Slovoed Classic Italian-Russian dictionary (Slovoed dictionaries) (Italian Edition)

inextinguible definition: Adjective (comparative more inextinguible, superlative most Origin From Middle French inextinguible and its source, Latin inextinguibilis.

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The Twisted Seminary Knot: A Murder Mystery file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Twisted Seminary Knot: A Murder Mystery book. Happy reading The Twisted Seminary Knot: A Murder Mystery Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The Twisted Seminary Knot: A Murder Mystery at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Twisted Seminary Knot: A Murder Mystery Pocket Guide.

They'll tell you that 'we threw out the gays 15 years ago. The issue here, he said, has involved the latter type, the priests who would be called gay even in Key West. Among some of them, Allison sees evidence of a very complicated, not to say twisted, culture of sexual subterfuge. I thought it was interesting that both he and Mike Daniel came to the same bottom line--that everyone would be better off if homosexual priests were allowed to come all the way out of the closet, at least in terms of publicly declaring their status, if not in violating their oath of celibacy.

I don't think the parishioners care. I don't know who does care. It's the secrecy that allows something to fester and to become really sick. I don't know if it has anything to do with pedophilia, but it [the homosexuality of priests] is one of the things that certainly has been denied by the hierarchy. And I think they think it's tied to the pedophilia.

  1. Floor Four?
  2. Dissecting Christian Trends.
  3. River of Destiny.
  4. GSLIS BiblioMystery - Our Collection.

How much more tangled can we make this web? The church wrongly ties pedophilia to homosexuality but also wrongly denies that many of its priests are homosexual? What a fine mess. But it's precisely this mess that makes official cover-up and complicity in child sex abuse possible, according to Windle Turley, a lawyer who represented several of Rudy Kos' victims five years ago. And I know you're going to say, "He's a lawyer who's in this for the money.

He doesn't blame pedophilia on homosexual clergy, by any means, but he does think the church's confusion and official hypocrisy on the issue of the sexuality of priests help create a dangerous atmosphere. The underground nature of un-celibate behavior, both homosexual and heterosexual, he said, has made possible a brand of adult dishonesty and manipulativeness in which pedophiles may find convenient shelter.

You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter s - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in! The sum of these problems, Turley believes, makes the Catholic Church tangibly more dangerous to children than other religious institutions. He says the Catholic Church suffers from a "long heritage and practice of hiding and concealing and tolerating sexual abuse.

Daniel told me that Catholic parishioners and parents find some aspects of the situation simply too bizarre and embarrassing to deal with. He said--and I confirmed with an attorney for the diocese--that one of the new rules adopted after the Kos case provides explicitly that it is not permissible for a minor to spend the night in the rectory and sleep in the priest's bed. On the other hand, if you need a rule like this, don't you think you might need to talk about a whole bunch of other things as well? All rights reserved. We use cookies to collect and analyze information on site performance and usage, and to enhance and customize content and advertisements.

By clicking 'X' or continuing to use the site, you agree to allow cookies to be placed. To find out more, visit our cookies policy and our privacy policy. Remember Me. Already registered? The Gay Priest Thing. Jim Schutze 4. Facebook Twitter. His ploy was to offer a young woman a position but stress she needed to withdraw all her money from the bank because she would need funds to get started. He would also take out a large life insurance policy on her. Once the young woman had settled into the hotel, she would become his captive and disappear. No one knows for sure how many people Holmes killed, although he later said 27, and some sources have claimed he murdered as many as When that failed, he abandoned the hotel and set out for Texas, where he planned to build a duplicate.

Chicago police began searching the abandoned hotel and discovered in the basement a vat of acid with a human skull and parts of eight ribs not quite dissolved, mounds of quicklime, the kiln, a dissection table, surgical tools and more bones. In August , much of the Murder Castle was mysteriously destroyed by fire. Some believed it was set by a Holmes associate who didn't want the police to discover anything else while others felt it was someone who wanted to rid the neighborhood of such a blemish.

Throughout his incarceration, Holmes wrote different confessions, each a blend of rationalization, prevarication and a bit of truth. I could not help the fact that I was a murderer no more than the poet can help the inspiration to song. He lies in the Holy Cross Cemetery, located south of Philadelphia. As for the Murder Castle, following the fire the upper floors were removed while the street level shops reopened. In , the aging structure was sold to the U. There are no plaques or signs memorializing the heinous crimes once committed on the site.

