Max wrote: Be careful of saying that God "cannot" do such and such because of an interpretation of a verse in the Bible. Deborah
[URL=http://www.americanvision.org/Today/09-09-08.html]]]Should Sarah Palin be in Politics?[/URL]
Makes your case, but as my first post points out, she's got a lot of compromising baggage- though that's the point of DeMar's article
he concludes -
"There is a warning and hope in the story of Deborah as God‚Äôs chosen judge during a time of Israel‚Äôs spiritual malaise. It‚Äôs a reminder that men need to become leaders. At the same time, we are not called on to judge the Deborahs of our time or those who support their civil work.
Why did Sarah Palin run to head the PTA? Where were the worthy men? Why did she run for mayor of Wasilla? Where were the worthy men? How did she beat an incumbent governor in the primary and go on to win the governorship? Where were the worthy men in this long election process? It seems to me that Sarah Palin got fed up and decided to do something about what was happening to her children‚Äôs school, her city, and her state. Sarah Palin‚Äôs candidacy is an indictment on the many men who have compromised their principles"
Not a good pool of choices for leaders in this country.
Jim Lincoln recommends a book deplored in various sections of this site [URL=http://members.aol.com/kjvisbest/parody_intro.htm]]]disparaging slander of KJV Only parodied[/URL] for its superficiality, its frequent inaccuracies, and general mean-spiritedness.
Dr. Thomas Holland [URL=http://www.biblebelievers.com/Holland1.html]]]Review of the Book cited by Jim Lincoln[/URL]
Theodore P. Letis reviews White‚Äôs qualifications and method rather searchingly‚ÄĒand quite effectively‚ÄĒcritiqued in a few short pages [URL=http://www.holywordcafe.com/bible/Letis.html]]]Review of White[/URL] see links to page 222-232 (e.g., Dr. Letis asserts that White ‚Äúhas no qualifications for writing on these subjects...‚ÄĚ [p. 223] The recent publication of the complete Today‚Äôs New International Version has created a real problem for White‚Äôs argument, in that the same positions he lampoons as being ‚ÄúKJV Only‚ÄĚ are now being taken by NIV advocates, who do not want their Bible‚ÄĒin this case the NIV rather than the KJV‚ÄĒchanged (see the documentation in the piece below; these references are not made up for satirical purposes but are real). That is the starting place for parody.
To say that the fetus is just a chunk of tissue is to demean status of the fetus, to deny it dignity and to legitimize a violent act of destruction of another human being. In order to go about this massacre of unborn human beings, the pro-abortion people have to have some semblance of argument which they pervert into demeaning and denying the humanity of life in the womb."
In a TV ad supporting Measure 11 in South Dakota, Dr. Nathanson explains that he and his colleagues who founded NARAL created it to ‚Äúexport our pro-abortion mentality across the land.‚ÄĚ He also reveals that, ‚ÄúOne of our strategies, in order to mislead the American people, was to deny what we knew to be true, that an abortion kills an existing human being.‚ÄĚ www.blackchristiannews.com
‚ÄúThis was the greatest mistake of my life‚Ä¶ and the greatest mistake in our nation‚Äôs history,‚ÄĚ states Nathanson, who performed 75,000 abortions and at one point ran the nation‚Äôs largest abortion clinic.
The new ad is part of an effort by VoteYesForLife.com to convince voters to pass a bill that would ban abortion in South Dakota." catholicnewsagency.com/new.ph
1Sa 11:2 And Nahash the Ammonite answered them, On this condition will I make a covenant with you, that I may thrust out all your right eyes, and lay it for a reproach upon all Israel. 1Sa 11:3 And the elders of Jabesh said unto him, Give us seven days' respite, that we may send messengers unto all the coasts of Israel: and then, if there be no man to save us, we will come out to thee. 1Sa 11:4 Then came the messengers to Gibeah of Saul, and told the tidings in the ears of the people: and all the people lifted up their voices, and wept. 1Sa 11:5 And, behold, Saul came after the herd out of the field; and Saul said, What aileth the people that they weep? And they told him the tidings of the men of Jabesh. 1Sa 11:6 And the Spirit of God came upon Saul when he heard those tidings, and his anger was kindled greatly. 1Sa 11:7 And he took a yoke of oxen, and hewed them in pieces, and sent them throughout all the coasts of Israel by the hands of messengers, saying, Whosoever cometh not forth after Saul and after Samuel, so shall it be done unto his oxen. And the fear of the LORD fell on the people, and they came out with one consent. "
(see Way of the Master season 3,#3)
Satan (Nahesh means serpent) wants to blind everyone, as Islam blinds/veils whole countries!
