Jesus condemned the teachers of homosexuality being ok

[MLD Woody]

The govt isn't driving this change. The will of the people is. Hence the poll data I posted earlier.

 

 

 

And again, still no actual reason given to make it illegal

[Westside Steve]

The govt isn't driving this change. The will of the people is. Hence the poll data I posted earlier.

 

 

 

And again, still no actual reason given to make it illegal

Of course it never was illegal.

But I understand you need to keep the strawling man alive.

WSS

[calfoxwc]

yes, the court drove the change, forcing the redefinition of Real Marriage.

 

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

 

not what obamao wants it to be after he lied about it.

 

before you deny it, you can save face here:

 

https://youtu.be/S5L2LMJcRIg

 

"mic drop"

[MLD Woody]

I don't give a shit what Obama said. I can think for myself (I know that concept may seem strange to you).

 

1) Why are these changes happening? Shifting public view. The govt may change laws, but that's after the people ask for them to be changed. Again, look at the polling data I posted. It is clear which way the majority leans.

 

2) And again, I still have not heard any reason to not let gays marry. Mostly just "I think it's wrong", which means nothing. Do you have an actual argument here, or no?

[calfoxwc]

yes, but you are the only stupid dumbfook birdbrain asswhole on this board,

so why bother?

 

go sit on your beak, woodpecker.

[calfoxwc]

"mic drop"

[MLD Woody]

You've reverted to full 5 year old mode

[calfoxwc]

and yet that even if that were true, it would be light years ahead in

terms of development over you, woodypeckerhead. You want to

be an oline "poop on threads" birdbrain, you pay the price.

 

"mic drop"

[tiamat63]

He's doing the mic drop thing too much.

[calfoxwc]

yet, I have never? done it before?

 

and it's only in one thread. I think.

[OldBrownsFan]

yet, I have never? done it before?

 

and it's only in one thread. I think.

 

"mic drop"

[One Post]

He's doing the mic drop thing too much.

Lol

[MLD Woody]

You get into a spot where you have nothing to add. Nothing to refute what I say and nothing to add on your own. You're waiting for the next article on The Constitution but it isn't there. The solution? Repost the same thing! Then say mic drop. Brilliant

 

 

You may now post the same thing again

[BrownsKidd]

Cal, your rhetoric is about as bad as ISIS at times. What is your point? Also, I would say that your understanding of the OT and NT and how the over-arching theme of all Biblical texts points to Christ is missing entirely. How do we think Christ would handle Homosexuals today? How do you think he confronted them back in the 1st Century? Christ took the OT and flipped it inside out. Christ revealed who God really is, and that is because man still had a limited idea of God and his nature.

I know that the Christian idea of the "Bible" being completely infallible is up there and equal to the same concept that Jesus is God (even though the bible never says of itself that it is perfect or infallible and most text in the bible that speak of scripture are only speaking of the OT), but one must understand that the OT, even though inspired by God and the Holy Spirit, is written still by men who did not completely understand God. This led to text, laws, rules that clearly depicted God in the wrong light. If the OT and the depiction of God is absolutely correct, why did Christ come and reveal a new law and a new kingdom of God. Why isn't the OT more Christ-like?

 

Yes, Homosexuality is sin, so is the plank in your own eye. So is the glancing at the Victoria's secret display in the mall a bit too long. So is gluttony. So is pride in your own religion. So is pornography or envy, jealousy, covetousness and the list goes on and on. Yet, your platitude on an internet forum does very little to represent Christ and His Kingdom in a way that I believe Christ would approve of. Ranting from the rooftops that Gays are bad and according to OT law should be put to death is a narrow narrative absent of Christ Kingdom awareness. Good luck with your religion.

[MLD Woody]

Oh shit. Christian slam

[calfoxwc]

Well, Brownskidd, you sound like a racist rapist nazi.

How's that for a bounceback? Sorry if you got mad, but it's your fault you are.

Your stupid claim that I proclaim that gays are bad makes you look like pee wee herman, Brownskid.

 

Ask anybody on the board except for the dimwitted birdbrain, woodypeckerhead - I have said many, many times

that I have worked with people who were gay, more than a few times in my career. I have run meetings with

people who were gay. They never knew, to my awareness anyways, that I knew. They never telegraphed it

knowingly, and most? of the time, I was surprised to find out from a mutal friend. Both make and female, btw.

 

I always, always, treated them just like anybody else, I treated them the same before and after I found out.

Gays are people, too.

