I think true holiness is being able to look at the sin of the world - or in ones own heart - and be repulsed by it rather than attracted by it. The Spirit shows us what is sin and what is not. Out of body experiences are to be shunned as mysticism. It is crossing a boundary where God said - no go. Fullstop. It is the rape of knowledge. There is no grey area where the occult is concerned.
John Yurich USA wrote: It is false to state that the Catholic Church supports homosexuality. The teaching of the Catholic Church is that homosexuality is sinful and an abomination.
Actually its the Bible that teaches homosexuality is sinful behaviour. So is supporting sinful behaviour by your lack of outrage and action over the abuse of CATHOLIC children - YOUR OWN CHILDREN - by adults you allow to continue in positions of power. Do you honestly think people think highly of you for supporting your church at this time? If humans can see the horror of your indifference as evil, how much more do you think an intelligent God can see? You don't have blood on your hands you have it all over your backs. Repent or be included in the same fate as the paedophiles and homosexuals in your church whom your shelter by your twisted loyalties.
Concerned wrote: I hope I didn't make you feel bad. I do enjoy your reasoning and arguments on some topics. For the record, a few of the men have changed their handles when attacking as well, but oddly, their IP's are anonymized or spoofed. Makes one wonder... Looking forward to reading your always interesting and sometimes intriguing posts. We need the balance that comes from the female points of view. : )
I can assure MY feelings are not involved. It's your feelings that are making you weak. I'm leaving early I was going to hang around for another week or so, but there is no need now. Kia toa.
Wise, understanding, fearless, known, tested in leadership, righteous in his judgements, impartial, fearless of man, male, able, fearing the true God, truthful, hating covetousness, guided by the word of God, trusting in God alone, faithful in marriage, free from the love of money.
Everyone needs to "come out of Her". 'Her' is every Religous Lie set up in opposition of The Truth. RCC don't have that on their own. 'Her' is every religion claiming "Jesus is The Christ" who adds and subtracts from The Truth. 'Her' is every man and woman who goes along with it. Supports the lies in their own church, ignores the lack of real fruit, tolerates hypocrisy. Greases up to the Pastor/Priest/Reverand. Fails to stick up for the poor. Goes to church because they don't have anything else to do on a Sunday morning. Form their little tight groups and persecute in devious ways anyone who they don't admit.
I didn't get out of prison to be caught in a bird cage - and that is what false protestantism is. And there is plenty of it around, as I am sure you are aware.
Here are some important traits of the judgemental person. The first clue will be haste. The judgemental person judges HASTILY, they will be unconcerned with facts, but will seek out false witnesses to support their case. Did you know that false witnesses were stoned in the OT whether the person they accused turned out to have done what they claimed or not? Thats right. To accuse someone you need 2 witnesses.
Of course this is how Jesus died - by the hand of false witnesses.
Angela Wittman wrote: We need to be more careful when judging whether others are saved or not... We can't read hearts or minds. But I do believe that a Christian will seek the truth and sometimes he/she will have to leave a church in order to find it.
Yes. I agree dear. Firstly, it's impossible to judge people on the internet - you can only judge their words. Secondly, and this is easy to understand where judgement is concerned: If you were accused of a crime by someone and it ended up in court you would expect to hear from witnesses and to have actual facts presented in a careful case wouldn't you? You would be very surprised if the judge just looked at you, at a couple of words you'd said twisted by a false witness and threw you in jail wouldn't you?
Unprofitable Servant wrote: The church is not a public forum for any and all to express their beliefs. I would find it hard to believe that an atheist group would allow a Christian to come in to their meeting and preach either.
Forget about the atheists - the atheists are the ones outside the church - not in it and they don't want to come to your church.
Think of it like this: Christians talk of free speech as being a God given right - is this correct? However AT CHURCH Christian's don't demand the same rights.
Where the 'atheist' came in was where I said: I wonder if atheists have noticed?
That is, the atheists outside the church who hear Christian's demanding their God given right to free-speech in the world. And then I said: Doublestandards.
You do not think so. Shall we leave it at that then. Obviously you aren't going to change my mind by keeping on posting about atheists not being entitled to a forum in your church. Although I don't see any harm in it. People who have the truth aren't afraid of it ever not being the truth are they? I would wish atheists did demand a forum in your church - it would be an opportunity to slay them with the Word of God.
John UK wrote: Both are beneficial, Phoebe. John said: Matthew 3:11 KJV 11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
John UK wrote: You speak in riddles woman. Why do you never say what you mean and mean what you say? If you have a defective view of the atonement (which you have), it becomes all of us on this site to assist you and preach to you the gospel of God, which is Jesus Christ as a propitiatory and substitutionary sacrifice of atonement, where he took in his own body the wrath of God due unto sinners.
Perhaps it the fault is on your side John. Try just reading the plain words that are before you, rather than attempting to see behind the supposed veil.
John UK wrote: Good evening Phoebe No I don't speak Maori, nor have I ever been to the South Pacific, much as I would love to. But I was merely trying to obey the following scriptures.... 1 Corinthians 9:20-22 KJV 20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; 21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. 22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. Sure, I have failed. But surely it is better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all? I went to all the trouble of looking up Maori dictionaries, and tried to evaluate what you were saying. Ah well.
John. John. Don't you realise that your own words, as Scripture says, are witnessing against you now.
I can only warn you stop. It is your choice whether you take that advice or not. You are elected to receive that choice today. What will you chose? Fire or Water?
John UK wrote: 1. No charge intended nor made; you must have made that up. 2. Oh dear. What then? We cannot obey the Bible in case we make mistakes, being fallible and all. 3a. No, of course not. The welfare state does, and makes a right mess of it. 3b. In my wisdom, I went out fishing for bass twice last week. I hoped to get a fish big enough for a local (unsaved) family who are living on scraps, one for my Bible teacher who I cannot support with cash as I have very little, and the third (if I was lucky) for myself.
Morena. Here again laying traps for others - you deceitful, deceitful men.
Neil wrote: But you haven't defined "poor," either. If it's such child's play to answer my question, then find one & get back to me with his answer. Or better yet, find several. Then it'll be fun trying to reconcile their replies. rhymnrzn, I have to wonder if you actually understood my question. I wasn't asking for another sermon, I was asking for a specific answer. What is "rich?" What are "much goods"?
Well then, try Psalm 144. Beyond that I can not help you in your pursuit.
Neil: "So how then does one define "rich": relative to then, or now? And either way, by which metric? Net worth, gross income, net income, or what? If you cannot arrive at a universally acceptable & precise definition of "rich," then we're wasting our time here, for none of us know what we're talking about, including myself.
Why do you discuss the meaning of the word 'rich'? Will you ever arrive at a definition? People find out what 'rich' means when they are poor. Are you that interested in semantics? Ask a child - they know.