Anonymous: You said to Helice...

Maybe you haven't heard of the wrath of the Lamb. It's YaHWeH who actually does the saving by using the Blood of His Son to take away your sins, privided you repented first.

I asked you what do you mean "repent" and you haven't answered.

-thnker-

This is working Marxism - "what do you mean".

This is working Truth - Turning from this sin (as layed out in the 10 Commandments) and back to God.

Rom 7:7-25

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Anonymous: You said...

I learn something new all of the time. I thought this was an inquisitive type question, because when some people say repent, it actually means only partially repent.

Repentance has to do with sin.

In other words a person stops sinning. All Ten Commandments reveal what sin is. Like Paul said in the scripture you pointed out, you can't know what sin is unless the law points it out.

Paul then states he is trying to not sin and his mind is willing but the pulls of the flesh snares him and he then sins.

Sin is the transgression of YaHWeH's Laws [I John 3:4] and any one who sins gets the death penalty [Rom. 6:23]. That's not Marxism, that YaHWeH's wages for sin and the followers of the Messiah know this because this is what He taught.

Your cute and all that, but you don't fly.

I have no idea what your getting at because you don't explain yourself. Your interesting but like any puzzle, if the pieces are not all there, then a person looses interest.

Most of the folks who come here, has a concept they follow. Even if it's only taken from part of the scriptures. Some don't use any scriptures but seek for answers in other then the Bible.

This place is supposed to be "Jesus Talk", in other words what Jesus was interested in and doing. Jesus is supposed to be the Messiah and doing His Father's business. That's what I'm interested in. What the title of this Forum represnts is what is attractive about it. There is no other place you can discuss this on the Internet. Any other site has limitations and you can only talk about what the host of the site says you can talk about, which means only their concept of what a Christian is. They tell you what doctrines you can discuss.

The Administrator may hate your guts, but she is standing to her rules by letting a person like you or me say what they want. If she limits people, then she becomes like the others and say "only my doctrines can be discussed". There is a decorum so as not to become abusive and using foul language to hurt. Other then that you have a free wheel.

You still haven't declared what you are about. Just calling everybody a Marxist with anything they say. Doesn't make any kind of sense.

Some people take Paul's letters to mean you don't have to keep the Law and then at the same time say you shouldn't sin but in reference to only what they consider is sin, like our dear Grams.


So I ask you again, what do you mean repent?.... so I can see what your saying and if it correlates to what Jesus said? The Bible is the measure by what a person should or should not do. It is God's Word and instruction on how you should live.

-thinker-

Hi Thinker,

To a non-believer, repenting simply means looking back at a past action, seeing that you had acted in a way that was not consistent with whatever you consider to be the correct way to act, and saying to yourself, "That was really dumb and I'll avoid doing that again!" The corollary is that you will try to think about your actions when there is a niggling uneasiness about what you are about to do.

Don't bother trying to correlate that to what Jesus may have said. I only wanted to point out that repentance is not limited to the Christians' definition(s) of the word.

One other thing, Thinker. Did you rename this thread to a completely new topic? I'll admit that it has been driven badly off-topic. Maybe you should start a new thread and let this one die its first death?

In a dogmatic sense, Marxism and even more so Stalism, look rather like any dogmatic religion, including types of Christianity. Of course Jesus talked a lot about loving your neighbour, but those who are interested in dogma, put love in second place in their hearts, so basically any authoritarian ideology is similar to dogmatic versions of religion.

Anyone can change a subject line within a thread, and that's what happened in this case.

I don't have any problems with that, Helice. Its just that I go by the right-hand side-bar, which doesn't get changed so it gets confusing. If no one has an objection, I'll change the subject back to "Your Beliefs vs the State" which seems to be radically different than "God already has said what He means - period." If the original subject has died, anybody can change it back and I'll just forget about it.

Bad Bird: You said...

then why is this in the Christian Forum?

Just because somebody puts the label on themselves and say they are Christain, doesn't make them one. When the state acting from a non religious platform, will put these folks in the same catagory as what they think is Christian.

Get this straight, I don't agree with these people for two reasons, 1. they didn't do what is right 2. what they did is not bilbical and is not what a real Christian would do.

Concerning the state verses God, I believe God trumps the state. The state doesn't think so. The whole issue here is what does God think about this matter?

You and anyone who is not Christian will automatically take the state's side because you don't believe in God or anything about what He represents. You assume these folks are "believers"....
"There is nothing to be gained from trying to understand why this particular religious group (who just happened to be Christians, or semi-Christians, or whatever) took the inaction that they did. It simply isn’t relevant to the the relationship between the state and believers, no matter what they believe in"

What I am more concerned with is the current that is sucking our contries into keeping God out of everything including medicine when the whole law system was based on the Bible and it's laws just 60 years ago. Contrast the 1950's with today and you see a big errosion of what made us great in the world. We are at every instance using every scenario to throw out God in everything and this case is a perfect example.

I don't think these people were right in their decision. Should they be penalized.....? On what grounds?

You said...


This affects me even though I don't agree with them. If they are punished for their beliefs, then I can be punished for my beliefs. At one time our countries trusted in God, so the money says. The Laws were based on the Ten Commandments but a few minorites have managed to cause such a stir that people can't say a prayer for their football team and ask that everyone get home safely after the game, when the majority are Chrisian. Call a lawyer. So much for democracy. the same in schools where people are forced to be fed the "evolution theory" in contrast to the creation account, when the majority believe in the creation. Call a lawyer and punish the guilty party.

So we come to these people who think they are Christian and as you point out in the quote above, it's verses "them and the state". Who made the law for the majority? The Ten Commandments were emblazoned on all of the judicial buildings and the Bible was the book on which everyone swore an oath because the system was based on the Christian God. Even you who are trying to be unbiased , put "them" in the category of "those christians" or "semi-christians" or just "beleivers" which encompasses them all. Nero did that. I then, am put in their category, only by mention of the word God when I don't even believe what they do.

It's "them or us" attitude by both sides and what is at stake is our freedom of religion. Bit by bit, the erosion is taking God totally out of the picture to a totally secular state like Russia or China.

What would be a good penalty to set a precedent for our countries concerning this problem in the first post? Religion is a factor and the child that died is the club being used to get rid of religion.

-thinker-

If you will look in the forums list, you will see that this thread is in Pagan Circle! By definition, it is not a Christian Forum.

But I'm not the moderator, so I didn't change your new version of the thread topic back to the original subject.

However, you did sum up your position regarding the topic when you said,


Which God? It should have been clear that I was intentionally being non-specific. You even quoted my position when you said,


Why should Christians have a different relationship with the state than other believers?

and,
FYI: Today, finally, Texas has issued warrants for the arrest of five male members of the group in question, charging specific offenses. Their whereabouts are unknown. When and if they are apprehended and tried we will find out what Texas thinks a good penalty would be and, after all the appeals are exhausted, what the country thinks is a good penalty.

As for "--the child that died is the club being used to get rid of religion"; perhaps it is. Just as the death of an innocent passer-by killed as a result of gang warfare might be used to get rid of the gangs. (Don't carry that simile too far, I wasn't intending to draw parallels between gangs and religious groups. It was just the first one that popped into my mind. )