Vambram said:

I'm not the one who is in denial.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure denying that you're in denial is a wise response.

Servus said:

No president has ever fulfilled all of his campaign promises.

Click to expand...

The fact that Republicans don't care that the president won't release files related to child molestation because he or his buddies might be implicated doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Clare73 said:

The natures of divine life, angelic life and human life are not the same.

Click to expand...

When discussing "eternal life" and "immortal life" they are technically identical

Your claim differentiated these states and your response didn't seem to pick up on the logic flaw

peaceful-forest said:

This might sound crazy or stupid, but I actually used to have time to do my job accurately and without the anxiety I experience now. Now, it's all about "rush, rush, rush", "meet your goal", "money, money, money". Our work is closely monitored now. I (and others) actually have to calculate when to go to the bathroom so we're not accused of taking too long on a task. Have you ever heard of such a thing happening in the workplace? This is something you would expect in a Communist country.



I've desired to do something with Linux for some time. I don't know how I would go about that. When I look for Linux jobs, they want knowledgeable people with schooling. I do not ever want to go back to college again. American colleges are scams and you can't do anything with your degree. I've tried twice to get a good job with college, it doesn't work.

If I could make money off of my writing, I would do it.

Click to expand...

Don't resign yet, think twice before you do so, considering that the economy is not in good shape.

Did you mean you are so tightly monitored that even your bathroom times are recorded?

Writing? That might be a good idea, I wish I could write well (but I don't).

CoreyD said:

Yes, it's 18, sorry.
So, in Acts 17:11, 12 those Bereans who examine the scriptures, and were able to identify the truth, because of seeing it for themselves, did not have an objective way of knowing the truth... you think it was subjective?
You don't think the truth can be acquired that way?

Would that view not make Hebrews 4:12; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Timothy 3:16, 17; 2 Peter 1:21 and all the scriptures invalid?

Click to expand...

I think the fact that the Bereans examined the OT points to the fact that they were willing to hear Paul, but wanted to verify. That's a good thing compared to those who rejected Paul.

What is subjective about

"That is the key. Being able to examine the scriptures, and know the ring of truth, because of seeing it."

isn't Scripture itself, but each one of our interpretation. I can read Scripture and something can ring true to me while it is utterly false to you, and visa versa.

Scripture isn't subjective, it is objective truth. But what is subjective, the the many different way people interpret the same scripture passages.

ARBITER01 said:

"Many philosophers debate for centuries, and never come to a conclusion.
As a Christian, how does one determine what is truth?
Is it by consulting what people says... be it there may be a multiplicity of opinions, ideas, interpretations, and the like?

How did early Christians view finding the truth?
How would Jesus establish truth?"

Click to expand...

I'm sorry you were misled by one statement.

The title is Can Truth Be Known? How
The subject matter is what many philosophers debate for centuries, and never come to a conclusion.... which is, Can Truth Be Known? How
The question - As a Christian, how does one determine what is truth? is to hear from all who identify as Christian, how they would answer the question.
The body of the OP does not focus on a Christian having the truth, but rather, persons who did not have the truth, finding it... and how.

I hope that clears things up for you.

Oompa Loompa said:

Yes. With the rise of moral and cultural relativism, people no longer see the value of religion.

Click to expand...

It's a natural reaction when one accepts that other people have good reasons for holding different values. You start examining your own.

Vambram said:

It didn't happen.

Click to expand...

I said that Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort admitted to working with Russians.
That happened.
I said that Trump officials met Russians at Trump tower where they were discussing acquiring from Russia dirt on their opponent.
That happened.

Please stop insisting reality is not reality.

Hentenza said:

Ecclesiastes 12:7 then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. | New American Standard Bible ​

Click to expand...

Hentenza said:

This is about as clear as it gets. The body returns to dust and to the earth while the spirit (soul) returns to God. You can’t deny the plain reading.

Click to expand...

Hentenza you are so right, in that the texts is very clear. However, most of christianity get it wrong including you, sorry. I had too, early in my christian walk. Why are so many deceived on this issue, because most have been mislead from early childhood before they were old enough to study their bibles. Mislead by parents and pastors giving eulogies at funerals.

In your above statement Hentenza, after the word spirit, you insert the word soul, because you and most others think spirit is synonymous with soul. I have been trying to show you it is not, which is not easy when someone gets settled on a belief. So lets look at a few more texts for clarity on what this spirit actually is.

"The body without the spirit is dead" (James 2:26)
"The spirit of God is in my nostrils" (Job 23:3)
"The Lord formed man from the dust of the earth and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul' (Gen 2:7)

It is not the word "soul" that is synonymous with spirit, but rather the phrase "breath of life", according to the bible.

And as I have been sharing with you in past post, a "soul" is the combination of two elements, body + breath of life. Thus a soul is a living individual. Gods Word teaches that we are souls--not that we have souls. Therefore, upon death, a living individual/souls body returns to the earth and the spirit/breath of life returns to God, and the individual/soul ceases to exsist in life and sleeps in the first death until they are called to life again in either the first of second resurrection.

This teaching is affirmed in (Ecc.9:5,6,10; Psalm 115:17)"The living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing...", "The dead do not praise the Lord"

"For David did not acend into the heaven" (Acts 2:29,34)

"Only God is immortal" (1 timothy 6:15,16) The concept of an undying immortal soul is not found in the bible, which teaches that that souls are subject to death.

Jesus called the unconscious state of the dead, sleep in (Jn.11:11-14)

I have brought you and all others who may read this thread to a cross road in your undrerstanding of a soul. Will you continue on the broad road you have been traveling or will you take the less travel road through the narrow gate? Your faith in God's Word or lack thereof, will determine your path.

Blessings

Oompa Loompa said:

I would go as far as the Easter and Christmas Christians. Or people who never go to church or read their Bibles at all, but when asked, they will claim to be "Christian." I believe they are called "carnal Christians."

Click to expand...

The thing is, I could present you with a dozen quotes from members, reworded so that you couldn't search for the people who posted them, and I guarantee that you couldn't tell from them whether someone was a Christian or not. In fact, you'd probably think most were not. And I'll bet the ones that you thought were not all go to church and read their bibles regularly. And quite possibly the ones you thought were are not regular church goers.

Bradskii said:

Having been a member of this forum for a number of years I can only agree with you. But the point is not that there are a lot of people like that, but that the number is increasing.

Click to expand...

Yes. With the rise of moral and cultural relativism, people no longer see the value of religion. It is more like that of a bandwagon sports fan.

ThatRobGuy said:

...the candidate that got them more of what they wanted was a "Casino owning, vodka brand creating, swimsuit pageant operating, greedy narcissistic real-estate developer, former New Yorker democrat who swears and cheats on his 4 wives"?

Click to expand...

Just the sort of person that you would not invite around for dinner with the family. But... ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the man who represents your country to the rest of the world.

RileyG said:

As in so-called Sunday Christians? Then yes, I can agree. I think it depends on how sincere they are, or not - only God knows.

Click to expand...

I would go as far as the Easter and Christmas Christians. Or people who never go to church or read their Bibles at all, but when asked, they will claim to be "Christian." I believe they are called "carnal Christians."

jonojim1337 said:

From Wikipedia:

“No excavations are allowed on the Temple Mount, and no positively identified remains of the destroyed temple have been found.”

May I suggest to you the First temple was never in Palestine.

Click to expand...

That is not what the thread is about, it is about Pharisees.

And I myself never use wiki.

ThatRobGuy said:

So now that we've got the semantics out of the way, do you feel that the IRS infringing in ways that are similar?

Click to expand...

Given that we've just established that this:

ThatRobGuy said:

the IRS requesting non-specific account information from banks about wide swaths of customers in one swoop so they can go fishing for reasons to audit?

Click to expand...

is not actually what's happening, I'm not seeing the similarities. The biggest, and most important, difference is that a John Doe Summons is - essentially - a form of warrant. The IRS has to go in front of a judge, present their case, and get the summons approved before they can issue it. For example, in the Coinbase case that you cited, the judge initially denied the summons because it was overbroad. They had to come back with a narrowed scope before it was approved.

Landon Caeli said:

“People that are against Tariffs are FOOLS! We are now the Richest, Most Respected Country In the World, With Almost No Inflation, and A Record Stock Market Price. 401k’s are Highest EVER. We are taking in Trillions of Dollars.

Click to expand...

Trump should reduce the tariffs. They're causing food prices to rise.

MAGA: Reducing them is a terrible idea. Just listen to Trump.

Donald Trump moved to lower tariffs on food imports, including beef, tomatoes, coffee and bananas, in an executive order on Friday as the White House fights off growing concerns about rising costs. Trump reverses course and cuts tariffs on US food imports

MAGA: Reducing them is a great idea. Just listen to Trump.

"The holiness of sin," "redemption through sin" and "the holy s*tan" are Sabbatean (Jewish satanist) terms. The actively reject the entire holy Torah, but also the entire rabbinical tradition.

Reform Judaism was founded by theistic satanists.

I suspect their longtime involvement in the pride movement, as the rabbinical tradition teaches that gay marriage and that between different kinds(exact meaning debated) was the final straw before the Flood of Noah and that even the worst of the B'nai Noah don't write marriage licenses for man with man. Hence the very meaningful logo.

