Paul James

I never said that. Why have you quoted what another member said and put my name to it?

God's will is that you get to know who Jesus really is. That comes by reading the Gospels and asking Him to make Himself real to you. God's will is not a list of "shoulds" and obligations. If you think you have to do things you should, that is trying to please God by following the Law. God's will is for you to get to know Jesus and allow Him to just love you. His love is unconditional. You don't earn it, You rest in it. Once you rest in His love for you, you will be having fellowship with Him, and then He will work His will in you. I never pray for guidance. I just fellowship with the Lord in prayer and His Word, and guidance just happens. Often happens in ways I didn't expect. The problems with those who struggle with guidance and knowing God's will is that they have expectations, and when those expectations are not fulfilled, they think they have departed from His will, and fear and insecurity sets in. They start to think that Jesus doesn't love them any more because what they were expecting did not happen. But what Jesus is waiting for is for them to stop trying to fulfill what they think God may be expecting of them, and to rest in His love and grace, and just wait until the way becomes clear. It may be something unexpected but totally right. In trying to be better Christians, we stop being authentic. The only way to be authentic is just to be ourselves. If Jesus wants to change anything about you for the better, He will without you interfering with His workmanship in you. Giving up the struggle and resting in the Lord is consistent with the Scripture: "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not to your own understanding. Commit your way to the Lord and He will guide your paths." Sometimes we have to sit down and shut up so the Lord can do what He wants to do in us.

You may need to learn who Jesus really is. The Jesus I know and whom I have had fellowship with since 1969 when He revealed Himself to me, loves us unconditionally. He loves us no matter who we are or what we do, or what has been done to us. He loved you so much that He was prepared to go to the Cross and suffer so that your sins may be taken from you and placed on Him. He is looking forward to when you go to meet Him face to face one day, so He can put His arms around you and just love you. Let me ask you a question. Have you decided to be celibate because Jesus wants it of you, or do you think you should, because of the guilt of what happened to you - that you in some way let it happen and didn't resist strongly enough? Do you realise that Jesus never stopped loving you even though what happened to you? Do you feel that you "should" forgive yourself for letting him touch you inappropriately? Do you believe that Jesus will stop loving you if you don't forgive the boy? What difference would it make if you did forgive him? Would it change anything. Would it make you feel less guilty? Why are you trying to be a better Christian? Do you think that Jesus loves you any less the way you are right now? What makes you think that there is anything you can do to make Jesus love you more than He does right now? Jesus doesn't need anything from you to "earn" His love for you. He loves you free of charge. If you really knew Jesus, you would be happy just to rest in His love and continue just being yourself. Pray for the boy and ask Jesus to surround him with His love, as He wants to surround you with His love. You can only forgive and love others, when you know that Jesus loves you with such a love that would overwhelm you. My advice to you is to relax, avoid the "shoulds" and just spend time getting to know Jesus by reading about Him in the Gospels and asking Him to reveal Himself to you.

Sounds like your question is a loaded one where you already have your preconceived answer. It is obvious to me that the answer I provided does not fit into your preconceived view, so I have nothing more to say about it.

The seed that falls on the good ground and grows to bear fruit are those who are saved. This is totally in line with the Scripture (as I previously quoted): "He who endures to the end will be saved."

the Bible says that he who endures to the end will be saved. It is not how a person starts out in the faith, but how he ends.

The parable of the sower shows that not all who start out in the faith will end up being saved at the end. It shows that some will start off with a big religious hiss and a roar, but will fall away after a short while when persecution and problems arise. If "once saved always saved" is true, then all those who start out on the faith will be saved at the end. According to the parable of the sower, that is not true.

From what I know of the book of Job, it was God who pointed out Job as being a totally righteous and upright man. It was Satan who responded with a "yes...but!' The challenge was that it was all very well for a guy to be righteous and godly when everything is going well, but would he continue his faith if he lost everything? God knew that Job would stand firm, and He let Satan deprive Job of family and possessions to prove Satan wrong. Job's wife didn't share his resolve and she was prepared to give up at the first hurdle by saying to him, "curse God and die!" When Satan saw that Job wasn't going to crumble, he upped the stakes by asseting that if Job's health was taken away, then he would lose his faith. So God let him do that, but prevented Satan from killing Job. Anyway, what would have been the point of killing Job? Nothing would have been proved then. The point of the whole scenario is that Job maintained his faith in God come hell or high water. It shows us that even if we lose everything, including our health, and we end up on a dung heap covered in festering sores, there is no reason to be discouraged and to throw away our faith in God. That is the crucial lesson in the book of Job, and that is why we have it in our Bible.

I'll take your word for it.

