Ted Haggard to Host Regular Prayer Gatherings

wbmoore »

Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:30 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

There is no doubt Ted sinned and was busted. There's no doubt God changes people, as Saul was changed. But while Saul taught immediately upon conversion about how Jesus was the Christ, it does not seem he tried to start a church.

I wonder if his repentance is real, given that he was caught red handed, his sin was made public, and he renigged on the terms of his reconciliation agreement with the church and left counseling and accountability without finishing the terms of the agreement. Only God knows if the repentance is real. God will have to judge. We can only measure what is taught and the fruit of his labor.

Pastor Tackles Truth, New Age Spirituality, Mormonism

wbmoore »

Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:23 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

I've noticed the Mormons ignore anyone who successfully refutes their arguments.

Such as "chapter and verse of the Bible that EXPLICITLY teaches that God created the world or the universe out of nothingness"

And their human philosophical arguments against God creating ex nihilo.

convenient.

Pastor Tackles Truth, New Age Spirituality, Mormonism

wbmoore »

Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:44 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

"Please quote chapter and verse of the Bible that EXPLICITLY teaches that God created the world or the universe out of nothingness"

I will ignore the rest of your question, because it does not matter if some one agrees with the truth - their agreement or disagreement does not change the truth.

God both created and made everything. While man can make things, only God truly creates.
Gen. 2:4
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created. When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens-

We see in Colossians 1:16-17 that everything was created by God, including whatever is visible or invisible - this would include any materials used in said creation.

Colossians 1:16-17
16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

God did it through speaking it into existence.
Hebrews 11:3
3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

Pastor Tackles Truth, New Age Spirituality, Mormonism

wbmoore »

Wed Mar 25, 2009 11:55 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

Savedbymercy,

I'm sorry you find yourself in an argument with someone who wants to ignore truth.

Pastor Tackles Truth, New Age Spirituality, Mormonism

wbmoore »

Wed Mar 25, 2009 11:51 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Hi believer.

I'd dont know if I'll hang around or not. I've found my interested in most of the discussions here has waned. I find myself making better use of my time on my blog (http://wbmoore.wordpress.com). Plus, I spend a lot of time with my wife and kids. Her back surgery went well, thanks to God. My MIL will probably be living with us by June, as her husband passed away last month. Praise God that he knew Christ.

Pastor Tackles Truth, New Age Spirituality, Mormonism

wbmoore »

Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:54 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

"5. Solitary power problem. Creatio ex nihilo assumes that a powerful God once acted alone. But power, as a social concept, only becomes meaningful in relation to others."

This is an invalid assumption. Power, in terms of that which was used to create, has nothing what-so-ever to do with social concepts - it has to do with ability. God is not a created thing. God needs nothing. God chose to create. God chose to create from nothing.

Again, not a problem.

"6. Errant revelation problem: The God with the capacity to create something from absolutely nothing would apparently have the power to guarantee an unambiguous and inerrant message of salvation (e.g, inerrant Bible). An unambiguously clear and inerrant divine revelation does not exist.:"

Again, not a problem.

The Gospel is clear, to those to whom have been elected or choose to not be hard headed or blind. You have only to believe God sent Jesus to suffer and die for your sins. People choose to disbelieve or add to what God has said, but this does not mean it is ambiguous, nor does it mean it is not clear.

"7. Evil problem: If God once had the power to create from absolutely nothing, God essentially retains that power. But a God of love with this capacity appears culpable for failing to prevent genuine evil. If Gods knowledge is unlimited and power unlimited, it stands to reason that he could have created a universe without evil but acted against his deepest values and allowed evil into existence."

Again, not a problem.

You make the common mistake of believing God is only love. God is so much more that He chose to make beings capable of making choices. Another mistake you make is to believe that evil is the opposite of good (or love). It is not. Evil is the lack of good (or love). God did not create evil, but allowed for beings to decide to not be with Him.

Had He not allowed people to have choice, then He would have robots. But He wants beings with Him who want to be with Him. So He gives us the choice.

"8. Empire Problem: The kind of divine power implied in creatio ex nihilo supports a theology of empire, based upon unilateral force and control of others."

