Latest activity

durangodawood · Monday at 10:26 PM

Servus said:
Solomon was old when he wrote Ecclesiastes. He's talking about old people becoming sedentary because they're to immersed in nostalgia. He's talking about himself dwelling upon his former glory leading to becoming despondent over his present life.

Well, youve probably studied this - while I havent.

Im just thinking of the typical way people perennially mythologize the olden days as morally better. Its like human nature, regardless of reality.

wing2000 · Monday at 10:25 PM

From the Southwest....
Fruits and Vegtables - no change (that would change if Mexico is ever asesses higher tariffs)
Dairy - same
Meat - same - or at least our monthly "box" has not gone up yet (we have meat delivered from a company that sources it from family-owned farms)
Coffee - same - I order from a coffee beas from roaster who imports coffee directly from farmers in Guatemala, Honduras and Ehtiopia. Again, it's always been bit more at $17 lb, but worth it for the quality, freshness and supporting small businesses here and abroad.

iarwain · Monday at 10:24 PM

childeye 2 said:
Kimmel: "I don't think the murderer who shot Charlie Kirk represents anyone".

That's great, but that's from his "comeback" speech. I wouldn't call it an apology, but he actually seemed to show some contrition, which to be honest I didn't really expect. I guess it was part of his deal with Disney to get back on the air. I do agree with him though, I don't think the murder represents anyone. The problem with the murderer is that he seemed to buy into left wing attempts at dehumanization and the spin they put on twisting Charlie Kirk's words to make it sound like "hate speech".

durangodawood · Monday at 10:19 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
The reason some of his wacky stuff gets embraced to the degree it does (instead of immediately getting laughed out of the room like flat-earther stuff) is because the drug companies have made themselves untrustworthy to a certain degree as well.

Frankly thats an excuse for stupid people. Ok, maybe just ignorant - to be generous.

ThatRobGuy said:
We can't necessarily let the drug companies and healthcare establishment off the hook scot free for the role they've played over the last 25 years in making mainstream medicine seem less trustworthy in the eyes of a lot of people.

People tend to look at these things through a lens of "compared to what alternative?"

The correct response to the portion of pharma thats lying and manipulative is not to take refuge in the promises of other liars.

ThatRobGuy said:
Unfortunately in this case, the "what" RFK gets compared to are the people who brought us:
"We see no evidence that Oxycontin is habit forming"
"Vioxx is completely safe, and concerns about risk of stroke are overblown"
J&J/Janssen in particular has had numerous scandals over the years... One recent case would be the near billion class action lawsuit they just had to shell out to people in the US & Canada after years of insisting that their talc based baby powder was safe. Apart from the fact that the talc by itself was found by the WHO and FDA to be possibly carcinogenic to humans when used in the genital area on females... they were shipping out batches (as recently as 2019) that were found to have asbestos in them, something they initially denied and publicly tried to attribute to FDA testing facilities making mistakes or being contaminated.

Yes theres a ton of money to be made in lying to the customer. So, whats desperately needed is a trustworthy regulator - which is exactly what we dont have right now. Instead he sends people down whole other avenues of woo and fraud. Its pathetic.

Reluctant Theologian · Monday at 10:18 PM

Carl Emerson said:
Hi there,

There are several references in the Gospels to the need for prayer and fasting to prepare one's self before dealing with some demonic issues.

Many modern translations omit the reference to fasting and some even omit the reference to Prayer.

Can someone explain what is going on here...

First what reliable manuscripts include this.

Second is there a place for prayer and fasting before being used to speak into a serious spiritual bondage?

Comments appreciated.

Do you have specific sections you would like to have comments on?

Pop D. · Monday at 10:09 PM

Heavenly Father, Holy is Your Name, we pray You will watch over and protect StarryEyedShoeGazer, in the Name of Jesus, as only You can do. Amen and Amen.

RabbiJames · Monday at 10:08 PM

PARASHAH: “VaYelech” (and he went) DEUT 31:1-30

“I am 120 years old today,” starts Moshe, “I can no more go out and come in…”

Interestingly, he mentions his age, 120 years old. Guess the day he spoke to his people was his last birthday. He would complete 120 years on earth and give up the ghost. We can divide 120 years into 3 parts: the first 40 years, the second 40 years, and the third 40 years. “40” is the number of tests and trials.

He lived the first 40 years as a prince of Egypt and a general in the Egyptian army, through circumstances (which never happen by accident) Adonai sends Moshe running to the land of Midian, where he meets his wife and family and becomes a shepherd. So, we go from royalty to a shepherd, a profession loathed by the Egyptians. Then the last 40 years are the “ministry years”. Adonai changed his profession so that he could fit into God’s perfect plan, that of freeing his people from the bondage of slavery through HIS chosen vessel.

Moshe was 80 years old when he received the commission to free his people. The prior years were all “training years” or “Years of getting ready”. What will we be doing when and if we reach 80 years of life? Will we be ready to continue in ministry? Or will we be looking forward to a rocking chair and sipping iced tea through a straw?

We must take the example of Moshe, active until the day he dies. One can retire from a secular job, but not from ministry. Ministry is a life-long calling. Whether it be a pastor or rabbi, Torah teacher or Sunday School teacher, music leader, youth worker, or just giving out bread to the hungry along with a gospel tract of the “Bread of Life,” we must not think of retirement, not from that.

“I can no more go out and come in.”

Moshe has already been told that he is about to leave the land of the living, so he is to anoint the future leader. So, who will lead the people to the promised land? The answer is in verse 3:

“YHVH your Elohim Himself is passing over before you. He shall destroy these nations from before you, and you shall possess them. Yehoshua himself is passing over before you, as YHVH has spoken.”

There is a play on words here. Adonai Himself is leading the people; He is passing over before the people. This is what a king in battle does. The king leads his army. Yet the verse also states that “Yehoshua” will pass over before the people. So, who is leading? BOTH are leading. The spirit of YHVH is within Yehoshua (Joshua), whom Moshe has anointed as his successor.

“Yehoshua” will take the lead and lead the people to the promised land. “Yehoshua” (Joshua) is the longer name of “Yeshua” the name “Yehoshua” contains the name “Yeshuah” which is “salvation” or we could say, the name “Yeshua” with the added “h” which means “Behold, Salvation comes from “YAH” The name “Yehoshua” has the first three letters of YHVH (the “Yod” “Hey” and the “V”)

Symbolically, it is God himself who will take the people through the final steps of the journey to reach the promised land, through his servant Joshua. We will not live forever in our mortal bodies; sooner or later, we must name a successor, someone who will take our place. It might be our children, if in business, some faithful business partner, or if in ministry, someone who is mature in the faith.

After Moshe had finished writing the scrolls of the Torah, he gave them to the priests to put beside the Ark of the Covenant. So, I imagine that the Ark of the Covenant had some sort of “side-pocket” or a place to put the scrolls. Now, the “Aron HaKodesh” was complete, with a gold chest with the tablets of the Commandments, the pot of Manna, Aron’s rod, and now, the Torah scrolls. All to remind us that the “Torah is our guide and leader to give us the 'Bread of Life' who is Yeshua, who leads us through his Holy Spirit and his WORD.

Moshe also commanded that the Torah would be read during the time of Sukkot at the end of seven years (vss 10,11). It may have been just the book of “D’varim (Deuteronomy) or the whole Torah (from Genesis to Deuteronomy). The Hebrew Word used is "Sefer," which means "book."

Yes, the Bible consists of 66 books today, yet when Moses wrote down the words that the Holy Spirit inspired him to write, he wrote them as one long book, word after word. No paragraphs, nor verses, nor chapters. He probably used many pieces of parchment, papyrus, or pieces of thin leather. Deuteronomy, however, is a review of all that was written from Genesis to Numbers.

Why is the WORD of God important to us? What is its purpose in our lives? Why should it be so important to read and study it?

It shows us the perfection and sinless being of God and who He is. It points out our weakness and sinful nature, and it points us to reconciliation with God through Yeshua. Then it teaches us how to live a holy and righteous lifestyle through the mitzvoth (commandments) (In that order!) Good works do not come before salvation, rather the other way around. Righteous works will count towards rewards in heaven, not towards a salvation experience, THAT only comes by faith in the completed work of Yeshua at Calvary.

Let's not wait 7 years to read the Bible. Let's read and study it every day. (Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth) B.I.B.L.E. In Pirke Avot (Ethics of the Fathers), which is part of the Talmud, it is written: "Love and pursue peace and love mankind, and bring (mankind) to the Torah" (Spoken by Hillel). This is witnessing and making disciples through God's Word. Rabbi Shammai said, "Make Bible study (Torah study) a fixed habit." Say little and do much. May our works show more than our words!

Shalom

Postvieww · Monday at 10:07 PM

Michie said:
The FBI secretly deployed more than 250 plainclothes agents to the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021 riot, an operation so disorganized it unleashed searing frustrations among many of the FBI’s rank-and-file that the bureau had lost its core competencies to “wokeness” and allowed its employees to become “pawns in a political war,” according to an after-action report kept from the public for more than four years.

Scores of FBI agents and personnel – many from the bureau’s premier Washington field office (WFO) – sent anonymous complaints to the after-action team detailing how agents were sent into an unsafe scenario without proper safety equipment or the ability to identify themselves readily as armed officers to other police agencies, the report obtained by Just the News shows.

The most persistent complaint was that the bureau during the James Comey and Chris Wray era had become infected with political biases and liberal ideology that treated the protesters from the summer 2020 Black Lives Matter riots far differently than those arrested in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 episode.

Go here to read the rest of the story. Prior to this the FBI had admitted only to 26 “confidential sources” among the J6 crowd. None of this would ever have come out but for Trump winning a second term. The FBI is a rogue agency that needs to be brought to heel, or dismantled and replaced.

274 FBI Agents Embedded in January 6 Event

Does this mean Cris Wray lied to Congress as well ? Where are all of those posters who ranted about an insurrection? There was no insurrection on Jan 6, just a dog and pony show instigated in part by undercover FBI.

stevevw · Monday at 10:02 PM

Hans Blaster said:
Are you trying to bore us to death. That video was unwatchable.

Lol I honestly I did not see this reply when I wrote the previous one to another poster. You are literally proving the point I just made. That skeptics or should I say cynics are dismissing the scientists doing this work as nothing, boring, not relevant and no need to even take it seriously.

You demand double blinds but you then dismiss scientific testing altogether. Shows complete hypocracy, inconsistency and blatant bias.

wing2000 · Monday at 10:01 PM

Oompa Loompa said:
Apparently, she is accused of marrying her brother to circumvent immigration laws.

More false accusations: [this claim was never substantiated]

"Wasn’t she the one that married her brother in order to gain citizenship??? What SCUM we have in our Country, telling us what to do, and how to do it. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

...but of course with Trump, he doesn't care. He got plenty of traction with people who believe the birther crap.

stevevw · Monday at 9:51 PM

Ophiolite said:
You have previously denigrated the competence of ancient artisans to manufacture vases from that period with "simple"tools.

And you are denegrating them by not acknowledging their knowlegde of being able to create such works without the simple tools. You want to force them into a box as typical of the modern orthodox narrative as it has done for 200 to 400 years since colonialisation and the destruction of that cultural knowledge. Now your only aiding in this lie.

There you go I can play your moral outrage game.

Ophiolite said:
Now you are denigrating the approach of scientists, openly suggesting investigators "wouldn't have time" to do the job right. Your fly-by-night operators may be light on comepetence and commitment, not so serious workers in the field.

And now your denigrating the scientists who actually did the tests and stated they only had limited time to test a certain number being around 20 vases due to the time limits set by the Petrie museum and not the scientists.

You want them to give up some of that time doing blind tests which are completely unnecessary. Your now denegrating their own words and explanations as to why they did not do blind testing. Just as others on this thread are denegrating good scientists and calling them nut jobs. Give me a break the hypocracy is plain to see.

