in light of my post "Questions to Consider" how can a supposed "Man of God" ask his audience to plant a seed of faith in the amount of $100 and guarantee that by doing so God will save the planter's unsaved loved ones? That's right! Plant a seed of faith and God will save your unsaved family members. Or so said Kenneth Copeland this very evening.
Benny Hinn isn't any better. Did you know that if you are saved, "the family line" will not be broken if YOU remain faithful; to mean, YOUR prayers will save your loved ones... YOU will pray them into Heaven. Or so said Benny Hinn this very evening.
Well, last time I checked, John 14:6 said...
I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
To qualify that further, John 6:44 says...
No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him.
No amount of money you give can bribe God into saving your unsaved family. He is not willing that any should perish, but neither will he force anyone to accept His love and forgiveness.
Everyone must choose for themselves, and everyone must choose when the Lord calls him. We must choose when we hear His calling... when our consciences are pricked. That is the clear teaching of these two verses.
So what about Jesus? To confront another error being taught in mainline churches, is Jesus who He said He was? And if so, why not take Him at His word? For if He is THE way, THE truth, and THE life, and NO ONE comes to the Father BUT THROUGH HIM, why then are many "pastors" teaching and promoting the belief that there are many ways to God?
Someone is not telling the truth. Either it's Jesus, or its the men who are, in effect, calling Jesus a liar.
The Bible says...
...Let God be true, but every man a liar.
Does anyone care that heresy is being taught by evil men? Will anyone speak out against them? What must God think of the Church-- the REAL Church --which has chosen to keep silent? Many of whom have lifted up these heretics with praise and devotion? Does anyone care that apostasy has swept across Europe and is, at this very moment in time, swallowing America whole?
How can anyone who believes, NOT believe that He is coming very soon?
15 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Perhaps if we hired some ninjas...
I've always wondered why the TV preachers are mostly frauds yet the radio guys are mostly orthodox (at least on the stations we have around here).
Wouldn't that be something?
I'm hoping that a Dem President will be less damaging to our nat'l and global interests than the last four administrations have been.
How's that for fair and objective?
Also, you felt free enough at ER's place to spout your true feelings, don't hold back here.
What, this?
Amongst the remaining candidates, his policy positions seem the least dangerous and damaging.
That's the same thing I've said here. I did say that I like Obama, he seems presidential. But that's a personal thing. I liked Bush a bit before he came into office. He seemed funny, self-effacing, likable (although, never presidential). Saying I like someone is not the same as saying I like their policy.
Or are you speaking of something else?
1. Protect the US from foreign invasion (and do so responsibly - we don't do that by having the world's largest military machine or by engaging in military adventurism around the world).
2. Live within our means.
3. Because oil is a finite and rapidly disappearing resource and because we have built our economy to be entirely dependent upon it, we MUST seek to change that. Now. This to me is one of our more pressing needs.
4. We can't change that by merely trying to find other natural resources to rape, we must begin to live within our means (see #2); we must begin to quit the hyperconsumption.
5. As one of the wealthiest nations in the world, it is in our national interests to share that wealth. And not in patriarchal ways or ways that foster dependence and debt.
For starters.
I don't see any of the candidates talking about these issues in the way I'd like to see them talking about it, but at least the Dems seem somewhat amenable to considering these points.
How about you, Eric? What do you see as our national interests?
Haven't you figured that out yet? You and I will never get enough people to agree to do what's necessary to change Washington. And no amount of campaign rhetoric will make me believe ANY candidate genuinely wants to change Washington. What they want is to manipulate the rules to suit themselves. Not govern in OUR best interests. If they cared about this nation they would change it. But they don't. So they won't. End of story.
As to your weighted list, they're nothing more than propagandist constructs designed to distract you from the raping we are ALL receiving from our Government. And don't be so obtuse as to say the raping comes from BushCo. That also is a construct; and the argument of the ideologically-autistic.
And no, I don't especially expect gov't leaders will go in directions that I think best. As I've stated, I'm looking for the ones that do the least harm. At this point, it's about the best I expect out of them.
Although, every once in a while, they'll - WE'LL - come along and create some good laws, some good rules, some good policies. This has the greatest likelihood of happening locally, where the locals can better ensure the policy-setters do their will, but it happens occasionally on the nat'l level.
The thing is, Eric, I don't think any of us - dems, republicans, greens, elected officials nor ordinary citizens have all the answers. But most of us, while we're not so good as we may think we are, aren't so bad as we could be. Most of us have our better moments where we're wanting to do what's right, at least occasionally.
And so, we will all muddle through life the best we can. Hopefully, we can rely more upon the God and good within us than we do our more destructive traits. But we do what we do: Muddle through the best we can.
There are no enemies here. Just fellow humans seeking to do the best we can.
~Mary Wollstonecraft
While I wouldn't go so far as Wollstonecraft - I think it does happen that some individuals embrace evil for its own sake (although it may be that they're mentally ill).
But certainly most of us - our political leaders included - do not set out to "do evil" but rather seek to do what makes them happy/causes them the least distress (at least in their own minds) and it has the unintended effect of evil. Think of slavery, think of Hiroshima, think of 9/11.
I don't think Bush, nor Clinton, nor McCain, nor Obama, nor you, nor I are setting out with much beyond good intentions and a wish for the power to fulfill those good intentions. But some of our best laid plans, you know...
Allow me to invoke the word of God in contradiction...
"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
--Genesis 6: 5
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked"
--Jeremiah 17:9
"Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage. "
--Jude 1:14-16
And this is just the unregenerate mind of man. Let's not get started on the righteous!
Dan said:
"Politicians... seek to do what makes them happy/causes them the least distress..."
Which is all I've ever said. They're out for themselves... not for us. Not for "We the People" which in the minds of most politicians is a figment of their own self-serving imaginations-- the Constitution a mere inconvenience to their own fevered lusts for power.
I'm not sure of your point.
For one thing, Wollstonecraft is the mother of Mary Shelley, who wrote Frankenstein - but Wollstonecraft didn't write Frankenstein herself.
And while I wasn't thinking of Frankenstein, it IS a good model for our sinful nature and the point I was making.
Dr. Frankenstein was only interested in doing good - saving life. His actions were far short of that mark, but his intent was honorable.
Same for our politicians. Brother Bush and Sister Clinton are not evil monsters intent on doing evil. They have some misplaced loyalties and poor ideas about how to achieve good ends, but they are like us in that regard.
I like Politician-Bashing as much as the next fella, but these leaders of ours are just the same as you and I in most regards. They are citizen-leaders in a system that can encourage corruption.
Lord Acton was right.