How could anybody...
voice from the past
adulteress like Amy Grant.
This is a disgrace and blasphemy to the memory of Jesus Christ.
voice from the past
DAnneWest
How could anybody be being this up again, for the one hundreth, billion,
cazillionth time!!!
Just Give Me A Name
What is up with these people? It's Amy Grant's private life I believe
and she does not owe anybody an explanation.
Sincerely from Hope with Love
voice from the past schreef:
Covenant
>
>
Name says it all really.
Sundialer
to give an account of her life. Sin can be washed away and forgiven and
relationships restored, but the damaging consequences of sin often remain.
The fact remains that she is unashamed and unrepentant.
It appears Amy Grant's "crossover" is more complete than anyone imagined.
How sad.
"DAnneWest" <dann...@wmconnect.com> wrote in message
news:20030723130846...@mb-m14.wmconnect.com...
voice from the past
> How could anybody be being this up again, for the one hundreth, billion,
> cazillionth time!!!
Truth is eternal---or is a thing of passend trend for you...
voice from the past
voice from the past
> voice from the past ...
> >
> >
>
>
> Name says it all really.
You should get in touch with the one who really gets into the past:
JESUS ON JUDGMENT DAY.
voice from the past
voice from the past
If Amy Grant is just playing music as someone in the world, it's to be expected.
DON'T FOLLOW HER AS A MINISTER OF CHRIST; that would be foolish.
voice from the past
DarkrWater
>From: tima...@hotmail.com (voice from the past)
>Date: 7/24/2003 6:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <d9dcb939.03072...@posting.google.com>
I think the reason why people bring it up all the time is that she did wrong,
and expects everyone to just over look it.
I personally don't give a rat's whatever what she did, but she should stay a
pop singer and stop portraying herself as a Christian artist.
lifesabirch
believer and not going to her in person. You seem to be guilty more
than Amy. Better get right before you meet your Maker, ya know.
"Sundialer" <Sundialer@*nospam*mail.com> wrote in message news:<bfo75j$hgl$1...@slb9.atl.mindspring.net>...
Maybelline
Look, little god,
You have no heaven or hell to put anyone in so why don't you focus on
your own multitude of sin and let other people do the same.
You sound totally rediculous and attract NO one to the faith by your
stupid ramblings about a person you do not even know personally.
Just think how totally pathetic a person would have to be to actually
take your word on Amy Grant. YOu do not know her. Focus on you and
*your* garbage.
Maybelline
I Dream of Amy
Because she's makes me feel warm and fuzzy down in my pants. You
calling her an adulteress is only giving me a hard-on.
Sundialer
don't feel guilty, I feel sad and disappointed.
She disregards the teaching of Scripture to suit her interests. Why? Because
she can. In light of the way the Christian music industry treated the
adulterous affairs of Michael Card and Sandi Patti compared to the divorces
of Susan Ashton and Amy Grant, there exists a double standard. Amy Grant
comes from a prominent Christian family in Tennessee which includes senator
Bill Frist and because her record sales dwarf other Christian artists, she
seems to think that she doesn't have to submit to those sticky points of
biblical authority, and those whose bottom line she makes fat agree. Sorry,
no.
Too many of her public statements conflict with or do not adequately explain
what appear to be serious improprieties regarding the whole situation
surrounding her divorce. If you're a public figure who is also a professed
Christian and you're professing a Christian message through what you do then
you have submitted yourself to a specific standard of accountability and
public scrutiny. Sorry, that's the deal.
I don't think she's been honest with the Christian community, I don't think
she's being honest now, and because of this I don't regard her as an
exemplary model of Christian obedience to Christ. That's my take and I
accept responsibility for saying it. I would respect her more if she would
come clean or just stop giving lip service to beliefs she seems
uncomfortable with. She wants to have her cake and eat it too. Her wealth
and position have for the time being afforded her the illusion that she can.
She consistently makes a point that her faith is not "cheap grace," well
then, what specifically is it? She never gets real. She just offers vague
generalities about healing and forgiveness. But to her, it is time that
heals, and forgiveness is forgiving yourself. Well ok, but what about Jesus
in her life? To whom is she accountable? She has everything she could
possibly want, even a new husband, but she hasn't really lost anything, and
she doesn't seem bothered by what she has lost, mainly her integrity. That's
not judging anyone or throwing stones...that's just telling the truth. Truth
judges, not the person speaking it. That's the nature of truth.
"But be doers of the word, and not merely hearers who deceive themselves.
For if any are hearers of the word and not doers, they are like those who
look at themselves in a mirror; for they look at themselves and, on going
away, immediately forget what they were like." ---James 1:22-24.
"lifesabirch" <lifes...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:103a5b9.03072...@posting.google.com...
bob_m...@spammenotagilent.com
Sundialer <Sundialer@*nospam*mail.com> wrote:
: ...affairs of Michael Card and...
I normally wouldn't respond to this troll, but Sundialer's
got the wrong Michael here. Now *that's* slander...
Bob (old fart) Miller
AMYS EMPEROR
>family in Tennessee which includes senator
>Bill Frist
Explain?
Sundialer
sorry for the mistake.
I was referring to Michael English whose label Warner Alliance officially
disassociated itself from the artist after he confessed to an extramarital
affair just days after receiving three Dove awards in 1994. Later he
returned all twelve of his Dove awards.
<bob_m...@spammenotagilent.com> wrote in message
news:10591599...@cswreg.cos.agilent.com...
faience
> Guilty for what?
As lifesabirch pointed out ... for not going to AMY in person
about her behavior - for saying it here to 3rd parties instead.
Not Biblical, BamBam, not Biblical at all!
>
> Too many of her public statements conflict with or do not adequately explain
> what appear to be serious improprieties regarding the whole situation
> surrounding her divorce. If you're a public figure who is also a professed
> Christian and you're professing a Christian message through what you do then
> you have submitted yourself to a specific standard of accountability and
> public scrutiny. Sorry, that's the deal.
Sorry, she turned down "the deal" YEARS before all this!
She became artistically her own person in about 1985.
> I don't think she's been honest with the Christian community, I don't think
> she's being honest now, and because of this I don't regard her as an
> exemplary model of Christian obedience to Christ.
Cool! You and Amy agree! She doesn't consider
herself exemplary in her obedience to Christ. She's said
that over and over. You musta missed a BUNCH of interviews.
Good. We can all go back to our coloring books now.
ruth
--
Avoid SARS! Stay home! Shop online!
Noir & More Books
http://www.choosebooks.com
http://www.stores.ebay.com/shops/noirandmorebooks
AMYS EMPEROR
>> Guilty for what?
>
>As lifesabirch pointed out ... for not going to AMY in person
>about her behavior - for saying it here to 3rd parties instead.
>Not Biblical, BamBam, not Biblical at all!
>
>>
>> Too many of her public statements conflict with or do not adequately
>explain
>> what appear to be serious improprieties regarding the whole situation
>> surrounding her divorce. If you're a public figure who is also a professed
>> Christian and you're professing a Christian message through what you do
>then
>> you have submitted yourself to a specific standard of accountability and
>> public scrutiny. Sorry, that's the deal.
>
>Sorry, she turned down "the deal" YEARS before all this!
>She became artistically her own person in about 1985.
>
>> I don't think she's been honest with the Christian community, I don't think
>> she's being honest now, and because of this I don't regard her as an
>> exemplary model of Christian obedience to Christ.
>
>Cool! You and Amy agree! She doesn't consider
>herself exemplary in her obedience to Christ. She's said
>that over and over. You musta missed a BUNCH of interviews.
>
>Good. We can all go back to our coloring books now.
>
>ruth
>
>--
Ruth must be having a "better than normal day"~!
She's lucid~! hahahahahaha
Those kind of posts are so immature~!
Not Christian, at all.
I 'nore 'em. : ) Lala
Sundialer
"faience" <nickel...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bfs7kv$i7i96$1...@ID-37744.news.uni-berlin.de...
> "Sundialer" <Sundialer@*nospam*mail.com> wrote in message
news:bfru79$2r0$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net...
> > Guilty for what?
>
> As lifesabirch pointed out ... for not going to AMY in person
> about her behavior - for saying it here to 3rd parties instead.
> Not Biblical, BamBam, not Biblical at all!
Read the rest of the teaching...not just the first part.
> > Too many of her public statements conflict with or do not adequately
explain
> > what appear to be serious improprieties regarding the whole situation
> > surrounding her divorce. If you're a public figure who is also a
professed
> > Christian and you're professing a Christian message through what you do
then
> > you have submitted yourself to a specific standard of accountability and
> > public scrutiny. Sorry, that's the deal.
>
> Sorry, she turned down "the deal" YEARS before all this!
> She became artistically her own person in about 1985.
Sadly, you may right, but this does not absolve her from accountability and
scrutiny from the Christian community as long as she is making public
statements about it as a Christian. Being artistically her own person is
irrelevant.
> > I don't think she's been honest with the Christian community, I don't
think
> > she's being honest now, and because of this I don't regard her as an
> > exemplary model of Christian obedience to Christ.
>
> Cool! You and Amy agree! She doesn't consider
> herself exemplary in her obedience to Christ. She's said
> that over and over. You musta missed a BUNCH of interviews.
Well, we come full circle. She remains unashamed and unrepentant, and for
that she is not exemplary...not because she is imperfect and admits
mistakes. She talks publically about her faith, but she doesn't have
immunity from public criticism. I and others have every right to publically
point out the one area of rebellion she refuses acknowledge while putting on
this charade that she was justified in divorcing her first husband. John the
Baptist criticized Herod for exactly the same reason and was beheaded for
it.
Sundialer
her extended family by marriage, or her a part of his...I'm not sure but I
read of the relation it in an article about her divorce. The two
occasionally meet at political charity events and galas and also have
connections to Vanderbilt University. In other words, she is not without
some degree of prestege in her connections and status. Something that
perhaps Gary Chapman lacked while Vince Gill is more of an artistic equal.
"AMYS EMPEROR" <amyse...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030725163311...@mb-m20.aol.com...
Covenant
Passend trend....
Indeed!
;' ))
--
Covenant
A Man With Far Too Much Time On His Hands
Covenant
WOW !!!
An honest to goodness PSYCHO !!!!
;' ))))
Covenant
**snurk**
;' )
DarkrWater
>From: "Sundialer" Sundialer@*nospam*mail.com
>Date: 7/25/2003 2:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <bfru79$2r0$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net>
I think the problem here is that the readers of this newsgroup regard Amy as
just a singer whose works are nonsecular. She became quite popular when she
stopped singing about Jesus and turned to her Baby Baby period.
The thing here is that I could go on and on about what kind of life she is
leading, what she did outside of her marriage, etc. But nothing I say can
change anything she says or does now.
I really enjoyed her music when she was primarily a Christian artist, and to be
honest her earlier pop stuff was great also.
I have other artists that I listen to now, and what message she is giving with
her music doesnt affect me.
The beating of the old issue of did she or didn't she will go on for years.
People are angry at what she did, perhaps their bubble was burst.
But if what she has done bothers people, the best bet is not to listen.
I personally have found the music/comedy of Wierd Al and enjoy that a lot.
God bless,
Dar. K.
AMYS EMPEROR
>> >Sundialer"
>>
>> >family in Tennessee which includes senator
>> >Bill Frist
>>
>> Explain?
>Not her immediate family, but as I understand it Bill Frist is a member of
>her extended family by marriage, or her a part of his...I'm not sure but I
>read of the relation it in an article about her divorce. The two
>occasionally meet at political charity events and galas and also have
>connections to Vanderbilt University. In other words, she is not without
>some degree of prestege in her connections and status. Something that
>perhaps Gary Chapman lacked while Vince Gill is more of an artistic equal.
>
Oh, so it's either a distant blood or marriage relation,
or it isn't.
Or it is a casual relationship,
or it isn't.
Or they are from the came city and are famous,
so you are just simply complaining about anything,
claiming anything
if it suits your purpose to complain.
That's swell~!
As to your other remarks, your "fingerprints" (values) are all over those
complaints as well;
you select the verses which suit your purpose,
"requiring behavior of others"
and ignore the verses which prohibit your/this preoccupation
That's swell~! ; ) Lala
Annie M
Wow, is this what it's suppose to be like? Is this what is required of
us by God as believers? I am really disturbed by this kind of trampling of
another's persons integrity and the incredible arrogance it takes to just
dismiss them without a drop of compassion or a shred of evidence. Jesus
would not do this, and from what I know of Amy Grants reputation I don't
think she would, or has ever had anything but good to say about anyone.
