None

No one is claiming anyone to be "betteer" than anyone else. The fact remains that historcally, it has been the Arabs who have began hostilities with Israel, and they are the ones who perpetuate it. That is historical, documented fact. When the Arabs choose recognize the right of Israel to exist, and choose to live in genuine peace with Israel, there would be peace inside of 24 hours. Arabs are part of the "we". If they didn't consider themselves "better", why would they not recognize Israel's rights?

I recently read Marlon Brando's opinion of the Jews and found it interesting. source: http://www.adherents.com/people/pb/Marlon_Brando.html Personally, I believe, if given the opportunity, every human alive is capable of contributing something wonderful to the world. Yes, we all CAN get along. When we stop pointing blame and thinking ourselves better than the "others".

Just go. Play with someone else's head. I'm not playing anymore.

From here: http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/32-35.htm Deuteronomy 32:35 'Vengeance is Mine, and retribution, In due time their foot will slip; For the day of their calamity is near, And the impending things are hastening upon them.' Psalm 103:9 He will not always strive with us, Nor will He keep His anger forever. Matthew 19:19 HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER; and YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." Mark 12:31 "The second is this, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' There is no other commandment greater than these." Luke 10:27 And he answered, "YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." Romans 12:19 Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the Lord. Romans 13:9 For this, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT MURDER, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT COVET," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." Galatians 5:14 For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." Hebrews 10:30 For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." James 2:8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF," you are doing well. There is a difference between Levitical law and the Universal Laws of God. The example of the different food laws is Biblical proof of this. Paul's opinions on circumcision is Biblical proof of this. Notice James calls this Law the "Royal Law"? Look at the context in which James uses that Law: Favoritism Forbidden 1)My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don't show favoritism. 2)Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. 3)If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, "Here's a good seat for you," but say to the poor man, "You stand there" or "Sit on the floor by my feet," 4)have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? 5)Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? 6)But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? 7)Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong? 8)If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself", you are doing right. 9)But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. 10)For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. 11)For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker. 12)Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13)because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment! Two men build a company together. Both came into this union with different credentials. One man is taller than the other, better looking and carries himself with an eminence that keeps the clients captivated, ensuring their return for more product. Should this "better man" consider himself of greater value to the company, even though they went into it 50/50? They merged a union, two talents into one company. Two becoming one. Both with different roles in their union. Is one "over" the other? Marriage is a union. Two become one. Both are of equal importance in this union. Both have different roles in this union. Both should value the other the way they value themself and not discriminate because of gender. If we are not to show favortism, as James states and "wives, obey your husbands" was not written in stone, why do some people still feel that the man should rightfully be the final judgment in the home? The home, the marriage, is a 50/50 union into ONE WHOLE.

