PDA

View Full Version : God vs. Science


rockdawg21
08-10-2009, 08:26 PM
A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the students, "Let me explain the problem science has with religion."

The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.

"You're a Christian, aren't you, son?" "Yes sir," the student says.

"So you believe in God?" "Absolutely."

"Is God good?" "Sure! God's good."

"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?" "Yes."

"Are you good or evil?" "The Bible says I'm evil."

The professor grins knowingly. "Aha! The Bible!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you.

Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him?

Would you try?" "Yes sir, I would." "So you're good?!"

"I wouldn't say that." "But why not say that?"

You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."

The student does not answer, so the professor continues.

"He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"

The student remains silent.

"No, you can't, can you?" the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. "Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"

"Er...yes," the student says.

"Is Satan good?" The student doesn't hesitate on this one. "No."

"Then where does Satan come from?" The student falters. "From God"

"That's right.. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"

"Yes, sir." Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?" "Yes."

"So who created evil?" , the professor continued, "If God created Everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil."

Again, the student has no answer.

"Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?" The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."

"So who created them?" The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question.

"Who created them?" There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized.

"Tell me," he continues onto another student. "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?" The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor, I do."

The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you.

Have you ever seen Jesus?" "No sir. I've never seen Him."

"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?" "No, sir, I have not."

"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus?

Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?" "No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't." "Yet you still believe in him?" "Yes."

"According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?" "Nothing," the student replies. "I only have my faith."

"Yes, faith," the professor repeats. "And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith."

At the back of the room another student stands quietly for a moment before asking a question of his own. "Professor, is there such thing as heat?" "Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."

"And is there such a thing as cold?" "Yes, son, there's cold too." "No sir, there isn't." The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain.

"You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'.

We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that.

There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest --458 degrees."

"Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat.

You see sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it." "What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?"

"Yes," the professor replies without hesitation.

"What is night if it isn't darkness?"

"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word."

"In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?"

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. "So what point are you making, young man?"

"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed." The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time.

"Flawed? Can you explain how?"

"You are working on the premise of duality," the student explains. "You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought." "It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it."

"Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?" "If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."

"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

"Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.

"To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean." The student looks around the room. "Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out into laughter. "Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir."

"So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?"

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.

Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers.

"I guess you'll have to take them on faith."

"Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists withlife," the student continues. "Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?"

Now uncertain, the professor responds, "Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."

To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

The professor sat down.

Chris F
08-10-2009, 08:52 PM
I tried this when I was in college. The professors there only get belligerent and disrespectful. I had to drop a class one semester because of it. To many simply accept what one with the appearance of authority says and they ignore the real of authority of God's word. Good post.

Crisco
08-10-2009, 09:12 PM
pwned

KENTUCKYREDBONE
08-10-2009, 10:15 PM
I tried this when I was in college. The professors there only get belligerent and disrespectful. I had to drop a class one semester because of it. To many simply accept what one with the appearance of authority says and they ignore the real of authority of God's word. Good post.

Somehow I ain't surprised that they would be belligerent over you disagreeing with them!

Max
08-11-2009, 06:37 AM
great post

Chris F
08-11-2009, 08:19 AM
Somehow I ain't surprised that they would be belligerent over you disagreeing with them!

:) What do you mean. I am easy to agree with.

KENTUCKYREDBONE
08-13-2009, 01:12 AM
:) What do you mean. I am easy to agree with.

Your thinking to reasonable! The leftist ain't reasonable most times!

sender
08-14-2009, 03:36 AM
pffff come on guys! Havent you heard of the big bang thery!!! I bunch of matter just apearing out of nothing and and randomly making planets and life all over the place...

Buzzard
08-14-2009, 04:01 AM
Cute story but not reality based.

Chris F
08-14-2009, 04:11 AM
Cute story but not reality based.

Then by all means buzzard put up or hush up.

Bonnie
08-14-2009, 05:20 AM
At least the professor was intelligent enough to know when to sit down... :Whistle:


Nice! :)

cubsfan47
08-14-2009, 01:58 PM
AHEM!

Disclosure: I am a professor, have been for 32 years.

Many of us can be arrogant. I try not to be. The really good ones are actually humble.

Anyway, if any of you are interested in a real scientists view, you might try "The Language of God", by Francis Collins. Collins was the head of the Human Genome project. Collins has been born again.

Neezar
08-14-2009, 02:21 PM
Cute story but not reality based.

http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p82/Amadeo78/07church.jpg

Bonnie
08-14-2009, 02:28 PM
http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p82/Amadeo78/07church.jpg

:laugh:

VCURamFan
08-14-2009, 02:48 PM
pffff come on guys! Havent you heard of the big bang thery!!! I bunch of matter just apearing out of nothingI believe in the Big Bang. I believe in all matter appearing ex nihilo. I could be wrong, but I'm assuming that when God spoke & the universe began there was maybe just a slight rumble or so.

sender
08-14-2009, 03:26 PM
I believe in the Big Bang. I believe in all matter appearing ex nihilo. I could be wrong, but I'm assuming that when God spoke & the universe began there was maybe just a slight rumble or so.


Haha sorry I just brought that up cause every time I have this arument with friends it comes down to that and they try and explain the big bang theory but without a higher power that theory is false too cause you need matter to come from somewhere... WHOOH!

VCURamFan
08-14-2009, 03:30 PM
AHEM!

Disclosure: I am a professor, have been for 32 years.

Many of us can be arrogant. I try not to be. The really good ones are actually humble.

Anyway, if any of you are interested in a real scientists view, you might try "The Language of God", by Francis Collins. Collins was the head of the Human Genome project. Collins has been born again.Dr. Collins gave the Commencement Speech at my Graduation back in May. He's absolutely hysterical!:laugh:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=517A86924749A74E&search_query=vcu+2009

(It's a 3 part play-list. Click "Play All Videos" to be able to see his whole speech)

VCURamFan
08-14-2009, 03:33 PM
Haha sorry I just brought that up cause every time I have this arument with friends it comes down to that and they try and explain the big bang theory but without a higher power that theory is false too cause you need matter to come from somewhere... WHOOH!I konw, that's why I think it's so funny. The very premise of this dogma which they believe disproves any & all supernatural powers relies on those very powers!

Chris F
08-15-2009, 01:30 AM
AHEM!

Disclosure: I am a professor, have been for 32 years.

Many of us can be arrogant. I try not to be. The really good ones are actually humble.

Anyway, if any of you are interested in a real scientists view, you might try "The Language of God", by Francis Collins. Collins was the head of the Human Genome project. Collins has been born again.

Yeah I teach History in Community Colleges and there it is usually the students who are arrogant and know it all. Then when you challenge them to think outside their talking points they quickly crumble and drop the class.

I liked that book. It was very interesting. Many have wrote of the report because Collins "got religion" It was the Human Genome Project that came out and said homosexuality is 100% a choice.

Tyburn
08-17-2009, 12:24 AM
:)

One of the best minds in the North of England was a Professor who taught me BOTH Philosophy of Time, Philosophy of Science, AND Philosophy of Religion

His Name?

Herr Friedel Weinart

Tyburn
08-17-2009, 12:25 AM
It was the Human Genome Project that came out and said homosexuality is 100% a choice.
What would they know :mellow:

Tyburn
08-17-2009, 12:28 AM
Guys. Another name for Science if practised and taught properly is "The Glorification of GOD in The Act of Creation and Universal Laws of Nature"

It wont tell you HOW GOD did it, but it can come close to telling you WHAT GOD did. Its a Form of Revelation, but it applies only to the Natural and Created Temporal Realm.

Chris F
08-17-2009, 08:19 AM
What would they know :mellow:

A lot. The mapped the entire human genome and found nothing to support the idea that there is a gay gene. SO since it is not genetic it therefore must be nutrue not nature.

Bonnie
08-17-2009, 08:29 AM
A lot. The mapped the entire human genome and found nothing to support the idea that there is a gay gene. SO since it is not genetic it therefore must be nutrue not nature.

Interesting. How so "nuture"? :unsure-1:

VCURamFan
08-17-2009, 02:10 PM
Interesting. How so "nuture"? :unsure-1:I think what Chris means is that the classic argument if "Nature vs. Nuture". While he may not have an argument with overwhelming evidence in support of nuture, he does have one (the HGP) with overwhelming evidence against nature. Therefore, the only option left is nuture.

logrus
08-17-2009, 03:22 PM
Lets break this **** down computer style


GO GO FLOWCHART!!
























http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/2395/105446b888d886a6ab142c2.png

Neezar
08-17-2009, 03:29 PM
Science ignores contradicting evidence also. They just cover it by saying, "Well, we can't explain that yet but we will be able to someday."

:laugh:

Neezar
08-17-2009, 03:33 PM
Oh yeah, and another one to add under science. 'continues to be disproven over and over'. 'And under faith 'has never been disproven.'


According to science one way to prove something is to disprove the opposite. So by science's own rules Faith holds up better than any of their theories.

Tyburn
08-17-2009, 04:46 PM
A lot. The mapped the entire human genome and found nothing to support the idea that there is a gay gene. SO since it is not genetic it therefore must be nutrue not nature.
You mean they found no SINGLE gene controlling sexual urges towards the same sex. That doesnt rule it out from being Genetic. It just makes it a complex possibility that it could either be controlled by a number of different genes, or...worse still, like height, it could be reactional to the environment.

There is not, from an evolutionary, or purely religious reason, any sense in having a single gene control homosexual impusles...that would be asking for trouble, a single mutation and the species dissapears from the face of the earth against its makers design.

Tyburn
08-17-2009, 04:48 PM
I think what Chris means is that the classic argument if "Nature vs. Nuture". While he may not have an argument with overwhelming evidence in support of nuture, he does have one (the HGP) with overwhelming evidence against nature. Therefore, the only option left is nuture.
He has nothing of the sort. He knows its not controlled by a single gene. Thats ALL he knows. Well...if it was...there would be a hell of a lot more homosexuals...it would be like half the population!!!

Chris F
08-17-2009, 06:30 PM
Dave,

It really is simple. HGP is not Christian and was a scientific study that was free from the bias of any one group like the NEA, LGB&T, MAMBA, or religious group. Their study mapped the entire (that might be a big word in England) but really here it means what it says, entire. The know every gene and what it controls and thus they have a map to begin to isolate, or heaven forbid manipulate in the future. The HGP came out and said there is NO genetic reasons for homosxeual urges. Same true for a preference for blondes or long legs. There is however a gene for the desire to reproduce. So science proved this no any Christian group. Homosexuality is a personal choice just like favorite color, food preference, etc. What is proves is the bible is correct that it is a choice that can be stopped by the individual and not some sort of uncontrollable urge that God created them with and that they cannot stop being gay. So it is science and the Bible that says this. My opinion means nothing on this. So unless you and Logrus, or anyone else has some contradicting, non biased scientific reports that has been peer reviewed then what I have is the truth.!!!!

Bonnie
08-17-2009, 06:36 PM
I think what Chris means is that the classic argument if "Nature vs. Nuture". While he may not have an argument with overwhelming evidence in support of nuture, he does have one (the HGP) with overwhelming evidence against nature. Therefore, the only option left is nuture.

Oh, okay. I was taking Chris too literally about "nuture".

Tyburn
08-17-2009, 06:41 PM
Dave,

It really is simple. HGP is not Christian and was a scientific study that was free from the bias of any one group like the NEA, LGB&T, MAMBA, or religious group. Their study mapped the entire (that might be a big word in England) but really here it means what it says, entire. The know every gene and what it controls and thus they have a map to begin to isolate, or heaven forbid manipulate in the future. The HGP came out and said there is NO genetic reasons for homosxeual urges. Same true for a preference for blondes or long legs. There is however a gene for the desire to reproduce. So science proved this no any Christian group. Homosexuality is a personal choice just like favorite color, food preference, etc. What is proves is the bible is correct that it is a choice that can be stopped by the individual and not some sort of uncontrollable urge that God created them with and that they cannot stop being gay. So it is science and the Bible that says this. My opinion means nothing on this. So unless you and Logrus, or anyone else has some contradicting, non biased scientific reports that has been peer reviewed then what I have is the truth.!!!!
Chris,

I'm living this.

I also studied Biology to A-Level. They might know what each gene controls, but they DO NOT know what the genes working together can do in all the hundreds of possibilities that would entail.

My best guess would be that a multitude of genes react to a specific environment producing homosexuality, that is quite possibly a mutation, or a medical form of mental unhealth.

In that respect the problem is that BOTH Nature and Nurture can have influences on the desire. It has however, got to be quite a difficult ordering of genes, and quite a strange environmental factoring, so as to maintain a species at all!

In terms of Scripture, you cant even get that right. SHOCKING from a Priest! The Bible says that the ability to practise homosexual acts is a choice. It remains silent on the feelings and urges behind that. Christ never even mentions it.

So even with the Genome mapped ENTIRELY we still do not really know.

Chris F
08-17-2009, 08:02 PM
Chris,

I'm living this.

I also studied Biology to A-Level. They might know what each gene controls, but they DO NOT know what the genes working together can do in all the hundreds of possibilities that would entail.

My best guess would be that a multitude of genes react to a specific environment producing homosexuality, that is quite possibly a mutation, or a medical form of mental unhealth.

In that respect the problem is that BOTH Nature and Nurture can have influences on the desire. It has however, got to be quite a difficult ordering of genes, and quite a strange environmental factoring, so as to maintain a species at all!

In terms of Scripture, you cant even get that right. SHOCKING from a Priest! The Bible says that the ability to practise homosexual acts is a choice. It remains silent on the feelings and urges behind that. Christ never even mentions it.

So even with the Genome mapped ENTIRELY we still do not really know.

1- That is an excuse. The combination of genes does not justify nor excuse any sort of behavior. By your logic we should not prosecute, rapist and pedophiles because who knows their genes may keep them from stopping themselves.

2- As for Jesus remaining silent of the homosexual issue. Well since his audience was primarily Jewish it did not become an issue till Paul got involved with the Greeks and gentiles. Jesus did not have to address it because homosexuality was already clearly a sin and forbidden by scripture. As for excusing urges for sin that is plain ridiculous Dave. The sin nature is still subject to the blood of Christ.

Tyburn
08-17-2009, 09:11 PM
1- That is an excuse. The combination of genes does not justify nor excuse any sort of behavior. By your logic we should not prosecute, rapist and pedophiles because who knows their genes may keep them from stopping themselves.

2- As for Jesus remaining silent of the homosexual issue. Well since his audience was primarily Jewish it did not become an issue till Paul got involved with the Greeks and gentiles. Jesus did not have to address it because homosexuality was already clearly a sin and forbidden by scripture. As for excusing urges for sin that is plain ridiculous Dave. The sin nature is still subject to the blood of Christ.
1) whom said anything about justification or excusing?? I Affirmed that Scripturally the PRACTISE of any kind of sodomy is wrong. As for having the FEELINGS of sodomy...thats not condemned, anymore then the FEELING of Lust.

Having the feeling is not a sin, its just a product of a fallen world. The sin is in the practise. You feel lust, thats fine, just dont act on it.

2) Homosexual practise was forbidden in scripture. having the feelings is neither praised not condemned. Its not mentioned. Thats the problem with people like you. Let me give YOU a bit of logic.

If the feelings of homosexuality are wrong, and are a choice, they can be changed and healed. If they are not it is because those whose duty it is to pray for healing are not up to the task. Praye a little harder Chris and perhaps I will be healed, if what you say be true. But then of course, if what you say is true and I am not healed. Well...perhaps YOU didnt pray hard enough, perhaps you ceased praying and fasting...perhaps you never bothered fasting in the first place.

I'm quite suprised you havent brought up the other issue. That homosexuality is PUNISHMENT from GOD, and not always on the person it is inflicted. Curses extend at least three generations biblically. We happen to be pretty much the third Generation after the Enlightenment broadly speaking. The Enlightenment was the birth of secularism. Perhaps that accounts for why there are so many homosexuals. Only now is the generation being punished for the de-christianization of the Western World??

Some people, sure as eggs believe that as much as they believe that dissability is also punishment.

Its all just the opinion of a few Christians who have absolutely no first hand knowledge of the issue they are talking about. You wait til someone you care about tells you that the feelings are NOT their choice. You'll either have a swift change of heart, or you'll distroy the relationship you have with them. I've SEEN it happen Chris. Why do you think so many gays keep their sexuality hidden. You know nothing about the homosexuals that NEVER SIN because they NEVER PRACTISE but live in fear of people like you. Why not? because you only ever see the militant Pride scene.

Incidently Homosexual practise is no bigger a sin then any other sin. I've seen you wrong people on here, and let me tell you now. GOD views that exactly the same as some of the disgraceful things I did a few years back.

Besides Your Genome Mapping hasnt even answered some of the basic questions. For example, the different Species...well, the different cross-breads within the Human population. I'm not talking about ethnic group or skin pigmentation, or superficial differences that many Homo-Sapiens have got themselves frustrated over. No. I'm talking about something FAR more subtle then that. The actual different SPEICIES of Human, or rather, the different cross-breads from interactions with other Speices of Human in the past.

There is a distinct possiblity that there is MORE then one Genome in the Human Breeding pool. That Genome might not even match some of the variations of strains you might come across. Science would support me on this one...but if you are Young Earth Creationalist...then you are suddenly going to struggle when I say that in theory there COULD be a single Gay gene, in the Genome of a different type of Human, or the descendants of the cross breeds. I think it highly unlikely for the reasons ive already stated. But its a possiblity

Take Cats for Example. I've lived with a "Taby" for 19 years. You know the classic black stripes and golden to silver fur in between? The problem with Taby Cats is there are VERY few of them left. What we call Taby, is infact a cross bread between Taby and Tortershell.

Pure Taby Cats dont have any black or any Yellow/Golden tones at all. They are a pure Silver colour, the stripes are made of two different tones of Silver. Last month I met my first PURE bread Taby Cat. I swear down it resembled more a russian blue, then what we would consider a taby. There is a thought that a similar thing happened between two types of Humans resulting in the complete extinction of one side of the Union. They were called Homo-Neanderthalis. They are physically different and probably have a slightly different genome you see.

They are trying to map the Genome of a pure bread neanderthal right now. it was completed last year I believe. it IS different to the Homosapien Genome.

Chris. They interbread! Something that the Scientists are trying to play down greatly. You dont need to be a genetacist to know that if two different Genomes come together you get a THIRD. They say that there was not enough interbreading to create a third Genome. Its possible, but it doesnt rule out that fact SOME genetic transfer to place. Some of us might not be as...human as we think :laugh:

Here is the other issue. The Homo-Sapien Genome is probably not a pure bread, and the pure bread Neandethalis is VERY OLD and his DNA is not what it used to be when he were alive, shall we say. :unsure:

There so are traits within some human skelletons that look, shall we say, other. You might have seen the man with almost no neck, quite a large head, and large eyes, abnormally large eyes...well large eye sockets. This man is shorter then most Humans, and squat. (think Jeff Monson :laugh: ) Their heads are slightly more elongated at the back of the skull. They arent fat exactly, but they are usually wide in bone structure. They are extremely physically strong. Like abnormally strong, and alot of it has to do with their skelletal structure and the fact they are more squat then your average human being. They have a few odd extra teeth in their mouths at the back sometimes. Their chest cavities are more cylindrical and barrel like, but in a squat way, not an obease way. They have superior bones of the legs (Correy Hill is NOT carrying any traits there then :laugh: ) They also grow quicker. They develope both biologically and physically faster the Sapiens.
...and they have funny fingers and thumbs :mellow:

Neanderthalis were located from the north pole down to North Africa as far west only as Europe and as far east as the middle east and Ukraine. They were supposed to have died out. With the Homosapiens who came WEST from Russia. But the latest evidence suggests that the Neandethalis servived as traits within the interbreading of Sapiens.

Also...They were not stupid. You know Sapiens have used the term as an insult. But the brain capacity was almost the same, the BMI was more, the height a little less...and the ability to learn, equal. But the Neandethalis was designed for a different purpose. They were physically better made for hunting, for strength. In short, they make perfect Wrestlers, and ideal Warriors in terms of physical make up and genetics. They just might not have been so social. That might have been there downfall when Sapiens are far more social and together they could do more then be good fighters and hunters.

Thankfully some of their genetic information might lurk still in some sapiens today.

Neezar
08-18-2009, 12:02 AM
If the feelings of homosexuality are wrong, and are a choice, they can be changed and healed. If they are not it is because those whose duty it is to pray for healing are not up to the task. Praye a little harder Chris and perhaps I will be healed, if what you say be true. But then of course, if what you say is true and I am not healed. Well...perhaps YOU didnt pray hard enough, perhaps you ceased praying and fasting...perhaps you never bothered fasting in the first place.


It is the Americans fault that you are poor and the Christians fault that you are gay.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Tyburn
08-18-2009, 01:00 AM
It is the Americans fault that you are poor and the Christians fault that you are gay.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
thats the logic of His argument. Not mine. If you believe that the FEELINGS are a sin, then shouldnt you be praying for healing, and wouldnt GOD Listen to you at least sometimes?

So, more to the point, not the Christians fault I'm Gay, but if Pastor Chris is right, the Christians fault that I'm not healed I suppose.

Thats why its a bad argument. This isnt by design, nor is it by anyones Fault. The Feelings are simply a product of the fallen world

Chris F
08-18-2009, 08:07 AM
Bible and Jesus, says if you were to look at a women with lust (feelings) you have committed adultery already in your heart (feelings) Checkmate sir.!

your logic is based on a faulty hermeneutic.

Tyburn
08-18-2009, 01:17 PM
Bible and Jesus, says if you were to look at a women with lust (feelings) you have committed adultery already in your heart (feelings) Checkmate sir.!

your logic is based on a faulty hermeneutic.
That is about mind fantasy. Its not about streight forward feelings.

If you have the feelings but everytime they come up you dont dwell on them, or fantasize about it, but instead take it to GOD...trust me, its not a sin.

One can train ones mind to do it naturally.

But its a mute point. You have sinned, ergo you are just as bad. You also struggle with pastoral care online, which makes you appear online to be lacking in spiritual fruit. Perhaps thats different in real life where you cant hide behind your words because you are in someones presence...or maybe it isnt. A lot of Priests have no idea about pastoral ministry at all. Being called a "pastor" and being a "pastor" are too different things. Ive never seen you act like a pastor online, although i've seen you act like a nonchelent Preacher almost every time someone has a difference of opinion to you.

People should NOT speak with opinions about sins they have no idea about. Especially not to someone who knows from experience about such things.

You should really just leave me alone Chris, because I've stated my case, its valid, and I know the practical side rather then the theory of what I'm talking about in this case :)

VCURamFan
08-18-2009, 03:22 PM
That is about mind fantasy. Its not about streight forward feelings.

If you have the feelings but everytime they come up you dont dwell on them, or fantasize about it, but instead take it to GOD...trust me, its not a sin.Dave, I think I disagree with you here, but I'm not entirely certain. To double check, I'm going to break down my opinion really basically & when/if you reply, first go down the list & say "Yes" or "No" to whether or not you agree with each individual point. That way, at least, we'll know what we're arguing about!:laugh:


Sex outside of marriage, i.e. adultery, is a sin (Exodus 20:14).
Homosexuality is a sin (Genesis 19:5-7; Leviticus 18:22).
Christ does not overturn the Old Testament (Matthew 5:17).
Lusting after someone, even if you don't act on it, is a sin (Matthew 5:28).
There's a difference between temptation & sin (1 Corinthians 10:13).
If you are tempted to lust, but don't & instead turn to God, you have not sinned.
If you give in to lust, even for the slightest moment, you have sinned & need to turn to God to repent & ask forgiveness.This is a very, very rudimentary outline of my understanding of sin & temptation, specialized to the specific discussion we're having on sexual (& more precisely, homosexual) sin. I believe that this is all solidly based in Scripture (hence the references so you can check up on me).

Now for why I think I disagree with you: you seem to be saying that when you get lustful feelings, they're not sinful because you don't go so far as to fantasize. I think this is a flaw in your understanding. Just like fantasizing is a sin even though it's not physical sex, so lusting is a sin even though it's not fantasizing. Just because it's a lesser form of sin doesn't prevent it from being a sin.

Now, the reason I'm not sure if I disagree all hinges on my interpretation of what you mean by "feelings". If you are using "feelings" to mean "temptations" (as opposed to "lusts", as I have understood you to mean), then I concur with you: if you run to God everytime you begin to be tempted, then you are avoiding sin.

People should NOT speak with opinions about sins they have no idea about. Especially not to someone who knows from experience about such things.

You should really just leave me alone Chris, because I've stated my case, its valid, and I know the practical side rather then the theory of what I'm talking about in this case :)On the other hand, I do disagree with you here. Just because I haven't personally experienced the temptation to shoot heroine doesn't mean that I shouldn't speak out about how terrible it is and what an abomination to the LORD it is to fill your body with that junk. Just because you haven't personally experienced the temptation to murder someone (at least, I don't think you have!:ninja: ) doesn't mean that you shouldn't speak out about how terrible it is and what an abomination to the LORD it is to destroy someone created in His image. Just because Chris hasn't personally experienced the temptation to have homosexual intercourse doesn't mean that he shouldn't speak out about how terrible it is and what an abomination to the LORD it is to pervert pure sexual love like that.

Now, would a message about the dangers of heroine be more effective and carry more weight coming from a recovering addict? Certainly. Would a speech about the horros of murder be more effective and carry more weight coming from a death row inmate? Undoubtedly. Would a sermon about the evils of homosexuality be more effective and carry more weight coming from a man struggling to resist his urges? Absolutely. But just because somone has less personal experience with a specific sin does not mean that God forbids them to encourage others to avoid it.

Tyburn
08-18-2009, 09:52 PM
1)Dave, I think I disagree with you here, but I'm not entirely certain. To double check, I'm going to break down my opinion really basically & when/if you reply, first go down the list & say "Yes" or "No" to whether or not you agree with each individual point. That way, at least, we'll know what we're arguing about!:laugh:


2) Sex outside of marriage, i.e. adultery, is a sin (Exodus 20:14).
3) Homosexuality is a sin (Genesis 19:5-7; Leviticus 18:22).
4) Christ does not overturn the Old Testament (Matthew 5:17).
5) Lusting after someone, even if you don't act on it, is a sin (Matthew 5:28).
6) There's a difference between temptation & sin (1 Corinthians 10:13).
7) If you are tempted to lust, but don't & instead turn to God, you have not sinned.
If you give in to lust, even for the slightest moment, you have sinned & need to turn to God to repent & ask forgiveness.This is a very, very rudimentary outline of my understanding of sin & temptation, specialized to the specific discussion we're having on sexual (& more precisely, homosexual) sin. I believe that this is all solidly based in Scripture (hence the references so you can check up on me).

Now for why I think I disagree with you: you seem to be saying that when you get lustful feelings, they're not sinful because you don't go so far as to fantasize. I think this is a flaw in your understanding. Just like fantasizing is a sin even though it's not physical sex, so lusting is a sin even though it's not fantasizing. Just because it's a lesser form of sin doesn't prevent it from being a sin.

