RandyPNW said:

Wrong. We are told that division is necessary. God set up lots of walls for Israel.

1 Cor 11.19 No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval.

You appear to be talking about the ideal where believers are to be unified in Christ. The point is, not all who claim to be "in Christ" are really acting consistent with that. And so, sometimes it is necessary to separate from those who choose to be divisive.

God made Israel to be separate from the pagan world under the time of the Law. The purpose was to preserve the holiness of the community.

But there are times when Christians act like pagans, and separating from them temporarily becomes necessary. Paul spoke to that.

Click to expand...

Division is evil. It shows us who is evil. Those who follow division are not doing good. That's what scripture said.

HopeSings said:

I'm ugly too. Good thing for us that Jesus will make us like him.

Click to expand...

Amen Glory to His Holy Name forever

Diamond7 said:

Matthew 7:22 MANY will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’

There are many people who say they do not have to follow the law of God. Is this what the Bible means by "lawlessness". Did they really prophesy, drive out demons and perform miracles? Or did they just think they did?

Click to expand...

You forgot the verse prior to it,......

Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by thy name, and by thy name cast out devils, and by thy name do many mighty works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (lawlessness).

Doing your own will is no better than being unsaved/rebellious. Just because you go to church and do certain things there in the name of Jesus, doesn't mean that you are even in the will of GOD, you are just a church goer.

It's a clarion call for Christians. If you are not doing HIs will, then you're doing your own. Be sure you are in the will of GOD.

Jeremiah 9:23 Thus says the Lord:

“Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom,
Let not the mighty man glory in his might,
Nor let the rich man glory in his riches;


Login to view embedded media

essentialsaltes said:

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is calling for the resignation of Florida GOP Chairman Christian Ziegler, who is ensnared in a police inquiry involving alleged sexual battery.
“He’s innocent till proven guilty, but we just can’t have a party chair that is under that type of scrutiny.”

Click to expand...

This. I agree with this.

I know people can and do make false accusations for personal gain, but you really can't have someone under police scrutiny for a potential current offense in a position of authority, if he is some kind of sex offender you don't want to subject women to having to work under him.

The individual in question should take the personal time to deal with the legal issues and come back to public life after his name is officially cleared, or of course not if not.

Stuff like this gives me the creeps.

KevinT said:

Perhaps we don't disagree as much as I thought. I had to look up the definition of deontological:

"The ethical study of duties, obligations, and rights, with an approach focusing on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves and not on the goodness or badness of the consequences of those actions." ​

​

I agree that having a system that can look at the big picture is better than the nit-picking system that had developed among the Jews of that time, where the tithing of herbs from the garden was emphasized over larger concepts of justice, mercy and faith. But as Jesus said, both should be done (Mat 23:23)

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say Jesus said both should be done, as there is a difference between endorsing an action and stating that it's possible to focus on more important things without neglecting the importance of others.

KevinT said:

​

You mentioned Col 2. Regarding Paul's instruction there:

Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. (Col 2:16)​

How would this sentence be different if I were to rewrite it as,

"Therefore do not let anyone judge you by who you marry and sleep with -- even if it be your father's wife" ? (Kevin's rewrite)​

​

There are fundamentally the same. In Col 2:16, Paul is making reference to old Jewish regulations, and rejecting them. So I just swapped out one old Jewish restriction for another. But note the contrast to 1 Cor 5 where Paul states just the opposite. That is the passage I posted earlier about the immoral church member who married his father's wife.

Click to expand...

Those aren't fundamentally the same, because the one is something that is specifically Jewish and tied up in having a Jewish identity and the other is prohibited far more widely, basically universally. Paul doesn't contradict his words in Colossians or Galatians or Romans in Corinthians, unless one or the other or both are twisted. Especially since Paul's words in 1 Cor 5 are not about whether or not the one caught in sin is justified, with the sanction against him not being a matter of condemnation but as an attempt for him to self-correct. It is hand him over to Satan so that his flesh may be destroyed and his soul saved, which implies that his justification is not tied into his adherence to the law but is dependent on the grace he has received from God.

KevinT said:

Paul says different things at different times when talking to different people. As far as I am concerned, he is unreliable as a source of doctrine. I think he was the Lord's chosen agent to reach the Gentiles, and he was a Godly man who was doing the very best in dedicating his entire life to God's work. But when he is not consistent, I don't trust him. And in addition to not being consistent with himself, he appears to me to not be consistent with the rest of the Bible. Peter commented that Paul was hard to understand, I believe for just such reasons. I am not throwing Paul out. I believe God had given him an understanding that worked for the situation he was in. But I don't think what Paul wrote then is always applicable in a larger scope. And if today I see someone drinking poison wood grain alcohol (methanol), I am certainly going to judge them as headed for big problems, and am going to intervene to the best of my ability. And if the man replies that he isn't going to "let me judge him by what he drinks," I will try all the harder to help him see that he is misguided. Details matter.

Best wishes
KT

Click to expand...