"Love your neighbor as yourself" is treating each other as equals. Jesus said these are the most important Laws and He would know. If you want to compare Jesus' relationship with His church to marriage between a man and a woman, do it like this: Jesus said the reason the Father loves Him is because He lays down His life, no one takes it from Him, He lays it down willingly. Wives do not have to be told to submit to their husband's rulership when the marriage is in perfect unity because both the man and the woman will love each other enough to lay down their lives for each other willingly, treating each other as they want to be treated. Everything they do will be to please the other, this is perfect unity. It does not need additional rules. Rules that are easily broken or abused. Rules that give no room for God to work in their heart, showing them the joy of giving freely. Perfect love is perfect unity. Oneness. Not, one and a lesser. You bind people with imperfect rules and it all falls apart. (Bib, that should answer your question, too.) Love your neighbor as yourself is not the same as treating each other as equals. For instance, I have been a supervisor, and had people under me. They were not equals on the job, but it was still possible to love them as myself. In addition, it is not one of the 10 commandments. Also, once again you failed to respond to any of the things OC said, and you did not address anything I said directly. You brought an entirely different thing into the argument, and it doesn't prove that the teachings of Paul are invalid today. When a woman marries a man, she is not marrying him for his profit or gain, she is marrying him because she loves him and he loves her. If she were not marrying him but was hired at his place of employment and was working "under" him, she would have to obey the rules he lays out for this place of employment they both work at. Husbands and wives join together and become ONE. Bosses and employees join together and become bosses and employees. There is a difference. Nevertheless, God still says in his Word that the wife is to be in submission to her husband. There is no getting around that, nor the fact that not one of the 10 commandments says we are to treat each other as equals, and based on your standards, that means it is not a universal law. It is nothing but your opinion, and in this case, your opinion is contrary to scripture. By the way, children are not equal to their parents in authority either, nor are parents to treat them as equal in authority, but they still love them. Before children reach the age of accountability, they're guiltless when they obey their parents and their obedience causes them to sin. When they are no longer a child, the situation changes, they're to "put away childish things" and obey God, above all. Respect and honor is different than obedience. As far as laws go, Jesus made it completely clear which ones He felt were the most important and He said, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself." If that doesn't say for us to treat each others as equals, IF NOT BETTER, then what does it mean to you? Women naturally fall into a pattern of wanting to please their husband trusting his judgment above their own, when he has won her respect and love. It's a natural born instinct to submit to a man's dominance. The man naturally has power over the woman. It's harder for her to break this instinct and obey God because she wants to please her man, above all. A woman rests in this submission and often uses it as an excuse if both slip into sin. She "can't say no to him". To tell a woman she has to obey her husband, as a child has to obey his parents, with or without his love and respect, is telling her she may use this excuse. That's a trap satan uses. The laws of our great nation under God are fair and just. As God is. If she's lead to believe she "was only obeying her husband" and thoughtlessly commits a crime with him, it won't hold up in court. It didn't hold up in God's "court" for Sapphira. Sapphira was accountable for her actions and was not praised for her obedience to her husband. She obeyed her husband, as told to by Peter and Paul in the Bible. "The husband is under God and the wife is under the husband" leaves no room for if's and's or but's. A rule is a rule, black or white. That's why it was not written in stone. That's why it's a choice a woman makes and usually does make, willingly, for her husband. Foundational rules are rules in their purity. To love God first and then each other, placing ourselves last is the perfect example of humility and when we obey these foundations every other rule in life falls into place naturally. These foundations leave no room for selfishness, greed, condescension, narcissism and self-exaltation. The world might be a better place if these rules were in everybody's heart and followed strictly, don't you think?

Welcome to Worthy YHWHblesses!

"Love your neighbor as yourself" is treating each other as equals. Jesus said these are the most important Laws and He would know. If you want to compare Jesus' relationship with His church to marriage between a man and a woman, do it like this: Jesus said the reason the Father loves Him is because He lays down His life, no one takes it from Him, He lays it down willingly. Wives do not have to be told to submit to their husband's rulership when the marriage is in perfect unity because both the man and the woman will love each other enough to lay down their lives for each other willingly, treating each other as they want to be treated. Everything they do will be to please the other, this is perfect unity. It does not need additional rules. Rules that are easily broken or abused. Rules that give no room for God to work in their heart, showing them the joy of giving freely. Perfect love is perfect unity. Oneness. Not, one and a lesser. You bind people with imperfect rules and it all falls apart. (Bib, that should answer your question, too.) Love your neighbor as yourself is not the same as treating each other as equals. For instance, I have been a supervisor, and had people under me. They were not equals on the job, but it was still possible to love them as myself. In addition, it is not one of the 10 commandments. Also, once again you failed to respond to any of the things OC said, and you did not address anything I said directly. You brought an entirely differen't thing into the argument, and it doesn't prove that the teachings of Paul are invalid today. When a woman marries a man, she is not marrying him for his profit or gain, she is marrying him because she loves him and he loves her. If she were not marrying him but was hired at his place of employment and was working "under" him, she would have to obey the rules he lays out for this place of employment they both work at. Husbands and wives join together and become ONE. Bosses and employees join together and become bosses and employees. There is a difference.

