Forums | MacLife

more or less wrote:

wait a minute,

ouija board are dangerous?

Of course!  Certainly just as dangerous as is "Magic: the Gathering" and "Dungeons & Dragons!"

Enough with the agnostic cheerleading.

Res, what you got?

resedit wrote:

Stuff about "bohemians"

Maybe you can help me with something. My dad & stepmom spend quite a lot of time talking about how satanists are out to get them, and the way they talk about it, I get the impression that they are seriously afraid of satan - though they wouldn't admit it. At the same time, they see all nonchristians as automatic satanists.

What gives?

I mean, does satan really have any more hold over a person than you let them? Obviously, according to christian doctrine, somebody who doesn't believe in Jesus is going to hell, but is somebody who's completely apathetic about all of it a spiritual threat to a believer? Can't they be left alone? Moreover, if people like the Bohemians did exist, aren't their rituals just spitting upwind? Can Satan, or Baal, or any false god, give people any power that God Himself doesn't okay? If they can, but without existing in the first place, then isn't it all in our heads anyway?

Doctrine and style of worship aside, why do the "holy rollers" feel such a need to have an archenemy?

dvpierce wrote:

resedit wrote:

Stuff about "bohemians"

Maybe you can help me with something. My dad & stepmom spend quite a lot of time talking about how satanists are out to get them, and the way they talk about it, I get the impression that they are seriously afraid of satan - though they wouldn't admit it. At the same time, they see all nonchristians as automatic satanists.

What gives?

That I can't speak to.
I don't believe all nonchristians are automatic satanists, hell - I don't believe that many who say they are satanists are really satanists (though I do think it is dangerous to do so)

Satanism is from my perspective intentional worship of Satan.
Most members of that "Church of Satan" thing in San Francisco for example were actually athiest, though what they were doing was dangerous.

I mean, does satan really have any more hold over a person than you let them?

He can - I don't think Satan or Demons can possess just anyone, but certain acts, whether intentional or not, can allow them in - and essentially give up your control over yourself to the demon. I think lust can result in that, as can playing with tarot cards and ouija boards, wether you realize it or not. Doesn't necessarily mean that you are possessed or oppressed just because you've played with one, but it is dangerous and can result in it.

Satan is a liar and the father of lies (biblically) and deception is his way. When one plays with those things, they are opening themselves up to deception - and giving power to the dark things even if they do not realize that is what they are doing.

Obviously, according to christian doctrine, somebody who doesn't believe in Jesus is going to hell, but is somebody who's completely apathetic about all of it a spiritual threat to a believer?

No. Actions of someone apathetic can be a cause of temptation to a believer, but come on - the believer has responsibility to deal with temptation, and when the believer fails, it is because the believer did something wrong - passing the blame is just that, passing the blame.

That hot young chick isn't wearing those short shorts for the purpose of making christian guys lust or anything of the sort, she's wearing them for whatever reasons she has - and any failings on my part because of it are solely because I did not follow the instructions to set my mind on what is pure.

I can tell you that there have been times when I have lusted after such hotties, and there also are times when I have not lusted. But when I lust, it is my failure.

Can't they be left alone? Moreover, if people like the Bohemians did exist, aren't their rituals just spitting upwind? Can Satan, or Baal, or any false god, give people any power that God Himself doesn't okay? If they can, but without existing in the first place, then isn't it all in our heads anyway?

Satan does have power on this earth. The Bible is clear about that, and even specifies that he will use signs and wonders to decieve many. Satan is a supernatural being, as are his angels (demons). They are not bound by the same laws of nature that we are bound by.

Satan doesn't give people power, I don't believe so. But people possessed can appear to have powers. But it is not the person doing those things, but the demon within him.

Doctrine and style of worship aside, why do the "holy rollers" feel such a need to have an archenemy?

I really don't know, I've never really been a part of any of their culture.
I hate to say it, but some of them I think (not all) are under satanic influence themselves.
Paul made it very clear that orderliness was an important part of worship, and that no one should speak in toungues if there isn't somewhere there to interpret.

There was a missionary to China who went to one of these churches where they speak in toungues, and what she heard was cursing of God in a little known chinese dialect. The people were completely oblivious to it, and they did not believe her when she told them what they were saying.

