stevenr wrote:
...GS, I'd love to see what your hair looks like. I prefer to wash, then rinse and repeat... Seems like your way would leave some soap scum.

pennelope wrote:
she'd take the whole world down with her if she could.

Dave wrote:
He's showed up on a Bush track safe and sound.
Praise the Lord.
Thankyou for your prayers

Dave wrote:
G'day, 6 yr old down syndrome boy has been missing in the scrub at beechworth, a small town in the hills near me, since y'day. It's been cold and rainy.
I'm asking for prayer please, safe return of this precious little being.
My heart goes out to the family.

pennelope wrote:
Brother GS, ....we can stand up for the truth regarding protecting the sacred marriage vow....the greatest problem we have in this area is that Christians are too afraid to speak up about it... so why should Trump?
....it is our job as the church to be the light. Watch the churches crumble on this issue because of the Johnson Amendment.... they cannot shut their doors to a she-man who wants to use their bathrooms either.

GSMontana wrote:
Rodney K. from Tennessee writes:
Jim,
We should pray for her. We should not vote for her.
Like I said in another thread, Jim is a true believer in the Democratic Party. If Trump were running as a Democrat Jim would be telling us how Trump is better than the Republican candidate.

just a nobody wrote:
"Not a few Christian friends stand aloof from the Temperance movement on the ground that its supporters are censorious. So censorious that some of them will hardly admit the piety of those who do not join their ranks. The best way of setting this objection aside is by honestly confessing the truth. Abstainers at least some of them have been far too much given to sit in judgment upon others. They have thus not only done and spoken what was sinful but they have sadly hindered their own cause. The writer of this knows not a few who have been repelled from Abstinence societies nay from the fellowship of abstaining friends solely by the censoriousness which was exhibited. Union with the Temperance Society seemed to be made a test of union to Christ The injury thus done has been wide and great." - Horatius Bonar
He was writing this FOR an abstinence society in favor of abstinence. Just some food for thought...

1517 wrote:
Politics aside, she should remain in all of our prayers.

Observer wrote:
In terms that someone may understand:
Obligeth it me to point out YET AGAIN that on this thread 2 women which vaunteth their Christ mindedness nevertheless contrary to Rom 14.1 did doubtfully dispute and not only scorneth those of weaker faith, but did much dispute and contend to exhaust the patience of the weaker brethren and then when it was pointed out to them that their vaunting was in vain because for they didst judge the brethren (contrary to Rom 14.4) they did much clamor (contrary to Prov 9.13) to be justified and didst continue without abating to be contentious (Prov 27.15) and wouldst not hearken to the admonitions or rebukes of the brethren but did fairly dissimulate holiness, sobriety and godly wisdom to lord it over God's heritage (contrary to 1 Peter 5.3). The brethren being exhausted wisheth for the desert (Prov 21.19) so that their sore trial may be over.

GSMontana wrote:
3/4 of Hillary supporters are low information voters, and rest are radical liberals. She only appeals to the lowest common denominator.

Christopher000 wrote:
Rodney Wrote:
How apt!
How apartment? I don't get it.
Good morning.

Geoff wrote:
“But unto the wicked God saith, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth? Seeing thou hatest instruction, and castest my words behind thee.”
‭‭Psalms‬ ‭50:16-17‬

Angela Wittman wrote:
Sorry, pennelope, but you and I must be looking at Phil Johnson's article differently because I didn't get that impression about him at all. I'm a former theonomist who had a change of heart after studying the actual works of the Reformers and Protestant history. I would go to Phil Johnson for help if I were being persecuted because I think he is genuine and would lay down his life for a fellow believer. Can we please keep in mind that violating the Ninth Commandment is serious business and God hates those who murder people's reputations?

Frank wrote:
Jim from Lincoln, this is from a pro-life site so it is biased towards doing the right thing. Notice how it is worded versus your pro-death agenda. 99.99999 percent of abortions are for convenience sake; plain and simple. Whatever percent that is left, should be done in accordance with the below. This is just so you don’t confuse anyone by raising the issue of the mother’s life as an excuse to murder babies.
"When the life of the mother is truly threatened by her pregnancy, if both lives cannot simultaneously be saved, then saving the mother’s life must be the primary aim. If through our careful treatment of the mother’s illness the pre-born patient inadvertently dies or is injured, this is tragic and, if unintentional, is not unethical and is consistent with the pro-life ethic. But the intentional killing of an unborn baby by abortion is never necessary."

pennelope wrote:
free churches would not have this problem, only those that have incorporated themselves under the headship of these very regulations.

From the article wrote:
It controversially suggests that churches may fit that category. “Even a church could be seen as a place of public accommodation if it holds a secular event, such as a spaghetti supper, that is open to the general public,” the guidance notes. The specific criteria involved in classifying something as “secular” have yet to be outlined.

Attorney Matt Sharp for Alliance Defending Freedom contends that the law is a major violation of First Amendment rights, and that the guidance takes significant liberties by suggesting that a church could be considered public accommodations simply because it hosts an event such as a “spaghetti supper.”

Observer wrote:
OOS

Christopher000 wrote:
Hannah's one lucky lady.