[URL=http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/4027/Brannon-Howse/By-Chaplain-Gordon-James-Klingenschmitt]]]Urge to Stop Persecution[/URL]
‚ÄúGovernor Kaine campaigned like a Christian to get our votes. But now, instead of governing like a Christian, or respecting his own chaplains‚Äô First Amendment rights, his administration forced the resignation of five police chaplains, simply because they prayed publicly ‚Äėin Jesus‚Äô name.‚Äô These five chaplains lost their jobs for honoring Christ. They‚Äôre heroes of the faith, because they refused to deny Jesus when ordered to by the Kaine administration. If they contact me, they will be honored through my web-site: www.PrayInJesusName.org . And now Governor Kaine pretends he‚Äôs the martyr, because we question why his administration forced them to resign for praying to Jesus? He‚Äôs still got a job, they don‚Äôt. Governor Kaine isn‚Äôt the martyr, he‚Äôs the persecutor.‚ÄĚ
Citizens are urged to call Governor Kaine‚Äôs office at 804-786-2211, to insist the chaplains be reinstated and the policy reversed, and also email him through his web-site: http://www.governor.virginia.gov/AboutTheGovernor/contactGovernor.cfm" Former Navy Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt,who was also fired in 2007 for praying ‚Äúin Jesus name‚ÄĚ in uniform
[URL=http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/4032/Brannon-Howse/By-David-New]]]CONCERNING THE MARRIAGE AMENDMENT[/URL] "From a historical perspective, homosexuals do not have a legal right to engage in homosexual sex. The common law punished homosexual sex as a crime. All of the original 13 states defined homosexual sex as a crime. Six months before James Madison attended the constitutional convention in 1787, he tried unsuccessfully to update the law to punish homosexual sex. He did this as a member of the Virginia legislature in 1786. The proposed law was known as Bill No. 64." ... "There are three reasons why the homosexual lifestyle is wrong for California. First and most obvious are the health issues. The homosexual lifestyle is not a healthy one. The life expectancy for homosexuals is lower than heterosexuals. And the opportunity for a practicing homosexual to catch a sexually transmitted disease (STD) is very high.
By contrast, a married couple who are faithful to each other have little chance of catching a sexually transmitted disease. Millions of married couples spend their entire life free of sexual diseases. This cannot be said for the ‚Äėgay‚Äô lifestyle.
Even if we agree that homosexuals should be allowed to marry, the health consequences of..."
[URL=http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=307667278225125]]]Should Congress Be 'Perp-Walked'?[/URL] "A federal grand jury in New York is probing the accounting shenanigans at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It's about time, and we hope it doesn't end there.
Remember the early 2000s, when companies such as WorldCom, Enron, Tyco and Xerox suddenly and spectacularly were revealed to have been cooking their books?
Remember the glee expressed by Washington politicians, especially Democrats, as they watched CEOs and their underlings get perp-walked out of their buildings and into federal custody?
Enron became the poster child for corporate misdeeds. In the accounting crisis of 2002, CEO Ken Lay was one of the most loathed human beings on Earth. And no, that's not an exaggeration.
Here was California Attorney General William Lockyer, one of many Democrats on the national scene who gloated at the downfall of the Enron chief and others: "I would love to personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooed dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.'"
Lockyer wasn't the only one swept up in a spiteful prosecutorial frenzy. Sure, some of the prosecutions were deserved. But some were excessive,..."
DJC49 wrote: THY SEED Gen 16:10 in the KJV reads: I will multiply THY SEED exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude."
"Biologically, a woman produces no seed" as Morris said.... so the Gen 3:15 exception unless you add in this exception, which in context says that the SEED is already known to be MALE- thus allowing the legal descent.
as the passage says, the woman is already carrying a SON. 10And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed ... 11And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; ... 12And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, ... 13And she called the name of the LORD ...Thou God seest me" God's x-ray vison saw her SEED-which she carried- the MALE Ishmael.
It's clear, isn't it?
One has to violently bend and twist Scripture into a pretzel in order for the "THY SEED" found in this verse to have reference to Hagar without the context that this is a relevation that she was carrying a son.
Why would the LORD state directly to Hagar that "I will multiply THY SEED" if He wasn't directly referring to Ishmael.v11,12
makes sense to Gill-"that seed she had conceived" is the point.
