Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums

TheEssenceofExcellence

Sep 1 2005, 05:52 AM

QUOTE(RaginCajun @ Sep 1 2005, 12:16 AM)

QUOTE(TheEssenceofExcellence @ Aug 31 2005, 11:11 PM)

[right][snapback]819872[/snapback][/right]

you can say the same about a heterosexual marriage.
[right][snapback]820549[/snapback][/right]

true, but I never said you couldn't say that about a heterosexual marriage.

Tangerine Sheri

Sep 1 2005, 05:55 AM

QUOTE(TheEssenceofExcellence @ Aug 31 2005, 10:28 PM)

QUOTE(mako @ Aug 31 2005, 03:33 PM)

QUOTE

Aren't the end times moving along fast enough for you people? Are you that set on speeding them up?

What end times? Your savior is reported to have said he would return while some of those of that generation still lived....that was 2000 years ago, seems he must be a false prophet, don't you agree?

[right][snapback]819882[/snapback][/right]

He that hath ears to hear it let him hear, and he that doesn't let him hear not...

You just don't understand his word. Let me attempt to explain it to you:

[COLOR=red] "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

[COLOR=gray]

What Jesus is saying here is that those who know his word and follow him are given eternal life and will never die (not even after physical death). This includes his followers that were alive the first time he came to earth. In other words those of "that" generation who followed him will still be alive when he returns.

So you see, what you quoted him as saying does not make him a false prophet.

Get it?
[right][snapback]820567[/snapback][/right]

No human being or doctrine is infallable and assigning that infallability to anything is very dangerous these words were written for a different time and have no meaning today if they did then so much has been lost in translation so to interpret these words literally shows a great misunderstanding If anyone claims to be the savior or the Messaih or the One true One or better or holier run as fast as you can you will be feeding someones ego,

RaginCajun

Sep 1 2005, 06:02 AM

QUOTE(TheEssenceofExcellence @ Aug 31 2005, 11:52 PM)

QUOTE(RaginCajun @ Sep 1 2005, 12:16 AM)

QUOTE(TheEssenceofExcellence @ Aug 31 2005, 11:11 PM)

[right][snapback]819872[/snapback][/right]

you can say the same about a heterosexual marriage.
[right][snapback]820549[/snapback][/right]

true, but I never said you couldn't say that about a heterosexual marriage.
[right][snapback]820598[/snapback][/right]

true, but i didn't say you said that. i said not you said...(get it?)

my point is clear for all who reads.....

hey, sherri berri...why don't you post? got something ta' say? i see ya browsing all the time on this topic.

TheEssenceofExcellence

Sep 1 2005, 06:07 AM

QUOTE(Sheri berri @ Sep 1 2005, 12:55 AM)

QUOTE(TheEssenceofExcellence @ Aug 31 2005, 10:28 PM)

QUOTE(mako @ Aug 31 2005, 03:33 PM)

QUOTE

Aren't the end times moving along fast enough for you people? Are you that set on speeding them up?

What end times? Your savior is reported to have said he would return while some of those of that generation still lived....that was 2000 years ago, seems he must be a false prophet, don't you agree?

[right][snapback]819882[/snapback][/right]

He that hath ears to hear it let him hear, and he that doesn't let him hear not...

You just don't understand his word. Let me attempt to explain it to you:

[COLOR=red] "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

[COLOR=gray]

What Jesus is saying here is that those who know his word and follow him are given eternal life and will never die (not even after physical death). This includes his followers that were alive the first time he came to earth. In other words those of "that" generation who followed him will still be alive when he returns.

So you see, what you quoted him as saying does not make him a false prophet.

Get it?
[right][snapback]820567[/snapback][/right]

No human being or doctrine is infallable and assigning that infallability to anything is very dangerous these words were written for a different time and have no meaning today if they did then so much has been lost in translation so to interpret these words literally shows a great misunderstanding If anyone claims to be the savior or the Messaih or the One true One or better or holier run as fast as you can you will be feeding someones ego,
[right][snapback]820601[/snapback][/right]

To claim that these words have no meaning today, and that we shouldn't interpret them literally, shows a great misunderstanding in my point of view.

Jesus did claim he was the Son of God. But he specifically said that the master is not above the servants and that the servants are not above the master.

But if someone starts saying they're the saviour at this point in time, I agree with your advice.....because the anti-Christ will come first.

TheEssenceofExcellence

Sep 1 2005, 06:09 AM

Got ya, I think we're on the same page in that respect.

TheEssenceofExcellence

Sep 1 2005, 06:10 AM

hey, would it make everybody happier if I put: "In my point of view" or "In my opinion" at the bottom of all of my posts?

(serious question since many seem offended)

Lady

Sep 1 2005, 08:31 AM

Hi all

After reading this thread I think I see Essence's point with the gay marriage thing. Now, before you all start yelling and getting worked up, as I've stated repeatedly I'm not religious have no inclination to follow a divinity and really don't care all that much for the effects of religion, BUT what I think Essence was trying to say is this:

Marriage - in the Bible is a man and a woman, now look at it in a simplified way. Man = red
Woman = blue

Man + Woman = purple, which is marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Man + Man = blue, this is not marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Woman + Woman = red, again not purple

Just my opinion, but no matter how you try and twist it blue + blue/ red + red is never going to make purple. I'm not saying gays shouldn't be joined in some sort of ceremony and I'm not saying that its right or wrong. I'm just saying that I can see Essence's point and I don't think it's quite as prejudiced as some people seem to think

JMPD1

Sep 1 2005, 12:00 PM

So Lady, and Essence, the entire world should bow to the morality of YOUR religious book, irregardless of their own faith or lack thereof?

