Leaderboard

i believe in freedom of religion, and if someone who is gay wants to have a church marriage based on their religion they ought to be able to do it. I do not believe any church should should be required to provide gay marriage services if it is against their belief system. God is able to sort out his own. Denying others their gay marriage, wherever they find it, does not bring anyone closer to the Kingdom of heaven. Criminalizing gay marriage is not something God has called me to do. Jesus is coming and he will call all of his own from where ever they are. I will not want to be found standing between Jesus and any of His lambs. I have friends in prison ministry, they do not go there and stand around telling the inmates how sinful their conduct is or has been in order to make sure they know what is right or wrong. God's Spirit reveals to each of His own what they need to understand about their condition as sinners at each step of their walk with Him, and he does the same for me. God does not reveal to any all that he might. we are all deeper in this sin problem then we really are able to comprehend, and Jesus loves sinners. And i am so grateful i am one sinner that Jesus loves.

By God's grace and the power of the Holy Spirit in the life, anyone-- whether homosexual or heterosexual-- can overcome their sins. However, one thing is for certain: If sinners don't realize they're sinning, they won't repent and seek God's power to overcome their sins. On the contrary, they will go right on sinning, persuaded that they're doing all right-- until it's too late.

Ryan You are right, there is no such teaching. Why? There will no longer be any temptation from without because all the wicked including Satan will be no more, and no more temptation from within because the body of sin and death will have given way to a new, glorified body,

in my neck of the woods, it's very common to hear,"are you from around here?" when meeting someone new... I can't imagine anyone feeling as if someone was being aggressive or offensive by asking. The somewhat differently phrased question, "Where are you from?" isn't really aggressive, imho, but it does seem a bit rude. On the other hand, when I was going to school in Austria, a local elderly lady in the village asked me (in German) where I was from. We had a wonderful conversation because she asked... I was also asked that same question on the trains. It was because I had an accent and obviously was not a native. It didn't bother me to be asked. In fact, it was a rather pleasant way to begin a conversation...

I stumbled on the "godbeforegovernment" website this morning. There is a "Christian Flag". I didn't know that. Anyway, pastors all over the country have begun to fly the Christian flag ABOVE the United States Flag on their church properties, to send the message "one nation, UNDER God". Personally - we are NO LONGER "one nation under God". The court's decision made THAT perfectly clear. But I totally agree with the Pastor's statement, "God BEFORE government".

Gay said: "Please, my conservative friends, lose gracefully. If you claim to follow a loving God, demonstrate it by showing His love to those whose lifestyles counter yours daily. Remember that for them, too, your Saviour died—for sins no blacker than yours. My liberal friends, remember that if your open-mindedness extends only to those who share your convictions, it masks intolerance. My conservative friends, remember that you follow the Jesus of prostitutes and thieves, and if your love ends at the church doors, it masks hate. I beg for grace, from both sides and for both sides. Because your identity is so much broader than which side of this trench you claim. Your life is far too complex, too rich, too unique to be encapsulated in this one opinion. And so is every other life around you. I’m exhausted by the sneers, the jabs, the hate. I see a battlezone strewn with hurting people firing indiscriminate barbs at other hurting people. I ache for a day when love truly wins." I agree with you that if believers claim to love God and their fellow man, we need to embrace all people and all cultures and all sinners with love and compassion. I do NOT agree that all believers -whether right or wrong - are obligated to accept the revision of God's definition of marriage by a secular humanistic government. It is one thing to accept gays as they are. It is a totally different thing to condone it and celbrate it in our congregations with government-sanctioned sacramental ceremony. God has defined marriage as the union of a man and woman; and the government has no right to revise that definition or persecute people who are following thier religious liberty right to believe what they think God says - right or wrong. This is IMO a blow against religious liberty and freedom of belief - not a victory of gay rights.

Certainly I can appreciate your position, I still cannot see that if asked in a "polite, get-to-know-you" manner that it would be considered aggression. Having been in several countries and lived for a while in one I had lots of people ask my origin. Even living in this local people often ask, "Where you from?" Perhaps I am just dense and don't think of it as anything out of the ordinary.

