Leaderboard

IMO, yes, anyone preaching the love of God is working for the kingdom. There is that Scripture that says that anyone desiring to do God's will shall know of the doctrine. I don't know of anyone who has gotten the entire message all in one go... but if the heart soil is fertile then the seed of truth (putting it in Bible language) will be cherished.

A child asked his father, "How were people born?" So his father said, "Adam and Eve made babies, then their babies became adults and made babies, and so on." The child then went to his mother, asked her the same question and she told him, "We were monkeys then we evolved to become like we are now." The child ran back to his father and said, "You lied to me!" His father replied, "No, your mom was talking about her side of the family."

Dr. Glenn Reynolds passed to his rest on February 22, 2015. He was a renowned physician and activist for the disabled. He had had polio in his youth but continued to practice medicine and conduct his activities from a wheelchair. He was honored by the American Medical Association as physician of the year. He served on the presidential commission for the disabled.

Matthew 24:14 (KJV) "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." Does this mean only SDA preaching, and SDA doctrine? Or is the SDA church considered only part of the way the gospel is preached?

Long but interesting Four things found in most Emerging Church movements. 1. Downplay the importance of sound Bible doctrine 2. Ecumenical, seeks to break down barriers between faiths and denominations 3. Strong reliance on Spiritual Disciplines over a deep study of the Word of God. 4. Neglect of Bible prophecy Message 1 - The Emerging Church Controversy within Adventism Pastor Steve Wohlberg examines how elements of mysticism have slowly been creeping into the remnant movement. He leaves no stone unturned in this compelling ... YOUTUBE.COM

Obama's regs will make Internet slow as in Europe, warn FCC, FEC commissioners BY PAUL BEDARD | FEBRUARY 23, 2015 | 2:14 PM As the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Election Commission toy with regulating aspects of the Internet, critics on those agencies are warning that speed and freedom of speech are in jeopardy. In a joint column, Federal Communications Commission member Ajit Pai and Federal Election Commission member Lee Goodman, leveled the boom on the Obama-favored regulations, essentially charging that it will muck up the freedom the nation has come to expect from the Internet. In one key passage of the column published in Politico, the duo wrote Monday that heavy-handed FCC regulations like those imposed in Europe will significantly slow down Internet speech. “These Internet regulations will deter broadband deployment, depress network investment and slow broadband speeds. How do we know? Compare Europe, which has long had utility-style regulations, with the United States, which has embraced a light-touch regulatory model. Broadband speeds in the United States, both wired and wireless, are significantly faster than those in Europe. Broadband investment in the United States is several multiples that of Europe. And broadband’s reach is much wider in the United States, despite its much lower population density,” the two wrote. They also joined to warn about the Democrat-chaired Federal Election Commission eyeing regulation of political speech on the Internet. Noting recent votes on the issue that ended in a political deadlock, the two wrote, “these close votes and the risk of idiosyncratic case-by-case enforcement inevitably discourage citizens and groups from speaking freely online about politics.” Bottom line, they warned: “Internet freedom works. It is difficult to imagine where we would be today had the government micromanaged the Internet for the past two decades as it does Amtrak and the U.S. Postal Service. Neither of us wants to find out where the Internet will be two decades from now if the federal government tightens its regulatory grip. We don’t need to shift control of the Internet to bureaucracies in Washington. Let’s leave the power where it belongs — with the American people. When it comes to Americans’ ability to access online content or offer political speech online, there isn’t anything broken for the government to “fix.” To paraphrase President Ronald Reagan, Internet regulation isn’t the solution to a problem. Internet regulation is the problem.”

Our opening post attempted to list four things that are found in the Emerging Church movement. I will suggest that the following are seven things that are found in the Emerging Church movement: 1) Men, or males, if you prefer to say it that way. 2) Women, or females if you want to say it that way. 3) People who are searching for answers. 4) People who have made a commitment to Christ. 5) People who understand that they have not achieved perfection in their doctrinal understanding. 6) People who know that they have not achieved perfection in the application of doctrine to the life that they live. 7) People who are willing to trust God. NOTE: Finding that people in the Emerging Church movement who have common characteristics does not mean that such are negative.

I give to several different "ministries". One I really LIKE is the Jesus Film Ministry. They are taking the gospel into the darkest areas of the planet. The film uses actors to portray the story of Jesus, but the ONLY dialog in the movie is from the Gospel of Luke. ONLY those words are used. It's like SEEING the story, while hearing it in your heart language. The film has been translated into hundreds of languages and dialects. The movie is available free online, so that anyone - just riding a bus - can show the movie to someone riding next to him - in that person's language. The Jesus Film Ministry has also produced a "Jesus Film" for women, called "Released from Shame". It is the story of Mary Magdalene. And a Jesus Film for children. They are NON-Denominational. They JUST want to tell the story of Jesus. Personally - I believe they are doing a wonderful job.

