Are you a Christian Engels? In what way do you interpret the scriptures? The scriptures are not vague about who Jesus said He was, why He came, and what our response to that should be. It's all there in black and white and it's not a secret. Regarding the exclusivity of Jesus, It's hard to misinterpret scriptures like this:

John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

Luke 13:2 And he answered them, "Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way?
Luke 13:3 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.

It's not just one or two scriptures, it is the whole measure of Christ and His mission on Earth. What do you believe He came here to do?

Nonsense.

If you were a true Christian, you'd follow the laws of the old testament too.
I presume you don't go into town everyday and put people of other religions to the sword?

I want to address this scripture quotation first:

Matthew 5:17

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

You have fundamentally misunderstood what Jesus is saying here. What do you think He is talking about? What do you think He means when He said He came to fulfill the law? Please elaborate.. This, however, is what He was talking about:

John 19:28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.

He fulfilled what the law and prophets said about Him on the cross.

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

What did they write concerning Him?

Luke 24:25 And he said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!

Luke 24:26 Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?"

You need to understand what was written about Jesus and how He fulfilled it before you can understand what He was talking about.

Your misunderstanding of the gospel and Old Testament law not withstanding, a true Christian is not under the old covenant, they are under the new covenant.

Romans 10:4-10 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them.

But the righteousness based on faith says, "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) "or 'Who will descend into the abyss?'" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).

But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim);
because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.

The old covenant is for Israel, the new covenant is for the whole world. Christians are not under law, but grace.

Romans 6:14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

So you can drop the "no true scotsman" fallacy....

It's funny you would invoke this fallacy, yet state earlier "If you were a true Christian.." Yet, according to Jesus, there are true and false Christians:

Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

A true Muslim follows Allah, and Allah has instructed his followers to exterminate all of the nonbelievers.

And that's the point. When you take shots, you are not taking them because of taste. You need a shot of alcohol, fast and taste is there to either mask the alcohol or make it easier to swallow. We taste less when it's chilled. Have you tried to bounce two fingers worth of any alcohol when it's luke warm? I do agree that it's a waste to use good whiskey like single malts (not all of them are good) but hey, if you can afford it, why not? No one should have to sink to bourbon, blended whiskeys are for that use (and are often smoother too, since they are blended)..

When it's time to enjoy the taste, then small sips and around that magical 15C (it gets warmer all the time) it's about aroma and how to maximize what is in the liquid. I would actually prefer the good stuff to be just under 40% alcohol, 35-38% would be better, brandy/cognac can be stronger than whiskey. Whiskey stones are quite neat, specially if the shot is brandy (which i like more and more each year, starting to pass whiskey, lets say brandy is often smoother without it bankrupting you)..

That was so great -- the kid doing Luke was my favorite I think, but all are really awesome!

Congratulations! Your video, Mark Hamill's Joker Tells Mark's Luke That He's His Father, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 95 Badge!

Your video, Mark Hamill's Joker Tells Mark's Luke That He's His Father, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

So... if Star Wars is all about action, adventure, chivalry, pirate movies and swashbuckling, WTF is up with the prequels?

Lucas forgot about all that and thought, "You know what this series needs is some galactic C-Span, whiny teenagers, overly contrived plots, and cutesey CGI comic-relief characters. Oh and don't forget a double-dose of nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo (because Luke didn't sell it enough in Empire)."

Ah, interesting... very different & spirited vocal from Ann Wilson. Cool stuff. And yet - although Ann Wilson is singing live - the rest of the band is faking along to a pre-recorded backing track. Not uncommon in those days for TV guest spots. (And, of course, de rigueur along with "vocal support track" for any aspiring ingenue pop star these days.)

Also, check out Luke Skywalker, faking it on lead guitar! Complete with, uh, some sort of concealed light saber weapon...

There is some truth in what you've said. For one, the bible says that Christians are the light of the world. Our number one responsibility is not to change the culture, but to allow God to change us so that His light, the light of Jesus Christ will shine forth from our lives and touch those around us. It is the church who retreated from the culture in the preceding decades which has allowed these forces that shape our culture today to slowly encroach on it, and eventually take over. The influence of the church on the culture is minimal because Christians have not been shining their light. Instead, it has largely taken an adversarial position and been engaged in a protracted "culture war". The real business of the kingdom of God is not shaping our culture through legislation, but by showing agape love to all those who cross our path. Jesus said that our unity and love towards one another is the evidence that He was sent by the Father:

Joh 17:21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

Likewise, our lack of love and infighting is evidence to the world that the Father did not send Jesus. Unfortunately, those who are really living for Christ do not stand out as much as those who are not. Before I knew the Lord, I didn't have any positive examples of Christians in my life. I wasn't born into religion and didn't have much exposure to the church aside from what I saw on television. Now that I have seen what is going from the inside I can say that the vast majority of the positive things that Christians do is not reported on. In my town, the churches are all working together to serve the community, despite their differences. Many have been blessed and many lives have been transformed in wonderful ways, but you'll never hear about it unless it comes by word of mouth.

So, when you say Jesus hung out with sinners, this is essentially what the church should be doing, which is not to go a building every week and shout hallelujah, but to get out there and serve your community. To form relationships with people and to meet them where they are at and what their needs may be. Yet, you couldn't really say that Jesus "hung out" with sinners. Certainly He visited with sinners and ate meals with them, because He loved them. This really bothered the pharisees who asked Jesus one day why He did that. This is what He said:

Luke 5:30 And the Pharisees and their scribes grumbled at his disciples, saying, "Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?"
Luke 5:31 And Jesus answered them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.
Luke 5:32 I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance."

Jesus hung out with sinners because He loved them, and because He loved them He was calling them to repentance. Jesus did teach about hell and the fear of God, in fact Jesus said more about hell than every person in the bible combined. Most of what we know about hell was spoken by the Lord. It is the reality of hell that led Jesus to the cross:

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

Jesus did not come to condemn, but save. He shed His innocent blood for our crimes, so that we can be forgiven and have eternal life. This is the gospel of Jesus Christ, the good news for all who are held in the bondage of sin and facing eternal separation from God.

and I still remember him playing Luke, Mike Seaver's friend on "Growing Pains"

@artician

Even if the models for the decline of empires are inexact, poorly sourced or even exaggerated, they are doing so to combat the overwhelming force of the status quo that feeds us a constant stream of comforting, mind-numbing bliss through mass media, mostly delivered though TV news, advertising and cleverly veiled in the actual entertainment that the audience enjoys.

It's hard to mount a comeback against a presupposed cultural truth supported by any form of economic interest. The tobacco industry, for example, mounted powerful misinformation and doubt as scientific evidence slowly leaked out that smoking was harmful. People just don't want to hear that the way they live and what they "know" to be true is going to change and that personal choice is going to have to be limited to some extent.

The same is true for global warming, deforestation, species extinction, pollution, etc., etc. You can resist the "ineffectual mumblings" of Hitchens, Chomsky and the like, but you do so to at your own peril. People like you are the do-do bird in this scenario. People like you are the 2 pack-a-day smoker who thinks they've been smoking for 20 years and feeling fine so why quit now. "Screw the scientists, they're all out to make themselves rich so they concoct these cackamamy experiments to 'prove' they need more research funding." Okay, it's your right to dismiss the advice of people smarter than you.

This video follows the same vein as Peter Joseph's Zeitgeist series (which I suggest you watch or rewatch for shits and giggles.) The idea of consumption tax seems a lot easier for our system to adopt than Joseph's idea of a "Resource-Based Economy." It just sounds more fair that those consuming resources pay back into the system and less airy-fairy than some socialist "to-each as to his need" idea. And let's face it, it's right on a social level. It's just too hard to get there based on our current economic and political structure.

Our wasteful way of life is just unsustainable. I don't think anyone can deny that the ponzi scheme of FIAT money is eventually going to collapse because the balance of wealth is way out of whack AND ONLY GETTING WORSE. And the USA is at the top, and yet owes trillions in funny money that they can only pay back if they stop building missiles and tanks. But I think we all know that when the shit hits the fan, we're going to want to get behind those tanks to ride out the storm of resistance from the 99%. Not the privileged 99% in the west, the 99% of destitute, impoverished poor that build the toys, sew and clothes, glue the plastic Walmart crap, and GROW THE FOOD that we want.to have cheap. We're doing this all on the backs of the "free slaves" in undeveloped countries: Columbia, Bangladesh and on and on.

Search your feelings, Luke. You know it to be true.

I'd be interested to find out which character made him more money, Luke Skywalker, The Joker, or Kenneth W. Dantley Jr...

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by lucky760.

Luke 6:31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

Luke 6:32 "If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them.

Luke 6:33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.

Luke 6:34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount.

Luke 6:35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil.

The bible doesn't teach that unbelievers can't be moral..and if some Christians say that, they haven't read or understood the scripture. It's a strawman argument.

It's "Peter Komar" and "Luke Warner": http://www.defence.gov.au/news/raafnews/editions/4813/topstories/story01.htm