|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is it right to preach to people? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
apostolos Inactive Member |
It seems this issue is basically an extension of the first amendment argument. Please correct me if I am wrong, but was not the original intent of the first amendment to provide freedom for citizens of this country to express views and ideas without fear of persecution? If this is true then preaching must be included.
Now to be technical, talking to someone at their door is not preaching. It is conversing on a pre-determined subject matter. Preaching is delivering a theological discourse which usually includes a call to make a decision based on the truths presented. This is my own definition, by the way. My point is that the topic at hand is concerning "preaching" and not, as many have called it, "visitation". What preaching does include is everything from preaching at an established meeting site to preaching in a randomly selected open air or public forum. Someone brought up the point about trespassing on private property. This is valid to the legal discussion. It is not legal to "preach" on private property without permission. However, preaching may be done on public property without a request for permission. This is unless of course the city in question has established laws about getting permission to hold gatherings in public places. I will not attempt to speak for every situation, but I do know from some experience that most cities in North Carolina only require an approved permit stating where it will take place (to verify it is public property) and what kind of meeting it is. In response to this statement,
So it is a free country, would be happy for a Klan memeber to preach and scream their garbage in your streets?
let me state (with a request for correction if any is needed) that the issue being raised is one of morality, not legality. Certainly it is the right of any person or group to gather in public to make an expression of beliefs in a peaceable way (again assuming conditions set by the local government have been met). Therefore, such activity can not reasonably denied unless sufficient legal cause can be provided. Now at this point any person ascribing to moral relativity must agree. This is because if all of morality is relative, then there is no place for castigation of one groups' interpretation of morality. If, however, there is an absolute standard of morality, then in order to invalidate an attempt to preach publicly a sufficient display of the evidence of some moral transgression is required.(please note that I am not attempting to change the topic, I am merely stating my position. A discussion of this already underway here.) If all of this is true, and I am willing to discuss any related point, then the real issue is preaching being right or wrong morally, not legally. I have considered this over the past couple of days and these are my thoughts on the matter thus far. I hope they will be some clarification on the perspective I am attempting to represent. Russ {edited to insert link} [This message has been edited by apostolos, 11-20-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prozacman Inactive Member |
Ha Ha! Good Point. Fortunately I live in the snooty rich part of town where we are only exposed to it on the 6 oclock news.So then, we say to ourselves, "We are privileged to earn megabucks, so we can live away from the rednecks. Humph! Please pass the Polaner All-Fruit!"
[This message has been edited by Prozacman, 11-20-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18354 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
I am resurrecting this old thread from the dead. Most of the early conversation was by now inactive members, so I am going to quote them and attempt to carry the topic on from here.~Phat
The question is, is preaching right or wrong? Brian,inactive member writes: I quote our old member,now inactive, because he articulated his position quite well. Personally, I firmly believe in freedom of speech, but I can understand why many parents want to protect what their children are exposed to. I have had a few at my door of different flavours of Xianity, the latest was an American baptist who asked 'Do you know the Lord Jesus Christ?' I think it was the hardest shift that guy has put in for a long time. I do feel strongly about this, in my opinion these people are keeping alive a fairytale that has no basis in fact, it is a severely flawed belief system that would have died out centuries ago if certain people didn't see how powerful a control mechanism it is. Generation after generation of children have been indoctrinated, psychologically abused by people forcing THEIR beliefs onto their children. Children are being suffocated with this nonsense before they have the capacity to make an informed choice, it is child abuse. The believers whom I know want to protect their children from what they see as a hostile and compromising world of secular agendas which, in their minds..are evil. The atheists and secular humanists whom I know also want to protect their children..from believers.
