Leaderboard

Gayle Tucker passed away today. My wife and I just attended a Mad About Marriage seminar about three months ago. I saw a lot of comments on her Facebook page but didn't know how sick she was or what was wrong. Her and Mike had a powerful ministry together. My mistake. I just saw the announcement today. She passed away on the 10th. When I met her she held out her hand and introduced herself. "Hi, my name is Gayle," she said. "I know," I responded. "Have we met?" she asked. "No, I just watch a lot of Adventist TV."

maybe I'm easily amused, but this fascinated me!

There is nothing true in what you have posted. The first sentence is false because nowhere does David say or imply that. You are just imposing your own misperception and misunderstanding on him. The second sentence is also false, ridiculously so in fact. Sexual orientation can exhibit as same gender orientation, opposite gender orientation or bisexual orientation to name the basic three. Being a Christian does not nullify that you are heterosexual. Being a heterosexual does not mean that one is actively engage in any sexual behavior or in a heterosexual relationship, good bad or indifferent. OK, technically I'll give you the next one since you may well know many self identified heterosexuals that are reprobates. But not all heterosexuals are as I thin you are implying. And neither are many self identified homosexuals. And that makes your last two sentences also false taken together.

DO NOT ALLOW YOUR WIFE TO ABUSE YOUR 9 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER. REGARDLESS OF YOUR DECISION TO REMAIN MARRIED OR SEEK DIVORCE. IT IS YOUR PRIVILEGE TO BE A PARENT AND YOUR DUTY TO BE YOUR DAUGHTER'S PROTECTOR AT ALL TIMES.

I am of the same mind,, I support all kinds of people, without supporting their lifestyle, I support overweight folks, which I am, with out supporting their previous dietary lifestyle, or what ever caused it, even if it is families genes. Kevin, it seems like you have reached perfection in your lifestyle, and are without any struggles at all, well done. I only dream of reaching that.

No. You do not understand. Talk to some actual human beings, instead of assuming. I have, and regularly do. I know a number of people who are celibate by choice and homosexual by orientation. Denying their orientation is denying who they are: pretending it does not exist. Your position is rigid, and it is based in ignorant assumptions that do not fit reality.

Sorry I didn't meet your expectations. The answer is yes, I did read the Snope's article and chose to believe some one closer in time and patriotic integrity. I also listened to and watched the present commander in chief on a video, read and mock the Holy Bible, specifically Words of the Holy One and knew if a person chose to ignore the morality of the King of kings, he could not be trusted with any other needful behavior for negotiating necessary morality of lasting endurance. God is Love!~Jesus saves!

That winning marble must have been in training for quite some time for such a strong come-from-behind win.

That "problem" only has power if a majority of people believe it. Even most Catholics - including Pope Francis - don't believe in the infallibility of the Pope. Concerning the immaculate conception, looking at it from a purely theological Catholic standpoint (Mary was a sinless virgin until the day she died), most Catholics don't buy it (no different than many SDA's rejecting the infallibility of EGW). Most Catholics believe Mary was a virgin when she conceived Christ (i.e., no human male was involved in the conception of Christ); but have no opinion of her virginity after that time.. I can buy that.

Okay, you had your say. What was EGW's instructions for people believing they had new light? If it was rejected after doing the above? Did she say to keep pushing the agenda or to be quiet and keep to ones self? Tests of New Light. Ellen White recommended the following specific ways to determine the genuineness of new light: 1. Is it Christ-Centered? "Does this light and knowledge that I have found, and which places me at variance with my brethren, draw me more closely to Christ? Does it make my Saviour more precious to me and make my character more closely resemble His?" 47 2. Does it Harmonize with All of Scripture? God "has given directions by which we may test every doctrine,--'To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them' [Isa. 8:20]. If the light presented meets this test, we are not to refuse to accept it because it does not agree with our ideas."48 3. Does it Produce Fruits of Righteousness? "The most convincing testimony that we can bear to others that we have the truth is the spirit which attends our advocacy of that truth. If it sanctifies the heart of the receiver, if it makes him gentle, kind, forbearing, true and Christlike, then he will give some evidence of the fact that he has the genuine truth. But if he acts as did the Jews when their opinions and ideas were crossed, then we certainly cannot receive such testimony, for it does not produce the fruits of righteousness."49 47 Testimonies for the Church, 3:444. 48 Gospel Workers, p. 301. 49 1888 Materials, 2:632. Ellen White called for the church to be open to new light. She strongly opposed the attitude that we have all the truth for our time.38 New light is not a private affair, however, for no one should claim that he or she has all the light.39 "God has not passed His people by, and chosen one solitary man here and another there as the only ones worthy to be entrusted with His truth. He does not give one man new light contrary to the established faith of the body. . . . Let none be self-confident, as though God had given them special light above their brethren." 40 38 Counsels to Writers and Editors, p. 33. 39 Testimonies to Ministers, p. 107; The Great Controversy, p. 343. For biblical support she referred to Job 11:7; Isa 55:8, 9; 46:9, 10. 40 Testimonies for the Church, 5:291.

