- Apr 25, 2005
- 18,279
- 1,221
- 48
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Upvote
0
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.
eww.... you didn't get crumbs all over his lips, didja?No, I didn't. I am sorry. I was eating breakfast, getting kissed by my husband for Valentine's Day, and trying to type, among several other things. Not an easy combo at all.
do you think that means you are to completely forget your entire past?!?Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but [this] one thing [I do], forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.(Phl 3:13,14)
Love,
Christina
We are not talking about forgetting, we are talking about our distorted view of it inflaming our passions. If we recognize this, that we are being deceived by the evil one, we are better off not to speak of it. Rather we should thank God for our previous walk that brought us to where we are today, and look forward and not back.do you think that means you are to completely forget your entire past?!?
do you think that means you are to completely forget your entire past?!?
looking back in GUILT at past sins hinders us. Examining our past, using our wisdom given to us through experience, does not.Looking back hinders us from moving forward. I am not concerned with my past; yet I am grateful for where I am today. I take no responsibility for where I am. It is only by His Grace that I am even typing to you now.
Love,
Christina
looking back in GUILT at past sins hinders us.
I am sorry UB . . but that sounds an awful lot like someone who prepares everything for a destructive fire, but does not light it himself, rather leaves the match to another to do the actual lighting saying "I am not responsible for what he/she did" when someone else comes along and picks up the match and actually lights the fire . . . . . . .agreed. Again, I'm not responsible for others actions, only my own.
so then. Questioning something is setting up a fire?I am sorry UB . . but that sounds an awful lot like someone who prepares everything for a destructive fire, but does not light it himself, rather leaves the match to another to do the actual lighting saying "I am not responsible for what he/she did" when someone else comes along and picks up the match and actually lights the fire . . . . . . .
Such a one cannot decry all responsibility or even most of the responsiblity for what happens. . .
.
Hey Oblio, a pleasure as always!
There is validity in what you say, in that the rhetoric flies thicker from the EX-whatevers... however, are we not the sum of our experiences?
so then. Questioning something is setting up a fire?
s I stated before, if you felt like it was going to be a problem in a thread, stay out of it.
I admit that some people attack like pit bulls, but thems the breaks.
none of this has anything to do with the issue.It can be. OF course it can be.
It can also be like yelling FIRE in a crowded room.
Where you do something, the conditions under which you do it, have effects that can be anticipated and predicted.
Would you leave a box of matches laying around in a room with a child or where it is easily anticipated a child will be in?
If you do, and the child picks up the box of matches and hurts themselves or evenkills him/herself or someone else, can you honestly say you have absolutely no responsiblity?
If you leave a loaded gun laying on a table, and this is a room a child can have access to, and a child gets to the gun and injurs or kills him/herself or someone else, do you have no responsibility whatseover?
Of course not UB . .
It is very easy to anticipate and predict that a thread with the title you gave it and on this subject would result in a fire being started. . ..
In fact, it was predicted and you were informed of this and you ignored our warnings.
HORSEFEATHERS UB~
Now why would such a thing make any logical sense?
That would be no different than leaving a room where a fire started so it could burn out of control instead of doing something to try to contain it . . .
Would you do that in your house if a fire started before it got out of control?
Or would you try to put it out while it was still small?
I think the later . . .
If someone was in your house while you weren't there and a fire started, would you want them to simply walk away and ignore it? Or would you want them to take whatever measures they could to safely put it out?
I think the later . . . .
See you aren't being logical about this issue in this thread .. .
As you created them to be . . . . .
.
.Originally Posted by thereselittleflower
I am sorry UB . . but that sounds an awful lot like someone who prepares everything for a destructive fire, but does not light it himself, rather leaves the match to another to do the actual lighting saying "I am not responsible for what he/she did" when someone else comes along and picks up the match and actually lights the fire . . . . . . .
Such a one cannot decry all responsibility or even most of the responsiblity for what happens. .
I just come in to "refuel it" every now and then. Gotta stay warm and cozy.so then. Questioning something is setting up a fire?
As I stated before, if you felt like it was going to be a problem in a thread, stay out of it. I admit that some people attack like pit bulls, but thems the breaks.
Excuse me but... are you trying to make a theological analysys of the RCC doctrine out of the selection of items (maybe made in Hong Kong) of some shop somewhere in the US?hello all.
I was waiting for my fiancee to finish getting her hair done, when I came across a place where they were selling statuettes of Mary, Christ, etc...
I ordinarily don't care much about the statuettes... I've seen them before, and RCC believes many things about Mary that I do not, but that is their perogative.
A few left me with a disturbed feeling, however.
For instance:
This statue was titled "Mary instructs Christ." In her hand is a bible.
this one is called "lighting the way."
this one depicts Mary as some kind of warrior. On the chalice, it has JHS... dont' know what that means.
did a count on the statuettes. (the table went around the corner, not pictured.) 3 statuettes of Christ. 2 of Mother Theresa. a dabbling of statuettes of unnamed saints. 58 statuettes of Mary.
Now, whether or not Marian Dogmas of RCC are true or not (I do not wish do debate that.) Even if they ARE true....
does the fact that Marian statuettes out number those of Christ nearly 20 to 1 not speak of the attention given Mary as opposed to Christ?
does the fact that they depict Mary instructing Christ in the scriptures not bug anyone?
The other two photos would require some explaination to me, but they left me feeling oddly bothered.
Another one, not pictured, showed Mary standing on a snake. I know what scripture this is in reference to, but the scripture states
15And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
In which the seed (Christ) would bruise his head (the serpent) NOT Mary.
Perhaps some clarification is in order.
However, I do not want this to turn in to a flame war. Please refrain from doing so.
I simply want to question RCC members on what appears to be error, most tellingly the crushing of the snake, the Mary teaching Christ scripture, and the overwhelming amount of attention paid to Mary in statuettes... as opposed to Jesus.
Any thoughts?
Excuse me but... are you trying to make a theological analysys of the RCC doctrine out of the selection of items (maybe made in Hong Kong) of some shop somewhere in the US?
none of this has anything to do with the issue.
If you don't like the thread, don't post in it. I fail to see why that is a complex subject.
no, not in the slightest. I was refering only to the statuettes that I've seen. I never claimed that RCC theology was based off those statuettes.Excuse me but... are you trying to make a theological analysys of the RCC doctrine out of the selection of items (maybe made in Hong Kong) of some shop somewhere in the US?
Your posts along this line of reasoning given all that has been said to you about this only begs the question . . .
Why are you trying so hard to silence us UB?
.
and if we didn't post in it, then our faith would go misrepresented with every lie and myth out there.none of this has anything to do with the issue.
If you don't like the thread, don't post in it. I fail to see why that is a complex subject.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?