Michael Hranek wrote: Waslow Please, to the best of my knowledge I've never met you, but I have repeatedly met those forget The early church (think Apostle Paul as an example) believed in the sudden imminent (it could be any time without warning EVEN ....... ) return, let me repeat that RETURN of the Lord Jesus Christ for His church So are we going to waste time discussing our favorite interpretation of Scripture to prove we are right and those other people are wrong? or wake up and realize time is short, people are dying and going into hell today (rapture or no rapture) and like the laborers hired in the last hour go out into the harvest fields to bring in all the precious harvest we can, BEFORE the storm of God's holy wrath sweaps the chaff (even the humanly speaking good people you and I have met, and again love and care so much about we don't want them to die and go to hell) into hell forever SteveR Rapture or no rapture the judgment of God is coming on the Great Harlot and nothing you, Pope Francis 1, the RC Queen of heaven and all the blasphemous rosaries prayed to her will stop it, will it
1517 wrote: When Christ returns it is over. It is not a play with different acts. Rapture theology is new (19th century) and is based more in sensationalism than biblical truth. We should, as others have stated, focus on the King's return and not on the itinerary.
It is NOT "new" started in the 19th century by Darby.
It may be what the dialogue was at the time of the incident but the language quoted in the article is quite offensive. I stopped reading and came back to make this comment, so I don't know if it improved. I suggest follow my advice not my action, don't click the link to read the article
Then you must be AGAINST Obamacare, because it funds abortions (see link below). Either you are FOR Obamacare and therefore FOR funding abortions and abortifacients or you are AGAINST abortions, YOU CANNOT BE BOTH.
You rightly tell John Yurich he cannot have a mixture of truth and false teaching by being a practicing Catholic but you seem to be willing to support Obamacare for the perceived good you think it does even though there are many bad and evil consequences that come from it.
Don't be wishy-washy my friend, stop your support for the Democratically conceived, written (Republican amendments to it were either blocked or not passed - so NOTHING Republican about it, even then Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said we have to pass it to see what is in it) passed and implemented national plan to ruin healthcare for everybody in our nation.
It is nothing but more governmental control of the masses. I am sure jpw could wax more eloquent on that part than me.
Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
While is clear that hell was to be the future abode of the devil and his demons, that does not mean that God never intended to punish the impenitent lost there. To say, well humans will end up there but that wasn't God's original plan would mean that the following scenario would have to take place:
The holy Trinity were looking down upon Their creation and suddenly noticed the serpent tempting Eve. When to Their amazement not only did she fall, her husband deliberately followed her in disobedience. They had to counsel now, the entire human race was ruined. They could choice to save a remnant according to grace but what to do with those who were not recepients of mercy. Well, We have this place call Hell that We made for the devil and demons, I guess We will have to send them there also.
I trust you can easily see how absurb such a scenario would be for an omniscient God. God always intended that the impentitent lost would spend eternity in the place where the worm dies not and the flame is not quenched. May we, by His grace and for His glory, not be hardened to the eternal fate of those who know not God but be motivated to warn sinners to flee the wrath to come.
"While Emanuel emphasizes the personal benefits of forgoing measures that extend life, the unspoken issue is the scarcity of resources in a system beholden to a fixed government budget"
Emanuel chastised physicians for thinking only about their own patientsâ€™ needs.
Since then, however, many promoters of Obamacare, including Howard Dean â€“ the former head of the Democratic Party and a former medical doctor â€“ have admitted the lawâ€™s Independent Payment Advisory Board is a â€śhealth-care rationing bodyâ€ť with the authority to â€śstop certain treatments.â€ť
The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course.
This is what "independent" Jim thinks is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Now who was it that advocated the survival of the fittest??
no they don't flock from Canada they wait a real long time and some die because of it, hard to make it here if you have died from a treatable disease.
