Liberal Christians only believe some "fundamentalism?

AlAyeti · Post by **AlAyeti** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:59 am

There are now political Christians wanting to "re-claim" Christianity from whatever the "Right" is, or has done to it. Claiming that their way of Christianity is more like what Jesus would want.

But many of these Liberal positions hold to funadamentalism on the poor, the needy and anti-war and violence, but oppose Biblical truth on many other issues.

Why do Liberal Christians deny the truths of the New Testament on marriage and children as defined by Jesus himself?

Liberals will teach about condom usage but decry the Biblical truth about abstaining from sex until marriage as something ignorant or intolerant?

Why are not Liberal Christians funding missionaries to go to Muslim and other countries to spread the Gospel exactly the way Jesus described and exactly the way it is presented in the Gospels?

How can Liberal Christians support a womans right to kill her unborn child and encourage a woman to go and do it, while at the same time, denying the same rights of choice on the matter be given equal recognition to the father of the child?

How and why can Liberal Christians call themselves Christians while only preaching and teaching some immutable Christian positions and not all?

AlAyeti · Post by **AlAyeti** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 6:35 pm

That pretty much is what people always say of the enemy no matter what side they are on. They must have had it all back then too. Every one on the other side is always satan. He also thought the kingdom was coming soon(in his life time) and after the gentiles were save all the Jews would be saved too. It always sounds like the end to someone. It maybe for all we know an astroid could hit. Sure sounds like Rome to me. Maybe Paul was just a troubled person. Luther sure was and he identified with what he thought was Paul's thinking. Anti-Jewish and all. Luther was anti-everyone.

Luther found out what was written about Jesus in the Talmud. Rabbi's are as capable of wrongdoing as anyone else. "Yehsu" is a term of adamant dersion.

Were there even Rabbi's before the Babylonian dispersion? And, what caused the need for God to exhile the Israelites? Seems like someoene decided someone else was following the wrong path. Could that someone be the "man" Jacob wrestled with until daybreak?

Any Book of the Prophets if written by a non-Israelite would get them arrested for anti-Semitism.

If Paul was thinking that Jesus was coming back soon, why not run for the hills and wait it out? Why die so nobly in Nero's Rome? Certainly not a reasurring act to be witnessed by all of those other believers that thought Jesus was coming back soon. You know, all of those Churches he founded for a temporary time frame.

What Paul wrote in Romans could have been written, well, right now huh?

How many Christians are still meeting their fate like Paul did? I mean right now!

AlAyeti · Post by **AlAyeti** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 7:06 pm

Quote:
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Al, you fit nowhere on this list? (If not, PROVE IT ABSOLUTELY, or consider showing a bit more "humility" than you do.)

A few. But I don't have an excuse for being born to violate God's will. And I seek repentance. And, I certainly view number 32 (something I obviously have a position on) as a perfect definition of the Liberal Churches!!!

I've seen all of those things apply to the very people who would refer to themselves as being "holy". They judge/condemn, and aren't better by one iota in their hearts.

How does the whole thing read? Don't judge people, or, in the same way you judge others you will be judged.

I refuse to want children to be murdered by their mothers or sexualized in schools. Judge me on that.

And I think I'd better address this:
Mel said:Quote:
If you weren't basically encouraging or advocating for the further oppression of homosexual people (if indirectly), then I would just accept that you hold the beliefs you do.

Al responded: Quote:
That is a purposely presented false statement about my position. I view the acts and not the person. I go nowhere near the condition of the soul either. I will report this personal attack if you chose to continue down that path.

Al, you cannot claim that your views have no effects beyond that which YOU calculate.

I am consistent. The homosexual agenda will have to keep its boundaries ceasing at children. There is enough evidence that pedophiles infest the homosexual agenda. You claim that homosexuals want freedom, and I have never opposed that. Stop the attempt to label me a hate crimes proponent. But I will not sit idly by any longer while children are being sought within the movement to legalize and normalize all homosexual behavior. Children should not be part of a movement based solely on sex acts.

That is EXACTLY why I consistently mention to you, the effects that your comments can/do have upon human beings. IF I had ZERO FACTS, I would share one insurmountably-important fact with you:

You have zero facts that I even care about what adults willingly do. But, I care deeply about the rights of children to be children and not sex objects.

