Well then,U S,you shouldn't have a problem with me posting what the Bible speaks. And,btw,you never apologized for,yet again,wrongly assuming and accusing me of being "just the facts" in another thread. You seem to have a pattern of jumping to false conclusions. As far as ...more to the story. Reasoning is not allowed? Maybe the prostitutes,like you,can draw conclusions without having many facts to go on. Most people,on the other hand,would require more information besides a "hello" before coming to a conclusion like..."that's the type of person I wish I was with".
I did read the comment. Saying "hello" to prostitutes is of no effect...only the gospel is. If these men are so interested in the well being of the lost,they would care more about the lost receiving the gospel than being cordial. Who receives the praise in that? The men. Not God. And, U S...I suppose that no Christian or professing Christian men ever commit adultery or are tempted to? Everyone on this forum is above reproach and are totally pure? I would beg to differ. The reason that I make mention of it is because the Bible does.And the Bible does address the saved in this regard. Christians need to take heed and,curiously,you seem to hate that a Christian would offer such a suggestion or give such an illustration. Your desire to be contentious would appear ill-motivated and is,again,totally unnecessary. And,I am basing my post on the men simply saying "good morning". First of all,if the prostitutes are so convinced of a man's character enough to say that they wish they had a man like that simply because he greets them (as I'm sure do all their "clients"),the prostitutes would have to have greater knowledge or imagination of the men greeting them than would seem plausible. ...must be more to the story.
How do prostitutes know which men are Christian? Men who have witnessed to them? And if these men are married,why aren't their wives with them or why don't they just ask their wives to witness to them? I have known of "Christian" men who conveniently take interest in the spiritual well being of the lost female office workers at their place of business. Of course,these women dress immodestly.And,as can be expected,these men end up having affairs. I would wonder at the motives behind married Christian men who make it a habit of interacting with prostitutes. And while some prostitutes may wish that they had that kind of man,I'd venture to say that so would many a "Christian" man's wife. Some prostitutes may very well wish for something better,some may just say it,but,ultimately,what they need is not found in man but in Christ;when prostitutes have had an encounter with a Christian,man or woman,they should be desiring Christ,not man. If the exchange between the Christian and a lost soul was void of the gospel,then it was indeed in vain.
Christopher,you had mentioned a boy. Whether it was a boy or girl wasn't the issue as much as the observation that this society subjects children as young as 5 years of age to inappropriate images all the time. If you think that they are unaffected by these images and don't entertain such thoughts of emulating them,you are sadly mistaken. I've seen children as young as 6 play in an area outside my last apartment and witnessed such...little girls dressed in short shorts and halter tops doing sensual cheerleader moves to some weird sensual music and boys kissing them and them kissing each other.And "no" I wasn't being a peeping tom. I was just one of the many tenants that could hear everything that was going on because of the proximity of the quad to my deck door. Needless to say,they were very much in my prayers. And,I might add that girls may be just as bad these days as the boys. Their idols are the nasty acting female singers du jour. For some reason, if it's a country or pop song,the lyrics of the song have to be pretty much limited to one topic and the attire of the divas have to match.Frankly, I don't think that there would be many songs around if that subject was eliminated.
Dolores,if your church doesn't attend to the immodesty issue,you should find another church. If I recall correctly,you did say that there are many women there even on "stage" that dress inappropriately. Charismatic and pentecostal churches seem to be the worse offenders which isn't to say that other churches are exempt. I went to one church where they made provision for that. Women would have long scarves to offer to other women who might come in in short dresses or inappropriate attire. This was done in a very gentle,unoffensive manner. The women who received the scarves were not offended and those in the congregation,likewise,weren't offended by the immodesty. Men who "just" watch porn are dangerous too and I would submit that men like Ted Bundy all watch/watched porn too.In fact,that is usually very prominent in their background. Any one who has watched porn has messed up their mind. Christ can set them free but anyone who thinks that they can look at acceptable porn like half naked people and be unaffected are deceived and have deceived their spouses as well.
It's interesting that the little boy wanted a mermaid doll which is a scantily clad doll,Christopher. The question is-did he want it because he feels like a girl or did he want it because he is a boy who likes or has been exposed to so many lustful images of women in comparable attire that he is just being a typical young male feeling the need to become sexually mature at such a young age? We,correctly,object to the transgender issue but may be too quick to forget about what,namely,rampant promiscuity of this nation,birthed it. We don't like the fruit but forget and didn't attend to the root of the problem. No doubt we are a laughing stock to other nations but sometimes using that which is abominable to rule over us is God's way of waking us up or for the purpose of judgment.
The article states "...Bishops from around the world will return to the subject at a Vatican synod in October which will seek to find a compromise on that and other divisive issues." It speaks volumes in regards to the RC church. They could save themselves a lot of trouble if they would just go to the true Word of God and find out what it says. In fact,if they went to Scripture,they could abolish the papal office and the rest of their system altogether. This system which has had so many fallible "infallible" faux pas and which anathematizes Christians for holding to grace only through faith in Christ only defies reason. Their history and catechism are so lacking in foundation I guess that the only way that they manage to get away with it is to threaten their followers with excommunication. They must know that if and when the people figure it out that they will lose them. This is probably why BG is their poster boy. Many a time are the lies of Satan subtle but the RC system is a case of not seeing the forest for the trees.
I'm just wondering...if a person can't determine which sex they are or are confused in that regard,how can they possibly give any credence to the notion of homosexuality? Defining oneself as a homosexual would require knowing ones gender. I'm guessing that there can be no such thing as a gender confused homosexual. Further,if students can't correctly figure out which gender they are,should they really be attending a "higher education" institution? I would imagine that the questions might get harder there after.
