The Russian was right

[beefy]

When one is in the military, one may engage in acts which are quite contrary to Jesus' words.

When Jesus says, "do good to those who hate you," how can one kill someone else and consider it to be doing them any good?

When Jesus says, "love your enemies," how can one love their enemy as they rip out their guts with a bayonet?

Some people who kill other people in their military occupation, really need to think about what they are doing.

These people who kill in the military make thousands of mothers childless, children fatherless, and countless untold numbers of grieving widows. There is nothing honorable about that. That is what these people are trained to do. Trained to kill. They bring pain, grief, and suffering to those caught in their wake, both the guilty and the innocent. And they grieve me as well.

In short, what I have to say is this. Jesus reached out to the fatherless and widows. These people who kill in the military and claim to follow Christ merely make more work for the following Christians who are out there reaching out to the families of all the insurgents and "terrorists" and innocent bystanders that the other "Christians" have killed.

To be Christian means to be Christ-like. There is nothing Christ-like about taking anothers life just to save your own. Is their life worth less than the life of your family? Are they not just as loved by God as you? Is their life worth less than your country? Is their life worth less than your freedom?

No. God loves us, all of us. God forgave us when we deserved death. He took away the punishment for our transgressions. If we do not forgive our own transgressors in the same way, how then can we represent God's love to the world?

The Bible says to imitate the life of Christ here on earth, and Christ never killed those who threatened His safety and the safety of His disciples. They ended up dead too.

But what did they say? "To live is Christ and to die is gain." Death is gain, my friend.

In the words of the great Christian Leo Tolstoy, who was a lieutenant in the Russian army at one time...

"We must say that by whatever name people may call murder - murder always remains murder and a criminal and shameful thing.

With regard to those who voluntarily choose a military career, I would propose to state clearly and definitely that not withstanding all the pomp, glitter, and general approval with which it is surrounded, it is a criminal and shameful activity; and that the higher the position a man holds in the military profession the more criminal and shameful his occupation."

And a truly shameful occupation it is. Worthy to be rebuked and admonished.

[youngmoigle]

Matthew 10:34 (KJV)
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

(Let me guess: a parable - or quoted out of context.)

[TÐöer]

Judges 20:23 (NIV)

The Israelites went up and wept before the LORD until evening, and they inquired of the LORD. They said, "Shall we go up again to battle against the Benjamites, our brothers?"
The LORD answered, "Go up against them."


If this is out of context, you should read the whole story 19-21. Good read.

[TÐöer]

God forgave us when we deserved death.

Huh? :confused: I deserve death?
Why create me in the first place?

[youngmoigle]

Whoever wrote it (and let's remember, there are lots of authors, editors and translators, each adding, subtracting or altering this farrago of faith-fodder) may have wanted to make Jeebus sound a bit more Messiah-ish, or perhaps justify some violence in Jeebus' name.

Only time in the Silly Book that I remember a tale of Jeebus being in close proximity to a drawn sword (that business in the garden, with Peter and the allegedly-cut-off ear), he was supposedly quite unhappy with the use of the weapon.

In Luke 22:36 Jesus told the disciples "whoever has no sword must sell his coat and buy one"



This from bits and pieces I've learned over the years (can't quote sources)...

About 2500 years ago the Jews first started thinking that a messiah might arrive on earth to sort things out. Some thought he would be a priestly type who could show them the error of their ways, and others thought he would be a warrior who would bash the shit out of their enemies.

About 2000 years ago the Jews (or at least the Zealots) started a terrorist campaign against the Romans, and their messiah was probably the warrior.

Trouble was, the Zealots lost the battle and Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD. That fact could not be denied, so the warlike messiah was slowly but surely replaced with the priestly version (gentle Jesus meek and mild).



[And it may not always have been one or the other. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some Jews who thought they would get two messiahs at the same time.]

[beefy]

Let me set y'all straight on those verses you presented.

Youngmoigle, I will adress your arguments first...


Matthew 10:34 (KJV)
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

(Let me guess: a parable - or quoted out of context.)


Absolutely right. Quoted out of context.

Let me show you what kind of sword Jesus brought, and what manner of fire He brought down to earth.

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn "a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -- man's enemies will be the members of his own household."

That's right. Jesus brought the word of God, the "sword of the spirit", and that caused much division between households. It even caused nonchristian sons and daughters to put their Christian mothers and fathers to death!

"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:" Ephesians 6:17

"I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!" Luke 12:49

That's right. Jesus came to bring the "fire of the Holy Spirit" on the earth, and it was kindled among His disciples...

"And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." Acts 2:3-4

There were some who wished Jesus would bring physical fire down on the earth, but Jesus rebuked them. For he "came not to destroy men's lives, but to save them."

"And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, 52 And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. 53 And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. 54 And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? 55 But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. 56 For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village." Luke 9:51-56

Obviously the fire He came to bring was not physical fire. He rebuked His disciples for suggesting such a thing.

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters, as well as his own life, he can't be my disciple." Luke 14:26

Indeed. And why did he say this? To hate one's own parents?

"He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." Matthew 10:37

Anyone who loves his father or mother so much that he would disobey Jesus' command to "love your enemy" is not worthy of Jesus. So, if they decide to kill their enemy out of love for their father or mother, they are disobeying Jesus' command.

By choosing to not love their enemies, thereby disobeying Jesus, they have demonstrated that they do not love Jesus more than their father or mother.

"If ye love me, keep my commandments." John 14:15

Only those who really love Jesus will follow His commands like "love your enemy." And they certainly love Jesus more than their father or mother.

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate...even his own life -- he cannot be my disciple." Luke 14:26

And why did He say this? To hate one's own life?

"Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it." Luke 17:33

Truly, if anyone seeks to save his life (by killing a terrorist who threatens his life), they will lose it. But those that will lose their lives, as did Jesus' disciples, will preserve their eternal life.

