Raf

What the Hay: No, the reason is that believing is not a law. No, the reason is that believing is not a law. No one said believing doesn't work. Only that it is not a law. Want to know what God thinks of your opinion? When was the last time He asked you for it? Perhaps. Or it could just be that believing is not a law. Finally, we agree.

In order not to derail (and I apologize because I already have), I'll just say that Belle, with all due respect, you are seriously mistaken. Be happy to discuss privately if you wish.

I'd like to find the parents of Glenn Close, Darryl Hannah and Michael Learned to explain to them the difference between little boys and little girls.

Before you go, are you clear that what Wierwille did is considered plagiarism? I mean, plagiarism is a strong word, and if you really think what Wierwille did was plagiarism, you should be clear about it. So, was it plagiarism or was it plagiarism?

There's still something fishy here though. CBS should have outright denied the claim in the UCC press release, but they didn't, which suggests to me they are guilty of what UCC claims. That has nothing to do with any policy of not accepting ads for religions.

Knuckles, Sorry to hear that's the way things are in your community. I have no doubt there are churches right here in South Florida that are exactly the same. I doubt they are the majority, but I cannot knowingly deny they exist.

The first thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me is Finding a Christmas tree. The second thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me Rigging up the lights And finding a Christmas tree. The third thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me Hangovers Rigging up the lights And finding a Christmas tree. The fourth thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me Sending Christmas cards Hangovers Rigging up the lights And finding a Christmas tree. The fifth thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me F i v e m o n t h s of b i l l s Sending Christmas cards Hangovers Rigging up the lights And finding a Christmas tree. The sixth thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me Facing my in-laws F i v e m o n t h s of b i l l s Oh, I hate those Christmas cards Hangovers Rigging up these lights And finding a Christmas tree. The seventh thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me The Salvation Army Facing my in-laws F i v e m o n t h s of b i l l s Sending Christmas cards Aw Jeez I'm trying to rig up these lights! And finding a Christmas tree. The eighth thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me I WANNA TRANSFORMER FOR CHRISTMAS! Charities And what do you mean, "your in-laws"?!? F i v e m o n t h s of b i l l s Oh, making out these cards Edith, get me a beer, huh? What? We have no extension cords?!? And finding a Christmas tree. The ninth thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me No parking spaces DADDY, I WANT SOME CANDY!! Donations! Facing my in-laws, F i v e m o n t h s of b i l l s Writing out those Christmas cards Hangovers Now why the hell are they blinking?!? And finding a Christmas tree. The tenth thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me: "Batteries not included" No parking spaces BUY ME SOMETHIN'!!!! Get a job, ya bum!!! Oh, facing my in-laws F i v e m o n t h s of b i l l s Yo, ho! Sending Christmas cards, Oh, Jeez, look at this! One light goes out, they ALL go out!!! And finding a Christmas tree. The eleventh thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me: Stale TV specials "Batteries not included" No parking spaces I GOTTA GO TO THE BATHROOM!!!! Charities!! She's a witch! I hate her! F i v e m o n t h s of b i l l s Oh, I don't even KNOW half these people! Oh, who's got the toilet paper? Get a flashlight!! I blew a fuse!!! And finding a Christmas tree. The twelfth thing at Christmas that's such a pain to me: Singing Christmas Carols Stale TV specials "Batteries not included" No parking? WAAAAAAH!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAH!!! Charities! Gotta make 'em dinner! F i v e m o n t h s of b i l l s I'm not sending them this year, that's it! Shut up, you! FINE!! If you're so smart, YOU RIG UP THE LIGHTS!!!!! And finding a Christmas tree.

News orgs are starting to pick this up: I just heard a report on NPR that sounds like it could have been written by the UCC staff (not even an attempt to contact CBS!) Turns out NBC has a policy against accepting religious advertising of any sort (I guess they lose out on the Mormon commercials). According to cnn.com, "A CBS spokesman confirmed that the ad was banned, but would not comment directly about the above statement. 'It was against our policy of accepting advocacy advertising,' said the spokesman."

Oh Holy Night and The Little Drummer Boy.

