Results 61 - 80 of 155
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Curtnsally Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | What is Free Will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Curtnsally | 34557 | ||
How about Jacob and Esau as discussed in Romans 9? 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad--in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls--she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." God chose one not the other. Why? To serve His purpose in election (whatever that means). How can He do this? Because He is sovereign. And what is the lesson for us? Read on... 16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. If that wasn't enough, Paul gives us more evidence, with Pharoah starring in subsequent verses: 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." God hardened Pharoah's heart to glorify Himself. God's explanation: 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. Is that really fair? 19 One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" Back in the penalty box we go: 20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?'" Hard teaching, but I think it speaks to your question. All have sinned. None deserve salvation. God is sovereign and can choose to show mercy to whomever He chooses. If it is His will to choose some and not choose others, (and apparently it is), who are we to question God? And who can resist His will if He chooses us? Matthew 22:14 "For many are invited, but few are chosen." Blessings Curt |
||||||
62 | What is Free Will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Curtnsally | 34564 | ||
Bro Tim I quote A.T. Robertson's Commentary... By "all men" (pantav) Jesus does not mean every individual man, for some, as Simeon said (Luke 2:34) are repelled by Christ, but this is the way that Greeks (verse 12:22) can and will come to Christ, by the way of the Cross, the only way to the Father (14:6). --------------- Jesus is opening up the covenant of grace to "all men", not just the Jews. Blessings Curt |
||||||
63 | What is Free Will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Curtnsally | 34574 | ||
Blessings Brother Tim! - You said: "The whole argument of Romans 9 is not to exclude people, it is Paul's attempt to show that God is just to include people." And so Pharoah was (unchosen, de-selected, hardened) for (inclusion, exclusion) what??? Paul was saying that God chooses, period... and by the way, Gentiles, lucky you! You've been chosen! He juxtaposes chosen people with unchosen people, individuals and groups. To your statement: "God is just to include people"... If God is only just, then we are all doomed. If we are saved, it is only God's mercy that saves us, not His justice. Clearly, in Romans 11:30-32 God selects and deselects groups (meaning salvation) to serve His sovereign will, just as He did with individuals such as Pharoah, Jacob, Esau, Paul and many others. If I took your position to the extreme (which I know you don't), we end up with universalism... that God's grace and mercy were sufficient to save all men, and who are we to say that some won't be saved?... Isn't God's love infinite? I believe that Romans 9 is saying very directly that God's sovereignty is above all. We are all sinners and deserving of death. God chooses to save some (maybe many) but it is purely His call as to who is chosen, according to His divine will. I believe that Romans 11:30-32 supports this... the One doing the "binding" in verse 32 is who (God/man)? Blessings Curt |
||||||
64 | What is Free Will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Curtnsally | 34585 | ||
Hi again First of all, I read in one commentary that the word "men" is not in the earliest manuscripts, that it is merely implied... for whatever that is worth. Secondly, the "redefinition of the word all" is not based on a particular theology, but based on context and how it fits with the remainder of Scripture. I know you don't believe that Jesus is saying all men will be saved... only that all will be drawn. OK... what happens after they are drawn? Here is what Scripture (not theology) says: John:16 (Jesus speaking) You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit--fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. God chooses. Mat 22:14 "For many are invited, but few are chosen." God chooses. 2 Thessalonians 2:13 But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth. God chooses. James 1:18 He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created. God chooses. 1 Peter 1 1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, 2 who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance. God chooses. 1 Peter 2 9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. God chooses. Revelation 17:14 They will make war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will overcome them because he is Lord of lords and King of kings--and with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers." God chooses. Genesis 18 18 Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. 19 For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing what is right and just, so that the LORD will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him." God chooses. Psalm 33 11 But the plans of the LORD stand firm forever, the purposes of his heart through all generations. 12 Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, the people he chose for his inheritance. God chooses. Psalm 106 4 Remember me, O LORD, when you show favor to your people, come to my aid when you save them, 5 that I may enjoy the prosperity of your chosen ones, that I may share in the joy of your nation and join your inheritance in giving praise. 6 We have sinned, even as our fathers did; we have done wrong and acted wickedly. 