Pennned suggests that John MacArthur should repent for "...NT prescription for the church should be replaced with his presumptions),..." Really? I haven't found John MacArthur countering Scripture in regards to this rather I have found him to be very well grounded in his teachings on said subject. Are you one of those tongue waggers for the Holy Spirit or one of those "miracle" workers. Every time there is a healing cited it is always something that really can't be documented or very minor...like "oh,my aching back or foot or headache",etc. Woe to those who seek signs and wonders. They really don't know Who they're missing...namely,the Holy Spirit. And they repel many unbelievers from Christianity.
heehee maybe Obama can become the next faux pa since his final term is almost up here. The good news is that he probably couldn't mess up their system any more than it already is. He could be the first "black" faux pa. And the RCs already consider the faux pa to be a representative Christ on Earth...not to different from the confused people who elected Obama and called him "messiah". Perhaps this would be a way for Obama to be elevated by the world. "popabama"
...a very funny thing to occur here in America where cohabitation/living together in sin or being totally absent from a home where ones children live has been the preference. Anyone who has an inclination to try polygamy ought to take a lesson from Solomon...poor guy. No wonder he was lamenting.
The RCs are only happy if they keep Christ in a manger with Mary as a very key figure in the scene or if they keep Him on their crucifix. The erroneous date,as you point out,came to us through the RC church not from the Bible. Christianity is based on the TRUTH. Making up a date to celebrate Christs' birth which no Christians would have dreamed of doing until they wanted to quit making waves in the 4th century is what's wrong with it. If it was an abomination to do it for the earlier Christians/Apostles,it's abominable now,no matter what "good" will is intended. Christ did not come into being in His incarnation,the Word was always with God. The birth is nothing apart from His death and resurrection...something else the RCs can't get. It is finished. Why meditate on the shadow when one has the substance? Christians rejoice in Christs' works every day. For the Christians- "Joyful 28th".
Maybe they should leave. Christians trying to receive "higher" education in secular institutions is quite a challenge especially since practically everything taught in these places attempts to make God into a fairy tale.I remember becoming more primed to be agnostic when I went.Even science and history were laden with humanistic/evolution "facts". Duke U seems to think that there is some value in porn and so does the rest of the country. Compromise begets this kind of dense mentality and if colleges support it,truth is of no effect.
Unprofitable...I have to wonder why a professing Christian as yourself would accuse another Christian of "disdaining" people and praising atheists. If you can't figure out what I meant by saying that those who wish to keep Christ out of pagan celebrations like c-mess are doing more of a service for Christianity than many Christians who are deceived by the holidays or that I absolutely think that women should not be scantily clad (including cheerleaders)-which you judge as a hatred towards them, I suggest that you appear to be the one who hates cheerleaders as you put down those who care enough about them to expose their very grievous attire and you would misjudge the Christians who came before us who were punished/ostracized for their loyalty to Christ so as to keep Him out of foolish festivities made up by the true enemies of Christ (inc. the RC church). You are the one siding with the world. Sad to see which team you're on. If Christopher has been blessed to avoid seeing cheerleaders at a game,good for him. But,of course,if cheerleaders weren't there to be seen by someone,they wouldn't there to begin with. They're being,intentionally,used to some end. Too bad tv viewers can't avoid them as well.
Unprofitable,you state "...Thank God, someone cared enough for you to share the gospel." According to the implications of your posts I need to be saved.Your lies are troubling as are your erroneous judgments. And you seem to be just about the only one who sees my posts as being in need of removal. I certainly don't hate cheerleaders but I do hate the sin of immodesty,lasciviousness,and that men are so gullible to fall into that so readily and then,worse,close their eyes to justify it. And because Paul makes mention that physical exercise profits some or that he compares our walk to running a race doesn't in any way mean that he would condone pro sports of today. No Christian would condone and allow their sons and daughters to watch a program where they,at some time during the program,will be assaulted by porn/half nude people and aggressive/macho behavior. If you don't think girls and boys,as well,pick up on what their parents watch,you are sorely wrong.The message is: if my parents like this then it must be good to emulate or to copy. And if women can dress like cheerleaders on the field in public,why can't I dress seductively in public? Are you so deceived? We are not to be stumbling blocks,especially to children.
A very serious charge,Unprofitable "...Your desire is that the light of the gospel should not shine in darkness but must be extinguished." How you draw your conclusions is very scary. I'm all for inner city missions.You might want to reread what I had posted. Your ability to correctly comprehend what I write leaves much to be desired. If you understood my comment in regards to atheists in my previous post,you wouldn't be slandering me unjustly. Atheists want to take Christ out of a very pagan celebration.You wish to keep Him there? I suppose all of the other Christians before the 4th century including all of the Apostles would be just as guilty of siding with the reprobates because they didn't join together with them in their celebrations. It would appear that I am in very good company.
You made a lot of false statements,Unprofitable but I'll state the obvious- football players are at the game as is the chaplain...A place where the football players are cheered on by women in stripper attire as they come onto the field surrounded by inebriated fans. I don't have an obsession with strippers. If you read my last post you might get that. It's because I do care about women who are exploited,willingly and unwillingly,that I speak against such things as football. It would seem to me that if you cared about women being objectified that you might care more about them not being used. I'm sure that you wouldn't like your daughter out there on the field dressed as an object to be lusted after. The question is- why don't you care?