Ophiolite said:
You offer an AI comment on the double blind tests. Here is the AI comment I got:

In summary:
The call for independent, double-blind testing is entirely valid. Without it, the “CNC-level precision” claim rests on shaky ground, since extraordinary conclusions have been drawn from possibly narrow or biased data. At the same time, dismissing the vessels as “primitive” underestimates the ingenuity and persistence of ancient craftspeople. The most balanced position is that careful, impartial metrology should precede any sweeping technological claims.

And the scientists did careful, impartial metrology. Thats all that matters and it has been done a dozen times now and all tyhe data is consistent. Its good science. Stop creating logical fallacies, red herrings and strawmen. This level of moral outrage and nit picking would not be applied to anything esle. Especially of it supports the skeptics.

They can present evidence like the experiments done in backyards and homes as proof the simple methods can achieve such levels of precision and never question is legitimacy. Simply present it as gospel. Even presenting their own words without one bit of scientific and independent evidence as gospel. Just simply saying its wrong is good enough.

Never once stiopping to apply double blinds or even questioning the methods and claims. Yet we later find they cheat and compromise on the tests. But thats all acceptable to the skeptics because it suits their narrative. Its blantant hypocracy and your showing your bias.

Ophiolite said:
Steve, you really need to reflect on the possibility that you don't understand science, or archaeology, or their methodologies. I'm sure you find this sort of speculation entertaining, but so are crime thrillers and Rolling Stones concerts, but neither tell us how the world works. Time to get your critical thinking sent in for an upgrade.

What on earth is the speculation about the plain hard and cold facts of numbers. I think its the other way around. You cannot handle the numbers so skeptics go into overdrive about everything from moral outrage in claiming the simple numbers are somehow descriminating against ancient people.

Or that somehow the numbers, the plain clear data like the plain clear signatures are somehow being biased. Give me a break, Just deal with the numbers or don't deal with them at all. But please stop the fallacies and moral outrage over numbers and data lol.

seeking.IAM · Monday at 9:46 PM

Shameful and embarrassing. How much lower can we sink? Whatever happened to decency and respect?

Hvizsgyak · Monday at 9:45 PM

Stopped_lurking said:
Yes, my interpretation would be that those who put those signs have identified that those that feel represented by those symbols are worried about encountering hate in society, and that they wish say that hate against those who feel represented are absent at that particular location. That seems to me like a straightforward interpretation.

Alright, I can see where you are coming from. But can you see where the confusion is with that sign for many of us here. I we understand it to mean what we thought it meant don't you think thousands of other people would see it the wrong way. Wouldn't it make more sense to say "we identify with this cause". Everybody is happy then.

Tensions are super high everywhere here is the US. Wouldn't it be better to try not to provoke anger in others. We want peace in this country and you want peace in this country. We don't have to agree on everything but let's take extra steps to try and stay calm, cool and collect :oldthumbsup:

.

Like I said in my other post, some of us read between the lines better than others.

Ivan Hlavanda · Monday at 9:40 PM

PloverWing said:
Is the story of Eden literally true? no, probably mythology.

This is where you are terribly wrong.

The first 3 chapters of Genesis are literal history.

Understanding these 3 chapters as mythology will result in wrong understanding of the whole Bible.

Saying Adam and Eve were not literal for example, would have serious implications for virtually every tenet and doctrine of the Christian faith. If Adam was not a real man, then sin did not enter the world through one man as Romans 5:12 states. How, then, did sin enter the world? Further, if the New Testament is wrong about how sin entered the world, what else is it wrong about? If Romans 5:12 is wrong, how do we know that the entirety of Romans 5:8–15 is not wrong? If the story of Adam and Eve is not to be taken literally—if they did not really exist—then there was no one to rebel, there was no fall into sin. Satan, the great deceiver, would like nothing better than for people to believe that the Bible should not be taken literally and that the story of the fall of man is a myth. Why? Because once we start denying parts of the Bible, we lose our trust in the Bible. Why should we believe anything God’s Word says if we cannot trust everything that it says?

Jesus taught that God created one man and one woman (Mark 10:6) and mentions Abel, a son of Adam and Eve in Luke 11:51. Was Jesus wrong in His beliefs? Or did Jesus know there were no literal Adam and Eve and He was simply accommodating His teaching to the beliefs of the people (i.e., lying)? If Jesus is wrong in His beliefs, He is not God. If Jesus is intentionally deceiving people, He is sinning and therefore cannot be the Savior (1 Peter 1:19).