The former site of Dr. Friday, April 2, Beware the Maneaters of Tsavo. The lions in the Kenyan region of Tsavo are different. For instance, fully grown males don't have full manes of hair like other African lions. Additionally, for a period of time in , a pair of Tsavo lions acquired a taste for something that most lions tend to shunhuman beings.

The tale of the man-eating Tsavo lions began in March of when Indian workers erected a railway bridge over the Tsavo River, started being attacked by two lions. The British, who controlled Kenya at the time, had brought the workers to Africa to help build the Kenya-Uganda Railway. During the next nine months, the two big cats killed and ate at least 72 workers—with some claiming nearly double that many were attacked and consumed. Frightened by the seemingly supernatural pair of lions, workers tries to scare them off by surrounding their camp with bonfires and fences made of thorn bushes.

Yet despite these efforts, the lions continued their reign of terror. Colonel John Henry Patterson, who supervised the construction, set traps and attempted to ambush the lions—even sitting in a tree all night with his rifle—but the killing continued. Finally, on December 9, , he managed to shoot one of the big cats. He claimed that as he continued to hunt the animal into the night, it, in turn, began stalking him. It had taken five shots to finish the job.

Three weeks after killing the first lion, he managed to track down the other. In his account, Patterson said he shot the beast five times and, despite having a shattered leg, it continued to charge him and chased him up a tree. After the animal limped off, he came down from the tree only to have the cat charge him again. He fired two more shots, hitting it in the chest and in the head. There they go again, citing the Deity to justify their outrageous and barbaric sins. It was His Divine Will.

And what a crass comment regarding President Barnes and his view toward women. Carol has clearly demonstrated in her comments whose theology is more toxic. If so, would you also say bestiality or prostitution is okay if it were made legal a couple of years ago, like gay marriage? What emotion am I feeling right now? Out of the past 2,? I bet you have an interesting explanation to account for all of those centuries of those topics not only NOT being central to the faith but rejected by it. Not true.

I feel I am now being bullied at synod for being same-sex attracted AND faithful to the teachings of Jesus on marriage. Kuyper certainly would not be eligible for such an award. No, I do not think that. Your weak response here shows my point. They were men of conviction unlike the Religious Right of today whose only conviction is a sense of entitlement of their right to oppress people.

Through the centuries since Christianity became a religion, Jude has been a weaponized text used to justify murder, torture, and conquest. Not at all: the converse would be that if it did not, then it would mean to be a warrior for injustice is consistent with following Christ, which is certainly not so. Those who war for injustice are not followers of Christ.

Hence, to be a Christian is to work for the establishment of justice, i. Your last sentence there merely reveals your desperation; fundamentalism stops a thinking mind. Precisely my point: a good number want to believe simplistic shibboleths rather than exercise their noggins.

Thank you. In some sense it is, but so is your parroting the Liberty University party line in the exact same sense. On the contrary, Ymin reveals himself to be quite spiritually alive and mature, in contrast to the babyish fundamentalism you advocate. Look at the two of you: one advocates for the oppressed, the other for oppression.

You have to be kidding me. TK rejects homosexual behavior read sex and calls it sin. That is clear. For your education: Gen. Now you want to argue: well, argue with God. You want to call Christians intolerant — you have to call Jesus intolerant too. He clearly reiterated what God had already said in Gen.

You want to call traditional Christians names — fundamentalist is one. Well, you have to call Jesus a fundamentalist too. He went back to the fundamentals of belief in God and His word. You better call Jesus a hater too. Consult the text before you try to make a case against orthodox Christian belief.

Jeremiah 29 Is not my word like as a fire? And as I said, Keller would agree with you that those who are called to ministry should be free to do it. He would simply differ with you as to whether or not a lifestyle of sexual relationship outside of marriage is compatible with that calling. What do you suppose Dr Keller would say?

GSLIS BiblioMystery - Our Collection

Otherwise, no one wants to go to your churches. Your argument is merely insensitive, baseless assertions devoid of anything to support it but your own prejudices. If given a choice between lining up on the side of Jude, the brother of Christ, or John Spong, who denies the deity of Christ, I will gladly stand with Jude!!! You can check out the Wikipedia article on him if you want. David conquered to subdue neighboring tribes but he suffered for his sins as well. Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.

Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. Good one. I have an idea, although it was stolen from Robert A. In short, you have no basis for saying so other than to advance your own power and control over others.

OK cool. The authorship of the letter is uncertain, although some assert this was who wrote it [I guess the siblinghood of Jesus, James, and Jude by some accounts is where we part from our Romish brethren who say Mary always was a virgin, but I digress…]. So, make yourself happy. But none of that counters the point this is a great example of scripture weaponized for evil. I have no argument with deity.

My argument is only with those who think they know the mind of deity. Genesis was written by men after an oral telling for centuries. Jesus never defined His followers like that. Go to the text of Scripture to find out what a Christian is. You are welcome to your own opinions but not your own facts. It is clearly the context. And your evidence is…. Who made you privy to the mind of deity? Jesus said Genesis was normative. So you disagree with Jesus? Was Jesus oppressive too? He was a man and He supported the Law and prophets.

Buzzword bingo? How cliche. That tells the who story right there. Tim is such a Godly man he would not want an award but for all the Glory to go to God anyway. So gracious of him still to be speaking amidst such apostasy and liberalism. Our prayer is that God softens hearts, that those who have ears let them hear and that people respond to the Gospel in love and obedience listening to God and His perfect word rather than the culture. Besides, no, gross, sin is never justified.

Lol what are you even talking about? Or more specifically, what are you referring to — aka whose comment? Now do you have some factual info that shows crimes against LBGT persons have increased since Trump was elected? This is just sad. He stands with years of Christian tradition on these matters. No the context is what happens when people suppress the knowledge of the one true and living God.

Murder Mystery - Trailer - Netflix

The problem is that you do not like those knowable purposes. Here is what works to prevent spread of STDs. Heterosexual sex between two people who were chase before marriage and are faithful in marriage. What about when Jesus said he was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel? But later on, he stated to witness to all the ends of the earth. I recently saw a movie about Florence Jenkins, who was a poor opera singer but who got Syphilis from her first husband.

This was in a day and age when there was no treatment for this disease- that was in the late 19th century. She was forced to have a chaste marriage with her second husband. And because vaginal sex is not safe sex- much riskier than oral sex, esp. Makes one wonder if he really does know anything about the Scriptures!

God has awards for you. And that from an award winning renowned author. Well at least now we know why she was awarded. Those men of faith still are followed and listened to as well as the book they taught from The Bible. More people follow the ones you redicule than the corrupt views you have on society. Since I do not believe that God did any such thing — I believe things such as Old Testament verses which state god commanded Israelites to enslave enemies, for instance, are metaphorical, not factual — I am not concerned with it.

However, in a larger sense, if a god did or does very much at all of what fundamentalists say there can be no doubt such an entity is pure evil. Since I do not believe such things, I have no doubt the real God is good. Not to any reasonable person. Even so, such pithy constructions as imply sex only exists for procreation are at best laughable. The person who states such nonsense is either a manipulator or a simpleton. While there is some history the bulk of the Bible is metaphorical and was always intended as such.

The assertion otherwise only gained wide acceptance in the 19th Century when mass communication provided an opportunity for those who pushed it to make money. Anyone could have told you that. John indicates otherwise. All the Evangelicals on here venting their rage at Princeton for taking back the award would see hell freeze over before they would give an award to a female or LGBT minister, or allow them to speak in their institutions. Rank hypocrisy is what it is, and something Evangelicals are very good at.

But then why would excluding women and LGBT be central to the faith? If you read the book of Acts, groups, such Eunuchs, which were excluded from the Assembly of the Lord in Deuteronomy are now fully included. You might want to reread that text. Has she ever read or listened to Keller? Absolutely dumbfounded. Thank you for demonstrating ethnocentrism. How does that help advance the Gospel or the Great Commission? Are you seriously claiming that Jesus never talked about wolves or corrupt leadership or warned of false teachers, and the apostles never rejected corrupt theologies?

The question is: on what grounds? The PCA is attempting to follow a biblical view of sexuality. Seriously, Wikipedia? Furthermore, perhaps you should work on understanding the concept of a false equivalency. Calvin was indeed magistrate. That makes him a mass murderer? You are a bit silly here. To be clear, the bible does not teach a geocentric universe but a theocentric one not spatially, but spiritually centered. Most people find at least a corollary relationship between wealth and power.

