New Posts

Landon Caeli · 2025-11-25T12:50:11-0600

BCP1928 said:
Who's "we?" I don't care if you ostracize me--I would take it as a testimonial to my patriotism.

You're the one who said 'The rest of us will just go about our business without assimilating".

So, who's your "us" first?

chevyontheriver · 2025-11-25T12:49:33-0600

Michie said:
Notre Dame returns ‘Catholic Mission’ to its core values after ‘confusion’

The University of Notre Dame reinstated “Catholic Mission” among its staff values after it opted to drop the language.

www.catholicnewsagency.com

Notre Dame took out the 'Catholic Mission' part of their mission statement. And people took note and objected. So they put it back in.

But not so fast. They took one thing out and put something else in.

Old: “Leadership in Mission: Understands, accepts, and supports the Catholic mission of the university and fosters values consistent with that mission.”

New: “Catholic Mission: Be a force for good and help to advance Notre Dame’s mission to be the leading global Catholic research university.”

Does anyone see the difference? And is the difference for the better, or for the worse? I think Fr. Edward Sorin of the Congregation of the Holy Cross, the founder of Notre Dame would not be happy about it. But then a mission statement usually only reflects the underlying ethos of a place and the ethos of Notre Dame isn't what it was.

Valletta · 2025-11-25T12:49:15-0600

FunkDocktaXXVII said:
Thank you for all the info!

You're welcome!

PesachPup · 2025-11-25T12:47:00-0600

Mockingbird0 said:
Quartodecimanism: Myths and Facts

Myth: Those second-century Christians who ended the Paschal fast on 14 Nisan were called "Quartodecimans".
Fact: The word "quartodeciman" is not reliably attested until after the council of Nicea. It was never applied in the second century to those who ended the Paschal fast on 14 Nisan.

Myth: The second-century Christians who ended the Paschal fast on 14 Nisan celebrated Easter on the night of 14/15 Nisan.
Fact: They may have, but they may instead have celebrated on the night of 13/14 Nisan. This is the date when, according to the Gospel of John (John 18.28) Jesus ate the last supper with his disciples. Polycrates, in his letter to the Roman bishop Victor, wrote that "my family have always kept the day when the people [i.e. Jewish people] put away the leaven." The removal of the leaven, according to the nearly-contemporary Mishnah, begins on the night of 13 Nisan. (Mishnah Pesachim 1).

Myth: Victor tried to excommunicate the churches in the Roman Province of Asia.
Fact: Eusebius's account is anachronistic. We can read between the lines of Eusebius's account by examining the letter that Irenaeus wrote to Victor, which Eusebius quotes: "Never was this [difference in practice] made a ground for repulsing anyone, but the presbyters before you, even though they did not keep it, used to send the Eucharist to Christians from dioceses which did." So what Victor actually did was refuse to send the _fermentum_ to the Asian stranger-churches in Rome, not attempt to excommunicate the churches in Asia.

Myth: The Nisan-14 practice was the practice deprecated at the Council of Nicea.
Fact: The controversy at Nicea was between two schools of Sunday observance: Christians who might be called "Jewish calendarists" (and who were in later years called "Protopaschites") who wanted to celebrate Easter on the Sunday falling in the Jewish week of Unleavened Bread, even if that meant that the festival would fall before the spring equinox; and "Independent calendarists" who wanted to calculate their own month of Nisan and set the Easter festival to the third Sunday in that independently-calculated month of Nisan, so that the festival would always fall after the spring equinox. The "independent calendarists" carried the day. But the decision was controversial, with some Christians refusing to abide by it. One scholar has proposed that the Nisan-14 custom, moribound in the early 4th century, was revived in the later 4th century by Christians protesting against the Nicene decision, and who had read about the practice in Eusebius's book.

Myth: The controversy over the Nisan-14 practice was between the Eastern churches and the Western churches.
Fact: The Nisan-14 practice was confined to the Roman Province of Asia. All the other churches in the world, according to Eusebius, kept Easter on Sunday.

