it went sth like: "the fact that a guy serves in a church, does not guarantee much"
like some of you know, i like to comment here and there,
talk crap. get serious on almost nothing. (although sometimes can get upset too) :p
so feel free if u want to comment. especially, err the statement's owner. ;D
first of all, i'd like to let u know that i dont know whether the statement is right or wrong.
if you love to have some conclusion on it, i dont have.
so, you might want to stop here. :)
since you continue to read onto this line, let's start discussing! :)
first of all, actually i have about the same idea as you, my friend.
however, i'd love to show a a little different argument to this.
for me, generally, the fact that a guy serving in a church guarantees something better.
not that i am defending my fellow male friends.
it is as simple as:
"does the fact that a doctor working in a Mt. Elizabeth guarantee much?"
the answer, i guess, it depends.
if the doctor is compared to doctors in the SE Asia area, generally it does, doesnt it?
like one has tweeted back, how much is much?
i am also not sure about how much,
but generally, i guess it guarantees better than if a guy is not ministering.
having said that,
generally only means generally.
majority will be like that. but outliers must be present.
yet, i believe using one criterion to assess a man is never enough.
we know BMW is a good brand for car.
generally, a BMW is more luxurious than a Honda.
but being a BMW does not always mean it is a fantastic car.
a wrecked BMW, for example, is of course not good.
and in this case, a brand new Civic is of course better, isnt it?
so what i think is: use more criteria to assess our man/woman! :)
and to my good friend that inspires this post,
wish your ncc-guitar-man has as good heart as his guitar-playing. ;)
just sharing a bit of my thought.
feel free to whack me with your comments. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment