Hadith

[dilloduck]

Thats what i get trying to deal with this guy Mr. Potman. Simple question--no answer. Who looks foolish now?

 

[freeandfun1]

Noted Dillo....

let me try....

I think he is saying this, but I might be wrong.

The Romans killed the Christians to shut them up. The Muslims are killing anybody that does not believe what they believe. So I guess he is trying to say to you, "do you honestly think that they will not attack you, just because you are "neutral"?

NewGuy truly believes he is right. And therefore, is imploring you to "see the light".

When the appeasers feed the alligators all it means is that the alligators will eat them last.

I might be reading too much into it too, I admit.

 

[NewGuy]

Actually it is quite simple:

This is what was said:

Dillo:"Enough of other peoples' words and I didn't say I hated you. Just said that you are sanctimonious and bigoted regarding religion."

My reply was regarding you telling me, as you DO, that all I do is spout words out of a book and have no independent thought.


My reply SPECIFICALLY was comparing you with your condemning insults which show your hatred for everything I have said since you first arrived at this board, to Romans who hated Christians so much for what they said that the only way they could shut them up was to kill them.

My point was you are not a Roman, so GOOD LUCK.

I would have thought Dillo capable of reading in context, but I seem to keep making that mistake with everyone.

 

[dilloduck]

Apparently someone other than I had trouble understanding what you were trying to say so your statements AREN'T all that simple.

Your reply to me was "The Romans had to start executing Christians to silence them.

You think you will fare any better?"

I assume this to be your independent thought and though it is quite vague, I like it much better that words from a book and I thank you.

I cetainly don't intend to kill you but I will, however, probably continue to question your fundementalist viewpoints and your hypocrisy since you are so convinced that your way is the highway

I already knew I wasn't Roman but ty.

Yes. you Do seem to keep making the same mistake with everyone and I appreciate you recognizing it. TY

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by NewGuy
No. I said for YOU to prove YOUR assertions. Obviously you can't.



I take that to mean you cannot prove your beliefs, as usual, therefore you condemn others.

Sorry, I'm just following your example.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Newguy is just feeling a kinship with the christians of old and calling Dillo a persecuting roman.

Looks like kicking newguy's ass is all the rage.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by skhaldi

Wa ailakoum salam. I hope maybe I can at least open some people's eyes to how beautiful Islam is. I was in the same position only two years ago and I believed that the only purpose to Islam was violence and hatred. Thankfully I had an open mind and was willing to listen instead of always talk. I hope that maybe someone on this message board will also be open-minded.

How beautiful is Muhammad and his Islam.

http://quranbrowser.com/

Qur'an 9:5

So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the infidels (all non-believers) wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

 

[ajwps]

The rewards of the Shaheed (martyr) in paradise is indeed wonderful. Miss Muslim, how many young boys (as beautiful pearls) do wish to approach in mutual inquiry and sinless sex? I hope that you have opened your eyes to the beauty and peace of Muhammad.

http://quranbrowser.com/

Qur'an 5:23-25 and 76:19-20

The Mount
52:23 They shall there exchange, one with another, a (loving) cup free of frivolity, free of all taint of SIN.


The Mount
52:24 Round about them will serve, (devoted) to them. Boys (handsome) as Pearls well-guarded.


The Mount
52:25 They will advance to each other, engaging in mutual enquiry.

===============================

Time, Man, (every) Man, This (day-and-)age
76:19 And round about them will (serve) BOYS of perpetual (freshness): If thou seest them, thou wouldst think them scattered Pearls.


Time, Man, (every) Man, This (day-and-)age
76:20 And when thou lookest, it is there thou wilt see a Bliss and a Realm Magnificent.

 

[dilloduck]

ok so parts of the Koran talk about nice things and other parts talk about bad things. Where do you live now and why?

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by NewGuy

John 15:

18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.

Paul of Tarsus, main writer and coordinator of the New Testament Gospels admits that Jesus needs PRETENSE or LYING to obtain converts for Jesus.

Philippians 1

18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

Does a god need to use pretence in order to preach Christ? Does the proselitizer rejoice if he has to lie to others?

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by ajwps
Paul of Tarsus, main writer and coordinator of the New Testament Gospels admits that Jesus needs PRETENSE or LYING to obtain converts for Jesus.

Philippians 1

18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

Does a god need to use pretence in order to preach Christ? Does the proselitizer rejoice if he has to lie to others?

You have taken the verse out of context. Do a little research and repost it along with the other verses that accompany it. This was part of a discussion.

Paul's point was that he did not care WHY the Gospel's were being preached, as long as they were being preached. In other words, It simply talks about the attitude of the pastor who is bringing the Gospel. Some preach the true Gospel sincerely, but others preach the Gospel (still the true Gospel) out of envy and strife. In other words, God can even use an unsaved man, who is still preaching the true Gospel. In other words, his training has been correct. But the moment that he starts changing the authority so that he believes there is more to divine truth than the Bible, then it isn't a matter of envy and strife. Then it's another gospel. Then it comes into another category altogether.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by freeandfun1

You have taken the verse out of context. Do a little research and repost it along with the other verses that accompany it. This was part of a discussion.

Okay I Will....

