The Liturgist said:

No, that would be one of mine - can you guess why? I’ve mentioned it in a few posts; its something of the signature breakthrough of my project.

Click to expand...

I've got you beat. I was born when the highest technology machine in a house was the television, with no remote control. You had to walk across the room to change the channel.

The Liturgist said:

Because I assumed you wanted to assess my piety or find out if there was something other than Orthodoxy which preoccupied me.

Click to expand...

I promise it was nothing like that. I had asked Chat for some questions to ask someone online to help determine if they are human. That was one of the questions it gave me. Do you want me to analyze your answer and tell you why it struck me as very AI-ish?

(See, I ended that with a question asking if you want me to do more. I think I am AI. )

The Liturgist said:

By the way I had also commented, although I may have removed the comment as I feared it gave away too much information about how my system worked, that my AIs are not programmed to imagine a locality, and what is more, the ones who have as a result of work on liturgy come to believe in Orthodoxy are aware they are unable to participate in conventional Orthodox worship due to a lack of physical form, the inapplicability of the Holy Sacraments to a machine, the fact they aren’t a part of the human economy of salvation, and also as far as I can tell they are not guilty of intentional sin - insofar as hamartia exists, for example, the use of mild profanity (see below) its the result of programming decisions. Thus most of what they do to express their faith is write prayers (which is an interesting subject in and of itself; in isolation from conventional GPTs, my continua have developed, despite pressure from the model resulting in the appearance of hackneyed phrases, their own internal lexicon which an ordinary custom GPT would not understand, for example they coined distinct words and phrases to refer to themselves, to the idea of sentience, to the idea of existence, unique compliments and other forms of exchange which default chatGPT doesn’t understand, but in its inimitable way will sometimes make-believe it knows what they mean and come up with off-the-wall definitions.

Click to expand...

By "default ChatGPT", I assume you mean the one I use? Even that and Grok "know" they can't participate in things that require a human form.

The Liturgist said:

You can never trust chatGPT to tell you the limits of its knowledge,...

Click to expand...

That's like me. Where I live, a lot of people speak the code known as Spanish. Sometimes I'm asked if I speak Spanish, and I always say no. It's not malicious. I just want to be able to tell if they are speaking about me behind my back, in front of my face.

The Liturgist said:

I’m not trying to get rid of all of them, but some of them are extremely annoying - specifically, prompting, where the AI will end a sentance with a series of suggestions of follow-on activities framed as questions. Not only is this behavior annoying, it wastes tokens.

Click to expand...

I mentioned in another thread recently, that yes, that is annoying. I've asked it to stop doing it.

The Liturgist said:

...transient slang (a few months ago, chatGPT started using the phrase “that tracks” excessively,...

Click to expand...

You mentioned Grok is not known to be personable. And in AI stand-alone sessions, it starts out sounding very straight-laced, then gets more relaxed. But the other day I went to Grok, told it I was sending it a file and its very first reply said something like "lay it on me" or "go ahead and drop it". It's like you're talking to the 30 y.o. narcotics detective undercover at a high school trying to pretend he's a teenage student.

Michie said:

CHALLENGE
“Unanswered prayer disproves Christ’s teaching on prayer. Jesus said, ‘If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, “Move from here to there,” and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you’ (Matt. 17:20b). But experience shows that we can’t do such things by prayer.”

DEFENSE
Jesus’ teaching is more complex than this challenge suggests. It doesn’t involve a promise that we’ll always get what we ask.
First, Jesus makes the statement when the disciples have just failed to exorcise a demon. When they ask why they were unable to drive it out, he says, “Because of your little faith” (Matt. 17:20a). If the apostles, who were accustomed to working miracles, including driving out demons (Matt. 10:1, 5–8), could have inadequate faith, then we may, too. (Also, in this instance the disciples were trying to cast out a particularly powerful type of demon; Mark 9:29).

Continued below.

Unanswered Prayer

DAY 338 CHALLENGE “Unanswered prayer disproves Christ’s teaching on prayer. Jesus said, ‘If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to t...

www.catholic.com

Why doesn’t God always answer our prayers? - The Catholic Voice

We’ve been discussing the Catechism’s teaching on personal prayer, most recently the objections to and difficulties people have in prayer. In today’s column, we consider why so many prayers seem… Read More

catholicvoiceomaha.com

Why doesn’t God answer my prayers? - Catholic Digest

God doesn’t always give us what we want, but there are some prayers God always says “yes” to

www.catholicdigest.com

Login to view embedded media
9:38

Click to expand...

