How do you battle the "Christian" protestors?

[Vicomte13]

You weren't interested in the details about this video which popped up many many many pages later after a poster kept asking for it but you were intereted in offering your personal input regardless of whether there are concrete facts to support your input?

Yes, that is exactly correct. Obviously.

 

[Vicomte13]

How do I do that

Forget it. I did not notice until now that you are female. Not interested in having a private chat with you, or a public one either. Your thread. Out.

 

[miknik5]

Well there you have it
I guess my soul is less important being that I am a woman

 

[stevenfrancis]

In a way, I understand your dismay. After all, this isn't the method prescribed by Jesus to spread the good news. I'm not going to watch the video. I will accept your testimony that the Christians were expressing convoluted versions of the Gospel, and that these may have been Christians who have self-justified their hatefulness. They are surely in need our prayers. I am also going to go out on a limb, and say that the BLM folks were saying less than kind things about caucasians and most likely law enforcement officers.

Normally it is best to just walk away,

Amen. You should follow your first instinct.

They wearing shirts and yelling on the top of their lungs on how homosexuals, Catholics, jews, and random sinners are in need of repentance or they are going to hell.

True enough. However, I doubt they were "speaking the truth in love", as is our real calling, and I'll bet they weren't including themselves in the list of folks in need of repentance. (turning away from sin). Something all sinners, (i.e. all of us human being types), should be doing in an on-going manner.

The crowds in Union Square blew up and it became a huge debate between them and the crowds. They even had the audacity to be a bit racial by saying negative things about Black people (ironically, some of the protestors were black). It was a huge blow up, with cops around and it reached about 4+ hours.

Debate is good and healthy. It can eventually break down the stereo types and cut through the hype and biases that folks carry around. The first amendment of the constitution of the United States guarantees we can do this, even in the public, so long as we are not physically violent. If you're not of the mind set of one of the groups involved, then there likely wasn't much reason for you to be there, unless is was to provide a Christian example and simply, quietly pray in front of both groups or something like that. Anyway, as long as it was non-violent, it's alright.

As a Christian who is Catholic but is also very close to a Non-denominational-Protestant church, i found this very offensive because of the fact that it was destroying the true of Image that Christ wanted.. and there just comes a time where you can't just let that happen.

Why? They were two groups expressing their frustrations. If you wanted to offer a third point of view, then you could have done that to. Assuming that your third view would have been true Christian Gospel, it may have even had a calming effect on the scene. But, yes, the alternative would indeed be to "let it happen", then go home and pray for all involved. It's the U.S., and they are all protected under the law to assemble and speak without violence.

What kind of biblical verse can you give that rebukes this kind of acts? Do you and your church support this yourself - going into a public area with huge signs "Jesus is God", "Repent" and yell at the top of your lungs as to why they should repent?

You wanted to yell a bible verse at a loud argument between two groups filled with hate?? It wouldn't have had any effect I'm afraid. The things that man have had some effect would require some great courage. We never think of it at the time, but for instance, finding the 1/2 way point between the two groups, kneeling down in front of both groups, and beginning to pray a rosary, for instance, without speaking to either group about anything whatsoever, unless they asked you something. The the visible witness of prayer in peace. Who knows what may have resulted from that. I've personally seen it work wonders between pro-life/pro-choice people when you're not being accusative to anyone. Not saying anything to anyone. Not shouting anything. Just simply holding your beads, and praying while the world swirls around you. A blessed witness to all. The Holy Spirit takes care of the rest.

 

[Ronald]

Here's what GOD would say about it:
Who gave man his mouth?

Thanks, that's better, short and focused to the point!
He gave man a mouth, but he seems to use his ears more when he's communicating to a woman, because she can talk and talk and talk and sometimes a man can't follow what the heck she's talking about.

 

[miknik5]

Thanks, that's better, short and focused to the point!
He gave man a mouth, but he seems to use his ears more when he's communicating to a woman, because she can talk and talk and talk and sometimes a man can't follow what the heck she's talking about.

Out of man came woman...
And GOD created man, but HE called both the male and the female, "man"...

GOD did not separate the two...HE saw them as really ONE flesh...because they indeed came from ONE flesh.
.
But it's the "man" who seems to separate what GOD did not intend to be separated...
And in fact is actually gathering up and in HIS SON as ONE BODY...where there is no longer male or female but ONE and in ONE...

Apart from a woman, a man is NOT tempered
And apart from a man, a woman is NOT tempered

 

[miknik5]

If you think you are "better" than the woman who is the more sensitive of the two, than go for it.

Your mouth is proving that you aren't "better" and aren't "tempered"

You must be proud of your achievements, sir...that you have achieved a higher level of "reasoning and communication skills" above even your own mother!

But what I am hearing with my own ears is actually selective and condescending...

Maybe another woman or a man will agree that because you have said you weren't being condescending that I am the one who must have something wrong with my ears and am just talking and talking and talking but not really listening.,

Or, could it be the other way around?

 

[miknik5]

You do know that any form of communication we might have had in the future, has already been broken down.

Correct?

So, what made you feel that you should continue in "discussing" my communication issues?

 

[miknik5]

It is really not okay to insult and bully posters...

It really isn't...

 

[Vicomte13]

You do know that any form of communication we might have had in the future, has already been broken down.

Correct?

So, what made you feel that you should continue in "discussing" my communication issues?

You were aggressive from the very beginning - certain of viewpoints. Your "sir" is delivered with the tone that a cop delivers it, and your words were spoken with the authority of somebody who is absolutely certain of his - or her - rectitude.
On everything.

Including the errors you were speaking.

I tried a little humor at first, and quite a bit of honesty. And what I heard back was what comes across as the typical doctrinaire Protestant fanatic self-righteousness, just exactly the nonsense that the Jehovah's Witnesses bring to my door.

I always invite them in and have the discussion they want to have, but when they push, I open up the Greek or Hebrew and correct the errors in the translation they use.

Sometimes they come back. Usually they don't.

I don't start by insulting anybody. I encounter your Protestant approach - in all of its bullhorn arrogance and self-righteousness - and I start by trying to chip away at the edges, to point to things, to have a conversation.

That's what I was trying to do. I was willing to have a private conversation with you, to start with text and source, to nail down each peace. You're CERTAIN of things because you simply believe them, which is fine as far as it goes, but you express a certitude that those who see things differently are in some ways wrong, morally, spiritually. That's arrogant and offensive, and when the actual texts are focused on in the original forms, and cross referenced, it does not withstand scrutiny.

I prefer to have such conversations in private, because the purpose is to open the eyes, not to win points before a crowd.

Your response shut me down and took it to the crowd.

THEN I noticed that you were a woman and decided that I didn't want to have what would amount to a long, private conversation with a woman about details that pertain to my own life. You discarded, disregarded, and archly ridiculed my references to the direct miracles I have experienced.

There was precious little chance we were ever going to have a real conversation from the beginning, because you take your understanding, which is quite imperfect, of a translated book you've read, you use this is a template to judge, and you take a very oblique and insulting approach to essentially telling people that their views are unspiritual.

I've seen that movie before more than once. Been in that sort of a conversation more than once. It is as pleasant as getting a root canal. Not interested in having another one.

I could teach you things that you clearly do not know.
But you think you know everything - it is a very Protestant trait.
It's exhausting to deal with, and in the end it's the reason that Protestants go to their churches, fight with each other, then divide and go form more churches, and more, and more. While Catholics go off to theirs and do their thing. And ne'er the twain shall meet.

I've tried for a lifetime to make a bridge across that gap in the different sides of my family. And I have found Protestants to be impossible to have a religious conversation with.

So I decided to can it and walk away.

Apparently you're hurt. When you address people with the air of smug spiritual superiority that you use, you offend people, like me. At that point, we COULD fight with you. The thread is full of people here doing that.

I decided that it's pointless. I've seen the movie before. I don't like the movie. And I'm not going to play.

That's the truth. I said "Out" before but came back because you posted on.

If you're hurt, that's unfortunate. You're going to get hurt again and again, and it isn't because you're being persecuted for Christ. I'm not persecuting you, and I love Christ. It is because you assert things that are not true and you will not accept correction, or even private conversation. So go believe what you want to believe and fight with people. I won't be one of them.

Goodbye and good luck.

 

[Ronald]

GOD did not separate the two...HE saw them as really ONE flesh...because they indeed came from ONE flesh.

Spiritually, the two become one, but they are still two separate individuals. Men and women are different in many ways. We were made to compliment each other, nevertheless, we're wired differently or so to speak. Men have their strengths and women theirs. It is no mystery that throughout history, men gathered together to meet and communicate apart from women and likewise women associate and communicate well with each other. We often think differently or haven't you noticed. Men are more cerebral and women emotional. I could spend a lot of time on this but you must know the problems in communication between men and women? I've been with a lot of women and even with my wife, communication isn't great, but we manage. Now I can call my brother on the phone or a male friend and we are all on the same wave length -- and such is life.

