bèlla said:

Have you ever been a farmhand or did work of that nature? I spent a season on a local production farm to learn how to garden but I wouldn’t want to do it for a living nor are young people required to follow suit. Automation is the future and I posted articles from WSJ acknowledging the same and they’re already doing it. Most farmers don’t want to pay a livable wage. They want the cheapest labor they can get.

~bella

Click to expand...

This is what the free market does. Its built into the system. If farmers need more workers they will.pay higher wages to get them. Or they find automation to do it. Farmers have to make profits to in order to stay in business. If they dont they go out of business and sell their land or sell to corporations who seriously don't pay any better.

Whats going to happen is more and more automation is going to occur. China is already miles ahead of us on that. All these calls for living wages, higher wages, unions etc is now going to fall in rhe wake of automation becauae it has the ability to do the work cheaper and more efficiently than your typical worker.

There is a way to handle this and its by required work. If you are on unemployment then you are required to work at a job assigned to you. If you are on welfare rhen you are required to work including working on these farms to add to your income.

But none of that is going to last. This world is moving to automation for so many things. Many manufacturing and farming jobs are going away.

RileyG said:

I wonder why?

Click to expand...

Lots of reasons, mostly cultural or having to do with Orthodox perceived as a high-demand religion (a perception that is often accurate). There's also the fact the number of Orthodox Christians in the US is relatively small, and some potential spouses have high standards and view marriage as being at least somewhat of a social transaction between families, and not necessarily in terms of western individualism.

The end result is that in the last couple of decades, the orthodox church hasn't really grown in size much, even though conversions have continued, as statistically converts have tended to lose interest after several years, or cradle Orthodox disaffiliate.

eclipsenow said:

I'm a leftist - and I disagreed with 95% of the political junk Charlie Kirk talked about.
But I'm also a Christian, and I was horrified by his murder - and felt sick.
I did NOT celebrate as some might have!
I have publicly called for all 'leftists' of whatever stripe (Communist, Socialist, Social-Market, Social-Liberal, Ordo-Liberal....) to recognise that Charlie Kirk's murder was horrific and unjustified.

As Bernie Sanders said, COWARDS resort to violence because they are not convinced they have enough good arguments to defeat their opponents through speech.

Also, Bernie listed ALL the big political assassinations of the last few decades and condemned them all - whatever side of politics the victim came from.

Trump has said he didn't know about that Democrat and her husband that were assassinated.
MAGA only seems to condemn the assassinations of the Kirks, not the Hortmans.

As with your post. Where did YOU condemn the attitudes above?
Utter hypocrisy.

Click to expand...

A YouGov poll indicates that a portion of individuals with progressive viewpoints publicly expressed condolences for Kirk, while privately exhibiting a different stance. Without passing judgment, how can one verify that they did not privately celebrate or then present a different posture in online discussions to avoid repercussions? The candid answer is that such verification is not possible. My point is to highlight why conservatives may be cautious about accepting liberal statements at face value. Research has shown that, while a small subset, their actions can have a disproportionate impact on critics of their ideology.

Hentenza said:

CAIRO/JERUSALEM (Reuters) -Israel restricted aid into Gaza and kept the enclave's border shut on Tuesday while re-emergent Hamas fighters demonstrated their grip by executing men in the street, darkening the outlook for U.S. President Donald Trump's plan to end the war.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/hamas-fighters-tighten-grip-gaza-clouding-future-ceasefire-2025-10-14/

Hamas continues their violence preventing much needed aid for Gazans. The only way this peace will hold is if Hamas lays down their weapons and stops the violence.

Click to expand...

OP said:

Meanwhile, re-emergent Hamas fighters demonstrated they were reasserting control in Gaza by deploying hundreds of security forces in the streets and executing several people they accused of collaborating with Israel.

Click to expand...

This is why it isn’t generally a “good thing” to assume what one’s God wants is what a Government should “strive” towards.

Sure HAMAS is evil, but this is the upshot of them being sure that their cause is just; that the only way (their) God’s will has been thwarted is if “we were betrayed from within!”

Then again, it might just be “settling-scores” now that it’s clear that the leadership of Hamas has failed its citizens miserably there’ll be a power-struggle within Gaza…this might be the beginnings of that?

Stopped_lurking said:

Apart from Max, where are the witten papers by Karoly, the Artifact Foundation and Chris Dunn?

Click to expand...

The Chris Dunn's team has done a Report which is another form of an academic paper with Overview, method, then analysis, findings and conclusion.

Also here with the geometry which is fully laid out in steps with calculations.

The Artifact Foundation also done a Report.

Stopped_lurking said:

I like Max's papers, I just feel that they would be better if they would go through peer-review. How big a problem is the lack of provenance? Why did he use that particular quality metric?

Click to expand...

I think they all explain why they used the specific quality metric. I think Karolys method is the same. Certainly in using layers to determine circularity and concentricity. I think the method had to be adjusted to measure the vases as there was no precedent to go by.

