• 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.

Shootings at Bondi Beach

It's breaking news but there have been multiple shootings at Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia.


The death and injury toll is as yet unkown.

Two suspects have been arrested but not identified. I'll bet a pound to a penny that they are Moslems.
How sad.
Upvote 0

Muslim man hailed as hero after wrestling Bondi attacker with his bare hands

When two men opened fire on crowds gathered Sunday to celebrate Hanukkah on Bondi Beach in Australia, one man stepped in to stop it. Ahmed al-Ahmed, 43, took on one of the shooters and wrestled him to the ground, preventing the death of potentially many more people.

The world watched in horror as the massacre unfolded, all caught on film. Yet along with the indiscriminate murder of Jewish men, women and children, the remarkable courage of a Muslim man to save lives has also been documented for all to see. Now the footage has been verified, and the man has been identified as a local father of two young girls who runs a fruit shop.

His parents told ABC News that their son was having coffee with a friend in Bondi when he heard gunshots, and went to intervene.

Continued below.
Praying for peace for all!
Upvote 0

Church is getting difficult

I carry Halls throat drops with me and pop a couple during the service. They help some, but not a lot, with singing the hymns.
I got my eyes tested and changed glasses last month but it didn't make a difference.

The thing is, I knew people who attended church well into their nineties and here I am, two decades younger than that, and I'm having problems!
I'm nearly 80.
Upvote 0

2 Canons of the bible

Greetings again sambas

I presume your second paragraph is a support for the verse above it. If not, then my apologies. It appears you are suggesting that the Luke 24:44 verse, when it says "the law of Moses, the books of the prophets, and the Psalms", means to include 1 Enoch. But I don't know of any support for this. Could you give me your source so I might study this inclusion of 1 Enoch into what Luke wrote in Luke 24:44?


Peace to you brother
I said it excluded 1 enoch. Jesus was referencing this canon list which is our now protestant OT

you can find the same canon list in Eusebius and other early christian writings (ask chat gpt).
Upvote 0

Trump administration says sign language services ‘intrude’ on Trump’s ability to control his image

Yeah, forget the Americans with Disabilities Act. Who cares about laws?

Who cares if the deaf are able to understand the message, or if they are held back from political discourse, or civic participation?

REAL Americans can hear fully and are not deaf or hard of hearing is what I get from posts like yours. (sarcasm)

The lack of caring about the disabled like deaf and whether their rights are protected comes off to me as as the opposite of empathy. I don't think that attitude reflects Christ at all.
I hope you don't really think anyone is so bitter and mean, that they think the deaf are somehow lesser human beings than others - I certainly don't.

I just see easy ways around this, like talk-to-text, or even T.V screens with written text on a wall somewhere, where the deaf can read it.

...That's why IMO, this issue is being blown out of proportion, in ways undeserving.
Upvote 0

Maccabees no prophets

Greetings to you samaus, I hope your week is beginning well.

The title of your thread is Maccabees no prophets. You then quote 1 Maccabees which shows us that the Jews of that time believed that the prophets had ceased to be sent by God. This in turn supports our own reading of the Bible that God had put an end to all prophets, dreams and visions until the coming of Elijah. That time span would then be around 400 B.C. to the coming of John the Baptist and Jesus.

But you then turn to this (below)...


So let me ask this...
(1) If we read that God told us through the Scripture that there would be no more prophets or visions until the coming of Elijah...
(2) ...and in historical writings we see that the Jews of the time actually thought the same thing (so its not some modern day reading)...
(3) ... but then you say that there was in fact prophecies before the coming of Elijah...
(4) ... is God shown to be a liar?

Now I would presume that you would not in fact be calling God a lair. But it does seem that you have a problem with what appears to be a most reasonable reading of God's promise (one even the Jews of the times held) and what you say you believe.

Am I missing something?

Peace to you brother
when did God say number 1? The Judeans in Maccabees thought that but I know of no saying from God saying I will stop prophecy at Malachi. Jesus said the law, and prophets were until John the baptist (around 30 AD) so according to Jesus they could continue up until his time.

the people you call scholars actually believe the internal date of psalms of solomon 48bc- 1ad and date the original composition to that time period. i dont know why they dont reject the internal date and make up a fable as to how it was written much later aka pseudepigrapha like they do with the majority of other biblical texts
Upvote 0

Kirk Cameron Takes Heat for His Annihilationist View on Hell

I hope, @1Tonne , you can at least see where we conditionalists are coming from Biblically with our stance even if you disagree with how we're interpreting it, and that you do not make the insulting accusation that we are trying to diminish Christ's sacrifice in any way.
I do understand where you are coming from and I do not think it is you personally who is diminishing the sacrifice of Christ but your belief.
I also do not think that annihilationist's are heretics as some people think. I believe that they are misguided in their understanding but not heretics.
Is this you declaring a victory, or just asking me to go away? Abd FWIW, you can tell when I'm posting on a telephone because my spelling worsens by orders of magnitude. <Laugh>

The quotes provide context for my replies, to avoid the standard "you took me out of context!" dodge. If I misquote you then you have a valid beef.

To be clear, I don't consider, or call, God a pitiless monster. But that's how your religion paints Him, inflicting ghastly punishments to be inflicted eternally for finite offenses. It's your lot who say God is a monster, by insisting that He inflicts torture 0n those who offend Him so horrific that no human psychopath could inflict them even if he was so inclined, and which no living human victim could possibly survive for more than a brief period of time if it . The "gift of God, ", eternal life, simply provides a mechanism to torture the recipient of God's hatred for an limitless period of time, because, at least in your religion, God's malice endures forever and ever.

Not to mention infinitely unforgiving, infinitely vindictive, infinitely spiteful, etc. And to what end? As I've asked before, who benefits from the Infinite horrific and inconvievably brutal punishments that benefit no one.? In your religion is that necessitated by God's infinite ability to hold a grudge?

Even, apparently, to the point of sins unknowingly committed, or because the condemned was never persuaded to believe in Christ, or so I'm told. No more of that "forgive them because they don't know any better" stuff either, right? Once again, it's "burn, baby burn!"

Working from your own in-house lexicon again I see. And no, infinite Punishment for finite offenses would simply be simply cruelty for its own sake. Holiness? Debatable, especially not knowing how it's defined in your in-house dictionary. Just? Infinite punish for finite offenses? Not in any of the languages I know. No more "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth", it's "burn forever for being too boneheaded to listen to the right preachers". Ain't no justice there, matey.

That has to be a "See, He doesn't condemn everybody to eternal torture!" thing. After all, He's God, and He could roast everybody ever if He wanted to! Yeah, that kind of mercy.-sigh-

Which in your ecomony it apparently pretty much always is...

So it could be worse, it cou'd be two infinite stays in hell to run consecutively.


Into negative numbers?

No, you simply ascribe it to Him.

Chapter and verse?


Funny, I'd have thought that God might be hoped to behave as our Lord Jesus did. Silly notion, huh?

So it's OK if He behaves in a manner that we'd find utterly abhorrent in a human being. Right.


It would if it was anything other than a noxious doctrine made up from whole cloth.

No, it reveals how ghastly human imaginings of God's behavior can be.

And that Damnationist doctrines are far more apalling than most of us care to imagine.
Assuring us that God is just lying in wait for an opportunity to send us to eternal torture. Right.

The wages of sin is death. But apparently that isn't nasty enough to suit some folks.

Which eternal life? The on in Heaven or the one in hell?

Yep, it's very clear. The Wages of Sin is Death. Not eternal life in hell. Y'all don't seem to understand the contrast.

And it's the only eternal life there is.


Destruction meaning, in English, destruction. Not Bad Erernal Life.

He came so that we might have life, and have if more abundantly. You lot claim we've got "life" in any case, it's just torture we're to be saved from.

Well yeah, that's precisely the thing, You'd have us believe that God grants everyone eternal life, but unless we're saved from God's wrath and hatred, eternal life is a sentence to perpetual torture.

"Reality" being that God's hatred of humanity is such that He finds everyone guilty of crimes worth of eternal torment unless we're saved from His implacable hatred.

Hurray, they've been saved from God!


And God's just itching for an excuse, right?

And in your religion, the need is to be saved from God.
Oh. You did it again. This time I think it is 29 more erratic little posts. LOL
I don't believe so. And how are you hoping to inspire true repentance which we know is a true change of heart and mind, a new way of thinking while spreading ECT? You are turning many people off of God, instead of showing his true nature. Which is not to burn someone for an eternity. He wants our love plain and simple. He wants our trust and belief that we can put our lives in his hands. He's long suffering wishing all would come to repentance and not perish. That's our Father, not the one you've made him out to be.
I’m not speaking theoretically here. I actively share the gospel, and I see real fruit. I regularly see people seriously reconsider their sin, their lives, and their standing before God. Some make clear decisions to honour God and leave their old way of life. Others say they will genuinely think about what we discussed. That isn’t manipulation; that’s conviction at work. And I see this very often.

Repentance in Scripture is produced by truth, about God’s holiness, our sin, judgment, and mercy. Jesus warned about hell more than anyone, yet perfectly revealed the Father’s heart. If warning people turns them away from God, then Christ Himself would be guilty of that charge.

This may help you understand how fear can be very good:
There are two kinds of fear. Bad fear paralyzes and keeps people from acting. Good fear, the fear of the Lord, leads to wisdom, repentance, and life (Prov 1:7). The gospel spoken in it's fullness with the truth of Judgement often produces this good fear, and it moves people to act. This good fear will make people want to honour God and put Him first in their lives.- I have seen this many, many times.

God is patient and desires repentance, but His long-suffering does not remove the reality of judgment; it explains why it is delayed. Speaking honestly about that reality is not unloving, it is necessary.
The fear of the Lord is not the enemy of repentance. It is the beginning of wisdom.

Yes, your quoting from Proverbs. But there are a few different words for fear in the OT, one is this one which is not the one you're quoting.

