About the incident in Acts 16 where Paul circumcizers Timothy
⭐ 1. TORAH SYSTEM: ANCESTRY IS THROUGH THE FATHER (NOT THE MOTHER) You are correct. ✔ Tribal inheritance ✔ Land inheritance ✔ Lineage ✔ Covenant membership by birth All come through the father’s line in the Torah. Examples: Levi → Levite Aaron → priestly line Judah → Davidic line Israelite status → father Land allotments → father’s house (Num 1, Num 26, Josh 13–21) Nowhere in the Torah is descent through the mother the determining factor for tribal identity. So by Torah law, Timothy — whose father was Greek — would be considered: ⭐ A Greek (non-Israelite) unless he underwent circumcision and entered the covenant. The Torah basis is correct.


⭐ 2. SECOND TEMPLE JUDEAN CUSTOM: IDENTITY OF CHILDREN OF MIXED MARRIAGES WAS MATERNAL This is NOT Torah law. This is post-exilic Judean halakhic development. By the time of Jesus, Paul, and Acts: Children of a Judean mother and a Gentile father were treated as Judeans who must keep covenantal signs (circumcision, Torah, customs). Evidence: ✔ Ezra–Nehemiah Mixed marriages were condemned because of the mothers, and the children were assumed to “belong to” the foreign women. ✔ Mishnah Kiddushin 3:12 (reflecting earlier practice) “If her child is from a slave or a Gentile, the child is like her.” Meaning: If mother = Israelite, Father = Gentile, The child is treated as Israelite (obligated to circumcision) ✔ Josephus also confirms this social assumption. He describes children of Judean mothers as part of the Judean community even when the father is non-Israelite. So although the Torah itself is patrilineal, Second Temple Judean society was functionally matrilineal for identity in mixed marriages. This is the world Paul is operating in.


⭐ 3. TIMOTHY’S REAL SOCIAL SITUATION Acts 16:1–3: Mother = Judean (believer, raised him on Scriptures — 2 Tim 1:5; 3:15) Father = Greek Locals all knew the father was Greek Timothy was NOT circumcised So to the surrounding synagogues, Timothy was: ⭐ A Judean (by maternal identity in Second Temple society) ⭐ But an uncircumcised Judean = covenant-breaker An uncircumcised Gentile is one thing. An uncircumcised Judean is FAR WORSE in the eyes of Judeans. Paul could not bring him into a synagogue without massive scandal.


⭐ 4. CIRCUMCISION IN THE TORAH IS ABOUT COVENANT, NOT ANCESTRY Genesis 17 teaches: “Every male among you shall be circumcised… He who is not circumcised shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.” Key points: ✔ Circumcision = sign of the covenant ✔ ANY non-Israelite can join Israel THROUGH circumcision (Ex 12:48) ✔ An Israelite male who is not circumcised = covenant breaker So by Torah definition: Timothy’s ancestry is irrelevant His covenant status is determined by circumcision Timothy was: ✔ raised in Scripture ✔ Judean by community definition ✔ but uncircumcised = outside the covenant in Judean eyes This is the problem Paul needed to solve — not salvation, but social identity and synagogue access.


⭐ 5. WHY PAUL REFUSED TO CIRCUMCISE TITUS BUT DID CIRCUMCISE TIMOTHY ⭐ TITUS 100% Gentile Pressured by false teachers to circumcise “for salvation” Paul refuses (Gal 2:3–5) Circumcising Titus would corrupt the gospel. ⭐ TIMOTHY Considered a Judean in Second Temple society Uncircumcised Judean = covenant-breaker Impossible to bring him into synagogues without offense Circumcision removes a cultural obstacle, not a theological one Acts 16:3 explains Paul’s logic: “because of the Judeans in that region who all knew his father was Greek.” This is 100% a missionary strategy, not covenant theology.


⭐ 6. PAUL’S CONSISTENT RULE ✔ If circumcision is demanded for salvation → REJECT IT (Titus) ✔ If circumcision helps avoid unnecessary offense → ALLOW IT (Timothy) This exactly matches Paul’s own stated principle: 1 Corinthians 9:20 “To the Judeans I became as a Judean, to win Judeans.” Timothy needed to be acceptable in Judean synagogues. Titus did not. Thus Paul circumcized one and refused the other deliberately.

