Phil G said:

You have repeatedly shown that your "understanding" of a variety of topics on this thread alone is nothing more than beliefs, not an understanding.

Click to expand...

I do have an understanding, more than most.

There are two sources who have said Trump is selling pardons. I makes one wonder.

linux.poet said:

So you’re just going to work everyone until they collapse and run everyone into the ground?

Click to expand...

Nah. I’m retired now so I can rest every day IF I wanted to.

linux.poet said:

This is the theological tradition I was raised in regarding the Sabbath, so I am inclined to agree with it on traditional inertia alone, as in the “this is what I have been taught and I’m not going to change ”. I grew up in the “we go to church on Sunday but we go home and go back to work on Sunday afternoon anyway” group, and even the Sunday service was optional if my dad wanted to go on a nature trip to some campsite somewhere.

I now realize how much workplace idolatry has snuck into our church culture and how much that needs to change. Keeping the Sabbath may not be the correct answer, but the constant pressure for more secular and religious work, as opposed to taking time for real meditation and contemplation and prayer, is our biggest liability in Bible Church land.

It may not be Saturday, but I think I need a structure with time set aside for worship, to focus on it. Otherwise, people will just pull me back into the hamster wheel of endless work. Do we trust our fallen minds with the task of organizing rest periods and deciding how we want to honor the Lord in them AND pushback against those who don’t want to respect any rest to the Lord we set? If we trust our minds, in the power of the Holy Spirit with such a task, should we not take counsel from those we have a structure of rest already, even though we might disagree with them? An abundance of counselors is considered wise.

Click to expand...

Like Paul explains no one should be judged about which day they choose. Sunday services have been around since the first century with sources like The Didache and Ignatius among many. The early church celebrated the Lords Day as the celebration of the resurrection which is what mainstream churches celebrate.

Before I retired I worked Monday through Friday so I had the weekends off. As a family, and now, services are on Sunday with the occasional Saturday night service. Structure is important as is going to services but trusting in the Spirit to guide you is just or more important. Our fallen minds are really not fallen anymore since we are regenerated and justified. As a deacon in my church what I see more is people that put their personal lives as the priority rather than to listen to the Spirit. God is awe inspiring and deserves our worship.

The death of self is a metaphor for the acknowledgement of one's own ability. It is similar to those in AA who acknowledge a power greater than themselves. Christianity spread for the first 300 years under very adverse conditions. It was not so much the intellectual acknowledgement of theological propositions that were persuasive. It was the reality of changed lives.

It is difficult for us to understand in modern society but up until a little over 100 years ago most everyone on earth grew up, lived, and died in the village where they were born. Thieu friends were their siblings and cousins who were much more numerous than today. People knew each other with a depth that few achieve today. When a person was transformed from a shrewish wife or a drunken husband into some one who cared about others, it was recognized and often desired to have that change for themselves.

The "death" may be thought of more as the willingness to be made a different person. The environments of prison and hospitals often produce people more interested in this sort of transformation. In a country club environment the satisfaction with daily pleasures seldom inspires one to change.

And again, OP doing nothing to make the claims about pseudoscience go away.

stevevw said:

Inca Stone-Dissolving Plants
Inca Stone-Dissolving Plants

Click to expand...

This is the only one I'm going to even point out... but did you actually even read the source you're using? Because it even says that the claim is a story made up in 1983.

Hans Blaster said:

What silly people the english are.

Click to expand...

It comes from having Oxford and Cambridge being a place mainly for the clergy to begin with; don coming from dominus, Latin for lord, which was used to refer to the clergy. But only in Oxford and Cambridge/

Just felt like adding the only actually good piece of information on this whole farkakta thread.

Clare73 said:

It's not about "the Protestant denominations," it's about the word of God in Scripture.

The rejection of a non-Scriptural doctrine (Co-Redemptrix) puts one in agreement with the God-breathed (theopnuestos, 2 Tim 3:16) word of God written.

Click to expand...

Well, as you saw from King Charles the 'head' of the Anglican church, they are all turning and following after the entity that prophecy said would happen.

Michie said:

English Literature students at the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom have been warned: Scripture contains some “graphic bodily injury and sexual violence.” Specifically, the institution highlighted the Old Testament account of Cain killing Abel and the gospel accounts of Jesus’ crucifixion.

Other literary works also receive trigger warnings, the university explained. In a statement, it said that type of “content note is a standard academic tool used to signpost when sensitive or graphic content will be discussed.”

But critics called the move a form of censorship, saying it is “misguided” and “absurd” to label God’s Word as potentially triggering.

Bible Receives Trigger Warning from University of Sheffield​

Continued below.

UK University Slaps Violence Warning on Bible, Citing the Crucifixion and Cain and Abel

English Lit. students at the University of Sheffield in the U.K. have been warned: Scripture contains “graphic bodily injury and sexual violence.”

churchleaders.com

Click to expand...

Its all about triggers and safe spaces to the point that it actually causes anxiety and division. If Cain killing Abel is a trigger warning then just about everything is a trigger warning. The news is a trigger warning whats happening in Nigeria is a trigger warning. Live assassinations on campuses are trigger warnings.

It is true that theres a lot of violence everywhere. But all this PC is really making it worse. Life is horrible sometimes. But what they don't tell you with the bible is there is a moral to the story. They always want to make it bad and leave out the good bits. If students got the full picture then they would actually be less triggered in life.

This is tied to how history is legitimately written. Chinese history is also canonized, and as a necessity or else historical information cannot convey legitimately. The Jews often quote from difference sources, including common stories, common theologies which are usually Pharisaic in nature, just as Jesus put, "the Pharisees are on Moses' seat" (the significance is that Canon needs an authority to legitimize it).

Quotes from common stories include how archangel Michael had a dispute with Satan on the corpse of Moses. When this was quoted, at best it means the source is partially reliable, or more strictly speaking only this part of the book is legitimate. The quote itself doesn't automatically legitimize the whole book. Canonization on the other hand, authenticate the whole book as being legitimate and can be regarded as the Word of God. That lies a fundamental difference.

The OT canonization started (as authorized by God) with King Hezekiah. It's said that 17 out of the 24 books of the Jewish OT Canon are with the mark or seal of King Hezekiah. The more critical authentication is through Ezra (authorized by God). It seems that 22 out of the 24 canonical books are the effort more or less from Ezra. These 22 books were written in Hebrew. 2 more books were added later, more likely they are the book of Ezra (naturally so) and the book of Daniel (there's a reason for this as well, by God's will). These two books were written in Aramaic as a later add-in. They are legitimized by the Pharisees (more likely involving Pharisee elites inside the Great Sanhedrin) near Jesus' days. Even Josephus only reckoned the 22 book version of the Jewish Canon (Josephus is an elite Pharisee but not one in the inner circle of the Great Sanhedrin, Paul is a closer candidate to the Great Sanhedrin).

That said, Daniel was added (as by God's will) to the Canon, more likely because Daniel actually encountered Jesus, if you compare the description of Jesus' appearance in Revelation with that in Daniel. The Jews didn't reckon Daniel as a formal prophet, but Jesus authenticated Daniel by calling him a prophet directly.

In a nutshell, whenever an outside source is referenced, whether it's from a common story, a common Pharisaic theology or even from the Septuagint, it only means that part of the book is reliable, no less no more. In contrast, only a canonical book can be deemed as the Scripture or Word of God. Only the Scripture is not broken, as Jesus put.

rjs330 said:

Well of course it would have to include people otherwise who would vote to the candidates? Hey look i didnt say my idea was perfect. It would need some tweeks somehow, but it would stop gerry mandering and make things more even. Maybe something along the lines of a gride and the grids would have to have so many people per square mile based on total population. Just brain storming. Some portions of the grid would be bigger while others would be smaller. If you have 20 representatives then you get 20 grids. And each of those grids have to have the same amount of people in them. Squares or rectangles. Like an excel spread sheet.

Click to expand...

Ah I see. I had thought you were suggesting giving each representative equal square miles regardless of population.

There's a lot to consider in devising fair and meaningful districts, I think. Squares seem to cut communities or regions in half completely arbitrarily. I'd want to see how the current non partisan commissions do it in places like, recently, CA. before concocting my own notions.

Apple Sky said:

Maybe I just couldn't believe that man had walked on the the moon,

Click to expand...

But you did.

Prior to that you had been saying that the moon landings were false and that nothing would change your belief in a Flat Earth.
Then you watched Charles' testimony - which some of us commended you for.
Them you wrote on here that you "hand on heart believed every word", wrote a prayer saying "sorry" for doubting the astronauts and said that Flat Earth was a load of rubbish and "I can't believe I said that."

I don't believe yours was the only life that was changed by that testimony. It's quite possible that people came, and are still becoming, Christians as a result of it. You were already a Christian but you became a moon landings believer.

And then you weren't.
Had your mind previously been completely changed by a lie? Were you lying when you said "hand on heart"? Or did you just change your mind again and decide that posting FE YouTube videos and winding everybody up was more fun?

rusmeister said:

I’m not trying to derail the thread, and don’t expect 100% agreement from everyone, but to point out that these people are complicated. I could equally turn the guns, so to speak, on Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, Andrew Klavan, etc, and state both where I think them right and where I think them wrong without condemning them on the whole as “bad people”. And if you look at the Left, I think you’ll find that quite a few of them are going to occasionally express ideas we actually agree with, even though we disagree on so many of the big issues. Again, this is not about Tucker as such but about how we refuse to sift through the ideas and fairly weigh each one on its own merits.

Click to expand...

You're absolutely right that it's more complicated on the conservative side for the reason you say - weighing individual ideas on their own merits, which is how it should be done. Another factor is the widening of the so-called Overton Window. They're discussing things that couldn't be discussed just two years ago (outside of Fuentes' bedroom where he makes videos. ).

I'm going to be a little harder on the Left than you, though. Most of the Left is seeing this as some kind of victory. "Conservatives are tearing each other apart! Yay!" They don't understand that this is normal, healthy discourse, they way it should be. They don't understand that because they don't engage in it amongst themselves. They love nice, safe echo chambers, and they're more monolithic. If you were to tell me you know a person who is pro "trans rights", and I were a gambling man, I'm pretty sure I could win money predicting how they stand on at least a half dozen other sociopolitical issues. But sadly, it wouldn't help me to predict what non-human color their hair is.

What is wrong with people. This is getting worse.

Strong in Him said:

Why else would you have done a 180 degree turn and slammed Flat Earth - unless that is what you really believed?

Click to expand...

Maybe I just couldn't believe that man had walked on the the moon, My unbelieving came from what I found out then to a better understanding of the subject.

Akita Suggagaki said:

You misplaced an effect for a cause. The intention, the purpose, the cause was to force Republicans to address healthcare. But Republicans were too obstinate and the shutdown happened. It was Republicans who used it to get what they wanted. And they did.

Click to expand...

Obamacare - exclusively Democrats
Oversight of the ACA (because Obama didn't want his name on a failing venture) - Democrats
Addition of Subsidies to help with rising cost of healthcare - Democrats
Dates for the subsidies to end - Democrats
Who didn't address the need all of 2024 - Democrats
Who designed the subsidies to go directly to big pharma? - Democrats
Who designed the subsidies to not lower anyone's deductible, out of pocket or subscription cost - Democrats

Whose fault is all this?

Oompa Loompa said:

Great! So you would be totally fine with Trump spying on ANTIFA activists and illegal aliens to prosecute and deport, should he follow the same protocols used against conservative parents speaking out against liberal school boards.

Click to expand...

I have no legal issues with anyone following the law.

essentialsaltes said:

"The provision retroactively makes it illegal,"

Constitution says:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Click to expand...

Is that part of the constitution that has been replicated in the Trump Bible?

Anyway. I'm sure the GOP can find enough democratic support to ammend that part of the constitution.

calicocat said:

He's a laughing-stock even among some of the more insane extreme ones. I'm honestly not certain he isn't a fed like Carlson.

Click to expand...

He's the opposite of a laughing-stock. They fear him, and that's the real reason that, although I'm sure he's chomping at the bit to debate anyone important, only one major conservative figure, Dinesh D'Souza, has debated him. If he were a laughing-stock they should have an easy time debating him and making him look like a laughing-stock. And anyone who did so would be considered a hero.

They fear him because he's right on some important things that they don't even want to talk about, and he can usually defend his positions well with reason.

"The provision retroactively makes it illegal,"

Constitution says:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Desk trauma said:

Now imagine if a Democratic politician had said the US lacks skilled workers and needs to import them.

Click to expand...

You would agree with them wouldn't you?

Stopped_lurking said:

If it exists and make predictions about or manipulate the world we can describe it even in scientific terms.

Click to expand...

I don't think the ancients thought in scientific terms. That was not the paradigm. I think it was more that they were part of nature and this was something they experienced. They were more in tune with nature rather than having to look outside it trying to work it out.

So they would be seeing things differently because it came naturally to them. If nature followed laws and they were experiencing those laws then they were more or less controlling nature without fully understanding this scientifically.

I go back to the thought experiment of colorblind Mark who is a scientists that knows everything technical about sight, brain connections, lightwaves and the color spectrum. Yet has never experiences the color Red.

One day she can see colors and has her forst 'Red experience'. We can say Mary gains an insight and new knowledge of reality that science could not tell her. This red experience is part of reality. Gives additional knowledge and changes how the world is. It can only be gained by phenomenal experiences.

Just like the red experience brings knowledge so does all phenomenal experiences. Living completely immersed in this phenomenal paradigm unlike todays enlightened material paradigm will bring a different kind of knowledge that is fundemental to the objective world. Being fundemental means it is the source of the material world and thus a more likely state of being that can manipulate it in different ways.

Stopped_lurking said:

If there is someone out there that can soften stone with some ancient technology or lost knowledge of course we can look at them doing it. Until someone does it, it is reasonable to put it in the category of perhaps possible. Just saying that it exists, doesn't make it so even if one invokes indigenous knowledge or something similar.

Click to expand...

Oh it doesn't just exist in imaginations. In fact this is probably a good example of how we can look at ancient knowledge and the signatures and discover how they were smarter than we think. Just like those articles I linked saying that science is also realising the value of Traditional knowledge.

I thought I already linked a couple of articles. One on how they molded blocks on the outer casing of the pyramids. The other on how ancients softened and changed stone with natural chemicals and plants.

More investigation has happened due to the rise of modern tech which allows more detailed studies and testing. I think by studying and testing these sites we are discovering their abilities.

Whether that was intentional or a coincident we will have to work out. But it seems theres too many coincidents to be not some sort of advanced knowledge at that time if we are talking about sound and energy waves, anti gravity, manipulating stone material and all that.

Here are some more

Evidence of Molecular Bond Reversal… & Ancient Stone Softening Technology
~Evidence of Molecular Bond Reversal… & Ancient Stone Softening Technology

The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids
Were the stone blocks carved from natural limestone or cast with an early version of concrete? A materials science research team provides evidence to answer this age-old mystery.
The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids

Inca Stone-Dissolving Plants
Inca Stone-Dissolving Plants

This is about acoustic sonic waves in cutting hard stone and lifting stones.

Investigating the Cavity Resonance Acoustic Properties of the Great Pyramid for Free Energy Generation A Study of the King's Chamber and Its Potential Applications
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381806657_Investigating_the_Cavity_Resonance_Acoustic_Properties_of_the_Great_Pyramid_for_Free_Energy_Generation_A_Study_of_the_King's_Chamber_and_Its_Potential_Applications

The Role of Abolishing Gravity in Ancient Egyptian Pyramids Architecture
The Role of Abolishing Gravity in Ancient Egyptian Pyramids Architecture

Electromagnetic properties of the Great Pyramid: First multipole resonances and energy concentration
Electromagnetic properties of the Great Pyramid: First multipole resonances and energy concentration