New Posts

RDKirk · 2025-11-25T12:17:55-0600

DaisyDay said:
I've been reading that a lot of the top military lawyers were let go as part of the Trump purge/consolidation of power.

Explainer: JAG Firings Spark Concerns About US Military Legal Oversight

In a significant shake-up at the Pentagon last week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the top military lawyers for the Army, Navy and Air Force. This decision comes amid a broader series of dismis...

www.jurist.org

...But despite the high profile natures of these firings, some analysts have argued that the firings of the military’s top lawyers — its Judge Advocate Generals (JAGs) — poses an even greater threat to the rule of law in the US.

“Trump…firing the Army, Navy, and Air Force JAGs [is in some ways] even more chilling than firing the four star [generals]. It’s what you do when you’re planning to break the law: you get rid of any lawyers who might try to slow you down,” wrote Georgetown Law Professor Rosa Brooks on X.

“When you start firing the military’s top lawyers, that means you are getting ready to order the military to do unlawful things. Trump replaces those JAGs with men who will justify any future unlawful and unethical actions that he wants the military to do,” wrote Democratic political candidate and former US fighter pilot Amy McGrath, also via X.

And more recently - eight months later:

Hegseth fired the Air Force’s top lawyer. The JAG who took on the job is stepping away.

It’s been eight months since the service had a Senate-confirmed leader in the role.

www.defenseone.com

Eight months after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the Air Force’s top lawyer, the judge advocate general tasked with those duties has stepped down. No one has yet been nominated to permanently fill either of the service’s top legal jobs.

Maj. Gen. Rebecca Vernon, who had served as deputy Air Force JAG since 2022, became acting JAG after Hegseth’s Feb. 21 announcement that he was firing Lt. Gen. Charles Plummer. Vernon’s last day on the job was Sunday and her retirement date is set for January 1, 2026, Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek said.

...
The judge advocate general of each military service—TJAG for short—must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. A former Air Force lawyer said the lack of a Senate-confirmed TJAG leaves the branch’s legal officers in limbo.

“It’s tough to make any long-term plans without that position filled,” the lawyer said. “We’re in the middle of assignment season and the TJAG makes those decisions. There’s a ripple effect throughout the [JAG] Corps that hurts morale, retention, budgets, hiring, and every major policy decision.”

The services are missing more than their top JAGs: the Pentagon has also been sending lower-level lawyers to the Justice Department to serve as temporary immigration judges.

This has raised concerns among legal experts. Margy O’Herron, a senior fellow in the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program, wrote in September that the administration’s plan will pull JAGs “away from the important work they are trained and assigned to do, risking military readiness.”

Earlier this year, Hegseth said he fired the Air Force and Army TJAGs because they were "roadblocks to orders that are given by a commander in chief.”

That just doesn't fill me with confidence that the secretary is not and will not issue illegal orders.

That only means the lawyers themselves aren't morally concerned about the legality. But those orders will be couched in legalese to confuse the issue to force the issue to the Supreme Court. We see this in the case of the Venezuelan speed boats. The orders are couched in legalese about the "War on Terror" as already authorized by Congress. But Congress will not pass a resolution to clarify that the White House is outside the intended scope of the War on Terror. The Supreme Court historically refuses to get involved in military operations, and this Court certainly won't.

A soldier is only held accountable for "manifestly illegal" orders, and this is not a "manifestly illegal" order if Congress keeps silent and it has to go to court.

rambot · 2025-11-25T12:17:55-0600

essentialsaltes said:
Update time.

Mississippi Republican Takes Plea Deal After Destroying Satanic Statue in Iowa
Michael Cassidy, a former congressional and legislative candidate, was set for trial June 3, but his attorney filed a guilty plea on his behalf to an aggravated misdemeanor count of third-degree criminal mischief, the Des Moines Register reported. [felony charges were dropped as part of the deal. He gets 2 years probation and pays restitution.]

Since that 2023 event, Iowa has refused the Satanic Temple's applications to have a holiday event at the Capitol.

State again denies Satanic Temple's request to hold event at Iowa Capitol building
Matt Kezhaya, general counsel for The Satanic Temple, said the government is not alowed to deny pubic services or benefits to people or religous groups because officials disagree with their beliefs.

