Shane wrote: Mike, Whether its round or flat, a crows nest gives you a better view. Its that simple. It doesn't prove curvature. Think about the first time you stood on top of your roof as a kid. Im sure you thought the same thing i did... "what a view. You can see things so much better from up here." Same thing holds true without obstructions, as on the ocean .
Can't anyone remember what they saw out their windows when they flew in a plane? It doesn't take much altitude to see the horizon line. Shane, I sent you videos showing the horizon line in every direction. What more do you want? Do engineers account for the curvature of the earth when they erect buildings and bridges? No. There's no need.
Mike, Whether its round or flat, a crows nest gives you a better view. Its that simple. It doesn't prove curvature. Think about the first time you stood on top of your roof as a kid. Im sure you thought the same thing i did... "what a view. You can see things so much better from up here." Same thing holds true without obstructions, as on the ocean .
Mike wrote: Anything could seem possible if it is buried in large numbers. Think of the heyday evolutionists have had with the idea of species changing over billions of years. Probably why I like simple, like the crow's nest argument for curvature, not required on a flat ocean. Watcher, you have said circle can mean circumference. True, and so perhaps that is what you believe of the Isaiah verse? If so, do you believe the Earth is cylindrical? I assume the folks who hold to flat Earth have some thoughts on what it looks like from outside.
Picture a hubcap. Raised in the middle (where the North Pole is), and a rim around the outer edge where Antarctica is. It's quite simple to see.
As for Buckeyes, my goodness, you certainly know your facts. There is absolutely NOTHING I can present that you do not have an answer for. You are a wealth of information, that's for certain. I am reminded of an atheist I have had discussions with. He REALLY BELIEVED what he had learned and could argue quite convincingly, I might add, his position. There are so many scientists that believe the earth is round, and they would die for their convictions. They are still wrong.
First of all, I have no desire to open a discussion here on eschatology. It is just an exercise in futility.
Second, I am not interested in defending or denouncing John MacArthur his ministry or his message. Just want record to be straight.
The portion of the sermon that was included starts with JM stating that salvation is wrought in hearts by God through His grace and the convicting work of the Spirit (John 16:8-11), do not we believe that?
What we DID NOT hear him say
--That Christians would not go through tribulation. (John 16:33)
--That the day of salvation is not today or you can put it off fleeing to Christ for salvation. (II Cor. 6:2)
--That there is hope for those who IN THIS LIFE reject Christ apart from repentance and faith during their days here on earth.
--That it doesn't matter how we live. (I John 3:2,3 Titus 2:11-14)
--That the salvation occurred just because they saw Jesus in flesh, he said that was the what God used to bring conviction to their heart.
--That the Lord's return is some secret thing which, by the way, is NOT a premillianist view.
That is why I said you should not base your understanding of other's viewpoint based upon the interpretation of it by those who despise its teaching. They simply misrepresent it.
"New research by British scientists reveals the world is being polluted and warming up less quickly than 10-year-old forecasts predicted, giving countries more time to get a grip on their carbon output."
They don't need more time to "get a grip" on carbon. The lack of warming is evidence warming isn't happening. For the last 20 years the temp rise, so called, has been flat. Yes, the "warming" has been less quickly happening, so much less there isn't any.
Many who dis "the Rapture " mean the longer term "the PreTrib rapture" as that is the popularized form in the US And the many films/ books about " the Rapture" mean "the PreTrib rapture"- sloppiness leads to lack of precise terms.
After much research into this issue Theo Hikmat made this SermonAudio post, much research compiled- he came to the conclusion that what most ministers teach about this subject is not correct, As he says this subject must be dealt with, We need to search the Bible and see what it says about this very important topic.
Underground Christian link here has 28 comments - interesting takes from listeners.
Semantics difference on denials - not substance difference - looks like Trump had a point on " wire-tapping" charges.
For that reason, speculation has run rampant about whether Manafort or others associated with Trump were under surveillance. The President himself fueled the speculation when in March he used his Twitter account to accuse former President Barack Obama of having his "wires tapped" in Trump Tower.
