There is almost zero in here that looks anything like Christ

[bbyrd009]

Also, it would be nice if we all acted civilly to each other.

i completely agree ok, but...while taking steps to insure that happens seems intuitive, it ends up having unforeseen consequences. See, when it becomes against the law to slap me on the cheek, i may now have some "right" that has been "given" to me--that can only be enforced at the point of a gun--but i lose the opportunity to turn the other cheek, see; that now becomes impossible.

That might mean different things to different persons.

yes, therein lies the rub

 

[Job]

I've found in the last two years of posting that it's very possible to know persons. You can tell by the way they write, by what they write, by how they treat others.

This is so true.

 

[Butterfly]

Butterfly,
You can do what you want. "We are supposed to"...
I didn't mean that you cannot approach this as a bigger picture.
I've just never heard of this before and was interested in why you think it's important. Not that you have to explain it to me...

It's something that I had to start doing in my life when I went through my divorce, it would have been so easy to react in the wrong way because of the roller coaster ride we were on as a family. I found that taking a step back and evaluating situations from all angles enabled we to respond in a wiser way. I found it permeating other situations, and also with studying scripture - I do it without thinking about it now - although in forum life I can just take things in context of what is written at times as well.
Butterfly

 

[lforrest]

I would never report anyone. This is not kindergarten and I'm not the age in my avatar. She's just cute and I like her sunglasses -- they look like mine.

I believe we're here to discuss biblical principles and to learn from each other. Arguing is totally useless.

If I've noticed older people tend to complain quite a lot. They must learn over the years that it is effective.

In my experience endless arguing is useless. Anything important usually comes out at the beginning of an argument. The rest is just regurgitation.

 

[GodsGrace]

i completely agree ok, but...while taking steps to insure that happens seems intuitive, it ends up having unforeseen consequences. See, when it becomes against the law to slap me on the cheek, i may now have some "right" that has been "given" to me--that can only be enforced at the point of a gun--but i lose the opportunity to turn the other cheek, see; that now becomes impossible.

yes, therein lies the rub

I don't understand bb. It seems like you're against rules.
People need rules. We don't know how to live without them.
This isn't Lord of the Flies...
Remember what happened?

 

[bbyrd009]

I don't understand bb. It seems like you're against rules.
People need rules.

Law is not evil; it is the minimum standard, needed for those who have not accepted grace. But can you make a law that i must give my shirt to someone who is stealing my coat? There is a law against someone stealing my coat already, see; that i, under grace, do not adhere to. Am i breaking the law, giving him my shirt? If i insist on applying the law to him who has stolen my coat, am i still under grace?

We don't know how to live without them.
This isn't Lord of the Flies...
Remember what happened?

so then "who is 'we?'" should be considered here; we are obviously talking about two different groups of people imo, but they have somehow been made equal now, see. The Lord of the Flies can be perceived as having happened from lack of laws, or it can be seen as the failure of the law, depending upon how you...what "we" you put yourself in, see. The Lord of the Flies made up all kindsa rules, if i remember right. The whole point of the book might be characterized as people who did not understand grace, or adolescent children devolving into power grabs. A great perspective on the world, iow.

 

[bbyrd009]

People need rules. We don't know how to live without them.

imo "we don't prefer to live above them" is likely a better characterization?

This isn't Lord of the Flies...
Remember what happened?

see how easy it is to suggest that if there was only a cop there, none of that would have happened, right; rather than to perceive Jack and Ralph as the "Cops," or sovereigns, or chiefs, however you might like to put it. Imo the whole point of the story is that Ralph was doing fine, but Jack wanted to be chief. So the right frame is more like "too many Jacks," not "not enough cops" iow.

 

[GodsGrace]

imo "we don't prefer to live above them" is likely a better characterization?
see how easy it is to suggest that if there was only a cop there, none of that would have happened, right; rather than to perceive Jack and Ralph as the "Cops," or sovereigns, or chiefs, however you might like to put it. Imo the whole point of the story is that Ralph was doing fine, but Jack wanted to be chief. So the right frame is more like "too many Jacks," not "not enough cops" iow.

bb,
Sometimes you give me a headache...


