New Posts

Apple Sky · 2025-12-08T04:30:30-0600

The Earth has borders. Antarctica is
an ice wall surrounding us.

Job 26:10 He hath compassed the waters with
bounds, until the day and night come to an end.
Job 38:8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it
brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?
Job 38:11 And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but
no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?
Psa 74:17 Thou hast set all the borders of the earth:
thou hast made summer and winter.
Psa 104:9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not
pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

Dan1988 · 2025-12-08T04:29:24-0600

2PhiloVoid said:
It's not a mystery at all. I've given plenty of information on what I think the Christian Faith is (in line with the Nicene Creed), and I've been doing so for over 15 years on these forums.

From what I have gathered, you don't hold to a biblical systematic theology, based on "sola scriptura". You seem to mix Bible doctrine with worldly wisdom, such as philosophy. my understanding is that these are mutually exclusive so you can't hold on to both.

Having a sound theology is not based on how many years you've been studying Church history or the bible. And salvation has nothing to do with how well you know the scriptures, the vast majority of saved people never even had access to a bible. God is not impressed with any mans wisdom and understanding of scripture, He saves people by His grace and not by how wise they think they are.

Douggg · 2025-12-08T04:23:28-0600

@keras,

How can you not understand this ?

Aggie · 2025-12-08T04:09:31-0600

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.

https://x.com/OriginsUnveiled/status/1964040999468224774

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, 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.

romansroad · 2025-12-08T04:08:17-0600

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.

sjastro · 2025-12-08T04:08:02-0600

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.

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.

Stopped_lurking · 2025-12-08T03:58:25-0600

stevevw said:
Your assumption was more that 'a boat was put out of play'. You implied that the boat being put out of play was in an innocent situation which should not have been attacked. You did not make a neutral assumption of innocence or guilt.

You are straight up misrepresenting my position, here. To me it is irrelevant if they are innocent or not (of what?). Once their boat is incapacitated, they have a right to stay afloat and call for help.

stevevw said:
You assumed guit in the language you are using.

Yes, killing those in peril is bad in my eyes.

stevevw said:
And the same people who are privy to the actual intel state that nothing illegal was done. It has been the same protocol used in these situations for past presidents and military and it has never been questioned.

What second strikes on an incapacitated smuggling boat, have been done earlier?

stevevw said:
Now some Woke ideologues want to make a big noise about it because they hate Trump and his admin.

Take it up with them.

stevevw said:
You are using every bit of info and then assuming guilt. You don't know the intel. You think that a capsized boat means innocent parties which is an assumption.

Innocence or not is irrelevant to me, how many times do I have to tell you?

stevevw said:
Even the way you word it implies guilt.

Only in the sense that I feel that at sea, persons are to be helped if they are in need.

stevevw said:
Your not neutral and have an axe to grind.

No.

stevevw said:
So, that doesn't mean they were not trying. This is what I mean. You take 'no radio signal' and immediate assume innocence.

I have already stated that I think they even have a right to call for help.

stevevw said:
Every single little bit of info interpreted as guilty.

You are the one talking about guilt and innocence, not me.

stevevw said:
Its blantantly biased and you can see it in the particular words used.

Like what words?

stevevw said:
See your doing ot again. Using the idea of a 'capsized boat' in isolation as though it could be some fisherman stranded to imply a certain meaning to "capsized boat". Its blantant bias.

Smuggler or fisherman, makes no difference to me.

Let me guess, you've never been part of any Marine Rescue society?

stevevw said:
But that did not happen did it. Neither happened. The drug boats were not stopped and the drug problem got worse on the streets. A double wrong. So if the stopping of the drug boats saves 1,000 lives is that good.

stevevw said:
Its an ethical dilemma. If people want to complain about the wrong of killing terrorist who are poisoning 1,000s of people systemically through the allowance of druhgs flowing into the nation at unrecedented levels.

Then people can complain about the moral wrong of not doing anything and the actions that the Dems contributed to making the problem much worse. Thus being responsible for those deaths.

How is this relevant for ordering a second strike on an incapacitated boat?

stevevw said:
Thats unreal. Its too late and in situations like terrorism there is no stopping them. For evey one you stop 10 replace them. Its like saying that if we tell Hamas very sternly or place a sanction on them that they will happily stop.

