Leaderboard

I wanted to tell everyone about a video titled "A Film Makers Journey, Patterns of Evidence - Exodus" published by Thinking Man Films. A very large ancient community of Semites has been unearthed in the Ancient area called Goshen. Burials with Semite clothing, and weapons, etc. They have even tracked the skeletons, so they have documented that the number of newborn male deaths spiked way up at one point. The number of male deaths dropped in proportion to female deaths after this spike. The population of males decreased. They can tell the health of the individuals from their bones. The first burials were of relatively healthy individuals. After many years, the health began to deteriorate, and stress injuries were very, very common. (Hard labor as slaves?) Then suddenly all burials just stopped. The site - anciently - was suddenly abandoned, with clothing, tools, - everything taken from the homes. All I can say is, "Wow!!!" The DVD was $14.95.

I don't think people need excuses to eat meat when it is healthier for them. Eating meat clearly isn't healthiest for everyone, but to say that vegetarianism is healthiest (or better) for everyone is a falsehood.

Do vegetarians actually live longer, or does it just seem longer to a vegetarian? I have heard it said that fruits and vegetables are not food; they are what food eats. PETA - People Eating Tasty Animals I'm not "judging" vegetarians; just having a little carnivore fun!

I don't waste my time with continuously shrill and vitriolic people... the church shouldn't either...

Having been a vegetarian for most of my life, I don't usually give the subject a lot of thought. However, my personal opinion is that there is little difference in eating pork or beef when "prepared" in the usual ways. I would consider it unclean unless it were kosher slaughtered. Since there are no kosher butcher shops anywhere near me, meat is out even if I were inclined to eat it. I remember a steak house ad on the radio I heard once. "Our meat is aged 21 days!" Sounded pretty gross to me.

The gay community does not want anyone to dictate their "conscience" for them.Yet they believe they should be able to dictate "conscience" for someone else. In selling products to gays were you forced to provide for or attend a ceremony you felt strongly that was wrong as a photographer is required to do? If you were and decided to help them celebrate that is a matter for your conscience,but that doesn't give you any right to try to enforce that same belief on someone else. The bakers feel very strongly that they should not participate in anyway concerning something they feel is so unbiblical. The conscience of someone else is not in our control. Anymore than you would like someone to try to enforce what you believe. . Allowing or welcoming gays on here I doubt is a problem for anyone. The problem comes in when if you do not agree with the lifestyle and believe it is unbiblical is the pushback from gays and those of a more liberal mind set quickly letting it be known that isn't christian. To be considered christian you either are to agree that maybe we just don't understand scripture or the story of the woman caught in adultery is repeated. Jesus mingled with all but no where will you find Jesus promoting or passing a law to legitimize a unbiblical lifestyle. Or at the very least do not voice an opinion

I wonder what would have happen in my 20 years as an ABC manager had decided not to sell products to gays. or if we decided not to allow gays on here? or if Jesus decided not to mingle with publicans and sinners.

The issue is usually more complex than vegetarian = healthy. If it weren't, Mormons wouldn't be living as long as Adventists.

I hadn't watched it before all the hubbub in the comments, but I'm glad I did watch it. And I'm thankful the video was shared. I realize that it's not something everyone here would appreciate, but the style in which it was presented is a hook to draw the audience into the message. Much like CS Lewis's Screwtape Letters, it is a modern-day glimpse into the "mind" of Satan. I agree with Photodude, it's not meant to make someone feel warm and fuzzy. It's made to make a person think about the everyday things we engage in, and who's behind the evil. Most people at CA already are aware of the evils of this world, but it wasn't artistically styled to reach the members of CA. I do know a few people I could share this with--but not here.

The editor of a small Israeli newspaper, furious over several government bills that had recently been passed, printed a scathing editorial with an enormous headline: "HALF OF THE MEMBERS OF THE KNESSET ARE CROOKS." Many of the Knesset members were outraged and exerted pressure on the editor to print a retraction. He finally gave in to the pressure and ran his apology with the headline: "HALF OF THE MEMBERS OF THE KNESSET ARE NOT CROOKS."

