Latest activity

HARK! · 2025-11-06T17:11:42-0600

Hentenza said:
Until He ushered in a new covenant.

Renewed covenant.

(CLV) Jer 31:33
For this is the covenant which I shall contract with the house of Israel after those days, averring is Yahweh: I will put My law i within them, And I shall write it on their heart; I will become their Elohim, And they shall become My people.

Is Yah's Torah written on your heart?

Bradskii · 2025-11-06T17:07:58-0600

Meanwhile, the White House signage now has gilded letters to go with all the gold trimmings Trump is adding, the Lincoln bedroom is an excess of marble, the demolishing of the East Wing for the new King's ballroom is apace and they're still cleaning up after his Great Gatsby party. Where is he this weekend? Playing golf again? Or setting up a new AI vid of him jetting around in a gold crown dumping on Americans?

As I read earlier somewhere, if the Dems had used AI to publish stories like this to try to show how out of touch Trump is then the GOP would be apoplectic.

Let them eat cake!

christianlloydteegardin · 2025-11-06T17:07:44-0600

Delvianna said:
I'm going to quote you what I said about verse 15:

The use of περιβολαιˊον for the hair's covering is a different word than the one for the veil, suggesting that the principle of gender distinction, regardless of the cultural practice.

It's not a veil, it's just showing gender distinction vs a woman having shorter hair but again culture applies to this as men were supposed to grow out their hair if you took a Nazirite vow. So essentially if you take this principle literally, that Paul taking a Nazirite vow would be seen as wrong because he grew out his hair which would have been the same and not distinct vs a woman.

Fascinating. I'll pose the idea to my pastors and see what they think.

HARK! · 2025-11-06T17:06:34-0600

Hentenza said:
Have glasses for sale cheap.

Are you trolling your own thread?

ralliann · 2025-11-06T17:06:16-0600

DaisyDay said:
So you can't actually say what words of his condoned murder? You've seen and quoted his words at least twice, but you seem to be unable to point to the exact phrase because they don't exist.

First Amendment rights can be violated and it appears that Dowd's have been by the government punishing him for private, protected speech.

That doesn't follow. You lack a good understanding of the issue: for instance, in an at will employment state, an employer can fire you for no reason, but not for an illegal reason such as race, sex, ethnicity or religion. Public employees can be fired for many reasons including insubordination but not for their speech off the job (with certain exceptions).

Maybe try to understand the point being made before dismissing it out of hand?

It is obvious. Done with this game.

Fervent · 2025-11-06T17:05:35-0600

partinobodycular said:
Yeah, ain't it funny how the puddle always manages to fit the hole?

So you say.

partinobodycular said:
Well lets take a trip back to the ancient Middle East, wherein slavery was perfectly moral. A perfect example of the puddle fitting the hole.

Slavery is an economic issue, the moral aspects cannot be separated from the economics. Regulations don't imply agreement, just an acceptance of a reality.

partinobodycular said:
As you wish. I wouldn't want to stress you out with fallacious ideas.

When you come up with ideas that aren't fallacious, go ahead and get back to me.

Chesterton · 2025-11-06T17:05:21-0600

Oompa Loompa said:
She was talking about a supposed person with a supposed abnormal condition. I am only bringing that up because I am told that if it cannot be proven or disproven, it cannot be argued and is therefore not worth discussing.

I know, but sometimes I like to play along if I'm bored or something. In this case, that scenario only made it worse.

Delvianna · 2025-11-06T17:04:54-0600

christianlloydteegardin said:
Check my edit. Verse 15 seems to provide an exception.

I'm going to quote you what I said about verse 15:

The use of περιβολαιˊον for the hair's covering is a different word than the one for the veil, suggesting that the principle of gender distinction, regardless of the cultural practice.

It's not a veil, it's just showing gender distinction vs a woman having shorter hair but again culture applies to this as men were supposed to grow out their hair if you took a Nazirite vow. So essentially if you take this principle literally, that Paul taking a Nazirite vow would be seen as wrong because he grew out his hair which would have been the same and not distinct vs a woman.

essentialsaltes · 2025-11-06T17:04:17-0600

probinson said:
According to the article, for the 2025 tax season, 296,531 taxpayers used IRS Direct File. Given that there were roughly 145 million tax returns, that means that just 0.2% of taxpayers used IRS Direct File last season. I think most people would agree that could be classified as not being used "very much".

There are (or were) many limitations on who could use the system, including that it was only available in 25 states. But 100% growth in a year for a new product is pretty good.

Hentenza · 2025-11-06T17:04:08-0600

SabbathBlessings said:
You're the one who said the 4th commandment wasn't there. Either was the 1st or 2nd or 3rd.

Find it.

SabbathBlessings said:
Doesn't mean we can break any of them.