Its funny how those complaining suddenly now appeal to interdiction when they never bothers for years.

Talk to them then, why do you say this is response to me?

FYI, drug smugglers are still being interdicted and there have always been people thinking that it is important.

stevevw said:
Thats like we keep pouring water into a bucket with a hole in it. The entire system is broken and it doesn't work. The softly, softly approach that was taken in the name of interdiction is what caused the problem. Now it time for tougher measures to stop it before it completely undermines things.

What I find telling is that the people who are calling for all these moral hoops to jump through are the ones who made the problem and now they want to be the moral police.

Why are you saying this in response to me? I didn't create the problem.

stevevw said:
Oh I see so let the terrorist call for help and wait until the backup comes and then engage. Hum I am glad you are not leading the miliary.

stevevw said:
I did not realise they were taking drug boats out back then.

They didn't, they interdicted them.

stevevw said:
Whatever they did it sure did not work because they kept coming and increasing. Its funny as this is the same government who let in 20 million unchecked people who are now causing much chaos.

Relevance?

stevevw said:
I have nothing against the Dems and want them to be at their best to make for a good and health democracy. But they are not at their best in recent years and have become radicalised. Maybe thats a sign of the times and identity politics. .

Poor old Barak.

You don't know the intell. It may be that they have tracked all the intell and know exactly what processes they were dealing with and how these drug were making their way to the US. You don't know and yet you are claiming to know like you are one of the agents lol.

That video is just the media release version. They also have the classified versions which will have all sorts of intell and angles ect.

I can only go with the information we have. The video of the second strike hasn't been released to the media (yet!), have it?

stevevw said:
Go back and look at the terror hits by Biden and Obama on buildings and vehicles. They often had two and three strikes at the same targets. This is playing general from an armchair and applying one rule to some and not others.

I don't care if you think they are as bad. I'm no Democrat. I just think it is really really bad to target individuals clinging to a capsized boat, regardless if they are fishermen or smugglers.

Jerry N. · 2025-12-08T03:45:21-0600

Christsfreeservant said:
I got on YouTube today, and I clicked on a link to a particular church’s Sunday gathering, and I was immediately struck in my spirit by the shirt the pastor was wearing in front of his congregation. The shirt read: “The Boys Are Back in Town!” And underneath that was, “Merry Christmas!” And the caricature was of Jesus Christ and Santa Claus together on a sleigh riding through the air. Santa was in front, and Jesus Christ was pictured further back and partially behind him. Both were laughing. And the caricature of Jesus had his arms out at the side, and Santa’s arms were lifted upward.

View attachment 374170And I was appalled! What blasphemy! It upset me to the core! How could a “man of God” who pastors a church congregation wear such a shirt? And then I recalled a writing the Lord had given me originally in 2018 titled “Christ’s Dismissal,” which I will share parts of here with some additional comments added. For it really helps to explain why I was so appalled at this pastor’s shirt he was wearing in front of his congregation as he prayed and as he preached his sermon to the people.

Christ’s Dismissal

Christmas, as it has come to be known, is largely considered to be a Christian celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, God the Son. But there is another (false) god that is celebrated on Christmas Day, and his name is Santa. So, what does the word “Christmas” literally mean? Well, the first part of the word is Christ, meaning the Anointed One, meaning Jesus Christ, the Son of God (See: Isaiah 61:1-3; Luke 4:18-19).

But, what about the word “mas”? What does that mean? Well, it is generally held that the word “mas” means “dismissal.” Yet, whether you agree with that or not, it doesn’t really matter, for I believe we shall see here, by the evidence itself, that indeed that is what is intended.

Satan and His Angels

From what I have been taught, and from what I understand, Satan used to be an angel in heaven, but he wanted to be God, and so he rebelled against God along with about a third of the angels, and so God cast them down to the earth (Isaiah 14:12-14; Luke 10:18; Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 9:1; Revelation 12:3-9).

“How you are fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer, son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground,
You who weakened the nations!
For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’” Isaiah 14:12-14

Now, let’s think about Santa Claus for a moment. Where does he live? The North Pole (“on the farthest sides of the north”). How does he deliver gifts to children all over the world in a single night? He rides on a reindeer-driven sleigh up in the sky, on the heights, or “above the heights of the clouds.” And on the pastor’s shirt today, Santa was pictured in a sleigh above the stars of God in a position next to, but in front of (superior to) Jesus Christ.

