I don’t know. He was a child and fully man as well and had to learn and grow before His ministry started. But I don’t know when to draw the lines of time on it. It took,I h prayer and the Holy Spirit to fully realize.

eclipsenow said:

You jump around between verses like a hyperactive grasshopper - without slowing down and considering the context of each author.

This is a great example of eisegesis.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, all of the verses I provided in #154, refer to the one event - the great and terrible Day of the Lords vengeance and wrath.
Your replies are just to 'shoot the messenger', and flood the thread with the opinions and beliefs of preterism and Spiritualism.

Tell us when you think the righteous will enter Israel and extend all their boundaries?
When will the Lord send fire to consume our enemies? Isaiah 26

Sunshine

HARK! said:

After noting his desire to quickly release documents related to the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy, if elected, Trump clarified that he’d be willing to do the same with the Epstein files.

Trump suggests he’ll release Jeffrey Epstein ‘client list’ if elected: ‘I’d have no problem with it’

During an appearance on “The Lex Fridman Podcast,” Trump, 78, insisted that he never visited the dead financier and alleged sex trafficker’s notorious private island, where scores of young women an…

nypost.com

Click to expand...

Reversing President Trump's pledge to release the Epstein files should come as no great surprise!

One would have thought that Americans had have learned by now that failure to deliver on his promises is a reoccurring theme in "TRUMPWORLD

Jesus always existed with God, and he was and is God, the second person of our triune God – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So he didn’t just come into being when he was born as a baby to his mother Mary. For Jesus willingly left the throne in heaven which he had with God the Father, he came to the earth, and he was born to Mary, but conceived of the Holy Spirit. So he was not born with a sin nature as we are, and he never once sinned. But when he lived on the earth he was both fully God and fully human (God incarnate).

[John 1:1-36; John 8:24,58; John 10:30-33; John 20:28-29; Romans 9:5; Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 2:9; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8-9; 1 Peter 1:20-21; 2 Peter 1:1]

Now Mary was chosen of God to bear the only begotten Son of God, but this did not make her someone to be worshipped as though she is a god. But she was a young woman of tremendous faith in the Lord who believed what the angel told her, even though she didn’t understand, at first, how it was going to take place, since she was a virgin. And that took a lot of faith and courage to believe what the angel told her, too, especially since she would most certainly now be marked as an adulteress, for who would believe her story?

Now try to put yourself in her position, which will be harder for males, or try to imagine a situation where God might send an angel to you to call you to do something that you know will get you tagged as crazy, or as someone who cheated on your mate, and so you know people are going to think you have lost your mind or that you have sinned against God. And so you know they are not going to believe you, and that they are probably going to reject you, or that they might even put you to death for what they think you did.

For this isn’t just a “nice story” that gets repeated once a year, but this is a story of tremendous faith and trust in God and in his calling upon the life of a young woman who sets a great example for us who follow Jesus with our lives as to the kind of faith which we should have, too; a faith which believes in miracles and in divine intervention. And Mary said, “Behold, the bondslave of the Lord; may it be done to me according to your word.” And this should be our response to God when he calls us to do “the seemingly impossible.”

And some of us may be being faced with difficult situations in our lives which seem to not have answers, and the Lord may be leading us in directions we never thought possible, and so we know we will have to step out in faith, believing that God is in control, and then just trust him with the details. And Mary can serve as a wonderful example for us of that faith, where we rest in the Lord, and where we consider ourselves as servants of the Lord, and so we say with Mary, “May it be done to me according to your word.” Amen!

His Tender Mercies

An Original Work / January 26, 2014
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

Fear not! I’m with you.
Be not dismayed!
God watches o’er you.
Trust Him today.
He’ll lead and guide you;
Give you His aid.
He’ll love and keep you
With Him always.

Walk in His footsteps.
He’ll lead the way.
Trust in His love;
Believe that He cares.
He will not leave you.
Faithful He’ll be.
His tender mercies
Now you will see.

Fellowship with Him
Throughout the day.
Tell Him your heartaches.
He’ll heal always.
Rest in His comfort.
He is your friend.
Your faith He’ll strengthen,
True to the end.

Login to view embedded media
“May it Be Done to Me”
An Original Work / December 14, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

peter2 said:

Why not, thanks. i shall have a try. Actually, i, lastly and above all, wondered whether the intention of protecting Jesus was relevant, not from Jesus chilhood or Mary's motherhood.
Rather,
as regards God's centered reasons or plan to let him die on the cross :
Was it God's will to use the protecting feelings of Mary and Joseph to spare the baby Jesus life, or did they both flee to Egypt without caring for such feelings, but already at that moment, and may be they as well, being concerned by God's centered care about Jesus' doom on the cross ?

Click to expand...

In the infancy narratives, the Bible presents both things happening at once:

• Mary and Joseph act with the very normal protective love of parents.
• God is also actively guiding events so Jesus lives to fulfill his mission.

What the text actually emphasizes​

In Matthew 2, Joseph doesn’t “reason it out” from a long-range plan about the cross. He’s repeatedly warned in dreams (“take the child… flee to Egypt… Herod is about to search for the child to destroy him”), and he obeys quickly. That’s the narrative focus: obedient protection under divine direction.


So the flight isn’t described as “they didn’t care about feelings” or “they were already thinking about the cross.” It reads like: God warns; Joseph protects; the child is preserved.

Did they flee because of feelings, or because of “God’s plan”?​

Most Christian readings would say: both, but not in the same way.

• On their side (human level): they protected Jesus because that’s what faithful parents do—fear, urgency, love, responsibility. Those “protecting feelings” are not treated as a distraction from God’s will; they’re part of how God normally works through people.
• On God’s side (divine level): God wills that Jesus not die as an infant at Herod’s hand, because Jesus’ death is meant to happen at the appointed time, in the appointed way—publicly, voluntarily, and as part of the saving work the Gospels later describe.

So God’s will isn’t “use their feelings instead of his plan,” but “use their love and obedience within his plan.”

Were Mary and Joseph already thinking about the cross?​

The texts don’t suggest they had a fully formed, detailed concept like: “We must save him now so he can die on the cross later.”


They do have hints, though:

• In Luke 2, Simeon’s prophecy includes both Jesus’ destiny and a coming sorrow for Mary (“a sword will pierce your own soul”), which Christians often connect to the passion.
• Mary “treasures” and ponders, but that’s not the same as having the whole script in her head.

A simple way to put it:

• They knew enough to obey and to trust.
• God knew (and intended) the whole arc.

The core theological idea​

Classic Christian theology calls this providence through secondary causes: God accomplishes his purposes through real human decisions, real emotions, real obedience—not by bypassing them.


So yes: it’s very reasonable (and very “biblical”) to say God intended Mary and Joseph’s protective care to be one of the means by which Jesus was preserved—without implying they were coldly calculating “his doom on the cross” from the start. ( chat GPT )

timothyu said:

Says them. Yet the Kingdom often takes a back seat to the affairs of man.

Click to expand...

That may be true of some churches, but not all.

Michie said:

I won’t know until Wednesday. Thank you for the prayers.

Click to expand...

Continued prayers!

Blessings!

I could not read all of the op and found this:

Rescued One said:

I fell in the yard and couldn't get up. A stranger from one street over helped me get up. That was encouraging! It's too bad he's moving away.

Click to expand...

I hope you’re doing ok! God bless!

Not surprising, sadly.

I will have to watch this later!

Wolseley said:

50% of all new marriages end in divorce. 80% of all divorces are initiated by the women. 75% of all suicides annually are committed by men. And society has become "feminized" to the point where male roles are not recognized any more, or if they are such roles are..

Click to expand...

survival of the fittest.

embrace it.

Mark Quayle said:

No. If he caused it, and that is reality, then whatever is real within that reality is caused by God. To characterize something within that reality as uncaused is therefore logically self-contradictory.

