Just for entertainments sake, let's read Romans 16:1 in the Greek.

sunistao humin Phoibe hemon adelphe on diakonos ekklesia ho en Kegchreai.

which is translated as

I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:

Then let's read 1 Tim 3:10.

de dokimazo houtos kai proton dokimazo eita diakoneo on anegkletos.

which is:

And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being [found] blameless.

Isn't it interesting that the translators, when dealing with Pheobe used the word servant in place of diakonos, and when dealing with Timothy used the word deacon.

Hmmmm.

Sadly, I'd say most don't go 'cause they're not saved. Period.  If they were, there would be a desire, a commitment that was a little more than shallow.

Even some who do go, and do get involved, are doing it only because of the wife, or maybe the kids.

Could be 'cause they aren't getting the real Gospel.

Of course, Schuller, and Warren, and Joel O have lots of guys......just a matter of getting them enthused with the possibility gospel (notice the small g)

Actually....got to admit that I'm mighty partial to real food, not that kentuck imytayshun.

Stuff like........

Chicken fried snake(with jalapenos)
Nopalitos(with jalapenos)
Jalapenos
Trail beans(with jalapenos)
brisket(with jalapenos)
fried corn (with jalapenos)
jalapenos
frijoles(with jalapenos)
enchiladas(with jalapenos)
javalina/jalapeno sausage(with jalapenos)
and bbq armadillo (or prarie dog) (with jalapenos)

Eat your heart out, colonel!!

[God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good]

If a close friend of yours, who was not a christian asked you this question:
     "If God is the creator of everything in the universe, and God supposedly did not create homosexuality, then why did he make men and men or women and women attracted to each other?"
What would you say?

One of my friends asked me a question very similar to this, and after much thought I came up with my own answers, I would love to know anyone else's answers too.
Thanks!

Gen 1:27
So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:31
And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Please note that God said that everything He made was good.

Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.

Note that God says that this is an abomination, which is the exact opposite of good.

Rom 1:19
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.
Rom 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Rom 1:21
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23
And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Rom 1:25
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Rom 1:26
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Rom 1:28
And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Please note throught he bolded and underlined parts, that God is simply allowing them to do what they want to do anyway, and He is not striving with them or trying to convince them otherwise.  They choose to be attracted to each other, and choose to give themselves up to that attraction and lust, just as Bronze explained.

God made men to be attracted to women, and women to be attracted to men....that was good (and is).  

OK – this has to be asked:  Does white buffalo taste differently than brown buffalo?  

Bronzy - How about the ‘perfect red calf’ the Jews are awaiting the birth of?  What do you figure one of those tenderloins will go for???    

It's already been born....last year, and has twice been certified as "kosher" by the rabbinical board, and once by the new sanhedrin.  And btw, the sanhedrin yesterday put out a request for bids for construction of the temple.

FWIW, there have been at least 10 white ones born in the past 8-10 years. Only one male, though...the rest have been female, and 4 of them have been to the same mother at a ranch in Ariz.

Hmmmm.......a whole passel of questions!!  I'll try to take them one (or two) at a time.

Why do you suppose our Father would want to eventually destroy the place where Iraq is?  I wonder if He finds the historical and contemporary wickedness of that area to be an abomination to Him, which is in precise contrast to His glorious peace when He once walked in the Garden of Eden.  (any Bible references?)

As noted in the previously quoted scripture from Jeremiah 50:1,
"...Bel is confounded, Merodach is broken in pieces; her idols are confounded,...", the reason for God's disgust with the area is their apparently continuing penchance for idol worship.....and not just any old idols. Bel and Merodach both were pagan 'gods', and were particularly bloody in the form of their worship, with sacrifice of children and virgins being foremost. One of Bel's names was Molech, and he is referenced many times in scripture.
Lev 18:21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through [the fire] to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I [am] the LORD.
Lev 20:3 And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.

These are just two of nine references to the practices.

Merodach was the name given by Nimrod to Babel, and is a symbol of man's monument to himself.

Why do you say that the whole earth will mourn the destruction of Iraq?

Rev 18:9
And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,
10
Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.

Note that it is the 'kings' of the earth, the leaders of nations that will be the ones doing most of the crying.  Those who have profited, whether by war, or selling of munitions, or through commercial trade, will bemoan the loss.  Very possibly (this is supposition) the major loss will be in the loss of oil. Consider that that area contains well over 50% of the worlds total proven oil reserves.

