SavedByGrace1981
-
Posts
2,925 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by SavedByGrace1981
-
-
There are a great many fallacies, just in the above statements. He gives no sources for what he says. Most evangelical Christians who truly have a relationship with Christ do not support police action wars and say so. It makes no difference because the Christians in name only out-number them and make it appear as if Christianity can accept any position no matter what if one's world view is comfortable with it. An issue few people are ever brave enough to confront, including Mr. Baldwin. Not everyone who claims to be an Evangelical Christian actually is.
I don't think Baldwin would necessarily disagree - the latter part of his article bears this out.
The problem for us (evangelicals) is how the world sees us. To the world, anyone who claims to be a Christian - is. A politician can say he/she is a Christian (for genuine or for cynical reasons), and at the same time be a cheerleader for un-Constitutional wars.
Only Christ can truly judge one's heart. The rest of us can only rely on their words and their actions.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
So, what has happened to turn the most peace-loving institution the world has ever known (the New Testament church) into the biggest cheerleaders for war? I’m talking about un-provoked, illegal, unconstitutional, unbiblical–even secret–wars of aggression. The biggest cheerleaders for the unprovoked, unconstitutional, pre-emptive attack and invasion of Iraq were evangelical Christians. Ditto for the war in Afghanistan, the bombing of Libya, the attacks in Yemen, etc. Who is calling for the bombing of Iran? Evangelical Christians. Who cheers for sending more and more troops all over the world to maim and kill more and more people (including innocents)? Evangelical Christians. Shoot (pun intended)! Most evangelical Christians didn’t even bat an eye when the federal government sent military and police personnel to murder American citizens, including old men, women, and children–Christian old men, women, and children, no less–outside Waco, Texas.
This is a thought-provoking article. I'm not a pacifist (I served six years in the Navy in the 70s), but I find I agree with most of what he says.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Can someone please explain what are all the lions doing out of Daniels den?
When I saw this for the first time I thought something happened to either the board or my pc?
What is the reason for this?
I don't know about the lions, but if you start seeing tigers and bears, you might have to click your heels to return to Kansas.
But seriously, try going into your profile and changing some of your settings. Maybe someone is playing a joke on you.
-
Has anyone seen this?
MUST GO VIRAL Ground Zero Memorial FLASH SINGING of Amazing Grace When Bloomberg Spks
What do you think?
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Have we overreacted to 9/11? Oh the whole, no. One cannot argue with the fact that we have not had a repeat of that terrible day on our soil in the ensuing 10 years.
That said, I do believe (and I will always believe) that our invasion of Iraq was misguided and wrong. On that note, I suppose I disagree with the esteemed Mr. Krauthammer
Blessings!
-Ed
-
NASA Releases Closer Looks at Apollo Landing Sites from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter
by Nancy Atkinson on September 6, 2011
New images of the Apollo 12, 14 and 17 landing sites are the highest resolution pictures ever of human forays onto another world, as seen from a bird’s eye view — or in this case, a satellite’s eye view. The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter dipped to a lower altitude, just 21 kilometers (13 miles) over the lunar surface.
Well . . .
This will FINALLY put to rest the rumors that the moon landings were staged in a NASA sound studio, won't it?
Or will it?
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Thanks to everyone who has commented thus far.
The afternoon before we had this discussion at church, I had watched a program that I recorded from the Biography Channel that really touched me. The program was about John Walsh who has been the host of "America's Most Wanted" for the last 20 some years. For those who don't know, Walsh's 6 year old son was abducted in 1981 from a Florida shopping mall. (as a parent and now grandparent, I cannot even imagine the horror and grief one would go through in that situation)
A couple of days after the abduction (when the little boy's fate was still unknown) Walsh and his wife made an appearance on "Good Morning America" seeking help in finding their son.
Shortly after their appearance, Walsh related that he was in his hotel room when he received the news that his son had indeed been murdered.
He became (understandably) enraged, and in his words literally "broke everything in that hotel room."
This program was still on my mind as we had the discussion later at church. Here was an example of rage and of temper. It is also an example of righteous anger (after all, few things are more un-righteous than the murder of an innocent child).
