robmac68

Thread closed. After all, if there's so little to discuss, four pages is more than enough. Right?
 

Actually, Ted did not come out in favor of having a Muslim POTUS. That is absolutely NOT what he said, and his further comments later are proof of that. He was completely correct when he said that the Constitution forbids having a religious test for POTUS. That means that we don't use that as a litmus test and say, "No, you can't run." But that doesn't mean the American people can't vote against one. Cruz did not support the idea of a Muslim POTUS. He supported the Constitution.
The day after Carson made his comment, he furthered clarified. Something he constantly does. He supported bans on certain types of weapons...until he began the run for POTUS, then he "clarified" what he meant.  He said vaccinations should be mandatory and a different time said people should not be allowed exemptions for vaccinations for religious or philosophical reasons (now, not to get into a vaccine discussion, my point is that making vaccination mandatory is an expansion of governmental "authority" and control). But after he began his run, and people were coming out against his vaccine statements, he explained what he "really" meant. 
I'm tired of politicians (and Carson is one, regardless of his "outsider" status) who make statements and then backpedal, or who've had certain policies or beliefs for years and then all-of-a-sudden change their minds. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with people changing and growing. But when it's a sudden change and it's accompanied by excuses rather than admitting having been wrong about something, I don't trust it. That is why I don't trust Carson or Trump. I trust, rather, the man who admits that he was wrong or mistaken about something (example would be Cruz admitting he was mistaken about John Roberts during the debate...no excuses, just an admission of having been wrong). 
Bush was the establishment first choice. He may be bowing out soon, though, because his campaign is hurting. Fiorina and Rubio are, IMO, the next choices of the establishment. Paul has lost a lot of support because of his aligning with the establishment (beginning with his endorsement of McConnell during the primary over the constitutional opponent [who later became governor of KY, so I'm thinking he'd have had no problem winning the general] and continuing  on to other issues). Trump has seemingly blamed 9/11 on W (he didn't really, but he did say over and over that it happened on W's watch [he used the word "reign" once, which tells me a lot about his view of what he expects if he gets in...] which is true, but students of history know that it was not due to W but rather policies from past administrations) and that could potentially hurt him. I don't think Trump is going to get the nomination, and I certainly hope not.
Cruz is not perfect, but he is the best one running. A constitutionalist is what we need in there. A Christian one is icing on the cake.
 

Seriously??  If such were the case as you pointed out, we would not need the comparison that the "rich cast in much."  Many that were rich does not specify they were all lawmakers and scribes.  Rich were casting in a lot from their abundance but she cast in more.  If Jesus was pointing out they were robbing this poor widow, He would have just pointed out she gave all she had, now she has nothing.  He then goes on to point out she gave more than "all" that gave.  This was everyone giving, not just scribes and lawmakers.  He is pointing out her 100% and "all they" gave less than 100%.  This was not needed to be done if just pointing out that the scribes and lawmakers were thieves. 
And personally I don't see a widow being robbed.  Malachi 3:10&11 applies to her so she is being taken care of. 

If that is the case, it doesn't sound like there was much "fellowship" going on and she might have been better off having been booted from the membership.  The board might have done her a favor.  Maybe she should start looking for a "Bible believers fellowship" or a home church and get away from the building that houses this organized religious chaos (Acts 7:49). 

The failure is primarily with our men.

Santorum is another big government neo-con, not an actual conservative.

Amazing that in 1960 Christians were rightly warning of the dangers of voting for a Catholic yet here we are five decades later and most Christians are flocking to a Catholic (either Gingrich or Santorum) while all but a few of the rest rally to a Mormon. All the while, Christians failed to give their support to one of the Christian candidates. That's very telling about the state of Christianity in America today.

Let's hope Mitt Romney (of the false religion of Mormonism) doesn't get back in an split up the support for the other possible republican contenders. I sure don't want to end up with the voting choice (presidential) between an extreme liberal dem and extreme false religion rep.  That left no "lesser of 2 evils" since they were both so wickedly evil I wouldn't vote for either one.  I believe that's why the "Obam-ination" won last time, because conservative Christians wouldn't vote for a Mormon, leaving no choices on the table at all.  (Which is exactly what liberals want... wouldn't surprise me if they funded Romney in part because of that).   Just one more reason why I can't see our once great country coming out of this spiral down the tubes. Makes me stop and pray... "even so, come, Lord Jesus", and might I also pray "soon".
 

Just like TV, YouTube and any type of 'source' for 'info' can and has been used to promote sin and the devils ways. It's about choosing to do right, even in the times of temptations. We should strive to be 'clean' no matter what we do and where our eyes are focused.

