Clare73 said:

It is in the phrase itself, understood in the context of the audience.

Click to expand...

Using that logic we can eliminate most of God's words as applicable only to whom words were spoken to

Reminds me of the Orthodox council of Constantinople in 1872. Racism was determined a heresy. Is heresy a good reason to not give communion in most tradition?

NewLifeInChristJesus said:

No, I got it right.

Click to expand...

You are right about the death part. However, The Law of Sin is our slavery to Sin. That is what those who are in Christ Jesus have been set free from. Read the following with that in mind. If you still don't see, we will show you.

Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Romans 7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
Romans 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Romans 7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
Romans 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
Romans 7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.


Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

ozso said:

Lots of couples choose and succeed at being childless. My brother and his wife made that choice and have been married over 40 years. And he's never said anything about having gotten a vasectomy or her tubes being tied, or her ever getting an abortion, and that's not the sort thing he'd keep secret. So it can be done.

Click to expand...

Apparently they used some kind of BC. Condoms or Birth control or vasectomy, getting her tubes tied or something, that wasn't anyone's business. Of course they wouldn't tell people, since it's no body's business.

Apple Sky said:

Thank you - God created the earth level & unmovable & the three heavens, so what does Satan do, makes people think the dead opposite by infiltrating the minds of the elite.



Well said.

Click to expand...

Disagreeing isn't the same as mocking. There are plenty of us who believe the bible, but don't believe the earth is a flat disc. It wouldn't be mockery to state our beliefs and how they differ to yours. It's only mockery if somebody tries to make fun of you, This would seem to be against the rules of the Forums, which include:

"Be considerate and do not make another member's experience on this site miserable. This includes making false accusations or persistently attacking them in the open forums."

JulieB67 said:

I'm talking about the fact that God added to the church daily, (immediately) the same that should be saved. Is this the same church for you today? Is it possible to become a member in just one day for some? No. That's my point. It's not the same church today. God adds the church, not man.

Click to expand...

Those being added to the Church were pious Jews, those who were already devoted to God, many of whom had probably been prepared to receive Christ by having gone through the baptism of repentance through John the Forerunner;

RileyG said:

confessions are anonymous, and someone who is a predator isn’t going to confess anyway, that’s counterproductive. That bill is just an attack on the faithful.

Click to expand...

I'm sure a voice can be recognized. And I'm sure predators, that don't think, that they did any thing wrong will brag about it. This bill happenend for a reason.

RileyG said:

Ahhh, I think i understand! Thank you!

Click to expand...

no problem!

Sry, my eyes are watery , so kinda can't see properly. So sorry for gramar mistakes.

But we were forced to put our doog to sleep cause of bone-cancer , last few days she just couldn't walk. We took her to treatment few times, it was fine for couple of weeks, but today wass that day.

We were 2nd " owner " of her, she had a hard time with previous owner.

But I assume Jesus likes dogs and he will take care of her.

Her name was Tessa , ....

Pleace just pray for her to enter Pet-Heaven.

Thanks. <3

GoldenBoy89 said:

If only there was a good guy with an app!

Click to expand...

The problem is snipers using it even at a facility to track how officers are grouped, their movement, who the best target is and so on.

We, as followers of Christ, have so many things to be thankful for to God. For one, I am thankful that he gave me the breath of life, and that, at the age of 75, he is still giving me the breath of life. I am thankful to God that Jesus Christ (the second person of our triune God – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) came to the earth, was born as a baby to a human mother, grew to manhood, and in his death on that cross put my sins to death with him so that, by the grace of God, I might die to sin and walk with him in his ways.

[Matthew 7:13-14,21-23; Luke 9:23-26; John 1:12-13; John 6:44; John 10:27-30; Acts 26:18; Romans 2:6-8; 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 12:1-2; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 1:5-10; 1 John 2:3-6; 1 John 3:4-10]

I am thankful that, at the age of 7, he called me to be one of his followers, though at that young age I was still pretty immature. What I knew, though, was that I did not want to live a wicked life, but I wanted to live for my Lord, to please him. I had seen hypocrisy displayed before my eyes on a regular basis, and I knew that I did not want to be a hypocrite. I did not want to be someone who faked my Christianity, or who just did religious stuff. So I was a seeker of truth who wanted the real Christian life, not the fake one.

