Judah

exitstageright said:

Well ,all far as appearances are concerned, that is why I love Formal Nights on cruises. Those Formal Nights are the only time that women pay attention to me. When I wear my black tux pants and white Dinner Jacket, some women ask ME to dance. I very rarely get turned down for a dance on Formal Nights. But, I cannot wear my white Dinner Jacket when I go grocery shopping.

Click to expand...

That’s why I suggested her. She’ll help you equally attractive in less formal attire. You’ll learn your best colors, silhouettes and get a seasonal guide for your wardrobe.

~bella

Amen and praise the Lord.

I saw a video earlier from someone who consults with churches concerning security. He mentioned a correlation with drug cartels and ICE arrests and said contracts are being put on their heads. I’m assuming the deportations are affecting business. He said cartels have a presence in all 50 states because of mass immigration. Many gang members attend church (usually catholic) and incidents are occurring in that setting or on the premises. A warning follows. The comments are equally informative and several shared experiences along those lines.

~bella

Cartel Threats Against Americans: Why Churches Should Pay Attention

Login to view embedded media

Who doesn't like Atari?

Oompa Loompa said:

Sure you do. A YouGov poll showed that 24% of the left would celebrate the death of a political opponent.

Click to expand...

24 percent isn't the majority. Not even that large of a minority. So it's hardly a typical attitude for "the Left".

RocksInMyHead said:

You mean this?

Because that's not a quote from Title 10.

Click to expand...

Oops.

Lukaris said:

I believe the Lord permits various expressions to worship God in spirit and in truth ( John 4:24 etc.).If somehow a person does this in light of His commandments ( John 14:15-18 etc,) then I guess it must be right. How it all works, the Lord knows.

Personally, I worship within the liturgy and the Eucharist is given to the faithful. We should discern where necessary but realize expressions vary among Christians.

Click to expand...

Indeed, but we should as Orthodox nonetheless differentiate between what are valid cultural variations of the liturgy, for example, the Western Rite, and what forms of worship are actually defective.

I take the view that most traditional liturgical churches have a liturgical form that falls within the pale of Orthodoxy, aside from a few echos of problematic doctrinal differences such as the filioque (which recently we persuaded a large number of Lutheran churches to drop).

The most problematic issues are worship driven not by ancient hymns but by Christian rock and “praise and worship” music, and variations on sacraments adopted to suit…the demands of contemporary views on sexual morality.

boughtwithaprice said:

Your second statement is where we differ. It is a theological debate that we need not have unless you are willing.

Click to expand...

Forgive me, but according to my understanding of Roman Catholic Christology and the EO-RC Joint Theological Declarations, I believe it would be an error to assert your church believes that the Blessed Virgin Mary is of a different nature, substance or essence from other humans, since Ephesus and Chalcedon declare our Lord is in a hypostatic union of two natures, His uncreated divine nature and the human nature He assumed in the incarnation, which are united hypostatically without change, confusion, separation or division. If the Theotokos actually has a different nature, which every Roman Catholic theologian I’ve met denies was the intention of the Immaculate Conception, then our Lord would not share our human nature.

Indeed a primary reason why the Orthodox object to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is because of concerns it would lead people to deny the full humanity of Christ our True God and His consubstantiality with us, that is to say that God became one of us, a man, in order to redeem our fallen nature, restoring and glorifying it through His Passion and Resurrection.

Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man without change, confusion, separation or division. Indeed St. Athanasius, who your church very strongly venerates, said God became man so that man could become god, becoming by grace what Christ is by nature.

I can indeed quote numerous Catholic liturgical texts that prove Christ is of the same essence as the rest of humanity.

Rather, the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, if understood correctly, means that Theotokos was conceived without original sin, but with our human nature, but in objecting to the saying that she had the same nature as the rest of us, and by implication objecting, by accident, to the full humanity of her son, you illustrated the main concern the Orthodox have about the idea of the Immaculate Conception.

