acemona

Where does he expressly forbid this? I know he says do not judge lest you be judge the same way. Not expressly forbidding but a dire warning about it.

 

I say that you have to teach the full message. Absolutely what you are saying but also the negatives. But the message, like Joel Olsteen preaches, where he says he will not talk/teach about sin and the consequences of sin is only preaching half the message.

 

As a parent, would you tell your children to behave because you love them. And they do something wrong and you tell them you love them more. Would you ever get to the point that you would teach them that their actions is unacceptable and if they continue with them, they will have a punishment?

 

If you would, what is the difference in telling a person sinning and that continually sins, I love you but I don't condone your lifestyle. I will always love you and Jesus will always love you but you aren't promise tomorrow and unless you repent and strive to live as a follower of Jesus, than you endanger where you will be for eternity. I don't make the call but this is what the Bible says about the call.

 

I think some people have a hard time with the harshness of the Bible and since they can't argue with the author about it, they attack the Christians about it. This is NOT MY RELIGION. This is what it says in the Bible. You continue a life of sin and you RUN THE RISK of Jesus saying at the end of time, that he does not know you. And we will reply, "But Jesus, I did this for you and that for you." And he replies, I never truly knew you.

 

Notice I didn't just lamblast homosexuals, but sin. There is sin in my life that I FIGHT ON A DAILY BASIS. And if I don't get a handle on that sin, repent and run from it, I know I run the risk of having the same thing done to me.

 

I don't sit in some ivory throne and throw down judgment but sit here and say I sin and struggle with it, too. Let's both beat this sin together.

The Question is ultimately - "how can you judget the heart of any sinner, homosexual or otherwise." How do you know that Elton John does not have a relationship with the Risen Savior? You can't know that, and yet you would say that he has not repented and is going to hell b/c he continues practicing homosexuality and outwardly. I envy every day, am I going to hell. My son a 9 year old is selfish every day - is he going to hell? Elton John is Gay - every day, of course he is going to hell (irony).

GODS LOVE IS UNCONDITIONAL "IN THAT WHILE YOU WERE YET A SINNER I LOVED YOU"

Our love should be unconditional as well.

I am able to send a message to my children that I love them while at the same time discipline them. Yet, it seems that adults cannot handle a message that says I love you but don't condone your actions. Why can't they be done at the same time?

 

I think it comes from two points: 1)One in our country's mindset, we should be allowed to do whatever we want to do whenever we want to do it however we want to do it; 2)if you don't like my lifestyle, then I might be wrong and I can't handle being wrong.

 

And I know it goes both ways. I could be wrong and the Bible is a fictional book that means diddly and squat. But I do not believe that and have faith that it is not. And if I believe it is not, I have to act on what it says even if that means standing in the face of the rights/liberties/freedoms of this country.

At what point will you turn your back on your children and send them to hell? That is what you are assigning to Jesus/God/Holy Spirit. That at some point Jesus will reject his teaching to Peter and quit forgiving. Was Jesus' instructions to Peter meant just for Peter and they did not apply to Jesus himself?

You are allowed to do whatever you wish - the Bible even says it, "Everything is permissable, but not everything is beneficial." I think you show a better WAY by how you live, not by condemning the way someone else lives.

From Christ's own words....

 

Matthew 10:33-35 (New International Version)

New International Version (NIV)

Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

 

33But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

 

34"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn

" 'a man against his father,

a daughter against her mother,

a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw

 

Jesus himself said he did not come to bring peace. There are either two choices. For him or against him. Should we be willing to accept any and all that want to live their life for Christ, yes. But should we water down his expectations, so that we can accept all? I think not.

 

Jesus does not leave it any other place. There is no room in Jesus family for middle of the road or riding the fence or fitting him in when your schedule allows.

 

And for me, I fail in this so many times it makes me embarrassed.

In your own words, JESUS DID IT. The holy spirit convicts not "man." It is not my job to convict anyone but to SPREAD THE GOOD NEWS Jesus accepted everybody btw. He did not say go get sinless and then come to me, he said come to me. You still have not told me what I edited in my message, what did I leave out? Do YOU convict people of their sin, or does JC/Holy Spirit. By convict I do not mean immediately send them to hell but to make them aware of what they are doing so that they can have a choice to repent.

Where does JC tell us to go to the mountain tops and PREACH that Homosexuality is wrong? NOWHERE. JC exhorts us to take the GOOD NEWS OF GOD'S GRACE TO THE ENDS OF THE WORLD. He expressly forbids us to judge others.

I agree. And at the same time, I do not have the authority to edit the message that Christ left. I will teach on the awesome relationship but I will also teach on the goats/sheep that Jesus taught on.

 

You might feel that you have that authority to edit his message and that is your call, but I do not have that authority.