Providence seems to be an issue in the least because skeptics use that to dispute the vases. The Artifact Foundation began testing museum vases only this year.

Stopped_lurking said:

Are there others? Why is no of the Petrie vases from his analysis in the precise class? When others sort them into their precise class (why is there a difference?).

Click to expand...

There are Petrie vases in the precise class from the Artifact Foundations tests. They set the parameters of the precise class which was 0.001mm to I think 0.200mm which was the tolerance accepted in precision tooling. Five or 6 vases from memory came under this. One at 48 microns median score.

Max was testing vases that were from a private collections (Matt Beall) but also housed at the Petrie museum. Thats why I was saying that people can question the providence of private collections but the Petrie museum regards them as genuine enough to display them as authentic. Max also found around 11 vases in the precise class.

There are no other researchers or tests as far as I know. Like I said there are many small tests of one off vases. You can even see a guage test done on line before your eyes showing the precision.



Starts at 1.20 minute mark. Now thats a proper social media test. Live on camera for everyone to see.

Login to view embedded media

Stopped_lurking said:

Sure, keep saying it if you feel like it. I'm not saying what we do here is science, I'm saying that neither Karoly, Max, the Artifact Foundation, Chris Dunn or we are doing science right now. We are all just discussing the data they have put on the table.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Karoly and the Artifact Foundation, Chris Dunn and team and Max are all doing science. The equipment they have used, the calibration of that equipment, the various methods of testing ie Light Scan, Lazer and Guage sensors and the reports coming from them are science. Theres no spectulation. This is hard data and not spectulations about peoples credibility.

No sure if you have used all these devices or even understand them. Or actually done tests on vases. Your standing on the sidelines. If you want to dispute the tests then you have to repeat the tests and show how you done it to arrive at a different finding.

Stopped_lurking said:

I want peer review for it to be science, what is so hard to understand about that?

Click to expand...

Peer review does not make it science. You don't need peer review to confirm that an object measures 5 cm on a ruler. Do you think you need some professor in a tower confirming that the guage measure above is correct. You can get a set of guage sensors and see for yourself. No better evidence.

Stopped_lurking said:

Without good provenance we don't even know if the data is relevant.

Click to expand...

WE have good providence vases showing precision. This whole thread has become about knocking down logical fallacy. You know very well that vases from Petrie museum tested precise.

Stopped_lurking said:

Only if they are correctly measured and the provenance is good.

Click to expand...

They have been measured in various ways 50 times over. They have been measured properly. And even if we go with the exaggerated slight deviations in some places on the vase. We are talking 2 or 3 thinness of paper. Other parts within a hair thinness. This level of precision has to have been made by a pretty sophisticated lathe. It was not by sticks, flint, chisels and pounders.

Stopped_lurking said:

Or the methodologies are not the best, there are many possibilities. The provenance question for the precise class is a big unknown, at least as Max uses the precise class.

Click to expand...

We have 3 independent tests and they use the same and different methods. The light scanning is a matter of levels of accuracy. The Artifact group mentions results from the OG vase guage method and that the light scans confirmed and tightened the accuracy. Each method is showing the precision in various ways. None are contradicting each other.

Stopped_lurking said:

I've never said they require it. I think Olga vases could be good enough if you had literally thousands of vasemakers making vases for most of their lives.

Click to expand...

The trouble is OLga cheated. She actually used the wheel (like a lathe) to get the better precision and only proving that tech is needed to achieve such precision lol.

Stopped_lurking said:

It's not a question of if he could, has he done any research in metrology? This is normally the part where you point out his articles.

Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean. I am saying as part of being a precision machinist in making parts you have to be able to know the metrology to ensure the parts are precise lol. Its just a given. You don't need an article to prove that.

If they studied precision tooling and did not teach the science of measuring those precision tools and parts then thats pretty silly.

Stopped_lurking said:

That is not supported by his scientific output.

Click to expand...

Most papers don't go into proving the scientists have the equipment or whether they can use them. They just state the equipment, the calibration and the method and findings. Your placing criteria in a paper that is not expected and therefore being bias.

If you want to know the specific scientists ability you research the scientist seperately. If you do that you will find he has vast experience and knowledge in metrology. He measures stull all the time even down to the micro level.

Max does Gamma Spectroscopy, Neutron Detection, Alpha Dection which all require an understanding of metrology. Even more complex than simple vase measures.

Stopped_lurking said:

Because they are not arguing that their objections are the final word. They are highlighting what they see as problems, then the researchers should go back and do some additional analysis. This is what happens in peer-review but since they never publish in any journals it remains just conjecture.

Click to expand...

I think you will find they are arguing their opinion is the final word lol. When they call the very testers they are disagreeing with whackpos and amateurs this is not about any fair process. They have it in for them because of an ideological belief and not science. You don't call those who scientists disagree with whackos lol.

