![Nathaniel Webb Profile](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1886983776661557248/4HhgH37r_x96.jpg)
Nathaniel Webb
@NathanRWebb
Followers
157
Following
3K
Statuses
1K
Christian, Sinner, Husband to Jenna, Father to 6, Businessman, Software Developer, Preacher, and Believer that Jesus can, and will, change the World
Jackson, TN
Joined March 2012
@abbythelibb_ “To save his marriage”…. Wow, but no, he lost his marriage. That’s like saying adultery helps keep marriages together. How about husbands and wives just cling to Jesus and go through the hell it takes to get to a better place together? 100% worth it in the end. Always
0
0
0
@GuntherEagleman No doubt about it. It's absolutely crazy the lengths he is going to in order to please the American people and do what's right. No hiding away in his estate, he is out with the people he's fighting for.
0
5
43
@SchrodingrsBrat Absolutely! Homeschooling is really great as it allows you to take the time to teach your kids these things
0
0
0
I’m trusting this guy’s history, but he is dead on about the issue. It’s the Islamic Jihad that’s the problem, and a two state solution won’t fix it, it will just make it worse.
Listen up. I am Jordanian, and I tell you that the two-state solution is dead, stone cold. And I’ll tell you why. Back in 1994, when Yitzhak Rabin was ready to hand the Palestinians a state on a silver platter, who was the loudest voice against it? Benjamin Netanyahu. And what did the world call him? A radical, an enemy of peace, a warmonger. Even inside Israel, many thought he was being extreme. But was he? Bibi’s argument was simple: You don’t hand a state to people who openly declare that your country has no right to exist and that their ultimate goal is to wipe you off the map. That’s not a “peace process”, that’s national suicide. He understood the security risks. A Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) would leave Israel a mere 9 miles wide at its narrowest point. That’s nothing. That’s an easy invasion route. That’s a security nightmare. It would take minutes to cut Israel in half and massacre its people. But did Israel listen? Of course not. In 2000, Ehud Barak came back and sweetened the deal. He offered Arafat a state again. Thank God Arafat said no. And why did he say no? Because he never wanted a state, he wanted Israel gone. Fast forward to 2005. Ariel Sharon tried another approach. He said, “Fine, let’s give them a test run.” So he pulled every single Jew out of Gaza, 70,000 settlers, forcibly removed. He even went so far as to dig up Jewish graves to ensure Gaza was 100% Judenrein. No excuses left. The Palestinians had a chance to prove they could run a state. So what did they do? Did they build hospitals, schools, and infrastructure? Did they work on nation-building? Did they take this golden opportunity and create a thriving mini-state to prove to the world that they were ready for independence? Nope. Instead, they turned Gaza into a terrorist launchpad. Since 2005, Gaza has been a rocket factory, a jihadist training camp, and a tunnel network straight out of a horror movie. Billions in aid poured in, and instead of building a future, Hamas built weapons to destroy Israel. So let’s go back to the original question: Who was right, the dreamers who kept offering the Palestinians a state or Bibi Netanyahu, who warned them this would be a disaster? The answer is clear. Bibi was right. The Palestinians never cared about statehood. They only cared about destroying the Jewish state. And this is the part most people don’t want to say out loud: This conflict was never about “occupation.” That was always a lie. The West Bank and Gaza are just convenient excuses. The real issue is Islamic jihad. Bibi understands this better than anyone. The people Israel has been negotiating with for decades don’t want borders. They want annihilation. It’s not about compromise. It’s about erasing Israel from the map. So, no, the two-state solution isn’t “dying.” It’s already dead. And it’s been dead since the first time Israel tried to make peace with people who don’t believe in peace. Danny Burmawi
0
0
0
@MetzUAC1530 Not sure you are interested in understanding, but no worries. Wish you well and hope we can meet together in glory someday.
1
0
2
@JDean1840615 @MetzUAC1530 But I should be a bit more clear, I am arguing from a Baptist perspective, and I cannot speak broadly for other evangelicals.
0
0
0
William, this seems to be a really overly simplistic view of the scriptures. If we go to Romans 3:28 and Galatians 2:16, we can see that a man is justified (saved) by faith. Baptism is ignored in these places. Now, it would be incorrect for me to take those texts at face value without bringing in the rest of the Scripturs to understand them. Similar to your Baptism text.
1
0
1
@MetzUAC1530 No, but it tells us how we are saved. The question you are posing really isn’t a question about baptism mainly (at least it doesn’t seem so), it is a question about soteriology, the nature of how we are saved and what saves us.
1
0
3
@MetzUAC1530 And I apologize if the statement regarding bringing in all the texts came across rude, I just think that is really key to understanding what Peter meant here appropriately. After all, Peter was the one who was speaking in that Acts text.
0
0
0