do this act, it is him. His heart. It is what he is. And that is evil. It isn't the act which is evil, just as it isn't the gun that kills someone that is evil, but rather the person himself who wields the gun. So it is my son that I would hate. But there would still be that part of me that loves him because he is my son, and I would want him to repent (that is to turn away from the evil he has chosen), and stop harming his sister, the rest of his family, and himself.

As for your statement about tackling someone who is about to go over the cliff if you really loved them, I would say that is true, but it was only an analogy and of course all analogies break down at some point. Perhaps I should have used this analogy since it may be a bit closer (although since it is just an illustration to make a point it too will fail somewhere along the line, so try and remember that it is just an analogy…ok?).

Unlike the cliff analogy, where someone is certain to die within the next few seconds, just when exactly a person will embark on the next step to eternity is not usually known. It’s more like a person that smokes. You know that smoking will eventually kill you (if something else doesn’t first). I know that it will kill you as well. I also know that I can’t jump on you and make you stop smoking forever. So I will do what I can. Which is to warn you of the dangers of smoking.

Now you may not die today from cigarettes, nor even tomorrow, so I could have a lot of time to try and convince you, then again I may not, your heart may clog up with that nasty tar and stuff and just slam shut one minute from now.

And that is the way it is (to a point) with your choice of heaven or hell. You may have until you are a hundred to make the choice, or you may not have even a second more. We don’t know, and neither do you.

Am I unloving to not jump on your back and beat the snot out of you until you stop smoking? Of course not. Am I unloving if I never even warn you about it? Yes.

As for you not being unhappy as a homosexual, that is not true. You said that you never said that you were unhappy so how could I know something like that. I know that you are miserable in your current lifestyle because I know that you are without God. God made us to be in fellowship with him and when we are instead selfishly excluding God from our lives then we are, by nature, unhappy. That’s how I can know this about you.

His_saving_Grac
February 25th, 2002, 09:01 PM
I think that it is easier to push people away from God by focussing on sin, than it is to draw people closer by doing the same. However, if you can demonstrate love and acceptance, you can draw people toward God much easier. And this is a point I have been trying to make also BB.

His_saving_Grac
February 25th, 2002, 09:03 PM
Originally posted by goose

No, that's justice. Also, I don't see why Elijah couldn't have a little fun in his work. I'm sure it pleased him to please God about such things. THAT is just a very sick thing to say.

His_saving_Grac
February 25th, 2002, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by goose
Beanie,

I'm not missing the point. I understand what you're saying. I just disagree with your point and I'm proving God's and mine. There is not one bit of "GOD" in your post. You are one of those who use God to justify your sick need.

His_saving_Grac
February 25th, 2002, 09:08 PM
Originally posted by goose
If God told me to, I would. But He didn't. It's the people who God appointed to take the lifes of them. God told me that much. You obviously are not heeding mine nor the Word of God. Why don't you read the bible all the way and try to understand for yourself instead of babbling about things you don't understand? And THAT, my friethe number one reason to NOT become a "christian".

You are a sick individual. Why don't YOU read the entire bible once.

Goose
February 25th, 2002, 09:28 PM
HSG,

I thought you weren't going to post to this thread anymore?

I'm on my second time around of reading the bible actually. For someone who preaches non-judge-righteous, silence and love, you sure seem to be hypocritical.

Knight
February 25th, 2002, 10:40 PM
Originally posted by goose
HSG,

I thought you weren't going to post to this thread anymore?

I'm on my second time around of reading the bible actually. For someone who preaches non-judge-righteous, silence and love, you sure seem to be hypocritical. LOL!

MSG is actually pretty good at judging isn't he?

Lion
February 26th, 2002, 01:02 AM
Knight-That would depend on your definition of good.

Great signature Knight!

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 08:43 AM
Lion:Well God’s heart does work that way. Look, the Bible never says anywhere “Hate the sin, love the sinner.” That is a cliché’ that helps send people to hell.
_____________________________

I realize the bible doesn't say that. It does command that we love our neighbor as ourself. And loving by hating is the kind of doubletalk that one can find in 1984, if one dare to read beyond the bible.

