Discussion:
Accepting forgiveness
(too old to reply)
Jacob
2008-11-10 00:34:40 UTC
Permalink
Have you ever thought that false humility is a weapon Satan uses to
keep us down? One form of false humility is where we deprecate
ourselves. We like to think of ourselves as being less important, more
sinful, less capable, etc., than we really are, thinking that we are
being humble! With a mistaken understanding of Php.2:3, we try to make
ourselves out to be worse than others. This kind of approach also
hinders us from freely receiving forgiveness from God. (Actually a
correct translation (NASB) tells us to consider others as being more
important than ourselves, meaning we should place other people's needs
before ours.)

We think it is humility to consider that we are too sinful for God to
forgive us, or that some particular sin we have committed is too
heinous to merit any forgiveness. Of course we never merit any
forgiveness. God gives it to us as a gift, free, because its
punishment has already been taken by Jesus.

Due to some twist in our thinking we believe that it would be
unrighteous to take forgiveness for our sins because they are no light
matter. By punishing ourselves by belittling ourselves, continuing in
condemnation, and not doing anything that might give an impression
that we are saints, we derive some perverted pleasure! We think we are
humble!

As much as we deplore ourselves for having sinned the way we have, we
ought to maginfy God for the greateness of His grace in preparing a
way of salvation for sinners like us. Otherwise, while we may be right
in thinking that we are wretched sinners who do not deserve any mercy,
we insult God by thinking that His heart is not large enough or His
love is not deep enough.

Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (1Jn.2:2). By sacrificing
Himself, the Son of God as a Man, the Lamb without blemish, He has put
behind the problem of sin once for all (He.9:12,26). Now we can
receive this forgiveness freely, for all of our sins and the worst of
our sins.

The first step is to confess our sins. If we do that God will do His
part, to forgive and cleanse us (1Jn.1:9). Though it is sufficient to
confess only to God the sins we have done only against Him, it may be
helpful sometimes to share it with someone who is mature, who can keep
secrets and who can help us. If we have hurt others through our sins,
we need to confess those to them too.

Once we have acknowledged our sin, we must realise that the only One
who has the right and authority to forgive sins has Himself promised
to do that for us when we confess our sins. There is no higher
authority. And there is nothing else we can do to get forgiveness. Do
we imagine that by letting ourselves feel miserable we can earn this
forgiveness?

Let us learn to continually bask in the sunlight of God's forgiveness.
If we fall at any time, there is still forgiveness kept ready for us
(1Jn.2:1). We don't want to treat forgiveness cheaply, do we? Let us
then be thankful for it as a most precious gift from God!
Matthew Johnson
2008-11-11 03:09:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob
Have you ever thought that false humility is a weapon Satan uses to
keep us down?
No. Rather, I always KNEW it was just one of many such weapons. The
difference is vital.

After all: the rest of YOUR posts reads like one long laundry lists of
excuses for avoiding real humility out of fear of "false humility".
Post by Jacob
One form of false humility is where we deprecate ourselves.
Another is when we are too sure of ourselves, as you are here.
Post by Jacob
We like to think of ourselves as being less important, more sinful,
less capable, etc., than we really are, thinking that we are being
humble!
What are you smoking? I have never met anybody who _likes_ thinking
about himself/herself this way. I _have_ met people who were compelled
by their own faithfulness to the truth who thought this way, and found
true repentance.
Post by Jacob
With a mistaken understanding of Php.2:3, we try to make ourselves
out to be worse than others.
But again, WHY are you so sure that understanding is mistaken? The
'understanding' you gave below was certainly mistaken.
Post by Jacob
This kind of approach also hinders us from freely receiving
forgiveness from God.
What? Why would this be so? You must misunderstand either 'humility'
or 'forgiveness' to think this is true. Which is it? Or is it both?
Post by Jacob
(Actually a correct translation (NASB) tells us to consider others as
being more important than ourselves, meaning we should place other
people's needs before ours.)
But that is NOT a "correct translation". It completely misses the
sense of the word TAPEINOFROSUNH (G5012).

TAPEINOFROSUNH is usually translated 'humility', but apparently this
was not clear enough for you. But then why couldn't you see the
sterling example of humility in the following verse? Didn't you
realize that that "Have this mind among yourselves (Php 2:6) refers to
the humility of Christ? So the following verses, show us His very
great, even Godlike, humility. And yes, if "Godlike humility" sounds
like an oxymoron to you, then you are beginning to get the idea;)

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who,
though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a
thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a
servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human
form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on
a cross. (Phi 2:5-8 RSVA)

For two thousand years now, this "emptying himself", a.k.a. KENOSIS,
has been hailed as the very pinnacle of godly humility, therefore the
example for us all.

But we beginners have to start with lesser examples. If, for example,
you are now chafing at my correction of your serious errors here, then
you need to start with remembering the Proverb:

Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.
(Pro 12:1 RSVA)

This "love of discipline" includes facing unpleasant truths and
welcoming correction of your own errors.
Post by Jacob
We think it is humility to consider that we are too sinful for God to
forgive us, or that some particular sin we have committed is too
heinous to merit any forgiveness.
Ah, but this is NOT the same as "thinking of ourselves as being less
important, more sinful, less capable, etc.". Why, it is not even
CLOSE.

Nor is that your only mistake. You make a far more serious mistake
when you imagine that there IS something too sinful for God to
forgive. This is an even more serious error, because it is really
nothing more than an excuse for surrendering yourself to two of our
worse spiritual enemies, pride and despair.

Perhaps this is one of the evil side-effects of the Protestant
over-emphasis of the Pauline Epistles. After all, the Gospels are full
of examples of repentance, repentance of even the worst
sinners. Anyone who pays real attention to them will notice the
message: Christ calls all to repentance, no matter how sinful.

