PDA

View Full Version : ARCHIVE: Is it ever right to deny Christ?



Pages : [1] 2 3

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 10:59 AM
The Holy Scriptures speak of Jesus declaring in no certain terms that-"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."

The Lord Jesus Christ is absolutely clear. You cannot
intentionally deny Him and be right with God. It is puzzling why some believers on TOL would indirectly infer you can deny Jesus and still be right with Him. I cannot think of any circumstance where denying Him would be righteous. Can you?

Thank God for the martyrs that shed their blood for their faith in Christ.

As the apostle John put it: He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son.

Overcoming (and not denying Jesus) even in the midst of death has its rewards...

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by Sheepdog
I would have had no problem in any respect, if the young high school girl at Columbine had said no to the question from her murderers "Are you a Christian". There was absolutely no need to surrender her life for the cause of 2 highly confused idiots.

Did her admitting her faith help her assailants? She knew their intent. The tragedy of that event is the religious legalism that was indoctrinated to this child, that she, under no circumstances, can ever deny her faith.

Every situation is different. And it would be a very rare occasion to ever deny, but we cannot say there is never one.

Sheepdog says: "Did her admitting her faith help her assailants?" Not sure. But she sure did impact the country and the world. But what circumstance can you think of that would allow such denial? Throughout the centuries believers have died for their faith without ever denying Him.

I speak of personal experience, I have been confronted with either denial or death or serious injury or Christ. I stood for Christ (though it was very difficult-nobody wants to die) and God supernaturally spared me.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:31 AM
Originally posted by Sheepdog


So if a gun toting manic walks up a public street and yells out loud "I'm going to kill every Christian I see today... excuse me sir are you a Christian?" Are you telling me that your going to respond "Yes"? Not me! I would say no, and then we he turns to go after the next Christian, I would then risk my life to save the life of others by jumping on his back and trying to take his gun. What good am I to the other people he is after, if I am laying there dead?

Sheepdog, I'm surprised by your response. It is a honor to die for Christ.

To answer your question: I would say, "Yes, I'm a Christian" and I would try to disarm the man if possible (if not trust God like the early believers with my life and share the Gospel with him. I have been put in situations like this by militant Muslims. I would never think of deny Him in front of them, you'd miss a great witness opportunity.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 11:31 AM
If an unbeliever denies Christ his whole life that is the WORST possible thing he could do because he will suffer in hell for an eternity. I.e. the verse Freak references.

But what about a "saved" person who is coerced into denying Christ, or denies Christ as an act?

Let's take three examples:

1. Imagine some nut ball on drugs breaks into your house. He says.... "I am on a mission to slaughter Christians". He aims his shotgun at your kids and asks... "Is this a Christian family?". To save your kids you tell the nut "hey I don't know what your talking about our family is agnostic".

2. Imagine if someone were incoherent for whatever reason. Maybe they were highly medicated for health reasons. And while their faculties were lost another person tricked them into simply saying that they denied Christ.

3. Imagine your son Billy gets the role as Peter in the church play. As "Peter", Billy must "act" as if he is denying Christ.

Think about those three circumstances.

Do you think our relationship with God is so shallow that God doesn't know our true hearts and how we REALLY feel about Him? Don't you think God would know we were just "acting" or being coerced?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by Knight
If an unbeliever denies Christ his whole life that is the WORST possible thing he could do because he will suffer in hell for an eternity. I.e. the verse Freak references.

But what about a "saved" person who is coerced into denying Christ, or denies Christ as an act?

Let's take three examples:

1. Imagine some nut ball on drugs breaks into your house. He says.... "I am on a mission to slaughter Christians". He aims his shotgun at your kids and asks... "Is this a Christian family?". To save your kids you tell the nut "hey I don't know what your talking about our family is agnostic".

2. Imagine if someone were incoherent for whatever reason. Maybe they were highly medicated for health reasons. And while their faculties were lost another person tricked them into simply saying that they denied Christ.

3. Imagine your son Billy gets the role as Peter in the church play. As "Peter", Billy must "act" as if he is denying Christ.

Think about those three circumstances.

Do you think our relationship with God is so shallow that God doesn't know our true hearts and how we REALLY feel about Him? Don't you think God would know we were just "acting" or being coerced?

This is easy. First question is trust God with your lives. Try to disarm the man but you should never deny Jesus.

Second question is abusrd. I'm talking about intentionally denying Christ.

Third question is another absurd question. I'm speaking of intentionally denying Christ.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by Sheepdog


That's fine! But, I don't think it is an honor to commit suicide for Christ out of pride.

Who ever said that? Nobody REALLY wants to die. But if your put in no other position then don't deny Jesus though.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:38 AM
Knight, I'm really surprised by your responses. Intentionally denying Jesus is absolutely wrong. If it isn't I'm not sure what is then.

Calvinist
November 27th, 2002, 11:40 AM
Freak is confused as ussual. How is it that I, a newcomer to TOL, understand that Freak is confused and no one else seems to be? He has no idea what he believes and spouts off all kinds of rubbish based on what he "feels" to be truth.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by Calvinist
Freak is confused as ussual. How is it that I, a newcomer to TOL, understand that Freak is confused and no one else seems to be? He has no idea what he believes and spouts off all kinds of rubbish based on what he "feels" to be truth.

Jesus said: "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."

Now, who's confused?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by Sheepdog


What I am saying is, each situation needs careful evaluation. God knows my heart, and knows that I would never deny Him, but just saying something doesn't make it real. I have no problem with deceiving someone to save a life, even my own. Jesus did it, and so did many other bible characters.

That's fair. But I'm speaking of intentionally denying Jesus.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by Freak


That's fair. But I'm speaking of intentionally denying Jesus.

Intentionally denying Jesus is absolutely wrong. Would anybody disagree with that?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by Freak


Intentionally denying Jesus is absolutely wrong. Would anybody disagree with that?

I have a feeling some are trying to look for a loophole just to disagree with Freak (namely Knight).

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by Sheepdog


If anyone has been saying otherwise, then I would disagree with them. But, I believe that what has been said about denying Jesus, or lying has nothing to do with what is actually believed in their heart, but only to deceive others who have malicious intent.

I made it clear on my first post-I'm speaking on intentionally denying Jesus. Knight seems to be having some trouble though...not sure why....

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by Freak


This is easy. First question is trust God with your lives. Try to disarm the man but you should never deny Jesus. Say goodbye to your kids.

You continue...
Second question is abusrd. I'm talking about intentionally denying Christ. No, its not absurd Freak because in none of these examples are you REALLY denying Christ! Your only doing it out of coercion or as an act! Which is the crux of the question.

You continue....
Third question is another absurd question. I'm speaking of intentionally denying Christ. Again Freak in your haste to act self righteous you are missing the entire crux of the debate.

Intentionally denying Christ (without coercion or as an act) would be wrong! Nobody is saying otherwise.

And it IS noble to die for Christ.

But there ARE situations that would make dying for Christ NOT noble, especially when it comes to a situation where other lives are at stake besides your own!

Since when are we held hostage by truth for the intention of obliging wickedness?

Freak, you don't believe a Christian can lose their salvation do you?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by Knight
Say goodbye to your kids.

You continue...No, its not absurd Freak because in none of these examples are you REALLY denying Christ! Your only doing it out of coercion or as an act! Which is the crux of the question.

You continue....Again Freak in your haste to act self righteous you are missing the entire crux of the debate.

Intentionally denying Christ (without coercion or as an act) would be wrong! Nobody is saying otherwise.

And it IS noble to die for Christ.

But there ARE situations that would make dying for Christ NOT noble, especially when it comes to a situation where other lives are at stake besides your own!

Since when are we held hostage by truth for the intention of obliging wickedness?

Freak, you don't believe a Christian can lose their salvation do you?

Knight, you said: But there ARE situations that would make dying for Christ NOT noble, especially when it comes to a situation where other lives are at stake besides your own!

The question I'm raising is it right to ever intentionally deny Christ? You answered no. That's good.

Then you go on: Since when are we held hostage by truth for the intention of obliging wickedness?

We are held hostage to Christ and Christ calls us to not deny Him. Deny yourself, Jesus said, and take up your Cross and follow Him, even if meant losing your precious family. My parents who are retired missionaries had to lay down their lives and those around them for Christ and it is noble.

No, I do not believe a follower of Christ can lose their salvation. Romans 8:30 speaks clearly on that issue. I do question however ones salvation if they intentionally deny Christ in light of what Jesus said.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 12:14 PM
As legalistic as Freak is it is a complete contradition that he would oppose the death penalty. He is a very very confused man. To deny Christ is from the heart and not the lips.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by Freak

No, I do not believe a follower of Christ can lose their salvation. Romans 8:30 speaks clearly on that issue. I do question however ones salvation if they intentionally deny Christ in light of what Jesus said.

That is because you are a confused legalist and fail to realize that God seeks relationships more than shallow words in a sin-cursed world.

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 12:17 PM
That is my point too Yx...and it is not a one-time thing. Trying to use Matthew 10 and Luke 12 to say that is is just wrong-headed.

I am glad Freak started this thread, perhaps the other one on whether or not lying is never righteous will get to stay on track.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by Calvinist
Freak is confused as ussual. How is it that I, a newcomer to TOL, understand that Freak is confused and no one else seems to be? He has no idea what he believes and spouts off all kinds of rubbish based on what he "feels" to be truth.

It must be your undeniable super-empowered perceptive abilities that revealed to you that DDW was a female ;).

Calvinist
November 27th, 2002, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom


It must be your undeniable super-empowered perceptive abilities that revealed to you that DDW was a female ;).

You mean the same powers that revealed to me that DDW was a female enlighted to me that Freak is confused?

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 01:08 PM
Yep, that is what Yx is saying.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 01:17 PM
You may want to loan some of your perception super powers to Hey Zeus because the extensive advertising on the forums pages of myself being a moderator wasn't enough to clue him in that he had to still ask.

Calvinist
November 27th, 2002, 01:27 PM
Do you think Freak is confused?

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by Calvinist
Do you think Freak is confused?

In case there has been placed in this thread any kryptonite that may be blocking you super-sensory perceptive powers I will repaste my reply to Freak earlier in this same thread.


Originally posted by Yxboom


That is because you are a confused legalist and fail to realize that God seeks relationships more than shallow words in a sin-cursed world.

Calvinist
November 27th, 2002, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom


In case there has been placed in this thread any kryptonite that may be blocking you super-sensory perceptive powers I will repaste my reply to Freak earlier in this same thread.



Die Green Menace!!!!

Pilgrimagain
November 27th, 2002, 01:42 PM
Peter denied Christ and was still saved.

Pilgrimagain
November 27th, 2002, 01:43 PM
That being said, even at gun point I would not deny Christ.

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 01:49 PM
You may want to loan some of your perception super powers to Hey Zeus because the extensive advertising on the forums pages of myself being a moderator wasn't enough to clue him in that he had to still ask.

LOLOLOL

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 01:50 PM
If a crazed gunman were to have your son or daughter at gun point would you deny Christ?

cirisme
November 27th, 2002, 01:50 PM
No.

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 01:51 PM
PA, what if it were somebody else at gunpoint? Someone who was not quite so willing to die for your faith??

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 01:54 PM
No one is going to deny that this is a tough one. In order though I think to make the dogmatic statement that it would NEVER be morally permissible, there are some hurdles to be overcome. First, that lying can be morally permissible, and the Bible gives us two clear examples when it was. Second that this issue is an example of an inviolate subject when it comes to lying. I don't think the Biblical case can be made for that. I have no problem with the concept that even accepting that lying can be morally righteous (which I do) that there may be some inviolate subjects. I have yet to see that proven. Matthew 10 and Luke 12 do not prove that as Knight has pointed out over and over again.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 01:58 PM
As pious as you may think you sound Cirisme it is very unrealistic. And since it is a command as a father to seek the well-being for their children to allow their children to be sacrificed for the sake of hollow words sheds a very horrid light on that man as a father who would sacrifice his own children on the alter of a misguided conviction.

cirisme
November 27th, 2002, 02:01 PM
It was unrealistic for God Himself to die for us.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 02:04 PM
Just as Jepthath to sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering. Are you not doing the same? To appease God you will sacrifice your children on the altar.

Unlike Jepthath who did not kill his daughter you would have.

cirisme
November 27th, 2002, 02:06 PM
Straw man.

I said I would not deny my God, I never said I would allow such a horrible thing to happen to my own flesh and blood.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 02:10 PM
Do you know what a straw man is?

My question:

Originally posted by Yxboom
If a crazed gunman were to have your son or daughter at gun point would you deny Christ?
Your answer:

Originally posted by cirisme
No.

And your contradiction:

Originally posted by cirisme
I said I would not deny my God, I never said I would allow such a horrible thing to happen to my own flesh and blood.

Should I re-ask the question?

cirisme
November 27th, 2002, 02:13 PM
Not denying Christ, and stopping a tragedy are two different things.

You can keep from denying Christ, while preventing a tragedy. :)

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 02:15 PM
You are so incoherent. Give me your address and I will buy you a mirror for Xmas so you can practice making sense.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 02:16 PM
I am so shocked to read that many here would actually sacrifice their children to some maniac for a completely meaningless reason!

I say "meaningless" because my denial to the gun wielding nut is false! Therefore I am not doing anything brave by demonstrating to a delusional criminal that I am Christian.

Now, on the other hand.... if the government became increasingly wicked and put me on trial for being a Christian and if my life depended on me denying Christ I HOPE I would be so brave as to NOT deny Him even if it cost me my life.

I say "HOPE" because I am human. I am weak! I think I would be brave and profess my faith but I cannot say for absolutely certain. I pray that I will never be in that situation.

But that isn't what we are talking about here. We are discussing a meaningless slaughter of my children! My professing Christ would mean nothing, God wouldn't see that as bravery! I think He would see it as a disappointment. I suspect that God would be a little disappointed that I didn't use my wisdom like the Hebrew midwives did and thwart the evil plan so that I and my family could live and alert the authorities to the man in an effort to save even MORE lives!

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 02:18 PM
Well put Knight.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 02:18 PM
I can only share your hope there as well as frustration by the pious lunacy.

cirisme
November 27th, 2002, 02:19 PM
:nono:

A) You deny Christ.
B) You don't deny Christ.
C) You don't deny Christ while doing something to try to stop a tragedy.

You people only see A & B as the only possible answers, you think I'm answering B.

I am answering with C.

;)

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 02:21 PM
That was not an option in the scenario Ciris... and you keep wording it in an overly emotive manner. IT IS A LIE. NO ONE IS ADVOCATING ACTUALLY DENYING CHRIST.

whitewitch
November 27th, 2002, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by Knight
I am so shocked to read that many here would actually sacrifice their children to some maniac for a completely meaningless reason!

I say "meaningless" because my denial to the gun wielding nut is false! Therefore I am not doing anything brave by demonstrating to a delusional criminal that I am Christian.

Now, on the other hand.... if the government became increasingly wicked and put me on trial for being a Christian and if my life depended on me denying Christ I HOPE I would be so brave as to NOT deny Him even if it cost me my life.

I say "HOPE" because I am human. I am weak! I think I would be brave and profess my faith but I cannot say for absolutely certain. I pray that I will never be in that situation.

But that isn't what we are talking about here. We are discussing a meaningless slaughter of my children! My professing Christ would mean nothing, God wouldn't see that as bravery! I think He would see it as a disappointment. I suspect that God would be a little disappointed that I didn't use my wisdom like the Hebrew midwives did and thwart the evil plan so that I and my family could live and alert the authorities to the man in an effort to save even MORE lives!

So the girl at that school in Colorado was a meaningless sacrafic in your eyes?

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 02:23 PM
You are answering with D) You are incoherent. C was never an option and you knew full well.
Will you dare throw C in the face of the many Jewish father who witnessed their own children brutally murdered before their own eyes.

cirisme
November 27th, 2002, 02:23 PM
That was not an option in the scenario Ciris...

What were the options, obviously they're unwritten. :rolleyes:


NO ONE IS ADVOCATING ACTUALLY DENYING CHRIST.


If a crazed gunman were to have your son or daughter at gun point would you deny Christ?

?

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 02:26 PM
Ciris.. the problem is that we are all pouring different meanings here into what is going... so I jumped on you somewhat inconsistently, and I apologize. I just want to be clear that no one is advocating actually denying Christ but LYING in a specific circumstance.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by whitewitch


So the girl at that school in Colorado was a meaningless sacrafic in your eyes? Talk about major misrepresentation! Is that a requirement or just a perk from being a witch? :nono:

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 02:29 PM
It's a perk. I miss that perk. LOLOLOLOL

cirisme
November 27th, 2002, 02:33 PM
It's a perk. I miss that perk.

According to freak, you should still have that perk. ;) :D

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by whitewitch


So the girl at that school in Colorado was a meaningless sacrafic in your eyes? Two points....

1. Her professing Christ had NO effect on any other lives! In her case I am in awe of her bravery and I can only pray I would be so brave.

2. Had she not been so brave (out of fear or confusion) God would not have held that against her! God knew her heart and would have known she was being coerced.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 03:00 PM
It is the sacrificing of another person for your own belief that is what is being rejected.

NSMinistries
November 27th, 2002, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Two points....

1. Her professing Christ had NO effect on any other lives! In her case I am in awe of her bravery and I can only pray I would be so brave.

2. Had she not been so brave (out of fear or confusion) God would not have held that against her! God knew her heart and would have known she was being coerced.

I would have thought she did reach alot of people by her death. Look at the books printed about her.

NSMinistries
November 27th, 2002, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by whitewitch


So the girl at that school in Colorado was a meaningless sacrafic in your eyes?

When did you get back?

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by NSMinistries


I would have thought she did reach alot of people by her death. Look at the books printed about her. She DID reach allot of people that's why I said I was in in AWE of her bravery.

But her professing Christ didn't cause the death of OTHER's which is what is up for debate.

NSMinistries
November 27th, 2002, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by Knight
She DID reach allot of people that's why I said I was in in AWE of her bravery.

But her professing Christ didn't cause the death of OTHER's which is what is up for debate.

Gotcha... At work scanning not reading...:doh: :thumb:

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by NSMinistries


Gotcha... At work scanning not reading...:doh: :thumb: No problem, in fact I should have worded that one post differently because it did make it sound like I was saying something else.

Sorry!

cirisme
November 27th, 2002, 03:50 PM
So, are we all on the same page?

NSMinistries
November 27th, 2002, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by Knight
No problem, in fact I should have worded that one post differently because it did make it sound like I was saying something else.

Sorry!

Its cool...

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 03:55 PM
Originally posted by cirisme
So, are we all on the same page? Everybody but you and Jaltus and Freak!

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Everybody but you and Jaltus and Freak!

I thought it funny that Cirisme would be the one asking if we are all on the same page.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 04:06 PM
At least Sheepdog has shown the TF to admit it.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by Knight
I am so shocked to read that many here would actually sacrifice their children to some maniac for a completely meaningless reason!

I say "meaningless" because my denial to the gun wielding nut is false! Therefore I am not doing anything brave by demonstrating to a delusional criminal that I am Christian.

Now, on the other hand.... if the government became increasingly wicked and put me on trial for being a Christian and if my life depended on me denying Christ I HOPE I would be so brave as to NOT deny Him even if it cost me my life.

I say "HOPE" because I am human. I am weak! I think I would be brave and profess my faith but I cannot say for absolutely certain. I pray that I will never be in that situation.

But that isn't what we are talking about here. We are discussing a meaningless slaughter of my children! My professing Christ would mean nothing, God wouldn't see that as bravery! I think He would see it as a disappointment. I suspect that God would be a little disappointed that I didn't use my wisdom like the Hebrew midwives did and thwart the evil plan so that I and my family could live and alert the authorities to the man in an effort to save even MORE lives!

Knight, where has your mind gone to?

You said: say "meaningless" because my denial to the gun wielding nut is false! Therefore I am not doing anything brave by demonstrating to a delusional criminal that I am Christian.

What??!!! You can't be serious? Who says your witness for Christ is meaningless. Martyrs throughout the centuries have laid thier lives down for the sake of Christ and they too were called fools for Christ. Even Jesus was mocked because of His death. That "delusional" criminal needs Jesus. Your witness may bring him/her to Christ. But denying Jesus in the midst of that situation is absolutely wrong!

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:08 PM
Freak again!!! For the umpteenth time, it is the sacrifice of others for the self-denial of Christ that is being called into question.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Knight, where has your mind gone to?

You said: say "meaningless" because my denial to the gun wielding nut is false! Therefore I am not doing anything brave by demonstrating to a delusional criminal that I am Christian.

What??!!! You can't be serious? Who says your witness for Christ is meaningless. Martyrs throughout the centuries have laid thier lives down for the sake of Christ and they too were called fools for Christ. Even Jesus was mocked because of His death. That "delusional" criminal needs Jesus. Your witness may bring him/her to Christ. But denying Jesus in the midst of that situation is absolutely wrong! Oh.... this is so painful sometimes....

Why is that I have to explain everything to you Freak? Couldn't you try to think things through once in a while? Why do I have to do all the heavy lifting?

When some nut is about to murder my kids the last thing I am worrying about is witnessing to the murderer!!!!!

My kids are more important than some delusional psychopath!

If I have the ability to grab my gun I would blow this guys head off! Wouldn't you? But if that isn't possible I will do whatever I can to neutralize the situation so I can call the authorities and stop any further violence this guy might cause throughout the neighborhood!

This specific situation is unlike any Christian martyr situation in that it is in the privacy of my home and my families lives are at stake - not just my life!

Dying for a cause can be a noble thing. But dying for no cause (which is what it would be since we are dealing with an individual wacko) and taking your family with you is not noble at all!

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:17 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
Freak again!!! For the umpteenth time, it is the sacrifice of others for the self-denial of Christ that is being called into question. Don't bother him with the facts he is on a roll. :rolleyes:

Let the guy murder your kids and yourself as long as you can slip him a Jack Chick Tract. :down: :down: :down: :down: :down:

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Oh.... this is so painful sometimes....

Why is that I have to explain everything to you Freak? Couldn't you try to think things through once in a while? Why do I have to do all the heavy lifting?

When some nut is about to murder my kids the last thing I am worrying about is witnessing to the murderer!!!!!

My kids are more important than some delusional psychopath!

If I have the ability to grab my gun I would blow this guys head off! Wouldn't you? But if that isn't possible I will do whatever I can to neutralize the situation so I can call the authorities and stop any further violence this guy might cause throughout the neighborhood!

This specific situation is unlike any Christian martyr situation in that it is in the privacy of my home and my families lives are at stake - not just my life!

Dying for a cause can be a noble thing. But dying for no cause (which is what it would be since we are dealing with an individual wacko) and taking your family with you is not noble at all!

Look, Knight, if you want to hold that view, that is between you and God. I just know many other believers around the world who would attempt to disarm the criminal but would not deny Christ in the process. Of course, defend yourself but just don't deny Christ in the process that is what I'm saying.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Don't bother him with the facts he is on a roll. :rolleyes:

Let the guy murder your kids and yourself as long as you can slip him a Jack Chick Tract. :down: :down: :down: :down: :down:

That is unfair, Knight.

Defend yourself but never deny Christ in the process.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:22 PM
I think a repeat of my previous comment is in order since you need to say things like 3 or 4 times for Freak to understand.