I have no doubt that gays and lesbians would not feel welcome at many mainstream churches, although they would be allowed in. But to think that blacks and Latinos would not feel welcome at many mainstream churches stretches credibility. I've been to churches in the South. I'm sure it happens, don't get me wrong, but it's not the norm. Far from it. Gays and lesbians - totally different story. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

What's objectionable? The implication that churches turn people away because they are brown, for one thing. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are some knuckle dragging churches where that happens, but the overwhelming majority of churches do not (and by that, I mean doctrinally). I think the first people turned away by the bouncers might be a gay couple, but I'm not sure. I agree with WordWolf that the last couple is probably lesbian. Nobody's kissing or holding hands, so there's nothing but honest speculation to base that on. I don't like the ad, but I'm surprised anyone would refuse to air it, especially considering that the networks routinely air newscasts where mainstream Christianity is treated with far greater malice than this ad suggests. === Quick correction after looking at the ad again: the first couple is gay. They're holding hands as they walk up to the bouncer. As for the last couple, one woman has her arm around the other: not conclusive, but certainly suggestive that they are a "couple."

Oh come on, Santa doesn't count. Cindy, judging by the comments on this thread, you will only like this movie if you see it in 3-D.

I can't imagine having seen this in 2-D, but I have to tell you that in 3-D it is an awesome, awesome ride. That scene in the beginning, with the emergency brake, man, you feel like that train is going to hit you right in the head! The snow, the dancing waiters, the roller coaster ride, the Forrest Gump effect with the lost ticket: I cannot tell you what a difference it made. You're absolutely right about the story: it fell flat. Nice ending, but my most fundamental test concerning a movie takes place three days later. Here's the test. Three days after you've seen a movie, any movie, name a character. If you can, it may well still be a lousy movie. Or it may be great. But if you can't, then I guarantee you it was a lousy movie. Or you have ADD. One or the other. I couldn't name a character in Polar Express if you paid me.

This is utterly inappropriate.

I can't say it better than that.

I am deeply saddened by this news. Deeply.

Planning to see it this week in 3-D on an Imax screen. Hopefully I'll enjoyu it despite satori's warning. :)-->

ckeer: Thank you for clearing that up. Much appreciated.

I've been saying this for years. People point to the "incorruptible seed" verse as proof that the holy spirit within is that seed, but that's not what the verse says. You're better off looking at Ephesians, where it's called a token of our inheritance, than this particular verse. Fascinating, is what it is.

Welcome Knuckles. Let me know if you need cream and sugar.

I used to have these bits of advice I would give to people, but then I stopped. I figured I would keep the advice to myself. No one ever gave me any money for my silence, though, so my answer would have to be no, I never got any money saving tips.

Cuz it ain't there. Not once. Not a single time. In fact, in teaching specifically on the subject of giving (II Corinthians), Paul spends a couple of chapters on the subject of giving, and not once does he mention 10% or any other percent. This would be understandable if he were writing to (former) Jews, for whom the 10% figure would be understood. But he was writing to (former) Gentiles, who never had any background in the tithe and would have needed such instruction if it was, in fact, God's minimum standard.

Happy Birthday Cindy and tcat!

There's an old saying: If you're worried about having committed the unforgivable sin, don't: you haven't. [Correction, in case anyone digs this up. I was trying to remember where I got this saying when it hit me: credit to CKnapp, with apologies for not recognizing it sooner. Raf: 12/23/04]. That said, I truly respect everyone's difference of opinion on this. I continue to hold my own and wish you well. (I'm just not in a verse wrangling mood this week). Thanks Johniam and George St G.

No, we do NOT "only" have our fleshly point of view. You know better than that. My view is also that you're mistaken about the nature of the unforgivable sin. As long as one continues to reject Christ, it's unforgiven. Once you have accepted him this sin is no longer being committed, and thus there is no need to forgive it. ALL things become new. ALL, with distinction (that distinction being spiritual, not fleshly). ALL things become new. You don't suddenly lose the fleshly, physical consequences of previous sins (you don't suddenly lose the need to go through detox, for example). But all things become new. Thou SHALT be saved. No condition is set on this.