Ah, I see. I carry on conversations in other places with non-Christians who can be quite profane at times. I don't make appropriate language a condition of the conversation when it's a nonbeliever. But with Christians, it isn't my condition; it's God's. In any case, thanks for editing it for this forum

Interesting thoughts on Jerks for Jesus. Do you think that such a person can actually prevent someone from coming to Christ?

Perhaps a better question would be, why do people come to Christ? Is it our persuasiveness (or lack thereof)? Or is there something else at work... often in spite of us?

WW, regardless of the correct definition of Heresy, it seems a wee bit of an obfuscation to suggest that it has been used in anything but a derogatory way through much of history .

And I think your "hermeneutics" regarding my post missed the point entirely . As I have pointed out in the past, responding to intolerance is not equivalent to intolerance. And I made it clear, that in fact, people are entitled to their beliefs, even if they do include "believing in forcing others to hold the same beliefs". But in that case, Everyone else is entitled to respond in kind to such an imposition. And the fact of the matter is, even the other Gnostic sects I have some issues with, did not impose their beliefs on others; indeed, as history demonstrates--others views were imposed on them.

Anyway, nice try . But I'm not buying it.

Peace and Long Life
Gandalf's Beard

wisewoman wrote:
Interesting thoughts on Jerks for Jesus. Do you think that such a person can actually prevent someone from coming to Christ?

Perhaps a better question would be, why do people come to Christ? Is it our persuasiveness (or lack thereof)? Or is there something else at work... often in spite of us?

Hard to say. A recent conversation over there involved Christian Person A (online) who knew a Christian Person B (non-visitor) who did not quite believe in Jerks for Jesus, and A was looking for a gracious way to explain the topic to B. The forum was only too ready to supply a painfully long list of examples, many of which are unprintable.

(I agree on the swearing, BTW. When I was growing up we were in trouble if we said "aw, man!" Whether it was because Jesus was the Son of Man wasn't made clear, but it was treated as a bad-word. So even typing "jerk" makes this body a little twitchy.)

Dick Staub (author of "Too Christian, Too Pagan") commented on a friend "who found Christ in spite of me," but that was a silent Christian rather than an aggressive one. It must happen. But non-believers are already up against enough stumbling-blocks, without us providing more for them. I wonder if hypocrisy might be a factor. Non-Christians are surprisingly attuned to it and it's often cited as a personal turn-off. One poster phrased it as, "Some Christians are more upset at being called a Jerk for Jesus than they are about actually being one."

I have enjoyed reading the ongoing debate. It actually ties into a Bible Study that my weekly Bible Study group is doing about if different religions lead to God.
Let’s pretend for a minute that we either live before Jesus came to earth / was foretold or that we have never heard of him. One of us wants to convince the others that he (or she) is god. How would this person go about it? First, let’s consider what people would think of when they think of a “god.”

According to The NEW OXFORD AMERICAN Dictionary, God / god
1 (without article) (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
2 (god) (in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity:

I’ve bolded what I consider key words. A god is considered powerful, a ruler, and worthy of worship. People expect gods to show extreme power and do signs and miracles. They expect them to be indestructible by humans. To summarize, a stereotypical god would be powerful to the extent that no one could harm him, worthy of worship and demanding worship, and a ruler.
I think it is reasonable to assume that this person would:
a. Do many signs and miracles as publicly as possible.
b. Gather witnesses of the most “important” sort. (i.e. respected people, prominent people, scholars, etc.)
c. Require others’ service.
d. Require people’s worship
e. Show power in as many ways as possible
f. Establish a kingdom, take over government, or clearly grant certain people permission to govern others
g. Make sure that all accounts of his/her actions were written down and agreed.
I think it is reasonable to assume that he/she would not:
a. Be born in a stable to a poor family. (or claim to be since the hypothetical person would have no power to determine where he/she was born)
b. Spend a lot of time in remote places.
c. Forbid people to talk about the wonders he/she has done.
d. Serve others.
e. Eat and associate with the despised people of the society.
f. Allow him/herself to be arrested, beaten, and killed.
I know the above scenario is not proof of anything. (Proofing anything is challenging since it only takes one example to prove something wrong. i.e. It would only take one apple to fall up to disprove the theory of gravity). Yet, the scenario above is interesting to consider. If Jesus were just pretending to be the Son of God, one would think he would put on a better show and be the kind of person the religious leaders were expecting. The idea of a god becoming human and dying for people is not something one would expect humans to come up with for themselves. At an Intervarsity meeting a few years ago, I heard a speaker talk about much the same sort of idea. He pointed out that because the accounts in the gospels do not always agree it is more likely that Jesus is who he says he was. He also pointed out that Jesus appeared first to women who had very little status at that time and thus were not the best witnesses. (I don’t remember his specific points very well. I think it was his talk that first got me started on the line of thought described above and some of the ideas I expressed might stem from things he said.)