Originally posted by Yxboom
Just as Jepthath to sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering. Are you not doing the same? To appease God you will sacrifice your children on the altar.

Unlike Jepthath who did not kill his daughter you would have.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:23 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
I think a repeat of my previous comment is in order since you need to say things like 3 or 4 times for Freak to understand.



I'm not appeasing God. My life is Christ. I lay down my life as He laid down His.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:24 PM
Will you lay down your children's life for now the 5th time?

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Look, Knight, if you want to hold that view, that is between you and God. I just know many other believers around the world who would attempt to disarm the criminal but would not deny Christ in the process. Of course, defend yourself but just don't deny Christ in the process that is what I'm saying. If that is possible then OF COURSE THAT IS WHAT I WOULD DO!!!!!!!!

But...

If....

It is NOT possible then I am gonna do whatever it takes to difuse the situation so I can stop this lunatic from killing me, my kids and the neighbors around me.

What about you Freak? What if there are NO other options?

Imagine the lunatic ties you up in a chair, aims his shotgun at your child's face and asks..... "Yes or no are you and your family Christians....? Answer me YES or NO in three seconds or I blow your kids head off!"

What do you say Freak?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by Knight
If that is possible then OF COURSE THAT IS WHAT I WOULD DO!!!!!!!!

But...

If....

It is NOT possible then I am gonna do whatever it takes to difuse the situation so I can stop this lunatic from killing me, my kids and the neighbors around me.

What about you Freak? What if there are NO other options?

Imagine the lunatic ties you up in a chair, aims his shotgun at your child's face and asks..... "Yes or no are you are you and your family Christians....? Answer me YES or NO in three seconds or I blow your kids head off!"

What do you say Freak?

That's very easy to answer. I would say Yes I am a Christian. My family and I have faced a similar incident in Benin back in 1997. It is absolutely wrong to deny Christ intentionally.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:28 PM
And no cirisme Option C.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
Will you lay down your children's life for now the 5th time?

Yes! I will not deny Christ even for family.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:29 PM
And God was pleased that you have partaken in the murder of your very own children :nono:

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by Freak


That's very easy to answer. I would say Yes I am a Christian. My family and I have faced a similar incident in Benin back in 1997. It is absolutely wrong to deny Christ intentionally. Intentionally?????? That's not intentionally!!!! You are being coerced!!!

Your a fool, and you are the reason that unbelievers reject Christianity. They see the illogical stupid things that Christians like you say.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:30 PM
The greater sadness is that after partaking in the murder of your very own children you would fight for the release of the gunman to escape capital punishment :down:

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:31 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
And God was pleased that have partaken in the murder of your very own children :nono:

God was pleased that the blood of believers was shed as a witness to His awesome glory. As Proverbs tells us: He giveth and He taketh away, blessed be the Name of the Lord.

BTW, you don't have to agree with Knight everytime (we all can see you attempt to do this), he's not your daddy.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Intentionally?????? That's not intentionally!!!! You are being coerced!!!

Your a fool, and you are the reason that unbelievers reject Christianity. They see the illogical stupid things that Christians like you say.

Fool for Christ, you are correct!

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Yes! I will not deny Christ even for family. You make yourself the willing accomplice to a psychopathic murderer!!! After he is done murdering you and your kids he moves to the next house! Maybe if he is lucky the people in the next house will be as dumb as you were. Heck, he might be able to wipe out a whole block of stupid Christians before he enters the house of one who has a brain and stops him.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Sheepdog


If someone came to you and said "I'm looking to kill Jay Bartlett and his family, are you Jay Bartlett and is this your family?", you could say no, and you wouldn't be denying yourself, you would still be who you are. But you would only be lying to him, to save your family. What is the difference between that and denying to him who you are in Christ?

This is all very moot, because a believer cannot really deny who they are in Christ anyway. Christianity is a new identity, denying it doesn't change it.

If they ask me to deny Christ verbally? Which by the way has happened in Muslim nations-I would say NO!

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by Knight
You make yourself the willing accomplice to a psychopathic murderer!!! After he is done murdering you and your kids he moves to the next house! Maybe if he is lucky the people in the next house will be as dumb as you were. Heck, he might be able to wipe out a whole block of stupid Christians before he enters the house of one who has a brain and stops him.

Knight, this is happening in Nigeria as we speak. It's not because these believers are stupid, but rather they believe it is a honor to die for Jesus!

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 05:36 PM
yxboom:


is the sacrificing of another person for your own belief that is what is being rejected.

Hey, if you believe that adultery should be punishable by death, then you are willing to sacrifice lots of people for your own belief.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by Flipper
yxboom:



Hey, if you believe that adultery should be punishable by death, then you are willing to sacrifice lots of people for your own belief.

Very good point Flipper.

He gotcha you Yx.

LOLOLOLOL

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by Freak


God was pleased that the blood of believers was shed as a witness to His awesome glory. As Proverbs tells us: He giveth and He taketh away, blessed be the Name of the Lord.
First off do a search and you will see that no where in Proverbs does it say that and stop misquoting Scripture. You aren't talkin to Aunt Jamaima who doesn't have a Bible. :down:
Secondly, God is so pleased with martyred blood that He is going to avenge and pour out His wrath because of it :down:

Rev 6:10 KJV And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

Originally posted by Freak
BTW, you don't have to agree with Knight everytime (we all can see you attempt to do this), he's not your daddy.
But Knight, PaulD, Jefferson and I are all the same person just ask Hey Zeus. It is common knowledge on TOL that we all agree. :down:

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by Freak

Knight, this is happening in Nigeria as we speak. It's not because these believers are stupid, but rather they believe it is a honor to die for Jesus! No it isn't happening in Nigeria. What we are talking about is completely different than what is happening in Nigeria.

We are talking about a specific hypothetical situation here in the USA under current conditions. When a psychopathic individual enters your house by force to murder your family.

Nothing like what is happening in Nigeria.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by Knight
No it isn't happening in Nigeria. What we are talking about is completely different than what is happening in Nigeria.

We are talking about a specific hypothetical situation here in the USA under current conditions. When a psychopathic individual enters your house by force to murder your family.

Nothing like what is happening in Nigeria.

That's right you have family members in Nigeria, as I do, to tell you, right?

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:40 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Very good point Flipper.

He gotcha you Yx.

LOLOLOLOL You really are unable to think aren't you Freak?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:40 PM
Originally posted by Knight
You really are unable to think aren't you Freak?

Whatever Knight.

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 05:40 PM
yxboom:


Will you lay down your children's life for now the 5th time?

Isn't that technically what Nori and a couple of others (including Goose I think) said that they would be regretfully willing to do if OT law was restored by a theonomist govt, and that the child then dishonored his or her parents?

I think that it was.

Really, this thread and others has been a fine demonstration of the situational ethics and relative morality, for all you moral absolutists out there.

Perhaps the confusion lies in the fact that the answers really aren't that clear, not even in scripture.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:40 PM
Originally posted by Flipper
yxboom:
Hey, if you believe that adultery should be punishable by death, then you are willing to sacrifice lots of people for your own belief.
They are guilty of.......adultery tried and convicted and punished by death. They are not a sacrifice for they have partaken in a criminal act punishable by death.

Calvinist
November 27th, 2002, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by Knight
You really are unable to think aren't you Freak?

No he is not. He is the worst kind of boob. A nog, and a dimwit.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by Flipper
yxboom:



Isn't that technically what Nori and a couple of others (including Goose I think) said that they would be regretfully willing to do if OT law was restored by a theonomist govt, and that the child then dishonored his or her parents?

I think that it was.

Really, this thread and others has been a fine demonstration of the situational ethics and relative morality, for all you moral absolutists out there.

Perhaps the confusion lies in the fact that the answers really aren't that clear, not even in scripture.

Again you are equating an unconvicted innocent person with a tried and convicted criminal. You are purposely trying to muddy the waters in a clear stream.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:43 PM
Flipper your example couldn't have been more foolish. Your so far out of the area of the debate that your wasting valuable space that could be used to demolish Freak and his distorted view.

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 05:44 PM
And God was pleased that you have partaken in the murder of your very own children

And what if you refused to answer the question or chose to take no action, and the gunman murdered your children. Do you then share responsibility? Have you partaken in their murder?

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:45 PM
If your son brutually raped and murdered a 12 year old girl would you be sacrificing him by turning him into the authorities?

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 05:45 PM
Again you are equating an unconvicted innocent person with a tried and convicted criminal.

Oh really? I thought that you established on that threat that no one was innocent. Not one. Well, not unless they were older than some arbitrary age... Five, was it? Maybe eight?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Flipper your example couldn't have been more foolish. Your so far out of the area of the debate that your wasting valuable space that could be used to demolish Freak and his distorted view.

Knight, I'm sort of disheartened by your recent personal attacks upon me. None were leveled at you.

....

So, how do you know what's going on in Nigeria? From your daily newspaper or do you have loved ones as I do in that part of the world?

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by Flipper


And what if you refused to answer the question or chose to take no action, and the gunman murdered your children. Do you then share responsibility? Have you partaken in their murder?
Yes.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by Flipper


Oh really? I thought that you established on that threat that no one was innocent. Not one. Well, not unless they were older than some arbitrary age... Five, was it? Maybe eight?

Good point Flipper. These guys are so illogical it's mind boggling!

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by Flipper


Oh really? I thought that you established on that threat that no one was innocent. Not one. Well, not unless they were older than some arbitrary age... Five, was it? Maybe eight?
Did I establish that or are you trying to take one of Freak's inane posts and pin them on me. Surely you could do better than that.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:48 PM
Let's get one thing clear.....

When a psychopathic murderer wants you to deny Christ or die YOU ARE NOT INTENTIONALLY DENYING CHRIST!!!!

You are UNINTENTIONALLY DENYING CHRIST!!!!

You are ACTING!

You are being coerced!!!!

You don't REALLY deny Christ!!!

You are only mouthing the words to diffuse a wicked situation.

God is smart enough to understand the situation at hand and would be happy to see you thwart the wicked murderer.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom

Did I establish that or are you trying to take one of Freak's inane posts and pin them on me. Surely you could do better than that.

Legit concern Yx.

You have failed to answer many questions. You love to deflect.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:50 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Good point Flipper. These guys are so illogical it's mind boggling! Of course it is a good point since he is quoting your arbiturary age restriction. Freak in co-battle with an atheist. There was once a time Freak would have had an aneurysm. Nothing personal Flipper.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:50 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Let's get one thing clear.....

When a psychopathic murderer wants you to deny Christ or die YOU ARE NOT INTENTIONALLY DENYING CHRIST!!!!

You are UNINTENTIONALLY DENYING CHRIST!!!!

You are ACTING!

You are being coerced!!!!

You don't REALLY deny Christ!!!

You are only mouthing the words to diffuse a wicked situation.

God is smart enough to understand the situation at hand and would be happy to see you thwart the wicked murderer.

Knight, that is very weak view that is horribly incorrect. Was Peter an idiot or James a fool to die? They were killed by psychopathic murderers.

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 05:51 PM
Yxboom:


They are guilty of.......adultery tried and convicted and punished by death. They are not a sacrifice for they have partaken in a criminal act punishable by death

Errr... well, actually, I think you'll find that most people don't think that adultery should be punished by death. I know you think that its an absolute rule, but as you can provide insufficient evidence for its absolute source, then your views ride roughshod over the views of more liberal christians and non-believers who don't think adultery should be punishable by death, or even that it is a crime.

No more than being a fundamentalist Christian should be a crime.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by Freak
Legit concern Yx.

You have failed to answer many questions. You love to deflect.
I am not gonna ask if you are that stupid since you have overwhelmingly proven you are. So I will simply ask how is the concern legit he is using your logic to diffuse mine when I disagree with you to begin with.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Knight, I'm sort of disheartened by your recent personal attacks upon me. None were leveled at you. Freak your being foolish!!!

