GoldenBoy89 said:

How about we start by treating drug addiction?

Where are this administration’s efforts on that front?

Click to expand...

DOGEd

Trump team revokes $11 billion in funding for addiction, mental health care​

Drug overdoses linked to fentanyl and other substances have declined sharply in recent years, thanks in part to a surge in funding for addiction treatment during the Biden administration. But street drugs still kill more than 84,000 people in the U.S. every year, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

President Donald Trump has made fentanyl smuggling a top concern during the opening weeks of his administration, extending an emergency declaration linked to the powerful street opioid.

But his team has also rapidly slashed the number of federal researchers focused on addiction and Trump pardoned a tech mogul convicted of building a "dark web" platform used to traffic illicit drugs.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration is also being merged into a new organization, called the Administration for a Healthy America (AHA), as part of a restructuring of HHS that's expected to eliminate 20,000 federal employees.

ThatRobGuy said:

I don't know if "afraid" is the right word.

But if a particular institution was all but captured by the opposing political team, would you be itching to drop thousands of dollars to send your kid there so that they could be in that bubble and come back in 4 years hating all of your values?

I don't think any parent would be too keen on that idea regardless of their political stripe.

Click to expand...

A kid who is that impressionable shouldn't be allowed in college, especially if his parents have filled him with crap about "opposite political teams."

lismore said:

When a prophet of the Lord spoke his words were considered to be the very words of God, watched over by the Lord. When an Apostle wrote a letter, it was judged to be inspired scripture. The fact that the Canon is closed could indicate that there is no-one qualified to add to it.

Click to expand...

Amen - and when the last Apostle of the Lamb died - the canon was closed. There were only 12 Apostles of the Lamb. But there were additional Apostles - as already shown a number of times

lismore said:

IMHO with the closed Canon we're as close as we're going to get until the Lord returns.

Click to expand...

The five - Apostle, Prophet, Evangelist, Pastor, Teacher were given for the same purpose, there is no separation between them in the verses.. If the purpose was fulfilled with the close of the canon - then all five are no longer needed.

I think the disagreement is in our considering of who is called an Apostle. -

To re-iterate:

The twelve - Apostles of the Lamb including Matthias who took the place of Judas.

Several of then wrote the Canon - Matthew, Peter, James (son of Zebedee) and John.

A number of them we have no writings, nor a whole lot of information on: James (son of Alphaeus), Thaddeus, Andrew, Bartholomew, Phillip, Simon (the zealot) and Matthias. Are essentially silent after the Gospels.

Two who were not shown as Apostles - Mark and Luke also wrote canon scripture.

Paul - the Apostle to the Gentiles - was not one of the 12 - but very much an Apostle.
Same with Barnabus and several others with minor mentions in Scripture.

Paul wrote his letter to the Church at Ephesis in approximately 60ad. Wrote to the church:

Referred to as 'the five fold ministry'. Positions in the church for building the church, edifying and equipping. There is no separation in thought - in other words he is speaking a single line of thought. They are connected together.
Seven years earlier Paul wrote to the Church at Corinth


If the closing of the canon ended the role of Apostle and Prophet - then it also ended the role of Evangelist - Pastor and teacher as well. That is where our differences lie.

wing2000 said:

Relevance to this criminal case against Hernandez (and his brother)?

Click to expand...

His arrest was at the request of the United States government. It is considered normal and common that the United States holds classified documents regarding criminal cases - particularly, those which the government has specifically initiated.

The baptistnews.com article helps fill in some of the missing information. It's hard to evaluate the grading of the essay without a) reading the essay itself, b) reading the exact wording of the assignment, and c) reading the article she was responding to. The article fills in some of those pieces, though information is still incomplete here. The main question should be whether the essay met the requirements of the assignment.

The CBN video was informative to listen to. At the end, there's this exchange:

"I assume that, you know, you wouldn't change things if you could. Knowing everything you do now, you would do the same thing, right? I mean, I would assume that's true."
"Yes, absolutely."

This far into it, she probably needs to make that statement when speaking in public. But privately: if she could do it over, would she improve the essay in any way? Construct a more compelling argument, or address the research article more directly, anything?

Landon Caeli said:

...I do not know what classified documents Trump has access to, neither do any of us.

Click to expand...

Relevance to this criminal case against Hernandez (and his brother)?

ThatRobGuy said:

Right, but that influence (under normal circumstances) is one that's usually confined to a person's area of expertise or aptitudes.

For example, if someone loves the guitar playing of Eric Clapton so much that they want to style their own playing after it and be able to sound like him, that would be what I would consider typical influence.

If someone looks up to Eric Clapton so much, that in addition to being able to play like him, they also want to adopt his views and positions on a variety of other subjects outside of music, that would be something more than just typical influence.

And in some cases, it's not even a professor in particular on an individual level, it's the appeal to credentialism as a whole in the soft sciences in ways that don't present themselves as much in the hard sciences.

Where, because someone has a certain title or academic credential, even in a subjective topic that may not be even directly in their wheelhouse, their opinion is given more weight.

Click to expand...

You're conflating a bunch of different things. Do some people exhibit the sort of fandom you describe? Yes. Is it commonplace on university campuses? Not at all in my experience.

Again, I've seen it much more often with media personalities who have a clear financial incentive to cultivate this sort of personality cult. Trump is easily the most prominent example of this at the moment.

ThatRobGuy said:

It's not a pet issue, but it's one where the perception of "taking the issue seriously" is often packaged in such a way that they make it synonymous with "going with the approach we want"


For example: In your opinion, is there any way a person can perceived as having taken that issue seriously without landing on the conclusion of some sort of single-payer/state run/medicaid for all type of solution?

Click to expand...

You're putting words in our mouths.

In the 15 years since the ACA passed, Republicans haven't developed a health care plan of any sort. We're not even at the point of evaluating a plan to see if it's serious or not.

In the days of Jesus, the religious leaders were constantly questioning Jesus in order to test Him and on this occasion a lawyer asked Jesus what is the great commandment?

Matthew (22:35) Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, (36) Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

Jesus reply was the 1st great commandment was to love God and the 2nd was to love ones neighbor. These were given as a commandment for man to love.

Matthew (22:37) Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

(38) This is the first and great commandment. (39) And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

One should note that by following the 1st and 2nd great commandment they will be adhering to the 10 commandments issued by Moses. If they love the Lord they won’t have any other Gods before him, or make any graven images or take his name in vain, they will remember his Sabbath and if they love their neighbor they will honor their Father and Mother and they won’t kill or commit adultery or steal or bear false witness nor will they covet. This is why Jesus goes on to state that on these two commandments hang the law and the prophets. Because by fulfilling these two commandments one fulfills the law.

(40) On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Jesus stated that these 2 commandments where the 2 great commandments however the following verses will show that these commandments were not new and that the Jews and Jesus was speaking to were aware of them. These were the same ones issued to Israel by Moses.

Deuteronomy (6:5) And thy shall love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

Leviticus (19:18) Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

Now that it has been established that man was commanded to love one needs to examine the scriptures to get an understanding of the love required in these great commandments.

In the following verses Moses is telling the Israelites that God chose them strictly out of His love for them.Deuteronomy (7:7) The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: (8) But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

(9) Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;

Note in verse (9) Moses states a condition that God requires in order for Him to keep covenant and have mercy. And that is an individual must love God and keep His commandments. The scriptures will show that there is only one way to love God and that is by keeping His commandments.

Note that Jesus states in the following verse that in order to love Him one has to keep His commandments.

John (14:15) If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Jesus further defines the love He requires when He states in the following verse that those who have His commandments and keep them are those that love Him. One does not have to guess at Jesus definition of love He made it clear.

John (14:21) He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Jesus also reinforced what was said in Deuteronomy verse (9) by adding that those that love Him will be loved by the Father. How does one love Jesus? by keeping His commandments and Moses said God will keep covenant and have mercy with those who keep His commandments. So therefore by following Jesus one shall receive love from Him as well as mercy from the Father.