Click to expand...

Only if God is unable to make a person or agent who can also be a causer. But if God can cause a causer, one who can affect the cosmos like God can, even if only on a tiny scale, then everything is NOT caused by God.

And if God causes all real things within the reality you speak of, then God is wholly to blame for any real sin. There is no one else to blame. And if blaming God for sin is sinful in itself, blame God for causing me to do it--I can only do what God causes me to do.

(shrug) We all know that the mainstream media has about as much accuracy, integrity, and impartiality as Pravda and Izvestiya, circa 1950.

According to their parish website, the pastor of St. Susanna in Dedham, Massachusetts is Fr. Steve Josoma.

I would caution you, Father. Another priest, once upon a time, went into politics instead of sticking to his priestly ministries---his name was Father Joseph Coughlin, and we all know how that turned out, don't we?

Using state funds to influence elections is illegal.

They are not migrants. Migrants migrate. They stay in one place for a specific job or a set amount of time, and then they leave and go somewhere else.

They are also not immigrants. Immigrants enter a country legally, with the intention of becoming citizens and permanent residents.

Let's call them what they really are: illegal aliens.

rjs330 said:

Except Islam allows lying to infidels in order to do whatever it takes to take over.

Click to expand...

It doesn't, as I explained in this response to you back in October.

rjs330 said:

Yes we need to listen to Muslims who have left to get the stories we wouldn't know otherwise... If you don't want to believe her story, then don't. Turn a blind eye. I don't care anymore.

Click to expand...

I don't doubt her stories about child brides and being promised to her cousin when she was born. This is a practice that occurs in the Islamic tribe I work with. More than half the children are married by contract before they are five years old, and the wedding can take place once they reach puberty and a dowry is paid. I have attended dozens of weddings that were prearranged by the parents and where the bride was a child. In 2016, I tried to help a 13-year-old girl get out of an arranged marriage by convincing the girl's mother and the boy's family how important it was for her to stay in school. I also had to pay the boy's family the same amount of money that the parents had agreed to years earlier for the girl's dowry. In their culture the family of the groom gives a dowry to the bride's family. In many cultures it's the other way around. The agreement was I would pay the money the boy's family needed for the dowry if they agreed to wait until she finished school to move forward with the wedding. Unfortunately, later that year I made a brief trip to the US, and while I was away, the girl's mother died, and the boy's family took the girl against her will to another island, and they were married anyway. Everything ex-Muslim Sabatina James blames Islam for in that video when it comes to her prearranged marriage and child marriages in general is the result of culture and tradition, not Islam. Those practices predate Islam and occur in non-Islamic cultures as well.

Just four minutes into the video, Sabatina James says, "Recently in Pakistan, five women were buried alive just because they refused the arranged marriage that their family had chosen for them. They wanted to marry men of their own choices. Three of them were actually teenagers. So this stuff happens every single day."

That incident wasn't recent; it happened in 2008, and it was tribal traditions, not the teachings of Islam, that led to their deaths.

Pakistan: Three teenage girls buried alive in tribal 'honour' killing

Three teenage girls have been buried alive by their tribe in a remote part of Pakistan to punish them for attempting to choose their own husbands, in an "honour" killing case. Some reports said that two older relatives of the girls had tried to intervene, but they too were shot and buried with the girls while still alive.

Under tribal - not religious - tradition, marriages are carefully arranged by elders. Marrying without permission is considered an affront to the honour of the tribe.

Another article:

Five women beaten and buried alive in Pakistan 'honour killing'

Honor killings predate Islam and occur in Pakistani Christian families as well.

Pakistani murders his sister in name of ‘honor’: police

A Pakistani girl has been killed by her brother for insisting on marrying a man of her choice, police said on Tuesday, marking the nation’s latest gruesome “honor killing”

Anum Ishaq masih, in her late teens and from a Christian family, was murdered while she slept in the city of Sialkot, southwest of Lahore, in the early hours of Sunday.