Your not thinking!

I am hard on every Christian who makes Christians look brainless.

Don't kid yourself I don't discriminate.

You continue...
So, how do you know what's going on in Nigeria? From your daily newspaper or do you have loved ones as I do in that part of the world? Nigeria isn't the USA.

Nigeria, and the USA are very different.

Not only that but we have defined this hypothetical situation pretty specifically, therefore it is not the same as Nigeria.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by Knight
No it isn't happening in Nigeria. What we are talking about is completely different than what is happening in Nigeria.

We are talking about a specific hypothetical situation here in the USA under current conditions. When a psychopathic individual enters your house by force to murder your family.

Nothing like what is happening in Nigeria.

Re-read your post Knight. You said "Nothing like what is happening in Nigeria"

Well....your wrong.

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 05:55 PM
Yxboom wrote:


Freak in co-battle with an atheist. There was once a time Freak would have had an aneurysm. Nothing personal Flipper.

True enough. I'm not in agreement with Freak here (obviously, as an atheist I think that you should say whatever it is you need to say to save lives). However, it seems to me that there are inconsistencies with what I am reading here with what I have read on other threads, and so I am pointing them out. Perhaps they are reconcilable?

Still, it's an odd feeling to be on nominally arguing in the same vicinity is Freak. Perhaps the Perettis of this world are correct, and these are still more signs of the End Times?

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Knight, that is very weak view that is horribly incorrect. Was Peter an idiot or James a fool to die? They were killed by psychopathic murderers. Your hopeless!

How many times have we gone over this????

Peter, Paul and all the other Christian martyrs WERE NOT IN THIS SPECIFIC SITUATION!!!!!

I have already stated what they did was noble!!!

And I hope I would be as brave as them.

But this situation is different. And if you cannot see the distinction then frankly your just a fool.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by Flipper
Yxboom:
Errr... well, actually, I think you'll find that most people don't think that adultery should be punished by death. I know you think that its an absolute rule, but as you can provide insufficient evidence for its absolute source, then your views ride roughshod over the views of more liberal christians and non-believers who don't think adultery should be punishable by death, or even that it is a crime.

No more than being a fundamentalist Christian should be a crime.
Not only have you disturbed the thread with pitting false claims against me but you do know you are sabbatoging the thread on this discussion of adultery and the death penalty as this threads intention is to discuss "A believer denying Christ" If you wish to continue the discussion you need to go over to an appropriate thread otherwise I will delete your posts.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom

Not only have you disturbed the thread with pitting false claims against me but you do know you are sabbatoging the thread on this discussion of adultery and the death penalty as this threads intention is to discuss "A believer denying Christ" If you wish to continue the discussion you need to go over to an appropriate thread otherwise I will delete your posts.

ohhhhhh a threat against our resident atheist. You must feel powerful huh Yx?>

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 05:59 PM
Yxboom wrote:


And what if you refused to answer the question or chose to take no action, and the gunman murdered your children. Do you then share responsibility? Have you partaken in their murder?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes



I thought that it was exactly this sacrifice that the entirety of Christianity was founded on? Isn't the supreme example of paternal inaction to be seen in the crucifixion? The ultimate wrongful sacrifice of an innocent who would not deny what he knew to be true?

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 05:59 PM
Freak it is time for your diaper change. Because Flipper knows that I am cool with him and it isn't against him as a threat.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Re-read your post Knight. You said "Nothing like what is happening in Nigeria"

Well....your wrong. So Nigeria is a free country, just like the USA, with similar freedoms?

And people living in homes which they own are having individual (un-government related) people entering their houses and tying them up? And the the psychopathic murderer is asking if they are Christians (YES or NO) with a gun to their child's head?

Is that what is happening in Nigeria Freak?

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 06:00 PM
Sheepdog wrote:


That is the same kind of of stupid reasoning that liberals use to compare aborted babies and death-row inmates.

Well if you're so wise, perhaps you can tell me at what age a child knows enough right from wrong to be executed for dishonoring his father and mother?

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by Flipper
I thought that it was exactly this sacrifice that the entirety of Christianity was founded on? Isn't the supreme example of paternal inaction to be seen in the crucifixion? The ultimate wrongful sacrifice of an innocent who would not deny what he knew to be true?
Christianity is founded on the execution of an innocent man, namely Jesus.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by Knight
So Nigeria is a free country, just like the USA, with similar freedoms?

And people living in homes which they own are having individual (un-government related) people entering their houses and tying them up? And the the psychopathic murderer is asking if they are Christians (YES or NO) with a gun to their child's head?

Is that what is happening in Nigeria Freak?

It is apparent you were speaking out of your rear.

Yes, thats what's happening.....Ever heard of Sharia Law and the problems Nigeria is facing at this very hour as Muslims are entering Christian homes and killing them?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by Flipper
Sheepdog wrote:



Well if you're so wise, perhaps you can tell me at what age a child knows enough right from wrong to be executed for dishonoring his father and mother?

Very good and legit question...

I'm still waiting for my brothers and sisters to answer this question.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by Flipper
Yxboom wrote:

I thought that it was exactly this sacrifice that the entirety of Christianity was founded on? Isn't the supreme example of paternal inaction to be seen in the crucifixion? The ultimate wrongful sacrifice of an innocent who would not deny what he knew to be true? Flipper, really, seriously... you are way off base. You are not adding any value to the discussion because you haven't been following it closely enough or failed to pay attention.

So either get with the topic or bud out.

Thanks!

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Flipper, really, seriously... you are way off base. You are not adding any value to the discussion because you haven't been following it closely enough or failed to pay attention.

So either get with the topic or bud out.

Thanks!

Another threat to Flipper. I think Flipper has brought some legit questions that you believers are failing to answer.

No wonder atheists (like Flip) don't like Christianity because of all these threats directed to them.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by Freak
It is apparent you were speaking out of your rear.
Freak doesn't even have his own material he has to take it from DDW the TOL witch :nono:

Consorting with atheists and now witches too eh Freak.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by Freak


It is apparent you were speaking out of your rear.

Yes, thats what's happening.....Ever heard of Sharia Law and the problems Nigeria is facing at this very hour as Muslims are entering Christian homes and killing them? OK, great now tell me....

Do you condemn the ones who out of fear and or desire to save their family did not oblige the wicked?

YES or NO do you condemn them?

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom

Freak doesn't even have his own material he has to take it from DDW the TOL witch :nono:

Consorting with atheists and now witches too eh Freak.

Actually, it was a term I used about Me Again about a year ago....

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 06:05 PM
Yxboom wrote:


Not only have you disturbed the thread with pitting false claims against me but you do know you are sabbatoging the thread on this discussion of adultery and the death penalty as this threads intention is to discuss "A believer denying Christ" If you wish to continue the discussion you need to go over to an appropriate thread otherwise I will delete your posts.

Sorry about the false claims thing - I was going from memory (which is obviously faulty on this).

However, I think that there are parallels to be drawn between deny Christ (or not) when innocent lives are at stake. However, I will discontinue any posts about adultery.

The question of innocence seems to have relevancy here though, no?

I mean, if they were guilty criminals, you wouldn't be having this discussion, right? Shouldn't views expressed on another thread have a bearing on this thread if they are relevant, or if there is an apparent incoherency.

Sheepdog, I withdraw my question, you can answer it on the other thread, if you so have a mind. Or start a new one.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Another threat to Flipper. I think Flipper has brought some legit questions that you believers are failing to answer.

No wonder atheists (like Flip) don't like Christianity because of all these threats directed to them. No he hasn't added anything, he isn't even on the topic!

But I guess misery loves company.

Flipper
November 27th, 2002, 06:06 PM
Alright then...

I'll stop back in later and review the carnage...

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by Freak


Very good and legit question...

I'm still waiting for my brothers and sisters to answer this question.
It is for the courts to decide. Get rid of your Hello Kitty Bible and read

Deu 21:18-21 KJV If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: (19) Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; (20) And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. (21) And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by Knight
OK, great now tell me....

Do you condemn the ones who out of fear and or desire to save their family did not oblige the wicked?

YES or NO do you condemn them?

No Knight it's not great. Nigerian believers are dying for their faith. Why should I continue to discuss with you when you are mean spirited to your fellow brother in Christ?

I believe it is absolutely wrong to deny Christ intentionally in light of what Jesus has said. Look, if you can't accept that then fine. That's your decision. BTW, you are NOT obliging the wicked as you say-you honor Christ by not denying HIM!

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 06:11 PM
I'll be back. Time for some dinner.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by Flipper
Sorry about the false claims thing - I was going from memory (which is obviously faulty on this).
By-gones

Originally posted by Flipper
However, I think that there are parallels to be drawn between deny Christ (or not) when innocent lives are at stake. However, I will discontinue any posts about adultery.
If there are parrallels to be drawn you should have drawn them as it is too late now.

Originally posted by Flipper
The question of innocence seems to have relevancy here though, no?

Denying Christ is the relevant topic.

Originally posted by Flipper
I mean, if they were guilty criminals, you wouldn't be having this discussion, right? Shouldn't views expressed on another thread have a bearing on this thread if they are relevant, or if there is an apparent incoherency.
You will see that guilt has no bearing on the conversation as Freak is concerned because the other Death Penalty threads bear this out in plain view.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 06:15 PM
Originally posted by Freak


No Knight it's not great. Nigerian believers are dying for their faith. Why should I continue to discuss with you when you are mean spirited to your fellow brother in Christ?

I believe it is absolutely wrong to deny Christ intentionally in light of what Jesus has said. Look, if you can't accept that then fine. That's your decision. BTW, you are NOT obliging the wicked as you say-you honor Christ by not denying HIM! Your not denying Christ INTENTIONALLY Freak can't you see that?

It's everything BUT intentionally!

So here is how we stand....

The murderer enters my house, ties me up and threatens to murder my kids because he thinks we might be Christians. I deceive the murderer. He leaves. I call the authorities and hopefully the cops kill the guy in a blaze of gunfire.

Or....

The murderer enters Freaks house, ties up Freak and threatens to murder Freaks kids because he thinks they MIGHT be Christians. Freak obliges the wicked man and he then proceeds to shoot all of Freaks family and Freak. The murderer leaves the house and moves on to the next house.

Knight
November 27th, 2002, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by Sheepdog


Then instead of sending in troops to protect them, we should be supplying the Muslims with guns? Yea!!! Think of all the witnessing we could be doing!!! LOL!

By the time they murder all those Christians those Muslims are sure to convert!

Dee Dee Warren
November 27th, 2002, 07:11 PM
[quote]Freak doesn't even have his own material he has to take it from DDW the TOL witch

Consorting with atheists and now witches too eh Freak.

Err, good point. A name for which Freak has yet to apologize though he froths and foams at smaller slights directed at him.

Calvinist
November 27th, 2002, 07:13 PM
Just wait till I have 1000 posts!

Freak
November 27th, 2002, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by Sheepdog


Then instead of sending in troops to protect them, we should be supplying the Muslims with guns?

We tend to forget the words of our Savior Jesus when He once said: 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 repaid 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.


Does that mean allow ones enemies to destroy your family. Of course not! Defend your family but in the process don't deny Jesus. You can do both. My family has accomplished this while serving Christ overseas. The focus is to love those who persecute you and attempt to do good to them. What better way to do good then by showering them with God's love, grace, and mercy. But don't deny knowing Christ in the midst of terror-the enemies need to see the overcoming life-Christ and His life-which will allow you to overcome not to deny.

ebenz47037
November 27th, 2002, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
As pious as you may think you sound Cirisme it is very unrealistic. And since it is a command as a father to seek the well-being for their children to allow their children to be sacrificed for the sake of hollow words sheds a very horrid light on that man as a father who would sacrifice his own children on the alter of a misguided conviction.

