Christopher000 wrote:
I cringe whenever I hear of something being blessed. I know people who keep their palms from Palm Sunday, unwilling to toss them because they say a priest blessed them. I find it absolutely incredible how much power a Priest holds in the eyes of the church. Nobody has ever benefitted from a Priest blessing anything but their faith is too strong to see it. Not unlike the faith healers. I don't believe they heal anyone, but the peoples faith is so blind that they can't see past the music, chanting, and overall Hollywood style productions.

"Francis drove up the main boulevard leading to St. Peter's Square, blessing the thousands of people in what was a giant Harley parking lot.

Lurker wrote:
I have read it many times. For the record, Deut 29-30 is what is known as the song of Moses mentioned in Revelation 15 1-4. It lays out the terms of the everlasting covenant God made with Abraham which Israel eventually broke and later God broke to establish a better new covenant with better promises.... eternal life. Paul called it the law of faith.
You are reading Deut 30:1-10 chronologically which suits your presupposition but won't work. Here's why.
Deut 30:1-5 is chronological and explains what God proposed to do to redeem His people.

Christopher000 wrote:
I just remembered that even SteveR said he would like to see you move on from the Roman system.
Just so I don't have to endure the broken record again...it's not about going to a specific church in order to be saved...not one person has ever said that. For the 3, 874, 362, 947th time, it is about attending a church that believes in and teaches from the Bible alone, without adding heretical, manmade traditions, without subtracting teachings/doctrines that they feel their traditions or Papal decrees supercede, and without the blasphemous, unbiblical, abominable, manmade rituals.
Not about what church one attends, but rather about a church that is inline with very clear doctrine...teaching it, preaching it, living it.

Dolores L wrote:
We have never in the history of our country had a president with the audicity to say"We are no longer a Christian nation"!! This morning I read an artical saying the very same thing you and were trying to get across..the next scene that will unfold is the antichrist is now here.

Article 11.

Unprofitable Servant wrote:
Hey Steve, just a fyi, jpw is a lady,
although been through this before, from her post,"Dolores, I'm a gal like you."

jpw wrote:
I've had many friends whose husbands were not believers. He needs your prayers,

reminder wrote:
Matthew 5:44 - "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
Matthew 5:46 - "For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?
Luke 6:27 - "But I say to you who hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,
Luke 6:32 - "If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them.
Just a reminder to John UK and Frank - pilgrims joined at the hip. Unscriptural amount of favouritism shown to each other on this site.
Which MODERATOR is abuse. All Christians esp. moderators of sites should read 'The Subtle Power of Spiritual abuse" You two are classics.

Michael Hranek wrote:
SteveR
At the expense of the kids???
Excuse me but if the BSA or any other organization or cherished religion is guilty of abusing or putting into danger children they are the ones guilty.
The SBC may indeed be guilty of its own 'missdeeds' but it would be dishonest to blame them for parting company with the BSA any more than if would be to blame the victims of rc priest abuse (or any other denomination's abuse for that matter) for daring to raise protest against it and part company with them over it.
And in case of actual abuse of children for turning the matter over to the police and courts to be dealt with appropriately by law.
AGAIN Don't blame the very imperfect SBC for what is wrong with the BSA or criticize if they part company with them, blame the BSA.

Michael Hranek wrote:
SteveR
Welcoming sinners to attend services where the Truth, where the Gospel of Christ is preached whether or not they be atheists, muslims, mormons, roman catholics, boy scouts, homosexuals, or serial killers (ex. abortionists, and the politicans and movers behind the murder of pre-born babies) is one thing.
Providing them with facilities to carry on their activities is an entirely different thing again.
Neither the SBC nor any other church that would be faithful to Christ ought to provide, abortionists, homosexuals, muslims, mormons, roman catholic priests, ungodly politicans any pulpit nor opportunity to speak let alone promote their causes, agendas and false teachings, or anything else to aid and abet them in their sin and the promotion of it.
PERIOD. thank you very much

Barry from KY. wrote:
There are a few SBC churches allowing the organization to use their building here locally.
I think this begs the question, should the body of Christ turn this organisation away? How can we be salt if the body of Christ secludes itself. It makes Christians seem more cultish, I would think.
Christ dined with sinners and tax collectors, what about us???

Christopher000 wrote:
Thanks Steve...can't believe that there is another "Christian" group doing this, and under the Baptist name. Truth is that I really don't care for labels anymore because there is so much junk within each one. I also don't care for them because they tend to make people narrowminded, doctrinally, and in other ways.
As for the Satanic cult thing, I think you misunderstood. On a totally seperate matter, there was an Italian priest who wrote books, went on the airwaves, etc, exposing different nefarious things going on within the Vatican. One of the things he would speak about was the rampant homosexuality, another was that he said there was a secret Satanic cult within Vatican walls. Man I wish I could remember his name...Father something.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
So, SteveR, "Two wrongs make a right,"

But one criticism of yours is very accurate, the RCC heirarchy facilitates homosexual behaviour by ignoring Scripture. IMO- they use it as power over their Priesthood to keep them in line

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

1 Timothy 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

Christopher000 wrote:
Gey outta here...are you kidding me? I have always heard about the various conspiracy theories, but figured they , well, didn't know what to believe. I wonder what else is really true now such as the Satanic cult within the Vatican written and spoken of by an old priest (forget his name).
I am beginning to wonder how long this Pope will be keeping his job, or even remain on planet Earth.
Very short article...

"Rainbow Baptists is a website providing support, information and advocacy for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and queer identified Baptists, their family and friends. Rainbow Baptists is an outreach ministry of The Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (AWAB).

John for JESUS wrote:
SteveR...
I agree with you, but then how can faith in Christ ever be called a work of the law which is meritorious for salvation then? It wasn't even part of the law. It isn't possible to earn salvation by faith.

John for JESUS wrote:
JOHN UK...
I don't care if Mormons think faith is a work. I'm kind of surprised at you for using that as an example.
SteveR...
I don't believe that is a command to have faith in order to receive eternal life. Gal 3:21 says, "For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law." V23 says, "but before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed." Faith wasn't revealed as a means of justification yet.

The Mosaic Covenant and the Abrahamic Covenant are different, one is law the other PROMISE

Barry from KY. wrote:
Bible reading has been in decline for years. I know of one deacon at a SBC here in KY that told me he never read the bible except during church services. He just didn't have the time...

Joe Bob wrote:
Please don't misunderstand. The issue is over what God hath said. i.e. Homosexuals can do everything others can do today, the issue is the term marriage because it is tied back to what God hath said and they want to challenge that.
But, you say the baker should refuse to bake a cake for such a event. What about the facility (owned by a realtor)that rents their building out for events? What about the Limo service (car dealer) that rents for events?

Mike wrote:
No need, Steve. All grace is prevenient.

Dont mistake them for a branch of NE Puritans, but there are some similarities. Anyways, I hope Lee returns and presents his testimony

JfJ
This is one of several OT quotes of salvation by faith

Dolores L wrote:
I do not remember ssying the girl was being persecuted..the message was is our freedom of speech being slowly tsken away from us..that's a big difference but you people think differently than I do..so to end my side of the confersation,"let's just agree to disagree"..I for one am tired of beating a desd horse..we are going to have to stsnd nrfore

Frank wrote:
I think Lee is really SteveR.

Lee appears to pontificate from a 'Holiness Movement' Church point of view. Their view would contradict every other person you have accused me of being, but you are way too simple to understand that.