Drug Dealing and the Bible

[Nazaroo]

Nearly 23,000 people have been killed in drug-related violence in Mexico since the launch of a government crackdown on drug gangs at the end of 2006, according to a government report.
The report, leaked to media on Tuesday, said gang violence has continued surging this year, with 3,365 people killed between January and March.

The confidential report, sent to parliamentarians, indicated security forces have been involved in most of the gunbattles of the past three years: 977 fights have been between gangs and security forces, compared to 309 between rival gangs.
The total toll of 22,743 deaths was a rise of more than 7,000 compared with previous official estimates.
The worst-hit regions were in northern areas near the 3,200-kilometre US border.
The government report said Chihuahua state was Mexico's hardest-hit state, with 6,757 people killed.

Drug arrests
More than 121,000 drug suspects have been detained since 2006, according to the document. It gave no figure for how many of those had been convicted.
in depth
Fernando Gomez Montt, the interior minister, confirmed in a news conference that new figures had been passed on to legislators but gave no further details.
Violence has spiked since Felipe Calderon, the Mexican president, launched a military crackdown on organised crime when he took office.
The government attributes the increase in violence to gangs lashing back at security forces and infighting among cartels whose leadership has been shaken by the arrest of senior commanders.
The US-backed deployment of more than 40,000 soldiers and federal police across the country has come under increasing criticism from opposition politicians and drug trade experts, who argue the crackdown has led to human rights abuses and done little to stem the flow of narcotics to the US.
In the latest violence, the bodies of six men were found on the side of a road on Tuesday in Cuernavaca, a city near Mexico's capital where authorities say a battle has erupted for leadership of the Beltran Leyva cartel. Its leader was killed in a battle with marines in December.
Police said the six men were tortured, then each shot once in the head.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2010/04/201041432158263233.html

Keep praying that the Lord will help the Mexican and US government to bring a final end to this Drug war, which is destroying two countries, the USA and Mexico.

peace
Nazaroo

 

[Nazaroo]

US-trained cartel terrorises Mexico

US-trained cartel terrorises Mexico

US-trained cartel terrorises Mexico
Founders of the Zetas drug gang learned special forces techniques at Ft. Bragg before waging a campaign of carnage.

Chris Arsenault Last Modified: 28 Oct 2010 13:38 GMT


k

Despite the deployment of 50,000 troops, Mexico seems to be losing the 'war on drugs' [AFP] It was a brutal massacre even by the gruesomestandards of Mexico’s drug war: 72 migrant workers gunned down by the "Zetas" - arguably the country's most violent cartel - and left rotting in a pile outside a ranch in Tamaulipas state near the US border in late August.
The Zetas have a fearsome reputation, but the real surprise comes not in their ruthless use of violence, but in the origins of where they learned the tricks of their bloody trade.

