The Barbarian said:

Humans and chimps are more closely related to each other than either is related to other apes.

Click to expand...

*Bzzt* *Bzzt* Pedant alert! Chimpanzees are more closely related to bonobos than they are to us.

fhansen said:

That's the question. And to believe that everyone who ever heard those words, which are only meant as words of encouragement and exhortation to begin with, and applied them to themselves, whether they be the first audience who heard them or any of the rest of us down through the centuries, was/is necessarily saved woud not be reasonable, For that matter, the bible speaks of those who thought they were one of God's but were not, and others who didn't know they were His but were.

Click to expand...

I’m disappointed that you so easily went askew here. My question to you was who was us and all you had to do was look at who is Paul taking to. Here let’s look.

“Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are at Ephesus and are faithful in Christ Jesus:”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭1‬:‭1‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

His words are directed at the saints who are at Ephesus. The Greek word here is hagios. I‘m sure Paul is not talking about spiritual beings with wings, right?

Saints- ἅγιος hágios, hag'-ee-os; from ἅγος hágos (an awful thing) (compare G53, H2282); sacred (physically, pure, morally blameless or religious, ceremonially, consecrated):—(most) holy (one, thing), saint.

Look at the definition of hagios. These are morally blameless and consecrated human beings which are those with saving faith.

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons and daughters through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭1‬:‭3‬-‭5‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Chose- ἐκλέγομαι eklégomai, ek-leg'-om-ahee; middle voice from G1537 and G3004 (in its primary sense); to select:—make choice, choose (out), chosen.

Is in the middle voice so the saints that are at Ephesus and Paul are the agent of the action.

Predestined- προορίζω proorízō, pro-or-id'-zo; from G4253 and G3724; to limit in advance, i.e. (figuratively) predetermine:—determine before, ordain, predestinate.

This one is really easy to understand. Again refers to the saints that are at Ephesus and Paul since he includes himself by using ”us”.

“In Him we also have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things in accordance with the plan of His will, to the end that we who were the first to hope in the Christ would be to the praise of His glory.”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭1‬:‭11‬-‭12‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Those with saving faith and Paul have obtained an inheritance because of God’s will to the end (not to the middle or almost to the end but to the actual end).

Obtained- κληρόω klēróō, klay-ro'-o; from G2819; to allot, i.e. (figuratively) to assign (a privilege):—obtain an inheritance.

This verb is in the aorist passive so is an action already given and received by the agent.

Now, how many saints (those with saving faith) do you think were at Ephesus? Paul, writing from a Roman prison, intended that all who long for Christlike maturity would receive this writing. Even those with saving faith continue to mature AND cooperate with their Sanctification. But, once again, because they have been already been given the inheritance then their sanctification comes from within salvation not for their salvation. It would be redundant for those with saving faith that have already received their inheritance to have to work for their inheritance, don’t you think?

fhansen said:

And we'll know for certain who persevered-who apparently had this "saving faith"- at the end.

Click to expand...

Nah. Thats the problem with your church’s faith plus works doctrines. You don’t get to enjoy our Lords rest. Haven’t you heard that His yoke is comfortable and His burden is light?

fhansen said:

If we love, we'll show the fruit of that love-and you know far better than I if you have it. If so, more power to you; you're doing God's will.

Click to expand...

We do love naturally. Do you love naturally brother? Or do you have to force yourself to love?

fhansen said:

You seem to accept the carrots and reject any sticks. To the extent that we love, then we will have no problem forgiving others. But with faith and without love we are nothing, as Paul tells us in 1 Cor 13. Jesus didn't say those words in Matt 6 just to fill in space. Again, if you love, if you return the love and mercy that's been shown to you, then you're doing God's will. This begins with faith in Him. His purpose is to produce something in us, something better than He began with, something like Himself, something within whom real truth and justice and righteousness reign, rather than simply to ignore injustice now and allow us to remain in our sins as long as we...believe.

Click to expand...

