Leaderboard

One Black and One White Texas Cop Posts Photo Slamming ‘Black Lives Matter’ That You’ve GOT to See! 12Aug, 2015by Warner Todd Huston Two cops in Texas, one black and one white, have the perfect photo to destroy the argument of the anti-human “black lives matter” crowd.

I think I understand what people/society wants, but what does the serial killer, the protesting/rioting/looting people of Ferguson want? You had stated that the unrest will continue untill there is real change. And that is why I asked the question - what change do you or the protesting/looting/rioting people of Ferguson want?

...in reading the above, the "class" that first came to my mind were the Greenpeace protesters who made such a spectacle of themselves and caused a lot of problems on the Willamette River here recently. The police and Coast Guard didn't do anything to them, even though the problems caused were terribly disruptive and dangerous to the community... And then we just had a protest group of Black Lives Matter (just can't use the BLM initials, as I read it as Bureau of Land Mgmt). Most of the protestors were white from what I could see. I noticed that things turned nasty on Facebook when people's comments started being directed specifically at black protestors. That's when the "ignorance, lack of initiative," and "missing fathers" started being the jousting arrows. The police didn't do anything to the protesters blocking traffic here either, the Police Chief stating they were using discretion. I think that was the right thing to do - there's no reason to light the fuse to the powder keg. To be quite honest, I'm fearful of protesters. It doesn't matter what they are protesting. It doesn't matter what their race is. When someone breaks the law through civil disobedience, it wouldn't take much to push it over to indiscriminate criminal behavior.... My "fear", though, is rather fickle, as it was the result of civil disobedience on the part of women that gives me the right to vote today... "a time and a place," .... "a time and a place"... for everything under the sun...

You are speaking in riddles. Can you talk more plainly so that someone like me can understand?

I don't know any serial killer to ask, but I have you. My guess is that a serial killer would think that society would like for him to stop killing.

I'm not saying you are saying that. I'm referring to BW's point about BLM really meaning ONLY BLM.

The air has changed in our area; it has that clean, crisp smell of fall. That is a good thing, but the shorter hours of sunlight is not a good thing.

I am a strong supporter of Adventist education for at least grades 1-8. I believe more needs to be done to make this affordable and accessible. The schools we have need to be promoted more among our churches and should be involved more with the churches. The facts in the NAD are not pretty. While our denomination is growing in number, the number of children attending our schools is decreasing in number. I have mixed feelings about it once kids get to high school. High school grades are very expensive and undeniably take money away from other ministries. Many churches have been very successful with after-school programs for their high school members. Some evangelical churches even train their high school students to be missionaries. The high school years are a time when many children start questioning authority. While it is good to protect them from the world, the strict rules at Adventist high schools can turn a child's attitude against the church. I have two children and two step children. All four of them are attending a non-denomination Christian school. The grades are 6th, 7th and 9th. I have two 7th graders. I didn't force my 9th grader to go to the school but gave him a choice between public school and this private school. He wanted to get into a charter school for medical careers but it was full so he decided to go to the Christian school.

Looting ,burning,stealing ,destroying property of others leads to safety,housing,jobs etc how?

Safety. Housing. Jobs. Income. Work-life balance. Life satisfaction. Health. Education. Community. Environment. These are the things that matter to all people.

I do? Why would I be asking you if I knew what the protesters/rioters/looters want? The right to vote? If you are of age, just go and register. The right to marry whomever? The anti-miscegenation laws have been done away with. The US Supreme Court has even struck down anti-same sex marriage laws. Segregation laws? Gone. Discriminatory housing rules? You can now go and live/buy a house wherever your pocketbook can take you. There is not a position in the USA that is not open to all Americans except for the presidency which is only open for the US-born. So what do the protesters/rioters/looters want? No only the right to protest but also to riot and loot?