And what attributes is this false god Santa given? He is omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent, meaning he is present in all places at all times, he is all-knowing, all-seeing, and he is all-powerful. And what this means is that he has been given the attributes of Almighty God, because he, Santa (Satan), wants to be God. And the shirt pictured him in a position as though he is God, like God is Father, then Son, then Holy Spirit, in that order.

Don’t believe me? Well, Santa knows when every child across the world is sleeping and when they are awake. He knows when they have been good or bad, too. He is also able to be in multiple department stores all across the world, all at the same time, holding children on his lap, promising them presents they will most likely never receive. And he is able to magically deliver gifts to every child on the globe – that is the ones who have been good, so he says – and in a single night, too. So, he must be able to see all, know all, and be everywhere all at the same time, and be all-powerful, too.

The Christmas Deception

What is the central focus of the celebration of Christmas, in reality? Is it not the buying of gifts, many of which people do not need, and many of which those buying them cannot afford? And is it not about Christmas trees and decorations. And, then there is all the baking of cookies, and the shopping, and the Christmas cards, and the new clothes and shoes and hats, and all the parties and games, and for some, raunchy Christmas movies, too.

So, what does any of that have to do with Jesus? Well, they say that Jesus was given gifts when he was born and thus we give each other gifts when we celebrate his birthday. But does that even make sense? Some will say Jesus was our gift and thus we give each other gifts, but that doesn’t make sense, either. For the gift of Jesus is the gift of salvation from sin, so the gift we should give each other is the message of how we can all be forgiven our sins and be delivered from our bondage, and now walk in Christ’s holiness.

And, when we celebrate each other’s birthdays, who gets the gifts? The person with the birthday, right? So, if we are truly celebrating Jesus Christ, then should he not be the one to receive our gifts? And what gift does he want from us? He wants are all on the altar of sacrifice laid, living holy lives, pleasing to him, no longer conformed to the ways of this sinful world, but transformed in the renewing of our minds away from what is sinful to walking in Christ’s righteousness and holiness, in his power and strength.

Also, when we celebrate each other’s birthdays, does everyone in the room, besides the one with the birthday, all congregate together and give each other gifts, and then pass around pictures of what we looked like when we were helpless babies, while the one having the birthday gets ignored? But that is what people do, isn’t it, when they picture Jesus as a helpless baby in a manger, and they put a manger scene somewhere in their houses, and then they all gather together and give each other presents and play games and eat lots of food and watch movies, too? (If that is what you do.)

Ok, so let’s go back to Santa, for he plays a huge role in this deception, too. For, while Jesus Christ is pictured as a helpless baby in a manger doing nothing but just lying there, Santa comes on the scene in all his glory. And he promises to bring gifts to children and to ride through the sky on a sleigh and to deliver gifts across the globe on a single night. And he asks children across the world to write him letters (like prayers) requesting what they want from him. And, children, who have long awaited his return, are anxiously anticipating his soon arrival (like Jesus’ return one day).

So, who has the hearts of children on Christmas? Jesus Christ? Or Santa? And, who wanted to be God? And, who masquerades himself as an angel of light? Santa (Satan). And, what has the hearts of most adults during the Christmas holidays? Shopping, presents, parties, food, games, movies, etc.

Know the Truth

The whole point of Christmas, from the point of its creators, is to dismiss Jesus Christ in favor of Santa, a false god, who is truly Satan who wanted to be God. It is to dismiss Jesus Christ in favor of gifts, commercialism, greed, worldliness, and idolatry. Jesus is pictured as a helpless baby in a manger on purpose, while Santa, a false god, is given the attributes of Almighty God, and he steals the hearts of children away from God; away from Jesus Christ.

So, don’t listen to these thieves and robbers who want to pull us and our children away from pure devotion to Jesus Christ. Don’t give your hearts away to false gods and idolatry and commercialism and to ignoring Jesus.

If truly you want to celebrate Jesus Christ, then do it the way Jesus says. He says to remember him by remembering his blood that was shed on the cross for our sins, and by remembering his body which was given for us in his death so we can die to sin and live to righteousness. And this remembering of him is not a mere formality or a mere ritual we go through, either.

