Why Should Jesus Love Me?

hick-up

“squuuze me”

Since: Feb 09

Florida, USA

#433628 May 10, 2012
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
That does not uphold your statement:
"They most certainly are asking Christianity to change their rules."
Name a single law that dicrates anything to any relgion.
The law dos not say religions have to recognize ANY secular marriage. In fact many Christian denominations don't. The RCC s=does not recognize any marriage that is not in their church per their rules (conversion is mandatory for non-catholics).
Later ...

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433629 May 10, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, now you went and gone and did it!
He'll go here: http://creationmuseum.org/
That there is a crime against humanity

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433630 May 10, 2012
Dr Shrink wrote:
<quoted text>
you sound,like you know everything based on museum-apartment of rich people artifacts adverising theor own cave searching,teaching them like you,and using people like you to advertise their agenda for free.
at first would be nice,to ask me
where I am living and my skills?
and after this question to ask your sent question to me.
museum does,nt have earth age 0 clock
also believe to your own pleasure,and fell free of worries about me?
if I wisited museums(apartments of rich,or graves of not to old bones)
ratehr keep busy about hot political debate-gays and legalization by Obama,for sure not by God Romans 1;24-25....is final answer about gays same treated by Gods LAW,like thiefs,adulters,of alcoholics,or drug users Gal 5;17-21
have good and free mind today from worries about my private hobbies?
Okay

Where do you live, and what are your skills?

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433631 May 10, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree
If every joining was considered a civil union and the respective rights that came with it were based on that union then fine. And if on top of that union recognized by government people wanted to partake in the religious sacrament of marriage to be recognized within their faith as a union approved of by God then that is fine too. But a religion can't claim a secular right for their own.
Marriage allows a spouse judicial protections concerning testimony, it allows certain medical rights such as visitation and decision making in certain circumstances, it allows for insurance benefits, and can grant someone citizenship. Secular rights can't be given to a religious sacrament, it should be separate.
Both unions, heterosexual and homosexual should be legal. If the faith wants to restrict who can engage in marriage that is their business. But secular must remain secular and religious must remain religious. And when they clearly are intertwined then the right to do so cannot be denied IMO
Good insight.

Tolerance is what makes the world go round.

By being intolerant and harping on literal translations, makes Bible fundementalists as dangerous as Muslim fundementalists. However, those that are able to gain from it a message of tolerance and love, rather than comdemnation and hatred, they are the ones who wins over souls

hick-up

“squuuze me”

Since: Feb 09

Florida, USA

#433632 May 10, 2012
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of them. There is nothing to prevent the clergy from holding public office in the USA.
And your point is what?

Do you think it should be against the law for people of faith to hold public office?

How many of those people actually wrote any law or introduced any Bills?

Have you been drinking?

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433633 May 10, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
Edit: would have LIKED to see your answer, not LIED to see your answer
I don't usually narc on other's typing mistakes, but that is a rather humourous typo...

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433634 May 10, 2012
hick-up wrote:
<quoted text>
And your point is what?
That androids do, in fact, dream of electric sheep
hick-up wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think it should be against the law for people of faith to hold public office?
Are we talking Mother Theresa, or Brevik?
hick-up wrote:
<quoted text>
How many of those people actually wrote any law or introduced any Bills?
About a hunnerd, maybe.
hick-up wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you been drinking?
Yes. Consistently.

Hi, hick-up

:P

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#433635 May 11, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Good insight.
Tolerance is what makes the world go round.
By being intolerant and harping on literal translations, makes Bible fundementalists as dangerous as Muslim fundementalists. However, those that are able to gain from it a message of tolerance and love, rather than comdemnation and hatred, they are the ones who wins over souls
Some verses are so stand-alone literal such as love thy neighbor, love thy enemy, do unto, others, etc that IMO it is basically Biblically impossible for anyone to claim Jesus would have taught, encouraged or condoned hatred.

