Raf

This is utterly inappropriate.

quote:

---

Words fail at a time like this.

---

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. :)-->

Mark's always been a super nice guy. Thank you; he is definitely in my prayers.

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.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Georgio Jessio:

I always did find it funny that the Abundant Sharing teaching was about tithing and was backed up with Old Testament teachings. As far as I remember I was never shown the 10% rule in the New Testament.

---

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.

quote:

---

Originally posted by johniam:

Raf:

quote: From our flesh point of view" you are correct. But I didn't think we were looking at this from a flesh point of view.

All we have is our flesh point of view. If the unforgiveable sin is rejecting Christ and nobody is confirmed as having committed it until they die then it doesn't make sense for Jesus to say "neither in this world neither in the world which is to come". No. It has to be possible to do something in THIS world which can't be forgiven in the world which is to come, or verse 32 doesn't make sense.

---

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.

Good question. I'll look it up, let you know if I have an answer or not.

VIRGINIA MUISE, 111, DEVOUT RED SOX FAN

By Myrna Oliver Los Angeles Times

Virginia Muise, believed the oldest resident of New England and the 31st oldest person in the world, died Nov. 2 at a nursing home in North Haverhill, N.H. She was 111, and had lived to see her beloved Boston Red Sox win the World Series twice -- the first time in 1918, the second a week before she died.

Her regional and worldwide ranking in longevity has been verified by the Los Angeles-based Gerontology Research Group, which tracks "super-centenarians," or those older than 110. Mrs. Muise had lost her hearing and normally used a wheelchair because of arthritis, but could still walk short distances.

Mrs. Muise always kept a Red Sox cap on the nightstand by her bed and was delighted by the baseball team's World Series victory. Until her health deteriorated, she had been a regular at Fenway Park.

Mrs. Muise was born on July 27, 1893, in Halifax, Nova Scotia, where her family ran a rooming house.

She was 18 when the Titanic sank in April 1912. Accompanying her dockworker father to the Halifax port, she watched Titanic survivors disembark from rescue ships and saw hundreds of victims' coffins stacked along the wharf like cordwood.

Recalling another historic disaster, she once said bluntly: "The whole city blew out its windows." Mrs. Muise was referring to the 1917 explosion of an ammunition ship in Halifax Harbor that killed 2,000 people and leveled two square kilometers of the city -- considered the largest man-made explosion in history prior to the detonation of the atomic bomb.

Her husband, Charles, was a blacksmith who died at 94 in 1977. Although the two were not relatives, each had the common French-Canadian surname Muise.

The family moved to Boston in 1923, and Mrs. Muise immediately became interested in the Red Sox, who were still basking in their glory as the 1918 World Series champions. Lured partially by discount tickets for women that were prevalent in that era, she became a faithful baseball fan who attended almost every game.

A housekeeper and cook in Canada, Mrs. Muise in 1923 became manager of the cafeteria at the former Boston Lying-In Hospital, a position she held until her retirement in 1958.

Her son, Gordon Muise, 81, said his mother was far prouder of her pioneering professional achievement than of being the oldest person in New England. But that didn't keep anyone else from appreciating her longevity.

In July 2003, New Hampshire Gov. Craig Benson proclaimed her 110th birthday "Virginia Muise Day" and issued a proclamation reading:

Besides her son Gordon, Mrs. Muise is survived by another son, John; daughters Margaret Doucet and Edith Murphy; 18 grandchildren, and several great-grandchildren.

Los Angeles Times is a Tribune Co. newspaper

Publication Date: Thursday, November 11, 2004

Well, maybe I was too harsh.

I'll forgive me, but first I insist on an apology. If I don't apologize to me, then I don't see how I can forgive me.

Can you forgive you?

No, I cannot. As far as I'm concerned, I can just go to hell for all I care. :)-->

John,

quote:

---

Yes, he shall, but that's a pretty big "if". From our flesh point of view it doesn't look like there's any reason why anyone couldn't turn to Christ and get saved, but God says in his word "hath never forgiveness...nor the world which is to come".

---

Thanks for your reply. Yes, it's a very big "if." One might even say "uttermost."

"From our flesh point of view" you are correct. But I didn't think we were looking at this from a flesh point of view.

Biblically, doesn't it make sense to you that Jesus was speaking of people who never turn to him, that this is the unforgivable sin (namely, rejecting him)?

Regarding the usage of fruit and trees in Matthew 12:33, Jesus is talking about behavior and speech, not eternal life (or life in the age to come, to put it literally). In none of the verses which follow does Jesus state or imply that he's talking about salvation.

Note the verse: "EITHER MAKE THE TREE GOOD, AND HIS FRUIT GOOD..."

How can you "make" a tree good? Literally, you can't. But if it's a figure of speech and not literal, then the figure calls attention to itself, doesn't it? You can't literally change a tree. But you can literally change you. If you insist on the meaning of trees and fruit as unchangeable seed, you will always, hands down, miss the point of this verse.

This has become a doctrinal discussion. If anyone objects to that, I'll stop.

Good question. I believe I've already answered it:

quote:

---

They may not take advantage of it, but that doesn't mean it wasn't available.

---

Let me turn the tables on you:

If someone who was once "born of the wrong seed" recognizes his error and turns to Christ and confesses Romans 10:9,10, SHALT he be saved or not?

Using the principle of difficult verses being interpreted in light of the clear: it is clear in the Bible that ANYONE who comes to Christ will be saved by him (would you like me to list the verses?). This one verse, which you cite, is the difficult one to be interpreted in light of those clear ones.

I'd like to spend some more time studying that verse before delving into a satisfactory answer. In the meantime, please consider my question.

I would agree with you if someone actually got hurt in all of this. No one did.

I think it's more in poor taste for this to have happened than it is for me to mock conspiracy theorists.

Oh, by the way, HI ZIX!

quote:

---

Originally posted by learning:

wow. Raf, Coolwaters.. you guys are awesome.

I'm actually suprised that some people haven't jumped all over Raf for that statement. W2G!

---

I think everyone knew I was kidding. :)-->

I do not hold the view that in order to have seed, the devil must be equal to God.

I do hold to the belief that there is no category of human beings that God cannot save. There is no class of people who "sold out" to the devil in a way that makes true repentance and salvation unavailable to them. They may not take advantage of it, but that doesn't mean it wasn't available.

Folks, I have nothing to say but see this movie. Forthwith. Now. Straightway.

Jamie Foxx is absolutely amazing. You forget it's him. GO SEE THIS MOVIE.

Return of the Living dead was hilarious. It's funny that Shaun of the Dead gets so much attention as a parody when Return already served that function so well (my personal favorite is when the zombies get on the ambulance radio and request more paramedics).

I haven't seen Shaun of the Dead, but I've heard there's some pretty funny scenes there too.

I agree that it's more meaningful. I think the question at hand is whether it's more literal.

I don't believe in an incorruptible "seed of the devil" in the same vein as Christ in you. I think people are the children of the devil when they follow his example. I don't think it was ever intended to be viewed as unchangable seed, and it is never presented as the "unforgivable sin" of the gospels. The connection is only made by extrapolation, in my view.