Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Love and Torture in History

Forum Quick Jump

285 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Starkman
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747

Posted 10/5/2002 9:17 AM (GMT -6)

Brandi,

Welcome to the reality of diverse folks, eh!
Hek, I've been ignored, particularly by specific people on this board, after I've even specifically addressed a post of theirs or asked them a question. Happens. At first there was kind of a "Well, maybe I should just shut up and get off the board." But, I'd rather love in return, not hold grudges, and get on with talking with those folks who have responded.

For hanging in there,

Starkman

Electra
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 611

Posted 10/5/2002 9:47 AM (GMT -6)

Shenaya, Welcome to the board! Raw and honest opinions are welcome here--there are plenty to go around as you well know after following the discussion for a while. However, after brandi expressed gratitude for the anonymity she has, why would you try to expose her other pseudonyms? Although we don't know who brandi is, maybe we do know who some of her other pseudonyms are. Exposing them seems more hurtful than helpful.

Peace,
Electra

Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Matt. 10:8

Electra
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 611

Posted 10/5/2002 9:51 AM (GMT -6)

Semeia, thanks for your response. I appreciate the clarification. I'll try to be more clear because I think you're right--we may not be as far apart as it seems. Thanks, Electra

Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Matt. 10:8

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/5/2002 10:30 AM (GMT -6)

Electra,

Okay...I removed the previous psuedonym she had used which I thought was pretty obvious...but it seemed to me (my raw opinion again) that she feels hiding behind her pseudonym seems to make her more comfortable in lashing out at others because of the pain she felt. But that's cool...no need to hurt others more through my observations.I made the wrong assumption that no one knew her other psuedonym either. All they all are is psudonyms to me.

I just don't understand when she's getting all the positive feedback that she is that she gets defensive over the abortion topic over and over...isn't this site ALL ABOUT expressing DIFFERENT views? Brandi your last post came across to me that you don't want opinions you just want to assert your opnions loud and clear and want to draw in the opposing viewpointnt and if they don't it's them devaluing you as and individual. Just thought I better clear up what I was trying to say.

Bye for now.

~Shenaya~

Edited by - Shenaya on 10/05/2002 3:47:32 PM

Edited by - Shenaya on 10/05/2002 3:48:40 PM

Electra
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 611

Posted 10/5/2002 10:45 AM (GMT -6)

Doc, thanks for your comments. I'm glad you are raising this question because I think it gives us another opportunity to work out some of the implications of love--for the past and future of the church.

I found Mephi's analogy between what it means to be an American and what it means to be in the Church helpful. I hold Christians in the past and present more responsible for sin, not less. But confrontation should always be in service of reconciliation, not rejection, if it is done in love. I think most white people in America are disgusted by the oppression done to black people, and aren't afraid to condemn the violence in our history. But unless we have the courage to take responsibility for what white people have done, we place all the burden of healing on black people--who don't have a choice about identifying with the violence that has been committed. So, yes, expose the evil for what it is. By no means submit to authority of the past uncritically. But rejecting perpetrators and reassuring ourselves that we never would have done such things is too easy (In addition to confronting the Pharisees about their confidence they would not have killed the prophets like their anscestors did, Jesus also confronted his disciple Peter about his confidence that he would loyaly follow Jesus even to death--Jesus let him know that in fact, Peter would deny him three times.). We may get ourselves off the hook, but we miss out on the healing that can happen for everyone. Jesus proves that we don't have to be guilty of a particular sin to take responsibility for it and do something about it. I think that this healing of injustice via reconciliation vs. the lack of injustice via rejection should be most evident in the Body of Christ.

As for what determines who participates in the true church, this is simply not up to us. Love is a center, not a boundary based on particular beliefs or practices, and the center is Christ. Who are we to begrudge God's generosity? Jesus included Judas in the New Covenant. Think about the theological implications of that. Betrayal is always tragic but should not be a surprise----and need not be a success. There is no fear in love.

Peace,
Electra

p.s. Martin Luther King Jr. is an example of a Christian who used political power for good.

Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Matt. 10:8

Edited by - Electra on 10/05/2002 5:31:04 PM

Electra
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 611

Posted 10/5/2002 10:50 AM (GMT -6)

Shenaya, thanks for making that change. You're right, this board is about discussing different views, but so far you have just been discussing another person. Let's share ideas instead of trying teach people a lesson. I would like to hear your thoughts on the topic of this thread.

Peace,
Electra

Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Matt. 10:8

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/5/2002 10:53 AM (GMT -6)

It still bcame a part of the thread, and isn't this a forum where knee jerk reactions can be discussed? I'll take the reprimand and move on.(I mean move on to a different thread, or just keep on following a long, whatever)

~Shenaya~
p.s. I do appreciate the wisdom you impart on this site. I guess I just come and say things like I see them. Don't mean to be trying to teach any lessons.

Edited by - Shenaya on 10/05/2002 3:57:38 PM

Electra
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 611

Posted 10/5/2002 11:05 AM (GMT -6)

quote:
It still bcame a part of the thread, and isn't this a forum where knee jerk reactions can be discussed? I'll take the reprimand and move on.(I mean move on to a different thread, or just keep on following a long, whatever)

~Shenaya~
p.s. I do appreciate the wisdom you impart on this site. I guess I just come and say things like I see them. Don't mean to be trying to teach any lessons.

Neither do I, so sorry for coming off like a reprimander. I sincerely do look forward to your contribution. Electra

Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Matt. 10:8

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/5/2002 11:11 AM (GMT -6)

I am sorry too. REALLY.

LOVE and PEACE,

~Shenaya~

BBBCanada
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 2763

Posted 10/5/2002 11:35 AM (GMT -6)

Yes, I think Meph provided a good example as well. I agree on the whole with Electra on her post concerning Meph's post, with one exeception. Electra said:

quote:
But unless we have the courage to take responsibility for what white people have done, we place all the burden of healing on black people--who don't have a choice about identifying with the violence that has been committed.

For the most part I agree with this. The offenders should take the first move and apologize and right past injustices. Don't misunderstand me here. Even if I personally have not offended? The person who has been offended or feels the offence should still be made amends with. Why? Because their feelings are real. The stance of the accused should be, "What can I do to right this past wrong." Instead of, "Blow it out your A** I never did anything to you!" Even though the accused did not offend I believe the onus should be on him for possible reconciliation. Now, where I might have problems with this, is how we go about doing this. That is, to what extent should I own up to someone else's injustice, which is not merely a mistake. The particulars may be construed in such a way that we then further injustice on the pentitent which is not healthy either.

Brandon
"A life after death can only be thought of in terms of life before it, and nobody can dream of a new earth when there is no old earth to hold any promises"--Henri J.M. Nouwen, "The Wounded Healer"

Edited by - BBBCanada on 10/05/2002 4:45:07 PM

brandi
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 118

Posted 10/5/2002 5:57 PM (GMT -6)

Shenaya

quote:
Okay...I removed the previous psuedonym she had used which I thought was pretty obvious...but it seemed to me (my raw opinion again) that she feels hiding behind her pseudonym seems to make her more comfortable in lashing out at others because of the pain she felt.

The truth is that the joke is on you.

I didn't get a chance to see the other pseudonym(s) you claim that I "hide" behind but WRONG! I may be related to, be a friend of, or co-write with the other person/persons you claim that I am but this DOES NOT mean that I am the other pseudonym for the majority of what has been posted! It most certainly does NOT mean that I am only one writer. The truth is I am not one person behind this pseudonym.

Personally, I HOPE that the majority of the time I have NOT been "lashing out at others" when I've posted. I hope this has NOT been the spirit that my posts have been received but if it has then I must say that I am sorry to those who have felt lashed out upon. Please forgive me.

Shenaya

quote:
You seem to take it very personally that some posters are making the choice not to take you up on diving into that topic. If you were to start your own thread on the topic,the people who choose to respond are ready and willing to tackle it.

