Missouri Democrats Introduce Legislation To Confiscate Firearms – Gun Owners Get 90 Days To Turn In Weapons

February 15, 2013

in Front Page, Government, Missouri, U.S. Constitution

full text of Missouri House Bill No. 545:

AN ACT

To amend chapter 571, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of any assault weapon or large capacity magazine, with a penalty provision.

---

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Chapter 571, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 571.023, to read as follows:

571.023. 1. As used in this section the following terms shall mean:

(1) “Assault weapon”, any:

(a) Semi-automatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:

a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

b. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand;

c. A folding or telescoping stock; or

d. A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel;

(b) Semi-automatic pistol, or any semi-automatic, centerfire or rimfire rifle with a fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition;

(c) Semi-automatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:

a. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand;

b. A folding, telescoping or thumbhole stock;

c. A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel; or

d. The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at any location outside of the pistol grip;

(d) Semi-automatic shotgun that has one or more of the following:

a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

b. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand;

c. A folding or telescoping stock;

d. A fixed magazine capacity in excess of five rounds; or

e. An ability to accept a detachable magazine;

(e) Shotgun with a revolving cylinder; or

(f) Conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.

Assault weapon does not include any firearm that has been made permanently inoperable;

(2) “Detachable magazine”, an ammunition feeding device that can be loaded or unloaded while detached from a firearm and readily inserted into a firearm and includes a magazine that can be detached by merely depressing a button on the firearm either with a finger or by use of a tool or bullet;

(3) “Fixed magazine”, an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the firearm action;

(4) “Large capacity magazine”, any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:

(a) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than ten rounds;

(b) A twenty-two caliber tube ammunition feeding device; or

(c) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.

2. No person, corporation or other entity in the state of Missouri may manufacture, import, possess, purchase, sell, or transfer any assault weapon or large capacity magazine.

3. This prohibition shall not apply to:

(1) Any government officer, agent, or employee, member of the armed forces of the United States, or peace officer, to the extent that such person is otherwise authorized to acquire or possess an assault weapon or large capacity magazine, and does so while acting within the scope of his or her duties;

(2) The manufacture of an assault weapon or large capacity ammunition feeding device by a firearms manufacturer for the purpose of sale to any branch of the armed forces of the United States, or to a law enforcement agency in the state of Missouri for use by that agency or its employees, provided the manufacturer is properly licensed under federal and state laws; or

(3) The sale or transfer of an assault weapon or large capacity ammunition feeding device by a dealer that is properly licensed under federal, state, and local laws to any branch of the armed forces of the United States, or to a law enforcement agency in the state of Missouri for use by that agency or its employees for law enforcement purposes.

4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:

(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;

(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or

(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.

5. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony.

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills131/biltxt/intro/HB0545I.HTM

Biblical Christianity says: click "REX 84" in the labels section and read the reason this is so very scary!   Go Here and watch the video re: FEMA and American concentration camps.

Pope resigns in bombshell announcement, sending troubled church scrambling to replace him

VATICAN CITY –  With a few words in Latin, Pope Benedict VXI did Monday what no pope has done in half a millennium, announcing his resignation and sending the already troubled Catholic Church scrambling to replace the leader of its 1 billion followers by Easter.

Not even his closest collaborators had advance word of the news, a bombshell that he dropped during a routine morning meeting of Vatican cardinals. And with no clear favorites to succeed him, another surprise likely awaits when the cardinals elect Benedict's successor next month.

"Without doubt this is a historic moment," said Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, a protege and former theology student of Benedict's who is considered a papal contender. "Right now, 1.2 billion Catholics the world over are holding their breath."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/02/11/pope-resigns-in-bombshell-announcement-sending-troubled-church-scrambling-to/#ixzz2KgeQ7FXg

St. Malachy predicted Pope Benedict’s successor will be last pope

Irish bishop’s 12th century prophecies end after this next pope

By

IrishCentral Staff Writers,

Published Monday, February 11, 2013, 1:47 PM

Updated Monday, February 11, 2013, 1:57 PM

 

The Irish prophet  Saint Malachy has predicted that  the next Pope after Benedict will be the last and he will be “Peter the Roman, who will nourish the sheep in many tribulations; when they are finished, the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the dreadful judge will judge his people. The end.”
 

The prophecies of the Irish saint Malachy, the 12th century bishop of Armagh have thrilled and dismayed readers for centuries. He has stated there will be only one more pope after Benedict, and during his reign comes the end of the world.
 

