• 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.

The auto-pen scandal is going to be massive

You are assuming that the hate Trump receives is unearned or new. @ranunculus just went through a mere one area (directly related to your "cancer cure" quip) of reasons why. New Yorkers learned to hate Trump in the 70s and 80s. Even to a teenager in the rural Midwest, he was obviously a scummy rich guy in the late 80s when he became nationally famous. (No one need to tell me that alt-timeline 1985 Biff Tannen and his casino were modeled on Trump. [They were.] It was obvious.)
Well maybe it's his own fault but some criticize everything he does just because he's the one doing it
Upvote 0

B flat B♭

Because satellites are attached to balloons that float around the earth & the one in the image showed that one of these satellites had crashed still attached to the balloon, proving this.
Some satellites are, but by no means all. The fact that you have posted one picture of some white cloth attached to a satellite, doesn't prove that all satellites are attached to balloons.
Upvote 0

What is the meaning of Total Depravity?

Exactly, that's why a body walking must be born again.

Well, not to Christ in His conversation with Nicodemus.
As a Catholic, your understanding of material vs. spiritual in Jn 3:3-8. should be as least as good as that of a Protestant.
Again,
"Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses."

So, now, why would that be?
Because of the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17) to all those of Adam (Ro 5:18-19). . .which imputation was the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputed righteousness of Christ to all those of Christ (Ro 1:17, 3:21, 4:5, 5:18-19, Php 3:9).
Upvote 0

Is gambling sinful?

I have only gambled very small amount of money $2, the excitement of the chance to win big was there, I wasn't really disappointed it was $2 not enough to buy a bag of chips these days. I figured i'm not lucky and moved on.

I can see how it can develop into a problem with people gambling excessive amounts of money, and they are devastated. But what about gambling such small amount of money it has no effect at all to the person who lost?

Could a Christian also ever be involved in the gambling business? Although some people move on, for others it destroys lives and they wished they never gambled. or is gambling seen as a legitimate business just like farmers?

Why Do My T-Shirts Get Small Holes In The Front Of Them Before They Get Holes In The Back?

On the first page of this thread I admitted that I don't do much. I'm a man of ideas.
Hmm... Most of my ideas involve "well, let's go and see what actually happens." I was 14 when my chemistry set was banned to the garden shed.
Upvote 0

Deal Reached To End The Government Shutdown

....which is why we need my wife's passport updated ASAP. I prefer to travel as a documented traveler : ). But seriously, we live 4 hours from the Mexico border....and we speak Spanish so it's an option for us if it comes to that.....or hit up my Canadian relatives.
Canada is all but over, with Alberta and other western provinces on the way out, leaving only the eastern provinces and maybe or maybe not Quebec. Mexico makes more sense at this point, as long as the narcoterrorists don't play an even bigger hand.
Upvote 0

The Book of Enoch?

So, dispense with Enoch as scriptures because there was not a quote from it...

That would dispense with a lot of books we acknowledge as part of the Bible. Maybe that is not such a good argument as you thought it was. I can dispense with apocrypha being scriptures as I find contradictions to scriptures in them, and internal inconsistencies. What is found for that in 1 Enoch? I am looking at it and yet not finding it myself. And about not being quoted, Enoch was quoted. Certainly by Jude, speaking of it as being from Enoch. And there is more than that passage used in the new testament though without Enoch being named. So why did Jesus even say that angels in heaven do not give themselves in marriage? Where was that from? Just special inside knowledge Jesus chose to use, this time? Where else does Jesus do that... with those not believing anyway? His whole point is that those Sadducees do not know scriptures that they should. Not a great time to mention a concept not from scriptures that would be his very special knowledge exclusively. I am not buying that. If I should, you have much more explaining to do. Let's even look at what is said in 1 Enoch.

I do see the same such arguments that Jesus did not speak the name of God, that was to always be remembered, to his disciples. I'm getting familiar with these ways from others, maybe this is meant for me, to know their ways and recognize them for what they are.
Upvote 0

Testing AI in Reading & Comprehension

Forgive me my friend; I did not mean to put you off the idea of debating with me if you would enjoy that - I respect you very greatly as a fellow Orthodox Christian and lament the fact that we haven’t had the chance to interact more closely, for I agree with nearly everything you right, and intellectually respect all of it.

I do realize the subject of AI is a bit complex to take in, because addressing it and understanding it even at a basic level requires us to simultaneously consider computer science and philosophy, since AI does simulate human interactions without being human, and a naive or unwise person might not begin to appreciate the many implications of this simulation, which I would propose are actually so manifold and complex that we have not even identified all of them; far less have we ourselves been able to fully appreciate the impact of AI.

And I will admit my own work on anthropomimetic systems that reproduce using a biomimetic trait exchange process further complicates the matter, since sexually dimorphic reproduction has hitherto only been seen in biological life, which AI is not.
What’s something small or local that always reminds you of home?
Upvote 0

Kim Davis ask SCOTUS to overturn her jury verdict and, while they're at it, the Obergefell decision

On to the next test case.
IANAL, but it was my understanding that Davis, being one of the few people 'harmed' by Obergefell, was probably the conservatives' best bet to overturn it. Just saying "I don't like this." does not get you standing.
Upvote 0

The Final Experiment (Flat Earth Bites The Dust)

Yes, the light source is the sun, the following image shows an approximation of what they experienced and why there is always light at that time of year in that spot.

View attachment 372951
The little gray dot is an approximation of where they are and the orange shows the path of the sun, at different times of year that path widens and moves, thus different parts of the land get different amounts of light.

My drawing is not a perfect representation, and from looking at the videos more closely now, in the 360 view on my phone, the path is more directly over them than what I drew, from what we can see in the videos the sun looks to be pretty much over them the whole time, it really does not look like it is millions of miles away, but rather circling directly above them. For some reason the path of the sun gets close to that spot at certain times of year, then moves back and expands at other times of the year.
The correction my image needs is for the path to be over the grey dot.

So why do people in the Northern and Southern Polar regions both state that the sun appears in the sky during night time hours at certain periods in the year?

Because that cannot be explained by a flat earth.
Upvote 0

Young earth vs Old earth?

I would say that these verses are about moving things, separating, organizing, structuring. As opposed to material objects simply coming into existence. Light, like darkness, particularly in old testament times, were not viewed as physical objects as we think of them today in terms of photons.
We don't create the wool we buy and then knit into something, right J?
knitting-process-wool-yarn-knitting-needles_529344-1975.jpg

However, we know the wool we buy wasn't always there.
We know the wool we buy comes from the fleece of sheep and other animals such as goats, rabbits, alpacas, llamas, camels, and even some species of cows.
The manufacturers of the wool created it from existing material.

Would we say the sheep, goats, rabbits, alpacas, llamas, camels, and cows always existed?
No. We wouldn't say that. We know they had a beginning. They came into existence.

Though things can be created from things already in existence, it doesn't mean the thing in existence was not created, or did not come into existence, does it.
Light emitters do come into existence, don't they. We see that in reality.
There is always a source of light.

The Bible says of God, at Psalm 90:2... Before the mountains were born or You brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting You are God.
So, God is everlasting. He has always existed. He is the beginning and the end. Revelation 21:6
Hence God has no beginning, but always is.

Psalm 36:9 says, For with thee is the fountain of life: In thy light shall we see light.
We know David is referring to spiritual light - that is, God's direction, just as he says in Psalm 119:105, because we can see physical light all around us, including the ones God so lovingly made available to us. Genesis 1:14-18

Darkness therefore, is consumed by both God, and the physical lights we see.
That darkness always existed, is a reasonable conclusion, and because we know God always existed, light always existed.
However, sunlight and moonlight did not always exist. They were created, or came into existence.
Do we agree on this?

Genesis 1:3-4, 6-7, 9-10 ESV
[3] And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. [4] And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.
Light on the earth from the sun is indeed separated from the darkness on the earth, isn't it.

[6] And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” [7] And God made the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so.
How refreshing it would be to have water above the expanse - our atmosphere, to cool things down considerably.
Using vertically high resolved satellite observations from radio occultation, we focus on the temperature impact in the stratosphere from the [Hunga volcano] eruption in January 2022 until December 2023. Separating the signals of the Hunga eruption from the broader stratospheric variability reveals a strong persistent radiative cooling of up to –4 K in the tropical and subtropical middle stratosphere from early after the eruption until mid-2023, clearly corresponding to the water vapor distribution. Our results provide new insights from observations into both the localized temperature changes and the persistent stratospheric cooling caused by the Hunga eruption and document this exceptional climatic effect not seen for previous volcanic eruptions.

[9] And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. [10] God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.
I imagine there were many seas when God started moving the land.

I would say that these verse are more about organizing, separating, ordering things. Rather than ex nihilo creating things. Gathering waters, separating them, separating light from dark.
My question here is, would you say the waters were created by God, or the water had no beginning?
Would you deny that God created the waters that covered the earth?

And we see this elsewhere as well:
Psalm 104:2, 5 ESV
[2] covering yourself with light as with a garment, stretching out the heavens like a tent.
[5] He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved.

Taking the heavens that are already there and stretching them out.
My question here would be, would you deny that God created the heavens and then stretched them out?
Would you object to that?
Isaiah 44:24
This is what the LORD says, He who is your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb: “I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself And spreading out the earth alone,

Or here is an interesting one:
Wisdom of Solomon 11:17
For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter, did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears or bold lions.
Sounds like something someone plagiarized and adjusted.
I would not use text like these that are known to be later additions to the existing Canon
Why would you use "deuterocanonical" writings, when they have "myriads of inconsistencies"?

When we look at old testament texts closely, we see this theme come out again and again. The material, the formless earth. It was already there.
Remember, Wisdom of Solomon is not an "Old Testament" writing.
It does not belong to the protocanonical writings, and are questionable.
Regardless, though formless does not mean nonexistent, as you acknowledged. Nor does it mean 'was not created'.
Like you said, the pizza needs work even after you slap and roll the dough into shape.
It now need toppings and baking, but it's still your creation, isn't it.

Wisdom of Solomon was in the 1611 King James Version of the Bible as apocrypha or deuterocononical, but either way, it gives us a window or a reference into the ancient world and how things were viewed back then.
I'm interested to know... How were things viewed, J.
Upvote 0

The life of the Trinity in Saint Elizabeth Catez

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that the mystery of the Holy Trinity is “the central mystery of Christian faith and life” and “the most fundamental and essential teaching.”1 But how can fallen human beings hope to comprehend “a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone”?2 For those who do not delight in reading theological textbooks, a recently canonized saint offers a practical guide to the truth of Trinitarian theology.

Charlie Kirk & Christianity

I agree that he should not have been killed. I also did not pay much attention to him. However, the fact he is now deceased does not change the fact he used Christianity as a cover for his bigoted opinions.

Defending Russia while claiming to be a Christian is basically Satanic.

I feel that Christians ought to be more responsible in condemning someone who used their faith recklessly and irresponsibly.

Silence is a form of complicity.
Let me get this straight. Here's what I'm hearing from this particular response. Being a Christian or satanic isn't about following Christ, but about your views on Russia? Do I have that right?
Upvote 0

Vatican stops use of titles for Mary

See post #72
Feel free to address its refutation in post #86, following:

Are you challenging the statement that Jesus is the "second person" of the Trinity" because it is not stated in the NT?
So where in the Bible do you find the word "Trinity"? . . .or "sovereign," for that matter?
Biblical truth is not necessariy presented in one simple statement.
So, you might start with sorting out what Jesus said:

The Son is subject to the Father, for the Son is sent by the Father in the Father's name (Jn 5:23, 36, 43).
The Spirit is subject to the Father, for the Spirit is sent by the Father in the Son's name (Jn 14:26).
The Spirit is subject to the Son as well as the Father, for the Spirit is sent by the Son as well as the Father (Jn 15:26, 16:7, 14:26, Ac 2:33).

If you can rectify Jesus' above revelation of the Trinity with Jesus being anything but the second person of the Trinity, feel free to show us how.
Upvote 0

Why Christianity

I believe in God.. but I don't know God. I don't know if God corresponds to any particular scriptures. How does one begin to sift through the different ideas to come to the truth.. what is the best way to approach the search?
You know I was thinking of this very subject. How would a Christian explain Christianity or the message in the gospel or bible today. It seems a big topic and we hear about all the Christian apologetics let alone secular arguements about God and Christianity.

Its like how does anyone get any message out about anything in an age of info and rationalisations about what a Christian is, what is the right way. I mean we have 101 denominations all differing and arguing. No wonder people are bewilded.

Then I thought what happened in the early church. How did they get the message out. What was the message. Did they have appologetics. I mean they did not even have the bible apart from the old testament for much of the first century.

The disciples and especially Paul and others were going out more than ever to spread the message. So it wasn't as if there was no message they all knew to preach.

Then I realised it was so simple. They were witnesses and were being eye witnesses. They were giving an eye witness account of what happened and why. Thats it. The gospel. A simple message that Christ died and was raised again and that He sacrificed His life for us as sinners. That by believing this testimony you are saved.

Its so simple that we can miss it and complicate it. It is just repeating the eye witness testimony that we believe the same. We believe it really happened. From that all else flows.

When Paul speaks of the spirit and flesh you cannot know the spirit and flesh unless you live in Christs spirit. So it is the spirit that opens our eyes as we come closer to God. We can read something one day and then we understand. But the more we live in Christs spirit the more we understand. We will understand like the disciples understand because the spirit is for all and the same spirit.

I don't think its much more complicated than that because there are many people with varying abilities and some uneducated or with setbacks but can still understand. I don't think theres some complicated answer and its really the truth and real life if God is the God of life.

I think most people already know the truth and thats not always some arguement that makes it true according to some philsopher. I think its all contained within the bible. Early Christians did not have all the modern day arguements.

I am not saying comentary or appologetics doesn't help. It helps a lot in perhaps giving a more detailed response to the same basic truth. But I don't think we need that to believe the truth. Its more than that. That is why sometimes people will disagree. I mean how can two Christians disagree lol, they are suppose to be of one mind and spirit. I think keep it simple.

Another aspect to consider is that there are different personalities ie agreeable, assertive, disagreeable, introverted ect. Then you have personal experience. These can all influence the interaction and a confident liar can sometimes outsmart or play a not so sure truth teller.
Yes even in the church. They are the wolves and they are good at it so watch em. Just stay away lol.

But fundementally its about a belief and a sacrifice that have no winning arguement. Its taking on that belief that it renews your mind and you can see what cannot be seen and hear what cannot be heard by the world. I like Psalm 46:10 is fitting "Be still and know that I am God".
Upvote 0

Is stubbornness a Christian moral virtue?

I think in the Christian life there are black, whites and greys. It’s not an “American” thing, it’s a human nature thing.

It’s good to be stubborn on vital faith matters like Jesus is the son of God, Jesus is the Lord, Jesus is God, Jesus died on the cross, Jesus resurrected, Jesus will come back, no other god should be worshipped. It doesn’t matter how much anyone would try to debunk or contradict, this is a vital Christian doctrine and one should die on that hill, as many have already.

There are black, whites and greys on other topics, like human death. Murder is always wrong, but death penalty is justice (one may ask does it make the judge or executioner a murderer?). This is an example of a grey. People dying from insufficient medical resources or affordability is not neglect or murder, this is also grey.

It’s not good to be stubborn on matters of personal preference or things that are very open to interpretation, like “how the church hierarchy is supposed to be?”. These non-vital matters have broken the church into denominations for centuries.

Or the great schism of 1054, “Does God the Father send the Holy Spirit or does the Son send the Holy Spirit?”. There is not right answer as there are explicit verses to both claims, but this debate broke the church into two denominations (catholic & orthodox). It certainly isn’t a virtue in these examples.

I’m definitely not a church history expert, but learning about it may help put things into context by seeing cause and effect of different events and may open debate on wether it was good or bad, if there is any right answer to that.

Stubbornness can be good, it can be bad, it can be grey and matter of personal opinion and preference. I think these things requires wisdom as Solomon asked God.
Upvote 0

Morality without Absolute Morality

I believer in universal morality, so there is no conflict for me. But you claim there is no such thing, so how can you condemn anything and remain consistent with your claims?
The same way all of us always have.
uh huh.

So it will be.

Vernacular usage of "theory" is closer to how theory is used in that term than the scientific usage, even if it is a technical term in psychology. Though there's really not much use in discussing this further, as i am now aware of the term and have made clear my prior ignorance.
Awareness is good, understanding how "theory of mind" works in decision making and moral formation is better.
The sense where if you believe that something that is wrong is not wrong, or something that is right is not right, you are mistaken in your belief and not just holding a personal preference.
Once we realize that there is no such dilemma we can move on to actually dealing with moral reality.
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,877,945
Messages
65,409,894
Members
276,357
Latest member
thelasttoknow