December 8, 2025

Our Morning Offering – 8 December – Immaculate! Immaculate! By Fr Faber


One Minute Reflection – 8 December ‘ … Pure and Immaculate Virgin, chosen from among all other beings … ‘

Immaculate Conception propers & commentary (EF)

The Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary propers & commentary (EF)

December 8 – The Immaculate Conception of the Most Blessed Virgin propers & commentary (EF)

Rev. Fr. Leonard Goffine's Instruction on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Solemnity of Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary readings & commentary (OF)

Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary readings & commentary (OF)

Daily Gospel

The Immaculate Conception (Declared a dogma December 8, 1854 by Pius IX)

The Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Saints of the Day

Sermons for Everyday Living

Pope John Paul II’s Last Sermon on the Immaculate Conception

Tallis’ Gaude Gloriosa

Audio The Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Guéranger)
Login to view embedded media

Kjelete said:

Everyday, something new and mean stuff is coming from American online. For example that unemployed people drain the system. That's how I understand it from you. Now it's like your dream of a society where everyone works will never happen, a kind of utopia. The reason I'm writing is because my mother worked in a factory for 32 years or something, and got a medal, and my father has worked for about 30 years also in different places, woke up to the same alarm every day for 30 years, yet they are treated degradingly when we are out because they "just" go there.

Its fun to be mean perhaps, I never understand it, but americans have to kinda weirdos to put all this nonsense out there. I'm always treated well because I've sung so much, but I think it's a bit the opposite of what it should be, maybe then, I've learned a lot on my own, worked hard, but I think 30 years in a factory is tougher

Click to expand...

Well, we are 8 billion +and no one can carry all the burdens of the world.

We are all good at something even factory work, best is to do what you are good at. makes life more stressless.

Trust in God conduct oneself with integrity, and the One above will take care of everything.

"Think good and it will be good."
The Rebbe.

12/08/25 Day 5

O St. Lucy, whose name proclaims the radiance of light, we approach you with humble confidence to seek your holy intercession. Obtain for us, through your prayers, that sacred illumination which guides our souls away from the shadows of sin and leads us toward the brightness of virtue.

Obtain for us also these petitions which we offer to you in this novena:

[Mention your petitions now]

We beseech you, St. Lucy, through your powerful advocacy before the throne of the Lamb, the protection of our eye sight, and for the grace to employ our eyes always in service of God’s glory and never for that which offends His divine majesty.

Help us to perceive with clarity the truths of our faith and the needs of our neighbor, that we may walk steadfastly in the light of Christ and labor earnestly for the salvation of souls.

Pray for us, St. Lucy, that having honored you as our advocate in this earthly pilgrimage, we may one day behold with you the eternal splendor of the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ our Lord, in whose divine light all shadows flee away forever. Amen.

Generation gap?

Login to view embedded media
Login to view embedded media

Welcome @Factotum

I get asked when I "found out" that there was no "Santa" all the time, by people who regard it as an inevitable tragic moment in every childhood. These same people have children in their families who are being told the tale. Why do they do it? Why would you tell your own children this thing, knowing and expecting them to be distraught when they found out it is not true?

I was told that it was a puzzle that the grown ups were setting, and I should try to solve it. The year that I was 11 I announced that I thought I had solved it. I said that there is really a Saint Nicholas, who was known for giving gifts, but there is not really a flying sledge, he is not fat, and the red suit thing is an American cola advert. I figured it had been a fun game, I learned that Jesus was the entire purpose of Christmas as we do it at our house, and while we can quietly leave others to do things their own way, we should and did keep the most questionable Pagan and pointless materialist habits out of it. There was no sense of tragedy or betrayal there, it was more a small rite of passage. In a country where there are people who celebrate the Winter Solstice according to pre-Christian beliefs it was a lesson to learn.

We did also know an atheist family, they told their son that Santa was a game, which made perfect sense to him since he was always being taught to doubt everything that could not be proved with science, and Christmas in their home was a simple matter of stay away from all others and play games. He never had a moment of tragic, distressing enlightenment about it either.

@keras,

How can you not understand this ?

