Latest activity

Maria Billingsley · 2025-07-06T20:45:34-0500

HBP said:
I just realized how extremely narrow these forums are. The Forum Rules define those who are "truly" Christians as those who fully accept the Nicene Creed. I just happened to be reading a book by Marcus Borg in which he distinguishes between "popular" Christianity and "academic" Christianity. Academic Christianity includes many NT scholars who identify as Christian, including Borg, but are almost unanimous in their judgment that popular Christianity simply isn't true, period. None of them would be able to post here as Christians. The academic perspective, like it or not, is simply that Jesus was not, and did not think he was, who and what the Nicene Creed and popular Christianity posit him to have been.

As mentioned elsewhere, I entered Christianity via a startling, "mystical" conversion experience some 55 years ago; attended a Baptist seminary; served with Campus Crusade for Christ; and have been neck-deep in theology and apologetics for decades. Do I fully accept the Nicene Creed, the "full eternal deity" of Jesus Christ, and Paul's status as a full Apostle, equivalent to or greater than the Apostles who actually walked with Jesus? Well, no I don't, at least not in the sense the Forum Rules and Statement of Faith are talking about. Probably like Marcus Borg, however, I think of myself as a "mature" Christian but certainly not "not a Christian." Here, alas, I am apparently not a true Christian.

I guess I shouldn't even be posting on the Controversial Christian Theology forum since I discovered to my surprise that it, too, is restricted to Christians as so defined and that discussions "may not contradict the Nicene Creed." Again, the majority of the very best NT scholars would be unable to post here.

To be clear, I have no "problem" with the Nicene Creed, the CF Forum Rules of the CF Statement of Faith. A forum can obviously operate however it wants. Those who can accept the Nicene Creed as their definition of Christianity are welcome to do so with my blessing. But it certainly isn't the only understanding of Christianity or what Jesus was all about. Since a forum is not a denomination or church, I'm not sure what is gained by such a restrictive definition of "true Christian" or by so narrowly restricting discussions. Is the idea to "protect" true Christians against challenging views, even those of the most renowned NT scholars? If so, doesn't that seem kind of odd and even cult-like?

Having been here long enough to have participated on a number of threads, it certainly appears to me that a fair number of folks are paying lip service to the Nicene Creed and other forum requirements of being a "true Christian" while the substance of their posts says otherwise. I'm not comfortable playing that game, nor with constantly wondering whether something I have said has crossed the line. So, I will accept being a non-Christian for purposes of these forums, strange as this may seem to me, and limit myself to discussing recipes for guacamole at The Kitchen Sink.

Would love to read the link from this forum that describes one must believe in all the tenents of the Nicene Creed in order to be a Christian.

fhansen · 2025-07-06T20:39:23-0500

Clare73 said:
In the OT God reckons belief in the promise of seed as saving belief in the Seed, the Messiah.

Abraham took God at His word; Abraham believed the promise; he did not know Christ, the Messiah, let alone have a "saving belief" in Him according to that knowledge.

Clare73 said:
Au contriare. . .

Ro 5:14 - Sinful Adam causing death to reign over those who did not commit transgression (i.e., break a specific command with death penalty attached) was a pattern of the sinless CHRIST. . .esplane me dat!

In verse 12 Paul tells us that all sin. Look around yourself: is that correct, or NOT?? In 13 he tells us that sin isn’t charged against anyone where there is no law. So verse 14 only means that all sin, even though they had no command to break.

You insist that no real righteousness is given to believers, but only an imputed/declared righteousness. So this is where you get it wrong:

Clare73 said:
Ro 5:19 - JUST AS through the disobedience (sin) of the one man, the many were made sinners (guilty of Adam's sin by imputation),
SO ALSO through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous--(acquitted by imputation of Christ's righteousness)
(The parallels couldn't be any more clear.)

Paul is adamant about the fact that through Adam all became sinners, not merely declared to be sinners but became sinners. Therefore, to follow that pattern, through Christ they must become righteous. (The parallels couldn't be any more clear.)

Dan Perez · 2025-07-06T20:34:09-0500

Guojing said:
The key is to understand why water baptism was required under the gospel of the kingdom for Israel.

