p., those who trade freedom for so-called security are foolish. I don't recall when I've thought or said otherwise.
Now to those who treasure this imaginary security, ask what do you think of when you hear the term "maximum security"? Liberals and their clinger wannabees, who say we must balance liberty with the need for security, are dense ignorers of history, and liars unfit for the rough seas of freedom. Liberty is not for sale. If you won't take risks to be free, what is it your security is protecting? You want a nice secure police state? Go somewhere with high walls, and leave the rest of us alone.
John UK wrote: Thanks Frank. In the passage I quoted, which I could have quoted any of the letters to the churches by God's dictation, the church at Ephesus was commended for certain things, and warned about other things. They obviously didn't heed the warnings, as I think I'm right in saying that Jesus removed the church from Ephesus, that is, he shut it down.
What do you think, bro? Are there not many "if-then" scenarios in Scripture? How is it some think God cannot be sovereign if he allows that which he allows and has written in black and white?
Jim Lincoln wrote: Alexander Hamilton that great American patriot and Founding Father was responsible for The Founding of the Fed It was a brilliant idea and finally in place in American governmental system So read the article, Penny, and be thankful there weren't tea-party types in what would turn out to be the Republican Party.
No surprise you'd think the Fed was a great idea. Fat gov agency pretending not to be, printing monopoly money, pretending economic expertise, and creating inflationary cycles to "stabilize" the economy.
Thomas Jefferson on Alexander Hamilton: "Hamilton was indeed a singular character. Of acute understanding, disinterested, honest, and honorable in all private transactions, amiable in society, and duly valuing virtue in private life, yet so bewitched by the British example, as to be under thorough conviction that corruption was essential to the government of a nation."
amazing huh wrote: Mike 1) --- Even faith is the gift of God Eph 2:8. ---
Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:"
Since there is only one gift (not gifts) in the verse, and we know eternal life (salvation) is the gift of God, faith cannot be the gift in the verse, for it is clear that faith and salvation are not the same thing. Eternal life is had when the Holy Spirit indwells.
Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."
Acts 8:20 "But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money."
Timothy 1:6 "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands"
Frank wrote: Now, there is a strong rumor that BG is a 33rd degree mason. And since she noted the masonic symbolism on our bills, then I don't think bringing up BG's name was inappropriate. I know of no president that has existed since Billy's rise to fame that would argue against putting him on a dollar bill or coin? Even Obama paid presidential homage to him. Now I will also readily admit that the general female population would rather have Sanger, but the general evangelical feminists would support Graham. But, both are good candidates and it appears the secular feminists will win this one
33rd degree? Ever wonder why we never hear of 32nd or 31st or 4th? Everyone is 33rd. Must be quite a club, where everyone is top gun!
comedy scripts wrote: Amazing??? Do you Roman Arminians ever read and understand the words in the Bible? --- Quote; "Question: Are the elect .... those who are by God predestinated .... are they winnable to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ? And does God will to use us in the winning?" 1. Are the elect predestinated? = Well according to God yes they are - Eph 1:4,5 and Rom 8:29,30 teaches us these truths. 2. Are they "winnable" to faith? Surely Michael is joking here?? Why does GOD elect a sinner? But We should remember the Arminians think faith is a purely human faculty. So perhaps MH is thinking of simply a "Change of mind" here. "And does God will to use us?" Who is this presumptuous "US" mentioned ? For the Arminian it is the mortal who convinces the mortal to save himself.
You're a mean one, Mr. Scripts. You apparently think God elects, then magically men are saved. No means necessary, thus only Arminians think they have anything to do with bringing the lost into the fold. I wonder how Paul the human would have responded to being called Arminian, that ever so useful title?
1 Corinthians 9:22 "To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some."
s c wrote: And whose face was on the Roman currency? Currency is just another worldly means used to elevate that which the world holds dear. I can guess that Obama and maybe even Billy Graham will have their mugs on the filthy lucre one day as well if a tangible monetary system exists that long. And is there anything really honorable on dollar bills? "In God we trust" is questionable. Given all of the satanic symbolism on it,it would,seemingly, refer to the "great architect" of freemasonry.
That was a Lincolnesque kind of thing to do, sc, bringing Graham's name in to a discussion about whose face might be on money. lincoln will be tickled.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Wow, it must be ironic too many people that a person from a farm state is attacking gasohol and one from a non farm state, at least that one that doesn't raise that many cattle is supporting it. I really don't care how the government counts inflation when I go to the grocery store, and the prices of the products that depend on corn, such as popcorn, which I will remind you Mike, is not a sweet corn, or beef which depends on field corn and not sweet corn affects the pocketbook no matter after this counted in the inflation rate or not. So, this is where I do disagree with the farmers in this state and think that ethanol shouldn't be subsidized. I would think you would disapprove of subsidization corn for gasoline? ---
You may be from a farm state, but you've complained about it enough to know where you stand. I don't support gasohol btw, Jim, nor gov subsidies for it. You didn't find that in my comment. I was simply relaying facts about gasohol, responding to your association of it to ground beef prices. Want some more? Gasohol is inferior because it is tough on engines. Another- the higher the ethanol content, the lower the mileage. The wacko environmentalists are all for it, that's the push for it.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Even if this is an old article, the chickens are finally coming home to roost. let them eat gasohol
The ethanol in gasohol is made from sugar crops or grains, primarily corn. That is field corn, not sweet corn. People don't eat much field corn.
As the link shows, gasohol was being produced at least 35 years ago. The price of ground beef today has more to do with the treasury printing press than a shortage of corn. Not to worry though, the government doesn't count increases in food or fuel prices in determining the inflation rate. So no matter how expensive ground beef gets, it has nothing to do with inflation.
Jesus in his wisdom, made it simple. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone. Bob Jones said something dumb in the heat of the moment 35 years ago and has apologized, though he might have said- let him who has never said something dumb be the first to demand apology.
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- I personally have no problems with individuals being against various sins, as long as they realize The Inadequacy of Moralism and just as importantly The Purpose of the Local Church and Community Issues ---
Which translated says, individuals can speak out against evil doings, but the Church is called to something else. Sounds kinda Catholic, the idea that the Church is a separate entity from the people that compose it.
According to the article, some states actively support this, others are opposed. Some haven't decided. Why not make those who support it be required to have the "workers" settle there? Like in New Jersey where presidential contender Jeb Bush had this to say:
"Bush, in an interview about a year ago with Thane Rosenbaum, said America‚Äôs best chance to rejuvenate itself and get back on the path of sustained economic growth lies with increased immigration. He calls for unlimited growth in guest-worker visas and is critical of the ‚Äúborder security first‚ÄĚ approach to immigration.