⭐ 1. The problem was NOT race — it was covenant identity. Ezra 9–10 and Nehemiah 13 make this absolutely clear. The issue was: ✔ foreign wives ✔ who did not worship YHWH ✔ raising children in foreign religion ✔ which threatened to destroy the restored covenant community. The complaint in Neh. 13:24: “Their children spoke half in the language of Ashdod, and could not speak the language of Judah.” This means the children were being raised in Philistine / pagan culture, did not know Hebrew, could not learn Torah, and followed their mother’s religion. Thus: The foreign mothers were producing non-Israelite children culturally and religiously. This is why the marriages were condemned. ⭐ 2. In the ancient Near East, children normally followed the mother’s culture. This is a key fact. Across the ANE: mothers raised children, fathers worked outside the home, religious instruction came from the mother, language, customs, and household gods were transmitted maternally, and mothers’ foreign cults typically entered the home. So when Ezra says the children “belonged to the foreign women,” he means: ✔ they were being raised as Gentiles, not as Israelites ✔ they would not be covenant members ✔ they threatened the Israelite identity of the restored community. This is NOT about DNA. It is about covenant lineage. ⭐ 3. Torah explicitly warns that foreign wives will turn sons away from God. Ezra quotes Deuteronomy 7:3–4: “You shall not intermarry with them… for they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods.” The warning is not that foreign people are bad — but that foreign worship destroys covenant continuity. This is exactly what happened in Ezra–Nehemiah. ⭐ 4. Defining “Israel” in Ezra’s time = covenant membership, not genetics. After the exile: Israel was a tiny remnant, identity was fragile, the nation had nearly disappeared, idolatry had destroyed them once already, and they needed to rebuild a faithful community. Therefore, Ezra took a strict stance on marriage to ensure: ✔ children were raised Hebrew ✔ children learned Torah ✔ households worshiped YHWH alone ✔ Israel did not become culturally dissolved among the nations. ⭐ 5. Why children were assumed to “belong to the foreign women.” There are four reasons in the text: A. Language — Neh. 13:24: “Their children spoke the language of Ashdod… not the language of Judah.” This shows the mothers trained them in foreign identity, children were disconnected from Scripture, and they could not participate in covenant learning. B. Culture and religion — Foreign wives brought household gods, pagan festivals, ancestral deities, foreign customs, and syncretism. The home was influenced far more by the mother than the father. C. Household inheritance laws — In many ANE cultures the mother’s clan or tribe conveyed household gods (teraphim) and children inherited the mother’s cultic obligations. We see this in Genesis 31 with Rachel’s teraphim. D. Deuteronomy 7:4 — Ezra interprets this literally: “They will turn your children away from Me.” Ezra concluded children of these marriages were being lost to foreign worship, so they “belonged” to the mothers’ nations, not to Israel. ⭐ 6. Why the solution was strict (Ezra 10). Ezra commands: “Send away the foreign women and their children.” (Ezra 10) This sounds harsh, but the logic was: Israel was rebuilding a pure covenant community, the family line must be “holy seed” (Ezra 9:2) meaning covenant-faithful lineage, not genetic purity but spiritual loyalty, Israel was only a few thousand people — cultural dissolution was a real threat, and foreign wives represented active idolatry at the center of the home. Ezra acted to preserve the covenant identity of the nation. ⭐ 7. Important: The Bible does NOT prohibit all mixed marriages. Examples of righteous mixed marriages: Moses marries a Cushite woman, Boaz marries Ruth the Moabite, Salmon marries Rahab the Canaanite, Joseph marries an Egyptian, Tamar (a Canaanite) becomes ancestress of Judah, and Uriah the Hittite is a righteous Gentile. Why were these allowed? ✔ Because these foreign spouses joined Israel’s covenant ✔ They accepted YHWH ✔ They raised children as Israelites. This is the exact opposite situation from Ezra–Nehemiah.



did it violate the torah to trace ancestry through the mother

ChatGPT said:​

Short answer: No — tracing ancestry through the mother does not violate the Torah, but it is not commanded in the Torah either.
It is simply not the Torah’s system for determining tribal identity or covenant lineage.
Let’s break it down clearly:

---

⭐ 1. TORAH DOES NOT DEFINE TRIBAL IDENTITY THROUGH THE MOTHER​

Every place in the Torah where lineage, tribe, land, inheritance, or covenant status is assigned, it is always:
✔ “by the father’s house”
✔ “according to their fathers”
✔ “from the sons of … (father)”
Examples:
Numbers 1:2
“by their clans and families, by their fathers’ houses.”
Numbers 34–36
Land inheritance is only through the father’s line.
Leviticus 24:10 (the blasphemer)
Son of an Israelite mother + Egyptian father = not considered Israelite, treated as outsider.
Deuteronomy 7:3–4
Israelite women marrying Gentile men → the children would “turn your sons away,” showing the child follows the father.
Conclusion:
The Torah’s structure is fully patrilineal for identity.
So Torah law does not trace tribal identity through the mother.

---

⭐ 2. BUT — THE TORAH DOES NOT FORBID TRACING ANCESTRY THROUGH THE MOTHER​

Here is the key distinction:

◼ Torah commands tribal identity through the father​

—but—

◼ Torah does not prohibit recording or noting ancestry on the mother's side.​

You can know someone’s maternal ancestry, talk about it, document it — there’s no law against that.
Examples of maternal lineage mentioned:
✔ Moses’ mother is named (Exodus 2:1–4)
✔ Kings’ mothers often listed (1–2 Kings)
✔ Judges and leaders sometimes identified by mother
✔ Priests sometimes identified by both parents (Leviticus 21:13–14)
This proves maternal lineage can be recorded biblically,
but it never determines tribal identity or covenant membership.

---

⭐ 3. SECOND TEMPLE “MATERNAL IDENTITY” WAS A CUSTOM, NOT TORAH​

After the exile (5th century BC), Judeans developed a halakhic rule:
Child of a Judean mother = Judean
Child of a Gentile mother = Gentile
This was not biblical law, but a cultural and religious fence built to protect purity.
This rule is visible in:
✔ Ezra–Nehemiah
✔ Early Pharisaic halakhah
✔ Mishnah Kiddushin 3:12 (reflecting earlier custom)
✔ Josephus (1st century AD)
But none of this is found in the Torah itself.

---

⭐ 4. SO DID IT VIOLATE TORAH TO TRACE IDENTIFY THROUGH THE MOTHER?​

No.
It did not violate Torah because:
✔ The Torah never forbade maternal genealogy
✔ The Torah only prescribes how official tribal identity is assigned
✔ Cultural customs can go beyond the Torah without contradicting it
✔ As long as the custom does not replace or alter Torah commandments, it is not a violation
However:
If someone claimed “maternal descent = tribe” as if it were Torah-commanded,
that would contradict the Torah’s patrilineal system.
The Second Temple practice did not formally try to replace tribal identity,
because after the exile, most tribes (except Judah and Levi) were lost anyway.
It was simply a practical purity rule, not a biblical lineage rule.