Why do some Christians seek to save their lives? Don't they know they will lose it?

Why do some Christians take up the sword? Don't they know they will perish with it?

"Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." Matthew 26:52

In Luke 22:36 Jesus told the disciples "whoever has no sword must sell his coat and buy one"


You misunderstand the context of Jesus' disciples buying swords.

From "A Practical Christian Pacifism:"

What About Jesus' Command to Buy a Sword?

Some would argue that Luke 22:36-38 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/nkjv/Luke%2022.36-38) justifies joining an organization of the world whose purpose it is to "defend" a nation by killing those which it views as politically opposing it. The verse says the following, "Then He [jesus] said to them [His disciples], 'But now he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garments and buy one. For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors.' For the things concerning Me have an end.' So they said, 'Lord, look, here are two swords.' And He said to them; 'It is enough.'"

Let us agree upon what these verses do plainly teach. First, clearly Jesus does say that his disciples could have swords, and in fact He does command them to buy a sword. However Jesus gives us the reason he gave that command. He says, "For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors.'" So, what Jesus is saying is that he must be numbered with the transgressors, so he says in effect, 'go ahead and buy swords so that you will be considered rebels-insurrectionists-transgressors when the religious leaders come toarrest me'.

In this way, Jesus will fulfill the prophesy about Messiah being numbered with the transgressors. It is that simple and this fits the context of that passage the best.The most important principle in properly interpreting the scripture is context and cross reference with other scripture. The context of this passage is NOT some political statement, nor some statement about defending a nation. Rather, it is a statement about Jesus fulfilling Messianic prophesy about being numbered with transgressors.

When other's want to kill us for loving the Lord Jesus, then we allow them to send us Home, for to be with our Father is our heart's desire.

Saying that the twelve disciples were commanded to defend themselves with only two swords that they found is wrong. They could not possibly do much defending with only two swords for twelve men.

[beefy]

TheDoer, your arguments are next...

And yes, I have read the whole chapter. It is still out of context. Let me show you why...

The Israelites went up and wept before the LORD until evening, and they inquired of the LORD. They said, "Shall we go up again to battle against the Benjamites, our brothers?"
The LORD answered, "Go up against them."

Although God (Jesus) does remain the "same yesterday, today, and forever," Hebrews 13:8, His commands to His people have changed over time.

What many choose to cite in order to justify war are the Jewish wars of the Old Testament . What is wrong with this approach is that the ancient Israelites were men living under the Old Covenant. Under this old covenant, the Jews were permitted to own slaves, kill women and children, and all sorts of terrible atrocoties to mankind. But God gave them permission to do so, and He physically spoke to them on many occassions.

Under the New Covenant, however, the rules have changed, and the Old Covenant has been made obsolete.

"But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. " Hebrews 8:6

From the International Standard Version:

The New Covenant is Better Than the Old
"7For if the first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need to look for a second one. 8But God found something wrong with his people when he said,
“Look! The days are coming, declares the Lord,when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.

9It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors at the timewhen I took them by the hand and brought them out of the land of Egypt. Because they did not remain loyal to my covenant,I ignored them, declares the Lord.

10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11Never again will everyone teach his neighbor
or his brother by saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
because all of them will know me,
from the least important to the most important.
12For I will be merciful regarding their wrong deeds,
and I will never again remember their sins. ”

13In speaking of a “new” covenant, he has made the first one obsolete, and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. " Hebrews 8:7-13

In the King James version, it says the Old Covenant has aged and "vanished away. "

You see? The Old Testament doctrine has been made obsolete, including the "eye for an eye" doctrine.

“You have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say to you, that ye resist not evil.” Matthew 5:38-39 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/nasb/Matthew%205.38-39)

Don't confuse the ancient Jews with Christians. The Jews were not Christians, thus they followed the Old Covenant.

That is what the "Old Testament" means, "Old Covenant. " The word "Testament" literally means "Covenant." Look it up.

Christians follow the "New Testament", which means "New Covenant. " You should follow the New Covenant.

Don't get me wrong though. Jesus still upheld the Ten Commandments, on numerous occassions. But He said the greatest commandment was to love God, and to love your neighbor. The terrorists are our neighbors too, as evidenced when Jesus said "Love your enemy. "

Christians do not fight with carnal weapons against flesh and blood. The weapons we are supposed to fight with are the sword of the spirit and the sheild of faith, and those we fight with are spiritual enemies.

"For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: 4 (http://bible.cc/2_corinthians/10-4.htm) (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" 2 Corinthians 10:4-5

Our fight is against the spiritual powers of darkness in this world. Not against flesh and blood.

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." Ephesians 6:12

Never forget that all kingdoms, Iraq, America, Canada, etc..., belong to Satan. That is why Satan tried to offer Jesus the kingdoms of this world, because they belonged to him, and were his to give. And the kingdoms of this world are still available to those that worship Satan. They run this world, until Jesus comes back.

"5 (http://bible.cc/luke/4-5.htm) And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. 6 (http://bible.cc/luke/4-6.htm) And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 (http://bible.cc/luke/4-7.htm) If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine. 8 (http://bible.cc/luke/4-8.htm) And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." Luke 4:5-8

Do not think for a moment that Satan does not rule America as much as he rules Iraq and Canada. All the power of this world is delivered unto him, and if any serve Satan, they can rule these kingdoms, for he hands it over to them. This is how it has always been.

Jesus the man never killed anyone, and neither did His twleve disciples. You shouldn't either, as a Christian, a disciple of Christ. So clearly Jesus would not use "any means necessary" to protect the child. He didn't even defend Himself, and he rebuked Peter for even using the sword in self-defense. Nor did He come to the aid of His very own disciples when they were crucified, hanged, and burned at the stake for His sake.

And, as a Christian, you are to imitate those disciples, and Jesus, following their example.

1 Corinthians 11:1 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/nkjv/1%20Corinthians%2011.1), "Imitate me as I imitate Christ."