Again, not a problem. Your assumption predicated upon the idea that God being in control is a bad thing. You also assume that God would control everything all the time with no allowance for God's grace and love and the concept of free will we see in the BIble that is in tension with God's supremacy and election.

Pastor Tackles Truth, New Age Spirituality, Mormonism

wbmoore »

Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:53 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

"1. The problem of the word nothing. Nothing in Christian orthodoxy means nothing in existence or absolute nothingness. The theoretical problem here is that one cannot conceive of absolute nothingness."

Actually, you are incorrect. This is not a problem. If one can think of a lack of something, one thinks of nothing. Thus the invention of the idea of zero. The same applies to the concept of nothing. But God, not being limited by man's perceptions or abilities, is able to create from nothing - whether you can understand it or not.

"2. Historical problem. Genesis and 2 Peter and elsewhere affirm that creation is from something (water, deep, chaos, etc.), not creation from absolutely nothing."

Please show this scripture, for I am unaware of it. If you are going to make Biblical claims, please support them with the verses in question.

"3. Empirical problem. We have no evidence that our universe originally came into being from absolutely nothing. Everything observed in existence indicates otherwise."

Again, not a problem. Just because something is not observed does not mean it does not happen. You are relying upon a concept that the one who creates rules for the running of a universe must necessarily follow those rules. However, this is a fallacy, as God is not bound by that which He creates.

You are saying God is not powerful enough to have created everything from nothing. That He did not breathe it into existence. This shows the heresy of Mormanism.

"4. Creation at an instant problem. We have no evidence in the history of the universe after the big bang (an explosion from mass and energy about the size of your fist) that entities can emerge instantaneously from absolute nothingness. As the earliest philosophers noted, out of nothing comes nothing (ex nihilo, nihil fit)."

Again, not a problem.

The science measuring the processes since what is perceived as a "big bang" hinges upon things like decay rates and closed systems, making assumptions which have not been proven. While our science continually changes, God does not. While mankind is not powerful enough to create from nothing, God is.

Gay Couples Apply for Marriage Licenses in Nationwide Protest

wbmoore »

Sun Feb 15, 2009 11:07 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

Here is something I wrote a while back about concerning a Utilitarian perspective on homosexual sex, sex outside of marriage, cohabitation, abortion, and divorce ( http://wbmoore.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/utilitarian-perspective-on-sex-outside-of-marriage-cohabitation-abortion-and-divorce/ ).

People said divorce and abortion and cohabitation would not hurt anyone, and in fact be good for folks. The fact is, all these affect society in bad ways. Homosexual marriage will as well. Morality is being degraded the more we allow people to do whatever they want in the name of freedom.

Obama Emphasizes 'One Law' that Binds All Religions

wbmoore »

Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:53 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

believer,

no, Jehovahnissi is not me. I just happened to see the comment when I was searching for some thing. I'm spending all my time with my kids and wife (her back is better, but now she's got an infection of some sort in her feet), and blogging on http://wbmoore.wordpress.com

I come by CP occasionally, but the arguments all seem to be the same. Sometimes the names change, but not even that occurs very often.

I pray things are well with you believer.

In Him,
WBMoore

Anti-Theist: Christianity is Bad for the World

wbmoore »

Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:49 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

My thoughts on the subject:
http://wbmoore.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/who-saves-us-and-can-we-loose-our-salvation/
http://wbmoore.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/losing-ones-salvation-and-cheap-grace/
http://wbmoore.wordpress.com/2009/01/09/more-on-whether-one-can-loose-ones-salvation/

Calif. Court Sides with Episcopal Church over Property

wbmoore »

Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:29 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Well, to my understanding, individual churches agreed the Episcopal diocese owns resources. But its interesting the church was on the deed, instead of the diocese - given that, I'd think the church would own the property.

Regardless, I think both sides are wrong for going to court. They should have just been wronged by the other side.

1 Corinthians 6:1-8
1 If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? 2 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4 Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! 5 I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6 But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers! 7 The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8 Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.

Anti-Theist: Christianity is Bad for the World

wbmoore »

Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:42 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

it seems to me the only unpardonable sin is to deny Christ until you die.