But these same examples also show the humility necessary for
repentance. Surely you noticed? When the prodigal son came to his
senses and decided to go back to his father, he humbled himself (Lk
15:19). Likewise with the Publican, whose prayer was made up of humble
words(Lk 18:13), unlike the Pharisee's prayer, which was proud,
presumptuous and arrogant (Lk 18:11).

Humility is vital for the Christian's spiritual warfare. To avoid it
out of fear of "false humility" is to surrender to the enemy. That is
an act of treason.

[snip]
B
2008-11-13 04:30:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob
Have you ever thought that false humility is a weapon Satan uses to
keep us down? One form of false humility is where we deprecate
...
Post by Jacob
We think it is humility to consider that we are too sinful for God to
forgive us, or that some particular sin we have committed is too
...>
Post by Jacob
Due to some twist in our thinking we believe that it would be
unrighteous to take forgiveness for our sins because they are no light
matter. By punishing ourselves by belittling ourselves, continuing in
...
Post by Jacob
Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (1Jn.2:2). By sacrificing
Himself, the Son of God as a Man, the Lamb without blemish, He has put
...
Post by Jacob
The first step is to confess our sins. If we do that God will do His
part, to forgive and cleanse us (1Jn.1:9). Though it is sufficient to
...
Post by Jacob
Once we have acknowledged our sin, we must realise that the only One
who has the right and authority to forgive sins has Himself promised
...
Post by Jacob
Let us learn to continually bask in the sunlight of God's forgiveness.
If we fall at any time, there is still forgiveness kept ready for us
(1Jn.2:1). We don't want to treat forgiveness cheaply, do we? Let us
then be thankful for it as a most precious gift from God!
B - to know that Christ exists in all of us..that we are truly made in
Gods image should allow us to know that we are all great..not as
individuals..but as ONE in God. Forgiveness is easy for me...hauling
around the heavy sack of grievances towards someone is tiresome. If we
actually realized that we are all learning on this earth...working
towards being better (most of us in an obvious speed)...then maybe we
can look past the hurts and such to the Christ within each of us and
see how we struggle and how we all just want to be loved. My
forgiveness is swift. I care not to feel a wall between others that is
self-manifested....God directs me to break down said wall and just
love.
I.M.O
Bren
B.G. Kent
2008-11-29 00:59:21 UTC
Permalink
I do believe that people that do not want the term marriage being given to
gay persons is purely because of hate. I believe that if they search
themselves they will see this. Since the US. is not a particular "one"
religion country and should separate church from state (lest it become
extremist like some Muslim countries) I think if you take religion out of
it you will see that there is nothing more to this anti-marriage for gays
thing than hatred. It used to be illegal for blacks and whites to marry,
now we have that...it used to be illegal for women and black folks to be
able to vote..now again..we have that. Time for change. Canada has equal
marriage for all adult non-related people as do many European countries
and I feel that it is time for America to come out of the darkness to the
light of fairness and loving behaviour. This is what I wish. I am not gay
but have many gay friends and I see California stepping back as a
regression to the stone ages. Yes it is a vote by the majority but the
majority doesn't always do the right thing..remember the majority were
once for slavery too. Doesn't make it right.

Bren
Steve Hayes
2008-12-01 00:29:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by B.G. Kent
I do believe that people that do not want the term marriage being given to
gay persons is purely because of hate.
Habitually believing the worst of people and that people do everything from
the worst of motives is one of the major causes or war in the world today.

It's like believing that gay people want to use the term "marriage" for
homosexual liaisons purely because of hate.

And, from what I've read on Usenet, some people really do believe that.

But ascribing everything to hate when hatred is not the motive is a very sad
attitude, and causes numerous avoidable conflicts and even wars.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
B
2008-12-22 02:54:19 UTC
Permalink
I do believe that people that do not want the term marriage being given =
to
gay persons is purely because of hate.
Habitually believing the worst of people and that people do everything fr=
om
the worst of motives is one of the major causes or war in the world today=
.
It's like believing that gay people want to use the term "marriage" for
homosexual liaisons purely because of hate.
And, from what I've read on Usenet, some people really do believe that.
But ascribing everything to hate when hatred is not the motive is a very =
sad
attitude, and causes numerous avoidable conflicts and even wars.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: =A0http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog:http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop=
uk

B - what else is it but hate born of fear? Gay people want
equality ...that is all. Why does their being married have anything to
do with you and your sexuality or God? It is simply fear of something
different being turned into hate and then using the Bible to hide
behind with that hate. There's no other reason..in my opinion. I can't
see Jesus turning Gay people away..not letting them marry...I just
can't see it. I can see Jesus talking love...and sharing love whilst
all the biblicist are banging their fists and saying "they don't
belong in our exclusive club!!!". It's all hate..no love.

that's my belief.
Bren
Antares 531
2008-12-23 02:32:22 UTC
Permalink
(snip)
Post by B
B - what else is it but hate born of fear? Gay people want
equality ...that is all. Why does their being married have anything to
do with you and your sexuality or God? It is simply fear of something
different being turned into hate and then using the Bible to hide
behind with that hate. There's no other reason..in my opinion. I can't
see Jesus turning Gay people away..not letting them marry...I just
can't see it. I can see Jesus talking love...and sharing love whilst
all the biblicist are banging their fists and saying "they don't
belong in our exclusive club!!!". It's all hate..no love.
that's my belief.
Bren
Marriage is, by definition, a union of one man and one woman. If
homosexual people want a similar union, for legal purposes such as
joint tax returns, etc., I have no argument with them, but they should
give this union another name, and not steal the name that has been
traditionally used to indicate a union between one man and one woman.
Let them call their union something like Co-bond or Unity agreement,
or what ever they can come up with...other than using the term,
marriage.

