The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

[Outcast]

I'm not doing the work for you . You need to read it without looking for your confirmation bias. And once again, Jesus said that he was the new deal. And that GC 1 and 2 were the way to operate henceforth.

[Admiral Thrawn]

No, thanks, I have read it more than enough to suit me, but I do often refer to it. God also destroys places who had no idea that Great Commandment 1 or Great Commandment 2 even existed. And neither of those is one of the Ten Commandments. Why would God leave those out of the Top Ten?

 

And I am not aware of an example of God destroying a city for being inhospitable to visitors. Do you have a refernce for me? I know that there was at least one city was destroyed because they were inhospitable to Jesus.

 

The 10 commandments could be 'summarised' by the 2 GC's in this following way:

 

1st GC -- corresponds with the 1st and 2nd and 3rd commandments.

If you love God, with all your heart, all your soul, all your might, all your mind, then these three first commandments are being obeyed.

 

2nd GC --- corresponds with the rest of the commandments.

If you love your neighbour as yourself, then the rest of the commandments will follow. You naturally will not steal from your neighbour if you love him.

You will not kill him if you love him.

 

You will not falsely charge him in a court of law, and bear false witness to put him in jail (like some jezebel women do to men on false charges of sexual assault).

 

You will not covet your neighours possssions or his wife, or sleep with his wife, if you love your neighbour as yourself.

 

So, you see, there is no discrepency, just a new thought of condensing the 10 commandments into 2 simple ones. It's easier to follow the 2 simple ones in love, then it is to follow the 10 without love.

[a4a]

Why is Vegas still standing?

Is Mickey Mouse a false idol of sorts?

 

a4a

[Admiral Thrawn]

Why is Vegas still standing?

Is Mickey Mouse a false idol of sorts?

 

a4a

 

Why is Mugabe still a dictator over Zimbabwe? I dont know, but these institutions are not going to last forever. Their end will come one day.

[Moai]

I believe you are referring to the civil war that occurred at the end of the book of Judges, where eleven tribes of Israel were fighting Benjamin tribe.

Nope, I am referring to the war against the Midianites in Numbers Chapter 31. And God commands to "kill all the males among the little ones" and all the women who have lied down with a man. Numbers 31:17 Please explain how it is just to kill young boys and women.

 

If most of the women were prostitutes or uneducated, then in that context, it would be unappropriate for them to speak. Now-a-days things are different and most women may not be prostitutes or uneducated, and people may actually "listen" to them. What is the point of having someone preach, that the congregation will not take seriously?

It is not specified if the women are prostitutes or not, or ignorant or not. The text just says, "women." And even an ignorant woman can speak intelligently on her own experience with the Holy Spirit can't she? Your response is an ad hoc fallacy, I think.

 

Paul writes allot of things that are really like guidelines (or 'spiritual advice' to the Christian who genuinely wants to grow spiritually and mature) rather than moral law, unless something is expressly forbidden. The Holy Spirit deals with each individual differently. A woman may be, or may not be called to preach. I do know that Joyce Myers, is an 'annointed' woman preacher, and I know she has the annointing ('spiritual authority') to preach. I'm sure there are more examples that I am not aware of.

 

How are we to know which are "guidelines" and which are moral laws? How are we to know that Joyce Myers has the "annointing"? Because her interpretation agrees with yours? My aunt agrees with you, though. Loves Joyce Myers.

 

Therefore, in answer to your question, woman preachers can and are indeed called by God.

 

If you can explain it in such a way that you are cool with that, more power to you.

 

The idea here is not to debate on history. As far as I am concerned, I know the Jews have been in Egypt, because the Bible says so, and that is all the evidence I need.

 

That's fine, you can believe whatever you want.

 

Furthermore, Egypt's grandeous past has been compromised by something, like a curse hung over that land. I believe it had something to do with it's relationship to Israel at some point in history.

 

Civilizations rise and decline. Curses have nothing to do with it. Dynasties have risen and fallen in China at a time when they never heard of the Israelites.

 

There are dynamics of free-will here that we are not going to understand on a summary glance. Let's take this bit by bit.

 

Pharoah's heart was wicked, and he wanted the Jews to remain there as slaves. The Bible says, God does not actually tempt anyone to do wrong, but may allow the devil to do that, since anything the devil does, God has to grant permission, or it is within God's parameters. Pharoah's lust for power and desire to control the Jews, and thought of pushing the God of the Jews, just a little further to see if he could win, is all coming from him. You really have to appreciate the dynamics of this.

 

That is not what the text says. In the Bible, Pharoah decides that he should free the Jews, but then God changes his mind.

 

The Plagues, were actually in defiance of all the Egyptian dieties. Each plague mocked an Egyptian god. The Egyptians trusted in their gods, while the true God, knocked them one by one. They worshipped the frogs, they got more frogs then they could handle, etc.... I do not have the details or particulars of all the Egyptian dieties, but that is the rationale behind the plagues. That the God of the Jews, (and my God too) is superior to all the Egyptian gods, or any gods on this earth.

 

Well, that is just fine if that is so, but Pharoah's own magicians did the frog thing. They couldn't duplicate the lice one, though. I am not familiar with a lice diety in Egyptian mythology. Interestingly, the fifth plague is all of the cattle in Egypt dying, yet later God kills them all again. See Exodus 9:6, 9:19, and 12:29.

 

The First-born Passover plague is a typology of Christ. The Blood of Jesus protects the believer from death, or judgement. Like the blood on the Lamposts protected the Jews from the Angel of death. Jesus had no sin, the Passover bread is unleaven, leaven represents sin, therefore, even the Jewish Matzza reflects Yeshua (Jesus) the Messiah, even though they do not know it, or recognize Jesus as fulfillment of the Passover

 

You do not address whether or not it is just to kill the first born children of all of Egypt because of someting Pharoah is doing.

 

I've heard a testimony from a survivor of the Tsunami, who said, he saw Jesus when a wave was about to crush him, and he called upon Him, and was delivered.

 

I have heard testimony of a Mormon man who was in a fire, and where his Mormon underclothes covered he wasn't burned. Therefore, Mormonism is true.

 

Where did the Tsunami occur, in a place where there had sex-tours, brothels, places of sin, and idolatry. Other disasters are happening on places where there is plenty of sin. December months, are high time that most western sex tourists would go to have sex with underage boys, girls, or go on a wild sex spree. You think that a place that is infested with underage sex, whoredom, sodomy, and every sin under the sun, is going to be ok?

 

Sure. Lots of them are still there, untouched by tsunamis, earthquakes, etc. Why kill everyone and not just the pervs taking cruises down there? God could just sink the boats and spare the children living there. There is a tribe in South America where women have many husbands. This is against God's Law, right? How come they are still there, and have been for centuries? Prostitution is legal 7 miles from my house. How come my city is still here--and has been for 150 years?

 

The problem is, we only see the disasters, but not the sin on the land where these disasters hit. But people are also saved or survive these disasters when they do hit. Those who are right with God, go to a better place anyway if they die. Mansions in heaven would be waiting for them.

 

Oh, so if someone is going to go to Heaven it is ok to kill them? Why not save all the believers so they can enjoy more of life and die of old age? It would be simple for a God to selectively kill sinners and leave believers alone, right?

 

Are disasters all Divine punishments on humanity? Not necessarily so, but we can not disqualify the possibility that it is. I leave this point open for discussion on this board.

 

It is possible, but it probably isn't.

 

I'd rather look at the statue then die if I were there and wouldn't take a chance on debating if it could cure me or not! If you would like to argue, and you were in that camp, good luck!!!

 

Looking at a statue did not then nor does it now prevent venom from acting on your body. Suggesting otherwise is just silly. Sure, maybe it was a magic statue, but I don't think so. I don't think any such thing happened.