But I do agree that there can be an inherent danger in too strict of a literal translation. We often hear the terms 'letter of the law' and 'spirit of the law' when dealing with legal matters. Not that I am encouraging people to supplant their own meaning but I do think even with the Bible one needs to grasp the spirit of the message.

Let me give one example. Jesus said (paraphrasing here) that whomever seeks to commit adultery in their heart is already guilty of that sin. Now too strict an interpretation would mean every time we overcame temptation (obviously a good thing) we were actually guilty of sinning just by being temped (obviously a bad thing). The result is drastically different.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#433636 May 11, 2012
Part 2 of 2

But can we just dismiss sins of thought? No. But I believe the message speaks to the giving over of one's mind whereas to engage in the sin mentally. If I see an attractive woman walk by in a hotel lobby and I am married and for a minute I think "dang I should go buy her a drink in the hotel bar." And then that is followed up with "what the heck an I thinking? I am married." did i commit a sin? I don't think so. But if I come into work every day and fantasize about sleeping with a co-worker or the only reason I don't ask her out is because I think I might get caught, am I guilty of adultery according to Christ's teachings? I say absolutely.

So trying to allow ourselves to be led into the proper understanding is important. What we shouldn't do is things like look for a verse to justify a behavior. I have seen some basically commit the act and then look for a verse to defend it afterwards and say "see technically I can do this" That isn't how it is supposed to work.

And lastly I may not know which souls any of us may have helped or how much to be more open to the message but I think everybody has a pretty good idea who they helped to push away (if they have). Christians are given very specific instruction how to witness IMO for the very reason you said and that is it is much more beneficial to the seeker.

(T) Peace

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#433637 May 11, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't usually narc on other's typing mistakes, but that is a rather humourous typo...
I thought so too!

I use spell check but my computer lags and no way am I proof-reading everything before I post it.

Good to see ya again DF

(T) Peace

P.S.

BTW posting to me always puts you at risk for semi-unrelated rants in my reply! Don't say I never warned you!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#433638 May 11, 2012
hick-up wrote:
<quoted text>
I fail to understand your referance to a
double edged sword.....
One time in High School my buddy thought it would be funny to take the dull edge of a knife and slash it against my hand real fast so I couldn't see what end was up and freak out thinking he was about to cut me. It worked real well considering it was a double-edged knife!

Let me just say...ouch!

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#433639 May 11, 2012
hick-up wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't need you to explain to me why we have a Constitution ...and I fail to understand your referance to a
double edged sword. But I can tell by your tone that I won't be in this conversation with you. Have a good nite.
Have fun in L.A.:)

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#433640 May 11, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Some verses are so stand-alone literal such as love thy neighbor, love thy enemy, do unto, others, etc that IMO it is basically Biblically impossible for anyone to claim Jesus would have taught, encouraged or condoned hatred.
But I do agree that there can be an inherent danger in too strict of a literal translation. We often hear the terms 'letter of the law' and 'spirit of the law' when dealing with legal matters. Not that I am encouraging people to supplant their own meaning but I do think even with the Bible one needs to grasp the spirit of the message.
Let me give one example. Jesus said (paraphrasing here) that whomever seeks to commit adultery in their heart is already guilty of that sin. Now too strict an interpretation would mean every time we overcame temptation (obviously a good thing) we were actually guilty of sinning just by being temped (obviously a bad thing). The result is drastically different.
Mmmmh.... good points :)

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#433641 May 11, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
Part 2 of 2
But can we just dismiss sins of thought? No. But I believe the message speaks to the giving over of one's mind whereas to engage in the sin mentally. If I see an attractive woman walk by in a hotel lobby and I am married and for a minute I think "dang I should go buy her a drink in the hotel bar." And then that is followed up with "what the heck an I thinking? I am married." did i commit a sin? I don't think so. But if I come into work every day and fantasize about sleeping with a co-worker or the only reason I don't ask her out is because I think I might get caught, am I guilty of adultery according to Christ's teachings? I say absolutely.
So trying to allow ourselves to be led into the proper understanding is important. What we shouldn't do is things like look for a verse to justify a behavior. I have seen some basically commit the act and then look for a verse to defend it afterwards and say "see technically I can do this" That isn't how it is supposed to work.
And lastly I may not know which souls any of us may have helped or how much to be more open to the message but I think everybody has a pretty good idea who they helped to push away (if they have). Christians are given very specific instruction how to witness IMO for the very reason you said and that is it is much more beneficial to the seeker.
(T) Peace
More good points and I don't mean the point of the double edged sword LOL

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#433642 May 11, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
That there is a crime against humanity
They have a plastic Triceratops with a saddle on.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#433643 May 11, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
That androids do, in fact, dream of electric sheep
<quoted text>
Are we talking Mother Theresa, or Brevik?
<quoted text>
About a hunnerd, maybe.
<quoted text>
Yes. Consistently.
Hi, hick-up
:P
Ah. A Phil Dick reference!
Another of "The Few, the Proud, the Fen".

I knew I liked you.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433644 May 11, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Some verses are so stand-alone literal such as love thy neighbor, love thy enemy, do unto, others, etc that IMO it is basically Biblically impossible for anyone to claim Jesus would have taught, encouraged or condoned hatred.
But I do agree that there can be an inherent danger in too strict of a literal translation. We often hear the terms 'letter of the law' and 'spirit of the law' when dealing with legal matters. Not that I am encouraging people to supplant their own meaning but I do think even with the Bible one needs to grasp the spirit of the message.
Let me give one example. Jesus said (paraphrasing here) that whomever seeks to commit adultery in their heart is already guilty of that sin. Now too strict an interpretation would mean every time we overcame temptation (obviously a good thing) we were actually guilty of sinning just by being temped (obviously a bad thing). The result is drastically different.
The Bible can be used to motivate and inspire. Unfortunately, it cn be applied for good and bad purposes. Just as it provides soul food for some really nice people on here, it was used to incite hatred against Jews in Germany, before the war.

I believe that the teachings in the Old Testament is oldworldly. Back in those days, you met another civilisation and tried to burn them into the ground - take their resources, their women an their slaves.

However, the New Testament is a much more civilised message, propagating love and tolerance (Okay, they had to - The Jews of those days would have been squashed like bugs if they tried to initiate a war against the Romans).

So why can't that be the 'spirit' of the Bible? That instead of looking for ancient, bigotted texts, to use against a group you don't like (homosexuals, Jews, Atheists, blacks, gingers, whatever), use the spirit in which the NT was written in. Methinks Christians get the 'love thy neighbour' wrong. Love thy neighbour by respecting his or her human rights.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433645 May 11, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought so too!
I use spell check but my computer lags and no way am I proof-reading everything before I post it.
Good to see ya again DF
(T) Peace
P.S.
BTW posting to me always puts you at risk for semi-unrelated rants in my reply! Don't say I never warned you!
I thought G_O_D's typo was good, but then on another thread, Richardfs made the mother of all typos... He said him and his wife was in the 'swinging pool'- and immediately corrected 'swimming pool'.

Typo of the year, that one

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433646 May 11, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>They have a plastic Triceratops with a saddle on.
*Shakes head*

Looks at the horizon.

*Shakes head again*

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#433647 May 11, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Ah. A Phil Dick reference!
Another of "The Few, the Proud, the Fen".
I knew I liked you.
Haven't read too much of his stuff yet, but I love his insight into things. A visionary.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min River Tam 37,272
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min Robert F 688,914
Why are Europeans a race of savages, thieves, a... (Jun '15) 7 min Johnny 72
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 47 min Insults Are Easier 988,595
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 1 hr Tony 6,553
Why doesn't God STOP the world's MADNESS and in... 5 hr HFCS - What It Is 8
EXPOSING: The Clintons And The Russians 6 hr bohart 2
More from around the web