Just started a prayer group, feels good.
I need to connect with God in every way, that is what praying is all about. Think about tithing. If we were to tithe with the time God gives us, that is 2 hrs 40 mins a day that we need to give back to Him. Praying is a good way to fill that.
A prayer group is the next step, getting out and helping others is another step... Sharing, caring and loving. We do not need a building to be the body of Christ, we need body parts. These parts connect through communication and the finest form of communication is prayer.
So pray, connect and live.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
TODAY IS THE DAY...
Just thinking how some days are harder than others.
Cried when I read a story in the paper about a son who bought his dad new mustang because the dad had sold a mustang to help the son through college. HAPPY
Heard some other stories about a boy had killed himself after telling everyone that he was lonely. SAD.
I am struggling with being out of work. SAD.
I am not struggling with the knowledge that Christ is my savior. HAPPY:)
Cried when I read a story in the paper about a son who bought his dad new mustang because the dad had sold a mustang to help the son through college. HAPPY
Heard some other stories about a boy had killed himself after telling everyone that he was lonely. SAD.
I am struggling with being out of work. SAD.
I am not struggling with the knowledge that Christ is my savior. HAPPY:)
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Leave the poor alone...
Ok I have been reading a lot of Ann Coulter http://www.anncoulter.com/, and in the process Ann covers a lot of topics mostly ranging from liberals are godless, to liberals are traitors. I have also tapped into a couple of other conservative soapboxers.
In the process I realized a few things. First, I have really been thinking hard about how liberals have basically taken this nation away from us, rather those who started this nation. That being the hard core Christians that wanted to separate church and state in an manner that increased freedom, not handed freedom over to the state in a underhanded manner.
Second, the arguements laid out by the left are based in some basic, truths. First of all, we have to admit that when people were being abused by their bosses back in the nineteenth century, this fueled the unions and those in power to establish workers comp and other social programs that tend to put a crimp on free enterprise. Score one for the liberals. Yet in their zeal to help the proletariat, they completely ignored the minorities, including the Indians.
To keep things on track...the whole point of this post is to ask liberals a question that dives into the heart of their movement: Who says that being poor is an affliction that needs to be healed?
As a believer in Christ, I have had to come to the conclusion that Christ wants me poor, at least for now. And I willingly accept this. It does not help in certain situations like when my kids want to buy something or when my wife wants to plan that vacation that we have never had. And it certainly does not help when I want to get the best for my loved ones. Yet, I know that if I were to break from God's plan and go rob a bank, or cheat someone out of their hard earned money, I will loose a lot more in the bargain.
So, in relation to what I have been talking about, I really don't want my leaders to steal or cheat for my sake either! This is the basic problem in politics: "We need to help the poor!"
Despite anyone's beliefs, we as Christians should not allow our leaders to try to save the poor, this is God's domain. By that, I mean we as Christians should be making the need to help the poor obsolete in the political spectrum. Now if you don't know already, there are a lot of religious organizations out there doing a lot for the needy. So how do we get the government out the charity business? Vote, and communicate this to your elected officials. I would rather see the government conduct business similar to what the constitution calls for and have all the rest of that money wasted on "charity" spent on defense. After all we have a few folks out there who think that planes are for more than transportation.
God will make some of us rich, and some poor, some stupid and some brilliant. If you think about it, perhaps it might be a good idea to let him run things the way he sees fit. And if you really think about it, he had a strong influence on the birth of this nation and it might be a good idea to not step on his toes in that area either.
In the process I realized a few things. First, I have really been thinking hard about how liberals have basically taken this nation away from us, rather those who started this nation. That being the hard core Christians that wanted to separate church and state in an manner that increased freedom, not handed freedom over to the state in a underhanded manner.
Second, the arguements laid out by the left are based in some basic, truths. First of all, we have to admit that when people were being abused by their bosses back in the nineteenth century, this fueled the unions and those in power to establish workers comp and other social programs that tend to put a crimp on free enterprise. Score one for the liberals. Yet in their zeal to help the proletariat, they completely ignored the minorities, including the Indians.
To keep things on track...the whole point of this post is to ask liberals a question that dives into the heart of their movement: Who says that being poor is an affliction that needs to be healed?
As a believer in Christ, I have had to come to the conclusion that Christ wants me poor, at least for now. And I willingly accept this. It does not help in certain situations like when my kids want to buy something or when my wife wants to plan that vacation that we have never had. And it certainly does not help when I want to get the best for my loved ones. Yet, I know that if I were to break from God's plan and go rob a bank, or cheat someone out of their hard earned money, I will loose a lot more in the bargain.