If it’s not there then there is nothing to break. The Christian is not required to keep the 4th commandment. Find a post crucifixion verse that requires the Christian to keep the 4th commandment.

SabbathBlessings said:
We can, but I do not think it’s the way we serve and worship God. Mark7:7-13 Mat15:3-14 Isa56:6

You can have your sabbath if you so desire and I won’t judge you for it. I will rest on Jesus.

HARK! · 2025-11-06T17:03:21-0600

(CLV) Num 15:15
As for the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the sojourner sojourning with you. It shall be an eonian statute throughout your generations. Like you so shall the sojourner be before Yahweh.

Chesterton · 2025-11-06T17:02:22-0600

Desecrating the foul, putrid bodies of the barbarous, villainous enemies of our Realm whom we've so gallantly slain in righteous, valiant battle?

(Ooh, sorry. Got a little carried away with my Realm patriotism there. :sorry:

)

HARK! · 2025-11-06T17:00:46-0600

Hentenza said:
For the Jew not for the Christian and Christians are not Jews.

Ephesians 2

11 Wherefore, remember that once you, the nations (Gentiles) in flesh - who are termed 'Uncircumcision' by those termed 'Circumcision,' in flesh, made by hands -"

Not anymore!

12 that you were, in that era, apart from Christ, being alienated from the citizenship of Israel, and guests of the promise covenants, having no expectation, and without God in the world."

Not anymore! Hmmm...covenants, plural.

13 Yet now, in Christ Jesus, you, who once are far off, are become near by the blood of Christ."

Citizens of Israel.

(CLV) Hb 8:10
"For this is the covenant which I shall be covenanting with the house of Israel after those days," the Lord is saying: "Imparting My laws to their comprehension, On their hearts, also, shall I be inscribing them, And I shall be to them for a God, And they shall be to Me for a people.

14 For He is our Peace, Who makes both one, and razes the central wall of the barrier"

No difference between those who were born into the false dogma of Judaism, and those who were born into the false teaching of Paganism. All of those in Yahshua are in the truth of YHWH's perfect Torah.

15 (the enmity in His flesh), nullifying the law of precepts in decrees, (dogma, Talmud) that He should be creating the two, in Himself, into one new humanity, making peace;"

Israel!

(CLV) Mt 15:24
Now He, answering, said, "I was not commissioned except for the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

16 and should be reconciling both in one body to God through the cross, killing the enmity in it."

(CLV) Num 15:15
As for the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the sojourner sojourning with you. It shall be an eonian (FOREVER) statute throughout your generations. Like you so shall the sojourner be before Yahweh.

17 And, coming, He brings the evangel of peace to you, those afar, and peace to those near, 18 for through Him we both have had access, in one spirit, to the Father." 19 Consequently, then, no longer are you guests and sojourners, but are fellow-citizens of the saints and belong to God's family,

jacorian · 2025-11-06T17:00:38-0600

You can take all your millionaires & their assets & it would equal the budget for 1 year-6 trillion dollars. The money would be exhausted in no time by the people with their hand in the cookie jar-Congress-you know the people that get to insider trade. I frankly view taxes as evil but am willing to say some is necessary. But the fact is our govt has outcompeted us for the available monies in society. We prop it up & it rarely reaches us & it never cures anything. So frankly I would not give Congress more license to spend. Very recently the tax code has had some reform but it still has a long way to go. I think our reps are totally oblivious to how the tax rates & the brackets are set up. The code is too complex. Frankly it's the middle class that is deteriorating because of the big bills that now burden us. You cannot have a healthy society if you think govt should control our lives as if govt is God & looking out for us. No human being is that good so don't canonize these people. We do need structural changes--in spending, in the Pentagon, the tax code, etc. The last 3 decades I have observed that a single party has been trying to train with good success our population to be lazy & not develop a work ethic. This arises from people who are generally insecure & they want to do something miraculous & cure all the world's ills. They want to be liked so they seek to take from Peter to pay Paul. This has left us with only 50% of the population working & carrying the tax load. How fair is that? Not very. It dehumanizes individuals to allow such a society to develop just because a bunch of people want to be viewed as benevolent. They are anything but. Arguably there is waste & govt & no accountability for the dollars. We are a bottomless pit. There still can be some tweaks on the tax code. But to give approval for a govt to take away all a person's assets I find quite alarming & immoral. Where in the Bible does it justify that theft. We would hope that successful people can contribute more voluntarily & I am sure some do. But perhaps greed still remains one of those deadly sins. Relative to the problem of healthcare & I have administered the medicaid program which is our socialized version for poor people. We do need reform on all levels. Each party is too extreme. Problem with medicaid is it confines you to permanent poverty in order to stay qualified (means tested). It does not offer the best care because the reimbursement rate is poor. Private insurance is better but also costly. Here the other party thinks insurance should only be for catastrophic stuff. So if you suspect you have a stress fracture in the foot, that does not warrant any radiography. The bill is on you. As you can see neither party lives in the real world. Remember there is more than healthcare in the federal budget so you will never raise enough money to pay for everyone's whim. We are far too large & far too unhealthy a country to cover every expense. Maybe some people think doctors should work for $30k a year so I guess that puts nurses at $20k. Does not anyone know what Petscans & MRIs cost, dialysis, stem cell infusions, chemotherapy, brain surgery, ALS, cystic fibrosis. This is a lot of ailments & a lot of money. We do need to be more proactive in preventative behavior. Lifelong fitness skills, mental health, shutting the border once & for all against fentanyl, stemming alcoholism, better workplace conditions, crime reduction, canning junk food, & banning smoking products.

