1Tonne said:

You’re insisting on using your ‘normal English’ meaning, but that’s exactly where annihilationist's go wrong.

Click to expand...

Oh, of course. Imagine thinking the Bible actually means what it says. What a silly concept! Well, at least for those with a doctrinal ax to grind that the plain meaning of the Scripture just doesn't support. Then you have to resort to the "what that really means is _________". technique.

1Tonne said:

The Bible defines life and death, not your personal dictionary.

Click to expand...

Ah, I see! It requires your personal dictionary. What it says just can't be depended on. If requires your doctrinal Risetta Stone to be correctly understood, right?

1Tonne said:

Scripture makes it clear: life is union with God through Jesus, death is separation from Him.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it just can't be properly understood until it's passed through your bunch's patent doctrinal filters, and then it's as plain as is the summer sun. <Laugh>

1Tonne said:

John 17:3: ‘Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.’ Romans 6:23: ‘The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.’ To be with Jesus is life; apart from Him is death. So stop twisting definitions to suit your argument and start letting God’s Word define life and death.

Click to expand...

Or at least your doctrinally altered "real meaning" of God's Word. Sorry mate, that's a load of rubbish. It's a matter of saying that one can't understand what the Bible really means without your lot's doctrinal lexicon, and that only then can it be properly understood, Juar a variation of the ever popular "only my denomination/sect/cult/whatever understand the Real Meaning of Scripture. There's no end of We're The One True Church outfits to choose from, yours is just one more.

essentialsaltes said:

There's one column for people who deserved what they had coming to them for their free speech, and another column for martyrs.

Click to expand...

Oh, right, my mistake

A new poll reveals what mass attendance actually predicts about virtue and deportation policy.

America’s Catholic bishops may incessantly complain about President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda, but American Catholics actually support such measures as mass deportations. EWTN News and RealClear Opinion Research published a poll late last week which found that a majority (54 percent) of American Catholics favor mass deportations, including 27.5 percent (the largest share recorded in the poll) who “strongly favor” the policy, while only 30 percent oppose it and less than 17 percent expressed indifference. Support for the “detention and deportation of unauthorized immigrants on a broad scale” increased to 60 percent among white Catholics and opposition fell to 26 percent.

It just happens that over 300,000 children ended up in a living hell.

Click to expand...

In fact, mass deportations were more popular among American Catholics than Trump himself was. While 54 percent of Catholics endorsed mass deportations, Trump’s support among Catholics only stood at 52 percent, while 37 percent held an unfavorable view of the president — up almost 10 points compared to opposition to mass deportations.

White House Assistant Press Secretary Taylor Rogers responded to the survey results noting that the president “won in a landslide victory with historic support from patriotic Catholics across the country because he promised to fight for people of faith, and he has delivered in record time.”

Continued below.

BasedLutheran said:

Science denialism. We have literally 3 decades of VAERS data showing deaths and other harm from Hep B vaccine

Click to expand...

Hold on; I’ve had the Hep B jab. Why am I still alive?

12-15-25, not a reply. Jan Karel Van Baalen was a Dutch Reformed Minister. His book "The Chaos of Cults" is a real blessing for me. The current new age movement could be considered unofficial Theosophists. As of this non-reply. Collapsed silver cord souls are trying to hang on to me. (Ecclesiastes 12:6 mentions the silver cord). Also, there are three local people who have lost it and they are beyond hope. Thank you & good day

PSALMS 112​

The Traits of the Righteous
1Hallelujah!
Happy is the person who fears the Lord,
taking great delight in his commands.
2His descendants will be powerful in the land;
the generation of the upright will be blessed.
3Wealth and riches are in his house,
and his righteousness endures forever.
4Light shines in the darkness for the upright.
He is gracious, compassionate, and righteous.
5Good will come to the one who lends generously
and conducts his business fairly.
6He will never be shaken.
The righteous one will be remembered forever.
7He will not fear bad news;
his heart is confident, trusting in the Lord.
8His heart is assured; he will not fear.
In the end he will look in triumph on his foes.
9He distributes freely to the poor;
his righteousness endures forever.
His horn will be exalted in honor.

10The wicked one will see it and be angry;
he will gnash his teeth in despair.
The desire of the wicked leads to ruin.

Landon Caeli said:

Oh. Well, I say it is, as the author. So now that's been clarified.

