• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Why Kat Von D Will Not Get Rid of an Item in Her Home Some Christians Think Is ‘Demonic’

Gargoyles and grotesques aren't necessarily about "good vs. evil", or to teach a simple version of morality, but I suppose that's the closest analogy for some people.

Grotesques are meant to be unruly, vaguely scary or humorous, that's precisely the point of them.
Upvote 0

what is Calvinism answer to how God works?

I noticed you relented from citing examples.
We've been through it enough that I see no point in going around again and again. It's no strawman I'm 'beating up" on, it's the capricious theological monster Calvinists prop up with their word games about compatibilist "free will" that's not really free will and God who is wrathful with human beings who are just carrying out what He has supposedly decreed them to do in the first place.
Upvote 0

There’s a Giant Flaw in Human History

Individuals who have responded in this thread do not operate at your limited intellectual and educational levels, so stop projecting.
So you already have dismissed everyone I linked. None have expertise and an education. Why should I even engage. This is what will happen now that you have dismissed everything. I will dismiss everything you as lacking credibility. Same rule applies.
Since you are incapable of understanding the problems in your so called experts ‘theories’ don’t assume everyone else cannot either.

Your arguments are based on confirmation bias while your take on images shows pareidolia which is the psychological condition of seeing things that are not there. Only you can see the softening of stone while everyone else sees irregular surfaces.

Well let me put my forensic scientist cap on, I have had to analyse SEM results and have sometimes been led astray as SEMs are very good at detecting contamination.

It is a well known fact the Giza plateau sits on a water table which rises and falls and the Sphinx which is made from limestone has been affected by groundwater penetrating the limestone via capillary action. Dissolved salts such as silicates recrystallize in the limestone creating the impression of geopolymer cement defined by a high water content, the presence of silicon dioxide, calcium and magnesium-rich silicate minerals.

This my theory and I asked GPT-5 to find evidence of the same effect on pyramid casing stones.


Can the high water content and silicates in low-level pyramid casing stones be explained by groundwater and capillary rise?


Yes — and there is direct geological, archaeological, and hydrological evidence that the lower casing stones of the pyramids interacted with groundwater and capillary moisture for long periods.

This interaction can fully account for:
  • Elevated water content
  • Amorphous silicate coatings
  • Silica spheroids in SEM images
  • Mg–Ca rich cement patches
  • Chemical compositions different from “fresh” limestone
Below is the evidence.



1. Evidence that groundwater reached or influenced the pyramid bases


1.1 Geological surveys show historical high water tables near the pyramid base


Multiple geological studies (Egyptian Geological Survey; Hassan 1949; Gauri et al. 1988; Abdel-Mota'al 2010) show that:

  • Ancient groundwater levels across the Giza Plateau varied significantly.
  • During wetter periods (Old Kingdom and Middle Kingdom), the water table was several metres higher than today.
  • In some recorded phases, the water table approached or overlapped the lowest courses of the pyramids.

The lower portions of:
  • The Great Pyramid
  • Khafre’s pyramid
  • Menkaure’s pyramid
all show moisture-related weathering distinct from upper courses.



2. Evidence of capillary rise in the Giza limestones


2.1 Tura limestone (the casing stone material) is highly microporous


Petrographic and porosity measurements (El‐Aref 1987; Kamel & Kamal 1990) show:

  • Tura limestone has very fine micro-porosity (0.5–2 μm pores).
  • Such pore sizes maximize capillary action, enabling water to rise 2–5 m above the water table.
This means even if the water table didn’t physically touch the casing, moisture could still wick upward into the lower courses for centuries.


2.2 Field observations confirm capillary staining on casing blocks


Archaeologists who documented the few remaining original casing stones (especially on the northern and eastern sides of the Great Pyramid) note:

  • A distinct “tide line” or discolored band on the lowest casing stones
  • Crusts of evaporated salts, including halite, gypsum, and silica
  • More porous and friable texture on the bottom 4–6 courses

These are classic signatures of prolonged capillary wetting and evaporation cycles.