christianlloydteegardin · 2025-11-06T17:00:27-0600

Delvianna said:
Like I said, I don't agree with your summation and that its a spiritual principle at all. But if you do, then sit down with your church leaders.

Check my edit. Verse 15 seems to provide an exception.

Hentenza · 2025-11-06T17:00:02-0600

HARK! said:
(CLV) Col 2:14
erasing the handwriting of the decrees (δογμασιν dogmasin G1378 dogma) against us, which was hostile to us, and has taken it away out of the midst, -nailing it to the cross,

Again the Torah was not nailed to the pale.

The legal document containing decrees is referring to the law. The law was nailed to the cross.

χειρόγραφον cheirógraphon, khi-rog'-raf-on; neuter of a compound of G5495 and G1125; something hand-written ("chirograph"), i.e. a manuscript (specially, a legal document or bond (figuratively)):—handwriting.

“For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all the things written in the book of the Law, to do them.” Now, that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, “the righteous one will live by faith.” However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, “The person who performs them will live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us—for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”— in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham would come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3‬:‭10‬-‭14‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Galatians 3:10-14 For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THE THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO DO THEM.” Now, that no one is just | New American Standard Bible -

For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THE THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO DO THEM.” Now, that no one is just

bible.com

Again, is crystal clear.

Delvianna · 2025-11-06T16:59:38-0600

christianlloydteegardin said:
I think, at least, wearing a little cowl on top of one's head would be enough to satisfy the spiritual submission principle in 1 Cor 11. It's less of an explicitly modesty-oriented principle and more of a spiritual one, a reflection of one's role in the divine headship of Christ. Men wear no hats/long hair due to their covering being Christ, and women wear head coverings as part of their role in submission to men. That's what I get anyways.

Like I said, I don't agree with your summation and that its a spiritual principle at all. But if you do, then sit down with your church leaders.

Oompa Loompa · 2025-11-06T16:58:50-0600

Tropical Wilds said:
Read the thread, hon.

I have read everything you posted. Have you read it?

Oompa Loompa · 2025-11-06T16:58:07-0600

Chesterton said:
Honestly, I've seen funner facts.

You're talking about a person with an abnormal condition. The vast majority of people are happy to eat food.

She was talking about a supposed person with a supposed abnormal condition. I am only bringing that up because I am told that if it cannot be proven or disproven, it cannot be argued and is therefore not worth discussing.

probinson · 2025-11-06T16:57:53-0600

essentialsaltes said:
[Treasury Sec Bessent said people weren't using it. Users doubled in 2025 compared to 2024.]

Actually, Bessent said this:

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who is also the current IRS commissioner, told reporters at the White House on Wednesday that there are “better alternatives” to Direct File. “It wasn’t used very much,” he said. “And we think that the private sector can do a better job.”

According to the article, for the 2025 tax season, 296,531 taxpayers used IRS Direct File. Given that there were roughly 145 million tax returns, that means that just 0.2% of taxpayers used IRS Direct File last season. I think most people would agree that could be classified as not being used "very much".

Additionally, I expect that all of the major tax filing companies will continue to offer free federal tax filing services as they have for years. So I'm not sure what all the fuss is about.

christianlloydteegardin · 2025-11-06T16:57:16-0600

Delvianna said:
Probably, but it was a cultural thing, not a mandate and I think that is the distinction. It would be equivalent to wearing a miniskirt back in the 1800's. The societal uproar that would cause....

I think, at least, wearing a little cowl on top of one's head would be enough to satisfy the spiritual submission principle in 1 Cor 11. It's less of an explicitly modesty-oriented principle and more of a spiritual one, a reflection of one's role in the divine headship of Christ. Men wear no hats/long hair due to their covering being Christ, and women wear head coverings as part of their role in submission to men. That's what I get anyways.

edit: the 15th verse seems to equate a woman's long hair for a covering, so I believe a woman should at least have long hair.

Chesterton · 2025-11-06T16:56:07-0600

is waterboarding.

