The deep danger of politicizing Christianity. It simply reveals our deep need for revival.

[Hidden In Him]

And for what do you "correct" me by telling people I have mental problems? Seriously!

Marks, thick-headed means obtuse, which is another word I have used to describe you before sometimes. They mean the same thing. I have never considered you as having mental problems. You have always seemed intelligent in other respects, just that you seem very slow to hear spiritually speaking. That is not a mental condition, it is a spiritual one, and not intended as an insult but to make you aware of what I think your primary problem is sometimes.

But now, maybe I should be asking you: DO you have mental problems? If so, I would need to tailor how I address you... some. Even if you did, I would still have enough respect for you to tell you like it is. I don't think you have any mental deficiencies or I wouldn't hold you to the standard I do.

 

[Truther]

If you read what I said concerning that verse, I tried to clarify and define land not as a country but as God's people. Whether it be Jerusalem or the church, the principle given applies to both. Rhank you fpr writing.

blessings,

Gideon

I read it.

It is commonly quoted in Christendom but not useful for us per the word of God. God does not honor it today.

We think if we straighten up and fly right, our lives will be fixed personally or our nation will be fixed via the verse.

Our lives are not "land" to be healed.

This verse is for the Jews living in Canaan over 2500 years ago.

What we have is the N.T. promises to lean on today.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Or, to put this another way . . .

24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

Much love!

I'm aware of the verses, Lol.

 

[teamventure]

The left vs right wing has gotten so polarized that the only way for a born-again Christian to vote is conservative.
In fact, I believe things have gotten to the degree that God will judge a Christian in some way by how they vote now.

 

[marks]

I'm aware of the verses, Lol.

I thought you would! What are your thoughts on how these verses fit regarding you and I?

Much love!

 

[Hidden In Him]

I thought you would! What are your thoughts on how these verses fit regarding you and I?

Much love!

Posts #129 and #133.

 

[farouk]

What really counts by God's grace is continuing to practise Acts 2.42, as they did in the days of the Apostles:

"And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

 

[marks]

Marks, thick-headed means obtuse, which is another word I have used to describe you before sometimes.

Yes, I understand that.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Yes, I understand that.
View attachment 11959

It comes from a Latin word that means "dull," and as I said:

You have always seemed intelligent in other respects, just that you seem very slow to hear spiritually speaking. That is not a mental condition, it is a spiritual one, and not intended as an insult but to make you aware of what I think your primary problem is sometimes.

Have you not read in scripture where they were "dull of hearing."

 

[marks]

Posts #129 and #133.

What I'm really hoping you will come to, even if you remain unaware of the inappropriateness of your words, what I'm looking for at the end of the day is that you can find a way to stop feeling the to divert Biblical discussion into discussion about your negative opinions of me.

Typically people do that because they just don't have a better answer to the actual discussion. Maybe it's just a bad habit. Maybe that's how every talked where you grew up. I don't know.

If you call me "slow to hear spiritually" -See, I'm not interested in making a "self defense", that's not why I'm here, but those sorts of comments let me know you've got it all wrong about me. Plus all the other comments. You can call this disciplining, correction, but you aren't fooling me.

The thief knows when he is caught that he is a thief, and the honest man knows he's not.

Much love!

 

[Hidden In Him]

The thief knows when he is caught that he is a thief, and the honest man knows he's not.

And that is where we disagree in your case, LoL.

But I will pray about it if there is anything better I can do.

God bless,
- H

 

[marks]

And that is where we disagree in your case, LoL.

But I will pray about it if there is anything better I can do.

God bless,
- H

To the first part . . . you never seem to stop.

To the second part, me too!

Much love!

 

[marks]

Have you not read in scripture where they were "dull of hearing."

Yeah. I have.

 

[marks]

James 3:13 "Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom."

 

[Prayer Warrior]

As, but what if we are found quite content where we are spiritually, thinking we have need of nothing because we are forgiven, so why sweat it? What if we are found divided against other brothers or sisters in Christ, judging they cannot possibly be children of God because they disagree with us as to beliefs. Should we fear then? Absolutely.

I hate to jump in the middle of a row between two brothers that I respect (@marks and @Hidden In Him ), but I pray that you two will come to peaceful terms.

@Gideons300 , like you, I am very concerned about divisions between brothers and sisters in Christ. I have often said that I am anti-denominational. For the most part, I have stopped arguing about denominational doctrine where both sides are presented in scripture as a dichotomy (for instance, free will and predestination). I will debate doctrine that is UN-biblical or ANTI-biblical, but that's about it.

But what you're talking about in this thread is not a matter of denominational differences. You're talking about moral stances taken by two political parties. The fact is that the Republican platform reflects biblical principles such as sanctity of human life and biblical marriage, and the Democratic platform reflects the opposite.