But it's the "man" who seems to separate what GOD did not intend to be separated...
And in fact is actually gathering up and in HIS SON as ONE BODY...where there is no longer male or female but ONE and in ONE...

Yes, spiritually, there is neither Jew nor Gentile, male or female in Christ ... but when we communicate, our flaws, misconceptions, patterns of thoughts, quirks, cause confusion sometimes. We still have the sin nature, sin dwells in the members of our flesh. I admit my flaws come out, my insensitivity, my blunt comments and I've been called rude as well - sorry for that.

Apart from a woman, a man is NOT tempered
And apart from a man, a woman is NOT tempered

This is one of the ways a woman compliments a man, softens him sometimes -- because they are gently, nurturing, kinder, sweeter, less aggressive, etc. Part of a man has a warrior in Him. God made him that way, because man had to fight battles throughout history. If we had the temperament of women, I suppose history would look different -- not necessarily better though. America became free because we fought for it.

 

[miknik5]

One day, man will learn of war no more, sir...
No, history wouldn't look "different".
GOD trained the man in war to prove Israel...
HE did it so as to harvest to HIMSELF those who would remain faithful in THE WAY...

 

[miknik5]

You judge according to the flesh...
And you aren't supposed to do that.
There is nothing "wrong" in me but the only thing that is (according to you) is this idea that as a woman, GOD doesn't have the right to pour out HIS SPIRIT upon the "weaker" vessel if HE chooses?

HE does.
And HE did...
And because HE did, I will speak without fear of speaking.

You came into this thread already with a preconceived notion...and in this, you announced yourself as "innocent" when in fact you weren't.

You can't hide a hidden agenda from GOD.
Therefore, you will have to judge yourself as to why you felt it necessary to give me a lesson on what are men and womens roles in the world

Because when it comes to being in THE BODY, since HE is the HEAD of HIS OWN BODY, HE is able to give gifts to the "members" of HIS BODY (both man and woman) as HE chooses...

Regardless if the man doesn't like it...

 

[miknik5]

You were aggressive from the very beginning - certain of viewpoints. Your "sir" is delivered with the tone that a cop delivers it, and your words were spoken with the authority of somebody who is absolutely certain of his - or her - rectitude.
On everything.

Including the errors you were speaking.

I tried a little humor at first, and quite a bit of honesty. And what I heard back was what comes across as the typical doctrinaire Protestant fanatic self-righteousness, just exactly the nonsense that the Jehovah's Witnesses bring to my door.

I always invite them in and have the discussion they want to have, but when they push, I open up the Greek or Hebrew and correct the errors in the translation they use.

Sometimes they come back. Usually they don't.

I don't start by insulting anybody. I encounter your Protestant approach - in all of its bullhorn arrogance and self-righteousness - and I start by trying to chip away at the edges, to point to things, to have a conversation.

That's what I was trying to do. I was willing to have a private conversation with you, to start with text and source, to nail down each peace. You're CERTAIN of things because you simply believe them, which is fine as far as it goes, but you express a certitude that those who see things differently are in some ways wrong, morally, spiritually. That's arrogant and offensive, and when the actual texts are focused on in the original forms, and cross referenced, it does not withstand scrutiny.

I prefer to have such conversations in private, because the purpose is to open the eyes, not to win points before a crowd.

Your response shut me down and took it to the crowd.

THEN I noticed that you were a woman and decided that I didn't want to have what would amount to a long, private conversation with a woman about details that pertain to my own life. You discarded, disregarded, and archly ridiculed my references to the direct miracles I have experienced.

There was precious little chance we were ever going to have a real conversation from the beginning, because you take your understanding, which is quite imperfect, of a translated book you've read, you use this is a template to judge, and you take a very oblique and insulting approach to essentially telling people that their views are unspiritual.

I've seen that movie before more than once. Been in that sort of a conversation more than once. It is as pleasant as getting a root canal. Not interested in having another one.

I could teach you things that you clearly do not know.
But you think you know everything - it is a very Protestant trait.
It's exhausting to deal with, and in the end it's the reason that Protestants go to their churches, fight with each other, then divide and go form more churches, and more, and more. While Catholics go off to theirs and do their thing. And ne'er the twain shall meet.