Essence stated he would be "fine with" the US government passing a law banning gay marriage in a christian church. How would feel if the Muslims in this country got a law passed that said women had to obey muslim religious rules? Or Jewish leaders got a law banning the sale of pork products? Of course, I can already hear the chorus of "its not the same thing...", but it is. One religious group forcing their beliefs onto the majority of people.

Once more, this is why the founding fathers designed this country's government to seperate church and state. You know, that pesky article that states that the government shall NOT endorse any one religion over another.

But I am getting tired of repeating myself. I have better things to do with my time and energy that fight these senseless battles. You torch bearers continue on spouting your creedos of hate and spite on those whom you would destroy.

good journey

Turtle

Sep 1 2005, 12:03 PM

QUOTE(Lady @ Sep 1 2005, 04:31 AM)

Hi all

After reading this thread I think I see Essence's point with the gay marriage thing. Now, before you all start yelling and getting worked up, as I've stated repeatedly I'm not religious have no inclination to follow a divinity and really don't care all that much for the effects of religion, BUT what I think Essence was trying to say is this:

Marriage - in the Bible is a man and a woman, now look at it in a simplified way. Man = red
Woman = blue

Man + Woman = purple, which is marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Man + Man = blue, this is not marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Woman + Woman = red, again not purple

Just my opinion, but no matter how you try and twist it blue + blue/ red + red is never going to make purple. I'm not saying gays shouldn't be joined in some sort of ceremony and I'm not saying that its right or wrong. I'm just saying that I can see Essence's point and I don't think it's quite as prejudiced as some people seem to think

[right][snapback]820674[/snapback][/right]

I prefer to see all the colours in the rainbow.
Painting flowers in neat rows of green and red are not for me.

beowulf

Sep 1 2005, 12:33 PM

QUOTE

Marriage - in the Bible is a man and a woman, now look at it in a simplified way. Man = red
Woman = blue

Man + Woman = purple, which is marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Man + Man = blue, this is not marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Woman + Woman = red, again not purple

Just my opinion

That is your opinion, and I respect that. I would, however, like to point out that you are basing this observation on a religion and a book that over 2/3’s of the world does not accept as anything more than mythology. To use this as a basis for a law or laws that affects those that do not hold that world view is nothing more that establishment of a state religion, something that our Constitution forbids. To outlaw Gay Marriages based on a religion has possible consequences that most do not even consider. If the Christians ban Gay Marriage today, how far is the journey to ban Atheist Marriages, Deist Marriages, Pagan Marriages, Islamic Marriages, Jewish Marriages, and marriages of any other minority? While that analogy is rather ridiculous, it shows that those given power cannot be trusted to use it wisely. Please Lady, think about what you are postulating your opinion on, any group given power over others will invariably end up being corrupted by the power they sought. This is just my opinion, based on over 6 decades of life, living in various other countries, observing other cultures and religions and a lengthy study of human history.

QUOTE

The present day Christians you speak of hail from a less developed continent not to mention nations then most of the others in the world. All countrys/nations/continents kill in the name of something or other while they're still developing and trying to find an identity.

Less developed? The Balkans have a history that stretches back to the Old Stone Age, they were civilized contemporaries of the Greeks and Egyptians, the Romans colonized the area (much to the disgust of the previous owners) before the current era and this area was a meeting place for the different religions and cultures during the Middle Ages. Their current national history goes back 200 years longer than ours. Less developed? Until the recent disintegration of Yugoslavia (which was more a confederations of states than a nation), these folks maintained one of the most advanced non-western societies in Europe, both culturally and economically. Again you show your ignorance of the facts of the world. As for the Africans, these folk were originally a peaceful people, with little history of warfare, but the warlike attitude of the religion taught them by Christian missionaries changed that. Christianity cannot deny the bloodshed that was loosed by those people, it is the very cause of it. Lack of development is no excuse for religion directed murder!

QUOTE

As far as the Nazi's are concerned, that's exactly what I addressed earlier....that todays Christians are still being judged by what those of the past did

When the “past” is only 60 years ago, it can hardly be called the past. It is highly unlikely that people have changed to any degree in the 6 decades since the Holocaust. All we have to do is look at McVey’s Oklahoma action, the abortion clinic bombings, the Olympic bombings, the growth of the Christian Militias in this country, etc. to see that there has been no changes for the good and quite possibly many changes for the worse. I guess what you want is evidence of Christians in America doing bad this very instance…well, just watch the newspapers and TV and you will probably see it soon! No matter what you think, the evil done by Christianity in the past must be shared by the Christians of today, just as the evil done by the Nazis remains a burden on the souls of the present day Germans. Did not your God state that he punished until the 3rd and 4th generations (Exodus 34:7)? Seems even your religion agrees that guilt must be shared.

QUOTE

You just don't understand his word. Let me attempt to explain it to you:

[COLOR=red] "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

[COLOR=gray]

What Jesus is saying here is that those who know his word and follow him are given eternal life and will never die (not even after physical death). This includes his followers that were alive the first time he came to earth. In other words those of "that" generation who followed him will still be alive when he returns.

So you see, what you quoted him as saying does not make him a false prophet.

Get it?

And what does that have to do with him prophesying that he would return while “some of those standing here” still lived. He said this more than once (Matt 24:30-34, Mark 9:1, Luke 21:32, John 21:22) and trying to play with words does not change the fact that he said that he would return will some of those still lived (in John, he implies that it will be during the lifetime of John) and here it is 2000 years later, no antique disciplines lounging around – SO THE MAN MUST BE A FALSE PROPHET…Now way to tap dance out of it. Get it? - the Wolf

TheEssenceofExcellence

Sep 1 2005, 05:08 PM

If people like beowulf can't understand scripture that's their problem. But wether you want to believe me or not, once again, I will say Jesus was not a false prophet.

Thanks lady for understanding where i'm coming from.

People are still trying to say that what I've been talking about infringes on rights, but it doesn't. I think lady did a very good job explaining it. But I will try to explain a little more as well.

Think of it this way. For a second think of yourself as you would if you were a Christian. (I know many of you aren't, and many of you might not have a religion at all, I don't know) But for a second think in the eyes of a Christian....

Okay, here you are: Your a Christian person. You believe in God, and you believe he sent you his word and doctrine in a book, and you believe without question that what's in this book is the law and teachings of God. So why would you ever condone something taking place in your church that goes against your God and the teachings and laws he has given you in the Bible? It would make every Christian a hypocrite plain and simple if they were to condone or allow that sort of thing in their churches.

That's not infringing on others rights, that's practicing your beliefs. If a law was passed banning gay marriage in a church of God, and it stated that any union wouldn't be recognized by the Church (even though it would be recognized as any other marriage by the Govt.) that doesn't infringe on their rights.

One example you dished out was a law passed that all women had to be subservient to muslims, but that would be infringing on others rights because it effects the whole populous and makes others HAVE to do exactly what one religion believes. Banning gay marriage from Christian churches wouldn't do that, because they could still get married at other places. (using gay christians as examples for why they should be allowed to be married in christian churches can't be used, because if they were truly Christians they would already know that that wouldn't be accepted as a marriage under God's law)

Back to beowulf, what I said wasn't a play on words. I was simply explaining Mako's question. I explained how people who have faith in Christ will always be alive, which makes Jesus coming back while people from that generation yet live, possible.

All above was said: "in my opinion."

JMPD1

Sep 1 2005, 05:29 PM

Why do you require a Federal law? Why can't your Church issue astatement that "It is not our policy to conduct same-sex marriages" and leave it alone?

What if there is a Christian church somewhere that DOES conduct same sex marriage? By enacting a LAW that would make it ILLEGAL to perform such, do you not think that you are infringing on someone's rights?

You are now putting a secular governmental organization in the position of supervising what a religious organization can or cannot do. And, you are restricting the rights of individual churches to perform their services as they see fit.

Example: There are sects of christians in the US, that, as part of their religious observances, cavort with poisonous snakes and ingest poison to demonstrate their faith in god. Should there be a law to prevent these people from worshipping as they see fit? No, I believe that it is their choice.

By involving ANY form of governmental control over what churches (temples, synagogues, etc) may or may not practice, you are violating the Letter AND the spirit of the Constitution by favoring one religion over all others by giving one theology beliefs force of law in disregard to all others.

zandore

Sep 1 2005, 05:34 PM

QUOTE(TheEssenceofExcellence)

Think of it this way. For a second think of yourself as you would if you were a Christian. (I know many of you aren't, and many of you might not have a religion at all, I don't know) But for a second think in the eyes of a Christian....

Essence you missed a whole category of people! There are a fair number of us that "USED TO BE" Christians but no longer are. I myself used to be but one day "I SAW THE LIGHT" and realized it for what it was.

Lady

Sep 1 2005, 07:33 PM

Wow JMPD1 I can't believe anyone can be so far off the mark. Where was I talking about hate? Where did I say gay marriages are wrong? I quite clearly remember stating that I don't come down on either side of the argument and YES i do base my thesis on the Christian faith, because we were discussing gay marriages in the context of the Christian faith.

What was said about banning atheist marriages etc is completely irrelevant and, as an atheist, I can tell you now that I WILL NOT marry in a church, as I do not believe in that particular ceremony in a religious context. Similarly, I would not wish prayers to be read at my funeral - prayers from ANY religion!

Also, I was not discussing marriage as a point of law. I fully agree that there should be a recognisable ceremony that provides gay marriages with the same right as heterosexual marriages, but (and unfortunately I find myself saying it again) I was speaking in the context of CHRISTIAN marriage, which, strangely enough, is based on the doctrine of the bible and so must be interpreted as such.

I find it very sad that I am now being attacked for what, I feel anyway, was a purely intellectual point. I made my previous post quite deliberately ommiting any sort of religious prejudice and don't quite understand the harshness of JMPD1's response. By all means, if you have a problem with Essence address that issue, but do not attack me for making a point that quite clearly did not imply the things you mentioned in your response.

RaginCajun

Sep 1 2005, 08:41 PM

QUOTE(Lady @ Sep 1 2005, 01:33 PM)

Wow JMPD1 I can't believe anyone can be so far off the mark. Where was I talking about hate? Where did I say gay marriages are wrong? I quite clearly remember stating that I don't come down on either side of the argument and YES i do base my thesis on the Christian faith, because we were discussing gay marriages in the context of the Christian faith.

What was said about banning atheist marriages etc is completely irrelevant and, as an atheist, I can tell you now that I WILL NOT marry in a church, as I do not believe in that particular ceremony in a religious context. Similarly, I would not wish prayers to be read at my funeral - prayers from ANY religion!

Also, I was not discussing marriage as a point of law. I fully agree that there should be a recognisable ceremony that provides gay marriages with the same right as heterosexual marriages, but (and unfortunately I find myself saying it again) I was speaking in the context of CHRISTIAN marriage, which, strangely enough, is based on the doctrine of the bible and so must be interpreted as such.

I find it very sad that I am now being attacked for what, I feel anyway, was a purely intellectual point. I made my previous post quite deliberately ommiting any sort of religious prejudice and don't quite understand the harshness of JMPD1's response. By all means, if you have a problem with Essence address that issue, but do not attack me for making a point that quite clearly did not imply the things you mentioned in your response.
[right][snapback]821557[/snapback][/right]

i think the fact that you put your own opinion in there lead some to think that. when you first "opened" up, you said that this is what essence is saying. adding your opinion is fine but we all have different reactions. (get it?)

