Is Jesus Enough?

[flyfishing]

Onion ring did not read the entire article but what i did read could certianly carry some generilizations. Lots of articles to the church do so. I believe the premise of JESUS being all in all...

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

*MOD IN THE ROOM *

I closed the thread for a bit so I could read through it all without more fuel being added as I read.

It seems to me ya'll are saying the same things just from different sides of the line.

My perception of the initial article was that Jesus is our "all in all" (Col 3:11). He is my provider and He uses my job to meet that provision, however, I have also stepped outside and found money that I had prayed for just that morning.

I think the article was only pointing out how some, while that is not their knowledgble intent depend on other things to meet the description of what only Jesus is. I am to go to Him first to meet any need or expectation. . .not another. While He will use others to meet that, the bottom line is. . .He's the provider. . .no matter what. Whether it comes via another human or drops out of the sky. That is in no way saying that the human is not necessary, because God did put us here, together, to lift and build one-another up.

So, while Jesus is enough (in His own words) He has put us together to work as a body. To comfort, exhort, and edify each other. To speak to each other in Psalms and hymn's, and spiritual songs. To incourage each other with that hope that is within us.

Yes, Jesus is enough. And when we seek His face then we are better equipped for Him to live through us, and move through us and our being will be Him in us. . .movers and shakers of a world that desperately needs to see Him in us.

Please let's cut the insults and let's be an incouragement to each other, as He is to us.

Thank you.

 

[onionring]

So what's going on?

You're shutting down the thread so you can read through it (more or less at your leisure)? Yet not before weighing into it with your own take and interpretation of the article (not exactly impartial "moderation")?

Interesting use of power. ...mmm... I wouldn't mine being a mod.

 

[flyfishing]

So what's going on?

You're shutting down the thread so you can read through it (more or less at your leisure)? Yet not before weighing into it with your own take and interpretation of the article (not exactly impartial "moderation")?

Interesting use of power. ...mmm... I wouldn't mine being a mod.

I believe he may be referring to the debate ocurring between jim and i which was previously settled..

 

[Svt4Him]

So what's going on?

You're shutting down the thread so you can read through it (more or less at your leisure)? Yet not before weighing into it with your own take and interpretation of the article (not exactly impartial "moderation")?

Interesting use of power. ...mmm... I wouldn't mine being a mod.

Yes, but there may actually be things going on that you are not aware of, therefore the mod felt it should be shut down while they had a chance. So actually I would think that was wise. In the event that people complained about any post, it would be inpartial, since they are not taking the complaint as gospel, but choosing to rather read it and see if it conforms to the rules.

 

[Jim B]

Please let's cut the insults and let's be an incouragement to each other, as He is to us.

Aye, Aye, Cap'n. I will do it.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

So what's going on?

You're shutting down the thread so you can read through it (more or less at your leisure)? Yet not before weighing into it with your own take and interpretation of the article (not exactly impartial "moderation")?

Interesting use of power. ...mmm... I wouldn't mine being a mod.

The only reason you got to make this post is because the thread is open again. and I did that because someone did complain about all the flaming. I did not want any more flames to be added to the fuel while I assessed the damage.

I believe I did give my thoughts along w/telling ya'll ta cool it. Did you miss that part of my post?

 

[onionring]

The only reason you got to make this post is because the thread is open again. and I did that because someone did complain about all the flaming. I did not want any more flames to be added to the fuel while I assessed the damage.

I believe I did give my thoughts along w/telling ya'll ta cool it. Did you miss that part of my post?

*sigh*

Sarcasm. Anyone heard of this before?

Of course, the part about "wouldn't mind being a mod" was for real.

How about you getting hot on that for me, Q?!!



btw, What's a guy got to do to become "infamous" (regarding reputation)?

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

*sigh*

Sarcasm. Anyone heard of this before?

And I was being sarcastic back

Of course, the part about "wouldn't mind being a mod" was for real.