This was in May 2012 at Victory Tabernacle Church, Hartford, AL
My daughter Jessica is singing the lead in the verses, switching to harmony on the chorus, son Jonathan singing lead on the chorus, and my very cute wife LynnDee supervising.

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
Titus 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
Get right or get left (behind).  The Rapture/"catching up"/"harpazo" is imminent.  It can happen at any time.  No prophetic signs need to occur in order for the Church to be "caught up to meet the Lord in the air" (1 Thess. 4:16-17)  We need to be looking for "that blessed hope", not for any Shemitah to happen.  Shemitah is for Israel....rapture is for the Church/the Body of Christ.

Watched The Time Changer this past week...my wife and I loved it.  I loaned it to my parents and they too enjoyed it.  

The U.S. Dept of education had the rainbow behind their facebook avatar for a while but had a lot of complaints so they actually took it off yesterday afternoon.  
The sad truth is in a statistic I heard on FRA radio:  70% of millennials are for sodomite "marriages" verses 49% of baby boomers.  That tells me too many "Christians" have been way too permissive with their children.  I was shocked to find out a lot of IFB Christians that I know personally had actually let their children make the choice to go to church or not when they reached teen years.  Their reasoning, "I didn't want to force it on them and have them rebel and turn away."  Guess what??  They've turned away!!!!  That statistic also shows the impact of public schooling.  It still blows my mind that, "Christians" I personally know, think I am a bit off my rocker for claiming that the godless institution called public school is a sin.  But look at the results.  "Oh if you rear your kids in church, public school wont have an impact"  What a lie straight from satan!  1-3 hours a week in church will never counter 6 hours a day with sodomite loving, God hating, evolution teaching humanists!

Something I brought up in my sermon yesterday, is that, until fairly recently, even many non-Christians tended to have at least a sympathetic view of believers, particularly those being oppressed and persecuted. Just common decency. True, not all, but many.  But now, homosexuality has become the 'cool' thing: many youth play with it, declaring at 12 or 13 that they are gay or lesbian, (more the girls, I think, than the boys), its cool and trendy to 'be gay'. As such, with same-sex 'marriage' not all the rage, and everyone on Facebook changing their avatars to have rainbows on them, its not only trendy and cool, its seen as enlightened and possibly the next step in human evolution. So now, to be a Christians who stands against it, means you are standing against love, against progress, against enlightenment, against all supposed good things that will make society a better place, (they believe), so now, standing against, even persecuting Christians is going to be seen as a great help to society, which cant possibly soar with the majestic New Age eagles if they are being weighed down by the Neandertals (sic) who believe in creation, God, absolute truth and hell.  Who would have thought they could actually make persecution of Christians cool and trendy?  
Also, prepare to see the new Popester begin a shift of official church position on same sex marriage. 

Unfortunately the so-called "Greatest Generation" gave us the rebellious liberal youth that worked hard to wreck America in the 60s and 70s. The Baby Boomers were even more lax with their offspring, as has those who have come since. Most children, youth and even young adults today have spent nearly their whole lives awash in liberal, secular, sinful indoctrination through public schools, TV, movies, "news", government, colleges, music and even much of what they picked up from their parents.
Sadly, in many Christian households it's not much different. Our pastor often points out that when parents say they don't want to push Christianity on their children, that they are just going to let them decide for themselves what they want to do because they don't want to influence them, what they are really saying is they don't care enough to do what's right for their children and they are going to allow the world to influence them instead, pushing them to accept and adopt the secular, sinful ways of the world. Even so, some parents just go right ahead and let little Billy and Bonnie skip church in favor of watching a movie on TV, playing video games, or engaging in some other secular matter.
It's interesting to notice that such parents will readily admit their children aren't able to make various important decisions on their own yet when it comes to Christianity they think somehow their children know enough to make the right decisions.
Christian parents complain about the stuff their children pick up and copy from public schools but they keep sending them there. Later, these same parents spend thousands of dollars to send their children to secular schools where their children learn all about how to get drunk fast, dress to quickly attract sexual attention, and receive a full dose of anti-Christian propaganda. Then they wonder why their college age darlings come home pregnant, become drunks, think Christianity is the white man's religion of dominance over women and non-whites, hold socialist and communist ideas.
We all know the "sports first" factor which infects many Christian families and leaves many pews empty and Sunday school seats unused because children involved in every sport under the sun, even during church hours, is far more important than the state of their souls and eternal destiny.
We can sound the alarm, provide biblical guidance, but if the parents let it go in one ear and out the other there is little more that we can do. That puts their children at great risk and sets the stage for things to be even worse for their own children in this area. Meanwhile, the average age in most biblically sound churches today grows older each year as children, youth and young adults choose the world over the things of God.

