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.
Shrug. Like everyone else, they're in it to make a profit. Even then, have seen at least one pawn shop go under.I think you’re referring to pawn shops and they’re notoriously slanted in the shop’s favor.
Rejection of God’s commandments is not the issue, being put back under the bondage of the law is beyond problematic. So you are right to say that by the works of the law no one is justified. However, this is really not what you are teaching is it?The lesson here from Paul and Isaiah is for me at this time in history, is the same as then. That a man can't live in rejection of God's Commandments, Judgments and Statutes, then show up each week with the Blood of an unblemished Sacrifice, as required by Law, for justification of willful rejection of God's Laws.
For by the "Works of the Law" shall no Flesh be justified.
There's more than one way.......![]()
Maria Corina Machado Immediately Dedicates Her Nobel Peace Prize to President Trump - She Has More Integrity than the Entire Nobel Committee | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft
The Nobel Committee passed over President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday despite brokering eight different peace treaties his first year back in office, and it’s only October.www.thegatewaypundit.com
Maris Corina Machado very strongly disagrees with your progress left wing liberal biases against President Donald Trump.
Haven't seen that around here since before the movie Onward. There's a brief visual joke along those lines in one of the trailers. Onward just serves as a handy reference point to the year. Onward was released in 2020, so it's been over half a decade since I've seen those signs around there.I see shop all over town that say "WE BUY GOLD." (This generally means gold jewelry.)
Assertion.Pete Hegseth has never condoned anything that is illegal under conventions of American warfare. Please stop attempting to spread falsehoods against my Secretary of Defense and Secretary of War. As a soldier who is still serving in the US Army after 27 years of service, I have never been prouder to be an American soldier than I am now.
Welcome to CF. If it were me I would lead by example, show acceptance, respect and above all , love. If you only knew how hard it is for Christians to find a new congregation! Lets not be the reason for that difficulty.Good morning all,
I’ve been a Christian for nearly 40 years, but like to keep it simple and not get too bogged down with tradition etc…,
I’m seeking some Christian counsel regarding how we accept people in to our church family or should I say not accept?
My belief is welcome one and all, as Jesus would, let him do the working in their lives our job is to love and disciple…..
I am finding fellow church members judging new people, how they look, how they act, are they safe, where are they from? We shouldn’t ask them into groups but vet them so to speak before inviting them to bible studies, online groups, social groups! Who decides how much vetting is enough?
They seem to throw around the words wisdom & discernment to justify that they don’t want someone in our church…..my spirit is struggling with this…. Had anyone else had this with the discernment/wisdom thing?
Ha ha ha!![]()
Maria Corina Machado Immediately Dedicates Her Nobel Peace Prize to President Trump - She Has More Integrity than the Entire Nobel Committee | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft
The Nobel Committee passed over President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday despite brokering eight different peace treaties his first year back in office, and it’s only October.www.thegatewaypundit.com
Maris Corina Machado very strongly disagrees with your progress left wing liberal biases against President Donald Trump.
Paul says in Romans 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. In other words if there is no law there is no sin. Sin is not imputed or no blame can be accredited to any person when there is no law. Now, let’s see what Sin is according to the Bible in I John 3:4 it states, "whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." So if the law was nailed to the cross that would mean its okay to use the Lords name in vain, put other gods before HIM, make graven images and bow before them, pollute the Sabbath day, steal, commit murder, commit adultery and bear false witness. If all these things are okay to commit, then we might as well throw the Bible out the back door and do what ever feels good to us.
We will see that Paul was in fact a law keeper and how he preached out of the Law and the Prophets.
Now let's begin by taking a look at both of the laws and how they worked together. We will see there were two laws given to Moses, they were the commandments and the sacrificial law. Watch how they worked together.
And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do against any of them: (Leviticus 4:1-2) The law in the scriptures above is the commandments.
Notice something else very important in these two scriptures. It states, "if a soul shall sin through ignorance." Notice that the scripture did not says on purpose. Why? There is no sacrifice for a sin that is committed willfully. Let's find out what was to be done if a person committed a sin against the Lord unintentionally. Let's skip down to the 27th verse and take a look at the second law (which is the sacrificial law).
And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty; Or if his sin, which he hath sinned, come to his knowledge: then he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering. And the priest shall take of the blood thereof with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar. (Leviticus 4:27-30)
When the common people sinned through ignorance and it came to their knowledge, what did they have to do? They brought an offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for their sin which they had committed, then the priest would offer the animal to the Lord. Think about this for a moment. If an animal was killed for a person that committed sin, what will happen to us today if we a trespass against the Lord?
