Wisconsin Parents Who Prayed as Daughter Died to Face Murder Charges
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Please do explain how you rationalise this.
(2) "to test, try, prove," in a good sense, said of Christ and of believers, Hbr 2:18, where the context shows that the temptation was the cause of suffering to Him, and only suffering, not a drawing away to sin, so that believers have the sympathy of Christ as their High Priest in the suffering which sin occasions to those who are in the enjoyment of communion with God; so in the similar passage in Hbr 4:15; in all the temptations which Christ endured, there was nothing within Him that answered to sin. There was no sinful infirmity in Him. While He was truly man, and His Divine nature was not in any way inconsistent with His Manhood, there was nothing in Him such as is produced in us by the sinful nature which belongs to us; in Hbr 11:37, of the testing of OT saints; in 1Cr 10:13, where the meaning has a wide scope, the verb is used of "testing" as permitted by God, and of the believer as one who should be in the realization of his own helplessness and his dependence upon God (See PROVE, TRY); in a bad sense, "to tempt"
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, I guess so, unless Satan leads you into the wilderness, and speaks to you.
I guess you are right, you can only be tempted in the wilderness and by Satan speaking to you.
Christian Graus wrote:
Any promise made to Israel certainly does not guarentee to flow to the New, we have new and better promises, not the same ones given to a specific nation.
You mean to say all promises in the old testament are fulfilled and has nothing to do with us.
Christian Graus wrote:
you went on to make some bizarre suggestions.
I thought it was not suggestions but a question. As a Christian, if you do not know why you pray, I leave you to declare it bizarre suggestions.
Christian Graus wrote:
Please start answering my questions at some point.
I thought before writing this you will have answered mine. Let me take them...
Christian Graus wrote:
Why does healing exist at all ?
I guess you mean why He heals us. Because God loves us, and love to see our joy full. Unhealthy body is not a joyful one. He heals us to let us know He is God and has power of sickness.
1Cr 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it]. Exactly the sort of verse I would point to. Christians are not tempted by God, or even tempted by the Devil, or in any other way tempted especially. We suffer the same temptations that all people go through. The word, of course, means trials.
Paul Selormey wrote:
I guess you are right, you can only be tempted in the wilderness and by Satan speaking to you.
You're the one who drew the parallel. I think we've established from the Bible that we're not especially tempted at all, we suffer the same trials anyone else suffers. The difference is not that God tempts us, but that He makes a way out.
Paul Selormey wrote:
You mean to say all promises in the old testament are fulfilled and has nothing to do with us.
No, not all the OT promises have been fulfilled yet.
Paul Selormey wrote:
As a Christian, if you do not know why you pray, I leave you to declare it bizarre suggestions.
I assume your suggestions were meant to indicate what you thought I was saying. I guess if you pulled them out of thin air, then that's fair enough. I know that a Christian knows that he doesn't know what to pray for, tho, that's why the Spirit intercedes in prayer.
Paul Selormey wrote:
you will have answered mine
I thought I had ?
Paul Selormey wrote:
I guess you mean why He heals us.
I agree with your answer in part, but I think that healing of the body, being temporal, exists as a pointer to the existance of more permanent/eternal healing. That is, by healing cancer in someone who goes on to die of *something* anyhow, God is showing a sign to those who will hear that He can do even better - give eternal life.
Paul Selormey wrote:
I do not know His plan for this situation, neither do I think it is complete yet
OK - I'm not so super spiritual as to try to defend any situation that involves people who believe in God, or to con myself that there is glory for God in a situation where an 11 year old girl is allowed t
-
It's like the story about the man who clung to his roof in a flood, in the early stages the police told him to leave he said he trusted the lord, when a boat came and offered help he said he trusted the lord, when the helicopter came he said he trusted the lord, and he drowned. When he got to the pearly gates he was angry and demanded to see the boss and the lord said "but I sent a policeman to warn you, I sent a boat and a helicopter and you ignored them all". Surely it is not too much for believers to believe that doctors and hospitals are god's work, or do you believe that are they aligned with the other side??
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
Christian Graus wrote:
What happened to common sense ?
It was stabbed in the back by True Believers of every hue and cry, defending their right to slash and burn until there's nothing left of civil discourse.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Ray Cassick wrote:
Their beliefs end at tip of their nose. They have no right to impose their beliefs on another that way.