Scholium wrote: DJC49... "Poindexter" - Dictionary definition is quote; "a person who is intelligent but socially inept; a nerd" Well, Well, DJC49, what a VERY Christian way to treat someone whose crime is to debate from a different perspective from you. Your committment to your definition of "seed" is the problem here. You have decided that God CANNOT create a "seed" (specifically one half of a seed namely the egg), without the help of the sinner donor. You are the one who is demoting the Lord from Sovereign and Creator. Not me!
Demoting is right...
& DJC49 scoffs at Morris & the ICR staff's Biblical expertise 10/3/08 11:44 AM by claiming Gen 16:10 which reads: "And the angel of the LORD said unto HER, I will multiply THY SEED exceedingly,"is saying the SEED applies to Hagar! the SEED is her son! So much for DJC49's Biblical expertise!
10And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed ... 11And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; ... 12And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, ... 13And she called the name of the LORD ...Thou God seest me" God's x-ray vison saw her SEED-which she carried- the MALE Ishmael!
Gen 3:15 was just quoted 10/3/08 8:11 AM per Morris Ge 3:15[The "seed of the woman" can only be an allusion to a future descendant of Eve who would have no human father. Biologically, a woman produces no seed, and except in this case
Biblical usage always speaks only of the seed of men. This promised Seed would, therefore, have to be miraculously implanted in the womb. In this way, He would not inherit the sin nature which would disqualify every son of Adam from becoming a Savior from sin. This prophecy thus clearly anticipates the future virgin birth of Christ.] (Henry M. Morris, The Defender's Bible) Seed details-Paul S. Taylor traces SEED as finalized in Christ's genealogy in Matthew 1 & Luke 3:23-38.
Messiah would be the "seed of a woman" come to destroy the work of the Devil. The "new thing" of Jer.31:22 is what Luke 1:35 fulfills- The seed was "of' Mary -"born of"
The error is missing the import of the word SEED (male) which a woman does not have.
Gen 16:10, the angel of the LORD says her SEED is MALE- a son Ishmael, "wild man" read 10-12
Heb. 10:5" Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:"
DJC49 wrote: 8/25/08 8:46 PM DJC49 Chronological Bible debate "We have probably +95% of the original in our Bible versions.The rest is debatable" 9/8/08 9:50 AM
thank you for your closely reasoned & godly response.
There is a pattern to my type of responses to your ilk.
When Locke was linking a goofy picture to support your side against those he referenced, I reciprocated...I note you did not rebuke him then, or now,for HIS little pics.
Just now, when you used the insulting, juvenile term against Scholium,I noted the kid level of your communication.
You recently linked to a paper calling Paisley, Cairns, Waite, the Bob Jones(es), heretics and antichrists, and you only backed off at the wording antichrist, after a snarky little note to me to read it and maybe I'd learn something.
I note also your post yesterday, "Sometimes I wonder if I'm actually posting with Christians at all! It seems as though many here haven't a clue as to the foundational beliefs of the Christian faith. "10/2/08 12:02 PM About ICR and Henry M Morris, and christiananswers.net etc. calling the position affirmed by Answers In Genesis, etc. "Rank heresy!" is pretty juvenile, given your status 'anonymous' -sniping at these guys is not impressive.
DJC49 wrote: What strikes me funny about all these experts is how they claim to have the 'scientific proof' and rational explanations about the material mechanisms that are behind the GREAT MYSTERY of the Incarnation and the lesser mystery of the imputation of sin into Adam and his progeny. Products all of an unbelieving age; an age that wants scientific "proof" to EVERY mystery there is.
ah yes, ICR knows nothing of either Biblical language , nor basic biology- they should hire a PhD with a degree in either field, no?
