buckthesystem

I have often heard "but there were no women apostles". But there was Junia who, it would seem, didn't walk with Jesus in his earthly ministry but she is recognised by most of the church fathers, as an apostle. Then there is Mary Magdalene who is considered an apostle by the early church because she is the first person that Jesus revealed himself to, after the resurrection, and he sent her to tell the deciples of the news. So Mary Magdalene was a "sent one". I think it is important to remember that a woman (Mary Magdalene) was the first person to see the risen Lord, and yet we are told "women should be silent". I'm not arguing that peoples' interpretation of scripture is wrong. I could well be the one who is wrong. But, for me anyway, this raises questions.

Although I have a lot of sympathy for you and it sounds like you have every right to be upset and your treatment, you DID walk out without paying. However mean this salon staff might be, they are running a business. And, I guess that means that they are obligated to do what you request, with your hair. And if they haven't done the job properly or it is not satisfactory to you they are under an obligation to fix it. But by walking out without paying, you are acting like judge and jury and saying "you did a bad job with my hair and I sentence you to not be paid for it". This has got to be wrong. I am not saying that you are totally in the wrong though, they certainly reacted very badly to you. I am just saying "walk a mile in someone else's shoes". If I come across as way too harsh or totally "out of line", please would someone tell me.

I haven't heard it before but it is a really good story. Can I copy it to email to my sister? Or would that be wrong? She would know, obviously, that I didn't write it?

So what about people wearing Christian wear when they aren't Christian? They might be wearing it to be facetious: Sort of to say "well it doesn't mean anything because you have a fish on your t-shirt, I do too". I have seen a range of "send up" t-shirts. Ones with very much "anti-Christian" messages on them. From a distance they look like normal Christian t-shirts but you have a closer look and they are quite different. It really used to mean something if somebody wore something like a crucifix pendant for example, until they became a "fashion statement" and "every man and his dog" was wearing one. Does that demean the whole thing?

I hope I am not seen as trivialising an issue that obviously concerns you, too much. When you say to your son "stay away from girls" (or words to that effect) he might take it to mean that either girls are bad and might corrupt him or he might see it that there is something mysterious about going out with girls that you are keeping from him and he might get all the more curious and perhaps resentful. I don't really see what harm there is with a friendship with a 14 yr old boy and a 13 yr old girl. Providing it is no more than a friendship. I look at my husband's grandparents. It seems they were "going with each other" since primary school and it turned into a happy and wonderful relationship for 70 odd years. What is so magic about age anyway?

PS to the above: Now, hopefully, the campaign of civil disobedience that UK people have talked about for the past couple of years, will begin. Tony Blair was just in NZ for a "mutual admiration society" talk with our PM. I only hope he hasn't talked that silly woman into foisting something like this on us. Unless anybody thinks I am "going over the top" in concern about this let me explain: After the formation of the "League of Nations", to be a fully fledged and voting member it was necessary to be an nation in our own right. NZ had never gained independence from Britain. At the time, Whitehall in its arrogance, declared NZ (and Canada, yes Canada is very much in this category too) to be independent. However, this was never followed up with legislation. Result; NZ (and Canada) is very much still "under the thumb" of Britain. Quite what this has to do with Christianity. I believe that as Christians we all have a responsibility to ensure that we continue to have as much freedom as possible, and we also have an obligation to fight evil "with every fibre of our being" where ever we see it. And this scheme by the EU/UK government is most definitely evil. If anyone disagrees, please let me know.