9) Now, the reason I'm not sure if I disagree all hinges on my interpretation of what you mean by "feelings". If you are using "feelings" to mean "temptations" (as opposed to "lusts", as I have understood you to mean), then I concur with you: if you run to God everytime you begin to be tempted, then you are avoiding sin.

10) On the other hand, I do disagree with you here. Just because I haven't personally experienced the temptation to shoot heroine doesn't mean that I shouldn't speak out about how terrible it is and what an abomination to the LORD it is to fill your body with that junk. Just because you haven't personally experienced the temptation to murder someone (at least, I don't think you have!:ninja: ) doesn't mean that you shouldn't speak out about how terrible it is and what an abomination to the LORD it is to destroy someone created in His image. Just because Chris hasn't personally experienced the temptation to have homosexual intercourse doesn't mean that he shouldn't speak out about how terrible it is and what an abomination to the LORD it is to pervert pure sexual love like that.

Now, would a message about the dangers of heroine be more effective and carry more weight coming from a recovering addict? Certainly. Would a speech about the horros of murder be more effective and carry more weight coming from a death row inmate? Undoubtedly. Would a sermon about the evils of homosexuality be more effective and carry more weight coming from a man struggling to resist his urges? Absolutely. But just because somone has less personal experience with a specific sin does not mean that God forbids them to encourage others to avoid it.
1) if you dont know where I'm coming from now Ben you havent been paying attention in the last four years :mellow:

2) Correct, along with Cohabitation, which a lot of Christians like to forget.

3) Incorrect. What the Scriptures say is Homosexual practise is a Sin. Homosexuality is a lot more then sodomite sex Ben, and this is where you need the experience to know what I'm talking about. Homosexuality for example covers character, the ammount of masculinity a man has. That has nothing to do with Sexual sin at all, but a lot of Homosexuals are lacking in masculinity, they either appear effeminate, or they appear macho, both being used to compensate for the fact they arent masculine. Homosexuality also involves sexual preference, even if you remain celebate and in the closet your whole life. Do you need to have sex to be a hetrosexual?? Of course not. Well the same is true for homosexuals. The Bible simply doesnt speak about these other, more complex issues. It doesnt speak on what to do if you fins yourself attracted to another man. It simply says DO NOT practise in anyway shape or form, and the fantasy and lust that effects Hetrosexual couples is the same applied to Homosexuals.

So it depends on your definition of what a Homosexual actually is, RATHER THEN what he might, or might not, be doing. As I suffer terribly from all this, I can tell you honnestly, there is a lot more to Same Sexed Attraction, then the condemned act.

YES Homosexual ACTS are outright condemed

4) Correct

5) This is a bit generic, because you cant exactly know when temptation actually becomes lust within the mind. Its easy to see when it becomes lust that is acted on. But its not easy to say at what point in a persons thought process when encountering attraction (any attraction) outside of marriage is actually a sin. I would not dare be presumtious and say that the feelings of homosexual attraction are always sin. Thats what some Christians do because they dont know how else to deal with what is a very complex thing. Its far easier to just tell the homosexual that what he's feeling is sinful, it also makes the Christian feel far better about themselves, because they dont have to then deal with Homosexuals at all. They dont see it as a Christian Struggle, they see it as a heathen trapped in sin. So they write the whole lot off. Strangely enough, that makes, particularly the CHRISTIAN Homosexual feel extremely outcast. Its alright for the gays who dont WANT to be part of the Church, dont CARE about sin. Its alright for them, they can just go militant. But its the damage done to those two scared to admit they have a problem for fear that it will prevent them from Christs Salvation, that it will rip apart their families, that it will distory their friendships. AND they are trapped, they dont know what to do about it, because they cant even mention it. Also, everytime this question comes up, I find myself basically faced with a number of very arrogant Christians, who refuse my worth as a Christian. Who basically try and lump as all as militant Heathens in sin.

Some of the nicer ones will tell you to basically pretend you are not homosexual dispite the feelings. They will tell you that you shouldnt lable yourself, but its not out of care for the individual, its out of betterment for themselves, for then they do not have to face the truth, which is, call it whatever you want, the fact remains the feelings wont change. It doesnt matter how long one is silent, or how long one pretends, or if one lables themselves or not. The feelings remain. But as the adage goes, "out of sight, out of mind" just another view I have had to contend with on this Forum

Then there are those who feel that you are being punished, or that because you suffer from that particular sin, you shouldnt be allowed certain responsibilities. They say to lead, you must lead by example. Yet GOD sees all sin the same, so why would it be inappropriate for me to lead in a Christian Environment?? Its alright for an adultorer, or a liar, or a gossiper, or a shyte-stirer...but having homosexual feelings...The irony of course is the effectively, rather then emasculating the homosexual, it feminizes them further, for they are bunched once again with the women. Seen but not heard. Another view ive come across from this forum.

So you see how that has NOTHING to do with sexual sin whatsoever, and yet it is still encompassed within the term. You see how, even when I havent practised in years, I regularly come up against this. So. No. Homosexuality is not condemned by Scripture beyond practise...everything else is infuriatingly open for interpretation. Better that it actually says one thing of the other, because at least then people like me would know EXACTLY where we stand, without having to wade through a whole host of equally valid possible theologies and ending up...with no conclusion.

6) the problem is where one ends and the other begins. Yes I think they are different. Which is why I think having the feelings is just temptation, whereas acting on them physcially, or in the mind, is sin itself.

7) I dont really use the word Temptation. That would seem to be the issue. The feelings, are just, desires and urges. One simply has them. But simply having them, isnt the same as indulging in them. it is the persuing of those feelings which I believe is the sinful bit. Sorry if you dont understand that :unsure-1:

10) do you see what you've subconsciously done. I said that you shouldnt speak about sins you dont experience from an opinion basis. I didnt mention crimes. All the examples you give are Crimes.

Tell me, would you condemn Suicide in the same way? Would you go out and tell those people, and their families and friends, what sinners the suicidee was for doing that act? Would you do that if you had never known anyone who tried, or succeeded in that action? or if you had never felt suicidal?

Sins do not always equal Crimes, because crimes are Human inventions that are human measures of obvious sins. We have a duty to be law abbiding citizens. But also, at least in your first example, you dont need to be a sufferer to know the biological effect. But have you any idea what the biological or psychological effects of Homosexuality, or depression, or suicidal, or self harm behaviour might be? All of which have sinful elements, and all have a struggle to overcome that SHOULD be overcome. But only by people who know what they are talking about. Pastor Chris does not.

Pastor Chris is not encouraging me not to practise. He is not encouraging me at all, he is smacking me down. He isnt telling me my practise is wrong, He's telling me I have no way out of this sin, that the mere feeling is sinful, probably enough to bar me from being a Christian. He may not have said that last bit, but it is the usual implied tone of the pentecostal and evangelic churches. Has he offered me any help? has he offered me a solution? does he actually CARE. No. He's saying it, because from his perspective, His interpretation is absolutely Truthful. GOD will save who he wants and disregard who he wants. Its up to GOD because I am sinful from the moment I first had the feeling, and will be unable to be saved until the last time the feeling goes away. Therefore, I am perceived not only as inconsequential, but also as a threat. I'm sure Pastor "Checkmate Sir" Chris loves to win an argument for his own egotistical boost (which would be a sin, but never mind about that) but in this case, understand that I am actually a threat. I am perceived as a heretic, and if I start speaking, supposing someone were to listen to me and be misguided.

If they are honnest, that is the feeling of the whole lot of them. Dont put him in charge because he might mislead people, tell him not to talk about it, because he might influence people. Thats what it boils down to. Even from my Friends. Now, how do you think that makes me feel? When I believe myself to be a Christian, when I recognise that they have sins viewed equally as bad by GOD, when I consider my interpretations valid and safe for others to read.

Ben, there are people who would not stand for it. I can actually handle a lot of abuse, and remain perfectly stable within my relationships. There are people who would feel quite unwelcome after hearing the views of some of the people who claim to be their friends on this forum.

Actually. I dont. I believe they are entitled to their own opinions. I believe in their own way they are trying to do what they feel right. I Believe that if they could help me, they would, but as they cant, there is nothing for them to say. I have a load of perserverence. You could treat me quite badly and unfairly, for quite a long period of time before I decide enough is enough. I am not easily worn down long term.

Do you realize that my whole anxiety disorder, and the whole depression are a reaction to trying to deal with this situation, over many years. It took me nearly a decade before I cracked under that pressure. Do you realize I only started to practise because I felt like with the medication I had been given a second chance, and which was worse, to sin, or to distroy myself through the stress and worry of possibly sinning, in one particular way...when we ALL sin every single day!!

You know we all have thorns in our sides, and we all have our crosses to bear...and if I could get rid of this, the feelings, the practise, the whole lot. If I could wake up tommorow and be hetrosexual and masculine through and through. I would. I dont want this, I am as sickened by it as Pastor Chris...but unlike Chris, I have to face it every single day. Knowing, that even though I want to have a family, I never can unless something changes, and that I shall always be alone, because I refuse to give into this one little sin. I will lie, I will be mean, I will sin in other ways, consisantly, no problem. But over my dead body will I embrace this particular sin. I just cant, its horrific, I could never live with myself, with my conscience.

For the record, Celebacy doesnt feel like a gift when your forced into it :laugh:

Neezar
08-18-2009, 09:57 PM
You should really just leave me alone Chris, because I've stated my case, its valid, and I know the practical side rather then the theory of what I'm talking about in this case :)

Um, I think you came in this thread and engaged Chris in debate. Maybe you should just leave him alone. :laugh:

Tyburn
08-18-2009, 10:06 PM
Um, I think you came in this thread and engaged Chris in debate. Maybe you should just leave him alone. :laugh:
Thats because I am an expert on the subject, and he is not, yet he was talking like one :laugh:

That bugged me.

But now, its gotten personal, and he's being mean. Wish I'd never said nowt now :sad:

Neezar
08-18-2009, 10:09 PM
Thats because I am an expert on the subject, and he is not, yet he was talking like one :laugh:

That bugged me.

But now, its gotten personal, and he's being mean. Wish I'd never said nowt now :sad:

Dave, answer me this. How is Chris stating his beliefs being mean to you?

Crisco
08-18-2009, 10:14 PM
Thats because I am an expert on the subject, and he is not, yet he was talking like one :laugh:

That bugged me.

But now, its gotten personal, and he's being mean. Wish I'd never said nowt now :sad:

I've wondered Dave and I'm being serious here npot trying to be mean, have you ever thought of seeking out a repentent lesbian for companionship?

You both would have a smiliair understanding and the same cross to bear... Perhaps over time the companionship and confidant status could blossom into something more? Sexual attraction can often sprout from emotional attraction.


Would be worth a shot.. I know it sounds crazy but it's not like you would lose anything if it didn't work..

Neezar
08-18-2009, 10:14 PM
Ben, there are people who would not stand for it. I can actually handle a lot of abuse, and remain perfectly stable within my relationships. There are people who would feel quite unwelcome after hearing the views of some of the people who claim to be their friends on this forum.



You really shouldn't insinuate things like that without being able to back it up. It only makes it seem like you are making things up to plead your case.

Neezar
08-18-2009, 10:16 PM
I've wondered Dave and I'm being serious here npot trying to be mean, have you ever thought of seeking out a repentent lesbian for companionship?

You both would have a smiliair understanding and the same cross to bear... Perhaps over time the companionship and confidant status could blossom into something more? Sexual attraction can often sprout from emotional attraction.


Would be worth a shot.. I know it sounds crazy but it's not like you would lose anything if it didn't work..

We've tried that before. Dave is afraid of dykes and he can't tolerate the feminine kind.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Crisco
08-18-2009, 10:25 PM
We've tried that before. Dave is afraid of dykes and he can't tolerate the feminine kind.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Should definately try and face his fears.

Just cuz a chick is a lesbian doesnt mean she is a dyke. Some of them are pretty hot.

A lot of gay man act like a bunch of fems so it's not so much of a switch really.

Tyburn
08-18-2009, 11:19 PM
Dave, answer me this. How is Chris stating his beliefs being mean to you?
He's not stating his beliefs. His saying his beliefs are Truth, and they are just an interpretation :mellow:

Tyburn
08-18-2009, 11:27 PM
I've wondered Dave and I'm being serious here npot trying to be mean, have you ever thought of seeking out a repentent lesbian for companionship?

You both would have a smiliair understanding and the same cross to bear... Perhaps over time the companionship and confidant status could blossom into something more? Sexual attraction can often sprout from emotional attraction.


Would be worth a shot.. I know it sounds crazy but it's not like you would lose anything if it didn't work..
Well I have known several lesbians, but, they are as disinterested in me, as I am in them.

I can occasionally foster emotional and romantic relations with women, but thats not enough to base a marriage or a family on. Also, all the christian homosexuals i've come across, might not want to be homosexual, but ive not heard of any of them actively wanting a family of their own. They asipire to celebasy, Plus...at present, finding any of the people with this issue would involve actively looking for them...im trying not to actively seek any other homosexuals at all...even if it was just for friendship...it would feel a bit...naughty.

There are certain things I can help, like being identified and approached by other homosexuals, which does happen, and its always...awkward. For example, what do I do when I get approached by this guy at the car boot sale who says quite bluntly "my partner and I were wondering if you were gay"

:blink:

Or the guy at work who keeps following me around...even when I tell him non to politely where to go :scared0011:

Chris F
08-19-2009, 02:58 AM
That is about mind fantasy. Its not about streight forward feelings.

If you have the feelings but everytime they come up you dont dwell on them, or fantasize about it, but instead take it to GOD...trust me, its not a sin.

One can train ones mind to do it naturally.

But its a mute point. You have sinned, ergo you are just as bad. You also struggle with pastoral care online, which makes you appear online to be lacking in spiritual fruit. Perhaps thats different in real life where you cant hide behind your words because you are in someones presence...or maybe it isnt. A lot of Priests have no idea about pastoral ministry at all. Being called a "pastor" and being a "pastor" are too different things. Ive never seen you act like a pastor online, although i've seen you act like a nonchelent Preacher almost every time someone has a difference of opinion to you.

People should NOT speak with opinions about sins they have no idea about. Especially not to someone who knows from experience about such things.

You should really just leave me alone Chris, because I've stated my case, its valid, and I know the practical side rather then the theory of what I'm talking about in this case :)

Sorry Dave but I prefer to trust the bible and not you. I am not a pastor. I have not been for some time now. I am a minister I do, do hospital visit, funerals, marriages, I do preach etc etc. But I do not shepherd. If you took the time ot read scripture and opposed to running your mouth in such an arrogant manner you'd know there are 5 folds to ministry. One does not have to operate in all 5 offices. So relax take a chill pill and a class in hermeneutics and come back when you have matured enough to be civil.

Chris F
08-19-2009, 03:14 AM
He's not stating his beliefs. His saying his beliefs are Truth, and they are just an interpretation :mellow:

Then by all means use logic to show that and not your typical I know more then you so leave me alone. You will need to show book chapter and verse that show "my interpretation" to be a false premise. If oyu are such an expert then you will have no problem. And if it is the science side you prefer to tackle then by all means cite a peer reviewed study that shows "my interpretation" to be wrong. If oyu are such an expert then you will have no problem with that either. Ben has done shown you in several areas of scripture the errors of your fallacy.

Jesus was very clear and other areas of scripture does as well. Anything placed ahead of God is sin, this includes feelings weather acted on or not. A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.

You claim I should encourage you on this issue. Well until today I had no clue you struggled with that. This is an online forum and I do not choose to read between the lines or make assumptions. We all struggle with sin daily. Nothing makes you any more special or your sinful lust any different then mine. Sounds like to me you primary sin is pride. Funny how you are so quick to spot it in others.

Buzzard
08-19-2009, 06:27 AM
A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it.

So every relationship starts with sin? Another reason I am happy to be agnostic.

Vizion
08-19-2009, 06:33 AM
So every relationship starts with sin? Another reason I am happy to be agnostic.
yea, you don't want accountability to God, right?

Buzzard
08-19-2009, 06:42 AM
yea, you don't want accountability to God, right?

I don't need accountability for something I don't believe in. I just found his statement to be quite odd. If it works for you, then by all means keep up with it and enjoy your walk.

Peace.

Vizion
08-19-2009, 07:24 AM
I don't need accountability for something I do believe in but am afraid to acknowledge. fixed :laugh:

Tyburn
08-19-2009, 01:17 PM
Sorry Dave but I prefer to trust the bible and not you. I am not a pastor. I have not been for some time now. I am a minister I do, do hospital visit, funerals, marriages, I do preach etc etc. But I do not shepherd. If you took the time ot read scripture and opposed to running your mouth in such an arrogant manner you'd know there are 5 folds to ministry. One does not have to operate in all 5 offices. So relax take a chill pill and a class in hermeneutics and come back when you have matured enough to be civil.
That depends on what denomination you are part of. For Ordained Ministry in The Church of England, the Priest has pretty much outlets in all Ministerial positions, from celebrating the Eucharist, to Pastoral Visits, To Education of School Children, to Funerals and other Sacrements, to Preaching and Reading. There are people who just preach, but they are NOT Ordained Ministers. You only need to be a liscenced Reader to Preach.

Heck. I could do it if I wanted to. :laugh:

Tyburn
08-19-2009, 01:22 PM
Then by all means use logic to show that and not your typical I know more then you so leave me alone. You will need to show book chapter and verse that show "my interpretation" to be a false premise. If oyu are such an expert then you will have no problem. And if it is the science side you prefer to tackle then by all means cite a peer reviewed study that shows "my interpretation" to be wrong. If oyu are such an expert then you will have no problem with that either. Ben has done shown you in several areas of scripture the errors of your fallacy.

Jesus was very clear and other areas of scripture does as well. Anything placed ahead of God is sin, this includes feelings weather acted on or not. A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.

You claim I should encourage you on this issue. Well until today I had no clue you struggled with that. This is an online forum and I do not choose to read between the lines or make assumptions. We all struggle with sin daily. Nothing makes you any more special or your sinful lust any different then mine. Sounds like to me you primary sin is pride. Funny how you are so quick to spot it in others.
No. The line between feeling and acting, could be the line between temptation and sin, which would mean the feeling is just temptation and not sin.

THAT is why yours is a interpretation.

My Primary Sin is Judgement, Chris. I might be a good Judge of Character, but I really do Judge, and that a sin when you consider, I dont honnestly have the right to Judge people like I do. The irony is, I judge noone harder then I judge myself. Perhaps that is why the Sexual sin has caused more pain then it would normally. I judge it far, FAR worse then you do, and I'm the one living in it.

Did you honnestly not know I was struggling with sexual sin of that nature?? I've spoken about it enough on here that I assume anyone half as regular as you would know. I suppose I dont talk about it so much now as I used to on here. But I pretty much assume, unless your a new or like very sporadic patron, that you would know by now. LOL

Chris F
08-19-2009, 05:45 PM
No. The line between feeling and acting, could be the line between temptation and sin, which would mean the feeling is just temptation and not sin.

THAT is why yours is a interpretation.

My Primary Sin is Judgement, Chris. I might be a good Judge of Character, but I really do Judge, and that a sin when you consider, I dont honnestly have the right to Judge people like I do. The irony is, I judge noone harder then I judge myself. Perhaps that is why the Sexual sin has caused more pain then it would normally. I judge it far, FAR worse then you do, and I'm the one living in it.

Did you honnestly not know I was struggling with sexual sin of that nature?? I've spoken about it enough on here that I assume anyone half as regular as you would know. I suppose I dont talk about it so much now as I used to on here. But I pretty much assume, unless your a new or like very sporadic patron, that you would know by now. LOL

I am being completely honest Dave I had no clue. I do not view people in that way. We are all struggling with some sort of sin and for me to point yours out and focus on it is not any more acceptable then me to ignore mine. I am not on here near as often as I once was and I typically only scans post that suit my very limited interest. You may have discussed it a lot but really I do not read the entire threads usually just a few to get the gist of the discourse. Sorry I did not know or pay closer attention to your struggle.

There is noting wrong with judgement Dave. You should judge others. You just need to make sure it is a righteous judgement using the standard of God's Word. We must never use human standards as the basis of our judgement. Sexual sin is deep in every person especially males. This is why we must crucify the flesh daily. I believe only through the power of the cross of Christ can one escape any addiction or sinful desire.

Tyburn
08-19-2009, 09:14 PM
I am being completely honest Dave I had no clue. I do not view people in that way. We are all struggling with some sort of sin and for me to point yours out and focus on it is not any more acceptable then me to ignore mine. I am not on here near as often as I once was and I typically only scans post that suit my very limited interest. You may have discussed it a lot but really I do not read the entire threads usually just a few to get the gist of the discourse. Sorry I did not know or pay closer attention to your struggle.

There is noting wrong with judgement Dave. You should judge others. You just need to make sure it is a righteous judgement using the standard of God's Word. We must never use human standards as the basis of our judgement. Sexual sin is deep in every person especially males. This is why we must crucify the flesh daily. I believe only through the power of the cross of Christ can one escape any addiction or sinful desire.


Well if you didnt know, then I guess you werent really being mean afterall. I thought you did, but then I've argued this very point out with others, like MacT from long ago, and I sometimes forget which people that hold the same views ive argued with, and which I havent :laugh:

As for Judgement, Its never the Judgement of looking to see someones fruit or something like that. Usually it just plain Judgement of standards I hold which is many case have absolutely nothing to do with the Christian Life or GODs Word at all. I dont write people off though, so I suppose I might judge someone unfairly, but that doesnt mean I will lose interest in talking to or debating with such a person. But when that person does something wrong, even when I forgive, I truely never forget, and depending on how badly the wrong was, or how badly I felt I was wrong, often it can lie dormant in my mind, expressing itself subconsciously in the things I say (or in this case, write) Some would say its holding a grudge, but I really do forgive...I just have trouble forgetting if that makes sense...which means those things I do forgive are NOT gone, they are filled away for remembrance on the occasions of similar future interactions. Of those people I do like, I can go far to far the other way and become quite possessive almost.

Finally I have quite traditional views about family, which mean I feel sometimes that what other members of the family do reflect back on me. That was a real issue at school when one of my Sisters used to Smoke. I abhore smoking, and I was deeply angry because I felt like her Smoking reflected back on me, because we were part of the same family, a bit like disgracing yourself in eons past would bring your other family members into disrepute.

She doesnt smoke anymore.

There is also the matter of Loyalty that often conflicts with my judgement. If I consider someone a friend and THEY (not I) are wronged. I will hold a grudge on their behalf, sometimes for long after them, particularly if they are Family. Tiffany always laughs about the fact that when she got a new boyfriend, I invited them round for a private meal to check him out. She asked me afterwards "do you approve" And she was right in her assumption that the meal was EVERYTHING to do with whether I approved of Him or Not. Its not Easy Going Father my Sisters have to seek approval from for Future Husbands...ITS ME :laugh:

As A matter of fact I do approve of him. Even though he several years older then me, and she is two years my junior. But If He maltreats her, he has more to fear from me, then he does backlash from her.

You see, its something I have to constantly tone down. People on here think I am a Liberal. The truth is what you see that makes you think that is the hard work I've put in to stop myself being 100percent dogmatic on every issue under the sun. You dont realize, I think sometimes, that I have extremely strong views, and it takes a hell of a lot to make me overturn a past judgement. I am not by Nature Easy Going, I am not by Nature particularly Diplomatic. I appear so, and I am more so now then before because I have taught and forced myself to learn those skills. What you see, when I play peacemaker, is NOT my natural Character, it is a learned skill that has developed over time....and I dont always make the rullings I Judge public when I am playing that role. Sometimes when I'm being diplomatic on here, I understand and aggree with one particular side, and I actually become completely objective in order to continue to function in such a role.

The gift of reconciliation wasnt bestowed on me from Birth, it is something that has been carefully nurtured and fruits quite against my Judgemental Nature. :)

bradwright
08-19-2009, 10:32 PM
well Dave i have read this thread from the very beginning and it seems to me you are not very good Christian,how could you possibly say you are a good christian when you some how believe that being gay is something you are born with when everybody ( but you Dave) knows without a doubt that it is a choice you have made in your life...i mean dont you see it Dave ? you could stop being gay any time you want ! ! so tell me Dave,why dont you stop being gay right now ?
i think it could be because you like people being cruel and insensitive to you because of your self inflicted gayness...this all reminds me of a story i once heard about the boy that cried wolf...it seems you and the boy in said story have the same over powering need to be vilified that you will do and say anything just for the attention that it brings you with out fully understanding the consequences,
no more excuses Dave,now stop being gay and find yourself a nice girl and get married and have a family together and live a NORMAL happy life.

if there is anything else i can help you with Dave just let me know,

Tyburn
08-20-2009, 12:56 AM
if there is anything else i can help you with Dave just let me know,
there is nothing. :)

Thanks :laugh:

TexasRN
08-20-2009, 02:11 AM
there is nothing. :)

Thanks :laugh:

Good answer, Dave.


Now, moving on......how about that weather?:laugh:



~Amy

Buzzard
08-20-2009, 02:40 AM
fixed :laugh:


Far from fixed. Do you really think I believe in your God, or any God for that matter? I have tried to have belief, but it doesn't work that way for me. I'm not going to lie to you or myself and say I believe when I really don't.

adamt
08-20-2009, 02:58 AM
Far from fixed. Do you really think I believe in your God, or any God for that matter? I have tried to have belief, but it doesn't work that way for me. I'm not going to lie to you or myself and say I believe when I really don't.


What do you believe? Atheism is a religion. It is the belief their is no God. The religion they teach in the public school system. Believing nothing is still a belief system a.k.a. religion.

Could you also explain what you mean when you say you tried to have belief.

I am not being beligerent. Just exploring your point of view.

Buzzard
08-20-2009, 03:30 AM
What do you believe? Atheism is a religion. It is the belief their is no God. The religion they teach in the public school system. Believing nothing is still a belief system a.k.a. religion.

Could you also explain what you mean when you say you tried to have belief.

I am not being beligerent. Just exploring your point of view.

I have no problem explaining my belief, or lack of belief to you.

First off, I am agnostic. I could also be labeled an agnostic atheist too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

I was once a church goer and "converted" over to Christianity. I never felt that I belonged in any of those groups as I never truly believed what was taught to me or what I read. I can't just say I believe in God and "poof" I now believe. It's much deeper than that. In order for me to truly believe, I need more than "the bible tells me so."

There are many religions out there, and I don't believe in their versions either. To me, none of them have passed the "is it real or mythology" test. While I could tell you that I believe, I don't like lying to you or to myself.

What I believe is that when I die, I cease to exist. Perhaps the energy that was in my body will live on in another state, perhaps not. I can see the comfort others can feel when they think that they will go to heaven after they die, I again don't believe in that either.

I don't mind people sharing their beliefs with me, but don't want them forced upon me. If people ask me questions about their beliefs or why I don't believe, I will answer them and hopefully they won't be offended.

Have a good evening and thanks for asking.

Chris F
08-20-2009, 04:09 AM
I have no problem explaining my belief, or lack of belief to you.

