jamie

The thing about that is.. if a preacher is preaching certain parts of the bible yet omitting others, the message becomes lopsided. Most christians, like at my old church, will say..."well he preaches from the bible", never even realizing that 'omission' is where the problem is. Omission is nothing more than an 'itching ears' doctrine yet it can be biblical in the sense that it is only a (part) of Gods word. Harder to detect than outright heresy, yet just as dangerous.

I never have to believe or not believe anybody when they tell me someone is a false teacher. I will usually already know in my own spirit one way or another. There are some things that might not be right that I can look over as long as it doesn't pervert the character of God. Cults aren't really what I consider dangerous for most christians because they aren't a hidden deception to most people, it's the churches that preach half truths and doctrines that pervert Gods character in subtle ways that are dangerous. In my old church just the refusal to preach against sin was disastrous, yet the preacher appeared to be the sweetest thing since icecream. I guess we have to ask ourselves, "is this person preaching the true character of God, His expectations and His holiness" We have to look at the fruit therein.

Any old wolf in sheeps clothing will tell you that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, and his diety. I know my old apostate preacher taught that, but he didn't preach the same gospel and it wasn't the same Jesus Thats not true because some believers are very gullible and lack discernment. This is why the body has many parts.

Nofear, unfortunately you are right. I believe these micro chips will first be implemented for all 'practical purposes', and will seem like a great alternative and convenience to mankind. Unfortunately as we know, without God man will eventually sink to the lowest depths.

Congrats Robert!!!! And may you have many many more years together!!

Leonard I have alot of respect for you, and agree with you most of the time. I'm not even going to say anything about Paul and Jan....But writing a generous check doesn't put one in right standing with God. Our opinions on whether someone is a true believer or not should run a lot deeper than money or success.

I've noticed that the thing to do today is to 'go see' or 'read' all the smut that Hollywood or whoever puts out, in the name of making oneself more equipt to evangelize. Probably if just those calling themselves christians would stop lining these peoples pockets there wouldn't be a reason for damage control in the first place. If you want to help those being deceived then ((boycott)) and take care of the root first.

Where does that thought come from..."choice" separates addiction from being a disease? What I mean is, we don't choose to get cancer, heart disease, parkinsons, etc... But there is choice involved in alcoholism or drug additcion therefore it would seem ridiculous to call them diseases. I agree they cause diseases, but of themselves are not a disease.

I think man calls it disease and God calls it a generational curse. A generational curse means that past generations were prone to the same sin, maybe just a different form. I think 'choice' seperates addiction from being a disease.

Repetitive practiced sin = stronghold of addiction. (not a disease!) Mood altering drugs are for those who don't know the joy of the Lord and are open season for satan to oppress.

BUSH'S NEW IRAQI GOVERNMENT BETRAYS AMERICA Jim Kouri, CPP May 28, 2006 NewsWithViews.com Here's a news story that deserves wide coverage in the United States: The new Iraqi government assured the Iranians on Friday that it believes Iran has a right to develop a nuclear program and will not allow Iraqi territory to be used to "threaten" Iran. In essence, the Iraqi government is taking Iran's side against the US and European Union. Despite Iran being a launching point for foreign fighters who kill American, British and coalition soldiers, as well as Iraqi soldiers and police officers, Iraq promised the Iranians that its territory would not be used by the US should the need arise to attack. Speaking during a visit by the Iranian foreign minister to Iraq to congratulate the new Iraqi government formed a week ago, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said Iraq's new government ''is a friendly government to Iran.'' These words should be viewed as Iraq's backstabbing ingratitude after Americans suffered loss of precious live and treasure to liberate that nation from the brutal dictator Saddam Hussein. ''Iraq definitely will not be a place to threaten Iran from,'' Zebari said at a news conference in Baghdad, with the Iranian foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, standing at his side. Mottaki was the second foreign dignitary to call on Iraq's week-old government after Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair, who visited Monday. Mottaki's trip came as a reminder that although the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government remains beholden to the U.S.-led coalition for its existence, it also enjoys warm relations with its neighbor, Shiite Iran, and does not wish to become embroiled in the rising tensions between the US and Iran. Mottaki's visit took him to the heavily protected Green Zone, which is guarded by the US military. Most Iraqi ministries are based there, along with the US Embassy, which is housed in Saddam Hussein's former Republican Palace. Iraq's leaders don't appear to take offense to the fact that Iran harbors terrorists who cross the border into Iraq and kill liberators and Iraqis alike with improvised explosive devices and other weapons. They view their relationship with Iran through the prism of Islam. Speaking less than a mile from the embassy at the Convention Center, where Iraq's new government was sworn in last week in the presence of US officials, Mottaki warned that Iran would retaliate against any Arab country that cooperated with the US in any attack against Iran. ''In the event that America did do this, from any place, there would be a strong hit from Iran at that place exactly,'' he said, a further warning to the United States not to use the 133,000 troops currently based in Iraq to wage war on Iran. He said he thought it doubtful the United States would attack Iran because America ''was the one that was defeated'' the last time it went to war. But, he added, ''because sometimes wise people are not the ones in charge of making decisions in America ... we are prepared for any eventuality.'' And he said this in a US protected IRAQ. The comments underscored Iran's confidence in its relationship with the new Iraqi government, which includes representatives from all the major factions in Iraq but which is dominated by a coalition of Shiite religious parties that have close ties to Iran. So where's the gratitude? Don't hold your breath. The United States should begin to withdraw its troops from Iraq as quickly as possible. We need those National Guard troops currently deployed in Iraq back home and on our own borders to stem the tide of millions of illegal aliens entering the US. The Bush Administration worries about Iraq's sovereignty, but cares little about the continual compromise of US sovereignty. If the Iraqi government desires close ties with a country that openly admits it wishes to annihilate the Jewish people in Israel, while harboring and supporting terrorists who would cause harm to innocent American civilians, let them do it without our brave sons and daughters protecting them. Iraq and Iran fought a brutal and devastating war in the 1980s, but relations have warmed significantly over the past year, since the United Iraqi Alliance took control of Iraq's government. The Alliance has a number of religious parties whose leaders sought exile in Iran because of their fear of retaliation by Saddam Hussein because of their opposition to him and the Ba'ath Party. President Bush has refused to rule out the use of military force against Iran should negotiations fail to quell concerns that Iran's nuclear enrichment program is being used to develop a nuclear bomb. However, by allowing US troops to remain in Iraq while its government plays footsies with Iran is a travesty. There is nothing less honorable than being played for a sucker on the world stage. Withdrawal now would not be dishonorable. We liberated them and helped set up a constitutional structure. It's time for the Iraqi people to run their own affairs and build their own nation. Many of our National Guard troops are in Iraq. Bring them home to safeguard our own borders.