I have been following this issue for years, ever since it was first "mooted". There has been a MASSIVE campaign against it and the last I heard the "Minister of id cards" suggested that there should be a referendum on the issue. He has always claimed that "public opinion was on his side" despite the fact that it is clearly NOT! A referendum would have proved this beyond a shadow of a doubt. Anyway I found this news item which is short and clearly tells us what is to happen: "U.K. lawmakers have agreed to a compromise proposal that will see ID cards become mandatory for British passport holders by 2010. Previously the ID cards bill, which the House of Lords rejected five times over the past few weeks, required anyone renewing a passport to also receive an ID card by 2008. The amendments mean that until 2010, those renewing passports will be able to opt out of receiving an ID card but will still have their biometric and other personal details entered into the National Identity Register, the database which ID card opponents have objected to along with the issuing of the actual cards. In a vote on Wednesday, the House of Lords approved the amended proposal by 287 to 60. U.K. Home Secretary Charles Clarke said pricing for the ID cards will be determined once the bill becomes law. U.K. Home Office Minister Andy Burnham said he was "delighted" to back the amended proposal and added that it "preserves the integrity" of the National Identity Register while "meeting the concerns" of those who opposed mandatory ID cards. Sylvia Carr of Silicon.com reported from London." The protestors' "object of the exercise" was to abolish the stupid, sinister and very dangerous "national identity register" altogether. Nobody, clearly, cares at all about having yet another silly little plastic card in their wallets. EXCEPT OF COURSE PEOPLE DO OBJECT TO PAYING THE MASSIVE COST, WHICH EVEN NOW THE UK GOVERNMENT STILL REFUSES POINTBLANK TO IDENTIFY! Of course this is obviously partly the UK government giving in to blackmail by the European Union, and partly the UK civil service just wanting to exercise the incredible arrogance of the parasites that they are.

Just another case, I think, of too many politicians with too little to do, trying desperately to justify their existance - and of course their wopping great salary. We can start to have real ethics when we have some honesty in government. When you have people with absolutely no integrity creating legislation, how can you have confidence in anything they do? Let alone that legislation?

There is a lot of renewed publicity here about computer chips being compulsorily implanted in all new dogs by our government. This has brought up the inevitable "wait until the government decides that all children/old people/prisoners/prisoners released into the community/people with mental disorders/people with memory loss (delete as appropriate)". Then the warnings about "this is the start of the imposition of the MOB". However, this morning discussing it with some of my neighbours, one quoted from (I think) an email she'd received saying "the mark is required to enter by deception and breach of faith - or dishonesty", and another said that she believed "chips" would be the MOB because of the part in the Bible where it says "and there fell a noisome and grevious sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast...." and this would occur if somehow the batteries operating the microchip got broken. I am more confused than ever after this conversation. I still don't think the MOB will be the "computer chip" though as there is so much else that "covers all the bases". What do others think.

The big difference between these things that happen in America and the same sort of thing happening in Europe or UK is that the UE or the UK media or "powers that be" are quite open about the motive behind it all. In America that is quite often disguised. I was just reading an article about the creation of an EU driving licence, apparently (according to the article) it has all been "approved" (approved by whom though, it doesn't say) and "is expected to be passed into law this year). I only found the one article though, and as it is my habit to find at least two other sources before quoting something, I'm not being too fussed about it yet. I only hope this practice is not a mistake. Anyway, "an rfid windshield sticker for your insurance verification" is a horrifying thought. Would it be compulsory? The problem with that is that there are so many who will just accept it and many who will even think it is a good thing. However, function creep coming to a town near you. Roll over and take it at your peril.

I could be wrong about this, but I think the excuse given in this particular case, for imposing the death penalty, was that under shari'a law the death penalty does not exist for following Christ, but for "abandoning islam". That does not explain why people are killed for proselytising or simply practicing Christianity, in muslim countries. Will be praying for Abdul Rahman anyway, I really hope he is successful in getting out of the country.

I think people tend to take offence far too easily today. We all seem to be "walking on eggshells" trying to "choose our words carefully" so as not to offend, and as a result we don't get to say what we really mean. Though, of course, we do have to put thought into what we do and say and not blunder ahead with a speech that is obviously not appropriate. "How words can affect change" indeed. There is a whole industry today built around the twisting of words and creating "neutral" and "inclusive" statements to say absolutely nothing. We have to be careful that we continue to reject politically correct words and euphemisms and say what we actually mean. This is all within reason of course.