First off, I am agnostic. I could also be labeled an agnostic atheist too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

I was once a church goer and "converted" over to Christianity. I never felt that I belonged in any of those groups as I never truly believed what was taught to me or what I read. I can't just say I believe in God and "poof" I now believe. It's much deeper than that. In order for me to truly believe, I need more than "the bible tells me so."

There are many religions out there, and I don't believe in their versions either. To me, none of them have passed the "is it real or mythology" test. While I could tell you that I believe, I don't like lying to you or to myself.

What I believe is that when I die, I cease to exist. Perhaps the energy that was in my body will live on in another state, perhaps not. I can see the comfort others can feel when they think that they will go to heaven after they die, I again don't believe in that either.

I don't mind people sharing their beliefs with me, but don't want them forced upon me. If people ask me questions about their beliefs or why I don't believe, I will answer them and hopefully they won't be offended.

Have a good evening and thanks for asking.

At least you are smart enough to say you do not know if there is a God instead of denying one all together.

Buzzard
08-20-2009, 04:24 AM
At least you are smart enough to say you do not know if there is a God instead of denying one all together.

Who knows, maybe one day I'll see things differently. Since this is the section for you all to discuss your beliefs, I have tried to abstain from pushing my point of view in this section. I do enjoy reading this part of the forum though as I am on a continuing quest for knowledge.

I wish you well in your journey too.

adamt
08-20-2009, 04:56 AM
I have no problem explaining my belief, or lack of belief to you.

First off, I am agnostic. I could also be labeled an agnostic atheist too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

I was once a church goer and "converted" over to Christianity. I never felt that I belonged in any of those groups as I never truly believed what was taught to me or what I read. I can't just say I believe in God and "poof" I now believe. It's much deeper than that. In order for me to truly believe, I need more than "the bible tells me so."

There are many religions out there, and I don't believe in their versions either. To me, none of them have passed the "is it real or mythology" test. While I could tell you that I believe, I don't like lying to you or to myself.

What I believe is that when I die, I cease to exist. Perhaps the energy that was in my body will live on in another state, perhaps not. I can see the comfort others can feel when they think that they will go to heaven after they die, I again don't believe in that either.

I don't mind people sharing their beliefs with me, but don't want them forced upon me. If people ask me questions about their beliefs or why I don't believe, I will answer them and hopefully they won't be offended.

Have a good evening and thanks for asking.




do you believe in good and evil?
if so, who defines that?

what keeps you civil? as in-- if you could get away with it, what keeps you from stealing or killing even? what keeps you from killing the people you don't like....other than the law? would you be opposed to mankind being more like the animals....i.e. survival of the fittest, dominant males, the smartest and strongest weeding out the weak and lazy and dumb?

what makes you go during the day? I mean how do you keep from deciding that there is no point to life and then give up?

who do you think jesus was? do you believe He performed miracles?

I am not asking these questions condescendingly, rather i am curious, as you are very civil how you are answering them, and are quite articulate as well.

Buzzard
08-20-2009, 05:47 PM
do you believe in good and evil?
if so, who defines that?

I believe there are good actions and bad actions. What keeps me in line is I am a good person and I follow the golden rule. Some of the religious teachings I learned I still keep and apply today.


what keeps you civil? as in-- if you could get away with it, what keeps you from stealing or killing even?

Again, the golden rule and how I was brought up. I was taught manners etc. at a young age and have carried on those teachings into my adult life. I'm not perfect, and I do sometimes have my moments as all others do. I try to learn from my mistakes so as to not repeat them.

what keeps you from killing the people you don't like....other than the law? would you be opposed to mankind being more like the animals....i.e. survival of the fittest, dominant males, the smartest and strongest weeding out the weak and lazy and dumb?

what makes you go during the day? I mean how do you keep from deciding that there is no point to life and then give up?

What makes me go through the day is the enjoyment of life with all of its peaks and pitfalls. I enjoy life too much to decide to give up on it. That's the basic answer there.

who do you think jesus was? do you believe He performed miracles?

I'd rather not discuss that here as I don't wish to take away from this forums beliefs and cause undo friction between myself and the other members here as I have done in the past.

I am not asking these questions condescendingly, rather i am curious, as you are very civil how you are answering them, and are quite articulate as well.

Thanks for the questions. I hope that I have been able to answer them enough for you to get a basic understanding of how I live my life. While it may not be enough for some, I am happy with where I am and for the most part happy with how I live my life. I can always be better, and hope to become a better person with each day that passes.

adamt
08-20-2009, 06:04 PM
Thanks for the questions. I hope that I have been able to answer them enough for you to get a basic understanding of how I live my life. While it may not be enough for some, I am happy with where I am and for the most part happy with how I live my life. I can always be better, and hope to become a better person with each day that passes.


thanks for the answers, i'm not trying to push my beliefs on you when i say this, but i hope and pray the Holy Spirit reveals himself to you, it sounds as if you might be open to it if He did. You doubt it, it seems, yet would be open to a revelation were He to give it to you. I know as well as you do that there is nothing that I can say to "convince" you. So I just thank you for your considerate informative answers.

And p.s. the "undo" friction was not your fault as much as it was theirs. "They" are the ones that are supposed to be showing you the love of Christ. I don't blame you if you don't care for the Love of Christ the way some so called christians like to "show" it. :)

Vizion
08-20-2009, 06:09 PM
Buzzard - from where comes our moral conciouss that you so aptly place your moral structure?

NateR
08-21-2009, 06:33 AM
I don't mind people sharing their beliefs with me, but don't want them forced upon me.

Just a bit of advice, you can't post in the Christian section and then try to claim that we are forcing our beliefs on you. :rolleyes: If you really are not interested in hearing anything about Christianity, then just pretend this section doesn't exist.

This section is for believers to talk about their faith or for non-believers to ask legitimate questions. Not for troublemakers to take potshots at our beliefs and then cry foul when someone criticizes them back.

Bonnie
08-21-2009, 07:03 AM
Speaking of faith, it reminds me of the original post of this thread. :laugh:

For me it is quite simple: Without God there is no science. Without God there is no man so there is no science. Without God there is nothing, nada, zippo, zeroooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Therefore, without God we aren't even having this debate "God vs. Science"!

I think the whole "Big Bang Theory" is some man's way of explaining what he cannot comprehend: GOD!

Buzzard
08-21-2009, 08:18 AM
Just a bit of advice, you can't post in the Christian section and then try to claim that we are forcing our beliefs on you. :rolleyes: If you really are not interested in hearing anything about Christianity, then just pretend this section doesn't exist.

This section is for believers to talk about their faith or for non-believers to ask legitimate questions. Not for troublemakers to take potshots at our beliefs and then cry foul when someone criticizes them back.


I haven't made any such claim that those in this section are forcing their beliefs on me.:rolleyes:

I'm not taking potshots at your religion or other religions in here, unlike some who have poked at Islam and LDS.

Get back in bed and wake up on the right side of it, you seem to have stubbed your toe or something.

Neezar
08-21-2009, 12:13 PM
And p.s. the "undo" friction was not your fault as much as it was theirs. "They" are the ones that are supposed to be showing you the love of Christ. I don't blame you if you don't care for the Love of Christ the way some so called christians like to "show" it. :)

Please don't make statements like that unless you were here and know how all of this began and what the situation actually was. Okay? Okay. Thanks.

Tyburn
08-21-2009, 12:58 PM
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. This section is not here for debate ON Christianity. The Assumption for anyone posting in this section is that they either are Christian, or they are sympathetic. Rather this section of the Forum is for sharing our struggles, celebrating our successes, prayer requests, and Christian Theological Debates of a cross denominational nature.

Its not here for Evangalism, particularly, if that happens, then its GODs way of working, but we are not here to argue whehether GOD Exists or doesnt, Or Whether another Religion is correct. That is not the primary reason for this section.

Though we will tollerate different points of views, some of you guys need to remember that when you post questions which might have moral and spiritual implications, but frankly have nothing to do with Christ. There is a place for such threads, its called the Woodshed. The Christian Section is a place for Christians to discuss Christian Stuff. The whole website, it should be noted in Christian, and I dont advocate confining Christianity to this section. BUT, in regards to the heathen, this section is a place really for believers who are already saved, so if you feel we are not being kind, go post in another section, and if you are going to always challenge the basis of Christianity, again go post in the woodshed.

adamt
08-21-2009, 04:10 PM
Please don't make statements like that unless you were here and know how all of this began and what the situation actually was. Okay? Okay. Thanks.


i don't need to know the circumstances, all i need to know is that christians are the only Christ some people will see, and it is pretty clear why people like buzzard don't want the Christ they experience in some christians. If we christians bill ourselves as above the fray, then we oughta be. Some of the most arrogant people on here are "christians". Christians are supposed to take rebuke, but that don't happen too well. All this post will accompolish is to make people rebuke me.

NateR
08-21-2009, 07:14 PM
I'm not taking potshots at your religion or other religions in here

Just in case you forgot:

So every relationship starts with sin? Another reason I am happy to be agnostic.

Tyburn
08-21-2009, 07:46 PM
i don't need to know the circumstances, all i need to know is that christians are the only Christ some people will see, and it is pretty clear why people like buzzard don't want the Christ they experience in some christians. If we christians bill ourselves as above the fray, then we oughta be. Some of the most arrogant people on here are "christians". Christians are supposed to take rebuke, but that don't happen too well. All this post will accompolish is to make people rebuke me.
Your entitled to your opinion. But you arent really regular enough to know whether what your saying is a true reflection or not. Have you ever thought that in the case of Buzzard, he might initiate things deliberatley for a response? Do you know all the interactional history? Buzzard isnt here to be converted, I doubt he has a sincere interest. He's just here to cause debate, which would be fine if this was a place for debate ON Christianity...but ITS NOT.

We dont need someone to play devils advocate, and we dont need someone to debate against Christ, because in this section, the presumption is, clarity on a Christian matter for Christians needing it.

Its the difference between an AA Meeting, and Drink Awareness Advert. One is a debate about Drinking, the other is a self help group for Alcholics. Imagine what would happen if a load of Teenage Drinkers turned up at an AA meeting to tell them they were all wrong :huh:

Well for people struggling with sin, or needing clarity, that is what this section is for. The rest of the site is the Christian Awareness Advert. This section is for Christians Primarily. Or those who will at least respect and understand and not oppose Christianity itself.

Buzzard
08-21-2009, 08:57 PM
Just in case you forgot:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzard
I'm not taking potshots at your religion or other religions in here

Just in case you forgot:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzard
So every relationship starts with sin? Another reason I am happy to be agnostic.


Yes Nate, I did post that. I posted that in response to Chris F saying

A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.



Do you agree with his statement? If that is the case, why is the set-up one where one is destined to fail? My comment was based on that quote, not on Christianity in general. I feel that there are many great things which have happened due to Christianity, but disagree with that premise. How is a feeling of love for someone a sin? I'm all ears and am looking for an honest answer.

Your entitled to your opinion. But you arent really regular enough to know whether what your saying is a true reflection or not. Have you ever thought that in the case of Buzzard, he might initiate things deliberatley for a response? Do you know all the interactional history? Buzzard isnt here to be converted, I doubt he has a sincere interest. He's just here to cause debate, which would be fine if this was a place for debate ON Christianity...but ITS NOT.


And you Tyburn aren't qualified to know my intentions in regard to my conversation with adamt. I was having a great civil conversation with him and enjoying the fact that I can give him honest answers to my thoughts, and he'll still think of me as an ok person.

I'd sure be much more inclined to possibly "converting" through the likes of adamt's conversations than with yours. You can doubt as much as you want about my "sincere interest", but once again you are wrong. My conversation with adamt is not about debate, it's about honest feelings and honesty in how I live my life. You quell my "sincere interest" with the manner in which you speak to me.

adamt, I like how you present yourself and I thank you for your insight and the time that you spent in conversing with me and the interest you have taken in the path that I have chosen.

Tyburn
08-21-2009, 09:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzard
I'm not taking potshots at your religion or other religions in here

Just in case you forgot:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzard
So every relationship starts with sin? Another reason I am happy to be agnostic.


Yes Nate, I did post that. I posted that in response to Chris F saying




Do you agree with his statement? If that is the case, why is the set-up one where one is destined to fail? My comment was based on that quote, not on Christianity in general. I feel that there are many great things which have happened due to Christianity, but disagree with that premise. How is a feeling of love for someone a sin? I'm all ears and am looking for an honest answer.



And you Tyburn aren't qualified to know my intentions in regard to my conversation with adamt. I was having a great civil conversation with him and enjoying the fact that I can give him honest answers to my thoughts, and he'll still think of me as an ok person.

I'd sure be much more inclined to possibly "converting" through the likes of adamt's conversations than with yours. You can doubt as much as you want about my "sincere interest", but once again you are wrong. My conversation with adamt is not about debate, it's about honest feelings and honesty in how I live my life. You quell my "sincere interest" with the manner in which you speak to me.

adamt, I like how you present yourself and I thank you for your insight and the time that you spent in conversing with me and the interest you have taken in the path that I have chosen.
The fact your getting Defensive prooves my point Buzzard :)

You aggree with him because he dissagrees with us. Its kinda petty to be honnest

NateR
08-21-2009, 09:48 PM
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/2395/105446b888d886a6ab142c2.png

Everyone should understand why we have a Christianity section. This was intended to be a place for believers to learn more about their faith, support each other and grow in their faith. It's also intended for non-believers to ask serious questions about the Christian faith.

This is NOT a place for non-believers, who are antagonistic towards Christianity, to post attacks and insults to Christians. Especially ones that are so ridiculously biased.

Scientists can be just as closed minded and stubborn to new ideas as the most dogmatic religious person. To try to claim that scientists actually base their world view on the evidence presented before them is incredibly naive.

NateR
08-21-2009, 09:51 PM
Do you agree with his statement? If that is the case, why is the set-up one where one is destined to fail? My comment was based on that quote, not on Christianity in general. I feel that there are many great things which have happened due to Christianity, but disagree with that premise. How is a feeling of love for someone a sin? I'm all ears and am looking for an honest answer.

No I don't agree with his statement at all. Two people can be attracted to each other and have feelings of love for each other without sin being involved at all.

Mark
08-21-2009, 10:04 PM
A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.

Chris, could you elaborate on this? And tell us the Bible verse that came from? Thanks Mark

Crisco
08-21-2009, 10:25 PM
A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.

Chris, could you elaborate on this? And tell us the Bible verse that came from? Thanks Mark

I believe he may be referencing verses such as

Romans 6:12
Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts.

Feelings is a subjective term. Feelings of love and devotion to future wife is not called sinful in the bible to my knowledge or that I've been able to find. However, Lusting after her is most definately a sin. It all depends on how you view the word feelings.

Bonnie
08-21-2009, 11:02 PM
I'm confused about the word "feelings" as far as what's being said regarding sin. Are we talking about two single individuals who are attracted to each other but not married? Physical attraction is the first thing that usually brings people together. If you're getting married how is it sinful to have feelings of "physically" wanting that person? Isn't that normal? I'm not saying "acting" on it before marriage, but just having those feelings towards the one you love and plan to marry. So where is the line between okay normal feelings of physical attraction and lust between two unattached single people that Crisco referred to?

I understand it is sinful to lust after a married person and to be bed hopping and sleeping with people who are not your husband or wife.

Tyburn
08-21-2009, 11:16 PM
A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.

I beg to differ :mellow: :laugh:

I aggree with VCURamFan that there is a difference between Temptation and Sin...and that level of clarity is NOT expressed in Scripture, ergo both interpretations are valid, but BOTH are Interpretations.

It really does depend on how you define Feeling, what EXACTLY those feelings are, and how exactly you feel them, ie the thought processes when the feelings first appear.

VCURamFan
08-21-2009, 11:54 PM
I beg to differ :mellow: :laugh:

I aggree with VCURamFan that there is a difference between Temptation and Sin...and that level of clarity is NOT expressed in Scripture, ergo both interpretations are valid, but BOTH are Interpretations.

It really does depend on how you define Feeling, what EXACTLY those feelings are, and how exactly you feel them, ie the thought processes when the feelings first appear.Dave, Mark was just quoting Chris. Apparently, though, he's doesn't know how to work the big blue "QUOTE" button at the bottom of each post!:laugh:

Seriously, if you read the 2nd half of what Mark said, he's questioning Chris & asking for proof:

Chris, could you elaborate on this? And tell us the Bible verse that came from? Thanks Mark

Tyburn
08-22-2009, 12:00 AM
Dave, Mark was just quoting Chris. Apparently, though, he's doesn't know how to work the big blue "QUOTE" button at the bottom of each post!:laugh:

Seriously, if you read the 2nd half of what Mark said, he's questioning Chris & asking for proof:
:scared0011:
ohhhhh...how embarissing, how embarrising.... :ashamed: :ashamed: :ashamed:

I didnt realize it was a quote. I thought he was saying he aggreed with Chris, and asking Chris to continue to explain :ashamed: :ashamed: :ashamed:

How EMBARISSING :ashamed: :ashamed:

and on that note I'm going to go to bed, and pretend it didnt happen :laugh:

Chris F
08-22-2009, 12:51 AM
A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.

Chris, could you elaborate on this? And tell us the Bible verse that came from? Thanks Mark

Be happy to Mark. I used the word feelings because I feel in mixed company it is more appropriate then the vulgar expression we typically use. So the word feelings in a stronger since if you know what I mean. Jesus said to look at a women with lust. Any intimate feelings outside of marriage is sin weather we accept that or not. Jesus says so and the verse Crisco used is another great example. Paul spoke about our battle with the flesh and how we must crucify it. Platonic feelings are not at all what I am referring to. If someone has a book chapter and verse that says intimate feelings outside of marriage are okay I'd be happy yo check them out.


Matthew 5:28 Mark is where JESUS made this statement and when you look at it in context it become even more obvious.

adamt
08-22-2009, 02:05 AM
A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.


actually lusting is an act,it exhibits itself as an act, mentally or even physically, but thinking on something is an act, having the desire to think on it or the temptation to fantasize about it is not the sin. Everyone knows good and well the difference between temptation and taking a second look. Or worse. But it is an act. Whether impulsive or not.

Neezar
08-22-2009, 02:48 AM
i don't need to know the circumstances, all i need to know is that christians are the only Christ some people will see, and it is pretty clear why people like buzzard don't want the Christ they experience in some christians. If we christians bill ourselves as above the fray, then we oughta be. Some of the most arrogant people on here are "christians". Christians are supposed to take rebuke, but that don't happen too well. All this post will accompolish is to make people rebuke me.

You have NO idea what happened here to cause any friction and yet you boldly proclaim the christians to be at fault. And you call other people arrogant? Wow. Just wow.

adamt
08-22-2009, 03:40 AM
Please don't make statements like that unless you were here and know how all of this began and what the situation actually was. Okay? Okay. Thanks

You have NO idea what happened here to cause any friction and yet you boldly proclaim the christians to be at fault. And you call other people arrogant? Wow. Just wow.


You have been assuming I don't know what happened. Wow, just wow.

And yes, christians are at fault sometimes , when we don't act like christians, and yes there were alot of christians that don't act like christians. If a teenager and a toddler get in a fight, there's not many reasons a teen is justified in fighting with a toddler. If you came upon that scene, who do you think is at fault. Whether or not the toddler started it, the teen has a certain maturity to maintain. Even Christ managed to treat satan civilly when being tempted. Like I said we might be the only Christ some people see.


I had no idea that we christians could just decide to not evangelize. That's kinda our job, more importantly it's our privelige. Most converts don't exactly try to get converted. Who are we to say buzzard might not get converted. Whether he is being an antagonist or not doesn't mean jack squat. What all happened in the past gives NO reason to harbor bitterness and give up on that soul. Don't forgive him but don't expect forgiveness. And don't expect Buzzard to know about forgiveness when professing christians can't even display it. Bitterness is an ugly thing. It's also an obvious thing, when someone who's "not a regular" as tyburn asserted of me, (though i have been here everyday for the last three years,), it's obvious when buzzard's remarks are overanalyzed just to find something to get at him, versus treating him with love. We're told to love our enemies aren't we, not try to verbally beat him up and teach him a lesson.

To take the evangelism out of the christianity section is like taking the mma out of this--matt hughes-- website. Taking the evangelism out of being a christian makes it nothing but a social club. No different than elks or moose lodge.

Mark
08-22-2009, 03:50 AM
Be happy to Mark. I used the word feelings because I feel in mixed company it is more appropriate then the vulgar expression we typically use. So the word feelings in a stronger since if you know what I mean. Jesus said to look at a women with lust. Any intimate feelings outside of marriage is sin weather we accept that or not. Jesus says so and the verse Crisco used is another great example. Paul spoke about our battle with the flesh and how we must crucify it. Platonic feelings are not at all what I am referring to. If someone has a book chapter and verse that says intimate feelings outside of marriage are okay I'd be happy yo check them out.


Matthew 5:28 Mark is where JESUS made this statement and when you look at it in context it become even more obvious.
I agree 100%. Feelings was the wrong word I think. I think lust is the word you are looking for. Mark

adamt
08-22-2009, 03:58 AM
you know what's interesting.

Believe it or not, I try to be open minded, though I state my point bluntly and passionately at times, I do think i keep my mind open and seek the beams in my own eyes well before I point others' out. I try to actually listen to what others might have to say, not just write them off and argue with them.

Anyways, the interesting thing is.... when talking about bitterness and accusing several on here of just trying to find fault with buzzard because they don't like him or what he has done, I realized that I am a bit bitter myself. So what's a feller to do when that happens? I guess a feller better confess it and get over it huh? Truth is I kinda have this "problem" with Chris F. I subconciously look for his faults cause he rubs me the wrong way. He has since the homeschooling debate-- I didn't like the way he represented us homeschoolers, in fact i was ashamed to be one of the homeschoolers on here. Then the woman as a pastor debate flared up and I totally disagreed with everything he said and how he said it. And then the insurance thing was discussed and it made it personal, so I have seriously wanted to tear into him since then. But you know what. That makes me way at fault.

So ChrisF, I reckon I owe you an apology. More than that, in an effort to fix my bitterness, I would like to like you. I would like to be your buddy. If possible. So what do you say. Friends? Find some common ground? Forgive me?

Mark
08-22-2009, 04:05 AM
you know what's interesting.

Believe it or not, I try to be open minded, though I state my point bluntly and passionately at times, I do think i keep my mind open and seek the beams in my own eyes well before I point others' out. I try to actually listen to what others might have to say, not just write them off and argue with them.

Anyways, the interesting thing is.... when talking about bitterness and accusing several on here of just trying to find fault with buzzard because they don't like him or what he has done, I realized that I am a bit bitter myself. So what's a feller to do when that happens? I guess a feller better confess it and get over it huh? Truth is I kinda have this "problem" with Chris F. I subconciously look for his faults cause he rubs me the wrong way. He has since the homeschooling debate-- I didn't like the way he represented us homeschoolers, in fact i was ashamed to be one of the homeschoolers on here. Then the woman as a pastor debate flared up and I totally disagreed with everything he said and how he said it. And then the insurance thing was discussed and it made it personal, so I have seriously wanted to tear into him since then. But you know what. That makes me way at fault.

So ChrisF, I reckon I owe you an apology. More than that, in an effort to fix my bitterness, I would like to like you. I would like to be your buddy. If possible. So what do you say. Friends? Find some common ground? Forgive me?
It takes a big man to admit he's wrong. Good thing Im not a big man. Haha just joking.

MattHughesRocks
08-22-2009, 04:07 AM
So much drama in here.No wonder I rarely come in :laugh:

Chuck
08-22-2009, 04:27 AM
It takes a big man to admit he's wrong. Good thing Im not a big man. Haha just joking.

Bro we've heard the stories recently and seen the pictures... I think "big man" is a fair description... :tongue0011:

NateR
08-22-2009, 04:49 AM
Be happy to Mark. I used the word feelings because I feel in mixed company it is more appropriate then the vulgar expression we typically use. So the word feelings in a stronger since if you know what I mean. Jesus said to look at a women with lust. Any intimate feelings outside of marriage is sin weather we accept that or not. Jesus says so and the verse Crisco used is another great example. Paul spoke about our battle with the flesh and how we must crucify it. Platonic feelings are not at all what I am referring to. If someone has a book chapter and verse that says intimate feelings outside of marriage are okay I'd be happy yo check them out.


Matthew 5:28 Mark is where JESUS made this statement and when you look at it in context it become even more obvious.

I think "intimate feelings" might not even be a strong enough word to describe what Jesus was talking about. Jesus was specifically referring to lustful thoughts of a purely sexual nature. Intimacy is not always synonymous with sex.

Neezar
08-22-2009, 05:06 AM
You have been assuming I don't know what happened. Wow, just wow.



I'm sure you couldn't resist proving me wrong if you actually knew anything about it. :)

Neezar
08-22-2009, 05:09 AM
Oh well, back to God vs science.

Guys. Another name for Science if practised and taught properly is "The Glorification of GOD in The Act of Creation and Universal Laws of Nature"

It wont tell you HOW GOD did it, but it can come close to telling you WHAT GOD did. Its a Form of Revelation, but it applies only to the Natural and Created Temporal Realm.

Dave, I couldn't find that anywhere. Did you make that crap up? :angry:




:laugh:

Mark
08-22-2009, 05:13 AM
I'm sure you couldn't resist proving me wrong if you actually knew anything about it. :)
I like proving you wrong.

Neezar
08-22-2009, 05:17 AM
I like proving you wrong.


"Well if you are going to dream, dream big", I always say.






:laugh:

Mark
08-22-2009, 05:20 AM
[QUOTE=Neezar]"Well if you are going to dream, dream big", I always say.
You can say that again.

Neezar
08-22-2009, 05:22 AM
You can say that again.


"Well if you are going to dream, dream big", I always say.






:unsure-1:

Mark
08-22-2009, 05:33 AM
[QUOTE=Neezar]"Well if you are going to dream, dream big", I always say.

hahaha I knew it

Tyburn
08-22-2009, 12:30 PM
It takes a big man to admit he's wrong. Good thing Im not a big man. Haha just joking.
:laugh: me neither :laugh:

Tyburn
08-22-2009, 12:40 PM
You have been assuming I don't know what happened. Wow, just wow.

And yes, christians are at fault sometimes , when we don't act like christians, and yes there were alot of christians that don't act like christians. If a teenager and a toddler get in a fight, there's not many reasons a teen is justified in fighting with a toddler. If you came upon that scene, who do you think is at fault. Whether or not the toddler started it, the teen has a certain maturity to maintain. Even Christ managed to treat satan civilly when being tempted. Like I said we might be the only Christ some people see.


I had no idea that we christians could just decide to not evangelize. That's kinda our job, more importantly it's our privelige. Most converts don't exactly try to get converted. Who are we to say buzzard might not get converted. Whether he is being an antagonist or not doesn't mean jack squat. What all happened in the past gives NO reason to harbor bitterness and give up on that soul. Don't forgive him but don't expect forgiveness. And don't expect Buzzard to know about forgiveness when professing christians can't even display it. Bitterness is an ugly thing. It's also an obvious thing, when someone who's "not a regular" as tyburn asserted of me, (though i have been here everyday for the last three years,), it's obvious when buzzard's remarks are overanalyzed just to find something to get at him, versus treating him with love. We're told to love our enemies aren't we, not try to verbally beat him up and teach him a lesson.

