Mike just because "A" happened before "B" doesn't mean "A" caused "B" There was an example in my old college logic book, where a primitive tribe beat drums every morning before sunrise to make the sun come up. We would know better, they might have known better if they did a little experiment to see if beating drums would stop the sun from going down. One of the problems with "science" (religion) of clinical psychology they are a great believers of anecdotal evidence. It --might-- lead to correct speculation, but then it might very well not. Yellow fever wasn't caused by night air or contaminated garments but by the mosquito. See, Walter Reed--American pathologist and bacteriologist. A son of Methodist minister, who didn't follow in his father's footsteps -- Thank God
I will agree "vaccinations" by mosquitoes are to be avoided. Oh the article in my original message, nor this one by an established source, 'Leaky' Vaccines May Create Stronger Viruses deny the idea that perfection has come to world.
I like chickens, especially banties. Keep them healthy.
These non governmental people really have no practical function in government. This goes along with my long standing dislike for the idea of chaplains. As put by a more famous person,
John Locke wrote: In order that public goods may be no excuse for religious tyranny, nor religious liberty for licentiousness...The functions of the state and church must be distinguished.... Civil government is confined to the care of things in this world, and has nothing to do with the world to come.
Good morning/evening God Bless all. History channel docs are a joke,
Yes we need strong preaching and teaching, something's are God's judgement. Protest,yell,cry and scream from the mountain tops in defence of the murdered millions. Better than sitting back passing judgement and doing nothing. That's my opinion.
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- Besides not being scientific, anecdotal stories hits one in the gut, as one has to sympathize with Barry of Kentucky. But, generalizing from the specific to the general is dangerous. ---
There is no "but." Denying what actually happens because it isn't "scientific" is more than dangerous, it's ostrich-like. Not to leave out it isn't science anyway. Research, as you might know, often determines what research funders expect to be found. Like global warming as example. Plug in the predetermined data, lo and behold the computer model manufactures the expected results. And this brand of politics is called science. Medicine man politics is a numbers game, where the specific is ignored because it can be buried in the general. There isn't anything truly scientific about it.
Putting things into context and basic comprehension would be of great benefit for you "why". My prior post stated that the word "prostitute" is in the Bible. A synonym is "hooker". You should have no problem with my use of the word "hooker" if you have no problem with the Word of God. Your passage regarding immodest apparel is off topic when discussing the specific word "prostitute". I see that you have a great problem with Christians who are against immodesty and porn. I would submit to you that I'm not your problem,you are. I understand that immodest dress and the like are evil. Don't you? Again,if you are unaware of the use of the word "prostitute" in the Bible, you really should look it up. And if you have a problem with someone mentioning the word "hooker",you really should avoid articles that deal with dress codes as they are much more explicit than you,apparently,are able to handle as you visualize so much more from a simple word than most. Again,the Lord can set you free from such. You might be able to see more clearly if you would allow Him to aid you.
Barry from KY wrote: I'm not educated enough in theology to know if this happened because of our actions or is this something God placed before us.
John 9:1-3 (KJV) 1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. 2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? 3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
Did any of you read this article? I would suggest that you do.
Besides not being scientific, anecdotal stories hits one in the gut, as one has to sympathize with Barry of Kentucky. But, generalizing from the specific to the general is dangerous. I put up a URL about John Locke on another thread, John Locke I can stand the writer about him I can't but not withstanding, the article is no doubt accurate, but I will go elsewhere and point out that John Locke believed in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricism and not anecdotal or case study practices for getting at the truth, of the natural world, anyway. The Scientific Method is better. Diseases are just that, part of the natural world.
John UK, interesting example like my favorable comment about another Englishman, besides Shakespeare of course.
James May wrote: There are many Christians who do not understand the very serious nature of the King James Only heresy. They suppose that KJVers prefer the 1611 Bible over all other translations, believe that it is the very best of English versions, and perhaps use the KJV to the exclusion of all other Bibles. Unfortunately the King James Only movement goes far beyond such a moderate belief and practice. Instead it teaches that the KJV is the one and only perfect Bible and that all modern translations are corruptions of the Word of God. Christians who do not exclusively use and defend the KJV as the perfect Word of God are viewed as disobedient and/or ignorant. King James Onlyism teaches that true blue KJVers should separate from their less obedient brethren, or at least diligently seek to win them to ‚ÄúThe Truth.‚ÄĚ Those who teach these false views frequently display a smug confidence that they alone are the true defenders of the Word of God....
