Royal Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22,533 Excellent


About shiloh357

  • Rank
    Royal Member
  • Birthday 03/07/1967

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Standing for Israel and defending Israel from Islam, anti-Zionism and Replacement theology.

Recent Profile Visitors

15,448 profile views
  1. Excellent!!
  2. Well, no one can really force to accept anything against your will. We are being forced to accommodate it and at least "publicly" accept it. I will do neither. I will not accommodate homosexuality because it doesn't deserve accommodation.
  3. Turns out the priest was actually beheaded while his parishioners helplessly looked on. The man who killed him was in prison and was released by a French judge because the man promised him he was trying to reform his ways. I can imagine no one in France is happy with that judge.
  4. Nature is what we call "general revelation." Acknowledging a Creator isn't the same as trusting in that Creator for salvation. Nature teaches us that there is a Creator with the power and wisdom to create the world and all it contains. But nature does not tell you WHO that Creator is. It's like being in lost in a dark cave and finally seeing a pinhole of light. The pinhole of light will lead you out of the cave if you move toward it. In the same way, the general revelation of nature will lead you to the Creator and we know that God will reveal himself to those who truly seek Him. God is not hiding from anyone. So God will provide a person who seeks him with more information, namely that which is in Scripture. God will send ministers/missionaries to preach the Gospel to those who truly seek him. He has promised in His word that those who seek him WILL find him.
  5. It is important to keep something in mind when reading epistles to individual congregations in the Bible. Paul was writing to address specific issues in those congregations and a careful reading of the epistles bears that out. Corinth Christians had all kinds of problems stemming from their pagan background and because they were still living in the midst of the most pagan, the most immoral community in the world, they were trying to ascertain how they were to relate to their former way of life. In his epistle to the Corinthians, Paul has to address getting drunk at the Lord's Supper (Communion). This is because when the Corinthian believers were pagan, getting drunk was an act of worship to the pagan gods. That was normal. They had made the mistake of assuming that they could import that custom into their worship of God. And Paul addressed that. They had issues with men still wearing their hair in effeminate styles, long and wavy like they did when they were male prostitutes. Paul addressed that issue as well. But one must understand that the women in the pagan world served in pagan temples and just outside of Corinth, they're were women who were prophetesses up at the Oracle of Delphi. They were used to speaking in a demonic tongue and giving out prophecies on a regular basis. When they became believers, it was likely that Paul was addressing this issue, as well. There was a tendency of new believers trying to mix their former pagan customs with their new faith in Jesus. The Corinthians were really bad about doing that. There are a lot of Christian men today, who see women as inferior to themselves view passages like this as, "women need to sit down and shut up." That's not really what Paul was saying. He was dealing with a cultural issue and gave instructions to address it in Corinth. Paul did not want these former priestesses from Delphi trying to get up in a meeting and exercise their former pagan religious worship practices, thus corrupting the congregation in the process. There is another discussion that Paul had with Timothy over the role of women in the Church and that is a separate issue from we have here in Corinthians.
  6. No one gets perks based on how they have sex. Rather, you get benefits based on the marriage you entered into. Yes, those "perks" as you call them should be tied to the religious covenant of marriage. That's because the marriage license is not unreasonable and is the law of the land. The Bible teaches that we should obey the law the land where it does not run crosswise with the teachings of Scripture and there is nothing about a marriage license that infringes on any part of the doctrine of marriage. It's not a matter of wanting it. It's the law of the land, period.
  7. Sounds like something I would enjoy!!
  8. Which is just a roundabout way of saying that you support the gay marriage lifestyle. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Gay marriage is not marriage and they don't deserve any benefits that a married man and woman receive. Gays are not a minority group. They are a bunch of sodomites and live in perversion. No one deserves any benefits simply based on how they have sex.
  9. No, what's liberal is to make the same arguments against the church standing against the homosexual lifestyle that the homosexuals make. What's liberal is falsely accusing Christians of some mythical "fixation" against homosexuality when the truth is the opposite. What's liberal is arguing that gay people should be allowed to marry each other just like heterosexuals. Those are liberal, unchristian and unbiblical positions to take.
  10. I would like to try it. Is that a national franchise? The name sounds familiar.
  11. Growing up, my mom used to pan fry her chicken. Then take the grease and make the BEST chicken gravy for the mashed potatoes. Between that and her backed beans, oh man...!
  12. There is a KFC near my house that's pretty good, but then I get there at the beginning of the lunch rush when the food is actually fresh. The worst KFC food I got was around 1 pm and it was pretty bad. I always go around 11 am. But I hear you about the hormone injections. I guess that explains why their chicken breasts are as big as my head, LOL
  13. God called it an abomination. He doesn't call every sin an abomination. He also singled homosexuality, idolatry and occultism as abominations. That means they occupy a special place as being especially evil and disgusting in his sight. That's not me, that is God. You'll need to explain to him why he is wrong for doing that. No, it doesn't have to. Context and word usage determines how we understand a word in a given text. Hebrew has only 8700 words and so the same word is used differently. Hebrew words can play double, triple and quadruple duty. Some words in Hebrew are used in as many as 18 different ways and context is the determining factor in that. I never said that toevah is used ONLY of homosexuality. There is a group of sins that God considers equally contemptible. It defeats the common argument that God sees all sins the same way. He clearly does not. There are things which he sees as worse than others. But not every sin is called toevah. And nothing you have said negates the fact that the sin of eating pork was not considered as contemptible in God's eyes for Israel as the sin of homosexuality. Yes, but the writers of the NT are not commenting on whether or not all sins are abominations or not. Their point is about those who live in and practice a lifestyle habitual sin. A practicing liar will not inherit the kingdom of God any more than a practicing homosexual. The argument that homosexuality isn't any worse than any other sin isn't based on a fear that we are spending too much time criticizing it. It is usually based on the fact that we criticize it at all, and we are told that we spend too much time on it, whether that accusation is true or not.
  14. My recipe for fried chicken has only three ingredients!! A set of car keys, $10 and a local Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant.
  15. No, I don't think one has to read Hebrew and Greek to know what the Bible says. You can read the Bible in English and make sense of it's over all message, but the Bible was not originally written in English. Hebrew is far more precise than English and it is far more nuanced than English. For that reason, there is no English translation that will ever be perfect enough to allow readers to catch everything that is being said. Hebrew and Greek and their peculiarities are an important factor in biblical interpretation. And knowing Greek and Hebrew, while not necessary to understanding the overall message of the Bible, are important factors. So important that someone had to know those languages in order to give us a Bible in the first place. And it is important to know those languages or at least have a working knowledge of them in order to work through the finer points of the Bible's theology and worldview. And the homosexual movement has twisted the Bible and has tried to take every thing the Bible says about God hating homosexuality and re-interpreting it in order to make the Bible appear NOT to condemn homosexuality. You applied their most common argument against the Bible by trying to equate the two uses of "abomination" as if they are used equivalently, when they are not. It is gays who argue that "abomination" can't really mean that God hates homosexuality because the same English word is used in reference to the dietary commandments. The truth is that the Hebrew uses two different terms, like it or not. And whether you make room for it or not, your pro-homosexual argument doesn't hold any water. Just because you don't think Hebrew or Greek are necessary, doesn't mean that they are going away and it doesn't mean that they are not a factor in this. You can't refute the fact that it can be proven that God holds homosexuality in his most highest contempt. You can kick against it all you want, but you can't refute it and you can't defeat it.