-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Rosa Parks, dead at 92
- Thread starter gb93433
- Start date
DeafPosttrib
New Member
Filmproducer,
Well say!!!
I'm from near Detroit. I'm white. I was born in Detroit at Henry Ford Hospital. I love black people. I do have many black friends in Detroit. I know the crime in Detroit is so high. Of course they would saying, because of black people. Also, we know Detroit has history, that it was filled of racism. Over 100 years ago, there were about 98% of white population in Detroit. Today, there is 98% of black population in Detroit.
The reason, many black people moved to Detroit in year from around 1940's to 1960's, because of job. Mostly main reason, they moved to Detroit because of Ford factory. The riots of 1968 changed Detroit forever.
I know, in the past, many whites treated blacks terrible. I know how blacks were feeling toward whites. But, blacks have problems of today with whites. Blacks are still bitter, oppesses with white of past. They have to forget the past, and to forgive them.
I strongly disagree with South laws on blacks. That was racism, and hatred.
Flimproducer is right, Rosa Parks didn't break Alamaba's law, she follow U.S. Supreme Laws over Alamaba. So, she was doing the right thing.
South states' law over black do not make a sense to me, they were stupid. There is no difference between white and black, both are same sinner.
About two months ago, I watch rent movie about the true story of bus strike of 1995. I watched Martin Luther King Jr. lot, and also Rosa Parks. I really respect both so much. Martin Luther King Jr. was so brave and strong stand for God, brough America to freedom. He was martyer for bring the truth and freedom.
This year, I have been drove past Rosa Parks Street in Detroit many times. I always called her, "Rose" in sign. Because her first name 'Rosa'. I respect her so well.
Today, I looking at the condition of inner cities in America, look awful terrible. Most inner cities are almost full of black. I think it is sad. Because, I think both black and white seems not get along well. It is long way to go.
Should I moving in Detroit and living there? Well, I rather to live outside of Detroit because of safety. I living in apartments. But, there are mixed of blacks and whites in my apartments! Several black people live in their apartment next my door!
My sister lives in Derborn Heights. Her black neighbor lives next house from her house. She told me, black neighbor family is soooo wonderful! Also, she said, many white neighbors around her house are not nice and not friendly. She likes black family next house from her house. I met my nephnew's friend is black boy lives next house from my siter's house. He is very nice person!
My family used to lived in Detroit from early 1900's to 1970's. My Dad grew up in Detroit, and moved out to Waterford when he was 13. The reason, they moved out, because of high crime.
I do not understand why many inner cities of America are high crime today. Why cannot white and black get along each other together?
Today, I did watched T.V. of local news on Rosa Parks' funeral service. Recently about 30 minutes ago, I saw Rosa Parks' coffine was being carry in the wagon with horses on the way to the cementary. It was emotional feeling watching Rosa Parks being carrying on the way to the cementary. There are ton of flashes from photos around Rosa Park in the street. Thousands of black people admire her so well. That's all, let you know.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
Well say!!!
I'm from near Detroit. I'm white. I was born in Detroit at Henry Ford Hospital. I love black people. I do have many black friends in Detroit. I know the crime in Detroit is so high. Of course they would saying, because of black people. Also, we know Detroit has history, that it was filled of racism. Over 100 years ago, there were about 98% of white population in Detroit. Today, there is 98% of black population in Detroit.
The reason, many black people moved to Detroit in year from around 1940's to 1960's, because of job. Mostly main reason, they moved to Detroit because of Ford factory. The riots of 1968 changed Detroit forever.
I know, in the past, many whites treated blacks terrible. I know how blacks were feeling toward whites. But, blacks have problems of today with whites. Blacks are still bitter, oppesses with white of past. They have to forget the past, and to forgive them.
I strongly disagree with South laws on blacks. That was racism, and hatred.
Flimproducer is right, Rosa Parks didn't break Alamaba's law, she follow U.S. Supreme Laws over Alamaba. So, she was doing the right thing.