---

⭐ 5. SUMMARY​

Here is the simplest answer possible:
✔ Torah identity = father’s line only
✔ Torah does NOT ban recording maternal ancestry
✔ Second Temple Judaism used maternal identity for community membership
✔ This did NOT break Torah, but it did not come from Torah


All this ancestry stuff became irrelevant since Jesus

Parashah: “VaYishlach” (and he sent) GENESIS: 32:3-36:43

We see in this week's parashah that Ya'akov is on his way home to Beth-El. He comes to his “encounter” with his brother Esav. It is a time of tension for him, as we know, he “stole” from him the blessing. Or was it really theft? Remember that Esau “sold” or “traded” his birthright for a “bowl of red lentils.” Was it really theft? Perhaps we can say that Jacob took advantage of his brother's worldliness and carnal nature; some say it was “deceit,” but was it really? Esau and Jacob made a deal: Esau's birthright for a bowl of soup. It would be like exchanging a Mercedes-Benz 2025 for a used bicycle. Isaac gives Jacob the firstborn birthright, and Esau gets the leftovers. He threatens to kill Jacob.

Jacob and Esau departed as enemies. Time has passed, and Jacob has had much to think about. He feels perhaps guilt and remorse for having taken advantage of his brother. YHVH has blessed him with wives and children, the future “Am Yisrael.” He now feels a need for “compensation” for wrongdoing. Therefore, to “ease” the angry spirit of Esau (so Jacob thinks), he sends him gifts of cattle, hoping to “cool him off.”

But let's think about that: is compensation necessary for wrongdoing? The Torah says YES, it is. If I borrow your camera, and I drop it, break it, I will owe you another camera. If you and I have a wrestling match, and I accidentally break your hand, I would have to pay the doctor's bill, etc. This is the true meaning of “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.
”
Just for precautionary measures, he separates his family, “just in case” Esau is still on the war-path. Can we blame Jacob? Esau is coming to meet his brother with 400 armed men! Oi Vey, why with 400 men? Armed too! Could this be an attack? Or friendship rekindled? Jacob is “Schvitzen” (sweating). But now he is about to encounter “GOD” in the flesh.

He says, “Adonai, help!” Hey God, remember your promise? To keep me safe? You aren't going back on your promise, are you? YHVH responds with a personal visit that night. A very interesting visit.

The Torah says that during the night “a man wrestled with him until the break of day” Ya'akov didn't know it then, but he was wrestling with “HaMalach Elohim (The Angel of the LORD). How do we wrestle with God today? Ever think of that? Good question! We all “wrestle” with God in trying to understand his ways in our lives, some of his ways are uncomfortable, his ways might be testings, trials, hardships, and trying to understand how these events will work for “good” in our lives.

Trying to find HIS perfect will for our lives is one way, dealing with “flesh vs spirit” issues is another way. Trying to get HIM to follow “us”, instead of “us” following HIM, is another way. Just seeing where we fit in with his plan for our lives is a wrestling match, yet “Jacob prevails,” he says, “Bless me before you go!” YHVH says to him, “Your name will no longer be Ya'akov, but Yisrael.”

It is also interesting that both the angel and Jacob ask for names. First, the angel asks for his name, then Jacob asks for a name. Remember that in the book of Exodus, Moshe asks God his name also. The same answer is given: “Why do you ask me my name?”

We are so different from God, since we are finite beings, our names (at times) describe who we are. We are, in a sense, boxed in by names. We tend to act according to our names. Yet, God is very different. Why is that?

Adonai-Elohim can not be “boxed in” by a name, He is “beyond names” He told Moshe; “Ehye Asher Ehye” (I am who I am) which is not really answering the question, He is telling him “I have existed, I exist, I will exist” Now that answer was not given to Jacob (now Israel) Adonai answered his question with a question; “Why ask me my name?”

Today, we have many, many names that describe who God is. The most common three have been and are: Elohim, El, and Yah. When we read the names of prophets, they contain either of the two “El” or “Yah”. We also see that Israel states, “I have seen the face of God and have lived (Panim el Panim) But why “faces?” Why not “face?” One could say “13 faces” or “attributes” which describe who Elohim is.

Jacob finds himself alone, facing, as he thinks, imminent danger from being slaughtered by his brother Esau. He puts his family in hiding, he sends gifts of cattle to Esau to maybe “soften him up,” he might think. Now comes a wrestling match. Jacob is at his wits' end; it is only he and Elohim. Elohim comes to visit him in the form of the “Angel of YHVH.” The Torah says that he “wrestled with a man all night,” and Jacob did not relent; he did not give up the wrestling match until the Angel touched his thigh, thus wounding him. Then comes the interesting part: the Angel gives him a blessing, and he changes his name from “Jacob” to “Israel.”

From “trickster, deceiver” to “straight to G-d” When we see the name “Yisrael” it can be divided into two parts; “Yasher- El” (straight to G-d) the name “Yisrael” also contains the acronyms of the patriarchs and matriarchs who played a part in forming the nation of Israel; “YI” Yitzchak “S” Sarah “R” Rachel and Riv’kah “AE” Abraham “L” Leah.

