The Grammys: The day the culture died?

[Patebald]

Again, thanks for sharing your unique insight!

It's not unique... it's practical. And you're welcome

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]I don't believe the comparison was to individuals...but to 'light and darkness'. 

So it's some amorphous "darkness" and not the actions of an individual that people are complaining about...got it.

No, you don't....but that's not so unusual!
"Men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil".[/quote]

Yet SC specifically said we shouldn't be surprised when ducks don't act like swans (<~~ people) and CU said we should refer to them (<~~ again...this is people) as maggots, something you agreed with.

 

[T-Bone]

I guess you avoid most of the old Testament prophets as they speak of the condition of the nation of Israel by saying to them "No Duh!"

Well... since I'm living in a different dispensation and nearly 4000 yrs after the fact I really don't have much at all to say to the prophets... as far as I know they're all dead

Thanks for being obtuse...where do you read that I stated anything about you speaking to the prophets at all...the "No Duh" was meant to be in response not literally talking to them..."Duh"?  And your sense of timing of the prophets is way off too! 

 

[Patebald]

where do you read that I stated anything about you speaking to the prophets at all?

Ummm... when you formulated your narrative in present tense format by suggesting I "say to them No duh". I don't say anything to them... they are dead

 

[T-Bone]

where do you read that I stated anything about you speaking to the prophets at all?

Ummm... when you formulated your narrative in present tense by suggesting I "say to them No duh". I don't say anything to them... they are dead

Once again thanks for be obtuse!  I am sure you got my point.

 

[rsc2a]

And, even then, the prophets were (generally) speaking to those who were supposed to be God's chosen people. Those were where the harshest condemnations came down from the likes of Elijah, Isaiah et al.

 

[T-Bone]

And, even then, the prophets were (generally) speaking to those who were supposed to be God's chosen people. Those were where the harshest condemnations came down from the likes of Elijah, Isaiah et al.

.Yes God talked through the prophets to His  chosen people, but not just about them, my point is made, the prophets spoke primarily to Israel and they spoke much about the condition not only of Israel but also the surrounding pagan & unbelieving nations...they did not just say "no duh", the Babylonians act like Babylonians, the Ninevites..., the Edomites..., the Assyrians... etc. etc. etc.

 

[rsc2a]

And, even then, the prophets were (generally) speaking to those who were supposed to be God's chosen people. Those were where the harshest condemnations came down from the likes of Elijah, Isaiah et al.

.Yes God talked through the prophets to His  chosen people, but not just about them, my point is made, the prophets spoke primarily to Israel and they spoke much about the condition not only of Israel but also the surrounding pagan & unbelieving nations...they did not just say "no duh", the Babylonians act like Babylonians, the Ninevites..., the Edomites..., the Assyrians... etc. etc. etc.

Would you agree that the tone of the prophets wasn't one of "those stupid maggots"? And, even in the one case I can think offhand where a prophet had no regard for the people he was calling out, God rebuked him sharply for it.

 

[T-Bone]

And, even then, the prophets were (generally) speaking to those who were supposed to be God's chosen people. Those were where the harshest condemnations came down from the likes of Elijah, Isaiah et al.

.Yes God talked through the prophets to His  chosen people, but not just about them, my point is made, the prophets spoke primarily to Israel and they spoke much about the condition not only of Israel but also the surrounding pagan & unbelieving nations...they did not just say "no duh", the Babylonians act like Babylonians, the Ninevites..., the Edomites..., the Assyrians... etc. etc. etc.

Would you agree that the tone of the prophets wasn't one of "those stupid maggots"? And, even in the one case I can think offhand where a prophet had no regard for the people he was calling out, God rebuked him sharply for it.

Certainly Jonah had a problem with sharing God's truth to Nineveh...but I believe he died a bitter old prophet..he paid the price.  I believe we are to be concerned for souls...and we must be able to answer the question appropriately when we share of call out...do we share it because we love them?  I don't always do it with that in mind for sure.  But not to speak out, when it is time to speak out, I find a lack of love also.

I personally would not call them maggots, but don't mind calling reprobates what they are and apostates what they are, as a biblical method of identifying them to the people I may be teaching.  Doubt I would get in the face of someone I was trying to share the Scripture with and call them that...I might, but it would not be my first approach.

 

[Bruh]

[quote author=rsc2a]Sure. But I'd say that half of the values encouraged by many churches are contrary to Biblical values as a whole, so I don't see a big difference between two very often.

I'm not familiar with churches that encourage perversion....but IF they do, I'm against it! Unlike some, I'm not defending either!

You aren't familiar with any churches that embrace empirism (described as nationalism)? You aren't familiar with any churches that stress "bootstraps economics" for the poor?  Or churches that seek to divide the Body over trivial issues? Or churches that promote (implicitly or explicitly) racism. Many churches practice a form of Marcionism-lite. Gnosticism is rampant in the church. I could go on if you'd like...
[/quote]

I'd like to know the names of these so called churches?  Can you give a list of them?  Thanks

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=T-Bone]Certainly Jonah had a problem with sharing God's truth to Nineveh...but I believe he died a bitter old prophet..he paid the price.  I believe we are to be concerned for souls...and we must be able to answer the question appropriately when we share of call out...do we share it because we love them?  I don't always do it with that in mind for sure.  But not to speak out, when it is time to speak out, I find a lack of love also.[/quote]

I would state that instead of leaning against the cross commanding folks to repent, we'd be on a lot more solid footing (with them and with God) if we were kneeling in front of it with tears of repentance asking others to join us.

 

[T-Bone]

[quote author=T-Bone]Certainly Jonah had a problem with sharing God's truth to Nineveh...but I believe he died a bitter old prophet..he paid the price.  I believe we are to be concerned for souls...and we must be able to answer the question appropriately when we share of call out...do we share it because we love them?  I don't always do it with that in mind for sure.  But not to speak out, when it is time to speak out, I find a lack of love also.

I would state that instead of leaning against the cross commanding folks to repent, we'd be on a lot more solid footing (with them and with God) if we were kneeling in front of it with tears of repentance asking others to join us.
[/quote]

I would suggest that there is a time and place for both.  It doesn't seem to me the Bible requires either/or exclusively, but both need to be in our approach.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=rsc2a]You aren't familiar with any churches that embrace empirism (described as nationalism)? You aren't familiar with any churches that stress "bootstraps economics" for the poor?  Or churches that seek to divide the Body over trivial issues? Or churches that promote (implicitly or explicitly) racism. Many churches practice a form of Marcionism-lite. Gnosticism is rampant in the church. I could go on if you'd like...

I'd like to know the names of these so called churches?  Can you give a list of them?  Thanks
[/quote]

- Churches that embrace empirism: Any church that goes along with the American war machine because of "national security"
- Churches with bootstraps economics: Any church that believes the chief way to help the poor is to encourage them to work harder
- Churches that divide over trivial issues: bible versions, music styles, clothing styles, views on the rapture, tithe or no, want more?
- Churches that are racist: curse of Ham anyone?
- Marcionism-lite: A huge chunk of churches pretty much avoid the OT. Paul is very popular. The Gospels get some play, primarily around Christmas and Easter. And there are some dispensationalists who would claim that anything but Paul is "not for the Gentile".
- Gnosticism: a false sacred/secular attitude is saturating the Church and from that stems all kinds of goofy teachings on alcohol, music, vocation, ecclesiology and a host of other things

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=T-Bone]Certainly Jonah had a problem with sharing God's truth to Nineveh...but I believe he died a bitter old prophet..he paid the price.  I believe we are to be concerned for souls...and we must be able to answer the question appropriately when we share of call out...do we share it because we love them?  I don't always do it with that in mind for sure.  But not to speak out, when it is time to speak out, I find a lack of love also.

I would state that instead of leaning against the cross commanding folks to repent, we'd be on a lot more solid footing (with them and with God) if we were kneeling in front of it with tears of repentance asking others to join us.

I would suggest that there is a time and place for both.  It doesn't seem to me the Bible requires either/or exclusively, but both need to be in our approach.[/quote]

There's a place to ignore our own brokenness so we can sneer our nose at others?

 

[T-Bone]

[quote author=T-Bone]Certainly Jonah had a problem with sharing God's truth to Nineveh...but I believe he died a bitter old prophet..he paid the price.  I believe we are to be concerned for souls...and we must be able to answer the question appropriately when we share of call out...do we share it because we love them?  I don't always do it with that in mind for sure.  But not to speak out, when it is time to speak out, I find a lack of love also.

I would state that instead of leaning against the cross commanding folks to repent, we'd be on a lot more solid footing (with them and with God) if we were kneeling in front of it with tears of repentance asking others to join us.

I would suggest that there is a time and place for both.  It doesn't seem to me the Bible requires either/or exclusively, but both need to be in our approach.

There's a place to ignore our own brokenness so we can sneer our nose at others?
[/quote]

Don't turn into Patebald---did you intentionally ignore the "both"....never a place to avoid our own brokenness, but in our brokenness we can stand and speak the truth boldly.  Sometimes in tears and sometimes being forthright!  Never in self-righteousness or pride.

