[TheRealThing]

After DJT's rally in Florida this past weekend, the media laughed him to scorn for saying there were immigrant related issues in Sweden. Story after story, monologue after monologue, interview after interview and newspaper articles ad nauseum, that's all we heard. Further, Swedish authorities and the State controlled media joined in on the fun, mocking the President from afar.

Then came Monday and Tuesday and Sweden, the rape capital of the world and evidently awash in media lies and omissions, was swept by immigrant staged rioting and looting, as images of bashed in store fronts and the charred remains of burned out cars leaked out in spite of Sweden's best efforts to keep a lid on things. Will US media apologize for jumping at the chance to slam the President? I sincerely doubt it.

Because Chris Stirewalt evidently feels compelled to make an argument countering the President's statements regarding dishonesty by much of the press; All day long on Monday and on both FOX News networks, Stirewalt in an obvious effort at media rehabilitation, was on one news show after the other extolling the virtue of the media. Tough media questioning is the fundamental service of the fourth estate, he said. Maybe so, but he's as wrong about this one as he was in having initially assailed the character and integrity of then candidate Trump. A regular on Megyn Kelley's show, Stirewalt mocked and berated Trump as some kind of simpleton for the best part of a year. And he's yet to lighten up from what I have seen. He got nothing right in his campaign to slime the person of DJT, but he's still hitting the gas.

My perspective--- The media are not a bunch of innocents, going about their charges to protect freedom. Though they should be. During the election season a desperate Clinton campaign, under fire from the FBI and enduring huge defamation at the written word of her own campaign chairman, was grasping at straws. Although they still believed fully that Hillary would win, this had all become very personal, and they were out for their political pound of flesh from one DJT.

Succession of Events---

DJT in typical New York sarcasm and under fire for a previous aside he had made in a debate regarding Putin, had this to say in a campaign speech. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said during a news conference here in an apparent reference to Mrs. Clinton’s deleted emails. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Then unthinkably, Hillary Clinton suffering a number of October surprises, loses the election. Immediately surfacing is the story line in which Dems charge Russian hackers of influencing the election. Of course now that that has been disproven, they have attempted though rather loosely, to clean up the charge and say that hackers got Podesta's emails and gave them to Julian Assange.

Not to excuse what Trump said, but he was appalled by the latitude she had received at the hand of the last Administration, and so too evidently, were the thousands of supporters who chanted 'lock her up' at Trump rallies. What he said was risqué and would have in normal times been politically unacceptable. But these were desperate times and anything but normal. But from that day to this, the press has tried to make a Russian collaborator out of him, as they tried to do with Rex Tillerson.

Now, if you ask Stirewalt the press should be aggressive in their pursuit of the truth about this President's imaginary ties with Russia. Hillary had demonstrable ties with the Russian uranium deal. And in telling President Medvedev he had to keep a low profile until after the election, Obama clearly had some kind of deal cooking with Russia. Where were the tough questions then? But all of that should be put aside for the sake of pure truth, which as I see it is this. A furious media could not and will not accept the fact that Trump is President. Therefore the media have robust contempt for DJT, and are taking him to task in using his own words against him, (though I believe those words are a textbook example of sarcasm), so Trump unwittingly gave them the ammo they would wind up using most effectively against his Administration.

The point then is this. The media have managed to make a veritable mountain out of Mr Trump's statement. For my part there is a lot of doubt that a Russian collaborator would be stupid enough to make what the press has portrayed, as an unwitting confession on national TV. So it's one thing to ask tough questions, it's quite another to just make something up, and then ask the tough questions.

[TheRealThing]

Sweden in denial---

"The Swedish officer turned whistleblower, a 47-year veteran of law enforcement, painted a picture of absolute chaos — and that is just in the small town of Örebro with just over 100,000 residents. “Here we go; this is what I’ve handled from Monday-Friday this week: rape, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, rape-assault and rape, extortion, blackmail, assault, violence against police, threats to police, drug crime, drugs, crime, felony, attempted murder, rape again, extortion again and ill-treatment,” Springare wrote, expressing despair amid what he described as a society on the brink of collapse."
https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-new...+Feb+21+17

The left would side step reality by acting as if it is possible, even in the face of very real threat, to ignore all the raging unrest and acts of terror. Such is only achievable by self delusion, thereby elevating one's self to some ethereal plane of secular utopian bliss. Libs are so in love with the lie of secular humanism in fact, and so complete is their conversion to that faith, that they can now delude themselves accordingly. The blinded eyes of the Swedes stand in testament to man's unfortunate plight, as do those of a US media who despite the death throes of the ill-conceived ObamaCare mandate, still insist in wrapping themselves up in it like a warm blanket.

I believe the decadence and despair of the societies of this world have become abundantly self evident in the daily headlines. Man is not evolving, he is deteriorating. If not, why all the bad news?

[TheRealThing]

I have been in my lifetime, impressed by what I believe to have been a growing contempt as expressed by the media against the conservative right. Further, I believe the adage, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" best describes the unholy political alliance between the media and the Democrat Party. In saying that, I do not mean to infer that any one individual from among either entity is in any way irretrievable from the perspective of our Lord. I believe they are just as reachable as any. Their activities taken together however, even by way of the most cursory of honest review of same, reveals a stand against Christianity that is undeniable.

I have characterized the growing of collective contempt as being symptomatic of the struggle of good versus evil, but stopping at that point is to miss the forest for the sake of looking at the trees. It is important therefore to consider what the end game of said contempt could mean for our country and the world, because as mentioned in the thread starter, liberalism (which denies God's hands-on involvement in the affairs of men) is a world wide concern. Most notably by way of example in my mind, may be seen in the views of our two closest allies, England and Israel. These views are as expressed in our news broadcasts, in which English born ideologues employed by US news outlets fit right in with their American brothers-in-arms. The same is applicable to lesser degree in the case of the Jewish media, though they are no less driven.

Said media groups regularly deny or don't report the foment and upheaval which plague societies around the world, while they celebrate what is perceived to be man's evolution. Obama called such 21st Century thinking, which I believe requires the cafeteria approach in being selective about the things one is willing to consider. All of these things taken together amount to a kind of welcomed propaganda, or in other words, men's preference to believe a lie.

But as mentioned, it is important to discern where the contempt, the stand against authority, will take us.
Revelation 19:19-21 (KJV)
19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

The scene above is the real account of man's last stand against the authority of God Himself. The armies of men are led by no less than Antichrist and his false prophet, who are the first to be cast into the lake of fire.

I confess it is difficult to consider that men will actually meet on the battlefield in an effort to defeat God, and though the defiance of men legalizing homosexuality may today seem a far cry from all out war, that is where all this is taking us. And after all, does not God say that in the last days men will be despisers of those that are good? 2 Timothy 3:2-3 (KJV)
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

There is a reason that men despise those that are good, and that is because they insist on measuring themselves against other men, when the only standard of measurement recognized by God is that of the Lord Jesus.