So, in relation to what I have been talking about, I really don't want my leaders to steal or cheat for my sake either! This is the basic problem in politics: "We need to help the poor!"
Despite anyone's beliefs, we as Christians should not allow our leaders to try to save the poor, this is God's domain. By that, I mean we as Christians should be making the need to help the poor obsolete in the political spectrum. Now if you don't know already, there are a lot of religious organizations out there doing a lot for the needy. So how do we get the government out the charity business? Vote, and communicate this to your elected officials. I would rather see the government conduct business similar to what the constitution calls for and have all the rest of that money wasted on "charity" spent on defense. After all we have a few folks out there who think that planes are for more than transportation.
God will make some of us rich, and some poor, some stupid and some brilliant. If you think about it, perhaps it might be a good idea to let him run things the way he sees fit. And if you really think about it, he had a strong influence on the birth of this nation and it might be a good idea to not step on his toes in that area either.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
More on the Sabbath...
The Seventh-day Sabbath Was Made for Everyone
A multitude of Christians call God’s fourth commandment the “Jewish Sabbath.” But nowhere is this expression found in the Bible. The seventh day is called “the sabbath of the Lord,” and it is never called “the sabbath of the Jew” (Exodus 20:10).
Luke, a Gentile writer of the New Testament, often refers to things that were particularly Jewish. He writes of the “nation of the Jews,” “the people of the Jews,” “the land of the Jews,” and the “synagogue of the Jews” (Acts 10:22; 12:11; 10:39; 14:1). But he never refers to the “sabbath of the Jews,” although he mentions the Sabbath repeatedly.
Christ also taught that “the sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27). Adam and Eve were the only two people who existed when God actually established the Sabbath. There were no Jews in the world until 2,000 years later, so it was never meant just for the Jews. Jesus uses the term “man” in the generic sense, referring to all mankind. The same word is used in connection with the institution of marriage that was also introduced at creation. Certainly no Christian can believe that marriage was made only for the Jews.
A multitude of Christians call God’s fourth commandment the “Jewish Sabbath.” But nowhere is this expression found in the Bible. The seventh day is called “the sabbath of the Lord,” and it is never called “the sabbath of the Jew” (Exodus 20:10).
Luke, a Gentile writer of the New Testament, often refers to things that were particularly Jewish. He writes of the “nation of the Jews,” “the people of the Jews,” “the land of the Jews,” and the “synagogue of the Jews” (Acts 10:22; 12:11; 10:39; 14:1). But he never refers to the “sabbath of the Jews,” although he mentions the Sabbath repeatedly.
Christ also taught that “the sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27). Adam and Eve were the only two people who existed when God actually established the Sabbath. There were no Jews in the world until 2,000 years later, so it was never meant just for the Jews. Jesus uses the term “man” in the generic sense, referring to all mankind. The same word is used in connection with the institution of marriage that was also introduced at creation. Certainly no Christian can believe that marriage was made only for the Jews.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The Bible alone...
When articulating an argument or theological position, we should base our points on scripture and support them with other inspired writings, not use the inspired writings to establish doctrine...
That's it, have a good day...
That's it, have a good day...
Friday, February 12, 2010
3 days to tear down...
I once had a conversation with someone, who, let's say didn't see eye to eye with me or God about a great many things (cool Star Wars line...)
The subject of the conversation was the issue of Christ's claim that he was the temple that was going to be torn down and rebuilt in 3 days. Just like many who heard Jesus make this claim, my buddy was skeptical. However, since most of us know that Jesus was referring to his death and resurrection, my friend was questioning the whole validity of the the time span.
"If Jesus died on Friday night and came to life on Sunday morning, that is nowhere near three days."
Now, I pointed out that Friday, then Saturday, then Sunday would count as three days, so there...but he was not moved. So I pointed out that there are some considerations that need to be accounted for: the Jewish day and night cycle of Jesus' time, vs. the cycle we use today. You see for us, a day is midnight to midnight. However, for the Jews in Jesus' time, this was different: the official day started at nightfall. This is significant.
When Jesus went to the Garden to pray on Thurs. night, that was the beginning of the prophecy, also the beginning of the first day of the prophecy. So on this day Jesus was captured, accused and sentenced to death. He was also put to death on the same day.
The second day, starting at nightfall on Friday night, he was already in the tomb and his disciples were deterred from attending to his body because this is also the beginning of the Sabbath. Now we know that sometime on Saturday night, Jesus was resurrected, but because the third day of the prophecy began at night fall on Saturday, Jesus was well into the final day of his prophecy when he came to life and saved us all from our sins.
