Leaderboard

"Lord Jesus, in the authority of your powers I ask you to keep on healing brother Jack Sequeira and give him a constant flow of life's energy to get stronger everyday. May all glory and honor go to you as we accept your will for his life."

According to Mrs. Sequeira Jack recently had surgery. She didn't specify what type of surgery, but she asked me to remember him in my prayers. Now I'm asking those on this forum to do the same. Robert

I'm not saying that anyone was suggesting...just saying... SDAism has often had a fatalistic approach to world happenings by saying, 'well, Christ is coming soon', sort of like 'washing of hands'. If people really believe this world was given to mankind to manage, then would that not be like spitting in the face of God to not do our best towards changing and preserving it?

As to leaving it in the hands of God: what is His miraculous plan for the people of Kiribati when their nation is entirely submerged? Is he going to take them all to heaven? Or miraculously move them to another country? If he miraculously made them appear in your country, would you take them in, or would the INS round them up and incarcerate them. Would they be welcome? And, if God chooses not to miraculously teleport them, will you send a boat? For whatever inscrutable divine reasons of his own, God has a long record of *not* saving us from the consequences of our own actions. He does hold us accountable, however, for the ways our own actions impact others.

If the question is the pragmatic one of whether we *can* change, then why keep on arguing about the empirical one of whether climate itself is changing? If, in the end, you don't *care* whether climate is changing, why keep listening to the well-paid liars rather than the scientists who actually know? So, let's take it as read, because it's what the evidence actually says: the world is warming, and human activities are contributing. Then look at the consequences: more extreme floods and droughts, island nations being covered by rising seas. Impacts on the lives of millions of the most vulnerable on earth. If you are unable or unwilling to change, you are saying you don't care about those lives. Will you argue and work to save them? I doubt it: there's a strong correlation between those views and the 'stop foreign aid' views. As it happens, there are two issues on the political question of whether action can happen: 1. Australia, the USA and Canada use the most energy per capita of countries on earth. While together we form only about 5% of global population, we produce about 40% of global emissions. If we change, emissions change. 2. There is action happening already. China has signed up: most populous country on earth, something like 13% of global population. China has agreed to grow its economy using more renewable energy and less fossil fuels. Many other countries have also joined. The notion that we can't, or shouldn't, act is contrary to the facts.

I just read through this whole thread in an effort to figure out where it went off the rails. I have to conclude it really never was on track. The question/OP at the begining really sets the stage with a false premise that limits the possible choices to yes or no regarding the type of thinker one might be and further limits the range of the discussion by an implausibly narrow defining adjective for "thinker". But wait, that's not all! The originator of the topic then falls deeper in the rabbit hole of logical fallacies by furthering the false premise by very selective focus on the least likely or helpful definitions of the word in question, and a word related in root only that is much nearer to the opposite of both of the key words of the OP question. The primary word "thinker" has been quite lost lost in the sophistry of the whole premise of the hopelessly lost quest to illuminate it. Quite simply, the effort is ultimately the very opposite of simple straightforward thinking. And sophisticated thinking.

It's called 'pick and choose', when it come to meanings of words..... Worldly 1. of or relating to this world as contrasted with heaven, spiritual life,etc.; earthly; mundane. 2. experienced; knowing; sophisticated: the benefits of his worldly wisdom. 3. devoted to, directed toward, or connected with the affairs, interests, or pleasures of this world. 4. of or relating to the people or laity; secular; neither ecclesiastical nor religious. From my HS basic English class we learned that words can/do have different meanings, according the how they are used. Ignorance can be chosen is one desires, but then one may have difficulty in conversing with those in live in this world.