"Once state officials open up the Capitol to public events, as it has for displays and events around the holidays, they can't legally exclude The Satanic Temple because of its disfavored or minority viewpoint," he said in a statement.

In June, the ACLU of Iowa filed a civil rights complaint on behalf of The Satanic Temple Iowa alleging state officials illegally discriminated against the group based on its members’ religion when they denied the group’s event request in 2024.

[And now they've denied it again for 2025.]

When you fight for freedom, this is the EXACT freedom you fight for.

All these free speech folks who shrug when racist wingnuts spout off certainly will protect this speech as well.

2PhiloVoid · 2025-11-25T11:58:49-0600

jacks said:
Just a point. Some people truly are raised to be atheists. I don't have any statistics on this, but it might be more common than one thinks. It is certainly my background and those I was acquainted with. The option to believe in a supernatural power was not really on the table. We were taught all forms of religion, was nothing more than a way to control the masses or for the weak minded. We didn't ridicule those "poor deluded people", but we certainly wouldn't have wanted to identify with them.
Writing this now I can't believe how ignorant I was, while ironically thinking I was so smart.

Yes, I know that's the case. But the most vocal of the Deconstructionists are usually "Ex-Christians." Mainly because they feel they have an axe to grind.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-25T11:55:07-0600

com7fy8 said:
Well . . . yes love causes us to do something.

But we do have ability to choose to do something. So, this would mean we have some sort of free will . . . meaning ability to choose.

I know I have the ability to move or not move my finger (I thank God for that). In my thinking, what I desire or intend to do with my fingers is my will, and scripture concurs. Is it free? Do I just make up a will to do something? Perhaps when I'm bored? But I didn't will to be bored. I don't actually will to will when I think about it, and there's always a reason why I reason.

Okay, I have an ability to choose to move my finger. But in the moral/immoral sense, to have a will that equivocates back and forth between obeying God and disobeying God would be doublemindedness.

James 1:8: “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.”
James 4:8: “Purify your hearts, ye double minded.”

com7fy8 said:
However, we have how there is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" > in Ephesians 2:2. Satan's spirit is working people to do what they do, I see this means, since his evil spirit "works in" disobedient people. And his spirit has anger, fear, lust, and unforgiveness which were not in Adam and Eve when God created them "very good".

This is the same scripture that informs my reasoning about what makes me will as in lust or covet. It's important to note that the Truth preceded a lie in existence. I'm defining a lie as something false that undermines what is true. The reason this is important is because if we already had a free will walking and abiding in the truth through faith, then the lie that we don't have a free will would make free will a lie. So yes, there is a prince of the power of the air, and that power implies the ability to create desires in the flesh through deception, or vain imaginings which lead to sin. So, in this scenario, what looks like free isn't actually free.

com7fy8 said:
Humans now in sin are not "very good". And so their wills are not in the "very good" state in which humans were first created.

So, their wills are free, meaning they can make choices; however . . . where does the Bible say they work their own wills???? And we have, for children of God >

"for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure." (Philippians 2:13)

So, I see from this, that God is the One who works in our wills, to get us to do whatsoever is "for His good pleasure". And this would be in His love having us so submit to Him.

So, we might say we have the ability to choose this, but who in us is working us to use this ability the right way? Are we of our own selves freely getting our own selves to submit to God working at every moment . . . or does God change our character so we become submissive to Him in His love?

Exactly. These are the right questions to ask. In the dialect of Faith, God is the Eternal power, and we are dirt. “But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.” <-- What is this power? --> In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Michie · 2025-11-25T11:49:00-0600

Physical fight ensues after woman told not to take political photos, attempts to take back donations

A Roman Catholic archdiocese has put a priest on administrative leave after he was arrested and accused of assaulting a woman during a donation drive.

The Archdiocese of Miami, Florida, released a statement on Monday in response to the arrest of 72-year-old Father Jesus Saldaña earlier this month.

“Father Jesus Saldana, pastor of St. Kevin’s Catholic Church, was arrested and charged with battery to a visitor stemming from an incident earlier this month in the parish parking lot near a bin collecting items for hurricane relief,” stated the archdiocese.