Just to find out, is this you considered belief? Or is there some way in which your belief has more validity than theirs?
Learn to write self marginalizing code! Call 1-888-BAD-CODE ------------------ Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.
-
1Cr 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it]. Exactly the sort of verse I would point to. Christians are not tempted by God, or even tempted by the Devil, or in any other way tempted especially. We suffer the same temptations that all people go through. The word, of course, means trials.
Paul Selormey wrote:
I guess you are right, you can only be tempted in the wilderness and by Satan speaking to you.
You're the one who drew the parallel. I think we've established from the Bible that we're not especially tempted at all, we suffer the same trials anyone else suffers. The difference is not that God tempts us, but that He makes a way out.
Paul Selormey wrote:
You mean to say all promises in the old testament are fulfilled and has nothing to do with us.
No, not all the OT promises have been fulfilled yet.
Paul Selormey wrote:
As a Christian, if you do not know why you pray, I leave you to declare it bizarre suggestions.
I assume your suggestions were meant to indicate what you thought I was saying. I guess if you pulled them out of thin air, then that's fair enough. I know that a Christian knows that he doesn't know what to pray for, tho, that's why the Spirit intercedes in prayer.
Paul Selormey wrote:
you will have answered mine
I thought I had ?
Paul Selormey wrote:
I guess you mean why He heals us.
I agree with your answer in part, but I think that healing of the body, being temporal, exists as a pointer to the existance of more permanent/eternal healing. That is, by healing cancer in someone who goes on to die of *something* anyhow, God is showing a sign to those who will hear that He can do even better - give eternal life.
Paul Selormey wrote:
I do not know His plan for this situation, neither do I think it is complete yet
OK - I'm not so super spiritual as to try to defend any situation that involves people who believe in God, or to con myself that there is glory for God in a situation where an 11 year old girl is allowed t
Christian Graus wrote:
Christians are not tempted by God, or even tempted by the Devil...
First, I never said God tempts, that is why I have spent so much time to let you accept the difference b/n tempt and test - since it make so much difference. So, the Bible saying Jesus was tempted by Satan was a special case, it never happens to human? Being "common to man" is as simple as that. I and the unbeliever have access to pornography, he/she may not see anything wrong with it (she/he is already in sin), but I will sin if I touch it. The sinful world and the holy world are different, if I sin I move from the holy to the sinful. At least we know who governs each worlds.
Christian Graus wrote:
situation where an 11 year old girl is allowed to die for no good reason.
You kept repeating this thing as if the parent intentionally did it, I trying and praying for you to come out this state, because it is dangerous.
Christian Graus wrote:
I know enough to know that His plan is for life, not death. His plan had nothing to do with what happened here.
Please read Matthew 16:24-27, it has nothing to do with our current physical life.
Christian Graus wrote:
This implies that those who deny their children medicine, have more faith. I disagree.
As a Christian, I should live by faith (Hab 2:4, Rom 1:17, Gal 3:11, Heb 10:38). If by my faith, I should go to the hospital, that is mine and God never expects all to have the same faith, and I will not use mine to judge all. In my current church, the Pastor have been to hospital many times, but the wife will not - they both understand what they are doing.
Christian Graus wrote:
I'm sorry, but to me, this is a bunch of high flying reigiousity that ignores my question.
Which part is really still not answered? Please state it, and if you want yes or not answer say so.
Christian Graus wrote:
This is a tragedy for the child, for the testimony of the church and, yes, for the parents. That they are sad, does not defend their ignorance or their actions.
I thought you understood the verse you quoted at the start. To a Christian, there is no tragedy, we have God who is in control of all our situations. Even physical death to a
-
I do not know which part of my post you were responding to, but I think this will help... Baptism, does not make you a Christian. Like many other Christian activities or stage, you became a Christian and is baptized. I know you have seen the Catholics and related baptized babies, who do not even know why they were being baptized, but I can tell you there is no Biblical bases for it. Best regards, Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
I'm sure that you will correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of christianity is that some form of baptism or acceptance into the church is necessary in order to get to heaven. You seem to be taking some solace in the fact that this child is now with god, my point was what if she was never baptised and/or never accepted god? There is no mention of this in the article as it is not important for the legal case, but I thought it may affect your argument. Hopefully they did not show the same disregard for the safety of her soul as they may have for her body. If she never accepted god then she may not be in the happy place you assume.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
Ray Cassick wrote:
Good. Their beliefs end at tip of their nose. They have no right to impose their beliefs on another that way. Really bad way to die.
