blackbird

No. Just a Bible believer.

quote Sodom, Sodomy, and Sodomites One of the most prevalent sins in Sodom was the homosexuality of the men, engaging in sexual relations with the other men and boys. Sodom is where we get the term “sodomy and sodomites” named after this widespread sin of the town. After the angels entered the home of Lot, the men of the city surrounded Lot’s house. According to Genesis 19:5, “They called to Lot, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.’” unquote The Bible Story of Sodom and Gomorrah and Its Destruction (christianity.com)

Also, don't forget the central issue in the Bible is the sin of mankind which is the rebellion of mankind against God. That is the central problem in the world today. Where do you stand on that and what is your relationship with God? So is God concerned about man's relationship with God? You bet. If we are to take the Bible literally, which I believe we are, without salvation billions will spend eternity in hell.

No, it is not my "pet issue". It is one issue of many as far as politics and the world. But I know it is a central issue with the progressives and radical left/liberals. Sexual orientation and gender identity is even being taught in schools as if it is the norm and only way to stop bullying, which it isn't.

Because that is what God is concerned about in his written revelation, the Bible. What goes around comes around to our kids, families, friends, and everyone else. If you study the Bible's central teachings you will learn about the fall of mankind and mankind's corrupt heart and what can be done about it, i.e. the salvation that God offers through his Son, Jesus Christ.

That idea sounds like it would come from the modernist, apostate churches that preach the false social gospel. This author in his book exposes the false social gospel: quote 1. Man is not so bad, and God is not so mad. In his book, The Kingdom of God in America, H. Richard Niebuhr criticized the liberal Social Gospel describing its message as, A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross. Rauschenbusch and his followers tended to blame sin on societal structures rather than human nature. According to Kyle Potter in a Georgetown College article, they believed individuals could not leave a life of sin until they were freed from the social and economic situation that drove them into sin in the first place. This view plainly contradicts the Biblical concept of original sin. 2. Cultural restoration is the Gospel. Social Gospel adherents seemed to believe the Gospel was centered on cultural involvement: if people transformed culture, only then would Christ be revealed. But this understanding of the Gospel is too narrow. Christians are absolutely called to engage culture—that is the heart of the Cultural Mandate—but the Gospel is larger than that. It is the story of God’s creation, fall, redemption, and the final restoration. Rauschenbusch seemed to over-emphasize cultural restoration and minimize Christ as the agent of cultural transformation. 3. Social salvation is superior to individual salvation. Conservative theologians saw redemption as a matter strictly between each individual and God, but Discover the Networks says progressives in the Social Gospel Movement, held that redemption could only be achieved collectively, by means of unified, social and political activism. Though Rauschenbusch saw individual salvation as important, he always considered it secondary to social reform. In a recent interview with the Gospel Coalition, Tim Keller rejects this notion: …individual salvation needs to be kept central. Though the Social Gospel movement has since fizzled, similar theology has appeared in Emerging Church circles today. Pastor Rick Warren referred to the Social Gospel supported by many of the mainline churches as “Marxism in Christian clothing.” But Warren points out we shouldn’t choose between cultural restoration and personal salvation. The Gospel contains both with Christ at the center. unquote Three Fallacies of the Social Gospel (tifwe.org) Another article says, quote: Reformation of Individual Human Hearts The Biblical Gospel of Christ is not centered upon reformation of whole societies of the world, but reformation of individual human hearts. The impact upon society that ensues from reformed human hearts through regeneration by the Spirit is resultant not primal. The genuine, i.e., Biblical, Gospel of Christ, as it is delineated and elucidated in the Word of God, does indeed tangentially mention how the Church—not as an institution or organization, but an assemblage or amalgamation of individual believers—are to reach out past “the four walls” of their local churches to render assistance to the poor, the needy, the oppressed, and so forth, nevertheless, such charitable “works” are not the central and primary message or objective of the Gospel. Rather, they are, as I say, tangential, and a matter of charitable outflow of reformed or regenerated individual hearts. The purpose and intent of such charitable works is to demonstrate the agape-love of God—that “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life”—not to assume the untenable task and unbearable burden of righting every wrong in the societies of the world and underwrite the financial needs of every person in the entire world. Word of God and Gospel of Christ Written to Believers “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God” One vital, though at first glance seemingly tangential, fact to keep in mind in this respect and with regard to all aspects of Biblical truth is that the Word of God is not addressed to unbelievers but to believers, except in the sense of providing unbelievers with Truth about and from God to convict and convince them of who He is and how desperately they need Him in their lives and that only He has the power and the plan to save them from the damnation they so richly deserve. To the self-reliant, intellectual unbeliever the Gospel of Christ and the Word of God is pure foolishness, but to the believer it is empowerment and a manual for daily living as well as the after-life: “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18). God Did Not Obligate the Church to Subsidize the Poor Jesus, for example, did say: “For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them… (Mk. 14:7), but He did not command or obligate the Church to subsidize “the poor” as a people-group, and that the Church should lobby their Federal, State, and local governments to take money from the not-poor in the form of taxes to underwrite government programs to subsidize the poor—not just on an emergent or urgent basis but as a matter of course—for multiple generations, thereby essentially teaching those generations that they do not have to work to earn income to support themselves and their families, but incessantly receive subsidies freely handed out by governments funded by taxpayer-extortion. In fact, as the verse specifically and expressly states, what Jesus said was: “whenever you wish you can do good to them.” Clearly, this was not an obligation or a demand He was placing upon individual Christians or the Christian church at large, but rather He made it clear that it was volitional, i.e., of a person’s own free will, and left to the individual’s own judgment on a case-by-case basis, and not a mandatory or compulsory matter in general. unquote What’s Wrong With The Social Gospel? | Spirit Life Magazine Of course there are many different articles and points of view on what the message of the Bible is. You will have to study that, but many modern churches have become apostate. Some of the larger denominations are really into the social gospel and have even gone so far as to ordain practicing homosexuals as ministers. So we should endeavour to really study this subject and ultimately the Bible should have the final word, as the Holy Spirit teaches it to us.