On the topic of historical documents / evidence, etc., Lee Strobel (writer of the Case for Christ) was an atheist until he investigated the evidence. I can’t really say much more since I have only read excerpts from his work and thus do not know what “evidence” he uses to point to Christ. I just briefly glanced at his website, http://www.leestrobel.com/ but it looks like he has videos about questions / ideas that would tie in well with this discussion.

Side note: MM – I wanted to let you know that you are not the only one to find people not following the Biblical guidelines as regards to conflict resolution. Both my parents work in a Christian environment (not the same one) and both are having problem with people who have complaints / problem with them going over their heads to other people. In my Dad’s situation, A went to someone outside of the environment in which my dad works to B and B went to C (my dad’s superior) and C told my dad about the problem. Although C did say that he told B that he should talk to my dad.

Side note 2: I just got a new parallel Bible, and I want to make the most out of my Bible reading. For quite a while I have been reading my Bible daily, but I tend to read it but not really think deeply about it. I’ve come to realize that I am not getting all out of it I could. So I’m wonder what others do when they read the Bible. My church handed out bookmarks with different ways to approach the Bible. I thought I would post them here to see what other thinks. I don’t however want to cause any um … extended debates about the wrong and right way to read the Bible.
Devotional Reading

• What scares, confuses, or challenges me in this text?[/*47lbtftt]
• What delights me in this text?[/*47lbtftt]
• What stories or memories does this text stir in me?[/*47lbtftt]
• What is God up to in this text?[/*47lbtftt][/list47lbtftt]

Historical Reading

• Who wrote this passage?[/*47lbtftt]
• Why was this text written?[/*47lbtftt]
• Where was this text written, and what do we know about that part of the ancient world?[/*47lbtftt]
• How is this text similar to other ancient stories?[/*47lbtftt]
• When was this text written and what do we know about that time in history?[/*47lbtftt][/list47lbtftt]

Literary Reading

• What is the plot?[/*47lbtftt]
• Who are the characters?[/*47lbtftt]
• What is the theme of this passage?[/*47lbtftt]
• What is the setting for this passage?[/*47lbtftt][/list47lbtftt]

Lutheran Theological Reading

• In what ways does this text point to or lead us to Christ?[/*47lbtftt]
• Can other passages in the Bible help us understand or interpret this passage?[/*47lbtftt]
• What is the plain meaning of this text?[/*47lbtftt]
• Is the interpretation we are commending accessible to everyone?[/*47lbtftt][/list47lbtftt]

Perhaps a better question would be, why do people come to Christ? Is it our persuasiveness (or lack thereof)? Or is there something else at work... often in spite of us?

I lean towards the "something else" part. I tried really hard to help my friend through a tough time and help her figure out if she wanted to be Christian. I think her parents were the type that left it up to her if she wanted to be baptized / follow a certain religion or denomination. Maybe some of the things I said/did helped her, but at the time I think it actually pushed us apart. I think to some extent God used me to reach her, but I also think I messed it up at times (if that makes any sense). Later she met a Christian woman and ended up becoming Christian. Part of our relationship was done long distance. I moved away and we kept in touch by letter. She actually wrote me a letter basically saying she didn't want to be friends anymore. Now however, we are friends again. She wrote to me to renew the friendship after she had become Christian.


NW sister to Movie Aristotle & daughter of the King

I've quite enjoyed reading this discussion, though my participation has been minimal.

When reading The Old Maid's paragraph above about "Jerks for Jesus" -

...I believe Bruce Barnes (Left Behind character) phrased it as "The cross offends. If you are offended, that means that I am doing my job." That was enough for him; content was an afterthought. Thus it simply must be the hearer (thou vile sinner, thou), because the speaker assumes that he/she could never mess up enough to prevent an Insta-Conversion Experience.