Unfortunately, your extremes make you fearful to love, for fear that you will love someone all the way to hell. Thus, we go back to the theme of the thread - honey and vinegar. Dogs, for example, want to please their masters. If you beat the animal into submission, it will do what you want and be miserable. But if you praise it for the good it does, it will want to please you more. The beaten dog will do everything out of fear, and won't strive to do more than it has to to avoid being punished.

It is to say, "love God or die." Either choice seems dismal.

I don't think it is possible to "love people all the way to hell." A parent can punish a child without hating it. My parents didn't turn their love off and on every time I did something bad. I was punished if I disobeyed, but they didn't stop talking to me, turn a cold shoulder, act indifferent, call me names, or any of the things that demonstrates hate. They just gave me a suitable punishment, and told me that I had to be accountable.

However, I think you can hate people all the way to hell. It is easy to make someone feel so unworthy of respect and love that they don't even respect and love themselves, and so they just give up on themselves.

Here I think we disagree, which is fine.

I understand the "tough love" thing. I've seen the talk shows where parents send their kids to boot camp because they won't listen. And it seems like the kid just wants attention, and the parent won't hand out any discipline whatsoever. So the kid continues to rebel, wanting attention. But that doesn't seem like "love" to me. That's just laziness. Usually the parent just doesn't want to deal with the kid, and thus, you get unruly kids, because they aren't corrected ever. Extremes. Bad, bad things.

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 08:55 AM
Re: God hating us because we sin.

I don't hate anyone because they sin. I understand that people aren't perfect. Sometimes, even those with the best of intentions make mistakes, myself included. So I forgive. I understand.

And if God can't be at least that good, he has no place in my life. I would be truly unhappy to have to bean counter hating me for every petty thing I did that offended him. No time for people like that, and no time for a God like that.

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by Knight
LOL!

MSG is actually pretty good at judging isn't he?

I thought you were encouraging that.

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy


I thought you were encouraging that.
We encourage judging righteously. NOT judging hypocritically or even hypocrisy in general. Jesus tells us that hypocrites are worse than sodomites. Read Matthew 7:1-5 which tells us step-by-step just how to judge righteously. Not just the first verse.

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 10:59 AM
Wow. So, one FIRST must be reflective of their own faults before pointing out the faults of others. Then, they can more clearly point out the SLIGHT faults of others (plank vs. speck.)

What a revelation.

Something HSG and I and others have been saying since the beginning.

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 11:27 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy
Re: God hating us because we sin.
...And if God can't be at least that good, he has no place in my life. I would be truly unhappy to have to bean counter hating me for every petty thing I did that offended him. No time for people like that, and no time for a God like that.

Come on Beanie. Let's get some of your liberal, open-mindedness working. I think there is a difference between a sin and a mistake. I don't think you're going to hell if you make a left hand turn when you should have taken a left. Doh! A sin is something you lust after or something that's just down right evil. A sin could also be as simple as having pleasure letting those that do sin. If you love evil, you're a sinner. You need to be truly sorry for those sins. You can't be perfect all the way. You'll still be tempted like Jesus was. But, that's why we as christians live under a covanent of grace.

I abhor evil. Simple as that. If I had a child who sinned, I wouldn't get irrate and beat the snot out of him. I would deal with it in a rational, rightly judging matter. I'm more powerful then him. I'm not going to abuse my powers. God gave me the authority to deal with these matters and I pray that I would use the same standards that God will use with me when I'm judged.

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by beanieboy
Wow. So, one FIRST must be reflective of their own faults before pointing out the faults of others. Then, they can more clearly point out the SLIGHT faults of others (plank vs. speck.)

What a revelation.

Something HSG and I and others have been saying since the beginning.
If that's true, then why do you argue with all the christians on here (besides HSG)?

Knight
February 26th, 2002, 11:37 AM
Beanie says...
I realize the bible doesn't say that. It does command that we love our neighbor as ourself. And loving by hating is the kind of doubletalk that one can find in 1984, if one dare to read beyond the bible.Actually I don't think there is any doubletalk here at all. But one needs to REALLY think about what true hatred would be.

I think true hatred would be to hold someone's hand as they blazed a trail for hell.

I think it would be more loving to warn the hellbound even if it is uncomfortable at times.
‘You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him. - Leviticus 19:17Therefore loving your neighbor MAY involve rebuking him harshly.

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 12:33 PM
I agree with Knight. I never read about Jesus holding a sinners hand and telling him everythings going to be ok. He's not Stuart Smiley from 90's SNL. "I'm smart enough, I'm good enough, and dad gone it, people like me" type stuff. He warned them. He even called them names. He was offensive. He was a man. Not a woman. He had the hardness of a man. Not the tender love of a woman. When Jesus chased the merchants out of the temple, was he nice about it? How long did it take him to make that whip? Did he use it in a nice way? Did he just nudge the tables over, or did he utterly flip them with all his strength?

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by goose


Come on Beanie. Let's get some of your liberal, open-mindedness working. I think there is a difference between a sin and a mistake. I don't think you're going to hell if you make a left hand turn when you should have taken a left. Doh! A sin is something you lust after or something that's just down right evil. A sin could also be as simple as having pleasure letting those that do sin. If you love evil, you're a sinner. You need to be truly sorry for those sins. You can't be perfect all the way. You'll still be tempted like Jesus was. But, that's why we as christians live under a covanent of grace.

I abhor evil. Simple as that. If I had a child who sinned, I wouldn't get irrate and beat the snot out of him. I would deal with it in a rational, rightly judging matter. I'm more powerful then him. I'm not going to abuse my powers. God gave me the authority to deal with these matters and I pray that I would use the same standards that God will use with me when I'm judged.

Would you tell you son you hated him when he did wrong? Especially if he wasn't sorry?

Let's say your 19 year old son is living with his girlfriend, and sexually active. You disagree with him, and he disagrees with you. You say it is a sin, because the bible is clear about fornication.

Do you tell your son you hate him?

This is what Lion says God advocates. Is that correct Lion?

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by goose
I agree with Knight. I never read about Jesus holding a sinners hand and telling him everythings going to be ok. He's not Stuart Smiley from 90's SNL. "I'm smart enough, I'm good enough, and dad gone it, people like me" type stuff. He warned them. He even called them names. He was offensive. He was a man. Not a woman. He had the hardness of a man. Not the tender love of a woman. When Jesus chased the merchants out of the temple, was he nice about it? How long did it take him to make that whip? Did he use it in a nice way? Did he just nudge the tables over, or did he utterly flip them with all his strength?

What did Jesus say to Zacheus?
Did he rebuke him harshly?
Did he call him names?
Or did he "hold his hand" by asking him to dine with him, something that no one else would do because he was a "sinner?"

Yes, he went into the TEMPLE and flipped the tables over. But did he do the same in the brothels? Not that is mentioned. Now, why do you think that is?

And name calling? The Pharissees? Again? Really?

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 01:07 PM
And again with the extremes.

One must either "hand hold to hell" or rebuke harshly.

That's like saying let a child do what ever he wants, or spank the child for every little thing.

There are other options. It's called being moderate.

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy


Would you tell you son you hated him when he did wrong? Especially if he wasn't sorry?

Let's say your 19 year old son is living with his girlfriend, and sexually active. You disagree with him, and he disagrees with you. You say it is a sin, because the bible is clear about fornication.

Do you tell your son you hate him?

This is what Lion says God advocates. Is that correct Lion?


Proverbs 27:5 "Open rebuke is better Than love carefully concealed."
I'd probably not only talk with my son and his girlfriend, I'd also try to talk with the girl's family. I'd go public even. I'd be ashamed of my son. I would be harsh. I wouldn't get irrational or abusive, but I definately would be very abrasive. I would cry at the death of my son, just as any father would. Sin is death. Repentance and acceptance of forgivness is quickening the dead.

