fhansen said:

Because they both understood that, while the law was incapable of actually producing holinesss in us, it was nonetheless holy, right, spiritual and good as per Rom 7, testifying to another righteousness that could actually accomplish what the law could not. So the OC was made obsolete only because the NC could actually produce the authentic obedience that the old could not. Basil of Caesarea, a 4th century bishop, sheds some light here:
“If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children.”

Click to expand...

the OC points to Christ and everything the OC was, Christ is better; therefore looking to Christ over the precepts of the law is a better way. People seem to think this is too abstract and we need a more concrete list to follow, this is what the holy spirit is for. but the NT is full of examples of Christian living, all aligned to Christ's law, and even explicitly saying to love your neighbour as yourself. This is the line the NT authors quote but it is a quote from Christ and includes first to love God with all your heart then love each other as yourself. Where this easily aligns with most of the 10, the 4th commandment is not a natural product and this seems to trouble people.

This forces us to critically look at the 4th commandment. After doing so, we must admit it is ritually based and there is no NT commandment to keep it. There is also no biblical teaching that bifurcates law, the 10 are a part of a greater covenant, and if we bring in 1 (or 10) we bring in them all because they are not meant as a single unit. When we attempt to separate the 10 from the rest of law, we do so without biblical support. what is all of them? well start reading Exodus 20 (when the 10 are first introduced) and keep going to Exodus 24 (where the blood covenant is made). that very clearly shows the covenant is greater than the 10 alone and that the 10 do not stand apart.

I have no issue with keeping the day, I myself defacto keep the day out of tradition and habit, but I do not see it as a NT commandment and gatherings in the NT has a different focus. There is no commandment to rest in the NT outside of seeking spiritual rest from Christ. Gatherings also do not have a focus of rest and are aligned to community and teaching/preaching. Simply saying "its the God's law" has no logic as it's all his law, not just the 10. Mat 5:17 the context is establishes "the law and the prophet" Jesus is not trying to isolate the 10. what he says he says regarding all the law.

There are also explicit verses to speak against forcing the practice of keeping days. You may interpret these differently, but it builds an expectation for specific teaching regarding the keeping sabbath if it were to be valued in the same way as the old and that teaching is missing. Based on how the NT presents it, there is no reason why we should look at the 4th commandment as a requirement of the faith.

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

Mercy Shown said:

The question was whether a Sabbath keeper has more genuine faith than a believer who worships on Sunday. That is a question about the nature of saving faith, not about the authority of Scripture.

Click to expand...

How can one separate God's saving faith from the authority of what God says, it not found in our Bibles.

ThatRobGuy said:

Home invasions are not one of those types of crimes where "no priors" is going to be a valid rationale for leniency. If this was something like petty shoplifting or non-violent drug possession, then the "no priors, let's go easy on him" aspect would perhaps make sense.

For a criminal act of that nature, it stemming from elements of a mental health crisis doesn't change the appropriate law enforcement response. One could argue that most instances of stalking (and several instances of violent crimes) stem from some sort of mental faculty issue(s). That can't be an excuse for "slap on the wrist" responses do felony home invasion.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I also find the term "dark-skined black friends" to be somewhat condescending, especially when trying to generate sympathy towards someone who broke into a home. Ironic considering if anyone, regardless of their color, tried to pull a stunt like that in the hood I grew up in, they would be dead before they crossed the threshold.

Peace in Christ.

The Son is the brightness of His glory.

Heb 1:2-3 KJV
(2) Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
(3) Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

But notice this much overlooked detail at the beginning of the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24: Jesus WENT OUT and DEPARTED from the temple. The glory of God departed from the temple. The “temple” being spoken about by Jesus is the “temple of His body.” John 2:21 .

The “buildings” of the temple are the structures …the architecture of it.

“buildings”= Greek : Oikodomeo (οἰκοδομέω) is a Greek verb meaning to build a house, but metaphorically it means to edify, build up, or strengthen people, faith, or the church.