If you refuse to obey Jesus' command to "love your enemy," and "do good to those who hate you," then that is your problem.

But only those who really love Jesus will follow His commands.

"If ye love me, keep my commandments." John 14:15 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/nkjv/John%2014.15)

And Jesus commanded you to do good to those who hate you and to love your enemies, those who hate you. And killing them is not doing them good nor is it showing them love.

Therefore killing friends or enemies is disobedience to Christ.

See?

[beefy]

How interesting Mr. Black, that your symbol is one of a black goat with red eyes, which looks very much like the Baphomet, the very symbol of Satan. I hope that you only chose this symbol to mock the Bible, and not to show allegiance to the Baphomet (aka Satan).

http://arckangel.com/db3/00257/arckangel.com/_uimages/baphomet6.gif

http://www.saintsagainsttyranny.com/satan_baphomet_250.jpg

[GenericBox]

God you religious people are so damn stupid and arrogant.

[TÐöer]

Maybe you didn't realise this beefy, But Mr. Black IS Satan. :p

[TÐöer]

What many choose to cite in order to justify war are the Jewish wars of the Old Testament . What is wrong with this approach is that the ancient Israelites were men living under the Old Covenant. Under this old covenant, the Jews were permitted to own slaves, kill women and children, and all sorts of terrible atrocoties to mankind. But God gave them permission to do so, and He physically spoke to them on many occassions.

Under the New Covenant, however, the rules have changed, and the Old Covenant has been made obsolete.


Huh? Choice? You have a choice in following the bible? So you can just choose which ever is more convenient for you?

Are you saying that we should abandon the old testament because there is the new? And yet, Christians keep refering back to them, for guidance.

With or without the new testament. What God allowed, or encouraged the israelites to do back then, doesn't seem wrong to you?

To put it plainly, God didn't just let man be evil, but had an active role in making them do wrong.

[TÐöer]

@ TheDoer, did you guys elect me as Satan while I was getting my wife a nice cup of tea? Again?

This has got to stop!


Lol. Sorry couldn't help it. People see what they want to see.

[youngmoigle]

Beefy wrote:

Jesus brought the word of God, the "sword of the spirit"

So the disciples could buy the word of god (the sword of the spirit) with cash? Sounds a bit strange to me.



Beefy wrote:

Let us agree upon what these verses do plainly teach. First, clearly Jesus does say that his disciples could have swords, and in fact He does command them to buy a sword.


That's what I said the text said - what's your beef?

[beefy]

Are you saying that we should abandon the old testament because there is the new? And yet, Christians keep refering back to them, for guidance.



And the Christians who do this are wrong, dead wrong.

With or without the new testament. What God allowed, or encouraged the israelites to do back then, doesn't seem wrong to you?

To put it plainly, God didn't just let man be evil, but had an active role in making them do wrong.


The Bible says God found fault with His people. He found fault with them because they did not follow His Covenant.

To answer your question, yes. What God allowed does seem wrong to me. But I am not an ancient Israelite, with a hardened heart. In the Bible it says that God allowed them to do these things because their hearts were hard. They didn't see anything wrong with it, becuase their hearts were hard. But my heart is not hard, and neither is yours, because we are not the ancient Israelites.



Hebrews 8:7-9
"For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:"

"Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord."

Hebrews 8:13
"In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away."

You see? The Old Covenant (Old Testament) has "vanished away". Old Testament literally means "Old Covenant." Look it up in the dictionary for proof. And the Bible uses the word "covenant," not me.

You see? God has changed His way of doing things since then, "because they continued not in my covenant."

And the ancient Israelites did do primitative and bloodthirsty things, and God allowed them to. They had hardened hearts. Jesus even explains that many of the laws that Moses gave to the Israelites were given only because of the hardness of their hearts.

"And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away."

"And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept." Mark 10:4-5

" But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Mark 10:6-9

Jesus effectively cancels the Moses law for divorce, except it be on the grounds of fornication.

"But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery." Matthew 5:32

You see? Jesus changed many laws of Moses because those laws were made for people with hard hearts.

[beefy]

Beefy wrote:
Quote:
Let us agree upon what these verses do plainly teach. First, clearly Jesus does say that his disciples could have swords, and in fact He does command them to buy a sword.
That's what I said the text said - what's your beef?

This is my beef. He gave the reason for that command. So that the prophecy would be fufilled.

However Jesus gives us the reason he gave that command. He says, "For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors. '" So, what Jesus is saying is that he must be numbered with the transgressors, so he says in effect, 'go ahead and buy swords so that you will be considered rebels-insurrectionists-transgressors when the religious leaders come toarrest me'.

In this way, Jesus will fulfill the prophesy about Messiah being numbered with the transgressors.
It was about fulfilling prophecy, not killing people with those swords.

What do you think Jesus meant when He referenced prophecy immediately after giving the disciples orders to buy swords? Don't ignore the second verse, please.

"Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. 37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end." Luke 22:36-37 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/nasb/Luke%2022.36-37)

For what other reason (other than explaining why the disciples needed swords) could Jesus have possibly referenced prophecy after giving this command to His disciples? Must the second verse be disregarded?

[TÐöer]

And you call Jesus Perfect? He is unable to speak clearly, that his followers all have their own interpretations. And people who can think, come to the conclusion that his words are incoherent.


Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn "a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -- man's enemies will be the members of his own household."


That's right. Jesus brought the word of God, the "sword of the spirit", and that caused much division between households. It even caused nonchristian sons and daughters to put their Christian mothers and fathers to death!

Are you sure it is not the other way around? Christian children killing non Christian parents? His words are so easily misinterpreted, any Christian would think they need a real sword.

To break a family, any family is wrong! There are better ways of doing it without hating each other. If the words that one speak is true, all will be converted together. Jesus was definately not around when the children picked up Christianity. Otherwise, the family members would have surely roasted him first.


