A Flag in the Sand - Non Denominational

[Jodie]

If they (non-denoms) choose not to hear the truth, then we must let it be. It is their choice to turn from the truth as God has given us all the gift of “free will” If however, we see an opportunity to liberate them with the truth, then it is our duty and obligation to minister the truth.

God Bless All!

 

[Maccabees]

Non-denoms are hung up on not being a denomiation.
Ok your not labeled.
However your independant from any other source and free to pick and choose your doctinre according to your interpretation of the Bible decided by your pastor usually who the last time I checked was one man that was not given the power to bind and loose as per apostolic succession.

The churchs in the Bible were not independant whether you were in ROme, Galatia, Ehpehsus, they were all binded by the church leadership the apostle in union with Peter when Peter changed the rules see Acts they were bound to it there was no independant church going according to their indenpent view of scripture. All the churches were united and one as Paul said may their be no divisions among you. As a non-denom you have didvided yourself away from the rest of Christianity you are a long ranger not bound to the rules by the Church Jesus founded.

 

[Peace-bwu]

Mickey:

Hi Peace-bwt,

Excellent post! Numerous times, the sacrament of infant baptism has been beautifully interpreted for Dave. Yet over and over and over again, he says, “prove to me in the Bible where babies were baptized, you can’t!” I really don’t think he reads the Catholic responses. Are we wasting our time talking to Dave? I don’t know.

Good to know, I haven’t been to this site for awhile. Maybe I’m wasting my limited time with Dave, feeding pearls to swine? Pharoh had a strong will and look where that got him, apparently washed away in the Red Sea. When Christ’s teaching about eating His body were “too difficult to accept,” many His followers turned away and discontinued to follow Him. Oh well, maybe it will help someone else who is reading.
Thanks for giving me the scoop!

 

[oudave]

Peace-bwu:

Good to know, I haven’t been to this site for awhile. Maybe I’m wasting my limited time with Dave, feeding pearls to swine? Pharoh had a strong will and look where that got him, apparently washed away in the Red Sea. When Christ’s teaching about eating His body were “too difficult to accept,” many His followers turned away and discontinued to follow Him. Oh well, maybe it will help someone else who is reading.
Thanks for giving me the scoop!

Hi
It doesnt supprise me that you call me a swine, I’m sure that you have other loving names you call others who don’t agree with you.
I am only here to give my opinion and I’m not an opinion that will just go away because of you or anyone’s name calling.
In Him and Him Only, Dave.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

 

[Church_Militant]

oudave:

Hi
It doesnt supprise me that you call me a swine, I’m sure that you have other loving names you call others who don’t agree with you.
I am only here to give my opinion and I’m not an opinion that will just go away because of you or anyone’s name calling.
In Him and Him Only, Dave.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

Boy! You are really outta whack today aren’t you??

You know full well what that man is refering to and that it means not to waste time with those who ridicule and deride the Good News that we share. As I’ve said before Dave, if you wanna talk. talk, but don’t be aggressive and insulting like that.

Here’s the actual passage and its context so you can be real clear about what it says… It’s Matthew 7.

1 Judge not, that you may not be judged, 2 For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 Any why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye? 4 Or how sayest thou to thy brother: Let me cast the mote out of thy eye; and behold a beam is in thy own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

6 Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you. 7 Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. 8 For every one that asketh, receiveth: and he that seeketh, findeth: and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened. 9 Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he reach him a stone? 10 Or if he shall ask him a fish, will he reach him a serpent?

11 If you then being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him? 12 All things therefore whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you also to them. For this is the law and the prophets. 13 Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. 14 How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it! 15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16 By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.

21 Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity. 24 Every one therefore that heareth these my words, and doth them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock.

26 And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand, 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof. 28 And it came to pass when Jesus had fully ended these words, the people were in admiration at his doctrine. 29 For he was teaching them as one having power, and not as the scribes and Pharisees.

Pax vobiscum,
P.S. to Mickey and Peace-bwu…http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/dontknow.gif you may be right.

 

[TheGarg]

Little Mary:

…and FURTHERMORE…

How to handle it when I get that “talk to the hand” attitude.

It takes all my strength to keep my temper in check.

Is it better, sometimes, to just walk away, even if it means giving them the last word?? :banghead:

When someone tells me “Talk to the Hand!” i usaully reply with “Its about time i got some intelligent conversation!”