That is why this is such a serious issue. To deny the literalness of Adam and Eve is to place oneself in opposition to Jesus and the apostle Paul. If one has the audacity to claim he is right and Jesus and Paul are wrong, then Jesus is a sinner, not God and not the Savior; the apostle Paul is a false prophet; and the Bible is not inspired, inerrant, or trustworthy.

Sketcher · Monday at 9:40 PM

rambot said:
A quote from Chuck Kirk.

Now I look at this quote and I get seriously confused. I cannot understand why a person would have a problem with empathy.

How would the Good Samaritan Help someone that thinks their terrible without it?

How can Jesus heal someone without it?

In my view, empathy connects us and allow people sympathy to flow more greatly. It creates stronger bonds between strangers.

So help me understand how and WHY empathy is bad.

To be fair to Mr. Kirk, he preferred "sympathy" to "empathy" when talking to people: Login to view embedded media
The abuse of the word "empathy" can be harmful, and the use of the word "sympathy" can be more honest.

Is it bad for me to genuinely have empathy for someone? I'd say it's good having come from a bad circumstance. At that time it has value, but for me to really have empathy, I would have had to have gone through what they did. I have sympathy for the Mormons in Grand Blanc. I don't want to have empathy for them because I don't want someone driving a vehicle through my church's front door, setting the church on fire, and shooting people I know and love. That shouldn't ever happen, not to my church, not to theirs.

timewerx · Monday at 9:37 PM

SavedByGrace3 said:
I suspect many, if not most, of the people who do not believe the Bible is true are not Christians, are not theists, and likely do not believe in anything spiritual at all. Given that only 20% of Americans believed the Bible is the literal word of God, I do not think this is an unexpected or significant state result.
I do wonder who was included in this poll.
83% of Americans believe in God.
70% of U.S. adults describe themselves as spiritual.
62% of U.S. adults identify as Christian.
As to the Bible:
In 2022, Gallup found that only 20% of Americans believed the Bible is the literal word of God, while 49% viewed it as inspired by God but not entirely literal, and 29% considered it a collection of human writings.
Thank you for this thread.

Christians who frequent forums as we have are a different flavor than everybody else.

And Christians you talk to in a public setting like a church or Bible study isn't going to tell you truth what they truly feel about the Bible out of fear of persecution if what they say is offensive to mainstream beliefs.

It really takes more faith and spiritual fortitude to go against the majority. Blind belief is easy but isn't really what Jesus taught. Everything must be subjected to scrutiny.

DreamyLaLa · Monday at 9:27 PM

Multifavs said:
I made two plush pumpkins using this pattern: DIY PUMPKIN PLUSH
View attachment 370862

I didn't have any orange fabric or green minky, so I made my pumpkins white and pink with brown stems.

I love your choice of colors! White pumpkins are my favorite, and I wish there were pink ones in real life!

perplexed · Monday at 9:26 PM

I don't think it is that hard to come up with something good about Trump
Something along the lines of
Trump's hostile reaction to "defund the police" is appropriate and good leadership

DreamyLaLa · Monday at 9:25 PM

Multifavs said:
I just made a plush dove with the same pattern I used to make a plush crow last year!
View attachment 370739
View attachment 370740

My crow is happy to have a friend.
View attachment 370741

So cute! I like the dove's blue eyes!

Hvizsgyak · Monday at 9:24 PM

Login to view embedded media Login to view embedded media
I hope when this has been vindicated, it will be placed back where it was in the Current News Section. Nobody is buying this Tyler Robinson story. We want true justice to be done for Charlie Kirk. Here is more info on the cover-up of this assassination.

Multifavs · Monday at 9:20 PM

I made two plush pumpkins using this pattern: DIY PUMPKIN PLUSH

I didn't have any orange fabric or green minky, so I made my pumpkins white and pink with brown stems.