Since you enjoy Brandi's candidness then Brandi will entertain you once again. The beef hasn't been about "taking it personally" as much as it's about getting frustrated. When ANY person ventures out to learn with a group and joins in on a conversation then they should at least be acknowledged. Brandi wasn't acknowledged until a "beef" was made which you call "taking it personally" Brandi stated to Doc that the intent was NOT to DEBATE the topic of abortion as much as to make sense out of how people can get so upset by some things yet overlook others. It's like the log/speck thing only works some of the time?! It's hard to UNDERSTAND the mindset of those who are walking in the light and wanting to love yet don't see anything wrong with the killing of innocent lives. We don't want to judge yet have a whole board dedicated to judging the actions of the early church fathers --doesn't make sense!?!?

Anyway, the main reason I think it best to be off is because I do believe that my frustration is coming across in the last few posts that I've made and this is a good sign that it's time to move on -- to take a vacation.

Again I am sorry if I have "lashed" out in my posts!

Starkman

quote:
Welcome to the reality of diverse folks, eh!

This is precisely the primary reason I think I need an indefinite BREAK. Thanks for your posts, Starkman.

Brandon, don't get too mad at me for taking a vacation. I really have appreciated you!

TRYING to walk in God's love and peace!
~Brandi~

Edited by - brandi on 10/05/2002 11:16:56 PM

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/5/2002 6:12 PM (GMT -6)

quote:

The truth is that the joke is on you. I didn't get a chance to see the other pseudonym(s) you claim that I "hide" behind but WRONG! I may be related to, be a friend of, or co-write with the other person/persons you claim that I am but this DOES NOT mean that I am the other pseudonym for the majority of what has been posted! It most certainly does NOT mean that I am only one writer. The truth is I am not one person behind this pseudonym.

Obviously this seems as juvenile to you as it does to me as well at this point. It's just that your "frustration" is irritating when you do get a lot of responses and as soon as someone avoids your abortion soap box you have a fit.

And by the way I don't think the joke is on me afterall. It's pretty interesting that you ALL need a vacation from the board at the same time.

Shenaya

Edited by - Shenaya on 10/05/2002 11:54:18 PM

Edited by - Shenaya on 10/06/2002 12:01:59 AM

brandi
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 118

Posted 10/5/2002 7:02 PM (GMT -6)

Shenaya, I must be frustrating you so much. I sense an irritation in what you wrote?

The "group" you ask about consists of this: there's myself, my husband, and a couple dear friends who have contributed things under the name of "Brandi". I primarily write the entries but they are not all from my origin. I share this because you assumed that other pseudonyms had also been me. I WAS NOT playing a game or trying to act juvenile.

Brandi is leaving because she feels a need for a break. You know how it is when you are at a GREAT party or visiting some dear friends and then you get to the point where you know it's time to leave? Vacations (breaks) are meant to be a time to rejuvenate. To be honest, I am the primary writer of this pseudynom thus feel it best to take a break.

God's blessings Shenaya!
~Brandi~

Again, I am sorry if I have irritated or frustrated you.

brandi
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 118

Posted 10/5/2002 7:12 PM (GMT -6)

Now that I have fully disclosed to the whole cyber viewing world that I need a break from this board I want to say one more thing...

Dear brother and sisters, I am sorry if I came off as taking things "personally" or acting "frustrated." I believe there comes a time when a break is best and I have gone PAST this time. I am not leaving in a pouting mode. I am not leaving with hard feelings... I am leaving because of the mere fact that I am sitting here right now bearing my soul to a whole cyber audience.

Before Brandi takes her jet and leaves for the Bahamas she wants to say THANK YOU! I appreciate each of you on this board. Some I don't agree with too much while others seem to sing my song in theology yet I love you all in Christ!

I will be reading along and I will pipe in if there is a prayer request ... but I need to mosey on down the road for a spell. I need to kick back, take my shoes off, and REST!

