Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RUSH: How Did This Happen? The Left Corrupted Language, Undermined Morality - There was No Pushback
www.RushLimbaugh.com ^ | March 29, 2013 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 03/30/2013 6:50:54 AM PDT by Yosemitest

Edited on 03/30/2013 8:09:00 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]




TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: children; school; sexeducation; sourcetitlenoturl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 next last
To: Yosemitest

He kicks butt good too...far more effectively than anyone else that I have heard because he deeply understands the mind control that is being used against us and the evil that is behind it.


81 posted on 03/31/2013 10:11:13 AM PDT by fabian (" And a new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo in laughter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco
Rush gives just enough **minutes** to sensitive subjects so that his defenders can say, “Yes! He did cover that topic!”

Rush's track record on reporting homofascist bully has been horrendous. It's right up there with how well he ignored ( and continues to ignore) Obama’s eligibility and other important issues.

Rush is the Master of Safe!

82 posted on 03/31/2013 10:36:51 AM PDT by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

This coming from a man who has been married 4 times and had Elton John sing at his wedding.

Thanks for nothing, Limbaugh.


83 posted on 03/31/2013 11:03:04 AM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
You have no ideal how hard it is today to find a woman that will remain faithful and be what the Bible considers a good wife.
No I don't have a problem with Rush's marriage problems, because I've had many friend and acquaintances over the years that were shocked to find out their wives were nothing but gold-diggers or liars.
And as far as Elton John, Rush has a boss, also, that he has to work for, and most bosses don't always agree with your values.
Julie Talbott may be the reason "why" Rush doesn't say he's against homosexual marriage.
84 posted on 03/31/2013 11:19:18 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....

Limbaugh is a fraud. His listeners are suckers.


85 posted on 03/31/2013 11:44:42 AM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

So you want to make 20,000,000 enemies?


86 posted on 03/31/2013 11:52:00 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

I started listening to Rush in the late 80s when he was local in Sacramento. I listened to him a lot over the years, and stopped about 11 years ago. Why?

Because he stopped telling the ugly truth about the immoral agendas of the left, became utterly silent about the homosexual agenda, and if he wants to point fingers at why the Godless immoral Dem agenda is so powerful, he should look in the damned mirror. He pretended to support social conservative issues but his touch was so light as to be unnoticeable most of the time.

He’s about 15 years too late to the party to be all shocked, horrified and disturbed by this.


87 posted on 03/31/2013 8:32:37 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wildbill

So children adopted and fostered by homosexuals being ruined means nothing to you?

So children in public schools being taught that “gay is good” and they should try it, and here’s how - means nothing to you?

So businesses forced to cater to homosexual weddings nad the like or be forced to pay fines and/or close up means nothing to you?

So people being forced to “sensitivity training” and be punished for expressing their view that homosexuals marrying each other is wrong means nothing to you?


88 posted on 03/31/2013 8:37:58 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

So he cares more about money than morality, or the country going to hell.

I’ve known that for years. That’s why I won’t listen to him any more.


89 posted on 03/31/2013 8:39:40 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest
Yes, if we yield to the Holy Spirit, we are walking in the Spirit and not the flesh.

But we are walking by faith and are not trying to keep the Law, we are focused on staying in obedience to the Holy Spirit.

The Law is fulfilled by love, and when we are controlled the Holy Spirit, He gives us the fruits of the Spirit, one of which is love.

90 posted on 03/31/2013 10:39:57 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
No one is minimizing anything.

Our Bibles contain the Old and New TESTAMENTS, not Old and New Covenants.

The New Covenant is a specific promise made to Israel.

It is established by the New Testament Blood atonement.

What was made 'old' in Heb 8 was the Mosaic Law, which could not save.

The New Covenant replaces the requirement that the Jew was under while under the Mosiac Law, so he will not be under that Law in the Millennium.

91 posted on 03/31/2013 10:44:20 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Hbr 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

Hbr 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

That is not for today, that is for the Millennium. No one is told today not to teach about the Lord. All of the chapter has to read as one promise, not just particular verses.

It isn't for today, it is for the Jew who is saved and enters into the Millennium Kingdom.

92 posted on 03/31/2013 10:48:51 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; PapaNew; daniel1212

Actually, a will is a specialized form of promise, a recorded promise, if you will, where upon the occurance of an event, property will convey from one person to another. While the details for any given reference should not be ignored, making too sharp a distinction between covenant and testament will tend to obscure more than it illuminates.


93 posted on 03/31/2013 11:40:26 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
No, because the Bible makes it very clear that a testament isn't into effect until there is a death of the testator.

That isn't the case for a Covenant.

Heb.8 is speaking to Israel (note the words Israel and Judah in Heb.8:8) and isn't referring to our present salvation.

What is 'old' and done away is the old Mosaic covenant.

The Bible is the Old and New Testament, not Old and New Covenant.

94 posted on 04/01/2013 3:20:17 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
Our Bibles contain the Old and New TESTAMENTS, not Old and New Covenants.

Better read Hebrews 8 & 9 again...and again...

95 posted on 04/01/2013 4:24:21 AM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
Hbr 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. That is not for today, that is for the Millennium.

That of course is a heresy for it nullifies power of the cross and the gospel which declares us the righteousness of God and our likeness to Jesus Christ NOW. Those Biblical declarations about us are impossible if God still sees us as unrighteous and still remembers our sins. Your doctrine makes Christ of no effect whose blood washes ALL our sin away and CLEANSES US FROM ALL UNRIGHTEOUSNESS.

96 posted on 04/01/2013 4:35:01 AM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
fortheDeclaration is trying to completely separate the new testament from the new covenant. I suppose you can say they are different because a testament is a will that contains promises and devises which are covenants. But the two go together and really are hard to separate conceptually as you say.

Separating the two is a novel concept to me and not according to the real world or scripture (Heb 7-10 among others) and leads to heresy which always happens when basic Biblical truths are denied.

97 posted on 04/01/2013 4:45:07 AM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; PapaNew

Um, no, sorry, not so much. You’re trying to triangulate to an absolute distinction because dispensationalism requires you to do so. I understand. I used to be a dispensationalist. That ended one day in the cafeteria at Moody Bible Institute, many years ago. I finally met a dispensationalist fellow student who was more extreme than I. He had deduced that no Scripture applied to the church at all, apart from Ephesians. His problem, and yours, is that the writers of the New Testament/Covenant break the separation rule over and over again. This puts demands for mental gymnastics on the dispensational reader that are impossible for any reasonable reader to sustain.

For example, you think that the reference in Hebrews 8 to Israel helps your cause, when in fact it does the opposite. Nothing could be stronger evidence that the New Covenant and the Christian church are one and the same than Hebrews 8-10, in which the Jeremiah New Covenant prophecy is unambiguously applied to the contemporary Christian church of the author (I believe Paul).

Lest you have trouble accepting this, let me point out another example:

Amos 9:11 “On that day I will raise up The tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, And repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, And rebuild it as in the days of old;”

Is not the tabernacle of David clearly Israel?

Yet what of the fulfillment?

Acts 15:14-18 “Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. [15] “And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: [16] ‘After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up; [17] So that the rest of mankind may seek the LORD, Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the LORD who does all these things.’ [18] “Known to God from eternity are all His works.”

In the fulfillment, it could not be more clear that the entire contemporaneous church, Jew and gentile alike, are in view, that James and the men of the Jerusalem Council applied those words directly to themselves and to the Gentiles who were entering the church.

Thus fails the one device essential to your exposition, that any reference to Israel or anything distinctly Jewish automatically proves an impassible distinction in the intended audience. Each passage must be evaluated in its total context, both micro and macro, without superimposing a preconceived scheme of artificial categories, especially when the net effect of such theories is to separate Christians from so much Scripture intended for their use.

Peace,

SR


98 posted on 04/01/2013 6:22:33 AM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
I think his boss during that time was a flaming homosexual, if my memory serves correctly, and they decided that they didn't want him to come out on either side.
But I could be wrong. My memory ain't as good as it use to be.

Remember, the only perfect Man that was ever on earth, the people of power killed, because He showed them the error of their ways.
99 posted on 04/01/2013 6:50:58 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
This is where your theory falls apart.
Don't get caught up in all the minutiae.
Read your Bible, OBEY God, and live your life.
Help those you can, and share what you've learned with others freely.
"Free received, freely given."
100 posted on 04/01/2013 6:57:11 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson