Faan vd Westhuizen retweetledi
Psalm 139:14 - “I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”
No child should be aborted.
English
Faan vd Westhuizen
1.5K posts
Faan vd Westhuizen
@docfaan
Transplanted GP. Crazy dad of crazy family. Love sport, books, art films, challenges. In my heyday I ran a few marathons. Life's too short for hate.
Everywhere Katılım Temmuz 2010
3.8K Takip Edilen1.2K Takipçiler
Dis ’n wen!!!!
‘n NGV-pilaar val in Grondwethof.
Solidariteit het pas die regering se gewraakte planne om vir dokters voor te skryf waar hulle mag praktiseer, in die Grondwethof, gestuit.
In ‘n eenparige uitspraak het die regters van die Grondwethof artikel 36 - 40 van die Gesondheidswet ongrondwetlik verklaar. Die regering moet Solidariteit se kostes dra.
’n Kernpilaar van die regering se beplande Nasionale Gesondheidsversekering (NGV) is só in die Grondwethof omvergewerp.
Die hart van die NGV is sentrale beplanning. Die regering wil besluit waarheen en na watter dokter jy mag gaan.
Sentraal daartoe is die regering se plan om vir dokters voor te skryf waar hulle mag praktiseer.
Die regering wil bepaal waar daar ’n behoefte is, en dan wil hulle aan ’n dokter ’n sertifikaat uitreik wat bepaal waar hy/sy mag praktiseer.
Dit is hierdie planne van die regering om vir dokters voor te skryf waar hulle mag praktiseer, wat Solidariteit suksesvol ongrondwetlik laat verklaar het.
Die stryd teen die NGV is nie verby nie, maar hierdie is ’n strategiese oorwinning!
Baie trots op Solidariteit se regs- en navorsingspan!!!
Nederlands
@Hunter_Eagleman Yip. Ended up with a few broken arms and lacerations in less desirable places from falling from a tree and riding a horse bareback 😀
English
No helmets, No supervision and pure chaos!
Nobody did it like Gen-X! 😎
English
Faan vd Westhuizen retweetledi
all of their ideas now are like “should we dissolve the government, imprison our opponents, and seize every lever of power in the country? we’re the good guys remember, if we don’t do this the bad guys will win (an election)” like they don’t even talk about healthcare anymore lol
Pat Adams@PatAdams96
Kamala Harris is now calling for Democrats to hold a “No Bad Idea Brainstorm” where they discuss: - Abolishing the Electoral College - Packing the Supreme Court - Making Puerto Rico and D.C. states “We’ve got to neutralize these red states from cheating!”
English
People who think that we can cut out the early chapters of Genesis and still have a Christian gospel are not merely making a small mistake. They are cutting at the roots of the very gospel they claim to preserve.
Genesis is not optional background. It tells us who God is, who man is, why sin entered the world, why death reigns over man, why creation groans, why marriage matters, why judgment is just, and why a Saviour is necessary. If we remove Genesis, we do not get a deeper Christianity. We get a gospel without its foundation.
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). That is where everything begins. God is Creator, man is creature, and all things belong to Him. Then Genesis 3 shows man’s fall, his guilt, his shame, his hiding, and God’s first promise of redemption. “He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel” (Genesis 3:15).
Paul did not treat Genesis as disposable. He built the doctrine of sin and salvation upon it. “Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin” (Romans 5:12). And again, “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22). If Adam, the fall, sin, and death are treated as symbols we can discard, then Paul’s explanation of Christ’s work is weakened at the root.
Christ Himself went back to Genesis when He taught on marriage. “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female” (Matthew 19:4). Our Lord did not correct Genesis. He confirmed it.
So no, we cannot cut out the early chapters of Genesis and still have the Christian gospel intact. Without creation, there is no Creator to whom we are accountable. Without the fall, there is no explanation for our ruin. Without the promise of the Seed, there is no first announcement of redemption. Without Adam, we cannot rightly understand Christ as the last Adam.
The gospel does not begin in Matthew. It begins in Genesis, where God first exposes man’s ruin and announces the hope that will be fulfilled in Jesus Christ.
English
@Recon1_ZA All that potential washed down with expensive liquor, in fancy cars, while rolling up their tinted windows and looking away when they drive past Zandspruit squatters camp.
English
If you recall the hair standing up on your neck when you first heard World in Union by Ladysmith Black Mambazo and P.J. Powers then you know the promise that that song carried for the future of a democratic South Africa for those who believed in the possibility.
