SabbathBlessings said:

Where from the mouth of Jesus did He say He changed His holy day,

Click to expand...

““Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter shall pass from the Law, until all is accomplished! Therefore, whoever nullifies one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. “For I say to you that unless your righteousness far surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭17‬-‭20‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

You guys love to verse mine these verses but never actually address what Jesus is saying.

1. Jesus incorporates the moral commandments into His two love commandments. The 4th commandment is not a moral commandment despite what your sect believes. The Mosaic law plainly considers the practice as ceremonial.

2. Jesus uses this teaching here to address that errors that the scribes and Pharisees are making and warns others to not act like them. The audience here was primarily Jews with gentiles, who were not under the law, mixed in with the crowd.

3. The law convicts of sin but does not offer a means to repentance. The law remains to point the unbelieving sinners to a savior who then provides that means to repentance.

“And He *said to them, “Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and his companions became hungry; how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the consecrated bread, which is not lawful for anyone to eat except the priests, and he also gave it to those who were with him?” Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath.””
‭‭Mark‬ ‭2‬:‭25‬-‭28‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Here the Pharisees were accusing Jesus of breaking the law by picking heads of grain during the sabbath. They were hungry. Jesus gives them the story of David who ate the consecrated bread meant for the priests because he was hungry. It’s not breaking the law to fulfill a practical need. So the sabbath was made for man who distorted that sabbath from a rest to a burden. Jesus becomes Lord of EVEN the sabbath because He is Lord of all. Man can’t keep the sabbath without perverting it as the sabbatists promote a moral sabbath. So Jesus gave us His rest.

If you make an argument against what I wrote then get creative and don’t waste my time with your tired arguments using the same verses that I have already addressed.

Servus said:

No more freebees for those who are able to work a job but don't want to.

Click to expand...

I mean you are in no position to adjudicate anyone on that bit...

But just so long as we agree Republicans don't want to help the poor...sure.

They don't even try to be logical or make sense ot act qith integrity because their supporters would never notice.

Valletta said:

And it was five or so years after Melania got her green card that she became a citizen.

Click to expand...

So what? What does Melania have to do with anything? Nobody is talking about her other than you. Vance's comments were about the people who got us to the moon.

In the case of the German scientists that is a unique case, the U.S. led the industrialized world but a small group of German scientists was ahead in rocket science.

Click to expand...

What's your idea of "small"? Operation Paperclip brought over 1600 of them. Either way, the ex-Nazis were hardly the only immigrants populating academia in the mid 20th century. Pick a discipline and you'll find that, even when the work itself was done in the US, large numbers of the scientists doing the work were born in Europe.

Neither Vance nor Trump claimed that no immigrant contributes until they become a citizen.

Click to expand...

No, what Vance claimed - and what I've been addressing - was that we got to the moon on the backs of citizens, not low-paid immigrants. This is demonstrably untrue.

rjs330 said:

And you don't seem to have a problem with it. I guess broad brushing is okay as long as you are doing it to white people.

Click to expand...

I don't? When have I commented on the substance of their positions?

Always in His Presence said:

Open a thread on the Prophet and I'll jump in. This one is about apostles

You bet I have met several of them personally.

One who is mandated by Jesus of Nazareth Himself to be a voice in a country where Christianity is outlawed - Gospel meetings in the open are closed down and ministers imprisoned - jut like what Paul faced. Similar to Paul - he has seen thousands come to Christ - the simplicity of the Gospel is preached with miracles following. He has helped plant 32,000 churches in the region.

I know another who was called by Jesus of Nazareth to start a church in Nazi Germany in the middle of WW2. In the middle of the greatest prosecution and closing of churches - this Apostles was never attacked - the church grew to 180 and remained open throughout the war and thrived. In 1981 they died in the pulpit and the person who took their place grew the church to over 6,000 with 40 satellite churches in 13 nations.

Your Welcome

Click to expand...

Names?

BCP1928 said:

All knowledge is acquired in that way. Science acquires knowledge through observation and experiment with nature. Craftsmen acquire their skills by trial and error, working directly with the natural materials. They all actually experience what they discover and utilize.

Click to expand...

They cannot possibly experience what they are discovering. Experience is a completely different paradigm to material science. One is quantities like matter, electrons and fields. The other is about qualities like experiences of love, spirituality and colors. A completely different realm.

Its the Mind/Matter metaphysics. What is fundemental mind or matter. Besides how could someone experience a sunset of Mars even though we can observe its physical effects.

As mentioned earlier the experience of colors like Red for example brings knowledge about nature and reality that material science cannot bring. How could material science test for the experience of Red. The only way to test is to directly ask the experiencer. The experiencer gains the new knowledge directly from nature.