How can you have a nuclear attack without a weapon. Or maybe this thread is not what I thought it was. I think they were saying that they believe it will be destroyed with the use of a weapon - nuclear weapon, contrary to what I said in my blog commentary. If you click on the link to my blog commentary in my first post, you will read what I said about how Iran could destroy America. I don't think Americans are concerned enough about the fact that we might be destroyed as a nation. I think people who do believe that it will be destroyed eventually, say it so matter-of-factly. It's like many either just don't take it serious enough or have just resigned themselves to thought that it is inevitable anyway. I think it is a really serious thing. The prevous poster said that we might be reduced to a third world country status. Do you even understand what that would be like? I think most Americans really have no idea just how extremely rich we are. Even the poorest person in this country has more than many in other countries. I went on a missions trip to Mongolia last summer and oh my goodness, if you could see just what real poverty is. At least homeless people in our country have places where they can go and get food, like a shelter. But in many countries, if you don't have any food there is no where to go and get any because no one around you has any either. I think more people should travel to some of these places and see what people in other parts of the world live like to really appreciate how truly blessed we are in this country. Americans are just too spoiled, spoiled, spoiled and they have no idea just how spoiled they are. No Kaydee, I can only imagine how horrible it would be if we were reduced to a third world country. To say that I believe it will happen doesn't mean that I embrace it or look forward to it. Though my place and my peace is in God, that doesn't mean I believe His people won't have to suffer to a certain degree. Our comfort zone will be no more. I believe there are special promises and blessings for those who love the Lord, but I also know that the just can suffer right along with the unjust. We don't know for a fact what's coming, but we do feel something is coming. The faith of the christians in this country has yet to be truly tested at a national level, and everything that can be shaken will be shaken. God's people have to be tried and refined, and how we respond to the refiners fire will determine everything.

Absolutely true, but I believe judgment is coming by way of nuclear attack. I don't think we will be totaly obliterated, but I do believe we will be severely crippled and reduced to a third world country.

But they are the fastest fingered text messengers in the world!

If one does not have strong enough faith to withstand this man's fallacious arguments, then they SHOULDN'T read it! And yes, there are those who shouldn't, and I say that with objectivity, not scorn. But to those who feel called to apologetics, yes, we need to maintain our credibility, for the sake of others, for the sake of their souls, even for the sake of the brethren whose faith is challenged by The DaVinci Code or whatever other hogwash is being spread on any given day. And yes, the guy started out saying that it was a work of fiction, but in a recent interview, he told the interviewer that if he were to re-write it as a non-fiction, he would not change the "facts" in the book ("fact" was his word...certainly not the one I would use). To put your money in the pocket of the actors and producers who spew out this garbage is to take part in their sin. If you need darkness to reprove darkness, you've got a problem. I don't feel a need to appease man by trying to make myself 'credible' their way, when I am already credible Gods way. Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them Acts 19:19 Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. 20- So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed.