I am sorry if I have irritated anyone. I am especially sorry for temporarily getting Doc's thread off track.

~Brandi~

shell
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 280

Posted 10/5/2002 7:26 PM (GMT -6)

Hi Brandi,

Hey can I join you on your jet to the Bahamas? I need to take a rejuvenating break from a lot of things as well!

I hope you get your needed break. It's hard not to participate in these discussions isn't it? It does take time and energy though, that's for sure. For the time being I am trading in my keyboard for warm bubble baths and cups of hot tea by the fireplace...but I know I can't stay away long, and hopefully you won't either.

REST AWAY...and sweet dreams to you. I don't know about you but I need some sleep.

Shell

Edited by - shell on 10/06/2002 12:42:48 AM

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/5/2002 10:41 PM (GMT -6)

BRANDI:

quote:

Shenaya, I must be frustrating you so much. I sense an irritation in what you wrote?

SHENAYA:
My intent wasn't to get into it the way I have here. I just didn't understand why you would be mad and leave over what happened. Like I've said before you get a lot of feedback so I just didn't get where you were coming from being miffed and all. That was just what I was trying to say, but I guess I got my claws out. I didn't mean to get so irritated about it myself. Man, my first posts here didn't go well at all. Like Electra said I will be sticking to the theological issues from now on. You do seem like a nice person behind that pseudonym and I'll keep my personal opinions about attitudes to myself from now on. I am really not the self righteous b**** that I probably came across as on here.

Peace?
Shenaya

Edited by - Shenaya on 10/06/2002 03:47:35 AM

GregBoyd
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818

Posted 10/6/2002 1:10 AM (GMT -6)

BJS (to Brandi) That is, Greg and Co. may have their reasons for not defending the unborn to the extent that Brandi and I might.

Doc: Okay, I'll go this far on this topic. There’s a TON of very very complex issues that surround this issue. For the record, I desperately want to defend the unborn, probably "to the extent" of Brandi or BJS. (As a personal aside, I have at some cost and time investment helped pregnant women go full term). But saying that doesn’t settle issues of such as * what is the metaphysical status of a fetus at conception/ 4 weeks/ 12 weeks, etc? * HOW should an individual defend the unborn? * How should the church defend the unborn? * how should a government weigh unborn rights? *to what extent should government decide controversial matters rather than individuals? * what, if any, are the political ramifications? * how does the plight of the unborn compare with the martyring of people in the past, etc…

I believe it is because most people on this discussion board sense this complexity that they "didn’t want to go there" with Brandi ON THIS THREAD – which is about the Church killing heretics. My comment to Brandi was an attempt to explain to her why her posts haven’t been responded to… at least why I don’t want to engage in her particular concerns ON THIS THREAD.

It is, frankly, beyond me how a person, or person(s), speaking through a psuedonym, can be personally offended because their posts aren’t responded to. With Shenaya, I don’t get it. If AN IDEA is intriguing to people, its responded to. If not, its not. For whatever reasons (I think the one I gave above is likely), there were no takers on Brandi’s abortion concern. That’s that. I don’t get LEAVING because a person "feels ignored."

AL: YOU CAN NOT CONTRAST SOTERIOLOGY WITH ECCLESIOLOGY. DID GOD TRY TO SAVE THE WORLD OTHER THAN THROUGH HIS INCARNATE WORD? DID CHRIST SENT HIS SPIRIT, PERSONALLY (NOT JUST IN ALL OF CREATION) EXCEPT THROUGH THE CHURCH?

Doc: I sure CAN contrast soteriology and ecclesiology. Whether one is a baptist, episcopalian, Catholic, etc… is NOT a matter of soteriology. Look, according to the traditional view of the Church, one is "outside" the Church insofar as one holds heretical beliefs. They may be saved (though this was uniformly denied), but they are "outside the Church" insofar as they hold these heretical beliefs. I’m only wondering why LOVE was never one of the critiera for what constitutes being INSIDE or OUTSIDE. I would have thought, and wished, that KILLING was a heresy. That’s all. It is for me. And so, I think that insofar as Calvin burned Servetus at the stake, he was ACTING HERETICALLY. He undoubtedly has some good things to say, as heretics often do. But I don’t see why I or anyone should take HIM more authoratitvely than (say) the gnostics.

Electra: As for what determines who participates in the true church, this is simply not up to us. Love is a center, not a boundary based on particular beliefs or practices, and the center is Christ. Who are we to begrudge God's generosity? Jesus included Judas in the New Covenant. Think about the theological implications of that. Betrayal is always tragic but should not be a surprise----and need not be a success.

Doc: Still, you would want to post facto acknowledge that Judas’ act of betrayal was not manifesting the love of the New Covenant.

Brandi: I am sorry if I have irritated anyone. I am especially sorry for temporarily getting Doc's thread off.

Doc: This is not "my thread" Brandi. It’s ours. And we didn’t get off track, because no one wanted to engage in the abortion issue. Had we done so, I think we would have gotten off track. In this case, I would have either said, "heh, can we bracket this issue and get back to the martyrdom issue." But if people RATHER wanted to take abortion, I perhaps would have started a NEW thread to discuss the issue that was on my heart. Perhaps there would be takers. Perhaps not. It’s a matter of what people want to talk about.

Shenaya: I just didn't understand why you would be mad and leave over what happened.

Doc: My sentiments exactly. Brandi, take whatever break you need to… certainly. Consider floating a balloon on your topic when you want to. Start a thread. If there are people interested, you’ll get a response. If not, you won’t. Either way, this is a reflection of people’s interest, NOT THERE ASSESSMENT OF YOU. WE DON"T KNOW YOU. I wouldn’t conclude that the participants on this board are not "loving" because they aren’t interested in what you’re interested in.

Blessings

"In Christ...the ONLY THING that matters is faith energized by love." Galatians 5:6

Electra
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 611

Posted 10/6/2002 2:56 AM (GMT -6)

Doc: Still, you would want to post facto acknowledge that Judas’ act of betrayal was not manifesting the love of the New Covenant.

Electra: Yes, as I have said all along, I think we should expose evil and call it what it is. To the extent that evil happens within the church, we should be more, not less, rigorous about holding people accountable. But I don’t think this means we should redefine the bounderies of the Body of Christ on that basis. Aparrantly Jesus’ love was great enough to knowingly include his own betrayer in the community established in his shed blood and broken body. We should confront evil for the sake of reconciliation, not exclusion.

Electra

Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Matt. 10:8

brandi
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 118

Posted 10/6/2002 2:59 AM (GMT -6)

Thanks, Shell! A bubble bath sounds inviting. Candles, a cup of tea, and a good book by the fire sound great too!

Shenaya

quote:
Like I've said before you get a lot of feedback so I just didn't get where you were coming from being miffed and all.

Precisely why I know that a break is what I need.

Now that we've gone through the storm together I want to say welcome! I hope you enjoy yourself on this board.

Doc

quote:
I don’t get LEAVING because a person "feels ignored."

I have my doubts that the Internet dialogue thing is my 'cup of tea' when it comes to intense topics like theology. I guess I've discovered that I prefer to interact live. I am NOT leaving at this point because I "feel ignored" -- instead I am taking a break because I know when I NEED to. Hey, MAYBE I am gaining an understanding of how Jesus felt when he sometimes needed to go off in solitude! I need to rejuvenate.

Again I apologize if I overreacted in my frustration. I understand that people won't respond if they're not interested in what is being presented. I was too self-centered in that I wanted to gain understanding, therefore NEEDED to receive input in order to get this understanding, yet instead received NO response. One of the components of love is to be "NOT self-seeking" thus I was NOT interacting in love through this frustration.

Doc

quote:
This is not "my thread" Brandi. It’s ours. And we didn’t get off track, because no one wanted to engage in the abortion issue

I referred to it as "your thread" because you were the originator of this particular topic. I apologized for getting off track because a few posts were spent discussing "Brandi" instead of love and torture.