JMPD1

Sep 1 2005, 08:46 PM

@ Lady: OK, so you can see Essence's point. I can see the point he is trying to make as well, except, I don't agree with it. And, my final statement, regarding 'torch burners' that you find so offensive, is only so if it applies to you. Does it? I cannot see how it does, if you don't subscribe to any religious group.

Would you suppost a law that prevents same sex marriage? And, since you claim no religious preference, what is the basis for your objection to same sex marriage?

And, since I'va already asked essence, let me ask you:

Why should there be a law to prevent same sex marriage? Isn't it enough for a particular church to state that they will not conduct such a ceremony? (see post #562 for the whole spiel)

good journey

Kismit

Sep 1 2005, 11:51 PM

QUOTE

Man + Woman = purple, which is marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Man + Man = blue, this is not marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Woman + Woman = red, again not purple

I like your metaphor it is clear and precise, however and here is the clincher. It is in the eyes of all Christian's, God's job to judge and decide what colour he wants in his garden. Not the members of his congregation but his job, the members of his congregation are supposed to love thy neighbour regardless of any percieved flaws. Not pass judgement.

And Essence of Excellence it could actually make a difference if you post something as an opinion rather than as an absolute..

Also it pays for us to remember that one Christian's opinion that gay people should not marry in a Christian Church can be balanced out by another Christian's view that it is not their job to judge and that marriage is fine so long as people love eachother and work at their relationships. Two positive opinions from Christians would actually cancel out the first opinion, So can I get a couple of positive opinions from Christians?
Of course I can, there are plenty all over the baord allready.

Lady

Sep 2 2005, 08:28 AM

JMPD1 - I'm not talking about banning same sex marriage, I'm not talking about a law supporting such a proposition. What I was trying to say (and obviously I didn't make this clear enough in my post) is that the Bible does not accept such a union as marriage, therefore it cannot be considered so and could not take place in the eyes of the Christian Church. I'm not saying it shouldn't take place in secular society and I'm not saying it's right or wrong (repeating myself AGAIN) all I'm saying is that in the context it was initially referred to in, it can't be considered marriage. I tried to make my explanation as clear as possible by using the colour metaphor, but apparently that was wasted on some.

And, again, I say that there is no need for a law and I wasn't talking of same sex marriages in such context. I'm sorry if my posts have been misinterpreted.

Kismit - As I've already stated I'm not Christian and follow no religion, but it was my understanding that the Bible was supposed to be the word of God and if it does not agree with same sex marriages, surely God has already had his say on the matter and the Church's view on gay marriages must be interpreted as such? The judgement you speak of has already been made, if this is the case, so again I return to my point that same sex marriages are wrong in the eyes of the Church.

I don't know if Christianity is defined by how literally a person follows the Bible and whether or not they obey this teaching, but this has always been my interpretation of the religion and I made my posts as such.

I'm sorry for any confusion and I did not make my post to start an argument, I merely wished to clarify my views and support an idea that I thought was being rather senselessly attacked. Again I offer my apologies if this has caused offence or ire.

JMPD1

Sep 2 2005, 11:48 AM

No problem Lady, I may have jumped the gun a bit too.

But, while you are not calling for a law, Essence and others of his mind set ARE.

And once again, whether you believe the bible to be the word of god, right from her lips, doesn't give you, or anyone else, the right to determine how a person should live, or who they should marry.

And, furthermore, a church service is absolutely unnecessary to be married. When you obtain your marriage licence from your municipality, signed, sealed, and dated, you are married in the eyes of the law. The religious ceremony is just that: a ceremony.

Except for the religion based issue of same sex marriage, there is no other basis for making such a union illegal.

good journey

Turtle

Sep 2 2005, 12:43 PM

QUOTE(Kismit @ Sep 1 2005, 07:51 PM)

QUOTE

Man + Woman = purple, which is marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Man + Man = blue, this is not marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Woman + Woman = red, again not purple

I like your metaphor it is clear and precise, however and here is the clincher. It is in the eyes of all Christian's, God's job to judge and decide what colour he wants in his garden. Not the members of his congregation but his job, the members of his congregation are supposed to love thy neighbour regardless of any percieved flaws. Not pass judgement.

And Essence of Excellence it could actually make a difference if you post something as an opinion rather than as an absolute..

Also it pays for us to remember that one Christian's opinion that gay people should not marry in a Christian Church can be balanced out by another Christian's view that it is not their job to judge and that marriage is fine so long as people love eachother and work at their relationships. Two positive opinions from Christians would actually cancel out the first opinion, So can I get a couple of positive opinions from Christians?
Of course I can, there are plenty all over the baord allready.

[right][snapback]821980[/snapback][/right]

Well said Kismit.
It is a shame that we all judge people.
We use weight, looks, how they act, to our own specs.
It is a shame that we haven't learned to just let things "be" for what they are.

Blessings

Lady

Sep 2 2005, 12:53 PM

No probs JMPD1. I just wanted to expand on a point I thought wasn't being made very clear.

As I have said repeatedly, I don't personally have any problem with the way people want to live their lives. I don't really care what goes on, as long as I'm left alone

And I wouldn't endorse a law that prevents people doing what they want, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else.

There's enough prejudice and hatred in the world already without people introducing legality into love

beowulf

Sep 2 2005, 01:29 PM

QUOTE

If people like beowulf can't understand scripture that's their problem. But wether you want to believe me or not, once again, I will say Jesus was not a false prophet.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

Here it is quite evident that the eternal life spoken of as a reward for belief is being discussed. In order to have that eternal life, you must first die….that is suffer physical death.

Matthew
16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom

24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Mark
13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
13:25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
13:26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
13:28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
13:29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.
13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
Luke
21:27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
21:29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees;
21:30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.
21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

John
21:20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
21:21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

In each of these cases, the terms pass, pass away infer physical death. In John 21:22 the term tarry infers to wait in place in expectation of. You are attempting to use a verse speaking of eternal life after death to prove that these folks are still around. No, they had to die to get that death (only implied here, but well discussed in several other places). If what you infer was true, then this would be another way Jesus was a false prophet. Having had his words recorded in 3 different places and a fourth place naming a specific person, it can be said truthfully that your Jesus uttered a prophecy that did not, in the light of no existing 2000 year old people around, come true. This makes him a false prophet and the penalty under Jewish law would be death by stoning! Maybe that’s why he hasn’t come back (after missing the first deadline), he doesn’t want to be stoned to death! - the Wolf

101

Sep 2 2005, 07:08 PM

If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

What does this mean in laymans. I am not sure what tarry means.

beowulf

Sep 2 2005, 07:16 PM

Here you are, Ma'am:
tarry - 1 a : to delay or be tardy in acting or doing b : to linger in expectation : WAIT
2 : to abide or stay in or at a place
The Wolf

101

Sep 2 2005, 07:20 PM

Hey Beuwolf thanks.

But I am unsure of what you guys were talking about but I don't think any man would be living forever or coming back like Christ did. Because they are not God. So he is the one who intrepeted wrong not you Sweetie. And Jesus is not a false prophet. He will return but when we do not know.

EmpressV

Sep 2 2005, 08:21 PM

THE END!?.

BurnSide

Sep 2 2005, 08:28 PM

Grim, i have removed your posts since you seem to simply be just quoting the same thing over and over.

LarryOldtimer

Sep 3 2005, 04:00 AM

US Constitution, Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .

Since the Supreme Court has said that the provisions of the Bill of Rights apply to the state governments as well as the federal government, it would seem that an attempt to direct what various religions deem proper for marriage (a religious rite), any such marriage of people of the same sex would have to be secular, and not forced upon people of a religion who didn't desire to have such rites in their church. If a particular religion wanted to recognize marriage of people of the same sex, the law couldn't prevent them from doing so. The marriage wouldn't necessarily have standing under the law. Separation of church and state, regardless of how much adherents of a particular religion would want their religion to be the state religion.

TheEssenceofExcellence

Sep 3 2005, 04:48 AM

QUOTE(Kismit @ Sep 1 2005, 06:51 PM)

QUOTE

Man + Woman = purple, which is marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Man + Man = blue, this is not marriage in the eyes of the Bible

Woman + Woman = red, again not purple

I like your metaphor it is clear and precise, however and here is the clincher. It is in the eyes of all Christian's, God's job to judge and decide what colour he wants in his garden. Not the members of his congregation but his job, the members of his congregation are supposed to love thy neighbour regardless of any percieved flaws. Not pass judgement.

And Essence of Excellence it could actually make a difference if you post something as an opinion rather than as an absolute..

Also it pays for us to remember that one Christian's opinion that gay people should not marry in a Christian Church can be balanced out by another Christian's view that it is not their job to judge and that marriage is fine so long as people love eachother and work at their relationships. Two positive opinions from Christians would actually cancel out the first opinion, So can I get a couple of positive opinions from Christians?
Of course I can, there are plenty all over the baord allready.

[right][snapback]821980[/snapback][/right]

I'm not judging them. I'm simply following my faith and God's law. In my last post I think I did put "in my opinion" or "in my point of view" at the bottom of my post.

As far as absolutes go, in my opinion following my religion is simply following my religion, if you view it as an absolute, then whatever....

Lastly, if there are Christians who condone gay marriages under the God of Israel, they're simply not true followers of the Christian faith. Some people who think that way may get offended, but it's the truth.

As far as positive opinions from Christians go.....I've given positive opinions and spoken my mind........and what I've received in return is angry people saying that i'm a torch burner. You decide who's intolerant of others....

TheEssenceofExcellence

Sep 3 2005, 05:45 AM

QUOTE(beowulf @ Sep 2 2005, 08:29 AM)

QUOTE

If people like beowulf can't understand scripture that's their problem. But wether you want to believe me or not, once again, I will say Jesus was not a false prophet.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

Here it is quite evident that the eternal life spoken of as a reward for belief is being discussed. In order to have that eternal life, you must first die….that is suffer physical death.

Matthew
16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom

24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Mark
13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
13:25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
13:26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
13:28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
13:29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.
13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
Luke
21:27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
21:29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees;
21:30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.
21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

John
21:20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
21:21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

In each of these cases, the terms pass, pass away infer physical death. In John 21:22 the term tarry infers to wait in place in expectation of. You are attempting to use a verse speaking of eternal life after death to prove that these folks are still around. No, they had to die to get that death (only implied here, but well discussed in several other places). If what you infer was true, then this would be another way Jesus was a false prophet. Having had his words recorded in 3 different places and a fourth place naming a specific person, it can be said truthfully that your Jesus uttered a prophecy that did not, in the light of no existing 2000 year old people around, come true. This makes him a false prophet and the penalty under Jewish law would be death by stoning! Maybe that’s why he hasn’t come back (after missing the first deadline), he doesn’t want to be stoned to death! - the Wolf

[right][snapback]822878[/snapback][/right]

Once again you mis interpret the text you read. Once again let me explain...

First of all your big point in this post was that they had to die to get eternal life. Well if they died, they do have eternal life, meaning they are still alive some where right? So like I said before, them still being alive when he comes back is explained by what I said earlier. Plus there's the resurrection that will take place when he comes back, which will (even if they are dead) bring them back to life, meaning they WILL be alive when he returns.

Now, on to your long quotes of scripture.. First let me point out the fact that you left out what's said after the quote: "21:21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. After that it says: "Then went this saying abroad among the brethren that the disciple should not die: YET Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but if I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?"