Some of the cartel's initial members were elite Mexican troops, trained in the early 1990s by America’s 7th Special Forces Group or "snake eaters" at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, a former US special operations commander has told Al Jazeera.
“They were given map reading courses, communications, standard special forces training, light to heavy weapons, machine guns and automatic weapons,” says Craig Deare, the former special forces commander who is now a professor at the US National Defence University.
"I had some visibility on what was happening, because this [issue] was related to things I was doing in the Pentagon in the 1990s," Deare, who also served as country director in the office of the US Secretary of Defence, says.
"Other cartels have accused the Zetas of not following the 'gentlemen's code' of drug trafficking"
Kristen Bricker, NACLA Research Associate
The Mexican personnel who received US training and later formed the Zetas came from the Airmobile Special Forces Group (GAFE), which is considered an elite division of the Mexican military.
Their US training was designed to prepare them for counter-insurgency and, ironically, counter-narcotics operations, although Deare says they were not taught the most advanced commando techniques available at Ft. Bragg.
Military forces from around the world train at Ft. Bragg, so there is nothing unique about Mexican operatives learning counter-insurgency tactics at the facility. However, critics say the specific skills learned by the Zetas primed them for careers as contract killers and drug dealers.
“The Zetas definitely have the reputation of being the most dangerous, the most vicious, the most renegade of the cartels,” says Kristen Bricker, a Mexico-based research associate with the North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA).
About 29,000 people have died since Felipe Calderon, Mexico’s president, declared war on the drug cartels in 2006.
Extreme violence
The group has mounted the severed heads of its victims on pikes in urban areas, posted torture and execution videos on the internet, forced poor migrants into prostitution and massacred college students during house parties.
"Other cartels have accused them of not following the 'gentlemen's code' of drug trafficking and causing undue violence," Bricker told Al Jazeera.
"At one time, it was considered bad form to kill pregnant women, but not any more." For safety concerns, Bricker didn’t want to say where she lives in Mexico.
Deare estimates "probably more than 500" GAFE personnel received special forces training. He is unsure exactly how long the programme lasted. The Zetas came to the attention of Mexico’s Attorney General’s office in 1999.
After US training, GAFE operatives defected from the Mexican military to become hired guns, providing security to the Gulf cartel, a well established trafficking organisation, according to Laura Carlsen, director of the Americas program of the International Relations Center.
"They split from the Gulf cartel and formed as a cartel in their own right," Carlsen, based in Mexico City, told Al Jazeera.
The Zetas' alleged current leaders, Heriberto Lazcano, known as Z-3 and Miguel Trevino, or Z-40, were first recruited by Osiel Cardenas, the now-jailed leader of the Gulf cartel. The name "Zetas" originates from the radio code "Z" used by top military commanders in Mexico.
But unlike Zorro, the Mexican outlaw hero who also used the "Z" alias, Los Zetas steal from everyone, not just the rich. And they certainly don’t give much back to the poor, except the corpses of their relatives. "They are just known for being a different kind of human being," says Bricker.
Frequent defections
The number of initial defectors from GAFE is thought to be somewhere between 30 and 200, but "the exact number is unclear", says Deare. However, the possibility of defections should not have come as a surprise to US trainers.
The Mexican state "does not pay soldiers enough" Deare says. "I am not saying they [the government] have to pay as much as the cartels, but they [security forces] must be paid decently if they aren’t going to be susceptible to corruption."
The GAFE’s desertion rate of an estimated 25 per cent is high, even by the low standards of Mexico’s security forces. Between 2000 and 2005 more than 1,300 of the elite troops defected, La Journada newspaper reported.

The Zetas decided forming their own cartel was more profitable than working for the military or even other drug gangs [Reuters] "The US really needs to examine their vetting procedures and manuals to see why so many people who they train do so many terrible things when they go back home," Bricker said.
But just blaming Uncle Sam for the rise of the Zetas and increasing drug violenceis too simplistic, says Bricker.
"It wasn't just US training. The GAFE were also trained by the Kaibiles of Guatemala, a notoriously brutal special operations force from that country’s dirty war in the 1980s," said Bricker.
And even without special training for cartels, there is little trust that Mexican security forces can deal with the drug trade.
In May 2006, "La Barbie" a leader of the rival Sinaloa cartel, took out a full page advert in a Mexico City daily newspaper, to allege that Mexican police were protecting the Zetas.
For their part, the Zetas have long complained that the Sinaloa cartel enjoys police protection.
Despite debacles surrounding the Zetas and increasing violence, Deare - who physically resembles the tough but fair minded under-secretary of defence played by Harrison Ford in the fictional drug war thriller Clear and Present Danger - thinks Mexico needs more, not less, US involvement.
America has pledged some $1.3bn to assist Mexico in the drug war through the 2007 Merida initiative, but much of that cash hasn’t been spent because it has been stalled in Congress, Deare says.
Ulterior motives
Other analysts are critical of the initiative because it allows the US to "meddle" in Mexico’s affairs and has not garnered the desired results.
"For citizens here, Merida causes two great concerns: it raises questions of national sovereignty and there is a lot of fear that under the cover of the drug war there will be increasing attacks on grassroots movements," says Carlsen.

GAFE, for example, was established in 1994 to fight Zapatista rebels in southern Mexico, La Journada reported.
The Zapatistas, a poorly armed primarily indigenous militia, rose up against the Mexican government on January 1, 1994, the same day the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into effect between the US, Canada and Mexico.
The Zapatistas called NAFTA a "death sentence", in part, because the agreement would allow subsidised US crops to enter the Mexican market, pushing small farmers off the land.
After battling the insurgency, GAFE gained additional training and support from the US to fight the drug trade, a business which arguably benefited more than any other from NAFTA. Relaxed borders increased trade flows in many goods, illegal drugs in particular, and rural displacement swelled the ranks of unemployed young men eager to make quick cash by any means necessary.

Valued between $19bn and $40bn dollars on a yearly basis – exact figures aren’t available for obvious reasons- the drug trade has massive power as a corrupting influence.
And despite 50,000 Mexican troops fighting the cartels, despite the mangled bodies and US assurances of support, Bricker speaks for all three analysts from divergent political outlooks when she states: "No one has been able to present any evidence that the Mexican government is winning this war."
And, if winning the war on drugs is the goal, training the most violent cartel probably isn't a great start.

This article shows the dirty role of key parts of the US Government with involvement in the Drug Problem.

The USA needs to have a unified and strong ethical position on drugs, not a factionalized, split group of forces fighting each other.



peace
Nazaroo

 

[Nazaroo]

Youtube sermon on "pharmakeia" and drug dealing here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sP7gyWYy48s

peace
Nazaroo

 

[Nazaroo]

The true cost of 'vacations in Mexico' has become apparent.

God Himself may have struck a prestigious resort for the wealthy, and stop-over for expensive Carribean cruises:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/101115/national/mexico_hotel_explosion_cda

Six Canadians wounded in Mexico hotel blast


The Mexicans, and even the Canadian government are claiming it is some kind of "natural accident" (right under the elitist private section of an elitist private hotel).

Yet there may be an even simpler explanation. More Mexican Drug-Related Terrorism, but the governments, more terrified of losing tourism revenues than catching terrorists, are sloughing it off.

The cost of the massive Drug Culture of North America rolls on.

peace
Nazaroo

 

[Nazaroo]

The PROHIBITION was a practical success... admitted by Editor of Touchstone Magazine

The PROHIBITION was a practical success... admitted by Editor of Touchstone Magazine

The Editor of Touchstone made the very cogent point that the Prohibition actually worked quite well in cutting down alcohol abuse and the death toll, and health costs from alcoholism.


http://merecomments.typepad.com/merecomments/2010/11/legislating-morality-1.html

"So, then, did Prohibition actually lower the level of drunkenness in America? Yes, it did. The evidence is inescapable. Take a look at actuarial tables drawn up before and after Prohibition, and note the number of people who died of alcohol-related causes.

You will find, for example, a sudden and very sharp drop in deaths caused by cirrhosis of the liver. Not only that, but the incidence of such deaths remained low all throughout the Prohibition years, even though some of them coincided with the miserable time of the Great Depression. Prohibition, whatever else we can say about it, actually did achieve the primary end for which it was passed.

Did it mean that nobody got drunk? Of course not.

Did it mean that drunkenness became far less common, far less of a way of life? Of course it did.

Does that mean that it was a good law? No, it was a well-intended bad law.

Is it evidence that one cannot legislate morality? Quite the reverse.

Is it evidence that one should not legislate morality? No, not at all.

The question is, what to legislate about, where, how, to what end, and with what possible unintended effects."

The Editor here admits what every American and every Christian should know:

(1) The Law does work. You CAN improve moral behaviour by legislation. Its worth having laws and enforcing them.

(2) Prohibition did work and will work again. North America's largest drug problem, affecting the largest number of people, and causing the greatest economic and and negative social and health impact of all drugs ever abused, can be improved drastically by legislation and enforcement.

peace
Nazaroo

 

[Nazaroo]

Death rate in Mexico now 8 per day!