Hebrews 6343-
dreadful, fear, thing great fear terror
From pachad; a (sudden) alarm (properly, the object feared, by implication, the feeling) -- dread(-ful), fear, (thing) great (fear, -ly feared), terror.

The one your quoting is Hebrews 3374 yirah which is more about reverence, that type of fear and yes, this fear is good. We know we should fear God's wrath, not want to take part in the second death, etc. But that has nothing to do with instilling the belief that God is going to burn someone for an eternity. It's as if you all are reading an entirely different Bible.
The OT uses more than one Hebrew word for fear, but the conclusion you’re drawing from that distinction doesn’t follow.
Yirah (Prov 1:7) certainly includes reverence, but it does not exclude terror or dread of judgment. (H3374 - yir'â - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon (nkjv))
In Scripture, reverence and fear of consequences are not opposites; they belong together. Yirah is used repeatedly in contexts where God’s holiness, justice, and wrath are very much in view (e.g., Deut 10:12–13; Prov 16:6). It is reverent fear because God is holy and judges sin, not because He is harmless.
The New Testament reinforces this fuller sense of fear. Hebrews 12:28 uses eulabeia, a word that carries reverence, godly fear, piety, and even caution, avoidance, dread or anxiety before God’s holiness; and aidos, meaning respect or shame. This shows that biblical fear is not mere politeness or admiration; it includes caution, awe, and a recognition of God’s authority and judgment. Godly fear compels us to take Him seriously, to live in a way that honours Him, and to avoid treating sin casually.

This is why Jesus explicitly connects fear of God with His authority over hell: “Fear Him who can destroy both soul and body in hell”. That is not abstract reverence; it is fear grounded in real consequences.

“Godly fear” isn’t merely respect; it’s a holy fear. The kind that keeps you from treating God casually. It says, “I dare not play games in His presence.” That is precisely the fear Scripture commends.
C. S. Lewis captured this well in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe when Mr. Beaver says of Aslan:
“Safe? Who said anything about safe? ’Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good.”
We’ve lost this balance in many churches. People want God to be safe. But He is holy, and holiness is not tame.

The Bible does not present two gospels: one of love and one of warning. God’s love, patience, and desire that none perish coexist with sober warnings about eternal judgment. Saying that eternal punishment has “nothing to do” with the fear of the Lord is not a biblical distinction; it’s a theological assumption brought to the text.

So no, this isn’t about “reading a different Bible.” It’s about allowing all of Scripture to define the fear of the Lord, not just the parts that feel more comfortable.

-Reverence without judgment becomes sentimentality.
-Fear without reverence becomes terror.
-Biblical fear holds both together.
You are turning many people off of God
But again, can you inspire true repentance or are they just accepting out of fear? This doctrine is going major damage.
So, since you have said that I am scaring people away from God, or that the only reason they accept is because of fear, I’ll ask you plainly: how do you personally speak the gospel to people outside the church, and how often? Do you see many people change? ....-Or does your annihilationism drive you to apathy?
Upvote 0

What does the Bible teach about the role of men?

So, then, do not give him respect which is fake. But honor him in order to encourage him to do what is good. Be a good example.

"Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." (Romans 12:21)

Whatever God knows is "good" is what this means. This means what is possible with God.

Define honor. We don't honor evil.

God HATES the workers of iniquity.
Upvote 0

United Airlines settles suit over flight attendant’s expression of Catholic beliefs

"And you shall be hated by all men for My Name's sake.....if they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you."

(Matthew 10:22, John 15:20)
Yup. Saying sin is sin is not hate nor it is discrimination. Too bad lgbt et al cannot understand that. Sigh
  • Agree
Reactions: Michie
Upvote 0

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

Encyclopedia Britannica says "the details of the development of that custom are NOT CLEAR." ODD how you leave that out! That means those who gathered this information for botanica don't know when Christians began to worship on a Sunday, information differs, as it does today.

You say it is "odd how you leave that out", but what is odd is how you leave out the rest of the sentence from your quote. In full, it reads:

"The practice of Christians gathering together for worship on Sunday dates back to apostolic times, but details of the actual development of the custom are not clear."

The Encyclopedia Britannica article that you cited just said that Sunday being the day of worship "dates back to apostolic times". That is clearly centuries prior to Constantine. While perhaps you might try to say the article is wrong, that's still what the article says, and it's the article you pointed to. Again, the claim you made, and I quote, was:

"Encyclopedia Britannica States Constantine made the day of worship on the first day."

But the article clearly says that the Christian day of worship was on the first day well before Constantine; in addition to its statement it dates back to apostolic times, it also notes Justin Martyr (again, well before Constantine ever lived) explicitly saying Sunday was the date of Christian worship. Thus, your assertion that "Encyclopedia Britannica States Constantine made the day of worship on the first day" is wrong, for it clearly says that became the Christian date of worship over a century before his birth. The only thing it ascribes to Constantine is enacting a law that "aimed at providing time for worship" but the day of worship was already Sunday. As for the rest of your post, it's irrelevant to the question of what the Encyclopedia Britannica article says (again, this was the article you cited).
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,879,877
Messages
65,439,704
Members
276,453
Latest member
nickynick