On to your other quotes: The quotes from Matthew, Mark, and Luke you posted are sayings Jesus was making about the generation that will be around during the time of Revelations. Not the generation who was hearing him speak at the time. Remember, he said that the generation that was around while he was on Earth would NOT receive any signs. Afterwards he told of what signs later generations would receive that would prelude his return.

St. Mark: Chapter 8: 11-12: "And the Pharisees came forth, and began to question with him, seeking of him a sign from Heaven, tempting him. And he sighed deeply in his spirit and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? Verily, I say unto you, There shall no sign be given to this generation."

when he says: "there be some standing here, which will not taste of death, till they see the son of man coming in his kingdom." He's either refereing to the ones there who's souls will never die, or the people in later generations who will be standing there during the time of revelations.

Why in the heck would he be talking about signs that generation would see upon his return, when he already stated that that generation wouldn't see any signs??? I'm sorry beowulf, but you once again mis interpreted scripture. Jesus isn't a false prophet. He is the one and only begotten son of God. And thus far you haven't proven otherwise. I pray you come to a better understanding of God's word.

RaginCajun

Sep 3 2005, 05:59 AM

essence, i have a request. can you please cut back some of the "meat". ^^^^^

Turtle

Sep 3 2005, 01:29 PM

I will give you one example of why Christians are getting a bad rap. A group of Christians go to a funeral in Tenn. for a US soldier killed in Iraq. They start yelling out that this was God's punishment for the US defending a country that promotes Gay rights. Then as they are leaving the funeral they are shouting God hates Gays. If I only could find the words to express the degree of stupidity that they displayed by doing that. THAT kind of behavior is why they are getting a bad rap!
Just as it is on this forum. When Christians come here and try to force their way of viewing God, that we are all aware of ourselves, then some of us can't help but feel a sense of annoyance. Just like in the non cyber world, I don't want to be told by a person that hates Gays that I need to follow their source of spiritual guidance to be close to God. That is not the "God" I know. I don't follow any organized religion that tells me to hate or promotes hatred toward any other human being regardless of their sexual preference, or any other judgemental BS that tells me how I should or should not live.
If you want to live your life that way ...fine...but what a shame that you do not see the self -imposed prison you are in.
IMHO

zandore

Sep 3 2005, 02:51 PM

QUOTE(TheEssenceofExcellence Posted Today @ 01:45 AM )

Once again you mis interpret the text you read.

Essence:
Where is it said that this (The verses that Beowulf posted) is what these verses mean? Which Bible book, chapter, and verse number please.

Kismit

Sep 4 2005, 02:02 AM

Essence,
You are entitled to your opinion, nobody can take that from you. Certainly nobody can change it, because taking away someones rights would be a not very pleaseant thing to do. I'm sure you would agree.

QUOTE

Lastly, if there are Christians who condone gay marriages under the God of Israel, they're simply not true followers of the Christian faith. Some people who think that way may get offended, but it's the truth.

Actually to state that this is 'The Truth,' is infact an absolute, coloured by your own judgements. It is your truth. I can't take that, I cannot change it. For you, it simply is the truth. But for others it is not. For some people, the thought of forcing another person to live a lie would be a violation of that person's rights.

I could argue that homosexuality is indeed genetic, it is not something you choose to be it is something were you are literally born that way. This has been scientifically studied, but I can not force you to alter your point of view.

I could argue that if God is the creator of all things why would he purposely design some people to be gay, if he had a problem with this way of life? But again I cannot alter your own truth with a simple question. Your truth is right for you.

I could also argue that Jesus preached love, that his sole message is one of love, I feel his message was a grand and generous thing, I beleive that the message behind Christian faiths is a beautiful ideal, and one worth learning about. I could argue all of these things, but it would not change your view, I cannot force you to change and I would never dream of removing your right to believe what you feel is true, for as you said, it is just your faith and your faith is a big part of who you are, and I will not condemn you for that.

Just as I could not condemn any person for their right to live in a manner that makes them happy.

My faith beleives in the three types of people,

Those who's purpose in life is to give good for good

Those who's purpose in life is to give bad for good

and

those who's purpose in life is to maintain the balance of both good and bad.

We do not view anything as black and white, just a whole lot of different grades of grey. And we work to keep balance and harmony for everyone.

Perhaps these others are mearly defending their beliefs. Allthough I also cannot force them to change their minds views or opinions any more than I can do to you.
I am not in any position to judge which opinion or belief system is the one true absolute truth. So I simply cannot pass that judgement.

If however you do feel as though you have been personaly attacked it is as always advised that you report the particular violation to a moderator. And we will do our best to help rectify the situation.

shonen001

Sep 5 2005, 07:35 AM

(quote=wongfeihung,Aug 4, 2005, 10:48 p.m.)
"How do I know there is a God? You just have to believe....... That last remark is what really bugs me about religion. You just have to believe. What are we believing in? are we believing the priest that there is a God? How does HE know??"

