I don’t pretend to know the intent behind the post of God’s Music...not that other’s are, I’m just trying to state some context for my following words.

Like Tony, I have sat quietly and watched my children sleep and let the tears flow...thanking God for the blessings that they are and praying to Him that I will do right by them. I also make it a point to pray this audibly during bedtime prayers so that they may see that I still need God to guide and direct me as I ask the same of Him to guide and direct them...hoping that they see that reliance on God never ceases.

TonyRush - 02 May 2008 02:23 PM

Every once in a while, I’ll hear a story about some father killing his child.  It’s one of the few things that can get such an immediate emotional reaction out of me.  It’s literally out of my comprehension how a man could do that.  I can’t fathom any father rejecting his own child. 

I’m in total agreement here. I was once called in for potential jury duty for such a case. A man(hard to call him father) brutally beat his 3 year old son, killing him. I couldn’t wait to cast my “guilty” vote and I hadn’t even been selected. It turns out the judge declared it a mistrial before final jury selection even took place and he subsequently plead guilty the next time, avoiding a trial. Sorry for the side note, I am just trying to show that, yes, I can empathize with your “immediate emotional reaction.”

TonyRush - 02 May 2008 02:23 PM

In fact, if you’re a parent, you’re probably nodding along with me.  But, I’ll ask:  could you destroy your own child?  Could you turn your back on your own child and refuse to ever see them again? 

I don’t think I could.

TonyRush - 02 May 2008 02:23 PM

Of course, if you could, then it’s probably not disturbing to think that God could do the same to His creation.  If that’s a little offensive, it’s worth asking yourself seriously what that means about God.

As I said earlier, I don’t know the motives of God’s Music in saying the cross was missing. But, you said it wasn’t missing...that it was a means to an objective in a post where your focus was on the objective. That’s fair enough. But, there’s a logical connundrum. The means(the cross) is an example of the type of parental rejection we both do not understand and believe is not capable in ourselves from someone we both believe is perfect in His love. God the Father turned his back on His innocent son and arranged his horrible and agonizing death...even if only temporary. Yes, I know his motive was love(John 3:16), but he poured out His righteous wrath on his own Son, who had done nothing, to accomplish the objective.

Like Tony, I believe that the love I have for my children is “wimpy” when compared to the love God has for His children...but God rejected His Son, even if only for a day or 3. In keeping with context of your story, what do I do with that?

Don’t take this post as choosing a side in the debate over whether someone was choosing to disparage a good story or not. I don’t care who wins or loses that one.

Side note...in replying to this post, i noticed it was topic number 666

I honestly can’t for the life of me figure out why anyone would be offended by me wanting to add the Cross to the story, and especially it being someone with preaching creditentials.  Without the CROSS there would be no Father-Son/Daughter relationship with God.  For God So loved the world that He GAVE His only begotten Son (on the cross).
The Cross is the PROOF of God’s LOVE.

Cliff, I don’t appreaciate being blasted by your post in the least.  But in the spirit of Christ, I forgive you.

God’sMusic - 03 May 2008 12:30 PM

I honestly can’t for the life of me figure out why anyone would be offended by me wanting to add the Cross to the story, and especially it being someone with preaching creditentials.  Without the CROSS there would be no Father-Son/Daughter relationship with God.  For God So loved the world that He GAVE His only begotten Son (on the cross).
The Cross is the PROOF of God’s LOVE.

Cliff, I don’t appreaciate being blasted by your post in the least.  But in the spirit of Christ, I forgive you.

Then, you were serious with your post about the cross, and not taking a jab at Tony? I honestly thought you were taking a swipe at him.

When Tony said the following in his original post about God’s love, I felt he was referring to God’s sending Him to the cross as a demonstration of the depth of His love for us:

”But, I’ll ask:  could you destroy your own child?  Could you turn your back on your own child and refuse to ever see them again? 

Of course, if you could, then it’s probably not disturbing to think that God could do the same to His creation.  If that’s a little offensive, it’s worth asking yourself seriously what that means about God.

See, I believe that no matter how much I love my sons....no matter how my heart fills with joy to see them living, breathing, laughing, talking, playing and growing.....no matter how my love is unrelated to their behavior.....

....I believe God’s love for us makes me look like a wimp.  I’m a lousy, lousy parent compared to God.”

