Hentenza said:

Earthly death

Click to expand...

This would be considered the first death, punishment or not.

Hentenza said:

but the spirit returns to the one who made it

Click to expand...

Yes, and at Judgement Day (hasn't happened yet) the second death happens. Which coincides with Christ's teaching with Matthew 10:28.

Hentenza said:

The preponderance of the evidence points a certain direction.

Click to expand...

If you don't want to believe death is not really death. Christ even calls it the "second death". I don't think we need to add or take away from that. And to say, well Christ doesn't really mean death.

And Malachi makes it pretty clear that the wicked will be turned to ashes. That's what a fire does. Which also coincides with Christ's teaching in Matthew 10:28

We have many verses that state that the wicked will be burned up, shall perish, be cut off, consumed away and so on.

...from the DOJ announcement in 2024 (when it was still a functioning justice department):

“As the former two-term president of Honduras, Juan Orlando Hernández had every opportunity to affect positive change for his country," said U.S. Attorney Damian Williams for the Southern District of New York. "Instead, Hernández helped to facilitate the importation of an almost unfathomable 400 tons of cocaine to this country: billions of individual doses sent to the United States with the protection and support of the former president of Honduras. Now, after years of destructive narco-trafficking of the highest imaginable magnitude, Hernández will spend 45 years where he belongs: in federal prison.”

[...or not, thanks to one Donald J Trump]

"According to court documents, from at least in or about 2004, up to and including in or about 2022, Hernández, the former two-term president of Honduras and former president of the Honduran National Congress, was at the center of one of the largest and most violent drug-trafficking conspiracies in the world. During his political career, Hernández abused his powerful positions and authority in Honduras to facilitate the importation of over 400 tons of cocaine into the U.S. Hernández’s co-conspirators were armed with machine guns and destructive devices, including AK-47s, AR-15s, and grenade launchers, which they used to protect their massive cocaine loads as they transited across Honduras on their way to the United States, protect the money they made from the eventual sale of this cocaine, and guard their drug-trafficking territory from rivals. Hernández received millions of dollars of drug money from some of the largest and most violent drug-trafficking organizations in Honduras, Mexico, and elsewhere, and used those bribes to fuel his rise in Honduran politics. In turn, as Hernández rose to power in Honduras, he provided increased support and protection for his co-conspirators, allowing them to move mountains of cocaine, commit acts of violence and murder, and help turn Honduras into one of the most dangerous countries in the world."

"During his time in office, Hernández publicly promoted legislation and the efforts he purported to undertake in support of anti-narcotics measures in Honduras. At the same time, he protected and enriched the drug traffickers in his inner circle and those who provided him with cocaine-fueled bribes that allowed him to obtain and stay in power in Honduras. For example, Hernández selectively upheld extraditions by supporting and taking credit for extraditions to the United States of certain drug traffickers who threatened his grip on power, while at the same time promising drug traffickers who bribed him and followed his instructions that they would remain safe in Honduras. In addition, Hernández and his co-conspirators abused Honduran institutions, including the Honduran National Police and Honduran military, to protect and grow their conspiracy. Among other things, members of the conspiracy used heavily armed Honduran National Police officers to protect their cocaine loads as they transited through Honduras towards the United States for eventual distribution. Members of the conspiracy also turned to violence and murder to protect and grow their drug trafficking enterprise, attacking and murdering rival traffickers and those who threatened their grip on the Honduran cocaine trade."

[During his time in office, Trump pubicly decried the scourge of illegal drugs on the American people and then pardoned one the facilitator of 400 tons of cocaine into the United States.]

'Discovering Your Spiritual Gifts'
- Kenneth C. Kinghorn
----
Kindle ebook
- 99¢

The arrest marks the first time investigators have settled on a suspect in an act that had long vexed law enforcement, spawned a multitude of conspiracy theories and remained an enduring mystery in the shadow of the dark chapter of American history that is the violent Capitol siege.

No details other than that it's a man.

The HS may or may not happen to us with baptism. It is a sign of the cleansing God has done at getting saved. The HS is responsible for our regeneration though. Sanctification is a work of the HS. The infilling happens when we ask to be in filled. The Holy Spirit . The samaritans had not received the HS until Peter and John showed up. The did not know to ask. So they prayed for them to receive Him and it made a marked difference in them. They became full fledged brethren with the guarantee with the promise, with the gifts and fruits of the Holy Spirit. The fruits God produces in us. A changed life, a new focus, growth in the HS.

some kids do learn respect from their dads and not sparing the rod. That’s the way it is supposed to work. It leads to understanding oftentimes. That’s discipline. The ones who learn well young go the farthest in faith and are spared from learning late in life. A wise dad will teach the way so there is not so much disobedience. I ve seen it work. There is the way for those of us w/o wise dads.

Coolerranch said:

Yeah, but how do those things show how God values our lives?

Click to expand...

The books do not mention God directly, to the best of my memory.

Do you think the books would have been stronger if the author had made some of the characters explicitly religious and had them comment on how God would view their situation? Alternatively, would you put God's point of view into the narrator's voice? How do you envision changing the books?

Hentenza said:

Who do you think are those who are now dead?

Click to expand...

It says, “was also preached to those who are now dead“, the gospel was preached unto Abraham and Abraham is now dead. This is the proper understanding of this verse. After death there is no life except in a resurrection from the dead. Jesus said, John 3:13 and this is true. Jesus preached to the spirits in prison, the people of his day, Satan holds people in a spiritual prison and only through Jesus can they be set free. Luke 4:18 Isaiah 61:1-2 The popular idea of heaven and hell is not true.

I had a mistake in the maths at one point not doing things in the right order.


In Dan 9 the messiah was going to be cut off (the crucifixion) at the end of 483 years (69 times 7) starting from when a decree went out to rebuild. One of the decrees is in Nehemiah 2 the 20th year of Artaxerxes of Persia which based on archeology was 445 BC. The author of Genesis (150 days, 5 months) Jubilees (150 days, 5 months) , and Revelation (times, time, half a time, 1260 days) are using 360 day a year calendars. So 445 BC minus 483 = -39 AD then minus another 1 year when going from BC to AD or vice versa 40 AD in Gregorian years. To convert to 360 day years then 483 times 5.24 days (the difference between Gregorian years of 365.24 and 360 day years)= 2530/ 360 = 7 year difference. Subtract 7 from 40 AD puts the crucifixion at 33 AD. Please explain if there is a problem with that math.

If the decree was 7th year of Artaxerxes 457 BC in Ezra then 457-483= -26, - another 1= 27 AD - 7 = 20 AD so that makes no sense unless someone has Jesus being born around 10 BC (the NT says something about Jesus 30th year)

BCP1928 said:

What I was asking for initially was what the Christian motivation could be for judging the killing of those two men a righteous act.

Click to expand...

But that is the point. There is no Christian motivation here only personal. This is not a collective group’s opinion but individual personal opinion.

BCP1928 said:

You get all uppity when I bring Christanity into it, but even atheists who think interdicting those boats by just blowing them up is OK, draw the line at circling around to kill the survivors in the water.

Click to expand...

I don’t get uppity but I do think that you are confusing personal opinion of a few with those of all Christians. You do know that is a fallacy right?

BCP1928 said:

The only people who I have talked to about it who think such an action was righteousl have been Christians.

Click to expand...

Then you need to talk to quite a few more to make such a sweeping determination. Your “survey” is hardly conclusive.

FredVB said:

I see God is not limited. God created all the universe with it possible for any worlds with life, any other way it would not. God provides for that. God cares for life. God is everywhere, God is not limited in power, and is not limited in caring, God cares for all life. This includes each of us individually. As God cares so there is reason for us to do so.

Click to expand...

The level and degree of care of God for humans is, however, quite varied. For all of humanity God has provided this earth to sustain life. For most humans, life is far from pleasant, with many dying of disease, famine, and pestilence. God is also perfectly just and holy with requirements to be met in order to please Him. Sadly, all of us have fallen short of His glory and are rightly deserving of an eternity in the lake of fire which burns forever. In His matchless love and grace He sent Jesus Christ to earth to redeem His people. His people were, historically, the Jewish nation and no others among the hundreds of millions of people living on the earth. Following the redemption of Jesus Christ, His people are those who have faith in Jesus Christ. Those who do not have faith in Jesus Christ are not His sheep with the result being that the vast majority of humanity will be eternally lost.

iluvatar5150 said:

I agree that there's a capture of the perception of intelligence. I disagree on why/how.

Frankly, what you described is, IME, how dumb people treat intelligence. That "keys to knowledge" phenomenon is what I witnessed in fans of certain media personalities like Rush Limbaugh and Dave Ramsey. I'm sure it applies to some younger streamers now, but I don't keep up with them. I don't see intelligent people seeing a single person or group of people as having the keys to anything. Intelligent people might have preferred sources or commentators, but they don't treat these folks as some sort of oracle on whose every word they hang.

Click to expand...

While the phenomenon may not exist to the degree it did in example I gave of the early church...

I think you're underestimating the degree it does exist.

Close to three in four students (72%) say that they believe their professors have influenced students’ political viewpoints.
26% say a professor has changed their opinion on a political or social issue.
49% say they have participated in social activism due to a professor.


There's still a certain level of reverence there.

iluvatar5150 said:

If college taught us anything, it wasn't that "the smartest guy in the room" was always a lib. What it taught us was the process for learning and discovering knowledge. How to find and evaluate information; how to construct an argument; how to develop a plan to achieve a goal; etc. And for the last decade+, the only party that has embraced that ethos at all has been the Dems.

Dems have captured the "intelligence" vote because the Republicans have abandoned it.

Click to expand...

But which factors played the roles of cause and effect?

Did conservatives abandon it first? (leaving it to become a more liberal echo chamber after all of the conservatives bailed)
Or did the universities take a sharp left turn first that alienated conservatives from wanting to participate in that system?

iluvatar5150 said:

What was the last real policy idea developed by Republicans? Ignoring the wars, W had No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D. Those may have had mixed results, but I'll give him an A for effort. Since then, what? (I'm ignoring both parties' responses to crises like the 2008 crash and COVID, since they weren't planned) They were almost exclusively obstructionist throughout Obama's presidency; didn't do anything during Trump1 except tax cuts based on an economic idea that had debunked for ages. They were mostly obstructionist again during Biden; and now in Trump2, they've turned into a personality cult that appoints incompetent drunkards and sycophants to cabinet positions.

Click to expand...

Warp speed for covid was, at least in part, an endeavor of the Trump administration was it not?
"No Tax on Tips" was something from the Trump admin
The First Step Act

I think those were all decent ideas (and had some bipartisan support)

So to say they've done nothing and have been purely obstructionist isn't entirely fair.

iluvatar5150 said:

If they'd wanted to appeal to the intelligence vote, they would've done something like come up with a health care plan. Modified the transition to electrification so that things could actually get built. Done something about the explosion of tuition costs. Tried to appoint people with expertise. Instead, they just keep leaning on tired old stuff that the "intelligent" people know isn't going to fix anything, like more tax cuts, more fossil fuel extraction, and hiring your drunk buddies. Oh, and tariffs, too. They've destroyed a bunch of stuff without so much as a concept of a plan to rebuild it. Including the East Wing.

Click to expand...

Doesn't that drift a bit into that very same "tone of elitism" that can put some people off?

"If they wanted to appeal to intelligence, they would've focused on the things my people think are important"

Jerry N. said:

The reason that the 33 sectors of the map in the UN logo might be connected to Freemasons is the push for a One World Order.

Click to expand...

I doubt it.

I'm so glad you've found a church home. Blessings! And welcome to CF!

