• 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.

Now does everyone understand why the "right to refuse illegal orders" video was made?

If you mean 1969 - 1999, can you give some examples?? I can't seem to find any military counsels' refusals to bow down when I consider thing's like... Vietnam, Libya 1986, Desert Storm, etc...
You must not have been on the inside.

The entire current LOAC training regimen for the armed services was created as a result of the My Lai incident. Because of their LOAC training, a high percentage of soldiers can personally testify of refusing illegal orders in the field. You don't hear about it because it goes nowhere...nobody gets prosecuted for refusing to obey a manifestly illegal order.

The absolute confidentiality of chaplains was emphasized to give troops a safe space to discuss legal misgivings to someone in uniform who could arrange assistance. I sent troops more than once to the chaplain to avoid them spilling too much information to me, because I did not have confidentiality...I was required to report to the commander.

Regarding our getting into conflict, remember I've already pointed out that where and who we fight is not up to the military...the president and Congress determine that. Even so, In the run-up to the Iraq invasion, the military dragged its feet as much as possible hoping Congress would reject the war. The Army Chief of Staff even got himself fired for publicly disputing the SecDef. The Marine Corps commandant started that public dispute, then retired in protest. In fact, all the generals who had been junior officers in Vietnam retired just ahead of the Iraq invasion. The DIA even leaked information in conflict with the SecDef's public statements. Unfortunately, nobody was paying attention...so that's why you din't hear of it.
Upvote 0

State leaders speak out about plans to expand the Islamic Academy of Alabama

I've provided the numbers before, pretending the two are equivalents would be dishonest.

One clearly has a higher propensity for that type of preference for power consolidation.


Roughly half of the ~50 Muslim majority countries end up with an officially codified state religion that gets special constitutional treatment (and severe punishments for insulting the faith or leaving the faith)

Of the ~120 Christian majority countries, a much smaller percentage of those have an official state religion, and of the ones that do, most are a historical holdover/relic that's no longer enforced or carries any legal weight. (for example, the Icelandic government isn't throwing rocks at anyone for leaving the Church of Iceland)


So while one can say "they both do it, so that means it's a wash", that's too blunt an instrument to perform any pragmatic problem solving or knowing what needs more focus.

In the same way that if:
Bill drinks 4 beers a night
Ted drinks 15 beers every night

Yeah, we can say "they both have a drinking problem", sure...but clearly one needs more urgent "priority focus" in regards to tackling the problem.
But you still haven't explained how Muslims in this country can get past the Constitution and the majority of voters.
Upvote 0

Dear Pete Hegseth, I’m Grateful the Japanese Navy Spared My Grandfather’s Life

Aren't we glad Jesus doesn't have this attitude.
Oh? What attitude would Jesus have towards those who deliver poisons to kids, rape them, and turn them into sex slaves? Weaponizing empathy does not work with me.

Romans 13:3-4 NIV
[3] For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. [4] For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
Upvote 0

Dear Pete Hegseth, I’m Grateful the Japanese Navy Spared My Grandfather’s Life

That's because not everyone accepts the insistence that the administration and the navy are evil incompetent homicidal monsters. See once that idea sets in people's brains, anyone who doesn't go along with it is evil too. It's like 'if you don't agree with our version of events, you're going to hell'.
You are completely failing to address the scenario I described above. Instead youre invoking prejudices citizen onlookers may have.

But prejudices various other people may have are completely irrelevant to how I should understand the morality of the scenario I described. Lets stick with what happened and the morality of what happened.
Upvote 0

Charlie Kirk Didn’t Shy Away From Who He Was. We Shouldn’t, Either

It's a graph of expulsions of people attempting to cross the border. As your numbers indicate, Biden caught and expelled a lot more than Trump. I'm still trying to figure out why you think that's a bad thing.

And you think Biden should have gone down there and broken up the demonstration? How would that work? As you see,Biden was focusing on stopping illegal immigrants from crossing the border. As your numbers indicate, he was 4 to 5 times more effective than Trump in this effort.
No, 4 to 5 times as many people were crossing the border and that number is down 96% under Trump
Upvote 0

B flat B♭

Stonginhim you mention that some people read the Bible literally where it is not supposed to be read literally. There are certainly places in the Bible where the scriptures are not to be taken literally. But before I reply fully to your post . I need to know Just exactly which part of the Bible are you referring to that shouldn’t be taken literally . Are you referring to the creation account ?
That's one of the things, yes.