Doc

quote:
If there are people interested, you’ll get a response. If not, you won’t. Either way, this is a reflection of people’s interest, NOT THERE ASSESSMENT OF YOU. WE DON"T KNOW YOU. I wouldn’t conclude that the participants on this board are not "loving" because they aren’t interested in what you’re interested in.

Gosh, I hope I didn't say that I thought the participants on this board were not "loving" -- if I did I am sorry! I believe the thing I regret is comparing murder with people ignoring a person. Poor, poor analogy! Here's what happened:

I posted what I "thought" fit with this topic --> I received no answer to my questions --> I felt my posting had been a waste of time since I received no answer --> I allowed my frustration to come across in my posts --> I evaluated the situation and discovered that cyber interacting isn't my 'cup of tea' --> (BUT HERE'S WHERE I MADE THE MISTAKE AND LEARNED ANOTHER LESSON IN LIFE) I should have quietly existed and taken the break that I have spoken about. I guess we live and learn as we go along.

Blessings,
~Brandi~

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 10/6/2002 3:24 AM (GMT -6)

Doc: I’m only wondering why LOVE was never one of the critiera for what constitutes being INSIDE or OUTSIDE.

Love has ALWAYS been the criterion. I do like how
Electra put it on page four: "Love is a center, not a boundary based on particular beliefs or practices, and the center is Christ." (We can not consider love apart from Christ.) I think I would put in a period where that last comma is. That way saying "Christ" becomes an enlargement on the statement about Love.

Let me tell a story.

Augustine, at the end of his life recanted on something like 78 or 178 doctrines that he had written along his long path. Back at the time of the Council of Orange, it was true that as much of Augustine's possitions got the ax from that council as did Pelagius. True. Why. I mean, why wasn't Augustine named by name. It was his humble character. His positions got repremended. But he did not nead one. That's evidence of LOVE being a criterion. That is evidence of the Holy Spirit at work. I've read several other instances where it is the character of what the person fronting the possition is like, and the degree to which the possition causes divisiveness that matters. THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A GREAT VARIETY OF POSSITIONS. We are human. That is how we learn and communicate. (BTW, I agree with you on Cal vs. the stake. But we can also point to him for a possive example of what we ourselves can follow: Luther remarked on his way of softening conflicts and bringing together. He compromised lots in things that mattered greatly to him versus Zwingli and Luther.)

YOU IGNORED THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SALVATION AND ECCLESIOLOGY. IT DIDN'T FIT YOUR WORKING DEFINITION OF ECCLESIOLOGY. I DON'T KNOW IF WHAT I POSTED MADE A DENT.

* * * * * * * *

Now, I think I caught something in what you were saying to Brandi. If you envision this thread as being about martyrdom, rather than about the church, then perhaps we are having two separate conversations.

BBBCanada
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 2763

Posted 10/6/2002 3:27 AM (GMT -6)

Greg said:

quote:
BJS (to Brandi) That is, Greg and Co. may have their reasons for not defending the unborn to the extent that Brandi and I might

Ahhh...Greg? It's BBB!!! Not BJS. DOY-A! That's happened a 2-3 times this week already on different threads. First couple times? No problem. After a while though? I feel like I'm being ignored.

To Brandi? I love ALL of you.

Lastly, Greg says:

quote:
But if people RATHER wanted to take abortion, I perhaps would have started a NEW thread to discuss the issue that was on my heart. Perhaps there would be takers. Perhaps not. It’s a matter of what people want to talk about.

I for one would be a taker if you were to start a thread on this issue because...well...I think you're way off on this one.

Like your first question?

quote:
But saying that doesn’t settle issues of such as * what is the metaphysical status of a fetus at conception/ 4 weeks/ 12 weeks, etc?

It's a moot point to extent. Judastic thinking doesn't allow for such a foreign concept. That is, a metaphysical dualism. But it is, in another sense, precisely the bottomline question in the abortion debate. That is, if the fetus is a human being, than all of your other questions hinge on this one.

