I'm surprised that they can attempt to do this. Wouldn't this constitute an act of gender identification? Isn't this illegal now? After all,a woman by birth may be offended that someone is saying that she is a woman. Maybe she's a man in a woman's body or maybe she feels like a cat. Maybe it wasn't too bright for the guv to be "gender benders" in their political correctness after all.
...was going to ignore "i will answer" because their reasoning failed any way. First,I did call sodomy sexual immorality. Secondly,I have spoken against many "Christians" who may happen to be correct in their assessment of the ills of abortion,for example,but have always taken issue with their profession of Christianity based on their statements or actions which run contrary to said profession. Many of the high profile "Christian" celebrities come to mind here. Ex: While gambling is wrong in the Bible,one who professes Christianity and takes issue against it yet plays the lottery while pointing the finger at gamblers has a beam in their eye to remove and is no position to be an endorsement for Christianity until they repent of their sin in the same area. Robertson may be correct in his view on sodomy but his own immorality disqualifies him as a Christian spokesperson against perverseness. As such,he would appear to be a hypocrite just as the lotto player against casinos. One may only effectively speak against those things which they are not party to.
Those who pimp their wives and daughters out (yes,pimp,,,because they make money off of their sexual impropriety and dressing in bikinis and the like),are in sexual sin. Try to defend that. Have we come so far that we don't even know what immodest dress is? Seemingly so. So,anyone who wants to move Christians to vote for a particular candidate because they think that they reflect conservative values when they are part of the carnality problem are deceived themselves. I will grant that Cruz is savvy in using Robertson in trying to win the popular "Christian" vote however. The world's system loves the worldly.
Rodney,there are no "minorities" in God's eyes. We are all in the human race. And this is a racist article. No one would be allowed to even suggest this about "white" babies. And you know it. Further,no one can say that people have abortions because they are poor. People have abortions because they are selfish. If economics was a factor,it's no secret that there are many,many people who would love to adopt their children. They are without excuse. And no one forces them to have intimate relations to begin with.
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
...THEN TO SEE TO CAST OUT... A Christian ought not to judge another brother if they are themselves guilty of something comparably-sexually immoral cannot judge the sexually immoral However,one can judge another brethren in an area which they are not guilty or partaking of.
One can judge and should judge those who profess Christianity/ brethren!- 1 Corinthians 5:7-15
To the unperceptive anonymous poster- If you had read my prior post,you would have seen that I do not/have not watched the show. Reed and Cooley,likewise,did not need to watch the show to know that there was a problem. I can know that the beverly hillbillies is inappropriate without watching it because the vast majority speak of it. Today,one can just try to get email and have to get slammed with a picture of duck dynasty's daughter or whoever "scantily clad" "dancing with the stars". Indiscretion/humility is not characteristic of duck dynasty.
Rodney,I was looking at the minority abortions compared to abortions on a whole. The murder of babies is not just a "black" thing. If an article was written about more white babies being aborted,it would have been deemed a racist article.
Mike,listen to one of the pastors on SA address it. ...not trying to gossip just to explain why Phil Robertson is not a good endorsement for anything Christian. Saying things like "what the f ",sexual innuendo,hanging out at bars,and having women wear short shorts,etc. would not be examples of Christian behavior.
To find out more on duck dynasty,I would recommend Jason Cooley or Robert Reed who are both on SA. It's better than having to do an internet search on them and then stumbling across inappropriate material. Most families didn't have a problem with the dukes of hazzard either...along with a mess of other shows. The most dangerous entertainment is that which professes Christianity but imitates the world. ...a bad witness of Christ to the world and a sorry example to the church.
U S,being an instrument of sexual immodesty is a "beam" compared to the "splinter" of sodomy because the one who is pointing his finger at the homosexual is guilty himself of sexual perversion. Both sins are sexual in nature but the accuser is blinded by his and because he professes to be a Christian,he is a hypocrite and cannot be light to the sinner. Sodomites don't get the double standard,in case some Christians have missed that. Again,it's interesting to see how some Christians will compromise or wink at or dismiss what God judges as hetero nakedness but will also be the first to have a problem with homosexuality. And to the other "anonymous" poster- Big difference between being in the world and of the world. Phil is definitely of the world. Never mind that Christians can witness and be a light without having to roll around in the mud with the swine. Sadly,some emergent church pastors would consider this an effective way of being "relevant".
"Minorities" may be having more abortions but aren't they also having more babies? Is it a fair comparison if the most abortions are by "minorities" when they are also the ones who have more pregnancies? ...not so sure that this is primarily an inner city problem. There could be more fairer skinned women who have abortions who get pregnant but because there aren't as many of them getting pregnant,then it would seem that there is a greater percentage of "minority" abortions. One has to factor in the total number of births and do the percentages that way.
MLK is dead and unless he had enough true vision to repent and receive Jesus as his Savior,his words,plagiarized or other,are of no effect.He was an instigator and hate monger.Christ is the one who sets the captives free. There are most among us who are enslaved. ALL babies matter.The article is racist. Of course,propaganda is usually biased. Maybe,at the very least,it will motivate the proud to reconsider killing their unborn.
4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
There are many,many baptisms in the Bible.They are all different and for different purposes. In fact,there is a baptism of fire which many Christians misunderstand to be a desirable thing. Phil's belief that natural water baptism is necessary for salvation is wrong and heretical. And if he were stuck in a ditch,we would pull him out but give him directions as to avoid getting stuck. Just because none are without sin doesn't mean that we are not to rebuke those who are in error. The Bible says as much. If one could not correct and strive for justice,one could not have a judicial system nor train up child. Of course,one only has credence as to that which they are addressing if they,themselves,are not guilty of the same. Phil's association with sexual immodesty disqualifies him from effectively judging sodomy. The beam in his own eye must first be removed.
I must have missed the memo that states that dark skinned people were exempt from plagiarism and idol worship. If people who like to identify themselves based on their melanin levels take issue with me maybe they can be comforted in knowing that fair skinned people have been guilty of plagiarism and idol worship too. Not only that,but they will join together with people of all shades this coming week to celebrate one of the biggest idol sessions around.
I haven't watched it but have heard pastors speak in length about what the dy-nasty is about,what they believe,and the immodesty and lewd jesting that is part and parcel to their productions. For anyone who is curious,they might check out Jason Cooley's sermon on them. I guess that I shouldn't be surprised that some Christians will embrace or have no problem with what is very popular with the world...usually the same ones tuning in to the televised pagan games. Just as an aside,anyone who requires baptismal regeneration of natural water for salvation should be considered a questionable Christian source to begin with.
Rigby stated "... because I don't believe in a literal resurrection, I'm not really a Christian" ...kinda says it all,doesn't it? The literal resurrection is pretty basic and NECESSARY to the faith. Without that,we are most miserable and have no hope.