God did not dictate a literal, detailed account of how he created the universe because a group of scientists wanted to know.
Instead, Moses, or someone, wrote 2 creation accounts. He wanted people to know that it was GOD who created. At the time he wrote it down, there were several other countries around him who all believed in a different god for a different thing - a god of the rain, a god of the stars, a god of animals, crops and so on. Moses said that there is only one God who created everything.
Also, Moses was not writing for scientists; he was writing for people who, I understand, thought in picture language. They did not know, or want or need to know, about atoms, gravity, astronomy etc etc.

And if you take these accounts literally, which do you believe?
In Genesis 1 God created male and female together; in chapter 2 he created Adam from dust and, a little later, created woman from one of Adam's ribs.
In chapter 1, God created humans and said "it is very good"; in chapter 2 he created Adam and said "it is not good for him to be alone."
Genesis 2 does not tell us when God created the trees, birds, the garden etc. There are also other countries mentioned in Genesis 2.
Upvote 0

RFK Adjusts Hepatitis B Vaccine Recommendations; Democrats Lose Their Minds

What is the evidence that infants receiving the vaccine 24 hours after birth have a better or worse outcome than those receiving it at three months?

What is the evidence that newborns at low risk who receive the birth-dose have better outcomes than those who don't?

The data is available. Many countries don't recommend the birth-dose of the Hep B vaccine. Is there evidence that those counties have "more childhood hepatitis B infections" and "more chronic infections that will follow patients into adulthood"? That's why these medical organizations say they are "deeply concerned". Can they point to evidence that countries that don't universally recommend the Hep B birth-dose have worse outcomes?

I happen to believe that if you're going to recommend a preventive medical intervention, you need to show evidence of benefit. Is there any such evidence?
Upvote 0

B flat B♭

Maybe not predict but he was able to influence people at that time ,just as he sill does today, you see a moving earth around the sun & space makes God's word unbelievable & tends to hide God. Just like the big bang theory & Darwinism did, it's all the work of Satan.
Rubbish.

Many, if not all, scientists accept evolution, that the earth is a globe and that it revolves around the sun.
Some of them are also Christian. Evolution, the shape of the earth etc etc has nothing to do with salvation and whether God loves, and can save, you. Evolution doesn't stop people from believing that Jesus died on the cross and cannot prevent us from being filled with the Spirit.
THAT is what Satan doesn't want - I don't believe he gives a toss about the shape of the earth.

Even though both you and @d taylor have said that this is impossible; Christians believe Genesis 1 and that the earth is a globe.
Upvote 0

RFK Adjusts Hepatitis B Vaccine Recommendations; Democrats Lose Their Minds

Ah, the old guilt by association.

Simply pointing out that your contention that it's not "just" Democrats is somewhat less than honest, since the organizations you cited are primarily Democrat.

Medical associations receive funding from medical companies.

And you don't see a problem with that?

Objective To investigate whether funding of drug studies by the pharmaceutical industry is associated with outcomes that are favourable to the funder and whether the methods of trials funded by pharmaceutical companies differ from the methods in trials with other sources of support.
...
Results 30 studies were included. Research funded by drug companies was less likely to be published than research funded by other sources. Studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies were more likely to have outcomes favouring the sponsor than were studies with other sponsors (odds ratio 4.05; 95% confidence interval 2.98 to 5.51; 18 comparisons). None of the 13 studies that analysed methods reported that studies funded by industry was of poorer quality.
Conclusion Systematic bias favours products which are made by the company funding the research. Explanations include the selection of an inappropriate comparator to the product being investigated and publication bias.
This next article is talking specifically about the food industry, but it illustrates just how much finance bias factors into these studies:
One study detected that research articles sponsored exclusively by food and beverage companies were 4-8 times more likely to have conclusions favorable to the financial interests of the sponsoring company than articles that were not sponsored by food or beverage companies. A subsequent comprehensive review by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) examining sponsor influences on the quality and independence of health research cited that industry-sponsored studies were about 30 times more likely than non-industry sponsored studies to report statistically significant findings in favor of the sponsor.
Industry-sponsored studies are about THIRTY TIMES more likely than non-industry sponsored studies to report findings in favor of the sponsor. You're in denial if you think that pharmaceutical companies' funding doesn't impact the findings of their studies and the recommendations that the medical organizations make that are funded by them.

Except that the medical associations ARE concerned.

Hand-wringing seems more appropriate.

Because this decision will "lead to more childhood hepatitis B infections, will lead to more chronic infections that will follow patients into adulthood, and will complicate vaccine access for children".

So they say.

Has anyone asked them why other countries that don't recommend a universal birth-dose don't have these issues?

Those are VERY GOOD reasons to be "deeply alarmed".

Sure they are, if they were evidence-based.

There is also a broader reason to be "deeply alarmed".

Here comes the slippery slope...

This decision was taken with no new evidence with an ACIP board that has been concocted for its ideological purity rather than its independent expertise.

That's amusing. Prior ACIPs have been in the pocket of the industry for years. They weren't selected for their "independent expertise". They were selected for their willingness to rubber-stamp things. They have all been selected for their ideological purity. It's just now they're "concerned" because the "ideological-purity" in place now isn't the one that puts financial gain first.

The presentations around the vaccination established no causal link to any injury beyond "death following anaphylaxis", based on a 1994 study. There was not a single public-health based reason given supporting the decision to revise the schedule. Instead, what there was was a lot of picture of sad babies with needles and insinuations about phamecutical firms.

It's funny you should mention that there was not a single public-health based reason to support this, because when the universal birth-dose was instituted, there also was not a single public-health based reason to recommend it to newborns at low-risk. Prior to the 1991 recommendation, it was common practice to only vaccinate newborns whose mother tested positive for Hep B. That was evidence-based and logical. No evidence was presented that there was a public-health benefit to indiscriminately vaccinating all newborns. Someone just decided that an evidence-based, risk-stratified approach was not as easy as a universal approach. It's odd that only now people are upset that recommendations are changing without evidence.

And for crying out loud, if you want the Hep B vaccine for your child, you can still get it. Just because it's not recommended does not mean it's not available. "Talk to your doctor". Works for just about everything else.

The complaint that there were "randomized, placebo-controlled, extended follow-up trials" is just so telling. As is the admission that "The safety concern may be more theoretical than real".

Did you watch the 20/20 clips I posted from January 1999 about the Hep B vaccine? The parents of the children who died and are permanently injured from the vaccine are not "theoretical". That was at a time when industry capture wasn't nearly as pervasive as it is today and mainstream media wasn't afraid to do real investigations. Alas, that is no longer the case today.

This is the thin edge of the wedge. RFK Jnr and his pack of cronies are out to destroy one of the greatest achievements in human health.

There's the slippery slope I was waiting for!
Upvote 0

Why Is It So Hard for Christians to Talk About Justice and Greed?

Thi

This is a good point. We are incapable of righteous judgement unless we have been born again and are walking after the spirit.

Perhaps a righteous judgement would have us avoid the popular movements of social Justice in the world today and promote the Justice of God found in the cross alone.

Jesus did not come to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved.
Yes, and I think we might be over-complicating things a bit. Should we prefer to be socially unjust? And yet we necessarily live in societies, societies where injustices often occur due to the avarice and general selfishness of man. Social justice concepts at their best strive to identify and rectify those actions and systems that foster inequalities between our fellow man. With the onset of the industrial revolution, for example, labor was often woefully exploited, with low pay, poor and unsafe working conditions, sweatshops, etc. Some churches spoke out in support of unions and the right to strike. Were they being hypocritically judgmental against the poor industrialists? Similiarly the Geneva convention was a matter of setting forth social justice policies as they can be applied to the tragedy of war. Political involvement is sometimes morally demanded.
Upvote 0

RFK Adjusts Hepatitis B Vaccine Recommendations; Democrats Lose Their Minds

What is the evidence that newborns at low risk who receive the birth-dose have better outcomes than those who don't?
What is the evidence that infants receiving the vaccine 24 hours after birth have a better or worse outcome than those receiving it at three months?
Upvote 0

God hides things

⭐ 1. GOD PURPOSEFULLY HIDES TRUTH Isaiah 45:15 “Truly, You are a God who hides Himself.” Deuteronomy 29:29 “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and our children.” Two categories: secret things → God keeps hidden revealed things → for humanity to obey Job 28:21–23 Wisdom is hidden from every living thing… God understands the way to it. True wisdom is inaccessible unless God opens it.
⭐ 2. GOD CONCEALS SPIRITUAL TRUTH IN PARABLES, SYMBOLS, AND MYSTERIES Matthew 13:11 “To you it has been given to know the mysteries… to them it has NOT been given.” Jesus deliberately hides truth from the hard-hearted. Matthew 13:34–35 Jesus spoke in parables “to fulfill what was spoken… I will utter things hidden since the foundation of the world.” Parables = concealment and revelation at the same time. 1 Corinthians 2:7 “We speak the hidden wisdom of God in a mystery.” Colossians 1:26 “The mystery which has been hidden from ages and generations but now is revealed to His saints.”
⭐ 3. GOD HIDES FROM THE PROUD AND REVEALS TO THE HUMBLE Matthew 11:25 “You have hidden these things from the wise and learned and revealed them to little children.” A deliberate divine filter. Proverbs 2:3–5 If you cry out for insight… seek her like silver… THEN you will understand the fear of the Lord. Truth is found only through earnest searching.
⭐ 4. PROPHECIES ARE OFTEN SEALED UNTIL THE APPOINTED TIME Daniel 12:4 “Seal the book until the time of the end.” Daniel 12:9 “The words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end.” Biblical apocalyptic literature often hides timelines, symbols, and meanings. Revelation 10:4 The seven thunders spoke… “Seal up what the seven thunders said.” Even John is not allowed to reveal everything.
⭐ 5. JESUS IS HIMSELF A “HIDDEN MYSTERY” Isaiah 53:2–3 “He had no majesty that we should desire Him.” The Messiah appeared ordinary, hiding His glory. 1 Corinthians 1:27–29 God hides the truth from the powerful and reveals it through the lowly. Luke 24:16 “Their eyes were restrained so they did not recognize Him.” Concealment is part of God’s strategy.
⭐ 6. GOD HIDES HIMSELF TO TEST HEARTS Jeremiah 29:13 “You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart.” Proverbs 25:2 “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; the glory of kings to search it out.” God hides truth so that only the sincere find Him.
⭐ 7. GOD ORCHESTRATES HISTORY IN A HIDDEN WAY Ecclesiastes 3:11 “He has set eternity in the human heart, yet no one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end.” Psalm 77:19 “Your way was in the sea, and Your path in the great waters, yet Your footprints were not known.” He acts invisibly, leaving traces that must be searched.
⭐ 8. GOD HIDES TO PROTECT WHAT IS HOLY Matthew 7:6 “Do not give dogs what is holy; do not cast pearls before swine.” Divine truth is not for mockers. Proverbs 1:24–29 God refuses to reveal truth to those who reject correction.
⭐ WHY DOES GOD NOT PUT EVERYTHING IN THE OPEN? The Bible gives five reasons:
⭐ 1. TO SEPARATE THE HUMBLE FROM THE PROUD God reveals His secrets only to those who want Him. This preserves the moral dimension of revelation: Truth is a reward, not a triviality.
⭐ 2. TO PROTECT THE UNREADY If God fully exposed the spiritual realm: humans would be overwhelmed accountability would increase to unbearable levels rebellion would instantly receive judgment Concealment is mercy.
⭐ 3. TO TRAIN DISCERNMENT Truth is not just data. The search itself produces: wisdom transformation humility holiness Revelation is formative, not merely informational.
⭐ 4. TO PRESERVE FREE WILL If God revealed Himself in overpowering visibility: unbelief would be impossible love would be coerced faith would vanish Hiddenness creates space for genuine relationship.
⭐ 5. TO UNFOLD HISTORY IN STAGES Revelation is progressive: Old Covenant concealed Christ Christ concealed the Church Age Revelation conceals the future Things are revealed when the time is right. As Jesus said: “I have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.” —John 16:12

Asking AI to explain Sunday observance when NT has no such command

The sabbath was the last day of the week. The disciples met the first day of the week. Early Christian, and Roman writers said sabbath was saturday (well it was friday sunset to saturday sunset) , and the disciples met on Sunday (unsure if it was defined as saturday sunset to sunday sunset or not) so within the bible there is that transition from saturday to sunday. Ask chat GPT. Hebrews explains for those first century Israelite Christians once they believed in Jesus they rested from the works of the law of Moses.
Upvote 0

Dear Pete Hegseth, I’m Grateful the Japanese Navy Spared My Grandfather’s Life

No Christian I've read accepts the two innocent fishermen murdered scenario. That's what they keep getting accused of by those who do accept that scenario. While failing to acknowledge others are leaning towards the other scenario.