Christian wear is great for young people. I like to see people in the streets, or in offices or shops, wearing a Christian bracelet (WWJD I think) - it identifies people. I used to work in a supermarket and the cleaners would come in about 10 minutes before the shop closed, the boss of the cleaners who was there about 50% of the time had a baseball-type cap with WWJD on it that he always wore while working. It is amazing how many people asked him what the letters stood for. We were changing to go home at the factory where I work the other day and one guy whom I know is not a Christian had a tee shirt on with a picture of Jesus and a scrpture under his overalls. He said he had bought it at the thrift shop for $1 and "it was his size and anything would do to wear to work". I can't see, though, somebody buying Christian bracelets, dog tags or car ornaments from the thrift shop, unless of course they were Christian. I had a metal fish for my old car (which was wrecked). It wasn't magnetic so I had to glue it on and I managed to chisel it off, but the imprint of the fish still remained. My son used that car body to make up a stock car that he used to be in the "demolition derby". The scene of the wreck when the competition was finished was quite errie really, he came second in the derby and the car, at the end of it, had one tyre totally ripped off it, two wheels buckled, the radiator absolutely wrecked shooting steam everywhere and the body of the car basically looked like it had been through a car crusher. My son slipped out through what had been the front windscreen. Anyway the imprint of the fish was clearly visible, the light caught it and it really stood out as being the only thing that was not damaged. I don't have any Christian car ornaments any more as I feel that If I have that on my car I really should obey all the road rules and I know I don't - it is just the way it is, sometimes it is impractical to do so. So my only concession is a key ring with a fish on it. My daughter was working here and living with us last year and I gave her some keys to the house on a key ring which was a wooden cross, she said she found that awkward as she didn't know what to say if somebody asked her about it. She has "gone back" now and I noticed that she still has the key ring (she actually took her other keys off what they were on and put them on the "Cross" ring), so she must like it.

OK I'll admit that I'm not "that clued up" on exactly what is what in the Bible yet. But the only study I made on "end times" was thrown into confusion by finding some passages in the Bible that described speech by Jesus indicating that his return would be "in the lifetime of the listeners", and as this was 2000 years ago, my limited understanding believed that "a spanner had been thrown into the works" and until I heard a satisfactory explanation for this I would drop the whole subject. What do others think? The parts I found where Jesus indicates that he will return in the lifetime of the listeners, are: Mat. 16.28, 23.36, 24.34, 26.64 Mark 9.1, 13.30, 21.32 Luke 9.27 John 21.22 Or is it just me trying to wreck a perfectly good theory? Any thoughts?

Thanx "otherone" for the excellent RFID site. I found a couple of sites on this topic, but this one is by far the better one. I used to assume that everybody would automatically see this "emerging technology" as a threat to our freedom (everybody's freedom that is) but pretty recently I have come up against a very negative attitude just about anywhere I look. People either accept it as "inevitable" and say "yes, it is not good, but it is coming whether we like it or not, so we may as well get used to it" or "wow, isn't it wonderful". The saying "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear", I thought, had been ridiculed so many times that I wondered how anybody could seriously say it with a straight face. But, incredibly and horribly, people are still chanting it "ad nauseum" where ever you look. In my mind, people who repeat that phrase actually mean "I am an obsequious little slave and I will do anything to please my master - AND BY "MY MASTER" THEY DON'T MEAN GOD! I realise that these things are coming (in the case of Europe and the UK, they have already come) in America, Europe or the UK and we're kinda "behind the times" in NZ. But I am under absolutely no illusions, I realise that whatever works (or doesn't work for that matter) in EU, UK or US WILL BE HERE IN NZ TOMORROW. Also, do you think the current "terrorist paranoia" in America will last for ever, or do I just have to "wait it out". It would be interesting to visit America, but I can't as I don't want to be fingerprinted just to enter a country. So, how about campaigning to get rid of this ridiculous requirement. BTW if I was a terrorist I would have absolutely no problem with supplying my dabs to "customs" or "homeland security" - or what ever the dep't is. Do you, or anybody else, think that the "requirement" for all people who enter America to be fingerprinted has hurt the tourist trade in America? I am also totally staying away from EU or UK and they are "flirting" with "other" biometrics right now and there is a lot to be said for principle. BTW although I am never likely to have a motor vehicle that is new enough to come with the "blackbox" technology, If I ever do have a vehicle where it is fitted (there might come a law that says that a "blackbox" is required to be fitted as part of a "warrant of fitness" check) I will be disconnecting it and discarding it within the hour. "People power" should never be underestimated.