Butero, I showed you where Noah was told by God that he could eat every animal as opposed to Moses strict dietary laws. A perfect example of rules changing around a culture. The Law God gave Noah about killing was in it's pure form. If it were obeyed there would have been no need for wars and battles and God's people would not have had to shed the blood of the men who were shedding blood. Right? Even David knew the difference between killing wicked murderers and killing for selfish gain(as he did and was punished for). Jesus said all the laws hang on two Laws: 1)Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul. 2)Love your neighbor as yourself. When those Laws are firmly in place, and not broken or altered, the other laws will be followed effortlessly. The Ten Commandments clarified Laws that made sense to the Laws Jesus mentioned. "Love your neighbor as yourself" is treating each other as equals. Jesus said these are the most important Laws and He would know. If you want to compare Jesus' relationship with His church to marriage between a man and a woman, do it like this: Jesus said the reason the Father loves Him is because He lays down His life, no one takes it from Him, He lays it down willingly. Wives do not have to be told to submit to their husband's rulership when the marriage is in perfect unity because both the man and the woman will love each other enough to lay down their lives for each other willingly, treating each other as they want to be treated. Everything they do will be to please the other, this is perfect unity. It does not need additional rules. Rules that are easily broken or abused. Rules that give no room for God to work in their heart, showing them the joy of giving freely. Perfect love is perfect unity. Oneness. Not, one and a lesser. You bind people with imperfect rules and it all falls apart. (Bib, that should answer your question, too.)

God's Laws never contradicted each other or God's Word would be considered corrupted. Man is the one who needed extra laws for when the simple Universal Laws of God were broken. The reason God never wrote "wives, obey your husbands" in the Ten Commandments is because it goes against the rules to treat each other as equals. There is another reason and that is because if this supposed "universal law" were to be broken due to the wife's attempt to obey God's Laws, His Word would have been contradicted. As it is, God never contradicts Himself and to say He does is blasphemy. Those extra rules in the NT were to establish order in the chaotic era those people lived in, the only way they knew how. That was honoring God at that time. To say those rules apply to all time is to say it is a Universal Law of God and that is a lie. Those rules fit that era only. God also instituted the death penalty and sent the children of Israel into battle, even though he commanded them not to kill, one of what you refer to as universal laws. There was no contradiction, because he never intended the commandment to have anything to do with the military or government. By the way, which of the 10 commandments tells us to treat each other as equals? I don't remember any that states, "Thou shalt treat each other as equals." If God wanted us to do that, it seems like he would have placed that commandment with the other 10, what you call, universal laws. Since it is not there, it is only opinion, and I think I will reject it. That seems to be your approach. And no, those rules given by Paul do not only apply to that era. They apply today as well, and I will continue to hold to them. I reject your heretical teachings to the contrary. When Noah took his family off of the ark, God gave him some different rules about killing another human and also about what animals to eat: Genesis 9:3-11 3) Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything. 4) "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. 5) And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man. 6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man. 7) As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it." 8) Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: 9) "I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you 10) and with every living creature that was with you the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you - every living creature on earth. 11) I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be cut off by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth." Different era, different rules. Certainly from the laws Moses laid out.

God's Laws never contradicted each other or God's Word would be considered corrupted. Man is the one who needed extra laws for when the simple Universal Laws of God were broken. The reason God never wrote "wives, obey your husbands" in the Ten Commandments is because it goes against the rules to treat each other as equals. There is another reason and that is because if this supposed "universal law" were to be broken due to the wife's attempt to obey God's Laws, His Word would have been contradicted. As it is, God never contradicts Himself and to say He does is blasphemy. Those extra rules in the NT were to establish order in the chaotic era those people lived in, the only way they knew how. That was honoring God at that time. To say those rules apply to all time is to say it is a Universal Law of God and that is a lie. Those rules fit that era only.

Yes, I do obey the Sabbath Law. I don't labor on Saturday. I do this out of love for God. If every rule given in the Bible is a Universal Law given by God Himself, how many of these do you yourself break? Look throughout the entire Bible and you will find nearly every man or woman of God in rebellion against someone or some decree made by man, to follow the ways of God. Peter stated, as plainly as he gave the obedience rule, that we are to obey the government rules and laws because the government was put there by God to ensure justice. God's Universal Laws never contradict each other. God has planted HIS seeds of righteousness in my heart and I obey Him. And, how do my "actions say otherwise" when what I want is Truth so that I have Truth to teach my children? How do you think nations have fallen? By following blindly rules that made no sense and went against God's Laws.