So then, If I believe that JC will act as the hound of heaven and will forgive infinitely, AS HE TOLD PETER to do, then I am editing God's message?

Am I editing his message when I choose NOT to point out someone else's sin b/c JC tells me not to in him messages on judgment and casting the first stone.

I might be like Paul and try to hold my christian brothers accountable - if they have asked, but according to the message I read, it is not my job to point out the sin of others. A loving rebuke is different than a condemning threat.

Lets take the Celebrity Elton John for example. I don't know him from Adam so it would not be beneficial (spiritually) for me to tell him from a pulpit or anywhere that he is going to hell as a result of him homosexuality. I don't even see JC or Paul or Mark or John or anyone saying that in the Bible. If I had a relationship with him however, I could talk about the wonderfullness of JC and God and then let the HOLY SPIRIT convict - according the word I read, it is the HOLY SPIRIT that convicts not any person.

Is all this editing, or is it simply how I read the scripture through JC and what the Holy Spirit has revealed it to me?

Of the Ten Commandments... Nine of them are mentioned by Jesus.

Yes they were, and he said that they were to be used to point someone to the Creator. They were not meant as a litmus test for a just life, and those that broke them were not meant to be condemned by the community.

Ladies,

Which is healthier:

"Repent and follow Jesus or you will end up in Hell"

or

"Man, I have this awesome relationship with JC and he will accept you right where you are and love you warts and all"

Salvation is NOT Fire Insurance it is a relationship and should NEVER be entered into out of fear.

Any christian denomination that does not talk more about the grace, mercy and love of JC than it does about condemning those who sin should be banned.

How would you feel if my Christianity was the one that was being held up as the right way to live?

I don't want the 10 Commandments posted in schools, I want the Beatitudes -

1. Blessed are the POOR

2. Blessed are those who mourn

3. Blessed are the MEEK

4. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness

5. Blessed are the MERCIFUL

6. Blessed are the pure in heart

7. Blessed are the PEACEMAKERS

8. Bleseed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness

I also want what JC called the Greatest Commandments posted in the schools:

Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the prophets hang on these two commandments

All children must also memorize Matthew 7: 1-6 before they are allowed to graduate. Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and the you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Everybody must forgive someone 7x70 before they sue or take action against them.

Every 50th year (The year of Jubilee) all debts that are owed must be forgiven .

Anyone earning over 150,000.00 a year must recite Matthew 19:16--30

Any taxpayer who complains about their money going to welfare recipients that do not deserve it must memorize and recite daily Matthew 25: 31-46

Add in Oprah and Tom Cruise and you have an all-star, I mean all-idiot cast.

I didn't see where Elton John said to Ban Jesus or God, only organized religion. Is it not possible for him to love God, but not love the Southern Baptists. Heck, I struggle loving the Southern Baptists and I am baptist.

Oh wait, he is Gay so he can't possibly love God, only straight people can love God.

You are correct. Although it has never been done, the Constitution doesn't specify that the Speaker has to be a member of Congress.

i believe you are wrong on this. The Speaker of the House must come from the Body b/c that person is third in line for the presidency and must come from a populary elected group.

But, I could be wrong as well.

Does that mean that a majority of South Dakotans support murder?

But for you, that stance is a litmus test for congressional candidates, and yet they have very little say . . .

Abortion is a big issue for many voters in election - however, when was the last time there was a vote in either house of congress on the issue. Most times it is now Ballot issues (one was defeated in Monatana - I think) and not true legislative issues. So why does it matter where one stands on the issue, unless you think there is going to be a Constitutional Ban - and we all KNOW that is not going to happen.

The tenth regional tournament is widely regarded as the best in the state... From personal experience, I would have to agree. Also, it was not uncommon to have 6500+ in the Fieldhouse during the semifinals.

You apparently have never been to an 11th region tournament. Especially the one held at The Frankfort Convention Center last year. AWESOME. Best playing facility in the state.

My church just began an outreach emphasis. We started with a small group (10 or so) and worked to develop 10 startegies that we thought would attract people to our church (focusing on the unchurched). here are some of our ideas.

1. Church Promotions Team (we have a 15,000.00 budget for next year for advertising/promotion)

2. Consistent local mission work that involves many members of the church community.

3. Praise service early on Sundays

4. Revival

5. Sponosr local youth sports teams

6. Bible school off of church grounds - go where the kids are.

These are the ones I can remember off of the top of my head.

Not really. The Khmer Rouge insurgency didn't even start until 1968. They weren't a danger to the government of Cambodia until the early 70's. By that time, the media and peaceniks had convinced us that we were losing the Vietnam war. We wouldn't have been embroiled in Vietnam the way we were in 1968 if LBJ hadn't wanted to be a war president.