Killings Up Nearly 50% in Mexican Border City

CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico – A total of 1,700 gangland killings occurred in the northern Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez during the first seven months of the year, a figure that was up 47.6 percent from the same period in 2009, when 1,150 people were murdered, officials and press reports said.

The January-July 2010 figure includes 18 murders that occurred over the weekend in Mexico’s murder capital.

Ciudad Juarez, located across the border from El Paso, Texas, is the scene of a war for control of smuggling routes between the Juarez and Sinaloa drug cartels.

Fifteen people, including two women, were murdered in the border city on Saturday.

Three other people were killed on Sunday, Chihuahua state prosecutors said.

July ended as the second-most-violent month of 2010 in the border city, with 291 homicides, or an average of eight per day, being registered.

June ranks as the most violent month of the year, with 313 homicides, followed by May, with 262; March, with 240; January, with 227; April, with 205; and February, with 163.

Ciudad Juarez, where nearly 6,000 people have been murdered since 2008, has been plagued by drug-related violence for years.

The murder rate took off in the border city of 1.5 million people in 2007, when 310 people were killed, then it more than tripled to 1,607 in 2008, according to state AG’s office figures, with the number of killings climbing to 2,635 last year.

Ciudad Juarez, with 191 homicides per 100,000 residents, was the most violent city in the world in 2009, registering a higher murder rate than San Pedro Sula, San Salvador, Caracas and Guatemala, two Mexican non-governmental organizations said in a report released earlier this year.

Some 25,000 people have died in drug-related violence since President Felipe Calderon declared war on Mexico’s cartels shortly after taking office in December 2006.

More than 7,000 gangland killings have occurred so far this year in Mexico, Attorney General Arturo Chavez Chavez said last month.

The death toll for all of 2009 was 7,724. EFE

Its hard to imagine that there is a large scale Revolution taking place next door to the USA, but it is, with 30,000 US troops, matched by Mexican federalis.

This is the true price of recreational drug use, and
Christian leaders have to take a stand now or
allow the USA to be overrun by drug dealers and drug addicts.

peace
Nazaroo

 

[Nazaroo]

The results of Christian wishywashy toleration of recreational drug abuse.

Non-Christians simply carry on sinning, distort the message, and mock Christ.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IBxfGdRZvaI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IBxfGdRZvaI

peace
Nazaroo

 

[Gerald]

Christian leaders have to take a stand now or
allow the USA to be overrun by drug dealers and drug addicts.

A bit late with that warning, don't you think...?

 

[Nazaroo]

"Wine is more dangerous than doing other drugs." a new study by the University of Victoria' Centre for Addictions Research says.


Released thursday, the study compared alcohol to marijuana, estacy and crack cocaine, heroin, and 'crystal meth'.

Alcohol is incredibly cheap when compared with every one of those things" said the Centre's director, Tim Stockwell, adding excess booze was more likely to lead to death.

The study found low alcohol prices contributed to more than 2,000 alcohol related deaths in British Columbia annually, and more hospitalization than all illicit drugs combined.

The study recommended that the Provincial Government regularly increase the price of beer, wine, cider and coolers, as it recently did with spirits.

"We're not being prohibitionists here, most people enjoy a drink, we're just concerned about the public health and safety aspects." Stockwell said.

Reporter, Sandy Buemann, QMI Toronto Sun Dec 17 2010.


--------------------------

more evidence of the obvious.

Alcohol kills and destroys.


peace
Nazaroo

 

[BabyChristian]

By the way DRUG DEALING is in fact mentioned specifically in the New Testament and condemned, in the original Greek.

We had a long thread on this only a year or two ago.

It can be found here:

Pharmakeia: Drug-Dealing in the New Testament


We suggest anyone interested in what the New Testament really says about drugs and drug dealers should go here.

Here is a quotation from that thread:


------------------------------------------------------------
Drug Dealers In the Bible? Where?

Drug dealing is treated gravely and severely condemned in the New Testament: 5 times.

(Gal.5:20, Rev.9:21, 18:23, 21:8, 22:15, original Greek)

Paul Spoke out against Drug Dealing:

Gal 5:20 "Now the works of the flesh are OBVIOUS: sexual immorality, uncleanness, ... DRUG DEALING ( pharmakeia )...and things like these I am warning you, THOSE WHO DO THEM WILL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD!"
​

John also Speaks out against Drugs:

Rev. 9:21 "Nor did they even repent of their murders or their DRUG DEALING (ton pharmakon) or their sexual immorality or their robbery."

Rev 22:15 "OUTSIDE (heaven) are the dogs and the DRUG DEALERS (hoi pharmakoi), and everyone who practises falsehood."

Rev 18:23 Babylon the Great City has fallen...All nations were deceived by your DRUG DEALING (en te pharmakeia)"

Rev 21:8 "But as for the ...DRUG DEALERS (pharmakois) their place will be in the Lake of Fire, which is the Second Death!"
​

Why Should we translate 'pharmakoi' as Drug Dealers?

The Greek word ‘pharmakeia’ has been used since 500 years before Jesus’ time to refer to the buying and selling of drugs for both recreational and medical purposes, and also to refer to quacks selling ‘miracle cures’ etc. This is the very word we get our modern English word ‘Pharmacy’ from, to refer to a dealer or supplier of drugs, a drug store.

Why isn't this in my English Translation?

It has been known since ancient times that the word means ‘drug dealing’. Abundant references in Classical literature show this beyond dispute. In English bibles the term ‘drug dealing’ was deliberately avoided and a completely different word, ‘sorcery’ put in its place. This is was not just due to superstitious ignorance.

During the Middle Ages the Church became the largest manufacturer and supplier of the most popular drug on earth: ALCOHOL. The church sold out to the drug dealing industry, and God’s Word was intentionally kept obscure.
​

To this day, the Western Church not only makes its own wine for religious use, but also sells it commercially through various monasteries and companies.

There may have been some 'excuse' for this sorry state of affairs in the 16th century, before drug dealing was widely understood and formally criminalized. However, in the 21st century there really is no excuse for failing to properly render the original Greek, and make the truth plain.



Are Drug Dealers Really Going to be Destroyed?

This is the million dollar question! In recent times, some Universalists have tried to re-interpret the bible to support the idea that all people are ultimately saved. When Revelation says,

Rev 21:8 "But as for the ...DRUG DEALERS (pharmakois) their place will be in the Lake of Fire, which is the Second Death!"
​

...the Universalists would have us believe it should be rendered,

"...their PART will be in the Lake of Fire, ..."

In this interpretation, a person's 'part' or 'portion' refers to his works and/or collected earnings for good and bad deeds. From this idea they want you to believe that only their 'bad works' will pass through a kind of testing fire, but the drug dealers themselves (and other extreme criminals) and their souls will be saved, thus 'fulfilling the scriptures' in a humane way.

But can this interpretation hold up? Sadly, NO. For safeguarding the meaning here and removing any ambiguity, the action of the Lake of Fire is plainly identified by the following phrase:

"...the Lake of Fire, which is the Second Death!"



Ordinary Death versus the Second Death

Now ordinary death is horrifying enough: it is often inconvenient, humiliating, slow, painful, and terrifying, especially if the death is a crime being perpetrated upon an innocent victim. We may hope in an afterlife, but death is quite serious, even for sincerely spiritual people. And the New Testament doesn't avoid the issue, or flower it up with euphemisms. Instead it warns seekers of God that bad things can happen.

"you (disciples) will be persecuted: handed over to courts and imprisoned... betrayed even by friends and relatives, and some of you put to death... and hated by all for My name's sake, ...but not a hair of your head will ultimately be lost!" (Luke 21:12f)
​

Of course we shouldn't be surprised. The very existance of 'sin' can mean that innocent or at least undeserving people can suffer. By definition, murder is killing someone who shouldn't be killed. Experience shows that even children can be victimized, and even good people can still make mistakes that cause injury or cost lives.