I also edited it into one sentence, as a courtesy for those who need special help in understanding.

Click to expand...

" So they got whacked by the Islamists." isn't an opinion, it's a statement. Even with your edit that's still a statement, that isn't (as far as I know) backed up by anything. Hence, disinformation.

Coriovallum said:

When I was doing an internship at the World Zionist Organization in Jerusalem I was told that there was a specific denomination which donated millions to our projects. I even asked why they would do such a thing but they basically told me: "don't ask, we need the funding".

Now as a Christian my question is a little different:
why do some Christians feel a strong connection with the secular state of Israel? If it is only related to biblical places then one can also include support for Egypt.
Moreover, is there a specific group that is more into funding Israeli projects and why?

One a side note;
The modern term "Jew/s" did not exist in biblical times. Neither was there the concept of "Judaism" as we know it today.
The reason to support the secular state of Israel because of "Jews" as the chosen people is rather strange in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Because a lot of Christians don't understand scripture. I mean, that's the best way I can sum it up lol. They take the verse:

"The nation is like a mighty lion;
When it is sleeping, no one dares wake it.
Whoever blesses Israel will be blessed,
And whoever curses Israel will be cursed.” - Numbers 24:9

Click to expand...

And think that means to blindly give to Israel no matter what. We are supposed to help aid in bringing Israel back in alignment with God, that is our mission. But just throwing money at them isn't going to aid them in the long run. "Blessing" Israel doesn't always mean just throwing them cash, you can bless them with the gospel (Galatians 3:9, Galatians 3:14) or wisdom, or personal help, or as a profession in let's say being a doctor or nurse and helping the injured. But I think it would be wrong as a follower of Christ to give to an institution that practices Judaism and ignores Christ. That's aiding in the wrong direction and I highly doubt the Father is going to bless that endeavor.

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

I am an American citizen by birth and a born-again Christian. If there were ever a war between Israel and the USA, I'm unsure which side I would support. Does this uncertainty mean I should lose my citizenship?

Click to expand...

I guess I really don't understand this "born again" thing, because I can't figure out why that would involve backing the State of Israel against your own country.

Lybrah said:

I haven’t been going to church in a while. I feel like it’s boring. I find myself daydreaming and the sermons are good, but I really don’t like to sing or stand up. I like just saying prayers and even though the sermons are good, I don’t feel like going. I’m not really getting anything out of the Bible study, either, which is online. When I do go to church, I do tithe.
Am I falling away or is this not the right church for me? The people are nice.

Click to expand...

Hello! I sometimes find large and long services a bit hard. I prefer to help out in ministries or smaller meetings. Maybe there might be something, a ministry you can serve in, something that you're interested in? Like Sunday School, finance, stewarding, caretaking, etc? I enjoy helping the elderly or those with anxiety to fit into church. As the old saying goes, if you do something you're passionate about you'll never work a day in your life! God Bless

Mercy Shown said:

Thank you for clarifying your concern. I agree with you on an important starting point: God did not “get rid of” any of His commandments. Scripture never says that. What it does say—repeatedly—is that God fulfilled them in Christ.

Click to expand...

Jesus fulfilled the law, not destroyed Mat5:17 and fulfill does not mean because Christ fullfed the law we can now vain His name or break any of these commandments. Jesus addressed this plainly not addressed to Him, but to "whoever" which is everyone Mat5:19

Where we differ is here: if any day—Sabbath included—is treated as salvific or as a test of genuine faith, then Christ’s obedience and sacrifice are no longer sufficient in practice, even if affirmed in words (Gal 5:4; Phil 3:8–9).

Click to expand...

So are you saying we can worship other gods and go after idols and that's an example of faith to God and we are saved in our sins? Can you show Scripture that says this? God never treated the Sabbath commandment as different than any of the others, only than placing the seal for this entire document, in he 4th commandments Exo20:1. No one can break God's seal, because man is not god no matter how much they want their words to be the same as His, its really a vain attempt.

Hello Richard! Thanks for your post. I think there is a pressure on often struggling believers to partake in meaningless activities at this time of year. There was a Christian lady I knew who used to peer into people's windows to see if they had a Christmas Tree and if not knock on their door and ask why not. Well meaning I suppose but annoying.