Gordon
B.G. Kent
2009-01-02 20:48:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antares 531
(snip)
Post by B
B - what else is it but hate born of fear? Gay people want
equality ...that is all. Why does their being married have anything to
do with you and your sexuality or God? It is simply fear of something
different being turned into hate and then using the Bible to hide
behind with that hate. There's no other reason..in my opinion. I can't
see Jesus turning Gay people away..not letting them marry...I just
can't see it. I can see Jesus talking love...and sharing love whilst
all the biblicist are banging their fists and saying "they don't
belong in our exclusive club!!!". It's all hate..no love.
that's my belief.
Bren
Marriage is, by definition, a union of one man and one woman. If
homosexual people want a similar union, for legal purposes such as
joint tax returns, etc., I have no argument with them, but they should
give this union another name, and not steal the name that has been
traditionally used to indicate a union between one man and one woman.
Let them call their union something like Co-bond or Unity agreement,
or what ever they can come up with...other than using the term,
marriage.
Gordon
B - I seen a "marriage of minds" a "marriage of polar opposites" being
used. They are no more stealing it than any other word that morphs with
time.
What's wrong with them using the word marriage? I haven't seen one post
explaining this to the point of it making sense. Traditional meanings of
words have always changed over time. This is just hatred and bigotry
hiding behind the Bible.
Why don't people admit that they are disgust in their hearts and that they
don't like homosexuals and that they foster hatred towards them?
I pray for them to see the light of Christ.

that's what I believe.

Bren
Steve Hayes
2008-12-23 02:32:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by B
B - what else is it but hate born of fear? Gay people want
equality ...that is all. Why does their being married have anything to
do with you and your sexuality or God? It is simply fear of something
different being turned into hate and then using the Bible to hide
behind with that hate. There's no other reason..in my opinion. I can't
see Jesus turning Gay people away..not letting them marry...I just
can't see it. I can see Jesus talking love...and sharing love whilst
all the biblicist are banging their fists and saying "they don't
belong in our exclusive club!!!". It's all hate..no love.
that's my belief.
Just because [people disagree with you, it doesn't mean they hate you.

Fear that other people who disagree with you are conspiring against you and
hate you is a possible symptom of paranoia.
--
The unworthy deacon,
Stephen Methodius Hayes
Contact: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Orthodox mission pages: http://www.orthodoxy.faithweb.com/
B.G. Kent
2009-01-02 20:48:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by B
that's my belief.
Just because [people disagree with you, it doesn't mean they hate you.
B - I know this. I'm not talking about disagreeing...I'm taking about the
basis of their attitude that marriage is only for some.
Post by Steve Hayes
Fear that other people who disagree with you are conspiring against you and
hate you is a possible symptom of paranoia.
B - true. However I don't believe that people are conspiring etc. I
believe that they actually have hatred for homosexuals and that they are
using the Bible as a handy cover for that hatred. I have no problem with
different opinions on this..what I do dislike is someone talking FOR God
and saying "it is" and not "it may be"..that is where I have a problem.
Unless you have objective proof of God...please don't tell me what God
thinks..tell me what you THINK God thinks.


Bren
Steve Hayes
2009-01-06 02:49:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by B.G. Kent
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by B
that's my belief.
Just because [people disagree with you, it doesn't mean they hate you.
B - I know this. I'm not talking about disagreeing...I'm taking about the
basis of their attitude that marriage is only for some.
So those who say that marriage is not for children under a certain age hate
children?

Those who said that a man may not marry his grandmother hate grandmothers?

Come off it.
--
The unworthy deacon,
Stephen Methodius Hayes
Contact: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Orthodox mission pages: http://www.orthodoxy.faithweb.com/
B.G. Kent
2009-01-07 04:17:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by B.G. Kent
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by B
that's my belief.
Just because [people disagree with you, it doesn't mean they hate you.
B - I know this. I'm not talking about disagreeing...I'm taking about the
basis of their attitude that marriage is only for some.
So those who say that marriage is not for children under a certain age hate
children?
Those who said that a man may not marry his grandmother hate grandmothers?
Come off it.
B - so you are equating two grown umrelated adult people with children?
or
a incestuous relationship? you come off it.

Bren
Steve Hayes
2009-01-08 02:16:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by B.G. Kent
Post by Steve Hayes
Come off it.
B - so you are equating two grown umrelated adult people with children?
or
a incestuous relationship? you come off it.
No I'm not. I'm just tired of your hate speech and wish you would stop it.

It contributes nothing to the discussion in this forum and is one of the
things that is helping to kill it.
--
The unworthy deacon,
Stephen Methodius Hayes
Contact: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Orthodox mission pages: http://www.orthodoxy.faithweb.com/
l***@hotmail.com
2009-01-09 02:45:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by B.G. Kent
Post by Steve Hayes
Come off it.
B - so you are equating two grown umrelated adult people with children?
or
a incestuous relationship? you come off it.
No I'm not. I'm just tired of your hate speech and wish you would stop it=
.
It contributes nothing to the discussion in this forum and is one of the
things that is helping to kill it.
2 tim 2:14 We're not to "wrangle about words". The
context is pretty definitive. We don't try to justify the
clear teaching of scripture to unbelievers who do not
accept Scripture as God's word to me.

diamarturomai is a verb of extreme forcefulness and
solemnity. As if need, Paul again calls Timothy to
be mindful of the spiritual reality that we are always in
the presence of God. An interesting little study there
to look over scripture and its use of "the presence of
God." The majority of the times it is used, it speaks
to judgment. Here, whatever else is being taught, it
is obvious that Paul is deadly serious.

Now, what was Paul so deadly serious about in calling
it Timothy's attention? logomachia which the NASB
translates, "wrangle." Literally is means to wage a
campaign of words. The context has Paul teaching his
young (30) elder that false teachers who use philosophy,
rationalizations, sophisticated speculations, are not
to be engaged. The Word of God is never to be subjected
to debate with an unbeliever, and Brenda is just that,
an unbeliever.

