They voted for the Bible to be the official state book. Nothing in the bill was said about the plan of redemption. Nothing in the bill was said about subjugation of the people of TN to it. Nothing in the bill was mentioned about the transitory nature of life. No one suggested that it was to be considered a good luck charm for the state. No one said that all the people in the great state of Tennessee were now more spiritual. No one said that they were intending to set up a state sponsored religion because of it. Nothing was advocating setting up a Christian state. They just said it would be considered their official state book. (which apparently will not happen per JL link)
Y'all are complaining because of that???? Would you rather they chose the Koran, the book of Mormon or a book by Madelin Murray O'Hare?
They wanted to honor the Bible as their state book, seems like a good move to me. Maybe it will encourage people to pick it up and read it.
We live in a secular world. Things are going from bad to worse, in case you had not noticed. The state has a religion, it is called secular humanism.
I believe we should be glad that they wanted to honor the Bible.
John Yurich USA wrote: There probably are church members who never communicate with their pastor about anything let alone their beliefs.
Name one church that allows you to be a MEMBER without you communicating your faith to them, other than WCF churches that say that babies are Christians. You are in your 50's so you can't use that one anyway. You have been a RCC all your life, you KNOW you STATED your belief in the RCC when you were growing up.
John Yurich USA wrote: If the RCC is not cognizant of my beliefs then I am not considered a heretic by the RCC. It is no business of the RCC what my beliefs are. Just as if I were to attend an Evangelical Church it would be no business of the minister what my beliefs are. My beliefs are no business of any clergy member.
so when the RCC describe the people who are heretics, they named the people? or did they make a generic statement that covered everybody who held beliefs that they consider anathema. If you fit the definition, then regardless of whether it is known to the RCC you are still fit their definition of the heretic. When one says if the eyes of RCC you are considered a heretic, it is due to your belief system not your name or whether you made it known to the RCC. They consider thousands who hold Protestant beliefs as heretics without them knowing who they are, just based upon their belief system. If the shoe fits wear it.
John UK wrote: Wow, what a mistake to make. I wonder if I picked that up off of a record or something, like... Let's go To San Francis....co Say Frank, what's California's nickname then? Thanks for putting me straight on that, as I like to learn something every day. I wonder if I was thinking of Silicon Valley?
I could think of a few nicknames but don't want to offend the good brothers and sisters in Christ that call it their home.
California â€śThe Golden Stateâ€ť has long been a popular designation for California and was made the official State Nickname in 1968. It is particularly appropriate since California's modern development can be traced back to the discovery of gold in 1848 and fields of golden poppies can be seen each spring throughout the state. The Golden State Museum is also the name of a new museum slated to open in late 1998 at the California State Archives in Sacramento. The museum's exhibits will bring to life the momentous events of California's history through a series of innovative, interpretive exhibits
pennned wrote: US, from my memory which can fail, others correct as I reflect on this things or others can chime in. isn't 508 another corporate process?
Actually it looks just like tax code and does not mention corporations. It is clarification on 501c3. It is more the court ruling with which we are forced to deal.
Just like Roe v Wade (a court decision) is the "law of the land" so Taylor v Commissioner of Internal Revenue is the "law of the land." Thus all churches are considered to be under the restrictions of 501c3.
Pretty sure this is what the LGBT groups will use to try and shut churches down. Alas, it takes those who stood against submitting to a 501c3 status and pulls the rug out from under them. I doubt that churches who stand for the truth of the Word of God will start taking orders from the government as to what they can or cannot teach and preach. It will be a purging process and may drive the church in U.S., like the church in communist countries, underground.
Our Lord reminds us that in the world you shall have tribulation but be of good cheer for He has overcome the world.
Frank wrote: Brother US, I'm glad you mentioned that all come under those restrictions without applying. I did a long meditation on the "church" and found that out months ago,but forgot that fact. To me that makes it even more troubling because those who know this, still apply even when they don't have to. Why apply to be restricted when you are already restricted? Why apply for tax exemption, when you already have it? My conclusions were very negative, so I won't share them. Anyway, my guess is the only ones who are exempt are house churches, but I know of none of those in my area. My guess is they would be exempt because normally no salaries or benefits are involved. And they probably don't meet the criteria for a legitimate church, but I have never studied that issue. Anyway, thanks for bringing up what you did. Most don't know that.