The Justice Department and the FBI have denied that Trump's own "wires" were tapped.
While Manafort has a residence in Trump Tower, it's unclear whether FBI surveillance of him took place there..
Mr. Speaker, government secrecy is anathema to all people, and darkness by rulers can be trumped by the sunshine of a public and an independent judicial system. But, Mr. Speaker, secrecy by a judicial system is a threat to liberty of all free peoples.
In our country we have the Constitution; and, specifically, the amendments to the constitution protect us as free people against government β government intrusion and government violation of our privacy β because government has no rights. It has power. It has what we give it when we give up our liberty and our rights.
penned wrote: I do not hold to rapture teaching anyway.
One would understand if you said you thought the timing would be different. You think Paul was lying when he wrote to the Thessalonians?
But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.Β For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.Β For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.Β For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:Β Β Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.Β Wherefore comfort one another with these words.Β
that is what is referred to as the catching away or rapture of the church. You don't think God will do this?
Italian prosecutors put geologists on trial for not predicting a 2009 earthquake, despite signs of increased seismic activity, that killed 300 people in central Italy.
The defendants, 6 scientists &a government official, are accused of manslaughter. While this legal action seems absurd, it highlights the trust the public wants to put in the estimations of scientists,&the harm that results when the invalid old-earth paradigm causes geologists to operate in a false sense of security& waste energy on Global warming
Maybe geologists will see the evidence constantly amassed by young-earth creationists &will allow Open-minded thought &planning for building code based expenditures instead of costly attemps to respond to fake global warming.
in an Age of the Earth Debate, the former president of EEGS, Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Societ -was asked, Q. " if the earth really were young, and had recently experienced a global flood, that would mean that geologists should give governments greater warnings about earthquake risks, so do you think we should do that? " A. "yes, governments should be warned of earthquake risks greater than that predicted by old-earth assumptions." Since that debate 2/28/2004 the world has not only seen the recent quakes that made the headlines like in Italy and Haiti, but four of the top ten most powerful quakes in the last 100 years have hit since that recent debate: - 2004-12-26 Mag. 9.1 Off Coast of Sumatra - 2005-3-28 Mag. 8.6 Northern Sumatra - 2007-9-12 Mag. 8.5 Southern Sumatra - 2011-3-11 Mag. 9.0 Off Coast of Japan & etc Since 9-11, when the terrible casualty count was about 3,000 dead from terrorism, governments have spent more than a trillion dollars attempting to minimize risk of further such deaths. In contrast, the quake casualties in the decade since our debate stand at 750,000 dead from earthquakes. That's 68,000 deaths per year- and growing! The earth is young& unsettled. NOT billions of years old-unsettling idea to Evilutionists- Post Flood vibes.
Great Sermon! Salvation comes by faith, and good works because of salvation.That is the way of Salvations.Jas 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Jas 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
Amen! Good sermon, well explained.
Anything could seem possible if it is buried in large numbers. Think of the heyday evolutionists have had with the idea of species changing over billions of years. Probably why I like simple, like the crow's nest argument for curvature, not required on a flat ocean.
Watcher, you have said circle can mean circumference. True, and so perhaps that is what you believe of the Isaiah verse? If so, do you believe the Earth is cylindrical? I assume the folks who hold to flat Earth have some thoughts on what it looks like from outside.
Ryan Maue wrote: By focusing on whether climate change caused a hurricane, journalists fail to appreciate the complexity of extreme weather events. While most details are still hazy with the best climate modeling tools, the bigger issue than global warming is that more people are choosing to live in coastal areas, where hurricanes certainly will be most destructive.
--http://tinyurl.com/yag5msq4 (Climate Change Hype Doesnβt Help) π It was an interesting commentary. I picked out the comment that I thought was most important. Are there other comments you would think would be more important? Well, you had better rush to read it, since this is a Wall Street Journal article and it may or may not stay visible to the general masses