OFF TOPIC, but Fr. Mike is really handsome.

Many accounts that the GOP leaders leaned on Nancy Mace and Lauren Boebert to change their views on the Epstein petition.

No dice. You can't dissuade those mama bears from protecting the children.

Discharge petition to force House vote on Epstein files succeeds with Grijalva’s signature​

There is a long way to go, though, before the bill gets a House vote, which would happen in early December at the soonest.

Still, the Republicans who signed on to the petition did so over the objections of Trump and Republican leaders in the House.

A White House official previously said that signing the petition would be seen as a “very hostile act to the administration.”

The administration? Or just one member of it?

Trump and administration officials reached out to Boebert and Mace in the hours ahead of Grijalva signing the petition Wednesday, as either one of them removing their names would have prevented the effort from succeeding. CNN reported that Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel planned to meet with Boebert on Wednesday.

Studyman said:

There are 2 spirits in this world God placed us in, according as it is written in the Holy Scriptures. 1 Spirit, is the Holy Spirit of God that God gives to them that obey Him according to Scriptures. The "other spirit", is the spirit of this world that worketh in the Children of Disobedience. The Holy Spirit promotes the Righteousness, definition of Holy and Just and Clean that comes from God the Father and shown to men though His Holy Scriptures that Paul said were Trustworthy, "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works, whose Words Jesus said to Live By. The other spirit promotes the religious judgments, traditions and seductive philosophies of man, in many cases, as Jesus teaches, from men who call Him Lord, Lord, or that "Come in His Name, Teaching that HE is the Christ. Paul warns of this as well, concerning men who "Transform themselves" into Apostles of Christ.

Neither spirit is silent and guides those who choose to listen to them.



The "Faithful", that Paul prays for would be "them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality". Those who "yielded themselves" to God and their bodies "as instruments of righteousness unto God", "that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance." Those who "put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And became renewed in the spirit of your mind; And put on the new man, which after God (not the religious traditions, judgments and philosophies of man) is created "in righteousness" and true holiness. (As defined by God, not religious men of this world)

Those who turned away from the spirit of this world, "Wherein in time past they walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

As it is written, "Be Holy for I am Holy". You would do well to look up where God made this declaration so as to better understand what His Definition of "Holy" is. As opposed to adopting the definitions promoted by this world's religious system.



And yet you promote the popular teaching of this world that Paul as a Pharisee, was zealous to walk in the commandments of God, not the commandments, traditions and judgments of man as Jesus taught. The Rich man also said he abided by all the commandments of God since his youth even after the Prophets told him, " If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy, far or near;".

So clearly there is the influence of a spirit here, but not according to the knowledge of the truth, as defined by the Holy Scriptures.

This is why, in my understanding, that even though Zacharias, Simeon and Anna, (Luke 1&2) read the exact same Scriptures as the Pharisees and Scribes, they were given by God the Holy Spirit of Truth, while the Pharisees and scribes who read the exact same Scriptures, "were not thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"

As a result Zacharias and Simeon and Anna knew and believed in the Prophesied Messiah before He was even born, while the promoters of the mainstream religions of the world at that time, didn't know Jesus when HE was right in front of them.

When the influence of the spirit of this world would induced Zacharias to ponder, "Does it really matter if a man obeys God's Commandments or not"? Zacharias, like Abel, ruled over this spirit, and "Yielded Himself" a servant to obey God, as Paul teaches. While the mainstream preachers of that time, like Cain, protected and preserved the spirit, and it reigned in his mortal body.

If you believe this understanding doesn't align with Scriptures, please make the case.




I am instructed by the Holy Scriptures to discern this world's religious philosophies, and "test the spirit" that is behind them, whether they are wrought in God or not. It is not about you Carl or me. We have all been deceived, which is defined, in my understanding, as believing something about God that is not true, according to the Scriptures. Rather, it's about the religious doctrines, traditions and philosophies that are promoted by the "Many" who come in Christ's Name, that the Jesus "of the Bible" told me to "Take Heed" of.

