buckthesystem

Marriage - in my view - is all about children. We must procreate and we must be married in order to procreate. As Christians we must produce other Christians, it is our responsibility to witness to people, who hopefully will be persuaded by that enough to seek a personal relationship of their own with God, and we should also, if we can, produce children and give them the chance to seek and attain their own relationship with God. A child needs two parents to provide them with enough support to live properly while they do that. Marriage doesn't exist in heaven because there is no need for it. There is need for it on Earth because we all need a life partner for companionship and perhaps a physical relationship. As Marnie said, God created marriage for man's benefit, not God's. As for dating. Well in biblical times, it was much simpler. We would probably be matched with someone "suitable" by the family while we were still young, but in today's society we are left to find our own mate and the way we have devised of doing this is "dating". We think we have progressed as a society and wouldn't marry someone unless we have got to know them and found them suitable. How can you know whether or not somebody is going to make a good marriage partner if you have not dated them first and got to know them? I think, also, that it is important that you have a good relationship with God and an important attribute for a potential marriage partner is that their relationship with God is strong too and then you can worship and glorify God together. That is a pretty big part of a marriage.

It is incredibly bad. Of course I've got to agree with everything everybody said about it being the ultimate in evil to "re-write" the Bible, but is it really all that much different from the way various modern government organisations have re-written many history books? It is just basically an example of extreme politically-correct-speak, very common in today's society. Adolf Hitler had his own form of "newspeak". That is one of the reasons that the only version of the Bible I have found that I can trust 100% is the King James Version. Subtle little word substitutions like "thou shalt not kill" becomes "thou shalt not murder" make the meaning of the passage totally different. Still we were warned to be wary of false teachings. The "Nazi Bible" is a good example.

This is interesting: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2312996,00.html

The mark of the beast. Well there are a lot of theories on this. I believe that the MOB will be a real physical, tangible mark. The book of Revelation says "...and no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark..." We have to take this literally. A lot of you are making the mistake that the technology for this, the antichrist, the OWG and the one monetary society leading to the cashless society, will come out of America. It is my view that it won't. America will be basically left out of this at the start and then forced to join with the rest. I believe that what will be behind it will be the EU, the "United Europe". The Bible talks about everything coming together so that the antichrist can reign, and he has been granted the power to control everything and everybody, before he even starts. All the EU countries seem to be already on that path, already just "marching down the road towards totalitarianism" just waiting for an antichrist to come along and take control of everything. These governments are setting their people up for (possibly) the reign of the antichrist. One of the most important things being that 23 out of 25 member states of the EU have introduced gun control. Another thing that seems to have crept into EU countries is that the church isn't very strong, it doesn't seem to be encouraged at all. And some of their laws, eg legal prostitution, euthanasia, equal rights for "gays", etc. etc. can only be described as "depraved". Satan must just love this. I have read that if the Eurocrats have their way they will soon have European military and police forces to enforce more and more dictatorial edicts. Ripe for the antichrist to come in and take control of the EU with its ready made army and enforcement system, one currency (already existing of course, the Euro) and take control of the rest, the people, transport and social controls already in existance throughout Europe and either make war on the rest of the world and force it to succumb also, or do so by "diplomatic" means - which I think will probably be more likely. The Bible also talks of "the Harlot" or the "false religion". Only in my opinion also , I believe that this is already practically "on the way" in Europe with "calls for" "tolerance and inclusiveness, kindness and understanding" in some of the churches (I have used inverted commas for these words for a reason). Soon all we will need for "everything to fall into place" will be a great merger of churches or an emergence of a "new tolerant, politically correct church". One that doesn't include the literal belief in the resurrection. Those who said that they believed that the MOB will be an RFID subdermal microchip have it pretty near correct. I will take it one stage further and say that I think persuasion to take the MOB has already started with the introduction in virtually every country throughout the world of the id card. This is rather more than just a "softening up" as I believe also that very soon id cards will become so vital that unless you have one you will not be able to buy or sell, or drive, or engage in any commercial activity whatsoever, work at a job - or at least get paid, open or operate a bank account, visit a national park, an amusement park, a museum, go to any (even free) shows or nightclubs, own any property, operate firearms (registered ones anyway), own pets (registered ones anyway), visit hospitals or get medical treatment of any kind. Then perhaps, after most people have persuaded themselves that there is "really no harm in adopting this biometric id card", it will be suggested "of course your card can get lost or stolen or mislaid or left somewhere so why not replace it with a subdermal RFID microchip?". Voila, "voluntary MOB"! Some more reasons why I believe that it will all start in Europe is because everything seems to have already happened there to enable the MOB to exist. I think this was another example of "function creep". The EU was established in 1992, beforehand came a succession of communities and treaties that bound the European countries increasingly closer. This - I believe and do stand to be corrected - was entirely a series of bureaucratic decisions without any input from the people, just their "representative" voting to establish "closer ties". Originally it was a political decision made by bureaucrats, the purpose of which was to create an economical and political bond and pledge that the original signatory countries would never again go to war with each other. The "one currency" is also pretty new, only having existed since 1 January 2002. The way I have heard this process described is "a slow motion coup d'etat" (sounds marginally better than "function creep" or "boiling frog syndrome"). As for "giving up their sovereignty", literature on the subject describes this as "pooling their sovereignty". (Gee, the power of semantics, or rather "newspeak"). The most dangerous thing about all this is their "Corpus Juris" - basically the setting up of a European public prosecutor with jurisdiction in criminal law throughout Europe. How the antichrist will just love all this. All the power put in one place just waiting for him to come in and take over. We have already seen how easy it is for "leaders" to impose "regulations" that were first seen as unpalatable by the population, by stealth. The antichrist will have time on his side and unlimited money. The EU already claims the authority to dictate indirect tax policies and direct taxes on individuals ("impose pecuniary obligation on persons other than states, shall be inforceable"). Now having considered all this, and realised how easily people can be duped into believing that "the common good must prevail" and how quickly people rally to a cry of "peace should prevail" (check 1 Thessalonians 5.3), when the antichrist declares his success in setting up a seven year peace treaty he will have everybody "eating out of his hand". Yes, it looks like it will all "fall into place" just so the Bible said it would, and the antichrist will probably come out of the EU and hence the mark of the beast also.