At one time relative to the verse in Timothy above, I did not recognize the significance of the word 'fierce,' and of it's placement in the text. Men will be fierce, otherwise how could they presume to face off against the forces of God? No, what we are witnessing in this day is far greater in scope than mere rhetoric or politics as usual. It is the culmination of man's rebellion. And if we would be honest, we would see the acceptance of every religion except one. Christianity. Not that Christ can be defeated, He will rule, and we with Him, forever.

[mr.fundamental]

As long as you remember to sell everything you own and follow. God Speed to you sir! The vow of poverty is great.

[The Urban Sombrero]

"Christianity," if one includes Roman Catholicism, continues to be numero uno in assembling the masses. Thus, "Christianity" is still being accepted by the masses. Now, the garbled mix of right wing politics and religion offered up as "true, blessed Christianity"? Eh, not so much. And, to be fair, the grounding of hope on the beautiful and educateable being of man, the source of illumination and beauty? Eh, not so much either.

I may disagree with TRT often, but I respect his principled adherance to that which he believes, and he's right on it, in my view, in much of his cultural analysis.

[TheRealThing]

Gallup did a poll in 2012, not exactly yesterday, but recently enough to make a point. On December 24, 2012, 77% of Americans claimed to be a Christian. And yet in truly timeless fashion, the following is what the Lord says about the matter;
Matthew 7:13-14 (KJV)
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.


Any way one would look at it 77% is by far and away MOST--- not few. So doctrinal pitfalls notwithstanding, there is obviously tremendous error as to to the actual number of those who are saved among men. Whether they be Roman Catholic or Southern Baptist taken collectively or statistically, most everyone who claims to be a Christian is not. That according to Scripture, is just the regrettable truth of it. And there is another undeniable truth which applies to the process of identifying a Christian.
Matthew 7:20 (KJV)
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Christians are all "new creatures in Christ," and as a consequence their attitudes about sin conform to a strictly standardized norm. Nor do they support, accept or look over abortion for example, or any of the many social no-no's you and I have argued on here. Unity of thought and purpose are prevalent in the true Church. In other words, Christians are and therefore act differently than lost folks. Again, not because they're one bit better. But because they are changed by the power of God, being conformed to the image of God, according to the will of God.

I believe the idea of right wing politics as it exists today, is a misunderstanding, an extrapolation or even a conflation of two separate concepts. However both may be the result of the misbegotten notion as to what constitutes a true and saving relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Let me attempt to analogize as follows. Overweight folks often admit for health's sake that they need to lose weight, as they worry heart attack or diabetes could well loom on the horizon. Therefore, they fully intend at some point very soon to diet and get in shape. But weeks turn to months, which turn to years, which turn to decades. And yet, absent those dreaded chest pains most people wind up never getting in shape. Now, they often gain a whole new perspective once that heart attack actually comes, and the unmistakable near death brush with one's own mortality brings with it a real change of heart.

In a way the same is true with eternal life. When a sinner becomes truly convicted of the horrific nature of their sin and of the coming judgment, sometimes, (as in FEW there be that find it sometimes) they repent and God is faithful to forgive their sin. But as in the case of the overweight person, as long as it all seems afar off, the vast majority of people do nothing. The reason? They really don't want to. And then one day unawares, those chest pains come, or the death angel calls. I believe every person intends to get right with the Lord, but puts it off. At some point however, a man's conscience becomes scared and seared with the hot iron of sin, and his once tender heart is hardened to the point where he can no longer accept Christ as Savior. The chronically overweight person is caught in the snare in which he had become so comfortable, as is the lost person who puts off that which he knows so well that he should not. Then it is too late.

But I referred to the misunderstanding of conservative behavior as it is relative to political preference. Conservatism is by it's nature associated with the things of God, that is true. But not because of a political point of view, rather as to what kind of governance is acceptable to those who are led by their sense of morality. Hence the mention of what things are natural and attributable to 'Nature's God,' as written in the Declaration of Independence. The argument by the left always coalesces there because it is fundamental to understanding the original intent of the Founders. But more precisely, would be the left's continuingly errant argument which puts the cart, (the faith of Christians) in front of the horse, (the political views of Christians.) Christians cannot set aside their spiritual enlightenment, and liberals are not willing to set aside their convictions. The difference--- One is the gift of the Holy Spirit, the other is an acceptance of a world system. But that doesn't mean that all who say they are conservative are saved, or Christian, and that was my argument with regard to DJT. Though he may not actually know Christ as Lord and Savior, he nonetheless honors the concepts of US' traditionally conservative values.

Apart from Godly direction, in spite of what law the Congress may pass, or what ruling the Supreme Court may hand down, this land will continue in obvious decline. I maintain the contempt of present day is not the two way street that many try to suggest. The right reject unGodly behavior, without rejecting those who do it, though media characterizations and politicizations charge otherwise.

[TheRealThing]

"Christianity," if one includes Roman Catholicism, continues to be numero uno in assembling the masses. Thus, "Christianity" is still being accepted by the masses. Now, the garbled mix of right wing politics and religion offered up as "true, blessed Christianity"? Eh, not so much. And, to be fair, the grounding of hope on the beautiful and educateable being of man, the source of illumination and beauty? Eh, not so much either.

I may disagree with TRT often, but I respect his principled adherance to that which he believes, and he's right on it, in my view, in much of his cultural analysis.

^^ Thanks for saying this, I appreciate it.

We have been privileged to live in a time which has featured exponential growth in knowledge. From the days of Chevy Super Sports, to the super computers of the present, man's technological advance has been nothing short of jaw dropping. But in the midst of celebrating all our advancements, I believe we have somehow forgotten how to take measure of our moral condition, which has backslidden nearly as far as technology has advanced.

The past 8 years have been called by many a time of transformation, and so it was IMHO. College students for example, are aged somewhere between 17 and 25 years, eight of which have been spent under the Presidency of one man, who if you will recall made many of his speeches from the college campuses across this land. All which means that from the earliest days of their ability to reason, they have to varying degrees been indoctrinated with the liberal view, which view was validated by no less than the President. The riots and unrest, though led by paid protestors, are nonetheless being participated in by these students and non-students of like age. Thus some are motivated by money, and some are motivated by ideology. But the reality is this, prior to the last administration we had not seen protests, especially nationally organized protests, for decades. First it was Occupy Main Street followed by a supportive media blitz against the nation's so-called one percenters. Then came the race riots attached to police actions involving violence, (but only when violence was used against blacks, not whites or even Hispanics), again inflamed daily by the media. And then came the protests and violence against the Trump campaign/Presidency.