To take the evangelism out of the christianity section is like taking the mma out of this--matt hughes-- website. Taking the evangelism out of being a christian makes it nothing but a social club. No different than elks or moose lodge.
Listen VERY Carefully. This section of the Forum was set up FOR CHRISTIANS TO HELP CHRISTIANS. Its primary purpose is NOT a discussion on whether GOD exists or not. If you've been around as long as you claim (and by regular I actually meant interacting and posting, not just lurking) you would know this was the stance we have ALWAYS taken.

You also seem to struggle with reading. Because I made it perfectly clear that the whole site was Christian, and if you want to have your little evangelistic Discussions that you can do so in the website. but THIS section is about helping each other as Christians on a journey, its not in essence a free for all, or a place where we need to proove anything about Christianity at all.

You really should know this if youve been paying attention...and you really should be supporting us, rather then dividing us on the issues. If you are serious, I expect to see you post some evangelistic questions as threads in the woodshed. :ninja: We are not telling you to disregard the Great Commission, we are telling you that this section is not for that purpose. Also, we have had interaction with Buzzard before, do not presume that he has innocently strolled onto this section to innocently ask if GOD exists or not. Thats not true. He only ever seems to contribute to the contriversial threads in this section or in the politics section mainly. We are Christians, but we are not all pacifists, some of us dont particularly want to entertain the person whose role appears to be to stir up trouble and upset people.

Tyburn
08-22-2009, 12:45 PM
I think "intimate feelings" might not even be a strong enough word to describe what Jesus was talking about. Jesus was specifically referring to lustful thoughts of a purely sexual nature. Intimacy is not always synonymous with sex.
Exactly.

Pastor Chris, when questioned actually changes his story. Now its not any feelings, its feelings of an explicit sexual nature, which as I pointed out to him before was fantasy in the mind. Or of course a physical reaction within the body (which apparently he couldnt say because he thought it too crude or something) Meanwhile, I'm left, by yet another member of the Church to feel my very existance is an abomination.

Why it took Mark Hughes to get him to clarify a point he's been arguing AGAINST with me over several pages, I dont know. :angry:

Tyburn
08-22-2009, 12:48 PM
Oh well, back to God vs science.



Dave, I couldn't find that anywhere. Did you make that crap up? :angry:




:laugh:
:biggrin-1: Why, Yes, Yes I did. Sounded good didnt it :D


:laugh:

Tyburn
08-22-2009, 12:50 PM
[QUOTE=Neezar]"Well if you are going to dream, dream big", I always say.
You can say that again.
:unsure: we still havent got quoting quite right yet, have we :laugh:

adamt
08-22-2009, 03:13 PM
Listen VERY Carefully. This section of the Forum was set up FOR CHRISTIANS TO HELP CHRISTIANS. Its primary purpose is NOT a discussion on whether GOD exists or not. If you've been around as long as you claim (and by regular I actually meant interacting and posting, not just lurking) you would know this was the stance we have ALWAYS taken.

You also seem to struggle with reading. Because I made it perfectly clear that the whole site was Christian, and if you want to have your little evangelistic Discussions that you can do so in the website. but THIS section is about helping each other as Christians on a journey, its not in essence a free for all, or a place where we need to proove anything about Christianity at all.

You really should know this if youve been paying attention...and you really should be supporting us, rather then dividing us on the issues. If you are serious, I expect to see you post some evangelistic questions as threads in the woodshed. :ninja: We are not telling you to disregard the Great Commission, we are telling you that this section is not for that purpose. Also, we have had interaction with Buzzard before, do not presume that he has innocently strolled onto this section to innocently ask if GOD exists or not. Thats not true. He only ever seems to contribute to the contriversial threads in this section or in the politics section mainly. We are Christians, but we are not all pacifists, some of us dont particularly want to entertain the person whose role appears to be to stir up trouble and upset people.

Wow, you couldn't have written a post that supported my points any better. You prove your arrogance with your unnecessary sarcasm and condescending remarks aimed to agitate me. Just cause you don't "want to entertain the person whose role appears to be to stir up trouble and upset people" doesn't mean you should let him go to hell, and it doesn't give you the right to disobey Christ and not love Him. You're displaying your own bitterness there. And the fact still stands, we are christians, if you are a true christian there is no seperating evangelism from any part of your life.

For all i know buzzard is an agnostic apostate and needs to be loved not hated.


I know you'd love to hide your christianity in a woodshed until it suits you, but i choose not to do that.

adamt
08-22-2009, 03:18 PM
you know what, why don't you just ban buzzard so he doesn't disturb your happy little clique. Then you can ban me because i don't trip over myself to flatter you. Then you'll have the perfect forums, right?

That reminds me of the homeless guy laying in front of a church and every single one of the members walked by him one sunday morning without stopping to say a word, then when the service started the homeless guy walked to the front of the church and they saw it was their pastor. Needless to say what the sermon was about..... loving your neighbor. Buzzard is the guy you were told to love, not your fellow pharisees and saducees(aka religious and learned people)

NateR
08-22-2009, 05:44 PM
you know what, why don't you just ban buzzard so he doesn't disturb your happy little clique. Then you can ban me because i don't trip over myself to flatter you. Then you'll have the perfect forums, right?

That reminds me of the homeless guy laying in front of a church and every single one of the members walked by him one sunday morning without stopping to say a word, then when the service started the homeless guy walked to the front of the church and they saw it was their pastor. Needless to say what the sermon was about..... loving your neighbor. Buzzard is the guy you were told to love, not your fellow pharisees and saducees(aka religious and learned people)

Now you are just getting emotional and losing your capability for logical thought. I have no interest in banning Buzzard, he hasn't done anything even remotely close to deserving that. Telling him that the Christianity section is not the place for him to be bashing Christianity is about moderating this website.

It has nothing to do with us being modern day Pharisees (which, if you hadn't just dropped into the middle of the conversation and start jumping to conclusions, you would know). In the same way that I would tell a forum member that the UFC section is not the place to discuss the last Affliction fight, I'm going to tell an Atheist that the Christianity section is not the place to be espousing Atheism, Agnosticism or just ridiculing Christianity.

I never told Buzzard that he wasn't allowed to post here. I just told him that that, if he did decide to participate in one of the discussions in the Christianity section, then he couldn't claim that we were forcing our beliefs on him because he can come and go of his own free will.

I'm not going to hide my convictions from Buzzard, because that would be allowing him to force his non-belief on me.

Chuck
08-22-2009, 06:43 PM
Now you are just getting emotional and losing your capability for logical thought. I have no interest in banning Buzzard, he hasn't done anything even remotely close to deserving that. Telling him that the Christianity section is not the place for him to be bashing Christianity is about moderating this website.

It has nothing to do with us being modern day Pharisees (which, if you hadn't just dropped into the middle of the conversation and start jumping to conclusions, you would know). In the same way that I would tell a forum member that the UFC section is not the place to discuss the last Affliction fight, I'm going to tell an Atheist that the Christianity section is not the place to be espousing Atheism, Agnosticism or just ridiculing Christianity.

I never told Buzzard that he wasn't allowed to post here. I just told him that that, if he did decide to participate in one of the discussions in the Christianity section, then he couldn't claim that we were forcing our beliefs on him because he can come and go of his own free will.

I'm not going to hide my convictions from Buzzard, because that would be allowing him to force his non-belief on me.

Nicely explained.

adamt
08-22-2009, 06:53 PM
Now you are just getting emotional and losing your capability for logical thought. I have no interest in banning Buzzard, he hasn't done anything even remotely close to deserving that. Telling him that the Christianity section is not the place for him to be bashing Christianity is about moderating this website.

It has nothing to do with us being modern day Pharisees (which, if you hadn't just dropped into the middle of the conversation and start jumping to conclusions, you would know). In the same way that I would tell a forum member that the UFC section is not the place to discuss the last Affliction fight, I'm going to tell an Atheist that the Christianity section is not the place to be espousing Atheism, Agnosticism or just ridiculing Christianity.

I never told Buzzard that he wasn't allowed to post here. I just told him that that, if he did decide to participate in one of the discussions in the Christianity section, then he couldn't claim that we were forcing our beliefs on him because he can come and go of his own free will.

I'm not going to hide my convictions from Buzzard, because that would be allowing him to force his non-belief on me.


It was a sarcastic tongue in cheek rhetorical, hypothetical remark. It was neither illogical nor emotional. And quite honestly IF I were emotional it wouldn't necessarily mean I was incapable of thinking logically.


My post was meant for tyburn really. I don't think you are quite as cliquish as he is. Or arrogant for that matter. I get the feeling from tyburn that he would be happy if only christians that he approved of were here. (maybe tyburn could develop a doctrinal statement of faith we all have to adhere to, so we know if we are really christian enugh for the forums)

I have always felt you(NateR) have done an excellent job moderating and I can disagree with you without necessarily getting on your "black list", which is another reason why my comment was tongue in cheek. I know you don't run this place with a lopsided iron fist. I have seen how much people can get away with. You're very merciful.

And telling me I dropped in, in the middle of the conversation, would be equivalent to me telling you, you butted into tyburn's and my conversation- since i was replying to tyburn. I don't feel that way, but if this is a registered public forum, i don't think you can have a problem with people "popping in" in the middle of a conversation. Everything that has been said is recorded so anyone can catch up and start discussing at any time. Not to mention the fact that i had kept up with everything from the beginning of the conversation. I just didn't have anything to say until recently, but that didn't mean I just dropped in in the middle of it.

Jonlion
08-22-2009, 07:45 PM
I don't need accountability for something I don't believe in. I just found his statement to be quite odd. If it works for you, then by all means keep up with it and enjoy your walk.

Peace.
http://www.amazon.com/Case-Christ-Journalists-Personal-Investigation/dp/0310209307

I would recommend you read this book Buzzard, i'd think you would enjoy it.

Although, blessed is he whom has faith without proofs but this may help you in your quest.

Jonlion
08-22-2009, 08:08 PM
Wow, you couldn't have written a post that supported my points any better. You prove your arrogance with your unnecessary sarcasm and condescending remarks aimed to agitate me. Just cause you don't "want to entertain the person whose role appears to be to stir up trouble and upset people" doesn't mean you should let him go to hell, and it doesn't give you the right to disobey Christ and not love Him. You're displaying your own bitterness there. And the fact still stands, we are christians, if you are a true christian there is no seperating evangelism from any part of your life.

For all i know buzzard is an agnostic apostate and needs to be loved not hated.


I know you'd love to hide your christianity in a woodshed until it suits you, but i choose not to do that.


I'm not sure Evangelism is every person's calling. I'm not 100% but the Bible doesn't spend too much time on insisting that we spread the word and make converts.

So far for me, it is to love christ and by loving Jesus, and surrendering to him in that free myself from unhappiness and temptations that might haunt me. My hope then being that people notice my godly ways and ask questions to how i have achieved it and i would gladly tell them of the joy i have found in Jesus. Alas im still a long long way from getting there

I think if in the church community everyone plays to that Christian virtue then they stand as a beacon to those who are without it.

I think Evangelism is great and have a good friend who went to China to spread God's word, and what is happpening is amazing but i dont have that in me so intend to go about it in different ways. I will speak of god and support any person who asks for it but i feel like God made us with different roles. Point being im not sure its everyones duty to evangelise but we must love our enemy and so patience and understanding and love as Jesus showed us.

I will try and get some scripture to back me up at some point, for i know that i err on many things here.

I would say to you and Buzzard, i have been turned off by preachers and doctrines of christianity and teachings that probably were wrong and i pray that false teachers find the error of their ways.

I can only say that for me in my struggle the Bible everytime as been answering my issues, every day i debate something or hear a sermon that raises questions for me, the next passage of the bible i turn to answers it. It has been amazing for me.

However also, Matt Chandler and the other preachers at the Village in Dallas, for me talk with utter truth always using the bible to back up their words. And for anyone feeling disgruntled, turn to the bible or listen to him via Podcast.

God Bless

adamt
08-22-2009, 08:16 PM
I'm not sure Evangelism is every person's calling. I'm not 100% but the Bible doesn't spend too much time on insisting that we spread the word and make converts.

So far for me, it is to love christ and by loving Jesus, and surrendering to him in that free myself from unhappiness and temptations that might haunt me. My hope then being that people notice my godly ways and ask questions to how i have achieved it and i would gladly tell them of the joy i have found in Jesus. Alas im still a long long way from getting there

I think if in the church community everyone plays to that Christian virtue then they stand as a beacon to those who are without it.

I think Evangelism is great and have a good friend who went to China to spread God's word, and what is happpening is amazing but i dont have that in me so intend to go about it in different ways. I will speak of god and support any person who asks for it but i feel like God made us with different roles. Point being im not sure its everyones duty to evangelise but we must love our enemy and so patience and understanding and love as Jesus showed us.

I will try and get some scripture to back me up at some point, for i know that i err on many things here.

I would say to you and Buzzard, i have been turned off by preachers and doctrines of christianity and teachings that probably were wrong and i pray that false teachers find the error of their ways.

I can only say that for me in my struggle the Bible everytime as been answering my issues, every day i debate something or hear a sermon that raises questions for me, the next passage of the bible i turn to answers it. It has been amazing for me.

However also, Matt Chandler and the other preachers at the Village in Dallas, for me talk with utter truth always using the bible to back up their words. And for anyone feeling disgruntled, turn to the bible or listen to him via Podcast.

God Bless

Thats an understandable point of view.....

Neezar
08-22-2009, 08:16 PM
My post was meant for tyburn really. I don't think you are quite as cliquish as he is. Or arrogant for that matter. I get the feeling from tyburn that he would be happy if only christians that he approved of were here. (maybe tyburn could develop a doctrinal statement of faith we all have to adhere to, so we know if we are really christian enugh for the forums)



:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


Dave is one of THE MOST liberal and tolerant Christians on here. And he accepts ANY and EVERYONE only with the asking. :biggrin-1:

Which part of the forums were you actually reading in the last 3 years?

adamt
08-22-2009, 08:19 PM
Be happy to Mark. I used the word feelings because I feel in mixed company it is more appropriate then the vulgar expression we typically use. So the word feelings in a stronger since if you know what I mean. Jesus said to look at a women with lust. Any intimate feelings outside of marriage is sin weather we accept that or not. Jesus says so and the verse Crisco used is another great example. Paul spoke about our battle with the flesh and how we must crucify it. Platonic feelings are not at all what I am referring to. If someone has a book chapter and verse that says intimate feelings outside of marriage are okay I'd be happy yo check them out.


Matthew 5:28 Mark is where JESUS made this statement and when you look at it in context it become even more obvious.



yeah i thin we agree on this, i responded but didn't submit til after you clarified. I think it is just dingy definition of some terms used, because i think we mean the same thing

Mark
08-22-2009, 11:49 PM
I'm not sure Evangelism is every person's calling. I'm not 100% but the Bible doesn't spend too much time on insisting that we spread the word and make converts.

MARK 16:15-16 "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."
As you grow in your relationship with christ, he will give you both the opportunities and the inner strength to tell his message. Thats what it says in my Bible. Mark

Buzzard
08-22-2009, 11:50 PM
Also, we have had interaction with Buzzard before, do not presume that he has innocently strolled onto this section to innocently ask if GOD exists or not. Thats not true. He only ever seems to contribute to the contriversial threads in this section or in the politics section mainly. We are Christians, but we are not all pacifists, some of us dont particularly want to entertain the person whose role appears to be to stir up trouble and upset people.

Again Tyburn, your focus on me is a little disturbing. You like to bring my name up out of the blue and even went so far as to post a video on youtube in regard to me. If you can't handle my positions on controversial subjects, stay out of them. Your assumptions that I just want to stir up trouble is wrong to say the least.

How have I, if you don't mind explaining, been stirring up trouble? Is it because I won't let you talk down to me without a rebuttal?

As an ambassador to your religion, you have a long way to go and could learn a lot from others here on this forum. I won't name names of those whose opinions and views I hold in high regard, but believe me, yours isn't one of them. Your accusations about my motives are quite insulting; I've learned that that is just your way and I'm okay with it.

In order to keep out of this topic in this forum, I started a new topic with the same name a week or so ago in the woodshed forum with a question for Chris F. It was promptly deleted by a mod.

My question which got my name brought up again as a troublemaker was then re-asked to Chris F by Mark, and Chris clarified his point. Once it was clarified by Chris F, my point became moot.

Then my motives were again questioned in a great civil conversation I was having with adamt, and Tyburn again thinks that he is a mind reader and knows what my intentions are. Again, he is wrong.

I have respect for the mods, with one exception. We all know who that would be so I shall refrain from naming names once again.

http://www.amazon.com/Case-Christ-Journalists-Personal-Investigation/dp/0310209307

I would recommend you read this book Buzzard, i'd think you would enjoy it.

Although, blessed is he whom has faith without proofs but this may help you in your quest.

Thanks for the thought Jonlion. I just may see if I can acquire that and give it a read.

For the record, I have no desire to try to convert anyone to agnosticism nor ridicule them for their beliefs. While I may have questions about the whys and such, I don't wish to ask them for fear of offending anyone. I do sometimes wish to chime in when other religions are being ridiculed but I have tried to keep my trap shut on those occasions.

Have a wonderful weekend all.

Vizion
08-23-2009, 12:39 AM
I'm not sure Evangelism is every person's calling. I'm not 100% but the Bible doesn't spend too much time on insisting that we spread the word and make converts. Evangelism is EVERY Christian's calling, do not be decieved to believe otherwise. Like Mark said, that's what's in the Bible, go THERE first, not to your own human understanding which will always lead you astray.

Chris F
08-23-2009, 12:58 AM
you know what's interesting.

Believe it or not, I try to be open minded, though I state my point bluntly and passionately at times, I do think i keep my mind open and seek the beams in my own eyes well before I point others' out. I try to actually listen to what others might have to say, not just write them off and argue with them.

Anyways, the interesting thing is.... when talking about bitterness and accusing several on here of just trying to find fault with buzzard because they don't like him or what he has done, I realized that I am a bit bitter myself. So what's a feller to do when that happens? I guess a feller better confess it and get over it huh? Truth is I kinda have this "problem" with Chris F. I subconciously look for his faults cause he rubs me the wrong way. He has since the homeschooling debate-- I didn't like the way he represented us homeschoolers, in fact i was ashamed to be one of the homeschoolers on here. Then the woman as a pastor debate flared up and I totally disagreed with everything he said and how he said it. And then the insurance thing was discussed and it made it personal, so I have seriously wanted to tear into him since then. But you know what. That makes me way at fault.

So ChrisF, I reckon I owe you an apology. More than that, in an effort to fix my bitterness, I would like to like you. I would like to be your buddy. If possible. So what do you say. Friends? Find some common ground? Forgive me?

That alright adamt. I rub A LOT!!!! of people the wrong way. The truth is never popular. I have thick skin so I do not mind the harsh rhetoric. I do not take anything personal in the least. The topics you mentioned are very controversial in nature and have caused separation in the body of Christ for a very long time. I doubt anything we say on here will change that. Most on here are reformed in their beliefs so I naturally expect everyone to disagree wiht me on topics of faith. Now and again someone will surprise me and agree but it is rare. I am not a bad guy just a brutally honest one who take the bible very seriously. I have an open mind as long as book chapter and verse are cited. But most of the time people cite their opinions or the church creeds. Those are meaningless. No one on here has all the answers so we should look at this site as a place where iron can sharpen iron. I do not think you did anything wrong to need to apologize but if you felt like you need to I accept and look forward to more discussion with you in this section

Chris F
08-23-2009, 01:00 AM
I think "intimate feelings" might not even be a strong enough word to describe what Jesus was talking about. Jesus was specifically referring to lustful thoughts of a purely sexual nature. Intimacy is not always synonymous with sex.

it is in biblical terms. Do a word study on this verse and you will see why I say that.

Chris F
08-23-2009, 01:05 AM
Exactly.

Pastor Chris, when questioned actually changes his story. Now its not any feelings, its feelings of an explicit sexual nature, which as I pointed out to him before was fantasy in the mind. Or of course a physical reaction within the body (which apparently he couldnt say because he thought it too crude or something) Meanwhile, I'm left, by yet another member of the Church to feel my very existance is an abomination.

Why it took Mark Hughes to get him to clarify a point he's been arguing AGAINST with me over several pages, I dont know. :angry:

Not so Dave I said the same thing both time. You are mixing semantics and pushing buttons that have no need to be pushed. LUST and Intimate (sexual) feelings are the same. The bible is not gray it is black and white and sometimes red. The problem you have Dave is that you see the bible with rose colored glasses that fit your preconceived dogmas, and personal beliefs and then read it to fit those beliefs. What I said is what I said and since oyu do not live in my head you have no place by which to say what I did or did not mean.

Chris F
08-23-2009, 01:09 AM
Again Tyburn, your focus on me is a little disturbing. You like to bring my name up out of the blue and even went so far as to post a video on youtube in regard to me. If you can't handle my positions on controversial subjects, stay out of them. Your assumptions that I just want to stir up trouble is wrong to say the least.

How have I, if you don't mind explaining, been stirring up trouble? Is it because I won't let you talk down to me without a rebuttal?

As an ambassador to your religion, you have a long way to go and could learn a lot from others here on this forum. I won't name names of those whose opinions and views I hold in high regard, but believe me, yours isn't one of them. Your accusations about my motives are quite insulting; I've learned that that is just your way and I'm okay with it.

In order to keep out of this topic in this forum, I started a new topic with the same name a week or so ago in the woodshed forum with a question for Chris F. It was promptly deleted by a mod.

My question which got my name brought up again as a troublemaker was then re-asked to Chris F by Mark, and Chris clarified his point. Once it was clarified by Chris F, my point became moot.

Then my motives were again questioned in a great civil conversation I was having with adamt, and Tyburn again thinks that he is a mind reader and knows what my intentions are. Again, he is wrong.

I have respect for the mods, with one exception. We all know who that would be so I shall refrain from naming names once again.



Thanks for the thought Jonlion. I just may see if I can acquire that and give it a read.

For the record, I have no desire to try to convert anyone to agnosticism nor ridicule them for their beliefs. While I may have questions about the whys and such, I don't wish to ask them for fear of offending anyone. I do sometimes wish to chime in when other religions are being ridiculed but I have tried to keep my trap shut on those occasions.

Have a wonderful weekend all.

Buzzard if you need to ask me anything just PM and I will be happy to answer

Neezar
08-23-2009, 05:29 AM
Buzzard if you need to ask me anything just PM and I will be happy to answer

Yeah! Me too, Buzz! Just pm me. :biggrin-1:

Buzzard
08-23-2009, 07:10 AM
Thank you Chris F and Neezar for your kind offers.

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 08:11 AM
For all i know buzzard is an agnostic apostate and needs to be loved not hated.


I know you'd love to hide your christianity in a woodshed until it suits you, but i choose not to do that.

Yes, quite...for all you know

:laugh: I was refering to the OTHER Section called "The Woodshed"

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 08:14 AM
It was a sarcastic tongue in cheek rhetorical, hypothetical remark. It was neither illogical nor emotional. And quite honestly IF I were emotional it wouldn't necessarily mean I was incapable of thinking logically.


My post was meant for tyburn really. I don't think you are quite as cliquish as he is. Or arrogant for that matter. I get the feeling from tyburn that he would be happy if only christians that he approved of were here. (maybe tyburn could develop a doctrinal statement of faith we all have to adhere to, so we know if we are really christian enugh for the forums)

I have always felt you(NateR) have done an excellent job moderating and I can disagree with you without necessarily getting on your "black list", which is another reason why my comment was tongue in cheek. I know you don't run this place with a lopsided iron fist. I have seen how much people can get away with. You're very merciful.

And telling me I dropped in, in the middle of the conversation, would be equivalent to me telling you, you butted into tyburn's and my conversation- since i was replying to tyburn. I don't feel that way, but if this is a registered public forum, i don't think you can have a problem with people "popping in" in the middle of a conversation. Everything that has been said is recorded so anyone can catch up and start discussing at any time. Not to mention the fact that i had kept up with everything from the beginning of the conversation. I just didn't have anything to say until recently, but that didn't mean I just dropped in in the middle of it.

If you dont like how we run things here, you dont have to stay. Noone is forcing you to post in the midst of what you see as an unchristian clique. But if you want to stay, please be kind enough to follow the rules that the moderators enforce.

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 08:15 AM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


Dave is one of THE MOST liberal and tolerant Christians on here. And he accepts ANY and EVERYONE only with the asking. :biggrin-1:

Which part of the forums were you actually reading in the last 3 years?
:ashamed: Denise, are you implying that im easy :laugh:

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 08:23 AM
MARK 16:15-16 "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."
As you grow in your relationship with christ, he will give you both the opportunities and the inner strength to tell his message. Thats what it says in my Bible. Mark
Some people have a specific tallent for Evangalism, they are called to Evangelise. Not everyone is called to Evangelise. A calling is about a vocation, that goes beyond the normal ability.

For example, when I was with Kononia, we would do outreach projects on University Campus every week. I was rubbish at talking to people. So I made the coffee instead because we ran a little coffee stall. Now, that in a way was evangelism because I was part of the groups outreach, but I was not gifted with the actual ability to talk to the people, whereas some in our group were.

Being prepared to tell people about Christ, and being bent on converting people are different things. I dont go out of my way to forever try and make people convert. However, when at work, someone spots the tattoo on my arm, and asks me about it. I will spend a bit of time explaining to them, perhaps it plants seeds, but its opportunistic, I dont go looking for a heathen to convert...but I will talk to one that crosses my path. I think the former is Evangelism, and the latter is just doing our bit in the Great Commission...does that make sense?

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 08:34 AM
1) Again Tyburn, your focus on me is a little disturbing. You like to bring my name up out of the blue and even went so far as to post a video on youtube in regard to me. If you can't handle my positions on controversial subjects, stay out of them. Your assumptions that I just want to stir up trouble is wrong to say the least.

How have I, if you don't mind explaining, been stirring up trouble? Is it because I won't let you talk down to me without a rebuttal?

2) As an ambassador to your religion, you have a long way to go and could learn a lot from others here on this forum. I won't name names of those whose opinions and views I hold in high regard, but believe me, yours isn't one of them. Your accusations about my motives are quite insulting; I've learned that that is just your way and I'm okay with it.

3) In order to keep out of this topic in this forum, I started a new topic with the same name a week or so ago in the woodshed forum with a question for Chris F. It was promptly deleted by a mod.

4) My question which got my name brought up again as a troublemaker was then re-asked to Chris F by Mark, and Chris clarified his point. Once it was clarified by Chris F, my point became moot.

Then my motives were again questioned in a great civil conversation I was having with adamt, and Tyburn again thinks that he is a mind reader and knows what my intentions are. Again, he is wrong.