Brian writes: I teach Religious Education and it is not possible to teach every single concept of every single religion, you have to teach what you believe will give your students a good background knowledge. The student is perfectly entitled to question what is being taught, as a teacher I welcome any feedback from my students, and I am sure your science teachers would have welcomed questions about evolution from you. Key Phrase: The student is perfectly entitled to question what is being taught NosyNed writes: Why is it that I never feel personally "offended" when my view of the world is mocked? I may be annoyed or amused at what I think is a display of ignorance. I have never felt that anything about me or my person has been affected in any way even when I am called "dammed" and "evil". When we get the "evolution is a religion" line (it appears that) the so-called "evolutionists" don't seem to take it personally while a surprising percentage of the other side does. Brian writes: Perhaps a question to bring up--in general---is whether there should be a law protecting kids from their parents. The most inmportant years for learning are between about 3-6 years old, what you learn at this age from trusted adults, such as your parents,is difficult to let go off. Children usually believe that what their parents say is true, obviously it depends on the intensity of the forcing of the parent beliefs on to the child, but you can rest assured there are many xians who suffocate their kids with THEIR beliefs, it isnt even the kids belief. Comments? Lets pick this one up where it left off...... Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo If You Don't Stand For Something You Will Fall For Anything~Malcolm X
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Perhaps a question to bring up--in general---is whether there should be a law protecting kids from their parents.quote:There's a fine line between training and abuse, whether physical or psychological.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18354 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
zombie writes: Which brings up the question of what is best taught to our young people. There's a fine line between training and abuse, whether physical or psychological. Personally I can think of several useful teachings from the Bible. This does not mean that I would discourage my kids (or anyone elses) from learning critical thinking skills.Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo If You Don't Stand For Something You Will Fall For Anything~Malcolm X
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
So can I, but are any of them exclusive to the Bible? Most of the useful things can be taught in a non-partisan way.
Personally I can think of several useful teachings from the Bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18354 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
I disagree. I believe that there are essentially two flows in life. Critics would accuse me of black/white thinking, but My take on it is this:
Being In The Flow Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo If You Don't Stand For Something You Will Fall For Anything~Malcolm X
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
I'm not going to log in to Facebook to find out what your take is.
I disagree. I believe that there are essentially two flows in life. Critics would accuse me of black/white thinking, but My take on it is this:Being In The Flow
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18354 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Sorry, Ringo---my bad.
The Bible tells us that there is a spirit of the antichrist. quote:Many people think that the antichrist is some evil leader who arises in the east somewhere and causes havoc. While this may be true, there is another important thing that we might learn from this. Pop culture tells us to simply "go with the flow." Did anyone ever stop to think about what the flow actually is? We know and believe that there is One God and One Holy Spirit. We know this because we know the Son--Jesus Christ-- quote: Many people get angry at this and claim that christians are being arrogant and exclusive...unloving towards multicultural individualism. They ask how we can possibly know that there is only One Way. To be honest, many christians are not the best examples of whom they claim to represent. I have been guilty of this many times, and my excuse was always that I was simply being human. The actual problem was that I was walking in the flesh and not the Spirit.
There are basically two flows. One of them is the Holy Spirit. The other one is a false spirit. a vain imagination rather than being inspired by the Holy Spirit. Basically there are two possible imaginations---Gods and our own. ANTICHRIST antichristos NT:500 can mean either "against Christ" or "instead of Christ," or perhaps, combining the two, "one who, assuming the guise of Christ, opposes Christ" (Westcott). The word is found only in John's epistles (from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright (c)1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers) One Flow is characterized by the fruit of the Spirit.
quote: The other flow manifests a variety of different ways, but basically is characterized by the lusts of the flesh.
quote: zombie writes: I guess this means that you could either explain this in a non partisan way or that you disagree with the basic premise. Most of the useful things can be taught in a non-partisan way. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo If You Don't Stand For Something You Will Fall For Anything~Malcolm X
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
I have no problem with that. My problem is that professing Christians are often the ones with the false spirit, the vain imagining.
There are basically two flows. One of them is the Holy Spirit. The other one is a false spirit. a vain imagination rather than being inspired by the Holy Spirit. Basically there are two possible imaginations---Gods and our own. Phat writes:
Bingo.
One Flow is characterized by the fruit of the Spirit. Phat writes:
I would say it manifests as not showing the fruits of the spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. The other flow manifests a variety of different ways, but basically is characterized by the lusts of the flesh. In other words, it isn't just about sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. It's about not practicing what you preach. The best sermon is setting an example.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024