Here's how I sum it all up: The anger Walsh felt was righteous. But the rage and the temper were carnal (though absolutely understandable).
After his temper had subsided, it's probably a safe bet that he had to pay the hotel for repairs to the room.
But perhaps here's another difference - the rage and temper were fleeting, but the righteous anger lived on. And, as horrible as the act that caused it was, eventually something positive came out of the anger.
Walsh and his wife lobbied Congress for a national data base for missing children (which was eventually realized); and the show "America's Most Wanted" was conceived. As a result, something like 1000 criminals have been re-captured and put behind bars.
A final note about this: The program didn't go into a lot of detail about it, but it did indicate that the Walsh's were devout Roman Catholics. I hope though the years since their son's murder that they have found comfort and peace in God.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Last Sunday evening at church we had an informal devotional where the subject of losing one's temper came up. Woven throughout the discussion was the very familiar passages of Christ clearing the Temple of the moneychangers (Matthew 21:12f.; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45f.; John 2:13-17)
We all agreed (as I suppose most Christians do) that was an example of righteous anger - Christ declaring that God's House had been turned into "a den of thieves". Christ was righteously angry - but He of course did not sin.
But was this an example of Christ losing his temper? I don't think so - because to me "temper" implies carnality. But I'd like to hear what others think.
Usually when we lose our temper (even if it's over something we have the right to be angry about), we do it in such a way that we offend someone. Then, when we've "cooled down", we find we need to go to that person and make things right.
Is this always the case if we "lose our temper"?
And, in Eph 4:26 Paul commands us to "be angry and sin not." Is this even possible?
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Just to let you know I leave on Wednesday for two weeks, since I have a lot to do before then I will be gone from worthy 100% starting now! see ya all!
That's great - but I hope you weren't planning on going to Martha's Vineyard.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
I think it was Jade that brought up the White Horse Prophecy that Joseph Smith told a couple of the church leaders when he was alive about the country reaching a point where the constitution was hanging by a thread and some Mormon person would come to it's rescue and save our constitutional form of government.
It may well be that Glenn thinks he's this person for it seems to me that the constitution is truly hanging by a thread in these days.
Hmmmm . . . with Mitt Romney running for the GOP nomination, and eventually the WH . . .
Perhaps we'll see "dualing Mormons"
I don't really like getting into dissing other people's beliefs, but I worked with a Bishop of their church for some time and spent a lot of coffee break time discussing their doctrine. I studied for some time with some of their missionaries and attended church there for some time. I can tell you from personal knowledge and experience that they have some really disturbing beliefs, and what little I could pick up about what goes on inside the Temples and the more I learned about Masonry from family and a couple of men who had denounced Masonry, is even more disturbing of the similarities..
i hadn't considered it until Jade brought it up the other night, but if he thinks he's this person, he's going to give saving this country everything he has....... and I really don't know what to think about it. I get the gut feeling that Beck is out to save the country and wants the help of anyone willing to help no matter what faith they are in....... I guess I should get his book and check it out for myself.
Saving the country is fine, but in whose image?
Most statists would argue they want to "save the country". Obama wants to "save the country." The problem is - what is the country going to look like after they "save" it? The same with Glenn Beck. I watched his TV program when it first came on, but lost interest along the way. I probably agreed with him 90-95 percent.
It's that other 5-10 percent that's potentially problematic.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
I debated whether to post this in the 'politics' thread but......it's not really political, IMO. Interesting round up of fine, conservative American women........
http://www.cblpi.org/calendar/
I may be wrong, but I think S.E. Cupp claims to be an atheist.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Poor Mr. Obama has an identity crisis - now he thinks he's Harry Truman.
For those who are not amateur historians, Truman in 1948 ran against a republican "do nothing" Congress. No one gave him much of a chance against the slick Thomas Dewey, but Truman was one scrappy politician and ended up winning that race. In fact, there's the famous photograph of Truman on election night holding up a copy of the Chicago paper that mistakenly declared Dewey the winner:
There's only one problem with Obama doing this: He's no Harry Truman.
Truman had a lot of detractors (my parents among them), but like him or hate him you knew where he stood on issues. Although he did (like Obama) rail against the republicans, Truman also took responsibilty for things. Someting Obama does not do. Most have heard of the famous sign that was in Truman's office: The buck stops here.
So Obama can choose to run against the Congress since he has no popular accomplishments. Obamacare gets more unpopular by the day, as people take Pelosi's advice and "find out what's in it. And his other "accomplishment" - the stimulus, was a failure.
Who knows - with a duped public. a fawning media, and a corrupt political machine a.k.a the Democrat Party (and don't ever underestimate the republicans propensity to shoot themselves in the foot), he just might pull off a "Truman-esque" win.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Close.
He's married and known as someone else, but his memories are of himself, not this other man. The other man just got over an illness or being knocked out or something like that, so the people blame this on his memory issue. In trying to find out what happened and where he is located and how to get back to the Enterprise, that is how he discovers the planet is dying. Actually, it's because of the sun dying (those size stars begin to expand as they die). After a very long time, Piccard gives up on trying to find the Enterprise and decides to start a family with his wife. As for the side note, the man the people know has the flute, but he has no idea how to play it, but over the years he begins learning how to play it until then he become accomplished at it. As for the planet dying, I forget the transpiration, but when he's an old man a special rocket is being launched which is supposed to do something about it, but he doesn't know what. After it is launched, his family and friends tell him that rocket is launching a probe to tell whoever is out there about their planet - that is, the only way they can "save" themselves is to save their memory and pass it on to whomever may be out there. And he is either told or figures out that it's the very probe the Enterprise had encountered. It's then that he wakes up on the bridge as if from a dream - but with more intact memories. The probe is brought into the Enterprise for examination, and all they find inside of it is the flute Piccard had learned to play. The episode ends with him playing the flute.
Thanks - your memory is much better than mine!
Blessings!
-Ed
-
1. Whats your favourite of the ST movies
STAR TREK 4. (The one with the whales). The actress who played the mom on SEVENTH HEAVEN was in it (I don't recall her name). I'm weird, but my favorite line was Kirk's to her when she sees Spock swimming in the pool with the whale: "Oh, him? He's harmless. Part of the free speech movement at Berkeley in the sixties. I think he did a little too much LDS.
2. Whats your favourite of the ST tv series
Next Generation.
3. Who are your favourite ST characters
Data, followed by Q, Picard, Spock, and Scotty.
4. Bring up an episode you watched that you like
In Next Gen there was an episode where the Enterprise encountered a "pod" containing 3 people from 20th century Earth who had been cyber-frozen. Interesting take on what people in that situation might do and how they would react.
Also, I had another favorite (I'll describe it from memory the best I can). They encounter an alien space probe, which immediately does something that knocks Picard out cold. The rest of the episode finds him on a dry, dying planet. He's married and has a family, and lives in a sort of medieval village. He seems to be the "wise one" of the village, and he knows the planet is dying. Anyway, he lives his entire life there, and dies an old man. As a sidebar, he is an accomplished flute player (something the Enterprise Picard had never been)
When the episode ends, we're back on board the Enterprise, and Picard is just waking up. We find out he's only been "out" a few minutes. When he returns to his stateroom, there is the flute. Hmmmm . . .
Blessings!
-Ed
-
This is really going to cause me to show my age, but . . .
In 2011, it's hard to believe that sending satellites into orbit was once a big deal, but in 1957 it was HUGE. That of course was the year that the Soviets launched the first satellite - Sputnik - into space. I was only a kid of four, but I must have picked up on everyone else's apprehension - and I came up with a somewhat unique fear of my own.
I absolutely could not go to bed that night (and I forget how many nights thereafter because i was absolutely convinced Sputnik was going to come crashing down . . .
. . . and crash right into our house!
Blessings!
-Ed
-
the only hope we have financially would be for us to pass a ballanced budget ammendment to the constitution and give them two or four years to do it. That is the tea party's part of this whole debate. The house will pass it but harry reid won't let the senate vote on it..... We'll see hhow it goes.
The amendment process is long - it starts with votes in both Houses. We know that the present Harry Reid led Senate will not pass a BBA - so we're looking to 2013 (at the earliest) for it to even get to stage two - which is a vote in each state legislature. I believe it needs 38 states to pass. One can only guess at how long that would take. 2015? 2016?
