I think if one reads ALL the comments that were posted today 4/23/16..it is very clear that most was a misrepresentation of two posters that were having a dialogue when another showed up with the usual lofty ethereal two cents that was actually off target and none of their business...the rest is history.
B. McCausland wrote: Thank you, MS If God had to bless us only when personally we had everything sorted out or correct, he would never do so. It is of his mercy that he does bless in spite of our selves. See Ph 1:15-18 His plans do not depend on ourselves being right or wrong. However, after all is said and done, we will be the main losers when missing on our part, not God, or his cause, as His will be performed anyway, somehow. (Lk 19:40) This said, there are numerous instances and passages in Scripture witnessing to the fact that the grieving our sins cause, detracts away blessing which otherwise, as a norm, may flow in proportion to consecration, obedience and faith. The 'agree-to-disagree' policy is a flawed notion
Talk about contradictions! God blesses irrespective of whether we are right or wrong. BUT then again we miss out on blessings by our grievous sins, non obedience etc.
Geff wrote: Hmm, I never compared anyone to a retard, you are the only one here yet to make that comparison. And just because the government needs to keep some material classified for security, does not mean they were in some sort of weird kabal to attack their own country! You must learn the difference between research, and spinning a web of assumptions based on little tidbits of information that may or may not be credible!
So the word of those who have read it does not matter because it doesn't fit your conspiracy nuts narrative? Doesn't surprise me.
Geff wrote: For example, 911 truthers such as yourself do get one thing correct: there was an attack on 911; the rest about Bush or our government supposedly planning it and being behind it is myth with no evidence or factual backing.
Is that why 28 pages of the official report have never been made public and why those who have read it say that if they were made public it would bring down the entire Washington DC machinery?
Would it not be an idea to do some research before mouthing off and treating everyone else like a retard?
Dave wrote: Ditto Jim. We know we have God's word, we know it's infallible, it's been preserved in the Holy Bible. Any discoveries are guaranteed to be in harmony with our scripture, else it's authenticity would surely come into question, Ey brother Jim. :-)
John UK wrote: Thank you Dolores. It is always a cause of great sadness to me to see believers bickering about things, and I have done my fair share in the past, so I'm not pointing any fingers as though I was some self-righteous nincompoop. But hey, the Lord knows all things; he has seen what goes on here, and he is bound by his word to deal with untoward behaviour. We have to remember that some of these dear folks have no church to attend, and so they are growing cold in their isolation, which leads to callous remarks and heresy-hunting in the guise of helping the saints.
Some of the most callous remarks plus downright lies are told by some on here who tout their religious duties, church going, charitable works, etc. We are all works in progress...NONE have attained.
Carl wrote: Please no more catholic articles. -------------- Unless it is to inform us the pope has publicly repented to the whole world that he is a false teacher, that Romanism is a false man-made religion, and he is giving all the vaticans wealth to the victims of the pedophile priest scandal.....and falls on his face to beg God that he would grant him mercy.