 |
| 
BJS
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2001
Total Posts : 587
| Posted 5/8/2003 5:41 AM (GMT -6) |   | You're very welcome, Tim. 
Brett
"Siste viator et memento mori." | | Back to Top | | |
 |
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 5/8/2003 5:49 AM (GMT -6) | | Before I go any farther with this, can we all agree that none of us really knows the "answer"? That there are sincere christians on both (or all) sides of the debate and that we aren't calling into question someone's salvation by arguing?
I love argument, as long as I don't perceive it as personal. To me this is an academic, philosophical debate that has been going on for centuries. There is no definitive answer,
I just want to be clear about that.
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true."
- James Branch Cabell | | Back to Top | | |
|
BJS
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2001
Total Posts : 587
| Posted 5/8/2003 6:43 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Before I go any farther with this, can we all agree that none of us really knows the "answer"? That there are sincere christians on both (or all) sides of the debate and that we aren't calling into question someone's salvation by arguing?
I love argument, as long as I don't perceive it as personal. To me this is an academic, philosophical debate that has been going on for centuries. There is no definitive answer,
I just want to be clear about that.
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true."
- James Branch Cabell
Has anyone suggested otherwise?
Brett
"Siste viator et memento mori." | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/8/2003 7:04 AM (GMT -6) | | RD: Before I go any farther with this, can we all agree that none of us really knows the "answer"?
Tom: To which question?
RD: That there are sincere christians on both (or all) sides of the debate and that we aren't calling into question someone's salvation by arguing?
Tom: For sure. There are sincere brothers and sisters on both sides of this particular issue.
RD: I love argument, as long as I don't perceive it as personal.
Tom: You just don't like anything "personal" do you?  Juuust kindding, Gina. You're right. None of this is personal.
RD: To me this is an academic, philosophical debate that has been going on for centuries. There is no definitive answer.
Tom: Yeah, I think on some of these issues we all have to admit that we could be wrong. That doesn't mean we can't know for sure that a particular answer to a questoin is a WRONG answer. I don't know the answer to "How many stars are in the universe?" but I know a lot of wrong answers. So I'll agree that we don't have final, definitive answers to a lot of things, but I think we can know what a lot of the wrong answers are to these questions. This is partly why I embraced open theism. I found determinism and classical Arminianism to be providing wrong answers to many of the questions about the nature of God's relationship to us. I'm not convinced that open theism has pat answers to everything either. I just think it has fewer holes than other approaches.
Tom 
| | Back to Top | | |
|
DLW
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2457
| Posted 5/8/2003 7:44 AM (GMT -6) | | I would point out that there wouldn't be so much heat on this subject if, as is pointed out in Dorrien's "The Remaking of Evangelical Theology", having the most systematic theology had not been the criteria used for determining who would provide the leadership for White Neo-Evangelicals in the USA.
Calvinists have had a somewhat higher standing than Arminians in the past due the greater rigor of their theology. As such, when open theism shows the unreasonableness of aspects of their theology, it does potentially tip the balance of power that had been settled.
From a sociology of religion perspective, there is more going on than just interpreting scripture and systematic theology.
dlw
Prayer from Kenya
From the Cowardice that dare not face new truth,
From the Laziness that is contented with half-truth,
From the Arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
Lord Deliver Me. | | Back to Top | | |
|
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 5/8/2003 11:24 AM (GMT -6) | |
Tom: This is SO not true. How does the fact that we’re debating at all prove determinism?
It doesn't. I was kidding.
Tom: Not even close. Such silliness isn’t worthy of the title “prayer” in my opinion. If you’re interested in caricatures, RD, I could suggest a prayer which seems to me to sum up your position:
That "prayer" was satirical. The point was that when someone prays, if it is petitionary prayer, everyone acts as though God has the power to grant the request. Whether youre praying for someone's safety, for someone's salvation, for their health, you are doing so b/c you believe that God has the power to work miracles, to protect people, heal people, and so on. Most Christians would agree. So the point is, if you agree with that for the purposes of prayer, why is it so hard to believe that God does control things?