Myth: Those who kept the Nisan-14 practice were Torah-keepers.
Fact: The Evangelist Matthew's community were Torah-keepers, but there is no evidence connecting them to the Roman Province of Asia. The community in which the _Didache_ was written were partial Torah-keepers ("If you can shoulder the Lord's yoke in its entirety, then you will be perfect; but if that is too much for you, do as much as you can." But again there is no evidence linking them to Asia. The Nisan-14 assembly as it is known to us from Melito of Sardis's _Peri Pascha_ shows no evidence of Torah-keeping. Indeed, _Peri Pascha_ is partly Jew-hating.

John 18:28 does not prove that Jesus ate the Passover meal on the night of the 13th/14th. But rather just the opposite. Nine times in the NT it confers the notion that Jesus ate the PASSOVER meal with his disciples on the same night that he was betrayed. John 18:28 in fact confirms that it was the scripturally mandated time to eat the PASSOVER on the 14th day of the month at evening when all of it was to be consumed before the dawn of the next day.

The events of John 18 actually records (in one blurred account) of Jesus being brought before Pilate not once but twice. Luke records the third time taking place the third time after having been seen to Herod. The first instance took place before dawn. It was early according to John 18:28. Back to this in a minute. Luke 22:66 says, AS SOON AS IT WAS DAY, Jesus was taken before their council. And then in Luke 23:1 Jesus was taken inside the judgment hall to where Pilate then asks him, "Are you the king of the jews?" Compare that to John 18:33,34 where it is inside the judgment hall [he called for Jesus to be brought to him]. The 1st encounter of Jesus with Pilate was in John 18:29 where Pilate meets with Jesus and his accusers OUTSIDE OF the judgment hall. Thus, on this 1st encounter, The Jews did not go into the judgment hall "so that they might eat the PASSOVER ".

You see the PASSOVER must be eaten before dawn arrives. The dialog between Jesus and Pilate on the subsequent encounters is in the presence of the Jews inside the judgment hall, for Pilate says in Luke 23:14 "I have examined him [who was brought before ME] before you".
WHY was this okay now and but not okay the 1st time? Because it was after daybreak when the restriction about eating the PASSOVER expires at dawn. If the time for eating the Passover had not yet arrived, it would have defiled them to enter into the judgment hall. If they were so conscientious to not defile themselves in the 24 hour period prior to the time, they would have not entered the judgment hall during the daylight hours in which Jesus was brought TO Pilate. But they did. Verifying the time required to eat the Passover... before dawn.
Be blessed
The Pup

JohnB445 · 2025-11-25T12:45:45-0600

I thought this was a possibility, but then it didn't make sense to me according to the scriptures and I stopped.

What does that mean? Should I have never been this foolish to think he already came back again? But I was new and haven't read the entire Bible. It was the very beginning where I was just learning about the Trinity.

Hentenza · 2025-11-25T12:40:32-0600

Apple Sky said:
I know this, I never said they were as I have explained all this too David Lamb.

Don't you ever read the posts on here ?

Post 1850.

BCP1928 · 2025-11-25T12:40:22-0600

rambot said:
yeah....forcing joining clubs I'm not behind.

I've just never worked in a "traditional" office so I have NO idea what that would be like.

One of the benefits of a blue collar job is that you can tell the prissy twits from HR who think up this kind of thing to stuff it.

Wolseley · 2025-11-25T12:40:21-0600

joymercy said:
True story of mine, that demonstrates the confusion I and my fellow Catholics experienced in real life, at the local food pantry:

1) All food recipients were required to show proof that they lived in the local area, so that we could provide food only to local area residents, due to our limited resources

2) There was a sudden shift in about the year 2022, in which people came to pantry with a passport only and no proof of residence to show that they were from the local area we served

3) People we were trying to help were showing passports from other countries, and had nor proof of local address, such as a ID card or piece of recent mail

4) We were running out of food while people were still in line.

5) We had to cut back on whom we served, although it just really hurt us, as we believe in providing food to those who are hungry. We just could not meet the demands of car loads of people, all with only passports and no other ID, as well as local residents who were hungry.

6) We tried hard at first to serve everyone, but we could not.

What are supposed to do then? I take it that this real life experience is showing that we just pray-fully do what we can, and with much love, until there just simply are no more groceries.

