Mike, on this one I can't reply.
You don't know my heart either.
You are only reading words in this case, and I can't go into why or excuse what I've said.
I'll just take your guilty verdict and swallow it, and will not take the defense stand, because of reasons that are quite personal to my heart, where some people have managed to get into very deeply on here and early in my membership.
The more we love some folks, well ...
never mind with all that.
I'll just take your post as it's written.
And pray Chris forgive me, if I hurt him and pray he knows......
| 2005/9/11 22:52|
Santa Clara, CA
Annie, I do not know your heart all that well. But enough of it to know that you are passionate and love the Lord. I also realize that these things ought not to have place in any of our hearts, mine included.
| 2005/9/11 23:52||Profile|
I'd really like to hear from Chris.
I consider him the dearest brother I've met, though you and maybe even he may not see that in that post... but I need to hear it from him, After he's read all that I wrote after that post in the next ones and see if he can piece together where I was going with it all.
I think he understands my heart even more than you Mike.
I don't think he'll take partial quotes and read things into them that weren't meant nor intended.
But anyway, though I could email him, I'd rather just sit here and wait for his own response and so that he and I can go from there and I can ask his forgiveness if how I put it hurt him.
I am open to whatever he says to me. He can do it openly on this thread also. I said it publically, so he can correct me publically.
He's been a true brother, and I trust him to speak wisely and fairly and not judge me or mince my words, nor his own.
God Bless him and heal him if I did in fact hurt him in any way or come off wrong to him.
With my heart Chris.
| 2005/9/12 1:46|
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
| The hear of the issue|
Quote:This talk about the heart of the matter brings to my mind the interesting dynamics of scriptural interpretation.
You don't know my heart either.
You are only reading words in this case, and I can't go into why or excuse what I've said.
Often when I read a post, I can only read what I read, I respond to what is written, not to the intent of the poster. Some folks, and I include myself in this category, leave to much to the interpretation of the person reading the material. I interpret posts based on what is said, I mean you don't have to be a rocket scientist to tell someone is being short or sarcastic. If you are in doubt, love believes all things even things that may appear to contrary.
Thus the true intents of a person can often only be gleaned by frequent use and frequent dialogue between us and ultimately God and his word. How much interpretation of the scriptures is a often seen as a black and white issue without really understanding the true heart motive as to why things are in the bible anyway. I am not in anyway trying to detract from the absolute truth of the word, but more trying to highlight that sometimes our application of the word of God without fully understanding the heart motive behind what is written can lead to bondage and more sadly to a skewed picture of our Father in heaven.
Taking this reason to its fullest expression could lead to the danger of never taking the scriptures literally and never taking anything as truth, but you get my heart. 8-)
| 2005/9/12 2:27||Profile|
| Re: hearing hearts|
Since you've quoted me here, let me ask ... on this previous page, you asked a question ... and I responded to your post.
What did you think of the reply I posted to your post ?
And you can just read the words, that's O.K..
I just don't want to confuse anybody by how or what I say... because I'm trying to get the hang of this keyboard dialog business, as I told someone last week, it lacks the "tone of voice and inflections" etc. and I still consider myself fairly new to this way of communicating.
I think Chris would be qualifying as a rocket scientist soon ... so it's sort of funny that you brought that up. Probably why he uses smilies for a sig.
I think he's got an answer there for me.
| 2005/9/12 2:48|
Welp Chris, here I am again. It's almost 9 a.m. and I still haven't been able to sleep.
I feel so badly for what I did to you. I totally misunderstood your post.
I don't know why I did, but I just did. I Guess I was hyped on what other's had said. I read something into the below and it threw me. It just sounded "at the time", that we couldn't use the Net to find facts. Forgive me for thinking that was what you were saying.
I've taken all nite to figure it out and this portion below was the only part that I reacted so harshly to, because I misread you.
I don't know if you can make sense of what I posted to you on page 4 at all. I tried to explain what I meant in a few posts After the bad one to you. But nevertheless, I guess what I did to you doesn't merit you going back to read those pages or links.
I think, my forum days are over. When I misunderstand someone who's been nothing but a friend to me ... it's time to get packing.
I love you brother and will continue to pray for you, but please, don't feel that you have to respond to this at all.
God bless you richly and protect you at all times.
