• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The Harm Caused by Excessive Criticism of the Roman Catholic Church and Other Denominations

Hello!






You are going full bore anti-Catholic here, aren't you? Are you enjoying it? Are you honoring God in doing so, letting out your hate of your Catholic brothers and sisters?
It's the truth spoken in love. Jesus rebuked in order to convict and set captives free - from ritualistic institutions that are so immersed in tradition that they didn't even recognize Jesus face-to-face.

I stand by every word, no matter how you misinterpret the intention. And you haven't refuted a single point.

Anyone who loves Jesus would not have just said "no-no" to the last "pope's" heresy and slapped his hand with a ruler. They would have defrocked him and run him out of town on a rail.

Agreeing with Who Jesus says He is is the core essential of saving faith. And doing the will of the Father, and obeying the Son - which the Institution is in flagrant violation of as detailed.

I encourage all genuine brothers and sisters with a personal relationship with Jesus to flee from her.

That goes for any church espousing heresy.
Upvote 0

Thoughts on Confirmation

I hadn't realized that Eastern and Western traditions differed here. Thanks!

In the Catholic and Anglican traditions, the presence of a bishop is an important part of the rite. I gather that in Orthodoxy, a priest (rather than a bishop) normally performs the chrismation?
Yes, a priest normally performs the chrismation.
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Did Jesus Stop Eating After His 40-Day Fast? Some Food for Thought

Did Jesus stop eating altogether after the time of his 40-day fast referred to in Matthew 4:2? It’s a notable question, not only under consideration because of his relation to the Deity, but the question also addresses another issue, which is to what extent we can draw inferences from the Bible when it’s not actually and obviously stated in the Bible?

When it comes to the Bible, even those who strive to go by every word in the Bible may tend to draw their own conclusions if the answer is not actually found there. In a sense. The Bible leaves some room open for us to do so, when the conclusion does not run contrary to what is expressed in the Bible, or in its overall spirit. An opening, if you will, is found in the last Verse of the Book of John. In John 21:25, John says “Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” Not knowing what those “other things” Jesus did, one who knows their Bible would reasonably conclude that whatever Jesus did was in terms of what is good and right.

So, did Jesus stop eating altogether after his 40-day fast? At the outset, one may reason that Jesus ate prior to his 40-day fast. Of the fast itself, Matthew 4:2 says, “And after fasting forty days and forty nights, [Jesus] was hungry.” Well, it seems he was eating before the start of the 40 days, otherwise why does the Bible not make the duration longer? This would infer another conclusion, which may be that even though Jesus has a divine relation to God, it isn’t beyond him to eat. So, the question remains, Did he eat after his 40-day fast?

One might reason that he would have to eat to keep his body alive. It is commonly known that a person can live for 1-2 months without eating. 2 months is 60 days which is more then the 40 days that Jesus fasted, so it is plausible that his body would still be functioning after 40 days.

To the possibility that he may have stopped eating altogether, that is one possibility alluded to in Luke 22:14–16, when at Passover, Jesus says to his disciples in Verses 15 and 16, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” That might suggest that if Jesus was so inclined to abstain from eating, he could just as well have been fasting at times prior to the Passover without eating at all. Then again, that Passage could show he was eating beforehand. Could he really have not eaten at all since his 40-day fast up to the time of his Passover Seder? Depends on the duration of time between his 40-day fast and his last Seder.

It would help if anyone knows the time of year in which the 40 days ended. 40 days is a month and ten days. Would the 40 days have ended in February? March, maybe? Passover typically starts in early April, so it is conceivable that IF Jesus’ last Passover with his disciples was in the same year as his 40-day fast, he could have easily lived around Passover if it was in the same year as his 40-day fast, particularly if the fast began sometime in February. But WAS it really in the same year?

It's been said in some quarters that in the year Jesus was put on the cross, he had celebrated his third Passover with his disciples. The Bible doesn’t particularly say if it was Jesus’ third Passover, or second or first. We do know two things from the Bible: Within Matthew 4:12–17 we find that Jesus begins his ministry after John the Baptist baptized him. Luke 3:23 says that Jesus was 30 years old when he began his ministry. The Bible doesn’t say how old Jesus was when he had his last Passover. Some say Jesus last Passover meal was in 30 or 33 AD. Well, if it was in 30 AD it would be conceivable that Jesus could have lived without eating up to the Passover if it was in 30 AD, when Jesus would be 30 years old. But if was in 33 AD, when he would be 33 years old, it’s unlikely his body would have lasted that long without eating. That is, if it was a real body that can be touched. Is there any dispute among the Romans who put him on the cross that they didn’t feel his body?

