New Posts

Dan1988 · 2025-11-10T05:54:44-0600

RDKirk said:
When Scripture says God “marveled” at disbelief, it does not imply ignorance, because omniscience precludes that. It does three other things: 1) It conveys relational reality, the impact of disbelief on God’s engagement with humanity. 2), It is didactic, helping human readers appreciate the seriousness of belief and unbelief in a narrative or moral context. 4) It displays the irrationality of the human action in the face of the reality of God's power or (particularly when Jesus does the "marveling") it indicates a human action that is greatly different from the norm of human reactions.

For instance, scripture will describe Jesus "marveling" at great faith from someone who would not normally be expected to show such great faith. As a human being observed by the humans who would remember and write of the moment, Jesus would have openly displayed some semblance of "Wow, people, are you seeing this?" that would be recorded as "marveling."

God’s “marveling” is anthropomorphic way of describing divine relational response, not a literal surprise or lack of knowledge.

The same member tried to challenge Gods Omnipotence, Omniscience and Omnipresence. He claimed that God makes mistakes and changes His mind when He makes mistakes and learns from His mistakes.

He tried to twist the meaning of >> Genesis 6:6 "So the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart".

I tried to reason with him, in an effort to convince him that nothing takes God by surprise and He never needs to changer His mind about anything. But it was all to no avail, as he firmly held on to his opinion

Evilarm · 2025-11-10T05:51:35-0600

Wow not a priest for once, how unusual.

redraven · 2025-11-10T05:50:39-0600

stevevw said:
This all sounds personal and subjective. So what about the many people who align with Kirk. Are they also not Christians.

Not that I am saying either opinion is correct but that this idea that some are not Christians and others are can be taken many ways dependning on a persons tilt whatever that is.

I think this is identity politics. Just like Kirk is not a true Christian belonging to the true Christian identity. There are other Christian identities within Christianity that war just like in secular society.

Like X politician is not a true Dem or Repulican or instead is a Nazi or white supremisist or Woke or Trans or a Women or male or black or Queer. Everything is determined by the identity and its ever changing morals and criteria for whats fits the moral and immoral identity of each group. According to the ideology they subscribe to.

Thats why I think as with the early church. Don't get too involved in the political arena. Just say the truth of the gospel warts and all and let people take it or leave it. Walk away. Don't get too bogged down in the politics and arguements as in the end its bel;ief and the spirit. Not some logical or reasoned arguement. Though that can dispell misconceptions many have today.

If they are interested they will come looking. God will be the one who awakens them. But if they are hostile Christ said pack up your stuff and go to the next town who may be more open.

You say my comment is personal and subjective, but if you objectively look at how Kirk behaved - as I gave examples of earlier in the thread and as others have noted both in this thread and in many other forums, it's objectively true he often behaved contrary to the teachings of the bible and of Christ.

It sounds like you are saying I'm subjective because I condemn him for his behavior, yet his behavior is something which is objective.

When his behaviour objectively does not match what he claims to be - a Christian - then it is not subjective to say he didn't behave as a Christian.

This is not only the issue many have with Kirk, but the 'Christian faith' in general and all religion for that matter.
The behaviour should match the label. People cling to religion as a matter of convenience and cling to the faith when it is convenient for them while behaving in ways that clearly contradict the teachings of the faith they claim to be. Then they are seen as hypocrits and are no longer believable.

Tropical Wilds · 2025-11-10T05:49:06-0600

Now we all gasp in surprise (again) when the the concessions they agreed to later (again) don’t happen as anticipated (again) and our erratic president justifies reneging (again) to the detriment of the nation (again) while all the people who follow him blindly excuse it (again) because they will gladly set their own house on fire if it means they can pretend they “pwned the libz.”

Bradskii · 2025-11-10T05:48:56-0600

Postvieww said:
i also said Newsom was not personally in court but he is the top dog in the state that made the stupid regulations. Newsom also did not light the match that started the fires but he still holds some responsibility on how it was handled.

So the lie that someone told you...you'll let it stay as it is in your post.

Well, OK. At least people who read it now know the truth. Including you.

stevevw · 2025-11-10T05:44:02-0600

Hans Blaster said:
They can?

If you can't the miracles in the bible. Or the many ways Christianity has changed individuals and the world. I am pretty sure Jesus calling Lazras out of his tomb or the disciples healing the sick and lame and raising people from the dead is knowledge beyond material science.

Hans Blaster said:
Indigenous knowledge and nature emersion? What are you talking about? We are talking about one of the most advanced cultures on the planet at the time. They had farms and villages and governments.

