Latest activity

DragonFox91 · 2025-10-12T20:03:05-0500

bèlla said:
I’m not liberal and my conservatism is taking a hit in this climate and I’ll probably lean more moderate when it’s said and done. Nevertheless, I have limits to what I‘m willing to sit under spiritually or entertain. I’ve had my fill with the gender wars and I’m tired of hearing christian men sounding like mascots for red pill or quasi incels. It isn’t attractive.

If things continue as they are you’re going to lose us. We’re tired. Far more than we admit. Something has to change and I’m sure you’d agree.

~bella

There's a difference between 'theologically conservative / liberal' & 'conservative / liberal.' A theological liberal to use an extreme (but common) example would be 'there's a scientific explanation for each of the Bible's miracles.' Or a less extreme example 'church should be entertainment' over 'church should be teaching.'

bèlla said:
Women took the lead because men weren‘t interested. I’ve been in those circles for more than 20 years and mentored my share.

~bella

That's some of it too. My opinion is something was motiviating the men to not be interested, like the women wanted to lead & the men said 'okay, whatever'

Maria Billingsley · 2025-10-12T19:57:21-0500

Xeno.of.athens said:
do you believe that God cares about how you worship him? should you kneel when you pray, should you be standing when you pray? Should you receive Holy Communion Every time you gather should you be baptised once or more than once? is it OK to dance while you're in church? is it OK to speak in tongues even if you had no idea what those tongues might mean and you don't know what you're saying?

cheque out your answers to see if they fit with what the Bible has to say. The Old Testament has a few things to say about worship so does The New testament.

Or do you not really care very much about what the Bible has to say on worship and you just go along with whatever your denomination says is good?

Jesus Christ of Nazareth did teach about how we should worship, however it s not what you think . In his words:

John 4:23-24
"true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth" .

His teachings shifted the focus from specific physical locations or rituals to the inner heart, sincere obedience, and a life lived in love for God and others.
Blessings

River Jordan · 2025-10-12T19:55:19-0500

sfs said:
I was aiming for irony there.

Oh, my mistake.

Hentenza · 2025-10-12T19:54:46-0500

SabbathBlessings said:
Psa 89:30 “If his sons forsake My law
And do not walk in My judgments,
31 If they [f]break My statutes
And do not keep My commandments,
32 Then I will punish their transgression with the rod,
And their iniquity with stripes.
33 Nevertheless My lovingkindness I will not [g]utterly take from him,
Nor [h]allow My faithfulness to fail.
34 My covenant I will not break,
Nor alter the word that has gone out of My lips.

Exo 20:1 20 And God spoke all these words, saying: Exo 20:1-17

Deut 4:13 So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

Psa 119:89 Forever, O Lord,
Your word [a]is settled in heaven.

Where is the Ten Commandments- in heaven where His word is settled under His mercy seat Heb 8:1-5 Rev 11:`19 Rev 15:5 because man is not greater than the Testimony of God Exo 31:18 .to edit one jot or tittle Mat 5:18 Isa8:20

Still no post resurrection verse that requires the Christian to keep the 4th commandment. More c&p?

Hentenza · 2025-10-12T19:51:48-0500

Soyeong said:
While there is a type of contract to perform a specific task that no longer needs to be done after it has been fulfilled, the Bible does not present the Mosaic Covenant or any other covenant as being this type of contract, but rather it says things like this is a statute forever throughout your generations.

Only to Israel. The covenant to the house of Israel still remains until the time of the gentiles is finished.

Soyeong said:
The Bible often describes the Mosaic Covenant in terms of being a marriage between God and Israel, so it is presented as a marriage contract.

Where? Evidence please.

Soyeong said:
It is not the case that when someone does something that expresses their love their neighbor or their spouse, then they have fulfilled their obligation and no longer need to love their neighbor or their spouse, but rather it is something that we need to keep on fulfilling as an ongoing obligation.

But that is exactly what Jesus stated. He stated that all of the law of the prophets (Matt 7:12) is summarized in the “treat them as you would like to be treated” commandment.

