1
   

ACTING IN GOOD FAITH

 
 
lmur
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 04:56 pm
Setanta wrote:
Do you ever "P45?"


Did a quickie search & I think I found what you might be referring to. I'll give a whirl around it, thanks for hint.

Is this the "place" you mentioned in another post, recently?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 04:58 pm
Probably . . . here's the link:

P45--Wasting time at work . . .
0 Replies
 
lmur
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 05:02 pm
Thanks - will check it out.

Gotta go - pub is calling.
Slán go fóill!
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 05:20 pm
I no longer take strong drink, so i'll wish you well and safely home at the end of your modest revels.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 05:46 pm
When does one hear the calls from a pub? I've never had the pleasure.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 06:55 pm
Setanta wrote:
Without either endorsing or rejecting C.I.'s position, i'd say it's pretty damned obvious why he posted it, but you folks are playing dumb because it is a refutation of a key part of your thesis. He's pointing out that the god of the old testament wanted to see real fear in the hearts and minds of his adherents.


Speaking for myself only, not for other Christians or theists on the thread, I have no problem with the idea of the fear of God.

In the same way that I am careful how I drive in front of a policeman for fear[/u] of getting a ticket (not an overwhelming, paralyzing fright[/u], but a deep respect for the position he holds[/u] is what this word describes) , I am to fear God and not sin in front of Him (yes, this would refer to anywhere and everywhere since He is omnipresent) because He does punish sin.

There is not a problem with God punishing sin as far as I am concerned. God who made us has a right to us as the potter does with the clay.

Since Man has been given a free will, the ball is really in our court.
0 Replies
 
echi
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 07:29 pm
real life wrote:
Since Man has been given a free will, the ball is really in our court.


Care to debate that in the FREE WILL thread, sir?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 07:40 pm
Gee, I drive in front of the police quite often, but "fear" never enters my mind. It's prolly because I'm a careful driver. Driving safely is for self-preservation (because most fatal car accidents happen close to home) and to keep my car insurance low (no ticket means less cost).
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 07:42 pm
That's interesting that real fears cops. A guilty mind will do that to a person.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 08:29 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
That's interesting that real fears cops. A guilty mind will do that to a person.


Oh please, don't tell me you've never tapped the brake when you saw a policeman and double checked to make sure you weren't speeding, made sure to use your turn signal, weren't careful not to cut across the lanes too quickly, etc. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 08:34 pm
echi wrote:
real life wrote:
Since Man has been given a free will, the ball is really in our court.


Care to debate that in the FREE WILL thread, sir?


Sorry to say, last time (actually the only time) I visited that thread it just didn't catch me, so to speak. But I'll try it again.

I think it probably is a subject that will appear in several different threads because the current talking points of some of the players here seem to include trying to misrepresent what fear of God means in a number of different threads all at once, and the free will argument is the natural response to that.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 08:46 pm
I like that; free will with fear.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 08:51 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
I like that; free will with fear.


Let's twist Real Life's words around just a bit more, shall we?

How did you get free will with fear out of that? Honestly, C.I., you don't understand the difference or you just disagree with it?
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 09:06 pm
Hi Momma Angel,

Good to hear from you. Hope you are doing well.

Don't worry about it, CI just likes to tease and prod. I don't take him too seriously. Cool
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 09:09 pm
real life, I like you already! Don't take yourself too seriously; that's good advise for all. You know, people reap what the sow.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 09:10 pm
real life wrote:
Hi Momma Angel,

Good to hear from you. Hope you are doing well.

Don't worry about it, CI just likes to tease and prod. I don't take him too seriously. Cool


Good to hear from you! I'm doing very well, thanx for asking.

C.I. seems to be avoiding me actually. I have challenged him on something he said about me and he is ignoring me.

He doesn't take it too well when someone puts HIS OWN WORDS smack dab in his face and they show him he is wrong. None of us like that. Difference is, I think most people will admit it apologize and go on from there. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 09:13 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote:
real life, I like you already! Don't take yourself too seriously; that's good advise for all. You know, people reap what the sow.


Shocked You mean unless it is you? How about reaping a little bit of what you sowed (YOUR WORDS) and answer my challenge then? :wink:
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 09:32 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
real life, I like you already! Don't take yourself too seriously; that's good advise for all. You know, people reap what the sow.


Nah, I'm just a harmless little fuzzball. And I have fun talking with you CI.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 10:09 pm
Setanta wrote:
Without either endorsing or rejecting C.I.'s position, i'd say it's pretty damned obvious why he posted it, but you folks are playing dumb because it is a refutation of a key part of your thesis. He's pointing out that the god of the old testament wanted to see real fear in the hearts and minds of his adherents.
I see it the same way. He is attempting to point out that the OT God and, by extension, God himself is not satisfied unless buttocks quake.

Attempting.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jan, 2006 11:10 pm
MA says that Jesus and the Father (God) are one so the Old Testament and the New Testament should agree as Jesus is also the Father yet the Son denies the Father's words (the Old Testament). Either the Son and the Father are not One or either the Old Testament is false or the New Testament is false.

If God is Eternal the Old Testament should be Eternal Testament why become Old and be revised with the New Testament? It comes down to God not capable of Eternal Testament. Jesus can't be God as he failed to give his testament first and make it the Eternal Testament.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 09:51:28