I have respect for the mods, with one exception. We all know who that would be so I shall refrain from naming names once again.

.
1) well we are discussing you in a manner of speaking, so I'm naturally going to use your name.

2) I am not an ambassidor of any "religion" Christianity has nothing to do with "religion" infact, its cross religions as its got as much to do with Judaism as it does Christ. Its about a knowledge of GOD and His People, coupled with the revlation of Christ, and appears as the opportuinity of a personal relationship with your creator.

3) Well I didnt delete it, but it very much depends on how the question was asked. If you used something inflamitory or rude, or if you phrased your question in an inappropriate manner, then I can understand why it will be deleted.

4) you seem to think that I care what your views about me are. Why would it bother me if you either loved or hated me?? Your not important enough to me, for me to care what your personal opinions are, even though I assume your mentioning them to upset me in some way. The bit that I have emboldened, shows exactly what your like on this forum. You dont need to name names to make your point...its exactly what your doing in this whole forum in regards to stiring up trouble and simply here for a debate and not to learn

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 09:02 AM
Not so Dave I said the same thing both time. You are mixing semantics and pushing buttons that have no need to be pushed. LUST and Intimate (sexual) feelings are the same. The bible is not gray it is black and white and sometimes red. The problem you have Dave is that you see the bible with rose colored glasses that fit your preconceived dogmas, and personal beliefs and then read it to fit those beliefs. What I said is what I said and since oyu do not live in my head you have no place by which to say what I did or did not mean.
Really? :huh:

lets proove it then :mellow:

It began when Pastor Chris made the distinction between Practise and Feelings, condemning the feelings. Please note Pastor Chris is saying that the urges for homosexuality are wrong and that the bible supports the urges be stopped. He is not mentioning Practise. Just the feelings, which are sinful according to him.

The HGP came out and said there is NO genetic reasons for homosxeual urges.... So science proved this no any Christian group. Homosexuality is a personal choice just like favorite color, food preference, etc. What is proves is the bible is correct that it is a choice that can be stopped by the individual and not some sort of uncontrollable urge that God created them with and that they cannot stop being gay.

Dave replies pointing out that the Bible mentions nothing about the feelings and urges of Homosexuality, just the practise. Thus asserting that the urges and feelings themselves are not mentioned as sin


In terms of Scripture, you cant even get that right. SHOCKING from a Priest! The Bible says that the ability to practise homosexual acts is a choice. It remains silent on the feelings and urges behind that. Christ never even mentions it.

Pastor Chris says its just an excuse to be able to sin
1- That is an excuse.

2- As for excusing urges for sin that is plain ridiculous Dave. The sin nature is still subject to the blood of Christ.

So Dave Clarifies his point even further

whom said anything about justification or excusing?? I Affirmed that Scripturally the PRACTISE of any kind of sodomy is wrong. As for having the FEELINGS of sodomy...thats not condemned, anymore then the FEELING of Lust.

Having the feeling is not a sin, its just a product of a fallen world. The sin is in the practise. You feel lust, thats fine, just dont act on it.

2) Homosexual practise was forbidden in scripture. having the feelings is neither praised not condemned. Its not mentioned.

Pastor Chris says feelings in the mind are the same as action (the brackets are his)

Bible and Jesus, says if you were to look at a women with lust (feelings) you have committed adultery already in your heart (feelings) Checkmate sir.!

Dave explains why feelings and fantasy are different

That is about mind fantasy. Its not about streight forward feelings.

If you have the feelings but everytime they come up you dont dwell on them, or fantasize about it, but instead take it to GOD...trust me, its not a sin.

One can train ones mind to do it naturally.

Ben makes clarity on feelings and temptation


Now for why I think I disagree with you: you seem to be saying that when you get lustful feelings, they're not sinful because you don't go so far as to fantasize. I think this is a flaw in your understanding. Just like fantasizing is a sin even though it's not physical sex, so lusting is a sin even though it's not fantasizing. Just because it's a lesser form of sin doesn't prevent it from being a sin.

Now, the reason I'm not sure if I disagree all hinges on my interpretation of what you mean by "feelings". If you are using "feelings" to mean "temptations" (as opposed to "lusts", as I have understood you to mean), then I concur with you: if you run to God everytime you begin to be tempted, then you are avoiding sin.

So according to Pastor Chris you cant have the feelings without sin, the urges themselves can be changed by choice. According to Ben and Dave if you take the feelings right to GOD as soon as they emerge then no sin is committed...this of course means that the temptation cant be a choice, just the action in mind and body...something Dave has been trying to make a duel distinction to for the last few pages, and one Pastor Chris has said is simply an excuse.

Are you ready for the U-turn :huh:

Jesus was very clear and other areas of scripture does as well. Anything placed ahead of God is sin, this includes feelings weather acted on or not. A heterosexual who has feelings for one they are not married to is sinning even if they do not act on it. That is truth not my interpretation.

Mark Hughes asks for Clarity

Chris, could you elaborate on this? And tell us the Bible verse that came from?

...and suddenly Pastor Chris says that feelings are not sins automatically...which has been his argument all along. he's falling for what in his words are simply an "excuse" to sin


I used the word feelings because I feel in mixed company it is more appropriate then the vulgar expression we typically use. So the word feelings in a stronger since if you know what I mean. Jesus said to look at a women with lust. Any intimate feelings outside of marriage is sin weather we accept that or not

So How are Homosexual Urges automatically sin? because when I used the argument in bold, that he uses in his clarity, he told me it was an excuse.

adamt
08-23-2009, 02:15 PM
well, tyburn, at least your replies left it where we could let bygones be bygones and not keep up the arguing, I'll let you have the last word as far as I am concerned, unless you count this as a word, which i am not saying anything of substance so i don't count this. And of course unless you say something else poignant for me to respond to.

Otherwise I will just say, I feel sorry for you sometimes....... You are posting on a whole different half of the world, you get on here and do your thing when we're all sleeping. And we're on here yapping when you're sleeping. How much difference is there between your time and central time in america?

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 04:06 PM
Otherwise I will just say, I feel sorry for you sometimes....... You are posting on a whole different half of the world, you get on here and do your thing when we're all sleeping. And we're on here yapping when you're sleeping. How much difference is there between your time and central time in america?
Five Hours Atlantic Coast

6.5 hours Mid West

Eight Hours Pacific Coast

However, you will have probably noted that over a weekend I shunt my hours to compensate. So on my days off I actually move my self by about 6 hours. I starts when I need to wake up at 5am for my Saturday Early. When I come home at 3pm, I sleep until 9pm...so I BEGIN a 6 hour posting Stint at 9pm in the evening, which means I close about 3am. its very similar the next night, i'm always up on here around the 3am marker. Then I revert back

The Laugh of it is, a lot of Americans on this forum post at strange times for their timezone also. You have a lot of late night posters, which are still online and havent gone to bed, when I wake up in the morning. I am an early riser, they are night owls, and this 5-8 hour gap is bridged.

My ability to regularly shift and not upset my internal clock is fanstastic, it means when I go to the United States so long as I know the time when I get there, I just slott right into a completely different timezone...often to me its no more tiresome then what I would do when not at work anyway...so there is no such thing as jetlag in that respect for me.

Of course it also depends which part of the Mid West you are in. There are two timezones in Central America (I mean in the Centre of continental America, NOT Central America as in Meso-America LOL (probably more if you account for possible local variations in mountain ranges and the likes))

Roughly speaking New York in the North to Florida in the south is 5 hours behind,

West from Illinois in the north to Alabama in the south is 6 hours behind

Anything in a diagonal north West from Texas (but not including Her) in the south to Washington State (but not including Her either) is 7 hours

and the West Coastal States are Eight hours with the exception of Arizona...Arizona actually jumps between the Pacific and the Diagonal Texas/Washington State Timezone, depending on the seasons...now just to make it EVEN more confusing...both England AND the United States have Daylight Savings, that change the times by up to an hour twice a year...and NO they dont start and end at the same time!

The other Exceptions include The State thats joined to Canada on the Arctic Circle...Goodness only knows what timezone they think they are living in...and Hawaii, which is actually the polar opposite to Greenwich Mean Time, which is what I live in...so they are almost exactly 12 hours ahead/behind, depending on which side of the timezone line you live on :laugh:

NateR
08-23-2009, 04:34 PM
it is in biblical terms. Do a word study on this verse and you will see why I say that.

I've read the verse and it's clear that Christ is talking about lust, not intimacy.

Now if you are only referring to sexual intimacy, then I would agree with you. The Jews understood the moral laws of the Torah to refer to any form of erotic touching, not just sexual intercourse. My point is that intimacy is not always sexual. There is intimacy that exists between parents and their children. Are you trying to claim that a parent is sinning when they show love to their child?

I agree with the verse as it is written, I just think your personal interpretation is a little too extreme.

Jonlion
08-23-2009, 05:13 PM
MARK 16:15-16 "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."
As you grow in your relationship with christ, he will give you both the opportunities and the inner strength to tell his message. Thats what it says in my Bible. Mark


I'm not saying it isnt there, I'm just saying that the Bible does not spend as much time on evangelising than it does on other subjects.

Its an important aspect indeed but i feel that some people get too caught up in Evangelising than focusing on more important and relevant matters.

I shall try and dig further in when i have some more time to research my point!

Jonlion
08-23-2009, 05:15 PM
Some people have a specific tallent for Evangalism, they are called to Evangelise. Not everyone is called to Evangelise. A calling is about a vocation, that goes beyond the normal ability.

For example, when I was with Kononia, we would do outreach projects on University Campus every week. I was rubbish at talking to people. So I made the coffee instead because we ran a little coffee stall. Now, that in a way was evangelism because I was part of the groups outreach, but I was not gifted with the actual ability to talk to the people, whereas some in our group were.

Being prepared to tell people about Christ, and being bent on converting people are different things. I dont go out of my way to forever try and make people convert. However, when at work, someone spots the tattoo on my arm, and asks me about it. I will spend a bit of time explaining to them, perhaps it plants seeds, but its opportunistic, I dont go looking for a heathen to convert...but I will talk to one that crosses my path. I think the former is Evangelism, and the latter is just doing our bit in the Great Commission...does that make sense?

Thank you Dave, sometimes you are much better at explaining things than I!

Buzzard
08-23-2009, 06:41 PM
1) well we are discussing you in a manner of speaking, so I'm naturally going to use your name.

2) I am not an ambassidor of any "religion" Christianity has nothing to do with "religion" infact, its cross religions as its got as much to do with Judaism as it does Christ. Its about a knowledge of GOD and His People, coupled with the revlation of Christ, and appears as the opportuinity of a personal relationship with your creator.

3) Well I didnt delete it, but it very much depends on how the question was asked. If you used something inflamitory or rude, or if you phrased your question in an inappropriate manner, then I can understand why it will be deleted.

4) you seem to think that I care what your views about me are. Why would it bother me if you either loved or hated me?? Your not important enough to me, for me to care what your personal opinions are, even though I assume your mentioning them to upset me in some way. The bit that I have emboldened, shows exactly what your like on this forum. You dont need to name names to make your point...its exactly what your doing in this whole forum in regards to stiring up trouble and simply here for a debate and not to learn

2. I guess you don't understand what I meant. Your way of spreading the word turns me away. You could learn from many members on this forum, whether you will or not is up to you.

3. Nothing in the new thread I posted in the woodshed was inflammatory or rude. It was a simple question posed to Chris F asking "What do you want me to do" in response to his question to me. That's it.

4. You sure seemed to care enough about me to devote a youtube video about me and claim that you won an argument against me.

No Dave, I'm not stirring up trouble here. I'm exposing you once again as someone who thinks they know my motives. I didn't know that you were a psychic and practiced that frowned upon art. I learn something new everyday. Your not good at it btw.

Mark
08-23-2009, 06:48 PM
I'm not saying it isnt there, I'm just saying that the Bible does not spend as much time on evangelising than it does on other subjects.

Its an important aspect indeed but i feel that some people get too caught up in Evangelising than focusing on more important and relevant matters.

Have you ever read MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE and JOHN for starters?
What is more important? Mark

Mark
08-23-2009, 07:03 PM
I dont go out of my way to forever try and make people convert.

That tells me that you are not on fire for the lord. Are you luke-warm?
REV 3:15-16
Or is your sin keeping you from good works and good fruit. You could also read 1JOHN 3:6

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 07:45 PM
That tells me that you are not on fire for the lord. Are you luke-worm?
REV 3:15-16
Or is your sin keeping you from good works and good fruit. You could also read 1JOHN 3:6 Mark
Do you mean Luke-Warm :huh: :laugh:

No, I'm simply not much good at it. I tried when I was down in London, but I was far better supporting those who actually go out deliberatley to convert the masses. If we all did that Mark, we would all be pastors of Missionary Churches wouldnt we...and neither of us are.

I dont pass up the opportunity to talk to someone if it presents itself, neither do I hide the fact i'm a Christian. But when I talk to those people who ask me about my tattoo for example, or anything else (like why I run around with a hoody that has a Bible verse printed on it for example) I do not try and force people to believe as I do. I tell them what I know, and I leave them to make their own decision. I do not believe people have the power to convert I believe only The Spirit can Convert, and he chooses to do it through people. So if I am presented in that situation, I trust that whatever I say might be seeds that he can make grow.

I probably have the gift of administration. Its a support role that allows those with the gifts to actually be conduits for GOD as a vocational calling, the opportunity to do so. Think back to my illustration. What if The Jordan Brothers had to make the coffee ASWELL AS try and talk to the students? they would be less effective, splitting their time on coffee making, when they really should just talk and leave the coffee making to someone else. As I cant really talk like that (funny, coz I can do public speaking, and public performance in drama and music, and even profession....but when it comes to convincing others to accept Christ...I just come across like a cheap advert for the Church, tiz shameful really, but I feel my skills lie elsewhere)

As for sin. Well sin stops or hinders a great many things. It is hard to talk to others about the Christian Life when there is this VERY BIG sin lurking around my own Life. I also dont like screaming at others or smacking them down, I dont even like doing that online. You will very rarely find that I speak Truth without concern for how the person I am speaking to will receive it. I wont do what Nathan Rosario does, I cant, because even if its true, its far to direct...incidently, I often am the person to talk to them AFTER a brush with direct truth...but even then...you know my skills of reconcilliation are a learned tallent...I wouldnt say they were a blessing I was given, they are a fruit I have laboured long and very hard to get.

Dont know if that answers your question or not :unsure-1:

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 07:48 PM
Thank you Dave, sometimes you are much better at explaining things than I!
:laugh: I simply use more words. Tiz a gift :laugh:

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 07:53 PM
2. I guess you don't understand what I meant. Your way of spreading the word turns me away. You could learn from many members on this forum, whether you will or not is up to you.

3. Nothing in the new thread I posted in the woodshed was inflammatory or rude. It was a simple question posed to Chris F asking "What do you want me to do" in response to his question to me. That's it.

4. You sure seemed to care enough about me to devote a youtube video about me and claim that you won an argument against me.

5) No Dave, I'm not stirring up trouble here. I'm exposing you once again as someone who thinks they know my motives. I didn't know that you were a psychic and practiced that frowned upon art. I learn something new everyday. Your not good at it btw.
2) my way of spreading the word :huh: Are you following the conversation between Mark and I?

3)well, you can either take it up in private with whichever Mod deleted it, or if you are really that bothered and really just want to cause a fuss, you go talk to Nathan Rosario. He's in command here :laugh: Not I :rolleyes:

4) I didnt "devote" a video to you. I mentioned you in passing at the end of a weekly blog. Might have been a big deal for you, but I have nearly 80 of them thus far.

5) You dont need to be a psychic to figure you out Buzzard. A bit of attention to how you opperate and some psychological knowledge, and it all becomes clear. No Crystal Ball needed.

Incidently...I read how the house of a heathen burned down recently. She put a Crystal Ball in her window on a hot day, the light through the ball (from the sun) acted like a magnifying glass, and her sofa burst into flames!

Bet she didnt see that one coming :ninja: :laugh:

NateR
08-23-2009, 08:20 PM
I'm not saying it isnt there, I'm just saying that the Bible does not spend as much time on evangelising than it does on other subjects.

Its an important aspect indeed but i feel that some people get too caught up in Evangelising than focusing on more important and relevant matters.

I shall try and dig further in when i have some more time to research my point!

What would be more important or relevant than evangelism?

Mark
08-23-2009, 09:54 PM
1. No, I'm simply not much good at it.

2. If we all did that Mark, we would all be pastors of Missionary Churches wouldnt we...and neither of us are.

3. I dont pass up the opportunity to talk to someone if it presents itself, neither do I hide the fact i'm a Christian.

1. Is that what you are going to tell god, at the pearly gates?
2. Im not talking about pastors, im talking about being an evangelical christian.
3. First it was "I dont go out of my way" and now it is "I dont pass up the opportunity" which is it? Mark

Mark
08-23-2009, 09:58 PM
I probably have the gift of administration. Its a support role that allows those with the gifts to actually be conduits for GOD as a vocational calling, the opportunity to do so.


Yes, dave i think we all have a special gift, but i think we all need to spread the word. Mark

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 11:20 PM
1. Is that what you are going to tell god, at the pearly gates?
2. Im not talking about pastors, im talking about being an evangelical christian.
3. First it was "I dont go out of my way" and now it is "I dont pass up the opportunity" which is it? Mark
1) I wont need to Tell GOD anything. I hope that my life will show that where he presented the opportunity, I allowed Him to work through me, and where none was presented, I did my best to support those who actively Did evangelise (who might not have been able to without my help, so I kinda did in a round about way.

2) I am not an Evangelical Christian. The Evangelical Low Church which you see in some Denominations like Low Anglicanism, Pentecostalism, Free-Church, Presbyterian, and the odd Methodist Church, I will admit that my emphasis lies else where.

My Theology is slightly different. The High Church dwells on GOD as King and GOD as Creator, The Low Church dwells on GOD as Saviour, and GOD as Friend, and they differ substantially (even though he is both) You DO NOT approach the King of Kings, like you Approach Jesus your best friend. Low Church tends to be informal, because they are in the company of a friend, addressing a meek and mild teacher. They come dressed in whatever they like because he accepts them as they are, and their services are loud and happy clappy, and they speak of nothing but fire and brimstone, or being slain in the Spirit. They go mad for charities, they preach on the streets, and they try and convert everyone they meet with little to no regard for where that person is. They speak Truth bluntly, they often think the power lies with them, that its about how many they can bring to Christ to earn themselves crowns and treasures in heaven.

High Church, which is towards the Catholic end of the spectrum is more ridgid. Its caked in History and remebrance of The Church as the Body of Christ, as the Communion of Saints, being those believers who are already dead but still apart of the Church. The Emphasis is on the Crucifixition, on the price paid by Christ on the Cross which is summed up in the Eucharistic Feast. The never ending cycle of prayer and praise is repeated, and its the same today, as was uttered centuries ago (sometimes even in Latin!) They divide the year into feasts and festivals so throughout the course, rather then focusing on one or two events, the whole of Christianity is covered and rememberd and focused on each and every year. They dress up in their Sunday best because they are meeting the Lord of the Universe, and they strictly say the prayers in a dignified and respectful manner of preplanned collects

There is a radical difference...its almost as different as the Choirs of Angels. One Choir goes about bringing messages to and from the created and creator. The other Host do NOTHING but prayer and praise in the throne room...they NEVER leave GODs DIRECT presence, not to fight the spiritual war, not to deliver messages to His People. Their concern is ONLY Him....everything else fades away...including those who dont know and love Him....because there concern isnt for themselves, or infact even for others...they have only one Concern...and that is For Him. They are content simply to Be, they do not have to DO anything.

Thats exagerated beyond believef, but you see the distinction I'm drawring. My Emphasis is on prayer and praise aimed at GOD, Others appears to be an emphasis based on the lost.

I do have a heart for the lost...but I cant dwell on it to much because it upsets me too much. I cant face the thought of people I dont know, people who are better then me, being sent to Hell....I've only just got into accepting Intrinsic Value :unsure-1:

3) Its BOTH Mark. Would I walk down the road and grab the nearest Heathen and tell him about GOD...NO I WOULD NOT...but if I were walking down the road and He asked me about GOD, I would tell him all.

Didnt that happen to a Prophet once...that he was asked by someone important to tell him about GOD, and got onto some kinda horse drawn chariot, and went all the way back to this Regal mans homeland telling him all about GOD at the heathens own request?

Tyburn
08-23-2009, 11:29 PM
Yes, dave i think we all have a special gift, but i think we all need to spread the word. Mark
If I'm honnest I dont think its as important as it was. Christ said that his Disciples should take the Gospel to the ends of the world and make believers out of all nations...thats pretty much been done. Alot of people have in essence allready rejected Christ. Particularly in our two countries...Everyone should have at least heard the name "Jesus Christ" or "Christianity" by now.

I believe there is a need for revival, but thats slightly different to Evangelism.

I also believe there is a need for missionary Evangelists who have a vocational calling to go to those nations which HAVENT heard of Christ...but I dont think I am called to do that. I cant talk an English Grad Student into believing there even IS a GOD...much less a tribe of Africans or Indians.

I'm just not good at Evangelism (unless its supporting other Evangelists without actually having to talk to the people myself) for noone believes me when I tell them :unsure-1:

adamt
08-24-2009, 01:16 AM
i always figured there were three main things every christian oughta be ready, willing and able to do. Those three things would be to preach, to pray and to pass on.

I always figured preaching the gospel (good news) was more than evangelizing. Which i think everyone is called to proactively do. The gospel to those not yet born again is they can be born again, but christians need the gospel too. We're still saved and we aren't stuggling down here in vain or alone. What part of the "gospel" I preach depends on who is listening I guess. Unsaved get something different than those on milk and those on milk get something different than those on meat. But to be honest it's all good news.

But I hope every christian is ready and even eager to preach what they know, pray before proceeding with whatever it is they are doing and more than ready to die. Christians ought not have a "bucket list" of stuff to get squared away before the rapture.

adamt
08-24-2009, 01:21 AM
I'm just not good at Evangelism


moses wasn't any good at delivering the gospel either.


ch spurgeon was no good at delivering messages either. He never spoke in public. He only read what he wrote. He wrote out all his sermons and merely read them.

Whatever it takes. No one said you have to knock on doors and "witness". But we can all be a witness. Seems to me you are more than competant writer and speaker. You're very computer savvy and articulate to boot.

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 01:42 AM
1)moses wasn't any good at delivering the gospel either.


ch spurgeon was no good at delivering messages either. He never spoke in public. He only read what he wrote. He wrote out all his sermons and merely read them.

2) Whatever it takes. No one said you have to knock on doors and "witness". But we can all be a witness. Seems to me you are more than competant writer and speaker. You're very computer savvy and articulate to boot.
1) Moses had Aaron. I have nobody.

2) well, thats kinda what I think and what ive already said. I am a living witness and I do pass on if I get the opportunity...but I dont run after the heathen, and purposefully wake up wondering who I shall convert today.I think of witnessing and Evangelizing as two separate things. We must all witness, but Evangelism , proper vocational evangelism, is probably a calling into missionary work.

NateR
08-24-2009, 01:47 AM
moses wasn't any good at delivering the gospel either.


ch spurgeon was no good at delivering messages either. He never spoke in public. He only read what he wrote. He wrote out all his sermons and merely read them.

Whatever it takes. No one said you have to knock on doors and "witness". But we can all be a witness. Seems to me you are more than competant writer and speaker. You're very computer savvy and articulate to boot.

Excellent point, but also look at who Jesus chose to be His disciples. Did He pick well known Rabbis, scribes, scholars or Pharisees? No, he picked fishermen, tax collectors and so on. Average men who were not known for being exceptionally intelligent or well spoken.

It's like that old saying, "GOD doesn't call the equiped, He equips the called."

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 02:10 AM
Excellent point, but also look at who Jesus chose to be His disciples. Did He pick well known Rabbis, scribes, scholars or Pharisees? No, he picked fishermen, tax collectors and so on. Average men who were not known for being exceptionally intelligent or well spoken.

It's like that old saying, "GOD doesn't call the equiped, He equips the called."
I am hardly like Moses am I :unsure:

Mark
08-24-2009, 02:14 AM
1) Moses had Aaron. I have nobody.
Are you serious?
Ok no crowns for you then! Mark

adamt
08-24-2009, 02:30 AM
1) Moses had Aaron. I have nobody.

2) well, thats kinda what I think and what ive already said. I am a living witness and I do pass on if I get the opportunity...but I dont run after the heathen, and purposefully wake up wondering who I shall convert today.I think of witnessing and Evangelizing as two separate things. We must all witness, but Evangelism , proper vocational evangelism, is probably a calling into missionary work.



1. moses missed blessing by insisting he couldn't do it(i believe). he was not supposed to have an "interpretor". i think God might have taken his speech impediment away had he not tried to use it as an excuse. Instead he shared the spotlight with his brother.


2. when a woman has children at home, but she works out of the home (say as a nurse) ...and someone asks her what she does for a living and she says a nurse, is she less of a mother because when someone asks my wife what she does for a living she says she is a 'stay at home mom.' Now is the nurse less of a mother? Nah. I don't think so. I mean not necessarily, she might be, but not just cause she's a nurse outside the home. I'm a taxidermist and I do better than many professional taxidermists. but when someone asks me what i do I tell them I am a farmer. Does that make me less of a taxidermist? I'll leave that rhetorical. Now, I do what God wants me to do when he wants me to do it. I evangelize as he sees fit. Directly or indirectly. Does that make me less of an evangelist than Billy Graham. I'm not as good, I don't do it like he does it. But if you are something you are something. If you aren't, then you aren't. I am an evangelist. I just don't get paid for it like some guys do. I don't think you can hardly say I'm NOT an evangelist cause I can't claim the accolades that Graham can. But those accolades are of God not Graham. I think God judges you on what you can do. I fully believe if a fella does the best he can he is just as good as someone else who's best is better. If Billy Graham gets to heaven and finds out he only gave a 90% effort and Eddy Kirk gets to heaven and he gave 100% his whole life... who do you think God will reward more? Billy Graham is nothing without the gifts and opportunities God made in and for him. We are judged by our hearts not our yields. God hasn't given me the platform or the ability that he has given some christians. But I want to do the best with what he has given me.















Eddy Kirk= Dr. Edward Norris Kirk

The guy who led D.L. Moody to Christ. Now does all the work that D.L. Moody did somehow reflect back on this guy? Arguably D.L. Moody would not have been without this fella. Who gets more in heaven? D.L. or the guy who converted him?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Norris_Kirk

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 02:41 AM
Are you serious?
Ok no crowns for you then! Mark
:laugh: :laugh:

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 02:49 AM
1. moses missed blessing by insisting he couldn't do it(i believe). he was not supposed to have an "interpretor". i think God might have taken his speech impediment away had he not tried to use it as an excuse. Instead he shared the spotlight with his brother.