I don’t know…

wing2000 said:

...from a volunteer that worked with the suspect:


He had tried to make a go of life in the coastal city of Bellingham, Wash., after he and his family were evacuated from Afghanistan by the U.S. military in August 2021. In Afghanistan, he had fought in a C.I.A.-trained paramilitary unit. In the United States, he did temporary jobs, took his five sons to a local mosque and hosted visitors for tea in an apartment decorated in traditional Afghan style, with floor pillows and red rugs.
But by early 2023, he started to show signs of depression and erratic behavior, according to accounts from a volunteer in northwest Washington who worked with his family.

In the months after, he sequestered himself inside his darkened bedroom, refused to answer his phone, and even failed to bathe or dress his sons when his wife left to take short breaks from him. He dropped out of the English classes he was supposed to take, did not seek work and stopped paying rent. His family received an eviction notice.

“Rahmanullah has not been functional as a person, father and provider since March of last year,” the volunteer wrote in a January 2024 email for a friend to send to a nonprofit group working with immigrants. “His behavior has changed greatly.”

...

Occasionally, Mr. Lakanwal did emerge from “dark isolation,” only to disappear onto the open road, taking seemingly aimless drives hundreds of miles away to Chicago and Phoenix and Indianapolis in “reckless travel,” the volunteer wrote. He posted photos from the car on Instagram.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/04/us/rahmanullah-lakanwal-national-guard-shooting-dc.html

Click to expand...

I tried to make a go of life in Bellingham/Ferndale once. It was terrible, but I didn't start shooting random people thousands of miles away. Oh, wait, never mind.

Michie said:

A Christian pre-med student has gone viral in recent days for filing a religious discrimination complaint with the University of Oklahoma after a trans-identified teaching assistant allegedly flunked her for an essay stating that gender ideology is "demonic."

Samantha Fulnecky, a junior at the University of Oklahoma who is majoring in psychology, received a zero out of 25 for a 650-word opinion essay she was told to write in her "Lifespan Development" class in response to an article about social gender expectations, according to The Oklahoman.

According to a copy of her essay published by the local outlet, Fulnecky asserted that God created two distinct genders with different roles, and that the idea of changing one's gender is a satanic assault against that design.

Continued below.

Christian OU student flunked after calling gender ideology 'demonic'

A Christian pre-med student has gone viral in recent days after filing a religious discrimination complaint that claims a trans-identified teaching assistant flunked her for an essay stating that

www.christianpost.com

Click to expand...

Didn't the professor inform students about how to construct and justify a reaction/opinion essay? If not, then the professor needs to add that into the curriculum and the rubrics of the class so the writing exercise itself doesn't become a socially engineered "gotcha" moment. Moreover, I don't think mere opinion essays are useful in a classroom, which is one reason I never assigned them when I taught.

Secondly, as a sophmore student of Psychology (of all things) at a secular, state university, Fulnecky should know what she's getting herself into by choosing that as a major. If she's planning on becoming a 'licensed' psychologist, she's not going to be able to earn the degree and also go into practice with rules that she, herself, makes up. She's going to have a tough time when she finally gets to engage the E.R.B.

Thirdly, the writing assignment was to be a response piece to an article dealing with Developmental Psychology (which is what the course she is enrolled in is supposed to be about, generally). [Link to the article abstract she was to respond to: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/sode.12042 ]
She needs to know that she's not going to pass simply because she throws Bible verses alone onto a written page; no, she needs to show she has the ability to rationally demonstrate that she can have appropriate empathy for potential patients and medical sensibility. That is, if she's planning on going into professional practice as a psychologist.

This video from CBN provides a short interview and feedback from Fulnecky on the situation:

Login to view embedded media

Cool thread!


I think I'd go with these 2 legends:


Cool thread!


I enjoy these 2 legends most:


Login to view embedded media
...

Login to view embedded media

Jesus was baptized at about thirty years of age: “Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matt. 3:13–17).
“And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age…” (Luke 3:23).

The disciples followed the example of their Master: “After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
And John also was baptizing in AEnon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized… And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.” (John 3:22–26).
Thus much water was needed for baptism so that a person could be baptized entirely. Partially wetting a person is not sufficient for baptism. The meaning of the original word baptidzein (baptism) is “to immerse under water.”

John 4:1–2 gives further detail about the baptism performed by the disciples, which therefore took place before the giving of the missionary/baptism command: “When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)…”
The disciples thus baptized one another, as well as many other people, more than John the Baptist. The followers of Jesus have always desired to act according to the example of their Master:
“And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.” (Luke 7:29–30).
The plan of God, beginning from the giving of the missionary command after the work of the cross, has been that all who have come to faith are to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ after their conversion. For this reason, in the early congregation there were no unbaptized, except in some cases for a few hours or days until a place of baptism was found. “…be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ…” (Acts 2:38, 41; 10:48). To remain unbaptized for three days was called delaying (Acts 9:9 / 22:16). Baptism has therefore belonged to “the principles of the doctrine of Christ” for about 2000 years (Heb. 6:2). It is an expression of obedience and honor toward God.
“In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Thess. 1:8). “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life…” (John 3:36).

The church practice of infant baptism has made void the plan that God has for all people. Peter exhorted thus:

“…Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ…” (Acts 2:38).​

“Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers…” (Acts 2:41–42).
Thus the congregation founded at the cross began to function. The congregation, ekklesia (Eng. congregation), means those people who have received the risen Jesus. WE are the congregation. The work of the cross, the blood sacrifice and death of Jesus amidst sufferings, is the foundation of our eternal life. We have received the forgiveness of our sins through the merit of His substitutionary sacrifice.
There is no teaching or example in the Bible of the baptism of infants in arms. Nor is there any of belonging to a church. Therefore, it is good to resign from the church before baptism. This belongs to repentance.

The Bible knows no practice in which someone who has come to faith could remain unbaptized. Jesus gave the missionary/baptism command about forty days after the work of the cross (Acts 1:2–3, 9). This remains in force until the end:
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mark 16:15–16).
First, therefore, the hearing of the message of salvation and coming to faith, then baptism by immersion in water in the name of Jesus Christ. This is the unambiguous teaching and example of Jesus and of the early congregation. To this also refers the teaching in Eph. 4:5, “One Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM.” If someone has not been baptized after coming to faith with this only biblical baptism, he is unbaptized, even if he had been “baptized” many times with other kinds of “baptisms.”

Give therefore your life to Jesus, and come to baptism. This is the good will of God: “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” (Acts 10:48). Thus the blessing of Heaven may fill your life.
“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” (Acts 22:16).

Blessings,
Weijo Lindroos, from the Turku Congregation
Email: weijo.lindroos@pp.inet.fi

ThatRobGuy said:

Cultural perceptions of what size is preferable doesn't negate science and cardiology.

Click to expand...

No, they don't.

On the subject of peer review here is a breakdown of the references in my previous post.

Short answer: Most, but not all, are peer-reviewed.
Below is a precise breakdown so you know which sources are peer-reviewed academic publications, which are scholarly but not peer-reviewed, and which are field-standard technical works used by Egyptologists.

---

✅ Peer-reviewed sources (academic / university-press / scholarly reviewed)​

These do undergo academic review or are published by major university presses or academic journals.

Peer-reviewed books or monographs​

• Barry Kemp — Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization (Routledge)
  (Academic peer-reviewed monograph)
• Ian Shaw & Paul Nicholson — Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology (Cambridge University Press)
  (Multi-author academic volume; chapter peer review)
• Dieter Arnold — Building in Egypt: Pharaonic Stone Masonry (Oxford University Press)
  (Major academic monograph)
• Baines & Malek — Atlas of Ancient Egypt (Oxford University Press)
  (Scholarly academic publication)
• Ian Shaw — The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford University Press)
  (Edited academic volume; chapters peer-reviewed)
• Harrell & Storemyr — publications on quarries
  • Many appear in peer-reviewed journals, e.g. Journal of Archaeological Science, Egyptian Archaeology, Archaeometry.
    

Peer-reviewed articles​

• Harrell & Storemyr, “Ancient Egyptian Quarries” (various articles in academic journals)
• Experimental archaeology studies published in academic venues (some by Stocks, others by independent researchers).
  

---

Scholarly but not formally peer-reviewed​

These are highly authoritative, widely used by Egyptologists, but are technically not peer-reviewed in the modern journal sense.

Reference books / authoritative field manuals​

• A. Lucas & J.R. Harris — Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries
  • Gold-standard technical reference since 1926
  • Extensively revised by Harris
  • Not peer-reviewed, but professionally edited and academically authoritative
• Clarke & Engelbach — Ancient Egyptian Masonry (1930)
  • Classical technical treatise; no peer-review process at the time
• R. Engelbach — The Quarries of the Western Nubian Desert
  • Highly respected archaeological monograph; not peer-reviewed in the modern sense
• Norman de Garis Davies — Tomb publications (e.g., The Tomb of Rekhmire)
  • Egypt Exploration Society publications
  • Extremely scholarly, but not formally peer-reviewed
• Kanawati — Old Kingdom Art and Archaeology
  • Scholarly fieldwork monographs; not technically peer-review journal publications
• Denys Stocks — Experiments in Egyptian Archaeology (2003)
  • Fully academic but not issued through a peer-review academic journal
  • It is, however, standard in the field and cited in university research.
    

---

Not peer-reviewed (but academically credible / professional)​

These are technical reports, stonemason reproduction experiments, etc.

• Practical stonemasonry replication reports
• Non-journal experimental archaeology reports
• Some excavation reports (pre-peer-review era)

In Egyptology, many foundational works (including Lucas & Harris) come from periods before “peer review” was standard.
Despite this, they are accepted, authoritative, and relied upon by Egyptologists worldwide.

---

⭐ Bottom Line​

• Around 50–60% of the references in the table are from peer-reviewed or university-press academic sources.
• The remaining references are foundational, authoritative Egyptology works that are not peer-reviewed in the modern context, mostly because they predate widespread peer review.

Hail Mary,
Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
pray for us sinners now,
and at the hour of our death.
Amen

Sara50840 said:

I’ve always struggled with feeling God’s presence. It’s hard having faith in something I can’t feel or haven’t really EXPERIENCED in the way I hear stories about. It makes me scared that my faith isn’t genuine or if I’m doing something wrong.

I’ve been a Christian since I was 4. Yes, this has haunted me for awhile because I feel like that was way too young, but I feel as if I’ve had enough faith since then (and panic prayers) that at some point it really did become genuine. Plus I read “Stop Asking Jesus into Your Heart” by JD Grear to help with some of my fears.

But now, I don’t know if I’m just backsliding or if it’s something more serious.

I’ve never been good at prayer or Bible reading. I get distracted. I get busy. I have really good phases where I do it daily and then I drop off and have trouble getting back on it. But even then, it feels more like studying and learning information instead of meditating and sitting with God. I read, do a quick prayer, and go about my day. I’ve tried to sit with Him more, but then my thoughts just wander, and I don’t ever hear Him or feel Him.

I keep trying to pray for God to reveal Himself to me. To ease my anxiety. To give me some kind of answer. But I hear nothing. And then I just become less motivated to read the Bible or pray. I’ve never been good at praying anyway.

I don’t know what to do at this point. Has anyone else experienced this? Is this normal for Christians to just feel distant? I feel like most of my “encounters” with God have just been vicariously through others. I know all the answers to questions at church, am very familiar with the Bible, and serve regularly, but it just feels like I’m following obligation and not living by faith.

It feels like I’m just forcing everything, and I don’t know how to make it feel real.

Click to expand...

Do you Love Jesus Christ of Nazareth?

How long before he convinces Kanye to get Trump to give him a pardon?