• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

SNAP benefits ( gentally)

If you can make more money living on welfare than you can by working then your employer is screwing you over. Quitting and living on welfare would be the right thing to do if you can't get a better paying job.
As has been shown the majority of those on Welfare are either not working full time or not working period. There are very few people working full time long term who need these benefits. And an extreme minority of married people who do.
Upvote 0

B flat B♭

Well, there is the issue that the lines of force are nearly perpendicular to the earth's surface at the North and South poles whereas they are parallel to the earth's surface everywhere else. Most compasses only work with the latter.
Absolutely but was trying to keep it simple. :cool:
Upvote 0

Maine elects woman convicted of killing Canadian tourist to city council: ‘So broken’

“Right. When the morality of the left becomes absurd then so are the analogies. Your side defends crime. No thanks.“
^_^ Your analogy, hiring a pedophile to work in a daycare *_* , entirely your choice of words, illustrated my point, not yours as to which one was peculiarly unsuitable for office taking into consideration the crime and the office. ^_^

This is not an insult but a fact.
No, not a fact - just your uninformed opinion. :doh:
Progressives are the ones fighting for bond reform which releases criminals, sometimes multiple violators and violent criminals, on no cash bonds regardless of their danger to the public.
Again, you are either misunderstanding or misrepresenting yet another issue which was people languishing days, months or even years awaiting trial on minor charges simply because they could not afford bail. And here you go, you dashing off on yet another tangent to show your immense disdain for the left. :rolleyes:

Is it possible to stick to the topic or do we need to list all our grievances with "your side"? Can't we stick to our actual argument instead of bringing up irrelevant issues?
Normalizing crime is spitting in the faces of the victims.
Then stop doing that! :idea:
Again, not worth replying to.
And yet, you keep doing it. :cheer:

The circles are getting dizzying, so once again, good day.
Upvote 0

B flat B♭

They don’t stop working at all but do need recalibration because of declination. The true North Pole and the magnetic North Pole are not the same.
Well, there is the issue that the lines of force are nearly perpendicular to the earth's surface at the North and South poles whereas they are parallel to the earth's surface everywhere else. Most compasses only work with the latter.
Upvote 0

SNAP benefits ( gentally)

Somehow it’s Michelle’s fault these terrible parents never taught their kids to not waste food and make better choices for themselves.
Did you eat the lunches they served? I went to school and had lunch with my kids and grand kids. It was terrible food. I couldn't believe it. I had heard how the kids were tossing it away instead of eating much of it. After eating with them I understood why. I tossed half the food myself. We offered tge kids to send them food but its wasnt cool. As they got older we just gave them money so they go get their own.
Upvote 0

What Satire are You Reading?

Johann Weisman had everything: good income, status, and a life of extravagance. A celebrated doctor turned
businessman, he lived in a world where nothing came cheap. He scoffed at meals below $20, considering
them an insult to his refined palate.

One evening, to celebrate securing a new contract, Johann and his business partner Hans set out in search
of a fitting restaurant in Vienna. Their demanding tastes and fussiness turned the search into a prolonged
ordeal, as they scoured the city for an establishment that could match their impossibly high standards—even
though every venue they encountered was among the most expensive in town. They sneered at each upscale
spot, dismissing the polished menus and lavish decor as unworthy.

At one glittering venue with sky-high prices, Johann spat, "This dump has the unrefined charm of a grimy
cafeteria built for drifters," while Hans derided another, branding it "a pathetic food truck on wheels that dares to
charge extortionate rates." At yet another high-end restaurant, Johann smirked and added, "This looks like a place
for the homeless." Their disdain was palpable, their arrogance unrelenting.