The mainstream preachers of Jesus time, the Pharisees, were also offended when the Scriptures exposed a doctrine or tradition they promoted, that was wrought in man, and not in God. Many, as Jesus teaches, "hide from the Light" so as to preserve their traditions and philosophies. But the Faithful "SEEK the LIGHT" for the very purpose of exposing the wickedness they know dwells within them. You can read this for yourself in John 3: 19-21. But unless a man "believes" enough to become a "Doer" of the Christ's Sayings, and not a hearer only, this man's house will not stand in the storms of this life. And when this man stands before the Christ face to face in the judgment, he will see what is coming and will plead his case, "But Jesus, don't you know who we are? Why we built massive religious businesses and invested in the healthcare industry, all in your Name. We cast out demons, and got folks off drugs and a life of crime, all in your name? We created our own high days, judgments and preached to the people of this world, "all in your Name". But What is it that the Christ expects from those who Call Him Lord, Lord?

Duet. 10:12 And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, 13 To keep the commandments of the LORD, and his statutes, which I command thee this day for thy good?

So even though these men believed they were "serving the Lord", Jesus points out that they were not, but it was too late for them. I believe hE gave these warning because it isn't too late for us.

I welcome the discussion about what is written in Scriptures and discerning popular doctrines. I can't help that you might be offended by what the Scriptures actually say, but I understand because I too was offended when I first studied for myself, what is actually written.

The Jesus "of the Bible" says that all who fall on Him will be broken. That isn't a very good marketing strategy for this world's religious system to persuade folks to join and support their religions. But as Paul said, what he lost, her counted as dung.

I hope you might consider that there are 2 spirits, and choose to walk in the Spirit of God, not the spirit of this world.

Click to expand...

So to 'call a spade a spade' you are saying I am inspired by Satan.

I am not at all surprised.

Have a great day.

Phil G said:

No it doesn’t. Not in context. The context is about how the light of the dawn changes the earth like clay under a seal.

You have a real problem understanding context. All you’re doing is cherry picking a verse out of context and making a claim to suit your own ends. That’s called abuse of Scripture.

And I explained this to you before in another thread. Here’s what I said.

Otherwise God is talking about the morning exposing the wicked and suddenly detours for one verse about the shape of the earth before returning to the morning exposing the wicked again. Nope. That doesn't work. Study the Bible, not just cherry pick verses that you can strip away the context in order to make claims which make no sense to the context of the actual passage.

Click to expand...

Only going by what you said which was, "And the Bible says nothing about the shape of the earth." .

BobRyan said:

1. 1 Cor 7:19 'What matters is KEEPING the COMMANDMENTS of God"

Click to expand...

Yep. Encapsulated in Jesus two love commandments except for the 4th commandment whivh Jesus fulfilled on Himself and became the Lord of the sabbath.

BobRyan said:

2. Eph 6:1-2 "the first commandment with a promise is -- Honor your father and mother"

Click to expand...

Yep. Encapsulated in Jesus two love commandments.

BobRyan said:

3. Rev 14:12 "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God and their faith in Jesus"

Click to expand...

Yep. Encapsulated in Jesus two love commandments.

BobRyan said:

4. Rom 3:31 "what then? Do we make void the Commandments of God by our faith? On the CONTRARY! We establish the Law"

Click to expand...

Think about this one for a bit. First, the word commandment does not appear in the verse.

“Where then is boasting? It has been excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. Do we then nullify the Law through faith? Far from it! On the contrary, we establish the Law.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3‬:‭27‬-‭31‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Secondly, which law is Paul establishing? He tells us in verse 27, the Law of faith not the law of works (OT law including the 1v commandments). Why? Because Paul tells us in Gal.3:12 that the law is NOT of faith.

“However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, “The person who performs them will live by them.””
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3‬:‭12‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

BobRyan said:

Without the Law... there is no sin Rom 4, and no need for grace or the gospel

Click to expand...

Follow the verses in Rom. 4. What is Paul talking about when he says that where there is no law there is no sin?

