I understand your comments, and to a point agree; but you are missing a valid point, which is truth. In this case he (Rush) mentions a truth that others have ignored. While I take all news with a grain of salt, I look to a variety of sources for news; not all people who report the news are, in my opinion, Christian... That said, there are some Christians who don't speak truth. On top of that, many Christians don't have the access or time to report on ALL of the stories that are of relevance and interest to Christians. My point? I believe that the people here on SA are doing the best they can to filter in stories that are relevant, and hopefully, factual. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
If I may add my .02... The Bible clearly teaches that man, because of their sin nature, cannot make atonement for their own son, much less anyone else's. The sin nature comes from the father, (or so my wife often tells me,) so if Jesus was not the virgin born Son of God, then He could not have made an atonement for His own sin, much less someone else's. He must be the Son of God for that. Although not specifically stated, I believe that the reason God chose a virgin was so there would not be any confusion to the parentage. As far as perpetual virginity; that is ludicrous, there was nothing in the Bible to suggest it. (I'm sure Mary having other children answers that RCC charge.)
SteveR. The question is not so much, "How did such and such treat his slave/bondservant?" But how did God tell them to. Your question is ludicrous, as it implies that mankinds behavior is indicative of God's design. Free will and a sin nature assures us that man will pervert God's plan at every opportunity.
I've seen homeschooling done well, and I've seen homeschooling done very very very wrong. The problem is it is the extreme that makes the impression on unbelievers. They will always point out the uneducated child whose parents "homeschooled" to keep them away fromevil influence
There is a difference, I believe, in keeping bond-persons/slaves for sex slaves and bond-persons/slaves for general slavery. Besides, nowhere did God allow for the sexual aspect that ISIS is allowing. Keeping a female who has "not known man" meant that she was still pure. The likelihood that one who had known man and could be pregnant, thus spawning a child of an enemy was avoided.
Not sure I agree with you John, it seems to me that you waited until the fourth day for Lazarus, and he interrupted the widow with the only son at his funeral as well. I'm thinking He can probably do it whenever He wants to... (although, in this case I believe these people are crackpots.)
JY. you misunderstood my post. That was an if/then comment. If he is saved then I would not want to be at his resurrection. If he is not saved, then he has a whole lot more problems. And ask yourself this, remember when Paul mentioned that there were some that preach Christ in order to add to his bonds? They were preaching Christ, but do you really think they were saved? (i'm in the car, without a Bible, so I don't have the scripture reference offhand. Speak to text rules. LOL)
It's sad when anyone detours from the Gospel to take the quick road to power, position and possessions. I heard that Billy Graham was a sound preacher and his early days, (though I've never read his early material, after reading some of his current positions.) It's really sad that he went the way that he has with ecumenism and false doctrine; the tens of thousands he was in the position to reach, and squandered that opportunity... The fact is, none of us know his spiritual condition; he might be saved in stupid, or lost and lying... If he's lost, that's sad. But if he is saved, I would not want to be him at the resurrection before the judgment seat of Christ.
I apologize for my ignorance on this matter, but I was curious, I rarely get a chance to get on the board and when I do so it is from my iPhone app. John Yurich, why do you keep referring to yourself as the real John Yurich?
I teach at a secular college, and when the term scapegoat came up one time I had fun showing the class where the term originated. It was a fun way to share the gospel, without looking like I was sharing the gospel.
PoT- you said to SteveR, "Even if this guy is trying to impersonate you, you don't need to attack him." I have been off and on this board for a year at least with my name Stevenr. I have an n. I also make it clear I am originally from Missouri. I have never impersonated anyone. SteveR, I am on an iPhone. It shows me the last x number of posts. If I don't check regular, which I often do not, then I miss some comments. I saw no valid critique, so I did not respond to it. However, that said, if the "valid critique' was anything like your diatribe, then I will likely ignore it.