Lindy

You are dismissing what every firefighter, police officer, paramedic, and soldier do because they get small paychecks for what they do. Sorry Jenda....You made a good point.... I'm just TRYING to get a point across

That is exactly what you are doing. Do you think $30k a year is the reason why hundreds of thousands of men and women put their lives on the line to help other people? ..........I know that they didn't put their nation's heroes on crosses. They executed people who had committed crimes. This man was a criminal. Is there anything that causes you to believe this man did one single good thing in his life? Don't give me what he could have. I know the behavior of people like the thief on the cross. His last bit of desparation on the cross was motivated by a fear of going to hell. I remember treating a man, a long time ago, in the back of my ambulance for almost 30 mins. This guy dealt narcotics to kids and the father of a kid who had overdosed had shot him. He cried all the way to the hospital, saying how sorry he was. He lived. I'll never forget seeing him, a year later, standing outside of a school selling coke to 8th graders. Whenever i think of the thief I think of this man because they exhibited the same remorse when they got desparate. I am not fooled as easily as others. EXACTLY what I am doing? Trident- Boy, if I wanted my words twisted and mangled I would call my ex.I wouldn't ever try to discredit those who treat and protect. You missed my point AGAIN...... I guess that you do classify what they are 'supposed to do' as "good works" and I respect your position; so I will drop that part of my debate. As for the low life that deals drugs to the school kids....I agree with Jenda...the slime didn't mean a word of his remorsefulness, or his ill conceived repentance. He wasn't honest with himself, and you can bet that God knew he wasn't being honest with Him either.... Don't you think that Christ would have been able to see thru the heart and soul of the thief on the cross? I do. You have lived a different life than I have, you have been in different situations than many people have and you have a different outlook on others. You say you are not as easily fooled as others...in your occupation you can't afford to be, you have to be dubious of certain things... I have a fault of believing in the best of others....of trying to see the better part of someone. It has backfired on me a couple of times, and I have found things in or about people that I didn't want to see. But even with the bad things I have found in people, I can't forget the good things I found.

Can i received God's grace without works? Yes or no will do. If the answer is no then grace is not about God's goodness, it's all about me. Yes or No won't do, sorry. Christ asks us to make a covenant with him, and then he will save us. Read John 3:16. It's right there in black and white. His grace is for those who believe. IF you believe, you will prove it with your works. Works is not what saves us, it is only the proof that you believe and have made a covenant with Christ. Good Statement Jenda! I like it! I like it A LOT This too!

Ok...these men do their job....what they get paid to do...(I'm not trying to downplay the importance of what they do.) But if you classify doing what they are 'supposed to do' as "good works" then I will understand...but I was thinking more along the lines of "men" doing good works on their own, without payment, just out of charity for others and to show the love of Christ...which would be hard for them to do if they don't believe. I think you are missing my entire point here....BEFORE he was put up and died on the cross...he could have been a hero to someone, a helper to someone else, he could have given the shirt off his back to a begger....you don't know what he did in his life before they sentenced him to death.

Bat~ I laughed at every paragraph . .......except the last one that's when the laughter subsided.... yes bad things happen to good people and good things happen to bad people life isn't fair sometimes, but we have to deal with it the best we can. RAY~ Just between you and me...The truth? I think he is too!

True, but just because you do good works doesn't mean you have faith. I see phonies every day. The hardest workers of good I know are athiests and agnostics. But he didn't. He did nothing before he died. ~The hardest workers of good I know are athiests and agnostics.~Trident....I am wondering about that ....what good do they do? If they don't have faith and understand the importance of serving others....what "good" work do they do? And how do we know that? Was there a published memo that told us the life story of this man? Maybe he saved a child from river, or helped a cripple up a mountain, who can judge a man's life and say what he did or didn't do was monumental in his forgiveness from Christ? I will agree that it appears that he was saved by his "faith" at the last moments of his life....and I would also assume that he felt in his heart and in his soul that this was the Christ ...otherwise his words would have meant nothing and he would have received....nothing. He changed his way of thinking, he accepted the fact that this was the One True Christ... If he spoke to the other thief about his faith...wasn't that missionary work? Sharing the faith with another? I wouldn't call that nothing.....if the other thiefs heart was softend and humbled, he may have been saved himself by Christ! So you see, the "saved" thief didn't do "nothing" he did what he could in the last moments of his existence.