But it gets worse, and in the context of putting all this together in factual chronology, it is important to recognize the true nature of the transformation. Then President Obama never chastised those engaged in property damage, arson and rioting. Not once in 8 years. Nor did DOJ heads Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch. Instead we heard the praises of BLM sung from the Oval Office. Further, we saw members gesturing from the floor of both chambers of the US Congress, raising their hands in infamy to say 'Hands up, don't shoot.' From the President to the supportive media, this false narrative has stoked the fires of unrest for nearly the entire Obama era.

So post Obama, what are we left with going forward? Well a tremendously contemptuous standoff between liberals and conservatives for one. The media calls that situation a deeply divided country. And said division is not one which will be eased in a couple of months or years for that matter. Conservatives are trying to return this land to the state of civility which existed as it was 8 years ago, not that we should in any way settle for that goal, but even that much progress won't be easy. Congressional Dems leading the charge against the elected federal government will never capitulate, they will instead have to be voted out. I believe it will take 8 years of a DJT Presidency to significantly begin the opening of American eyes, (those who've been indoctrinated over he past 8 years). Following that, it certainly would not hurt to see Mike Pence in the White House for the next 8. In that time, everybody will see that the only interest Republicans really have, is to that of the 'common good', a return to workable national unity and a healthy appreciation for American sovereignty.

[The Urban Sombrero]

^^ Thanks for saying this, I appreciate it.

We have been privileged to live in a time which has featured exponential growth in knowledge. From the days of Chevy Super Sports, to the super computers of the present, man's technological advance has been nothing short of jaw dropping. But in the midst of celebrating all our advancements, I believe we have somehow forgotten how to take measure of our moral condition, which has backslidden nearly as far as technology has advanced.

The past 8 years have been called by many a time of transformation, and so it was IMHO. College students for example, are aged somewhere between 17 and 25 years, eight of which have been spent under the Presidency of one man, who if you will recall made many of his speeches from the college campuses across this land. All which means that from the earliest days of their ability to reason, they have to varying degrees been indoctrinated with the liberal view, which view was validated by no less than the President. The riots and unrest, though led by paid protestors, are nonetheless being participated in by these students and non-students of like age. Thus some are motivated by money, and some are motivated by ideology. But the reality is this, prior to the last administration we had not seen protests, especially nationally organized protests, for decades. First it was Occupy Main Street followed by a supportive media blitz against the nation's so-called one percenters. Then came the race riots attached to police actions involving violence, (but only when violence was used against blacks, not whites or even Hispanics), again inflamed daily by the media. And then came the protests and violence against the Trump campaign/Presidency.

But it gets worse, and in the context of putting all this together in factual chronology, it is important to recognize the true nature of the transformation. Then President Obama never chastised those engaged in property damage, arson and rioting. Not once in 8 years. Nor did DOJ heads Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch. Instead we heard the praises of BLM sung from the Oval Office. Further, we saw members gesturing from the floor of both chambers of the US Congress, raising their hands in infamy to say 'Hands up, don't shoot.' From the President to the supportive media, this false narrative has stoked the fires of unrest for nearly the entire Obama era.

So post Obama, what are we left with going forward? Well a tremendously contemptuous standoff between liberals and conservatives for one. The media calls that situation a deeply divided country. And said division is not one which will be eased in a couple of months or years for that matter. Conservatives are trying to return this land to the state of civility which existed as it was 8 years ago, not that we should in any way settle for that goal, but even that much progress won't be easy. Congressional Dems leading the charge against the elected federal government will never capitulate, they will instead have to be voted out. I believe it will take 8 years of a DJT Presidency to significantly begin the opening of American eyes, (those who've been indoctrinated over he past 8 years). Following that, it certainly would not hurt to see Mike Pence in the White House for the next 8. In that time, everybody will see that the only interest Republicans really have, is to that of the 'common good', a return to workable national unity and a healthy appreciation for American sovereignty.

Republicans, having been freed from all sin and self-interest, having the divine right of kings, having the blessing of the Pope, having the ability to defecate minus smelly odor...

Shameless, and I mean shameless, spin.

[TheRealThing]

Republicans, having been freed from all sin and self-interest, having the divine right of kings, having the blessing of the Pope, having the ability to defecate minus smelly odor...

Shameless, and I mean shameless, spin.

The Jewish Orthodoxy as it existed at the time of Christ though in many points errant, was nonetheless, the face of God. The Lord came to change all that and rescue men from the error of the Church. Representatives of said status quo got their feathers ruffled in just the way you do, and spoke out against what they believed to be the absurd notion that one man could be right, while the entirety of the Church was wrong. Just because the Lord has not yet brought forceful pain of Judgment does not mean that it is not soon coming. And just because all things continue as they always have does not mean they're not about to change. As I have said, we're on our way down the drain, it's only a question of how far down we are.

In the case I have laid out, one side advocates for social reform. The other side (for the most part) advocates for the values of our fathers. Said social reform is the direct result of the twisting of the concept of the separation of Church and State, which compromise of our values over time, has been further characterized by the legalizing of abortion on demand and the homosexual lifestyle. Frankly it's gotten so ridiculous that gender confusion permeates everything from movies to the law. Not to mention the fact that our last President, a Democrat, went on a number of world tours to promote homosexuality and spent many millions of our taxpayer dollars to so do. Saying that does not excuse Republicans for not opposing the insanity with the force they should have, but you can't say they're the ones introducing social legislation.

So I must have missed the actions of sexual activism on the part of past Republican Administrations, as I must have missed any such actions on the part of the present Republican Administration. Call that spin if you want, but you can't do much by way of rebuttal.

[The Urban Sombrero]

The very President of the United States has only a VERY recent "conversion" in the abortion issue, the homosexuality issue.

The very President of the United States has, without any real explanation, broken with decorum, if not honesty, and refused to release his tax information.

The very figure head, TRT, which you have so often supported and defended, stands as rebuttal. No person, and I mean no person, who has remotely based his principles, his thinking, his life on Scripture refers to a passage being in "Two Corinthians."

Thus, my contention that Christians are forever falling for one Constantine or another, hitching faith wagons to one or another falling star in a manner that is unwise.

[TheRealThing]

The very President of the United States has only a VERY recent "conversion" in the abortion issue, the homosexuality issue.

The very President of the United States has, without any real explanation, broken with decorum, if not honesty, and refused to release his tax information.

The very figure head, TRT, which you have so often supported and defended, stands as rebuttal. No person, and I mean no person, who has remotely based his principles, his thinking, his life on Scripture refers to a passage being in "Two Corinthians."

Thus, my contention that Christians are forever falling for one Constantine or another, hitching faith wagons to one or another falling star in a manner that is unwise.