Soyeong said:
The terms of God's covenants are not up in the air such that it is in accordance with God's righteousness to be a doer of charity in one covenant while it might be sinful to be a doer of charity in another covenant, but rather each of God's covenants are made with the same God with the same eternal character traits and therefore the same eternal and cumulastely valid instructions for how to be a doer of His character traits (Jeremiah 31:33).

Sure but you quote old covenant terms. The house of Israel is not the New Testament church.

Soyeong said:
God could give two people two different sets of instructions for how to be a doer of righteousness in different situations, but all of those instructions have the same character trait in common and all of them would be valid for a third person who has the goal of knowing and loving God by being a doer of righteousness even though God did not directly give any instructions to them.

I disagree. Jesus redeeming sacrifice on the cross changed the salvation formula but even in the old covenant the determining factor for salvation was faith not the law (Heb. 11).

Soyeong said:
It's not that we need to add our works in addition to our faith as if faith alone were insufficient but that we can do works that embody our faith, such as with James 2:18 saying that he would show his faith through is works, so everyone who is a doer of the same works as James has faith in Jesus. In Romans 1:5, we have received grace in order to bring about the obedience of faith, and in Titus 2:11-13, our salvation is described as being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good, and to renounce doing what is ungodly, so we are not required to have first done those works in order to earn our salvation as the result and we are not required to do those works as the result of having first been saved, but rather God graciously teaching us to be a doer of those works is part of His gift of salvation, which requires our participation.

Agree.

Soyeong said:
In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in what he accomplished through the cross is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law (Acts 21:20).

Agree.

Soyeong said:
In Ephesians 2:8-10, we are new creations in Christ to do good works, so while Paul denied that we can earn our salvation as the result of our works lest anyone should boast, God graciously making us to be a doer of good works is nevertheless still a central part of His gift of salvation.

But not as a requirement for salvation. The verses are clear that we are made a workmanship of Christ and will do the works prepared in advance for us to do so we do works naturally from salvation but there is nothing here about doing the works of the law.

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 His law, 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.

Psalm 119:29-30 is not a part of the new covenant. The audience was Israel and hardly applicable to the Christian church.

Soyeong said:
If God said the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt in order to put them under bondage to HIs law, then it would be for bondage that God sets us free, however, Galatians 5:1 says that it is for freedom that God sets us free. In Psalms 119:142, God's law is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is the transgression of God's law that puts us into bondage while the truth set us free.

“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

These verses are pretty damning to your argument. You quote Gal. 5 but fail to take into account Paul’s teaching regarding the keeping of the law. The freedom of Gal. 5 does not speak about keeping the law.

Soyeong said:
God has not commanded anything that is contrary to walking the Spirit, which is why 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 God's law (Romans 8:4-7)

Gods law is no longer the Jewish law for the Christian church but it still remain for the unbelieving Israel. The spirit now convicts us not the law.

“For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8‬:‭2‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.

bible.com

Soyeong said:
In Revelation 14:12, those who kept faith in Jesus are the same as those who kept God's commandments.

“For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8‬:‭2‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.

bible.com

The commandments of God here is not the law or even the 10. The commandments are the commandments of Jesus (2 commandments not 613 Jewish laws).

Soyeong said:
Christ quoted three times from Deuteronomy in order to defeat the temptations of Satan, which included saying that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God, so he affirmed everything that God has spoken.

Yes but Jesus is God and He gave us two commandments not 613 or even 10.

Soyeong said:
In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and God's law was how his audience knew what sin is, so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom, which Paul also taught based on God's law (Acts 20:24-25, 28:23).

Sure but remember that where there is no sin there is no law. Christ fulfilled the law (completed it as no one ever could) so we are now convicted of our sin by the spirit not from the law).

“But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of God’s grace. “And now behold, I know that all of you, among whom I went about preaching the kingdom, will no longer see my face.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭20‬:‭24‬-‭25‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Acts 20:24-25 But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of God’s grace. | New American Standard Bible - NAS

But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of God’s grace.

bible.com

Not sure why you are using these verses. Nothing here about the law.

