I am honestly flummoxed ... how is the "two-state solution" different form what we have today. Gaza is a state governed by Hams, and Judea and Samaria is governed by the Palestinian Authority.sombear said:boognish_bear said:A lot of folks won’t read past the first couple paragraphs of Biden’s op-ed today - but don’t sleep on it.
— ClearingTheFog (@clearing_fog) November 19, 2023
In addition to calling out Hamas, it is a direct refutation of Netanyahu’s policies - almost unheard of from an American President.
free/🎁 link:https://t.co/vov74JkGI1 pic.twitter.com/DVhPuKNjlv
What???
I read the entire thing. There is no refutation of Israel at all. It's about as strong a defense of Israel as one can imagine. In fact, I'm strongly pro-Israel, but I think he should have referenced settlements, to lay it all out there.
Regardless, unfortunately, it's all futile anyway. There simply is no way to ensure there will be no Palestinian terrorism when strong majorities support it.
Netanyahu said "we are at war,"
525,602 Views |
6919 Replies |
Last: 2 hrs ago by whiterock
And the public education system.
When Islamofascists talk about a "two state solution" it's code for "Israel needs to give up more territory to Arabs." It's a subterfuge not to be taken seriously.
Sometimes I need to be reminded that they lie all the time, just like all other kinds of Leftists.
Sometimes I need to be reminded that they lie all the time, just like all other kinds of Leftists.
nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
It's not one extreme or the other. Obviously, perverts should not be in fake marriages & definitely should not be allowed to adopt. There is so much more from the perspective of public health and plain common sense. But we can respond in an intelligent and civilized manner.
The Christian response should be one of love and compassion. Acting out of hatred, which is the case of sharia, never produces anything good.
"Love your neighbor as yourself."
Matthew 22:39b
The Christian response should be one of love and compassion. Acting out of hatred, which is the case of sharia, never produces anything good.
"Love your neighbor as yourself."
Matthew 22:39b
historian said:
The Christian response should be one of love and compassion.
Toward the penitent. To those who won't listen you shake the dust off your feet and it is not in vain that Godly authorities bear the sword.
Quote:
Acting out of hatred, which is the case of sharia, never produces anything good.
Is it though? Or is it simply an acknowledgment that some behaviors are so disruptive to the social order that they must be stopped.
Regardless, the broader point is that on this issue, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
ShooterTX
Intelligent, patient response.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
Well done.
I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
I'm not saying individuals should throw anyone off a building.
I'm not saying the church should throw anyone off a building.
I am saying that a country and a society that has gone here:
Tranhausen By Proxy
...has no business being critical of a country and society that chooses to use homosexuals as gravity test dummies so it doesn't end up there.
That is all.
I'm not saying the church should throw anyone off a building.
I am saying that a country and a society that has gone here:
Tranhausen By Proxy
...has no business being critical of a country and society that chooses to use homosexuals as gravity test dummies so it doesn't end up there.
That is all.
The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
I think the Founders wrestled with all of this appropriately.
Their conclusion was that sins or crimes which directly affect others, must be punished under the law. If someone causes someone else harm, then the violator must be held accountable.
Hurting someone's feelings was never considered "harm" under the law. So if someone lives a homosexual lifestyle, it is a sin against God, but not something that should be punished under the law.
Of course, the left has decided that "words are violence", so now they are trying to punish Christians & conservatives for hurting their feelings and other forms of emotional harm.
I think the Founders did a very admirable job. They created a system which would encourage morality and Christianity, without creating a theological government for society. Sadly, our society has moved so far away from God that many see the Constitution as evil & individual liberty as a threat.
ShooterTX
Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
FLBear5630 said:
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
It does only mean taxes. That was the context for that original discussion.
"Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor." (Romans 13:7)
When Caesar demanded worship, many early Christians were martyred as a result.
When the Nazis sent Jews to concentration camps, Christians likewise were martyred in their effort to protect them.
The disobedience of immoral civil law is a Christian mandate.
Quote:
Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?
There is a vast difference between legislating theology and legislating morality. Every society in the history of man has legislated morality to maintain civil order. It's just a matter of whose morals get enforced.
Expelling Christians from caring for orphans so that they can be indoctrinated into a secular, LGBTPQ2+ agenda is already a thing.
Multiple States Threaten To Shut Down Christian Adoption Agencies
If they lose these court cases, hopefully they will realize that orphans are better served with the possibility of temporary normal homes through the foster care system than permanently being placed with two homosexuals/transvesties/etc and completely shut down services rather than compromise their witness.
So speaking of planks in our own societal eye, we had best focus on those before we lecture anyone on the international stage.
ShooterTX said:
I think the Founders wrestled with all of this appropriately.
Indeed they did.
Quote:
Their conclusion was that sins or crimes which directly affect others, must be punished under the law. If someone causes someone else harm, then the violator must be held accountable.
Hurting someone's feelings was never considered "harm" under the law. So if someone lives a homosexual lifestyle, it is a sin against God, but not something that should be punished under the law.
A fairly strong case can be made that homosexuality is more than simply a private behavior that can be ignored by law. Given the overlap between it and pederasty (leave alone the public health implications) there is a significant degree to which it affects others and lowers the moral standard of society.
The Nature of Homosexuality
Quote:
I think the Founders did a very admirable job. They created a system which would encourage morality and Christianity, without creating a theological government for society. Sadly, our society has moved so far away from God that many see the Constitution as evil & individual liberty as a threat.
Indeed.
"It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, (and) to obey his will."
- George Washington
"(Jesus's moral laws are) the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The great pillars of all government and of social life (are) virtue, morality and religion. This is the armor ... and this alone, that renders us invincible."
- Patrick Henry
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
- John Adams
"Morality must fall without religion."
- Alexander Hamilton
At any rate, this has probably gone far enough down a rabbit trail that started when some found it necessary to reach for gay rights as the obvious critique of Sharia Law.
Back to your regularly scheduled programming about the current state of play in Israel.
Worship? Who is demanding worship? How about not throwing off of buildings? You do love extremes!Realitybites said:FLBear5630 said:
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
It does only mean taxes. That was the context for that original discussion.
"Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor." (Romans 13:7)
When Caesar demanded worship, many early Christians were martyred as a result.
When the Nazis sent Jews to concentration camps, Christians likewise were martyred in their effort to protect them.
The disobedience of immoral civil law is a Christian mandate.Quote:
Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?
There is a vast difference between legislating theology and legislating morality. Every society in the history of man has legislated morality to maintain civil order. It's just a matter of whose morals get enforced.
Expelling Christians from caring for orphans so that they can be indoctrinated into a secular, LGBTPQ2+ agenda is already a thing.
Multiple States Threaten To Shut Down Christian Adoption Agencies
If they lose these court cases, hopefully they will realize that orphans are better served with the possibility of temporary normal homes through the foster care system than permanently being placed with two homosexuals/transvesties/etc and completely shut down services rather than compromise their witness.
So speaking of planks in our own societal eye, we had best focus on those before we lecture anyone on the international stage.
You are so right, the US should not take a position on anything because you disagree with whether Gay people should be able to adopt? Ok.
This is the wildest friggin Board I have ever seen!
What law were they applying? I do not recall Due Process really getting its day.FLBear5630 said:Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
I can tell you that we are living in a permissive society today that borders on lawlessness. That is what you get when you have no righteous judgment and you have "your truth" and live "your truth."
Homosexual conduct was illegal in Texas until about 20 years ago. No-fault divorce is a fairly recent innovation. Adultery used to be subject to civil and criminal sanctions. Frank Sinatra was booked for the offense of Seduction. I think your view of the Founders' take on private morality and law may need some adjustment.ShooterTX said:Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
I think the Founders wrestled with all of this appropriately.
