-
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.
Israel and the New Covenant.
- By Hentenza
- General Theology
- 310 Replies
I guess you can make the argument that excluded from his/her community meant excluded from salvation but then you would be arguing that salvation is by works and that is not biblical. Scriptures are clear that Abraham was saved by his faith not by his works.
The Abrahamic covenant is a foreshadow of the law which would come 430 years later. The requirement of every male being circumcised continued. Paul explains below that one that is not circumcised but keeps the law should be regarded as circumcised and his praised is not from his people but from God.
“For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a violator of the Law, your circumcision has turned into uncircumcision. So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will his uncircumcision not be regarded as circumcision? And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a violator of the Law? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from people, but from God.”
Romans 2:25-29 NASB2020
Romans 2:25-29 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a violator of the Law, your circumcision has turned into uncircumcision. So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements | New American Standard Bible - NA
For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a violator of the Law, your circumcision has turned into uncircumcision. So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements
bible.com
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
NSPM-7
It's important to understand how this memorandum defines " political violence ". It is much broader than the physical:
White House Anti-Terror Order Targets ‘Anti-American’ Views
The order, experts warn, could target protestors' constitutional right to protest and free speech.share.google
National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 is designed to address what the article calls "ideological markers" which supposedly indicate support of violence. Included in the order are things deemed "anti-Americanism" and "anti-capitalism".
Also included are things deemed "anti-Christianity". How far would that go?
If a public debate were held between a Christian and a non-Christian and the latter received applause, cheers and maybe even laughter from non-Christians in the audience, could they all be accused of "intimidation" of the Christians?
If Jews for Jesus gathered at a public venue and members of Jews for Judaism showed up to counter with arguments of their own, could the Torah-observant Jews be accused of attacking Christianity?
If victims of psychological or emotional abuse called out the abusers, could they be accused by those abusers of "hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality"?
Where does this order draw the line to protect free and open religious discourse?
AI Generated:
The memorandum defines "organized political violence" not as a single act, but as a culmination of sophisticated, organized campaigns that utilize targeted intimidation, threats, and violent acts with the explicit political purpose of silencing opposing speech, limiting political activity, changing policy outcomes, and preventing the functioning of a democratic society. The scope of acts categorized as these politically motivated terrorist activities is broad, including both traditional physical crimes like rioting, looting, trespass, assault, and destruction of property, as well as non-physical forms of intimidation such as organized doxing campaigns, swatting, and threats of violence. These campaigns are stated to be animated by recurrent motivations, including anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and support for the overthrow of the U.S. Government.
I dont know but, many parts of this memorandum eerily sounds like it is describing this administration. Just sayin....
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