Pt. Why would you expect Brenda to bring anything
to the discussion?
Steve Hayes
2009-01-12 01:34:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@hotmail.com
2 tim 2:14 We're not to "wrangle about words". The
context is pretty definitive. We don't try to justify the
clear teaching of scripture to unbelievers who do not
accept Scripture as God's word to me.
diamarturomai is a verb of extreme forcefulness and
solemnity. As if need, Paul again calls Timothy to
be mindful of the spiritual reality that we are always in
the presence of God. An interesting little study there
to look over scripture and its use of "the presence of
God." The majority of the times it is used, it speaks
to judgment. Here, whatever else is being taught, it
is obvious that Paul is deadly serious.
Now, what was Paul so deadly serious about in calling
it Timothy's attention? logomachia which the NASB
translates, "wrangle." Literally is means to wage a
campaign of words. The context has Paul teaching his
young (30) elder that false teachers who use philosophy,
rationalizations, sophisticated speculations, are not
to be engaged. The Word of God is never to be subjected
to debate with an unbeliever, and Brenda is just that,
an unbeliever.
I've jsut been reading "For the sake of silence" by Michael Cawood Green.

It's a novelized biolgraphy of Fr Franz Pfanner, who founded the Trappist
monastery at Mariannhill, near Pinetown, Natal.

In a short time it became the largest Trappist monastery in the world. The
Trappists are Cistercians of the Strict Observance, which means they do not
speak at all, except with the permission of their superior, and that only for
essential matters to do with their work.

But then they started doing mission work among the Zulu-speaking people around
them, and eventually there was a clash between their missionary vocation and
their contemplative one, and after about 30 years they left the Trappist
order, and became a missionary order. And words overwhelmed them. They had
endless arguments about such things as how to translate various theological
terms into Zulu. Initially they translated "grace" a "igrasiya", which is a
Zuluised transliteration rather than an translation, and someone else
suggested they use a native Zulu word, while others argued that by now people
already knew "igrasiya" and knew what it meant in a Christian context.

They argued about the name of God, and such arguments still continue.

Recently a Catholic newspaper in Malaysia was suppressed because in its Malay
edition it used the name "Allah" for God, and the government wanted to allow
only Muslims to do that.
--
The unworthy deacon,
Stephen Methodius Hayes
Contact: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Orthodox mission pages: http://www.orthodoxy.faithweb.com/
B.G. Kent
2009-01-09 02:45:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by B.G. Kent
Post by Steve Hayes
Come off it.
B - so you are equating two grown umrelated adult people with children?
or
a incestuous relationship? you come off it.
No I'm not. I'm just tired of your hate speech and wish you would stop it.
It contributes nothing to the discussion in this forum and is one of the
things that is helping to kill it.
B - Stephen I get tired of the hate speech daily on this board against
gays,liberal Christians,pagans etc. and I wish people would stop it for it
contributes nothing to this forum either....but I can't control everyone.
This forum is by far not being killed...I'm not sure where you get that
one from. It takes two people to argue or discuss something...take
responsibility for your part in it.


Blessings
Bren
l***@hotmail.com
2009-01-12 01:34:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by B.G. Kent
B - Stephen I get tired of the hate speech daily on this board against
gays,liberal Christians,pagans etc.
IT"S NOT HATE SPEECH. It's a call to repent! It's a calling
out to STOP your sinful ways! But because you want to
continue you on in your worldliness, your speculative way,
your sensuality and sin, you think we are haters of men.
Girl, you are, as the scriptures declare, blinded by your
sin.
Post by B.G. Kent
and I wish people would stop it for it
contributes nothing to this forum either....
In that you and the others refuse to believe the
revelation from on High, you will fall into greater
and greater darkness, hardening your own hearts
to the Truth. What does the witness of Israel,
the angels of Gen 6 and Korah teach us? It
teaches us that there comes a time when God
says, "Enough!" and judgment comes. "As it
was in Noah's day," and all those who refused
to hear and obey God were washed away by the
wrath of God. But you "mock, following after
their own lusts, and saying, 'Where is the promise
of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell
asleep, all continues just as it was from the
beginning of creation." Uniformitarianism.
You will go to hell denying our great LORD
and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Post by B.G. Kent
but I can't control everyone.
you can't even control yourself so why do you
glory in self appraisal in thinking that we have
any such thoughts as this?
Post by B.G. Kent
This forum is by far not being killed...I'm not sure where you get that
one from. It takes two people to argue or discuss something...take
responsibility for your part in it.
But you don't discuss.
But you don't actually consider anything outside of your
glass house.
Responsibility? Do you not know that being created
after the image of God, being made responsible, that
accountability naturally follows? Brenda, wake up!
The time of bathing yourself in your self contrived,
self centered, self glorifying "religion" is all but at an
end. God will not wink at your refusal to believe.
Chico
2009-01-14 01:47:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@hotmail.com
Post by B.G. Kent
B - Stephen I get tired of the hate speech daily on this board against
gays,liberal Christians,pagans etc.
IT"S NOT HATE SPEECH. It's a call to repent! It's a calling
out to STOP your sinful ways!
This illistrates the confusion fundamentalist have about "absolute values".
For the Jewish prophets and for Jesus, the fundamental values of
Christianity are justice, mercy, truth, and above all, love.

I find it hard to udnerstand why people who claim the Bible is innerrant and
should be read literally, cannot see those five absolute fundamentalist
CHristian values.

There are fundamentalisat in this group that pick and choose which scripture
they want. Yet the act like Pharisees.

And Jesus said to them "You know the law by heart, but youhave forgotten
the heart of the law, justice, mercy and faith."

(Matt 23:23)




Jesus even promised in his framatic personal story of the last judgement
that the fate of our eternal souls doesn't rest just on "getting saved but
equally on how well we care for the worlds needy and forgotten people.
But because you want to
Post by l***@hotmail.com
continue you on in your worldliness, your speculative way,
your sensuality and sin, you think we are haters of men.
Girl, you are, as the scriptures declare, blinded by your
sin.
Post by B.G. Kent
and I wish people would stop it for it
contributes nothing to this forum either....
In that you and the others refuse to believe the
revelation from on High, you will fall into greater
and greater darkness, hardening your own hearts
to the Truth. What does the witness of Israel,
the angels of Gen 6 and Korah teach us? It
teaches us that there comes a time when God
says, "Enough!" and judgment comes. "As it
was in Noah's day," and all those who refused
to hear and obey God were washed away by the
wrath of God. But you "mock, following after
their own lusts, and saying, 'Where is the promise
of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell
asleep, all continues just as it was from the
beginning of creation." Uniformitarianism.
You will go to hell denying our great LORD
and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Post by B.G. Kent
but I can't control everyone.
you can't even control yourself so why do you
glory in self appraisal in thinking that we have
any such thoughts as this?
Post by B.G. Kent
This forum is by far not being killed...I'm not sure where you get that
one from. It takes two people to argue or discuss something...take
responsibility for your part in it.
But you don't discuss.
But you don't actually consider anything outside of your
glass house.
Responsibility? Do you not know that being created
after the image of God, being made responsible, that
accountability naturally follows? Brenda, wake up!
The time of bathing yourself in your self contrived,
self centered, self glorifying "religion" is all but at an
end. God will not wink at your refusal to believe.
Hall Monitor2
2008-12-01 00:29:52 UTC
Permalink
Bren, you are making too much sense.....

ANd the thought that gay people are "attacking the sanctity of marriage" is
silly.

How does 2 gay men getting married, affect the "sanctity" of any one else's
marriage?
Post by B.G. Kent
I do believe that people that do not want the term marriage being given to
gay persons is purely because of hate. I believe that if they search
themselves they will see this. Since the US. is not a particular "one"
religion country and should separate church from state (lest it become
extremist like some Muslim countries) I think if you take religion out of
it you will see that there is nothing more to this anti-marriage for gays
thing than hatred. It used to be illegal for blacks and whites to marry,
now we have that...it used to be illegal for women and black folks to be
able to vote..now again..we have that. Time for change. Canada has equal
marriage for all adult non-related people as do many European countries
and I feel that it is time for America to come out of the darkness to the
light of fairness and loving behaviour. This is what I wish. I am not gay
but have many gay friends and I see California stepping back as a
regression to the stone ages. Yes it is a vote by the majority but the
majority doesn't always do the right thing..remember the majority were
once for slavery too. Doesn't make it right.
Bren
Matthew Johnson
2008-12-02 04:26:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hall Monitor2
Bren, you are making too much sense.....
ANd the thought that gay people are "attacking the sanctity of marriage" is
silly.
How does 2 gay men getting married, affect the "sanctity" of any one else's
marriage?
By being a mockery of the true marriage God gave mankind in Gen 2:23.

That was easy. Next question?
Robert E. Hall
2008-12-03 04:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Johnson
Post by Hall Monitor2
Bren, you are making too much sense.....
ANd the thought that gay people are "attacking the sanctity of marriage" is
silly.
How does 2 gay men getting married, affect the "sanctity" of any one else's
marriage?
By being a mockery of the true marriage God gave mankind in Gen 2:23.
I guess we're back to living in the Old Testament, huh?

When you use the Old Testament you can make anything easy.

Now on to shellfish...
B.G. Kent
2008-12-02 04:26:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hall Monitor2
Bren, you are making too much sense.....
B - well there's a first for everything...LOL.
Post by Hall Monitor2
ANd the thought that gay people are "attacking the sanctity of marriage" is
silly.
How does 2 gay men getting married, affect the "sanctity" of any one else's
marriage?
Blessings
Bren
Zor-El of Argo City
2008-12-02 04:26:53 UTC
Permalink
Care to give a reliable cite proving the majority of Americans approved
of slavery?

The purpose of marraige is to provide societal support (in the long run)
for chidren; simce homosexuals are unable to produce chidren without
outside help, what need have they for marraige? Civil unions provide all
the legal rights they've been crying for.

If you're serious, start demanding that 'civil unions be opened up for
the use of non-sodomites!

NUCLEAR POWER: The global warming solution!
B.G. Kent
2008-12-03 04:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zor-El of Argo City
Care to give a reliable cite proving the majority of Americans approved
of slavery?
The purpose of marraige is to provide societal support (in the long run)
for chidren; simce homosexuals are unable to produce chidren without
outside help, what need have they for marraige? Civil unions provide all
the legal rights they've been crying for.
If you're serious, start demanding that 'civil unions be opened up for
the use of non-sodomites!
NUCLEAR POWER: The global warming solution!
B - I'm very serious and see nothing wrong with adult unrelated persons of
the same sex marrying. You have'nt given any reason for them not to.
Again..it comes down to hate. Persons who are against them marrying would
have been the same folks back in the day that would not want blacks and
whites to marry.

Oh and Nuclear power? it's great...but pray tell what do we do with the
waste that pollutes our earth? seal it in cans and bury it? how long can
we do that before it leaks?


Bren

---

[Please take the discussion of nuclear power elsewhere. There are
answers to your question, but this isn't the right group --clh]
Robert E. Hall
2008-12-03 04:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zor-El of Argo City
The purpose of marraige is to provide societal support (in the long run)
for chidren...
That sounds more like a corperate merger, than a marriage.

I hope it has more purpose than simply the perfunctory.
Post by Zor-El of Argo City
Civil unions provide all
the legal rights they've been crying for.
Didn't we offer the black all the benefits of water fountains......just not
the same one.
Post by Zor-El of Argo City
If you're serious, start demanding that 'civil unions be opened up for
the use of non-sodomites!
This shows that you do not know what you are talking about.

Sodomy is not practiced by all gay people.