Now I'm not saying they all are being used by demons, but I do know that every example of speaking in toungues in the Bible was strictly evangelistic in nature, and I know missionaries who have been given the gift to evangelize, often without even knowing that is what was happening (they did not know they were speaking in a language they did not know).

-=-

The hebrew word "prophecy" is used in two ways - it is used of the prophets who prophecied, but it also used to indicate the mutterings of a madman - and there is an example in the old testament where King Saul is described as prophesying - as a possessed madman, not a prophet of God.

I don't think that is necessarily the case with holy rollers, but I think sometimes it can be.
That I think is why Paul was very clear that toungues were not to be used without someone there to interpret, and the same with prophecy - there were to be others there to confirm the revelation as well, and were to be done in an orderly fashion when done. The services were to be orderly, and not confusion. Toungues are specified as a gift for evangelism, if using it outside of evangelism, then what is its purpose- and where is it coming from?

-=-
This is my perspective, my interpretation of the issues - and I do not claim that a christian must agree with me to be "biblical", these are the kinds of things that are discussed in church groups with varying opinions, and that's fine. Sometimes two different opinions that look incompatable actually are when you get into discussion with the other person, it can be hard to accurately transcript thoughts on these types of things.

Thanks, res.

/thinks some more.

Troutski wrote:

They stole my material again!

... turns out that Bush is in fact fidgety, cold and snappish in private. He yells at those who dare give him bad news and is therefore not surprisingly surrounded by an echo chamber of terrified sycophants.

More cheery news about El Chimpancé Sonriendo Burlonamente.

Funny, I seem to recall reading basically the same thing about Hitler in Albert Speer's memoir. (Good read, btw.)

Oops. I guess I just invoked Godwin. Goodbye.

Farmerkev wrote:

I like how Bush goes from being a puppet of Rove and Cheney and <da-da-da-dum> "them", to an evil tyrant who won't listen to dissenting views just depending on the slam someone wants to make.

There's nothing inconsistent about an idiot or an incompetent who lives in his own little world and doesn't want to hear bad news.

However, when Hitler did it, his generals plotted to kill him and history remembers him as a nutcase. An evil nutcase, but nonethless, a nutcase.

Personally, I don't think GWB is evil. I think he's either dumb or extremely out of touch with reality, which means if he's smart, he may be quite crazy.

avkills wrote:

resedit wrote:

That hot young chick isn't wearing those short shorts for the purpose of making christian guys lust or anything of the sort, she's wearing them for whatever reasons she has - and any failings on my part because of it are solely because I did not follow the instructions to set my mind on what is pure.

I think she is wearing them to show off. But then they get mad when we look.

Heh.
That's how I found out I was old.
I was sitting in the smoking area and a little hottie showing rib walked by (short shirt, hip huggers).
She notices I was watching her, and suddenly tried to pull her shirt down to cover skin. They use to smile when they saw me noticing.

resedit wrote:

avkills wrote:

resedit wrote:

That hot young chick isn't wearing those short shorts for the purpose of making christian guys lust or anything of the sort, she's wearing them for whatever reasons she has - and any failings on my part because of it are solely because I did not follow the instructions to set my mind on what is pure.

I think she is wearing them to show off. But then they get mad when we look.

Heh.
That's how I found out I was old.
I was sitting in the smoking area and a little hottie showing rib walked by (short shirt, hip huggers).
She notices I was watching her, and suddenly tried to pull her shirt down to cover skin. They use to smile when they saw me noticing.

Dude, that dont mean you got old, it means ya musta got ugly or developed a lear or something.

Kev's not a Bush apologist.

He is, perhaps, an illogic antagonist.

And to be perfectly honest I think he's on to something here.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

Kev's not a Bush apologist.

He is, perhaps, an illogic antagonist.

And to be perfectly honest I think he's on to something here.

Com'on shnik, on to something?  Like maybe politics? <snort>

Troutski wrote:

ShnickyShnack wrote:

Kev's not a Bush apologist.

He is, perhaps, an illogic antagonist.

And to be perfectly honest I think he's on to something here.

Com'on shnik, on to something?  Like maybe politics? <snort>

Look, it's true that the Bush stereotype sometimes consists of a clueless puppet, and other times a psychopathic, controlling dictator. I think it's rather funny to point out the contradiction.

Not that it's a big deal ... he's just a man, after all.