Don't care what your NAME is.
But you know WHO you are; and I know WHO this is.
However, this judgement will stand for always, which will not be altered on the last day. (Revelation 20:15).
What does "who this is" mean? You?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Don't care what your NAME is.
But you know WHO you are; and I know WHO this is.
However, this judgement will stand for always, which will not be altered on the last day. (Revelation 20:15).
What does "who this is" mean? You?
Barack Obama.
Obama has no way to escape judgement day, and God has no mercy on his soul.
Amen. (Revelation 20:15).
:biglaugh:
I always find it comical when someone thinks they speak for god.
What do you mean, societal retribution?
Well, if you see yourself as "moral" you should.But America is not the only country which can be platform to the Second Coming of Christ. (Matthew 21:43).
So what do I care if American voters have the wrong attitude?
In those terms, no.
To follow a "divine entity" to exact any ultimate justice, which by very definition exceeds any and all "understanding" by we mere mortal creatures, can choose to obey "man's laws".For you, what would be the lesser of two evils?
Revelation 13:8 - and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
So what do you think of this passage?
Do you agree this passage is clear, unequivocal and self-evident to the reader: Certain individuals are preordained to be destroyed by fire on the day of judgement?
Barack Obama.
Obama has no way to escape judgement day, and God has no mercy on his soul.
Amen. (Revelation 20:15).
No. It's God's will that all be saved. Saying that God predestines certain people to Hell is to deny that He loves us and wishes that we be saved.Revelation 13:8 - and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
So what do you think of this passage?
Do you agree this passage is clear, unequivocal and self-evident to the reader: Certain individuals are preordained to be destroyed by fire on the day of judgement?
That was written about 100 lifespans ago, and it seems XIII we are living nowhere near to the time that it was written. Many copies of Revelation dry-rotted over a thousand years ago! It is a waste of time to try and put all of the stuff in that book into the future. You are wasting your time. The time was near. We are far away. Our time is far, far away from that time.Revelation 1:3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.
Well, if you see yourself as "moral" you should.
Responding to the above seemingly political post: USA is a very mixed blood country. I think for our next president we should have a Scotsman. We have a lot of native Scotsmen here. Wouldn't that just be savagely entertaining to have a Scottish president here in the USA? He'd win the vote by a 'Wee margin'. How about an Iroquois? Talk about the end of the world!
Revelation 13:8 - and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
So what do you think of this passage?
Do you agree this passage is clear, unequivocal and self-evident to the reader: Certain individuals are preordained to be destroyed by fire on the day of judgement?
The fact is that Christians here in the USA are wrong to treat black skinned people differently than white skinned people. They were wrong to invade and to conquer the natives who lived here before themselves. Manifest Destiny was wrong. Fear and loathing of homosexuals is wrong. (Even teasing Scottish people is slightly wrong, but sometimes it seems appropriate.)Thank you for divulging your background; but this is nonsense.
You're obviously not referring to Scots people. Why would a Scotsman win a US presidential election by a slight margin in light of the fact Obama won the 2008 election by a considerable margin despite the fact he's a minority?
To win by a 'split decision' would be reminiscent of JFK's election in 1960; but Catholics would no longer be considered a 'minority' in the 21st century.
However, non-white minorities may still encounter the same resistance, prejudice, and opposition now as JFK did back in 1960.
Although American voters have a right to choose or reject a candidate based on whatever grounds, they don't have a 'right' to comment on the reasons behind it; for the 1st Amendment is not necessarily consistent, and concordant with God's law, and God's will.
Secular law is not the same as religious law (or God's will); and God doesn't need to justify what He does in front of the creation before He destroys it.
However, it would be incorrect to assume that Christian voters are the only ones who would oppose minorities in a US presidential election; for the holocaust in Revelation 20:15 is not the exclusive reserve of Christians only, but all people will stand in judgement before God on the last day.
The atonement of Christ implies that Jesus will be God's spokesman on the day of judgement. God's will and the will of Jesus are one and the same. (Revelation 13:8).
Revelation 13:8 - and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
So what do you think of this passage?
Do you agree this passage is clear, unequivocal and self-evident to the reader: Certain individuals are preordained to be destroyed by fire on the day of judgement?
No, to be "moral" means to refuse or resist President Obama's attempt to "recruit" such a foreign national into US politics.
But on the other hand, it would be IMMORAL to expect a foreign national to leave his country behind to immigrate to the USA with the express purpose to run for office.
Think about it. If God had wanted such a person to run for office in America, surely it stands to reason such a person would've been born in the USA instead of some other place. If God is all-powerful he could easily have arranged for such a person to be born in America instead of some other country.
Evidently, God never intended such a person to be American, nor to run for office in the USA; otherwise, s/he would've been born in America, and there would be no conflict of interest, cultural difference or ideological contention.
And I don't give a damn about what Rowan Williams said; for his interpretation of resisting God's will is nothing but his own opinion; but you have to seriously ask how it can be against God's will to refuse President Obama's invite to run for office in America; especially if such a person is a foreign national, is not an American citizen, has been singled out from the rest of the crowd, but doesn't like your country at all.
So to hell with Obama's agenda; and to hell with the Archbishop.
Just get it through your thick skull such a person will never set foot on American soil, s/he is not American, and will never run for office in your god-forsaken country.
This is the best MORAL advice and argument I can give you. So take it or leave it.
All I can offer in rebuttal is that the majority of voting Americans, in the last two elections running, is that "conservative" candidates LOST, and not by only significant margins...
..so to ever claim that you choose to speak for the "majority" of Americans, is just plain dumb stupid.
Unless of course you choose to speak for the Almighty as the ultimate authority, in which case we might fairly assume you are WRONG.
We need not (and should not!) take everything written in the bible as literally true. We are under no instruction to do so, nor are we under any compunction to do so. We are free to take from the bible what we find inspirational and wrestle with the rest. Revelation is a highly metaphoric writing, and not to be taken literalistically. Too many people take Revelation way too seriously. It leads to too many wacko theological constructions. Like some of them presented here.Revelation 13:8 - and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
So what do you think of this passage?
Do you agree this passage is clear, unequivocal and self-evident to the reader: Certain individuals are preordained to be destroyed by fire on the day of judgement?
Revelation 13:8 - and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
So what do you think of this passage?
Do you agree this passage is clear, unequivocal and self-evident to the reader: Certain individuals are preordained to be destroyed by fire on the day of judgement?