“When they had set a day for Paul, people came to him at his lodging in large numbers; and he was explaining to them by solemnly testifying about the kingdom of God and trying to persuade them concerning Jesus, from both the Law of Moses and from the Prophets, from morning until evening.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭28‬:‭23‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Acts 28:23 When they had set a day for Paul, people came to him at his lodging in large numbers; and he was explaining to them by solemnly testifying about the kingdom of God and trying to persuade them concerni | New American Standard Bible - NASB (

When they had set a day for Paul, people came to him at his lodging in large numbers; and he was explaining to them by solemnly testifying about the kingdom of God and trying to persuade them concerni

bible.com

Yes and Paul also said:

“To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might gain Jews; to those who are under the Law, I became as one under the Law, though not being under the Law myself, so that I might gain those who are under the Law;”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭9‬:‭20‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

1 Corinthians 9:20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might gain Jews; to those who are under the Law, I became as one under the Law, though not being under the Law myself, so that I might gain those who are under | New American Standard Bible

To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might gain Jews; to those who are under the Law, I became as one under the Law, though not being under the Law myself, so that I might gain those who are under

bible.com

Paul was going to preach the gospel of good news to the Jews as a Jew do he could convert Jews. Understand that Paul is not going to call the law a curse in Galatians to now defend the law in Acts 28. Paul is not bipolar.

Soyeong said:
All of the 613 commandments are either in regard to how to love God or how to love our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them so the position that we should obey the greatest two commandments is also the position that we should obey all of the commandments that hang on them. Christ seen this ministry teaching his followers to obey God's law by word and by example and being a Christian is about being a follower of what he taught, no about refusing to follow him. The reason why Jesus established the New Covenant was not in order to nullify anything that he spent his ministry teaching or so that we could continue to have the same lawlessness that caused the New Covenant to be needed in the first place, but rather the New Covenant still involves following God's law (Jeremiah 31:33).

Then Paul and others are preaching a different gospel. No where in the New Testament does it teach that the Christian is still under the Jewish law. Absolutely no where. The whole if the NT teaches exactly the opposite. As Paul teaches if you keep the law then you have your keep all of it. Good luck with that since only God as man was able to keep it perfectly.

exitstageright · 2025-10-12T19:47:19-0500

Citanul said:
True, but they didn't come out of a speed dating type scenario. Every friendship I've had was the result of prolonged contact with the person, not talking to them only for a few minutes and then moving onto a conversation with someone else.

Well,.....what I really meant to say is, if one is friendly in meetings, for example smiling, one would be attractive. Just like the lyrics say in the Eagles song,"Lyinin' Eyes" Those lyrics are, "City girls just seem to find out early, how to open doors with just a smile. "I guess that is the problem I have with women. Most people are afraid of public speaking. But I can quote Shakespeare in front of 500 or 1,000 people in a theater and not be afraid. But,I am not comfortable asking ONE WOMAN out to dinner or lunch. Because I might say the wrong thing to her. Or ,I do not know what to say to her in order for her to get interested in me. I am not one of those "pretty boys". Therefore,I have to find other ways to get a woman interested in me.
Women complain to me many times, saying their man is either a jailbird, alcoholic, drug abuser and /or very irresponsible. I have never drank,smoked,took illeagal drugs,been arrested,or spent time in jail. But all of my attributes are not good enough.

RandyPNW · 2025-10-12T19:38:47-0500

SabbathBlessings said:
Sorry if I don't take your word for it over the translation in Greek as shown written word for word The History of the “Two Laws” Theory in Romans 3:20

The Pharisees were teachers of their own laws, not God's they kept their laws not God's Mat 15:1-14 Rom 2:21-23 which Jesus condemned harshly, following their path is not the way back to reconciliation. Mat 5:18-20 Rev 22:14-15

There is no Scripture that says the Ten Commandments are the same laws as the sacrificial laws that Moses wrote placed besides the ark of the Covenant. This goes against the very teaching of God. You quote you but does that trump what God said in His own written and spoken Testimony the Ten Commandments Deut 4:13 Exo 34:28 that no more were added Deut 5:22 sorry if I choose to believe the Testimony of God Exo 31:18 over man. There was no Moses at creation according to God in His written and spoken Testimony, the Ten Commandments Exo 20:11. But you are free to believe what you wish

2 Chr 33:8 and I will not again remove the foot of Israel from the land which I have appointed for your fathers—only if they are careful to do all that I (God) have commanded them, according to the whole law and (in addition to) the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.”

