seekeratthesea

I think you are incorrect in what the Bible puts forth on a number of fronts... 1. The Bible is not a science book, and as such it is not trying to give scientific descriptions of what happened. If I were to say that the sun rises in the east and someone else goes into great detail about the rotation of the earth in relation to the sun, would you tell me that I am wrong in what I said about the sun? 2. In Gen 1:1 when it says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", I take that to mean that everything that was created was created at that point. You will notice that Gen 1:16 does not say "and then God made two great lights", it just said that God made them, it does not tell us when they were made. Look at it this way. Let

I think you are incorrect in what the Bible puts forth on a number of fronts... 1. The Bible is not a science book, and as such it is not trying to give scientific descriptions of what happened. If I were to say that the sun rises in the east and someone else goes into great detail about the rotation of the earth in relation to the sun, would you tell me that I am wrong in what I said about the sun? 2. In Gen 1:1 when it says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", I take that to mean that everything that was created was created at that point. You will notice that Gen 1:16 does not say "and then God made two great lights", it just said that God made them, it does not tell us when they were made. Look at it this way. Let

The Holy Spirit is often mis-used by Christians to add validity to whatever they believe. It's the old "the Holy Spirit guided me to....Holy Spirit told me....Holy Spirit showed me...." It's often used pre-emptively to shut down arguments against whatever point they're trying to make, to make their point unquestionable or "infallible" to use the Vatican's more straightforward version. It's also used many times as a last resort after all their other points have fallen short. Another misuse of the Holy Spirit is to reverse things and claim that whoever doesn't agree with their point DOES NOT have the Holy Spirit, and from there it degenerates into whether or not the disagreeing person is really a true Christian or truly saved. Interpretations of Scripture are usually the subject matter in cases like this, their interpretation is right and yours is wrong because they say the Holy Spirit guided them. Whenever someone uses the Holy Spirit in these ways it borderlines onto blasphemy and it's time for the alarms to start going off.

We need to give the Left something so they can save face and vote for an amendment that removes Roe v. Wade. As for the death penalty, Jesus stopped not one, but two executions. He actively stopped the execution of a woman who had committed adultery. He passively stopped the execution of a man who had committed murder. (Barabbas) With God and Jesus, nothing happens by accident. We don't NEED to give the left anything. If you in something then you should work toward that goal, WITHOUT GIVING UP other things that you believe in. And Christ was not against the death penalty.

How about objectively....less deaths from military battles, less battles, less wars. A LOT of people find it hard to believe at first but at least they're open to the idea and GLAD when objective analysis bears out the truth. How about measuring it without a pre existing desire to find MORE wars just so people can then be right about about being near to the end times? interesting but i, on the other hand, would get depressed, not glad if this objective analysis bears out the truth. my luck, it probably will. i'm actually looking forward to the new heavens and the new earth. when nothing will hurt or destroy on God's holy mountain. when there will be no poverty, no killing, not injustices or oppressions of any kind. that's what we're looking forward to, not the wars themselves but to the end of all war. Looking forward to it is good. Imagining that we're in the end times when there is no sensible reason is wrong.

How about objectively....less deaths from military battles, less battles, less wars. A LOT of people find it hard to believe at first but at least they're open to the idea and GLAD when objective analysis bears out the truth. How about measuring it without a pre existing desire to find MORE wars just so people can then be right about about being near to the end times? And how do you measure objectively "Rumours of Wars"? You measure it without a pre-existing intent to find MORE "rumours of wars" just because people who study such things almost always tend to believe the "end" is just around the corner, almost always happening within their own lifespans. I don't think that's coincidence. End times studies are intriguing and I think those who are most attracted to end time scenarios aren't getting into those studies because they think the end times are a long ways off. I think they're intrigued by the end times happening in their own lifetimes and end up seeing their interpretations through their own distorted prism, tending to "find what they want to find. You measure it with a pre-existing knowledge that these "rumours of wars" have ALWAYS been a sad part of human history, spiking and declining throughout history. You measure it with a knowledge that even the current decline might be temporary. But since it is declining, there's no more reason to believe we're necessarily in the end times now than we were a thousand years ago.

