Jaime Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='KnightofChrist' date='02 July 2010 - 11:27 PM' timestamp='1278127637' post='2137231'] Not if we should obey God rather than man. [/quote] well I get that's where we disagree. This is all opinion Knight. There isn't anything you're going to find that's definitive on the subject of praying or not praying for specific people who request that you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='Selah' date='02 July 2010 - 11:25 PM' timestamp='1278127537' post='2137229'] But hot stuff, isn't it important to pray for the souls of the unsaved and those who need Christ? I guess I just don't understand where you're coming from. [/quote] OF COURSE! and I do that all the time! I pray for unbelievers. I pray for my enemies I pray for the souls that might still be unsaved! But in most cases enemies, unbelievers and unsaved folks have not specifically requested that I leave them out of my prayers. I don't understand why this is so confusing. Christopher Hitchens is on record saying [list][*]He does not believe in God[*]If he's wrong he'd never show allegiance to the God of Christians[*]He does not want anyone to pray for him[/list]This is taking a pretty solid stance. I'd prefer he didn't but he has every right to hold these beliefs. God gives him the right to freely choose! Has anyone who is being critical of my stance been forced to believe in Jesus? I'd wager the answer is no. Every single person here who is reading this CHOSE to be in relationship with God. No one coerced you! No one did anything against your will to make you believe. He has the same right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marie-Therese Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='hot stuff' date='02 July 2010 - 11:10 PM' timestamp='1278126635' post='2137225'] Where is the arrogance? I've never suggested that you or anybody else can't pray for the guy. I've never put down anybody's desire to pray for Hitchens (not that the same courtesy has been returned) I said that I struggled with the idea of praying for a man who has explicitly asked not to be prayed for. That is all I've said on the matter. And quite frankly there is nothing I've said that warrants your criticism. As far as your example of a man committing suicide, you're comparing apples to salmon. The Church acknowledges that a person committing suicide is most likely not a rational state of mind. The Church does not say the same for someone who actively rejects God's grace. As far as Rexi goes, his statement of "Well there is nothing I can teach you then" is rude and disrespectful. One, I'm not looking to be taught anything, I'm sharing an issue I've struggled with. B) The likelihood that Rex has anything to teach me is about as promising as Winchester not being adorable at any given moment. The only thing that I found annoying about it is the fact that I've ever expended any energy defending the twerp when he first came on the board as a 12 year old. Nihil and I were having a perfectly calm and rational discussion. there was no arrogance. And trust me Marie, I know when I'm being arrogant on a thread! This was one of the few discussions where I wasn't. [/quote] I accept your argument as well as your position, I simply disagreed with it. I was never critical of you, only of the position you were arguing. If you want to see arrogance, look in the post above where you call Rex a twerp. Look back and see where you told him you didn't need his help because you were "older and wiser." Whether you are or aren't is beside the point. The fact is that, as that older, wiser person, you should be mindful of the example you set. Calling a fellow member a twerp because you don't like his tone is simply uncalled for, especially because to me it smacks of schoolyard name calling. If you want to direct his attention to his tone or his words, admonish him gently and with the position of being one of his elder brethren, not as someone who is acting like he's offended by the prospect of a young guy telling him anything. I'm 34 years old. There are loads of times that I will defer to Rex because he is more learned in some aspects than I. That is not because I am unintelligent or lacking in education. I'm not too old to learn something. I am not trying to pee in your cornflakes, Jai[i][/i]me, really I'm not. I simply call it as I see it. I beg pardon if I offended or overstepped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='Marie-Therese' date='02 July 2010 - 11:43 PM' timestamp='1278128637' post='2137235'] I accept your argument as well as your position, I simply disagreed with it. I was never critical of you, only of the position you were arguing. If you want to see arrogance, look in the post above where you call Rex a twerp. Look back and see where you told him you didn't need his help because you were "older and wiser." Whether you are or aren't is beside the point. The fact is that, as that older, wiser person, you should be mindful of the example you set. Calling a fellow member a twerp because you don't like his tone is simply uncalled for, especially because to me it smacks of schoolyard name calling. If you want to direct his attention to his tone or his words, admonish him gently and with the position of being one of his elder brethren, not as someone who is acting like he's offended by the prospect of a young guy telling him anything. I'm 34 years old. There are loads of times that I will defer to Rex because he is more learned in some aspects than I. That is not because I am unintelligent or lacking in education. I'm not too old to learn something. I am not trying to pee in your cornflakes, hot stuff, really I'm not. I simply call it as I see it. I beg pardon if I offended or overstepped. [/quote] When a 16 year old takes the position of "Well there's nothing I can teach you" then he's assuming he CAN teach me something. That is inappropriate and arrogant. and yes I called him a twerp because I am disappointed that i spent any time trying to calm folks down when a little 12 year old Thomas More showed up and annoyed the croutons out of most of the folks around this place. I've gently corrected Tyler in the past. I know the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='hot stuff' date='02 July 2010 - 10:53 PM' timestamp='1278129209' post='2137236'] When a 16 year old takes the position of "Well there's nothing I can teach you" then he's assuming he CAN teach me something. That is inappropriate and arrogant. and yes I called him a twerp because I am disappointed that i spent any time trying to calm folks down when a little 12 year old Thomas More showed up and annoyed the croutons out of most of the folks around this place. I've gently corrected Rexi in the past. I know the results. [/quote] It would be nice if you could at least quote me correctly. [quote name='Resurrexi' date='02 July 2010 - 04:54 PM' timestamp='1278107672' post='2137093'] If you don't see how one of the most prominent anti-theist writers in the world is an enemy of monotheism, I don't think I can help you. [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='Resurrexi' date='02 July 2010 - 11:57 PM' timestamp='1278129450' post='2137237'] It would be nice if you could at least quote me correctly. [/quote] yes it really was a dramatic misquote. Its called paraphrasing kiddo. Now you can either get your feathers ruffled, or join the discussion in a mature fashion. You haven't answered the question I posed. How do you come to the conclusion that Christopher Hitchens is my enemy? Is it simply because he doesn't believe what I believe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='hot stuff' date='02 July 2010 - 10:41 PM' timestamp='1278128466' post='2137233'] OF COURSE! and I do that all the time! I pray for unbelievers. I pray for my enemies I pray for the souls that might still be unsaved! But in most cases enemies, unbelievers and unsaved folks have not specifically requested that I leave them out of my prayers. I don't understand why this is so confusing. Christopher Hitchens is on record saying [list][*]He does not believe in God[*]If he's wrong he'd never show allegiance to the God of Christians[*]He does not want anyone to pray for him[/list]This is taking a pretty solid stance. I'd prefer he didn't but he has every right to hold these beliefs. God gives him the right to freely choose! Has anyone who is being critical of my stance been forced to believe in Jesus? I'd wager the answer is no. Every single person here who is reading this CHOSE to be in relationship with God. No one coerced you! No one did anything against your will to make you believe. He has the same right. [/quote] I strongly believe that this "solid stance" would change radically if he actually had reason to believe. One saying that "if I'm wrong I still won't worship Him" really means nothing at all. It's just an arrogant man making a grandiose gesture born entirely from his lack of respect for theists in general and Christians in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='hot stuff' date='02 July 2010 - 11:01 PM' timestamp='1278129687' post='2137239'] yes it really was a dramatic misquote. Its called paraphrasing kiddo. Now you can either get your feathers ruffled, or join the discussion in a mature fashion. You haven't answered the question I posed. How do you come to the conclusion that Christopher Hitchens is my enemy? Is it simply because he doesn't believe what I believe? [/quote] I will present my argument in a syllogistic fashion. Anyone who is anti-theist is an enemy of the Catholic Church Christopher Hitchens is opposed to thiesm. Ergo, Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of the Catholic Church. Anyone who is an enemy of the Catholic Church is also an enemy of each of her members. Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of the Catholic Church. Ergo, Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of each of the members of the Catholic Church. Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of each of the members of the Catholic Church. hot stuff is a member of the Catholic Church. Ergo, Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of hot stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='03 July 2010 - 12:05 AM' timestamp='1278129951' post='2137241'] I strongly believe that this "solid stance" would change radically if he actually had reason to believe. One saying that "if I'm wrong I still won't worship Him" really means nothing at all. It's just an arrogant man making a grandiose gesture born entirely from his lack of respect for theists in general and Christians in particular. [/quote] That's fine Nihil but you know objectively that there are some people who will know that Christ exists and reject him. They will know that God wants to love them and they will hate him for it. This is not conjecture, this is fact. There are some people who will have nothing to do with God. And God, out of unconditional and unbelievable love, gives those people permission to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='hot stuff' date='02 July 2010 - 11:08 PM' timestamp='1278130124' post='2137245'] That's fine Nihil but you know objectively that there are some people who will know that Christ exists and reject him. They will know that God wants to love them and they will hate him for it. This is not conjecture, this is fact. There are some people who will have nothing to do with God. And God, out of unconditional and unbelievable love, gives those people permission to do so. [/quote] Maybe so. I suppose I'm getting sidetracked though. In any case, I know you would also agree that right up until his death he's still not beyond salvation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='Resurrexi' date='03 July 2010 - 12:06 AM' timestamp='1278130007' post='2137243'] I will present my argument in a syllogistic fashion. Anyone who is anti-theist is an enemy of the Catholic Church Christopher Hitchens is opposed to thiesm. Ergo, Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of the Catholic Church. Anyone who is an enemy of the Catholic Church is also an enemy of each of her members. Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of the Catholic Church. Ergo, Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of each of the members of the Catholic Church. Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of each of the members of the Catholic Church. hot stuff is a member of the Catholic Church. Ergo, Christopher Hitchens is an enemy of hot stuff. [/quote] The failure in your argument is the first line. Simply because he disagrees with the Church does not make him an enemy of her. He states his opinion to anyone who listens. He does not advocate for laws against the Church. He simply holds an opinion. He has killed no Catholics. He has not called for the death of any Catholics. He has not infringed on anyone's ability to celebrate their faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='03 July 2010 - 12:16 AM' timestamp='1278130573' post='2137248'] Maybe so. I suppose I'm getting sidetracked though. In any case, I know you would also agree that right up until his death he's still not beyond salvation. [/quote] Absolutely! I would love to see Hitchens change his mind. Maybe millions of Christians praying for him will cause that to happen and he will come out and say so. In that case I will be happy to admit that my struggles on the issue were unwarranted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 I think I'll bow out here. There's not really any more to be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='03 July 2010 - 12:20 AM' timestamp='1278130834' post='2137251'] I think I'll bow out here. There's not really any more to be said. [/quote] arrogant jerk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 [quote name='hot stuff' date='02 July 2010 - 11:34 PM' timestamp='1278128074' post='2137232'] well I get that's where we disagree. This is all opinion Knight. There isn't anything you're going to find that's definitive on the subject of praying or not praying for specific people who request that you don't. [/quote] We must pray even for those whom persecute us! We are to pray for those that beat us, stone us, or even crucify us. Why are we called to pray for those that hate us, even unto death at their hands? Yet if they just ask us not to pray for them we dont have to? St. Stephen as he was stoned to death prayed for those murdering him. In obedience to Christ prayed for those that hated him. Would he not need have prayed if they yelled back at him "Shut up Christian we demand ( request ) you not pray God have mercy on us!" If those who crucified our Blessed Lord "requested" He not pray for them. Should Christ have not prayed "Father forgive them for they know not what they do"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts