|| Replies ||

User	Jeniffer | 2006-08-24 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Anyone up for bananas? I feel like bananas....and maybe some grape friut, mon. A big fruit hat, mon.

User	Chell | 2006-08-24 |
Subject	untitled
Message	sorry- wrong thread.... lol- that’s what I get for having multiple windows open at once....

User	Chell | 2006-08-24 |
Subject	untitled
Message	**I’ve never once said that my church or religion is the only way,** 6/23/06 Forum Post: Is Gay Wrong, “Well, then, Chell, I’ve misunderstood what you’ve been saying. By Savior, I mean the only way to God.” **yet you keep using that terminology; you talk about jumping in blindly; you talk about blind faith;** So, you have come to believe through personal knowledge and your own understandings of what the Bible teaches? Or have you decided to accept the conclusions of the Council of Nicea- who leaned on their own understandings and interpretations of the Bible? Aren’t both of these leaning on your own or someone else’s understanding? Why is your way acceptable- while trying to understand Him myself, in my own ways, and my own understanding, is not acceptable? Does God only talk to learned men? Can’t I develop, with His guidance, my own beliefs? (I’m not trying to be mean, simply asking.) **you talk about not thinking for yourself (or not thinking at all!) if you accept Christian teachings.** 5/31/06 Forum Post by Mae The Way to Heaven If you are relying on your own knowledge to determine if something is truth or not, you’re never going to get there. 6/6/06 Forum Post: The Way to Heaven, kanu, you often allude to the fact that spiritual things, as they honestly exist, are beyond the understanding of mere human beings, (or at least I think you do. Sometimes I get a little bit lost in your answers 8>) ) . This is one of those things. **In practically every post where you discuss Christianity, it is in a negative sense and the practitioners of an organized Christian religion are discussed in a negative way.** This is a debate forum. We are supposed to argue either for or against the chosen topic. People couldn’t possibly debate against religion without having a opposing outlook on that topic. And if we’re not allowed to debate the other side, what is the topic doing in a debate forum in the first place? Are we all just supposed to agree with each other? **"yet thinks it feels GREAT! to be a pompous, overbearing jerk." You’ve met this man, so that you know this pronouncement is true?** I haven’t met the man, so I don’t know if he’s a pompous, overbearing jerk. I was simply quoting him. From the Mission Statement of J.P. Holdings (better known as JPH) the creator of Techtonics: ”How does it feel to be a pompous, overbearing jerk? Great! I’m glad you asked. I have a few critics whose delusions about myself I entertain because it makes it easier to show that they can’t answer any actual arguments. If you really want to know what makes JPH tick, though, you need to grasp that I fit the personality profile here. Thus: To outsiders, INTJs (INJT stands for the Introverted iNtuitive Thinking Judging) may appear to project an aura of "definiteness", of self-confidence. This self-confidence, sometimes mistaken for simple arrogance by the less decisive, is actually of a very specific rather than a general nature; its source lies in the specialized knowledge systems that most INTJs start building at an early age. In other words, why my simpler-minded opponents think I’m arrogant. When it comes to their own areas of expertise -- and INTJs can have several -- they will be able to tell you almost immediately whether or not they can help you, and if so, how. INTJs know what they know, and perhaps still more importantly, they know what they don’t know…” **"I’ve never claimed to accept the Gnostic gospels," - Actually, you used 1 John to proclaim the Gnostic gospels as acceptable teachings while declaring the Gospel of Matthew to be somehow less acceptable because it isn’t one complete book. (And no, you didn’t say that directly, but you very strongly implied it.) ** Thank your for clarifying that I implied it. Again, this is a debate forum. We were discussing the Da Vinci Code and I used the only reference you accept as authority on spirituality to show that the Gnostic scriptures COULD be acceptable teachings based on the guidelines set within that scripture. There is a huge difference between saying something ‘Could Be’ and something ‘Is’… If something ‘Is’ there’s no need for debate- it’s a dead subject. **All I’m saying is that in your trying out this one and looking at that one, you seem to find only fault with modern-day Christianity and not with any of these other religions - though they aren’t working for you either, apparently.** If I only found fault with Christianity I would be Muslim, or Taoist, or some other religion. I am simply a person who strives to understand the meanings of the teachings of Christ and follow them as closely as I can. (Can’t call me a Christian as I don’t hold to the belief of the Trinity.) **It seems -- to me, at least -- that you need to have further discussions with God and study on the subjects of faith and pride and, like you said, leaning on your own understanding, again with the idea of faith.** So, I need to accept, without question, the conclusions a group of educated men (again, leaning on their understandings instead of my own or God’s.) I have to have faith that the Council of Nicea got it right? Does God want us to unquestioningly accept the conclusions of a group of men that got together and decided to tell others what to believe instead of letting people come to the truth themselves? That wouldn’t be relying on my faith and pride in finding God, but the faith and pride of other men. **Not for a moment do I think you shouldn’t ask questions, study and continue to seek God. I do think, however, that your approach to Christianity is not a balanced one and that in your posts here you are doing exactly what you proclaim to dislike about Christians.** How would you, Mae, define a balanced approach to the study of Christ and Christianity? Isn’t every Christian religion slanted by its choice of Biblical interpretations? Is my way unbalanced only because it differs from yours? (Agains, not trying to be mean, just asking questions.) **Forum Post by Mae 6/2/06 The Way to Heaven If you don’t want to accept that Jesus Christ is the one and only way to heaven, then that’s your decision; if you don’t like what I have to say about it, then I’m not forcing you to read any of this,** I have already accepted Christ’s sacrifice and strive to make my good ‘fruits’- so I guess I’m already saved. Ahhh. I’m growing tired of this. I’m coming to believe it is better not to ask questions in any of the debate forums that deal with religion. I thought debate was about discussing alternative ideas about a subject. But, apparently, when the debate is about religion I can either get on board or get called names.

