Democrats freaking out about church speech

@kellyjay said
The consequences were paid for in full by Christ which is why none of us can take any credit for our righteousness. We are completely beholden to God for it all, we are not made righteous by our works. This is not saying we are not going to do works, obeying and believing in Christ can only occur once we are made right with God through Him. He is the Way!

So if you can’t take any credit then how come YOU get to go to heaven and play with the baby tigers and non Christians get to be burnt alive forever by your version of Jesus?

How can that happen? You don’t get the credit, then by default the other lot don’t get the blame.

Ignore that! LOL

@kellyjay said
When a debt is paid in full, it’s paid in full. With respect to consequences no one escapes reaping what they sow, if someone murders they will pay their debt here, but if they come to God for His grace, He will cover our sins. Christ paid for all of our sins, but its up to us to accept that!

Coming to Christ for forgiveness is done to those who turn to God giving their l ...[text shortened]... uide us. Keeping in mind this is all done due to God’s Love not anything we do to justify ourselves.

You are describing no consequences for Christians who hate people when "the day of judgement" comes.

@fmf said
You are describing no consequences for Christians who hate people when "the day of judgement" comes.

So you believe Jesus should never have died for all of our sins?

@kellyjay said
So you believe Jesus should never have died for all of our sins?

I know what you believe about the meaning of Jesus' death. What I am saying is that you are describing there being no consequences for believers in Jesus if they hate people.

@fmf said
I know what you believe about the meaning of Jesus' death. What I am saying is that you are describing there being no consequences for believers in Jesus if they hate people.

I don’t care what you think I believe, please answer my question!

@kellyjay said
I don’t care what you think I believe, please answer my question!

Jesus died because he was executed by the Romans for sedition. So I am talking about the ideology that was constructed with regard to his death. It is an ideology that you subscribe to. I do not subscribe to it, so I don't have any 'Jesus should have done this' or 'Jesus should have done that' theories for you.

I am talking to you about what you are saying and what you are describing. And what you are describing is believers in Jesus facing no consequence and having to take no responsibility for - in this case which we were discussing, hating certain politicians - on "the day of judgement".

You believe the consequences of these believers' "sins" will be borne by Jesus. So, there are no consequences for the believers themselves. This makes it odd, then, that you said you won't have any excuse for having hated people during your lifetime when it gets to the day of judgement". Why would there be any issue about needing or having an "excuse"?

Meanwhile, you are describing there being no consequences for you on that day. Unless you believe that a Christian ~ a believer in Jesus ~ can be thrown into the "Lake of Fire" for hating people during their lifetimes? That would be a "consequence" for them.

@fmf said
Jesus died because he was executed by the Romans for sedition. So I am talking about the ideology that was constructed with regard to his death. It is an ideology that you subscribe to. I do not subscribe to it, so I don't have any 'Jesus should have done this' or 'Jesus should have done that' theories for you.

I am talking to you about what you are saying and what you are de ...[text shortened]... the "Lake of Fire" for hating people during their lifetimes? That would be a "consequence" for them.

Since you reject the main foundational point, all of the other points really cannot be seen or understood.

@fmf said
Jesus died because he was executed by the Romans for sedition. So I am talking about the ideology that was constructed with regard to his death. It is an ideology that you subscribe to. I do not subscribe to it, so I don't have any 'Jesus should have done this' or 'Jesus should have done that' theories for you.

I am talking to you about what you are saying and what you are de ...[text shortened]... the "Lake of Fire" for hating people during their lifetimes? That would be a "consequence" for them.

"Jesus died because he was executed by the Romans for sedition."

That's a bogus statement. Substantiate it with any historical record if you can.

Apparently your knowledge of the scriptures after so many years of thinking you were a Christian doesn't add up to much.

@kellyjay said
Since you reject the main foundational point, all of the other points really cannot be seen or understood.

I am asking you about the ideology that you propagate here.

@secondson said
"Jesus died because he was executed by the Romans for sedition."

That's a bogus statement. Substantiate it with any historical record if you can.

Well, according to Christian texts, the Romans crucified Jesus. According to the historical records of that era, with the Romans, execution by crucifixion was carried out for political crimes such as treason and sedition. The Romans used crucifixion as a political weapon that sent a clear message to those living in the areas they occupied. If he had been found guilty of a religious crime, it would have been a Jewish matter and he would have been stoned to death. That was the Jewish form of execution. By contrast, crucifixion was the Roman method of punishment. The Jews did not crucify people.

@fmf said
I am asking you about the ideology that you propagate here.

You can not understand the great truth of Jesus Christ, so you will never see the little details in the light of truth if you are blind to Christ.

@kellyjay said
You can not understand the great truth of Jesus Christ, so you will never see the little details in the light of truth if you are blind to Christ.

I am asking you about your use of the words "excuse" and "consequence" because you are describing how Christians have no "excuse" for feeling hatred and will have no "excuse" on "the day of judgement" ~ as if they have to take personal responsibility for their behaviour ~ but then you go on to describe how there is, in fact, no "consequence" for the believer in Jesus for the "sin" of feeling hatred: responsibility for it has been taken by someone else. You should perhaps try clarifying "the great truth" of this self-contradicting dogma.

@kellyjay said
Hating anyone is a sin, If they hated Clinton they have issues with God, the same
is true for those that hate Trump. There is no its okay to hate sign hung on anyone's
neck in this life. You either treat everyone equally or not, we are not given license
to hate someone just because they are bad either. Love your enemies is as true as
love you neighbors.

This hating you speak of, is it a requirement for proper Christian behavior to not hate ? Or is it just suggestion or loosely held belief ?
Having seen so much hatred in my experiences I would appreciate your take on this.
Thank you.

@thinkofone said
God used a phrase to denote a miscarriage rather than two words you believe denote miscarriage. In your mind why exactly isn't that permissible?

What makes it even more laughable is that your interpretation of the KJV translation you wrote:
<<So we see two men "striving", then a woman accidentally gets harmed with a subsequent miscarriage. >>

There you've clearly a ...[text shortened]... ce again, see my response to Philokalia. While you're at it, read the article that Philokalia cited.

You obviously misunderstood my point...........again.

IF the verse was saying that the accident caused a "miscarriage", which I question highly given the odd Hebrew verbiage, then it would be an accidental death.

In Jewish law, men were not killed for causing an accidental death. They were sent away to another city so that the loved ones of the person accidentally killed would not seek revenge as they lived the rest of their lives in peace.

Therefore, not killing the person for the accidental miscarriage does NOT imply they did not view it as human.

@caissad4 said
This hating you speak of, is it a requirement for proper Christian behavior to not hate ? Or is it just suggestion or loosely held belief ?
Having seen so much hatred in my experiences I would appreciate your take on this.
Thank you.

Leviticus 19:17
“You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him.

1 John 2:9
Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness.

1 John 2:11
But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.

1 John 3:15
Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

1 John 4:20
If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen

Jesus said there were two great Commandments all others hung on, love God,
and love your neighbor. We break both when we hate each other. The only place
I know of where that it is said it is acceptable, is when our feelings for those on
earth are compared to our feelings towards God. This however strengthens our
feelings towards each other, as we can be let down and be given cause to dislike
someone even to the point of hate. While God is first in our lives that couldn't be
the case, because that wouldn't happen, so it would strengthen our ability to do
the right thing no matter what occurs here.