Now wth the Fake President and the other Leftists in the Government seemingly taking the nation deeper and deeper into the CCP cesspool this song still strikes a cord that brings tears to a Patriot’s eyes and a lump in the throat.
What should we expect from companies like Facebook which are controlled by either out and out atheist’s or agnostics? These platforms are simply doing what the Apostle John wrote of in John 8:44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
“Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature.” (Colossians 1:15)
‘A widespread cult heresy based on this verse claims that Jesus Christ was not eternal but merely the first being created—perhaps an angel—before becoming a man. Note, however, that the verse does not say He was the “first created of every creature” but the “first born of every creature,” and there is a big difference. In fact, the very next verse says that “by him were all things created” (v. 16). He was never created, for He Himself is the Creator. “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3).
He is “born” of God, not “made,” the “only begotten Son” of God (John 3:16). “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him” (John 1:18). The eternal Father is omnipresent, and therefore invisible, inaudible, inaccessible to the physical senses. The eternally existing Son is the “image” of the invisible Father, the One who declares, reveals, embodies His essence. Although He is always “in the bosom of the Father,” yet He is eternally also “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person” (Hebrews 1:3). He is the eternal, living Word, which was “in the beginning with God” (John 1:2), and which “was God” (John 1:1).
Thus, the phrase “firstborn of every creature” in our text can be translated literally as “begotten before all creation.” The eternal inter-relationship of the Persons of the Godhead is beyond human comprehension in its fullness, and the terms “Son” and “begotten” are the best human language can do to describe it. Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh, is the only begotten, eternally generated Son of the Father, forever shining forth as the image of the otherwise invisible God.’https://www.icr.org/article/12614/?utm_source=phplist9275&utm_medium=email&utm_content=HTML&utm_campaign=February+27+-+The+Firstborn+of+Every+Creature
Many years ago after attending schools that leaned toward the NIV and other versions based on the Critical text of Westcott and Hort I came to the personal conviction that the Authorized Bible based on the Received Greek Text and the Masoretic Hebrew Text was God’s Word in the English language. Here is the testimony of Alex Bowler https://www.alexbowlerevangelism.com/why-i-use-the-king-james-bible.html as to why he uses only the Authorized Bible, the King James Bible.
The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Psalm 12:6 & 7
‘A Personal Testimony
Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: Matthew 7:7
As a new Christian I decided to read three Bibles: the New International Version, the Good News Bible and the King James Bible. I thought that the NIV and GNB, written in modern English, would help me to understand the King James Bible better. During my Bible studies however, I began to notice great differences between the King James Bible and the other two versions. I saw that passages about the deity of Christ, the blood of Jesus, the Trinity and other important doctrines had been changed, watered down or even deleted in the NIV and GNB and I grew increasingly uneasy about this. I knew in my heart that God must have preserved His true word for us to read so one day I prayed: “Lord, please show me which Bible you want me to use, which Bible is your true word.” Later that same day I decided to go for a walk in a nearby park, and saw in the distance a Christian friend, who attended a local Anglican Church, walking towards me. As she approached me I could see that she was carrying a Bible under her arm. We greeted each other and then she said, “Hi! Guess what? The Lord spoke to me today and told me to bring this King James Bible to your parents’ house and to give it to you!”
From that day I have only read and preached from the King James Bible – God’s pure preserved words in English.
Rotten Roots
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. Jude:4
Brooke Foss Westcott (1825 – 1901) Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828 – 1892)
‘ …. ye have perverted the words of the living God, …’ Jeremiah 23:36
The 4th Century Roman emperor Constantine wanted to bring unity between Christians and pagans. He therefore commissioned the creation of fifty Alexandrian ‘bibles’. It is speculated that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts, which underlie modern versions, are part of this fifty but if so, why are there so many differences between them?