How do you know God doesn't exist? You're reasoning for not believing in God seems to hold no more substance than the reasoning of those who actually do (or so it seems from your point of view).
Furthermore, from a scientific approach (if you wanna go that route) evidence does seem to suggest that many of the places and other information found within the bible are or are most likely based on factual information.
Personally, it sounds like you're confusing faith with organized religion...saying you don't believe in God because of your distrust of priests, to me, is like saying you don't believe in education 'cause you've had a few bad teachers.
It's obvious you're still searching for something...otherwise you wouldn't be in this forum...or probably even on this site, for that matter. I'm not trying to sway you necessarily, as I don't feel I am responsible for your after-life, but your reasoning, albeit simply ones opinion, doesn't seem very compelling.

shonen001

Sep 5 2005, 08:14 AM

QUOTE(bacca @ Aug 5 2005, 07:54 AM)

I'd say that i have to agree with the first post....What I find funny is how the God followers here so quickly jumped on him about it. If you truly feel that nothing he said is true or possibly true then why get so upset about it? or is it that part of you goes oh um what if? and then you have to do anything you can to discredit the idea for fear of it being true and therefore ruining the things that you have put so much time and energy into trying to make true before?
[right][snapback]774016[/snapback][/right]

First of all, aren't you being a bit hypocritical? Perhaps it is YOU who is afraid to question YOUR beliefs.
Second of all, I don't think most of the "god followers" were "jumping on him"; but merely sharing their own perspectives, plenty of which was in agreeance.
and finally, you are aware that this is a forum, right? A place of discussion...any of this ringing a bell?

Kismit

Sep 5 2005, 09:53 PM

QUOTE(Lady)

I'm sorry for any confusion and I did not make my post to start an argument, I merely wished to clarify my views and support an idea that I thought was being rather senselessly attacked. Again I offer my apologies if this has caused offence or ire.

Sorry I didn't see this until today. Lady, thank you it seems we are on similar roads. I hope I did not make you feel uncomfortable. We do tend to debate quite a bit here. By the time you've been at U.M. for a couple more months your arguements will be so water tight you could probably get a law degree without blinking an eye.

Heru

Sep 5 2005, 11:17 PM

If there is no god then whats the point of doing good. Whatever you do in your life doesnt mean anything so who cares if you kill rape torture and steal. I would still do good but I couldnt say anything if somone killed somone next to me I mean who am I to judge afterall survival of the fitesst right.

manticoreconfusion

Sep 5 2005, 11:23 PM

look i dont belive gods exist too but u shouldnt go messing with peoples beliefs
they wanna belive it they can
just stay outta it i say

RaginCajun

Sep 6 2005, 12:38 AM

QUOTE(Heru @ Sep 5 2005, 05:17 PM)

If there is no god then whats the point of doing good. Whatever you do in your life doesnt mean anything so who cares if you kill rape torture and steal. I would still do good but I couldnt say anything if somone killed somone next to me I mean who am I to judge afterall survival of the fitesst right.
[right][snapback]828869[/snapback][/right]

kids...newbies...

RaginCajun

Sep 6 2005, 12:40 AM

QUOTE(manticoreconfusion @ Sep 5 2005, 05:23 PM)

look i dont belive gods exist too but u shouldnt go messing with peoples beliefs
they wanna belive it they can
just stay outta it i say
[right][snapback]828874[/snapback][/right]

we are not messing with people's beliefs. i wish there was an age limit sometimes on who can post on certain topics. go back and read very carefully KID.

Insight

Sep 6 2005, 12:44 AM

QUOTE(WongFeiHung @ Aug 4 2005, 08:48 PM)

Ok, before any of you religious people come in here and start saying how I'm going to go to hell, and turned into salt or whatever, read this WHOLE thing.
(Some of the things I say here may have been posted in replies to other topics)

I believe that God is completely made up. Throughout many thousands of years and civilizations all over the globe, societies have had a God or gods. This is because they have no better explanation for misunderstood things. "There was an earthquake!!! God is angry!" "Our crops grew tall this year!!! God is pleased!" "This lady woke up from a coma!!! It's a miracle, God saved her!" And so with the common belief that god controls everything we have accepted his rule and everything he does is right. "My grandma dies!!! God did that for a reason!" and so on.

The reason that civilization made God or gods was to keep everyone in line. So many more people would resist stealing and murdering if they thought they would go to hell if they did so. Everyone would be a better person if they thought they would go to heaven for it. God was created to help people stick together and prosper. And I don't think it was a bad thing! Society might not have advanced past what middle eastern poor people have now if they didn't make it, so it was a great idea to conjure that illusion up!

And isn't it convenient that there is no way of proving any of this stuff. Is there a heaven, only the dead know. Is there a god, same answer. How do I know there is a God? You just have to believe....... That last remark is what really bugs me about religion. You just have to believe. What are we believing in? are we believing the priest that there is a God? How does HE know?? He believed a different priest and here is how the telephone game starts. You start out saying "oh Ted has a funny face", and it ends up as "Green books taste like toe jam!" There is no credibility. Religion is worse! It has gone on for thousands of years!

The ancient greeks would have sworn on their lives that there were really manticores, cyclopses and chimeras, but no we know they don't exist. And the same thing happens with christians and angels. maybe they don't see them as frequently, but they believe. If there really is a god, then the bibles MUST be false. This is a quote I got off of comedy central (tv) and i think it is true while funny. I'm not sure it is really a quote though because I don't remember it word for word. "The bible says God doesn't want me to do my sister, but it also says that adam and eve created all humanity and if they had kids, there would be no one else for them to do! Someone had to bang their sister."

I might have forgotten some stuff, but I am tired and it's like midnight here so if you Christians want to attack me now, go ahead, I'm sure there is plenty of stuff in there for you to find holes in, but once you point them out to me, I WILL fill them in.
[right][snapback]773492[/snapback][/right]

Why do you think Christians would attack you? There are alot of religions out there. Lots. They all have a God, or Gods. Why do you single out critianity? I'm just curious.

majreynolds

Sep 6 2005, 04:57 AM

QUOTE(WongFeiHung @ Aug 4 2005, 10:48 PM)

Ok, before any of you religious people come in here and start saying how I'm going to go to hell, and turned into salt or whatever, read this WHOLE thing.
(Some of the things I say here may have been posted in replies to other topics)

I believe that God is completely made up. Throughout many thousands of years and civilizations all over the globe, societies have had a God or gods. This is because they have no better explanation for misunderstood things. "There was an earthquake!!! God is angry!" "Our crops grew tall this year!!! God is pleased!" "This lady woke up from a coma!!! It's a miracle, God saved her!" And so with the common belief that god controls everything we have accepted his rule and everything he does is right. "My grandma dies!!! God did that for a reason!" and so on.

