when a homily makes the news....

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Duh, it's clearly implied. Even the thief admits he's getting what he deserved!
Is it your habit that when the Bible doesn't say what you want it to have said you suggest that, oh, somehow what you wanted was implied anyway? Fascinating
 
Not implied, explicitly stated! In a biblical debate J would think a Korean Presbyterian minister would actually look up and read the relevant text, of which he is blissfully ignorant: "We {thieves} are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong (Luke 23:41)."
That's not Jesus explicitly stating that the dying thief received the justice he deserved.

As for my being a Korean Minister, don't worry, I have many higher ups. If I feel I need some advice in doing that role, I'll turn to them
 
That's not Jesus explicitly stating that the dying thief received the justice he deserved.
Hn wbat js it about a confession of personal guilt and an admission of just treatment that you don't unerstand? hmmm
 
Luke 23:42-43

Is this not Jesus offering Grace?
Absolutely Waterfall, it's a great example of it. Here, he extends forgiveness and assurance to the repentant criminal on the cross beside him. This act exemplifies the unconditional love that Jesus has for each and every one of us.

As a pastor, I find this passage to be a great reminder that God's grace is always available to us. No matter how far we may feel from God, Jesus' promise to the criminal, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise" is a testament to the transformative power of grace
 
Nothing in the parable hints that the victim had a "criminal record."
There is no basis in the NT for your assumption that crminal conduct should be rewarded.

Yet, the POTUS' belief varies from that which you have extorted (put out there) ... criminal behaviour is great while you can maintain control (avarice)!

Is there another CON Troll beyond or behind of what you speak? Do they believe they are Pro's? In time even the committed psyche deteriorates and escapes us ... for reasons we cannot explain in a world as it is lying here ... bottom doubt?

Generally existence cannot get together with the alternate ... cause them other side Cis quite abstractly disposed ... lost in thought and separate from the emotional ... get out of here .. was the claim! I don't have time to think said who else ... Mad Hadera as ... just a night cap ... intoxicated with out ... sans (not a grit of proper info). That's the dirt on being if you can't look down ... there are consequences ...

Complex and sophisticated life need not be up there with the rich ar datum ...
 
Are any of you still wondering why I oppose Christianity?

What if there is an alter Christianity so that there can be 2 sides to Trump and Mysti called things that we've been buffaloed about ... the commitment to a greater good remains fuzzy because of dissociative tryst! It's busted ...

Who was that guy who used to fire up the other side of the story? The greater back side ... as MU el ...

Was it Charles Har Vi ... in a nich of his own as a fire brand ...???? So much to be questioned and inspected ... especially in the deeps under the cover story!

Just a one-layered home Ayre ...
 
Luke 23:42-43

Is this not Jesus offering Grace?
Yes, "Grace" means" unmerited favor." So Jesus' assurance of a place for the thief in Paradise in no way implies that the thief didn't merit punishment for his crime. During my prison ministry as a pastor, i learned that justice can be unevenly applied due to compassion.

(1) CF handled our children's sermons and lived a life of altruism and acts of compassion. He excelled at doing our children's sermons. But he had one weakness; he had molested an 11-year-old boy! We had some great discussions on spirituality during my prison visits. But I didn't want CF to feel like our church now viewed him as aworthless piece of prison sh_t. So for his birthday, I thought we should send him a congregationally signed card. People were outraged and one couple left the church in protest of this suggestion. In his case, there was no thought of hating the sin, but loving the sinner. For CF's trial, the letter-writing campaign I organized on his behalf backfired badly. The judge construed CF's great reputation for altruism and acts of compassion as a sign of how dangerous he truly was because of his job as a school counselor. CF was given a 14-year prison sentence, when other molesters with a bad reputation often received a sentence of just a year or so. Prison life was toxic for CF. Though only about 50, he soon died in prison of dementia.

(2) DC was a bright young man who played guitar in our church praise team. He was known for being very courteous to our elderly members. But he too had molested a child. This time the judge knew me and respected my recommendation; so my recommendation of leniency carried weight. DC got off with a reprimand and a warning and became a happily married productive citizen.
 
I am sure many here have heard and seen the end of the homily Bishop Budde gave on Monday. I actually encourage folk to listentto the whole thing, not just the end, as the call for unity leads into the plea for mercy.

SOrt of surprised the homily and the reaction to it (like POTUS demanding an apolpgy and various folk insisting that the Bishop should have 'stuck to the Gospel') has yet to bee discussed here.

Anyway, what do folk think? NOt just do you agree/disagree with what was said but was it appropriate in that place and time? Will it have any impression on the public discourse in the nation? Where does prophetic critique belong in the church and in the world at large?
I was struck that she supported illegal immigrants who presumably are paid terrible wages. If they are legitimate refugees, why didn’t they apply for refugee status through proper legal processes? It doesn’t matter that most of them aren’t criminals. If any of them are murderers, drug dealers, child traffickers or lawbreakers in addition to being illegal migrants, it’s too many. I vote for supporting honest, legally arrived immigrants by paying good wages.
 