 

So, that's rotten egg of your rambling right there. I do defend Real Marriage, and the gov forcing all Americans

to redefine it, is wrong. Real Marriage is between a man and a woman. An institution, among other things, that

ascribes responsibility to take care of, and be responsible, for biological and adopted kids, etc.

 

Now, civil unions would have done that. I believe in leaving people alone. Let gays and goths and nose ring

and lizardpeople be who they are, who they want to be. Just leave me along, too.

 

Ah, but there is the problem. The left demands to not leave other people alone, while you had better leave them alone.

 

I was fine with civil unions. Just create it, and run with it. Makes sense. Gays should have the same legal protections, etc.

that Married Couples do. Call it a "civil marriage" maybe.

 

But to politically and legally demand that all of America CHANGE THE MEANING OF A WORD shouldn't stand.

Ranks up there as stopping a grade school child from silenetly praying at lunch.

 

The left is due for a rude awakening. And, btw, your nonsense about "What would Chist do..." is okay, until

you ignorantly assume Christ would have done your will.

 

That's another problem - you hard core, all in libs believe you are gods and your emotionalism rules.

 

Vote for Trump. We surely need CHANGE from the leftist direction we are going in.

[BrownsKidd]

Well, Brownskidd, you sound like a racist rapist nazi.

How's that for a bounceback? Sorry if you got mad, but it's your fault you are.

Your stupid claim that I proclaim that gays are bad makes you look like pee wee herman, Brownskid.

 

Ask anybody on the board except for the dimwitted birdbrain, woodypeckerhead - I have said many, many times

that I have worked with people who were gay, more than a few times in my career. I have run meetings with

people who were gay. They never knew, to my awareness anyways, that I knew. They never telegraphed it

knowingly, and most? of the time, I was surprised to find out from a mutal friend. Both make and female, btw.

 

I always, always, treated them just like anybody else, I treated them the same before and after I found out.

Gays are people, too.

 

So, that's rotten egg of your rambling right there. I do defend Real Marriage, and the gov forcing all Americans

to redefine it, is wrong. Real Marriage is between a man and a woman. An institution, among other things, that

ascribes responsibility to take care of, and be responsible, for biological and adopted kids, etc.

 

Now, civil unions would have done that. I believe in leaving people alone. Let gays and goths and nose ring

and lizardpeople be who they are, who they want to be. Just leave me along, too.

 

Ah, but there is the problem. The left demands to not leave other people alone, while you had better leave them alone.

 

I was fine with civil unions. Just create it, and run with it. Makes sense. Gays should have the same legal protections, etc.

that Married Couples do. Call it a "civil marriage" maybe.

 

But to politically and legally demand that all of America CHANGE THE MEANING OF A WORD shouldn't stand.

Ranks up there as stopping a grade school child from silenetly praying at lunch.

 

The left is due for a rude awakening. And, btw, your nonsense about "What would Chist do..." is okay, until

you ignorantly assume Christ would have done your will.

 

That's another problem - you hard core, all in libs believe you are gods and your emotionalism rules.

 

Vote for Trump. We surely need CHANGE from the leftist direction we are going in.

I don't know what to think about that rambling.

 

I do agree that Civil union should be allowed, as you do. But we should understand, that the word "Marriage" has no spiritual value, at all. So what if our government says, "let's call it marriage". So what? What does that do on any spiritual plane of existence? Nothing. Let people call it marriage, no skin off my back, yours or anyone else's.

 

What should be realized is that government recognition of anything, does not validate it spiritually. A signed legal document means nothing in a spiritual sense. Marriage has and will always be a commitment between two people, that's it. The government got involved because the government saw opportunity.

 

Think of it like this. When are a man and a woman married? By today's westernized tradition it's after the marriage certificate is signed and then a person licensed to oversee the marriage signs the marriage certificate. Where, in this process, is it spiritually binding? There is nothing in that Bible that tells us how it should be done, and if we look to tradition, which tradition is used? IMO, as said earlier, it's a commitment between two people and their witnesses. Most marriages have used witnesses as a way to validate the social marriage of two people. Then, the consummation of the marriage sealed the deal between the man and the woman. That is when, I believe, at least according to Jewish tradition (which Christianity would be closely related) is when the marriage is spiritually binding.

 

But, even then, divorce was allowed in ancient OT.

 

How our government defines marriage is okay with me. I don't have to accept it, nor do I have to agree with it. Marriage is only a word and its secular defining means nothing spiritually.