On its wings, the lyrics:
There′s a dream, I feel
So rare, so real
All the world in union
The world as one
Gathering together
One mind, one heart
Every creed, every colour
Once joined, never apart
It′s the world in union
The world as one
As we climb to reach our destiny
A new age has begun
If South Africa had achieved and sustained 5% real annual GDP growth for the last 30 years with a population of 64M in 2024 our hypothetical real GDP would have been $12,470 per capita instead of the actual $5,709.
The average South African would be enjoying living standards and real purchasing power similar to those of citizens in upper middle income countries.
Government revenue would have scaled, allowing for vastly expanded infrastructure, education, healthcare, and social spending without increasing tax rates.
Real incomes more than doubled would have pulled millions out of poverty with unemployment in low teens.
In the decade post 1995, South Africa wasn't doing much better and pretty much held the same average as we do today, considering apartheid, international sanctions, political unrest, and a recession in the early 1990s.
It is unfortunate that with all those barriers removed, 30 years down the line, we have so very little to show for the amount of time and money spent.
English
@RepJeffries
Oh, look. A snollygoster with a Twitter account and delusions of adequacy.
The Virginia Supreme Court did NOT "overturn the will of 3 million voters." The Court ruled -- 4 to 3 -- that YOUR legislature violated Article XII, Section 1 of Virginia's OWN constitution in the PROCESS it used to put that amendment on the ballot. The process was broken. Broken BY YOUR SIDE. Procedural violations have consequences. That is not disenfranchisement. That is called THE RULE OF LAW. I know. Revolutionary concept.
Now let us discuss what that amendment was actually engineered to accomplish -- because I would explain it further, but I left my crayons at home. Your party wanted to redraw Virginia's congressional map from 6-5 Democrat... to 10-1 Democrat. In a state that votes approximately 50-50. The existing maps -- the ones confirmed to remain in place -- were drawn by a BIPARTISAN commission in 2021 with YOUR party at the table. Now those same bipartisan maps are "Jim Crow."
If you stand close enough to that argument, you can hear the ocean.
Jim Crow. Let us linger here for a moment. Was there not a single person on your staff with the spine to tap you on the shoulder and say, "Sir, perhaps WE should not be the ones invoking Jim Crow"? The DEMOCRAT Party. The party that wrote Jim Crow. Filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 75 CALENDAR DAYS. Gave us Senator Robert Byrd -- a KKK recruiter personally eulogized as the "conscience of the Senate" by your Democrat colleagues. Every piece of racial oppression stitched into American law has a Democrat's signature at the bottom. Every. Single. One.
And YOU want to lecture people about Jim Crow attacks on Black representation while your party was engineering Black voters into window dressing for a 10-to-1 map they were supposed to be grateful for.
You are the reason God created the middle finger.
Quinn's Law Number 22 says liberals love democracy -- right up until it does not go their way. Quinn's Law Number 26 says liberals love the courts -- right up until the ruling stings. Watch both fire at once in a single post from a man who was clearly hiding behind the door when God handed out brains.
The Virginia Supreme Court is the FINAL word on Virginia constitutional matters. That ruling stands. Those bipartisan 2021 maps stand. The only thing that does not stand is your party's attempt to confiscate a purple state's congressional delegation through a procedurally invalid ballot maneuver -- and then call anyone who noticed a racist.
Next you are going to tell me that the party which seceded from the Union to protect slavery, invented the KKK, authored Jim Crow, spent a century blocking Black political power, and JUST tried to manufacture a 10-to-1 map in a state split evenly down the middle is, somehow, the true defender of Black representation in America.
...you already did. In the same post. Eats soup with a fork AND writes legislation with the same level of coordination.
I could eat a bowl of alphabet soup and produce a more coherent argument than whatever you just published, @RepJeffries. That is not a low bar. You went under it anyway.
But what do I know -- I am only a science teacher who actually read the Virginia Constitution AND the Court opinion, while you apparently could not pour water out of a boot if the instructions were printed on the heel AND your staff read them aloud.
IF you agree:
LIKE this post so the algorithm shows it to people who need to read it.
SHARE this.
COMMENT below -- is enforcing constitutional procedural rules "Jim Crow," or is engineering a 10-to-1 map in a purple state the REAL voter manipulation? Tell me.
JOIN Bski's Classroom community on X or YouTube.