LOL, I see. And that being the case you, the lone Sombrero, are above it all I suppose? The world system as it exists today has been essentially the same since the days of King Nebuchadnezzar. Finance, governance, the social order, all of it. And God has according to His inerrant Word, chosen to use this system, and His flawed yet saved children, to reach a lost world. But where recent 'conversions' are concerned, the Apostle Paul was literally on his way to do harm to Christians, betrayers of the Jewish Orthodoxy, when the Lord intercepted him on the road to Damascus. In a matter of mere seconds, Paul (Saul) went from murderer to servant as he said without equivocation, Acts 9:6 (KJV)
6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?
What followed in the life of Paul represents the bulk of the New Testament.

I said I have noted a marked progression, an unashamed declaration on the part of man to oppose to the tenets of Christianity. That is true in the Congress, the courts, and society at large. Further, I had opportunity to see that same phenomena manifested in like fashion across Europe and the far east. But even if I'd not traveled to and lived in those places, the headlines bear adequate witness of the truth. Hence the premise of this thread, liberalism has infected the entire world. The world at the time of Antichrist, not so unlike the world as it is now in fact, will be a lawless place. Lawlessness will be accompanied by man's bent to Globalism, thus the fruition of the liberal vision of a world without borders and of men united in monolithic brotherhood. Mankind will celebrate, but Scripture tells us this culmination will actually take place during the seven years of Tribulation.

Anything... any cause, any politicization, rationale, law or argument which stands either implicitly or explicitly in opposition to the Word of God, is wrong. End of story. Somehow though, people have gotten to the point where they feel that eloquent opposition will magically trump truth. Satan operates in that exact guise. Guile worked so well in the case of Eve when she defied God's expressed commandment, Satan has used the tactic every day since. Christians do not hitch their spiritual wagons to a thing, that is other than a faith in the risen Lord, or they are not Christians at all. But then in your having said they do, you have made my argument for me; The vast majority of folks who claim to be Christians are not actually saved. I believe they understand that there is One true God, and that He is the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob, The God of Israel. And yet in stopping short of a saving faith, and though they likely realize their faith lacks certainty, out of resect if nothing else they tend to defer to the tenets of Christianity. Your 'two Corinthians' criticism means nothing to the pragmatic and authentic Christian, who was never deceived about Mr Trump. And I couldn't help but notice you did not attempt to dance around the fact that it is the Dems who've tried to 'legislate' conservatives into submission.

There is however misconception about Christianity, though not in the way you preach. It is impossible to be saved and not know the truth. The salvation experience is nothing short of a miracle, as each person whom God saves, the same by Him have their eyes opened. They become a new creature in Christ and are led by the Holy Spirit, as that is His ministry. No, the misconception is in man's insistence that his life compares favorably to other people. That he of himself is better than murderers and liars, thusly sidestepping or mitigating Christ's finished work on the cross. Why would He die, and why would God the Father allow Him to die, if we could of our own pass muster at the judgment? The standard is perfection as in the perfect life of the Son of God, not in any comparison to other people. That would be like comparing flu viruses, there are no good ones.

[The Urban Sombrero]

⬆

Marrying one's politics and one's faith in some partisan love affair is unwise. No amount of excessive verbiage changes that.

The opposition to the principles of Christianity may extend to certain pet issues; however, the freedom to live out one's faith, one's dictates of conscience unhindered...that remains a constant. I have not been forced one time to accept an imposed dictate that violates my Christian scruples and convictions. The idea that equal protection under the law extends to all does not violate my belief that the practice of homosexuality misses the mark of God's high calling. The belief that the human being can evolve into perfection as he/she perfects society is in opposition to that which I believe, but I have never once been forced to believe an untruth.

To defend essential liberty and freedom of conscience against all, secular and church, who would encroach upon it most often offends both sides. However, it is the path that history of church and secular authority shows most prudent.

[mr.fundamental]

Again, let's sell all of our possessions and let each man come as he have need... or I could even go for the year of Jubliee if you want... total down with this. Also, we should be a good steward of the Earth since we have reign over it, no more fossil fuels tomorrow! Go TRT, we must get rid of greed! Amen brother, down with Wall Street. Preach, Preach, as you will point out Jesus spent most of his time talking about money and the heart of man, lets get rid of consumerism...I never thought I would agree with TRT but here is one example that we see eye to eye on... end of consumerism and greed.

[TheRealThing]

⬆

Marrying one's politics and one's faith in some partisan love affair is unwise. No amount of excessive verbiage changes that.

The opposition to the principles of Christianity may extend to certain pet issues; however, the freedom to live out one's faith, one's dictates of conscience unhindered...that remains a constant. I have not been forced one time to accept an imposed dictate that violates my Christian scruples and convictions. The idea that equal protection under the law extends to all does not violate my belief that the practice of homosexuality misses the mark of God's high calling. The belief that the human being can evolve into perfection as he/she perfects society is in opposition to that which I believe, but I have never once been forced to believe an untruth.

To defend essential liberty and freedom of conscience against all, secular and church, who would encroach upon it most often offends both sides. However, it is the path that history of church and secular authority shows most prudent.

I heard the conductor call for the willing to board the loop train in Circleville again, I'm not willing. Anyway, you're still sporting the bullet holes from our previous engagements on Essential Liberty. The term does not exist ANYWHERE, in any founding document.

If you voted for any candidate ever, who is a sworn supporter of the modern day Democrat Platform you don't need to be forced or imposed upon to violate your Christian scruples, you already did that of your own volition. Not that my witnessing and commenting on the historical record should need any more substantiation, but as to the case about Dems, in the US Congress there is a total of only 6 Republicans who support the practice of abortion; In the Senate are Susan Collins ® ME, Shelley Moore Capito ® WV, Lisa Murkowski ® AK. The 3 in the House are Lynn Jenkins ® KS, Rodney Frelinghuysen ® NJ, Charlie Dent ® PA. The last time I checked it took way more than 6 people to pass legislation in Congress.

No form of truth exists in opposition to any other form of truth. My faith therefore, does not exist apart from the realities of this world, whether they be spiritual, political or secular. There are no mitigating factors, owing to life in this world, to insulate men from the steely missiles of God's inflexible Word. But more than that, are the ramifications brought to bear here in this life as the result of choices we all make, as well as the life to come. Men say 'what goes around comes around,' Scripture says Galatians 6:7 (KJV)
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

If you think you can argue for, and vote for policies and candidates in support of social behaviors which clearly violate God's law go ahead. What Christ said was that 'a house divided against itself cannot stand.' No Christian should argue for the horrors of abortion, or the legalization of abominable behavior. The argument to which you cling which makes demands for the freedom to err is moot and irrelevant. People have been allowed to do what ever they want to do with themselves in the moral sense, for my entire lifetime. You may not think you've been forced to violate your Christian scruples, on the other hand I know I've been. The argument is not whether people can be gay, the argument is whether the Supreme Court should legalize that lifestyle, to include benefits no less, that all Christians are by law, FORCED to pay for.