 

I say all that to say this. We are living in a post-Christian society, and I would argue that we were hardly ever a Christian nation to begin with (see the treatment of indians, slaves, immigrants, etc.,). There is no politician that will usher in an era of Christian morality, so thinking trump somehow will change 'Murica is vain and wishful thinking.

 

A good example of someone that lived his fullest while living in a carnal society is that of Daniel. Daniel managed to live and prosper during the Babylonian period, along with Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. The babylonians were FAR from Jewish. Yet, Daniel through his life and example flourished and was blessed. Do you think Daniel was blessed because he fought against secular meaning of a word? Do you think he prospered by spouting religious rhetoric in public venues in his time?

 

We don't have to agree with what the government does, but we do need to live a life that is an example of what our God is.

[calfoxwc]

you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?

 

How can we be "post-Christian" when there are Christian churches all over our country?

 

check this out::

 

US Christians numbers 'decline sharply', poll finds. The number of Americans who identify as Christian has fallen nearly eight percentage points in only seven years, according to a new survey. Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans identified as Christian in 2014 - down from 78% in 2007.May 12, 2015

 

so it was a bit over THREE FOURTHS of our country, per the poll, and now it's a bit less than 3/4ths?

 

we're "post-Christian" like obamao was supposed to be "post-racial" ?

 

nonsense.

 

check this out:

 

http://www.soundvision.com/article/wedding-statistics-in-the-united-states

 

here do weddings take place?

80 percent of weddings are performed in churches or synagogues

that makes your claim that there is nothing spiritual about Real Marriage?

and Daniel, in all his exploits, was always true to Jerusalem - he was saved from the lions

he was cast to, by an angel, if I remember correctly.

Your points are inaccurate. the worst claim is that we were never a Christian country because

of slavery etc. Is that like you think no one is a Christian because we all sin?

That we weren't made in God's image because we look different?

Your post needs a lot of work - your opinions don't match your listed attempts at justification.

[LogicIsForSquares]

you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?

 

How can we be "post-Christian" when there are Christian churches all over our country?

 

check this out::

 

US Christians numbers 'decline sharply', poll finds. The number of Americans who identify as Christian has fallen nearly eight percentage points in only seven years, according to a new survey. Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans identified as Christian in 2014 - down from 78% in 2007.May 12, 2015

Lots of people identify as Christian because that is how they were raised. Clearly, they aren't holding any hard line about the faith or else we would be living in a theocracy.

[calfoxwc]

I disagree. Christianity isn't a political legal framwork like Islam is in so many countries.

 

"Lots of people", sure, I agree with that. But "lots of black people" hate police hate white people,

lots of white people don't trust inner blacks...

 

hardly basis for labeling an entire country on. I was just disputing his claim of our country being "post-Christian"

[jbluhm86]

 

you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?*

 

*creates thread called "Jesus condemned the teachers of homosexuality being ok" to justify stance on "real marriage"...

 

[DieHardBrownsFan]

 

*creates thread called "Jesus condemned the teachers of homosexuality being ok" to justify stance on "real marriage"...

 

another hilllwacky-cintuckucki gif.

[jbluhm86]

 

...check this out:

 

http://www.soundvision.com/article/wedding-statistics-in-the-united-states

 

here do weddings take place?

80 percent of weddings are performed in churches or synagogues

that makes your claim that there is nothing spiritual about Real Marriage?

 

You do know your "source" on marriages in churches and synagogues comes from an Islamic-based website, right? Not exactly the best way to support Christian viewpoints...

[The Cysko Kid]

Well, Brownskidd, you sound like a racist rapist nazi.

How's that for a bounceback? Sorry if you got mad, but it's your fault you are.

Your stupid claim that I proclaim that gays are bad makes you look like pee wee herman, Brownskid.

 

Ask anybody on the board except for the dimwitted birdbrain, woodypeckerhead - I have said many, many times

that I have worked with people who were gay, more than a few times in my career. I have run meetings with

people who were gay. They never knew, to my awareness anyways, that I knew. They never telegraphed it

knowingly, and most? of the time, I was surprised to find out from a mutal friend. Both make and female, btw.

 

I always, always, treated them just like anybody else, I treated them the same before and after I found out.

Gays are people, too.

 

So, that's rotten egg of your rambling right there. I do defend Real Marriage, and the gov forcing all Americans

to redefine it, is wrong. Real Marriage is between a man and a woman. An institution, among other things, that

ascribes responsibility to take care of, and be responsible, for biological and adopted kids, etc.