That right there is our immigration dilemma in microcosm. What happens when the hordes of illegals swarm into an area, and absorb everything that the relief system can provide for them, until it runs out? Some people go without, both citizens and illegals. What happens when more and more and more people show up, demanding goodies, and there's simply no more goodies left to give? What then?

Everybody loses.

Dale · 2025-11-25T12:37:27-0600

mark46 said:
If you want a businessman in the White House that doesn't understand debt, then so be it. There are very few such businessmen. Debt is part of almost all business models. A "balanced budget" is not a meaningful concept for business.

A wise businessman knows when they have a debt problem. They seek to reduce debt and increase income. Investors do look for excessive debt as as a warning sign.

Donald Trump used corporate bankruptcy to stiff contractors, workers and investors. He never was a good businessman.

Warden_of_the_Storm · 2025-11-25T12:34:16-0600

Theatrum orbis terrarum by Abraham Ortelius,1570, and notice the inset in the top right which reads in Latin: Tartariae siue magni Chami regni, or “Tartaria or the kingdom of the great Cham.”

And who do we find in the Kingdom of the great Cham?

The Great Cham, or in the original Mongolian, the Khan.

Like... is there nothing strange that the fact that the maps talking about Tartaria specifically only focus on the Far East? Like, the area that in the Middle Ages was the area least explored by Europeans on the Eurasian continent? Nothing suspicious about that connection?

RocksInMyHead · 2025-11-25T12:32:40-0600

BPPLEE said:
Why is it okay to copy and paste some article from a source that leans left, or right but it's not okay to use AI?
Either way is dialing it in but I don't see anyone complaining about copy and paste jobs as long as a source is given

I will note that I have been critical of both, and for the same reasons. I come to a forum to have a discussion with the users on that forum, not with a large language model or the author of an article who is not present.

MotoToTheMax · 2025-11-25T12:28:21-0600

Have they checked all the local churches? Seems they tend to offer safe harbor for these kind of people.

essentialsaltes · 2025-11-25T12:28:14-0600

Donald Trump’s Approval Rating Negative in 20 States He Won

According to polling by YouGov for The Economist, the president's approval rating is underwater in all but 11 states.

The pollsters also found that, except for Idaho, all states have a lower approval rating for Trump than they did in January. They found that the biggest shift happened in Oklahoma, where Trump's approval rating swung from +27 points to -7.

President Donald Trump said on Truth Social earlier this month: "So many Fake Polls are being shown by the Radical Left Media, all slanted heavily toward Democrats and Far Left Wingers…Fake News will never change, they are evil and corrupt but, as I look around my beautiful surroundings, I say to myself, 'Oh, look, I’m sitting in the Oval Office!'"

partinobodycular · 2025-11-25T12:26:21-0600

Pepperdoodle said:
It's utter ridiculous and dangerous to use AI for "church" or "a pastor".

Why?

Wolseley · 2025-11-25T12:21:52-0600

"Eat it, Craig!" LOL! ^_^

Angeleyes7715 · 2025-11-25T12:20:44-0600

Dave G. said:
I pray that God directs a pathway for you, both spiritually and physically, and pray that in Jesus' name.

Are you on a prescribed medicine, and taking it ?

Yes I'm on medications they work well.

CLEEB · 2025-11-25T12:17:57-0600

Yo

Richard.20.12 said:
Great points. If God starts to deceive us in one area our faith will be weakened in all areas. It makes no sense. God is pure. He doesn't do things like this. He never has. He never will. God is truth. That is His character.
I asked AI and this is what it comes up with. AI can be surprisingly good for Bible study. Especially if you're looking for a word or concept but don't know exactly what it is so you can't just do a word search.

"Was" vs. "Became": This is a critical point. While the KJV (and most modern translations) says "The earth was without form, and void," some Old Earth creationists, particularly those who hold to the "gap theory," argue that the Hebrew word hayah (הָיְתָה) can also be translated as "became" or "had become." If translated as "became," it would imply a change in state – that the earth was not initially "without form, and void" but became that way after an initial creation (Genesis 1:1) and before the six days of creation. This "became" implies a ruin or judgment that necessitated a renewal.

"Tohu wa-bohu" (without form, and void): These Hebrew words literally mean "desolation and emptiness" or "chaos and waste." In other biblical contexts (like Isaiah 34:11 and Jeremiah 4:23), these terms are used to describe the aftermath of a judgment or destruction. So, to some, seeing these words in Genesis 1:2 suggests that the Earth was already in a state of ruin or disarray, not merely a pristine, unformed void from God's initial creative act. This state would then require a reformation to become habitable.

The Context of Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." If Genesis 1:1 is a complete, initial creation of a perfect heaven and earth, then Genesis 1:2 describing it as "without form, and void" seems contradictory unless something happened in between. This "something" is where the "gap" and the idea of a pre-Adamic world or a Luciferic flood often come in for those who interpret it this way. The subsequent six days would then be a restoration or re-creation of what was ruined.

You are very very correct. There is even more to learn from the spirit about these and other things. The devastation of the prior Earth was caused by the Satanic rebellion. The division of light from darkness was GODS separation of the kingdom of GOD from the kingdom of Satan. Satans kingdom is still on the Earth today, he is the god of this age, the prince of this world that is under his sway. 1 John 5:19 Many people do not believe this. Adam lost the dominion GOD gave him to Satan because whoever you render yourself a servant to obey that is who you obey. See Luke 4:6 Jesus came to qualify to replace Satan but has not yet returned to do so. This is why we pray thy kingdom come thy will be done on Earth as it is in heaven. Satans kingdom began on that first day of the recreation of the Earth Genesis 1:3-5 Satans kingdom will end when Christ returns.

RDKirk · 2025-11-25T12:17:55-0600

DaisyDay said:
I've been reading that a lot of the top military lawyers were let go as part of the Trump purge/consolidation of power.

Explainer: JAG Firings Spark Concerns About US Military Legal Oversight

In a significant shake-up at the Pentagon last week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the top military lawyers for the Army, Navy and Air Force. This decision comes amid a broader series of dismis...

www.jurist.org

...But despite the high profile natures of these firings, some analysts have argued that the firings of the military’s top lawyers — its Judge Advocate Generals (JAGs) — poses an even greater threat to the rule of law in the US.

“Trump…firing the Army, Navy, and Air Force JAGs [is in some ways] even more chilling than firing the four star [generals]. It’s what you do when you’re planning to break the law: you get rid of any lawyers who might try to slow you down,” wrote Georgetown Law Professor Rosa Brooks on X.

“When you start firing the military’s top lawyers, that means you are getting ready to order the military to do unlawful things. Trump replaces those JAGs with men who will justify any future unlawful and unethical actions that he wants the military to do,” wrote Democratic political candidate and former US fighter pilot Amy McGrath, also via X.

And more recently - eight months later:

Hegseth fired the Air Force’s top lawyer. The JAG who took on the job is stepping away.

It’s been eight months since the service had a Senate-confirmed leader in the role.

www.defenseone.com

Eight months after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the Air Force’s top lawyer, the judge advocate general tasked with those duties has stepped down. No one has yet been nominated to permanently fill either of the service’s top legal jobs.

Maj. Gen. Rebecca Vernon, who had served as deputy Air Force JAG since 2022, became acting JAG after Hegseth’s Feb. 21 announcement that he was firing Lt. Gen. Charles Plummer. Vernon’s last day on the job was Sunday and her retirement date is set for January 1, 2026, Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek said.

...
The judge advocate general of each military service—TJAG for short—must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. A former Air Force lawyer said the lack of a Senate-confirmed TJAG leaves the branch’s legal officers in limbo.

“It’s tough to make any long-term plans without that position filled,” the lawyer said. “We’re in the middle of assignment season and the TJAG makes those decisions. There’s a ripple effect throughout the [JAG] Corps that hurts morale, retention, budgets, hiring, and every major policy decision.”

The services are missing more than their top JAGs: the Pentagon has also been sending lower-level lawyers to the Justice Department to serve as temporary immigration judges.

This has raised concerns among legal experts. Margy O’Herron, a senior fellow in the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program, wrote in September that the administration’s plan will pull JAGs “away from the important work they are trained and assigned to do, risking military readiness.”

Earlier this year, Hegseth said he fired the Air Force and Army TJAGs because they were "roadblocks to orders that are given by a commander in chief.”

