Amish Donate Cash to School Gunman's Widow

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

I see what you are saying. See my prior post to THEO.

As a sidenote; some Amish DO vote and they have also won some landmark legal cases in supreme court.

Sometimes, they have won cases only because someone was willing to go to bat for them. I am trying to remember....I think Wisconsin vs Yoder was one of them.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Newman

God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference.

And therein lies the dilema. How do we know when its time to be still and know that God is God? How do we know when its our turn to do our part and fight for every inch we take?

A church in Benjamin Franklin's day struggled with the idea of using a lightning rod on their building. Wouldn't God protect them? If not, wouldn't it be God's will if the church was struck?

Franklin pointed out to them that they built a roof to protect from rain. What was the difference?

Right.

Why go to the doctor when God can heal?

Why vote when God raises up who He wills?

Why fight for certain laws to change society?

You see what I mean.

So goes the seesaw of liberal vs conservativism.

But even Christians argue both sides of these issues.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Now, hundreds of years later, there is still no agreement concerning the effectiveness of lightning rods.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/010824.html

And why buy insurance?

[ILG]

The question boils down to this:

When does a passive view mean avoidance of responsibility? And, on the flip side, when does a very active stand mean a refusal to trust in God's will?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by ILG

And why buy insurance?

On the rods - I meant concerning their effectiveness scientifically.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by ILG

The question boils down to this:

When does a passive view mean avoidance of responsibility? And, on the flip side, when does a very active stand mean a refusal to trust in God's will?

Being passive though, when it comes to demanding or expecting miracles, is different than walking past the hurting and hungery because "it is their lot in life". The Amish are very agressive when it comes to humanitarian aid.

[Newman]

Originally Posted by ILG

Right.

Why go to the doctor when God can heal?

Why vote when God raises up who He wills?

Why fight for certain laws to change society?

You see what I mean.

So goes the seesaw of liberal vs conservativism.

But even Christians argue both sides of these issues.

I have a book I have not made time to read yet. But the premise is that East did not invent too much beyond fireworks because of their eastern view of acceptance as to what was compared to Christianity's belief that man can have dominion over his world to some degree.

Just thought I would throw this idea into the mix.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Being passive though, when it comes to demanding or expecting miracles, is different than walking past the hurting and hungery because "it is their lot in life". The Amish are very agressive when it comes to humanitarian aid.

Yes, I will agree with that. It just that I find it very interesting that Christians (not just Amish, I just tend to think about the Amish all the time...) pick and choose what they will be agressive or passive on and then judge another for being different. The thing is, why one place and not another? Why one thought and not another? It's just interesting...

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Newman

I have a book I have not made time to read yet. But the premise is that East did not invent too much beyond fireworks because of their eastern view of acceptance as to what was compared to Christianity's belief that man can have dominion over his world to some degree.

Just thought I would throw this idea into the mix.

Should man have dominion over this world?? Or more specifically, should Christians fight for dominion? How far should it go?