User	Jeniffer | 2006-08-23 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Oh, yes, and I SAID that myself. I’ve never been in that situation. I’m argueing from logic and perspective. "Possesed", also, could be interpretational. If you don’t believe in possession, which I think is uniwise, then you could interpret "possessed" as insane and maniacal. Maybe I should go get myself in a life threatening situation and then come back.......

User	Jeniffer | 2006-08-23 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Well, what would you do?

User	ghostknight | 2006-08-22 |
Subject	untitled
Message	"But if a stark raving maniac who is very likely possessed comes to rape, torture and/or kill you and maybe your family, even though it wouldn’t be pleasant to, I’d say have no scruples about "stopping his heart". you’ve obviously never had to make anything like a possibly life-threatening choice. you live in a world of theory. possessed... i’m going to enjoy having you around.

User	Jeniffer | 2006-08-20 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Hey, Chell, I respect that completely. It’s not even killing that I’m focused on. It’s not like I’ve ever killed a human being *as if!*, and I’m not saying I ever will. All I’m saying is that there IS such a thing as being a time to kill; just as there is a time NOT to kill. If someone comes up and tries to steal your wallet, for heavens sake don’t shoot him dead. That is unnecessary manslaughter. Just spray him in the face with tear gas and get the heck outta there. But if a stark raving maniac who is very likely possessed comes to rape, torture and/or kill you and maybe your family, even though it wouldn’t be pleasant to, I’d say have no scruples about "stopping his heart". I heard about a woman who was kidnapped and stuffed into the trunk of some guys car. What he didn’t prepare for was the gun that she had in her purse. When he drove her out to the woods and opened the trunk, she shot him and killed him. Turns out he was a serial rapist and killer, and not only had she saved herself, but all the other women who might have suffered the same fate. I believe in aiming for a foot in some cases, and definitely not looking for a time to kill, but recognizing when, if, it is the time.

User	ghostknight | 2006-08-20 |
Subject	untitled
Message	i would go so far as to say that the higher power out there will reveal itself in the way the reciever will understand. things don’t usually make the most sense until we’re forced to make a choice and act on it, i believe. and looking back on an action can ruin the impact; we start to wonder about what we did and possibly take the meaning away. theory is nice, reality... not so much sometimes. the action speaks louder than the words in a very real sense.

User	Chell | 2006-08-19 |
Subject	untitled
Message	I have no problem with running, hiding, even hurting to get away, I’ll be screaming, "I’m sorry!!" at the top of my lungs while swinging... but to fight to the point of killing? Nope. I can’t do it. I can NOT kill a human. No matter what others might call it later. God knows I’m this way. God knows I couldn’t kill anyone for any reason, even if it wasn’t one of His laws. And if God wanted me to survive a bad situation he’d find a way for me to escape, to hide, or use non-lethal force to get to safety. If he sent a neighbor I’d scream for that neioghbor to help or get help. If he sent a camel I’d ride it as fast as it would go. If He sent a boat I’d hide inside it. I guess if God reached inside me and changed me enough that I could stop a human heart, then I’d do it. But I’d HAVE to know God WANTED me to kill this human being who may, given time, find Christ and be saved instead of being damned because of the state of sin he’s in when we battle to the death. As far as the whole rounding people up who won’t wear the mark of the beast...if I haven’t been taken during rapture, killed in the earthquakes, the firestorms, or taken out by one of the plagues... a martyr’s death for refusing the mark of the beast will be eternally more enjoyable than the years of absolute hell that will await those left behind. Do you plan on trying to fight the antichrist? Aren’t you hoping to go during rapture???

User	Jeniffer | 2006-08-19 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Yes, Chell, I agree with that one hundred percent. It’s ALL in God’s hands. But have you ever heard of "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"? That means don’t threaten to jump off a building and shout "If you’re really there, God, catch me!" He’ll probably let you splat. I think that principle works in more ways than one. What if you sit down and refuse to do anything about the enemy charging for you because "that would be doubting God" ? What if He wants you to fight yourself? What if it’s God’s will for you to stand up and fight? You ever see that mini series about Moses that they had months ago? Moses told a story about a man who was caught in the middle of a flood, and he sat down to wait for God to save him. A neighbor, a camel, and a boat passed by and offered to help him, but to each he refused and said, "I’m waiting for God to save me." The man drowned. When he got up to heaven, he was furious and demanded of God, "Why didn’t you save me?!" God said, "I sent a a neighbor, a camel, and a boat; what more could you have asked for?" Would you rather be saved by a giant hand coming down from heaven and swooping you up to safety, or trust in God to give you the courage to fight, run, hide or whatever else He wants you to do when they’re locking up people who don’t bear the mark of 666? If it’s your calling to be a martyr, He’ll see to it that you’re a martyr.

User	Toxic_Rayne | 2006-08-19 |
Subject	untitled
Message	My pet grasshopper is a satanist. *tox*

User	Chell | 2006-08-18 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Ghost, baby,no one believed the whole Satan worshipper story anyways- you’re too funny and too honest to be a follower of the Father of Lies. LOL Glad I connected with ya though, always nice to know I’m not alone in my insanity...

User	ghostknight | 2006-08-17 |
Subject	untitled
Message	ooh, i like that, chell. oh, there i went and ruined my reputation as a satan worshipper. =)

User	Chell | 2006-08-16 |
Subject	untitled
Message	*but why let the enemy take you out of this world before you’re finished doing what God wants you to do here?* God won’t allow me to be taken from this earth before I’ve finished doing what God wants me to do here. My life, my death, lie in his hands. And even if I was killed in what other humans would see as ’premature’, there’s nothing I can do that another of his believers couldn’t do in my stead. My mission will be over when God removes me from this earth, in what ever way he knows if best- even if it means dying to prove I love my enemy. If someone tries to kill me and God wants me to be here, nothing they try will work. Lions mouths will be held shut, seas will part, earthquakes will open prison doors... If my enemy wants to kill me, and God doesn’t stop it, then it’s time for me to go Home. I don’t want to lose access to heaven because I killed someone and fail in some futile attempt to explain to God that is wasn’t killing because it was self-defense. I’d rather perish than break what I believe to be God’s law.

User	Jeniffer | 2006-08-16 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Well, I think the bible means what it means, and misinterpretation is misinterpretation. To set the matter straight, I know about the teaching of "turn the other cheek." In most situations, that is the attitude to take. Jesus said to love your enemies; hold no resentment against the ones who persecute you, but rather simply look on them with compassion and love for another human being, because actually they are worse off than you. Let me use a true story to illustrate something: Ever heard of Corrie Ten boom? She was a middle aged spinster who went to a concentration camp during world war II. She was a Dutch watchmaker, and a Christian. Her older sister, Betsie, was of much gentler character than feisty Corrie. Corrie was constantly learning from her. Corrie had to battle withher resentment of the Nazis, not because they imprisoned and abused her, but because she saw what the did to others, including her sister. She could not help herself. One day before they were arrested, they watched Nazis herding Jews into a truck. I can’t remember, as it was a awhile back that I read her book, if it was her sister or her father who watched with Corrie, and prayed to God to "help those poor people". Corries realized it was not a prayer for the Jews, but for the Nazis! Because they had "touched the apple of God’s eye." That is what Jesus meant by "love your enemies." But at the same time, would you think it wrong to kill a Nazi? Do you really believe that there is no such thing as righteous killing? Or do you have trouble reconciling the difference between the two principles? I think war is pointless, and that killing is something that should b done when there is no other choice but to be killed yourself by an evil person. In the old testament, God required animal sacrifices. That is killing. Turn the other cheek means be meek and mild, rather than violent and angry, but why let the enemy take you out of this world before you’re finished doing what God wants you to do here? Being a martyr does not mean being a wimp. We’re not all supposed to be martyrs anyway. Go has no resentment or hatred like we do, but the bible says He hates evil. It also says in several psalms, of evildoers, "I hate them with perfect hatred." Perfect hatred is not human hatred, anger, or resentment. It is the opposite of reverence for what they stand for. Abhorrence. And with that logic about statues, I guess Michaelangelo and Davinci went to hell, big time. And I myself have been guilty of playing around with clay.... And thank you, mae, for agreeing with me. That is rare around here.