Israel now says something interesting: “Vayikra Ya’akov shem haMakom Peniel Ki ra’iti Elohim Panim Et Panim” (and Jacob called the name of that place “Peniel” (face of God) for I have seen Elohim “faces to faces”.What is interesting is that here, the word “face” is used in the singular and in the plural. Peni-el, (face of God) in the ancient paleo-Hebrew letters, the word is symbolized as “mouth, life, action, God, Leader” in gematria, the word “Peniel” adds up to 171, (the unique, one (echad) G-d is perfect) when we add 1+7+1 = 9. “9” is the number of “emet” (truth) and “Yeshua” also has that title.

But “Panim El Panim” (faces to faces) is somewhat strange, or is it? How many faces does God have? Or does he even have a face, since he is “spirit”? In one way, he “has a face” in physical form as the “Angel of YHVH, Jacob saw him, Abraham also saw him. But now, “faces?” What could that mean? Here is one idea;

He has the “Panim Rachamim” (faces of Mercy) or “mercies” (endless mercy!”) He has the “face of forgiveness” the “face of longsuffering” the “face of patience” yet the faces of “punishment” “chastisement” “judgement and condemnation” for unrepentant sinners, the faces of “joy” and “wrath” of “happiness and sadness” “approval and disappointment” the face of a “God who listens and responds” the list could go on. I am thinking of Exodus 34, when Moses asks to "see God" and he lists his atributes. We could possibly call the atributes "faces."

We can imagine how he is feeling inside when we are in obedience or disobedience. Another way of seeing “Panim El Panim” is “Faces God Faces” because “El” is one of G-d’s names. (the shortest one)

Israel has now surrendered to the will of YHVH. He meets Esau, and the meeting is touching; no hard feelings. And Israel renders homage before his brother, a very penitent attitude. They fall upon each other’s necks and kiss and weep! Israel made amends; he shared with his brother Esau a portion of his blessings. Making amends is very important. There is such a thing as “restoration” (of relationships) and “restitution” (for things, perhaps stolen, destroyed, etc.)

Israel and his children go to Shechem, where we see that “Dinah is raped.” Yet we must ask; "What business did Dinah have in wandering off and mixing with the 'daughters of the land?" Being that Shechem was a pagan Canaanite city. Was she looking for trouble? The brothers take drastic action and retaliate, destroying the city. I would say very “rash” and “violent “action. But why would they want to associate with people who are idol worshipers? The case being, they had no business there in the first place. If you are in the wrong place and at the wrong time, you're bound to get “bit”.

However, Jacob (Israel) moves on and arrives at Beth-El, where God appeared to him when he left his home in Beersheva, where he envisioned the Heavenly Ladder. He builds an altar there and calls it “El-Elohei-Israel” (God, the God of Israel). He stands firm in his convictions, yet his sons have a lot to learn.

There are probably many times when we act rashly and do not do things God's way, thus embarrassing our relationship with YHVH. I think we all have a bit of carnal Esau and Jacob in us all. Yet, like the Ladder that reached heaven, we are to advance up the ladder step by step, rung by rung, hanging on to Yeshua all the way.

Israel/Jacob moves on; he nears "Efrata" (now known as Bethlehem), "Beit-Lechem" (House of Bread). This is where Rachel gives birth to Benjamin and then dies in childbirth. Now, here is a lesson to learn. Rachel had stolen the household idols from the house of Laban, her father. We don't know the reason why. One possible reason is that she believed that having the idols in her possession would guarantee the blessings for her new family, or that it would have been impossible for Laban to track down Jacob without "divination" through those idols or "household gods." These are just possibilities, in accordance with popular belief and tradition in Mesopotamia.

When Laban caught up with Jacob, he accused him of stealing "his gods!" Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen them. Jacob responded:
"May that person not live" (if the gods were found in that person's possession). Jacob's words came to pass. Rachel died in childbirth and was buried alone in a tomb near Bethlehem. It is still there today.

Lessons to be learned: We all wrestle with God, trying to figure out his ways in our lives. Let us submit to his perfect will in our lives. Make peace with people whom we have offended. Restoration and restitution are BIBLICAL MEANS. Sometimes, the only thing we can do is offer a sincere "I am sorry." Be careful with our words, they just might come to pass. Let us go back to our Beth-El, the "House of God." He will meet us there; he is already waiting.

Jan001 said:

I a

I agree that Revelation, chapters 1-12, was imperative for the first-century Christians to read and understand, as was Matthew 24, chapters 1-35.

The heaven and the earth of the Jews (their temple) literally passed away in 70 AD.

Nero committed suicide on June 9, 68 AD. He killed many Christians. He was an antichrist.

I think the final antichrist, aka the man of sin, will pretend to be the Jewish Messiah and that he will literally kill Enoch and Elijah, who have come back to earth to witness to the Jews that Jesus Christ is their true Messiah.

Click to expand...

The man of sin had to happen before 70 AD. He was going to sit in the physical temple of God which stopped existing 70 AD. If a replica OT temple was built the God of Abrahams spirit would not be in it so it can not be a temple of God. It was likely one of the zealots that put a statue of himself in it by the sound of it. I made a post on Daniel 9 how it ended 70 AD Daniel 9 ended 70 AD . Rev 1-12 happened 70 AD so the two witnesses happened 70 AD. Yes according to Gospel of Nicodemus, History of Joseph the Carpenter, and Apocalypse of Peter the two witnesses were going to be Enoch, and Eiljah. All 3 texts are internally written pre 70 AD, and have a prophecy of those 2 witnesses looking forward not written past tense. All 3 texts are apocrypha inspired for the wise only. Gospel of Nic, and History of Joseph are the most important two out of them. Josephus described this guy
Jesus ben Ananias - Wikipedia

which is interesting although it does not match Rev 11. So that is not one of the two witnesses but it gives an idea of what they might of looked like to outsiders- crazy people.

