wingnut-

I have never said any such thing. I would think considering previous conversations you know my stance regarding liberty and the freedoms of Americans. In regards to this specifically though, I would say it is very unwise to elect someone who wants Sharia Law into a government position. The reason I say that is because Sharia wants to usurp the Constitution, so in my opinion those of that mindset are not loyal to America, therefore not qualified for the position.

I Corinthians 10:31 So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

I agree with this, and here is something Jesus said that sheds some light on the subject. Luke 11:47 Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets whom your fathers killed. 48 So you are witnesses and you consent to the deeds of your fathers, for they killed them, and you build their tombs. 49 Therefore also the Wisdom of God said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and persecute,’ 50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation. The answer to this debate is found in whom He was speaking to. God bless

I was thinking the same thing when I read this, nothing like giving people ideas.

I have never been a fan of his, he has been off the reservation for a long time. I will give him credit for at least admitting that he is a liar, that is more than you will get from most of those in La-la land. Living in France probably gives him more courage to say such ridiculous things because it is highly unlikely the French would hand him over even if our government requested it, which they won't anyway.

I guess Bernie the Socialist doesn't understand that limiting the opportunities of someone based on their personal beliefs is contrary to freedom in the form of, the pursuit of happiness.

No problem davida, take your time, I'm in no hurry. God bless

Hello Davida, I agree believers are not appointed to suffer His wrath, nor will we, to me this is covered going back to Exodus. Exodus 12:23 For the Lord will pass through to strike the Egyptians, and when he sees the blood on the lintel and on the two doorposts, the Lord will pass over the door and will not allow the destroyer to enter your houses to strike you. 24 You shall observe this rite as a statute for you and for your sons forever. Believers are covered by the blood of Jesus, the seal of the Holy Spirit. This is also why we only see the seal being applied to the remnant of unbelieving Israel in Revelation. Well, there really is no scripture to support that He only comes halfway, or that there is more than a Second Coming. The passages that are used for this belief all specifically mention His coming. I Corinthians 15:20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Paul gives the order of resurrection in I Corinthians 15, Christ the firstfruits having already occurred at His resurrection, the next will be at His coming, and what immediately follows in verse 24 indicates what immediately follows which doesn't allow for the tribulation in between. I Corinthians 15:24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. This points to what follows the millennium, His reign on earth and death being done away with. The passage from I Thessalonians is no different. I Thessalonians 4:14 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15 For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. This passage tells us that He brings those who have previously died with Him, and that it is also at His coming. Those who are alive and remain meet them in the air, but all of these speak of His coming. We agree on this, the difference is in what we view as the day of the Lord or the Lord's day as you referred to it. This is where the difference is, and it takes us back to the reference of the thief, which keep in mind is what He proclaims when He comes, as the passage states, I come as a thief. I Thessalonians 5:2 For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. Paul and John are both referring to the same event, the day of the Lord. It brings sudden destruction, and when the Lord says destruction He means it, which is why they will not escape. Peter writes of the same thing and clarifies how the sudden destruction comes about. II Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed. 11 Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, 12 waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! When this occurs the gathering will have already taken place, the gathering will be at the outset of this day as I see it. This is why I suppose people refer to the position as pre-wrath, although the difference in timing with post-trib is minimal as I see it. Anyway, just something to consider, at the very least hopefully it helps you understand what I believe. God bless

That is my understanding as well, that this executive order relaxes the Johnson Amendment, which in turn gives anyone the IRS comes after grounds to appeal any action taken against them. The SCOTUS could potentially hear such a case and overturn the Johnson Amendment as unconstitutional on that basis, so it could possibly bring us to an official conclusion on the matter which bypasses the need for Congress to pass new legislation. Considering that the Johnson Amendment was in fact unconstitutional to begin with, it needs to be removed. The bottom line on this is, that it was a positive thing for the people, and as Christians I would think we can all agree on that. Trump didn't have to do this, but he did, and hence why in my opinion it is the best thing he has done to date. Campaigning from the pulpit is still illegal, as specifically stated in the executive order, but preaching biblical truths are what has been addressed. In other words, issues that politicians use such as the homosexual agenda are not off limits to be preached against. God bless

Hey Marilyn, Thanks again for clarifying. Just to clarify my response to you, I do understand what you are saying about the other group that will be judged. I know recently in another area we discussed my native american heritage, so when you mention something like this it makes me think of my ancestors prior to the pilgrims arriving in America. Native Americans were deeply spiritual people before the gospel message arrived here, and though maybe many of their ways of expressing it are seen as pagan rituals, I am not so sure their hearts were not in the right place. At any rate, I don't think we disagree on this if I'm understanding you correctly. I may be in the minority on this, but I just wanted to let you know that if you make a long post I will read it. I do agree that long posts which don't include scriptural support don't interest me so much. I am more interested in what scripture has to say than someone's opinion, if that makes sense. God bless

Just so you know, I rather enjoy the longer posts when there is scripture in them.

Hey Marilyn, Yes, the two covenants, law and grace. I consider having to face judgement as being on the wrong side of things, but I agree with what you are saying in regards to how they are judged. However the Lord deals with humanity, I am sure we both agree it will be just. I'm still not clear on your answer though in regards to the original question, do you see the distinction being made as between belief and unbelief, or no?

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

I can help with that, it is the only place in all of scripture where we see Him announce He comes. Revelation 16:15 “Behold, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake, keeping his garments on, that he may not go about naked and be seen exposed!” 16 And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon. This is why I am certain of the timing, because it is given in scripture. God bless

Naturally, they want to use it as a recruiting tool.

I think the real problem when it comes to social media is that most times there is no real relationship. It is very easy to type things out on a keyboard and hit enter than it is to say the same things to a person's face. When we are looking at a computer screen it is quite a bit different than looking into a person's eyes, where we see the immediate impact of our words on an individual. I think as others have pointed out it is best to wait and consider a response in this type of setting than to just answer back, particularly if what we read brings out an emotional response. Another issue as I see it is that in a setting like this forum, we have people from all over the place, and not everyone's first language is English. So often there are communication gaps, or in so many cases simply misunderstanding what the other individual has said. How many times do we see when following a thread that someone replies to a post and says in their response exactly what the other person said, just in a different way? I don't know about anyone else, but I see it all the time and it usually leaves me scratching my head. Are we really considering what was even said in the first place, or simply responding to one sentence that we misunderstood the presentation of and disregarding the majority of what was written? It's a tricky situation when so many people from so many different walks of life are brought together in one place, but I rather enjoy it all the same. I know I often misunderstand what someone says to me, and I am aware that not everyone understands me either. I'm working on clarifying things in discussions to avoid confusion, I guess time will tell if this helps at all, but so far it seems to be effective. God bless

If this is true, Canada has crossed over into a whole new realm.

I did say so, that was what I posted.

I really appreciate the information badjao, what is going on over there has really been on my mind for quite some time. It is frustrating to know there is such a conflict and to find information about it so difficult to come by. My thoughts and prayers are with all the people of the Philippines, and I see by your location you are right in the danger zone. My prayers are with you and your ministry, be safe my friend, and God bless you all.

When I went to college years ago I went 6 hours each weekday, so roughly 30 hours a week. I worked full time as well, so basically I just didn't have a life outside of those two things. I was either working or going to school and had the weekends to do my socializing in. Not sure if that helps, but that is how I did it. God bless

That makes no sense at all, what I posted and said was the best thing Trump did is in regards to the Executive Order from May 4th. It has nothing to do with cabinet nominees or appointments. Harry Reid has nothing to do with an executive order that allows ministers to preach the truth from the pulpit without backlash from the government.

Over 95 billion in 1 quarter, those kind of numbers should really start to put the wastefulness of the government in perspective.

Hello again Marilyn, So would you agree that the two covenants are summarized by the distinction between those who live under the law as unbelievers, and those who are part of the second covenant are those who have accepted Jesus or believers? I imagine we agree that anyone under the law is going to come up on the wrong side at the GWTJ. God bless

I wonder that as well jade, most folks don't seem to acknowledge that ISIS is attempting a takeover there. As they get pushed out of Syria they need a new home base, and it would appear they are targeting the Philippines. I don't know why no one is trying to get aid to these people, or what is taking the Philippine government so long to get rid of what they claim is several hundred radicals. It is hard to find much information on it because the media here simply doesn't want to cover any news that sheds a bad light on Islam.

To me, this is the best thing President Trump has done to date, in particular section 2 which I put in bold. The White House Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release May 04, 2017 Presidential Executive Order Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty EXECUTIVE ORDER - - - - - - - PROMOTING FREE SPEECH AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, in order to guide the executive branch in formulating and implementing policies with implications for the religious liberty of persons and organizations in America, and to further compliance with the Constitution and with applicable statutes and Presidential Directives, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Policy. It shall be the policy of the executive branch to vigorously enforce Federal law's robust protections for religious freedom. The Founders envisioned a Nation in which religious voices and views were integral to a vibrant public square, and in which religious people and institutions were free to practice their faith without fear of discrimination or retaliation by the Federal Government. For that reason, the United States Constitution enshrines and protects the fundamental right to religious liberty as Americans' first freedom. Federal law protects the freedom of Americans and their organizations to exercise religion and participate fully in civic life without undue interference by the Federal Government. The executive branch will honor and enforce those protections. Sec. 2. Respecting Religious and Political Speech. All executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the greatest extent practicable and to the extent permitted by law, respect and protect the freedom of persons and organizations to engage in religious and political speech. In particular, the Secretary of the Treasury shall ensure, to the extent permitted by law, that the Department of the Treasury does not take any adverse action against any individual, house of worship, or other religious organization on the basis that such individual or organization speaks or has spoken about moral or political issues from a religious perspective, where speech of similar character has, consistent with law, not ordinarily been treated as participation or intervention in a political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) a candidate for public office by the Department of the Treasury. As used in this section, the term "adverse action" means the imposition of any tax or tax penalty; the delay or denial of tax-exempt status; the disallowance of tax deductions for contributions made to entities exempted from taxation under section 501(c)(3) of title 26, United States Code; or any other action that makes unavailable or denies any tax deduction, exemption, credit, or benefit. Sec. 3. Conscience Protections with Respect to Preventive-Care Mandate. The Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Labor, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall consider issuing amended regulations, consistent with applicable law, to address conscience-based objections to the preventive-care mandate promulgated under section 300gg-13(a)(4) of title 42, United States Code. Sec. 4. Religious Liberty Guidance. In order to guide all agencies in complying with relevant Federal law, the Attorney General shall, as appropriate, issue guidance interpreting religious liberty protections in Federal law. Sec. 5. Severability. If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any individual or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its other provisions to any other individuals or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. (c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. DONALD J. TRUMP THE WHITE HOUSE, May 4, 2017.