Behunin~ I think that is a great phrase...and that is what was given...charity to mankind! The ultimate gift.Tao~ I know we are on the same wavelength on a lot of different things....Thanks for the support my friend :) Jenda- Peace~ Great Posts! Tr2~ You don't understand me at all...but I still admire your perseverance. P.S. I am correct in saying that the Jesus of the Bible is the same as the Jesus of mormonism. And I'm glad your with me 100% !!!! You just made me smile :)

I wanted somebody to say this. The mormon Jesus: The literal son of god and his goddess wife The brother of all spirits born in heaven Was married and had wives Had a beginning Atoned for sin on the cross and in the garden of Gesthemene The bible's Jesus: Not the literal son of god and his goddess wife Not the brother of all spirits born in heaven Was not married and did not have wives Did not have a beginning Atoned for sin on the cross alone There is only one Christ, that is correct. That means one of these guys is an imposter. Those are opinions that cannot be backed up, what I posted are facts. Speak for yourself! Hey T~I don't have anything against you or the way that you perceive Christ, I think that the important thing is that you know Him and that you love Him. There shouldn't be any animosity between those that love Him. I happen to think that He is eternal, yet he is the Son of God as the Bible says He is. I think of Him as a brother to all, since we are all children of God, that counts him in as well. I don't think that it should make a difference where He atoned for our sins...whether it be in the garden or on the cross...The fact is THAT HE ATONED...He suffered. He bled, He died, He rose again.....Those are the important aspects to me. I think it will be ironic to see Christ and be near enough to hear Him talk, and feel His love ......and then hear Him say something like "you spewed hate and discontent for those who love Me, you hurt, you discouraged, and you turned away those who honor Me.....WHY?" How very small one would feel if admonished by Christ. What would be an answer you would give Him? And of course it's my opinion which can't be backed up...

If this comment was aimed at me, I take acception. I am not the sterotypical "mormon" who blindly follows whatever a churchleader says just because they say so. So if you are taking a shot at me and my question, back off. I think, read, breath, live, etc.... for myself, as I am sure many (not all) LDS people do. The Jesus of the Bible is the same Jesus in the BoM. There is only one Christ. This is probably contrary to what some other religions or people believe about the LDS church. But that is of their own doing and thinking, not based in reality. Thank you Behunin! Me either....I think for myself, and I won't back down on what I believe...to those who have a problem with how we look at things...it just makes me sad that they can't comprehend that There is only one Christ. My Jesus...Your (their) Jesus = OUR Jesus I only wish people could open their hearts and their minds to accept that fact.

.curvette, I like that term ....I call it Life As We Know It Sometimes we can't get to know others at all if we don't open our minds to the realities of what they see, do or live. It doesn't mean that we have to adapt to that situation of their reality....it just gives us a better understanding of what is real for them. My two cents worth.

