wingnut-

Hello Fidei, This a good question and I am interested in reading others thoughts on the matter. For me personally it is not an easy question to answer because I really can't fathom why anyone would do such a thing. That being said, the example that comes to mind for me would be satan and the third of the angels that rebelled. I have often wondered why they were so foolish to do such a thing, particularly since they had the privilege of being in heaven and witnessing the glory of God firsthand. When it comes to people, I guess the easiest answer would be for power or material positions, possibly both. God bless.

II Timothy 1:7 For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.

I would hope every Christian feels the same way. If you have exercised your free will and chosen Jesus Christ as your personal savior then you have begun your spiritual journey. As you walk with Him and grow in your relationship then confusion and sinful inclinations will become easier to identify and avoid going forward. It won't happen overnight, it takes time and effort, but keep the faith and fight the good fight, God bless.

I think maybe you are having trouble with the concept of free will. God gave free will to all of creation, including the angels. Allowing someone the right to decide their own actions and being responsible for their actions are two different things.

Hello warrior, You'll have to forgive me, I just had surgery yesterday and apparently am having issues properly putting my thoughts into words. Disregard my original post and I will rejoin the discussion when I am more clear minded. God bless.

The harlot is a symbolic reference in my opinion. How do you arrive at the conclusion that the earth is the Lord?

Mystery Babylon is not an actual being, nor do I believe it is a single nation based on the chapter in question. More than likely it is a reference to the earth itself.

To answer your question would require more information. What exactly do you have against pastors?

This is why pat wears a hat

I still think Enoch and Elijah are the most likely since they are the only two not to die a natural death.... yet.

Ok, this may end up in the conspiracy section with that link

Well, I can't speak for anyone but myself, and I do my best to encourage any person I can. Can't say that I always do, but no one is perfect.

No power issues that I know of.

Well, I didn't say that intangible assets are not factored in. However, to reassess your conclusion that a company is only valued at its asset value when it is going to be liquidated, perhaps you can explain why companies keep an inventory that is conveniently required each quarter? You see, the problem here is that for the last decade or so, the very people who installed this new form of economics just so happen to be in charge of teaching economics at institutions of higher learning. What they teach now is simply there to support their flawed system. I don't really see what kind of point you are making, and how your question supports your point. What exactly is this new form of economics, what what is this flawed system you are talking about. Could you be precise and talk about specifics instead of this vague accusation? Why are you even talking about economics? Accounting is pretty different from economics. My guess you have not taken any form of accounting. When you ask about why companies keep an inventory do you mean they keep stocks for their products available or count their inventory? I do not understand what you are asking. Companies take an inventory count if they are a product selling companies, because they are required by law to report their financial statements especially if they are public companies. Inventory is a type of hard asset and obviously needed to be reported so investors could make inform decision about their investments. There are plenty of things you can tell about a company by their inventory levels, by comparing the company to their peers. If the inventory level is unusually high relative to their monthly sale volume (turn over ratio), it is a warning sign the company isn't doing so well. Hey udx, Your answer to my question supports my point, and contradicts your statement that I responded to. Compare your own responses below and see if you understand my point. This is what you said originally. This is how you responded to my question regarding inventory and actual value. As to why am I talking about economics, well, probably because that is what was being discussed. That is what the gold standard was all about, the basis on which value was determined. Since we abandoned the gold standard we now operate under an economic system that is based on imagination and wishful thinking. Hence my example of Facebook being a fortune 500 company in spite of having no actual value. P.S. I did two semesters of accounting back in the day, just for amusement.

Hello sister, I am improving, still working on getting back to 100%, but thank you. Ok, so now that we have clarified a few things I will get back to the main issue here. First, we both agree that there are two resurrections spoken of by John, and neither of them involve this resurrection you are speaking of. So back to the main question, where does John write about this resurrection? Ok, so I have a few questions in regards to this statement. First off, who does this include in your estimation? Is it just the revived Jews living in the headquarters? Where do you think the individuals from the first resurrection who will be reigning with Christ are? It seems to me that there would be a logistical problem in trying to fit everyone inside of present day Jerusalem. The second issue is with your assertion that people will somehow not care all of a sudden if their parent dies, and that mourning the loss of a loved one would cease to exist. Do Christians today not have the truth and yet still mourn the loss of a loved one, even one they know they will see in heaven again someday? I fail to see a difference. The facts according to scripture are that no more crying doesn't come until after the judgement. I realize that is problematic for those who hold to a literal thousand years, but it is one of the reasons why I do not see this as a literal thousand years.

Well, I didn't say that intangible assets are not factored in. However, to reassess your conclusion that a company is only valued at its asset value when it is going to be liquidated, perhaps you can explain why companies keep an inventory that is conveniently required each quarter? You see, the problem here is that for the last decade or so, the very people who installed this new form of economics just so happen to be in charge of teaching economics at institutions of higher learning. What they teach now is simply there to support their flawed system.

