independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Prince fan community site
Create new topic 
Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)Stymie said: ThreadBare said: Would that the evil that Christian/church folk do wouldn't detract from people's impressions of the points of the Bible. But, ambassadors represent, either positively or negatively.  Oh, I hear ya. I've had some bad church experiences, too. I'm just convinced that my revelatory faith journey is tied to being active within the church. To put it mildly. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: I agree with the concept. I can screw a Republican but I could never live with one
That's called being obsessed with politics. I have been married to one Republican and one Democrat. I disagreed with them but it didn't dominate our relationship. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Stymie said: ThreadBare said: Would that the evil that Christian/church folk do wouldn't detract from people's impressions of the points of the Bible. But, ambassadors represent, either positively or negatively. Yep!  Me and God, or the Goddess, or Krishna, or Allah, or Jehovah, or Yahweh, or Adonai, or Jah, or Nkosi Yezulu, or Shangdi, or the other "9 Billion Names of God!"....that's all I need.  I don't need a bunch of other folk crowding me.  ONLY LOSERS FEAR A MORE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD~~Sananda Maitreya Beware of men that will not go down! (I wish my momma had taught me all this)-BklynBabe | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
noimageatall said: Stymie said: and that's why my spiritual exploration is alone.
Yep! Me and God, or the Goddess, or Krishna, or Allah, or Jehovah, or Yahweh, or Adonai, or Jah, or Nkosi Yezulu, or Shangdi, or the other "9 Billion Names of God!"....that's all I need. I don't need a bunch of other folk crowding me.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Janfriend said: What does this mean to people?
I had a conversation with and uppity Christian male who was listing his requirements for a wife. After the physical list, he proceeded to say she had to be Christian and I asked "why?" and he mentioned this equally yoked thing. I then asked him "So, let's say you met someone who was attractive, had he same morals and values you had, and you connected with them on an emotional and spiritual level. You would say no to a relationship because they were of a different faith?" His reply "Yes." "Why?" He said that if he had children he wouldn't want them raised in a different faith. I asked why not raise them with both faiths? "Because it would kill me to know they are not going to Heaven."  ok. I told him that he could not guarantee he was going to Heaven or anybody else in his same faith, so why not give the child both faiths and let them decide when they are an adult on what's best for them. It didn't agree with me, but I've never thought I would pass up on love because of a difference of religion...unless it's evil
What do you think about this concept? many I know belief that this is true, that if they do not belief in the same "religion" it can't happen, well for me, love has no boundaries so being in a relationship of love is my priority regardless.....they don't know that i believe this or that i am not a person of their belief anymore but..... Have a happy and loving 09
Love Lead Live Create Inspire Copyright 2005 LOVE M | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: Stymie said: Religion is very divisive.
This has be one of the saddest threads I've read for ages. Such close minded bigotry. Ah well, just another reason to thank the lord I am not religious... I Agree ! - Very old testament !! - I guess it is only natural as the Judo-Christian myth is essentialy few thousand years old and scarily out of date. Who is Jim Jones by the way ? -- I'll google his ass ? "when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: Stymie said: Religion is very divisive.
Indeed, it is. Jesus, for all of the love He embodies (John 3:16), was constantly saying things that were divisive (Mark 10:29). Chief among these, illustrating just how emphatically He expected His followers to live for Him, is this passage from Luke 12: 49 I have come to cast fire upon the earth; and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is accomplished! 51 Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; 52 for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law. Jesus was a rebel. He called out religious leaders as well. Followers of Christ being warned to not be yoked with people outside Christ's Church? Doesn't seem so hard to believe, given Christ's own comments concerning believers and families. Throughout the Bible, there is a continual theme of sanctification, whereby God set aside those with whom He walked in relationship and covenant and devotion. It would follow, then, that those humans who walked thusly with Him would be encouraged to give themselves in marriage only to others who shared the same perspective. How can two walk together, lest they agree? (Amos 3:3) | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: Stymie said: Religion is very divisive.
Indeed, it is. Jesus, for all of the love He embodies (John 3:16), was constantly saying things that were divisive (Mark 10:29). Chief among these, illustrating just how emphatically He expected His followers to live for Him, is this passage from Luke 12: 49 I have come to cast fire upon the earth; and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is accomplished! 51 Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; 52 for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law. Followers of Christ being warned to not be yoked with people outside Christ's Church? Doesn't seem so hard to believe, given Christ's own comments concerning believers and families. Throughout the Bible, there is a continual theme of sanctification, whereby God set aside those with whom He walked in relationship and covenant and devotion. It would follow, then, that those humans who walked thusly with Him would be encouraged to give themselves in marriage only to others who shared the same perspective. How can two walk together, lest they agree? (Amos 3:3) Fine. From now on then, lets have no more christians on here saying that their faith is inclusive and that they consider those of other faith/no faith their equals. Should settle a few arguments my way. Excellent.. "It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
razor said: ThreadBare said: Indeed, it is. Jesus, for all of the love He embodies (John 3:16), was constantly saying things that were divisive (Mark 10:29). Chief among these, illustrating just how emphatically He expected His followers to live for Him, is this passage from Luke 12: 49 I have come to cast fire upon the earth; and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is accomplished! 51 Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; 52 for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law. Followers of Christ being warned to not be yoked with people outside Christ's Church? Doesn't seem so hard to believe, given Christ's own comments concerning believers and families. Throughout the Bible, there is a continual theme of sanctification, whereby God set aside those with whom He walked in relationship and covenant and devotion. It would follow, then, that those humans who walked thusly with Him would be encouraged to give themselves in marriage only to others who shared the same perspective. How can two walk together, lest they agree? (Amos 3:3) Fine. From now on then, lets have no more christians on here saying that their faith is inclusive and that they consider those of other faith/no faith their equals. Should settle a few arguments my way. Excellent..  "...I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty cat. I will let you fall in love...with that kitty cat. And then on some dark, cold night I will steal away into your home...and punch you in the face!" |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: ThreadBare said: Indeed, it is. Jesus, for all of the love He embodies (John 3:16), was constantly saying things that were divisive (Mark 10:29). Chief among these, illustrating just how emphatically He expected His followers to live for Him, is this passage from Luke 12: 49 I have come to cast fire upon the earth; and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is accomplished! 51 Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; 52 for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law. Followers of Christ being warned to not be yoked with people outside Christ's Church? Doesn't seem so hard to believe, given Christ's own comments concerning believers and families. Throughout the Bible, there is a continual theme of sanctification, whereby God set aside those with whom He walked in relationship and covenant and devotion. It would follow, then, that those humans who walked thusly with Him would be encouraged to give themselves in marriage only to others who shared the same perspective. How can two walk together, lest they agree? (Amos 3:3) Fine. From now on then, lets have no more christians on here saying that their faith is inclusive and that they consider those of other faith/no faith their equals. Should settle a few arguments my way. Excellent.. John 3:16 describes an inclusive path to salvation, with "God so loved the world..." But, the Bible is also fairly explicit about naming Jesus Christ as the only pathway to salvation. Whether people believe or reject that, ultimately, is between them and God. As for religious pluralism or universalist approaches to salvation, you won't find those in the Bible. If that clarification results in you enjoying more won debates, then congratulations. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: razor said: Fine. From now on then, lets have no more christians on here saying that their faith is inclusive and that they consider those of other faith/no faith their equals. Should settle a few arguments my way. Excellent.. John 3:16 describes an inclusive path to salvation, with "God so loved the world..." But, the Bible is also fairly explicit about naming Jesus Christ as the only pathway to salvation. Whether people believe or reject that, ultimately, is between them and God. As for religious pluralism or universalist approaches to salvation, you won't find those in the Bible. If that clarification results in you enjoying more won debates, then congratulations. And don't we all know it. As for winning more debates, thank you. The less you Chrisitians are able to counter reasonable arguments through lies about what it is you actually stand for, the better. Now we can be clear that you have learnt nothing from history and are still the same ol' bigoted bunch we all knew you were. The less debates you win, the more your faith falls apart. Excellent... "It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: ThreadBare said: John 3:16 describes an inclusive path to salvation, with "God so loved the world..." But, the Bible is also fairly explicit about naming Jesus Christ as the only pathway to salvation. Whether people believe or reject that, ultimately, is between them and God. As for religious pluralism or universalist approaches to salvation, you won't find those in the Bible. If that clarification results in you enjoying more won debates, then congratulations. And don't we all know it. As for winning more debates, thank you. The less you Chrisitians are able to counter reasonable arguments through lies about what it is you actually stand for, the better. Now we can be clear that you have learnt nothing from history and are still the same ol' bigoted bunch we all knew you were. The less debates you win, the more your faith falls apart. Excellent... If our faith were about winning debates, then you'd be on to something. Actually, it's about the results that build our faith. It's about the miracles that lend credibility to the Bible. It's about seeing my father healed. It's about my being saved inexplicably from car accidents and tornadoes. It's about praying for seemingly random things, and seeing them change over night. You can have your debates -- I'll keep putting trust in the God you call fictional. Because His credit's good with me any day. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: razor said: And don't we all know it. As for winning more debates, thank you. The less you Chrisitians are able to counter reasonable arguments through lies about what it is you actually stand for, the better. Now we can be clear that you have learnt nothing from history and are still the same ol' bigoted bunch we all knew you were. The less debates you win, the more your faith falls apart. Excellent... If our faith were about winning debates, then you'd be on to something. Actually, it's about the results that build our faith. It's about the miracles that lend credibility to the Bible. It's about seeing my father healed. It's about my being saved inexplicably from car accidents and tornadoes. It's about praying for seemingly random things, and seeing them change over night. You can have your debates -- I'll keep putting trust in the God you call fictional. Because His credit's good with me any day. of course. I forget your faith is immune to rational discussion. If God saved yoy from car accidents and tornadoes, why hasn't he saved the millions of others who die in such circumstances? are you special? WHy have other fathers died and not yours? To be honest, its probably not worth you replying because I know you will have ready prepared self-made reasons that corroberate your existing faith. It so sad and ridiculously frustrating that so many people are either not willing or not able to see things for what they are. Its very sad for all of us, but particularly for you and thise like you as you live your life in such ignorance. you and your ilk hold us all back from our potential as beings.  "It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: ThreadBare said: If our faith were about winning debates, then you'd be on to something. Actually, it's about the results that build our faith. It's about the miracles that lend credibility to the Bible. It's about seeing my father healed. It's about my being saved inexplicably from car accidents and tornadoes. It's about praying for seemingly random things, and seeing them change over night. You can have your debates -- I'll keep putting trust in the God you call fictional. Because His credit's good with me any day. of course. I forget your faith is immune to rational discussion. If God saved yoy from car accidents and tornadoes, why hasn't he saved the millions of others who die in such circumstances? are you special? WHy have other fathers died and not yours? To be honest, its probably not worth you replying because I know you will have ready prepared self-made reasons that corroberate your existing faith. It so sad and ridiculously frustrating that so many people are either not willing or not able to see things for what they are. Its very sad for all of us, but particularly for you and thise like you as you live your life in such ignorance. you and your ilk hold us all back from our potential as beings. There are devout Christians who not healed or saved from anything | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Janfriend said: razor said: of course. I forget your faith is immune to rational discussion. If God saved yoy from car accidents and tornadoes, why hasn't he saved the millions of others who die in such circumstances? are you special? WHy have other fathers died and not yours? To be honest, its probably not worth you replying because I know you will have ready prepared self-made reasons that corroberate your existing faith. It so sad and ridiculously frustrating that so many people are either not willing or not able to see things for what they are. Its very sad for all of us, but particularly for you and thise like you as you live your life in such ignorance. you and your ilk hold us all back from our potential as beings. There are devout Christians who not healed or saved from anything I quite agree. I wonder therefore why threadbare thinks her remarkable survival this evidence of anything, apart from that she is special in the eyes of god? "It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: Janfriend said: There are devout Christians who not healed or saved from anything I quite agree. I wonder therefore why threadbare thinks her remarkable survival this evidence of anything, apart from that she is special in the eyes of god? Threadbare is a man I do believe God looks out for us though. There are times in my life when things work out when I didn't think they would. I have had miracles happen as well as tragedies, but Christians can always explain away the tragedies as lessons to be learned | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Janfriend said: razor said: I quite agree. I wonder therefore why threadbare thinks her remarkable survival this evidence of anything, apart from that she is special in the eyes of god? Threadbare is a man I do believe God looks out for us though. There are times in my life when things work out when I didn't think they would. I have had miracles happen as well as tragedies, but Christians can always explain away the tragedies as lessons to be learned i'm not clear on your point. You seem to critisising christians, or are you one yourself? I agree that christians, or those of any faith, have an inbuild tendency to see fortune as gift from god and tragedy as a lesson from god, ignoring the obvious fact that both are just chance... "It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: Janfriend said: Threadbare is a man I do believe God looks out for us though. There are times in my life when things work out when I didn't think they would. I have had miracles happen as well as tragedies, but Christians can always explain away the tragedies as lessons to be learned i'm not clear on your point. You seem to critisising christians, or are you one yourself? Not sure why you would assume that. I try not to make any religious declarations on this board | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The admonition to avoid becoming unevenly yoked is a very practical one -- if one's religious beliefs play a large part in one's life.
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Uhope said: The admonition to avoid becoming unevenly yoked is a very practical one -- if one's religious beliefs play a large part in one's life.
It would be a very challenging situation for a devout believer in the Bible to find common, livable ground with someone who does not refer to the Bible as a guide in their life. I imagine it would be the same for believers in the Quran vs. not, etc. -- use your religious book/beliefs of choice. Morals/Values? Holidays? Priorities? Entertainment? Political/military participation? How to raise children? The list goes on. I know I, for one, try to live my life (every facet) and shape my values by what I learn from the Bible. Like someone mentioned earlier in this thread, for me, knowing what religious background a man was from would come up before ANY "falling in love" would happen -- likely seconds after learning his name. We'd have nothing sustainable in common if he was not one of Jehovah's Witnesses. My religious beliefs are extremely important to me and they will not be compromised to accommodate someone who doesn't believe as I do. For those to whom being actively involved in their faith is not so important, perhaps those types of "mixed" marriages can work. 
That said, just anyone who is one of Jehovah's Witnesses isn't necessarily good mate material, either. Then you get into if he's cute, funny, has good shoulders -- that type o' thing.  "Compromised to accommodate"? Why not do your thing, he does his and raise your children with both? You said you live your life by what you learn from the Bible. So do Methodists | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: ThreadBare said: If our faith were about winning debates, then you'd be on to something. Actually, it's about the results that build our faith. It's about the miracles that lend credibility to the Bible. It's about seeing my father healed. It's about my being saved inexplicably from car accidents and tornadoes. It's about praying for seemingly random things, and seeing them change over night. You can have your debates -- I'll keep putting trust in the God you call fictional. Because His credit's good with me any day. of course. I forget your faith is immune to rational discussion. If God saved yoy from car accidents and tornadoes, why hasn't he saved the millions of others who die in such circumstances? are you special? WHy have other fathers died and not yours? To be honest, its probably not worth you replying because I know you will have ready prepared self-made reasons that corroberate your existing faith. It so sad and ridiculously frustrating that so many people are either not willing or not able to see things for what they are. Its very sad for all of us, but particularly for you and thise like you as you live your life in such ignorance. you and your ilk hold us all back from our potential as beings. Actually, I'm quite aware some people aren't healed, aren't saved, aren't delivered, aren't rescued. That doesn't mean that Christians are to cease practicing our faith, our hope, our prayers. That would be like saying, "Well, you researchers have yet to find a cure for cancer or AIDS. Why do you persist in your search? Surely your hope is groundless and your pursuit built on a pipedream that holds back humankind's progress..." Yet, we hold the opposing view, that medical research is very much in the interest of humans. Everyone, it seems, has faith... just in different things.  *Note to self: find a really, really butch avatar...* | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: razor said: of course. I forget your faith is immune to rational discussion. If God saved yoy from car accidents and tornadoes, why hasn't he saved the millions of others who die in such circumstances? are you special? WHy have other fathers died and not yours? To be honest, its probably not worth you replying because I know you will have ready prepared self-made reasons that corroberate your existing faith. It so sad and ridiculously frustrating that so many people are either not willing or not able to see things for what they are. Its very sad for all of us, but particularly for you and thise like you as you live your life in such ignorance. you and your ilk hold us all back from our potential as beings. Actually, I'm quite aware some people aren't healed, aren't saved, aren't delivered, aren't rescued. That doesn't mean that Christians are to cease practicing our faith, our hope, our prayers. That would be like saying, "Well, you researchers have yet to find a cure for cancer or AIDS. Why do you persist in your search? Surely your hope is groundless and your pursuit built on a pipedream that holds back humankind's progress..." Yet, we hold the opposing view, that medical research is very much in the interest of humans. Everyone, it seems, has faith... just in different things. *Note to self: find a really, really butch avatar...*Yes, you should 
No, to use your analagy, your belief that your personal good fortune is proof of your god's existance is more akin to a scientist making a small breakthough of understanding on, say, cancer and claiming that he therefore understands the secrets of the entire universe in all areas. It's perverse and irrational. Just like religion in fact... "It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: ThreadBare said: Actually, I'm quite aware some people aren't healed, aren't saved, aren't delivered, aren't rescued. That doesn't mean that Christians are to cease practicing our faith, our hope, our prayers. That would be like saying, "Well, you researchers have yet to find a cure for cancer or AIDS. Why do you persist in your search? Surely your hope is groundless and your pursuit built on a pipedream that holds back humankind's progress..." Yet, we hold the opposing view, that medical research is very much in the interest of humans. Everyone, it seems, has faith... just in different things. *Note to self: find a really, really butch avatar...*Yes, you should
No, to use your analagy, your belief that your personal good fortune is proof of your god's existance is more akin to a scientist making a small breakthough of understanding on, say, cancer and claiming that he therefore understands the secrets of the entire universe in all areas. It's perverse and irrational. Just like religion in fact... Small breakthroughs of understanding occur in the realms of science and faith. Listen, I'm not going to argue with you. I don't do that. If you've chosen to not believe in the God of the Bible, that's on you. I think it's funny that you don't seem to be at peace with others believing in Him. Your issue isn't with me. Best to ya, amigo. [Edited 7/19/08 19:35pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Janfriend said: Uhope said: The admonition to avoid becoming unevenly yoked is a very practical one -- if one's religious beliefs play a large part in one's life.
It would be a very challenging situation for a devout believer in the Bible to find common, livable ground with someone who does not refer to the Bible as a guide in their life. I imagine it would be the same for believers in the Quran vs. not, etc. -- use your religious book/beliefs of choice. Morals/Values? Holidays? Priorities? Entertainment? Political/military participation? How to raise children? The list goes on. I know I, for one, try to live my life (every facet) and shape my values by what I learn from the Bible. Like someone mentioned earlier in this thread, for me, knowing what religious background a man was from would come up before ANY "falling in love" would happen -- likely seconds after learning his name. We'd have nothing sustainable in common if he was not one of Jehovah's Witnesses. My religious beliefs are extremely important to me and they will not be compromised to accommodate someone who doesn't believe as I do. For those to whom being actively involved in their faith is not so important, perhaps those types of "mixed" marriages can work.
That said, just anyone who is one of Jehovah's Witnesses isn't necessarily good mate material, either. Then you get into if he's cute, funny, has good shoulders -- that type o' thing. "Compromised to accommodate"? Why not do your thing, he does his and raise your children with both? You said you live your life by what you learn from the Bible. So do Methodists Methodists and Jehovah's Witnesses do not see eye-to-eye on many aspects of the Bible's teachings. I listed a few above. The Bible describe marriage as a situation where two people become "one flesh". One body cannot sucessfully go in two different directions. A husband and wife should strive to be as united as possible to have a happy marriage, especially if children are involved. It's important that if a husband believes a certain way of life is best for the family, a wife can/will support that without reservations (and vice versa). I have many friends who can attest to how unhappy it can be with their mate "doing their thing" and them doing theirs; it can be the worst kind of loneliness. For Jehovah's Witnesses, being able to share in Christian, spiritual activities (ministry, meeting attendance, etc.) as a united family is extremely important. Like I said, for those to whom following the tenets of their faith very closely is not foremost in their lives, perhaps a marriage of two different faiths can work. But a case in point; there's a thread here about a Muslim woman who feels it proper to wear a burqua as evidence of her modesty and submissiveness -- out of respect for her religion. She and her husband would be miserable if her husband didn't support her in these views. It would be a source of constant conflict. And that could be the case if he were even a nominal Muslim. It's highly unlikely she would even consider marriage to a Christian or anyone else who did not share her interpretation of their scriptures, including dress, grooming and proper behavior for wives. There would be no way for "two different things" to be done and have peace in the house. And kids grow up best when they see their parents united, getting along, and in agreement. Stability is there and kids feel secure. It's not important to everyone. But the scriptural tenet about being equally yoked (or not unevenly yoked) should be given some thought by those who consider themselves Christian.
BTW -- Encouragement to marry within one's own faith/denomination is not unusual, even if people don't pay as much attention to it as they once did. Most religious leaders, if pressed, would likely recommend that a congregant marry someone from their own church; Catholic/Catholic, Jewish/Jewish, Baptist/Baptist -- for the very reasons I mentioned. It's all about unity. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: razor said: Yes, you should
No, to use your analagy, your belief that your personal good fortune is proof of your god's existance is more akin to a scientist making a small breakthough of understanding on, say, cancer and claiming that he therefore understands the secrets of the entire universe in all areas. It's perverse and irrational. Just like religion in fact... Small breakthroughs of understanding occur in the realms of science and faith. Listen, I'm not going to argue with you. I don't do that. If you've chosen to not believe in the God of the Bible, that's on you. I think it's funny that you don't seem to be at peace with others believing in Him. Your issue isn't with me. Best to ya, amigo. [Edited 7/19/08 19:35pm] You're right of course. I'm not at peace with those who believe, and my argument isn't solely with you (although right now it is ). The cumulative influence of "those who believe" affects all of us, almost always for the worse. It's a bit like saying "I find it funny that you dont seem to be at peace with those believing in Hitler". Most of those were good folks too, who simply got mislead and caught up in a powerful and timely propaganda. But if more people were around to provide an alternative viewpoint, who knows? I'll keep debating..."It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: It's a bit like saying "I find it funny that you dont seem to be at peace with those believing in Hitler". Most of those were good folks too, who simply got mislead and caught up in a powerful and timely propaganda. But if more people were around to provide an alternative viewpoint, who knows? I'll keep debating...
Wow! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2the9s said: razor said: It's a bit like saying "I find it funny that you dont seem to be at peace with those believing in Hitler". Most of those were good folks too, who simply got mislead and caught up in a powerful and timely propaganda. But if more people were around to provide an alternative viewpoint, who knows? I'll keep debating...
Wow! Hitler promoted an agenda that encouraged his followers to believe that only his view of what makes a man supreme was the correct view. He then insisted that those who agreed should be willing to fight and die for the cause. All with the ultimate aim of building a larger power base. His followers were good people on the whole looking for a sence of purpose. And all of it was baseless nonsence. Remind you of anything? "It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: 
Good night.  What is that? I'm a business man in the rat race?"It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him"
Abraham Lincoln | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
razor said: 2the9s said: Wow! Hitler promoted an agenda that encouraged his followers to believe that only his view of what makes a man supreme was the correct view. He then insisted that those who agreed should be willing to fight and die for the cause. All with the ultimate aim of building a larger power base. His followers were good people on the whole looking for a sence of purpose. And all of it was baseless nonsence. Remind you of anything? In Luke 9, Christ instructs His disciples to leave towns where people prove resistant to the Gospel. In fact, He tells them to "shake the dust from their sandals" as they leave the towns. That doesn't sound at all like the talk of Someone Who wanted to brainwash the masses... My final comment on this, lest I belabor the point and become like the gentleman caught on the hamster wheel: The Org constantly reminds me that there's a big difference between not respecting others' opinions and disrespecting those who hold them. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Create new topic Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