Yes and they came from the land and nature and were at their peak. The agriculture and communities were a natural evolution of people coming together as they evolved.

But everything about their world was of nature, spirits and the gods. The crops was aligned with seasons which were aligned with the sun which was a god. The architecture was aligned to the sun and stars. A rock was not just a rock but a spirit which was part of the spiritual worldview everyone had.

This was the peak of the gods and spirits. The early Egyptian kings were gods. All the ancients had gods that came and built the world and the megaliths. The megaliths and even tiny vases were made for the gods. Everything had the filter of gods and spirits and how this was in relationship to their experiences with nature.

Indigenous peoples today are a shell of their ancestors. But still they believe the same. They often speak of the white man and science being alien to their ways and that they destroyed their knowledge and disconnected them from their culture as the material scientific worldview dominated. .

Hans Blaster said:
"Nature's secrets"? This whole section reads like a condescending evaluation of "primative peoples".

Actually that you mock this idea of ancient and Indigenous knowledge as an alternative knowledge that is real and transcends scientific materialsm is condensending.

Hans Blaster said:
If there are manipulations of the rock, where are the signatures? (What is "energy manipulation"?)

The signatures come in changes structures and makeup. I linked a paper on how the Egyptians created stone by manipulating minerals and chemicals. Other studies are being done right with scans ect show possible manipulations of energy, sonic pulses in cutting ect. I linked them already.

There are other research on plant use in various ways such as medicines and as softening agents for stone. Acids and other reactions which melt, soften or weaken stone. Even making them lighter by messing around with electrons.

Hans Blaster said:
As we know the ancient Egyptians famously lived off the natural bounty of the land in their forest tents.

Living in nature is not just in the forrest lol. I could imagine the Giza plateau as thriving with all sorts of energy and inventions. The whole site is on a specific zone that is very active in several ways.

We have not begun to understand.

Hans Blaster said:
How?

I just explaned how. Their spiritual and phenomenal beliefs. These are conscious experiences. Like any conscious experience it transcends the physical aspect you are in or engaging with.

This is where art and music and other insights into humans and life and reality come from. It can only come from this aspect. Even science. When scientist imagine something outside the box they are transcending the limits of physical science in their imagination. IMagination is a big part of science and life.

So now imagine before all the white noise of the modern world, well before englightenment and the Greeks. Going way back to where there were only humans and nature. Or where nature or natural ways were used to live. Blending in with nature. Flowing with nature in a spiritual sense.

It is at this peak of oneness with nature through the spirit world and gods that enable ancients to gain insights that we could now know today with enlightened sciences. I don't tyhink you can even get it. You don't understand Christian spirituality so why will you understand this.

Hans Blaster said:
When did this happen? How does one "change reality"?

Well for the Hebrews they escaped slavery, built the Ark of the Covenant and important symbol of Gods covenant which changed all human history. They made the 10 commandments we still use today and set the way for Christ who saved the world. Thats pretty good knowledge and change lol.

Thats what I mean. If you think the ancients never had any spiritual aspect that changed their reality. THen you have to also say that every Christian is wrong, there is no knowledge to gain and we are deluded. Just like many treat the ancients and Indigenous peoples knowledge. As make belief and superstition. According to the newage gods of knowledge material science and atheists.

Hans Blaster said:
I thought it was a big reed boat coated in bitumen for sealing. Not that advanced.

Well it seemed just right for the job at hand. Any less a build and it would fail. It managed to save humankind and if it was not for that specific knowledge the world would be a different place. In fact reality itself would be completly different.

rocknanchor · 2025-11-10T05:38:41-0600

rocknanchor said:
Appraising a favorite quote, Surely, you must have one among several that could be considered?

Here’s one of mine, ,

You cannot have the indwelling [also infilling] without turning the [Church service] gavel to the Holy Spirit and you turn to a great truth, for the Holy Spirit is the vicar of Christ (John 16:7,14:26) – C.M. Ward

But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you, ,But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, ,has set you overseers, to shepherd the church of God, , will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have told you. (John 16:7, Acts 20:28, John 14:26)

One thing we all agree on is this: Jesus did physically leave us, Hooray! Long-live the thing we agree on, NOT on things that divide us! But, as we know, that fundamental, victorious unity is short-lived. Let’s talk about it.

Some we must admit, are unavoidable, but, I suggest here the vast majority are quite infantile! Among the many things Brother Ward said in his lifetime, some, I hold in sharp disagreement. But this ‘truth’ as he says is as unfiltered as it gets.