1John 2:18; 1John 2:22, 1John 4:3; and 2John 1:7 are the only verses that mention "antichrist" specifically; and all of them match Tom's questions rather than Scuba's proposition. I think as one studies deeper into things, they become more complex and convoluted rather than simpler and more clear. The basic message of the gospel is summed up in the most memorized verse in the Bible - John 3:16 - and Romans 10:9: "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved;" and those basic truths are pretty much common to almost all Christian sects. We don't need a Greek or Hebrew lexicon or EGW to understand that. As I've said before, I believe that Jesus would have us look for ways to INCLUDE other believers in our fellowship rather than how to EXCLUDE then through peculiar doctrines that complicate the gospel message.

The day you honor seems a tricky test. Jews still honor Saturday, the seventh day. Yet they clearly don't follow Jesus Christ. Numerous devoted followers of Jesus Christ do not keep Saturday as Sabbath with no intent to dishonor Him by doing so. Many of them specifically keep Sunday and follow and worship Jesus Christ. Why is it not honoring any other day than Saturday, the seventh day? Why do you think that followers of Antichrist only honor Sunday, the first day? What do you call anyone who denies that Jesus is the Messiah? What do you call someone who denies that Jesus came in the flesh? Do you think that there is only one antichrist? (Hint - see if you can find in Scripture where the word "antichrist" is used.)

Homeschool. I know its not possible or even desirable for some families and each family is so different that it has to be a personal family choice. However, I could not bear to send my kids to boarding school and those I know who went encountered difficulties in many areas. A local 1-8 Adventist school, day academy, or an e-link to a boarding school would be my second choice. I worry where our Adventist colleges are headed, too.

Protesters are people. You know what people want.

I'm not sure what you are saying in this sentence. It's truthful that they are shot? "The thing about playing nice because you are a pastor ..... ::Nuff said. Stepping away from that topic, carefully!::" Again, I'm not sure what your point is. "It kind of reminds me of the song from the 70s, "You're so vain" by Carly Simon. Many are so vain, they think that the topic of racism is only about them and can't even see they are participating in the continued practices of racism." BW, Is this you talking? Who raises the subject of women and their abuse of men at every opportunity? Come on son, have some insight. Recently, you confirmed in another thread what I suspected. Something which is understandable. Your passion for men's rights comes from you own experience and struggle. To others it seems like a unfounded preoccupation but to you it is a painful reality. Can you see any parallels?

And what are the changes you or these people are looking for? As I see it, the issues raised by the M Brown incident is very simple - if/when confronted by law officers who are risking their lives to protect society, is it asking too much for a citizen to comply? If the officer is guilty of misdeed, then pursue it through the courts. That is far safer than confronting an armed person!

Greg, Oh, that more Adventist pastors and evangelists believed this were actually true. Sadly, too many do not believe this and sometimes I think the majority are of this opinion. One of our most influential evangelists who is regularly seen on our TV networks once chastised me, telling me I should know better because I would not accept his use of Ellen White's writings (not misuse -- this was one of the areas in which her teaching is in direct contradiction to scripture) to prove his viewpoint was right and the scriptural view was wrong. Worse, the man had just spent 5+ minutes of his sermon excoriating pastors of other denominations for teaching falsehood that could easily be proven to be falsehood by reading the next verse, then in this instance he promptly started teaching falsehood that was proven false by the very next verse AND he used Ellen White as his proof. Many pages of exchange and bible bible study in the matter would not sway him. Finally he simply said, "My God would never do such a thing." And there we reach the crux of the problem We none of us worship the God of the Bible; we all worship gods of our own making, either after our own image or in an image we wish we could emulate. Most of us will not allow anything to sway us from this worship. We will ignore any bit of evidence that does not support our personal god, and we will pull any other bit of evidence out of context and spin it however necessary to "prove" our god is right. Three quotes from Ellen White have become extremely common fixtures in my exchanges with Adventists on this subject. These three quotes prove that these people do not really believe in Ellen White, they simply use her for their own purposes:

Megyn Kelly, who works for Fox. Megan Fox is an actress.