The prediction in full is "In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock amid many tribulations, after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people. The End.”
 

Experts say it could refer to an Italian pope who would take Peter’s name.

Read more: http://www.irishcentral.com/roots/St-Malachy-predicted-Pope-Benedicts-successor-will-be-last-pope-190715001.html#ixzz2KgfAb3fF
Follow us: @IrishCentral on Twitter | IrishCentral on Facebook

 

"The Fearful Master"- the UN

From chapter 18:  Our Last Best Hope
An inside look at an example of a United Nations operation. This was written in the early sixties, but this is still their method of operation.

                                        
This is the meaning of a republic; a limited government. This is what we Americans once had until the socialists, Communists and other collectivists turned back the clock to the ideas that dominated the political systems of the Dark Ages. Many Americans today, thinking that collectivist ideas are new, argue that we must place more and more power into the hands of the Federal Government so that it will be strong enough to cope with the challenges of the modern world. But, as Thomas Jefferson stated in 1801:

I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a Republican government cannot be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of a successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm, on the theoretic and visionary fear that this government, the world's best hope, may, by possibility, want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest government on earth.6

As for peace in the world, until all nations follow the concept of limited Government, it is unlikely that universal peace will ever be attained. Unlimited, power-grasping governments will always resort to force if they think they can get away with it. But there is no doubt that there can be peace for America. As long as we maintain our military preparedness, the world's petty despots will leave us alone.⁷

To make sure that we do not get caught up in the middle of the endless squabbles between the countries of Europe, Asia and Africa, we must put an end to the insane practice of trying to entwine our economic and political affairs with those of the rest of the world.

Let us, then, move the clock forward to that point where we were when this great nation was infused with the only really new political concept the world has seen in thousands of years. Let us throw off these Old World ideas and heed the sage advice of that true "modernist," George Washington, who told his countrymen:

Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct. And can it be that good policy does not equally enjoin it? . . . Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence-- I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens-- the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. . . . If we remain one people, under an efficient government, the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions on us, will not likely hazard giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall council. Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?

The next time you hear someone speak lightly about sovereignty or national independence, remember that this was the one single accomplishment of the American Revolution. Our present involvement in the United Nations has put us right back where the shooting began in 1775.

The Declaration of Independence states:

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. . . .

It then lists the causes. It is stunning that this bill of grievances and complaints can be justly applied to the present encroaching tyranny of the United Nations and, to some extent, our own expanding Federal Government. It speaks of a "multitude of new offices" and "swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance" (taxes); it complains about being subject to "a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution and unacknowledged by our laws" (supremacy of the World Court); it deplores "transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous acres and totally unworthy of the head of a civilized nation" (Katanga).

The men who put their signatures to the bottom of the Declaration of Independence were signing their own potential death warrants. Most of them were prosperous and comfortably situated with every reason to go along with the existing bureaucracy. Besides, what chance did inexperienced farmers have against the British Army, at that time the most invincible fighting force in the whole world? If the colonies had been overpowered, as it appeared more than likely they would be, these men who signed the Declaration would have all been banged or shot as traitors. Yet, without hesitation they stood up for what they believed to be right and declared: ". . . and for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."

In signing the Declaration of Independence, John Adams turned to his colleagues and spoke these words:

If it be the pleasure of Heaven that my country shall require the poor offering of my life, the victim shall be ready. But while I do live, let me have a country, or at least the hope of a country-- and that a free country. But whatever may be our fate, be assured . . . this declaration will stand. It may cost treasure, and it may cost blood; but it will stand, and it will richly compensate for both. . . . And live or die, survive or perish, I am for the declaration. It is my living sentiment, and, by the blessing of God, it shall be my dying sentiment: independence now, and independence forever!

Can it be that modem Americans are not equal to their ancestors? Are we not willing, if necessary, to make sacrifices in the cause of freedom? Is it more important to enjoy the temporary comforts of the "good life," the security of a non-controversial social status, than to pass on to our children the cherished liberty we ourselves inherited? As Patrick Henry would have replied, "Forbid it, Almighty God!"

As you read these final words, you must come to a decision as to your own reply to these questions. Each man and woman will soon be called upon for his answer. The rapidity of world events will no longer permit us to remain aloof and unaffected by them. Disinterest will no longer purchase a ticket for escape. Tyranny demands unqualified allegiance: We are either for it or against it. There is no middle around.