In 1844 Lobegott Friedrich Constantin (von) Tischendorf claimed to have found 86 sheets of vellum, in a wastepaper bin which were to be burned, in the Roman Catholic St Catherine’s Monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai in Egypt. He later claimed that by 1859 he obtained what they came from: a huge codex he called Sinaiticus. This included parts of the Old Testament, all of the New Testament, as well as the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. A Greek palaeographer, Constantine Simonides, really threw the cat amongst the pidgeons and infuriated Von Tischendorf, who was glorying in his ‘discovery’ and his publication of Sinaiticus in 1862, when he claimed that same year to have produced Sinaiticus himself twenty years earlier!
Two 19th Century liberal Anglican churchmen, Westcott and Hort, studied Vaticanus and Sinaiticus and liked what they saw! They set out to create a NEW bible and saw their inclusion on the committee formed to undertake a modest revision of the King James Bible as a golden opportunity to introduce their radical and heretical changes, even insisting on the inclusion in that committee of the Unitarian scholar Dr. Vance Smith! (This revision of the King James Bible was sanctioned by the Southern Convocation of the Church of England.) Using Vaticanus and Sinaiticus they changed the historical Greek New Testament text to conform to those corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts! The result was the notorious English Revised Version of 1881, which horrified evangelical Christians on its publication and caused an outcry! This was the start of the counter-Reformation in earnest! The rot truly set in in 1881. (NB The New Testament was published in 1881, the Old Testament in 1885)
A wicked plan was put in place to flood Bible colleges, churches and bookshops with fake ‘bibles’ produced from these corrupt manuscripts and to attack by all means the pure preserved words of the Lord in English – the King James Bible. This plan continues to this day with a vengeance!
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Matthew 7:18-20
Statements of Westcott and Hort
The following quotes are taken from the diaries and letters of Westcott and Hort.
1846 Oct. 25th – Westcott: “Is there not that in the principles of the “Evangelical” school which must lead to the exaltation of the individual minister, and does not that help to prove their unsoundness? If preaching is the chief means of grace, it must emanate not from the church, but from the preacher, and besides placing him in a false position, it places him in a fearfully dangerous one.” (Life, Vol.I, pp.44,45).
Oct., 22nd after Trinity Sunday – Westcott: “Do you not understand the meaning of Theological ‘Development’? It is briefly this, that in an early time some doctrine is proposed in a simple or obscure form, or even but darkly hinted at, which in succeeding ages,as the wants of men’s minds grow, grows with them – in fact, that Christianity is always progressive in its principles and doctrines” (Life, Vol.I, p.78).
Dec. 23rd – Westcott: “My faith is still wavering. I cannot determine how much we must believe; how much, in fact, is necessarily required of a member of the Church.” (Life, Vol.I, p.46).
1847 Jan., 2nd Sunday after Epiphany – Westcott: “After leaving the monastery we shaped our course to a little oratory…It is very small, with one kneeling-place; and behind a screen was a ‘Pieta’ the size of life (i.e. a Virgin and dead Christ)…I could not help thinking on the grandeur of the Romish Church, on her zeal even in error, on her earnestness and self-devotion, which we might, with nobler views and a purer end, strive to imitate. Had I been alone I could have knelt there for hours.” (Life, Vol.I, p.81).
1848 July 6th – Hort: “One of the things, I think, which shows the falsity of the Evangelical notion of this subject (baptism), is that it is so trim and precise…no deep spiritual truths of the Reason are thus logically harmonious and systematic…the pure Romish view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical…the fanaticism of the bibliolaters, among whom reading so many ‘chapters’ seems exactly to correspond to the Romish superstition of telling so many dozen beads on a rosary…still we dare not forsake the Sacraments, or God will forsake us…I am inclined to think that no such state as ‘Eden’ (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam’s fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants” (Life, Vol.I, pp.76-78).
Aug. 11th – Westcott: “I never read an account of a miracle (in Scripture?) but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover some want of evidence in the account of it.” (Life, Vol.I, p.52).
Nov., Advent Sunday – Westcott: “All stigmatise him (a Dr. Hampden) as a ‘heretic,’…I thought myself that he was grievously in error, but yesterday I read over the selections from his writings which his adversaries make, and in them I found systematically expressed the very strains of thought which I have been endeavouring to trace out for the last two or three years. If he be condemned, what will become of me?” (Life, Vol.I,p.94).
