Amy Winehouse is dead

[artist4perry]

I am a creationist; I believe man created god.

You know, Ed, that makes a heck of a lot more sense than the opposite! Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-RpFTjnm1Q

Just cuz I love posting this.

Love this. Gotta laugh at things we don't agree on. Dan, maybe one day you will find out if your right. But I guarantee if I am dead like Rover all over I have nothing to regret. So I love God and do no harm. I love my loved ones here as well. But if I am right and I see them for all eternity, well that is just the icing on the cake isn't it?

[Saint John]

I am a creationist; I believe man created god.

You know, Ed, that makes a heck of a lot more sense than the opposite! Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-RpFTjnm1Q

Just cuz I love posting this.

I hate that show, but that was great!

[scarygirl]

I thought I'd post this. To anyone who ever doubted the depth of this girl's talent.

Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDXgKIpJyIk&feature=related

It's unfortunate that so many people don't bother to to dig past the surface of the song Rehab...

[RedWingFan]

Proof that there is a God!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhvaDJTUmrU

[Frontiers65]

You are all assholes.....She is a human. I just think when you all bite the dust.

Lol, that's a long ways off! Any chance you'll think in the meantime?

Hhahahaah yes! I am Immortal!

[Seven Wishes2]

You know, Ed, that makes a heck of a lot more sense than the opposite! Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

Right on, brother. One of the best and most profound posts I've ever read anywhere.

Seize the day.

[steveo777]

You know, Ed, that makes a heck of a lot more sense than the opposite! Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

Right on, brother. One of the best and most profound posts I've ever read anywhere.

Seize the day.

In the end, we're all humanary stew!

[conversationpc]

You know, Ed, that makes a heck of a lot more sense than the opposite! Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

Right on, brother. One of the best and most profound posts I've ever read anywhere.

Seize the day.

I see it just the opposite. Simply because there's a life after this one is all the more reason to "seize the day" and really live while we're still here in this life.

[Melissa]

Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

+1.

[Rip Rokken]

I know some religions teach your either born good or bad. I disagree. I have never held the belief that you are predestined for heaven. Nor are you predestined to hell. Don't know if that makes sense to you.

Actually, I used to think quite a bit about predestination. Big problem is, that's what the Bible teaches. And there is no way anyone can believe that "every person" has a chance to be presented with the Gospel before they die (and hence, be presented with the "choice"). I talked about this with my mother several months ago, and she said that even in indigenous tribes, many evidence the "Gospel story" in their own native beliefs. Could be, but definitely not all of them.

The problem is that you're not taking those passages in context with the whole of scripture. I've always understood that what those portions of scripture are talking about is that, in and of just ourselves, we aren't capable of doing good. However, mankind shares what I've heard referred to as "common grace", i.e. even though not all people are believers, because of his grace, people can do good things. The desire to to good things that's in everyone is that common grace regardless of if someone is a believer or not and the farther someone alienates themselves from God, the more that common grace is lost and, unfortunately, we see lots of examples of that in society as well.

No disrespect intended, but this is simply...

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colber ... truthiness

"Common grace" is an overly-easy and convenient way to explain how people who are not indwelt with the Holy Spirit are still able to do good, make moral choices, etc. In my personal experience, I've probably seen more pure good and compassion (without spiritual strings like eventual conversion or a motive of eventual reward) come from non-religious people than religious ones (including myself). Even animals can do good and show love and compassion in their limited ways, and they aren't considered as even having "souls" or "spirits" in Christianity.

If unsaved people are able to do good via "common grace", is that righteousness still considered filthy?

[Rip Rokken]

One of the biggest confirmations to me personally that there is no divine being in charge, is the absolute wreck which we call Christendom today. It's no shining city on a hill, and there is zilcho quality control from the Almighty inside his own religion -- everything goes without supernatural intervention, and we are taught to believe that it will all be dealt with in one fell swoop when he returns...

As for God's church, obviously it isn't always going to work the way it should. There are tons of folks who attend church on a Sunday, may call themselves a Christian, but rarely live like it when they're not between the four walls of the church building. Heck, I've been a believer and there've been times over the last 22 years of my walk with Christ that I've done things that haven't exactly been a great witness. When that happens, that's my fault and not God's. He didn't turn me into an automaton when I began following him.

