Leaderboard

There seems to be such a hatred for those who need help...

First of all ecumenism is not a call to compromise structural of theological identity. It never was. The overarching idea behind the ecumenism is mutual cooperation based on similar mission, and doesn't necessitate complete abandonment of individualistic beliefs when joining any given ecumenical organization. For example, or local church belongs to Churches United in Christ organization that pools resources for various charity projects. There are a wide variety of these organizations that perform all sorts of tasks based on ecumenical ideals. You may have heard of some: Campus Crusade for Christ Highly ecumenical Christian organization focused on evangelism and discipleship over 190 countries in the world National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. World Student Christian Federation Action of Churches Together in Scotland Christian Churches Together in the USA Churches Together in Britain and Ireland Churches Uniting in Christ Conference of European Churches Fellowship of Saint Alban and Saint Sergius Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity Taizé Community World Council of Churches World Alliance of Reformed Churches Edinburgh Churches Together Creationism as a movement tends to be ecumenical in nature, and spans a wide variety of denominations and faiths who contribute to various organizations even though their individual beliefs may be different. There tends to be automatic characterization of "ecumenical" being somehow detrimental. Ecumenism is actually a Biblically-mandated ideal. It's just so happens that every church thinks that they are THE ONE when it comes to conformity, and everyone should join it. Adventists are not different in that regard. Some go as far as declaring every other church as abomination and think that everyone should come out and join Adventism as per God's mandate.

Given that the mods are volunteers, working in their own time, when they have time, a certain lack of Teutonic efficiency is pretty inevitable. In the end, they make the best judgement calls they can, given what they know. There's not actually a real cost to anyone if something is moved to Politics - unless the reader doesn't subscribe to that forum (a decision I have made for a while in the past for my own mental health). I'm certainly not second-guessing the decisions you reference, but by conventions the Politics thread tends to be the one where the most vitriol occurs. And, like it or not, threads about Obama tend to be or become vitriolic. That would be my guess as to why that particular post was moved. The distinction between world and US politics is always a tricky one, simply because the US is the current dominant superpower, which means all of us citizens of the world are affected by US politics. As such we tend to follow it and have views about it, in a way that Americans tend not to to the same extent about 'our' politics. I guess the bottom line is that all of the mods do the best they can, and offering feedback - ideally in a positive and constructive way - can only help them do better.

​I mostly agree with this. It is a bit less of a mystery, since Satan already existed, but still there is no reason it should have happened.

Robert's question was, "Are we born justified?" His answer is yes. My answer is no. "Justified" means "declared to be righteous". The word "justified" has to do with legal standing. It means "right-ness before the LAW." In other words, our standing before the LAW. The LAW is the standard, to which our behaviors are compared. We use the words "imputed righteousness" and "imparted righteousness", to explain what Christ has done FOR US, and what Christ does IN US. Both imparted and imputed righteousness are Christ's gift to us, and we can take no credit for either. The gift is called "grace". I've been doing a slow read thru the letters of Paul, trying to get a deeper insight into just HOW we are justified (declared righteous before the Law). What I keep finding, over and over and over and over, is that BELIEF is the necessary response - on our part, before one is regarded as "justified" by God. "Abraham BELIEVED GOD, and it was accounted to him for righteousness" ( Rom 4:3, Gal. 3:6). In other words, Abraham was accounted as just - as righteous, WHEN he believed. "A man is NOT justified by works of the law, but by FAITH in Jesus Christ" .... we have BELIEVED in Christ Jesus that we might be JUSTIFIED by FAITH in Christ" (Gal 2:16-17). "Faith in" is another word for "belief in". Galatians 3:8 "God would justify the nations by faith." Galatians 3:22 "But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe." (NKJ) Galatians 3:24 "Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith."(NKJ) And on and on and on and on

​As most here know, I believe that "the rest of the dead" will be those who lived and died in ignorance - including all young children. They are not guilty before the Law, because they died without the Law. But they have never "believed", and belief (faith) is the ONE REQUIREMENT for one to receive immortality. One's name is written into the Book of Life, the moment one believes. His name may be "blotted out" later if he does not "walk by faith". Isaiah was shown the Kingdom of Messiah on the earth during "The 8th Day" - the 8th millennium. The "rest of the dead" will be raised, and then educated in the ways of God by the priests of God and of Christ (those made immortal at the SC). Those who believe in God through Christ, who CHOOSE to serve God, will be given immortality, and those who refuse will come up as the army of Gog/Magog. Only AFTER the Gog/Magog battle, will the Holy City New Jerusalem descend to the earth. Rachel Cory, prophecyviewpoint.com

