rambot said:

All kinds of interesting things were made known.

Like how many big MAGA infleuncers are not even in America.

Click to expand...

Who are they?

Oompa Loompa said:

January 22, 2025 is now current events?

Click to expand...

I am not posting this in News and Events. I am posting it in American Politics.

ChubbyCherub said:

I appreciate all men are not like this, but many are, and I cannot and will not indiscriminately agree to uphold men's leadership/authority without question and standards

Click to expand...

We don’t have to uphold a man’s authority we are not married to, however, we do have to uphold our husband’s authority based on God’s design. It took me a long time to see that a husband’s position is recognized by God even if that husband is abusive. We don’t have to stay in the abuse; we are allowed to separate ourselves. Sometimes this is not possibly, however, God recognizes the abuse, and when the wife humbles herself to God and ask for help, God removes that man - sometimes to the detriment of the man to break the authority - God takes the man from this life.

But if the woman is not humble, she cannot have the peace she seeks, because God’s law dictates a woman is subject to the man - only a humble and meek heart brings down swift help from God. That’s just how it is.

Jude gives an example of positions and how they are to be honored and respected even if the individual is wicked,
Jude 1:9 KJV
Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

God originally gave Satan a position of honor that the other angels recognized - they would not disrespect Satan because he’s evil, because of the position and honor God gave to him, although he will be punished in the end.

ChubbyCherub said:

I also appreciate that some may view this as unbiblical but, as I stated, if Jesus came down and sat in front of me, I'd explain my position with an open heart and I believe He would understand my point of view comes from a pure place rather than a challenge to His authority and word

Click to expand...

No He will not. He requires obedience and honor and respect and a humble spirit. We should not condemn ourselves believing we can ignore what He has put in place because how we feel. Of course He understands how we feel, but God says I change not. So in order for God to remove the authority the man has over the woman, the woman must recognize the authority and humble herself and ask God for help. Then God will help swiftly. But if we ask out of pride and out of our selfishness, our feelings, we will not be helped.

That’s the lesson to learn - humility is the answer!

Welcome to CF!

Sabrina the Teenage Witch

Studyman said:

It doesn't exist in Scriptures, at least I can't find evidence that it does. I could be wrong. It is, in my view, a "Judgment" that men, "who profess to know God", have placed on His Commandments and Judgments, that has been adopted by many. For me personally, I don't believe I, or any man, is qualified to judge God or His Commandments as being "moral or immoral". But that is the minority view on this topic, when compared to the philosophies of the religions of this world God placed me in.

According to God's Inspired Word, His judgments, commandments and Laws were given for the well being of those who turn to Him for "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

This would most certainly include the 10 commandments in my view.

Click to expand...

ceremonial, sacrificial, civil, moral, etc... these are all post-biblical labels applied to law. they don't demand the law is cut up and sectioned off this way only that they can be useful for theological applications. With the case of "moral" this is a qualitative judgment, but it's not that helpful because in order to apply it uniquely to the 10 we have to redefine what moral means. Since there are moral laws both inside the 10 and outside and there are aspects of the 10 that are not based on moral action, then "moral" is only being used as a replacement for the 10 commandments but since it uses the word "moral," it creates a bias carrying a suggestion that qualitatively speaking it rises above the other laws.

A title that's more useful that isolates the 10 is calling them polemic pillar laws in their role of contrasting surrounding ANE (ancient near east) values. They don't alone accomplish this and the whole law shares that role too, but they do stand as a poster of contrast, quickly establishing value systems that are very different in terms of its monothesisic values (commandments 1-3) values of civil order that extend to moral action (5-10) and with th 4th how they value 7th day practice which was already a pre-existing value system prevelient in ANE cultures. The 10 takes the 7th-day system that would have had mass pagan association, redeeming by pointing it to worship/practice to a monotheistic God as well as lacing it with a redemptive story.

