0
   

Hate is a Four-Letter Family Value

 
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 06:01 am
You were wrong. You now want to carry it on. Why? If you don't want to be caught on errors....do not post them. If you do post them, accept that you were wrong and carry on.
0 Replies
 
kate4christ03
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 08:51 am
mesquite wrote
Quote:
Sorry Kate, but I just don't see much common sense (sound practical judgement) to equating the attributes of God as depicted in the first person accounts of books of Moses with the attributes of Jesus as depicted in the first person accounts of the gospels. They are like polar opposites


Mequite i understand what your saying.....but Christ himself says he is the "I AM" bf abraham...so he claims to be the God of the ot.....All i can say is during the ot it was a different time and different instances.....plus you seem to forget..there are instances in the nt that God shows his wrath....ie acts with annaias and sapphira (whom he strikes down dead)...
or read revelation......The God of the Old test is the same God of the New testament.......
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 11:27 am
kate4christ03 wrote:
mesquite wrote
Quote:
Sorry Kate, but I just don't see much common sense (sound practical judgement) to equating the attributes of God as depicted in the first person accounts of books of Moses with the attributes of Jesus as depicted in the first person accounts of the gospels. They are like polar opposites


Mequite i understand what your saying.....but Christ himself says he is the "I AM" bf abraham...so he claims to be the God of the ot.....All i can say is during the ot it was a different time and different instances.....plus you seem to forget..there are instances in the nt that God shows his wrath....ie acts with annaias and sapphira (whom he strikes down dead)...
or read revelation......The God of the Old test is the same God of the New testament.......


Kate, you seem to have glossed the point that I was comparing the first person accounts of OT God to the first person account of Jesus.

The accounting of annaias and sapphira appear to be attributing the act to the OT God.

We do however have an accounting of Jesus striking down a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season.
:wink:
Mark 11:12-14, 20-21
Quote:
12 And on the morrow, when they were come from Bethany, he was hungry:
13 And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet.
14 And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever. And his disciples heard it...

20 And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots.
21 And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.


http://www.bibleexplained.com/Gospels/Mark/fig-tree-withered.jpg

Revelation is a tough read. Who is doing the dirty deeds there?
0 Replies
 
kate4christ03
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 11:42 am
Mesquite you seem to forget that JEsus said he was doing His father Gods will.....all he did was what God told him to.....and JEsus himself spoke of hell and condemnation for those that reject him as Savior.......and revelation is clear that Christ will come down and uphold Gods wrath....revelation 19:11-16
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 12:37 pm
kate4christ03 wrote:
Mesquite you seem to forget that JEsus said he was doing His father Gods will.....all he did was what God told him to.....and JEsus himself spoke of hell and condemnation for those that reject him as Savior.......and revelation is clear that Christ will come down and uphold Gods wrath....revelation 19:11-16


Am I missing something here. Isn't Jesus suppose to be God, one in the same? How can Jesus be God and have God tell him what to do. Why doesn't Jesus come out and say, 'Look dudes, I'm God and this is the way it is!'

God's wrath? Is that how you show love? Kill people? Can you imagine what this world would be like if parent behaved like God and killed their disobedient children? If I remember correctly didn't God demand that at one time?
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 01:01 pm
God's message - I'll whack you.

Jesus' message - I'll forgive you.

Different strokes for different folks.
0 Replies
 
kate4christ03
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 02:51 pm
mesquite i find it amazing that i gave verses that show Jesus himself saying those that reject him are condemned and will go to hell......and that all he did was Gods will....also you forget the bible says God sent Christ ....its Gods love that sent him for us to have forgiveness.....
0 Replies
 
kate4christ03
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 02:52 pm
xingu read phil 2:6 that might help clear things up
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 02:54 pm
kate4christ03 wrote:
mesquite i find it amazing that i gave verses that show Jesus himself saying those that reject him are condemned and will go to hell......and that all he did was Gods will....also you forget the bible says God sent Christ ....its Gods love that sent him for us to have forgiveness.....


Ah yes, God's love--which condemns to Hell those of his "creations" who do not subscribe to a particular creed--preferrable, one assumes, the creed you espouse. Yes, a loving God indeed . . .
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 03:48 pm
kate4christ03 wrote:
mesquite i find it amazing that i gave verses that show Jesus himself saying those that reject him are condemned and will go to hell......and that all he did was Gods will....

You mentioned it but I didn't see any verses. You did give a verse from Revelation which reads like it came from someone on some sort of a hallucinogen. Didn't Jesus himself say something to the effect of beware of false prophets?
kate4christ03 wrote:
also you forget the bible says God sent Christ ....its Gods love that sent him for us to have forgiveness.....


I didn't forget it, I just have a problem seeing the love in that barbaric act.

