Bible Questions

[emilynghiem]

Your problem is a failure to comprehend by leaping to idiotic conclusions. You can pray in public all you like. However you cannot co-opt public government meetings and use them to advance your own personal beliefs by forcing others to waste their time waiting while you pray. That you are incapable of understanding this salient point and feel the desperate need to use obscenities while stomping on the rights of others says volumes about what you really are. The mere fact that other Christians here are taking you to task should be warning enough but instead you are blind to both their advice and wisdom.

No, my problem is that you are a whiny little bitch.

You argued that prayer, in and of itself, is offensive, and thus prohibited under the Constitution. I shoved your face in the fact that I get free reign to offend whiny little bitches even in public forums. You then tried to claim that I would get offended and demand the government protect from the prayer of a Satanist. I personally, not being a whiny little bitch, would have no problem if a Satanist got elected to be mayor and started every city council meeting dedicating the proceedings to whatever he thinks Satan is.

Unfortunately, for him, the whiny little bitches would object to that, and force him to comply with what the Supreme Court has ruled is acceptable under those circumstances. The whiny little bitch test has three parts, prayer must have a secular legislative purpose, must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion. If you want to try and learn the whiny little bitch test is commonly refereed to as the Lemon test.

You really should stop being a whiny little bitch, you aren't impressing anyone, especially when I can actually cite case law to prove how wrong you are.

Dear QW: Here is where calling DT a "WLB" detracts from any of your valid legal arguments and logical points you are trying to make. If it is not helping but hurting your ability to make your points, then is your real purpose to vocally express complaint, hurt the feelings of DT and flip the insult/offense you feel back into this person's court? Is your purpose to protest to the same degree you are outraged as a personal affront?

if so that is completely separate from the logical/legal arguments you are trying to make.

I would rather see you address these two issues separately so you can succeed at resolving them.

running them together does not work.
you can end up venting, if that is your primary need here and I understand and sympathize with your feelings of insult, but it obfuscates and defeats any focus you could have directed toward the logical and legal arguments which I believe deserve full audience. These are logical conscientious people you are addressing so I hate to see that wasted due to emotions getting in the way.

QW this is why forgiveness is necessary to set the stage before we attempt corrections.
If we are still projecting ill will and feelings from past issues, it clouds and blocks our ability to resolve the actual problems that caused them in the first place.

Can we address the emotional insult first, and then work on the issues and content per se.

I think this would go more smoothly and effectively, whereas the personal/verbal insults just make you look bad and discredit any constructive intent you have; it reflects on the speaker.

I am interested in your points. I believe all issues of church-state conflicts should be rsolved by consensus with the parties affected so these issues do not get volatile and insulting to anyone or escalate to the point of violating people's freedom if the conflicts go unresolved.

I am happy to discuss how to resolve conflicts, and how to prevent the emotional offenses.

Thanks, QW
Let's keep trying to work this out.

 

[Gracie]

So the point of the sacrifice of Christ is to break the vicious cycle of retribution for past wrongs by divine forgiveness which allows correction and healing. So there can be peace and justice restored for all humanity, regardless of the past.
This doesn't mean to blindly forget the injustice, but calls for restitution and equity restored.
the forgiveness is on the spiritual level, where grace is given unconditionally not earned.
And from that divine healing and peace then the corrections/restitution follows by free will.
so after we restore good faith relations and harmony among humanity, then we can work together civilly to correct prevent and deter future problems by learning from the past.

Receiving healing grace and salvation through Christ Jesus means to establish restorative justice and embrace it in all our relationships and institutions where all nations/tribes are united in the spirit of truth, bringing peace and freedom to all, for equal and lasting justice. This is the Kingdom of God to be established on earth as it is in heaven, as God's will is done.

I like that, what you wrote. Made sense to me. Filed and noted. Thank you.

Ok. Carry on.

 

[emilynghiem]

He keeps putting words in my mouth, and attacking me based on them. If you don't like me calling him on it get him to stop doing it.

No problem, I think you SHOULD stop and correct whenever this happens.
Half of it is due to just plain misunderstanding what you were trying to say.

Half of it is from already assuming and questioning your intent as negative.
For that part, both of you might have to agree to forgive each other first for that perception of each other, and not start off with a negative spin or bias when you reply to each other. That is a mutual effort, where you are both tend to come at each other that way.

The miscommunication part is sincere and would happen anyway even between people
trying to accommodate each other. Those crossed signals and mixed messages are easier to untangle without the negative spins added on.

Maybe if we stick to the content of what is being said, the emotional attachments will drop in the process. those are probably carried over from the longstanding issues we are bringing up in this forum, and not part of the solutions that can come out of our discussions here.

I believe this process can lead to insightful resolution, and thank you for sticking with it.

I have ideas for resolving issues of prayer in schools and public institutions, etc. (also how to deal with sex ed, creation/evolution, and religion itself) if you would like to discuss solutions.
We all know the problems because people don't agree, but what solutions can we agree on?

 

[hortysir]

Ok...I have made a decision and I think those who have been so kind in assisting me deserve an explanation the best I can give. It may not make sense...then again, maybe it will. And I have a request as well. I still will need help from time to time if I think of something or read or hear something and I am not sure of an answer. I can google, yes. But I can ask here, too. However, that will come in time...and no clear cut answer of WHEN or even IF.

I have decided to not read the bible any further. The more I read, the more the relationship with the childlike awe and friendliness and trust and comfort becomes threatented. I am familiar with some of the books of the bible, but I have never read it from front to back...nor do I plan to.

My relationship with God has always been between He and I. I chat with Him in my garden..or under the stars. I feel Him in everything I touch...my crystals (He made them so beautiful), His birds that sing to me, His bugs that come visit me, the trees and leaves whispering to me. I have always just talked to Him as I talk to you, to my friends, to people I am comfortable around. Just people. I never understood the phrase "I am a God fearing woman/man" because I never feared Him. I love Him and I know He loves me. Reading the bible will change all that. I will become more "aware" of what He is, what He can do, how I should be more humble perhaps or wrongs I have committed, etc. In short....the bible is the apple. I want to stay the innocent child in chatting with the God I love...not read things that will scare me or turn me away from how I always have been with Him. Nothing could do that, but once you see something...you can't UNsee it, if you know what I mean. So taking another bite out of that apple...I will become like Adam and Eve and the bible to me is that apple tree.

With that said..I DO want to read portions of it that show His compassion and mercy and love for His children. Us. Me. What gospels would you recommend for me to read? Proverbs? I like that one...full of wisdom and common sense. But what others are there I am not aware of?

"Where more than one is gathered in MY name, there I will be also"
Fellowship is important.
A physical church isn't required.

Take your time on the Bible-reading part. It is a very important part.
The OT may be a bit harsh for you if you want to focus on our Loving Father.

Read the letters from Paul or John in the NT.

Most importantly, when considering some in this thread and how you choose to worship.......


Check out Romans 14

 

[Gracie]

Perfect thing I needed to read, Hortysir, in that link. Thank you!!!

 

[koshergrl]

Romans, Acts, Corinthians...all fascinating to our modern sensibilities, because Paul is addressing different churches and issues among believers and authority/administration of the church. All still vibrant and completely applicable.

 

[koshergrl]

I am looking forward to hearing what you think of Romans, Gracie.

 

[The Irish Ram]

So foxy, here's a question...when somebody says they want to believe but just can't bring themselves to do it, how do you advise them?

I'm not foxy, well, I am a little , but I'd suggest prayer.
Ask the Holy Father to send the Holy Spirit to convict them. It's not our job. It is the Holy Spirit's job. Our job is a co-mission to spread the Gospel, and to pray.

 

[koshergrl]

Awesome. That's what I do but just like to touch in with others in case I'm missing something.

 

[emilynghiem]

Perfect thing I needed to read, Hortysir, in that link. Thank you!!!