In a way, I both agree and disagree with you here, YX. I believe that God wants us to want the best for our children. But, I also think my daughter woud be better off in heaven beside our Father than to live in this world knowing that her mother denied Christ.

Yxboom
November 27th, 2002, 10:54 PM
1 Cor 15:3-4 FHKV (Freak's Hello Kitty Version)

Jesus died for our sins (but was not actually executed because God would not like that), and was buried (because he had died of natural causes and not an execution as stated before God would not have allowed such a thing), and rose again the third day (after dying and not being executed) according to Scripture.

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 02:53 AM
I can see Knight's etc..point in a sense. But just as it was with the man merely gathering wood on the Sabbath day, so it is with things we seem to take lightly concerning the things of God.



Peter denied Christ and was still saved.
Peter was afterwards given a good butt-chewing as well. ;)


If a crazed gunman were to have your son or daughter at gun point would you deny Christ?

I'm with Cirisme. No.



PA, what if it were somebody else at gunpoint? Someone who was not quite so willing to die for your faith??

Each person is judged individually.


Dying for a cause can be a noble thing. But dying for no cause (which is what it would be since we are dealing with an individual wacko) and taking your family with you is not noble at all!

This is the problem I'm seeing with this thread. The essential difference is still not clear. Peter denied Christ merely to save his hide. He wasn't even threatened directly with death, merely asked the question.

Jesus turned, looked upon Peter which in turn sent him into a fit of depressive crying. Later Jesus posed the same question three times..'Peter do you love me'. He didn't come up to Peter, give 'em a high five and say "Good one bro!"

There is nothing "noble" about the situation.



Let's get one thing clear.....

When a psychopathic murderer wants you to deny Christ or die YOU ARE NOT INTENTIONALLY DENYING CHRIST!!!!

You are UNINTENTIONALLY DENYING CHRIST!!!!

You are ACTING!

You are being coerced!!!!

You don't REALLY deny Christ!!!

You are only mouthing the words to diffuse a wicked situation.

God is smart enough to understand the situation at hand and would be happy to see you thwart the wicked murderer.
Your hopeless!

This is the rub of the incident with Peter. He wasn't REALLY denying Christ! He was saving his hide because he thought they might kill him as well. That's it!




How many times have we gone over this????

Peter, Paul and all the other Christian martyrs WERE NOT IN THIS SPECIFIC SITUATION!!!!!

I understand what you are saying concerning Paul as he was martyred for preaching Christ. That is noble. But what Peter did is not to be classified as "noble" any way you cut it.

Also the situation with your scenario is very similar to the Roman persecution of Christians. You stated that the "crazed killer" was performing what he is to do with the motive that they "might be Christians". This is precisely the motive the Romans possessed.
A crazed, pagan orientated Roman breaks into the home of a Christian in order to kill them on that basis alone. Do you expect the family to hand THEM a 'Chick Tract'? No. But did this cause them to deny Christ unintentionally ONLY to save them from having their skin boiled off of their backs? No!



But this situation is different. And if you cannot see the distinction then frankly your just a fool.

Peter denys (unintentionally) Christ, his one and only God and Savior, in order to selfishly save his life.

A Muslim breaks in to Avmetro's house, and threatens to kill his wife and 2-year old unless he denies Christ and (heck, let's add to..) praises his 'god' Allah and the honorable prophet [peace be upon him], Elijah Muhammed (unintentionally by Avmetro of course).

No, I do not see the difference. And no, I am not a "fool".



So here is how we stand....

The murderer enters my house, ties me up and threatens to murder my kids because he thinks we might be Christians. I deceive the murderer. He leaves. I call the authorities and hopefully the cops kill the guy in a blaze of gunfire.

Romans enter a Christians house, threatens to murder his/her family because they think they might be Christians. It's almost a direct parallel.

I personally cannot see the reason for all the rampant fear of death on this thread.

If I and my family were to be killed on the basis of being confessed Christians THEN HOW LUCKY CAN I GET! Not only do I now get to eternally look upon the face of my God and Savior whom I love dearly, but I get a martyrs reward in heaven as well!!

God bless--AVmetro

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 03:22 AM
You really are unable to think aren't you Freak?
No he is not. He is the worst kind of boob. A nog, and a dimwit.
...Onward "Christian" soldiers...:rolleyes:

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 07:26 AM
I wanted to discuss just for a bit, what I see as the misuse of Matthew 10 and Luke 12 to this discussion, irregardless of what position anyone is taking. Knight has, on another thread, already argued the contextual setting of the passage and its nonapplicability to his point. I will be drawing a bit on Jaltus’ argument:


Knight, you were equating lying with lying about the intent of denying Christ. My point is that verbal denial is all that is called for in Luke 12, there is nothing dealing with intent. You cannot ASSUME your argument in order to prove it, which is what you are doing when you equate what I call denial with lying. You are glossing over the distinction we are arguing about in order to say that there is no distinction. That is an illegitimate argument.
With all due respect that has to be one of the most inane points I have heard in this discussion. Basically Jaltus is saying that despite what someone’s intent is, they are in peril of eternal damnation if they merely utter certain words. That is ridiculous and of course leads to his later ridiculous argument that even an actor is in jeopardy if he utters certain words during a reenactment of Bible story.
In making this statement Jaltus is completely missing a major cultural factor that unlike today, the ancients did not believe that someone really could say one thing and believe it without it manifesting itself outwardly. In other words, they would be terribly unimpressed with our “sinner’s prayer” that did not lead to a radically observable changed life. It would be empty words, and thus meaningless. James touches upon this when he argues that some people “say” they have faith, but he will show his faith by his works.
So here are the verses in question, and I use Luke so that Jaltus is not propelled into orbit:

Luke 12:8-10 – Also I say to you, whoever confesses Me before men, him the Son of Man also will confess before the angels of God. But he who denies Me before men will be denied before the angels of God. And anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but to him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven.

Jaltus has painted himself into a painful corner for intent is not all implied in the high context fiber of the Scriptures, then a true intent to believe is not required for confession of Christ before the angels of God (in Matthew it says before the Father). So all we Christians should be doing is to get people to mouth the sinner’s prayer and that is it, they are saved, right? No. The same then follows for the “denial” mentioned here. It is not just mere words or a one-time occurrence.. it is the entirely of one’s being and life. This is made even more certain by verse 10 which actually talks about “verbal” wrongs done against Christ (i.e. improperly denying one is a Christian even) which will be forgiven, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be. Ever. Why? Because it is the sin of stubborn unbelief that God has gifted that person with the ability to see the truth.

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 07:42 AM
With all due respect that has to be one of the most inane points I have heard in this discussion. Basically Jaltus is saying that despite what someone’s intent is, they are in peril of eternal damnation if they merely utter certain words. That is ridiculous and of course leads to his later ridiculous argument that even an actor is in jeopardy if he utters certain words during a reenactment of Bible story.
In making this statement Jaltus is completely missing a major cultural factor that unlike today, the ancients did not believe that someone really could say one thing and believe it without it manifesting itself outwardly. In other words, they would be terribly unimpressed with our “sinner’s prayer” that did not lead to a radically observable changed life. It would be empty words, and thus meaningless.

That's a good point Dee Dee. ;)

I wouldn't say this pertains to this discussion in *some* aspects however. Neither I, nor anyone that I know would believe Peter to have genuinely denied Christ *inwardly* as well as outwardly. And the fact of the matter is that he didn't. He didn't REALLY deny Christ, but merely stated it in order to save his neck. To deny Christ in order to spare one's own life is selfish. I think the rest of Peter's story speaks for itself. :cry:

God bless--AV

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 07:45 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
In making this statement Jaltus is completely missing a major cultural factor that unlike today, the ancients did not believe that someone really could say one thing and believe it without it manifesting itself outwardly. In other words, they would be terribly unimpressed with our “sinner’s prayer” that did not lead to a radically observable changed life. It would be empty words, and thus meaningless. James touches upon this when he argues that some people “say” they have faith, but he will show his faith by his works.James obviously thinks that someone could say one thing and believe it without it manifesting itself outwardly. It's just ridiculous that it happens. Ditto with the Pharisees, whom Christ declared honored God with their lips, but not their hearts.

And what do you do with the practices of equivocation and honorable lying?

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 07:56 AM
The All New God version 6.0!! (http://www.theologyonline.com/newgod/) :rolleyes:

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 07:59 AM
The thing about anthropomorphisms bothers me. Is that supposed to be for, or against neo-theism?

And what is the Biblical reason for opposing welfare, public education, and gun control?

Calvinist
November 28th, 2002, 08:00 AM
Yes, that's it DDW, keep arguing away... haha.. muhahahahHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by AVmetro
The All New God version 6.0!! (http://www.theologyonline.com/newgod/) :rolleyes:

AV

Do I detect a certain amount of sarcasm in your posts on this thread?

If so, I am not sure in which direction (I don't want to misunderstand your view, and if I presented my view there is a host of TOLers ready to pounce by the looks of things. I was wondering if you were one of them.

peace in Him

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 08:04 AM
And what is the Biblical reason for opposing welfare, public education, and gun control?

They actually have that on there? :confused: Nobody takes away this man's guns! :mad: :D

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 08:05 AM
No one is ever sarcastic on TOL.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 08:10 AM
James obviously thinks that someone could say one thing and believe it without it manifesting itself outwardly. It's just ridiculous that it happens. Ditto with the Pharisees, whom Christ declared honored God with their lips, but not their hearts.

That made no sense Smilax. The point is that they don't genuinely believe it if it does not manifest itself outwardly consistently. You proved the point by mentioning the Pharisees.


As far as equivocation and honorable lying, those are specific social anomalies for etiquette within specific social situations. Since such things were "expected" you cannot use them to diffuse the whole concept which I already articulated above. Since you and I are obviosly relying heavily upon Holding's work in this area, I refer you to his article on whether or not baptism is required for salvation, which I am sure you are already aware.

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 08:11 AM
No one is ever sarcastic on TOL.

Suu-u-u-r-r-ee!! :doh:

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 08:14 AM
AV

Do I detect a certain amount of sarcasm in your posts on this thread?

If so, I am not sure in which direction (I don't want to misunderstand your view, and if I presented my view there is a host of TOLers ready to pounce by the looks of things. I was wondering if you were one of them.

peace in Him

That link was meant to convey the feeling that if you deny Christ in the face of persecution (of any form) then you are a soft, creme-puff, 21st century Christian. :)


God bless--AV

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
That made no sense Smilax. The point is that they don't genuinely believe it if it does not manifest itself outwardly consistently. You proved the point by mentioning the Pharisees.Ahh, don't eat me. Perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying, but I'm sure we agree in the end.
As far as equivocation and honorable lying, those are specific social anomalies for etiquette within specific social situations. Since such things were "expected" you cannot use them to diffuse the whole concept which I already articulated above. Since you and I are obviosly relying heavily upon Holding's work in this area, I refer you to his article on whether or not baptism is required for salvation, which I am sure you are already aware.Aye, I was just pointing out that the culture's view on words was more complicated than what I thought you were suggesting. True belief leads to actions, yes. But with words, it's a different beast. But, of course, words caused by belief should lead to action.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 08:20 AM
Can I eat you anyway?? You dared to challenge the Lead Horse and that is JUST NOT to be tolerated in my Posse.

I do think you were reading way too much into what I was saying. All I was pointing out was Jaltus' shallowness in thinking mere words in a one-time event with no intent/disbelief behind them would be what Matthew 10 and Luke 12 were referring to. If so, then mere words without intent/belief would be enough to be saved. The ancients did not put that much stock into mere words.

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 08:30 AM
Originally posted by AVmetro


That link was meant to convey the feeling that if you deny Christ in the face of persecution (of any form) then you are a soft, creme-puff, 21st century Christian. :)


God bless--AV

Then for the record, I'm in the "Say Yes" camp, and damn the consequences - God tells me he'll pick up the pieces.

After all, if God can look after someone when their spouse dies young (and I know two people to whom that might happen soon, one with three young children), or if the family is in a car (auto) accident, or even 9/11, then does the same not apply? And was there not greater good from Columbine because of that one word.
Don't people trust God? When you let your kids out the door, when partner goes to work, when sickness comes, when war breaks out - thinking of our boys going of to Iraq. Why should this be any different?
Lots of strong talk about guns on this site from the Right I see (pardon me AV), but God says trust not in horses and men, but in the Lord your God. And whatever you might want to say about Freak (and I think he's a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic), he's out there, on a front line. He's got expreience. And I pray god that if I get into a situation that demanded the confession from my lips, I would say yes, to a lunatic, a tyrant, or whatever, cos God knows I am there, at that point, not by chance.

That's my rant for the week. As you were.

peace in Him

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 08:36 AM
Cool post Solly. Any time you deny Christ to save your own neck, you give satan another chance to ROTFL at our Savior :mad:

...and btw, I don't really own a gun ;).

God bless--Jeremiah

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 08:39 AM
...and I don't care how trivial the matter is, I won't give the devil that chance..

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 08:39 AM
Excellent Solly. :up:

Remember folks, this is the same God that made the worst tragedy in the world, the greatest event in the world, Jesus' crucifixion.

:up:

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 08:40 AM
Pro-confession versus pro-deception? And just as pro-choice is pro-abortion, so pro-deception is pro-denial.

I'm going to duck now to avoid the incoming spears.

If every aspect of your life is committed to your Lord and Savior, why would you ever give a verbal denial of Him? What could possibly be more important than that?

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by AVmetro

...and btw, I don't really own a gun ;).



Only a bible, and it's loaded.

Hmmm, where did I hear that before?

peace in Him

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 08:50 AM
Only a bible, and it's loaded.

..and don't forget a chocolate factory full of oompa loompas. They can take on anything....err..except Dee Dee in a preterist debate. :noid:

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 08:51 AM
Av... just a correction to be fair okay?? You said "no matter how trivial the matter is"... well I certainly hope you are not implying that the scenario posed by Knight is trivial?

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 08:53 AM
Hmmm, I heard that oompa loompas were eschatological genuises. They may be a match for me. After all I am a brat, and I saw what they did to Ms Salt.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 08:53 AM
You said "no matter how trivial the matter is"... well I certainly hope you are not implying that the scenario posed by Knight is trivial?
In God's sight, yes. :)

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 08:54 AM
Av... just a correction to be fair okay?? You said "no matter how trivial the matter is"... well I certainly hope you are not implying that the scenario posed by Knight is trivial?

You aren't talking about the "play in a theatre" scenario are you?
All else I believe I addressed on the previous page. :confused:

God bless you--AV

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 08:57 AM
No AV, I am talking about the home invader scenario, that is certainly NOT a trivial issue.

And Ciris that was just dumb.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:02 AM
And Ciris that was just dumb.

Brilliant response.


Not. :rolleyes:

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by Knight
Yea!!! Think of all the witnessing we could be doing!!! LOL!

By the time they murder all those Christians those Muslims are sure to convert!

The seed of the church is the blood of its martyrs.

Over 150 years ago, missionaries from Great Britain and Germany traveled to northeast India to preach the gospel.

Dr. P.P Job, Director of our sister mission in India, tells the story of how, during this time, a man, his wife and two children were converted to Christ. Their spontaneous faith spread throughout the village, angering the leader of the community. He summoned the man before the village and demanded that he renounce his Christian faith or face execution.

The man, facing this crucial decision, sang a song that I have heard sung around the world,"I have decided to follow Jesus, I have decided to follow Jesus, I have decided to follow Jesus, no turning back, no turning back.”

Enraged, the chief ordered the archers to shoot the two children. As both of the boys lay twitching on the ground,the chief asked, “Now will you renounce your faith? You have lost both of your children. You will lose your wife as well.”

The man replied by singing, “Though no one joins me, still will I follow. Though no one joins me, still will I follow.Though no one joins me, still will I follow. No turning back, no turning back.”

The chief was beside himself with rage and he ordered the wife put to death. Now he asked for the final time, “Now I will give you one more opportunity to deny your faith and live. There is no one for you in the world.”

The man then sang, “The cross before me, the world behind me. The cross before me, the world behind me. The cross before me, the world behind me. No turning back, no turning back.”

Eventually the courage of this man and his family would lead to the conversion of this chief and the entire village, but he didn’t know that at that time. His call was simply to be unashamed of the gospel. Their death (as is the death of all His saints) was a tragedy and not something that God allows lightly (see Psalm 116:15). Yet, God was able to cause something beautiful to come out of it.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:05 AM
To Ciris: And yet even dumber. I am offended that you think that the death of someone's family is trivial in God's eyes.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
No AV, I am talking about the home invader scenario, that is certainly NOT a trivial issue.

And Ciris that was just dumb.

The Believers are standing up against your weak version of Christianity, DD. There is no situation that one can be in where one intentionally denys Jesus and be right with God. It's because your view- apathy is so rampant. Unless you have been where I have been it's best not to judge.

The fact is your wrong but your too prideful to admit it DD. Do you always have to be right? Especially after the Bible tells you your dead wrong.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:07 AM
I am offended that you think that the death of someone's family is trivial in God's eyes.

Ooooh! You're offended. Let me go get my liberal hand book so I can see how to make it better. :rolleyes:

Scriptual truths will offend people. :)

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:07 AM
And pride goes before the fall Freak. (which must mean that I am due for a large eschatological fall I know)

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:08 AM
Originally posted by Solly


Then for the record, I'm in the "Say Yes" camp, and damn the consequences - God tells me he'll pick up the pieces.

After all, if God can look after someone when their spouse dies young (and I know two people to whom that might happen soon, one with three young children), or if the family is in a car (auto) accident, or even 9/11, then does the same not apply? And was there not greater good from Columbine because of that one word.
Don't people trust God? When you let your kids out the door, when partner goes to work, when sickness comes, when war breaks out - thinking of our boys going of to Iraq. Why should this be any different?
Lots of strong talk about guns on this site from the Right I see (pardon me AV), but God says trust not in horses and men, but in the Lord your God. And whatever you might want to say about Freak (and I think he's a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic), he's out there, on a front line. He's got expreience. And I pray god that if I get into a situation that demanded the confession from my lips, I would say yes, to a lunatic, a tyrant, or whatever, cos God knows I am there, at that point, not by chance.

That's my rant for the week. As you were.

peace in Him

Solly, thank you for standing up for Jesus! There's nothing special about me I just love Jesus and will not deny Him. Great posts!

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 09:08 AM
It boils down to whether you will follow Christ no matter what the consequences. Is obedience more important than the lives of others?

This is the classic problem about whether you want to kill someone to save more lives, or whether you let the many die for the sake of one so that you do not take an innocent life. It's just that we have denial of Christ in place of the sin of murder.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:09 AM
Scriptual truths will offend people.

I am offended because it is NOT a Scriptural truth but your false conception of piety. Only a heartless God would consider the death of someone's family TRIVIAL. You are sick if you think that.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:09 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
And pride goes before the fall Freak. (which must mean that I am due for a large eschatological fall I know)

DD, your wrong about this issue.

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 09:09 AM
Perhaps not as trivial in regards to emotions etc.. But the principle remains the same nonetheless.

These speak more of giving all to christ, but the point is made nonetheless:

Mat 10:35 For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
Mat 10:36 A man's foes will be those of his own household.
Mat 10:37 He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me isn't worthy of me.
Mat 10:38 He who doesn't take his cross and follow after me, isn't worthy of me.
Mat 10:39 He who finds his life will lose it; and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.


Mat 19:29 Everyone who has left houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, will receive one hundred times, and will inherit eternal life.

What you must ask yourself:

Would you deny Christ in order to save your life/family?

Did Peter deny Christ in order to save his life?

Would you *sincerely* deny Christ in this scenario? (No)

Did Peter *sincerely* deny Christ in the biblical account? (No)

Was the Lord happy? What happened to Peter?

Dito in regards to you.


My wife and I are both Christians and my daughter is two. I would have no more trouble confessing Christ than any individual in 'Foxe's Book of Martyrs'. Or any 1st century Christian under Nero for that matter.

God bless--Avmetro

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by Solly


The seed of the church is the blood of its martyrs.

Over 150 years ago, missionaries from Great Britain and Germany traveled to northeast India to preach the gospel.

Dr. P.P Job, Director of our sister mission in India, tells the story of how, during this time, a man, his wife and two children were converted to Christ. Their spontaneous faith spread throughout the village, angering the leader of the community. He summoned the man before the village and demanded that he renounce his Christian faith or face execution.

The man, facing this crucial decision, sang a song that I have heard sung around the world,"I have decided to follow Jesus, I have decided to follow Jesus, I have decided to follow Jesus, no turning back, no turning back.”

Enraged, the chief ordered the archers to shoot the two children. As both of the boys lay twitching on the ground,the chief asked, “Now will you renounce your faith? You have lost both of your children. You will lose your wife as well.”

The man replied by singing, “Though no one joins me, still will I follow. Though no one joins me, still will I follow.Though no one joins me, still will I follow. No turning back, no turning back.”

The chief was beside himself with rage and he ordered the wife put to death. Now he asked for the final time, “Now I will give you one more opportunity to deny your faith and live. There is no one for you in the world.”

The man then sang, “The cross before me, the world behind me. The cross before me, the world behind me. The cross before me, the world behind me. No turning back, no turning back.”

Eventually the courage of this man and his family would lead to the conversion of this chief and the entire village, but he didn’t know that at that time. His call was simply to be unashamed of the gospel. Their death (as is the death of all His saints) was a tragedy and not something that God allows lightly (see Psalm 116:15). Yet, God was able to cause something beautiful to come out of it.

Ha! Jesus wins! DD and her fallacies fail! Praise Jesus Christ for those who stand for Him in the midst of death. Great post!

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:12 AM
It is NOT TRIVIAL IN REGARDS TO ANYTHING. To say such a thing is out and out sick.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:12 AM
Originally posted by AVmetro
Perhaps not as trivial in regards to emotions etc.. But the principle remains the same nonetheless.

These speak more of giving all to christ, but the point is made nonetheless:

Mat 10:35 For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
Mat 10:36 A man's foes will be those of his own household.
Mat 10:37 He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me isn't worthy of me.
Mat 10:38 He who doesn't take his cross and follow after me, isn't worthy of me.
Mat 10:39 He who finds his life will lose it; and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.


Mat 19:29 Everyone who has left houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, will receive one hundred times, and will inherit eternal life.

What you must ask yourself:

Would you deny Christ in order to save your life/family?

Did Peter deny Christ in order to save his life?

Would you *sincerely* deny Christ in this scenario? (No)

Did Peter *sincerely* deny Christ in the biblical account? (No)

Was the Lord happy? What happened to Peter?

Dito in regards to you.


My wife and I are both Christians and my daughter is two. I would have no more trouble confessing Christ than any individual in 'Foxe's Book of Martyrs'. Or any 1st century Christian under Nero for that matter.

God bless--Avmetro

Awesome Post! Got your email my friend. Still looking forward to you coming to Haiti with us.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
It is NOT TRIVIAL IN REGARDS TO ANYTHING. To say such a thing is out and out sick.

Give all to Jesus, including your family, DD! It's called radical committment!

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 09:14 AM
The seed of the church is the blood of its martyrs.

Over 150 years ago, missionaries from Great Britain and Germany traveled to northeast India to preach the gospel.