Anybody remember me? I was a regular on this forum from 2004 until 2018, after which I mostly moved on to other things. I don't plan on becoming a regular here again, but I'm back for the time being to ask about a recent piece of evolutionary anthropology news.


According to this analysis, when the human and chimpanzee genomes are compared while including portions that hadn't previously been sequenced, their similarity drops from the commonly given 98% value to 84.7%. On the surface this seems valid, and the conclusion has been accepted by Jerry Coyne, an evolutionary biologist who is qualified to evaluate it. Jerry Coyne's post from yesterday is what brought this analysis to my attention.

But there is something odd about this conclusion: it's virtually identical to an argument made in 2012 by Jerry Bergman and Jeffrey Tomkins in the Journal of Creation. Bergman and Tomkins' 2012 argument was that when human and chimpanzee genomes are compared using data typically omitted from these comparisons, the percentage similarity drops to somewhere in the 81-87 percent range. Either the recent analysis by "Origins Unveiled" is an example of a major creationist claim being vindicated by mainstream evolutionary anthropology, or it's a very clever false flag operation by a creationist or Intelligent Design proponent, which was convincing enough for even Jerry Coyne to be fooled.

Looking more closely, I've noticed a few other possible red flags. First, the argument made by "Origins Unveiled" (and accepted by Jerry Coyne) is based on a paper published in Nature on April 9th. The exact same argument made by "Origins Unveiled"—that this paper shows the creationist figure of 81-87% to be correct—was previously made six months ago by Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. And second, "Origins Unveiled" is a relatively new Twitter account (registered in 2024) without any identifying information, aside from that they were a were considering a Ph.D in evolutionary anthropology until they quit due to "the rampant political correctness I witnessed among professors and students in potential university programs". Some of the account's other posts include accurate summaries of evolutionary anthropology concepts, but a fair number of creationists have legitimate PhDs and have published mainstream biology or geoscience research, so the ability to accurately explain these concepts doesn't prove the account's provenance either way.

I would like some help evaluating whether the "Origins Unveiled" Twitter account is for real, and whether it's a coincidence that they've reached the same conclusion as Luskin (and also previously Bergman and Tomkins), or whether this Twitter account is being operated someone associated with the Discovery Institute who's posing as an evolutionary anthropologist. I suppose it's also possible that this account belongs to a creationist or ID proponent but that the substance of their argument is still correct. I'm aware of one other case where a creationist objection (not to the theory evolution itself, but to the way it's been presented in textbooks) turned out to be valid.

No I am not still taking them, and haven’t in a long. I had another knee surgery this year and they weren’t a problem. When it seemed I had one surgery after another, I started to take them to create the feeling of happiness in the midst of my depression and scrupulosity. There was a period of 10 years I was out of work for 5 because of surgeries. It was a hard time for our family. It may be discipline, which I would welcome because that could mean God is still with me. Or just the absence of Him altogether. I cannot bear that thought.

stevevw said:

All I know is he selected one example and ignored the rest. Thats not dealing with the evidence. Qoute mining over one bit of my evidence is not dealing with the evidence.


The same science tells us the forensics of those marks. This then gives evidence that some other knowledge and tech was used. The science even tells us the possible method or what it took to make the mark. The science shows us that melting or softening stone takes a particular knowledge. It verified that the stone was melted and softened.

Click to expand...

Get through your thick skull you have not presented a shred of evidence of anything in this thread that supports your nonsense.

The sheer stupidity is for you give lectures to educated individuals in this thread who at the very least know what evidence means.
Evidence is physical in nature, it is measurable and/or observable not your idiotic definition where it is derivable and interpretable according to one's bias.

When it comes to melted or softened stone in the case of Egyptology there is not a shred of evidence of any physical changes occurring when subjected to petrological testing as shown in my previous post.

If concentrating on Egypt is too narrow by all means supply petrological tests for any of your non Egyptian images showing the rock has been physically changed.
Otherwise as you have demonstrated images are subject to interpretation where bias not evidence is the determining factor.