I know that you are quite aware of this, but much of the "information" that is found on the internet must be viewed skeptically. While it is a forum for a free exchange of ideas (alot like Athens in Acts chapter 17), much of it should not be viewed as "source material." Many political or Christian websites might seem unbiased in nature, but the underlying intent is often less than honorable. This is true of blogs, reports, journals, and especially true of commercial information and newspapers (like certain liberal newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post -- or even the Discovery Channel). That is why most schools ban the use of internet sources on research papers unless it can be substantiated that such information is both accurate and unbaised.
As was pointed out by several people in this thread, there is always another side to most issues. I heard a professor lecture about the importance of real research. He gave a lecture entitled "Why Did Di Die?," concerning the death of Princess Diana. This professor pointed out that if you ask various sources, they will state several various factors that played a part in the death of others. For instance, medical staff will say that Diana died from internal hemmoraging. Engineers will state that faulty automobile or guardrail design killed Diana. Conspiracy theorists will accuse the paparazzi of killing her (by chasing her at high speeds). MADD would say that alcohol killed Diana (since the driver had too much to drink). The paparazzi would accuse the consumer of killing Diana (because the consumer buys magazines with photos of Diana, thus creating the paparrazi frenzy surrounding celebrities). A sociologist would accuse Diana of killing herself, because she was unhappy with Charles, and she was having a secret relationship with Dodi Fayed as a result. A psychiatrist might blame Charles, for causing such feelings in Diana as a result of his ongoing affair with Camilla Parker-Bowles. This list could go on and on. The point is, there are many factors that led to her death, not just one.
| 2005/9/12 9:11|
Santa Clara, CA
| Apology to Grannie Annie|
Taken some time and prayer and some private offline discussion with Ann and needed to confess my own shortcomings here.
I was wrong in the manner of how this was addressed in response to the reply to Chris further back in this thread.
This thought has been running concurrently of late:
[i]First the prose, then the test[/i]
In other words, not shortly after a whole long expression of a plea to slow down did I find myself faced with a test here. And I failed it. Did not [i]pray[/i] before the posting, let the impulse take over, slighted the whole of slowing down and just reacted. It is a difficult and dangerous reaction to toss out the word 'pride' without first removing the plank and even then it would seem that then the leveling of the charge would be not something to just throw out there after some examination.
I handled this poorly.
I ask for your forgiveness as I had sought it from Ann in private and now publicly, as it was done here before you all.
| 2005/9/16 10:39||Profile|
| Re: Apology to Grannie Annie|
Why do we seek a king? Why do we want a politician to be this or that? What purpose does a king serve in terms of the eternal? Why are we stumbling like Israel did in the times of the Judges?
1Sam. 8:6 But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, Give us a king to judge us. So Samuel prayed to the LORD. 7 And the LORD said to Samuel, Heed the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them. 8 According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even to this daywith which they have forsaken Me and served other godsso they are doing to you also. 9 Now therefore, heed their voice. However, you shall solemnly forewarn them, and show them the behavior of the king who will reign over them.
1 Samuel 8:11
This will be the behavior of the king who will reign over you: He will take your sons and appoint them for his own chariots and to be his horsemen, and some will run before his chariots. 12 He will appoint captains over his thousands and captains over his fifties, will set some to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and some to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers, cooks, and bakers. 14 And he will take the best of your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves, and give them to his servants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and your vintage, and give it to his officers and servants. 16 And he will take your male servants, your female servants, your finest young men, and your donkeys, and put them to his work. 17 He will take a tenth of your sheep. And you will be his servants. 18 And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, and the LORD will not hear you in that day.
1Sam. 8:19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, No, but we will have a king over us, 20 that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.
Politics are of this world. Jesus refused to be part of this world. How then should we who are joined with Christ see this world? Those who seek to remain under a king will always be empty of the peace that comes from the King and High Priest.
Why, why, why do we seek for the things that will not satisfy?
| 2005/9/16 16:23||Profile|
I understand your apprehension about government and politics. There are stories throughout history about people who crossed oceans in order to escape the tyranny of a ruler. But remember, these groups did not view government as evil. They just viewed tyranny as such. In fact, the Pilgrims set up the [i]Mayflower Compact[/i], which became the basis for modern Constitutional government:
Quote:Thus, not all form of government is wrong. During the period of the Exodus, the Hebrews followed the command and Law of Moses, which set up a simple government consisting of elders. You spoke about the time of the Judges. But remember, after every Judge died, there was a time without leadership, when people "did what was right in their own eyes." During times like these, the nation nearly fell apart. Thus, another Judge would rise who would bring about much needed leadership. The early church itself set up a form of Government. There were apostles and deacons that oversaw the affairs of the Church. Even Paul sought for the approval of the apostles when he met with them.
"[i]In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereigne Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britaine, France, and Ireland king, defender of the faith, etc., having undertaken, for the glory of God and the advancement of the Christian faith, and honour of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northerne parts of Virginia, doe, by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politick, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enacte, constitute, and frame such just and equall laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time as shall be thought most meete and convenient for the generall good of the Colonie unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.[/i]"
Remember also that America has no king. The founding fathers abhorred the very thought of a leader that would even be modeled as such. In fact, there was a faction of men (under Colonel Nicola) that once sought to make George Washington a "king." He fought the idea -- because he believed that "all kings eventually become tyrants." http://www.pbs.org/georgewashington/classroom/civic_virtue3.html Instead, America has a [i]democratic republic[/i]. While far from perfect, this nation has stood the test of time. Like it or not, it has recognized "[i]certain unalienable rights[/i]" that men still fight for and die for in other nations.
When it comes to obeying government, the Bible is explictly clear in Romans 13:1-7:
Quote:As is true with any nation, a lack of government brings about anarchy. The preceding verses tell us that God has allowed for various government's to come to power, and that we are to be subject to their authority. Jesus himself reminded us to "[i]Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's[/i]." II Peter 2:10 warns us not to "despise government." Paul did not disobey the laws of Caesar -- and even used the Roman political system to "appeal unto Caesar" which enabled him to bring the Gospel into "Caesar's household" (Acts 25:8, Acts 25:11, Philippians 4:22).
1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
Of course, our allegiance is first and foremost to God. There are men who refused to adhere to the rule of law if it violated the Law of God (like Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego). But remember, these men [u]still[/u] followed the other laws that they were subject to. As was stated before, the leaders of these nations will be held into account for their actions. That is why it is still imperative that we pray for the leaders of nations.
There is a view of government that is inspired by a foreboding understanding that this world is deceived, and thus anyone who listens to the government is deceived as well. We all know that the antiChrist will one day enter the picture. There are strong arguments for a pre-trib and post-trib coming of the Lord (I like what Keith Green said: "[i]Pray for pre-trib, but prepare for post-trib[/i]"). Regardless, I believe that a [u]true[/u] believer that seeks the face of God will not be deceived (remember, it says, "...if it were possible...") by the [i]son of perdition[/i].
So what should a believer do? I know that I have spoken to believers that have lived under terrible oppression in Islamic or Communist nations. They came to the United States, and enjoy the freedom of worship that is permitted here. One even told me that not a day goes by that he does not thank God for this nation. Sadly, there are believers in this nation that take such freedom for granted. With the usually bloodless "persecution" that we face in this nation, we forget about men throughout history who were executed for printing Bibles, sharing the Gospel or simply naming the name of Jesus. May God help us to make the most of the opportunity that He has blessed us with in a nation, however hypocritical it may sometimes be, that still allows us such freedom.
Quote:Maranatha! Even so, come Lord Jesus!
"[i]...and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this[/i]?"
| 2005/9/16 18:02||Profile|
Mike, forgive me that I am just now finding your post.
I went straight to "the Lounge" when I signed on today. Ha ~ guess I'm fearing these 'lower parts' and rather just 'hang loose' with our friends here. "Lounging" around. ha.
You have been more than gracious here and I'll always love you brother. Always. And look forward to ETERNITY to with the whole LOT OF YA'S. [b]AMEN ![/b]
His Peace to all of us and GRACE to all of us.
Rookie, touchy subject, but even as 'radical' as I can get, I tried very hard to obey the verse that Chris said above here, and even quoted somewhere on here, that God 'puts' these "kings" over each nation.
The only verse the Lord gave me was "Put not your 'trust' in Princes." and I just left it at that.
But freedom of speech is exactly what brother Chris has brought out.
For as long as it exists, I see nothing wrong with you airing your opinions and neither would the Bill of Rights.
You're a good brother Rookie and have much to share, as I've read other threads. But as politics gets so ugly as a conversation .... I too am taking a break from it.
Actually, my reason, as I stated earlier on in this thread, was "the only time I discuss politics, is where and when I see it lining up with End Days prophecy in some way." But never, just for the sake of discussing that subject that divides us all up so instantly.
Hoy Vey, right all ?
God Bless Mike, Chris and Rookie. BIG TIME !!!
| 2005/9/16 19:01|