Which will it be, America?

To read the book "The Fearful Master by G. Edward Griffin, please click HERE.http://www.peacekey.com/1-1-a/UN_Web/1_UN_Book/The_Fearful_Master_Contents.htm

Please read this book.

Alger Hiss was the US representative at the convention to draw up the United Nations.  He was convicted as a communist spy after this came into being.  The CIA has unclassified their info (or a good portion of it) and is available HERE.

Can "Churches" Be Saved if they Don't Teach the Truth?

 This was posted a year ago... I wanted to post it again.

Short and sweet...

Mattew 15:
13. But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
14. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

The false churches teaching doctrines of devils...

1 Tim. 4:
1. Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2. Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3. Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
4. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
5. For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

2 John 1:
9. Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine (truth), receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11. For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

The "Churches" listed in the "What Do They Believe" links to the left, for the most part, are what I believe the scriptures are calling plants that "my heavenly Father hath not planted." Those are devilish "church" plants.

Matthew 13:
24. Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25. But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
27. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28. He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29. But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Many that start in goofy doctrines, learn from the word of God enough to leave, loving the Word more than the organization. Our job is to find the wheat, and lead it into good fields by the truth.

John 3:
16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Many God fearing/honoring truth lovers living for what they honestly believe is the pure word of God believe different things from the same scriptures. Those in disagreement aren't necessarily the ones in discussion.

Romans 14:
1. Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
3. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
4. Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
5. One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
7. For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
8. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
9. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
10. But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
12. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
13. Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

The only yardstick for the truth is the word of God, the bible. The only one I trust is the KJV. See Gail Riplinger "New Age Bible Versions" here

If you are seriously walking according to the scriptures, the Spirit will lead you into all truth. If you are trusting something other than the word of God for your salvation map, you will be deceived and end up lost eternally!

OK. It started to be short and sweet, but kept growing. Sorry. May God bless you with a love for the truth!

Who or What are the Nicolaitans?