Do you deny that is relevant? Do you deny Ymin is agreeing with those in power at the seminary or not? Your definition of maturity is not the one found in Scripture. The minor prophets are rife with siding with the oppressed and marginalized.

I’ve Spent Thirty Years Trying to Solve One Horrific Murder Case

I agree. Jesus moves toward the outsider: moral, racial, gender, etc. By no means. It is not injustice to love someone enough to try to stop them from spiritually hurting themselves — especially when they are blind to it. Thanks for the perspective. He is risen indeed, and He is coming again on the clouds of Heaven. Our knees will bow, our tongues will confess. And then, he will judge.

Gay or straight; murderer or extortionist or just plain old self-righteously angry and selfish human being. Did you acknowledge His Lordship, before He comes in a judgement He died on a cross to spare you from? None of you can study, or argue, or compromise, philosophize or social engineer your way out of Gospel truth. It is He, who is coming back to judge the living and the dead. You can choose to interpret it in a way to include women and LGBT, or not. The men in history have overwhelmingly chosen to NOT include anyone but themselves.

How surprising. Remember, There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free , nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free , nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. We are all accepted. You are not God, you are not Jesus. Please acknowledge that. Probably feeding them and clothing them. Helping the poor is mentioned times in the bible.

Stuff about LGBT people, what maybe 7 times? Not mentioned by Christ but by fallible, sexist men from a different time. We all worship the God of our own imagination, as we all have different experiences that promote our viewpoint. Christianity currently seems to forget Jesus came to help the poor and downtrodden, not fixate on the very seldom mentioned verses that are said to be about homosexuality. Probably all wearing shirts made with more than one fabric and eating shrimp as well. I am glad, and I am confident that Jesus would be with you. Privilege is blinding sometimes, maybe they do not realize there are people whose lives are made hell on earth because of these beliefs of complementarianism and the shunning of LGBT people.

So true. The fixation against LGBT people when so much of the bible is about loving other and caring for the unfortunate demonstrates tremendous hypocrisy. If the award was withdrawn on the basis of his Biblical values, then Keller should be very happy. In fact he is blessed and this incident removes a significant amount of prestige associated with the award.

I do not know about the axes of power at Princeton Seminary, nor am I particularly interested in it. I would imagine his position has majority support among faculty and staff. So what? That is not possible without relief to the oppressed. A backer of male-only priesthood cannot reasonably claim to support it.

No doubt. Indeed he and they did. We differ on what those are. As Jesus had no soft spots for the Pharisees and Scribes, it is doubtful he would be favorably impressed with The Religious Right. Our African Brothers tend to excuse polygamy and bride-selling while engaging in witch-hunting that would make Cotton Mather look like a doofus on a Sunday Stroll. The death of the Mainline is greatly exaggerated by those engaging in wishful thinking.

Ethical principles — as in moral values and duties? They are universal and they are eternal. But what is the source of ethical principles? We DO, however, have a lot of Bible study in our Church. We just take a less literal and more scholarly approach to it than many Evangelicals do. Liberal Churches CAN grow.

It is just a matter of marketing. Progressive religious types are usually far more accepting of differences in beliefs than most Conservative religious people are. More eisegesis. Sno-cone lib theology. Grow up and learn how to discuss issues using the text. Princeton has shown their backside in full colors. Sad to see such an institution going down the drain of political correctness. Keller is right, they are wrong. Well, now … certainly glad to hear the truth from you … goodness, how it warms the cockles of my heart and stirs my convictions.

You are one remarkable disciple, so thanks for enlightening me, and showing me the errors of my way. Immediately, I will repent and become just like you. Certainly glad that some of the folks here, in this thread, like you, are guardians of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The world is far, far, better for your diligence in defending the faith, the very faith articulated by Keller, no doubt … enough of women, no more LGBTQ persons allowed.

Oh, how much better a world it would be if only we could have the world of Keller. Oh my, how dramatic, how full of righteousness, so full of truth and understanding. So glad to know that the writer of Revelation was really talking about the PCUSA, a church I have wantonly supported all of my life, and now, by your words, my conscience is stricken, and I will disavow my church, and fall on knees in repentance, that even for a moment, I dared to think that the PCUSA was a reflection of the kingdom of God.

How wrong could I be. Not at all. While most of the world may agree Hitler was just about the most evil man in the entire corpus of human history, Calvin would certainly be in the top ten. Is that not a legitimate basis for debate? It prevents any genuine dialogue. This is not a singularly PCA issue. It includes:. Abraham Kuyper himself for whom the award was named. Ironies abound. Why do you feel the need to re-narrate that? Liberal churches can grow. That combination is rarely found these days.

The stats are pronounced. That is not how the apostles understood the Gospel 2 Cor. No other book has such promises associated with it Isa. Once one begins to embrace such a hermeneutic — if consistently applied — central tenets of the faith are equally undermined. Secondly, are you looking at the stats? And they are not alone. Most Protestant mainlines share that problem.

  • Princeton Theological Seminary reverses decision to honor Redeemer’s Tim Keller.
  • Hazlitt Magazine.
  • (PDF) The Serial Killer Files | Chrysa Mantziou -!
  • The Stranger House.
  • Why are they dying so precipitously? Could it be associated with their theology? What are they missing? I think Jesus was hardest on the theological Right. Certainly he broke social norms with how he treated women, respected them, honored them as equally image-bearers of God — and yet authority was given solely to men.

    Your objection here is with Jesus. If you are not a Christian, I understand you are bringing an external grid to bear. If you are a Christian, it begs the question: who can contradict you if not God? How could such a god be anything other than a self-projection? It could be a bit unclear how physical and how spiritual this Resurrection is- read 1 Corinthians This respect for different beliefs certainly does dampen more theological liberal enthusiasm for winning people to their religion.

    This does not necessarily mean the Jews were going to hell. Marketing sort of involves letting people freely choose the product one is selling, without coercion. As Paul stated in Romans , the Jewish rejection of the Gospel meant riches for the world. The trick or clue is to find those people who think like us already and are seeking exactly what we have to offer.

    Publicity and bearing witness are means of attracting these people to our fold. Hee hee … and seriously, I appreciate where you are, though I cannot join you there. But a jolly picture you have … and I suppose you have grandchildren who are recipients of that kindly smile. Enough of our bickering for the day … wishing you well in the goodness and glory of Christ. You have a computer, so do your own research.

    But here is a start: Mounting evidence shows that religious people give more dollars and volunteer hours to charity than do nonbelievers, and conservatives give more than liberals. Good night Irene. Anyway, enough of this nonsense. There are yet other dragons, maybe even real ones, to meet. Kind of. It was once explained to me that morals involves doing what we are told by some authority, like a religion, whereas ethics involve doing what is right. Grundys and the like — advocates of censorship especially related to S-E-X. I do not believe God is concerned with disagreement.

    Jesus obviously had a closer bond with Martha, Mary, and Lazarus, as well as Mary Magdalene, than the 12 Disciples, who tended to be more gofers than soul mates. Your third paragraph is a mismash of sputtering and cross-examination, and is not appropriate for dialogue. If you seek dialogue you need to treat those with whom you seek it with respect. Respect does not involve cross-examination. Keller is or was up for an award, so of course scrutiny of his beliefs are relevant. You are free to believe whatever you want.

    I have no interrogatories for you. Reveal whatever you want but your disrespectful interrogation will not achieve the results you desire. The primary reason for the decline of Mainline churches is the fact affiliation with a church is no longer an informal requirement for social respectability as it was roughly to years ago among white Americans. Thus leading businessmen in local communities joined leading churches where they were not out of conviction but out of obligation. Neuhaus seemed to indicate he was looking for subscribers like that couple and seemed to imply they could reverse that trend.

    Well, if anybody thought they would, they were sure wrong, especially after the revelations of abuse by priests. With few exceptions Gen-Xers and Millenials are not interested in church. Most of the Mainlines have adjusted accordingly. By and large we do not expect to fill seat sanctuaries on Sunday mornings. So you say ethical principles are universal, but does that also mean ethical principles would be the same for people in the 15th century BCE as they are for people today? Such misogynistic language will surely get you in trouble with the PC nazis of your social justice powder puff ranger club.

    Quick drink your kool aid — the purple stuff. That was a close call. I have always considered the concepts of splitting certain polities like countries and churches just like India and Pakistan were in , with a sympathy for the desire of my faction to be free from yours; however, I continue to oppose such out of concern for future generations. Good question.

    Our collective understandings of them have certainly evolved. Going back that far, lives of persons not born in a privileged status were certainly devalued. The concept lives of persons previously considered not as worthy as others developed full throttle with The Enlightenment late 17th Century and 18th Century , and is certainly still not accepted universally, as present controversies readily demonstrate.

    But some relationships cannot be maintained peacefully and separation, though sad, does allow each party to follow their own vision, rather than continual fighting. But do ethical principles — moral values and duties — exist independent of people? In the U. One could say, for example, that Edmund Burke was in favor of what he perceived as justice. One could not say the same thing about any prominent conservative since the mids with a few possible exceptions like David Brooks and David Frum, and even then there are critics of theirs who say they are no longer conservative.

    I regard the quest for social justice as noble, but recognize no ideology fully solves all problems. Religion is best when it is voluntary. Universal ethical principles principles that determine what is good or evil, right or wrong by their very nature universal and therefore applicable in all times and in all places would be determined by an authoritative someone supreme being as in God and would therefore be absolute in their application. But how do we ascertain these ethical principles? The subject matter is of little interest to me.

    Humans determine what is right for humans. When conflict arises ethical principles are employed toward solving same. Who gets to determine what the ethical principles are, then? And to say there are no absolute moral values and duties, no absolute right and wrong is itself a moral absolute. And this fundamentalist you keep talking about: you got a frog in your pocket or something? Obviously everyone determines which ethical principles they hold and which they follow, as well as which they do not follow at times, and, when two or more principles conflict, which of the two they will follow and why, or, if they would in a particular case follow a thi.

    I do not believe necessarily there are no absolutes, but there will always be times when two or more principles conflict. This of course renders inert the notion of fundamentalism that certain absolutes exist, because in every case where someone will articulate one, I can guarantee you that there will be another principle in conflict with it. In governing, for instance, the existence of conflicts in law are always a factor in jurisprudence. If the city lost they could lose funding.

    The case reached the Supreme Court where Justice Scalia wrote the decision finding for the city, and in so doing struck down an ill-conceived Religious Freedom Restoration Act which was passed in the s or s, with strong support from both parties in Congress. Thus the church was forced to follow the historical preservation act, which conflicted with the RFRA.

    Such decisions are common. Much as there were parts of RFRA which were admirable — Jewish Congress members are particularly concerned about their ability to practice their religion unmolested — the act was overreaching and thus unconstitutional. It is no secret I write in opposition to fundamentalism. I am not about to change that. Your whining about it does not impress me. Let me end this with a suggestion for your edification: check into the nearest community college and take a class in critical thinking. Hey, bruh — thanks for the entertainment. Obviously you never intended to have a serious conversation.

    You just offered typical right-wing bait-and-switch zingers for an opportunity to spout talk radio memes as if it makes you look smart. I never said there are no universal ethical principles. Your morality is utter bull feathers. Sitting on the horns of a dilemma, k? Of course you never said there were no universal ethical principles, but in fact you are the one who posited them I called them moral values and duties. I wanted you to explain how a universal ethical principle moral values and duties could be universal and yet not absolute.

    Your reply was typical of all prog libs post mods at this point unable to resolve the logical dilemma — you stomp your little feet, call names, and hold your breath until your face turns blue. Without God there are no absolute universal ethical principles and therefore no sin agreed upon by everyone — just opinions. I happen to see the universal ethical principles found in the Bible as revealed by God as a reflection of His moral nature and therefore normative for us — for time and eternity. How people have implemented and applied those moral norms is another story.

    So take a deep breath, take a potty break, get a drink your choice of adult beverage. Life will go on. By the way, could you please give me the call letters of that radio station you referred to. Sounds like a good station. I do read, however. A lot. Seems to me series of pejorative labels e. If you are not a Christian, I understand your objection on the basis of the paradigm itself. Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. Your beliefs are inherent in the discussion. You seem to want to talk more about labels than content. It matters ultimately, not like a winning jab in a social interaction at work… but rather as ultimate concerns about the very meaning of life.


    I gave you a litany of articles citing sociological stats from peer-reviewed studies. You responded with anecdotal remarks. As I said before, numbers do not equate with spiritual health, but staggering decline as the mainline has been seeing for decades should give one pause. This is about what happened regarding Keller. I am not the topic of this conversation. Your personal attacks will not be met with the responses you want. Is it possible your objection is not so much with conservatives as with Christ?