(I saw a troon rabbi in the Israel times actually quote one of their mottos: "“Kinderlach (children), redemption will only come through transgression,” she[sic] tells them." https://www.timesofisrael.com/from-...film-depicts-journey-of-a-jewish-law-breaker/ )

They believe in forcing the coming of Moshiach (who in Kabbalah is a serpent emerging from the pit to behead Christians and make a "sacred economy only the virtuous will be able to participate in" and their Moshiach's number is 6-6-6.) Filling the world with evil sin badly God is forced to send redemption is a core tenet based on the Talmudic belief Moshiach will come when the world is completely either evil or good.

Christian support for pride might wane if more people realized certain aspects of the movement are meant to goad Him into sending the apocalypse.

RileyG said:

3 pastors for a small congregation? How odd!

What denomination was it, if i may ask? Not to go off topic…

Thank you for your insight!

Click to expand...

I prefer not to say denomination because it is no indictment of them. It could happen any number of places in a shrinking congregation. The setting was a city church in a large city's once thriving neighborhood that had gone seriously downhill and was then infested with prostitution, drugs, and all that comes with it. Most of the former members had moved out and moved on - probably for good reason - all save the diehards who refused to give up. It was sad in one way, yet a few were still doing church in the midst of squalor. So, there was that. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Robban said:

From an artcle entitled, "The factions of the second Temple era."

Four, mainly, Pharisees, Sadducees, Zealots and Sicari.

Pharisee from the Hebrew word Perushim "Separatist",

one explanation is that they seperated thenselves from the follies and pleasure of the world.

Ours Sages attribute the destruction of the second Temple to the baseless hate that prevailed among the Jews.

If the Jews had been united they would have merited G-d`s protection.

Click to expand...

From Wikipedia:

“No excavations are allowed on the Temple Mount, and no positively identified remains of the destroyed temple have been found.”

May I suggest to you the First temple was never in Palestine.

partinobodycular said:

I'm pretty sure @Maria Billingsley understood what you were saying. She was simply conjecturing as to what that 'archetypical' Pharisee would look like in the modern day. In the U.S. at least, they'd almost certainly present themselves as a Christian. In fact I'm pretty sure that I've had conversations with a few here on CF.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, this reminds me of Christians who steal from Caesar, even under the guise of humility.

But going beyond just the religious pretext, I think we can see a personality from all walks of life, but showing the same traits.

essentialsaltes said:

Deceptive Daily Caller headline. Mayor describes closing stores as one of the ills of private grocery stores, leaving food deserts behind, so her proposal is to create public grocery stores.

"We cannot allow" these ills to affect the people of the city. Hence, an alternative.

Her proposal for a 90-day warning for grocery stores to have mass layoffs only makes sense in the context of grocery store closures.

Click to expand...

Impressive. It normally takes a few posts before these type of threads are 'corrected'.

fhansen said:

Of course, but it's not only about the elect, as you put it. God wants all to repent, all to become the elect, IOW, as Paul made clear in his appeal to the Athenians. Also here in 2 Cor 5:20:
"We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God."

Click to expand...

Yes salvation is only for the elect. That scripture is only for the chosen of God

seeking.IAM said:

I do not know about the parish in this post, but...

I once got invited to speak in a large historic church (not Episcopal) in a large city. I arrived early and was promptly ushered into the Senior Pastor's study where I met all three pastors. When we emerged for the start of the service, I saw about a dozen people sitting in the first two rows of a church that could sit hundreds. I was flummoxed. I was so taken aback, it felt awkward that I had just gotten up early and drove 3 hours to talk to a handful of worshippers. After the service I was invited by someone to go to lunch. In the restaurant, my first question was, "Where was everybody today? Are the <NFL team> playing at home today?" They said, no, that what I saw was all of them. My next question was, "I have to ask. How are you supporting three pastors and a large building?" The answer: We have an Endowment.

Like, I said. I have lots of questions. Two dozen average attendance and an assault in the church. Imagine how that two dozen could break down into family units. Could the diocese be dealing with a situation where the alleged perpetrator or victim was the kid(s) of somebody on the Vestry or church board? Is that why there was no investigation from April to September? Does two dozen average attendance permit a church to have a paid Rector in place? Or are they relying upon supply priests shuffling in and out? Was there little oversight present until it all blew up?

To answer your question, I think pride, loyalty to the past, or money keeps people hanging on until the last guy turns out the lights rather than joining another congregation.

Click to expand...

3 pastors for a small congregation? How odd!

