• 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.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

the myth of flat earth debunked again

I can see North Devon on a clear day over the sea from where I live, it is about 60 miles away looking over the sea and I can also see Tenby.

I also just realised that adding that you can see Tenby is... not a big thing, since it's just across the Bae Caerfyrddin, which is Carmarthen Bay to any non-Welsh speakers out there, and if you can see North Devon then you must be in that general area.

Which still doesn't address my point of how I can't see the Isle of Man on a clear day from the North Wales coast, which on a flat earth, I should be able to do easily.
Upvote 0

Cursed is the heart of this people

I am not so sure about anyone trying to present a polished and virtuous image on the outside. I would like to see at least more of that.
Giving tithes to the poor used to be a thing that you could do to appear virtuous before men, but it’s not like that anymore.
Upvote 0

The NEA is pushing far left teaching upon children

Ok, I guess that is one view. What about different kinds of non-binary identities? I guess those who feel genderfluid would sometimes "masquerade" (I don't think this word really describes what trans people feel they do) as something they are not according to you, but agender individuals would they be problematic?
I am aware trans people don't feel they are simply masquerading, but all they can change is appearances and not biological facts. Androgyny is just another way of creating confusion, so yes it is also problematic.
Also a natural question would of course be; what are the gender norms for each gender? Outside of procreation we find people of both genders doing every human activity.
This is somewhat culturally dependent, but if there weren't clearly "feminine" and "masculine" presentations there would be no grounds for transgenderism in the first place.
Upvote 0

Is the Bible inerrant?

I have always thought that those of us who are in places where it is safe to read the Bible, ought to read it in order to understand how it applies. what truths it can enable the Holy Ghost to enlighten us about, regarding our own lives and how it relates to our church/denomination. As long as it is accurate enough for that purpose, everything is fine with me.
I have mixed feelings about this, because there are clearly some who are gifted students/teachers and a lot of possibility for errors coming from people who don't recognize exegetical fallacies especially failure to distanciate. So while there is some benefit to everyone who can read reading for themselves, there are reasons to not encourage private readings as well. Though I am in agreement that so long as its accurate enough that conscienctious students of reasonable intelligence can come to similar understandings of the same passages it is accurate enough.
Upvote 0

My Introduction

Testimonial evidence for the Resurrection would fit best in Exploring Christianity since you’re asking us Christians to evaluate your take on it.

I saw your recent thread though and I think it should be okay where it is. It’s more philosophical than theological.
Thanks for the feedback. I'll leave my thread where it's at.
Upvote 0

AI use in search for early life in 3.3 billion year old rock.

"In searching for the earliest life on Earth and other worlds, researchers normally look for intact fossils or biomolecules made only by living organisms. But such signals are few and far between. Now, researchers have devised an artificial intelligence (AI) that can identify signs of ancient life in rocks of unknown provenance, based only on the pattern of chemicals left behind as biomolecules degrade over eons."

https://www.science.org/content/article/ai-spots-ghost-signatures-ancient-life-earth

Ancient chemical clues reveal Earth’s earliest life 3.3 billion years ago

the myth of flat earth debunked again

I can see North Devon on a clear day over the sea from where I live, it is about 60 miles away looking over the sea and I can also see Tenby.

Since you just repeated what you said, I'll do the same:

Where are you in South Wales that Devon is 60 miles away from you? I don't need specific locations like the town or whatever, but let's just go with the county.


But regardless, on a clear day, I have no way of seeing the Isle of Man with my naked eye as would be expected to on a flat Earth. But it's perfectly expected on a globe earth.
  • Like
Reactions: FaithT
Upvote 0

Do you keep the Sabbath? (poll)

That’s the point. There is no longer a biblical model of rest. Christ fulfilled all of the law and became the Lord of the sabbath. Our rest is now in Him, TODAY (Heb. 4:3). We don’t have to keep one day. We can worship and rest any day.

Secondly, the Mosaic law including the 10 commandments was given to Israel 430 years after Abraham. There was no sabbath keeping before then. Abraham commandments and statutes mentioned in Gen. 26:5 could not have included the Mosaic law Including the 10 commandments BECAUSE it was given to Israel 430 years later. In addition, Abraham was not justified by his works of any law since he was justified by his faith (Rom. 4:13-14).