Like you said you keep quiet about that and just do the science. Prove it with the actual science. That means doing exactly what the testers did. Redo the tests in the proper way they claim and see what findings they get.

Stopped_lurking said:

Given that we don't even know the provenance of any vase in Max's precise class (which is populated only by vases from Matt Bealls collection, Precision and Classification of Predynastic Egyptian Stone Vessels: REVISED), I think that it is premature to invoke machining on par with modern machining to explain anything (this is a statement about my opinion).

Click to expand...

Well we sort of do know the providence. If the Petrie museum thinks they are genuine enough to house them as examples of Egyptian predyanstic vases then thats pretty good support. Many artifacts in museums come from private collectors on loan. .

Stopped_lurking said:

Do you have a reference for that? This isn't a normal scientific statement, "they look to good therefore it must be unknown method X". Find the tool that match those toolmarks, then you can make a statement like "it's probable that these marks where made with this tool". Hence, why I think they should be out doing digs.

Click to expand...

Lol so if they don't find the tool or device what then. That this must mean no advanced method was used. Of course not. NOt finding the method does not negate the method. The method is determined by the signatures. A certain level of precision in symmetry and roundness is commonly associated with lathing. If we don't find a lathe does that mean it was not created by a lathe.

The problem is we don't find much of any tools and methods fullstop. Even the basic tools. Metals like copper or bronze were reused as it was precisious and useful. BUt if they had some other way we don't understand we would not even know what to look for.

Stopped_lurking said:

Every instance of advanced tech and knowledge will need to go through the same tedious process with editors and peer review for me to take it serious, I'm sorry that's just the modern scientific process. You can't build a holistic argument if you haven't first shown that the parts are relevant.

Click to expand...

Yes for specific examples you have to do a thorough investigation into not just the science but also like you said the cultural aspects, the archeology, social and religious aspects. All aspects to understand the culture and their practices and how this relates to the worls they produce.

But like cultural practice and phenomena we can step back and make some general observations. We can say for example that at a certain point in pre history the world was full of Megalithic cultures as we see the massive works. We don't need to prove every single example. We can make hypothesis about the level of knowledge they had at that time which stands out above other periods.

Even just investigating the out of place works is enough to warrant further investigation and being open to some sort of alternative knowledge that appears beyond that time. Thats why I think those who immediate cry whacko and conspiracy are actually the non scientist. Because science is full of out of place and contradictory ideas that move it forward. Shutting it down immediate is anti scientific and more a belief.

Stopped_lurking said:

I'm not an expert and any data I have highlighted have come from the researcher themselves.

Click to expand...

I have noticed that some are highlighting the less precise specific examples and trying to make out this is the entire vase and therefore not CNC machines. Or exaggerating that less precision when its actually still very good.

Thats why I say I think a formal and complete retesting is required to properly refute the researchers. All this bits and pieces of complaints on social media are too hard to control and ensure proper methods themselves.

But at the same time I am reducing things to the basics and saying ok lets forget about all the semantics about a few so called imprecise examples. As there are many more precise ones. But forget about all that and the basic idea of whether they had a lathe at all. Or made these by chisels, pounders and rubbing. I think we can say the metrology is precise enough to say a lathe was involved. Its just a case of how sophsiticated.

Stopped_lurking said:

Whilst highlighting that they don't believe the OG vase in its current form to be from ancient Egypt.

Click to expand...

Yes the providence again. Thats fair enough. So other vases like the OG have tested precise from the Petrie museum. One I think even more precise than the OG vase. Which sort of lends support for the OG as its not just a one off anymore.

Stopped_lurking said:

These are statements about ME and my opinions, you do realise I have first-person access to my own thought processes?

Click to expand...

But the problem is like all of us when you challenge the tests your not just making a personal opinion. It has to be qualified. It seems everyone in going crazy about the qualifications of every little thing said by these researchers. But no scrutiny on the people who are questioning their credibility.

Stopped_lurking said:

So what is it in those two statements that you mean I need to support?

Click to expand...

You need to support what you said because its actually challenging the testers. In the first example your disputing a measure. But you have provided no support. This is undermining the testers measures. You need to do tests and show how their measures are not reflecting the 3D dimensions of the vase.

The second one is more a general claim that the formal tests that have been officially published and laid out in academic format are the same as a few sentences on a social media platform. Your word just can't be the evidence. I disagreed and gave the arguement why ie done in academic format, did the tests and explained the steps to get to that specific measures.

They are clearly two different formats. You have not provided any evidence for how they are the same. Just your personal opinion.

Stopped_lurking said:

It's a claim about me! I didn't say "They are using circularity in a non-standard way". Even though I think I can argue that point if you would like? The normal way to report circularity according to ISO 1101 (see below) is different than what they do. So to use the term circularity in their case is (slightly) misleading. So a quality measure dependent on circularity and concentricity is a bit unfortunate, as circularity sounds like it is one thing but they actually mean something else.

