That description fits most big cities and they are all run by Democrats. People are moving because of crime, taxes, and horrible schools.
-
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!
What happened to the caravan after the midterm elections?
- Thread starter HankD
- Start date
That description fits most big cities and they are all run by Democrats. People are moving because of crime, taxes, and horrible schools.
That hasn't happened to me but I do have a real example. I was talking to a young strong (6' 3", 230 lbs.) black neighbor about religion. He believed that there are many ways to his god. He asked me what I believe. I told him I believe that jesus is the only way. This made him angry. He told me he could punch me in the face but was afraid he'd kill me. I said, I'm standing on my faith. Go ahead. I'm not afraid to die. I didn't need to pull out a gun and shoot him. I defeated him with the power of God. BTW, later he was arrested for pulling a knife on a FedEx man.
You can't pin me down to simple answers to complex questions. Go ahead with you simplistic view of the world.
Interestingly, that sounds a lot like the black guy I have described here before who came to work at our wood packaging plant in the early 80's when I was about 21. I had no argument about faith with him, except maybe one time he asked "You're a Christian, aren't you?" after I had told him once about the loans I gave some of those guys there and quoting "turn not away from those who want to borrow." Well, he wanted his share of that and asked for loans, and I did it a couple of times, then saw him passing joints with those other guys out of the parking lot, and I decided I will no longer be their enabler. He made threats, sometimes took out his Bowie knife and talked about how sharp it was, pointing it at me. When he outright threatened, I dared him to assault me, as I pierced my eyes straight into his, finding out that's a nonviolent weapon to a big, aggressive guy who is usually backed down to (I also saw him successfully bully those other black guys). Toward me, he would feint blows, then be amazed that I didn't move, but continued to pierce those eyes. I didn't work at that place very much longer after these incidents and other things going on, but about 6 months later I saw his name in the trial results our paper printed at that time, and he was convicted of aggravated assault. And then some time later I saw his name again, convicted of burglary of a habitation. I doubt if he was (is?) smart enough to remember my name and look up my house, supposing he might still hold a grudge, to try his burglary. But I would have gladly put a bullet in him if he had tried.
The question I asked was: Was Jesus ever violent? Not complex at all. So Yes or No.
You need to move out of that bad neighborhood with so much black on white crime.
Indeed, been there done that but not quite the immediate danger.
One day, while witnessing to a Muslim on the internet I proclaimed Jesus as God in the flesh come to die for our sins and I was told that if I were there with him in the cafe he could kill me and get away with it and he probably would if I was there.
RighteousnessTemperance&
Well-Known Member
You want to make this all about you, but it is not all about you. You have the right not to have or carry a gun. No one is saying or suggesting otherwise.
But you do not have the right to tell others they cannot have or carry one to protect themselves from evildoers. This is the issue and you are completely wrong about it.
I'm telling you about my faith, my understanding of what it means to follow Jesus. You have the right to interpret the Bible as you see fit.
Your private interpretation?
RighteousnessTemperance&
Well-Known Member
OK, as long as your comment applies just to you personally, that is, as a personal conviction, there is no problem. I might have the same response in a given situation, even if I had a gun. The problem begins when you try to impose it on others, especially by mandating it for society.
If you are going to have a socialist society, you do not want people to have guns because they will stand up for their property. Socialists want your property for themselves and they want to destroy your family because family is not part of the structure of socialism since it is not based upon any morality unless you can find some morality in atheism, which I can't.
In Canada, the government is now murdering adults with socialized medicine. It is called MAiD, which is the Canadian government advertising for a ghoulish program of medical assistance in death. Go to the doctor in Canada and if you are too sick or they can get away with it, they are going to give you a lethal injection in the name of $$$$.
Yes. Every Christian has both the right and responsibility to interpret the Bible for themselves with the aid of the Holy Spirit.
I see no problem in trying to get society to adopt what I consider to be moral laws. Do you?
Tell Team Soros that you have a problem on the Baptist Board:
2 Peter 1:20 (KJV) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
cmg As a former Catholic (back in my departure day) this passage was brought forth against non Catholic "versions" of Christianity.
Saying that they (RCC) the true Apostolic Church was the authoritative interpreter.
There are many voices making claim of that "authority".
So what is your thought? Does the aid of the Holy Spirit keep one's interpretation from being "private" or does the correct interpretation lie in an authoritative body (presumably the Church)?
Another of the most popular views is in the following rendering of the passage.
NIV 2 Peter 1:20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation.
Just curious - Probably the basis of another topic.
RighteousnessTemperance&
Well-Known Member
Yes, I see numerous problems, because you seem unable to distinguish between moral law and personal conviction. If you want to offer your approach as a voluntary option, fine. But again, you have no moral grounds to impose it on others, thereby infringing upon, abridging, or denying their fundamental rights to self-protection. In this you are completely wrong, because you wish to disarm the weak and enable the wicked.
Thanks for posting! Good post!
"...the correct interpretation lie in an authoritative body (presumably the Church)?" is the key but that it means all Christians of good-will.
We are dealing with a socialist/commnist troll who is trying to use the Scripture to disarm Christians and non-Christians in order to do in this country what was done in Venezuela. This country is a target for socialists because it is highly developed with a lot of assets for them to steal. Socialists abandon a country that has nothing to steal as the commies abandoned the Soviet Union when that country could no longer support the lavish lifestyle of the big shots.
Yes it does look that way though I wonder - there must be other Geo-politico dynamics at work.
Surely ole Bernie is just disillusioned? He seems harmless enough (apart from his socialism).
But what did you think of the view that Peter's (through the Spirit) passage means that prophecy is not the private view of the prophet himself but of God?
Right, it comes from the Holy Ghost and socialists cannot twist it to serve their selfish material desires to dominate power and wealth through violence and theft.