Does our standing as children of God entitle us or give us the right to
stand with such condescending judgment over another child of God? Even if
she is in the wrong, what good does it do anyone? I don't think this is how
it's suppose to be in the kingdom of God. If you know her tell her what
you think but if you don't and her life and decisions are not something you
have access to, why not leave it with God and pray for her , or show some
concern for her. That would be Christian. I can see why Amy likes the book
of James.
You can say anything you want to me about how *you feel* but it will not be
relevant if you don't know her or anything about that which you speak. It is
all based on assumption. Is it so hard to just except that its not our
business? God is not so small and defenseless that he needs us to go around
fixing people for him and making them live up to our standards. He really
is God ya know and he can handle this , really. Sometime I wonder if
people ever really * trust* God with anything.
Annie
Sundialer
"AMYS EMPEROR" <amyse...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030725205254...@mb-m03.aol.com...
Sundialer
apparently she condones adultery and justifies a divorce that suited her own
interests. To cite "irreconciliable differences" as a reason to break her
marriage vows so that she can be free to pursue another does great violence
to the sanctity of their intended purpose. Marriage is prophetic covenant
pointing to the relationship between Christ and his true church like a bride
and groom. Amy Grant trampled her own integrity by first trampling on what
Christ intended marriage to be and her continual refusal to answer for it.
Jesus exposes sin and offers healing and grace in the face of repentance,
but repentance requires that the heart be pierced with its obligation to
acknowledge its own sin. Amy Grant has never acknowledged the unbiblical
foundation by which she justified her divorce and destroyed her family. She
denies it to this day, and every moment she denies it and we accept it the
name of God is defamed among the lost. It gives them power over us to
destroy any witness we may have as a people of God.
I wish Amy and all of her family well, and to those who enjoy her music God
bless you, but when she talks about her faith, as she still occasionally
does...it means nothing to me because I'm not sure I can trust her to really
speak the truth.
" Annie M" <e...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:uEmUa.934$IH3...@news01.roc.ny...
Covenant
> I think the problem here is that the readers of this newsgroup regard
> Amy as just a singer whose works are nonsecular.
*I* think the problem is that some people forget we are ALL human beings.
> The thing here is that I could go on and on about what
> kind of life she is leading, what she did outside of her marriage,
> etc.
And, unless you are living her life, none of it would mean a thing.
You don;t know ANYTHING. Repeat that to yourself...
> The beating of the old issue of did she or didn't she will go on for
> years.
Only for as long as there are hypocritical saddo-s... Much like those who
continue to drag these things up time and again, quoting scripture bnadly,
and forgetting that *to forgive is divine*.
> But if what she has done bothers people, the best bet is not
> to listen.
And NOT to visit a newsgroup dedicated to her.
Makes sense, no?
Covenant
> God is not so small and defenseless that he needs us to go around
> fixing people for him and making them live up to our standards. He
> really is God ya know and he can handle this , really. Sometime I
> wonder if people ever really * trust* God with anything.
;' )
"For truthfully I do say to those ... Ye art the kind of people whom's
asses THE LORD shall kick upon the final calling..."
Covenant
> Marriage is prophetic covenant
And so am I...
I prophesy that you will live a very sad and bitter life if this is the sort
of thing you continure to devote your time to.
Get over it.
Get under it.
Get through it.
Get a life.
--
Covenant
A Man With The Gift....
AMYS EMPEROR
ugly dog," what I actually intend is:
> Wow, is this what it's suppose to be like? Is this what is required of
>us by God as believers? I am really disturbed by this kind of trampling of
>another's persons integrity and the incredible arrogance it takes to just
>dismiss them without a drop of compassion or a shred of evidence. Jesus
>would not do this, and from what I know of Amy Grants reputation I don't
>think she would, or has ever had anything but good to say about anyone.
>Does our standing as children of God entitle us or give us the right to
>stand with such condescending judgment over another child of God? Even if
>she is in the wrong, what good does it do anyone? I don't think this is how
>it's suppose to be in the kingdom of God. If you know her tell her what
>you think but if you don't and her life and decisions are not something you
>have access to, why not leave it with God and pray for her , or show some
>concern for her. That would be Christian. I can see why Amy likes the book
>of James.
>You can say anything you want to me about how *you feel* but it will not be
>relevant if you don't know her or anything about that which you speak. It is
>all based on assumption. Is it so hard to just except that its not our
>business? God is not so small and defenseless that he needs us to go around
>fixing people for him and making them live up to our standards. He really
>is God ya know and he can handle this , really. Sometime I wonder if
>people ever really * trust* God with anything.
>
>Annie
>
so just substitute it in your own mind~! hahahahahahaha
It's the very same thing really, but is quicker,
so mine is *obviously* better~! ; ) Lala
Annie M
> Amy Grant, I'm sure is a wonderful and talented person in many respects,
but
Apparently ! Case closed, and I'm off for a fun day at Harborfest,
there will be sinners all around and i will still have fun and the ones i'm
related to I will still love, and smile at and hug real tight. There must
be something wrong with me.
Annie
Sundialer
in fear to people who are merely pointing out truth. Israel didn't like
prophets coming around pointing out their sin...so it was easier to just
have them killed than to take heed. Its understandable that you would lash
out at me, but you really don't have a problem with me. You have a problem
with what scripture teaches, so in effect, instead of dealing with the issue
you find it easier to plink personal attacks at me.
I have not slandered Amy Grant in any way. I have only shown that her public
actions and statements do not agree with biblical teaching. Scripture
exposes her. Scripture judges her. You're just mad that someone keeps coming
along pricking the conscience by showing it.
Forgiveness is the basis of God's nature and grace but it seems some of you
want it without acknowledging, confessing, or expressing sorrow for the sin
that stands in the way.
So, Covenant. I have quoted Scripture badly? You haven't quoted any at all.
So instruct me...what is the teaching of verses like Matthew 5:31...,
Hebrews 10: 26..., John 3:19..., or John 9:39...?
As long as people like Amy grant are public communicators who knowingly and
willingly bear the name of Christ in their very public ministries, they
wield some influence over their followers and have readily accepted and
benefitted from this visible mantle. Whether they, you, or anybody else
rejects this is irrelevant because the Christian community is going to hold
them accountable.
If anyone's a hypocrite its you, and people like you because you want a warm
fuzzy God who will pat you on the head when you do something wrong without
requiring you to confront it and change it. You want to be forgiven your
sin, but you still want its benefits. If you don't understand this you don't
understand what it means to be a Christian...if you are one, and certainly
not what Scripture teaches. Yes God is a god of forgiveness, but he's also a
god of holiness, justice, righteousness, truth, vengence, and wrath with an
uncompromised hatred of sin. This includes adultery, my friend dressed up as
"irreconciliable differences."
I will say it again, "until" Amy Grant acknowledges her adultery, she should
shut up, as in closing her mouth and stop talking as a public
Christian...everything else is just the rot of hypocrisy until then.
"Covenant" <cove...@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bftlmb$gaq$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
Covenant
> Well, its what people know about themselves inside that cause them to
> react in fear to people who are merely pointing out truth.
No.
It's people reacting to someone just exactly like you who feels that a
bushel of rumour, speculation, opinion and downright lies *amounts* to The
Truth.
So , there y'go !
Take that with you.... Don't let the door.. etc etc etc...
Covenant
> So, Covenant. I have quoted Scripture badly?
Yes... Yes you have.
> You haven't quoted any at all.
That's because it is not neccesary to *do* so.
>So instruct me...what is the teaching of verses like Matthew
> 5:31..., Hebrews 10: 26..., John 3:19..., or John 9:39...?
I have no *need* to instruct you.
BUT.. If the only way that you can *debate* is by throwing out contextless
scribblings of badly translated doctrine, which you both laud and ignore to
your own advantage.... All I need to do is point you to one quote.
"Remove the log..."
I'm sure you can extrapolate the rest.
faience
post the following:
"Annie: Here is the subject for today: ___________
You write the post!
Sincerely,
AE"
ruth
who also thought Annie said it all!
--
Avoid SARS! Stay home! Shop online!
Noir & More Books
http://www.choosebooks.com
http://www.stores.ebay.com/shops/noirandmorebooks
"AMYS EMPEROR" <amyse...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20030726112641...@mb-m21.aol.com...
AMYS EMPEROR
>*LOL!* I have an even better idea! On any topic, just
>post the following:
>
> "Annie: Here is the subject for today: ___________
> You write the post!
>
> Sincerely,
> AE"
>
>ruth
>who also thought Annie said it all!
I could do that.
Annie, like yourself, is my subordinate.
I could have any of you.
But I couldn't trust you to do so with my level of equanimity~!
hahahahahaha : ) Lala
Sundialer
love she shared with him because she wanted another. There's nothing
speculative or untruthful about it. She and Vince Gill have said as much in
not so many words and have made no bones about it. Only an anencephallic
would be too stupid to discern this. This is not the point anyway. For a
Christian, Matthew 5:32 is as clear as you can get on the doctrine of
divorce, and Amy's divorce doesn't fulfill this teaching's instruction.
She's an unrepentant adulteress who picks and chooses what Scriptural
mandates have authority over her and which don't.
As uncomfortable as this is for you, what part of Christ's teaching on
divorce do you not comprehend? For someone who chooses to call themself
"Covenant," surely you must understand something about it, or is that just a
stroke irony?
As far as inviting me to leave, that's not very friendly. Here's an idea!
Why don't you go pay your $40 to join Friends of Amy and that way you don't
have to worry about someone coming along and challenging you to think about
your values.
"Covenant" <cove...@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bfv53p$ke7$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
Sundialer
think you would at least be able to give a good answer to those who inquire
of you for one. Why don't you explain to me what the verse you refer to
means, and show me specifically how the "scribblings" as you call them are
badly translated and out of context? Its not about whether you "need" to
instruct me. I'm asking you to back up your argument and to show me the
context as you understand it.
As far as removing logs and splinters from our eyes, I have, and I have seen
first hand the wreckage left behind from divorce and why God declares his
hatred of it. I do not condemn nor do I judge Amy Grant...the authority of
Scripture does that as long as she continues to call her divorce justified
in the eyes of God. According to Matt 5:32; it is not, nor will it ever be.
True healing and forgiveness will not come until she deals with it once and
for all.
While you're ruminating on logs and splinters also consider for yourself the
following verse from Proverbs that says, "Whoever corrects a mocker invites
insult...rebuke a wise man and he will love you.
No, Covenant. I have not interpreted Scripture badly. It speaks for itself.
You just do not like what it is saying to you.
"Covenant" <cove...@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bfv58p$kgh$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
PearL
>You're just mad that someone keeps coming
>along pricking the conscience by showing it.
The thing is.. Why do you feel like you NEED to "keep coming along to prick the
conscience" ? Why do you feel the need to keep pointing out her "supposed" sin
again and again? Dont you think God already KNOWS her sin, as well as ALL of
ours? *IF* Amy has done wrong and is unrepentful, why not just leave her in the
hands of God? Let Him deal with her.
~ PearL~
"Just when you think you've seen it all.....
You see some more..." --Moochacha!!!
Covenant
> Amy Grant divorced her husband of sixteen years because she
> annihilated the love she shared with him because she wanted another.
> There's nothing speculative or untruthful about it.
You know what...
*I* believe you are a liar. Pure and simple.
No doubt you have your reasons for saying what you have above... SO here are
mine...
As has been asked many times... Show me the proof of what you say above.
Show me that the reason Amy Divorced was purely due to what you say.
Can you?? Hmmm... No you can't.
And yet.... And yet there is nothing speculative about what you are
saying???
I think that, whereas you can type the english language, you might just have
a problem with it's *full* comprehension.
> She and Vince
> Gill have said as much in not so many words and have made no bones
> about it.
;' ))
*Not so many words*.....
read..
*Have not said it at all*.
> Only an anencephallic would be too stupid to discern this.
;' )
heh heh heh....
There we go!!!!!
I *love* it when trolls look out their dictionaries in an attempt to use
insults that they think will give 'em a modicum of respect whilst using
language that is never seen outside this EXACT sort of nonsense.
> This is not the point anyway.
Oh yes it is.
> For a Christian, Matthew 5:32 is as
> clear as you can get on the doctrine of divorce, and Amy's divorce
> doesn't fulfill this teaching's instruction. She's an unrepentant
> adulteress who picks and chooses what Scriptural mandates have
> authority over her and which don't.
