and they are now in 1st place in the n.l.
west with a 6-1 record !
and the hated l.a. dodgers are in last place !
The Dodgers are my team. One can't go wrong with the team with the history of the Dodgers, namely the first team to intergrate with Jackie Robinson (even though he was a Bruin).
I Hate the Jerks...err, Giants. I hate the Giants so much that I hate Halloween because its colors are black and orange.
i finally saw this movie.
i am a huge chicken when it comes to movies dealing with the paranormal.
i watched this based on a recommandation, and thoroughly enjoyed it.
Good points. I too liked the fact that the "monster" was not in your face. The element of surprise was the best part of the movie. Though the last five minutes of the movie was the best.
i try to understand why other people believe what they believe.
the author discussed in the article below evidently wants to hide his head in the sand and paint all atheists with the same broad, incorrect brush.
it's as if he's never actually sat down with an atheist and had friendly conversation.. .
I don't think that atheism is a "personal rebellion against God" rather I believe that it is a suppression of the truth (Romans 1).
i finally saw this movie.
i am a huge chicken when it comes to movies dealing with the paranormal.
i watched this based on a recommandation, and thoroughly enjoyed it.
I finally saw this movie. I am a huge chicken when it comes to movies dealing with the paranormal. I watched this based on a recommandation, and thoroughly enjoyed it. I was struck by the view of the movie that these sorts of entities are not to toyed with. I am wondering if anyone has seen this movie and has any thoughts?
a new novel written by an ex-jw received a mainly positive review in today's minneapolis newspaper.
the author posted on this board about 2 months ago under the username "mutinyinheaven" , but hasn't posted since.. the book is available through amazon.com.. http://www.startribune.com/entertainment/books/88705662.html?elr=karksuuuodey3lgdio7aiu.
reviews: "confessions of a teenage jesus jerk"last update: march 21, 2010 - 2:04 pm.
Undercover, my initial suspicion is that the publisher, with little or no knowledge of Christianity or psuedo-Christian cults, just lumped the story in with the rest of what so many secularists condescendingly refer to as "Jesus freaks."
a new novel written by an ex-jw received a mainly positive review in today's minneapolis newspaper.
the author posted on this board about 2 months ago under the username "mutinyinheaven" , but hasn't posted since.. the book is available through amazon.com.. http://www.startribune.com/entertainment/books/88705662.html?elr=karksuuuodey3lgdio7aiu.
reviews: "confessions of a teenage jesus jerk"last update: march 21, 2010 - 2:04 pm.
I'm placing this on my "to read" list. I don't care for the title. Jesus has about as much in common with JWs as small-neck clams have with humans.
benny hinn is one of those preachers that tell you if you give $$$ to their ministry, you will get 10 fold!.
i never understood why people do give $$$ and these preachers live the high life and encourage their listeners to do the same.
the watchower's kingdumb halls can't even pay their electric bills and you see these other "ministries"making hand over fist.
Terry, I really have to laugh. You have once again demonstrated your ability to, at best, broadbrush, or at worst, another revelation of utter ignorance of Christianity, and what it teaches. For the sake of clarity, Pentecostalism, is accepted as a part of historical Christian orthodoxy. Examples of orthodox Pentecostal denominations would be Calvary Chapel, The Assemblies of God, The Foursquare Church, The Church of God, and The Church of God in Christ.
Though Oneness sprung from the Azusa Street movement, as did the other Pentecostal denominations, United Pentecostalism, i.e., Oneness Pentecostalism, is not accepted as a part of the historical Christian orthodoxy. The reason is that they are modalistic in their theology proper. In other words, they believe that God puts on three masks (Father, Son, or Holy Spirit) at differing times. Modalism has been labeled a heresy since about the 2nd century A.D.
Back to the original post, there have been a number of critiques of the prosperity gospel. Christianity in Crisis by Hank Hannegraf, Charismatic Chaos by John MacArthur (both are very extreme), and recently the 3rd edition of Let The Nations Be Glad by John Piper (a more calm and loving approach) are some of a number of books that have been very critical of the prosperity movement. I for one was part of a church that was, and still is teaching prosperity. I eventually left that church because of this and other issues. I even thought of writing a paper on this issue. I even interviewed a number of prosperity pastors for it. However, my professor persuaded me that this was not the best outlet for that paper.
