USNationalist

sjd- i have a really bad headache, So i'll try to respond a little later. Suffice to say I think you are misunderstanding some of what I have said.

Good times. No need to apologize for anything. Disagreement and miscommunication is all apart of discourse. heh.

My view point is indeed the correct view point. If I did not think it was- I would not believe it. heh. It really doesnt matter what christian church you affiliate with. Memberships do not mean salvation. If you believe Christ was the son of God, who died on the cross for our sins, rose again in 3 days, and your life bears the fruit of the spirit, then you are fine. All this back biting between different factions of the church is stupid. The idea of finding a religion that works for you though can lead you down a very bad path. Because it makes our perception of truth relevant to what we want to believe.

not even a little bit sarcastic. This listen to your heart nonsense is why we have rainbow churches now. And why every other person out there with a Christian name tag is able to excuse their actions- because in their heart they think they love God, and that they are a good person. " The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately wicked; Who can know it? -Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is the driving force of the flesh. Our own flesh is evil- and the heart pushes its will upon us. The heart wants what it wants- not what is good or right.

No, I am not LDS. LDS claims for burning of the bousums have nothing to do with the heart. It is a claim of the working of the holy spirit. Too many people confuse them for each other and slap gods approval onto things that he is against. Picking a religion is not a hobby. Or a shoe store and you're trying to find one that fits for you. It is about taking up a cross- and changing who you are.

Sounds like you want to pick a faith that works for you. Not humble yourself and serve a God. And Following your heart- is the worst idea anyone has ever come up with. And I hate how it is the all popular solution for lives problems. It is a ridiculous notion- and no good comes from it.

Pushka and Moshka- I am not sure how you came to those conclusions. As far as what I said- the Goverment still pays for education- through the form of vouchers. And there is no reason to abolish laws that say kids must receive an education. My way simply allows the parents of each child to have more say in what their child is taught, and how they are taught it. School will be competing against each other to get parents to choose to send their kids to their school- so you can expect each school to improve its performance over the public school system- in every single way.

I dont know about the "other" board. But I have been an occasional member of this board since around 2000. And there has always been some kind of conflict between a group of posters and the moderators. Usually it is only one or two moderators actually stirring up trouble. And then, usually within their first month of becoming mods- I guess they are eager and over zealous or something. I usually leave when that happens.

The only way to get the government to make something work- is to not let them have anything to do with it. I am for the abolishment of the public school system. The Government can give vouchers to parents so they can choose what private school to enroll their children in.

I think societies "anti-violence" trend is also a major contributor to the prevalence of jerkwads. People talk about "cyber bullies" and how they say what they want because they can get away with it. But reality is, the exact same thing is going on face to face because of how the law (and the threat of lawsuits) handcuffs individuals. People learn from consequence, you take away the negative consequences for being a douche- and you encourage its growth.

Moderators for this forum has always been nut jobs. Thats why I can never stand to stick around for too long at a time.

I am familure with that Saying My parents told that to the Canadian Govt when they found a gun in our vehicle while crossing the border. But it is absurd to apply that to bullying. The kid picked on isn't generally in any kid of mortal danger. Of course real threats of harm can be found in school- but I would say that goes beyond bullying.

The verse this whole thread was spawned from. "Revelation chapter 22 verses 18 to 20:"

That is a stupid conclusion. You are more then capable of defying God. But as is the case with defying ANY authority figure- there is a penalty. IF there were no God would you say there is no free agency because the US Government enforces laws on its citizens and it is Uncle Sams way or the highway? Fiannan- What you said to your kid about "no such thing as an unbiased position" (or something like that) was spot on. All initially perceived morality is relative to the setting of a persons upbringing. Christians households will brainwash their kids into believing in Christ. Atheist households will brainwash their kids into thinking there is no God- and Religion is just a brainwashing institution. Thats why God does not care what kids think (the whole age of accountability bit). Once an individual has the ability to think logically and coherently, its up to them to sort out what they want to think, even if they are idiot teenagers.

Public schools are run by the government- how can you expect anything but failure from them? Schools take roll and receive money each day per kid in their seat. Thats why they hesitate so much to suspend a trouble maker, and expulsion is almost unheard of. The bullies that get shot in schools have it coming. Its their fault for torturing someone to the point where they throw their life away for vengeance. It's the schools fault for never doing anything remotely effective to stop bullying. And it's the parents faults for letting their kids think it is acceptable to be jerkwads.