3. Evidence that groundwater altered the geochemistry of these stones


3.1 Silica precipitation and amorphous coatings on lower stones


Geochemical studies of the Great Pyramid casing remnants (Harrell 1991; Klemm & Klemm 2001) show:

  • Silica-rich amorphous films on lower edges
  • Microcrystalline and colloidal silica deposits in pore spaces
  • Mg-enriched carbonate alteration in lower zones
  • Dolomitization features in moisture-influenced areas

These match exactly the silicate and Mg–Ca textures that the geopolymer hypothesis cites as “artificial binders”.

But they are well-known groundwater alteration products in limestones.

3.2 Identical alteration is documented in the Sphinx enclosure


The Sphinx’s lower limestone shows:

  • High water content
  • Amorphous silica gels
  • Clay mobilization
  • Salt crystallization
  • Recrystallized calcite

These effects arise from the same groundwater regime shared by the plateau.

The lower pyramid casing stones exhibit the same signatures, though less extreme.



4. Evidence of long-term moisture cycling affecting the casing


4.1 Salt efflorescence recorded on lower pyramid blocks


Salt crust analysis by Gauri & Bandyopadhyay (1999) shows:

  • Halite, gypsum, and sodium carbonates
  • Crystallized in patterns indicating evaporation from upward-moving groundwater
  • Found primarily on lower courses, decreasing upward

This is diagnostic of capillary rise.

4.2 Mechanical degradation patterns align with moisture flow


Weathering profiles on lower casing remnants show:

  • Preferential subflorescence damage (salt crystallization inside pores)
  • Zones of higher porosity created by dissolution
  • Breakdown surfaces consistent with wet/dry cycling

These are not seen in upper courses, which stayed dry for 4,500 years.



5. Why this matters for the “reconstituted stone” hypothesis


Everything that Barsoum’s team attributed to artificial reconstitution has a well-understood natural explanation:


Feature observedGeopolymer claimWell-established groundwater explanation
High water contentReconstituted limestone stored waterCapillary rise + long-term groundwater wetting
Amorphous silicate binderArtificial geopolymerSilica gels from groundwater evaporation
Silica nano-spheresManufactured nanoparticlesNatural colloidal silica precipitates
Mg–Ca rich phasesArtificial binder formulationGroundwater dolomitization & ion exchange
“Unnatural” chemistriesHuman-added mixGroundwater alteration + diagenesis

In every case, the natural geological process explains the data without requiring synthetic casting.




Conclusion: Yes — groundwater and capillary rise completely explain the features observed in lower casing stones


The combined evidence shows:

  1. The water table rose high enough to influence the pyramid bases.
  2. Tura limestone actively wicks moisture through capillary action.
  3. Groundwater introduced silica, magnesium, clays, and carbonates.
  4. Evaporation cycles created amorphous silica phases and silica spheres.
  5. Weathering patterns on lower casing stones match known capillary processes.

Therefore, the high water content and silicate anomalies are geological in origin, not evidence that the blocks were cast.





Real evidence trumps confirmation bias and pareidolia.


Once again only someone as deluded as you, completely paralysed by pareidolia can see evidence of stone softening or moulding in the images.
Seriously it is breathtakingly stupid.
Upvote 0

There’s a Giant Flaw in Human History

Petrie is just your current map of the Mississippi.
I find it ironic. You claim truth over experts and when I cite them you relegate them to fiction. Yet claim your own words are fact. Double standards.
That's a laugh, coming from you. You don't give them any.
You complain that I don't provide per review and then when I do you completely ignore it. No one can have a coherent discussion when people just dismiss evidence.
So what? Given the evidence presented here, I would have to side with the cut and pounded school, but it doesn't really matter. All you have ever shown us is that the ancient Egyptians may have possessed technology that we don't know about, and that is hardly late breaking news.
You stacked the deck. You have already dismissed the evidence and then say theres nothing to see.
Upvote 0

what is Calvinism answer to how God works?

Is the position on Calvinism, that God created people who he would never save, and they will live a short meaningless life only to burn in hell for all eternity with never having even the slightest possibility of avoiding it?


I'm game, I'll love to have a discussion with you. I used to hold to your position before I recanted and became a Reformed Calvinist. Tell me who about this passage. Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring;

Who is the different offspring here?


The other position is everyone has a free will choice to choose or reject God, and because they chose to reject, they go to hell and it's their fault.
Please by all means show a reference where Calvin denies free-will? He states that all sinners sin willingly; nobody coerces sinner to sin against their wills, right? What Calvin does state is that we (sinners) do what we love to do. Which is to sin (John 3), (Eph. 2).​


Suppose you came to the conclusion Calvinism was true all along, are you fine with that, and would it bother you?

And I wanted to give my stance on the matter, I have no idea, and I'm honestly not too concerned I'm more focused on just living the way God would like me to live than figuring out how everything works. If I find out it's true I accept it and move on, I am a believer so I have no reason to be concerned if its true.

But if Calvinism is saying that some believers are not elect and predestined to hell and we HAVE NO IDEA WHO IT IS, and i find that out then yes i would be really concerned.
I too was concerned if I was one of the elect. Simple, do you believe that you are a guilty sinner before a Holy God? Do you believe God that He justifies those who trust in Him? Do you believe in the incarnate, crucified, and risen Christ? That he lived a perfect holy life and sinless life, suffered and paid the price of your sins? That by His obedience to the fulfillment of the Law, He became a curse for you, so that you can be perfect, blameless and righteous before God by His works not your own? It is by His imputed righteousness that we can stand righteous. And be saved. Because of Christ Alone! This sir is the marvelous exchange of our sins to Christ and His righteousness to us who believe this, because this is God's word, His promise, His oath, His covenant. That no one can break. Believe this and you are one of the elect!
Upvote 0

Gallup: Drop in U.S. Religiosity Among Largest in World

On that point, we may have some disagreement (at least on the implication and philosophy)

Many don't care how a president "represents me to the rest of the world".
I'm sure that you're aware of the book 'The Ugly American'. A quick description from wiki:

'The book depicts the failures of the U.S. diplomatic corps, whose insensitivity to local language, culture, and customs and refusal to integrate were in marked contrast to the polished abilities of Eastern Bloc (primarily Soviet) diplomacy and led to Communist diplomatic success overseas.'

But the term has hung in there as a stereotype of Americans abroad. Somewhat self centered, loud and ignorant of other cultures. As I say, it's a stereotype and not typical of many Americans I've encountered outside the US. But Trump is all those things and more. And I'd have to ask you, if you were overseas and some fellow American was embarrassing him or herself in some way then wouldn't you feel embarrassed yourself?

Imagine an American playing at Wimbledon and he's gracious in defeat and generous in victory. He plays hard but fair and wears his heart on his sleeve. If he wins, don't you feel a sense of pride? If he's an absolute jerk and throws his toys out of the pram every time he loses a point, abuses the umpire, the crowd, his opponent then isn't there a tendency to say 'Hey, I know this guy is a jerk. But we're not like that.'

If your president makes a speech to the UN and emphasises all that's great about the US and urges everyone else to look to the better angels of our nature, then isn't a sense of pride you'd feel? As opposed to him whinging about the escalator and insulting the leaders of other countries. Do you really mean to say you'd not be embarrassed? Isn't your reaction to again say 'Hey, I know this guy is a jerk. But we're not like that.'
Upvote 0

Can Truth Be Known? How

Not really. What rings true to you may be an annoying sound to me, and visa versa.

Personal interpretation of Scripture is by definition subjective.
That not the ring of truth and I did not have that in mind.
If you want it to be, you aren't listening to me, so take care.
Upvote 0

Can Truth Be Known? How

Not really, but let's run with it.

Non-believers are not really able to know truth without trial and error, and that is no guarantee of them knowing it without talking themselves right back out of it.
Trial ad error sounds like the person that doesn't know right from wrong, and tries something to see the result.
Not everyone follows that unwise course.

Some people ask questions, and listen to the answers Then they try to verify what answers are the best, by consulting a reliable source... in this case, the Bible.
That way, they don't rely on trial and error.

It's true that sometimes one may take a wrong path, because of the confusion that surrounds them, but is that trial and error? Not really, no. Jesus's disciples were with him, but the confusion that existed in their time affected their understanding on occasion.