Click to expand...

Ok well thats a better response. But I think its still out of context. As far as I understand they have done the 3D measure for circularity and concentricity. They even state this. They aim was to prove the precision in the physical 3D vase. Why would they not do this. Are they lying.

• Structured light scanning:
  This process uses structured light to capture the surface of the vases, creating precise 3D models with high resolution (better than a thousandth of an inch).

Stopped_lurking said:

View attachment 371557

Stop, making it sound as the researchers are victims in this. If they wanted to they could have published their findings in an appropriate journal. They want this kind of attention, that why they present it as they do.

Click to expand...

Like I said I am only trying to apply the same criteria of what is being applied to these tests and researchers. Like proper science if a test or claim is being disputed then they should redo the tests and show how this was wrong. Not pick out bits out of context which misrepresents things.

But with all this fixation on a specific example of a specific example is taking away from the bigger picture.

RileyG said:

Where did you read that Westman de-transitioned? I've never heard that.

(Regardless, trans people are a teeny tiny minority, and most are victims of countless crimes, not perpetuators of it).

Click to expand...

According to Snopes, the gender identity of Westman is unclear:

Jipsah said:

I think I said that at the outset, at least about England. We do know that He lived in Egypt for a time.

Click to expand...

Jesus was just an infant in Egypt, For 2 or 3 years at the most.

As for the 18 years between when He taught in the Temple, to when He was Commissioned, the Bible says nothing.
Most people assume He never left Nazareth then, but those were dangerous times. Tiberius was Emperor; 14 to 37 CE, expanding, conquering and brutally supressing any revolts. Britian was conquered by Caesar in 55BC, then under full control after 47AD. Plenty of records prove how Rome traded with them. Even before the conquest, according to the Greek geographer Strabo, Britain exported gold, silver, iron, hides, slaves, and hounds in addition to grain.

The mythological legends of ancient Britian say Jesus did go there. It was possible and quite sensible. People should seriously consider why they object to it, in the absence of any hard evidence either way.

I dress up for God, (like someone else said already), not for those that attend mass. I've grown up in an environment where it was deemed disrespectful if you weren't presentable before our Lord. If you have the very pretty purple dress wear it, and in my opinion if you were dressing up to catch a husband, church would be a great place to do it, so who cares what anyone else would think. I always wear a veil too, I think it's important.

Studyman said:

Thank you for actually reading my post before responding this time, I very much appreciate it.

OK, so lets look at the verse you use to support the religious philosophy that a common man that sinned, was required by God's LAW, to take a goat to the Levite Priest, to provide for the remission of his sins the "FIRST TIME" Moses went up on the mount.

First, God made His Offer of a Covenant to the people, same as He did Abraham some 430 years earlier.

Ex. 19: 4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself. 5 Now therefore, "if ye will obey" my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, "then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me" above all people: for all the earth is mine:

6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, "and an holy nation". These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, "and laid before their faces" all these words which the LORD commanded him.

8 And "all the people" answered together, and said, "All that the LORD hath spoken "we will do". And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

After this, in chapter 20, God gave the People His 10 Commandments.

You will notice, if you are interested in what is actually written, that there is NO WHERE in this agreement between God and the people, where THIS Law was given to them "Because of Transgressions". So according to what God actually teaches, these Laws were not "ADDED" because of Transgressions at all. There was a LAW "ADDED", but as anyone can clearly see, it wasn't the 10 Commandments, it wasn't Passover, it wasn't God's Sabbath. It's right there before your own eyes.

So what does the verse you referenced actually say?


Ex. 24: 1 And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the LORD, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off. 2 And Moses alone shall come near the LORD: but they shall not come nigh; neither shall the people go up with him. 3 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, "All the words which the LORD hath said will we do". 4 And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. 5 And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the LORD. 6 And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. 7 And he took the book of the covenant, and "read in the audience of the people": "and they said", All that the LORD hath said "will we do", and be obedient.

8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold "the blood of the covenant", which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.

Where does God or Moses require that a man bring a goat to a Levite Priest for the remission of his sins? Please show me in the verses you referenced? Remember, the "LAW" Paul is speaking to that was "ADDED", wasn't ADDED until 430 years after Abraham.

Men have offered peace offerings and burnt offerings to God since the beginning. "And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:"

Gen. 4: 18 And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him: 19 Every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, and whatsoever creepeth upon the earth, after their kinds, went forth out of the ark. 20 And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and "offered" burnt offerings on the altar.

Gen. 22: 13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and "offered" him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.

Ex. 10: 24 And Pharaoh called unto Moses, and said, Go ye, serve the LORD; only let your flocks and your herds be stayed: let your little ones also go with you. 25 And Moses said, Thou must give us also sacrifices and burnt offerings, that we may sacrifice unto the LORD our God.

So MS, just look at all the lies and deceptions that you and I have been influenced by that are exposed in just these few verses.