"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters, as well as his own life, he can't be my disciple." Luke 14:26

Indeed. And why did he say this? To hate one's own parents?

"He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." Matthew 10:37

Anyone who loves his father or mother so much that he would disobey Jesus' command to "love your enemy" is not worthy of Jesus. So, if they decide to kill their enemy out of love for their father or mother, they are disobeying Jesus' command.


You have just proven that Jesus is the lord of the gaps. The gaps which you just filled in with your own interpretation. Another way of interpretation is that Jesus was so egoistic, that he required his followers to love him, more than they did their parents. And to disobey them at ANY COST.

Let talk about real life now. When a teacher notices her student performing bad practices introduced by the parents, example: ancestral worshiping. Does she tell the student to fight back against the parents?

[beefy]

Beefy wants us to agree on what the verses say. Which ones? There have been numerous editions of the silly book, in a number of languages.



Sure there are. Want to hear another translation?

John the Baptist actually does interact with soldiers who come to him asking specifically what they should do. John's response is related in Luke 3:14: And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, "Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.


The word here used for either violence or extort is “diaseiō” and most lexicons define it:
1. to shake thoroughly
2. to make to tremble
3. to terrify
4. to agitate
5. to extort from one by intimidation money or other property

Notice that the entire system of war, and those participating, is about constantly putting others in fear. Terrifying people is something that war is perpetually in the business of doing. If nothing else is agitating to a people, war is most certainly agitating. If anything is gained by war, surely money, and that by intimidation and conquest. If anyone can kill a man in combat, then surely the combatants get shaken thorughly from thime to time. If anything makes one tremble, it is war, and the drums and soldiers of war, that do so.

Everything about war and its participants breaks this command, "Do violence to no man."

[TÐöer]

And the Christians who do this are wrong, dead wrong.

Good. Got that out of the way.

To answer your question, yes. What God allowed does seem wrong to me. But I am not an ancient Israelite, with a hardened heart. In the Bible it says that God allowed them to do these things because their hearts were hard. They didn't see anything wrong with it, becuase their hearts were hard. But my heart is not hard, and neither is yours, because we are not the ancient Israelites.


'Allowed' seems to light a word, to what God actually did.
I shall repeat my quote:

The Israelites went up and wept before the LORD until evening, and they inquired of the LORD. They said, "Shall we go up again to battle against the Benjamites, our brothers?"
The LORD answered, "Go up against them."


God played an active role in the demise of the Benjamites. He didn't just let them be.

If you were a parent and one of your stuborn son came to you, and asked you "Shall I beat up my brother?" What will your reply be?

Hardened heart is no justification for encouraging further wrong doings.

if it was anything, from that story, it shows that God, planned the demise of the Benjamites. If the israelites did not have the blessing of God, they might have been deterred. If they did and lost the first time, they would have quit. But no, time and again, God told them to fight against their brothers, until eventually, killing of woman and children was the way they won.

[beefy]

He is unable to speak clearly, that his followers all have their own interpretations. And people who can think, come to the conclusion that his words are incoherent.

Jesus words may be incoherent to you because you have not yet recieved the Holy Spirit. It is the Spirit of Truth, and it discerns the Truth of Christ's words. If you repent and ask for it, you will recieve it.

"Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you" John 14:17



Are you sure it is not the other way around?


Yes. I am sure. Why?

Because Jesus taught love, not hate.

Jesus didn't mean to actually hate your parents. Just not to love them more then Him. He commanded to "love your neighbor." Your parents are obviosly more than neighbors to you, you live with them for a time. Therefore you are to love them, just not more than Jesus.

Another way of interpretation is that Jesus was so egoistic, that he required his followers to love him, more than they did their parents. And to disobey them at ANY COST.

More like disobeying them only when they told you to do something that was against God's law. Loving them and honoring them is the first priority. "Honour your father and mother," remember?

[beefy]

Hardened heart is no justification for encouraging further wrong doings.



You think so? I disagree. It is impossible for a hardened heart to truly do the right things, because the heart will always be hardened.

God did not plan the demise of the Benjamites. He did know they were going to sin, but that doesn't mean He planned it. He forsaw what their freewill would compell them to do. The Benjamites and Sodomites and the like merely reaped what they sowed. They reaped in violence and polgamy and rape and all that awful stuff.

The Bible says, "You reap what you sow."

They sowed in violence, therefore they reaped in violence. God simply used people that were actually obeying Him to exact justice on those that weren't. That is the way He did things back then.

Today, you reap what you sow in different ways. If you do wrong, God may use a policeman to exact vengeance on you. Or a soldier. Or a lighting bolt. Or a flood. Or a car accident. Whatever He chooses to use.

Now, if you sow in love and forgiveness, you will reap in love and forgiveness.

This I highly recommend.

[TÐöer]

You think so? I disagree. It is impossible for a hardened heart to truly do the right things, because the heart will always be hardened.

God did not plan the demise of the Benjamites. He did know they were going to sin, but that doesn't mean He planned it. He forsaw what their freewill would compell them to do. The Benjamites and Sodomites and the like merely reaped what they sowed. They reaped in violence and polgamy and rape and all that awful stuff....


You don't seem to have read that chapter completely. :eek:

God, knew that if they fought the benjamites will eventually loose, and their woman and children slain. That is why, each time the israelist lost, God, told them to continue the attack.

And for the problem, which God created. He had also planned, that they should kidnap the women of Shiloh to give to the benjamites.

Isn't that a little too involved on his part?

Reap what you sow? He encourage the Isrealites to go to war. Even those who stand by God, don't their skin feel pain when they are sliced open? Don't their family members cry for their loss? Are all the benjamites to blame for actions of a few?

He could have swiftly dealt with the matter by smiting the wrong doers. but he did not.

Could it be God's will to put man vs man because of what Adam and Eve did. That even those who listened to him, are punished too.

