Jump to content

HappyChristian

Member Since 10 Feb 2007
Offline Last Active Private
*****

#395553 Black Friday

Posted by HappyChristian on 02 December 2014 - 10:35 AM

I, personally, think it's ridiculous to go shopping like that - so many people. Ugh!  But, honestly, I don't think we can use it as a litmus test as to whether someone's a Christian or not...or right with God, etc. Mayhap some of the shoppers are Christians who just want to save money?  That would fall under being a good steward...and it would fall under personal liberty that so many people talk about regarding other things... :icon_smile:




#395551 I Want To Leave Home.

Posted by HappyChristian on 02 December 2014 - 10:31 AM

CC, I think Kitagirl hit the nail on the head.  Find a place to go for a few days and let your hubby know - lovingly.  And while you are letting your lungs rest, spend some extra time with the Lord to strengthen you for your return.

 

I am sorry that things are still so bad for you.  




#395492 Shalom!

Posted by HappyChristian on 01 December 2014 - 09:23 PM

Welcome.


#395473 Matthew 24

Posted by HappyChristian on 01 December 2014 - 08:13 PM

The Holy Spirit indwells individual people. the temple referred to in 1 Cor. 6 is the temple of our individual bodies. Not the corporate body of our churches. Context shows that from verse 15 on into the 7th chapter.


#395464 Pilgrims & Baptists: The Little Known Connection

Posted by HappyChristian on 01 December 2014 - 07:58 PM

Actually, John, states were supposed to to be republic in style of government as well. Just making a point. :-D

And there is no proof to back up the claim that the vast majority of "Christians" at the founding were secular and thus not really Christian. Many probably were. But vast majority? Not likely.

Other than that, I mostly agree with you, John.


#395442 Matthew 24

Posted by HappyChristian on 01 December 2014 - 05:10 PM

Because Paul said "Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit," not once but several times. Your corporate body that is, the Church.

:umno:




#395410 Pilgrims & Baptists: The Little Known Connection

Posted by HappyChristian on 01 December 2014 - 11:32 AM

GP -  I would never say that the Pilgrims were not admirable. Even the Puritans were (to certain points).  Both groups came to the New World for freedom of religion. The Puritans wanted a theocracy based upon Israel, while the Pilgrims wanted a bit more freedom (no king telling them how to worship, in other words).  These two groups opened the way for others to come seeking freedom, that's for sure.  However, as John said, too many of the groups seeking freedom wanted freedom the way they wanted it run.  

 

A great, very quick, read about the indoctrination of Puritans being proponents of liberty is The  Coming Destruction of the Baptist People by James Bellar. He was most definitely one of the top scholars of American Baptist history.  The book Miss Daisy mentioned, America in Crimson Red, is bigger but gives a great look at the history of Baptists in America. 

 

I would venture to say that nobody here was taught in school anything but that the Puritans and the Pilgrims were those behind our freedoms and liberties...(please correct me if I'm wrong and let me know what you were taught)




#395293 Pilgrims & Baptists: The Little Known Connection

Posted by HappyChristian on 30 November 2014 - 03:23 PM

We do have to keep in mind, even though some may think all Puritans were the same, they weren't.
Just like Baptists, they had 'sects' that were biblical, and some led by men's 'doctrine', of which the earlier Puritans
of the 'Mayflower' beginnings, were of the 'freedom' mindset. It all depends on the particular 'author'
that you have read, and whether they agree with certain teachings in the Bible. They slanted 'christian' history back then, also.

The Puritans didn't come over on the Mayflower...that was the ship that carried the Pilgrims. Puritans weren't interested in liberty. They wanted to found a new Israel, based on the law of the OT.

Rather than reading 'authors' I suggest reading their own works. The Mathers were prodigious writers. They wanted a church run state and a state run church just like in England, only "purified."

Sadly, way too many text books have presented them as liberty lovers and the reason for the freedoms here in America when that simply is not the case. The big problem with that actually began when the Christian school movement began. It was driven by Reformed folk who wanted to create a theocracy on the pattern of what the Puritans wanted. What better way than to rewrite a bit of history and give credit to Puritans rather than Baptists. Regardless of sect...


#395107 The Grand Jury

Posted by HappyChristian on 28 November 2014 - 04:56 PM

I think the guilt or innocence of MB or even one's opinion of such is directly linked to one's reaction to the grand jury ruling and to how one thinks proceedings were conducted. Hence my previous posts.

There are bad cops out there for sure. But there are good ones, too. And sometimes they need to defend themselves against thugs, even if it means shooting them. Til dead at times, sadly. Investigate, yes. Certainly. That was done here. Regardless of how we think proceedings went - surely the defense would have objected had the prosecution been leading - the grand jury saw no reason to indict.

Even so, DW will have to live with the fact that he took the life of an 18 year old - even though a thug and criminal and it was self-defense.


#395095 Pilgrims & Baptists: The Little Known Connection

Posted by HappyChristian on 28 November 2014 - 02:29 PM

Interestingly, and to head another direction in the relationship between Pilgrims and Baptists...

