Anti-Semitism In France!

[Ron Cusano 0]

Oh, but I do understand that. What I am trying to point out is that your "conscience" is at odds with the teaching of the Bible which you said you believe in. There seems to be a contridiction. I am not saying that you should follow my conscience, but rather, as a Christiance, your conscxience should be in harmony with your beliefs.

And in reading your post, I realize something that's been in the back of my mind. Ron talks about not standing up for what I believe, not following my conscience. He misses the point that that is exactly what I am doing. But it's mine, not his that I follow.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Oh, but I do understand that you are speaking your "conscience"! What I am trying to point out is thet your "conscience" is at odds with the clear teaching of scripture in which you say you believe. That seems to be a contridiction. I am not suggestion that you follow MY conscience, but rather that YOUR conscience should be in harmony with the Bible, which is your spiritual foundation.

And in reading your post, I realize something that's been in the back of my mind. Ron talks about not standing up for what I believe, not following my conscience. He misses the point that that is exactly what I am doing. But it's mine, not his that I follow.

[lisah25 3]

Oh, but I do understand that. What I am trying to point out is that your "conscience" is at odds with the teaching of the Bible which you said you believe in. There seems to be a contridiction. I am not saying that you should follow my conscience, but rather, as a Christiance, your conscxience should be in harmony with your beliefs.

And as soon as you find those verses, we'll talk more about it.

My "conscience" (interesting use of quotes there, btw) may be at odds with what you believe in. It's not for me. And even if it is, isn't that really between my and God?

[Ron Cusano 0]

I work in sales and most of my salary is based upon commissions so my time is my own. I am at liberty to make my own hours, come in to the office or work from home, or go on the road. So, to answer your concern, I am not stealing anything from my employer.

I hope you are working at a company that you own, because if you are working for an employer, you are stealing his time (='s money) by posting here at LBT.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I, for one, will not vote for any canidate that has taken a position in favor of anything I consider to be against by spiritual and moral beliefs. Being right on some points does not offset being on the wrong side of the fence on other inportant moral issues.

Yes, Jesus healed the sick and did many miracles and wonderful things, all in fulfillment of prophecy to establish His messianiac credentials. Although he cares about all of our suffering, that was not the specific reason for his actions during the 3 1/2 years of his public ministry.

And all of the other things that you mentioned ate terrible social issues, but supporting immoral laws isn't going to fix them.

So we are left with two choices:

#1. Do not vote

#2. Vote for the lessor of two evils

Choice #1 (although requiring free will to make the choice) leaves us impotent at choosing our government.

Choice #2 forces us to use our God given free will and to exercise the greatest gift God has given us; the human brain.

While your choice for #2 may be different than mine and my choice may differ from many of the other members of LBT, I will not criticize the other members as being anti-Christian or anti-bible. We all have to decide which part of the very contradictory aspects of life to vote for.

[Ron Cusano 0]

You forgot choice #3 - Do all in nour power to raise up good, solid moral canidates for public office that will uphold Judeo-Christian ethics and principals. It has been my observation that most canidates that are anti-abortion and anti gay marriage usually fall into this catagore, so there are rarely a shortage of canidates to vote for. No, I don't believe we have to, or should accept the lessor of two evils, because that still leaves us with "evil"!!

So we are left with two choices:

#1. Do not vote

#2. Vote for the lessor of two evils

Choice #1 (although requiring free will to make the choice) leaves us impotent at choosing our government.

Choice #2 forces us to use our God given free will and to exercise the greatest gift God has given us; the human brain.

While your choice for #2 may be different than mine and my choice may differ from many of the other members of LBT, I will not criticize the other members as being anti-Christian or anti-bible. We all have to decide which part of the very contradictory aspects of life to vote for.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

You forgot choice #3 - Do all in nour power to raise up good, solid moral canidates for public office that will uphold Judeo-Christian ethics and principals. It has been my observation that most canidates that are anti-abortion and anti gay marriage usually fall into this catagore, so there are rarely a shortage of canidates to vote for. No, I don't believe we have to, or should accept the lessor of two evils, because that still leaves us with "evil"!!

Let me know when you find one of these candidates.

[Ron Cusano 0]

They are out there! They are usually what is referred to as Conservatives, but there are exceptions even there. Maybe you are looking in the wrong places!! :-)

Let me know when you find one of these candidates.

[TommyO 5]

Ron, you are talking in circles and it's becoming more and more evident as we move along. You continue to use the bible to justify your stand on homosexuality, you then say the laws of the land (Our society is based on Judeo Christian principles) agree with that position and should be followed when the bible is not explicit enough. Then when the laws do not meet your need you insist that one is only required to follow the teachings of the bible.

When someone introduces a verse from the old testament that disproves your argument you talk of the new testament as the new Covenant and as such it overides the old testament. However when there is nothing in the new testament that backs your argument you decide that the old testament is correct and should be followed.

When other Christians disagree with your interpretation of the Bible you tell them they are bad Christians because you know the truth and they do not. You stated that the bible interprets itself and that in itself would imply that it is impossible to intepret it any other way. Yet people continue to disagree on the intent of scripture.

I can't help but think that these topics may not be as clear as you think and that possibly you have spent most of your efforts verifying your beleifs and not putting them to the test.

Sometimes when we discuss topics individually we miss the contradictions so, for example if in January someone questions a topic and we provide an answer we fail to notice that in March the solution we give to another issue is contradicting our solution in January but it doesn't matter because we have forgotten the previous solution.

I could go through the over 100 pages of this thread and give you specific examples but I do not have the time or energy. Even if I did the only thing that would happen is a debate would begin around the intent of the statements, so It's safe to say that this thread does not intepret itself.

It amazes me that even in a discussion such as this thread individuals misinterpret each others posts but you continue to insist that it is impossible for you to misinterpret the scriptures. Might I remind you that many thousands, likely millions of Christians disagree with your interpretation.

How come only you have this power?

[anonemouse 1]

I, for one, will not vote for any canidate that has taken a position in favor of anything I consider to be against by spiritual and moral beliefs. Being right on some points does not offset being on the wrong side of the fence on other inportant moral issues.

Well, you will never vote, then. No candidate will mimic your beliefs 100%. Like TOM said, the ones that are pro-life and anti-gay rights are very often pro-rich, pro-death penalty, and anti-poor. Not exactly the candidates Jesus would support if he could vote, now are they?

From what I know, the basis of Christianity (or at least Jesus) was loving your fellow man and helping the down-trodden. I think even Jesus would make compromises in today's world. Sometimes you have to choose the candidate that will help the most people, and make compromises where your other principles are concerned.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Tommy,

The Bible is more that explicit about homosexuality, and I never said that "when the laws do not meet your need you insist that one is only required to follow the teachings of the bible". You are misquoting me. Maybe that is what you thought I wrote. If you go back a read it again, you will see that I said "we are obligated to obey the laws of the land except where thay are in violation to the Word of God and the commandments of God".

You accused me of making contridictions on scriptural issues that I talked about. I challenge you to show them to me!!

As far as disagreements on the scriptures, you either beleive what they say or you don't. You can't take what you want and change what you don't like. Sadly, most liberal Christian denomination do exactly that. They say they believe in the Bible, but when it some to things they have a problem accepting, they rationalize around it. You can't pick and choose a verse of scripture and build your own belief system around it. It has to fit in with and be consistant with the WHOLE teaching of scripture. There is no contridiction between the Old and the New Testaments, only misapplication by some who may not be as familar with the Bible as they should be.

I have NEVER asked anyone to accept or believe anything about the scriptures just because I said so. My opinion means nothing. I constantly encourage people to open the Bible and see for themselves. I usually give them scriptural reference to point them in the right direction, but the Word of God is clear and explicit, and doesn't need any help from me.

Ron, you are talking in circles and it's becoming more and more evident as we move along. You continue to use the bible to justify your stand on homosexuality, you then say the laws of the land (Our society is based on Judeo Christian principles) agree with that position and should be followed when the bible is not explicit enough. Then when the laws do not meet your need you insist that one is only required to follow the teachings of the bible.

When someone introduces a verse from the old testament that disproves your argument you talk of the new testament as the new Covenant and as such it overides the old testament. However when there is nothing in the new testament that backs your argument you decide that the old testament is correct and should be followed.

When other Christians disagree with your interpretation of the Bible you tell them they are bad Christians because you know the truth and they do not. You stated that the bible interprets itself and that in itself would imply that it is impossible to intepret it any other way. Yet people continue to disagree on the intent of scripture.

I can't help but think that these topics may not be as clear as you think and that possibly you have spent most of your efforts verifying your beleifs and not putting them to the test.

Sometimes when we discuss topics individually we miss the contradictions so, for example if in January someone questions a topic and we provide an answer we fail to notice that in March the solution we give to another issue is contradicting our solution in January but it doesn't matter because we have forgotten the previous solution.

