Willie T

Shower time for me.  Play nice, Kids.

2 minutes ago, RRep said:

i never entered a contract with Jesus he offered me a free gift of salvation 

Does that change the way God wants you to live... for your own good?

Just now, RRep said:

what will happen to us for the second portion if all our sin is forgiven past present and future for belief alone for salvation?

We are still "saved"... this is just the way God wants us living.

*Cletus*, you didn't even bother to read those six pages I sent you, did you?

To simplify it, "REPENT" means two things as it pertains to us.

The first is to "change our mind about what will give us Eternal Life."  This comes before we are followers of Christ.

The second pertains to our subsequent walk with Christ, and that meaning is to turn from sin when we recognize it in our thoughts or actions.

5 minutes ago, RRep said:

your right  brother. confessing sin is a joke because it is our unbelief in God that send us to the lake of fire.

Karl Barth even said one time that "Religion is unbelief."

God repented something like 27 or 28 times in the Bible.  So, we know right there that the meaning is not just to quit sinning.

26 minutes ago, RRep said:

what does gospel mean? anyway

*Cletus* just told you.  (Well, except that he added a slight misunderstanding of "repentance")

Just as when Jesus started way back with the Law and the Prophets and began expounding about Himself to the two men on the Emmaus Road, "The Gospel" is not a verse or two to be selected out of the Bible's entire story of the redemption of man.

It starts in Genesis.

3 minutes ago, GandalfTheWise said:

I usually split "laying on hands" into two categories.  The first is related to an appointment and confirmation into a formal form of ministry.  In this case, it's commonly done by acknowledged leadership of a congregation, denomination, or ministry.  The second is related to interpersonal ministry.

When talking interpersonal ministry, I view it as optional and as a way of potentially providing encouragement and making a connection with someone.  Off the top of my head, some healings in the gospels and acts involved touch in some form and others did not.  I see it as a one possible way of communicating with a person in a tangible way and not as a mandatory ritual for a prayer to be answered.

The general guidelines I follow are these:

If the church or ministry or context where I am with someone has particular rules or guidelines, I will respect them.  For example, my last church had a strict same-sex prayer policy for public ministry.  I don't see any point in causing unnecessary offense so I didn't approach a woman to offer prayer, but depending on context would if a woman approached me (and would some times ask someone else to join us in prayer).  In other settings, I felt free to pray with anyone I knew well.

I usually decide on physical contact (almost exclusively only either holding a hand or a hand on the shoulder) based on how well I know the person or after asking permission.  Some people like their personal space and any form of touch is distracting.  Other people feel comforted by touch and contact. I see it mainly as a question whether it would make the other person feel more comfortable and help in encouraging and comforting them, or if it would be awkward or distracting.   If at all possible, I like to have my wife with me and sometimes prefer to have her take the lead.

If it is someone I do not know very well, I usually err on the side of keeping my distance.  If I have concerns about it being misunderstood or creating the wrong impression, I'll keep my distance as well.

As usual, a very reasoned and logical reply.

2 hours ago, Cobalt1959 said:

So you think a registry for habitual sex offenders is a bad thing?

If any person doesn't, they know nothing about that mess called a registry.  You, yourself could end up on it for some of the most innocent things.  One 15 year-old couple in Utah are both on it for life because their fathers (Mormons, I believe) objected to them going too far in their dating.  (I think they are nearly thirty now, and still, daily,  suffering the devastating consequences of that labeling...…. They will carry it to their graves.  Their lives are both literally over.)

BTW, as someone who has spent a good part of his life dealing directly with Sex Offenders (mostly convicted) I can honestly and frankly inform you that you just may want to tell God you want to sit this healing stuff out.... BECAUSE if you ARE convicted of something like that and get on that dreaded registry (whether falsely, or not) your life is essentially over, and you will never get it back.

Enough has been posted that I think we can now ask for your opinion, *Zion*.

3 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

True, “we must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29). However, prudence is from the Lord and we are in Times When people are looking to accuse a innocent Christian of misconduct. So I urge making “go in twos to pray for the opposite sex,” and the exception being what you said. 

I just said that.  But if you find yourself in a situation where there is not the other person there to keep you looking safe, we should not fear men more than we desire to obey God.

26 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Yes it is ok, long as you are not alone with the man. For instance, if you surround a person needing the laying on of hands make sure you are with others laying hands. 

On one hand we must obey the Spirit of God, but we mustn’t ignore the dangers of accusation in this day and age. 

In Numbers is safety. Jesus sent them out in twos (Luke 10:1-23), because by two all things are confirmed (John 8:17, Deuteronomy 19:15) and God is in their midst (Matthew 18:20). 

That's good common sense, but if the situation is not such as to be able to play it safe... we should not and Cannot ignore the greater calling that God give us not to fear the wagging tongue of man, but to do His bidding.

2 minutes ago, Still Alive said:

What's kind of funny is that I feel that I am the one that is keeping it simple. ?

You actually are.

Since I have seen healing both ways for years, I would have to say. "Yes."  (But I believe that "laying of hands" on someone really does nothing.)

1 hour ago, Still Alive said:

I confess that I'm a "partial" Preterist. But I don't label it. I just think the fall of Jerusalem was part of what it is talking about. It also hit me, about 20 years ago, that somewhere around the year 2018 might factor into all the end times stuff. I base it on this: it says that this generation will not pass away until all these things come to pass. And the length of the life of a generation as described in the bible, post flood, is roughly 70 years. And Israel became a nation in 1948.

What's interesting is just how much events really do seem to be coming to a swift close, forgetting about the semi-date-setting I did back then. I do believe that if the R's keep control of congress in this next election cycle, it could get pretty ugly in the US, but that's not the whole world.

But it's just speculation on my part.

Oh, and you're 9 years older than me, ya old fossil!

In truth, ALL OF US ARE PARTIAL PRETERISTS, even if we try to vehemently deny it.  We all believe some of the OT prophesies were met (completed and came to pass) in Jesus.

I didn't know about [URL=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd8pLOYmnzE ]THIS[/URL], but I am finding it interesting, right from the very first statement about the book.  Thank you very much for telling me about it.

1 minute ago, Still Alive said:

Chilton?

If so, I can get 8 one hour sermons called "days of vengeance" on youtube.

If it helps, the book was written by David Chilton.

1 minute ago, Still Alive said:

Can you get them as audio? something to fill my three hour commute.

I don't know.  I have never looked for that since I often like to re-read some paragraphs or chapters several times in a row.

1 minute ago, Still Alive said:

Thanks for that recommendation. I'll look for them on Amazon.

They can both be downloaded, for free, online.  But, a warning:  They are both large books, and cannot be covered in just a few days.

2 hours ago, Still Alive said:

So, what, exactly is being argued about being written either in 69 or 96?

I understand the general understanding, but this discussion seems to be about a specific book or document.

Specifically, if the book of Revelation was written prior to the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple, it makes it very difficult to refocus all that the book talks about as being meant to happen thousands of years off into the future.

The book The Days of Vengeance is probably the most comprehensive commentary of Revelation ever written in all of history, and the other book that really presents both sides of the "date of writing" issue is Before Jerusalem Fell.  Both are great books that no Christian should fail to read.

19 hours ago, Still Alive said:

I've never met a preterist. Is this becoming a common or even large minority belief among people claiming to be Christian?

I've personally met only two in my entire 73 years of life, that I know of, anyway.