That just doesn't fill me with confidence that the secretary is not and will not issue illegal orders.

That only means the lawyers themselves aren't morally concerned about the legality. But those orders will be couched in legalese to confuse the issue to force the issue to the Supreme Court. We see this in the case of the Venezuelan speed boats. The orders are couched in legalese about the "War on Terror" as already authorized by Congress. But Congress will not pass a resolution to clarify that the White House is outside the intended scope of the War on Terror. The Supreme Court historically refuses to get involved in military operations, and this Court certainly won't.

A soldier is only held accountable for "manifestly illegal" orders, and this is not a "manifestly illegal" order if Congress keeps silent and it has to go to court.

rambot · 2025-11-25T12:17:55-0600

essentialsaltes said:
Update time.

Mississippi Republican Takes Plea Deal After Destroying Satanic Statue in Iowa
Michael Cassidy, a former congressional and legislative candidate, was set for trial June 3, but his attorney filed a guilty plea on his behalf to an aggravated misdemeanor count of third-degree criminal mischief, the Des Moines Register reported. [felony charges were dropped as part of the deal. He gets 2 years probation and pays restitution.]

Since that 2023 event, Iowa has refused the Satanic Temple's applications to have a holiday event at the Capitol.

State again denies Satanic Temple's request to hold event at Iowa Capitol building
Matt Kezhaya, general counsel for The Satanic Temple, said the government is not alowed to deny pubic services or benefits to people or religous groups because officials disagree with their beliefs.

"Once state officials open up the Capitol to public events, as it has for displays and events around the holidays, they can't legally exclude The Satanic Temple because of its disfavored or minority viewpoint," he said in a statement.

In June, the ACLU of Iowa filed a civil rights complaint on behalf of The Satanic Temple Iowa alleging state officials illegally discriminated against the group based on its members’ religion when they denied the group’s event request in 2024.

[And now they've denied it again for 2025.]

When you fight for freedom, this is the EXACT freedom you fight for.

All these free speech folks who shrug when racist wingnuts spout off certainly will protect this speech as well.

The Liturgist · 2025-11-25T12:14:56-0600

Always in His Presence said:
Philipians 4:11 Not that I speak in regard to need, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content: 12 I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. 13 I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

The emphasis being the last verse - despite severe hardships, St. Paul endured.

PloverWing · 2025-11-25T12:10:47-0600

The trouble with Large Language Models in their current form is that, unless they cite their sources, I don't know where they're getting their information from.

If I do a google search and see a link to the Mayo Clinic website, then I know the value of that information. If I see a link to a Facebook post, then that tells me something different. Unless the LLM tells me whether it's quoting a professional's expertise or a random guy's tweet on X, I don't trust the information. When someone on CF posts "According to AI, ...", I interpret that as "Here are some grammatically correct sentences I found on the Internet. They may or may not be true." And I skip it.

2PhiloVoid · 2025-11-25T11:58:49-0600

jacks said:
Just a point. Some people truly are raised to be atheists. I don't have any statistics on this, but it might be more common than one thinks. It is certainly my background and those I was acquainted with. The option to believe in a supernatural power was not really on the table. We were taught all forms of religion, was nothing more than a way to control the masses or for the weak minded. We didn't ridicule those "poor deluded people", but we certainly wouldn't have wanted to identify with them.
Writing this now I can't believe how ignorant I was, while ironically thinking I was so smart.

Yes, I know that's the case. But the most vocal of the Deconstructionists are usually "Ex-Christians." Mainly because they feel they have an axe to grind.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-25T11:55:07-0600

com7fy8 said:
Well . . . yes love causes us to do something.

But we do have ability to choose to do something. So, this would mean we have some sort of free will . . . meaning ability to choose.

I know I have the ability to move or not move my finger (I thank God for that). In my thinking, what I desire or intend to do with my fingers is my will, and scripture concurs. Is it free? Do I just make up a will to do something? Perhaps when I'm bored? But I didn't will to be bored. I don't actually will to will when I think about it, and there's always a reason why I reason.

Okay, I have an ability to choose to move my finger. But in the moral/immoral sense, to have a will that equivocates back and forth between obeying God and disobeying God would be doublemindedness.

