John Lee wrote: I wonder if he would have said that God is still in charge if he had not got out of the woods. It's like thanking God for journeying mercies if you get there safely, but leaving him out in the cold if you have a blowout or worse.
Brother, I understand and agree with your thought. If God is all loving and sovereign, then we can thank Him for any circumstances we are put through. A perfect example is the Apostle Paul praised the Lord regardless of his circumstances and his suffering.
Romans 8:28 âAnd we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.â
1 Peter 3:17 âFor it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing.â
Ephesians 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination. 23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it [is] confusion.
Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.
Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Jeremiah 23:14 I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness: they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah.
Watcher wrote: Completely agree Jim. It would take took many compromises to vote for Trump or anyone as far as I'm concerned. I know this won't sit well with y'all patriotic types, but just because something's a lesser evil, it's still evil.
I have always said that Trump in an immoral buffoon. But, I voted for him for the following reason. All politicians pander to their base and Trump pandered to me. Better said, he pandered to those who opposed abortion. I know he wasnât against abortion, but he said he was and I felt because of that perhaps just one little baby might be spared because of that. Anyway, I believe that abortions went down during his time in office.
But, I understand your position about the lesser evil concept. I voted because I thought just one little innocent life might be saved and that was it. I can assure you I didnât vote for any patriotic reasons. When the command to not murder was given, this country didn't exist.
Jim's candidate makes no pretense; abortion on demand.
Jim Lincoln wrote: excerpt from, "Georgiaâs recount revealed no fraud â and just how unfit Loeffler and Perdue really are" https://tinyurl.com/y6ncvkcg excerpt from, "Republican leaders swore an oath to defend the Constitution. That means telling Trump itâs over." https://tinyurl.com/y2gkuhw3 "We are a nation of laws, not tweets': Republican Sens. Romney and Sasse decry Trump efforts to challenge election https://tinyurl.com/y3dwmsbb CV, One of the 6,000,000 of the majority who voted against Trump, want him to accept The election of Joe Bidenâđ
Jim, I asked you this question some years ago and you didnât respond. Since you are posting so frequently, I will ask it again.
Why is it that no one on this Christian forum; no one thinks you are a Christian? Now I donât believe in a herd mentality, but I am saying that no one does.
I am not trying to be nasty or cruel, but this has perplexed me for many years. And if you agree with my thought, why do you continue to post?
Could so many Christians be wrong about this? Your continued posting is what makes me pretty certain you are a paid troll. Or perhaps someone in a cult like Obama was?
Gender is described as a âsocial constructâ therefore students are taught they can reject or modify their âsex assigned at birthâ to something that FEELS truer to oneself. (p. 58) Examples of gender include, but are NOT LIMITED to: male, female, transgender, androgenous, agender, gender expansive, genderqueer, nonbinary, two-spirit, intersex, or questioning.
No, God created us as male and female. And there is nothing science, psychology or medicine can do to undo that.
Isaiah 3:9 The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves.
Colin wrote: Instruct those who are rich in this present world not to be conceited or to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy. Instruct them to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, storing up for themselves the treasure of a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is life indeed. â 1 Timothy 6:17-19 Paul doesnât rebuke Christians who are rich. Itâs a matter of motivation and intention. Who is your master? Mammon or God? I believe I heard it said that JC Penney the founder of the franchise was a Christian and lived on 5% of his earnings. He gave 95% away. I donât know if itâs true but itâs a beautiful story.
Yes, JC Penny believed in something that is called a progressive tithe. IOW, if you were poor you tithed 10 percent, but if wealthy it could go up to what he did. I have also heard that he drove around in a sort of beat up pick-up truck.
I have no idea about his Christian testimony, but I understand he was raised in a Christian home. I also understand that some catholic monks give up "all" their possession and live in poverty.
Any links on his Christian testimony would be appreciated.
James 5:1 Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
2Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten.
3Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.
4Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth.
5Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter.
6Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you.
True riches is the Kingdom of Heaven! The rich young ruler didnât do the below.
Matthew 13:44 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.
The article used the now commonly accepted phrase; empowering women. Iâm sure we all realize this simply means empowering women to murder their unborn children. Like Eve, women want something that was not intended for them.
The power that God gave women is largely gone and satanâs empowerment of women is world-wide.
The Quiet Christian wrote: Amen, Brotger Frank! The problem is that our society wants to throw off those standards and make up their own as if they are their own gods and the creators of themselves. Really soumds like a Psalm 2 scenario.