Who are the Nicolaitans found primarily in the book of Revelation? Why did God say he HATED them? Jesus taught His disciples to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, whom He denounced as hypocrites. He declared that they had so corrupted the truth of God with the doctrines and ordinances of men (which would occur countless times in the church) that the truth was no longer with them. That which these blind leaders of the blind were giving forth as truth were making their converts twofold more the children of hell than they were. They are discussed in the second chapter of Revelation: "And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write, 'These things says He who has the sharp two-edged sword: . . . Thus you also have those who hold THE DOCTRINE of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate." (Revelation 2:12, 15) The deeds of the Nicolaitans are also mentioned in verses 1 and 6 of same chapter. The Lord demands repentance on the part of those who hold and practice these things and He threatens drastic punishment if they do not obey Him: "Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place - unless you repent." (Revelation 2:5) The Greek word for Nicolaitans (Strong's Concordance Number #G3531) found in Revelation is actually three Greek words combined. Because it is a proper noun, the word is TRANSFERRED instead of being translated into English. Thus, it is subject to the laws of Greek construction in regard to ellipsis, contraction and phonetics. The three words used are: NIKOS, of which we use the English equivalents instead of the Greek letters, as we shall also of the other two. Nikos is defined as "a conquest; victory; triumph; the conquered; and by implication, dominancy over the defeated." Another transferred name in which this term is used is "Nicopolis," which is composed of Niko, which means conquest and polis, which means city. Hence, the city of conquest, or city of victory. LAOS, which means people. Another use of this word is found in NICOLAS, which is transferred and is composed of Nikos-laos and means one who is "victorious over the people," the letter "s" being in both words the nominative case ending, which is retained only at the end of the word to denote the case, while "a" short and "o" short are contracted into "a" long.
A still further transferred use of LAOS is found in the name Lao(s)diceans (or Laodikeus, Strong's Concordance Number #G2994), compounded with DIKE or DICE as the Greek "k" is the equivalent English "c." Thus, in the name Laodiceans, we have LAOS, meaning the people, and DICE, meaning judgment or vengeance, i.e., the people of my judgment, or of my vengeance. Also the Greek word la(ic)os, which means "laymen," of which LA-OS is the root and stem, which selfsame word, with the "o" short contracted to "i", to which root and stem the plural definite article TON is joined to form LAITON, which is a Greek phrase meaning "the laity." TON is the third and last word entering into the construction of the proper name Nicolaitan. TON, in which Omega, the long "o", is contracted into long "a", thus making the word TAN which is the genitive case plural in all the genders of the definite article 'the.' We therefore have, without the legal Greek construction, the English hyphenated word NIKOS-LAOS-TON, but which, with its lawful contractions, becomes the English translation found in Revelation. What is the real-world meaning of the word? In its native tongue and its ecclesiastical setting the term Nicolaitans means the bishops and prelates of the Church have gained a triumphal victory or conquest over the LAITON, the laity. Members are compelled and forced to submit to the arbitrary dominion of men who have become that thing which God hates: "The elders who are among you I exhort, I who am a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that will be revealed:  Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; NOR AS BEING LORDS OVER THOSE ENTRUSTED TO YOU ('lords over [God's] heritage' in the KJV Bible), but being examples to the flock;" (1Peter 5:1-3). Exactly what the Nicolaitans were teaching and preaching can be found in religious and secular dictionaries. When we look for the definition of the term "hierarchy: the power of dominion, government by ecclesiastical rulers" we find the following, which is offered as evidence: "If anyone shall say that there is not in the Catholic Church a hierarchy established by the divine ordination, consisting of bishops, presbyters and ministers, let him be anathema, Council of Trent (translation) XXIII 6." (Century Dictionary) In other words, let anyone who has the audacity to say there is not a hierarchy, not a collection of human beings who have been given the power by other men of dominion, as ecclesiastical rulers over churchmen who are declared God's heritage, let that man be ACCURSED --- let death and hell and the devil get him. Surely, the thing in which that ecclesiastical company is glorying is their shame! Webster's dictionary defines the word "episcopal" as "the power of government, belonging to, or invested in, bishops or prelates. Government of the church by bishops." It also states "in episcopacy, the order of bishops is superior to the other clergy, and has exclusive power to confer orders." In this definition it is affirmed that a certain portion of presbyters (elders) were even "in apostolic times superior in authority to ordinary presbyters," and also mentions the fact that episcopacy recognizes "episcopal rank" which is created by the institution thus governed; all of which affirms that any church in which episcopal government obtains is practicing the very carnal and fleshly iniquity of creating "Superiors" in what should be a holy brotherhood. The use of this appellation makes INFERIORS out of brethren who are in the selfsame clergy. How can RANK and HIERARCHY destroy a church? The approbation of "ordinary elders" demands a set of elders who are extra special, thus creating "rank" (caste) in the otherwise Divine brotherhood, all of which DESTROYS holy fellowship, creates division and strife, and fosters envy. No marvel that our Lord should hate a thing like that, condemn it, and demand that those who are guilty repent. But will they, who follow the ways of the Nicolaitans, repent? Yes, some will when the tribulation is on. Others, however, will stick to their ecclesiastical crowd, vainly imagining that their boasted "superiority" will carry them through that time of the greatest trouble the world has ever known, or will know. They must go down with the rest of the hosts of Antichrist. One of the most unfortunate features of all this is that there are those in the Church who do not hold to their doctrine yet still dominate the laity by lording it over them! the above: Written by:  J. H. Allen   Why do Protestant churches wear the clerical collar of the Roman Catholic church, proudly”                                              I have been in assemblies where all the protestant clergy (?) were wearing the clerical garb of "Mystery Babylon" with apparent self-esteem and spiritual superiority, neglecting the clear teaching of scripture. If Jesus were to walk into those types of assemblies, or the apostles were to take part in those meetings, they would not be recognized at all as having any spiritual authority… because of their clothing!   Heb 13:2  Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. Please-    Jas 2:1  My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. Jas 2:2  For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; Jas 2:3  And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Jas 2:4  Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?  This is exactly the practice of some protestant churches.  Brothers lording over brothers contrary to scripture.  It is not limited to an understanding of social standing/ money.  It is about being swayed by outward appearances and the "church" has fallen under the influence of "Mystery Babylon" without careful examination.  Those who practice this will undoubtedly defend their tradition with heartfelt self-rightousness.  That doesn't make them right. In the media- what church is instantly recognized by the collar?  What church do people instantly assume the clerical collar wearer belongs to?   Of course Roman Catholicism.  To deny this is foolish.  To defend the habit on grounds of tradition or any other argument doesn't change that simple truth.  If you wear that collar, you are associated with Rome.  If you doubt that, you are deceiving yourself. 1Th 5:22  Abstain from all appearance of evil