Jump to content

Sojourner414

Advanced Member
  • Content count

    290
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

205 Excellent

6 Followers

About Sojourner414

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    On a long road...
  • Interests
    The Lord, His Word, and serving Him.

Recent Profile Visitors

577 profile views
  1. How The Devil/Satan Deceiveth The Whole World

    Sorry, but that doesn't wash: you're simply using "nationality" to try to disqualify anyone who disagrees with you from doing so. I know Scripture wasn't originally written by "anglo-saxons", but you also need to know that Scripture was written by several people inspired of God, including: - A transplanted Chaldean - A former Egyptian prince of Hebrew birth - A Hebrew court officer in Babylon - A Gentile physician So it wasn't all an "Israelite" show, but the common thread that tells the redemptive story and God's love for us weaves its' way through it all. And through that story, Scripture is clear on the fact that Israel and the Church have separate destinies. Not to mention you're picking one or two verses (instead of using whole passages) out of Scripture to make your points. What I see here though, is that you are trying to "linearly connect" the Church to Israel, thereby trying to claim to the promises the Lord made to Israel. That's called "replacement theology", and that kind of thinking is not only unscriptural, but coveting the blessing the Lord has given to another is a violation of two commandments: -You shall not steal (Exodus 20:15) - You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor (Exodus 20:17) The only one who has the right to the blessings of Israel is the modern-day nation of Israel. And the Lord will do that, after He has dealt with her in the Tribulation. The Church has a different destiny, as outlined in Scripture by Paul and by Jesus Himself. Israel and the Church are two separate entities, and no amount of "cherry-picking" is going to change that on your part.
  2. Or they could mail back their brains and all the information and ways of thinking they learned...
  3. How do you Identify Wolves in Sheep's Clothing?

    It is; unfortunately, wolves always leave the destroyed behind them and continually do so. My prayer is to stop them before they "eat" even more.
  4. Objective morality

    If the universe did not have a creator, then were do you view it coming from? Because if you say "from the Big Bang", then where did that come from? And where did that event come from? And so on and so forth, until you have an infinite regression, which cannot exist. The Big Bang was a finite event and therefore cannot be eternal; it happened in time. So something would have had to have caused it, and ultimately, it would have to be uncaused or you suffer infinite regression. And at some point, the universe didn't exist, so there cannot be an infinite universe or infinite causes. The God of the Bible, however, is infinite and not bound by time; because He is infinite, time simply has no bearing on Him. Then where do you get your feelings of right and wrong from? How would you know they were right and not wrong? And please: do feel free to throw the question back. As for "what does it matter?": it matters to God, who created humans. True morality is not based upon an arbitrary set of standards He pulled out of thin air, nor is it based upon a "higher moral standard" that the Lord adheres to, since nothing is greater than God. The source is that morality is based upon God's own character: whatever He is not is evil, and what he is is good. That is exactly my point: humans are not the focus, nor can they be. Without a creator, morality simply becomes a set of preferential choices, and there can be no baseline because everyone's "preference" becomes true. The problem with that though is that innately, we sense right and wrong and declare things to be "wrong" whether we think they should be universal or not. The question is: where did this idea come from? We certainly didn't decide it for ourselves, as morality did not originate from human beings, and certainly did not "evolve". As for your examples of golf and mother's day: those are not appropriate examples, since they do not require a code of morality to perform. However: murder, rape, theft, lying and the like do have eternal consequences, and those consequences are answerable to God, whose character is the standard by which those choices are measured.
  5. Translation: "We don't believe in God, because He's MEAN and won't let us have our way!!!"
  6. Objective morality

    An objective standard of morality comes from a viewpoint that is truly objective; i.e: one that sees the universe and everything in it, and sees it as it truly is and not distorted or covered in any way. That being the case, that standard cannot originate with us, because we cannot see all things (our vision is limited, yet we know by inference that there is more out there than we can readily observe), and we cannot see they in their true state (dark energy, dark matter and such are physical examples; a person's thoughts and feelings are metaphysical examples). That being said, such a standard can only come from the source that the universe itself came from, as that source would be the only origin capable of perceiving the universe and its' contents with clarity and accuracy. Needless to say, the basis of that morality would be the nature of the source of the universe, otherwise, we would not have any idea that anything was "right" or "wrong". And an unconscious event would not have any ability to impart characteristics upon a universe at all, let alone ones that inherently allowed for any kind of life. That this universe has that life, let alone sentient life that can perceive that there is a right and wrong, does not come from unconscious, unthinking, unfeeling nothingness. So my two questions for you to consider (they do not require an answer) are this: 1) If we came from nothing, then why do each of us, no matter the society, culture or geographical location, have a sense of anger and a desire for it to be corrected when we perceive that we have been wronged? 2) If our feelings of right and wrong come from nothing, then why do they matter to us? Example: If someone say stole the rent money from us the day before the rent was due, and ultimately right and wrong are just human constructs, then why would it matter that it be corrected?
  7. Is it just me...

  8. Is it just me...

    ..................................|....................\.........._ The wall fell over lol. Last.
  9. Is it just me...

    Yeah, and I mailed those addresses out already. It was the LAST thing I just did before taking last here.
  10. Is it just me...

    yeah, but I have last.
  11. Is it just me...

    While you were multitasking and ladypuppytree was complaining about last being stolen.... I stole last.
  12. Is it just me...

    Denial: it's not just a river in Egypt....
  13. Is it just me...

    uh-uh.
  14. Is it just me...

    Nope.
  15. The First Church of "As Witchcraft"!

    This comes off as playing the "Everyone hates me because I'm speaking the truth" card. When someone presents themselves as "the only one who gets it right" and people have a problem with it, that's not "being despised for the truth". Rather, it is being rebuked for being obnoxious and self-centered. Cobalt1959 had it right on the spot when he said: and: On the other hand, Jesus never presented Himself as a know-it-all or acted as if people were stupid and didn't know their head from a hole in the ground. He always treated individuals with compassion and kindness, and addressed groups and types. As for these "thousands" leaving: no, I don't expect you to name every name. But do you have viable statistics? How many are leaving for a "closer walk with God" as opposed to "leaving because they do not believe anymore"? Or because "another religion seemed to have it right better"? Or do they even say? Is it their claim or yours? You have a lot to learn about using the word of God the right way: You expect people to listen to you "just because", without ever doing anything to earn their trust or respect. You're not talking to people as much as you're talking at them; you're treating them like utter morons and expecting them to comply with your demands. You then use Scripture as a bludgeon to smash people in the head with, rather than speaking the truth in love to them and helping them realize what Scripture is saying. Most folks who would hear you would be utterly turned off from ever wanting to talk about Scripture again. And I cannot blame the congregations for "ejecting" you with that kind of behavior! Just the title of your topic here alone shows that you view anyone who doesn't "do it" like you do as apostate and utterly lost! Yes, I know the retorts you could use of "it's their choice"; "it proves they are sinning and running from God"; "they just don't want to hear Scripture prove them wrong" and all that other garbage. But what you forget is: as ambassadors of the Lord, our attitude and our behavior matter as much as our words. Last I checked, a sledgehammer was not "standard equipment" for a believer to correct other with. Finally: any "accusation" here against you is not by us, but by yourself. It is your own words that have indicated how you believe about others and how you treat others. But have you ever considered things from their point of view? Try seeing how you behave through the eyes of those you think are "into witchcraft"-- better yet: look in Scripture and see if your behavior is how the NT books (mostly by Paul) tell us the Lord wants us to comport ourselves to the rest of the Body (not to mention the world). Last I looked, it isn't. And with that, I'm done in this topic. I pray the Lord can get through to you on this.
×