Posted on 04/22/2014 11:10:38 AM PDT by xzins
Instead woman already in the military ... will find themselves assigned to combat arms to meet a quota designed by a wideload Member of Congress whose most strenuous activity is the Pilates class she makes once a month.
Still, they wont be seeing the elephant overnight. Right now only a handful of the 203,000 women currently in the military can pass the physical for combat infantry or Marines. When faced with the reality that women cant pass the test, Congress and Pentagon paperpushers will change the test until they can pass.
Unfortunately, when you lower standards by definition you get substandard material. This is not to say women as a group are substandard.
The Marine Corps, which I was counting on to maintain standards, is showing signs of going wobbly. CNS News reports the Corps has delayed a requirement that female Marines do a minimum of three pullups. The postponement came after 55 percent of females in boot camp couldnt meet the standard. By comparison, only 1 percent of the males failed.
This test is important for the future of our militarys combat effectiveness because upper body strength is vital both in combat and on the front line where soldiers carry ammunition, lift the wounded, manhandle sandbags and tote weapons.
I suppose we could allow women to push a shopping cart into combat or issue spinner luggage. But that wont work either because after she fills the bag with shoes there wont be any room for equipment.
The deadline for degrading the combat arm is 2016 and as the date approaches, and the lack of qualified women becomes obvious enough for even a Democrat to see, thats when the pressure to change the test will be the most severe.
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
I’ve not shifted the subject. The subject all along has been your homosexual Christian friend who continues to live with his homosexual partner engaging in homosexual practice.
I’m saying that without repentance of that lifestyle and rejection of it, that person is a wolf among sheep.
Paul says in 1 Co 6 that homosexuals had become Christian and also says those continuing the practice will not inherit the kingdom of God.
If Jesus says that wolves will enter the flock, then we should look for wolves in the flock.
James is a discussion of a fruitful Christian life and does not contradict the gospel of the grace of God and the free gift of salvation to all who call upon the Lord as laid out in Romans and Galatians.
These less stressful rear echelon jobs are there so the front line troops can de stress for a few years. If you fill them with split tails, then the combat troops go from combat to combat with no break. In the Navy it is worse, the shore jobs have all split tails and the men end up with sea duty for years and years and have no life.
Face it, there is no good scenario with women in the military program (WIMP).
Was MS Arc known as a warrior or as an inspirational leader?
Specifics please.
;-)
That sounds like a denial of salvation to a sodomite who is living with his partner. From there we dealt with grace, faith, and "preconditions" for salvation. From your statements now, it sounds like you grant that a sodomite may become a born-again Christian. Well, that was the point of my argument.
So now it looks like you're saying even though a sodomite can be born again, he can't continue in his "gay" lifestyle and if he does...? What? He loses his salvation?
So now, at least for me, we're shifting to the issue of walking and living by the same grace by which we're saved, which for me is a different subject than I've focused on, but very important because it's the key to victory or defeat in a believer's life and is the very heart of the gospel of grace and the "faith that was once delivered to the saints" which we should "earnestly contend for" (Jude 3).
Paul says in 1 Co 6 that homosexuals had become Christian and also says those continuing the practice will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Don't miss the first thing he says, "the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:9). So the question becomes whether you can be righteous and then lose your righteousness. This begs the question, what is the Bible definition of righteousness?
It is clear that the Bible definition of righteousness is not our good works or anything that we do. "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe" (Rom 3:21-22). Righteousness is not a work of man but a gift from God. "For if by one man's offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ" (Rom 5:17).
So are we still under the Old Covenant of the curse of the law which condemns you? No, we are under the new covenant whereby " you are not under the law but under grace" (Rom 6:14) and "Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us" (Gal 3:13). What is the New Covenant? It is this: "For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he says, a new covenant, he has made the first old. Now that which decays and waxes old is ready to vanish away." (Heb 8:12). Jesus said "It is finished" and God promises He does not remember our sins or iniquities. Our continuing salvation does not depend on OUR works, but on Jesus PERFECT work on the cross - he has done it all. The Christian life is not DO, but DONE. THAT is the gospel of grace and understanding and resting in his finished work will, as Jesus promised, "set you free."
You already said he was professing to be a Christian. I wasn't saying a practicing homosexual could not become a Christian. I was saying that any person professing to be a Christian who is living a homosexual relationship out continually with a homosexual partner is probably a wolf.
And I'm saying anyone who says he has come to faith in Christ and who continues unrepentant in his sin is giving evidence of fake faith. And if he is public and proud of his sin and considers it just fine and dandy and NOT a sin, then I'm certain I'm dealing with a wolf.
You tell me...does you friend believe he is sinning OR does he think living in a homosexual relationship is OK?
All I know is that she was FEARLESS and would kick our collective @sses, LOL!
I don't know. I haven't seen him for years. But I know that that more condemned he feels about his homosexuality, the more stuck he will be. The more he feels like he's a "wolf", the tighter grip this stronghold will have over him. The condemnation of the law never delivers anyone. The law makes sin worse because "the strength of sin is the law" (1 Cor 15:56).
I also know that the more he embraces the grace of God's unconditional love and forgiveness because of Jesus, the more free he will be (Rom 6:14). And to the degree he accepts that he is the righteousness of God in Christ (2 Cor 5:21) and that God does not count his sins against him but keeps his promise that he does not remember his sins and iniquities (Heb 8:12), he will walk in victory over this bondage and "will reign in life" (Rom 5:17).
Personally, PN, I can’t help thinking you are letting your feelings interpret your bible rather than letting the words of the bible determine the bible. And you are using “grace” to hide behind. Paul clearly said, “Shall we continue in sin so that grace may abound? May it never be!” In other words, grace is not an excuse for sin.
IF your friend is living proudly in a homosexual lifestyle and affirming it as absolutely just fine, then Christians have to compare that with what the bible says about homosexuality being a sin.
Do you think that the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin?
How do you fall from grace? By sinning? No. "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; you are fallen from grace" (Gal 5:4).
I pinged you to Al Mohler’s article that’s similar to our recent discussion. Thought you’d like to read it.
God has and always will hate sin. But He Himself solved the sin problem for man by sending his beloved Son to suffer for us, because man was utterly unable to solve the sin problem. So now, "if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitiation ['victim'] for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:1-2).
PN, I firmly believe that God’s grace can save anyone God chooses to save. At the same time, the salvation of anyone telling me their former sins weren’t really sins is suspect.
That’s not salvation by grace. That’s pseudo-salvation by rationalizing my sins away....and for that there was no need for Christ to die on the cross.
Who said anything about that?
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.