- though it may sound cliched, I can't help thinking of Peter's exhortation:

...but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect... - I Peter 3:15, ESV, emphasis added

This may not always be easy - but as the recipients of grace, believers should be eager to extend it to those around them.

Wow! Y'all been busy, haven't ya? How many posts since my last yesterday?

Ex Nihilo is an intriguing concept, that as far as I recall (and my memory could be faulty) doesn't actually appear in the Bible (It's not even stated in Genesis1 or 2). But if you find a passage that explicitly states the concept of Ex Nihilo, I'll figure out a way to reinterpret it. EDIT: And by the way 220CT, none of the Bible passages you quote state God made something from nothing, and the quotes from Job clearly indicate the opposite, that God made Something from Something... His Spirit. Come to think of it, so do the Psalm quotes. /EDIT

I thought something out of nothing meant God didn't use already existing materials like water and dirt. "Things which are seen were not made of things which do appear" [Heb 11]. What did He use? The spoken Word! God SAID let there be light [Gen 1]. The worlds were framed by the WORD of God [Heb 11]. And what about these verses?

John 1 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."
Romans 4 "... even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were."
1 Corinthians 1 "And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are."

As in creation, so in redemption: something out of nothing.

In Islam Allah refers Only to the God of Abraham.

Don't Muslims believe they're descended from Ishmael? And that he got the blessing from Abraham? When in reality Isaac got the blessing and Ishmael was banished?

Because Islam is so strict on the concept of no other gods with Allah; and no images of any kind; it is a mistake to consider that Islam authorized the general use of such things. Additionally, Islam forbids the images (statues) of any kinds of humans, animals or any of Allah’s creations, so how about using a symbol for Islam?

Isn't this injunction against idolatry the Muslims' problem with seeing Jesus as God? Just like the Pharisees? The latter couldn't comprehend the Incarnation, the Word made flesh [John 1]. And isn't this why the Muslims claim Jesus didn't die? Because in their minds God can't die? When in reality He did?

Judaism stopped worshipping Jahveh when they rejected Jesus. Muslims are just the biggest of the Christian heresies. The god of Islam is not the God of the Bible: Islam claims that God is impersonal and unknowable whereas the Scriptures teach that He is both personal and knowable. Therefore, we cannot be worshipping the same God.

Agreed! God is now rightly worshipped in Jesus Christ alone. And I heard, second-hand, that a Muslim who lives in my hometown thought it profound that he could call God "Father." That was new to him. He also wanted to know he could be forgiven of his sins. He wanted assurance of salvation. He said he couldn't find anything like that in Islam.

Quite different: Jesus claimed to be Jahveh. That's a whole lot different. This isn't an issue of a divine spark or any of that nonsense--it's an issue of identity. What did Jesus' words mean in the Jewish context in which He said them? When He says, "Before Abraham was, I Am." His audience gets the point right away because they pick up rocks to stone Him.

Great example! What is Jesus saying? "I Am that I Am," Exodus 3:14. Jesus is telling them He is Jehovah, Yahweh, the eternal, self-existent One. And what is the significance and context of this name? Redemption. And let's not forget Jesus' seven "I am's" in John! I AM the bread of life, I AM the door, I AM the Good Shepherd, I AM the light of the world, I AM the resurrection and the life, I AM the way the truth and the life, I AM the vine! And what Jesus tell John in Revelation? "I AM Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending ... which is and which was and which is to come, the Almighty" [Rev 1]. "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever" [Hebrews 13].

The assumption among Jerks for Jesus is that since "My Word, which goeth forth from My mouth, shall not return unto me empty" is true, then no delivery method, no matter how incompetent, offensive, hasty* etc. can overcome the power of the Word -- which treats the Gospel like spell-casting. I believe Bruce Barnes (Left Behind character) phrased it as "The cross offends. If you are offended, that means that I am doing my job." That was enough for him; content was an afterthought. Thus it simply must be the hearer (thou vile sinner, thou), because the speaker assumes that he/she could never mess up enough to prevent an Insta-Conversion Experience.

*where "hasty" means, some believers pay lip service to Matthew 13. They want to sow, then reap on the spot. If they don't reap, it must be the fault of the Vile Sinner, Thou. Jesus told his disciples back in their beginning that they would reap where others had sown. They would go on to sow and others might reap after them. A common symptom of the Jerks for Jesus is the insistence upon sowing and reaping in one encounter, the instant decision. Thus aggravating a few Calvinists along with the free-willies: since when is it your decision, they would say. Some people are willing to believe in free-will when it means I-didn't-get-another-notch-on-my-Bible-belt-and-it's-your-fault.