So while I agree a BBA is needed - I'm not sure we have that much time left.
Blessings!
-Ed
I would not be so sure that it would fail in the Senate..... Harry has not let it come up for a vote.... I think it's because he's afraid it might pass.
But what is to stop Reid from continuing to not let it come up for a vote? (Given the arcane Senate rules, I'm not sure what he can and cannot do.)
Blessings!
-Ed
-
the only hope we have financially would be for us to pass a ballanced budget ammendment to the constitution and give them two or four years to do it. That is the tea party's part of this whole debate. The house will pass it but harry reid won't let the senate vote on it..... We'll see hhow it goes.
The amendment process is long - it starts with votes in both Houses. We know that the present Harry Reid led Senate will not pass a BBA - so we're looking to 2013 (at the earliest) for it to even get to stage two - which is a vote in each state legislature. I believe it needs 38 states to pass. One can only guess at how long that would take. 2015? 2016?
So while I agree a BBA is needed - I'm not sure we have that much time left.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
SavedByGrace, I agree. We can not look to man to resolve this issue, nor any other for that matter.
From here on in we are at the mercy of God.
We should all be ashamed of those we have voted into office, however there does not seem to be any better to be had.
Once they get to DC they all seem to become clones of the old timers, or lost in the shuffle.
You're right - we can get so caught up in all this that we can seem to forget that God IS in control. I remember what my wife had to remind me of after the '92 election:
"Dear, God didn't wake up this morning and go (slaps head), 'oh my, Clinton was elected. What am I going to do now?"
In our form of government (which wasn't the norm in Christ's day) we do have somewhat of a say in who governs us. I believe God does hold us responsible for that.
So while we can rightly complain about the lack of principled leaders we have, part of the reason is we don't support the few who DO try to hold to principle. Sadly, we're to the point where if we had Senators and Congresspeople who WOULD do what is necessary and cut spending, they would probably get voted out in the next election.
So addicted are we to government "bennies" and "handouts".
Blessings!
-Ed
-
The Tea Party AND the Republicans.
Anyway, this will finally put to rest the argument that though someone might not like either party, at least the republicans are better.
What you fail to see is this: while it's true the Republicans benefited from the voter anger directed at Obama and the democrats (expressed by increased turnout via the so-called "tea-party), they (establishment repubs) actually hate the tea-party almost as much as the dems.
When the tea-party got to DC, who were they met with? Why, "speaker" Boehner and "Senate leader" McConnell. Two better examples of DC dinosaurs never existed. They proceeded to tell the tea-party "hey, thanks for your help. Now SIT DOWN and SHUT UP!
You say some people believe the republicans are better? Well, I used to be one of those people. In the 70s, I was a registered Democrat. (In Oklahoma at the time, it didn't make sense to be anything else.)
I became a republican mostly due to the democrats pro-abortion stance. (It was and is evil. You cannot say it any other way)
At about the same time, the so-called "moral-majority" came into being and, just like the tea-party of today, it found its home in the republican party.
Well, as I've come to find out - lip service is cheap. What have the repubs done about abortion? Nothing. And what will they end up doing about the Tea-party concerns? ditto - nothing.
I left the republican party after 2004, when I saw that Bush and his GOP congress were spending as much as any democrat since the LBJ administration
So people can rah-rah about partisan this or partisan that all day long. The sad fact is - we have a HUGE problem. The sadder fact is - we have no LEADERS who are interested in solving it.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Amidst all the focus on the debt bill vote, the one bit of news we all can agree on that was worth celebrating -
Within 5 minutes until the end of the voting session, Gabriel Giffords walked onto the Congressional floor to vote on the bill. No one knew she was coming, so it was a complete surprise to everyone.
The whole room suddenly filled with applause and cheers, and it took a while for the announcer to state what the celebration was about. It was most definitely a happy moment to witness!
After the voting was finished and the move declared for members to say anything (I forget the fancy terminology, sorry), all who spoke said something to welcome her back, which again led to extended celebrations.
Anyway, I just wanted to share.
At the risk of my appearance of ignorance of current events, who is Gabriel Gifford? Thanks
She's the Arizona congresswoman who was shot in the head by the loon out in Tucson back in January.
She's lucky to be alive, and to me the story of her recovery transcends politics (and I probably disagree with most of her previous political stances)
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Ask yourself honestly....
If you were holding a Christian festival and 4 Moslem's show up with a video camera would you be welcoming?
Please indulge me as I attempt to add my $0.02
This issue underscores the challenge that Christians face as we try to live Christ-honoring lives in this fallen world. Think about it - some Christians do not believe in ever killing a living being - even in self defense. They would not shoot at a charging bear or a dangerous intruder.
Other Christians might go the other direction and glorify guns and violence. A "Christian Militia", so to speak.
I happen to be somewhere in the middle - seeing scriptural problems with both extremes.
But let's look at the first example - the charging bear isn't being shot at because he's a bear - but because he presents a clear and present danger. Likewise the intruder - he presents a clear and present danger.
I don't read anything in Scripture that tell us to always lie down in the face of imminent danger or death.
In our secular society (the USA melting-pot), Muslims should never be persecuted just for the fact they are Muslims. They have every right - as do I as a Christian, or someone else as a Jew, or someone else as an Atheist - to live their lives in peace and harmony.
In the example you cited above, Katy Ann, you are correct. The Muslims did have a right not to be videotaped, and the others should have respected that. It should never have escalated to the point it did.
So I will go out on a slight limb here and assume you and I are in agreement to this point.
Where we might diverge, however, is here: While I don't believe individual Muslims are necessarily evil, I DO believe the religion/political movement they follow is. I've stated my reasons for saying this - Islam denies Christ's deity (so it is anti-Christian), it seeks to destroy any political system in which it finds itself, it treats women as property little better than slaves, and it believes in "holy wars" and killing infidels.
You cannot "compromise" with such a belief. At the least, it must be controlled. At best, it must be defeated. You won't like the comparison, but when Nazism flourished in 1930s-40s Germany, it could not be "compromised" with. It had to be defeated. Did that mean all Nazis had to be killed? No - in fact, you'll still find Nazis to this day. But they (at least not yet) do not pose a threat to the rest of us.
So here is the impasse in which we find ourselves. How do we differentiate or separate the individual Muslims with the religion and political system they follow?
I suppose we could use a Solomon at this point - someone who would openly pray for God's wisdom. Since we're unlikely to get that, we have to depend on the secular leaders we have (good luck with that!)
And while these discussions can certainly get heated at times, I will make the effort to never criticize or question someone's Christian walk just because they don't see things exactly as I do.
Blessings!
-Ed
-
And that's about the only good thing that happened in washington in the past two months...... and this is really really good.
Amen to that, bro!
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Please don't wake me from my pleasant sleep.
If we're spending 3 trillion less that's a good start. I'm glad the real decisions are made after the next election...now we have to win that one or we're automatically sunk.
I hate to be the one to wake you, but if by "winning the next election" you mean Republicans controlling all three branches, may I remind you of what happened the last time that was the case?
Do the new entitlements "No Child Left Behind" and "Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit" ring a bell?
If I may ask - what do you see as being different this time?
If the promised "spending cuts" (which due to baseline budgeting are really just "reductions" in spending "increases") even happen, it will be the first time.
Pleasant dreams!
Blessings!
-Ed
-
Thank you all for your kind words and affirmation.
It's easy to beat ourselves up sometimes - thinking we really haven't grown much in Christ. (And truthfully all of us can grow more) But this particular incident made me think how I might have reacted 30 years ago. I know I would have reacted angrily (perhaps even using words I shouldn't) Now? It really didn't stress me out at all.
And maybe I'm going out on a limb a little here - but I think God may have been pleased that I didn't react like a child, and blessed me accordingly (by having the parts and labor covered under warranty.)
Blessings!
-Ed
Are Evangelical Christians Warmongers?
in Most Interesting News Developments
Posted
While I certainly know of no Christians who cheered the raid itself, the events leading up to it were more controversial.
Speaking only for myself (and my memory is just a little foggy), I do remember being resentful of the MEDIA's attempt to paint Koresh as some kind of "mainstream" Christian.
Resentful, but not surprised, I suppose.
But you're right - had there been more social media back then there likely would have been more Christian outrage expressed at the raid.
Blessings!
-Ed