Okay, you had your say. What was EGW's instructions for people believing they had new light? If it was rejected after doing the above? Did she say to keep pushing the agenda or to be quiet and keep to ones self?

Hi Pickle, I mis-spoke in my previous response to you. I don't agree with the highlighted portion above, contrary to what I carelessly said above. I believe that the persecution takes place during the time of (the end the 1260 days) and ends at the end of time. My original statement above indeed contradicts itself. Sorry. See how easy it is to get mixed up between the "time of the end" and the "end of time" (at least for an old guy like me)? I can't address your point, because I don't understand what your point is. I see nothing in 2Thess. 2 that contradicts my assertion. To me, Paul says "don't believe that the Day of the Lord has already come or is imminent - It cannot come until the man of Lawlessness (be he the Pope, the Mahdi, or someone else) fulfills his role ." I believe that the 70th week of Daniel is cut off from the previous 69 weeks and occurs at the time of the end. It seems to me that Paul is also cutting off the 70th week and sending it down to the future - beyond the time of the apostolic church. First of all, that phrase is in Daniel 12; but you probably knew that. I'm not saying that what I'm about to say is true; but some Commentators seem to believe the proper translation of "stands up" should be "stands aside". These commentators believe that Michael - who has been the archangel preventing satan from destroying Israel - stands aside and lets satan "possess" the antichrist; and thus carry out His attempted end-time destruction of both physical/ethnic and spiritual Israel. Of course, His attempt is thwarted by Jesus stepping back in at the 2nd Coming. I'm not saying I believe this; I'm saying some pretty smart commentators (e.g., Marvin Rosenthal) say this. As I've said before Pickle, I'm no theologian or expert in ancient languages. I'm just a guy trying to figure stuff out. I am unable to robustly address every issue that you raise. All I can say is that I am not a lone ranger in my beliefs; they are backed up by several Christian (including Messianic Jewish) scholars. Of course, that doesn't make them right; but they are far better studied in the matter than I am; and I find nothing significant on which to disagree with them.

Here are a few texts to ponder over; Matthew 16:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. Matthew 6:12 Then understood they how that he bade [them] not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. * In these verses the leaven represents doctrine, so Jesus is saying beware of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. Why? because they had wrong/false ideas about certain doctrines Luke 12:1 In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. * In this verse Luke calls leaven hypocrisy. In other words; Beware of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. 1 Corinthians 5 gives us some more detail also. 1 Corinthians 5:1 It is reported commonly [that there is] fornication among you. * There was sin amongst this group of believers/church 1 Corinthians 5:6 Your glorying [is] not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth. * Leaven in dough raises and expands throughout the dough. Sin was in this church as was likened unto leaven. The leaven of sin if not kept in check, could have moved through the believers. *For that person to keep the feast (Passover/unleavened bread) who had sinned would have to 1/ Repent and could keep the feast with the believers or .... *2/ Follows the council in the scriptures: 1 Corinthians 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. * 2/ The believers were not to keep company with the sinning persons and were not to eat with that person, in other words they were not to partake of the feast of passover/unleavened bread if they would not repent. They were to put out/away from their company that sinning person. * As verse 12 says the believers judge persons that are within their church. **So leaven can mean, wrong/false doctrine, hypocrisy, all sin. 1 John 2:1,2 "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world."

