The_Patriot21

I would say all can to an extent. We see, in the Bible, that God uses dreams a lot to talk to His people. I do not feel that satan, directly gives us dreams, but he can interject thoughts into our heads that can create dreams. I also don't feel that dreams, are something that God does a lot of anymore, I think that dreams are just another mechanism our minds use to process all the information we see in a day-we see a lot of stuff and we don't even realize it, and this stuff comes out in our dreams a lot, in a lot of wild ways, and that creates dreams. I think, honestly, in todays world, thats where 99% of dreams come from. I even think that in a way, they can create that "deja vu" thing people talk about, where theyll dream about something and it happens. I think, often times in life, there are a lot of things that lead up to each event, and theyre often small things. I think our mind sees these small things over a course of a day or two or whatever, things that our active mind disregards or doesnt even notice-but our subconcious connects the dots as to the logical outcome of these small things, and then we have the dream, and then 2 days later, what do you know, it happened. Thats just my hypothesysising though.

It is not love to excuse their actions and portray them as innocents. Pray for them. Long for them to come to Christ. Do not make light of their actions. They are killers who need Jesus. Too late for the one, but the other still has a chance to get saved. If you read all my posts, you will see Im not excusing their actions.

Of course Patriot. But what does this have to do with hiding the truth? They are malicious and did a very wicked thing- of course I myself do not hold any malice against them, but on that same not I am not going to reason out something for them to make their act less than what it is- evil. I pray the man who was turned in finds the Lord and I pity Him in the sense of what he is battling- but again, hiding the truth does nothing. Im just saying, sometimes I think the liberals, at least get part of it right-we do need to love them, and sympathise with them, and draw them to Christ. We don't need, to let them get away with it, they need to know there is no excuse for their actions-which the liberal agenda often pushes the pendulum to far in that direction-but we can learn from the sympathy part.

but on the same note, are we not to love our enemies?

I dont carry, with the goal of being a hero-I carry, because I want to be prepared. Id just as soon never use a gun. But, if I carry my entire life, and never use it-then its just a little extra weight. Not have it the one time I do need it, however, and its a totally different story. Its called be prepared. With that being said, theres nothing wrong with going into law enforcement, other then usually, in most situations, they show up after the fact. After the fact, is usually, to late.

the US is actually under a republic to be technical. A democracy, everyone votes, on pretty much everything. A republic, the only thing we vote for, are the people who represent us-and they vote for the laws. Just going to point that out.

Even Biden and Obama, have said in the past their goal is a weapons ban. The evidence is out there. No, theyre not going to do an outright ban because theyre not stupid-that would lead to instant civil war-that is, if it even manages to somehow get through the senate and house. So theyre doing it the smart way-theyre going to widdle away at it little by little, make it so difficult for people to own guns and ammo, that many will just get rid of them anyway, and trick people into thinking theyre the problem-and then when they do finally pull the last straw, no one will even notice.

Actually, if more people are carrying, violence tends to go down. Just going to point that out. And the Bible doesn't say thou shalt not kill-thats actually a mistranslation, the hebrew word for kill translates better into murder, and there is a difference-the Bible lists when you can use a gun to protect oneself, and when not to. Its a personal decision we all do, have to come to however. I do carry a handgun, Ive never been tempted to use one against another human, and nor will I ever, unless someone threatens me or my family and friends, or I happen to be somewhere. I believe we are called to preserve life-if my using my gun, will preserve the life of innocent people, I will use it. And I am against any form of gun control-even forcing us to keep the guns locked away. Its none of the governments business whether I own a gun or not, and while i do keep my guns locked up, its none of the governments business where or how I keep them locked up.

dont get me started on that ny paper. Publishing names of gun owners is stupid, low handed, and immature. It puts a lot of lives at stake, it really does.

no jtc, 30 years ago, they just hi-jacked them, flew them across the border and held them for ransom. Just sayin. And I agree with tinky, actually doing some profiling would help, but Im not convinced it will solve the problem.

If there is ever any evidence that it's being considered, I'll join in the Tea Pary protests. Then you better go sign up, as is evidence, the evidence is growing stronger by the day. The latest defeat is nothing more then a detourance. If you choose to ignore the evidence, well, ignore it right up to the point they come and take yours, only by then it will be to late to do anything about it.

thats because people have fought them off to date rejected. Whats it going to take it prove it to you, actual confiscation?