"moral" is too loaded of term and pits the 10 against the other laws which was never the purpose. The 10 do not act alone from the covenant they are created in, they are called tablets of covenant law, but even before Moses climbed the mountain to get the tablets the commandments were already communicated to the Israelites, along with a host of other laws. The 10 are first brought up in Ex 20 and Moses climbs the mountain in Ex 24. Those 4 chapters in between all address laws that stand together with the 10, not separate to them and a part of the covenant relationship that was formed that Israel committed to... all before the tablets were made.

We completely miss the point when we extract the 10 outside of its context and force them to work as some sort of universal moral code, for one they don't work this way. I may avoid killing my neighbour, stealing from him, lying to him or sleeping with his wife, (those are actually pretty easy to do) but I may also hate him and avoid him at all costs. If I see he has fallen, cross the street and ignore him. This all would keep the 10, but grossly misses the point. For example, Ex 23:4 "If you come across your enemy’s ox or donkey wandering off, be sure to return it." this is not a requirement of the 10 commandments, yet it is presented alongside of them and should not be regarded as separate to them. So, sure we include this as well.... it also presents laws on how we keep slaves, do we include that as well? The point is we can't cut and paste law and pick what we think is better than another. It's a package deal and is designed to work together, and it all points to Christ (including the slavary parts)

I still see a video for a different song.

Venables said:

We haven't been to Mykonos but we were on Lefkada earlier this year, it's one of the mid-sized Greek islands off to the west, Ionian Sea I believe. It was an majestic experience, particularly for mission groups. A sizeable number of beautiful and inspirational churches and deep tradition. I'm having one of those days and can't quite recall the name, but there was one church in the particular that was extraordinary and stayed with us. From the Byzantine architects, a redoubtable design and beautiful frescoes within it. Reminded us of some of the churches on the French Mediterranean coast. Even without the icons, but the architecture on the coast seems it was similarly inspired.

Click to expand...

Greetings Venables,
Yes we have heard of Lefkada in one of our Mediterranean-focused ministry teams. It is indeed on the Ionian Sea, and quite majestic by any measure. I believe I have even also encountered the historic church you are recalling. Amusingly I too am blanking on the name and more specifics, but the son of one of our missionaries was already masterful with a camera, and took a number of pictures of a church on the island.

With, I believe many a beautiful fresco and icon on the interior. It is as though the church's founders were taking their own versions of photographs centuries ago, sending them down to us to marvel at. You have in fact inspired me to get back in touch with them! From our initial teams gathered from our original church networks back in the US, we tend to form somewhat improvised small mission teams that then fan out across Europe. The one drawback being it's often easy to lose touch when focused elsewhere, as we are in France and Germany like many other teams. But the pictures of that marvellous old church on Lefkada are gradually stirring up a bit more in my mind. All the more reason to re-establish some contact.

Akita Suggagaki said:

If you allow this you can actually deepen and purify your faith though it may change as well.

Click to expand...

That is why God says to continually seek Him. The institutions are not too keen on this, as they like to keep people corralled without themselves having to move on, halting all progress, theirs and the masses..

rambot said:

A quote from Chuck

So help me understand how and WHY empathy is bad.

Click to expand...

Well what more does he say about it?

I don't remember Casey Casem, but I do remember Wolfman Jack.

Zceptre said:

So more so the method of operation that is in question I guess you are alluding to here.

Maybe something along this approach:

2 Corinthians 5:18-19 (NIV)
All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation:
that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

Instead of bashing them over the head with Hell and damnation.

I think I'd have to agree some of the street preaching I've seen leaves a bitter taste more so by the delivery of the message in not being in line with this passage and Christ's approach. I think the God who is love is understated (1 John 4:8) and while there is a place to tell people to repent I think it is often emphasized too heavily, more so than Christ did even though He did do so (Luke 13:3).

I know for me personally, damnation and condemnation never made me love God more nor pulled me away from sins as a youth, but realizing how loved I am by God worked wonders in my life. (Romans 2:4)

Click to expand...

I think even the parables were relating peoples lives at the time to the Kingdom of God. Something along those lines with a modern version. Or whatever it is that connects peoples real experiences with offering a new way beyond what the world offers.

It has to sound like its Good News or a reveelation or something people are seeking. That spaaarks their interests even without mentioning God or the bible in direct ways. Christ was good at it.

