...

1 hour ago, heartstrings said:

The majority vote, in any given state, determines which candidate ALL of that state's electoral votes go to. My state, for instance, had a majority vote for Trump; so all 29 of our state's electoral votes went to Trump. I don't see how you can say votes don't matter. 

The E.C. usually votes the same way that the public majority votes, but there is no rule, regulation or law that requires them to do so.  The E.C. has voted contrary to the public majority 4 times in the past and has now done so for the fifth time in our history.  The E.C. can vote however they please and they just have.  

At last count, 59,794,934 individual voters voted for Hillary Clinton. 59,588,437 individual voters voted for Donald Trump.  That is a difference of 206,497 votes in favor of Clinton.

However, out of 538 electoral voters, 228 of them voted for Clinton and 279 of them voted for Trump.  That is a difference of 51 votes in favor of Trump.

For example, Maine has 4 electoral votes, but only three of them voted with the majority.  One of them voted against the majority.

Unless I am missing something, the majority of individual voters chose Clinton, but the majority of E.C. voters chose Trump and Trump is now the President of the United States.  One can conclude that the E.C. voted contrary to the people.  How can you still think that the votes of the majority still matter if the E.C. can ignore the votes of the majority and elect someone for whom the majority did not vote?

5 hours ago, RSS Robot said:

I’m amazed that we actually get to choose our government—the vast majority of human beings that ever lived on planet earth simply had to accept whatever government was thrust upon them. Millennia of people would marvel at the idea that we actually get to vote—what a privilege! America is a historical anomaly, and I’m grateful for it!

Thankful to live in a nation where the voice of the people is still in play—I believe we witnessed history last night as an outsider overcame astounding odds and an enormous political/financial/media machine to become president-elect—against all odds and expectations. The whole process actually restores a bit of my faith that the American political system is still a reality.

For the first time in my life, I did not vote at all in this election.  I am thrilled that Mrs. Clinton was not elected, but I am horrified at who was.

However, the above quoted statements are demonstrably false.  The people elected Hillary Clinton.  The Electoral College, for only the fifth time in our history, voted contrary to the people. 51 electoral votes were favored over 224,985 votes of the majority of the people.  In all other elections (except 4), it just so happened that the E.C. voted the same way as the people, but the results of last night's voting should illustrate how the votes of the people do not, and have never, elected a president.   

So it is clear, 538 people (currently) can vote however they please and can nullify the votes of how the majority of almost 325,000,000 people vote.

And 51 of them just did.  Ignoring the 31 who voted for other parties, 228 of them voted for Clinton and 228 voted for Trump; which cancel each other out.  However, 51 more of them also voted for Trump.  51 people vs. 224,985.  

So, stop kidding yourself by thinking that your vote matters.  It doesn't now and it never has.

A post like this casts a dark pall over all mission work. It is a poor choice of subjects when a new member makes a post like this as his first, introductory post. This person seems to have an ax to grind and exhibits no Christian qualities that I can see. His anger is freely expressed and we only get to hear one side of the story.

With respect, it is my opinion that, instead of silencing this voice, we should give him our ear, learn from his experiences and do what we can to change the attitude of many of our missionaries.

I have witnessed some of what the OP is complaining about.  He may have violated forum rules, but I empathize with him.  I know IFB missionaries who fit his description and I have  personally been on mission trips to South Africa in the past, with a non IFB church, and know that LexUS is justified in many of his claims.  I have been searching for a sound IFB church in my area for quite some time now without success because of some of the same complaints that LexUS has with missionaries.  It's obvious that he is upset about the issue and he admitted that he was writing out of anger. 

Personally, I think that post should stay.  I think the points that he raises are important enough to overlook any violations of forum rules.  Should a 911 operator hang up on a panicked caller if they use foul language?  I think it is an illustration of Romans 2:24:

"For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written."

It is astounding to watch the Catholic Church continue surpass itself in evil as each day passes.  Thinking of all of the souls that are being lead astray, breaks my heart.

