acemona

And each person was judged according to what he had DONE - not what he had believed. BTW you ask me earlier who Paul was speaking to in 1 Cor. - I would say who is John speaking to in Revelations? We know that most of the book is symbolic, why is this part not? Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire after they had given up their dead - where do their dead go after being judged. How can "death" be thrown into hell, or hell be thrown into hell? Is it not possible that John is just letting the Turks know that there was a power mightier than Domitian and since John could not put into real words the power of awesomeness of Jesus he had to paint a picture as best he could?

In reference to God being small, my comment was that some statements on here sure do limit God and God's mercy - making God small. I believe God is much bigger than we allow God to be. So EVERY knee will bow and EVERY tongue confess that Jesus is Lord, and then some of them will be sent of to hell? That is the statement you are going with. "In Christ" does not necessarily mean - confessing to a personal relationship with Jesus in this world. It means, that because of the work/sacrifice of Jesus that ALL will be brought to God. If you take the scripture literally, you cannot in good faith say that those in the old testament are going to heaven . . . how to you do that, given what you believe the new testament says about salvation, it doesn't jive, unless you don't take the scripture literally. You cannot also say that those who live in the outback in australia and have never heard of Jesus are going to heaven. According to your reading of the NT they are simply out of luck because of their birthplace - the scripture does not allow for them to enter Heaven with a literal interpretation of some of the verses. We are saved, in the words of a modern day lyricist . . . "not because of who I am, but because of what you have done, not because of what I've done, but because of who you are" That is great theology to me.

You attribute cause and effect that is simply not there. If I am poor and working 2 low paying jobs, when is it that you would expect me to be involved in my child's education, plus, if my child has to work to help pay the bills - when will my child be involved in his education. Do you realize that you get fired from the local Speedy Mart when you have to call in sick a couple of times b/c your child has to stay home from school - and then you are without a job. Imagine trying to have a school visit by taking off work, ain't gonna happen. Your attempt to put middle class values on lower class groups simply can't/doesn't happen. What the poor have to put their value on is making enough money today to pay the rent and buy some food. They can't spend a lot of time thinking about tomorrow. I know it seems so easy to just say - they need to make different decisions, but when you are right there in the middle of it the decisions don't come so easy. It is hard to understand if you have never experienced it, and even harder to explain when you have. BTW, as I anticipated you could not name one person who loves to be on welfare and has a desire to remain there. I would bet that 95% of the people who claim that are a lot of people like that cannot name one - they just assume that it is true.

So if I DIE having never even heard of Jesus, I am going to hell. B/C I certainly have no chance of believing in Him if I have not heard of him. So much for those non-limbo babies the Catholics were recently talking about. What an awfully small God The scripture does attributes that to ADAM. . . 1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all (doesn't that mean everybody) die, so in Christ all (why doesn't this mean everybody?) will be made alive. 23 But each in his own turn Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Tell me EXACTLY what your "emphasis" means. Can it not mean that because of Jesus, and only Jesus all people will be saved? For as All Men because pf Adam were to die, so ALL men because of Jesus are to live. Why do we attribute so much more power to Adam than we do to Jesus. According to YOU (most people on this thread), whether I believe in ADAM or not I am going to hell - because of what ADAM did. Why is not the opposite true b/c of what Jesus did? Jesus just not that powerful?

The problem is that Bush kept firing all of the other leaders who disagreed with an open ended program and kept hiring new ones until he found one who agreed with his position. I am pretty sure that congress is falling right in line with commission that Bush created but ignored.

That is just the typical MANTRA hauled out by people to make an argument. You may have heard a story once about somebody that was on welfare and LOVED it b/c they didn't have to work, but I will bet money that you can't name me one person you know who is on welfare and LOVES it. I have known plenty, working in education, and not one of them desired to be on welfare. In fact, most were even embarrassed to use the food-stamps they got b/c they didn't like people thinking they were poor. Scripture: To whome much has been given, much will be required. Spiderman: With great power comes great responsibility. Choose your philosophy.

Class envy by whom? Surely you don't think the poor are making the laws that establish the tax brackets do you? I would say that anyone passing these laws are taxing themselves. I would venture to say that Nancy Pelosi and Henry Reed are not envious of anyone else's wealth. It might just be the Christian thing to do. Didn't Jesus tell the rich young ruler to sell everything he had and give his money to the poor. If I am making (as a family) 200,000.00 dollars per year and I take home 140,000 and I live in a 400,000.00 home, why would I scream for a tax break? It would appear to me that my life is pretty good. If I really want to reduce my tax burden I can give more money to charity and it will go way down.

Sure there can. I exert influence and try to make changes where I can. Research the Jesse and Al and see if they have made statements about the negative images in hip hop music. They have, but they can't convince the public to stop buying the albums so what do the do? Not only that, it is not simply using the words - Imus attacked a very specific group of young ladies that had names. They could say - "he is talking about me" Whereas when Snoop talks about Hos there is not a "person" who can say "he is talking about me" unless they want to admit that they are a one. It would be one thing for me to call people from Appalachia hillbillies (I am from Appalachia btw) but it would be something completely different if I called out members of a high school basketball team from one of the schools in Eastern Kentucky or Western Viginia and said - those particular boys are ignorant, in-bred, hillibillies. I would do neither, having much love for the area but surely you can see the difference in the two statements. If you are really outraged, why are you not starting a campaign against it? All it takes is one voice and others will soon join the chorus.