Jesus also says different things at different times, because they are addressing different issues and different audiences. It would be totally inappropriate for a doctor to prescribe chemotherapy for an allergic reaction, or antibiotics for cancer. Attempts to create a universal, one-sized fits all systematic doctrine are almost certainly in error, but not because the sources are in any way insufficient or because of any contradictions within the Biblical data. So on the one hand you're correct that what Paul has written isn't always applicable, but not for the reasons that you seem to be putting forward for it.

BobRyan said:

As my prior post shows - I did not bring up the Sabbath topic with you,... You raised it with me then asked to not discuss it once the Bible details were posted.

You have free will you can ignore whatever texts you wish. I was just responding to a topic you brought up.

Click to expand...

Are you obeying Isaiah 58 right now?

Jamdoc said:

It's a useless sign because it doesn't point to anything.
It's like putting a roadsign somewhere out in the middle of the desert with a city's name on it, without a distance, or even a direction just "hey it exists out there somewhere"

When God did give indications of something still a ways off, He gave time, like Daniel's 70 weeks.
when there's something an unknown distance away, as in Jesus didn't know when the day or hour would be, only the events would happen in quick succession, He gave signs to watch for, rather than a timeline, and those signs were to be close to the event so that people could watch for them and know what was coming next.
It was "when you see this, know it's close, even at the door"
not "when you see this, generations of people will live and die and something will happen someday"

Click to expand...

It points to the times we live in and exposes the harlot Babylon, the love of simplicity and lack of knowledge,


Protestantism rejected the law when they secularized society, which enriched the merchants. I leave simplicity and lack of knowledge to its reward. I'm done correcting you.

Lady Bug said:

I heard that V2 was the reason for mine too. Why did V2 order this?

Click to expand...

Here's a book that can explain it in detail:

Ugly As Sin: Why They Changed Our Churches from Sacred Places to Meeting Spaces-And How We Can Change Them Back Again​

The above book is a marvelous companion book to the following two tomes:

Why Catholics Can't Sing: The Culture of Catholicism and the Triumph of Bad Taste​

What Went Wrong With Vatican II: The Catholic Crisis Explained​

Amazon.com

pgp_protector said:

FYI Everything you touch, smell, drink, eat (organic 100% natural or anything) is made op of 100% Chemicals.
That 100% pure water you're drinking? It's a Chemical.

Click to expand...

It is ironic that someone so opposed to chemicals would be using a device whose very existence is wholly dependent upon the discovery, via science, of those chemicals, their extraction and processing, via science, their incorporation in microprocessors, whose function was discovered via science. As Spock would say "It's not logical Captain."

And yes, the capricious and exploitative consumption of substantive quantities of di-hydrous oxide with non-linear bond angle goes on unabated.

jonojim1337 said:

I meant one of the prophecies of the kings.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry. I don't understand what you are trying to say.

jonojim1337 said:

The Beast and the false prophet deceive the whole world, cause the worship of the Beast, with a moving and speaking image, and causes one to be marked - he who does sin is a slave of sin.

Click to expand...

Are you referring to the two horned beast rather than the ten horned beast?

Mercy Shown said:

Meribah was a place in the desert where the people refused to believe that God was leading them, and they rebelled. God told Moses to speak to a rock, and it would bring forth water, but Moses, in his anger, struck the rock twice, and water still gushed out. Hebrews 4 refers to this example when explaining why the nation of Israel did not enter His rest. However, Hebrews 4 states that there is a new opportunity for God's people to enter His rest, which is today. The rest that was forfeited at Meribah was not the seventh-day Sabbath; it was the Sabbath of the promised land. The seventh-day Sabbath is an example of that rest. Just as God rested from His works, we are to rest from ours by faith in Jesus great sacrifice.

Click to expand...

Brother, you have the reason God was angry with them and made an "oath" to punish them, but not how God accomplished His punishment with Manna in the desert so that those who died, "they will never enter my place of rest". Importantly, Joshua was among those punished in the desert with Manna who entered the promised land, yet did not give Israel this another "day" of rest still to come. The rest cannot be the promised land for those that died in the desert because Joshua entered the promised land but did not succeed in giving Israel this another "day" of rest still to come. This was a punishment in addition to not letting them enter the promised land for 40 years with Manna in the desert.


Paul tells us what he means by his use of the word "rest". "Rest" in this passage does not mean anything other than what Paul tells us he means in the following passage; the rest of God on the seventh "day" of creation. The passage reveals that Judaism has not fully understood God's rest on the seventh "day" of creation to enter God's "day" of rest outside of Jerusalem like here in the United States. They have a human tradition of the Sabbath and not the true biblical Sabbath since creation. What I learned is that when God made the seventh day of creation holy, He separated that "day" from the week, fixing His "day" of rest in the time zone of Eden and that is why Jerusalem remembers the Sabbath half a day earlier than the true seventh day of the week in Jerusalem, the days of the week being from morning to morning and not from evening to evening.


Login to view embedded media
United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

I said this verse translated as below in a page supporting ministry of derek prince and commented below



Hebrews 13:5
Let your conduct be without covetousness; be content with such things as you have. For He Himself has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.”

Love of money does not mean wrong to want enough money to supply your needs now and for future but the term used is covetousness to not be satisfied unless you have as much as another just because you hate another to be jealous which you dont need and not wrong to want to help others but must not be pursued instead of to neglect relationship with God to seek first the kingdom that you are giving enough time to following God during the day at the same time while you work.

For the saying you can not serve God and mammon does not mean you cant seek mammon but not serve it to put it first so it is master that you should be serving God first that that is the meaning that while you are serving God you are not serving mammon and if you put that first you are not servant of mammon and should be content with what you have now even if seek for more and not to be motivated by jealousy which is tied to hate.

To not worry about tommorow means not to worry about what may happen to what you have now that you dont be charitable because you fear you will not have enough for tommorow and maybe that you work more than you need to for fear of not having enough even if you have enough now for today and future.

LoveDivine said:

Thank you. Drawing and painting is mostly just a hobby for me. It's my way to unwind from my busy job. I love portraits, but I have the most fun drawing/painting florals. I agree though that the right pencils/pastels would be much better for drawing portraits. I will definitely invest in those if I decide to practice drawing portraits.

Click to expand...

You've chosen a great way to unwind.
Some people sit in front the big screen TV, and flick through channels, and end up wasting several hours watching things that are of no benefit.

I can understand your choice of genre, since doing portraits require more effort, than doing flowers.
The different colors of flowers would certainly be refreshing.
I'm sure you would enjoy painting all the beautiful scenes in the new world. That's something I look forward to... and doing it with endless time available.

LoveofTruth said:

We’re close

I also saying that men could have faith and be saved and have the Spiritual life before scripture was given. Read Hebrews 11 and consider men like Abraham who had the seed (Christ the Word) in him before scripture was given.

If you read my whole thread you will see what I’m speaking about.

Click to expand...

If you read Hebrews 11, all the giants of faith led to ACTION.

Faith is not passive. The scriptures makes it clear, the Spirit will never lead us away from God's Word Isa 8:20, that is the "other spirit" we are warned about.

Charming building, isn't it?

ImaginaryFiction said:

Well for one, everyone has been a slave to someone else at some point. This notion slavery only involves white people in America is ridiculous.

In Barbary the blacks owned more white slaves than America ever owned of black slaves

BBC - History - British History in depth: British Slaves on the Barbary Coast

Their untold story, by Professor Rees Davies

www.bbc.co.uk

What about native Americans that owned slaves?

How Native American Slaveholders Complicate the Trail of Tears Narrative

The new exhibition 'Americans' at the National Museum of the American Indian prompts a deeper dive for historic truths

www.smithsonianmag.com

We all know Jews were slaves.

What about the blacks in America that enslaved blacks?

Blacks Owning Blacks: The Story of William Ellison – Cathedral of Liberty

William Ellison Jr. (c. April 1790 – December 5, 1861), born April Ellison, was a U.S. cotton gin maker and blacksmith in South Carolina, and former African-American slave who achieved considerable success as a slaveowner before the American Civil War.

cthl.org

And of course who sold black slaves? Other blacks that enslaved their own people to sell.

But at the end of the day it doesn't matter to you or me, we didn't own any slaves. Why should we be held accountable for something that happened a 100 years before we were born?

Let's say I found out I had an ancestor that was a Nazi child murder and rapist, killed animals and raped women. Ok, that has nothing to do with who I am as a person now. I don't do those things, I pay my taxes, work hard, love my wife and try to be a decent person.

So no one alive today in America has ever been a slave, and no one alive today has ever owned a slave.

Click to expand...

And you think only conservatives understand these things and take them into account?

Ana the Ist said:

Are they relevant to the OP?

Is this a discussion of whether or not the pardon was reasonable or some sad attempt at painting the governor or Texas in general as racist?

Click to expand...

It's a discussion of whether or not the pardon was reasonable. You - as usual - seem to be hung up on the use of the word "racism" over a year ago. Do you have an alert set or something?

Ana the Ist said:

Perhaps there's quite a bit of reasonable doubt to the story.

Unless there's evidence that he drove to the protest with the intent of shooting people, it seems at least reasonable that the victim either intentionally or unintentionally aimed at the man who now pardoned and died because of it.

Click to expand...

Somehow I doubt anything has changed that would cast any doubt in the year since the verdict was rendered. But I'll let Rob speak for himself.

essentialsaltes said:

I can just imagine how 'free' Christians would feel if public schools were forbidden from discussing [i.e. teaching about] Christianity.

Click to expand...

They shouldn’t be teaching about Christianity or any religion in a public school as far as I’m concerned. That’s something parents should teach their kids not schools

Dr Graham said:

I agree, science is just man's attempt to understand God's creation.

Click to expand...

Even atheists are very amazed at Creation. They just have no regard for the creator.

prodromos said:

It's a mystery why they call it the History channel.

• They conflate the 'secret diary' account with Operation High Jump in Antarctica, however the so called 'diary' gives a fictional account of his flight over the Arctic.
• Admiral Byrd flew over the North Pole in 1926. In the 'secret diary', it says he was contacted by residents of the hollow earth due to concerns after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, except that didn't happen until 1945

Click to expand...

I have to agree with you here, someone is lying.