The direct experiences of the ancients with nature and reality gave them a deeper knowledge about reality that the material science can never know. Its like a back door to what material science is trying to understand from the outside. A direct line to nature and reality.

Because the entire worldview belief was immersed in direct experiences of nature, looking at nature from the inside and not from the outside like material science. Becoming part of nature and directly connecting with it.

This gave the ancients a direct experience and knowledge of nature and reality which enabled them to understand how it worked. How stones reacted, how certain locations altered things, how the basic laws of nature worked. Through experience not intellect.

If they became part of nature or immersed in it more deeply through conscious and transcedent experiences then why would they not discover some of natures secrets in how it worked.

In fact I think the direct subjective experiences of nature and reality cannot be seperated out of the equation. Galileo I think said that to do science the subject needed to be removed from the equation. But if fundemental reality has to include subjective conscious experiences then we cannot remove the subject.

Science will never fully understand reality by removing the subject and I think it is actually the direct experiences of reality is how we understand more fully nature and reality.

As the ancients were fully immersed in the most fundemental aspect of reality (the direct conscious experience) without any distraction from enlightened materail scientific thinking. They were able to gain more directly and fully what science has been trying to work out from the outside for 100s of years.

zoidar said:

Most of what you have quoted is true of believers, but not true concerning all Jesus atoned for, since he atoned for everyone, not just believers.

Click to expand...

It's true for all whom Christ died for which causes believers.

zoidar said:

If that were true, everyone would be saved.

Click to expand...

I don't see how you come up with that

joechristianwarrior said:

Out of curiosity, how did you come to the conclusion that masturbation is a sin? The Bible is clear on lust being a sin, condemns homosexuality explicitly, ditto re adultery and fornication. But I've not read on a single page of the Bible condemnation of masturbation...

Click to expand...

Can't really do it without lusting.

Apple Sky said:

No there wasn't as there's no such thing as curvature on earth.

Click to expand...

Says the scientist of the year.

Why would the curvature of the earth make the sea curve?

Desk trauma said:

Yep, that’s how I know there wasn’t enough red string

Click to expand...

Ok well good luck with your non-Christian president by his own admission, Jewish president according to multiple officials, best friend of the state of Israel according to Netanyahu

Rescued One said:

Be compassionate to those who have PTSD and terminal illnesses insread of judgmental. Jesus wept.

Click to expand...

A mind-blowing passage from the Scriptures reminds us that if we care for these, it’s like we’re caring for Jesus (“you did it unto me”)!

ARBITER01 said:

Sorry, you're gonna have to do better than that. This isn't about me.

As I said, if you're obeying Moses instead of Jesus, then Jesus is not Lord in your heart,.... no matter how much you try to spin it otherwise.

Click to expand...

The deceiver would have us believe that Moses created LAWs. That Jesus lied to us. And that we can not trust the Holy Scriptures "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

Jesus said to Take Heed we are not deceived by these "Many" who come in His Name. My sincere hope is that men turn away from the religions of this world who promote such foolishness, like Moses created the 10 Commandments, or the LAW "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD."

My hope is that they might be persuaded to believe the Word's Of God that HE gave to Jesus and His Prophets. But alas, the Jesus "of the Bible" said many will just not be persuaded.

Luke 16: And he said unto him, If they "hear not" Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

For me, I believe in the Words Jesus "of the Bible". And I truly wish everyone did.

stevevw said:

Lol I think you said something similar before about it all being about sex. I am pretty sure the womens movement was much more than sex. In fact it was gender and not sex. The civil rights revolution was about race. The culture wars are now about identities of all sorts. Its much more than sex.

Click to expand...

You're right. It was about the autonomy of women in general. But the "culture" was always about identities. The question is who is going to impose them.

stevevw said:

The breakdown of the family is not just about sex. Though sex is a big part and thats just a natural and core aspect of being human. If sex is part of marriage and relationships and thats part of the family.

But if progressive ideas around sex which relate to marriage and the family contribute to the break down of society and poor outcomes for every one. Then yes the progressive beliefs and ideas around sex have destroyed society.

The point is while you macke a mockery and conflation that its all about men missing out on sex. Which only makes my point that sex itself is what has been perverted and reimagined within the Godless ideologies where men and women are the gods of sex. This is the very problem that is destroying society.

The lies that women or men are the gods of their own bodies and over when and where and who they can have sex. This leads to many, many further pproblems and we are seeing the end results of a few decades now of progressive counter culture. And its not a pretty picture. The ideas of freedom and happiness and liberation have turned out to be lonliness, depression, anxiety and dispair.

Click to expand...

Yes, and on the other hand it is Christians who insist that men are gods not only of their own bodies but of women's bodies, too.

Guojing said:

When you say Acts 21 is no longer possible, are you answering yes to my clarifying question? I just want to understand where you are coming from.

