Perfect.
Posted on 08/27/2006 6:41:55 AM PDT by mcg2000
Semper Fi, brother.
Funny, my “subjective” definition of “someone who dies to further something of more valuable than a disgraceful life abounding it” is nearly identical to definition #2 of “a person who is put to death or endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause”.
But I grant that definition #1 would have applied to Steve Centanni, who traded it in order to live on to both practice and advocate the same religion today as he did last week. AFAIK, that wasted martyrdom is more promoted by internet warriors than by any verse in the Bible
As I recall, even captured Marines are not expected to die rather than trade absurd confessions for release. Semper Fi, friend.
Of course you are right about this. I think the difference between what you and I are saying is that of ultimate issues. I would not object to someone giving false information to his captors or even making political statements, it's just that requiring me to deny my God is where I draw the line. And having me say that I am converting to a religion that worships a false god, when, in fact, I am not converting to that religion is far, far over that line. That is something one cannot do.
For all of us, there must be some lines we will not cross.
Of course God can tell the difference. That's part of the problem. If one believes in God AND denies Him, then there are two sins, denial & hypocrisy. An atheist would be better off, in that at least he could so sincerely.
Terrorist are not men, they are gun holding false god worshipers.
Before mankind they said they made statements at the point of a gun.
The solution to the arafat's P.A. maggots and gangsters is a "nice" clean blanket of MOABS over Gaza, NOW!!!
I understand having sacred lines that can’t be crossed. At different times there were different things I’d rather have died for than say at gunpoint. Maybe there’s something now regarding family that I’d hot headedly still refuse to put on tape even thought they’d know it was a lie and I’d correct in hours.
But on clearer reflection, there’re circumstances where I should know that holding that line is a weakness rather than a strength. If the recital is unbelievable, the substance is absurd and the damage is non-existent then refusing to do it may just be thickheadedness, stubbornness or vanity.
I like to think that the line I’d never cross is if it’d likely cause harm to something, someone or some principle that I deeply value, but who knows how strong I’d be.
ditto....The Lord knows how these guys really feel...and let's face it...do any of us know how we would have acted in the same circumstance.....I'm so thankful they're free and back home....the last thing I prayed for last night was for their safety...and anyone who trashes them for doing whatever it took to get home needs to be put in the situation they were.....
None of that’s supported by scripture, it’s all your own invention.
I think that there’s no sin of denial when God knows it’s BS, and any “sin” of hypocrisy is to Allah, not God. Maybe there’s the sin of bearing false witness, but I don’t think that commandment applies to having a gun to your head any more than not killing applies to killing the guy holding a gun to your head. So Steve Centanni should have a clean conscious.
God knew that Peter was full of it, and acting out of fear, when he denied even knowing Jesus. Did that make it okay?
I'm a girl and I'd also tell my captors that HC was hot to keep them from sawing off my head.
I wouldn't do that. I think everyone should keep their mouths shut and quietly pass the word that this is how to get out of such a situation in one piece.
Did Peter’s denial help pave way for more Christian oppression or was it part of a deal for the freedom to renounce his obviously absurd conversion/denial within hours to live and prophesize as a Christian. In addition to not reading God’s mind from ambiguity, we need to ensure the biblical analogies are applicable to this kidnapping deal.
Apparently your Bible conveniently forbids denying Christ only when you have no reason to do so. I suppose it also prohibits lying only when it wouldn't benefit you, adultery only when you're not horny, theft only when you don't have a need, etc. The Bible I read is not so limp-wristed.
By the way, there is no such word as "prophesize."
You already acknowledged that God can tell the diffenece between deniying him and reading a denial at gun point for the freedom to retract it back in #125. You’re going in circles to your own words now.
God forbid if your wife ever has a gun to her head and is told to spread her legs, you know she wouldn’t be committing adultery if she chose not to die. Any sane person like yourself would recognize the difference and not hold her responsible for the sex. God is at least that sane. And you know it’s the same if the rapists demanded that she lie or steal instead. But you’re too “limp wristedly” stubborn to acknowledge what you must sense on some level by now, that these hostages were ideologically raped, not converted. And you know that there’s nothing in the Bible to back up your absurd standard of judgment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.