Exposed Lie #1. The Entire Law that God gave to Moses was "ADDED" "Because of Transgressions".

As you can see by accepting the Word's of God in your own Bible, this is a false teaching that this world's religions have promoted to both of us since our youth, and long before that.

Exposed Lie #2. The "LAW" Commanding a common man to bring a goat to a Levite Priest in order to provide for the forgiveness of his sins, was Commanded by God to Israel, before Israel broke the Covenant, "Ratified in Blood" the First Time Moses went up to God.

As you can see, there were no Commandment of God "Commanding" a common man to sacrifice animals for his sins anywhere before Israel broke the Covenant they had made with God.

Exposed lie #4. The practice of free will sacrifices and burnt offerings to God existed long before even Abraham was born, and were part a true believers honor towards God before Moses even Left Egypt. These are symbolic of the Glory, honor and respect true believers show to God through their obedient works. These were not part of the "LAW" Paul spoke to that were not "ADDED" until 430 years after Abraham.

If men could just turn away from the internet preachers, and place their trust in God, or as Paul teaches, "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members (Eyes, hands, feet,) as instruments of righteousness unto God.

If only you and I could engage in honest discussion and answer each others questions in search of God's Righteousness, there is so much influence from the "course of this world" that can be exposed, just as the 4 deceptions we have already exposed.

I asked you once to answer me, "Why did God tell Moses to get out of His way so HE could wipe Israel out?" I would also ask, since you are on this forum preaching to me, "Why did Moses have to go up to God a 2nd time?" Wasn't the "covenant" God made with them already established?

Again, if a man would turn away from this world's religious system, including the religious websites, and place their trust in God, you will find that Israel "Broke the Covenant". It was gone, Israel had become like Sodom, and God was ready to wipe them out.

But Moses interjected on their behalf, and went up for them a 2nd Time to secure "another Covenant", which still included the 10 Commandments and many of God's eternal judgments, statutes and Laws that Noah and Abraham knew, that were given the first time, just like on the First Covenant. But on the 2nd Time Moses went up, God "ADDED" Laws, because of the great transgression, concerning sacrifices and burnt offerings required by the individual for sin.

Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean here, but animal sacrifices for sin go way back before the Torah became The Law.

️ 1. Genesis 3:21 – God clothing Adam and Eve​

“Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.”

Click to expand...

Meaning:
This is not explicitly called a sacrifice, but the implication is that an animal was slain to cover their shame and nakedness — a symbolic picture of atonement and covering for sin (compare “atonement” = kaphar, “to cover”).
However, this is God’s act, not a commanded sacrifice by humans.

---

2. Genesis 4:3–5 – Cain and Abel’s offerings​

“And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering.”

Click to expand...

Meaning:
This is the first recorded animal offering by a human.
While the text doesn’t explicitly say it was for sin, Hebrews 11:4 gives commentary:

“By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous…”

Click to expand...

This suggests Abel’s sacrifice was accepted because of faith in God’s provision for sin — a substitutionary offering, prefiguring later sin offerings.


Still, no law or priesthood existed here; it’s voluntary worship, not an atonement system.

---

️ 3. Genesis 8:20–21 – Noah’s burnt offerings after the Flood​

“And Noah builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.”

Click to expand...

Meaning:
Burnt offerings (olah) were acts of devotion and thanksgiving.
Verse 21 says, “The Lord smelled a sweet savour,” and in response, promised never again to curse the ground.
This shows divine acceptance, but again, it’s not explicitly a sin offering for atonement — more a dedication or thanksgiving offering.

---

️ 4. Genesis 15:9–10 – Abram’s covenant sacrifice​

“Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old…”

Click to expand...

Meaning:
These animals were cut in two as part of the covenant ceremony between God and Abram.
This was not for sin, but to ratify God’s covenant promise to give Abram descendants and land.

---

5. Genesis 22:13 – Abraham and Isaac​

“And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket… and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.”

Click to expand...

Meaning:
This was a substitutionary sacrifice — the ram died in place of Isaac.
It foreshadows substitutionary atonement (Christ, the true Lamb of God), but it was not a sin offering under law — it was an act of obedience and faith.

---

️ 6. Exodus 10:25 – Moses before the Exodus​

“And Moses said, Thou must give us also sacrifices and burnt offerings, that we may sacrifice unto the Lord our God.”

Click to expand...

Meaning:
Before Sinai, Moses acknowledges that sacrifices were part of Hebrew worship, but still, no system for sin atonement or priesthood yet existed.
These were likely peace or burnt offerings, expressing devotion to God, not Levitical sin offerings.

---

7. Job 1:5; 42:8 – Job’s burnt offerings​

“And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone about, that Job sent and sanctified them… and offered burnt offerings according to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their hearts.”

Click to expand...

“Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering…”

Click to expand...