Unqualified said:

Israel has returned.

Click to expand...

The OT Davidic kingdom of Israel was restored on Pentecost 2000 years ago. Kingdom of Israel restored on Pentecost.

There are three main components to our Lord’s commandment that I see here, and so I am going to look at each of the three parts individually, but then I’ll also look at how the three must all be a part of the same whole.

Love One Another

Now, for us who are English speaking people, we must understand that this word “love” is not of human flesh. It is not centered in our emotions nor in the ones we are loving. We love others regardless of whether or not others love us in return, or even if they hate and despise us, in return. For this is loving like God loves, like Jesus loves us. For Jesus didn’t give his life up for us on that cross because of how wonderful we are, but while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. So this love is self-sacrificial, and it is unselfish.

And this word translated in the English language as “love,” in the Greek interlinear it is the word “agapē,” which means “to prefer.” It is used in the Bible in the context of either preferring what is evil (this one very little) or preferring what God prefers (which is how it is used primarily). And what God prefers is all that is holy, righteous, godly, morally pure, upright, honest, faithful, and obedient to our Lord’s commands. So this love is morally pure, upright, honest, and faithful in its love for other people.

Lay Down Your Life

And, as already was mentioned, this love is self-sacrificial and unselfish, and it is willing to die to show the love of Christ for the people of this world. It is willing to be hated by other humans in order to love them with the love that Christ had and has for us. And in what ways did Jesus demonstrate this love? Well, he spoke the truth in love to the people, whether they wanted to hear it or not, and whether they liked him or hated him in return. He told them the truth they needed to hear even though, for him it meant his death.

So, when we love others like Jesus loved us, it is not about a popularity contest. It has nothing to do with whether people love us in return. It is all about what they need and us supplying them with what they truly need (not necessarily want), as we are able, and as we are led by the Spirit to do so, even if it costs us friends, family, church family, and other humans who might reject us and turn away from us, because we are just too weird for them. It is what it cost Jesus in order for him to show us his love for us.

Do What God Commands

If we are going to love God and our fellow humans with this kind of love, the way in which God loves us, we must be those who are walking (in conduct) in obedience to our Lord’s commands. This is not to say that we will always do this perfectly, or that we will never fail (1 John 2:1-2), but the Scriptures make it quite clear that if sin is what we practice, and not obedience to our Lord and to his commands (New Covenant), that we do not know God, we are not in fellowship with Christ, and we will not inherit eternal life with God.

So, obedience to our Lord’s commands is not something to be dismissed, nor is it just a recommendation which we are free to ignore. It is a requirement of God, not as a means of earning our salvation, but as a love response to God for saving us from our sins. Yet, it is not optional. In the Scriptures we learn that obedience to our Lord’s commands = faith, and that disobedience to his commands = unbelief, which results in separation from God and us not having the hope of salvation from sin and eternal life with God in heaven.

The Scriptures Teach

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).

[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]

In Harmony

Based off Romans 12:9-21; 1 Peter 3:8-17
An Original Work / September 2, 2012
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

Love each other truly.
Cling to what is good.
Hate all that is evil.
Never lack in zeal.
Serve the Lord with fervor.
Joyful in hope be;
Patient in affliction;
Praying faithfully.
Honor one another.
Live in harmony.

Share with all God’s people
Who are found in need.
Do not be conceited.
Sympathetic be.
Love, and show compassion
In humility.
Keep your tongue from evil.
Peaceful you must be.
Honor one another.
Live in harmony.

God sees who are righteous;
Listens to their prayers.
But He’s against evil –
Is His to avenge.
Do not fear what they fear.
Suffer patiently.
In your hearts, make Christ Lord.
Serve Him faithfully.
Honor one another.
Live in harmony.

Login to view embedded media
All About Love
An Original Work / December 9, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

Ivan Hlavanda said:

I know there are Christians out there that do not hold the view the first 11 chapters of Genesis are literal history, Adam was not literal, God did not create everything in 6 days ets...because the science disproves this.

If you do not believe in literal Adam, you then cannot believe in literal 2nd Adam, Jesus Christ the Saviour. Because if Adam did not exist, then the fall did not happen and there is no need for a Saviour.

You cannot believe in a metaphorical Adam and then believe in literal resurrection of Christ, the second Adam who came to fix what the first Adam broke. You also have problem explaining Romans 5:12-21

P.S. I know the view of metaphorical Adam is held by very few, but it has been bothering me deeply that people believe this, and I am studying Romans 5 and this is on my heart.

Click to expand...

The fall does not hinge on a literal Adam. Many conservative evangelicals and Bible scholars acknowledge this. If you think their number is "very few", I would recommend investigating the topic a bit more. Have you at least read the works of Tremper Longman III and John Walton?

Others that might be worth reading, Bruce Waltke, Robert Alter, Gordon Wenham, Nahum Sarna, Pete Enns. Or if you prefer more theological content, NT Wright or John Collins. Among others.

These are all very well known, many of which are conservative evangelicals that hold to the inerrancy of scripture.

And there are broader professional sources that support positions of a non historical Adam as well. Bible commentaries: NICOT, TOTC, the Oxford handbook of the Pentateuch, and more.

So, the position is not held by "very few", you just have to broaden your horizons to see the substantial body of Evangelical Old Testament scholars.

In academic biblical studies, a significant proportion of respected scholars interpret Adam as archetypal, symbolic, or theological, not necessarily historical.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro faces subpoena over private home security upgrades after firebombing​

A GOP-led committee in the state legislature voted Tuesday to issue three subpoenas seeking records related to, among other things, roughly $1 million in security upgrades to his personal home in the suburbs of Philadelphia. The Intergovernmental Operations Committee is also seeking documents concerning "several charter flights arranged for the Governor's Office" in mid-January.

