• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blindfaith

God's Tornado
Feb 9, 2002
5,775
89
59
Home of the Slug
✟7,755.00
Faith
Non-Denom
La Bonita, if you don't like what Knight posted, then don't respond. Trying to pick a fight over an email his wife sent him is ridiculous. My mama taught me if I don't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all. ??

This forum is not up for debate. If you want to debate, then go to another forum that is open for it.

btw Knight - I appreciate the post.
 
Upvote 0

Knight

Knight of the Cross
Apr 11, 2002
3,395
117
52
Indiana
Visit site
✟4,472.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
La Bonita Zorilla said:
Debate is necessary because there is not universal agreement that it was an awesome post.
As we've already discussed, it is not necessary for you to agree with this statement. However, you must also allow that those who do agree with it are going to oppose your opinion.

BTW, the day there is universal agreement among people on any single issue I will be very surprised.
 
Upvote 0

La Bonita Zorilla

Diana's Quiver Bearer
Mar 25, 2003
2,303
76
51
New York
Visit site
✟2,855.00
Faith
Methodist
kimber1 said:
it was meant as an edification thing and should be treated as such.
If so, it fails to do so. The applicable dictionary definition of edification here is "instruction to improve spirituality" and the article does precisely the opposite by encouraging bad behavior and smugness among Christians.
 
Upvote 0

La Bonita Zorilla

Diana's Quiver Bearer
Mar 25, 2003
2,303
76
51
New York
Visit site
✟2,855.00
Faith
Methodist
Knight said:
As we've already discussed, it is not necessary for you to agree with this statement. However, you must also allow that those who do agree with it are going to oppose your opinion.
As they certainly should. I have no problem with that whatsoever.
 
Upvote 0

Knight

Knight of the Cross
Apr 11, 2002
3,395
117
52
Indiana
Visit site
✟4,472.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
La Bonita Zorilla said:
If so, it fails to do so. The applicable dictionary definition of edification here is "instruction to improve spirituality" and the article does precisely the opposite by encouraging bad behavior and smugness among Christians.
In your opinion......
 
Upvote 0

JOYfulbeliever

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2002
2,943
73
✟3,922.00
Faith
Baptist
La Bonita Zorilla said:
If so, it fails to do so. The applicable dictionary definition of edification here is "instruction to improve spirituality" and the article does precisely the opposite by encouraging bad behavior and smugness among Christians.

I'm not sure how this "encourages bad behavior". I guess that is entirely your opinion.

Personally, I thought the OP was AWESOME! Thanks for sharing it, Knight.
 
Upvote 0

La Bonita Zorilla

Diana's Quiver Bearer
Mar 25, 2003
2,303
76
51
New York
Visit site
✟2,855.00
Faith
Methodist
JOYfulbeliever said:
I'm not sure how this "encourages bad behavior".
The article states:

Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights.

Which is a blatant falsehood as in no way are courts stripping "Christians" of all their rights, and certainly most Christians know that, so, they can't be "sick and tired" of something that is not happening.


Now a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying.

Of course no such thing is happening whatsoever. No one is saying "stop praying". What is being said is "stop uttering sectarian prayer in official context as agents of government" which is quite different.


The silent majority has been silent too long.. it's time we let that one or two who scream loud enough to be heard, that the vast majority don't care what they want.. it is time the majority rules!
Blatant bullying and advocacy of tyranny of the majority. Not very much in the spirit of Christian love, eh?




[font=Times New Roman, Times]
you are no longer going to take our rights away .. we are fighting back.. and we WILL WIN!
[/font]


Postulating a falsehood again, cheerleading, and hyperbole. Again, none of it in context of Christian ethics, but brimming over with arrogance and pride. Shameful.


[font=Times New Roman, Times]
After all the God you have the right to denounce is on our side!
[/font]


Quite obviously not, per the scripture I cited above.


[font=Times New Roman, Times]
May 2003 be the year the silent majority is heard and we put God back as the foundation of our families and institutions.
[/font]


A disgusting Nixonian construction and appeal to bigotry and bullying. To put "God back as the foundation" of one's family depends on the individual family members; and, one would hope, churches and other religious institutions would already have God as their foundation. But it is wrong to demand such be done with government and other secular institutions. "The last time we mixed politics and religion, people got burned at the stake."
 
Upvote 0

La Bonita Zorilla

Diana's Quiver Bearer
Mar 25, 2003
2,303
76
51
New York
Visit site
✟2,855.00
Faith
Methodist
kimber1 said:
sounds like you have a personal beef adn i for one do not see why you are taking such offense to this article. it's all about standing up for what we Christians believe in. how is that wrong??????????????????????
Do you believe as Christians we should run roughshod over everybody else? That's exactly what it's advocating.

While we're at it, why not guillotine a few non-Christians or at least stick 'em in concentration camps? That's exactly the mentality being promoted here.
 
Upvote 0

JOYfulbeliever

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2002
2,943
73
✟3,922.00
Faith
Baptist
Whoa! Where in the world did you get that Christians should "run roughshod over everybody else"?

And forgive me, but I don't see the first person in here that has said ANYTHING that would even compare to the horrific events of guillotining a few non-Christians? No one is saying or promoting that! I have never met a true Christian that would agree with that. We are to LOVE, not chop the heads off of those that don't believe.

This thread is NOT debate. It's been said before. I can't believe it has to be said again.

If you don't agree with the OP, fine, but don't put words into the mouths of those that do agree with it. For that matter, if this stuff bothers you so much, I don't understand why you keep coming back to this. The OP was in support of many Christian beliefs. If you don't share those beliefs, it's cool...but don't come in and compare us to putting the heads of non-believers on a guillotine. If you don't like the discussion, no one says you have to continue in it.

And again, this forum is not for debate. If you want to debate this, it's fine. You are more than welcome to...by starting a thread in the debate forums! Let's keep this just a friendly discussion, okay?
 
Upvote 0

La Bonita Zorilla

Diana's Quiver Bearer
Mar 25, 2003
2,303
76
51
New York
Visit site
✟2,855.00
Faith
Methodist
I've said all I need to say about the text of the article in the post a couple above. The article is offensive to me as a Christian and should be to anyone else who takes Christ's words seriously. BTW there is nothing in the general rules nor the rules of this forum about it being "not for debate". So then is the unwritten policy that one can only be politically correct here, then?
 
Upvote 0

Knight

Knight of the Cross
Apr 11, 2002
3,395
117
52
Indiana
Visit site
✟4,472.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Well, you can't please all of the people all of the time.

Your point has been made. You disagree with the sentiment of the article. That's ok. I, and many others here, disagree with your analysis of it. That's ok too.

I have already stated my reasons why I disagree with your analysis. There is no need for me to do so again.
 
Upvote 0

La Bonita Zorilla

Diana's Quiver Bearer
Mar 25, 2003
2,303
76
51
New York
Visit site
✟2,855.00
Faith
Methodist
Not a problem. Did you know both of the heroes you feature quotes from on your sig lines have been characterized as agnostic or atheist (not as an insult though possibly that too, but claimed as forebears by freethinking groups?
 
Upvote 0

dignitized

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2005
24,931
759
✟29,618.00
The founding fathers gave us the first amendment to keep the GOVERMENT out of the church NOT - as some would have you believe - the church out of the government. The founding fathers were notorious for their public displays of faith, so much so that De Toque Ville commented on it in the book Democracy in America.

Its sad that we are being required to hide our faith.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.