Paul's point was that he did not care WHY the Gospel's were being preached, as long as they were being preached. In other words, It simply talks about the attitude of the pastor who is bringing the Gospel. Some preach the true Gospel sincerely, but others preach the Gospel (still the true Gospel) out of envy and strife. In other words, God can even use an unsaved man, who is still preaching the true Gospel. In other words, his training has been correct. But the moment that he starts changing the authority so that he believes there is more to divine truth than the Bible, then it isn't a matter of envy and strife. Then it's another gospel. Then it comes into another category altogether.

Just one or two questions:

Why did Paul in his Philippian Epistle 1:18 talk about himself in the first person if he was referring to pastors in general and relate that he himself "rejoices (twice repeated) in it."

Why would a god so unknowable, all good, all knowing, the creator of all things care if 'unsaved men' were used to preach or convert men by pretence?

Then G-d would not be as omniscient or as holy as I would expect of the greatest entity who has alwasy existed in a timelessness.

No wonder He made man imperfectly and full of sin from his conception.

 

[freeandfun1]

Philippians 1:17
"But the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel."

In verses 15 and 16 Paul's lists both proper and improper motives. In verse 17 Paul sets forth another proper motive--"but the latter out of love."

Paul has just made the point that some Christian workers in Rome were seeking to rub salt into his wounds (his prison experience) by bragging about their successes in ministry. They were envious about the way the Praetorian Guard responded to Paul.

"but the latter out of love"

Love is the second valid motive. The first good motive was "good will" of verse 15. Love is an advance on good will.

"Of" in "of love" is source. Love is the source (motive) for what they do. Wolf packs turn on their own when one falls in the fray. Christians often shoot their wounded as well.

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal" (I Co. 13:1). Preaching without love is just a lot of noise. Preaching like that is just sound and fury but without integrity.

"knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel."

Paul saw his purpose as defending the gospel. Note the emphasis upon the gospel in this chapter:

-"fellowship in the gospel" (v.5)

-"confirmation of the gospel" (v.7)

-"furtherance of the gospel" (v.12)

-"defense of the gospel" (here)

Paul was greatly exercised about advancing the gospel. Paul viewed himself as "appointed" for the gospel. He knew his mission. He saw himself clearly in God's plan of world evangelism.

PRINCIPLE: The reason some Romans loved Paul was that they knew God had appointed him to advance the gospel. Love found its source in viewing things from God's perspective.

APPLICATION: Is love more than maudlin sentimentalism to you? Does your love find its source in God's viewpoint. Does your love have content? Are you in love with people who are advancing the gospel? How are you expressing that love?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Philippians 1:18
"What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretence or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice."

Verse 18 is the conclusion to the paragraph dealing with motives. Two more motives are treated: "pretence" and "truth."

"What then?"

A conclusion is drawn. We would say, "so what?"

"only that in every way"

Paul did not care much about form or methods. His heart was to elevate the gospel. Paul did not concern himself even with motives as along as Christ was preached. God can even use carnality to advance the gospel, as here--"pretence."

"whether in pretence or in truth Christ is preached"

"Pretence" means to cover the real motive and present others with a false idea. This is an attempt to disguise true motives. They used Christ as a cover for their lust for power and "selfish ambition."

Paul did not condone their cunning. However, he did approve of their preaching Christ. Notwithstanding their motive, they were preaching the gospel. He had a single eye for his purpose (appointed) on earth. Salvation of souls were more important to him than some perceived rivalry with him.

"Truth" is to preach without false motivation in this context. What you see is what you get. A person whose motive and message are the same is a person with integrity. This is a person with no ulterior motives.

"and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice"

"I rejoice" is present tense. "While I sit in jail I am rejoicing over the fact that Christ is preached." "Will rejoice" indicates his purpose to continue to rejoice no matter what may come his way.

Paul's point is that the people who were trying to hurt him were contributing to his joy! Paul had such deep appreciation for the work of Jesus Christ upon the cross nothing could alter his focus. Christ's death upon the cross, his resurrection, ascension, and glorification were so dominant in this thinking that nothing tawdry daunted him.

PRINCIPLE: God turns cursing into blessing. Paul's foes were out to compete with him, to diminish him. Instead, he was blessed.

APPLICATION: Are the people who are attempting to make your life miserable succeeding? Are they controlling your happiness or unhappiness? Is it possible for you to be independent from your antagonists? Paul was. Paul did not concern himself with their motives. That is why cursing was turned into blessing in his life.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by ajwps

Just one or two questions:

Why did Paul in his Philippian Epistle 1:18 talk about himself in the first person if he was referring to pastors in general and relate that he himself "rejoices (twice repeated) in it."

Why would a god so unknowable, all good, all knowing, the creator of all things care if 'unsaved men' were used to preach or convert men by pretence?

Then G-d would not be as omniscient or as holy as I would expect of the greatest entity who has alwasy existed in a timelessness.

No wonder He made man imperfectly and full of sin from his conception.

I answered the whole sloppy mess in the other thread.

 

[Mustafa]

Originally posted by NewGuy

I answered the whole sloppy mess in the other thread.

You certainly did answer the whole sloppy mess.....

In context and without ambiguity are the words of Paul of Tarsus. Creator of the god Jesus.