Always in His Presence said:

Does that mean you can't back up your grand claim?

Click to expand...

The only grand claim I see in this thread is that Obamacare is collapsing. It’s been over 9 years (15 since it was signed into law).

How about we start with backing up that grand claim first?

GoldenBoy89 said:

Who cares? They’re the ones spending the money.

You’re obviously fine with elected (or otherwise) officials using their positions for personal profit. What’s the problem with Hunter joining in? You can’t argue it’s fine for Trump then turn around and say it’s wrong when a democrat is suspected of doing the same.

Click to expand...

The Trump businesses have a long standing decades history of success waaaaay before he decided to run for president. On the other hand, Hunter Biden doesn't.

rambot said:

That doesn't matter whatsoever, does it?

Click to expand...

Yes it does.

ChubbyCherub said:

Why do we have to give birth to redeem ourselves of Eves sin in addition to having to redeem ourselves in the way men do?

Click to expand...

Paul does not tell the women to have babies, if I remember right. He says that if they live in a holy and sober way, they will be saved while bearing children. What especially matters is not the baby upbringing, but how they stay right with God in holiness and sobriety. And do this while in their lifestyle calling of having and bringing up children.

ChubbyCherub said:

My husband has a similar view and suggests that Jesus doesn't expect us to understand the apostles who were Jewish, we are not, and although they preached to the Gentiles, they were of a different time.

Click to expand...

I think what Paul means is for all of us. He says for the lady to learn in silence. Well, leaders are to be "examples to the flock" > so, we too need to learn in silence, as an example > 1 Peter 5:3. Plus, Paul says not to usurp authority "over" her man. However, she does have authority, by having authority over his body, as we can see in 1 Corinthians 7:4.

Mark Quayle said:

—"What more is needed"? Context is needed. It is not talking about him desiring that absolutely all sapient sentients responsible to God be saved, nor even all humans.
—"What more is needed"? Reasoning use of language is needed. It is not double-minded for God to feel outrage at disbelief and to call it desire for the opposite (I say, supposing, for the sake of argument, that the verse was stand-alone, which it is not).

Click to expand...

"Reasoning use of language"? Sounds like you're trying to deny what is written in the Bible because it doesn't suit your doctrine.

Mark Quayle said:

Frankly I doubt very much that is what you mean by it, though what you do mean by it may be understood by you to be implicative of that conclusion. "Of their own accord" can mean something along the lines of independence from others of our kind, but it cannot be independent of God's causation.

Click to expand...

It is what I meant, because your "reasoning" is unable to connect with the efficient cause of your belief.

Mark Quayle said:

I don't think you would say that your reasons not to believe in determinism are unrelated to your belief in free will.

Click to expand...

Nope, but that's because there is a straight line between my exercise of said free will and my reasoning faculties.

Mark Quayle said:

Confirmation bias. That we must (and do, constantly,) choose does not imply free will.

Click to expand...

Oh? So that we must exercise free will doesn't imply free will? Sheer confusion.

Remember - there is only one President that Epstein thought enough of to hang a portrait in his home.

Fervent said:

I don't need to answer yours because the supposed "problem" doesn't exist. God isn't double minded, so when He says He desires all to come to knowledge of the truth, what more is needed?

Click to expand...

—"What more is needed"? Context is needed. It is not talking about him desiring that absolutely all sapient sentients responsible to God be saved, nor even all humans.
—"What more is needed"? Reasoning use of language is needed. It is not double-minded for God to feel outrage at disbelief and to call it desire for the opposite (I say, supposing, for the sake of argument, that the verse was stand-alone, which it is not).

Fervent said:

It means that whatever reasons a person claims to believe determinism are not actually related to their belief in determinism, should determinism be true.

Click to expand...

Frankly I doubt very much that is what you mean by it, though what you do mean by it may be understood by you to be implicative of that conclusion. "Of their own accord" can mean something along the lines of independence from others of our kind, but it cannot be independent of God's causation.

I don't think you would say that your reasons not to believe in determinism are unrelated to your belief in free will.

Fervent said:

You seem to misunderstand the argument, because it's not just that i affirm what I affirm, but that whether we affirm or deny free will we must do so on the basis of an act of free will. So in order to make an affirmation of determinism, the claimant must first demonstrate their affirmation to be false.

Click to expand...

Confirmation bias. That we must (and do, constantly,) choose does not imply free will.

essentialsaltes said:

But that would be weaponizing the DOJ for political purposes. That's more a Trump thing, despite all his 'three fingers pointing back' talk.

Click to expand...

Which he did -

Bradskii said:

How else do you think there could be a change of government? We're not talking of force here. It's what might be described as a peaceful transfer of power. As a citizen, if the US was considering becoming a theocracy, then would you like a say in that or would you leave it to others to decide?

Click to expand...

I don't believe there truly is such a thing as a peaceful transfer of power, just a change in nominal leadership pursuing the same basic program under a different heading.

Bradskii said:

Oh dear me, no. Christianity is judged on Christians and how well they follow the teachings of Christ.

Click to expand...

Christians should rightfully be judged on how well they follow the teachings of Christ, but failure to live up to an ideal is no discredit to the pursuit of that ideal.

Valletta said:

It's common sense that with less people and the same amount of doctors that doctors will have more time per patient and thus better healthcare.

Click to expand...

Then show us what sort of figures we're talking about. Don't treat us like morons, making claims and expecting us to accept them. Back them up. Who is getting health care that you think shouldn't? How much does that cost as a percentage of overall costs? How much will healthcare drop, if at all, for an individual?

I know you won't do any of this because all you have is a fact free claim. I'm only asking the questions to show that you cannot answer.

JimR-OCDS said:

My former parish has embraced the LGBTQ+ ideology. Conservatives and of course Trump
supporters, are convinced to leave. It doesn't matter if you don't support Trump, but as
long as they think you do, you're not welcomed.

Click to expand...

I find that surprising. Our parish is mostly GOP

According to AI - it is a close up photograph of the top side of an intel Xeon Platinum 848+ processor

The golden/bronze color and the distinctive pattern of circles and squares are the exposed copper layers of the processor’s integrated heat spreader (IHS) after the nickel plating and lid have been removed (a process called “delidding”).

What you’re seeing is the actual silicon dies (the four large rectangular chips arranged around the center) and the surrounding copper heat-spreading structure that sits directly under the lid on these server-grade CPUs. The circular features are thermal vias and structural supports in the copper IHS.

Perhaps you have a different view of these tiles?

zippy2006 said:

According to the GIRM all bow at the mention of the Incarnation in the creed (cf. 137). This is different from what is being discussed in the Zenit piece of the OP, where the subject of the bow is not explicit. McNamara is clear, "With respect to such customs, the above norms of the GIRM say nothing either for or against. Thus, wherever the local custom is for all to make the bow whenever the name of Jesus and Mary are mentioned, nothing in the text of the GIRM would forbid it."

Click to expand...

The GIRM calls for it:
275. A bow signifies reverence and honor shown to the persons themselves or to the signs that represent them. There are two kinds of bows: a bow of the head and a bow of the body.

1. A bow of the head is made when the three Divine Persons are named together and at the names of Jesus, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and of the Saint in whose honor Mass is being celebrated.​

Queen Elizabeth

Job 33:6 said:

The ACA has decreased costs for million of Americans.

Click to expand...

I stopped there because it is an inaccurate statement.

stevevw said:

I have been thinking about the current political claimte and how people are being cancelled and even killed for their views. Is street preaching or declaring the gospel in public now a dangerous occupation.

Click to expand...

The main danger is myself, how I might take preaching into my own hands, possibly in order to make a show of myself. However, if I am doing the preaching which God has me doing, that is all that matters.

I suspect there is persecuted stuff which is not for preaching the cross of Christ. But it is mixed with political and business and land conflicts and other things of this life which are connected with desire for what money can do.

Fervent said:

There you go with your futile thoughts of "voting"

Click to expand...

How else do you think there could be a change of government? We're not talking of force here. It's what might be described as a peaceful transfer of power. As a citizen, if the US was considering becoming a theocracy, then would you like a say in that or would you leave it to others to decide?

durangodawood said:

You are way too ignorant about this topic to be making grand claims. Just go learn the basics about whats in the the law.

Click to expand...

Does that mean you can't back up your grand claim?

rjs330 said:

Yet anyone with half a brain knows its not true because if it were Biden would have released it.

Click to expand...

But that would be weaponizing the DOJ for political purposes. That's more a Trump thing, despite all his 'three fingers pointing back' talk.

Follow the money -

Make a law that there can be no lobbyist - no PAC Money, no contributions to any politicians - then also bar them from any stock purchases connected to the health care industry.

Watch how many still support them.

Always in His Presence said:

Oh, please - link looking forward to it.

Click to expand...

You are way too ignorant about this topic to be making grand claims. Just go learn the basics about whats in the the law.

Fervent said:

Christianity must be judged on Christ...

Click to expand...

Oh dear me, no. Christianity is judged on Christians and how well they follow the teachings of Christ.

durangodawood said:

My goodness. The list of the things that came through as promised goes on and on.

Click to expand...

Oh, please - link looking forward to it.

Bradskii said:

So you'd vote against an Islamic theocracy? But would you vote to maintain the status quo or vote for a Sikh theocracy?

Click to expand...

There you go with your futile thoughts of "voting"