Simple objective experiment. Ask these two questions of your Google AI

1. Did Protestant reformers use the historicist method of interpretation for the prophecies in the book of Daniel?
2. Using the historicist model, please interpret the 2300 day prophecy of Daniel 8

As for this thread title, ask Google AI this question

"Did rival popes refer to each other as antichrist before Martin Luther did?"

To @prodromos & to anyone else it may concern ..............

Thanks Will Duffy, you've just helped to prove flat earth.


Read genesis 1:1-14

It needs to keep going, but darkness is winning and will continue to win until the Lord returns and sets everything right again. I don't see this trans thing ever going back to the way it was when it was classified as a mental disorder instead of acceptance. We might get barriers in place for children, but how long will that hold?

JohnB445 said:

For example, a young man just starting college is murdered. He didn't get to live a long life, while someone else becomes a believer in their 40's.

Click to expand...

Each person makes their own choices.

JohnB445 said:

The person in their 40's had more time to accept Jesus

Click to expand...

True. And people living to 900 years of age before the flood had wayyyy more time than anyone has had for 1000's of years.

Warden_of_the_Storm said:

Exactly as I said in the post you replied to:


Just leave this thread, AV, and just go back to making your own threads if you want attention.

Click to expand...

Run a search on EGYPT in this thread by a poster named Warden_of_the_Storm and see why I'm taking your whining with a grain of sand.

John Emmett

Artwork partially created using artificial intelligence.

johansen said:

context is usually required before replying to a forum post.

--we're talking about.. reading stories... in books. like, the bible.

Click to expand...

I don’t see the Bible as simply stories in a book like any other book. Again, nothing in Scripture indicates those incidents with Lot and his daughters was okay.

Lord have mercy!

fhansen said:

Because of what He does for man. God doesn't need man to exist at all, but obviously wants him to exist, and loves him intensely. Salvation is all about meeting man's needs, to the glory of God.

Click to expand...

No because of what He did for God and His Glory

Delvianna said:

I just don't think this should have been a sweeping law. It should have been kept to the decision of each state. Let the majority vote win.

Click to expand...

It was voted against even in California.

Like their forefathers the men of Sodom, they don't value consent.

Literally nobody wanted this.

It's not even about marriage, but persecuting Christianity.

They don't push it in Muslim countries or pagan ones like Japan, because those cultures are already non-Christian. I don't think they even have it in Israel iirc.

Vambram said:

The evidence I showed is not wrong.

Click to expand...

Your evidence demonstrates the US military provided logistical support and training to Bolivia in 1986. Is that what the US Navy is doing off the coast of Venezuela?

Praying for your intentions and your healing and peace.

I fully realized that my conscience is a flawed and limited guide for living. The Lord’s Gospel made me realize I needed His truth for everlasting life and daily living.

On a basic & sensible level, the Lord’s commandments, to me, confirm how I need to live life, treat others, & be law abiding ( see Matthew 22:36-40, Matthew 7:1-12, Matthew 19:16-19, Romans 13:1-14 etc.).

I understand that I am still deeply flawed & subject to sin ( 1 John 1:5-10 etc.). The Lord wants us to be charitable & pray for ourselves & others ( see Matthew 6:1-13, 1 Timothy 2:1-6). He wants us, in some way, to help spread the Gospel; at least as part of charity and prayer ( see Matthew 9:36-38). I don’t claim to be a worthy evangelist.

The Lord wants us to know Him as God and Savior & to live by faith in Him ( John 3:16-21, Ephesians 2:8-10 etc).He wants us to have a sound understanding of our faith. Christians have a lot of variances; personally I don’t know every precise truth but I believe cooperation is necessary. I believe careful reading for ex. of Philippians 2:1-30, Colossians 1:1-29 are helpful in this.

CoreyD said:

Aw. Don't steal my joy.
Shred by shred is bit by bit.


Read Genesis 2:4 again.
Does it say it's a continuation, or a history, a recounting of creation?
Before answering, read Genesis 5:1; Genesis 6:9; Genesis 10:1; Genesis 11:10
...and please answer wisely.

Click to expand...

Haha

Genesis 6:9. Lets see.

Genesis 5:30-32 ESV
[30] Lamech lived after he fathered Noah 595 years and had other sons and daughters. [31] Thus all the days of Lamech were 777 years, and he died. [32] After Noah was 500 years old, Noah fathered Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

So we see the geneologies up to Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japeth.

The story introduces the flood narrative.

Genesis 6:5-8 ESV
[5] The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. [6] And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. [7] So the Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.” [8] But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.

Genesis 6:9-11 ESV
[9] These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God. [10] And Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. [11] Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight, and the earth was filled with violence.

I would say, this is a continuation. Noah fathers his children at the end of chapter 5. And now after 6:11, we see the story of Noah and his children during the flood.

Let's look at 10:1.

Genesis 9:28-29 ESV
[28] After the flood Noah lived 350 years. [29] All the days of Noah were 950 years, and he died.

Noah passed away.

Genesis 10:1-3 ESV
[1] These are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Sons were born to them after the flood. [2] The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. [3] The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.

So Noah dies at the end of chapter 9. Then the story continues in chapter 10 by talking about the sons of Noah. And it continues on to talk about the founding of the nations. Events that occurred after Noah's death.

Genesis 10:20, 31-32 ESV
[20] These are the sons of Ham, by their clans, their languages, their lands, and their nations.
[31] These are the sons of Shem, by their clans, their languages, their lands, and their nations. [32] These are the clans of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, in their nations, and from these the nations spread abroad on the earth after the flood.

Ok. These look like continuations of the story to me.

I would say, Genesis 2 can also be a continuation. Meaning that it would tell the story of events that happened in continuation of chapter 1. Rather than retelling day 3 or day 6.

And I would say that, the story is focusing in on a specific family (Adam and Eve) of that broader humanity. Much like a story might focus in on Noah and his sons in chapter 6, whereas chapter 5 was broad and about a prior family line. So as you continue, the story focuses in on specific branches.

A federal judge has ordered the release of hundreds of individuals arrested in Illinois as part of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, known as "Operation Midway Blitz."

Another activist judge trying to usurp power from the Executive Branch.

partinobodycular said:

Thank you. I assume that you're switching to solipsism now. Anything else would be disingenuous.

Click to expand...

Nope, and it's clear to me that neither do you. So why do you pretend that you do?

partinobodycular said:

I'll give it a shot, morality is simply this... do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God. God in this case simply being the entirety of life... all that is, and all that you believe.

Click to expand...

God is not "the entirety of life", but you're certainly onto something quoting Micah.

partinobodycular said:

Humility wrapped in justice and mercy, if there's a higher standard for morality than this, I can't imagine what it could be. The problem as I see it, doesn't rest in finding the standard, it rests in achieving it.

Click to expand...

The Good is the only standard for morality that there is.

partinobodycular said:

As a solipsist I expect very little from others. You're free to follow your morals, and I'm free to follow mine. That's it... period... end of story.

Click to expand...

Given your participation in this thread, I find your claim of solipsism disingenuous..unless you don't know what that term means.

partinobodycular said:

However, society and its social norms are precisely what you get when you put those two simple rules into practice. You get a balance between my right to act in accordance with my morals, and your right to act in accordance with your morals.

Click to expand...

"Right"? Where do these "rights" come from?

partinobodycular said:

Now this balance can fluctuate from time to time and place to place as balances are wont to do, but they'll always be adequate to the time and place in which they occur. And they'll always give their adherents the sense that they couldn't possibly be otherwise.

Click to expand...

Uh huh...but none of this has to do with establishing what morality entails. It's rather uninteresting description.

partinobodycular said:

Morality is simply nature doing what nature always does... find a balance between two or more opposing forces such that nature, and only nature, is the true arbiter of what's moral.

Click to expand...

Mere assertion, based on nothing but your personal opinion. So why should I take anything you say seriously?

CoreyD said:

So, spending time debating with the view that one interpretation is just as good as another, and we cannot establish the truth one way or the other, is lawlessness, and individuals who hold to this view will find out later... one way or the other, that this is not righteousness.

Click to expand...

And what always happens is that everyone thinks they have the truth in interpretation of Scripture and those who disagrees with them are wrong. So as you say, that is not righteousness.

Additionally, everyone claims to be led by the Spirit. The person, who claims to be led by the Spirit, says Water Baptism is needed for salvation is at odds with another person, who claims to be led by the same Spirit, says Baptism isn't needed, it is just a symbol.

So while you post points out a real problem, there is no way to solve it

Vambram said:

There is absolutely zero evidence that Donald Trump was involved in the crimes done by Epstein.

Click to expand...

So far.

But the evidence piles up that he knew exactly what was going on for a long time before cutting Epp loose.