Is such an amendment on the table right now, or are you promoting such a bill? I am promoting it. Would you support it? Why? I would not support it. I think states should have the right to decided BOTH, and that being allowed to decide one provided that you something else is wrong. The death penalty and abortion are separate issues, and unrelated. In the death penalty you have individual jurors acting on behalf of the govt in deciding on the life of a guilty person based on considerations for the victim and society at large. In abortion you have one individual deciding on the life of an innocent unborn person, based on the self interest of the adult. This things are not comparable and shouldn't be treated as if they were.

Is such an amendment on the table right now, or are you promoting such a bill?

Adam and Eve had daughters as well as sons, this is where the women came from. It was incestuous by todays standards but normal by that era. Your boss may just be baiting you for a chance to rage on about Christianity, incest etc. Very few people become Christians merely because they get one specific question answered, and there is always a counter argument to whatever answer you give, or a complaint about the answer. Be ready to hear her start an argument about the Bible promoting incest between brother and sister.

Dress in church is a very relevant subject...including in my own church. It may have been better to make your point WITHOUT laying our your criteria by which others may call themselves Christians. There are many legitimate Christians that dress improperly, just as there are many legitimate Christians that have other failings.

I have lived together with women and now think it was the wrong thing to do, and I was not very committed during the "live-in" preferring to be able to get out the relationship easily if things didn't work out. From the male perspective, it's almost always a matter of getting the benefits of marriage without the commitment. Having said that, I am still not sure that God needs a marriage to be performed in a church, and sanctified by a govt court clerk in order to be legitimate. There were no such things in the days of Abraham after all. People lived in the wilderness away from towns and cities, within family communities/clans that didn't always have marriages licenses or the societal structures that we have today, but marriages were still recognized my God. It reminds me of the 60's arguments when young adults were arguing against the necessity of the piece of paper, i.e. marriage license and when some of these people were just making their own vows independent of church and govt authorities. I would acknowledge that almost all of these were just sham, feel good "marriages" intended to avoid commitment and tweak the older crowd; but I still find it hard to believe that God would ONLY accepts marriages recognized performed by churches that are recognized by the state. The fact that most of those 60's live in things were shams does not mean that all of them will always be that way. I believe it feasible that God would accept a marriage as legitimate based on the hearts of the couple, rather than the approval of state/church authorities, not necessarily with a state marriage license, especially since that occurred all he time in more ancient times. A hypothetical hermit couple, living in the Canadian backwoods could conceivably take Christian vows before God without the aid of a pastor and it could be a legitimate marriage in the eyes of God, even if looked down on by more traditional minded Christians. It would be a case of God judging the heart and marriage. The problem is that as in the 60's/70's such notions can lead to many more uncommitted pseudo marriages than committed marriages. Only God could judge the hearts of the bride and groom along with the legitimacy of the marriage.

Literal interpretation of this passage Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. means that Peter is a rock and that Christ's church is built upon Peter as an individual, in line with catholic theology, rather than what I believe, in that Christ was speaking of the faith and knowledge exhibited by Peter in Matthew 16:16. I also think that's a legitimate case of differing interpretations, whereas two honest, objective, Christians can have different interpretations of the same line of Scripture. Do you read Revelation literally?

How about objectively....less deaths from military battles, less battles, less wars. A LOT of people find it hard to believe at first but at least they're open to the idea and GLAD when objective analysis bears out the truth. How about measuring it without a pre existing desire to find MORE wars just so people can then be right about about being near to the end times?

