Strong in Him said:

What, it' pathetic that someone "commanded to preach God's message' writes stuff that isn't even Scriptural?
Agreed.

Methinks you can't cope when people challenge you.

Click to expand...

I am sorry to have reacted like that. It was not nice and I apologise.
However, it seems all here are unable to hold a decent conversation. I guess this is because no one likes their long held beliefs to be challenged.

I realize that to believe Jesus did go to Britain, means that Britain does have an Israelite heritage.
The ten Northern tribes, taken into exile by Assyria did migrate across Europe and some to as far as the British Iles and Ireland. Jeremiah 31:21, John 7:35, Matthew 15:24, 2 Esdras 13:39-50
But that disturbs people who have to maintain a separation between the Church and a one and only; Jewish Israel in order for their fanciful belief of a 'rapture to heaven' to be possible.
The whole idea of a Jewish redemption and mass conversion, is not Biblical and will never happen.

Who it was that did mass convert, was those who the Apostles went to, after the Jews rejected the Gospel. They were the Lost Tribes and we Christians are mainly, their descendants. Gods Promises to the Patriarchs will be kept by the Christian peoples.
Amos 9:9 dispels any ideas that the exiled ten tribes are lost forever.

SabbathBlessings said:

Which are shadows- what are shadows without the previous verse. This is an easy one.

Its point to Heb 10:1-10 which tells us why these are shadows and points to Christ. Its all the same context as in Heb9:10-15

Why NSAB used — because its pointing to the key idea of the previous verse

16 Therefore, no one is to [a]act as your judge in regard to food and drink, or in respect to a festival or a new moon, or a Sabbath [b]day— 17 things which are only a shadow of what is to come; but the [c]substance [d]belongs to Christ.

Why KJV used:

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

In this verse, the colon connects two related but distinct ideas:

1. Before the colon — Paul gives a command:
2. After the colon — Paul explains why:

1. The Context of Colossians 2:16–17​

Paul is addressing Gentile believers in Colossae who were being pressured by some teachers to adopt Jewish ceremonial practices — dietary laws, feast days, and sabbaths — as necessary for salvation or spiritual growth.

---

2. Understanding “Sabbath Days”​

The key phrase here is “sabbath days” (Greek: sabbaton).
This word can refer to:

• The weekly Sabbath (the 7th-day Sabbath from the 4th Commandment, Exodus 20:8–11), or
• The ceremonial sabbaths — annual feast-day sabbaths (like the Day of Atonement or Feast of Trumpets) described in Leviticus 23, which were part of the Mosaic ceremonial law.

To discern which Paul means, we look at the pattern of the verse.

---

⚖️ 3. The “Triad” Pattern of Jewish Holy Times​

Paul lists:




That exact pattern appears several times in the Old Testament, such as:

• 1 Chronicles 23:31
• 2 Chronicles 2:4
• Hosea 2:11
• Ezekiel 45:17

In those passages, the sequence “festival (holyday), new moon, sabbath” refers to the Jewish calendar of ceremonial observances:

• Annual feasts (holy days),
• Monthly new moons,

---

✝️ 4. What Paul Is Actually Saying​

Paul’s point is:




These rituals were shadows of the substance (reality) — Christ Himself.
The sacrificial system, feast days, all foreshadowed Jesus’ redemptive work.
Once Christ came, the shadows were fulfilled and no longer binding as ceremonial requirements.

---

️ 5. What About the 4th Commandment Itself?​

The weekly Sabbath from the 4th Commandment (Exodus 20:8–11) was established at Creation, not as a “shadow” of Christ, but as:

• A memorial of creation (Genesis 2:2–3),
• A sign of God’s covenant (Exodus 31:16–17),
• A gift of rest for humanity (Mark 2:27).

So Paul’s statement in Colossians 2:16–17 isn’t abolishing the moral law (the Ten Commandments).
He’s contrasting the ceremonial shadows with the living reality of Christ.