There is a common expectation that the vote on WO will be taken Wednesday. The question to be placed before the delegates is: Shall the Divisions be authorized to decide whether or not women should be ordained to clergy status as are men. If the vote is "yes" then the Divisions would have the authority to say either yes or not. They could allow or they could prohibit. If the vote is "no" then things would stay as they are and no change would be made. A "no" vote would not prohibit women from being ordained. IOW, this is a vote as to whether or not to transfer the authority to decide to the Divisions. In a move that has not been expected by many, a "no" vote is seen as being a positive step that favors the ordination of women! It has been argued that some, and perhaps all, Unions already have the authority to ordain women. A "no" vote would not change this. On this basis, a "no" vote would likely continue the practice of certain Unions ordaining women and it has the potential for additional Unions to begin to ordain women.

I make some misunderstood posts as well sometimes. So I understand. Its hard to get people to read things in the exact way you typed it. Especially on a hot button issue like this one. But while I think your reply to me was a nice one and I'm happy that you can see my concern in that post even if it was a bit animated, I still must say that I just don't see things eye to eye with you on this issue. I certainly do think that gay marriage is a part of the persecution. Its both functioning as a means to silence bible believing Christians as well as fan the angry flames of the papal powers that will soon play a roll in the near future. You might not believe me when I say this, but I also wish some people would change the way that they view homosexuals so that more homosexuals can come to Christ without having rattled emotions and a distorted idea of their sins and who God is. But I do not think they should be shielded from the truth simply because it could potentially be a hard truth to handle for some people.

