heartstrings

Way back about 1980, when I first started voting( I voted for Reagan), and I would tell folks that the Dems were communists, they would look at me like I was from another planet. But that's exactly what they are; and have been for decades, They are striving for a communist totalitarian dictatorship, and if they get it, it won't be pretty.

No love=no "Spirit" No Word of God = no "Truth" (KJV) We must have both to please God. If we only hold to one or the other, we have neither.

When I was selling sheep to Muslims, I would always ask what country they were from. They would usually come in groups of 3, occasionally just two. One thing that was interesting is you would have like one guy from Saudi Arabia, another from Kuwait, and another from Bahrain, or the West Bank, All would be speaking Arabic and acted like they were just best buds. One of the guys, from The West Bank, a Palestinian, had been educated in Morocco ( I checked out his Facebook page). So why, if all these Muslim folks can get along so well, do the other Arab countries like Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iran, Quatar, etc etc., not take in the Palestinians? Is it solely to keep them there as a thorn in Israel's side?

I keep seeing people online comparing the colors of the Palestinian flag, and other Islamic flags, to the colors of the four horses of the apocalypse. But the King James calls the last one a "pale" horse instead of "green". Am I missing something? I'm not saying their flags' representations aren't intrinsically evil(I believe they are) But I'm thinking this is a bit of a stretch. No?

Their nasty religion reminds me of this..... Matthew 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. 28Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. A woman covering herself is good in and of itself. But I want no part of conforming to any facet of any dead religion which practices, sanctions and celebrates the things Islam does.

I believe, after the rapture, that anyone who refuses the mark of the beast is part of that particular "elect". Doesn't have to be Israelites specifically.

Matthew 24 15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened. Sunday night our pastor, in reading this passage, said that the "elect" here refers to the children of Israel. I always thought it was simply believers. What say you?

I know the Jews are sinners, I know they're spiritually bankrupt and lost, as a nation. They've been that way for hundreds, thousands of years; just read your Bible. God allowed them to be judged many times and He allowed other nations to judge them like the Philistines, the Amorites, Edomites, Canaanites, Babylonians, Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Nazis etc. But each and every nation He allowed to persecute and judge the Jews, He then judged that nation for doing it. I, for one, do not wish to be counted in that number. God said He will bless those who bless them and curse those who curse them. I do believe the Hamas and the Palestinians who support them are reaping some of that judgment right now. God bless the Jews and their nation Israel.

Monday morning, I got a message from a Muslim wanting to buy a male sheep, two days after the Hamas attacks. Coincidence? I'm leery of selling sheep for any get-together where all or some may be celebrating the atrocities done in Israel.

No, it's not supposed to be a "social club" per se.. But being "social" is the whole point of "the assembling of yourselves together". Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

I drink coffee in Sunday School and leave my cup there when church starts. I don't believe it belongs in the preaching service and I can do without it for an hour. But I wouldn't attend John Piper's church regardless of whether he let me drink coffee in the sanctuary or not. He has much more pressing things to get right on, than "drinking coffee" in church.

I would rather have someone like Ron DeSantis or Ted Cruz but, I'm most likely going to have to choose between our present corrupt, senile, puppet ruler and Donald Trump. At least Trump loves his country, unlike traitor-Joe.

In a video ( I watched very little of it) Ray comfort says "nowhere in scripture do you find the apostles saying 'Jesus loves you' to sinners". Actually, Ray, one of the apostles wrote this down: Mark 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me." So, if God, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, inspired Brother Mark to write this for us to read, it stands to reason that God wanted us to know that God loved this particular sinner, and, knowing that the scripture also says that "God is no respecter of persons" (Romans 2:11) then it also stands to reason that God wants all sinners to know that He loves them as well. Understand that people will be eternally separated from God, in the lake of fire, if they reject God's love, but that in no way negates the love God has for sinners. I just don't get this "trend" of teaching "God hates sinners" and "God doesn't love sinners" or "God loves sinners but He also doesn't". I do know that God is not the author of confusion.

Proverbs 15:1 says A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. But I have read where Jesus called the Pharisees/scribes things like "fools", "whited sepulchres", "hypocrites" and a "generation of vipers". Now I seriously doubt that Jesus let it get into an arguing match but, I think this pastor was initially right in telling this policeman what he was. And the cop confirmed it. I just wish the pastor hadn't argued and that he stood his ground instead of running. What say ye? https://www.facebook.com/reel/1401798970766981

Utter foolishness. There will be lawsuits; if not already.

A person can be "locked" inside their body unable to move or speak. But if they can hear the Gospel, they can obey the command to believe and repent. Believing and repenting is not a work. It's all faith.

The way I understand it, it refers to the fact that married folks run into troubles, get on each other's nerves from time to time, and have occasional conflicts( or more than occasional). I once heard an old visiting preacher say "me and my wife have never had a cross word" and I thought to myself along the lines of......"yeah, and you'll lie about other things too".

You left out verse 9, but I believe the passage relates to this.... 1 Corinthians 7: 25Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. 26I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be. 27Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. 28But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you. Both passages indicate that it is good NOT to marry. Why? So that one can better focus on serving God and because, as 1st Corinthians 7:28 says, those that marry "shall have trouble in the flesh". But if you DO marry, you're not sinning, even though NOT to marry is good. This is because some people get along just fine unmarried while other people can't. BUT, if you are already married, you are commanded to stay married to that person at all costs unless they commit fornication which I believe includes any kind of fornication like molesting children, committing homosexualty etc.) Matthew 19:9

Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. So, if "from the beginning" men were intended to never "put away your wife", that kind of sounds like "until death do you part" right? Of course it does. God intended one man for one woman, from the beginning, and He intended it for life.

Depending on what it was, I would think that the best place for you to have brought up your "concern" was in a business meeting. That way it's brought out in the open for everyone to consider. I would NOT go to the pastor, then go to someone else just because the meeting with the pastor didn't bring the results you were after.

This man(now deceased) was a renowned economist and an instructor at George Mason University. https://www.prageru.com/video/is-capitalism-moral

Well, Bro Tony, I also worked for one of those multi-billion dollar companies wherein the CEO, COO, whatever, was making millions, I got tired of being limited to their paycheck so I quit(officially retired) and started my own company. Then, about 18 years later, I started another enterprise in addition to the first. Now, if I don't make enough money, I have no one to blame but me.

How do you "overhaul" something which sustains itself? without "regulating" it?

I prefer the word "free enterprise". But a "capitalist" system is far better than anything else that exists. Sure beats socialism/communism by a long shot.

That was posted on facebook by a dear friend of mine. Actually, no, it wasn't offensive at all. You're in a church setting, saying things you know most of your hearers agree with and everybody clapped at the end. But I can tell you how to make it offensive. Define the "nuclear family" with the man as the "head", like the King James does, and by all means relate his roles as "loving his wife", "giving himself" and "providing" like the King James does. Then don't stop short like you just did. Define the wife as being "subject" and her role as "submitting" and "obeying". I wonder of they would clap for you then? And just so everyone knows, I treasure my Wife and don't treat her like a "doormat". But many pastors treat their men like "doormats" while getting lots of admiration from some of the ladies. I wonder about such men. Maybe many are just simply afraid to proclaim the whole counsel of God? Ephesians 5[22] Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. [23] For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. [24] Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. "Nuclear families" have long been and are being destroyed because everything is out of order.