I definately would not try to cover up my love for him and being 19, I would ask him to leave if he lived in immorality so not to effect my other children living at home. I would have to protect my children doing good, lest I taint them and send a wolf among my little sheep. I'm the shepard and God has given me a rod of authority.

I will not provide for evil. I would despise him and the things he did. I would also tell him that he doesn't have to do the things he does and that I and God would forgive him if he truly asked for forgiveness. "Ask, and it shall be given to you." I would forgive him if he repented.

"Knock, and it shall be opened"

Something tells me it would take a while if my son was that deep in immorality to come back, knock at my door, and apologize. He has dishonored God, me and the rest of my household.

"Ask and it shall be given you"

If it sought for forgiveness with a true heart, I would give it to him. After all, it wouldn't be turning my back on my son. He turned his back on me when he started loving sin.

This is coming from someone only 2 years older than his 19 year old son, so I'm sure there are some areas that I will refine as I get older and wiser, but I think I have a good general idea.

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 01:59 PM
So, you are saying that if he lived on his own with his girlfriend, you would tell him that you hated him, and would continue to hate him until he changed?

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy


What did Jesus say to Zacheus?
Did he rebuke him harshly?
Did he call him names?
Or did he "hold his hand" by asking him to dine with him, something that no one else would do because he was a "sinner?"

Yes, he went into the TEMPLE and flipped the tables over. But did he do the same in the brothels? Not that is mentioned. Now, why do you think that is?

And name calling? The Pharissees? Again? Really?
Argh. You just don't get it. Jesus looks at our hearts. Let's have a look shall we?

First, merchants were in Jesus Father's House. The house of God. A temple of God. "You make my father's house a den of thieves". Brothels are houses of evil. God has no place there except to call sinners to repentance and live in his father's house.

"seek, and ye shall find"


Luk 19:3-4 "And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and could not for the press, because he was little of stature. And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree to see him: for he was to pass that [way]."

He was zealous for his savior! He wanted to learn what Jesus had to say so much, that he RAN and climbed up a tree just to hear and see Jesus!

[quote]Luk 19:6 "And he made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully."
Jesus knew Zaccaeus's heart. You could outwardly tell that this man loved Jesus! For the first time maybe in his life, Zaccaeus had a change of heart. He wanted to listen to Jesus.He loved Jesus. You hate Jesus. You walk the other way. You argue with Him and His word. In your heart, you would rather spit on Jesus and his followers rather than listen to what He has to say, humble yourself and ask for forgiveness. You don't love God enough to change from what you do and who you are because of your love of sin. You CAN change! There CAN be a remission and cleansing of sin, but you need to ask Jesus for help.

Luk 19:10 "For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost."

Zaccaeus was lost, but he received Jesus into his house, repented and was saved. You can do the same. What is holding you back?

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 02:43 PM
I don't hate Jesus. Show me where I have ever said that.

You say that you speak the word of God. I think you don't. I have a problem with you, not with God. I think you don't have love. You have a lot of vindication. It's pretty creepy, actually.

Zacheus was asked to come down from the tree and dine with Jesus. Zacheus didn't welcome Jesus. Jesus welcomed Zacheus, and did it with kindness. He did it to the shock of the public. And he didn't say that he wouldn't dine with Zacheus until after he changed. He didn't call Zacheus a thieving tax collector. He didn't call him a cheat. He didn't call him a dog, or a whore. He called him by name, and was gentle. He loved him "while we were yet sinners."

Yet, some people here want me to believe that God hates us for our sin. I say, bologna. I say, you serve evil forces. It's as if you want God to hate certain people. And it keeps reminding me of the people that would say, "I'm going to heaven and you're not!" Some people can't enjoy what they have unless they know others don't have it, and flaunt it. It's weird. And it's twisted.

You say that Jesus was angry. So why wasn't he upetting the brothels? Why wasn't he rebuking them harshly? Why wasn't he calling them names? Was he "holding their hands to hell?" Where is all of this harshness, except where people exhalted themselves?

If I don't "get it," it's because you are a loud gong thinking it is making beautiful music.

We may just have to agree to disagree.

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
So, you are saying that if he lived on his own with his girlfriend, you would tell him that you hated him, and would continue to hate him until he changed?
He would be dead to me. You see hate and love as emotions. I think of hate, despise and abhor as synonymous. I wouldn't stop telling or trying to show him God's plan of salvation, but there would be consequences to his evil actions. I would be sorrowful that he chose to side with evil. I would forever keep at the the door of his heart till he comes knocking. Till then, he's got to survive outside without God.

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 02:51 PM
Can you explain what "he would be dead to me" means?

Does that mean that you would cut him out of your life? And if so, how would you keep at the door to his heart, exactly?

Would this apply if he decided, as an adult, to smoke? If he swore on occassion? If he worked on the Sabath? etc.?

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by beanieboy
I don't hate Jesus. Show me where I have ever said that.

You say that you speak the word of God. I think you don't. I have a problem with you, not with God. I think you don't have love. You have a lot of vindication. It's pretty creepy, actually.

Zacheus was asked to come down from the tree and dine with Jesus. Zacheus didn't welcome Jesus. Jesus welcomed Zacheus, and did it with kindness. He did it to the shock of the public. And he didn't say that he wouldn't dine with Zacheus until after he changed. He didn't call Zacheus a thieving tax collector. He didn't call him a cheat. He didn't call him a dog, or a whore. He called him by name, and was gentle. He loved him "while we were yet sinners."

Yet, some people here want me to believe that God hates us for our sin. I say, bologna. I say, you serve evil forces. It's as if you want God to hate certain people. And it keeps reminding me of the people that would say, "I'm going to heaven and you're not!" Some people can't enjoy what they have unless they know others don't have it, and flaunt it. It's weird. And it's twisted.

You say that Jesus was angry. So why wasn't he upetting the brothels? Why wasn't he rebuking them harshly? Why wasn't he calling them names? Was he "holding their hands to hell?" Where is all of this harshness, except where people exhalted themselves?

If I don't "get it," it's because you are a loud gong thinking it is making beautiful music.

We may just have to agree to disagree.

Beanie,

I think you're creepy. If you're living an immoral lifestyle, God despises you. But because he also loves your soul salvation, he gives you a chance to repent. he loves the image you were created in, but he despises what you've become. But you don't repent. You don't despise wickedness. He doesn't want to cast you into the fire, but he will if he has to.

Again, Jesus knew Zaccaeus's heart before anyone else could discern his intentions. Even before Zaccaeus knew of himself!

Again I ask, why don't you accept Jesus into your heart?

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 03:14 PM
Beanie,

He would not be as vivid in my heart like he was before. I would cut him out of my life until he would want to be grafted in again. He would be dead, or dying to me, until he accepts true life again.

I would judge every action and take value to that action. Just as there are verying punishments in the bible, so would I decide which punishment to use. Some being severe for severe crimes. Somes punishements being small for lesser stuff.

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 03:59 PM
Goose - this is the kind of judgement that people aren't up on. You are judging my heart. If I was not somewhat interested in seeking God, I would not be here. I would be apathetic.

But it is like me being up in a tree, and you telling me that Jesus hates me, and will continue to do so, until I change. And I'm telling you to keep it down, because I want to hear what he's saying.

You are not God. You do not know my heart. Please do not assume to know it.

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 05:10 PM
Beanie,

Again, why don't you fully ask Jesus Christ into your heart and let him take over?

beanieboy
February 26th, 2002, 05:20 PM
Honestly? Because people like you have. Because Knight says he has. Because Jefferson says he has. Because Freak said he has. And I don't want that to happen to my heart. I don't want to gleefully mock people, harden my heart and act without compassion, and become full of myself. I don't want that to happen to me.