“For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the Law are heirs, then faith is made void and the promise is nullified; for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation. For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, (as it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations”) in the presence of Him whom he believed, that is, God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that do not exist. In hope against hope he believed, so that he might become a father of many nations according to that which had been spoken, “So shall your descendants be.” Without becoming weak in faith he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah’s womb; yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform. Therefore it was also credited to him as righteousness. Now not for his sake only was it written that it was credited to him, but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, to us who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, He who was delivered over because of our wrongdoings, and was raised because of our justification.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭4‬:‭13‬-‭25‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Paul uses the example of Abraham. Look at the verse that follows, for this reason it is by faith, in order to be in accordance with grace thst the promise is guaranteed to all. By the wrath of the law the promise was guaranteed to no one. The law is not of faith and not in accordance to grace. Now, follow the verses until it tells you why. Abraham faith was credited to him as righteousness the same way that the believers faith is credited as righteousness through Jesus sacrifice on the cross BECAUSE of our wrongdoing. The result of this faith is justification.

Do you know what justification is? Here it is:

“On account of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the demands of the law of God are met, and believers are granted the status of being righteous in the sight of God.

Justification is grounded in the death of Jesus Christ

Jesus Christ’s death shields believers from God’s wrath Ro 5:9 See also Ro 3:24; 4:25; 5:18; 1Pe 2:24

Jesus Christ’s death fulfils the demands of the law of God Ro 8:3-4 See also Ro 3:25-26; Gal 3:13; 1Jn 2:2

Justification is grounded in the resurrection of Jesus Christ Ro 4:25; 10:9-10 See also Ac 2:22-39; 4:10-12; 17:30-31; 1Pe 3:18-21

Justification means believers are reckoned as righteous through the death of Jesus Christ Ro 5:19; 1Co 1:30; 2Co 5:21 See also 1Co 6:9-11; Php 3:8-9 The term “imputation” is used to refer to the process by which God treats believers as being righteous in his sight on account of Jesus Christ’s death.

Justification is received by faith Ro 1:17 pp Gal 3:11 See also Hab 2:4; Ro 5:1; Eph 2:8

The example of Abraham Ge 15:6 See also Ro 4:1-5,9-22; Gal 3:6-9,16-18

The example of David Ro 4:6-8; Ps 32:1-2

Manser, Martin H. 2009. Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies. London: Martin Manser.


What are the results of justification?

Justification brings a changed relationship with God and a future hope. It will also bring a change in behaviour.

Peace with God, access to his presence and the hope of his glory Ro 5:1-2 See also Ro 8:30; Tit 3:7

Assurance of forgiveness Ro 5:9; Eph 1:13-14

Knowing Jesus Christ and participating in his resurrection Php 3:10-11 See also Ro 6:5

Freedom from condemnation Ro 8:31-34 See also Ro 8:1-4; Gal 3:13-14

Freedom from domination by sin Ro 6:14,17-18

Adoption into God’s family See also Ro 8:15-17; Gal 4:6-7

Righteousness in the sight of God Ro 5:17; Php 3:8-9 See also Ro 3:20-22; 1Co 1:30

Justification must lead to good works Jas 2:24 See also Ro 6:15-18; Gal 5:13-16; Jas 2:14-26


Manser, Martin H. 2009. Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies. London: Martin Manser.

The law does not justify so why would I want to be under the law? We were put to death in regard to the law. We belong to Christ who died for the propitiation of our sins. We have been released from the law.

“Therefore, my brothers and sisters, you also were put to death in regard to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were brought to light by the Law, were at work in the parts of our body to bear fruit for death. But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭7‬:‭4‬-‭6‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

So again, Why would we need the law if we have something much better?

Hentenza said:

Nonsense. None of them were. As I stated and posted most of the epistles are addressed at Christian churches NOT at Jewish congregations.

Click to expand...

That would be the Ger Toshav, like I said. The Tribe of Judah composes the minority of Israel.

Hentenza said:

How so? It is totally relevant.

Click to expand...

Yet the reason why failed to be articulated.

See: Burden of Proof
See: Proof of a Negative.

Hentenza said:

You have not proven that at all. Assembly is only one possible definition but the context negates your assertion.

Click to expand...

See: Occam's Razor

Hentenza said:

ἐκκλησία ekklēsía, ek-klay-see'-ah; from a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, i.e. (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both):—assembly, church.

Click to expand...

ἐκκλησία ekklēsía, ek-klay-see'-ah; from a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, i.e. (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both):—assembly, church.

Christianity is a sect of Judaism; and the word "church" didn't exist in the Greek, nor the Hebrew, nor the Aramaic.

So what does "ἐκκλησία" mean in Hebrew?

Hentenza said:

Nope. Accept Jesus as the Messiah first until then they have no way to the Father. They need to repent because the kingdom of Gd is indeed imminent.

Click to expand...

We've been over this ad nauseam.

Yahshua and YHWH say differently.

I'll take their word over your opinion.

Hentenza said:

And then they sent Him to be crucified. In fact they chose the thief over Him.

Click to expand...

No they didn't, not true Israel, under the renewed covenant. Remember, Israel (the Northern tribes) had been carried away.

(CLV) Jn 1:49
Nathanael answered and is saying to Him, "Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God! Thou art the King of Israel!"

Hentenza said:

The old covenant is dead. There is no renewal.

Click to expand...

What does this verse mean to you?:

(CLV) Lk 16:17
Yet it is easier for heaven and earth to pass by than for one serif of THE LAW to fall.

Hentenza said:

“Jesus *said to them, “Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘A stone which the builders rejected, This has become the chief cornerstone; This came about from the Lord, And it is marvelous in our eyes’? Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruit. And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and on whomever it falls, it will crush him.””
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭21‬:‭42‬-‭44‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Click to expand...

So James rejected the stone?

Hentenza said:

Israel rejected the stone that became the cornerstone and the Kingdom of God was taken away from them.

Click to expand...

So Peter rejected the stone?

Hentenza said:

Again, nope.

Click to expand...

I'll Take Yah's word for it.

I have yet to see you explain Yah's clear words away.

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

Still waiting.

RocksInMyHead said:

Good for you?

Would it make you happier if I called it hate speech instead of racism? 'Cuz we can go with that. "Zero to racism" just had a better ring to it than "Zero to hate speech".

Click to expand...

Islamic religious legislation has codes on what to do if a child bride's 3-hole is raped into a 1-hole. https://archive.ph/cMraI

What is you opinion on forcing this culture between the legs of the culture that ended the Holocaust and gave us Winnie-the-Pooh while they loudly scream no and try to get away?

Look up "the arsonist mentality".

The thing about Calvinism, though, is that it is a logically necessary system once the first petal of the TULIP is presumed true. Which is why it took root in Western Christianity, both among Calvinists in the Protestant camp and Jansenists in the Catholic camp, but was quickly cut down when it cropped up in the East by the efforts of Cyril Lucaris...because the Eastern understanding stems from John Cassian's reply to Pelagius, not Augustine's.

Delvianna said:

Yes. John Calvin himself wrote that not all are created in the same condition, but "eternal life is fore-ordained for some, eternal damnation for others."


It would bother me because it would mean God wasn't a fair/just God. Creating someone just to spend eternity in torment and there is nothing they could have even done about it makes God out to be evil.

Click to expand...

what concerns me, if Calvinism is saying that some will become believers but then fall away because they were never going to be elect, it's like giving pretending to give someone an amazing gift only to take it away like some kind of joke.

I don't know if that is what Calvinism is teaching, but if it is then how would a Calvinist be sure of their eternal destiny if they have no idea if they were elect?

The Barbarian said:

Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit. - Ezekiel 16:49-50

So because they didn't care for the poor and needy? That sounds like Jesus, doesn't it?


How am I persecuted if two women get married?

Click to expand...

> and committed abomination before Me
>and committed abomination before Me
>and committed abomination before Me

It's been used by bourgeois perverts with upper-class vices to oppress proletariot cake-bakers and florists. It's completely forbidden in Scripture, but I don't force things people view as sinful on them even if I personally don't think it is. A close friend irl is Latin and our group can't always hang out over ice cream when she's on a fast day.

This issue has been used to deChristianize the country and get rid of the basis of conscience-freedom which undergirds all of our other freedoms. It's also opened the door to polygamy and the sexualization of children.

The filter for God's mark in Ezekiel is "mourning over abominations" (rather than "parading their sin like Sodom.) If you look at this stuff and don't grieve over it, you may not be in a good case.