You don’t realize how expensive immigration is. Maybe they need to pay proper wages first.
I don’t know about the US process, I remember I was looking into calling a place in the US once to get some information ( that was years back) and they had actually a fee for taking the call, something like $10.
For immigrating to Canada, you pay for:
- translation of your papers
- paper copies
- certification of those copies, potential lawyer fees
- pictures
- a fee for every family member, and an application fee of $575
- fees for the documents you are getting

You also have to do the process online.
If you are already in the country, you might have to leave the country because you can only apply from outside of the country. That would mean you have to have a mailing address and a place to stay outside of the country. You also need valid documents to get into that country.
My hunch is, that the US process is even more expensive and possibly more complicated.
If one already has a job here, you would have to give it up to go out of the country.
Even in Canada, there are refugees who can’t afford to apply for permanent residency or Canadian
Citizenship costs $630 for an adult and $100 for a minor. Plus the costs for the paperwork.
 
You don’t realize how expensive immigration is. Maybe they need to pay proper wages first.
I don’t know about the US process, I remember I was looking into calling a place in the US once to get some information ( that was years back) and they had actually a fee for taking the call, something like $10.
For immigrating to Canada, you pay for:
- translation of your papers
- paper copies
- certification of those copies, potential lawyer fees
- pictures
- a fee for every family member, and an application fee of $575
- fees for the documents you are getting

You also have to do the process online.
If you are already in the country, you might have to leave the country because you can only apply from outside of the country. That would mean you have to have a mailing address and a place to stay outside of the country. You also need valid documents to get into that country.
My hunch is, that the US process is even more expensive and possibly more complicated.
If one already has a job here, you would have to give it up to go out of the country.
Even in Canada, there are refugees who can’t afford to apply for permanent residency or Canadian
Citizenship costs $630 for an adult and $100 for a minor. Plus the costs for the paperwork.

Thus we avoid the laws 't causes at a great price to how it all adds up to totalitarian ... because always some will take extreme advantage!

Consider the extractions of some administration even if they are proud of their ir ration ability ... not all ... but there are rare exceptions.

When in university I was discouraged because of the text book cases that disbelieved that there were exceptions to everything and nothing ... because they never experienced anything but how it was booked! Is there more TU Ide ... the former thing? C'est tout ... for now!

Wait a bit and damn, the thing altered ... squirmed like a asp ...

Asp; is that a word for something that stings ... like a true?
 
Last edited:
I was struck that she supported illegal immigrants who presumably are paid terrible wages. If they are legitimate refugees, why didn’t they apply for refugee status through proper legal processes? It doesn’t matter that most of them aren’t criminals. If any of them are murderers, drug dealers, child traffickers or lawbreakers in addition to being illegal migrants, it’s too many. I vote for supporting honest, legally arrived immigrants by paying good wages.
Your reasoning is deficient IMO.
It doesn't matter that most aren't criminals? Well it should.
 
M
I was struck that she supported illegal immigrants who presumably are paid terrible wages. If they are legitimate refugees, why didn’t they apply for refugee status through proper legal processes? It doesn’t matter that most of them aren’t criminals. If any of them are murderers, drug dealers, child traffickers or lawbreakers in addition to being illegal migrants, it’s too many. I vote for supporting honest, legally arrived immigrants by paying good wages.
There is a difference between requesting mercy and supporting. Followers of Jesus are called to be merciful and kind. Self-described Christians seem to care nothing for directions given by Jesus.

The fact that thousands of people risk their lives to be illegal immigrants reveals the failure of the process for legal recognition as refugees and legal immigration.

The number of refugees on the move in the world reveals failures of our global political and economic systems. If Western nations were not eager to sell the volume of weapons they do to other countries, there would be less internal and external warfare. A fairer economic system would have fewer people leaving their countries for a chance for decent lives.

The concept of illegal immigration would have made no sense to Jesus. Read the Hebrew scriptures for many stories about economic refugees beginning with Ruth.
 
The number of refugees on the move in the world reveals failures of our global political and economic systems. If Western nations were not eager to sell the volume of weapons they do to other countries, there would be less internal and external warfare. A fairer economic system would have fewer people leaving their countries for a chance for decent lives.
This is the exact issue - thank you Jim Kenny. "We" (empire?) have created these situations. "We" often fail to recognize our responsibility for much of the suffering of the world. "We" are leading civilization through an inevitable phase of deterioration.
 
There is a difference between requesting mercy and supporting. Followers of Jesus are called to be merciful and kind. Self-described Christians seem to care nothing for directions given by Jesus.
I'm with you on this, just for different reasons. And I think most atheists stand with your subset of Christians. And that's what it's come to: A majority of the nones standing with a minority of the Christians.
 
Back
Top