Dear Gracie: My favorite interpretation of the Bible, which puts it all in simple perspective, came from a Buddhist Monk. He said the OT was about living by the letter of the law,
and the NT was about living by the spirit of the law. Isn't that the most beautiful Wisdom?

If you read, hear and speak all things with love there is no need to fear.
Perfect love casts out all fear.

Most of the negative things in the Bible are about the past, the OT serves to teach us from
the past, the war and destruction caused by the letter of the law corrupted by political greed for power. We still see that going on today which is carried from past wars never resolved. So that part is a warning why we should not abuse law for "retributive justice" or judgment or punishment, because we reap what we sow. As we judge others, others will judge us. And it goes in a vicious cycle causing war and suffering, or hell on earth.
We need to forgive and learn from the past, so we don't keep repeating the same mistakes.

The positive message in the Bible is about living by the spirit of the laws
or love of truth, justice with mercy, and peace for all humanity for a lasting future.
So this is "restorative justice" which Christ Jesus represents and fulfills, and
breaks the past cycle of retributive justice (of collective sin/karma/suffering
passed down from generation to generation).

So whatever fear you might feel, if you pray and ask help with forgiveness
of the conflict or division in your mind, the fear will be overcome and
replaced with peace and faith that there is a better way to focus to solve problems.

So you will find an answer to any problem that you may fear could trouble you.
Just keep asking and you shall receive.
Keep forgiving the past, and answers and corrections will come to improve the future.

Let your love be greater than your fear!
It only takes one tiny crack of light, even a single match, to cast out the darkness filling an entire cave (another parable, this one from a Korean monk)

 

[emilynghiem]

So foxy, here's a question...when somebody says they want to believe but just can't bring themselves to do it, how do you advise them?

I'm not foxy, well, I am a little , but I'd suggest prayer.
Ask the Holy Father to send the Holy Spirit to convict them. It's not our job. It is the Holy Spirit's job. Our job is a co-mission to spread the Gospel, and to pray.

I agree to pray for what steps to take or things to ask next.
some other things may be praying for
1. wisdom or clarity, prayer to remove confusion fear or misunderstanding from the past
2. forgiveness or better understanding of whatever in someone's past
could be causing them to doubt, reject or not let go [or praying to understand
what it is that is bothering or stopping them, what questions do they have
they need answered, what issues do they need resolved for their minds to be ready?]
3. praying for understanding, for an example of whatever it is they
don't get, for a parable or a real life experience to come to mind
that can help explain where they see what it means in real terms to them personally
it can be a relationship in their life that would be made different by forgiveness etc.
4. praying to be prepared for change, for thanks in advance for whatever blessings or
whatever greater knowledge or understanding they are about to receive.
so even where you don't know what to ask or do, just praying for thanks
unconditionally for fellowship or whatever can help release the fear or confusion in the way.

any of these may trigger their minds to be more open and receive understanding/insight

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Your problem is a failure to comprehend by leaping to idiotic conclusions. You can pray in public all you like. However you cannot co-opt public government meetings and use them to advance your own personal beliefs by forcing others to waste their time waiting while you pray. That you are incapable of understanding this salient point and feel the desperate need to use obscenities while stomping on the rights of others says volumes about what you really are. The mere fact that other Christians here are taking you to task should be warning enough but instead you are blind to both their advice and wisdom.

No, my problem is that you are a whiny little bitch.

You argued that prayer, in and of itself, is offensive, and thus prohibited under the Constitution. I shoved your face in the fact that I get free reign to offend whiny little bitches even in public forums. You then tried to claim that I would get offended and demand the government protect from the prayer of a Satanist. I personally, not being a whiny little bitch, would have no problem if a Satanist got elected to be mayor and started every city council meeting dedicating the proceedings to whatever he thinks Satan is.

Unfortunately, for him, the whiny little bitches would object to that, and force him to comply with what the Supreme Court has ruled is acceptable under those circumstances. The whiny little bitch test has three parts, prayer must have a secular legislative purpose, must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion. If you want to try and learn the whiny little bitch test is commonly refereed to as the Lemon test.