For there are so many influences around that the young convert is faced with such a steep uphill battle that they would benefit far more from you who hold the truth if we could step back from the playing field just long enough to address some of these things that ends up distancing themselves from biblical truths.

The Elephant Issue, Doctrinal Bias Gone Bonkers

New Testament OS (‘Oversight’, Hebrews 13:7), or

New Testament DO (‘Double-honor’, 1Timothy 5:17)?

One of the first things to slap a new convert’s face is our UN-CHRISTIAN divide over the “Vicar”. A search within AI is futile;

Vicar: Pastor, Elder, Minister, Bishop, Deacon

OS: Pastor, Elder, Minister, Bishop, Deacon

AI tries to apply subtle variables to the differences of Church OS vs Vicar, but is incapable of removing them from those who are considered to be a ‘Vicar’. So the question remains over this issue that has done far more than just threatened unity which we are told over and over in the NT to keep. That question is, by the New Testament standard, how well has DO survived? We know Cephas (Peter) found error enough “to be blamed”, Has today’s DO found error? I just told you it does – divisions.

How do we know? Ask yourself, Does today’s DO demonstrate an approval for the excellence of 1 John 2:27, or treat it as “a lie”?

But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.

There may be other examples, but if those are sound, so will they be here, will either be shown to treat the ‘Vicar’ as worthy of far more than DO, or, well within the above NT bounds!

Tropical Wilds · 2025-11-10T05:16:31-0600

rjs330 said:
Interesting. You claim that 5% is many. Yet have no actual numbers. We actually have numbers for the BLM numbers Yet were told consistently how there weren't many riots. Yet it was more than 5% which you claim is many.

The truth is, you dont have any idea how many right wingers are authoritarian racists. And we don't know how many leftists are radical socialist communists. So it appears that you don't really have a leg to stand on in regard to that.

Now we could go to X, BlueSky, You tube etc and start having a battle of who has more radicals posting

Authoritarian racist things vs radical leftist communist socialist things but thats not very helpful.

I guess we should just leave it at what we can see day to day. And right now, radical leftists are leading due to the violence and rhetoric.

Maybe some day that will change.

You are arguing nonsense, you simply want to invent a boogeyman to scare yourself, then blame everybody else for your fear. You don’t like BLM, leftists, socialists, communists, so you invent transgressions or round up a few issues to be indicative of a whole or a pattern, sprinkle in our bias against certain groups, become afraid, and then declare your fantasy a real-life problem.

The obvious solution would be to stop scaring yourself by indulging in the propaganda designed to make you fearful in order to have you act against your best interests and examine the facts as they are, not dig your heels in deeper and sob louder.

St_Worm2 · 2025-11-10T05:14:12-0600

Piano Strings

Michie · 2025-11-10T05:13:28-0600

FaithT said:
Ewww.

Wow! I enjoyed that! Very interesting.

Normandt · 2025-11-10T05:09:03-0600

Homily Tuesday, November 11 2025

32nd OT

Ws 2:23 – 3:9

"They are in peace"

Being at peace means isolating evil, entrusting it to the Lord, and becoming as free as possible, in joy and peace.

Lk 17:7-10

Jesus said: "Who among you would say to your servant who has just come in from plowing or tending sheep in the field, ‘Come here immediately and take your place at table’?"

Yet this is what God offers us, his meal, the Eucharist that he serves us of himself. "Come quickly and sit down at the table" of the Lord, to receive all his graces, his Love.

Biblical texts: NAB-RE

Normand Thomas.

Nithavela · 2025-11-10T05:04:57-0600

Desk trauma said:
Electing a Muslim mayor is Islam conquering NYC?

lol

In the view of the right, it is really easy for one side to "take over".

It's basically enough for a couple of right wing people with flags to stand in a formation in the middle of town to "take back" New York, so this sounds like a lazyness issue.

rusmeister · 2025-11-10T05:01:47-0600

Running the risk of weighing in here…

I certainly have seen VERY charged disagreements, perhaps even in politics. This is by no means the most acrimonious thread ever in TAW.

The central problem I see in the discussion is that one man has opinions on a number of different issues, but what the thing to do in our time is find one opinion which we strongly disagree with, and then completely dismiss or cancel the whole man, equating and dismissing everything he thinks about all issues with the one, two, or three stupid and bad opinions (in our own wise and good opinions, of course). We say, “The MAN is bad”. Well, we’re ALL bad. All of us think something that is unpopular with a majority somewhere.

Also, people do change over time. Charlie Kirk at 18 was not the same as Charlie Kirk at 31. Both external influences (as our friend Chesterton- not to be confused with the great GKC of course - here pointed out) and internal convictions can and often do change over the years. Some people grow up, or something happens to completely change their perspective.

GZT thinks conservatism brings only death and destruction. Aside from the obvious questions the honest observer would have, such as defining what exactly is meant by “conservatism”, his perspective may become modified over time. Some people might become convinced that the Orthodox Church really IS the historic Church established by Christ and become Orthodox, others might become convinced that it is not, and leave it. Certainly I have been so tempted over the past few years. EC thinks Calvin’s view of the family differs from established Orthodox teaching and might change his mind over time - Though I, too, am curious about what anti-Orthodox things Calvin says about marriage and the family. His main heresy was elsewhere. Most of Christendom for most of its history, until the 20th century, had huge agreement on the subject of marriage and the family, though there WAS a very slow and gradual falling away over a thousand years, such as in the Catholic idea that the couple performs the sacrament, enabling the idea of “annulments”, and the Anglican “till death do us part” that denied anything eternal in the marriage relationship and made multiple marriages in one’s life much more acceptable.

So regarding accusing Fr Josiah, I think it hasty. He probably should have looked up Fuentes‘ current views more thoroughly, though the vital issue is whatever F said about pornography. Any priest who speaks to audiences online, outside of his own parish, is “putting himself out there”, for better or for worse. The risk of doing so is significant. Ne has chosen to take it. Speaking for myself, people like him and Fr Seraphim, the monk at the Iona monastery, help me continue to believe in the Orthodox Church, when I have seen falling away from the traditional and ancient teachings, the Patristic consensus, on all sides, and while it doesn’t surprise me that the heterodox denominations are all falling away, nowhere has it struck me harder than finding it in the Orthodox Church.

I find that I don’t even see agreement on Patristic consensus with other members here, let alone elsewhere on the internet. What can be said when a member has an avatar that promotes a slogan that we certainly agree with as an isolated statement, and find completely abhorrent as connected with a Marxist political movement that has had anarchy and racial discord as its goal, sporting a particular hierarch who has made no effort to avoid the appearance of approving of things that we may not approve, who has effectively approved of such things? I don’t what to say to Orthodox people who attack a heterodox Christian man who says that men ought to be faithful to their wives and responsible husbands and fathers, and that we should honor the Theotokos, just for example (if you are unaware that Charlie Kirk DID say such things, you really should educate yourself). Certainly they mean to attack other things that such people say, but they make no acknowledgement of the huge good things that he said. Some here and in my real life think divorce between two practicing Orthodox Christians is acceptable (and the evil of men, at least, is in nodding their heads at teachings such as loving one’s neighbor and one’s enemy, but then making an exception of their wives), some think cremation is fine, some women proudly disdain headcoverings in church, and flaunt NOT wearing them, rejecting the idea of submission altogether, not seeing the pridefulness of so doing.

Most people I know are unwilling to take the trouble to explore nuances, to ask whether a man who has an obviously bad idea might also have good ideas, and so are not able to state the distinctions. Furthermore, we trust our own sources a little too much, and forget that even “our side” might choose to, or at least inadvertently leave out part of a story that might modify our understanding of it.

If I can, I’ll make a little time and watch the interview itself. But I don’t need to watch it to say what I am saying now. Honestly, I am at a point where I can hardly watch even the people I mostly agree with anymore. They are saying what I already know or have figured out, and sometimes say things that disappoint or dismay me.

As a final note, I think that modifying our views over time to be fine - IF they are being gradually modified to align with the mind of the Church, the Patristic consensus, little by little. Just bear in mind that that gradual change of mind IS sometimes to the good and should be taken into account. Hardly any of us hold all the views we held when we were eighteen.

rjs330 · 2025-11-10T04:52:47-0600

Unless the GOP can get some traction regarding the economy and inflation the Blue Wave will be huge in 2026.

The economy and inflation isn't bad, but its not as good as Trumps first term. And inflation sure isn't as bad as under Biden. However, Americans don't care. The midterms will go to the Democrats anyway. It always goes to the party not in power. So if the GOP wants to get somw things done, they need to move quickly. They don't have much time. If you ask.me they are wasting time with this shut down, even though its the Dems fault.

HIM · 2025-11-10T04:40:11-0600

Carl Emerson said:
Then how do you understand Galatians 3? Why was he rebuking them when he said...