.

On 11/5/2016 at 7:16 PM, RSS Robot said:

1. Remember your dual citizenship.

Our first loyalty is not to America but to our King. Patriotic as we may be, we have an eternal homeland:

“For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.”—Philippians 3:20–21

...Is your testimony to your family, neighbors, and coworkers one that shows both truth and grace? Would they find it hard to believe that you have a dual citizenship?

...These are issues where we must learn to think biblically—as American citizens with dual citizenship.

...The fact that we are dual citizens reminds us that the future is bright.

The author claims that, as Christians, we have dual citizenship, but provides no Scripture which supports such a claim.  

If you are a Christian, then you are a pilgrim; passing through a foreign country on your way home to your one and only country.

(1 Peter 2:11) "Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;”

We are soldiers chosen for battle, not to get comfortable and involved in the minutiae of this life.

(2 Timothy 2:4) "No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.”

As visitors in a foreign land, we are to obey the laws of the land during our visit, as long as they don’t conflict with God’s laws.

(Acts 5:29) "¶ Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.”

As Christians, our citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven comes first and everything else is secondary.  As pilgrims in a strange land, we must work to provide ourselves and our families food and shelter, but the true patriot loves his true Kingdom and is loyal only to his true home.

(James 4:4) "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God."

(1 John 2:15) "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”

The Kingdom of Heaven is all that there is.  The Earth, and everything in it (including the United States) will be destroyed and a new one will be created.  I love my God; not any man made flag.

I have heard it said, “Many brave men fought and died for worldly nations, but only one died for your eternal salvation."

.

11 hours ago, Rosie said:

how much do you have to pay for startmail

It's $59 a year.  There is a seven day free trial, so you can look around and see if you like it.  Then, if you do like it, you can purchase a year subscription.  I've had it for three years and I am very pleased with it.  

Google monitors and scans the contents of emails.  They claim that it is for the purpose of being able to customize advertising that you see, but it is much more than that.  Before you get any email, facebook or other social media mumbo-jumbo, you need to watch a documentary called, "Terms and Conditions May Apply." The internet is much more dangerous than people think.

I use startmail.  They don't search your emails and they are online privacy advocates.

I also use Blur (formerly Don't Track Me) in conjunction with Startmail.  You can create unlimited aliases and they will forward to whichever email address you attach to them. 

6 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Have you heard this statement?

"I don't believe in lifestyle evangelism."

I never hear any form of that statement or sentiment.  Like DaveW, I hear people stating the opposite; that they only believe in lifestyle evangelism, or, more commonly, "I just believe in setting a good example and, if they like what they see and ask me questions, I'll talk to them a little about Jesus."  I have never witnessed this happening once in my entire life.

I stated, in a separate thread, that the IFB church I was attending refused to go soul-winning and believed it to be a bad idea that didn't work.  I talk to people who talk a good talk about the importance of sharing the Gospel, but when I ask them to go soul-winning with me, they never accept.

Welcome to the forum, Mr. Owens.

.

I will pray for you.  What area are you located?

1 hour ago, Mark16 said:

I feel like a Baptist but am becoming disappointed with the huge number of Baptist who I feel are going through the motions and are condescending to people living with the Holy Spirit strong in them.  Just like I searched for what was missing in my life, I think the same is true for the huge Church I am attending.  Interested to learn what this site is about, because from my short time here it seems others may have been frustrated like me with their Church. 

I can empathize with what you are feeling.  All of us here have been witness to churches getting farther and farther away from sound biblical teaching.  It is, indeed, difficult to find a good church.  Although it seems that the majority of them are teaching heresies and are not places that are edifying, there are good churches out there.  If we are diligent, we can find them, but we must remember that we will not succeed in finding a perfect church.  Remember: the trouble with churches is that they're all full of sinners.  

Welcome, friend.

.

.

.

On 4/12/2016 at 5:49 PM, heartstrings said:

My thinking on this, is that if we had no pain, no thorns and thistles, sweaty faces, no trials and tribulations, suffering or death, we would be in a state of Godless utopia. We wouldn't need to pray or even need God at all.

This implies that, before the fall, Adam and Eve were living in a godless utopia without the need of God at all.  This further implies that, since there will be no sin in Heaven, that it too, will be a godless utopia and that we will have no need for Him.  Since such statements are considered heresy in any biblically sound, Christian conversation, would you care to clarify your meaning or recant those things?

(Genesis 3:16-19) "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. {17} And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; {18} Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; {19} In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

As far as I can see, working hard and sorrow in childbearing were consequences for sin, not rewards.  While I agree that, in our sinful condition, hard work is good for us, it is still a consequence.  We must also be careful not to re-write God's words.  He said that that He would multiply women's sorrow in childbirth, not pain.  For certain, childbirth is a very painful process, but, for all we know, it could have always been meant to be painful.  Perhaps that pain would have a more pleasant or joyful experience had we not fallen.  It also says that, "in sorrow shalt thou eat of it...."  We are not in pain when we eat things we have grown are we?  

However, even if we did interpret the word "sorrow" as meaning "pain," that would mean that pain already existed before the fall (if God was going to multiply it) and would not have been an outcome (positive or negative) of the fall.

I do not believe that we are given any cause to believe that sin is good for us.  If it was, I think God would have said, "It is not good for man to be without sin." and then would have described how He gave us sin in a similar manner to how He gave Adam a wife.  As it stands, Genesis does not recount God gifting us with sin; rather, it recounts us making a conscious choice to willingly engage in sinful disobedience.

I believe that God knew that the fall was inevitable simply because of the fact that He gave us free will.  Free will is necessary for true love to exist.  If I tell you that I love you, the only reason that it means anything to you is the fact that you know that there was always the option of me not loving you.  If that option was not there, the fact that I love you would be meaningless.  Unfortunately, along with the freedom to make loving and godly choices, comes the ability to make hurtful and evil choices.  Even though our fall was inevitable, it does not mean that we should call it good.  It reminds me of when Jesus said,

• (Luke 17:1) "Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!"

.

.

.

Some additional phrases or examples of a poor understanding of English:

• Literally - "You literally scared me to death."  (You literally need a dictionary)
• I know, right? - I'm not even sure what this means, but I hear it so frequently that it drives me crazy.
• Prolly - "He'll prolly stay home from work." 
• Epic - "Wow!  Epic beard, dude!"  No, Ben Hur is an epic.  I just have a long beard.

A brother of mine, who is an elementary school teacher, tells me that English is a living language that evolves as time moves on.  I disagree, for the most part.  I believe that the language changes because people, who don't know how to use it, abuse the language so badly that the dictionaries change the definitions to keep up with common usage.

If we look up the definition of the word "literally."  In Webster's 1828 dictionary, the word "literally," means:

1. According to the primary and natural import of words; not figuratively. A man and his wife cannot be literally one flesh.
2. With close adherence to words; word by word. So wild and ungovernable a poet cannot be translated literally

• Mirriam-Webster

1. in a literal sense or manner :  Actually <took the remark literally> <was literally insane>
2. in effect: Virtually <will literally turn the world upside down to combat cruelty or injustice — Norman Cousins>

• Dictionary.com

1. in the literal or strict sense: She failed to grasp the metaphor andinterpreted the poem literally. What does the word mean literally?
2. in a literal manner; word for word: to translate literally.
3. actually; without exaggeration or inaccuracy: The city was literally destroyed.
4. in effect; in substance; very nearly; virtually: I literally died when she walked out on stage in that costume.

Not only have they included a definition that means the exact opposite of it's true definition, they have included the new definition along with it's original meaning.  So, tell me, when a young person is trying to discern the meaning of the word "literally," how are they to do so accurately?

.