I thought you were basically saying, “Nice story....but....no cigar. The cross is the real issue here, and you are just glossing over it.”

I apologize for taking your post as sarcastic and disparaging (as Rev Tabasco also evidently did), but I think I took it that way because you often take jabs at people on these message boards in a sarcastic manner - especially Tony.

(Just look at your posts # 3, 5 7 and 9 on the “Wine, Strong Drink in the Bible” thread for one of the many examples of this).

I thought it was more of the same and reacted as such. If you were really serious - then I certainly do apologize and will try to better discern in the future between when you are making a serious comment and when you’re making a jab at someone.

You may want to know that people have commented to me in private Emails on your posts, asking me if I think you are serious in the jabs you are taking at people or just trying to “stir the pot” to get a reaction. I have told more than one that they would have to ask you directly to know for sure.

I would have answered you privately if you had addressed me privately, but I am answering you on the board because you have addressed me here publicly - and I want all to know that I am truly sorry for mistaking your post for one of your jabs at Tony.

SGN - 02 May 2008 06:32 PM

Didn’t you just recently agree with Tony that being offended is a choice.  Did you perhaps choose to be offended just now?

I didn’t make that statement. Tony made it in post # 25 of the “Wine, Strong Drink in the Bible” in response to a comment by God’sMusic.

I didn’t post any comments on that thread.

Tony,

Thank you for sharing this wonderfully touching post with us!  Obviously you have taken such deep thought into this post.  And yes, children do have a way of giving us a glimpse into God’s tremendous love for us!  God’s love IS most amazing!  His love is far above and beyond what any words could ever express or anything we can even think or imagine!  His love never fails!  I have a daughter of my own of whom I am so proud.  I have loved her from the very moment she was just a thought in my heart and a twinkle in my eye.  And I have loved each and every stage of her life and watching her grow into a beautiful young lady.  When we think of how much we truly love our children, how much more does God love us!  He has certainly shown us by example with the life Jesus lived even to the point of the cross, and He still shows us each and every day that we live, move and breathe!  Thank you once again for sharing your heart with us in this post!

Amazed in His presence and humbled by His love . . . . . . .

Angie

CliffCerce - 03 May 2008 02:25 PM

God’sMusic - 03 May 2008 12:30 PM

I honestly can’t for the life of me figure out why anyone would be offended by me wanting to add the Cross to the story, and especially it being someone with preaching creditentials.  Without the CROSS there would be no Father-Son/Daughter relationship with God.  For God So loved the world that He GAVE His only begotten Son (on the cross).
The Cross is the PROOF of God’s LOVE.

Cliff, I don’t appreaciate being blasted by your post in the least.  But in the spirit of Christ, I forgive you.

Then, you were serious with your post about the cross, and not taking a jab at Tony? I honestly thought you were taking a swipe at him.

When Tony said the following in his original post about God’s love, I felt he was referring to God’s sending Him to the cross as a demonstration of the depth of His love for us:

”But, I’ll ask:  could you destroy your own child?  Could you turn your back on your own child and refuse to ever see them again? 

Of course, if you could, then it’s probably not disturbing to think that God could do the same to His creation.  If that’s a little offensive, it’s worth asking yourself seriously what that means about God.

See, I believe that no matter how much I love my sons....no matter how my heart fills with joy to see them living, breathing, laughing, talking, playing and growing.....no matter how my love is unrelated to their behavior.....

....I believe God’s love for us makes me look like a wimp.  I’m a lousy, lousy parent compared to God.”

I thought you were basically saying, “Nice story....but....no cigar. The cross is the real issue here, and you are just glossing over it.”

I apologize for taking your post as sarcastic and disparaging (as Rev Tabasco also evidently did), but I think I took it that way because you often take jabs at people on these message boards in a sarcastic manner - especially Tony.

(Just look at your posts # 3, 5 7 and 9 on the “Wine, Strong Drink in the Bible” thread for one of the many examples of this).

I thought it was more of the same and reacted as such. If you were really serious - then I certainly do apologize and will try to better discern in the future between when you are making a serious comment and when you’re making a jab at someone.

You may want to know that people have commented to me in private Emails on your posts, asking me if I think you are serious in the jabs you are taking at people or just trying to “stir the pot” to get a reaction. I have told more than one that they would have to ask you directly to know for sure.

