Benji, Finish the passage in Philippians 2 add Galatians 4 and Hebrews 12 and otter passages and our Lord came for a very specific purpose. Isaiah reminds us that it pleased the Lord to bruise Him. (We will never comprehend that) We are called to be a servant That doesnât mean we suffer needless abuse Remember Paul tiold those who were servitude to take the opportunity to get out if they could
Jim Lincoln wrote: So this is why so many of the GOP want to defund PBS â
No, the reason to defund PBS and NPR is because they should be allowed to compete in the marketplace on their own without taxpayer subsidies. If their programming is so worthwhile then advertisers will come. If it is not then we don't need to waste taxpayer dollars supporting it.
John UK wrote: Is there a biblical warrant for graduation ceremonies?
Sure John look in Matthew 25 at the parable of the talents, when they servants had done well, they were commended by the Lord.
Paul said he finished His course, and henceforth there was laid up a crown of righteousness for him.
In the Old Testament in the book of Esther chapter 2 after a year the candidates to replace the queen graduated from prep school and one was rewarded for doing it the best.
In the book of Daniel 1 the students spent 3 years in school and the Bible says
18Â Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in, then the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar. 19Â And the king communed with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore stood they before the king. 20Â And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm.
There is a Biblical principle to acknowledge accomplishments of those that have done well. Even when the disciples dropped the ball, our Lord commended their willing spirit.
Frank wrote: I didnât read the article! Brother U.S. using the expression âpulling a Frankâ has a negative connotation to it, so it is a form of sarcasm. âUsuallyâ when I donât read any of an article I will say so. IOW, I am commentating on the comment someone made. There is nothing wrong or misleading when I do that. In this thread, I was simply commenting on what John UK said. I didnât care about the article and I didnât care whether you or John read it or not. But, if you ever think that I should read an entire article, then I will. Most comments on this forum donât concern themselves with the specifics of an article. Are we good now?
My apologies, no criticism or sarcasm intended, I always looked at it as a statement of honesty. I usually read the article but like brother Christopher pretty much skip anything found on the wnd website. I was trying to follow your good example and let JohnUK know that I was commenting on a comment and had not read the article. Sorry it came across as offensive, it was never intended that way.
"This result echoes a 2017 analysis in the same academic journal by a separate team that used variation in channel listings to calculate that Fox News gave Republicans a half-point boost in 2000, building up to a six-percentage-point advantage in 2008 compared with a baseline scenario in which the channel didnât exist....
They did not find a similar significant effect for MSNBC."
Fox News is consistently one the higher watched cable channels and MSNBC is watched by comparatively few. Kinda hard to have an influence when nobody watches your station. Guess when it comes to News channels Americans are avoiding Junky TV.
Not familiar with the group and canât say they are associated with the bad organizations mentioned. Not supporting them but they do have a right to peaceably assemble. Must confess I pulled a Frank here and didnât read the article
Agree Frank the overriding principle is we ought to obey God rather than man. My point was indeed that the culture at the time of the New Testament was completely different than ours. You canât compare apples with oranges. Theyâd we take our directives from how this was addressed in different cultural settings in Scripture
John, I think you know my thinking on your question so I will respond to your question with questions
Do you pass out tracts? Are they in English? Do you listen to sermons in mp3 format from here on SA? Do you have a written copy of the Bible you can carry with you? Do you use motorized transportation to get to your fellowship? When you sing Psalms are you doing so in Hebrew?
None of the above was done by the Apostolic Church
Furthermore we have the Jews in Esther using the laws of heathen lands to turn about what would have been their destruction,.
Neither Nehemiah or Ezra decided that because an opposing group told them to stop that it was the godly thing to do. They both appealed to the law that allowed them to do what they were doing to continue the work. Laws established by heathen kings. The women whose son was raised from the dead by Elisha used the law to get back her property.
Plenty of Scriptural precedent to say it is right to expect the law to be correctly applied to Christians and to use redress that is given to them if it is not
John UK wrote: Quiet Christian, once again, you appear to be saying that you support an alliance "who are simply fighting for the rights of Christians", which thing does not have any biblical warrant, indeed, it is antithetical to the Christianity taught by Jesus Christ.
Paul used his "rights" as a Roman citizen to avoid being scourged and get an apology for being falsely imprisioned.
JohnUK, he Lord did not live in a society where you had been granted the unalienable right by law to freedom of religion and speech, so humanly speaking He could not have claimed any. The comparison to modern day is not valid.