Your welcome and thanks for your kind words. I am with you, have to wonder, unless it was just out of ignorance, why any church would willing apply for 501c3 status. Most would agree with your negative thoughts about it brother Frank. I am sure pennned would have a few choice and sage words about it.
"But churches are different. Under section 508(c)(1)(A) of the tax code, churches are exempt from applying to the IRS for tax exempt status. Thus, churches are automatically exempt from income taxes under the federal tax code without first applying to the IRS for recognition of exempt status.
Cases have dealt with this issue. In Taylor v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the United States Tax Court agreed that, under section 508(c)(1) of the tax code churches do not have to apply for tax exempt status and are considered automatically exempt. But the court also stated, â€śNothing in section 508(c)(1) relieves a church from having to meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3).â€ť
Essentially, what the Taylor court was saying is that churches are still subject to the restrictions in section 501(c)(3) of the tax code EVEN IF THEY NEVER APPLY to the IRS for recognition of tax exempt status.
I also grieve with you sister Mourner at the passing of your mother. Like brother Frank both my parents passed to their eternal reward to be with our precious Lord. We trust as ladybug and Frank said that God's grace well prove to be more than sufficient and comfort and strengthen you and your family as you deal with this loss.
Thank you for taking time during which you need those to minister to you that you put your thoughts out to minister to us with solemn words to ponder in our walk with Christ.
Not surprising to see they dynamic duo distort the issue here. Nobody mentioned anything about living to be any age until John Y brought it up. The people who posted expressed a longing to be in place where no sin, no struggles, no separation, no sorrows, no sickness, no sadness exist. Where they could spend uninterrupted fellowship with their Savior and leave the disappointments and discouragements of this vain world behind. We long to lay our weapons down and enjoy the rest that remains for the people of God. By His grace we will press on and fight the good fight of faith until our Master calls us home, but we look for a city whose builder and maker is God.
As MS pointed out, where your treasure is there will your heart be also. In Scripture we do have an example of one who wanted to live out a long life here in this world. Take your ease, eat, drink and be merry. God called him a fool. John Y's telling statement is though heaven is where he wants to spend eternity yet living in this world far more desirable to him.
As my good brother Frank pointed out
Philippians 1:21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 23 For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better:
Passerby wrote: Good Afternoon to all responders to my post. ...So if we are divided over race, why shouldn't the world be? ...
Passerby, sorry to hear you got a headache, hope all is better. I did a search in the article and it said nothing about blacks or whites. (although some comments below the article brought up the issue-but those comments are not found here) This means the ONLY one that brought up race or skin color was YOU. (please don't take my word for it, read all the posts and see where the topic of race is first mentioned, btw comments prior to yours came from people who are black and people who are white) YOU bring up the issue and then turn around and call us racists or try to lecture us on dividing the issue on racial lines. Look in the mirror please, it never crossed anyone's mind but yours. Again, this speaks volumes about how you view the world around you. The Bible clearly states, (Colossians 3:11) "Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all." That is our emphasis, we do hope you will share it.
Passerby wrote: ... Even in white â€śChristianâ€ť churches. Sorry to say that they are very gullible. I am not posting this to debate racism. The issue is that the media is instrumental in separating groups of people. Only whites will be offended. Not one Christian will be. Because they are not ignorant of Satanâ€™s devices. So donâ€™t vent against my post.
Let me get this right. You can rail against other posters (like Joe the Protestant) you can accuse the country of being racist ("the KKK on every level of government") you can be selective in your outrage in crimes against other people based upon their ethnicity, BUT you are above anyone making comments on your comment? You see nothing prejudice in saying that people in "white Christian churches" are ignorant and gullible. You would be first to complain if someone had said people in black churches are gullible. (not saying they are) If you don't want people to respond to your posts, then simply don't post here, no one is forcing you to make comments on this forum. Even your "only whites will be offended" is a telling comment on your racial outlook. You comment isn't offensive, just terribly misguided.
Nosey, your statement about jobs would only be valid if there were an allotment of just so many jobs, and a person working overseas means a person is not working in America. It is kind of like our parents admonishing us to eat our food because there are starving children elsewhere. Our consumption of all that is on our plate does not assuage the hunger of another person overseas. Buying stuff made in China does not mean American jobs are suffering. Certain ones may be affected, but jobs are not a static place or industry. There are people working here that would not have any job if it was not for the products that are produced in China, Japan or any other part of the world being purchased by the American consumer.
You then say self-service scanners are putting Americans out of work. Now it may be moving jobs from one place to another. There may be fewer cashiers, but there are more people employed manufacturing and servicing the self checkout scanners plus other ancillary beneficiaries.
The president tax policies are what is giving us the highest percentage of people no longer in the workforce in decades.
kenny wrote: Why can no one engage in a discussion by sticking with the topic? Parsing words and snarky comments prove nothing but stupidity. UnprofitableServant: You've crossed the line, Hoss. Meet me at the Marietta Diner parking lot - or anywhere else of your choosing - this evening and I'll happily explain my wife's pajama situation with you in person. I live nearby so anywhere close is great with me. Don't be a coward - meet me. Maybe after your wife gets home from Kroger. And that's assuming you're a man.
Really, I stood in amazement at terms YOU used to describe a stay at home mom, pointing out you would not use the same terms for your wife and you get upset at me for it? I have no quarrel with you and have asked the moderator to remove my comments 4/7/15 12:11 P.M.
Again, am not endorsing her having a career but a little research shows you jumped to conclusions.
Heidi Cruz told the New York Times in 2013, â€śI think it works really well for our family for us both to have careers, and I know what my commitments are to Goldman. I think itâ€™s also really good for our girls to have me at home with them.â€ť
Glad your wife stayed home to be a mom for her kids.
I said nothing about drawing conclusions, I said something about jumping to conclusions. Drawing conclusions is based upon known facts, jumping to conclusions is based upon speculation.
She apparently stays at home with the kids. The sitting around in pj's drinking coffee is a great example of you jumping to conclusions and really, your wife was a stay at home mom, you think she sat around in her pj's and drank coffee? You gotta think about what you are saying.
kenny wrote: . BTW - Mrs. Cruz is not a part time clerk at Kroger while Ted watches the kids. She's an executive with Goldman Sachs. Who's raising the girls?
Thanks for your response. Welcome the 21st century. She doesn't have to leave the house to be an executive with Goldman Sachs and clearly the Proverbs 31 (v24) woman was a work at home mom.
I don't know, the kids may be being raised by nannies or grandparents or stuck in a daycare. But you don't know if she isn't the one rearing the kids and taking care of the house. Remember I not trying to debate your position, just saying we can't jump to conclusions. Go ahead and write the man off your list of candidates, but I think we should be careful with drawing conclusions about things that we do not know for sure are true.
Mourner wrote: Self correction: Matthew 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. 6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you. It was wrong to say past the angel said he had risen He said He is risen present tense. I realized my error as soon as I shut the laptop. Sorry. I don't think the various places recording an empty tomb addresses when it was left behind, but when it was discovered. The bible study notes from the Companion Bible that I know little about its authors dealt with the Jewish calendar and Gentile reckoning what I found the most interesting was it side by side description of those days from both reckonings so as to address the 3 1/2 days. While I was cleaning in the kitchen I was listening to a sermon that I found helpful. There was little I disagreed with accept for some application. It did stress why self denial was an important part of the life of a Christian and that was encouraging to me
kenny wrote: .. I think he is a phony, a hypocrite and to be honest, a pansy. ...
First let me premise this by saying I am not defending Ted Cruz or disputing the view about the wife being a keeper at home, so please don't go there and say I am.
I am saying you are jumping to conclusions brother. Not everyone shares your view or has the same understanding of Scripture you have. To say he is a hypocrite and is blatantly disobedient assumes he views the verses in Titus the way you do and then just chose to do his own thing regardless of what he knew the Bible teaches. We should be careful and remember we all have our own corruption that we must deal with daily. It matters not to me how you vote or have voted, but I would be not be so quick to judge someone on the basis of my beliefs and understanding, not all share that knowledge. Your assessment might be right on and he needs to repent, but without knowing all the details we would do well not to jump to conclusions.