According to my current reading of the Bible using First-Order Logic, yes, homosexual acts are sinful. As usual, I could be wrong. FOL isn't the be-all and end-all. I am not a prophet of the Lord.

Leviticus 18:

22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Click to expand...

Leviticus 20:

13 If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Click to expand...

Romans 1:

26b For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Click to expand...

1 Corinthians 6:

9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men [a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Click to expand...

NIV Footnotes: [a] The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts.

1 Timothy 1:

9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

Click to expand...

Jude 1:

7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Click to expand...

1 Corinthians 7:

2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.

Click to expand...

Are homosexual acts sinful?

For each of the above passages, list the pros and cons factors. Be exhaustive and objective in listing the factors. Then, for each factor, assign a weight between 0 and 10. I would put a higher weight on Bible verses and a lower weight on extra-biblical writings. Try not to let your preconceived notions influence your weighting strategy. Do this for all the pros and cons of all the passages. Sum up the weights for the pros. Sum up the weights for the cons. Decide for yourself probabilistically.

I use Occam's razor hermeneutically when I interpret Bible verses. Some ad-hoc nuance can explain away each of the above passages as referring to a man having sex with a temple prostitute, or a man having sex with a boy, or men having sex with angelic beings, etc. However, there is a simple unifying explanation: it is talking about a man having sex with another man, consented or not. This simple explanation satisfies all seven passages nicely. To me, this simple unifying factor is worthy of a heavyweight.

In any case, a Christian needs to sympathize and empathize with gay people with the love of Christ.

Can a person call himself a Christian if he doesn't believe homosexuality is wrong?

Sure, some denominations don't believe that homosexuality is a sin. I have no authority to decide who is a Christian or not. If a person calls himself a Christian, I'll treat him as a fellow brother.

Will such a person inherit the new earth?

Some will, and some will not, like anyone who calls himself a Christian. God is the final judge, not I.

Are people born homosexuals?

Some are. Everyone is born with a tendency to sin one way or another. E.g., some men are born with the inclination to watch porn. Some like to get drunk. Some take drugs. Some can't control their eating habit. Some like to pray to Mary. Etc.

See also:

• Was lesbianism a sin?
• The concept of men having sex with men and the word for it
• Why is a homosexual act a sin when it hurts no one?
• How to treat LGBTQ+?

...be called a loose canon?

Hello and blessings, everyone;
My name is Cynthia, and I'm from Florida. I'm glad to be accepted on this forum. I'm a born-again Believer, seasoned, unmarried, with a mind to serve the Lord. I am learning to think outside the box, detaching from this world's matrix. I am looking forward to fellowshipping with many like-minded believers.

I would like to bring to your attention the following groups that are sort of borderline in terms of whiteness. Lets see what you think

Irish: Common sense tells us Irish are White, yet back in the past in the US they were considered non-white for some reason

Russians: Common sense says they are White, yet one might argue otherwise. They say Russia is part of Europe. But, geographically, majority of its territory is actually in Asia. Although its true that its population is more dense in its European part rather than Asian part. Politically, Russia isn't allied with Europe either. On the contrary, it is allied with various Asian, Middle Eastern and African countries, while it views the West as the enemy. But, interestingly enough, a lot of White Nationalists actually side with Russians in their conflict with Ukraine. Which makes it a bit of a twist since the very conflict that makes Russia look non-white (where it is opposed to the West and finds support in various African countries) is the exact thing that makes it look White (since it gets support from White Nationalists). Finally, genetically speaking, Russians are not fully white either, they have some Mongolian admixtures. However, let me be clear though: when I talk about "Russians" I am talking about people that are genetically Russian. So I am not discussing actual Mongols or other Asians that live in Russian territory, nor am I discussing people from Caucus or Siberia that happened to live in Russia either. I am talking strictly about ethnic Russians. And I suspect ethnic Russians might not be fully white genetically due to the interbreeding that resulted from Tatar-Mongol conquest. I read somewhere they might be something like 90% European and 10% Asian. However I also read that other European countries might have non-white admixtures too. So the key here is to compare and see if Russians have more non-white admixtures than others.

Non-Russian Slavs: In the political context discussed above, non-Russian slavs are all opposed Russia (in fact, even more vehemently so than US) so they would be "white" from this perspective. But it would be silly to say that they are different race from Russians since they are of the same (slavic) group. However, there is a nuance to this. Speaking of Asian admixtures mentioned above, I heard that Russians might have more of those admixtures than other Slavs. In particular, those admixtures came from Tatar-Mongol conquest and subsequent interbreeding, and this affected Russia-proper more so than other Slavic countries.