10 For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse. ???

Studyman said:
This is the foundation of your error, that the Pharisees were trying get the Galatians to obey God's Laws.

Galatians 3 is understood by understanding the immediate context of the passage and over all premise of the letter.
The Faith of Abraham and we the church having this same faith and how it relates to the Gospel is the immediate context and premise of the letter. If we go back to chapter 1 verses 5-8 we see that the Gospel is that Jesus died for our sins that we be delivered from this PRESENT evil world according to the will of our Father God.

Gal 1:4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:
Gal 1:5 To whom [be] glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

As we continue we see in verses that this Gospel of Jesus giving Himself for our sins to deliver us from this present evil age was through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Gal 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

As we move further along we see when it pleased God, at the time He seen fit He called Paul by His grace. And that this revelation of Jesus Christ was a revealing of Christ in Paul, so that Paul might preach the Gospel of him that they delivered from this present evil world.

Gal 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace,
Gal 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

And In this revelation, this revealing of Christ in Paul so that he might preach this Gospel of Christ that delivers us from this present evil world. God was seen in Paul by those who were in Christ experiencing this deliverance that Paul himself was experiencing and those who seen this glorified God and His power and grace seeing God working in him.

Gal 1:22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:
Gal 1:23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.
Gal 1:24 And they glorified God in me.

Before we continue, Amen?

Reluctant Theologian · 2025-11-10T04:24:23-0600

The Sabbath was created for mankind, not the other way around Yeshua says .... the fact He says 'mankind' implies a wider domain than just Israel or the Jews. That and Genesis 2:3 (relating to a situation long before the Torah was given) indicate to me some kind of universal application.

I know the Ten Words (decalogue) were given to Israel - and I'm a Gentile, but by yielding to that universal principle from Genesis 2:3 - all of a sudden magically I'm also keeping the Ten Words intact as a Gentile ... that's just fascinating.

For me it's not a hill not die on (I respect others' choices in this), but as soon as a Christian admits it's good to rest at least one day a week, and admits it makes sense to do that on an identical day, the only logical conclusion has to be that should be on a Saturday = Sabbath.

The Bible does not contain an instruction to rest one day per week - but it does contain the instruction to rest on the 7th day = Sabbath - and that's definitely not Sunday - that's the 1st day of the week. There are prophecies in the TNK/OT referencing the Sabbath day that have not been fulfilled yet ...

Be blessed sister !

Phil G · 2025-11-10T04:20:33-0600

Apple Sky said:
Because no one believes me when I do, many on here reckon they are either poetic or allegories.

That's because they are! At least most of the ones you keep quoting!

But instead of considering the points made to you, reading the verses in context, studying God's Word in depth and reading commentaries to help, all you do is dismiss it all and carry on regardless!

SabbathBlessings · 2025-11-10T04:07:51-0600

bob121 said:
Hope you had a great day, thank you for your lengthy reply, happy to keep the iron sharp, Sister

Thank you and blessings!

bob121 said:
You’ve asked for one verse in which Jesus or an inspired writer says, “The weekly Sabbath assembly is now transferred to the first day.”
Honest answer: that sentence does not exist.
But the absence cuts both ways.
After Calvary there is no inspired command, example, or warning that continues the seventh-day convocation for the body of Christ.
What we do have, in the only inspired history we possess, is:

Resurrection appearances deliberately clustered on “the first day of the week” (Jn 20:1, 19, 26

The only post-Pentecost weekday service Luke records is first-day (Acts 20:7).

The only repeated weekly duty Paul singles out is first-day (1 Cor 16:2).

By Revelation the day already bears the theological title “the Lord’s Day” (1:10).

This does not seem like you are interested in having an honest discussion about these verses I asked where does the Scripture say in any of these verses that the Sabbath commandment ended and was now transferred to the first day, everything God blessed and sanctified by the power of God was now given to the first day a day God made for work and labors Exo20:9. You just keep repeating the same verses that still do not say this. I did briefly address these verses but we can look at them deeper if you want, but only God can reverse His blessing Num23:20 only God can sanctify a day and us (both connected to the Sabbath) , so we really need to hear these words plainly to make an honest change in God’s Holy Word.

Also you cannot honestly use Rev1:10 as day one when the Scriptures clearly does not say or support this. God personally spoke what His holy day is and said it is the seventh day, the Sabbath Exo20:10 Isa 58:18 , it came out of the mouth of God Jesus told us to live by Mat4:4 so we do not need to guess God’s holy day, He said so plainly, said the Sabbath is the Holy Day of the Lord, meaning there is only one that Jesus who is God is Lord of the Sabbath day, not the first day. When God speaks, He means what He says, the issue is man thinks they know better, when we are the creation and should be His servant Isa56:6

bob121 said:
Silence on the other side is just as real:

No post-Cross epistle tells Gentile churches, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.”

No council (Acts 15) imposes Sabbath-keeping on converts.

The God of the Universe was not silent why God wrote His laws from tables of stone (only the Ten Commandments) to tables of the heart 2Cor2:3 Heb8:10. God wrote His laws in the hearts and minds of the New Covennat believers, God already defined His laws in His written and spoken Testimony. Exo31:18 Deut 4:13 Paul came after the covenant was ratified. He can’t change God’s commandments, he is not God, he himself says he is a servant of God. That said it clearly shows the Sabbath did not end in the NC by words of Jesus and the apotles and by actions. I can post lots of reference and the Gentiles were keeping every Sabbath with the Jews Acts 13:42 Acts 13:44 Acts 18:4 and in Acts 15:21 clearly showing the Sabbath was kept reading the Scriptures in church, in every town, in every generation, so its weird people use Acts 15 against the Sabbath when it states clearly the Sabbath was being kept. Is that not New Covenant? This was decades after the Cross. Just as Jesus indicated His faithful would be doing Mat24:20 Isa56:6-7

bob121 said:
No prophecy says the weekly Sabbath will be the end-time test of loyalty (Rev 14:7 quotes creation, not the Decalogue calendar).

It’s almost an exact quote of the 4th commandment Exo20:11 which reveals the God we are to worship.

bob121 said:
So the discussion must move from “Produce one transfer verse” (none exists) to “Which trajectory does the Spirit highlight in the only inspired record we have?”
I’m willing to walk through Hebrews 4, Colossians 2, Isaiah 66—wherever the text takes us—provided we let all the silences speak as well as the promises.
Ready when you are

We can’t move forward if you do not address what has already been addressed. The resurrection, Acts 20:7, 1 Cor 6:2 do not say anything about a change to one of God’s commandments. God already spoke clearly on this matter Psa89:34 Mat5:18-30 Jesus certainly never told one soul about a change. He is Lord of the Sabbath and the Sabbath comes with the power of His blessing and sanctification, Sunday comes by the power of man Dan7:25, why you will not find one thus saith the Lord to support this theory. It’s a man-made tradition, that sadly competes with what the Lord of the Sabbath said so plainly about His Sabbath. He changes not, we just need to get back to what God says, there is no one greater. It’s why we have such a huge salvation warning about Pauls writing, because sadly people use it against the God of the universe, when its not at all what Paul is saying if looking at the context and reconciling it with the rest of God’s Word.

Regarding Heb 4, Col2 Isa66 I am happy to go over any one of these verses. You can pick and let me know.

I hope this can be fruitful for us both.

God bless.

Venables · 2025-11-10T03:51:34-0600

We haven't been to Mykonos but we were on Lefkada earlier this year, it's one of the mid-sized Greek islands off to the west, Ionian Sea I believe. It was an majestic experience, particularly for mission groups. A sizeable number of beautiful and inspirational churches and deep tradition. I'm having one of those days and can't quite recall the name, but there was one church in the particular that was extraordinary and stayed with us. From the Byzantine architects, a redoubtable design and beautiful frescoes within it. Reminded us of some of the churches on the French Mediterranean coast. Even without the icons, but the architecture on the coast seems it was similarly inspired.

Venables · 2025-11-10T03:39:13-0600

And just to add a word to the wise on this to be wary of any news or information made from AI, and check all news sources carefully as some lean towards the sensationalist. This has come up with mission materials but too with any apparent news, even the better AI software unavoidably hallucinates by design. We recently averted a near fiasco with some outreach information we were posting as both print and online--the AI started out fine, but eventually began just making up addresses and apparent recent events out of thin air, in a way that was hard to catch. We barely did so (some other missions were not as lucky), and now have a strict no-AI use policy for all mission work or news updates. It's just too much of a hazard for inserting misinformation, something churches have been careful about for centuries with good reason, and one of our communications tech advisers advised us that the newer AI tech paradoxically gets worse on this. (The AI's take in more of what they put out before as they train, and start to break down in his description)

Christsfreeservant · 2025-11-10T03:38:46-0600

“Neither in the temple, nor in the synagogues, nor in the city itself did they find me carrying on a discussion with anyone or causing a riot. Nor can they prove to you the charges of which they now accuse me. But this I admit to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets; having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. In view of this, I also do my best to maintain always a blameless conscience both before God and before men.” (Acts 24:12-16 NASB1995)

Lately the Lord has been having me repost some writings from May of 2023, which are on the subject of Church abuse, and which collectively are combined together in a short book titled, “The Church Under Fire.”

These writings are based off Acts chapters 23-27, with regard to the kinds of persecutions which Paul faced from religious people. And the Lord has used some of my church experiences, as well, to illustrate how church abuse is being carried out in the church today against those who are serving Jesus Christ with their lives, who are walking in the ways of the Lord, and who are seeking to follow the Lord in obedience to his commands in holy living.

And Paul is not the only biblical example of being a recipient of such abuses, either. Jesus was continually harassed and plotted against, and he was the target of false accusations against his character. And his opponents looked for ways to accuse him on a consistent basis. And Job and the prophets of the Old Testament faced such abuse, too, as well as did the other New Testament apostles, plus the deacon Stephen, and many other Christians.

But abuse of this kind, where people are being falsely accused of what they did not say, or of what they did not do, or of what they did not experience, is not limited to just the area of the church, but it expands to all areas of life. And sometimes it is to keep an honest person from exposing the lies or from calling out sin for what it is, or from exposing corruption going on within the church, in the government, in the media, and in the corporate world, too.

And sometimes it is just pure arrogance on the part of the accusers who think because they are “so and so,” or because they carry a particular title in front of their name, that somehow they are always right and that anyone who disagrees with them, or who challenges them, is wrong. But even the experts are still human beings, and they make mistakes, and so we should never look to other humans to be our gods, no matter who they are.

And let me give you some personal examples from my life in a different area other than the church. Lately I have been faced with some medical issues, and God has chosen, this time, to have me be seen by multiple experts in many different fields of medicine, for he has a plan and a purpose for it all. My primary physician, who is the one ordering these tests for me, has been very kind and gracious, so far. He has listened to me as I have shared with him my sufferings, and he ordered the tests for me, to try to help me.

Some of the experts in the medicine field were not so kind and gracious, though some were. When I went to the hospital with sharp pains in my chest, with chest pressure, and with difficulty breathing, they ran some tests. The tests did show my lung nodule had grown since 2016, but they minimized the amount of growth. And the doctor told me my heart was fine, and then she mocked me and said my suffering was all from my emotions. Another doctor minimized the lung nodule, too, calling it a “tiny spot.”

Then I had the tests. The lung nodule had nearly doubled in size, so it is called a lung mass now. That is significant. And it showed up as suspect for cancer. My breathing is now at 44% out of 100% breathing capacity. That is also significant. My heart is not working properly and is borderline for heart failure, so that is a serious issue, as well. And there is concern for cancer in my brain and my left breast, too. So, the point here is that doctors are not gods, and they don’t get everything right, so we should not bow to them.

And the overall point here is that we are not to let other humans be our gods, and we are not to bow to them and to do everything they say we should do just because of the title before their names. And we should also not let them and their opinions of us dishearten or threaten us or make us feel as though we have to do what they say. Many people die at the hands of doctors who make errors in judgment. And many people are dying in their sins because they are listening to pastors who teach them lies, not truth.

Stand up for what is right, like Paul did, and like Jesus did. And take all the counsel that you get, from whoever you receive it, to the Lord, in prayer, seeking his guidance and counsel, before you make any decisions, especially ones which could cost you your life. And before you accept any drug prescriptions, or medical procedures, look them up online, and especially look at even the rare side effects or possible dangers to your body before you just do whatever the doctor or pastor or whoever tells you to do.

But all in all, trust the Lord with your life, follow his leading, and pray for wisdom to make certain that you are hearing from the Lord, and that this is the direction that he wants you to go, before making any serious decisions in your life. And don’t let others’ opinions of you dishearten you. But take what they say to the Lord in prayer and seek God’s counsel. He will show you the way that you should go, and then follow his lead. The others could be right, but they could be wrong. So get your counsel from the Lord and follow him.

As the Deer

By Martin J. Nystrom
Based off Psalm 42:1

As the deer panteth for the water
So my soul longeth after You
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship You

You alone are my strength, my shield
To You alone may my spirit yield
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship You

Login to view embedded media
Caution: This link may contain ads

In View of This
An Original Work / November 10, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

SabbathBlessings · 2025-11-10T03:30:20-0600

DamianWarS said:
AI is not only a summary of popular positions but also tends to be very agreeable with the position you feed it and mirrors your own bias. It's not trying to challenge you or argue with you, it's trying to help you so will often present answers that easily align with your own thought process. The answer you have feels more of a summary by the way its outlined but it could just be the style of the AI you're using.

An AI answer cannot be used as a mic drop response as I can easily ask it a conflicting view and get it to agree with me as well. In the end we still need to use the answer critically for it to have meaning. In fact, I have asked AI if using the electrical grid during the sabbath is unlawful since it contributes to a workforce demand. That's a very leading question and AI ended up applauding me for my sincerity and ethics, ultimately agreeing that unnecessary use of the electrical grid during the sabbath is indeed unlawful. But I don't see anyone turning off their lights on the Sabbath just because I got AI to say it's unlawful. Even though AI is a helpful tool for exegesis, it should not be regarded as the measure. We also carry a lot of bias that we need to recognize and we can influence AI systems even unknowingly with this bias.

In the interest of transparency, what AI did you use? and how did you prompt it to get that answer (was it one question or was this after a much longer conversation)? I don't know how unbiased you're approach was but sometimes we can carry a bias without knowing it so If you want to get answers that are less biased to your own position, use AI without a history of pervious interactions (like using incognito or private browsing mode) so each discussion is new and try and use neutral wording over leading questions because AI will happily move to where you're leading it. For example, "how does Col 2:16 relate to Sabbath" is a fairly neutral question, but saying "Is the Sabbath of Col 2:16 actually talking about a special festival over the weekly sabbath" is a leading question because it feeds the ideas first, then AI just expands upon them. You can even ask it "tell me how the Sabbath of Col 2:16 is ceremonial and not the same as the Sabbath of the 4th commandment, which is moral" this of course, would be intentionally biased where all you're looking for is something that agrees with you, not something that challenges you. You could also lean into the innate bias of AI and ask it the opposite of your position like "tell me how the Sabbath of the 4th commandment is ceremonial and the same context of the Sabbath in Col 2:16" then try and deconstruct the answer and challenge each point. The latter would be the most critically challenging for yourself, but probably the most rewarding.

With the above more neutral question, ChatGPT gave me a much different answer than you did, even equating the weekly Sabbath with ceremonial laws which is an opposite answer to what you got. Curiously, you've left your question out of the OP so at the very least I would include this so it doesn't appear like you're hiding it. My AI response I got was using a fresh ChatGPT conversation without any other history or prompts. Even this question can be leading because I'm forcing the AI to compare the Sabbath with Col 2:16 but I'm at least transparent with what I fed it. An even more neutral question could simply be "what does Col 2:16 mean?" But if you have to keep prompting AI to get the answer you want or be highly specific, then what AI is probably only parroting is your own bias.

If you ask it to go by Bible only, you will get better answers, which is what I did. Its the same Bible study that I have been studying for years and I am not suggesting we replace AI with our own prayerful Bible study far from it.

However, Col2:14-17 is an easy Bible study about the feast days connected to the annual sabbaths that came after the fall and sin, verses the weekly Sabbath that points to our Creator Himself that came before the fall and is according to God’s perfect plan. These things we can find directly in our Bible, but sadly many people just do not care, as it does not support their narrative against what it really is, an attack on God’s Sabbath and Holy Day.

Something holy, sanctified, blessed by the God of the Universe that He Himself says when keeping is doing justice and righteousness that is one of God’s commandments. He placed this commandment in the same unit as only worshipping Him which IS moral and the 4th commandment tells us which God we are to worship in the first three commandments Exo20:11 Exo 20:1-7the same God in the NT we are to worship as God does not change Rev14:7 , we do not tell God what is moral or not as if the Holy Spirit made a mistake regarding His commandment.. That’s the issue, man has taken it up themselves to determine for God, when is His holy day, what commandments we can pick and choose that is moral or not, therefore we decide if we should keep them or not, what are His commandments, what they mean, instead of going by what God plainly wrote and spoke in His own Testimony, its making ourselves our own god instead of letting God be God because He is just that. The God of everything Exo20:11 Rev 14:7. It’s a sad arguement. God reveals by His own mouth exactly what He means, sadly people choose not to listen. It’s nothing new under the sun, it was the same issue for the majority of people in the Bible.

The Liturgist · 2025-11-10T03:21:58-0600

Chesterton said:
Never mind.

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.

Apple Sky · 2025-11-10T03:11:00-0600

Tom D said:
Is it that good?
I've never heard of it, I only know Punch and Private Eye.

Yes it is, it is well known in the UK.

New Posts

New Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page