As do you, regarding ALL scripture relating to forgiveness, not judging your
fellow man, and the hypocrisy therein.
And you either simply are ignoring that (for your own ends)... or your just
trying to cause trouble...
So which is it?
> As uncomfortable as this is for you,
You don't understand....
This is not uncomfortable for me in the SLIGHTEST!
Not even remotely!
You wanna know why I'm talking to you???
My reasons are manifold...
But...
Partially, cos it keeps you from trying to troll the *rest* of the group...
You're a plaything right now.
Partially, cos I find your glorious attempts at reasoned debate to be
hilarious, mainly due to the fact that you have crippled your own debating
point by decrying someone for doing exactly what you are doing yourself.
(Choosing which scripture she can ignore...)
Partially, cos I find it *really* funny when you dash for the thesaurus.
But mostly... Cos *you* are *exactly* the sort of person that makes the rest
of the world think that Christians are mad.
You're the sort of person people cross the road to avoid, ranting and raving
about our destruction.
Exactly the kind of person who gives Christianity a bad name!
> what part of Christ's teaching on divorce do you not comprehend?
Have I even *discussed that with you? I think not.
And yet.. there you are suggesting that I cannot comprehend it...
Hmmm.... Sounds to me like you are making an ill educated guess through
nothing more than *lack* of evidence...
Wow.... Looks like you really *do* make a habit of that, huh !?
> For someone who chooses to call
> themself "Covenant," surely you must understand something about it,
> or is that just a stroke irony?
That's for *you* to decide, Sparky !
*I* know why I am called Covenant..... *You* don't...
And yet... Look at that.. you *again* decide to choose negativity based on
no evidence!
And yet.. Look at that.. you try to use my *name* as a barb???
Hmmm... How Christian of you!
> As far as inviting me to leave, that's not very friendly.
Ohhh man.... You are *too* funny !!!!!
(Ah me.... How someone like this can waltz into this place, try to drag out
(yet again) the same old same old regarding the same old thing that we ALL
know no-one knows the truth about... atacks the subject of a *name* NG, and
by association attacks it's members... and then has the gall to stick out
it's bottom lip and say.. "You're not being friendly..." I really do find
that hilarious !!!!)
> Here's an
> idea! Why don't you go pay your $40 to join Friends of Amy and that
> way you don't have to worry about someone coming along and
> challenging you to think about your values.
If you were a challenge, it might be worthwhile... But you're not.
You're just yet another of the sad, lonely, bitter people who have so little
in your life that you find it neccessary to attempt to stir up trouble in
the ether of usenet.
You are in NO way challenging my values, mainly due to the fact that you
have NO idea what my values are.
But hey... You've already shown that you can condemn and criticise with no
more proof than what is going on inside your twisted little head... So carry
on... Don't worry... everyone else is ignoring you, and i'll get bored with
you soon.
AMYS EMPEROR
>> Amy Grant, I'm sure is a wonderful and talented person in many respects,
>but
>> apparently Yada yada yada
>
>
> Apparently ! Case closed, and I'm off for a fun day at Harborfest,
>there will be sinners all around and i will still have fun and the ones i'm
>related to I will still love, and smile at and hug real tight. There must
>be something wrong with me.
>
>
>Annie
>
hahahahahahahaha : ) Lala
Maybelline
As far as removing logs and splinters from our eyes, I have, and I
have seen
> first hand the wreckage left behind from divorce and why God declares his
> hatred of it. I do not condemn nor do I judge Amy Grant...the authority of
> Scripture does that as long as she continues to call her divorce justified
> in the eyes of God. According to Matt 5:32; it is not, nor will it ever be.
> True healing and forgiveness will not come until she deals with it once and
> for all.
*I* would say that it is not your interpretation of scripture that is
at issue here. I totally agree that adultery is wrong and stated so in
the bible, which I take as authority.
What *IS* at issue is the fact that Amy Grant never stated she had an
affair. In fact, she said just the opposite. That is the only thing
concretely said on the matter both from her and Gary too btw. He
simply spun words and situations and gave anecdotes but NEVER accused
her. (I even challanged him several times to so so if it were true if
he was, as he said, so concerned about the "Truth" getting out there,
which was his lame defense for causing so much trouble. And, as I
said, she *denied* an affair. Period.
What she also said is that it was hurtful, both the marraige and the
divorce. She also said that she cared for Vince since she met him.
Said they were close friends. And, that she didn't have anything to do
with him while he was deciding on if he should divorce. and again for
6 monthes when she was makeing her decision about divorce 2 years
later.
So it is easy, for some people, to erase all that came in between and
jump to conclusions based more on what THEY are capable of than the
person, whom they do not know, is capable of. But the facts are that
she has denied it.
Vince said he wrote a song for her and felt for her all along, but he
ALSO said he never even kissed her untill they were engaged.
You want to take everything that is said and ignore the things that
say no, there was no inappropriate contact, and focus on the details
that could be spun into her being an adulterous. Why?
The point is that we do not know. She could be lying, or not. WE
CANNOT JUDGE her heart.
So, I will appeal to your love of scripture, for surly you wish to
hold yourself to the same standard you want to hold her to, no? and
point you to the fact that while we *are* to judge behaivior, such as
saying that adultery is wrong, we are not to judge hearts and minds.
Becoming a Christian does not give us super powers, we are still
limited, flawed humans. We cannot see what goes on behind doors and
walls and through states. We are also not able to see hearts and
minds. So, unless you SAW her having sex with Vince, or heard her say
she did while she was yet married to Gary, then shut up. Please.
Jer. 17:9-10 "The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately
wicked. Who can know it? I the Lord (notice it doesn't have your name
here) search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according
to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve."
So, if you, like me, love God and the scripture, then chill out
because He is on the throne and in control. He has it and her, and me,
and you, all taken care of.
You are not God and do not poses the powers to *rightly* accuse her.
Maybelline
Sundialer
~S
"Maybelline" <maybell...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:7efa1a0a.03072...@posting.google.com...
> "Sundialer" <Sundialer@*nospam*mail.com> wrote in message
news:<bfvqq0$299$1...@slb9.atl.mindspring.net>...
>
Sundialer
never kissed him, or confided in him during her marital turmoil, or he with
her during his. This is exactly the point of Christ's teaching on divorce in
Matt 5:32. Unless Gary or Amy was unfaithful to the other with someone else,
there is no biblical authority for one or the other to ask for a divorce.
Yet it is exactly this strangely intimate relationship Amy shared with Vince
Gill outside of her mariage that caused Jannis Gill to seek a divorce Vince
in 1996 after she had found an intimate love letter written by Vince that
declared his love for Amy...not just friendship. In an interview Jannis said
this letter explained what amounted to a condition of emotional abandonment
as Vince was spending more and more time with Amy than with his own wife.
It is precisely at this point Amy should have backed away from this very
unhealthy relationship. Scripture admonishes us to avoid even the very
appearance of evil, and yet by all accounts she went out of her way to
nurture and encourage this extremely dangerous situation to her own
marriage. By doing this she was in essence in the process of murdering the
love she had for her own husband and throwing wood to the fire of another.
This is an act of complete, even defiant rebellion against God's
commandments. Gary Chapman pleaded with her to stay in counciling to save
their marriage, but by 1998, Amy no longer had the spiritual power or
discernment to control what had become an illicit love, so much so that they
were seen together openly in various public places demonstrating
innappropriate displays of affection, even though, as Amy has stated, no
physical act of intimacy had taken place while she was still married.
Christ says, "But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman (or man)
with lust has already committed adultery with her (or him) in his/her heart.
If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away; it is
better for you to lose one eye than your whole body to be thrown into hell."
Matt 5:28
Whatever the cause of sin in our life that endangers our relationships with
God and to each other Christ commands us to get rid of it, and if a
pernicious vine has grown up around the heart, no matter how desirable, take
it out.
Together Amy and Vince destroyed two families and affected countless other
lives with hurt, shame, anger, and confusion because they chose each other
over God. Perhaps they will tell you as much when they talk about their
failures, but was this God's plan? Did he sanction it? Do you really think
he would subject their children to the horror, guilt, and insecurity of
divorce because he made a mistake in joining them in marriage the first
time? Is he so impotent? Clumsy? Would he approve of their happeness amid
the pain of so many others? To think so, in my mind, would be truely
arrogant and selfish.
Now with the release of Amy's new album in August she is once again speaking
publically about it and her faith. There is a great tendency to forget what
happened, to gloss over sin, to hide it, sweep it under the rug. Amy and
Vince are counting on it. I've been criticized for bringing it up. We can
argue over whether these self professed Christian artists are indeed,
"ministers," "teachers," or "evangelists." But one thing is sure, whatever
they do is public, and they have gained immensely from our trust as
Christians. Everyday their marriage is a reminder and a lesson for the
community of Christ. First, why God has set limits. Two, why our convictions
toward marriage should preserve its sanctity, and three, marriage is the
arena for the experience of profound spiritual truths that transform two
people as "one flesh" and that often call for heroic qualities that stand
for more than just the achievement of happiness. Marriage teaches that love
and fidelity are the most precious realities of life and that without them
we are maimed. Easy emotional escape routes must be cut off for the good of
families, communities, and the married couples themselves.
Amy and Vince trashed all of this and left a wake of great emotional damage
for their own happiness. The danger of it all is that at first we hate sin,
then we tolerate sin, but in the end, if we forget, we embrace sin.
~S
"PearL" <bstn...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030727065234...@mb-m28.aol.com...
Sundialer
"The Lord bless you and keep you;
the Lord make his face to shine upon you,
and be gracious to you;
the Lord lift up his countenance upon you,
and give you peace.
~S
"Covenant" <cove...@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bg0egd$u06$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
PearL
>The danger of it all is that at first we hate sin,
>then we tolerate sin, but in the end, if we forget, we embrace sin.
What I have seen of most here is not an embracing of sin... but instead an
embracing of the sinner. Just as God embraces every one of us (as sinners),
regardless of the sins we have committed.
Annie M
seen
> first hand the wreckage left behind from divorce and why God declares his
> hatred of it. I do not condemn nor do I judge Amy Grant...the authority of
> Scripture does that as long as she continues to call her divorce justified
> in the eyes of God. According to Matt 5:32; it is not, nor will it ever
be.
> True healing and forgiveness will not come until she deals with it once
and
> for all.
And how on earth could you know weather she has dealt with this or not
or what may have happened in the privacy of her marriage so as to make a
judgment about her divorce ? By reading articles and what little she has
said to the public? What kind of person tells a ravenous tabloid media
about there personal problems and marital troubles. She does not owe you
this just because she is a believer. You are wrong to judge her for what you
think you know and your wrong to post as you did in starting this thread.
This cocky arrogant attitude is, in my opinion, much more damaging to the
cause of Christ than Amy Grants failure to stay in her unhappy marriage.
People understand failure but they don't understand why Christians devour
eachother and then claim to be all about love.
Annie
Aarweswan
Romans 8:1
"For God sent not his son into the world to condemn it, but to save it" John
3:17
"this is how it is to be crucified and judged without love" - Janis Ian
Why do people love to stir up trouble and then blame it on their interpretation
of Gods word?
Amy Grant owes nothing to the public. Nothing. Amy Grant owes everything to
her, correct me if I'm wrong, isn't it called a _personal_ relationship with
God?
Covenant, Annie, Pearl, your kindness shows your inner nature. Thanks.
A couple of questions:
*Didn't the OLD testament have a brighter, happier sequel called the New
Testament? Isn't it about the "Good News" that Jesus Christ came to redeem the
people who couldn't change themselves?
*Doesn't the bible say that when God sees us, he sees us as Holy? We ARE the
righteouness of God in Christ Jesus.
*Did Christs' disciples really give their lives to simply reaffirm the strict,
stale, LOVELESS, religion that the law already taught? What was so
revolutionary that would have caused them to give up their lives? More rules???
*Isn't Jesus our mediatior, our advocate? hmmm.... apparently he is unable to
do that unless you go on the 700 club and tell every pious bible-thumper you've
been born with the disease of humanity... just like them! I guess the
difference is the biblethumpers have their skeletons hidden in deeper, more
secure closets.
According to Websters dictionary, the name "Satan" means accuser... hmmm...
whose job do you think it is to accuse Christians of sin already forgiven?
Be careful.
A@ron
Sundialer
unless Gary Chapman was cheating on her, abusing her, or endangering her
safety in some way, then according to scripture, Amy has no biblical grounds
to justify her divorce. Yet she said, "I believe and trust that I've been
released from this (marriage)..." However, she gives no biblical authority
for this statement, she can't because there isn't any.
In a November 1999 interview with CCM magazine she spoke in generalities
about her divorce. She declined to comment on any of the specifics of the
counseling sessions. She said, "I have tried at every turn to take the high
road, and yet, my personal life kept just spiraling downward." She will not
say what it was that was causing her life to spiral. Concerning one
particular session she says she wasn't even thinking about God healing her
marriage, but healing her personally. Later sessions identified what it was
exactly that needed to be healed in her, but again she will not say what
this was. "A lot of life is just meant for everybody to take to their
grave," she said.
Ok, its none of our business, its private, what we think we know we don't,
and maybe she has resolved it spiritually, but trust is the casualty.
Because she is a public person publicly bearing the name of Christ, and
people, for good or bad, look to her for Christian leadership and
inspiration, this mystery surrounding her divorce has created a strong sense
of moral ambiguity that has left the state of her faith in regard to the
source of its ultimate authority and its obligation to public accountability
in a static state of tension and confusion. Maybe she doesn't owe the public
anything. Certainly she owes the public something.More than we're getting.
Ok, Fine. If this is where she is going to leave it then she needs to divest
herself of all public associations that come from being promoted as a
Christian artist. If she's not going to be bound by biblical standards then
she needs to stop speaking as part of evangelical Christian music.
Grace, mercy, forgiveness, peace are all ours in Christ yes, but justifying
rebellion rooted in moral autonomy apart from what God calls sin will
prohibit us from having these things fully no matter how much we think and
talk about being in Christ. Scripture makes this perfectly clear without
needing interpretation.
~S
" Annie M" <e...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:_R0Va.6222$pH7....@news01.roc.ny...
Sundialer
sacraments, the forgiveness of sins, and the consolation of religion are
thrown away at cut prices. Grace is represented as the Church's
inexhaustible treasury, from which she showers blessings with generous
hands, without asking questions or fixing limits. Grace without price; grace
without cost! The essence of grace, we suppose, is that the account has been
paid in advance; and, because it has been paid, everything can be had for
nothing....a cheap covering for sins." ---Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of
Discipleship
"Aarweswan" <aarw...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030728015653...@mb-m02.aol.com...
Annie M
> about her divorce. She declined to comment on any of the specifics of the
> counseling sessions.
You only prove ,the more you talk, that you are ignoring my very point.
This is it. How can you not see how absurd this statment is? Do you
actualy believe that you are entitled to that information?
Thank you from making my point so perfectly and for alowing me to use one of
my favorite words *absurd* :-)
Annie
Annie M
> "Cheap grace means grace sold on the market like cheapjacks' wares. The
> sacraments, the forgiveness of sins, and the consolation of religion are
> thrown away at cut prices. Grace is represented as the Church's
> inexhaustible treasury, from which she showers blessings with generous
> hands, without asking questions or fixing limits. Grace without price;
grace
> without cost! The essence of grace, we suppose, is that the account has
been
> paid in advance; and, because it has been paid, everything can be had for
> nothing....a cheap covering for sins." ---Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost
of
> Discipleship
>
>
Irrelevant. You don't know her heart. Your wrong, why can't you just say
so and stop acting like your all knowing in this situation.
Annie
faience
> ...she said, "I believe and trust that I've been
> released from this (marriage)..." However, she gives no biblical authority
> for this statement, she can't because there isn't any.
Since both Amy AND THE COUNSELING MINISTER
said this marriage should end on Biblical grounds, i am completely
baffled by your statement.
Sure, they *could* be wrong. But you aren't saying they
*could* be wrong. You are saying they *are* wrong. How can
you know this? How can you know what was said in these
counseling sessions?
> Ok, its none of our business, its private, what we think we know we don't,
> and maybe she has resolved it spiritually, but trust is the casualty.
> Because she is a public person publicly bearing the name of Christ, and
> people, for good or bad, look to her for Christian leadership and
> inspiration, this mystery surrounding her divorce has created a strong sense
> of moral ambiguity that has left the state of her faith in regard to the
> source of its ultimate authority and its obligation to public accountability
> in a static state of tension and confusion.
It seems to me that this whole situation is ... or at least could be
used by God to help us release our own dependence on human
celebrities, and look to the real source for guidance. We need
to *let go* of our need to "trust" a celebrity -- even a Christian
celebrity -- to manage *her* life right. You seem to think Amy
has a duty to live her life in a way that can be looked up to -- to
publicly list and repent of her sins, *whatever* they are.
That's absurd!* It's OUR job to let go of the need to have the
ambiguities of a stranger's marriage resolved in public.
pax
ruth
(Annie! I borrowed your word... It is kinda cool!)
Annie M
"faience" <nickel...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bg3dpa$kilmj$1...@ID-37744.news.uni-berlin.de...
And so fitting isn't it! Hhahahahahahahaha Good points Ruthie
:-)
Maybelline
> unless Gary Chapman was cheating on her, abusing her, or endangering her
> safety in some way, then according to scripture, Amy has no biblical grounds
> to justify her divorce. Yet she said, "I believe and trust that I've been
> released from this (marriage)..." However, she gives no biblical authority
> for this statement, she can't because there isn't any.
But a person could assume, from that statement, that he did do the
things that would cause a biblical break of the marraige. I am always
amazed at those who take mental leaps against her but totally overlook
the things that could be pointing to justification.
Either way, I STILL respect her so much for NOT telling. It would have
been totally gross. Seems our pop culture actually thinks "Springer"
type behaivior is the standard now. Sad.
> In a November 1999 interview with CCM magazine she spoke in generalities
> about her divorce. She declined to comment on any of the specifics of the
> counseling sessions. She said, "I have tried at every turn to take the high
> road, and yet, my personal life kept just spiraling downward." She will not
> say what it was that was causing her life to spiral. Concerning one
> particular session she says she wasn't even thinking about God healing her
> marriage, but healing her personally. Later sessions identified what it was
> exactly that needed to be healed in her, but again she will not say what
> this was. "A lot of life is just meant for everybody to take to their
> grave," she said.
Doesn't that just speak volumes to you????? It tells me that she is
either protecting Gary, or she is totally knocked over by the
realizatioon of her own sin. Maybe a combination of both huh? If the
former, then I really respect that, if the latter, then I totally
identify with that because I too came to the realization through
divorce that I am nothing but a dirty sinner in need of Christ's love,
forgivness and restoration. It is overwhelming.
> Ok, its none of our business, its private, what we think we know we don't,
> and maybe she has resolved it spiritually, but trust is the casualty.
> Because she is a public person publicly bearing the name of Christ, and
> people, for good or bad, look to her for Christian leadership and
> inspiration, this mystery surrounding her divorce has created a strong sense
> of moral ambiguity that has left the state of her faith in regard to the
> source of its ultimate authority and its obligation to public accountability
> in a static state of tension and confusion. Maybe she doesn't owe the public
> anything. Certainly she owes the public something.
The thing is, Christians have perpetuated a totally unattainable
standard for ourselves. And, the way you talk only perpetuates it.
Being a Christian does *not* mean that you are immune from sin or the
frailties of humanity. And, to say that she owes the public is so
strange. Divorce is totally painful. Even if you are the initiater. It
is a banner of failure. You see the effects on your kids, and then
there is just truckloads of shame. She is only human and I am sure
needs time to heal. The other fact is that she was not the only one
involved. Gary took the low road and tried to tarnish her as much as
possible but it takes a lot to get to the point of being willing to
leave a spouse in the first place. He takes NO responsibility at all.
It is gross. Then you have people second guessing and adding things up
that they really know nothing about.... blah, blah, blah.
> More than we're getting.
> Ok, Fine. If this is where she is going to leave it then she needs to divest
> herself of all public associations that come from being promoted as a
> Christian artist. If she's not going to be bound by biblical standards then
> she needs to stop speaking as part of evangelical Christian music.
Are you kidding? This whole thing is probably the thing that makes her
cling even more to Christ. I would agree with you if she was out
promoting the virtues of divorce and saying that she no longer values
the word, or living a Christian life. But she is not doing that. She
has said in her music and in interviews that she is broken. "i try to
be faithful and then i go wrong" good grief she is totally admitting
failure.
Did Paul quit his life for Christ after acknowledging that he is the
"chief of sinners?" Did he ever lay out for us what exactely his
sin/sins were? Can you tell me where he identified the constant thorn
in his side? Where do you get the example of this?
> Grace, mercy, forgiveness, peace are all ours in Christ yes, but justifying
> rebellion rooted in moral autonomy apart from what God calls sin will
> prohibit us from having these things fully no matter how much we think and
> talk about being in Christ. Scripture makes this perfectly clear without
> needing interpretation.
Acknowledging sin and frailty, yet not getting into the personal
details publically, is *not* the same as justifying rebellion.
God knew she was a sinner all along. And so did all the emotionally
well people. She *never* was a saint. Even when her sin wasn't in the
media for you to know about. Dang, give her a break, she is not
flaunting divorce, she is just trying to do the best she can like most
of the rest of us.
Maybelline
Maybelline
> As Maybelline has pointed out, Amy says she never had an affair with Vince,
> never kissed him, or confided in him during her marital turmoil, or he with
> her during his. This is exactly the point of Christ's teaching on divorce in
> Matt 5:32. Unless Gary or Amy was unfaithful to the other with someone else,
> there is no biblical authority for one or the other to ask for a divorce.
> Yet it is exactly this strangely intimate relationship Amy shared with Vince
> Gill outside of her mariage that caused Jannis Gill to seek a divorce Vince
> in 1996 after she had found an intimate love letter written by Vince that
> declared his love for Amy...not just friendship. In an interview Jannis said
> this letter explained what amounted to a condition of emotional abandonment
> as Vince was spending more and more time with Amy than with his own wife.
<Snip>
This was a very good post. I agree with most of what you say.
I can only say that i think you are not adding an important
ingredient. Let me say that no matter what, adultery is wrong. I have
been cheated on and I never justify it. It is cruel and gross.
But let me try to explain to you that stealing is also wrong, right?
Now, take a person consumed with wanting more, more, more. They do not
care who gets in their way, they take what they want. They go and
steal from stores and homes and banks etc... Now, take a person who is
hungry and has kids to provide for. They steal a loaf of bread from
the local grocery. Both people are wrong no matter what because to
steal is wrong. But you can understand the one way more than the other
right?
Humans have a self preservation response. When a spouse becomes so
hungry and thirsty in a relationship that their weakness becomes so
profound, they find a way to fill the space. And, unfortunately, even
though gluttony is a sin, when you are starving and suddenly you are
in front of a buffet, you are most likely going to commit that sin.
The responsibility is on BOTH people. She *SHOULD* have had the
strength to resist a man (Vince)being kind to her and valuing her. But
that is very easy to say to a person who is not withering away. Gary
put her in a state of need. He *SHOULD* have loved her as Christ loved
the church.
I remember after being married for 5 years and an old boyfriend
actually said something kind to me. I literally felt drunk. Can you
believe how pathetic that sounds? I had no strength to resist it. We
all want to be loved and valued. But what I had gone through in those
five years was what laid the ground work for that, and the weakness to
actually get involved with that relationship and leave my husband. Now
you can say that i am an adulterer and that I left my husband for
another man, as he said back then, but I say that although I was wrong
to not resist the old boyfriend, I was right to leave my husband. I
had been allowing him to treat me in a totally inappropriate way which
led to my weakness. In other words, my sin with the old boyfriend was
a symptom of a bigger problem and we (my husband and I ) were both at
fault. I know leaving him was right and I do not regret it. I only
regret the sin that showed me how much i needed to leave. Does that
make sense?
I just find it strange that the blame all goes to her for her
"obvious" sin but people like you do not think about the ground work
that was layed before hand.
If I was to deliberatly not fulfill an obligation to another person
and weaken them and set them up for sin, and then they actually did
it, who is more at fault?
Maybelline
AMYS EMPEROR
>Since both Amy AND THE COUNSELING MINISTER
>said this marriage should end on Biblical grounds, i am completely
>baffled by your statement.
>
>Sure, they *could* be wrong. But you aren't saying they
>*could* be wrong. You are saying they *are* wrong. How can
>you know this? How can you know what was said in these
>counseling sessions?
>
>> Ok, its none of our business, its private, what we think we know we don't,
>> and maybe she has resolved it spiritually, but trust is the casualty.
>> Because she is a public person publicly bearing the name of Christ, and
>> people, for good or bad, look to her for Christian leadership and
>> inspiration, this mystery surrounding her divorce has created a strong
>sense
>> of moral ambiguity that has left the state of her faith in regard to the
>> source of its ultimate authority and its obligation to public
>accountability
>> in a static state of tension and confusion.
>
>It seems to me that this whole situation is ... or at least could be
>used by God to help us release our own dependence on human
>celebrities, and look to the real source for guidance. We need
>to *let go* of our need to "trust" a celebrity -- even a Christian
>celebrity -- to manage *her* life right. You seem to think Amy
>has a duty to live her life in a way that can be looked up to -- to
>publicly list and repent of her sins, *whatever* they are.
Yes, Ruth is correct.
Ruth can be correct; *sometimes* Ruth is correct~! ....
but Ruth is *always* BORING~! hahahahahaha ; )
>
>That's absurd!* It's OUR job to let go of the need to have the
>ambiguities of a stranger's marriage resolved in public.
>
>
>pax
>ruth
>(Annie! I borrowed your word... It is kinda cool!)
It's *MY* word~! Annie got it from me~!
Where's my credit~!? Your oversight is *absurd*~! ; ) Lala
AMYS EMPEROR
>Humans have a self preservation response. When a spouse becomes so
>hungry and thirsty in a relationship that their weakness becomes so
>profound, they find a way to fill the space. And, unfortunately, even
>though gluttony is a sin, when you are starving and suddenly you are
>in front of a buffet, you are most likely going to commit that sin.
>The responsibility is on BOTH people. She *SHOULD* have had the
>strength to resist a man (Vince)being kind to her and valuing her. But
>that is very easy to say to a person who is not withering away. Gary
>put her in a state of need. He *SHOULD* have loved her as Christ loved
>the church.
>
>I just find it strange that the blame all goes to her for her
>"obvious" sin but people like you do not think about the ground work
>that was layed before hand.
>
>If I was to deliberatly not fulfill an obligation to another person
>and weaken them and set them up for sin, and then they actually did
>it, who is more at fault?
>
>Maybelline
Maybell, I appreciate your ideas and your testimonial (snippied).
I agree with the principles you express, BUT ....
you have gotten to conjecture about a thing *unknown*,
just as the other in this argument.
I just wanted to say so .... and that you are not my least favorite wife.
This should make you feel better. hahahahahaha : ) Lala
Sundialer
" Annie M" <e...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:VG9Va.18792$YB3....@news02.roc.ny...
Sundialer
is Christian in many aspects that...yes, she does have a higher
responsibility and an equally higher obligation to set forth a biblical
standard in eveything that she does, precisely because she is more visible.
If you work for a company, or represent an organization, or proclaim the
name of Christ and you do something that damages the mission or reputation
of your trust then there are consequences. Yes, reconciliation and
forgiveness should take place, but the consequences are an accounting for,
or the righting of a wrong. Kobe Bryant, because he is a public figure
understood this an immediately dealt with it publically and as extremely gut
wrenching as it was and embarrassing to be laid bare like that, thats the
sacrifice you have to make to be restored. After that you have nothing to
hide. Amy Grant doesn't feel the need to deal publicly with what happened
because she hasn't had to. Her wealth, relative prestege, and sales power
have insulated her.
Christ suffered a sinner's death in an extremely degrading and humiliating
way for all the world to see, His ministry was public and he hid nothing in
private, and because Amy Grant practices her Christian vocation in public
and accepts to some degree its public implications, she too must die to
herself publicly, not to save face, or to protect her privacy because what
she did was not entirely private, it affected people beyond her immediate
circles. She must so that we all may share collectively in healing and "all"
glory be given unto Christ. Some of you have said she doesn't owe the public
anything, then the the moral ambiguity and tension will remains in her
public works, and the mission of Christ will be hindered.
This is the ugly devastation and consequences of sin and it is messy.
~S
"faience" <nickel...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bg3dpa$kilmj$1...@ID-37744.news.uni-berlin.de...
>You seem to think Amy
Sundialer
> "Sundialer" <Sundialer@*nospam*mail.com> wrote in message
news:<bg2u7p$tbf$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net>...
> > Scripture is clear that the only mandate for divorce is unfaithfulness.
So
> > unless Gary Chapman was cheating on her, abusing her, or endangering her
> > safety in some way, then according to scripture, Amy has no biblical
grounds
> > to justify her divorce. Yet she said, "I believe and trust that I've
been
> > released from this (marriage)..." However, she gives no biblical
authority
> > for this statement, she can't because there isn't any.
>
> But a person could assume, from that statement, that he did do the
> things that would cause a biblical break of the marraige. I am always
> amazed at those who take mental leaps against her but totally overlook
> the things that could be pointing to justification.
Then she can't call it "irreconciliable differences." And because she won't
come clean about the whole mess we have nothing to look for to provide
justification except the authority of biblical teaching.
Or it could tell you she's protecting herself and Vince Gill. You've said
we're all human. Well then, where there is smoke, there is usually fire if
human nature is a guide.
> > Ok, its none of our business, its private, what we think we know we
don't,
> > and maybe she has resolved it spiritually, but trust is the casualty.
> > Because she is a public person publicly bearing the name of Christ, and
> > people, for good or bad, look to her for Christian leadership and
> > inspiration, this mystery surrounding her divorce has created a strong
sense
> > of moral ambiguity that has left the state of her faith in regard to the
> > source of its ultimate authority and its obligation to public
accountability
> > in a static state of tension and confusion. Maybe she doesn't owe the
public
> > anything. Certainly she owes the public something.
>
> The thing is, Christians have perpetuated a totally unattainable
> standard for ourselves. And, the way you talk only perpetuates it.
Yes. Following biblical commandments is unattainable for so many people
because they totally negate the empowering supernatural strength of God's
Holy Spirit. We all sin and fall short, but to volitionally treat God's word
like a buffet table because you think some of its commands don't apply to
you...thats rebellion. Either you want to follow God or you really don't
want to and you're not being honest about. Or your confused so you throw up
yor hands and say, "I'm only human."
> > Ok, Fine. If this is where she is going to leave it then she needs to
divest
> > herself of all public associations that come from being promoted as a
> > Christian artist. If she's not going to be bound by biblical standards
then
> > she needs to stop speaking as part of evangelical Christian music.
>
> Are you kidding? This whole thing is probably the thing that makes her
> cling even more to Christ. I would agree with you if she was out
> promoting the virtues of divorce and saying that she no longer values
> the word, or living a Christian life. But she is not doing that. She
> has said in her music and in interviews that she is broken. "i try to
> be faithful and then i go wrong" good grief she is totally admitting
> failure.
You've misunderstood me. I didn't say stop being a Christian. I said stop
promoting yourself as a Christian artist and taking advantage of its
benefits.
>
> Did Paul quit his life for Christ after acknowledging that he is the
> "chief of sinners?" Did he ever lay out for us what exactely his
> sin/sins were? Can you tell me where he identified the constant thorn
> in his side? Where do you get the example of this?
Paul never did anything unbiblical and then turned around and called it
biblical.
> > Grace, mercy, forgiveness, peace are all ours in Christ yes, but
justifying
> > rebellion rooted in moral autonomy apart from what God calls sin will
> > prohibit us from having these things fully no matter how much we think
and
> > talk about being in Christ. Scripture makes this perfectly clear without
> > needing interpretation.
>
> Acknowledging sin and frailty, yet not getting into the personal
> details publically, is *not* the same as justifying rebellion.
If she is a Christian, that implies subjecting oneself to the Lordship of
Jesus Christ and his teaching. She says she didn't commit adultery, but she
didinitiate the divorce, and she found justification for doing it in
something called "irreconciliable differences" Scriptural authority doesn't
justify irreconciliable differences, but it does justify unfaithfulness. God
is not interested in protecting you from the shame of sin. He is very much
interested in making his strength evident in your weakness so that you can
be truely healed and his glory revealed to the world.
> she is not flaunting divorce, she is just trying to do the best she can
like most
> of the rest of us.
In a most perverse way...I think she is flaunting divorce, because she
refuses to acknowledge the role she played in causing the breakup of Vince
Gill's family, and he in hers. Their happiness now broke a lot of other
lives, and they make-believe it has God's approval. They're forgiven they
say, perhaps, but how does a holy God give forgiveness for sin that they
refuse to acknowledge as sin in light of God's word?
AMYS EMPEROR
>I'm saying that because she is a public person promulgating a ministry that
>is Christian in many aspects that...yes, she does have a higher
>responsibility and an equally higher obligation to set forth a biblical
>standard in eveything that she does, precisely because she is more visible.
>If you work for a company, or represent an organization, or proclaim the
>name of Christ and you do something that damages the mission or reputation
>of your trust then there are consequences.
We are well aware of "what you are saying."
We have experienced this argument with every 'celebrity.'
You are not inventing a new concept.
What "we" would say is that you are not showing Christian characteristics. That
your sin is equal to others. Etc.
>Yes, reconciliation and
>forgiveness should take place, but the consequences are an accounting for,
>or the righting of a wrong. Kobe Bryant, because he is a public figure
>understood this an immediately dealt with it publically and as extremely gut
>wrenching as it was and embarrassing to be laid bare like that, thats the
>sacrifice you have to make to be restored. After that you have nothing to
>hide. Amy Grant doesn't feel the need to deal publicly with what happened
>because she hasn't had to. Her wealth, relative prestege, and sales power
>have insulated her.
You poor sentence structure is indicative of poor thought processes.
Are you saying Amy has greater "wealth, prestige, and sales power" than Kobe
Bryant?
That Amy should have called a press conference to admit that She engaged in the
same activity as Kobe? (tho She didn't)
Do you argue that Amy ought have less of the above?
Then your argument is with those who respect Her, not Her, Herself.
Would the loss of the above equal God's judgment?
You seem confused by your demand for Her condemnation.
Lala
PearL
>Gary
>>put her in a state of need.
Well... we dont *really* know that he did. We've only heard rumors that he
didnt treat her well, just as we've heard rumors that she cheated.
(AMYS EMPEROR)
>Maybell, I appreciate your ideas and your testimonial (snippied).
>I agree with the principles you express, BUT ....
>
>you have gotten to conjecture about a thing *unknown*,
>just as the other in this argument.
Psh, I actally *agree* with AE!!! Go figure!!! ; )
PearL
>So
>unless Gary Chapman was cheating on her, abusing her, or endangering her
>safety in some way, then according to scripture, Amy has no biblical grounds
>to justify her divorce.
? Just as I said to Maybelline that we as outsiders dont know for sure that
Gary did treat her badly (as was rumored), neither do we know that he didn't.
>Because she is a public person publicly bearing the name of Christ,
Isnt every Christian publicly bearing the name of Christ? Do *you* want to get
up on national television and air all your sins? I wouldnt. I may feel a
little let down about the way she handled things, but I certainly dont expect
her to reveal all her dirty laundry in public.
>If this is where she is going to leave it then she needs to divest
>herself of all public associations that come from being promoted as a
>Christian artist.
Good grief....
PearL
>I'm saying that because she is a public person promulgating a ministry that
>is Christian in many aspects that...yes, she does have a higher
>responsibility and an equally higher obligation to set forth a biblical
>standard in eveything that she does, precisely because she is more visible.
>If you work for a company, or represent an organization, or proclaim the
>name of Christ and you do something that damages the mission or reputation
>of your trust then there are consequences. Yes, reconciliation and
>forgiveness should take place, but the consequences are an accounting for,
>or the righting of a wrong. Kobe Bryant, because he is a public figure
>understood this an immediately dealt with it publically and as extremely gut
>wrenching as it was and embarrassing to be laid bare like that, thats the
>sacrifice you have to make to be restored. After that you have nothing to
>hide. Amy Grant doesn't feel the need to deal publicly with what happened
>because she hasn't had to. Her wealth, relative prestege, and sales power
>have insulated her.
Altho I agree with what you say above... why are you telling *US*? Shouldn't
you be taking this up with Amy?
Covenant
> "Cheap grace means grace sold on the market like cheapjacks' wares.
> The sacraments, the forgiveness of sins, and the consolation of
> religion are thrown away at cut prices. Grace is represented as the
> Church's inexhaustible treasury, from which she showers blessings
> with generous hands, without asking questions or fixing limits. Grace
> without price; grace without cost! The essence of grace, we suppose,
> is that the account has been paid in advance; and, because it has
> been paid, everything can be had for nothing....a cheap covering for
> sins." ---Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship
"Judge not, lest ye be judged."
