ARCHIVE - World Trade Towers Blown Up

[Amadis]

The Christian INDIVIDUAL's response to the WTC atrocity is to pray for those who did it (those still alive), that they might be won to Christ's gospel and God's love; to forgive those who sincerely seek forgiveness, and to take prudent but nonviolent measures to protect oneself from future physical danger.

The Christian NATION's response (or the response of any nation) should be to rain a hellstorm of fire and death and destruction and pain and horror and unimaginable suffering on anyone connected with the atrocity. To obliterate participants and accessories before and after the fact, and to blast away with skin-flaying force, mercilessly -- for years and years if need be -- at those who might have anything to do with terrorism, either as an individual or as a nation. To reduce to a paste of blood and ash any military or paramilitary structure or body of men that set their faces against us.

 

[Zakath]

A question for you...

A question for you...

Amadis,

Eloquent piece, as usual.

One question bothers me after reading it though...

If a nation is to rain hellish punishment upon the perpetrators of such acts and the Christians are not, who gets the task of reducing the enemy into "a paste of blood and ash"?

Do you envision that activity reserved for us non-believers only, or can you Christians participate as well?

 

[Nihilo]

The American Commercial Airline Industry is currently the single greatest threat to the Nation's Security. That must be properly dealt with so that it is no longer true.

We are at war, whether it is against a state, or an individual. The rules of the game have changed. Although we may be the best at the old rules (Cold war, desert storm), there doesn't seem to be anybody playing that way anymore. New rules means we need to learn them and become proficient at them, soon.

I think issuing knives to all airline passengers is better than forbidding them, personally. Just try to hijack a plane with anywhere from 50-150 angry, knife-wielding passengers on board, each willing to die for the cause of bringing the plane down in an unhabited area rather than a skyscraper!

It's probably not likely that hijacking a passenger airliner and ramming it into buildings is going to work anymore. People no longer naively believe that hijackers are content to take over the plane and ransom the passengers, so they will revolt, and sacrifice themselves. Unfortunately, these "soldiers" will probably continue to try until it definitely doesn't work! (After Tuesday's tremendous success, would you be disheartened if you were one of these Islamic radicals?)

 

[His_saving_Grac]

D__o__n

D__o__n

Jesus said that. Why? Because He was telling the Pharisees that they were wrong for telling Him not to do anything on the sabbath

I think you know this, but some may not so I will say it for them. The pharisees were the law holders. They were part of the clergy, the "doctors" of the Jewish Law. The scribes were the "lawyers" of the law. That is who is being told how to "judge".

Jesus got very upset a lot at the steadfast holding to the letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law, which is what the "doctors" and "lawyers" of the law of Moses were supposed to be in charge of.

So in effect, he still isn't talking to us but to the church heirarchy that was in place at the temple. We also should try to judge rightly (not righteously), which in effect, would curb our condemnation of many things.

Care to start a new thread? Or e-mail me so we can discuss this further

I would love for this to be a thread that we could talk about without the hate and anger, but I doubt that would happen given the beliefs of the moderators here. Too many individuals have trouble getting rid of their hates and discussing something as important as thiswithout pulling up Pauls preaching and showing why we should hate, judge and attack what we disagree with, and the individuals involved. I have already seen one such thread started in the old forum and the temp forum. Both had the moderators in there quoting Paul and Bob Enyart and getting upset with any that disagreed. That is where I saw a few people banned.

So I leave the choice up to you. It you DO start a new thread, please post here as I don't get a lot of time to read ALL the topics, so I may miss it if few people respond and it doesn't make it to the new posts area when I do get on.

Bless you again.

 

[His_saving_Grac]

The Christian INDIVIDUAL's response to the WTC atrocity is to pray for those who did it (those still alive), that they might be won to Christ's gospel and God's love; to forgive those who sincerely seek forgiveness, and to take prudent but nonviolent measures to protect oneself from future physical danger.

The Christian NATION's response (or the response of any nation) should be to rain a hellstorm of fire and death and destruction and pain and horror and unimaginable suffering on anyone connected with the atrocity. To obliterate participants and accessories before and after the fact, and to blast away with skin-flaying force, mercilessly -- for years and years if need be -- at those who might have anything to do with terrorism, either as an individual or as a nation. To reduce to a paste of blood and ash any military or paramilitary structure or body of men that set their faces against us.

I am confused now. Where is the Christian nation? Isn't it made up of Christian individuals where ever it is? So how can it do opposites? Or should they pray for them as they are dropping hellfire on thier heads?

Should we warn them so the innocents can leave first? Or do we kill the innocents with their leaders? Do we KNOW for a fact that not one christian is living there so we won't be doing the same as they did to us?

I noticed your last line. Any military or paramilitary structure or body of men (and women too I presume) that set their faces against us .

Hmmmm so if they don't like the way we did something, blow them away too?

I am glad I am a christian individual, but I am even MORE happy I am not a citizen of this christian nation you mention. I don't think I could stand to look at a person suffering the agonies you have described, and because I couldn't watch from up close an personal, then I couldn't order that done either. I am a firm believer of "If I won't do it myself, I sure won't order someone else to do it."

should be to rain a hellstorm of fire and death and destruction and pain and horror and unimaginable suffering on anyone connected with the atrocity. To obliterate participants and accessories before and after the fact, and to blast away with skin-flaying force, mercilessly -- for years and years if need be -- at those who might have anything to do with terrorism, either as an individual or as a nation. To reduce to a paste of blood and ash

Could you HONESTLY say you could stand there and WATCH them feel this to MIILIONS of individuals? If YOU can't then YOU shouldn't ask for it. If you CAN, then you missed your calling. They needed you in Germany from 1930-1945.

 

[D__o__n]

Ah, but Saving Grace, that was just the point that I brought up oh-so-long ago.

Paul's preaching does NOT condone hating, or even condemning. Don't even get me started with that blatant misuse of Romans 12:9. Paul's preaching, just as Christ's, does say we should stand up for those things that are right and good in God's eyes (something I know you agree with).

In fact, Paul was taught by Christ, so therefore what Christ taught, is just as applicable as what Paul taught.

The further error usually involved with that is that Paul taught, in nearly all cases, exactly what Peter, James, and John taught.

Now, as for your "judge rightly rather than judge righteously" statement: I humbly submit to you that if we are judging righteously, then we will be judging rightly.

And don't get me started on the misuse of that "judge rightly" thing, either, cause Jesus did NOT praise a man for judging rightly....

 

[surreal]

Sorry...

Sorry...

I lost track of this post. Thanks for your replies, no the post was directed at D__o__n.

I could direct my accusation at myself actually. Will I accept any other way? Why do you think I am on these forums? I read these posts and see what I think. For example, Bob is finally getting to me with his anti-evolutionist stuff. I still believe in parts of it but I see a point in his "that is a lot of just-by-chance" stuff. I don't have a lot of faith in chance actually... so it is starting to get to me

Anyway, seeing as there is no God in what you call "karma" which isn't a religion anyway... I think you are looking for Buddhism but I'm not sure since there is more than one way of life reflecting the existence of karma.

My problem is when people say "Well you are wrong because God said so." You can't argue with someone who tells you that every time you make a valid point you are wrong, because God says so. Logic cannot defend itself against "Goddidit" arguments because the people so blindly believe in God that they won't even accept that logic works here. I am willing to explore other points of view. If you say "God exists" I don't bluntly say "No he doesn't" and not even leave room for further argument. See, it stops there. Here:

I've explored other paths, and whether there's a god or not.

THERE IS! AND THERE'S ONLY 1 WAY TO HIM!

See? That isn't logical. There is no way to argue with that. If he (you) can't even try to prove it to yourself or listen, there can be no discussion. There is no point in you being here if you have already decided there is only 1 way and you aren't willing to even consider a change.

 

[His_saving_Grac]

D__o__n

D__o__n

Paul's preaching does NOT condone hating, or even condemning

No, but it IS the one most used by those who condone "judging and judging righteously" I notice that the moderators are the only ones who really know what righteous judgement is, and everyone who disagrees is judging, but not righteously. THAT makes me laugh.

Paul's preaching, just as Christ's, does say we should stand up for those things that are right and good in God's eyes (something I know you agree with).

Yup, I do.

In fact, Paul was taught by Christ, so therefore what Christ taught, is just as applicable as what Paul taught.

Well HE says he was. And so far only 6 of the letters attributed to Paul (of 14) are actually authentic.
I, personally, am not sure about it since there are three different versions of the appearance of Jesus and what happened next to him or his followers. But I am looking for reasons to lose that mistrust.

The further error usually involved with that is that Paul taught, in nearly all cases, exactly what Peter, James, and John taught.

Not really. James actually started the Nazareen church. He was James the Just (or James the lessor). The Nazorite teachings were claimed to be heretical, as were the teachings of Thomas. The story of Andrew, Peter and Paul actually is quite different if you read Barnabas (who actually travelled with Paul for most of his life and wrote down his actions as it happened.) Again, the Book of Barnabas wasn't accepted because the church felt it was contrary to what they were presenting. So it was deemed apocolyptic.

And don't get me started on the misuse of that "judge rightly" thing, either, cause Jesus did NOT praise a man for judging rightly....

Yup. I agree. Shhhhh the moderators are watching lol.

 

[rapt]

Saving grace: >>To be a hypocrate is to be a greek actor. That is what a hypocrate was.<<

It's no wonder you can't understand Don if that's the depth of your understanding of the word hypocrit.

Saving grace: >>He (Jesus) never told us to judge. Paul did. Jesus said "only he who sent me can judge" I don't think that was you lol <<

Jesus told the Saducees: "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures."

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

Luke 12:57 Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?


Jesus was only repeating the same thing Moses taught:

Leviticus 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.

Deuteronomy 25:1 If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked.

The word "judge" doesn't have to appear within the text in order for us to understand our responsibility to do so, such as is the case in:

5
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

(to "see clearly" is clearly "judging")

6
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

(One must excersize just "judgment" to discern who a dog or a swine is)

15
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

(Who without just judgment can know who is a false prophet and who is a sheep? "Ye shall know them" is a clear indication that we should excercise just judgment based on thier deeds and words compared to the commandments of the Word of God)

Isn't it ironic that the above scriptures all appear in the same chapter that begins like this:

1
Judge not, that ye be not judged.

It is so utterly SHALLOW to read one verse of a chapter and run with it as if one knows what is being said. Context, context, context, or else one will be smugly content with a pretext. Let us practice proper exegesis, which is based on context and other like scriptures, rather than eisegesis resulting from the neglect of both. Adding to or taking from the true meaning of a text is no light matter. (Rev 22:18,19) Remember the man who tried to stabilize the ark of the covenant when it was in route, but whom God struck dead because he didn't honor the proper way to transport it? (2Sam 6:5-7)


The entire chapter (Mat 7) is clearly saying not to judge unrighteously, but righteously. It is clearly not saying to forsake judgment altogether, as so many shallow and unread believers suppose.

2
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest (judgest) not the beam that is in thine own eye?

"If we will JUDGE OURSELVES, we should not be judged", says Paul (1Cor 11:31). Paul's gospel is NO DIFFERENT THAN CHRIST'S GOSPEL.

 

[Zakath]

With all this judgement scripture flying around, don't forget Paul's instruction, the one that is most applicable for you religionists...

"What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. 'Expel the wicked man from among you.'"

- I Cor. 5:12-13

If the apostle Paul says it wasn't any of his business, why do so many Christians today try to make judgements of those outside their religion their business?

 

[surreal]

Oh that was good

Oh that was good

That was a good quote and good timing for this situation.

The problem is, the bible contradicts itself so much they can just quote it a hundred more times saying the exact opposite.

 

[Zakath]

Re: Oh that was good

Re: Oh that was good

The problem is, the bible contradicts itself so much they can just quote it a hundred more times saying the exact opposite.

One of several reasons I am not a Christian...

 

[Nazirite]

rapt,

Judge not.

 

[D__o__n]

Surreal first.

I now accuse you of reading comprehension problems.

(However, based on Saving Grace's argument, if more than one person is having the same problem, then the problem is more than likely with me)

Did I not say that I already explored many points of view? Many paths?

The implication is that I've already tested the theories, and found an answer.

What you're asking me to do, by insisting that I consider alternative points of view, is to re-visit areas where I've already been.

That, my friend, is illogical. It's like saying, "we've already discovered uranium; but hey, let's discover it again."

And the fact that Mr. Enyart is convincing you of the illogicality (is that a word?) of some of the paths that you've already taken--thereby re-inforcing the argument and path I've presented to you--should tell you something....

 

[D__o__n]

Now Zakath and Surreal:

ERROR! ERROR! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON!!!

The so-called "contradiction" you presented with 1 Cor 5:12 is easily answered by LEARNING HOW TO READ.

9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Wow. Taken in FULL CONTEXT (apparently something you are either reluctant to do, or were never taught to do), this passage tells Christians they are not to have anything to do with fornicators, or the covetous, or extortioners, etc., etc.

But gee whiz, **** Tracy--how do I know who's a fornicator, or covetous, or an extortioner?

(slapping head) By golly, that's right--by judging! (i.e., discerning)

I told Saving Grace that he needed to learn the difference between "judging" and "condemning"; I was wrong. YOU TWO do....

 

[D__o__n]

Saving Grace:

But I am looking for reasons to lose that mistrust.

I'll give you just one: Faith.

And if that ain't enough--then there's nothing that will help you.

The further error usually involved with that is that Paul taught, in nearly all cases, exactly what Peter, James, and John taught.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really.

Well, how about I explain my position then? I accept the (commonly accepted as we find it today) Bible as the inspired Word of God. I accept it as verbal plenary and conceptually inspired.

Based on that, I look at the writings of James, and Peter, and John (in the commonly accepted as we find it today writings), and find that the teachings, while not word-for-word, are echoed by Paul.

Hope that explains it a little more.

 

[rapt]

Acts 7:22
And Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and in deeds.
23
And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren the children of Israel.
24
And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended him, and avenged him that was oppressed, and smote the Egyptian:
25
For he supposed his brethren would have understood how that God by his hand would deliver them: but they understood not.
26
And the next day he shewed himself unto them as they strove, and would have set them at one again, saying, Sirs, ye are brethren; why do ye wrong one to another?
27
But he that did his neighbour wrong thrust him away, saying, Who made thee a ruler and a judge over us?
28
Wilt thou kill me, as thou diddest the Egyptian yesterday?

The guilty will alway cry "Judge not! Judge not!"

 

[rapt]

God knows who comes to a forum such as this and why, whether to seek Him or to scoff at Him and his word, or to exalt themselves as judges while hollering "judge not" to Christians, who they suppose have no right to judge them.

The fact remains (unbeliever or believer; God respects no one's person), that God IS the Judge, and He will INDEED judge those that reject His word, whether they want to believe that or not.

Acts 13:40
Beware therefore, lest that come upon you, which is spoken of in the prophets;
41
Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you.

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.


1 John 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

I can certainly judge THAT to be true.

 

[Zakath]

Now Zakath and Surreal:

ERROR! ERROR! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON!!!

The so-called "contradiction" you presented with 1 Cor 5:12 is easily answered by LEARNING HOW TO READ.

I never implied it was any kind of biblical contradiction. If there is a contradiction it is in the behavior of Christians who won't follow Paul's direction. All I wanted to indicate was that even Paul wouldn't judge outsiders while you Christians seem quite willing to try, judge and condemn them all in the same post.

Wow. Taken in FULL CONTEXT (apparently something you are either reluctant to do, or were never taught to do), this passage tells Christians they are not to have anything to do with fornicators, or the covetous, or extortioners, etc., etc.

Shucky durn, give thet boy a gold star!!! He shore kin read them thar scripturz...

We'd better also give him a tourniquet since he just shot himself in the foot...

The context of Paul's comments, Don, is discussing those in the church. His comments about judgementalism are to be limited to those inside the Christian fellowship, not those outside.

 

[rapt]

So you think Paul didn't judge "them that are without" when they came to pervert the truth with their lies?

Think again.

So they (Paul and Barnabas), being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus.
5
And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister.
6
And when they had gone through the isle unto Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name was Barjesus:
7
Which was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God.
8
But Elymas the sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith.
9
Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him.
10
And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?
11
And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.
12
Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord.

Beware lest ye be found to fight against God as well, o ye devils that despise His Word.