Thirdly, the law was never given to the church. There is absolutely no mention in scripture where the law was given to the gentiles. We can’t be forced to follow laws that were never given. The new covenant for the church is the new convent of blood that Jesus speaks about in Luke 22:20. Notice that He ushers the new covenant to the church through communion.

The moral commandments of the Jewish law including the Ten Commandments were summarized in Jesus’s two commandments.

“Upon these two commandments hang the whole Law and the Prophets.””
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭22‬:‭40‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Most sabbath keepers attempt to separate the 613 mitzvot which included the 10 commandments but that is not biblical. Scriptures says ALL of it not just some of it was fulfilled(completed) by Jesus sacrifice on the cross.

“For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.””
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭5‬:‭14‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

The WHOLE LAW was fulfilled (completed) in ONE word. All of the law is now one word in the one commandment but both love commandments apply.

With Jesus we still sin (1 John 1:8-9) but we don’t live in sin. In the old covenant people were convicted by the letter of the law but now that faith has come (Gal. 3:23) we are convicted by the Spirit. There was no indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Old Covenant. This is one of the great things that makes the gospel of good news so great.

“But I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I am leaving; for if I do not leave, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. And He, when He comes, will convict the world regarding sin, and righteousness, and judgment: regarding sin, because they do not believe in Me; and regarding righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you no longer are going to see Me; and regarding judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.”
‭‭John‬ ‭16‬:‭7‬-‭11‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

The only people that remain under the law is unbelieving Israel, as they rejected the Messiah, and those who choose to remain under the law. Sabbath keeping is no longer necessary because the law is no longer necessary. As Paul explains in Col. 2:16 no one should judge anyone whose decides to keep the sabbath or decides not to keep it. The problems comes when those that want to keep it accuse those that do not as living in sin because they consider the sabbath as a moral law and necessary for salvation although they will deny that. The effect is the same, if I dont keep the sabbath then I am sinning and if I don’t repent then I cant be saved. It is works salvation. There is no biblical model to keep the sabbath that does not involve being under the law.

Why would we need the law if we have something much better? Where in scripture is there a post crucifixion verse that requires the Christian to keep the 4th commandment? Hint: there isn’t one.


Your analysis is very good, but may I expand?

The Sabbath commandment was under the Old Covenant and is considered part of the law. During the Old Covenant, there was no atoning sacrifice of Christ. It was repetitive work to walk in righteousness. Since it was work, it was a covenant of flesh. Do this and you will be saved

In the New Covenant, we are no longer in the flesh, but in the spirit. Romans 8:6-11
The Israelites kept the law of the flesh, but it did not please God. We read in Isaiah 29:13 and Matthew 15:8 that God does not want lip service or outward appearance. The spirit cleanses the heart.

The New Covenant fulfills the Old Covenant. The New Covenant does not nullify the Old, as Jesus said not one jot or tittle shall pass
The principle of the Sabbath is rest. Is then sloth? God forbid. We rest from our fleshly ambitions and put to death the deeds of the flesh
We do not profane the Sabbath, we honor the principle of the Sabbath by mortifying the deeds of the flesh. Scripture says that if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature. Old things have passed away, all things become new.

We honor Jesus by following His commandments. Our first love was when He called us. If any man come after me, let him deny his very self and follow in my footsteps. We mark this as the new birth, scripture says we need to be born of water and the spirit.
Baptism is a sacrament commanded by Christ to mark this occasion. Baptism is called the circumcision of Christ, Colossians 2:11-12
This is significant because the matter of baptism is water. Water was created on the first day and circumcision occurs of the eighth day. Circumcision was given to mark entry into the Old covenant and was given to infants of members of the Old Covenant. Our Lord was circumcised the eighth day under the Old Covenant. As there was no New Covenant yet established, Jesus was baptized as an adult, as were new believers entering the New Covenant. Once the people were established as the New Covenant church, they baptized their children, just as once Old Covenant Israel was established, they circumcised their infants on the eight day.
Because Jesus established baptism as the rite of entry into His kingdom, we honor him on the first day of the week, Sunday, as water was created first, and we are born again, going back to the beginning per se, to be new creatures under the new covenant. Circumcision also occurred on the eighth day, which if we mark the start of the week, not the beginning of fleshly life, follows the Sabbath
We read the words of the resurrection account in the Gospel, the words begin after the sabbath was past toward the dawn of the first day of the week…….

Although we honor Our Lord on Sunday, we do not profane the Sabbath. We honor its principles by dying to our flesh and mortifying its deeds every day of the week. We do not treat Saturday as some kind of Mardi Gras to go hog wild then go to Mass on Sunday. We died with Christ and now live with Him every single day of the week.
The fleshly keeping of the Sabbath is no longer necessary, but if one’s conscience leads him to keep it, as scripture says, whatever you do, do it for the Lord

I like sabbath blessings post that says the sabbath teaches her of a way of worship and honor to God. That is well and good to look at it that way for her
I strongly disagree when some say Christians apostacize by worshipping on Sunday. That is not scripture, as Jesus Himself performed the first Mass on the way to Emaus, which was on a Sunday. He opened the scriptures to the two disciples and revealed Himself in the breaking of bread. That happens every Sunday at Catholic Mass to commemorate the first Mass, and we also have Mass every single day of the week multiple times per day all over the world, as Jesus commands do this in remembrance of Me, and I will be with you always until the end of the age. What madness would say to have the flesh of the Son of God before us always until the end of the age could be the mark of the beast?

Keep the sabbath if it helps you worship the Lord, but do not judge your brother. As scripture also says how can you claim to love God whom you cannot see, if you fail to love your brother whom you can see?
Upvote 0

The new mind. Not politics

Scripture said that we should be renewed in our mind. This means obeying the Lord. You can't have the mind of Christ if you dont obey him. Politics, especially economics, is wrong thinking. Jesus said not to worry about the things of this life. Such thinking will make you unfruitful. Economics are worldly fears, complaints and strife. Its all evil and not of faith in God. Furthermore boasting in the economy is also sin according to James

Matthew 6:31 “Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing?

James 4:13 Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, spend a year there, buy and sell, and make a profit”; 14 whereas you do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away. 15 Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that.” 16 But now you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.

Matthew 13:22 Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful.

2 Timothy 2:4 No one engaged in warfare entangles himself with the affairs of this life, that he may please him who enlisted him as a soldier.
Politics is a filthy thing as it causes division even among people who profess Christianity. Satan causes this division. Luke 4:5-7 Satan said that all the kingdoms of the world were given to him. Who gave them to Satan ? Who would have that authority ? Satan is the god of this world, even Jesus called Satan the prince of this world. This is not GODS world until Jesus returns. Thy kingdom come thy will be done on Earth as it is in heave. Until Jesus returns this world and all its governments are under Satans control. If take part in them then you ally yourself with Satan. Learn the truth about the great honor the saints are given, Psalm 149 You, voter and participant in Satans governments , do you think if you do that you will have this honor. We are ambassadors of the nation we happen to be living in, not citizens, we represent our kingdom and shine as lights in the kingdoms of darkness. An ambassador doesn’t take part in the politics of the nation he is in but rather proclaims their replacement by the kingdom he is a citizen of.
Upvote 0

Hell doesn't exist and there is no eternal suffering, instead bad peolle just cease to exist

  • Tartarus is a specific reference to the pagan concept of the 'lowest level of hades'; The word “Tartarus” is arguably the closest word used to this concept of eternal torment but this word is only used in one specific verse: 2 Peter 2:4 which is talking about a place where "fallen angels" are sent and is never mentioned as a destination for humans. - Also note that this same verse clearly limits the time spent in that place to "until judgment".
  • Gehenna is an actual physical place in Jerusalem, it was (in the first century CE) possibly a trash dump, garbage we know dead bodies were taken there and burned in a 'eternal fire' (a constantly burning fire that was always burning garbage). it was considered a "cursed place" due to legends about people sacrificing children there. It was mentioned in a lot of parables; often 'jesus' talking about wealthy people ending up in Gehenna (just like all the poor people). essentially saying that all their wealth doesn't save them from eventually dying and being thrown into the trash heap. - The parables did seem to imply that “Gehenna” was some undesirable place but it’s very dishonest to claim that the word literally translates to the common concept called “Hell”.