I wouldnt say it is a sin, but i think your bishop is probably one of the people most likely to be able to help you with this stuff.

That is a misinterpreted verse. It is ridiculous to apply it to a bible that was not even canonized at the time. It is especially funny to see protestants try to use the verse to condemn the mormon church. I guess they forgot about the books Martin Luther removed during the reformation.

What Good or bad things you do- have zero bearing on the status of your salvation. At least no as far as tallying up good and bad and seeing which you have more of. Actions mean nothing. You dont get points for doing good, you dont get negative points for doing bad. Works are merely the outward manifestation of what is inside us. So you cant dismiss 1 bad deed because someone had 10 good deeds. If I do a million good things- and only 1 bad thing, but I refuse to repent for that bad thing- my salvation is forfeit. Likewise If i do 10 good things and 6 bad things- but am repenting an actively trying to improve myself and create change in my life- then The Grace of God covers those sin. Punishment is ONLY for people who refuse to turn away from what they are doing wrong. If someone repents- there is no punishment, regardless of the sin. If someone is repentant, then it is the Churches job to provide what assistance it can to the individual to help them keep from making those same errors.

I am not a mormon. My statements regarding the nature of man however are completely accurate. Both logically and Biblically. My statements regarding church discipline are also biblically accurate.

-"Due to the failure of most all churches to exercise this discipline, the image of the church is sullied." There is no point in condemning sin and not the sinner. The sinner is the one who willingly chooses to sin. Sin has no control over anything- the problem is with the person, not the act. The sinner is condemned because he sins. Sin is not some creature that controls our actions. The bible addresses the issue (Paul does), it isn't just a straight to "dont come to church anymore". There is progression in church discipline, and only when all avenues fail should a person be cut off from the church until such time as they have made sufficient change- and the church should welcome them back. 1Cor 5:9ish-13ish (the first part of that chunk of verse I think) talks about putting away the immoral "brother".

Obviously if Church Punishment is not used with the explicit intent of encouraging repentance then it is worthless. The Church has no authority to harm or imprison anyone, so punishment for punishments sake alone is impotent. Church Discipline addresses two areas. One: By separating individuals, who fail to live up to the standards of the faith, from the church it washes its hands of their actions. Due to the failure of most all churches to exercise this discipline, the image of the church is sullied. Which is harmful to the cause of the great commission- making it among the worst wrongs that can be committed. Two: Because people who are Christians by title only still receive acceptance in the church, they will have little to no inclination to legitimize their faith. By failing to act, the church essentially gives the impression that their current lifestyle is acceptable and sufficient for their salvation. Which can lead to the condemnation of an individual due, in part, to the churches inaction- which is another very serious wrong.

Essentially. Except you can never change your natural inclination. The Flesh and spirit will be in constant conflict until one is left in the grave. All that can change is which one has the greatest level of dominance over the other.

How does eternity- no matter where it is spent, not eventually become torture in itself.

The sinner is condemned because of the sin. Christianity is not in the business of dishing out punishment per sin (unless you are catholic). Punishing someone for sin is a ridiculous notion. Church punishment is strictly for use against unrepentant individuals. It is their heart being judged, their refusal to humble themselves and submit to Gods authority is why they are punished. Not the act of the sin. Of course all flesh is evil. Works are the manifestations of the core. The Works of the flesh (see Pauls writings in galations) are bad. Our Spirit is in constant contention with our flesh.

...Maybe I will have to put this another way to get you people to understand. All Flesh is evil. We are all creatures of the flesh, and our spirit contends against it. Sinful acts are what comes natural to all man. That is why sin must be resisted. By nature all men are evil (not good). This people are inherently good rhetoric is ridiculous liberal hippy garbage. Nothing has ever been farther from the truth. We are a condemned people from birth- that is why Christ had to die- to save us from the condemnation that comes from our own nature. Also- it is obvious that several of you are on the defensive over having your flawed conceptions (regarding the nature of man) attacked, and are going over board with that defense. You are trying link my arguments to other arguments that I have not made and trying to lump them together. I have not said a word on how church discipline should be handled, I only stated the reason and target for it. Nothing I have said implies any lack of compassion or otherwise "loving intent" when church discipline must be exercised effectively.