State schools are not a neutral place to learn. The corriculum is driven by God haters. The environment is steeped in the paganism and occultism that is marketed to the world.

As the resouces, network, and the support systems for homeschooling grows, it will address the weak areas and empower more people join in. This is the right direction.

Campos is advocating moving in the other direction. Danial is not a good example. Danial was taken captive to Babylonia.
If Campos is looking to draw lessons from the bible, he should look at Lot.

1517 wrote:
1)Christians pulling their children from the wicked public school system proves the church has abdicated

2)In history, the standard for education was the New England Primer which taught sciences (math, history, natural science,..) from biblical perspective

3)The problem is not the conspicuous wicked world, with its version of education, but the very fact that the American church has forsaken her first love, watered down the scripture, and has professing members that remain on spiritual milk, have more fear of the "Canaanites" than for the very God they profess to trust. You have "churches" embracing perversion, gluttony, easy believe-ism, and "your best life now" nonsense, and we, on this forum, sit back and wonder why we have homosexuality, evolution, and all manner of insanity pushed in schools. Hebrews 11 is not full of people "playing it safe" with the world

We need to stop coddling our children and treating them like little idols that we must do all WE can to protect them and trust in the promises if God and not trust in the fear of man. If God is for us, who can stand against?

1517 wrote:
My focus is on the parents instilling the solid rock faith that is courageous because of the object of that faith, Jesus Christ.
Anyway, Mr. Campo was saying that if our children are taught to use the mind that God has given, founded on the immovable faith on Christ, we as Christians can give an answer and should not fear the bogeyman of public education. Parents are responsible to ensure their child is equipped.

1517 wrote:
CV,
It sort of funny that you accuse myself and Mr. Campo of conceding to the mighty anti-God Science while referring to science as the anti-God world

Science is not the anti-God world.

Homeschool will not add to your salvation.
Not everyone wants to homeschool. People are free to choose

To engage does not mean that you must get in there and reform them into your ways. Campos doen't realize that we are constanly engaging the world.

If the school system is hostile, we try to influence it. But if it is stubourn and getting blatanly worse, we say good riddence to Obamas ways and take our business elsewhere. If what we do is sucessful, and it appears to be, more people will join in.

Like Danial said, try us out for a week. If it doesn't work, give us the food offered to the idols.

And were not abdicating or conceding anything. Were taking full reponsibility in our own hands. If it works, poeple will network and you'll get quality resources.

1517 wrote:
CV,
Mr. Campo is saying

Science was not the problem, it was the atheistic philosophy behind it.

Mr Campo first needs to understand that -
1)Stateschools and homeschools can both teach science
2)And that the State is not neutral, it is rabidly hostily to Christianity. Homeschools were it's response.

Implicit in your and Campo's position is the admission that the worldly view of science is a superior science. For, it's ok to belive in God. And we should engage the world. But then we should also study science the worlds way - the true science!

1517 wrote:
Mr. Campo is saying we should not shy away from asserting the truth of God's creation in the sciences. Why sit back and allow the foolish of the world have a monopoly on the sciences when it is Christianity that has the true foundation to those sciences?

SteveR wrote:
Yo Yo
thats a command for all Churches including the RCC

Sorry, I should have just said the RCC.

Steves asertion that Rev churches all had problems.

Stevie, God calls His church to correction through repentance. He does not extend that to Satan or its spawns the JW's, RCC, Islam, etc

You say that Gs's standards would exclude all but 2 of the 7 Churches.
Your standard would exclude no one. You only apply it to the RCC, but the Holy Spirit would be just as hemstrung to leave His people in Satanism. All your reasoning would apply equally here.

Unprofitable Servant wrote:
Actually,CV, historically speaking, it is public schools that are relatively new not homeschooling.

Why do we feel that homeschooling lacks intelectual integrity? To presuposed that in "evolution" you're exercising a superior intelecual thought process, but in creation you make a brainless leap.

What you've got is an endoctrination that - without an atheistic mindset, you lack intelect. Some seem trapped inside that box.

Way back when, when everyone was homescooled, we still produced the scientist and visionaries and built universities.

Todays acedemies and universities are not Christian. They were started at a time and by a culture that even public schools were run by Christians.

Danial was taken captive and even given a babylonian name. Danial maintained his separateness.

How many times has he expunged reference to the Christian God, but talked it up whithin the context of other religions?