Dr. P.P Job, Director of our sister mission in India, tells the story of how, during this time, a man, his wife and two children were converted to Christ. Their spontaneous faith spread throughout the village, angering the leader of the community. He summoned the man before the village and demanded that he renounce his Christian faith or face execution.

The man, facing this crucial decision, sang a song that I have heard sung around the world,"I have decided to follow Jesus, I have decided to follow Jesus, I have decided to follow Jesus, no turning back, no turning back.”

Enraged, the chief ordered the archers to shoot the two children. As both of the boys lay twitching on the ground,the chief asked, “Now will you renounce your faith? You have lost both of your children. You will lose your wife as well.”

The man replied by singing, “Though no one joins me, still will I follow. Though no one joins me, still will I follow.Though no one joins me, still will I follow. No turning back, no turning back.”

The chief was beside himself with rage and he ordered the wife put to death. Now he asked for the final time, “Now I will give you one more opportunity to deny your faith and live. There is no one for you in the world.”

The man then sang, “The cross before me, the world behind me. The cross before me, the world behind me. The cross before me, the world behind me. No turning back, no turning back.”

Eventually the courage of this man and his family would lead to the conversion of this chief and the entire village, but he didn’t know that at that time. His call was simply to be unashamed of the gospel. Their death (as is the death of all His saints) was a tragedy and not something that God allows lightly (see Psalm 116:15). Yet, God was able to cause something beautiful to come out of it.

Amen. :angel:

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:14 AM
It is NOT TRIVIAL IN REGARDS TO ANYTHING.

CaLM DoWN Dee Dee aND We CaN HaVe a RaTioNaL DiSCuSSION. ;)

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by smilax
Pro-confession versus pro-deception? And just as pro-choice is pro-abortion, so pro-deception is pro-denial.

I'm going to duck now to avoid the incoming spears.

If every aspect of your life is committed to your Lord and Savior, why would you ever give a verbal denial of Him? What could possibly be more important than that?

Smilax, great post. Great question!

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:15 AM
Freak you obviously have not been paying too much attention to a lot of what I have been saying. In case you have not noticed, I am not the only one participating here, so you're singling out of me for your attention belies motivatoins on your part other than this issue, especially since I have not been the most zealous defender. I have readily admitted that I am giving this issue deep and serious thought, but I cannot dismiss Knight's very weighty example and arguments out of hand. I do not believe it would be wrong in that specific example, and Knight has defended that well.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:17 AM
Ciris, I am very calm, and your suggestion that I am not is dumb once again and a stupid debating trick (but one worthy of Freak.. why don't you just call me "little lady" to make it complete?)

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:18 AM
DD, stop being prideful! Bow before Jesus!

Give everything to Him.

When you said: but I cannot dismiss Knight's very weighty example and arguments out of hand.

We are asking you to dismiss Knight's "very weighty" example for Jesus, are you willing to do that?

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:19 AM
DDW, Why not deal with the issue instead of always calling me "dumb" and "stupid"?

Calvinist
November 28th, 2002, 09:20 AM
.....arg.... fighting temptation to mock and post green pics of reptiles with fire and lightning... must resist... till.... 1000 posts....

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:20 AM
Freak... sigh, you just don't get it. I would dismiss anything for Jesus that I believed He would have me to do. The problem is that I don't agree that what you are proposing is what God would have us do in that specific situation. Your cheap semantical tricks aren't doing anything for this discussion.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:22 AM
When I tell DD to bow before Jesus she replies:

Your cheap semantical tricks aren't doing anything for this discussion.

She would hate the third world believers who love Jesus (and who would give everything For HIM) and who lack the formal education DD espouses that she has. They too would simply say give all to Jesus and DD would reply: Your cheap semantical tricks aren't doing anything for this discussion.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:23 AM
DDW, Why not deal with the issue instead of always calling me "dumb" and "stupid"?



ALWAYS Ciris?? Really?? Caught a bit of the Melodrama Syndrome from Jaltus have we?? I use those words very judicioulsy and you have managed to offend me once agian with your insinuation that I throw them at you daily like candy. The only person that I regularly call an idiot is myself. That comment that our God considers the brutal death of someone's entire family to be TRIVIAL is stupid and dumb and sick. I can't remember the last time I ever said anything like that to you so stop misrepresenting me.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren


ALWAYS Ciris?? Really?? Caught a bit of the Melodrama Syndrome from Jaltus have we?? I use those words very judicioulsy and you have managed to offend me once agian with your insinuation that I throw them at you daily like candy. The only person that I regularly call an idiot is myself. That comment that our God considers the brutal death of someone's entire family to be TRIVIAL is stupid and dumb and sick. I can't remember the last time I ever said anything like that to you so stop misrepresenting me.

DD, Your cheap semantical tricks aren't doing anything for this discussion.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:26 AM
Whoa, Dee Dee. That's a bit strong, don't you think?

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:28 AM
And you have again failed to engage the issue Freak. All I can say to you at this point with regards to my relationship with Christ is to say:

"Who are you to judge another's servant? To his own Master he stands or falls." I think we are getting to the point where this passage applies.....

I am confident of Christ's lordship in my life. I am serioulsy weighing this issue as I do all issues. If you guys (not everyone - don't misunderstand me) want to just dismiss Knight and I's points as claiming that we do not honor Christ as Lord, I think you are missing our point, and really failing to engage the underlying issues. That is what I call cheap. Everyone here is willing to surrender all to Christ that He would have us surrender, so to insinuate otherwise is slanderous. We disagree on exactly what He would have us do. That is entirely different issue altogether.

Calvinist
November 28th, 2002, 09:28 AM
Freak: Can you describe for me what a "Donatist" is?

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 09:28 AM
To Ciris: And yet even dumber. I am offended that you think that the death of someone's family is trivial in God's eyes.


Quite the contrary. As Solly pointed out:

Psa 116:15 Precious in the sight of Yahweh is the death of his saints.

The citation he provided of the martyred family is a prime example. Is this "sick"?



Freak you obviously have not been paying too much attention to a lot of what I have been saying. In case you have not noticed, I am not the only one participating here, so you're singling out of me for your attention belies motivatoins on your part other than this issue, especially since I have not been the most zealous defender. I have readily admitted that I am giving this issue deep and serious thought, but I cannot dismiss Knight's very weighty example and arguments out of hand. I do not believe it would be wrong in that specific example, and Knight has defended that well.



Gen 22:2 He said, "Now take your son, your only son, whom you love, even Isaac, and go into the land of Moriah. Offer him there for a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell you of."

Is this "cruel"? I know that God did not allow Abraham to go all the way through with it, but the principle remains. This is what Christ asks of us today, to sacrifice ourselves and all we have for His sake.

The objection I am seeing here is no worse than the destruction of the Amalekites. Remember- Men, women, and children?

Cruelty?:

What of Aaron's son's that offered profane fire with "good intentions"?

What of the man who merely gathered wood on the Sabbath day and was stoned by the children of Israel as a result?

Now back to Peter and his denial. The effect it had on Him and the Lord. Was Jesus angry and/or sorrowful or did he dismiss it all because they were, in reality, nudging elbows behind the scenes?

God bless you Dee Dee--Jeremiah

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:30 AM
Whoa, Dee Dee. That's a bit strong, don't you think?



No, not in light of your comment to me. You have suggested that I regularly make it my habit to call you dumb and stupid and that is simply not true. In fact I don't remember ever saying that to you before (perhaps I have, but it would be rare)... so your use of ALWAYS was unfair.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:32 AM
Yes, DD, you have embraced a "cheap Gospel" if you believe there is a circumstance where a denial of Jesus is called for. Stop deflecting you deal with the truth.

I am not judging you but rather rebuking you.

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 09:32 AM
I made that last post before I read Dee Dee's last. I should have worded it slightly differently.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:33 AM
DDW,
You're taking always out of context.

And you have been doing for quite some time recently(past 3 weeks or so).

And will you please respond to my PM, I would like to take this to a private place.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:33 AM
AV... none of that was TRIVIAL. The labeling of the death of anyone as TRIVIAL is sick.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:37 AM
12My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:37 AM
If I misunderstood your use of "always" I apologize. That is certainly what it seemed like you were saying. That was very sloppy wording on your part then, but now that you say I took it out of context... I reread it, and can see how you could have meant it differently. So if I misunderstood you on that, I do apologize.

I don't apologize though for my statement that stating that the death of one's entire family is TRIVIAL TO GOD. That is still sick.

And no, I do not wish to get into a PM discussion right now.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:38 AM
NM

Calvinist
November 28th, 2002, 09:39 AM
Donatists anyone? I know I am not worthy because of the low post count and all. But perhaps Church History can be useful...

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:39 AM
I made that last post before I read Dee Dee's last. I should have worded it slightly differently.

No problem AV.

Freak
November 28th, 2002, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
If I misunderstood your use of "always" I apologize. That is certainly what it seemed like you were saying. That was very sloppy wording on your part then, but now that you say I took it out of context... I reread it, and can see how you could have meant it differently. So if I misunderstood you on that, I do apologize.

I don't apologize though for my statement that stating that the death of one's entire family is TRIVIAL TO GOD. That is still sick.

And no, I do not wish to get into a PM discussion right now.

DD, perhaps a reading of this passage will help:

12My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:40 AM
What does NM mean?? I am not up on all the latest lingo.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:40 AM
So if I misunderstood you on that, I do apologize.

Thank you, Dee Dee. But could we get off the "you're sick if you believe...", that's too much on a personal basis.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:41 AM
What does NM mean?? I am not up on all the latest lingo.

"Nevermind."

I made a post before I saw your last one. :doh:

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:43 AM
Freak get a grip!!! that has nothing to do with whether it is trivial or not. It is precisely because DEATH IS NOT TRIVIAL that to die for one's friends is noble. How do you think that the father of someone who did have his children die a martyr's death would feel to hear that God saw those DEATHS AS TRIVIAL.

Those of you who are arguing with me on this I think are confusing your disagreement with me on one issue with this issue... agreeing with me that God DOES NOT VIEW ANYONE'S DEATH AS TRIVIAL does not mean you agree with me on the whole other thing.

cirisme
November 28th, 2002, 09:43 AM
Well, I got to get going for Thanksgiving.

Everybody have a happy turkey day! :D

I'll see you all when I get back online. (maybe late tonight, or early tomorrow)

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 09:43 AM
If I might do a bit of cross stiching here, on another thread Freak is getting a pasting for suggesting that the irrevocable words of Scripture about the death penalty might not be so irrevocable. Now we are to believe that the irrevocable words of Christ about those who deny him he will deny are not so irrevocable.

Hmmm.

DD, I see where you are coming from, and the wrangles you are having; I think most of us have been there, and as I glance up from my keyboard to the pictures of the wonderful family God has given me *pause...* I feel it rise up again.

For me, and I invite you to consider it, the principle is first and foremost: no denial. everything goes from there. Not: no denial but here's an escape clause.

None of us know what we will do in such a circumstance should it arise; Cranmer recanted; when released he preached again what he had recanted of, and when he was put in the flames, he stuck the hand with which he had written the recantation into the midst of the fire. God is merciful, he knows our frames, that we are but dust, that is why even suicide cannot be declared an unforgivable sin.

Peter was a coward, but he learnt, and he suffered for it the more readily.

It's is the principle that needs conceding, and then we give it up to God, not make our own moral concessions about when it does and doesn't apply.

peace in Him

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:45 AM
Ciris... let me clarify... because perhaps you are taking me out of context. I am not saying you are a sick person. I would never say that. I am not attacking you as a person, you know me better than that. I am saying that is a sick statement, and you should retract it. We have all probably been guilty of that at one time or another.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:48 AM
Now we are to believe that the irrevocable words of Christ about those who deny him he will deny are not so irrevocable.