So, it seems the answer to whether he continued to fast after 40 days depends on whether he celebrated his last Passover when he was 30 years old or when he was 33 years old, considering he was put on the cross shortly after his last Passover. Perhaps the answer is just unanswered, like John 21:25. Or perhaps as in John 21:25, there is conceivable just one person from those thousands of years ago, like John perhaps, that knows the answer.
We do have instances in the bible of Him eating after the 40 days in the wilderness. An example is:

“41 But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, He said to them, “Have you any food here?” 42 So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. 43 And He took it and ate in their presence.” (Lu 24:41-43 NKJV)
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Karoline Leavitt accuses CNN of 'encouraging violence' against agents for reports on new ICE tracking app

Maybe you missed the party about "harm." The idea, at least for conservatives, is to not endanger the life of anyone.
Perhaps you should watch the CNN clip again. The concept of "harming anyone" or even engagement is not mentioned. What is mentioned is turning away, going in another direction. That would be the avoidance of interaction altogether. The avoidance of "harm", to either party.

Interfering with an operation where there is there is danger, where there is a likelihood of harm, is irresponsible.
agree, which is why avoiding the area entirely is a grand idea. I would rather avoid being anywhere near an operation of such.
Were there a rash of assassinations of police officers at speed traps then your example would be irresponsible. Say a terrorist, maybe like the one in the Boston marathon bomb incident, is on the run and someone decided to broadcast the whereabouts of police officers. The guy could evade and kill more people, or he could decided to shoot it out. r take the case of a school shooter, broadcasting the location of officers closing in on him means more students and teachers and cops could be killed.
Do you include Trump supporters literally assaulting law enforcement on January 6, 2020, in this scenario?
Upvote 0

Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

I will not answer that. See, if I said I had higher education in biology than most here, then that would be an arrogant argument from authority. So, "I know more than you, and so you should listen to me". I wouldn’t want to do that.
If I said I had less formal education, yet I’m still pointing out problems like irreducible complexity, and asking for clear, step-by-step evolutionary pathways where every stage is functional and advantageous, and those questions remain unanswered by people with degrees, then, that would be embarrassing those who claim to have degrees in this field.

No, what's embarrassing is that you're refusing to answer a simple question and yet you're acting from a position of self-subscribed superiority.

And again, you're not 'pointing out', you're just making claims.
  • Winner
Reactions: NxNW
Upvote 0

The Path to Salvation

You are adding something that is not there into Acts 2:37-38. The passage states:

Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and they asked Peter and the other apostles, "What are we to do, my brothers?" Peter (said) to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit."

Note the passage does not say "afterward." In fact it does not specify either during or afterward. 3 Peter as I quoted above actually states:
"Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, . . ."
The point is the experience of receiving the Holy Ghost is not simultaneous with obedience to water baptism. And both experiences are essential for salvation.
Upvote 0

Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

I really want to ask: what is your understanding of science at, specifically biology? High school, college level, university?
I will not answer that. See, if I said I had higher education in biology than most here, then that would be an arrogant argument from authority. So, "I know more than you, and so you should listen to me". I wouldn’t want to do that.
If I said I had less formal education, yet I’m still pointing out problems like irreducible complexity, and asking for clear, step-by-step evolutionary pathways where every stage is functional and advantageous, and those questions remain unanswered by people with degrees, then, that would be embarrassing those who claim to have degrees in this field.
Upvote 0

Asking For Prayer/s in Coming Back To Christ

I’ve been at a crossroads recently to the point where I broke down in tears which I haven’t felt in a long time. I want to serve the Lord but I’m afraid I’ll leave him again I am a wandering soul searching for love, companionship, peace, joy and a sense of purpose. I’ve tried what the world has to offer and it is all vanity like King Solomon said. I miss Jesus and love him. I want to be a part of heaven and the new earth someday.

Keep me in your prayers so that I keep on the straight and narrow path.

God bless.

Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

Another popular view in early Christianity is that ensoulment occurs at the time of the quickening. When a baby is felt in the mother's womb. But this doesn't really relate to the question of a historical Adam.

The idea that ensoulment occurs first with Adam, and then that's when everyone else gets a soul, I'm not sure that this has ever been a popular view, as far as I'm aware.