I and other homosexual people are human beings and DO have feelings. Human beings can intuitively sense the EFFECTS of comments directed AT or around them. And I've implied to you MANY MANY times, that I go for the throat or neck of your comments (the effect they have on people), not YOU.

In the work Homosexual Activists Work To
Normalize Sex With Boys
Frank V.York and Robert H. Knight

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Homosexual Activists Work To Normalize Sex With Boys 2
Sexual ‘Liberation’ 3
Going After Children 3
Sexual Ageism and ‘Age of Consent’ Laws 4
Homosexual/Pedophile Efforts in Canada 6
Efforts to Normalize Pedophilia in the United States 7
David Thorstad Connects Pedophilia to ‘Gay Rights’ 8
Using Psychiatry/Psychology 9
Child Abuse ‘Experts’ Provide Cover for Pedophiles 12
The Kinsey Pedophilia Agenda 14
Judith Reisman’s Research 15
Academics Work to Normalize Pedophilia 16
Public Schools Are Recruiting Grounds 17
Entertainment Industry Popularizes Adult/Child Sex 18
Conclusion 18
Appendix 20
Correspondence from the American Psychological Association 21
Correspondence from the American Psychiatric Association 27
Endnotes 28

I'll post content if you'ld like. But I'm thinking that Romans chapter one verse 32 would be very applicable to thoses that support the sexualization of the young.

The quality of the conversation would be instantly BORING, if that was what I intended to do. I don't enjoy hurting people, but I DO want them to be aware of and compassionate concerning the PAIN and BURDENS others are enduring with as they NAVIGATE through this life; it's called COMMUNICATION.

And I really do apologize if I hurt your feelings; I DO regard feelings. Even so, I can't help but wonder why you would seemingly distance yourself from what others feel, when you lay your heavy dogma upon them. It's interesting for me, reading and responsing to your comments:

It's as if I see a completely DIFFERENT TRUTH in the biblical quotes you present, when I compare it to the overall effect (emotionally and spiritually) of what your posts convey. And that's one reason I really don't quote the Bible much, because that (effect) happens a lot in various fora.

Thanks. I do not believe that the New Testament is hard to understand. And, neither does it seem the homosexual agenda that plans hate crimes speech applied to the text of it.

By God's grace, it's like He's given me the defenses to ward off the FIRE/BRIMSTONE type of comments that people so easily propagate and believe to be affective for Christ. I know I'm a sinner; I know I'm gay and I'm not going to lie about what I believe (or not), just to fit into someone's "Christian" categorization.

Again, sorry if you believe/think I'm attacking you, but I'm not. I've seen thousands of posts by Christians who generally believe that God is on THEIR SIDE. He may be, but He is also an advocate for many who are trying or wanting to make their way through life period. He's not as "partial" and "exclusive" as certain Christian groups/interests try to paint Him as being; I have not taken His grace completely for granted (I'm forever grateful). I say this in faith, and it really bothers some people that Jesus could or would come to the level where liberals (less than "perfectly" religious AND conservative) might reside. Well, all I can tell you (I have not tangible proof for you here on the net) is that Jesus has always been here with me, and MANY other "liberals".

And he's not likely waiting around, to see who gets into office or makes it to the Supreme Court; He already knows. But He is watching hearts, and He also knows how INEFFECTIVE certain comments are, which DO NOT reflect the love He gave us FREELY.

Please work within your community to stop the sexulization of the youth in schools by people you agree. I'll soften my views that the Liberal Christians, the homosexual agenda and pedophiles are working side by side.

You know, I haven't met one real believer, who isn't FULLY aware that they need God's grace from moment-to-moment. I may be gay; and I am a "sinner"...but that (Jesus' love) is where I started, and that is where everything I know which is "Christian" is referenced to. Not politics, or the popular moral-outrage of any given era.

I don't understand the need for such much espousing of personal feelongs. But I honor your use of them. What is written as evidence of each position outside of personal opinion, can be used to show the points trying to be made.

I don't KNOW God's perfect will, and I'm not ashamed to say so...especially after what I've been through as a human being.

I'm decalring that God's perfext will is not for a child to be the sex partner of a Pederast or pedophile. I'll take that to the throne.

bernee51 · Post by **bernee51** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:05 pm

AlAyeti wrote: In the work Homosexual Activists Work To
Normalize Sex With Boys
Frank V.York and Robert H. Knight

Perhaps it would have been honest of you (or at least not leat your bias show so blatantly) if you had mentioned that the publication you refer to is an FRC document.