South states' law over black do not make a sense to me, they were stupid. There is no difference between white and black, both are same sinner.
About two months ago, I watch rent movie about the true story of bus strike of 1995. I watched Martin Luther King Jr. lot, and also Rosa Parks. I really respect both so much. Martin Luther King Jr. was so brave and strong stand for God, brough America to freedom. He was martyer for bring the truth and freedom.
This year, I have been drove past Rosa Parks Street in Detroit many times. I always called her, "Rose" in sign. Because her first name 'Rosa'. I respect her so well.
Today, I looking at the condition of inner cities in America, look awful terrible. Most inner cities are almost full of black. I think it is sad. Because, I think both black and white seems not get along well. It is long way to go.
Should I moving in Detroit and living there? Well, I rather to live outside of Detroit because of safety. I living in apartments. But, there are mixed of blacks and whites in my apartments! Several black people live in their apartment next my door!
My sister lives in Derborn Heights. Her black neighbor lives next house from her house. She told me, black neighbor family is soooo wonderful! Also, she said, many white neighbors around her house are not nice and not friendly. She likes black family next house from her house. I met my nephnew's friend is black boy lives next house from my siter's house. He is very nice person!
My family used to lived in Detroit from early 1900's to 1970's. My Dad grew up in Detroit, and moved out to Waterford when he was 13. The reason, they moved out, because of high crime.
I do not understand why many inner cities of America are high crime today. Why cannot white and black get along each other together?
Today, I did watched T.V. of local news on Rosa Parks' funeral service. Recently about 30 minutes ago, I saw Rosa Parks' coffine was being carry in the wagon with horses on the way to the cementary. It was emotional feeling watching Rosa Parks being carrying on the way to the cementary. There are ton of flashes from photos around Rosa Park in the street. Thousands of black people admire her so well. That's all, let you know.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
After being away from the thread awhile, I found it had dropped to the bottom of the page, and was content to let it rest in peace. But since it is back at the top I'll post again, since there were a few things I wanted to address earlier.
First, TexasSky asked several questions, which I don't think anyone has attempted to answer. IMO, some of these questions are not parallel to the question under consideration. Further, it seems they perhaps are driven by a quest to find inconsistencies in one's application of Romans 13. One thing about inconsistencies - they prove that and not more. That someone takes two positions that are not consistent shows that one, or perhaps both, of them must be wrong (or misunderstood). But it does not show which is wrong.
1. Do you think the women in China who refuse to abort female children are wrong? No. "Thou shalt not kill" is clearly commanded by God, and they are to obey God rather than men.
2. Do you think the founding Fathers of America were wrong? I haven't given this a lot of thought before. But I think they must have been in some (or even many) of their decisions, since they were sometimes based on political, social, legal and other concerns, rather than obeying God.
3. Do you think Paul and the Apostles who continued to preach the message of Christ, even when Rome was feeding Christians to lions, were wrong? No. "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel" is clearly commanded by God, and they are to obey God rather than men.
4. Was Corrie Ten Boom wrong for sheltering Jews? I'm not that familiar with Corrie ten Boom, but understand her family hid Jews and others in order to protect their lives. In this they were disobeying evidently because they knew these people would be imprisoned and killed.
5. Was John Huss wrong? In what particulars? I think that his religious views and rejecting the Pope's authority got him killed. In that he appears to have been obeying the doctrines and commands of God rather than men.
To me it seems that the thread has caused others to take inconsistent positions in order to strenghten their point. For example, someone wrote, "If a law is morally wrong, we have no reason to obey it. Actually if a person were to obey it, they would be committing the sin." Does that mean then, that before Rosa Parks defied the bus law that every black person in Montgomery who gave up his or her seat (or sat in the back or the bus) was sinning when they did so? This same poster, in defending Ms. Parks, "proved" that Jesus broke the law, which the Bible indicates He did not do.
Finally: Tinytim asked, "How many of you that has posted on this thread was alive in 1955 and remembers this incident?" I wasn't here yet, but would arrive on the scene not too many years after.
First, TexasSky asked several questions, which I don't think anyone has attempted to answer. IMO, some of these questions are not parallel to the question under consideration. Further, it seems they perhaps are driven by a quest to find inconsistencies in one's application of Romans 13. One thing about inconsistencies - they prove that and not more. That someone takes two positions that are not consistent shows that one, or perhaps both, of them must be wrong (or misunderstood). But it does not show which is wrong.
1. Do you think the women in China who refuse to abort female children are wrong? No. "Thou shalt not kill" is clearly commanded by God, and they are to obey God rather than men.
2. Do you think the founding Fathers of America were wrong? I haven't given this a lot of thought before. But I think they must have been in some (or even many) of their decisions, since they were sometimes based on political, social, legal and other concerns, rather than obeying God.
3. Do you think Paul and the Apostles who continued to preach the message of Christ, even when Rome was feeding Christians to lions, were wrong? No. "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel" is clearly commanded by God, and they are to obey God rather than men.
4. Was Corrie Ten Boom wrong for sheltering Jews? I'm not that familiar with Corrie ten Boom, but understand her family hid Jews and others in order to protect their lives. In this they were disobeying evidently because they knew these people would be imprisoned and killed.
5. Was John Huss wrong? In what particulars? I think that his religious views and rejecting the Pope's authority got him killed. In that he appears to have been obeying the doctrines and commands of God rather than men.
To me it seems that the thread has caused others to take inconsistent positions in order to strenghten their point. For example, someone wrote, "If a law is morally wrong, we have no reason to obey it. Actually if a person were to obey it, they would be committing the sin." Does that mean then, that before Rosa Parks defied the bus law that every black person in Montgomery who gave up his or her seat (or sat in the back or the bus) was sinning when they did so? This same poster, in defending Ms. Parks, "proved" that Jesus broke the law, which the Bible indicates He did not do.
Finally: Tinytim asked, "How many of you that has posted on this thread was alive in 1955 and remembers this incident?" I wasn't here yet, but would arrive on the scene not too many years after.
In answer to Gershom:
I really don't care if Woodrow Kroll isn't KJVO. What has that got to do with the price of tea in China? The man is a good preacher and I LIKE the saying. Got a problem with that?
In answer to film producer:
Back up and re-group my friend. I never questioned the lady's christianity. I stated the FACT that she was in rebellion to God given commands to OBEY magistrates.
As to the historical setting of Titus...I myself am well versed in Scripture. God says what He means. You ought to try glomming onto the doctrinal and spiritual meaning of Scripture as well and try reading past chapter 1 my friend.
1Sa 15:22
And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
1Sa 15:23
For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
From this sharp rebuke to Saul, we can see that God puts rebellion right up there with witchcraft and idolatry. God HATES rebellion of any kind. Particularly when it is in rebellion to His commands.
I would like for you to prove Scripturally that comment about church leadership is DIFFERENT. (as if a mayor is any LESS responsible to God than a stuffed shirt pastor)
I really don't care if Woodrow Kroll isn't KJVO. What has that got to do with the price of tea in China? The man is a good preacher and I LIKE the saying. Got a problem with that?
In answer to film producer:
Back up and re-group my friend. I never questioned the lady's christianity. I stated the FACT that she was in rebellion to God given commands to OBEY magistrates.
As to the historical setting of Titus...I myself am well versed in Scripture. God says what He means. You ought to try glomming onto the doctrinal and spiritual meaning of Scripture as well and try reading past chapter 1 my friend.
1Sa 15:22
And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
1Sa 15:23
For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
From this sharp rebuke to Saul, we can see that God puts rebellion right up there with witchcraft and idolatry. God HATES rebellion of any kind. Particularly when it is in rebellion to His commands.
I would like for you to prove Scripturally that comment about church leadership is DIFFERENT. (as if a mayor is any LESS responsible to God than a stuffed shirt pastor)
Just started reading the thread, and had to stop here.
Romans 13 says, Let EVERY soul, be subject to the higher powers. Every soul, even the king. God is higher than the king, and His Word is Law. The Babylonians did NOT have the right to punish the three Hebrew children for praying to Jehovah.
Where do you get these ideas? Seriously. Where do you get them?
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Sorry, if you can calm down and ask a question in a less demanding and arrogant manner I might consider responding.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Thank you.
In Romans 13 God ordains the higher powers. He is clearly discussing human governments there, not His own power as evidenced in the rest of the passage.
Hanaiah, Mishael, Azariah, and Daniel were subject to the Babylonian government. They did not protest the law, they simply refused to ober. They knew the consequences, the law was the law. The Babylonian governement was ordained by God since "the Most High rules in the kingdon of men and giveth to whomseover he will." They knew the chance they were taking by disobeying the God ordained authority and the rightfully suffered the consequences. God's intervention was not to stop their arrests, but to strengthen them to endure the penalty for breaking the law.
When we choose to disobey the law on Biblical grounds we must be willing to suffer the consequences. We have a choice, obey God or man. When we choose to obey God instead of man that does not take away the state's right to punish us for disobeying their laws.
In Romans 13 God ordains the higher powers. He is clearly discussing human governments there, not His own power as evidenced in the rest of the passage.
Hanaiah, Mishael, Azariah, and Daniel were subject to the Babylonian government. They did not protest the law, they simply refused to ober. They knew the consequences, the law was the law. The Babylonian governement was ordained by God since "the Most High rules in the kingdon of men and giveth to whomseover he will." They knew the chance they were taking by disobeying the God ordained authority and the rightfully suffered the consequences. God's intervention was not to stop their arrests, but to strengthen them to endure the penalty for breaking the law.
When we choose to disobey the law on Biblical grounds we must be willing to suffer the consequences. We have a choice, obey God or man. When we choose to obey God instead of man that does not take away the state's right to punish us for disobeying their laws.
That's the point. It may have been the command of the king, but it wasn't law, not true law. It did not conform to God's law and is therefore null and void. The three Hebrew children were right to disobey the king in this instance, and the king was wrong to punish them for it.
The Babylonian governement was ordained by God since "the Most High rules in the kingdon of men and giveth to whomseover he will."
That in no way justifies the abuse of power. God establishes government for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. 1 Pet. 2:14. Where the innocent and those who do well are suffering at the hand of the king, the king must be resisted and, if the opportunity and power is available, deposed.
They knew the chance they were taking by disobeying the God ordained authority and the rightfully suffered the consequences. God's intervention was not to stop their arrests, but to strengthen them to endure the penalty for breaking the law.
That's insane. So I ask again, where do you get this stuff?
guitarpreacher
New Member
Now that's got to be the dumbest thing I've read in a long, long time
yes on both questions askjo...
and guitarpreacher...
is that the best you can come up with? Just call it dumb 'cuz you sure ain't got anything to refute it with. Typical. Very typical of one who has swallowed the media hype for decades.
Rosa Parks----rebel.
MLK---Communist agent.
and guitarpreacher...
is that the best you can come up with? Just call it dumb 'cuz you sure ain't got anything to refute it with. Typical. Very typical of one who has swallowed the media hype for decades.
Rosa Parks----rebel.
MLK---Communist agent.
MLK was a "Commie"??? Shoot---I didn't know that???!! Honest!!
Funny now that you mention it----Dated back to 1942 and the opening year of WW2 for the Americans---to which when Charles Lindburgh asked to enlist in the Army Air Corps---FDR's comment was---"He will not fly in my Army!!" And all CL said was to the effect that we ought to leave the Nazi's alone---they're not bothering anyone!!!
And MLK visited the White House as a Communist agent????