2. when a woman has children at home, but she works out of the home (say as a nurse) ...and someone asks her what she does for a living and she says a nurse, is she less of a mother because when someone asks my wife what she does for a living she says she is a 'stay at home mom.' Now is the nurse less of a mother? Nah. I don't think so. I mean not necessarily, she might be, but not just cause she's a nurse outside the home. I'm a taxidermist and I do better than many professional taxidermists. but when someone asks me what i do I tell them I am a farmer. Does that make me less of a taxidermist? I'll leave that rhetorical. Now, I do what God wants me to do when he wants me to do it. I evangelize as he sees fit. Directly or indirectly. Does that make me less of an evangelist than Billy Graham. I'm not as good, I don't do it like he does it. But if you are something you are something. If you aren't, then you aren't. I am an evangelist. I just don't get paid for it like some guys do. I don't think you can hardly say I'm NOT an evangelist cause I can't claim the accolades that Graham can. But those accolades are of God not Graham. I think God judges you on what you can do. I fully believe if a fella does the best he can he is just as good as someone else who's best is better. If Billy Graham gets to heaven and finds out he only gave a 90% effort and Eddy Kirk gets to heaven and he gave 100% his whole life... who do you think God will reward more? Billy Graham is nothing without the gifts and opportunities God made in and for him. We are judged by our hearts not our yields. God hasn't given me the platform or the ability that he has given some christians. But I want to do the best with what he has given me.















Eddy Kirk= Dr. Edward Norris Kirk

The guy who led D.L. Moody to Christ. Now does all the work that D.L. Moody did somehow reflect back on this guy? Arguably D.L. Moody would not have been without this fella. Who gets more in heaven? D.L. or the guy who converted him?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Norris_Kirk
:unsure-1: perhaps its because I like to have simple definitions. The truth is, I do see Evangelism as the kinda work that Graham would do, and YES, i'd say that because I cant do that its not evangelism, instead its just simple witnessing as opportunities present themselves.

If you dont distinguish between the two, then I can understand why you'd see me as an evangelist even though I say I'm not, when I am doing possibly as much as the average Christian to spread the news in a non aggressive way.

But I cant help but see them as different...perhaps it is because I recognise that whilst everyone can witness/evangelise like I can...the sort of witness that Graham gives is vocational and a gift beyond the normal. I cant do that because I have not been given those gifts...I wouldnt want to claim that sorta likeness when I dont really own it...for fear of belittling the good that GOD brought through that, and of the fear of pride and arrogance in putting myself up to a lable I dont feel confidently good at.

I'm sure I've had this discussion before in this thread. I am not the most...personally confident of people, regardless of how I hide it, I actually struggle with feeling quite inadequet on a number of levels. :unsure-1:

adamt
08-24-2009, 03:32 AM
sounds fine to me. no need to argue fine details of trivial matters.

Chris F
08-24-2009, 08:45 AM
Really? :huh:

lets proove it then :mellow:

It began when Pastor Chris made the distinction between Practise and Feelings, condemning the feelings. Please note Pastor Chris is saying that the urges for homosexuality are wrong and that the bible supports the urges be stopped. He is not mentioning Practise. Just the feelings, which are sinful according to him.



Dave replies pointing out that the Bible mentions nothing about the feelings and urges of Homosexuality, just the practise. Thus asserting that the urges and feelings themselves are not mentioned as sin




Pastor Chris says its just an excuse to be able to sin


So Dave Clarifies his point even further



Pastor Chris says feelings in the mind are the same as action (the brackets are his)



Dave explains why feelings and fantasy are different



Ben makes clarity on feelings and temptation




So according to Pastor Chris you cant have the feelings without sin, the urges themselves can be changed by choice. According to Ben and Dave if you take the feelings right to GOD as soon as they emerge then no sin is committed...this of course means that the temptation cant be a choice, just the action in mind and body...something Dave has been trying to make a duel distinction to for the last few pages, and one Pastor Chris has said is simply an excuse.

Are you ready for the U-turn :huh:



Mark Hughes asks for Clarity



...and suddenly Pastor Chris says that feelings are not sins automatically...which has been his argument all along. he's falling for what in his words are simply an "excuse" to sin




So How are Homosexual Urges automatically sin? because when I used the argument in bold, that he uses in his clarity, he told me it was an excuse.

As I said and if I could take the time to spell it for you and talk slower I would. I used feelings instead of lust because i was raised that word is not good in mixed company. Lust/feelings are a sin and i never once changed my position. learn some reading comprehension or take a chill pill. I never changed where I stood nor would I. It is wrong a sin and Paul says no homosexual will see the kingdom. If you are looking at men in a way that you desire to do things with them you are still a homosexual and will not go to heaven. If you fight the urges with fear and trembling and lots of prayer and fasting then you can find forgiveness w/ repentance. Same goes for a heterosexual with women. If they look a the opposite sex and have intimate desires for one whom they are not married they too will not go to heaven because they have unrepentant sin in their heart. My position has not nor will it ever change because it is based on scripture and not man's wisdom. So Dave I empathize with you and your struggle. Prior to salvation I lusted after women and lied to myself that I was okay with God. It was not till I was older did that verse cut right through me. I feel on my face and begged for forgiveness and I have never lusted for another women again. Only Jesus can take away the desire for any "feeling" weather it be sex, drugs, booze, theft, lying, etc. Man has created pop psychology to excuse sinful behavior. Did you know compulsive liars now have a disorder? So do thieves and up till the 1970's so did gays. The Word of God is the standard we must judge ourselves and others by not man's wisdom and pseudo science.

Chris F
08-24-2009, 08:50 AM
I've read the verse and it's clear that Christ is talking about lust, not intimacy.

Now if you are only referring to sexual intimacy, then I would agree with you. The Jews understood the moral laws of the Torah to refer to any form of erotic touching, not just sexual intercourse. My point is that intimacy is not always sexual. There is intimacy that exists between parents and their children. Are you trying to claim that a parent is sinning when they show love to their child?

I agree with the verse as it is written, I just think your personal interpretation is a little too extreme.

By your arogant spirit I see you have no desire to learn so I will drop it. You are thinking in English and it was not written in English. It is not my interpretation it is what it says in its context, in Greek and based on customs and cultures of the time. You can keep your mindset all you want NateR but as we have argued before you debating bible with me is like me debating graphic design with you. Go to seminary take some classes in hermeneutics and then come back and tell me you still read it the same way.

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 11:09 AM
sounds fine to me. no need to argue fine details of trivial matters.
:laugh: I cant help it :blink:

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 11:13 AM
As I said and if I could take the time to spell it for you and talk slower I would. I used feelings instead of lust because i was raised that word is not good in mixed company. Lust/feelings are a sin and i never once changed my position. learn some reading comprehension or take a chill pill. I never changed where I stood nor would I. It is wrong a sin and Paul says no homosexual will see the kingdom. If you are looking at men in a way that you desire to do things with them you are still a homosexual and will not go to heaven. If you fight the urges with fear and trembling and lots of prayer and fasting then you can find forgiveness w/ repentance. Same goes for a heterosexual with women. If they look a the opposite sex and have intimate desires for one whom they are not married they too will not go to heaven because they have unrepentant sin in their heart. My position has not nor will it ever change because it is based on scripture and not man's wisdom. So Dave I empathize with you and your struggle. Prior to salvation I lusted after women and lied to myself that I was okay with God. It was not till I was older did that verse cut right through me. I feel on my face and begged for forgiveness and I have never lusted for another women again. Only Jesus can take away the desire for any "feeling" weather it be sex, drugs, booze, theft, lying, etc. Man has created pop psychology to excuse sinful behavior. Did you know compulsive liars now have a disorder? So do thieves and up till the 1970's so did gays. The Word of God is the standard we must judge ourselves and others by not man's wisdom and pseudo science.
I'm not interested Pastor Chris.

I wasnt out to see whatwords you would or wouldnt use to describe the difference between sin and non sin. I'm just showing you changed your mind. That further to that, you used the same "excuse" you claimed I used earlier on.

What a shame it took Mark Hughes to ask such a simple question for you to backtrack and change your story. Had you done that when I first bought up the distinction, this thread could have been half so long.

The Fact is, suddenly, you are like the rest of us...believeing that having the feelings in some minute cases can actually NOT be sinful. I think I almost would have respected you more, had you stuck to your guns and not folded at the first sign of questioning from a true authority figure.

Tiz actually a dissapointment to me.

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 11:17 AM
By your arogant spirit I see you have no desire to learn


Go to seminary take some classes in hermeneutics and then come back and tell me you still read it the same way.
He knows Hebrew...do you Pastor Chris? :huh:

At least Nathan never changes his Tune. If he is wrong, it is not for the lack of truely believeing he is correct. He wouldnt change his tune under questioning. Yet you would. I personally think you can take your hereneutics and shove them, since your hermeneutics havents helpped you keep your facts straight in this thread. I didnt know they changed depending on who was questioning you about the same thing. :laugh:

You have a nerve :angry:

Chuck
08-24-2009, 03:17 PM
As I said and if I could take the time to spell it for you and talk slower I would. I used feelings instead of lust because i was raised that word is not good in mixed company. Lust/feelings are a sin and i never once changed my position. learn some reading comprehension or take a chill pill. I never changed where I stood nor would I. It is wrong a sin and Paul says no homosexual will see the kingdom. If you are looking at men in a way that you desire to do things with them you are still a homosexual and will not go to heaven. If you fight the urges with fear and trembling and lots of prayer and fasting then you can find forgiveness w/ repentance. Same goes for a heterosexual with women. If they look a the opposite sex and have intimate desires for one whom they are not married they too will not go to heaven because they have unrepentant sin in their heart. My position has not nor will it ever change because it is based on scripture and not man's wisdom. So Dave I empathize with you and your struggle. Prior to salvation I lusted after women and lied to myself that I was okay with God. It was not till I was older did that verse cut right through me. I feel on my face and begged for forgiveness and I have never lusted for another women again. Only Jesus can take away the desire for any "feeling" weather it be sex, drugs, booze, theft, lying, etc. Man has created pop psychology to excuse sinful behavior. Did you know compulsive liars now have a disorder? So do thieves and up till the 1970's so did gays. The Word of God is the standard we must judge ourselves and others by not man's wisdom and pseudo science.
Feelings... Lust...Desire...Urges...Look...Behavior..... are these all the same to you?

Where is there room for God's grace in your theology? If you lusted after a woman then died of a heart attack would you burn in hell?

What do you think God expects from us? We're damned from birth... doomed because of our sinful nature. Who will see Heaven Chris? Somebody who dies free from any sinful feeling? With no sinful desires? Never looking in a sinful way? Never having a sinful thought?

Or somebody who falls on their face and through much fasting and trembling was it? Somebody who reaches some sin free state?

You seem to be focused quite a bit on the outcome and not the struggle.... that's a little too close to a works based theology for me.

Chuck
08-24-2009, 03:28 PM
By your arogant spirit I see you have no desire to learn so I will drop it. You are thinking in English and it was not written in English. It is not my interpretation it is what it says in its context, in Greek and based on customs and cultures of the time. You can keep your mindset all you want NateR but as we have argued before you debating bible with me is like me debating graphic design with you. Go to seminary take some classes in hermeneutics and then come back and tell me you still read it the same way.

Who better to recognize arrogance then you right?

Would you be the sliver or the plank?

Twinsmama
08-24-2009, 04:41 PM
It takes a big man to admit he's wrong. Good thing Im not a big man. Haha just joking.

:laugh: That theory hasn't really been tested to my knowledge. I haven't heard any men admit to being wrong.:laugh: My dad always told me "Just because I haven't been wrong yet doesn't mean I won't admit it when I am!" :unsure-1:

Crisco
08-24-2009, 08:19 PM
By your arogant spirit I see you have no desire to learn so I will drop it. You are thinking in English and it was not written in English. It is not my interpretation it is what it says in its context, in Greek and based on customs and cultures of the time. You can keep your mindset all you want NateR but as we have argued before you debating bible with me is like me debating graphic design with you. Go to seminary take some classes in hermeneutics and then come back and tell me you still read it the same way.


Arrogance and Pride brother.

Careful not to fall.

I have to agree with Chuck... Your way of thinking seems to put your salvation more attributed to Chris being a good boy and not enough faith in Gods mercy.

Also sir... No one stops sinning no matter how powerful their faith... To assume you don't sin could be considered a sin if you believe it to be blasphemy.

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 08:32 PM
Arrogance and Pride brother.

Careful not to fall.

I have to agree with Chuck... Your way of thinking seems to put your salvation more attributed to Chris being a good boy and not enough faith in Gods mercy.

Also sir... No one stops sinning no matter how powerful their faith... To assume you don't sin could be considered a sin if you believe it to be blasphemy.
As The Lutherans would say "SIN BOLDLY" because you can be assured that the power of forgiveness and the cross CAN wipe out anything you confess and repent. They actually used that slogan to show how sinful they were and how Christ could still save them dispite it.

Let Your Sins Be Strong



13."If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly. For he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here we have to sin. This life in not the dwelling place of righteousness but, as Peter says, we look for a new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. . . . Pray boldly-you too are a mighty sinner." (Weimar ed. vol. 2, p. 371; Letters I, "Luther's Works," American Ed., Vol 48. p. 281- 282)



13. If you are a preacher of mercy, do not preach an imaginary but the true mercy. If the mercy is true, you must therefore bear the true, not an imaginary sin. God does not save those who are only imaginary sinners. Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides. We, however, says Peter (2. Peter 3:13) are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth where justice will reign. It suffices that through God's glory we have recognized the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world. No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day. Do you think such an exalted Lamb paid merely a small price with a meager sacrifice for our sins? Pray hard for you are quite a sinner.

On the day of the Feast of St. Peter the Apostle, 1521

I rest my case, your Honour :D

Chris F
08-24-2009, 09:32 PM
He knows Hebrew...do you Pastor Chris? :huh:

At least Nathan never changes his Tune. If he is wrong, it is not for the lack of truely believeing he is correct. He wouldnt change his tune under questioning. Yet you would. I personally think you can take your hereneutics and shove them, since your hermeneutics havents helpped you keep your facts straight in this thread. I didnt know they changed depending on who was questioning you about the same thing. :laugh:

You have a nerve :angry:

Yes I took 2 years of Hebrew but I admit I spend little time in the OT so it is very very weak.

I am probably one of the most unchanging persons on here. I NEVER change my tune Dave you trully do live in a fantasy world if you think differently. You are inventing a theory in your little mind to suit the fact you clearly were proven wrong and it irks you so much you need to cast doubt so you can feel better. While you are taking a hermeneutics with NateR be sure to get a class on logic and argumentation as well.

Chris F
08-24-2009, 09:39 PM
I'm not interested Pastor Chris.

I wasnt out to see whatwords you would or wouldnt use to describe the difference between sin and non sin. I'm just showing you changed your mind. That further to that, you used the same "excuse" you claimed I used earlier on.

What a shame it took Mark Hughes to ask such a simple question for you to backtrack and change your story. Had you done that when I first bought up the distinction, this thread could have been half so long.

The Fact is, suddenly, you are like the rest of us...believeing that having the feelings in some minute cases can actually NOT be sinful. I think I almost would have respected you more, had you stuck to your guns and not folded at the first sign of questioning from a true authority figure.

Tiz actually a dissapointment to me.

Stop lying Dave. Your not interested because I never once changed anything and proved your fantasy wrong and you feel guilty and convicted. It is to bad it took you a few days to dream up a comeback that is so bad and such a lie. Bible says liars won't get to heaven either so you may want to get think you foolish statements. That is unless you can prove you live in my head and know what I am thinking and what my meanings really are. As for being questioned by an authority figure I do not see that I am older then Mark, I am a minister and have been for 15 years, I have multiple degrees in bible and Theology. And I have been following Christ for 25 years. Mark is an administrator and Matt's brother hardly means he is an authority figure on this topic Dave. He is a man who was seeking clarification which I was happy to give and he and i left it at that. You might learn from Mark and choose more wisely the words you use. Mark knows his words carry weight and so he just does not throw them out flippantly.

Chris F
08-24-2009, 09:42 PM
Feelings... Lust...Desire...Urges...Look...Behavior..... are these all the same to you?

Where is there room for God's grace in your theology? If you lusted after a woman then died of a heart attack would you burn in hell?

What do you think God expects from us? We're damned from birth... doomed because of our sinful nature. Who will see Heaven Chris? Somebody who dies free from any sinful feeling? With no sinful desires? Never looking in a sinful way? Never having a sinful thought?

Or somebody who falls on their face and through much fasting and trembling was it? Somebody who reaches some sin free state?

You seem to be focused quite a bit on the outcome and not the struggle.... that's a little too close to a works based theology for me.

Chuck you can't use grace as an excuse to sin spend some time in Romans and you will see just how wrong "your" theology really is. A trully saved person will not continue to walk in sin and be the same person they were prior to Gods grace. they are a new creature. By your logic God's grace is a ticket to be whomever you want.

Chris F
08-24-2009, 09:46 PM
Who better to recognize arrogance then you right?

Would you be the sliver or the plank?

That is fine believe as you choose I understand the rally behind the boss thing that goes on here and has for years. I was not born yesterday. But the fact is I cherish learning and if someone offers info I do not know I do nto dismiss it I soak it up. I enjoyed NateR info on Jewish thoughts on the resurrection. I disagreed but I learned from it so I can seek the truth in my own walk. NateR on the other hand just acted like a teenager that know it all and can careless what anyone else says that is not a part of the inner circle. It is okay I am used to it. My walk wiht the lord has no bearing on this forums acceptance of the gosepl or not.

Crisco
08-24-2009, 10:00 PM
That is fine believe as you choose I understand the rally behind the boss thing that goes on here and has for years. I was not born yesterday. But the fact is I cherish learning and if someone offers info I do not know I do nto dismiss it I soak it up. I enjoyed NateR info on Jewish thoughts on the resurrection. I disagreed but I learned from it so I can seek the truth in my own walk. NateR on the other hand just acted like a teenager that know it all and can careless what anyone else says that is not a part of the inner circle. It is okay I am used to it. My walk wiht the lord has no bearing on this forums acceptance of the gosepl or not.

Holier then thou much?

God bless and keep you brother.

May your arrogance not be your downfall.

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 10:00 PM
Yes I took 2 years of Hebrew but I admit I spend little time in the OT so it is very very weak.

I am probably one of the most unchanging persons on here. I NEVER change my tune Dave you trully do live in a fantasy world if you think differently. You are inventing a theory in your little mind to suit the fact you clearly were proven wrong and it irks you so much you need to cast doubt so you can feel better. While you are taking a hermeneutics with NateR be sure to get a class on logic and argumentation as well.
I've taken Exams in Sentance and Predicate Logic, and I was reasonably good at Truth Tables also. I had to do it for my degree.

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 10:07 PM
Stop lying Dave. Your not interested because I never once changed anything and proved your fantasy wrong and you feel guilty and convicted. It is to bad it took you a few days to dream up a comeback that is so bad and such a lie. Bible says liars won't get to heaven either so you may want to get think you foolish statements. That is unless you can prove you live in my head and know what I am thinking and what my meanings really are. As for being questioned by an authority figure I do not see that I am older then Mark, I am a minister and have been for 15 years, I have multiple degrees in bible and Theology. And I have been following Christ for 25 years. Mark is an administrator and Matt's brother hardly means he is an authority figure on this topic Dave. He is a man who was seeking clarification which I was happy to give and he and i left it at that. You might learn from Mark and choose more wisely the words you use. Mark knows his words carry weight and so he just does not throw them out flippantly.
I prooved that you changed your tune by posting the quotes. Its not a case of you arguing. The quotes and the proof are already collated and presented. Plus...all the people I think of as good Christians are also dissagreeing with you in this thread Pastor Chris. That to me would imply that I am not making this up, and I am not inventing anything. Other people are spotting EXACTLY the same thing.

If you dont want to listen to me, try Chuck....or Crisco....or Nathan.....or Ben....even Mark had to ask you for clarity.

I dont care how long you have been a Christian, and I dont care what you feel about me, or the issue of homosexuality, or the distinction of sin and non sinful feelings, I dont really care that you change your tune, and that you then lie about changing your tune, I dont care that you act more pompous then I.

None of that will cause me to lose sleep...and unlike others who have felt your wrath and fled...I will not be moved neither. I have nearly unbeatable online cardio, and stamina to boot.

So if we are just going to go round in circles, so be it. :rolleyes:

adamt
08-24-2009, 10:22 PM
I've taken Exams in Sentance and Predicate Logic, and I was reasonably good at Truth Tables also. I had to do it for my degree.



i don't even know what that is!!! :unsure: And kinda proud of it too!

Chuck
08-24-2009, 10:29 PM
Chuck you can't use grace as an excuse to sin spend some time in Romans and you will see just how wrong "your" theology really is. A trully saved person will not continue to walk in sin and be the same person they were prior to Gods grace. they are a new creature. By your logic God's grace is a ticket to be whomever you want.

Using grace as an excuse to sin?? Is THAT my theology Chris?? I asked you multiple questions and you failed to answer any of them. I asked for clarification and you chose not to give any. Do you live in my head in the same way you referenced Dave in your earlier post? I'm happy to share my theology with you Christ. Just ask. Which is what I did to you... I asked... you dodged. :wink:

I agree completely with the part of your post I put in bold.. whatever attempt you made to understand my "theology" failed miserably.

Why don't you just answer the questions I asked you? Clarify yourself a little?

Chuck
08-24-2009, 10:39 PM
That is fine believe as you choose
It's in the Bible :wink:

I understand the rally behind the boss thing that goes on here and has for years.
Right. I'm definitely a company man.. never disagreeing with the MOD's, never challenging them, never on their bad side.... :laugh: :laugh:

I was not born yesterday.
Perhaps not yesterday but if I had to judge by your attitude the last few days I would guess in the last 4-6 years.

But the fact is I cherish learning and if someone offers info I do not know I do nto dismiss it I soak it up. I enjoyed NateR info on Jewish thoughts on the resurrection. I disagreed but I learned from it so I can seek the truth in my own walk.
If you cherish learning so much then why not contribute in a way that's conducive to learning? Without the judgment perhaps? The attitude?

NateR on the other hand just acted like a teenager that know it all and can careless what anyone else says that is not a part of the inner circle.
To be fair I'm not so sure Nate care's much what the "inner circle" says either. A circle which... the last time I checked... I was on the OUTSIDE of :D

It is okay I am used to it. My walk wiht the lord has no bearing on this forums acceptance of the gosepl or not.
Praise God that my walk isn't dependent on YOUR ability to share that gospel....

Why must you be such and angry young man, when your future looks quite bright to me?

Tyburn
08-24-2009, 10:47 PM
i don't even know what that is!!! :unsure: And kinda proud of it too!
allow me to show you.

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/3286/img10r.gif (http://img341.imageshack.us/i/img10r.gif/)


this is an extremely simple Truth Table. Its Sentance Logic because you have an equation that looks like a sentance. I cant remember much of how you work it out...but there are like one or two very simple rules and then its easy as pie. Thing is...it was about the only Maths based thing I've ever been good at...and now I cant really remember much at all :laugh:

The Values on the Left are kinda of portions of a premise, and when you put the sentance together, and equate, you get the value of the whole sentance.

So then you get the sentance. your basically saying If x=Y then Y=z

then you put different properties to x y and z and see which combinations make the "Then" True, and which make it false. but in the truth table given the signs in the brackets are not equals...so its more like (x is to y) THEN (z is also y) I cant remember what the V equation stands for (its not z is also y, because if you look down the collom you can see if that were the case then when there is a false in the first collom there would always be a false in the second colomn if the second value was false and the first value was True....I think...hahahahaha.... but pretty sure arrow stand for is the same as, or then if its between brackets

Do you follow?

We CAN use Sentance and Predicate Logic to run a truth table using a premise from THIS Argument. (though I doubt Chris was actually refering to this sort of pure logic)

Now the argument in the Table shown is almost certainly true, because to make it out of all the different mixtures of the values of each premise. only ONE would make the whole thing False. If every Premise was False, then the argument would be False. But the argument is still true with ANY combination of one premise being false, and ANY combination of two out of three premise being false.

Neezar
08-25-2009, 05:08 AM
Right. I'm definitely a company man.. never disagreeing with the MOD's, never challenging them, never on their bad side....




:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Chris F
08-25-2009, 08:45 AM
Using grace as an excuse to sin?? Is THAT my theology Chris?? I asked you multiple questions and you failed to answer any of them. I asked for clarification and you chose not to give any. Do you live in my head in the same way you referenced Dave in your earlier post? I'm happy to share my theology with you Christ. Just ask. Which is what I did to you... I asked... you dodged. :wink:

I agree completely with the part of your post I put in bold.. whatever attempt you made to understand my "theology" failed miserably.

Why don't you just answer the questions I asked you? Clarify yourself a little?

Please repeat your questions I honestly did not notice any question in your post. I apologize for not answering them

Chris F
08-25-2009, 08:50 AM
Why must you be such and angry young man, when your future looks quite bright to me?

I am not angry at all. In fact, I am so blessed it hurts. The joy of the Lord is all I need. Just because I disagree does not make me in any way angry. I understand the differences on here. I know most are from a Calvinist background and do not share my beliefs in taking the bible in context and literally. Thats okay and really no reason at all to be angry. Like you said I seriously doubt NateR really cares what I think or say as long as it does not bring shame on Matt. I am sure he wrote me off a long time ago. :laugh:

Chris F
08-25-2009, 08:53 AM
Holier then thou much?

God bless and keep you brother.

May your arrogance not be your downfall.

Not at all Crisco. I am confident with who I am in Christ and what God's word says. Fact is Jesus and Him crucified never has been the popular thing to believe. Most people prefer to follow man's ways and not the Bible as it is written.

Chris F
08-25-2009, 08:54 AM
As The Lutherans would say "SIN BOLDLY" because you can be assured that the power of forgiveness and the cross CAN wipe out anything you confess and repent. They actually used that slogan to show how sinful they were and how Christ could still save them dispite it.

Let Your Sins Be Strong



13."If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly. For he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here we have to sin. This life in not the dwelling place of righteousness but, as Peter says, we look for a new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. . . . Pray boldly-you too are a mighty sinner." (Weimar ed. vol. 2, p. 371; Letters I, "Luther's Works," American Ed., Vol 48. p. 281- 282)



13. If you are a preacher of mercy, do not preach an imaginary but the true mercy. If the mercy is true, you must therefore bear the true, not an imaginary sin. God does not save those who are only imaginary sinners. Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides. We, however, says Peter (2. Peter 3:13) are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth where justice will reign. It suffices that through God's glory we have recognized the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world. No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day. Do you think such an exalted Lamb paid merely a small price with a meager sacrifice for our sins? Pray hard for you are quite a sinner.

On the day of the Feast of St. Peter the Apostle, 1521

I rest my case, your Honour :D

Strange you would use the Lutherans since they have just voted to ordain openly gay clergymen. Not sure they are the best examples for biblical leadership/

Chris F
08-25-2009, 08:59 AM
I prooved that you changed your tune by posting the quotes. Its not a case of you arguing. The quotes and the proof are already collated and presented. Plus...all the people I think of as good Christians are also dissagreeing with you in this thread Pastor Chris. That to me would imply that I am not making this up, and I am not inventing anything. Other people are spotting EXACTLY the same thing.

