SITE NOTICE | MORE..Awesome Embed Editor! The embed editor has been refreshed yet again with an entirely new interface. Check out our new 2-Minute Tip on how easy it is to embed sermons on your website! .. click for more info!
‚ÄúChristian service members must share the Gospel with unbelievers so they can be saved, not support unbelievers to worship their false gods that will lead them to hell.‚ÄĚ
There is a big difference between allowing someone to exercise their freedom and accomodating them. God has the power to stop everyone from following any false god, is He guilty of accomodating them by not doing so?
I find it interesting how these people reject any possibility that God could exist, and yet they call themselves free thinkers. They would have to entertain that possibility if they were really free thinkers wouldn't they?
Maybe they mean their thinking is free....to which I would respond, "you get what you pay for".
The problem is that these people have become literary contortionists; they twist the Bible to make it say what they want it to say.
Micheal Vines sums up his argument for homosexuality thus, "God doesn't say in a loving, commited relationship it's wrong, therefore it's right".
Okay, how about I just turn that argument around, God doesn't say in a loving commited relationship it's right, therefore it's wrong. And considering that, even by His own admission, every reference to homosexuality in the Bible is negetive, which is more likely to be true?
Furthermore, you could come up with situations that are not explicitly spelled out in the Bible to justify any sin.
When it comes to justifying sin reason grows wings.
A thought occured to me. (Yeah, I know, it's scary). But before this judge comes down too hard on discrimination she should consider that someone had to discriminate in some way to eliminate other judges and put her on the bench.
The problem with ethics apart from God is that the standard has been discarded. You have now become free to subjectively choose what is right and what is wrong. Human nature-the flesh-will more often than not take you in the wrong direction.
By definition a fetus is a mammal that has reached its basic structural form in its development process. This means that a human fetus, by definition, would be human. It is actually the liberals who use the term incorrectly.