Yes and here is a map of it, it's supposed to represent the underworld.

Click on the map where ever you want a close up.
Upvote 0

An Epistemological Look at the Resurrection

Introduction: My Background and Purpose


I come from a Christian background, though I no longer identify as a Christian. I spent 35 years actively involved in the church, during which time I taught classes on Christian apologetics with theological questions. This means I'm not approaching Christianity as an outsider who's never understood its claims, I know the arguments intimately. I've defended them, taught them, and lived within that framework for most of my life.

I studied philosophy at Geneva College, a Christian institution where faith and reason were treated as partners in the search for truth. After graduating in 1981, I continued studying philosophy for over 45 years, with particular intensity during the last 20+ years of my retirement. I'm now 75, and I've spent this time focusing on three interconnected areas:


Epistemology (how we know what we know), approached through the lens of Ludwig Wittgenstein's later philosophy, especially his final work, On Certainty. Wittgenstein's insights about language, meaning, and the foundations of knowledge have shaped much of what I've written.


Near-Death Experiences (NDEs), which led to my recent book From Testimony to Knowledge: Evaluating Near-Death Experiences (available on Amazon). In that work, I developed a rigorous framework for evaluating testimonial evidence and applied it to one of the most contested areas of human experience. The framework I use, JTB+U (Justified True Belief plus Understanding) with three epistemic guardrails, applies universally to any knowledge claim based on testimony.


Wittgenstein's later philosophy, particularly his concept of "hinges," those bedrock certainties that make justification possible rather than requiring justification themselves. Understanding what genuinely functions as a hinge versus what merely claims hinge-status to avoid scrutiny turns out to be crucial for evaluating religious claims.

My Current Project

I'm now working on a second book that examines the evidence for the bodily resurrection of Christ. I'll be sharing my analysis of the testimonial evidence in this forum, applying the same rigorous standards I used for evaluating near-death reports. My approach will focus on what the historical evidence can and cannot support, examined through clear epistemic standards that apply to any historical claim.

My Intentions


I want to be transparent about my approach: I have no desire to engage in polemics or personal attacks. I'm not here to mock anyone's faith or treat sincere belief with contempt. I recognize that for many of you, Christianity isn't just an intellectual position, it's central to your identity, your community, and your understanding of reality. I take that seriously.

That said, I also recognize that some may find my arguments offensive simply because of their conclusions. This isn't my intention, but it's an unavoidable risk when examining claims that matter deeply to people. I can only promise to be as fair, clear, and rigorous as possible. Good arguments should stand or fall on their own merits, not on whether they make us comfortable.


If my analysis is flawed, I want to know. If I've misunderstood the evidence or applied standards inconsistently, I'm genuinely interested in correction. But if the evidence truly is as weak as I believe it to be, that's something we should be willing to acknowledge, even if it's uncomfortable.

Why Philosophy Matters

Before I present my epistemological framework, let me address something important: philosophy is inescapable. Whether you love it or hate it, you're already doing it.


Every time you evaluate a political claim, make a moral judgment, defend a religious belief, assess scientific evidence, argue for God's existence, or even decide how to raise your children, you're engaged in philosophy. You're making assumptions about what counts as evidence, what makes reasoning valid, how we distinguish truth from error, and what standards we should use to evaluate claims.

Even if you say "I hate philosophy" or "I just believe what the Bible says," you're making philosophical moves. You're claiming that some approaches to truth are better than others, that certain sources are more reliable than others, that some methods of reasoning should be trusted while others shouldn't. Those are philosophical positions.


The question isn't whether to do philosophy, we're all doing it already, whether we realize it or not. The question is whether to do it well or poorly, clearly or confusedly, consistently or arbitrarily.

What Good Philosophy Does


I agree with many people's assessment that much philosophy isn't worth the paper it's written on. Academic philosophy can become self-indulgent, unnecessarily obscure, and disconnected from the questions people actually care about. But that doesn't mean all philosophy is worthless, it means we need to distinguish good philosophy from bad.

Good philosophy does several things:

1. It clarifies concepts. When people argue past each other, it's often because they're using the same words to mean different things. Philosophy helps us see those differences and speak more precisely.


2. It examines assumptions. We all operate with unexamined beliefs, about what counts as evidence, what makes something true, how we should evaluate testimony. Philosophy brings those assumptions into the light where they can be tested.

3. It checks consistency. We often hold beliefs that contradict each other without realizing it. Philosophy reveals those contradictions and asks us to resolve them.

4. It evaluates arguments. Not all reasoning is equal. Some arguments are strong; others only appear strong until examined. Philosophy provides tools for telling the difference.

5. It distinguishes knowledge from conviction. We can feel absolutely certain about things that turn out to be wrong. Philosophy helps us understand when our certainty is justified and when it's just... certainty.


This last point, distinguishing knowledge from conviction, will be one of my central points. Because one of the deepest confusions in religious epistemology is treating strong conviction as if it were the same thing as knowledge.

What I'll Be Presenting


Over the coming posts, I'll lay out an epistemological framework that applies universally, to scientific claims, historical events, legal proceedings, and yes, to religious truth claims as well. I'll explain:

  • What knowledge is and what it requires (JTB+U)
  • The difference between believing you're justified and actually being justified
  • How testimony functions as a route to knowledge
  • What standards distinguish strong testimony from weak
  • Why certain beliefs require justification while others can function as foundational
  • How to recognize when circular reasoning is disguised as legitimate support
  • How to recognize self-sealing arguments

Only after establishing this framework, and giving everyone a chance to engage with it, question it, and push back on it—will I apply it to Christianity's central historical claim: the resurrection.

My goal is to show my work. I want you to see not just my conclusions but the reasoning that leads to them. If the reasoning is sound and the standards are fair, the conclusions should follow. If either the reasoning or the standards are flawed, that should become clear through honest discussion.

An Invitation

I invite you to engage critically with what I present. Ask questions. Point out where you think I've gone wrong. Offer alternative explanations. Show me where my reasoning breaks down or where I've applied standards inconsistently.

What I ask in return is that we distinguish between two different kinds of responses:


Substantive objections: These engage with the actual argument, they show where reasoning fails, where evidence is misrepresented, where standards are applied unfairly.


Defensive moves: These avoid the argument itself, they question motives, appeal to faith as exemption from scrutiny, redefine terms to escape conclusions, or simply assert that the argument doesn't apply to religious claims.


I'm interested in the first kind of response. The second kind doesn't advance understanding; it just protects belief from examination.

If Christianity's claims are true, they should be able to withstand honest scrutiny. If they can't, we should want to know that. Truth has nothing to fear from careful thinking.

I look forward to the conversation.

Campus Prayer at Univ. of South Florida interrupted by harassers; felony hate crime charges filed against two men

2 of 3 men who disrupted Muslim prayer at USF identified, police file hate crime charges

Police said they filed hate crime charges against Christopher Svochak, 40, of Waco, Texas, and Richard Penskoski, 49, of Canyon, Oklahoma. Both have known local addresses in the Tampa Bay area, but no affiliation with USF, according to officials.

Police filed charges against Svochak and Penskosk under Florida State Statute 871.071 for disturbing schools and religious assemblies — which will be upgraded to a felony hate crime. They also filed charges for disorderly conduct and disrupting a school or lawful assembly.

The two men, and the unidentified third suspect, are associated with “the official street preachers.” In a statement, they said they were exercising their constitutional right to preach and speak against Islam.

Cell phone video captured the moment the three men confronted the group of students. The Muslim Students Association at USF said the men shouted slurs at them, waved bacon, and mocked their sacred rituals.

