WordWolf

Ok, cool. My turn, then, let's see....

"Second verse, same as the first."

"Space Oddity," by The Thin White Duke. (David Bowie.)

Sounds like the last line from "BACK TO THE FUTURE." (Except it was "need", not "needs". So, it's remotely possible this is a different movie that referenced BttF.)

So, it's George's turn.

I think there are two different groups of people in this case. One group uses church in place of helping others. They perform ritualistically at church in one form or another, and believe that's what's required of them- and ALL that's required of them. I also believe there's plenty of Christians who use church either as a springboard to helping others, or as an organization/location to facilitate actually helping others, and are beneficial to their communities- and not just to their parishioners. I know one church parish that seems to focus accordingly. I think we agree that rules are necessary, but when the rules become the END and not simply the MEANS, then there's a problem.. one we might call "churchianity."

I can certainly agree that's why a lot of people serve in their churches, or attend mass daily. I think they're sincere in acting out of love for their religion, and are TRYING to serve God by serving their church. The problem- for those who perceive a problem- is when a church becomes an intermediary BETWEEN a relationship with God and/or Christ, and receives all service IN PLACE OF God and/or Christ. It's a touchy subject. I won't get in someone's face and say they should spend fewer hours serving their church and a few hours serving alongside their church to help others. I know at least one person in that position, but unless they actually ask me, I will leave them to their business. When I was very young, my family was quite involved in our local Roman Catholic parish. We had commentators, a Eucharistic minister, and altar boys in my nuclear family. We certainly were sincere whenever we did what we did. It was not many years later when most of us drifted away from that same church, each with our own reasons and for our own reasons. (As for me, that's when I became anti-Christian, anti-religion and especially anti-Bible.) I'm certain my family was acting with less zeal than many tailgaters, and I don't think it was every about what we actually ENJOYED doing. In this, I can only speak for us, since there can be any number of motivations for everyone else, and certainly there's other parishes where people DO enjoy themselves more than that parish did/does- one not far away from that one.

"If I was not clear, let me clarify. I used the word churchianity as a mechanism to draw a particular contrast. If I implied or explicitly replied I had perceived you as having been triggered, I apologize. However, from the emphatic nature of your quick response to my use of the word, I perceived some aspect of triggering." I'm glad we cleared up the misunderstanding. It looked to me like you'd already declared I'd been "triggered" over the phrase, and were referring me to Psychologists or other experts to "solve my problem" - as if I had a problem that needed to be solved. Since I wasn't even "triggered", it seemed to me a lot of effort to make. "I perceived some aspect of triggering." I admit I'm a little quick on the draw when I see someone diagnose me with incomplete information and begin recommending solutions to problems that don't exist. I think I fall short of actually being "triggered" -by accusations of being triggered. I still don't like it and prefer to set the record straight. BTW, I didn't respond that quickly, I responded about 24 hours later, at my convenience. So, I hope we can put that non-issue to rest.

I think you're conflating two things here. I acknowledge that "churchianity" is what's now called a "trigger word." I never said I was "triggered", and I never claimed to have an emotional reaction to it. Frankly, what I called this sort of thing before was "SLOGANEERING", and compared catch-phrases repeated mindlessly by twi'ers and ex-twi with actual thinking. I consider usage of slogans by twi'ers as an excuse to AVOID thinking, and note that when I find a catchphrase being used- generally it's to the detriment of THINKING and of DISCUSSION. But you can save pages and clips on how to avoid being "triggered" by catchphrases. I never was, and never claimed to be. If I caused any confusion to that point, it was accidental, and I'm sorry.

I think it IS true, no matter who said it, that pulling one verse out and isolating it from its context can make it appear to say the opposite of what it actually said. (The same is true of all literature. "Now is the winter of our discontent" is taken to mean that the speaker is now unhappy. The sentence read "Now is the winter of our discontent MADE GLORIOUS SUMMER by this sun of York." So, the speaker was now HAPPY.) As for Matthew 18: 6-7, the context doesn't affect the meaning- so the most obvious reading of those verses is what I said it was, as just about anyone can see if they try honestly. (My condolences to those whose reading abilities aren't up to that task, or for reading my posts for that matter.) As for I John 1:9, even the quoted verse makes it clear that the forgiveness is dependent upon the sinner CONFESSING. The context spells out that it's about the sinner repenting- since the preceding and especially following chapter go into how a follower of Jesus is to do what he says, and that we have an advocate in Jesus if and when we sin. So, those verses don't contradict to me. Those people like vpw who cause the "little ones" to stumble don't do one act in one instant- they set up plans and elaborate snares- like vpw did. These aren't people who are sorry for hurting others- they may get sorry FOR GETTING CAUGHT, but not for sinning. So, the forgiveness of I John 1:9 has nothing to do with them. That's for a sincere follower who slips, not an evil plagiarizing rapist whose main regrets are either getting caught, or regrets he couldn't rape MORE. Hebrews 10 is a much more complicated matter. Hebrews 10:17 is part of a passage contrasting the Mosaic Law and the post-Pentecostal covenant. "16 "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD : I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE." In fact, if you keep reading the chapter, what sounded like Christians getting a blank check on sinning sounds like nothing of the kind. 26 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. 28 Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." 31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God. So far, it's all fairly consistent. The follower who stumbles and repents gets forgiveness, and the one who claims to be a follower but causes the followers themselves to stumble aren't followers- so they don't repent and they don't get forgiveness. I find that comforting, but not everyone would. Certainly someone like vpw who caused the little ones to stumble wouldn't like it, but they won't repent of the evil of their actions, either.

This suspense show introduced the Douglas Fir to the general audience. To hear this show, you'd think investigators sat around eating pie and drinking coffee whenever they weren't actively investigating.

I meant to get back to that about an hour later. Oh, well...

"So now you'd better stop, and rebuild all your ruins. For peace and trust can win the day despite of all your losing."

"She'll only come out at nights, the lean and hungry type."

"MOTHER'S LITTLE HELPER", the Rolling Stones.

Neither do I.

That's him. Randy Grainger was a kid on an episode of "the Odd Couple." The radar operators were from the Austin Powers movies. And so on.

"Peace and trust can win the day in spite of all your losing"

Randy Grainger Sy Liebergot Radar Operator Johnson Radar Operator Peters Tom Miller Dick Mitchell Emmanuel Grayson Constable Sanders

Ben Affleck.

Correct, just to make it official.

"It's close to Midnight, something evil's lurking in the dark."

MONSTER MASH!

I'll get back to this in a bit.