It's not a sin or a moral failing to give the benefit of the doubt that the administration and Navy aren't being careless and homicidal. Those that hate Trump basically NEED it to be that way. They MUST be incompetent monsters.
I dont think thats the scenario most people are talking about. The one I understand is:

Killing of criminal suspects who werent putting up any resistance. And then going on to kill more when they are shipwrecked.

I dont see a defense for this thats compatible with traditional Christian morality as understand it. I will admit that my sense of Christian morality has been evolving tho.
Upvote 0

Now does everyone understand why the "right to refuse illegal orders" video was made?

The last 30 years of the 20th century.
If you mean 1969 - 1999, can you give some examples?? I can't seem to find any military counsels' refusals to bow down when I consider thing's like... Vietnam, Libya 1986, Desert Storm, etc...
Upvote 0

State leaders speak out about plans to expand the Islamic Academy of Alabama

Yea

Yeah But how many janitors marry Kennedys? There is still a rigid caste system in late stage capitalist countries.
I do warehouse and janitorial work and if I lived in India, I would probably be a Dalit stuck in a caste system with thousands of years of formal structure. It would be the result of my karma and my underclass status would be deserved because of past lives I supposedly wasn’t “enlightened” to deserve better. Capitalism hasn’t discriminated against me religiously, culturally or socioeconomically. Capitalism can thrive if people have civil rights and economic opportunity. If I didn’t have a low IQ, I would probably do better in a capitalist system.

It seems like secularists can rationalize a caste system from economic data in a secular economy and equate wealth & poverty ( which is a human condition) with a structural economic disparity of a formal caste system that is based on primitive religiosity of a concept like karma. Capitalism can be good or bad depending on obvious economic and social conditions.

The case of the Dalits in holdovers from the caste system in India:


Socioeconomic status and discrimination​

Discrimination against Dalits has been observed across South Asia and among the South Asian diaspora. In 2001, the quality of life of the Dalit population in India was worse than that of the overall Indian population on metrics such as access to health care, life expectancy, education attainability, access to drinking water and housing.[64][65][66] According to a 2007 report by Human Rights Watch (HRW), the treatment of Dalits has been like a "hidden apartheid" and that they "endure segregation in housing, schools, and access to public services". HRW noted that Manmohan Singh, then Prime Minister of India, saw a parallel between the apartheid system and untouchability.[67] Eleanor Zelliotalso notes Singh's 2006 comment but says that, despite the obvious similarities, race prejudice and the situation of Dalits "have a different basis and perhaps a different solution".[27] Though the Indian Constitution abolished untouchability, the oppressed status of Dalits remains a reality. In rural India, stated Klaus Klostermaier in 2010, "they still live in secluded quarters, do the dirtiest work, and are not allowed to use the village well and other common facilities".[68] In the same year, Zelliot noted that "In spite of much progress over the last sixty years, Dalits are still at the social and economic bottom of society."[27]

According to the 2014 NCAER/University of Maryland survey, 27 per cent of the Indian population still practices untouchability; the figure may be higher because many people refuse to acknowledge doing so when questioned, although the methodology of the survey was also criticised for potentially inflating the figure.[69] Across India, Untouchability was practised among 52 per cent of Brahmins, 33 per cent of Other Backward Classes and 24 per cent of non-Brahmin forward castes.[70] Untouchability was also practised by people of minority religions – 23 per cent of Sikhs, 18 per cent of Muslims and 5 per cent of Christians.[71]According to statewide data, Untouchability is most commonly practised in Madhya Pradesh (53 per cent), followed by Himachal Pradesh (50 per cent), Chhattisgarh (48 per cent), Rajasthan and Bihar (47 per cent), Uttar Pradesh (43 per cent), and Uttarakhand (40 per cent).[72]






Ecclesiastes 12:1-14, Romans 13:1-14
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,879,438
Messages
65,434,082
Members
276,440
Latest member
Raising Wild Saints