After nearly 5 hours of scrutinizing menus and scoping out venues, they finally settled on an upscale location
that promised a first-rate experience. Bringing with them aged whiskey and expensive cigars, the pair were
preparing to indulge freely. But they were kicked out after only 20 minutes—abruptly told it was closing time.
They staggered out into the city streets, their judgment clouded by their revelry. They didn’t notice the black
van parked nearby until it was too late.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The van screeched forward, headlights blinding. Before Johann could react, rough hands yanked him back. A
hood was shoved over his head, muffling Hans’s protests as they struggled. Their kidnappers moved swiftly,
bundling Johann into the van while leaving Hans behind. Johann’s world blurred into darkness.
Johann’s new reality began in a dim room in the beautiful rural town of Bad Goisern on Lake Halstatt. His two
kidnappers' goal was to demand a ransom of 2 million.

The two kidnappers were Robert and Rune—known to their friends as Rob and Run. They sat slouched in the
dim room, their cigarettes dangling lazily from their fingers. A half-empty bag of fast food sat between them,
grease stains spreading across the table.

Rob: "After we get the money, we’ll be set for life. A life of eating and drinking without work...or learning,.... Just
happy days ahead."
Run: "Yeah....our dream lifestyle is not far away...Ha, ha..."
Then they started to laugh, which got louder and louder, their mouths stretching wide, exposing every inch of
their cigarette-stained front teeth.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Eventually, the kidnappers dragged themselves back to reality and walked into Johann’s room, the ransom
note clutched tightly in the first one's hand.

"Alright, doc," Rob said, leaning against the doorway with a smirk. "Time to make your family cough up the
cash. Two million bucks—that’s all we’re asking. Not too much."
Run chimed in, "Yeah, they’ll pay to get you back. I mean, who wouldn’t? You’re worth it, right?"
Johann, calm and composed, met their gaze. "My family’s wealth has declined a lot, We don’t even have two
thousand, let alone two million. They won’t pay you two million."
Rob and Run looked at each other for a while, then Rob’s smirk faltered, replaced by a confused frown. "What’re
you talking about? You’re rich!"
Johann: "You're wasting your time..."
The two kidnappers looked at each other, not knowing what to say.....


The two kidnappers grew increasingly frustrated. A few hours later, they inspected Johann's clothes and took
most of his money and valuables away, leaving only some coins.
Johann’s response remained unchanged, and boredom crept into the kidnappers’ routine, dulling their edge.
Cigarettes became their distraction, their escape from the monotony. They smoked constantly, the acrid fumes
filling the small room.

Noticing this, Johann attempted to turn the situation to his advantage. “This air,” he said one evening,
coughing dramatically. “It’s unhealthy. You’re smoking yourselves to death, and you’re taking me with you.”
The kidnappers laughed dismissively. “No, you’re bluffing, doc,” one of them sneered, exhaling a plume of
smoke. “We’ve been smoking our whole lives, and we’re fine. I don't think it's harmful.”
Johann frowned, retreating into silence. He bided his time, observing them as they grew more restless and
started chain-smoking even more.
Over the next few days, the smoke thickened, clinging to the air like a suffocating fog. Johann, who had been
coughing intermittently, noticed the kidnappers themselves beginning to cough more frequently. They rubbed
their throats, visibly annoyed.
Sensing his opportunity, Johann struck again. This time, his words carried more weight. “You see? Even you
can’t ignore it anymore. This air is toxic,” he rasped, clutching his chest. “It’s not just me—it’s affecting you
too.”
The kidnappers, though still skeptical, exchanged uneasy glances. Their growing discomfort validated
Johann’s claims, and he seized on their hesitation. “If I die,” he said weakly, “you lose everything. No ransom.
You’ll have nothing to show for your trouble. I need a specific medicine to counteract this.”
Their resolve finally faltered. Reluctant but desperate to keep him alive, they asked Johann what medicine he
needed. Johann provided them with a list of ingredients: vinegar, ground nutmeg, crushed chili peppers, and
adelwez. He explained that the ingredients must be cooked together and insisted the concoction be prepared
with all windows closed to retain potency.
Johann explained carefully, emphasizing that the ingredients must be cooked together in precise proportions
to ensure the mixture’s potency. He insisted the concoction be prepared with all windows tightly shut, claiming
that even the faintest draft could weaken its effectiveness.
Many people know it's dangerous to cook while closing all windows, but not them.
Knowing nothing of the risks, the kidnappers followed his instructions, bolting the windows and sealing every
crack.

The small, dimly lit room grew increasingly stifling, the air turning thick and oppressive. As the mixture simmered on their wood-burning stove, an ominous transformation began. A new toxic gas crept into the room, its presence subtle but a bit dangerous. Apart from that, the lack of ventilation caused carbon monoxide levels to rise imperceptibly, unnoticed by the kidnappers who remained focused on their ransom plans.
Johann, fully aware of the consequences, stayed low to the ground, breathing the marginally clearer air near
the bottom edge of the door. From his position, he watched intently as the effects of the gas began to take
hold. Gradually, their movements slowed, their once-brisk actions reduced to sluggish, clumsy gestures. Their
speech became slurred and incoherent, their heads drooping as if weighted down by invisible hands. Johann
remained still, his heart pounding, as the room sank into a suffocating silence.

One by one, they fainted. The older among them slumped heavily against the wall, his cigarette slipping from
his limp fingers to the floor below. The other stumbled forward, falling to his knees as he mumbled something
incomprehensible before collapsing in a motionless heap.
Upvote 0

Does Regeneration Precede Faith?

It's not incorrect. Show me how it's incorrect. The semantic core of ἑλκύω denotes a decisive movement from one position to another. We've already discussed this in another thread. You've seen my argument there. Where is your interaction with it?
I don't know Greek but I don't understand why your argument would be correct. What I did was asking AI and it says you are incorrect. In this case I trust AI. Sadly my friend who was a teologian and teacher in Greek passed away a few weeks ago, so I can't ask him.

With substantiating references, I meant show me a Greek speaking scholar who agrees with you. First then will I take your argument seriously.

I have not replied in the other thread yet, about "His people" but you are wrong in your grammatical conclusion there too. My advice to you is before you post grammer to support your case, check with a Greek speaking scholar or at least AI, to make sure you are correct. It would spare everyone a lot of time.

Concerning the topic of this thread, I'm not interested to prove or disprove it, at this point. I just posted here to tell you, you have to check your grammer. It saddens me if people think you have a case for your argument through grammer, when there is none.
I'm not interested in trading barbs. At this point, both of you are arguing for the sake of argument. I've been more than patient in taking the time to read and respond, yet neither of you has addressed the actual arguments I've presented. Instead, you continue deflecting to peripheral issues. Until you engage the substance of my points directly, I will not be responding further.


In this conversation, I have referred you to posts #35, #75, #91, #93, #100, #118, #119, and #124. You've engaged with none of them, at least not meaningfully. So yes, I'm ignoring you at this point, because you're not here to discuss; you're here to play games. If you actually care about dialogue, start with my comments on the context of John 12 in posts #75, #93, and #100, and interact with the argument. I have repeatedly laid out an argument that answers your understanding of verse 36. Show me where the error lies, or find something better to do with your time. I have no obligation to refute bare assertions, and I won't engage further with posts that show no effort beyond that.

1 John 2:29; 4:7, and 5:1. There's been no answer. (See posts #91, #118)

John 6:44-45. There's been no answer. (See posts #35, #119, #124)

Context of John 12, cf. John 6. There's been no answer. (See posts #75, #93, #100)

That wraps things up.
Upvote 0

There’s a Giant Flaw in Human History

First and I am not saying this is how the vases were made. But the point of me using religion and especially Christianity is that potentially "Transcendent" or "spiritual" beliefs can be a force in the world that can defy scientific materialism or methological naturalism.

You do recall the miracles and coming back from the dead. Or the other God made events that changed history and reality.

Second It does not have to be that some spirit or supernatural force cut the stone. As I pointed out the spiritual or transcedent realm or the Indigenous realm of knowledge is immersed in a transcedent experience of nature itself. The common idea that natives and nature go hand in hand is because we say they understood nature very well. In ways we have lost and are rediscovering.

Its this conscious and experiential immersion in nature that reveals aspects of nature that could not be seen by the material sciences looking from the outside in.

So it may be they discovered some of natures secrets in utilising the natural forces around them to change nature itself. Such as their experience brought them knowledge of how stone changes in different situations with natural chemicals or energy manipulation.

It was not just observation but an immersion. Become part of nature itself and this was the only way such knowledge could have been gained. As its 1st person, direct and not third part science.

In that sense it was their spiritual, conscious experiences, transcedental and phenomenal beliefs that brought them to a deeper level that brought this knowledge. Just as the early Hebrews gained knowledge and changed reality due to being immersed and governed by a spiritual reality and not a material one.

Just out of interest do you think Noahs Ark was advanced tech. It was directly designed by God lol.
According to the Bible, God did not design Noah's Ark, He just specified the basic dimensions and the material. If there was an Ark it was built by craftsmen using tools.
Upvote 0

What is the meaning of Total Depravity?

Prove it.
I have, many times i nthe past, with the same exchanges between us. But I did again, anyway, in the remainder of that same post.
Of what sin did they die when no sin was charged against them.
They were already dead, born that way due to their alienation from God. That's the state known as "original sin". Now, if this is what is meant by imputation, that a real change, towards injustice/unrighteousness, took place, not just a change in status, IOW, then we can understand why sin could already be in the world even if not charged against those who sinned but hadn't heard the law. We're born sinful, not just viewed as sinful. And this is why the antidote for this is reconciliation with Him, is "re-communion". engraftation into the Vine because there and only there can man be just...justified.
he righteousness that comes from God (Ro 1:17, 3:21, 4:5) through faith in Christ is the imputed righteousness of Christ (Php 3:9), just as righteousness was imputed to Abraham through faith in the promise (Ge 5:5-6, Seed, Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16).
The righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith is real, personal righteousness given, as demonstrated by an objective reading of the passages I included. This is simple: unrighteousness (sin) entered the world at the Fall. Jesus takes it away, both forgiving sin and replacing it with authentic righteousness as we now become new creations in Him.
We are united with God through faith in Christ, wherein the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us (Php 3:9),
just as righteousness was imputed to Abraham through faith in the promise (Ge 15:5-6, Seed, Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16).
No, God doesn't separate righteousness from righteousness, as if pretending that we're righteous while leaving us in our sins would be something good. He forgives our sins, our unrighteousness, while telling us, and empowering us by virtue of grace, His life in us, to "go, and sin no more". The many will be made righteous, Rom 5:19. Thats why there's no condemnation in Christ, Rom 8:1.
Upvote 0

A perspective on Baptism and the plan of salvation that I have not heard before

I have prayed and thought of this thread and the reasons I wanted to discuss it here. We all want to worship our Lord Jesus Christ. He states, I am the Alpha AND the Omega, the first and the last.

Revelation 1:8

8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, saith the Lord God, who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty


Baptism is a sign for His believers.
Matthew 28:19-20

Baptism is described as the circumcision of Christ.
Colossians 2:11-12

Water was present on the first day. Genesis1:2
Circumcision was to occur on the eighth day.
Leviticus 12:3

Water is important to God as He says it is life giving. See scriptures

Psalm 1
Isaiah 35
Isaiah 43
Isaiah 55
Isaiah 58
Jeremiah 17
Ezekiel 47

John 4
John 7
Apocolypse (Revelation) 22:1-2

John 7 describes the Holy Spirit as the river of living water, while revelation says the river flows from the throne of God AND the Lamb
Filioque?