How about you getting hot on that for me, Q?!!

Here's a mod application: http://www.christianforums.com/modapply

btw, What's a guy got to do to become "infamous" (regarding reputation)?

Reputations are given as people who like some particular post you've made have clicked on the little hand in the upper right hand corner of your post and told you how much they like it. We only have the option of "famous" though, not infamous. Meaning. . .there is no option to degrade someone.

Quaffer

 

[flyfishing]

And I was being sarcastic back

Here's a mod application: http://www.christianforums.com/modapply

Reputations are given as people who like some particular post you've made have clicked on the little hand in the upper right hand corner of your post and told you how much they like it. We only have the option of "famous" though, not infamous. Meaning. . .there is no option to degrade someone.

Quaffer

Whats up with the blessings quaff??

 

[onionring]

...
Reputations are given as people who like some particular post you've made have clicked on the little hand in the upper right hand corner of your post and told you how much they like it. We only have the option of "famous" though, not infamous. Meaning. . .there is no option to degrade someone.

Quaffer

I feel cheated. In reading the reputation information (in user CP area) it describes several levels of negative reputation. At long last I finally thought I had found a place where I belonged. Whoa-is-me.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Well, onionring. . .I was going to give you some rep's but you've removed the ability for me to do so. Why did you do that? :-( I like being nice

 

[onionring]

Well, onionring. . .I was going to give you some rep's but you've removed the ability for me to do so. Why did you do that? :-( I like being nice

What's the point if you can't be "infamous"?!!

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

What's the point if you can't be "infamous"?!!

You could always have your name changed by a mod to "infamous"

 

[onionring]

You could always have your name changed by a mod to "infamous"

Hmmm....

*A ray of hope shines down on me*
* No....WAIT! It's the cops!!!*

Thanks for the idea, though. Not exactly the same thing (what I'm looking for).

 

[orange]

But for what??For salvation yes!

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

But for what??For salvation yes!

I don't understand the question.

 

[thinbo]

onionring: thanks for the reply, didn't notice any flaming goin on, where was I, oh yeah, the article, man it's an article, i feel no need to swallow things whole in order to find them of worth.

To me, you might as well accuse me of thinking Duff Beer is the best beer in the world, because I like watching The Simpsons. I appreciated it because it spoke to me, it spoke to my own personal experience. I could have written it myself, as could many on this thread.

I would not expect it to speak to you, or your own personal experiences, not because you describe yourself as an Atheist. But because you wouldn't describe yourself as a Christian. (Not a dismissal of your views, just a relevant factor) In truth, I can't talk much of State of Union speeches, having only heard snippets of two, (note the Union Jack above my name).

I would not question the thoroughness of your grammatical parsing. I would question the idea that objectivity can be gained, simply by parsing someone elses words. There is ambiguity in even the simplest of phrases, it is not removed simply by being thorough.

Here's a simple phrase, I would be willing to defend sometime: Objectivity is a myth, albeit a modern one.

(Don't particularly want to hijack this thread)

 

[thinbo]

Is Jesus Enough?

A meaningless question indeed, a trigger, that triggers in me the following:

Have I forgotten what the real point of Christianity is?
Am I building my life on a different foundation to the one, I had, when I first believed?
Has my life simply become about religous routines?
If He is the Vine and I am the branch, am I still connected?

It's not something I would ask of anyone else, directly, but it is something, I need to regularly ask myself.

 

[flyfishing]

Is Jesus Enough?

A meaningless question indeed, a trigger, that triggers in me the following:

Have I forgotten what the real point of Christianity is?
Am I building my life on a different foundation to the one, I had, when I first believed?
Has my life simply become about religous routines?
If He is the Vine and I am the branch, am I still connected?

It's not something I would ask of anyone else, directly, but it is something, I need to regularly ask myself.

I feel just fine with is christ your all in all? is he enough??? That keeps me focused on the love outpouring..