 

[Church_Militant]

TheGarg:

When someone tells me “Talk to the Hand!” i usaully reply with “Its about time i got some intelligent conversation!”

Originally Posted by Little Mary

…and FURTHERMORE…

How to handle it when I get that “talk to the hand” attitude.

It takes all my strength to keep my temper in check.

Is it better, sometimes, to just walk away, even if it means giving them the last word??

Yeah …and THEN just turn on your heel and walk away…
Pax vobiscum,

 

[StubbleSpark]

oudave:

Hi
It doesnt supprise me that you call me a swine, I’m sure that you have other loving names you call others who don’t agree with you.
I am only here to give my opinion and I’m not an opinion that will just go away because of you or anyone’s name calling.
In Him and Him Only, Dave.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

See, now this is what I am talking about. This self-righteous man who single-handedly thinks his sentimental interpretation of Sacred Scripture somehow refutes 2000 years of the brightest minds in the East AND West discoursing on that Scripture waltzes in and accuses Catholics of doing what he himself is doing.

By blatantly ignoring well-established rhetorical devices and quotes from the very Scripture he claims to uphold, he thinks he can make an appeal to mere sentimentality and gain the superior and righteous ground.

Dave has no idea of the context in which the “pearls before swine” quote was said because he did not read ANY of the responses to his last post. WHICH IS WHY PEACE BWU FELT LIKE S/HE WAS WASTING TIME TRYING TO TALK TO DAVE IN THE FIRST PLACE!! (Those were really good arguments, too!)

For crying out loud, Dave! No one is going to feel sorry for you because we react negatively to YOUR LACK OF COMMON COURTESY!

I would tell you how to be more courteous and Christian in your exchanges, but as your wanton display of neglect has already shown, you lack all respect for the people you portend to lead to Christ and you would not read this post anyway!!

Wait! Why am I even bothering?

Hello, brick wall … really? Wow, you are like so much more responsive than that Dave guy…

 

[Little_Mary]

TheGarg:

When someone tells me “Talk to the Hand!” i usaully reply with “Its about time i got some intelligent conversation!”

Thank you! Hope you dont’ mind if I use that one!!

 

[oudave]

StubbleSpark:

See, now this is what I am talking about. This self-righteous man who single-handedly thinks his sentimental interpretation of Sacred Scripture somehow refutes 2000 years of the brightest minds in the East AND West discoursing on that Scripture waltzes in and accuses Catholics of doing what he himself is doing.

By blatantly ignoring well-established rhetorical devices and quotes from the very Scripture he claims to uphold, he thinks he can make an appeal to mere sentimentality and gain the superior and righteous ground.

Dave has no idea of the context in which the “pearls before swine” quote was said because he did not read ANY of the responses to his last post. WHICH IS WHY PEACE BWU FELT LIKE S/HE WAS WASTING TIME TRYING TO TALK TO DAVE IN THE FIRST PLACE!! (Those were really good arguments, too!)

For crying out loud, Dave! No one is going to feel sorry for you because we react negatively to YOUR LACK OF COMMON COURTESY!

I would tell you how to be more courteous and Christian in your exchanges, but as your wanton display of neglect has already shown, you lack all respect for the people you portend to lead to Christ and you would not read this post anyway!!

Wait! Why am I even bothering?

Hello, brick wall … really? Wow, you are like so much more responsive than that Dave guy…

Hi
How can you call me self-righteous when I’m the one who is being refered to as swine? first of all in order to even use that verse you must first be casting pearls. Usally when someone resorts to name calling it’s because they have run out of legs to stand on.
In Him and Him Only, Dave.

 

[StubbleSpark]

oudave:

Hi
How can you call me self-righteous when I’m the one who is being refered to as swine? first of all in order to even use that verse you must first be casting pearls. Usally when someone resorts to name calling it’s because they have run out of legs to stand on.
In Him and Him Only, Dave.

Being specious and manipulative is hardly showing Christ’s love, Dave. No one called you swine. The metaphorical device was used to highlight the repugnant way in which you condescendingly try to discourse with us dumb Catholics.

If someone said to me “You kinda look like Mel Gibson,” did that person say that I AM Mel Gibson? No. Are they confused about whether or not I am in fact Mel Gibson? No. Does that make my name Mel Gibson? No.

You want to talk about having no legs to stand on, Dave, go and read the responses to your original hit-and-run and respond to them.

Also, you might be compelled to respond to this: ALL Christians have, since the time of Christ, practiced infant baptism. Even to this day, Martin Luther’s Church (remember him? He is kind of important to the development Protestantism) STILL practices infant baptism. That means there are only a handful of Christians in the modern world who self-righteously divorce themselves from God’s Tradition. In ALL OTHER CHURCHES, CATHOLIC, ORTHODOX, ANGLICAN (includes EPISCOPAL), LUTHERAN, PRESBYTERIAN, UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, (and others) STILL PRACTICE OR ACCEPT THE IDEA OF INFANT BAPTISM.

Only the Weslyan, Southern Baptist Church and American Baptist Churches reject infant Baptism.

religionfacts.com/christianity/denominations/comparison_charts/practices.htm

Why have you let your late traditions of man come between you and the will of God the Father? You take the wide path: no fasting, permissible recreational sex, no requirement to keep the Lord’s Day holy. Yet in the world of Christians, especially on this issue – and historically as well – you are in the tiniest minority. Yours are that late sliver of Christendom that saw fit to outlaw this supernatural sacrament and deny it to the most deserving among us: the innocent new born babe. If you, as a loving Christian parent, cannot accept the responsibility of raising a good Christian child, that is YOUR problem (your choice) and not the problem of His faithful.

Are you planning to fail, or failing to plan? Or maybe this is God’s fault for not giving His faithful a roadmap for righteous living? Is that it, Dave? You think perhaps that God failed to plan, or that He planned for you to fail? Because that is the testimony your fast-and-free belief system gives to the world. You would not do something as dastardly as consecrate your own children to life with God. That would take away their ability to reject Him later in life, right?

God invented marriage. Families are His creation. His plan is not flawed, but a sign of how things are in perfection, in Heaven. If God wants us to consecrate our whole families to Him, who are YOU to say otherwise!

REPENT FOR THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS AT HAND!

 

[StubbleSpark]

As far as non-denoms are concerned, I am reminded of that great quote (possibly Bishop Fulton Sheen):

“Those who stand for nothing, fall for anything.”

 

[Mickey]

oudave:

first of all in order to even use that verse you must first be casting pearls.

READ THE REPLYS TO YOUR POSTS DAVE! THERE ARE MANY PEARLS HERE!!!

---

---

---

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/10/10_16_2.gif

---

---

---

---

 

[INRI]

StubbleSpark:

As far as non-denoms are concerned, I am reminded of that great quote (possibly Bishop Fulton Sheen):

“Those who stand for nothing, fall for anything.”

Actually it was G.K. Chesterton who once said (paraphrased) “Once man stops believing in God, he doesn’t believe in nothing, he’ll believe anything.”

As for oudave, a more appropriate G.K. Chesterton quote might be:
“Bigotry is an incapacity to conceive seriously the alternative to a proposition.” - Lunacy and Letters

 

[Curious]

The ones I know don’t want to hear about it; and they don’t want anything to do with it (Catholic teaching). Unless they have already studied it in depth (at least the ones I know have NOT), how can they shun it? Isn’t their flag, then, firmly in the sand?

I’m not trying to speak for non-denoms, which is what I suppose I would call myself if someone pinned me down about it.

But my impression, in answer to the question, is that non-denoms seem to revel in freedom, and then toss out some scriptures about their freedom in christ. It relieves them not to be under any structured authority and that they can conduct their services ‘how the Spirit leads.’

I would imagine that to a non-denom, even a loving, bible-knowing, praying non-denom, that the structure of the Catholic church seems constrictive and binding, formal and filled with what they call ‘traditions of men.’ While they are preaching, singing, stomping, dancing, testifying, and taking up offering in whatever way they wish, with few or none to answer to as far as authority goes, they most likely see the Catholic Church as burdensome and cold, following after ‘man’s hierarchy’ and not the way the Spirit leads.

I hope I’ve been able to offer a plausible explanation to the question. I’ve called myself non-denom for years now and been to mostly non-denom churches so I know at least know a little about what I’m talking about.

 

[Church_Militant]

I’ve been non-denom too, and I guess you’d have to compare it to a couple who gets a divorce then says, I don’t have your name anymore but I want to be like you in some ways, but I don’t have to listen to you about what I do any more.

Many n-d 's teach about submission to authority in the family and in the body of Christ which is ironic because they reject the authority of the Catholic Church which is clear as a bell from history. Their teaching is that one should never break that discipleship even if the authority is less than perfect, but hang in there with prayer and fasting for them. If this is true then they need to rethink their position outside of the Catholic Church IMO.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[StubbleSpark]

So, when a non-denom uses the word “church” he seems to be using it in a very narrow sense. The purpose of being non-denominational is to be set apart from any organizing body larger than a given congregation. Because once you have such an organization, you are a denomination.

So non-denoms’ usage of the word “church” really can only be understood as a localized congregation. An “assembly of God” if you will. I suppose there is also a belief in a larger “spiritual church” like most evangelicals. But I fail to see how these two contradictory ideas can be reconciled.

One demands a sort of fierce, republican laissez-faire style of theological, spiritual, pecuniary, and philosophical independence of each congregation. While the other is an ultra-liberal, rosy-hued view that attempts to blur these obvious divisions through an appeal to sentimentality alone. This can be illustrated by asking different non-denoms where the boundary of the “spiritual church” ends. I am sure you will get answers that range from including devout Buddhists to excluding Catholics like Mother Theresa. (And without an authority to weigh in on the matter, this debate can be considered eternally open.)

Also, I think non-denoms would have a hard time spreading seeing as each congregation would have to be a complete church unto itself in order to be “unorganized” and remain non-denominational. I have also witnessed a number of non-denoms bemoan the fact that, when they move, their new local church’s teachings are not to their liking. I know one Calvinist non-denom who has ended up going to a Lutheran church (without converting) because he could not stand the direction his local church was going.

Such cases illustrate the necessity of an over-arching organizing body and how administrative ministries can insure unity in teaching, aid in spreading the Gospel, and quiet the inevitable disagreements among the body of believers.

That this was part of Christ’s plan, there can be no doubt. In His own words: “I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, so that they may all be one as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they may also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.” John 17:20-21. And according to St. Paul in I Timothy 3:15 it is the Church and NOT Scripture that is the “pillar and foundation for truth.”

In other words, the “church” of the non-denoms is a diminished concept of the one true church Christ wanted to establish and the apostles and martyrs fought and died for. In structure, it more resembles the system of mosque and imam used by Muslims: it exists within a vaguely defined religious-cultural milieu and the imam “leads” the flock by proof-texting the Qur’an in support of his personal views. It is a more detached, cynical, and gnostic reworking of what Christ really wanted: to establish the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth with a holy priesthood, constant and inerrant teachings, total unity without sacrificing diversity, both physical and supernatural in form and function, and spreading to every corner of the Earth like the undying flame of His love for us.

 

[Peace-bwu]

oudave:

Hi
It doesnt supprise me that you call me a swine, I’m sure that you have other loving names you call others who don’t agree with you.
I am only here to give my opinion and I’m not an opinion that will just go away because of you or anyone’s name calling.
In Him and Him Only, Dave.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

I think you misunderstood what I was saying, sorry. I was not calling you a name. I was referring to the scripture that says not to feed pearls to swine, I take that to mean, if you show people truth and they choose to ignore it then it is like “feeding pearls to swine,” meaning move on and dont’ waste your time or get boggled down with people who refuse to hear Truth. I have had alot of people ask questions on this site, and in my own life, who really dont’ want to hear the answer, they are just tryin to “trip me up” It can be quite frustrating. I think the other members in this thread were trying to save me the time and effort. This certainly was not intended to call you names. I was referring to Scripture.

Belive it or not, that quote has been a comfort to me when I have been chastised for my faith, etc.by people who really don’t know what the Catholic Church teaches and really don’t care. Please note, I was not judging you, only referring to the habit of some who ask questions about the Catholic Church but dont’ really want an answer, it is generally used as a method to" trip people up" If you werent’ using this technique, and the other members were wrong to warn me, I apologize. If this was what you were doing, please find a different method. You are entitled to your own opinion, but if you have already asked this question and have had people explain it several times, why keep asking? You are wasting other people’s time and efforts to explain. I don’t call people “names.” I was not aware that some people might not be aware of this Scripture passage, I should have used a quote.

Peace Be With You

 

[StubbleSpark]

Curious:

I would imagine that to a non-denom, even a loving, bible-knowing, praying non-denom, that the structure of the Catholic church seems constrictive and binding, formal and filled with what they call ‘traditions of men.’ While they are preaching, singing, stomping, dancing, testifying, and taking up offering in whatever way they wish, with few or none to answer to as far as authority goes, they most likely see the Catholic Church as burdensome and cold, following after ‘man’s hierarchy’ and not the way the Spirit leads.