Now we see how the sacrificial law was used when a person broke a commandment unintentionally.
Let's go into Paul's writings and take another look at both of these laws. We will go into the Book of Galatians chapter 3. This is one of the chapters that the majority of Christian preachers use to do away with the Lord's commandments. Now, let's read carefully!
Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. (Galatians 3:19)
Take heed to what Paul's says above, "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions." What is transgression? Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (I John 3:4) Transgression is braking of the commandments. What law was added because of the braking of the law? The sacrificial law! Paul is simply asking these Gentiles, "why perform the sacrificial law? It was added because of sin until the seed should come. Who is the seed?
Let's back up in this chapter and find out.
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ. (Galatians 3:16) Who is the SEED? CHRIST! So, this law was added (which is the sacrificial law) until Christ came. What was the sacrificial law used for until Christ came? Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. (Galatians 3:24)
The sacrificial law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Before we continue, we must clear one thing up. Are we justified by faith alone? Let's see. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. (Romans 3:31) What law is established? Certainly not the sacrificial law, we have seen above that it was added because of transgression until the Seed came (which was Christ). The Royal law to be established forever which are the Ten Lords commandments!
Rebuttal:“For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.” (Romans 5:13)
Rebuttal:“Sin is the transgression of the law.” (1 John 3:4)
Rebuttal:“It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come.” (Galatians 3:19)
Rebuttal:“Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.”
It doesn’t have to. The shape of the earth does not affect any scriptural teachings or doctrines. Again, your interpretation is problematic.Where in scripture does it mention the earth being a ball ?
Romans 3:20 declares, “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.” Some interpreters have argued that Paul is speaking of two distinct laws: the ceremonial law, which could not justify, and the moral law, which continues to bind believers. This reading, however, is a later development in Christian history rather than Paul’s own intent.
Well, it's not even clear if this is about McCabe at all. The indictment says:Gonna be an uphill battle to get to “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
What “left wing”?
And yet what does the Bible also say?Paul says in Romans 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. In other words if there is no law there is no sin.
It is a ball. The evidence is undeniable so that means that your interpretation is wrong. God does not deceit us so it has to be you.
What “left wing”?Since the left-wing supports Hamas that shouldn't be a complaint from them.
Gonna be an uphill battle to get to “beyond a reasonable doubt”.It is not clear if by "Comey corroborated" you mean (according to McCabe's testimony) Comey approved of the leaking after the fact, or if you're saying Comey corroborated McCabe's testimony. If you mean the former, that's true, but not the later.
(I apologize in advance if you meant the former, and thus I'm basically arguing against something you weren't trying to say)
In my prior post I linked to the report of the Office of Inspector General which was very harsh on McCabe's conduct. In its summary on pages 22-23, it says the following regarding the conflicting reports:
We concluded that McCabe lacked candor during his conversation with then-Director Comey on or about October 31, 2016, when they discussed the October 30 WSJ article. As detailed above, Comey and McCabe gave starkly conflicting accounts of this conversation. Comey said that McCabe “definitely” did not tell Comey that he had authorized the disclosure about the PADAG call. To the contrary, Comey told the OIG that, on or about October 31, McCabe led him to believe “in form or fashion” that McCabe did not authorize the disclosure about the PADAG call to the WSJ. Comey described how McCabe gave Comey the impression that McCabe had not authorized the disclosure about the PADAG call, was not involved in the disclosure, and did not know how it happened. By contrast, McCabe asserted that he explicitly told Comey during that conversation that he authorized the disclosure and that Comey agreed it was a “good” idea.
While the only direct evidence regarding this McCabe-Comey conversation were the recollections of the two participants, there is considerable circumstantial evidence and we concluded that the overwhelming weight of that evidence supported Comey’s version of the conversation. Indeed, none of the circumstantial evidence provided support for McCabe’s account of the discussion; rather, we found that much of the available evidence undercut McCabe’s claim.
So Comey didn't corroborate McCabe's claim that he told Comey. Though, as you say (and as I noted in my prior post) McCabe did not claim that Comey authorized him to leak it, just that he told Comey about it after the fact (as is stated in the above excerpt, though it's more clear in its more in-depth description of it earlier on page 12). Their disagreement was on whether McCabe told Comey about it afterwards.
YesWere they identified as such?
And your evidence is? That sounds pretty racist there pal!The “Palestinian” people are just barely better than Hamas. Maybe.
It is a ball. The evidence is undeniable so that means that your interpretation is wrong. God does not deceit us so it has to be you.Well there's nothing in scripture about the earth being a ball.