“Saqib Ishaq masih, 23, killed his sister by smashing her head with a wooden log while she was sleeping,” said Rana Zulfiqar, the officer in charge of the police station in Sialkot. “The girl, named Anum Ishaq masih, was in her late teens and wanted to marry a Christian neighbor, but the family was against the marriage.”


Later in the video she says the following: "It's actually frightening how little Christians know about what Islam teaches about them. Christians are among the worst of creatures."

Islam doesn't teach that Christians are the worst of creatures. Only those who oppose God's revealed books to them or those who engage in idolatry are considered the worst of creatures.

She goes on to say, "The Quran itself in Surah 5 says that a Muslim and a Christian cannot be friends."

The verse she's referring to was revealed in Medina during a time of conflict when certain Christian, Jewish, and pagan tribes had formed alliances to fight against the Muslims.

"O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies; some of them are allies of one another. Whoever of you allies himself with them is one of them. God does not guide the wrongdoing people." (Qur'an 5:51)

The Christians being spoken of were very specific Christians at a specific point in time. That verse is not a blanket command for Muslims to not be friends with Christians today.

As for those who have not fought against you for your religion, nor expelled you from your homes, God does not prohibit you from dealing with them kindly and equitably. God loves the equitable. But God prohibits you from befriending those who fought against you over your religion, and expelled you from your homes, and aided in your expulsion. Whoever takes them for friends—these are the wrongdoers. (Qur'an 60:8-9)

O you who believe! Do not befriend those who take your religion in mockery and as a sport, be they from among those who were given the Scripture before you, or the disbelievers. And obey God, if you are believers. When you call to the prayer, they take it as a joke and a trifle. That is because they are people who do not reason. (Qur'an 5:67-58)

As you can see from those verses, Muslims can be friends with those who do not fight against them or mock them.

Sabatina James knows the things I pointed out above, but she also knows that those watching the Michael Knowles show, like yourself, don't.

Genesis 6:4​

New International Version​

4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
1 Enoch internally written before the flood by Enoch 7th from Adam inspired scripture hidden (apocrypha) from the swine, and unworthy by God himself explains how the sons of God were fallen angels, and Jude, and Peter imply the same thing when they say angels left their heavenly abode were put in chains until judgement which is what 1 Enoch says also.

The Cave of Treasures internally is written after 70 AD as it says Titus has destroyed Jerusalem. Inspired scripture stopped 70 AD (Dan 9 said vision, and prophecy would be sealed up by then) so it is not inspired. Some manuscripts say it was written by Ephrem the Syrian who died 373 AD. That text says sons of Seth mated with daughters of Cain, and made the giants, and explicitly says fallen angels were not involved. Augustine of Hippo 400 AD says the same thing. Conflict of Adam, and Eve with Satan (which is divided into 4 books) also say the same. That text was also written after 70 AD as it says Titus has destroyed Jerusalem, and shares a lot of content with Cave of Treasures. That text also says Melchizadek was the son of Cainan. I'm not sure if it was written before or after cave of treasures. So Ephrem the Syrian is the earliest author denying what 1 Enoch says AFAIK. In those texts sons of god meant Seths children as Seth, and other people in that lineage were righteous Genesis 6:9. Augustine also promoted the idea that 1 Enoch was not written pre flood. So up until 300s AD the majority of Christians believed 1 Enoch was written pre flood like Jesus, Jude, 1 Enoch, and all the other evidence says it was (there is stuff in the dead sea scrolls about Abraham reading Enoch when in Egypt, and Levi passing Enochs books to his children). My guess is the synagogue of satan after 70 AD started saying to Christians you can't trust 1 Enoch it is a myth it is pseudepigrapha it was written after the flood etc, and a lot of Christians believed them just like Adam, and Eve believed the devil in the garden of Eden, David believed satan with the census (God allowed the devil to tempt David) , and just like 50 million Christians today believe the synagogue of satan when they say "god gave us palestine help us kill steal and destroy in the name of the god of abraham'. The reason the synagogue of satan did not like 1 Enoch is because of the son of man that existed before creation with the lord of spirits prophecy (ask chat GPT to show all the prophecies of Jesus in 1 Enoch) which was used by Daniel later on, and when Jesus called himself the son of man the high priest rent his garment, and said “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy. Mathew 26: 65.