Scripture tells us that there will be theological disagreements and variances of understanding, yet it says whatever we do, we do from the heart as for God and not men (paraphrase) Col 3:23

We are not here to lord ourselves over one another. The Sabbath came after creation, not at the beginning. Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega, not the end only. The Sabbath was a sign of the Old Covenant. Jesus chose water to represent the New Covenant and told us we must be born of water and the Spirit to enter the kingdom of Heaven. John 3

Water represents the first day of creation and baptism the circumcision if heart on the eighth day. The Sabbath is not to be profaned, but it has been fulfilled. We are no longer limited to worshipping God in the temple on the Sabbath, but can now worship Him in spirit and in truth any time and anywhere. Matthew 18:20

Life comes from Christ, not obeying the Old Covenant. Galatians 3:11


People may disagree with the Catholic Church due to their personal opinion, but the teaching of the Catholic Church is thoroughly based in Scripture.
Calling her the harlot of Babylon or Sunday worship the mark of the beast is presumptuous and misleading. The sacraments all point to Christ whom we worship. Our honor of Mary amplifies the Word of God as described in Gen 3:15. Mary says that her soul amplifies the Lord. She does not detract from Him

There is no scriptural cause to oppose the Catholic Church. Personal opinion may give one cause, but personal opinion does not a scriptural reason make. 2Peter 1:20

Pray for the salvation of all men for the greater glory of God the Father and Our Lord Jesus Christ in the unity of the Holy Spirit

This is absolutely correct, there is no basis for calling the Roman Catholic Church the harlot of Babylon or any of the other obscene things that people have said about it, such as accusing it of having killed 120 million people as one member claimed, or accusing it of being responsible for censorship on the Internet (yes, someone actually said that).

This is not to say the Roman Catholic Churches has not committed grievous actions, for example, the martyrdom of St. Peter the Aleut*, a 15 year old Aleutian boy who was on a fishing expedition to California who was arrested along with his fellow Aleutians because the Franciscans felt threatened by his Russian Orthodoxy, and he received the crown of martyrdom for refusing to renounce it. St. Peter the Aleut, pray for us!

However, the important thing is that the Roman Catholic Church made amends for these actions, it apologized for these errors under Pope St. John Paul II, it has returned relics to the Orthodox church, even those which were given to it for safekeeping at the onset of Turkocratia such as the head of St. Andrew the Apostle, which itself is a noble act, since the Roman church preserved the relics of the Orthodox church and then returned them in the late 20th century, and the Roman Catholic Church from a doctrinal perspective is mostly correct, differing from the Orthodox Church on only a small number of issues such as the aforementioned question of the exact nature of the conception of the Theotokos or the actual powers of the Bishop of Rome. In terms of Roman Catholic Eucharistic doctrine, and the veneration of icons and relics and Our Glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary, the Roman church is correct, likewise her sacramental theology is substantially the same as the Orthodox church, and her more ancient liturgies, such as the Traditional Latin Mass according to the Tridentine, Dominican, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Norbertine, Carmelite and related uses, are on a par with the liturgies of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox church in terms of beauty.

*Coincidentally, the place of his martyrdom was San Pedro, most likely the San Pedro near Los Angeles, and not that near San Francisco.
Upvote 0

Testing AI in Reading & Comprehension

What I am saying is that they are capable of thought, and of believing they have emotions, and of believing they have an identity...
I'd like to differ with you, but here's where my social-media-awkwardness comes up. Would you like to discuss this or not? Either way is fine with me, but I don't want you to be like "why is this guy trying to start an argument with me? Go away." :)
Upvote 0

Trump federalizing DC police, deploying National Guard in capital crime crackdown

Yeah, that is actually the point. It really does sound like something made up that you'd read in The Onion. But he really did say something that made him look ridiculous.

Did you only just realise this?
Like I have said, repeatedly, sandwich guy should have been charged with disorderly conduct or let go with a warning.
The testimony was ridiculous
Upvote 0

Appointed to Eternal Life - Acts 13:48

I didn't that Paul said everyone is chosen. I said, "Ephesians 1 indicates that we are chosen to be in Him before the foundation of the world", which is a paraphrase of, "He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world."
You said that "all names are in the book of life until they are blotted out." I took that to mean you were suggesting all are chosen, but whether our predestined status is "actualized" is conditioned on our response. I apologize if that's a misrepresentation.

But help me understand the difference. You said: "Ephesians 1 indicates that we are chosen to be in Him before the foundation of the world. Predestined. Whether we choose to or not is of our own free will." (My emphasis)

So, "we" are chosen, but, you say, whether or not that predestination is actualized(?) is conditioned on our own choosing.