I found an honest Article here that says it much better than me. GBU Gail,Thank you for the Above! It is almost like a balm of calm when I see your posts. . And LifeHiscost.. GBU This article here might help you regarding people known as Gay. "Would you also consider those who commit adultery, murder, rape, child molestation, etc. a "sweet part" of the church (body of Christ), especially if they promote their freedom to choose that behavior will not be condemned by God (Jesus)? " LifeHicost .. of course they were always gays in church. You actually think that just the very fact someone who has same sex attraction automatically means - does not desire the Desire of Ages? Oh BOY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (its actually very regrettably common perception among too many Christians) . So much ignorance on this topic. No Offence LifeHiscost, You expose a real serious issue in our Church I'm am addressing on this post. Not laser beamed at you. I see it all over here. Deeply It shows regarding others as less than. ................................................................................................................................................ Stop Comparing Your Lust to My Sexual Orientation Admitting that I’m gay doesn’t mean I’m embracing sin. It means I’m being honest. by Matthias Roberts “Just because you’re attracted to men doesn’t mean that you should accept it.” I’ve heard the words often. “The other day, my best friend’s husband admitted in our small group that he struggles with lust. My pastor said that most men struggle with lust. Since men are naturally inclined to this, does that mean that they should just accept it? It’s ‘natural’ for them, isn’t it?” Usually, this is followed by a slight smile, as if they’ve dealt the final blow and won the conversation. The idea is fairly simple: gay people shouldn’t accept their sexuality just like men shouldn’t accept their propensity to lust. It is an argument against the idea that homosexuality is naturally occurring and thus acceptable — “it’s the way I am.” Men, according to this argument, have a strong drive towards lust. If gay people can accept their sexuality, why shouldn’t lusting men be able to act on their attractions? The connection makes sense on a surface level — both speak about sexuality, but that’s where the similarities end. Besides promoting an animalistic view of the male sex drive, this argument exposes ignorance in the church about human sexuality, and it is causing damage in the process. “The attraction is not the lust.” My sexuality, our sexualities are not lust. There is a fundamental difference here. Lust, in the sexual sense (which is the sense I will be referring to in the course of this piece), requires an attraction. That attraction is oriented toward something, usually men, women, or both. This attraction is where we get our spectrum of sexuality. But, the attraction is not the lust. It is a byproduct of our sexual orientations, not the other way around. In other words, lust necessitates sexual orientation but sexual orientation does not necessitate lust. When I was growing up, I would go to youth groups and summer camps where on certain nights they would separate the men from the women in order to have “real talk time.” We would go out into the woods, build campfires, and spend several hours talking about lust and women. We would learn strategies on how to guard ourselves against lust. These strategies were many things, but none of them were attempts to completely remove attraction to women. I can imagine the silence if someone were to raise his hand and proclaim, “I know! What if we just stopped liking girls?” In these circles, it is assumed that it’s possible to hold one’s own sexuality without lusting — that’s what we were being trained to do as Christian young men. “Admitting my sexual orientation is not acting upon it.” Yet, strangely, this idea doesn’t often carry over to homosexuality (and it’s virtually nonexistent in popular ideas around bisexuality). While many churches are now teaching that homosexual desire is not in itself sinful, the persistence of this lust argument is evidence that the message isn’t actually believed. There is pressure in many of these same churches to not accept one’s sexual orientation if it is anything different from the majority. In my teen years, I believed that if I used the word “gay” to describe myself, I would be giving myself over to Satan. Because of this, I couldn’t utter the word out loud until I was in my twenties and instead chose Christianese identifiers like “same-sex attracted.” As my friend Jonah eloquently points out in a recent piece, within many of our churches we teach that “experiencing same-sex attraction isn’t a sin,” while also telling LGBT people that they must be constantly “fighting it,” “battling it,” or “taking up their crosses.” There’s a disparity between these sentiments. As with heterosexual people, lust can be an outflow of homosexuality. But that lust is not what bisexual, lesbian, and gay people are “embracing” when we come to terms with our sexuality. Neither is promiscuity, or flamboyance, or any other thing stereotypically associated with the so-called “gay lifestyle.” By accepting our sexualities, we are naming something that is true about our experience. Admitting my sexual orientation — to myself and others — is not acting upon it. It is possible to be certain of one’s sexual orientation without engaging in sexual activity (case in point, I’ve never even held hands with someone in a romantic way, and yet I am certain that I am gay). It should be a given in faith communities, even in communities where sexual activity is reserved for male-female marriages, that there is space to admit and accept one’s own sexual orientation. For me, to say that I am gay is to say that I am sexually attracted to men. Anything else would be a lie. “Honesty should be fostered and celebrated.” The argument comparing lust and sexual orientation, and others like it, expose an ignorance around sexuality within the church. This is causing damage because it makes it difficult to have productive conversations around sexuality. If sexual orientation is misunderstood as being sinful, or is compared to something that is sinful, environments are created where it is not safe for LGBT people to bring their full experiences. We cannot turn off our sexual orientations with a switch, we cannot simply confess them and stop experiencing them, but they are something that we can hide from others. Unfortunately, one of those places where hiding is often required is in the church. To combat this, it is important for faith communities to foster understanding around what sexual orientation is (attraction towards certain genders and gender expressions) and what it is not (lust, sin). This understanding builds the ground for open conversations around sexuality, morality, and theology. Too often, I walk into conversations around faith and sexuality where it becomes abundantly clear that some people in the conversation have no idea what they are talking about. Yet, they present themselves as experts. These conversations are nearly impossible to navigate and they rarely ever produce meaningful dialogue. Without understanding, we end up talking past each other and drive each other away. Stop comparing sexual orientation to lust. Lust requires orientation. Orientation does not require lust. Coming to terms with my sexuality does not mean I am embracing sin. It does mean that I am being honest about my experience. Regardless of what we believe about what I should do with that experience (the morality question), that honesty should be fostered and celebrated. May we be people who create these spaces ....................... True words in article above.... please give it a listen and a ponder. Who knows what might Happen... ... For God to actually give you unction of His Sweet Spirit to be able to speak into the LGBTIQQAA hearts? In the future I may turn this into a thread with added input from me.

Wanted to add just one more thought. The ROLE of a "priest" included more than just making "atonement". The priests taught the Law, and governed. The Son of God can certainly remain the mediator to explain the things of God to us, and to govern us. Those were His roles in Heaven BEFORE the rebellion of Lucifer.

There are two gays in this thread who do not promote homosexual behaviour. I am sure they have both endured both support and condemnation from all sort of people. It would be interesting to read their take on what attitude non-gays could take towards them that is helpful and not harmful.

