Byron A

As a thief in the night to THE GODLESS Preacher Wesley. Not to Believers. Interestingly enough, a lot of pre-millennialists talk of the Gog-Magog alliance, but fail to grasp that this happens 'when the thousand years are fulfilled,' even though the Scripture is very plain about it in Revelation 20. Gog and Magog cannot occur until after the thousand years are completed, so one of two situations has occurred. 1. Either the thousand years is over, or: 2. what is going on is not Gog and Magog. Or, as the amillennialists (including Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cramner, Richard Hooker) teach, 3. We are currently in the millennium. http://www.prca.org/articles/amillennialism.html

A theology course I once took said that everyone brings assumptions to the table in any debate. Every theologian, every politician, every layman. Once we figure out what those assumptions and debate them, we are actually getting somewhere. It seems like one of your assumptions is that man is fallen from birth, so any desires and urges we are born with should automatically be suspect. I disagree. We are born perfect and innocent. We have the undistorted image of God within us at birth. Yes, Adam and Eve brought sin into the world. I completely agree with that. And we are more susceptible to committing sin because of the influence of the sin of Adam and Eve, as well as the influence of all the sins that are committed around us. Not to mention that the very world around us has a fallen nature. However, a baby is innocent, free from sin. Is this not the whole idea behind the age of accountability, and children automatically being saved up to that age? I guess my view is that if we compare it to "Nature vs. nurture" debate, I come out on the side of sin being "nurtured".

Now I am confused. If there is nothing to be ashamed of, why is it sinful or condemned? It is not sinful or condemned to be attracted to the same sex. According to most English Bible translations, it is only the sexual activities that are condemned and are sinful. Unless it can be proven otherwise that the original language texts also condemned the orientation, I will go with these translations...

If they are not teaching their misinterpretations, then yes, there is a difference. But when they're repeatedly confronted and shown the error of their interpretation and they refuse to back down and accept the truth, then there is no difference. They are saying, "My interpretation is the correct interpretation". Homosexuality is not a gift from God. It is not an accepted behavior of anyone who claims to be a christian. There is nothng in the bible that supports homosexual activity. When someone comes here and tries to use scripture to support the homosexual lifestyle, they are twisting scripture into something that it isn't. The bible is crystal clear on this issue. There are no grey areas. Most of us here are "layman christians", but when we put our words out here for the world to see, we become witness' for the Word and our words better be true. If they're not, we better be willing to learn. I condemn any sexual activity outside of marriage as sinful. That includes homosexual activities. However, "being gay" doesn't necessarily mean you are sexually active. There are celibate homosexuals just like there are celibate heterosexuals. I ran across a group of gay Christians one time on the net who believed gay sexual activity was wrong. The vowed to remain celibate their whole lives. Is this pastor promoting sexual activities outside the marriage covenant, or is he just promoting accepting who you are? If the former, than I agree that he is promoting fornication. However, if the latter, than I can't say that I disagree with him too much. Reason with me a little, please. Let's say that you had a desire to murder. Should you promote accepting who you are; a person who desires to murder? Let's say you had a desire to steal. Should you promote accepting who you are; a person who desires to steal? How about a greedy nature? I think it is clear to Christians that we should not promote an acceptance of anything that is not in the Will of God. Anything that is not of Him, we should not be tolerating in us. So why should we promote 'accepting who you are' as a gay person, when we know that this desire isn't from God? I think it pushes the bounds. Debating whether or not it is deemed sin is really a strawman. I don't care what label it ends up with. It's a desire that is not from Him, so why fight so hard to try and make it acceptable? How about just a confession: Lord Jesus, please strip from me anything that isn't of You, transform my mind by the power of Your Word. Ro 12 1 Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God

Nor did I say that I condone homosexual activities. Only that I condone acceptance of homosexual sexual orientation.