Well said brother! One thing seems certain; the world does not want to worship the God of the bible. But, He is the only one there is. Praise His holy name.
The Quiet Christian wrote: Sorry, Brother John, but the Bible was confiscated by George Mason University. Seriously, though, does appear to be a mission field opportunity. I wonder if the Moderators on those sites would permit someone to offer the hope that we share in Christ?
I donât think so brother. It would be like an abortion facility saying that Christians can come in and counsel those seeking to murder their children. You and I discussed this before, that even most professing Christian chaplains cannot present the gospel of our Lord. I have had online debates with Muslims, catholics and atheists. I sort of intruded on them uninvited. None of them yielded at all in spite of making no legitimate argument against my position. I remember the Muslims arguing that the crusades were carried out by Christians and therefore Christianity was evil.
But, I did get to present the gospel, so who knows what happened later.
A moral mandate from God does not change because He doesnât change.
Malachi 3:6 For I [am] the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.
Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so [are] abomination unto the LORD thy God.
Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
The homosexual community doesnât want to be tolerated by Christians; they want to be accepted by them.
The Fix, DiAngeloâs book doesnât leave a lot of leeway for that. For example, DiAngelo claims âwhen a person denies they are racist, this denial is actually proof of both racism and white fragility.â
I didnât read the article, because the above was enough for me. Because I deny that I am a racist and I donât contribute to racism. The below definition is from the internet:
white fragility noun
1.discomfort and defensiveness on the part of a white person when confronted by information about racial inequality and injustice.
And, I detect in myself no defensiveness or discomfort when I ponder this issue or if someone were to accuse me of being a racist. I would speak firmly against that and they would consider my firmness to be guilt. This lady has simply made up her own illogical rules for debate.
If a man can work and chooses not to, then the below applies to him. My only responsibility as a provider is to work hard and place my trust in the Lord to provide.
1 Timothy 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.
I remember once at a homeless shelter talking to one of the leaders. She said that 95% of the homeless choose to be there, but in order to help the 5% that were unfortunate, they had to help all of them. There was no way to separate them out. The below applies to this thought.
2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
John Lee wrote: I remember in the OT (someone will know where) that a person asked God not to give him riches lest he forget God, and for God not to make him so poor that he was constrained to steal in order to live.
I havenât been following this thread but I did note this comment and I agree with your thought. And thanks brother for noting this verse. I do not believe that wealth is a blessing from God. But, I donât believe that loving mammon is âalwaysâ a bank account issue but is always a heart issue. The verse you alluded to fits my thoughts perfectly.
The more someone is given of this world, the more they are likely to love this world. So, when our Lord provides for our necessities, but does not give us abundance, is He loving us less than more?
Proverbs 30:8 Remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me:9 Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the Lord? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain.
Neil wrote: "... the politician to whom you've harnessed your theology to loses." - a grossly exaggerated Red Herring. Supporting this or that public figure does not mean one endorses their whole philosophy as well, faulty reasoning shared with Christians for whom no candidate is worthy of their vote. This conforms to my expectations of lib-arts college professors published on Wa-Po.
Well said Neil! I believe that it is impossible to be a practicing Christian and be elected to public office. So, none of them affect or change my Christian thoughts at all. I voted for Trump because he pandered to me on the abortion issue. And statistics show there were far less murders of little babies in the womb during his term.
The below are the basics of Christian morality and no politician will get elected if they say them:
The Quiet Christian wrote: Amen, Brother Frank. Brother Tim nailed this as well. Unity means submission to their worldview, which is increasingly based on the many strands of Critical Theory and Intersectionality, both of which I've been reading about. Both require an active submission to their "religion" of self-worship thru conscience acts against whatever they say is wrong. It's one thing to agree to disagree, and within certain boundaries, I'm OK with that - like many of us do here on SA. And they will demand unity thru cancelling or crushing their opposition. Our child likened it to Islam.
Thanks brother for your wise thoughts. I sometimes use the "agree to disagree" thought, but only for what I refer to as secondary issues.
The Quiet Christian wrote: O Lord, we lift to You our Brother John, who has continued to suffer physically for some time now. We are grateful he is reviewing medical care that provides some relief, but we cry out for a cure and for healing. In Jesus' name, Amen.
Amen brother! I pray for him nightly and the Lord will provide!