Who was the sacrifice to?

Who got their jollies from the pain and suffering?

Who was the one offended by sin that was to do the forgiving?

The whole idea is nonsensical even without the trinity aspect.

If you throw that in then you have God sacrificing himself to himself.
0 Replies
 
kate4christ03
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 04:26 pm
sorry mesquite i didnt give the verses....i just told you about them...

here they are....john 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
mt 23:33 "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? (this is Christ judging the pharisees)
mt 25:41 Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels
(this is Christ speaking of what God will do)
mt25:46 Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 04:52 pm
Kate, it sounds as though this condemnation is for failure to do good deeds and not for failure to believe or properly grovel which IMO is more in tune with his character than the must believe concept.

"Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

Mat 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

Mat 25:43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not."
0 Replies
 
kate4christ03
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 06:34 pm
mesquite please read john 3:16-18......it says to believe in Jesus Christ and those that dont are condemned.......plus i can produce more verses throughout the nt that say that you have to repent and believe in Jesus to be saved.......if you want
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Sep, 2006 08:52 pm
kate4christ03 wrote:
mesquite please read john 3:16-18......it says to believe in Jesus Christ and those that dont are condemned.......plus i can produce more verses throughout the nt that say that you have to repent and believe in Jesus to be saved.......if you want


I didn't say that there were not other verses saying different, I was just noting that Mathew 25 put a high importance to deeds and promised a trip to hell for those that ignored the advice.

However, I see you point to the book of John to show the contradiction. Are you aware that the "book of John" is the least reliable of the gospels? "The Fellows of the Jesus Seminar, in their study of John, were unable to find a single saying of Jesus that they could confidently rate as authentic."
Source
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Sep, 2006 01:08 am
Hey Neo, sorry been kind of busy and not around much. But I'm catching up.

Kate I see you have met pretty much everyone? We have had other threads discussing the transition of Old Testament to New but I don't see that anyone has changed their views in the slightest about it. All you can do is what you are doing, show them in the Bible what it says and let them make up their own minds.

Some can be a bit gruff at times but hey, we all have our personalities! Good to see you!
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Sep, 2006 07:21 am
kate4christ03 wrote:
JPB when i said "hate torture kill" i was using kill in the context of those that were first discussed at the beginning of this thread ...that believe that we are justified to kill (murder) those that believe differently .......ie rudolph blowing up the abortion clinic and killing a security guard....or the rcc killing ppl who didnt believe as they did during the inquisition.....


Kate, the problem with christians not acknowledging that their fringe elements are also christian and with muslims not acknowledging that their extremists are also representing Islam is that the rest of us have no option but to lump the good in with the bad. You can't simply turn away from your own membership because they don't represent your personal thoughts and expect society to do the same. Fringe elements must be dealt with from within the group, not ignored. They don't go away and you don't get to decide for the world who is and isn't part of your club. This applies to any religion.

If moderate muslims want the world to see Islam as a peaceful religion then it is going to take the moderate muslims to change the image we all have of Islam by taking on their extremists. If christians want the world to see christianity as a loving religion then it's going to take loving christians to challenge those who don't represent that philosophy. In the eyes of the world, christians today are fundamentalist hypocrites who want nothing other than to eliminate anyone who disagrees with them. Many, if not most, people have the same view of Islam. Saying they aren't 'true christians' doesn't change anything. Of course they're true christians. Of course muslim extremists are true muslims. The perception of the group is the responsibility of the group.

Saying that the RCCs during the Inquisition weren't christians is ludicrous. You can't rewrite history, Kate, and claim that actions done in the name of the church weren't done by christians because you wish it to be so. This is the most ridiculous claim I've ever seen.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Sep, 2006 11:01 pm
JPB,

Just because someone says they are a Christian that doesn't make them a Christian. Hitler claimed to be a Christian also but I think we can all safely say he wasn't the kind of Christian Christ would have embraced. :wink:
0 Replies
 
kate4christ03
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Sep, 2006 12:23 pm
JPB wrote
Quote:
Kate, the problem with christians not acknowledging that their fringe elements are also christian and with muslims not acknowledging that their extremists are also representing Islam is that the rest of us have no option but to lump the good in with the bad. You can't simply turn away from your own membership because they don't represent your personal thoughts and expect society to do the same. Fringe elements must be dealt with from within the group, not ignored. They don't go away and you don't get to decide for the world who is and isn't part of your club. This applies to any religion.