It seems that a lot of you have accepted that government has the right to do this. It is theft. Pure and simple. "Taxing a population" is a whole other matter. But taking money, just because you can, and you sure don't need it but want to deprive others of it has got to be immoral. The Bible tells us that we should not steal. Period. That does not mean that we have the right instead to delegate the power to steal to other - government employees. It is actually worse than that, as: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1222-04.htm or http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/sto...sp?story=674001 or http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/007712.php or http://www.7gen.com/blog/freedom/privacy/b...independent/944 or http://www.mindfully.org/Technology/2005/M...-Car23dec05.htm The several sites are just to prove that it not only a "mooted" thing, or a thing publicised by just one newspaper, but a definite thing that is going ahead. I recently found an article saying that this technology had been "exported" to America from Europe and "trials" were to commence at the end of the year in certain states, but I just can't find that article. If I had an hour to spare I probably could find it though if anyone wants. Has anyone else seen anything like this? I'm sure you will see that there is a lot more at stake than just "who should pay for the upkeep of the roads" (isn't that what people pay taxes for anyway?)

About an hour ago I said much the same as I am going to say here, on the thread "do we have a responsibility for others?". Anyway, I thought it would be more appropriate if I put this on another thread altogether. It might get more attention. Would someone please point it out to me if it is not acceptable though, to repeat things like this, I really don't want to annoy anyone!! I have been thinking about this a lot lately and I seem to be unfairly blaming something that "50cdog" said on the other thread, but it is just that he used the "right" words. "50c Dog" was saying that his father thought of himself as a Christian but only had "head knowledge". I saw this and saw something in myself as well, I "only have head knowledge" too. Nothing else to go by that tells me that God is in my life, only my saying that he is. How arrogant is that? I have read of, listened to and heard of other peoples' testimonies of "dramatic conversions" and some other have heard God "speak" to them as surely as if he was next to them. I have prayed and spoken to God, but he has never talked back to me. Things have happened that I have put down to "God's intervention", but I have suddenly thought that maybe that was an aberration. Nearly three years ago we had a family business that failed. We had to sell the house we'd lived in for 25 years and we moved, eventually to this town where we have been able to get another house and find work and hopefully will settle for ever. Just after we realised that we had to move, we both wanted to live "out in the sticks" so we bought a caravan, left our youngest with my sister and moved "down south" and lived "out in the sticks" (or as far "out in the sticks" as you can get in NZ that is). Just before we left I parked my car in the driveway and walked behind the car, it rolled backward knocking me over and badly burned my leg and back. It was totally my fault as I took the car out of gear and didn't pull up the handbrake before walking behind it to check the mail box. This meant that I couldn't just leap into finding work right away, I had to get over the accident. Anyway, while we were in our caravan with our dog and cat, my husband spent most of his time fishing and I had a lot of time on my hands to read books. I had read my mother's "journal" about how she became a Christian and how wonderful it was which I had found when we were packing up to sell the house. The journal had lain in a draw for 23 years before that but I didn't even get to finish it because the pages were mistakenly used for packing because I stupidly left it with a pile of scrap paper. Reading this had inspired me to seek out a number of books on Christianity, and eventually the Bible. This is the only reason that I decided to become a Christian. I had just finished reading one book in particular and I looked up and said to myself "it is all true". So, after that I sought out a church, but realised that we still had to "be real" and find work. My husband is an electrician but hadn't worked as one for a while, he applied for a job on the "off chance" in this town - even though we'd never been here before and had no connection with it - and he got the job and fitted in with it "as if it was made for him". The firm even rented us a house for cheap. I, on the other hand, "couldn't settle" and went through four jobs (each for about five months, and then resigning) until I found this one that seems to be OK. We have managed to buy another house now (even though we're going to have to work until we're 90 to pay the mortgage) and our youngest has also found work here and moved in with us. I thanked the H/S for providing all that and helping us. Yet suddenly my life experiences seem so incredibly trivial and I am wondering if God is really there or if I have made the whole thing up to "rationalise" things in my own mind. Please help anyone as your opinions and/or idea would be really appreciated right now.