Richard T said:

I Imagine many of those folks are not legalistic but just wishing the widow to come out of grieving and do something that takes her mind off her husband's death. In general though you seem right on focusing on the true meaning of Christmas.

Click to expand...

I have been accused of being a Jehovah's Witness more then once. I guess Jehovah's Witnesses are not into Santa and Christmas Trees then! God Bless

ThatRobGuy said:

Correct, because when an elected official is giving an address or a presser, that official should be the center of attention.

Click to expand...

Maybe take some time and read what you're responding to?

If you think that the administration firing a translator because they're a bit "extra" makes for bad optics, how is that any worse than the administration getting rid of ASL translation altogether because some translators can get a bit "extra"?

I'm not challenging the premise. I'm challenging your reasoning as to why the administration did what it did.

Sadly too common today and if you obey Chrust you're a "pharisee".

My prayers for this nation at the moment.

hedrick said:

First, it's more like 9%.

Click to expand...

Hello! You're right 1.5% was an old figure from a previous UK Census. The last UK census in 2023 gave 3.8% identifying as gay or queer, 10.4% of 18-24 year olds. Still hugely less than the 41% of content on Netflix which means Netflix are promoting an agenda not representing demographics. Their agenda seems to be working, the number of people identifying as homosexual is increasing. God Bless

JimR-OCDS said:

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.

Click to expand...

They do but I thought it was interesting how well-done the similarity was considering the length, and not reading off anything.

There is no hope if God is not omniscent.

The Bible uses anthropomorphic language to help us understand events regarding an infinitely glorious God.

You are also going by pure English, In Hebrew, the word used is נָחַם (nāḥam), which can mean:

to grieve

to be pained

to relent

to feel sorrow

This is truly a Christmas special and it would do our souls good to think of our brothers and sisters in Christ around the world at this time and remember that God works across the world in different cultures and contexts.

13-year-old Alaia and nine-year-old Manuela have fond memories of Christmas in Nicaragua, but this wasn't to last. As well as the usual festivities, her parents would share the Gospel with others.

One day Alaia and Manuela’s father received a phone call and the father said to the man on the phone he'd be there in a few minutes. The end of the day arrived and the girls and their mum heard nothing. Their mum said “Remember when I told you that something could happen to your dad or me because of preaching about Jesus?” “That day has come. Your dad has been arrested.”

The family didn't hear from the dad- days became months and they did not even know if he was dead or alive. Then he called them- he told them to flee the country.

Alaia, Manuela and their mum fled- miraculously they fled the border with zero papers and soon the father, by God's grace, joined them.

The family are now in a new Country- what a blessing they must be to their church family, they do however miss Nicaragua at Christmas.

I will finish with this quote BY A 13 YEAR OLD Alaia- unbelievably wise beyond her years by God's grace. “I learned that persecution teaches you not to cling to earthly things, one day we’ll die and won’t take anything with us. So, the best thing we can do is live – and even die – for Christ.”

Source:

Open Doors Prayer Diary Nov/Dec 2025

BCP1928 said:

If Christians can't exercise the degree of social discipline in this country that they desire to, what makes you think that Muslims will be able to?

Click to expand...

I would argue that Christians could exercise a much higher degree of religiosity and government entanglements if they really wanted to.

That's the thing, most don't want to.

The percentage of Christians that would want some sort of Christian theocracy is lower than the percentage of their Muslim counterparts who would want that.


The one stat I highlighted a few pages back.

Even among the 45% who say "The US should be a Christian Nation", only a quarter of that subset want any measure of codified state religion.



Similarly, among those who say in the new survey that the U.S. should be a Christian nation, only about a quarter (24%) said in the prior survey that the federal government should advocate Christian religious values. About twice as many (52%) said the government should “advocate for moral values that are shared by people of many faiths.”


Which lines up with the global outcomes we see. Only 31 of the ~120 (about a quarter) Christian-majority countries have any level of religion codified via law.



Or, in short, your premise is a tad flawed.

The lack of "Christian version of Sharia" in this country isn't due to legal guardrails stopping them from implementing their desired level of religiosity, it's that 75% of them don't actually desire it.

Your premise seemed to operate on the assumption that the majority of Christians are chomping at the bit to have a theocracy, and that our laws were the only thing stopping them, so "If it's stopping the Christians from doing that, its sufficient to stop Muslims from doing that should they ever become a majority"

Studyman said:

NO sir, LOL, you have not "Got it".

Your argument sir, is built on silence.

For me God isn't Silent at all. He said, "Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."

Click to expand...

It’s really quite simple. Which laws, commandments, or statutes did Abraham keep? Book and verse please.

RBL72 said:

If pay diligent and close attention to the words of Yeshua we can see the Paul was on his own, starting from a poor foundation in Acts 15, as stated in the article. The Apostle John understood all this if you read 1 John 2:19: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be manifest that they were not all of us." As stated in the article also, Paul never quotes Yeshua at all other than 2 Cor 12:8-9, where the context is questionable anyway. Since when does Satan have a duty to buffet people for being prideful? He is the very author of pride from the very beginning, if you look at Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:17. And since when did Yeshua extend his grace to cover the sin of pride? These things don't make sense and I'm clearly not the one to say we need to discard Paul's gospel, but I do know for sure that we need to adhere closely to the words of Yeshua, and hold onto them steadfastly no matter what, especially if there are conflicts from other sources. Thanks. Bob

Click to expand...

This is what I think, too!

Paul holds a lot of clout in the bible for having never met Jesus and getting information second hand from apostles who were directly appointed and spent time with Jesus while He was on Earth.

Why, though? I don't have access to the Torah, I don't have access to the original language from which everything has been translated and I don't have Paul to talk to etc. Some things just don't add up with Paul and I think it is right to question this? I'm not saying he's wrong and I'm right, or there aren't things out there which confirm why he said what he said etc, but I can't take it on face value with the information I have?

A new in-depth study (Hebrew) by Israel's Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Centre concludes that a significant majority of those identified as journalists and media workers killed during the Gaza war were not neutral news gatherers, but belonged to terrorist organisations, including Hamas and "Palestinian" Islamic Jihad.

The study examined 266 "Palestinians" who were described as journalists or media workers in various press reports and official lists and who were killed between the outbreak of hostilities on Oct 7 2023 and the end of 2025. According to the findings, at least 157 of these victims, about 60 per cent, were members of terrorist organisations or had clear links to such organisations, including in roles involving both propaganda and operational activities.

Of these, 104 were affiliated with Hamas, 45 with "Palestinian" Islamic Jihad, and a smaller number with the armed wings of Fatah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of "Palestine", the Democratic Front for the Liberation of "Palestine", or the Popular Resistance Committees.

The analysis by the intelligence centre emphasises that these were not isolated or random cases. Rather, many of the individuals counted as journalists were involved in terrorist networks, they were employed by media companies run by Hamas or its allies, or were actively involved in military units. In a number of documented cases, individuals described as media professionals also acted as fighters or agents, reflecting a deliberate strategy by terrorist organisations to combine media work with operational objectives.

For decades, Hamas has invested heavily in its information apparatus and treats the media as a central front in its ideological and tactical campaigns. Its own publications and channels are strictly controlled by the movement and not by independent press associations, which reinforces the link between media work and political warfare.

International press freedom organisations and human rights groups have repeatedly cited the casualties among journalists in Gaza as evidence of disproportionate use of force or targeted attacks by Israeli forces. Last year, Reporters Without Borders claimed that Israel was responsible for a large proportion of journalist deaths worldwide, citing dozens of "Palestinian" media workers killed in the conflict. Such assessments have been used to portray Israel as particularly hostile to media workers.

However, the Intelligence Centre's study puts this portrayal into perspective by showing that a significant proportion of those identified as journalists were not independent or neutral reporters, but rather were affiliated with terrorist organisations. Many of those counted were associated with media outlets effectively controlled by Hamas or other militant factions, making them part of the political and military apparatus of those organisations rather than autonomous observers.

The category ‘journalist’ in Gaza can no longer be regarded as synonymous with neutrality without carefully examining the affiliation and role of each individual.

Dave... said:

I'll Quote Macarthur for context. on these passages in Acts. If you can give me your thoughts on this.


" the believers in Samaria who were converted under the ministry of Philip had to wait a short while to receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit, until Peter and John came up to Samaria and laid hands on the converts (Acts 8:17). In that unique transitional situation as the Church was beginning, those particular believers had to wait for the Holy Spirit, but they were not told to seek Him. The purpose for that exception was to demonstrate to the apostles, and to bring word back to the Jewish believers in general, that the same Holy Spirit baptized and filled Samaritan believers as baptized and filled Jewish believers--just a short while later Peter and a few other Jewish Christians were sent to witness to Cornelius and his household in order to be convinced that the gospel was for all men and to see that "the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also"(Acts 10:44-45). Those special transitional events did not represent the norm, as our present text makes clear, but were given to indicate to all that the body was one"....