Samie, Your first reference here is another that I had intended to include in my response to you, so here I guess I'm preaching to the choir, so to speak. As I have pointed out repeatedly Christians waste a lot of words because they do not know the New Covenant, either in its statement or how it works. The New Covenant says, The New Covenant is, "I will write my law on their hearts." Paul said of those gentiles in Romans 2:14, 15, "who show by their works that the law is written on their hearts." By their visible works these people show that they have already received justification by faith in the blood of the lamb, even though they have never heard of the lamb and have their names written in the Lamb's Book of Life even though they have never done the work the church normally claims is necessary by saying, "I accept Jesus Christ as my personal savior." That "work" as you so accurately call it is not necessary to their salvation and the proof of this is that God has already proceeded to the second step under the New Covenant and started writing his law on their hearts. I know many who have been doing the work multiple times over the years but have constantly resisted God's every effort to write his law on their hearts. These are people you have referenced in the cite from chapter 9.

I am more or less in the same camp as Joe on what I do on Sabbath. Since my job can easily consume me during the rest of the week, I like to do things that I simply do not have time to do during the week. Relax. No need to be in a hurry. Hanging out with friends, enjoying a good meal, not feeling rushed to get something done or be on a schedule. I think faithfulness to the commandment mostly means putting aside the work I do to make a living. From there, it is about doing things that are enjoyable, that bring joy and happiness to others and to the day. Playing with the kids when they were little. Riding bike, hiking, stopping to smell the roses. I don't see a need to stress over things I shouldn't do.

Sounds like the first connotation is "a god"; like satan, or krishna or dagon. I would respectfully submit that Jesus is more than "a god". He is the exact representation of the Father. Jesus said "if you have seen me, you have seen the Father". The Father granted to Jesus all authority and power. Jesus is God as in the 2nd connotation. This is the last I will post on this. Trying to reason with you is like trying to empty the ocean with an eye dropper.

Wiggle, wiggle! Aren't you the one who asked earlier "how do we know whether God condones those who worship of Jesus or not?" God may not condone those who worship Jesus; but He must condone the worship of Jesus. Is or is not Jesus God? Jesus accepts worship several times in the NT. If He is not God; and accepted worship, He is evil. If He is God and accepts worship of Himself; that seems to be condoning worship. It is true that Muslims did not invent the word "allah". Christians and Jews did not invent the word "god" either. Many ancient Middle Eastern pagans (many of whom were children of Abraham) worshipped false "allahs" (IOW, false "gods").

Here is a talented young man!! I only delve in this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/meet-the-youngest-living-master-penman_55c91007e4b0f1cbf1e60326?cps=gravity_5053_1776149331304020291&kvcommref=mostpopular

My mother won an award once for her penmanship. But she only wrote, she didn't do swirlies and stuff.

I wonder if it is wise to have a president rather than a council of elders. Any time there is a titular president, focus is placed on the man. We see this in the US federal government, where originally the president was to be a figurehead, with real power concentrated in Congress. It didn't take long before all eyes were on the presidency. In the British Parliamentary system like we have in Canada, the Prime Minister is intended to be "primus inter pares", or "first among equals". It didn't take long before the PM became "first without equal". With our "presidential" system at the GC, all the talk about San Antonio was: Ted Wilson's election; the WO vote and how Ted Wilson "won"; and how Ted Wilson will deal with the aftermath. The world expects to see a man at the head of every organization. To the world, Obama, not federal Congress, not the 50 states, and not the people, are the USA. To the world, Tim Cook, not the board of directors, not the shareholders, is Apple Inc. To the world, the Pope, not the Bishops, not the priest and certainly not the faithful, is the Catholic Church. Is it necessary to have "someone in charge"? Would the work of the GC be chaos were there no president? Does the local church with a council of elders absolutely need to elevate one of their number to the position of "Head Elder"? Since the church is made up of imperfect humans, must we follow the human way of organization by always having one person as the "boss"?