Xeno.of.athens said:

The Law, as revealed by God and fulfilled in Christ, serves as a moral compass and pedagogical guide for the Christian faithful. It includes the Mosaic Law, especially the Decalogue, and finds its perfection in the New Law of the Gospel. “The Law has become our tutor unto Christ” (Galatians 3:24), and its enduring moral precepts are reaffirmed by the Church as binding. The Catechism teaches that “the Old Law is a preparation for the Gospel” and “remains necessary for man” as it “denounces and discloses sin” (CCC §1963–1964).

The Ten Commandments, given to Moses on Sinai (Exodus 20:1–17), are “fundamentally immutable” and “engraved by God in the human heart” (CCC §2072). They express the natural law and are reaffirmed by Christ, who deepens their meaning in the Sermon on the Mount (cf. Matthew 5–7). The Commandments are not abolished but fulfilled in charity: “If you love Me, keep My commandments” (John 14:15). They are the foundation of Christian moral life, guiding the faithful in their duties toward God and neighbour.

For the Christian in this world, the Law and Commandments are not burdens but paths to freedom and holiness. Grace enables their fulfilment, and the Spirit writes them anew on the heart (cf. Jeremiah 31:33; CCC §1965–1966). The faithful are called to interiorise the Law, living it not merely by external observance but through love: “Love is the fulfilment of the law” (Romans 13:10). Thus, the Commandments remain essential, not as relics of legalism, but as living expressions of divine wisdom and the way of life in Christ.

Click to expand...

By the way, its amusing that despite you affirming this, and despite the fact that your church is responsible for the majority of worship services celebrated on the seventh day, some sabbatarian members still accuse the Roman Catholic Church falsely of teaching people to break the Ten Commandments, when this is demonstrably, evidently false.

peter2 said:

i agree, but i wouldn't find useless to assume Mary was supported (and may be supported the apostles) by her belief during the three days of death. As called Peter, i assume the apostle (Peter) must have felt sheepish of his denials before her, even after resurrection, at least up until Jesus gives him back the leadership over his shep, may be still when waiting for the Holy Spirit.
i wonder whether it's not in what preceeds that part of this motherhood of Mary Jesus gives to John (indirectly to Peter) consists

Click to expand...

Indeed - this is an interesting point.

You might enjoy reading the Orthodox theotokia, particularly the stavrotheotokia, the hymns venerating the Blessed Virgin Mary at the foot of the Cross.

Yarddog said:

I didn't say that.

Click to expand...

You didn’t have to

prayers

Noah's Rainbow

ThatRobGuy said:

Does Finnish laws require that they "fall in-line" with certain precepts in order to maintain certain tax benefits or receive certain grants?

That's an honest question, I'm not familiar with those kinds of legal frameworks for Finland.

I know for Denmark, they passed a law in 2012 that said that a State church (any that carry the label of Church of Denmark) isn't allowed to opt out of performing Same Sex marriages, and if a particular clergymen refuses, the local bishop has to appoint a replacement.

But wasn't sure if all of the nordic countries were the same in that regard.

Click to expand...

From my understanding not even the Lutheran protestant church in Finland requires churches to marry same-sex couples. In Sweden the Lutheran church does, but not because they are required by law (it's no longer a state church, it was decided in Kyrkomötet.). No churches are by law forced to marry same-sex couples, neither Orthodox or Catholic churches does it and I can only recall one imam that does it. I think the Norwegian church also does marry same-sex, however I'm not certain if they are required by law (I don't believe so, because they are not longer a state church either iirc).

Edited to add.
No law in Norway either, the Norwegian church decided to do same-sex marriages in a vote in 2016.

I think that the danish state church, is the only one that is an actual state church today. In the other countries the largest churches have a kind of de facto position in society due to their size, and long history, and old buildings etc. In Finland there is also a higher position for the Orthodox church I guess due to the shared history with Russia before independence (but it is very small).

We didn't come to borrow any money,
We didn't come to borrow any dough,
We didn't come to borrow any trouble,
We just dropped in to say hello,

Hellllll-o to you Mr. Manny,
Please don't think that we are hammy,
We just dropped in from Alabammy,
We just dropped in to say Hello!

Oh boy you said it!

Manny Weeks: Good Bye!