"The Pennsylvania State Police and independent security experts conducted thorough reviews to pinpoint security failures, review protocols, identify gaps, and make concrete recommendations for improvements to the Governor’s security. As a direct result of those recommendations, security improvements have been put in place to keep the Governor and his family safe," the spokesperson said. "The Shapiro Administration has repeatedly responded to lawmakers' inquiries on this matter and publicly released a substantial amount of information about the security improvements put in place by PSP without compromising those security protocols."

Strong in Him said:

I am sure they did that because they were showing the sacrificial love that Jesus showed, taught and embodied.

What evidence do you have that they were expecting "the mark of the beast?"
How do you know what their motives were; were you there?

Click to expand...

See acts 2:16-21 and understand the meaning of the "day of the lord".to Israel.

It has a very specific meaning

You can also refer to 1 peter 1:3-9 for the last day trial he was telling Israel about, 1 peter was written at around the acts 8 time period.

Then 2 peter which was written near the end of peter life, he had to explain why that day of the lord did not arrive, and urge them to read Pauls ephistles for more info.

ThatRobGuy said:

That's what he claims...he also claims that he was approaching in (what appears to be an aggressive attack stance) to attempt to trade the knife for cigarettes.

View attachment 374221


If we're being honest, given the guy's previous criminal record of stabbing, and roughing up store clerks. In all likelihood, it was probably more of a "give me those smokes!" (holding the knife to imply "or else")


...but even if we operate on the assumption that the defendant's statements on that were 100% accurate, I would hope you're being facetious here. Someone yelling a slur from 20 feet away as a person is moving towards them with a brandished weapon wouldn't be justification for assaulting them with said weapon. (especially in an open-air environment in a state that establishes a duty to retreat)

Click to expand...

I bet there's an uber-radical leftist somewhere saying, man, I'm glad he got that pack of smokes, and knifed that fascist nazi.

# 1. FOR /// GAR is a CONJUNATION

#2 I. ///. EGO. is a PERSONAL POSSESSESIVE PRONOUN. in. the NOMINATIVE CASE. in. the SINGULAR

#3 NEITHER ///. OUDE is an. ADVERB

#4 RECEIVED ///. PARALANBANO. is in. the AORIST TENSE in the ACTIVE VOICE inv the INDICATIVE MOOD , means you better believe it

#5 IT /// AUTOS. is a PERSONAL POSSESSIVE PRONOUN in. the SINGULAT in. the NEUTER , N meaning MALE and FEMALE

#6 OF /// PARA is a PREPOSTION

#7 MAN ///. ANTROTRPOSin vv the GENITIVE CASE in the b. SINGULAR

#8. NEITHER. /// OUTE. is a CONJUNCAION

#9 WAS I TAUGHT. ///. DIDASKO. in. the AORIST TENSE in. the PASSIVE VOICE. , means it is CHRIST working , in. the. INDICATIVE MOOD

in the SINGULAR

#10. BUT /// ALLA. is a CONJUNCATION

#11 BY /// DIA. is a PREPOSITION

#12 THE REVELATION ///. APOKALYPSIS. in vv the GENITIVE CASE. in. the SINGULAR

#13 0F. JESUS. ///. IOSOUS. in. the GENITIVE CASE in. the SINGULAR

# 14 CHRIST ///. CHRISTOS in vv the GENITIVE CASE in v the SINGULAR.

#. A And PAUL. is the ONLY GOSPEL. that was given by. Christ himself to Paul

# B. And it is the ONLY way to be SAVED FOR TODAY. , PERIOD

# C. No. one can be saved by WAYTER BAPTISM

# D Paul n. never preached to be BORN AGAIN

# E And PAUL NEVER WATER BAPIZED NO ONE EVER , TRYN ME !!

dan p

Hentenza said:

To me that’s the common sense approach.

Click to expand...

Yes, to met that's conservatism, although my liberal friends would disagree. Perhaps they would prefer "that which has been shown to work in the past."

BCP1928 said:

He didn't. Mark Kelly didn't either.

Click to expand...

Did the hit dog holler?

Yes. And if we are supposed to believe that the pulpit guarantees us that truth will be taught, then how come so much false doctrine and baloney also gets spewed from behind pulpits? Most all cultic leaders came from behind a pulpit, and still use a pulpit. Many strange doctrines still get broadcasted from pulpits.

The church is told 'FROM the pulpit' that 'What you are hearing FROM the pulpit is nothing but truth FROM God!' And the congregation is told that they should subject themselves 'to the pulpit' and the message - 'Because' the pulpit has the 'approval of the pulpit!!'

This is circular reasoning, and has more in common with ex cathedra than it has to do with truth and what scripture warned us of.

It may be subtle, but quite often the pastor or preacher will weave into the sermon somewhere that 'God wants you to hear this', or 'God told me to tell you', or 'God revealed to me today..' as if they are always getting and giving some message directly from God!!

Thats manipulation, and God told me to tell you that...

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

See photos from Mount Pocono area ahead of Trump visit to Mount Airy​

AV1611VET said:

I would go to Sunday school and hear how God created us, then go to school and learn how [Gaia] created us.

I'm thankful that I learned the Truth in my earlier years; else I may have suffered cognitive dissonance and ended up choosing the wrong path.

Proverbs 22:6 Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.

Click to expand...

