stevevw said:

For me its music. Music can be spiritual and it can take you to places beyond your surrounding world.

I play the guitar and write songs as a past time and therapy really. I can be learning a song or trying to write a song and be taken away for an hour or two and I feel like I just arrived back on planet earth lol.

I think the beauty of an art like music or painting or any art where you can detach yourself from the world and be taken to some transcendal place is a doorway to spirituality if it is for God or in the spirit of God.

I often get visions or rather concepts of something beyond the world. Or insights about self or the world that cannot be articulated in everyday interactions. In fact they are hard to put into words. Thats why art and for me music is a form of communication. But both ways. It sort of opens the mind to what is beyond.

One sentence I think that captures how music can take me into Gods presense would be a song I have not finished from years ago called 'Shadow of my soul'. The first verse is

I hear a voice thats far away calling out my name and though I can't see anyone I can hear it just the same.
Its singing songs that talk to me calling me back home and penetrates my very being to the shadow of my soul.

Sorry two sentenses but it only makes sense with the whole verse.

But just the song title takes me to a place where it is that the shadow of my soul exists and its where I can expand my world from the world I live in and it brings me peace beyond the world.

Click to expand...

Steve, that line “penetrates my very being to the shadow of my soul” lands deep—I totally get it.
David’s harp did the same for Saul: one strum and the tormenting spirit lost its grip, because the music carried something (or Someone) bigger than the room.
I’m wired deeply creative too, and whenever I hand the work back to God that same “doorway” stops being escape and becomes embrace—like the Spirit slips inside the art and hands us a glimpse of the real country we’re made for.
Would love to hear the rest of Shadow of My Soul when you finish it; until then, keep letting that far-away Voice call you (and all who believe and trust Christ) home.

2PhiloVoid said:

Do you only appraise things other people say via simple, dichotomous criteria?

Click to expand...

It's a bad habit one picks up when dealing with right-wing Christians.

2PhiloVoid said:

I don't "think" in dichotomous, either/or metrics. Maybe take that to heart in interpreting what it is you think I'm saying? You've seen enough of the sort of things you know I say. I'm surprised you're having a knee-jerk reaction.

Click to expand...

The question is, why critical theory?? I have the impression that the right would like to bundle all that the left does that they don't like into that one package. What's so powerful about it?

Desk trauma said:

Still no legal chattel slavery, guess the vile thirteenth amendment has held on somehow?

Click to expand...

I’m more concerned about that you steal from Caesar.

Servus said:

I agree that taking Communion is a sacred and solemn occasion, and we should examine ourselves before partaking.

However Paul made it very clear what the unworthy manner was. And it's virtually impossible to repeat it when taking Communion in church these days.

The Communion is known as the Eucharist. And Eucharist means "Thanksgiving". And in Paul's time the Eucharist was like the feast Americans have on Thanksgiving Day.

It was a big banquet. And some were being selfish and depriving others. Selfish and committing gluttony. Treating the Eucharist like a pagan pig-out. Which is clearly spelled out in 1 Corinthians 11.

Considering how Communion is taken in church these days, it's virtually impossible to partake in an unworthily manner as Paul described, by hogging the Eucharist and pigging out on it, and getting drunk on the sacramental wine.

Click to expand...

Thank you, Servus, for your comment and your evident love for God’s Word.
I get the Corinthian pig-out scene—but I think the principle travels:

Any greed, bitterness, or unforgiveness toward another believer is the same heart-condition Paul flags.

“Examine yourself” still means: clear the heart before you lift the cup—even if the portions are now bite-size.

RamiC said:

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16 NIV

When this becomes "For the Creator so loved the world that we were given the Christ that whoever believes in Christ shall not perish but have eternal life." the crucifixion starts to look a lot less personal, human and agonised. This is God suffering as one of us, for our sakes, and because of our sins, such that they are forgiven. It is important to know the extent of that love.

Click to expand...

