New Posts

David Lamb · 2025-10-20T01:48:40-0500

jonojim1337 said:
This thread isn’t about making me a saint. But rather, to avoid sin unto death.

Yet in your opening post on this thread you wrote: "I’m not perfect, but compared to how vile some people are, who profess themselves to be normal, have a job etc… I have no problem calling myself a saint."

Michie · 2025-10-20T01:39:34-0500

John Sharman said:
Yes, I got that. Did you get what I wrote?

I got what you said but I don’t agree with it there are different modes or traditions within the tent of Pentecostalism . Pentecostalism or Pentecostal Churches do not equate to automatically practicing the same way. The difference is Holiness Pentecostal branch’s goal is to really hone in on practicing holiness in every single thing they do. Not all Pentecostals do it the same way as the Holiness branch of the Pentecostal denomination. Anyway, this is a safe haven for you and others so I will not debate it with you here. God bless! :wave:

Aristarkos · 2025-10-20T01:37:22-0500

Dan Perez said:
Read Gal 6:15 and give your reply. as to what it means.

Again you're mixing up the groups of believers. There are three groups of believers:

1. Child of God (Gal. 4:1; 1 John 3:10)
2. Son of God (Rom.8:14; Gal. 3:25, 26)
3. Perfect (adult) man (Eph. 4:13)

When you talk about those under the law, which group do you think they belong to?

Aristarkos

Michie · 2025-10-20T01:11:08-0500

Login to view embedded media

rambot · 2025-10-20T01:08:11-0500

Learning always said:
Christians are not concerned with equality, because they practise humility and charity.

I think they're supposed to.

.Mikha'el. · 2025-10-20T00:41:50-0500

GodDoesListen55 said:
I used to write here all the time; it was an awesome little outlet for me, but then I was called “dramatic,” so I just went back to doing the more fun posts of CF.

I don't see why you should let anyone's opinion dissuade you, Miss Chelsea. :hug:

partinobodycular · 2025-10-20T00:26:48-0500

jacks said:
Hmm. Sorry not sure what this means. "Society" isn't a single unit, it is made up of multiple entities, people and institutions. They together form a community.

Which is why I put society in quotation marks. It's this assortment of people and groups that together form the heart of our social contract. In spite of its diversity we collectively agree to certain social guidelines, the aim of which is to provide for the safety and stability of the group as a whole, and the fair and equitable treatment of the people in it.

jacks said:
And if one is only willing to sacrifice as much (and no more) than a self perceived equitable standard, how is that a sacrifice at all?

It's every person's right to judge the equitability with which they're treated. And the true measure of a community isn't how well it serves the foremost of its members, but how well it serves the least of them. People are instinctively social creatures, they seek acceptance. Deny them that and the consequences are as much your fault as theirs. Ignore the disenfranchised at your own peril, but don't think that you can blithely judge those who's shoes you've never walked in.

jacks said:
Our society doesn't neglect "empathy", there are numerous safety nets and many institutions (churches for example) and people that contribute greatly and unselfishly to the needs of the disadvantaged.

The most venomous of the disenfranchised aren't the ones that you recognize, it's the ones that you don't. Blacks, women, gays, illegal immigrants, all have served their time as the disenfranchised. The community isn't judged solely by the good that it does, but also by the good that it doesn't do, and far more so when it fails to do so under the guise of some ethically 'superior' social good.

jacks said:
However, the larger laurels and financial compensations go to those who are contributing to our societies betterment. (I admit this can be over done and you have people or companies that are being overly compensated for their contribution.)

You're free to judge the integrity of the community's actions by whatever standard you see fit, but remember that the other person has the exact same right. Your standing as part of the 'community' has absolutely no bearing on the superiority of your claims over anyone else's. Might doesn't make right.

As for who contributes more to the 'betterment' of our society, wealth may be your chosen standard, but it's far from the most important of mine.

jacks said:
I'm merely looking at the average working stiff vs those that make no effort to contribute.

As I've said, until you've walked a mile in their shoes, what right do you have to judge?

NBB · 2025-10-20T00:20:32-0500

Lady Bug said:
I've been trying to think about this one, even before you posed this question. I think that something is wrong with the house. After all, since its inception in December 1979, it has never been blessed. I'm obsessed with suicide. The thing is, in my heart I don't think I actually want to die. A couple of examples come to mind - I had a diagnostic mammogram a few weeks ago to rule out inflammatory breast cancer because I was terrified that the bump/spot on my breast was something malignant, but it's "just" cellulitis. I was terrified though that if were IBC then I wouldn't live long. Then, I get a tad apprehensive when wanting to walk in a wooded area (it is never as bad as I make it seem), hoping that I'm in a state of grace when doing this, just in case anything happens. I think I do care about not dying, but I'm obsessed with ideation.