Why do I need to see a fake version of the "gospel" in order to dispell the darkness and become 'credible'? My case against it is the TRUTH of Gods word and His spirit living within me. I hate to say it but if this movie is causing people to lose their faith then they never had it to start with. Even the man who wrote it admits it's a work of fiction! It don't get no plainer than that. Let satan sift.

I guess i'm a little curious to know why christians feel they need to see it, knowing it is false???

I watched it too, and after they sent Chris (the bald guy with the MOST talent) home I turned it off!! Grrrr!!! I watched again last night to see who would win, though I already realized the public would vote for the most 'likeable' instead of the most talented. Obviously!!! I agree with you that Chris was the most talented, but I am not sure Taylor was the most likeable. I think Taylor was the most entertaining to watch and that is why he won. He also is very good at taking someone else's songs and doing them in a way that was uniquely his own. He could also do different styles well. If I were to guess as to why Chris was voted off when he was, it was likely the fact most thought of him as one dementional. He could sing differen't styles of songs, but was far more comfortable with the hard rock style. When it came to likeability, I hated to see things come to an end for Elliot. He was not the best talent on the show, but he has a good voice and seems to be a very humble person. I like Taylor because he is fun to watch, and ultimately that is why I think he won. After Simon told Taylor that he reminded him of a drunk guy at a wedding trying to sing karaoke, thats all I could invision every time he got up there. LOL! My picks were Chris and Katherine. And I thought Chris was very multi-dementional!!

I watched it too, and after they sent Chris (the bald guy with the MOST talent) home I turned it off!! Grrrr!!! I watched again last night to see who would win, though I already realized the public would vote for the most 'likeable' instead of the most talented. Obviously!!!

Replacement Theology basically teaches that the church has completely replaced Israel in God

Maybe God is asking "who do you say I am"....'what are you going to do with this Christ?' Whats is your foundation, rock or sand? This movie isn't even real deception and people are falling away through extreme gullibility and ignorance. Theres a lot more deception yet to come that will be a whole lot more subtle and clever than this movie!! It will be narrowed down to a remnant who will hold fast to the truth. Gotta know God in Spirit and in Truth (word)

She has very little vocal talent...when she moved to california she aspired to be a dancer because she didn't have what it took to be in the music industry. Someone with some connections gave her a break...and here she is! (I read that) I feel that satan anointed her because he saw great potential there.

Maybe the rocks are crying out.

I live in a very small town also, but I am 30 miles from a military base one way, and around the same distance from a nuclear plant the other. Ug.

Bill permits 193 million more aliens by 2026 By Charles Hurt THE WASHINGTON TIMES May 16, 2006 The Senate immigration reform bill would allow for up to 193 million new legal immigrants -- a number greater than 60 percent of the current U.S. population -- in the next 20 years, according to a study released yesterday. "The magnitude of changes that are entailed in this bill -- and are largely unknown -- rival the impact of the creation of Social Security or the creation of the Medicare program," said Robert Rector, senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation who conducted the study. Although the legislation would permit 193 million new immigrants in the next two decades, Mr. Rector estimated that it is more likely that about 103 million new immigrants actually would arrive in the next 20 years. Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican who conducted a separate analysis that reached similar results, said Congress is "blissfully ignorant of the scope and impact" of the bill, which has bipartisan support in the Senate and has been praised by President Bush. "This Senate is not ready to pass legislation that so significantly changes our future immigration policy," he said yesterday. "The impact this bill will have over the next 20 years is monumental and has not been thought through." The 614-page "compromise" bill -- hastily cobbled together last month by Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Mel Martinez of Florida -- would give illegal aliens who have been in the U.S. two years or longer a right to citizenship. Illegals who have been here less than two years would have to return to their home countries to apply for citizenship. Although that "amnesty" would be granted to about 10 million illegals, the real growth in the immigrant population would come later. As part of the bill, the annual flow of legal immigrants allowed into the U.S. would more than double to more than 2 million annually. In addition, the guest-worker program in the bill would bring in 325,000 new workers annually who could later apply for citizenship. That population would grow exponentially from there because the millions of new citizens would be permitted to bring along their extended families. Also, Mr. Sessions said, the bill includes "escalating caps," which would raise the number of immigrants allowed in as more people seek to enter the U.S. "The impact of this increase in legal immigration dwarfs the magnitude of the amnesty provisions," said Mr. Rector, who has followed Congress for 25 years. He called the bill "the most dramatic piece of legislation in my experience." Mr. Rector based his numerical projection on the number of family members that past immigrants have sponsored. Immigration into the U.S. would become an "entitlement," Mr. Sessions said. "The decision as to who may come will almost totally be controlled by the desire of the individuals who wish to immigrate to the United States rather than by the United States government."