If you burn CDs they give off a horrible black smoke and smell awful. But you have to destroy them, so just melt them so that they cannot be played again and you could set them into a concrete path or something to decorate the garden. Or they could make quite good plant pots, or a decorative top to a table.

My husband and I used to have a pet goat which we kept on the hill behind our house. We kept it tethered to a long chain attached to stake in the ground which one of us would go up and move occasionally. The goat never became tame and wouldn't tolerate anybody going near him except me or my husband. One day it was pouring down with rain and quite a stormy night. My husband was not home and I could hear the goat bleating as he had obviously got his chain caught up round a bush or something. My daughter was about four at the time and my son two. I couldn't leave the goat the endure the weather all night and it was a moon-less night and "pitch black" so I got a torch and made my way up the hill to free him and lead him to the shed. When I got up the hill I found that the goat had entangled himself worse than I had thought and was in quite a bad temper after his battering from the rain. Just I untangled the chain, he became free enough to butt me out of the way with his horns and I ended up tumbling down the bank landing just about at the back door, the torch went the other way and I had no hope of finding it. Just after I had gone back up the bank as I still had to free the goat I hear the scream of a child coming from the house. I rushed down to find my kids standing by the microwave which was sparking badly and something inside it was on fire. It seemed that the kids had had some lollies in the fridge wrapped in tin foil so they had put them in the microwave to warm up and the tin foil had created a spark and the lollies had caught fire. I'm sure that the goat was laughing his head off about it too. I felt a total fool that day. The kids thought it was a big joke that I had been butted down the hill ("just like Jack and Jill" my daughter said), and the goat seemed to think it was a big joke that the kids set fire to the microwave. I'm sure animals can laugh - if they can, he certainly did.

Sure, you should "honour your parents" but that doesn't mean living with them always. I have come to believe that there should always be at least 100 miles between a family and the "in-laws". There is always friction there, and the "mother-in-law" joke has reached cliche status, but there is a reason for this. I have also found that real problems start when your kids reach teenage years. I realise that it is a long way away for you right now, but the way it is going your Mother in law will still be there when both children are older. 20 years ago my own Mother-in-law told me a story about her "having a special relationship with her grandmother" and going to her grandmother to tell her how much her own mother picked on her (even though my mother-in-law's own sister says that this story is erroneous) and my mother-in-law said to me "when your daughter is grown it will be just the same". Now she is trying very hard to make it come true, and taking advantage of the fact that my daughter is of an age where she is vulnerable to manipulation, and I am wary of this every time my daughter wants to go and visit her. I hesitate to tell you to "keep your distance" when you obviously get along well with your mother-in-law, but you must always put your own immediate family first. Is your mother-in-law in a position to get her own house?