I would have answered you privately if you had addressed me privately, but I am answering you on the board because you have addressed me here publicly - and I want all to know that I am truly sorry for mistaking your post for one of your jabs at Tony.

Let’s please be careful of publicly reprimanding GM for what you call “taking jabs” at Tony.  I do not want this to become a Tony vs GM issue, but suffice it to say, that I have received just as many PMs and emails about Tony’s jabs at anyone who disagrees with his viewpoints.  If you feel a personal reprimand is needed it would be better done in private.

Now, let’s please get back to the real topic.

CliffCerce - 03 May 2008 02:25 PM

God’sMusic - 03 May 2008 12:30 PM

I honestly can’t for the life of me figure out why anyone would be offended by me wanting to add the Cross to the story, and especially it being someone with preaching creditentials.  Without the CROSS there would be no Father-Son/Daughter relationship with God.  For God So loved the world that He GAVE His only begotten Son (on the cross).
The Cross is the PROOF of God’s LOVE.

Cliff, I don’t appreaciate being blasted by your post in the least.  But in the spirit of Christ, I forgive you.

Then, you were serious with your post about the cross, and not taking a jab at Tony? I honestly thought you were taking a swipe at him.

When Tony said the following in his original post about God’s love, I felt he was referring to God’s sending Him to the cross as a demonstration of the depth of His love for us:

”But, I’ll ask:  could you destroy your own child?  Could you turn your back on your own child and refuse to ever see them again? 

Of course, if you could, then it’s probably not disturbing to think that God could do the same to His creation.  If that’s a little offensive, it’s worth asking yourself seriously what that means about God.

See, I believe that no matter how much I love my sons....no matter how my heart fills with joy to see them living, breathing, laughing, talking, playing and growing.....no matter how my love is unrelated to their behavior.....

....I believe God’s love for us makes me look like a wimp.  I’m a lousy, lousy parent compared to God.”

I thought you were basically saying, “Nice story....but....no cigar. The cross is the real issue here, and you are just glossing over it.”

I apologize for taking your post as sarcastic and disparaging (as Rev Tabasco also evidently did), but I think I took it that way because you often take jabs at people on these message boards in a sarcastic manner - especially Tony.

(Just look at your posts # 3, 5 7 and 9 on the “Wine, Strong Drink in the Bible” thread for one of the many examples of this).

I thought it was more of the same and reacted as such. If you were really serious - then I certainly do apologize and will try to better discern in the future between when you are making a serious comment and when you’re making a jab at someone.

You may want to know that people have commented to me in private Emails on your posts, asking me if I think you are serious in the jabs you are taking at people or just trying to “stir the pot” to get a reaction. I have told more than one that they would have to ask you directly to know for sure.

I would have answered you privately if you had addressed me privately, but I am answering you on the board because you have addressed me here publicly - and I want all to know that I am truly sorry for mistaking your post for one of your jabs at Tony.

Cliff, I certainly didn’t see anything at all in GMs post that questioned or derailed Tony’s post. I cannot for the life of me see what you or RevTabasco were seeing.

With the addition of Steadman’s post about how God DID what was inconceivable to us in that He DID give His son to death, the cross or missing cross, brought on even greater significance. Again, Tony’s story was great, but the addition of GM and Steadman’s thoughts made it even more outstanding.

There was hardly anything to disagree with in my post so I guess the criticism is that it was incomplete because it didn’t mention “the cross”.  It didn’t mention the virgin birth, the resurrection or imputed righteousness either so I’m not sure how long a post I could’ve written to have made it complete. 

And that’s okay.  I think GodsMusic’s reply was consistent with how he and I normally communicate.  I wasn’t offended.  Just reminded that even when I post something he agrees with, it’s still going to be a cause for criticism. 

Tony

TonyRush - 04 May 2008 10:55 AM

There was hardly anything to disagree with in my post so I guess the criticism is that it was incomplete because it didn’t mention “the cross”.  It didn’t mention the virgin birth, the resurrection or imputed righteousness either so I’m not sure how long a post I could’ve written to have made it complete. 

And that’s okay.  I think GodsMusic’s reply was consistent with how he and I normally communicate.  I wasn’t offended.  Just reminded that even when I post something he agrees with, it’s still going to be a cause for criticism. 

Tony

As was yours just now. 

Perhaps this is a good time to close the Religion/Doctrine and Theology section.  There seems to be a complete lack of respect for anyone with a differing opinion.