Thanx for your input 50cdog. You say that your father "thinks he is a Christian but only has head knowledge". Gee, when I read that it kinda scared me and I thought "well, I only have head knowledge about being a Christian too". Maybe I am deluding myself and I am not 'saved' at all. Reading posts from others it seems that a lot of people (and people whose testimonies I've heard from their mouths, read about or heard on the radio etc.) either have a miraculous conversion where they can be absolutely sure that Christ is in their lives (like - say - Marnie), or "hear" from God just as surely as if he was in the room with them. If I'm going to be absolutely honest I have to admit that I only decided to be a Christian because I read my mother's diary (my mother was a committed Christian and was converted about two years before she died) 24 years after it was written. This lead me to seek out various books on the subject and I concurred that "it was all true" very suddenly and then sought the Bible. Come to think of it, this all sounds a bit presumptuous and maybe I'm just an interloper. For what it is worth I must say that the book that "tipped me over the edge" in proving to myself that Christianity was worthwhile was "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. 50cdog you also mention "the Christian life". This is terrible, I'm beginning to realise how ignorant I am, I don't even know what that is. I have gone through some really "rocky" times in the past two and a half years or so and where we thought we might lose everything, but something has always "come up" at the last minute. Each time I thanked the H/S for it, but I could be totally wrong. Help, anyone! What should I do? Ideas urgently needed.

Apart from my older sister I am the only one in my family who considers themself to be a Christian. Somehow I accept that as the others live some distance apart there is very little I can do and it up to them to find the Lord (if that is, indeed, destined for them). But my husband and kids are a bit closer - although my youngest son is the only one who lives at home. I feel a responsibility towards them to share what I have found but I find I am easily discouraged. Am I "letting the side down"? Whenever I have talked about it with my husband, I find he is very "tolerant" and "polite" and just says "that is great, but I am not ready" or "it is not for me" (or words to that affect) and my son makes silly remarks about "cults" and pretends that he "has the wrong end of the stick" and even is embarrassed to admit to anyone he knows that his mother goes to church. He works "out in the bush" and gets transported every day by the "work van". He was getting dropped off one day and my car was in the parked at the end of the driveway with a Bible clearly visible on the back "parcel shelf". He says that he has been getting remarks about it ever since and gets called "God boy" - I don't know whether I believe this or whether he is just being facetious. Anyway, I find I cannot stand the thought of them not "being saved". And sometimes I wonder if it is selfish to be concerned with my salvation when they might be "lost". Please help. Any ideas?

Just a bit of picking peoples' brains here. Ideas or opinions and what people think about this topic. Is life supposed to be nothing but a major trial for us, an ordeal to be just "got through" until we reach the end? And then we can die knowing that our family still have to "endure" until they too, reach their end? I too, work at a menial job which I know I don't do very well, but my employers are good and don't ever complain or say that I'm not "up to scratch" - I just know that I'm not very good (in fact my employers have gone the other way and tried to tell me that I am a "good worker". I can't figure out why they would do this). This makes things pretty hard for my workmates and I don't get on very well at all, it is not their fault it is mine. The difference between me and Jeffnevins is that I am not educated at all and totally incapable of doing anything else. Nebula is pretty right. It all sounds like depression. I know that is what I get, but it doesn't make it any easier. This is compounded by the fact that my youngest son, at age 20, lives at home and I can see him making all the wrong choices. He seems to have chosen the career he wants and is good at it. He is a logger and really wants to be a logger, but he does things like spending $11,000 on a truck and then getting drunk and letting his unlicenced friend drive him home and turn the corner too soon into our driveway "writing off" the truck. Losing his only jersey and then having to go out in the cold in a tee-shirt because he didn't think to buy another one. Then he puts holes in all his socks and runs out of socks to wear and blames everyone else for it. My husband just shrugs it off, but I get upset and think that maybe it is my fault. I feel a responsibility for him but don't know what to do or say. Anyway, I'm rambling. Do others think that life is supposed to be just an endurance? But Jeff, my heart goes out to you and I am praying for you. Hang in there and have faith.

Hazzard you say "certain countries will make war on him at the very time he is supposed to be ruling the world". It would be interesting to know what countries these are. Then we could go there. A theory is that the "Beast" to be worshipped is not a man, or even an entity, but money and great power. Not just money to sustain life, but gambling in the hope of reaping large amounts of money or "playing the stock market" also in the hope of gaining large amounts of money. Or complete hedonism, worshipping yourself and devoting your entire life to gaining pleasure and luxury for yourself. This would fit in with the "id card", using an id card to enable you to complete financial transactions. It will all be pretty simple and even rational to have a society where everybody is given the choice whether or not they want "the mark" and/or "to worship the beast", or be killed. What about an elderly person with Alzheimers disease who might physically cooperate with having the MOB imposed on them, but can have absolutely no idea or understanding of what it is all about? Just food for thought.

I cannot believe that a just God would condemn thousands of people to be slaves of satan because they were literally held down and forcibly branded (as I can evision happening with - say - prisoners, political 'dissidents', mental patients, children, and many others) or drugged and branded with satan's mark while they are anesthetised. Or even if people have been tricked into receiving the "mark" and they genuinely didn't realise what it was, will God condemn them? It seems that God wants everybody to eventually be saved and it is his hope that all will come to him, so why would he throw out those who would have chosen him, but have been "kidnapped"? Surely if you want loyal followers and you take them by force or trick them, they are not really loyal followers and will "take the first opportunity to run". If we are to believe this idea then we are condemning an entire generation of people to perdition because they live in the "time of technology". Would a just God condemn a young person who made it clear that they would chose God over satan, just because they have controlling parents?

Being the hopeless cynic that I am I have to cast doubt on the integrity of the "law enforcement officers" for wanting this dna. The stated motive (i.e. to prosecute whoever impregnated the child) seems worthy enough, but having a sample of phoetal tissue also provides a sample of the girl's own dna. Now why do law enforcement officers want this? Can they be trusted to destroy it after their stated purpose has been achieved? Is what it says in the article the ONLY MOTIVE for wanting a dna sample from phoetal tissue? I fully expect a response of "How can anyone doubt the integrity of someone trying to help children". But it must be realised that things are not always what they seem.

I was discussing with a friend this morning when Jesus comes again and she said to me "how do you think we will know? Will we see the light first?", her young son said "no, we will hear the engine". My friend said "Jesus will not be driving a car, he will be riding on a cloud". "Wrong!" I said "Jesus will be driving a Holden with a V8". My friend's husband intervened and said "I think Jesus will have a motorbike, probably a BMW" Thus ensued an interesting, even if somewhat daft, conversation. We (more or less) agreed in the end that Jesus would drive a Holden V8, and will definitely have "kept up with the times" just as 2000 years ago he rode a donkey because that was what was expected of someone at that time. Any thoughts or views that we hadn't factored in?

Absolutely. Although I have heard people say "you have to take scripture absolutely literally and take out of it what someone at the time it was written would have understood it to mean" there is so much that people of that time just would not have understood, or believed, but that are explainable by today's technology (simple things like "millions of people will be able to see" - or words to that effect - but now we have TV cameras). Biometric id schemes are pretty much widespread throughout the world now and come into effect in a lot of places in a short time. I have read claims that NZ "has not adopted biometric id" but in 1998 we had the "digi-id-driving licence" foisted, dishonestly, on us. One thing that all these schemes will have in common is that people will not be able to "buy or sell" without the biometric national id card. Could be wrong, but it is worth debate.