B. McCausland wrote: You seem to have a problem because you understand the word social in a different way. The term social here has to do with the ills a society experiences as a result of the fall. ---
Norman Thomas, 6 time Socialist Party presidential candidate and what he said about the Democratic Party in 1944.
‚ÄúThe American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of ‚Äėliberalism,‚Äô they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened‚Ä¶. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform."
Socialist Democrat Party is what the wacko left should be calling themselves today. They ain't your granddaddy's Democratic Party any more.
The Quiet Christian wrote: It's a tough call, Mike, and not ridculous. I think you have a valid point, but if someone who is unredeemed stumbles across the truth, does that person's status make that truth less true? What if that person acts on that truth? From the Lord's standpoint, without Christ, that person is still wrong and I get that. But can we not encourage the unredeemed to do rightly, apart from Christ, while encouraging them to come to Christ in saving faith?
Sure can. And when an unredeemed sees and acts on truth, it is still the right thing to do, and is no less truth, though his positional standing has not changed. What is true cannot be made untrue, for what is true is determined by God, not man, right positional standing or not.
No, QC, if a couple oriental Buddhists are doing honorable work, and you work beside them, you mustn't do the same honorable work lest you be unequally yoked. You must quit and come out from among them.
If this sounds ridiculous, there's a reason for it.
Lurker wrote: --- I am proud of my children and grandchildren. To inflate and abuse the biblical definition of proud/pride to suggest that this is an affront to God is just plain ignorance and arrogance as children are an heritage unto the Lord."" ---
Adriel wrote: Left against Right again. The Democrat Liberalist socialist movement, predominantly on the Left, today is growing in hostility because it cannot get all the voters they would like. But this is becoming something more than politics whether in state or religion. Domination over all hearts and minds is their primary aim. ---
Fortunately, noisy gibberish doesn't convert into votes. Media cooperation with noise also doesn't convert into votes. Look how noisy Jim/Lincoln is capable of being. How many here has he converted to the left?
James Thomas wrote: --- Thank you Mike for sharing your thoughts and stirring my grey matter up a bit.
Thank you for all your work, James. Hope you enjoyed your grandparent duties! Sorry for the lack of/late response, but life often gets in the way of our plans. In any case, I know we approach Scripture differently, so I won't say much. They are secondary issues in reality, not worth long struggling with brothers or sisters over.
A short story: I admit to reading literally unless it can be clearly, simply shown to be otherwise. It's how I was brought to leave the RCC after spending my first 29 years with it. I just could not make sense of what I spent my life believing, when the Bible clearly said said that which was contradictory to my upbringing. The Lord saw fit to let me find a 200 year old Bible in the attic of a house we bought, led me to read some of it, and led me to believe what it said. No coincidence. Where was truth? I could believe what it said, or I could believe what was taught by the RCC. Choosing the Scripture had no alternative, or more correctly, the Lord made it obvious by leading me to those chapters and verses which I needed to see truth. I looked for no hidden meanings. And here I am, warts and all.
Interesting they go after the often less than notable dangers of the far right, so called, but ignore the left wing-nuts who actually burn things, shout down opposition, hate everything, (not just people of different coloration) and are an angry lot of whiners who try to force others to comply with their mental aberrations.
From the news: "..the (Chinese)government was stepping up efforts to restrict travel and public gatherings while rushing medical staff and supplies to the city at the center of the crisis, Wuhan, which remains on lockdown with no flights, trains or buses in or out."
Also: "A notice from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing said there would be limited capacity to transport U.S. citizens on a Tuesday flight from Wuhan that will proceed directly to San Francisco."
Dangerous enough for lockdown for the Chinese folk, but apparently not to US citizens headed to San Francisco or the west coast?
Any news of quarantine until assurance of no issue when they arrive? If not, which might it be, over-reaction of the Chicom govt, or a need to manufacture a crisis here?
Jim Lincoln wrote: I wouldn't criticize the Catholics are in this March. One might have to be suspicious of the motives of our president, considering his vigorous support of abortion before he decided to become a Republican
Maybe he grew up. Leaving the Dems is a good start.
James Thomas wrote: --- Daniel 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end..... when Compared to Rev 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: So the question becomes....what‚Äôs the book? There is The little book which is opened in Rev 10 which is The book of life. But what‚Äôs the book of life? The gospel aka the grace of God through Jesus Christ. ---
Hi James, I'm sure we won't agree, but I offer this bit-
The "prophecy of this book" of Revelation 22:10 is the same "prophecy of this book" referenced in Rev 22:18, and the "book of this prophecy" of v19. It's also the same book as in Rev 1:11, where John is told to "write in a book" the things he sees, and send it to the 7 *churches.*
As well, the "words of this prophecy" of Rev 1:3 is the same as in Rev 22:18,19.
What's the book of 22:10 and co.? The book of Revelation itself. That which reveals, unveils, discloses. Parables hide, revelation discloses.