Our God, the one and only true God of the universe, is Father, Son Jesus Christ, and Holy Spirit. So, not one of us can believe in God the Father and not believe in Jesus Christ, God the Son. So all who profess to believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but who reject Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, do not truly believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. So, all Jews who do not accept Jesus Christ as their Messiah do not believe in the same God as we do who believe in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Master.

For no one can come to God the Father except through Jesus Christ, and none of us can believe in Jesus Christ unless God the Father first draws us to Christ, i.e. unless he first persuades us as to his holiness and righteousness, and of our sinfulness, and of our need to die to sin and to obey God, as those who profess faith in our Lord Jesus. For faith in Jesus Christ requires that we deny self, die daily to sin, and that we walk (in conduct, in practice) in obedience to our Lord and to his commands under the New Covenant.

[Hebrews 12:1-2; Ephesians 2:8-10; John 6:44; Luke 9:23-26; Acts 26:18]

Now there are many people today who are teaching a gospel of salvation absent of death to sin and walks of obedience to our Lord and to his commands. For they are teaching that we are saved and on our way to heaven based merely on a verbal confession of Christ as Lord and belief that God raised him from the dead. But that is being taught out of context, and it ignores the bulk of the teachings on the gospel of our salvation which insist that we must deny self, die to sin, and follow our Lord in obedience.

But if we love Jesus, we will obey his commandments, and we will be loved by him and by God the Father. But if sin is what we obey, and not God’s commandments, then we do not love God – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – and we don’t know God, and we are not in fellowship with Jesus Christ. And so we don’t have salvation from sin and eternal life with God, which is promised to all who believe in Jesus, who are dying to sin daily (in practice), and who are following our Lord in walks of obedience to his commands.

For our faith in Jesus Christ is not based on the teachings of other humans, many of which distort and alter the truths of the Scriptures to make them less offensive and more attractive to human flesh and to the world. But our faith in Jesus must be based on the teachings of the Scriptures taught by Jesus Christ and by his New Testament apostles, taught in their correct biblical context, and not out of context which many do in order to deceive. And then we will know the right way in which we are to go by faith in God.

For Jesus Christ taught that to come to him we must deny self, take up our cross daily (die daily to sin), and follow (obey) him. For if we hold on to living in sin and for self, we will lose our lives for eternity. But if we deny self, die daily to sin, by the Spirit, and we walk in obedience to our Lord and to his commands, in his power, then we have eternal life with God. For not everyone who calls him “Lord” will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one DOING (obeying) the will of God (see Luke 9:23-26; Matthew 7:21-23).

For by God-gifted faith in Jesus Christ, which is not of our own doing, we are crucified with Christ in death to sin and raised with Christ to walk in newness of life in him, no longer to live as slaves to sin but as slaves to righteousness in walks of obedience to God’s commands. We are no longer to permit sin to reign in our mortal bodies to make us obey its desires. For if sin is what we obey, it results in death. But if obedience to God is what we obey, it results in sanctification, and its end is eternal life with God (see Romans 6:1-23).

So, please read the Scriptures in their appropriate biblical context so that you are learning the truth spoken by Jesus Christ and by his New Testament apostles, and so you are not relying upon other human beings in our day and time to actually teach you the truth of what God’s word teaches us.

[Matthew 7:13-14,21-23; Luke 9:23-26; John 10:27-30; Acts 26:18; Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:5-10; Romans 3:23; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 8:1-14; 1 Corinthians 10:1-22; Galatians 5:16-24; Ephesians 2:8-10; Ephesians 4:17-32; Ephesians 5:3-6; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 3:1-19; Hebrews 4:1-13; Hebrews 10:19-39; Hebrews 12:1-2; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 1:1-10; 1 John 2:3-6; 1 John 3:4-10; Revelation 2:1-29; Revelation 3:1-22]

My Sheep

Based off John 10:1-30 NIV
An Original Work / June 24, 2012
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

My sheep hear me. They know me.
They listen to my voice and obey.
I call them and lead them.
They know my voice, so they follow me.
They will never follow strangers.
They will run away from them.
The voice of a stranger they know not;
They do not follow him.

So, I tell you the truth that
I am the gate, so you enter in.
Whoever does enter
Will find forgiveness and will be saved.
Nonetheless whoever enters
Not by the gate; other way,
He is the thief and a robber.
Listen not, the sheep to him.

Oh, I am the Good Shepherd,
Who laid his own life down for the sheep.
I know them. They know me.
They will live with me eternally.
The thief only comes to steal and
Kill and to destroy the church.
I have come to give you life that
You may have it to the full…

They know my voice, so they follow me.

Login to view embedded media
If We Love Jesus Christ
An Original Work / December 8, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

I think what they will find will shock the US. The ideology that was pushed that caused so much insanity internally as far as unreal ideas has to have spread beyond the borders.

If its all about identity and protecting people based on identity to garner support then there will be corruption no doubt about that. Information hidden, bad actors protected, buying power and exploiting power. All the red flags were there and they hid them because they controlled that information.

The main concern I've got is this. What does how we speak resound to to a person whose background isn't Christian faith? We would be speaking in a manner that's foreign. What does that convey about being a Christian?

Lots of people from my past would respond to this question with what I'd call righteous indignation. Remember, though, the ONLY people Jesus got angry with were the religious authorities and teachers of the day. They were indulging themselves in self-serving practices that blocked the public from access to God.

And I'd ask those of you who object to my objection to take a step back and seriously think about this. We're having enough trouble as it is reaching the people God calls us to reach. What do you think the message is that we're sending when we speak in KJ English? And talk about pillowing our heads in slumber and so forth? What the heck is that, anyway, to those outside our circles?

I grew as a person of faith in an environment that was full of thees and thous, church biuldings being called the house of God (incorrect at best, hersey otherwise) and all the trappings of the late 19th century holiness movement.

What do you think those trappings do to people who are hit with them out of the blue today? I'd suggest they either drive people away, or deliver a message to them that the truth is somehow bound up in archaic expression and practices. You can't be a real Christian unless you behave this way, so you've got to become something artificial.

I know, I know that isn't the intended outcome of people who take pleasure in acting and speaking this way. But it matters. We've only got so much time to reach people. Let's actively reject anything that gets in the way. What would the argument be to keep doing this stuff? Seriously, in light of all this, what could it possibly be?

Jeesuspelastaa said:

The old covenant ended at the cross, where the new covenant began through the blood of Jesus. “This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.” Luke 22:20. The new covenant was made with the descendants of Jacob. But later, into THAT covenant, we who have turned from paganism also became included. This is the covenant mentioned in Jeremiah 31:31-33.

Click to expand...

God's character traits are eternal, so any instructions that God has ever given for how to know Him by being in His likeness by through embodying His character traits are eternally and cumulatively valid regardless of which covenant someone is under. For example, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are also eternal (Psalms 119:160). It was in accordance with God's righteousness to be a doer of charity before He made any covenants with man, so that is an eternally valid way to know God regardless of which covenant someone is under. Sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), so there were no actions that became righteous or unrighteous when the law was given, but rather it revealed what has always been and will always be the way to do that. The New Covenant is made with the same God with the same eternal character traits and therefore the same eternal and cumulatively valid instructions for how to embody His character traits (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom/Grace. Jesus also set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6). So Jesus seen this ministry teaching his followers to obey the Torah by word and by example, and in Matthew 28:16-20, he commissioned his disciples to teach to the nations everything that he taught them, so did not intended for what he spent his ministry teaching to be nullified with is death. In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in the Gospel that Jesus spent his ministry teaching and in what he accomplished through the cross us by repenting and becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20). The reason why Jesus established the New Covenant was not to nullify anything that he spent his ministry teaching, in order to nullify what he accomplished through the cross, or so that we could continue to have the same lawlessness that caused the New Covenant to be needed in the first place, but rather the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).

In Galatian 3:16-19, there is a principle that new covenants do not nullify the promises of covenants that have already been ratified, so all of God's covenants and eternally and cumulatively valid. One thing can only make another thing obsolete to the extent that it has cumulative functionality, so a computer makes a typewriter obsolete but does not make a plow obsolete, which mens that if the New Covenant were something different that was not cumulative with the Mosaic Covenant, then it could not make it obsolete. So the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is cumulatively based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6). The fault that God found with he Mosaic Covenant was not with the Torah but with the people for not continuing in their covenant, so the solution to the problem was not to do away with the Torah but to do away with what was hindering us from obeying it. This is why the New Covenant involves God sending His Son to free us from sin so that we might be free to meet the righteous requirement of the Torah (Romans 8:3-4) and God putting the Torah in our minds, writing it on our hearts, taking away our hearts of stone, giving us hearts of flesh, and sending His Spirit to lead us in obedience to the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).