Also, He came for exact purpose of giving His life for HIs sheep (Philippians 2:7,8) so even if He had redress for His grievances He would not have taken it.
the Bible speaks against stealing and the LBTQ community is trying to steal the lawful practices of Christians that have been granted to them via the Constitution. I take it you don't condone stealing and think the practice of it should be stopped.
Claiming lawful privileges is not an abandonment of our position as slaves to our Lord and Savior. There is no commandment to be a doormat for people to abuse.
"Oregonâs **Democrat-controlled** House passed legislation that will ensure that LGBTQ issues are included in public school curricula, including elementary grades....Gov. Kate Brown **(D)** signed the bill into law on June 4. It goes into effect on January 1, 2020. The summary of the bill states that by September 30, 2026, textbooks and instructional materials for the above courses should include âperspectives of individuals who are .. lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.â âŚthere is no available opt-out for students who do not wish to be exposed to the materialâ
This is the party that Jim from Lincoln and Pulitzer Prize winning writer George Will want you to vote into power.
That is another thing that should be noted that is true of posts here, Hello.
Both John Yurich and Jim from Lincoln have as one of the goals of their posts to provoke a response. They say stuff and sit back and wait for the responses to come back. Thus you get the previous post by Jim as an example and John's comment about the length of the piano player's dress. John even lamented once that no responded to his post in which he made a rather unbelievable claim.
Please keep that in mind when observing people's responses to them.
We not here on a 30 person face time conference, so we canât see facial expressions, or hear tone, or watch body language. Our only clues are the words that are typed and how they come across.Â Â I think of the many times people have acknowledged brother Christopher as a Barnabas because of His encouraging and understanding spirit.Â Â It comes across in the words that he posts.
This is why we should pray for wisdom (James 1:5) and grace in the expression of our thoughts. Yet the One of whom the Psalmist stated that grace was poured into His lips sometimes offered sharp rebukes to those He lovedÂ Â (Matthew 16:23) when it was appropriateÂ Â Â Our rule should be, first of all to glorify God in all things, yet also to no strive but be gentle unto all men, to patiently give instruction withÂ Â an attitude of meekness. I do pray that people will forgive me for the times I have not heeded my own musings I am sharing here.Â Â
Hello, hello, hello... wrote: Remember none of us poor sinners possess omniscience so we can't know often the motives of a particular poster.
There is obviously a great deal of truth in saying that we are not all knowing like God is.Â Â But I think before we say we canât tell what peopleâs motives are we should consider the words of our Lord who told us that good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things and an evil man out the evil treasure of his heart evil things, for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
If we cannot see peopleâs attitudes, intentions, and motives in what people write then words are meaningless.Â Â Words express both thoughts and attitudes. Do we sometimes misinterpret or misunderstand, why of course, that is part of being human. I have done more than my fair share of that here.Â Â I try and question is this what you are saying, yet sometimes it is impossible to miss the obvious.Â Â Â
Jim Lincoln wrote: Good article, đ about bad behavior đ
Kind of reminds of Obama's pastor and Obama himself for that matter, read any of his books or notice he told Seinfeld that cursing was how he relieves stress Jimbo? Yet not ONE word of condemnation from you about it. Trump should be called out and condemned for his words, he's got a foul mouth (not the first President with that problem) but your silence about the same behavior from his predecessor is deafening.
Frank wrote: The anti-abortion has always been âgenerallyâ a farce. They have never promoted the death penalty for abortion providers and they have never promoted the death penalty for the women who have murdered their unborn children. They frequently call it murder, but they never call it murder worthy of prosecution for murder. Is that not hypocritical or is it just me? All they have done is try and regulate it or one could say reduce the numbers. How can someone regulate murder? Now, in spite of what I said above, I praise the Lord when He does anything to reduce the numbers of abortions.
Maybe it is just a reality check. The chance of getting a law passed that acknowledges abortion is murder and the mother and the doctor should stand trial has zero percentage of passing. Whereas putting restrictions on that limit the number of babies killed has proven to have success.
Locks on doors certainly doesn't deter all burglaries but we don't say that the lock manufactures are hypocrites because they can't stop all break ins.
Hmmmm, it seems that since Jimâs quote turns out not only to be misleading (by implying that the decrease in those claiming charitable giving deductions meant there was less charitable giving ) but completely false (there was actually an increase in charitable giving) that we would see Jim come to the rescue and apologize for posting what turned out to be fallacious and deceitful material. But all we have so far is Jiminy Crickets. How about it Jimbo, you gonna come clean here?