Where though is the quality control? Why doesn't he protect his own testimony? If his nature never changes (like the link to Scarygirl's article emphasizes), then why not send a few lightning bolts here and there (or everywhere, really) as a sign of his disapproval to things being done from within his own body? We're talking about major infractions against God's testimony especially from leadership -- not just a few things here and there that don't line up with our beliefs. If the church really is the "Body of Christ", and you look at that beyond just a cool-sounding term, then why isn't God moving it with beauty and grace instead of letting it pull itself apart in different, spastic directions? Is his spirit that incapable of doing this? What an incredible testimony that would be. Even Paul encouraged believers to "think the same thing". You can hardly find two pastors alike who teach the same things, much less think them.

And by the way, he does actually want automatons who will spend eternity praising and worshiping him. Otherwise, what's to prevent anyone in eternity from rebelling again unless they are given emotional lobotomys (as indicated by Revelation 21:4)? How can anyone possibly be happy and anxiety-free knowing that some of their relatives and loved ones, maybe even their spouses or children, are screaming in agony for all eternity in "unquenchable fire"?

As for if God were real then everyone would want some of him...I don't see any evidence at all in humanity for that kind of a statement. There are some who could look God straight in the eye after being given the proverbial keys to the kingdom and they'd either throw it all away in a quest for their own wealth and glory or they'd find a way to crucify him a second time just like they did the first time.

The Bible predicts that hearts will be hardened in the last days, but who can blame anyone with the state of God's testimony in the world today? Like I said, no quality control at all. Rational people treat it the same as any other sales pitch, and if they can't see it working for the believers themselves, then why take that plunge themselves?

The "I don't have to prove anything to anyone, I'm God" approach doesn't resonate with people anymore. If God is truly good and perfect, they want to see some of that in his work. Right now, what he's offering is almost good enough to qualify for this seal of quality:

[Rip Rokken]

You know, Ed, that makes a heck of a lot more sense than the opposite! Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

Right on, brother. One of the best and most profound posts I've ever read anywhere.

Seize the day.

I see it just the opposite. Simply because there's a life after this one is all the more reason to "seize the day" and really live while we're still here in this life.

That's exactly the opposite of what Jesus teaches, though.

[Behshad]

You know, Ed, that makes a heck of a lot more sense than the opposite! Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

Right on, brother. One of the best and most profound posts I've ever read anywhere.

Seize the day.

In the end, we're all humanary stew!

Except for you. I dont recall that stew call for a dash of jackass

[conversationpc]

Where though is the quality control? Why doesn't he protect his own testimony? If his nature never changes (like the link to Scarygirl's article emphasizes), then why not send a few lightning bolts here and there (or everywhere, really) as a sign of his disapproval to things being done from within his own body? We're talking about major infractions against God's testimony especially from leadership -- not just a few things here and there that don't line up with our beliefs.

Who's to say there isn't any "quality control"? The Bible says there are many who are "weak and sick" due to disobedience. Regardless, you don't always know what's going on in someone's life that may be a result of their sin.

If the church really is the "Body of Christ", and you look at that beyond just a cool-sounding term, then why isn't God moving it with beauty and grace instead of letting it pull itself apart in different, spastic directions? Is his spirit that incapable of doing this? What an incredible testimony that would be. Even Paul encouraged believers to "think the same thing". You can hardly find two pastors alike who teach the same things, much less think them.

We're all still human and even with the Holy Spirit's direction, our humanness still gets in the way. Like I said earlier, God doesn't turn us into robots.

And by the way, he does actually want automatons who will spend eternity praising and worshiping him...

Wanting something and forcing it are two different things.

Otherwise, what's to prevent anyone in eternity from rebelling again unless they are given emotional lobotomys (as indicated by Revelation 21:4)? How can anyone possibly be happy and anxiety-free knowing that some of their relatives and loved ones, maybe even their spouses or children, are screaming in agony for all eternity in "unquenchable fire"?

The unquenchable fire bit could be a matter of interpretation. A large number of people don't believe it's a literal fire. My pastor actually covered this two weeks ago and I can't remember his reasoning for it but his belief is that the fire is not literal. I'm not sure how you get "emotional labotomys" from Revelation 21:4.

The Bible predicts that hearts will be hardened in the last days, but who can blame anyone with the state of God's testimony in the world today? Like I said, no quality control at all. Rational people treat it the same as any other sales pitch, and if they can't see it working for the believers themselves, then why take that plunge themselves?