Dong, dong, dong (Again, i will not point out any similarities but allow you to make the connections yourself) AMAZING

So stopping the spread of Communism in Vietnam doesn't qualify as an American interest?

We pulled out before we beat the North Vietnamese into submission and while the South "fell," Vietnam is now one of the strongest market economies in SE Asia. I would submit then that the premise was wrong - McNamara has admitted as much.

Also FWIW - Ho Chi Minh was western educated and not married to the Russian Economic System (it certainly was not communism btw), but b/c he did not bow at the Altar of the "Open Market" he was considered a threat.

Pol Pot I would think was more of a threat and we, for the most part, left the Khmer Rouge alone - odd.

dong dong dong (I will not point out the similarities to modern conflicts, you can discern them for yourself)

How does the Church change the mindset to have people not seek abortions? I hope that it is not by simply telling someone it is a sin and that they should not do it. Is it by creating an environment that reduces the # of unwanted pregnancies (sex ed., that includes abstinence and birth control) and eliminating the socio-economic conditions of the group that is most likely to have abortions (poor white women). You see, as a general rule here is what a poor white woman hears from the Christian right (not you necessarily, but what THEY hear) is that A) What a sinner you are for getting pregnant out of wedlock - B) You are only having babies to collect more Welfare -C) you cannot have an abortion because that is a sin, but we are not going to help you with the means to raise the child. D) You should really just carry the baby to term, fall in love with it, make it a part of your life, and then give it away. You know there will be no social repercussions from your immediate communty who will look down on you for giving a baby away.

Why do wealthy white women have fewer abortions than poor white women - do they have less sex? I doubt it.

I think you are wanting the government to take care of a sympton and not a root cause.

And I have answered yours. Government made a policy that protects the right to an abortion. As I have answered before and you don't seem to accept is the best way to solve abortion is for the church to change the mindset of the populace and not seek abortions. Churches are doing this through their own means or supporting organizations that do. But with government in essence making abortions a legal option, that needs to also be addressed. If Roe vs. Wade had never came into play, than I would not see a need to use the government to solve the abortion issue. My understanding, the church is not the one that first sought the need of a Supreme Court decision to allow abortions but those on the other side of the issue. And for the record, the lady that sought the abortion, later recanted that it was a good decision, became a Christian and campaigned against abortion rights.

 

Absolutely, the government should be involved in those things that you mention. My view is that they should be involved but the church is the one that can solve.

 

So when you become a politician, using the Scripture that you used, it frees you from the responsibility of making disciples?

 

And please don't lower this good debate to the point of making it a political slam. Kerry was pro-life and I would have seriously considered voting for him as I have DEMOCRAT Ken Lucas in each of his races (up to this point:sssh: ) I look at issues AND NOT the political party.

How could the CHURCH have solved the practice of institutional segregation. It could not have unless it made it illegal. Explain to me how the church CURES poverty. Not, how does it help (a very few) those who are poor, how does it get rid of poverty? How does the church provide health care to 10 Million uninsured children (I will use HHS #s, I think my 46 million was total population and not just children). The Church cannot solve those, so it should work through the government to cure them - just like you want it to with Abortion.

And yet we have created a governmental system in this country in which our politicians are consistently told that they have to leave their Christian faith at the door of the governmental offices and quit trying to force their faith on others.

 

John Kerry even said in the campaign he had to seperate himself from his faith in his judgement when he went to DC. He lost my vote on that comment.

 

Again, you have not answered one of my questions I have posed over and over to you. If Jesus felt that the government systems were the answer and not the church why did he not lead an overthrow of the Roman Empire's government structure or even the political structure with King Herod of Israel as so many of His followers wanted Him to do?

 

My faith is not in a system that was designed by our Founding Fathers but in a system that was founded by our Heavenly Father.

Again I will ask - why then are you wanting to use the government to fix abortion and not poverty and suffering. The church should fix the abortion issue. You say the church cannot, I say the church cannot fix the institutions and policies and systems the create poverty, the church can only help alleviate the symptons - the Church cannot cure poverty, the government can create plans that lesson it. If the government is good for one, it is good for both. By the way, AGAIN the government does not create abortion it ALLOWS abortion. IF WE CAN PASS LAWS THAT SAY ALLOWING ABORTION IS A SIN THEREFORE WE WILL BAN IT, LETS PASS A LAW THAT SAYS ALLOWING POVERTY IS A SIN THEREFORE WE WILL BAN IT. NO MORE ABORTION, NO MORE POVERTY, NO MORE PEOPLE WITHOUT HEALTH CARE. You say, but people make decisions to be poor, I say people make decisions to have abortions. And you say it is not okay to have an abortion, and I say it is not okay to be poor. But you say abortion kills another human being, and I say hunger kills human beings, as does the cold of winter as does no healthcare.