So you see his prophecies are true and valid. I would like to note a couple of things that follow along with this incident. First, everything happened so that no Torah laws where violated, including Jesus and all his disciples resting on the true Sabbath and finally...I really appreciate what my savior did for all of us on that day so long ago...
The subject of the conversation was the issue of Christ's claim that he was the temple that was going to be torn down and rebuilt in 3 days. Just like many who heard Jesus make this claim, my buddy was skeptical. However, since most of us know that Jesus was referring to his death and resurrection, my friend was questioning the whole validity of the the time span.
"If Jesus died on Friday night and came to life on Sunday morning, that is nowhere near three days."
Now, I pointed out that Friday, then Saturday, then Sunday would count as three days, so there...but he was not moved. So I pointed out that there are some considerations that need to be accounted for: the Jewish day and night cycle of Jesus' time, vs. the cycle we use today. You see for us, a day is midnight to midnight. However, for the Jews in Jesus' time, this was different: the official day started at nightfall. This is significant.
When Jesus went to the Garden to pray on Thurs. night, that was the beginning of the prophecy, also the beginning of the first day of the prophecy. So on this day Jesus was captured, accused and sentenced to death. He was also put to death on the same day.
The second day, starting at nightfall on Friday night, he was already in the tomb and his disciples were deterred from attending to his body because this is also the beginning of the Sabbath. Now we know that sometime on Saturday night, Jesus was resurrected, but because the third day of the prophecy began at night fall on Saturday, Jesus was well into the final day of his prophecy when he came to life and saved us all from our sins.
So you see his prophecies are true and valid. I would like to note a couple of things that follow along with this incident. First, everything happened so that no Torah laws where violated, including Jesus and all his disciples resting on the true Sabbath and finally...I really appreciate what my savior did for all of us on that day so long ago...
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
When the devil goes to war...
>>>
I have been thinking for awhile about the war in heaven, the one mentioned in Revelations (chapter 12). It seems that we have an incident that needs to be placed. Now the problem I have is this, we read that the devil spoke to God in the book of Job, right. So at this time our great Adversary had not been cast out of heaven yet, according to the text in Revelations.
So when did this great battle take place? I read today in Matthew (12:12) “From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been suffering violence.” At this time Jesus was still in the early stages of his ministry, and was addressing the issue of biblical references to John the Baptist. I found the violence remark to be very interesting, since it could have multiple meanings, yet when we look at the evidence it might also refer to the looming battle in heaven.
Now some folks think that the Adversary was cast out of heaven early on, but this does not make sense to me, Rev. 12:13…“And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.” The woman is considered the Church, the bride of Christ. Yet, when you read this particular verse, you find that our Adversary realizes he has been cast out of heaven after being defeated.
Ok…my point being that the only discussion about victory being complete is when we are discussing the event of Jesus’ death and resurrection. So this, I believe is the point where Satin reveals his plans for domination, along with the corruption of a third of heaven; “And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.”Rev 12:4 To me this clearly shows that Satan has made his move and was trying to kill Jesus early on, probably via the actions of Herod. So in failing to kill Jesus, Satan attempts to overthrow the Kindom and gets tossed.
Sounds logical to me.
I have been thinking for awhile about the war in heaven, the one mentioned in Revelations (chapter 12). It seems that we have an incident that needs to be placed. Now the problem I have is this, we read that the devil spoke to God in the book of Job, right. So at this time our great Adversary had not been cast out of heaven yet, according to the text in Revelations.
So when did this great battle take place? I read today in Matthew (12:12) “From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been suffering violence.” At this time Jesus was still in the early stages of his ministry, and was addressing the issue of biblical references to John the Baptist. I found the violence remark to be very interesting, since it could have multiple meanings, yet when we look at the evidence it might also refer to the looming battle in heaven.
Now some folks think that the Adversary was cast out of heaven early on, but this does not make sense to me, Rev. 12:13…“And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.” The woman is considered the Church, the bride of Christ. Yet, when you read this particular verse, you find that our Adversary realizes he has been cast out of heaven after being defeated.
Ok…my point being that the only discussion about victory being complete is when we are discussing the event of Jesus’ death and resurrection. So this, I believe is the point where Satin reveals his plans for domination, along with the corruption of a third of heaven; “And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.”Rev 12:4 To me this clearly shows that Satan has made his move and was trying to kill Jesus early on, probably via the actions of Herod. So in failing to kill Jesus, Satan attempts to overthrow the Kindom and gets tossed.
Sounds logical to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)