+

I would also note that most concerns you might have about the Orthodox rejection of the doctrine are likely predicated on the basis of St. Augustine’s model of original sin, but we use the model of St. John Cassian’s Ancestral Sin, in which original sin is less about inherited forensic guilt and more of a hereditary disease that predisposes us to the sinful passions and causes us to be mortal. This model does an equally good job at precluding Pelagianism since no one afflicted with this disease could save themselves. However one can, through faith in Christ, who defeated death on on the Cross and remade humanity in his image, becoming the firstfruits of the resurrection, we can be saved, as the Blessed Virgin Mary was, and so close to God was she, closer physically than any other human by virtue of carrying Him in her immaculate and voluntarily sinless womb, that in response to her faith, which she affirmed in agreeing to carry Christ our God at the Annunciation, that when she reposed, she was taken up into Heaven bodily, which the Orthodox church has always celebrated, since the first century, on the Feast of the Dormition, celebrated by the Armenians at the end of July and by everyone else on August 15th, called the Assumption by the Oriental Orthodox, but which your church apparently did not formally dogmatize until Pope Pius XII declared it ex cathedra in the 1950s, which has the unfortunate effect of causing some anti-Orthodox polemicists to falsely accuse us of having followed the Roman church in adopting a recent doctrinal innovation (ignoring the fact that the Eastern Catholic churches had celebrated the feast since antiquity, and the Roman church historically was liturgically minimalist, particularly in August, probably due to the notorious heat in Rome in that month, and thus the Transfiguration was also never a prominent part of the Roman calendar).

At any rate the assumption of the Theotokos at the time of he repose is one of many indicators of her obedience, this being an honor previously granted only to a few, notably St. Moses and St. Elias, who as prophesied were present at the Transfiguration on Mount Tabor. Orthodox hymns describe her as Immaculate. But we do not say, nor do we need to say, that there was anything supernatural about her conception, because our hamartiology, while perfectly refuting Pelagius, does not require this. It should also be noted that historically the hamartiology of St. John Cassian was preferred in the West as well, until St. Augustine overtook him and all other Church Fathers during the early Scholastic period.

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:

I'm not against prisoners doing the harvest. For the price of their upkeep.

Click to expand...

Not a terrible idea, but media outlets would portray it as racism if minority prisoners were photographed working side by side in fields.

Aaron112 said:

I was not following the thread.... just saw this post....
Scripturally it is best to never listen to that voice - 'Mr Spock' , in fiction or in reality. He is not an authority in the Kingdom of God.

World-wise, the needs of a few always seek to control and direct the many, regardless of lives lost or money cost.
That is the one world governmen (religious and politic and economic and scientific and entertainment , et al)
serves itself or the devil, selfishly, not caring for the widows or orphans or neighbors or family ..... the way of the flesh , the ways of the world, are carnal and destructive and death dealing.

Click to expand...

Sir, this is a republic, not a kingdom. Stick to the topic.

Xeno.of.athens said:

here we are in Christian Forums in 2025, centuries have gone by, Christianity has been The major religion of The West for two thousand years and I wonder if we're living in The best of all possible worlds?

if we're not then why? if we are how do we explain all the messy and terrible stuff that goes on in the world?

the reason that I wonder if it's The best of all possible worlds is that it doesn't seem likely that God would have made a sub optimal world and even with sin being present, and demons being present, an all manner of natural disaster being present, could The world be anything but the best of all possible worlds since it is the work of God's hands? Or is God a slip shod workman producing substandard products?

Click to expand...

Evil is very very very present. God is patient ..... Judgement is soon.

jamiec said:

This is a typically ignorant USA superstition, and typical Fundy thinking (which has deeply contaminated & defiled US Catholicism, sad to say).

Rights come partly from God, and partly from the State. Sometimes they agree or overlap, and sometimes they do not.

The stuff in the US constitution is of no legal force outside the US, and it certainly has no force in the Catholic Church. I’m not from the USA, and I do not care what the jokers responsible for the US Constitution said. We have our own legal traditions in the UK, and they do not include what the poxy US of A says.

Click to expand...

A non-American is likely unaware that it's from the Declaration of Independence, which lists causes of secession from the British Empire. It goes "We hold these Truths to be self evident, that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Now, if something is granted at the pleasure of the state, then it is a privilege, not a right. What is left unsaid is the assumption that the natural condition of a subject of the state is one with no privileges at all, for how can the state grant what a subject already has? And if all such things are privileges granted by the state, then how can a subject be aggrieved if the state withholds it? If a privilege belongs to the state, then the state can do with it as it sees fit. If, however, each person as rights, something inherent in them by simply being, then it's not a thing that is granted by the state. If it is a right granted by God, then a state that acts to remove them is acting against God Himself. Which was the point of bringing that up in the Declaration of Independence.

All of which Western Europeans apparently consider a pernicious superstition inherent in ignorant Americans, at least when they don't want Americans to come over and help with some war (and sometimes even then). And yet the roots of such is found is found in Western Europeans such as the Englishman John Locke.

Hentenza said:

Just that it was given to Israel not to the New Testament church. The law, included the 10 commandments, was never given to the gentiles.

“because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8‬:‭7‬-‭8‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Romans 8:7-8 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020

because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

bible.com

The Christian church are the body of Christ comprised of believers not those that walk in the flesh.

This is right after Paul said:

“For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8‬:‭2‬-‭4‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Romans 8:2-4 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in th | New American Standard Bible - NASB

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in th

bible.com

Do you really think your interpretation of these verses is correct? Is Paul defending the law in these verses?

Click to expand...

Those walking in the flesh are not subject to God’s laws Rom 8:7-8 why Jesus will say depart from Me Mat 7:23 Not everyone who says Lord Lord (believers) will enter His Kingdom, only those that do His will Psa 40:8 Mat 7:21-23 Exo 31:18 Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14

Why do you think the Holy Spirit of Truth who wrote the Ten Commandments because all of God’s commandments are Truth Psa 119:151 those who keep not His commandments have no truth in them 1 John 2:4 would be teaching people to be an enemy to God by breaking God’s laws. That’s not what it means to be in Christ walking in the Spirit where there is no condemnation Rom 8:1 because the righteousness of the law is fulfilled (keeping) in us Rom 8:4, in contrast being in the flesh is being an enemy to God and not subject to the law of God (not keeping) Rom 8:7-8 they lay it aside as to say its not for me Mark 7:7-13. Those who are walking in His Spirit are keeping His commandments (His version) though love, faith and the power of the Holy Spirit John 14:15-18

Romans 7: 22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. The law of sin is death Rom 6:23 there is no death for those in Christ because one would be keeping God’s laws and not rebelling John 15:10 John 14:15-18 Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14

It’s time for me to move on. I do wish you well. All will get sorted out in God’s time.

DragonFox91 said:

There's a difference between 'theologically conservative / liberal' & 'conservative / liberal.' A theological liberal to use an extreme (but common) example would be 'there's a scientific explanation for each of the Bible's miracles.' Or a less extreme example 'church should be entertainment' over 'church should be teaching.'

Click to expand...

I agree that 'there's a scientific explanation for each of the Bible's miracles' is one example of theological liberalism, but I'm not following your other example. A nondenominational church with an entertaining praise band and an Orthodox Presbyterian church that spends 6 months carefully teaching the Westminster Confession are both likely to be theologically conservative (they're both likely to be inerrantists and complementarians, for example). Can you elaborate on what you had in mind?

Pro 6:16 - These six things the LORD hates,
Yes, seven are an abomination to Him:

Pro 6:17 - A proud look,
A lying tongue,
Hands that shed innocent blood,

Pro 6:18 - A heart that devises wicked plans,
Feet that are swift in running to evil,

Pro 6:19 - A false witness who speaks lies,
And one who sows discord among brethren.

Hentenza said:

Oh really apple sky. Both of these are nonsense. Look the firmament crap has already been debunked. For one raqia should be translated to expanse and secondly we have already been to space and have the knowledge and pictures that it is not as you say. We even have the evidence from both of the Hubble and James Webb telescopes which are in orbit around the earth.

Click to expand...

If @Apple Sky doesn't give a brief synopsis of the videos she links, then don't bother viewing them, as it potentially provides income to the nutjobs who produce these videos.

He's always had moments where he blurts out some of the most incoherent speech one can imagine. I haven't noticed it becoming any more frequent. I'm baffled how anyone has any respect for him.

The naïve, in this context, are not those who are innocent, inexperienced, and trusting people who are gullible and who easily believe other people, that they are who they say they are, doing what they say they are doing. The naïve, in this context, are the foolish, the seducible, careless, easily deceived, and the self-indulgent and selfish who are unwilling to part with their foolishness and their sinful practices, who refuse God’s reproof, and who neglect the counsel of God in order to continue in their sinful ways.

Many of them are the malicious, morally unclean, deceptive, manipulative, opportunistic, who are liars, untrustworthy, egocentric fakes who fake their Christianity in order to deceive and to take advantage of others who trust them. Rather than turning to the Scriptures, taught in the correct biblical context, to get their counsel, they turn to the adulterous and idolatrous church to get their counsel. And what they receive is a clever blend of truth and lies which does not put sin to death, but which pampers the sinner.