7 When our fathers were in Egypt, they gave no thought to your miracles; they did not remember your many kindnesses, and they rebelled by the sea, the Red Sea. 8 Yet he saved them for his name's sake, to make his mighty power known. God chooses. Ezekiel 20 5 and say to them: 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: On the day I chose Israel, I swore with uplifted hand to the descendants of the house of Jacob and revealed myself to them in Egypt. With uplifted hand I said to them, "I am the LORD your God." God chooses. Romans 3 10 As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; 11 there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. 12 All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." We are so blessed... Because God chooses us! Choosing means "To select from a number of possible alternatives; decide on and pick out." Does this not imply that some are chose, some are not chosen, otherwise, what is the selection? When God chose Israel, did He not leave others unchosen? If not, then what did choosing Israel mean? God is sovereign and can choose whom He will for His sovereign purpose. Blessings Curt |
||||||
65 | What is Free Will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Curtnsally | 34619 | ||
Hi Brother Tim That's a great answer, but I think I can challenge it. Unfortunately its too late tonight, and I'm in meetings all day tomorrow. But I'll get back to you shortly. Briefly, I think the verses which indicate that God hardened Pharoah, and chose Jacob (and hated Esau before he had been born) gives us some indication and are a few examples. There are others. Talk with you soon. Blessings til then Curt |
||||||
66 | What is Free Will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Curtnsally | 34620 | ||
Greetings Brother Barry, I don't wanna work so I'm going to bang on this drum all day. Matthew 22 (Jesus speaking) 14 "For many are invited, but few are chosen." John 15 (Jesus speaking) 16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit--fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. John 15 19 If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. Matthew 11 26 Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. 27 "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. Romans 8 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. Predestined, called, justified, glorified... this is God's process for salvation and sanctification. Nowhere does it say predestined, called, ANSWERED, justified, glorified. The process involves God working His sovereign will. His grace is sufficient. No RSVP required. We get to go along for the ride... the result of His grace alone... not because we are smart enough to choose yes. Even our choosing comes from Him. Enjoying the thoughts... keep it up! Blessings Curt |
||||||
67 | What is Free Will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Curtnsally | 34711 | ||
Greetings Lion "I'm not sure" is probably my best answer at this point. If "my trying harder" implies that the power comes from me, then I would say that this would raise a issue of God's sovereignty in my actions. But if, as you say, "my trying harder" is God acting out His will in my life, then you are probably right. I think the problem is in the wording. When I think of the words "my trying harder", I think of something in which the power is coming from me... I am the engine that is pushing. The reality is (and I think we agree) that God is the engine that is driving, and we are the rail cars, each responsible for part of the load. I'm not sure that makes a lot of sense, but its the metaphor that came to mind. I am curious what you thought of the rest of my previous post in terms of the theology of sovereignty? Blessings, Curt |
||||||
68 | Question about Genesis 6:6 | Genesis | Curtnsally | 32674 | ||
Was it not the serpent that tempted Eve? Also, there is no "doctrine of fairness" with animals in the Bible. Animals are just animals, plants are plants, etc... just part of the physical world. Yes, we live in the era of Disney with make-believe animals that have human characteristics, but this is not the reality of creation. Animals are a subserviant part of creation, and God gave man dominion over them. Further, God has dominion over man and the rest of His creation. Sometimes, we don't get to ask "why?" The answer is simply "because He's God!" Oh well... maybe we'll find out some day. | ||||||
69 | Question about Genesis 6:6 | Genesis | Curtnsally | 32717 | ||
I believe this is an accurate conclusion. Rights emanate from God, who establishes the order of all things. We read: Gen 1 26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground--everything that has the breath of life in it--I give every green plant for food." And it was so. Man is given dominion over the animals and plants... this is pretty clear. The concept of rights for animals is not found. In fact, the concept of rights for humans can only be inferred. There is nowhere in the Bible that we find God saying, "The rights for all humans are... blah blah blah". We could, however, infer rights from the "shall nots" as in the 10 Commandments, for example. If "thou shall not commit murder", we could conclude that we have the God given right not to be murdered by someone else. But I don't see anything in Scripture that would give animals similar inferred "rights". It is also interesting to note that this order was established before the fall of man, thus it cannot be argued it is the result of the fall. It is the perfect order established by God at the time of creation. We are to grow crops and livestock to be harvested for food and other purposes for the benefit of mankind... this is the way God intended it to be. By the way, my experience with animal rights activists is that they are generally not drawing on Scripture for their position. They are most often in the secular humanist camp (whether they know it or not), drawing on philosophies of humanism to make their case. In its most basic form, humanism says that mankind determines the order of things and God is not a factor. Humanism leave us with laws that protect the eggs of the bald eagle, while permitting the taking of the unborn human life through abortion on demand. When makind makes up rules outside the guidance of Scripture, stange and often scary results can occur. Your thoughts? Curt |