If the Bible says so, why would God want to predict our collective grief over the destruction of that part of the world?

I think the above scripture covers this one.  It's an economic thing.  Also, keep in mind, that it is not "our" (as in Christians) collective grief, it is the grief of those who are still in, and part of, this world and it's controlling influence (satan....he is the 'prince of the power of the air.')

It sounds like you are speaking of the "rapture."  If history plays out the rapture like some believe it will, do you think God would allow some saints to stay behind so they can evangelize the lost?  The reason I ask that is because when the "time of trouble" begins, there will be those who want to come to Christ, and they will be baby Christians who need tender loving care to "fill their oil lamps" and be ready for the "Bridegroom."  Who will lead them if all the Christians are raptured?

No, I don't believe that any Christians will be left behind. Why? If one is a Christian, then they are saved...not a little bit, not a little more, and not just some.....saved is saved, and not saved is not saved.  Will there by "christians" in name only left behind? Yes, because they are not saved to begin with, no matter what they call themselves.  As Bronze pointed out, there will be 144,000 Jews that are saved and sealed for the purpose of evangelizing and testifying to Messiah Jesus during the period of "jacob's trouble."

We (Christians) won't be here, because:
1Th 5:9
For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

and the time of tribulation is specifically spelled out in scripture as the pouring out of the wrath of God upon this earth, and those here who deny Him.  It is also pointed out (Daniel) as having a purpose of cleansing Israel once and for all, bringing an end to sin and completing His work of redemption.

When do you think the "time of trouble" will begin?

It begins when a dark leader (often called the anti-christ) comes to power over a confederation of nations and signs a peace treaty with Israel, 'guaranteeing' her peace and safety. More details can be found in Dan. 7 and 9, and throughout Rev.  Paul refers to this also:
1Th 5:3
For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

Here Paul is referring to the Jews, and this cross references to what Jesus said in Matthew 24

In 2Th 2:3
Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
Paul is pinpointing a sequence of events culminating in the revelation, or unveiling, of this 'man of sin', or the anti-christ.

 

Further, when it does, will it be too late to get our troops out of there? or to get visas for Iraqi's?  Since your quote above spells out destruction, what do you think the reason should be for our active-duty military personnel to maintain good, high morale while they are over there fighting and witnessing so many die?

I think most of our troops will be gone....either via the rapture, or by sudden withdrawal for some reason.  Visa's?  I think it will be too late.  The reason to maintain high morale would be directly tied to their standing with Christ....if they are saved, then they will know they are doing some good, especially in witnessing.

If those who live there were to try to find someplace else to live, where would be the easiest, safest, and fastest place/way to go?  Is America an option?  How?

I have no good advice on this....sorry.

If you write back, thank you so much!  Some of these questions have been on my mind for quite some time.  I look forward to learning but at the same time, I don't want you to feel any pressure to write back.  God bless you today!

I hope it's a little help...there is so much covered in so few words that it's next to impossible to connect all the little dots, but the picture is there.

And God bless you!!

Which one, LSD, or LDS?

Don't make no diff....LSD is nothing but LDS on pickled jalapenos.

 

[shall make her land desolate, and none shall dwell therein: they shall remove, they shall depart, both man and beast"]

Selahjoy:

I hope the following will be helpful.
First, what we now know as Iraq was originally called, among other things, Shinar.  Generally, the residents of Shinar were also called Babylonians, due to the building of Babylon, and also Chaldeans.
The modern day Iraq does not bear that much resemblance to the land are originally encompassed by Shinar, which actually extended into part of Iran, and into Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

However, in Jeremiah we see some specific words against that area.

"The word that the LORD spake against Babylon and against the land of the Chaldeans by Jeremiah the prophet. Declare ye among the nations, and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and conceal not: say, Babylon is taken, Bel is confounded, Merodach is broken in pieces; her idols are confounded, her images are broken in pieces. For out of the north there cometh up a nation against her, which shall make her land desolate, and none shall dwell therein: they shall remove, they shall depart, both man and beast" (Jer. 50:1-3).

Notice that apparently UTTER destruction is destined, in so much as that no man or beast shall inhabit the land.  Although Babylon, and Iraq have undergone much destruction through the centuries, that utter destruction has not occured.....yet.

Jeremiah also said:

"Therefore, behold, the days come, that I will do judgment upon the graven images of Babylon: and her whole land shall be confounded, and all her slain shall fall in the midst of her. Then the heaven and the earth, and all that is therein, shall sing for Babylon: for the spoilers shall come unto her from the north, saith the LORD" (Jer. 51:47-48).

This corresponds to a certain degree with the pronouncements of John (Jesus) in the book of Revelation concerning the destruction of Babylon, and how all the world will mourn her passing.

It does appear that Iraq/Shinar/Chaldea/Babylon is in for a big hit, probably occuring during the tribulation period and the battles that will occur between the beast (anti-christ/man of perdition) and the other countries that will come against him.  In particular, you should note that the "200 million" man army (China?) belonging to the King(s) of the East will travel via a dried-up Euphrates river to get to the area.

There will be a 7 year "time of trouble", but that time (the tribulation period) is decreed against (1) the Jews (it is also called the time of Jacob's trouble), and (2) against the entire world, as it encompasses the outpouring of God's wrath upon the earth.

I would suggest that the best prayers for those in Iraq would be that first, they come to know the Lord Jesus....and secondly, find someplace else to move to....

What is he?

2Ti 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Jud 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Jud 1:8 Likewise also these [filthy] dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities
Jud 1:12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds [they are] without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
Jud 1:13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever

Does he hear from God? How can he, since he denies every attribute that God has counted to Himself.

Does he hear from god? Yes, he listens to himself very well.

I often wonder what people mean when they say God has feminine attritbutes. Is being merciful and loving exclusivly feminin? Or is God part woman in some people's minds?

I don't know about in their minds, but........

Maybe the attribute part has to do with being.......

patient
long-suffering
gentle


Just look at how long our wives have had to put up with us, and that'll give you a little clue!!  

I unterstand all about their belief and the history behind it. It is the fact that they DON'T that gets to me. It is the simple thing of reading a history book.

LoL....that I understand. I guess it just comes with a combination of what someone who read part but not all skipped over and jumped to a conclusion......hehehehe........or glommed onto one verse and said "WOW", there's the whole answer!  And then they taught someone else, who didn't bother to check it out, and then they each told someone else, and............

Rabbit multiply.

Tibby:

Sorry I didn't get to conclude, but I was very busy....here's this to consider.

Modalists, in the main, do NOT deny in any way, shape, form or fashion that Jesus is divine, or that His blood is the only means to salvation, or His resurrection.....

Because of this, it is extremely hard to say that modalism is a heresy that is deserving of death....or, that those who are modalists are not saved.

In the simplest terms, the Gospel is.....believe in thine heart, and confess with thine mouth.........

They do believe....and they do confess.

While I do not personally understand how they (modalists) can maintain such a stance in the face of scripture, I do not consider them to be 'gentiles', or unsaved.....just in error, and practicing a heresy that DOES lead to other error.

Not all heresies, though, are of the type that can permit the possibility of one being saved while following a heresy.....Eunomianism and Decetism in particular.

Tibby:

Modalism was first declared heretical around 200, along with a couple of variants. following is a little info.

Sabellianism
Although the heresy was first taught in 190 by Theodotus of Byzantium and by Paul of Samosata, it  was most notably promoted by Sabellius in the third  century.  A variation was later promoted by Monarchus, and became known as Monarchianism. It denies the Trinity by teaching  that  the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not  separate persons. Instead, the monotheistic God (called a  monad) progressively revealed Himself as the creator and  lawgiver through the “office” of Father, as the  redeemer through the office of Son, and as the source of  grace through the office of Spirit. It continued through the teachings of Praxeus.

Various other "famous" teachers currently in tune with this are T. D. Jakes, Joyce Meyers, and Marilyn Hickey, although they stay away from the use of the term "modalism", preferring instead to call it "facet", or "presentation."  

 Scriptural Refutation: John 3:16;  17:22–23; 1 John 5:7–14.

I would, at this point in time, just like to say that none of you have any clue as to which one tastes best, since you have not mentioned in any way, shape, form or fashion the requirement....YES, REQUIREMENT.....that ALL chicken (pollo) must be ingested with copious quantities of that culinary delight, JALAPENO PEPPERS!!!!

[size=-2]Bunch of gastronomic illiterates....mumble, mumble[/size]