---

Summary​

Concept	Description
“Sabbath days”	Refers primarily to ceremonial sabbaths (yearly feast days) tied to sacrifices and rituals.
“Shadow of things to come”	These observances pointed forward to Jesus’ sacrifice and ministry.
The 4th Commandment	The weekly Sabbath predated the Law of Moses; it is not a shadow, but part of God’s moral law.
Paul’s intent	To warn believers not to let anyone judge or condemn them over ceremonial religious observances now fulfilled in Christ.

Click to expand...

So if the adjective shadow on verse 17 refers to what is listed in verse 16 then it would be shadow meat, shadow food, shadow drink, shadow festival, shadow new moon and shadow sabbath, right?

Colo Millz said:

Christ himself is our sabbath - therefore we fulfil the 4th commandment in our Sunday celebration of new creation.

Click to expand...

Yes, Jesus is another Sabbath (Heb 4:8), the one remaining for the people of God (Heb 4:9), our full-time (Heb 4:4) Sabbath rest (Heb 4:8-10) from our own works to save and in his work which saves to the uttermost (Heb 7:25).

mindlight said:

The curse was lifted by Christ. But if women are no longer in Christ and in the church I guess the curse comes back on them while men are free of it. If that's the trend then feminism is in for a massive reversal in the coming decades.

Click to expand...

We can say "the curse was lifted by Christ," and in the same way I often say "Babel is disarmed in Christ," but there will still be many people who insist that Eve's curse and Babel must be observed within the Body of Christ until His return.

Apple Sky said:

I just did.

Click to expand...

How did you "prove" it?

Hans Blaster said:

It isn't. The base budget law was changed by the "BBB".

Click to expand...

Incorrect -

The current continuing resolution (CR) offered in Congress is based on the old budget levels from FY25, not a new budget. Here's the breakdown:

• CR Timeline: The House Appropriations Committee released the Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2026, which funds the government through November 21, 2025.
• Budget Basis: The CR continues funding at FY25 levels, as Congress has not passed any of the twelve FY26 appropriations bills. Only a few have cleared either chamber, and none have reached the President.

That isn't fantasy in my mind - that is established fact.

Hentenza said:

Love you anyway

Click to expand...

Thank you, love you too

I am surprised Newsmax didn't sign up. Guess there is a line they will not cross.

Strong in Him said:

Oh yes - I went and measured it last week.

Can you prove anything you say without YouTube, Dean Odel/Eric Dubay/Rob Skiba?

Click to expand...

I just did.

Valletta said:

The best definition I know of conservatism is common sense. So too conservatives are for a limited or smaller government. I've never heard about conservatism shifting around 2015. To me immigration is not a liberal or conservative issue at all. But during the Biden administration border laws were blatantly violated and the people were lied to, be told the border was safe, secure, and closed while we as a country were inundated with numbers of border crossings in numbers beyond imagination. The scheme appeared to be fueled by a quest to establish essentially one party control. Whole towns were decimated and human trafficking rose to a level not seen since the Civil War. Despite a campaign that outspent Trump by more than 2 to 1 people could see for themselves that the border was not closed or safe or secure, so much so that many who personally did not like Trump as a person voted for him. Because of the great numbers of people overwhelming our nation, and because so many were unvetted, the common-sense choice was to secure the border and remove those here illegally. They are welcome to try for American citizenship from outside of the country.

Click to expand...

You think conservatism is just common sense, and liberals don't have it? How unfortunate to think this way.

Unfortunately, this is the perception that contributes to polarization in America today. Each side believes it possesses all the common sense and facts, while considering the other side delusional. Progress will be limited until we acknowledge that both liberals and conservatives possess common sense, and that each ideology aims to improve America and the world.

The remainder of your comments regarding border security are not accurate. It is true that during the Biden administration, more undocumented immigrants have crossed the southern border compared to his predecessor. However, attributing sole responsibility to President Biden lacks factual basis and does not adequately consider the complexity of the issue.