It depends on what you mean by rational, which to me seems like a backhanded slap to people who do come to Christ despite the poor testimonies of some believers. That being said, in my opinion, there are a large number of folks who claim they're Christian but are basically so in name only, not in truth and deed.

The "I don't have to prove anything to anyone, I'm God" approach doesn't resonate with people anymore. If God is truly good and perfect, they want to see some of that in his work.

There's plenty of evidence in his work for anyone who's willing to see it. I see it every day. The times I don't see it are typically the times when I'm living in a selfish manner.

[conversationpc]

You know, Ed, that makes a heck of a lot more sense than the opposite! Some people just can't cope with the idea that dead people are just that ... dead. We need to validate "the other side" to help cope with the idea that we may never see them again. Personally, I air on the side of caution and assume that I never will see them again. It makes me much more aware of just how precious the time with them now is. And if I see them again ... cool! Well, most of them.

Right on, brother. One of the best and most profound posts I've ever read anywhere.

Seize the day.

I see it just the opposite. Simply because there's a life after this one is all the more reason to "seize the day" and really live while we're still here in this life.

That's exactly the opposite of what Jesus teaches, though.

How so?

[conversationpc]

The problem is that you're not taking those passages in context with the whole of scripture. I've always understood that what those portions of scripture are talking about is that, in and of just ourselves, we aren't capable of doing good. However, mankind shares what I've heard referred to as "common grace", i.e. even though not all people are believers, because of his grace, people can do good things. The desire to to good things that's in everyone is that common grace regardless of if someone is a believer or not and the farther someone alienates themselves from God, the more that common grace is lost and, unfortunately, we see lots of examples of that in society as well.

No disrespect intended, but this is simply...

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colber ... truthiness

"Common grace" is an overly-easy and convenient way to explain how people who are not indwelt with the Holy Spirit are still able to do good, make moral choices, etc.

As if an easy explanation makes it any less true, Rip. As for convenient, you throw that word in there to make it look like I'm grasping at straws to come up with an explanation, which is not the case at all.

In my personal experience, I've probably seen more pure good and compassion (without spiritual strings like eventual conversion or a motive of eventual reward) come from non-religious people than religious ones (including myself).

Yes, to me it's a turn-off that it seems like some people want to be noticed for the good they do but, in the end, the good they do is of some benefit for someone else even if that person's heart isn't necessarily in the right place. For instance, some may only participate in feeding the poor because of how it makes them look or feel. That sucks, in my opinion. However, in the end, the poor are still fed.

However, it can be argued that the non-religious do things for similar reasons, like the celebrity who always has cameras in tow when they visit the children's hospital or the rich dude who gives to the poor because they feel guilty for having so much more money than just about everyone else.

If unsaved people are able to do good via "common grace", is that righteousness still considered filthy?

That common grace is from God, right? If it's from God, how can it be considered filthy? If it comes out of that person's motivation to be noticed or only to make themselves feel better, then yes, I would say it's filthy.

[Rip Rokken]

I see it just the opposite. Simply because there's a life after this one is all the more reason to "seize the day" and really live while we're still here in this life.

That's exactly the opposite of what Jesus teaches, though.

How so?

It depends on the context of "seizing the day". Jesus strongly advocates suffering in this age in order to attain riches in the next. This life is "but a vapor". I don't know too many Christians (American at least) who are into suffering, and they keep themselves pretty comfortable with worldly things. They have found ways to ignore most of Jesus' teachings about Christian living and make excuses for being rich and comfortable, allowing the occasional R-rated movie, eating way more than is needed to sustain life, etc. They are totally out of touch with what is actually taught in the New Testament, and no surprise because those things aren't emphasized in most churches these days -- can't teach that stuff if the pastors want to keep anybody in the pews on Sunday.

Megachurches especially are all about creature comforts -- it's what it takes to attract and keep people.

If Christians want to seize the day for Jesus, then sell all your belongings and give them to the poor, stay poor, and distance yourself from your friends and family if they aren't into what you're doing.

And oh, yes... if you're a guy, you might consider getting your balls cut off for the cause:

Matthew 19:12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

[S2M]

Read up on Ayn Rand, Dave.....Altruism has ruined this country, as well as mankind. The individual is king. Altruism(religion) implies(infers) that nobody can take after themselves, and always needs a helping hand....Altruism and religion assume that the individual is intrinsically flawed, needing to be saved at every point in life....that there is always that neighborly safety net there....and thats bullshit....and totally illogical.