I shall repeat my question.

If you were a parent and one of your stuborn son came to you, and asked you "Shall I beat up my brother?" What will your reply be?

Will you :
a.) try and convince him not to do wrong?
b.) remain silent.
c.) tell him to go ahead?

[beefy]

Most of my sources are from the nonviolence teachings of Jesus Christ and from other Christians who obey the command "love your enemy." These are typically the kind of Christians that truly put all their faith in God, since they do not use guns to kill people or even protect themselves.

The rest I derive from the calling of the Holy Spirit inside of me. Someone says something, and a Bible verse comes to mind in my head. I remember Bible verses almost like a second-nature when I need to. This is quite a feat, considering I really have terrible memory. But the Holy Spirit allows me to do it. I cannot take credit for it.

[TÐöer]

Quote:
Hardened heart is no justification for encouraging further wrong doings.

You think so? I disagree. It is impossible for a hardened heart to truly do the right things, because the heart will always be hardened.


Do you mean to say, that we should put all our psychopaths and criminals in jail on a lawless island. Then drop several crates of weapons, and ask them to fend for themselves? Simply because, they have hardened heart?

Don't tell me their hearts are not hardened. If so, you should preach to them first. They are first in line to hell.

[TÐöer]

Most of my sources are from the nonviolence teachings of Jesus Christ and from other Christians who obey the command "love your enemy." These are typically the kind of Christians that truly put all their faith in God, since they do not use guns to kill people or even protect themselves.

The rest I derive from the calling of the Holy Spirit inside of me. Someone says something, and a Bible verse comes to mind in my head. I remember Bible verses almost like a second-nature when I need to. This is quite a feat, considering I really have terrible memory. But the Holy Spirit allows me to do it. I cannot take credit for it.

Yes. Please ask your holy spirit to answer my questions.

Thank you.

[beefy]

And for the problem, which God created. He had also planned, that they should kidnap the women of Shiloh to give to the benjamites.

Isn't that a little too involved on his part?

There is quite a difference between planning an event and forseeing an event and planning in preparation for it. God did not cause the benjamites to kidnap the women. He forsaw it, and made preparations accordingly.

Don't their family members cry for their loss? Are all the benjamites to blame for actions of a few?

I firmly believe that the whole of the Benjamites (incliding the women and children) were doing evil and terrible things all the time.

Evidence for this comes from when God saves one righteous man, Lot, from recieving the punishment of the wicked. If God sees a righteous man in a town, he will spare his life, but not the lives of the wicked. God did not punish Lot for the actions of the wicked. He spared Him.


God did not punish Noah and his family for doing good. He spared them, and destroyed the wicked, which was the rest of the world. This shows that God protects the righteous, not the wicked, from unjust punishment.

If you were a parent and one of your stuborn son came to you, and asked you "Shall I beat up my brother?" What will your reply be? Will you :
a.) try and convince him not to do wrong?
b.) remain silent.
c.) tell him to go ahead?


Your example is flawed.

The Israelites did not ask God for permission to kill their fellow man. They didn't say "God, can we kill those guys?" God told them to kill them. And on many occasions, God did all of the fighting and the Israelites did not lift a finger.

I am not being physically tol by God that it is okay to tell my son to beat up his brother, therefore I will do option a)convince him not to do wrong.

If he disobeys, I will spank him, for the Bible says,"spare the rod and spoil the child."

I will not hesistate to correct my child if he beats his brother.

[beefy]

Do you mean to say, that we should put all our psychopaths and criminals in jail on a lawless island. Then drop several crates of weapons, and ask them to fend for themselves? Simply because, they have hardened heart?

Don't tell me their hearts are not hardened. If so, you should preach to them first. They are first in line to hell.

No way. Jesus wants us to feed the criminals, love the criminals do good to the criminals.

He wants us to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

He wants us to "do good to those who hate you."

Like I was saying. Jesus said that whatsoever you do unto the least of these, you have done it unto me.

Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." Matthew 25:40

If we establish that terrorists and murderers of "the least of these," the least of the human race, then it becomes pretty clear. They are certainly not "the greatest of these," the greatest of the human race, now are they?

Therefore when we show love to these people, we are showing love to Christ. If we condemn these people, we are condemning Christ. If we kill these people, we are killing Christ!

And if we neglect to show love to "the least of these" (terrorists, murderers, and rapists), then we are simultaneously neglecting to show love to Christ!

Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me." Matthew 25:45

You understand now?

Like I was saying, we should all follow and remember the golden rule when deciding what actions to take. Jesus told us the golden rule, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets."Matthew 7:!2

Unless you would desire men to bomb your home and blow your brians out with a shotgun, you should not do it unto them. You should love as you would have others love you. You should show should mercy as you would have others show mercy to you. You should forgive others as you would have them forgive you.

There have been men and women in the military who are clearly not following the golden rule. Instead, they are "doing unto others" (bombing, shooting, stabbing) simply because they do not want the Iraqis to do the same to them. They don't want to be bombed or killed, therefore they are killing and bombing Iraqis because they are afraid of being bombed or killed themselves.

[TÐöer]

Jesus words may be incoherent to you because you have not yet recieved the Holy Spirit. It is the Spirit of Truth, and it discerns the Truth of Christ's words. If you repent and ask for it, you will recieve it.

"Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you" John 14:17


Can you explain why, they are so many branches of Christianity? are you saying only those who speak in tongues have the holy spirit? How come even among those that speak in tongues, you have many different sects? How do you know, who has the REAL holy spirit? Or does the holy spirit intend to split you up to begin with?



Jesus didn't mean to actually hate your parents. Just not to love them more then Him. He commanded to "love your neighbor." Your parents are obviosly more than neighbors to you, you live with them for a time. Therefore you are to love them, just not more than Jesus.

More like disobeying them only when they told you to do something that was against God's law. Loving them and honoring them is the first priority. "Honour your father and mother," remember?

How do you honour your parents when, their dying wish is to dye according to the rites of his forefathers. and you insist on taking no part in it, because you only worship God?

You are truly interpreting Jesus words the way you want it. He said clearly that you must hate your parents and you must obey him before your parents. There is no middle way for him. No pleasing of both parties.

[beefy]

Don't tell me their hearts are not hardened. If so, you should preach to them first. They are first in line to hell.


Absolutely, right on...and this is the kind of people Jesus hung out with. Drunkards, gluttons, criminals, tax collectors, whores, etc...

He even saved a criminal while he was dying on the cross next to him.

Shoot, Jesus even mininsters to people at their execution, the like of which he had not part of.

Christians should remember they have no right to kill their fellow man, even if they believe he is a criminal. For Jesus said, "He that is without sin, cast the first stone." Jesus was totally against the death penalty!

He never killed anyone. And the Bible says to imitate Him.

[beefy]

Can you explain why, they are so many branches of Christianity? are you saying only those who speak in tongues have the holy spirit? How come even among those that speak in tongues, you have many different sects? How do you know, who has the REAL holy spirit? Or does the holy spirit intend to split you up to begin with?



There are so many sects because there are so many different translations. But Jesus said the way to know the true Christians. He said, "Ye shall know them by their fruit." If they bring blessings and love more than any other sect to this world, then they are the true Christians. If they feed to poor instead of complaining about "Welfare-leeches" all the time, they are probably true Christians. If they are reaching out to all the grieving Iraqi mothers and fatherless children in war-torn countries, instead of killing people and making more fatherless and widows, then they are probably true Christians.

How do you honour your parents when, their dying wish is to dye according to the rites of his forefathers. and you insist on taking no part in it, because you only worship God?

You can honour your parents and love them without taking part in pagan rites or sacrifices, you know...

He said clearly that you must hate your parents and you must obey him before your parents. There is no middle way for him. No pleasing of both parties.

In this you are correct. You cannot serve God and man.

"No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13

"For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." Galations 1:10

But if your family needs you, as a Christian, you should help them, and love them, no matter what.

[TÐöer]

Quote:
And for the problem, which God created. He had also planned, that they should kidnap the women of Shiloh to give to the benjamites.

Isn't that a little too involved on his part?
There is quite a difference between planning an event and forseeing an event and planning in preparation for it. God did not cause the benjamites to kidnap the women. He forsaw it, and made preparations accordingly.
[\quote]
He planned it, the moment, he said "Go ahead."

He could have reacted differently but he did not. Don't you see his involvement? Involvement causes outcome therefore he planned it.

[quote]
Quote:
Don't their family members cry for their loss? Are all the benjamites to blame for actions of a few?
I firmly believe that the whole of the Benjamites (incliding the women and children) were doing evil and terrible things all the time.

You have jumped to a very big conclusion there. The same that the terrorist of 9/11 made.

And you do realise, I was refering to both those on the side of God, and those protecting their homeland. Both parties have loss for the actions of a few benjamites. In short. God blew the issue out of proportion.


Evidence for this comes from when God saves one righteous man, Lot, from recieving the punishment of the wicked. If God sees a righteous man in a town, he will spare his life, but not the lives of the wicked. God did not punish Lot for the actions of the wicked. He spared Him.

Why are we discussing times when he did right, when the issue is on times he did wrong? Which you are denying.


Quote:
If you were a parent and one of your stuborn son came to you, and asked you "Shall I beat up my brother?" What will your reply be? Will you :
a.) try and convince him not to do wrong?
b.) remain silent.
c.) tell him to go ahead?
Your example is flawed.

The Israelites did not ask God for permission to kill their fellow man. They didn't say "God, can we kill those guys?" God told them to kill them. And on many occasions, God did all of the fighting and the Israelites did not lift a finger.

It does appear to me, that they asked God, and God didn't just interrupted their discussion. But consider that they didn't ask God... Does it make a difference whether they asked God, or God interjected them with his command?

How is my example flawed?


I am not being physically tol by God that it is okay to tell my son to beat up his brother, therefore I will do option a)convince him not to do wrong.

If he disobeys, I will spank him, for the Bible says,"spare the rod and spoil the child."

I will not hesistate to correct my child if he beats his brother.


But as you said, there is no point in explaining to a hardened heart. What God basically did is, told the brother to fight against brother, because according to you, he felt it was hopeless to tell them to do right.

[TÐöer]

No way. Jesus wants us to feed the criminals, love the criminals do good to the criminals.


yep, so both you and jesus, knows that it is wrong to let people suffer, just because they have hardened hearts.

So now, please explain again, why did God tell them to attack their brothers?


Quote:
Hardened heart is no justification for encouraging further wrong doings.

You think so? I disagree. It is impossible for a hardened heart to truly do the right things, because the heart will always be hardened.

[beefy]

I gotta hand it to you. That was funny.

But you know what I mean. Imitate His love and forgiveness, not necessarily His profession.

Sometimes I really hate the English language.

He could have reacted differently but he did not. Don't you see his involvement? Involvement causes outcome therefore he planned it.

What kind of logic is that? "Involvement causes outcome?"

You think that if I am involved in Martin Luther King Jr. nonviolent protests and a few of us protesters get shot, that I am responsible for their death? Give me a break. You can be involved in something without being the cause of the outcome. God was involved in protecting people who were doing good, and the outcome due to His involvement was that the bad people got destroyed. What is wrong with that?

Why are we discussing times when he did right, when the issue is on times he did wrong? Which you are denying.


What I am trying to say is that if someone righteous like Lot or Noah was among the Benjamites, then God would have spared those righteous people, like He did in the past. But He didn't, so there must not have been any rightous people there, or else He would have told them to flee before its too late.

Does it make a difference whether they asked God, or God interjected them with his command?

It does make a difference, because one scenario (asking God) fits in with your example, and one (God commading and interjecting them) does not. That is why your example is flawed.