There are few things that I find more offensive these days than coming into the room and the TV is on showing a film where people are swearing ALL the time. It seems to have got to the stage now where there are very few film that come out where the characters don't say "f#*% for literally every second or third word. I don't expect that people who come into my house will talk this way and if they do I don't care who they are and ask them to leave, and so I don't expect to be subjected to this by the television. If we walked into a shop or business and our ears were assailled with the f#*% word all the time we would soon lodge an objection with management and take our business elsewhere, so why do we put up with this rubbish? I would turn the TV off at this point, or switch to something not offensive, but unfortunately I don't have control over the TV. I have been told that these films are going for "reality", but I have a hard time believing that. I have heard more than one person say "but EVERYBODY swears". This is probably where they get that idea from - EVERYBODY on some TV programmes does swear. As for ratings and timing of commericials, now with the advent of the video recorder, it doesn't matter if an advertisement for the porn. channel is on during a film screened at 4.30 in the morning, it can be recorded and watched any time you or anybody else wants.

This is interesting: "Satan is no more evil than the head of MI5 or the prime minister, he says". So rephrase that a bit and say: "The head of MI5 or the prime minister is just as evil as satan". Yeah, that is probably true.

I get really offended when people tell me about something dishonest they they did, something they stole or some dishonesty they would want to do in a particular situation and then say "but you'd do it too, of course, wouldn't you", or "I'd be a fool not to, don't you think?" I don't like people assuming anything about me, particularly that as I only work in a factory that I am not very bright, or that I am dishonest. It is as if they are trying to justify their own behaviour by association. I think life would be a lot easier if we could all be more trusting of each other, and people would say plainly if you someone has offended them. The most offensive thing of all is when people are in superior postion to me (which is just about everybody I know now) and they say something that is obviously erroneous and expect me to believe it. Still, despite this, I believe that people are generally good and if they have a genuine love of God, he will take care of those things.

What do you think of these two news items? http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3752271a11,00.html and: http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/thepress/0,21...11a6009,00.html Somehow, with this last one, I don't think that the government is so much motivated by a desire to "help youth" as it is motivated by a far more sinister agenda. Anyway, it would be interesting to find out what others think.

I am not trying to say that there is any excuse at all not to visit our elderly relatives and appreciate them while they are here. And I am certainly not saying that "things are not always black and white" with people on this board and their relatives. But when I see someone not having a great deal to do with their elderly relatives I realise that there may be more to it than "meets the eye". Elderly parents can often "emotionally blackmail" their children into doing what they want, staying in town, or leaving it, working at a particular job or not taking a job that the parents might feel will "take the child too far away". One thing I have realised since my own kids have grown up is that children never "owe" their parents for giving birth to them and bringing them up and if you try and "emotionally manipulate" them you will only succeed in driving them away. More than 30 years ago now just after I first met my husband it was his 25th birthday, I came with him when he went to his parents' house to visit, the day before his birthday. I will always remember his mother' words to him: "so it's your birthday tomorrow then? Well just you remember that 25 years ago I was damn uncomfortable" (she was absolutely serious). I was horrified and whenever I have heard a mother try to hold her child responsible for (say) her stretchmarks, I cringe. Both his parents spent the last 30 years trying to manipulate him - an only child - (and as a result, our whole family) using "the will" as a carrot, or rather more a threat: "if you don't (do whatever) we will 'change the will'"! By now I have finally convinced him "you were never going to get anything out of 'the will' anyway" and his father is dead and his mother is 83 and living alone and none of us really want to see her. It is good to have a nice-natured, sweet elderly relative, but sometimes they are just not nice people to be around. I am now getting to the stage where I will might soon be in a position of "wanting family to visit and they never do", but I would far rather that they never come and visit than they do but resent it. As long as I know they are happy and I have done my best to ensure that, I will be happy. Jesus loves us unconditionally, so the least we can do is to love our children unconditionally as well. I also hope to leave my children whatever I have without putting conditions on it.