Their conclusion was that sins or crimes which directly affect others, must be punished under the law. If someone causes someone else harm, then the violator must be held accountable.
Hurting someone's feelings was never considered "harm" under the law. So if someone lives a homosexual lifestyle, it is a sin against God, but not something that should be punished under the law.
Of course, the left has decided that "words are violence", so now they are trying to punish Christians & conservatives for hurting their feelings and other forms of emotional harm.
I think the Founders did a very admirable job. They created a system which would encourage morality and Christianity, without creating a theological government for society. Sadly, our society has moved so far away from God that many see the Constitution as evil & individual liberty as a threat.
You are mixing civile enforcement of laws with moral authority that is at best a personal obligation and totally voluntary in a secular society. There is not the Church, any denomination, can do outside of yelling at its members. Which most have down to a science.Wrecks Quan Dough said:What law were they applying? I do not recall Due Process really getting its day.FLBear5630 said:Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
I can tell you that we are living in a permissive society today that borders on lawlessness. That is what you get when you have no righteous judgment and you have "your truth" and live "your truth."
I do agree that we need increased enforcement and prosecution or people will ignore the law regardless of what the Pastor says
No, I am saying that you are not precluded from making a judgment. Churches can kick you out and refuse to associate with you. More should start applying this form of discipline. That requires "judgment," which is something you seem to not like.FLBear5630 said:You are mixing civile enforcement of laws with moral authority that is at best a personal obligation and totally voluntary in a secular society. There is not the Church, any denomination, can do outside of yelling at its members. Which most have down to a science.Wrecks Quan Dough said:What law were they applying? I do not recall Due Process really getting its day.FLBear5630 said:Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
I can tell you that we are living in a permissive society today that borders on lawlessness. That is what you get when you have no righteous judgment and you have "your truth" and live "your truth."
I do agree that we need increased enforcement and prosecution or people will ignore the law regardless of what the Pastor says
Civil laws will reflect someone's morality. They used to reflect a more strict view of sexual morality. 50 years ago we had laws that were more in line with Christian morality--blue laws, prayer in school, stricter standards for marriage, divorce, and sexuality. I would argue society was better off before these ethics were upended starting in around the time of the sexual revolution. Civil laws today reflect the morality of a more libertine, licentious and non-Christian society. We are not better off as a result.
They aren't going to judge you, me or anyone else. They need the tithing. Hell, even the Catholic Church has bought into that full bore. Can't go one week without some appeal...Wrecks Quan Dough said:No, I am saying that you are not precluded from making a judgment. Churches can kick you out and refuse to associate with you. More should start applying this form of discipline. That requires "judgment," which is something you seem to not like.FLBear5630 said:You are mixing civile enforcement of laws with moral authority that is at best a personal obligation and totally voluntary in a secular society. There is not the Church, any denomination, can do outside of yelling at its members. Which most have down to a science.Wrecks Quan Dough said:What law were they applying? I do not recall Due Process really getting its day.FLBear5630 said:Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
I can tell you that we are living in a permissive society today that borders on lawlessness. That is what you get when you have no righteous judgment and you have "your truth" and live "your truth."
I do agree that we need increased enforcement and prosecution or people will ignore the law regardless of what the Pastor says
Also, kicking people out doesn't increase the flock. If you want 30 people having a circle jerk telling each other how great they are, I guess that will work. More likely, based on what I see here, you guys will turn on each other. Then you will lower standards to let the unwashed in and give you someone to judge. After all, it can't be about judging if you have no one to judge or throw off buildings...
Realitybites said:
I'm not saying individuals should throw anyone off a building.
I'm not saying the church should throw anyone off a building.
I am saying that a country and a society that has gone here:
Tranhausen By Proxy
...has no business being critical of a country and society that chooses to use homosexuals as gravity test dummies so it doesn't end up there.
That is all.
