I want you to tell me in your own choice of words what title would best describe your position in belief?I'll add that one to my list of what I am thankyou
What words would you use to title your belief system?
Am I a prophet 🌠🌠🌠🌠🌠🌠🌠🌠
- Thread starter Fundaamental
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
What words would you use to title your belief system?
There are people who like to say 'The reason God did such and such was such and such' as if God cannot have a more complicated plan than that or more than one purpose for doing something.
Where do you stand on the ration between God's reasons for extreme events like the Flood in terms of how much of it was the fact that He also gets attacked by Satan and the fact that the Bible often says that God did something because of the wickedness of man? In the prophecy to Ezekial, God talks about how it is Satan's fault, it was Satan all along. Ezekial reiterates that Satan made plans even before the world was created to ascend above the level of Jehovah's throne. Also, the book of Job is very specific in stating that Satan Started it, it was all Satan's fault, none of it God's doing or the doing of Job. But God is also very, very personal.
And, there are people who cannot read scripture for what it says, and try to over-complicate a rather simple, straightforward principle.
To never believe something unless it has been substantiated,
Gives each individual the opportunity to come together and discuss something on the bases of proving each others reasoning without resorting to quarrels.
And at the end of the discussion if each individual has valid points for there substantiation, then we can discuss those valid points.
With the same reasoning of substantiating those valid points.
This opens the door to patience.
Then after all points have been substantiated, both parties can depart and think about it.
Then they can come back and substantiate some fundamental true points in to some other parts of scripture.
If there then seems to be something clearly adding up and ringing true. Well then a brother has been won over and no love was lost.
then there could be a situations where both deciding points that could be true, then this is where we accept each other for our different believes, but still no love has been lost.
Gives each individual the opportunity to come together and discuss something on the bases of proving each others reasoning without resorting to quarrels.
And at the end of the discussion if each individual has valid points for there substantiation, then we can discuss those valid points.
With the same reasoning of substantiating those valid points.
This opens the door to patience.
Then after all points have been substantiated, both parties can depart and think about it.
Then they can come back and substantiate some fundamental true points in to some other parts of scripture.
If there then seems to be something clearly adding up and ringing true. Well then a brother has been won over and no love was lost.
then there could be a situations where both deciding points that could be true, then this is where we accept each other for our different believes, but still no love has been lost.
Proverbs 26:4-5 – Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself.
Does this also apply to somebody who thinks to highly of them self's.
Strange how not one single person in this thread has answered whether the unjust Judge was an athiest.
I's there a crime with your answers being a yes or a no.
I's there a crime with your answers being a yes or a no.
The lord as spoken a future event that may well come true.
The lord said I will go befor you, but your resolve will be tested.
The lord said many will disagree and many wolf's will come but my grace will be sufficient to you,
You will hold your tongue as Jesus did when the Pharisees demanded Jesus to perform.
You will not have a single word offend you.
The lord said I want you go to forth where I will test your fruit of patience. And I will unveil many spiritual truths the eyes do not see.
Perhaps this has already passed.
The lord said I will go befor you, but your resolve will be tested.
The lord said many will disagree and many wolf's will come but my grace will be sufficient to you,
You will hold your tongue as Jesus did when the Pharisees demanded Jesus to perform.
You will not have a single word offend you.
The lord said I want you go to forth where I will test your fruit of patience. And I will unveil many spiritual truths the eyes do not see.
Perhaps this has already passed.
There was a talking donkey in the book of Numbers. Maybe he was an ass. That's the same thing, right?
L
Locoponydirtman
Guest
L
Locoponydirtman
Guest
That morality tale raises questions. How will an indigent old widow ever be able to attack a judge in a high state position? What would she possibly do to get revenge on him, how could she ever even get started gaining elite access to a court of law? He must have been a terrible coward, to be afraid of an old woman with no family while in the prime of his life and fully integrated into the state government.
The parable is a logical paradox. The judge is unjust, but he gives this woman justice. Unjust judges do not grant justice, because they are unjust, it is therefore impossible for an unjust judge to be just. I wonder what the solution is.
Firstly, the judge is a character in a parable, not a real person, so your question is irrelevant, and secondly, the text doesn’t give enough information to answer the question.
Atheism is a tricky concept. Strictly speaking, someone who just isn't around theists (people who do believe in God) is an atheist. Ancient Philosophy is anti-atheistic and looks in places that claim to have theological knowledge for people who are spiritual, so that the practitioner can become wise. Philosophy meets with varied and mixed results.
Atheism isn't always unbelief, which complicates things substantially. No one can undo what they have not already done in the past. People who reject previous beliefs that they had because of former faith become unbelievers.