If it is rape, the law should force the guy to pay all expenses to raise the child until it reaches 21 years of age or be sent to the gulag for 21 years of labour. The money from forced labour could be used to pay the expenses. But no abortions. It is time the law toughened up in these cases.

In Trudeau's Canada, religious Christians are not welcome. In Justin Trudeau's Canada, Religious Christians are Not Welcome (capforcanada.com) Trudeau's talk about being "inclusive" does not include religious or bible-believing Christians. This would be the same for Biden's America.

When Presidents, Prime Ministers, and other politicians support all that sodomy stuff I think it is an important political issue to be concerned about. It is turning America into a Sodom and Gomorrah and teaching our kids it is normal.

One thing Biden never mentions is the fact he and many Democrats are pushing America in that direction: America become a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah? Evidence America has Become the Modern Day Sodom and Gomorrah – Online Ministries (online-ministries.org)

You might be interested in the Free Presbyterian Church from Northern Ireland. They have many sermons from their various ministers. They have established churches in north America including Canada. God uses Godly men to preach his word to mankind. Some are good and some not so much. Some of the Free Presbyterian sermons are exceptionally powerful. One website with over two million sermons from countless church and preachers. SermonAudio Sermon Search

quote The fact that the law of Moses, including the Ten Commandments, has ended does not mean that one can worship idols, take God's name in vain, disobey parents, steal, kill, commit adultery, or do other sinful things condemned in the Ten Commandments. Nine of the laws found in the Ten Commandments are repeated as a part of the New Covenant and must be obeyed today. These laws are binding today, not because they were a part of the Old Covenant, but because they are a part of the New Testament. The one commandment found in the Ten Commandments that has not been made a part of the New Testament is the commandment to "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy"(Exodus 20:8). There is a good reason for not repeating this commandment in the New Testament. The Sabbath was given to the Jews to remind them that God brought them out of the land of Egypt "through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm" (Deuteronomy 5:15). It is not the Sabbath day but the first day of the week, the day Christ arose from the dead (Mark 16:9), that has significance for followers of Christ under the New Testament. Therefore, Christians are not commanded to keep the Sabbath (Colossians 2:16), but are expected to assemble on the first day of the week and take the Lord's Supper (Acts 20:7). The 10 Commandments From Exodus 20Commandents Repeated The New Testament Have no gods before me v.31 Cor. 4:8; Acts 14:15 Make no graven images v.4Acts 17:29 Do not take the name of God in vain v.7Mat. 6:9 Keep the Sabath Day holy v.8?????? Honor they father and mother v.12Eph 6:2 Do not kill v.13Rom. 13:9, Rev. 21:8 Do not commit adultery v.14Rom 13:9, Heb. 13:4 Do not steal v.15Rom. 13:9, Eph. 4:28 Do not bear false witness v.16Rom. 13:9, Eph. 4:25 Do not covet v.17Rom. 13:9, Col. 3:5 One cannot be saved by "keeping the Ten Commandments." We are no longer under the covenant that contains the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were a part of the law of Moses that was given to bring the Jews to Christ (Galatians 3:24) and that ended at the cross. That law, or covenant, condemned those who "continued not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them" (Galatians 3:10). In the New Testament there are still commands to be obeyed- even nine of those found in the ten commandments. But under the New Testament there is forgiveness of sins through Christ for the one who repents and is baptized (Acts 2:38), thus becoming a Christian, and for the Christian who tries to live right and confesses his sins (1 John 1:7-9). unquote Are We Under The Ten Commandments, Today? | Timberland Drive (timberlandchurch.org)