User	Chell | 2006-08-15 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Jesus told the apostles to arm themselves in one part of the scriptures, but then says to turn the cheek and love your enemy. The only time, it appears, that violence from Christians is allowed is when God actually tells you to do it, and he hasn’t come down and talked to anyone for almost 2000 years, so he hasn’t sanctioned any violence. (Unless, of course, you believe George Bush when he said, ’I’m driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq ..." And I did. And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, "Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East." And by God I’m gonna do it.’" while speaking to Palestinian ministers in June 2003.)

User	Blue Monk | 2006-08-15 |
Subject	untitled
Message	Christianity remains divided into many denominations precisely because there are so many schools of thought within which there are just as many schools of action. We know that Christ said "turn the other cheek", but was there any time when he said to let someone rape and murder your families or plunder and destroy your homes, cities and nations? Some people have taken this extreme and may be extinct now except for the rest of us. Remember, He did not come to replace the law, so let us use good judgement as to just how much abuse the law allows.

User	Chell | 2006-08-15 |
Subject	untitled
Message	*We must kill to eat, to defend ourselves, and to obey the Lord, in some cases.* How do you reconcile the concept of self defense with Jesus’ words in Matthew 5 28-38? "You have heard that it was said, ’Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. "You have heard that it was said, ’Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. The scriptures are very clear- you do not resist… you let them strike you, you give extra to those that want to sue you, you go an extra mile with those that force you. We are commanded to love our enemies, not strike out against them. It does NOT say defend yourself. Jesus did not teach the concept of self-defense. *Jesus, actually, is the one who does the stealing.* You mean like when Jesus had the disciples steal a colt? (Luke 19: 28-34) *Is it a sin to carve a statue?* Moses made it clear in Deuteronomy 27:15, that it IS a sin to carve an image (a statue) OR cast an idol (an object of worship). You will be cursed for carving an image as well as casting an idol… "Cursed is the man who carves an image or casts an idol—a thing detestable to the LORD, the work of the craftsman’s hands—and sets it up in secret." Then all the people shall say, "Amen!" “A man is justified not by faith alone, but by works also, which come of faith.” I totally agree that works alone will not save anyone. And as you pointed out, faith alone will not save anyone. Those who accept Christ on their death beds, on death row, or only after finding out they’re terminally ill, will not gain forgiveness- the atonement will not apply to them, their works will damn them. It won’t matter if they have been ‘born-again’ or baptized, had last rites, or take the sacrament. Their life’s works will damn them because they hadn’t accepted Christ earlier and acted out of faith- but out of fear of death and judgment (ironically, the same reasons everyone else accepts Christ and expects to be saved). The sacrifice can not save you from the deeds you have done. You have to accept Christ and change your deeds to prove that you are worthy of the atonement. Therefore, the sacrifice is not a gift; we have to show Christ we earned it. If you accept Christ as your Savior but still support war, the death penalty, if you hate your enemy, if you fight your opponent in a law suit, if you carve statues or cast idols, if you work on Sunday, if you don’t honor your parents, if you lie, if you steal, if you murder, if you bear false witness against your neighbor (Muslims hate everybody..) your actions will damn you because you haven’t followed Christ’s teaching and therefore his sacrifice can not apply to you. If all it takes is asking forgiveness for our actions, then we, obviously, can be saved by faith alone. *The mistake and contradiction is in the interpretation, not the meaning* The definition of interpretation is: a mental representation of the MEANING or significance of something So what your saying is, “the mistake and contradiction is in the MEANING, not the MEANING.” But you are absolutely correct- the various meanings of what the Bible says is decided by the agendas of those deciding the meaning…

User	ghostknight | 2006-08-15 |
Subject	untitled
Message	"It doesn’t mean He makes mistakes. When He repented, it means He took it back, and decided not to do it." heh. self serving logic. heh.

User	ghostknight | 2006-08-15 |
Subject	untitled
Message	private messages are wonderful things, aren’t they?