Again: The Biblical issue is not whether or not to ordain. For the Bible does not use the word Ordain. it is the role that women should have in spiritual nurture. In the development of the SDA Denomination, our early leaders fought this issue out as a doctrinal one. Some were convinced that women should not have a teaching, public, role in spiritual development, just as some believe to be the case today. Others believed, as some argue today, that women may have a teaching, public role, in spiritual development.. That issue came before our members in a very early General Conference Session. But, that issue was not the doctrinal issue. Rather it was a policy issue: No decision was made as to the policy. Rather no policy was voted either way. IOW, no policy was set in place. So, from this perspective, one cannot say that there is a new, established doctrine that prevents women from being ordained. That simply is not true. And, it should be remembered that for a number of years, as is well known, the SDA Church gave Ellen White the credentials of an ordained minister and so listed her in the official records of the denomination. She accepted those documents, without rebuke. She must not have felt it was a sin for a female to be ordained.

If I have to type something like this, My good grammar and most excellent spelling and suburb punctuation will suffer. Ok .. they start talking about billions of animals dying around the world (13:24) and the signs of the end with reports of red seas (plague) in different parts of the world (19:20) ..(at 25:20) the Pope talk starts with a mystical experience both old pope and new pope is reported. now we have a chasmatic Pope winning over many etc. Climate change and sunday legislation is mentioned a moral crisis of the planet climate change the Pope will address {one hour and 5 minutes in) Ben Carson comes up (one hour and 7 minutes). Talking of His prez run thrusts SDA beliefs in the spotlight for all to investigate what we believe like no other event before. Giving the 3 Angels message will now be our job in this tousher in Jesus Coming again. i dont wordsmith this well enough to give the total impact I thought it was interesting enough to have others weigh in. yes the usual stuff about immorality and gays and genders comes up as always ... funny how Danny Shelton never brings up the rampant churched approved immorality of divorce and remarriage in the last days as a sign. Marriage is Sacred ...i heard it said among many divorced people. ​ ​ God bless you Both!

I have viewed the video discussed and one person had a possible reason to think the victim was running away from a police officer. Unfortunately, in the excitment, the witness missed the fact that the suspect was also running towards another police officer with apparent intent to attack the officer. The officer responsible for the shooting apparently saved the other officer from injury and/or death. As far as the other witness, memory has been demonstrated many times to be very malleable and extremely subject to error. Many examples can be demonstrated if this. You only need to follow the number of men exonerated of rape charges where they were convicted by eyewitness identification. This is especially, for some reason, often in black men / white women cases. Another common false memory is the number of people who believed they were watching television when the second tower was hit on 9/11. So many have watched the reruns so many times that they think they actually saw it happen. I do not really know whether I saw it "live" or if it was memorex! Some researchers will tell you that implanted false memories are more difficult to 'erase" than memories that were in error.

​ 1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John, 2who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. 3Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near.....Revelation 1 Sounds to me like the Revelation is about past, present and future. God is Love! Jesus saves!

​Huh? So you deny the plain word of God. The Greek says war. The English says war. Your question is a logical fallacy. Why would God have destroyed Satan rather than just physically expelled him from heaven? By killing him right then He would have destroyed His own chance to win the overall war with Satan for He had not yet disproved Satan's allegations. Why should I give you examples of war that God said to engage in when you know there are many examples already? In addition to Moses and Abraham there are others such as judges and kings of Isreal. Disprove them all.

Ps: Sorry I was late, I just found this forum cause I was having to make a good argument for justified killing to my pastor's son, I feel like I am ready now. Take care all!

By loving our enemy, sometimes that means to stop him from doing evil with deadly force. Sojourner, I like your picture by the way. I train in martial arts as well and get asked how I can still follow what the Bible says. The Hebrew word used in the 10 commandments means to "murder", or to kill in hate, or with evil in your heart, or to have animosity in your heart towards your enemy. The Hebrew word in Ecclesiastes means just to kill, as in on the battlefield, an execution for an evil crime, or the defence of one's self, family, or freedoms. God bless, and keep up the aikido!

So... what if someone *is* racist? What if what they say is egregiously, clearly racist? Do we call them on it, or do we stay silent? Who is silencing whom? From my perspective, no-one is silencing anyone. People are disagreeing with other people and, being human, they sometimes fail to do so civilly. There's no monopoly on it on any side of politics. We each ought to do our own bit to raise the standard. But freedom of speech inherently includes the right to disagree and challenge.