God is not Moses. Moses is not God. Moses was a servant of God as are we to be.

James 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.

Which Law?

11 For He (God) who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.

The Ten Commandments is the whole law of God, the only law that sits under His mercy seat. Not the edited version of man. His own Testimony, that God of the Universe wrote, not man. Where mercy and justice will come together soon. Rev 11:18-19 I personally would not want to remove a jot or tittle on what God covers under His mercy seat, but we are given free will, despite that never working out for anyone in Scripture. Eze 22:26 Eze 20:13 Neh 13:17 Exo 31:14 we were told not to follow the same path of disobedience Heb4:11

The law that describes what sin is can't be the same law that was added as a prescription for sin. I pray one day you will see this.

I cannot see this because all that you're saying is an interpretation--not what was said.

1) The Scriptures do not say that the 10 Commandments are different from the entire body of Law that included sacrificial laws. They are different sets within the one Law, and are designated in places separately, but they all remain part of the Law of Moses. They are not "God's Laws" and "Moses' Laws."

2) The Scirptures do not say that the "words of the Covenant," sometimes called "the 10 Commandments," are restricted to just those 10 Commandments. We are informed that "Covenant Law" included the regulations on how the 10 Commandments were stored in the Ark and in the Tabernacle. In fact, the Tabernacle itself was called "the tabernacle of the covenant law."

Exo 38.These are the amounts of the materials used for the tabernacle, the tabernacle of the covenant law, which were recorded at Moses’ command by the Levites under the direction of Ithamar son of Aaron, the priest.

In reality, though the 10 Commandments were used as a symbol of the entire agreement between God and Israel, the totality of all of the laws were included in the covenant agreement...

Lev 26.14 “‘But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, 15 and if you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my commands and so violate my covenant...

The Law, therefore, included "all these commands," "my decrees," and "my laws," as well as "all my commands." Doing any of these things--not just the 10 Commandments, "violated my covenant."

But the 10 Commandments, as symbolic of the whole Covenant, also represented more than just all of the laws governing the keeping of the 10 Commandments. They represented, symbolically, God's promise to Israel's ancestors, to maintain Israel as His People...

44 Yet in spite of this, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or abhor them so as to destroy them completely, breaking my covenant with them. I am the Lord their God. 45 But for their sake I will remember the covenant with their ancestors whom I brought out of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their God. I am the Lord.’”
46 These are the decrees, the laws and the regulations that the Lord established at Mount Sinai between himself and the Israelites through Moses.

At the heart of this argument you believe that the 10 Commandments alone represent God's "decrees, laws, and commands," and that violating them alone constitute violating God's "covenant." Well, I must admit that the 10 Commandments were used by God in His Law to represent Israel's ideal faithfulness to God with respect to those 10 Commandments, including the Sabbath Law.

One could keep many of the external ceremonial laws without really keeping the 10 Commandments from the heart. And that was, I think, the point.

And so, the 10 Commandments were the seal of true obedience among those who had genuine faith in God's mercy, though all of the external laws of sacrifice were also part of this covenant law. Much of the external laws were designed, in fact, to protect God's standard of true obedience to the Commandments from those kept separate by sin. It meant that the 10 Commandments, along with the regulations governing the keeping of them, could only truly be fulfilled by Christ, enabling the curtain of separation to come down.

As such, these 10 Commandments were symbols of a promise, and not the full text of the Law--all of their "decrees, laws, and regulations." Your error is, I think, in thinking their use as a symbol of the whole covenant meant that they were exclusive of the rest of the full body of laws.

The statutes given *by the hand of Moses* were included in this Law and Covenant. There is no distinction between these and the 10 Commandments given by God. Both statutes given by Moses and Commandments given by God were *from God.*

The fact that the 10 Commandments were used as a symbol of the Covenant in the ark indicated God's promise to Israel on behalf of their forefathers. The fact they were encased in an ark and in the Tabernacle indicated that the statutes governing this order were part of the entire set of decrees, laws, and regulations.

Your argument for the Sabbath regulation is as much part of the whole body of laws as it is a part of the 10 Commandments. And it all, both the 10 Commandments and the external regulations governing their separation, were designed to maintain a kind of separation between God's presence and Israel until Christ's work on the cross was finished.