||||||
70 | The future of loved pets | Genesis | Curtnsally | 32857 | ||
Dear friend I just happened to see your post, and felt great empathy for your position. The loss of a much loved pet is a difficult experience. I know there are many here who have been through a similar loss, and feel your grief deeply. There are occasions in life when Scripture does not provide a clearly spoken answer that we wish it did, and I think this may be the case for you at this particular time. When I find myself in a situation like this, I try to focus on the character of God, who loves us very much. So much so that He gave His Son for our eternal salvation. How much, in deed, He must love us! Do we trust that He will hear and respond to our deepest needs? I am reminded of this verse: Matthew 7 8 For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. 9 Or what man is there among you who, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone? We cannot know or begin to fathom all of the wonders of heaven. But you and I can trust God completely that He will give us eternal blessings beyond measure, not a lousy stone. How great is our Father in Heaven! In sympathy Curt |
||||||
71 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Curtnsally | 33204 | ||
In my humble opinion, Genesis is not a "how" story. If God wanted to tell us how He created everything in the universe, it would take a lot more than one book. Genesis is, I believe, a "who" story which tells us "God created". This is the message we take from the book. "In the beginning, God created..." thus the "who" is established. As to evolution: in the study of living things, there is no question that things evolve. This observation is a far cry from the ill-conceived notion that somehow all living things were created through evolution, which is a non-starter both theologically and in the fossil record. This is where scientists and believers get confused. Some scientists try to take micro evolution and turn it into creation. Some Christians try to disavow all evolution as a communist plot... a serious mistake on both sides. We don't have to commit intellectual suicide to be Christians, nor do we have to be atheists to be scientists. Science and theology are both a search for the truth, and in God's world, they are in perfect harmony, as God is the author of all truth. When we seek truth, we should reconcile what we see in science with what we know theologically. If they don't match, we need to review our thinking to see where we are wrong. We should not settle for for bad or contrived "truth" on either side, but seek to find harmony of all truth as best we can... not by disavowing portions of theology or science, but by digging deeper to get to the "real" truth. As Christians, we must be careful not to throw out the baby with the bath water. Just because some folks in the scientific community try to wrongly assert creation through evolution, we should not assert that there is no such thing as evolution just to prove them wrong. I am perfectly comfortable saying, "Living things have evolved (generally within species), but God created them first". This is consistent with Biblical theology and modern science. As scientists, we must not follow those who assert false truth in order to rationalize their own personal theological (or a-theistic) position. We should examine the scientific truth and let facts speak for themselves. God gives us wisdom to understand the knowledge we collect. The beauty of our faith is that we don't have to be ostriches. We can examine theological truth in the full light of science and scientific truth in the full light of Scripture... we know that God makes it all work together... real "truth" is inseperable. To the extent that we can explain the consistencies of Scripture and scientific knowledge (which, as Christians, we believe are harmonious), we gain credibility both as scientists and as theologians. |
||||||
72 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Curtnsally | 33362 | ||
Certainly man has evolved. One has only to look at the height of people now versus colonial times to see this. A quick tour of New England will show most colonial homes had six foot high ceilings... a little short for your average American these days. I could certainly believe that God created everything fully formed, in fact, that is what I believe. But there is ample evidence in the world to show that things have not stayed static. Things have changed. Does this conflict with Scripture? Not that I can find. No one is stating that we should bend Scripture. But there are times when our understanding of Scripture is wrong. This is not a flaw in Scripture, but a flaw in ourselves... our understanding. Or maybe you think the world really is flat, and the earth is the center of the universe? This was commonly held and Scripturally defended for centuries. My point is this, we should not assume that our theological understanding is perfect, nor our scientific understanding. But God created the universe, and the truth of Scripture and science of the universe must match. As Christians, I believe we should be about the business of showing how they do match. This is one way we can be a witness for Christ who is the author of all that is. On your side Curt |
||||||
73 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Curtnsally | 33374 | ||
