This is too funny - but I suspect the minister didn't appreciate it.

A minister was completing a temperance sermon. With great emphasis he said, 'If I had all the beer in the world, I'd take it and pour it into the river.'

With even greater emphasis he said, 'And if I had all the wine in the world, I'd take it and pour it into the river.'

And then finally, shaking his fist in the air, he Said, 'And if I had all the whiskey in the world, I'd take it and pour it into the river.'

Sermon complete, he sat down...

The song leader stood very cautiously and announced with a smile, nearly laughing, 'For our closing song: Let us sing Hymn #365, 'Shall We Gather at the River.'

Smile - life is too short not to!!

If this brightened your day, Don't let it stop here, Pass it on with a smile Keep Spreading The Cheer.

See you at the river!!! Bring your own glass or cup!

The greatest commandment

This lesson must be important because it is in three gospels. It is found in Matthew 22:36 - 39, Mark 12:29 - 31, and Luke 10:27 & 28. In Matthew it is called the great commandment. In Mark it is called the first commandment, and in Luke a lawyer asks Jesus how he can inherit eternal life. We are to love God with all our heart, soul, body, and mind. (If we love Him, we will keep His commandments). We are to love our neighbors as ourselves. If you don’t want to be robbed, don’t steal. In the 10 commandments, the first four involve us and God. The last six are between us and everybody else. The final character trait that we develop as Christians is love. Love works no ill. If you love someone, you won’t kill them.

I have watched a number of his You Tube videos and have yet to be disappointed. This guy is from England and truly tells it like it is on the subject of muslims and other issues as well. Pretty straight foward if you ask me. If Im off base on this issue please educate me. Especially the progressive liberal leaners. You know I have an opinion on why these individuals for the most part dont assimilate to our way of lifew in the U.S. other than the grand Jihad. First they are so uneducated coming from countries that have such low expectations of their people therefore dont really bother to try and educate them. So it stands to reasdon that these peole havent learned to progress for hundreds and hundreds of years. Sure there are many muslims that have the ability finacially to become educated but for the most part those that come here only know what they know, and that is to just take what they want because thats the way they are brought up to live. They develope these communities in our country because they know just enough to know that they can get away with their bullshit and nobody will dare try and stop them. Why, because they have also learned all about the race card and the use of our constitution against the rest of us. Those that have supposedly assimilated still prefere their own kind and choose their own ways of meeting out justice. Its called SHARIA along with all the words they use to lie, cheat and steal from the rest of us. If it sounds like Im bitter about this your damn right Im bitter!!!! So to all here on OPP that consider me a racist thats on you. All Im doing here is shedding additional light on this pervasive problems our so called leaders have provided us and me and my family. As an aside I just wanted to remind everyone here as to what we almost had as the new POTUS.

Semper Fi

https://youtu.be/j9e_vcSut0A

https://youtu.be/nhjvoJatKOY

FUBAR! look what the Obama admin tried to sneak by us on their way out--15jh., b26
As reported by the Military Times, U.S. military personnel can now request to carry concealed handguns for protection at government facilities, according to new Defense Department directive issued last week in response to a series of deadly shootings over the last seven years.
While service members already were authorized to carry weapons as part of specific job responsibilities, the new policy allows them to apply to carry their privately owned firearms “for personal protection not associated with the performance of official duties,” the directive says.
It also clarifies when military recruiters can be armed, said Army Maj. Jamie Davis, a Defense Department spokesman.
“Commanders have always had that authority to arm recruiters,” Davis told Military Times on Monday. “Some of the wording wasn’t very clear, so they’ve gone through and cleaned it up so it is very clear now that the commanders have that authority to use at their discretion.”
Effective Nov. 18, the directive culminates years of work, Davis said.
The effort began after the 2009 shooting at Fort Hood in Texas, where former Army Maj. Nidal Hasan killed 13 people and wounded more than 30 others. It accelerated after the July 2015 attacks on a recruiting station and Navy reserve center in Chattanooga, Tennessee. That incident claimed the lives of four Marines and a sailor. Both lone-wolf attacks were believed to be inspired by international terrorism.
In April 2014, Spc. Ivan Lopez-Lopez killed three soldiers at Fort Hood and wounded 12 others after an argument. Lopez-Lopez killed himself when confronted by a military police officer.
Those wishing to carry a concealed personal firearm on Defense Department property must apply for permission. They have to be at least 21 years old and meet all federal, state and local laws and host-nation requirements the directive says.
The individual military services will determine requirements for those who will grant conceal-carry requests, the directive says. Those officials must have a minimum rank of lieutenant colonel, commander or the civilian equivalent.
“These authorizations will be for a maximum of 90-calendar-day increments and may be renewed for as long as the threat or circumstance necessitating arming exists,” according to the directive. Service members will not be given permission to carry a concealed handgun if they have violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice “for any offense that calls into question the individual’s right to carry a firearm,” or if they have been convicted or face charges in civilian courts, the directive says.”
So, how would you classify this new directive? First of all, what took so long? And, for the record, this piece failed to mentioned some other attacks on U.S. military installations. There was Carlos Bledsoe and his shooting at the Little Rock Army recruiting station. There was the shooting on the U.S. Navy Yard in Washington, DC. There was the shooting of two Airmen by an Islamic jihadist on Ramstein AB. So, here we are some seven years later, if you start with the Nidal Hasan Islamic jihadist attack on Ft. Hood, and we’re just now rectifying this? Just imagine if we had a real Commander in Chief who said, enough, fix this now, and I mean within one week of what happened at Ft. Hood in 2009. Perhaps what happened just a year ago in Chattanooga, Tenn. at the Marine recruiting station, and then at the U.S. Naval Reserve Training Facility, would not have happened.
I find it rather perplexing that the Defense Department spokesperson Army Major Jamie Davis stated, “Commanders have always had that authority to arm recruiters” — then why weren’t they armed? And give me a freaking break with this excuse that “some of the wording wasn’t very clear” — then who is the doggone Einstein who first wrote the language? Whatever happened to that simple military maxim of KISS — Keep It Simple Stupid?
Actually, these two statements are cause for more concern. When we had the shooting at the Little Rock recruiting station, where one Soldier was killed, another wounded, why was the language not “cleaned up” then, Major Davis? And the readers of AllenBWest.com want to know, who were the Commanders that decided not to arm their recruiters after this Islamic jihadist attack? And at what level was this decision delegated? To me, this is evidence of dereliction of duty on someone’s part, so Major Davis, please tell us who? What Commander decided not to arm their recruiters, and why did it take nine years to “clean up” language?
What truly angers me is when folks just assume we’re dumb, and unable to think beyond these empty PR statements. Any person, especially journalist, worth their weight would say time out and dig deeper into this. There’s no reason it should have taken our Department of Defense nine years to “clean up” language when Major Davis is telling us Commanders could’ve armed recruiters. And who was the person that told Installation Commanders they could not come up with their own directives and policies on arming troops on their bases and posts? After all, these are the Three and Two Star Generals we trust to train, deploy, employ and fight the enemy in faraway lands. So, you mean to tell me we cannot trust them to develop a policy to protect troops on their home station bases?
There’s more to this than meets the eye, and someone was trying to sneak this by us, before they head out the door. Of course, we shall never get answers to the questions I have posed; for some, “what difference at this point does it make?” However, if I were a loved one of any U.S. Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine who lost their life on a U.S. military installation after the Little Rock recruiting station and Ft. Hood Islamic jihadist attacks, I’d seek answers to these questions. Then again, we never got resolution on Benghazi or Extortion 17.
source--allen west, military times,

Nevada election officials will recount ballots in five counties after independent presidential candidate Roque De La Fuente requested and paid about $14,000 for the effort.

De La Fuente finished last in the state but this week requested a recount in Nevada, a state Democrat Hillary Clinton won. De La Fuente says he wants to counterbalance a recount Green Party candidate Jill Stein requested in Wisconsin, which President-elect Donald Trump won. Stein also has requested recounts in Trump-won states of Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Nevada Deputy Secretary of State for Elections Wayne Thorley said Wednesday that state law requires the five counties — Carson City, Douglas, Mineral, Nye and Clark — to begin the recount within five days and to complete it within five additional days.

Thorley says if recount results show a discrepancy of at least 1 percent for De La Fuente or Clinton, a full state recount will be launched.

I am neither a scholar or a scientist. I am a christian, I believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. We are all
of us bombarded with "facts" which challenge our reason on this subject. It is my faith that allows me to believe
What God says. I may not be able to "reason" the issue, I just believe and I have faith that all things will be clear someday.
firstly believing is key. Who are we to question, our minds being finite and miniscule, therefore incapable of fully
grasping the actions of God. If we blessed we get glimpses of God, but only if we are first GIVEN faith.

Nothing but supposition. Jesus said that Creation happened in six days. That is what the earliest Greek manuscripts of the New Testament say. The word used describes a 24 hour period. Jesus spoke the universe into existence. This indicates that it was instantaneous. When Jesus performed miracles, he spoke and they happened. Same with Creation. And, once again, context is very important. Every other time the Hebrew word for day is used with a number, it means a 24 hour day. What makes you think that it doesn't, in the case of Genesis? Let me ask you a question. Do you have a problem with a literal interpretation of Genesis, with a six day Creation?

Four blind men and an elephant

Listening to any man teach the bible is like listening to a blind man describe an elephant. There were four blind men describing an elephant. One stands next to the trunk, one stands near the leg. One stands by the side, and one stands near the tail. The man near the trunk describes the elephant as being like a snake, whereas to the man standing near the leg an elephant is like a tree trunk. To the man standing by the side the elephant is like a wall, but to the man near the tail an elephant is like a rope. None of the men can see the elephant from trunk to tail. All men describe the elephant based on limited knowledge and experience. Our biblical understanding is similar. Some base their biblical understanding on hearsay, what they heard someone say. None of us can know the future with any certainty. Much less what happens after death. What we think we know may not be true. No man is infallible. The bible is a translation. Your interpretation of scripture may be incorrect. Your understanding may be unfruitful.