For over six decades, the United States has faced challenges related to migration from the south and individuals overstaying their legal status. This was a significant factor leading President Reagan to grant amnesty to nearly three million undocumented immigrants. Subsequent administrations, including those of Presidents Bush, and Obama, pursued comprehensive immigration reforms to address the ongoing issue.

Nearly 2 million undocumented immigrants crossed the US southern border during President Trump’s first term.

Your post suggests this issue only emerged during the last four years under the Biden administration, as if it hasn’t happened before in American history.

One principle of conservatism is accurately assessing facts. It is important to begin with factual understanding before making claims about common sense.

fhansen said:

Yes, we cannot, in your conceptualization where Scripture is viewed narrowly.

Click to expand...

Scripture must be viewed in the light of all Scripture (Jn 6:65, 37, 39).

Jn 6:65 - No one can come to me unless the Father enables him.
Jn 6:37 - All that the Father gives me will come to me (all do not come because all are not given to him).
Jn 6:39 - I shall lose none of all that he has given me.

Those whom the Father gives to him (the born again) are never lost.

Apple Sky said:

Sorry please forgive me, that was very rude of me.

Click to expand...

Love you anyway

dms1972 said:

The point is that Phillip was sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit. Also sometimes they were directed not to go to a certain location, for example in Acts 16 : 6-7 we see the Holy Spirit keeping them from preaching in Asia, because God has a timetable for the spread of the Gospel.

Click to expand...

Those who have the Holy Spirit will have a strong desire to share the Gospel with many. But the Holy Spirit gives more than just a strong desire to share the Gospel. He guides and directs, and He transforms us.
Sadly, it seems that many have been guided into never saying the Gospel unless it is within the 4 walls of the church. I believe that this guidance comes more from self-preservation than the Holy Spirit.
"The early disciples were fishers of men. While Modern disciples are often little more than aquarium keepers."

dms1972 said:

If that's the case then the the chap mentioned seemed like a lone-ranger, going onto a campus where he wasn't a student.

Click to expand...

Maybe he was a lone-ranger. Maybe he wasn't. In either case, the Holy Spirit has driven him to this place.

dms1972 said:

Certainly Evangelism is to be done through the local church

Click to expand...

While it’s true that evangelism should ideally flow through the local church, not every church today has a heart to go out and share the Gospel. Many play it safe, focusing on attracting people into the building rather than sending believers out into the world.
I know of a large church that runs a daycare, after-school programs, and community events, all good things, yet the Gospel itself is rarely shared. Even their big annual outreach event, a light party, is filled with fun and games, but no mention of Christ. It’s heartbreaking because activity without a message isn’t evangelism.
Sometimes, we have to obey what the Bible says and ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature’ (Mark 16:15), even if our local church isn’t doing it. Evangelism doesn’t always happen through church programs; it often happens through individual believers who are willing to step outside the four walls and speak.

dms1972 said:

The odd thing is I see this video, and I see other videos of lone-rangers setting up their box in some city square by themselves. It ends the same way most times. The Police are sometimes called and the "evangelist" is moved on for his own safety, then he posts the video of his "mistreatment".

Apologetics and evangelism done in this manner is sometimes little more than a game. It then become necessary to explain to non-christians that what they have been subjected to at times was not a genuine christian witness nor apologetics, before we can get a hearing. Some will be harder to reach because of having been subjected to some sort of toxic "evangelism" in the past.

Click to expand...

This is typical if we point out people's sins. Persecution. It is rare to see it escalate to the point of needing the police, though it does happen, and when it does, it makes the video very interesting and so people will put it on Youtube.
Also, I am not saying that everyone who posts videos like this has the Holy Spirit within them. Some are doing it just to get clicks.
But in reality, most who do evangelism do not do it for clicks. Most are Spirit-filled people - Like Charlie Kirk. - This person was arguing for the existence of the creator, and so I would be willing to bet he is not there for clicks. - But God knows his heart.

dms1972 said:

It then become necessary to explain to non-christians that what they have been subjected to at times was not a genuine christian witness nor apologetics

Click to expand...