What is every man-based church “built” or structured upon? Is it not their handwritings of ordinances (statements of faith, church constitutions, church by-laws, church covenants, creeds, etc, etc, etc)? Every man-based church is built upon some man's handwriting. God did not build it.

But these things (man's handwritings that every man-based church is structured upon) are abominations that cause desolation. God’s glory departs from these gatherings of “organized religion” …built/structured upon a man’s handwriting.

Mat 24:1-2 KJV
(1) And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings (structure, architecture) of the temple.

See you not all these things? The buildings of the man-based churches have at the core of them man's handwritings which "structures" their churches. But these things cause desolation among us. His glory departs from them.

This departing of His glory desolates the temple because of the “abomination” that causes this desolation: There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

(2) And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

A man’s handwriting found in our church gatherings (where it should not be found) is causing this desolation. When we shall "see"...that is, understand what it truly is, we are to immediately flee from it. We are to leave the man-based (structured, organized on a man's handwriting) leaving it all behind and never look back.

We are the temple of His body and we are not being truly built up but scattered because of our many handwritings that divide us into “denominations”. Not one stone is left upon another. There is no cohesion among us because of these abominations found in our church gatherings. We are supposed to be His living stones built up in Christ. 1st Peter 2:4-5 .

This verse 15 is immediately linked to verses 1 and 2.

Mat 24:
(15) When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)
(16) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
(17) Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
(18) Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

When many read verse Matthew 24:15 about Daniel the prophet, they immediately go to verses in Daniel: Daniel 9:27, Daniel 11:31, and Daniel 12:11. But these verses do not show us what the abomination is.

Jesus gives us a big hint about what the abomination that is causing the desolation: “whoso reads, let him understand." This is found in Daniel 5. Daniel could “READ the writing” on the wall and UNDERSTAND it. He did make KNOWN to the king the interpretation of it.

Dan 5:16-17 KJV
(16) And I have heard of thee, that thou canst make interpretations, and dissolve doubts: now if thou canst read the writing, and make known to me the interpretation thereof, thou shalt be clothed with scarlet, and have a chain of gold about thy neck, and shalt be the third ruler in the kingdom.
(17) Then Daniel answered and said before the king, Let thy gifts be to thyself, and give thy rewards to another; yet I will read the writing unto the king, and make known to him the interpretation.

The other king’s wise men could NOT READ the writing nor could they understand it so that they could not give the king the interpretation of it.

Dan 5:8 KJV
(8) Then came in all the king's wise men: but they could not read the writing, nor make known to the king the interpretation thereof.

God points to us what the abomination is. It is a “meme”(if you will) of man’s handwriting of decrees found in their church gatherings. The writing of a man’s hand was on the wall of the “palace”…that is, the temple. It was written against the candlestick…against the knowledge of God.

Dan 5:5 KJV
(5) In the same hour came forth fingers of a man's hand, and wrote over against the candlestick upon the plaister of the wall of the king's palace: and the king saw the part of the hand that wrote.

ARBITER01 said:

Just as a reminder for fellowship threads,

First the ruleset for a fellowship tag,...

Use this tag for any thread where you just want to share chit chat or discuss a topic with other like-minded members. There should be No debate at all, it is strictly fellowship in nature. The OP of these threads can report their own thread if it crosses the line into debate and staff will assist in a thread clean up (please see above for a definition of debate).

Click to expand...

Is my post too quickly worded or a debate?

samaus123456789 said:

Well if you don't believe that then you don't believe Genesis 6:4, Jude, and Peter

Click to expand...

Samaus, greetings you you brother. I hope your weekend was a good one.

For transparency,

(1) I believe the Bible (in its current form) suggests that angels did in fact come in physical form prior to the great flood. Per some of the verses you suggest.

(2) I believe that nowhere in the Bible does it affirm that angels procreated with human women. In other words, angels did not procreate with human women.