@JoJoFromJerz @GuntherEagleman @catturd2
#MAGA #Trump
English
The decision by the Virginia Supreme Court to overturn the will of more than three million voters will not stand.
English
This sounds biblical because many verses are quoted, but the conclusion is still wrong. The problem is not the verses. The problem is how they are being used.
Yes, righteousness is seen in obedience. No true believer lives in open rebellion and still honestly claims to know Christ. John is very clear. “The one who says, ‘I have come to know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a liar” (1 John 2:4). So we must never preach a gospel that produces lawless people.
But obedience is the fruit of salvation, not the ground of our acceptance before God. That is the difference they are missing. Scripture says we are “justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:24). Paul also says that the man who is justified is the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly (Romans 4:5).
So when Jesus says, “If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:17), He is exposing the rich young ruler’s false confidence. That man thought he had kept the law, but Jesus pressed the law into his heart and exposed his idol. He walked away sorrowful because he loved his possessions more than God (Matthew 19:22). The point was not that sinners can earn life by commandment keeping. The point was that the law exposes our inability and drives us to grace.
John’s letters are not teaching that commandment keeping becomes our righteousness before God. They are teaching that those who have been born of God will show evidence of that new life. “We love, because He first loved us” (1 John 4:19). First comes grace. Then comes love. First comes life. Then comes obedience.
Christ alone is our righteousness before God. Our obedience proves that faith is living, but it does not become the righteousness by which we stand justified. If we confuse those two, we rebuild the very scales the gospel destroyed.
English
Every religion eventually brings man back to the scales. Does my good outweigh my bad? Have I done enough? Have I prayed enough, suffered enough, obeyed enough, given enough, changed enough? And every man made religion leaves the sinner hoping that somehow the odds may fall in his favour.
But the gospel destroys the scales completely. Christianity does not say our good must outweigh our bad. It says we have no righteousness of our own that can stand before a holy God. “All our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment” (Isaiah 64:6). Even our best works cannot cleanse our guilt.
This is why Christ is not merely a helper for weak people. He is the righteousness of guilty sinners. Paul did not want to be found standing before God with his own righteousness, but with “the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith” (Philippians 3:9).
That is the difference. Every false religion tells man to climb. The gospel tells man he is dead, guilty, helpless, and unable to save himself. Then it points him to Christ, who obeyed perfectly, died sacrificially, rose victoriously, and becomes the only righteousness of His people.
“He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Christ alone is our righteousness. Not Christ plus our merit. Not Christ plus our religious effort. Not Christ plus our moral record. CHRIST ALONE. And the sinner who has Him has more righteousness than the law could ever demand from him, because he stands clothed in the righteousness of the Son of God.
English
Matthew 23:5-12 Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.
“But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father,and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah.
The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
Hillbilly Catholic@RosaryQuotes123
One year since this moment.
English
I could use some help...
I came back to church after years away and I'm still figuring a lot of it out... but what is going on with the "Christian Leftists"????
These are people who know Scripture better than I do... but the SAME PEOPLE turn around and tell me a kid in elementary school can know 100% that they were born in the wrong body.
That puberty blockers are healthcare.
That get flustered and extremely angry at any reasonable question I throw at them about it.
That actually to question any of it is a form of sin in someway?
These people will literally say the church is too White.
As if whiteness itself is a big problem or a sin and that we need to repent of being white, and fix it in a room full of people who showed up to worship Jesus.
Can someone explain this to me?
How on earth does this make any sense from someone who is supposed to be a Christian?
How did these Christians get to this place?
How did a faith built on the goodness of creation, the dignity of the body, the truth that every person bears the image of God regardless of skin, end up getting SO sucked into these Leftist slogans?
What I notice is that every position the Christian left holds happens to track PERFECTLY aligns with the cultural arguments of the Leftist political movement.
Every single one.
Trans kids.
Race.
Sexuality.
Borders.
Guns.
Climate.
And they'll use the Bible, in genuinely bizarre fashion and slogans to uphold these political beliefs.
Like "love thy neighbor" for example, to say that illegal immigrants didn't do anything wrong.
"The least of these" somehow means trans kids or something?
"Turn the other cheek" somehow means that criminals should never be held accountable for crimes.
It seems, and I could be wrong, that a LOT of Christians are using politics to shape their faith.
Not the other way around
Maybe I'm missing something. I'm willing to be wrong.
But from where I'm sitting it looks FAR LESS like Christians are wrestling with hard questions and more like a version of Christianity that has agreed to push forward every argument the culture wants it to...