Meaning:
These are the clearest examples before Moses of animal sacrifices being used in relation to sin.
But notice:

• There’s still no written command or priesthood; Job acts as his family’s priest.
• God accepts the offerings (Job 42:9).

This shows a principle of substitutionary atonement known by the patriarchs, but not yet codified in the Mosaic Law.

RDKirk said:

That's only a surface view of what "culture" means that they bring with them.

Click to expand...

I agree that you've given a more complete view of what "culture" means. I'm not as pessimistic as your last paragraph suggests, though I agree that there's lots of potential to violate each other's cultural norms.

RileyG said:

Hope you are doing well

Click to expand...

Shrugs. I am okay. I guess. Thanks. I hope you are, too.

Guojing said:

But if you claim salvation relies on following what Jesus said, not selling all you have means you will not be saved?

Click to expand...

Definitely a thought worth contemplating. There’s a principle involved: the more of this world with its offerings and values we give up, the nearer we are to God.

Tough future! I remember when reading the book 2150AD by Thea Alexander I imagined a future of advanced society where everyone walked around in great shape and in tunics. Looking like leadership of the Roman Empire of old. Everywhere I go it seems like people are terribly out of shape these days. And I would say it is hard keeping young people as they cannot see any kind of upper, advanced way in the people these days.

I have come to the conclusion that Isaac Newton was closest in his 2060AD Christ return prophecy. I would also venture to say that in 2150 AD we will probably be walking in white tunics and looking like folk of the Roman Empire of old. But it will be the time of the last millennial where the evil angels will be locked up for a thousand years during the reign of Christ.

1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. -Revelation 20

So… In the meantime, I will work and do the best I can. Awaiting the return of Christ Jesus

bèlla said:

No I haven’t but I prefer classical education.

Click to expand...

Classical education is better, much better.
Modern education has been very successful in achieving its "mission".
Education? No, it's dumbing down Americans and Australians.

Asians are no smarter than Americans, on average. Then why are Asians getting the TOP scores in PISA Maths?
Why Americans and Australian teenagers are poor at Maths, on average ?

Servus said:

There's a reason why most everyone in Australia lives on the coast.

Click to expand...

That is true. It's a desert surrounded by a skid-mark of green.
But the truth you just posted does not contradict the scientific evidence.
"People avoid living in deserts and like the beach" does NOT disprove "Australia's starting to cook in accordance with climate change."
Both statements can be true. Both ARE true!
Unless - of course - you are politically wedded to an anti-science proposition.
Then - being MAGA - you can just believe anything you want to. Apparently. Conservatives used to be about conserving nature, not practicing a radical experiment by altering the atmosphere of the entire planet!

Eunice Foote discovered CO2 trapped heat way back in 1956.
She put thermometers in equal glass jars out in the same sun, and filled them with different gases.
The CO2 jar warmed higher, methane even more.
This is backyard science - but MAGA denies it.
Why is that? Oh yeah - big funding from Koch brothers and Exxon.
Trump gives billionaires tax cuts and kicks the bottom 16 million Americans off healthcare and calls it a "Big Beautiful Bill." Go figure.

REALITY:

"Australia, on average, has warmed by 1.51 ± 0.23 °C since national records began in 1910, with most warming occurring since 1950. Every decade since 1950 has been warmer than preceding decades. The warming in Australia is consistent with global trends, with the degree of warming similar to the overall average across the world’s land areas."​

I understand that. But that does not mean people, specifically dispensationalists understand what those dispensations are. For instance, this is a proper understanding of a dispensation.

This is one of best examples of the nature of God's supernatural book, the Bible. Moses as well as other prophets wrote- That what we call the first covenant given by Moses to Israel, was predestined to be replaced by God in favor of a second covenant that was to come. That the first covenant was but an instrument towards his designs of a predestined second covenant through which he would save billions and transform the world.
Now like I said many of the prophets spoke of this but no one did it quite like Moses in the first five books of the Bible. This is why God rejected so many of the first born in Genesis but elected and predestined the second born.

• Cain the first born of Adam was rejected in favor of the second born Abel.
• Ishmael, Abraham's first born was rejected in favor of his second born Isaac.
• Esau the first born rejected in favor of the second born Jacob.
• Jacob, later named Israel blessed Joseph's second born over the first born.
• Moses struck the rock the first time in the wilderness and nothing happened, but the second time he struck it water, “the living water” came out.