If you dont want to listen to me, try Chuck....or Crisco....or Nathan.....or Ben....even Mark had to ask you for clarity.

I dont care how long you have been a Christian, and I dont care what you feel about me, or the issue of homosexuality, or the distinction of sin and non sinful feelings, I dont really care that you change your tune, and that you then lie about changing your tune, I dont care that you act more pompous then I.

None of that will cause me to lose sleep...and unlike others who have felt your wrath and fled...I will not be moved neither. I have nearly unbeatable online cardio, and stamina to boot.

So if we are just going to go round in circles, so be it. :rolleyes:

Thus the reason I clarified and why you had quotes to post. I told you exactly what was meant by what I said. If you want to claim you live in my head have at it. But again I never changed my tune. Same bat time same bat channel. As for not caring well if that were true you'd stop posting about it days ago. You are the type that must get the last word so you can somehow feel you won and argument. :)

Tyburn
08-25-2009, 12:48 PM
Strange you would use the Lutherans.... Not sure they are the best examples for biblical leadership/
You and They would make pretty good company then...no?

Tyburn
08-25-2009, 12:49 PM
As for not caring well if that were true you'd stop posting about it days ago.

:laugh: or maybe I am just boared and have nothing better to do :laugh:

Chris F
08-25-2009, 04:20 PM
You and They would make pretty good company then...no?

If you say so Dave. :)

Chris F
08-25-2009, 04:22 PM
:laugh: or maybe I am just boared and have nothing better to do :laugh:

I assumme you mean bored and if so a creative mind like yourself, I am sure, can think of a lot better things to do with your time then to lie about people and act like you know what others are thinking and meaning.

Tyburn
08-25-2009, 05:35 PM
I am sure, can think of a lot better things to do with your time then to lie about people and act like you know what others are thinking and meaning.
your wrong again :laugh:

NateR
08-25-2009, 09:26 PM
I am not angry at all. In fact, I am so blessed it hurts. The joy of the Lord is all I need. Just because I disagree does not make me in any way angry. I understand the differences on here. I know most are from a Calvinist background and do not share my beliefs in taking the bible in context and literally. Thats okay and really no reason at all to be angry. Like you said I seriously doubt NateR really cares what I think or say as long as it does not bring shame on Matt. I am sure he wrote me off a long time ago. :laugh:

That's the mature response, pigeonhole everyone who disagrees with your personal theology as a heretic. :rolleyes:

I'm not even sure I know what "Calvinist" means. Either way, it's totally irrelevant to my theology.

You claim that you've been a pastor and attended seminary and all that stuff, so we NEED to believe every word that you post or we're just fallen and lost. Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds? For all we know, you're making all of that up and you've never set foot in a church in your entire life. This is the internet, you could be anybody. You have to understand that, unless you are willing to provide some evidence to your claims of expertise, then no one is going to believe you.

If you are not willing to provide that evidence, then you need to understand that your credibility rating is at zero and shouting down, belittling, condemning and insulting everyone who disagrees with you is not going to win you over any friends and does nothing but shame the name of Christ.

I do also believe in taking the Bible literally and within the context of when and where it was written, which is exactly why I've come to believe the way I do. Sorry you can't handle the fact that people disagree with you or are even remotely prepared for the possibility that your tiny human brain might have gotten something wrong.

I do find it kind of laughable that you talk so much about context, yet barely know anything about the Old Testament or the Jewish culture of the day. If anything, the Old Testament is the first Gospel of Jesus Christ. What do you think the apostles were using to preach the good news in the decades before the New Testament was written? So, why would anyone who is serious about learning about GOD, neglect the OT? That makes no sense to me, because you are missing out on over half of the story. The OT is the evidence that Jesus is who He claimed to be.

If you don't study the Old Testament, then how do you know that Jesus is really the Son of GOD?

adamt
08-25-2009, 10:06 PM
If you don't study the Old Testament, then how do you know that Jesus is really the Son of GOD?


good point..... also if you don't study the old testament your understanding of sin is seriously lacking. You may not even comprehend you are indeed a sinner and all the "other" ways to heaven have been tried. Including having a perfect man in a perfect setting and still sinning. also being given the opportunity to "work" your way to heaven and still failing miserably. The Old Testament shows the need for a savior. Even trying to build a tower to heaven. The OT shows what don't work, and why we need Christ.

Crisco
08-25-2009, 10:15 PM
That's the mature response, pigeonhole everyone who disagrees with your personal theology as a heretic. :rolleyes:

I'm not even sure I know what "Calvinist" means. Either way, it's totally irrelevant to my theology.

You claim that you've been a pastor and attended seminary and all that stuff, so we NEED to believe every word that you post or we're just fallen and lost. Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds? For all we know, you're making all of that up and you've never set foot in a church in your entire life. This is the internet, you could be anybody. You have to understand that, unless you are willing to provide some evidence to your claims of expertise, then no one is going to believe you.

If you are not willing to provide that evidence, then you need to understand that your credibility rating is at zero and shouting down, belittling, condemning and insulting everyone who disagrees with you is not going to win you over any friends and does nothing but shame the name of Christ.

I do also believe in taking the Bible literally and within the context of when and where it was written, which is exactly why I've come to believe the way I do. Sorry you can't handle the fact that people disagree with you or are even remotely prepared for the possibility that your tiny human brain might have gotten something wrong.

I do find it kind of laughable that you talk so much about context, yet barely know anything about the Old Testament or the Jewish culture of the day. If anything, the Old Testament is the first Gospel of Jesus Christ. What do you think the apostles were using to preach the good news in the decades before the New Testament was written? So, why would anyone who is serious about learning about GOD, neglect the OT? That makes no sense to me, because you are missing out on over half of the story. The OT is the evidence that Jesus is who He claimed to be.
If you don't study the Old Testament, then how do you know that Jesus is really the Son of GOD?


I've always wondered this aswell about Chris. How does one talk about context but claim to not know much about OT?

What exactly is taught in Seminary that you became a pastor yet still didn't pay deep attention to the OT?

I'm not trying to be mean with this post I'm asking real questions.

Tyburn
08-25-2009, 11:07 PM
I do find it kind of laughable that you talk so much about context, yet barely know anything about the Old Testament or the Jewish culture of the day. If anything, the Old Testament is the first Gospel of Jesus Christ. What do you think the apostles were using to preach the good news in the decades before the New Testament was written? So, why would anyone who is serious about learning about GOD, neglect the OT? That makes no sense to me, because you are missing out on over half of the story. The OT is the evidence that Jesus is who He claimed to be.

If you don't study the Old Testament, then how do you know that Jesus is really the Son of GOD?
That there, is probably the most valuable lesson you've ever taught me since joining this forum.

The Importance of the Old Testament answers WHAT Christianity REALLY is. You cant understand the importance of Christ, without understanding WHY he came, and WHY he had to do what he did.

Almost all of Christondom has forgotten that we ARENT Christians at all...we are Messianic Jews. The paradigmn jump is ENOURMOUS, and I might never have understood and reshapped a LARGE PART of my own personal theology without having spoken to you at length on this issue.

IMHO the point your trying to make here is the most important thing you've ever said on this website.

Chuck
08-26-2009, 12:36 AM
Please repeat your questions I honestly did not notice any question in your post. I apologize for not answering them

You can click here :http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/showpost.php?p=63728&postcount=169 to see my questions...

There are only 11 of them but I can see how it would be hard to miss. They're the statements ending with a question mark :)

Chris F
08-26-2009, 03:32 AM
That's the mature response, pigeonhole everyone who disagrees with your personal theology as a heretic. :rolleyes:

I'm not even sure I know what "Calvinist" means. Either way, it's totally irrelevant to my theology.

You claim that you've been a pastor and attended seminary and all that stuff, so we NEED to believe every word that you post or we're just fallen and lost. Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds? For all we know, you're making all of that up and you've never set foot in a church in your entire life. This is the internet, you could be anybody. You have to understand that, unless you are willing to provide some evidence to your claims of expertise, then no one is going to believe you.

If you are not willing to provide that evidence, then you need to understand that your credibility rating is at zero and shouting down, belittling, condemning and insulting everyone who disagrees with you is not going to win you over any friends and does nothing but shame the name of Christ.

I do also believe in taking the Bible literally and within the context of when and where it was written, which is exactly why I've come to believe the way I do. Sorry you can't handle the fact that people disagree with you or are even remotely prepared for the possibility that your tiny human brain might have gotten something wrong.

I do find it kind of laughable that you talk so much about context, yet barely know anything about the Old Testament or the Jewish culture of the day. If anything, the Old Testament is the first Gospel of Jesus Christ. What do you think the apostles were using to preach the good news in the decades before the New Testament was written? So, why would anyone who is serious about learning about GOD, neglect the OT? That makes no sense to me, because you are missing out on over half of the story. The OT is the evidence that Jesus is who He claimed to be.

If you don't study the Old Testament, then how do you know that Jesus is really the Son of GOD?

1. NateR grow up and act like the leader you are suppose to be on here

2. I said I do not spend much time in the OT when it comes to using my Hebrew. If you can't even read my post correctly how on earth can you sit here in a seat of judgement on my hermeneutics. You have more maturing to do then I originally thought.

3. What evidence would you like? I think even if I posted all the evidence in the world you'd still say they were doctored or not real. So I am not at all concerned how you feel in this case. I know who I am in Christ and would not lie and go to hell just to pretend to be someone I am not.

Chris F
08-26-2009, 03:38 AM
I've always wondered this aswell about Chris. How does one talk about context but claim to not know much about OT?

What exactly is taught in Seminary that you became a pastor yet still didn't pay deep attention to the OT?

I'm not trying to be mean with this post I'm asking real questions.

Can you all not read. read the context people Dave asked me about my Hebrew I said I spent little time in the OT in context of the topic of Hebrew. You all wonder why you have such screwed up theology. Maybe if you all would stop reading into what people say what you want to hear like you all seem to do with scripture you might have a revelation on how wrong you all have been.

I took 2 years of Hebrew and I also studied Jewish backgrounds and customs as well I know the OT just as good as the NT and how to read the NT in light of the OT context. It is called hermeneutics and I know it is a big word you all hate. But if you get a kick out of speaking down to me because you feel higher up then be my guest. Jesus and Paul and Peter were not that accepted by the religious folks either.

Chris F
08-26-2009, 03:41 AM
You can click here :http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/showpost.php?p=63728&postcount=169 to see my questions...

There are only 11 of them but I can see how it would be hard to miss. They're the statements ending with a question mark :)

Chuck give me a break I work 50-60 hours a week some nights some days with little time to back track. I click on the last page and catch up so if it was not on the last page I did not see it. So try reciprocating the respect you seem to demand from others.

Chuck
08-26-2009, 03:49 AM
Chuck give me a break I work 50-60 hours a week some nights some days with little time to back track. I click on the last page and catch up so if it was not on the last page I did not see it. So try reciprocating the respect you seem to demand from others.

Perhaps you should hit the sack then? You seem a little cranky. The post that you quoted had the questions... I thought if you quoted it... you probably saw it.

Either way... the :) in my post is normally a pretty good indicator that humor is implied... so rather then me "giving you a break" I encourage you to go take one. Shut off the computer, prop your feet up with your favorite beverage, breath out a big sigh and relax.... You'll feel better, trust me! :wink:

Chris F
08-26-2009, 03:56 AM
Feelings... Lust...Desire...Urges...Look...Behavior..... are these all the same to you?

Where is there room for God's grace in your theology? God's grace is Jesus Christ and the cross, not a free ticket to live like a sinner and think you live like the world and still be saved because you said a little prayer. No fruit no salvation plain and simple. Romans will clear this up for you as will 1 JohnIf you lusted after a woman then died of a heart attack would you burn in hell?If that was what was in your heart yes. A true believer who have no need to lust but rather would crucify their flesh with prayer and fasting. Is your god, whom you have made in your own mind, so impotent that he can't deliver you from lust?

What do you think God expects from us? He said in scripture that we are to obey His commandments. You know those things in the OT. NateR is an expert ask himWe're damned from birth... doomed because of our sinful nature. Who will see Heaven Chris? Everyone whom God has called and sent His Holy Spirit to convict them of their sin and they turn from their old ways and walk as new creatures because of what Christ did on the cross. So those who forsake all follow him. Somebody who dies free from any sinful feeling? If the reason they are free from those feelings are because of Jesus yes!With no sinful desires? Paul said we must crucify our flesh daily. W/o Christ we cannot stop those desires. However my God is able to deliver me from myself and its (flesh) desires. It seems you think that God owes you salvation and that you can do what you like and blame it on your sin nature.Never looking in a sinful way?Why do you feel the need to look in that way. Are women just object of lust for you? somebody who falls on their face and through much fasting and trembling was it? Somebody who reaches some sin free state?There will always be sin the difference is does it have dominion over you or you over it?

You seem to be focused quite a bit on the outcome and not the struggle.... that's a little too close to a works based theology for me.

answers in red above

Not works based at all. Just following the bible. Nothing I can do can make God choose me. He did so in his own sovereign grace. However scripture is cl;ear God wants us to forsake all and follow him and we are not to allow anything between Him and you. The story of the rich young ruler is a great example. Jesus said go sell all your stuff because Jesus knew that was more to Him then following Him. Sounds like you have some things you need to lay aside yourself. Are you a new creature are the same one with a new paint job. Several had PM'd me and I want to make it clear I am not trying to be mean in my post to Chuck or anyone else. The bad thing about online discussion you cannot see a persons body language when they type. I am pushy because I am the type of person who pushes you to do more. I am not a warm and fuzzy guy. This is why I quit pastoring and started being an evangelist. If anyone thinks on what is said here then regardless of how you feel about me you are challenged and thinking about Christ!

Chris F
08-26-2009, 03:58 AM
Perhaps you should hit the sack then? You seem a little cranky. The post that you quoted had the questions... I thought if you quoted it... you probably saw it.

Either way... the :) in my post is normally a pretty good indicator that humor is implied... so rather then me "giving you a break" I encourage you to go take one. Shut off the computer, prop your feet up with your favorite beverage, breath out a big sigh and relax.... You'll feel better, trust me! :wink:

You are right I did see them and I thought they were rhetorical and that you did not expect an answer. I apologize that i did not give you the response you desired. Next time you place a question I will try to do better to respond to it

Chuck
08-26-2009, 04:31 AM
answers in red above

Not works based at all. Just following the bible. Nothing I can do can make God choose me. He did so in his own sovereign grace. However scripture is cl;ear God wants us to forsake all and follow him and we are not to allow anything between Him and you. The story of the rich young ruler is a great example. Jesus said go sell all your stuff because Jesus knew that was more to Him then following Him. Sounds like you have some things you need to lay aside yourself. Are you a new creature are the same one with a new paint job. Several had PM'd me and I want to make it clear I am not trying to be mean in my post to Chuck or anyone else. The bad thing about online discussion you cannot see a persons body language when they type. I am pushy because I am the type of person who pushes you to do more. I am not a warm and fuzzy guy. This is why I quit pastoring and started being an evangelist. If anyone thinks on what is said here then regardless of how you feel about me you are challenged and thinking about Christ!


"Feelings... Lust...Desire...Urges...Look...Behavior..... are these all the same to you?" Everything in your post is irrelevant for discussion unless we both have a clear understanding of the question I raised above.

I appreciate your concern for my relationship with Christ as I believe it is genuine. I don't struggle with lust Chris. This conversation started originally with you and dave talking about "feelings" and in Dave's case they would be for men. In the questions I posed to you I used a woman because I'm heterosexual not because I struggle with lust.

You used words like "feelings", "lust", "desire" "look", & "urges" synonymously... to me they are very different. The first thing I was asking you to clarify was if you thought those were all the same thing.

I'm quite familiar with Romans and I would like to think I have a pretty firm understanding of my Salvation and God's grace. I don't think our Salvation is a license to sin... far from it. I also don't think our salvation comes from saying a little prayer in response to an altar call and then living as we choose but that's a topic for another time. But what I do think is that there is a difference between looking and lusting. Between desire and urges. Again the discussion stemmed from Dave and you talking about "feelings", homosexuality and nature, nurture etc...

Your post... a while ago... about "feelings" is what opened up this can of worms... I think many of us may have misunderstood what you were trying to say. Your explanation including the part about being raised not to say certain things in "mixed company" simply confused me more.

At this point I'm really not sure what you believe with regards to sin and our struggles with it and after reading your post above it's pretty clear you're not understanding where I stand either.

You're welcome to clarify yourself... we can start over or just drop it all together... I'm fine either way. I'm just not sure what your feelings are so I really can't respond to them. :D Who knows.. we may even agree! :wink:

Chuck
08-26-2009, 04:32 AM
You are right I did see them and I thought they were rhetorical and that you did not expect an answer. I apologize that i did not give you the response you desired. Next time you place a question I will try to do better to respond to it
No apology necessary... I was never offended... I was just trying to clarify where we both stood on the issue so we could discuss it.

Chris F
08-26-2009, 05:09 AM
"Feelings... Lust...Desire...Urges...Look...Behavior..... are these all the same to you?" Everything in your post is irrelevant for discussion unless we both have a clear understanding of the question I raised above.

I appreciate your concern for my relationship with Christ as I believe it is genuine. I don't struggle with lust Chris. This conversation started originally with you and dave talking about "feelings" and in Dave's case they would be for men. In the questions I posed to you I used a woman because I'm heterosexual not because I struggle with lust.

You used words like "feelings", "lust", "desire" "look", & "urges" synonymously... to me they are very different. The first thing I was asking you to clarify was if you thought those were all the same thing.

I'm quite familiar with Romans and I would like to think I have a pretty firm understanding of my Salvation and God's grace. I don't think our Salvation is a license to sin... far from it. I also don't think our salvation comes from saying a little prayer in response to an altar call and then living as we choose but that's a topic for another time. But what I do think is that there is a difference between looking and lusting. Between desire and urges. Again the discussion stemmed from Dave and you talking about "feelings", homosexuality and nature, nurture etc...

Your post... a while ago... about "feelings" is what opened up this can of worms... I think many of us may have misunderstood what you were trying to say. Your explanation including the part about being raised not to say certain things in "mixed company" simply confused me more.

At this point I'm really not sure what you believe with regards to sin and our struggles with it and after reading your post above it's pretty clear you're not understanding where I stand either.

You're welcome to clarify yourself... we can start over or just drop it all together... I'm fine either way. I'm just not sure what your feelings are so I really can't respond to them. :D Who knows.. we may even agree! :wink:

I thought i did when Mark asked. feelings was what I used in place of lust. If you look at a women and then begin to have intimate feeligns (not husband wife or parent child NateR) then Jesus says you have commited adultery in your heart already. So just thinking about it is a sin plain and simple. Does this help Chuck?

Play The Man
08-26-2009, 08:26 AM
Strange you would use the Lutherans since they have just voted to ordain openly gay clergymen. Not sure they are the best examples for biblical leadership/

There are Lutheran Churches, such as the LCMS, that remain faithful to the Lutheran Confessions.

Crisco
08-26-2009, 03:50 PM
There are Lutheran Churches, such as the LCMS, that remain faithful to the Lutheran Confessions.

Luthers stance on the jews turned me away from him.


You can't be a Christian and encourage the murder of his chosen people.

adamt
08-26-2009, 08:10 PM
Luthers stance on the jews turned me away from him.


You can't be a Christian and encourage the murder of his chosen people.



could you point me in the direction of what you mean by this??????

Play The Man
08-26-2009, 08:25 PM
Luthers stance on the jews turned me away from him.


You can't be a Christian and encourage the murder of his chosen people.

That is a fair point. Here is the LCMS's position on Luther's statements:

http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2166

Q. What is the Missouri Synod's response to the anti-Semitic statements made by Luther?

A. While The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod holds Martin Luther in high esteem for his bold proclamation and clear articulation of the teachings of Scripture, it deeply regrets and deplores statements made by Luther which express a negative and hostile attitude toward the Jews. In light of the many positive and caring statements concerning the Jews made by Luther throughout his lifetime, it would not be fair on the basis of these few regrettable (and uncharacteristic) negative statements, to characterize the reformer as "a rabid anti-Semite." The LCMS, however, does not seek to "excuse" these statements of Luther, but denounces them (without denouncing Luther's theology). In 1983, the Synod adopted an official resolution addressing these statements of Luther and making clear its own position on anti-Semitism. The text of this resolution reads as follows:

WHEREAS, Anti-Semitism and other forms of racism are a continuing problem in our world; and

WHEREAS, Some of Luther's intemperate remarks about the Jews are often cited in this connection; and

WHEREAS, It is widely but falsely assumed that Luther's personal writings and opinions have some official status among us (thus, sometimes implying the responsibility of contemporary Lutheranism for those statements, if not complicity in them); but also

WHEREAS, It is plain from scripture that the Gospel must be proclaimed to all people--that is, to Jews also, no more and no less than to others (Matt. 28:18-20); and

WHEREAS, This Scriptural mandate is sometimes confused with anti-Semitism; therefore be it

Resolved, That we condemn any and all discrimination against others on account of race or religion or any coercion on that account and pledge ourselves to work and witness against such sins; and be it further

Resolved, That we reaffirm that the bases of our doctrine and practice are the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions and not Luther, as such; and be it further

Resolved, That while, on the one hand, we are deeply indebted to Luther for his rediscovery and enunciation of the Gospel, on the other hand, we deplore and disassociate ourselves from Luther's negative statements about the Jewish people, and, by the same token, we deplore the use today of such sentiments by Luther to incite ant-Christian and/or anti-Lutheran sentiment; and be it further

Resolved, That in our teaching and preaching we take care not to confuse the religion of the Old Testament (often labeled "Yahwism") with the subsequent Judaism, nor misleadingly speak about "Jews" in the Old Testament ("Israelites" or "Hebrews" being much more accurate terms), lest we obscure the basic claim of the New Testament and of the Gospel to being in substantial continuity with the Old Testament and that the fulfillment of the ancient promises came in Jesus Christ; and be it further

Resolved, That we avoid the recurring pitfall of recrimination (as illustrated by the remarks of Luther and many of the early church fathers) against those who do not respond positively to our evangelistic efforts; and be it finally

Resolved, That, in that light, we personally and individually adopt Luther's final attitude toward the Jewish people, as evidenced in his last sermon: "We want to treat them with Christian love and to pray for them, so that they might become converted and would receive the Lord" (Weimar edition, Vol. 51, p. 195)

adamt
08-26-2009, 11:30 PM
wow what luther has to say about jews is very interesting to say the least.


But what is WAY more interesting is how the lutheran blatantly pick and choose what they choose to believe from their own namesake.

They are openly admitting to picking the parts of stuff they like to believe and denying those things they don't want to believe.

Now if they can just admit that is what they do with the bible......

Jonlion
08-27-2009, 04:31 AM
Have you ever read MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE and JOHN for starters?
What is more important? Mark


Yes I have read all of the Gospels

What would be more important or relevant than evangelism?

And so far, for me the overrriding message wasn't to go out and Evangelise.


MARK 16:15-16 "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."
As you grow in your relationship with christ, he will give you both the opportunities and the inner strength to tell his message. (This i hear you on strongly) Thats what it says in my Bible. Mark

Now when i re-read this, i just purely saw it as a message to the disciples and not to me personally. I guess this is wrong of me.

Its just that for me my overriding feeling of the Gospels is Jesus's teachings, surrendering myself to Jesus and loving him with a contrite heart. I haven;t perhaps heeded the Evangelistic part as of yet.

Please dont get me wrong though, If asked, or if the situation arises I shall speak of the Lord Christ.

It is only that i am scared, no petrified of false teachings, i dont wish to turn people away from Christ like i have by preachers and Evangelists that come at me with wrong doctrine or perhaps correct but not in the right way. I literaly weep and pray for my friends who look at christians and me now with cynacism, questioning my choice and i desperately want them to know the Christ i now know.

My aim is through changing my sinful ways, loving and being devoted to Jesus that people around me will ask about the change, ask about my godly ways and then i can evangelise. I guess in my own way i am partaking in it, i just dont envisage myself as chasing people down streets or going on mission trips.

One of my friends has just been to China and she loves it, and i rejoice the the 139 converts but thats God's will for her, maybe it may be mine at a later date but i feel we have different roles.

At this current time, i am a baby in christ, my 3 month trip to america culminated in myself being fully saved, so i am enamoured in the Lords word but before i evangelise i need to get more confident in Christ.

Does that make sense?!

I want to state i that i see Evangelism is vital but i see others at the moment as of greater need for me at the moment.

However i would be grateful for your or Nate R help on this as believers of Christ for far longer than me, and so you can pass on greater wisdom to me.

For me Timothy 6:11 resonated strongly "pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith"

Thats what im trying to do now.

Lastly so far in my reading the greatest reference to Evangelism was in Romans 10:15

"How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news"

So i dont know, i know its important and will stir up in me the more confident i become in spreading the word. Its just for me at the moment im focusing on loving Jesus and feeling his love back. I do want to share that with the world though.

Any help is appreciated.

God Bless

Jon

NateR
08-27-2009, 04:37 AM
What evidence would you like? I think even if I posted all the evidence in the world you'd still say they were doctored or not real. So I am not at all concerned how you feel in this case. I know who I am in Christ and would not lie and go to hell just to pretend to be someone I am not.

My point is that this is the internet. You can claim all day long that you have gone seminary or studied hermaneutics, but it means nothing. Especially when the only fruit you display on this forum is rudeness, anger, pride and a hateful attitude toward anyone who dares to disagree with your "expertise."

The point of this section is to discuss Christianity, not to allow it to be taken over by self-proclaimed experts who bear little to no fruits of the Holy Spirit.

Also, I've always suspected that you had a persecution complex, but your accusation that I would claim you were doctoring your degree or diplomas is really just proof that you might suffer from some paranoid delusions.

You might like to compare the "persecution" that you are going through on here to what Jesus and Paul went through, but it's really just evidence that you might need some psychological counseling. You are bringing it all on yourself with the un-Christian attitude you constantly display on here.

Play The Man
08-27-2009, 04:51 AM
wow what luther has to say about jews is very interesting to say the least.


But what is WAY more interesting is how the lutheran blatantly pick and choose what they choose to believe from their own namesake.

They are openly admitting to picking the parts of stuff they like to believe and denying those things they don't want to believe.

Now if they can just admit that is what they do with the bible......

Luther was a very prolific person. He wrote letters, sermons, theses, etc. His students even jotted down his "tabletalk". He was a great theologian but he was a sinner like all of us. Luther was not Jesus. He was sometimes vulgar, used scatalogical language, and was often entangled in the politics of his day. LCMS affirmed that they follow Scripture. The Augsburg Confession is their interpretation of Scripture as it pertains to doctrines and issues of the Christian faith. They are just saying that they don't affirm every word that came out of Luther's mouth. Luther did not want the Church to be called "Lutheran" - he preferred "Followers of the Way of St. Paul". I am not a Lutheran, but I would suggest you peruse the Augsburg Confession before commenting on what they do with the Bible.