In talking to these pastors, many of whom graduated from Oral Roberts Univerity, I found that they sincerely believed that God intends for Christians to take the "wealth of the wicked" which was stored for "the righteous." When I asked them about the human tendancy for greed, they all downplayed it and stated that if the finances are freely given to the church, then greed is not a problem. I also asked about Jesus' poverty, and they all to a man, denied this. When I pointed out that Jesus had to borrow a donkey for Palm Sunday, an upper room for the Last Supper, and a tomb for His burial, they downplayed it by saying that Jesus did that because He was not from Jerusalem, but from Gallilee. I guess Jesus and His step-father, Joseph, must have had a rip roaring carpentry business in that hick village of Nazareth.
The issue with the prosperity "gospel" is that it makes God the means for the ends, riches. This was something that Paul clearly stated was an improper use of the gospel (1 & 2 Timothy). The other thing that distresses me about the prosperity gospel, is that is preached to the lower economic strata, particularly in Africa, by preachers that come from North America, where the lifestyle of an average welfare recipient would be considered lavish by many Africans.
Lastly, this is not supererogation. It is a misuse of Jesus' teaching about money. Jesus stated that it would be easier for a literal camel to go through a literal needle's eye, than for a rich man to get into the kingdom of heaven. Jesus, never took a dim view of wealth, He after all needed money to pay for a Roman tax. However, he wanted his followers to know that their trust was not to be in wealth, but in God. This is why he said that where one's treasure is then his heart will be there also. What the prosperity teachers have done, in my opinion, is corrupt the gospel by making it a means, in stead of an ends.
to the calvinists among us, please assist me in understanding this.
msthemearminianism teaches that each person is not spiritually helpless.
rather, each person has free will and can choose to be saved.
Leaving,
The basis for what Arminians call Total Depravity is Romans chapter 3. In it, Paul states that "no one seeks after GOd, no not one." It is only after the Holy Spirit moves upon the hearts of some that they are able to see the choice before them. It's a lot like this, a erson can set before a hungry lion a bowl of vegtables and a bowl of meat. The lion has an objective choice, but he can only chose what his nature as a carnivore dictates. Therefore the lion will always chose the meat. Similarly, when sinful man is presented with the objective choice between serving God or serving themselves sinful man will always chose to serve themselves. This fact is made utterly evident in the history of Israel as recorded in the New Testament.
Based on the fact that Calvinists believe that God has to act first on the heart of a sinner before he can chose does not contradict any of those Scriptures. Particularly in the case of the Philippian jailer cited in Acts. The jailer had a dramatic experience that God used to change his heart causing him to ask what was needed in order to be saved.
Your other two Scriptures, if memory serves, deal with people that are already in a saving relationship with Christ. I could be wrong, but I don't have time to verify that at this time, so I'll leave them for now. Anyway it is a great question you ask, and I would recommend Lorraine Boettner's book THe Reformed Doctrine of Predestination for you to read. It is an older book, but is still a staple with in the Calvinistic community as it clearly defines sotriological Calvinism. I would also recommend The Stone Lectures by Abraham Kuyper. In these lectures, Kuyper explains how Calvinism is not just about salvation, but is in actuality a rather strong worldview.
Edited to add: An unfertilized egg is not a person, and therefore would not be subject to hell.
*** w88 12/15 p. 5 is the bible open to just any interpretation?
what would a housewife think of a recipe book that was open to just any interpretation?
or of what benefit would it be to spend money for a dictionary that allowed its reader to interpret the meaning of words just any way he chose?is that the kind of guidebook we would expect god to give his creatures?
In my hermenuetics class we were taught the historical grammatical method. This means that the reader must take into account the author, the audience and the genre of the book. We were taught to ask oursleves two questions, "What did this Scripture mean to the original readers?" and "How does this Scripture apply to me today?" For example, Deuteronomy 22:8 requires that all rooftops have railings. The reason was that the rooftop was the "family room" of that day. The evening meal was served there as well as the majority of the familial activities. During the summer, the family would sleep on the rooftop. So the railing would prevent a child or adult from getting up in the middle of the night, for whatever reason, and walikng of the roof. Okay, so what does this mean to Christians living in the 21st century? Simply, if you have a pool, you should fence it off to prevent the drowning of a child.
I have found that this method is the best for studying the bible, and is the method used by most of the scholars I reference.
if you pick up your bible and look at the order of the books in the new testament you'll find that the gospels come before paul's letters.. this might casually indicate to the unaware that the gospel writers actually wrote before paul.
paul's letters containing paul's remarkable theology came first.
(chronologically).
Very interesting Terry, but I must ask where are the Wikipedia citiations to back up your assertions?
