Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Past hour
  2. Not wrong anymore that each blind man was wrong about his view of the elephant being true and the other blind men's view wrong. How would you see it, your part of the elephant as such?
  3. So 2 Corinthians 6:14 (KJV) is wrong. Maybe you should send your correction to www.gotquestions.org.
  4. Then just let it go. People reading the thread will see what you are saying, and you can all just ignore him if that's what it takes.
  5. Well, time will tell. At least to someone, maybe someone unwilling to share it with others.
  6. Each yoked to the same yoke but on different sides of it is not an unequally yoked, marriage itself it the yoke and both husband and wife are equally yoked and bound to it..
  7. No. He has been clear that he refuses to accept any view, even the meaning of the Hebrew words, if they indicate the earth is much older than Adam. He cannot bring himself to accept the truth from the original language, and holds tightly to English translations that failed to translate correctly in Gen 1:2, even though they translate "tohu" correctly elsewhere. People believe things for a variety of reasons. He prefers a young earth, in spite of highly sensitive scientific equipment and what the Hebrew actually means. I'm more interested in those who may read threads but never post. They are most likely searching for answers themselves, and use the threads to get information.
  8. Today
  9. It sounds like the marriage is made up of two unequally yoked partners.
  10. Christ rejects the Offer of Political Leader. Just before the feast of Passover Jesus went to His friend`s place in Bethany. It was the home of Mary, Martha and Lazarus. Jesus had previously resurrected Lazarus and His fame had gone out into the land. `Then, six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus was who had been dead, whom He had raised from the dead. There they made Him a supper; and Martha served, but Lazarus was one of those who sat at the table with Him…… Now a great many of the Jews knew that He was there; but they came not for Jesus` sake only, but that they might also see Lazarus, whom He raised from the dead….. (John 12: 1 & 2, 9) Thus, there was developing a great expectation of Jesus coming to the feast. He was the one who had overcome death. And death was man`s great fear. So, with great excitement the people gave Jesus a grand entrance into Jerusalem declaring Him to be their King. Who could go against Him who had the power over death, they would have thought. `The next day a great multitude that had come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took branches of palm trees and went out to meet Him, and cried out: “Hosanna! `Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!` The King of Israel.” (John 12: 12 & 13) But Jesus did not receive that offer of kingship by the populous, for Jesus knew that only by His sacrifice on the cross would death be finally overcome. The Anti-Christ receives the Offer of Political Leader. In the tribulation there will be a man however, who by deceit, tricks the world into thinking he can overcome death. He is made the Political Leader of the World System. The world worships him and Satan, saying, `Who can make war with him?` `I saw one of his heads (leaders) as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marvelled and followed the beast. So, they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?” (Rev.13:3 & 4)
  11. Not really. Because In that case the person announced his intentions ahead of time. Guy walks in with a gun shouting terroristic threats and then actually shooting people? Yeah that's like comparing apples to oranges, and it's a horrible comparison. If they said that shooter wasn't a terrorist right off the bat that's deceitful. Which yes, the media has certainly misrepresented that. However in this case there was absolutely zero evidence initially that this was an act of terrorism. There still isn't. No one yelled Allah ack bar. No one made any threats. And to date no terrorist organization has laid claim to it. There was zero evidence then of terrorism, and there still is zero. So to report it as terrorism would be deceitful. And it's logical for a news agency to report on the facts they have, and the facts they had initially, and the facts they have now, show tragic accident and not terrorism. So unless you have some actual facts, and not baseless conjecture to suggest anything different, then there's nothing wrong with how they're reporting it.
  12. I've learned that blind seeker gets very personal .Alot of personal insults come from this guy.
  13. A good place to end this thread, which has become frayed.
  14. No, I claim that being filled with the H.S. by no means makes one an expert, it makes no ones views superior to another's. No one has a higher position in the Body of Christ, as compared to another. All are unique and God has given each one gifts. Apparently those anointed one's (H.S. filled) in the Body of Christ still have disagreements. Many do not believe in your views, many don't believe in my views. Your outlandish claims by what others report as truth, is just that. In the late 1970's Henry Kissinger's number was 666 and many thought he would become the A/C, the man of sin. He didn't. Why should we believe that Trump is this same 666, or man of sin. Kind of like date setting. Anointing also means to put one into a leadership position, again also to anoint those who are sick among you with prayers and anoint their head with oil. Saul was anointed King based on stature by the Jews via the Priests. David was anointed King based on one having the heart of God by God via the Priests. In Christ Montana Marv
  15. What's your problem? Daniel didn't say anything about the Catholic Church nor was he prophesying of it.Daniel was prophesying of the end times.The king of the north who exalts himself above all ,the persecution of the saints in Israel and the destruction of the middle east by the armed forces of the king of the north. There's Nothing in there about the Catholic church or peoples interpretations which you seem to be stuck on. This prophecy is an end times prophecy about a man who exalts himself above all. Daniel 11 36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. This is the same man who Paul said would exalt himself above all before the coming of Christ. 2 Thes 2 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
  16. Well then, feel free to ignore me if it causes you to be so emotional. I can but say its not true. I do seek for clarification where there is vagueness. I do not know what is people's head when they say something, so I expect them to be willing to articulate their position when questioned. Also, I do expect questions to be answered and not ignored. I expect mutual respect and charity, even when opinions do not align. I read whatever is submitted to me, look up people's details in their comments (unless already informed). But are we not all here search for the truth and to contend for the truth of the Gospel? Cannot that be done peacefully? Certainly, but only where pride has be abated and humility and charity prevail. Do you think Barnabas went away with John Mark thinking Paul was hateful? Was Paul hateful when he confronted Peter when he was to be blamed? What allowed healing in all these situation? It was humility.
  17. Excuse me, but that's not what I said. Not even close. Try reading more slowly, and examining the things given for your consideration. Daniel gave the prophecy, not the interpretation of it. How often did Daniel himself have to ask for understanding of what he was seeing or hearing? Did he not write faithfully about things he did not understand? It is other men throughout history who have made all manner of interpretations of Daniel’s prophecies. Thus, what I said is that your interpretation (with which wholly I disagree [is that what really offends you?]), is very much in accord with what was possibly one of the first documented eschatological treatise put forth in defense of both Catholicism and the papacy, written by a French monk at the royal request of the queen of France. People, doctrines, positions of influence, and religious dominance were in question and being scrutinized. Prior to that, there were indeed various interpretations among the various non-Catholics, but there was a basic harmony among them concerning Catholicism being heretical and the papacy a usurpation of authority contrary to scripture. Nearly all their eschatological position were contrary to both your interpretation and that of the monk. Simple fact. I simply told you, and will say it again, that what you are believing is in my firm opinion very similar to that which the monk construed. And once more, he did so purely in defense the papacy to refute the eschatology of non-Catholics before the queen. Look it up. Why wouldn’t you? The same misdirecting is also very much like what has happened because Scofield wrote his interpretations, which someone has placed side by side with Holy Writ in a "reference bible," (now being widely used by almost every seminary out there). This, I believe, and how can it do otherwise, steers people to erroneous conclusions, via his notes that say, "This is that." Has not the devil consistently labored to teach us all what to think, instead of how to think? Now I am not saying Scofield wasn’t a man of God, but rather on many eschatological points it simply wasn’t “given to him to know.” For we all are given but a measure of both faith and grace whereby we speak one to another. Therefore, I give him much due respect for submitting them for peer review, much like we all should be doing here. But it seems to me, that just as the devil would have misused the body of Moses to an ungodly end, he has nonetheless managed to do so utilizing Scofield’s speculations to promote erroneous end-time theories. Now, Peter said "this is that" under the anointing of the Holy Spirit concerning the outpouring on Pentecost, but Scofield, like so many, was simply trying to fit pieces of scripture together wherever they seemed to fit, but again, it simply wasn't "given to him to know the mysteries of the Kingdom" as they were "seal until the end," meaning the later days of the Gospel dispensation. Sadly though, many are still trying to interpret or figure out scripture the same way, or worse, accepting whatever they were taught. For I have yet to meet a Christian anywhere who doesn't believe they were taught the truth, unless they truly humbled themselves and became both prayerful and critical students of God's word. That is why we must labor to understand that which was committed to the early church fathers, upon whom the burden of being faithful stewards of the prophets and apostles’ teachings and understanding fell.
  18. by Karen Faulkner, Worthy News Correspondent (Worthy News) – Leaders of more than twenty Christian, Muslim, and Jewish organizations in Australia have sent a joint letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese warning him that religious freedoms are in danger of unwarranted restriction following the publication on Thursday of the Australian Law Reform Commission’s (ALRC) report on faith-based schools, Christian Today reports. The much anticipated ALRC report recommends that Australia’s Sex Discrimination Act be amended to make it illegal for faith-based schools to expel or fire LGBTI+ students and staff based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The faith organizations’ letter asserted that the ALRC recommendations would “prevent the overwhelming majority of faith-based schools from preferring persons who share and authentically live out their faith” and possibly “extinguish their distinct and authentic character,” Christian Today reports. In a statement the Australian Christian Schools Alliance described the report as “a direct attack on faith and freedom of belief in Australia” and asserted that “Christian education as we know it will cease to exist.” AACS Executive Officer Vanessa Chen said: “If these ALRC recommendations are adopted, it means the government can tell Christian schools who we can employ, what we can believe and teach.” PM Albanese, who leads Australia’s Labor party, responded to the letter in a statement saying the recommendations would only be enacted if there was bipartisan support for this course of action. ‘I think Australians don’t want to see the culture wars and the division out there. I want this to be an opportunity for unity going forward, and that’s why we’ve provided the legislation to the opposition,” Albanese said. The post Australia: Faith Leaders Say Proposed School Law Reform Endangers Religious Freedom appeared first on Worthy Christian News. View the full article
  19. Only one. But rv won't accept what the Hebrew of Gen 1:2 actually says, so we go over and over with his attempted defense.
  20. Is this leading toward America being Babylon the Great? I don't discount the possibility, but I don't discount the possibility that Babylon the Great is something yet to come after America falls or that America is just a part of.
  21. This -violence against Christians- is a growing trend worldwide, we will be seeing it become increasingly pronounced in every country soon, nowhere will be safe to be Christian even if some places might be, or at least seem, safer than others.
  22. Isn't that sort of like announcing that an act of mass shooting by someone shouting "Alahu Akbar" is not an act of terrorism while the bodies are still being carried away (and this is not a hypothetical situation) and the motives are not known? Deliberate sabotage for terrorist reasons were ruled out before the real reasons for the apparent failures are known (and are still unknown)? Chances are that if it was done for terrorism, or other politically incorrect reasons, it could quite likely never be brought to light in the public (remember that we still have not had the Covenant school shooter's manifesto made public when it was originally promised that it would be). In a world of deceit, it is not a wise thing to be trusting without questioning.
  23. "Three witnesses to the sermon reported him to the Chashnytskyi District Executive Committee " Eeww
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...