 

I'm not familiar with that passage, about the cows, I'll look into it later.

I believe that God has the power to do anything that He wants to do.

If God choose to operate that way, with a statue, or make a donkey talk, in the case of Balaam, then He is going to do it. Since God can do anything He wants because He is God, then that validates everything, because God choose to do it that way.

If God did those things then, why doesn't he do them now? Isn't it a more rational explanation to say that the primitive peoples who wrote the stories in the bible knew very little about biology, astronomy, and seismic activity, and their explanations reflect that?

 

Well, they did more than just complain. They wanted to kill and stone Moses to death. They were constantly trying to usurp Moses' authority.

Well, they followed him for 40 years in the desert.

 

Only one person in that whole camp, named Joshua, had any positive thoughts. If he was able to believe in God, and in his chosen Annointed, Moses, why couldn't everyone else? That is why it says that broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, while narrow is the way that leadeth to life. I do not know why it works that way, and wish it didn't. I wish all of Israel thought as Joshua did, and I'm sure God would wish so too.

I think that I would have doubts myself. I am not going through anything remotely like that and I reject it totally, so there you go.

 

God will not force someone to serve Him. Although I said God can do anything He chooses to do, he will choose not to contradict Himself and His own Word. He said humans have power over the earth, and thus have a free-will. That free-wil will be respected, even if it means that 99% excercise that free-will wrongfully, and 1% exercise it right.

And I appreciate that.

 

Rejecting Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who died for your sin.

 

God gave His only Son to die for our sin. Why would He do that?

The point is, there is a way to defeat the 'sin' problem, so you can choose to use it. If there is a problem, you deal with it.

Doesn't this whole concept seem bizarre to you?

 

If my car was broken, I would not argue that it should not have been broken in the first place, I'd take it to a mechanic and fix it.

 

People are genetically born with a 'sin-chip', this 'sin-chip' causes a limited life-expectancy, and the propensity break God's commandments, and do all sorts of evil things. If Adam did not eat the fruit, we would need a few planets to contain all the immortal human's, which no doubt God would have made. We are 'spiritually dead' to the things of God, and need to fix the chip, by being born-again and accepting Christ.

I have the "sin chip" because of what Adam did. So, by definition I am being punished because of something Adam did. That is fundamentally unjust. I should have had a shot at eating the forbidden fruit or not and deal with the consequences myself.

 

While, repairing this 'chip' may not cause us to live forever physically, we will have a much better body, a glorified body, and live an infinately better existance than we are living now. On the converse, if you die with this defective 'chip', with all the sins you have done as a result of this 'chip', you will have an infinately worst existance then you are having now.

I'll take my chances.

 

Why? God can not allow anything unholy into heaven. Hell is prepared for the devil and his angels in the first rebellion. It is too bad that Adam sold out the human race, but Jesus bought back the race. But, there are only two eternal destinations. If you are denied entrance into heaven, the only place is that is left is hell.

You go to Heaven for the weather and Hell for the company.

 

There are varying degrees of damnation, in order to make the process fair. So people who committed more sin, may suffer under a hotter flame. Other people may suffer with no flame, but may just be in darkness and feel alone forever. Who knows? I'm sure Hitler and Stalin are probably in some of the worst damnation spots.

Interesting. I thought most Fundamentalists rejected the idea of "levels" of Hell.

 

Spies were sent to check on the land of Canaan, and they saw giants, and believed they could not conquer them. They charged God sent them to go into the wilderness and die at the hands of these giants, and incited a rebellion against Moses.

 

The 40 years were as a result of a rebellion of the Jews on negative reports of spies who said they could not conquer the land of Canaan. They got punished for that unnecessary rebellion. They should have all listened to Joshua, and they would have been ok.

No evidence anywhere of giants, either, so I don't believe in giants.

 

Just like today, people should listen to Jesus, and they too will be ok.

People who believe in Jesus go broke every day, die every day, suffer every day. If when they die things are better for Believers, I am sure we'll all find out, but here on Earth it doesn't seem to make much difference one way or the other.