Check your history......it's been declining since world war II......casualties and wars and the scale of the wars.....sorry Just to add a few. The cold war The war on drugs The war on terror The war on just about anything you can name. War isn't just bombs and guns, blood and guts. There are many aspects to it. There are intelligence wars, there are technological wars. So many things that go on behind the scenes. Not to mention those wars that we dont hear about, until they make movies about it...Rwanda. Okay...........I guess we could start claiming price wars between corporations too....but at this point I think you've pretty much established the fact that you're in search of wars so that you can deny that things are getting better instead of worse and willing to tweak the meaning in order to meet your goal. Wars, deaths, scales of war....I'm very sorry but it REALLY is down in an across the board, realistic kind of way, starting at the end of WW II. And sorry to add insult to injury but starvation and disease are down too. Living a pie in the sky illusion is bad but to deny improvement is a means of maintaining a negative perspective when it's not needed, at least not to the degree when things really were getting worse. Refusing to acknowledge and APPRECIATE the improvement makes it more likely to slip back into the greater horrors of the past. You may want to start asking yourself why this is unwelcome news to so many people. Isn't that kind of unreal pessimism and defeatism just what the enemy would want from us? You may want to go to an inner city, and tell me if war has decreased. War is not on the decline...it our concept of war that is. Once again war has not slowed down. Its just not fought the same. And honestly there are many wars, that are not covered. Have you ever heard of the Crips vs Bloods. Real bad in the 90's. How about some of those Mob wars. War is not something that has to be officially declared by a government. Wars are fought daily...and price wars are not what I'm talkin about. Honestly this world is not improving. Remember a deception of the antichrist will be "peace". I played online chess with a guy from Australia once..........chess is loosely based on old time battle and it was American against Australian so I guess you could add that to your list as WW III..........

Check your history......it's been declining since world war II......casualties and wars and the scale of the wars.....sorry Just to add a few. The cold war The war on drugs The war on terror The war on just about anything you can name. War isn't just bombs and guns, blood and guts. There are many aspects to it. There are intelligence wars, there are technological wars. So many things that go on behind the scenes. Not to mention those wars that we dont hear about, until they make movies about it...Rwanda. Okay...........I guess we could start claiming price wars between corporations too....but at this point I think you've pretty much established the fact that you're in search of wars so that you can deny that things are getting better instead of worse and willing to tweak the meaning in order to meet your goal. Wars, deaths, scales of war....I'm very sorry but it REALLY is down in an across the board, realistic kind of way, starting at the end of WW II. And sorry to add insult to injury but starvation and disease are down too. Living a pie in the sky illusion is bad but to deny improvement is a means of maintaining a negative perspective when it's not needed, at least not to the degree when things really were getting worse. Refusing to acknowledge and APPRECIATE the improvement makes it more likely to slip back into the greater horrors of the past. You may want to start asking yourself why this is unwelcome news to so many people. Isn't that kind of unreal pessimism and defeatism just what the enemy would want from us? You may want to go to an inner city, and tell me if war has decreased. War is not on the decline...it our concept of war that is. Once again war has not slowed down. Its just not fought the same. And honestly there are many wars, that are not covered. Have you ever heard of the Crips vs Bloods. Real bad in the 90's. How about some of those Mob wars. War is not something that has to be officially declared by a government. Wars are fought daily...and price wars are not what I'm talkin about. Honestly this world is not improving. Remember a deception of the antichrist will be "peace". Please be real here.........you're trying too hard here.

Check your history......it's been declining since world war II......casualties and wars and the scale of the wars.....sorry Just to add a few. The cold war The war on drugs The war on terror The war on just about anything you can name. War isn't just bombs and guns, blood and guts. There are many aspects to it. There are intelligence wars, there are technological wars. So many things that go on behind the scenes. Not to mention those wars that we dont hear about, until they make movies about it...Rwanda. Okay...........I guess we could start claiming price wars between corporations too....but at this point I think you've pretty much established the fact that you're in search of wars so that you can deny that things are getting better instead of worse and willing to tweak the meaning in order to meet your goal. Wars, deaths, scales of war....I'm very sorry but it REALLY is down in an across the board, realistic kind of way, starting at the end of WW II. And sorry to add insult to injury but starvation and disease are down too. Living a pie in the sky illusion is bad but to deny improvement is a means of maintaining a negative perspective when it's not needed, at least not to the degree when things really were getting worse. Refusing to acknowledge and APPRECIATE the improvement makes it more likely to slip back into the greater horrors of the past. You may want to start asking yourself why this is unwelcome news to so many people. Isn't that kind of unreal pessimism and defeatism just what the enemy would want from us?