Your point of condemning any sexual activity outside of marriage is kind of moot. A homosexual "marriage" is not recognized by God in any way, shape, or form. So any homosexual engaging in sexual activity is engaging in sin whether they have a piece of paper saying they are married or not. Because God does not recognize the marriage at all. Homosexuals cannot be married according to Biblical standards. Homosexuality is a sin in every single case. Period. There is absolutely no homosexual act that is condoned or approved of by God no matter what state the two people involved think the relationship is in. No homosexual union of any kind is allowable. By strictest definition of the term, a homosexual is someone who is engaged in sexual acts with a person of the same gender. That is the sin. Celibate people are neither gay or heterosexual, they are celibate. The tendency to be drawn to the same sex is, first of all, a personal lifestyle choice. A person is not born with it and a person is able to control it. It is not a "gift" from God. God does not gift people to sin. Second of all, the tendency to be drawn towards the same sex is not the sin, acting on it is. This pastor is saying that homosexual activities are acceptable. That they are not a sin. That they are a "gift" from God, which is 100% false, so yes, he is openly encouraging people to engage in sin. No, the definition of homosexual is being attracted to the same sex. Most people cannot help what they are attracted to. I see a big pair of breasts, I cannot help but glance. Doesn't mean I am going to entertain any ideas about the woman who had them, it just simply means that I can't help but be attracted to that physical attribute. I am sure that this is the definition of homosexuality that this pastor is using. Its the definition most Americans use outside of the fundamentalist circles. I am sure that he is not promoting homosexual activities, but rather recognition that God made some attracted to the same sex and there is nothing to be ashamed about it. However, since I do not know the pastor, I cannot say it with certainty. (BTW, I said nothing about gay marriage.)

Carbon-dating, I would presume. Its the most accurate age determination test.

He kind of looked like Osama bin Laden before he shaved. I wonder how many calls the FBI/CIA got saying Osama was in the USA teaching a middle school! Lol.

They will undoubtedly be teaching it in the schools before long. I really doubt that, since these guys have (rightfully so) been scorned by the scientific community as well as the religious community.

If they are not teaching their misinterpretations, then yes, there is a difference. But when they're repeatedly confronted and shown the error of their interpretation and they refuse to back down and accept the truth, then there is no difference. They are saying, "My interpretation is the correct interpretation". Homosexuality is not a gift from God. It is not an accepted behavior of anyone who claims to be a christian. There is nothng in the bible that supports homosexual activity. When someone comes here and tries to use scripture to support the homosexual lifestyle, they are twisting scripture into something that it isn't. The bible is crystal clear on this issue. There are no grey areas. Most of us here are "layman christians", but when we put our words out here for the world to see, we become witness' for the Word and our words better be true. If they're not, we better be willing to learn. I condemn any sexual activity outside of marriage as sinful. That includes homosexual activities. However, "being gay" doesn't necessarily mean you are sexually active. There are celibate homosexuals just like there are celibate heterosexuals. I ran across a group of gay Christians one time on the net who believed gay sexual activity was wrong. The vowed to remain celibate their whole lives. Is this pastor promoting sexual activities outside the marriage covenant, or is he just promoting accepting who you are? If the former, than I agree that he is promoting fornication. However, if the latter, than I can't say that I disagree with him too much.

Just plain weird. Yes, definitely weird. John Paul II?!? Didn't he work tirelessly for peace throughout his life? And now he is some sort of patron saint for terrorist killing?

For starters the democratic party (pro abortion). There are some democrats who are pro-life. They really played a part towards the endgame of getting Obamacare passed, remember? I, for one, am a pro-life Democrat. So, don't just assume that all Democrats all pro-choice. Especially Christian Democrats. Okay, so back to the subject. I think the best argument for his death has already been mentioned. Its the political ramifications of Osama surfacing when the administration had been claiming that he was dead. Obama knows this would be political suicide and knows there would be no benefits to it.

When someone starts painting ridicule on people who have reasonable and legitimate questions instead of even trying to address the issues being raised, then they are bullies. I don't like bullies...especially not the ones who justify murdering children. I push back when it's obvious they aren't here to reason. It's a paternal thing. You can ignore me if it bothers you....or feel free to stop them in a more "restrained" way if you think you can. Who is justifying the murder of children?

Someone is sounding overly sensitive here. What I said, I said in good humored jest. If I offended anyone, I really am sorry. I ask for forgiveness from my brothers and sisters in Christ.

A whole new style of conspiracy theorists will now start popping up that Osama bin Laden is still alive. I hereby coin the term for these loonies as "deathers".