This is a commentary by DAVID LIMBAUGH about Mel Gibson's very controversial movie regarding Christ's crucifixion. It, too, is well worth reading. MEL GIBSON'S passion for "THE PASSION" How ironic that when a movie producer takes artistic license with historical events, he is lionized as artistic, creative and brilliant, but when another takes special care to be true to the real-life story, he is vilified. Actor-producer Mel Gibson is discovering these truths the hard way as he is having difficulty finding a United States studio or distributor for his upcoming film, "The Passion," which depicts the last 12 hours of the life of Jesus Christ. Gibson co-wrote the script and financed, directed and produced the movie. For the script, he and his co-author relied on the New Testament Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, as well as the diaries of St. Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824) and Mary of Agreda's "The City of God." Gibson doesn't want this to be like other sterilized religious epics. "I'm trying to access the story on a very personal level and trying to be very real about it." So committed to realistically portraying what many would consider the most important half-day in the history of the universe, Gibson even shot the film in the Aramaic language of the period. In response to objections that viewers will not be able to understand that language, Gibson said, "Hopefully, I'll be able to transcend the language barriers with my visual storytelling; if I fail, I fail, but at least it'll be a monumental failure." To further insure the accuracy of the work, Gibson has enlisted the counsel of pastors and theologians, and has received rave reviews. Don Hodel, president of Focus on the Family, said, "I was very impressed. The movie is historically and theologically accurate." Ted Haggard, pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colo., and president of the National Evangelical Association, glowed: "It conveys, more accurately than any other film, who Jesus was." During the filming, Gibson, a devout Catholic, attended Mass every morning because "we had to be squeaky clean just working on this." From Gibson's perspective, this movie is not about Mel Gibson. It's bigger than he is. I'm not a preacher, and I'm not a pastor," he said. "But I really feel my career was leading me to make this. The Holy Ghost was working through me on this film, and I was just directing traffic. I hope the film has the power to evangelize." Even before the release of the movie, scheduled for March 2004, Gibson is getting his wish. "Everyone who worked on this movie was changed. There were agnostics and Muslims on set converting to Christianity...[and] people being healed of diseases." Gibson wants people to understand through the movie, if they don't already, the incalculable influence Christ has had on the world. And he grasps that Christ is controversial precisely because of WHO HE IS - GOD incarnate. "And that's the point of my film really, to show all that turmoil around him politically and with religious leaders and the people, all because He is Who He is." Gibson is beginning to experience first hand just how controversial Christ is. Critics have not only speciously challenged the movie's authenticity, but have charged that it is disparaging to Jews, which Gibson vehemently denies. "This is not a Christian vs. Jewish thing. '[Jesus] came into the world, and it knew him not.' Looking at Christ's crucifixion, I look first at my own culpability in that." Jesuit Father William J. Fulco, who translated the script into Aramaic and Latin, said he saw no hint of anti-Semitism in the movie. Fulco added, "I would be aghast at any suggestion that Mel Gibson is anti-Semitic." Nevertheless, certain groups and some in the mainstream press have been very critical of Gibson's "Passion." The New York Post's Andrea Peyser chided him: "There is still time, Mel, to tell the truth." Boston Globe columnist James Carroll denounced Gibson's literal reading of the biblical accounts. "Even a faithful repetition of the Gospel stories of the death of Jesus can do damage exactly because those sacred texts themselves carry the virus of Jew hatred," wrote Carroll. A group of Jewish and Christian academics has issued an 18-page report slamming all aspects of the film, including its undue emphasis on Christ's passion rather than "a broader vision." The report disapproves of the movie's treatment of Christ's passion as historical fact. The moral is that if you want the popular culture to laud your work on Christ, make sure it either depicts Him as a homosexual or as an everyday sinner with no particular redeeming value (literally). In our anti-Christian culture, the blasphemous "The Last Temptation of Christ" is celebrated and "The Passion" is condemned. But if this movie continues to affect people the way it is now, no amount of cultural opposition will suppress its force and its positive impact on lives everywhere. Mel Gibson is a model of faith and courage." -------------------------------------------- I received this from a friend, and just wanted to share the above commentaries with you....