"Written by men" but men who were inspired by God. "16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Timothy 3:16 KJV 3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts," KJV

We have reached a dead end with you. You obviously are not interested in knowing the truth. After thousands of years of expertise by biblical scholars, you know better.

I don't think God changed his mind. "If the Bible’s teachings for monogamy are so clear, why then are so many of God’s Old Testament saints polygamists? The reason Scripture records so many instances of polygamy and concubinage is not to endorse these actions, but to condemn them and show just how destructive such sexual perversity proved to be. Consider the outcomes of four of Scripture’s most notable polygamous relationships." quote LAMECH Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. When he built a city, he called the name of the city after the name of his son, Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad fathered Mehujael, and Mehujael fathered Methushael, and Methushael fathered Lamech. And Lamech took two wives. The name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. . . . Lamech said to his wives: “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; you wives of Lamech, listen to what I say: I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for striking me. If Cain’s revenge is sevenfold, then Lamech’s is seventy-sevenfold.” (Genesis 4:17–19, 23–24) The first polygamist in Scripture is Lamech, a son in the line of Cain. Lamech is not an exemplary character. Instead, Moses portrays him as the archetypal bad guy of the prediluvian world. In the line of the seed of the serpent, Lamech is the epitome of human wickedness, a man whose bloodlust and violence are exponentially worse than Cain’s. “As Christ has only one bride, so marriage on earth testifies to that truth.” Moses’s mention of Lamech’s two wives establishes a stark contrast between God’s good design in the garden and life away from the presence of God, east of Eden (Genesis 4:16). This story of the first polygamist in Scripture establishes that those who follow Lamech’s polygamous ways do so not out of righteousness, but because they’ve sinfully embraced the ways of the serpent and followed in the pattern of Cain’s unrighteous seed (at least in the area of sexual ethics). unquote For more case studies in the Old Testament: Why Did God Allow Polygamy? | Desiring God

No. The human body made up of countless systems and information storage in cells is beyond comprehension. The fact that man rebelled from God in the garden of Eden explains why there are many illnesses, imperfections in the world and death. That was man's fault when he rebelled against God. So we live in an imperfect world with fallen mankind. The future for those who turn to God in repentance and faith in Jesus Christ will be wonderful as they will enter into eternal life.

My posting was talking about science and biology, specifically the 20th and 21st century discovery that information is the fundamental cornerstone of all living things starting with a cell. The vast amount of information stored in a cell proves beyond a doubt that it required an intelligent designer. But if you want to remain in the dark ages and not acknowledge the fact that it required God to design and create the most basic living organism such as a cell with immensely complex DNA that is your choice. I prefer to accept what advanced science has found which points to an intelligent designer to create it. The old school of chemicals accidentally coming together has been shown to be not a credible explanation for the complexity of the information in DNA and cells.

I already quoted verses to you but you ignore them and persist with your nonsense. You have clearly spoken against divorce and I pointed out verses showing when it is justified by men or women.

So you believe in the Taliban ideology that a woman is just a slave and a man can abuse her as much as he wants and there is no escape.

There are certain things that society has always regarded as sacred. One is human life and the fact nobody has the right to kill another person. This is clearly taught in the Holy Scripture of Holy Bible. This is not just some "idealism in a book". This is what determines the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. This is what determined that the holocaust was a crime against humanity. The sanctity of life is not based on just opinions or emotions or feelings of men. It is something that God has communicated in his written revelation to man. We might not understand it fully or the reasons why in the light of the existence of pain and suffering, but that is what God says in his revelation. So I am not going to disagree or reject that. I must accept it even though I don't understand everything in the Bible. I understand one thing though; when humans make their own rules that deviate from God's word, it becomes a slippery slope and humans think they are gods and can do anything. I unequivocally reject that.

quote The double helix DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), first identified and isolated in the 1860s by Swiss chemist Friedrich Miescher, and was later 'discovered' by James Watson and Francis Crick in 1953. It is the 'language of life', the biological software, that determines the construct of every living thing - from the bacterium to man. For a human being, it is approximately six-foot long when unwound, consisting of about 3.1 billions of base pairs or nucleotides of 4 chemical letters (A,T,C,G). Every living thing has its unique, signature DNA, and it is a volume of exact digital information to construct the creature from birth to death. This two-dimensional code will generate all the three dimensional proteins that will, in turn, create all the molecular machinery in the critter. Above all, this genetic information is transferable and can be stored in a computer hard disk, paper or in any encrypting medium. It can be sent via an email attachment and be stored in iCloud or Dropbox. The amazing thing is that this information is independent of the medium it is being housed - just as in Shakespeare's book Macbeth - the information is independent of the paper and ink. The storyline, the information, is in Shakespeare's head, but the paper and ink are the materials he uses to pen it down. Not only is information independent from matter but there is a real distinction between tangible matter and intangible information. The DNA language or code is not the same as the DNA molecules. And unless this distinction is acknowledged, the Darwinist will be forever hopelessly clinging on to his 'lucky chance' and 'chemical accident' for life to emerge. The emergence of life is not about the chemicals only, just as the construction of a building is not about the raw materials per se - it is more about information. "One of the things I do in my classes, to get this idea across to students, is I hold up two computer disks. One is loaded with software, and the other one is blank. And I ask them, 'what is the difference in mass between these two computer disks, as a result of the difference in the information content that they possess'? And of course the answer is 'Zero! None!' There is no difference as a result of the information. And that's because information is a mass-less quantity. Now, if information is not a material entity, then how can any materialistic explanation account for its origin? How can any material cause explain its origin? And this is the real and fundamental problem that the presence of information in biology has posed. It creates a fundamental challenge to the materialistic, evolutionary scenarios because information is a different kind of entity that matter and energy cannot produce. In the nineteenth century we thought that there were two fundamental entities in science; matter, and energy. At the beginning of the twenty first century, we now recognize that there's a third fundamental entity; and it's 'information'. It's not reducible to energy. But it's still a very important thing that is real; we buy it, we sell it, we send it down wires. Now, what do we make of the fact, that information is present at the very root of all biological function? In biology, we have matter, we have energy, but we also have this third, very important entity; information. I think the biology of the information age, poses a fundamental challenge to any materialistic approach to the origin of the life. (Dr. Stephen C. Meyer) unquote -from the book Darwin's Universe, From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing, Survival for Nothing by Yan T. Wee; section "In the Beginning was Information", Pages 127, 128. The bottom line is random chance processes as in Darwinian evolution cannot produce information. The first living cells required a vast amount of DNA information with billions of bits of data. This could not be produced simply by accidental non-living chemicals randomly coming together. Life required someone to design and create this complex information within living cells at the beginning or life could not exist.

No I don't lack compassion. I just am not deceived by the lies coming from the Devil on the subject. I understand some people suffer pain with certain diseases. But I also know there are powerful drugs they administer and have been for years for people suffering pain. They also occasionally put people in a coma. Not everyone with health issues suffers a lot of pain. Some people die relatively pain free. People often die quickly when their heart stops. When the heart fails, you are gone very quickly. It is a lie and myth being spread around today that everyone will suffer huge pain when get an illness and so they should opt out by medical assistance in dying. That is false. But many people such as yourself are falling for it. Some people will suffer pain. Just how much is hard to know. But they can be given powerful pain killers. That should be what is done if necessary. Make sure you talk to your care aids or doctor about that if that is what concerns you. God has said "thou shalt not kill". So that is the bottom line. Trust in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and he will be with you and get you through. It is far better to be ready to meet death with Jesus Christ than to go against him in such a serious matter. Suffering is often part of this life. But this life is short and it will be over before we know it. Eternity is what matters and where one will spend eternity. That's what counts.

It makes sense. Abuse can come from a woman or a man so either one can seek a divorce.

Since it is legal under certain criteria, I don't have any right to interfere. That doesn't mean I agree with it. I don't. The fact that it is legal does not make it morally right in God's view according to his word and prohibition against killing.

BOTH the state and the doctors who administer the lethal injections are accomplices to the killing. There is no other way to describe it. Just because a person signs a suicide pact to be killed by someone does not eliminate the culpability.