Inapplicable. Those verses in context are not talking about this situation directly whatsoever. That was my point earlier in expounding on those verses. I bring to the fore once again Romans 13. The command to obey the government by Paul does not contain any exceptions.. yet we know that there is at least one.

Calvinist
November 28th, 2002, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by Solly
If I might do a bit of cross stiching here, on another thread Freak is getting a pasting for suggesting that the irrevocable words of Scripture about the death penalty might not be so irrevocable. Now we are to believe that the irrevocable words of Christ about those who deny him he will deny are not so irrevocable.

Hmmm.

DD, I see where you are coming from, and the wrangles you are having; I think most of us have been there, and as I glance up from my keyboard to the pictures of the wonderful family God has given me *pause...* I feel it rise up again.

For me, and I invite you to consider it, the principle is first and foremost: no denial. everything goes from there. Not: no denial but here's an escape clause.

None of us know what we will do in such a circumstance should it arise; Cranmer recanted; when released he preached again what he had recanted of, and when he was put in the flames, he stuck the hand with which he had written the recantation into the midst of the fire. God is merciful, he knows our frames, that we are but dust, that is why even suicide cannot be declared an unforgivable sin.

Peter was a coward, but he learnt, and he suffered for it the more readily.

It's is the principle that needs conceding, and then we give it up to God, not make our own moral concessions about when it does and doesn't apply.

peace in Him

This is MY point, though I speak of the Donatists who were fought by Augustine with vigor as DDW is doing. (but my post count is low... so what do I know?)

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 09:50 AM
The exception is that we obey God rather than man.

When man tells us to deny Christ, we should obey God.

I say that confession followed by lambasting of the attacker is the Biblical course of action.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:54 AM
Smilax that is begging the question. First of all I showed a passage that "seemed" without exception, yet it had one. Second, you are assuming that God would have us not lie in that specific situation, and that is assuming the very point that is in dispute.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:56 AM
This is MY point, though I speak of the Donatists who were fought by Augustine with vigor as DDW is doing.

Calvinist, I am missing something.. please explain...

And I state again, as I feel I must for the record, I concede this is not an easy issue. I am considering all of the points made (at least the ones that are somewhat coherent).

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 10:00 AM
Can you show from Scripture why you believe the lives of others are more important than the verbal confession?

Romans is discussing general behavior. This verses about denial are related to salvation. I don't think the presence of exceptions will carry over, but I'm listening. And I can sympathize with your position. I don't know if I could really go through with what I am professing. I believe this is what I should do. I don't know if I can say it is what I would do.

Why would God not have us lie? Because obedience to God is more important than even human lives, and the example of Abraham with Isaac demonstrates this.

Calvinist
November 28th, 2002, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren


Calvinist, I am missing something.. please explain...

And I state again, as I feel I must for the record, I concede this is not an easy issue. I am considering all of the points made (at least the ones that are somewhat coherent).

Well, the Donatists:

"In those days the church had just recovered from the last bitter wave of persecution begun in 303 by the emperors Galerius and Diocletian. When fear subsided, Christians could breathe again and indulge in recriminations over the lapses of some of their number in time of trial.

The official position of the church was that those Christians who had compromised their religion in time of persecution could, with due repentance and atonement, be readmitted to full membership in the religious community. But there was a minority faction of enthusiasts who insisted that cooperation with the authorities in time of persecution was tantamount to total apostasy and that if any traitors wanted to reenter the church they had to start all over again, undergoing rebaptism. Evaluation of the credentials of those who sought reentry would be in the hands of those who had not betrayed the church.

The logical result of the Donatist position was to make the church into an outwardly pure and formally righteous body of redeemed souls. The orthodox party resisted this pharisaism, seeing in it a rigorism inimical to the spirit of the gospels. But Africa was known for its religious zealots and the new Donatist movement proved a resilient one. Even after official imperial disapproval had been expressed, the schismatic church continued to grow and prosper. "

Donatists believed that those who recanted during the persecution were guilty of apostasy...

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren

I bring to the fore once again Romans 13. The command to obey the government by Paul does not contain any exceptions.. yet we know that there is at least one.

But isn't the point that, in obeying God rather than men, we are prepared to pay the price, for the confession of his name Acts 5.29?

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 10:17 AM
Freak get a grip!!! that has nothing to do with whether it is trivial or not. It is precisely because DEATH IS NOT TRIVIAL that to die for one's friends is noble. How do you think that the father of someone who did have his children die a martyr's death would feel to hear that God saw those DEATHS AS TRIVIAL.

Those of you who are arguing with me on this I think are confusing your disagreement with me on one issue with this issue... agreeing with me that God DOES NOT VIEW ANYONE'S DEATH AS TRIVIAL does not mean you agree with me on the whole other thing.


Not as in "Pfft, who cares" but that it is a small sacrifice in comparison to confessing Christ.

Christ commands that we forsake our family for His name if that situation ever arises. God commanded Abraham to kill his son *himself*! Knight's scenario pales in comparison.


I bring to the fore once again Romans 13. The command to obey the government by Paul does not contain any exceptions.. yet we know that there is at least one.


Going the route of the hyberbole-

Col1:15 NWT "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth,..."

A person can't win against that.

God bless you Dee Dee--Jeremiah

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 10:21 AM
Pauls says:

"To depart from the body is to be at home with the Lord".

Dee Dee,

IF you were put in that situation, where would you AND YOUR FAMILY end up afterwards? And I mean *seconds* afterwards?

This is why I consider the matter a mite bit more "trivial" (for lack of a better word @ the moment) than most would immediately imagine. ;)

God bless--Jeremiah

AVmetro
November 28th, 2002, 10:27 AM
Well, I got to get going for Thanksgiving.

Everybody have a happy turkey day!

I'll see you all when I get back online. (maybe late tonight, or early tomorrow)

Cirisme, Freak, Dee Dee, Solly, Calvinist, Smilax, Knight, and whoever I left out in my haste

HAPPY THANKSGIVING!! I'll be out of town all weekend. :eek:

God bless you all so much,
You're all like family to me. :)
Jeremiah

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 10:31 AM
Thanksgiving? What's that?

You colonials, any excuse for a party and a holiday!

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 10:33 AM
You get your share in daily teatime.

Solly
November 28th, 2002, 10:37 AM
milk and sugar?

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 12:37 PM
I would appreciate it if my objections to the label of triviality were dealt with in the context of which I originally ojected. No death is trivial in the sight of God. I cannot believe that this is even a point of contention.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 12:38 PM
Can you show from Scripture why you believe the lives of others are more important than the verbal confession?



Show me where they are not, utilizing the circumstances of the specific scenario posed by Knight.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 12:40 PM
Why would God not have us lie? Because obedience to God is more important than even human lives, and the example of Abraham with Isaac demonstrates this.


Begging the question once again. No one doubts that obedience to God is utmost.... the dispute is over what course of action God would approve of in that situation.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 12:42 PM
Going the route of the hyberbole-

Col1:15 NWT "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth,..."

A person can't win against that.



That made no sense Jeremiah. Perhaps it just did not communicate properly in written form.

smilax
November 28th, 2002, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
I would appreciate it if my objections to the label of triviality were dealt with in the context of which I originally ojected. No death is trivial in the sight of God. I cannot believe that this is even a point of contention.I didn't call it trivial.
Show me where they are not, utilizing the circumstances of the specific scenario posed by Knight.Pretty difficult, considering the specificity of the situation.
Begging the question once again. No one doubts that obedience to God is utmost.... the dispute is over what course of action God would approve of in that situation.We're back to the question of how important verbal confession is. What do you say about Romans x, 9?

A good example of the importance of words: II Samuel i, 16. But I doubt you'll accept it as relevant.

Dee Dee Warren
November 28th, 2002, 09:14 PM
Dear Smilax:

I didn't say you said it was trivial, but various responses were made to my objection to the use of the word "trivial" and they seemed to go very far afield of my original objection.

Of course verbal confession is important... whoever denied that?? But that also is insignificant without intent. The context of Romans 10 has nothing to do with out situation here. I also do contest the relevance of 2 Samuel 1:16 here, you are right about that.

Pilgrimagain
November 29th, 2002, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
PA, what if it were somebody else at gunpoint? Someone who was not quite so willing to die for your faith??

That's a bad question Dee Dee, I could never be anybody else than myself so any thing I might possit is meaningless.

Dee Dee Warren
November 29th, 2002, 09:00 AM
Oops, PA, I worded that ackwardly. My bad. I meant that it was not your life that was being threatened... no matter what you say, you get to live... but it was other people who would be killed, say even nonbelievers, if you said you were a Christian. I am really sorry about that ackward wording. I think sometimes half of the disagreements here on TOL can be found to have its root in bad wording.

cirisme
November 29th, 2002, 03:05 PM
You're all like family to me.

Man, this family is more dysfunctional than my own!

:D ;)

Pilgrimagain
November 30th, 2002, 08:30 AM
I havn't read through the entire thread but has any body addressed 1John2:22ff.

"Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is anti-christ - he denies the father and the son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the son has the Father also.

Freak
November 30th, 2002, 08:52 AM
Originally posted by Pilgrimagain
I havn't read through the entire thread but has any body addressed 1John2:22ff.

"Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is anti-christ - he denies the father and the son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the son has the Father also.

Great verse, PA! DD and the others are wrong to say that verbal confession is irrelevant. The verbal confession was an important aspect of the Christian life as we see the amount of times "Call upon the Lord" (which denotes a verbal expression) is used throughout Scripture.

Pilgrimagain
November 30th, 2002, 08:59 AM
As in, "If you believe in your heart AND confess with your tongue..."

Freak
November 30th, 2002, 09:03 AM
Originally posted by Pilgrimagain
As in, "If you believe in your heart AND confess with your tongue..."

That's right. I'm having a hard time understanding these posters who look for some kind of loophole to justify a denial of Jesus.

First of all there is no loophole and secondly it is absolutely wrong to deny Jesus intentionally under any circumstance.

Dee Dee Warren
November 30th, 2002, 09:37 AM
PA, that idea has been addressed when Matthew 10 and Luke 12 were addressed.

Calvinist
November 30th, 2002, 09:50 AM
Denying Jesus Christ never conforms to the character and will of God; and yet under the right circumstances I would sin and deny Christ: If I had to save the life of my family by doing so, for instance.

But here is the real question for me in regards to this idea of "saving your family" by denial. If you do deny Christ and save your family, are you guilty of the curse of this passage:

Matthew 10:33
But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

And if you don't deny Christ and your family is murdered, are you then guilty of your biblical obligation to your family?

Ephesians 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

Colossians 3:19
Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.
(Whole Chapter: Colossians 3 In context: Colossians 3:18-20)

1 Timothy 3:12
Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Titus 2:4
That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,

?????

Freak
November 30th, 2002, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by Calvinist
Denying Jesus Christ never conforms to the character and will of God; and yet under the right circumstances I would sin and deny Christ: If I had to save the life of my family by doing so, for instance.

But here is the real question for me in regards to this idea of "saving your family" by denial. If you do deny Christ and save your family, are you guilty of the curse of this passage:

Matthew 10:33
But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

And if you don't deny Christ and your family is murdered, are you then guilty of your biblical obligation to your family?

Ephesians 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

Colossians 3:19
Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.
(Whole Chapter: Colossians 3 In context: Colossians 3:18-20)

1 Timothy 3:12
Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Titus 2:4
That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,

?????

But what is the greatest commandment?

Dee Dee Warren
November 30th, 2002, 10:12 AM
Dear Calvinist:

I dealt with Matthew 10 and Luke 12 in this context as has Knight already.

Calvinist
November 30th, 2002, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by Freak


But what is the greatest commandment?

That's easy, I have it memorized:

"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."

So you are saying that "like unto it" makes the second part of the commandment subordinate to the first?

:nono: