100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Bible Question... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
"To anyone who says we have no right to judge others, I say... yes we do, in the case where they are harming others we judge them and we pass laws and we judge them and we pass sentence." This to me is very different than what Spider was attempting to assert. We as a society choose to live by laws. We put these laws into effect by voting during elections and then once passed, we expect our law enforcement officers to carry them out. Once a suspect is apprehended and charged with a crime, we then have a legal system designed to try this individual (if they choose to go to trail) and then we have a jury of peers that will render a verdict of guilt or innocence, or mistrial, based on the evidence presented by both prosecution and defense. If the defendant is found guilty by these 12 men and women of the jury, we sentence this individual. This WILL NOT occur until the due process has been met. For someone to presume to “discern” me or anyone else based solely on their own perceived moral superiority is not the same concept in my opinion. What I attempted to explain to him before he became so upset is that I don’t understand why he would feel he has the right to project his OWN moral criteria onto others. Conversely I would have no right to do such a thing to him. Krimsa, I have no idea what you think you read, but you didn't get what I was saying. I'm not going to try to explain it to you, but once again, you are jumping ahead of yourself and making assumptions about what others are trying to say. I think you will find a great deal more peace in life if you would actually try to understand what others are saying to you instead of quickly skimming and then jumping to conclusions. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sun 08/31/08 04:10 PM
|
|
So why you would get all defensive or feel that I am accusing you of something is within your own mind. I was addressing the subject, not the messengers. Seriously Spider, I think you jumped to conclusions here. I was not attacking you. How did you get that impression? I would have addressed you directly or quoted your post if I were talking directly to you. You have a right to your opinions but you don't have a right to pass laws against acts that do not violate the rights of others or harm others just because you feel they are "wrong" or a "sin." People should learn to mind their own business and live their own lives and allow other people to do the same as long as they are not harming others. You suddenly changed the subject of the thread to this about people establishing laws against "sin". What could have prompted that? For a Christian to say "Homosexuality is a sin", that's a different kind of judging called "discerning", which is proper and needs to be done by all people Now that seems like a fairly reasonable assumption on my part. Perhaps you meant to use "you" as an impersonal pronoun? I suggest using "one" as it avoids any misunderstandings. One has a right to one's opinions but one doesn't have a right to pass laws against acts that do not violate the rights of others or harm others just because one feels they are "wrong" or a "sin." Or "Everyone"... Everyone has a right to their opinions but they don't have a right to pass laws against acts that do not violate the rights of others or harm others just because they feel they are "wrong" or a "sin." It still seems fairly obvious that your comments were a dig at me, but that's okay. If they were a dig at me, you were simply speaking from a position of ignorance as someone who doesn't know me or what I believe.  It was NOT a dig at you. (Everything is not about you Spider.) As I said before, If I am addressing you personally, I will use your screen name or quote your post as I am in this post. And I did not change the subject of what I was expressing. We do indeed judge people and pass laws.. as a society, against acts that are HARMFUL TO OTHERS. My "you" was plural. I was addressing anyone who thinks they have a right to pass laws against what they feel is a sin. I was talking directly to a group of people, not just YOU. That is the way I express myself. I am sorry you took it personal. JB |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Sun 08/31/08 04:22 PM
|
|
Spider, feel free to explain it to me. Or clarify. You always have that option. You know where I stand on the issue of "discerning" or judging others outside of a court of law. That’s how a lot of people have gotten strung up throughout history. If I misinterpreted your position, please feel free to elaborate.
Here is my funny quote of the day on the topic. "If I judged people, I certainly wouldn't have any friends." Ed Wood-B Film Director |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bible aside, God gave us a conscience for a reason. If you consider something wrong, it's probably wrong for you. And we can dismiss the Bible, but it still exists. God's word is eternal. He's waiting for us to accept it or not, that's everyone's choice. I choose to accept God's word at its face value. Others do not. I am presuaded that everyone should study the Bible to gain true knowledge about God. We need this incomparable book for a right understanding of the great redemptive work of God culminating in the Advent, Atonement, Ascension, and Second Advent of God's only begotton Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. We need the Bible to teach us how ot live right and how to prepare for death and eternity. We need this Book to tell us of future events, how this age will end, the final overthrow of evil and destructive powers, and the coming Kindgom of Jesus Christ. If you hate the doctrine, what do you have to be afraid of? What is the issue that makes you hate the doctrine? Perhaps you hate the doctrines of the church because they make you uncomfortable? They do that, at times. It's God knocking on the door to your heart. Im not afraid of anything, sir. Basically Im just annoyed with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bible aside, God gave us a conscience for a reason. If you consider something wrong, it's probably wrong for you. And we can dismiss the Bible, but it still exists. God's word is eternal. He's waiting for us to accept it or not, that's everyone's choice. I choose to accept God's word at its face value. Others do not. I am presuaded that everyone should study the Bible to gain true knowledge about God. We need this incomparable book for a right understanding of the great redemptive work of God culminating in the Advent, Atonement, Ascension, and Second Advent of God's only begotton Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. We need the Bible to teach us how ot live right and how to prepare for death and eternity. We need this Book to tell us of future events, how this age will end, the final overthrow of evil and destructive powers, and the coming Kindgom of Jesus Christ. If you hate the doctrine, what do you have to be afraid of? What is the issue that makes you hate the doctrine? Perhaps you hate the doctrines of the church because they make you uncomfortable? They do that, at times. It's God knocking on the door to your heart. I have nothing to be afraid of. I hate the doctrine because it is a bald faced lie in my opinion. The Bible is not "God's word." It was written by men. In fact I believe that the entire New Tesatment if pure fiction written by Calpurnius Piso (pronounced Peso) family, who were Roman aristocrats. The New Testament and all the characters in it - Jesus, all the Josephs, all the Marys, all the disciples, apostles, Paul, John the Baptist - all are fictional. The Pisos created the story and the characters; they tied the story to a specific time and place in history; and they connected it with some peripheral actual people, such as the Herods, Gamaliel, the Roman procurators, etc. But Jesus and everyone involved with him were created (that is fictiotional!) characters. The entire religion is based on fiction. So that is why I hate the doctrine. JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cool beans. Annoyance is good.
|
|
|
|
|