For, when we remember him and what he did for us, we examine our own hearts to make certain that we are worthy to partake in his blood and his body via confession of sin, in true repentance, and in committing our lives to our Lord and to his service. For, what he wants from us are not our festivals and our parties, which he largely hates, in reality. But what he wants is our all on the altar of sacrifice laid, our hearts, thus, under God’s control.

[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]

Oh, to be like Thee! blessèd Redeemer,
This is my constant longing and prayer;
Gladly I’ll forfeit all of earth’s treasures,
Jesus, Thy perfect likeness to wear.

Oh, to be like Thee! Oh, to be like Thee,
Blessèd Redeemer, pure as Thou art;
Come in Thy sweetness, come in Thy fullness;
Stamp Thine own image deep on my heart.

Lyrics by Thomas O. Chisholm, 1897
Music by W. J. Kirkpatrick, 1897

Login to view embedded media
Caution: This link may contain ads

Jesus Christ and Santa Claus
An Original Work / December 7, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

That is a very nice post. I have mixed feelings about Santa Claus. The story has morphed in Europe from a Wild Man of the Woods to a fat little elf that brings gifts to children at Christmas by mixing him with St. Nickolas. If it stayed a fun little story for children that they were not expected to believe, I’d have no problem with it; however, Santa was key to commercializing Christmas and moving away from Christ. Children have enough trouble separating fantasy from reality, and adults should not make it harder. Since the true story of the birth of Christ is mixed with the fantasy of Santa, it is easier for children to grow up thinking that the Bible is myth and legend. We need to have seasons of joy, sharing, and celebration, and your pastor was probably trying to communicate that, but the idea that Santa is a personification of the spirit of Christmas has gone too far.

The Liturgist · 2025-12-08T03:17:00-0600

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.

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.

Angelina G · 2025-12-08T03:14:54-0600

Priscilla

The Liturgist · 2025-12-08T03:13:21-0600

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

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.

BPPLEE · 2025-12-08T03:11:44-0600

Yarddog said:
I didn't say that.

You didn’t have to

Angelina G · 2025-12-08T02:53:20-0600

prayers

Angelina G · 2025-12-08T02:51:31-0600

Factotum said:
I am an Evangelical Christian looking to love the respectful, beautiful exchange of ideas here.
I heard nice things about this community. I have no expectations, I have no gripes. All I have is compassion for everyone.
And I thank yall, in advance, if yall plan to revere those things about me.

Hi @Factotum. Glad to have you aboard.

Apple Sky · 2025-12-08T02:41:46-0600

Noah's Rainbow

timothyu · 2025-12-08T02:28:01-0600

stevevw said:
So I agree national identity is vital. It seems all sorts of different identities are fighting for truth and supremecy.

Its the old end of days indulgence in self-interest that started in the Garden and is once again going global and testing those who claim they love all as self..

Stopped_lurking · 2025-12-08T01:58:41-0600

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.

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).

rockytopva · 2025-12-08T01:55:38-0600

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!

Christsfreeservant · 2025-12-08T01:32:49-0600

“Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.’” “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” ”He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.” “Jesus answered and said to him, ‘If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me.’” (John 14:6,15,21,23,24 NASB1995)

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

Perpetual Student · 2025-12-08T01:29:20-0600

Oompa Loompa said:
Poor poor narco terrorists drug smugglers. If only they had the same level of outrage for the kids they kill every year with their cargo.

Let me ask two simple questions:
1) are you in favour of applying and protecting the rule of law, without ifs or buts and without exceptions?
2) Do you adhere to the principle that anybody is innocent until proven guilty?

stevevw · 2025-12-08T01:23:14-0600

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.

martinlb · 2025-12-08T01:07:47-0600

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?

Soyeong · 2025-12-08T01:00:27-0600

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.

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.

samaus123456789 · 2025-12-08T01:00:06-0600

⭐ 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.”

This sentence contains two ideas:

“At night it appears … like a man.”
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”

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.

New Posts

New Posts

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

⭐ WHAT DOES “LIKE A MAN” REFER TO?​

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

⭐ WHY “EVERY TWENTY DAYS”?​

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

⭐ IS THIS A LITERAL DESCRIPTION?​

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

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

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

⭐ WHAT DOES “LIKE A MAN” REFER TO?

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

⭐ WHY “EVERY TWENTY DAYS”?

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

⭐ IS THIS A LITERAL DESCRIPTION?

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