Anti-Theist: Christianity is Bad for the World

wbmoore »

Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:51 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

a doctrine is nothing more than a belief - sometimes the RCC even back it up with scripture, but not always. Yes, the RCC has a written set of doctrinal beliefs, but speak to three catholics, and you get at least three different views. I've heard some speak passionately concerning birth control, and others just nod and do what they want. I've seen different catholics with different views on Mary as well. Some hold to the Bible and others put the church on equal or higher footing.

Anti-Theist: Christianity is Bad for the World

wbmoore »

Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:07 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

jester, but he DID come back.

Pope Condemns Homosexual Behavior

wbmoore »

Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:01 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

jester,

you live up to you r name. :)

Its unfortunate my response to feet had to be so long, especially since I realize it will do him little good.

Anti-Theist: Christianity is Bad for the World

wbmoore »

Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:34 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

Star2, It seems you and I agree that a lost person can have appearance of a saved person. It seems in this matter we are in agreement on most points - the only disagreement seems to be whether one was saved to begin with is able to lose his salvation. Ultimately, the result is the same, a person who is not saved suffers the second death.

I agree that Jesus said if they overcame, they would not suffer the second death. Does this not describe the condition of a true believer? It does not describe their condition before this point where they have to overcome. I submit if they did not overcome then they were not saved to begin with, not that they lost their salvation.

To me, the difference is your view of God's sovereignty. Does God fulfill His plan? Does God do what HE said He will do? Is God faithful to complete the good work He began in you?

I think the answer is yes.

Pope Condemns Homosexual Behavior

wbmoore »

Sun Jan 04, 2009 12:57 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Flagged as inappropriate. show (page 6) " you have yet to say what spirit homosexuality is given over to that comes against the fruit of the spirit. you have yet to show what fruit homosexuality produces that comes against the fruit of the spirit.__without this it cannot be declared a sin" I HAVE said - People are either of God or of Satan. People who choose to willfully sin against God, such as murders, liars, and homosexuals are the children of Satan, until such time as they repent and quit sinning and turn to God. Once they turn away from their sin, and to God, they are then children of God. "surely if peter was led by the law he would have dismissed his vision as a bad dream. if abraham was led by discernment of what was pagan and what was of god, he would have never sacrificed isaac." Not true - there was lots of child sacrifice in pagan cultures. But Abraham trusted what God had told him and obeyed. "_it is amazing that you put so much emphasis on this so called law which is really not the law under the new covenant because it has nothing to do with loving ones neighbor as oneself." Then you disagree with scripture - because God made it clear that the 2 greatest commandments of the law was to love God with all your mind, body, and soul, and to love your neighbor as yourself. Therefore, to follow what God has taught is to love Him and your neighbor - not for justification but from love. "__the reason christ came was because man could not keep the law. that's the reason for the crucificition and why we now live under grace. christ paid for everything we cannot do.__by following it we receive no righteousnes because physically following something is not the same as abiding in the spirit, which we do thru grace thru faith." Actually, the Law was put in place to show us our need for Christ. Gal 3:24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ[h] that we might be justified by faith. We are not under the supervision of the law, but this does not mean it does not teach us right and wrong froms God's perspective. " you would believe that your human understanding of something that cannot be kept, trumps something of the spirit." No. Nothing trumps God. God has made it clear everything is to be tested, and if it does not line up with what God has previously said, then it is not from God. This is very different from just following what you think your heart is telling you. "you dont think that satan cant deceive someone by influencing their understanding of the law." I did not say that. I said it has to line up with what God has already said. You have been shown time and again where God has said to NOT commit certain sexual acts. Yet, you continue to try to justify your sinful desires. hide

Pope Condemns Homosexual Behavior

wbmoore »

Sun Jan 04, 2009 12:57 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

(page 5)
In rerference to
1 Corinthians 5:11 But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

"jesus said follow me , and jesus spoke and ate with all kinds including one of his own apostles who was stealing from community funds and apparntly never received jesus as his lord and savior. if this was done by one who lived daily with christ daily, imagine the mutitude of responses from those outside the apostles with whom jesus spoke. therefore it would appear that paul was referring to ones personnal life. such as the friendships that christ sought with john and peter."