You mean, you think a society sans cops could actually function?
I believe in the Kingdom of God.
But the problem is that not everybody does...

Of course if there were cops on the island it would have remained civil.
The point of the story is that when we are NOT watched over, the evil will always win because it cares not for its fellow man but only desires to achieve power, however possible, even at the cost of the innocent.

Good people are too good to win...
And all evil needs to flourish is for good to do nothing.
So if I'm not willing to kill Jack, Jack wins.

Jack...the bad kid. I can't remember their names.

 

[aspen]

Just came upon this by chance.
Why do mods allow this arguing to continue???

It causes good posters to leave.
Is this the goal !

A thread could be closed.
A poster could be banned from only one thread.
Zero tolerance creates a good atmosphere.

It surprises me that you seem to defend a person who starts a thread with the sole purpose of baiting members of this community. If you are correct and Sword is hurt and wants to be apart of this community, he is fully capable of doing so - instead, he has choosen to incite and provocate. His demands for personal testimonies from others is laughable in the face of his refusal to start off the thread with a personal testimony, dont you think?

His behavior is a akin to a first grader chasing a girl and hitting her because he likes her.

 

[GodsGrace]

It surprises me that you seem to defend a person who starts a thread with the sole purpose of baiting members of this community. If you are correct and Sword is hurt and wants to be apart of this community, he is fully capable of doing so - instead, he has choosen to incite and provocate. His demands for personal testimonies from others is laughable in the face of his refusal to start off the thread with a personal testimony, dont you think?

His behavior is a akin to a first grader chasing a girl and hitting her because he likes her.

I'm sorry Aspen.
I didn't read the entire thread. I did read the O.P. and he sounds hurt.
Having said that, I do admit that I don't know him. It seems like he'd like to be here but under different circumstances. Of course, I'm just guessing.

I felt attacked too when I got here, maybe that's why I said what I did.
I also said I don't really enjoy posting in this thread. Argumenting is not for me -- unless it's about free will.

And...
I'm trying to remember if I was ever hit in the first grade...

 

[GodsGrace]

Law is not evil; it is the minimum standard, needed for those who have not accepted grace. But can you make a law that i must give my shirt to someone who is stealing my coat? There is a law against someone stealing my coat already, see; that i, under grace, do not adhere to. Am i breaking the law, giving him my shirt? If i insist on applying the law to him who has stolen my coat, am i still under grace?
so then "who is 'we?'" should be considered here; we are obviously talking about two different groups of people imo, but they have somehow been made equal now, see. The Lord of the Flies can be perceived as having happened from lack of laws, or it can be seen as the failure of the law, depending upon how you...what "we" you put yourself in, see. The Lord of the Flies made up all kindsa rules, if i remember right. The whole point of the book might be characterized as people who did not understand grace, or adolescent children devolving into power grabs. A great perspective on the world, iow.

I had to re-read the above. It's late here.
Know what you mean by the minimum standard. I agree, but it is necessary. Not everyone is Christian or religious (Jewish, Buddhist, etc).

I don't understand your point about the coat and the shirt. I read it twice. I know you have good points to make and would like to understand but if you think it's not worth it...OK.

As far as the "We". OK. I get that too.
We do all need rules. We may not all need MORAL rules, but we do need rules to live in a society.

Moral rule: You must pay your taxes. Yes, I'd pay them anyway.
Civil rule: You must stop at a red light. What if I'm in a hurry and there are no cars around? We're supposed to obey the authority, but it seems like such a little offense.

And other such stuff.
And anyway, without rules we would never have knows what was a sin...

 

[aspen]

I'm sorry Aspen.
I didn't read the entire thread. I did read the O.P. and he sounds hurt.
Having said that, I do admit that I don't know him. It seems like he'd like to be here but under different circumstances. Of course, I'm just guessing.

I felt attacked too when I got here, maybe that's why I said what I did.
I also said I don't really enjoy posting in this thread. Argumenting is not for me -- unless it's about free will.

And...
I'm trying to remember if I was ever hit in the first grade...