How do we know that the Flood happened just 4,300 years ago? There is evidence that people migrated to the Americas around 20,000 years ago. I don't think the Bible provides enough evidence for a reliable, hard and fast timeline.

The catastrophic Flood was so disruptive, that it totally changed the geography of the planet. How do we know that the separation of the continents took millions of years. They could have been separated through the disruption of the surface of the planet at that time, because it not only rained, but the fountains of the great deep were opened up, disrupting the earth's service and geographical makeup. This means that the river that flowed out of Eden no longer exists.

There are only two alternatives. One is either prophetic or pathetic! :-)

You are not being offensive - just engaging in fair discussion. We have the teaching of Jesus in the Gospels, and the extension to that teaching is found in the epistles of the Apostles. Once the last Apostle (John) died, there is no further direct inspiration that can be termed as Holy Scripture. Therefore any subsequent "revelation" purported to be inspired by the Holy Spirit has to be false, unless totally consistent with what Jesus and the Apostles taught in the New Testament.

The point I wanted to make in my Scripture quote was that all these prophecies that are coming out containing "new revelation" that Jesus nor Paul taught in the Gospels or the Epistles, cannot be of the Holy Spirit, because Jesus did say that the Holy Spirit will bring to remembrance all that He taught the Apostles, and because Paul was appointed by Christ as an Apostle and given the ability to have his teaching inspired by the Holy Spirit as the result of the personal he received from the Holy Spirit, all revelation that is of the Holy Spirit is the revealing of what has already been written in the Scriptures.

The Shepherding Movement and Covering Doctrine was popular in the 1970s and 80s. Initially it was good for providing mentoring and protection for younger converts, but soon developed into "power and control" situations by leaders wanting to use their "spiritual authority" to make disciples for themselves. The outcome of it was that multitudes of believers were seriously harmed and many dropped right out of the faith because of the abuse and bullying that came with the "covering". I heard that there is a resurgence of it in some churches, so I have written a book to warn people not to be duped into accepting anyone's "authority" to be accountable to them instead of Christ. True Shepherd or Wolf.pdf

A church pastor is the same as a school teacher. They have a powerful position in the church or school. When I trained as a teacher, we were told of the vital importance of maintaining a professional distance between us and our students. I think the same should apply to church pastors and church members. We were also trained not to be alone in a room with a male or female student. If there is a complaint of impropriety, there is no defence and it remains the word of the teacher against the word of the student. So when counselling a student, it is important to have another adult present so that in a situation where a complaint is made by a student, it can be refuted by the teacher and the other adult present. I was accused in one school by a student who reckoned that I was leering at her in class (she was 12 years told), so I demanded the Principal to have another adult in my room when that student was present as part of her elective class, to keep me safe. Unfortunately, there are many situations where a pastor has had an affair with a church member. In one very large Charismatic church in a New Zealand city, the married pastor ran off with the church secretary, Until then, he was viewed as one of the leading lights in the New Zealand Pentecostal and Charismatic movement. If you need pastoral counselling, you would be safe by having the pastor's wife in attendance (unless she tends to gossip about clients in the church prayer meeting as has happened in a Charismatic church I once belonged to). Alternatively having a trusted female friend, or your husband in attendance. If your issue concerns your marriage and you wouldn't want your husband there, finding a Christian marriage counsellor would be your best bet. If you feel you need better Bible knowledge, you could enroll in an on-line Bible College (I am the Oceanic Ambassador for Nations University (NU) and I thoroughly recommend it for doing one of its basic Bible courses. I spent three years doing a Mastorate in Divinity and found it a wonderful journey with very supportive staff and student advisor). You don't have to do anything academic if you don't wish that, but there are inexpensive basic Bible courses that will greatly benefit you. Unfortunately, many church pastors have been well-trained in theology and divinity, but training in ethical relationships is neglected, especially for unmarried pastors. The ministry can be very lonely for unmarried pastors, which opens him up to unethical contacts and relationships with female church members. The role of not dating your workmates is a good rule for unmarried pastors. If looking for a life-partner, it would be best to look outside of his church congregation so that no female members are "pressured" by the pastor's position of power into a relationship that may end up being a disaster for the church. If the unmarried pastor is young, handsome and attractive to women and goes into a relationship with one young woman in the congregation, envy and jealousy are horrible things which can cause gossip and character assassination among the other young women. Concerning this, the RCC ordination requirement that priests are celibate, except for those coming from other churches already married, goes a long way to avoiding the problem because the priest is "unavailable" to the young women of the parish (although secret fornication is not unheard of, which is another issue). So, my advice is to keep you and your marriage safe through wise conduct and good interpersonal strategies.

This is an interesting verse: "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you" (John 14:26). Notice that Jesus said that when the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in us, He will remind you of all the things that Jesus has already said to His disciples when He was with them in person. All this is recorded in the four Gospels, and the letters of the Apostles. Just in case someone disputes concerning the Apostles' letters, all the material in them are further expositions on what Jesus had already said, and Paul's teaching was thoroughly tested out by the Bereans who searched the Scriptures (Moses and the Prophets) to make sure that what he was teaching was absolutely true and consistent with the Scriptures. Paul's letters are the result of the personal training from the ascended Jesus during his three years in Arabia. What the John's Gospel verse tells me, is that the Holy Spirit brings to remembrance what has already been written in the Scriptures. He has not come to give "new" revelation. Therefore any "prophet" who teaches new revelation purporting to be from the Holy Spirit, is totally false, because a true prophet under the anointing of the Holy Spirit will speak of only what has already been written in the Old and New Testament Scriptures. This is why we should never take any prophecy at face value. Paul teaches that when prophecies are given, they must be judged, and the only way to judge a prophecy is to "search the Scriptures whether these things are really true". If the prophecy is not consistent with the written Scriptures, it must be immediately rejected to prevent a spirit of divination attached to it attacking the listeners.

Further to my previous long post. When they insult you like that, agree with them! You have the right to agree in principle with anyone who criticises you, without you having to change your beliefs or your behaviour. It is a technique called "fogging". Anyone who criticises you has to justify their criticism of you. The other technique is positive enquiry where you ask, "What is it that makes it appear that I am...[whatever they are accusing you of]. When the respond, as the same question about their response, and keep on asking the same question about subsequent responses until they give up and cease trying to manipulate you through negative criticism, and start giving non-manipulative, real answers. Example: "I hate your shirt." What is it about my shirt that you hate? "It is the kacky colour of it." What is it about the kacky colour? "It is that shade of brown that makes it look something is spilled on it." What is it about the shade of brown that is concerning you? "Oh, shut up. I can see you're not listening to me." You're right! I'm not listening to you!

In the 20 years I have been involved in forums I have learned to have a thick skin. I guess that I was brought up with a father who was a very skillful and cunning debater. I remember we had a debate over politics one evening, and my brother and I started yelling at him. He said, "You've lost the argument, because you raised your voices!" We realised that he was goading us so that we would lose our cool. It doesn't matter what position you take concerning an issue, you will always get others who will disagree with you, and start kicking you instead of the "ball". When they start using "you" messages to you, they have effectively lost the debate because they have run out of answers. This is one of my "trade secrets": Reading Leslie Neilson's biography, describing all the famous movies he wasn't in, was an inspiration to me. He said that his biography was totally made up, and it was a very entertaining book. Using the same principle deals with those who demand "proof" from you for something you have written. No one has any right to demand proof for anything you say. You have the absolute right to your own opinion about any issue. But being part of a forum is a valuable learning situation. It is a matter of having your own beliefs and opinions, but being teachable at the same time. Other contributors have a lot to add and the majority is well worth reading. But there are trolls on every thread who work to turn every debate into a two-horse race and no matter what you say, they will argue against it, often repeating over and over the same comments in order to repeatedly belt you over the head with their trolling view. If you take the attitude that by their conduct they are automatically wrong, you can safely ignore them and not be drawn into their useless exchange. One when I was trolled, I gave a totally logical answer, but totally made-up and meaningless. I discovered that way of speaking on a Youtube video where a guy was lecturing to economists, using the jargon, and sounding very expert in the field, but what he was saying was totally meaningless. It was very funny. It was interesting when I did it to a troll, how many on the tread took my words seriously and thought I was saying something very "deep" and mystical! Also, not taking yourself seriously is a valuable attitude to have on these forums and if all else fails, resort to humour. If someone responds to one of your comments by saying, "You're joking!" Say, "That's not joking. The unsuccessful Scottish hunter went out into the fog and mist." That's joking! Remember, don't go out to try and convert people on the forum to your way of thinking or believing. Just give your opinions, use the forum as a ministry to those who are genuine questioners, don't be defensive, and use your knowledge and experience to be someone interesting to read.

We need to be careful about false humility that can be a deception to stop godly folk from coming boldly to God's throne of grace to find mercy and help in their time of need. The inner "voice" that says, "You're not worthy to approach a holy God", may be a lying spirit trying to block one's access to God through Christ.

Not as good as this one: A drunk driver gets pulled over by a cop for going through an intersection in the wrong lane. The cop asks the driver, "Didn't you see the arrows?" The driver replied, "Arrows?? I never even saw the Indians!"