Thanks for putting me on the spot! It occurred to me when I read Isaiah 55:11 the other day that it is God's word, out of His mouth, that it will not return to Him void [even though it may return void to me], that it will accomplish what He pleases [not what I please], and it will prosper in the thing whereto He sent it. The focus is all, and rightly, on God, not me. I was greatly comforted!

And I'm glad you pointed out John 4 "And herein is that saying true, One soweth and another reapeth. I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labor; other men labored and ye are entered into their labors." It made me really angry when I was reading 19th-century mission history recently that some critics thought (1) women's work in the zenanas was fruitless because they saw no fruit in their own generation, and (2) missionaries' work translating tracts and journals into native languages was fruitless because they saw very little fruit in their own generation. These writers didn't know or understand John 4:37-38. Another critic rightly noted that the late 19th-century mass conversion movements in India, esp. among the poorer and lower-caste populations, had nothing to do with the Anglicans' mission work among Brahmins. But he failed to realize that those movements were probably the fruit of the work of earlier generations. One generation tilled the soil, another planted the seed, another watered the seed, and another saw fruit. But God rules over all. "I have planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth anything, but God that giveth the increase" [1 Corinthians 3:6-7]. I gladly repeat, God is responsible for what happens to the seed of the Word sown, not me. My duty is to pray and sow, in that order.

Btw, I love the Bruce Barnes quote! I was discussing this earlier today with two friends!

@Pattertwigs Pal: nice definition and lists! Regarding how I read the Bible, I do a little of all four "readings" you listed. At the same time, I always start with a historical reading. It lays the foundation for the rest.

Interesting thoughts on Jerks for Jesus. Do you think that such a person can actually prevent someone from coming to Christ?

Perhaps a better question would be, why do people come to Christ? Is it our persuasiveness (or lack thereof)? Or is there something else at work... often in spite of us?

Jerks for Jesus most definitely prevent people from coming to Christ. My best friend from home is atheist because she doesn't want to associate with the kind of Christian she has had contact with: rude, exclusive, cruel, and misogynistic.
When the world sees someone who claims to be Christian screaming "God hates you!" at the grieving family of a solider, why on earth would we want to convert to something that appears to us to be so hateful? A few years back, a Christian group set up camp at the main traffic zone of our university and started screaming insulting names at the students as they walked by. Most of these were aimed at women for being "scandalously clad" in T-shirts and jeans. When a non-Christian sees that, what message does that send about Christianity? Who wants to be a part of that? Personally, I find it hard to consider such people to really be Christian, when even I (who know very little about the details) can see that they are doing exactly the opposite of what the Bible says we should do.

Even people who are not outright rude and just very forceful or upfront about wanting to convert people can be detrimental. Constantly quoting Scripture makes the other person feel judged and excluded, and that is not conducive to their conversion at all.

Honest conversion can't be forced. It's the same as the old saying "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink". You can lay out the case for converting to Christianity, but you can't make the person actually do it. That last little push has to come from within the person, and if God isn't calling yet, then it won't happen. As well-intentioned as it is for Christians to want to convert people, it's not something that can be done with swords and fire. There was a small moment in a book I read a few years back about a young girl's escape from Cambodia during its civil war. Her brother had himself baptized and "officially" listed as a Christian on his documents even though he still practiced his native faith because Christian refugees were sponsored to the US faster than non-Christians.

Human's can't convert other humans. The best a Christian can do is show people why they should and pray that God moves the person to do so.

When the world sees someone who claims to be Christian screaming "God hates you!" at the grieving family of a solider, why on earth would we want to convert to something that appears to us to be so hateful? A few years back, a Christian group set up camp at the main traffic zone of our university and started screaming insulting names at the students as they walked by. Most of these were aimed at women for being "scandalously clad" in T-shirts and jeans. When a non-Christian sees that, what message does that send about Christianity? Who wants to be a part of that? Personally, I find it hard to consider such people to really be Christian, when even I (who know very little about the details) can see that they are doing exactly the opposite of what the Bible says we should do.