Continued below.

Priest facing battery charge after scuffle with woman at donations table

A Roman Catholic archdiocese has put a priest on administrative leave after he was arrested and accused of assaulting a woman during a donation drive

www.christianpost.com

SabbathBlessings · 2025-11-25T11:48:40-0600

Studyman said:
Labels is not the correct word here for "moral". God's Saying some of God's Laws are "moral" and some are not, are "Judgments" of God's Law, not merely labels. Civil, Sacrificial and ceremonial Law could be construed as "labels" placed on God's Laws although God didn't divide His "Instruction in Righteousness" in such a manner. It is a 100% creation of religious men who profess to know God.

Your question was concerning the existence of the word "Moral" as it applied to God's Law in the Holy Scriptures. The truth is, it doesn't exist in Scriptures. In fact the very idea, the very thought to "Judge" God's Law as moral or civil, began in the garden of Eden by a religious voice who "professed to know God".

The foundation of its teaching, was that as long as a man lived by every Word of God, he would remain blind and ignorant. Only by judging God's Laws, some as worthy of honor and respect, and some as unworthy of honor and respect, can a man escape the "bondage" of being blind and ignorant.

"For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, (Judge the Law as unworthy of obedience) "then" your eyes shall be opened, and (Then) ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

This is the foundation of the "judgments" placed on God's Laws by this world's religious system. "I don't have to honor or respect God in this Law of His, because it's not moral".

I would advocate caution where adopting this world's judgments and Labels they place on God's Laws. It didn't bode well for those examples God gave us in the Scriptures. And as Paul said, "Are we better than they"? God forbid!!"

Why? This is the trap this world's religious system sets for us. First, it deceives us into believing some of God's Laws are not "moral" Laws which justifies men in their rejection of them. But because different religious sects and businesses of this world define differently what Laws are "moral" and what laws are not, there is often disagreements between the competing religious sects.

In your argument here, your definition of "moral Law" is different from SB's Definition of "Moral Law". So you have 3 choices really. You can submit to SB's judgment of "moral Law", and deny your own judgment. Or you can try and convince SB to "redefine what moral means" to align with your definition.

And the 3rd choice, which is the choice I advocate, is that we trust all of God's Word as "moral", and stop listening to all the other voices in the world that God placed us in.

We'll, there are "Greater Commandments", and "Lessor Commandments" according to the Jesus "of the Bible". Murdering your brother would be a greater evil that coveting what your brother had. Both have the same punishment for those who transgressed, but one would be worse for your brother than the other. And Jesus said this distinction has no bearing on whether we honor God in obedience or not.

But judging God's Laws, some as moral and others as not, isn't replacing the 10 Commandments, its exalting oneself over God. It's saying we are qualified to judge God and His Laws. In my view "it creates a bias carrying a suggestion that qualitatively speaking our judgment rises above the judgment of God.

You seem to making my point here. If I understand your position, you believe SB is in error by isolating the Commandments of God given in Exodus 20, from God's other Laws and assigning a greater value to the Laws defined in Exodus 20, and a "lessor" value to those Laws of God HE gave in, let's say, Leviticus 19.

But aren't you doing the same thing by isolating one of God's Laws in Exodus 20, and assigning it a "lessor" value than the other Laws of God given at the same time, to the same audience?

I couldn't agree more. But aren't you promoting the same thing by judging one of God's Commandments given in Exodus 20, as "not a moral command", and then pitting that LAW against the other Laws defined for us in Exodus 20?

I agree that God didn't create His Laws for men to judge one against or over another. Rather, God created Laws as "instruction in "HIS" definition of righteousness for those who would join themselves to Him in this cursed world.

Indeed, Noah and Abraham was also given God's Judgments, Statutes commandments and Laws. Except for the Levitical Priesthood, which wasn't "ADDED" until 430 years after Abraham, as Levi wasn't even born in Abraham's time.

Some were enumerated before Ex. 20, as far back as Cain and Abel, and Noah and Abraham. And truly they were a part of God's relationship with men throughout the Bible. I completely agree that we shouldn't judge God's Laws, some as worthy of honor, and some as not worthy of honor.

Absolutely. This is why, in my view, Jesus quoted His Father in the Gospel of Christ, "Man shall live by Every Word that Proceeds from the mouth of God.

Certainly a great topic of discussion to be had among men seeking the Righteousness of God.

To be fair- I do not recall ever calling only the Ten Commandments as moral. I believe anything God deems as righteous is moral and He singly isolated the Sabbath as such saying its doing justice and righteousness and blessed be the man who keeps from defiling the Sabbath Isa56:1-2 , so when man chooses to claim the Sabbath commandment that He blessed and sanctified is not moral which than makes it amoral puts them in a place as equal to God to determine this- which is why I believe God relates breaking the Sabbath as idol worship. Eze20:16 replacing what God commanded, with what we want to do as we are told whoever we obey is who we serve. Rom6:16 If we are not serving God which He again relates to keeping the Sabbath Isa56:6 who then is one serving. Anything that has to do with our salvation is moral, which is obeying God Heb5:9

I do however believe the Ten Commandments sits on a different foundation than the other laws, because God only placed the Ten Commandments under His mercy seat Exo25:21 and no more were added Deut5:22. I think there is a big difference between God Himself divinely writing something and laws God gave man that man wrote- hence why the ones that were handwritten by Moses were on paper as it fades, were outside the ark Deut31:24-26, while the Ten Commandments, the Testimony of God written by the Holy Spirit on stone, is inside the ark of the Lord. Exo40:20 and is in heaven Rev15:5 Rev11:19 I believe there is not a law of Moses that we should keep that doesn't fit under one of the Ten Commandments the way Jesus expanded upon them Isa42:21 Mat5:17-30

Michie · 2025-11-25T11:46:15-0600

Hail Mary,
Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
pray for us sinners now,
and at the hour of our death.
Amen

essentialsaltes · 2025-11-25T11:37:46-0600

essentialsaltes said:
US consumer confidence slips to six-month low; worries over job availability rising

US consumer confidence tanks in November as Americans see more financial pain ahead

The Conference Board’s reading hit 88.7 in November, down 6.8 points from October’s level of 95.5.

[That's the lowest since April, when LIBERATION DAY sent people into panic. One more drop like November's and it'll be the lowest level in 10 years.]

Its measure of consumers’ short-term expectations for income, business, and labor market conditions also dragged lower to 63.2, remaining well below the threshold of 80 that the Conference Board says typically signals a recession ahead. November was the 10th consecutive month with a reading below 80.

biblelesson · 2025-11-25T11:24:58-0600

BelieveItOarKnot said:
1 Cor. 15:42-46
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Most scriptures you referenced are taken out of context and are based on your own judgment of mankind - you use those scriptures to support you, not what they truly mean.
It would take too much time to correct all of what you have said, so I will only address this part!

Adam was in a natural body - that’s true. But, his body was not a corrupted body?

1 Corinthians 15:44 KJV
It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

Before the fall, Adam had not undergone the change that would have happened if he had eaten from the Tree of Life. The Tree of life would have caused the change from a natural body to a spiritual body. But sin came in and the process from natural to spiritual was stopped. The tree of life would have changed Adam to a spiritual body that would live forever- that’s why, after Adam sinned, God had to put them out of the garden and block the way of the Tree of Life.
Genesis 3:22-24 KJV
22 “And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:”
23 “Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.”
24 “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”

So, now how would God fulfill His original plan for man to be a spiritual being like Himself? Man at this point of the fall had to be redeemed.

You must understand that before the fall, man did not have to be redeemed from anything. Redemption came because of sin.

Adam and all men that came after Adam was not supposed to stay as men/natural, but was supposed to be spiritual and live forever. The result of this sin or fall caused God to withdraw His Spirit from man. Genesis 6:3 KJV, “And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.”

So now, man needs a redeemer. It’s the spiritual aspect of man that’s important- so how will it be accomplished now if the Tree of Life was blocked?
1 Corinthians 15:45 KJV
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
So it is by Jesus Christ that man has been redeemed and made children of God by the Spirit- the Holy Spirit.

Redeemed from what? A fallen state in Adam.

So, if Adam was already corrupt, as you are implying, then what state did he fall from?

Hvizsgyak · 2025-11-25T11:19:07-0600

Login to view embedded media
Unify, O Lord, your faithful :crossrc:

. Help us to overcome our divisiveness, in your Son, Jesus' name. :amen:

.

PTW · 2025-11-25T11:14:32-0600

Trash Truck

Carmenls · 2025-11-25T11:11:50-0600

Please pray that God will stop my chest pain and that nothing is wrong. Please ask if it is His will I am fine. Please help me Dear God and give me healing. I ask in the name of Jesus. Amen. Carmen

JM · 2025-11-25T10:55:04-0600

Switched to Barry's Tea. Orange pekoe got me hooked so I also picked up Irish Breakfast. Coffee is getting pricy up here Canada and tea is better for you, no?

Lukaris · 2025-11-25T10:53:47-0600

Andrewn said:
The Son of Man in the book of Enoch is identified as Enoch himself, isn't it?

I always understood The Son of Man to be the Son of God like in John 1:1-3 before the incarnation in this writing.

fhansen · 2025-11-25T10:45:10-0600

Michie said:
With Millennials and Generation Z leading the way, particularly among men, Bible reading among U.S. adults in 2025 is at its highest level in the last 15 years, according to new data from the "State of the Church" initiative.

The initiative by Barna Group and Gloocollected data from 12,116 online interviews conducted between January and October of 2025. The research revealed that approximately 50% of self-identified Christians report reading the Bible weekly, the highest level of Bible reading among Christians in more than a decade.

Weekly Bible reading among all U.S. adults reached its lowest point in 15 years in 2024 when it hit 30%. In 2025, the figure rebounded 12 percentage points to 42%, according to the latest data.

"Bible reading is rising again across generations, marking a reset to faith engagement levels we haven't seen in a decade," David Kinnaman, CEO of Barna Group, said in a statement. "People aren't just curious about faith — they're opening Scripture for themselves. This trend aligns with other signs of renewal we've seen in our research, like growing commitments to Jesus and increased church attendance."

Continued below.

More Americans are now reading the Bible but fewer believe it’s 100% accurate: study

With Millennials and Generation Z leading the way, particularly among men, Bible reading among U S adults in 2025 is at its highest level in the last 15 years, according to new data from the State of

www.christianpost.com

The world's been growing darker, which has the benefit of attracting more of us to the light. The bible separates and distinguishes between the two and offers an answer, the triumph of light over darkness. At the same time, knowledge has increased and there are good reasons for doubting the absolute perspicuity or scientific accuracy of Scripture. This need not be a problem; God's voice, the voice of Truth and Love, can be heard throughout the bible either way, I appreciate a teaching I'm familiar with here:

107 The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."72

BCP1928 · 2025-11-25T10:32:48-0600

stevevw said:
What evidence does a Christian who believes in God use.

None.

stevevw said:
Or a scientists who supports the idea of consciousness beyond brain.

Can't help you there. I suppose you are talking about substance dualism, which is not a fundamental Christian doctrine and not one I have a particular opinion about. So far, the scientific evidence suggests monism will turn out to be sufficient explanation for "mind" but it is not, to me, an important question.

stevevw said:
Because the evidence your talking about (empiricle and naturalistic) or material in nature. Is impossible to use to prove ideas like God or other immaterial beliefs. If it was verifiable by science then it would no longer be immaterial or supernatural. Or imatterially based such as consciousness beyond brain.

Science will relegate consciousness as a physical epiphenomena caused by the physical brain. So how can it possibly even entertain possibilities that are based on immaterial causes that have no physical processes to measure. Or who interpret even miracles as some physical explanation that cannot be explained. Still physical in nature.

Of course. Let me give you an example: The Bible tells us that God spoke to Moses out of a burning bush which was not consumed by the fire. The event is regarded as a miracle. Now science has discovered a plant in the region, Dictamnus Albus, which exudes a volatile oil which will sometimes spontaneously combust and burn off without harming the plant. Does that mean to you that science denies the miracle?

stevevw said:
Ok so how can it be used if its completely indifferent. It would be like using physics to explain the experience of beauty and love.

You just agreed that "When someone uses material science to refute immaterial possibilities they are imposing a metaphysical belief and not science".