You really should stop being a whiny little bitch, you aren't impressing anyone, especially when I can actually cite case law to prove how wrong you are.

Dear QW: Here is where calling DT a "WLB" detracts from any of your valid legal arguments and logical points you are trying to make. If it is not helping but hurting your ability to make your points, then is your real purpose to vocally express complaint, hurt the feelings of DT and flip the insult/offense you feel back into this person's court? Is your purpose to protest to the same degree you are outraged as a personal affront?

if so that is completely separate from the logical/legal arguments you are trying to make.

I would rather see you address these two issues separately so you can succeed at resolving them.

running them together does not work.
you can end up venting, if that is your primary need here and I understand and sympathize with your feelings of insult, but it obfuscates and defeats any focus you could have directed toward the logical and legal arguments which I believe deserve full audience. These are logical conscientious people you are addressing so I hate to see that wasted due to emotions getting in the way.

QW this is why forgiveness is necessary to set the stage before we attempt corrections.
If we are still projecting ill will and feelings from past issues, it clouds and blocks our ability to resolve the actual problems that caused them in the first place.

Can we address the emotional insult first, and then work on the issues and content per se.

I think this would go more smoothly and effectively, whereas the personal/verbal insults just make you look bad and discredit any constructive intent you have; it reflects on the speaker.

I am interested in your points. I believe all issues of church-state conflicts should be rsolved by consensus with the parties affected so these issues do not get volatile and insulting to anyone or escalate to the point of violating people's freedom if the conflicts go unresolved.

I am happy to discuss how to resolve conflicts, and how to prevent the emotional offenses.

Thanks, QW
Let's keep trying to work this out.

Is he detracting from my points? I doubt it, but I am pretty sure that every time he feels a need to attack a position I do not have it detracts from whatever point he thinks he has, so I like to point it out when he does it. I am not here to work out my differences with the whiner, I am here to mock him until he stops mocking and misrepresenting my beliefs.

 

[Avatar4321]

Is he detracting from my points? I doubt it, but I am pretty sure that every time he feels a need to attack a position I do not have it detracts from whatever point he thinks he has, so I like to point it out when he does it. I am not here to work out my differences with the whiner, I am here to mock him until he stops mocking and misrepresenting my beliefs.

But is that what Christ would do? The Atonement of Jesus Christ is about reconciliation. Not only between us and God but also with one another.

How are we supposed to expect the full blessings and power that comes from faith in Christ if we don't even have faith to let them mock us and turn the other cheek? How do we defeat evil if we return evil instead of returning good instead?

When Christ was being tortured, His killers mocked Him. Did He mock them in return? No. He forgave them. I'd like to think that some of those people He forgave that day eventually accepted Jesus as their Lord. Not because He mocked them, but because somehow He found a way to love even the people who were killing Him.

It's not enough that was as Christians be familiar with the Bible. It's not enough we have revelation from God. We need to live the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the best of our ability. His Atonement was not just the power to clean us from sin, but also the power to overcome our sins and become Holy, line upon line and precept upon precept.

How many people fail to come to Christ because of our sins and inaction? How much blood is on our hands because we know better but fail to act. We can truly be endowed with power from God if we will heed His voice and actually follow Him. "If you love me, keep my Commandments". If we don't love Him, or our fellow man, what good is anything we learn from the scriptures?

 

[koshergrl]

Christ didn't seek reconciliation with demons, however. Nor did he attempt to reason with those committed to denying him. He didn't attempt to reason with Pontius Pilate...and when he reprimanded people for being wrong, he wasn't always gentle. He was quite blunt and declarative.

 

[Gracie]

I think God sent me a Daffodil last night.

 

[emilynghiem]

Is he detracting from my points? I doubt it, but I am pretty sure that every time he feels a need to attack a position I do not have it detracts from whatever point he thinks he has, so I like to point it out when he does it. I am not here to work out my differences with the whiner, I am here to mock him until he stops mocking and misrepresenting my beliefs.

I mean that YOUR reactions and side remarks are also detracting from your points.
The things you say make you look bad, reflecting on you.