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:31 pm

AlAyeti wrote:

Luther found out what was written about Jesus in the Talmud. Rabbi's are as capable of wrongdoing as anyone else. "Yehsu" is a term of adamant dersion.

Considering that the Christians made the Jew the devil, They(The Rabbi's) were being nice. But Jesus was a Jew as were his Jerusalem followers. Paul started it. If he had not made his stuff up and became anti-Torah and anti-Jewish they would not have had a complaint.

Were there even Rabbi's before the Babylonian dispersion? And, what caused the need for God to exhile the Israelites? Seems like someoene decided someone else was following the wrong path. Could that someone be the "man" Jacob wrestled with until daybreak

?
Your understanding is obviously Shallow. How much of that was written by the priestly caste for control? I doubt God needed to "exhiled" Jews for any reason, they Just got caught up in the expansion of other nations. What matters is they wrote it after and picked up the pieces and moved back.

Any Book of the Prophets if written by a non-Israelite would get them arrested for anti-Semitism.

I think self critical awareness is different then the anti-semitic ideas of Luther.

If Paul was thinking that Jesus was coming back soon, why not run for the hills and wait it out? Why die so nobly in Nero's Rome? Certainly not a reasurring act to be witnessed by all of those other believers that thought Jesus was coming back soon. You know, all of those Churches he founded for a temporary time frame.

he was making money and had power and felt God was showing himself in Paul. The churches picked up his half backed ideas, they were gentiles.
We do not know how Paul died. It could be he just went to Spain or got caught up in Nero's paranoia. I think if Paul could have got away, he would.

AlAyeti · Post by **AlAyeti** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:56 pm

Perhaps it would have been honest of you (or at least not leat your bias show so blatantly) if you had mentioned that the publication you refer to is an FRC document.

Does that make them wrong? Like I wrote, I'll post more if asked.

If you tell me that a rock thrown into the air will fall back down, are you wrong becasue I don't like atheism?

I would hope that family organizations are documenting pedophilia. I have no problem "testing all things and holding firmly to the truth." Indeed as a Christian I cannot.

I would think that the any person would want to know about Pederastists and Pedophiles. Especially the homosexual agenda that asserts it has no designs on the young.

AlAyeti · Post by **AlAyeti** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:13 pm

AlAyeti wrote:
Quote:
Luther found out what was written about Jesus in the Talmud. Rabbi's are as capable of wrongdoing as anyone else. "Yehsu" is a term of adamant dersion.

Considering that the Christians made the Jew the devil, They(The Rabbi's) were being nice. But Jesus was a Jew as were his Jerusalem followers. Paul started it. If he had not made his stuff up and became anti-Torah and anti-Jewish they would not have had a complaint.

Unlike Islam and atheism and their atrocities, Christians have made incredible efforts to admit and atone for what "Christians" did to Jewish people throughout the history of the Church. How many times do we apologize before it is believed? Evangelicals pour not only their money but there lives into Israel. A country that outlaws Christians from "spreading the Gospel."

Quote:
Were there even Rabbi's before the Babylonian dispersion? And, what caused the need for God to exhile the Israelites? Seems like someoene decided someone else was following the wrong path. Could that someone be the "man" Jacob wrestled with until daybreak
?
Your understanding is obviously Shallow. How much of that was written by the priestly caste for control? I doubt God needed to "exhiled" Jews for any reason, they Just got caught up in the expansion of other nations. What matters is they wrote it after and picked up the pieces and moved back.

Please start a thread about the history of Judaism and Christianty. I would be more than happy to show my understanding of the issues. The incredible beauty of the Tanakh and the New Testament is the brutal honesty the writers portray their own members.

It does seem that the Israelites, like Christians, get "caught up" in the workings of nations. How many Christians are like the sisters Sodom and Gomorrah mentioned in Ezekiel? Or, Jews living in Europe or America?

Quote:
Any Book of the Prophets if written by a non-Israelite would get them arrested for anti-Semitism.

I think self critical awareness is different then the anti-semitic ideas of Luther.

Fair enough. It is this self criticism that keeps me amazed at the Biblical faiths. Very different tha you would expect if someone wanted to make up a religion. Why have all of the heroes losers?

Anti-Judaism is far different than anti-Semitism. Criticising Jews is not always anti-Semtism. If that is the case then Jesus was an anti-Semite as was Moses. And like I wrote, every Prophet. Oh yeah, and King David.

Quote:
If Paul was thinking that Jesus was coming back soon, why not run for the hills and wait it out? Why die so nobly in Nero's Rome? Certainly not a reasurring act to be witnessed by all of those other believers that thought Jesus was coming back soon. You know, all of those Churches he founded for a temporary time frame.

he was making money and had power and felt God was showing himself in Paul. The churches picked up his half backed ideas, they were gentiles.
We do not know how Paul died. It could be he just went to Spain or got caught up in Nero's paranoia. I think if Paul could have got away, he would.

It is clear from Paul's own words that he did not accpet money from the brethren. He worked making tents. There is little reason that portraying the brightest man in the history of the church as dying pathetically is a good place to get a lot of coverts. Especially from the Gentiles. But indeed the Church grew very large.

In Pauls letters, it is clear that he wanted to go to his churches.

Also, there is no reason to consider the history of the martyrs as lies.

melikio · Post by **melikio** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 3:39 am

I don't understand the need for such much espousing of personal feelongs.

When it's your turn to be hurt and dehumanized, perhaps you will.

But you make it clear to me, why I should have stopped responding to your posts LONG ago.

Why talk to someone who thinks they are so "right" about everything?

Why try to reason as a HUMAN being, with someone or something that clearly cannot understand you?

I'm glad that God understands, and regards every "feeling" a person may have. The "Bible" that some use to be cold, calculated and unyielding toward other human beings, is the same book that tells the story of a Savior, who could FEEL EVERYTHING...and relate to the lowest of sinners.

I've been on the planet long enough, to know real love when I see it. People who try to FORCE righteousness, accomplish NOTHING worthwhile (just as 1Cor13 says); it's just "noise".

If you lightly regard the "feelings" of other human beings Al, you tell me so much more by expressing that, than you likely imagine. I really don't want to read what you have to say, or be anywhere near the kind of religion that is based upon such an approach to reality. It allows people to CRAP on others, and call it "good". I've seen it so many times (up close), that I really don't need to discuss it.

I guess I really don't want to be a "Christian"; if I must administer so much pain to others; it doesn't make sense to me anymore. I don't know how "Al" really is...but I DO NOT want to be anything like the "Christian" he describes. It's meaningless and uninspiring to me.

Have a great life in God's grace, Al.

I would rather not put you on mental "ignore", but I just don't have any more motivation to trying to reason with you here. Perhaps we'll cross paths in life, and you will see/understand better, the essence of what I've attempted to share. I'm sure I can learn from things you have said, but my conclusions don't seem to come anywhere near where yours do.

May God's will be done; not mine.

Peace.

-Mel-

AlAyeti · Post by **AlAyeti** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 2:09 pm

Quote:
I don't understand the need for such much espousing of personal feelongs.

When it's your turn to be hurt and dehumanized, perhaps you will.

Homophobe and bigot isn't dehumanizing? Christians that desire to live their lives by turning away (repenting) from their sins and embracing a new life in Christ ARE dehumanized and are hurt by the incessant hatred they hear from the LGBT orgs, politicians, the ACLU and Liberal-Progressives Secularists and Liberal Christians.

I will miss your side of the debate.

But you make it clear to me, why I should have stopped responding to your posts LONG ago.

Why talk to someone who thinks they are so "right" about everything?

Right that the Gospel message is about repentance or that children should be allowed to be children? I have asked YOU many times to help me in my error if you see that I am?

Why try to reason as a HUMAN being, with someone or something that clearly cannot understand you?

Why give up so easily if I need to be enlightened. That is why I post facts and literature along with personal perspective.

I'm glad that God understands, and regards every "feeling" a person may have. The "Bible" that some use to be cold, calculated and unyielding toward other human beings, is the same book that tells the story of a Savior, who could FEEL EVERYTHING...and relate to the lowest of sinners.

I don't know the version that you mention. I only know the one that reaches out to me, a poor sinner, and leads me down the narrow road. Is that not Jesus?

I've been on the planet long enough, to know real love when I see it. People who try to FORCE righteousness, accomplish NOTHING worthwhile (just as 1Cor13 says); it's just "noise".

Iim thinking that is a perfect example of the Episcopalian Church as it has become.

If you lightly regard the "feelings" of other human beings Al, you tell me so much more by expressing that, than you likely imagine. I really don't want to read what you have to say, or be anywhere near the kind of religion that is based upon such an approach to reality.

I struggle against liars and lies perpetuated against Christians. I defend Christians as not being bigots and homophobes for opposing the homosexual agenda. You being a homosexual know very well about what I mean.

Isn't a heartless physicallifestyle based solely on hedonism worthless? Embraced by anyone of any persuasion?

How valued is an aging person within that lifestyle? Now, I have friends that are gay and know this answer. I'm just trying to convince you that I am no bigot nor, am I ignorant about this lifestyle. I lved and worked in West Hollywood in the eighties. Yes THOSE eighties.

It allows people to CRAP on others, and call it "good". I've seen it so many times (up close), that I really don't need to discuss it.

I defend Evangelical Christians crapped on from 360%. I'm tired of sitting my a-- on a couch and hoping that the world will heal itself. Now, men are demanding to marry men. Children are victims of unspeakable horror on an hourly basis, and Christians are afraid to open their mouths in school or the town square.

I was told about debatingchristianity.com after I was debating an anti-Christian on the radio. I do not see many Christians willing to enter into debate here because they get belittled and denigrated. From who? from what? Petty little positions to deny the guilt of what anti-Christians have wrought ont the world.

Here's a little personal note from me to you. I care about you and everyone else, but the truth is a joke now. How are we, you and I ANY different? How? You have your sins and I mine. But, that does not allow us to redefine the Lord of Glory to fit our comfort zone! Read the Gospels. It doesn't work that way.

I guess I really don't want to be a "Christian"; if I must administer so much pain to others; it doesn't make sense to me anymore. I don't know how "Al" really is...but I DO NOT want to be anything like the "Christian" he describes. It's meaningless and uninspiring to me.

What pain?

Forgiveness is an unshakeable gift from God through Christ Jesus. Only people can see the sins and the consequences of them . . . God cannot and will not.

Have a great life in God's grace, Al.

And I wish the same to you.

And while we are being nice, some child is being introduced to horror. Some Christian believes that secularism is not really anti-Christian and not worth a hill of sh-t.

The time for being all nicey-nice ended when children can get abortions and their parents by law, do not have to know.

It is time to stand up and NOT be lukewarm. Or, it may be my child or my neighbors! Get it! My silence is more a crime against God than what happens between two adult men in a bath house in San Francisco. That's just a crime against nature. Pretty petty considered to what is happening to children everyday!

I would rather not put you on mental "ignore", but I just don't have any more motivation to trying to reason with you here.

That would be unfortuanate. So many others haven't the %@#$'s to debate this topic and the other one we argue in.

Perhaps we'll cross paths in life, and you will see/understand better, the essence of what I've attempted to share. I'm sure I can learn from things you have said, but my conclusions don't seem to come anywhere near where yours do.

If we cross paths in real life it will be in a Church. I'm tired of the world and its ways. I want to see children playing with toys at the appropriate age, and taught about truth and morality that has nothing to do with condom use.

May God's will be done; not mine.

Or mine. But His alone. That is immutable.

Peace.

-Mel-

Peace.

redstang281 · Post by **redstang281** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:08 pm

redstang281, AL,

red: Welcome to the forum!

Thanks, appreciate it.

I think that in the context of the chapter it's pretty obvious Jesus would not approve of homosexuality. Jesus says that Moses allowed a provision in their society's law system for divorce because of the people's sin. But that does not change the fact that divorce is a sin.

Well, gay marriage and divorce are not the same thing. From the passage it is clear that Jesus is talking about divorce- one can not infer from this passage that Jesus is against homosexual marriage.

I believe so. Jesus says that divorce is a sin because it changes the original design of marriage. Likewise homosexuality also changes the design because a marriage. A man is not designed to leave his parents for a husband.

Matthew 19:5 - and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?

You could say that a two year old child is a problem for a mother because of the expense, responsibility, and inconvenience but should that be a good enough justification for her to kill it? After all she should have the right to who lives in her home, what her salary has to support, and how she spends her free time, right? It's obvious that would be wrong for her to kill that child. I don't know why people fail to see the connection. A baby is just an under developed child and development does not determine value, it's still a human. The government steps in and bands the killing a child after birth why should it not before birth too?

This example is in no way like a pregnant mother. Aside from all the obvious reasons, unlike an unborn child, difficulties with a two year old can not present a direct, possibly life threatening, health risk to the mother.

The only time I would support an abortion is in the case where the mother will most likely not survive the pregnancy. In that situation there is really no a choice. However I do not support a "choice" in any way.

Secondly, the child has been born, it is alive apart from its mother. In the womb a child is only alive as part of the mother. It is not a separate entity until after birth and the cutting of the umbilical cord...

I disagree. Children are not alive apart from their parents. They can't take care of themselves or provide for themselves without an adult. Parents have a responsibility to them and they can not legally gain freedom from that responsibility by murder. Likewise they should not be able to gain freedom from pregnancy by murder either. If we're going to allow abortion we might as well allow all parents to consider their own feelings an emotions before their childrens and reserve the right to kill them up until 18 years of age.

I believe those are the liberal Christians.

Guess what Jesus was.... a liberal!

What you consider liberal in Jesus's day would have been a conservative today in our country. The common factor is adhering to Biblical principals.

John 15:19 - If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.

Being a Christian is not about conforming to whatever values the world finds value in at the time it is about standing up for God's truth which always stands the test of time. I feel that liberal Christians are more interested in siding with the world then with God.

For liberal Christians it's absolutely about siding with the world- because that's where we are and that's where God is.

Actually Satan is the world ruler. Christian's job is to spread the gospel and to love one another not to support the evil in the world.

2 Corinthians 4:4 - In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the likeness of God.

James 4:4 - Unfaithful creatures! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.

You talk of not conforming, and yet what are you doing when you spit out scriptural interpretation you've been taught without giving another glance.

There's good conforming and there's bad conforming. Conforming to God's will is good and the worlds is bad.

As far as scripture, I don't blindly believe I read and pray-fully believe.

What are you doing as as part of institutionalized Christianity but conforming.

The church represents Christ body which all believers are called into. I will conform to Christ but not the world.

Liberal Christians fight against this- the same way Jesus fought against the establishment and the established way of thinking and acting out Jewish life.

So you advocate supporting the world but not Church? Doesn't sound like too good a plan for a Christian to me. Jesus fought against anti-biblical establishments the same way Bible believe Christians do today.

Where does scripture talk about God seeing the unborn and how God feels about unborn or aborted children?

God guides the development of infants in the womb with his special purpose and design. It's not our right to take their lives into our hands.

Jeremiah 1:5 - "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations."

In that respect I do not believe it is possible for someone to own true faith and at the same time hold worldly values that are in contradiction to the Bible. So I do not believe liberal Christians are at all Christian.

Fair enough. But the problem with this statement is two fold. Not only are you judging others (un-christian)

I'm not judging, I'm passing along God's warning as he has revealed to us through his word. God will be the one to judge not me or any other Christian. I am a sinner in need of his grace and mercy like anyone else. It's out of love I warn people so they in hope that they will have faith and believe to be saved.

you're assuming that you've got it all right, that you've got a stranglehold on truth and the path to salvation.

I'm just reading the Bible for what it says and not imposing bias on it.

This arrogance is what liberal christians fight against.

They should realize they are fighting against God then.

Matthew 12:30 - He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.

This sort of faith is dangerous because not only is it merely a self-fulfilling prophecy, but it's also exclusionary and full only of self-interest. It's this kind of thinking that Jesus fought and died teaching against.

Well Christ died for me (and you), so yes I guess I do have self interest in that. I also have love for everyone and desire to witness and help the needy since Christ has worked in me. So I am not totally self interested. The Bible says we should expect to see changes in our lives and I have seen that to be true.

2 Corinthians 5:17 - Therefore, if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come.

Romans 8:7-9 - For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law, indeed it cannot; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

palmera · Post by **palmera** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:28 pm

I believe so. Jesus says that divorce is a sin because it changes the original design of marriage.

Jesus's response does not say this. His response is that divorce cleaves apart that which was joined together by God. Divorce is not a sin because it changes the original design of marriage; rather, it may be seen as a sin because it spits in the face of that which God has unified.

'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?

This goes so much deeper than mere definition of marriage. It's not even a response to: "what defines marriage?" but in response to a test used by some Pharisees to trick Jesus.

This comes just after a remark about divine union. The point here is not about defining marriage (though the model of marriage then was man/woman) as man/woman but rather a statement regarding what God joins together. The point is that "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." There was no need to define what marriage is regarding gender in the Bible because during that time historically and in that place, it was understood that man + woman = marriage. The Matthean community did not (at least no evidence suggests such) deal with homosexual marriage.