We have every right to condemn countries that routinely engage in barbarism. The fact that perversion is common in our society does not mean it is pervasive or represents the majority, although sometimes it might seem that way. There are plenty of Americans angry about the perverted propaganda in schools, fake "women" cheaters playing in some a sports and sometimes severely injuring real women, the attempts to sexual use America's children, snd do on illustrate this. Look at what happened to Budweiser, Disney, & Target when they became woke. Americans are fighting back and winning victories against those evil forces. Unfortunately we are too often passive & complacent.
That sounds awful judgmental to me. You said something about a speck and beam.FLBear5630 said:They aren't going to judge you, me or anyone else. They need the tithing. Hell, even the Catholic Church has bought into that full bore. Can't go one week without some appeal...Wrecks Quan Dough said:No, I am saying that you are not precluded from making a judgment. Churches can kick you out and refuse to associate with you. More should start applying this form of discipline. That requires "judgment," which is something you seem to not like.FLBear5630 said:You are mixing civile enforcement of laws with moral authority that is at best a personal obligation and totally voluntary in a secular society. There is not the Church, any denomination, can do outside of yelling at its members. Which most have down to a science.Wrecks Quan Dough said:What law were they applying? I do not recall Due Process really getting its day.FLBear5630 said:Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
I can tell you that we are living in a permissive society today that borders on lawlessness. That is what you get when you have no righteous judgment and you have "your truth" and live "your truth."
I do agree that we need increased enforcement and prosecution or people will ignore the law regardless of what the Pastor says
Also, kicking people out doesn't increase the flock. If you want 30 people having a circle jerk telling each other how great they are, I guess that will work. More likely, based on what I see here, you guys will turn on each other. Then you will lower standards to let the unwashed in and give you someone to judge. After all, it can't be about judging if you have no one to judge or throw off buildings...
Nice shot, left myself open to that one. : )Wrecks Quan Dough said:That sounds awful judgmental to me. You said something about a speck and beam.FLBear5630 said:They aren't going to judge you, me or anyone else. They need the tithing. Hell, even the Catholic Church has bought into that full bore. Can't go one week without some appeal...Wrecks Quan Dough said:No, I am saying that you are not precluded from making a judgment. Churches can kick you out and refuse to associate with you. More should start applying this form of discipline. That requires "judgment," which is something you seem to not like.FLBear5630 said:You are mixing civile enforcement of laws with moral authority that is at best a personal obligation and totally voluntary in a secular society. There is not the Church, any denomination, can do outside of yelling at its members. Which most have down to a science.Wrecks Quan Dough said:What law were they applying? I do not recall Due Process really getting its day.FLBear5630 said:Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
I can tell you that we are living in a permissive society today that borders on lawlessness. That is what you get when you have no righteous judgment and you have "your truth" and live "your truth."
I do agree that we need increased enforcement and prosecution or people will ignore the law regardless of what the Pastor says
Also, kicking people out doesn't increase the flock. If you want 30 people having a circle jerk telling each other how great they are, I guess that will work. More likely, based on what I see here, you guys will turn on each other. Then you will lower standards to let the unwashed in and give you someone to judge. After all, it can't be about judging if you have no one to judge or throw off buildings...
Oh, I have a beam in my eye. Make no doubt, not perfect here nor think I am. I usually get to mass for the offertory because I don't want to hear the Priest preach and ask for money....
FLBear5630 said:Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
Except for the isolated Salem witch hunt aberration, the puritans in Massachusetts did not follow the examples of medieval Europe with hysteria, excess & decades of witch hunts. Even in Salem no one was burned at the stake. They were far from perfect but they tried to be sane about it.
Well, Salem was unique. But it did happen, true they hung them not burn. But Monty Python did such a good job in that skit.historian said:FLBear5630 said:Righteous Judgement - Didn't the Catholics tried that in the Middle Ages in Europe and the Protestants in the 1600's in the Mass Bay Colony?Wrecks Quan Dough said:What do you mean that it is not our place to punish? We have jury system where people are asked to find guilt or lack of guilt and assess punishment on the guilty every day. People love to quote the passage where we are told not judge, but they do not bother to reference John 7:24 where we are instructed to judge righteously.FLBear5630 said:But, it is not our place to punish. We all have our own planks and what you or I may consider abominations may be viewed less harshly than our judging.Wrecks Quan Dough said:The Law is good because it shows our shortcomings and violations of God's standards. The Law regulates society and provides order. The Law is lacking because the end result is condemnation for the violator and the repetitive offering of sacrifice. Christ is the embodiment of the Law and the Spirit of Grace. He never violated the law. He fulfilled the Law in every respect. And His sacrifice, one time and for everyone who calls on his name, brings life and forgiveness.FLBear5630 said:I am with you. My understanding was that Jesus came to say the "Law" was not enough and to show and instruct a different way.ShooterTX said:FLBear5630 said:So you are good throwing them off buildings????Realitybites said:nein51 said:
Can we mostly agree that throwing gay people off of buildings isn't ok?
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:32)
"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)
So tell me, is it worse to toss them off roofs, or let them play house and adopt little kids?
Yes, I understand that like they play house a lot of us play church and that our worldview is formed by Hollywood, Netflix, and Disney to a greater extent than the watered down coffee on Sunday morning. But something to think about.
There really isn't a middle ground between totally condoning and being forced to drink watered down coffee and throwing off buildings???
This is where I diverge with "Conservatives" today. I guess if we want to play Bible games,
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I guess you should pick the building you want to be thrown off before tossing anyone? I am sure there is some Baptist interpretation that means only for the non-Saved? Right. That is often how it works.
It is neither conservative nor Christian to condone throwing gays off of buildings.
Jesus did not condone the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He told her to "go and sin no more", but He didn't kill her.
In the same way, we must call out sin as sin, but we don't need to advocate for the death penalty over sexual immorality.
We should not support homosexuality as a legit lifestyle either... but our choices are not limited to full support or barbaric execution.
But, for many on here that is milquetoast and a fate worse than anything else including treason and now throwing people off of buildings...
Nothing that Christ did diminishes the usefulness of the Law or the standards of morality embodied by the Law. Christ did not abolish the Law. He fulfilled it. We should likewise not abolish the Law. That is a recipe for permissiveness and disorder.
As for disorder, I disagree. Jesus clearly said to give unto Caesar what is Caesars. If it is illegal, it is illegal. We are not talking public unrest, although falling bodies from buildings may cause that... But, I guess some literalist could say that only means taxes.
The injunction to not judge is not a command to withhold judgment on the morality of certain behaviors. The church is commanded to have discipline and to have discipline you must have discernment and judgment about what is right and what is wrong. The question is what is your measure of right and wrong. God's way or your own way? If you say "God's way," then what is your authority for that way if not the Law?
The Law is good. So is righteous judgment.
Except for the isolated Salem witch hunt aberration, the puritans in Massachusetts did not follow the examples of medieval Europe with hysteria, excess & decades of witch hunts. Even in Salem no one was burned at the stake. They were far from perfect but they tried to be sane about it.
In no way can someone say that the Puritans were sane about their believes! They were extremely harsh, especially to women. Banishment may not be hanging, but trying to survive a Maine or New England winter without the Colony was basically a death sentence, I believe at one point the Mass Bay Colony banished 1.4% of their population! There was also a whole host of punishments they doled out to those who were judged to have offended.
Palestinian Authority Warns That Gaza Hospitals Running Dangerously Low On Ammunition
NEW YORK, NY Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas issued an impassioned plea at the U.N. this week, begging Western powers for aid to help hospitals in Gaza, which he says are running dangerously low on ammunition.
"The situation for our dedicated Palestinian healthcare professionals is dire," he said. "They are out of 7.76 ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades, and C4 to strap onto adolescent boys. Soon, we will be severely crippled in our ability to kill Jews. We call on the U.S. and Europe to send money to help us before it's too late."