Jpb i will state this once more...Christ said we have to follow him and his teachings to be a christian...That is what christian means.....and even according to the bible i dont have to acknowledge those that torture bomb and murder as christians bc Christ said they were false...He also said we are to reject them and stand against them....I know many intelligent non-christians that use their brains and see by the teachings of the bible that ppl like jim jones or erick rudolph were not christians......if you and others want to lump all together without the facts that is your choice but its an ignorant one........
Quote:
Saying that the RCCs during the Inquisition weren't christians is ludicrous. You can't rewrite history, Kate, and claim that actions done in the name of the church weren't done by christians because you wish it to be so. This is the most ridiculous claim I've ever seen.


im not rewriting history im just actually studying it.....Those that hid behind christianity for power and greed (and it wasnt all the rcc bc many stood against it) were not christians bc Jesus himself said if they teach another gospel they are accursed and false....So by the bible i can say they werent christian......read luthers 95 thesis and see that the teachings the rcc were enforcing on the people were not biblical at all....

are you one of those guys that believes everything someone tells you about himself simply bc he states it.....without checking out his story?? If a guy came to you said he was a millionaire but lived in a trailer and had no money at all are you going to still call him a millionaire even if he doesnt fit the requirements......That is absurd........
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Sep, 2006 05:10 pm
kate4christ03 wrote:
Christ said we have to follow him and his teachings to be a christian...That is what christian means.

When did Christ ever use the term Christian?

kate4christ03 wrote:
....and even according to the bible i dont have to acknowledge those that torture bomb and murder as christians bc Christ said they were false...He also said we are to reject them and stand against them....

When/where did Jesus say not to pay heed to the entire Bible? I asked you earlier if your flavor of christianity had its own redacted version of the Bible with all of the no longer applicable portions scratched out. I don't recall seeing a reply, but if such a bible existed it would help eliminate the confusion.

Around a hundred years ago Mark Twain wrote:
The Christian Bible is a drug store. Its contents remain the same; but the medical practice changes. For eighteen hundred years these changes were slight -- scarcely noticeable. The practice was allopathic -- allopathic in its rudest and crudest form. The dull and ignorant physician day and night, and all the days and all the nights, drenched his patient with vast and hideous doses of the most repulsive drugs to be found in the store's stock; he bled him, cupped him, purged him, puked him, salivated him, never gave his system a chance to rally, nor nature a chance to help. He kept him religion sick for eighteen centuries, and allowed him not a well day during all that time. The stock in the store was made up of about equal portions of baleful and debilitating poisons, and healing and comforting medicines; but the practice of the time confined the physician to the use of the former; by consequence, he could only damage his patient, and that is what he did.

Not until far within our century was any considerable change in the practice introduced; and then mainly, or in effect only, in Great Britain and the United States. In the other countries to-day, the patient either still takes the ancient treatment or does not call the physician at all. In the English-speaking countries the changes observable in our century were forced by that very thing just referred to -- the revolt of the patient against the system; they were not projected by the physician. The patient fell to doctoring himself, and the physician's practice began to fall off. He modified his method to get back his trade. He did it gradually, reluctantly; and never yielded more at a time than the pressure compelled. At first he relinquished the daily dose of hell and damnation, and administered it every other day only; next he allowed another day to pass; then another and presently another; when he had restricted it at last to Sundays, and imagined that now there would surely be a truce, the homeopath arrived on the field and made him abandon hell and damnation altogether, and administered Christ's love, and comfort, and charity and compassion in its stead. These had been in the drug store all the time, gold labeled and conspicuous among the long shelfloads of repulsive purges and vomits and poisons, and so the practice was to blame that they had remained unused, not the pharmacy. To the ecclesiastical physician of fifty years ago, his predecessor for eighteen centuries was a quack; to the ecclesiastical physician of to-day, his predecessor of fifty years ago was a quack. To the every-man-his-own-ecclesiastical-doctor of -- when? -- what will the ecclesiastical physician of to-day be? Unless evolution, which has been a truth ever since the globes, suns, and planets of the solar system were but wandering films of meteor dust, shall reach a limit and become a lie, there is but one fate in store for him.
The full text
0 Replies
 
kate4christ03
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Sep, 2006 03:03 pm
mesquite.........Christian is a term first used in acts which means little Christ or disciple of Christ........Let me rephrase "Christ said we have to follow him and his teachings to be his disciple (christian)"


the whole bible is Gods word to us....the only things that dont pertain to christians is when GOd specifically gave instructions to the israelites for a specific event...and the law..bc we are under the new covenant bc of Christ dying on the cross...this new covenant was prophecied in hosea and further written about in romans, galations and hebrews.....and i honestly in no way see how this has to do with me saying that
Quote:
....and even according to the bible i dont have to acknowledge those that torture bomb and murder as christians bc Christ said they were false...He also said we are to reject them and stand against them....
Christ and the apostles warned us of those that will claim to be disciples of Christ yet be false bc of their actions ..or hatred....we are also told to stand against them....which is what im doing.......
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 0.11 seconds on 05/17/2024 at 02:38:00