ViaCrucis · Monday at 9:19 PM

Valletta said:
"Antifa is terrible," the president said. "These aren't protests, these are crimes that they're doing. They're throwing bricks at cars of the ICE and Border Patrol. … They're professional agitators. … They should be put in jail. What they're doing to this country is really subversive."

Trump to designate antifa a 'major terrorist organization'

President Donald Trump designated antifa a terrorist organization via Truth Social, recommending investigations into those funding the left-wing activist movement.

www.foxnews.com

Anti-fascism is simply the default state for all reasonable people who believe in basic human dignity.

aps,504x498,medium,transparent-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.jpg

-CryptoLutheran

DialecticSkeptic · Monday at 9:15 PM

I hold to a Reformed covenant theology, not as articulated in the Westminster Standards (Presbyterian) but rather the Three Forms of Unity (Reformed)—the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dort.

The Westminster Confession of Faith asserts that "the guilt of this sin was imputed ... to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generations" (6.3). Motivated by my theological convictions, and because their language could be misunderstood, I would nuance that statement a little bit.

First, Adam alone is personally guilty of his trespass, while all those in him are held corporately guilty through federal headship. We are guilty and condemned in Adam as covenant-breakers due to his trespass; in the same way, we are justified in Christ as covenant-keepers by his obedience. In both cases, it is a forensic matter of imputation via federal headship and covenant union: Adam is the covenant-breaker, as are all those in him, so also Christ is the covenant-keeper, as are all those in him. But I think that is probably what the divines meant anyway, that the guilt is personally his by trespass and corporately ours by imputation.

Second, the clause "descending from them by ordinary generations" seems to imply that sin is passed along through human reproduction. As for me, I reject that idea. It is my understanding that sin is passed along theologically (via covenantal solidarity), not biologically (via the gene pool), because sin pertains to the covenantal relationship between God and man. Both Adam's sin and Christ's righteousness are covenant realities of federal headship, and imputation refers to covenantal solidarity, not biological inheritance. (I don't believe that sin is something we can identify and isolate biologically, as if there is something in the human genome to which we could point and say, "Here is the sin gene and the nucleotide sequence that codes for it." And if sin is not a gene, then it's not a component of the reproductive cells involved in procreation, i.e., it's not passed along through biological continuity.)

In answer your question, then, infants are guilty and condemned in Adam as covenant-breakers because he was the federal head of the old humanity—and infants are humans. We are in Adam by nature, and in Christ by grace. While infants have not committed any actual sins, to say they "have not sinned" is to simply beg the question against federal headship and covenant union, and the symmetrical logic of Paul's contrast of Adam and Jesus.

1. "I don't see the scriptures teaching the imputation of Adam's sin, but I do see it teaching the inheritance of the sinful nature."

Why do we have this sinful nature? It is because something was broken, correct? Adam's trespass consisted of breaking the covenant (individually); and, since he is our federal head, we are reckoned as covenant-breakers (corporately)—that is, sinners. Thus, "the guilt of this sin was imputed" to all those in Adam.

2. "If infants are guilty by imputation, then how do you interpret Romans 4:15 and 7:9?"

Romans 4:15 defines what makes something a transgression, not what makes someone guilty. You can't step over a line if no line has been drawn. That doesn't mean there is no sin or guilt where there is no revealed command (cf. Rom. 2:12-15). In the next chapter, Paul explicitly says sin exists "before the law was given," though it is not counted as transgression in the same way. Infants are guilty in Adam apart from conscious transgression.

And Romans 7:9 is not teaching that infants are innocent until law arrives; Paul had said earlier that "death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam" (5:14). His whole argument is that spiritual death (proof of guilt) is universal, even without personal law-breaking.

3. "It seems to me that a person must know right from wrong in order to be guilty of wrongs committed. If this is the case, then children too young to know right from wrong really are innocent. What do you think of this?"

There is a difference between being held corporately guilty and individually guilty. Infants are held corporately guilty (original sin), not individually guilty (actual sins).

4. "As for the confessions that say infants are regenerated, do they mean all infants or only those who die?"

I don't know.

Hvizsgyak · Monday at 9:12 PM

Jermayn said:
MOD HAT

View attachment 370827

I don't understand the warning. What did I do wrong?

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page