Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community forums. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christian Fellowship Community Forums

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.

Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Welcome to the forums!
  3. Today
  4. By Peter Hasson - Seventy percent of Democrats say “some form of socialism” would be a “good thing” for the U.S., according to a new Gallup survey. While socialism is popular among Democratic voters, a majority of voters overall, 51%, say embracing it would be bad for the country, the Gallup survey found. Just 25% of Democrats said some form of socialism would be “a bad thing for the country as a whole,” according to the survey, which Gallup released Monday. Among Republicans, 84% of respondents said that embracing some form of socialism would be bad for the U.S.. A plurality of independents, 48%, said the same. Gallup’s writeup of the survey did not note that it showed 70% of Democrats supporting some form of socialism, which was included in the full results. Establishment Democrats, meanwhile, have attempted to distance their party from socialism ahead of the 2020 election. “I do reject socialism as an economic system. If people have that view, that’s their view. That is not the view of the Democratic Party,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last month. Two high-profile Democrats in the House, freshmen Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan are members of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). The survey, which was conducted April 17-30 and had a margin of error of six percentage points, marked even more enthusiastic support for socialism among Democrats than in Gallup’s 2018 survey on the same subject. The survey that year found that 57% of Democrats had a favorable view of socialism. That survey also marked the first time that Democrats had a more favorable view of socialism than capitalism. Although Democratic voters are increasingly comfortable with socialist ideas, the only open socialist in the party’s presidential primary, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, has consistently trailed former Vice President Joe Biden in national primary polls. Biden is polling just above 38% in RealClearPolitics’ average of national polls, while Sanders is polling just below 19%. Sanders has the full backing of the DSA. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] 70% Of Democrats Say Socialism Would Be Good For America: Survey is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article
  5. Becky the promises (the Messianic Texts) I referred to about the coming of the Messiah(Christ) are simply not conditional! Of course faith is need but it is God who gives that. ( Take for example the text I actually has in mind Genesis 22:8, and Genesis 22:15-18 ) One can not merit the coming of the Messiah. In fact one of the reasons the the Messiah I believe in came is because people could not measure up even their (our) good works were but dirty clothes or rags (See: Isaiah 64:4 - 64:7)! However the promise texts about the Messiah like those found in Psalm 2, *Psalm 9:14, *Isaiah 12:2ー3, Isaiah chapter 53, *Isaiah 62:11, Jeremiah chapter 31 were written to offer warning and hope. Yet they are found in the so called OT that Christians often claim is worthless and has passed away or at least this is the vibe that I have gotten this far on this thread. If these texts are obsolete or worthless then so is my hope in the Messiah (Yeshua/Jesus) whom these texts speak of! And so is the NT which based a number of it’s claims on the trustworthiness and inspiration of the Hebrew Bible/OT.
  6. Never once on this thread nor on this forum have I ever made an appeal to works. On this thread I have appealed to the promises about the Messiah and there is no way anyone can merit coming the Messiah this why I used the term promises to refer the texts about Messiah rather terms like rules, laws, or criteria.
  7. Welcome to the forum and also the U.S..
  8. Not LESS but MORE. Think of Salvation ... we follow a promise that “You will be My people and I will be your God” and when Jesus arrives to deliver the actual GRACE to make that promise a reality, we discover that we are now “Children of God”. Does being a “Child of God” render ‘worthless’, ‘invalid’, or ‘passed away’ a promise that we will be the “People of God” or was the old promise completely swallowed up in the new promise and both fulfilled and made even greater than we had imagined. God is a God of “far more abundantly beyond all that we ask or think” (Eph 3:20) and not LESS.
  9. And by appealing to God's grace through faith and not by your works can you see the bigger picture, that is, how the very promises have been fulfilled in a way which are beyond expectations? For example, while God's promise is fulfilled through Jesus, Israel, a kingdom of priests is encompassing the entire globe. Israel has become a light to all nations, even in or among the nations themselves.
  10. God's covenant to Abraham was conditional God keeps His covenants ... Gen 26:3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father; Gen 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; Gen 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
  11. It's over. Unless something quick is done there are thousands upon thousands illegally pouring in. The numbers are off the charts. Say goodbye to the USA. Build the wall!
  12. Yesterday
  13. Of course not! Please notice careful what I actually referred to. I came to faith in the Moshichi/Messiah(Christ) initially through my reading of the Hebrew and it’s promises about the Messiah in the covenant promos tonAbraham I mentioned, those through the promised Covenant mentioned in Jeremiah where God writes on people hearts and those promises mentioned in the book of Isaiah about the suffering servant (or Mashiach Ben Yosef/Messiah son of Joseph) interestingly enough This is true of Jesus and those found in the book of Daniel. If those promise as you now seem to be claiming are worthless, invalid, or have passed away then so has my faith in Yeshua/Jesus as Moshiach/Messiah through whom grace and forgiveness is granted. For I faith is based in the hopes of those promises and if that faith was misplace or wrong then so is my faith in the NT.