What a shock! She worked side by side with her husband Mike Tucker right up till the last. They had a great ministry together.

My husband's health issues require medication. Many are in the same position. He never had a sick day or a prescription for the first 40 years we were married. A birth defect we were unaware of caught up with him and he began having strokes by age 60. He also has afib,COPD and a aneurysm in the aortic heart valve. He needs to have an MRI every 6 months to monitor that. Because of his other health issues they don't want to repair it and the hole in his heart until or unless it increases in size. It was a little unsettling to have to have our Dr fight medicare to have it more than once a year. How long before they will decide that his life at this age doesn't have enough value to approve it twice a year. Prior to the mess with Obamacare there wasn't a question as to twice a year. Many people that have taken exceptional care of their health run into situations that require medications.

AS usual, drivel and falsehoods are being posted as facts. When will it ever end. If the above poster wants to be taken seriously on any subject, they need to do some fact checking and stop that knee jerking all over the place! This was so easy to check that my guess is that truth was not desired, just plain old trash talking!!

See my response in red embedded in the quote above. I liked your post here, Pickle. It didn't feel like an argument; it felt like a respectful exchange of ideas.

Elijah the prophet spoke uncomfortable truths to King Ahab. Essentially, the king banished Elijah from interacting with him or anyone else in Israel for three years and six months (James 5:17). In the end, the truth still came out. Kevin has posted much truth. I may not always agree with his style, but who am I to say God is not behind it? Elijah forced his entrance, uninvited, before the king to speak God's message to him--angering the king. I would have to echo Gamaliel's wisdom on cases like this one: "Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God." (Acts 5:38-39)

When Todd married this woman, she could not have been the "horrible person" that he claims she is now. What caused the change? There is a natural law that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. I would suggest to Todd to fiirst examine his relationship with his wife and how to mend it rather than finding ways to end it. Has she received the love and affection and attention that she craves for and deserve? I see nothing in the op that an attempt has been made to get to the root of this dislike for the 9 yo. Breaking/wrecking anything is always easier than restoring something which takes more time & effort. If the root cause is not dealt with, it's a guarantee that it will raise its ugly head again into the next relationship. Here is a tremendous opportunity for growth for all involved and to show the power of grace at work.

I've been clear, you've been willfully obtuse, I'll be leaving.

Then I reckon you don't support anyone. That would mean anyone of any type, as all of us are sinners. In your world one would have to be a perfect specimen of humanity. David was kind in his remarks about the above statement. Ignorance sometimes knows no boundaries. Ohhhhh....your statement just applies to gay people, I get it!

Have I specifically said that I condone and support homosexual activity? Or have I said that I support homosexual people? There is a difference, and your continuous accusation that people here are doing the former when they are doing the latter does not do you credit.

As I understand the Bible, the only legitimate cause for a divorce is fornication/adultery (see Mt. 5:32). However, separation is always allowed. Unless your spouse has committed adultery, you are not free to divorce her and to marry someone else. But you may certainly separate from her for awhile. In Mrs. White's writings, we find an additional circumstance or two where she accepted someone's remarriage without fornication being the cause of separation. For example, in one case the wife had become insane on account of the measles having gone to her brain and was committed to an insane asylum, leaving the five children with no mother to care for them. When the husband remarried, some church members complained, and Mrs. White said "Let them alone." Obviously, that was a special case. I can think of a few other special cases that might be cause for a divorce/remarriage, but only a very few. Your question implies, however, that you are not following the Biblical command which says "husbands love your wives" (Eph. 5:25). If you loved her, you would never call her a "horrible person." Women need affection and love. Your wife may simply be lashing out at your daughter on account of her own emotional starvation from affection. As a loving husband, you have the privilege and duty of commanding your household to be obedient to God's will, leading your family by your own righteous example. Separation/divorce should always be a last resort--the furthest thing from our minds in trying to solve a problem. No one is perfect, and perhaps no two people are perfectly matched. I have often wondered about the honesty of couples who claim to have never argued. As the minister said in a wedding I recently attended, arguments are natural, and will sometimes occur, but how they are handled is the important thing. He urged the couple to follow the Bible in resolving their disagreement and forgiving each other before going to bed that night (see Eph. 4:26). Very good advice.