Why a sanctuary?

Jesus said that there would be two groups calling themselves Christian and that one group he would call his brothers and to the other group he would say get away from me you workers of lawlessness. So yes you have to pass the test of whether Jesus would accept you or not.

As for your statement that no two Christians believe the same thing perhaps you've never met a true christian.

I said I agree that "Christians" have treated many unfairly but I don't about this "seat at the table" in mainstream society thing. I like to think of myself as a Christian but I've never had a "seat at the table" in mainstream society.

 

Try being a good Christian.

 

It would be nice if believers of a faith could come together and discuss their faith to each other without worrying about confrontations that could lead to derailing of threads which hinders free inquiry between one believer to another.

The sanctuary has been flooded with these types of confrontations a lot for a while and no one, as to my knowledge, has complained to any mods about it, even though it is against forum rules to do so. That's a big issue because it stifles the kind of inquiry that one believer would want to have with another believer. Believers discussions with each other would be different than the discussions than those that don't believe would have with each other, so it would be nice to allow that freedom... which was the original intent of the sanctuary: Freedom for believers.

Why is this so much to ask for, unfair, or a means to hide from questioning? Despite what has gone on, patience has been shown and answers have been answered to the believers ability. I don't understand what the big issue is with allowing for a sanctuary where believers can come together and discuss freely what they believe.

 

A good Christian? Is that a good person for the worth of participating with the situations he believed In, OR is that a human valuing individual for the situation of His choice? Either way there is the problem of fooling oneself with (1) trust in people for the sense of goodness, OR (2) allowing the discriminated stance to run out of Hand for the thoughtless individuality in their concerns. One fools himself in the success story needed for impression. Really a human being needs no more than BEING a loving Christian: I know, it's the feeling value to many, but effort tells me that I'd rather distrust with the lack of Feeling than think less of being interested in the essence of who I am as an Individual.

Conclusion: A fine Christian seeks a personal relation with God with fervently obeying the ten commandments in spite of the situation; with loving himself in realizing the negative issues first, which are also to the ten commandments the fulfilling of forgiveness or overcoming the presence of the past.

 

One is definitely right

 

Ha Ha

 

Christians run this society. You could run for a political office, I can't; only Christians need apply.

When I joined the Navy there was a question, religion? check one of 3. I left it blank. The recruiter asked, are you Catholic? No. Are you Jewish? No. Then he checked Protestant. I had no choice, but you did.

I have to, by law, obey your religious rules. This is how my whole life has been. Because I have not been willing to lie about my beliefs, I am not included in this society and I have not been allowed to live my life as I choose, but you have.

 

I think they DO need a sanctuary. It's a place to discuss their beliefs without persecution or...............reality.

On that note, in the Dreadlock forum, those wax-users oughta have one as well.

 

Impossible task,"there is none good but God"

 

how about just a good human?

 

Attempt is not accomplishment.

 

define good.

 

Only God is good. Good is my God.

 

ahh man that conflicts with my belief. I think god is a part of everything, all things put together is god to me.

 

It might conflict with a description you choose but where your treasure lay, there is your heart also.

 

however Grim is defining "good" when he says "good christian", which I assume he either means obedient and/or moral.

 

If I remeber correctly it has to do with Christians who accept evolution among other things.

 

So has there been an answer to the original question proposed in this thread yet?

 

The answer is they don't need one. That one is provided is a matter of taste.

 

I'll second that. speech is free, as is association.