It’s true that some may do it for attention or clicks, but honestly, how often do we really have to say to an unbeliever, "That person preaching on the street wasn’t doing it for God. They were just doing it for themselves and trying to get clicks"? Very rarely, if ever.
Most who go out to share the Gospel do so because they genuinely care about the lost and want to see them saved. Of course, we should always make sure we’re speaking with gentleness and respect, but also with a firm, unwavering conviction. The method may vary, but the message and motive should remain rooted in love for God and for people.

dms1972 said:

Some will be harder to reach because of having been subjected to some sort of toxic "evangelism" in the past.

Click to expand...

I think you’ll find that most people become hard toward the Gospel for deeper reasons than just being exposed to ‘toxic evangelism.’ That’s likely far down the list.
Two main reasons come to mind. First, many love their sin, and acknowledging a God who will judge the world in righteousness means they’d have to turn from the life they enjoy. Second, many have heard a watered-down message, ‘Just believe in Jesus and you’ll be saved,’ without ever being told why they need saving.
People must first understand the bad news, sin, judgment, and separation from God, before the Good News can truly be good.

mark46 said:

OK.

I am surprised that the foreign companies and US importers chose to absorb 45%. Many of those companies will be forced out of business or to reduce the quality of their products. Of course, other companies will simply choose not to sell to the US, not being to raise their prices by enough to remain profitable. There are lots of products where consumers won't even pay for 55% of the tariffs. They will just buy another product.

Everyone involved in the sale of tariffed products to the US is a loser other than those companies who are able to sell more to non-US customers.

Click to expand...

I dont think it will go on indefinitely. I think they were trying to keep prices consistent and the business relationships and markets in tact until things blow over. Also, anyone who implied they had to raise prices due to tarriffs ended up on the receiving end of Trump's wrath. At one time Trump told Walmart they BETTER NOT raise prices.


That won't go on forever, though, and I don't think things will blow over anytime soon. I've seen social media posts showing price changes and higher price tags over lower price tags at various stores.

wing2000 said:

There are many dairy farms that require people to operate the machinery that milks the cow.

Click to expand...

Yeah. Until the people are replaced by Tesla robots. Times are changing.

wing2000 said:

...do what?

Click to expand...

Come here voluntarily and get paid. But I guess even illegal immigrants paying back drug cartels technically voluntarily came here and are getting paid.

Strong in Him said:

That's kind of you.
God bless the Anglican community who have finally caught up with the Methodists.

Click to expand...

Ah, yes. The Anglicans and Methodists are essentially Mother and Daughter

d taylor said:

-
​

I thought women were attending these get-togethers and it was men who were not

Click to expand...

I think women tend to be more social than men. Women according to some psychologists are "more fun" than men, whatever that is supposed to mean.

I've never been to a single event in my life- probably because I am not interested in dating, and am an introvert. Nor do I know anyone in my area, personally.

RileyG said:

God bless the Anglican Communion, from your friendly Roman Catholic

Click to expand...

That's kind of you.
God bless the Anglican community who have finally caught up with the Methodists.

seeking.IAM said:

I really can't say for certain, but I expect not.

Click to expand...

Quite interesting. I wonder why they left then? Because it was "too liberal" so to speak? Hmmm....

RileyG said:

Interesting. Do they still follow The Book of Discipline and Wesleyan theology?

Click to expand...

I really can't say for certain, but I expect not.

Oompa Loompa said:

Some immigrant workers do.

Click to expand...

...do what?

Oompa Loompa said:

I do not think there is a single dairy farm in the country that milks their cows by hand. With or without immigrant labor.

Click to expand...

There are many dairy farms that require people to operate the machinery that milks the cow.

Apple Sky said:

Can you prove otherwise, without the aid of a text book or some scientist just spouting it ?

Click to expand...

Oh yes - I went and measured it last week.

Can you prove anything you say without YouTube, Dean Odel/Eric Dubay/Rob Skiba?