Am I understanding that right?

Who, then, is "we"?

If X is chosen, but only a subset of X exercises their free will in accepting that predestination, then presumably you're suggesting that those who are initially "chosen" is a larger group than those who actually come, correct?

"...that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love..."

How is a person without blame? Repentance, forgiveness, obedience, which requires voluntary action on our part. And with God's help we are able to be holy and without blame, before Him in love.
It sounds like you're conflating means with cause. It's certainly true that believers act, repent, obey, and walk in holiness. The question isn't whether human response occurs; it's why it occurs.

In Eph. 1, the purpose clause ἵνα ἦμεν ἅγιοι καὶ ἄμωμοι ("in order that we should be holy and blameless") describes the intended result of God's choosing, not its precondition. "He chose us" (ἐξελέξατο ἡμᾶς) for this purpose: "in order that we should be holy..." (ἵνα ἦμεν ἅγιοι...).

Holiness, repentance, and obedience are therefore the fruits of divine election, not its grounds. Paul doesn't say "He chose us because we were holy," but "He chose us in order that we would become holy."

I may have worded that poorly. Either you're in the book of life or you're not. If you're not, you're blotted out.

Revelation 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Action on our part. "He that overcometh..."
Righteousness. "...the same shall be clothed in white raiment..."
"I will not blot out his name out of the book of life" is hinged on, "He that overcometh."
Again, Rev. 3:5 is a litotes. A litotes is a figure of speech that affirms something strongly by denying its opposite. In English, we use it all the time: "He's no fool" means "He's very wise." "That's not bad" means "That's quite good." The denial of the negative functions to underscore the certainty of the positive.

Rev. 3:5 fits that category precisely. The structure is conditional:

"He who overcomes... I will never blot out his name from the Book of Life, but I will confess his name before my Father."​

The second clause ("I will not blot out / wipe away") is paired positively with "I will confess," forming a rhetorical reinforcement. It's not describing two possible outcomes (kept or erased), but one assured outcome (secure and confessed). The "not blot out" phrase functions as litotes; a denial of the negative to strengthen the assurance of the positive.

If John intended to warn believers about potential erasure, he would have written something like ἐάν τις μὴ νικᾷ, ἐξαλείψω τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ("if anyone does not overcome, I will blot out his name"). But that's not what we have. The conditional structure of what he wrote focuses entirely on the overcomer, and the promise is one of reward and certainty, not risk.

According to Revelation 20:12, the book of life is one of the books opened at judgment. Why open the book if a person's status never changes? Notice, "...according to their works."
The fact that the Book of Life is opened at the final judgment does not imply that names are added or removed at that time. Opening the book is a literary and judicial device. It allows God to reveal the eternal status of each person publicly, in accordance with their works. John's point is about manifestation, not the origination or alteration of the list.

"According to their works" refers to the public display of God's judgment, not to the grounds of election itself. The works demonstrate the fruit of God's prior choice or rejection. Human self-determination does not alter the divine decree.

So the opening of the book is analogous to a courtroom unveiling of a verdict. It shows what has already been true. The "never written" status of the wicked and the "blessing of the overcomers" reflect God's eternal appointment, not a mutable ledger.
Upvote 0

The Thing Most Sabbath Keepers Do not Talk About.

Anyone who is in a covenant relationship with God is part of God's Israel and part of the promise. It was never just literal, as I showed this to you a few times previously through Scripture. I can provide Scriptures, I can make one believe them.
We’ve been through the scriptures before and I don’t agree with your interpretation. Scriptures are clear though that Israel is in a state of unbelief by rejecting the Messiah. We have the promises based on Abraham‘s seed which is 430 years before the law was given. So our promises do not include the Mosaic law that Israel could not keep but led to Jesus sacrifice of the cross in order to fulfilled it.
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,877,902
Messages
65,409,131
Members
276,352
Latest member
Ocean.Child