Reply to B/W Photodude What a gorgeous, rare bird! On very, very rare occasions, I will see a Piliated Woodpecker. They are the common woodpecker's Goliath. I have found clear plastic bird feeders that attach to the outside of a window with suction cups. When I fill those, our cat thinks we have subscribed to "Feline TV" especially for him! It keeps him mesmerized for hours and hours upon more hours. The birds learn he is no threat and taunt him a bit. Every once in a while, I will hear a thump against the window and know that our cat thinks the "Feline TV" is interactive. He gets his pride hurt, but will be back to watching them again in no time!

To, perhaps clarify a bit as to where I am: People are interested in both Danny Shelton, 3-ABN and Linda. I Do not consider it inappropriate to post something about any of them. That is why I posted a link to the REVIEW article about Danny becoming the President of 3-ABN and his planned mission to London. I intend to do the same about Linda, when I have something that I think would fit. I believe that shortly there will be a book available that some may want to read. If so, I will post a notice of its availability. But, I will not allow this thread to be used to open old wounds on either side. And, there is much that I will not post that I may be aware of. Danny, Linda, 3-ABN are part of the past history and present family of Adventism. To the extent that it is appropriate, it is fine to post news related to current events.

Yes, it's possible, but challenging, for various reasons. To mention a couple, the medium itself lends itself to being easily misunderstood, as one is missing things like voice inflection and body language, the result being that posts can come across one or two degrees angrier than what the author may have intended. It's also easy to misunderstand someone as being sarcastic when that wasn't there intention (I think that happened with us). Being limited only to printed words makes it a challenge. Another challenge is people who post tend to have agendas, which I don't mean as either a good or bad thing. It's simply that there has to be some reason that leads people to want to discuss, and often it's because people have things they want to share, and there can be a challenge to put on one's "listening hat" as well. But in spite of these challenges, I've learned a great deal from these discussions.

Regarding a national Mike Brown day, I don't know about that...several people in Columbia, MO tried to establish a Darren Wilson day, but that didn't get a great reception either.

Last night was much less violent than the night before. Protesters did shut down a major highway in a rather strategic place and time yesterday. Several arrests were made. I hope that today is a bit more peaceful. I spend a lot of time worrying about my 91 year old grandma who lives even closer to Ferguson than I do. She likes to get out of the house to go to IHOP and Walgreens. When tensions are high, there's no telling what may happen to her if she's on her own.

I know this is a topic that was posted in July, but I just read it and it helped me out today. Cool article!