I also have a serious problem with so-called Christians who protest at military funerals. That's just sick! What does Jesus do? Comfort the grieving. So should we. I don't approve of the war, but I still respect those who do their duty and fight. I would have the same attitude toward those who fought in Vietnam. They were doing their duty. And those who've lost family members need comforting arms and kind words. Regarding Christians screaming at women "scandalously clad" in T-shirts and jeans, this sounds like a cult to me! I know many Christian university campuses with students wearing these types of clothing, especially if they don't have a strict dress code.

Honest conversion can't be forced. It's the same as the old saying "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." You can lay out the case for converting to Christianity, but you can't make the person actually do it. That last little push has to come from within the person, and if God isn't calling yet, then it won't happen. As well-intentioned as it is for Christians to want to convert people, it's not something that can be done with swords and fire. . . .
Human's can't convert other humans. The best a Christian can do is show people why they should and pray that God moves the person to do so.

Good points and I completely agree.

Constantly quoting Scripture makes the other person feel judged and excluded, and that is not conducive to their conversion at all.

I'm not sure what you mean here. How does quoting the Bible make someone "feel judged and excluded"? It's the Word alone that quickens, saves, heals, produces faith, discerns, guides, etc. People need to hear God's Word more than anything else. Still, we should quote what's apt for a person's situation. That takes wisdom. And if we don't have wisdom, we can ask God for it.

My current research on the WORD [add/change whatever you deem necessary]
John 1 “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.” Logos [Word]: both the thought and the expression or utterance of that thought. In Christ alone, word and deed match perfectly. There’s never any hypocrisy or deception. Christ: with God. Christ: with us [Emmanuel: Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:23].

2 Timothy 3 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God [theopneustos, divinely breathed in!], and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”

Hebrews 4 “For the word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight, but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.”

The Bible, the written Word of God, has been tested. Christ, the living Word, has been tested. Both are faithful and genuine! [Isaiah 28:16, Hebrews 2:10, 17; 4:15-16, 5:8-9, 7:28]

How do we know the Bible is true?
1. Self-evidence
a. It was written by God: 2 Samuel 23:2, Deuteronomy 8:3 [Matthew 4:4, Luke 4:4], 2 Timothy 3:16, 2 Peter 1:20-21
b. It is eternal, e.g. it will never pass away: Psalm 33:11, 111:7-8, 119:89; Proverbs 19:21, Isaiah 14:24, 40:8, 46:10; Jeremiah 23:29, Matthew 24:35 [Mark 13:31, Luke 21:33], John 6:63, 17:17; Hebrews 9:12
c. It has been tested: Psalm 12:6, 119:140, Proverbs 30:5 [2 Samuel 22:31, Psalm 18:30]
2. Prophecies and promises in it come to pass.
3. It reflects reality: God’s creation, man’s sinful nature, society’s corruption.
4. It records the history of Israel and other nations/peoples.

How did people in the Bible test God’s truth/promises?
1. They made an “if/then” bargain [covenant] with Him. [Jacob]
2. They believed God’s spoken Word and did X by faith. [Prior knowledge of God unrecorded?]
3. They witnessed miracles and responded in faith.
4. They witnessed a vision of God, divine revelation, and responded in faith. [Isaiah, Ezekiel, Paul]
5. John the Baptist asked, “Are You the one or do we seek another?” Jesus told him to believe in His deeds, which testified of Him.
6. Thomas said, “I need physical proof!” Jesus honored his request.
7. Israel tested God in the wilderness and was punished.
8. The Pharisees sought a sign. They refused to believe in Jesus’ claims and deeds.

God expects us to test His promises/word, but not Him. [Exception: tithing! Mal 3:10] Testing God is a sign of unbelief in a previous divine [self] revelation.

The Word
1. Quickens, makes alive, revives: Deuteronomy 8:3, Psalm 119:25, 50, Matthew 4:4, Mark 5:41, Luke 7:14, John 5:21, 25, 39, 11:43-44, Romans 4:19, 8:11, 1 Peter 3:18
2. But the only way the Word can GIVE life is if it itself HAS life! The Word is quick, living, active: Psalm 147:15, John 1:4, 5:26, 6:63, 68, 12:50, Acts 5:20, Philippians 2:16, 1 John 1:1, 1 Peter 1:23
3. Powerful: Matthew 4:4, 7, 10, 14:29, Luke 5:4, John 21:6
4. Pierces: Isaiah 49:2, Ephesians 6:17, Revelation 1:16, 2:12
5. Discerns: 1 Corinthians 14:24-25
6. Heals: Psalm 107:20, Matthew 8:3, 8, 13, 9:6, 22, 12:13, Mark 7:34, 10:52, 16:17-18, Luke 13:12, 17:14, John 4:50, 5:8
7. Delivers, sets free: Matthew 8:26, 15:28, 17:20, 21:21, Mark 1:25, 5:8, Luke 7:50, 10:17
8. Guides, gives light, produces spiritual growth: Psalm 19:8, 119:105, 2 Timothy 3:16, 1 Peter 2:2
9. Of truth: John 8:32, Acts 26:25, 2 Corinthians 6:7, Colossians 1:5, James 1:18
10. Saves: 2 Timothy 3:15, James 1:21