I had a lot to learn, though, and a lot of growing up to do, and I faced many difficult and challenging experiences throughout my life, some of which I caved to, and I tried to escape from, but the Lord brought me through them. And because of all of the difficult and trying circumstances I have faced throughout my life, the Lord has made me stronger and more determined to stay the course no matter how many times I get verbally struck, pushed down, cast aside, rejected, and misunderstood. I am thankful for God’s love.

And I am very thankful that my Lord did not give up on me when I failed, at times, to be the person he created me to be. And please do not misunderstand me here, for I am not saying that it is okay for any of us to live in sin and not in obedience to the Lord and that the Lord is going to hang in there with us and that we will still have salvation from sin and eternal life with God. The Bible teaches the opposite of that. So if we keep on sinning, or we return to sin, and we do not repent, we are not saved.

So, please do not take God’s grace for granted. For he is a person of his word, and he will do what he said he would do, both in his promises and in his warnings, which are also promises of what he will do if we do such and such. So, I am so thankful that, when I failed, he did not give up on me, but he pursued me, and he brought me back, and he had a plan and a purpose for my life to use me in the way he has been using me these past 21 years, and he has sustained me, and he is directing my path to walk in his ways.

Now I grew up as a very timid and fearful child. I was not the aggressive type. I was content with a few friends and with peace and quiet, and I had no desire to be at the forefront. I got walked over a lot, and misunderstood, too. And I was very trusting, though not of everyone, but I believed people, and I believed some lies, but truth was very important to me. Doing what was right was important to me, and not doing what was wrong. But the Lord took me through a lot to make me bold with strength in my soul.

So, I am very thankful for the Lord’s lovingkindness to me, for his truth, for his word, for his forgiveness and grace, and for loving me enough to choose me to be one of his disciples and ministers of the gospel of our salvation. For I was not worthy of his grace. And I know fully well that I am only able to do what he has called me to do because of his love and grace to me, because of his tender mercies, and only in his strength, power, and wisdom, as led by God, and not by the flesh. So I give God all the glory always. Praise Him!

Songs in the Night

An Original Work / December 18, 2013
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

“About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the other prisoners were listening to them.” Acts 16:25 NIV ‘84

Lord, I praise You forevermore.
You, my Savior, I now adore.
Hope in heaven awaiting me,
Because You died at Calvary.

I have been forgiven,
And I’m bound for heaven.
Jesus set me free from
All my sin, I say.
I will praise Him always!

Lord, I love You for all You’ve done:
Overcame death, my vict’ry won!
Jesus saved me, and now I’m free!
I rejoice in His love for me.

I will walk in vict’ry!
My sin is but hist’ry!
I am free to please Him
With my life today.
I will love Him always!

Lord, I thank You for giving me
A new life bought at Calvary.
Loving Jesus, I meet with Him.
Tender mercies now flow within.

Lord, I am so thankful;
Through my Lord, I’m able
To sit at His table;
Fellowship with Him.
I will thank Him always!

Login to view embedded media
With All My Heart I Give You Thanks
An Original Work / July 8, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

Fervent said:

Historically, what you are speaking about sounds like the moral level of interpretation. The level where we look for principles to live by. Certainly application is something we hope to come out of interpretation, but that's more the concern of the homilist than the exegete.

Click to expand...

A homilist is first and foremost an exegete. Otherwise it just becomes another academic exercise. Shouldn't all Christians be looking for the principles to live by?

Fervent said:

That's a whole other topic I could rant about lol

Click to expand...

...lol

Fervent said:

The issue for me isn't that you're looking at it procedurally but that you appear to have stock questions that you're bringing to the text, rather than examining the text and letting questions develop organically. I'm all for methodical approaches, but for me the first thing to deal with is the technical issues and from those issues questions will crop up.

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand the approach, part of the process is being fully aware of what you bring to the text, and it is not as structured as you think it is. It may be to you because you don't necessarily view it as a process.

Fervent said:

Treating it as a process is something I think is appropriate, what I find objectionable is that the process appears to be inverted to me. And it's likely because technical commentaries and academic study often present these issues as universal priors when they're not.

Click to expand...

I can understand that, and maybe at first glance when studying the theory about the various approaches it may seem rigid, but the practice is more flexible. But each to their own.