It is at fault because it is not true. That is a fatal flaw in a religious doctrine. Your post above seems to be a long way of saying that you cannot back up with evidence your claim that the title vicarius filii dei appears in Catholic canon law: it would have been much simpler to present the evidence, if you had it. I stand by what I have said: it does not exist in any credible source.

Yes - probation will close at the second coming, for those who are alive at informed that time. The SC will be the fulfillment of the Day of Atonement prophecy types. When Jesus returns there will be many who STILL could not choose Him BECAUSE they had mental disabilities, or were immature. But - I believe that Jesus will still be high priest for "the rest of the dead", who will be resurrected at the 8th millennium. I believe these will be people who lived and died in ignorance. It is only JUST that these people also, be given a chance to know God, to repent, and to enter the kingdom of God.

I don't think there is any doubt as the more freedoms we lose and the more man made freedoms are bestowed on special interests. I think gay marriage is one more step. I believe there will be gays teaching in our schools in the not to distant future. Many that define themselves as christian,SDA's included begin to circle the wagons defend the gay agenda and condemn those that don't as "pointing out the sins of others" The sin of a homosexual lifestyle is a sin that is defended by many like no other. I wonder what God believes Sunday observance has done to the meaning of His Sabbath? You can certainly make what God has ordained void in this world and heap a world of hurt on others.In the end God will win. Again a few days ago a homosexual couple ,armed with a tape recorder and approached a business they knew would turn them down,based on religious beliefs. Bet if you ask them the tremendous fines and court costs represent the gay agenda holding sway over their lives at this time There have of course been good laws ,bad laws invented by mankind. That has what do to with the question I asked you? You brought up prison ministries. If inmates responded to those ministering to them the same way supportive christians and gay/lesbians respond to any that disagree with them what would the response of those involved in prison ministries be ?

Do you honestly fear that somehow there will be a government attempt to force your pastor to perform a gay wedding? You think this is the crucible, the test that will reveal the Righteousness of God in mercy and grace, and holiness in those who live by the Spirit? Those who stand in the last day stand in Jesus alone. no one will be expecting approval for anything that they are or are not. The glory of the goodness of God towards unworthy sinners will be demonstrated, and all sincere in heart will respond, and live. When we show our love and loyalty to God in the end it will not be to save anyone. Everyone will have made their final decision, it will be to glorify God, and show what the power of the cross is able to do in fallen humanity. The existence of "Sunday Sabbath" observance has done no harm to the Seventh-day Sabbath. You cannot harm God, you cannot change what God has ordained. You can think to change, but you cannot make void what God has ordained. God is above human devising. Marriage remains what God made it to be, nothing has changed that. Bonnie said, I would hope not.But on the flip side of that do the inmates insist on those in prison ministry celebrate and to help get laws passed so their behavior is no longer considered a sin in God's eyes? Human legislation has no authority or power over God. And i cannot imagine anyone ever thinking this, except some ecclesiastical bodies like the Jews in Jesus time. People invent their way all the time, but that does not void righteousness. You not holy and righteousness without Jesus. And nothing can harm or invalidate the Righteousness of CHrist. No human culture is eternal and holy before God, that is why we depend on Jesus. There has been all kinds of laws, made and remade but they are not holy and righteous before God, whatever they are. They are Human stuff. i do not live by the legislature of my government i live by the power and love of Christ.

When all is said and done: there are only two leaders. If God is not leading, Satan must be leading.

I would guess they thought so. Are there jobs christians should not perform? I think so. They seem prepared to put their money where their beliefs are,whether others agree that it is a matter of conscience or not.No one has a right to dictate where someone else's conscience leads him