 

[Bruh]

[quote author=rsc2a]You aren't familiar with any churches that embrace empirism (described as nationalism)? You aren't familiar with any churches that stress "bootstraps economics" for the poor?  Or churches that seek to divide the Body over trivial issues? Or churches that promote (implicitly or explicitly) racism. Many churches practice a form of Marcionism-lite. Gnosticism is rampant in the church. I could go on if you'd like...

I'd like to know the names of these so called churches?  Can you give a list of them?  Thanks

- Churches that embrace empirism: Any church that goes along with the American war machine because of "national security"
- Churches with bootstraps economics: Any church that believes the chief way to help the poor is to encourage them to work harder
- Churches that divide over trivial issues: bible versions, music styles, clothing styles, views on the rapture, tithe or no, want more?
- Churches that are racist: curse of Ham anyone?
- Marcionism-lite: A huge chunk of churches pretty much avoid the OT. Paul is very popular. The Gospels get some play, primarily around Christmas and Easter. And there are some dispensationalists who would claim that anything but Paul is "not for the Gentile".
- Gnosticism: a false sacred/secular attitude is saturating the Church and from that stems all kinds of goofy teachings on alcohol, music, vocation, ecclesiology and a host of other things
[/quote]

Thanks for the list, but I wanted the names of these churches and locations.  Maybe their email address.  I can give you the same list and accuse and say shame on those churches but without names IMO its kind of pointless to make a list. 

 

[Bob H]

A group of reprobates shaking their fists in the face of God and declaring they will do what they want....they have no idea that they are bringing the wrath of God down on this nation!

Their behavior is God's wrath being brought down. Look up folks

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Thanks for being obtuse...

Somebody take a drink!

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=Smellin Coffee]Because WE are the ones who are acting surprised that ducks act like ducks and not swans.

I'm not acting surprised. I don't even understand what "surprised" has to do with anything. I wouldn't necessarily call a duck to swan comparison. Maybe swan to maggots.

Accurate comparison. 

I would point out to Smellin and Pate (Dude!), the OP's article wasn't written by a Christian or from a Christian perspective.
It seems even the blind can see the enveloping darkness as opposed to the enlightened, tolerant on the forum.

Maybe someone could point out where Jesus referred to the broken and downtrodden as "maggots" or something similar?

Now, if you'd like, I could show where He referred to the sanctimonious, religious-types as quite a few things...
[/quote]

We've discussed this before..... does anything ever get through you hard head?

Here's the highlights...

Jesus promised that those who reject Him.... will receive the damnation of hell. He didn't just tell religious people this rsc2a...... He told told his disciples to declare the judgement of God on the cities that rejected Him. He just wasn't talking about religious people rsc2a. Our Lord feed thousands and turned right around and accused them of following him solely to get their bellies filled. He didn't tell this to religious people rsc2a.

When I used the word maggot...... I was speaking of those who have continually rejected the Gospel. Don't tell me those people at the Grammy Awards are broken and downtrodden people looking for something other than what they already have. They are not looking for Christ. In fact, they mock and ridicule the Gospel. Now you go ahead and pretend you grasp the Gospel. The promised of Judgement for those who reject Christ is just as much a part of the those Gospel as God's loving promise to those who receive Him.

I could make the case that those that need Christ should see themselves as maggots in the eyes of God. I remember hearing a story of a illiterate native in Africa having received the Gospel. Someone asked him to explain what God had done for him. He gathered some twigs and a small green leaf. He arranged the twigs as if he would build a fire. He placed the green leaf right in the middle of all the twigs..... and on that green leaf he placed a worm. A maggot if you will. He then lite the twigs on fire....... the fire grew larger and larger......  and right as it appeared the fire would consume the leaf and the little maggot.... The native reached down and grabbed the maggot and pulled to his chest......

Maybe you can understand this. Maybe you can't. I would hope anyone that experienced the life giving grace of God..... would.

I could go on and on and on.....but I'll spare you the details.

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=T-Bone]Certainly Jonah had a problem with sharing God's truth to Nineveh...but I believe he died a bitter old prophet..he paid the price.  I believe we are to be concerned for souls...and we must be able to answer the question appropriately when we share of call out...do we share it because we love them?  I don't always do it with that in mind for sure.  But not to speak out, when it is time to speak out, I find a lack of love also.

I would state that instead of leaning against the cross commanding folks to repent, we'd be on a lot more solid footing (with them and with God) if we were kneeling in front of it with tears of repentance asking others to join us.

I would suggest that there is a time and place for both.  It doesn't seem to me the Bible requires either/or exclusively, but both need to be in our approach.
[/quote]

Exactly. Weeping influences some and fear influences others. Both have their place. God wants to Love man.... Yet, everyone should fear the Judgment of God. There is no such thing as one without the other.