What disgusts you the most about beanieboy?

[intro2faith]

And, you never responded to my post, I2F. I showed you an example of someone using respect and love to talk to someone getting nowhere.

No I didn't ignore your post. I didn't see it until you pointed it out again. The fact is, respect and love is not against what the Bible teaches. Cruel words are. Being easily angered is. If love doesn't get you anywhere, fine. But don't revert to cruelty just because love doesn't seem to be working.

Now for responses to those verses? Everyone seems to be ignoring them.

 

[Balder]

Hi, Ebenz,

If you have chosen not to follow the harsh tactics of others here, I respect that. When you emphasize "using respect and love to talk to someone getting nowhere" either, it seems as if you are advocating the cruelty or general meanness of some people here as the another legitimate Christian alternative. If that's not the case, though, I'm happy to hear that.

Peace,
B.

 

[Army of One]

No I didn't ignore your post. I didn't see it until you pointed it out again. The fact is, respect and love is not against what the Bible teaches. Cruel words are. Being easily angered is. If love doesn't get you anywhere, fine. But don't revert to cruelty just because love doesn't seem to be working.

Now for responses to those verses? Everyone seems to be ignoring them.

Sorry to jump in here. I2F, I don't think anyone is ignoring the verses that you quoted. They mean just what they say, but there are also numerous examples of the prophets, apostles, and God Himself acting in a not so nice way towards people (mocking, insults, being rude). The truth is, there are times for both approachs. Neither tactic is appropriate 100% of the time, and we should use discernment in deciding which approach to use.

 

[ebenz47037]

Hi, Ebenz,

If you have chosen not to follow the harsh tactics of others here, I respect that. When you emphasize "using respect and love to talk to someone getting nowhere" either, it seems as if you are advocating the cruelty or general meanness of some people here as the another legitimate Christian alternative. If that's not the case, though, I'm happy to hear that.

Peace,
B.

I'm not advocating using cruelty either. I'm pointing out that so many non-Christians and Christians here complain about how mean we are to non-Christians or people we don't agree with. And, to see something other than that, all one has to do is read one of my posts. I'm not bragging. I try to live my life how I understand scripture. But, like any normal person, sometimes I want to smack the person I'm talking to upside the head because they just don't get it. That's what happens, usually, when I get into a discussion with PureX. :chuckle: I don't know if he's playing devil's advocate or if he really believes what he says. But, I tend to get extremely frustrated with him a lot. But, I do like him. Hard to get around that concept. I think that if we met face-to-face, we would enjoy each other's company and be able to talk without calling each other names. But, we'd probably have to agree not to discuss certain topics ahead of time. :chuckle:

 

[intro2faith]

Sorry to jump in here. I2F, I don't think anyone is ignoring the verses that you quoted. They mean just what they say, but there are also numerous examples of the prophets, apostles, and God Himself acting in a not so nice way towards people (mocking, insults, being rude). The truth is, there are times for both approachs. Neither tactic is appropriate 100% of the time, and we should use discernment in deciding which approach to use.

I understand where you're coming from, but in those times when the prophets and so forth were acting "rude", didn't they have good motives? They weren't swearing at them or calling them names(I mean MEAN names...like borderline R rated). I guess all I can say is, we all need to watch our motives and always have love for others, and not be easily angered.

 

[Army of One]

I understand where you're coming from, but in those times when the prophets and so forth were acting "rude", didn't they have good motives? They weren't swearing at them or calling them names(I mean MEAN names...like borderline R rated). I guess all I can say is, we all need to watch our motives and always have love for others, and not be easily angered.

I agree, we should all be slow to anger, and we should not act harshly unless it's called for. I'm not sure if some of the insults found in the Bible could be considered "borderline R rated", but they were extremely harsh at times. After all, calling someone "Satan", "sons of hell", "of their father, the devil", or saying that they eat there own vomit like dogs, or wishing that they would emasculate themselves, are all pretty mean things to say. But your right in that we need to watch our motives, and not use the examples I listed as an excuse to be cruel in every situation. Our response has to be appropriate.

 

[intro2faith]

I agree, we should all be slow to anger, and we should not act harshly unless it's called for. I'm not sure if some of the insults found in the Bible could be considered "borderline R rated", but they were extremely harsh at times. After all, calling someone "Satan", "sons of hell", "of their father, the devil", or saying that they eat there own vomit like dogs, or wishing that they would emasculate themselves, are all pretty mean things to say. But your right in that we need to watch our motives, and not use the examples I listed as an excuse to be cruel in every situation. Our response has to be appropriate.

I agree. It just upsets me when people are cruel with their words all the time, and they never repent because they use the excuse "God is harsh too" or something like it. If you're going to try to win someone over to the Kingdom of Heaven, why not at least ACT like you care about the person??

 

[jack jackson]

I agree. It just upsets me when people are cruel with their words all the time, and they never repent because they use the excuse "God is harsh too" or something like it. If you're going to try to win someone over to the Kingdom of Heaven, why not at least ACT like you care about the person??

Well said. I agree with this. And I think this may fall under the category of the "gossip" thread. We should think about our motives, and whether what we say is going to edify the church and build up others or tear them down.

 

[Frank Ernest]

Are y'all advocating deception in order to edify the "church?" (as in ACT like you care?)

Would you tell them that their sin is just a mistake? Would you depersonalize a person's error by saying "mistakes were made?"

Should we rewrite the following in order to edify the church and ACT like we care?
Matthew 25:41 "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: ..."

Let's give it a shot:
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Well, you really shouldn't have done that, but it's ok because I care.

The point is, speaking as one of the Harsh Ones, that I DO care. If I did not, I would ACT like I care and be totally indifferent to the sufferings and seekings of my fellow man. It is God's Word that is very harsh (to some) and, at the point of judgment, fair and irrevocable.

Take it or leave it.

 

[beanieboy]

Maybe people are taking it personally, Beanieboy, that they haven't been successful in converting you or changing you.

And ironically, no one takes it personally that you are a Buddhist, says, "When are you going to accept Jesus!!! Do it!! Do it now!!!" Or maybe they do.

It's as if they want to control me. They want me to accept them into my heart. <shiver>

I believe it is more about their egos.
I have asked if it is a prereq to convert on this website, and have been told no.
But when I don't convert, they get angry.
I never came here intending to convert.

And somehow, calling me dog puke is supposed to make me think, "Gee, I want what they have in their heart."

They are more like the mosquitos at the picnic that I put up with so that I can talk to the guests that actually have something to say. .

 

[beanieboy]

Yeah, always when dealing with homos, fags, fudgepackers, rumprangers, colon cowboys. Always too offended.

This is something that shouldn't be rebuked?

Buddhist belief is that one should be pure in speech, thought, and action.
It is observence of being respectful of all, of acting in love, that draws me to Buddhism.

But this speech is condoned?
It is permissable because no longer being Under the Law, she can say whatever filth she chooses to?

 

[intro2faith]

Are y'all advocating deception in order to edify the "church?" (as in ACT like you care?)

Would you tell them that their sin is just a mistake? Would you depersonalize a person's error by saying "mistakes were made?"

Should we rewrite the following in order to edify the church and ACT like we care?
Matthew 25:41 "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: ..."

Let's give it a shot:
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Well, you really shouldn't have done that, but it's ok because I care.

The point is, speaking as one of the Harsh Ones, that I DO care. If I did not, I would ACT like I care and be totally indifferent to the sufferings and seekings of my fellow man. It is God's Word that is very harsh (to some) and, at the point of judgment, fair and irrevocable.

Take it or leave it.

No, I was not advocating deception. I was beingsarcastic. The fact is, some of these people treat others like crud ALL the time, with never a loving word coming from their mouths, but they SAY that they care about the person they're trashing.

I have NO problem with pointing out that someone is going to Hell because they have not accepted Christ. None whatsoever. It would be horrible not to in fact. BUT why take it one step further and swear at them and call them names and act like you hate them? I'm pretty sure that kind of behavior is not going to make the person being "witnessed to" think "Hey, these people are so loving, and they obviously care for my well being. I want what they have!"

Bottom line: You can say harsh things (ex. - Do you realize you are going to Hell if you don't accept Christ as your Savior?) But you do NOT need to say it in a harsh manner.

 

[beanieboy]

Are y'all advocating deception in order to edify the "church?" (as in ACT like you care?)

Would you tell them that their sin is just a mistake? Would you depersonalize a person's error by saying "mistakes were made?"

Should we rewrite the following in order to edify the church and ACT like we care?
Matthew 25:41 "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: ..."

Perhaps we should read what it says:

40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

The point of this passage?

As you do unto others, you have done unto God himself. If you have cared for someone, you have cared for God. If you comforted someone after a death, you have comforted God. If you gave food to a homeless person, you have given food to God.

Nowhere in this passage does Jesus speak of committing sin except for not caring for another by offering food, offering water, giving clothes, etc. - in other words, being selfish.
But if one gives of themself, they are serving God, whether they know it or not. (The sheep didn't know it.)

So, why do you bring this up in context of this thread?

 

[intro2faith]

Perhaps we should read what it says:

40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

The point of this passage?

As you do unto others, you have done unto God himself. If you have cared for someone, you have cared for God. If you comforted someone after a death, you have comforted God. If you gave food to a homeless person, you have given food to God.

Nowhere in this passage does Jesus speak of committing sin except for not caring for another by offering food, offering water, giving clothes, etc. - in other words, being selfish.
But if one gives of themself, they are serving God, whether they know it or not. (The sheep didn't know it.)

So, why do you bring this up in context of this thread?

Good question.

 

[eccl3_6]

oh my Sue!

#1 Whats wrong with being a homo?
#2 So if you know him tobe a hyprocrite...why get so agitated by what he says?
#3 Are you placing conditions on when someone can use the bible?
#4 So why not show understanding and compassion for the faith of others?

You're behaving like the the Sanhedrin

 

[intro2faith]

oh my Sue!

#1 Whats wrong with being a homo?
#2 So if you know him tobe a hyprocrite...why get so agitated by what he says?
#3 Are you placing conditions on when someone can use the bible?
#4 So why not show understanding and compassion for the faith of others?

You're behaving like the the Sanhedrin

Who are you addressing?

 

[Poly]

Who are you addressing?

I'm guessing a girl (or a boy ) named Sue.

 

[Nineveh]

Okay, it is better to rebuke IN LOVE than to spend an eternity in Hell.

But the whole IN LOVE part is what I'm getting at.

Now for those verses please

My last question to you was: Which is more loving? Rebuking bean who faces eternal seperation from God, or rebuking Rimi for rebuking bean?

 

[eccl3_6]

Who are you addressing?

The whole thread

 

[beanieboy]

I believe that i2f was able to rebuke me in love, and rebuked Rimi for this type of rebuke which is clearly not in love:

Originally Posted by Rimi

Yeah, always when dealing with homos, fags, fudgepackers, rumprangers, colon cowboys. Always too offended.

Your sister in Christ is acting in a way that i2f considers sinful, and is rebuking her out of love.

You, on the other hand choose to ignore it.
Do you not love Rimi? Or do you approve of that behavior?