Something out of nothing…
1. Genesis 18, Romans 4:17-21, Hebrews 11 Isaac, the son of promise, was born to parents 90 and 100 years old. Their bodies were as good as dead…
2. Nehemiah 4 “Will they revive the stones out of the heaps of rubbish which are burned?”
3. Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1 a virgin shall conceive…
4. Isaiah 53 a root out of dry ground…
5. Ezekiel 37:3, 10: “And He said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord thou knowest. . . .So I prophesied as He commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.”

Consider this: “But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you” [Rom 8]. What does this mean? Genesis 18 “Is there anything too hard for the Lord?” No! Nothing is impossible with God! [Jeremiah 32:17, Matthew 19:26, Mark 10:27, Luke 18:27]

EDIT
♫ Is there anything too hard for the Lord
Is there anything too hard for Him
He is God the mighty One
He speaks the Word and it gets done
Is there anything too hard for the Lord ♫
/EDIT

The power of Christ’s resurrection is the Word of God. God spoke the word of life to Christ the Word of life and He rose from the dead! The Spirit of God gives life through the voice of His Word! What does this mean? All God has to do is speak the Word! Once He does so, all we have to do is pray in faith, calling on the name of Jesus, and present God’s Word to Him. We can and must claim the promises of God in prayer! What is the gospel? Christ the Word of life is alive forevermore! [Rev 1] The question is, do you believe the word of God? That it will BE just as He has SPOKEN it? Do you take God at His Word? Do you obey God’s Word? Do you have faith in God that can move mountains? And can you say of Christ and His Word, “Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way and while he opened to us the scriptures?” [Luke 24]

Draugrin wrote:
Constantly quoting Scripture makes the other person feel judged and excluded, and that is not conducive to their conversion at all.

220 wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean here. How does quoting the Bible make someone "feel judged and excluded"?

Draugrin might have been referring to the funeral protestors or to the campus kids who insult the female students and try to justify it with Scriptures that speak of eternal punishment for sexual sinners. (Such groups assume that anyone who would go "scandalously clad" in blue jeans and T-shirts will do anything.) That's just a bully who's using the Bible to beat people up.

As to the funeral protestors, I actually saw the "rolling thunders" going to one such funeral. For those who don't know, the "rolling thunders" are motorcycle riders -- dozens or even hundreds of them -- who out of compassion for the widow and family show up unexpectedly at soldier funerals to form a massive, tattooed, living wall between the mourners and any potential protestors. Does this mean that the cyclists are on speaking terms with Jesus? No way to know without asking them. But in terms of their fruits, their motto seems to be, Who would Jesus roll with?

Draugrin might have been referring to the funeral protestors or to the campus kids who insult the female students and try to justify it with Scriptures that speak of eternal punishment for sexual sinners. (Such groups assume that anyone who would go "scandalously clad" in blue jeans and T-shirts will do anything.) That's just a bully who's using the Bible to beat people up.

Thanks, TOM. I agree. We shouldn't use the Bible to beat people up. That's bullying. We should "speak the truth in love" [Eph 4].

For those who don't know, the "rolling thunders" are motorcycle riders -- dozens or even hundreds of them -- who out of compassion for the widow and family show up unexpectedly at soldier funerals to form a massive, tattooed, living wall between the mourners and any potential protestors. Does this mean that the cyclists are on speaking terms with Jesus? No way to know without asking them. But in terms of their fruits, their motto seems to be, Who would Jesus roll with?

Good point. As I said earlier, what would Jesus do? Comfort the grieving. That's what some are appointed to do at Arlington National Cemetery for each military funeral. Do we have a heart of compassion or a heart of stone? It's ironic to me that sinners can have more compassion for the hurting than Christians.