Note in these scriptures it did not say those who profess their love for Jesus or those that claim that Jesus knows what in their heart. Jesus made a clear and direct statement if one has His commandments and keeps them they are the ones who love Him. The statement that Jesus made as well as the condition Moses gave in Deuteronomy verse (9) were based on behalf of an individuals actions not their feeling or emotions or conditions. To exhibit love towards Jesus one must engage in a specific action and that action is being obedience to the word of God. And one will see that they are to be obedient regardless of their feeling or the surrounding circumstances.

Jesus states again in the following verses what is required of an individual to receive His love.

John (15:9) As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. (10) If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

Notice Jesus use the word if ye keep my commandments, so what happen if ye do not keep his commandments. The above verse shows to be loved of Jesus one needs to be obedient. Jesus also states in verse (10) that He was obedient to the Father by keeping His commandments and therefore abides in His love.

Servus said:

Then it's probably high time it started considering how huge the drug epidemic has became and how many people have died from it.

If they were smuggling in anthrax that's been killing hundreds of Americans, would this stance against taking military action still stand?

How big does the epidemic have to get and how many more people have to die, before certain people agree that extreme measures need to be taken?

Click to expand...

How about we start by treating drug addiction?

Where are this administration’s efforts on that front? Without a multilayered approach to the problem, it just seems like they’re only interested in killing certain people.

Nithavela said:

I think it was a mistake to reduce the "body positivity" movement to people being happy with being fat. Especially since that is one of the body alterations that is easily reversible by changing habits in most cases. It not only drastically reduces quality of life and life expectancy, but unduly causes costs and drains manpower in the health industry.

If you are okay with having turned your body fat into your own enemy, fine, but leave some room for the rest of people who aren't at fault for having a body they are being shamed for.

Click to expand...

Agreed

Nithavela said:

What you need is a tiny minority living in Venezuela that you can claim you are protecting by conquering the country.

Works like a charm in the court of public opinion.

Click to expand...

Or a handful of US students.

Akita Suggagaki said:

Where are all his supporters now?
I would like to hear their views on this.

Click to expand...

Hernandez maintained his innocence throughout the trial, claiming that the drug traffickers who testified against him were "professional liars" seeking leniency and were motivated by revenge for his government's extradition policies. He argued that he was a victim of political persecution and a "set-up".

Trump and his White House press secretary framed the conviction as a "Biden administration set-up" and an example of "prosecutorial overreach".

...I do not know what classified documents Trump has access to, neither do any of us.

CLEEB said:

Gentiles were grafted into the olive tree to replace the unbelieving Israelites. James wrote to the 12 tribes scattered abroad. The elect are constantly called the church by Jesus and the Apostles. The elect in Revelation 7 & 14 is the church.

Click to expand...

Romans 11; while unbelieving Israelites were "broken off," and Gentiles were "grafted in," the text does not state that Gentiles replaced them but that they are now partakers of the promises of the olive tree. Paul's analogy explains that God's plan allows for the possibility of the original branches (unbelieving Jews) to be grafted back in if they turn from their unbelief.

Grafting explained: Paul uses the analogy of grafting a wild olive branch (Gentiles) onto a cultivated olive tree (Israel, God's covenant people) to explain how non-Jews are included in God's promises.

Broken branches: Some branches of the natural "olive tree" (Israel) were broken off due to their unbelief, making room for the "wild olive" branches (Gentiles) to be grafted in.

Not a replacement: This does not mean the Gentiles are a replacement. Instead, it signifies their inclusion in the spiritual blessings and promises of God through faith.

Hope for future inclusion: The passage emphasizes that the natural branches (unbelieving Jews) can be grafted back in if they return to faith, as God has the power to graft them back into their own tree.

essentialsaltes said:

No details other than that it's a man.

Click to expand...

They should deport him back to Dudemanistan.

Mark Quayle said:
Do you believe that being born again ("regeneration") is the result of the Spirit of God taking up residence within one (which is what I take you to be referring to as "spiritual baptism"), or is it the cause of the Spirit of God taking up residence.

In other words, do WE generate valid faith, or does God (the Spirit of God) generate it within us, fully valid? (The amount of faith is another question, not related to its validity).

timothyu said:

What would be the point? Can any father force a child to honour him, or must they learn to base their respect on their own discernment by comparison to others? God has been telling humans since the Garden to put His Will first, but we do not untill we learn why His ways are right and ours as a species is wrong.

Click to expand...

Comparing God with our earthly fathers is an invalid argument in this. We did not create our kids. We did not impute Adam's sin to them. We did not indwell them with our spirit. We did not make a place for them in heaven. They do not exist for our purposes.

God has been telling humans their moral responsibility since the Garden. But they have always been unable to obey until he regenerates them. (See Romans 8, the whole chapter, and notice the language of verses 7 and 8. They CANNOT. They consistently, always, choose in enmity against God.) The command to be holy does not imply the ability to do so. "His Will" as you call it, is given us to show us our need for him. We learn to obey AFTER he changes our nature from 'death' to 'life'.

THAT is Grace. "Learning his ways" cannot earn us the right to become his children, no matter the terminology or poetry with which the concept is stated.

High Fidelity said:

Good news. Presumably this falls under terrorism. Throw away the key when he's locked up.

Click to expand...

This might be too egregious an act of terror for even Trump to pardon him.

keras said:

To think Isaiah wrote about past events in Chapter 49, or any other scripture is wrong. He was a Prophet not a historian.

Click to expand...

And prophets are men/women of God who proclaim God's word for the situation they are in at that moment. They are not divine fortune tellers. They look at what is happening and say, e.g, "don't make an alliance with this country; they will destroy you" or "repent or you will perish."
Some of their prophecies also had/have a future application - unbeknown to the prophets, they were prophesying about Jesus. And it was Jesus himself/the Apostles who had been taught be Jesus who told us when various prophecies were being fulfilled. The words, "this is to fulfil what the prophet said ........" or, "as it was spoken/is written ........".

Nowhere did Jesus say, "read the words of Isaiah/Zechariah/Daniel and work out what they could apply to and how they could be fulfilled in the future."
So, again, what gives you the authority to do this?

Students don't lose their religious liberties in attending college. That includes the right to express beliefs that many would find to be despicable.

probinson said:

1) I don't go to bars.



Sounds like a real problem for hypothetical guy. He really should deal with himself.



I kinda feel sorry for hypothetical guy as you describe him. What an empty, broken life, just beating up random people.



Or, I could just go somewhere else, since apparently the owners don't care enough to stop hypothetical guy from smacking their other customers around for no apparent reason.



Oh boy! Adulation and praise from a bunch of drunks! (2) I don't drink beer). And now I kind of feel sorry for hypothetical guy number two that craves acceptance from random drunks in a bar.



Why on earth would I care what a bunch of drunks think about me?



I already told you, I'll just go somewhere else where hypothetical guy that beats me up for no reason isn't allowed.



Not obscure. Inane.

Click to expand...

a·nal·o·gy
/əˈnaləjē/


noun
noun: analogy; plural noun: analogies

1. a comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
   "an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies"
   • a correspondence or partial similarity.
     "the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia"
   • a thing which is comparable to something else in significant respects.
     "works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature"
   • Logic
     a process of arguing from similarity in known respects to similarity in other respects.
     "argument from analogy"
     

Strong in Him said:

No, post #2184 doesn't explain what the logo means/represents.

Click to expand...

I was answering why I speculated the importance of 33 sections. You can doubt it all you want. If you want to know what the UN claims is represents, it is easy to find. Speculation is just that. I just thought that Jesus being 33 years old had little credence, so I offered a slightly less silly reason.

Roger Stone....

Stone told Axios he won't make any money from a Hernandez pardon and that he flagged it to Trump because it was an injustice. He wouldn't disclose what he told Trump or what the president said to him.

• "All I did here was pass the letter on, in addition to publishing on Substack" Stone said.
• "I didn't know if the pardon was going to happen," he added. "But I think the president was moved by the story of how bad this prosecution was."

Isn't that lovely? Roger Stone, of all people, opines an injustice was done. Trump empathizes with the Honduran leader pleas of political prosecution and turns him lose....and likely didn't even consult with his DOJ.