Bible Topic Thread (merged)

What are you doing? Are you sore or afraid if you make nice your favorite thread will shut down?

You can LEAD! You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. You can lead a person to Christ but then it's up to that person as to whether or not they decide to follow HIM. I'm just confused by your tone :question:

I am not communicating this well. Let me try again.
You can present Christ to a person. The Holy Spirit "leads" them to accept. What we as humans concider leading, is just proclaiming.
Like I said, the mind set should be to give all the glory to God, not any to ourselves. This thought process helps me.
 
Not at all my friend. I was born and raised around the " fire and brimstone" method. I didn't like it at all. I was not trying at all to be that way, or to use that method.

Stop apologizing, you're fine. And believe me, this is not the last time you'll feel strongly about something in the political forum. A few Libs won't even come over here anymore b/c of how we wonderful conservative Christians treat them :birgits_giggle:
 
Like I said, the mind set should be to give all the glory to God, not any to ourselves.

Your opinion is wonderful, and I agree with you on this. Anything I do, I thank God for it and give him all the praise for it. I don't get the chance to show (left out lead for ya) people Christ as I am usually singing. I pray everytime before I step up to lead the worship "God, use me. Use the talent you have given me to show your love to those who don't understand it. Let your love fall down on them, and use me as a tool to help them see that you are their only hope"
 
I am not communicating this well. Let me try again.
You can present Christ to a person. The Holy Spirit "leads" them to accept. What we as humans concider leading, is just proclaiming.
Like I said, the mind set should be to give all the glory to God, not any to ourselves. This thought process helps me.

This is a problem of semantics. You were correct before, you're getting hung up on one word, I understand what you're saying and I think he's saying the same thing. It's hard to type exactly what you're thinking sometimes, it's so fast!
 
So what, are you gonna brow beat him now for coming off a little strong? I dare say PJ and Emain are not coming to this board for spiritual guidance. And I know they are not sore over someone trying to talk religion at them, otherwise they would have stayed away from the thread.

I have just been asking questions to try and understand where he is coming from. (I do not have PJ or Emain in mind in my questions, just evangalism in general.)

Manic, If you think that I am "brow beating", that is not my intention and I do appologize.
 
This is a problem of semantics. You were correct before, you're getting hung up on one word, I understand what you're saying and I think he's saying the same thing. It's hard to type exactly what you're thinking sometimes, it's so fast!

Trust me, there is nothing fast about my brain.
 
I have just been asking questions to try and understand where he is coming from. (I do not have PJ or Emain in mind in my questions, just evangalism in general.)

Manic, If you think that I am "brow beating", that is not my intention and I do appologize.

Brow beater :birgits_giggle: I'm teasin :)
 
I have just been asking questions to try and understand where he is coming from. (I do not have PJ or Emain in mind in my questions, just evangalism in general.)

Manic, If you think that I am "brow beating", that is not my intention and I do appologize.

No I didn't think you were doing that. You're just trying to get a better opinion on what your thinking. I agree with Kiss also, it's so hard sometimes to type out what your feeling and word it right so that everyone will understand it.
 
No I didn't think you were doing that. You're just trying to get a better opinion on what your thinking. I agree with Kiss also, it's so hard sometimes to type out what your feeling and word it right so that everyone will understand it.

Are you flirtin with me? In the bible thread no less! :eek:hmy::birgits_giggle::birgits_giggle: I'm teasin ya, it's NISS :)
 
When someone states that they do not believe in God because a good God would not allow evil, they make a fatal error in logic. First, the recognition of evil is the recognition that certain actions are "right" and certain actions are "wrong." But how do we determine what actions are morally right and morally wrong? We discern this on the basis of a moral law: a universal sense that certain states of affairs are right and others are wrong. Even most atheists will admit that certain actions are universally wrong and, conversely, universally right.

For example, no one could seriously argue with the statement that it is better to love a child than to torture it. The point is that there is an innate, universal sense of right and wrong within all of us. What is the basis of this moral sense? Some would argue that it is based on cultural customs or traditions. But can this be so?

The famous atheist Bertrand Russell once debated a Christian who asked him if he believed in right and wrong. Russell replied "of course." Then he asked him how he determined what is right and wrong. Russell replied that he determined right and wrong on the basis of his feelings. His opponent replied, "Well, in some cultures they feel it is okay to eat you, and in others they don't. Which do you prefer." The point is that social customs, attitudes, traditions or feelings cannot determine a universal sense of right and wrong.

A universal sense of moral right and wrong can only come from a source outside of ourselves: a transcendent source, a moral Lawgiver. So the recognition of moral law is by default the recognition of a moral Lawgiver. To argue that the existence of evil proves that there is no God is equivalent to stating that the existence of moral law proves that there is no Lawgiver! It's like declaring that the Chrysler automobile that I drive proves without a doubt that there is no Chrysler Motor Company!

Atheists often present the problem of evil to theists as if it is a fatal argument for the existence of God. Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, it is an absolutely unsolvable problem for the atheist. How does the atheist explain evil-the sense of moral right and wrong-in the absence of a moral Lawgiver? They can't! If there is no moral Lawgiver, then there is no way to explain the sense of moral wrong and moral right we all possess. C.S. Lewis said that evil is God's megaphone to a non-believing world. Evil speaks of moral law. Moral law demands a moral Lawgiver, and it is He that we call God!
 
New Topic Today:

Why Does God Allow Evil?

Thoughts?

Because even the gators, Bammers and Bullpuppies need fans too.

There are many thoughts on this subject, but none of us will know until we get the chance to ask him one day.
1) To Test
2) To Punish
3) To Strengthen
Are just a few of the reasons thrown around.
 
Because even the gators, Bammers and Bullpuppies need fans too.

There are many thoughts on this subject, but none of us will know until we get the chance to ask him one day.
1) To Test
2) To Punish
3) To Strengthen
Are just a few of the reasons thrown around.

You have to have evil for there to be good in the world. Good and evil go hand in hand with free will. Otherwise we would just be mindless robots put here for his pleasure. He wanted better for us.
 

VN Store



Back
Top