|
Post by danlirette on Nov 26, 2009 17:20:17 GMT -7
Hi Dan: I was thinking more hard rock that is being played in churches. There's nothing wrong with Third Day for instance. I'd have to completely agree with this. Hard Rock that makes you thrash and move about in violence and which stirs up emotions of the flesh ... is of the devil! Too bad so many churches are into that kind of thing
|
|
|
Post by Runner For Jesus on Nov 27, 2009 11:43:52 GMT -7
:)Amen, Dan. You hit it on the nail. It's of the flesh and incites all kinds of devilish manifestations.
|
|
|
Post by Runner For Jesus on Nov 27, 2009 11:59:10 GMT -7
Hate to differ with you Mitchie, but "Devil in her heart" is a Beatles song, and here's the lyrics and the album by them with this song on it; sung by them. www.mtv.com/lyrics/beatles/devil_in_her_heart/6517174/lyrics.jhtmlThe devil in her heart is repeated several times in this song. And a true born again believer does not have the devil in her heart. This is what Jesus said in Matthew 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. When you love Jesus, this is the desire of our hearts.
|
|
|
Post by mitchie2006 on Nov 27, 2009 13:56:43 GMT -7
Hate to differ with you Mitchie, but "Devil in her heart" is a Beatles song, and here's the lyrics and the album by them with this song on it; sung by them. www.mtv.com/lyrics/beatles/devil_in_her_heart/6517174/lyrics.jhtmlThe devil in her heart is repeated several times in this song. And a true born again believer does not have the devil in her heart. This is what Jesus said in Matthew 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. When you love Jesus, this is the desire of our hearts. You misunderstand completely. The only 'objectionable' song you could find was an early track that has NOTHING to do with what you're talking about. Yes, I agree that the Beatles recorded it for their second LP, but was NOT written by any of the Beatles themselves. Were the Beatles 'glorifying' the notion of having the 'devil in her (or anyone else's) heart'? Was it a celebration of the devil, or a lament? Context, runnerforjesus, context. Stop looking at one phrase that frightens you, and look at the entire thing. What's next? Should I get rid of my Dirt Devil vacuum cleaner right now because it's sucking everyting that's pure and good out of my living room floor? Should I avoid eating devil's food cake for fear of becoming possessed? If an expression of speech has you all afraid of a non-existant bogeyman, that's your problem. It's understandable. After all, if there's another thing I've found that fundamentalists like yourself cannot understand (besides irony - look it up) it's figurative language. I hope you haven't squandered the better part of your life by living in the comfy little box you've created for yourself while the rest of us have been busy being adults. If there's anything that's immoral in this world (and there certainly is, to be sure) I suggest first looking into a mirror and examining your own wicked beliefs and biases.
|
|
|
Post by Runner For Jesus on Nov 27, 2009 17:29:39 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by mitchie2006 on Nov 27, 2009 17:57:31 GMT -7
;D ;D ;D You do realize that the last two websites were satire, don't you? Do you need to look up another definition in the dictionary? Remember, the word is SATIRE. As for the first website (which was a copy of an earlier article that you had posted from another site) it was pure fundamentalist scare mongering. The second site, even if it was for real, which it isn't, poses a question that needs to be asked: Who gives a damn what Republicans think? I'm Canadian. However, for the record, apparently there is no record of Michelle Bachman making any comment regarding the group at all. She's still a dingbat, and a wingnut of the most ugly variety. Just perfect for Fox News. Who's next, Ann Coulter? I repeat: Michelle Bachman is retarded. Finally, regarding the third site (which was intended as a parody anyway) - there are so many things that are off the wall retarded there that don't even dignify much of a response. At least a response other than laughter. Even if the author of that article was serious, it's very revealing how Christians are constantly finding twisted and perverted meaning and imagery in everything when it's not actually there. Kind of like how sodomy is on their brains everytime the word 'gay' is uttered. I think I know who the real 'perverts' are in that case. At the very least, they could have bothered to get some of the lyrics right. Of course, as it's merely a parody (look that one up as well) of fundamentalist Christian scare-tactics, getting facts wrong deliberately helps it to look more authentic (not that fundies need any help looking ridiculous). With all that being said, you had already proven at the beginning of this thread that you're a person that is given to kneejerk reactions without any basis or fact-checking of which to speak. If you would get your head out of your colon long enough to stop jumping to the most bizarre conclusions, or at the very worst being happily fed this irrational tripe (standard procedure for right-wingnuts and fundies), perhaps you'd be better off. Now it may seem like I'm being a bit hard on you, I know, but I believe your Jesus warned that you're to expect laughing and mockery because you do indeed believe many outrageous, crazy stories. So whatever you do, don't blame me for being harsh. You're the one with the talking snakes, talking donkeys, floating messiahs and chariots of angels streaking across the skyline on trails of fire. Oh, and it's 'sang', not 'sung'. Also, since you like to do a little net surfing, why not add this one to your list of favorites! I've a set of these magnets on my fridge. My 2 little daughters just love them. Perhaps you'd like to get your own set in just in time for Christmas! www.jesusdressup.com
|
|
|
Post by mitchie2006 on Dec 30, 2009 23:31:07 GMT -7
Wow. Things got pretty quiet around here. I guess I sent Runner-for-Jesus running with her tail between her legs.
|
|