  14. By Kevin Daley - A federal judge in Washington, D.C. rejected President Donald Trump’s bid to quash a congressional subpoena for his business empire’s accounting records Monday. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta said the courts should assume Congress conducts investigations and issues subpoenas in good faith, despite Trump’s assertions that Democratic lawmakers subpoenaed his accounting records to embarrass him politically. “Courts have grappled for more than a century with the question of the scope of Congress’s investigative power,” Mehta wrote in the decision. “The binding principle that emerges from these judicial decisions is that courts must presume Congress is acting in furtherance of its constitutional responsibility to legislate and must defer to congressional judgments about what Congress needs to carry out that purpose.” “Applying those principles here compels the conclusion that President Trump cannot block the subpoena to Mazars,” he added. The speed with which Monday’s decision was released was not surprising — Mehta indicated earlier in May that he would place the dispute on an accelerated time table. The judge also rejected the president’s request to stay his decision pending appeal — that means Mehta’s ruling will remain in effect while Trump asks the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to lift Mehta’s decision. This is breaking news. This post will be updated. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] Federal Judge Backs Congressional Subpoena Of Trump’s Financial Records is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article
  15. By Henry Rodgers - North Carolina Republican Rep. Mark Meadows said that important documents relating to the origins of the counterintelligence investigation into President Donald Trump’s campaign will be released soon on Monday. In an appearance on Fox News, the House Oversight Committee member responded to the former committee chair Trey Gowdy’s comments that the FBI possibly withheld “game-changing” evidence regarding the origins of the Russia probe. Meadows said he agreed with Gowdy that former Trump campaign associate George Papadopoulos was being taped and recorded by FBI informants and that the unreleased transcript was never released to the FISA court. “[Gowdy] has seen documents that actually I have not seen,” Meadows said. “But we have come to the same conclusion and that is, indeed, George Papadopoulos was actually taped and recorded,” saying the documents would expose exculpatory information on the question of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. “I think the delay is over,” Meadows continued. “I think the president is serious. I’ve spoken to him recently and I think declassification is right around the corner and hopefully the American people will be able to judge for themselves.” Meadows also said he and Papadopoulos have spoken about the possible declassification that if Trump declassifies records, “the American people will be astonished to see not only was it going on and the president was right, he was actually taped and recorded but other than that, he was not colluding with the Russians and they knew this very early on. So that could be the game changer that [Gowdy] was referring to.” Gowdy and Meadows did not have a specific timeline for the release of the documents, but Meadows says it is “right around the corner.” Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] Meadows Says Declassification Of Russia Probe Documents Is ‘Right Around The Corner’ is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article
  16. a) Were the promises of God made through covenants? The promises of God are the very seals of covenants. b) If one has broken the Abrahamic covenant has it been invalidated? If invalidated then by who? How can anyone (Jew) keep appealing to a Covenant that they broke? Again, how can they be heirs when the Covenant had conditions and requirements in which they did not meet? c) Interesting, Jeremiah 15 The Lord says, “The people I love are doing evil things. What right do they have to be in my Temple? Do they think they can prevent disaster by making promises[a] and by offering animal sacrifices? Will they then rejoice? 16 I once called them a leafy olive tree, full of beautiful fruit; but now, with a roar like thunder I will set its leaves on fire and break its branches. 17 “I, the Lord Almighty, planted Israel and Judah; but now I threaten them with disaster. They have brought this on themselves because they have done wrong; they have made me angry by offering sacrifices to Baal.” d) "Did God in as recorded in the Hebrew Bible lie or mislead people?" I can only speculate why I take this question so so personally. I want to refrain from comment but lemme suggest that the faithful remnant were looking towards more than land deeds. I find amusement wondering whether Esau if in later bitterness murmured what he was entitled to. Please tell me that they appeal to God's grace through faith. If not, and to answer your last question they'll recieve what they deserve.