Please let me know when the owner of a store follows you around b/c they are afraid you are going to steal something, or the police pull you over b/c you are white and driving in a ritsy part of town or you are denied a job b/c you are white or when the something the Good Reverands do has a significant impact on you - then we will talk about them practicing racism.

Fired by whom? Most of them own their recording labels these days - Ever hear of DefJam? That is the whole point. You can condemn what they say all you want, but until the public quits buying their albums there is nothing anybody can do.

I would say that the two of those gentlemen do wield some power and certainly could practice racism, especially in their businesses. However, most of their power only comes when the public agrees with one of their "crusades" and exerts pressure. Mostly I would say that you have attributed ideas and notions to them that are simply your guess based on what you have inferred from their actions and has no real basis in fact.

If yu read the whole thread, what is say is that you can certainly be biggot. However, if you are not in a position of power your biggotry (if it were directed toward me) has no impact. If, however, you have power then your biggotry can be manifested in racism and discrimination.

My poll was really just so show that using abortion, in general, as a wedge issue no longer really favors republican candidates. BTW Hearsay did you see the recent Herald Leader article talking about what this decision really does. It simply changes where the fetus is when the action takes place, and places the woman's life in danger. One of the editorials copied in there also talked about it not being an issue of privacy, but of control, and who has control of medical decisions. Many on the right don't want universal health care b/c they don't want government making medical decisions, but they do want the government making decisions here. Amazing.

55% of the American People believe that abortion should be legal in most cases. 16% (included in the 55) believe that it should be legal in all cases. 43% believe is should be illegal in most cases, and only 12% (included in the 43%) believe it should be illegal in ALL cases. Which means, 86% of the public can see a case where an abortion should be legal. Which part of the democratic party encompasses 86, or even 55 percent of the American people? http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

Main Entry: rac·ism Pronunciation: 'rA-"si-z&m also -"shi- Function: noun 1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race (Webster's) If you cannot act on your biggotry you cannot PRACTICE racism. Racism is about power and superiority. It is not garbage. I am not talking about perception, I am talking about practice. Why is the original poster not outraged that Sean Hannity and Rushie and Glenn Beck are not outraged at Imus. BTW I am outraged that there hundreds of thousands of kids living BELOW poverty in this country and I am outraged that Fox News is not reporting on it.

So the protection against unreasonable search and seizure does not protect someone's privacy. I do not have a reasonable belief that I am safe and secure in my person and belongings, free from the fear that the government will take away my liberty in these areas. The 5th amendment does not protect me from incriminating myself so that I can remain silent on issues of personal matters. That way my personal matters can remain private. There is no "penubra" of privacy in that I can live in my home without the fear of having government soldiers quarterd there? I don't have the right to PRIVATELY own a handgun? Gosh, I have know idea where anyone would have gotten the idea that there was some right to privacy in the Constitution. And I thought the founding fathers were all about individual liberty - silly me, I guess they were all about government medling and the promotion of religion.

you mean the double standard that is illustrated when the national media focus for weeks on the missing white girl in aruba, or the death of the little white model girl in colorado, or the white girls abducted and killed in Florida. Or the outrage by Mr. O'Reilly of the alien that killed the young girl while he was driving drunk Or the outrage of Mr. Hannity when it comes to the IMAMS (sp) who were booted off of a plane b/c they have participated in their religious rituals in the airport earlier and some peopel were afraid. there is plenty of "outrage" out there it is just not the outrage that you want. Why do you get to decide what anyone is outraged about? Did the people in the article do something racist before they raped and murdered their victims? Is that what you want to Revs to yell about. You see, real racism can only be practiced by people who have power, and like it or not most of the REAL POWER in this country in still in the hand of whites. Now, anyone can be a biggot and there are minorities who can call me names, but until someone holds a position of authority and truly oppresses me b/c I am white then they cannot practice racism. What outrages you???

A strict constructionist would say that the government should be making medical decisions for individuals, WOW

The outrage that came with Imus was to generate some repurcussions for his actions. Without the outrage there may have been none. These perpetrators of this violent crime will have repurcussions at the appropriate time.

When we accept Christ in this life we are able to have "life more abundantly" because we are functioning in manner for which we were created. I absolutely think you would be petty if the child broke the rules in your classroom and that child was prevented from going to school the rest of his/her life. One mistake in an 8 hour day against some classroom rules and a punishment that lasts for the rest of his/her life? That is the better analogy. I would also like to believe that your "punishment" is redemptive in nature, an attempt to make the student whole and "repair" the student's relationship with you. Not a punishment that results in shunning the student forever.

It is still not free - you either work to play or you pay to play - just doesn't seem fair. What about those kids who have little financial means and a non-interested parent. I guess they have to take their ball and go home.

So, on top of the practices (2 - 2.5 hours per day during the season) plus the weight training that serious athletes do in the off season, plus the 1 - 2 hours of homework per night, plus the field work that the players do for upkeep of their facility (raking, dragging, mowing) they also need to "work" so that they can have officials at their games and nice uniforms etc. All this so that YOU (the general YOU and not a specific you) won't have to fork over the cost of a value meal or a matinee movie to watch them play. I guess that is fair.

Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 says (v22) For as in Adam all die, so in Christ ALL will be made alive. v51: Listen, I tell you a mystery; We will not all sleep, but we will ALL be changed in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. Christ's judgment is a redemtive one and even if the 32 where not yet "redeemed" when they died - who is to say that they will not be redeemed later. That would be an awfully petty God who punished someone for ETERNITY for a mistake they may have made when they were 18 or 23 - don't you think. GOD is so much bigger than that.