1850 May 12th – Hort: “You ask me about the liberty to be allowed to clergymen in their views of Baptism. For my own part, I would gladly admit to the ministry such as hold Gorham’s view, much more such as hold the ordinary confused Evangelical notions” (Life, Vol.I, p.148).
July 31st – Hort: “I spoke of the gloomy prospect, should the Evangelicals carry on their present victory so as to alter the Services.” (Life, Vol.I, p.160).
1851 Feb. 7th – Hort: “Westcott is just coming out with his Norrisian on ‘The Elements of the Gospel Harmony.’ I have seen the first sheet on Inspiration, which is a wonderful step in advance of common orthodox heresy.” (Life, Vol.I, p.181).
1851 Dec. 29,30th – Hort: “I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus. Think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS.; it is a blessing there are such early ones” (Life, Vol.I, p.211).
1858 Oct. 21st – Further I agree with them in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology as, to say the least, containing much superstition and immorality of a very pernmicious kind…The positive doctrines even of the Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue…There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible” (Life, Vol.I, p.400).
1860 Apr. 3rd – Hort: “But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with. I must work out and examine the argument in more detail, but at present my feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable.” (Life, Vol.I, p.416).
Oct. 15th – Hort: “I entirely agree – correcting one word – with what you there say on the Atonement, having for many years believed that “the absolute union of the Christian (or rather, of man) with Christ Himself” is the spiritual truth of which the popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit…Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ’s bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy.” (Life, Vol.I, p.430).
1864 Sept. 23rd – Hort: “I believe Coleridge was quite right in saying that Christianity without a substantial Church is vanity and dissolution; and I remember shocking you and Lightfoot not so very long ago by expressing a belief that ‘Protestantism’ is only parenthetical and temporary. In short, the Irvingite creed (minus the belief in the superior claims of the Irvingite communion) seems to me unassailable in things ecclesiastical.” (Life, Vol.II, p.30,31).
1865 Sept. 27th – Westcott: “I have been trying to recall my impressions of La Salette (a marian shrine). I wish I could see to what forgotten truth Mariolatry bears witness; and how we can practically set forth the teaching of the miracles”.
Nov. 17th – Westcott: “As far as I could judge, the ‘idea’ of La Salette was that of God revealing Himself now, and not in one form but in many.” (Life, Vol.I. pp.251,252).
Oct. 17th – Hort: “I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and ‘Jesus’-worship have very much in common in their causes and their results.” (Life, Vol.II, p.50).
1867 Oct. 17th – Hort: “I wish we were more agreed on the doctrinal part; but you know I am a staunch sacerdotalist, and there is not much profit in arguing about first principles.” (Life, Vol.II, p.86).
1890 Mar. 4th – Westcott: “No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history – I could never understand how any one reading them with open eyes could think they did – yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere.”
The True Manuscripts
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: II Timothy 3:16
The King James Bible is translated from the traditional Greek text (Textus Receptus). It has been proven through recent collation of the very earliest papyri that the King James readings are early and not late as some supposed. There are 5500 Greek New Testament manuscripts in existence today. From these existing manuscripts over 99% agree with each other – the text which underlies the King James Bible.
Dr Kenyon, curator of the British Museum said, ” This is the text found in the great majority of manuscripts.” “Until 1881 it held the field as the text in practically universal use.”
In 1881 Westcott and Hort changed this traditional Greek text in 8413 places!
Dr Hort said the following words about the changes they made: ” I do not think the significance is generally understood. It is quite impossible to judge the value of what appears to be trifling alterations merely by reading them one after another. Taken together, they have often important bearings which few would think of at first …… The difference between a picture say of a Raffaelle and a feeble copy of it is made up of a number of trivial differences …. It is, one can hardly doubt, the beginning of a new period in Church history. So far the angry objectors have reason for their astonishment.”
Hort also said: ” At present many orthodox (but rational) men are being unawares acted upon by influences which will assuredly bear good fruit in due time if the process is allowed to go on quietly.”