 

Now, civil unions would have done that. I believe in leaving people alone. Let gays and goths and nose ring

and lizardpeople be who they are, who they want to be. Just leave me along, too.

 

Ah, but there is the problem. The left demands to not leave other people alone, while you had better leave them alone.

 

I was fine with civil unions. Just create it, and run with it. Makes sense. Gays should have the same legal protections, etc.

that Married Couples do. Call it a "civil marriage" maybe.

 

But to politically and legally demand that all of America CHANGE THE MEANING OF A WORD shouldn't stand.

Ranks up there as stopping a grade school child from silenetly praying at lunch.

 

The left is due for a rude awakening. And, btw, your nonsense about "What would Chist do..." is okay, until

you ignorantly assume Christ would have done your will.

 

That's another problem - you hard core, all in libs believe you are gods and your emotionalism rules.

 

Vote for Trump. We surely need CHANGE from the leftist direction we are going in.

You can't say lizardpeople cracker ass. That's OUR word.

[calfoxwc]

I got it by listening to Coast-to-Coast a few years back.

 

you got a title of ownership?

 

nope. right back at ya, lizardlips.

[The Cysko Kid]

LiAR.

[BrownsKidd]

 

you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?

 

How can we be "post-Christian" when there are Christian churches all over our country?

 

check this out::

 

US Christians numbers 'decline sharply', poll finds. The number of Americans who identify as Christian has fallen nearly eight percentage points in only seven years, according to a new survey. Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans identified as Christian in 2014 - down from 78% in 2007.May 12, 2015

 

so it was a bit over THREE FOURTHS of our country, per the poll, and now it's a bit less than 3/4ths?

 

we're "post-Christian" like obamao was supposed to be "post-racial" ?

 

nonsense.

 

check this out:

 

http://www.soundvision.com/article/wedding-statistics-in-the-united-states

 

here do weddings take place?

80 percent of weddings are performed in churches or synagogues

that makes your claim that there is nothing spiritual about Real Marriage?

and Daniel, in all his exploits, was always true to Jerusalem - he was saved from the lions

he was cast to, by an angel, if I remember correctly.

Your points are inaccurate. the worst claim is that we were never a Christian country because

of slavery etc. Is that like you think no one is a Christian because we all sin?

That we weren't made in God's image because we look different?

Your post needs a lot of work - your opinions don't match your listed attempts at justification.

 

Cal, you're clearly biased in your opinions. If our country was EVER "Christian" the way Christ would have defined a nation, we are a horrible example. I gave you a few examples of why we were never a Christian nation and you pick out Slavery. Slavery is one yes, how we treated Native Americans under the guise of Manifest Destiny. We basically treated immigrants like slaves during the late 18th century and early 20th century during the industrial revolution.

 

Here are some quotes from Pastor, Author and Theologian from his book Myth of a Christian Nation.

 

“Consider these questions: Did Jesus ever suggest by word of example that we should aspire to acquire, let alone take over, the power of Caesar? Did Jesus spend any time and energy trying to improve, let alone dominate, the reigning government of his day? Did he ever word to pass laws against the sinners he hunt out with and ministered to? Did he worry at all about ensuring that his rights and the religious rights of his followers were protected? Does any author in the New Testament remotely hint that engaging in this sort of activity has anything to do with the kingdom of God? The answer to all these questions is, of course, no.”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

“Participants in the kingdom of the world trust the power of the sword to control behavior; participants of the kingdom of God trust the power of self-sacrificial love to transform hearts. The kingdom of the world is concerned with preserving law and order by force; the kingdom of God is concerned with establishing the rule of God through love. The kingdom of the world is centrally concerned with what people do; the kingdom of God is centrally concerned with how people are and what they can become.The kingdom of the world is characterized by judgment; the kingdom of God is characterized by outrageous, even scandalous, grace.”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

“The holiness of the kingdom of God must be preserved. If Jesus refused to acknowledge and fight for Israel as God's favored nation- even though it was the one nation in history that actually held this status at one time- how much more must his followers refuse to acknowledge and fight for America as God's favored nation" To say it another way, if Jesus was committed solely to establishing a kingdom that had no intrinsic nationalistic or ethnic allegiances- not even with Israel- how much more should his followers be committed to expanding this unique, non-nationalistic kingdom?”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

“I believe a significant segment of American evangelicalism is guilty of nationalistic and political idolatry. To a frightful degree, I think, evangelicals fuse the kingdom of God with a preferred version of the kingdom of the world (whether it’s our national interests, a particular form of government, a particular political program, or so on). Rather than focusing our understanding of God’s kingdom on the person of Jesus—who, incidentally, never allowed himself to get pulled into the political disputes of his day—I believe many of us American evangelicals have allowed our understanding of the kingdom of God to be polluted with political ideals, agendas, and issues.”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

...we must also recognize that people who have diametrically opposing views may believe *they too* are advancing the kingdom, which is all well and good so long as we don't christen our views as *the* Christian view. As people whose citizenship is in heaven before it is in any nation (Phil 3:20), and whose kingdom identity is rooted in Jesus rather than in a political agenda, we must never forget that the only way we individually and collectively represent the kingdom of God is through loving, Christlike, sacrificial acts of service to others. Anything and everything else, however good and noble, lies outside the kingdom of God.”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

“when the kingdom of God is manifested, it’s obvious. It looks like Jesus. But America as a nation has clearly never looked remotely like Jesus. There was nothing distinctively Christlike about the way America was “discovered,” conquered, or governed in the early years. To the contrary, the way this nation was “discovered,” conquered, and governed was a rather typical, barbaric, violent, kingdom-of-the-world affair. The immoral barbarism displayed in the early (and subsequent) years of this country was, sadly, pretty typical by kingdom-of-the-world standards. The fact that it was largely done under the banner of Christ doesn’t make it more Christian, any more than any other bloody conquest done in Jesus’ name throughout history (such as the Crusades and the Inquisition) qualifies them as Christlike.”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

“Jesus’ life and ministry consistently reveal the humble character of a servant. Though he rightfully owned the entire cosmos, he, by choice, had no place to lay his head (Matt. 8:20). Though he rightfully should have been honored by the world’s most esteemed dignitaries, he chose to fellowship with tax collectors, drunkards, prostitutes, and other socially unacceptable sinners (Matt. 11:19; Mark 2:15; Luke 5:29–30; 15:1; cf. Luke 7:31–50). Though he rightfully could have demanded service and worship from all, he served the lame and the sick by healing them, the demonized by delivering them, and the outcasts by befriending them. This is what the kingdom of God looks like.”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

“...we must never confuse the positive things that America does with the kingdom of God, for the kingdom of God is not centered on being morally, politically, or socially positive *relative* to other versions of the kingdom of the world. Rather, the kingdom of God is centered on being *beautiful*, as defined by Jesus Christ dying on a cross for those who crucified him.”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

“For many in America and around the world, the American flag has smothered the glory of the cross, and the ugliness of our American version of Caesar has squelched the radiant love of Christ.”

― Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church

 

And if you think that for one second Donald Trump is some moral compass that is going to put us right back on the "Christian" path, you're mistaken.

 

Christ never aligned himself politically, EVER. He said give to Cesar what is Cesar's and give to God what is God's when confronted by leaders who wanted to trick him into picking sides. THe nation of Israel clamored for a King so they could be like other nations, GOd didn't want to give them a king, but He gave in and gave them Saul. See how all those kings worked out for Israel. They were all human and had their issues and for some, their sins led Israel into captivity and bondage. But, what do some Christians like YOU, want? A political king to somehow right this "Christian" ship of a nation. Not going to happen. They are all corrupt.

 

So, let ask this, one example of Daniel (actually 4 if you count Shadrach Meshacn and Abednego), doesn't count? Why? Give me a good reason. Daniel lived under pagan rule and prospered. He would not have if he acted like you or many Christians of today. SO his example isn't good enough for you?

 

Also, our current traditions of marriage hold no spiritual weight. If so, you need to provide me some scriptural evidence to support your thesis. A governement document doens't mean jack shit when it comes to spiritual recognition.

[calfoxwc]

lol.

 

wait, lol...you beeactch about ME being biased in my opinons, (well, "duh")..

 

and then you use Boyd as your rock of unbiased opinions? LOLLOL

 

your assumptions give you false claims. and random arguments don't apply. Nobody

said anything about Jesus being political. Nobody.

 

I'll see you your ONE guy, and give you a bunch of sites where you can learn about the issue

you want to discuss.

 

About 472,000 results (0.55 seconds)

1. Bible Scriptures On Marriage - daretobedifferent.com‎
   Adwww.daretobedifferent.com/‎
   Struggling With Your Marriage? Follow God's Words & Heal Marriage!
   On-Site Training · Video Training
   Marriage Seminar/Class: Dare to be Different

Search Results

Lesson 7: God's Design for Marriage (Genesis 2:18-25) | Bible.org

https://bible.org/.../lesson-7-god-s-design-marriage-genesis-218-25

Aug 23, 2013 - This text describing the original marriage is the basis for almost everything else the Bible says about marriage. It explains God's reason for ...

[PDF]The biblical basis of marriage - The Christian Institute

www.christian.org.uk/wp-content/.../biblical-basis-of-marriage.pdf

you search the internet for sermons on marriage you will find much the same thing – hours and hours of great biblical teaching on what marriage means for the ...

The Bible's Teaching on Marriage and - Family Research Council

www.frc.org/.../the-bibles-teaching-on-marriage...

Family Research Council

As I have sought to demonstrate at some length in my book God, Marriage, and the Family: Rebuilding the Biblical Foundation, marriage and the family are ...

The Basis of a Christian Marriage by R.C. Sproul - Ligonier Ministries

www.ligonier.org/learn/.../basis-christian-marriage/

Ligonier Ministries

The Basis of a Christian Marriage. by R.C. Sproul. Some years ago, I attended an interesting wedding. I was especially struck by the creativity of the ceremony.

Biblical foundation for marriage - FamilyLife

www.familylife.com/articles/.../marriage/...married/gods-plan-for-marria...

God has a purpose for your marriage. ... Embracing God's Purposes for Marriage. Popular. Saving a marriage · Would She Walk Out on Her Marriage?

The Basis of a Biblical Marriage - Bible Truth

bible-truth.org/msg102.html

The Cherokee marriage-ceremony is very expressive and reflects this biblical truth. The man and woman join hands over running water, to indicate that their ...

What constitutes marriage according to the Bible?

www.gotquestions.org/marriage-constitutes.html

Does a couple have to get a marriage license in order for God to view them as ... There is absolutely no biblical basis for an unmarried couple to have sex and ...

A Biblical Perspective on Marriage - Christian Relationships, Marriage ...

www.crosswalk.com/.../marriage/.../a-biblical-perspective-...

Crosswalk.com

Yet, in our experience as marriage counselors, we have found that even mature believers often don't have a clear biblical basis for their beliefs. Having a sound ...

What is the Purpose of Marriage? | A Theology of Marriage - CARM

https://carm.org/what-is-the-purpose-of-marriage

Mar 18, 2014 - The purpose of marriage is revealed through the Bible which gives us a ... but when self-serving reasons are the basis of marriage, those often ...

Scriptural Basis for Definition of "Marriage" and "Family"

family.custhelp.com/.../scriptural-basis-for-definition-of-marriage-and-fa...

Where in the Bible does Focus on the Family get its definition of "marriage" and "family"? Whenever I browse your website I come away feeling excluded and ...

1. Biblical View on Marriage - Discover God’s Biblical Marriage‎
   www.otm.co/Marriage‎
   Create Biblical and Godly Marriage
   Small Group Bible Study · Bible Training · DVD Bible Study · Video Bible Study

[calfoxwc]

btw, it's spelled "Caesar".

 

You should consider your all black and white view on the issue as not helping you understand the issue.

 

According to your line of reasoning, a car is not a car if it is lacking a carb, or a steering wheel.

 

You are arguing perfection in being basically a Christian nation. All Christians are sinners, but an entire nation

can't be imperfect and still be a Christian nation?

 

come on. That is right out of liberal grade school nonsense. We are not officially a Christian nation because we

do not allow a gov-mandated official religion - that was another great consern of Founding Fathers, some of who

WERE Christians. Their goal was unselfish - FREEDOM for ALL.

 

 

Did America Have a Christian Founding? - Heritage Foundation

www.heritage.org/.../did-america-have-a-christi...

The Heritage Foundation

Jun 7, 2011 - In short, while America did not have a Christian Founding in the sense of ... to Jesus Christ and the use of Biblical principles in governing the nation,” and ..... Individualism: The Protestant Origins of American Political Thought.

 

 

Was America Founded As A Christian Nation? - Forbes

www.forbes.com/.../was-america-founded-as-a-christian-nation/

Forbes

Sep 25, 2012 - Meanwhile, those most ardently challenging America 's Christian origins wrongly portray the Founders as rank secularists. They would ...

[MLD Woody]

 

You should consider your all black and white view on the issue as not helping you understand the issue

 

I laughed