steveorino

I spanked my four kids when they were young between the ages of say 4- 9. I tried my best never to discipline them while I was angry, but I seriously doubt I was that good of a parent. Now that I'm a granddaddy (5 year old and 18 mo old) I can see where discipline doesn't require corporal punishment. The big difference now is I am more mature. It does take a lot more self discipline on the parent's part to instill discipline in their kids's lives w/o spanking, but it is worth it. That being said, every now and then I see a kid acting out terribly and his parents acting like they don't see the misbehavior. I can't help but think "that kids needs a good swat with a wooden spoon." Also I see more and more kids being overly disciplined by a male who is not the dad. These kids are being abused. As the nuclear family fades away this problem most likely will only esculate steveOrino

I think I have a little understanding on what it takes to read passages in context. steveOrino

the rest of the text says ... for those who love him. I guess some people just can't read. @#$%^& educational system! steveOrino

Obviously you did not read my post with any intenet to learn. Like most fundamentalist you think you have your verse that proves God's wrath is unreasonable. I "tried' to show you that passage is not about generational curses, but how God's mercies far exceeds his wrath. I used empirical evidence from the Kings of Judah to show that it could not be taken literally. I gave you the reference to Ezekiel 18 that is biblical commentary about generational curses. I also gave you JC's commentary about "generational curses". You obviously don't want to see. BTW I did not add {generations} The NIV translators added it. I merely quoted the text from their translation. Why did they add it? Because the same verse is quoted in Deut 5, and all the reliable texts have the word generation there. NIV and KJV have generations in each of their translations. But yes, NIV shows the word was omitted in translation of the EX text, but consistentancy with a parrallel text shows it should be in there. Of course KJV don't recognize the fact the same verse in a parralel passage has the word. Now you must be one of King James Only Atheists. steveOrino

Now I admit that little commentary didn’t clear it up completely, so let me add other insights. First notice the curse is for those who “hate" God, not “love God but screw up.” If this verse was to be literal then God would show mercy for thousands of generations for those who loved God. That means all you’d have to do was find a grandfather, great grandfather, great great grandfather, great great great grandfather, and so on, that loved God and you’d be exempt from the curse. The odds are pretty good that out of 1000 generations, some dude in your family loved God. More importantly than this supposition is the empirical evidence from the Bible itself that this verse is NOT literal. King Hezekiah was Judah’s most righteous king, but his son, Manasseh, was evil. Manasseh’s grandson, Josiah, was a righteous king who brought revival. . What happened to God’s promise of mercies to show Hezekiah’s children for a thousand generation? What happened to Manasseh’ curse to the 3rd & 4th generation? The fact they do not exist ought to give us a clue that the passage is not about generational curses, but about God’s unbounding mercies. Another insight is found from JC. When healing a blind man he was asked who sinned to cause this man to be born blind, him or his parents? JC’s reply it was not related to anyone’s sin, but rather to demonstrate the glory of God. (John 9:1-3) Also Ezekiel 18 gives further clarity. Read it when you have time. For those who remain unconvinced, consider Christ. He bore our curses by being made a curse for us, for it is written, "Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree" (Gal 3:13). If any such thing as a generational curse does exist, that curse over our life would have been broken by Christ. In Christ we receive the mercy of God, not a curse. steveOrino

None of those swoopers can stand up? Most everybody sliding in. Get lower on the tandems. You seem to be on level with the TM. Just my two cents. steveOrino

Theologians ask "What is this the point of the passage?" Does it mean to convey the idea that God punishes the children for the sins of their fathers? I don't think so. As I have said many times ... look at the context, include the next verse. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments. God's wrath would be visited to the third and fourth generations for those who hate God, His mercy would be visited on thousands of generations for those who love God. Notice the contrast. The point of this passage is not to communicate the number of generations who will be blessed versus the number who will be cursed, but rather that God's mercy far exceeds His wrath. Ironically you have used these passages to stress the severity of God's wrath over His mercy! steveOrino

Actually, we may agree on something. I do not favor the selling of sermons, etc. Books are a different thing altogether, but I don't like selling sermons. I'm not fond of paying rights to sing a worship song if the words are printed either. steveOrino