Click to expand...

Historical context: occurs after Jesus resurrection with primarily cultural Jews around the 40’s ad. James, the brother of Christ, is the head of the Jerusalem church which is composed of primarily cultural Jews that have embraced Jesus as their messiah but still retain the law because the temple is the center of their culture and activities. They are not willing to give that up. Paul comes to visit with some gentiles to bring tithes to the church. The Jews believe that Paul is teaching other Jews to forsake the law and that he invited a gentile into the temple which would have defiled the temple. The Jews try to kill Paul and the centurion saves him when Paul reveals his Roman citizenship.

Physical context: Paul, along with eight gentiles arrive in Jerusalem. They are welcomed initially and go to James house were the elders were also present. The next day Paul purifies himself at one of the purification pools and goes to the temple were there was a large crowd and they seize Paul. They take him out of the temple and shut the doors so that the temple would not be defiled. They beat Paul outside of the temple among the large crowd until the Roman soldiers arrive so this is still outside of the temple. The soldiers took him toward the barracks with the crowd following where Paul addresses the crowd outside of the barracks.


Cultural context: there is a lot to cover here but I’m going to just summarize. Jerusalem is the center of life for the Jews including the temple were they would congregate along with other Jews from other cities that would travel to Jerusalem to worship or attend special days or festivals. This was the center of cultural Israel. The Jews were cultural people whose life revolved around the Torah and the Law. The law had been given to Moses to give to Israel because they were God’s chosen people so it made them unique among the rest of the people inhabiting the Lavant. The Jews considered preaching against the law to be a capital offense so James had to thread lightly when teaching the Jewish converts about salvation by faith without the works of the law.

On the other hand, the churches that Paul planted were primarily gentile that also included Jews. Paul could teach salvation by faith without the treat of death but with opposing groups of Jewish converts promoting the law. Apparently the problem was particularly problematic in the Galatian church. The rest of the Apostles that left Jerusalem were also able to teach salvation by faith. BTW- based on accounts by early church fathers James was eventually martyred (stoned) for his Christian believes.

Situational context: the events of Acts 21:27-40 happened because of the clash of Christian doctrine of salvation by faith apart from the works of the law and the converted Jews that refused to give up what their ancestors had believed for 15 centuries.

A proper exegesis of all the elements of context would not be possible in this platform since it would take many pages to unpack it but this will do as a summary. As you can see the cultural Jews in Jerusalem still attended all events in the Temple and the Temple still ruled their lives. The law, among the Jews, continued for his reason. James had to be careful of what and how he preached the gospel of good news. A few years later, and prophesied by Jesus in Matt. 24, the temple will be destroyed and the Jews would be expelled from Jerusalem ending the temple life and dispersing the Jews.

The events of Acts 21 cannot happen again because all if its context can not be repeated. The cultural Jew in Jerusalem and the temple are no longer there. The law among the gentiles was never a problem because the apostles ruled in the council of Jerusalem that they are not under the law. The problem of continuing under the law was a problem unique to the converted Jews which Paul argues against in his epistles to the churches.

I hope this helps and clears my position. You do with this as you will. I have stated my case.

Strong in Him said:

I didn't know anyone had said the sea is curved at 8'' per mile - I haven't said that.

But there must be a good reason for saying it.

Click to expand...

No there wasn't as there's no such thing as curvature on earth.

stevevw said:

Why. If each side is so polarised now and sees the other sides policies as a threat to democracy and even peoples existence. Then why would not each side see the other as ideas and beliefs as bad and wrong and damaging for society.

Click to expand...

Only one side sees things that way. The other side just doesn't want to be told what to do by a religious faction of dubious moral credibility.

stevevw said:

To the Christians progressive policies are sin and seen as destroying the fabric of society. To the progressives Christian based policies are seen as hateful and bigotry and a threat to identity politics and ideology. Why pretend this is not the case.

Click to expand...

Because what is really at risk is not society but merely anglo-Protestant culture.

stevevw said:

I think you allude to the real issue when you say as a society we should be willing to allow contradictory and potentially harmful ideas because we are suppose to allow all beliefs no matter what. JUst because Christians think X behaviour is sin doesn't make it sin. Because we cannot allow one single moral truth.

If the different groups are fighting over what is best and truth for society. Then what if one side is right. What if the sin that Christians percieve is actually wrong and is destructive for society. Or if the religious belief is crazy and bad for society.

It seems a silly way to determine what is allowed and how we should order society based on subjective beliefs that could be potentially destructive because we are suppose to allow all beliefs and ideas no matter what. Based on an ideological belief in itself that there is no sin or moral truth or God and moral lawgiver.

Click to expand...

That why we don't do it that way and why the laws of a secular state are not considered, in themselves, to be moral precepts.

stevevw said:

But hey thats the way the world is and Christians must accept and adjust for this. But I think in the end it will be the world who will not accept the Christians and Jews because its a spiritual battle between good and evil.

Click to expand...

You need to think that over. ".Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right." --Abraham Lincoln.

stevevw said:

When was that. I don't think it was very significant. Because primarily Dems/Labor is anti big business and corps. They are traditionalls higher taxers of the rich to support the large social programs they support. If it happened it was either on the fringe or not significant.

Otherwise who were the pro big business. A party cannot be both taxing big bisuness and pro big business at the same time. Where does the monet come from. What about the unions. They cannot be both on the big corps and the workers union at the same time.

Of course with Christ they can get through anything. But it won't be nice and it will be a worry for the rest.

Click to expand...

I see you have completely embraced the heresy of Manichaeism.

Desk trauma said:

Not enough red string.

Click to expand...

Did you watch it?

DamianWarS said:

Christ does quote from 10 but in a diminutive way, "You have heard that it was said to those of old" then goes on telling us a better way. So he tells us an older way, then shows us a better way, that better way is uniquely from Christ saying "But I say..." this creates a contrast between the ways of the old (the law) with the ways of Christ, showing Christ's way is better. Better than what? Better than the law.

Click to expand...

I know you are just furthering what this world's religions have taught you, and you genuinely believe what you just posted. And it is doubtful, as Jesus declares, that you will be persuaded of anything different.

Nevertheless, because of Love for the brethren, I would like to share with you and those reading along, the error in this popular religious philosophy of this world.

#1. To believe you, I would have to believe that the "Them of Old Time" He is speaking to in Matt. 5, is God, and the Prophet HE Sent, and that Jesus came to destroy their teaching, so that men would be discouraged to no longer "Live By" the Word's Jesus said to Live By. But when you actually read what Jesus is saying, He isn't correcting His Father and the Prophets, HE is exposing the teaching of the Pharisees. Jesus just said:

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. Remember, these preachers, as did their fathers, "omitted the weightier matters of the Law". They transgressed God's Commandments by their own religious traditions. Please look at the first "LAW" you are claiming God didn't teach, but Jesus did.

21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

So what does the Law of God say?

Lev. 19: 17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.

So Jesus is just repeating what the Law and Prophets, and HE Himself has taught about the "Jews Religion" from the beginning.

Like it was pointed out to you earlier, the devils mission is to turn men away from obedience to God. And to do that, it "Professes to know God", like the serpent in the garden, and it quotes "Some" of God's Word, like the serpent in the garden. And Jesus Himself called these Pharisees and scribes, "children of the devil". Malachi said of their fathers: "Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been "partial in the law".

In every verse where Jesus is exposing the "Them of old time", He shows what the Words of God the corrupt priests quoted, and followed up with the Words of God they omitted. I'll give you a couple more examples, in the in sincere hope you might consider.

31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Duet. 24: 1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found "some uncleanness in her": then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

Jer. 3: 8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

Matt. 19: 7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, "except it be for fornication", and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Again, the "them of old time" promoted divorce for any reason. But the LAW only gave ONE reason for divorce. This is clear as a bell, for those who are interested in what is actually written. Lets examine another.

33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

34 But I say unto you, "Swear not at all"; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

What does the LAW say?

Deut. 5: 21 When thou shalt vow a vow unto the LORD thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the LORD thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee. 22 But if thou shalt "forbear to vow", it shall be no sin in thee.

In every case Jesus is pointing out the "LAW" that the "them of Old Time" omitted.

38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Lev. 19: 18 Thou shalt "not avenge", nor "bear any grudge" against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

The teaching that Jesus, who had just said "except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.", but then went on to diminish His Father and the Prophets His Father sent, is really wicked and not true. You mean well, I don't think you are promoting such a falsehood on purpose. And we have all been deceived in our lives.

But I hope you will consider that the "Them of Old Time", in Matt. 5, right after Jesus said HE didn't come to destroy the Law and Prophets, is NOT His Father and the Prophets, but the Fathers of the Pharisees, who were, as it is written and told us by Jesus Himself, "omitted the weightier matters of the Law".

Remember, The Christ Jesus "IS" the LAW of God who came in the Flesh.

David Lamb said:

On a flat earth, there should be no such thing as a horizon.

Click to expand...

And why is this ?

Personally, I wish our street preacher would pick a different verse to put on his sign. Many of the festival attendees grew up in churches, and they've already heard the message that God doesn't want them. The preacher is reinforcing that message.

But the first amendment to the US Constitution firmly protects our sign-carrying preacher, both as freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

Servus said:

You're just determined to make something out of nothing.

Click to expand...

Not reading what you are critiquing?

I don't wonder which posters would come out in favor of that strategy.