None of this was written by accident. It is all prophecy about God predestining the world to be saved via the second covenant with the first as a means to arrive at the second. There is much more of this in the Bible like Israel's first king Saul being rejected in favor of Israel's second king David. Even the book of Job is a prophecy of the first and second covenant. Everything Job had from God at first was destroyed by Satan. But what he received the second time around was much much more and endured. However, the the coup d'état of this prophecy is at the end of the five books of the Torah. God does not allow Moses to lead the people into the promised land because a man named Yahshua, Joshua in English, Jesus from Hebrew to Greek to English, was predestined to do that. A man named Jesus led the children of Israel into the promised land as a prophecy of Jesus leading the meek to inherit the entire earth!
Now ask yourselves how could Moses and the rest of the OT writers knew such things about a first and second covenant and could preach and prophesy this would happen thousands of years in advance? Especially through the historical story line of the lives of the patriarchs and the lawgiver Moses himself? It certainly was not written after the fact as the books of Moses and the prophets were known throughout the empires of those days many centuries before the Messiah came. Besides, do you think the Jewish political class who murdered Jesus because they thought he would take their ruler-ship over the Jewish people from them would go ahead and alter the scriptures in such a way as to prove the claims made about Jesus? In their rabbinical writings in the centuries following the first century they sure don’t. They couldn’t anyway. The entire Greek Empire had access to the Hebrew Bible written in Greek hundreds of years before Jesus came. That is just historical fact.
I would like you to use reason and logic about what I just pointed out. This is not just a matter of so called faith. What possible reason could Moses or any other writers of the OT have had to conjure up such a story line? What gain would it have been to them? What a total contrivance of nothing because there was no chance the world could or would develop along such lines. Especially in light of the fact that no one understood what it all meant. The apostle Paul called this in Ephesians 3:4.... the mystery of Christ 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; But he found this out after the fact because it became evident due to it transpiring in his ministry. His revelation of it came through the scripture as he was living out what was prophesied. God had to trick Peter into going to a household of gentiles to preach. Even after that Peter called Paul's writings on the subject scripture, because there was really no clarity in their minds on the matter up until that point, until after it began to come to pass. One might ascertain that surely some of the saved in ancient Israel knew that the messiah was going to bring the light, salvation and transformation to the nations because there is so much prophecy about it. Some of the prophets even spoke directly of a new covenant for Israel and the abrogation of the current one. But the means through which that would be accomplished was just to much to grasp for them. Especially since what was written was four-twelve centuries old before Jesus had arrived on the scene and, there was no more scripture written throughout that four hundred year period. Moses even stated it in Duet 18:17 The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelite's. You must listen to him. 18.....He will tell them everything I command him. 19 I myself will call to account anyone who does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name. Or as the writer of the NT book of Hebrew claims concerning the Old Covenant: 2nd Co. 3:13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelite's from seeing the end of what was passing away.
It is very easy today to nonchalantly look at our world without any regard to how impossible what we are living out could have been prophesied by Moses and the rest of the OT prophets. There is no getting away with the lies some folks make about Jesus, that NT writers made it all up after the fact and created a Jesus to fit OT prophecies. Those fallacious claims are as far from logic and reason as you can get with this body of prophecy with just a casual look at history. These prophecies were spoken in a world ruled in perpetuity by despotic kings, emperors and warlords. A world where the government imposed idol worship with the death penalty for non participation. A world where 1\3 to 1\2 of all people were the property of others. In most of it human sacrifice was practiced and the rulers were looked upon as demi-gods, most of whom just happened to be LGBTP. Property rights were non existent once kingdoms were established since the king could just take anyone's property and give it to their supporters. It was even a law in the Roman Empire where the new emperor could execute the families of anyone he wanted and deliver their property to his supporters. In that world Jehovah was just a small tribal god that was of such little regard that he did not even make the Greek or Roman pantheon of gods. Yet in those circumstances with the entire world and all its power arrayed against it every coming to pass as exampled by Israel already suffering multiple holocausts by the time Jesus came on the scene. Prophecies like this within the context of the replacement of the Old covenant by the New Covenant were spoken.
Psalm 22:27 All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the LORD: and all the families of the nations shall worship before you. 28 For the kingdom is the LORD'S: and he is the governor among the nations.
Isaiah 2:17......and the LORD alone shall be exalted in that day. 18 And the idols he shall utterly abolish.
Isaiah 54:5 ......The God of the whole earth shall he be called.
Here we are today. Prophecies out of God's supernatural book impossible to contrive and fulfill, being fulfilled. There are now believers who worship the God of the Bible among all ethnic groups on earth and this phenomena in numbers has been growing by leaps and bounds every single year. Half the world once deadly serious about worshiping their hundreds of idols have forsaken them. They are now just historical artifacts. Although half the world at this point are not heaven bound servants of God and believers. Half the world does call the God of the Bible, the God of the whole earth. The other half is soon to follow through the preaching of the Gospel. Can you see, especially you people who claim Christ that the only thing that can account for it is supernatural authorship? Only God could inspire Moses to write what he did and only God could bring it to pass in a world that was completely hostile to its fulfillment, but had no idea what it was that was going to be fulfilled in the first place. They just wanted to kill the messengers because they figured them a threat to their rule. You know what? They were right.

The One, Big, Beautiful Bill has a significant effect on federal taxes, credits and deductions. It was signed into law on July 4, 2025, as Public Law 119-21.

