fhansen said:

Hmm...appears to be a failure to communicate here. I'm not sure you really understand-what I said. But I certainly have no idea what you're meaning to say above. I mean, of course, "Eternal Life and God's Eternal Nature were there from the beginning". And I didn't say otherwise. Maybe you could clarify a bit.

Click to expand...

You said, "The major difference between the old and new covenants is that, in the new, man is reconciled with God before anything else- establishing a vital connection between us and the Vine."

You said, "Jesus came in the fullness of time to give the full-true revelation of God’s nature-and of His will for man: for us to ultimately live in eternal bliss with Him."

We were discussing the *differences* between the Old and New Covenants. From your statements above it sounded as if in the Old Covenant Israel was as yet not reconciled with God and did not have a vital connection with God, spiritually?

And the implication of your statement is that before the New Covenant was established by Jesus there was not a "full-true revelation of God's nature and will for Man?" Really?

And so, I challenged that statement by declaring that the Old Covenant did have a true revelation of God's nature. The "I Am" statement to Moses revealed God's "true revelation." And the God of Israel under the Old Covenant was, in fact, a true revelation of God's Nature.

So maybe you're just saying that Jesus "filled in some of the blanks" not yet known about God's plan of Salvation, even though God's Nature was indeed fully known? Maybe you will acknowledge that the Law of Moses had provided a measure of "reconciliation" with God until it was sealed in Christ's blood?

After all, God continued to have fellowship with Adam and Eve, indicated by His giving them animal clothing. That in itself was a form of "reconciliation" and continuing vital links with God!

All that the Law of Moses provided Israel was given to reconcile them to Himself, if only on a temporary basis. And it did create a vital, spiritual link between Israel and Himself.

The necessary "final atonement of Christ" was future at that point, but did not mean that the Law had no value up until that point.

I hope you understand what I'm saying?

Say it aint so said:

All that shows is Trump's claim of white genocide is South Africa is bupkis.

Click to expand...

All that shows is much ado about nothing

FredVB said:

We really need God's help. We see the results in marriages without depending on God's help. It really isn't working. And so God should have something to do with two individuals joining as husband and wife to each other, and God would. So we do need to consent to God, who would be the one who is most sure of who belongs together.

Click to expand...

YMMV. The world is loaded with non-Christians and atheists' who have wonderful marriages and people who are hardcore Christians who have terrible ones. In my own life, the relationship most worth emulating comes from a couple I know who've been together, what, 30 years now? They're not married, never will be, are athiests who have no use for religion, yet they have the most happy, healthy, stable partnership. A true relationship of love and partnership built on mutual respect, trust, and admiration.

The worst... The worst 5, actually... Are all hardcore Christian, all "god fearing people" who are in church every Sunday, believe all the "right things," yet their marriage is something I'd go out of my way to avoid. Lack of equality, lack of mutual respect, lack of happiness, and a total acceptance of "well, that's the way it is..."

I do not support any form of violent protest. I disapprove of the LA protest that involved burning cars, damaging stores, and attacking law enforcement. To avoid any misunderstanding, I want to reiterate that I do not approve of any kind of violence, regardless of the reason.

However, I am curious about how we can simultaneously condemn violent street protests while supporting a constitutional amendment that states:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

bèlla said:

There is nothing wrong with desiring a spouse, making them a priority and having a family. If someone wants to live differently they’re welcome to do so. But shaming people for desiring a covenant the Lord approves of is unbiblical.

Click to expand...

I apologize if it seemed like I'm shaming people for desiring to get married because that is not my intention.

I've been that situation. The very depressing heavy-hearted feelings if circumstances prevent you or makes it incredibly difficult to meet someone. The last thing I want to do is add to their despair.

But if they do not have [sufficient] self-control, they should marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

Click to expand...

I've actually advised a single member to get married if they can't control their desires.

If you need to verify it, you can look through my posts. It's fairly recent, not more than couple months ago. I'm not that unreasonable and it's definitely in the Bible and the context applies to present times as well.

First I quote what Paul said is better but if they can't control their desires, I get to the latter part. It simply did not come up in our discussion until now.

It isn’t going to happen and that’s wishful thinking. If you follow the market you should know otherwise. Their intentions are obvious.

Click to expand...

I know it's never going to happen until the status quo is demolished which will only happen by supernatural means in the future as prophesied.

But sometimes, wishful thinking does wonders to the soul and body. Thoughts feed the soul and the body. "Man does not live by bread alone".
Think only what is pure, clean, right, lovely even if the world does not operate in such manner even if it's only wishful thinking.

trophy33 said:

It requires the animal to be conscious during the slaughter. They slit his throat and let him bleed to death.

If they did not have the religious exemption from the law, they would go to prison for doing this to animals.

And in practice, it is even more cruel than that:

Widely condemned cattle-killing method is used by kosher meat firm's supplier

Widely condemned cattle-killing method is used by kosher meat firm's supplier

www.latimes.com

https://www.peta.org/features/agriprocessors/

It is basically impossible to practice this bronze age idea of kosher slaughter in high numbers in modern slaughterhouses without enormous stress to animals, to both the dying ones and the ones waiting to die. It is inhumane.

Click to expand...

I agree that modern methods of slaughter are not very humane. It is not so much the killing method as the confinement and fear in the animals at the slaughter house, whether it is kosher or not. As the article pointed out, shackle-and-hoist slaughtering is not kind. Additionally, animals know when another animal has been killed, except chickens. Many slaughter houses use captive bolts. One type penetrates the brain, and the animal might not bleed out properly to be really kosher. However, most captive bolts only stun and allow the blood to leave the animal when the throat is cut. When a good shochet slits the throat of an animal, the animal probably doesn’t feel the pain, based on the hormones found in the meat, but it doesn’t look nice. The nerves still constrict muscles for a while. It is really the mass production that is the problem rather than the quick work of the shochet.