Its also wrong scripturally, since by Christ all things were made, according to John ch. 1, often called The Last Gospel by traditional Western Christians (John 1:1-14 is read at the end of traditional Solemn High Masses by Roman Catholics, Anglo (Anglican) Catholics, Lutheran Evangelical Catholics, Western Rite Orthodox, and also Armenian Orthodox and Maronite Catholics among Eastern Christians, and on Christmas Day or Christmas Sunday, and in the Byzantine Rite and Eastern Orthodox liturgy, at the Paschal Divine Liturgy (Paschal Matins, which immediately precedes it, has the reading of tne Empty Tomb from Mark)

camille70 said:

I don't think any of the victims have accused Clinton though.

Click to expand...

Apparently, a phrase in the emails has led to a truly filthy story about Trump and Bill Clinton together. But Clinton has denied it. And he surely wouldn't lie about something like that.

Say it aint so said:

That is a notice by the FBI under the admin who is doing everything they can to keep things from the public. Take with one two grains of salt.

Click to expand...

That memo was just a short while ago. Now they are investigating people. If they bring a case against anyone it will probably be deemed malicious as it was ordered on social media by the president and given a response that they are following said orders.

RamiC said:

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16 NIV

When this becomes "For the Creator so loved the world that we were given the Christ that whoever believes in Christ shall not perish but have eternal life." the crucifixion starts to look a lot less personal, human and agonised. This is God suffering as one of us, for our sakes, and because of our sins, such that they are forgiven. It is important to know the extent of that love.

Click to expand...

Normally, including our church, what changes are the kind of thing printed in the bulletin, not Scripture. Also, the PCUSA has an agreement with the RCC that would prevent doing this in the words used for baptism.

rambot said:

I have seen Republicans take all manner of strategy to deal with this upcoming release.
So far I'm preferring this "there's probably nothing" strategy I'm seeing here to the other "raping teenagers isn't that big a deal" that is bubbling up on podcasts and commentaries

That feels like a losing strategy to me....

Click to expand...

I couldn't believe anyone would argue that because the girls being molested were in their early teens, it's not that big a deal. But there it is.

Brightfame52 said:

Okay supposing the Father is successful in His Drawing enablement, does that guarantee that the ones drawn to Christ will go to Him and become believers, converts?

Click to expand...

Yes, but as I went on to argue, that's not because the lexical content of ἑλκύω requires it. The guarantee arises from the syntax of the verse. John identifies the person raised (κἀγὼ ἀναστήσω αὐτόν) as the same person drawn (ἐὰν μὴ… ἑλκύσῃ αὐτόν). The final clause is adding a promise about the very one whose inability has been removed.

So while ἑλκύω itself does not mean "irresistibly bring to faith" (the verb does denote an effectual movement, but it is from inability to ability), John's syntax makes clear that the one thus enabled is the one Christ will raise. In other words, the irresistibility is not in the semantics of ἑλκύω (which is why those arguing for a "softer" understanding of ἑλκύω are not even touching the Calvinist argument); it is in the way John ties the drawn person to the resurrected believer.

Fervent said:

so the argument from silence isn't persuasive

Click to expand...

Indeed, since not only is it fallacious in this context for reasons you point out, but also factually inaccurate, since we have Patristic material from the second century affirming important Marian doctrines.

He didn’t die in Palestine and the 12th century dating is the correct date.

Phil G said:

But he didn’t believe in a flat earth. He was right on that one.

Click to expand...

And how does one know what Martin Luther believed ?

Servus said:

Most of what's in Mariology was never taught for centuries. Gospel verses about Mary do not teach most what's contained in Mariology, but are rather applied to the teaching of Mariology.

Click to expand...

Mariology firstly is the subset of theology pertaining to the Theotokos. Secondly, tnat is historically inaccurate. We have no evidence of any conflict over any doctrines pertaining to the Theotokos until the late fourth century, when St. Epiphanios documented the small schismatic groups known as the Collyridians and Antidicomarians; the former worshipped the Theotokos as a goddess, like the heretical Palmerians of the present, and the latter took the view that is unfortunately common among many Restorationist, Evangelical, Non Denominational and Radical Reformation churches which denied that which had been affirmed by all early Church Fathers who commented on the matter, and also the leading Protestant figures, namely, the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary and her status, contra Nestorius, as the Mother of God - doctrines upheld not just by Martin Luther, Thomas Cranmer and John Wesley, but also John Calvin, who reluctantly conceded the title Theotokos was correct and who never disputed the perpetual virginity of the Theotokos.

Additionally we have second century icons of the Theotokos, third century manuscript attestation of intercessory prayer to her (the specific prayer being one in continual use among the Orthodox), second century attestation of the beliefs of the Orthodox, Roman Catholics and high church Anglicans and some Lutherans concerning the nativity of tne Theotokos (although it is not canonical, but rather appears to parrot the ancient liturgies, the Protoevangelion of James), and likewise similar dating concerning the Theotokos.

No major Christian bishop objected to the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary until Nestorius, and his actions caused the first on-going schism in Christianity, the complex schism between the Church of the East (which in the 1960s separared into the Ancient Church of the East and the Assyrian Church of the East) which embraced Nestorianism in many of its provinces in the Persian Empire for a few centuries, before adopting the Chalcedonian Christological premise under Mar Babai the Great, the Oriental Orthodox, who follow the exact Christology of St. Cyril drafted in response, and the Chalcedonians, who use what I regard to be an adequate but overly complicated formula, which caused the Oriental Orthodox to separate from us over legitimate concerns we had over-reacted to the problem of Monophysitism, which we falslely accused the precursor of the Coptic Orthodox of teaching, when they had anathematized Eutyches and the Monophysites, who then embraced tritheism in the sixth century before becoming extinct.

Now this schism has had a transient property, so there have been periods of restored communion between the three groups, most recently between the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox, but under the influence of Old Calendarists, Armenian, Georgian, Russian and Ukrainian nationalists, and misguided Greek, Romanian and Ethiopian monks who have never met a member of the other church, there are many actively seeking to undermine the work of the International Orthodox Theological Association and preserve the EO-OO schism despite the theological dialogue being successfully concluded and despite the success of ecumenical agreements between the Copts and Alexandrian Greek Orthodox and between the Syriac Orthodox and Antiochian Orthodox in preserving the Christian population in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, where the four churches converge.

This shows just how damage continues to be caused by the violent persecution Nestorius initiated against members of the Church of Constantinople who insisted on using the traditional term “Theotokos” taught by St. John Chrysostom vs. his preferred “Christotokos.” Conversely, unlike his opponents, and unlike St. Chrysostom, who was death marched for calling out the consort-Empress of Emperor Theodosius II for wasting money on a solid gold commode, Nestorius lived out his life peacefully in exile and wrote a self-serving biography, the Bazaar of Heraclides, and his supporters in Antioch emigrated to Nisibis where they proceeded to spread his teaching into the church in the Persian Empire.

Thus contrary to what some will tell you, no one has ever been persecuted by the Orthodox for rejecting any Orthodox doctrines concerning the Theotokos. In the case of the Roman Catholic church, the status of Mary was not the main issue with the Protestant reformation; the followers of St. Jan Hus venerated her (which is why he’s venerated as a saint by the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia) as did the Martin Luther, who actively prayed an Orthodox version of the Hail Mary, as my friend @MarkRohfrietsch likes to point out, but not the intercessory prayers we use, but not seeking the intercession of the theotokos has never been regarded as a theological error (although I do strongly reccommend it from personal experience), whereas not venerating the Theotokos was classified as such by St. Epiphanios in the late fourth century, and if memory serves the Second Council of Nicaea also directed this, as did equivalent Oriental Orthodox canons and liturgical practices.

Widespread rejection of the veneration of the Theotokos did not become a thing until Calvinism in the 16th century, but even Calvin was not a Nestorian, admitting the Theotokos was a perpetual virgin and the Mother of God.

Darwin's great discovery was how it happens. Nothing in evolutionary theory is about "it just happened." It's a sad commentary on science education in the U.S. that so many people actually believe that story. Darwinian theory turns out to have useful applications in engineering, as engineers are now using evolutionary processes to solve problems that were not possible to solve using design. Turns out, God knew best.


It's directly observed today. It happened the way we see it happening now. God is a lot smarter and more powerful than most creationist think He is.

eleos1954 said:

It's "interpretation" of things seen ...