Daniel Martinovich said:

Seems beside the point. But I think we can agree on the state not having authority to determine truth.

Click to expand...

And I am a DISPENSATIONALIST and I have attended many different churches and I am OLD. and have never heard what

what you have written !

dan p

Daniel Martinovich said:

I'm not asking as a Preterist. I disagree with them as strongly as I disagree with dispensationalists and pre, mid, post, ah= millennialists as far as the scripture is concerned. But I have never seen someone cite anything other than what they believe to tag them as "heretics." So it is something I have been curious about for decades.

Click to expand...

And just. asking. ,BUT. the word DISPENSATIKONAISM. is found in. EPH. 1:10 , in. 3:2 and. in. 1. COR. 9:17 and. in. Col. 1:25

and in. 1. Tim 1:4 and in. Luke 16:2 , 3 , 4. !!

dan p

Ivan Hlavanda said:

The Church is not Israel, neither it has replaced Israel. I don't know how Christians can read Romans 11 and came to the conclusion that the Church has replaced Israel

Romans 11 13 Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry 14 in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. 15 For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead?

25 Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers:[d] a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,

“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
27 “and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”

28 As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers

Isaiah 66 8 Who has heard such a thing? Who has seen such things? Shall a land be born in one day? Shall a nation be brought forth in one moment? For as soon as Zion was in labor she brought forth her children.

God asked, can a nation be created in 1 day? Then He answered yes by establishing Israel in 1948.

This was prophesied by Ezekiel also. Ezekiel 36:19 I scattered them among the nations, and they were dispersed through the countries. In accordance with their ways and their deeds I judged them. - this happened in 70AD. Israel was scattered across the world, with no land, no army, no government. But let's take a look what God says in verse 24 'I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land.' And this indeed happened in may 1948.
We can then surely say that the modern Israel is the same Israel in OT.

The people of Israel are cut apart because God chose them to be His Holy, Exodus 19:6 and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel.”

They are special for the sole reason that God has declared them to be special. They are the physical fulfilment of the extraordinary promese God made thousands of years ago to Abraham and his wife Sara.

It is for this reason Paul says in Romans 11: I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew.

Click to expand...

I am not of either of the extremes. One of which you are articulating. I attested to an iron clad prophecy of the Jews returning to their homeland unlike the types of prophecy you're mixing up. What is written below cannot come to pass without a modern nation of Israel.

Isaiah 19: 23 In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria. The Assyrians will go to Egypt and the Egyptians to Assyria. The Egyptians and Assyrians will worship together. 24 In that day Israel will be the third, along with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing on the earth. 25 The Lord Almighty will bless them, saying, “Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance.”

But the only way this can come to pass in a biblically doctrinal crystal-clear way is the way I stated. Millions of Jew, Arabs, Syrians, Egyptians coming to their savior Jesus and that influence transforming the region.

It would be great if hamas were to behave and disband letting the people of Gaza begin rebuilding a better life without being subjugated again. I have little faith in that outcome however.It appears they may be making moves to reassert control.

Hamas has launched several attacks on rival clans, killing "collaborators" attempting to challenge Hamas's superiority in post-ceasefire Gaza.​

Hamas has reemerged in Gaza to try to cement its dominance over the enclave after the ceasefire and the release of the remaining 20 live hostages.

The terrorist organization’s goal since the truce agreement was signed in Sinai last week is to reemerge victorious and not comply with the US-backed deal that is supposed to see it disarm and give up governance.


Hamas has launched several attacks on dissidents in the meantime, murdering them and dragging them through the streets, to show that it has no intention of going anywhere.

It has always used a combination of gangland-style killings and the appearance of normalcy in governance to control Gaza. This has been Hamas’s pattern since it seized control in an illegal coup in 2007.
Full article

Always in His Presence said:

All you’re missing is proof. Maybe ai could help you.

Click to expand...

Just for funsies, this is what DeepSeek came up with:

US Government Funding Changes Since March 2025​

Key Developments​

March 2025: Final Continuing Resolution

• On March 14, 2025, the Senate passed a final continuing resolution to extend government funding through the end of Fiscal Year 2025 (September 30, 2025)
• The House passed the same measure with a vote of 217-213
• President Trump signed the funding bill into law on March 15, 2025
• This action averted a government shutdown that was looming

July 2025: Funding Rescissions

• On July 24, 2025, President Trump signed a recissions package that rescinded $9 billion in previously appropriated federal funding
• The House initially passed the package on June 12, 2025
• The Senate passed the legislation with an amendment on July 17, 2025
• The House agreed to the Senate amendment on July 18, 2025

RileyG said:

I hear some people say wearing blue jeans is disrespectful. I always wore blue jeans to everywhere.

My opinion only.

Click to expand...

The only time jeans are seen as inappropriate in my church (to my knowledge) is if a EM would wear them, which I dont think I’ve ever seen.