Do you honestly think that the Paul and the saints who are at Ephesus, who were chosen and already received their inheritance, are going to loose their faith? Do you think that even the saints who are at Ephesus are perfect, love perfectly, forgive perfectly? Do you think that even those with saving faith do not still sin? No one, and I mean no one, in this world, even those with saving faith, are perfect. Glorification will not happen until our eternal state. Look, you cheapen the free gift of God and Jesus sacrifice when you insert works as a requirement for salvation. Christ‘s sacrifice is sufficient. I know you say that it is not the case but when you peel the onion that is what is at the center.

ozso said:

Tell it to @Pommer

Pommer said:
Oh I see, there’s nothing “wrong” with it, per se, just that it was overly critical of the facts of the matter, that being this person has a documented history of fudging the numbers. Okay.

Click to expand...

Right - I don't see how that would imply that she actually changed election results or committed a crime. If I go around claiming that Kamala Harris won the 2024 election and that Pennsylvania had 200,000 more votes than voters (an example of one of Honey's many false claims), that's not changing anything official or committing a crime, but it is fudging the numbers.

This article breaks down several of her false claims and misrepresentations: Heather Honey’s research has made her a right-wing election expert. Her findings are deeply flawed.

Here is one I wrote 5-10 years ago

Login to view embedded media
Login to view embedded media
God come down, Fill our town

Show us your way, Reach all today

God come down, Fill our town

Do not leave one without the son

God come down, Fill our town


Men are going to and fro

Yet few of them truly know.

Hearts are lost hearts are hurt

Only you can bring new birth.

Wash away our guilty stain

Come into our hearts again.


Many war and many fight

Yet oh lord this is not right.

Some take what is not theirs

Oh God come and take our cares.

Others cry when no one knows

Their life on the edge and so it goes.


Some in passion some in lust

Make rushed decisions lacking trust.

Children born to broken homes

If only they were not alone.

God provides and God does give

If only men could to him live.


God come down, Fill our town

Show us your way, Reach all today

God come down, Fill our town

Do not leave one without the son

fhansen said:

I don't know of any Christian denominations that teach the faith is not a gift of grace first of all. To deny that would be to promote Pelagianism.

Click to expand...

Not all Augustinian/ Calvinist teachings are held by Christian denominations particularly those who do not hold to determinism. As far as Pelagian, he got it partially correct.
Thanks for sharing.

I used to binge read classic novels when I was younger. Nowadays, the vast majority of what I read are historic non-fiction books. I find I have a specific fascination with the Borden murders, and the murder of Robert Kennedy, and specific American presidential elections of interest.

Let’s take a look at a scripture to clarify this statement. Take note!

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. (Genesis 4:1)

What happened after Adam “knew” his wife? She conceived, and bare Cain.

The accounts of Sodom and Gomorrah and the Levite’s experience with the Benjamin’s, let’s us know that the act of “knowing” someone of the same sex, or as otherwise known as homosexuality, is a sin that is punishable by death.

What does God think about allowing homosexuals/sodomites to dwell among His people? He is clear about Israel’s stand on this issue as evidenced by scriptures in the Bible.

In I Kings 14:21 the Lord identified sodomites that were co-habituating with the Israelites:

And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the LORD did choose out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother's name was Naamah an Ammonite. And Judah did evil in the sight of the LORD, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins which they had committed, above all that their fathers had done. For they also built them high places, and images, and groves, on every high hill, and under every green tree. And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel. (I Kings 14:21-24)

Note what the scripture says, “Judah did evil in the sight of the LORD, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins which they had committed, above all that their fathers had done.” These men of Judah not only built temples to pagan gods, they allowed sodomites/homosexuals to dwell among them. Note what the Lord had Moses to write in regards to this:

There shall be no harlot of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. (Deuteronomy 23:17)

The lord have not changed his ways. For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed (Malachi 3:6) or Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

wing2000 said:

...since the National Guard is reportedly used for picking up trash, spreading mulch and walking around the National Mall and trainstation, I submit it would be more efficient for the Feds to hire people to do those jobs....

Click to expand...

Except those would be seen as "DEI hires" even if Trump has eliminated DEI hiring, just because most local hires would be non-white by demographics.