If only the rich survive, why are they called the 1%?
kinda a strange dilemma for Frank from J4J, in his mind the brother is living in adultery and the only way for that to stop would be to divorce his wife. But then divorce is sin too!! decisions decisions
When one looks at the manifold references given in Kings and Chronicles about how the current monarch was not like God's servant David, only ONCE is the issue of Uriah mentioned and nary a word about adultery. All the rest read like, I Kings 14:7 and 8
7 Go, tell Jeroboam, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Forasmuch as I exalted thee from among the people, and made thee prince over my people Israel,
8 And rent the kingdom away from the house of David, and gave it thee: and yet thou hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart, to do that only which was right in mine eyes;
Looks like our God forgives sin and cast it in the depth of the sea and behind His back, because they were laid on the Lord Jesus. Used by God to write many of the highly treasured portions of Holy Writ. Surely you don't think God condones adultery?
Your last post is not like you, very condescending and unkind. No condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit like brother Frank.
John for JESUS wrote: Frank... Terminating a marriage is different than remarriage. God allows for divorce, but it is a sin to then get married to someone else. Scripture is pretty clear about remarriage. If anyone is divorced, they should stay that way or get back with their spouse and someone who has remarried is not supposed to be a pastor or deacon.
greek scholar Spiros Zodhiatesin his book, What about Divorce alludes to the fact that the subject of divorce and remarriage may not be as black and white as it is being stated here.
Please indulge from me a few words about our dear brother Frank and possibly others who post or read this forum. First, congratulations is to bestowed upon the brother for over 30 years of marriage. God has truly blessed him.
Let us consider what Paul said to the Corinthians (chapter 6) After a lengthy list of immoral behaviors and noting that they that practice such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God, he states in verse 11, "and such WERE some of you, but YE ARE WASHED, but YE ARE SANCTIFIED, but YE ARE JUSTIFIED in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." Hallelujah that God would say that of any of us!!
The Scripture (Romans 8) reminds us that because we are justified, who shall lay ANY THING to the charge of God's elect? (some in this forum apparently) Because Christ died for our sins, rose for our justification and ever lives to make intercession for us, who can rightfully condemn? (are we wiser than God?) If God be for us, then by His grace and for His glory we stand in His presence robed in the righteousness of our precious Lord and Savior. What a blessed motivation to pursue holiness and live godly, soberly, and righteously shining forth as God's work in the midst of a crooked and perverse world.
Thanks for the keen insight about marriage SteveR. But maybe you should check your Bible both the passage in Matthew 5 and 19 that were quoted in support of the statements about divorce reference what was said in the law (Matthew 5:31 19:8)
Agree with GS If they walked in and asked for a cake that said congratulations and said nothing to the baker of its purpose would be different than if they request Jeff and John true love forever with two guys holding hands being part of the decoration, that would be an entirely different matter. You are not saying they should make the cake in the latter example are you?
It is a mute point if they have made inappropriate cakes previously or if they make cakes for second weddings. Do you stop reading your Bible because you have violated some of Its commands?
J4J, you are making people partakers in other men's deeds just because they do business with them. So, following the same logic you are putting out; the gas station owner is in support of the gay agenda because they filled up their vehicles at his gas station. The power company is also guilty because they are supplying electricity to the event. The pizza place is guilty for the fornication that goes on at frat parties because they delivered pizza to the dorm. The DOT is partaker in their evil deeds because they traveled across the roads to get to where they were going, etc. etc.
The article is addressing bakeries being forced to make a cake that honors a godless ceremony. Pennnnnnnnnnnned has made some very great points as Ellie has pointed out.
John for JESUS wrote: The only reason I kind of think they should is because they serve everyone else. Whether they are already living together or on their second marriage, so what's the difference?
There is a difference between serving "gays" and making a cake that honors a homosexual ceremony. I have yet to hear where Christian bakeries refuse to sell cookies, cakes, decorations, etc to anyone due to their "sexual preference". The objections come when they refuse to make cakes that honor the lifestyle. They already discriminate in not making cakes to honor, as examples, devil worship, human sacrifice or pro-abortion. This is just another example where they refuse to honor that which goes against their convictions.
Also John, following your reasoning, if we sin in one area then we might as well sin in all????