Now that Christ has died, and the veil has been rent, we rely on Christ for our Salvation--not works done under the Law, which were eternally separated from God by sin. Christ did not have to keep the 10 Commandments because they were for Israel and not for a Messiah who knew no sin.

Jesus had no need to keep the Sabbath Law, nor any of the many other regulations, ceremonies, and requirements of the Law. His righteousness was the fulfillment of the Covenant and the fulfillment of the promise. If you are going to start requiring Sabbath observance of Jesus you will be requiring that God obey His own laws required for sinful Israel!

In fact, Jesus' righteousness was designed to be fulfilled apart from the Law for Israel. He became a distinct priest, temple, and sacrifice. He alone fulfilled a Law that was for a sinful people. And did so separate from Sabbath Law.

Delvianna · 2025-10-12T19:38:01-0500

*LILAC said:
So do we just leave these fakeries alone or keep calling them out? Now this lady, she drives me absolutely bonkers. She hates when people bring up Enoch or the book of Enoch saying "it's not scriptural" but is somehow on board with using an Enoch calendar?! But she is a complete false prophet, loves to call herself one and also hates being corrected, which more Christians are now exposing their works of darkness because it IS witchcraft they are performing.

Login to view embedded media

Keep doing it. Because even if she doesn't stop, it might help someone who reads your comment that decides to stop watching her. You might not get HER to stop, but if you pull away her audience.... that's where it matters most so other people aren't following what she's preaching anymore.

Lukaris · 2025-10-12T19:37:31-0500

It is often said that there are non Americans needed to do the work Americans won’t do. We also hear how technology replaces humans in various jobs. Maybe in the case of agriculture, we need to pursue automation to avoid problems that result from labor shortages and immigration mismanagement.

Harvesting Robots: Automated Farming in 2025

From corporate agriculture operations to family-owned farms, automated systems enable the agriculture industry to become more sustainable, productive, and efficient. Learn how here.

howtorobot.com

It is interesting that in left wing California where “green energy” is always touted & mass migration without borders, there is actual bans that stifle automation in agriculture.

We Asked Robots Why California Should Repeal Its Prohibition on Autonomous Agricultural Technology: News Article - Independent Institute

Robots are spreading across America’s farmlands, but in California, where much of the technology was invented, government regulations prevent farmers from

www.independent.org

Meanwhile billions are spent on solar “farms” that can turn out to be useless piles of junk & environmental damage “green” talking points obscure in it’s mission to “save” the earth.

$2.2 billion solar plant in California scheduled to be turned off after years of wasted money: ‘Never lived up to its promises’

The hugely expensive Ivanpah Solar Power Facility was completed in 2014, but it’s now dated and inefficient. It’s set to close in 2026.

nypost.com

Maria Billingsley · 2025-10-12T19:36:51-0500

Paulwat said:
Do you think Donald Trump should've been banned from running for president?

I still can’t wrap my head around the fact that Donald Trump was allowed to run for president again after everything that happened on January 6th, 2021. The Capitol riots weren’t just a random protest that got out of hand they were a direct result of months of Trump spreading lies about a “stolen” election and pressuring officials to overturn the results.

A sitting president encouraged his supporters to march on Congress during the certification of an election he lost, and people died because of it. That alone should’ve disqualified him from holding office again under the 14th Amendment (Section 3), which literally bans anyone who engaged in or incited an insurrection from serving in government.

On top of that, there are his criminal indictments... from trying to interfere in Georgia’s election results to mishandling classified documents. Any one of those cases would’ve ended most politicians’ careers, but somehow Trump’s using them as campaign fuel.

I
Whether you’re left, right, or independent, how does this not set a terrifying precedent? If someone can try to overturn an election and still be allowed to run again, what’s stopping future leaders from doing the same — maybe more effectively next time?

It's dangerous to allow a man like hin to have power.

What do you think?should the courts or Congress have acted to enforce the insurrection clause?

The Supreme Court did act.

AI Generated

The Supreme Court's most prominent action on behalf of Donald Trump was the 2024 decision in Trump v. United States, ruling that a former president has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts within their core constitutional purview, and at least presumptive immunity for other official acts. The Court has also frequently ruled in favor of the Trump administration in emergency motions, often limiting nationwide injunctions issued by lower courts.