Sodomy is widely praticed amongs heterosexuals.
B
2008-12-22 02:54:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zor-El of Argo City
Care to give a reliable cite proving the majority of Americans approved
of slavery?
The purpose of marraige is to provide societal support (in the long run)
for chidren; simce homosexuals are unable to produce chidren without
outside help, what need have they for marraige? Civil unions provide all
the legal rights they've been crying for.
If you're serious, start demanding that 'civil unions be opened up for
the use of non-sodomites! =A0
NUCLEAR POWER: The global warming solution!
B - is not the government by the people for the people? then they
indeed wanted slavery or it never would have become an institution in
America. Many straight couples marry and don't or can't have
children..yet they are allowed to marry. By denying them the word
"marriage" you are putting them outside your exclusive circle..making
them second class citizens because of something they are born with.
This is simply hate...all dressed up as religion..in my beliefs.

Bren
Antares 531
2008-12-05 03:48:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by B.G. Kent
I do believe that people that do not want the term marriage being given to
gay persons is purely because of hate. I believe that if they search
themselves they will see this. Since the US. is not a particular "one"
religion country and should separate church from state (lest it become
extremist like some Muslim countries) I think if you take religion out of
it you will see that there is nothing more to this anti-marriage for gays
thing than hatred. It used to be illegal for blacks and whites to marry,
now we have that...it used to be illegal for women and black folks to be
able to vote..now again..we have that. Time for change. Canada has equal
marriage for all adult non-related people as do many European countries
and I feel that it is time for America to come out of the darkness to the
light of fairness and loving behaviour. This is what I wish. I am not gay
but have many gay friends and I see California stepping back as a
regression to the stone ages. Yes it is a vote by the majority but the
majority doesn't always do the right thing..remember the majority were
once for slavery too. Doesn't make it right.
Bren
Why do they insist on calling a gay union a marriage? All they really
want is the same legal status as a married husband/wife pair has in
things like joint tax filing, spouse inheritance rights, etc. If they
would petition for a legal union and call it something other than a
marriage I'm sure they would not meet with such relentless objections
from the non-gay people.

Marriage for one male, one female legal union.

CoBond for two males or two females in a homosexual legal union.
Randy Fiore
2008-12-09 01:43:59 UTC
Permalink
"Antares 531" <***@swbell.net> wrote in message news:Bw1_k.2901$***@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
...
Post by Antares 531
Why do they insist on calling a gay union a marriage? All they really
want is the same legal status as a married husband/wife pair has in
things like joint tax filing, spouse inheritance rights, etc. If they
would petition for a legal union and call it something other than a
marriage I'm sure they would not meet with such relentless objections
from the non-gay people.
You're probably right, but it smacks of seperate water fountains.

People might say, "What are you complaining about, you have a water fountain
of your own!"
B.G. Kent
2008-12-09 01:44:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Antares 531
Why do they insist on calling a gay union a marriage? All they really
want is the same legal status as a married husband/wife pair has in
things like joint tax filing, spouse inheritance rights, etc.
B - why do you insist on NOT calling it a marriage? If they want the same
legal status as a married couple..that IS marriage. Two adult unrelated
persons in love wanting to forge their families together and make a
life...that's marriage. Christianity should have nothing to do with the
government. Separation of church and state. Why the hatred? why the
cruelty? What would Jesus do?


Bren
Matthew Johnson
2008-12-17 04:14:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by B.G. Kent
Post by Antares 531
Why do they insist on calling a gay union a marriage? All they really
want is the same legal status as a married husband/wife pair has in
things like joint tax filing, spouse inheritance rights, etc.
B - why do you insist on NOT calling it a marriage? If they want the same
legal status as a married couple..that IS marriage.
Wrong. That is not what marriage is. Not in the Church, not even in California,
since the passage of Prop. 8.

Marriage is rather what it has always been, a pact between a man and a woman, a
pact with certain additional ramifications there is no need to go into.

For the essential point is: ever since the first written mention of 'marriage'
in ANE legal texts, marriage has been a pact between a man and a woman. NOT a
pact between "two adults".
DKleinecke
2008-12-22 02:54:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Johnson
For the essential point is: ever since the first written mention of 'marriage'
in ANE legal texts, marriage has been a pact between a man and a woman. NOT a
pact between "two adults".
Be careful. There are twists here.

Islamic marriage at least in its classical form is a pact between a
man and a family which is supplying a woman (generally assumed to be a
virgin). Previously married women had more power over their bodies
than virgins, but they still had to go through the ritual of finding
some man to give them in marriage. There are repeated suggestions that
a man might once have been able to marry two or more sisters at one
time - but this is forbidden in Islam (it is quite common in
polygamous societies worldwide). Although it is much more recent in
time the customs in Arabia can plausibly be used to deduce old Semitic
customs.

And, of course, the ANE legal texts do not define marriage. There is
a lot more to the world. For example, among the Comanche Indians a
biological man who did not want to go on the more-or-less constant
warpath could declare himself out and become what some people have
called a berdache. A berdache was free to marry a man.

Worldwide there are many diverse marriage customs. Either they must
all be considered or they must be specifically denied. Proposition 8
is rather poorly drawn and leaves a lot of questions unanswered. These
questions will have to be addressed by the courts. The courts might
even declare Proposition 8 unconstitutional because it is an
establishment of religion. That theory will surely be presented to
them.

We have to wait for the courts to act. However I believe there is no
question that two churches - the Catholic church and the Mormons -
massively supported Proposition 8. Whether that support constitutes
illegal meddling is something the courts will have to rule on.

On the whole though the argument is deplorable. Whether or not the
courts rule against Proposition 8 it does represent a move by
religious organizations into politics. We know that the Catholics want
to move on other matters - for example - abortion. Of course, the
Catholic church has never accepted the idea that establishment of a
church is a bad idea.

On the whole it seems that establishing any particular church is
deplorable. If Catholicism is an option why not Islam? Or Scientology?
The first three centuries of Christianity went by without Christians
contemplating ever having political power. And their behavior when
they did come to power appears, to many observers, to have been such
as to prove the idea that an established church is a bad idea.
Matthew Johnson
2009-01-02 20:48:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by DKleinecke
Post by Matthew Johnson
For the essential point is: ever since the first written mention of 'marriage'
in ANE legal texts, marriage has been a pact between a man and a woman. NOT a
pact between "two adults".
Be careful. There are twists here.
Most of the 'twists' are cavils. The rest can be dealt with.
Post by DKleinecke
Islamic marriage at least in its classical form is a pact between a
man and a family which is supplying a woman (generally assumed to be a
virgin).
Ah, yes, I knew someone would eventually bring that up! Yes, in some
particularly backward and barbarous societies, the pact was not so much between
a man and a woman, but between a man and the man (or men) who have control over
the woman. But that this was NOT universal, and even an ABERRATION from marriage
is shown by the examples of marriage in Homer where, for example, Penelope
really DID have the right to refuse the suitor, and if she were to remarry, to
marry the groom of HER choice.

Similarly, in the Bible, which ALSO described ancient marriage practices, we
find that the woman is often described as having a choice, even if in practice
we know that choice was heavily constrained by her family's considerations.
Post by DKleinecke
And, of course, the ANE legal texts do not define marriage. There is
a lot more to the world. For example, among the Comanche Indians a
biological man who did not want to go on the more-or-less constant
warpath could declare himself out and become what some people have
called a berdache. A berdache was free to marry a man.
Look around more carefully. Not only are there now a lot of people whining that
'berdache' is an unfair name for these people, but I have NOT found a
responsible source that calls that union 'marriage'. I doubt that the Comanche
language used the same word for both marriage and this berdache union.

But even if they did, this practice had NO input into our own culture. Nor
should it. It was just another barbarous practice based on pagan superstition.
Post by DKleinecke
Worldwide there are many diverse marriage customs.
And when I look more closely at each of them, I see that one attribute really
remained essential despite all the variety: it is a pact between a man and a
woman.
Post by DKleinecke
Proposition 8
is rather poorly drawn and leaves a lot of questions unanswered.
I disagree.
Post by DKleinecke
These
questions will have to be addressed by the courts.
The Courts should have thought of this BEFORE inflicting the unconstitutional
and un-christian redefinition of 'marriage' on the whole State. But they didn't,
so now they will have to deal with the questions.
Post by DKleinecke
The courts might
even declare Proposition 8 unconstitutional because it is an
establishment of religion. That theory will surely be presented to
them.
It is not among the arguments due for presentation by Dec 19, and will not be
considered when the Court rules on the current cases by June.

With good reason, too. That is the LEAST plausible of all the arguments against
Prop. 8 I have heard.
Post by DKleinecke
We have to wait for the courts to act. However I believe there is no
question that two churches - the Catholic church and the Mormons -
massively supported Proposition 8. Whether that support constitutes
illegal meddling is something the courts will have to rule on.
No, the IRS rules are pretty clear. It is completely legal.
Post by DKleinecke
On the whole though the argument is deplorable. Whether or not the
courts rule against Proposition 8 it does represent a move by
religious organizations into politics.
When were they ever out of it?
Post by DKleinecke
We know that the Catholics want
to move on other matters - for example - abortion. Of course, the
Catholic church has never accepted the idea that establishment of a
church is a bad idea.
Do you think all Catholics are closet Ultramontanists?
Post by DKleinecke
On the whole it seems that establishing any particular church is
deplorable.
To you it does. You are Protestant. Protestantism gave us the Thirty Years War,
and the only cure you would accept for it was the spirit of the Treaty of
Westphalia, whence grew our modern ideas of tolerance and separation of Church
and State. But as historical phenomena, these are ONLY about 500 years old, and
might not last for much longer.

[snip]
DKleinecke
2009-01-06 02:49:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Johnson
Post by DKleinecke
On the whole it seems that establishing any particular church is
deplorable.
To you it does. You are Protestant. Protestantism gave us the Thirty Years War,
and the only cure you would accept for it was the spirit of the Treaty of
Westphalia, whence grew our modern ideas of tolerance and separation of Church
and State. But as historical phenomena, these are ONLY about 500 years old, and
might not last for much longer.
I don't think Paul ever imagined a Christian government. I don't think
a long line of Christian saints and martyrs that came after him ever
imagined a Christian government. I don't think Constantine ever
imagined a Christian government - at least not until his council was
such a success. So the first three centuries of Christianity took
place in an environment just as non-Christian as a modern secular
state.

An established Christianity is an aberration that existed for somewhat
over a thousand years. The Protestants finally blew the whistle on the
abuses it implied.

Other, less benign religions were there to be established. If you want
to drag Christianity down to the level of the Aztec state religion go
ahead and argue for re-establishment. Maybe that is the only way you
know how to defend Christianity against Islam (which is, by its very
nature, an established religion). That is, if you can't beat them -
join them. I don't see much to choose between an established
Christianity and Islam.
l***@hotmail.com
2009-01-09 02:45:28 UTC
Permalink
To you it does. You are Protestant. Protestantism gave us the Thirty Year=
s War,
no. It gave the assembly of true believers freedom from
sacerdotalism and sacramentalism. It also put the Word
of God back into the hands of the congregation. It re-
established the gospel truth that salvation is by grace alone
and that Christ's righteousness is the only righteousness
acceptable before the throne of God.

As Paul taught Timothy, there are damnable seasons
of heresy which only go from bad to worse as they
accumulate over time. And as Christ taught, the tares
have been sown in right along side the good seed.

BTW, what happened to the architect of St Basil's?
l***@hotmail.com
2008-12-02 04:26:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jacob
Have you ever thought that false humility
yes, we just covered it in class this week! True humility
only comes when the regenerate man comes face to face
with the majesty of God.
Robert E. Hall
2008-12-03 04:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@hotmail.com
Post by Jacob
Have you ever thought that false humility
yes, we just covered it in class this week! True humility
only comes when the regenerate man comes face to face
with the majesty of God.
If we want to have a closer realtionship with God, all we have to do is
listen to the academics.