No, Paul was referring to people who claim to be brothers in Christ and yet sin. He was very clear about that. He said to not even eat with them.

"show me in the new testament when it wasnt appropriate to share the spirit of christ with friend or foe. how can one love someone with the love that is god and not share the spirit of christ. they are all of the same spirit"

It is always appropriate to share the love of God, it is not appropriate to have someone who claims to be a brother in Christ and yet sins purposefully and willfully as part of the assembly of God. By handing them over to Satan, you ARE showing love - tough love.

"all churches are entitled to set standards for membership, the man that was thrown out, clearly, in having his father's wife, was violating direction of the second commandment."

The same is true for people who have homosexual sex.

"why is it that you value witness, but have no witness. you have trfused togive any witness regarding homosexuals."

I am not sure what you mean concerning witness regarding homosexuals. I have known plenty of homosexuals who are nice people, yet they continue to disregard what God has said. Just because they are nice people does not mean they will go to heaven.

"which do think is greater the witness of your heart thru spirit that is without rationalization an is simply an acknowledgement thru the eyes of your heart of what is in the spirit and where the spirit rests or your human rationalization of what is of the a spirit."

But you also are attempting to rationalize what is from the spirit of God - the difference is that I test it. Everything must be tested. If it does not line up with what God has told us already, then it is not from God.

"peter's rationalization was according to the eating laws of 2000 years, it was his witnessed conversation of the spirit thru his heart that forced his to acknowledge something other."

God made it clear that He loved Gentiles and Jews - which is what was already said in Jeremiah. Again, What God told Peter in the vision was the same as what was already written.

Pope Condemns Homosexual Behavior

wbmoore »

Sun Jan 04, 2009 12:48 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

(page 4)
"it is coming to christ that modifies what we understand in scripture. it thru the one who lives in us that our understandingis modified"

As I've said before, without the Holy Spirit, it is impossible to understand what God has said, but this does not mean that God has changed what He said.

1 Corinthians 2:14
The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

God does not change.
Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

Malachi 3:6 I the LORD do not change. So you, O descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.

Hebrews 7:21 but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him: "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: 'You are a priest forever.' "

"on this site i hear alot of lip service about christ. yet in discussion the emphasis is on "god's word"which is euphemism for "my interpretaion of scripture".

I only hear you inventing things and ignoring what God has said. If you ignore God and choose to sin against Him, your neighbor and yourself, how can you believe you are led by the Holy Spirit?

"you have ignored all the posted gospel verses about FRUIT please address them in regards to homosexuality and annotate. "

No, I have not ignored them. You might have not understood my answers, but I have answered them. If you want to ask again, please do and I will try to reiterate for you.

"the scriptures you credit peter with seeing did not exist at the time of the incident, but yes there are scriptures about christ coming to the gentiles in isaiah."

I never credited Peter with seeing scripture. You are confused again, or at best not communicating well.

Peter was given a vision which explained that the new covenant mentioned in Jeremiah is for all people (Jer. 31:31-34; Hebrews 8:7-13), just as Abraham was told all nations would be blessed through him (Genesis 18:18; Genesis 22:18). This expanded upon what God had already said - not changed it.

Pope Condemns Homosexual Behavior

wbmoore »

Sun Jan 04, 2009 12:47 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

(page 3)
"and in regards to the law in essence there is only one law" love your neighbor as yourself"

This is what scripture actually says about the law and love:
Romans 13:8-14
8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. 11 And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. 12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. 14 Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.

You are to leave sin behind - if you sin against your neighbor or cause him to sin, you are not loving your neighbor as yourself.

"whatever there is in scripture it does not violate anyof these."

Scripture says to not sin and that homosexual sex is sin. So having homosexual sex is to sin against God, your neighbor, and yourself.

" your point is that your interpretation of scripture trumps these."

No, my point is that any message you think comes from God must line up with what God has already said.

"in acuality it is the reverse it is what is received thru the spirit that mofifies what is received thru scripture."

john 5:39 You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, 40yet you refuse to come to me to have life."

You are wrong on your interpretation of this verse. Christ himself said that the problem the Jews had is they thought the scripture gave them life, when it is God himself who does so.