Well, I see that some things haven't changed in the past seven years, such as the style of argument that you're fond of making. I know you're aware of this already, but some of us don't see a contradiction between those two things. That's one of the points made in my book.

Seeing as you're this forum's most dedicated creationist poster, I'd be willing to send you a copy for free. The only things I'd require in return are the postage, and a promise that you'll read all of it. And before you dismiss my book as "evolutionist claptrap" or something similar, notice that it's been cited in a positive manner by professional creation scientists, in this paper. (It's the book cited as "Kane et al. 2016".) Please let me know if you're interested.

PloverWing said:

Would it have been so bad if the FBI agents had chosen to kneel to show solidarity with the protestors?

In the march in our town in 2020, some police officers walked alongside us to help ensure that everything stayed peaceful and to make sure traffic stopped for us when we crossed streets. When we got to the park that was our end point and had a short ceremony (prayers from local clergy, etc.), the police officers knelt when we did. I took that as a statement from them that they disapproved of Floyd's killing and similar acts of excessive police violence, and I was encouraged that our local officers were making that statement.

Click to expand...

Sounds good to me!

Trump admin is ‘trying to put out a fire they started’ at Weather Service as a cold, snowy winter looms​

The National Weather Service is working to hire back hundreds of positions laid off or otherwise cut by the Trump administration, but it’s progressing at a snail’s pace, with about 80 final job offers accepted for meteorologists, hydrologists and other specialized staff.

The agency received permission in late July to add a total of 450 people after about 550 were cut by DOGE earlier this year. The decision to authorize new hires came after lawmakers and citizens expressed concerns about how the NWS cuts would impact public safety.

The slow hiring means the Weather Service is going into yet another critical storm season with more than a dozen forecast offices forced to get by with serious staff vacancies, potentially undermining the accuracy of forecasts and warnings during powerful winter storms.

There is still one forecast office, located in Hanford, Calif., that is too short on staffing to operate 24/7, according to a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) official who requested anonymity for fear of retribution.

Right now, there are nine NWS offices that are launching balloons at a cadence of once per day, the NOAA official said. [instead of the usual 2]

Servus said:

Florida Man strikes again.

Click to expand...

It will never end.

People matter more than guns.

I said what I said.

jonojim1337 said:

There it is again. It is by Grace that ye are saved, through faith, and that not of ourselves, lest any man should boast.

We are unprofitable servants. Meaning, NOTHING you will ever do will profit you.

Click to expand...

Indeed. The only wages people will receive are the wages of sin, which death. All else that God gives is by His mercy and grace alone.

rjs330 said:

Is your claim then, because we have Americans who commit crime, we should therefore allow illegals in who commit crime?

The truth is we don't actually know how much crime illegals commit because most places don't keep track of if a person is illegal or not. I know in my area inmates are not required to prove their citizenship.

And they should be top of the list. They are citizens. Yes, illegals arent supposed to get certain aid, and yet they do becauae states administer the programs and there are ways around the federal requirements.

Is this all the illegals are good for? Doing the dirty jobs and being taken advantage of. Maybe if we forced rhe farmers to hire only legals the wages would go up enough that Americans might do it. But this is a dirty little secret. Hire illegals and keep wages lower, for everyone.

The Bible says a lot of things Christians should and shouldn't do. Are you for forcing everyone to follow scritpure in all things or just certain things? The things you apparently support. What if I said we needed to outlaw lying and homosexuality. Would you be for that or against that?

Click to expand...

No I am not saying illegals should be allowed to come here, you can assume that if you like.

And anytime a person is arrested they go into the data bank / their fingerprint, their age, their address, their name, their nationality and whether they are illegal or not. All over the USA and today with computers it is easy to keep up with.

I didn't say illegals were supposed to get aid and wasn't saying that citizens shouldn't be at the top of the list.

Who said that was all their good for you? I believe I indicated this if not I'm saying it directly the majority of the US citizens think that those type of jobs is too low, to menial for them and will not do it. Jobs that the slaves did what did Trump call certain jobs /Black jobs.

Forcing, funny how people who don't believe in scripture always use the word forcing, who have I forced to do anything. Churches Don't Force anyone to do anything they speak of what's written in scripture do all people follow it no, most people mess up and mess up big.

Actually in a court of law lying is out lawed - line to the feds is outlawed. Lying to cops you can get fined.

Homosexuality at one point was outlawed not that long ago, funny how you use this, why not outlaw cheating / why not outlaw adultery / why not outlaw disrespect for your parents / why not outlaw disrespect for your neighbors / which are other things that Bible speaks against but you chose homosexuality.

Me personally I don't give a hoot what you or anybody else do that's your business. But I will say the Bible speaks against it and it's entirely up to you or any individual on what your/their sexual orientations are.

CF has been flaky for me the last two days, so I lost much of my last post. But I feel it's important to talk about one of those things that I lost: Healthy Vaccinee Bias.

Basically, it goes something like this:

• A mostly-healthy, low-risk population is vaccinated.
• A retrospective observational study is conducted.
• Very few people get sick ard/or die.
• THE VACCINES WORKED! THE HEAVENS REJOICE! THE MEDIA DOTH DECLARE THAT THE VIRUS HAS BEEN DEFEATED! ALL HAIL SCIENCE!

What studies like this fail to account for is that even if the mostly-healthy, low-risk population had not been vaccinated, they would still have had very few people get sick and/or die. We're back to correlation != causation. But in the case of these observational studies (funded by industry, natch) , correlation IS causation. We gave the vaccine, people didn't get sick, ergo, the vaccine was effective. This is why there is often not a comparator to unvaccinated populations.