BobRyan said:

Interesting youtube vid

Login to view embedded media
Notice there is a reference to GC 588 in the video.

Also notice that in the past 7 or 8 days we have Kirk Cameron discussing his rethinking of the soul and eternal hell, and we also have the release of the book by Charlie Kirk 'Stop in the name of God".

Both are discussed in that video

Click to expand...

I pre-ordered the book and received it but I probably won’t read it. I honestly do not trust that it was not altered prior to going to publish. I am glad to hear Kurt Cameron changing his views, hopefully he will on the Sabbath as well.

BobRyan said:

Adam and Eve were held accountable in Gen 3 for what God said in Gen 2 even though Moses had not yet been born. Clearly they did not have to wait for Moses to be born to hear what God had said.

Click to expand...

God told them and it is written. No sabbath though. I’m done with your circular logic and argument from silence. The only thing that can win the argument for you is to post a verse that shows people keeping the sabbath before Moses and a verse showing which commandments Abraham kept (maybe the Noahic law?). And then while you are at it post a verse that shows that the Mosaic law including the Ten Commandments was given to the gentiles collectively. I’ve been asking for these verse for quite some time but you either keep ignoring the requests or simply can not comply because they don’t exist. Which one is it?

Jan001 said:

I don't think the inspired scriptures were suppressed or hidden.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Click to expand...

Yes they were hidden by God. I made a post about How God hides things. Ask chat GPT to show all the bible verses about God hiding things, and why. It is so only wise people come across it not swine/unworthy. The word apocrypha means hidden. Thanks for the positive comment.

My son Jakeb is having another bad night. Please ask God to heal him mind and body, give him joy and keep him safe. I pray that the doctor will help him on Monday. Oh please pray there is nothing seriously wrong. I ask in the name of Jesus. Thank you and God bless you.

BrotherJJ said:

We agree Rev makes many symbolic points. Having said that, your reply leaves no room for any literal interpretations.

The OP made no reference to 666. So, I'll leave that rabbit hole for another discussion thread.

Literal vs symbolic scripture's examples:

This verse ALL literal
Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; & every eye shall see him, & they also which pierced him: & all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen

This verse symbolic
Rev 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
(NOTE: NOT wool or snow or a flame. BUT: "like wool" "as snow" "as a flame". We must pay close attention, CONTEXT is always KEY.

Rev text often announces symbolism with phrases like: sign, like or as, I saw, having the appearance of, which represents or which is...

Examples: Rev 12:1: "A great sign appeared in heave", "a woman". Rev 13:2: The beast "was like" "a leopard". When text signals a symbol we should interpret symbolically.

In Rev, #'s tied to counts of people or time are consistently literal.

Examples: 7 churches, 7 seals, 7 trumpets, 7 bowls, 42 months, 1,260 days, 12 TRIBES, 12K from each tribe etc...

Rev cites literal places. Examples: Jerusalem, Euphrates, Armageddon, Patmos, Zion etc. Unless symbolic its noted. Example: Rev 11:8. "spiritually" called Sodom & Egypt.

When Rev cites earthly judgments, they are literal. Examples: earthquakes literal, darkness literal, famine literal, plagues literal, war literal etc...

When symbolic is signaled, interpret symbolically. If not, interpret literally.

How this applies to the 144k. John gives numbers → literal tribes, literal names, literal genealogical bloodline categories. When no symbolic signal given → interpret literally!

So again I submit the 144k mentioned in Rev 7 & 14 are literal OT Israelites. Men redeemed from the earth, a firstfruits/resurrection wave soul harvest offering made unto The Father & Son. Amen

Click to expand...

Apocalyptic literature is often symbolic so it is difficult if not necessary to take it literal.