Zakath
February 26th, 2002, 06:11 PM
Good point, beanieboy.

Just what I want to be like when I grow up...
... the globetrotting exorcist evangelist who can't even remember what kind of degree he has from college

... the bigoted, obnoxious, ignorant jerk who pickets private homes and yells at residents

... all the calvalcade of lunatics who parade themselves as models of Christianity here at TOL!

I don't think so... :rolleyes:

Goose
February 26th, 2002, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by Zakath
Good point, beanieboy.

Just what I want to be like when I grow up...
... the globetrotting exorcist evangelist who can't even remember what kind of degree he has from college

... the bigoted, obnoxious, ignorant jerk who pickets private homes and yells at residents

... all the calvalcade of lunatics who parade themselves as models of Christianity here at TOL!

I don't think so... :rolleyes:
Congrats Zakath,

Another false accusation with me fulfilling none of the above!

Zakath
February 26th, 2002, 07:53 PM
Originally posted by goose
Congrats Zakath,

Another false accusation with me fulfilling none of the above!

I've obviously missed something.

Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me on which of the descriptions of denizens of TOL was a "false accusation"...

Lion
February 26th, 2002, 08:33 PM
Goose and Knight-Fantastic responses, I couldn’t hope to do any better.

Lion
February 26th, 2002, 09:25 PM
bb-Would I hate my son if he shacked up with his girlfriend out of marriage. Absolutely. I would despise him for harming himself and making a whore out of the woman. And I would tell him that he would have no part in my life until he repented and came back to God.

This would cause me horrible pain, far more pain than it would cost my son.

Why would I do this even though it would break my heart? Because I love my son and it is what is best for him. This attitude, which my son knows I take from the Bible, is the strongest possible way to keep him from doing such a terrible thing, to himself and others.

You say we demonstrate hate by our harshness, but it is you that shows hate at every occasion. You would allow your son to make a whore out of my daughter and tell him that he is just fine for doing it and you will still love him no matter what. Why, he could do anything, no matter how wicked or vile or horrible, and you will still love him. So why shouldn’t he do it? Dad will still love me… right? I can’t be all bad.

Paul tells us how to deal with a brother committing sexual immorality:
1Cor. 5:1-7 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles — that a man has his father’s wife! And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you. For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your glorying is not good (beanieboy). Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened.
Paul tells us not to keep company with such people or even to eat with them. We are to excommunicate them in the hope they will turn back to the Lord.

However that is for a fellow Christian. You are not a brother so I will still talk to you for a while. God doesn’t put as tough a standard on you because you don’t have the gift of the Holy Spirit to guide you. That’s why you need us.

Oh I know, now you’re going to start with that stuff about how we are Holier than thou, well we are, but it has nothing to do with us. It is a complete gift from God. I don’t deserve it. I was a terrible person. I was an atheist that tried to send people to hell. I deserve to go to hell.

Nothing, not one thing, or in any way what-so-ever, have I ever done anything that would make me worthy to spend eternity with God.

God offered me the precious gift of His Son’s blood to cover my sins, and all I did was accept that gift.

And the only reason I am a better person today is because I became a new creation when I accepted that gift. The Holy Spirit came into me and changed me. So now it’s not that I can’t go out and sin. I could. Sometimes I even do. But I don’t want to anymore. And the closer my relationship with God is, the less and less I want to at all. And when I’m really close, I don’t even get tempted at all. That’s what Goose is talking about when he says that he has a heart for God and you don’t.

Last point. As for judging your heart… we judge your heart by your actions and your words. You say that you are looking into Christianity… that’s a good idea, but here’s the kicker. You don’t get to accept it on your terms. It has to be on God’s terms. You need to really look into the Bible and see if it’s what you want. If you don’t, and so far it looks like you don’t, then you are free to choose to live without God. He won’t force you to chose Him, in fact He can’t force you to chose Him. That’s up to you, and that’s real love.