“Oh Unmovable God of Control! It’s such a comfort to know that you unconditionally predetermine the words I now speak, along with everything else that’s happening in the world. Even when I don’t pray, you determine that too! What an awesome God. You always get what you want. The world runs like a finely tuned watch, Lord. You’re the author and we’re just actors in your novel acting out our predetermined scripts. Whatever path my life takes, I know you planned each detail and that even if I wind up in hell, that’s your good pleasure and you get glory from that too.”
Actually, although I know you're trying to be sarcastic, this prayer ain't too bad. Yes, the world does run according to God's plan. He has planned each detail . I don't have a problem with it.
Is God more glorified by unconditionally pre-programmed worship than by PERSONS who worship out of the overflow of a personal experience with God? See, Gina, you’re driving the wedge here between “relating personally in love” to God and “worshipping God in reverence and awe.” You think the latter can be performed without the former. I don’t. The less we know his love and love him, the less we worship.
YOu're just ignoring the fact that the reason the universe is here AT ALL, if you believe in God, is that he created it. He stacked the deck, so to speak, by choosing to create at all. I don't pretend to know why God desires us to worship him. I don't know why he created the universe. There is some reason- was he just sitting there one day and decided, hey, I'm going to make the universe- and I'll make people! I don't know. I do know that if I believe he is an omnimax being, he did not NEED to create the world or us in it. So in my opinion, he created us for his glory. Just as he created the heavens, and the angels, etc.
Tom: Then worship is not a choice. And if it’s not a choice, is it even worship?
Of course, the act of worship is worship - you didn't reply to when I said, what about when every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess? Does that mean at that point, every person shall freely do so? If so how could God state that in the bIble a couple thousand years ago?
Tom: Let me ask you a question, Gina. When Jesus was here on earth, do you think the disciples considered Jesus theier best friend?
I'm sure some of them considered him their friend. But others considered him the Messiah- who was to be setting their people free and ruling on the earth!! They were disappointed when he was crucified, b/c they thought it was all over. That he could not have been the messiah, b/c he didn't fulfill that prophecy the way in which they believed he should have.
Regardless, Jesus was a historical person. You don't know him physically. When you say "Jesus is my best friend"- I don't get the concept. God is a Spirit, he was manifested physically, but no longer is.
Sorry. Jesus IS my best friend. He knows me better, loves me more, and has more invested in me than any other person. He died for me. I love him more and have more invested in my relationship with him than any other person in my life. I tell him everything, love to be with him, am grieved when my sin temporarily interrupts our fellowship, and love to do what pleases him. I’m wild crazy in love with God.
Good for you. I don't see how you're saying anything other than emotional platitudes here though.
Know what blows me away, Gina? This: God would rather spend five minutes with me in honest conversation than he would create a galaxy of stars.
Really? How do you know that? I don't find anything at all in the Bible that would support that statement.
But I imagine God would love to see you as comfortable as possible being as intimate as possible with him. You don’t even have to be an open theist to believe this!
Well, we have a difference of opinion. I think God doesn't care so much about my level of comfort as in worshipping and obeying him.
Maybe you’ll eventually get up the courage to follow God’s lead and take a spin.
Ad hominem attack here.
Can I ask a personal question, Gina? When you worship God, do you ever just tell God, maybe over and over again, “I love you”? Sorry to pry. It’s not my right. But I would be interested in knowing if you don’t mind sharing.
Sure, I "love" God. But saying you love him isn't worth that much. Many people throw the word "love" around lightly. Very easy to say, very difficult to act.
Tom: but in the end WE, not our influences, resolve ourselves in love for or rejection of God and WE, not our influences, will face the consequences.
This is the objection of Calvinism, as you know. WE are the ones determining our own destiny. I just don't believe it. I don't believe we are saved through our own decision to accept or reject. I believe in God's grace. That's just the difference again in our opinions.
