Democrats Are Once Again Pushing Taxpayer-Funded Abortion
Last week, the House Committee on Appropriations hosted a hearing to push forward a Democratic bill that would eliminate the Hyde amendment, which forbids the federal government from directly reimbursing for elective abortion procedures through Medicaid. In other words, Democratic politicians are making a renewed effort to require taxpayers to directly underwrite abortion procedures.
The Hyde amendment is a rider that Congress has added on a bipartisan basis to every relevant spending bill since 1976, an effort in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade to prevent Americans who oppose abortion from having their tax dollars used to fund it. Hyde once had such strong bipartisan support that, the first time it was added to a federal budget, 247 Democrats in the House and 48 Democrats in the Senate voted for it....
John UK wrote: Brethren, I have no need to be here. I have work to do for the Lord Jesus Christ. If no-one speaks to Ladybug, then according to what she just said, you agree with her that I am a wolf in sheep's clothing.
You should be free to speak your mind. But I am curious, why do you feel that unless someone speaks up, they are then by default expressing their agreement!
In another thread, I pointed out that the virus was a hoax perpetrated by the globalist gov's. You and your pilgrim bro's didnt buy it because it would require a whole lot of gov's around the world in on the scam.
I used the American election as an example of the sheer expansive network of powerful government agencies, senators, governors, judges/courts, media, big tech, all in on the scam. See pilgrims, that extent of kabal collusion can and did happen. The virus was hyped.
You saw no need to waste your time on govnmnts Your question to me back then was, how did what the gov do affect you anyway. I said it didn't!!
My point back then was, what did it matter to you what happened to anyone else!
Perhaps you've answered your own question now. That by silence you were agreeing and complicit with the gov's treatment of the people. I hope you see my point now
Looker on wrote: Oh dear, looks like Adriel doesnâ€™t comprehend Federal Headship. đź¤¦â€Ťâ™‚ď¸Ź
"The idea of federal headship is not explicit in the Bible; that is, the Bible nowhere calls Adam our representative. Federal headship is simply a way some scholars have chosen to speak about Adamâ€™s, and then Christâ€™s, involvement in the destiny of humanity."
"The weakness of federal headship is that it is an interpretive tool, not an explicitly biblical truth. Romans 5 does not say that Adam was the representative of the human race, only that â€śby the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one manâ€ť (Romans 5:17). God never says exactly how the transference of the sin nature occurred, only that it did occur." https://www.gotquestions.org/federal-headship.html
Adriel wrote: --- Is the whole cataclysm that is sinful life on earth - the woman's fault?
hmmm, let's see
Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
I would find it a mite risky to argue with God on this. After all, it doesn't say "as by one woman sin entered the world."
And yes, the 1 Tim verse does say Eve was in the transgression. It just doesn't say she was the source of it. It was entirely up to Adam to do what God commanded, thus he is the source, just like Romans 5:12 says.
Mike wrote: Hello Adriel, Adam was directly and personally commanded that he shall not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and was given this command before Eve was created. The responsibility then was on him from that point on.
Hi Mike; But:- 1Tim 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
The sin which Eve committed surely started the whole ball rolling. "being deceived (She) was in the transgression"
It's an interesting question to ask, 'Why Satan picked Eve to tempt' - And not Adam? Perhaps he knew Eve was the weaker vessel. (1Peter 3:7).
Is gender involved in God's choice of which sin started the sinful existence of mankind?
Is the whole cataclysm that is sinful life on earth - the woman's fault?
Adriel wrote: Mike; And the question is "Why does GOD consider Adam's actions to be more powerful-influential than Eve's?
Hello Adriel, Adam was directly and personally commanded that he shall not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and was given this command before Eve was created. The responsibility then was on him from that point on.
Years ago, when I was deceived under the Reformed Calvinist religion, I used to exchange emails with this patriarch. At that time, I was blind to his domineering mindset. I also started getting spiritual advice from others. I noticed the patriarch stopped emailing. I emailed him, and he said there should only be one mentor. I found that to be odd, that he would cut me off because I sought advice from other men. Now, years later, I see what he is. By God's grace I have eyes to see the true Gospel, as well as discernment to see that which is false. I did more research and discovered this patriarch religion, what it holds to. It's the same mindset, controlling, domineering. It's abusing God's word and using it to do harm. It's the same way in the Muslim religion. The pendulum swings wide in false religion, The Lord graciously teaches His sheep the right context of His word, so there's balance, no swinging wide. No using God's word as a weapon to justify sin, like a superior domineering mind. May the Lord have mercy on the deluded.