What God basically did is, told the brother to fight against brother, because according to you, he felt it was hopeless to tell them to do right.



What God basically did is, tell righteous people to kill evil people, and people of hardened hearts could do this without question. He did not feel hopeless, He did what was right in the event that His people had hardened hearts. This was the right thing to do, all variables considered.

[TÐöer]

There are so many sects because there are so many different translations. But Jesus said the way to know the true Christians. He said, "Ye shall know them by their fruit." If they bring blessings and love more than any other sect to this world, then they are the true Christians. If they feed to poor instead of complaining about "Welfare-leeches" all the time, they are probably true Christians. If they are reaching out to all the grieving Iraqi mothers and fatherless children in war-torn countries, instead of killing people and making more fatherless and widows, then they are probably true Christians.

You are just claiming that those are not real christians. But you have not explained, how among those who do exactly what Jesus asks, and even those who can speak in tongues, are divided?


You can honour your parents and love them without taking part in pagan rites or sacrifices, you know...

"No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13

"For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." Galations 1:10

But if your family needs you, as a Christian, you should help them, and love them, no matter what.
That's a little extreme is it not? You are allergic to rituals which you know has no powers.

A pagan has no problem going to a Christian Marriage. and yet, a Christian would never join in a Pagan Funeral even if it was their own dying parents wish.

Sure you can honour your parents in many ways. But to disobey 1 wish, is to dishonour them.

Could not Jesus have come to a middle path? You can practice as long as your heart remains with Jesus? :confused:

[beefy]

I don't pretend to know all the reasons why God did what He did. But I know that "He works all things for the good of those that love Him."

There are some questions that I simply will not know the answers to. And I can admit that.

I do not think the hardened hearts of the ancient Israelites were the same as the hardened hearts of criminals. Because criminals hearts in today's world can soften, whereas the hearts of the ancient Israelites could not.

That is my answer. That is all the explanation I can provide to you right now. To give you more I will have to do more research on the matter, which is fine, I love research.

[two dogs]

I don't pretend to know all the reasons why God did what He did.

You've been making an excellent pretense of doing so 'til now; why stop?

There are some questions that I simply will not know the answers to.
...
Because criminals hearts in today's world can soften, whereas the hearts of the ancient Israelites could not.
How in the fuck do you know that?!

[TÐöer]

I gotta hand it to you. That was funny.

But you know what I mean. Imitate His love and forgiveness, not necessarily His profession.

Sometimes I really hate the English language.

Quote:
He could have reacted differently but he did not. Don't you see his involvement? Involvement causes outcome therefore he planned it.


What kind of logic is that? "Involvement causes outcome?"


You really don't know what I meant?
What I was saying is that in telling them to attack their brothers (his involvement) had effected the actions of the israelites.

And therefore the sequence of events that followed. Was caused by his wise, words : "Attack them". Unless you mean, God didn't mean to say that, but he foresee he would?

Your example below of "involvment" and "outcome" does not apply to what I was trying to say. His involvement justified them, and pushed them to attack their brothers. He wasn't a foot soldier in that army.


You think that if I am involved in Martin Luther King Jr. nonviolent protests and a few of us protesters get shot, that I am responsible for their death? Give me a break. You can be involved in something without being the cause of the outcome. God was involved in protecting people who were doing good, and the outcome due to His involvement was that the bad people got destroyed. What is wrong with that?



Quote:
Why are we discussing times when he did right, when the issue is on times he did wrong? Which you are denying.
What I am trying to say is that if someone righteous like Lot or Noah was among the Benjamites, then God would have spared those righteous people, like He did in the past. But He didn't, so there must not have been any rightous people there, or else He would have told them to flee before its too late.

And what I am trying to say is, God claims, he does right. We all know that. lets put that a side for a moment. What if he is not so right? Which is what we are talking about now. I don't want to get sidetracked into arguing whether he did or did not, flood the earth and saved noah.

By the way, can you imagine how seriously evil people who deserve death, could live together? We can easily assume that some of the brides they took in were unwilling but pious woman. Did God tell his side to spare these woman?


Quote:
Does it make a difference whether they asked God, or God interjected them with his command?
It does make a difference, because one scenario (asking God) fits in with your example, and one (God commading and interjecting them) does not. That is why your example is flawed.

What? Both says the same. God had an Active and Intent role. Infact interjecting Strengthen's my argument on his involvement.


Quote:
What God basically did is, told the brother to fight against brother, because according to you, he felt it was hopeless to tell them to do right.

What God basically did is, tell righteous people to kill evil people, and people of hardened hearts could do this without question. He did not feel hopeless, He did what was right in the event that His people had hardened hearts. This was the right thing to do, all variables considered.

In the process, he made both sides die. He could have did it in an infinite number of ways. But he choose to push brother against brother.

And you can't pressume that they are all evil. In the end, he rewarded the benjamites with new wives. virgins at that.

[TÐöer]

I don't pretend to know all the reasons why God did what He did. But I know that "He works all things for the good of those that love Him."

There are some questions that I simply will not know the answers to. And I can admit that.

I do not think the hardened hearts of the ancient Israelites were the same as the hardened hearts of criminals. Because criminals hearts in today's world can soften, whereas the hearts of the ancient Israelites could not.

That is my answer. That is all the explanation I can provide to you right now. To give you more I will have to do more research on the matter, which is fine, I love research.

Jesus so conveniently made our modern hearts softer? he should have gone all the way, and saved more people.

Yes. I would encourage that you do more research. We would not have to argue on what we both can see is obvious regarding what God did. Refer to the holy spirit if you must.

I shall wait here for your answer.

But as I can predict, you will forget about the whole matter, and continue preaching from square 1.

[beefy]

"Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations."
You're right. I might consider this to be a doubtful disputation and forget all about it. I am quite convinced that it is.