The Bible warns it is not the food we eat that defiles us, but the words from our mouths.

Why not work out the differences, since these issues are more important to resolve?

If you are trying to 'mock him until he stops mocking me'
doesn't that just go in circles? Isn't the best way to stop any mocking also to stop it
and stick to the content instead?

I'm certain your beliefs and your commitment to them will find more clear expression
in the process of discussing the actual issues and how we may propose to resolve them.

Issues of prayer and religious matters mixed with public policy and institutions are very important to resolve. it is only going to be settled by including everyone's input so we take the best of all the ideas, and don't discredit or dismiss anyone's views who is affected.

These other personal issues you may have with each other will take care of themselves.
Can we stick to the content and not haggle over the other things that will pass?

I am interested in knowing more about what you believe and how this applies to solutions to problems in practice in society. why don't we talk about that? in the process, your beliefs will be clarified instead of assumptions being made back and forth. You both seem sincere and committed in what you believe, so why not focus on exploring that?

If your only goal is to haggle back and forth, I think that is a waste and a shame.
Clearly you have content to your character and beliefs that are more worthy to look into.
Can we please go into more depth and detail and not stagnate on things on the surface?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is he detracting from my points? I doubt it, but I am pretty sure that every time he feels a need to attack a position I do not have it detracts from whatever point he thinks he has, so I like to point it out when he does it. I am not here to work out my differences with the whiner, I am here to mock him until he stops mocking and misrepresenting my beliefs.

But is that what Christ would do? The Atonement of Jesus Christ is about reconciliation. Not only between us and God but also with one another.

How are we supposed to expect the full blessings and power that comes from faith in Christ if we don't even have faith to let them mock us and turn the other cheek? How do we defeat evil if we return evil instead of returning good instead?

When Christ was being tortured, His killers mocked Him. Did He mock them in return? No. He forgave them. I'd like to think that some of those people He forgave that day eventually accepted Jesus as their Lord. Not because He mocked them, but because somehow He found a way to love even the people who were killing Him.

It's not enough that was as Christians be familiar with the Bible. It's not enough we have revelation from God. We need to live the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the best of our ability. His Atonement was not just the power to clean us from sin, but also the power to overcome our sins and become Holy, line upon line and precept upon precept.

How many people fail to come to Christ because of our sins and inaction? How much blood is on our hands because we know better but fail to act. We can truly be endowed with power from God if we will heed His voice and actually follow Him. "If you love me, keep my Commandments". If we don't love Him, or our fellow man, what good is anything we learn from the scriptures?

Not being Jesus I do not pretend to know what he would do. I know I will not let someone whose only intent is to make fun of believers walk away just because he can cite Bible verses about rolling over like a scared puppy.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is he detracting from my points? I doubt it, but I am pretty sure that every time he feels a need to attack a position I do not have it detracts from whatever point he thinks he has, so I like to point it out when he does it. I am not here to work out my differences with the whiner, I am here to mock him until he stops mocking and misrepresenting my beliefs.

I mean that YOUR reactions and side remarks are also detracting from your points.
The things you say make you look bad, reflecting on you.

The Bible warns it is not the food we eat that defiles us, but the words from our mouths.

Why not work out the differences, since these issues are more important to resolve?

If you are trying to 'mock him until he stops mocking me'
doesn't that just go in circles? Isn't the best way to stop any mocking also to stop it
and stick to the content instead?

I'm certain your beliefs and your commitment to them will find more clear expression
in the process of discussing the actual issues and how we may propose to resolve them.

Issues of prayer and religious matters mixed with public policy and institutions are very important to resolve. it is only going to be settled by including everyone's input so we take the best of all the ideas, and don't discredit or dismiss anyone's views who is affected.

These other personal issues you may have with each other will take care of themselves.
Can we stick to the content and not haggle over the other things that will pass?

I am interested in knowing more about what you believe and how this applies to solutions to problems in practice in society. why don't we talk about that? in the process, your beliefs will be clarified instead of assumptions being made back and forth. You both seem sincere and committed in what you believe, so why not focus on exploring that?