Fervent said:

You seem to misunderstand my point about the ancient mind, because my point is our tendency to treat reading as a private affair is not reflective of how literature worked in the ancient world. Documents were basically public, in the same way that TV broadcasts in storefront windows are public. The audience is whoever wanted to listen to the letter, not a specific target group.

Click to expand...

I tend to disagree, as the ancient world had personal letters and then also more communal letters. Paul was continually warning about not allowing false teachers and preachers into the group. And with the fear of persecution it may not have been as open and public as what you are suggesting, especially since in some situations Christians were regarded as a threat and enemy of the state. So most likely a balanced and cautious approach, depending on the situation.

Fervent said:

Sure, but my point is your procedure as far as I understand it is built on an anachronistic understanding of literature and how to understand literature. It's reflective of an approach that became popularized in the 16th century as reading became widely available and privatized.

Click to expand...

We will always have an element of anachronism. We are coming from a modern world to discover the ancient to return to the modern, bringing with it the timeless principles to apply. You and I were not and will never be the original audience. What we can be is mindful of the ancient time and our modern biases, so as not to read the modern into the text.

Aseyesee said:

It’s not to say anything one way or the other … and there are plenty of false prophets just as there are many antichrists ...

When you speak the word angel, for most it conjures up all kinds of images that really don’t relate to anything that I am referring to …

When you see/hear an angel, the source of the truth they show is as if your drinking of the water of life; it flows up out of you and into your soul/garden/city.

Caiaphas spoke by the Spirit but what he said was right in one sense but all wrong in another sense (not knowing what he said, and whose motivation beyond doubt was less then desirable … Caiaphas was a messenger of God who had no idea he was …

The following verses (to be redundant) are fundamental to finding the path of life that is in us, that path no fowl knows of and no vultures eye has ever seen …

“Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well. Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets. Let them be only thine own, and not strangers' with thee.”

"But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life."

“Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.”

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:"

"If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."

"At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you."

This is not Paul's five ... but Jesus' one ...

When he leads us, then we find pasture inside us, as well as outside of us; if our eye is single …

Click to expand...

i remember ( and its my second oldest memory ) when God spoke to me ( a visitation ) for the first time and it was the first time i took thought in the form of a question ...

interesting that no one asks questions for reason of seeking out the answer being unwilling to forsake their preconceived notions which only serve as an obstacles to finding the answers ...

Guojing said:

If you want to believe you can be Israel, without having Jacob as your father, no one can stop you from having that belief.

Click to expand...

No different to the mixed race peoples currently occupying a small part of the Holy Land and falsely calling themselves Israel.
The real, true Israelite peoples are those who are Overcomers for God, as Jacob was. Just as the faithful Christian peoples are.

Guojing said:

the Body of Christ will reign in the heavens (1 Corinthians 6:3).

Click to expand...

That scripture does not prove that humans will go to heaven. Many scriptures say such a thing is impossible.

Fervent said:

The issue is that the "research" available doesn't really speak to the truth or falsity of the resurrection, we're all working with the same handful of texts and making arguments. So relying on his authority as an argument is fallacious.

Click to expand...

You seem to give the impression that you're equally as knowledgeable about the resurrection as the bishop who wrote a 352 page book about it.

Fervent said:

Sure, but there's also a pretty selective element to it. God does what He wants, and reveals Himself to who He wants.

Click to expand...

It's convenient that the miracles seem to go away whenever skeptics come along and try to investigate them. The Amazing Randi, a late atheist magician, used to offer a $1 million prize for any proof of the supernatural (like mind reading, etc) [since he was a magician he knew the tricks like spoon bending, etc]. Like I said, "I think ALL evidence of God and the paranormal can be explained by skeptics as coincidence, delusion, hallucinations, or fraud")

Fervent said:

Paul was certainly charismatic, but the community of believers in the resurrection were around before he came around.

Click to expand...

Yeah I didn't think of that.

Fervent said:

And while he didn't write much on Jesus life he made clear references to the resurrection and his interaction with Peter and James and others who directly interacted with Jesus. My point with Paul is that the earliest documents involving the Christian community involve belief in the resurrection, counter to your attempt to use Mark to the contrary. The question at hand is the resurrection, not what took place during Jesus' pre-crucifixion ministry. Paul's writings put a damper in the notion that the story was legendary.

Click to expand...