I suppose that it was Bills fault that he wanted the cross removed from behind him when he was giving a speech

I suppose that it was Toms fault that he took God out of thanksgiving.

But remember campaign time? EVERYTHING was all Christian then. Obama hired pro photographers to follow him as he took his family hopping from church to church.

Oh, and the Whitehouse put out a press release that he was a Christian.
How did they know? (No joke, look it up!) They knew because they saw him with his eyes closed and his lips moving.

This is an article about him, not him giving a testimony.

Not everyone starts out with full maturity.

Hulkster, "brother" I grew up on wrestling "brother". Wasn't much of a Hulkamaniac though. Can't stand to watch it now. I find it stupid and contrived.

Interesting verse US. Paul is in Ephesus writing to believers in Corinth.

This section addresses the point that it's not the mighty men with their excellency of speech and enticing words of man's wisdom that is able to convince fallen man. The preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness.

Despite that, Romes arminianism says that, man can "make a decision" if only we can make the right presentation.

But God says that He CHOSES the weak and the foolish - no convincing. Salvation is the power of God. It's His calling!

No flesh can glory in His presence- neighter the decision maker, nor the wise presenter.

1Cor1:21 has nothing to do with RC, if anything it condems it.

Steve throws out verses because he wants you to read into it that it pleases God to save poeple through preaching. Of course it does. So what! what does that have to do with the price of bread in Tibet. Totally unrelated

1517 wrote:
After reading through the postings, I don't see where SteveR is defending the supposed office of the Pope

The bible is the start and the end of our authority. Church history proves that man is fallible, and that Gods word was always under attack. The worst corruptions were under way within the first 100 years. Read Pauls letters, you can see the attacks going on. That's historical record that we ought to pay heed to.

Gods people broke free of Rome. Go do likewise.

SteveR wrote:
Catholics and historians rely on the writings of Tertullian and Origen for placing Peter in Rome. Christopher considers himself a more reliable source than these two Saints of the Early Church and claims Peter wasnt there. These Saints risked their lives, property and family to record these events. thus.. Christophers work is nonsense at best, and intential deception at worst

I will put my money on the popes. They didn't believe in this.

SteveR wrote:
No CV
It wasnt a simple spelling mistake

I took great offense

Adam Clarke on Luke 1:17

You taking offence at what I said is so phony. You're trying to hammer away at me because you want to divert away from the main point of my comment - the evanjellyfish false teachers are going gaga over this pope.

And your angle on me is to pretend the words itself had some magical biblical powers and demand special reverence.
Then you go and use the word trinity - clearly a term used to describe God- and make it UN-holy, and missapply it to people.

(Go ahead, you're braying and chomping at the bits- "trinity is not in the bible")

Don't shed a tear for this. Shed some tears for what Rome is doing.

SteveR wrote:
I would be most interested in knowing if this didnt begin with you and if you read or heard it somewhere

No Steve, Romes deception is in the Bible. It didn't begin with me.

SteveR wrote:
I put that through the conspiracy nut translater, it came up blank

John Yurich USA wrote:
Freedom of Religion means that one is free to practice their religion anyway they want to including not subscribing to all the doctrines of their religion.

Mike/NY always witty and funny

SteveR wrote:
1)
if you read carefully you will find the RCC maintains more of Gods Sovereignty in Salvation than your garden vareity Arminian Protestant.

2) Further, it bears more of a commentary role and opinion unlike the Protestant ones that are a substitution of truth like RCC 1994
"1994 Justification is the most excellent work of God’s love made manifest in Christ Jesus and granted by the Holy Spirit. It is the opinion of St. Augustine that “the justification of the wicked is a greater work than the creation of heaven and earth,” because “heaven and earth will pass away but the salvation and justification of the elect... will not pass away.”43 He holds also that the justification of sinners surpasses the creation of the angels in justice, in that it bears witness to a greater mercy.(312)"

3)
Judah BenHer and the Roman Navy were spared in the battle w/the Macedonian pirates?

1) Armins is really the core of Romanism. Don't know why we pander to either as biblical!

2)How does Rome define JUSTIFICATION?

Rome does not have "MANY unscriptural doctrines" as some are saying here.
Rome has NONE, ZERO scriptural components! Satan is very deceptive and clever - just like Stevie.

John UK wrote:
Unfortunately, there are some who do not believe in a sovereign God nor a reigning Christ, and they imagine that correct political strategies will win the day
GOD IS SOVEREIGN!