In Deuteronomy 30, it forms the basis for the New Covenant by prophesying about a time when the Israelites would return from exile, God would circumcise their hearts, and they would return to obedience to the Torah, which is what the context of Jeremiah 31:33 and Ezekiel 36:26-27 is in regard to.

If God saved the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt in order to put them under bondage to the Torah, then it would be for bondage that God sets us free, however, Galatians 5:1 says that it is for freedom that God sets us free. In Psalms 119:142, the Torah is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is the transgression of the Torah that puts us into bondage while the truth sets us free. Moreover, the Torah came through the line of the free woman, so that should impact how to correctly understand Galatians 4:21-31.

In Acts 15:6-7, Peter argued that Gentiles had heard and believed the Gospel message, which calls for our obedience to the Torah (Matthew 4:15-23). so he was agreeing with the Pharisees from long the believers in Acts 15:5. Likewise, in Acts 15:8-9, Peter argued that Gentiles had received the Spirit and had their hearts cleanse, so he was again affirming that Gentiles should obey the Torah (Ezekiel 36:26-27). It is contradictory to treat Acts 15:19-21 as containing an exhaustive list for mature believers in order to limit which laws Gentiles should follow while also treating it as being an non-exhaustive list by taking the position that there are obviously other laws that Gentiles should follow. It was not given as an exhaustive list for mature believers but as a list intended to avoid making things too difficult for new believers, which they excused with the expectation that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey Moses by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues.

In Ephesians 2:11-22, Gentiles were at one time separated from Christ, alienated from Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, and without hope and God in this world, all of which is in accordance with Gentiles at one time not being doers of the Torah, but through faith in Christ all of that is no longer true in that Gentiles are no longer strangers or aliens but are fellow citizens of Israel along with the saints in the household of God, all of which is in accordance with Gentiles becoming doers of the Torah.

In Psalms 40:8, it again supports obedience to the Torah.

In James 2:1-11, we we break any law and become a lawbreaker, then we need to repent and to return to obedience, which is what James was encouraging them to do.

"To fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so Jesus fulfilled the Torah by teaching us how to correctly obey it.

In Galatians 3:10, Paul said that cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything in the Book of the Law, so we should continue to do everything in the Book of the Law.

In John 7:19, the fact that the people that Jesus was speaking to did not keep the Torah does not mean that no one has been able to keep it, but rather there are many people who did keep it such as with those in Joshua 22:1-3 or Luke 1:5-6.

God wanted His children to repent and to return to obedience to the Torah all throughout the Bible and even Jesus began his ministry with that Gospel message, so it would be absurd to interpret Galatians 5:4 as Paul warning against obeying God and saying that we will be cut off from Christ if we repent and believe the Gospel of Christ. In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith, this is what it means to be under grace, and it would again be absurd to interpret this as him wanting God to be gracious to him by teaching him how to fall from grace, so you are not correctly identifying what Paul was speaking against in this passage.

In Romans 10:5-8, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to proclaiming that the Torah is not too difficult for us to keep and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life!

Everything in the Torah is either in regard to how to love God or how to love our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, so the position that we should obey the greater two commandments is also the position that we should obey the rest of the Torah and love is not doing something that is not in accordance with the Torah.

You are blatantly using Isaiah 1:14 out of context. Do you also think that Isaiah 1:15 means that we shouldn't pray?

