-
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.
Scholar warns feminism has become a ‘megachurch’ replacing faith, family and Christian virtue
I personally have an issue with this article. The scholar's argument that feminism is a "megachurch" that forces women to choose between family and fulfillment overlooks a significant reality present in her own life.Carrie Gress argues the movement functions as a secular megachurch targeting women with false promises
An author of 11 books, including an upcoming title on feminism, says the movement has evolved into a kind of secular "megachurch" with its own doctrines, rituals and moral code — one that she argues now serves as a substitute for faith, family and traditional Christian virtue.
“Feminism actually is not a subset of Christianity. It's actually a rival to Christianity," Carrie Gress, a fellow at the Institute for Human Ecology at Catholic University of America, told Fox News Digital in a recent interview.
Gress is the author of the forthcoming book "Something Wicked: Why Feminism Can’t Be Fused With Christianity," which she says examines how feminism has "quietly captured the minds and hearts of women by mimicking aspects of Christianity. Through its own ‘commandments,’ ‘virtues,’ ‘evangelization,’ and even ‘a sacrament,’ feminism has become an exceedingly powerful megachurch."
“In many respects, it can actually be seen as a megachurch," Gress told Fox News Digital. "It has taken on so many of the aspects of Christianity."
Continued below.
Scholar warns feminism has become a ‘megachurch’ replacing faith, family and Christian virtue
A Catholic author argued feminism functions as secular "megachurch" rivaling Christianity in a new book examining the movement's religious-like structure and doctrines.www.foxnews.com
It is undeniable that her ability to wear so many hats—as a wife, a mother of five, a professional author, an academic fellow and an editor —is a testament to the expanded opportunities secured by generations of women seeking equality. This is the Feminist movement.
By criticizing women who seek a career, autonomy and individualism as inherently anti-Christian, she is clearly not grasping the fruits of her now modern opportunities given to her by the foundational work laid by these like minded women of feminism.
I say this is shameful at best and hypocritical at worse.
Thanks for sharing.
Upvote
0
RFK Adjusts Hepatitis B Vaccine Recommendations; Democrats Lose Their Minds
- By probinson
- American Politics
- 66 Replies
First of all, I'm not "demanding" anything of anyone. I put things in quotes that people have said. I'm pleased to know that you don't think VAERS is "riddled with lies and misnfo" and I apologize if you think I was trying to make it seem like you said something you did not. That was not my intent.
I couldn't disagree more. VAERS did nothing to inform the vaccination policies during COVID despite a veritable mountain of reports. V-Safe did even less. The main thing they provided was the illusion that someone was tracking adverse events.
if you say so. Meanwhile, the database consists of reports from real people who have been harmed by vaccines, and they are tossed into this database and simply forgotten.
I truly don't believe the database exists for any other reason than to pretend like someone actually cares about adverse events from vaccination.
Did you see the increase in number of VAERS repots during COVID? Even though there were clearly fake reports, exactly how many reports do you think constitutes a "significant trend"? There's no doubt there's "noise" in this data, but there's also some very real "trends"that warranted further investigation. That didn't stop the government and public health from telling everyone to get vaccinated multiple times per year. Their booster recommendations during the Biden administration resulted in the top two vaccine regulators at the FDA resigning in protest.
The bottom line is, what you're saying sounds great. If VAERS were used in the way you explain, it would be a wonderful system to identify risks and pivot accordingly. But that's not what happens in practice. In practice, people pretend like the fact that there were over 1,000,000 VAERS reports in a single year when the previous high was around 60K is all just "noise" worthy of being ignored.
Would you be willing to share more specifics? What vaccine was involved, and what was concerning to you?
Fair enough.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Ellen White on the mark of the beast for those that worship on Sunday
- By Hentenza
- Sabbath and The Law
- 18 Replies
So what God said in Deut. 1 is wrong? And again, Sabbaths is plural in that verse so it doesn’t necessarily mean the weekly sabbath. You can’t be dogmatic about a verse where there could be optional definitions.
You don’t because I don’t read my pet doctrine into the verses like you do.
However, you are verse mining and not taking into account the actual context which begins in chapter 3.
“For we who have believed enter that rest, just as He has said, “As I swore in My anger, They certainly shall not enter My rest,” although His works were finished from the foundation of the world. For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: “And God rested on the seventh day from all His works”; and again in this passage, “They certainly shall not enter My rest.” Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience,”
Hebrews 4:3-6 NASB2020
Hebrews 4:6 Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now
Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience
bible.com
Notice that in verse 3 the writer is talking about “that” rest which refers to the believers rest from verse 1. He is contrasting the believers rest with the sabbath rest.
“Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience,”
Hebrews 4:6 NASB2020
Hebrews 4:6 Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now
Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience
bible.com
Look at the therefore. This is a conclusion from the first 5 verses of this chapter. These have been preached the gospel which had not been preached to those that Joshua (not Christ) brought into the promise land. The people that had the gospel preached to are the converted Jews that continue to try to force the law on the Christian church. This is the disobedience and the writer’s argument in the first 3 chapters of Hebrews.
Nope. Once again you are verse mining.
“But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to keep the Law of Moses.””
Acts 15:5 NASB2020
Acts 15:5 (NASB2020) - But some of the sect of the Pharise | YouVersion
But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to keep the Law of Moses.”
bible.com
And,
“After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. Since this is the case, why are you putting God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our forefathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.””
Acts 15:7-11 NASB2020
Acts 15:7-11 (NASB2020) - After there had been much debate, P | YouVersion
After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gosp
bible.com
No yoke if the law, including sabbath keeping, for the gentiles. In fact, no one has been able to bear the yoke of the law.
Nonsense. You are injecting Mark 2:27 into Col. 2:16 even though there is no relation. This is called reading your pet doctrine into the verses.
Do you actually believe the writings of Ellen White that all that worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and reject the seal of God? It’s a yes or no question so no commentary necessary.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
RFK Adjusts Hepatitis B Vaccine Recommendations; Democrats Lose Their Minds
- By DaisyDay
- American Politics
- 66 Replies
Repeating my own question back at me is singularly unhelpful. The question is genuine and I was hoping that you or someone with actual knowledge could answer it.
The data *are* - where?
What is their reason for this? Is there evidence that a dose given at 24 hours of birth has worse outcomes or is less effective than one given at three months or is this simply how they've "always" done it?
*countries* Also, do those countries' populations have more chronic liver problems than the populations of countries that vaccinate at 24 hours?
I don't know. Do you? Do you know if they have better, worse or similar outcomes at three months over 24 hours?
There is considerable evidence - overwhelming to the point of arising to proof - that hep b infant vaccinations prevent death and long term complications. The immediate question is which timing is preferable and why. At least theoretically, 24 hours will provide protection from transmission during the time the infant is vulnerable.
From post #36
Hepatitis B: The Disease & Vaccines
All infants and young children are recommended to receive the hepatitis B vaccine to help prevent the severe liver disease that can develop if infected with hepatitis B virus.
People most often get hepatitis B from contact with blood. Blood from a person infected with hepatitis B virus is heavily contaminated with the virus. The virus is present at such high levels that it can be spread by contact with quantities of blood too small to see. The virus can also survive on surfaces longer than most viruses — up to seven days. As a result, even casual contact with the blood of someone who is infected can cause infection. Casual contact can include sharing of washcloths, toothbrushes, or razors...
...The spread of hepatitis B virus has been difficult to control in the U.S. because the disease can be transmitted by casual contact and because so many chronically infected people don’t know they are infected. It’s estimated that about three-quarters of a million to 2 million people in the U.S. are chronically infected with hepatitis B virus. The original strategy aimed at controlling hepatitis B in the U.S. started in the early 1980s. The goal at that time was to vaccinate only those at highest risk (for example, healthcare workers, patients on dialysis, and intravenous drug users). But because the disease can be transmitted to those who are not in high-risk groups, this vaccine strategy didn't work. The incidence of hepatitis B virus disease in the U.S. remained unchanged 10 years after the strategy was first used! So, the vaccine strategy was changed. Starting in 1991, all infants and young children were recommended to receive the hepatitis B vaccine. As a result, the incidence of hepatitis B virus infections in the U.S. started to decline. Indeed, this strategy has virtually eliminated the disease in children less than 19 years of age. If we stick with it, we have a chance to finally eliminate this devastating disease within one or two generations.[oh well]
...Large quantities of hepatitis B virus are present in the blood of people with hepatitis B. In fact, as many as one billion infectious viruses can be found in a milliliter of blood from an infected individual. A milliliter is about one-fifth of a teaspoon. Therefore, amounts of blood too small to be seen can contain enough viral particles to cause infection. In addition, many people don't know that they are infected. For these reasons, it is very hard to avoid the chance of getting infected with hepatitis B virus.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