Yet we should not exaggerate ordinary death: there are things more terrible than death:

"Don't be afraid of those who kill the body and afterward can do no more.
I will tell you who to fear: Fear Him who, after He has killed,
has the power to cast into hellfire!" (Luke 12:4,5)
​

This is clearly the Second Death, and is to be feared far more than death.


According to Revelation it is applied against criminals, and evil men. And yet it is also clear from all the warnings, that all men are at risk: that any man could find himself facing the Second Death, if he committed a serious enough sin.

Even John, the Apostle of Love warns us of the gravity of certain sins. He says there is a 'sin that leads to Death', and actually tells Christians NOT to pray for those who commit such sins!

If anyone sees a brother commit a sin that is not a deadly sin, he can pray, and God will extend life to his brother, ...provided it is NOT a deadly sin: There is sin that leads to death: and I am NOT saying that you should pray in that case! (1 John 5:16)
​

Wow, not only are some people going to be destroyed, but we aren't even supposed to pray for them.



Ordinary Judgement versus Special Judgement: The Second Death

How could the Universalists get it so wrong? Simple: what they are talking about is the common Judgement that everyone faces. All people will have their works, good and bad, judged by God on Judgement Day. Of all the works and deeds, whatever is built upon sand will pass away. (James 5:1-4).

But every sincere Christian or seeker of God believes in God's fair judgement, and certainly doesn't need to fear it. (1 John 4:18) Even if my earthly deeds may turn out to be of little value, I will certainly be grateful to at least be judged fairly, and I'll be happy to make it to heaven, even if I am not much of a hero.


The Horrific Second Death:

But ordinary judgement simply CAN'T be what every Apostle was frantically warning us about! What they are talking about can only be the ultimate penalty for evil works: Pain, self-pity and horror, ending in utter destruction without appeal, as God hands out His Final Devastating Judgement. It makes sense to fear this!

John: "You are well aware that no murderer has eternal life remaining in him."

Peter: "If the righteous are scarcely saved, what will happen to the wicked?"

James: "Faith without deeds is useless!...it is by deeds, not just believing, that someone is justified."

Hebrews: "Whoever breaks the Law is ruthlessly put to death...and you may be sure that anyone who tramples on the Son of God, and who treats the blood of the Covenant as unholy, and insults the Spirit will be condemned to a far more severe punishment."

Paul: "...I am warning you, THOSE WHO DO THESE THINGS WILL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD!"

Jesus: "No one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will be forgiven."

1 John 3:15/1 Peter 4:18/James 2:20-24/Heb 10:28-29/Gal. 5:20/Luke 12:10

​

Obviously what these apostles are talking about is NOT ordinary Judgement of men and their works, where the chaff is burnt off, and the wheat remains, or the slag is removed, from true gold through a cleansing fire. Instead, here we are warned of a dire consequence worse than death, an irreversible and violent destruction.


The Book of Revelation is supported by every apostle and leader of the New Testament, although its detailed description of God's Final Judgement is unique. Some who suffer the Wrath of God clearly do NOT repent, and so are NOT saved, but are cast into God's garbage can:

"When it happens, those people will long for death but not find it anywhere!"

"But the survivors of the first plagues refused to repent, or stop their murders, DRUG DEALING, sexual immorality, or robbery."

"This is the Second Death: the Lake of Fire. And anyone whose name was not found written in the Book of Life was thrown into the Lake of Fire."

"And the Demon (Diabolos) who had deceived them was also thrown into the Lake of Fire and Sulfur, where the Beast and False Prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night, aeon after aeon." (Revelation 9:6,21, 20:15 20:10)
​

This makes it clear that the doctrine of Universal Salvation is bankrupt, and is not supported by the New Testament as a whole.

Anyone can be saved, but not everyone will be.



Of course God doesn't wish anyone to perish, but wishes that all might have Eternal Life. (John 3:16-17)


God is not Mocked

But according to the New Testament view, God's Divine nature, which gives men everywhere ample opportunity to repent, has a complimentary side which ultimately requires justice and fairness, and results in a Final Judgement for some.

God won't force people to repent,
but He will certainly destroy them if they refuse to.



No Hope for Drug Dealers?

We have seen that some people are not saved but are thrown into the Lake of Fire, and some of those who are thrown into the Lake of Fire are DRUG DEALERS. But is God referring to ALL drug dealers, or just some of them?


Jesus made it clear that there are 'small' sins and 'large' sins (Matthew 23:23). We have already seen that some sins lead to death, or worse. (1 John 5:16, Heb.10:28-29), and horrific punishments are prophesied in Revelation. Now please note again that Paul doesn't hesitate grouping DRUG DEALING alongside the worst sins that lead certainly to death and exclude Eternal Life also.

Gal 5:20 "...DRUG DEALING...and things like these I am warning you, THOSE WHO DO THEM WILL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD!"
​

And Paul is not just talking about a handful of ringleaders, or some international drug lords only: He warns ordinary church goers that committing these sins leads to death and disqualifies you for Eternal Life! That's pretty much EVERY DRUG DEALER, since it even includes backsliding Christians!

But wait, there may still be hope for a repentant DRUG DEALER: God is not an unjust Judge. We can hope He will make some allowance for ignorance, poverty, deception, or unreasonable circumstances. And indeed, Jesus gives us some hope here:

"The one who knew what his Master wanted, but didn't do it will get a severe beating, but he who did NOT know and earned a beating will get a lighter beating."
(Luke 12:47-48)
​

A DRUG DEALER who is STILL ALIVE, and capable of repenting and stopping his crimes, could receive forgiveness and be saved:

"As I live," says the Lord God, "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but prefer the wicked turn back from their evil and live. Turn back! Repent of your evil, for why should you die?" (Ezekiel 33:11)
​

On the other hand, a Christian who falls away from his faithfulness and commits crimes like DRUG DEALING and murder is in danger of the severest Judgement:

"But the righteous won't be able to count on their righteousness if they sin: If they trust in their righteousness and commit sin, none of their righteous deeds will be remembered! But in the sin they have committed, they will die." (Ezek 33:12-13)


​

"Don't be deceived, for God is not mocked: Whatever you sow, you will reap." (Gal. 6:7)
​

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jumping Jehoshaphat that's a long copy and paste and plagiarizing. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=50353

You do know right that you should put a URL on your post when you copy and paste an entire article from another site?

Kinda deceptive of you I'd say.......you may burn in hell for this, just like I do for drinking alcohol. :chuckle:

 

[JoeyArnold]

Jumping Jehoshaphat that's a long copy and paste and plagiarizing. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=50353

You do know right that you should put a URL on your post when you copy and paste an entire article from another site?

Kinda deceptive of you I'd say.......you may burn in hell for this, just like I do for drinking alcohol. :chuckle:

My dad is an alcohol. But he at least doesn't write or pretend to write and steal from others.

Good thing you don't steal words either.

 

[BabyChristian]

My dad is an alcohol. But he at least doesn't write or pretend to write and steal from others.

Good thing you don't steal words either.

Yeah, I was sober for 22 years, relapsed 5 years ago, don't drink 95% of the time still but screw up at times and Nazaroo pontificated that I was going to hell when I started a thread because I was angry at myself for drinking for one day. He got a neg rep for his tude.

 

[BabyChristian]

"Wine is more dangerous than doing other drugs." a new study by the University of Victoria' Centre for Addictions Research says.


Released thursday, the study compared alcohol to marijuana, estacy and crack cocaine, heroin, and 'crystal meth'.

Alcohol is incredibly cheap when compared with every one of those things" said the Centre's director, Tim Stockwell, adding excess booze was more likely to lead to death.

The study found low alcohol prices contributed to more than 2,000 alcohol related deaths in British Columbia annually, and more hospitalization than all illicit drugs combined.

The study recommended that the Provincial Government regularly increase the price of beer, wine, cider and coolers, as it recently did with spirits.

