(cont…) definitive terms in the New Testament. Stop twisting the Word of God to suit your perverted political purposes. If you want to support homosexuality, you have every right to your opinion, but you certainly are not a Christian in any sense of the word.
Apologies to anyone reading for this long post, I am just so sick of the Bible bashing that occurs on this forum. So many Bahamians are still in the angsty teenager phase where “God doesn’t exist because I hate Him” and cannot provide a single logical argument to support their assertion that God does not exist. It is nothing but one liner insults that prove the D average of this country is an overestimation of our national educational level.
I will end with a warning to any so called “Christian” that tries to suggest that homosexuality is not a sin : Revelations 22:18. You can try all you want with the legalistic interpretations, but the Bible speaks on the matter very clearly. There is no grey area when it comes to the Bible’s view of homosexuality.

(cont) crowd choose between Barabbas and our Lord. Pontius Pilate did not reside in Jerusalem, he actually resided on the coast, he was only in Jerusalem to monitor the Jewish people in case of rebellion during the Passover. There had been a history of rebellion in the province, and yet another one would have landed Pilate in hot water with Rome. Pontius Pilate had no choice but to order the death of Jesus in order to prevent another rebellion from occurring. Who forced his hand, the Jewish people. Pontius Pilate could care less about Jesus, some accounts seem to have him holding Jesus in a favourable light, but he would have more than likely been recalled to Rome had another rebellion took place under his watch. To stave off the riotous Jewish crowd, he gave them what they wanted and ordered the execution of Jesus. No such evidence has ever been put forth that Pilate viewed Jesus as a revolutionary.

In addition, slavery was not a uniquely black experience. I am sick and tired of this lie being perpetuated to the point where most individuals only know of the West African slave trade when hearing the term slavery. Romans enslaved Greeks, British enslaved Irish, Barbary pirates enslaved whoever they could capture, Arabs enslaved blacks, etc. Point is that slavery occurred on a much broader scale than the West African slave trade alone. To imply that the Bible has racial undertones in these Scriptures is just foolish and reeks of a political agenda. The writer of this article also fails to take into context that the idea of considering slavery as evil is very new relative to the known course of human history. The abolition movement only started to gain prominence in the 18th and 19th centuries (Brazil did not abolish slavery until 1888 – almost into the 20th century!), for thousands of years of recorded human history, slavery has been the norm. As a matter of fact, the early Church was revolutionary in the fact that they held abolitionist beliefs themselves. I suggest that the writer of this article read the book of Philemon. As it regards Onesimus, the slave that had been instructed to return to his master, Paul made every subtle attempt possible to encourage Philemon to manumit his slave. It was not Paul’s place to directly suggest this to Philemon, so he approached the question in a more subtle way. When it comes to the context of the quoted Scriptures, the principles behind them still apply to this day. Instead of slave/master, we can substitute employee/employer. Employees are to work diligently for their employers and do a good job, while employers are to treat their employees fairly and pay them their wages.

With regards to homosexuality : you can twist the Word of God however you want, but the Bible is clear that homosexuality is a sin. Marriage is always defined as a man and woman, and even if you throw out the entire Old Testament, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (among other Scriptures) speaks on the matter in (cont..)

First and foremost : I read Mr. Evan's article from this previous Friday the 27th of November, and I found his tone not becoming for a Christian. The line that I particularly took issue with was the one that seemed to suggest that homosexuals were not children of God. God made them just as any other, they can be saved like any other sinner provided they repent of their sins and change their lifestyle to one that is pleasing to the Lord. One person has a problem with homosexuality, another lying, yet another stealing, etc. we all have our sins that we struggle with, and God can forgive them all if we truly seek Him. That being said, there are many half-truths and historical inaccuracies in this article designed to parrot a specific political agenda.

Firstly, I am not sure where the topic of anti-Semitism fits into discussing Mr. Evan's article, but to suggest that centuries of anti-Semitic feelings were created from Bible Scripture alone is very naïve and ignores the context of these Scriptures entirely. Firstly, the issue of usury (the key issue between Christians and Jews in historical Europe) is never discussed. The writer of this article ignores the fact that usury was forbidden (by religious and government authorities) among Christians for many centuries, while Jewish populations had no such restrictions placed on them. Religiously speaking, nothing in the Jewish faith forbid a Jew from charging interest to a non-Jew, and in most instances, Jews were not held to the same laws that Christians were during this time period. This is how many Jews ended up becoming powerful merchants and wielding significant economic influence in whatever areas they resided. In addition, the context of what was occurring when those Scriptures were written is completely ignored. The persecution of Christians just got started with the crucifixion of Jesus; the early Church was heavily persecuted by the Jewish people of that area in an attempt to suppress the faith. What past did Paul have? This persecution is a major reason for the tone of the Scriptures quoted.

"“Jesus was executed as a Roman political criminal. There’s no doubt about that,” the Yale biblical scholar explains. “The person responsible for making that decision was Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor. And the method of execution was a Roman method of execution: crucifixion. There was probably collaboration between the priestly authorities in Jerusalem and Pilate, but it’s mainly a Roman decision, based on the judgment that Jesus was probably a political revolutionary.”"

This paragraph is just deliberately misleading. Yes, Pontius Pilate absolutely had to sign off on the execution of Jesus, the Sanhedrin had no power to put their sentence of death into effect, but the writer completely ignores the context of history in this statement. Pontius Pilate held a neutral at worst, favourable at best disposition towards Jesus as evidenced by Pilate trying to free Jesus in letting the

"The government is going to need to work out what kind of safety net it can continue to offer – and for how long. This isn’t going to be solved in a hurry."

Here is the problem : the Bahamas has a service based economy that is almost entirely dependent on external sources of revenue. Government revenue has taken a significant hit, while expenditures have massively increased (and will possibly increase even more in the future, depending on what the government decides). Whether we like it or not, we are not America, Canada, or any other first world nation that is capable of running these massive deficits. Most first world nations have domestic industries that can help them stem the bleeding, we do not. Most first world nations entered the COVID crisis in much better economic health than us, we entered already swimming in debt with slim long term prospects of improving that thanks to Dorian knocking out our #2 and #3 sources of revenue while requiring massive amounts of funding to repair infrastructure.

Who Minnis appoints as Minister of Finance will be very telling in many ways. It is arguably the most powerful cabinet position, which is why the sitting Prime Minister usually took on the responsibility as was the case with Ingraham and Christie in recent memory. Who he decides to put there is going to face nothing but a massive headache, and will be in a sink or swim position from day one. He sure better put someone who knows what they are doing in that role.

Bahamians need to get used to the idea of increased/new taxes right now. The government/possible new one in 2022 has no choice but to raise them. With the tourism industry dead in the water for the foreseeable future, they are going to need to increase revenue and there are not too many other ways to do it other than taxation at this point. For all the talk about new industries, Bahamians need to go read a history book. Our country lived in boom/bust cycles before the development of tourism and financial services, and we are clearly going back to bust without them. Agriculture and fishing are not going to power our economy, and oil is too cheap right now to think of that as a way out even if BPC finds a large reservoir.

The government really has two choices here :

1.) Put the debt on the Bahamian people
2.) Put the debt on the government

Both are horrible; new taxes will only destroy the rapidly shrinking middle class even more, and the large deficits will destroy our credit ratings to ultra-junk status which in turns mean even higher interest rates on the loans we will eventually have to take out to fund the country. We are screwed no matter which way you look at it.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but we haven't even started entering the hard times yet.

No more cruise ships for now, plus the fact that air arrivals will more than likely take a couple of years to reach what they were pre-COVID means that the tourism industry is dead in the water for the short-term future.

In the meantime, bills will continue to pile up and new students will continue to graduate from school to enter a depressed labour market (many of their parents will be unable to assist them through college thanks to the economic situation, meaning even more will be stuck here to search for work). On top of that, our debt will only continue to increase and taxes will have to be raised at some point in the future.

Better get out now if you still can, or hunker down and prepare for the worst while praying for the best.

Bahamians : Good for those Bay Street Boys, about time they got run out of business

Also Bahamians : We need more jobs, our people are starving and can't pay rent.

This country is truly unique.

The legality for such a mandate would be rightfully challenged, hence the change in direction on this policy.

The Bahamas is 33rd on this list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated…

PLP

P - Poverty
L - Loving
P - People

"Most people would probably agree that, in countries like the US and Britain where institutional racism still exists in varying forms"

The only institutional racism that exists in these countries is that against whites. Every other race can have their own scholarships, business loans, employment opportunities, college/university admissions, whatever other quota nonsense exists, on the mere basis of their skin colour, except for whites. The minute that whites try to band together and help the less fortunate ones out, the race card is immediately drawn.

Despite the perceptions of many worldwide, not every white person is born rich. Many white people live in poverty and are passed over for opportunities due to the moronic virtue signaling trend that has infested Western society like a plague.