Christ, Jesus. The Bible
Covenant
>> From: "Sundialer"
>
>> The danger of it all is that at first we hate sin,
>> then we tolerate sin, but in the end, if we forget, we embrace sin.
>
> What I have seen of most here is not an embracing of sin... but
> instead an embracing of the sinner. Just as God embraces every one
> of us (as sinners), regardless of the sins we have committed.
STANDING AND APPLAUDING !!!!
*Way* to knock that troll DOWN !!!!!
Covenant
> I have only one thing to say to you Covenant:
>
> "The Lord bless you and keep you;
> the Lord make his face to shine upon you,
> and be gracious to you;
> the Lord lift up his countenance upon you,
> and give you peace.
Thank you....
Now do the same thing towards Amy...
Or *can''t* you?
Covenant
> Scripture is clear that the only mandate for divorce is
> unfaithfulness. So unless Gary Chapman was cheating on her, abusing
> her, or endangering her safety in some way, then according to
> scripture, Amy has no biblical grounds to justify her divorce. Yet
> she said, "I believe and trust that I've been released from this
> (marriage)..." However, she gives no biblical authority for this
> statement, she can't because there isn't any.
How foolish are you to think you know everything that happened within their
marriage?
Covenant
> Or it could tell you she's protecting herself and Vince Gill. You've
> said we're all human. Well then, where there is smoke, there is
> usually fire if human nature is a guide.
ESPECIALLY if one is a bad minded .. ahem... *christian* (lower case) with a
*trash Amy Grant* agenda.
--
Covenant
A Man Getting REALLY Bored With This One....
faience
> PearL wrote:
> >> From: "Sundialer"
> >
> >> The danger of it all is that at first we hate sin,
> >> then we tolerate sin, but in the end, if we forget, we embrace sin.
> >
> > What I have seen of most here is not an embracing of sin... but
> > instead an embracing of the sinner. Just as God embraces every one
> > of us (as sinners), regardless of the sins we have committed.
>
>
> STANDING AND APPLAUDING !!!!
>
>
> *Way* to knock that troll DOWN !!!!!
>
Yes! What he said!
8~)
ruth
Just Give Me A Name
I think it's a kind of funny how this subject keeps coming back and how
the people who don't want to talk or hear about it are the ones who keep
this debate going. I think that if you don't want to talk about this
because you believe it's wriong to be judgemental the best thing to do
is to just ignore the debate. It will die soon if nobody responds to the
people who keep bringing this up.
It's also funny to see how people start to throw bibble passages and
interpretations of the bible at eachother. This while it is so simple.
Nobody in this debating place knows Amy Grant or her family well enough
to really know what was and is going on in her life and so nobody knows
her motives for the divorce. In her eyes it must have been a valid
motivation and she does not owe anybody an explanation because it's her
own life. You don't need to point people to whatever chapter in the
bible, magazine or TV-guide to understand that. Who are we to talk about
her life while we have not walked her shoes? People are just too busy
sticking their nose into things they should not stick their nose in.
Those people don't understand were the love for somebodies music ends
and privacy starts.
Sincerely from Hope with Love
Annie M schreef:
Just Give Me A Name
Personally I believe this whole debate is absurd because people are
talking about somebody elses private life and none of us knows anything
about that. Everybody seems to claim they know how it is, was, should be
and how it's in the bible but the only truth is that nobody knows
anything about it all. First of all they don't know any details about
Amy Grant's life nor should they know any of those details. As for the
bible there are just too many different and conflicting interpretations.
Sincerely from Hope with Love
Annie M schreef:
>
Just Give Me A Name
'I'm saying that because she is a public person'
Her music is public because you can buy it in a store. Her concerts are
public because you can buy tickets for those. Her interviews are public
because you can buy the magazines and read them. Her private life is not
public because you can not buy tickets for that. Big difference
Sincerely from Hope with Love
Sundialer schreef:
AMYS EMPEROR
>? Just as I said to Maybelline that we as outsiders dont know for sure that
>Gary did treat her badly (as was rumored), neither do we know that he didn't.
>
>
>
>>Because she is a public person publicly bearing the name of Christ,
>
>Isnt every Christian publicly bearing the name of Christ? Do *you* want to
>get
>up on national television and air all your sins? I wouldnt. I may feel a
>little let down about the way she handled things, but I certainly dont expect
>her to reveal all her dirty laundry in public.
>
>>If this is where she is going to leave it then she needs to divest
>>herself of all public associations that come from being promoted as a
>>Christian artist.
>
>Good grief....
>
> ~ PearL~
I really shouldn't have to say this because everyone knows,
but I would like to affirm my fondness of Pearl~!
hahahahahaha : ) Lala
AMYS EMPEROR
>>Maybell, I appreciate your ideas and your testimonial (snippied).
>>I agree with the principles you express, BUT ....
>>
>>you have gotten to conjecture about a thing *unknown*,
>>just as the other in this argument.
>
>Psh, I actally *agree* with AE!!! Go figure!!! ; )
>
> ~ PearL~
You do when you are correct~! hahahaha : ) Lala
Sundialer
news:<bg1kh8$s97$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net>...
>
>
> hungry and thirsty in a relationship that their weakness becomes so
> profound, they find a way to fill the space. And, unfortunately, even
> though gluttony is a sin, when you are starving and suddenly you are
> in front of a buffet, you are most likely going to commit that sin.
> The responsibility is on BOTH people. She *SHOULD* have had the
> strength to resist a man (Vince)being kind to her and valuing her. But
> that is very easy to say to a person who is not withering away. Gary
> put her in a state of need. He *SHOULD* have loved her as Christ loved
> the church.
Amy said this about Gary's perspective, "His feeling was that this is our
life, this is our commitment, and being true to this standard and keeping
this vow is the most important thing for us, for our children, for our
spiritual wellness." Gary pleaded with her to not leave, to not do this.
This doesn't sound like someone who was not loving her as Christ would. If
Amy is right, then Gary's perspective was very much in accordance with
Jesus' perspective. He may not have been a perfect husband, but what was it
he was doing that impoverished her so that God could not heal and would push
her towards divorce. It is frustratingly unclear. I think a clue is in a
remark Amy said about their differences. She said, "Gary has the kind of
valor toward ideals that would make people overthrow governments and run
armies. I think we have different gifts, and I think one of Gary's is that
he is like a standard-bearer. And if I have a gift, its compassion. And at
some point those things are different. They're really different..." Well, of
course, but under the Lordship of Jesus Christ are they incompatable? Does
this imply your marriage is hindered because you both have different gifts?
I would think it would be the reverse. What I don't have, she has, and what
she doesn't have I do, and together we are "one flesh" reflecting the image
of the invisible God. This is a part of what marriage is all about.
> I remember after being married for 5 years and an old boyfriend
> actually said something kind to me. I literally felt drunk. Can you
> believe how pathetic that sounds? I had no strength to resist it. We
> all want to be loved and valued. But what I had gone through in those
> five years was what laid the ground work for that, and the weakness to
> actually get involved with that relationship and leave my husband. Now
> you can say that i am an adulterer and that I left my husband for
> another man, as he said back then, but I say that although I was wrong
> to not resist the old boyfriend, I was right to leave my husband. I
> had been allowing him to treat me in a totally inappropriate way which
> led to my weakness. In other words, my sin with the old boyfriend was
> a symptom of a bigger problem and we (my husband and I ) were both at
> fault. I know leaving him was right and I do not regret it. I only
> regret the sin that showed me how much i needed to leave.
>Does that make sense?
Umm, from a human standpoint yes...From a biblical
perspective...respectfully no, but I thank you for your boldness in sharing
this.
> I just find it strange that the blame all goes to her for her
> "obvious" sin but people like you do not think about the ground work
> that was layed before hand.
>
> If I was to deliberatly not fulfill an obligation to another person
> and weaken them and set them up for sin, and then they actually did
> it, who is more at fault?
The teaching of Adam, Eve, and the Serpent show us that we are individually
responsible for our own choices. David was a man after God's own heart, but
because of his sin with Bathsheba, God took away his individual portion in
the establishment of God's holy temple. Moses, struck the rock impatiently
to bring water out of it for the people in the desert, and because of it God
prohibited him from entering the land God had promised them and for which
they had wandered around for forty years to finnally see. The ancient
Israelites were chosen by God, and they in turn were urged to choose life by
obeying him and reflecting his holy character in their dealings, but because
of their rebellion and apostasy, the people of Christ in the church became
the vehicle of divine revelation.
I would say that conscious action is formed by intent which reveals the will
as an act of choice. Unless there is more than one possible path from which
to choose, we are not free. For a Christian, there is always a choice, to do
what he requires of us, or to do what is expedient for whatever personal
reason. Whatever we choose...there will be consequences.
As newlyweds, my wife had let a shopping cart roll into a man's brand
spanking new luxury mini-van and it had left a large dent. She could have
left, but she didn't. She waited until the owner came out and she approached
him to tell him what happened. He was upset and was not very friendly about
it and she called me afterwards. I became furious myself. "How bad is it?"
"What kind of car was it?" "Why did you let the cart roll?" Secretly, I had
wanted her violate her Christian convictions about doing what was right, and
just leave the scene. It would have been so easy...just leave. 'This is
going to cost some money' I selfishly thought. When she got home I continued
to victimize her for it until she sat down quietly and began to pray through
tears I had caused. A crying woman is one thing, but a woman who prays and
cries...a man has no known ally in the universe against that. Immediately my
eyes were opened and I was pierced through to the heart. My sin was exposed
and it was horrible. I had hurt her and witheld my comfort from her when she
needed it most. I was ashamed and I wanted to run, but instead I slowly got
down on my knees as if I were proposing to her all over again, and through
my own tears asked if she would forgive me. She reached for my hand and
began praying for me, and I in turn prayed to God to forgive me, and we
prayed together, the whole thing had revealed a glaring difference between
us, but through commitment to each other and to God we began to be
transformed by the renewing of our spirits. We're still very different. She
likes country, I like jazz. Her gifts are mercy and service, and mine are
teaching, and prophecy. Prophecy is nothing more than proclaming the word,
not predicting the future. Thats as different as you can get. We compliment
each other in Christ, we don't push each away and think I don't understand
you. To let hurt feelings linger and to stop talking will isolate and
alienate your affection for each other in a heartbeat...I still had to pay
for that man's car.
It is fantastically true...that a family who prays together, stays together,
and it is all about the choices you make in every moment of life in the
ongoing process of being sanctified to God.
~S
>
> Maybelline
Sundialer
Jesus said, "Your sins are forgiven..." but then he said, "go and sin no
more."
What I have seen here is also a tendency to embrace God's attractive
qualities while ignoring his hatred of sin. In fact, I see no real
understanding of how destructive sin is.
We all want love and forgiveness but not what God requires to make it
possible.
~S
"PearL" <bstn...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030727231418...@mb-m03.aol.com...
> >From: "Sundialer"
>
> >The danger of it all is that at first we hate sin,
> >then we tolerate sin, but in the end, if we forget, we embrace sin.
>
> What I have seen of most here is not an embracing of sin... but instead an
> embracing of the sinner. Just as God embraces every one of us (as
sinners),
> regardless of the sins we have committed.
>
>
>
Steve Hunter
> Irrelevant. You don't know her heart. Your wrong, why can't you just say
> so and stop acting like your all knowing in this situation.
Because Sundialer is a cliche, a cautionary tale for all believers, a
typical self-righteous christian who thinks his sins are minor and
other's are major. Sundialer has probably chased many people away
from faith by his "holiness". IMO, there is nothing more repelling
than your type. You'd look good in a millstone.
Amy proves her faith by her works. Just the other day I got a
newsletter from a charity in Aspen that had an article about the all
the time Amy/Vince has given them. Mr & Mrs. Gill were listed in the
letter as giving over $25,000 in the last quarter. Others who work
with Amy were also listed as generous donors. These are great people
and great Christian examples who do so much good for the world it's
amazing to me.
On the other hand, Sundialer, you are a coward and a disgrace to
Christianity. If you feel the duty to publicly illuminate the "sins"
of other people that you don't even know why don't you at least use a
real name? Coward.
Steve in Breck
Adonis
while chasin' away and ol black crow or some such...git,git...git on outta
here...hehehe. Ya'll are funny.
"voice from the past" <tima...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9dcb939.03072...@posting.google.com...
> give any credence to the ministry of an unashamed and unrepentent
> adulteress like Amy Grant.
>
> This is a disgrace and blasphemy to the memory of Jesus Christ.
>
> voice from the past
MimiH561
>marriage vows so that she can be free to pursue another does great violence
>to the sanctity of their intended purpose.
Most people who are famous cite "irreconciliable differences." They have to
have some privacy. They do that so we will not know all the dirty details.
I'm sure her divorce was not just becuase of "irreconcilaible differences."
That is just used in the entertainment industry.
Mimi :)
MimiH561
>unless Gary Chapman was cheating on her, abusing her, or endangering her
>safety in some way, then according to scripture, Amy has no biblical grounds
>to justify her divorce.
We will never know if cheating, abusing or endangering Amy's safety were any of
the issues for the divorce. So, how can we judge? They will never tell what
REALLY went on! It's between Gary and Amy, and it seems both are not telling.
One old article I read said there was an incident a long time ago - back in the
Lead Me On years, that was so bad, neither of them will talk about it. That
was almost 20 years ago!
See ya!
mimi :)
Sundialer
never called anyone here a name. I've never said my sins are minor, and
others are great, and I've never judged anyone to Hell, such as you did with
that "millstone" remark Steve. I 've never insulted Amy or belittled her
works, I have only discussed the unbiblical foundation for her divorce. I've
only balanced the equation promoted by people such as yourself who only want
a warm Mister Rogers with a beard for a Jesus, warm and comforting but not
threatening, which is about the extent of your faith because it seems only
children would be attracted to it. Children who need comforting but do not
want to held accountable for their sin.
Congratulations, you have won me over with your shining example of Christ
like behavior. Be comforted in the pastel painted nursery of your Christian
childhood.
Lee Hutchison
"Steve Hunter" <st...@ultrafs.com> wrote in message
news:54cd769f.03072...@posting.google.com...
> " Annie M" <e...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message news:<dN9Va.18793$
> Because Sundialer is a cliche, a cautionary tale for all believers, a
AMYS EMPEROR
>Most people who are famous cite "irreconciliable differences."
Yes, I *always* use that one~!
hahahahaha ; ) Lala
Maybelline
> >(Maybelline)
>
> >Humans have a self preservation response. When a spouse becomes so
> >hungry and thirsty in a relationship that their weakness becomes so
> >profound, they find a way to fill the space. And, unfortunately, even
> >though gluttony is a sin, when you are starving and suddenly you are
> >in front of a buffet, you are most likely going to commit that sin.
> >The responsibility is on BOTH people. She *SHOULD* have had the
> >strength to resist a man (Vince)being kind to her and valuing her. But
> >that is very easy to say to a person who is not withering away. Gary
> >put her in a state of need. He *SHOULD* have loved her as Christ loved
> >the church.
> >
>
> >"obvious" sin but people like you do not think about the ground work
> >that was layed before hand.
> >
> >If I was to deliberatly not fulfill an obligation to another person
> >and weaken them and set them up for sin, and then they actually did
> >it, who is more at fault?
> >
>
> Maybell, I appreciate your ideas and your testimonial (snippied).
> I agree with the principles you express, BUT ....
>
> you have gotten to conjecture about a thing *unknown*,
> just as the other in this argument.
You are right. Thanks for being so kind while pointing thi out. :)
>
> I just wanted to say so .... and that you are not my least favorite wife.
>
> This should make you feel better. hahahahahaha : ) Lala
Quite!
Maybelline
Maybelline
> I'm saying that because she is a public person promulgating a ministry that
> is Christian in many aspects that...yes, she does have a higher
> responsibility and an equally higher obligation to set forth a biblical
> standard in eveything that she does, precisely because she is more visible.
I understand your point, but she has said many times that she is not a
minister, but a snger/songwriter who is a christian and writes about
her life. I think there is merit in that and a difference from a
person in a "ministry." I think we need mor people of faith
influencing the music that is out there and the TV and movies also.
Not as a ministry everytime but as people who are real and struggle
and still try to do the right thing.
> Kobe Bryant, because he is a public figure
> understood this an immediately dealt with it publically and as extremely gut
> wrenching as it was and embarrassing to be laid bare like that, thats the
> sacrifice you have to make to be restored. After that you have nothing to
> hide. Amy Grant doesn't feel the need to deal publicly with what happened
> because she hasn't had to. Her wealth, relative prestege, and sales power
> have insulated her.
But she has publically dealt with it. She has admitted to being a
sinner in need of forgivness. She has said in her music that she is
unfaithful and does wrong. She said she has the same black garbage in
her than we all do. I find that very transparent. The problem is that
if she didn't have sex with Vince before marraige, then it is hard to
confess to it. Kobe Bryant was BUSTED and that is when he fessed up.
Amy knew she was opening a can o worms and felt she still needed to do
it. That tells you something too.
And, you haven't even seemed to think that if she told her story it
*could* look very bad on Gary, which would then hurt him, his family,
and their kids. Have you ever thought she may be absorbing all this
ridicule so as to protect him and the kids, not HERSELF? Hmmmmm?
Annie M
"Sundialer" <sundialer@*nospam*mail.com> wrote in message
news:bg4cg6$1a8$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net...
> And the Christian warmth from such a compassionate crowd keeps coming.
I've
> never called anyone here a name.
You called Amy Grant an adultress and you don't know if that is true.
I've never said my sins are minor, and
> others are great, and I've never judged anyone to Hell, such as you did
with
> that "millstone" remark Steve. I 've never insulted Amy or belittled her
> works,
Re read your origonal post!
I have only discussed the unbiblical foundation for her divorce.
You don't know what the foundation of her divorce is. Have you read it?
I've
> only balanced the equation promoted by people such as yourself who only
want
> a warm Mister Rogers with a beard for a Jesus, warm and comforting but not
> threatening, which is about the extent of your faith because it seems only
> children would be attracted to it. Children who need comforting but do not
> want to held accountable for their sin.
No we just want the same right to call you on the carpet for you
presumptions and slanderous condemnation of Amy Grant that you have no real
right to pass. Your sinning here with this gray uninformed accusation that
you declare and you are shamelessly defending yourself. No one is sugar
coating sin here we are pointing our yours! Stop falsely accusing without
knowledge and let God help you. Maybe it would be best if you publicly
repent here so the forgivness and healing can begin. If you want to really
live up to what your saying you can tell us some more personal things and
repent for those too.
>
> Congratulations, you have won me over with your shining example of Christ
> like behavior. Be comforted in the pastel painted nursery of your
Christian
> childhood.
>
> Lee Hutchison
Give it up Lee, you know deep down that your wrong.
Annie
>
DarkrWater
>From: "Sundialer" sundialer@*nospam*mail.com
>Date: 7/28/2003 7:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <bg4cg6$1a8$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net>
I think that a lot of people will be surprised that when Jesus returns, he will
come not as the lamb when he was first on this earth, but with a sword.
Whatever Amy did, she will be judged, and she will pay the penalty, just as we
all will.
And the only ones who are suffering for what Amy and Gary did are her children.
They are paying for the break up of the household and the separation of their
father from them.
Vince is not their father, and will never be.
Maybelline
> Amy said this about Gary's perspective, "His feeling was that this is our
> life, this is our commitment, and being true to this standard and keeping
> this vow is the most important thing for us, for our children, for our
> spiritual wellness." Gary pleaded with her to not leave, to not do this.
> This doesn't sound like someone who was not loving her as Christ would. If
> Amy is right, then Gary's perspective was very much in accordance with
> Jesus' perspective. He may not have been a perfect husband, but what was it
> he was doing that impoverished her so that God could not heal and would push
> her towards divorce. It is frustratingly unclear. I think a clue is in a
> remark Amy said about their differences. She said, "Gary has the kind of
> valor toward ideals that would make people overthrow governments and run
> armies. I think we have different gifts, and I think one of Gary's is that
> he is like a standard-bearer. And if I have a gift, its compassion. And at
> some point those things are different. They're really different..." Well, of
> course, but under the Lordship of Jesus Christ are they incompatable? Does
> this imply your marriage is hindered because you both have different gifts?
> I would think it would be the reverse. What I don't have, she has, and what
> she doesn't have I do, and together we are "one flesh" reflecting the image
> of the invisible God. This is a part of what marriage is all about.
Her last comment on the subject is the most reveling. You left it out.
Go back and re-read it. She was trying to be kind and possitive and
*not* do to him what he had done to her in the media.
> > fault. I know leaving him was right and I do not regret it. I only
> > regret the sin that showed me how much i needed to leave.
>
> >Does that make sense?
>
> Umm, from a human standpoint yes...From a biblical
> perspective...respectfully no, but I thank you for your boldness in sharing
> this.
Biblical? Really? Well I guess you didn't know that he had screwed
anything that wasn't nailed down or painted, and he had beaten me once
and had totally emotional abuse. I didn't, however, leave him for
those things strangly enough. I thought I was in the marraige for
good. That is how you think when you get married and are a good
christian girl. But when the old boyfriend came in the picture and I
saw my weakness so blatantly it scared me that I had allowed this to
happen to a point that I was so weak. I never was a cheater by
charachter and took much pride in that. I was very critical of people
who called themselves Christians and then had affairs or divorced. I
learned the hard way that my strength was because God must have felt
that I had enough on my plate and sheilded me from further garbage.
Until, that is, I got so critical of others and ignored the fact that
leaving is, sometimes, the right thing to do.
> The teaching of Adam, Eve, and the Serpent show us that we are individually
> responsible for our own choices.
Totally agree. But we are also taught to be responsible and to not
depleate anothers strength. To get married and decide that you are
safe and can do whatever and whenever and not nurture is not Gods
recipe of marraige.
Not saying Gary did this but it does seem to be the "rumor."
Let me ask you this just for fun. Lets say you got married and your
wife decided to totally cut you off sexually and refused to do other
wifely obligations. Decided to just go shopping, not work, and spend
all your money. Go around town and make a scene and disrespect you.
You plead with her but she is totally happy and fulfilled, she doesn't
want to change anything. She doesn't have a problem, but you probably
do right? Then what? She says she wants the marraige to remain. Would
you ever put an end to this or just take it?
> As newlyweds, my wife had let a shopping cart roll into a man's brand
> spanking new luxury mini-van and it had left a large dent. She could have
> left, but she didn't. She waited until the owner came out and she approached
> him to tell him what happened. He was upset and was not very friendly about
> it and she called me afterwards. I became furious myself. "How bad is it?"
> "What kind of car was it?" "Why did you let the cart roll?" Secretly, I had
> wanted her violate her Christian convictions about doing what was right, and
> just leave the scene. It would have been so easy...just leave. 'This is
> going to cost some money' I selfishly thought. When she got home I continued
> to victimize her for it until she sat down quietly and began to pray through
> tears I had caused. A crying woman is one thing, but a woman who prays and
> cries...a man has no known ally in the universe against that. Immediately my
> eyes were opened and I was pierced through to the heart.
Well this just shows that you love your wife and God. Good!! But I
promise you that all men are NOT this way. I cried and prayed many
times and my husband had no difference. Saw it as weakness, took more
advantage.
> It is fantastically true...that a family who prays together, stays together,
> and it is all about the choices you make in every moment of life in the
> ongoing process of being sanctified to God.
I wish I could still believe this but my ex and i prayed together too.
I can only say now that it helps, there is no sure fire guarantee.
That is where faith comes in.
Maybelline
>
> ~S
>
> >
> > Maybelline
Brennan07
>Date: 7/28/03 2:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <bg431s$3ss$3...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>
and hell and wrath. No one ever acceptable, a hierarchy of evil based on the
individual's own personal weaknesses.
The word 'sin' is misunderstood by many. Mistranslated. "Chait" - what the
Christian bible calls sin. It is an archery term, it means "to miss the mark".
Very few 'sins' are in the category of deliberate malice.
There is such a similar spirit in fundamentalist Islam and Judaism and
Christianity, they have far more in common with each other than, say, Bishop
Spong or Sprague might with a fundamentalist Christian or Rabbi Abraham Joshua
Heschel with an ultra orthodox Jew.
Avital
PearL
>I've
>only balanced the equation promoted by people such as yourself who only want
>a warm Mister Rogers with a beard for a Jesus, warm and comforting but not
>threatening
You see Jesus as threatening? The God you quote; one of wrath, anger, and
intolerance, is the God of Old Testament... key emphasis on *OLD*. God gave
us the *New* Testament and His Son for a reason. A reverend once explained it
to me like this..
If you wrote out a will and testament and then 3 days later made changes and
wrote out a 2nd will, and then 2 dys after that you died...which will should be
viewed for your last wishes? The 2nd of course.
Therefore, we are to follow the New, God's last wishes, and use the Old only as
reference to the New.
Jesus hung out with tax collectors, prostitutes and sinners, and not once did
he speak ill of them. The only people Jesus ever looked upon with scorn were
the Pharisees or "religious people"...
"Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, "The teachers of
religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the
Scriptures. So practice and obey whatever they say to you, but don't follow
their example. For they don't practice what they teach. They crush you with
impossible religious demands and never lift a finger to help ease the burden.
"Everything they do is for show. On their arms they wear extra wide prayer
boxes with Scripture verses inside, and they wear extra long tassels on their
robes. And how they love to sit at the head table at banquets and in the most
prominent seats in the synagogue! They enjoy the attention they get on the
streets, and they enjoy being called 'Rabbi.' Don't ever let anyone call you
'Rabbi,' for you have only one teacher, and all of you are on the same level as
brothers and sisters. And don't address anyone here on earth as 'Father,' for
only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. And don't let anyone call you
'Master,' for there is only one master, the Messiah. The greatest among you
must be a servant. But those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those
who humble themselves will be exalted.
"How terrible it will be for you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees.
Hypocrites! For you won't let others enter the Kingdom of Heaven, and you won't
go in yourselves. Yes, how terrible it will be for you teachers of religious
law and you Pharisees. For you cross land and sea to make one convert, and then
you turn him into twice the son of hell as you yourselves are. "Blind guides!
How terrible it will be for you! For you say that it means nothing to swear 'by
God's Temple' – you can break that oath. But then you say that it is binding
to swear 'by the gold in the Temple.' Blind fools! Which is greater, the gold,
or the Temple that makes the gold sacred? And you say that to take an oath 'by
the altar' can be broken, but to swear 'by the gifts on the altar' is binding!
How blind! For which is greater, the gift on the altar, or the altar that makes
the gift sacred? When you swear 'by the altar,' you are swearing by it and by
everything on it. And when you swear 'by the Temple,' you are swearing by it
and by God, who lives in it. And when you swear 'by heaven,' you are swearing
by the throne of God and by God, who sits on the throne. "How terrible it will
be for you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are
careful to tithe even the tiniest part of your income, but you ignore the
important things of the law – justice, mercy, and faith. You should tithe,
yes, but you should not leave undone the more important things. Blind guides!
You strain your water so you won't accidentally swallow a gnat; then you
swallow a camel! "How terrible it will be for you teachers of religious law
and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! You are so careful to clean the outside of the
cup and the dish, but inside you are filthy – full of greed and
self-indulgence! Blind Pharisees! First wash the inside of the cup, and then
the outside will become clean, too. "How terrible it will be for you teachers
of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs
– beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people's bones
and all sorts of impurity. You try to look like upright people outwardly, but
inside your hearts are filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness. "How terrible it
will be for you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For
you build tombs for the prophets your ancestors killed and decorate the graves
of the godly people your ancestors destroyed. Then you say, 'We never would
have joined them in killing the prophets.' "In saying that, you are accusing
yourselves of being the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Go
ahead. Finish what they started. Snakes! Sons of vipers! How will you escape
the judgment of hell?
I will send you prophets and wise men and teachers of religious law. You will
kill some by crucifixion and whip others in your synagogues, chasing them from
city to city. As a result, you will become guilty of murdering all the godly
people from righteous Abel to Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered in
the Temple between the altar and the sanctuary. I assure you, all the
accumulated judgment of the centuries will break upon the heads of this very
generation. "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and
stones God's messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children
together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let
me. And now look, your house is left to you, empty and desolate. For I tell
you this, you will never see me again until you say, 'Bless the one who comes
in the name of the Lord!' "
- Matthew 23:1-39 NLT
PearL
>What I have seen here is also a tendency to embrace God's attractive
>qualities while ignoring his hatred of sin. In fact, I see no real
>understanding of how destructive sin is.
No one here is "ignoring" God. Several have merely been trying to point out to
you that since we (people on the outside looking in) have no first hand
knowledge of what actually transpired between Amy and Gary, Amy and Vince,
Vince and Janet, all of them and God.... that we should not be passing
judgement or lecturing about what each of those persons should do or not do.
Of course we all have our own opinions as to what *MAY* have happened...but
that does not mean that what we *think* happened, actually did happen.
Therefore, we should refrain from making "I *know* without a doubt that Amy
_____" statements.
PearL
>I really shouldn't have to say this because everyone knows,
>but I would like to affirm my fondness of Pearl~!
>
>hahahahahaha : ) Lala
I *knew* it!!! I'm gonna be made a wife any day now...I can feel it! lol ; )
JenJenMO
wife decided to totally cut you off sexually and refused to do other
wifely obligations. Decided to just go shopping, not work, and spend
all your money. Go around town and make a scene and disrespect you.
You plead with her but she is totally happy and fulfilled, she doesn't
want to change anything. She doesn't have a problem, but you probably
do right? Then what? She says she wants the marraige to remain. Would
you ever put an end to this or just take it?"
You are honestly saying that Gary did all of this? And what proof do you have
besides what you've heard through "rumors."
JenJenMO
children.
They are paying for the break up of the household and the separation of their
father from them.
Vince is not their father, and will never be."
That's very true. The children are always the innocent ones that suffer in
divorce.
C. Giesbrecht
>>(AMYS EMPEROR)
>
>>I really shouldn't have to say this because everyone knows,
>>but I would like to affirm my fondness of Pearl~!
>>
>>hahahahahaha : ) Lala
>
>I *knew* it!!! I'm gonna be made a wife any day now...I can feel it! lol ; )
>
> ~ PearL~
My condolences to you, Pearl. ;-)
Wifey Catherine
Sundialer
> > > regret the sin that showed me how much i needed to leave.
> >
> > >Does that make sense?
> >
> > Umm, from a human standpoint yes...From a biblical
> > perspective...respectfully no, but I thank you for your boldness in
sharing
> > this.
>
> Biblical? Really? Well I guess you didn't know that he had screwed
> anything that wasn't nailed down or painted, and he had beaten me once
> and had totally emotional abuse. I didn't, however, leave him for
> those things strangly enough. I thought I was in the marraige for
> good. That is how you think when you get married and are a good
> christian girl. But when the old boyfriend came in the picture and I
> saw my weakness so blatantly it scared me that I had allowed this to
> happen to a point that I was so weak. I never was a cheater by
> charachter and took much pride in that. I was very critical of people
> who called themselves Christians and then had affairs or divorced. I
> learned the hard way that my strength was because God must have felt
> that I had enough on my plate and sheilded me from further garbage.
> Until, that is, I got so critical of others and ignored the fact that
> leaving is, sometimes, the right thing to do.
No. I didn't know. You didn't say any of this in your first post. It sounds
like your husband smashed your marriage and what followed was the wreckage.
This is different, and divorce as it is taught by Christ would recognize
that.
> > The teaching of Adam, Eve, and the Serpent show us that we are
individually
> > responsible for our own choices.
>
> Totally agree. But we are also taught to be responsible and to not
> depleate anothers strength. To get married and decide that you are
> safe and can do whatever and whenever and not nurture is not Gods
> recipe of marraige.
>
> Not saying Gary did this but it does seem to be the "rumor."
>
> Let me ask you this just for fun. Lets say you got married and your
> wife decided to totally cut you off sexually and refused to do other
> wifely obligations. Decided to just go shopping, not work, and spend
> all your money. Go around town and make a scene and disrespect you.
> You plead with her but she is totally happy and fulfilled, she doesn't
> want to change anything. She doesn't have a problem, but you probably
> do right? Then what? She says she wants the marraige to remain. Would
> you ever put an end to this or just take it?
There are several ways that traditional Christianity has looked at
justifying divorce, and all are seen under the umbrella of unfaithfulness.
If somebody has given themselves sexually to someone other than their
spouse, if a husband (usually a husband) is abusive both physically and
psychologically, and lastly, if one or the other simply withdraws from the
marriage...emotional abandonment. In the last sense, the marriage is merely
a legal technicality whereas spiritually it does not exist. Even though, for
a Christian, the Bible never institutionalizes divorce. It only provides
controls. The clearest statement is Malachi 2:16, "I hate divorce." In Matt.
19:3-12, the Pharisees challenge Jesus in a way that tries to set him up.
They wanted to criticize him if he were too strict or too loose. Instead,
Jesus reaffirmed Genesis 2:24, and that divorce is allowed only on grounds
of adultery. Other divorce is merely a concession to hardness of hearts.
Easy divorce was out of the question.
Hosea, the prophet was instructed to marry a "wife of prostitution,"
supposedly a woman involved in the fertility cult of Baal. He marries her,
has three children, divorces her for sleeping around, but then marries her
again. Clearly the prophet's life was meant to serve as a sign and an
allegory of God's covenant relationship with Israel, which is like a that of
a marriage. Which is also like the relationship between Christ and his
church.
There is a short story written by Isaac Bashevis Singer called, "Gimpel the
Fool." which is about a man who is treated by his wife exactly as you have
described. It is an astonishingly moving story, maybe not very pragmatic in
today's cellular world, but noteworthy for its veiled theological insights.
To be honest with you about your hypothetical situation. I must say I don't
know. I would like to think that whatever I did, I would honor God first.
I know that not all men are this way. I am not always like this.
> > It is fantastically true...that a family who prays together, stays
together,
> > and it is all about the choices you make in every moment of life in the
> > ongoing process of being sanctified to God.
>
> I wish I could still believe this but my ex and i prayed together too.
> I can only say now that it helps, there is no sure fire guarantee.
> That is where faith comes in.
I admire you for your strength. There are no guarantees with God...only
promises which he will never break.
Jeremiah says, "For surely I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord,
plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope.
Then when you call upon me and come and pray to me, I will hear you. When
you search for me, you will find me; if you seek me with all your heart."
29:11-13.
> Maybelline
> >
> > ~S
> >
> > >
> > > Maybelline
Sundialer
> You called Amy Grant an adultress and you don't know if that is true.
If she says she was never unfaithful to Gary, then she doesn't have a
Biblical justification for her divorce. Look at the text. Jesus says, "But I
say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, (or husband) "except" on the
ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a
divorced woman commits adultery. Matt 5: 31,32; 19:9.
Well, maybe Amy was unfaithful to Gary with someone other than Vince? The
point is that by her own words she makes herself an adulterer, because she
said unfaithfulness was not the reason she divorced Gary. By Scriptural
standards she is an adulterer. I don't call her that, Scripture does. Argue
with the author of Matthew, maybe he's got it wrong.
> > I have only discussed the unbiblical foundation for her divorce.
>
>
> You don't know what the foundation of her divorce is. Have you read it?
If the reason for her divorce is not unfaithfulness then Scripture treats
any other reason as outside of God's will. Matthew 5: 31, 32; 19:3-12. If
you're a Christian, this teaching is given to you.
> I've
> > only balanced the equation promoted by people such as yourself who only
> want
> > a warm Mister Rogers with a beard for a Jesus, warm and comforting but
not
> > threatening, which is about the extent of your faith because it seems
only
> > children would be attracted to it. Children who need comforting but do
not
> > want to held accountable for their sin.
>
>
>
> No we just want the same right to call you on the carpet for you
> presumptions and slanderous condemnation of Amy Grant that you have no
real
> right to pass. Your sinning here with this gray uninformed accusation
that
> you declare and you are shamelessly defending yourself. No one is sugar
> coating sin here we are pointing our yours! Stop falsely accusing without
> knowledge and let God help you. Maybe it would be best if you publicly
> repent here so the forgivness and healing can begin. If you want to
really
> live up to what your saying you can tell us some more personal things and
> repent for those too.
That's kinda funny. I got a good chuckle out of that one. Thanks. I do feel
that I'm getting to you all better and better.
> > Congratulations, you have won me over with your shining example of
Christ
> > like behavior. Be comforted in the pastel painted nursery of your
> Christian
> > childhood.
> >
> > Lee Hutchison
>
>
> Give it up Lee, you know deep down that your wrong.
>
Well, I'm wrong about a lot of things, but respectfully, I don't think I'm
wrong about Matthew 5:31,32.