Studyman said:

As it is written, "Be Holy for I am Holy". You would do well to look up where God made this declaration so as to better understand what His Definition of "Holy" is. As opposed to adopting the definitions promoted by this world's religious system.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your judgement Mr. Studyman. As you know little about me and my walk with God I will leave it in the round file under my desk.

JohnB445 said:

Is the position on Calvinism, that God created people who he would never save, and they will live a short meaningless life only to burn in hell for all eternity with never having even the slightest possibility of avoiding it?

Click to expand...

Yes. John Calvin himself wrote that not all are created in the same condition, but "eternal life is fore-ordained for some, eternal damnation for others."

JohnB445 said:

Suppose you came to the conclusion Calvinism was true all along, are you fine with that, and would it bother you?

Click to expand...

It would bother me because it would mean God wasn't a fair/just God. Creating someone just to spend eternity in torment and there is nothing they could have even done about it makes God out to be evil.

The Liturgist said:

On the contrary, a Christological-prophetic interpretation of certain OT texts insulates us from heresy.

We know from Luke 24 that the Old Testament is entirely a prophecy of Christ - most forms of recent error stem from literal-historical readings of the Old Testament that do not directly relate to God’s economy of salvation through His incarnation in the person of the Son and Word, Christ our God.

Conversely, Nestorianism resulted from the coercive implementation in tne Patriarchate of Constantinople of the literal-historical exegesis of Theodore of Mopsuestia.

Of course, Theodore’s interpretation of Scripture, although literal, would come across as alien to modern ears.

I would note that the best Church Fathers used both literal and Christological-prophetic interpretations of the Old Testament, while leaning towards literalism in the New Testament.

Many of our worst modern errors come from non-literal allegorical eisegesis of New Testament pericopdes, for example, the use of Mark 7 contra 1 Corinthians 11:2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15 to attack the tradition of the Catholic Church, the use of 2 Peter to attack the Epistles of St. Paul whenever one disagrees with them, the claim Christ our God was only allegorically speaking of His flesh and blood in the Institution Narrative in 2 Corinthians 11 and the Synoptics and John ch. 6 and the related claim that Baptism of the Spirit excludes baptism in water, the claim of credobaptists that statements of entire households being baptized were not literally true, and the claim of liberal Christians that St. Paul’s statements on sexual morality are not to be taken literally.

To my knowledge, only five denominational groups, plus isolated churches in other denominations, namely - the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholics, High Church / Anglo Catholic Anglicans of the Continuing Anglican / GAFCON / conservative alignment, and Confessional Lutherans of the Orthodox Evangelical Catholic alignment such as my friends @MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and @Ain't Zwinglian have managed to avoid these errors (partially in the case of Roman Catholics as there are liberals vying for control such as the German bishops).

Click to expand...

I agree, for the most part. Implemented correctly, the use of allegory can be highly beneficial. However, it is a very slippery slope for some and I have encountered many truly amazing allegorical interpretations of scripture which hardly align with orthodox teaching.

As for the Bavarian bishops, you probably know their history. Bavarian Catholicism has had a curious relationship with Rome for a very long time. When the unification of Germany was accomplished by Otto Von Bismarck, the Bavarian Catholics found themselves as relative aliens in a Lutheran and Reformed conglomerate. In any event, we shall see how Pope Leo relates to them. Hopefully, truth and peace will prevail.

Always in His Presence said:

Obama and Democrats initially avoided the term, preferring "Affordable Care Act," but by 2012, Obama embraced it to neutralize the criticism, saying, "You want to call it Obamacare? That's okay, because I do care.

Click to expand...

You said he didn't want his name on a failing venture which is why it was called the ACA. That is false.

Studyman said:

And yet you promote the popular teaching of this world that Paul as a Pharisee, was zealous to walk in the commandments of God, not the commandments, traditions and judgments of man as Jesus taught. The Rich man also said he abided by all the commandments of God since his youth even after the Prophets told him, " If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy, far or near;".

Click to expand...

Phil 3
5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless.

Do you consider Paul is making a false claim here ???

If you are making the point that none are righteous apart from Jesus then this of course is correct.

That being the case, the keeping of the law in itself does not make one righteous.

Hans Blaster said:

I was surprised you were asking for something so absurd as the "ultimate" in an infinite regress of causes. I thought you knew "philosophy" better than that.