Tom: Then what ARE you saying? You appear to view God as capable only of relating to the world in deterministic ways, period. If you admit that our loving God is NOT within God’s control to determine, then we agree. Do we agree?
I don't understand the question.
Tom: A “personal” relationship is by definition a relationship between persons.
Yes, and I believe God is a spirit and not a person.
Therefore, you cannot possibly know that your pets “know you love them” in a personal way. How would you demonstrate THEIR knowledge of such a thing? Tailing wagging? Purring at your feet?
No, my pets don't love me in a personal way. They love me in an animal way. I love God in a human way. It is imperfect, it is fallible, it is not what i define as "personal."
Are you suggesting that your relationship to your pets is analogous to your relationship to God, that you relate to God as your pets relate to you (with as much free will as dogs have)?
Well, I look at it this way. For one thing, man is an animal, man is a mammal (according to science). We share many of our genes with the lower intelligence animals. But, I did not CREATE my pets. God created them. God also created me. The relationship is between God (creator) and human (created). I can't think of it, that verse in Romans, where God says something like, "I am the one who created you. Does the pot ask the potter, why am I this way? Who are you to ask that?"
Tom: our relationship with mentally handicapped children will, because of the limitations of such handicaps, not be able to reach its God-given potential in terms of “mutuality.”
Agreed. But my point was, there can be a loving a warm relationship between a parent and her mentally handicapped child. It can be completely satisfactory to both parties. The "free will" of the child is not there completely, but so what? It is still a relationship. Similarly, the love between a parent and baby- even though that baby cannot comprehend much or exercise its free will (if i conceded free will's existence ). WHat's wrong with that? Are you saying that's a lesser relationship just b/c the baby is not mature enough to make decisions? Is the love any less real?
That's what i've said before here, why is the love between God and humans any less real if the person does not have libertarian free will? I still haven't heard a convinicing answer,
Tom:you have more in common with God than you do with your pets and why it is possible for you and God to relate personally and lovingly to each other in ways you and your pets can never relate to each other.
Uh, I don't know about that. Are you saying a human is closer to God than he or she is to the animals? I don't know. God created us all. I wouldn't deign to think that I , the created, am anywhere close to the level of the creator.
Tom: Then you deny that God is omniscient.
Not so. I've written countless posts here defending classical theism and the classical attributes of God. I do believe omniscience is in contradiction w/ free will, but I have argued that libertarian free will does not exist.
In fact, since our “now” is constantly changing with the flow of time, God’s knowledge of what our “now” is constantly changes. If you want to argue that God is timeless but you agree that we are temporal, AND you agree that God’s knowledge is absolutely immutable, then you have denied God’s omniscience.
How so? If God is outside time and knows all in one, so to speak. I believe that God knows all true propositions, and he knew them before he created the universe.
Time affects the truth-value of some propositions but not others.
Yes, I guess by "absolute truth" I meant moral propositions.
Tom: Where in the world did THAT come from?
Well I'm familiar w/ some open view theologians called process theologians who believe God is evolving from primitive god to complex god. I know that some OV's deny that it is process theology, but many theologians see no practical difference.
Hey, I appreciate the discussion.I am always learning something. thanks
Edited by - TGB on 05/08/2003 03:38:22 AM
Edited by - TGB on 05/08/2003 03:45:49 AM
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true."
- James Branch Cabell | | Back to Top | | |
|
DLW
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2457
| Posted 5/8/2003 11:55 AM (GMT -6) | | Reasonable Doubt:Actually, although I know you're trying to be sarcastic, this prayer ain't too bad. Yes, the world does run according to God's plan. He has planned each detail . I don't have a problem with it.
Is this ultimate Truth as you perceive it? I ask because I am sorry but I could not believe if such were the case.
If we both accept that Exhaustively-Definite-Foreknowledge Omniscience does contradict free will then doesn't your position also undermine the reality of evil in this world?
Have you studied what life is like in under-developed countries? Have you read about the history of Christianity? I focus on the problem of order because I think there has been so much that has gone wrong with this world because of the failure of leadership.
For example, the rise of Islam was due in part to Mohammed's exposure to the "Byzantine", anti-semitic forms of Christianity that developed in the middle-east(It seems Mohammed's intent was to start up a Judaism for Non-Jews as is shown in how he was received by Jews in Jerusalem as a liberator from their Christian oppressors.). The rise of Islam reduced the number of centers of Christianity from four to one and put European Christians into the Dark Ages. If we accept Lord Acton's dictum that power tends to corrupt, so much of the evil perpetrated by Christian leadership may have been avoided if control had not been concentrated in Rome. We could have circumvented the bloodiness and centuries of animosity associated with the Protestant-Catholic schism. Protestant and Catholic Churches would not have had to rely on their respective states to as strong of degree after the 30-year war. This would have prevented them from being captured by the gov'ts with their respective witness deteriorated slowly, as took place in France.
What you see as the God's "Best of all possible Worlds", I see as a huge series of failures that necessitate much faith for one to continue to believe.
dlw
Prayer from Kenya
From the Cowardice that dare not face new truth,
From the Laziness that is contented with half-truth,
From the Arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
Lord Deliver Me.
Edited by - DLW on 05/08/2003 5:45:10 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 5/8/2003 1:56 PM (GMT -6) | | This is NOT meant to work-into-the-flow of this thread. And I have great respect to DLW's craft of discussing, examining, arguing, conversing, etc. So I do't want this to be an interuption. BUT, as something 'perhaps' useful for another moment, I'd like to bring one thing to DLW's eyes (FYIO)
quote:
"if we both accept that Exhaustively-Definite-Foreknowledge Omniscience does contradict free will then doesn't your position also undermine the reality of evil in this world?"
The "Not bad reasoning, but bad assumptions?" thread, at http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2040 mentioned Godel's "Incompleteness Theorem. NOT bringing 'that' up either (I see a parallel of sorts that makes me mention it.) I just want to point out that in my experiences discussing the topic, and seeing arguements from an EDF battlefield (on either "side") I've concluded that the ruts of that battlefield are not necessarily the path to somewhere desirable.
The snag in the carpet of EDF is that it views from within time. And that is not the only possibility to consider! I'd observe, further, that the "EDF" brand of omniscience DOES feel more in conflict with free will than the other "brand" of omniscience. EDF feels quite mechanical. Not as worthy of a Creator. More like something of a being or force within creation. That's why it always seems to me that "Openness" and "EDF" share much in common.
I probably, then, agree with DLW's statement above. But I might not buy into the total package of the Openness campaign--which I'm sure I do not.
You bring something appreciated to this board, DLW.
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 05/08/2003 7:04:37 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 5/8/2003 2:07 PM (GMT -6) | | In the "Not bad reasoning, but bad assumptions? " thread mentioned/LINKED above, Laplace said (with relation to Godel):
quote:
So when we encounter something that seems to violate our conclusions, does it mean that our assumptions were absolutely wrong? No, perhaps just wrong in context.
That pretty much says what I was trying to say above. EDF is a "context." And that particular context IS NOT THE ONLY context possible for Omniscience.
It also strikes me that the "all knowable things that there are to be known" of Boyd's brand of omniscience is in a subset of the EDF model. (Reminds me of the "null set" in math. Still "foreknowable" even is "un-foreknowable-because.)
The Creator God knows as Creator. And THAT context is BEYOND our context as creatures.
Simply, Free Will for us is PART OF the creation and the purpose of God, and the purpose he has for us. THAT is of the first set of things we need to know. Other things had better find their place behind or along side of that.
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 05/08/2003 7:14:02 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/8/2003 8:21 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom: If you admit that our loving God is NOT within God’s control to determine, then we agree. Do we agree?
RD: I don't understand the question.
Tom: OK. Earlier you admitted that love cannot be controlled. You also now admitted that you love God. So, I assumed that you believe your choice to love God was not in God’s control to determine either way. And yet you believe God unconditionally determined every detail of history (which would presumably include determining you to love God). My math might be off, but it looks to me that you are making two contradictory claims: 1) It does not lie in God’s control to bring it about that you love him, and 2) God alone determined that you would love him.
Do I still need to ask a question?
RD: I don't believe we are saved through our own decision to accept or reject. I believe in God's grace. That's just the difference again in our opinions.
Tom [Breathing a long sigh]: There’s no difference of opinion in what’s affirmed here, just your misunderstanding. We open theists don’t believe our choice “saves” us and we also believe in God’s grace.
Oh to be understood.
RD: I believe God is…not a person.
Tom: THIS, ladies and gentlemen, is at the heart of the debate! More than that even. This IS the debate. Nothing else really matters. I’ve suspected for some time that at the heart of the deterministic worldview is the denial of God’s personhood, the denial that God is a personal being and that God engages in personal relations with us. Never thought I’d hear a determinist admit it. I appreciate your honesty RD.
And I’ll add this—there’s no use whatsoever in discussing much of anything else about God without zeroing in on this first.
Tom
John-
I apologize for getting us off track. We're supposed to be discussing gratuitous evil. So, I guess you can see that determinists don't believe in gratuitous evil since every evil is determined by God for a specific purpose that glorifies God. The gratuitous folk are over on the other end of the spectrum.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 5/9/2003 12:57 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Tom: Not even close. Such silliness isn’t worthy of the title “prayer” in my opinion. If you’re interested in caricatures, RD, I could suggest a prayer which seems to me to sum up your position:
“Oh Unmovable God of Control! It’s such a comfort to know that you unconditionally predetermine the words I now speak, along with everything else that’s happening in the world. Even when I don’t pray, you determine that too! What an awesome God. You always get what you want. The world runs like a finely tuned watch, Lord. You’re the author and we’re just actors in your novel acting out our predetermined scripts. Whatever path my life takes, I know you planned each detail and that even if I wind up in hell, that’s your good pleasure and you get glory from that too.”
I don’t think you pray like that. Actually, I often pray like this:
“Father, thank you for inviting me to be a part of what you’re doing in the world. It’s an awesome mystery that I’ll never completely understand, but your Word invites me to present my requests with thanksgiving and to intercede for the nations and to believe that I can make a difference. I don’t want to miss an opportunity to be used by you in prayer that impacts the world if even in a small way. So grant me insight, Lord, into the needs that surround me. Help me understand the needs of my generation so I can pray intelligently and in sync with your purposes. Give me your heart for people and direct me as make myself available to you now.”
"you unconditionally predetermine the words..."
This does not appear to make man free, nor God. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 5/9/2003 4:42 AM (GMT -6) | | TGB
quote:
“Oh Unmovable God of Control! It’s such a comfort to know that you unconditionally predetermine the words I now speak, along with everything else that’s happening in the world. Even when I don’t pray, you determine that too! What an awesome God. You always get what you want. The world runs like a finely tuned watch, Lord. You’re the author and we’re just actors in your novel acting out our predetermined scripts. Whatever path my life takes, I know you planned each detail and that even if I wind up in hell, that’s your good pleasure and you get glory from that too.”
Amen brother. Would you pray for my grandmother as well? Thanks.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
She died in 1980.
Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through? | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 5/9/2003 6:18 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
John-
I apologize for getting us off track. We're supposed to be discussing gratuitous evil. So, I guess you can see that determinists don't believe in gratuitous evil since every evil is determined by God for a specific purpose that glorifies God. The gratuitous folk are over on the other end of the spectrum.
No problem, TGB. I got a satisfactory answer back on the first page. :)
By the way, I understand you are working on a Bible translation. Would you be interested in responding (in another thread) to a couple of questions I have about translations?
Specifically:
1. What do you think of Lamsa's translation? (I realize many do not think it reflects good scholarship, I'm just asking what you think of it).
2. I've heard that in the Aramaic and Syriac that the definitions of biblical words such as, justification, sanctification, salvation, etc. have different connotations than the Greek terms in the Greek NT. In your opinion is this true? and would you care to elaborate?
Thanks.
John E
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
Edited by - John Earp on 05/09/2003 11:46:43 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 5/9/2003 1:16 PM (GMT -6) | | i wanted to back RD on her last post. I thought it was wonderful and that she did a great job backing her stance. Way to go. I hope to post more later.
g n p
borg
a puritan prayer:
"All praise to thee for electing me to salvation, by foreknowledge of Godthe Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinklin of the blood of Jesus.
I bless thee for these lively excercises of faith, for the righteousness that is mine in Jesus, for grace to resign my will to thee; I rejocie to think that all things are at thy disposal and I love to leave them there. Then prayer turns wholly into praise, and all I can do is to adore and love thee."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/9/2003 1:44 PM (GMT -6) | | John: No problem, TGB. I got a satisfactory answer back on the first page. :)
Tom: Good! I guess that makes all the pages that followed…GRATUITOUS!
About translation, I’m sorry I’ve never read Lamsa’s work. And I don’t know Aramaic or Syriac either, so I can’t help you out on that one. Gee, I’m a big help!
The translation I work with is a translation from the Hebrew and Greek into modern Arabic targeting Muslim readers. The NT was finished more than ten years ago (the work of one man, an Egyptian) and the OT was finished two years ago about the time I came on board. So I’ve been mostly reviewing and (with others on the committee) suggesting changes and fine tuning things before we lock up the text for a few years. It confuses people to keep coming out each year with a revised translation.
The fun started eighteen months ago when we decided to take this translation and make a Study Bible version of it for Muslim readers (notes, glossaries, articles, cross references, etc.). We’re about half finished.
Because our translation targets Muslim readers of Arabic, we employ an Arabic that they are more comfortable with. So key terms (salvation, justification, etc.) as well as proper and place names are translated using words Muslims (as opposed to traditional Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Arabs in the Middle East) use when talking about spiritual things.
-----------------------
borg, do you agree with RD that God is not a person (is not personal and does not therefore engage in personal relationships with us)?
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
DLW
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2457
| Posted 5/9/2003 1:58 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
i wanted to back RD on her last post. I thought it was wonderful and that she did a great job backing her stance. Way to go. I hope to post more later.
g n p
borg
perhaps an alternative link might be appropriate since this one is supposed to be about gratuitous evil. I think my synoptic history of the structure of the Christian Church is a good example of gratuitous evil. The rise of anti-semitism, Islam, corruption of the Church, virulent relations between different sects are top candidates in my mind for gratuitous evils.
dlw
Prayer from Kenya
From the Cowardice that dare not face new truth,
From the Laziness that is contented with half-truth,
From the Arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
Lord Deliver Me. | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 5/9/2003 2:35 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
perhaps an alternative link might be appropriate since this one is supposed to be about gratuitous evil. I think my synoptic history of the structure of the Christian Church is a good example of gratuitous evil. The rise of anti-semitism, Islam, corruption of the Church, virulent relations between different sects are top candidates in my mind for gratuitous evils.
dlw
One of the things my mom said was this; that it is amaising how much God gets done sometimes *inspite* of people. | | Back to Top | | |
|
DLW
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2457
| Posted 5/9/2003 2:57 PM (GMT -6) | | Amen,
Brother!!
dlw
Prayer from Kenya
From the Cowardice that dare not face new truth,
From the Laziness that is contented with half-truth,
From the Arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
Lord Deliver Me. | | Back to Top | | |
| 68 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 8:52 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|