 

Under a strong annointing of the Spirit, like what the early Apostles had, or anything similar to that today, it is still possible.

 

Jimmy Swaggart lied about what?

Sleeping with prostitutes. Not only that, he said he would never do it again, and he did. How is it that he is still annointed to preach?

 

Eternal life in heaven to those who die in the Lord.

 

For those who were killed by the Holy Spirit, they went to hell, because Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, can not be forgiven. They have to pay for that sin.

Bummer. It doesn't concern me in the least, though.

 

That is because you are dead to the things of God by virtue of the sin nature. The Lord has to deal with your heart.

 

I will pray for you: Father, I ask that you make Jesus real to moaj, and manifest yourself to Him, in Jesus' name I pray, Amen.

 

Do you feel something now? Let us know if you do.

Nope. I had a born-again experience when I was 17, but it didn't hold, I guess. My father was a Baptist minister, and my uncle is a Methodist minister even now.

 

But, John 3:16 "God so LOVES moaj, that He GAVE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, that if moaj believes in Him, He will not go to hell, but will enjoy everlasting life in heaven for all eternity".

 

You are alive and well. You have the opportunity to receive everlasting life.

God is good to you, and will manifest Himself to you, so you can look to Him.

God wants you to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, and is not out to condemn people, but offer hope.

 

I would suggest to pick up a obtain a Bible, and study the Book of John, and learn about Jesus Christ. Try to get to know Jesus day by day.

I have six Bibles. I have studied the book of John. And I reject it totally. I'm glad it makes you feel better, though.

 

Thank-you. Since you blessed me, so shall you also be blessed in this New Year!

 

I really enjoy reading your post, and am very, very pleased to see that some members of this board are mature enough to engage in a fruitful discussion.

 

People on this board, who disagree with my views, should learn from moaj.

It's "Moai", by the way. That's what the statues on Easter Island are called. And I enjoyed your post as well. It is clear that your sharing your opinions comes from a good place in your heart, and that is laudable.

 

Nobody is being insulted here, and we also have a fruitful discussion.

Doesn't mean, someone has to win or lose an arguement, but ideas are discussed in an open and non-judgemental manner. This is what it is all about.

I agree. You either have faith or you don't. I don't, but I don't look down on those who do, or anything of the sort.

[Moai]

I'm not doing the work for you . You need to read it without looking for your confirmation bias. And once again, Jesus said that he was the new deal. And that GC 1 and 2 were the way to operate henceforth.

 

Sure. Matthew--3:10, 12; 7:13-14; 10:14-15; 11:20-24

 

Mark 7:9-10. This is an interesting one, as Jesus is chastizing the Jews for not killing their disobediant children.

 

Luke 12:5 John 3:36

 

And on and on and on and on. There are over 100 specific refernces to hell and people being devoured etc. I am not going to list them all, but I will if you really want.

 

How many are there about love and acceptance?

[Moai]

Requesting that you verify Scripture, chapter and verse.

 

This is unfounded.

 

The believers were the ones being burned, purged and killed, both by the religious classes who rejected Christ, and from the Imperial Rome, who demanded everyone worship Cesar as god. So, it is simply not true what you are saying.

 

If you did not worship Cesar, you died.

If you did not stick with the Jews in their rejection with Christ, you lost your job, your family, you were shunned by the community.

 

Believers were tortured and killed (not in the Bible, though), but it is UNBELIEVERS that Jesus describes as burning, being dismembered, etc. Again, the message is believe me or die. As I posted previously, there are over 100 references to hell and damnation in the New Testement.

 

I think that Matthew has the most, but I'd have to look it up.

[Nicholas]

Is there any doubt in your mind as to the Gospel authors' intentions?

 

Remember that Christ wasn't clear in just how soon he'd be back for the second coming. Perhaps the fire and brimstone message was a way of stressing the urgency of converting to Christianity?