Click to expand...

Nope. Directly observed facts. We see evolution proceeding exactly as it always has. Perhaps you don't know what biological evolution is. What do you think it is?

eleos1954 said:

God does state His creative power is seen and we are without excuse.

Click to expand...

But YE creationists still attempt excuses.

eleos1954 said:

While it (the theory) can describe what happens, the ultimate "why"—the origin of the chain of events or what drives the universe—is a question science cannot answer and may lie outside the realm of natural science.

Click to expand...

Of course it does. You have that much right. Even Darwin just supposed that God created the first living things. Science is too weak a method to consider the supernatural. It can neither support nor deny God.

DaisyDay said:

Are you a truck driver?

Click to expand...

My job does require a class A CDL, as one requirement among many, but I'm not a semi-truck driver, no.

Kjelete said:

Even with space-exploration now it`ll end one day anyways. They probably never find aliens ether, but that`s another story.

Click to expand...

Of course not, since we live under a dome. I’m a firm believer that society should be governed by a genetically superior race of people, among whom God was born. As it was in the days of Ptolemaic cosmology.

Landon Caeli said:

What if the magazine publishers began sporting toothbrush mustaches?

Click to expand...

Less subtle than using Nazi jargon, I suppose.

But that was enough. I imagine there are some 20th century historians on staff at Harvard. Those guys seem to have not realized what that would mean for them.

Servus said:

No way back on the first page I made a silly throw away quip: "Epsteingate, from the people who brought you Russiagate". The rest is off topic derail history.

It's a good thing I didn't make a remark about the Epstein files and Dinty Moore, because then half of this thread would be a discussion about beef stew.

Click to expand...

False implications about very important things like the Trump campaign / Russia investigations really should be challenged.

If otoh you had falsely claimed Dinty Moore is healthy and delicious, I probably would have let that slide.

Lukaris said:

Acosta was a bipartisan, swamp holdover during the 2008 Epstein sweetheart plea deal. Trump has had a lot of conflicts with former officials and his relationship with Acosta was not personal although Trump considered Acosta as a competent labor seceretary.

Click to expand...

A prosecutor who had saved his pedophile pal from serious consequences. It's notable that when the story became known, Trump tossed Acosta overboard. And of course, there's that birthday letter to Epstein that we can't post here. Trump is looking for the magic bullet that will end this slow train wreck, when the only thing that could (in principle) save him is to release all the unredacted files.

When the Miami Herald reignited public outrage in 2018 over Epstein’s plea deal, Bondi remained silent. She issued no public condemnation, launched no investigation, and maintained legal inaction despite growing evidence of systemic failure.

Then, unexpectedly, Bondi emerged on the national stage.

In 2020, she was appointed to President Trump’s impeachment defense team.

“The Price of Looking Away: How Bondi and Acosta Benefited from the Epstein Cover-Up”

“Promoted by Silence: The Strange Rise of Pam Bondi and Alex Acosta After Epstein”

medium.com

Lukaris said:

More rabbits will be pulled from the magic hat of course.

Click to expand...

He's hoping. But so far, nothing has worked.

Most do not.

Apple Sky said:

Actually rainbows are not arches but are full circles.

Click to expand...

No. There is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Dikaioumenoi said:

The Father's drawing is an enabling action. The conditional statement tells us nothing about who ultimately comes. So if the drawing can fail, then you are saying God can fail in His attempt to create the very possibility of coming. The creation of that possibility is what the drawing is. "No one is able to come unless drawn." The success of the drawing is the precondition for the possibility.

So is the Father's act of enablement necessarily effective, or not? If it is, your definition of ἑλκύω collapses your own position. If it is not, then the possibility of salvation itself becomes uncertain.

Click to expand...

Okay supposing the Father is successful in His Drawing enablement, does that guarantee that the ones drawn to Christ will go to Him and become believers, converts?

I watched Fr Chris Alar often on YouTube. I like his talks!

Desk trauma said:

Will no one rid us of this troublesome document!

Click to expand...

No one has been following that piece of paper since at least 1972.