I much doubt that you would say "Their beliefs end at tip of their nose. They have no right to impose their beliefs on another that way" or "Really bad way to die" in regard to death of a human being by abortion. Am I wrong on this?
-
Crap, they chose to prevent her receiving treatment.
Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.
Trollslayer wrote:
Crap, they chose to prevent her receiving treatment.
And, your point is? How, EXACTLY, do YOU have standing to condemn them on this? Perhaps I'm misremembering, but are you not an 'atheist?' So, if I am not misremembering, what is your basis for saying that their actions are wrong?
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Wow - you've not read the Gospels ? Astounding...
Interesting, reading the Bible is one thing, understand it is a different thing.
Christian Graus wrote:
Jesus was tempted by the devil to throw himself into harm, and Jesus said that the Bible says not to put God to the test. How is denying your child medical treatment in favour of prayer not testing God ?
Hmmm, and when they brought the sick to Him or was called to raise the dead, He said "Go and see the physician, stop testing God". You are really reading the Gospel. Best regards, Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
Paul Selormey wrote:
Interesting, reading the Bible is one thing, understand it is a different thing.
Both you and Mr Graus are partly right and partly wrong ... but you are significantly more wrong than he is. Or to clarify ... Mr Graus *may* be partly wrong, it depends on just what he means by "not putting God to the test." He didn't say enough for me to know just what he means ... though he did say enough (this is a different point from the possibility that he may be partly wrong) for the 'atheist' zombies to latch onto it and turn it into something I rather trust he would not mean. In refusing medical treatment, the parent were attempting to *force* God to perform a miracle. This is quite a different thing from praying and trusting in God to perform a miracle.
-
I'm sure that you will correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of christianity is that some form of baptism or acceptance into the church is necessary in order to get to heaven. You seem to be taking some solace in the fact that this child is now with god, my point was what if she was never baptised and/or never accepted god? There is no mention of this in the article as it is not important for the legal case, but I thought it may affect your argument. Hopefully they did not show the same disregard for the safety of her soul as they may have for her body. If she never accepted god then she may not be in the happy place you assume.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
cp9876 wrote:
You seem to be taking some solace in the fact that this child is now with god, my point was what if she was never baptised and/or never accepted god?
Most mainstream religions - which may exclude Selormy's cult - do not believe that children under the age of seven can sin. As innocent babes they are taken into Heaven immediately, without having to check in with St. Peter.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Christians are not tempted by God, or even tempted by the Devil...
First, I never said God tempts, that is why I have spent so much time to let you accept the difference b/n tempt and test - since it make so much difference. So, the Bible saying Jesus was tempted by Satan was a special case, it never happens to human? Being "common to man" is as simple as that. I and the unbeliever have access to pornography, he/she may not see anything wrong with it (she/he is already in sin), but I will sin if I touch it. The sinful world and the holy world are different, if I sin I move from the holy to the sinful. At least we know who governs each worlds.
Christian Graus wrote:
situation where an 11 year old girl is allowed to die for no good reason.
You kept repeating this thing as if the parent intentionally did it, I trying and praying for you to come out this state, because it is dangerous.
Christian Graus wrote:
I know enough to know that His plan is for life, not death. His plan had nothing to do with what happened here.
Please read Matthew 16:24-27, it has nothing to do with our current physical life.
Christian Graus wrote:
This implies that those who deny their children medicine, have more faith. I disagree.
As a Christian, I should live by faith (Hab 2:4, Rom 1:17, Gal 3:11, Heb 10:38). If by my faith, I should go to the hospital, that is mine and God never expects all to have the same faith, and I will not use mine to judge all. In my current church, the Pastor have been to hospital many times, but the wife will not - they both understand what they are doing.
Christian Graus wrote:
I'm sorry, but to me, this is a bunch of high flying reigiousity that ignores my question.
Which part is really still not answered? Please state it, and if you want yes or not answer say so.
Christian Graus wrote:
This is a tragedy for the child, for the testimony of the church and, yes, for the parents. That they are sad, does not defend their ignorance or their actions.
I thought you understood the verse you quoted at the start. To a Christian, there is no tragedy, we have God who is in control of all our situations. Even physical death to a
Paul Selormey wrote:
to let you accept the difference b/n tempt and test - since it make so much difference.
