This is DW's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following DW's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
DW
Recent Activity
Uh...RB...God declared everything He created good before sin entered the world. God did create Adam and Eve. As far as I know, neither one of them was L,G,B, or T.
1 reply
If God actually wants us to embrace homosexuality as a gift from Him to all mankind, why did he destroy Sodom because its residents were homosexual? If God actually wants us to embrace homosexuality as a gift from Hil to all mankind, why did He specically define marriage as between a man and a woman? If homosexaulity is the equal of heterosexuality in God's eyes, why is not sex before marriage between committed teenagers and adults given the same status by Him and us? Oh, wait a minute, today's culture does not condemn sex before marriage, either. Perhaps Timothy Wengert can write his next apology on that subject. It would be easy for him to do. Just substitute the word lovers in place of the word homosexuals. I doubt this would offend the ELCA, either.
1 reply
KCFree, your post this morning at 7:45 am was brilliant! It is a wonderful defense of the unequivocal Biblical position against homosexuality, although I'm sure you were being sarcastic and trying to belittle God's word. Even so, the Holy Spirit can use your words to bring understanding and open the minds of people like Bill and some others on this blog to God's truth. Bill's statement that he finds nothing in the Bible against homosexuality proves he and people of like mind do not respect the Bible. To them, it's just a piece of ancient literature, much of which is no longer applicable to people in the 21st century. It's not surprisinig that a freethinker has a better understanding of the Bible than does the Christian author of this blog. It is ironic that you use your biblical knowledge to try and tear down the Bible and attack God, while Bill's uses his lack of knowledge of the Bible to do the exact same thing. While you and Bill obstensibly have completely different agendas, and both of you come at many of the same issues from totally opposite directions, the end result is the same... you both end up disparaging, ridiculing and making a mockery of the Bible. Bill should be ashamed, and you should be more open to hearing and believing what God has to say to all of us in the Bible.
1 reply
"Bill, I assume you think God never punishes.Thats a comforting thought to many, but also disturbing; it means that NO MATTER WHAT any human being does to others they will never be ultimiately accountable." It should be no comfort to anyone to believe that human beings will ultimately be held accountable for their actions. After all, every single person who has ever lived deserves nothing but death. All have sinned. All are unworthy to stand before God based on their own actions or "goodness." As Jesus taught us, there is no difference in God's eyes between a murderer and a person who hates his neighbor. Both are sinners. Both deserve nothing from God. No one is good enough. No one is good, not one. In regard to Bernie Madoff's cancer, it most definitely is not a punishment from God. All bad things which happen to people are the result of the world's sinful, fallen state. Christians know that all good things come from God; all bad things are the result of sin in the world.
1 reply
Perhaps all of the other world religions should get together and pay homage to the "essential and precious nature" of each other's faith tradition, but not Christianity. The problems with conferences such as this is its organizers want participants to give tacit agreement to the idea that all religions are equally valid. Of course, no Christian can accept this nonsense. Christianity is not a "faith tradition" on par with Judiasm, Islam, etc. Christianity is the one true religion. There is no provision in Christianity for "other paths" to God and salvation. Jesus is the only way; the only path. Christians should not support conferences which imply otherwsie. To do so would be a disservice to those members of other religions who are on the wrong path.
1 reply
Bill, there's no need to make excuses or explain the statement. It sounds like Katharine Jefferts-Schori said exactly what she believes...there is no such thing as individual salvation or the need for a Savior, Jesus is not God or a Savior, and belief in Him as one's personal savior is idolatry. About what you would expect from a liberal theologian and the leader of Episcoal Church these days. The Episcopal Church is nice social organization, I suppose, but like almost mainline denominaitons, it has abandoned Christianity and isn't really a Christian church any longer. The worst part is, that probably makes Katharine Jefferts-Schori very happy.
1 reply
Several individuals have commented that "to dismiss Hitler as nuts lets us off the hook." I'm not sure I understand this comment. If Hitler were "nuts," how does let anyone off the hook for not doing anything to stop him? Whatever you think others should have done to oppose Hitler, it shouldn't matter whether he was nuts or not. Just do whatever you can to stop him, regardless of his motives. I believe the correct statement is, "to dismiss Hitler as nuts lets him (Hitler) off the hook. In other words, I suppose some people could argue that if Hitler persecuted the Jews because he was mentally ill, then he would not really be responsible for his actions. Right?
1 reply
I'm not sure the "soldiers who followed orders to murder Jews" is the same as Hitler giving the order to murder Jews. If it is, then we have to believe that soldiers who followed orders to kill Indians were murderers. We would have to believe that American pilots who followed orders to carpet-bomb Dresden were murderers. The soldiers who "murdered" Jews most certainly would have been murdered themselves if they did not follow their orders. Would the murder of the German soldiers placate those who wanted to stop the murder of innocent Jews?
1 reply
Lynne, Bill uses the term "anti-Judiasm." He accuses Christianity of being anti-Judiasm, as if it's a bad thing for a Christian to disagree with Jewish theology. Bill wants to pretend that all the early Christians were, theologically speaking, both Jewish and Christian. In fact, he goes farther and claims that Christianity really should be thought of as a sect of Judiasm. In any event, by definition, Christianity is "anti-Judiasm," and that's a good thing. I agree with you...no one should criticize Christians for being anti-Judiasm. If Christians were pro-Judiasm, they would cease to be Christians.
1 reply
Susan, there are no "allies" of Fred Phelps other than members of his own family.
1 reply
Question: What is the difference between the wildly anti-Judiasm views of Fred Phelps and the wildly anti-Christianity views of the atheists' on Bill's blog? Answer: There is no difference.
