• 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.

Struggling with scrupulosity

Thank you for sharing! I have scrupulosity as well. Fear of blasphemy is a very common obsession for Christians with religious OCD. I have found the blog articles at Scrupulosity.com to be very helpful. There are articles about committing the unpardonable sin on there, so you might find that useful. I am also part of the group coaching program on that website, and have found that to be helpful and encouraging as well.
I have been on there. I am going to check the group coaching out today.
Upvote 0

Trump dispenses with trials, orders military strike on alleged Venezuelan drug-trafficking boat (Now up to 2, 3, 4...)

Pete Hegseth denies he gave orders to ‘kill everybody’ on alleged ‘narco-boat’

Defense secretary called reports about his role in strike as ‘fake news’ intended to discredit US military

The US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has declared recent reporting that he may have illegally ordered all people to be killed in a military strike in the Caribbean as “fake news” on Friday evening, adding that the series of strikes of people on boats had been “lawful under both US and international law”.

I didn't do it, but it was legal!

Adm Frank M “Mitch” Bradley, head of Special Operations Command, reportedly ordered a second strike to kill the two survivors to comply with Hegseth’s orders.
As I've said before, I would bet that the orders as vetted by Pentagon lawyers skirted actually saying "kill everybody."

If Bradley presumed it that way...and transmitted the orders "more clearly" that way, then Bradley will take the fall, as will some or all of the officers below him, most especially the senior operations officer on the scene. Given today's thorough LOAC training, it's likely to get down to the person who actually pulled the trigger. The death march is going to start with whoever directed the second pass....
Upvote 0

Israel-Hamas Thread II

Who were the two men who fled from the tunnels?

Two terrorists who had emerged from the extensive tunnel system in the east of Rafah were eliminated from the air. The question arises as to whether Israel has just caught the highest-ranking terrorist leaders in eastern Rafah.

From the outside, this skirmish may seem like one of many, but this time something was different. The two emerged alone from the depths, not as part of a group, as had been customary in the region in recent weeks. It is precisely this circumstance that has prompted the security authorities to investigate whether they could be the commander of the so-called East Rafah Battalion, known in Israel as ‘Magd Janina’ and his deputy. It would be a blow that would severely affect the entire remaining Hamas structure in the region.

Whether the two men killed in the morning were indeed the battalion commander of East Rafah and his deputy remains unclear for the time being. If this assumption is confirmed, the incident marks a turning point: not only would another part of the leadership be eliminated, but it would also show that the underground structures no longer offer protection. It is rare for high-ranking commanders to leave their positions and it is a clear sign of decline.

For weeks, Israel has been fighting in the depths beneath Rafah against a structure that Hamas has built up over many years. The tunnels of the eastern Rafah corridor were once a place of retreat, a weapons depot, a command post and a lifeline for terrorist cells seeking to evade the Israeli armed forces. But the systematic destruction of the underground passages is dramatically changing the situation. More than 44 terrorists were killed last month; many more have surrendered or been captured.

The night before the current operation, Israeli forces discovered four more terrorists who had also emerged from an underground tunnel in Rafah and were killed in a coordinated operation with the air force. The pressure is mounting, and it is becoming increasingly difficult for Hamas to protect its last enclaves.

At the same time, Israel has sent an offer to the terrorist organisation via intermediaries: those who are still in the tunnels can surrender, will then be imprisoned in Israel and allowed to return to Gaza after serving their sentences – on condition that they completely disarm and renounce violence. The proposal may seem generous, but it has a clear goal: to completely break the underground backbone of Hamas without putting soldiers at unnecessary risk. So far, the organisation has not responded officially, but several prisoners have stated that they have come to the surface because their situation had become untenable.

The situation remains serious, but it is moving noticeably in a direction that hardly anyone dared to hope for months ago: the underground in Rafah is losing its power.

These days will decide how long Hamas will remain capable of acting in this area. The signs indicate that its ability to fight in a coordinated manner is virtually non-existent.
Upvote 0

The NEA is pushing far left teaching upon children

Well, since it doesn't. (The studies don't bear this out.) Why try to argue a point from silence?