Ashkinazi Jews: Jews look White yet genetically they are Middle Eastern, and we don't normally regard Arabs as White. Which by the way makes it a bit interesting. Arabs have darker skin than Jews do, despite them both being Middle Eastern. I am not racist, so I apologize in advance for any misunderstanding. But I would have to refer to White Nationalists simply because they are the ones who give it the most thought, and a lot of them famously do NOT regard Jews as White (as exemplified by Stormfront) yet other White Nationalists do see Jews as White (as exemplified by American Renaissance). It is also interesting to compare Jews to Russians in terms of Whiteness. If you look at Stormfront, they regard Russians as White (they even have a section "Stormfront Russia") but they regard Jews as non-White (and view them as their main enemies). On the other hand, if you look at the politics, then Jews side with the West while Russia is against the West. The pro-Western opposition within Russia is largely Jewish, and this is one of the big contributting factors to Russian antisemitism. So if you look at it from this perspective, then Russian antisemitism can be seen as non-white hatred against whites (where Russians are being non-white while Jews are being white) especially if you notice how it is coupled to Russian alliances with various non-white countries. This is the exact opposite to what you would gather from "stormfront Russia" where Russians take up the role of Whites and Jews take up the role of non-whites. Finally, United Church of God believes that Jews are two southern tribes while Western Europeans are 10 Northern tribes, and they don't think Eastern Europeans or Russians are any of the tribes. So from this perspective, again, Jews would be "whiter" than Russian -- which again contradicts Stormfront that regards Russians as White but doesn't regard Jews as such.

Sephardic Jews: By some twist, some White nationalists hate Ashkinazi Jews but don't hate Sephardic Jews, despite the fact that Sephardic have darker skin than Ashkinazi. This is due to some genetic studies that claim that both non-Jewish Western Europeans and Sephardic Jews are Israelites, while Ashkinazi Jews are not.

Arabs: Normally one would assume Arabs are non-white, but in light of discussion about Jews this too might be more complicated than it seems. If one is of the opinion that Jews are White, and since Jews and Arabs share middle eastern ancestry, would Arabs we white too?

Iranians: I heard Iranians are not Arabs but instead they are of European stock that just happened to be in the area. In fact, the word Aryan comes from "Iranian" or something like that

Spaniards: On the one hand, Spain is part of Europe, but on the other hand they are considered Hispanic. However, I talked to Indian guy who told me that Spaniards have some African blood (just like other Hispanics do) so they are non-white in this respect.

Hispanics: Some people argue Hispanics are White (as exemplified by Spaniards) while others argue they are different race

Latino: Since Latino are distinct from Hispanic, perhaps its possible to argue that one of those two groups is white while the other isn't

Indians (as in, from India): I been talking to an Indian guy who told me he believes that Indians are genetically of the same stock as Europeans, while Chinese aren't. So Indians are "whiter" than Chinese, despite Chinese having lighter skin. He also told me that Spaniards have 10% African blood, while Indians don't have any African blood at all, which makes Indians "whiter" than Spaniards, again contrary to what skin color would tell you.

Chinese: Even though Chinese are clearly non-European, who is to say that White should be European and not Asian? Look at the word white: it refers to color. So if Chinese have white skin, why aren't they white?

If you are living outside the Will of God, ie committing adultery, no longer worshipping God, reading your bible, pursuing your own
will, hobbies, interests, having an interest in other religions, (ie Buddhism)
could God still bless you with winning awards and money and being recognised in the Art world?

I should start by saying, although I'm not a Catholic, I am a Christian who practices confession, probably being in a category of her own in a way (my gateway into Christ was an obscure book called The Mune Shinri, which is relatively random in terms of spiritual commentary). There exists a lot about me, from trivial traits that should have no bearing (hypergraphia for example, people are borderline superstitious about my communication habits), misconceptions about who I am, and past actions I've committed that inspire what one might call judgment towards me, often by other Christians, with the last thing being what I am judged for on the widest scale, with the misdeeds I'm associated with being the kind that one might expect a human being to have a "psychologically ingrained" inversion to, enough for it to be common to bring up interpretations of Matthew 18:6, even though I don't stand by the version of me they think I am.