What's going on with the Christian church??????
English
Faan vd Westhuizen retweetledi
I can’t stop laughing. 🤣🤣
BRAVO!! These 5th grade boys came up with this on their own.
English
@rickbrennanjr @EcciusMaximus @sola_chad @Truth_matters20 The exact word fallacy: because "faith alone" is not find in the Bible, it must be false. (That's the fallacy) "Faith alone" means faith apart from works. See Rom. 4:5- [it doesn't refer to "working AND believing"] Also confirmed in Gal. 2 and Eph. 2.
English
The Greek text of Rom 3:28 says that a person is justified “by faith apart from works of the law.” The Latin Vulgate says the same thing: per fidem sine operibus legis—“by faith without works of the law.”
Luther DID add “alone”—in his German translation, but he DID NOT pretend the word was physically present in the Greek or Latin. For instance, in his 1530 Open Letter on Translating, Luther openly acknowledged that sola was not in the Greek or Latin text. His argument was that “alone” expressed Paul’s meaning in clear German idiom, because Paul excludes works as the basis of justification.
So the real question is not whether the exact word “alone” appears in Rom 3:28. It does not. The real question is whether Paul teaches the concept. And he does. Paul says we are justified by faith “apart from works of the law.” That is why Protestants confess justification by faith alone: not because Luther invented the doctrine, but because Paul excludes works from the ground of justification.
Further, the KJV did not “remove” faith alone as though Protestantism abandoned it. It translated the Greek with “without the deeds of the law,” which communicates the same exclusion of works. Modern translations such as the ESV, NASB, NIV, CSB, and NKJV likewise render the Greek as “apart from” or “without” works because that is the wording of the text.
So, no, “faith alone” did not take root because Luther smuggled one word into the Bible. It took root because the Reformers saw that Paul’s argument in Romans and Galatians teaches justification by faith apart from works. Good works are the fruit of saving faith, but they are not the basis on which God justifies the sinner.
English
Question for you guys @rickbrennanjr @sola_chad & @Truth_matters20. Do you agree or disagree with this timeline of “alone” being added to the bible? Why is that?
Centuries/Years:
1st: greek "..faith apart from works of the law"
4th: Vulgate "..faith apart from works of the law"
5-16th: Church fathers use this exact same original verse
1517: Luther enters the chat, adds "alone"
1600: German Protestant Bibles follow Luther
1611: Alone is removed by KJV translation but changes the verse to "...faith without the deeds of the law.."
<<<< Faith Alone takes root mission accomplished, lets switch back >>>>>
17th-20th: retain "without/apart from," some have limited retentions of alone in the continental protestant editions
20th-21st: NIV, ESV, NASB, NKJB, CSB, NRSV switch back fully to the Greek original.
CATHOLIC MAXIMUS@EcciusMaximus
You don’t get into heaven by Faith Alone. No one early Church ever spoke of this not even one.
English
Why Elon doesn't hold on to grudges:
In the year 2000 he was removed from Paypal while on vacation with his wife. His friends had gathered with investors behind his back and staged a coup.
Max Levchin (his co-worker) said:
"He does not hold grudges. He's been remarkably gracious with a bunch of people who basically ousted him as CEO while he was on his honeymoon."
Elon replied:
"I did view the company as at least partly my baby. If I attacked the company and the people there, it's like... it would be attacking my baby. I don't want to do that."
Even when kicked out of his own company, he refused to hold a grudge.
Later on he would say:
"It might sound corny, but love is the answer."
I think he's right. It makes no sense to hold grudges. Love is the answer in every case.
English
Faan vd Westhuizen retweetledi
The Supreme Court’s just said that you can’t gerrymander by race and all the people who claim not to be racist are really angry that they can’t be racist.
English
Faan vd Westhuizen retweetledi
Please be patient for a few minutes as the thousands of Strait of Hormuz Twitter experts are making the shift over to the Voting Rights Act.
They will be with you momentarily....
English
“…You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean.
In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.”
- Matthew 23: 27-28
English
The enemy is behind Candace and all who are using Charlie’s death to make money.
When Charlie passed away we saw people buying Bibles, running to church, asking about Jesus….
The enemy swooped in and led many astray into hatred, slander, and conspiracy. Including professed Christians.
That’s all I have to say.
English
Faan vd Westhuizen retweetledi
Faan vd Westhuizen retweetledi
