CBBC wrote:
Conservative Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church are both opposed to active sodomy. Both consider it sin. Homosexuality is NOT moral nor is this behavior biblical. Why couldn't Protestants and Roman Catholics discuss marriage and campaign against same-sex "marriage"?

Just because Satan has caused a social abomination and corruption in reprobate society does not mean we the true Christians can join with the idolatrous blasphemers of the Roman Catholic organisation.

As true Biblical followers of God and Christ His Son, we must battle against all who would remove Holy Scripture from society, whether they do it for reasons of lust or reasons of worshipping relics and other daft graven images.

Whatever the evil sins are we Christians must contend for the true faith.

CBBC wrote:
The "self-evident good" of contraception is that it brings Protestants and Catholics to the table to discuss issues such as "gay equality."

This is where the True Christian and the Roman Catholic part company. As Protestants we adhere to the Word of God. Whereas the sodomite and his Liberal supporters do not.

However it is noted that the Roman Catholic and the homosexuals/Liberals have common ground here, since neither adhere to the Scripture Laws and doctrines. The sodomite ditches the Bible to keep his lust and amoral practices. The Roman Catholic ditches the Bible to keep such Traditions as idolatry, graven images and blasphemy, to name but a few.

Candle lit wrote:
That's just it - Judas was not chosen to salvation, but he must have been chosen to be the son of perdition. Much like Cyrus in the O.T. was chosen years before he was born - prophesied about - to accomplish the purposes of God - though, without looking it up - I don't think Cyrus was one of the redeemed. So, my point is that when we say "elect" we mean elect unto salvation, but wouldn't those who accomplish God's purposes - like Pharoah - also be elect, but as an antagonist? In the case of Cyrus, as a help to Jacob/Israel, with the end result being to reveal Himself [GOD]. See Isaiah 45:1-7

But that does not mean God is obliged to save any of them.

However the Elect were chosen unto salvation.

Candle lit wrote:
The problem for me was His choice of the one who would ultimately betray Jesus - that would be Judas. I wrestled with this - thinking it was unfair that Judas was predetermined to "walk with Jesus" - to "taste" the goodness of the LORD - to be convinced of "Who" He was - and, yet, be the one to betray Him. I still have no more understanding of the "why" - I just accept it.

1] "those that thou (GOD) gavest me I have Kept" God elected them Jesus kept them. None were lost divine power saw to that.

2] "the son of perdition" Thus Judas never was one of the Elect. He never "knew" Jesus in truth, just like the majority of the Jews at that time. He received the just punishment which all unbelieving sinners receive.

3] WHY? In both cases - That the Word written by God, recorded by His servants should be fulfilled.

Heres the deal. God only loves those who have been reconciled unto Him by His son.

Romans 5:
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

The love of God is expressed in His salvation through Christ Crucified.