[conversationpc]

I see it just the opposite. Simply because there's a life after this one is all the more reason to "seize the day" and really live while we're still here in this life.

That's exactly the opposite of what Jesus teaches, though.

How so?

I don't know too many Christians (American at least) who are into suffering, and they keep themselves pretty comfortable with worldly things. They have found ways to ignore most of Jesus' teachings about Christian living and make excuses for being rich and comfortable...

If someone's life is eaten up with keeping themselves comfortable with worldly things, then I'm not sure how they even fit the definition of being a Christian in the first place. As for being rich, I don't see how that's supposed to be diametrically opposed to being a Christian.

...allowing the occasional R-rated movie...

I'll watch an R-rated movie every once in a while depending on the reason for it being rated R in the first place. Cussing or nudity turn me off and I don't watch those kinds of movies. There've been a few that I've seen, though, like "Braveheart", for instance, that I don't see a problem with anyone seeing, regardless of being a Christian or not.

...eating way more than is needed to sustain life, etc.

This is an area that I struggle in and have for many years now. EVERYONE has an area of struggle, you and me included. That doesn't mean I don't suffer in some way or another or that I'm somehow only trying to be comfortable, avoiding any conflict or suffering, etc., etc.

They are totally out of touch with what is actually taught in the New Testament, and no surprise because those things aren't emphasized in most churches these days -- can't teach that stuff if the pastors want to keep anybody in the pews on Sunday.

Not in my church. In fact, we've had some families get up during the middle of a couple of services lately and leave because of what was being taught. Oh well...

Megachurches especially are all about creature comforts -- it's what it takes to attract and keep people.

Can't disagree with you here. I think you almost HAVE TO cater to what people want in order to become a megachurch. That's not a recipe for a lasting, Spirit-led change in the lives of people going there. They only want to have their ears tickled.

[conversationpc]

And oh, yes... if you're a guy, you might consider getting your balls cut off for the cause:

Matthew 19:12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

No, thanks...I don't want to be anything like Don Dokken...

Dohhh!!!

[scarygirl]

And oh, yes... if you're a guy, you might consider getting your balls cut off for the cause:

Matthew 19:12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

No, thanks...I don't want to be anything like Don Dokken...

Dohhh!!!

That;s gonna leave a mark....

[Rip Rokken]

If someone's life is eaten up with keeping themselves comfortable with worldly things, then I'm not sure how they even fit the definition of being a Christian in the first place. As for being rich, I don't see how that's supposed to be diametrically opposed to being a Christian.

Being poor is glorified in the New Testament, and being rich is demonized. I totally agree with people being "eaten up" by wealth, but think about how many Christians are comfortable being (or staying) poor for the sake of Christ. Not too many, which is why it's not pushed in today's churches. Everyone wants to be comfortable, nobody wants to suffer. On the other end of the spectrum though, you have people like Mother Teresa who did nothing to really help the plight of the poor by keeping them poor. Speaking of Mother Teresa, here is a great 3-part mini-documentary (expose) by Christopher Hitchens on her. What a fraud...

Hell's Angel Pt. 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WQ0i3nCx60

Hell's Angel Pt. 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKkcDgeYBdk

Hell's Angel Pt. 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Pei8lSiv6s

I'll watch an R-rated movie every once in a while depending on the reason for it being rated R in the first place. Cussing or nudity turn me off and I don't watch those kinds of movies. There've been a few that I've seen, though, like "Braveheart", for instance, that I don't see a problem with anyone seeing, regardless of being a Christian or not.

So I guess brutal violence is acceptable to the Lord (no doubt, lol). There are hardly any R-rated movies that doesn't have at least some cursing - even period pieces these days. How much cursing or nudity is ok before it crosses the line into "displeasing" God?

This is an area that I struggle in and have for many years now. EVERYONE has an area of struggle, you and me included. That doesn't mean I don't suffer in some way or another or that I'm somehow only trying to be comfortable, avoiding any conflict or suffering, etc., etc.

I was thinking about this just the other day. Why doesn't the Holy Spirit convict people of eating certain kinds of food? Eating too much food I hear about occasionally, but no internal warnings about heavily processed, pesticide laden, genetically modified foods that have been linked to the rising cancer epidemic.

Not in my church. In fact, we've had some families get up during the middle of a couple of services lately and leave because of what was being taught. Oh well...