Sometimes the players...

Dan Perez · 2025-11-06T16:54:43-0600

Soyeong said:
In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Law of Moses, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Law of Moses in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so those who the position that the Law of Moses has been set aside is also the position that the New Covenant has been set aside.

Notably none of those verses say that the Law of Moses has been set aside.

It was in accordance with God's righteousness to be a doer of charity before God made the Mosaic Covenant, so that covenant becoming obsolete does not mean that it is no longer in accordance with God's righteousness to be a doer of charity. While God's covenants include instructions for how to be a doer of His righteousness, the way to do that is based on God's righteousness, not on any particular covenant. God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore any instructions that He has ever given for how to be a doer of His righteousness are eternally and cumulatively valid (Psalms 119:160). If God were to give two people different sets of instructions for how to be a doer of His righteousness in different situations, then all of those instructions would have the same trait in common, and all of them would be eternally and cumulatively valid for a third person whose goal is to know God by being a doer of His righteousness even though God did not directly give them any instructions. The only way that eternal instructions for how to be a doer of God's righteousness can be set aside would be by first setting aside God's eternal righteousness, and the same is true for God's other character traits.

God has not commanded anything that is not in accordance with walking in the Spirit, but rather Jesus set a perfect example for us to follow of how to walk in the Spirit by walking in sinless obedience to the Torah. In Acts 5:32, the Spirit has been given to those who obey God. In John 16:13, the Spirit has the role of leading us in truth, in Ezekiel 36:26-27, the Spirit has the role of leading to obey the Torah, and in Psalms 119:142, the Torah is truth. In John 16:8, the Spirit has the role of convicting us of sin, and in Romans 3:20, it is by the Torah that we have knowledge of what sin is. In Romans 8:4-7, Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Galatians 5:16-23, Paul contrasted with desires of the flesh with the desires of the Spirit and everything that he listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Torah while all of the fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's character that the Torah was given in order to teach us how to embody. For example, love is one of the fruits of the Spirit and the greatest two commandments of the Torah are to love God and our neighbor. Romans 2:25-29, the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Torah, which is the same way to tell for a Jew (Deuteronomy 30:6), and circumcision of the heart is a matter of the Spirit, which is in contrast with Acts 7:51-53, where those who have uncircumcised hearts resist the Spirit and do not obey the Torah.

In Romans 10:5-8, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to proclaiming that the Torah is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! In Deuteronomy 32:46-47, the Torah is our very life. In Proverbs 3:18, it is a Tree of Life for all who take hold of it. In Proverbs 6:23, for the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life. In Matthew 19:17, Jesus said that the way to have eternal life is by obeying God's commandments. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus affirmed that the way to inherit the gift of eternal life is by obeying the greatest two commandments of the Torah. In Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has becoming a source of eternal salvation for those who obey him. In Romans 2:6-7, those who persist in doing good will be given eternal life. In Romans 6:19-23, we are no longer to present ourselves as slaves to impurity, lawlessness, and sin, but are now to present ourselves as salves to God and righteousness leading to sanctification, and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so being a doer of the Torah is God's gift of eternal life.

So 2 Corinthians 3:6 needs to be understood in light of the other verses that says that the New Covenant involves following the Torah, that the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Torah, and that being a doer of the Torah is the gift of eternal life rather than a way that contradicts them. If the letter referred to correctly doing what God has commanded and that leads to death, then that would mean that God would be misleading us and shouldn't be trusted, but rather there is something deficient about following the letter that causes the Torah to lead to death rather than life.

Paul and Christ both set examples for us to follow of how to live in obedience to the Law of Moses (Acts 24:14) and we should be intimidators of Paul as he is of Christ.

And Romans 6:14 says. For sin shall NOT // OV. , is a DISJUNCATIVE PARTICLE NEGATIVE and the Greek word OV

means that SIN will neverrrrr everrrrr. RULE over you for you are NOT //. OV. UNDER the LAW but under Grace. , which

that the Law. of MOSES has been set ASIDE FOR. EVER !!

dan p

Chesterton · 2025-11-06T16:54:36-0600

And then they instituted totalitarianism.

YINST

Bradskii · 2025-11-06T16:54:34-0600

partinobodycular said:
It's essentially the anthropomorphic principle applied to morals. If the universe wasn't just so, then we wouldn't be here, and if morals weren't just so, then we wouldn't be here either. It's not magic, it's science.

An example I've used before is incest. It's universally thought to be wrong (including by me, but that's just at an emotional level). Because those who thought it was OK ended up with descendents who had genetic problems and didn't procreate very well. Leaving the rest of us. If biology had worked so that having sex with a stranger caused the problems and sex with a close relative was safe, then hopping into bed with a random stranger would be thought of as disgusting as having sex with your sister.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page