Here we go again. Who besides you has come up with the suggestion that those that who oppose gay marriage would like to see it criminalized.It would be nice if you would not keep inserting an implication here and there. Churches were performing gay marriage prior to this There has been more than one clergy faced with the demand for gay marriage against their religious beliefs This is redefining marriage to accommodate what as a group wants the definition to be. Pick your sin ......... Jesus is coming and he will call all of his own from where ever they are. I will not want to be found standing between Jesus and any of His lambs. Does this mean he will call the adulterer his own when he returns and calls him from the bed of someone else's spouse? The one caught in the act of stealing when he returns? Will those committing adultery,theft,lying,drunkeness,living a homosexual lifestyle when Christ returns be called by Him. If so it must not be true that we will all have made our decision by then. they do not go there and stand around telling the inmates how sinful their conduct is or has been in order to make sure they know what is right or wrong. I would hope not.But on the flip side of that do the inmates insist on those in prison ministry celebrate and to help get laws passed so their behavior is no longer considered a sin in God's eyes? I don't think people should be subject to the demands of the gay community when they see it as wrong either. But they are,they are losing their business and facing monstrous fines church marriage based on their religion they ought to be able to do it. The push is not for those that agree with them,it is to punish those that don't and make them knuckle under to their demands. The fall out from this will reach far beyond a gay marriage. What I find so interesting is following several SDA's on facebook. for gay marriage,yet the prospect of plural marriage becoming legal in time is beyond unthinkable. A classic response is,"Everybody knows that is wrong" Completely opposed. Is that a case of standing between Christ and His lambs.

The Holy Spirit convicts people of sin and provides grace at the same time. I am not God, i cannot convict anyone of sin and provide grace. My voice is not the voice of God. i can be about the business of pointing out everyone's sins as far as i believe and it will do neither me nor anyone else any good. i cannot provide any grace or forgiveness. i cannot measure anyone else's relationship to God. Just because i see something doesn't mean other's see it, just because i say something to them. i know God loves and speaks to everyone personally and He alone can judge, so i leave all that to God. What God requires of me is to love Him and to be like Him in all my associations as He empowers me. sometimes it involves providing for those in need, hungry, or without shelter, sometimes it is something else. God has not asked me to point our anyone's sins. God is able to do that work and offer full grace and power and love for the sinner, and this i cannot do.

Common sense, seems to me! God is Love! Jesus saves! Que sere sere. Many mole hills would be better left their original height. God is Love! Jesus saves!

No one should be shun at our churches and should be given love. But as you show all have sin that includes us all! Anyone without sin cast the first stone. In my home a person who was an a homosexual needed a place to stay. This person grew up with my grandchildren and they nor me look at him any different. When he return home he had changed and he share with me his experiences. He was raised in the church but left as some of my grandchildren have done. One is not married and lives with his lady friend who I adore. Both of these youth are doing things they were taught were not in tune with ELOHIM. However, both know my stand and have respected me. Did I talked to both about their choices, yes I have! But you don't pound them and shun them, just love them. You pray for them and leave it in the POWER of THE HOLY SPIRIT! In my youth I fail short and left the church and did things I am not happy about. My mother prayed for me and I return due to prayer. I, would you believe, used to deal in drugs before crack came out!!!! So the pot cannot talk about the kettle. What the pot does is get clean and live by example! Sin is sin but take heed with love and warning, no type of sin will make it into the Kingdom of ELOHIM! You can seemed to make it ok, or talk nice about it does not change that homosexual will not make it in as a liar, backbiter, adulterer, fornicator. smoker, drinker, dope dealer, dope taker, Sabbath breaker, unclean meat eater, trinity believer, counterfeiting ELOHIM'S NAMES and that THEY are THREE SUPREME INDIVIDUAL BEINGS and the sins goes on and on!!!!!! Get the sin out of you life before you try to move the sins out of others! Blessings!

The lifestyle, the orientation they both exist. I am not ready to listen to an openly gay pastor preach to me. It may come to that. Also, watching to gay people hugging one another in church would be disconcerting. Gays have always been in church, but they were discreet.

probably would be better to discuss the topic, rather than the people who post in it... just sayin'...

when Jesus separates the sheep from the goats In Matthew 25 he says, "34 Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me." Jesus identifies himself with the suffering, those whose needs are neglected. It is an abomination to live in plenty and do nothing for those who are destitute and perish for want of what you have laying around. He did not say, " away from me, you homosexuals." He did say "He that cometh to me i will in no wise cast out." Any sin is abomination, lying, stealing, adultery, disregard for your parents, wanton disregard for the lives of others, jealousy, hatred, murder, idolatry, selfishness, neglect of your salvation.