Yes, it sure is "legal" here. But that doesn't mean that it is ok. As you are probably all too aware, "legal" has nothing to do with "right". It has been legal for about four years now ever since our weirdo PM personally pushed it through legislation against overwhelming opposition. It was on her personal agenda and she surrounded herself with a handful of sympathetic MPs to make sure it got through in the House. The Bill to make it legal was sponsored by our famously openly gay and "vocal" MP, Tim Barnett (our PM is proud of the fact that there are four openly gay MPs in the House and one "transgender" MP and a couple of other MPs whom everybody knows are gay and they don't deny it - including herself - but they are not on record as being "officially" gay). Anyway, that is all by the by. What made me "stand up and take notice" about this was that prostitution is now considered to be "normal employment" and my daughter's friend attending a local polytechnic was given a "prostitution starter pack" and told it was a "good career for a girl". I just heard a radio news item about the story of the policewoman who worked as a prostitute and a "spokeswoman for the police" said "there is nothing wrong with being a prostitute and it has nothing to do with the police force". Scream! Please come back Lord!

I doubt if they will be convicted of "any wrongdoing", but they will not "get away with this" at all. God will be their judge and he knows and sees everything.

"....... deemed the nature of the secondary employment as compatible with policing ....." Gee, things have changed: Now prostitution is just "secondary employment" and it is also "compatible with policing". http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3738165a10,00.html

This is interesting: http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3737218a12,00.html

Doh! I did forget about that. They still haven't caught Osama and arent likely to. He will likely die of old age or illness before they catch him. I guess thats why I wonder why we are still there. The national security of Afghanistan is not really our concern is it? Especially when they are discussing re-implementing laws that were imposed by the Talliban which we are there to protect them from? wheres the sense in that? I can understand continuing to hunt for Osama Bin'ladin but I think the Afghan forces have had plenty of time to pull themselves together. Actually I remember distinctly shortly after "9.11" reading and hearing on the news that Osama Bin Laden was suffering from a kidney disorder and couldn't survive without regular medical treatment. He allegedly went to another country (sorry can't remember which one, although I have an idea it was Russia) to be treated and there was even a rumour at the time of him going to the US for treatment and then just leaving the country. Whether or not reports or sightings of him travelling were correct is largely irrlelevant (although it would support the theory that "catching Osama" was a "red herring"). Anyway, it would seem that he was quite ill about five years ago, so there is very little chance of him being still alive anywhere. What ever happened to that story? And how come everyone seems to believe that Osama is some sort of super man who continues to evade capture by America? I have got kind of cynical about this and think we have "straw man Osama". However, I have got to agree with what O'Dannyboy is saying about the Taliban. If Sar'iah law is to be re-introduced, what was the point of America even being there?

OK, I get the difference between deliberate sin and sin committed "on the spur of the moment". I struggled with the question as to why God heals some of us "from day one" and not others, i.e. some who may suffer from depression or be drug addicts or alcoholics or porn addicts or whatever, come out of the sin that is controlling their life, or are healed of the condition, immediately, while others are left to struggle with it on their own. New Christians can be very weak and where some find that as long as they have Christ in their life they can do anything, others feel just as fragile as before. So what if you are a drug addict and had "come to the Lord" but still had to struggle with ending this addiction on your own, and then you were actually in the process of lighting a joint or injecting yourself as you found you could not "just go cold turkey" and the rapture occurred or Jesus arrived again? Would he forgive you knowing what was "in your heart", or judge you for your sin and leave you behind? Thoughts?

Going back to the original question. If you were indulging in sin "at the time". Well I don't know. Isn't it said that "The Lord knows your heart"? So presumably the Lord would understand what you actually believed. However, that could cover a multitude of things too. Would the Lord forgive you and give you "the benefit of the doubt" and then ask you to account for your behaviour? Christians can never be perfect, what if you had lost your temper and were tired and were in the process of yelling at your child but that was not your usual behaviour? Any thoughts?