I agree with you that some in this community can be critical; indeed, voicing an opinion can feel like jumping into the fray, but over time, as you have probably noticed, it becomes apparent that only a few vocal people place doctrine over the wellfare of others......if you can drown them out, You are likely to find the pearls

 

[Job]

I didn't read the entire thread. I did read the O.P. and he sounds hurt.
Having said that, I do admit that I don't know him. It seems like he'd like to be here but under different circumstances. Of course, I'm just guessing.

Sword is not new to this site. He's been a member for about a year and most of his content is similar or worst than that of the OP.

I don't want to judge him but I see nothing that even comes close to Christ-like behavior. If he was my first introduction to Jesus, I would probably be an atheist.

Just saying...

.

 

[mjrhealth]

We do all need rules.

Not everyone needs rules, most people in this world would not know most of the "laws" yet will never break them. The laws are there for the "bad" people, it offers the government a way to put them away, yet most governments break them everyday. A bit like speed cameras, "safety cameras here" never yet seeing a "safety camera" apply the brakes to a speeding car.. Se there are many people in this world who drive quiet safetly, never broken the law, than along came speed cameras, suddenly Bob who has being driving for 50 years gets his first ticket. never really did anything wrong, just happened to hit 62 in a 60 zone at the wrong time. Now rules are made to increase governments income. Sad thing is with all there investments on speed cameras , more people are dying on teh roads than ever. makes it all a big joke.

 

[pia]

"Who told you that you were naked?" is not really being grasped here imo. Sounds to me like you went to a church at some point?

I'm curious now if you believe Rapture? too?

Not certain how to put that in perspective with Jesus being the final sacrifice needed? I have written many times that I did try to join a few different fellowship, starting at 6 odd years after my first encounter with Him.....It almost destroyed me, and tried to destroy my faith, so I opted out a long time ago now, but I know for sure that they inserted 'ideas', like weeds in a lovely garden, which made things so hard at times....I am still un-learning some of those things...
A couple of the fellowships I went to talked about the Rapture and a couple didn't..I have no direct knowledge about this, so it would be pure guesswork on my part, and I don't like doing it that way..........Do I believe that at some point our Father will gather all together in His Son ? Yes I do, because of things revealed which point to that being the Truth..

 

[bbyrd009]

You mean, you think a society sans cops could actually function?

well, depends upon your definition of "society" i guess, but certainly, yes.
We have many, hundreds of currently functioning, even ancient societies with no "cops."

Ralph's society was functioning, with him as chief.

 

[bbyrd009]

I believe in the Kingdom of God.

well, to be maybe kind of unkind here, i have that on my wall too, a little plaque, but i have to question that when i go to call a cop instead of offering the coat robber my shirt, i guess

 

[bbyrd009]

Of course if there were cops on the island it would have remained civil.

so you say, but cops just do what the chief orders, so imo the roles here are not being recognized. The book has enforcers for the chiefs already. iow all of the elements of "society" are already in place. Now if everyone on the island had a gun, it might have remained civil...lol

 

[bbyrd009]

The point of the story is that when we are NOT watched over, the evil will always win because it cares not for its fellow man but only desires to achieve power, however possible, even at the cost of the innocent.

pretty good description of the PTB in there somewhere, i guess? It seems that you are just discounting the role of "chief" in the story, which imo is more a story about "who will watch the watchers" to me at least. Or "absolute power corrupts absolutely" perhaps.

So if I'm not willing to kill Jack, Jack wins.

hmm. that is one conclusion, i guess. But Jack had followers, in order to even become chief, right. Jack all by himself would not likely have deposed Ralph iow. So Jack was empowered by other people, and just killing Jack removes a like a symptom, does not fix the problem, yes?

Jack...the bad kid. I can't remember their names.

ya, google is helping me lol

 

[bbyrd009]

Argumenting is not for me -- unless it's about free will.

HA! love it. Strikes me that the fact one can do the first one pretty much verifies the existence of the second one...

I'm trying to remember if I was ever hit in the first grade...

ha prolly at least got your hair pulled lol