The Bible doesn't say anything about "orientation," but it certainly has something clear to say about homosexual behavior. The Scriptures definitely condemn all immorality as sinful, and sexual relations between members of the same gender is included among the immortal behaviors. Jesus Christ shows us that it is sinful even to desire those things. We aren't doing gays any favor by telling them that homosexual relations are not sinful.

Part of the problem with this "abomination = homosexual behavior" is that it is taking a roof texting approach that ignores how the would abomination (really Hebrew and Greek words translated as such) is used throughout Scripture. There are numerous things that are described as an abomination. Homosexual behavior is not all by itself as an abomination. Do a word search to see how frequently it is used and look at the context in each case.

You may ignore me. I will do likewise of you. But please remember that your experiences of American culture are not inclusive or representative of the experiences of ALL Americans--political correctness (as you've labeled it) or mere politeness (as I intended), can go a long way in maintaining a peaceful society. Have a peace filled life, joeb.

It would be a silly over-generalization to say that every time the question is asked that it is meant to be racist. It depends on the context and how it is asked.

The Israelites were instructed by God to let the land rest one out of every 7 years. One of the purposes for the millenium is to allow the entire earth lie at rest to fulfill that rest period.

ISIS did not block out the sound from their video of the beheading of 20 Coptic Christians. Those men died shouting "JESUS!" They died well. Here's a link to a program by "Voice of the Martyrs" https://soundcloud.com/the-voice-of-the-martyrs/muslims-finding-christ-im-sick-of-killing In this program you will hear of Sunni Muslims coming to Christ BECAUSE they are "sick of the killing". Sunni Muslims have NEVER before come to Christ. No missionary could reach them. But the terrible persecution by ISIS has CAUSED many to rethink Islam.

i cannot take any responsibility for other's self deception, but i have heard a small voice behind me saying, "this is the way walk in it." i cannot concern myself with all the voices other's may hear, some will say, Jesus is in the desert lets go hear him. I have heard the warning to not go. When the word of God speaks and anyone hears, and knows it is the voice of God saying, Behold it is I who stands at the door knocking, whoever opens the door and lets Him come in will live.

I think people are a little too sensitive in nowadays as the sensitiveness of racial problem is escalating. There are many who are just curious about you because you are not a typical caucasian or talk with slight accent, I do not consider this any offensive way. When some of my patients come to my office with a slight accent I like to ask them "where they are from" in turn they ask me where I am from. Once a park entrance, an attendant ask me "what other language do you speak?" I said Korean. She said you have a slight accent in English. No one ever asked me this way. I guess she did not offend me by asking "where are you from" , a typical way of asking. Actually, I do not mind at all about asking me "where are you from" as I am proud of being Korean. No offense. You guys may ask me any time "where are you from as your English grammar is off a little".

That is a good testimony JoeMo ... thanks for sharing! We often tend to overlook God's leading and sometimes what I consider minor miracles. We look for the big flashes and overlook what saved us from being burned.

Well, if I go into another culture I'll certainly take this into advisement. Until then? I'll completely ignore it. In Rome do as the Romans do. In my culture I'll do what is acceptable in my culture. For someone outside my own culture to enter my culture and expect me to understand all their culture mores and take offense because I don't is an unreasonable expectation on their part, not on mine. This is simply political correctness run amok, once more, for I wouldn't expect them to honor all aspects of my culture inside theirs. That would be an unreasonable expectation on my part.

Surely not .... we are all too sensitive. Golly gee, sometimes I talk in my Texan voice, sometimes in the Midwest accents, sometimes like a New England-er. It's fun when people ask < "Where you from?". On the other hand, I do raise my eyebrow at the improper English, "Where you from?" "Where you at"

Indeed there is a pattern. I have said it before,this tactic is the same my boys used to try. At least they were young kids. If one found himself in trouble it didn't take long to try to shift the focus to the wrongdoing of his brothers.Anything to prevent a discussion and focus on their current behavior. In time they learned it did not take away the consequence of their wrongdoing. The only way their tactic would have had value is if their father and I said the wrongdoing of their brother's was okay. The "sin" being dealt with didn't have anything to do condoning other behavior,nor was it necessary to run thru a list of sins we found as objectionable

Divorce has what to do with the gay marriage ruling,other than to deflect from a lifestyle you seem to enjoy. Perhaps start a topic on women bobbing their hair. Has absolutely nothing to do with He calls an abomination

That was exactly my thoughts. I also notice, he had not one bible verse to backup any statements for one way or the other.