If the Everlasting Covenant (aka New Covenant) was made with Abraham and the Old Covenant didn't start until the people allegedly responded "rashly" in Exodus 19, then what do you do with what Moses taught under the New and Everlasting Covenant regarding Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread in Exodus 12? "Now this day will be a memorial to you, and you shall celebrate it as a feast to the LORD; throughout your generations you are to celebrate it as a permanent ordinance." and "You shall also observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread, for on this very day I brought your hosts out of the land of Egypt; therefore you shall observe this day throughout your generations as a permanent ordinance." Since God instructed the heirs of Abraham living under what you call the New and Everlasting Covenant (and before the Israelites allegedly concocted the Old Covenant) that Passover and Unleavened Bread were to be observed throughout their generations, why don't all the current heirs of the New and Everlasting Covenant observe Passover and Unleavened Bread as instructed by Moses for people living within the New and Everlasting Covenant? You seem to be judging the Israelites against a standard that is not taught in Scripture. Earlier you said that "God's covenant with Abraham had everything anybody would ever need", but where in God's covenant with Abraham (or anywhere else in Scripture) did it teach the Israelites that it would be "rash" or arrogant or somehow wrong to commit themselves to obey whatever God would tell them to do? According to what you say, the Israelites needed to know a better way to respond to God, but God's covenant with Abraham didn't provide them with the necessary instruction that you are now offering now thousands of years after the fact. You allege that they should have answered differently, but where do we find where God taught them a better way to answer? By what Scriptural standard do you condemn the Israelites? Where is the "Thus says the Lord" that shows that what the Israelites response to God's offer of a covenant in Exodus 19 was anything less than a good answer? If those people of Israel were brought before a righteous judge for speaking "All that the LORD has spoken we will do," what passage of Scripture would the Judge use to accuse the people as you have done? Where does God give us the prerogative to speak ill of the Israelites for their response? God himself actually judged the Israelites quite differently than you have in regard to the whole Sinai experience. In Deuteronomy 5 after Moses has retold the experience of the Israelites at Sinai he says, "The LORD heard the voice of your words when you spoke to me, and the LORD said to me, 'I have heard the voice of the words of this people which they have spoken to you. They have done well in all that they have spoken. Oh that they had such a heart in them, that they would fear Me and keep all My commandments always, that it may be well with them and with their sons forever!" (Deut. 5:28-29) Notice that God does not lament that the people spoke the wrong words, or that they spoke rashly, but rather God laments that the people don't yet have a heart to actually do what they have spoken. Throughout Scripture it recounts the errors and rebellions of the people of Israel when retelling the story of the Exodus, but not once does it mention that the people responded poorly when God offered them the covenant at Sinai. If the lesson is as important as you allege, it seems that God's Word would actually say so. What you are teaching regarding the Israelites response actually reflects very poorly on God himself. Jesus taught that we should go directly to people who offend or sin against us (Matt 17), but you are teaching that God himself does not do that with his covenant people the Israelites, but instead God neglects to ever tell the people themselves that they said something wrong, but rather God waits thousands of years to inform strangers that the Israelites answered incorrectly in Exodus 19, even though God had never actually taught the people to respond any differently, and even though the chosen people were supposedly already living under the New and Everlasting Covenant where God has promised to embed his Law in the hearts of the people so that when they respond spontaneously as the did in Exodus 19 they will automatically be obeying God's will. What I hear you saying is that God's New Covenant failed for the Israelites in Exodus 19, so we can therefore criticize them for being "rash". You seem to teach that God is quite fickle. If God's New and Everlasting Covenant that was given to Abraham failed the Israelites so miserably, without God ever letting them know that they spoke incorrectly, how do you know that the New and Everlasting Covenant is not also failing you miserably when you at one time sang a hymn that expresses an intention to obey God or follow Jesus? Will you find out thousands of years later that you're hooped because you said something wrong when the preacher asked you if you wanted to enter into covenant with God? What you seem to be teaching goes against Scripture in so many ways.

Because Scripture shows that God makes better covenants that build on His previous covenants and promises. In a sense, the promise of the Messiah that God gave to Adam and Eve was all they would ever need for salvation in Christ. Yet after the flood God gave to Noah and the animals the covenant of day and night, seedtime and harvest, with the rainbow as the sign of the promise that the earth would not be destroyed by water again. Then God gave a better covenant to Abraham and his descendants with the sign of circumcision. Then God gave a better covenant to the Israelites at Sinai, with the Sabbath as a sign. Later, God gave a covenant of peace and an everlasting priesthood to Phinehas the grandson of Aaron and his descendants. Later God gave King David a covenant of a lasting throne, a covenant that Jesus inherited but has not yet been implemented. Then God gave Jeremiah the prophecy of the new or renewed covenant. None of these covenants annulled, replaced, or changed any of God's preceding covenants. God's covenants can be trusted. Scripture also shows that God proceeded to make a covenant with the Israelites in the very next chapter. According to Scripture the "New Covenant" is not fully in place yet, for part of the "New Covenant" promise says, "They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," (Jeremiah 31:34) I suspect that some of your neighbors do not yet know YHWH. Indeed one of the last things Jesus commissioned his followers to do was to go make disciples and to teach all nations the same things that Jesus had taught the original disciples. So as long as we are still working on that commission, the New Covenant hasn't been fully implemented, yet there are already first fruits of that covenant visible in God's people.

