The Eagle needs to be praying with it's people"
Posted on 02/06/2015 12:37:53 PM PST by daniel1212
In this case there is hardly any major co. not on board.
You can go to Podesta’s outfit Center for American Progress and look at their donor list.
It’s a who’s who of American business.
They’re attempting to purchase amnesty.
Their slogan might now as well be "You can now move around the HIV country."
that’s his partner reading...that he married!!!
Common sense would tell anyone just figuring out which is which speaks volumes all it’s own. Sheesh!
The Eagle needs to be praying with it's people"
This is a really good discussion, thanks.
Lott {Abraham's Nephew} was visited by the angels. The men of the town came to Lott's door demanding that Lott hand them over so they could rape them. Lott refused likely for two reasons. They were his guest and as such he was responsible for their safety under his roof. Lott despite his acts afterward was not as far gone as the citizens of those two towns.
Lott offered them up us daughters instead and they were refused. Under the angels protection before GOD destroyed the cities they escaped. Lott, his wife, and two daughters were simply told not to look back upon the city. Lott's wife disobeyed.
Morally how wrong is the practice {action upon homosexuality} seen? Lott's daughters afterward got him drunk twice and conceived children. While evil and wrong it wasn't to the degree of acts in Sodom and Gomorrah. Can anyone reasonably believe a nation embracing and encouraging homosexuality will not be judged for it? GOD is the same today as He was in the days of judging Sodom & Gomorrah. So are His judgments which we are very in danger of facing as well.
Allowing and tolerating Homosexuality is not a wise or healthy act for a nation. It is an abomination that will lead to destruction of that nation. No government decrees can change that stone cold fact.
You are referring to this passage:
Daniel 11:37
He shall regard neither the God of his fathers nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall exalt himself above them all.
It is not that he has no desire for women but that he has no regard for the desire of women. The women in this case are not the object of the desire; they are the one’s desiring. But what is it that women desire as distinguished from men?
Christ sheds light on the meaning of the passage under discussion in the Olivet Discourse:
Matthew 24:19
But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!
The desire of women is referring to child bearing. After the abomination of desolation, the Anti-Christ will betray the Jews and massacre many. He will not treat pregnant women or those with babies differently, except maybe to target them.
There are rules of warfare that most nations agree to follow such as not targeting civilians. Generally, most today would regard targeting pregnant women and nursing mothers in combat to be war crimes. But the Anti-Christ will do this.
Casual reading of the passage could lead to the impression the phrase has a homosexual connotation, but the Bible is always very explicit when addressing that issue. In this case it is referring to something else.
In Hebrew the words for neighbor and enemy are spelled the same way. There were marks ADDED LATER to distinguish the words, but when they were originally written you had to tell the difference by context.
That’s why Christ addressed the “love your neighbor, hate your enemy” doctrine in the sermon on the mount.
The good Samaritan illustration is actually about salvation. It was addressed to a lawyer who was hostile in asking the question, “Who is my neighbor?” Christ’s answer was so compelling that He completely refuted the lawyer’s premise with a surprising and unexpected conclusion.
Christ was teaching how love is the fulfilling of the Law. But this illustration was not addressed to disciples but to someone publicly challenging the Lord. Generally it is a bad idea to use anecdotal evidence when entering into a debate because your opponent can always twist the illustration and turn it on its head to make a counterpoint.
After Christ describes a robbed and wounded traveler not being helped by religious leaders passing by, the traveler is helped by a Samaritan. Samaritans were despised by the Jews. The Samaritan helps the Jewish crime victim. This alludes to something similar that actually happened in the Old Testament.
The lawyer is probably listening with the technical legal question in mind as to who the “neighbor” technically is in Christ’s story. When the story ends, the obvious question would be “which person who passed the victim was keeping the law to love your neighbor?” The lawyer was probably prepared to answer that question with various technicalities.
But Christ asked something a little different. He did not ask merely which one was neighbor. He asked who was neighbor “to him who fell among thieves”. In other words, he asks the lawyer to put himself in the shoes of the victim. The whole time he has been imagining himself as the passer by. He is evaluating if the priest broke the Law. He is evaluating if the Levite broke the Law. But Christ asks Him to evaluate who his “neighbor” is from the perspective of the victim.
The problem the lawyer had was pride. He did not see his need for salvation. He saw himself as a law keeper. He needed to realize he was the victim of sin- hurting, bleeding, and dying. So, in concluding His argument Christ suddenly turns the tables and changes the perspective. Put yourself in the shoes of the victim. The lawyer wanted to be able to pick and choose who his neighbors were so he could be selective about the person to whom he shows love. So Christ asks whom he would pick as neighbor if he was the victim.
Obviously we would all pick the one who helped us. But if the Samaritan is our neighbor when we need his help, he must also be our neighbor when he needs our help.
The point is that neither we nor the lawyer have actually kept God’s laws. We are sinners - victimized by sin, dying and in danger of eternal judgment. Christ pictures Himself as The Good Samaritan. They ridiculed Him by calling Him a Samaritan (implying He was fathered illegitimately). He wore the slur as a badge of honor. Christ was after all only Jewish on His mother’s side. His Father was God, not a man. He was also despised and rejected by His own people.
Philippians also instructs that Christ has now become every nationality and ethnicity because He indwells all of them.
In order for us to receive Christ’s free gift of salvation, we must first realize we have broken God’s laws and see ourselves as the hurting and dying victim of sin in desperate need of help. Desperate people cannot be picky and choosy about who we receive help from.
Seeing this can allow a person to see his or her need for a Savior.
The Gospel is pictured in the story as Christ describes treating the wounds with oil (the Spirit) and wine (symbol of the blood of Christ). Christ died on the cross in our place to pay for our sins (breaking the laws of God). This fulfilled the prophecies of scripture, and also when He was raised again from the grave of the third day, He was seen by witnesses. He gave the gift of the Spirit after He ascended into Heaven with a promise to return with a reward for His followers. In the story, the Samaritan leaves the recovering victim with an inn keeper who is paid (church equipped to minister through gifts of the Spirit), and promised that the Samaritan will come back and pay the inn keeper any other money owed (picturing Christ’s return and His reward being with Him).
The Good Samaritan does answer the question of who is our neighbor, but it also addresses our deeper need for salvation through the message of the Gospel.
Possibly so, though I don’t think ‘this type’ of desire is meaning pregnant mothers.....
...”for he shall magnify himself above all”...As the verse continues..... so in context he simply is too busy with his self-importance to bother....no sexual desire for women perhaps.
The verse goes on...“But in their place he shall honor a god of fortresses”...
Which sounds like he’s focused on Military and Power...so likely spends much on a military buildup.
Hitler considered himself far too important to give much regard to women and many woman sought his attention, though he had Eva as a mistress, who was more like a child in her behavior and personality than a woman.
It is called collaborating. There is a difference between loving your enemy and collaborating, giving pearls to swines ready to trample you. That is not teaching your enemy anything but letting your enemy whither in sin.
Frankly I do get where you see unXhristian ill intent on what I wrote.
http://biblehub.com/mark/6-11.htm
Christ advise to forget those intent on deatroying you and your help.
When people support gays, whatever, they are “enemies” trying to proselytize, competitors, but when a company goes actively supporting their bashing of Christians, it is when you have become soulless and reject the holy Spirit for greed. There is no way for such the eventual self destruction and hell,mand it is no use feeling bad about it like Lot’s sister turning into a nostalgic pillar of salt for Soddom.
I might say Christ is even more adament than I am since He says to remember them as being bad people.
Tou do not test God. Unless you are islamist, then you do not believe Christ would come down the cross using His powers to give charity to those whipping Him. Nope, He let them accomplish their unjustice in the fullest of light for sake of the few with eyes who could see.
Tempting God as Southwest airline is doing, supporting gays bashing charitable Christians while making their beds with islamics cutting the gays head off and the Harlot Southwest shameful airline in bombings will not get “sympathy” from God. It shall be accomplished, and to reject that is going against God.
Lot comes across as a weak-willed immature somewhat carnally minded Christian, who seems to have simply decided to live in Sodom due to what he saw as materially positive, and was reluctant and hesitant to leave the doomed city, and afraid to go to where God told Him to go.
However, we never see him as having a rebellious spirit, and who was troubled by the iniquity of Sodom, had 2 virgin daughters while the others were married, and insisted that the strangers accept his hospitality, and risked the life of his own virgin daughters as well as his own, naively trying to reason with them.
His desperate offer of his 2 daughters is scandalous, and likely reflects the lower status of women (as in the parallel account in Jdg. 19) , yet perhaps he reasoned fornication was the lesser of two evils, or thought they would also be sobered by this offer and refrain from their demands to sodomize the men, which, to his credit, he wanted to protect them from all costs.
Lot is fearful to escape to the mountain as the Lord instructed, but rather then defiance he humbly beseeched the Lord for 2nd options, which is granted but Lot still soon ended up in the mountain anyway.
He does allow his unholy but desperate (it seems to be childless then was considered worse than death, in stark contrast to today) daughters to ply him with drink, which while excusable, yet he has just lost wife and all else, and had no place to go or work yet.
And if the text says that he did not know what he was doing in this condition with his daughters, then we must accept that he did not. But as per the proverb, ‘An inheritance may be gotten hastily at the beginning; but the end thereof shall not be blessed,” (Proverbs 20:21) the end of this scheme was not.
My comment was merely an explanation of the story of the good Samaritan. If we were to try to identify those in the story who represent the evil of things like homosexual activism, only the thieves and robbers would suffice.
The religious leaders merely failed to rescue the wounded traveler. The robbers actually did the wounding. Christ is not teaching to pretend evil does not exist or that we should compromise with it.
Loving our neighbor as ourselves requires opposing these destructive perversions which harm everyone exposed to them. There is no such thing as homosexual rights or freedoms. It is never right nor are those who engage in it free. It is slavery to sin.
Please do not post any Associated Press or Getty Images photos.
Tribes of gehon, not even selected naturally, but selected for hell eschatos.
OK.
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.