However, the only thing that makes me feel like I'm not going out of my mind in a cage is going out and walking in an open, scarcely populated area. I'm starting, however, not to feel too much difference in depression when doing this, but I do feel less confined in a small space, and that does help my mental health to a degree. Ever since I've been doing this walking, I hate staying home at all. I feel like I'm in a cage.

Sorry, I was conflating jinxing with curses. I didn't realize there was a difference; I just made an assumption that they were synonymous. I was wrong.

See, I think that this is where I was getting at. I feel like the curse has something to do with his former wife, and even my dad believed this. He hated the marriage and felt like he was lied to, in order to accept the woman, but after the marriage he discovered that his family deceived him about her and he wanted out, but he suspected that someone had wished bad upon him for doing this and that's why Mom got dementia and my brother and I have almost the exact misfortunes on certain things.

You could try to throw away old or useless objects, or that are 'suspicious' your house is going to end more orderly anyway even if that is not a cursed object problem, or maybe you throw the problem away who knows

childeye 2 · 2025-10-20T00:06:40-0500

CoreyD said:
Did God create his intelligent children with free will?
Though many whether religious or non religious claim not, and argue against this, the answer is clearly yes.

What is the proof?
There are a number of scriptures, but let's start with John 8:44

Starting with God's heavenly children - the spirit creation, called angels, the Bible says of the one called Devil and Satan... When he lies, he speaks out of his own character. That is... pertaining to self, or of his own.
The disciple James uses this term in this way...

James 1:14

Jesus thus makes clear that the angel that became Satan the Devil, acts according to his own will, or desire.
Jesus further states in the same verse, John 8:44... "your will is to do your father’s desires".
Humans too, have their own will, which is in opposition to the father.

Can sin be blamed for the will of intelligent creatures?
Jesus said, the one called Devil and Satan, "was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him".
So, no, this was a deliberate opposing of the truth. Hence, the name Satan.

It's also important to note that this angel .... in fact all of the angels... none are born in sin and shaped in iniquity.
So, sin cannot be claimed as a hinderance to free will. Nor can it be claimed that they have to give in to wrong desires.
The angels make their own decisions to do what the want. Genesis 6:2
Proof that the angels - God's heavenly children, do have free will.

Regarding humans, the same apply.
In saying that their will is to do Satan's desire, what was Jesus pointing out? They were acting on their own will. Not anyone else's.
That humans have free will is made clear in other scriptures.

1 Timothy 2:14

The Bible says Adam was not deceived.
Thus Adam acted on his own free will.
The verse says, Eve became a sinner, only after acting on her desire.
Adam and Eve were free willed agents... not driven by sin, but making free willed decisions.
Proof that humans... God's earthly children were created with free will.

Did sin somehow cancel out free will.
In the imagination of many, that is the case.
However, the Bible does not say that after sin came into the world through one man, that free will became obsolete.
Rather, the scriptures refer to man's free will, repeatedly.
Leviticus 1:3; 1 Corinthians 9:16-18 Deuteronomy 30:19; 2 Corinthians 9:7; Philemon 1:14

The Greek word hekousios - meaning free will, is the neuter of a derivative from hekon; voluntariness -- willingly, which is (an adjective, a primitive term) – properly, willing; "unforced, of one's own will, voluntary" (J. Thayer), i.e. acting on one's own accord. The root (hek-) emphasizes intentional, deliberate action (choice), i.e. "of free-will" (J. Thayer).

Please keep in mind that my comments about the "Will" are strictly in the moral/immoral context.

The definition of freewill in Greek that you have given above is an adjective, not a noun. It describes a certain type of action or choice that is uncoerced/voluntary.

Elsewhere, you identify a free will as a free agent. That term is describing a will in a state of equivocation between two masters and therefore is for all intents and purposes depicting an undecided soul in a state of equivocation ---> See doublemindedness, also understand why Jesus would say this ---> "You can't serve two masters".

Neither of these meanings are applicable to any description consistent with Adam being made with a free will. I can't actually comment on the scriptures you provided as 'proof' of a free will since the definitions of free will you provided are inconsistent. For the sake of clarity, you need to specify what the will is free from when you claim a free will.

