Yet for all that, it is still God's world and I think we need to have grateful hearts, work to stay close to God, and learn to love our fellow man.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Dark:
Yet for all that, it is still God's world and I think we need to have grateful hearts, work to stay close to God, and learn to love our fellow man.

Amen to that. Let's learn to love and respect ALL of our fellow creatures, of all sexes and beliefs, and treat each other as we would like to be treated.

quote:

Originally posted by patrask:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Dark:
Yet for all that, it is still God's world and I think we need to have grateful hearts, work to stay close to God, and learn to love our fellow man.

Amen to that. Let's learn to love and respect ALL of our fellow creatures, of all sexes and beliefs, and treat each other as we would like to be treated.

patrask, No one said otherwise. But there is a moral law that must be observed. Among liberal theologians, however, Jesus' resurrection doesn't matter. And because it doesn't matter, personal moral law gets skewed.

Stretching the example a bit, but maybe I get the point across:
Car drivers ban together to form a new Rules of the Road and decide to permit driving on oncoming lanes of traffic every other day while regular traffic is still traveling against them. The question of safety is hotly debated, but the liberal car drivers win out since they successfully argue that safety can indeed be incorporated into driving the oncoming roads. And they also firmly believe that they have a right to do so because they adhere to the freedom to act according to their conscience, in this case, driving against oncoming traffic on the road.

But there is more: they say the original planners of the Rules of the Road got it all wrong, being bias to those who say that no where does it indicate that such rules MUST be designed on the history of other likened roads thruout the land. They also feel those in power to designate such ancient rules fail to take into account those who differ in their conclusions, and that this is a form of a bias.

And so on and so on-

There is your liberal theologians of today. Actually, that little parody doesn't do justice to the real events as a modern liberal takes on scripture.

"All modern cultures since the beginning of history have understood the concept of universal order--all, that is, excerpt postmodern Western culture. Despite the difference among them, all major civilizations have believed in divine order that lays down the law for both natural and human realms. In the Far East is was called Tao; in ancient Eqypt it was called Ma'at; in Greek philosophy it was called Logos."

==from Colson, How Now shall We Live

quote:

Originally posted by patrask:
Are you just homophobic or what? I am looking at this as an inclusion, not exclusion. Its comin'.

Wasn't the above posted by the fellow who accuses others of name-calling?

PK, That Colson quote hearkens back to, I believe, the first chapter of Lewis' "Mere Christianity".

I am retiring from this den of iniquity, as my wish to understand has reached the limits of it's patience. Be kind to those who do not share your obvious well ingrained training in the absoluteness of scripture.

I have always felt that I understood and shared Ray's philosophy and interpreted that from his writings to mean that Man should strive to better Himself and become more god-like. The god I want to be like will not discriminate against any of His creatures but only asks that they learn to treat each other with mutual respect and honor each his own difference as equally valid in the eyes of that god.

Fare thee well

patrask, unfortunately truth hurts!

Why do you refuse the rugged cross of Christ and rather take-up the balsa wood of your own cross? Oh, please, don't tell me about personal suffering. We all suffer. The whole world suffers. But why don't you place your eyes and heart on the suffering of Christ on the cross? Christ calls out to sinners but just who are they that actually believe in what and why he died for sinners? Stop trying to analyze the passages to death. They were written to be understood as children understand. No skepticism, no bigotry, no wondering about the intent of the authors or how twisted the words have become thru the ages. Like children. Think about what I am saying. You say you wanted to understand. Well, give your patience another edge and think about it when Christ said you must be like children to enter the kingdom of heaven. You must be like children to understand his words.

Jesus demanded that we Repent from our sins, not accept and tolerate and embrace them. If you, patrask, wanted to be god-like, I'd stop calling Christians part of a den of iniquity, for starters. Was Braling II, in a previous posting, right?

There comes a point here as well when arguing and trying to appeal to someone's better judgement falls flat. Then it's time to leave them in God's hands and in the hearts of minds of people who can pray for them.

So you are on my list. Sorry, like it or not, patrask. And hope others put you on theirs, those who with a sincere heart seek first the Kingdom of God where righteousness dwells thru Christ.

No books - no knowledge. No prayer - no faith.
http://www.pnj.com/article/20090113/NEWS01/901130315/1006/NEWS01


...and maybe they should change the name of the school to simply "Rosa!"

quote:

Originally posted by fjp451:
"Rosa!"

I know this county. I grew up in Okaloosa county, right next door, and can attest that Santa Rosa county is extreme right wing. County officials even got the naturist beach at Navarre shut down. This county is a haven for fundamentalist Baptists and Pentecostals.

Doug Spaulding ! So, atheists rule instead?

quote:

Originally posted by Nard Kordell:
So, atheists rule instead?

I don't know - I was just pointing out my familiarity with the county.

Hey, will you be at the play Saturday night? I'd like to see you again.

I wonder if Stuart Gordon will be there - I have a couple things needing an autograph.

[Doug Spaulding ! So, atheists rule instead?]
Ironic Q!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_go_ot/obama_under_god

quote:

Originally posted by fjp451:
So, atheists rule instead?

It's been pointed out to me that the words "so help me God" were not in the Constitution as part of the oath - it was added by George Washington during his oath. Why?

It has to do with George Washington being a Freemason, because the Masonic oaths end in "so help me God".

You're not implying that Pres-elect is of the brotherhood.
"A sign? Here it is!"
"What! Surely you jest."

fjp451 ~
...as mentioned in an earlier posting, Rick Warren, who was also served papers concerning using the name of God, said last Sunday that he WILL NOT use the name of God during his part in the inaugural address. But will use the name of JESUS!

Doug Spaulding ~
Plan to make it to Ice Cream Suit on Saturday. See yah there!

quote:

Originally posted by Nard Kordell:
But will use the name of JESUS!

Doug Spaulding ~
Plan to make it to Ice Cream Suit on Saturday. See yah there!

He should do right by him and use his real name, Yeshua.

See you there!