In one clip, a man could be heard saying, “You guys don’t have any bombs on you do you.” Another clip showed one of the men saying, “Spit on Muhammed’s name, he is a scum bag, just like all you Muslim terrorist.” It all lasted about 13 minutes.
Saw this on the TikTok machine…half thought that it was a “bit”, seeings as how OTT the haranguing was.
Upvote 0

The NEA is pushing far left teaching upon children

How would the T be covered by "porneia", or did you only mean the others? I recognize that the A was not part of what you answered, but do you believe that would also be covered by "porneia", if so how? I'm not even sure the Q would be covered, I guess it would depend if the person using it means in a sexual way rather than a identity marker.
Sexual immorality applies to gender norms as well as directly sexual activity. The T is covered because it is a perversion for men to masquerade as women or women to masquerade as men.

A probably wouldn't be covered, and in many cases would be encouraged. Q depends on how we understand it, though it likely would fall under the whole 'male and female He made them" issue regarding sexual morals.
Upvote 0

Why do people hate ICE...

Op/Ed: ICE is grabbing U.S. citizens, defying its own rules and the Constitution

Dayanne Figueroa was on her way to work in Chicago last month when she drove onto a street where an immigration enforcement action was in progress. As she attempted to drive around the chaos, an unmarked vehicle collided with her car. Masked men jumped out of the vehicle, guns drawn and dragged Figueroa from her car by her legs. She was thrown into a minivan, taken away and held by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for hours. Dayanne Figueroa is an American citizen.

Figueroa’s case is not an isolated incident. The nonprofit newsroom ProPublica hasdocumented more than 170 cases of U.S. citizens, mostly Latinos, being detained at raids and protests since January.

The wrongful arrest of U.S. citizens by immigration agents is not new; it happened under Presidents Biden and Obama, and during President Trump’s first term. What is new is that Homeland Security and ICE are dramatically ramping up enforcement actions, while operating with less oversight than in the past. This has resulted in greater potential for mistakes — and for more traumatized or injured Americans.

The government denies that these episodes are happening. “There’s no American citizens that have been arrested or detained,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in October. “[Her statement] also is contradicted by Homeland Security press releases explaining why some citizens have been arrested or detained.

When citizens are arrested by immigration agents, it is frequently on the grounds of assaulting or impeding officers. The ProPublica report, however, found that such charges often were dismissed later or dropped. [Figueroa was never charged.]
I will be honest. As a law and order guy, I am frustrated at ICE. Every single Ametican rhat is picked up for assaulting or impeding, obstructing should be charged. They should have to go to court.

If ICE is truly wrong in their arrests they will stop doing it and if they are correct then they will be proven accurate. The failure to charge and take it to court is a TOTAL FAILURE on the part of Justice system. I fell like they don't want to mess with it even if they are correct. It needs to stop. Charge or dont bother. Its ridiculous.
Upvote 0

The new mind. Not politics

I read in scripture that Christian citizenship is in heaven. That we were bought with a price and are not our own. To seek things above not earthly things. That we cannot serve two masters. To not be carnally minded which is what politics is. GOD says it is not up to man who walks to his own steps. Man is incapable of ruling himself. Christians have a king that GOD appointed , Christ. We are to submit to him only and not to men. Yes, while we are yet here in the flesh, pay taxes, keep the laws of the nation you are in, pray for people in human governments. Why, so that we can live peaceful and quiet lives among the carnal governments. There is no command to actually take part in these governments. Remember who GOD has allowed to be the god of this world. Satan currently rules in the kingdoms of this world’s darkness and Satan offered them all to Jesus in return for his worship. All the kingdoms and nations of this earth will be overthrown by Christ when he returns. If this happens in your lifetime which side do you want to be on ? Take a good read of human history and their governments. Human history is constant war and death. Even here in the U.S. your vote means nothing because once in power politicians do what they want, there is no true will of the people, it’s a mirage. The U.S. government accepts homosexuality, abortion, transgenderism, does not follow its own constitution and has destroyed our economic, educational and medical institutions. If you can’t see these things then you must not have been very well informed and kept a watchful eye on your government. My government is the kingdom of GOD that I seek first and only. We Christians have been called out of the darkness of the world and into GODS marvelous light. We should not go back into that darkness.
Upvote 0

Human reading bible does not equal God speaking

It is plain, what is the issue with this verse? What does it mean to become a new creation in Christ? Would one be clinging to their old life of sin and worshipping others gods, or stealing from their neighbor, or would one die of self and be baptized with Christ turning a new path keeping God's commandments through love and faith. John14:15 Rom3:31 Rom 6:1-4
And Gal 6:15 says for in CHRIST JESUS Neither. CIRCMCISION. (. Meaning Jews. as all males had to be Circumcised )

is of any force.