Always in His Presence · 2025-10-12T19:34:36-0500

The Liturgist said:
I specifically did - see point 3.

Thank you for your oponion

Dan Perez · 2025-10-12T19:29:24-0500

ViaCrucis said:
In Greek this is pretty weird. Technically it's "baptisms of doctrines"; and there's no shortage of commentaries by those who note that the grammatical construction is peculiar, and that the plural for "baptism" is unusual; leading many to conclude that the author has in mind "washings", and in the context of the whole letter the author of Hebrews is trying to articulate the importance of moving beyond the elementary stuff which was found in Judaism (of which ritual washings or "baptisms" were common) and toward deeper things. Or that the author is being inclusive of Jewish ritual washings, John's baptism, and Christian baptism and how these are all included within the larger context of the Christian story.

I grew up Pentecostal, so I'm aware of how this passage is proof-texted to suggest that after regeneration there is a spiritual baptism, identified with the "baptism with the Holy Spirit"--a view I can no longer accept because 1) it simply isn't what the biblical texts themselves are saying and 2) it's an idea entirely foreign to the historic teaching of the Church and does not arise until modern times.

If the author of Hebrews intended to refer to the existence of two baptisms as part of Christian praxis, then this undermines the teaching of St. Paul the Apostle who writes that there is one baptism.
Given all of this, I think we should probably go with historic, scholarly commentary on this subject: The author of Hebrews is probably indicating "washings" in a broader sense, especially in a Jewish context given the nature of the epistle--to the Hebrews.

Biblically speaking "baptism with the Holy Spirit" is only identified with the unique circumstances of Pentecost; with what happened at Cornelius' house functioning as a kind of "little Pentecost" as a sign of the full inclusion of the Gentiles into the evangelistic and apostolic mission. If what happened on Pentecost was a common occurrence, then it would not have been shocking when something like it happened again at Cornelius' household, nor would Peter have to compare it to what happened as it did to them in the beginning. It's clearly a very unique thing that happened, not an ordinary repeatable experience. That's the biblical data and evidence we have, without imposing our own doctrinal views upon the text.

-CryptoLutheran

And I already knew the Heb 6:1 that you meant Heb 6:2 and the BABTIZE is really. the Greek word BAPTISMOS

and seem not to be WATER BAPTISM. and. refers to washing and cleansing !!

And. the Greek word BAPTISMOS. , is a GENITIVE C ASE , in. the Plural and BAPTISMOS SAYS TO BAPTIZE. , tables

chairs , cups , pots , check Mark. 7:4 and Luke 11:38. and JOHN. 13;5-15. !!

dan p

The Liturgist · 2025-10-12T19:25:10-0500

Always in His Presence said:
Wonderful. Now connect that to the infilling of the Holy Spirit as shown in Acts 2

I specifically did - see point 3.

The Liturgist · 2025-10-12T19:24:42-0500

Dan Perez said:
And Elizabeth. in. Luke 1:39-45. was then THE. first filled with HOLY SPIRIT. , but Mary. it seems was NOT !!

dan p

Since the Holy Trinity is undivided and indivisible, since the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, was literally carrying Our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ in her womb, and was thus literally filled with the incarnate Word of God (John 1:1-18), she would naturally have been filled with the Holy Spirit.

Also if she had not had the Holy Spirit, she would not have been able to consent when St. Gabriel allowed her the opportunity to become the Theotokos.

Lastly, since we say that Scripture is God-breathed, and the Holy Spirit is the breath of God, and since the Blessed Virgin Mary and Mother of God then sang in response to what St. Elizabeth one of the three Evangelical Canticles, along with those sung by St. Zecariah in the same chapter, and St. Symeon in Luke chapter two, and since we know it is not a sinister figure such as Judas or Herod being quoted, but rather the virgin who was selected by God to be the means of His incarnation, and since St. Luke the Evangelist does not make any critical remarks concerning the Magnificat, the canticle sung by the Theotokos in Luke ch. 1, we can definitely say she was inspired in that respect also, as the source of the inspired words of Scripture.