When someone tried to do that, they would be misusing material science. But since no one here is trying to do that you may be should find someone who is and argue with them. But you will have to develop some cogent arguments first.

stevevw said:
So if this is the case when you dismiss ancient or indigenous knowledge as unreal or make believe this is using material science to impose a material metaphysics on those who believe in a immaterial metaphysics as the basis for reality.

I don't dismiss ancient or indigenous knowledge as unreal or make believe. In fact I have, we all have, shown a great deal more respect for it than you do.

stevevw said:
This automatically discounts and dismisses all explainations such as knowledge from belief, spirituality, conscious experiences of nature and reality as unreal and make believe.

Nope.

stevevw said:
This is not science but belief. This is imposing one metaphysical belief over another epistemically and ontologically ie the only true and real reality is a material one and the only way we can know reality is by material sciences or methological naturalism.

Nope. What you are talking about is metaphysical materialism which is a religious opinion, not a scientific one.

stevevw said:
Its only murky if you want to restrict everything to the material and naturalistic worldview. Of course it will be because anything that cannot be measured in material terms will be unknown and unexplained.

Unknown and unexplained by science. That's fine. Explaining or refuting that for which there is no physical evidence is not their particular gig. If you want knowledge of the supernatural you will have to get it in some other way.

stevevw said:
But thats not because its unreal or does not exist. Only that the wrong method or paradigm is being used to understand this. Its like trying to use biology to understand psychology of the mind. Even worse, like using math to work out whether love is real.

Just like you using a science like archaeology to work out your own theology so you can prove others' theology is wrong.

rambot · 2025-11-25T10:30:53-0600

Landon Caeli said:
She's also wrong to oppose ME intervention. She does not grasp that support of a Western ally (Israel) helps America. Her priorities and ideas shift back and forth like an adolescent learning for the first time as she goes.

...She's unreliable. Inexperienced.

Her ideas do NOT shift back and forth. As she saw more first hand accounts of Israeli atrocities, she responded by shifting her opinion in on direct.

I am absolutely no MTG fan, but to think that "changing your mind after a preponderance of evidence that contradicts your opinion" is somehow a bad thing, I can't help you.

essentialsaltes · 2025-11-25T10:30:17-0600

For the curious.

Trump to end temporary protected status for Somali immigrants in Minnesota

Move could affect hundreds of Somalis who fled civil war in their home country

www.theguardian.com

fhansen · 2025-11-25T10:15:35-0600

Fervent said:
It's not, but the catechisms only create a false picture of unity when there is a great deal of division even within the Catholic church. It's simply that some diversity is tolerated while others are repressed.

I'd only say that catechisms are meant to set down and clarify core beleifs in a manner that is certainly more exhaustive and categorized and perspicuous than the bible often is. And in that way they seek to produce unity. Luther's Small Catechism should reflect that unity of Lutheran beliefs regardless of whether individuals wearing the name "Lutheran" agree with and hold to them or not.

mourningdove~ · 2025-11-25T10:14:30-0600

Rabbi's Daily Devotion ...

CHOOSE TO PRAISE THE LORD

Every day I will bless You, and I will praise Your name forever and ever.
— Psalm 145:2

If you’re anything like me, some days you awake feeling refreshed, and other days you feel sluggish and unmotivated. On those days, you may not feel like praising God. But I want to encourage you to consciously choose to start your day by blessing the Lord, even when you don’t feel like it, because this decision will affect the course of your day.

This is the law of firstfruits. Giving God the first part of our day orders the rest of it. When we decide to sit before the Lord first thing in the morning and thank Him for His goodness and declare His praise, suddenly our emotions change, and God begins to empower us. We may have had no desire to praise Him just five minutes earlier, but after electing to do so as an act of our will, we soon find ourselves feeling good. We have joy. Our perspective changes. Through transitioning ourselves in the spirit by choosing to put God first, we shifted the atmosphere.

Jesus did not say, “Whosoever feels, come.” He said, “Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.” Beloved one, we can’t control how we feel, but we can control our will. Let’s choose to give God the firstfruits of our day and set our course in Him. The more you do this, the stronger, happier, and more stable you will be.