Believers believing that it was literal doesn't prove it necessarily happened. Part of the reason I reject it now is that I think there are never ever any events that a skeptic couldn't explain away. Like a limb instantly growing back, etc.

Fervent said:

Nope, there are a number of explanations for the parallels especially as all of them were relying on source documents so the places where all three contain the same material could just as easily be explained by common sources as actual usage of Mark.

Click to expand...

So are you saying that Mark, which apparently uses less educated language, had both Luke and Matthew and made 97% of their gospel up of them? What is the point of that? If you believe Mark was first it makes more sense because Luke and Matthew would have been written to add more content.

Fervent said:

There's a case for Matthean priority, and while it is admittedly a minority position among scholars Markan priority cannot simply be taken for granted.

20 years after a historical figure is actually extremely fast comparitively speaking, and considering that Paul began his career as a persecutor of the church for their claim of resurrection his writing first is neither here nor there. The point is that legend is a poor explanation,

Click to expand...

One advantage of it is that it doesn't require the laws of physics to be broken. Paul's conversion is interesting though.

Fervent said:

both because the resurrection is too central to the story of Jesus for such an explanation to make sense and because of the unlikeliness of some itinerant preacher in a backwood of the Roman empire who died the death of slaves and seditious actors would posthumously inspire people to endure the kind of persecution that plagued the early church.

Click to expand...

But I think a key reason for people being willing to die from Jesus was to go to paradise. There are lots of counter-arguments for the belief that there must have been a resurrection - including ones from Christians like the bishop and MLK.

BTW something about the afterlife - why do you think the Sadducees (a Jewish group) didn't believe in the afterlife? I think the idea just evolved in the Bible, especially regarding Hell.

“This arrest highlights the Border Patrol’s unwavering commitment to protecting our communities and upholding the rule of law." said Chief Patrol Agent John R. Morris. "Through strong partnerships with local and federal law enforcement, we are able to identify and remove dangerous individuals—like this homicide suspect—before they can pose a threat to public safety.”

I sure hope we can deport this guy without a dozen hearings.

Apple Sky said:

Musk should stick to what he does best which is planning to escape earth.

Click to expand...

That is pure gold

the one that is taken never was ...

Apple Sky said:

Those born with Polydactyly must be throw backs as this does happen.

Polydactyly, the presence of extra fingers or toes, is primarily a genetic condition, often inherited as a dominant trait. However, it can also arise from new genetic mutations (de novo) or be associated with other genetic syndromes. While many cases are inherited, the specific genes and pathways involved in polydactyly are still being researched.

Click to expand...

I am sure that is true, but not all those with extra toes and fingers are giants.

Love365 said:

Honoring Mothers

A woman priest could hug nine women,
representing the nine months of pregnancy.

Click to expand...

A woman could hug nine other women. You don't have to be a priest to hug. You seem to have some strange reasons for having women ministers.

GoldenBoy89 said:

Do you disagree with their conclusion?

Click to expand...

I haven't bothered to evaluate it in order to agree or disagree with the conclusion. I just suggested that those who want to get and idea of which party has the most 1% supporters, they could start with a list of the wealthiest people in America.

FireDragon76 said:

Carlson is similarly a cultural Episcopalian that's made a grift out of being a reactionary. That's his "brand". He's the most shallow of the two.

Click to expand...

Well Carlson's Episcopalianism is more ironic given that as a Church it stands for nothing except progressivism and Tucker recognizes this and makes fun of the Church as such. Which is a reasonable position given you don't even have to believe Jesus is God incarnate to be a respected member of the Church.

His views are not mere grift either but as far as I can tell are genuine. Do you just not like that there's an actual audience for traditional and dissident views that reject your liberal progressive worldview?

Always in His Presence said:

Remind me again, who was president when Putin crossed the border with no help to the Ukraine from the US whatsoever

Click to expand...

No president was.

The US was providing help to Ukraine well before the Russian invasion. Mostly in the form of intelligence, training and weapons.

Buzzard3 said:

If no one is aware of any use for the theory of common descent in medical or biological research, it's a fair guess that none exist.

Click to expand...

You just saying that no-one is aware of any use for the theory of common descent in medical or biological research does not mean that no-one is aware.

You keep doing this: just saying that something is wrong and doing nothing to show that something is wrong, especially with regards to common descent since, oh surprise surprise, WE HAVE EVIDENCE.