The other issue is; in no other mental health driven condition; is surgery ever used to correct the mental health condition. There is an ethical issue with removing healthy body parts. If I came into a doctor's office and said I "identified as an amputee" therefore remove one of my legs; no one would ever do that. That is against medical ethics. But if someone feels they were born with the wrong set of sex organs...??? Then we remove what they have and try to replace them with... fake ones. How is that logical?
I asked because we can have study battles all day long. I found those kinds of interactions here just aren't worth it. As your study notes what drives suicides; "Transgender individuals have a higher prevalence of depression across several age groups, often due to life experiences that include discrimination, harassment, violence, misgendering, and enacted stigma that may generate poor mental health outcomes and harmful behaviors." The hypothetical was meant to understand at what point would it take for others, who for example, mislabel what they experience as a mental condition. Even if one is take your study as gold, they are calling out the need of post procedure support.
Upvote 0

Hierarchy in Heaven and Virginity

“There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead.” - 1 Corinthians 15:41–42

Paul here speaks of different bodies or "bodies", the sun is different from the moon, each star has its own unique twinkle, its own glory different from the others, and different from the sun or the moon. In the same way the present body--mortal, corruptible, etc--is different from the body in the resurrection (immortal, incorruptible, etc). While this body dies and decays, when it is raised up it is glorified and made immortal and incorruptible; "sown in dishonor, raised in honor". So the glory of this present body and the glory of the body in the resurrection are different--we should not imagine that the future risen body will just be like this one, it has a distinct glory--mortal vs immortal, corruptible vs incorruptible, dishonor vs honor, etc.

One may ask exactly how we might look in the resurrection, what about those who had missing limbs? Or those who died as small children, will they still be small children in the resurrection? I think Paul would answer and tell us that in some sense we're missing the point. The bodily existence in the resurrection will be radically different than our current bodily experiences. We cannot look at our current bodily experience and attempt to read that into the future. Though we can know that it is the body--for Christ rose from the dead, the first fruits of the resurrection of the dead.

Luke 19:17
“Well done, good servant; because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.”

This is part of a parable, where the faithful servant having been faithful with little, is given more. When we reach the end of our mortal days and stand before the Lord, how we lived with what what we had--our circumstances, the gifts we had, the people God brought into our lives, etc--how did we live? Were we faithful with what we had? Were you faithful as a parent? As a son or daughter? As a spouse? As a neighbor? Were you kind and welcoming to the stranger? If you were an employer were you just and fair to your employees? The good and faithful servant was faithful with the little they had, and so much more is given them. It's not about having authority in the future world, but rather that the faithful servant has done well with what they were given.

Matthew 5:19
“Whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

In contrast to those who tell others to not bother with the commandments, for if one is lax in even the least commandment he shall be called least in the kingdom. Ultimately the point Jesus is making is found in the following verse, "If your righteousness does not exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom". This requires a bit of unpacking, this is about the hypocrisy of those who claim to follow the Law; they claim to observe God's commandments but fail in the small things, they brag about how they tithe but fail to care for the elderly, they fail to show mercy. God isn't interested in religious showmanship, He wants sincere worshipers. It's not those who want everyone to think they are holy who are holy, it's those who do good in the dark of night, it's not the one who prays loudly in public for attention, but the one who goes into the closet and cries out to God, it is not the one who is wealthy publicly donating a large donation to the Temple, but the poor widow who gives her last coin.

In God's kingdom, that is to say, in the way that God is King, it isn't the hypocrites who want everyone to praise them for being devout who are called great, it's the tiny unimportant people who are sincere in their faithfulness, not calling attention to themselves, but simply and faithfully obeying God in the tiny little ways of their life. The one who snubs the homeless person and refuses to show compassion to the weak will be called least; but the one who is faithful to God's command--to love our neighbor, to show kindness even to the unthankful, to forgive those who hate us, etc--that is greatness in God's kingdom.

The way God is King--that's what Kingdom of God/Heaven means--is not like the way kings act here on earth; His Kingdom, His Kingship is found in the Meek Carpenter from Galilee who suffers--Jesus shows us the Kingdom. Jesus is the King.

1 Corinthians 7:38
“So he who marries his fiancée does well, but he who refrains from marriage will do even better.”

St. Paul argues that he believes it preferable (but it is not a commandment) to remain unmarried in this life; because being married means certain obligations--the one who gets married has obligations toward spouse and (almost certainly) children. Whereas the unmarried can focus on other things. Paul is clear that he does not regard celibacy to be a commandment; but he offers his opinion that celibacy is preferable to marriage. It's simply a matter of how and where one's energies are put. If I am unmarried, I could drop everything and go be a missionary somewhere if that was my calling (e.g.) but if I am married then my obligation is to my wife and kids, I can't just uproot myself that would be selfish and wrong. I owe my wife my time, my love, my energy--because I have made a sacred obligation and commitment to her and to our family. For Paul, who chose celibacy, he believed it was the best choice; but he does not dare command anyone refuse to marry, and indeed it is good to marry if you have promised to marry someone--marriage is good and blessed and holy.

Matthew 19:12
“There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.”

Similar to the above, those who commit themselves to lives of celibacy and chastity choose a good calling. Those who can, do so; but not everyone is called to celibacy and chastity. Both the celibate life and the married life are holy and valid life vocations.

Revelation 14:4
“These are the ones who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins… These follow the Lamb wherever he goes.”

what do all these verses mean?

There are a lot of interpretations of the 144,000. I tend toward the view that this refers to the collective whole of the Faithful of all places and times. And they are called undefiled and virgin because they are pure from the world. Not that they are literally virgins. The Church is called out from the world--Ekklesia--to be faithful to her one Lord Jesus Christ.

Though, of course, the Revelation is always difficult to try and interpret. And different opinions and interpretations abound.
Upvote 0

The NEA is pushing far left teaching upon children

No, you are a biological male with at least some personal preferences society has traditionally assigned to women.
Then we agree.
There is the strict definition again. Only the truly dysphoric think they are the "opposite" biological sex. Trans people generally are in no doubt about their biology.
All transgender people think they are the opposite sex on the inside. Its a psychological dysfunction.
Upvote 0

The NEA is pushing far left teaching upon children

don't know about that. You don't seem to have any trouble with strict definitions for it and imposing thse strict definitions is part of what creates the problem in the first place
I most certainly am strict on male and female. There are only two sexes. No more, no less. A male cannot be a female and a female cannot be a male.

But within that dichotomy are almost infinite personalities. Almost infinite likes and dislikes, ways of dealing with emotions, work and leisure preferences, clothing preferences etc. etc. But you are still a man or still a woman within those things. There is no line a personality crosses that determines they are the opposite sex/gender.

There are male and female traits that are typically associated with each sex/gender But even those things are not owned by that sex/gender. Thats why one cannot actually be the opposite sex/gender.

A man cannot be a woman inside.


If it was socially ok to be a physical male and a psychlogical female then trans people would be much better off.
No they would not, because it is a psychological problem. They know they are biological sex they were born as, but for some reason they "feel" like a woman. Yet know one can tell you what a women feels like. Its no different than having a delusional disorder. Where the mind is not connected to reality. Often that feeling actually is the result of other mental health issues. Its that way particularly with kids.

Transgenderism is a SERIOUS mental health issue. And it should be treated that way. It cannot be cured, or solved, or helped by altering the physical. There may be a short honeymoon feeling of relief, but the mental health issue is still there and they know they are not the opposite sex and eventually like almost all mental health issues they return to being depressed that they have these issues.
Upvote 0

The ANE perspective on creation & am I fence sitting?

For a big part of my life I have been confident in the young earth creation model but one thing that has sort of been a sticking point for me is the ancient near east (ANE) interpretation of creation. It was first pointed out to me in talking about day 2 of creation, the idea that the writer is making reference to a solid firmament. It is further reasoned that the people in those days only knew of a flat earth cosmology, so they were just speaking in terms that everyone would understand. Just because they got something wrong does not mean God’s word is not true. It’s not a science textbook after all. And I have thought about this and wondered if there is any validity to it. The other thing that has really captured my attention is ideas surrounding behemoth and leviathan found in the book of Job. I have been persuaded that these are references to dinosaurs until I saw this video of Ben Stanhope’s critique of Answers in Genesis. He makes a compelling argument that these are descriptions of a mythological creature that symbolizes a false god, such as the followers of the Canaanite deity Baal. The comparison may have been a way of showing people that the true God is omnipotent and has no fear of them. And while I may want to entertain the idea that humans lived alongside dinosaurs, it is a weak argument to suggest Job makes mention of it.





It leads me to ask, if I am wrong on these things, what else am I wrong about? Most people who espouse this view about creation week, saying that it was a polemic to the pagan nations who say their gods took part in creation, tend to also be theistic evolutionists. In a wikipedia article “Firmament” it reads,

But one thing I found interesting is that John Hancock believes the ancients did believe the earth was round.


Login to view embedded media

Maybe the way to reconcile this is to say that philosophers in those days were more split on the issue and many thought it was flat before the time of the Middle Ages.