Saying that it's the first step to confiscation is ridiculous. This is akin to saying that there can be no limit to any constitutional rights. This isn't the case, and never has been. Are anti-libel laws the first step to the abolition of free speech? Are city permits the first step to taking way the right to peaceably assemble? Of course not. Also, the law in question didn't create a mechanism for the government to "know about" where all the guns were. It provided for criminal background checks for most (not all) gun sales. If the goverment wanted to know who legally owned guns, they could check the state permits. I suppose those are unconsitutional as well? If you think that its ridiculous, then you really need to re-examine history.

its the first step to complete confiscation rejected, first off, second, its none of the governments business. The second ammendment says we have the right to keep and bear arms-not the right only keep and bear arms that the government knows about. Seeing as the second amendment was put there, as a fail safe in case the government falls to tyranny, the government knowing where the guns are so they can confiscate them, kinda defeats the entire purpose of the second amendment.

whats sad, isnt the fact that TSA wants to pat down a 3 year old in a wheel chair, is the fact that there are people on this planet would would in fact use a 3 year old in a wheel chair to smuggle weapons, drugs, bombs, or to use that child as a weapon. Just adding perspective here.

Maybe someone took those facebook photos saying we need to fire the entire US government a little to literally. . . And other, any kind of poison, can be easily obtained if someone who has a will to obtain it. But the real question is, what genius, would think this would actually work? All mail going to senators, republicans, and especially the president, are well filtered and checked loooong before the intended person gets it, theres like a .00001 chance out of a million that they would succeed. Unless all they were trying to do was make a statement of some kind, its a total waste of poison. And if they really wanted to make a statement, it would be far easier to just throw some flour or some other kind of white powder, into an envelope and mail that.

From reading the article, they didn't actually bulldoze it, so thats actually an exaggeration. What they did, was bury the entire site in sand so they can perform military training over the top of it, so they did at least somewhat preserve it.

Alright. Ill bite. If theyre confirmed by the Bible, where in the Bible does it confirm this, or any other similar experience.

they bring forth a good point though, if Unesco had excavated it, they wouldnt have been able to take it over. . .if anything speaks about UNESCOs inability, its that.

back2, its time to go back to the Bible. The tower Of Babel, was there and gone LONG before daniel or king nebuckanezzer. So if Neb is the head, the tower of babel was not the beast. . .just pointing that out. Your time line is just a wee bit backwards.

why would they have to create the sandy hook shooting? school shootings happen quite regularly, all they had to do was wait for one that would fit with their agenda. they just took advantage of a particularly horrendouse one.

Interesting article, though, interesting note, many Biblical scholars put the tower of babel somewhere in mespotamia, (southern Iraq) Just thought id provide that interesting tidbit. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v4/n1/where-is-tower-babel

After researching 1 Chronicles, I have come to the conclusion, that that passage, is a literal genealogy, as well Matthew, the key, is to look at the verses after the ones you listed. None of the names, in that passage, match up with Matthew. Now, its safe to assume that Solomon had more then one son, the genealogy in 1 Chronicles 3, doesnt follow the genealogy of Jesus, but simply his bloodline, and the genealogy split. They are seperate bloodlines.

investigation has barely started, smoke not even cleared, and CNN is already blaming the right for it. despicable. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn-national-security-analyst-warns-of-right-wing-extremists-behind-boston-bombings/

Alright, seems to me weve got off on the wrong foot, and people are taking what Im saying is wrong, so let me clear up some things. Well, maybe the reservation systems different there then it is up here-weve had several times weve dealt with the indian reservations and they have total control over who goes on their land, why, and when, and even have their own police force. Our companys have to pay them, just to drive a semi across it. Now with that being said, Im not complaining about that, If I was on the reservation and had control over stuff like that, I would to, but these permits, wouldnt be legal, anywhere else in reality. but even if the government owns the land-they have a good deal of the reservations thinking theyre in control, even when theyre really not. I honestly think that the reservations, are just another form of legal bondage, if you ask me. Now, let me clarify, Im not anti-Indian by any means. I don't know if taking away the reservations cold turkey, is a good idea either, so I agree with you on that jade, what Im saying is the system they have now, is keeping them just as much in bondage now, as it was back when they were put there originally, and they justify it, by giving them so called "special" privilege. Im not blaming the indian here, Im blaming the US government, for the way its treating them, for creating a setup, that on the one hand, gives them "special rights" while on the other, enslaving them. Just removing the reservations altogether- I think your right, would be detrimental, but if there was a better plan to slowly integrate the US indian into normal society, I think it would be beneficial to all, to treat them as equals-and train them to be equals, which by the Bible, they are equals.