As I recall, most of the recent SCOTUS decisions in the area of sexuality have been decisions that support homosexuality or remove penalties for homosexual behaviors. The thing that sets this decision apart from all other subjects being discussed is that it becomes an official policy and practice of this country. While divorce and adultery are other examples of immoral behaviors, they remain in the behavior of the population and are not official government policy. This new decision stand out also because it becomes a direct fulfillment of a Bible prophecy regarding the last days resembling Sodom and Gommorah. As far as God's wrath, as I read my Bible and Spirit of Prophecy, I do not really see God's wrath pouring out even because of these decisions. (I would appreciate being disabused of this idea!) What I do see in prophecy as the last days approach is that God is withdrawing protection from this earth and allowing Satan to do whatever he wishes in increasing intensity and destruction. Unfortunately, Satan has no love for anyone on this earth, not even those who are openly evil and will destroy whomever he is able to. I tend to believe that God's wrath is reserved for the seven last plagues and will be for everyone who engages in evil of any kind and who do not worship God. It is unfortunate that every plague and pestilence that occurs today is credited to God.

Gayatthefootofcross said:The United States is a country that has a massive racism problem, a massive violence problem, a massive greed problem, a massive war problem and a massive injustice problem; and you think God's going to judge you because people are equal before the law? I totally disagree with you. Have you ever lived in other country? To the contrary, American people are most generous, giving, and friendly people I know. I lived in other country. If you find other country that you think is better than this USA I do not think any one will prohibit you from emigrating to that country.

5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; 7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: 8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;) 9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:...2 Peter 1Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!....32 Remember Lot's wife.....Luke 17 God is Love! Jesus saves!

The supreme court disregards human morality and the Bible principles.

I would advise people to keep well away from the King James Version Only movement. It is openly founded on Racism and the superiority complex that G-d only gave his perfect translation of the Bible in 1611 to white people. The fact is that there were various Bibles available before the 1611 KJV, the Russian Orthodox Church are believed to have had the first copies of Bibles distributed amongst their churches for public reading. Shock horror if true, Russians are actually the chosen people not King Henry's Protestants.... The 1611 KJV and the other KJV versions that come after it also have a number of documented errors in translation which each edition has tried to correct. One thing that I learned in college is that you cannot take the 1611 KJV or any of the other KJV's and use that as a basis to translate the scriptures into a language like Russian or Chinese for example. The correct way is to make the translation directly from the texts that the KJV and other Bibles are translated from,otherwise it will not make any sense at all to the reader as you cannot anglisice words into other languages and retain context. As for SDA doctrines being reliant on the KJV, I disagree, SDA theologians are happy to debate SDA theology with any leading scholars from the likes of Fuller theological seminary and anywhere else. If they needed the KJV to prove their case it would fall over very quickly. Yet my experience in college was the reverse,. my lecturer and several of our Baptist students were advocates of the soul sleep theology of the SDA's. The SDA teaching on hell not being for eternity was also viewed favourably by several students. I supect this is because of study on the original texts as opposed to simply just study of the KJV or any other version of the Scripture.

My wife of 47 yrs and I are facing this right now, so this is a very timely question. She woke up with near total paralysis from the waist down Wed. CT & MRI showed metastatic dz (primary unknown at the moment). She had been wanting to die for several yrs because of severe pain. We had a little insight on dying well when our cat of 21 yrs died 2 yrs ago. The cat started lying on Marge's abdomen or chest when my wife's health deteriorated 5 yrs ago, even sleeping there through the night. One morning we woke up with the cat dead on her abdomen. To us dying well is dying in the comfort of one's home pain-free, and the last images one sees are the faces of those you love, not those of strangers in a strange place like a hospital. Hopefully, I'll be able to take her home and do just that.