(3) I believe there is some value in the Book of Enoch, i.e., that, historically, there was some Jewish sects that read from the Holy Scripture the coming of a Messiah priest as well as a Messiah conqueror, i.e., Messiah son of Joseph (Mâshîyach bēn Yôsēp̄) and Messiah son of David (Mâshîyach bēn Dāviḏ). This is a very important find.

(4) However, I do believe the Bible tells us not to believe in the Book of Enoch and therefore think it contains error. One of those major errors is the infiltration of beliefs about demons and evil spirits from the surrounding people groups regarding angel procreation with human women.

samaus123456789 said:

So you are rejecting the protestant canon first then 1 Enoch after that.

Click to expand...

One doesn't have to reject the protestant canon to believe the protestant cannon does not affirm that angels procreated with human women.

Peace to you brother

MarkSB said:

And you have evidence which shows that incidents reported in the VAERS system aren't being investigated at all, I suppose?

Click to expand...

How would you propose that I prove that someone is NOT doing something?

The evidence is in the way that vaccine injuries are constantly downplayed and marginalized. The evidence is in how the main response to bringing up VAERS as a data source is simply to dismiss it. Is that "proof"? Nope. But again, I don't know how you would expect anyone to provide definitive proof of something that is not happening.

MarkSB said:

I recall conservative Christians being one of the groups who most staunchly refused to wear masks, because it was their "right" not to do so. I suppose that's not politicizing in your book, though. No, that's not putting politics over the love or your neighbor at all, is it?

Click to expand...

I honestly can't believe that in 2025, we're STILL talking about masking. There simply is no evidence that masking is efficacious for stopping or slowing respiratory disease spread. Masks were nothing more than a talisman that accomplished little more than giving fearful people a false sense of security.

MarkSB said:

And what physical harms are those? Where is your evidence? I'm not saying that no harms occurred, but the only thing that has been presented are unvetted reports in VAERS. Anyone who cares about data integrity is going to consider that to be an unreliable source.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone talking about masking in the context of loving ones neighbor cares one whit about "data integrity".

The Barbarian said:

Can you cite a verse?

Click to expand...

Apparently not.

So you went to the vigil Mass and then the Sunday Mass the next day?

Priest usually gives the same homily at the Masses they celebrate that week-end.

Hong Kong pro-democracy campaigner and media tycoon Jimmy Lai has been found guilty of colluding with foreign forces under the city's controversial national security law (NSL).

The 78-year-old UK citizen, who has been in jail since December 2020, pleaded not guilty. He faces life in prison and is expected to be sentenced early next year.

Lai used his now-defunct Apple Daily newspaper as part of a wider effort to lobby foreign governments to impose sanctions on Hong Kong and China, the court found.

Lai, one of the fiercest critics of the Chinese state, was a key figure in the pro-democracy protests that engulfed Hong Kong in 2019. Beijing responded to the months-long demonstrations, which sometimes erupted into violent clashes with police, by introducing the NSL.

The law was enacted without consulting the Hong Kong legislature and gave authorities broad powers to charge and jail people they deemed a threat to the city's law and order, or the government's stability.

Lai was accused of violating the NSL for his role in the protests and also through his tabloid Apple Daily, which became a standard bearer for the pro-democracy movement.

Lai's trial came to be widely seen as yet another test of judicial independence for Hong Kong's courts, which have been accused of toeing Beijing's line since 2019, when it tightened its control over the city.

Hong Kong authorities insist the rule of law is intact but critics point to the hundreds of protesters and activists who have been jailed under the NSL - and its nearly 100% conviction rate as of May this year.

[Lai's] journey as a democracy activist began after China brutally crushed pro-democracy protests in Beijing's Tiananmen Square in 1989.

Lai started writing columns criticising the massacre and went on to launch a string of popular pro-democracy publications, including Apple Daily and Next.

See Also (2021):

MarcusGregor said:

Starting the disinformation campaign early I see.

Click to expand...

I never knew basic dialogue was considered misinformation. I bet that's what it was though - just my opinion.

FredVB said:

Eschatology therefore is not a subject whatever one's position with it is that has anything to do with that one's salvation or in fact any of that one's godliness. There is value in trying to understand eschatology in the Bible but no certainty that one is right. I do not see any showing their views of eschatology without it showing what they are neglecting with it. Any though can be godly still with any of those positions, but responsibilities here should never be neglected.

Click to expand...

I also tend to give eschatology a relatively low priority in my personal theology. However, the issue we have been discussing is one of soteriology - the eternal fate of the vast majority of humanity who do not believe in Jesus Christ. There is an enormous range of views on this topic ranging from universalism to annihilationism to orthodox views of eternal suffering in the lake of fire. Although I hardly know the precise nature of the eternal suffering I do hold to the orthodox view as given in the Bible.

JosephZ said:

Looking at the video footage and pictures from the scene, it appears one of the gunmen used a shotgun and the other a bolt-action rifle.

Click to expand...

So, shotguns and bolt action rifles will be banned next.

RileyG said:

I see.

Then it’s fair to remove him then!

Click to expand...

Fair? He's a priest and took a vow of obedience. When he violates his vow, he should be removed.

Jerry N. said:

Galatians 3:29: “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” Everyone in Christ through faith is a spiritual descendant of Abraham. It could not be clearer.

Click to expand...

But that it not the claim. The claim is that the Mosaic law was given to Abraham not Moses. So if that is what you are arguing then post the book and verse where that happened.

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

Oh, I understand. You prefer to disregard 1700 years of Christian history and only focus on the recent centuries to support your perspective. I'm not interested in cherry-picking history or facts.

Click to expand...

Correct, because unless time travel gets invented...

People from 1000 years ago can't travel to the future and impact me in anyway.

We're talking about implications for current policy prescriptions, which means we should be focusing on generations that are still...y'know...in the here and now.

rjs330 said:

No true Muslim can be a Christian.

Click to expand...

That's how mutually exclusive faith claims tend to work.

The debate about whether Jews, Christians, and Muslims worship the same God or not requires some finagling. Do different beliefs about God translate to, functionally, talking about entirely different "Gods"? Do Jews worship a different God than Christians because as Christians we believe in the Holy Trinity, that Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity who became flesh, and is the Messiah? The idea that Jews and Christians worship different "Gods" seems like a radically foreign concept to me. Yet we have a completely analogous case in the religion of Islam, which speaks of the same God of Abraham, but beliefs about that God are different (even including on things like who was promised son of Abraham, Isaac or Ishmael)--but it is quite common to say Muslims worship a different God than Christians (or Jews and Christians).

What is the objective criteria for determining where to draw the line between "different beliefs about God" and "believing in a different God"? Like the line seems pretty clear when we're talking about ancient Pagan religious worshiping a myriad of gods--Zeus, Odin, Osiris, et al. But when it comes to the Abrahamic religions who are all talking about the God who revealed Himself to Abraham, to Moses, etc there seems to often be a more subjective criteria involved: How do Jews worship the same God as Christians, but Muslims don't?

It's pretty obvious that Islam isn't Christianity, there isn't even a need to point that out. Judaism isn't Christianity either. But to claim that Jews and Christians worship different Gods sounds dangerously close to Marcion's old heresy. Maybe you agree with that statement, maybe you don't. But if you do agree that Jews and Christians worship the same God; then what is the clear and objective criteria that you would use to claim Muslims don't? That according to Islam God has no Son? Well, neither does Judaism. That Muslims don't believe in the Trinity? Neither do Jews. That in Islam Abraham's chosen son was Ishmael not Isaac? Well in Judaism the "prophet like Moses" was Joshua ben Nun; in Christianity it's Jesus. That Muslims have the Qu'ran and Christians have the Bible? Well Jews have the Tanakh, which certainly is (basically) the Christian Old Testament (more-or-less anyway), but the New Testament seems pretty important to me as a Christian. Is it just vibes? Subjective feelings?

In the context of modern American political discourse (and, this extends beyond American politics to Western politics in general), I can't help but think that the point really isn't serious comparative religious study and a concern for religious and theological nuances--the point isn't religion at all, or theology, or doctrine. The point is culture, and specifically cultural inclusion or exclusion. What sorts of people are we willing to accept as our co-nationals? And the goal is to place Muslims in the exclusion camp: Muslims don't belong, they are "other", and we don't want to include them in our circle of who is truly American, British, French, etc. And we're just using religion as a tribalistic cultural marker. This is Christianity as "civilization", not as the committed following of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who suffered and died for us, and whose teachings and commandments are to dictate our way of being. This is being "Christian" for the sake of cultural inclusion. And this is our deciding, based on our whims, to sometimes include Jews and sometimes exclude Jews--which is part of the long history of western antisemitism. Jews being accepted as "honorary Christians" based on the mere whims and winds of the political and cultural climate; rather than true inclusion and acceptance as neighbors.

And that's not being Christian. That's faking it for culture points.

If I was in Canada right now as any religious person that opposes the LGBT culture, I'd leave. I cannot believe the bill PASSED!

wing2000 said:

I read your post. Maybe you can explain to me how your understanding of Jesus' words supports demonizing other people based on their country of origin?

Click to expand...

Show me where I “demonized “ people based on their country of origin? Where is your proof?

Kathleen30 said:

Yes y

Yes u right the ancients certainly understood astronomy. But that is what scientists and many liberal theologians tell us today they we are more scientifically advanced and the ancients did not fully understand the basics of how the heavens worked. Even if the ancients built the pyramids : : )

Click to expand...

I know Kathleen, it's today's scientists that have it all deliberately wrong for greed & gain.

Who else could have built the pyramids ?
Who else could have made the Antikythera ?
Who else could have known how to manipulate the DNA ?

Always in His Presence said:

He is pro life and has ended a lot of the perverse things that Biden, a supposed Catholic supported.

Remember when Biden’s own church refused to give him communion?

Click to expand...

Biden lived in Delaware and D.C. and the local bishops were not conservative single issue prelates.
One just needs to look at recent Supreme Court decisions to see Catholics who ignore Chrustianity right and left.

Factotum said:

I feel the judge is unethical, immoral, and should've recused himself.

Click to expand...

And you base that feeling on what, exactly? Anything factual that you can demonstrate?

Factotum said:

But he knew as long as it was in NY, when Trump is the defendant, then no one will have a problem with him fleecing Trump's right to due process.

Click to expand...

Except that Trump had an entire legal team fighting to protect his right to a fair trial. And an entire appeals process in case he disagreed with the verdict.

The appeals court upheld the verdict, by the way. They found no judicial errors or malfeasance.

Factotum said:

Yes. I learned the powers from studying Liberal-Democrats' continuum of discerning the motives of MAGA voters and anti-Democrat citizens.

Click to expand...

With quite a few large doses of biased assumptions, it would seem

Factotum said:

And yes, I already explained why I feel 3.5M voted for a guy they've been duped into hating.

Click to expand...

Your biased feelings again. How reliable are they, I wonder.

Factotum said:

Were they New York residents? Since Trump strolled down that escalator in 2015???

Click to expand...

Since all members of the NY Court of Appeals work in NY, I presume they live there. Certainly they have all passed the NY bar and have been practicing law in NY. As for how long they've been residents of NY, I can't say.

Factotum said:

Too?

Click to expand...

Yup. You've already claimed to know why millions of NY residents voted the way they did, I just wonder how far that ability extends.

Factotum said:

Please do not use Ad Hominem logical fallacies on me. Treat me to the same courtesy you extend to anti-Trump humans when they describe how they feel.

Click to expand...

No ad homs here, I'm addressing the arguments you're making, and what, if anything, those arguments are based on.

-- A2SG, feel free to detail that at any time....