I've tried for a lifetime to make a bridge across that gap in the different sides of my family. And I have found Protestants to be impossible to have a religious conversation with.

So I decided to can it and walk away.

Apparently you're hurt. When you address people with the air of smug spiritual superiority that you use, you offend people, like me. At that point, we COULD fight with you. The thread is full of people here doing that.

I decided that it's pointless. I've seen the movie before. I don't like the movie. And I'm not going to play.

That's the truth. I said "Out" before but came back because you posted on.

If you're hurt, that's unfortunate. You're going to get hurt again and again, and it isn't because you're being persecuted for Christ. I'm not persecuting you, and I love Christ. It is because you assert things that are not true and you will not accept correction, or even private conversation. So go believe what you want to believe and fight with people. I won't be one of them.

Goodbye and good luck.

Not talking to you.
Talking to the other man who feels that woman have no right to speak.

 

[Ronald]

One day, man will learn of war no more, sir...
No, history wouldn't look "different".
GOD trained the man in war to prove Israel...
HE did it so as to harvest to HIMSELF those who would remain faithful in THE WAY...

See, you disagree with something basic and simple. If man did not fight in wars against each other, YOU SAY that history would not look different.

Then you don't complete your thought when you said "God trained the man in war to prove Israel" ??? You lost me.
God made man with the ability to defend himself, hunt for food, be aggressive when he needs to NOT ONLY FOR HIS CHOSEN NATION, but for all time -- because sin needs to be restrained.
And your last sentence lost me too. God doesn't use wars to harvest souls to heaven.

 

[miknik5]

See, you disagree with something basic and simple. If man did not fight in wars against each other, YOU SAY that history would not look different.

Then you don't complete your thought when you said "God trained the man in war to prove Israel" ??? You lost me.
God made man with the ability to defend himself, hunt for food, be aggressive when he needs to NOT ONLY FOR HIS CHOSEN NATION, but for all time -- because sin needs to be restrained.
And your last sentence lost me too. God doesn't use wars to harvest souls to heaven.

It was not the way it was supposed to be

You know that a day will come when they will beat their swords into plowshare a


Tell me how I lost you when you should already have in mind God's promised end of all these things

 

[miknik5]

What did you think was happening when man increased on the face of the earth they began to call on the name of the Lord?


Did you think it was because all men accepted their brother (AND SISTER) as their brother and sister and members of one species and family.

Or was it because of the very truth that one oppressed the other


Isn't that the reason why God made a distinction and had to take out from "Egypt" and bring into "Israel" His own "sons" (AND DAUGHTERS)

 

[Ronald]

It was not the way it was supposed to be

That is what is taught. But let me ask you this, why would God put the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden if He did not intend evil to enter into the world? Since He knows the beginning from the end, He knew they would fail the test -- so why put it in there? In addition to that, He also put Satan in the Garden. He put evil in the Garden to tempt them. He set them up for a fall?
They also teach that the Garden was perfect. How could it be with Satan in there tempting you?
This is my take on it. We needed to know good AND evil to appreciate what good is. We wouldn't really know unless we lived without it. We wouldn't know mercy, forgiveness, kindness, goodness, gentleness if we never knew the opposite. We wouldn't appreciate God and all His attributes unless we at times were without them. Isn't that the wonderful part of life, when you are sad, hurting, injured, poor, in need of something and then God sends you what you need? Living without God was necessary for me to realize and appreciate Him now. I know what love is because I've lived without it. I know what forgiveness is, because I needed it. I know what healing is because I was sick.
You really can't say He didn't intend it, especially since He set it up that way knowing we would fail. It was a perfect plan and that's how I see it.

You know that a day will come when they will beat their swords into plowshare a

Yes.

Tell me how I lost you when you should already have in mind God's promised end of all these things

You said something that didn't seem relevant. You said, "HE did it so as to harvest to HIMSELF those who would remain faithful in THE WAY..." So he made man with a warring nature to harvest souls? That doesn't make sense.

 

[Open Heart]

Not sure that I understand your question, since there is a question mark.

I'm suggesting that "non-denominational" is simply a new denomination, a new label. It's just as divisive, certainly.

 

[Freedom Now]

I'm suggesting that "non-denominational" is simply a new denomination, a new label. It's just as divisive, certainly.

Ah, now I get it. That is actually funny.

Now if you declare that "non-denominational" is just another denomination,

would you be so kind to explain to me, what this "non-denominational" denomination consists of.


Thank you so kindly.


May God bless you.