The SDA Denomination clearly has a place in "end time." But, that is not to say that the SDA denomination is alone in doing the work of God in End Time. God has people inside the SDA church as well as outside the SDA Church. God will use the SDA Church to accomplish God's will as will as use others to accomplish His will.

There are a couple of issues here: 1) Are we talking about Creation Week or what the Earth was like prior to Creation Week: See Genesis 1:1. There are many who believe that this passage is telling us that the Earth existed in some sort of unorganized form prior to Creation Week (CE). If so, the Bible only deals with the Earth from CE on. All it says about the Earth and the Universe prior to that is that God created everything. 2) Is it appropriate for us to use the geanological tables of Genesis to formulate an age for the Earth since Creation? Many believe that this should not be done. In ancient Hebrew thought such tables were not to be used to determine time periods. Rather they were to be used to establish relationships. IOW Jesus Christ was a relative of King David, who was a relative of Abraham (see Matthews 1:1. But, there is no idea that Jesus Christ was an actual biological son of King David, or that King David was a biological son of Abraham. The bottom line is that many believe that the4 Bible cannot be used to establish any kind of an age for the Earth, let alone an exact age.

v Chivalry Is Sexist, Says New Study The Huffington Post Canada | By Joy D'Souza Email Posted: 03/11/2015 4:34 pm EDT Updated: 03/11/2015 4:59 pm EDT Chivalry is dead, at least as far as equal rights are concerned. A new study out of Northeastern University in Boston says there are two types of sexists out there. Acts of so-called chivalry, like paying for dinner, offering up jackets and calling a women 'love' or 'dear' can be signs of "benevolent sexists," according to psychologist Jin Goh, while "hostile sexists" are those who specifically leave housework to wives and girlfriends, or wolf whistle at women walking down the street. People don't typically associate sexism with the warmth and friendliness benevolent sexists display, Goh explained to the Telegraph. While some women consider the behaviour of benevolent sexists to be gentlemanly and courteous, co-author and psychology professor Judith Hall at the Boston-based university told the Daily Mail that "benevolent sexism is like a wolf in sheep's clothing — [it] perpetuates support for gender inequality." The study, which paired 27 men with women between the ages of 18 and 22, encouraged the individuals to take a quiz and get to know each other. Rating their agreement on statements like "“a good woman should be set on a pedestal by her man” and "women are too easily offended" helped differentiate between the two types of sexists. So does that mean we should do away with chivalry altogether? Not necessarily. As Australia's News.com points out, if a man is carrying out these actions because he believes a woman is fragile, and thus requires protection, then he's being sexist. But if he's doing it to be kind? That's just being polite. Peter Glick, author of the original benevolent sexism study, says the intention is not to make men feel like they should stop being courteous, but rather knowing when they are crossing the line. In his 1996 report, Glick said people in general find benevolent sexism more desirable than detrimental, but it still promotes gender inequality. In many cases men don't even realize they are being sexist. In 2011 psychologists Janet Swim and Julia Becker looked at the differences in how men and women recognize and respond to sexism in their daily lives. Swim explained that men continued sexist behaviour after it was recognized, but revealed they were more sympathetic when asked to look at the comments from a woman's perspective. On International Women's Day Emma Watson, UN Goodwill Ambassador for Women, took to Facebook to discuss, among other topics, the act of chivalry and how it should really be consensual. Watson noted she wouldn't be offended if a man held a door open for her, since he's just being courteous, but to her, the real question is whether or not he would mind if she held the door open for him. Watson's wise words are worthy of a deeper conversation. Can we stop calling it chivalry and focus on gender-less courtesy? Let us know what you think in the comments below.

Great topic! It is going to take some time to read this blog! There so many replies that really worth more time reading. I am new here, type from a kindle, and I have multiple health issues. So I just want you to know how much I enjoy this topic.

It is getting a little bizarre,if it isn't sexist,it's racist,bigotry,or homophobic.

Unforgiveness comes in a package along with bitterness, pride, and could ultimately destroy emotions and your health. Can you ever bury or ever recover from the trap? Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/Inspiration/Galleries/Steps-Towards-Radical-Forgiveness.aspx#OlWs0Mk601sS5q2P.99

I envy all of you that have time to watch the news. I stay so busy I don't even have time to watch the weather forcast. If I don't check my weather ap on the Ipad, I won't even know when a storm is coming. Someday I will cherish a little couch time, with the socks off, watching FOXNews, MSNBC, Al Jazerra English or... CNN. When I see people arguing over which news source is best it reminds me of people arguing about which genre of music is best. Rock 'N Roll is evil. Country is OK. Jazz is of the devil. Gospel is wonderful but only if it doesn't have drums.