There is no difference, that's just a word game. Temptation is setting someone up for a chance to fail. A test is not a test, unless there is a chance of failure. What's the difference ?
Paul Selormey wrote:
So, the Bible saying Jesus was tempted by Satan was a special case, it never happens to human?
Humans are either unsaved, in which case, they are not tempted, they are unsaved and do whatever they like, or they are saved, and, being filled with the Holy Spirit, cannot be attacked by Satan. They can be tempted, and Satan may delight in that, but we are drawn away of our OWN lusts.
Paul Selormey wrote:
I and the unbeliever have access to pornography, he/she may not see anything wrong with it (she/he is already in sin), but I will sin if I touch it.
And it is your own lusts that determine if you're tempted by it or not.
Paul Selormey wrote:
, I trying and praying for you to come out this state, because it is dangerous.
What state is that ? I've plainly stated many times that I would never suggest they meant for her to die. I'm not sure how I could say that more explicitly. I just choose to believe that her being dead matter more than if they meant it or not, to the dead girl.
Paul Selormey wrote:
Matthew 16:24-27
Is about living for Christ, not being killed.
Paul Selormey wrote:
In my current church, the Pastor have been to hospital many times, but the wife will not - they both understand what they are doing.
Well, what they choose to do with their own body is their choice. I personally disagree, but they are welcome to make their own choices. When it's a child in your care, that's another thing.
Paul Selormey wrote:
Which part is really still not answered?
I said: If you wouldn't go to the doctor, would you not pray about a financial situation, would you pray and not work, or do you see that sometimes you pray for circumstances to go your way, and still expect to interact with the society you live in, in reasonably normal ways ? Your answer was that
-
I'm sure that you will correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of christianity is that some form of baptism or acceptance into the church is necessary in order to get to heaven. You seem to be taking some solace in the fact that this child is now with god, my point was what if she was never baptised and/or never accepted god? There is no mention of this in the article as it is not important for the legal case, but I thought it may affect your argument. Hopefully they did not show the same disregard for the safety of her soul as they may have for her body. If she never accepted god then she may not be in the happy place you assume.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
cp9876 wrote:
I'm sure that you will correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of christianity
I know why you have that view of Christianity. The actual process is very simple, it has nothing to do with 1. Baptism 2. Communion 3. Going to Church 4. etc Unfortunately, it looks very difficult and complex because many are turning it into a religion, mainly for their personal monetary gain, fame, power, control and the worse part evil purposes. The whole purpose of Jesus coming is to restore us to the Father, we His children. We were but lost the right through sin, even as we are born - Adam and Eve.
-
"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23)
-
"The wages of sin is death"(Romans 6:23).
The death here is the spiritual separation from God.
We have moved from His world of Holiness to sinful world of the devil.
-
"God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8).
This is the main point, knowing and accepting that He died for you, and that He rose again, which shows His power over death
-
"Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father but through Me'" (John 14:6).
So, nothing, virgin Mary or whoever is qualify to bridge the gap.
Now, knowing where we are, we take the steps to get accepted into the waiting arms of our Father...
-
"As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name" (John 1:12).
The conditions here are clear, believing an receiving Him.
Receiving Christ involves turning to God from self (repentance) and trusting Christ to come into our lives to forgive our sins and to make us what He wants us to be.
Just to agree intellectually that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that He died on the cross for our sins is not enough. Nor is it enough to have an emotional experience. We receive Jesus Christ by faith, as an act of the will.
-
"Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him" (Revelation 3:20).
This process of repentance and trusting in the Lord, is what takes you from the sinful world to His Holy world, there you are born-again. Your sins are cleans, and you start on a fresh slate. That is all, you can do this anywhere, in you
-
-
cp9876 wrote:
I'm sure that you will correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of christianity
I know why you have that view of Christianity. The actual process is very simple, it has nothing to do with 1. Baptism 2. Communion 3. Going to Church 4. etc Unfortunately, it looks very difficult and complex because many are turning it into a religion, mainly for their personal monetary gain, fame, power, control and the worse part evil purposes. The whole purpose of Jesus coming is to restore us to the Father, we His children. We were but lost the right through sin, even as we are born - Adam and Eve.
-
"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23)
-
"The wages of sin is death"(Romans 6:23).
The death here is the spiritual separation from God.
We have moved from His world of Holiness to sinful world of the devil.
-
"God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8).
This is the main point, knowing and accepting that He died for you, and that He rose again, which shows His power over death
-
"Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father but through Me'" (John 14:6).
So, nothing, virgin Mary or whoever is qualify to bridge the gap.
Now, knowing where we are, we take the steps to get accepted into the waiting arms of our Father...
-
"As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name" (John 1:12).
The conditions here are clear, believing an receiving Him.
Receiving Christ involves turning to God from self (repentance) and trusting Christ to come into our lives to forgive our sins and to make us what He wants us to be.
Just to agree intellectually that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that He died on the cross for our sins is not enough. Nor is it enough to have an emotional experience. We receive Jesus Christ by faith, as an act of the will.
-
"Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him" (Revelation 3:20).
This process of repentance and trusting in the Lord, is what takes you from the sinful world to His Holy world, there you are born-again. Your sins are cleans, and you start on a fresh slate. That is all, you can do this anywhere, in you
Thanks for the effort to educate me. I guess my question was very simple - the religious side of this debate seems to take solace from the fact that the 11 year old is now with god, I was simply saying that I'm not sure you can believe this from what we know, and what you say seems to confirm this. If in fact this 11 year old had not accepted Jesus then her parents were being more reckless with her soul than they seemed to be with her body.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
-
Ray Cassick wrote:
Good. Their beliefs end at tip of their nose. They have no right to impose their beliefs on another that way. Really bad way to die.
I much doubt that you would say "Their beliefs end at tip of their nose. They have no right to impose their beliefs on another that way" or "Really bad way to die" in regard to death of a human being by abortion. Am I wrong on this?
-
Ray Cassick wrote:
You are correct. Why? Because until such time as a fetus gets very close to leaving the womb it is property. It is no more than an organ that depends on the host body to survive. It is no more than me making the conscious decision to cut off an arm. End of story.
Well, since you're willing to spout this asinine non-sense, you have absolutely no rational basis to object to these parents allowing their daughter to die. Until such time as she attains legal majority, she is their "property." End of story.
-
Yeah, that is one view of it, and the one that will be used against them. To me they chose to teach their child to learn to trust in the Lord even in hopeless times, something she will neeed if she had lived. Many things happen in a Christian life. So, I will avoid packaging all under a single "visible result". Best regards, Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
Paul Selormey wrote:
Yeah, that is one view of it, and the one that will be used against them. To me they chose to teach their child to learn to trust in the Lord even in hopeless times, something she will neeed if she had lived. Many things happen in a Christian life. So, I will avoid packaging all under a single "visible result".
Right. Another view of it is that they are too hopelessly stupid to care for a child. Hopefully prison will prevent them from breeding again, thus insuring the removal of that one little bit of idiocy from the gene pool.
-
Paul Selormey wrote:
to let you accept the difference b/n tempt and test - since it make so much difference.
There is no difference, that's just a word game. Temptation is setting someone up for a chance to fail. A test is not a test, unless there is a chance of failure. What's the difference ?
Paul Selormey wrote:
So, the Bible saying Jesus was tempted by Satan was a special case, it never happens to human?
Humans are either unsaved, in which case, they are not tempted, they are unsaved and do whatever they like, or they are saved, and, being filled with the Holy Spirit, cannot be attacked by Satan. They can be tempted, and Satan may delight in that, but we are drawn away of our OWN lusts.
Paul Selormey wrote:
I and the unbeliever have access to pornography, he/she may not see anything wrong with it (she/he is already in sin), but I will sin if I touch it.
And it is your own lusts that determine if you're tempted by it or not.
Paul Selormey wrote:
, I trying and praying for you to come out this state, because it is dangerous.
What state is that ? I've plainly stated many times that I would never suggest they meant for her to die. I'm not sure how I could say that more explicitly. I just choose to believe that her being dead matter more than if they meant it or not, to the dead girl.
Paul Selormey wrote:
Matthew 16:24-27
Is about living for Christ, not being killed.
Paul Selormey wrote:
In my current church, the Pastor have been to hospital many times, but the wife will not - they both understand what they are doing.
Well, what they choose to do with their own body is their choice. I personally disagree, but they are welcome to make their own choices. When it's a child in your care, that's another thing.
Paul Selormey wrote:
Which part is really still not answered?
I said: If you wouldn't go to the doctor, would you not pray about a financial situation, would you pray and not work, or do you see that sometimes you pray for circumstances to go your way, and still expect to interact with the society you live in, in reasonably normal ways ? Your answer was that
Christian Graus wrote:
What's the difference ?
We are tempted to sin, never tested to sin. Our faith is tested, but our weakness and lust is tempted. God tested Abram over Isaiac but not tempted him.
Christian Graus wrote:
And it is your own lusts that determine if you're tempted by it or not.
Yes, not tested.
Christian Graus wrote:
What state is that ? I've plainly stated many times that I would never suggest they meant for her to die. I'm not sure how I could say that more explicitly.
So what really is the problem here?
Christian Graus wrote:
I just choose to believe that her being dead matter more than if they meant it or not, to the dead girl.
Yes, you chose. You may only know what happened if you know the full story (which I believe you do not know), and as to why...only God knows. He determines what happens in our lives not the medical doctor.
Christian Graus wrote:
When it's a child in your care, that's another thing.
They will account to God who gave it to them, and He knows whether they did it right or wrong.
Christian Graus wrote:
If you wouldn't go to the doctor, would you not pray about a financial situation, would you pray and not work, or do you see that sometimes you pray for circumstances to go your way, and still expect to interact with the society you live in, in reasonably normal ways ?
I do not know, let me try again. I never say I will not go to the hospital, neither am I compelled by any command in the Bible to go. What is written is that He will heal me, and that has nothing to do with a hospital. Financial situation? Yes, I will pray for it, like any other situation. Pray and not work? No, the Bible tells me to work so I will pray and work. Live in society in normal way? I do not seek a "normal way" but God's way.
Christian Graus wrote:
Your answer was that you expect to work, and that you don't care about possessions
So, I gave an answer afterall. I do not expect to work, He said if I do not work, I should not eat, and I should work and get enough to help others - it is a command.
Christian Graus wrote:
but would you do so
-
Paul Selormey wrote:
Yeah, that is one view of it, and the one that will be used against them. To me they chose to teach their child to learn to trust in the Lord even in hopeless times, something she will neeed if she had lived. Many things happen in a Christian life. So, I will avoid packaging all under a single "visible result".
Right. Another view of it is that they are too hopelessly stupid to care for a child. Hopefully prison will prevent them from breeding again, thus insuring the removal of that one little bit of idiocy from the gene pool.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Right. Another view of it is that they are too hopelessly stupid to care for a child. Hopefully prison will prevent them from breeding again, thus insuring the removal of that one little bit of idiocy from the gene pool.
Please do not get too emotional. Christian may fail a challenge or two. But when we are weak, He is strong. It might be God's purpose to have them there for a mission in the prisons, and they may be more fruitful in prison than outside it - that is our God, He just does not live in our human imaginations or limitations. That is mystery the non-Christian will not easily understand, and no amount of discussions will help. I do not know if this will help...if you live in a state of hopelessness, any failure makes it worse, but if you live in hope, every failure is an opportunity for growth and strength. Best regards, Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
-
Ray Cassick wrote:
You are correct. Why? Because until such time as a fetus gets very close to leaving the womb it is property. It is no more than an organ that depends on the host body to survive. It is no more than me making the conscious decision to cut off an arm. End of story.
Well, since you're willing to spout this asinine non-sense, you have absolutely no rational basis to object to these parents allowing their daughter to die. Until such time as she attains legal majority, she is their "property." End of story.
You know... I KNEW I should have not even bothered to reply to you... I just KNEW that you would respond with some drivel... I have to say this... you don't disappoint. You mistake 'property' with 'responsibility'. She is their responsibility to care for and protect. She is NOT their property to do with as they please. As a sentient and living human being she has rights human rights. If children were property to do with as the parents please then child sexual abuse could not be a crime. Just like in the years ago when wives had no legal recourse to say they were raped by their husbands. Now, go on... you know you want to... spew some more useless drivel...
-
You know... I KNEW I should have not even bothered to reply to you... I just KNEW that you would respond with some drivel... I have to say this... you don't disappoint. You mistake 'property' with 'responsibility'. She is their responsibility to care for and protect. She is NOT their property to do with as they please. As a sentient and living human being she has rights human rights. If children were property to do with as the parents please then child sexual abuse could not be a crime. Just like in the years ago when wives had no legal recourse to say they were raped by their husbands. Now, go on... you know you want to... spew some more useless drivel...