Dan Perez said:
And you quoted 1 Cor 1:14 reads , I thank God that I Baptized none of you , but Crispus and Gaius

and was that Water Baptism ??

dan p

Dan Perez said:

And the word Dispensation is used also in Luke 16:2 and verse 3 and also found in 1 Tim 1:4 and am Acts 9:5

and that Saul / Paul was the FRST ONE in the Body of Christ and That never Water Baptized no one !!

So , do you disagree with my Premise ?

dan p

Click to expand...

And have not replied to the above post and you say that baptism was not probhited for Gentils

and you have a verse ??

dan p

Semper-Fi · 2025-07-06T20:29:02-0500

johansen said:
Given the huge amount of neanderthal bones found in Israel it really makes me wonder if the giants of old.. are neanderthals and densovans.

I like the way God defines species.

"And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle
after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth
after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Species I think should be if they can reproduce "after their kind".
Science found Humans and Neanderthals can breed together.

N.H.M. has Neanderthal name meaning "human from the Neander Vally"

Genesis 6:4 talks about “giants” in the land before the flood.

Gen 6:4 There were giantsH5303

H5303
נְפִל נְפִיל
nephı̂yl nephil
nef-eel', nef-eel'
From H5307; properly, a feller, that is, a bully
or tyrant: - giant. Total KJV occurrences: 3

Giants is translated from two original Hebrew words:
Rephaim and Nephilim. Nephilim, which means “a feller,”
or one who fells a tree because of his unusual strength.

The term implies a “tough,” or a bully, an individual of
great physical might. The pre-Flood Nephilim were giants
in strength but not in tallness of stature.

The description of the Nephilim of pre-Flood matches with
the large-boned, exceptionally muscled Neanderthals.

Neanderthals and humans interbred and produced offspring that
interbred—and regularly. Promiscuous early humans interbred
'multiple times' in 'world of debauchery'

Promiscuous early humans interbred 'multiple times' in 'world of debauchery'

Researches initially thought interbreeding between Neanderthals and other primitive cousins was rare - but have now discovered they lived in a 'world of debauchery'

www.mirror.co.uk

There were at least three different human forms on Earth,
all having sex with each other.

The Rephaim are mentioned only after the Flood; they
were tall men, like Anakim (Deuteronomy 2:11, 20).

Deu 2:11 Which also were accounted giants,H7497
as the Anakims;H6062

H7497
רָפָה רָפָא
râphâ' râphâh
raw-faw', raw-faw'
From H7495 in the sense of invigorating; a giant: - giant,
Rapha, Rephaim (-s). See also H1051. Total KJV occurrences: 21

H6062
עֲנָקִי
‛ănâqı̂y
an-aw-kee'
Patronymic from H6061; an Anakite or descendant of Anak:
- Anakim. Total KJV occurrences: 9
-

The Bible talks about a great leader named Tubalcain. He was
the first to work with metal and develop instruments of war (Genesis 4:22).
And in those days violence filled the Earth (Genesis 6:11, 13).

The Neanderthals were no match for the swords, spears and
arrows of Tubalcain’s armies. eventually the violence and
degradation became so intense that God decided to destroy
all humans except Noah and others, in a worldwide Flood.

Bradskii · 2025-07-06T20:21:48-0500

I wouldn't trust whoever put your poster together. Your spider has one too many legs.

The Barbarian · 2025-07-06T20:21:38-0500

civilwarbuff said:
You didn't answer the question

You didn't like the answer you got. (no surprise there)

fhansen · 2025-07-06T20:18:02-0500

Clare73 said:
2) The Greek definition of the word dikaiosis (justification) is its NT meaning; i.e., declaration, sentence, pronouncement of remittance of sin, sinlessness, which it itself is not righteousness, only the absence of sin.
If "justification" meant "righteousness," there would be no need for the "imputation" of Christ's righteousness (Ro 5:18-19) patterned (Ro 5:14) on the "imputation" of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17-19).

If justification doesn't mean righteousness, but only the remittance of sin, then there would be no need to even impute Christ's righteousness to the believer. Because if that were the case then God would only be interested in forgiveness, not making anyone righteous whether by declaration or by actually changing them into righteous beings.

Joseph G · 2025-07-06T19:59:39-0500

Semper-Fi · 2025-07-06T19:54:39-0500

Job 33:6 said:
Michael Heiser understands that Genesis describes an ancient Israelite cosmology, not modern science. He takes the Bible literally, but he also doesn't confuse it with modern science and biology.