Hank Thanks for the support. The site, by the way is: www.icr.ORG For others out there, let me clarify my view of creation and evolution. Darwin in Origin of Species said: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." I believe this is the best argument against the Darwinian "creation through evolution" that permeates our pop culture and correlative "pop science". People, including scientists, tend to establish their core beliefs and then use science to support them. The reality is that science is showing many organs which could not evolve into being. The eye is one most commonly considered... how could the eye begin to develop if an organism could not perceive light? And, if there was by some quirk a "spontaneous" development of an optic nerve, how would this lead to the evolutionary development of a lense? Can an organism detect the need for focus in the absense of focus? Would the lense not have to appear fully developed in order to be useful under natural selection? There are many more examples of "irreducibly complex systems" in biology. By Darwin's own measure, continuing scientific research is "breaking down" his theory of "creation by evolution". These troubling questions for the "creation through evolution" scientists are on the table, and the silence of research on this topic has been deafening. Further evidence in the fossil record shows evolution at the micro level "within species or groups" but is lacking evidence of evolution at the macro level ("pond scum to man"). Given the long history of fossils collected, there is no explanation of this short of creation at the species level. Finally, for Christians, we need to be vigilent about science, not hiding from it. God, who created all that is, is the author of all truth. Science and theology must match. When they don't, we should lead the charge to find out why, and not leave it to atheists who redefine science to support their a-theology. We have nothing to fear from science, and no reason to disavow obvious scientific truth. Our goal is to debunk faulty conclusions drawn from valid observations. Our witness to the world is to be the "Daniel" of our time... to explain truths of physical world in light of the truths of the spiritual world. Truth is truth, and God is the author of all truth. Amen! Thanks again Hank Curt |
||||||
74 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Curtnsally | 33399 | ||
My first reaction to your question is: Oh my! There are so many!" Yet, with reflection, you ask a good question. I think we must start with a few definitions. First, I believe Scripture is primarily the history of God's relationship with man. Contained within this history is other information (like the creation account). Second, I believe that science is the study of the physical world... man's observation of things around him and subsequent conclusions about the nature of physical things. Now, let me give an example of science and Scripture matching. First, a simple one: God said, "Let there be light, and there was light". When we look around, there is light! Science and Scripture are in harmony. Science does not address the "God" issue, only the observation of light. Scripture addresses both. Nevertheless, they are in unity. A more complex example might be the flood story. There is considerable extra-Biblical evidence of a significant flood, both in the historic record as well as the world of geophysical observation and study. Often the difficulty in understanding the unity of science and Scripture lies not in the observation of data, but in the conclusions drawn from that data. The world view of the observer nearly always has a strong influence on the conclusions drawn. For example, if you look at the website of the National Center for Science Education, (http://www.natcenscied.org), their purpose is stated as follows: "We are a nationally-recognized clearinghouse for information and advice to keep evolution in the science classroom and "scientific creationism" out." Does this sound like science, or politics based on a particular world view? I think we as Christians must be keepers of the "whole truth", Scripture plus science... that science and theology should be able to coexist as one Truth from God. He did, after all, create the physical world. Did I answer your question? His, Curt |
||||||
75 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Curtnsally | 33441 | ||
Let me try again, starting with a dictionary definition: Science: 1a. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena. b. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena. c. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study. The answer to your first question is no, the presence of light is not science. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of light is science. And that information agrees with Scripture. Scripture further provides that God created the light. This is not in the scientific record. Science records that (most of) the light comes from the sun, the result of nuclear fusion. This is not recorded in Scripture. Is there an intersection of data? Yes. Is there mutually exclusive information? Yes. Is either wrong? No. Do they conflict? Not to me, though others may disagree. Is this concept, in its basic form agreeable with your understanding of Scripture and science? Your second question requires a lot of text. Let me do an end-around, if I might. I attended a lecture by Roger Rusk, highly regarded prof emeritus of physics at the Univ of Tennessee (brother of former Sec State Dean Rusk, if you remember the 60's). He was a solid reformed Christian a well known scientist who had dedicated his retirement years to reconciling science and Scripture. His lecture (3 hours worth) regarded the geophysical evidence in the scientific record that supported the flood story as recorded in Scripture. It was incredible, but I could begin to do it justice here. However, based on that and other study since, I have no problem accepting the flood story as you quoted it from Scripture, and I believe that scientific evidence (insofar as we have it) supports that description. I realize that scientists do not often support Scripture with their conclusions, but this is often as much due to their world view which significantly impacts their conclusion. An example... Here is how the National Center for Science Education describes their mission: "We are a nationally-recognized clearinghouse for information and advice to keep evolution in the science classroom and "scientific creationism" out." (ref http://www.natcenscied.org/). This sounds a lot more political than scientific. Let me ask you a question... do I read between the lines that you don't think Scripture and science should agree? Why or why not? |
||||||
76 | which came first the chicken or the egg | Gen 1:20 | Curtnsally | 33466 | ||
. Thanks for the welcome! A brief response, as I am at work. You conclude with the question: should science and Scripture agree? I accept your observation that they often don't because of world view. I disagree that science is not about discovering truth... this in itself is a worldview question regarding the very nature of scientific study. Ie, Why do we do it? I think science "should" be about discovering truth in the physical realm (this is my world view, others may disagree). Science does not, however, address the spiritual realm, and in this regard you are right... it does not rise to the level of Scripture (or even close). BUT that doesn't mean that they should disagree. Your last comment about proving or disproving theology using science is right on. This is a mis-match of types for sure. BUT, I still hold that Scriptural truth and science should agree when they overlap, as God is the author of all. Regarding the PCUSA, I believe that our denomination (particularly in Baltimore where I live) is a mission field. But I can also tell you that, out of the 12,000 churches in the denomination, you would find theological agreement with 11,000 or more. There are a handful of liberals who make difficulties for all. Take a look at our web site (centralpc.org) and you will see we have a great little (conservative evangelical reformed) church. By the way, we are up to 1,100 hits a day on our church web site with the number one page being "How to become a Christian"! Praise God from whom all blessings flow! Blessings Curt |
||||||
77 | What do we think about Uzza’s death? | Gen 19:26 | Curtnsally | 32226 | ||
Is it any different than Lot's wife? Both failed to trust God, certainly symbolic of the gravity for each of us if we do not trust Him. Yes it is harsh, but I think that is the message. Short answer. PS... You might find the New Testament a little more fun! lol Cheers Curt |
||||||
78 | what was man was jesus talking about | Num 13:16 | Curtnsally | 33870 | ||
JM, You lost me on this one friend, but you obviously have something in mind. What do you think? Jesus was fully God and fully man, the Son of God and the son of man. Add the Holy Spirit and you get the trinity, Father Son and Spirit. Jesus is often described as the Son of God, or the son of man. Can you give me a reference on the Isaiah verse? Your thoughts? Blessings Curt Curt |
||||||
79 | Double portion is really only two-thirds | 2 Kin 2:9 | Curtnsally | 33889 | ||
Hi Tim! So, just to play along, if there were 3 children, did the firstborn get: 50 percent (plus 25 plus 25) ie twice the amount of each? or 66 percent (plus 16.5 plus 16.5) ie twice the amount of both? That's my 6 cents worth (after compound interest!) PS Math is hard to relate when all math symbols are illegal characters! Blessings Curt |
||||||
80 | Double portion is really only two-thirds | 2 Kin 2:9 | Curtnsally | 33955 | ||
Hi Indiana Just a sidebar... I take it you are fellow believer in the PCUSA. Glad to know there's another one on this forum, as I am too. Actually, the vote is going quite well for evangelicals in the PCUSA right now, running about 2 to 1 in favor of leaving the "fidelity and chastity" verbage in the Book of Order. God is more mighty than the one of this world! I will also relate that I am on a search committee for a new pastor for our church, Central Pres Baltimore (www.Centralpc.org) Our pastor accepted a call to Highland Park Dallas, 3rd largest in the PCUSA... God is placing strong evangelical pastors in the "high steeple" churches of the denom... a great sign! Anyway, I have been very pleasantly surprised by the quality and number of evangelical pastors in the denom. I think we get disillusioned by all the noise coming from a very small group within the denom who are well versed at manipulating the system to their advantage. Did you know that the number of "more light" and "covenant network" churches... the openly pro gay churches... number less than 100 out of 12,000 churches in the denomination? Contrast this to the thousands of churches that have pro-actively signed on to the "Confessing Church" movement (the pro-evangelical position). In my study of the denomination, I have seen a very strong undercurrent moving back toward the authority of Scripture, the deity of Christ and the core values of the faith. While our church is often the lone voice in the very liberal Baltimore Presbytery, we did manage to get one of our elders elected to represent us at the next General Assembly. This is the first in almost 50 years. Though our church is one of the largest, we have traditionally been boxed out by the liberals. Not this time! My encouragement is growing. By the way, we anoint folks with oil at our healing service... yes, in the PCUSA! Blessings Curt |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ] Next > Last [8] >> |