First off there is no mid-trib rapture. It doesn't happen til after the trib. Why would you hide if you had God on your side? A lot of people will be killed during the trib. and a lot of those people are going to christians. There's always bottled water. You can get world event's on TV or radio. OK so let's assume that there are Christians around during the tribulation - even the first 3.5 years as this is the time when the persecutions would logically occur. Now I am assuming that persecution of Christians would entail (among other things) imposing a mark of the beast without which you would be unable to indulge in commerce, i.e. lead an ordinary life, buy or sell, own any property, operate motor vehicles, hold down jobs as you would not be able to be paid without the MOB), get new jobs, get paid social welfare, rent property (even rent a video tape - not that you'd be able to watch it anyway as you wouldn't be able to buy the electricity to operate the video machine). So therefore you would not be able to watch anything on TV (as you would not be able to use a TV, that is if you had one and it had not be taken by a government baliff to pay your "fines"). I am assuming also that a "government" controlled by the antichrist would impose "fines" on those who refused to take the MOB as an "incentive" to cooperate - at first of course, then there would be death for those who won't take the MOB. We are told that the antichrist will be a "popular" ruler and the quickest way for him not to be popular is if he goes round killing Christians straight off. So my theory is that he will wait a while before implementing this policy. However, many Christians will die anyway before they are deliberately executed because they might starve to death or commit suicide because life is too hard and they don't know how to survive. So after all this is done, Christians would be forced to live by creating their own societies and living "outside the law" and growing their own food and tending their own animals. Of course, in this scenario, we would all have to move out of the cities. There would still be - for the first 3.5 years anyway - creeks, rivers and lakes so that takes care of the water. But TV or radio - absolutely not! These things take electricity or batteries, so unless there was a blackmarket in batteries, I don't see how this would be possible. We wouldn't even be able to buy newspapers, so a blackmarket in providing just about every commodity would have to exist. This is all in theory, but it is interesting and probably necessary to work out plans for all possibilities. Can anyone come up with something more logical and reasonable than all this?

I am going to play the game because I believe that we should discuss any possible scenario no matter how remote the possibility of it happening might be. You can't just go through life dismissing ideas and saying "that would never happen" - that is just boring. Personally I don't know whether or not I should believe in a pre-trib. rapture, a mid-trib. rapture, a post-trib. rapture or no rapture at all. Obviously I would like to believe in a rapture (at any time) but the idea that it is "just too convenient really gets in the way for me. And this would mean that Christians don't have to be terribly worried about anything "because we are going to be out of it anyway". Might be a pretty shallow viewpoint, I don't know. Also I find myself thinking "I don't want to be just raptured, I want to die normally". I am pretty old now, so if a rapture doesn't happen in the next 20 years or so I'm going to die anyway. Death is one thing that I am almost looking forward to doing, a lot of people I've known plus most of my original family have died and I want to know what it will be like. Yeah, I know, that is shallow. It seems that there is no doubt at all, though, that there will be a tribulation, and probably sooner rather than later. I am not afraid at all of Christians being persecuted. I think I will just cope with it and I am confident that I will not give up Jesus for the ability to get paid money and buy luxuries. I am not called "buckthesystem" for nothing, I am used to not cooperating with "rules". As for water, food and shelter. I don't know - I don't have a specific plan. I think it would make a difference if you lived in a Christian community. But then, I am not terribly concerned either as I am not convinced that I could or would survive the tribulation anyway. Doesn't it say "the dead in Christ will rise first and be judged", so I don't think it matters much.

You're wrong Nebula, I never said that I wanted American troops to leave Iraq. Indeed I don't believe that the problem is so simple that it would be solved by just withdrawing all the troops. So don't assume anything or accuse anybody of being a "liberal" and therefore "lower than snailslime" and "that says it all". I don't consider myself to be a liberal at all, but if to be concerned about human dignity or human life is to be a liberal, I might change. I just thought you seemed to be trivialising the deaths of families in Iraq and saying "well, that happens, nobody is to blame" and saying that there is nothing to be concerned about, if innocent families, or anybody else for that matter, get in the way of soldiers "playing around with grenade launchers". No, it doesn't "just happen". It is not as if grenade launchers spontaneously materialised in Iraq and equally as spontaneously exploded, killing people. Please don't take anything personally. I am not dis'ing America or Americans in any way, or bagging your troops or anything, I just think that we should all be honest and accountable for our actions.

Are you saying that the people in Iraq can expect "bad stuff" to happen to them merely because they live in Iraq? Perhaps just as by "driving on the highway" we are taking a risk, their risk is trying to live an ordinary life in an occupied country? If we were driving on the highway and our family was killed by (say) a highway patrolman playing round with his gun, would we just accept it and say "there is no way to avoid bad stuff happening and this family was on the highway where there is a risk of that happening" and we can't attach any accountability to the person playing round with his gun?

I can't find another, more elaborate, news item, but here is the gist: http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3733802a12,00.html Any comments?

I have a CD called "satisfaction" by Michael Battersby. It is some "traditional hymns" sung in a "jazzed up" version. There is "just a closer walk with me", "Oh, when the saints", "Abide with me", "Eagles wings", Since Jesus came into my heart", "all honour", "I love you Lord", "Guide me o thou great Jehovah", "satisfaction", "How great thou art", and "When I survey the wondrous cross". I just love that CD. And when I play it my son and his friends don't even recognise it as "Christian music" and complain about it.