The testimony of Dr. Franklin Logsdon
Dr Frank Logsdon was the co-founder of the New American Standard Bible (NASB). He has since renounced any connection to it as well as to the Amplified Version.
“I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I’m afraid I’m in trouble with the Lord … We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface … I’m in trouble; I can’t refute these arguments; it’s wrong, terribly wrong … The deletions are absolutely frightening … there are so many … Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this? Upon investigation, I wrote my dear friend, Mr Lockman, (The benefactor through which the NASB was published) explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASV (NASB). You can say that the Authorized Version (KJV) is absolutely correct. How correct? 100% correct …
Dr Franklin Logsdon also said, “As a member of the editorial committee in production of the Amplified New Testament, we honestly and conscientiously felt it was a mark of intelligence to follow Westcott and Hort. Now, what you have in these books (Which Bible? and True or False? , by Dr. D.O. Fuller) strikes terror to my heart. It proves, alarmingly, that being conscientiously wrong is a most dangerous state of believing. God help us to be more cautious, lest we fall into the snares of the arch deceiver.”
How anyone can believe everything we see around us came by accident is beyond belief and yet many do. Thankfully, God has given us His Word which tells us ‘simple people’ that He is the Creator in the Book of Genesis.
Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
‘In the beginning – about 13.8 billion years ago – there was nothing. There were no atoms or molecules, and no forces. Then, suddenly, for no reason at all – Bang! Everything came into existence, and began to expand.
But that slow expansion can’t explain how all of space in the universe is about the same temperature, so a few millionths of a second after that Big Bang, everything went fizz and expanded very, very rapidly indeed for another few millionths of a second before it all returned to its earlier slow expansion. And scientists called this fizz Cosmic Inflation, and saw that it was good – well, perhaps not that good, but at least it made the difficult sums work out – mostly.
Yes, I am being satirical. That’s because it is a mythology that deserves to be satirized. Because not even the story I have given you is enough! Somehow, there had to be heat energy at the end of the inflation period, but the processes so far described would have resulted in a cold universe – “a cold, homogeneous goop”, as one scientist put it. So Big Bang cosmogonists have to further theorize that a reheating phase had to happen to get all the material in the new universe into a form that could expand to form our current universe.
My personal opinion is that America finds itself with a Biden administration because churches and professing Christians are trying to fit into an anti-Christian society. One of the things many professing Christens have accepted is the use of alcoholic beverages and this article is where the rubber meets the road. ‘It’s obvious in scripture that some wine is permissible to drink and other is not. This relates to alcohol. Scripture prohibits alcohol (Proverbs 23:29-35). However, all wine and strong drink is prohibited to the priesthood in the performance of their duties. I’m reading through the Bible twice this year and moving through it the first time, I arrived at Leviticus 10:8-11 earlier this week:
8 And the LORD spake unto Aaron, saying, 9 Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations: 10 And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean; 11 And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the LORD hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses.
It was so important for Aaron and his sons not to be under the influence of alcohol that they were to take extra precautions by refraining from any wine or strong drink. What does drinking any alcohol do? If they were to be drinking alcohol of any amount, it would threaten their ability to do their job as a priest. The drinking of alcohol could result in the execution of the priest by God like Nadab and Abihu were killed by God earlier in the chapter. God commands Aaron and his sons not to drink wine or strong drink, so that they would not be punished with death by God Himself. Leon Hyatt writes in his commentary on Leviticus:
Obeying this command would assure that they would not die for performing their duties incorrectly, but that assurance definitely implies that they would die if they disobeyed the command. The same stern penalty would result from disobedience to this command as from any other deviation from the instructions of Jehovah to the priests.
Refraining from alcohol would save the lives of the priests, but it would also enable them to “put difference between holy and unholy.” Drinking alcohol effects discernment. Any alcohol at all could impede a priest from discerning between what is unholy and holy. The mixing of the two is disastrous, a great offense to God, who is holy. Lastly, abstaining from alcohol was a necessity to ensure the priest might teach the children of Israel all of God’s statutes, part of the job of the priest. God is saying that alcohol would get in the way of doing that. The passage doesn’t say “alcohol,” but since wine and strong drink could become alcoholic, the priest in his role could not even drink what might be non-alcoholic out of safety for not being influenced by alcohol in a detrimental way in his duties. Is there a priesthood today? Every believer is a priest before God, the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer. Usually people like to focus on the benefits of being a priest, but not the responsibilities. If we look to the example of the Old Testament priest for lessons on the New Testament priesthood of the believer, we should acknowledge that the responsibilities outweigh the benefits. The responsibility should be the focus. We never stop our priestly duties. Today we know when a beverage is alcoholic, because it is plainly labeled. No believer should drink alcohol. It impairs him from his duties. He loses discernment for what is holy and unholy. Alcohol results in a multitude of unholy thoughts, motives, and actions. It keeps a believer from being filled with the Spirit. The Apostle Paul commanded, be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess. Excess is riotousness. The wine possesses or contains riotousness. When it is alcoholic it is riotous. That is seen in Proverbs 23:29-35. Our entire nation prohibited alcohol at one time for believers and unbelievers. Now professing believers advocate for and promote alcohol, serving it themselves. Habakkuk 2:15 warns:
Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness!
Professing believers attempt to attract unbelievers and accommodate them by serving them alcohol, this sin a way to fit in. I’ve read recently of a group of professing believers bringing people over on the Lord’s Day and serving mimosas for brunch. God gave the threat of death to Aaron and his sons for drinking alcohol. Habakkuk directs a “woe,” a severe judgment from God toward those who serve it to others. Do not mock God by ignoring, rebelling against, or scorning what He says about this. Alexander MacLaren writes on this passage:
Nothing has more power to blur the sharpness of moral and religious insight than even a small amount of alcohol. God must be worshipped with clear brain and naturally beating heart. Not the fumes of wine, in which there lurks almost necessarily the tendency to ‘excess,’ but the being ‘filled with the Spirit’ supplies the only legitimate stimulus to devotion. Besides the personal reason for abstinence, there was another,-namely, that only so could the priests teach the people ‘the statutes’ of Jehovah. Lips stained from the wine-cup would not be fit to speak holy words. Words spoken by such would carry no power. God’s servants can never impress on the sluggish conscience of society their solemn messages from God, unless they are conspicuously free from self-indulgence, and show by their example the gulf, wide as between heaven and hell, which parts cleanness from uncleanness. Our lives must witness to the eternal distinction between good and evil, if we are to draw men to ‘abhor that which is evil, and cleave to that which is good.’
Both the Hebrew and Greek words for wine in the Old and New Testaments are permissible for drinking, except when they are alcoholic. Drinking becomes impermissible is when the beverage is alcoholic. In that day, one didn’t know exactly to what degree a product of the vine or the tree was alcoholic. One had to be careful at all times, but the priest couldn’t drink it at all. It was forbidden, because if it was alcoholic, it would impair judgment necessary in the most important work in the world, the worship of God.’https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2021/01/leviticus-108-11-and-its-conformity-to.html
‘These are momentous days when we find ourselves in the midst of a worldwide ‘discipline’ or warning from God, calling us to acknowledge and seek Him. And although we shrink from the thought, this is the reason for all unexpected catastrophes, whether epidemics, floods or vast fires. The Bible says these things will come more often in the ‘last days’, when atheism abounds and people generally have no thought or prayer to their Creator.
A warning from God is not like the last judgement, because it is an expression of God’s love, urging people to turn to Him, whereas the last judgement will finally close the door of mercy for those who turn away from Him. A warning is not permanent, and God has also given mankind the skill to control it, eventually. But a warning catastrophe pulls us up and humbles us, reminding us that we are only people, and that we are in God’s hands and accountable to Him.
Coronavirus has certainly shaken us more than any other catastrophe of recent generations. The relatively gentle approach of our UK scientific elite soon gave way to radical measures as the virus defied all predictions. Mighty China shook with alarm; the grim regime of Iran was stunned; Europe was soon sent scurrying to lock-down, and the all-powerful USA was brought to cower like everyone else.
As the pandemic proceeds, significant features become apparent. It is the elderly (like the writer of this) who are most at risk – those who have had a lifetime of opportunity to honour their Creator (and may have refused). The virus seems to say to the younger people – ‘you have some opportunity left: don’t despise the longsuffering of the Lord.’ Remember that while God is love, He is also holy and just.
This may not be the last warning or discipline, although its full ‘indignation’ has not yet unfolded. Christians are praying for relief and healing for those suffering, and we are witnessing many acts of kindness among people, but it is vital that we heed the message and meaning of this pandemic. Its purpose is to call us to forgiveness and reconciliation with God, by coming to the Saviour, Jesus Christ our Lord, who has opened a way of salvation by suffering and dying for sinful people on Calvary’s cross. To trust in Him, repent of sin, and yield your life to Him, is to receive from Him a new and eternal life.’https://www.metropolitantabernacle.org/Articles/God-s-Love-in-a-Pandemic
It’s always good to hear how God has worked in the lives of others to bring them to Him.
Romans 14:12So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
‘A deputation meeting was recently held via a video conferencing link with a church in the north of England. This meeting focused on the public display of God’s Word by means of the Society’s Scripture posters. Various examples were given of God’s blessing attending them including the following encouraging report.
Some years ago, an ungodly man was on his way to conduct a course on business studies with accountants working in the motor trade. As he passed a place of worship in Norfolk, he was struck with the verse of Scripture on display which read, ‘So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God’ (Romans 14.12). Over a period of several days, as he was giving instruction regarding profit and loss and having to produce accounts, he found himself day by day being convicted by the text that he too must give account, not to man – but God. ‘This,’ he said, ‘was the beginning of my conversion experience.’
As the deputation speaker gave the account above at the meeting, the Elder of the church he was speaking to listened with great interest for, remarkably, he knew this man and had recently taken his funeral. After the deputation meeting the Elder wrote to say:
‘My wife and I were thrilled to be reminded of the conversion of Mr. W. In the motor trade, he had indeed lived life in ‘the fast lane’ but it was wonderful how he was stopped in his tracks by a Scripture poster. He became a dear friend and was a most discerning believer.’
When Australians voted in 2017 for a plebiscite to make so-called same-sex marriage legal it was not supposed to be used as a weapon against those who believe marriage is only between one man and one woman! Well, that isn’t the way it is and to tell you the truth I am sick and tired how those Christians who took a stand against this sin are being treated. For instance; ‘Tennis icon Margaret Court has once again divided opinion after calling on Tennis Australia (TA) to show her the same respect as Rod Laver when celebrating the 50th anniversary of her Grand Slam next year.
Court won all four majors in 1970 and finished her career with 24 grand slam singles titles — the most in history — but has sparked controversy in recent years with her outspoken opposition to same-sex marriage.
Gay marriage in Australia was legalised after the plebiscite in 2017 but Court disagrees with it on religious grounds because the Bible says marriage should be between a man and a woman.
The 77-year-old has been hounded for her views with plenty demanding the court honouring her at Melbourne Park have its name changed.’
Supposedly funny, ‘Australian comedian and host of Triple M Sydney’s breakfast program Lawrence Mooney said Court’s attitude towards gay people has no place in society.
“You can’t use ‘her views are popular’ and ‘she has a right to use them’ to be homophobic, you just can’t be,” Mooney told Channel 9’s Today program.
“And if you’re homophobic there’s no space for you in public life.
“Discriminating about sexuality is a crime, so it is legislated against.
“Margaret Court’s opinions on same sex marriage and sexuality are abhorrent and she should be hounded out of the sport until she falls into line.
If a person who do not believe in sodomite marriage used the language that is used against them in this abhorrent issue they would be in jail for a hate crime. The left seem to think hate is fine when directed at those who disagree with them and especially Christians! The Prime Minister is supposed to be a born-again Christian but he is a milk toast Christian when it comes to taking a stand on this issue and many other issues as well.
I believe, Mooney and those like him have the freedom to say what they believe concerning sodomites ‘marrying’ but those who disagree should have the same freedom to say what they believe and that is marriage is not for sodomites!