We all know revival always starts with the academics. ;-)
l***@hotmail.com
2008-12-05 03:48:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert E. Hall
Post by Jacob
Have you ever thought that false humility
yes, we just covered it in class this week! =A0True humility
only comes when the regenerate man comes face to face
with the majesty of God.
If we want to have a closer realtionship with God, all we have to do is
listen to the academics.
We all know revival always starts with the academics. =A0;-)
knowledge, not academics per se. Faith always begins in the
mind with belief of the truth of the gospel message. The Gospel
is not a feeling nor an experience. It is a message of didactic
content. And yes, the better informed you, the deeper your
spirituality _can_ become. Certainly you will not proceed beyond
your understanding. Receiving the Gospel message is the
result of spiritual illumination. In illumination, the Spirit both
enlightens the mind, making it capable of receiving the
content of spiritual things, and impresses on the mind the
objective reality of those things which the Word of God bears
witness.

The reason why so many Christians are weak and feeble is that
they are ignorant of the truths of Scripture, particularly pertaining
to nature of God -who He is and what He desires of us.
Randy Fiore
2008-12-09 01:44:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@hotmail.com
Post by Robert E. Hall
Post by Jacob
Have you ever thought that false humility
yes, we just covered it in class this week! =A0True humility
only comes when the regenerate man comes face to face
with the majesty of God.
If we want to have a closer realtionship with God, all we have to do is
listen to the academics.
We all know revival always starts with the academics. =A0;-)
knowledge, not academics per se.
And Jesus chose to reveal the knowledge of Himself to lowly fishermen.

He did not go to the Pharisees...

Faith always begins in the
Post by l***@hotmail.com
mind with belief of the truth of the gospel message. The Gospel
is not a feeling nor an experience. It is a message of didactic
content. And yes, the better informed you, the deeper your
spirituality _can_ become.
I think the above is true for you. The more informaed you are, the more you
open up to the Spirit of the the GOspel message, and the less you keep
trying to make it conform to your own bias' and limited understanding, the
deeper your spirituality can become. The more Christlike you strive to
become, the more humilty will shine through your life.

The Gospel is more than a rule book, Jesus was not a technician.

And, yes, it IS an experience. Everyone who Jesus came into contact with
_experienced_ His presence.
Post by l***@hotmail.com
Certainly you will not proceed beyond
your understanding.
I'm afraid unless you take off your blinders, you will only see a small
portion of what the Lord has in store. If you simply stay around those that
re-inforce your beliefs, then the Holy SPrit is hindered from taking hold in
your life.
Post by l***@hotmail.com
The reason why so many Christians are weak and feeble is that
they are ignorant of the truths of Scripture, particularly pertaining
to nature of God -who He is and what He desires of us.
The reason why so many Churches are spiritually dead today, is because
they've turned the Bible into a technical document.....and not left room for
the Holy SPirit of the Gospel message to take root.
B.G. Kent
2008-12-10 01:24:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Randy Fiore
Post by l***@hotmail.com
Post by Robert E. Hall
Post by Jacob
Have you ever thought that false humility
yes, we just covered it in class this week! =A0True humility
only comes when the regenerate man comes face to face
with the majesty of God.
If we want to have a closer realtionship with God, all we have to do is
listen to the academics.
We all know revival always starts with the academics. =A0;-)
knowledge, not academics per se.
And Jesus chose to reveal the knowledge of Himself to lowly fishermen.
He did not go to the Pharisees...
Faith always begins in the
Post by l***@hotmail.com
mind with belief of the truth of the gospel message. The Gospel
is not a feeling nor an experience. It is a message of didactic
*snip

Faith for me begins in the soul with belief of truth period. With that
truth guiding me I find it in the Bible, the Nag Hammadi, the Koran, the
Tibetan Book of the Dead, the Tao, Nature, the many dimensions and even
science.

Blessings
Bren
l***@hotmail.com
2008-12-10 01:24:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Randy Fiore
The reason why so many Churches are spiritually dead today, is because
they've turned the Bible into a technical document.....and not left room =
for
Post by Randy Fiore
the Holy SPirit of the Gospel message to take root.
But you are making this an either/or situation when it is both/and.
To
gain a deeper appreciation of what God has revealed in His Word, one
MUST learn technical aspects. Not to learn the technical aspects is
to confined yourself to secondary source material. But to be a
technician
of the Scriptures, one will have to have a good library of secondary
reference sources such at lexicons, word studies, dictionaries,
cultural reference works, historical reference works, etc. You seem
to be pushing for the idea that all one needs is "Holy Spirit
feelings"
and "mental images" to correctly dig out what God intends to
declare. That's just so much hogwash.

God is GOD. He isn't some wishy washy sentimental something
or other. He created language so that truth could be communicated.
Truth doesn't change but cultures do. For instance, if you are still
using the KJ translation, there are passages which speak of
"preventing" the Lord. Today we define that word very much
differently
than in 1600 Britain. "Pre-vent" as opposed to "ad-vent." And it
is no different when we study the scriptural passages in their
original languages. You really are quite naive and self limiting
if you continue to hold what you here advocated. It is not I or
others who work very hard at arriving at the intended meaning
who limit God, it is you. Just because some study technically
apart from the Spirit does not dismiss the reality that one must
be technical with the Spirit to arrive at the deeper meanings.
RP
2008-12-09 01:44:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@hotmail.com
Post by l***@hotmail.com
The Gospel
is not a feeling nor an experience.
The Gospel is not an experience?

If you were there when JEsus met the woman at the well, you would have been
quizzing her theology (which was probably flawed), and not gotten the
message of Jesus.
Loading...