Luke 21:29-31 29)He told them this parable: "Look at the fig tree and all the trees. 30)When they sprout leaves, you can see for yourselves and know that summer is near. 31)Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near. Song of Solomon 8:5 5)Who is this that cometh up from the wilderness, leaning upon her beloved? I raised thee up under the apple tree: there thy mother brought thee forth: there she brought thee forth that bare thee. Jesus said that the end would only come after His Gospel has been preached throughout all nations. From here:(note, that link is only part of a research inquiry) Has the Internet and other resources of media sped up this process of global awareness and unity like the "birth before the labor" quoted by Isaiah "for the sake of the elect" Jesus spoke of? It seems that prophetic unity has already been established and widely accepted by most. Every nation has compared notes and religions and the places that have yet to hear have been blindfolded purposely, as a doctor would try to stop the birthing process of a mother in labor. Also, some people seem to believe that God would not destroy a nation with righteous people in it. I beg to differ. Particulary because the Truth has been polluted by the selfish heart of man and most people only think they're obeying God's Laws. Most people forget the most important Law that Jesus stressed above all "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul." and war is proof we've disregarded "love your neighbor as yourself".

I hope the Russian's practice of "flexing their muscles" is just "reviving traditions" as they claim. Even that seems odd. They seem to be doing it more and more lately.

Consider Queen Esther, she went through years adorning herself before meeting the king and her beauty played a role in saving thousands of Jews. Had she gone into the king in less than perfection, he'd have probably thought she was insulting his royalty. Different cultures require different rules. One man's do list is another man's don't.

It does not matter what the church is counseling the husband to do, as long as they tell the husband that he is the one to "bath his wife in God's Word"(as opposed to her reading for herself), because that "command" went along with the submission command - if you obey one you have to obey them all - so says Paul, the husband can tell her anything he wants to and she has to listen to him. That's not right. It makes no sense according to the Law "love thy neighbor as thyself" or the fact that God created men and women on an equal status. Yes, they both have different jobs and different strengths in the home, but they're both souls in a human body. The soul in the female form naturally has weaker muscles and is able to bear children but her brain is the same in intelligence as a man. Hormonal factors are minute and do not effect decision making in a normally functioning man or woman so why is it the soul born in a woman's body is second best? She's not. Men and women are equal in the eyes of God and that's why "wives, obey your husbands" was never a Ten Commandment written in stone.

And there we have a key important factor. Nowadays, the vows taken in marriage do not include "wives, obey your husband" and an unsaved couple marries under the vows of the state. Are they then to take new vows after they're saved, to make sure to follow the "obey" rule and not have the husband endangered in court one day, should they divorce? Divorce rates, as stated in another thread, are far higher in churches than in secular marriages and have been for a while now. Wonder what went wrong?

God does not contradict Himself. God knew the past, He knows the present and He knows the future. Why would God leave a seemingly important commandment like "wives, obey your husbands" out of the Ten Commandments He wrote on stone if it were to represent the future church's relationship with Jesus and is to be considered a Universal Law of God? He spoke of Jesus in the Garden after the fall, He knew about the church/Jesus marriage then, why would He go past the days of Moses and wait until Paul or Peter's letters to make a new law "wives obey your husband"? Why not add it to the commandments in stone? The concept Paul laid out, the reasons he felt this rule should be applied from now on, should have been decided from the foundations of the first laws Moses brought down from the mountain. When God made Eve in the garden, why did God not tell her she was to obey Adam because she is his lesser and he is more important, deserving higher status in the marriage? And how can the pyramid go God>husband>wife, and this represents the church, if the woman is not married? Who will fill in the middle void? That IS the reason, right? Because it represents the church and Jesus? Or maybe because woman sinned and influenced Adam to sin, maybe that's why she is now to be punished. Always to be considered lower than man. A Law. Because of the Garden sins? Paul said this and he also said the representation of the church reasons for women being less than man in the home(in submission to man who is in submission to God). So, which IS it? And why didn't Jesus mention this new law? He is the reason Paul and Peter started changing rules and laws around which caused such an uproar(example:to circumcise or not to circumcise and the freedom of the food laws). Food laws are freed up but women get a new "obey" law. Makes no sense. Then on top of that, Peter says we're to obey the laws of the land. There should be no greys in God's Universal Laws, it is either black or white. "love your neighbor as yourself", your neighbor is the person closest to you, your spouse. If the wife is to be in submission to the husband, the husband is to be in submission to the wife as well, this makes sense to God's Universal Laws PLUS the new emphesis Jesus placed on loving one another as ourselves. That makes sense to the Love of God. Not, women are to forever be in obedience to men because of either a church/Jesus representation or Eve's Garden mistake. God's Universal Laws never contradict each other. Ever.