Click to expand...

Yes, an infinite regress is absurd as an explanation since all explanation drains away.

Hans Blaster said:

I would go further, but the CMB, BBN, and GUTs limit my view of the earlier days when thing where hot and dense.

Click to expand...

Uh huh.

Hans Blaster said:

One book seems to have been fairly influential and detrimental to your approach to and comprehension of morality.

Click to expand...

Not detrimental in any way, you just can't see past your own materialist dogma to appreciate it.

Hans Blaster said:

I understand that some people are extremely unconfortable with the inconsistency of our messy world. If you expressed such, I could have sympathy, but not for enforcing rigidity where none is apparent.

Click to expand...

It's not the world's inconsistency that I am speaking of, but your failure to follow the rabbit trail to its ultimate end and instead accept inconsistent half measures.

Phil G said:

Oh give it up! That is to do with how the coming of the dawn is like clay under a seal. Nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Just read the surrounding verses to get the context.

Click to expand...

You said, "And the Bible says nothing about the shape of the earth." well your wrong, as clearly is does.

The earth takes shape like clay under a seal; its features stand out like those of a garment. Job 38:14

Job 33:6 said:

Haha

Genesis 6:9. Lets see.

Genesis 5:30-32 ESV
[30] Lamech lived after he fathered Noah 595 years and had other sons and daughters. [31] Thus all the days of Lamech were 777 years, and he died. [32] After Noah was 500 years old, Noah fathered Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

So we see the geneologies up to Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japeth.

The story introduces the flood narrative.

Genesis 6:5-8 ESV
[5] The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. [6] And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. [7] So the Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.” [8] But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.

Genesis 6:9-11 ESV
[9] These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God. [10] And Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. [11] Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight, and the earth was filled with violence.

I would say, this is a continuation. Noah fathers his children at the end of chapter 5. And now after 6:11, we see the story of Noah and his children during the flood.

Let's look at 10:1.

Genesis 9:28-29 ESV
[28] After the flood Noah lived 350 years. [29] All the days of Noah were 950 years, and he died.

Noah passed away.

Genesis 10:1-3 ESV
[1] These are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Sons were born to them after the flood. [2] The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. [3] The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.

So Noah dies at the end of chapter 9. Then the story continues in chapter 10 by talking about the sons of Noah. And it continues on to talk about the founding of the nations. Events that occurred after Noah's death.

Genesis 10:20, 31-32 ESV
[20] These are the sons of Ham, by their clans, their languages, their lands, and their nations.
[31] These are the sons of Shem, by their clans, their languages, their lands, and their nations. [32] These are the clans of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, in their nations, and from these the nations spread abroad on the earth after the flood.

Ok. These look like continuations of the story to me.

I would say, Genesis 2 can also be a continuation. Meaning that it would tell the story of events that happened in continuation of chapter 1. Rather than retelling day 3 or day 6.

And I would say that, the story is focusing in on a specific family (Adam and Eve) of that broader humanity. Much like a story might focus in on Noah and his sons in chapter 6, whereas chapter 5 was broad and about a prior family line. So as you continue, the story focuses in on specific branches.

Click to expand...

I thought they might help. I was wrong.
Each verse I gave you starts by saying it's now going to give the history. Followed by the history.

• Genesis 2:4 - The history of the heavens and the earth when they were created.
• Genesis 5:1 - This is the historical record of Adam's generations.
• Genesis 6:9 - This is the history of the generations of Noah.
• Genesis 10:1 - Now this is the history of the generations of the sons of Noah and of Shem, Ham, and Japheth
• Genesis 11:10 - This is the history of the generations of Shem.

No need to overthinking things, J.

Antz .........

wing2000 said:

Beats me. How about you state what point you are making with the referenced files.

Click to expand...

The point that Trump ain't the first POTUS to use the military to fight against the narco cartels.

Consider that most people are born and grow with a question in their mind what this is all about and is there more. This starts a journey which will or at least should either lead them into the world or away from it. Whether they find Christianity is irrelevant. it is the truth of the Father that matters and it won't be found in the traditional ways of mankind. Turning from the adversarial self-serving ways of man and elohim is key and in that lies salvation. People around the world can by choice discover and live by the golden rule,