There is a fake bacon that is called Striples. I'm not sure who makes it, but it will be in the freezer section of the grocery store. I like to make BLT's with it, it's delicious.

Oh give me a break! Every opportunity you get you'll post something negative about black folks and then you expect me to play nice because I'm a Pastor. Get real! Read Matthew 23 and see what derogatory looks like. "When the outcomes of the action are determined by race, then it is racism. You are not the only person who has any understanding about what racism is" If you can't understand the difference that race makes when using the N word then you have not begun to understand what racism is. Check out the thread that deal with talking to white people about racism.

I concur with not allowing this thread, or any other one for that matter, BASH Danny or anyone else involved in 3ABN or any other ministry.. there are sites for that, this is not going to be one of those.

So true. When I encounter folks like this I tend to suspect it as being a facade, a mask they wear. Under many circumstances, even beyond the gooey ones, I wonder about what people's lives are really like, what they are really like when nobody is looking. So often people are just afraid of not being accepted if people really knew the truth. I think it really is a rare human being that is genuine and transparent in a real sense of "what you see is what you get." But we all are flawed and damaged in some way. There really is something freeing about letting go of worrying about what others might think and just being honest about our warts and insecurities. While the gooey ones may seem obviously superficial and may often be harmlessly annoying in their gooeyness, they may just be insecure and ha no ill motives other than saving face. The ones that concern me are the ones with ulterior motives, the ones that are just "playing" you for some devious purpose, manipulating you to get what they want or with a real intent to deceive.

"So, I am cool with the "N" word not being racist from one black to another, but when a white person uses the word and loses his job, that is racism." This statement seems to misunderstand what racism is or indicates resentment that a white person can't use the N word. "BTW, I would prefer if you would stop your derogatory remarks regarding the people of Kentucky or anything to do with Kentucky." I don't know anyone from Kentucky except you. I'm sure there are very nice people in Kentucky.

My suggestion... respond to all those "praise the Lord" and "amens" with an honest amen, and a smile. weep with those who weep, rejoice with those who rejoice.

Life: Thank you for your comment. In the spirit of openness and transparency and as many people here know: In the past, my involvement in issues with 3-ABN has been direct, personal and as a defender of Linda. But, in fairness to Danney, as I said earlier in this thread, the past is behind us and I am not going to allow this thread to become a bash Danney and 3-ABN thread.

Me:

Whbae: I understand. For all: This thread is not going to turn into a bash 3-ABN and Danney forum. Many people know exactly where I personally am on this issue. but, I see no need to extensively relive the past. The intent of my posts in this thread has simply been to provide current information. On that subject, I am being very limited.

It is my understanding that Jim Gilley is retiring. He ha had a long and productive life while serving our Lord. One can assume that a man as dynamic as Ps. Gilley will continue to be active in other directions. I have a high regard for the work that Danny Shelton has done through the years. Yes, there were bumps in the road and yes, Linda was a viable part of the early years. There are three sides to every story, especially in a marriage/divorce situation. Thankfully our Lord is the only one that truly knows the details. .. When all is said and done, I respect Danny for hanging in there and continuing with the work which the Lord has blessed. Many people now know the Lord due to 3ABN ... it has grown and gained capacity to reach many people who otherwise would not have heard the message. With all due respect I am reminded of "He who is without sin, cast the first stone"

God inspired a thought in my heart one Sabbath afternoon while on a sabbath hike alone, That was he wanted me to be transparent so the light and love he shines on me could be seen and reflect back to others around me. That kind of transparency is such that my wretchedness would not come between others and God's beauty as i witnessed to others of his glory.

I have agreed with much of what you have stated except this one post. The early church fathers still have to be interpreted in light of the Bible, not the other way around. The early church fathers do contradict each other in many cases.