"We're not being prohibitionists here, most people enjoy a drink, we're just concerned about the public health and safety aspects." Stockwell said.

Reporter, Sandy Buemann, QMI Toronto Sun Dec 17 2010.


--------------------------

more evidence of the obvious.

Alcohol kills and destroys.


peace
Nazaroo

That's just such a ridiculous bunch of hogwash. It depends on how much alcohol and how much of other drugs people are doing.

But you're right, alcohol is bad but being legal more people use it so yes the statistics are going to be higher in deaths.

You're posts are quite artful I've noticed. Lots of drama, red letters, big fonts blah blah blah.

 

[taikoo]

That's just such a ridiculous bunch of hogwash. It depends on how much alcohol and how much of other drugs people are doing.

But you're right, alcohol is bad but being legal more people use it so yes the statistics are going to be higher in deaths.

You're posts are quite artful I've noticed. Lots of drama, red letters, big fonts blah blah blah.

It is dangerous for sure. I've never had any and dont plan to.

You have all my best wishes for your success dealing with what it has brought into your life.

you will succeed, for the reason that you intend to.

And no god that could possibly exist would punish you for this.

 

[Desert Reign]

It is dangerous for sure. I've never had any and dont plan to.

You have all my best wishes for your success dealing with what it has brought into your life.

you will succeed, for the reason that you intend to.

And no god that could possibly exist would punish you for this.

That's well said. However, surely you wouldn't criticise Nazaroo for pointing out that alcohol is bad? And by the way, BC, he did post the link to that passage so it wasn't plagiarism. Perhaps it's when he sees people like you, BC, that his anger is kindled against the demon drink. As it happens, I don't 100% agree with him, but wouldn't you rather have him championing the cause against drug dealers, which is for the protection of all of us, than watching idly by saying 'My little bit won't change anything.'

 

[Nazaroo]

Jumping Jehoshaphat that's a long copy and paste and plagiarizing. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=50353

You do know right that you should put a URL on your post when you copy and paste an entire article from another site?

Kinda deceptive of you I'd say.......you may burn in hell for this, just like I do for drinking alcohol. :chuckle:

I wrote the post at Sciforums.

I am Einstuck, and about 100 other internet pseudonyms.

you can't plagarize yourself.

Don't make accusations you can't back up, especially when you are wrong.

An apology is in order, so do the adult thing and apologize.

peace
Nazaroo

 

[jeremysdemo]

You mean actually have a dialogue.....why do you request from others what you yourself are unwilling to do?

I like how you only respond when accused of something....while Jesus did the opposite, he always responded and only when he was accused didn't.

Bravo!

keep shinin

jerm

 

[taikoo]

That's well said. However, surely you wouldn't criticise Nazaroo for pointing out that alcohol is bad? And by the way, BC, he did post the link to that passage so it wasn't plagiarism. Perhaps it's when he sees people like you, BC, that his anger is kindled against the demon drink. As it happens, I don't 100% agree with him, but wouldn't you rather have him championing the cause against drug dealers, which is for the protection of all of us, than watching idly by saying 'My little bit won't change anything.'

Ethanol isnt bad; its just C2H5OH. What you do with it may be another thing.

My friends, I had not intended to discuss this controversial subject at this particular time. However, I want you to know that I do not shun controversy. On the contrary, I will take a stand on any issue at any time, regardless of how fraught with controversy it might be. You have asked me how I feel about whiskey. All right, here is how I feel about whiskey:

If when you say whiskey you mean the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.

But, if when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life's great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.

 

[Nazaroo]

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.

I appears you already have.


Peace
Nazaroo

 

[taikoo]

I appears you already have.


Peace
Nazaroo

You must be the brightest banana off the boat! You noticed!

First off its in italics to make it clear i did a cut and paste. That is some senators speech, from many years ago.

Second, the whole entire and blindingly clear, hit you on the head many times POINT of the speech is a parody of equivocation and compromising ones principles!!!!!!!!!!