I have answered your question over and over again - Jesus left it to his people and in our country, the government is the PEOPLE.

I am sure that you would not have voted for John Kerry even if he had not said that.

the reason many feel that they have to leave the Christian faith behind when they enter politics is b/c so many have such a narrow view of the christian faith and its values. You should leave proseltyzing and evangelizing behind, but you can never the leave the love of God behind and a Christian nations policies ought to reflect the love of Jesus - in everything not just Abortion.

God has granted us authority. All authority belongs to God, but he has put human beings on earth as caretakers. What is task? According to Jesus in Matthew 28:18-20m we are to go out and make disciples of all nations, teaching them to obey God in EVERY area of life. This includes politics. We must desciple people to make Godly decision about government, and promote the efoorts of those who are already doing so.

We need to stand against evil (poverty and social injustice). St Augustine said those who are citizens of God's kingdom are best equipped to be citizens of the kingdom of man. The alternative is unthinkable. In the 20th Century, because of poor governments 170 million men, women and children have been brutally murdered - by the governments. Historian John Hallowell "Only throuogh a return to faith in God, as God revealed Himself to man in Jesus Christ, can modern man AND HIS SOCIETY find redemption from the tyranny of evil."

It is Christian involvement through the government that has given us hospitals, civil liberties, abolition of slavery, modern science, the elevation of women, regard for humn life, great works of art and literature, a workable system of justice, education for common people, the free-enterprise system, and much more.

Obedience to authority demands good citizenship. The Apostle Pual in Romans chapter 13 clearly states that we must obey government leaders because all authority comes from God. HERE's the CATCH: in America, the PEOPLE are the LEADERS!!

The dems are saying nothing about rolling back the child tax credit (that is yoru misinformation) they are talking about rolling back the tax breaks that went to wealthiest 5% WHILE WE ARE AT WAR.

War in and of itself is a economy booster (see Great Depression and WWII) why were the ones least inconvienced by sacrifice actually given more money in a time when that money should have been going to the military instead of the gov't borrowing that money on the back of my 9 year old.

I believe the percentage is more like 34%.

Either # works for the sake of discussion. If 1% has 34% of the wealth should they pay 34% of the taxes?

So you roll back the tax cuts that would then in turn affect me...losing the child tax credit, reemergence of the marriage tax?

That's crap, you penalize the people who are married to benefit the ones who are not and have children out of wedlock and so forth...Im not buying.

Huh??

i am just saying that the top 1% of the wealthy control 95% of the wealth in the country. should they not pay 95% of the taxes?:confused:

How does taxing the "rich" more help the middle class and lower class? How does it help my situation and those in the middle class and those in the lower classes?

Is it class envy?

 

From my perspective, I have a lovely wife and two wonderful kids and reside in the middle/middle class, I would venture to say.

 

How does taxing the rich help me or any other tax bracket below us? Why such venom towards that group? The top 5% pay more than a 1/3 of all income taxes, and the top 50% pay over 95%.

 

What more do the Democrats want in increasing taxes and rolling back to the present tax system? I love the child tax credits I receive and not being penalized for being married.

 

I don't quite understand it.

Check and see what percentage of the wealth of the country is controlled by the top 1%. Don't base your question on what percentage of the taxes they pay, ask your question based upon what percentage of the total money they control.

Because back in the 70's government made a law in relation to abortion. That law would have to change.

 

Except I have already pointed out in another post that the best way to handle this is all of the things that churches have been doing to try and get people to CHOSE NOT TO have an abortion.

 

Again, I will ask you to provide the Scripture that God/Jesus indicates that their plans are for government to be the answer for society rather than the church?

 

This is not necessarily my view but the way I have read what God has said. Now if I am wrong or misguided on that, I would love to read the Scriptures that shows my mistaken belief.

Show me anywhere in the scripture where it says anything about democracy and freedom for the people. The government of the USA is us. it is made up of PEOPLE we elect, it is not some abstract substance that cannot be defined. the government does our bidding - regardless of how cynical we are.

Acts 6:1 Now during those days, when the disciples were increasing in number, the Hellenists complained against the hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. And the 12 called together the whole community of the disciples and said, "it is not right that we should neglect the word of God n order to wait on tables. Therefor friends, select (vote on, elect??) from among yourselves seven men of good standing, full of the Spirit and wisdom, whom you may APPOINT to this task. while we devote ourselves to prayer and to serving the word.

So did God and Jesus call for the governments to do this or churches?

They called for the PEOPLE to do this

Churches are People

Government is People (of, by and for . . .)

Again, why is it okay for Gov't to fix abortion, but not poverty, poor health, and social injustices?