NOR UNCIRCUMCISION. , meaning GENTILES

But a NEW CREATION

MEANING THE BODY OF CHRIST !!

Read 2 Cor 5:17

dan p
Upvote 0

Trump praises NYC Mayor-elect Mamdani after White House meeting

There in lies the problem. The GOP was ready to run every political race in every state through "what about Mamdani".
Now they are upset of Trump for these optics. It won't last. Nothing lasts with Trump.
Yup, and tomorrow (not literally) Trump will be blasting Mamdani for his socialist programs in NY.
Upvote 0

the myth of flat earth debunked again

And yet from where I live I can see Devon on a clear day which is about 60 miles.

Where are you in South Wales that Devon is 60 miles away from you? I don't need specific locations like the town or whatever, but let's just go with the county.

But regardless, on a clear day, I have no way of seeing the Isle of Man with my naked eye as would be expected to on a flat Earth. But it's perfectly expected on a globe earth.
Upvote 0

"Don't Give up the Ship"

I don't know what counsel is telling them. Yes, they receive training on responsibility and conduct. What happens when one is ordered to do something that is out of bounds? I think you already mentioned something to the effect, the White house lawyers will cover them. Apparently for some, that doesn't alleviate the concern. Specially in a White house where expressing your concern gets you fired or removed, and replaced with someone simply because they will comply
What does "out of bounds" mean? That's a meaningless term without real actionability.

The troops are taught not to obey illegal orders, and they are given a specific meaning for that: An illegal order is an order to break a law, and they should be able to name the law that it breaks.

Anything more esoteric, philosophical, or political than "breaks a law/does not break a law" is out of the realm of the common soldier to interpret. All that soldier can do is get court-martialed, and he will lose because the military court is not going to rule against the president...that's called "mutiny."
Upvote 0

The Saving results of the Death of Christ !

Not from that text, but:

It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.
John 6:45


So "heard and learned" may be the reason to be drawn.
So you're suggesting "hearing and learning" may provide a condition to being drawn, which in turn enables one to come? How could someone who is unable to receive Christ in the first place "hear and learn"?

The phrase διδακτοὶ θεοῦ ("taught by God" or "God-taught") in John 6:45 uses a predicate adjective derived from διδάσκω. Its function here is descriptive, not conditional. It describes individuals who have received the benefit of a divine act of teaching, not the offering of a teaching that may be accepted or refused. The genitive θεοῦ marks God as the source of the imparted knowledge. In other words, it is the effect of God's action, not a prerequisite for it.

Compare to "God-breathed" in 2 Tim. 3:16. It's the same sort of predicate adjectival idea. It's descriptive of a divine act. Just as Scripture is described as being "breathed out by God," those in view in John 6:44-45 are described as "having received God's instruction."

Grammatically and contextually, "taught by God" parallels "drawn" in the preceding verse: just as drawing is an effective divine act that enables ability, so being God-taught is a description of the outcome of that divine action (which actually further makes the point that the "him raised" refers to the one drawn). John 6:45 therefore does not suggest that hearing and learning is a condition to be drawn; rather, the hearing and learning are the result of God's effective action. They describe the means by which the knowledge and understanding is imparted by God to those whom He draws.
Upvote 0

The NEA is pushing far left teaching upon children

I don't want to make this a transgender thread. But I absolutely believe those that think they are rhe opposite sex are ill. They are not sinning in believing that. They are ill. Just like any other mental illness.

There are others that are not really trans, they just have a sexual fetish or autogynaphelia which isn't being actually trans. Thats a different story.

I have real compassion for those that are ill and suffering mentally. Thats why we should leave kids alone because their brains are not developed and many of them are suffering with other mental health issues that they grow out of if left alone. We should have real compassion for kids and harming them further with drugs and surgeries is not compassion or love.
  • Winner
Reactions: Vambram

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,878,577
Messages
65,419,976
Members
276,390
Latest member
ladyhope