"Why did the Samaritans (and later the Gentiles) have to wait for the apostles before receiving the Spirit? For centuries, the Samaritans and the Jews had been bitter rivals. If the Samaritans had received the Spirit independent of the Jerusalem, that rift would have been perpetuated. There could well have been two separate churches, a Jewish church and a Samaritan church. But God had designed one church, in which "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female," but "all are one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:2.)...

By delaying the Spirit's coming until Peter and John arrived, God preserved the unity of the church. The apostles needed to see for themselves, and give firsthand testimony to the Jerusalem church, that the Spirit came upon the Samaritans. The Samaritans also needed to learn that they were subject to apostolic authority. The Jewish believers and Samaritans were thus linked together in one body....

Today, believers receive the Spirit at salvation (cf.1 Cor. 12:13). There was no need for delay after Jews, Gentiles, Samaritans, and Old Testament saints were already included in the church. (Macarthur)


Today...

"Being filled with the spirit must be distinguished from being baptized with the spirit. The apostle Paul carefully defines the baptism with the spirit as that act of Christ by which He places believers into His body (Romans 6:4-6; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:27). In contrast to much errant teaching today, the New Testament nowhere commands believers to seek the baptism with the Holy Spirit. It is a sovereign, single, unrepeatable act on Gods part, and is no more an experience than are its companions justification and adoption. Although some wrongly view the baptism with the Spirit as the initiation into the ranks of the spiritual elite, nothing could be further from the truth. The purpose of the baptism with the spirit is not to divide the body of Christ, but to unify it. As Paul wrote to the Corinthians, through the baptism with the Spirit "we were all baptized into one body" (1 Corinthians 12:13; cf. Galatians 3:26-27; Ephesians 4:4-6)

Unlike the baptism with the Spirit, being filled with the Spirit is an experience and should be continuous. Although filled initially on the day of Pentecost, Peter was filled again in Acts 4:8. Many of the same people filled with the Spirit in Acts 2 were filled again in Acts 4:31. Acts 6:5 describes Stephen as a man "full of faith and the Holy Spirit," yet Acts 7:55 records his being filled again. Paul was filled with the Spirit in Acts 9:17 and again in Acts 13:9.

While there is no command in scripture to be baptized with the Spirit, believers are commanded to be filled with the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18 ). The grammatical construction of that passage indicates believers are to be continuously being filled with the Spirit. Those who would be filled with the Spirit must first empty themselves. That involves confession of sin and dying to selfishness and self will. To be filled with the Holy Spirit is to consciously practice the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ and to have a mind saturated with the Word of God. Colossians 3:16-25 delineates the results of "letting the word of Christ richly dwell" in us. They are the same ones that result from the filling of the Spirit (Ephesians 5:19-33). As believers yield the moment by moment decisions of life to His control, they "walk by the Spirit" (Galatians 5:16). The baptism of the Spirit grants the power that the filling with the Spirit unleashes." (Macarthur)

Click to expand...

Macarthur said: " the believers in Samaria who were converted under the ministry of Philip had to wait a short while to receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit, until Peter and John came up to Samaria and laid hands on the converts.

But wait! The Bibles says prior to the apostles coming they were baptized: Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

So, why was that not Christian water baptism?

Look again since Macarthur does not address this: Acts 8: 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

The Bibles does not say John and Peter baptized them, but prayed over them and laid hands on them, there is nothing about a “rebaptism”?

The example is still for us to baptize “someway?” in the name of Jesus and then some other way (this being by the laying on of the Apostles’ hands), receive miraculous powers of the Spirit.

They are also called “converts” prior to obtaining the miraculous powers of the Spirit.

Macarthur comes up with quite a story, but why would it not also apply to the Ethiopian Eunuch?

I do not agree with Macarthur’s “logic” concerning the Samarians.

Please go on and read further in Acts 8: 36 As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?” … 38 And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. 39 When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing

This certainly sounds like water immersion baptism, so why do we not follow this example?