But I also think there are times when no matter what you say it provokes a reaction because it is the truth. Its actually exposing the deciet and liars and they become threatened.

Paul we bashed several times for simply sticking to the gospel. It was those who were religious but used it like politics.

Its interest as with Christ and Paul and others they accused them of blasphamy. Of defying or breaching the religious code that the powerful were using to control.

I think this is similar to how today where Christians are shamed or made out to be hateful and harming others for holding a belief that is percieved to break the codes and practices of secular ideologies in the same way the Pharisees called Christians blasphemers for breaking the codes of the religiously powerful of that time.

peter2 said:

is it possible people loose something of their souls when attempting to secure their body's safety,

Click to expand...

Jesus says, "He who loves his life will lose it," in John 12:25.

And Jesus says not to worry about tomorrow, what we will wear and eat.

And Jesus does say >

"if you love those who love you, what reward have you?" (in Matthew 5:46)

So, yes . . . if ones mainly are concerned about their bodies and about ones who give them what they want . . . this can have them missing out on God's love in their souls. Because they are mainly concerned about their own lives and bodies and pleasures; and this keeps them from living in God's all-loving love which keeps our souls with God and is changing us into the image of Jesus so we are ready to spend eternity with Jesus and one another.

bob121 said:

why does God specifically tell us to love Him with all our minds?

Click to expand...

Your mind has to do with where your attention is.

mark46 said:

Trump has believed in high tariffs since the 80's. He is simply being consistent.

And he doesn't care how many people think that he or Press Secretary get taught about economic policy from the AP.
========
However, he SHOULD listen to the Wall Street and other billionaires.

IMO, much of this is a diversion while he gets his reconciliation law passed, including the huge tax break for his friends.

He has exactly ZERO interest in reducing the debt or balancing the budget. He has other priorities.

Click to expand...

I've heard people say, "We need a businessman as President." The whole reason for wanting someone who owns a business as President is that businessmen know how to balance budgets. If they don't care about that, there is no reason for wanting them in office.

camille70 said:

James isn’t out of the woods yet. They can indict her again. She might have a separate case requesting dismissal over malicious prosecution pending though. If so, I don't know what happens with that since this is currently dismissed.

Click to expand...

Comey can be indicted again despite this dismissal if it's done by someone properly appointed. This article discusses the issue:

We're now past the statute of limitations for Comey, it is true, but if an indictment is filed within the statute of limitations but dismissed after the statute runs out, the government normally gets another 6 months to bring the case; see US Code Title 18 Part II Chapter 213 Section 3288. Here's the full thing:

Whenever an indictment or information charging a felony is dismissed for any reason after the period prescribed by the applicable statute of limitations has expired, a new indictment may be returned in the appropriate jurisdiction within six calendar months of the date of the dismissal of the indictment or information, or, in the event of an appeal, within 60 days of the date the dismissal of the indictment or information becomes final, or, if no regular grand jury is in session in the appropriate jurisdiction when the indictment or information is dismissed, within six calendar months of the date when the next regular grand jury is convened, which new indictment shall not be barred by any statute of limitations. This section does not permit the filing of a new indictment or information where the reason for the dismissal was the failure to file the indictment or information within the period prescribed by the applicable statute of limitations, or some other reason that would bar a new prosecution.

The key points are the bolded. It was dismissed, and thus they get another 6 months to bring a new one. Unless the dismissal was failure to file the indictment within the period prescribed or something else that would bar a new prosecution. That is not the case for this dismissal; all they have to do is have a properly appointed prosecutor bring the case and they can do it again.

That said, there were other motions to to dismiss Comey filed that aren't in front of the same judge that did this dismissal, and some of those might end up triggering the second bolded section by virtue of "failure to file the indictment" due to grand jury shenanigans, or the conclusion it's a vindictive and selective prosecution (which wouldn't be any less vindictive or selective six months from now). Despite Halligan doing a bad job with the grand jury, no doubt due to her inexperience, from my understanding it doesn't seem like the issues are enough to conclude that it was actually a failure to file, but they might. In regards to the vindictive and selective prosecution, the fact it's vindictive is easy (if this can't be ruled vindictive, what prosecution can?) but as I understand it, you need more than just that--you need to also prove it's selective, meaning other people aren't getting prosecuted for similar alleged crimes, which is where things get more murky. If the case is also dismissed on those grounds, then it seems like it would prevent another indictment for coming to Comey on this... but this current dismissal doesn't preclude another indictment.