I am sure most forum members will agree with me on this point, whether Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox.

rockytopva · 2025-10-12T19:24:31-0500

Starship 11 update...

SpaceX tries for 2 successful Starship missions in a row with Monday's launch

SpaceX will have the chance on Monday to show that Starship's successful August flight, the first to complete all its primary mission goals, was no fluke.

abcnews.go.com

Jeff Saunders · 2025-10-12T19:23:02-0500

Freth said:
Comic books/super hero movies are obsessed with balancing good vs evil. It makes good fiction, but it isn't reality.

If you look at the Biblical perspective, good existed for untold eternity before evil manifested itself. Evil is allowed to exist for a short period of time. Good is restored for eternity. Hardly opposites that balance one another. In the face of eternal good, a temporary evil never stood a chance.

Evil is just a tool God uses to get his will done, without evil there is no freewill.

HIM · 2025-10-12T19:22:43-0500

ARBITER01 said:
That's what I thought. There is no scripture for being nosey.

If there are problems in my walk or anybody else's with The Lord (and I've been with Him about 35 years now), then things like that are for The Lord to address with us, not you.

I don't think it is ok for me to go asking people on here if they are caught up in willful sin, and neither should you. In other words, mind your own business. You're not my keeper and I'm not in your church.

My walk with The Lord is perfectly fine, in fact, maturing day by day towards perfection and an anointing. That's His responsibility with me.

Oh there is scripture Mr 35 years.

Always in His Presence · 2025-10-12T19:18:43-0500

The Liturgist said:
Forgive me, I’m doing the best I can. I promise you, there is an answer carefully expressed; the reason why I framed my answer in church history was to provide a historical proof for your argument. But if you want brevity, here is a summary:

Theologoumemna do not contradict Scripture, rather like doctrine, they are interpretations of Scripture.

The difference between Theologoumemna is that unlike Doctrine, they have not been formally endorsed by enough of the Orthodox church to be regarded as part of our dogmatic theology (the actual process by which something becomes dogma is complex since we don’t have a Pope, and worthy of a thread in its own right, for that is a rabbit hole even I won’t go down).

Some Theolougmemna are nonetheless extremely widely held, and as far as I am aware the interpretation I provided on speaking in tongues is the prevalent theologoumemnon on the subject, and is based on the Scripture detailing the reaction of the people to those who had received the Spirit - that these were real languages, and on an understanding of the interpreters St. Paul mentions as being translators, and based on the element of practical utility that seems to accompany the various gifts of the Spirit, all of which seem useful in and of themselves to ensure the safety and success of the Apostles and those who continue their work.

This includes Orthodox monastics, because people come to see Orthodox monasteries and ask the elders questions, and interact with them, thus making prominent Orthodox monks such as Elder Ephraim, memory eternal, a kind of missionary.

I have encountered from some members of the forum the view that Scripture only has one obvious interpretation, but this is clearly not the case; there are multiple possible interpretations of much of Scripture, which is why doctrine is of such great importance, to the extent that St. Isidore of Seville in the late 6th and early 7th century expressed a view that most traditional Christians would gravitate towards, that is summarized as “Scripture is in the interpretation, not the reading.” And we would cite 2 Peter 1:20 in support of that.

Now, the preceding posts I wrote provide a historical context that I wrote with a view towards explaining the historical context and theological rationale behind each of these five points.

Also everything written by my friend @FenderTL5 is correct. Insofar as you seem to be focusing on eschatological implications of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, that or Soteriology (the theology of salvation) are logical areas to study, but this thread also touches on the meaning of the NIcene Creed, church history (insofar as the Pentecostal and Charismatic movement is a recent phenomena whose members believe it to be a revival of the gifts of the spirit documented in Acts and elsewhere), and sacramental theology.

Wonderful. Now connect that to the infilling of the Holy Spirit as shown in Acts 2

Jeff Saunders · 2025-10-12T19:17:37-0500

Freth said:
Scripture confirms that the law of God is eternal. See Isaiah 66:23, Psalms 19:7-14, and Psalms 119:160 for statements of fact.