 

Pilgrims did not have the same mind set that Puritans did, as far as remaining part of the Anglican church. And Puritans were not at all in favor of any "free-thinker" (like Baptists) and would jail them or worse (Obadiah Holmes was beaten for daring to preach the gospel in Puritan territory).  Pilgrims here in America were not too friendly to Baptists, either.  They did not jail them, but they did not want them in their group.  Neither did either group like the Quakers.  Of course, Quakers were not biblical, but Puritans and Pilgrims were not really in favor of religious freedom. We can thank the hated Baptists for our freedoms - both politically and religiously (personal and political liberties are all rooted in true religious liberty).




#395091 The Grand Jury

Posted by HappyChristian on 28 November 2014 - 02:21 PM

Here's an article from a right-leaning news group, not the MSM.

 

http://www.newsmax.c...1/25/id/609483/

 

 

 

According to protesters who erupted in violence after a grand jury declined to indict Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., this was the case of a white policeman shooting an unarmed black teenager with his hands in the air in a community plagued by racial tension.

That's an account promoted by many in the mainstream media as well. But here are several facts about the case that are harder to find:

 

1. Surveillance video showed that shortly before the confrontation, 18-year-old Brown stole cigarillos from a convenience store and shoved a clerk who tried to stop him.

2. The autopsy report showed that Brown had marijuana in his system when he died.

3. Officer Wilson, driving to the call of a medical emergency, first encountered Brown walking in the middle of a street and told Brown and his friend to walk on the sidewalk. Brown responded with an expletive.

4. Wilson chose to confront Brown only after he saw the cigarillos in his hand and recalled the radio report of a robbery at the convenience store.

5. Wilson said when he tried to open his car door, Brown slammed it back shut, then punched Wilson in the face.

6. Fearing another punch could knock him out, Wilson drew his gun, he told the grand jury, and Brown grabbed the gun, saying "you are too much of a pussy to shoot me."

7. An African-American witness confirmed that Brown and Wilson appeared to be "arm-wrestling" by the car.

8. Another witness saw Brown leaning through the car's window and said "some sort of confrontation was taking place."

 

 

9. After Wilson fired a shot that struck Brown's hand, Brown fled and Wilson gave chase. Brown suddenly stopped. An unidentified witness told the grand jury that 6-foot-4, 292-pound Brown charged at Wilson with his head down. Wilson said Brown put his hand under the waistband of his pants as he continued toward Wilson. That's when Wilson fired.

10. A witness testified that Brown never raised his hands.

11. Gunpowder found on the wound on Brown's hand indicated his hand was close to the gun when it fired. According to a report, the hand wound showed foreign matter "consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm."

12. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist who reviewed the autopsy for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, said the gunpowder "supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has particulate matter in the wound."

13. Wilson said Brown was physically uncontrollable and "for lack of a better word, crazy." He said that during the confrontation, he was thinking: "He's gonna kill me. How do I survive?" Legal experts say police officers typically have wide latitude to use deadly force when they feel their safety is threatened.

 



#395088 The Grand Jury

Posted by HappyChristian on 28 November 2014 - 02:17 PM

All of the witnesses corroborated Wilson's story - and they were all black, so it wasn't the racial thing the MSM and POTUS and Holder have tried to make it.  Even the original one who made claims of MB's hands up recanted that - before it ever even went to the Grand Jury.

 

Those rioting in the streets were not simply from Ferguson. They were brought in to riot.  And they did. MB's step-dad encouraged people to burn the place down...which they did, destroying businesses owned by minorities.  Justice. Yeah, right.

 

I just wonder why folks aren't questioning about the black officer who killed a white 20-year-old in UT on Aug. 11.  Isn't his life important?  Sure, he might have been a thug, too (don't really know that much about it, because it's not making news anywhere - left or right wing).  However, MB had a criminal record. In the case of a Grand Jury, records are unsealed. He was a bad boy, with tragedy in his future.  

 

As John said, were it my son, my heart would be broken. But I'm honest enough to say that, if my son were the criminal that MB was as a juvenile, I would tend to believe what the police officer and so many witnesses said.  




#394699 ...honour The King,

Posted by HappyChristian on 25 November 2014 - 09:18 PM

Wow.


#394697 ...honour The King,

Posted by HappyChristian on 25 November 2014 - 09:01 PM

Nope. Not here in America, Dave. At least not according to our founders. He is to be subject to the very same laws we are. Kings aren't. Lex Rex.

Elected servants are just that, John. Servants who have been put into those positions to obey and enforce the law, not rule. Big difference. But, again, too many people don't know that and that is why we have "lords" and "kings" in DC. Not because it's God's will or because He ordained it...but because He allows it-because if our sin.


#394690 ...honour The King,

Posted by HappyChristian on 25 November 2014 - 08:19 PM

Not true, John. The founders purposely set up a form of government that limited the president precisely because they did not want a king. We the people and the law are the authority...those elected to publuc office are to serve the law and the people - not be their lords. Sadly, most folks don't understand that today and is one of the reasons BO can get away with acting like a king.

The powers that be means government...read Romans 13...God ordained the fact that we should have government. Not the style of it - that, as our founders knew, is left up to each nation. I do not believe BO is God's will for this country. I do believe He allowed it, but that is not at all the same thing.




The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500