62

Why are you asking that question when you can perfectly read that post 11 says exactly that?

See? That’s a great example of apron tugging!

63

We are allowed to have opinions on things that do not personally affect us. For example, I can have an opinion on China’s actions in Hong Kong, even though I have no personal connection to Hong Kong.

Caring about strangers which you have no personal involvement is quite Christian, especially if one is to assert objective morality

64

Why can’t I buy alcohol on Sunday?

65

I wasn’t referring to you at all. You’ve seen my posts here. I contend it is libs in this thread insisting one out-of-context snippet misinterpreted by a backwater mayor is worth an entire thread of anti-Christian pablum.

You pointed out what I’m talking about.

66

I’m not convinced the vaunted Sermon on the Mount is thoroughly good either.

It equates thought as equivalent to deeds which most would consider wrong.

67

Cool beans. I addressed the assertion that stuff like this impacts us all in society. Now you’re moving the goalposts to having “opinions on things that do not personally affect us.”

68

Which individual stopped you?

69

Obviously by “all” I didn’t mean every individual on the planet. Rather, I meant “all” in terms of those under the scope of a public policy.

“Context”

70

Are they correct that Jesus is not God’s son?

1 Like
71

Ah. More backpedaling.

:man_shrugging:

72

They do have years of study. As do muslims. In fact, muslims i think promote study of the Koran in a much deeper fashion from childhood to adulthood than US Christians

73

No. God hasn’t told me.

74

I wrote

It’s obvious I was talking about those under the scope of the policy. I also later spoke how me not being personally effected still grants me the right to speak out (hong kong for example).

You were also speaking about “libs” as a group of people. Which I responded to:

You asked about “they”. Not just me specifically. Glad to clear this up for you :slight_smile:

75

Which lib thinks that?

2 Likes
76

Whoever it is, I suggest they be forgiven rather than scolded

77

Right. I never called you out.

But as the saying goes, when you throw a rock into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps is the one you hit.

78

Lol okaayyy. Geez loeeze

79

Oh, gotcha! :call_me_hand:

80

You are correct. No individual stopped me.

81

Jewish reasoning is that no human could possibly be God. Impossible. The concept of Trinity is dismissed and not very well understood because of this dismissal. I do not fault their reasoning or their sincerity. I recall Jesus’ own words that those who are well have no need of a physician. Jews have been in the Father’s arms for many eras.

As for me: Not being of Jewish heritage it was Jesus and the Catholic Apostolic faith that dropped me into the arms of God. We might say that some of us needed to know a little more about God to be drawn to Him–which was Christ’s sole purpose. Even some Jewish people of the time felt outside the circle of the Father’s love because of so many laws and rules they were too poor to observe. (To badly misquote Edwin Markham…They drew a circle that shut some out; heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and He had the wit to win: He drew a circle and took us in.)

I see it this way: Those who have already reached their destination, or who are already in the circle, have no need to find a guide or even a map and dismiss them as superfluous. While Jesus may be superfluous to some, in many other cases he has been invaluable in bringing people to the Father. That should say something about the Father’s relationship to the Son and their Oneness.