I am confident that Bill was not picking sides in that debate as an objective of this article. Perhaps your discomfort with the editorial is that you think he was and was only targeting your POV. Either side of that debate or any divisive element in the Church needs to take a lesson here. I do think that we are in an era where fringe elements so easily have a platform and voice that greatly exaggerates their standing in the community. The impression is given because they are loud or produce much media material that is spread far and wide on the internet that they represent a far greater number and have far greater importance and validity than they really deserve. The bullies need to be called out.

This is a succinct summary of the point of the editorial.

that's not a video I would share with anyone.... not because it doesn't have a "message," but because it feeds on the same emotionality that Satan himself uses... just imho...

that we had 1,709 Visitors in 15 minutes? ( I was out of country at that time)

`Actually, I don't assume anything! There is more negativity going on toward the church than just WO. There are organizations that tear at the church for a variety of reasons, all having to do with what they think the church should be doing. For those that think the article was just about WO, I didn't see that way.

I read the article when it first came out, it was clear then. I reread it again, it is still clear. I assume that out of kindness, he did not name names or organizations.

The full trailer:

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath: 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ. Concerning this verse, I believe that Paul was telling the people NOT let the "circumcision" party judge them, for not going up to Jerusalem for the Feasts to offer "meat offerings" or "drink offerings". I follow the Jewish calendar. I try to remember what the Lord's "appointed times" taught and prophesied. I fully realize that we cannot "know" which day is the Day of Atonement - in the present calendar, because there is no priesthood to start the "year". I'm saying that I use the Jewish calendar for my focused meditation on different themes. I won't judge you - if you don't judge me. I believe that the fulfillment of the Day of Atonement will be the DAY that the redeemed will be resurrected and translated to Heaven. It will be the DAY that the wicked are "cut off". We will certainly KNOW what day it is, when these things happen. And it's likely we won't have much to eat, in the time period of persecution leading up to that DAY - so we will have been fasting.

Sad as this sounds, it may be best to fire some Church members that are both Pastor and Church killers, all in the name of Jesus.

It should be rather obvious what he is talking about. He is quite clear for those who have ears to hear and eyes to see. He is talking about a specific type of behavior that really shouldn't be tolerate. We try to curb the same type of behavior here.

So glad to know there are none here who are offended by those of us who choose to eat meat. For my husband and me, our diet of fruit, veggies, grains and meats is better and healthier.

If it had not been for Greta Van Susteren this man probably would still be there.

I am a vegetarian because I think it is healthier and feel better, but would not be offended if others ate meat out.

I have to disagree, the Apostles did have a president although he may not have been elected in the manner that western culture would complete the process. The brother of Jesus, James was the head of the Apostles in Jerusalem after the resurrection of Christ. http://www.churchhistory101.com/century1-p6.php

Samie, the verse was written in Greek, not English. You simply misread the verse. If you look at the Greek, it says "faith in me". It does not say "faith that is inside me". It cannot be read that way. To read it that way is to just make up an idea of what the verse says that has no basis in reality. That you misread the verse can be seen by: 1.Looking at the Greek. 2.Reading an exposition of the Greek (you can do this online by digging around a little). 3.Comparing various translations. 4.If you know a language besides English, by looking at those translations. By doing these things you can see that you simply misread the verse. It cannot be interpreted to mean what you misread it to say. You have no basis upon which to substantiate your interpretation of the verse. The Bible was written in Greek, not English. You can't just take a translation of English which can be read different ways in English, and pick a way that you would like it to say, and go with that, without any regards to what the verse says in Greek. I'm asking you to admit your mistake in regards to Acts 26:18. You say, "I will if shown from Scriptures that I am." I've shown you that your interpretation of Acts 26:18 is incorrect, that it says that we are sanctified by faith in Christ. I'm asking you to admit this, and then we can discuss Hebrews 10:10 if you like. Also, did you respond to the parable of the pharisee and the publican? I didn't see that you did. I'll check again to make sure.