The Bible shows us that God has an eternal standard for all of His creation. It is found in the war in heaven where Lucifer and a third of the angels fell because of sin, but two thirds did not. It is found in Eden where Adam and Eve lived in harmony with God before falling into sin. It is found in thousands of years of God's efforts to save man, even going so far as to send His only Son to die on the cross. It is found in the everlasting gospel. It is found in the patience of the saints who keep the commandments of God. It is found in Isaiah's description of the new heaven and new earth.

If you think about it, if God was going to change His standard, he could have done so at the very beginning, when there was war in heaven. He could have done so when Adam and Eve sinned. He could have done so any time in the thousands of years of sinful man, but He did not, He instead wrote His law in stone with His own hand.

God goes to great lengths in the Bible to call man to obedience unto righteousness. If God were to change His standard, the goal post moves forward or backward, and the whole of salvation and the cross are rendered moot.

The point of salvation is reconciliation with God, according to His standard. Sin is and always will be transgression of the eternal law of God. It has to be an unchanging standard, otherwise it's not a standard at all.

How do you explain Isaiah 65:17 " For behold, I create a new heavens and a new earth; And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind."
Rev 21:5 " And He who sits on the throne said, " Behold I am making all things new."
Did God forget about these verses and is going to keep some of the former things?

JulieB67 · 2025-10-12T19:16:04-0500

any time before the Antichrist commits the ToD act......@Douggg's view
no rapture.....@Gregory Thompson's view
before the 7 year tribulation starts, His Church to stay in the clouds for the 7 years......@ d taylor's view
no rapture to heaven, instead an earthly transportation to meet/be with Jesus at His return.....@ keras's view
rapture late January 2026/7...........@Marilyn C's view
Post-trib rapture ("after the tribulation of those days" - Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27)....@Spiritual Jew's view
no rapture..... @ViaCrucis's view
a rapture, but not to heaven, instead to a place on the present earth that God will designate as New Jerusalem....@Indentured Servant's view
Rapture/snatching away at the end of time (the very last day) to the GWT Judgement for all believers and non-believers. Only the martyrs are raised early and reign with Christ for 1000 years (the first resurection).....@1Tonne's view
Post tribulation Second Coming @JulieB67

Dan Perez · 2025-10-12T19:15:05-0500

Always in His Presence said:
Well known

Notice the emphasis on they were all - Look just a could verses back (remembering the Scripture was not written in chapter and verse.

Notice - the eleven were address, but there were others in the room that made up the 'them all' - Mary, the mother of Jesus, with His brothers and 120 people in total.

Did you catch it?

How many were filled with the Holy Spirit? Them all!

Thoughts

And Elizabeth. in. Luke 1:39-45. was then THE. first filled with HOLY SPIRIT. , but Mary. it seems was NOT !!

dan p

Maria Billingsley · 2025-10-12T19:13:24-0500

Valletta said:
Jordan says ICE agents ‘doing the Lord’s work’

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said on Sunday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents are “doing the Lord’s work” as the agency faces criticism over its tactics. “I think the ICE agents are doing the Lord’s work. They’re doing what the president promised the American people he was going...

www.yahoo.com

Such a tragic situation created by letting in ten to twenty million people, so many unvetted, in one presidential term. So many resources wasted because ambitious people decided to break the laws of our country. Those resources could have been used to bring in more who love America in legally.

How twisted is this going to get? This is a clear case of using the Lord's name in vain. God help Jordan who is deceived and spreading a falsehood to the Fold.

JulieB67 · 2025-10-12T19:12:55-0500

a Jew, anointed the King of Israel thought-to-be messiah. @Douggg 's view
a Gentile. @kinshasa19 's view
a Jew, the false prophet (in revelation 19:20), a nephilim, the actual seed of Satan, the beast from the land/earth. @d taylor 's view
a Gentile - from Islam. @Marilyn C's view
a Jesus teaching the opposite of Jesus' teachings @Gregory Thompson's view
There are many antichrists, not just one. All who deny Jesus is the Christ denies the Father and the Son and are antichrists (1 John 2:22). @Spiritual Jew's view
the Antichrist could be a person, but also maybe an institution. @9Rock9's view
The Antichrist will be the next Mahdi from Islam. @1Tonne's view
Man of Sin/Antichrist- Satan @JulieB67

bling · 2025-10-12T19:11:38-0500

You do the top ten, and I do the bottom ten.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page