No one here is denying the word of God concerning women, however, some are using it out of context as a ball bat. The point is being diverted away from, rabbit trails are being used rather than admitting the error of a superior abusive mindset, which borders a muslim type religion. Some here love to use His word to justify the satanic mindset of lording over the woman. This was the original point, it's now being buried under the plethora of verses pulled out of context and slapped up as justifying patriarchal abusive religion. When one doesn't understand the verses they put up, those same verses become a weapon for them, like a ball bat or club. It's a lopsided mindset, blinded by pride and ego. Only God can give right understanding and meaning, and He does to His elect.
1 Corinthians 11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
God designed women to be for men.
Genesis 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Someone who is supposed to help man, not co-rule with man.
1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
Once again, a woman was designed to be for the man; not the other way around.
1 Peter 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
Women are weaker vessels. Any reader of this can fill in what they believe the Holy Spirit is referring to as â€śweakerâ€ť.
2 Timothy 3:6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
women are easily led away.
I suppose the Holy Spirit was a Patriarchal misogynist. Just ignore my personal comments.
Ok all you busybody men, letâ€™s start with your command of God about loving your wife as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her. letâ€™s us all know about how you are working that in your lives before you attempt to stick your noses into other peopleâ€™s business. Gossipâ€™s and busybodies are a blight and sin before a Holy God.
The legalist, the patriarchal, the Pharisee, the dead works religionists twist the word of God, they exalt their 'superiority' over women in an attempt to beat down the weaker vessel. They justify their abuse by pulling verses from their context, like 'wives, submit to your husbands' but neglect or mention as an afterthought, 'husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church and what? GAVE HIMSELF for her- that's what love looks like. It isn't refusing to talk to your wife during an argument until she repents, like a certain pilgrim here has done. That is abuse. They start pulling out all the verses, again, from their context, about how women are to act, dress, etc. even though NO ONE HERE spoke against those verses . As I stated in my previous reply, ***"just because I disagree with patriarchal heresy doesn't mean I disregard God's word"***. Funny how that got overlooked by the bullies and their buds. As a dear brother/pastor friend of mine stated when error is exposed, ...."and that's what brings on the hatred of this world because you see when men, by nature, rest in other things and that's exposed as being evil and wicked in the sight of God that's not a pleasant message to receive. It takes the Spirit of God NOT to be offended at that".
1 Timothy 2:9, Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, 10 but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness. 11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.
Let us just ponder that the Holy Spirit is saying women should dress modestly, show good works, receive (not give) instruction quietly; that means in a non-argumentative manner. Women are to bear children; not abort them. And lastly letâ€™s notice this is to be done with self-restraint.
Okay feminists, I know there are exceptions like teaching younger women and their children. Lets use those to undo the rest of what God said.
Adriel wrote: â€”- 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. = "IN" deception and sin is when she influenced Adam. 15 Notwithstanding she shall be SAVED in childbearing, IF they continue in faith and charity and holiness WITH SOBRIETY. = There is a way out - a female way. = Different from the male way
The female way out is the same as the male way- Jesus the Christ. As for the â€śinfluenceâ€ť take on v14, she gave the pretty fruit to Adam, and what he do? He ate it. He was influenced by his choice to disobey God. Like v14 says, he was not deceived, therefore there was no deception in Eve handing him the fruit. While we donâ€™t minimize Eveâ€™s sin, Adamâ€™s is the greater.
1Tim 2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. = MEN praying.
9 IN LIKE MANNER also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; = MODEST. With shamefacedness = showing respect. Not painted vanity.
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. = A Different nature for women. Not the natural 'vanity' of sinful nature.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. = Silent in their subjection(to obey) and modesty. "Female" traits.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, NOR TO USURP AUTHORITY over the man, but to be in silence. = God does NOT use the woman in this way - NOR expect her like this in HIS presence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. = GOD made Adam "FIRST". This is full of meaning and divine statement which is ignored in sin.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. = "IN" deception and sin is when she influenced Adam.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be SAVED in childbearing, IF they continue in faith and charity and holiness WITH SOBRIETY. = There is a way out - a female way. = Different from the male way.