I looked some more into the Greek, and it looks like you got confused by the translation "faith that is in me" to think a possible meaning would be faith which was actually Jesus' faith (i.e. faith inside of Christ), but the expression means what we mean by saying "faith in Christ". For example, Young's Literal Translation has "by faith that is toward me." I looked at quite a few translations, in several different languages, and they all have "faith in me", as in the object of the faith, rather than Christ being the container of the faith.

Your suggestion doesn't look to be grammatically possible. If it were a genitive, you could argue if it was subjective or objective, but this isn't what's going on here. Regarding our having nothing to do with being justified, consider the following: This is just one example, of which there are many, but it's quite clear here that the public did something which resulted in his being justified.

Christ is talking, and speaks of those who are sanctified by faith in Him, so the answer to whose faith it is is "those who have faith in Christ."

We are sanctified by faith just like we are justified by faith.

The last sentence is interesting. There are arguments both ways. I think if you get into a mindset of trying to get someone to admit they are wrong, then you are right, as it almost never happens that someone admits a mistake, or even admits that a good point has been made. However, on the positive side, I've found that many, many times I've been led to new thoughts, and have been introduced to things I didn't know (such as books I didn't know about), and also I read a number of beautiful posts just jumping around. There are some great things to be found.

This can't be the case. Consider, for example, the following: Here faith is contrasted with works. Paul, in the clearest language, makes clear that faith is *not* work, e.g. "to him that worketh not, but believeth".

Yes, it's possible, but challenging, for various reasons. To mention a couple, the medium itself lends itself to being easily misunderstood, as one is missing things like voice inflection and body language, the result being that posts can come across one or two degrees angrier than what the author may have intended. It's also easy to misunderstand someone as being sarcastic when that wasn't there intention (I think that happened with us). Being limited only to printed words makes it a challenge. Another challenge is people who post tend to have agendas, which I don't mean as either a good or bad thing. It's simply that there has to be some reason that leads people to want to discuss, and often it's because people have things they want to share, and there can be a challenge to put on one's "listening hat" as well. But in spite of these challenges, I've learned a great deal from these discussions.

Because Scripture shows that God makes better covenants that build on His previous covenants and promises. In a sense, the promise of the Messiah that God gave to Adam and Eve was all they would ever need for salvation in Christ. Yet after the flood God gave to Noah and the animals the covenant of day and night, seedtime and harvest, with the rainbow as the sign of the promise that the earth would not be destroyed by water again. Then God gave a better covenant to Abraham and his descendants with the sign of circumcision. Then God gave a better covenant to the Israelites at Sinai, with the Sabbath as a sign. Later, God gave a covenant of peace and an everlasting priesthood to Phinehas the grandson of Aaron and his descendants. Later God gave King David a covenant of a lasting throne, a covenant that Jesus inherited but has not yet been implemented. Then God gave Jeremiah the prophecy of the new or renewed covenant. None of these covenants annulled, replaced, or changed any of God's preceding covenants. God's covenants can be trusted. Scripture also shows that God proceeded to make a covenant with the Israelites in the very next chapter. According to Scripture the "New Covenant" is not fully in place yet, for part of the "New Covenant" promise says, "They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," (Jeremiah 31:34) I suspect that some of your neighbors do not yet know YHWH. Indeed one of the last things Jesus commissioned his followers to do was to go make disciples and to teach all nations the same things that Jesus had taught the original disciples. So as long as we are still working on that commission, the New Covenant hasn't been fully implemented, yet there are already first fruits of that covenant visible in God's people.

Myron, may I suggest either being more concise in your comments, or dividing such lengthy posts into several separate comments? I highly doubt that more than 2 or 3 readers, if that, will wade through a 70+ paragraph novella....unless, of course, it described the Jumping Frog of Calaveras County, or Ben Hur's chariot race...