Here is the Scripture that counteracts your feelings of unworthiness to ask God for anything. "Be not anxious for anything, but by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, make your requests to God, and the peace of God that passes all understanding will keep your heart and mind in Christ Jesus" (Philippians 4:5-6). So, are you trusting your feelings of unworthiness, or are you putting your trust in God's Word? Are you trusting in your own righteousness, which is a filthy rag in the sight of God, or in the righteousness of Christ which has been given to you as a free gift? Are you of "the circumcision that worships God in the Spirit, rejoices in Jesus Christ, and has no confidence in the flesh (that is in ourselves)"? Or are you obsessed with yourself, your failings and shortcomings, in spite of what the Word of God says about you? Are you obeying your own feelings, or the Word of God?

In fact, there is no such thing as a "black" or "white" person. If we did see a person with a truly black or white appearance, we would be calling an ambulance or even a funeral director! This is black! And can't show pure white here because you wouldn't see the text. The reality is that we are all of different shades of brown. A Caucasian person is just a lighter shade of brown than a Jamaican who had just more melanin in his skin. Different shades of brown is not due to racial divide, because we are all of one race - the human race. It is environmental. Those in temperate and Arctic environment required less protective melanin than those in equatorial regions where more melanin is required to protect against the stronger sunlight. The reason why we have a mixture of different shades of brown throughout the world is migration. If a melanin-rich person lives in an Arctic environment and has descendants over successive generations, their skin would become lighter from one generation to another. For example, the original New Zealand Maori people came from a place closer to the equator, and so they were much darker when they first arrived in 900AD. You will notice that after successive generations, the skin tone or normal Maori people has become much lighter. This is also reflected in cats and dogs. These animals who originally lived in regions close to the equator had short hair, and those who lived further North, had long hair. Short hair animals didn't last long in Arctic climates, and long-haired ones did not survive the greater heat of equatorial regions. To go more deeply into this requires a more comprehensive study of genetics which is out of scope in this thread. The conflict between those of different brown skin tones is mainly cultural and historical. It is worse in the United States because Africans were imported as slaves and therefore viewed as people not much more than animals. In some Southern states, African Americans are still treated as sub-human and second class; and many resent it and see the "white" community, including the police, as the 'enemy'. This is the basis for the prejudice that seeing a person with a dark skin tone "has to be a criminal" in some way and therefore subject to suspicion and seen as untrustworthy. It is this same prejudice that tars and feathers all Nigerians as criminal scammers in the eyes of employers and those living outside the country, when the actual scammers are a minority. Of course, there are the "rent-a-crowd" professional protestors who will use any protest as a nail to hang their hats on, and many of these are prominent in movements like the BLM movement.

1. Get driving lessons from a professional driving school. Parents and family members are the worst teachers. They are not trained teachers and don't know how to inspire someone to have the confidence needed to successfully learn to drive. However, I taught my daughter to drive, but then I am a trained teacher, and always bolstered her confidence. As a result she is a completely safe driver with good driving habits. Once you have learned to drive, take possession of your car and demand everyone give you their keys. If any of your family, except your mother, takes the car without your permission, report the car to the police as a stolen vehicle, because that is what it is if they take it without your permission. If your name and your mother's is on the ownership papers, then anyone else taking it without your permission is stealing it. You said it got banged up, presumably by someone else taking the car. If the car is insured, there is a larger excess for someone who doesn't own the vehicle having an accident in it. They need to pay it. If the car is not insured, you have the right to demand payment for the repairs. If they refuse, you can make an application to the Small Claims Court to get a court order requiring them to pay. You would be better off moving and having your own place. There comes a time when children need to leave the nest and start living their own lives. Your mother may need to pay you for your share of the car, so you can put the money down to buy your own car and be independent.

Actually Paul never taught that women should not have a vocal part in the ministry of the church. Tertullian was the first church father to prohibit women having a vocal role in the services. All the church fathers before him allowed women to have a significant role in the churches. It was Tertullian's opposition of the Montanist movement that had women prophets who dominated the movement that gave rise to his opposition to woman's ministry. In fact, Paul's comment in 1 Corinthians 14 was to stop wives questioning prophecies in the church services thereby causing disruption. He fully supported women prophesying in church (1 Corinthians 11), and his instruction to Timothy about women not usurping men was to deal with a specific issue in the Ephesian church where some women were doing just that. Paul never meant for his teaching to either the Corinthians or the Ephesians to be blanket instructions for all churches. If you read Acts carefully you will see that Paul fully supported women being church leaders, teachers, and even apostles. Cancer comes from the devil. He is the one who steals, kills and destroys. God does not use the devil to punish believers. If the man's wife was a believer, then she was not under any condemnation at all, and it was because she was an effective Bible teacher that the devil attacked her with cancer to get her out of the way.