The U.S. Dept of education had the rainbow behind their facebook avatar for a while but had a lot of complaints so they actually took it off yesterday afternoon.  
The sad truth is in a statistic I heard on FRA radio:  70% of millennials are for sodomite "marriages" verses 49% of baby boomers.  That tells me too many "Christians" have been way too permissive with their children.  I was shocked to find out a lot of IFB Christians that I know personally had actually let their children make the choice to go to church or not when they reached teen years.  Their reasoning, "I didn't want to force it on them and have them rebel and turn away."  Guess what??  They've turned away!!!!  That statistic also shows the impact of public schooling.  It still blows my mind that, "Christians" I personally know, think I am a bit off my rocker for claiming that the godless institution called public school is a sin.  But look at the results.  "Oh if you rear your kids in church, public school wont have an impact"  What a lie straight from satan!  1-3 hours a week in church will never counter 6 hours a day with sodomite loving, God hating, evolution teaching humanists!

I have been pretty sad to see all the businesses who have added a rainbow to their logo and friends who have added a rainbow to their Facebook profile.  Even the White House added a rainbow.   So much has changed since he 80s and I remember asking my Dad what AIDS was, and why it was in the news.
Religious freedom has been restricted already but it will be gone soon.  The dissenting justices even said as much.

prayed...for your dad and the man that hit him..

Covenanter,
If I am a heathen publican. Why are you on this post listening to the instruction of a heathen publican? To listen to a heathen publican is to disobey the wisdom of King Solomon, "Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causest to err from the words of knowledge." Proverbs 19:27. I preceive that you are somewhat disingenuous.
Therefore, I have come to the only reason why you are on this post is to derail my instruction, belittle the study, and disrupt the fine spirit that the other brethren have developed on this thread.

Brethren and EKSmith,
Thank you for the very kind words and encouragement. I was invited by one of the members of OnLine Baptist (as of now to remain anonymous) as they knew I normally do not do anything on the internet (I have no Facebook and am not on any other forum) but they knew I could use some good Christian fellowship. I am thankful for some of the fine Saints I have met on this forum.
The Lord Jesus said, "He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep." John 21:16 The only intention of my heart, by posting he Revelation study, was to feed the sheep. I love preaching and I love teaching and I consider it a blessing from God above when someone enjoys the learning of the scriptures.
Again, I want to thank you for the very kind words. Your prayers for this teaching ministry is a great reward in my heart.
Alan

Thanks for the recommendation, I appreciate it.

I'm very sorry that. This study has locked and hope that it can be reopened I was following as I would with my pastor teaching it. Allowing the holly spirit to speak to my heart.. Brother Alan took of his time as a missionary/pastor to share this wonderful word of God with us. Could we not humble our hearts to our lord and allow HIs word to speak to hearts. Thank you sister for posting this thread.
brother Alan is in my prayers
loving you with the love of Jesus from my heart.
 
 
 
 
 
 

prayed...for your dad and the man that hit him..

praying
 

Unless you hold to the Gap theory, in which case, Satan's sin brought death, not Adam's, despite clear scripture to the contrary. Sorry, just stirring the pot a little.

Maybe this timeline will help with some analysis?
Gen 2:15 - God puts Adam in the Garden to dress it (serve in/labor) and keep it (keep/guard/observe)
Gen 2:17 - God tells Adam not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil
Gen 2:21-25 - God creates Eve
Gen 3:1 - The serpent asks if God told them not to eat of every tree
Gen 3:2-3 - Eve says they can eat of every tree except the one and adds the requirement not to touch
At this point, there are 3 possibilities (as mentioned by several people above):
God reiterated and expounded on the command after Eve was created Adam passed on the command and added that Eve shouldn't touch it. Eve relayed the command as she heard it. God reiterated or Adam passed on the original command without addition. Eve added the requirement when talking to the serpent. Gen 3:6 - Eve takes the fruit, eat is, and gives it to Adam who also eats it.
The verse suggests that Adam was there during the encounter and he did not correct her. It is also one long sentence that lists events but does not necessarily specify time order. the entire phrase "with her; and he did eat" is actually one Hebrew word. I suppose then, it is also possible that they ate simultaneously.
Anything we come up with is obviously speculation, but it stands to reason that Eve making up the new rule not to touch on the fly is unlikely given Adam's lack of intervention or correction. Therefore, either God added or Adam added it, which means Eve did not knowingly twist God's Word. That would put the responsibility back on Adam then wouldn't it?