BPPLEE said:

He's off to a roaring start, with 59 white people. At this pace he'll catch up to all those that came in under Biden in 66,000 years

Click to expand...

All that shows is Trump's claim of white genocide in South Africa is bupkis.

boughtwithaprice said:

And all hope for a discussion is nearly gone.
Is this how you wish to play it? They mocked Jesus the same way. Laughed it up, put a purple robe on Him and a crown of thorns. They knelt in mockery, spit on Him and beat Him on the head.
Oh they thought they were so right. The Jewish leaders said he was an imposter, so they all mocked His majesty. Do you think it is fitting that you join in? Is it safe to mock what we do not understand?
You need to present evidence to make a charge
Your post has not done that

Click to expand...

I’m all for a serious discussion, because I’m all for anything that can - using only good methods - lessen distrust and misunderstanding and bad will between Catholics & Protestants.

Gregory Thompson said:

Perfectly documented Satire.
Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

This is not a laughing matter. Not everything can, or should, be turned into a joke.

The Catholic Church teaches that angels have no history, whereas I Corinthians 6:18-20 tells us our bodies have a history and we must take care of this matter as important. PJP2 on this basis devised, Theology of the Body, TOB. Angels may only appear to have bodies.

JSRG said:

The Spanish Inquisition didn't begin in 1184, which was what boughtwithaprice was explicitly referring to:

"Another member expressed a desire to discuss the inquisition. That is a broad topic spanning hundreds of years. I will limit this thread to the most notorious of the Inquisitions, the Spanish Inquisition."

The Spanish Inquisition was a different entity from the French one you allude to.

Click to expand...

The “mediaeval” - IOW, the non-later, non-Spanish - Inquisition was established in 1184. There were many Inquisitions, for various regions & in various times. Each has its own history. The historical picture, as with historical matters, is quite complicated; for instance, not all heresy trials were dealt with by Inquisitions.There were executions for heresy and witchcraft in England, Scotland & Ireland; but none of them involved the Inquisition, which was never established in those kingdoms. Jurisdiction over cases of heresy belonged, by canon law, to the bishops; the burnings in England between 1555 and 1558 were not the business of the Inquisition, but had, as their legal foundation, the anti-Lollard statute of 1401 called De Haeretico Comburendo. The trials for heresy were tried by the bishops.

BPPLEE said:

The results

Click to expand...

Nobody in this thread is denying the election results.

BCP1928 said:

Or just opportunistic hooligans.

Click to expand...

Plenty of that, but they're not distributing face shields, I expect.

BCP1928 said:

Even if they were granted legalized status afterwards, right?

Click to expand...

Yes, being granted legalized status after breaking the law doesn't erase the fact that they broken the law. Regarding immigration, the only fault of Trump is actually enforcing the laws.

BCP1928 said:

That's why ICE cancels student visas without telling the students. Then they definitely can arrest them for an illegal visa overstay.

Click to expand...

I suspect there was some "due process of law" that got skipped.

However, I see the tactic of the Administration is to skip due process and dare the courts to do something about it.

The framers of the Constitution expected that not more than one branch of government would be acting in bad faith at any given time.

durangodawood said:

I would love to go back and see Kyoto. But Im kind of glad I skipped it and Tokyo for my first trip. Most of the places I went were not huge international tourism destinations and I really enjoyed the lack of crowds and fuss, while still seeing amazing things. Plus, crossing the land on the bike you are really in it.

Click to expand...

I agree. Avoid tourist traps and order from the Japanese menu because it is cheaper.

.Mikha'el. said:

That wouldn't bother me. You are not eating the lamb for the same purposes they had for it. For you it is just nourishment without greater significance attached to it. I personally would have no reservations about eating meat marked as halal because if it's halal, it is also going to be kosher, so fine for me to partake.

Click to expand...

Halal meat is kosher by Torah standards, but Conservative and Orthodox Jews would not eat it unless a rabbi certified it. However, not all halal birds are okay and many sea foods don't follow Torah.

trophy33 said:

But will is not limited to realistic options. We can will or want things that are not in our power. For example a prisoner may will to be free.

Click to expand...

Part of my point is what you are saying. Having free will does not mean we do what we might freely desire, since doing would go against what God wills, but we still have free will.

GoldenKingGaze said:

The Holy Spirit teaches the word best.

Click to expand...

Greetings brother. Thank you for your reply

I do agree that the Holy Spirit teaches the word the best. Although, my agreement probably only lines up with yours when the Bible confirms it.

GoldenKingGaze said:

I use speculative theology.

Click to expand...

This, imo, can be a problem sometimes. Although I do think all of us speculate to some degree. I think it wise that when one knows he is speculating that he leaves himself open to being wrong with his speculation. Thus always seeking more solid ground in scripture.

Peace to you brother
Keep seeking God's truth as if it were hidden treasure.

Oompa Loompa said:

100% of illegal immigrants broke the law.

Click to expand...

Even if they were granted legalized status afterwards, right?

essentialsaltes said:

This is certainly a concern, that the 'professional protestors', anarchists and/or accelerationists are co-opting the situation.

Click to expand...

Or just opportunistic hooligans.

Hazelelponi said:

And so operation "take our country back" begins.

I bet we have more fire power than the drug cartels and human traffickers, and those who protest and riot in their name.

I'm fine with rolling tanks through LA if it means we get it back from Mexican nationals who are trying to take it over.

People want to play games when it's real life. Watching our cities burn to the ground is not optional.

Click to expand...

What fanciful nonsense. I will not insult you by assuming that you actually believe that fairy story, but I wonder what your motive is for telling it.