The Biden Administration has responded, sending $100 million to Hamas on the strict condition that they promise they were just kidding about all that ammunition stuff and will really use the money to buy things like Tylenol and bandages. "I looked in the eyes of the Hamas leader, and I trust him," said Biden. "We stood man to man like when Matt Dillon faced the Mexican dog-faced pony-soldiers in Bonanza. If he goes back on his word I'll wrap a chain around his head, Jack!"
The Palestinian Authority was quick to clarify that in spite of the request for ammunition, Hamas has never operated from hospitals or used children as human shields or done anything wrong or hurt anyone ever.
At publishing time, $100 million worth of rockets had been delivered to hospitals in the region.
https://babylonbee.com/news/palestinian-authority-warns-that-gaza-hospitals-are-running-dangerously-low-on-ammunition
NEW YORK, NY Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas issued an impassioned plea at the U.N. this week, begging Western powers for aid to help hospitals in Gaza, which he says are running dangerously low on ammunition.
"The situation for our dedicated Palestinian healthcare professionals is dire," he said. "They are out of 7.76 ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades, and C4 to strap onto adolescent boys. Soon, we will be severely crippled in our ability to kill Jews. We call on the U.S. and Europe to send money to help us before it's too late."
The Biden Administration has responded, sending $100 million to Hamas on the strict condition that they promise they were just kidding about all that ammunition stuff and will really use the money to buy things like Tylenol and bandages. "I looked in the eyes of the Hamas leader, and I trust him," said Biden. "We stood man to man like when Matt Dillon faced the Mexican dog-faced pony-soldiers in Bonanza. If he goes back on his word I'll wrap a chain around his head, Jack!"
The Palestinian Authority was quick to clarify that in spite of the request for ammunition, Hamas has never operated from hospitals or used children as human shields or done anything wrong or hurt anyone ever.
At publishing time, $100 million worth of rockets had been delivered to hospitals in the region.
https://babylonbee.com/news/palestinian-authority-warns-that-gaza-hospitals-are-running-dangerously-low-on-ammunition
After the Massachusetts Bay colony banished Roger Williams and he established Rhode Island, those who were banished had a place to go. I'm not saying that the Puritans of the 16th century followed a form of jurisprudence based upon more modern ideas about justice. I am saying that they made an effort to be balanced and reasonable by the standards of the day. So, yes it was more sane when compared to Europe.
One could quibble about whether or not banishment was excessively harsh but since it was generally a religious community and they wanted to root out disruptive elements it was a better option than execution.
One could quibble about whether or not banishment was excessively harsh but since it was generally a religious community and they wanted to root out disruptive elements it was a better option than execution.
Well there is one that may be a similar modern form - Shirah Law...historian said:
After the Massachusetts Bay colony banished Roger Williams and he established Rhode Island, those who were banished had a place to go. I'm not saying that the Puritans of the 16th century followed a form of jurisprudence based upon more modern ideas about justice. I am saying that they made an effort to be balanced and reasonable by the standards of the day. So, yes it was more sane when compared to Europe.
One could quibble about whether or not banishment was excessively harsh but since it was generally a religious community and they wanted to root out disruptive elements it was a better option than execution.
I grew up in the NE and went to Conn alot to visit Grandmother. My daughter lives in Cambridge, MA so been to most of the historic stuff on that. They were a brutal people. But, in all fairness to survive where they did is not for the feint of heart. I do find the Salem incident fascinating how group think can infect a small group.
The dangers of groupthink have been real throughout human history.
“we have to move the refugees from Gaza somewhere” https://t.co/ZfUSspJnXZ pic.twitter.com/Lvywvl9b7I
— Kaguya’s Top Gal (@hayasaka_aryan) November 20, 2023
Arab countries won't take them.Redbrickbear said:“we have to move the refugees from Gaza somewhere” https://t.co/ZfUSspJnXZ pic.twitter.com/Lvywvl9b7I
— Kaguya’s Top Gal (@hayasaka_aryan) November 20, 2023
Germany will?