_________________________________________________

Rabbi Kirt A. Schneider, Entering His Presence (Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, 2023), Used by permission.

MotoToTheMax · 2025-11-25T10:01:14-0600

Good to see all the concern on how to better to protect children in churches on this place labeled Christian Forums. Warms my heart.

CLEEB · 2025-11-25T09:57:15-0600

ChubbyCherub said:
You've explained it well here but still..................I have to pray about it. It's a hard thing to understand

It is so difficult to understand because it isn’t true. Jesus had a GOD and this GOD was his FATHER. John 17:3 John 2:17 Revelation 3:12 While on Earth and also in heaven Jesus has a GOD. If you believe in the trinity then the FATHER of Jesus was the Holy Spirit not the one called the FATHER. Matthew 1:18-20 The trinity doctrine states that under no circumstances can the three gods be separated yet if one became a human how would that effect their unity. Being distinct makes people or anything else separate from each other. The trinity defies logic and reason. The trinity was developed by the primitive Catholic Church long after Jesus and the Apostles. It is an excellent deception, a definite work of the Devil. Search the scriptures to find direct proof of the trinity, it isn’t there, what “proves” it is scripture by deceived believers giving their own interpretations to define it by quoting scriptures they don’t understand or not confirming the proper meaning of Greek or Hebrew words and the deliberate alterations of scriptures by the Catholic Church. The Apostles knew Jesus was not GOD but the son of GOD and the GOD AND FATHER OF JESUS WAS GOD. Ephesians 1:3 1 Peter 1:3 2 Corinthians 1:3 1 Corinthians 8:6 Any scripture that trinitarians use to prove the trinity is in some way misapplied or misinterpreted or misunderstood. There is only one GOD who is the FATHER of Jesus Christ our messiah . Mark 12:32 Romans 3:30 James 2:19 Jesus is the mediator between GOD and man, the MAN Jesus Christ . 1 Timothy 2:5 but if Jesus was GOD then GOD would be the mediator between GOD and man. The idea of the Trinity creates confusion and scrambles the mind baffles one with bull dung. People who want to believe the trinity will and no one but GOD alone can change that.

sovereigngrace · 2025-11-25T09:53:08-0600

Hentenza said:
James is literally telling Paul to show the Jews his Jewishness. The Jews in Jerusalem that had accepted the Messiah still believed that they were Jews including all elements of their culture. They followed the law including the sacrifices because that it what Jews did for centuries. This is the same argument that Paul addresses in his epistles. Their social and religious life revolved around the temple and its activities. Plus they thought that Paul had brought a gentile into the temple which would defile the temple. This was not going to change overnight. James was afraid that the Jews would revolt against the Christians including Paul because of what Paul was teaching and they did eventually. Teaching that the law and the prophets were no longer necessary was a capital offense which is why Paul had to cite his Roman citizenship to survive.

Jesus gives us an idea of when this was going to change when He spoke of the total destruction of the temple. The ending of Matt. 23 is Jesus lamentation and grieving for Jerusalem and in the beginning of Matt. 24 Jesus tells His disciples that the temple would be destroyed which would virtually end both social and religious practices in the temple for the Jews.

I don’t have time to expand this more now but will be happy to later today.

I agree. The thinking behind his actions is shown in 1 Corinthians 9:20-21 for all to see. None could doubt his overriding desire to see his fellow-religionists saved. He testified: “And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.”

I don’t see any deeper a meaning than this. Paul writings make it clear that the old covenant arrangement has been superseded by Christ and the new covenant. There was a religious / political aspect to the sacrifices that all Israelis were bound to as Jews in order to maintain their Jewish privileges.

New Posts

New Posts

Mississippi Republican Takes Plea Deal After Destroying Satanic Statue in Iowa​

State again denies Satanic Temple's request to hold event at Iowa Capitol building​

US consumer confidence slips to six-month low; worries over job availability rising​

US consumer confidence tanks in November as Americans see more financial pain ahead​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Mississippi Republican Takes Plea Deal After Destroying Satanic Statue in Iowa

State again denies Satanic Temple's request to hold event at Iowa Capitol building

US consumer confidence slips to six-month low; worries over job availability rising

US consumer confidence tanks in November as Americans see more financial pain ahead