I don't think the idea of Adam receiving a soul and then transmitting it to the rest of humanity has ever been a mainstream view of the church.
You are right. It hasn't been a mainstream view of the church. I'm just saying that it has strong explanatory function.
Upvote 0

Imagine being Joseph of Arimathea

Luke 23:50–56


50 Now there was a good and righteous man named Joseph, who, though a member of the council, had not agreed to their plan and action. He came from the Jewish town of Arimathea, and he was waiting expectantly for the kingdom of God.

Imagine being in the minority. His brothers in the council actually use scripture to accuse and condemn Jesus.
How could they be so wrong, to see evil in him instead of good? But what can Joseph really do. To speak out puts him in danger.
He does not have the authority or influence to persuade the minds already made up against Jesus.
It must have been frustrating to see words of the law and Prophets turned around as weapons against Jesus.


But we see that also today don't we? Scripture used by the right and the left to point out, to prove the good of our view and the evil of those opposed.
Neither side seems to have the humility for introspection and reconsideration.

At times I am Joseph and at times I am Caiaphas. Fortunately no one is really injured by my pride and fear or whatever it is that makes me want to be in the right and to prove it. But then, mustn't we stand for what we believe in? Fight for it? Where do we draw the lone between obstinance and steadfastness?

I am reminded of the apostle Paul. He was most zealous for the law and tradition believing he was serving God.
Great points. Paul needed to be humbled, and then he was able to know the truth and not act from a place of self-righteousness or pride. It can be done; Jesus reveals that very fact in that He always acted from a place of Truth, never from ego. When we meet Him He begins to challenge and change us, away from ourselves, from our pride-driven falseness, and to God, the very Source of truth and of our very own selves.

The church has taught that, at the Fall man divided himself in some manner from God, from his fellow man, from the rest of creation, and from and within himself. We lost absolute transparency as we lost innocence. To come to know and believe in, hope in, and love Jesus is to humble ourselves before God, and He gives us our true selves back. It’s to come home, like prodigals from the pigsty. Or something more like a journey home where the way to it and the truth of it become clearer and clearer. Just some thoughts, FWIW.
Upvote 0

They are working with the nephilim underground

We are on our way there. I wonder how bad it has to get before divine intervention puts the all to right once again ?
The Day of the Lord
10 ¶ But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.fn
Upvote 0

Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

To be honest, I’m getting bored of this conversation. I’ve asked for clear, direct evidence, and instead keep getting long papers, deflections, and assumptions treated as facts. If this is the best evolution has to offer, it’s no wonder so many people remain unconvinced.

I really want to ask: what is your understanding of science at, specifically biology? High school, college level, university?
Upvote 0

Why did God choose Israel?

it is you who is doing the accusing ... even accusing a neighbor who has no guile in his mouth ...
We all get gamed by the accuser of our neighbors, if we're honest

There is no immunity or innoculation from that activity

The devil is not our neighbor. Sharp edge, ain't it?
Upvote 0

Christianity no longer seems moral to me

Morale is based on clear evidence of right or wrong when we are born into this world missing the very Spirit that tells us right from wrong. Unless I'm just so off and he is always actually there allowing our mistakes to happen. Even so though?
I like the way Augustine put it:
God wrote on tablets of stone that which man failed to read in his heart.” (The 10 commandments, of course.)

IOW, the law or morality is already written in man’s heart; God did not create man without a moral guide or compass, a conscience. But that conscience is the voice of God, Himself, inside us and so the further distant we are from God, the further we are from that authoritative voice; we become our own “god”, not necessarily obedient to the authentic morality written inside of us.

Man’s “falleness” consists of that very distance: by disobeying God, man said “no” to His voice, to His godhood, to Him, and the rest is human history. Jesus came to reconcile man with God again, to reestablish that vital connection whereupon we hear Him as we were meant to, we read the law written in our hearts. Having spent time in this seemingly godless world where good and evil are literally known, experienced daily, a world which is a pigsty relative to our true home, we might, like prodigals, run back to the Father when He shows Himself to us and calls us by His grace. As we turn to Him, that connection is realized. That’s the purpose of faith. Jesus came to reveal that true God so that we may believe, and be healed. This is why Christianity is so inestimably valuable, because it tells us who we are: where we came from, why we’re here, and where we’re going.
  • Like
Reactions: Hentenza
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,872,877
Messages
65,324,330
Members
276,059
Latest member
januarion