  17. By Whitney Tipton - A county court issued a stay Monday to prevent the city of Pittsburgh from enforcing the city’s recently approved gun rules until legal challenges by gun-rights groups are resolved. Plaintiff and city attorneys agreed to the stay after meeting Monday morning before Judge Joseph James in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported. “We want to make sure the public is aware of the fact that these ordinances are stayed and that there’s not going to be any enforcement of these ordinances until Judge James has an opportunity to decide the matter,” Joshua Prince, one of the plaintiff attorneys, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. City Of Pittsburgh Agrees Not To Enforce Gun Control Legislation During Ongoing Court Proceedings https://t.co/yHdzAyKcO0 — Cam Edwards (@CamEdwards) May 20, 2019 Plaintiffs, who include Allegheny County Sportsmen’s League and Firearm Owners Against Crime, as well as three individuals, filed lawsuits against the city April 9, the same day that Mayor Bill Peduto signed three new gun-control bills into law, according to the Tribune. The bills restrict the use of AR-15s, ban “large capacity” gun magazines of more than 10 rounds, and allows courts to temporarily take guns from people who are deemed threats, the Tribune reproted. The laws were proposed after the Tree Of Life Synagogue shooting in October 2018 that killed 11 people. The city council voted 6-3 in favor of the laws April 2. City residents who already own guns or equipment subject to the new laws will be grandfathered. Attorneys for Everytown for Gun Safety, an anti-gun organization founded by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, is defending the city of Pittsburgh for free. “We are here because the city has passed ordinances that we believe advance the cause of gun safety (and) will prevent future gun violence, and we are here to defend those laws on behalf of the city,” said Eric Tirschwell, litigation director for the group. Pittsburgh faces two other lawsuits over the gun laws, including one brought by the National Rifle Association (NRA) specifically challenging the magazine ban, and one brought by four individuals “who will be forced to alter their behavior and to incur additional expense” under the new regulations, according to the Post-Gazette. The status of other litigation is not known at this time. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] Pittsburgh Agrees Not To Enforce Gun Ban While Courts Deal With Lawsuits is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article
  18. Passed away is a poor description. The Law of Moses, for example, was not “abrogated” by Christ, it was (in Jesus’ own words) “fulfilled”. Having been “fulfilled”, we who are IN CHRIST are (as Paul says) no longer under the Law but under Grace. The promise to Abraham is accomplished in Christ and fulfilled in the Church ... the spiritual children of Abraham too numerous to count and of many nations.
  19. William one point I am making is partly about the vague (and in my opinion misleading/fickled) every changing meaning and use of the term OT. (a) Some Christians actually mean the entire corpus of literature they also call the OT! Yet, there is no evidence that the Hebrew Bible is a covenant and a lot more evidence that the Hebrew Bible records various covenants. Now if the Hebrew Bible with it promises about Messiah has passed away and is not invalid, how can I trust the NT states when it often references the Hebrew Bible/LXX to make its points? If, the Hebrew Bible God's word is no longer Scripture, how can I be sure that the NT writings will not also suffer the same fate? (b) Has the Abrahamic covenant become invalid and passed away? It after all is an OT? If so then why and how can Paul keep on appealing to it in the book of Romans? And, if so how can we as Christians be the so-called spiritual seed of Abraham when the covenant and the promises given to him are invalid/obsolete and have passed away? (c) Has the covenant mentioned in the book of Jeremiah ברית חדשה the ברית עולם הבא really passed away and become obsolete? As many, a Christian actually claim when they vaguely yet boldly claim the OT in its entirety has passed away! If, so then this might also mean that the work of Messiah and the NT has also passed away! (d) Sprinkled throughout the OT are mentions of certain promises (not covenants) that are forevָer ( עוֹלָ֖ם /olam ) yet according to some Christians, this is now not the case. Did God in as recorded in the Hebrew Bible lie or mislead people? (Romans 11:29) seems to hint that God never breaks or goes back on his promises.
  20. You didn't I was thinking ahead. Answering to a consequential conclusion that might be possibly put forward as an objection. I sometimes do this to show the basis of my thinking. Not meaning to put words in your mouth!
  21. When or where William did I ever suggest such?
  22. When a new covenant was introduced beginning with Adam was there a choice to not "transition" into the "newer" covenant? Putting this out there, what I see is a faithful remnant in the beginning of Acts, when Peter was addressing the "house of Israel" Acts 2:36, and I'm wondering how many of the faithful remnant making up the house of Israel said or thought, no Peter we like where we're at now? If you suggest that anyone could keep any of the covenants mentioned before which were abrogated or transitioned into a better covenant, that is, considering Hebrews justifies the reasoning for each prior covenant, you'll talk me out of the necessity of Jesus Christ. I mean if man were deemed "righteous" by any of the Covenants beforehand then what purpose had faith in the coming Messiah Christ Jesus since Genesis 3:15? From the very beginning this promise was mentioned...... why?
  23. This largely depends on what is meant by OT covenant. Does the 'OT covenant' mean: (1) Noahic Covenant /שבע מצוות בני נח / הברית עם נוח (2) The various Abrahamic covenants הברית עם אברהם (3) The Ten Commandments עשרת הדיברות Aseret ha'Dibrot (the ten words) (4) Mosaic Covenant ברית משה and the rest of the 613 Mitzvot (5) Davidic Covenant ברית דוד (6) The covenant mentioned in the book of Jeremiah ברית חדשה the ברית עולם הבא (7) The Hebrew Bible as a whole (Mikra) מקרא or rather the (Tanakh)תנ"ך (8) Two or more of the above? (9) None of the above, other?
  24. The difference in my view between the OT and NT Covenant are that any requirements in the OT Covenant which God commanded are bestowed upon persons in the NT Covenant. Of course there are requirements in the NT Covenant such as faith but faith is one of many fruits of regeneration as gifts provided by God. I often hear people insinuate that God needs to keep His OT Covenant, but are they or are they not Covenant breakers which are petitioning?
  25. True, just as the NT also does not use the term regeneration nor for that matter a number of other theological terms/jargon.
  26. Question, were there any conditions in keeping the OT Covenant?
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...