In Romans 7:21-8:7, Paul delighted in obeying the Torah and served it with his mind in contrast with the law of sin, which was working within his members to cause him not to do the good tha the wanted to do, which was waging war against the law of his mind, which he served with his flesh, which held him captive, and which the law of the Spirit has free us from. Moreover, Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Galatians 5:16-23, Paul contrasted the desires of the flesh with the desires of the Spirit and everything that he listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Torah while all of the fruits of the Spirit are in accordance with it. The desires of the flesh causing us not to do the good that we want to do is how Paul described his struggle with the law of sin, which the Law of the Spirit has freed us from, so that is the law that we are not under when we are led by the Spirit. The Torah was given by God and the Spirit is God, so it would be contradictory to interpret Galatians 5:18 as saying that we are not led by God when we are led by God. We need to die to the law of sin in order to be free to obey the Torah, not the other way around.

Christ lived in obedience to the Torah, so that is also the way that we live when he is living in us (Galatians 2:19-20). Grace and truth came through Jesus began he seent his ministry teaching us to obey the Torah by word and by example. In Matthew 11:28-30, Jesus was inviting people to come to him for rest and to learn from him, not inviting people to come to him for rest instead of learning from his example. Moreover, by Jesus saying that we would find rest for our souls, he was referencing Jeremiah 6:16-19, where the Torah is described as the good way where we will find rest for our souls, but they did not want to walk in it. In Hebrews 3:18-19, they did not enter into God's rest because of their disobedience/unbelief, and in Ezekiel 20:13, the greatly profaned God's Sabbaths, so you should not think that you can have the same disobedience to the Torah that prevented the Israelites from entering into God's rest and that it will go differently for you. In Hebrews 4:9-11, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, we should rest from our work as God rested from his, and we should be careful to enter into that rest so that no one might fall away by the same sort of disobedience, so we should continue to keep the Sabbath holy.

In Romans 14:1, the topic of the chapter is in regard to how to handle disputable matters of opinion in which God has given no command, not in regard to whether followers of God should follow God, so nothing in the chapter should be interpreted as speaking against following God. Paul did not mention the Sabbath anywhere in Romans 14 precisely because it had nothing to do with the topic tha the wars discussing.

⭐ THE VERSE: “At night it appears … like a man”​

In 1 Enoch 78:17, the Ethiopic reads (in most manuscripts):

“At night it appears every twenty (days) like a man,
and at daytime like the sky because there is nothing else in it except its light.”

Click to expand...

This sentence contains two ideas:

1. “At night it appears … like a man.”
2. During the day it looks like the sky (i.e., invisible).

So yes — the text does describe the moon as showing a human-like face.

---

⭐ WHAT DOES “LIKE A MAN” REFER TO?​

Assuming the text is describing real lunar appearance:

✔ It refers to the common visual impression that the full moon shows a face.​

Ancient cultures noticed:

• The darker maria (lunar seas)
• The brighter highlands
• The arrangement looks like two eyes, a nose, and a mouth

This is so universal that:

• Europeans called it the Man in the Moon
• Jews sometimes said “the face of the moon”
• Mesopotamians noted markings on the moon
• Chinese saw a rabbit; others saw a man
• Romans saw “the face of Selene”

Enoch 78:17 matches this universal observation.

---

⭐ WHY “EVERY TWENTY DAYS”?​

The text says:

“every twenty (days) like a man”

Click to expand...

This likely refers to the part of the lunar cycle where the moon’s illuminated portion resembles a face — this would be:

• Waxing gibbous → full moon → waning gibbous

That segment lasts roughly 20 days (about two-thirds of the lunar month).


So the text is saying:

✔ During the part of the month when the moon is mostly lit, its markings resemble a human face.​

---

⭐ IS THIS A LITERAL DESCRIPTION?​

If we assume nothing in 1 Enoch is fictional, then:

✔ The text is reporting exactly what humans still see today —​

the facial-like pattern on the lunar near side.


This is not symbolic.
This is observational astronomy.

BCP1928 said:

And now cience is trying to discovered what that event looked like from our side of things.

Click to expand...

Yes thats how science began. To discover how Gods creation worked and was manifested to us.

But it seems the investigation to understand and describe Gods creation has become the creator itself. Gods creation is being used as the creator itself. The nature of Gods creation is itself being made the god so that God can be ommitted.

The strange thing is if God is the creator then this itself tells us that science cannot figure out what created Gods creation because, well its God and not His creation.

Science will have to admit it will never work this out and all its doing is describing Gods supernatural creation up to a certain point within that human made concept of methological naturalism.