Only in America could that be taken as an insult You were right about Jesus though, he obviously leans pretty far to the left Well, what I was meaning was I rather be revolutionary than a moderate. JC said I wish you were either hot or cold ... if you are luke warm, I will spit you out! [SteveO paraphrase] steveOrino

No, I don't think the Germans of 21st century should be punished for Nazis, etc. However, if the Germans do not learn from that (and USA doesn't learn from it's own ilglorious past) we deserve what we get. steveOrino

AggieDave said something in similar thread back in Oct '04. I thought it was the best statement I ever heard about etting an AFFI rating. you have to ask yourself if you're going to be a good enough instructor for your students or are you going to be just good enough to pass the course... Aggie Dave steveOrino

Dude, how many ways can I say the same thing? I'll just paste what I said a few threads back. I believe mankind fell (rebelled) and God brought upon spiritual death (separation from him) as the result. I also believe that "guy dying on a cross" was the Son of God, who paid the price for my transgressions. See, Jakee, I'm not so moderate after all. steveOrino

That's too bad, because I strive to be like Christ, and he was anything but a moderate. steveOrino

I'd hardly consider Jay a "nut job" I believe he accepts Genesis as a literal account of origins. In that regards I don't agree but we come to the same conclusions. Man is in need of a savior. JC is that Savior. So, if Jay is a nut, so am I. Good company to keep IMHO. If I could somehow corral all my thoughts and keep them into submission, I think I (and the rest of the world) would remain guilty because of conscious deliebrate acts of sin. Verdict ... guilty, you bet! steveOrino

What sins has, say, a one month old baby committed? I'd say none steveOrino

For the time being let's forget any explanation of the origin of sin (lawlessness and missing the mark) Is it universal? I'll be 52 this Friday, and in my half century of living I have never met anyone who was perfect (without sin) Let say there "may" be someone who is perfect. That "someone" is not me. I need a savior. I believe JC is that savior. He, being (without sin) paid the price for me. I accept that, you don't. How hard is that to understand? steveOrino

Let's just say I would not want you to be a judge in our system. There are too many who think like that already. steveOrino

By that same reasoning Usay Hussein was not responsible for his actions. His enviornment and genetics made hima brutal man. steveOrino

A literal interpretation of Genesis tidies up the idea of original sin or at least gives it a concrete beginning. Of course a literal interpretation opens up a can of worms in a myarid of other ways, like science, etc. However, I do not need to believe in a literal 7 day creation to look inside and see I need a savior. I guess I could lay the blame on God and say, "You made me the way I am!" But you know, that never worked for my kids as an excuse when they were young. steveOrino

What is this death that you speak of in Genesis? Trees are living things Did their fruit not die before Adam (man) fell? (John 12:24 I tell you for certain that a grain of wheat that falls on the ground will never be more than one grain unless it dies. But if it dies, it will produce lots of wheat) Physical death was part of "good" that God saw as he looked at his creation. But what about spiritual death? I believe mankind fell (rebelled) and God brought upon spiritual death (separation from him) as the result. When did this happen? Genesis was a good enough story for many. For me? perhaps not, but I do see the nature of sin in every man. We need a savior. steveOrino

And what would YOU learn from any instructor here posting such? steveOrino

Literally No. "Adam" is the Hebrew word for "man". It is how the Hebrews saw their beginning. steveOrino

I realize the basic tenants of fundamental Christianity are beliefs i mostly hold to be true. When I use the erm I'm typically referring to those who believe every word of the Bible to be literally true and reject many metaphors. Take for instance the Holy Bible. Most fundamentalist beieve it is inerrant in every aspect. My studies have shown that not to be true. There are typographical and transcription errors. There are other changes that may or may not have been so innocent. It is "my" belief the Bible is inerrant in the manner in which it points to Christ as Saviorof the world. It is not inerrant as a history or a science book. Two purposes given to it, which I do not believe it ever had intended. steveOrino

Hmmm. Last year Brian and I sold over 225 stills for $20 of the 275 videos we did. We shoot over 100 pix on each jump (Canon Xti) and have them playing on 3 TVs within 5 minutes of their landing. steveOrino

You'll almost double your tandem video income if you purchase a good digital camera (like Canon Rebel) It'll pay for itself in one Summer easily. Good luck and be sure and post pix when you get them. steveOrino