I'm curious, what was the teaching that chased them off?

Can't disagree with you here. I think you almost HAVE TO cater to what people want in order to become a megachurch. That's not a recipe for a lasting, Spirit-led change in the lives of people going there. They only want to have their ears tickled.

Agreed, but aside from Catholicism, they are undeniably the most public face of Christianity these days -- on TV, in the news, on billboards. Why does God allow these places to lead the head of the pack in representing his church to a world of unbelievers?

[slucero]

...if everyone would keep their faith to themselves (after all it is a one-on-one relationship)... then the world would likely be a better place... too many people have died and killed in the name of their God...

This is the crock of crap I get so sick of. Someone claiming to be from God but doesn't live by his word is not a Christian. So if I killed blaming a Dog........Son of Sam................are all Dogs evil? You can kill in the name of anything to justify your behavior.

Rip, I would get into this deeper with you maybe someday when we can more one on one. But not here. I don't see setting here and arguing with folks for the sake of argument. I just don't see this being productive.

There are too many here ready to just bash my head in because they can and want to. That is not the same as you and I would discuss a topic among friends. At least you and I would not come out of it with bad feelings. I would still love you as a friend.

As for the topic, didn't bring it up, didn't want to. I still hold to my faith as stupid as some of you find me to be, and always will.

I just don't see him the way some of you do. Anyway best wishes to all of you! Enjoy your argument!

so no one has killed in the "name of God"??? I don't recall reading about people killing in the "name of their dentist... or their barber... or their mechanic... " in history class...

I never would belittle you for having faith.. it is your choice.. it's ALWAYS a choice... and a damn fine one I might add... but that choice is personal, and if made for any other reason, is disingenuous...

To call my post a "crock of crap"... is inane.. and hypocritical.. no different than denying the Crusades ever happened... or the Holocaust...

[Rick]

...if everyone would keep their faith to themselves (after all it is a one-on-one relationship)... then the world would likely be a better place... too many people have died and killed in the name of their God...

This is the crock of crap I get so sick of. Someone claiming to be from God but doesn't live by his word is not a Christian. So if I killed blaming a Dog........Son of Sam................are all Dogs evil? You can kill in the name of anything to justify your behavior.

Rip, I would get into this deeper with you maybe someday when we can more one on one. But not here. I don't see setting here and arguing with folks for the sake of argument. I just don't see this being productive.

There are too many here ready to just bash my head in because they can and want to. That is not the same as you and I would discuss a topic among friends. At least you and I would not come out of it with bad feelings. I would still love you as a friend.

As for the topic, didn't bring it up, didn't want to. I still hold to my faith as stupid as some of you find me to be, and always will.

I just don't see him the way some of you do. Anyway best wishes to all of you! Enjoy your argument!

so no one has killed in the "name of God"??? I don't recall reading about people killing in the "name of their dentist... or their barber... or their mechanic... " in history class...

I never would belittle you for having faith.. it is your choice.. it's ALWAYS a choice... and a damn fine one I might add... but that choice is personal, and if made for any other reason, is disingenuous...

To call my post a "crock of crap"... is inane.. and hypocritical.. no different than denying the Crusades ever happened... or the Holocaust...

I think you misunderstood her. I think what she was calling a crock of crap is what she explained immediately afterward.

[slucero]

doesn't read that way to me.. but if so then I apologize.

[Rip Rokken]

doesn't read that way to me.. but if so then I apologize.

I took it that she was referring to the post, haha! It's the sentence structure - the second sentence doesn't seem like a continuance of the first, but a commentary on the last sentence in your post. Maybe she'll clarify though.

[geminix]

Not sure who it was, but somebody posted this link in a thread quite a while ago about George Carlin's take on religion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o

[conversationpc]

Being poor is glorified in the New Testament, and being rich is demonized. I totally agree with people being "eaten up" by wealth, but think about how many Christians are comfortable being (or staying) poor for the sake of Christ. Not too many, which is why it's not pushed in today's churches. Everyone wants to be comfortable, nobody wants to suffer.

Being rich is not demonized in the New Testament at all. The love of being rich is.

So I guess brutal violence is acceptable to the Lord (no doubt, lol). There are hardly any R-rated movies that doesn't have at least some cursing - even period pieces these days. How much cursing or nudity is ok before it crosses the line into "displeasing" God?

