soccerdude8821 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 If Sean was a religious person, good for him. More religion, earlier, may have saved his life. His life was saved when he came to Christ "For whoever wants to save his life[h] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it." Matthew 16:25 and i agree with god bless sean taylor and go skins! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahbird Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 His life was saved when he came to Christ"For whoever wants to save his life[h] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it." Matthew 16:25 and i agree with god bless sean taylor and go skins! A nice sentiment but tell that to his baby daughter. I am sure she would like something more concrete. No quotation can replace the man he would have been for her.:2cents: To see my thoughts on quotes from the bible see my orginal post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cphil006 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Sean was religious, and brought up that way. He was becoming more so recently. It is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krayzie Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 when i heard what Coach Gibbs said that Sean had a growing relationship with God I just got tears again happy tears. Did anybody find that interview with Roy Williams, I think somebody said Roy was saying he gave his life to Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerdude8821 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 A nice sentiment but tell that to his baby daughter. I am sure she would like something more concrete. No quotation can replace the man he would have been for her.:2cents: To see my thoughts on quotes from the bible see my orginal post. 29And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother[a] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life. Matthew 19:29 I saw your original post, and I understand some of the things you said. "Christians" arent perfect and make mistakes just like everyone else. We do not think we are better than anyone. We know where we are going after this life is over. There have been times in my life where I have met people who dont exactly properly show Christ but it is not my place to judge. That is only Gods. In regards to Seans baby girl, of course at this age a quotation will not do anything for her and hopefully she can accept Christ when older and realize she has a God who will always be there for her and someone to spend the rest of eternity with, even more important than having a father on earth (I obviously still wish Sean could be there for her though)but it was better that Sean found his faith late than never finding it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krayzie Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 29And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother[a] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.Matthew 19:29 I saw your original post, and I understand some of the things you said. "Christians" arent perfect and make mistakes just like everyone else. We do not think we are better than anyone. We know where we are going after this life is over. There have been times in my life where I have met people who dont exactly properly show Christ but it is not my place to judge. That is only Gods. In regards to Seans baby girl, of course at this age a quotation will not do anything for her and hopefully she can accept Christ when older and realize she has a God who will always be there for her and someone to spend the rest of eternity with, even more important than having a father on earth (I obviously still wish Sean could be there for her though)but it was better that Sean found his faith late than never finding it at all. i love what you wrote right on the buttom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rdskn4Lyf21 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 A nice sentiment but tell that to his baby daughter. I am sure she would like something more concrete. No quotation can replace the man he would have been for her.:2cents: To see my thoughts on quotes from the bible see my orginal post. Seeing her father in heaven someday is a fact though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuraitengai Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Yeah, I sorta played slot WR when I played...not sure about all the heavenly physics details, but I'd be glad to try and hold on to the ball ill be more than happy to play some pitch and catch with you up there...but dont get too bitter when more passes end up in ST's hands than in yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuraitengai Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Seeing her father in heaven someday is a fact though. definitely something for her to look forward to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NattyLight Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 don't understand what his new relationship with the "lord" has to do with this tragedy. How does him being religous or not make this any better or worse.P.S. this is a football message board not a Religous board. I think we should keep religion out of this. I think it offends people.... Myself included. Religion doesn't offend me, but you sir, are right on. Seriously, what if he wasn't religious? Then he's burning in hell because he didn't accept Jesus as his Lord and Savior, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krayzie Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 one thing we can do for Sean's daughter is pray for her, that God keeps her and that she gives her life to Him and her mother too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty is Only Posted November 30, 2007 Author Share Posted November 30, 2007 Religion doesn't offend me, but you sir, are right on. Seriously, what if he wasn't religious? Then he's burning in hell because he didn't accept Jesus as his Lord and Savior, right? Religion can be defined as "mankind's attempts to reach God." By this definition, there are many religions and many ways that mankind seeks to find, understand and know God. Christianity can be defined as "God's reaching out to man through his Son, Jesus Christ." The premise of Christianity is that man can't bridge the gap between himself and God. He can pray, sacrifice animals, take monastic vows, build great structures, devote his life to helping the poor and so forth but the gap between him and his creator still remains unbridged. Sin is the culprit. Man has been alienated from God because of his rebellion, his refusal to acknowledge God as God. Sin is part of man's nature due to the Fall (the first sin) and mankind doesn't have the ability in itself to atone for sin. Sin against a completely righteous and holy God must be punished. God is a God of justice, and his justice demands punishment. God is also, however, a God of mercy. While he could have simply judged man's sin and been done with it, leaving us all separated from himself for eternity, he instead chose to intervene and meet the requirements of his justice himself and make it possible for us to be reconciled to him. God sent his Son, Jesus, to live a perfect life and ultimately pay the penalty for man's sin by taking our sin on himself and dying in our place. All the sacrifices of animals in the Old Testament were merely an arrow pointing to the ultimate, perfect sacrifice--God in human form, Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God. So, to say that there is but one way to God is correct. Jesus declared this to be the case. To imply that God is unjust in allowing only one way is shortsighted and selfish. God has lavished mercy on us all. To reject this gift of eternal life that God offers through the death of his Son is the height of arrogance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 You all need to STOP. Here's the basic point: Everyone deals with grief in his or her own way. For many Christians (and I include myself in this) it was a comfort to learn that Sean Taylor was a Christian. It helps us with our grief. This is appropriate. The rest of this discussion, debating the validity of Christian exclusivism etc. is out of place. Non-Christians don't need to be sharing their thoughts as to why they are offended that we find this comforting, and Christians don't need to be slinging Bible verses in the football section. If you'd like to debate religion, wander over to the Tailgate, and click on just about any thread. We'll be happy to accomodate you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Religion can be defined as "mankind's attempts to reach God." By this definition, there are many religions and many ways that mankind seeks to find, understand and know God........So, to say that there is but one way to God is correct. Jesus declared this to be the case. To imply that God is unjust in allowing only one way is shortsighted and selfish. God has lavished mercy on us all. To reject this gift of eternal life that God offers through the death of his Son is the height of arrogance. From my non-Christian position, I saw the original post as a simple question and appropriate for this forum. But, it was also predictable that a few Christians would use this thread as a vehicle for yet another tasteless display of their beliefs in a place where people of all religious and non-religious beliefs are gathered for other purposes. You Christians don't represent Christianity well when you fail to live by the Golden Rule which Christ told you was the sum of your faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70th Week Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 "Go to now, ye that say, to day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away. For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this or that. But now ye rejoice in your boastings: all such rejoicing is evil. Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin."—James 4:13-17. I just couldn't resist tech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuryYourDuke Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 ill be more than happy to play some pitch and catch with you up there...but dont get too bitter when more passes end up in ST's hands than in yours. Haha, what else could I expect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty is Only Posted November 30, 2007 Author Share Posted November 30, 2007 From my non-Christian position, I saw the original post as a simple question and appropriate for this forum. But, it was also predictable that a few Christians would use this thread as a vehicle for yet another tasteless display of their beliefs in a place where people of all religious and non-religious beliefs are gathered for other purposes.You Christians don't represent Christianity well when you fail to live by the Golden Rule which Christ told you was the sum of your faith. My posts (other than the original) were responses to posts by others who were making statements that I felt needed to be addressed. I was trying to correct error in fact or error in assumption. When someone is slandering my beliefs, I feel the need to at least correct their error or defend what someone is implying is a faulty or ridiculous tenet of faith. How is this 'tasteless' or inappropriate? Are you saying I should just let error or misrepresentation go unchecked when it's in my power to act? And how is defending or explaining one's faith in a civil manner a trangression against "do to others as you would have them do to you?" If I were in a position of ignorance or error, I would want someone to attempt to inform me. I am actually abiding by said rule, not breaking it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diablo77 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 maybe old news but, i think that gibbs said somthing to the effect that sean was alway at the congragation every every, somthing along those lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 My posts (other than the original) were responses to posts by others who were making statements that I felt needed to be addressed. I was trying to correct error in fact or error in assumption. When someone is slandering my beliefs, I feel the need to at least correct their error or defend what someone is implying is a faulty or ridiculous tenet of faith. How is this 'tasteless' or inappropriate? Are you saying I should just let error or misrepresentation go unchecked when it's in my power to act?And how is defending or explaining one's faith in a civil manner a trangression against "do to others as you would have them do to you?" If I were in a position of ignorance or error, I would want someone to attempt to inform me. I am actually abiding by said rule, not breaking it. You are rationalizing your misbehavior. How would you feel if non-Christians used this forum to preach in opposition to your beliefs? If you are honest with yourself and with us, you know very well that your obligation as the original poster was to make sure that this thread stayed within the scope set forth in your first post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty is Only Posted November 30, 2007 Author Share Posted November 30, 2007 You are rationalizing your misbehavior. How would you feel if non-Christians used this forum to preach in opposition to your beliefs? If you are honest with yourself and with us, you know very well that your obligation as the original poster was to make sure that this thread stayed within the scope set forth in your first post. I have no problem with non-Christians posting anti-Christian rhetoric or propaganda. This is an open forum (within reason) and as long as I'm free to debate and respond to their assertions, I have no problem with a respectful, thoughtful post of another's beliefs (or disbeliefs). How are my responses violating the rule below, which I infer you're trying to say I'm violating. How can I, as the original poster, control the responses of others? How are my responses irrelevant to the initial post? 5. Please be respectful of your fellow members. Every registered member agrees, upon registration, not use these forums to post material or topics which are knowingly false, defamatory, deceptive, inaccurate, racist, insulting, abusive, inflammatory, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually graphic, physically threatening, invasive of another's privacy or otherwise in violation of any law, including stalking or otherwise harassing individual members. Personal attacks or threats will not be tolerated. Go after the idea, not the poster. Free debate within the parameters outlined herein is welcome on these forums, and diversity of opinion lies at the heart of a good debate. Toward that end, every member is free to have their own opinion so long as it is expressed in a civil manner, is within the subject matter topic of the forum and does not otherwise violate forum rules. For the benefit of a very few individuals who believe the second paragraph of this rule is not at all connected with the first, we have deemed it necessary to provide direction. The specifics of this rule require you do not violate any of the parameters clearly laid out in paragraph 1 of this rule, which govern the application of enforcement for the entire rule. And as you debate your fellow members, we request you maintain contact with the content of the discussion within each reply, regardless of how heated it may become. We, again, point to Rule 18 we have not enforced here in some time. Please follow the rules. And please appreciate the people who wrote them know them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerdude8821 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 I believe everything that has been said has been well mannered and in an appropriate fashion, there have been no personal attacks (that Ive seen) and people are simply expressing views which were spurred by others questions. that being said, if you are offended by talking about religion, DONT CLICK ON THIS THREAD!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 I have no problem with non-Christians posting anti-Christian rhetoric or propaganda. This is an open forum (within reason) and as long as I'm free to debate and respond to their assertions, I have no problem with a respectful, thoughtful post of another's beliefs (or disbeliefs). If debating religion is your bag, I suggest Beliefnet.com where there are several forums for that purpose. This is a football forum. I don't care if you violated a forum rule. I'm just letting you know that you stepped out of bounds when it comes to common courtesy, and I'm not interested in your excuses for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelNeil Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 I know that Sean Taylor was a tight-lipped, guarded and private individual. There are but a few recorded interviews with him that survive. For this reason, I may not get much of a response to the question I'm about to ask, but I would like to get insight if any exists. Does anyone know what Sean's spiritual/religious beliefs were at the time of his death? I think that's a deeply personal question. I'm not speculating on your religion but it's usually a loaded one when coming from born again christians(BAC). I personally have rejected the mythology of christianity, and have tried to hold to it's personal guidance. I.E. Do onto others, The meek shall inheirit the earth, etc.. I actually thought it was in poor taste for Joe to speak on Sean's "personal relationship with the Lord". What if he didn't have one? Every one knows what a BAC believes when a person doesn't have one. I don't have a personal relationship with Jesus, because, well, he's dead. His words and compassion however have echoed through human history. In my older age I have come to the belief that all of god's creatures eventually find peace in their journey in this life or another one. Whether your baptised, whether you live for god, whether you travel to Mecca or are released into the Ganges. Our good deeds echo through out eternity, and our bad ones are absored by the forgivness of others. In this horrific tradgedy we all have the oppurtuntiy to break the cycle of ill will, and violence. Whether we forgive the lost souls that perptrated this crime, or find one character flaw to alter in our own lives. Our reaction to this can echo though our own soul's eternity. There is only one thing I know about god.... He Hates the COWBOYS!!!!!, otherwise they wouldn't be so ugly!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty is Only Posted November 30, 2007 Author Share Posted November 30, 2007 If debating religion is your bag, I suggest Beliefnet.com where there are several forums for that purpose. This is a football forum.I don't care if you violated a forum rule. I'm just letting you know that you stepped out of bounds when it comes to common courtesy, and I'm not interested in your excuses for it. Duly noted. Sorry if you were offended by my expression of my faith in response to another's post. My intent was not to offend, but to inform. I felt that I was at least commonly courteous in all my posts. Sorry you didn't see it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pookie Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Duly noted. Sorry if you were offended by my expression of my faith in response to another's post. My intent was not to offend, but to inform. I felt that I was at least commonly courteous in all my posts. Sorry you didn't see it that way. I wouldn't sweat it if I were you. The neat thing about the Redskin Nation is that we are from all walks and creeds. The Redskins organization is also known for having one of the largest and most active "ministries" in the league, so it's only natural that a lot of fans are believers. I read your posts and you came across as respectful. It's just we are a colorful bunch in more ways than one, and well, a feather or two must have been ruffled. Some of us are united by the love of Christ and that's ok. And some of us are united by the love of the game, and that's ok too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.