I see that you avoided the question, because the passage on modest apparel says nothing about prostitutes or their lack of attire. You are the one who is trying to conjure up the imagery in your posts. You would have no reason to use such a term on any article about immodest apparel unless you were trying to make the link. Plus, one has to wonder why they are always on your mind? Does your wife appreciate the fact that you spend, judging by your posts, an inordinate amount of time thinking about hookers and prostitutes? I think not. You even chose to ignore my response that I said nothing about my thougts. Do you always just nit pick for your responses? You should work on your judgmental jump to conclusions and the pride that will not allow you to admit you have gone overboard with your posts. The freedom we have in Christ is not one to obssess with the baser things of the world but to focus on Him.
Joe the Protestant wrote: After hearing of this I e mailed the dept. This: I just read a news article in which Ky. DOJJ has ordered a Pastor to stop telling people homosexuality is a sin. I don't know if this article is true, but if it is. This is setting a bad president, that will lead to states coming into churches to do the same. Freedom of religious expressing (I'm speaking of course of non violent) is being hampered in the public arena already. Please do not add to it. And this is the response I got. "H. DJJ staff, volunteers, interns, and contractors, in the course of their work, shall not refer to juveniles by using derogatory language in a manner that conveys bias towards or hatred of the LGBTQI community. DJJ staff, volunteers, interns, and contractors shall not imply or tell LGBTQI juveniles that they are abnormal, deviant, sinful, or that they can or should change their sexual orientation or gender identity." I guess they are "Open and Inclusive" unless you are a Christian.
Thanks brother; that was interesting. Now let's see what happens when a Muslim violates their rules. My guess is nothing.
Great Sermon! I truly love dr. Beeke and admire more than any other man in the faith. Maybe except for AN Martin. But was disheartened by Beeke somewhat ambiguous statement about homosexuality and it genetic connection. He almost seems open to the idea that thee could be some genetic link with this sin of the flesh and one's genetic make up. It is my hope that he will clarify this statement because he was way to ambiguous. The error of Attributing genetics to sinful behaviors will lead to host of other errors such as addiction and other things being genetic. It is perversity and not caused by genetics this is why paul says it is against nature.
I agree with US. Not all medicine is bad. A wise woman once told me to climb a ladder-seek natural and after a reasonable amount of time if that hasn't worked then seek medical. In some cases, it's life or death and should not be questioned. As for vaccines, my house is divided. Until furthur research is done on some parties part we err to the side of safety and refuse them. You can't undo them but you can always go get them.
SteveR wrote: History channel? You mean blasphemy channel Have you ever watched one of their so called Biblical documentaries?
but eat fish spit out bones
Nice to follow their wacky stuff & see what the common person thinks is "Biblical Scholarship"
I cringe whenever I see them focus on a subject, but eventually suck it up and watch to be able to do apologetics.
They range from infantile stupidity to plausible to pretty slick lies.
But then again, you'd have to watch a particular production to know whether the truth acually slipped by.
Some of their problem in the Biblical area is widespread apostosy of Churches / `pastors'.
But if you get a chance as a writer to contribute on stage to the world, you can speak the truth, even if the stage is usually used for spouting lies.
We could probably list 100 rotten History channel smears we both despise, but then there might be a guy in the mix here and there that actually gives a decent perspective. Hopefully, that would be McGuire.
Thanks for the thoughts, Frank, US, and Barry (and John earlier). Barry, I saw you comment on a thread the other day and was going to say nice to see you around, but never got back to it. Anyway, I remember you telling the story of your son some time back. Tragic, and I can understand your refusal to consider vaccines since. Well, all I can.say, I guess, is that judging by your comments, he sure is fortunate to have you as his father, and if he doesn't realize that just yet, he will. As for vaccines, I've never done any research beyond these threads that pop up from time to time with opposing views and links to various articles. I know that they're not all beneficial, and in some cases, can be deadly, cause damage, etc. After all, they're manmade concoctions.
Frank wrote: Tray, do you have an opinion of things or are you just going to quote "your" prophet? Thanks Observer and MS and Dorcas for agreeing with me. If the media picks up the story and runs with it, then I simply look for the misdirection I noted. Even Jim from Lincoln could run with this story, so But, Luke 17:10, please don't misunderstand me. I am glad they protested even though I would choose to not be among them. If just one little life can be saved, then it is worth it.
Hey brother Frank, I agree with you and will add my sorry for not mentioning it previously.
Although it sounds spiritual, Tray B, and we all need preaching, politicians understand money and numbers and obviously could care less about preaching.