Did you ever play with toy guns when you were a kid, "Cowboys and Indians", etc., etc? Is that acceptable? After all, if we follow your line of thought above then shouldn't it follow that even pretend violence is bad? Come on, you're smarter than that.

I was thinking about this just the other day. Why doesn't the Holy Spirit convict people of eating certain kinds of food? Eating too much food I hear about occasionally, but no internal warnings about heavily processed, pesticide laden, genetically modified foods that have been linked to the rising cancer epidemic.

Who's to say that he doesn't?

Not in my church. In fact, we've had some families get up during the middle of a couple of services lately and leave because of what was being taught. Oh well...

I'm curious, what was the teaching that chased them off?

He was teaching on the priesthood of the believer and that you don't have to go through a priest for confession, to talk to God, etc. With a large picture of the Pope on the screen behind him, he mentioned that the Catholic church had become more like Rome than Rome had become like the church.

Can't disagree with you here. I think you almost HAVE TO cater to what people want in order to become a megachurch. That's not a recipe for a lasting, Spirit-led change in the lives of people going there. They only want to have their ears tickled.

Agreed, but aside from Catholicism, they are undeniably the most public face of Christianity these days -- on TV, in the news, on billboards. Why does God allow these places to lead the head of the pack in representing his church to a world of unbelievers?

God's judgment comes to his own house first. These folks will get theirs at the time appointed. They always do.

[conversationpc]

On the other end of the spectrum though, you have people like Mother Teresa who did nothing to really help the plight of the poor by keeping them poor. Speaking of Mother Teresa, here is a great 3-part mini-documentary (expose) by Christopher Hitchens on her. What a fraud...

Hell's Angel Pt. 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WQ0i3nCx60

Hell's Angel Pt. 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKkcDgeYBdk

Hell's Angel Pt. 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Pei8lSiv6s

Well, I'm not Catholic and don't agree with the teachings of that church and, in fact, find many of their teachings anti-Biblical. So I'm not really a bit interested in watching the documentary. That being said, I'm sure that there's a rebuff to Hitchen's documentary out there somewhere. If so, have you listened to all sides? Perhaps Hitchens doesn't exactly have his story straight? After all, from what I know of the guy, it sure seems like he probably already had an agenda going into the making of that documentary.

[Rip Rokken]

Being rich is not demonized in the New Testament at all. The love of being rich is.

Just a few quick verses from Matthew:

Matthew 6:19-21 “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Matthew 19:23-24 And Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

I know it relates to the love of money, but hey... doesn't it kinda take some love for money to get rich? Unless you inherit it, but even then, if God will always sustain your needs, why not give most everything to the poor and just trust God for the day to day needs?

Did you ever play with toy guns when you were a kid, "Cowboys and Indians", etc., etc? Is that acceptable? After all, if we follow your line of thought above then shouldn't it follow that even pretend violence is bad? Come on, you're smarter than that.

Then shouldn't make-believe sex in the movies be ok, too? It's not the real thing.

I was thinking about this just the other day. Why doesn't the Holy Spirit convict people of eating certain kinds of food? Eating too much food I hear about occasionally, but no internal warnings about heavily processed, pesticide laden, genetically modified foods that have been linked to the rising cancer epidemic.

Who's to say that he doesn't?

All the Christians who have no clue what they are putting into their bodies and suffering for it, just like the unsaved. I do the work of the Holy Spirit in my house. Caught my little girl bringing home Icees from day care a few days in a row and had a chat with her. She's not even 8 and got her first cavity not long ago. I took over on nutrition and her diet changed immediately. Amazingly, she's actually enjoying eating healthy now.

He was teaching on the priesthood of the believer and that you don't have to go through a priest for confession, to talk to God, etc. With a large picture of the Pope on the screen behind him, he mentioned that the Catholic church had become more like Rome than Rome had become like the church.

Good. They were offended because like many Christians today, the bulk of their beliefs or practices are comprised of human traditions and concepts, not scriptural teaching.

God's judgment comes to his own house first. These folks will get theirs at the time appointed. They always do.

But not in a time frame that matters. Not in a way that sends a message to saved and unsaved alike, thereby keeping his testimony intact. If you want to trust someone's word for the future, they better be showing a solid example here in the present -- otherwise, they are just empty promises. Anyway, I'm afraid it's never going to happen, just like the "Rapture". Justice has to come in this age or there's no justice at all.