The point is that any/all of those scenarios could be avoided by handling this situation in a way that allows proof to be seen. Can you explain what Obama has against verifying anything??? No, I sure can't yod.....you see, I don't know the man. I understand the need for complete secrecy though and I'm sure you do as well. They have photos, video, eyewitness identification by one of Bin Laden's wives, DNA matching AND the eyewitness accounts of the Seals that took him out. What in heck else do you want? Why must everything be a conspiracy? I don't get the reasoning here...... But that is just not enough evidence for these guys! They won't believe it until they get to touch the wound in his head! They are all just a bunch of doubting Thomases! Lol.

My point wasn't to say that the Jews don't worship the same God as we do, or that Muslims do worship the same God as we do. My point was, by the logic used in the quote in the opening post, one could say the Jews didn't. I am just asking that people be consistent in their arguments. BTW, as an off topic comment, did you know that Arabic speaking Christians call God "Allah"? Just an interesting tid bit!

May I ask what objective criteria you use in order to decide what is allegorical and what is not? I only see three possible cases: - Everything should be taken allegorically - Everything should be taken literally - Something should be taken literally and the rest allegorically. But I do not see how to decide apart from our modern sensitivity or personal, fallible, taste. There is no sign on scriptures that says "the following verse is allegorical". By the guidance of the Holy Spirit. You are being gudied by A spirit... And did you receive permission to make that judgement from Him who said "Judge not, lest ye be judged", or was that a judgement your flesh made?

I'd make a lousy spokesman for the DNC. There are issues that I disagree with the Democrats on, as well. For example, I am a pro-Lifer. BUT, I agree with the Democrats more often than the Republicans. Thats why I consistently vote Democrat. God bless you!!!

First, related to the early reports,the news media is well known for having facts wrong...even fox news!!! The information should have waited until the president spoke, rather than hype left to rumor and speculation. I think now the information is a bit more correct in that the raid took place yesterday and Bin Ladin was shot in the forehead. It really isn't important at this point, in that he is now fish bait. I have no clue related to the DNA, that someone else would have to answer and as far as the General is concerned even a good ole grunt would tell you the General was following orders. Don't you mean especially Fox News? They are wrong more often than they are right.

No, he was too busy socializing our nation. Do you suppose the hunt for Osama was his job? No! That was the job of the military in Afghanistan. What about the credit to the US Commander in Afghanistan? He had more to do with this victory than Obama! But did Obama mention him? No. I just heard a report that those pictures are fake. The real ones have not been released yet. Obama, if you listened to the speech and looked up the details, had a lot of direct involvement. He made it the top priority to the CIA Director. He held a lot of meetings discussing this, with National Security Officials. He personally authorized the action. Extremely Conservative people like you and Dave are far from the only people that vote. He isn't going to lose any major amount of Democrat votes. He's going to gain independent and moderate votes massively. He is going to gain votes from people who are otherwise to apathetic to vote. There is more of all those people than there is of all the other people. I know some American Conservatives who essentially said "I would not have voted for Obama in 2012, but given what he's done for the country, and seeing this, he has my vote in the bag for 2012." Thousands of people went to Ground Zero and The White House respectively, and sang the National Anthem. Name one Republican that could win against the President that killed Osama. He has my vote for 2012! But then again, I have been a Democrat since High School!

Ezekiel 33:11 (New American Standard Bible) 11"Say to them, '(A)As I live!' declares the Lord GOD, 'I take (B)no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked (C)turn from his way and live (D)Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?' And neither should we. God bless your heart Dave. You may be a capitalist but I see some good in there . Are you not a capitalist? Are you a socialist?

Ezekiel 33:11 (New American Standard Bible) 11"Say to them, '(A)As I live!' declares the Lord GOD, 'I take (B)no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked (C)turn from his way and live (D)Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?' And neither should we. God bless your heart Dave. You may be a capitalist but I see some good in there . I don't think anyone's death is a thing to rejoice. Because of his death, he no longer has any chance this side of the grave to reconcile himself to God. Another soul lost. It is tragic. However, I do believe it was a necessary evil. His evil ways had to stop. I just hope an even more evil man won't take over the leadership of al-Qaeda. If such a thing is possible...

May 2, 1611, the KJV was published. This month marks the 400th anniversary of this classical Bible translation. In order to commemorate it, I have decided to switch my primary translation to the KJV for the month of May. I would like to urge all Christians who understand the KJV's archaic language to also use the KJV for this month. And NO, I am not a KJV-Onlyist. I have several translations at home, and even more that I use on e-Sword.