[TheRealThing]

Again, let's sell all of our possessions and let each man come as he have need... or I could even go for the year of Jubliee if you want... total down with this. Also, we should be a good steward of the Earth since we have reign over it, no more fossil fuels tomorrow! Go TRT, we must get rid of greed! Amen brother, down with Wall Street. Preach, Preach, as you will point out Jesus spent most of his time talking about money and the heart of man, lets get rid of consumerism...I never thought I would agree with TRT but here is one example that we see eye to eye on... end of consumerism and greed.

Lead the way brother.

[The Urban Sombrero]

I heard the conductor call for the willing to board the loop train in Circleville again, I'm not willing. Anyway, you're still sporting the bullet holes from our previous engagements on Essential Liberty. The term does not exist ANYWHERE, in any founding document.

If you voted for any candidate ever, who is a sworn supporter of the modern day Democrat Platform you don't need to be forced or imposed upon to violate your Christian scruples, you already did that of your own volition. Not that my witnessing and commenting on the historical record should need any more substantiation, but as to the case about Dems, in the US Congress there is a total of only 6 Republicans who support the practice of abortion; In the Senate are Susan Collins ® ME, Shelley Moore Capito ® WV, Lisa Murkowski ® AK. The 3 in the House are Lynn Jenkins ® KS, Rodney Frelinghuysen ® NJ, Charlie Dent ® PA. The last time I checked it took way more than 6 people to pass legislation in Congress.

No form of truth exists in opposition to any other form of truth. My faith therefore, does not exist apart from the realities of this world, whether they be spiritual, political or secular. There are no mitigating factors, owing to life in this world, to insulate men from the steely missiles of God's inflexible Word. But more than that, are the ramifications brought to bear here in this life as the result of choices we all make, as well as the life to come. Men say 'what goes around comes around,' Scripture says Galatians 6:7 (KJV)
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

If you think you can argue for, and vote for policies and candidates in support of social behaviors which clearly violate God's law go ahead. What Christ said was that 'a house divided against itself cannot stand.' No Christian should argue for the horrors of abortion, or the legalization of abominable behavior. The argument to which you cling which makes demands for the freedom to err is moot and irrelevant. People have been allowed to do what ever they want to do with themselves in the moral sense, for my entire lifetime. You may not think you've been forced to violate your Christian scruples, on the other hand I know I've been. The argument is not whether people can be gay, the argument is whether the Supreme Court should legalize that lifestyle, to include benefits no less, that all Christians are by law, FORCED to pay for.

I sport bullet holes in your cocksure imagination, O self-lauding one.

The extensions from private belief to public policy in a free society certainly loop around. That's for certain.

What does your faith say about supporting a man who lusts for married women, seeks them out, wins some, loses some? If it were Bill Clinton, you'd certainly have a say. You surrendered your consistency and witness in pom-poming for Donald Trump. And everybody knows it. The partisan always trips on his own feathers.

[TheRealThing]

I sport bullet holes in your cocksure imagination, O self-lauding one.

The extensions from private belief to public policy in a free society certainly loop around. That's for certain.

What does your faith say about supporting a man who lusts for married women, seeks them out, wins some, loses some? If it were Bill Clinton, you'd certainly have a say. You surrendered your consistency and witness in pom-poming for Donald Trump. And everybody knows it. The partisan always trips on his own feathers.

Still taking the high road I see, but what does your faith say about the woman taken in the very act of adultery, and the fact that the Lord would not condemn her for it? For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. There is none that doeth good, no not one.

There are two types of people in this world, the saved, and the lost. Now if my Church is seeking a Pastor, I want to make certain that he is blameless. But when I am deciding of whom will get my vote for President, now I can be pragmatic.

Bill Clinton was condemned by a federal judge, a certain blue dress and DNA testing. I call that proof. DJT on the other hand is by in large, the victim of a pack of lies. The left learned a long time ago that the charge alone, devoid of any proof whatever, is usually enough to ruin the aspirations of their political foes. It has been open season since the day Trump announced, and I predicted the melee which has ensued before 2015 came to a close.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Still taking the high road I see, but what does your faith say about the woman taken in the very act of adultery, and the fact that the Lord would not condemn her for it? For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. There is none that doeth good, no not one.

There are two types of people in this world, the saved, and the lost. Now if my Church is seeking a Pastor, I want to make certain that he is blameless. But when I am deciding of whom will get my vote for President, now I can be pragmatic.

Bill Clinton was condemned by a federal judge, a certain blue dress and DNA testing. I call that proof. DJT on the other hand is by in large, the victim of a pack of lies. The left learned a long time ago that the charge alone, devoid of any proof whatever, is usually enough to ruin the aspirations of their political foes. It has been open season since the day Trump announced, and I predicted the melee which has ensued before 2015 came to a close.

Apparently, you have forgotten a certain audio in which Donald Trump himself discusses the very scenario described: in which he relates an attempt to woo a married woman. I am here not suggesting a moral superiority on behalf of this one politician over another. Nor am I moved by your "high road," laughable observation. I read your posts during the campaign. The point here is how you gloss over the very same faults and foibles in one of your own that you berate and condemn in an opponent. The issue is how Christians latch on to this Constantine or that and lift them up if they seem to be a "friendly" in certain pet issues.

[TheRealThing]

Apparently, you have forgotten a certain audio in which Donald Trump himself discusses the very scenario described: in which he relates an attempt to woo a married woman. I am here not suggesting a moral superiority on behalf of this one politician over another. Nor am I moved by your "high road," laughable observation. I read your posts during the campaign. The point here is how you gloss over the very same faults and foibles in one of your own that you berate and condemn in an opponent. The issue is how Christians latch on to this Constantine or that and lift them up if they seem to be a "friendly" in certain pet issues.

Well if you did read my posts you know I have written extensively on why Trump was the only option for those who wanted to avoid involvement in supporting abortion on demand. Nonetheless, if I have misrepresented anything of fact in any post on this forum, by all means, put it up. I would point out however that faults and foibles are by definition, minor weaknesses. Hardly comparable to the epic scandals of the past administration.

I condemn any policy that stands in contradiction to Scripture. While I leave the condemnation of those who openly support such policy to the One Who has purview in such matters. I just refuse to vote for them. The issues taken up in my posts are always clearly stated, your weak attempts at redefining them notwithstanding. So the issue has not anything to do with Constantine as you say, and no Christian in our time thinks Trump is any kind of champion of the faith. They do know a sworn enemy of the faith when they see one however, and you can always tell them by the way they oppose Israel at every turn, and if they give say... 900 million of our tax dollars to Hamas? Not to mention Obama's parting gift of 221 million as he was doing his departing DC flyover in Marine One.

I no more forgot about the Trump audio, than I forgot about the Obama audo/video, in which he asked Medvedev to ask Putin to wait until after his 2012 bid for reelection. Apparently you forgot that Trump was sworn in on Friday January 20th, and by lunchtime on the following Monday had reinstated the Mexico City Policy. That action alone may have saved an untold number of innocent lives, and he wasted no time in doing it. But according to you this stuff is all politics. He's yet to do the first thing to betray his campaign promises and still, the onslaught of lies and false charges continue. :dudecomeon:

[The Urban Sombrero]

Well if you did read my posts you know I have written extensively on why Trump was the only option for those who wanted to avoid involvement in supporting abortion on demand. Nonetheless, if I have misrepresented anything of fact in any post on this forum, by all means, put it up. I would point out however that faults and foibles are by definition, minor weaknesses. Hardly comparable to the epic scandals of the past administration.

I condemn any policy that stands in contradiction to Scripture. While I leave the condemnation of those who openly support such policy to the One Who has purview in such matters. I just refuse to vote for them. The issues taken up in my posts are always clearly stated, your weak attempts at redefining them notwithstanding. So the issue has not anything to do with Constantine as you say, and no Christian in our time thinks Trump is any kind of champion of the faith. They do know a sworn enemy of the faith when they see one however, and you can always tell them by the way they oppose Israel at every turn, and if they give say... 900 million of our tax dollars to Hamas? Not to mention Obama's parting gift of 221 million as he was doing his departing DC flyover in Marine One.

I no more forgot about the Trump audio, than I forgot about the Obama audo/video, in which he asked Medvedev to ask Putin to wait until after his 2012 bid for reelection. Apparently you forgot that Trump was sworn in on Friday January 20th, and by lunchtime on the following Monday had reinstated the Mexico City Policy. That action alone may have saved an untold number of innocent lives, and he wasted no time in doing it. But according to you this stuff is all politics. He's yet to do the first thing to betray his campaign promises and still, the onslaught of lies and false charges continue. :dudecomeon:

Ah, so it's only policy you care about, and not character. You often confuse quantity of verbage for quality and precision of debate. Note: it is not a lie to point out the audio tape. It is not a lie to point out his refusal to make public his tax records.

My points have had zero to do with President Trump's policy designs. He won the election. This current debate we are having is concerning a wide-eyed, highly partisan, gung-ho get on board cheerleading as it pertains to the Christian faith and this world's politics. When President Trump continually says things like, "Nobody loves the Jews as much as me" and other egocentric, megalomaniac-sounding prattle, it gives a person pause for thought. Keeping a healthy skepticism about this world's political scene, no matter what faction holds power, is surely also your mindset.

[TheRealThing]

- Ah, so it's only policy you care about, and not character. You often confuse quantity of verbage for quality and precision of debate. Note: it is not a lie to point out the audio tape. It is not a lie to point out his refusal to make public his tax records.

- My points have had zero to do with President Trump's policy designs. He won the election. This current debate we are having is concerning a wide-eyed, highly partisan, gung-ho get on board cheerleading as it pertains to the Christian faith and this world's politics. When President Trump continually says things like, "Nobody loves the Jews as much as me" and other egocentric, megalomaniac-sounding prattle, it gives a person pause for thought. Keeping a healthy skepticism about this world's political scene, no matter what faction holds power, is surely also your mindset.

- No actually I cared about the fact that one of only two possible candidates would certainly become President, and I lined up on the side of the one who would preserve the lives of he unborn; And who further vowed to uphold the conservative values of our rather recent past, which IMO, he has done. In your manifold defenses of the past administration you said the political shenanigans to which were attached the daily news distortions, were nothing more than politics as usual. But this administration must be somehow different, as you act like your delicate moral sensitivities can barely withstand an occasional skipping glance off the daily news cycle. As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, there have been precious few Presidents to come along in my entire lifetime I thought to be a Christian. If we all waited until Pastor material were to run, we'd never be able to vote. You argue vehemently for strict obedience in the matter of separation of Church and State. But absent proof that would satisfy standards required by the court, you refused to make judgments about the characters and motivations of the last administration, you nonetheless have no compunction to that end in making moral judgments about those in this administration.

- Your view is limited. One cannot un-know the things which have been revealed to him by God. Faith and familiarity with God's Word, guide understanding in political matters as It does in understanding current events in general. Just as the Word provides perspective in matters such as the lies of Evolution and global warming. God created all things, they are not the result of organic matter languishing for aeons in some kind of primordial matrix, said matrix itself the result of the explosion of a singular space rock. And Global warming, if it exists at all, must then be controlled by the Lord Himself as no mention of such calamity is mentioned in Scripture. The opposite in fact is the case;

AFTER THE GREAT FLOOD
Genesis 8:21&22 (KJV)
21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.


"Marrying one's politics and one's faith in some partisan love affair is unwise" ---Sombrero

Marriage makes a man and woman 'one flesh' in the eyes of God. Separating life from each other from that point onward would be unnatural and destructive. Truth in like manner is the marriage of reality, and trying to divorce segments of truth destroys it's accuracy and God's natural interface for same. So the act of separating, divorcing or partitioning off truth is what I believe to be unwise. Mr Fundamental thinks Christendom today should sell off every possession and give it all (I suppose) in lump sum to the poor. The Church depicted in the Book of Acts is one which had it's eyes opened fully to the reality of the right relationship between Spiritual and secular truths, and acted accordingly. Today we have God's finished Word, something the Church did not yet have at the time of the Acts of the Apostles, which was likely written before AD 62. And The Revelation was not finished until around AD 85. The point is that those of the early Church (in Acts) probably believed Christ would return in their lifetime.

The more history marches forward, the more that is revealed from the prophetic texts. I believe man has arrived at the time depicted in
2 Timothy 3:2-3 (KJV)
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

Further as we are obviously still here, there is some amount of time remaining in the age of grace, though I believe the contempt and vitriol seen in the press and in the halls of government are happening in concurrent fashion. The likely fact is that we are in the last days as laid out the above verses in 2 Timothy.

[The Urban Sombrero]

- No actually I cared about the fact that one of only two possible candidates would certainly become President, and I lined up on the side of the one who would preserve the lives of he unborn; And who further vowed to uphold the conservative values of our rather recent past, which IMO, he has done. In your manifold defenses of the past administration you said the political shenanigans to which were attached the daily news distortions, were nothing more than politics as usual. But this administration must be somehow different, as you act like your delicate moral sensitivities can barely withstand an occasional skipping glance off the daily news cycle. As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, there have been precious few Presidents to come along in my entire lifetime I thought to be a Christian. If we all waited until Pastor material were to run, we'd never be able to vote. You argue vehemently for strict obedience in the matter of separation of Church and State. But absent proof that would satisfy standards required by the court, you refused to make judgments about the characters and motivations of the last administration, you nonetheless have no compunction to that end in making moral judgments about those in this administration.

- Your view is limited. One cannot un-know the things which have been revealed to him by God. Faith and familiarity with God's Word, guide understanding in political matters as It does in understanding current events in general. Just as the Word provides perspective in matters such as the lies of Evolution and global warming. God created all things, they are not the result of organic matter languishing for aeons in some kind of primordial matrix, said matrix itself the result of the explosion of a singular space rock. And Global warming, if it exists at all, must then be controlled by the Lord Himself as no mention of such calamity is mentioned in Scripture. The opposite in fact is the case;

AFTER THE GREAT FLOOD
Genesis 8:21&22 (KJV)
21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.


"Marrying one's politics and one's faith in some partisan love affair is unwise" ---Sombrero

Marriage makes a man and woman 'one flesh' in the eyes of God. Separating life from each other from that point onward would be unnatural and destructive. Truth in like manner is the marriage of reality, and trying to divorce segments of truth destroys it's accuracy and God's natural interface for same. So the act of separating, divorcing or partitioning off truth is what I believe to be unwise. Mr Fundamental thinks Christendom today should sell off every possession and give it all (I suppose) in lump sum to the poor. The Church depicted in the Book of Acts is one which had it's eyes opened fully to the reality of the right relationship between Spiritual and secular truths, and acted accordingly. Today we have God's finished Word, something the Church did not yet have at the time of the Acts of the Apostles, which was likely written before AD 62. And The Revelation was not finished until around AD 85. The point is that those of the early Church (in Acts) probably believed Christ would return in their lifetime.

The more history marches forward, the more that is revealed from the prophetic texts. I believe man has arrived at the time depicted in
2 Timothy 3:2-3 (KJV)
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

Further as we are obviously still here, there is some amount of time remaining in the age of grace, though I believe the contempt and vitriol seen in the press and in the halls of government are happening in concurrent fashion. The likely fact is that we are in the last days as laid out the above verses in 2 Timothy.

President Obama has but one wife, and to my knowledge, was not recorded suggesting that wealth and power enabled a feller to grab a woman's genitalia unhindered.

The folks described in your 2 Timothy passage? They seem to wear the veneer of religion, perhaps a sort of lukewarm, church respectability if you will. The admonition is to avoid them, the warning is that, as tepid water, they shall be spat out: perhaps in "last days" talk they are those whose "love has grown cold" (the single most ignored sign in the littany).

Obviously, the newspapers and television and social media sights give a generally slanted view of events, and a view so shallow and secularized that it cannot possibly lend itself to serious thought or spiritual contemplation at all. A good working knowledge of Scripture, a frequented prayer closet...these help us see with a little depth, and without partisan prejudice. Otherwise, one's thinking and speaking will be nothing but a jumble of absurd political cliches and self-complacent rationalizations which will prove worse than useless.

An example: the roll back of the regulation banning American companies from using conflict minerals such as blood diamonds. I hear an echo of Revelation 18: 11-13 in that, and, therefore, support the ban and oppose its lifting.

[TheRealThing]

President Obama has but one wife, and to my knowledge, was not recorded suggesting that wealth and power enabled a feller to grab a woman's genitalia unhindered.

The folks described in your 2 Timothy passage? They seem to wear the veneer of religion, perhaps a sort of lukewarm, church respectability if you will. The admonition is to avoid them, the warning is that, as tepid water, they shall be spat out: perhaps in "last days" talk they are those whose "love has grown cold" (the single most ignored sign in the littany).

Obviously, the newspapers and television and social media sights give a generally slanted view of events, and a view so shallow and secularized that it cannot possibly lend itself to serious thought or spiritual contemplation at all. A good working knowledge of Scripture, a frequented prayer closet...these help us see with a little depth, and without partisan prejudice. Otherwise, one's thinking and speaking will be nothing but a jumble of absurd political cliches and self-complacent rationalizations which will prove worse than useless.

An example: the roll back of the regulation banning American companies from using conflict minerals such as blood diamonds. I hear an echo of Revelation 18: 11-13 in that, and, therefore, support the ban and oppose its lifting.

Sorry but no, I won't. I do not believe verses 2-4 describe backslidden Christians or Christians whose love has waxed cold, rather these are men as they are in the last days. I did not initially belabor the point by including verse 4, but not one of the 19 descriptive terms used in 2 Tim 3:2-4 would not be applicable to men in our time. 'Unholy' for example, means men will profane God in their conversation, Hollywood loves to profane God. 'Without natural affection' means men will embrace abnormal relationships, do I really need to go into what that means again?

I must have missed the part of the Timothy text that says anything about tepid water and being 'spat' out, the correct verse applicable to that situation is Rev 3:16. At any rate, you seem to have been saying that the true Church either can be or will be, led into some sort of cultic deception. A view with which I completely disagree.
Matthew 24:24 (KJV)
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

There are two groups the Bible refers to as elect. The first is the Church, the second is the nation Israel. Matthew 24:24 is speaking of the elect of Israel. They are Jews as yet unsaved, and do not have the spiritual discernment afforded the saved by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I do not believe it is possible for the true Church to be taken in by any charlatan or false prophet. Paul says the following on the subject;
Romans 8:38-39 (KJV)
38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Say what you want, but the forces of death, life, angels, demons, etc., are far more powerful than partisan politics or a dead guy named Constantine who just happened to have legalized Christianity in Rome. Your argument is completely without merit, OR spiritual basis.

BTW, while we're extoling or slamming Presidential moral virtues, did 500,000 people die at the hand of Assad?

[The Urban Sombrero]

Sorry but no, I won't. I do not believe verses 2-4 describe backslidden Christians or Christians whose love has waxed cold, rather these are men as they are in the last days. I did not initially belabor the point by including verse 4, but not one of the 19 descriptive terms used in 2 Tim 3:2-4 would not be applicable to men in our time. 'Unholy' for example, means men will profane God in their conversation, Hollywood loves to profane God. 'Without natural affection' means men will embrace abnormal relationships, do I really need to go into what that means again?

I must have missed the part of the Timothy text that says anything about tepid water and being 'spat' out, the correct verse applicable to that situation is Rev 3:16. At any rate, you seem to have been saying that the true Church either can be or will be, led into some sort of cultic deception. A view with which I completely disagree.
Matthew 24:24 (KJV)
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

There a re two groups the Bible refers to as elect. The first is the Church, the second is the nation Israel. Matthew 24:24 is speaking of the elect of Israel. They are Jews as yet unsaved, and do not have the spiritual discernment afforded the saved by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I do not believe it is possible for the true Church to be taken in by any charlatan or false prophet. Paul says the following on the subject;
Romans 8:38-39 (KJV)
38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Say what you want, but the forces of death, life, angels, demons, etc., are far more powerful than partisan politics or a dead guy named Constantine who just happened to have legalized Christianity in Rome. Your argument is completely without merit, OR spiritual basis.

BTW, while we're extoling or slamming Presidential moral virtues, did 500,000 people die at the hand of Assad?

The folks of the "two Timothy" passage you cite are of the sort featured on TBNianity.

Question: the actions of Assad: how do they relate to the multiple wives of a President who deemed that power and wealth entitle a man to grab a female's genitalia, as opposed to a President of but one wife? I am, as I said, making no claim for some kind of moral perfection in former President Obama. That was never the issue. The issue was how the partisan swallows a camel but strains out a gnat. Now, a trailer load of straw later, here we are.

Does an acknowledgement of God without a serious pursuit of Him end up any better than a renunciation of God in favor of Man seeking to perfect himself? Water sprayed at a fire that misses the blaze by 100 feet no more extinguishes it than a stream that misses by a thousand.

[TheRealThing]

The folks of the "two Timothy" passage you cite are of the sort featured on TBNianity.

Question: the actions of Assad: how do they relate to the multiple wives of a President who deemed that power and wealth entitle a man to grab a female's genitalia, as opposed to a President of but one wife? I am, as I said, making no claim for some kind of moral perfection in former President Obama. That was never the issue. The issue was how the partisan swallows a camel but strains out a gnat. Now, a trailer load of straw later, here we are.

Does an acknowledgement of God without a serious pursuit of Him end up any better than a renunciation of God in favor of Man seeking to perfect himself? Water sprayed at a fire that misses the blaze by 100 feet no more extinguishes it than a stream that misses by a thousand.

HUH? :biglmao: You really shouldn't post after you've been drinking.

[The Urban Sombrero]

HUH? :biglmao: You really shouldn't post after you've been drinking.

Spread those feathers, Padre Peacock.

[mr.fundamental]

I think this is so funny. People are suffering out there, our very neighbors, and we are worried about the letter of the Law and not the intent. I think the religious right will bring down Christianity much like the pharisees because of they do not care about people. I will hear the argument I am pro-life but when asked they will carry a gun to defend themselves and take a life if necessary. They will have hatred to the brother who is perceived to be lazy. They will condemn a person because they want the same legal rights as another. They will get mad when someone goes the Dr. and can not afford the bill. They will judge that person on the spot. They will harm the environment in the name of profit. However, when asked to sell their possessions, they can not do it. They wept and walk away, much like my Teacher, Light, has talked about. At the end of the day it comes to down to our selfishness and yes I have mine as well. To think that any man is perfect is a lie. The religious right has created a much bigger mess in the name of power in my opinion. I hope that the church can survive. We have a great Savior! He has taught us how to live! I mess it up daily. I just hope through the Spirit, I can become a better man each day, and actually be a difference.

[TheRealThing]

I think this is so funny. People are suffering out there, our very neighbors, and we are worried about the letter of the Law and not the intent. I think the religious right will bring down Christianity much like the pharisees because of they do not care about people. I will hear the argument I am pro-life but when asked they will carry a gun to defend themselves and take a life if necessary. They will have hatred to the brother who is perceived to be lazy. They will condemn a person because they want the same legal rights as another. They will get mad when someone goes the Dr. and can not afford the bill. They will judge that person on the spot. They will harm the environment in the name of profit. However, when asked to sell their possessions, they can not do it. They wept and walk away, much like my Teacher, Light, has talked about. At the end of the day it comes to down to our selfishness and yes I have mine as well. To think that any man is perfect is a lie. The religious right has created a much bigger mess in the name of power in my opinion. I hope that the church can survive. We have a great Savior! He has taught us how to live! I mess it up daily. I just hope through the Spirit, I can become a better man each day, and actually be a difference.

I really appreciate your patience and hope you can continue to overlook our narrow perspectives. But you think the Church is going down do you? Maybe the following will make you feel better about it.
Matthew 16:18 (KJV)
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Should I even mention the fact that the good folks there in the early Church as described in Acts, lived in a theocracy? There was no income tax, nor was there government housing, free college, food, clothing, health insurance/care, transportation, cell phones, or state sponsored sex change operations for prisoners. The people of Israel in that day gave to the Church and the Church made distributions to the hungry.

As far as I know anybody who needs assistance here in the US has to but go to the welfare office, and help is forthcoming. We all know that there are good people who don't game the system and none of us would deny them the help they need. Nonetheless, there are many incurably irresponsible parents who sell their food stamps to buy things like cigarettes drugs and beer, leaving their children to suffer in hunger. So aside from government's blind support of a billion dollar a year welfare fraud industry in just giving stuff away, there is a role for the Church to play in the area of benevolence and I'm sure most of them rise to the occasion accordingly. But, if I might ask, are you speaking of help to gain one's financial footing, or across the board redistribution of wealth? Perhaps you are referring to the efforts that the various US benevolence entities make to feed the poor of other lands? All of these things happen daily here in America. Have you sold all your possessions and given the money to the poor, or maybe it would just be best to give as much as you can on a weekly basis to them?

[mr.fundamental]

I really appreciate your patience and hope you can continue to overlook our narrow perspectives. But you think the Church is going down do you? Maybe the following will make you feel better about it.
Matthew 16:18 (KJV)
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Should I even mention the fact that the good folks there in the early Church as described in Acts, lived in a theocracy? There was no income tax, nor was there government housing, free college, food, clothing, health insurance/care, transportation, cell phones, or state sponsored sex change operations for prisoners. The people of Israel in that day gave to the Church and the Church made distributions to the hungry.

As far as I know anybody who needs assistance here in the US has to but go to the welfare office, and help is forthcoming. We all know that there are good people who don't game the system and none of us would deny them the help they need. Nonetheless, there are many incurably irresponsible parents who sell their food stamps to buy things like cigarettes drugs and beer, leaving their children to suffer in hunger. So aside from government's blind support of a billion dollar a year welfare fraud industry in just giving stuff away, there is a role for the Church to play in the area of benevolence and I'm sure most of them rise to the occasion accordingly. But, if I might ask, are you speaking of help to gain one's financial footing, or across the board redistribution of wealth? Perhaps you are referring to the efforts that the various US benevolence entities make to feed the poor of other lands? All of these things happen daily here in America. Have you sold all your possessions and given the money to the poor, or maybe it would just be best to give as much as you can on a weekly basis to them?

It is the heart of the matter. The jewish people wanted a theocracy 1st and 2nd kings as well as the prophets tell of the story. Didn't work out so well, as we all know. A theocracy is not the answer if it was, the previous two books would not be useful.

Who owns the wealth of America?

[mr.fundamental]

Also just a quick thought... was the Roman Empire a theocracy?