The reason that civilization made God or gods was to keep everyone in line. So many more people would resist stealing and murdering if they thought they would go to hell if they did so. Everyone would be a better person if they thought they would go to heaven for it. God was created to help people stick together and prosper. And I don't think it was a bad thing! Society might not have advanced past what middle eastern poor people have now if they didn't make it, so it was a great idea to conjure that illusion up!

And isn't it convenient that there is no way of proving any of this stuff. Is there a heaven, only the dead know. Is there a god, same answer. How do I know there is a God? You just have to believe....... That last remark is what really bugs me about religion. You just have to believe. What are we believing in? are we believing the priest that there is a God? How does HE know?? He believed a different priest and here is how the telephone game starts. You start out saying "oh Ted has a funny face", and it ends up as "Green books taste like toe jam!" There is no credibility. Religion is worse! It has gone on for thousands of years!

The ancient greeks would have sworn on their lives that there were really manticores, cyclopses and chimeras, but no we know they don't exist. And the same thing happens with christians and angels. maybe they don't see them as frequently, but they believe. If there really is a god, then the bibles MUST be false. This is a quote I got off of comedy central (tv) and i think it is true while funny. I'm not sure it is really a quote though because I don't remember it word for word. "The bible says God doesn't want me to do my sister, but it also says that adam and eve created all humanity and if they had kids, there would be no one else for them to do! Someone had to bang their sister."

I might have forgotten some stuff, but I am tired and it's like midnight here so if you Christians want to attack me now, go ahead, I'm sure there is plenty of stuff in there for you to find holes in, but once you point them out to me, I WILL fill them in.
[right][snapback]773492[/snapback][/right]

I completely agree! God is absolutely fake! My belief is that we were seeded be a much more advanced race that may or may not exist anymore. The nonsense about Planet X is bologna. Both my parents and the rest of their ancestors were/are cathlocs. GOD IS A FAKE!

zandore

Sep 6 2005, 01:37 PM

QUOTE(RaginCajun @ Sep 5 2005, 08:38 PM)

QUOTE(Heru @ Sep 5 2005, 05:17 PM)

If there is no god then whats the point of doing good. Whatever you do in your life doesnt mean anything so who cares if you kill rape torture and steal. I would still do good but I couldnt say anything if somone killed somone next to me I mean who am I to judge afterall survival of the fitesst right.
[right][snapback]828869[/snapback][/right]

kids...newbies...
[right][snapback]828949[/snapback][/right]

Yeah a newbie

Hi Heru. Welcome to the UM Forum.

Would you feel the same way if it was someone you loved was killed? A parent? A brother/sister? Your child? You would not judge them?

101

Sep 6 2005, 01:42 PM

Hi Heru, I wonder what would it be if we did not have morals. Even people who do not believe in Christ or a god still have morals. Their parents taught them. The world around yopu teaches you morals. even if the world is evil it is anm example of what not to do.

Heru

Sep 6 2005, 08:40 PM

Trying to show you guys how most folks think. But im called a newbie or a kid just cause what youve never exprienced that in your life. Maybe most of you have met alot of people with morals in your life time and im happy that you had that. But is it so hard to concieve that some peoples lives are different from what youve had or seen on tv?

Anyway what i was trying to get accross that most failed to feel what i was saying. Is that to someone whose given up on the "morals" of the world telling em hes nothing but an evolved ape who should worked toward the betterment of his race. Is gonna make him not care even more. Why should he care that somone later on will have a better life. Now if that somone else was a reincarnated him well then maybe just maybe he may do good so next time he wont suffer as much.

So a good question would be if a man was doing evil would you tell him a lie if it was the only way for him to do good for the betterment of your race?

hyperactive

Sep 6 2005, 10:29 PM

Heru,

you need to look at the social nature of the human animal for your answers. Do you ask the same types of questions as to why other social animals work for the betterment of the social group?

mako

Sep 7 2005, 11:35 AM

The most caring and moral people I know are Atheists, Agnostics and Deists. Morality is not mandated by some invisible Guy-in-the-Sky, but rather by society! We have a built in desire to please our fellows and to help others, be this god-given or evolved; I have no idea, but it exists. This alone keeps us from not caring.

101

Sep 7 2005, 05:09 PM

Mako I care to differ...well maybe all you have seen are Christians who are actually hipocrits. Maybe that is why. I do know of some good Christians my man PA

. But I also have a wonderful ex relative who is athesist. She is wondeful and will give you anything she has to offer you. I love her. But I have met Christians who say "smoking blah blah blah" Who are they to judge others because they themselves may have sins of their own that aren't apparent to the outside world. That is in itself a hiprocrit. I have learned to not be as judgemetal. As a child is taught things are right and wrong that is how a Christian must be taught. Maybe to make them rethink about life. Not to be racist, judgemental, and love everyone for who they are not what they should be in their eyes.

< stole that from you (the yes smilie)

Turtle

Sep 8 2005, 12:14 PM

QUOTE(Heru @ Sep 5 2005, 07:17 PM)

If there is no god then whats the point of doing good. Whatever you do in your life doesnt mean anything so who cares if you kill rape torture and steal. I would still do good but I couldnt say anything if somone killed somone next to me I mean who am I to judge afterall survival of the fitesst right.
[right][snapback]828869[/snapback][/right]

Can't you see that LIFE itself IS the GIFT.
There is an old cree saying that goes:
"When you were born you cried and the world rejoyced. Live your life so that when you die, you rejoyce and the world cries."