Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Um...Institutes of the Christian Religion is theology. What theology do you study-Jack Chick? Anyway, it appears you're again sure of what you don't know.I have never read any of John Calvin's books, I'm too busy studying theology. In any case I'm sure Calvin, never claimed that God created some specific purpose of tormenting them in hell.
Daniel 9:27 — “The Week, the Half, and the One Week”
Many translations simplify Daniel 9:27 to “in the middle of the week.”
But the Hebrew text reads more intricately:
הַשָּׁבוּעַ חֲצִי הָאֶחָד שָׁבוּעַ
ha-shavua ḥetzi ha-eḥad shavua
Literal order: “the week, the half, and the one week.”
This layered structure suggests not just a single “half-week,” but a week and a half —
a full week plus the midpoint of another.
---
Word-by-Word Breakdown
HebrewTransliterationMeaning
הַשָּׁבוּעַha-shavuathe week
חֲצִיḥetzithe half
הָאֶחָדha-eḥadthe one
שָׁבוּעַshavuaweek
Pattern: “the week → the half → the one week.”
That sequence naturally reads as “a week and a half (of one week).”
---
Interpretive Sense
“He will cause the many of the covenant to prevail for the week and a half of the one week.”
This keeps every word of the Hebrew and shows a continuous covenant period —
a full week completed, then the half of another week where the covenant breaks
and the sacrifice and offering cease.
---
Timeline
Week One → Half of Next Week → TakeAway Sacrifice Ends
This pattern fits the prophetic rhythm of Daniel’s vision —
not merely “half of one week,” but a week and a half in total,
bridging one com
plete period into the opening half of the next.
Where is the noun, and does this mean you are finished with the discussion and want to spend the remainder of time arguing about a word?The Bible says Adam was not deceived.
Thus Adam acted on his own free will.
I think things are dawning on me now that he didn't tell us (even my mom) whether he truly believed in the religion or not. He kept some secular aspects of it like hygiene and absolutely refused to eat pork whatsoever, but toward the end of his life he started opening up to me about how Mo wasn't the great guy that Muslims say he was, and that he wasn't a prophet or a role model, but that you can't say anything about this to anyone or else you can get killed. He never came out to me and said he's an apostate - I told him once or twice (I'm paraphrasing): "You know, if you believe in those things, that disqualifies you from being an actual Muslim, you would even qualify as an apostate." (the latter "apostate" part, I think I have actually said, though)God bless you.
I have no further comment.
Thank you for your serviceHowever, those Senators are very clearly implying that President Trump has issued or shall issue illegal orders to the military. I've been in the US military for more than 27 years and I have more trust in President Trump than any other President whom has been my Commander-in-Chief. President Trump has not, and he shall not issue any illegal orders to the military.
Odd. I read VP Vance wasn't invited, nor was President Trump. Hmmm...
Only with modernist revisionism. As you seem to recognize down below.Anyone who has made a serious effort to study Islam knows that abrogation is a very complex and controversial subject. Very few verses found in the Qur'an have been agreed on as being abrogated among scholars, and of those that have, none override the verses that teach tolerance, coexistence, and peace. A far more important concept in understanding Islamic jurisprudence is puting things in historical and cultural context when reading any Islamic texts
Are Muslims or are Muslims not supposed to imitate Muhammad as the ideal moral example for all humanity? how then can you claim that we have to understand him in his historical situation? And is the Qu'ran the timeless revelation of Allah or is it a contextual document intended only for those who were in the unique situation of 7th century Arabia?.
The Muslims that were being spoken to in the Qur'an and the classic scholars lived in a different culture, at a different point in time, and were facing unique situations. You can't read the Qur'an, hadiths, or the tasfirs from a modern perspective, you have to read them through a historical lens, if not, you will continue to misinterpret what they are saying.
A claim that only arose in the 20th century among modernists, while all historic interpreters were agreed that they very much do.The violent verses found in the Qur'an don't abrogate the verses of peace because of the context they were written in. There are certain situations where the verses of peace apply, and others where the verses of violence apply, therefore, each verse has a specific context and application. In other words, each verse in the Qur'an is to be applied to its appropriate situation. For example, when Qur'an 9:5 says "When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. And capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush," it is dealing with a specific event at a point in history when Meccan pagans were breaking their peace treaties and declaring war on the Muslims, so that verse would not negate the peaceful verses in the Qur'an since it is very specific to it's intent and the point in history it was to be applied
A claim that is more modern attempts at whitewashing it into something it isn't..
Neither the Qur'an nor the hadith can be properly interpreted without putting them into the historical and cultural context they were written in.
Another white-washing and nothing more.According to Islamic teachings, Muslims are to emulate Muhammad's character traits like honesty, compassion, and humility and his ethical principles. Muslims understand the historical context in which the Qur'an was written. They see his actions as a warrior to have been appropriate for situations Muslims faced in the 7th century and not as mandates for Muslims to follow in 2025.
With humiliation? The issue isn't "taxes' it's that jizya is designed to humiliate the people paying it and make their second class status clear.You do realise that Muslims also had to pay taxes (zakāt)? And the tax was for the betterment of society as a whole. Would it be fair for non-Muslims to live in an Islamic state and receive all of the benefits and protections offered by that state without any contribution to the costs involved?
there was no "openly hostile" requirement. It is either under islamic control or is "at war" for not being subjugated. You can't whitewash it when there was no 3rd option.In very simple terms, Dar al Islam (House of Islam) historically was a Muslim land with a Muslim government where Islamic law governed. Dar al Harb (House of War) was a land not under an Islamic government or Islamic law, which was openly hostile towards Muslims. Since there are no countries or states that fit these definitions today, the terms are no longer used by Muslims for the most part.
I prefer Islamic fundamentalists to calling them "extremists" because they are simply practicing the religion in its purest form. Speaking the truth about Islamic jurisprudence and history isn't "anti-Islamic propaganda" it's not giving in to Islamic pressure and accusations for the sake of political correctness.The only people who talk about jizyah, abrogation, the division of the world into dar-al-Islam and dar-al-harb, and cite Qur'an 9:29 as an open-ended command to Muslims to fight until the end of time today are Islamic extremists and anti-Islamic propagandists. So when someone like yourself presents Islam the way you have in this thread and others, it's clear to me, as someone who has a strong background in Islam, that your understanding of this religion comes from those sources and not the actual teachings and understanding of Islam that the vast majority of the world's Muslims adhere to.
continued prayers the UK does the right thing and protects the most vulnerable!We're praying in Church, for it not to become law, and I've written to my MP twice, urging him to vote against it. I know others have written too. There are some of us in England and Wales who see the dangers of it going ahead, including many medical personnel and disability groups.

I agree. Not to mention, there are different versions of the 10 Commandments.My opinion on this article:
The push to display the Ten Commandments, while respecting them as a moral foundation, misses the central point of the Christian faith. It would be better to feature the Beatitudes, as these teachings from Jesus Christ of Nazareth truly represent the New Covenant's emphasis on mercy, humility, and the spirit of discipleship.
Matthew 5:3–10
* “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
* Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
* Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
* Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.
* Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
* Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
* Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
* Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."
Amen. It's slaughter of the most innocent. Selfish and cruel. Anyone who kills their own child in the name of choice deserves the wrath of God.Elective abortion is always wrong not only because the Church says so but because I have always believed that as a Christian.
I think we can still respect human beings while respecting our borders. I don't think the Holy Father said anything wrong, IMHO.How can a nation protect it's borders without law enforcement?
Even the Vatican prohibits illegal entry.
It's more sociological than anything. How people expresses themselves change with the times. Nothing new here, and that certainly relates to gender and gender expression.Comedian Bill Maher denounced the Left's embrace of gender ideology earlier this week and claimed many on his side of the political spectrum are not scientifically sound.
During a discussion with fellow comedian Patton Oswalt on Maher's "Club Random" podcast, which aired Monday, the two discussed the post-election soul-searching among Democrats, with Oswalt pushing back against the notion that Democrats have veered too far to the political fringe.
Oswalt suggested that the widespread notion that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is "too far left" shows the country is "broken," adding that the U.S. is still reeling from having "freaked out" over the election of former President Barack Obama.
Continued below.
![]()
Bill Maher blasts Left for having 'freaked out' over gender ideology: 'That's not scientific'
Comedian Bill Maher denounced the Left s embrace of gender ideology earlier this week and claimed many on his side of the political spectrum are not scientifically soundwww.christianpost.com