And Christianaswers.net and Answers In Genesis etc. agree with Henry M. Morris' "Biblical usage always speaks only of the seed of men"
"Num 5:28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed." The man provides the seed, then it is conceived in the woman. No man, no seed. Lev.15:16-18, 32,22:4 Lev. 18:20, 19:20,Num.5:13 all derive the English from "to lie a lying of seed" (which is why the Authorised Bible is better than a stilted 'literal')
Heb.11:11"Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed" echoes Mary's not just passive, but acquiescing aspect in sowing the seed, which is why it was "of" her seed "of" the woman 'be it unto me'-Lk 1:38
exactly the analogy christiananswers.net provides [URL=http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aiia/virginbirth.html]]]Daryl E. Witmer of AIIA Institute[/URL] "Ever since in vitro fertilization and embryonic transfer came on the scene in 1978 (not to mention artificial insemination), it is quite possible for a woman who has never experienced sexual intercourse to give birth. Of course, the Bible makes it clear that it was Almighty God, not some high-paid gynecologist, who worked the details of Jesus' Divine-Human conception, i.e. ‚ÄúAnd the angel answered and said unto [Mary], The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.‚ÄĚ Luke 1:35
Sound miraculous? Of course. But these days, who would deny that miracles occur? And such a 'small' one for the God who created the entire universe! "
Heb.10:5"body prepared" [URL=http://www.christiananswers.net/kids/ednk-jesusgodorman.html]]]Written at DJC49's level[/URL] "The part of God that is called the Holy Spirit created God's human body inside of a woman named Mary (Matthew 1:20). God went into this human body that grew inside of Mary."
Scholium wrote: God created His body, but required an existing egg?.. just ain't kosher, as they say.
EXACTLY The error is missing the import of the word SEED (male) which a woman does not have. Heb. 10:5" Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:" Ge 3:15[The "seed of the woman" can only be an allusion to a future descendant of Eve who would have no human father. Biologically, a woman produces no seed, and except in this case Biblical usage always speaks only of the seed of men. This promised Seed would, therefore, have to be miraculously implanted in the womb. In this way, He would not inherit the sin nature which would disqualify every son of Adam from becoming a Savior from sin. This prophecy thus clearly anticipates the future virgin birth of Christ.] (Henry M. Morris, The Defender's Bible)
[URL=http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/messianicprophecies.html]]]Seed details-Paul S. Taylor[/URL] traces SEED as finalized in Christ's genealogy in Matthew 1 & Luke 3:23-38.
Messiah would be the "seed of a woman" come to destroy the work of the Devil. The "new thing" of Jer.31:22 is what Luke 1:35 fulfills- The seed was "of' Mary -"born of"
Mike wrote: Jesus was tempted in every way as we are. What did satan appeal to in his temptation? The flesh. He knew quite well God the divine could not be tempted. He also knew Jesus the man could. Else why bother?
I agree- Henry M Morris points out the Matt. 4 incident replays the Gen. 3 incident, this time, the 2nd Adam wins out in the basic temptations,
the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life,
all 3 of which are covered in the 3 offers of Satan.
1Jo 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
-- Mat 4:3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. .... If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself downpartial quote of Psalms here) Mat 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God..... Mat 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
"something created by the Holy Ghost in the womb BUT NOT OF THE SUBSTANCE of the virgin Mary ... that would NOT BE HUMANITY AT ALL! He [Christ] is "bone of our bone" and "flesh of our flesh." His is a true humanity."
OF the substance means the same as hers, nurtured by her, as I listen to him.
It is you who add the derogatory, "heavenly' strawman, NOT what they stated.
[URL=http://www.newgateministries.com/jerusalemchronicles/dna-of-jesus.html]]]The DNA of Jesus Christ[/URL]
As the substance of the first Adam was corrupt, it needed to be a "new thing" as God's word says in Jer.31:22 ""And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth . . . ." Acts 17:26. "For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." I Cor 15:21,22. For as by one man‚Äös disobedience many were made sinners,..."Rom 5:18,19. "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." Rom3:23. "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Rom 6:23. the 1st Adam's flesh was not sinful before the fall, so 2nd Adam's New flesh is no problem.
and, DJC49, I NOTICED YOUR earlier 9/30/08 8:26 PM
DJC49 wrote: I owe an apology to ENGINEER for accusing him of not having read his own hyperlinked-to article. I must have missed that sentence. So I was WRONG in my assertion
I accept your gracious apology...
I think a large part of the emphasis comes down to WHEN did the Lord Jesus Christ begin His status as 2nd Adam?
[URL=http://www.icr.org/article/76/]]]the 2nd Adam [/URL] To say Christ only became 2nd Adam at the resurrection is derivative of the logic that led to the modern false 'bibles' that separated Jesus from Christ- [URL=http://www.truthquest.free-online.co.uk/jm_tds02.htm]]]What Lies Behind This Separation? Adoptionism[/URL]
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come."
thinking "the sinfulness of a woman passed to her offspring"
see Ps. 51:5 "51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. " Gen 3:16 " in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children" is read by many as the curse being, effectively, you will sorrow to have kids just as rotten as you are !