The only coherent meaning of the term free will as a noun that I can see in scripture is a will qualified as free from sin. That would also be consistent with the free will that God gave Adam when he was created.

lucypevensie · 2025-10-19T23:55:50-0500

Yuck

bratwurst

lucypevensie · 2025-10-19T23:47:13-0500

“Never say never” they say.

lucypevensie · 2025-10-19T23:44:57-0500

Swearing is not good.

GOOD

lucypevensie · 2025-10-19T23:43:45-0500

You’re an English teacher now?

lucypevensie · 2025-10-19T23:42:37-0500

Good news: they send robots in there instead.

lucypevensie · 2025-10-19T23:41:28-0500

Accept the effects of fruitcake.

ACCPT

A2SG · 2025-10-19T23:39:16-0500

JSRG said:
Complete and utter lack of any evidence? People unfriendly to Trump have pointed out to various problems with it, including the left-wing Vox (which, while saying some of the conservative/Republican attacks on the conviction are excessive, acknowledges there are some legitimate things to take issue with).

I didn't vote for Trump, but I still think Bragg's prosecution against him appears highly questionable and fairly blatant lawfare. Given that, I'm not going to blame anyone for not finding those convictions a reason to not evote for him. The excesses of that case probably made a good number of people take the much more credible-looking Jack Smith prosecutions less seriously.

Yes, some do see problems with Trump's criminal fraud trial, but the fact remains: the jury found him guilty, and the judge did not vacate their decision. So it stands. If an appeals court in the future sees these legal issues as being significant enough to overturn the verdict, that, and only that, will indicate to me that these problems actually make a difference. I'm not a lawyer, nor do I have anywhere near the experience or knowledge of NY financial law to make a determination myself.

As to the lack of evidence, I stand by that. Legal theories and arguments are all well and good, but no one has yet been able to prove, with evidence, any actual misconduct or malfeasance in the case. And any claims of bias on the part of the judge are weakened by the sentence he imposed: an unconditional discharge. No punishment, no jail time, nothing. Not exactly the actions of someone out to get him.

I'll leave legal arguments to the appeals court, as I'm not qualified to evaluate them, but arguments are not evidence. And anyone claiming "lawfare" with this, or with James' civil case against Trump, has yet to provide any actual evidence of misconduct or malfeasance.

-- A2SG, and both guilty verdicts continue to stand....

Fervent · 2025-10-19T23:24:11-0500

No I'm doesn't

timechangers · 2025-10-19T23:22:22-0500

com7fy8 said:
Of course I do not know the people you are talking about and I don't know your church. I have found that every person is unique. So, even if a few do the same thing, this does not mean they all have the same reason!!

So, each one can speak for oneself.

And I would say Jesus did not limit Himself to some group of ones who were like Him, but He shared with all kinds of people and loved any and all people enough to invest time in loving all different sorts of people.

His love is creative, for this.

So, I would say pray and be ready for love, however God has this go.

"And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma."

com7fy8 said:
Of course I do not know the people you are talking about and I don't know your church. I have found that every person is unique. So, even if a few do the same thing, this does not mean they all have the same reason!!

So, each one can speak for oneself.

And I would say Jesus did not limit Himself to some group of ones who were like Him, but He shared with all kinds of people and loved any and all people enough to invest time in loving all different sorts of people.

His love is creative, for this.

So, I would say pray and be ready for love, however God has this go.

"And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma." (Ephesians 5:2)

jas3 · 2025-10-19T23:20:57-0500

Leevo said:
A couple reasons I don’t switch: Primarily being that the only ones I can see myself theologically aligning with enough would be Anglicans, of which there are none within my state at all, at least that aren’t Episcopalian whom I have significant issues with. Secondarily, we absolutely love the church community that we have found and my family is doing well there. I would not want to uproot them unless necessary.

If you agree with Anglicanism theologically (and by Anglicanism I assume you mean the conservative ACNA or similar groups that actually hold to the historical Anglican beliefs), why not follow what they teach about Communion?

Nithavela · 2025-10-19T22:59:41-0500

Arcangl86 said:
I don't recall a "It's the right thing to do" exception to the appropriations clause.

Well, the fix is already in. If he doesn't "manage to pay them", the evil democrats were just too strong in their power grab towards the purse of loyal american soldiers.

Rescued One · 2025-10-19T22:33:40-0500

Worth reading. God bless America!

New Posts

New Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page