That being said, we're still taking this statement out of context. Within context, the Pharisees are testing Jesus regarding Mosianic law. They're testing him to see if he's heretical in his teachings; Jesus, as is characteristic of his portrayal in the NT Gospels, understands their attempted trick and responds accordingly. The whole talk about marriage was a vehicle for the Pharisees to catch Jesus blaspheming against Jewish law. To say then that 'it's clear Jesus defines marriage as man + woman' then becomes an act of irresponsible interpretation.

The only time I would support an abortion is in the case where the mother will most likely not survive the pregnancy. In that situation there is really no a choice. However I do not support a "choice" in any way.

On a side note- there is still a choice. If you don't support choice in any way then you can't (by your own logic) support abortion simply because the mother may die. So where do you stand? Abortion in some instances but not others, making amendments to your position in times of crisis? Most people, I think, feel this way. It makes sense- that way, you're saving the most lives (probably.) But at what cost?

disagree. Children are not alive apart from their parents. They can't take care of themselves or provide for themselves without an adult. Parents have a responsibility to them and they can not legally gain freedom from that responsibility by murder. Likewise they should not be able to gain freedom from pregnancy by murder either. If we're going to allow abortion we might as well allow all parents to consider their own feelings an emotions before their childrens and reserve the right to kill them up until 18 years of age.

You logic here is a little skewed. I'm not going to harp on semantics again with you. But the idea of equating aborting a child before it's even in human form, and killing a living breathing, separate person is absurd. I understand the whole pro-life thing, but you can't possibly be serious in making an argument like this.

What you consider liberal in Jesus's day would have been a conservative today in our country. The common factor is adhering to Biblical principals.

You really think so? Conservatives by and large hold the most political sway in this nation, hold the most wealth, and basically run the country through their corporations. Jesus, on the other hand, was a poor Jew who fought the corruption of the systems in his day.... hmmmm, sounds like a liberal to me here. Conservative Christians spend more time trying to save souls than save lives in their missionary approach. Jesus actually fed and healed people, producing physical, material changes in their lives rather than preaching about their souls. Paul's aim was about souls and heaven, Jesus's aim was about physical wellbeing, and hope for a better future here on earth. Jesus, again, was a liberal, just as much today as back then.

Actually Satan is the world ruler.

Wow.

2 Corinthians 4:4 - In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the likeness of God.

Is this supposed to support Satan as a world ruler? Do you not see that this is a direct reference to something Jesus said about the purpose of his gospels?

There's good conforming and there's bad conforming. Conforming to God's will is good and the worlds is bad.

That's a cop-out.

Quote:
What are you doing as as part of institutionalized Christianity but conforming.

The church represents Christ body which all believers are called into. I will conform to Christ but not the world.

Which church is "The church."

So you advocate supporting the world but not Church? Doesn't sound like too good a plan for a Christian to me. Jesus fought against anti-biblical establishments the same way Bible believe Christians do today.

Well, Jesus fought against the Temple.... so yeah! Jesus fought against socio-political oppression stemming directly from the church. In our society today, the institutional church doesn't oppress the material body but the mind. Yes, I will fight against that; because the brainwashing of generations leads to horrible things in the future. i.e. hate crimes against the Jews, burning "witches," establishing slavery to build a nation; raping a land and it's people all because of some predestined birthright.... if only "the church" took a socratic method to understanding humanity we'd all be in a better place.

God guides the development of infants in the womb with his special purpose and design. It's not our right to take their lives into our hands.

Quote:
Where does scripture talk about God seeing the unborn and how God feels about unborn or aborted children?

Jeremiah 1:5 - "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations."

This is a specific reference to a specific person. This cannot be construed as a general statement about all of humanity.

Quote:
you're assuming that you've got it all right, that you've got a stranglehold on truth and the path to salvation.

I'm just reading the Bible for what it says and not imposing bias on it.

Then you are the only person on earth who is doing so. Until you attend to the biases you bring to the text and confront them in your reading, you'll always be shaping the text to fit your own view and will never be open to the text itself.

Quote:
This arrogance is what liberal christians fight against.

They should realize they are fighting against God then.

If, as your logic states, God = arrogance, then I will protest God every day of my life.