Yo Yogi!

fhansen said:

As it is you don't know the truth, at least not in its fullness, or else you'd recognize it in that post. You're locked into a handful of concepts developed by people strictly by reading a book, God's Word, centuries after the fact, divorced from its original historical context and recipients of its revelation, The concepts are plausible enough in some places, strained in others, often wooden and isolated interpretations in any case.

The alternative is that God is the author of sin.


"See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess."

"This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him." Duet 30:15-16, 19-20

"Seek good, and not evil, that you may live" Amos 5:14

"Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." Rom 12:21

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Matt 22:37-40

There's a reason why we pray, "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven". And that reason is because of the fact that His will is not at all necessarily done on earth as it is in heaven. God allows evil here, for a time, for a season, for His purpose, after which the two: good and evil, will be eternally separated, no longer allowed to co-exist as His plans for His creation are fully consummated. All truth and beauty and goodness in this world come from God while evil is done by man, coming from those who oppose Him and His will. So tell the victims of abuse, of rape, of torture, of genocide, of the holocaust about how beautiful this world is. You may get a different opinion.

Geez! It was nothing but love-speech, calling man to God and the love He's shown us. But man preferred darkness. What else is new???? Are you saying the darkness is somehow preferable or superior to the light just because man rejected the light?

Click to expand...

I’m still waiting for him to explain how free will is a “gnostic belief” after I already quoted Iranaeus refuting total depravity and unconditional election by explaining how God has given man the ability to choose either good or evil in Adversus Haereses. This is a clear example of just spewing out nonsense in complete ignorance for the sake of argument. I literally quoted a second century theologian refuting Gnosticism and two of Calvin’s doctrines and he didn’t pick up on why Iranaeus was refuting them. Absolutely incredible.

Apple Sky said:

Not on a flat earth they don't, there are no solar flares on the flat earth sun.

Click to expand...

Well there you go, you've just disproved flat earth.

9Rock9 said:

I think both.

The Church is referred to as the Israel of God,

Click to expand...

To avoid misinterpretation of Galatians 6:16, avoid the NIV.

9Rock9 said:

and Paul does say that not all who are ethnically Israel are true Israel. Yet, Romans 11 seems to use Israel to refer to ethnic Jews.

Click to expand...

That is true, being ethnic Israel is not sufficient to be considered true Israel.

But that does not mean it is not a necessary condition, which rules us gentiles out, which explains your next point about Romans 11.

iluvatar5150 said:

T Cooking fast, though, is a lot harder to pull off. It's possible, but it narrows your options significantly. Even eggs, which is about as cheap, easy, and fast a meal as possible, can still run you 10-20 minutes if you have an electric stove and need to wait for the pan to heat up. Now think of something like a sandwich and how long that would take to make the bread, cook the meat, and make any condiments. Oh hey - on top of all the work requirements we want to put on this stuff, you also have to make your own mayonnaise. Or peanut butter and jelly, looool. Drag your three kids to the pick-your-own-berry farm so you can spend all the next day in the kitchen over a giant pot of boiling water.

Click to expand...

The work involved is certainly a factor, especially if the mother has a job (which conservatives want to happen). She works all day, takes a bus to the child care center to pick up the kids, hauls the kids with her to a market which has healthy foods (not in her neighborhood), picks up what she can carry on the bus with kids, spend an hour on the bus getting home.

It's past 6 pm. The kids are yowling in hunger. She's got a two-burner apartment range with 3 feet of counter space to make dinner.

Always in His Presence said:

Obamacare - exclusively Democrats
Oversight of the ACA (because Obama didn't want his name on a failing venture) - Democrats
Addition of Subsidies to help with rising cost of healthcare - Democrats
Dates for the subsidies to end - Democrats
Who didn't address the need all of 2024 - Democrats
Who designed the subsidies to go directly to big pharma? - Democrats
Who designed the subsidies to not lower anyone's deductible, out of pocket or subscription cost - Democrats

Whose fault is all this?

Click to expand...

Obamacare was the name coined by the GOP and meant to be a slur to discourage people from supporting the ACA. It worked. Many Republicans have a knee-jerk opposition to the word and anything Obama related.

That's why there were dozens of videos with people being mocked for saying they supported the ACA but wanted to get rid of Obamacare. That's why people were shocked and dismayed to learn they were asking to end their own healthcare plan because the branding was so successful. Much like the Department of War, it's just a nick/secondary name and not the legal name.

Some states also have their own exchanges instead of using the federal marketplace so may not even be referred to as the ACA or go through healthcare.gov to sign up.