But we can save this for another thread.

Gotta go to ch-urch.

P.S. I forgot something. My "exception" in my last post to Electra? I am not speaking about racism per se, but of principle for all issues discussed here.

Brandon
"A life after death can only be thought of in terms of life before it, and nobody can dream of a new earth when there is no old earth to hold any promises"--Henri J.M. Nouwen, "The Wounded Healer"

Edited by - BBBCanada on 10/06/2002 08:29:18 AM

GODesteem
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 34

Posted 10/6/2002 7:42 AM (GMT -6)

Hi Greg! I have a question for you, in regards to a statement you made. I will quote part of a paragraph, and then ask.

You wrote:

"I’m only wondering why LOVE was never one of the critiera for what constitutes being INSIDE or OUTSIDE. I would have thought, and wished, that KILLING was a heresy. That’s all. It is for me. And so, I think that insofar as Calvin burned Servetus at the stake, he was ACTING HERETICALLY. He undoubtedly has some good things to say, as heretics often do. But I don’t see why I or anyone should take HIM more authoratitvely than (say) the gnostics."

My question: What sources have you encountered in your research that unequivocally stated that "Calvin burned Servetus at the stake"? While I have hardly read any of Calvin's works, I have done some research into this particular issue.

Just interested about your research....

God loves Himself more than anything... He is our greatest treasure!

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/6/2002 1:13 PM (GMT -6)

BRANDI: Now that we've gone through the storm together I want to say welcome! I hope you enjoy yourself on this board.

SHENAYA: I genuinely Thank you Brandi. I do enjoy this board a lot! It's just nearly impossible to join in on a conversation when I work so many long hours. That's why posting just hasn't been a happening thing for me. Maybe someday.

We don't have a church that we attend regularly right now, so this is my "church" in a sense, and I read it whenever I can. We do not have many friends that even talk about God at all, let alone to this extent.

My family doesn't give a rip about a true relationship with God because they would be just as happy if I were dedicated to any "journey" I would choose, as long as I was having a nice "spiritual" experience of some sort.

I ended up here because a friend sent me Boyd's "Letters" book a couple of years ago and then she told me about the site and here I am today; raising a ruckus, I seem to do that everywhere I go. Thanks for the welcome on board.

PEACE AND LOVE

~Shenaya~

BJS
Registered Member

Date Joined Dec 2001
Total Posts : 587

Posted 10/6/2002 1:38 PM (GMT -6)

quote:
Greg said:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BJS (to Brandi) That is, Greg and Co. may have their reasons for not defending the unborn to the extent that Brandi and I might
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ahhh...Greg? It's BBB!!! Not BJS. DOY-A! That's happened a 2-3 times this week already on different threads. First couple times? No problem. After a while though? I feel like I'm being ignored.

And as great as Brandon is, I want to be sure our positions on some things are not mixed up!

Perhaps I should change my "call-sign" to avoid future confusion.

Brett

"Siste viator et memento mori."

Steven Morrow
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 18

Posted 10/6/2002 2:10 PM (GMT -6)

Hey guys, I wanted to comment on the current discussion. I have been looking into church History myself lately, and I was shocked to notice that there was so much brutality with the heretics. It almost makes me feel good to be an open theist, and be labeled that.. Not really its a terrible thing to kill because of ones wrong or diffrent belief..
My question is this, and I think it was mentioned before, but oh well. What about all the bad things in the Bible such as David killing alot of people. Yet he was still called a man after Gods on heart.
I am wondering if the situation with David is different because we know that he repented of one incident with Bathsheba and her Hub, and we dont know about Calvin, and other atrocious acts of Church History. Why should we hold Calvin and others up as great men of God when clearly without love they were nothing. Should we call them murderers. I think the question posed by Doc is a very thought provoking one.

Sorry I know I was just repeating Gregs opening statement, but I was just thinking out loud as I was reading . Thanks

Steven Morrow

285 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 7:58 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual