Woof 'n Worship? Seriously?

davimcg »

Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:41 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

I m thankful God gave us animals in which to see His glory and to eat: "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as {I gave} the green plant." Genesis 9:3. Amen.

'Rights Talk' Run Amok

davimcg »

Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:52 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

chicago24, What is a disability? Is being gay a disbility? Why does every disablility have to be accommodated? If I own a bed and breakfast and refuse to serve unmarried couples, is that my right? What rights as a business owner do I have? Who gets to determine those rights? Do you? Whose rights are paramount, a muslim's or a gay man's? Why aren' gay men allowed to give blood in the United States? Isn't it their right to give blood? Isn't that discriminatory maybe even "homophobic"? Are rights innate or do they come from your actions? Do I have the right to do something or because I do it do I have that right? If my rights obligate others, what rights do others have?

Please answer these on a case-by-case basis.

Catholics, Lutherans and Methodists to Mark 10th Anniversary of Justification Declaration

davimcg »

Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:31 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 3

Four hundred years of separation, hostility and debate led to an "agreement" that basically paraphrases Ephesians 2:8-9: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, {it is} the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast." Well done fellows.

Pastors to Proclaim Jesus Loves Gays at Pride Fest

davimcg »

Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:15 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 3

Definition of the homosexual lifestyle:

"Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. . . . [A]nd although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them." Romans 1:24- 27 and 32.

Verse 32 is an apt description for the homosexual agenda.

Christian-Muslim Statement Among First Fruits of 'Common Word' Gathering

davimcg »

Mon Oct 12, 2009 12:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

The second paragraph of the "joint statement" states, inter alia, "nor should they tolerate the denigration or desecration of one another's . . . founding figures . . . ." What does that mean? Because I am a Christian I do not believe that Muhammad was a prophet from God. I would think a Muslim would find that a denigration of their founder. Islam's belief that Jesus is not the son of God is a denigration to any believing Christain.

Theologically, we cannot get along. We have mutually exclusive beliefs. Additionally, the Koran commands the forced implementation of Islam, Jesus preached the complete and exact opposite. I understand what these people are trying to accomplish but their objective is impossible (I also am cynical of the Muslims at this conference due to the Islamic doctirne of Taqiyya). Bottomline, Islam is at war with Christianity and always will be. Most Muslims may want to live in peace, as most people do no matter their faith (or lack thereof). However, Koranic Islam is a doctrine of war and Muhammed spread his religion primarily by the sword.

Jesus said, "They will hate you because they hated Me first." Let's not kid ourselves, we cannot all get along.

The Cross of Christ is Not a Secular Symbol

davimcg »

Sat Oct 10, 2009 12:05 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

James Madison, one of the primary authors of the U.S. Constituion, said, "“We have staked the whole future of America’s civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future…upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to sustain ourselves, according to the Ten Commandments of God.” No Christian principles there, move along u4eeeahhh.

The Cross of Christ is Not a Secular Symbol

davimcg »

Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:58 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

Dearest u4eeeahhh, You are absolutely correct when you state, "This nation was NOT found on Christian principles . . . ." However, it was FOUNDED upon them. Your further statement that "[t]he majority wanted a secular nation free of religious institutions welding civil power and influence" is just wrong. Read Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" on the influence religion had on the individual and society in early America. Eductae yourself and stop propagating your contemporary mythology.

Christians Challenged to Be More Proactive in Strengthening Marriage

davimcg »

Sat Aug 08, 2009 12:39 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

Want to see the value of marriage. Take a walk around late at night in any neighborhood where marriage basically no longer exists. Visit the schools in those neighborhoods. Visit the prisons. Check out the welfare rolls. Peruse the poverty statistics. Read the statistics on drug abuse, dropout rates, out-of-wedlock pregnancies, abortions, STD and HIV rates, violent crime, and every other pathology that afflicts society.

If the last forty years has told us anything it's that it takes parents, a husband and wife, to raise a child. Any other situation, no matter how necessary, is still lacking.

The Culture of Offendedness?

davimcg »

Sat Aug 08, 2009 12:09 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

The best response to someone who claims "offendedness" is to point out just how intolerant he is to opinions that differ from his own.