T.A.J., do you believe God Himself made it a Universal Law, as He did the Ten Commandments, for women to obey their husbands, or was it the accepted way of that era that influenced Paul and Peter to view women as a little lower than man? To be in submission to men or it is a sin of God's Universal Law?

The wiki definition found here Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion. While laboring to benefit another occurs in the condition of slavery, involuntary servitude does not necessarily connote the complete lack of freedom experienced in chattel slavery; involuntary servitude may also refer to other forms of unfree labor. Involuntary servitude is not dependent upon compensation or its amount. The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution makes involuntary servitude illegal under any US jurisdiction whether at the hands of the US government or in the private sphere, except as punishment for a crime: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." According to lectlaw.com[1], involuntary servitude is defined as servitude to a person, which excludes the US government and its political subdivisions. The Libertarian Party of the United States and other libertarians consider military conscription to be involuntary servitude in the sense of the Thirteenth Amendment.[1] Some libertarians consider compulsory schooling and income taxation forms of involuntary servitude. Some have also argued that, should Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973) be overturned by the United States Supreme Court, a constitutional right to abortion could still be sustained on the basis that denying it would subject women to involuntary servitude contrary to the Thirteenth Amendment.[2] However, no U.S. court has yet accepted such an argument.[3] Differing views have been expressed as to whether the argument is so unpersuasive as to be "frivolous".[4] One major difficulty with the argument relates to the claim that pregnancy and child-bearing are within the scope of the term "servitude".[5] Which are women to obey? Peter's clarification that we're to obey our government rules or his and Paul's rules on submitting our services and freedoms over to our husbands. For example, if a nonbelieving couple were to get married and promise each other vows to love, honor and cherish each other, till death do them part, and later they get saved and join a church who informs the woman she is now bound to the laws of the Bible which say she is to obey her husband and serve him, in order to be doing the will of God. But her husband has only to love, honor and cherish her, not obey or submit himself to her, the final decisions of the household are to be his also, because he's the man. She is now forced to humble herself and submit to him and her husband is told he is now in charge, over his wife. Are we to disobey the laws of the land, even if the man could end up in trouble in a court room for abuse by controlling or domination and enforcing involuntary servitude by making her feel ashamed, guilty and unworthy of the kingdom of Heaven if she doesn't do as he says? 1 Peter 2:13-14 13)Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, 14)or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.

To me, Jesus is Lord and Savior, the begotten Son of God. He's whom I submit all of my loyalty and servitude to. Under His rulership, I'm able to learn the ways of God as He draws me closer to Him. He is the only one I confess my sins to and He is the one who helps me overcome all of my weaknesses. He forgives and He heals and comforts me when I'm in need of comfort. When I'm in obedience to Him and troubles still come, He shows me the game-plan of the enemy and guides me through the struggles with no anxieties. Some things "must needs be" as I walk through this life with Him. He makes the journey exciting and fun and fills it with joy, peace and His love, which spills over in abundance. That's who Jesus is to me.

Dear None: The book "Cross-Shattered Christ" as well as my Criswell study Bible give this verse as Jesus' last of His 7 words: Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost. fyi- Psa 31:5 Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me, O LORD God of truth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Various views of Paul "thorn in the flesh" {remember he had problems with his eyes? might have been that}. Anyway, I just listed 2 of the number of possibilities re suffering recorded in the Word of God:Job and Paul. King Saul had an evil spirit from the LORD, Satan causing David to sin by that census caused plague upon some of Israelites, the man blind [John 9]-uncaused by sin, the man lame for many years that Jesus healed and was told to not sin so something worse might happen, "same afflictions as your brethren which are in the world", more. Verse in 1 John that was given to me a while after something impossible happened to me in my 18 month full-time Good vs Evil experience-unbearable really to think about unless one is in a Hebrew 5/Ephesians 6:10-18 state, in my opinion. How this all Ends. To me, look at the entire Word of God, NEVER EVER be a Job's Comforter {suffering due to unconfessed sin, lack of faith,just do this and then all will be okay, on and on}. Look into some of the books on exorcisms and exorcists' experiences. Malachi Martin {deceased}; Christian psychiatrist Scott Peck {deceased}. Allen's "Possessed" [supposed to be true], where Blatty got his book "The Exorcist", the 1973 movie. Hebrews 12:2. John 16:12-15 Pray. Ron R. Dear Ron, I would never judge you and tell you you are being tormented because of a sin of some sort in your life. Second, I DO read the whole Bible as a full context. Whichever account is true of Jesus' last words makes no difference to the fact that He died for us and rose again and now has power over satan and his demons and they can do nothing when we wear His name. Only try to decieve us. Matthew 28:18 18)Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me". I'm not trying to comfort you, only to let you know I've been through it too. When these trials come they come no matter what we're involved in(good or bad). Because it may be God is planning on using us in some way and satan knows this and is attacking in full blast. There are too many possible reasons for spiritual warfare to speculate the cause and I'm not trying to tick God off like Job's advisers did. The only thing I can do for you is pray and let you know I'm praying for you.

Wow, that was beautiful, lucky.

Hmmm...it is a term usually referenced in regards to people who fall outside of God's design for gender roles. I'm not sure it has much to do with "women's rights.' Women and men are created equal in the eyes of God. Perhaps you could define "women's rights.' It was NOT my intention to hijack the thread into a gender debate. It was more my intent to show how the church's ideology has changed in regards to gender roles in the church and family....leading to a rise in the divorce rate. I find it no small coincidence that when the church began using wordly/secular ideologies in regards to gender...the church suddenly began to experience the same divorce rate as its worldly counterparts. I was recently reading about Bride Burning in parts of Asia, especially India. Men in those countries set their wives on fire and watch them burn to death if their wive's families cannot come up with the promised dowry and any additional dowry he may need later. This story is old news, I know, but look at the bigger picture. Men there have a horrible view on women. They consider them a piece of property, good for only worldly gain. Because of that perspective, that developed over a long period of time 1)female babies are killed in the womb to prevent such abuse on, not only the women, but the families who would end up bankrupt due to these outrageous demands, 2)an increasing male population, almost at double the females, 3)now, men who even seem to be pressuring for money are put in jail, 4)now, for some odd reason, women there are far more accident prone(especially in the kitchen, accidental kitchen fires have increased) than in earlier years where their husbands were the murderers, 5)polyandry is on the rise. 6)there seems to be no end in sight for the level of greed, pride of wealth. Unbalanced male/female ratio. Increasing female fetus killings, not decreasing(though the laws have banned the practice). Information flooding the entire world(it's hard to keep up appearances when your daughter is uneducated). What do you see happening in, say, 40 more years? I know what I see, but I'll just keep that to myself and let you draw your own images. You underestimate some "ideologies" as being just as self-centered as, say, the men over in India, before their greed and inconsideration for women turned out to be their country's downfall. Some people actually LEARN from history. What worked and what didn't work. Just as bride murders decreased in India while "accident" rates are increasing, here in America the divorce rates will decrease because the benefits to marrying will not be what they were, give or take 40 years from now, should the Lord Jesus tarry. On topic: If my husband were to grant me a divorce, I'd never even consider remarraige. My relationship with God is fulfilling enough for me. As it is, no divorce in sight for me. (You guessed wrong, Ax). What are we talking about? That's awful, I didn't know Indians were that sexist, but what does that have to do with the church's outlook on the genders? We've been though this before, men and women are equal in God's eyes. I can't even remember what this thread was about. Not to worry, Grungekid, that was just a reply to Axxman's question to about my views on women's rights. It's not a thread-jacking.

I'm sorry if this is off topic. I'm addressing Paul's "thorn in the flesh". I always read that to mean temptation. It was never fully explained but, you would think if it were something physical he'd have been healed from it? Jesus' last words are recorded differently in the different gospels and in different translations the words come out... differently. (We may be "one in Christ" but we're still human individuals who, occasionally, see and hear things differently.) John 19:30 30)When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

It usually works that way. Eventually, while your off doing something other than worrying over this, epiphany. It all comes together. Hopefully this will happen for you soon.