You need to learn what the word cosmology means. [Example] When the bible says He God
stretched out the heavens], and you claim it is cosmology, that is deception and a lie. No bible
wrighter ever used [science to discovered the heavens stretching-out]. God said it period.

The Barbarian · 2025-07-06T19:51:18-0500

Children of undocumented immigrants historically have been protected under the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. According to most legal scholars, undocumented immigrants come to the United States for employment, to contribute to the economy, and to live among U.S. society. What makes immigration laws enforceable against them is that they are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment became the basis for landmark Supreme Court rulings over the years addressing birthright citizenship because the Citizenship Clause’s line about who was “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States generated some uncertainty.

The 1898 ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark finally answered the question whether a child of Chinese immigrants (who were ineligible for citizenship due to the Chinese Exclusion Acts) born on U.S. territory was eligible for birthright citizenship. The case confirmed the unequivocal precedent that anyone born in the United States, regardless of their parent’s immigration status, is a citizen at birth.

...

Breaking Down Trump’s Attempt to End Birthright Citizenship

Breaking Down Trump’s Attempt to End Birthright Citizenship - American Immigration Council

Trump issued an executive order to end birthright citizenship for babies of undocumented immigrants and for people with temporary status.

www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org

Joseph G · 2025-07-06T19:49:15-0500

Looks like I'll be wiping the dust from my feet and moving on soon.

Anybody interested in staying in contact, believer or genuine seeker, my email is joegunlock@gmail com.

There is power in the Name of Jesus to save, keep proclaiming His Name - everywhere without fear!

God bless and always praying for all here. Please pray for me.

Joseph
biblegateway.com

pasifika · 2025-07-06T19:46:25-0500

BobRyan said:
The Creation Sabbath of Gen 2 is being used as a symbol of New Canaan - heaven, heavenly Canaan -- just as in Gal 4 Jersualem above "is our mother".

Gal 4
24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar. 25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother.

We still have mothers - even though this symbolism is used in Gal 4.

Heb 4 is using something that still remains - the Sabbath, and adding it as a symbol for saints waiting for heaven/eternal rest.

yes the "sabbath rest" still remains. But the "day" you enter into has changed as per Hebrews 3&4. not 7th day but a day called "today".

this i believe is a "spiritual day" as it's not belongs to any particular day of the the 7day week.

That day only comes for each and everyone is when we "Believe" the Gospel message as in Hebrews 4:3..we who have "Believed" enter that "Rest".

so is not a 24hr day of rest as in creation day but a continuous and permanent Rest once we "Believe".

The Barbarian · 2025-07-06T19:46:03-0500

civilwarbuff said:
Oh, did the WH build that?....

They specified it. Trump visited and endorsed Alligator Auschwitz himself.

Joseph G · 2025-07-06T19:45:46-0500

Looks like I'll be wiping the dust from my feet and moving on soon.

Anybody interested in staying in contact, believer or genuine seeker, my email is joegunlock@gmail com.

There is power in the Name of Jesus to save, keep proclaiming His Name - everywhere without fear!

God bless and always praying for all here.

Joseph
biblegateway.com

Semper-Fi · 2025-07-06T19:45:23-0500

Job 33:6 said:
They aren't about biology. Adams sons are identified as the fathers of all those who play the flute and live in tents etc. it isn't about biology.

So you reject the clear genealogy of Adam and his decedents,
that explains it and all I need to know, you just reject Gods word.
You just try and reason around Gods clear teaching in the bible.

The Barbarian · 2025-07-06T19:41:29-0500

Joseph G said:
Nope. Not interested in science fiction, thanks.

I don't think "they are all lying!" is going to be a very effective defense for you.

Landon Caeli · 2025-07-06T19:41:01-0500

FireDragon76 said:
Necropolitics was a term coined by the Cameroonian philosopher, Achille Mbembe ( awesome name, BTW). It's used to describe how powerful empires (both formal and informal/commercial) wield the power of death and degredation as a political tool. But necropolitics, IMO, also exists domestically now in the United States, and it's fairly blatant.

I like to pick your brain.

FireDragon76 · 2025-07-06T19:36:10-0500

Landon Caeli said:
Lack of safeguards! I get your view now.

...It took me a minute because I don't see it that way. I don't think people are quite that sinister, at least, if they think like I do.

Necropolitics was a term coined by the Cameroonian philosopher, Achille Mbembe ( awesome name, BTW). It's used to describe how powerful empires (both formal and informal/commercial) wield the power of death and degredation as a political tool. But necropolitics, IMO, also exists domestically now in the United States, and it's fairly blatant.

johansen · 2025-07-06T19:34:04-0500

Job 33:6 said:
Unless you think she is the mother of Adam too

Its turtles all the way down lol.

Akita Suggagaki · 2025-07-06T19:29:22-0500

iluvatar5150 said:
“Spiritual warfare” in the way she used it is nothing more than superstition.

Better than as the usual cudgel.

Fervent · 2025-07-06T19:27:50-0500

Jeff Saunders said:
Is not the connotative meaning just someone’s opinion on what they or a group thinks something means in the a particular context, but it’s still someone’s opinion and they have an agenda that they are trying to prove. A dictionary is just the agreement of what words mean at the time.

Technically speaking, both connotative meaning and denotative meaning are people's opinions of common usage. But neither are purely opinion based, but have to do with how the word is used and in the kinds of contexts its commonly found in. Words, in and of themselves, don't have a meaning as if anywhere a word is found the same concept is in play. Thinking as much is an exegetical fallacy known as the word-concept fallacy. Instead, the meaning of words depends partly on their common usage but more directly on the context in which they are found. Meaning primarily rests much higher than the word level, somewhere between the sentence level and the paragraph level. So dictionaries are of extremely limited value because they say nothing of what kinds of contexts the words are typically found in to shed light on various connotations that exist for the word.

Akita Suggagaki · 2025-07-06T19:24:05-0500

RileyG said:
As Christians, I know we are not supposed to feel "empty."

I have heard others warn that if the mind is "empty" the devil can come in. St John of the Cross says just the opposite, that if we empty ourselves the devil has nothing to work with. Of course the mind cannot be "empty" unless we are unconscious. But we can have a quiet, still attentiveness.

Psalm 62 My soul waits in silence for God alone;

That is how I best describe my practice once my mind has settled down.

Fervent · 2025-07-06T19:22:49-0500

rjs330 said:
There is no significant portion of people in the US who face that. The poor in this country have big screen tvs, 75% have one or two vehicles. People below rhe poverty levels get enough benefits to reach income levels or over $50,000 a year.

Say a single mother of 2 earns minimum wage. She will earn about 14000. Then with government benefits she earns 26000. Then with state benefits she typically will end up wearing about 47000 total in dollars and benefits. Enough to live on.

96% of poor report no one is going hungry in their family.

These homes typically had both air conditioning and a personal computer.

For entertainment, they typically had cable or satellite TV, three color televisions, a DVD player, a VCR, and a video game system, such as an Xbox or Play Station.

In the kitchen, they had a refrigerator, a stove and oven, a microwave, and an automatic coffee maker.

Other amenities included a cell phone, a cordless phone, and a clothes washer.[17]

On average rhe poor children have the same nutritional assessments as middle income children.

The home has at least one widescreen TV connected to cable, satellite, or a streaming service, a computer or tablet with internet connection, and a smartphone. (Some 82% of poor families have one or more smartphones.)

By their own report, the average poor family had enough food to eat throughout the prior year. No family member went hungry for even a single day due to a lack of money for food.

Thats not to say NO one ever has a problem. When the census was conducted 7% had missed a housing payment in rhe past two months. Only 2% had utilities problems.

We spend at least 220 Billion dollars to help the poor. Thats 2 1/2 times more than is needed to eliminate child poverty in rhe US. Yet we still have some. Why, its obviously not because we aren't paying enough.

So, one would have to ask rhe question why are some still having g problems despite all of this. And its not becauae we arw not helping. We are, by a very large amount. These poor are getting FAR more than the gleaning at the edge of the field. They have housing, clothes, food, cars, big screen tvs, xboxes and air conditioning.

Where are these numbers coming from? This sounds so far off from what I see in my community that I'm quite suspicious of it, but I'm open to being contradicted. So where do these figures come from? Is this self-reports? What was the sampling method?

Latest activity

Latest activity

Breaking Down Trump’s Attempt to End Birthright Citizenship​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Breaking Down Trump’s Attempt to End Birthright Citizenship