But if I cede the argument and say it had an ANE context, wouldn’t I be inconsistent to still believe in young earth creationism (YEC)? I have argued before that the Bible is inerrant and infallible and that no contradictions exist, only apparent contradictions. And I do feel in some way it would be a compromise to say that the Bible was wrong about the firmament being a solid dome that separated the heavenly waters above. I understand that the Bible is not a science textbook, but I believe that it has to be right whenever it does talk about science.
Even though your statement "ancient near east (ANE) interpretation of creation" is hypothetical....what does that have to do with Creation given to us in Genesis by Moses? Its not like he made Creation up...the information was given to him by God. Do you think God had a ancient near east interpretation of Creation?
Upvote 0

Eve and the Fallacy of Moral Choices

Indeed, membership into Mensa, IQ of 130 or higher, isn’t a prerequisite to “connect the dots.”

Those “dots” involve the conspicuous absence from those verses in Genesis of Eve lusting. As I illuminated previously, there are at least 3 words if not 4 words in the Hebrew for lust and lusting
Perhaps a Herculean effort on your part to not connect desire to lust?

I'll leave that to your eyes
Upvote 0

Why we are not supposed to keep the Sabbath

You can mock God where His Friend Abraham is concerned if the spirit in you leads to such behavior.

I would remind you that Abraham is dead, and will remain that way, because HE sinned, just as the Righteous God of Abraham says. And Abraham, like all obedient, Faithful Servants of God died in Hope that the Lord's Christ, whose day Abraham saw and was glad, will return one day, and raise Him from the dead.

That you would exalt yourself over Abraham, judging him as an adulterer, a judgment that neither God, nor Moses, nor any of the Prophets, nor Jesus nor any of the Apostles of Christ made, suggested or even implied, is proof positive that the Spirit that guided them in their discourse concerning Abraham, is not be the same spirit as the one directing your preaching concerning him.

You are free to continue in your judgments against Abraham, which are contrary to God's Judgments of Abraham, if your human heart directs you to. But I don't have to partake in them.

So long.
False accusations against me is not an answer to questions put to you. All you are doing is attempting to make a false accusation against me because you have no answers. Carnal minds do things like this to avoid being cornered by the truth. If you really want to be a law keeper then you had better keep the whole law because if you offend in just one point of the law you are guilty of all.
Upvote 0

The End Time Puzzle

Jesus will not bodily return to earth in power and great glory until the end of the 7 year 70th week of Daniel 9:27 to stand on the mount of Olives to split it in half, Zechariah 14:4.

1Thessalonians4:15-17, the resurrection/rapture event will be before His return, so that the living in Christ will not have to go through the great tribulation when God's wrath will be poured out. The resurrection/rapture event is also in 1Thessalonians5:9-11, verse 10.




View attachment 373822
The 70th week of Daniel was in the first century. There cannot be a pause in the counting of Daniel's weeks. It is a linear timeline.

It seems to me that Christians will continue to be persecuted until Jesus' second coming. God did not spare all the early Christians from martyrdom, nor will he spare all the Christians today from martyrdom through a so-called rapture. Suffering and persecution are part of the Christian life. Luke 9:23


John 17:15
I do not pray that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from the evil one.


Matthew 10:21-23
Brother will deliver up brother to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death; 22 and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved. 23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next; for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel, before the Son of man comes.
(Jesus came spiritually to earth in judgment in 70 AD. He used the Roman armies to destroy the wicked Jews.)

Romans 8:17
and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.

1 Peter 5:8-11

Revelation 6:10-11

they cried out with a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before thou wilt judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell upon the earth?” 11 Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.


At the end of time, Jesus will gather his followers from the earth. They will rise to meet him in the air, and they will follow him to the Mount of Olives and then onward to the Kidron Valley (Valley of Jehoshaphat) for the final judgment.
Joel 3:12
Upvote 0

The Mamdani Model: More Socialist Mayors to ComeBeware! The DSA will attempt to repeat Mamdani’s success in other Democrat strongholds.

Some politically conservative Christians see progressive policies in this way. But many Christians are socially and/or politically progressive.

Just making sure we're not equating "Christian" and "socially/politically conservative" in this discussion.
I think that's Steve's (and MAGA's) working definition.
  • Agree
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

The Mamdani Model: More Socialist Mayors to ComeBeware! The DSA will attempt to repeat Mamdani’s success in other Democrat strongholds.

To the Christians progressive policies are sin and seen as destroying the fabric of society.

Some politically conservative Christians see progressive policies in this way. But many Christians are socially and/or politically progressive.

Just making sure we're not equating "Christian" and "socially/politically conservative" in this discussion.
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,878,925
Messages
65,426,700
Members
276,411
Latest member
MaskedLady710