In the Catholic Church, the charismatic sits in the same pew as the stuffy Bible-scholar. And this diversity through unity does wonders for advancing spiritual understanding. It is a very progressive idea that people are trying to emulate in organized systems like government, military, and schools. For example, some universities are trying to create science buildings that incorporate facilities for the practice of seemingly unrelated sciences (like biologists studying genetics and mathematicians studying fractal geometry) to encourage creative thinking “out of the box.”

In Protestantism, if you do not like the service, you are obliged to go elsewhere, effectively cutting off any avenue for discussion. This is unprogressive and will only lead to atrophy – which leads to dwindling numbers in the pews, which leads to panic, which leads to a “new” generation of ministers (v.2.03a) who cull new favor by giving in to the times instead of following the will of God.

This is why the legions of Protestants fail to produce notable saints like Mother Theresa and Fr. Maximillian Kolbe. These two devout Catholics continued the tradition of identifying a specific sickness of the their age (abortion and rampant selfishness for Mother Theresa and aggressive secularism and Nazism for Fr. Kolbe), and coming up with an appropriate response in the name of Christ. More often than not, Protestants let times change them (as in the case of contraception), and thereby become greater participants in the problem and not the cure. In every age since Christ walked this earth, Catholic men and women of all stripe have stood to defend God’s Truth – often paying with their very lives.

What binds the past with the present is the supernatural string known as God’s Traditions. When I was a Baptist, I mistakenly labored under the notion that the Bible, especially the New Testament, was anti-tradition. Far from it. Why else would Christ command his disciples to obey the chair of Moses in Matthew 23:3 EVEN THOUGH He acknowledges they are hypocrites? Does Christ elsewhere encourage sinful behavior in His disciples? Is Jesus wrong in doing this? In I Cor 11:2, II Thess 2:15 and 3:6, it is tradition that is exhorted to be the guiding principle. This puts a majority of scripture at odds with the Frankenstein notion that “tradition BAD!”

I suppose the reason why non-denoms can claim the hand-slapping and toe-tapping (which I have been known to enjoy myself from time to time in a Catholic setting) is not one of those despised “traditions of man” is because it is not traditional. Because it certainly is of man. But how long does it have to be practiced before it is considered traditional? Twenty years? A month? A Martian year?

What happens then? Well, the congregation becomes displeased out of sheer anti-traditional bigotry (because it is not rational nor Biblical to do so). Then they claim their particular church has ossified and they pick up and move on somewhere else where they initiate their new flavor of “Christianity” until something else comes along. Notice that what is true or right never enters the dialogue. The change is motivated by fear that they may come to resemble that which they most revile as an example of how NOT to be Christian: the Catholic Church.

 

[Peace-bwu]

Church Militant:

Boy! You are really outta whack today aren’t you??

You know full well what that man is refering to and that it means not to waste time with those who ridicule and deride the Good News that we share. As I’ve said before Dave, if you wanna talk. talk, but don’t be aggressive and insulting like that.

Here’s the actual passage and its context so you can be real clear about what it says… It’s Matthew 7.

1 Judge not, that you may not be judged, 2 For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 Any why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye? 4 Or how sayest thou to thy brother: Let me cast the mote out of thy eye; and behold a beam is in thy own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

6 Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you. 7 Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. 8 For every one that asketh, receiveth: and he that seeketh, findeth: and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened. 9 Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he reach him a stone? 10 Or if he shall ask him a fish, will he reach him a serpent?

11 If you then being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him? 12 All things therefore whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you also to them. For this is the law and the prophets. 13 Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. 14 How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it! 15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16 By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.

21 Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity. 24 Every one therefore that heareth these my words, and doth them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock.

26 And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand, 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof. 28 And it came to pass when Jesus had fully ended these words, the people were in admiration at his doctrine. 29 For he was teaching them as one having power, and not as the scribes and Pharisees.

Pax vobiscum,
P.S. to Mickey and Peace-bwu…http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/dontknow.gif you may be right.

Thank you so much for explaining exactly what I meant. I felt so bad that oudave thought I was calling him a swine!! I would never do that! I will be more careful to properly quote, I just didn’t think it was necessary in my short post, but apparently it was. I read your perfect explanation after I apologized him and was glad it was there, I didn’t want everyone to think I was stooping to name calling.
Thanks,
Peace Be With You.