Chris F
08-27-2009, 05:15 AM
My point is that this is the internet. You can claim all day long that you have gone seminary or studied hermaneutics, but it means nothing. Especially when the only fruit you display on this forum is rudeness, anger, pride and a hateful attitude toward anyone who dares to disagree with your "expertise."Funny how you have no trouble seeing it in others. You at time are the most judgemental person on here, and you also claim "expertise" in some issues. So when i do it is pride, but when you do it, it is fine and dandy. Careful and try not to make your hypocrisy so evident NateR

The point of this section is to discuss Christianity, not to allow it to be taken over by self-proclaimed experts who bear little to no fruits of the Holy Spirit.There is no way you can judge a persons fruits from the Internet. For as many things you claim I do wrong I have PM's and emails thanking me and asking for more advice. You cannot say I do not have love, joy, peace, etc etc when you are no where near my home. I cannot control peoples perceptions of me. Just like Matt Hughes often comes off as arrogant and high and mighty to others who do not know him, I think you and others like oyu are rushing to the same foolish judgement they do against Matt. So NateR until you meet me and get to know me keep you self righteous judgements to yourself sir.

Also, I've always suspected that you had a persecution complex, but your accusation that I would claim you were doctoring your degree or diplomas is really just proof that you might suffer from some paranoid delusions.Not at all. I am just speaking from experience. I have had to prove myself all my life so your views are nothing more then your ignorance of me. I am very public with my apologetics and do not sit on a computer and preach to a choir. I often must prove my credentials in the public. Especially when I was teaching in colleges full of liberal acadmics.

You might like to compare the "persecution" that you are going through on here to what Jesus and Paul went through, but it's really just evidence that you might need some psychological counseling. You are bringing it all on yourself with the unChristian attitude you constantly display on here.So NateR do you think ma's wisdom (psychological counseling) is what the world needs. This statements tell me a lot about you. It tells me you have no faith in the cross of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit. You obviously do not take scripture at its word and literal because it clearly says 2 Timothy 3:16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. So NateR the God I serve does not need man's pseudo science to help His people. As for your claims of my UN-Christian like attitude well just because I do not subscribe to your particular set of creeds does not make me un-Christlike at all. Even Jesus could recognize a brood of vipers when he saw it.

My responses are in red above.

adamt
08-27-2009, 12:52 PM
Luther was a very prolific person. He wrote letters, sermons, theses, etc. His students even jotted down his "tabletalk". He was a great theologian but he was a sinner like all of us. Luther was not Jesus. He was sometimes vulgar, used scatalogical language, and was often entangled in the politics of his day. LCMS affirmed that they follow Scripture. The Augsburg Confession is their interpretation of Scripture as it pertains to doctrines and issues of the Christian faith. They are just saying that they don't affirm every word that came out of Luther's mouth. Luther did not want the Church to be called "Lutheran" - he preferred "Followers of the Way of St. Paul". I am not a Lutheran, but I would suggest you peruse the Augsburg Confession before commenting on what they do with the Bible.



with all due respect.... i don't have to read the augsburg confession to know what they do with the bible, all i have to do is read the headline news or even watch a few of them and i know what they do with the bible. Luther would be way more ashamed of lutherans than lutherans are of luthers antisemitic remarks. I've been to a lutheran service and I see how they do it.

But like many other denominations, you would be hard pressed to find two people who actually believed the same exact thing in any given church.

I don't think we could find two people on here that agreed on over 75-85% of the issues.

to steal a phrase from the army and tweak it a little bit. "church of one. " We all have individual belief systems, beyond God's personal will for our lives.


But the main thing is, it is really foolish to refer to yourself by who you follow, short of Christ. Lutheran, calvinist, armenian, way of paul, etc.... Creeds and confessions are also stupid. The Word is all you need. The Word as in the bible and The Word as in Christ. Creeds, colleges, confessions and commentary are not inerrant and they are not God breathed. They only lead to works based salvation.

Play The Man
08-27-2009, 09:26 PM
with all due respect.... i don't have to read the augsburg confession to know what they do with the bible, all i have to do is read the headline news or even watch a few of them and i know what they do with the bible. Luther would be way more ashamed of lutherans than lutherans are of luthers antisemitic remarks. I've been to a lutheran service and I see how they do it.

But like many other denominations, you would be hard pressed to find two people who actually believed the same exact thing in any given church.

I don't think we could find two people on here that agreed on over 75-85% of the issues.

to steal a phrase from the army and tweak it a little bit. "church of one. " We all have individual belief systems, beyond God's personal will for our lives.


But the main thing is, it is really foolish to refer to yourself by who you follow, short of Christ. Lutheran, calvinist, armenian, way of paul, etc.... Creeds and confessions are also stupid. The Word is all you need. The Word as in the bible and The Word as in Christ. Creeds, colleges, confessions and commentary are not inerrant and they are not God breathed. They only lead to works based salvation.

Adam, I am not trying to pick an argument with you, I am just trying to clarify a few points. I think you are confusing the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) with the LCMS (Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod). They are separate Churches. I think it would be fair to say that the ELCA is a "liberal", mainline Protestant Church. LCMS is a "conservative", confessional Church. Please scroll back to my past couple posts - they all refer to the LCMS. Please search for the news reports you are referring to and I would bet they are news reports about the ELCA.

Confessions state positions on theological issues. Catechisms try to teach theological truths. They quote Scripture to show how the writers arrived at a particular theological conclusion. You stated above (I'm paraphrasing) that there wasn't much unity within denominations, or on the forums, concerning theological issues. Confessions are attempts by denominations to build unity within a Church body by defining official Church positions on controversial theological issues. Confessions just state: "We believe . . . " because we believe Verse A, B, and C lead us to that conclusion. Pastors and members of a Church with a Confession must agree with the Confession to become members of that Church. If someone doesn't agree with the Confession, they cannot become a member and should look for a different Church. If a pastor is preaching contrary to the Confession, he will be asked to leave. Your Church may not have a Confession but I am sure it must have positions on Baptism, Communion, Who Jesus Was, How Scripture is to be used, etc. If a controversy erupts in your Church about a theological issue, I would hope that the disputants would look to Scripture for the answer; however, two sides could look at the same verses and come to different conclusions. Confessions work through theological issues presented by Scripture and say: "We have studied the Scriptures pertaining to the issue at hand, and this is the position of our Church." All I am saying is how about you spend 30 minutes to one hour looking at a Confession on the internet? You could pick one section of the Augsburg Confession and follow its footnotes to check the Scripture references they are quoting. You could decide if you think they are making valid conclusions or not. If you disagree with them, you will at least know what they believe and why, and you can direct your criticism at how you think they are misinterpreting particular verses.

Concerning catechisms, The Westminster Shorter Catechism, in Question #1 asks, "What is the chief end of man?". The answer that the catechism provides is, "The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever." The Larger Catechism and the Westminster Confession quote particular Scripture passages to provide evidence for the answer to the first question. Adam, do you think that man's chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever? If not, can you give a better brief answer to the question, "What is the chief end of man"?

The first question of the Heidelberg Catechism asks, "What is your only comfort, in life and in death?" The answer given is: "That I belong - body and soul, in life and in death - not to myself but to my Savior, Jesus Christ, who at the cost of his own blood has fully paid for all my sins and has completely freed me from the dominion of the devil; that he protects me so well that without the will of my Father in heaven not a hair can fall from my head; indeed, that everything must fit his purpose for my salvation. Therefore, by his Holy Spirit, he also assures me of eternal life, and makes me wholeheartedly willing and ready from now on to live for him." Cited as support for this answer is: Romans 14:8; I Cor. 6:19-20; I Cor. 3:23; I Peter 1:18-19; I John 1:7; I John 2:2; I John 3:8; John 6:35; John 6:39; Matt 10:29-31; Rom. 8:28; 2 Cor. 1:21-22; Rom 8:14; Rom 8:17. You can fact-check all the Scripture references and see if this answer is a valid answer to the question, based on Scripture. I find the question and answer incredibly instructive and comforting.

adamt
08-28-2009, 03:10 AM
Adam, I am not trying to pick an argument with you, I am just trying to clarify a few points. I think you are confusing the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) with the LCMS (Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod). They are separate Churches. I think it would be fair to say that the ELCA is a "liberal", mainline Protestant Church. LCMS is a "conservative", confessional Church. Please scroll back to my past couple posts - they all refer to the LCMS. Please search for the news reports you are referring to and I would bet they are news reports about the ELCA.

Confessions state positions on theological issues. Catechisms try to teach theological truths. They quote Scripture to show how the writers arrived at a particular theological conclusion. You stated above (I'm paraphrasing) that there wasn't much unity within denominations, or on the forums, concerning theological issues. Confessions are attempts by denominations to build unity within a Church body by defining official Church positions on controversial theological issues. Confessions just state: "We believe . . . " because we believe Verse A, B, and C lead us to that conclusion. Pastors and members of a Church with a Confession must agree with the Confession to become members of that Church. If someone doesn't agree with the Confession, they cannot become a member and should look for a different Church. If a pastor is preaching contrary to the Confession, he will be asked to leave. Your Church may not have a Confession but I am sure it must have positions on Baptism, Communion, Who Jesus Was, How Scripture is to be used, etc. If a controversy erupts in your Church about a theological issue, I would hope that the disputants would look to Scripture for the answer; however, two sides could look at the same verses and come to different conclusions. Confessions work through theological issues presented by Scripture and say: "We have studied the Scriptures pertaining to the issue at hand, and this is the position of our Church." All I am saying is how about you spend 30 minutes to one hour looking at a Confession on the internet? You could pick one section of the Augsburg Confession and follow its footnotes to check the Scripture references they are quoting. You could decide if you think they are making valid conclusions or not. If you disagree with them, you will at least know what they believe and why, and you can direct your criticism at how you think they are misinterpreting particular verses.

Concerning catechisms, The Westminster Shorter Catechism, in Question #1 asks, "What is the chief end of man?". The answer that the catechism provides is, "The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever." The Larger Catechism and the Westminster Confession quote particular Scripture passages to provide evidence for the answer to the first question. Adam, do you think that man's chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever? If not, can you give a better brief answer to the question, "What is the chief end of man"?

The first question of the Heidelberg Catechism asks, "What is your only comfort, in life and in death?" The answer given is: "That I belong - body and soul, in life and in death - not to myself but to my Savior, Jesus Christ, who at the cost of his own blood has fully paid for all my sins and has completely freed me from the dominion of the devil; that he protects me so well that without the will of my Father in heaven not a hair can fall from my head; indeed, that everything must fit his purpose for my salvation. Therefore, by his Holy Spirit, he also assures me of eternal life, and makes me wholeheartedly willing and ready from now on to live for him." Cited as support for this answer is: Romans 14:8; I Cor. 6:19-20; I Cor. 3:23; I Peter 1:18-19; I John 1:7; I John 2:2; I John 3:8; John 6:35; John 6:39; Matt 10:29-31; Rom. 8:28; 2 Cor. 1:21-22; Rom 8:14; Rom 8:17. You can fact-check all the Scripture references and see if this answer is a valid answer to the question, based on Scripture. I find the question and answer incredibly instructive and comforting.



wow, you are quite civil. kudos to you


my point still stands that following men is stupid. The bible says not to claim we are of paul or we are of peter or we are of cephas, thats what i am saying.


i was a little harsh with my statements earlier. I meant what i said just not as harshly and extreme as i said it. you make very good points. i am not completely agreeing with the degree you believe this, but i understand it. I go along with it, but it is still a shame we need more than the Bible.

i still believe people over complicate things. way over complicate things.


lets argue if jonah was dead in the whale or not? did he get resurrected?


orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr............ we could say who cares? what does it change and what does it matter?

were the israelites being punished by being slaves in egypt for the sins abraham commited while down there generations earlier???? Again. is it worth splitting another denomination over? denominations have split over less.

NateR
08-28-2009, 03:24 PM
Yes I have read all of the Gospels



And so far, for me the overrriding message wasn't to go out and Evangelise.




Now when i re-read this, i just purely saw it as a message to the disciples and not to me personally. I guess this is wrong of me.

Its just that for me my overriding feeling of the Gospels is Jesus's teachings, surrendering myself to Jesus and loving him with a contrite heart. I haven;t perhaps heeded the Evangelistic part as of yet.

Please dont get me wrong though, If asked, or if the situation arises I shall speak of the Lord Christ.

It is only that i am scared, no petrified of false teachings, i dont wish to turn people away from Christ like i have by preachers and Evangelists that come at me with wrong doctrine or perhaps correct but not in the right way. I literaly weep and pray for my friends who look at christians and me now with cynacism, questioning my choice and i desperately want them to know the Christ i now know.

My aim is through changing my sinful ways, loving and being devoted to Jesus that people around me will ask about the change, ask about my godly ways and then i can evangelise. I guess in my own way i am partaking in it, i just dont envisage myself as chasing people down streets or going on mission trips.

One of my friends has just been to China and she loves it, and i rejoice the the 139 converts but thats God's will for her, maybe it may be mine at a later date but i feel we have different roles.

At this current time, i am a baby in christ, my 3 month trip to america culminated in myself being fully saved, so i am enamoured in the Lords word but before i evangelise i need to get more confident in Christ.

Does that make sense?!

I want to state i that i see Evangelism is vital but i see others at the moment as of greater need for me at the moment.

However i would be grateful for your or Nate R help on this as believers of Christ for far longer than me, and so you can pass on greater wisdom to me.

For me Timothy 6:11 resonated strongly "pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith"

Thats what im trying to do now.

Lastly so far in my reading the greatest reference to Evangelism was in Romans 10:15

"How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news"

So i dont know, i know its important and will stir up in me the more confident i become in spreading the word. Its just for me at the moment im focusing on loving Jesus and feeling his love back. I do want to share that with the world though.

Any help is appreciated.

God Bless

Jon

Well, we all have to be wary of spreading false teachings. However, GOD doesn't require us to be Bible experts in order to spread His Word. We just need to tell people about our lives and what GOD has done for us. We're not lawyers, we're satisfied customers (don't overanalyze that analogy, like Mark does, because I've learned it falls apart under heavy scrutiny, :laugh: but hopefully you get the basic point I am trying to make).

Of course, it's important to know the Bible and to know how to recognize false teachings; but you don't need to have an answer for every single question that people might bring up. It's okay to say, "I don't know, but I can try to find out for you."

Finally, I think you are on the right track of just focusing on bringing yourself closer to Christ. If you truly love GOD and have a desire to be Christ-like, then it will show in your everyday life and you won't have to go searching for people to evangelize, the Holy Spirit will bring them to you.:cool:

NateR
08-28-2009, 03:37 PM
My responses are in red above.

I don't really see any point of continuing this discussion, but I just wanted to make one clarification. I have never, to my knowledge, claimed to be a Bible expert. I only pass on what I have learned from some great teachers that I have listened to. Any claims of my expertise have come from other people talking about me and I'm probably not as quick to correct them as I should be (even if I did correct them, it would just be seen as false humility). So for that I apologize.

With that in mind, Dave, I don't speak or read Hebrew. :tongue0011: My studies of the language haven't progressed too far beyond learning the alphabet and reading commentaries from Jewish scholars.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of Christian seminaries or Bible colleges, because many of them are heavily rooted in Anti-Semitism and Replacement Theology (which is the belief that the Church has replaced Israel in GOD's plan). Doctrines that I believe are incompatible with true Christianity.

Jonlion
08-28-2009, 04:38 PM
Well, we all have to be wary of spreading false teachings. However, GOD doesn't require us to be Bible experts in order to spread His Word. We just need to tell people about our lives and what GOD has done for us. We're not lawyers, we're satisfied customers (don't overanalyze that analogy, like Mark does, because I've learned it falls apart under heavy scrutiny, :laugh: but hopefully you get the basic point I am trying to make).

Of course, it's important to know the Bible and to know how to recognize false teachings; but you don't need to have an answer for every single question that people might bring up. It's okay to say, "I don't know, but I can try to find out for you."

Finally, I think you are on the right track of just focusing on bringing yourself closer to Christ. If you truly love GOD and have a desire to be Christ-like, then it will show in your everyday life and you won't have to go searching for people to evangelize, the Holy Spirit will bring them to you.:cool:


Thank you Nate, i get what you are saying and it make good sense, i appreciate it.

Thats the aim and believe me England, and where I am from needs desperately to hear the good work of Jesus Christ.

Chris F
08-29-2009, 01:19 AM
I don't really see any point of continuing this discussion, but I just wanted to make one clarification. I have never, to my knowledge, claimed to be a Bible expert. I only pass on what I have learned from some great teachers that I have listened to. Any claims of my expertise have come from other people talking about me and I'm probably not as quick to correct them as I should be (even if I did correct them, it would just be seen as false humility). So for that I apologize.

With that in mind, Dave, I don't speak or read Hebrew. :tongue0011: My studies of the language haven't progressed too far beyond learning the alphabet and reading commentaries from Jewish scholars.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of Christian seminaries or Bible colleges, because many of them are heavily rooted in Anti-Semitism and Replacement Theology (which is the belief that the Church has replaced Israel in GOD's plan). Doctrines that I believe are incompatible with true Christianity.

NateR what I said was the exact same thing people like John MacAuther, Adrain Rogers, and J Vernon McGee have preached. None of them are the same denomination and in fact in some case extreme oppositties. However, they are great preachers and bible teachers. What I wonder is if any of them were on here saying what I did would you give them the same amount of greif. They all teach that Jesus was speaking here about feelings of lust with the women and press the importance of the Greek for better explanation. Jesus was exposing their hypcorisy through out chapter 5.

As for bible colleges, what I do not like baout them is the teach man's wisdom way more then God's. The school I attended as well as my denomination does not believe in replacement theology and we consider it to be a false teaching. Only a fool would think God would forsake his chosen people. We are graphed into the vine we never replace it.

Neezar
08-29-2009, 02:56 AM
My point is that this is the internet. You can claim all day long that you have gone seminary or studied hermaneutics, but it means nothing. Especially when the only fruit you display on this forum is rudeness, anger, pride and a hateful attitude toward anyone who dares to disagree with your "expertise."

The point of this section is to discuss Christianity, not to allow it to be taken over by self-proclaimed experts who bear little to no fruits of the Holy Spirit.

Also, I've always suspected that you had a persecution complex, but your accusation that I would claim you were doctoring your degree or diplomas is really just proof that you might suffer from some paranoid delusions.

You might like to compare the "persecution" that you are going through on here to what Jesus and Paul went through, but it's really just evidence that you might need some psychological counseling. You are bringing it all on yourself with the un-Christian attitude you constantly display on here.

:applause: :applause::applause:

Chris F
08-29-2009, 03:21 AM
:applause: :applause::applause:

:stirthepot: just can't let it be can you.

Chuck
08-29-2009, 04:01 AM
:stirthepot: just can't let it be can you.

LOL... nope.... don't think she can :wink:

adamt
08-29-2009, 04:29 AM
NateR what I said was the exact same thing people like John MacAuther, Adrain Rogers, and J Vernon McGee have preached.


maybe it's not what you said as much as why and how you said it. I have yet to hear macarthur, mcgee, or rogers say anything in pride. and i say this with all due respect --------but I have yet to hear you say anything with anything but pride.

don't think that is fair??..... few people dare compare themselves to the greats like macarthur, mcgee, or rogers. You are the only one on here that would mention your name in the same post as theirs.

don't mean to be mean but just pushing you to be a better christian. that's just the way i am. you're welcome.....












.I am the type of person who pushes you to do more

NateR
08-29-2009, 04:51 AM
NateR what I said was the exact same thing people like John MacAuther, Adrain Rogers, and J Vernon McGee have preached. None of them are the same denomination and in fact in some case extreme oppositties. However, they are great preachers and bible teachers. What I wonder is if any of them were on here saying what I did would you give them the same amount of greif. They all teach that Jesus was speaking here about feelings of lust with the women and press the importance of the Greek for better explanation. Jesus was exposing their hypcorisy through out chapter 5.

And I would agree with that 100%, what were we arguing about again? :huh:

I also agree that Christ's point was to address self-righteousness and hypocrisy.

It's probably not the best idea to tell a teenage boy that if he lusts after a girl in his school, then he might as well just have sex with her because it's the same sin in the eyes of GOD. You can't get a girl pregnant or contract an STD by fantasizing about her; so there are some very practical differences in the consequences of the two sins. Thus, it's logical to assume that Christ's words are not about immorality, they're about pride.

As for bible colleges, what I do not like baout them is the teach man's wisdom way more then God's. The school I attended as well as my denomination does not believe in replacement theology and we consider it to be a false teaching. Only a fool would think God would forsake his chosen people. We are graphed into the vine we never replace it.

I'm glad to hear you say that, I couldn't agree more. :cool:

Tyburn
08-29-2009, 12:25 PM
:stirthepot: just can't let it be can you.
why should she :huh:

Chris F
08-30-2009, 12:49 AM
maybe it's not what you said as much as why and how you said it. I have yet to hear macarthur, mcgee, or rogers say anything in pride. and i say this with all due respect --------but I have yet to hear you say anything with anything but pride.

don't think that is fair??..... few people dare compare themselves to the greats like macarthur, mcgee, or rogers. You are the only one on here that would mention your name in the same post as theirs.

don't mean to be mean but just pushing you to be a better christian. that's just the way i am. you're welcome.....

You see that there is a judgement in and of itself. How can you say it i s with pride over the Internet. Other then emoticons the keyboard does not express emotion. That is imply your opinion. Pride is thing you are somehow better then someone else. I do not nor have I or will I ever think that. And since none of you get mail in my head you cannot say what or how I mean or feel

As for comparing myself with those men why can't I. God is no respecter of persons. He view me in the same way he does them and anyone else who follow Christ. I am equally educated, granted my schooling is in others subjects. They are men and they would be the first to tell you that themselves. I have had the privilege of meeting them all but McGee. So again that is your opinion.

Lastly iron sharpens iron. Keep pushing, but don't whine when pushed back.

Chris F
08-30-2009, 12:51 AM
why should she :huh:

Dave you can't see the sarcasm in the little guys eyes stirring the pot. Man you are wound way to tight sir. Besides according to you, you know how I feel and what I mean any hoot.

Chris F
08-30-2009, 12:53 AM
And I would agree with that 100%, what were we arguing about again? :huh:

I also agree that Christ's point was to address self-righteousness and hypocrisy.

It's probably not the best idea to tell a teenage boy that if he lusts after a girl in his school, then he might as well just have sex with her because it's the same sin in the eyes of GOD. You can't get a girl pregnant or contract an STD by fantasizing about her; so there are some very practical differences in the consequences of the two sins. Thus, it's logical to assume that Christ's words are not about immorality, they're about pride.



I'm glad to hear you say that, I couldn't agree more. :cool:

Not sure why you were even arguing then if that is what you feel. I think you had a problem with the term intimacy in the way I used it and I told you to look at that verse in Greek and you'd see why I said that then you attacked my credentials and went off on me. We often agree more then we disagree.

Neezar
08-30-2009, 05:04 AM
:stirthepot: just can't let it be can you.

:mischievous:









:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Tyburn
08-30-2009, 05:06 AM
Dave you can't see the sarcasm in the little guys eyes stirring the pot. Man you are wound way to tight sir. Besides according to you, you know how I feel and what I mean any hoot.
:laugh: little guy?

Denise is a Woman. :laugh:

Chuck
08-30-2009, 06:31 AM
:laugh: little guy?

Denise is a Woman. :laugh:

But the LITTLE GUY who is actually stirring the pot in the emoticon is who he's talking about :D

Silly Brit!!! :laugh:

Tyburn
08-30-2009, 12:03 PM
But the LITTLE GUY who is actually stirring the pot in the emoticon is who he's talking about :D

Silly Brit!!! :laugh:
:huh: :blink:

I dont get it :unsure-1:

Chris F
08-31-2009, 02:33 AM
:huh: :blink:

I dont get it :unsure-1:

What Chuck said. I meant the little guy stirring the pot. Not her literally.

Tyburn
08-31-2009, 01:42 PM
What Chuck said. I meant the little guy stirring the pot. Not her literally.
:ashamed: oh

Play The Man
09-22-2009, 10:07 PM
As The Lutherans would say "SIN BOLDLY" because you can be assured that the power of forgiveness and the cross CAN wipe out anything you confess and repent. They actually used that slogan to show how sinful they were and how Christ could still save them dispite it.

Let Your Sins Be Strong



13."If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly. For he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here we have to sin. This life in not the dwelling place of righteousness but, as Peter says, we look for a new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. . . . Pray boldly-you too are a mighty sinner." (Weimar ed. vol. 2, p. 371; Letters I, "Luther's Works," American Ed., Vol 48. p. 281- 282)



13. If you are a preacher of mercy, do not preach an imaginary but the true mercy. If the mercy is true, you must therefore bear the true, not an imaginary sin. God does not save those who are only imaginary sinners. Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides. We, however, says Peter (2. Peter 3:13) are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth where justice will reign. It suffices that through God's glory we have recognized the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world. No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day. Do you think such an exalted Lamb paid merely a small price with a meager sacrifice for our sins? Pray hard for you are quite a sinner.

On the day of the Feast of St. Peter the Apostle, 1521

I rest my case, your Honour :D

I was reading an article by German Lutheran journalist Uwe Siemon-Netto in the September issue of Christianity Today. Siemon-Netto spent some time visiting the Amish and wrote an article about his experience. A couple paragraphs stood out to me and reminded me of Tyburn's post.

But I did say this was an escape, didn't I? I loved what I saw, until the thought occurred to me that none of these kids would ever be physicians. I asked Raber about that.

"Could you be a doctor and still be Amish?" He hesitated, then replied, "Theoretically you could. But by the time you graduate you would have exposed yourself too much to the wickedness of the world." So I wondered aloud: "Does this mean that, having been through this kind of experience, I will go to hell?" Raber became adamant: "No! We would never say this. While we avoid this lifestyle, we must obey Jesus' words, 'Judge not lest you be judged'" (Matt. 7:1).

Our brief dialogue exposed the stark theological contrast between this Lutheran and his enchanting Amish hosts. Fearing the temptation of falling into sin, they would rather not risk worldly vocations as physicians, lawyers, policemen, or politicians. The Lutheran, on the other hand, has the Reformer's admonition in his ears: "Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly." In other words, do your duty in the secular "kingdom," aware that you are fallible and bound to sin but also that Christ is always there to implore for forgiveness.

KENTUCKYREDBONE
09-28-2009, 04:01 AM
Let us ALL be careful that we don't get overly technical or full of ourselves! To me a big part of the issue seems to be how you define lust. I just don't see the need for such big arguments and worry that some may be a little to full of thierselfs! This I believe can be applied to more than one side.

Neezar
09-28-2009, 04:44 AM
Let us ALL be careful that we don't get overly technical or full of ourselves! To me a big part of the issue seems to be how you define lust. I just don't see the need for such big arguments and worry that some may be a little to full of thierselfs! This I believe can be applied to more than one side.

Can you specify which argument in this thread that you are referring to? :laugh: