I found this letter hilarious. I don't care that Glenn starts it out with the hooey saluation or that The Daily World prints it. That's fine. Each to his/her own.

But, Glenn says in the same letter: "I’ll show you in the word of God" and "Truth is stranger than fiction!"

Glenn can believe whatever Glenn wants, but using the bible as proof to anyone other than others so inclined to subscribe to that sillyness is just more sillyness. And, even then, they can't agree.

"I know the bible's true because the bible says so!"


Greetings in the Saviour’s name, Jesus.

I’m going to wait until after Christmas, to make noise concerning Washington state’s casinos and The Daily World’s part, in their presence in Grays Harbor and their detrimental influence; legal, for now!

The wild, wild west, complete with saloons full of gamblers and prostitutes. How many of those do you think escaped damnation and perdition? I’ll show you in the word of God, where greed is condemned along with those who live the lifestyle inherent with those infested by those demons of greed and lust.

Truth is stranger than fiction!

Glenn True

Elma

So...you're saying that practicing greed and having sex with prostitutes is a perfectly fine lifestyle that deserves no condemnation?

No, I don't think that's what he's saying at all.

Then if a lifestyle of greed and sex with prostitutes is worthy of condemnation, and the Bible agrees, what's the big whoop? Does it make it less true because the Bible says it's worthy of condemnation?

Hey, whatever Republican legislators wanna do in their private lives is OK by me

And with me.

I found the letter quite humorous.

But, sense you're asking, casinos (the subject of the letter) are not always about greed. I've gone to the QBR dozens of times. I think I put money in the slot machine once. There are lots of reasons to go there (but, as of late, the food isn't necessarily one of them, btw).

Now, I have only been to Little Creek once... for the sole purpose of giving them $80 of my dollars while Lil Stash taught me how to play Craps. It was quite fun and worth every penny.

Secondly, I happen to support the legalization of prostitution. It matters not to me with whom Republican Congressmen, or Christian televangelists, or former New York Governors, choose to dally.

There are many, many legal as well as illegal activities in which human can engage that I would not consider "a fine lifestyle". But, I wouldn't think they all deserve condemnation either.

You earlier in the thread


The Beav


You


You seem to be "saying that practicing greed and having sex with prostitutes is a perfectly fine lifestyle that deserves no condemnation?"

WTF?

Of course as a Christian I personally believe that lifestyle is wrong/sinful and God is righteous and just to condemn it...so I don't practice it.

However, I am not interested in monitoring any legislators' private life...I'll leave that up to the news media and political operatives. If a legislator is acting out their lust with legal prostitution, or exercising their greed in legal ways, then its their business. I believe they will suffer spiritual consequences and answer for it sooner or later.

If their acting out is through illegal means, then that's a different story...and they need to suffer earthly consequences and answer for it sooner rather than later.

Re: I’ll show you in the word of God, where greed is condemned along with those who live the lifestyle inherent with those infested by those demons of greed and lust.

I can show in the word of God where Jesus showed grace and eternal mercy to those same kind of people. I can also show where it says that the people who don't participate in those activities are no better or worse than those who do. It's a bummer, really. It totally strips "self-righteous" of the righteous bit and leaves only self. Serious buzz kill.

As a believer, I do accept that there are eternal consequences to our actions. However, I believe that is up to the final judge. Too many Christians read about condemnation of one type or another and just can't wait to get the process started on God's behalf.

Some people just love an easy target. Perhaps it has something to do with the beam in their line of vision.

Good words, mdean. Happy New Year. Give my best to your fellow geeks in the pit. The new digs are looking good. I look forward to a tour.

Very well said. Thanks!

Indeed. Very well said.

The problem with sanctimony is that encourages others to look more closely for the feet of clay. The might be one way for each of us, but there is no one way for all of us.

I hereby take back every mean thing I've ever said about you, at least the stuff that you actually heard about

Someone's recanting, lord! Kumbaya...

Hope your 2010 goes better than your 2009, friend.

I'm confused, how can I be drunk? I haven't had anything to drink... Ditto what Stash said.

Wow, smelling salts really burn! Thanks, Beav, I'm gonna hold ya to that.

Thanks, Stash and everyone else. Happy New Year to all of you. I hope it's filled with love and joy and peace for all of us.

Common platitude, however, Jesus said that no one comes to the Father except through Him.

Damn! And everybody was starting to get along so well.

Invoking Funky's Law.

Spare us your sanctimony.

Christ's own words, Turnow.
Even meets Beavis's criteria.

Don't you think it's a little strange that one who professes to be a Christian would advocate for the silencing and suppression of Christ's own words? And remember, He said that He did not come to bring peace.

Can't say it any better than this:

As a believer, I do accept that there are eternal consequences to our actions. However, I believe that is up to the final judge. Too many Christians read about condemnation of one type or another and just can't wait to get the process started on God's behalf.

Final judgment is totally and completely up to God.
I've never said otherwise.

However, too many "believers" cling to the biblical kumbaya passages and reject Christ's instruction to judge with righteous judgment, holding matters up to the light of God's Word. What does it have to do with me if God's Word irritates, angers, or makes someone squirm?

Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

Or are you a Paul-hater, too?

Jesus calls on every person to "repent or perish."
One can choose to read Glenn's letter and yuk it up as "sillyness"...or one can choose to recognize the biblical truth contained in the letter, and take it to heart.

Save yourself, ikayak, Jesus is just a dead Jew.

Look up "passive-aggressive disorder" and the above is what you will find as a textbook example.

"I'm not judging anyone. God is. And I'm just pointing it out."

We are to imitate Christ and His Apostles.
They preached repentance.
If it irritates and angers you, take it up with God.


Mar 6:7 And he called [unto him] the twelve, and began to send them forth by two and two; and gave them power over unclean spirits;

Mar 6:8 And commanded them that they should take nothing for [their] journey, save a staff only; no scrip, no bread, no money in [their] purse:

Mar 6:9 But [be] shod with sandals; and not put on two coats.

Mar 6:10 And he said unto them, In what place soever ye enter into an house, there abide till ye depart from that place.

Mar 6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Mar 6:12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent.

And I've never accused you of such. I hope I didn't give you the impression that I was trying to put words in your mouth. If so, I apologize.



Most excellent. I love the quotes, they're so sweetly condescending. Naturally, a message of love and grace should call a person's status as a believer into question. Well done, you've almost made my point entirely, but let's continue, shall we?



Ah, the ultimatum. If you don't do this, you equal that. Period. Well, for the record, no, I'm not a Paul-hater. He's actually my favorite writer in the Bible. I especially like the part about 'though I speak with the tongue of men and angels, if I have not love it's all crap...' (paraphrased, of course.)

Effective witnessing requires love and understanding. We can preach all we want but unless we *show* people something desirable, something different, something genuine, it will fall on deaf ears. You see, it's possible to speak the truth in such a way that, even with the best of intentions, one still does more harm than good.

Fire and brimstone scares people, it does not inspire people. There may be truth to it, but again, that's up to the final judge. If one must resort to scare tactics, the package they're selling obviously lacks appeal of its own to draw people to it from actual desire. Then, you end up with a crowd of people who don't so much love, understand or wish to emulate Christ, so much as they're just afraid not to say they do. They become the bi-product proteges of the one-trick-pony "preachers", not Christ. I find it holds true that focusing on the benefits of ones actions does more to inspire than to focus on the consequences of ones inaction, and leads to a more sincere result.



Yes, but more importantly, he set an example with his life that was compelling. He was merciful, compassionate, wise and loving. People wanted to be close to him, be like him. People followed him because he was worth following.



OK, so let's look at the letter.

Greetings in the Saviour’s name, Jesus. (Unless there's another salutation somewhere, I think he just addressed the letter to Jesus.)

I’m going to wait until after Christmas, to make noise (Denoting doing the reader a favor of some sort. A gift. A gift of peace on this blessed holiday, with the unspoken "I'll be back."- Kinda funny, and somewhat ironic that he's going to table his zeal for the Lord on the holiday set aside to celebrate his Lord's birth.) concerning Washington state’s casinos and The Daily World’s part, in their presence in Grays Harbor and their detrimental influence; legal, for now! (Yes, it's definitely the newspaper's fault that casinos are in business here. It's about time someone pointed that out. But no noise 'till after Christmas. Must... show.... restraint... Is it possible that Glenn already knows his ways are a bit too "shoot first" to be productive, thus the holiday truce?)

The wild, wild west, (Personally, I'd like to have a few more 'wilds'in that sentence, it gives the reader a sense of just how wildly wild it really was.) complete with saloons full of gamblers and prostitutes. (Because only gamblers and prostitutes go to saloons. Right.) How many of those do you think escaped damnation and perdition? (I wouldn't presume to know. That's not up to me so I'll not hazard a guess.) I’ll show you in the word of God, where greed is condemned along with those who live the lifestyle inherent with those infested by those demons of greed and lust. (And I'll show you where Jesus hung out with tax collectors and prostitutes and saved his strongest words for those dressed in robes, pomp and pious self-righteousness. Because greed is not always manifest in monetary increments. More often, and more detrimental, it is manifest in ones action and selfishness, all carefully hidden by a squeaky-clean exterior. Same goes for lust. The stains hardest to get out are the ones buried deep in the heart where sin has its origin. Jesus wasn't killed for calling gamblers and whores on the carpet. He was killed because he was a thorn in the side of the so-called righteous, the powerful, influential swindlers who grew increasingly frustrated that Jesus could see through their appearance straight to their corrupt hearts. Christ's words cut them to the bone because they knew he was right. They did all the outward things right but inside they were poison.

I would also point out that I don't recall Jesus petitioning to shut down the bars. His mission was to change hearts. Treat the illness, not the symptom. If people's hearts change, the rest will follow.

You see, if you petition to shut down, oh... for example, let's say a brothel, you have done nothing of eternal good. You have merely given your street a make-over. You have an empty building and not one changed heart. You've still got as many hookers as before, they're just disenfranchised. However, if you offer the hookers an alternative, a better way of life, and they take it, well, now you have actually done some good. Reach enough of them and the brothel closes purely from economics. But the closed business isn't the win, the changed hearts are. Simply shutting the doos won't accomplish that, though. Thus, I see no record of Christ wasting his time and energy treating the symptoms.)

Truth is stranger than fiction! (My favorite part of the letter. The big finish. The grand "Aha!" to which there has been no proper setup. Classic.

So, yeah, it was a little humorous at times. I don't know Glenn, I'm sure he's a great guy, but if he had asked me to proof-read that first, I'd have told him it wasn't quite ready to go to print.

So when are you leaving, and who are you giving your money to?

You always seem to know just what to say and how to say it.

How about continuing with the rest of my statement.
And how about preaching the whole counsel of God...
I realize that much of it is not politically and liberally correct.




Well, I'm glad that we can discuss Paul's teaching without you running from the thread with your hair on-fire. There is at least one on this board who claims believer status but is a Paul-hater and rejects his scripture.

While we're on the topic of Paul and his love, may I remind you that it was Paul who wrote at least twice, once in the same epistle you have cited, that believers are to shun/have nothing to do with those who call themselves believers but practice a lifestyle of sin. Paul wouldn't continue calling them brothers...he called them "wicked/evil persons." Oh the judging!




Boo-hoo that it scares people.
Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.
Fear inspired the Ninevites to wise-up and repent.




Ah...just as I suspected.
With you it's about the "we"..."we show."
Remember the Parable of the soils?

I'm more of a Holy Spirit fan, myself.
It's all about God's Sovereignty.
Christ showed Saul something genuine all right.
He knocked him off his horse, on his a$$, and blinded him.




More importantly?
Personally, I believe every aspect of Christ's life, words, and actions are equally compelling. And Christ did preach repentance.

Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Not any less true today than it was then.




You are most likely mistaken.
I'm pretty sure Glenn meant "Greetings in the Saviour's name, (which is) Jesus."

I appreciate the work you put into your commentary on the letter, however, I believe Glenn was on a rant about state licensed "Long Branch" establishments which facilitate one or more biblically condemned works of the flesh; of which your favorite biblical writer says:

"they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."

OK, here you go.

However, too many "believers" cling to the biblical kumbaya passages and reject Christ's instruction to judge with righteous judgment, holding matters up to the light of God's Word. What does it have to do with me if God's Word irritates, angers, or makes someone squirm?

What does it have to do with you? Nothing. Not your words, right? Of course. And that's what makes them so easy to toss around so flippantly, because you don't have to take the heat for them. You can toss off the inflammatory remarks and then tell people to "take it up with God." It's all too convenient. Sure, it's not your problem if the Word insults or irritates, unless you get off on it, that is. I won't assume you do, but I know plenty who do so it's a serious red flag. It's a psuedo power trip. You get to be an abrasive jerk to people because you're just the messenger and then you get to direct them to God to register the complaint. It's the bully move, the intimidation routine. I've seen it a lot and it's an ugly example, grossly abused to get the messenger off the hook.



Here's where I think you're most missing my point. You're looking at the "lifestyle of sin"- the outward. I'll say it again, Christ saved his strongest rebukes for those living the perfect outward life. There was no evident lifestyle of sin but their hearts were filled with the stuff.

Paul was tormented by the duality of his own heart and lamented his own weakness to sin. It's possible that, had any of his followers been able to peer into his heart, they would have shunned him by using his own barometer against him. Paul was an abrasive personality, but that doesn't mean it's always the right tact to take. It may have been a lot of his old flesh getting in the way. That may have been part of his torment. Paul wasn't perfect, you know. So, yes, I like his writing. I think it's intelligent and contains much wisdom. I also think it should be studied critically, like I would study the message of any modern-day preacher. I don't just assume that because Paul did something, it's the right thing to do. He's not my yardstick.



Hmmm... maybe you do get off on it. Again with the condescending. Tough love has a time and a place, but it's usually a sign of an exhausted play book. And when it's Plan A, it's a sign of an empty play book. Hit and run. Seen it before. Didn't think much of it then, either.



2 Timothy 1:7: “For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind”

There's more than one kind of fear. Fear (reverence) is healthy. Fear (scare tactics) are unhealthy and yield insincere results. Sure, you made 'em dance alright, but only because you were shooting at their feet. Their heart remains unchanged.



Ah, your cynical nature was right about me all along. Well done, you've sniffed me out. And you're not at all presumptuous, I don't know where people get that about you.



He certainly got Saul's attention, which was the intent.



Yes, more importantly. He came to do more than die for sin. He could have made that whole sacrifice over a long weekend. He spent his time here to live a normal life and show it could be done, to fulfill prophecy and to set an example and his example was one of love and mercy to... wait for it... people living a lifestyle of sin. Oh, and the Pharisees who looked great on the outside. Ah, discernment, not everybody has it.



How often? I mean, I've gambled, does that mean I'm going to hell? Go ahead, tell me, you seem comfortable making that call.

Does Paul mean anyone who's ever done that? Done it more than five time? Where's the line? Oh, that's right, there is no definitive line, it's up to the final judge. And since we can only see the outside and God cares more about the heart, we do well to not write people off so easily and instead show them the love of Christ. Show them the positive difference he has made in our lives. It's much more effective than just trying to scare them into believing and a lot less arrogant and presumptuous.

Claims, eh? You know my heart? I can't improve upon this response either so...

As a believer, I do accept that there are eternal consequences to our actions. However, I believe that is up to the final judge. Too many Christians read about condemnation of one type or another and just can't wait to get the process started on God's behalf.

I'm doing exactly that.
You claim to be a believer.
I'm leaving it up to God.

"Claim" is a judgmental modifier. You also "claim" to be a "believer." In this context you are judging whether or not Funky's faith is indeed sincere and then shifting responsibility for your own judgment call on to God.

In other words, doing exactly what MDean described.

Paul teaches that Christ gave grace and gifts to men for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, and for edifying the body of Christ, His Church.

He gifted some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers. In a past season, confirmed by pastors, He led me to teach. In this season, also confirmed by pastors, He has given me a prophet's heart. Perhaps he has given you the heart of an evangelist. Each has a role in the Body of Christ.

Christ's prophets, OT and NT, preached repentance without concern as to how it affected them personally (well, Jonah was a bit reluctant, but evidentially feared God more than man.)

I hope you are not asserting that God's prophets were bullies and flippant, abrasive jerks on pseudo power trips; they (just two examples: Jeremiah/John the Baptist) spoke as God's Spirit led with little regard for how they would be received or the affect their words would have on men.

Hearts were not always changed, often not changed at all...remember Noah? However, the prophets were faithful to preach God's words and warnings. Which charges against God's prophets would you like to bring before the Lord?





He came to do the one thing that no one else could do:

I did not come to abolish The Law, but to fulfill it.

Doing so gave Him the one qualification that no one else could attain: He was chosen by God and able to be the Atonement, the Propitiation for sin, the perfect human sacrificial Lamb to pay the price for human sin for all who believed, and give His life to ransom His Bride.

He also said:

For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.

For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.

Let us go somewhere else to the towns nearby, so that I may preach there also; for that is what I came for.

For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth.




As should all Christians.





God warns against presumptuousness concerning His mercy, patience, and grace, so I tend to take that to heart.

At issue was greed and illicit lust.
If you ever watched Gunsmoke, you know that activities at the Long Branch facilitated and evolved into many works of the flesh, and Paul repeats that those who prasso
(practice/exercise/are busy with) works of the flesh shall not inherit the Kingdom of God.

Shame on presumptuous, arrogant Paul!...all those scoldings and warnings...trying to scare people the way He did! He should have just shown the people more love.

Funky has stated that she's a member of a UMC.
Their articles of religion state that the canonical books of the Old and New Testament, which would include each and every scripture written by Paul, holds unquestioned authority; and that they should be studied.

That is a basic tenet of Christianity.

Funky has asserted a hatred of Paul and of his teachings, a refusal to honor his inspired scripture, rebelling against a basic tenet of Christianity. Is that the heart of a true believer? The final judgment is, of course, up to God. In the meantime, the phrase claims to be is not out of line.

Good grief! Ya know, it was exactly this type of mean-spirited, judgmental, nastiness that drove me away from church in the first place. And that was a long time prior to my decision that Paul's teachings were at the root of a lot of these types of statements leading me to ignore his writings. That only came later when I spent time studying more in-depth the handouts and notes I had compiled in a binder from adult Sunday School that virtually always used the teachings of Paul to justify being hateful and hurtful. Have fun leading people to Christ. Why use kindness when a double-barrel shotgun will do?

BTW, not a member of UMC, just an occasional visitor. I'm still skittish of church people because so many are like you.

My Christ is better than your Christ!
My Church is better than yours.
My interpretation's better
Cause I got the Holy Spirit!
My God is better than yours.

Bicker on, Sky Godders. Bicker on. As long as you're pi$$ing all over each other, maybe you'll leave the sanity afflicted alone. Pttttthhhp!

And my point was that greed and lust can make a home in any heart, not just those that hang out in casinos. It's also very possible that a person can go to a casino and not be burdened with greed or lust.

1 Samuel 16:7 - "The Lord does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart."

Judging people that go to casinos and taking a shotgun approach that they are all greedy and lust-filled, is short-sighted. Often times, the really troublesome sin in a person's life is carefully hidden and invisible from the outside.

It also assumes that everyone exercising greed and lust are doing so with no concern. Not so. Many people struggle daily with weakness and desperately want to overcome it, while in the midst of it. Just like Paul. Another browbeating isn't the solution.

I prefer not to judge and condemn. I prefer to try and offer something desirable for people to strive for. I often fail. As such, after self-examination, I've never found myself in a position qualified to cast stones.

Condemn if you must, but a responsible judge will start with a mirror and branch out from there. A little self-examination goes a long way.

As for the casinos, as I said before, change the patrons and the business will follow. Merely closing the doors does nothing of lasting good. The greed and lust is still there. If you really care about people, you will recognize that. It's a very simple truth. If all you care about is scoring political wins, knock yourself out and chase those awful buildings, but it's an empty, self-satisfying, masturbatory, pointless endeavor. Closing buildings won't save the lost.



Scoff all you like, but it was Paul who said:

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

So yeah, if Paul wasn't showing people love, shame on Paul. And if you can only heap condemnation and cannot demonstrate love, shame on you.

Your lack of concern that your method might actually be pushing people away is concerning and telling. If you really care about the people you hope to reach, you will consider that they might not need hit in the head with condemnation, they might just need a friendly hand up. That's too soft for you, I expect. Pity. Because that's what Christ gave you.

"Confirmed by pastors"? I'm a legally ordained minister of the Universal Life Church, Iky, so you should believe everything I say.

Yep. If a preacher said it, it must be so.

I'm not on a huge rejection and condemnation rant of casinos. I just understand where Glenn is coming from.

Nothing in God's word condemns them per se, so people (even Christians) are at liberty to choose whether or not to participate in their gambling and entertainment activities.

However, not everything that is lawful is also wise. Demons of greed and illicit lust do hang out there looking for an opportunity to afflict. People need to choose for themselves, wisely.



Define love...as God defines it.

God is love, and He commanded Jeremiah to root out, pull down, destroy, throw down, and then to build, and to plant.

Which part of that do you charge God and Jeremiah with not demonstrating love?



He gave that to me when I was on my knees in repentance crying out for God's salvation. Are you seeing much of that from posters on this board?

How did Christ deal with the stubborn and the stiff-necked unbelievers? Certainly not the same as those on their knees in repentance wanting and willing to believe and be saved.

Was Jesus not being loving when He told people that they could not understand Him and hear His word because the devil was their father? Was John not being loving when he told Herod that it was not lawful for him to have his brother's wife? Are you willing to charge either before God with arrogant, unloving, condemnation?

Perhaps you are being too quick to judge in condemnation.

Perhaps you judge in error.

Other than the fact that you make the distinction between belonging to a UMC with a name tag,
and being just an occasional visitor with a name tag, which part of my post is not true?

BTW, Christians are given NT instruction to not forsake the corporate worship assembly to honor God.
Jesus Christ did not forsake it, and neither did His disciples, and believers are to imitate them.
If you are a believer, then you are also instructed to regularly attend corporate worship.
Christianity isn't about how you feel (skittish).
Christianity is about obedience by faith, submission in and of love, the keeping of Christ's doctrine.

Well, I'm done here so I'll have more time to pick on ya now! So there, HA!

Agreed. I'm glad we found some common ground.

Reverend Bogus here, fellow legally ordained minister of the Universal Church at your service. If you want to issue a fatwa or perhaps need a rubber stamped opinion, let me know. My diploma is under a pile of papers here somewhere on my desk along with a letter of great importance from some banker in Nigeria about a fortune awaiting me.

I can't and don't want to log on here enough to follow everyone's religious and political beliefs so I have no idea who I'm supporting or dissing with this comment. But I do believe in profiling and think those who don't take advantage of their eyes, ears and common sense in situations where safety is concerned are asinine. Granted, it should just be one part of a judgment, but it should be a part.

Wow, just read through this thread and ... I am all for respecting others religious beliefs ... but some of the rambling non sequitur here is a little disturbing, like a Dr. Bronner's soap bottle but not in a good way. The words fervent and creepy come to mind, among others. Just sayin' ... like this quote from above:

"However, too many "believers" cling to the biblical kumbaya passages and reject Christ's instruction to judge with righteous judgment ..."

Exactly what does this mean? What message are you sending? Replace the word "Christ" with Allah and what would be your reaction? Maybe I'm just having a hard time discerning the context.

Excellent question.

Zealots are tone deaf to contradictions inherent within their ideology, and are able to justify almost anything, as they are so convinced of their superior rectitude.

It exactly means that some who claim to be followers of Christ pick and choose which of His teachings they deem valid and worth their attention, instead of heeding His whole counsel. Many will accept His inclusive feel good kumbaya teachings, but reject His harsher teachings concerning sin and exclusion from His Kingdom.

I never replace Christ with Allah.
Christ did not teach believers to slay unbelievers.
That is my reaction.

Really?

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)

If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3)

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)

f your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12)

Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5)

God also commands believers to kill people who don't listen to priests or judges, witches, homosexuals, fortune-tellers, whoever strikes or curses their mother or father, adulterers, fornicators, women who aren't virgins on their wedding nights, blasphemers, people who work on the sabbath, and those who get too close to the tabernacle (unless they're a Levite).

Of course, I'm sure all these are somehow being taken out of context.

It makes me sad that you do not recognize/understand that the Incarnation of God the Son, His Atonement, and His Resurrection, announced a new Kingdom age.

Cite biblical scripture where the Incarnate Christ commands believers to slay those who do not believe.

None of my business, but I thought the Son and the Father and the Holy Spirit were one-in-the-same and if you read words in the OT, the Son not only agrees with them, but participated in the divine inspiration of them.

Additionally, I thought the Son said something like "I have not come to overrule the words of the past but to fulfill them". At least that's what a lot of people say when the want to pretend the OT words matter.

But, sometimes, it seems the OT words don't matter. Good thing none of it matters.

You can't tell the players without a program.

One Divine Essence, Three Persons.

Christ perfectly fulfilled the requirements of God's Law.
Doing so, He was able to be the Perfect Atonement for those who are unable to fulfill God's Law perfectly (everyone else) and believe (many).

The OT words DO matter.
Like every other instruction manual, comprehension and application is key.

There IS a program.
It's called The Bible.

And, all fully aware of the other's actions and intent.



AND, made it clear he was not changing any of it, but telling all, it still stood as the divine inspired, inerrent, word of God, right?



I know. Christians like Fred Phelps quote them all the time.



And there are some who think they have the comprehension and application down pat (pun intended), but amazingly, there are others with at least as much confidence and zeal that they have comprehended and applied the manual better and/or differently.



With far, far more interpreters, comprehension guides, application helpers, than third world telephone bank... and, just as helpful.

I will admit that teachings concerning the Godhead can get complicated, especially in discussion of the Eternal Deity of the Incarnate Christ.

And yes, the OT is the divine, inspired Word of God. However, the application of God's OT instruction changed with the passing of the OT Levitical system and the ushering in of the New Covenant and the Eternal High Priesthood of His Son, Jesus Christ.

I've long ago taken the not so subtle hint that you are an unbeliever and are more interested in ridiculing the Godhead and God's Word than really understanding it. And quite frankly, God's Word says understanding it requires the kind of spiritual understanding not given to unbelievers. Sorry, I didn't lay down that rule.

So at this juncture, I'm not really in the mood to go into further explanation. Color me kicking off the dust.

How very fortunate we are to have the reservoir of all metaphysical truth anointing us here at GHT with his omniscience.

LOL!
Well, even so Ninevah. Why not GHT?

No problem. I've got brooms and vacuums. And with three dogs and 4 cats, I've cleaned up worse messes.

Two dogs, one eight months old;
and two cats, 16 and 13.
I hear ya.

Nonsense usually is. Things that make sense aren't complicated.



But being gay is still bad, while eating shellfish is OK.

Like I said, nonsense.



Translation: You can't defend your beliefs in any sort of coherent way, so rather than even make the attempt, you prefer to airily proclaim that you "understand", and that such "understanding" is beyond "unbelievers," which includes anyone who disagrees with your personal interpretation. And then shift the blame for your own arrogance on to God. Well played!



See, the thing is, to paraphrase Berke Breathed, no matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney.

I thought I was the one who keeps saying that the OT doesn't matter due to Christ's new covenant. And you're the one saying that it still applies.

I guess it only applies sometimes, in certain circumstances, under certain conditions, when it fits your interpretation? Faith shouldn't require solving such mental Rubik's Cubes.

Get real, Beavis. The Divine Incarnation is a complicated and necessarily precise discussion among believers. To even begin an exploration of the Divine Incarnation with one who does not acknowledge the Godhead except in ridicule, is nothing but a exercise in futility.

God's Word says that those who do not have the Holy Spirit cannot understand the teachings of the Spirit. That's why holy scripture sounds like foolishness to you.

I didn't make the rules, I only strive to heed them.

No mental gymnastics involved. It's quite simple.
Christians are to obey OT law reaffirmed by Christ and His Apostles.
If it wasn't reaffirmed, Christians are not obligated by it.

Thus speaketh the purveyor of circular logic.



Well, see, there's the thing.

Not all of it does.

But since I don't agree with your exact, precise, personal interpretation, you label me a "nonbeliever", etc. etc. ad nauseum, and claim I "don't understand."

And then, as I said, you pass off the responsibility for your own arrogance to God:



QED

Well, see, here's the thing: I didn't say you couldn't understand anything scriptural. Scripture reveals that God has given man a measure of grace, so even children can understand the Sermon on the Mount.

You label yourself a non-believer with your ridicule of God as an "imaginary friend."

But then why don't most Christians follow the teachings of Jesus?

"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." (Matthew 5:38-39)

Seems to me only the Quakers/Amish/Mennonites are following this one...with a teensy few pacifists and conscientious objectors thrown in for good measure.

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God." (Mark 10:25)
"do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth" (Matthew 6:19)
"You cannot serve both God and Money". (Matthew 6:24)
"woe to you who are rich." (Luke 6:24)

So then why are so many pastors teaching and Christians following prosperity gospel teachings?

"But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell." (Matthew 5:28-30)

Shouldn't we be seeing a lot of one-eyed, one-handed Christians walking around? Unless, of course, we're NOT really supposed to be taking the Bible literally. Hmmmmm...

But, for those fundamentalists who believe we should be taking the entire Bible literally...and there are more and more of them around...then why don't we follow these teachings of Christ? Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure you will) but haven't you argued for literal interpretation of the Bible? Still got both eyes and hands?

Back to trying to resolve this spiritual Rubik's Cube.

Anyone else see any qualifiers or modifiers before or after the phrase "holy scripture"?



Now you're saying that not only am I stupid, but I'm stupid because I understand the Sermon on the Mount.

Supply-Side Jesus must be so proud.

Man am I depressed after reading this, or maybe it's just because I finished reading The Road. I am straining to think of the last time I had a discussion with anyone that ran anywhere along these lines with these overtones. Nope, can't think of one, except that dude on the streetcorner with the end is near sign. But I know so many people in the world think like this where seemingly all critical thinking is trampled under bronze age dogma. I find this incredible. There is no debating it. There is no reasoning. I do not mean to offend but how can humanity truly progress, or even survive in the nuclear age, if it continues to be mired in this medievalism? I mean, what will the aliens truly think of us when they reveal themselves and take us to their promised land?

Humanity progresses as the flat earth types have always composed but a slim minority of humanity, fringe dwellers, really. Ultimately the ideas of Galileo and etc. prevailed, despite their persecution and the suppression of their science by religious zealots, because others with curious minds confirmed the science.

You're exactly right "there is no reasoning" with ideologues.

Twist and spin, Beavis.
I didn't say, and would never say, that children are stupid.

OHHHHHH...so I have the understanding level of a child, then.

Then I guess I'm going to heaven, and you're not.

"Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein."
Mark 10:15

We'll talk when you have received the kingdom as a little child.

Apparently we won't, because according to you, of the two of us, I have the understanding of a little child and you don't.

Hey, dude, I don't make the rules.

See there you go again, not understanding scripture.
One receives the kingdom as a little child.
THEN one grows in the kingdom to spiritual maturity.
Christians are told to progress from the mother's milk of easily understood teachings, to the real meat of scripture, such as the Divine Incarnation.

See, there you go again, claiming that only you understand, that your interpretation is the only one.

Such arrogance. As it happens, what Jesus was referring to was the sense of childlike wonder with which the sage views the world, meaning true enlightenment is much like losing your veneer of adulthood and returning to the deeper and more intuitive understanding of a child.

But that would make too much sense, so you have to go off on some twisted semantic tangent, and when someone disagrees with you, they are "a nonbeliever who doesn't understand Scripture."

Hint: You are exhibiting a deadly sin.

I was hoping Glenn was going to write more about the "wild wild west". I lost interest after the word "prostitutes". At least I now know where to find some demons of greed and lust... The rambling of a lemming.

Welcome to GraysHarbor Talk. Glad you jumped in and started posting. Lurkers are welcome, but having more voices is better.

It takes a bit for me to "give up interest"... even with the lemmings. I always like to sort through intellectual guano to see if there is a jewel. It's not often, but every-once-in-a-while....

LOL...Explaining scripture is not a deadly sin.

And according to God's Word children do not have a deeper and more intuitive understanding of scripture or anything else. I wish they did...far fewer child abductions.

Hebrews 5:13 = For every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child.

So if you'll note, I was not interpreting Mark 10:15.
I was speaking to growing in spiritual maturity and discernment to understand scripture.
God's Word reveals that is a gift of His Spirit, which He imparts to believers, NOT UNbelievers.

So how about letting Jesus interpret Mark 10:15?

Mark 10:15 = Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.

Christ interpreting Himself:

Mat 18:2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,

Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Mat 18:4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

One has to be called by Christ.
One has to be converted.
One humbles himself and becomes dependent upon God as Jesus was dependent upon Him.


Jhn 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

Jhn 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

...said the guy who was exhibiting pride, which is not only a deadly sin but also the worst.

Sin.

Beyond that, Jesus can answer your question.
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Logically then, there's a deficit of love for Jesus.

Now I have a question for you:
If one does not follow the teachings of Christ,
what makes them a Christian?



Jesus told his disciples that if they had no sword they should sell a coat and buy one. (Luke 22:36) The verse in Matthew does not mean "do not defend yourself."



According to God's Word they could be ignorant and/or false teachers out for personal gain.



I'll argue for literal interpretation of the Bible.
I'll also argue for symbolic/figurative/metaphorical interpretation of the Bible.

Jesus said "I am the door of the sheep." Literally, is he a door for sheep? No. Figuratively? Yes.

Now look at Mar 1:33: And all the city was gathered together at the door. Is the door literal? Yes. Is "all the city" figurative for a very large crowd? Yes.

Some scripture is to be taken literally.
Some scripture is to be taken figuratively.



Do what God's Word commands us:
pray for discernment and study.

Belief. Faith. Personal relationship with Christ.

But it's hard to tell because, based on what you posted re false prophets, I would say that most who proclaim to be Christians really aren't. That is, if I was going to make a judgment call...and I don't. I'm not The Decider on that.

Then what does Matt. 5:38-39 mean? Enlighten me.

Well, let me remind you of what Christ said:


Luk 6:46 "Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?

Luk 6:47 I will show you what he is like who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice.

Luk 6:48 He is like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built.

Luk 6:49 But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete."






Jesus is addressing Israel's law given in Exodus 21:24; Leviticus 24:20; and Deuteronomy 19:21; the lex talionis (law of retaliation) - the principle of proportionate punishment (eye for an eye, etc.)

...and Jesus introduces "a better way" to deal with personal offenses, advancing the spirit of the law to illustrate the grace, good-will, favour...charis...from one man toward another, as a picture of the grace, good-will, favour, extended by God toward man.

So while man is at liberty to ask for retributive justice within limits, so that the punishment society exacts does not exceed the original wrong crossing the line into vengence, the better way according to Christ, is to respond with charis.

I do agree with this to point, however that slim minority seems to be typically be to people at the top charged with perpetuating "flat-earth-mentality" along with their followers throughout the ranks. "Flat-earth-mentality" has not gone away, the scientific establishment is as unreceptive to new ideas, and ideas that contradict what they have determined to be "fact". There is only room for independent thought within scientific and religious communities as long as it doesn't upset the status quo.

This totally contradicts the scientific method. Do you have an example?

Aren't scientist supposed to be skeptical? That's the purpose of the scientific process, as I think Stash was suggesting. That is, a theory does't change the prevailing scientific consensus until the theory is proven, and proven, and proven again.

As an example, remember the remarkable story of doctors in Brussels discovering that a fellow in a persistent vegetative state for 23 years was actually conscious and able to communicate with assistance.

Now comes a report that brain scans of persons in persistent vegetative states indicate brain activity. And in one case the researchers were able to communicate with the patient.

The brain activity is present in those who have experience a traumatic head injury but not in those whose vegetative state was precipitated by a lack of oxygen to the brain, such as Teri Shaivo.

Thus the science of understanding the consciousness of folks in persistent vegetative states evolves.

The point being that the transition from theory to scientific law is a slow process and all theories must be greeted with skepticism.

Agreed, however this same level of skepticism needs to be reapplied to all theories, old and new. This can be said for all disciplines of science.

With minor tweaking, this is the foundation of the scientific method. Do you have an example about which you are concerned?

All theories, or just the ones that go against certain religious views?

All theories, including religious views. Tested and retested, as technology and civility "advance"....why not?

How can you test a religion?

Why would you confuse scientific theories and religious views?

Objectively, you can't, since most promise to deliver the really big results postmortem.
People apply subjective tests, that's why we have the word "apostate" in the dictionary.

Not test it, but at look at it with a critical and independent eye. The idea being, to think independently....not believing something or someone just because everyone else does.
In the world of science, everything is "held under the microscope" so to speak, and expected to stand up to intense scrutiny. Yet when it comes to other methods of explaining our reality via religion, people will swallow almost anything that is thrown at them.

Scientists "swallow almost anything that is thrown at them" regarding religion?

I still stuck back on your first post in this line of discussion in which you wrote: "There is only room for independent thought within scientific and religious communities as long as it doesn't upset the status quo." That didn't make much sense and now you're throwing out more of the same.

Without discussion on some of your statements, I give up. But, then again, maybe you didn't want any discussion.

The followers of each respective encampment (being the scientific and religious communities) seem to swallow without question what is fed to them by their leaders.

Dissenting views, deviation from accepted views, and independent thinking typically give way to advances.

I understand not everyone has time to go put every theory to the test, or ponder every word of each religious text. Neither community has a monopoly on reality or our history.

For science, I agree. I'm not as sure about religion. Testing, proving, disproving, proposing a new hypothesis, is the essense of science. Testing, proving, or disproving, or offering a new hypothesis, is not part of any religious doctrine.



I think this sentence is vital. A serious discussion comparing science and religion is pretty much impossible. You agree to allow testing science, but you want religion "pondered" or thought about. Appropriately, the standards are completely unrelated and illustrate why the two subjects don't belong in the same conversation.

Or the same classroom, for that matter.

True that!