If there is anything that I or scripture has perceived that I have inarguably done wrong to someone, I have apologized, and I've had long conversations about these in detail with priests/ministers/etc. and they seem to be understanding, even if they themselves are under pressure by public perceptions of honor. I go to a number of churches from a number of different groups because that's how the local community is combined with the denominational ambiguity which is just a part of me, so this doesn't just pertain to one group either. It's the populace part that intrigues me enough to consult about though.

Anywho, without actually naming the real/perceived misdeeds (except by demand), coming from a very relatively openly judging society, I have gone to confessions and spoken at length about the things people say they don't like about me. Doctrine would say I only have to do this once, but I often bring the same things up on many occasions because larger society invalidates these (a common recurring theme in my life being that those in charge don't mind me while commoners despise me), and it's well-known they invalidate any major apology I've ever given as well, even if the people I've actually apologized to have actually forgiven me (as in people are judging me based on feeling cheated via a sense of disgust it seems, as the people active in judging me are not any who have truly been affected in any classic sense by me).

There is what would be argued as being a weird recurring phenomenon as well, where I might explain to total strangers situations of mine, and they claim to understand, then the more gossipy among those who judge me (who often even make up things about me if they think other people are waning in their judgment) barely say two exaggerated words about my guilt, and suddenly the person who says they understand become one of the judgers, which demonstrates how utterly powerful the situation is over peoples' very cores. It is as if the words of the latter are taken as superior or that I am of lesser personhood, and if my social environments were one big courtroom, they don't ask me questions or present anything for support, they simply imply the deal is sealed and I am permanently evil.

I'm fully considerate that the people here are not like the people I experience, but elsewhere, I'm often told, even by brothers and sisters in Christ, that my past is the kind of past that, if forgiven by someone, that person's ethical standing is dubious. A priest once even was threatened by a whole mass of having his church abandoned forever based on positive, even neutral things he was going to imply about my past, and I could see in his eyes that his hand was forced to vaguely condemn me, though I was able to pretend he didn't have me in mind as I knew that "wasn't him", though that was at a church I've only ever gone to once due to being detoured by the Vermont floods last year, with many seeming to have hoped I didn't make it out of that (I was on the brink), as well as to imply I shouldn't be considered welcome among the sheep of the lord, which is the mindset that made me reflect on all of this, as we're all thinking "one of us has to go" in different senses of the words.

Jesus says he does not expect we would be successful in being like him, but when the power of populace pressure takes precedent over the purity of his ideal message and causes people to be so absolute, at least among the parts of the populace who do not violate Proverbs 6:16-20 and are simply people going by their own unimposing instincts, is there an overlap with grounds for mortal sinfulness/anathema, a call to educate, or is this a matter of acceptance of them, in which case I do not feel like a Christian surrounded by other Christians and get lost in of myself trying to comprehend that I might be even though I consciously know I am? This train of thought also loomed in my head when I was watching the recent new TV show Shogun, which takes place during the Portuguese Jesuit missions in Japan, with the people there having a reputation for being very in-tune with majority thinking, which I've heard compared with the idea of "following two masters", especially due to things like the bit about the priesthood above, while other people say condemnation of such a core aspect of humans is to be partial among God's many cultures if not also implying it implies the very act of anything resembling judgment is to be seen as under the microscope. In short, where is the burden placed, and what happens in response, considering pious incentive is at stake?

Internal documents obtained by AFL show the board characterizing “supporters of the former president” as constituting “most of the Domestic Terrorism threat” in the United States. The documents also classified traits such as having served “in the military” and being “religious” as “indicators of extremists and terrorism,” citing unnamed research. It is not shocking to me.

“I, as a taxpayer in this country, resent using the system for your own personal self-aggrandizement,” the Amazon Freevee “Judy Justice” personality said of Bragg.
She doesn't think Trump should have been president, but is honest enough to speak about the case objectively. In my opinion the witch hunt against Trump is election interference. Trump won't be able to speak about most of his case during the debates, and that's a violation of my right to hear what both candidates have to say--that's more election interference.

I know I might pizz off a few by this post but I'm going through some sheet again and two people in my life who I normally talk to about this, are sort of out of commission.

It's basically a "I'm alone the whole day looking at the walls and you went out to CHURCH" (church is only one hour of that day) and is cursing at me calling me a B and miserable person for leaving him alone and yet at the same time (though not in the same convo) he barks that I'm all alone in this world and doesn't know what to do about it. I also got groceries for him but he doesn't appreciate it, he's more biching about the church stuff instead saying "G D F church."

I feel like I'm losing my mind, or if I'm going crazy, wondering if I'm supposed to be treated like this. In case this sounds like the dumbest question of all time, I think when you're being "abused" you have to ask yourself if you're doing something to cause it.

As a minister, I am “duty-bound” to accurately present the content of the Bible. A true call from God will result in a desire to help people understand Scripture and apply it to their lives. But a faithful opening of timeless Scripture can generate some visceral pushback from audiences today.

When I call out sin, point out errors in interpreting the Bible, or suggest that biology rather than emotions should dictate the discussion on human sexuality, I’m told that I need to be more tolerant. What exactly is tolerance in today’s society?

Tolerance is a manufactured, secular, socially manipulated and weakly constructed excuse for a sentiment. It is not a Christian virtue, a Fruit of the Spirit (Ephesians 6) or a command of Jesus. Only the “sparkle creed” suggests otherwise, and it is not a religious orthodoxy; it is a perversion of a traditional Christian statement of faith.

What is tolerance? The way the world imposes and enforces it, tolerance is a fabricated counterfeit of Christian love and genuine human compassion.

Instead of, “Let me help lift you out of your mess,” tolerance says, “I support your right to live as a disaster.”

A life-changing encounter with the Son of God promises, “You don’t have to stay this way, there’s a better, higher Way to live.” Tolerance says, “I embrace the fact that you’re broken. I will agree to underwrite the lie you can't ever change.”

Instead of offering hope, rescue and peace, tolerance says, “I celebrate the falsehoods you've been told. I will also lie and tell you that the fatal, degrading, noxious Hell you’re living in is a valid, ‘alternative lifestyle.’”

Continued below.

“We have to fight back against a rogue prosecutor who is trying to take a presidential candidate off the campaign trail. It sabotages Missourians’ right to a free and fair election,” the post continued.
A free and fair election is at the heart of a democratic process.

His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber. Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter. Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and to morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant. - Isaiah 56:10-12

@49:20 in the video below - And the reason why these empty brain preachers are doing that is because they are scared they will lose their little crowd... But the Word is the one that draws! If you tell the truth somebody will hear... If you tell the truth somebody will follow you. The Bible calls these preachers in Isaiah 56:10 dumb dogs... They don't like me... Who can't even bark.... Hello in here!

@49:20 in this linked video They are all dumb dogs, they cannot even bark!

Hi brothers and sisters happy Sunday
I have previous mentioned the woman that spoke to me, and how she mentioned she was influence by a angel (demon)
She posted another message to me, and this time it was a fallen angel. Well, at least it called itself Rafael and highly intellectual, and a noticeable difference from her talking. Just to say.
It started to talk about the end times, when how etc, and how it would happen and how it knew it was etc.
I didn't engage. She's apparently waiting for reply. I just skimmed it.
Now can I have your take on this? Do I respond at all, or not? And with what? I was lik, I'm not budging, I'm not having this.
But the question also is why me why now and what can be the intent of saying it at all?

After we lost one of our presbytery a few months ago to cancer now another member of our presbytery is in Georgia again with Cancer (lukemia). I don't know much about what's going on but that theyre receiving chemo in Georgia for Cancer. Will continue to update you guys as our Elder updates us. Thank you for your prayers.

It's 96 degrees here with high humidity. My church has no air conditioning. I have asthma. Would I have to go to confession if I skipped Mass this week? I can barely breathe out there.

Even the former Democratic Gov. of NY recognizes it.

I have lost my fight. My life has been a continuous spiritual attack and suffering struggle. I find my identity in Christ, but the enemy is always able to take it as I fail in obedience to God over and over. I wish I had never been born so I wouldn’t have to live in this torment of life. I’ve suffered from depression for 30 years over not being able to be the person God wants me to be. I have attempted suicide three times during this timeframe. Whatever God is trying to teach me in this blackness, I am just incapable of grasping. My foundation has collapsed and my hope is gone. The power of the Word feels dead to me.

Peace in Christ.

There is a “truth” of the gospel (the word gospel means “good news”) that is not currently being preached as it is not being understood. Although the words of the gospel are being spoken by the voices of earthly-minded men, it is being done without the Spirit of knowledge giving its true meaning.

The following is an attempt to explain the good news which is for the here-and-now rather than the “here-after” as being now universally preached by the “word of men”. The good news is not about after we “die and go to Heaven” but rather for our mortal salvation on this earth for the duration of this age.

Proverbs 11:31
(31) Behold, the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked and the sinner.

Fearing God (keeping His commandments) is the beginning of knowledge. The only way to enter in to understand the good news is to keep His commandments when we hear something that we do not initially agree with rather than behaving in envy, strife, wrath, contentions, etc.

Proverbs 1:7
(7) The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

We are to “take heed” on how we hear….for those who will hear (believing what one hears), more knowledge shall be given.

Mark 4:24-25
(24) And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given.
(25) For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath.

The world and its lust actively pass away (now) from this earth but he that does the will of God ABIDES “for ever”...that is, abides/stays into the age. The people of this world (who are conformed to this world) pass away in their mortal bodies. They perish.

The good news is not about passing away from this earth along with the rest of this world but about staying here mortally on this earth. The people of this world pass away as nothing in this current world can prevent their mortal deaths.

1 John 2:16-17
(16) For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
(17) And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that does the will of God abides for ever (INTO THE AGE).

Young's Literal Translation
and the world doth pass away, and the desire of it, and he who is doing the will of God, he doth remain -- to the age.

As it says in Proverbs 11:4, riches can not prevent our death…but the doing of His righteousness can. The “day of wrath” is the day of God’s coming judgment upon us for sin….the day of our death. It equates the "day of wrath" with "death."

NOTE: “Day of wrath” = our “death”.

Proverbs 11:4
Young's Literal Translation
Wealth profiteth not in a day of wrath, And righteousness delivereth from death.

Christ died for us in our place so that we are saved from that WRATH which comes for us through Him. The “wrath” of God is our mortal death that comes to take away from this earth. The wages of the sin is the death…the death of the mortal body.

Romans 5:8-9
(8) But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
(9) Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

Jesus is rescuing us from that wrath that is coming so that we can wait here on this earth for His Son from Heaven who shall redeem our mortal bodies at the “last trump”.

Notice here in 1st Thessalonians 1:10 that we who are delivered from that wrath to come are to WAIT for His Son who comes from Heaven. We wait for Him here on this earth….waiting for Him to come from Heaven. We don’t go to Heaven but wait for Him to come from there.

The “wrath” = our mortal death.

1 Thessalonians 1:10
(10) And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

Jesus was raised out of the dead so that we might have His ongoing life NOW in this earth.

Jesus died for us in our place so that we may have His life now in this mortal body while we wait for Him to come and change our vile bodies to be fashioned like unto His. We pass from death unto life now in this mortal body on his earth.

Young's Literal Translation
and to wait for His Son from the heavens, whom He did raise out of the dead -- Jesus, who is rescuing us from the anger that is coming.

We who hear His word and believe on Him that sent Him have an AGE-LASTING life.

Faith is an integral part of receiving the good news. We shall not come into condemnation/ judgment (mortal death)....the wrath of God... but pass from death unto life now in this mortal body.

The Greek transliterated word that is translated “everlasting” or “eternal” in most bibles is “aiōnios” which means “age-lasting”. It has a limited time duration (an “age”) and should not be translated as “eternal”.

John 5:24
(24) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting (AGE-LASTING) life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

They that believe on the Son has an “everlasting” life…that is, an AGE-LASTING life. This is a present tense wording. “Eternal life” is a now-in-the-present thing. It is not something to be had after death.

Those who believe have passed from death unto life. But those who do not believe the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abides on him. The wrath of God = the coming death of the mortal body.

John 3:36
(36) He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting (AGE-LASTING) life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Young's Literal Translation
he who is believing in the Son, hath life age-during; and he who is not believing the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath of God doth remain upon him.

Read Psalms 90 which deals with the wrath of God that comes upon men whose flesh withers like the grass. He turns man to destruction only to call us unto repentance as He is not willing that any should perish under His wrath.

Psalms 90:3-11
(3) Thou turnest man to destruction; and sayest, Return, ye children of men.
(4) For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.
(5) Thou carriest them away as with a flood; they are as a sleep: in the morning they are like grass which groweth up.
(6) In the morning it flourisheth, and groweth up; in the evening it is cut down, and withereth.
(7) For we are consumed by thine anger, and by thy wrath are we troubled.

Consider John 3:16: Whosoever shall believe into the only begotten Son of God shall not perish (mortally die from this earth under the wrath of God) but may have “everlasting”...that is, an AGE-LASTING life.

“aiōnios”= age-lasting

(John 3:16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in (into) him should not perish, but have everlasting (“aiōnios”or age-lasting) life.

Young's Literal Translation
for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.

In 2nd Corinthians 6:2, we read that Jesus gave Himself for our sins so that He might deliver us out of this present evil AGE that we are now living in.

This “age” now is where we are to have the promised “age-lasting life” (aka “eternal life”). It is about salvation/deliverance now in this present evil age where the world and its lust pass away under the judgment/wrath of God. The world is already condemned to perish under God’s wrath…the rising sun of His wrath.

2 Corinthians 6:2

For He says: “In an acceptable time I have heard you, And in the day of salvation I have helped you.” Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.

We are delivered out of this age (which is experiencing the wrath of God) by having an age-lasting life…continuing to mortally live in this current body to the end of this present evil age when the redemption moment of our mortal bodies happens: when this “mortal shall put on immortality”.

(Galatians 1:4) Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from (out of) this present evil “world” (AGE), according to the will of God and our Father:

Young's Literal Translation
who did give himself for our sins, that he might deliver us out of the present evil age, according to the will of God even our Father,

The word “mortal” means “subject to death” and does not mean we have died but only liable to. The potential to die is always with us while being “mortal” and not immortal. When we put on immortality, death is completely defeated in victory for death is not a friend but an enemy to be defeated in Christ.

The just shall LIVE (the living) by our faith in Him… and will never die into the age (as Jesus stated to Martha in John 11:26).

We believe “into” Him….a goal reached as we put on His immortal life at the “last trump” moment. Until then, we mortally live by faith which keeps us living on this earth.

God is not willing that any should perish but come unto repentance....to change the mind. “Perishing” means our mortal body dies under God’s wrath. We are removed from this earth….no matter how we go: we shall “all likewise perish.” This is not “spiritual death” but our mortal body’s death…hence the word “perish”. The mortal body perishes under the rising sun of His wrath.

Luke 13:1-5
(1) There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.
(2) And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?
(3) I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
(4) Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?

The Greek transliterated word for “repent” is “metanoeō” which means to “change our minds” or to “think differently, reconsider” We must hear the truth and change our minds about what we thought and believed for His thoughts and His ways. We once thought we knew what the gospel was…but were hearing it from the word of earthly-minded men who did not have an understanding of the good news.

(5) I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

The Lord is not willing that any should perish (mortally die from this earth) but that all should come to repentance….to change the mind about these things.

2 Peter 3:9
(9) The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

to be continued...

THE LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL.

How do you integrate the above statement into your theology and way of life?

Powerful testimony!

Login to view embedded media

Hello folks. How is it going? I am a Christian (recently converted to Catholicism from nondenominational in 2022), and am wondering what your favorite Bible translations are, and what your thoughts are on traditional services and attire (tefillin, tassels) in MJ compared to reform Messianic Judaism. Also, what are your thoughts on Catholicism or Protestantism? From what I know, MJs are Christians who have Jewish traditions, or Jews who believe in Jesus as the Messiah.

A few weeks ago I watched a Ken Burns documentary about the Shakers. I came across them in my readings on spiritualists like the Dukhobors, the historical Jesus, early Christianity and the religious imaginary's role in mysticism. I had heard of the Shakers when much younger (I remember the Shaker furniture fad occured in my early teenage years), but not in a sympathetic light (they were seen as wierd or heretical by Evangelicals), and I could not understand the Spiritualist or mystical religion they practiced.


Login to view embedded media

The Shakers came out of a religious milieu of mystical or ecstatic religion: the Quakers in England, and the Camisards in France. The Camisards were the descendants of persecuted French Protestants that fled to Manchester, in the UK. They had a charismatic or ecstatic type religion. This is the kind of religious environment that the founder of the shakers, Anne Lee, would have been exposed to. The Camisard worship involved spirited singing, prophecy, speaking in tongues, and their religion was shaped by an apocalyptic imagination.

This is a reproduction of what an early Shaker worship meeting might have been like. The building used is an actual Shaker meeting hall that has been preserved in Kentucky.


Login to view embedded media

I know someone named 'Lacey' who says she occasionally and ubrubtly hears a woman audibly speak to her things like, I best describe it as "words of knowledge". and Lacey says these things turn out true. Lacey also mentioned that one time while she was praying, a voice that sounded like her deseased aunt told her "get your things in order, youll be coming with us soon". I'm careful describing this as "words of knowledge" because I don't know if this is of God.

How do folks feel about the growing trend to dose up students with 'ADHD' medicine when they exhibit challenging behaviours, or learning difficulties in school.