The Right Side of the News

So I take it you've abandoned your defense of moronic Mexican tariffs and your contention that hundreds of pages of direct evidence laid out in detail is innuendo.

Yup, just pick the stuff you prefer from that little book and away you go.

Oh that's bad.Serious, Faith, that stuff can be as bad for your health as ciggs.Your bible was right on this one.

The usual smartass arrogance. The law was changed by God himself. But it wasn't "changed," it was that Jesus' sacrifice fulfilled it all in our place so that we will not be condemned for our failures to obey it.Here's the passage about the rescinding of the OT food laws as applied to the new Gentile believers: The following says He "blotted out the written ordinances that were against us" and then lists Old Testament requirements we are no longer to be judged for: {I realized the following doesn't apply to this topic but I don't want to erase it because it has something else to say that IMO needs to be said. }And this one mentions abstention from meats as taught by "hypocrites,"which together with forbidding to marry pretty clearly identifies the Roman Church as the hypocrites: Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

As far as health goes, I suspect the hamburger alone is enough of a problem without the cheese. I keep trying to get myself to go vegetarian but it's so much work.However, God isn't talking about health. All His standards are spiritual in nature. And since I didn't expect to llve anywhere near as long as I have, if I keep going for a few more years despite the cheeseburgers I don't think we can say they are all that bad.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

So what spiritual significance had this meat-to-milk thing before the ban was lifted? Before the cross did its thing why should my very salvation be contingent upon such a trifle as meat with milk?

I believe the meat and milk combo prohibition came from the law against "seething the calf in its mother's milk" which got extended to keeping all meat separate from all milk products,possibly without spiritual warrant but I'm not sure. Orthodox Jews observe this rule even today, keeping separate refrigerators for the two.I'm too lazy to look it up right now to see what the original spiritual meaning was, but I do recall some suggesting that it was intended to teach mercy to animals: boiling the calf in its mother's milk does sound cruel. But there may be other meanings I'll feel up to googling later. Something confusing here I'm probably not getting. "Before the cross did its thing" if it applied to you at all you'd have been a Jew. The cross frees us as Christian believers from the whole law given by Moses to the Jews. (In case there is any question it frees Jewish believers in Christ too.) The Jews have made the mistake of thinking the Law can save them but it can't. Those who were saved before Christ came were saved by faith just as we are. The Law was given by God to teach us all that we need Christ for salvation. Some of the Jews got it, most didn't, and today's Jews still llve as if the Law could save them.

Googled it and looked it up on a Bible site and couldn't find it. Must be using a wrong term to search the KJV. Have to try again later.

Very convenient, that.

As usual, Faith sticks with comforting lies rather than inconvenient truths. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Trump called Meghan Markle “nasty” in an interview with The Sun (a right wing but very downmarket newspaper).Then he denied it on Twitter, accusing The Sun of making it up.They had audio recordings of the interview. BBC

The denial tweet (from his campaign's account) included audio of him calling her nasty. And subtitles for the hearing impaired.https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1134809885957414917They know just how staggeringly stupid their base is.

Yes he did:

quote:

---

John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

---

That is a de facto end to capital punishment. No qualified executioners = no executions. Period. There is no possibility of humans ever executing humans without disobeying Jesus. You're misusing God's word to Noah:

quote:

---

Genesis 9:5-6 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

---

1. It doesn't say anything about murder or an other crime.
2. It says that animals will shed your blood, so it isn't talking about the justice system at all.
3. "the hand of every man's brother" seems pretty clear that it's talking about revenge killings.

Nope. See second quote in Message 2232

Your quote is wrong. It ignores what the Bible actually says and spins it into the opposite. That's why you shouldn't pay any attention to commentators or apologists. They're pushing their own agenda.Go to the source. The source is clear: Genesis 4, Genesis 9 and John 8, all in agreement.