They tried this during COIVD. Studies were awash with healthy vaccinee bias. It worked for a little while. Who can forget the government propaganda, "The Pandemic of the Unvaccinated"? Until the real-world demonstrated that people who were vaccinated were getting sick just as much as people who weren't vaccinated. Fully vaccinated populations experienced outbreaks of infections. Odd, if the vaccine is supposed to "protect" you. Then came the pivot. You'll still get COVID, but you won't die. But people who weren't vaccinated weren't dying either. And no matter how many industry-funded studies there were, reality set in. That's one of the reasons why COVID vaccine uptake dwindled each year and is now in the low 20% range.

The authors and organizations that write and publish these studies know precisely where their bread is buttered. They know the average person doesn't understand the difference between relative risk and absolute risk. They know the average person doesn't understand healthy vaccinee bias. So they publish studies with the "right" results to keep their funders happy.

Here is a great article that demonstrates how the industry has captured our healthcare systems.

I have parents that are flawed like everyone, though not to this degree. But I do have a couple of them in my family that are like this (I'll keep them anonymous, the point is the same).

I had family members, after me not answering calls for 6 weeks (was busy, had helped them, they seen it as I'm always available) who proceeded to beat on my door until they actually broke it open. I will not go into further details, but you can imagine I was not a happy camper and I'm putting that very nicely. Now, in my case I have an advantage, because this isn't my parents and that episode was somewhat extreme and so I haven't had any calls since. There is the "awkward silence" and sideways look at family gatherings if they are there now, but I will not open a door for further encouragement of the previously mentioned behavior.

The rest of my family, while not like this, does absolutely do crazy things. Has been my entire life and many of my childhood struggles (I learned as an adult) were caused by these very insane decisions or things neglected. Do I think our families intend to be off the wall? No, but it doesn't fix it nor make it easier to know that.

I'm praying for you, because I know the intensity of being harassed like that. I've had a number of situations with very similar patterns and behaviors with other people and it just is intolerable. My heart truly goes out to you in this.

I think the only things we can do (at least the only things I could do) is teach people how to treat you. They simply will never draw any lines and it seems for this kind of mindset, anything and everything is fair game if they try it and it "worked before" (even once). I feel like the boundaries and limitations must be firmly set and even explicitly pointed out to them, because they clearly don't see the lines they are crossing. I personally am not the best with having "sit downs" and "hard blunt heart to hearts" with grown people (physically at least) and I have these feelings in me that say "they SHOULD know this is NOT ok."

But... I think they simply needdd that really tough love kind of in your face very point blank sirens and flashing lights rules laid out before them, and not just in words. I think it takes absolutely refusing and becoming a person that will not budge when they push before they will stop pushing. Often words mean nothing to people, and they will also fight and complain if we don't move when pushed, but in my experience dealing with the mouthy backlash has been a picnic compared to the continued behaviors. So tolerating some nuisance accusations or people gossiping behind your back things that aren't true tends to be the requirement to set the permanent boundaries that people with this mindset need to view the situation or relationship differently.

With all that said I hope this doesn't make it hard for you to forgive them, even when you have to put your foot down extremely hard. I've had a lot of injustice done to me and it put some (unwittingly to me previously) bitterness in my heart that God had to forcibly uproot. Since then, I do the hard things needed, but I stay in a position of full forgiveness even when having to tolerate injustice or foolishness or (sometimes) outright childishness. A younger me would get angry about it, but now I just get serious and firmly plant my feet in concrete with tough love.

Some of those things you said really resonated with me, because I've experienced variations from many people, family and not, all my life. It's sheer chaos, and chaos isn't from God. Maybe preaching to them more would discourage them wanting to contact you. lol (sorry, couldn't help but try to add some humor, though it might actually also work)

Praying for you earnestly!

The often-overlooked chapel at Tepeyac, where St. Juan Diego lived and guarded the miraculous tilma for 17 years, remains a key part of the Guadalupe story and Mexico’s spiritual heritage.

The story of St. Juan Diego and Our Lady of Guadalupe began with the well-known apparitions of 1531. The Indigenous visionary remained for years dedicated to the preservation and dissemination of the message of the Virgin Mary at a chapel that is still preserved and forms an essential part of the Marian complex of Tepeyac.

Next to the current Guadalupe Basilica in Mexico City is the old chapel built to house the image miraculously imprinted on St. Juan Diego’s cloak. This historical site is little-known to pilgrims.

The Origin of the Chapel​

St. Juan Diego was the Indigenous man to whom the Virgin Mary appeared from Dec. 9–12, 1531, asking him to intercede with the first archbishop of Mexico, Friar Juan de Zumárraga, that a chapel be built “on the plain of Tepeyac” as a sign of her love for all nations.

It was on his tilma (cloak) that the image of the Virgin Mary was miraculously imprinted.

After the apparitions, the archbishop ordered the construction of a small chapel to house the tilma. St. Juan Diego lived next to it for 17 years, dedicated to recounting the events and caring for the sacred image until his death in 1548.

A Virgin for the ‘Completely Forgotten’​

Continued below.

essentialsaltes said:

Death panel ---> Death bots

Click to expand...

Death bots with a financial incentive

Starting Jan. 1, traditional Medicare recipients in Washington state will face a new hurdle to get certain procedures covered — private AI companies that get paid based on how many claims they deny.

Washington is one of six states selected to take part in a federal pilot program called Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction, which aims to reduce fraud and waste by requiring prior authorization for about a dozen outpatient procedures deemed “low-value services.”

AI companies will be paid a portion of the savings from claims they deny or, as the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction plan puts it, “compensated based on a share of averted expenditures.”