James 1:8: “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.”
James 4:8: “Purify your hearts, ye double minded.”

com7fy8 said:
However, we have how there is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" > in Ephesians 2:2. Satan's spirit is working people to do what they do, I see this means, since his evil spirit "works in" disobedient people. And his spirit has anger, fear, lust, and unforgiveness which were not in Adam and Eve when God created them "very good".

This is the same scripture that informs my reasoning about what makes me will as in lust or covet. It's important to note that the Truth preceded a lie in existence. I'm defining a lie as something false that undermines what is true. The reason this is important is because if we already had a free will walking and abiding in the truth through faith, then the lie that we don't have a free will would make free will a lie. So yes, there is a prince of the power of the air, and that power implies the ability to create desires in the flesh through deception, or vain imaginings which lead to sin. So, in this scenario, what looks like free isn't actually free.

com7fy8 said:
Humans now in sin are not "very good". And so their wills are not in the "very good" state in which humans were first created.

So, their wills are free, meaning they can make choices; however . . . where does the Bible say they work their own wills???? And we have, for children of God >

"for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure." (Philippians 2:13)

So, I see from this, that God is the One who works in our wills, to get us to do whatsoever is "for His good pleasure". And this would be in His love having us so submit to Him.

So, we might say we have the ability to choose this, but who in us is working us to use this ability the right way? Are we of our own selves freely getting our own selves to submit to God working at every moment . . . or does God change our character so we become submissive to Him in His love?

Exactly. These are the right questions to ask. In the dialect of Faith, God is the Eternal power, and we are dirt. “But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.” <-- What is this power? --> In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Michie · 2025-11-25T11:49:00-0600

Physical fight ensues after woman told not to take political photos, attempts to take back donations

A Roman Catholic archdiocese has put a priest on administrative leave after he was arrested and accused of assaulting a woman during a donation drive.

The Archdiocese of Miami, Florida, released a statement on Monday in response to the arrest of 72-year-old Father Jesus Saldaña earlier this month.

“Father Jesus Saldana, pastor of St. Kevin’s Catholic Church, was arrested and charged with battery to a visitor stemming from an incident earlier this month in the parish parking lot near a bin collecting items for hurricane relief,” stated the archdiocese.

Continued below.

Priest facing battery charge after scuffle with woman at donations table

A Roman Catholic archdiocese has put a priest on administrative leave after he was arrested and accused of assaulting a woman during a donation drive

www.christianpost.com

SabbathBlessings · 2025-11-25T11:48:40-0600

Studyman said:
Labels is not the correct word here for "moral". God's Saying some of God's Laws are "moral" and some are not, are "Judgments" of God's Law, not merely labels. Civil, Sacrificial and ceremonial Law could be construed as "labels" placed on God's Laws although God didn't divide His "Instruction in Righteousness" in such a manner. It is a 100% creation of religious men who profess to know God.

Your question was concerning the existence of the word "Moral" as it applied to God's Law in the Holy Scriptures. The truth is, it doesn't exist in Scriptures. In fact the very idea, the very thought to "Judge" God's Law as moral or civil, began in the garden of Eden by a religious voice who "professed to know God".

The foundation of its teaching, was that as long as a man lived by every Word of God, he would remain blind and ignorant. Only by judging God's Laws, some as worthy of honor and respect, and some as unworthy of honor and respect, can a man escape the "bondage" of being blind and ignorant.

"For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, (Judge the Law as unworthy of obedience) "then" your eyes shall be opened, and (Then) ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

This is the foundation of the "judgments" placed on God's Laws by this world's religious system. "I don't have to honor or respect God in this Law of His, because it's not moral".

I would advocate caution where adopting this world's judgments and Labels they place on God's Laws. It didn't bode well for those examples God gave us in the Scriptures. And as Paul said, "Are we better than they"? God forbid!!"

Why? This is the trap this world's religious system sets for us. First, it deceives us into believing some of God's Laws are not "moral" Laws which justifies men in their rejection of them. But because different religious sects and businesses of this world define differently what Laws are "moral" and what laws are not, there is often disagreements between the competing religious sects.

In your argument here, your definition of "moral Law" is different from SB's Definition of "Moral Law". So you have 3 choices really. You can submit to SB's judgment of "moral Law", and deny your own judgment. Or you can try and convince SB to "redefine what moral means" to align with your definition.

And the 3rd choice, which is the choice I advocate, is that we trust all of God's Word as "moral", and stop listening to all the other voices in the world that God placed us in.

We'll, there are "Greater Commandments", and "Lessor Commandments" according to the Jesus "of the Bible". Murdering your brother would be a greater evil that coveting what your brother had. Both have the same punishment for those who transgressed, but one would be worse for your brother than the other. And Jesus said this distinction has no bearing on whether we honor God in obedience or not.

But judging God's Laws, some as moral and others as not, isn't replacing the 10 Commandments, its exalting oneself over God. It's saying we are qualified to judge God and His Laws. In my view "it creates a bias carrying a suggestion that qualitatively speaking our judgment rises above the judgment of God.

You seem to making my point here. If I understand your position, you believe SB is in error by isolating the Commandments of God given in Exodus 20, from God's other Laws and assigning a greater value to the Laws defined in Exodus 20, and a "lessor" value to those Laws of God HE gave in, let's say, Leviticus 19.

But aren't you doing the same thing by isolating one of God's Laws in Exodus 20, and assigning it a "lessor" value than the other Laws of God given at the same time, to the same audience?

I couldn't agree more. But aren't you promoting the same thing by judging one of God's Commandments given in Exodus 20, as "not a moral command", and then pitting that LAW against the other Laws defined for us in Exodus 20?

I agree that God didn't create His Laws for men to judge one against or over another. Rather, God created Laws as "instruction in "HIS" definition of righteousness for those who would join themselves to Him in this cursed world.

Indeed, Noah and Abraham was also given God's Judgments, Statutes commandments and Laws. Except for the Levitical Priesthood, which wasn't "ADDED" until 430 years after Abraham, as Levi wasn't even born in Abraham's time.

Some were enumerated before Ex. 20, as far back as Cain and Abel, and Noah and Abraham. And truly they were a part of God's relationship with men throughout the Bible. I completely agree that we shouldn't judge God's Laws, some as worthy of honor, and some as not worthy of honor.

Absolutely. This is why, in my view, Jesus quoted His Father in the Gospel of Christ, "Man shall live by Every Word that Proceeds from the mouth of God.

Certainly a great topic of discussion to be had among men seeking the Righteousness of God.

To be fair- I do not recall ever calling only the Ten Commandments as moral. I believe anything God deems as righteous is moral and He singly isolated the Sabbath as such saying its doing justice and righteousness and blessed be the man who keeps from defiling the Sabbath Isa56:1-2 , so when man chooses to claim the Sabbath commandment that He blessed and sanctified is not moral which than makes it amoral puts them in a place as equal to God to determine this- which is why I believe God relates breaking the Sabbath as idol worship. Eze20:16 replacing what God commanded, with what we want to do as we are told whoever we obey is who we serve. Rom6:16 If we are not serving God which He again relates to keeping the Sabbath Isa56:6 who then is one serving.

I do however believe the Ten Commandments sits on a different foundation than the other laws, because God only placed the Ten Commandments under His mercy seat Exo25:21 and no more were added Deut5:22. I think there is a big difference between God Himself divinely writing something and laws God gave man that man wrote- hence why the ones that were handwritten by Moses on paper as it fades, were outside the ark Deut31:24-26, while the Ten Commandments, the Testimony of God written by the Holy Spirit on stone, is inside the ark of the Lord. Exo40:20 I believe there is not a law of Moses that we should keep that doesn't fit under one of the Ten Commandments the way Jesus expanded upon them Isa42:21 Mat5:17-30

New Posts

New Posts

Donald Trump’s Approval Rating Negative in 20 States He Won​

Mississippi Republican Takes Plea Deal After Destroying Satanic Statue in Iowa​

State again denies Satanic Temple's request to hold event at Iowa Capitol building​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Donald Trump’s Approval Rating Negative in 20 States He Won

Mississippi Republican Takes Plea Deal After Destroying Satanic Statue in Iowa

State again denies Satanic Temple's request to hold event at Iowa Capitol building