If your only goal is to haggle back and forth, I think that is a waste and a shame.
Clearly you have content to your character and beliefs that are more worthy to look into.
Can we please go into more depth and detail and not stagnate on things on the surface?

He started a thread about the issue, and walked away when he found out I actually knew what I was talking about and that he couldn't get me angry by pretending I would be upset if the government allowed other people to do the same thing I want to do. My side remarks are intended to emphasize that he is hypocritical, uninformed, incapable of admitting he is wrong, and likes to pretend he is the responsible adult but is actually immature and whiny.

 

[koshergrl]

And it behooves us to always check ourselves before we slide into anger and condemnation of people...I have to watch myself for profanity (obviously this is something I struggle with) and I don't just mean swearing....we're supposed to be sober and sedate and to always set a good example.

But I have a hard time believing that means we must never point out depravity, cruelty, stupidity, ignorance or when someone is doing the devil's work.

 

[emilynghiem]

He started a thread about the issue, and walked away when he found out I actually knew what I was talking about and that he couldn't get me angry by pretending I would be upset if the government allowed other people to do the same thing I want to do. My side remarks are intended to emphasize that he is hypocritical, uninformed, incapable of admitting he is wrong, and likes to pretend he is the responsible adult but is actually immature and whiny.

Dear QW: Thank you for explaining the circumstances.
Can we agree that HIS behavior and reaction to and perceptions of you
are HIS problem and reflect on HIS issues, not you?

You are only responsible for what YOU say, think or do.
I understand you want to clarify that you are NOT what this person insinuated.

But the more you worry about HIS doings and harp on this,
this starts to reflect on you, as projecting outside yourself.

That is why I ask let's start from what YOU believe and focus on the strong points
there that you want to share and enforce to solve problems.

Not waste time on what you DON'T mean and DON'T believe, that can go on forever,
in circles on things that aren't true anyway so why bother.

If he comes across as immature and whiny that is HIS problem to fix not yours.
I would be more concerned YOU don't come across as "bitchy" to the point
you look like a hypocrite even if your point WAS to dish it right back, and
to mock the mockery, etc. It still makes both people look bad or immature
if you can't stay focused on the content but have to play one-upmanship games.

I understand there are natural orders in relations and society, where people who
are used to being in charge run into these things, and start seeing who can bark
the other person down to establish the pecking order in the pack.

You don't need to do that with me.
I already respect that you have strong opinions, and you've had experiences in the past where this is how you respond to perceived attacks. I'm okay with that, as long as it
does not interfere or impede our ability to address the real content and issues at hand.

This other political stuff about communication and who was dissing who is another
level or factor we can talk about also; it is important but it is not the real "content"
of what is going on with religion and public policy, church and state relations.

What we are going through here is WHY we cannot resolve the content issues
because we get caught up in the person politics.

So this is a key issue also, I understand we do need to resolve and agree how to
communicate so this sort of run-in doesn't happen and block the whole interaction
from being productive.

QW can we go back and try again, starting with what you said about public officials leading a meeting by starting with a prayer whether it is Christian or Satanic or whatever.

What are the objections on principle, how do you propose we resolve this,
and does it make a difference if the oath or requirement or activity is biased
toward one faith or another?

Can you elaborate on what you said, and explain past conflicts/experiences you've run into with others, the problems you have with other people and the solutions you propose?

If we know the whole context of where you are coming from, there is no need for any insults or attacks or rejection. Can we try to explore the actual issues without triggering any defensive or offensive reactions, and/or try to work those out on the side if they come up.

If we can manage to address BOTH at the same time, this is what we are asking our church and state leaders to do when dealing with the same. So it is good that we practice what we preach if we want other people to straighten out these messes instead of fighting politically.

Can you tell me more about your background experiences or ideas handling these issues?
Where are you coming from, in your own words, so it is not misportrayed or painted?
Thanks QW
I appreciate what you bring to the forum to share with me and others
and just don't want that lost in the same politics that is FU this country. okay?