Also, by using National Guard, federal compensation money is flowing to the red states that leaped to send in their National Guard troops. You don't think they did that for free, do you?

rjs330 said:

Banning high capacity magazines wont do it. You can change out a magazine in less than 2 seconds. Revolvers can be reloaded in 3.

Click to expand...

Under ideal conditions and with a lot of practice, that's possible, but your average mass shooter isn't going to be able to do that during an adrenaline-induced chaotic situation. The banning of high-capacity magazines really comes down to common sense. Which shooter is going to be able to do the most harm in the most efficient manner? A shooter with a semi-automatic rifle equipped with a 100-round magazine or one with ten 10-round magazines? Your own numbers provide the answer. Even if the shooter is well trained, there will be an added 20 seconds added to the shooting time. But for a less experienced shooter under pressure, it will take them even longer. 5, 6, 7, or 8+ seconds? Even if they can switch magazines out in 5 seconds, which is unlikely, it adds close to one minute of downtime between shots being fired. This gives people time to react to the shooter between each pause, whether it be to run, hide, or make an attempt to disarm the shooter. It also increases the chances of the shooter making a mistake, especially an inexperienced shooter under pressure.

Niels said:

Jesus didn't directly address homosexuality, but the following is clear:

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
- Romans 3:23

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
- Romans 6:23

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
- Matthew 7:1-2

Click to expand...

Also Jesus says in John 7: 24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. This is thread is speaking on the law, this is righteous Judgement according to the laws and Commandment of God. Another example in Luke 12: 54 And he said also to the people, When ye see a cloud rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it is. 55 And when ye see the south wind blow, ye say, There will be heat; and it cometh to pass. 56 Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time? 57 Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right? We as a people suppose to judge what is right, we use judgement for everything else but when is comes to sodomy we judge not. We allow laws to support this abomination act, etc.

Jerry N. said:

I understand what you mean, but I don’t think you are saved until you accept the gift of salvation. It is a gift after all, and one does not have to accept gifts, no matter how wonderful they are. I don’t see what you mean in John 6, because both God’s choice and man’s acceptance are mentioned. I’m sure that God’s gift of forgiveness can be irresistible, but it would undermine the whole idea of evangelism if it was always true. God would save you no matter what man does, but we are called to preach the gospel.

Click to expand...

How can you accept what you already are? It’s like accepting your mother’s gift to you of blue eyes. How can you accept or reject it? It’s who you are.

The point of evangelism is because God decided that hearing the gospel was the method He would use to work on someone’s heart.

1 Corinthians 1:21 (NASB95) For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

Can you give me the verse in John 6 that says man has to accept the gift? Thanks.

prodromos said:

No, you claimed that was the view of the early Church fathers. You haven't demonstrated that.

Click to expand...

Yes, then you guys claimed there is an icon idol distinction. Which no-one has substantiated.

Have you actually read this thread? You started off by asking me for quotes when I already posted some. Just checking you understand how this talk has gone.

AdB said:

Some claim that the rider on the white horse in Rev 19:11-16 is the same as the rider on the white horse in Rev 6:2.

But I would argue that's not the case because:
1. The rider in Rev 19 is introduced as a new concept, being described in much detail.
2. The description of his attire is different
- a singel crown in Rev 6 vs many crowns in Rev 19
- having a bow in Rev 6, but not in Rev 19

What would be the arguments for them still being the same, namely Jesus?

Click to expand...

Revelation is a single document; it does not start over at Rev. 19.

It is a logical flaw to suppose that Rev. 19 says everything that is to be said about the rider on the white horse. He also has many characteristics (names). This is a clue that the rider in Rev. 6 could be the same rider.

The word bow of the first seal is another translator guess. The word in Greek is not specific; it could be a cross, or something else signifying the spread of the gospel.

prodromos said:

except by the pagans

Click to expand...

The pagans never even had idols resembling those of the Orthodox church, until some Buddhist groups copied the iconographic style of the Syriac Christians who had spread into the Far East, and lived there until the genocide initiated by Tamerlane in the 12th century (which the Buddhists do not appear to have done anything to stop, but in the case of Tibet they directly copied Assyrian hierarchy and there is some Assyrian influence noticeable in their Pagan worship. Likewise the Taoists of China and even the Buddhists of Japan use altars which clearly show Christian influence.

orbiter said:

We must awake out of our "sleep" and rise and depart from the man-based churches and be separate from them.

Click to expand...

I agree. Everyone should be a member of a church that affirms the Nicene Creed, and not a member of one of the man-based cults like the Mormons, Unitarians, Swedenborgians, J/Ws etc.

Jerry N. said:

Well, I understand what you are trying to say, but I don’t believe one is saved until they accept the call of salvation. I can’t deny my own testimony. The moment I accepted Christ’s sacrifice for my sins, there was a change in my spirit that wasn’t there before. I was redeemed at that moment, but I know I was being lead that way for a long time. However, I couldn’t see it until after I was saved. I knew I had a choice, and, by God’s grace, I was saved. I guess we have to agree to disagree. I may have been chosen for salvation before I was born, but I was offered a choice.

Click to expand...

Then you dont believe man is really dead spiritually, and you believe salvation by works, something a person does. Technically "accepting" is a verb an action performed, a work, something done.

Valletta said:

The fact is that Putin did not invade Ukraine until soon after Joe's gaffe. The topic of this thread is the shooting by a transgender.

Click to expand...

The fact is, he would have invaded either way. Like I said, this is Americans making themselves too important regarding some world events. And your phrasing there made it very much look like you were still talking of Ukraine, you didn't even put it in a different paragraph.

Jamdoc said:

Revelation 21:

So a new creation, and one of the founding principles of the current one: oceans, is gone (which I've always kinda felt sad about, as many of my favorite animals are marine life, and I guess there's just no place for them, they all get killed during the vials, and apparently not brought back)
one of the other founding principles, the sun and moon are no longer present, and no light and dark, just all light all the time.
and finally, another early principle of creation: marriage
it's gone.

So if those 3 major things can change with the new creation...

Click to expand...

It says sea not oceans. It is so easy for us to read our 20th-century conception of the planet into scripture. The "sea" in the Levant was the Mediterranean Sea. It is possible to plug the narrow channel connecting it to the Atlantic Ocean and let it evaporate. Geologists say that in the ancient past it was a grassland.

As for light, any view of night from space shows that the developed world (and much of the rest) is lit up all the time.

In the West, marriage is already almost gone.

The point I am making is that we need to be careful about what we read into sparse descriptions of ancient documents from an alien culture. God seems to take pleasure in tantalizing us with hints about mysteries, perhaps to see how ridiculous (I'm not saying you are) the human mind can fantasize about them.

Daniel Carlton said:

My claim was basically people who do what you do, in your church is idolatry.

Click to expand...

No, you claimed that was the view of the early Church fathers. You haven't demonstrated that.

It's the internet.
Let me know when main stream media news orgs are purposely spreading claims they know are blatantly false, but do it anyway.

prodromos said:

Bravo! We don't call them 'gods' because they aren't 'gods' and were never considered to be (except by the pagans). We don't call icons idols because they aren't idols. You're slowly getting there.

I don't need to prove anything because you have entirely failed to prove your own claims. You also don't appear to be interested in hearing any proof since you have just been dismissing everything we've posted so far. Right now it would be like arguing with a flat earther. A complete waste of time.

Click to expand...

My claim was basically people who do what you do, in your church is idolatry. The response immediately was “these are icons, not idols” which is a claim not being made by me. I cannot debate a case that has not been made - people who believe there is a “icons” and idols distinction need to do that, because that is your position and you should justify that.

Of course I am not demanding you do but the flip side of this is IF you are right, then something in my style of worship is missing. Do you believe that? Do you believe that a church is incomplete without these icons, statues etc? If so you should make that point if you want opposing views to believe what your saying is right.

sfs said:

I've had access to very good libraries -- and I've made good use of that access.

I've read Behe, Dembski, and Johnson, and interacted directly with Nelson. Without exception, their arguments have been abysmal.

Click to expand...

Then you are ready for Steve Meyer. I gave the link. Let's focus in on what he has to say.