Subject: Paul Harvey's comments on the movie "The Passion" by Mel Gibson Paul Harvey Comments on "The Passion" by Mel Gibson The majority of the media are complaining about this movie. Now Paul Harvey tells "The rest of the story" and David Limbaugh praises Gibson. Most people would wait and see a movie before giving the reviews that have been issued by the reporters trying to tell all of us what to believe. Paul Harvey's words: I really did not know what to expect. I was thrilled to have been invited to a private viewing of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion," but I had also read all the cautious articles and spin. I grew up in a Jewish town and owe much of my own faith journey to the influence. I have a life long, deeply held aversion to anything that might even indirectly encourage any form of anti-Semitic thought, language or actions. I arrived at the private viewing for "The Passion", held in Washington DC and greeted some familiar faces. The environment was typically Washingtonian, with people greeting you with a smile but seeming to look beyond you, having an agenda beyond the words. The film was very briefly introduced, without fanfare, and then the room darkened. From the gripping opening scene in the Garden of Gethsemane, to the very human and tender portrayal of the earthly ministry of Jesus, through the betrayal, the arrest, the scourging, the way of the cross, the encounter with the thieves, the surrender on the Cross, until the final scene in the empty tomb, this was not simply a movie; it was an encounter, unlike anything I have ever experienced. In addition to being a masterpiece of film-making and an artistic triumph, "The Passion" evoked more deep reflection, sorrow and emotional reaction within me than anything since my wedding, my ordination or the birth of my children. Frankly, I will never be the same. When the film concluded, this "invitation only" gathering of "movers and shakers" in Washington, DC were shaking indeed, but this time from sobbing. I am not sure there was a dry eye in the place. The crowd that had been glad-handing before the film was now eerily silent. No one could speak because words were woefully inadequate. We had experienced a kind of art that is a rarity in life, the kind that makes heaven touch earth. One scene in the film has now been forever etched in my mind. A brutalized, wounded Jesus was soon to fall again under the weight of the cross. His mother had made her way along the Via Della Rosa. As she ran to him, she flashed back to a memory of Jesus as a child, falling in the dirt road outside of their home. Just as she reached to protect him from the fall, she was now reaching to touch his wounded adult face. Jesus looked at her with intensely probing and passionately loving eyes (and at all of us through the screen) and said "Behold I make all things new." These are words taken from the last Book of the New Testament, the Book of Revelations. Suddenly, the purpose of the pain was so clear and the wounds, that earlier in the film had been so difficult to see in His face, His back, indeed all over His body, became intensely beautiful. They had been borne voluntarily for love. At the end of the film, after we had all had a chance to recover, a question and answer period ensued. The unanimous praise for the film, from a rather diverse crowd, was as astounding as the compliments were effusive. The questions included the one question that seems to follow this film, even though it has not yet even been released. "Why is this film considered by some to be "anti-Semitic?" Frankly, having now experienced (you do not "view" this film) "the Passion" it is a question that is impossible to answer. A law professor whom I admire sat in front of me. He raised his hand and responded "After watching this film, I do not understand how anyone can insinuate that it even remotely presents that the Jews killed Jesus. It doesn't." He continued "It made me realize that my sins killed Jesus" I agree. There is not a scintilla of anti-Semitism to be found anywhere in this powerful film. If there were, I would be among the first to decry it. It faithfully tells the Gospel story in a dramatically beautiful, sensitive and profoundly engaging way. Those who are alleging otherwise have either not seen the film or have another agenda behind their protestations. This is not a "Christian" film, in the sense that it will appeal only to those who identify themselves as followers of Jesus Christ. It is a deeply human, beautiful story that will deeply touch all men and women. It is a profound work of art. Yes, its producer is a Catholic Christian and thankfully has remained faithful to the Gospel text; if that is no longer acceptable behavior than we are all in trouble. History demands that we remain faithful to the story and Christians have a right to tell it. After all, we believe that it is the greatest story ever told and that its message is for all men and women. The greatest right is the right to hear the truth. We would all be well advised to remember that the Gospel narratives to which "The Passion" is so faithful were written by Jewish men who followed a Jewish Rabbi whose life and teaching have forever changed the history of the world. The problem is not the message but those who have distorted it and used it for hate rather than love. The solution is not to censor the message, but rather to promote the kind of gift of love that is Mel Gibson's filmmaking masterpiece, "The Passion." It should be seen by as many people as possible. I intend to do everything I can to make sure that is the case. I am passionate about "The Passion." You will be as well. Don't miss it! "

Translated many times, and much was lost or changed during translations...thank you for posting that AF Daw. Sometimes people need a reminder.

"3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:" Hi ya Spencer! I'm thinking that Seth had the looks and the spiritual nature of his father,(sometimes I just have to think simply. ) Will- I don't like to talk about evolution- cause I think that it is cut and dried...either you believe in it or you don't...I don't, never have, never will. That might be why you don't have a lot of answers from LDS, other than "I don't believe in it". It is a topic that is brought up time and time again to stir things up...I don't believe in stirring the pot on that one. :) Lindy

I have always thought of man in the image of God, and God having a body which was of the same image He gave man. Knowing that His body is different than the body that He gave man, yet basically the same, I had to wait a long time to find a church that didn't think I was insane when I expressed my thoughts on the matter. :) Lindy