For the adulterous and the idolatrous “church” teaches the forgiveness and grace of God more like a covering over the sin, to hide the sin, rather than to remove the sin from the life of the one claiming to want to be in a relationship with Jesus Christ. And they teach repentance (if they do at all) more like a verbal confession of sin, rather than as a change of heart and mind resulting in a change of behavior. But biblical repentance requires that we die to sin and now obey our Lord, in practice, empowered by God.

So, the result of this is that the malicious, adulterous, promiscuous, self-indulgent idolatrous sinner just uses God’s grace as a covering for his sin, but not as an instrument of God, via Jesus’ death and resurrection, which puts sin to death, which then results in obedience to the Lord’s commands. So they just continue on the same sin cycle as they had been on before they made a claim to faith in Jesus Christ. Nothing changes. But no heart, mind, attitude, or behavioral changes required = no genuine faith in Jesus Christ.

But if you turn to the Lord, to his reproof, and you, by faith in Jesus Christ, die with Christ to sin, and now walk in obedience to his commands, in the power of God, by his Spirit, then God will pour out his Spirit upon you, and he will give you new life in Christ Jesus to be lived for God and for his purposes. And he will make his Word (his gospel) known to you so that you can follow him in the way in which he would have us to go, as his followers. If we listen to God, and we obey him, we will live with him for eternity.

But, if we deny him by our lifestyles, and if we refuse him and his gospel message (the one taught by Jesus and his apostles in the correct biblical context), and if we neglect his counsel to us, and if we refuse his reproof, and we choose to go our own way, instead, and if we hold on to our sinful practices, deliberately and habitually sinning against God, and we don’t obey him in practice, then when we call to him, he will not answer unless we repent, in truth, and we die to sin, and we now follow him in obedience.

For Jesus Christ taught that to come to him we must deny self, take up our cross daily (die daily to sin), and follow (obey) him. For if we hold on to living in sin and for self, we will lose our lives for eternity. But if we deny self, die daily to sin, by the Spirit, and we walk in obedience to our Lord and to his commands, in his power, then we have eternal life with God. For not everyone who calls him “Lord” will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one DOING (obeying) the will of God (see Luke 9:23-26; Matthew 7:21-23).

[Matthew 7:13-14,21-23; Luke 9:23-26; John 10:27-30; Acts 26:18; Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:5-10; Romans 3:23; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 8:1-14; 1 Corinthians 10:1-22; Galatians 5:16-24; Ephesians 2:8-10; Ephesians 4:17-32; Ephesians 5:3-6; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 3:1-19; Hebrews 4:1-13; Hebrews 10:19-39; Hebrews 12:1-2; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 1:1-10; 1 John 2:3-6; 1 John 3:4-10; Revelation 2:1-29; Revelation 3:1-22]

My Sheep

Based off John 10:1-30 NIV
An Original Work / June 24, 2012
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

My sheep hear me. They know me.
They listen to my voice and obey.
I call them and lead them.
They know my voice, so they follow me.
They will never follow strangers.
They will run away from them.
The voice of a stranger they know not;
They do not follow him.

So, I tell you the truth that
I am the gate, so you enter in.
Whoever does enter
Will find forgiveness and will be saved.
Nonetheless whoever enters
Not by the gate; other way,
He is the thief and a robber.
Listen not, the sheep to him.

Oh, I am the Good Shepherd,
Who laid his own life down for the sheep.
I know them. They know me.
They will live with me eternally.
The thief only comes to steal and
Kill and to destroy the church.
I have come to give you life that
You may have it to the full…

They know my voice, so they follow me.

Login to view embedded media
They Neglect God’s Counsel
An Original Work / October 12, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

*LILAC said:

She's already deleted mine and a bunch of others' comments and I think I may have been blocked.

Click to expand...

I added my response to the mix. Even if she pulls down the comments, she has to read them first in order to decide to pull them... so MAYBE, something might reach her. I doubt it... but one can hope.

2PhiloVoid said:

That's alright. Carry On, then ... !

​

KANSAS - "Carry On Wayward Son" (1976)​

​

Login to view embedded media ​

​

Possibly one of my all-time favorites!​

Click to expand...

Not a gen x but love that song.

wing2000 said:

No prior president has ever used the military to execute civilians on the high seas without making any attempt to interdict and detain them. The fact is, we may never know what was on that boat and who the occupants were. The evidence lies at the bottom of ocean.

Click to expand...

And the worst part is we don’t want to know or care.

That would happen once and I would be looking for a new church -- if, that is, I had ever chosen to go there in the first place which seems particularly unlikely.