What denomination was it, if i may ask? Not to go off topic…

Thank you for your insight!

Oompa Loompa said:

Yes. A lot of people call themselves "Christian" but do not think following Christ is important. That is not new. They believe in Jesus, but do not follow Jesus.

Click to expand...

Having been a member of this forum for a number of years I can only agree with you. But the point is not that there are a lot of people like that, but that the number is increasimg.

Dikaioumenoi said:

Do you have a point?

Click to expand...

LOL. That's the last question you should ever ask me. I believe I make my points very clear and I don't play games.

Dikaioumenoi said:

I've not argued that the text says "they were appointed to believe." They were appointed to eternal life.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about you making a claim about what the text says. Clearly, everyone can see that the text doesn't explicitly say that they were appointed to believe. Yet, you do believe that they were appointed to believe because you believe that those who are appointed to eternal life are also appointed to believe. That is what I'm addressing, which is what I believe to be your false interpretation of Acts 13:48.

Dikaioumenoi said:

But their act of belief flows from that prior divine appointment, not the other way around.

Click to expand...

And there it is Why do you act as if you don't understand my point? What I'm addressing is what you said right here. I disagree completely with your statement here.

Dikaioumenoi said:

You can't dispute that grammatically.

Click to expand...

LOL. Yes, I can and I have. Don't try to tell me what I can or can't do.

Dikaioumenoi said:

Your best bet for defending your view would be to argue for the middle reading of τεταγμένοι, not a reversal of the syntax.

Click to expand...

I'm arguing using scripture to interpret scripture. I don't need to buy into your "middle reading" nonsense. Your interpretation of Acts 13:48 contradicts a lot of other scripture. Does that matter to you or do you think it's acceptable to interpret a verse in isolation from the rest of scripture?

Dikaioumenoi said:

This comment of yours was offered in response to a straightforward grammatical analysis of Acts 13:48, not a theological argument. Labeling the grammar as "wrong" or saying it "doesn't line up with Scripture" tacitly concedes that your theology, rather than the text itself, is your standard of truth. Luke's syntax is painfully clear: the entire relative clause ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον ("as many as had been appointed to eternal life") functions as a single substantival unit and occupies the subject position of ἐπίστευσαν ("believed"). It cannot mean "those who believed were appointed." That reading is grammatically indefensible, as it would require ἐπίστευσαν to lie within the relative clause as its predicate, reversing the syntactic relationship. Luke wrote the opposite: the appointed ones [subject] believe [predicate]. The Greek allows no other reading.

Whatever your view of the rest of Scripture, it must be reconciled with the grammar Luke actually wrote. If it cannot, then it is your interpretation, not my presentation of the syntax, that produces the apparent contradiction.

Click to expand...

You really need to humble yourself. You have deluded yourself into thinking that you are the ultimate Greek grammar expert of the entire world. You're making me nauseous here with your boring nonsense. I don't care what you say, the verse is up for interpretation and the meaning of it is not based on our understanding of the Greek grammar. And I certainly don't trust that your understanding of that is correct, anyway, since you are clearly very doctrinally biased. There is nothing in the text to demand that those who were appointed to eternal life were also appointed to believe by God because of being appointed by God to eternal life. If you actually read ALL of scripture, it should be clear that God wants all people to be saved and wants all people to choose to repent and believe or not. You need to question yourself and your understanding of the grammar and of scripture itself when you interpretation of any given verse or passages contradicts many other verses or passages.

Dikaioumenoi said:

The irony is hard to miss. You ask whether it matters to me not to contradict other Scripture, yet you dismiss the plain grammar of the verse because it contradicts your interpretation of other passages. Which is more likely at fault: Luke's Greek, or your reading of the rest of the Bible?

Click to expand...

Your doctrine is VERY CLEARLY false, so the way you're talking here means nothing to me. I know the truth and your doctrine is not the truth. I can prove that with ALL of scripture. We can't just base everyone on one verse. But, our interpretation of that verse needs to be able to be reconciled with all of scripture and you cannot do that with your interpretation of Acts 13:48. No amount of talk about the Greek grammar can change that.

Dikaioumenoi said:

I am letting Luke speak for himself; you are imposing your system over his syntax. If anyone is forcing a contradiction here, it is not me.

Click to expand...

Wrong. Your argument is not convincing even a tiny bit to me even though I know you have convinced yourself because of what you want to believe.

Dikaioumenoi said:

The issue isn't whether humans make choices. We obviously do. The question is why some believe while others do not.

Click to expand...

And your answer doesn't line up with the scriptures which teach that God graciously offers salvation to all people, implying that all people are capable of accepting it, or else He would not offer it or His offer would not be genuine.