Mar 27, 2009 -- 11:09AM, Campbellite wrote:

Mar 27, 2009 -- 10:31AM, kollo wrote:

Mar 27, 2009 -- 10:13AM, Campbellite wrote:

Mar 26, 2009 -- 10:15AM, kollo wrote:

Mar 26, 2009 -- 10:08AM, music4two wrote:

Mar 25, 2009 -- 3:08PM, kollo wrote:

Mar 25, 2009 -- 2:53PM, tawonda wrote:

To quote the late Bishop Fulton Sheen, after being heckled by an atheist in the audience at a public event where he was speaker: "Sure, [religion] is a crutch. But who isn't limping?"

I expect he got it from a 'nobody'.

Unfortunately there are far too many Christians who play the victim card and insist on remaining cripples or limping. They do not believe or wish to participate in God's plan for them to be true perfected overcomers. (not that I have attained, but like Paul I continue to strive for that upward calling) At times I am reminded of some denominational churches that hold an altar call every week and the same people go up every week to get saved all over again. They do not realise that there is more beyond the cross. I have heard some speak (with pride) that they went to the altar 50 years ago and need do nothing else. They still have the same character as they did those 50 years earlier. Nothing changed because they did not move forward.

That's what comes of believing in altars.

I will err on the side of thinking you are misinformed, rather than that you are just an ignorant wanker.

Coming to the altar is evangelical code (at least on this side of the Pond) for getting saved/confessing Jesus/getting religion. It has nothing to do with "believing in altars".

I don't think that can be true. There would not have been quite such a display of literary ingenuity were it so.

So you are a well-informed wanker.

My mistake.

See forum TOPIC: Lent February 25th  ..."return oneroute(this,'thread','view','/34789/13801211/Lent__February_25th');">Lent - February 25th

Mar 27, 2009 -- 10:13AM, Campbellite wrote:

Mar 26, 2009 -- 10:15AM, kollo wrote:

Mar 26, 2009 -- 10:08AM, music4two wrote:

Mar 25, 2009 -- 3:08PM, kollo wrote:

Mar 25, 2009 -- 2:53PM, tawonda wrote:

To quote the late Bishop Fulton Sheen, after being heckled by an atheist in the audience at a public event where he was speaker: "Sure, [religion] is a crutch. But who isn't limping?"

I expect he got it from a 'nobody'.

Unfortunately there are far too many Christians who play the victim card and insist on remaining cripples or limping. They do not believe or wish to participate in God's plan for them to be true perfected overcomers. (not that I have attained, but like Paul I continue to strive for that upward calling)  At times I am reminded of some denominational churches that hold an altar call every week and the same people go up every week to get saved all over again. They do not realise that there is more beyond the cross. I have heard some speak (with pride) that they went to the altar 50 years ago and need do nothing else. They still have the same character as they did those 50 years earlier. Nothing changed because they did not move forward.

That's what comes of believing in altars.

I will err on the side of thinking you are misinformed, rather than that you are just an ignorant wanker.

Coming to the altar is evangelical code (at least on this side of the Pond) for getting saved/confessing Jesus/getting religion. It has nothing to do with "believing in altars".

I don't think that can be true. There would not have been quite such a display of literary ingenuity were it so.

Mar 26, 2009 -- 10:08AM, music4two wrote:

Mar 25, 2009 -- 3:08PM, kollo wrote:

Mar 25, 2009 -- 2:53PM, tawonda wrote:

To quote the late Bishop Fulton Sheen, after being heckled by an atheist in the audience at a public event where he was speaker: "Sure, [religion] is a crutch. But who isn't limping?"

I expect he got it from a 'nobody'.

Unfortunately there are far too many Christians who play the victim card and insist on remaining cripples or limping. They do not believe or wish to participate in God's plan for them to be true perfected overcomers. (not that I have attained, but like Paul I continue to strive for that upward calling)  At times I am reminded of some denominational churches that hold an altar call every week and the same people go up every week to get saved all over again. They do not realise that there is more beyond the cross. I have heard some speak (with pride) that they went to the altar 50 years ago and need do nothing else. They still have the same character as they did those 50 years earlier. Nothing changed because they did not move forward.

That's what comes of believing in altars.

Mar 25, 2009 -- 2:53PM, tawonda wrote:

To quote the late Bishop Fulton Sheen, after being heckled by an atheist in the audience at a public event where he was speaker: "Sure, [religion] is a crutch. But who isn't limping?"

I expect he got it from a 'nobody'.

Mar 24, 2009 -- 1:26PM, Beautiful_Dreamer wrote:

Mar 24, 2009 -- 12:35PM, music4two wrote:

Mar 24, 2009 -- 12:16PM, Beautiful_Dreamer wrote:

Lent might not be about suffering, but I thought it was about self-denial.  If someone is suffering, they are often self-denying, although it might not be by their choice.  Much of the time when we have money or other problems, we have to decide what things are more important and what things we can go without. I certainly have. That would be sacrifice, would it not? Going without something we otherwise wouldn't, choosing something to give up?  I figure the challenge here is our attitude toward said sacrifice. But like I said, I haven't observed it much. I could be totally off.

If it is not by their choice to give something up then it is not "self denying."  The concept of giving up something for lent, although not a true doctrine of christianity, stems from the idea of denying oneself for the betterment of the gospel. Giving something up would only be possible if you have the capacity to have it in the first place. Giving up a luxury to give the money to th poor is only valid if you have the money for the luxury in the first place. Giving up something you never had or never had the posibility to have is a joke.  Like giving up mountain climbing when you have never gone mountain climbing and had no intention of ever going.

 

When I said some of us have to make a choice of what we can do without and what is most important to keep, usually that means that the thing we choose to do without is something that we had previously....that we had the capacity to have and thus the decision to give it up. Often those things are luxuries, but I *did* have them, and *chose* what to do without.  It is not the same thing as your mountain-climbing analogy, not at all.  And what if giving up the cable tv teaches me about not focusing on the material things, teaches me about what is really important in life?  Reminds me to focus more on God and the gospel? Isn't that what we are supposed to be doing, focusing on God and the gospel rather than material things of this world?  What if having to make the choice is what made me sit back and take stock of things, brings on an attitude adjustment that is desperately needed? That's not a bad thing at all, and isn't that worthy? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding but you appear to be doing the same thing.

 

And did I or did I not say that I could be off because I had not observed Lent before now? I did. So you really don't have to talk down to me, since I admitted a long time ago that I could be wrong.

Unfortunately you have a point. We have to be taught by trial and testing to learn those basic lessons of focusing on God. I long for the day that I and others will have God develop enough of Christ’s character in ourselves to just do God’s will without needing a crutch to accomplish it or a test to force me to do it.

To me lent is still a crutch to teach us to do what we automatically should do via our good character. We should do these things naturally without prompting testing or even reminding.  In the same way I do not need to be reminded to focus on the needs of my children or to love them. My relationship with God should be just as natural.