If you hadn't had kids...
Find a Conversation
If you hadn't had kids...
| Thu, 05-20-2004 - 10:34pm |
And your dh made enough $$ to support both of you comfortably, do you think you would be working?
| Thu, 05-20-2004 - 10:34pm |
Pages
Assuming and expecting are two entirely different things. At least in this marriage. I may assume dh is going to mow the yard Sat evening but I could be very wrong & I don't expect him to mow it. If it doesn't get mowed, then I do it. No biggie.
I would disagree with that, being Christian, however, within the context of this debate and this specific subthread, I believe it was MORE than clear I was only SPEAKING of Christians, particularly in light of the sentence that immediately preceded "I mean, if we're still sacrificing animals as atonement, why do we need Christ?"
<>
No. I think repentance does. It's why Isaiah and most of the other prophets (especially Amos) prior to and during the exilic period spoke of God hating and despising "your festivals and sacrifices". Because in the absence of true repentance, the ritual of burning sacrifice had become of no more consequence than a serial murderer who insists in court, "But I *said* I was sorry!"
<>
Again, no. That Christ died for you is something I believe. That his death is meaningless FOR you and for your atonement (or that of anyone else's, just this conversation is between us, so I'm using you--it's just as relevant if "you" is replaced with "me") is a surety if you do nothing in RESPONSE to that sacrifice. If you believe Christ to be nothing more than mythology, his sacrifice cannot help you. And that's between you, God and Christ. Doesn't change my belief God loves you as dearly as I believe and KNOW he loves me. Doesn't change my belief that Christ died as much for you as he died for me. The difference is that I accept it and you do not. The difference is NOT that I'm better, more deserving, nicer, more moral or anything else than you--not even slightly.
<>
I don't find the terms "sin" and "human nature" mutually exclusive. I can as easily classify "sin" as "human nature" as I can as "sin." It's still the same basic thing, with the same basic consequences.
It's totally okay with me if you don't believe; I don't need your belief to underwrite mine. it's totally okay with me if you think Christ a mythological legend. And if you need to use harsh words and terms to declare your disbelief, that's okay, too. I know beyond a doubt in my heart that Christ lived...and lives, but there's nothing I can show or point you to so that you can know from my knowledge. (The downside of "faith", I'm afraid)
However, PNJ's post was clearly speaking about CHRISTIANS, as was mine. Therefore, your declaration that "only Christians need Christ" seems....well....redundant, to say the least. And I'm unsure of the remainder of your post dealing with non-Christians. if you believe you don't need Christ, that's for you to decide, but why believe it had any relevance in a discussion ABOUT Christians?
Simple really, I don't know why on earth you want to make the whole thing so complicated.
You know, I don't "get" it, but I respect it, and even think its sweet.
Mondo
You have a very narrow definition of volunteer.
I see it in the same way the dictionary defines it. Volunteer:1 : a person who voluntarily undertakes or expresses a willingness to undertake a service.
You are a volunteer. You are voluntarily undertaking a service.
Oh, and get this, I didn't even bother documenting when they started sippy cups. I can tell you that it was the fourth of July 2 summers ago when we stopped using them, though!
Pages