This idea of the "in Christ" motif is very subtle deception. It completely ignores what the laws of Isreal taught about the plan of salvation, and the laws of Isreal contain the entire plan of salvation. You will find nothing about this "in Christ" motif in the OT laws. It simply doesn't exist. Also, part of the plan of salvation's purpose is to redeem our dominion over the earth and buy back our inheritance of it from the devil. The "in Christ" motif doesn't even begin to address these things. The laws of Isreal taught that Christ came to ransom us as our "kinsman redeemer". He had to become human to fulfill the laws of heaven and earth. Ellen White, in speaking about what happened when Adam and Eve sinned quotes the Father as saying, Live sinner. I have found a ransom. The Hebrew concept of "ga'al" is taught repeatedly, hundreds of times in fact, in the OT as the legal justification for the plan of salvation. Every OT reference to a Redeemer in English comes from the Hebrew word ga'al. Every one of the words translated as redeem or redeemed comes from ga'al or Hebrew words meaning ransom. It is the only concept taught about the plan of salvation in the OT. In the NT all references to redeem and redeemed come from Greek words meaning to purchase, buy, or ransom. The law of inheritance, ga'al, includes redeeming the earth and restoring it to us as our inheritance given to us from God. Paul said we are sold under sin, and that we, when we accept Christ's sacrifice, have been purchased by Him. The OT makes several references to people having sold themselves through doing evil. John, in Revelation, when it refers to "the redeemed" uses the Greek word for purchased, which is once again a continuance of the OT concept of ga'al. Jesus uses the same word imagery in his statements about redemption and the redeemed. I've spent hundreds of hours on this study using, first, the Bible, and then studying the SOP books to see what Ellen White had to say about it. Both sources are in complete agreement on this subject. However, only by twisting, taking out of context, or even flat out ignoring concepts taught in multiple places in the Bible, can one find support for "in Christ" motif. Ellen White says, in The Desire of Ages, that the law of inheritance, or ga'al, demonstrates Christ's relationship to His people.

Father God, I agree with aka's prayer; and add my own for Jack's complete healing and restoration; by the power and in the Name of Jesus.

Weather has always varied and will always vary. Climate has always changed, too. The difference this time is the very rapid rate of change, and the large human population that will not have a lot of time to adapt to that change. Neither of those things - the rate or the population - has a precedent on earth. It is clear that human activities are making a large contribution to the rapid rate of change. It makes sense to try to do less of that, because the effects and consequences will be huge for many people if we don't.

When we view the horrible excesses of ISIS we may be tempted to believe that the movement and its followers are not sane. But our review of the events at Waco reminds us that no true believer is totally remote from spiritual insanity. Human nature is seriously flawed on account of sin, and sanity is […] The post From Waco to ISIS: The Road Back to Sanity appeared first on Jon Paulien's Blog. View the full article

What explains the open winters in previous years. Or the exact opposite the next year with snow so high that people had to climb out second story windows. I have copies of old letters from my mother's family that homesteaded in MT discussing the weather with those writing the letters wondering if this was the biblical diverse weather. They range from worrying about the open winters and what it would mean for spring moisture and grazing land to trying to get out of their homes ,blocked by snow. My grandmother died from the influenza and my grandfather could not get out of the house,much less to the road to go for the DR. What caused the terrible Veterans Day blizzard that caused so many deaths in the 40's that came out of no where in MN. Our halloween blizzard that came out of nowhere was blamed on climate change. Later followed by open winters.Or is that all a lie or someone's imagination and the climate changes are all a new thing

Check out page 46, and let me know your thoughts,, please.. http://www.adventist.ca/3dissue/messenger/85-2/files/1.html

We have done that since I was a girl, in announcing meetings, concerts, etc. It can backfire.

In my book labeling anyone a liberal or conservative, is a complete misunderstanding of people in general! There is not one person that can claim they are a complete liberal and there is not one person that can claim they are a complete conservative! We are all both.

The problem is, he's not cutout for politics! He needs to do more trash talking, not to be so nice and soft spoken. He should've taken a look at what happen to Colin Powel, or at least spoken to him. Unfortunately he says things and than has to take his foot out of his mouth.

This reminds me of the several statements by EGW about how Jesus was viewed as too liberal by the Pharisees and how they were the conservative ones. (And I get the impression that many reactors to this topic read the source article to about the same degree or with the same level of comprehension as the source study discovered most professed Christians do with their own source book...)

I strongly disagree with the "Research". If one reads the Bible and understand it properly one should be conservative. God is very conservative. When God saw Adam and Eve disobeyed His common He did not give any room to rationalize it as liberals may come up such a reason as "well, Adam and Eve are newly created and did not have much experience to deal with such a temptation after all God allowed Satan to come disguised as Serpent so God should give a second chance". Look at Moses. When Moses came to the rock he disobeyed God and struck the rock instead of commanding with words as he was very angry with the Israelites. God could have said well I understand you, Moses, for being angry but don't do it next time. This would have been a liberal thinking. But, because of this disobedience God told Moses that he won't be entering the promised land Canan. The Bible has a lot of stories to be conservative. The wise man in the Old Testament days said the fools go to the left(liberal) while the wise goes to the right(conservative) Eccl. 10:2

Most interesting, but you also need to find and post the links to the actual research. Makes for less upfront argument as to the validity of the article. If they are suggesting that the Bible reading teaches us that life is not about ourselves but others, than there is alot of rhetoric out there about 'values' that is leaning the wrong way!!