John Yurich, sounds like you are trying to say a person who is heterosexual is choosing not to be a homosexual. That would be accurate as by nature, according to Romans 1, we are all born heterosexual. But because it is part of our nature, then you have to look at it like having blue eyes. You are not choosing to not have green eyes if you were born with blue eyes, it is just the way God made you . Also, you are not choosing to have blue eyes, it is just they way you were born. The way you worded it sounds like you come in with a tabula rasa and you chose one way or the other. Although that would be better than what the homosexual crowd is currently claiming at least it would recognize they are choosing, still not accurate though.
Really if I was attacking literalism, I would probably leave Nicodemus out of the equation and attack the woman at the well, or the crowd in John 6 or those who misunderstood about destroying the temple. Thanks for your gracious response Luker. I guess I was looking also at the things like, born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2) born of Virgin (Isaiah 7:14) out of Egypt have I called my son (Hosea 11:1), the triumphal entry (Zechariah 9:9) the pierced hands (Psalm 22:16), etc. Thanks will look into the passage in Isaiah 24. I will state for clarification, that God is in the heaven and He reigns over all His creation. (Daniel 4) I don't believe in a God who is at the mercy of human will to be able to accomplish His purposes on the earth. You will not find the phrase make Jesus Lord of your life, because He is Lord, you have a choice to acknowledge that but your acknowledgement or lack thereof does not change His position. I see the millennial reign as a reign HERE physically on the earth instead in His position at the right hand of the Father He currently occupies. My main point is that nothing that surrounds the 1000 year reign in Revelation 20 is by anybody here thought to be allegorical, so why do we say it is?
Why should the Greens have to sell their business when it is the government that is overstepping the boundaries of the Greens constitutionally guaranteed rights? Besides the fact that President Obama has given many exemptions to all his union buddies and their businesses.
Jim Lincoln wrote: I don't think the title of the bill was Free Healthcare but "affordable," [
Affordable????? ---- A new government actuarial study finds that as a result of the law, health care spending will be $478 billion higher over the next decade than it would have otherwise been had no law been passed. Furthermore, as a result of the health care law, about 50 cents of every dollar of health care spending in the United States will be financed by government by 2021, according to the report from the actuary‚Äôs office at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, unveiled today