Hello sister, Sorry for the delay in getting back to you, I have not been well of late. We are in complete agreement regarding the issue of the resurrection spoken of in Revelation, which are in regards to all of the scripture you have provided. The resurrection to a glorified body is not the same as the other resurrections I was speaking of. However, they are exactly the same as the resurrection you are speaking of in regards to the Jews. People who died a natural death, were brought back to life, and then die another natural death. Maybe I am reading you wrong, but it looks like you are trying to say that this Jewish resurrection is the same as the resurrection of the dead in Revelation 20? If that is the case, you are forgetting that this resurrection takes place after the millenium. John wrote of two resurrections, one at the outset of the millenium, which includes those resurrected to a glorified body. Then one after the millenium, which is referred to as the resurrection of the dead. Either way, neither of those two resurrections can possibly fit your scenario. So what you have is this, a resurrection of one nationality that takes place prior to the millenium which John did not mention. I also wanted to point out your mentioning that these Jewish folk would die at a hundred years. Are you referring to the passage in Isaiah 65? If that is the case, then I think you need to take another look at that verse, it states that anyone who dies at 100 would be thought accursed. All indications are that these people will live a lot longer than 100 years. Isaiah 65:20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. So, if someone is considered a child at 100, how long do you suspect they will live? Break it down in this fashion, if today one makes it to a hundred that is considered a long life. One tenth of a hundred is ten years old, which would be considered a child, right? Now, one tenth of 1,000 is 100, which according to that verse, is the age of a child in that time. So, it is the same scale. And by that scale, it is completely plausible that people who adhere to the truth in that time period will live for the duration of the millenium. To further expound on the problem with this thought process, look at what is said in the previous verse. Isaiah 65:19 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying. No more weeping or crying heard in Jerusalem, ever, for the duration of the time period in question. Now, either this group you speak of will not die any natural deaths, or all of a sudden people will lose their compassion and love for others during the millenium. Which do you find more likely? Scripture to me is fairly clear about when there will be no more weeping, and it follows the Great White Throne judgement and the millenium, which should make it fairly clear that everything following verse 17 in this chapter is speaking about eternity. God bless you.

Really that is more about the true value of currency, which is basically at present overrated by about 4-5 times the actual value, depending on whose numbers you accept. So in all actuality, if you reverted back to the gold standard, 4 dollars right now is only worth 1 dollar. 20 dollars is only worth 5 dollars, and so on. The larger the number, the more obvious the disparity between the actual value and the claimed value. The real bottom line in all of this is not that complicated, the problem is found in spending more than what is coming in, and this applies across the board. The general public is overwhelmingly in debt. This is a result of people spending more than they make. The government is overwhelmingly in debt. This is a result of spending more than they make. When the average guy goes out and maxes out his credit card, what happens? Simple, he is out of money, no more to borrow. He can't just keep reaching out and taking money anymore. What happens when the government exhausts their supply? They print more money. This is why the dollar is 4-5 times out of scale with its actual value. The gold standard was about the value of the gold, the actual value. What you have today is a system of imaginary value. The most clear example of the futility of this system was displayed in the dotcom boom in the 90's. For the clearest example today, look at a company that is now considered a fortune 500 company, Facebook. Where is the value in this company? What assets do they possess? When you look at a list of fortune 500 companies today versus a list of them from 20 years ago, the issue becomes much clearer. Companies used to have assets, this is what made them valuable. If they were to fold in that time, there were assets to recover those losses. What does an investor in Facebook have as an assurance for their investment? Nothing. Unless you consider their server and computer equipment along with a roomful of twenty somethings to hold some sort of monetary value that comes out to billions of dollars.

This really sums it all up. What has occurred basically is this, the economists who have created this new system of operation also have flooded the world with a wave of disinformation to try and convince people that there was a sound reason for abandoning the gold standard. So they will claim that we cannot return to it, we had to leave it and come up with something new. Nothing could be further from the truth. They took us off the gold standard and put us on this merry go round so that they can accumulate all the wealth for themselves. You see, they can't get their hands on all of the gold in the world, can they?

Just ask her out, confidence makes a difference. If she says no then you move on, fairly simple. And yeah, ask her face to face.

I agree, your husband needs to get those answers.

Praying

Praying

Hello again sister, We may have to disagree on this, but here is something else for you to consider. The definition of resurrection according to Thorndike/Barnhart dictionary: 1. The act or fact of coming to life again; rising from the dead. 2. The state of being alive again after death. There are multiple places to read about people being resurrected. Jairus's daughter; Matthew 9:18-26; Mark 5:21-43; Luke 8:40-56. The widow at Nain's son; Luke 7:11-17. Lazarus; John 11:1-44. In all three instances you have someone dead being brought back to life, and all are brought back to a natural life. That is what you said happens with the Jews, correct? I don't know how you can claim that is different. At any rate, where is this event with Israel found in Revelation? I'm in no hurry, respond when you get the time, God bless you.

Adultery is sexual unfaithfulness of a married person. What you are describing would be fornication outside of the two specific mentioned.