I could go through the over 100 pages of this thread and give you specific examples but I do not have the time or energy. Even if I did the only thing that would happen is a debate would begin around the intent of the statements, so It's safe to say that this thread does not intepret itself.

It amazes me that even in a discussion such as this thread individuals misinterpret each others posts but you continue to insist that it is impossible for you to misinterpret the scriptures. Might I remind you that many thousands, likely millions of Christians disagree with your interpretation.

How come only you have this power?

[Ron Cusano 0]

But there are certain things that you don't compromise if you are a Christian, and that is condoning what you know or believe to be evil. No, you can never find the "perfect" canidate. It's like trying to find the "sinless" man. No one is perfect. In today's politics, being pro-rich and anti-poor is very subjective. I don't think that any canidate from either party would lay claim to those titles. Those charges are hurled back and forth in every election.

Helping our fellow man that those in need are certainly good Christian virtues, but I don't think we need to compromise or values and moral beliefs to work in that direction. I think that more is down in that area privately that was ever done by politics.

Well, you will never vote, then. No candidate will mimic your beliefs 100%. Like TOM said, the ones that are pro-life and anti-gay rights are very often pro-rich, pro-death penalty, and anti-poor. Not exactly the candidates Jesus would support if he could vote, now are they?

From what I know, the basis of Christianity (or at least Jesus) was loving your fellow man and helping the down-trodden. I think even Jesus would make compromises in today's world. Sometimes you have to choose the candidate that will help the most people, and make compromises where your other principles are concerned.

[BJean 16]

I am sick and tired of listening to you say that the scriptures are not up for interpretation, Ron. Yet that is exactly what you do on a continual basis. You pick and choose and you tell us here exactly what you have decided each scripture you're citing means, ad naseum.

If anyone started reading this thread and believed something you said to be God's word, it wouldn't take them long to see that they better be very careful listening to you. You are manipulative and you use the Bible to answer every argument. Why can't you take responsibility for what you say? If someone disagrees with you, you say that you aren't the one saying it, the Bible is. I'm sick of it. Take responsibility for your words - YOUR WORDS - the ones that you are constantly spewing here. You have an opinion, own up to it. You like the fact that conservative Republicans are pro-death, pro-war, anti-help for the needy, anti-choice, against gun control, etc., etc., etc. These are your choices... own up to them. Because when you do not, your whole argument about scriptures, the Bible's teachings and your ministry appear to be a sham. One man's power struggle. And a seemingly not very bright man at that.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Think what you want! You are apparently sick of hearing things you don't believe or understand. I can't so anything about that. You want to discuss scripture, let's do it! I don't care what you think of me personally. I think you are fustrated because you hear truth and can't come with good reason to dispute it.

I am sick and tired of listening to you say that the scriptures are not up for interpretation, Ron. Yet that is exactly what you do on a continual basis. You pick and choose and you tell us here exactly what you have decided each scripture you're citing means, ad naseum.

If anyone started reading this thread and believed something you said to be God's word, it wouldn't take them long to see that they better be very careful listening to you. You are manipulative and you use the Bible to answer every argument. Why can't you take responsibility for what you say? If someone disagrees with you, you say that you aren't the one saying it, the Bible is. I'm sick of it. Take responsibility for your words - YOUR WORDS - the ones that you are constantly spewing here. You have an opinion, own up to it. You like the fact that conservative Republicans are pro-death, pro-war, anti-help for the needy, anti-choice, against gun control, etc., etc., etc. These are your choices... own up to them. Because when you do not, your whole argument about scriptures, the Bible's teachings and your ministry appear to be a sham. One man's power struggle. And a seemingly not very bright man at that.

[Ron Cusano 0]

OK, here are a few verses to make the point(s) we discussed -

You say that homosexuality does not have a bad effect on society and did not in Sodom. Apparently Jude disagrees -

Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

About weather a Christian ought to take a stand against sin (homosexuality & same sex marriage)

1 Peter 4:11 - If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ . . . How we vote is speaking publically about what we believe. Is condoning an abomination giving glory to God?

1Pe 1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Same argument, Is condoning an abomination holy?

Rom 12:9 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.| Can you abhor an abomination and vote for it too??

Rom 6:13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin . An abominable sin is certainly unrightousness!

There are countless more, but this should make the point.

Because I'm secure in my faith and how I live it. You made an accusation along the lines that I'm not following the Bible. Therefore, I think it's up to you to back it up.