Just remember. We are all searching for the truth. Good luck in your search. And God bless you.

[two dogs]

...
Just remember. We are all searching for the truth.

May I suggest that you expand your search, to encompass more than one book?

[TÐöer]

"Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations."
You're right. I might consider this to be a doubtful disputation and forget all about it. I am quite convinced that it is.

Just remember. We are all searching for the truth. Good luck in your search. And God bless you.

Doubtful disputations? To seek the truth, you must go through all this. until an answer comes. Otherwise, you must acknowledge the best answer that came up.

If something is the Truth, is it falsifiable?

I welcome you to come back anytime. It is good to have someone representing the other side in a debate. Only then can we find the truth.

[Atrax Robustus]

<snip> With regard to those who voluntarily choose a military career, I would propose to state clearly and definitely that not withstanding all the pomp, glitter, and general approval with which it is surrounded, it is a criminal and shameful activity; and that the higher the position a man holds in the military profession the more criminal and shameful his occupation."

And a truly shameful occupation it is. Worthy to be rebuked and admonished.

Allow me to amend your mendacious piece of shit beefy . . . :mad:


With regard to those who voluntarily choose a career in the clergy, I would propose to state clearly and definitely that not withstanding all the pomp, glitter, and general approval with which it is surrounded, it is a criminal and shameful activity; and that the higher the position a man holds in the clergy the more criminal and shameful his occupation."

And a truly shameful occupation it is. Worthy to be rebuked and admonished.


You clearly have no understanding of the military or the motivation that leads a man or woman to chose a military career.

[gruber]

*Cough* the crusade *hack* the teutonic order who slaughter untold innocent whcih includes children because they were ordered to by the pope *spit* sorry about that had something stuck in my throat.

so your saying there is nothing honourable about putting your life in danger to go to the aid of others as a soldier because there is a differnce between a real soldier who has honour and wouldnt hurt a innocent and a gun wielding inbred who cant tell his arse from his elbow whom you seem to be grouping all soldiers with.

[Seamus]

You clearly have no understanding of the military or the motivation that leads a man or woman to chose a military career.


Fair suck of the sauce bottle mate. I spent two years in the army (nasho) and I'm still not sure why some people join.

OK, with officers, I guess it's mainly that upper class tradition sending the family idiot into the Church or the army.

Other ranks? All I can say is if those people think the army is an improvement,their upbringing must have been pretty fucking dire. Probably a lot like Beefy's, except they had they brains to get the fuck out of Dodge as soon as humanly possible. :p

[Atrax Robustus]

Fair suck of the sauce bottle mate.

SHIT! Am I talking to KRudd here? :p Sorry - he used that term about two weeks ago.

I spent two years in the army (nasho) and I'm still not sure why some people join.

I'm not poking shit Seamus - but your motivation to enter the army was somewhat *imposed* as a nasho.

OK, with officers, I guess it's mainly that upper class tradition sending the family idiot into the Church or the army.

Other ranks? All I can say is if those people think the army is an improvement,their upbringing must have been pretty fucking dire.


As I said. Motivation. The military can be a shit job - but someone has to do it. A military career involves spending most of your working life preparing to do a job that you hope like fuck you never have to do. If you are required to do it - then it gets done.

BTW. In my experience I spent more time cleaning up shit-fights after the civil authorities realised that they had a disaster on their hands than "defending Australia and her interests".

Probably a lot like Beefy's, except they had they brains to get the fuck out of Dodge as soon as humanly possible. :p

:D

[TÐöer]

It's pretty sad. That even after we have won the debate, the wounded rabbit, can still hop around preaching, ignoring its wounds.

Which makes me come to the conclusion, that all these people like beefy, are FALSE Witness, to Jesus Christ. Whatever they say, has no value anymore because you know, they do not care about the truth, only gaining browny points by converting others.

Just remember that there are people like these in the world. This is what makes us, feel even more detasteful, when someone tells us, that they are witness to Jesus.

[youngmoigle]

Beefy, I think I've found that Russian...


99bzMBH5NYA

[Iridescence]

Ha, as distateful as I find bodybuilders, he looks rather good, and hey, guy can move!! Rather unique display :D

[NakedApe]

Marcel Marceau on 'roids.

[NakedApe]

On the topic of bodybuilders, here's Ah-nuld talking about heaven:

kUXV3ANiFGA

[Seamus]

Gee look at that, 100 kg of dynamite---with a two inch fuse.:p

Does that Russian's head look funny to you? It doesn't quite match the rest of that grotesque body. It's as if someone plonked a random head on that body.


Favourite line,which sums up body building pithily:


"What's wrong with your chest? It's all swollen" (DannY De Vito to Arnie in "
Twins")

[NakedApe]

Gee look at that, 100 kg of dynamite---with a two inch fuse.:p

Does that Russian's head look funny to you? It doesn't quite match the rest of that grotesque body. It's as if someone plonked a random head on that body.


Favourite line,which sums up body building pithily:


"What's wrong with your chest? It's all swollen" (DannY De Vito to Arnie in "
Twins")

It's a weird "sport" alright.

I work out a bit - I like to keep fit, and at my age it's all too easy to let yourself go - but I've often wondered how a desire to stay fit transmogrifies into a Jim Rose type freak show.
It wasn't quite so cringeworthy in the 70's when Schwarzenegger and Lou Ferrigno made bodybuilding popular - but today's contestants look weird, more like medicine cabinets than men.

Sorry for the thread drift, BTW...

[TÐöer]

Sorry for the thread drift, BTW...

It doesn't matter, beefy is gone after all. We have claimed this Thread.

[SinisterDexter]

I gotta hand it to you. That was funny.

But you know what I mean. Imitate His love and forgiveness, not necessarily His profession.

Sometimes I really hate the English language.



What kind of logic is that? "Involvement causes outcome?"



Protium, I have seen this style before. Is it a christian trait to reply in bold, or has Ray returned to us?