1 reply
Member, glad you're interested in attending a Bible study. Faith comes from hearing the word, so I'm glad you are reading the Bible quotes on Bill's blog. Perhaps it does have some value, after all.
1 reply
Susan, do you really think that "critical thinking" was just recently discovered? Understanding the Bible is not a matter of chritical thinking. "Critical thinking" would ultimately lead you to deny all the miracles, the incarnation, the resurrection, the power of prayer, etc. "Critical Thinkers" were around even in the 1st century. Here's what God, through Paul, had to say to them (and you): 1 Cornithians 18-25: "...For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.' Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men."
1 reply
Susan, once you start down the path of picking the parts of the Bible you like and choose to believe, and the parts you don't like and choose not to believe, where do you stop? Do you like the part where Jesus died for your sins? Do you like the part where Jesus rose from the dead? Do you like the part where Jesus said He will return to judge both the living and the dead? Do you like the part where Jesus said those who have faith in Him, and only Him, for their salvation will be saved, and those who don't will be condemned forever? Most folks on this blog love to quote the Jewish laws from the Old Testament and ridicule anyone who places any signficance in anything the Bible has to say because of them. I'm not a theologian, but I'm certain these kinds of objections to the Bible have been considered and answered long, long, ago. You haven't discovered anything new that makes the Bible inherently untrustworthy. I do know the New Testament law is much higher and should be much more troublesome to you. The Old Testament condemns physical adultry and proscibes harsh physical punishment. The New Testament condemns even lustful thoughts not acted upon, and condemns the individual to eternal damnation. Member, lets see, Bill and Susan are tolerant in their viewpoints expressed on this blog, and Saint Paul and the Bible are intolerant. Therefore, Bill and Susan are right and Paul is wrong. Therefore, Bill's blog is more trusworthy than the Bible. The truth is, Paul is not tolerant because God is not tolerant. God hates sin. He punishes sin. The sins of those who have faith in Jesus for their salvation are wiped away. It's as if they never happened. Those who don't have faith in Jesus are condemned by their own sins. Their sins...not God...condemn them to eternal punishment. It's simple, really.
1 reply
Susan, all Christian doctrine and beliefs are derived from the Bible. Anyone who believes that the information contained within its pages is no different than the blog posts of today automatically makes that person ridicously silly for paying much attention to it at all. I for one would not belong to any religion based on Bill's blog, or any other blog, for that matter. If you truly believe the Bible is just an ancient blog and no more, you're probably wasting you time worrying about anything contained within its pages.
1 reply
Susan, the answer to your question about why yuor opinion is no less valid that Paul's is obvious to everyone but yourself, and perhaps Bill. You believe your opinions as stated on Bill's blog are equal to anything printed in the Bible. Fortunately, almost no one else has such a high opinion of your opinions.
1 reply
Member, you're not doing Bill and Susan any favors by agreeing that they believe Paul's words are no different than their own blog posts. Once Susan and Bill decided their opinions on Christian doctrine are equal to or better than Paul's because they live in the 21st century AD and Paul lived 2,000 years ago, it eviscerates Christian religion. If Susan and Bill's blog posts are equally valid as Paul's letter, then there's no longer any reason to revere the Bible. It's no better or different than Bill's blog. They believe the Bible is not God's word, but Paul's opinion, no better or different than their opinions. I'm not surprised you believe this, but it's rather shocking that they do. After all, they are Christians. They should know better.
1 reply
KCfreethinker, Susan and Bill evidently believe the Bible is not truly God's word. They believe the Bible is just a book full of the opinions of ancient people. They believe their opinion on Christian doctrine is just as valid as Paul's. After all, Paul wrote a bunch of letters. He's just a normal human being writing a letter stating his opinion. Susan and Bill and anyone also can write a letter or post stating their opinion. It's ancient Paul's word against Susan and Bill's opinion. Equally valid opinions, in their minds. Given this scenario, it's no wonder that they're confused. Their opinions are equal to Paul's opinon. His letter to the Thessalonians is no more important than their blog posts, right? Just one person's opinion? Ridiculous.
1 reply
Susan, there are no translations of the Bible...no matter how old the manuscripts...which endorse homosexuality as blessed and encouraged by God. The Bible's condemnation of homosexuality is a straightforward fact, not a mistake based on a mis-translation. That would be quite a mistake by thousands of different translators. It is what it is. It can't be explained away just because you don't like it. God also prohibits all sex outside of marriage. I suppose you believe that is a mis-translation as well?
1 reply
Acts 11:26 "and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians." 1st Thessolians 2: 14-16 "For you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea. For you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all mankind by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved---so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last!" I'm not sure why it irritates Bill to think that Paul and the disciples were Christians. Jewish people can be Christians, too. There's no doubt that Paul thought of himself as a Christian, not a Jew. He changed his name from Saul to Paul to mark the transition. Paul's comments in Thessaloians indicate clearly he certainly no longer thought of himself as a Jew, whom he says killed Jesus, displeased God and, as a result, are now under God's wrath.
1 reply
The Jews savagely persecuted Christians following the ressurection of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. The Romans used Christians as human torches and fed them to Lions. Where's the outrage? "Evangelism" is not "anti-Judiasm." Evangelism is an imperative for Christians, a direct command from Jesus Christ, the Messiah. The proper objective of all Christians is to convert all nations and all people to the Christian religion. The Holocaust was not religious in nature. It was a secular atrocity. For every Christian or Muslim who denies the Holocaust happend, there are milliions who don't. The Holocaust denyers are extreme outliers. In the overall scheme of things, it's not worth getting THAT excited about.
1 reply