i cannot say whether wars & rumors of war are less frequent so i will have to acquiesce to your greater knowledge altho the granddaddy of all the rumors of war is certainly prevalent. read ezekiel 38 & 39 about the gog/magog war i.e. the russia/iran prophesies. I have read it, many times. It was also prevalent 25 years ago, when USSR seemed more of a threat and Iran less. Headlines can always be connected to prophecy, the more you do it, the easier it gets. And the more you do it the greater the odds of eventually hitting it correctly but it's prophetic lottery. It will seem prevalent in another 25 years also. Be aware, it's very easy to get lost in this stuff, people end up getting personally invested in their scenarios and end up becoming cheerleaders for their own personal anti christs, doomsday scenarios, etc........it starts getting morbid very quickly Seeker http://seekeratthesea.blogspot.com/

uu

Check your history, it's less, and they are smaller in scale, with less casualties....the world is less violent, for now at least, but took a huge drip in 1945 at the end of WW II and it's been going slowly down since. And it has nothing to do with some conspiracy by the bushies to control hide truths or portray world leaders in positive light...having "bush on the brain" just blinds people to other things. And don't worry, nobody is going to give bush credit anyway....and you can still be mad at him while acknowledging the truth about the decline, one does not cancel out the other

Well.............I don't know if it's down to hours, days or thousands of years. And I don't believe I should be worried about it. As far as the rest of your post, I see it as exactly what Christians should believe about Christ......not an Imam, but I doubt that either one of us will be changing the others mind about that any time soon. I will tell you little of what we believe, we believe the Prophet Isa (as) will return... yes.... but we believe as a precurser to this event the Imam Mahdi (atfs) will return first, then they will side by side rid the world of evil and rule in peace. so we watch for the Mahdi (atfs) first...... but we believe in the end of times the same..... I have read the books on christian theology about this... all the 12 books concerning the end of times..... it was the left behind series... very good books..... I wouldn't use the left behind series as an example of Chirstian theology or of end times scenarios.........when people learn how to make money off their theology, then their theology starts to become corrupted, and there are different perspectives from which to interpret prophetic books............the notion that the end times are just around the corner is naturally the most dramatic version, it's also the most egocentric in that it always means the end times just coincidentally occur in our lifetimes....it may just be a weakness of human nature. And although those scenarios are always feasible...........they also get a little more discredited with each passing decade as the cast of characters and nations gets constantly tweaked to match up with new headlines and current events. It's been going on long enough now that I think people are starting to catch on. So tell me please where Jesus Christ fits into Muslim theology. As a prophet but not the Messiah? Not the Son of God? So if I want to understand how a Muslim thinks of Jesus Christ.....is He roughly equal to Moses? Elijah? But greater than Isaiah or Daniel?

Well.............I don't know if it's down to hours, days or thousands of years. And I don't believe I should be worried about it. As far as the rest of your post, I see it as exactly what Christians should believe about Christ......not an Imam, but I doubt that either one of us will be changing the others mind about that any time soon.

We have been living in the "end times" ever since Jesus ascended to Heaven. Yes.............. And the times of today are not necessarily any more an "end time" than the times of Christ. I think there is a HUUUUU UUUUGE disconnect between our perception of time and God's perception of time, assuming He even bothers to perceive it or experience it. So do we just ignore what's going on around us and act as if everything fine? No........but for those who are on Armageddon Watch ........they should relax........we probably got it all wrong like always.

We have been living in the "end times" ever since Jesus ascended to Heaven. Yes.............. And the times of today are not necessarily any more an "end time" than the times of Christ. I think there is a HUUUUU UUUUGE disconnect between our perception of time and God's perception of time, assuming He even bothers to perceive it or experience it.