1 Corinthians 15:41-42 - From 35-58 is explaining several concepts at once using metaphors by using some of the same terminology that is described else where. So essentially, We cannot be born again in Christ unless we die to our flesh which is the same concept Paul uses here but hes making a different point. So, we will be raised with a heavenly body which is a different type in general vs the one we have now which perishable and hes giving examples of the differences in other things to illustrate his point.

Luke 19:17 - Is a parable about the different kinds of servants. 2 kinds used what God gave them and expounded on the nobles kingdom and was rewarded based on what was returned to the noble when he came back as King. This story is noble = Jesus. The 3rd servant didnt do anything with what God gave him which upset God, so he took back what was given and gave it to the guy who did the most. He says he should have at least put it in the bank which he would have gotten interest at least. So essentially: The 2 good servants brought people to Christ, corrected people etc. The 3rd servant could have helped others, taken part in the church, would would have at least passively helped in growing Gods kingdom but instead he did nothing.

Matthew 5:19 - Who ever teaches Gods commands (10 commandments and others like baptism and the last supper), God views as "great" in his kingdom.

1 Corinthians 7:38- Paul says it's better to remain single, because you can do whatever you need to do for God and you don't have any responsibility for anyone else (a wife) that could hinder what you could do for God. So if God told you to go somewhere, if you're single you can just pack and go but if you have a wife to look after, that creates issues in Pauls opinion because of "divided interests".

Matthew 19:12- Jesus is saying simply to accept how God's kingdom IS. It's like complaining about how someone runs his house and Jesus is just like, it is what it is, just accept it. The topic was divorce, where Jesus says if you divorce for any other reason other than sexual immorality, you are committing adultery. The pharisees didn't like that answer because back then they would write a divorce decree if the woman just got on his nerves... it was ridiculous. So clearly, they didn't like Jesus's answer.

Revelation 14:4 - This is a very very long study... and is not a simple answer. I will try to sum up because to explain would need a whole post for... so in the context of the verse "virgins" who haven't defiled themselves with women is debated among a lot of people... some people take this literally, and people like myself see the symbolic context to it. Woman = religion, virgin = being righteous, so someone who isn't a spiritual adulterer and has another god while also trying to follow Christ. So for me, in this context, these 144,000 are pure, undefiled (spiritually speaking), people who follow Jesus where ever he goes because he is their shepherd.

Mark Quayle said:

If I take this as an answer to my question, then you do indeed depend on CHANCE to cause things. Your notion of Free Will depends on it. And it is self-contradictory. Chance can cause nothing.

But, maybe you think that man is a 'little' first cause. That too is self-contradictory, if God, THE First Cause, created man and the universe in which man lives.

Further, your notion of Free Will puts God as a reactor to fact, and not the beginning of fact.

Further, or to say what I have already said, but differently, your notion of Free Will diminishes God's Sovereignty and Omnipotence.



Further, your notion of Free Will

Click to expand...

God's omnipotence, sovereignty and omnibenevolence can allow humans to make some autonomous free will choices out of a Love for humans which can allow them to become like God Himself with Godly type Love.
God is wise enough and powerful enough to be the first cause in the creation of a free will human, who can be the first cause to a very limited number of mental choices which do not negatively impact others.
You're the one limiting God's power to making only robotic type beings.

mkr said:

Hi Brother, Thank you.

I checked your wall, and I knew you write through the context of Asia. Yes, our culture and context is similar to what you said.

First of all, I see you are living at Philippians, the Fung Wong Typphoon is badly hitting right now? Are you safe? Our prayer is to the safety of people there.

To get back to the topic, I totally agree to what you said. Sharing the gospel to the first take or the first hearers are the best to share about Christ. While I was in Bible school back to many years ago, as practical class for requirements we used to share about Christ every Saturday. When we asked them "If they ever heard about Jesus?" They replied, "We never heard the person name, Jesus, if a thing or person or male or female?". Sharing about Christ to these people, challenge about life, witnessing, showing kindness is the great achievement we ever had sometimes. They willingly wanted to hear us. They expect the next visit.

Sometimes when we were sent to the wolves as a sheep, we have to be be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves (Matt. 10:16). But sometimes the past missionaries did the wrong witnessing like they did as they wished and left with a bad reputation. Buddhist believers had idols or kind of worshipping at home. A missionary the past rented their home, and throwed their gods, as they considered their sacred god, at the street to bin. When they found out, they had some problems then chased him out of the village. A second time, a lady came to the village some years later. She act wisely, and taught their kids as preshool students, showed them kindness. Later, as she was also in a rent, she has some problem with the landlord, then had a mean to leave.

This village is another way that they don't like Christian that they did every kind of indirect way. Giving something with showing kindness is also considered that we persuaded them to become Christian. This is the biggest mistake that they did the past.

When I situated this village, they considered me as I would do the same. But to this day, I never give anyone but I tried to involved with community work like we are poor village, I helped them repaired the road, or help need of school tables or some other works. They acted weird before but when I slowly did some community works, they talked me or greet me.

As our country is in a bad situation, if they report in a bad way about me to destroy me, then military easily come to arrest or torture me. This is happening everywhere. So I am very carefully to take any step further. As far as the situation concerns, I need to show some kindness, like involving some help for the community, not to individual but a whole so that they knew our care, love and act of Christ. This required physical needs, but challenging my condition. I knew the Lord would do some transformation one day.

I would like to ask to pray for us. God bless you.

Click to expand...

Greetings mkr,
The utmost thanks to you for persevering in your preaching and ministry under such clearly difficult circumstances. You clearly have great courage and persistence, and you're showing the finest example of the mission tradition. In all ways. Including bringing the Gospel to those who need to hear it most, meeting both spiritual and material needs for a flock who clearly appreciates what you are bringing. It's not much I know, but we wish you the best and pray for your safety and bless you and all around you for what you are doing.

ChubbyCherub said:

Thanks all.

I think I misread this whole thread as the bible wasn't a trustworthy source for basically anything and I wanted to know a) why this was the case b) to what everyone was referring to if this is the case c) how this could help me and my family on our journey towards God d) how anyone could believe in God, Jesus or the Holy Spirit from a text that no one believes...........

It was a bit shocking but maybe that's because I misread/misunderstood the premise of the whole thread and I probably should have realized that when I saw that the bible was being quoted despite what I thought I understood.

@RamiC @Fervent @2PhiloVoid - thank you all for your patience and assistance.

It's good to know I have somewhere to go with questions because my family has very tough questions that someone who believes, due to a Christian background, isn't really in the habit of asking until challenged.

God bless you all and thanks so much.

Click to expand...

Inerrancy and the overall trustworthiness are too often tethered together as if they are the same, so it's understandable that you would be suspicious. It seems especially problematic if your only tether to the faith is the Bible, but the reality is that it is the historic witness that tethers us together. And by that I don't mean some mystical tradition that is beyond question but the ongoing transmission from generation of Christians to generation of Christians. We know the Bible is trustworthy because we see how it changes the lives of the people who put it into practice, and there are a number of ways to understand what the Bible is that are easily overlooked with how many people talk about these things.

rambot said:

Sorry. I'm fairly certain much of this is laid out for Judaism as well.

Click to expand...

To the same degree?

Keeping in mind, Muhammed himself was a political leader with territorial ambitions.

And the integration of the two concepts (religion and politics) was there right from the get go.

Along with prescriptions for how to infiltrate and overtake new territories, and govern them (including what to do with non-Believers who were already there)

For example, the dhimmi status. Where in a Muslim conquered territory, "people of the book" could be allowed to maintain their religion in exchange for a fee/tax known as jizya.