So...this is not just a matter of Christians differing and disagreeing as to beliefs as you are saying. If someone joined this forum and began promoting an organization that was for legalizing the murder of 2-year-olds or polygamy, would you tell all of us that we should steer clear of disagreeing with these people because they are our Christian siblings? Of course not, but it seems that you are telling us that we should not disagree with those who promote a political party that blatantly supports the killing of unborn babies and homosexual "marriage," among other immoral practices.

It seems to me that you are smoothing out the lines between these two moral stances in order to bring unity on this forum. But there are some lines that should NEVER be blurred. Your arguments are passionate, and even eloquent, but I have had an uneasiness when I read your lengthy posts. Even though your reasoning sounds very scriptural, I sense that something is not quite right....

 

[Gideons300]

So you are talking about the unsaved? Deluded?

Absolutely not. Were the Laodecians not saved, part of the church? Can the unsaved not do anything but disobey God. They do not know Him.

But we are clearly told that to whom much is given, much is required. Have we not been given much? How can we then be satisfied with little in the way of pleasing God with our hunger for Him.

We are the people of God who have much to fear if the current course of the church is any indication of where we will stand when the Lord returns. How exactly are we different than those who started out telling God "Your will, not mine be done" and in the end, chose not to take His call seriously?

Will He not rather be far more pleased with those who started out telling God "No way, I like my way" only to rethink things and fully submit to God's willing, cry out to Him for more, always more of Christ living in them?

blessings,

Gideon

 

[marks]

I hate to jump in the middle of a row between two brothers that I respect (@marks and @Hidden In Him ), but I pray that you two will come to peaceful terms.

Thank you!!!

 

[Gideons300]

I hate to jump in the middle of a row between two brothers that I respect (@marks and @Hidden In Him ), but I pray that you two will come to peaceful terms.

@Gideons300 , like you, I am very concerned about divisions between brothers and sisters in Christ. I have often said that I am anti-denominational. For the most part, I have stopped arguing about denominational doctrine where both sides are presented in scripture as a dichotomy (for instance, free will and predestination). I will debate doctrine that is UN-biblical or ANTI-biblical, but that's about it.

But what you're talking about in this thread is not a matter of denominational differences. You're talking about moral stances taken by two political parties. The fact is that the Republican platform reflects biblical principles such as sanctity of human life and biblical marriage, and the Democratic platform reflects the opposite.

So...this is not just a matter of Christians differing and disagreeing as to beliefs as you are saying. If someone joined this forum and began promoting an organization that was for legalizing the murder of 2-year-olds or polygamy, would you tell all of us that we should steer clear of disagreeing with these people because they are our Christian siblings? Of course not, but it seems that you are telling us that we should not disagree with those who promote a political party that blatantly supports the killing of unborn babies and homosexual "marriage," among other immoral practices.

It seems to me that you are smoothing out the lines between these two moral stances in order to bring unity on this forum. But there are some lines that should NEVER be blurred. Your arguments are passionate, and even eloquent, but I have had an uneasiness when I read your lengthy posts. Even though your reasoning sounds very scriptural, I sense that something is not quite right....

There is none good, save God. If we think we are on high moral ground choosing one party or another, we are again, choosing the lesser of two very carnal, evil, flesh oriented organizations of men.

Again, this is not a post about which side is best. Far from it. It is about the church looking for more into earthly things than seeing their own likenesses changed into the image of our amazing God. And in doing so, each side sets themselves up as enemies of the other brothers and sisters who see it differently.

It is called earthly minded-ness and we need to move by drawing near to our God, confessing our own great need before we decide all who do not believe like us politically o not know God at all. Rhat, brother, is a dangerous leap into darkness.

blessings,

Gideon

 

[marks]

It seems to me that you are smoothing out the lines between these two moral stances in order to bring unity on this forum. But there are some lines that should NEVER be blurred. Your arguments are passionate, and even eloquent, but I have had an uneasiness when I read your lengthy posts. Even though your reasoning sounds very scriptural, I sense that something is not quite right....

I feel there is a higher ground we can reach together if we choose to. Between dealing with different ideologies, different theologies, all the other -gies. How does that verse go? Something about continuing ot encourage each other in good works, maybe Hebrews . . .

Here it is:

And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works

Much love!

 

[Prayer Warrior]

There is none good, save God. If we think we are on high moral ground choosing one party or another, we are again, choosing the lesser of two very carnal, evil, flesh oriented organizations of men.

Tell me, what about protecting the unborn and biblical marriage is carnal or evil?

BTW, you really didn't address my points.