Being taught by the right persons removes the danger of trial and error. Acts 8:26-40
Upvote 0

B flat B♭

But the book of Jashar is. Job 10:13
It isn't referring to any of the numerous forgeries that claim to be the book of Jasher. In fact it is highly likely that Book of Jasher (meaning, Book of the Upright or the Book of the Just Man) is simply a reference to the Pentateuch.
There are no traces or remnants of the supposed "lost book of Jasher", not even in quotations by other authors. Every publication which claims to be the rediscovery of the "book of Jasher" is a forgery. It seems very odd that a book that supposedly recorded certain major events in Jewish history would not have been included in the Hebrew bible, let alone vanish without a trace, but if it is just another name for the Books of Moses, then it makes perfect sense and has not been lost at all.
Upvote 0

Appointed to Eternal Life - Acts 13:48

That is your answer to my question of whether the Jews who rejected the gospel that Paul and Barnabas preached to them would believe or not was God's alone and they were not appointed by God to believe. So, you agree that they had a choice of whether to accept or reject the gospel and that God didn't make the choice for them? What I'm getting at here is that you believe God alone long ago chose to appoint who would have eternal life and who would believe because of that. Wouldn't that mean that, because He decided not to appoint those Jews to eternal life, that it effectually was His choice that they would reject the gospel (since He didn't appoint them to accept it unto eternal life) rather than it being their choice that resulted in them judging themselves unworthy of eternal life?

I just don't see how your doctrine can be reconciled with Acts 13:46. It seems that in your doctrine it is God who judges people unworthy of eternal life by not appointing them to eternal life rather than people judging themselves unworthy by using their free will to choose to reject the gospel rather than accept it.

They did not believe because they did not want the gospel. That is the point of v. 46.
That's a very vague statement that explains nothing in relation to what Acts 13:46 is all about. The question is why did they not want the gospel? John 3:18-19 tells us.

John 3:18 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.

They loved the darkness rather than light. Why? Did they have no choice but to love the darkness rather than light? No. They had the choice to either continue embracing the darkness or to embrace the light that was shown upon them by the gospel. There is no reason to think that they couldn't have instead chosen to accept the gospel when you consider that God offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11) and wants all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-6) and commands all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). God's offer of salvation and desire for all people to be saved is genuine. Because of that, you can only conclude that those who reject the gospel do so by their own choice even though they could have instead chosen to accept it.

Their rejection is morally their own.
Yes. So, why do you think that God appoints people to eternal life and they then believe because of God having appointed them to eternal life when you are acknowledging that man has responsibility in the matter? The way you interpret Acts 13:48 implies that you think the choice of whether someone will receive eternal life or not is entirely up to God. Scripture does not teach that.

But the deeper explanation for why one group remains in that hostile unbelief while another responds in faith is given in v. 48. Human unbelief is natural to our fallen nature; God does not need to manufacture it. Yet genuine faith arises only where God appoints to life.
Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Sure, someone might not be naturally inclined to believe if they don't hear the word of God. But, what about when they do hear it? There's nothing to suggest that some are not able to believe and accept what they hear. Everyone must choose whether to accept or reject what they hear.
Upvote 0

Can Truth Be Known? How

I think the fact that the Bereans examined the OT points to the fact that they were willing to hear Paul, but wanted to verify. That's a good thing compared to those who rejected Paul.
A lot of persons are unaware that Luke's writing of Acts was later than Matthew's Gospel.
The scriptures may thus have included references to the Gospel of Matthew.
However, the important thing is, the explaining of scripture proved to be a guide that persons could verify from the scriptures that were available.

Since we have both the complete "OT" and "NT", everyone has something objectives to verify what they hear.
Act 8:26-40 is another example of how Jesus reveals the truth to those seeking it.

isn't Scripture itself, but each one of our interpretation. I can read Scripture and something can ring true to me while it is utterly false to you, and visa versa.
That's not what the "ring of truth" is.
A bell in one's ears is not the ring of truth.
When you were at school, or you heard the church bell ring, you didn't mistake it for the fire engine
The ring of truth is the truth being sounded from God's word. Once one hears it, like the Bereans, they respond to it because it's the truth.
It's not an interpretation.

The ring of the school bell; the ring of the church bell; the ring of truth... they are distinct.

Scripture isn't subjective, it is objective truth. But what is subjective, the the many different way people interpret the same scripture passages.
Fair enough. Thank you.
So, one can distinguish the ring of truth from an annoying sound.
Upvote 0

Release from Epstein files

They didn't know that at the time. The meeting was basically a ruse. Trump Jr, Kushner, and Manafort got duped and nothing of significance took place. What you and others are doing is grasping at straws. Russiagate was supposed to involve a whole lot more than just a couple of insignificant meetings, where nothing actually happened. If that's all a two year investigation came up with, then Russiagate was a nothingburger and mostly a hoax.
This is the reality that progressive left wing liberals are denying.
Upvote 0

Liberal Protestant churches proclaim 'holiness' of transgenderism, rebuke Catholic bishops

Reform Judaism was founded by theistic satanists.

No. Stop. You can throw insults at liberal Christians if you insist (wouldn't be the first time), but do not accuse Reform Jews of being Satanists. You know how that kind of thing ended, last century.
Upvote 0

Are the Jews Israel, or is the church Israel? Or does it depend on the context of the passage?

Galatians was written before Paul's final visit to Jerusalem in Acts 21.
That's meaningless.

If the Israel of God, is us, and he taught us that we are dead to circumcision (Galatians 5:2), then what James and the elders accused him of in Acts 21:18-25 would have been correct.

That is how I know the Israel of God in Galatians 6:16 is not us
This makes no sense whatsoever. Is this all you have? Are you somehow not aware why Paul did what he did in relation to the law of Moses? It was because of what he wrote here, not because he thought he or anyone else was obligated to keep the law of Moses at that point.

1 Corinthians 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. 20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; 21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. 23 And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

Can you see that Paul did not keep the law of Moses or encourage anyone else to do so because he thought anyone was obligated to do so. He said "unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law" and he did that "that I might by all means save some" and did it "for the gospel's sake".

You didn't address one single thing I said in my post specifically. Why? You should be willing to address any challenges to your doctrine specifically.
Upvote 0

Do you keep the Sabbath? (poll)

You need to understand the Sabbath in the new covenant perspective. You still at the old covenant Sabbath understanding. Otherwise you'll miss true Sabbath Rest which is found in Jesus. Read the Galatians warnings.

If a man understands and believes EVERY Word Jesus used to define the Pharisees, he will understand that the Pharisees were not promoting God's Laws, but as the Jesus "of the Bible" taught, the Pharisees taught for doctrines the commandments of men. Truly they "Had a Law", but it wasn't God's Law. When a person accepts this undeniable Biblical Truth, Galatians and Acts 15 are seen in a different "Light".
Upvote 0

The Pharisees are winning

Politics should not divide Christians. But there is a battle between Christians and a large group right now that derives their morality from atheist secular humanist thought. That's where a lot of "woke" ideology comes from, and they place that ideology above God's. That's why Charlie Kirk was shot, they thought their morality overrode his Christian teaching.
Upvote 0

Why Kat Von D Will Not Get Rid of an Item in Her Home Some Christians Think Is ‘Demonic’

Just like gargoyles on historic Churches. Everyone is always looking at things through their own cultural lense. Art, Scripture, etc. That is the first mistake.

I actually came here to say that the people criticizing this would probably have a conniption fit if they ever toured some of the old churches and cathedrals of Europe and noticed some of the carvings and sculptures :eek: :D
  • Winner
Reactions: Michie
Upvote 0

Congregation protests closure of Episcopal church amid sex abuse investigation, demands reopening

I prefer not to say denomination because it is no indictment of them. It could happen any number of places in a shrinking congregation. The setting was a city church in a large city's once thriving neighborhood that had gone seriously downhill and was then infested with prostitution, drugs, and all that comes with it. Most of the former members had moved out and moved on - probably for good reason - all save the diehards who refused to give up. It was sad in one way, yet a few were still doing church in the midst of squalor. So, there was that. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
Ahhhh, gotcha!
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,878,197
Messages
65,413,692
Members
276,366
Latest member
Camros