Two commandments violations brought up with frequency on this site are against the 6th and 7th commandment. On another thread what does the Bible teach about the use of alcohol and often divorce and remarriage is an issue. The opinions are as varied as the opinion holders and the divisions in the Gentile Church. I was thinking last night, James said if we break one commandment we break them all, yet I firmly believe to break first table commandments are more heinous because they are against God. That isn't spoken of as often, yet it troubles the Gentile Church.

Lurker wrote:
A married man who has never been divorced from the wife of his youth for God hates putting away (Mal 2:16).

God (Heb 10:31, 1 Tim 2:12).

TPK wrote:
Once upon a time our denominations excommunicated divorced members especially since they were few and far between. Now that they are nearing the majority, all denominations have caved and commune with them in the pews.
Today many seminaries graduate female MDivs. And you rebuke them. However, in 20 years when all seminaries graduate female MDivs, who will remain to rebuke them?

"My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;
And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."

With the tremendous societal upheaval the world is no longer a safe place for children, women or elderly Eccles. 4:1-3; and Rev.14:12-13 came to mind. "So I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the side of their oppressors there was power; but they had no comforter. Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive. Yea, better is he than both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the sun."

Trevor Hammack wrote:
Rufus, what does that verse have to do with the News Article? The Greek word for communications that is used in that verse is éthos. It does not mean words we use or hear but about habit, manner, custom and morals.

Rollens wrote:
If we compare these kind of events to western countries we can see that Christianity has an effect upon society even though not all people are converted. There is a stark reality between the east and the west.

Frank wrote:
Living like a Christian does not make someone a Christian. Justification = works, works does not = justification. Do you agree?

I agree with James 2:17-19 "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble."

Frank wrote:
Ruth
In my mind, a fundamentalist is one that will not dialogue regarding what they consider to be essentials of the faith, but they will debate them.

Might I ask how one can determine the difference between dialog and debate and wouldn't it be easy to slip from one into the other trying to be charitable?

I agree with your second paragraph.

Quoting yours would take up too much space and its limited.

Mr. Patel,

Define totalitarian? It appears you thinks it is the antonym of pluralism. Yet, you see the sham of pluralism or of a democratic/republic and the myths attached to it. Do you honestly believe that the 'New Islam' is the answer?

You state that God is a merciful God. That is true of God in Jesus Christ but not outside of Him; though He is a perfect Creator and beneficent unto all his creatures and over sees all their actions, as the Omniscient One.

I fear you dangerously mix truth with error to your own harm and are in need of prayer for that reason. We all need prayer in this day of mixture. No man is an island, though some might be tempted in their straits to think so.

I think I understand it in other words; concerning Rev. 14:9-11 "It is to be noted here that the sins charged are cumulative, not distributive. Guilt is contracted as here charged, by 'worshipping the beast and his image, and receiving his mark.' If the beast signifies immoral civil power, and his image signify the Papacy, as we have seen they do, then it follows that worshipping both, and receiving the mark of the former constitutes the special guilt here charged by the angel: that is eulogizing, praising, and actively cooperating with civil and ecclesiastical society, at war with the Bible-in organized hostility to the Lord and his Anointed Ps 2:9"
Notes on the Apocalypse - D. Steele

CAS wrote:
Interesting given the oceans are typified to as a sign of judgment.