.a rather pompous individual much too taken with himself.
MYOEP. I don't wish to do variations because none of the others I have tried look quite the part that does.
Much, much to taken with himself. In fact, laughingly so.
0 Replies
reasoning logic
0
Reply
Thu 6 Jun, 2013 03:24 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
I believe you rl.
Thank you spendius for being so gullible.
Quote:
They sent you back with the wisdom of a culture a great deal older than ours
You are a wise one aren't you?
Quote:
Their very ability to abduct you is proof positive that they have no need of cunning and thus the skill has evolved out of them
Are you psychic or does this just come natural to you?
Quote:
When they can ride a ship down a light beam and pick up some likely looking goofball out of his yard in a suburban garden while he is putting the cat out and blot him out of the consciousness of anybody who might otherwise notice him having disappeared, they need no cunning.
Which is about what Jesus did recruiting His Apostles.
Are you suggesting that Jesus's apostles were goof balls?
Quote:
We will all believe that you you have a better message than Jesus.
Well thank you for the complement spendius.
Quote:
I had a wet dream in my youth,
Are you certain that you would like to share your wet dreams with the rest of us?
Really wished you had not re-opened this particular thread!
Why? I thought you were a supporter of truth and reality and when those such as myself share something that is not you would speak out, am I wrong?
0 Replies
colliedogboy
1
Reply
Tue 9 Jul, 2013 08:02 pm
The apostle Paul told us to be content in whatever state we find ourselves. Just knowing that Jesus died for me and paid the debt for my sins on that cruel cross is enough for me. Any person who will consider eternity will be able to remain content with eternal salvation. Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were all carried away to Babylonia as slaves, yet they never tried to complain, revolt, or overthrow the Babylonian government--they simply went about their daily chores and caused no problems for their captors. Only when Nebuchadnezzar made a decree that would have forced Daniel to worship Nebuchadnezzar and cease his daily prayers to God did Daniel fail to obey Nebuchadnezzar. Daniel continued his daily prayers to the true God and fell into the trap Nebuchadnezzar's "advisors" had arranged for Daniel. Daniel's duty was to follow God's instructions, not to "challenge the system". So it is today, on an individual basis.
Any person can honor God (Jesus) by living as Jesus instructed in the "Golden Rule", which is "Do unto others even as you would wish them to do unto you". No doubt some slaveholders were won to God by observing the Godly lives that their slaves led. Of displaying Godly attributes the Bible says "...against such, there is no law".
I would never want to own another person, nor would I want another person to own me, yet my instructions (if I am owned by another) are to be obedient, respectful, and even helpful by going the extra mile. Joseph gained favor with his owners during his captivity by following these precepts and was thus promoted to a high position in Egypt.
I cannot imagine that Jesus would ever have owned slaves even if He had had the money for such, yet it was a practice common to many areas of the world and He recognized it. It was a problem but not THE problem. He did not come to "challenge the system", only to live without sin and die on the cross for our sins. He never wavered from His purpose even though many different groups of people, for their particular reasons, tried to get Him to speak out on their particular issues. He said it all in the Sermon on the Mount. He paid it all on the cross. We are to honor Him and follow His teachings as we have occasion. I am only one man with one vote, but I vote "No" on slavery.
Welcome to the forum, dogboy. You make some good points. There are too few believers willing to tread here. BTW, it was Darius who made the decree that ended with Daniel in the lions den.
0 Replies
reasoning logic
0
Reply
Wed 10 Jul, 2013 01:56 am
@colliedogboy,
Quote:
He did not come to "challenge the system", only to live without sin and die on the cross for our sins.
Are you suggesting that Jesus never spoke out against practices that were immoral? You do not think that he spoke his mind at times?
When he chased the money changers out of the temple do you not think he was making a statement?
Was Jesus "challenging" the system since the temple probably was supposed to be (under the system-Jewish law) a house of prayer.
Were there a laws forbidding the money changers from gathering there? I think that Jesus may have got pissed because of what the temple had become over time.
Jesus spoke out against many things in the old testament, Things like an eye for an eye and so forth but I do not recall him speaking out against slavery but why would he if Christians were going to need more churches.
You simply do not understand the motive of the NT writer's rl. It's such a pity really when all you need to do is apply reasoning logic instead of that leaning to one side noggin of yours which it is too late to do anything about.
A lifetime of sneering at Christians is a force reasoning logic can't touch.
0 Replies
Frank Apisa
1
Reply
Sat 13 Jul, 2013 01:58 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:
Quote:
Was Jesus "challenging" the system since the temple probably was supposed to be (under the system-Jewish law) a house of prayer.
Were there a laws forbidding the money changers from gathering there? I think that Jesus may have got pissed because of what the temple had become over time.
Jesus spoke out against many things in the old testament, Things like an eye for an eye and so forth but I do not recall him speaking out against slavery but why would he if Christians were going to need more churches.
Sounds to me that you DO understand the motives of the NT writers, RL.
