16 Feb 10
Originally posted by Proper Knobyes i thought Whitey was taking a pot at you Noobster, quite surprising really.
Excuse for what? You've lost me.
Theists constantly remind us that they get their morals from the Bible, the revealed/inspired word of God. A vicar/priest or whichever title you wish to use, live their lives by the word of God. I think you would agree with me that such members of the clergy therefore should be setting an example to the rest of us? See ...[text shortened]... , which is a small village out of town, the rectory is the largest house in the village also.
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by FreakyKBHnope, its hardly unrelated irrespective of your slithering, but i knew you couldn't of course reconcile your 'all faith and no works convenience store type of Christianity', in the face of such incontrovertible biblical evidence to the contrary. Perhaps you should get a job at Waltmart, who knows where it may lead. 😉
Oh, you mean instead of addressing the passage from Romans, you opted to throw something entirely unrelated back at me? Makes sense.
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobI chanlenged your brothers 'point' and your response was:
Excuse for what? You've lost me.
He was an alcoholic going through bouts of mania and alcohol induced pyschosis, rational thoughts didn't go through his head.
Which seems to be excusing him from needing to be rational or explain himself. Yet you agree with his point, so you should be able to explain it rather than passing it on to your brother then excusing him.
Theists constantly remind us that they get their morals from the Bible, the revealed/inspired word of God. A vicar/priest or whichever title you wish to use, live their lives by the word of God.
Not necessarily in my experience.
I think you would agree with me that such members of the clergy therefore should be setting an example to the rest of us? Seeing how they live their life by Gods word.
And that is what I am challenging. Why must they set an example, and why do you believe that they live their lives by the word of God but their congregation (who are just as much Christians) do not?
At a point in history where we are being told to live more within our means, economize, be more frugal, etc etc.
By whom and for what reasons?
It doesn't really portray a good image of the church when the vicar lives in quite possibly the largest house in the town.
I would agree with that, but it is up to the congregation to decide whether they want to 'portray a good image' or not. Depending on which Church you are referring to of course.
Granted as Conrau pointed out the house serves other purposes. But we're talking about a substantial property that only two people live in, it easily looks like it could have 5 bedrooms.
Incidentally where my brother now lives, which is a small village out of town, the rectory is the largest house in the village also.
Where I come from (Livingstone, Zambia) the Anglican Church's priests house is also very large. But the priest does not own it, nor is he particularly well paid. I think the current priest has a fairly large family, so it is probably quite well used at present, but I am fairly sure that many of the priest that have lived there in the past have been single.
Should priests also drive electric vehicles?
17 Feb 10
The JW's are all about making money too don't be fooled. The founder got popped for some crazy miracle wheat He was trying to pedal and it was not even good wheat. Somebody has to keep the lights on at the kingdom hall that cost money. The Leaders greedy men trying to keep men's minds enslaved to the whacky unstable doctrines that change over time. Not all Christendom is good I can agree to that but just don't be fooled about the JW's there just as greedy as any sect of Christendom.
Manny
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobThe fact that he threw up when and where he did says something (lol!)
During my brothers drinking days, he once knocked on the towns vicars front door. The vicar lives in a massive house all on his own next to the church (which is the counties largest). And asked him if he thought it was acceptable as a Christian that he should live in this huge house all by himself when lots of families in town were living in small shelte ...[text shortened]... int he threw up on the doorstep.
Apart from being very drunk, i think my brother had a point.
I'm assuming he didn't throw up on purpose.
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by menace71apparently Bill Underwood of the examiner doesn't think so, infact he could not even forward a donation to us even though he wanted to, unlike you beggers of Christendom, who have made your church a cave of robbers!
The JW's are all about making money too don't be fooled. The founder got popped for some crazy miracle wheat He was trying to pedal and it was not even good wheat. Somebody has to keep the lights on at the kingdom hall that cost money. The Leaders greedy men trying to keep men's minds enslaved to the whacky unstable doctrines that change over time. Not all ...[text shortened]... n't be fooled about the JW's there just as greedy as any sect of Christendom.
Manny
As for your other rather ignorant assertions, its clear that you have not the faintest idea what you are talking about, in fact, its less than ignorant, its stupidity run wild. We are a self financed organisation. Do you know what that means? Yes that is correct we pay for the upkeep of our kingdom halls by ourselves, we do the maintenance by ourselves, we build them by ourselves, we have architects, lawyers, builders, willing unpaid volunteers and no amount of smear mungering on your part will make the truth any less truthful. Perhaps you can point to the church salary of an elder? Anyone will do, there are after all in excess of 100,000 congregations of Jehovahs witnesses worldwide. Lets here you say it, what do the elders get paid for giving up their precious time and effort to look after the brothers and sisters under their care? I want to hear you say it Manny, how much! You aught to be ashamed of yourself for posting the rubbish that you have on this one, for you are putting bad for good and making good bad.
(Isaiah 5:20) Woe to those who are saying that good is bad and bad is good, those who are putting darkness for light and light for darkness, those who are putting bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16951
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by Conrau Kexactly but you can understand why it would look bad from an outsider looking in?
I think your brother was being totally unfair. That house does not belong to the vicar. Most likely it belonged to the diocese or even possibly to the community itself. This vicar was appointed to that home and would have had no authority to sell it or even to share it.
In my own experiences, the presbytery (where the priest lives) serves as an ad hoc of ...[text shortened]... lot of people think the same way as your brother. I just want to explain why this is not fair.
btw in your opinion what would a fair wage be to a priest or minster? or anyone working for the church?
17 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadWent wrong.
I chanlenged your brothers 'point' and your response was:
[b]He was an alcoholic going through bouts of mania and alcohol induced pyschosis, rational thoughts didn't go through his head.
Which seems to be excusing him from needing to be rational or explain himself. Yet you agree with his point, so you should be able to explain it rather than passing ived there in the past have been single.
Should priests also drive electric vehicles?[/b]
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadI'm not excusing anyone here, and what is there to provide an excuse for? Knocking on the vicars door and asking him to justify why he lives all alone in the biggest house in town? Granted, turning up drunk and throwing up on the vicars doorstep wasn't the classiest thing to do, but as i told you earlier he was a very sick and troubled young man. Note this isn't an 'excuse', merely a 'reason' for his actions. If ever the oppourtunity arose i'm sure my brother would now apologise, but that vicar has since moved on and this happenned a few years ago.
I chanlenged your brothers 'point' and your response was:
[b]He was an alcoholic going through bouts of mania and alcohol induced pyschosis, rational thoughts didn't go through his head.
Which seems to be excusing him from needing to be rational or explain himself. Yet you agree with his point, so you should be able to explain it rather than passing ...[text shortened]... ived there in the past have been single.
Should priests also drive electric vehicles?[/b]
Not necessarily in my experience.
Fair enough
Why must they set an example, and why do you believe that they live their lives by the word of God but their congregation (who are just as much Christians) do not?
Why should members of the clergy set an example to the rest of us? That's such a daft question it doesn't even warrant a response. Where did i say the congregation do not have to live by the word of God? You're arguing points i never said. In this particular instance it was easier to put the 'grievances' to the vicar himself as he is the official church representative in town and he lives in the massive house next to the church. As far as i know there isn't a list anywhere of the names and adresses of the congregation, so the vicar will have to suffice.
By whom and for what reasons?
Government adverts on tv here in the UK. To reduce our carbon footprint and waste. Come on, what did you think i was alluding to?
Should priests also drive electric vehicles?
Why not? We're all going to have to at some point. If the Church paved the way that would be good, would it not?
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobI disagree. A priest has various functions in the Church, setting an example is not necessarily one of them. I realize that it traditionally is so in many denominations, but you act like it is an obvious requirement when it isn't.
Why should members of the clergy set an example to the rest of us? That's such a daft question it doesn't even warrant a response.
Where did i say the congregation do not have to live by the word of God? You're arguing points i never said. In this particular instance it was easier to put the 'grievances' to the vicar himself as he is the official church representative in town and he lives in the massive house next to the church. As far as i know there isn't a list anywhere of the names and adresses of the congregation, so the vicar will have to suffice.
Fair enough.
Government adverts on tv here in the UK. To reduce our carbon footprint and waste. Come on, what did you think i was alluding to?
So once again, it is the Church priest who must set an example? Why?
Why not? We're all going to have to at some point. If the Church paved the way that would be good, would it not?
And who is 'the Church'?
It would be good if everyone 'paved the way'. Surely it should be your brother who was an alcoholic going through bouts of mania and alcohol induced pyschosis who was more in need of doing something positive? Rather than stop wasting his life on drink he chose to go and criticize the one man in town who quite possibly gave up many of his hopes and dreams to dedicate his life to helping other people.
17 Feb 10
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadsetting an example is not necessarily one of them?????
disagree. A priest has various functions in the Church, setting an example is not necessarily one of them. I realize that it traditionally is so in many denominations, but you act like it is an obvious requirement when it isn't.
Where did i say the congregation do not have to live by the word of God? You're arguing points i never said. In this par bly gave up many of his hopes and dreams to dedicate his life to helping other people.
Sorry Whitey but it is a qualification, at least Biblically anyhow. On setting out the qualification for overseer, here are some other translations of 1 Timothy 3:2
A bishop then must be blameless - King James version
So an elder must be a man whose life is above reproach - New living translation
Therefore, an elder must be blameless - International standard version
A bishop must have a good reputation, Gods Word translation
The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures reads
(1 Timothy 3:1-7) . . .If any man is reaching out for an office of overseer, he is desirous of a fine work. The overseer should therefore be irreprehensible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospitable, qualified to teach, not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, but reasonable, not belligerent, not a lover of money, a man presiding over his own household in a fine manner, having children in subjection with all seriousness; (if indeed any man does not know how to preside over his own household, how will he take care of God’s congregation?) not a newly converted man, for fear that he might get puffed up [with pride] and fall into the judgment passed upon the Devil. Moreover, he should also have a fine testimony from people on the outside, in order that he might not fall into reproach and a snare of the Devil.
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAnd which of these qualities is not expected of an ordinary Christian?
The overseer should therefore be [b]irreprehensible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospitable, qualified to teach, not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, but reasonable, not belligerent, not a lover of money, a man presiding over his own household in a fine manner, having children in subjection with all seriou ...[text shortened]... m people on the outside, in order that he might not fall into reproach and a snare of the Devil.[/b]
17 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo you're saying you're not an overseer?
setting an example is not necessarily one of them?????
Sorry Whitey but it is a qualification, at least Biblically anyhow. On setting out the qualification for overseer, here are some other translations of 1 Timothy 3:2
A bishop then must be blameless - King James version
So an elder must be a man whose life is above reproach - New living tra ...[text shortened]... m people on the outside, in order that he might not fall into reproach and a snare of the Devil.