|
The point I see at the beginning is one of "contention"
and this is not good or acceptable in a Church setting among believers
because love should cover until we all come into the
unity of the faith. However, when confronting false systems it
can not be avoided. Why do you think Paul had
so many problems with legalistic Jews who followed him and the other apostles to
stir things up and why was he forced to leave Ephesus
the way he did? jt
I'm confident that you wouldn't be INTENTIONALLY
EVASIVE so, please answer the question as asked. Employing the 'model'
(placards, bullhorns etc.)provided for us by DM & Kevin vis a vis the
Super Bowl, Mardis Gras and, outside the Temple in Salt Lake City, would they
do the same thing outside a mosque (a Muslim place of worship) and, if not
then, whey not?
Do revisit what kicked this discussion off. There
is a serious point to be made here.
I don't know about DavidM but I'm sure Kevin and
Ruben have encountered Muslims in their SP travels. I figure it
would be tit for tat (with truth on their side)
since Muslims call everyone and everything Western "the great Satan"
My Scots friend tells me that in the UK the
Muslims have taken over and that now the Red Cross will not put anything
Christian out at Christmas for fear of offending
them. Her brother in Manchester England says he will not give the Red
Cross another cent because of it and he isn't
even religious. jt
I do not have a problem with 'exposure'. I
don't think that that is Dave's point though.
May I suggest that an equal. if not greater,
danger to believers lies within Islam. Could you imagine David Miller
or Kevin going to Mosques and, utilizing bullhorns, villify the attendants
by addressing THEM as servants of Satan?
I would think it would be more like Jeremiah
(see Jer 13:1,2); this is obviously a one time object lesson
to
the part of Israel Jeremiah was ministering to
rather than a pattern of behavior for all time. However, part of
public proclamation of Truth by nature involves exposing the lie
of the false gods which of course will
be offensive to those who worship them. Why do you have such a problem with this? jt
Elijah.
Can you give us a "for instance"
DaveH? jt
DAVEH:
As I understand your position (and please correct me if I
am misunderstanding your position), many Christians
(specifically you, in this instance) believe that
everything written in the Bible is specifically applicable
to Christians today. So, if a prophet of the
Bible used a technique of mocking, that means it is OK for
you to do the same thing. If a prophet of God in the
Bible is commanded to go preach on the streets, you assume
that instruction applies to you as well....is that
correct, Kevin?
To me, that
isn't logical at all. Just as what he compelled the
prophets of the OT to do was not necessarily applicable to
the prophets of the NT, what the Lord wants us to do today
may or may not be what he wants us to do today.
It seems to me that the Lord over time
has commanded various people to do things that he may not
have commanded at a subsequent time or other
peoples. Hope that makes some
sense.....
Kevin Deegan wrote:
DAVEH: And because some of the early
prophets mocked with God's blessing, you believe it is
your right to do so as well? Isn't that stretching
logic a bit beyond it's breaking
point?
NO
How so?
Kevin
Deegan wrote:
Yes, but where they "Contending for the
faith"? DAVEH: What do you
think they were disputi9ng if it wasn't their
perspecdtive of the faith? Don't you think they
were arguing the truth as they saw it, perhaps in the
same way it is done on TT occassionally?
Please show me where God admonished Paul, for
his "much contention" DAVEH:
My last post about admonishment was regarding the
bickering (if that's the proper word for it)
Christians who Paul admonished.
If you were an apostle as
was Paul and admonished me for arguing about theology,
I would pay heed. But I don't think you've even
claimed to be an apostle, Kevin. (Am I
wrong on that?) >From my perspective you seem
to be one who is contributing to the contention.
Why do you think Paul's admonishment not to contend
(Titus 3:9) doesn't apply to you? Isn't it just
a matter of perspective? If another TTer were to
argue against your understanding of whatever doctrine,
why do you think you would be in the right and he
would be in the wrong? Do you sincerely believe
you are right on all your points of doctrine, or do
you allow you may at times be wrong?
Show me where Elijah was admonished in the
scriptures for MOCKING.
In fact right after Elijah Mocking the prophets
of Baal, God answered his
prayer. DAVEH: And because
some of the early prophets mocked with God's blessing,
you believe it is your right to do so as well?
Isn't that stretching logic a bit beyond it's breaking
point?
God Mocks
Prov 1:26
Because I have called, and ye
refused... But ye have
set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my
reproof: I also will laugh at
your calamity; I will mock when your fear
comethDave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
DAVEH:
Were not a lot of early Christians in contention,
and admonished for it?
Kevin Deegan wrote:
No read the scriptures. They were "IN God"
with MUCH Contention. Dave Hansen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
DAVEH:
Do you suppose that could have been one of
Paul's faults?
Kevin Deegan
wrote:
> By the way did you know that
Paul was VERY
CONTENTIOUS?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
|