Also, for those who are offended by this article, please try to understand Dr. Mohler's distinction between real offense and today's frivilous "offendedness".

Religious Freedom or 'Silly Prejudice'?

davimcg »

Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:39 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Mike85 - Of course churches dictate, it's called dogma. You are free to disagree (and to leave). When the government dictates, you are not free to disagree. Thus, one reason most Americans want "gay marriage" kept illegal (besides the fact that it is an abomination) is because if it is made legal, the government will start to dictate that everyone must go along with it - including churches.

Mike85, gays wanted us to stay out their bedrooms. So we did. Well, please stay the hell out of my conscience and my morality. Stop forcing your perverison on everyone.

Religious Tolerance in America

davimcg »

Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:14 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Jeez Cheisa, what an intolerant generalization of all evangelicals. Of course projection is the best way to deny ones own faults.

Gay Activists and Religious Freedom

davimcg »

Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:02 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

Alockslee, Your reading of the First Amendment is spot on. The text's stated purpose is to prevent the federal government, Congress, from creating "any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . . ." However, the U.S. Supreme Court has incorporated the protections of the First Amendment to apply to the states as well. Thus, according to the U.S. Supreme Court (but not the actual text of the First Amendment) every state must abide by the protections of the First Amendment. Therefore, your declaration that the First Amendment only restricts the "FEDERAL" government is incorrect, at least according to current Supreme Court jurisprudence.

Also, your postings about how have Mr. Colson's rights been infringed upon leads me to believe you did not read his commentary very carefully. The infringement he writes about is the State of New Jersey forcing eHarmony to provide a dating service for homosexuals. That's a state forcing an organization to act in opposition to its sincerely held religious beliefs. Thus, New Jersey has infringed upon eHarmony's free exercise of religion and, therefore, has violated eHarmony's First Amendment protections. And, if you did not know, First Amendment protections are accorded to organizations not just individuals.

Finally, for further reference, the "Equal Protection Clause" is in the Fourteenth Amendment, not the First.

Why Homosexual Behavior Is More like Consensual Incest and Polyamory than Race or Gender - Part 1

davimcg »

Sat May 23, 2009 2:10 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Flagged as inappropriate. show Hey MickeyC, here's an update for you. It turns out the motivation for killing Matthew Shephard had nothing to do with his being gay. It was the result of a drug deal gone bad. Not that it is any less tragic, which basically is the point as to why "hate crimes" are nothing but political sophistry. hide

Miss California Shares Untold Stories with Her San Diego Megachurch

davimcg »

Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:03 am Agree: 5   Disagree: 11

To Chicago24: The Bible never, not one time, makes any mention of race. Thus, anyone who used the Bible to justify miscegenation laws was either ignorant or a liar. However, the Bible is very specific about homosexual conduct - it forbids it. Furthermore, race has never had anything to do with the definition of marriage, but sex has. Every society in the history of the world has defined it as being between a man and a woman. But, Chicago24, I guess you're just smarter and more "enlightened" than every one who has ever come before you, including Jesus.

Obamamania Infects Notre Dame

davimcg »

Sat Apr 04, 2009 1:24 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

Way to spout the "false choice" rhetoric of our pro-abortion President Diana626. You have been trained well.

Is Israel Always Right?

davimcg »

Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:49 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

While I am a political supporter of Israel and support their efforts to eliminate Hamas, as a Christian, I do not believe that the Jews have a God ordained right to that land any longer. That right was squandered when its people rejected their Messiah. Additionally, God's promise that all nations would be blessed by Abraham's seed was fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. Thus, the Abrahamic covenant has been fulfilled and is no longer extant.

Having said that, I do believe in the political right of Israel's survival and, when comparing the two sides in this conflict, have no problem judging Hamas as the bad guys. In fact, Hamas is evil and evil needs to be destroyed.

So, when the question of "proportionality" arises, my response, as a Christian, is evil does not abide by the concept and, therefore, proportinality should not be an issue in evil's destruction.

This question I pose to the author: When God commanded Saul to totally destroy the Amalekites, was He abiding by the so-called law of proportionality?