I agree with the pps who mentioned lessons in housekeeping (not just cleaning, but paying bills, anticipating taxes and repairs &tc). I've started having dd do taxes with some of our ancient tax papers. She also balances a pretend check-book (we don't actually use checks :lol:). Dd's learning to budget and when she starts to daydream about the future I try to shed a little reality into the mix (sure, three hundred a month isn't too bad a car payment, but don't forget your insurance will be nearly the same amount). Dh and I married young, we just had our anniversary last Sunday (12 years). At first I was very against my kids getting married young... then I remembered that once they're 18 it's not up to me anymore :p Now, I just try to have them prepared for anything :lol:

I do find it disturbing. I'm hoping that understanding all the ins and outs will be a comfort, but I doubt it.

:party: Sounds like your house is the place to be! :lol: How much fun are you going to have looking back on all this mess, to the soundtrack of Rainbow Connection bashed out on a banjo...

Ah, we did something like that in Cub Scouts, then. :iagree: We've done experiments that it didn't seem possible to mess up and yet... So, we've backed off from experiments. I'm starting to think I may have an anti-science thumb (to go along with my black thumb when it comes to plants).

Ah, well now you know how great a scientific mind I have :lol: I have no idea what an azimuth is ;)

We've had those problems too. Our heating and a/c are not central (so 90% of the time our windows are open), all I can figure is that half of our experiments bomb because our "room temperature" is very seldom "room temperature" and we live in a very humid area. Also, the science we did just didn't relate to anything else in our lives. :confused: I thought the sun rose in the east and set in west?

We've just started a new science program for my older two dc (I haven't changed my sig yet). Dd felt her text book was WAY to dry and ds was just not interested in the books he was using. We've switched over to a more Christian science curriculum and so far so good. The kids are happier and more interested in science that includes God. For my dc the science programs we were using just didn't speak to them.

:confused: How am I supposed to post then? You're referring to both Bill and Heather as is they cannot read what you're saying. I suppose that since it's you defending them from me that's acceptable? This isn't a party and we're not standing next to each other. It's a message board, we write notes and walk away. I dropped a line to Heather, regarding her specific post about pressuring the church to accept something and change their teachings. Bill read the note to Heather, public forum - I get that, and responded as if it was directed at him. It wasn't. :shrug: Do I need to put a disclaimer in my sig line?

:D Sure thing. :grouphug: No problem. I admit, I can see how it could be taken that way. If I had responded to Bill with those verses, then it would definitely be meant that way. However, I responded to Heather, who understood my meaning quite well. Bill just took it up and responded. It was almost sort-of-kind-of taken out of context.

Well, their names were Abram and Sarai before the covenant. What I meant was, his covenant with God had not been confirmed or sealed when he did that with Hagar. I think, when the covenant was finalized, so to speak :p, that Hagar's position was changed, and I'm not sure she was ever equal to Sarai or Sarah. I'm pretty sure in all/most polygamous situations one wife takes precidence over the rest. If you look, you'll see prostitution is pretty well reviled throughout the NT. It's not just Paul. In Revelations the whore of Babylon, the prostitute that slept with all the kings and brought sexual immorality to all, is called both a whore and a prostitute (I say this because I think the difference between the two is money, right?). I know that prostitution was a side street to what we were discussing, but it seems like the first hurdle to cross iykwIm. While Christ did forgive the prostitute for her sins, when they'd lined up to stone her (he who is without sin...), he also told her to go and "sin no more." Well, if prostitution is alright, then why would she need to be forgiven and why the admonishment not to sin anymore? I've always assumed he meant that she should go and not prostitute herself anymore.

You would greet me in public :w00t: :lol: I understand what you're saying, then. It just seemed like my motives (in the scriptures I posted) were being assumed to be nasty. ETA, to your ETA, I agree.

Do you consider what is in the New Testament as rules to follow, or only the commandments? Sure thing. I didn't know if you wanted them, except that part about Abram and Sarai... also, take note, they hadn't changed their names yet. The covenant hadn't been confirmed when Abraham did that.

It was meant as, "Heather, I agree with you and the Scripture does too." Uhuh, but I posted agreeing with Heather that what was being pushed was the idea that Christians saying that homosexual sex was a sin is hate and has to be gotten rid of, IE, the teachings needed to be changed to what is now commonly accepted. I see this in many posts in this thread where it is not how someone votes that is being attacked, but the belief they hold. As far as voting goes, I guess we're all supposed to vote what we believe is right. Sure, I see that. I think Heather and I are both concerned with how it goes from saying we must tolerate to we must accept. However, that fence (between how you vote, versus what you believe) keeps getting hopped. One moment belief is fine, as long as you vote according to whatever someone else believes, the next voting is just a surface issue and the root is the "hate" of the teaching. Not disagreeing with you..... just trying to clarify where I'm at here. :iagree:

:shrug: The quotes were about people trying to change what is taught at church to things that jive better with what is accepted by instinct or the teachings of the world. I can see how it could be insulting. It was in support of Heather's post saying that she would not change what she believed and doesn't think that churches should have to change what they believe because it doesn't accept what is being taught outside of the church today.

It could be taken that way, I guess. It was posted in response to someone I agreed with as a way of support.

I'm sorry Denise, I post and then see that you've posted :p Prostitution is listed with sexual immorality, that is considered sexual immorality. I thought you knew that, this is not coming out with the tone it's meant for... what I mean is that I thought you knew prostitution is listed with sexual immorality and so you knew something I didn't (how it differed from pre-marital sex while going along with adultery). This was not meant to be a question so I could 'prove' you wrong, iykwIm. Irk. Does any of that make sense? I didn't expect your answer to be what it was, rather I expected to learn something new... if that makes sense.

I'm not RC, I am a member of a Baptist church, but I have a few answers to your other questions :D. In Romans (6:16) Paul says, "Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? for it is said, 'The two will become one flesh.'" He's referencing Gen 2:24, "For this reason a man wil leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." So, Paul says that 'uniting' with a prostitute means you're one flesh with them and that's what Christians tend to consider marraige. Gen 16 (that's the part with Hagar) 3, "So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife."

Even after the divorce...

What about prostitution? What covenant or promise is the prostitute breaking?

Nevermind :D

:grouphug:

:lol: I think I got lost in the mix ;)

Denise in Florida, would you consider pre-marital sex sexual immorality?

Was this in response to the verses themselves, if so are you being ironic? This is what I was agreeing with, shrunk to the point. What I responded with where verses to shore Heather up, let her know that I agree and share with her where these sorts of teachings are to be expected.

:grouphug: In our church we've all noticed that rebellion is strongest Sunday morning. Some days I leave the slouchers home, because I need to go to church, I enjoy church, and I come home to find them just as grumpy and unsatisfied while I'm bouncing off the walls joyfully :p If I were you and dh wanted to stay home, I'd leave the baby too (for sure). :grouphug: