Latest activity

bbbbbbb · Oct 16, 2025

FredVB said:
I am not disagreeing with that.

None of this is showing I had some problem or was upset, so I have no idea why you spoke about that, as if it was an issue in discussion. I do not disagree with God choosing, but I would if you would say we cannot understand any basis God has in that. Your own definition of elect does not match how it used in the Bible still. And while God alone chooses, God is not willing that any perish, right? Or do you disagree with the passage that says that?

Your point was that "Believers are elected to be conformed to the image of Christ. That is the right application for the word." It seems to indicate to me that you do not believe that God chose (elected) people to be saved, but merely to be conformed to the image of Christ. Am I correct in thinking this?

LynnMaria · Oct 16, 2025

Learning always said:
Don't be discouraged. If you do pray to Our Lady with perseverance, then she'll help you.

@Learning always - thanks so much I appreciate that. I feel so hopeless and alone sometimes, so my faith gets tested.

Say it aint so · Oct 16, 2025

MrMoe said:
Is the ‘joked with a colleague privately’ excuse used for Jay Jones still valid?

JosephZ · Oct 16, 2025

dogs4thewin said:
and people who do things like this would not obey those laws anyway. Laws only work for people who care. It is like this people who can be trusted with guns do not need gun laws and people who cannot (usually) do not give a darn.

You're right, many criminals will not obey gun laws, but even if they decide not to obey gun laws, the laws will still reduce the availability of guns to criminals and the number of gun deaths in the country. For example, having universal background checks that include private sales will reduce the number of gun sales and transfers to criminals; safe storage laws can prevent guns from being easily stolen and ending up in the hands of criminals; and a ban on high-capacity magazines and assault-style weapons can limit the number of casualties during a gun crime or mass shooting. Combining stricter gun laws with stronger penalties for violating them and when crimes are committed with guns will save a lot of lives.

One of the biggest problems right now is that gun laws vary so much from one state to another that criminals in states with strong laws can just travel to a state with less restrictive laws to get what they want. If stronger gun laws like those found in California were to be applied at the federal level, gun violence would drop dramatically nationwide.

o_mlly · Oct 16, 2025

Hans Blaster said:
I tracked this convo back to where it emerges from a deleted post, and I see no sentence of this sort from either of us.

Hans Blaster said:

I'd never heard of "vertical morality" so I did a quick search.

Click to expand...

o_mlly said:

What I am trying to pursue with you in the other thread is rational morality, making no appeal to a higher authority, only to reason.

Click to expand...

The post is in the parallel thread that morphed into a morality issue and was a reply addressed to you: "Malevolent vs. benevolent dispositions and conservative political ideology in the Trump era".

fhansen · Oct 16, 2025

Hentenza said:
Even if you interpret the scriptures as not all being recorded it still does not prove that what you bring to the plate to “simplify” or “clarify” interpretation is true because it is still not inspired. Only the scriptures are absolute truth.

No, you're assuming that all revelation had to be recorded in written form.

Then we're faced with a situation here where the whole church, the early church, believed and practiced in a particular way, and then did so for the centuries following. Then a group comes along, some 1850 years after the fact, and says,, 'We got it right. The church had it wrong all this time, even though the group was nowhere near at the time that it all transpired. The church wears parts of revelation in its life, it's lived experience..

bbbbbbb · Oct 16, 2025

we celebrate Christmas in winter.

RocksInMyHead · Oct 16, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
Why would anyone expect the sentiments surrounding the racial complexities of his presidency to be any different for this specific issue, when it was in place for many of the other issues?

Because there's a far simpler and more straightforward explanation.

bbbbbbb · Oct 16, 2025

church service

mark46 · Oct 16, 2025

rambot said:
Education Department wipes out special ed office in shutdown layoffs, union says

is anyone concerned how this would impact anyone they know with special needs in their family?

If you don't now anyone do you care much about their loss of support?

In the US, healthcare is not a federal responsibility for all. The federal responsibility for the cost and choices regarding safety net programs for the weak and vulnerable have been expanding since !932 (under Democrats and Republicans). Some of our states have much larger economies that many countries. IMO, the swing toward more state responsibility is a good one.

State governments can decide to step into the breach during a shutdown (many have). Also, states can decided what social programs to support.
========
TO BE CLEAR
I strongly favor the federal government shifting monies from rich to poor states so that poor states can better serve their citizens. But the federal cost of administration should be reduced by literally hundreds of thousands of employees. The issue is which departments should be reduced, which should be eliminated and which should be expanded. Then the departments can make the cuts. As with any enterprise, there should be efforts to be more efficient. Of course, Trump has no such interest. He wants to disable the federal government instead of making it work better.

When Clinton/Gore eliminated 360K federal jobs (with Gingritch holding their feet to the fire) there was little uproar and few (if any) legal fights. We need to move again to a revenue sharing approach to social programs (other than Social Security and Medicare). The feds collect the money and send ti to the states and local governments, where decisions can be better made.

AS AN ASIDE
These efforts should also be made within the Homeland Security and Defense. but that won't come until Senators want it to happen.

o_mlly · Oct 16, 2025

johansen said:
Eureka hospital agrees to provide emergency abortions following lawsuit by state

Providence St. Joseph Hospital in Eureka, Calif., has agreed to provide emergency abortion services following a lawsuit filed by state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta.

www.latimes.com

The site has a paywall.

What you may be referring to is a different patient at a different hospital.

"Providence St. Joseph Hospital allegedly gave a hemorrhaging patient buckets and towels and directed her to another hospital 12 miles away."

johansen said:
... maybe you should read all of it.

Maybe you should.

Always in His Presence · Oct 16, 2025

Always in His Presence said:
the word pappas in Greek and papa in Latin meant 'father and were used as terms of affection for Bishops and some patriarchs. It's demonstrate in it's use from Dionysius of Alexandra in referring to his mentor Heraclas of Alexandria.

prodromos said:
Not quite. The title of Pope belonged first to the Patriarch of Alexandria and continues to be used today.

You seem to have missed the reference above - pappas indeed was used towards Heaclas of Alexandrea (the Patriarch of Alexandria) - but it was a common term of endearment - not the Title of an office and certainly not for the ruler of the church because he was one of a number of patriarchs, not overall head.

Always in His Presence · Oct 16, 2025

Xeno.of.athens said:
nope, not so.

Yup - it is so and just as valid as your response.

See the Roman Catholic Church is the authority over Roman Catholics - no one else.

The Orthodox has pages that you are missing and your opinion is:

Xeno.of.athens said:
I have all the pages I need.

Protestant churches are similar in that we have books not including the Apocryphal - it isn't that we have pages missing - just do not have pages we do not need.

Just as viable a point of view.

o_mlly · Oct 16, 2025

Hans Blaster said:
I'm pretty sure the "direction" this part of the conversation was going was "Jesus = Truth" ...

And you are wrong. That's what happens when one doesn't read their own replies.

"What I am trying to pursue with you in the other thread is rational morality, making no appeal to a higher authority, only to reason."

Strong in Him · Oct 16, 2025

Apple Sky said:
Yes - which he does, the 12 are part of his work.

Don't be silly - you made no mention at all of "the 12" being compared to the disciples until I brought it up.

Though if you are finally admitting that 12 people walked on the moon, that's something.

Nithavela · Oct 16, 2025

NxNW said:
Except it's a Republican government.

As long as there is a single democratic party member left in the government, the government is tainted.

Colo Millz · Oct 16, 2025

Hentenza said:
No issues there. I do cringe though when people use commentators to prove doctrinal issues though.

Why?

What's the difference between reading a commentator and listening to a sermon?

I confess I also cringe when listening to sermons, I am a fan of the three minute homily.

:preach:

Aryeh Jay · Oct 16, 2025

NxNW said:
Except it's a Republican government.

But the Democrats refuse to kowtow to the Party in charge.

mark46 · Oct 16, 2025

FAITH-IN-HIM said:
What is most remarkable is the level of investment exhibited by President Trump’s supporters—whether in the media, politics, or among ordinary citizens—in advocating for him to receive a Nobel Prize. Realistically, how many of us genuinely pay attention to who wins the Nobel Prize, or even know when nominees are announced? For most people, unless they are watching live coverage, the news passes by with little more than a passing comment such as “Oh, that’s nice,” before moving on.

However, recent discussions surrounding the Nobel Peace Prize have intensified, with considerable debate about its significance and who should be awarded. This heightened interest appears largely driven by President Trump’s pursuit of the honor.

President Trump holds one of the highest positions achievable in the past century—the President of the United States. Is the Nobel Peace Prize really considered more prestigious than being President of the United States? I don’t think so.

So I really do not understand what is this obsession from MAGA that President Trump get noble peace prize?

MAGA is obsessed because Trump is obsessed.

The Nobel prize isn't a popularity contest. I don't think that the popularity of Sadat and Begin was all that important.

All that being said, starting a war with Venezuela may/should hurt Trump's chances for a peace prize. Curiously, many countries would like to see this 2nd Cuba defeated with a change in government. The CURRENT peace prize winner supports fighting for this regime change. One is reminded of Mandela.

Hentenza · Oct 16, 2025

Colo Millz said:
Like the ECFs.

They are at least as reliable as your average Sunday sermon, I'd say, and we should pay attention to them to the same degree.

No issues there. I do cringe though when people use commentators to prove doctrinal issues though.

Nithavela · Oct 16, 2025

essentialsaltes said:
Real Americans. Who Matter. Like Marjorie Taylor Greene's children.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene breaks with the GOP on Obamacare, calling to avoid premium hikes
Greene said she's "not a fan" of Obamacare [oh yes you apparently are] but complained that her "own adult children’s insurance premiums for 2026 are going to DOUBLE" if Congress ignores the issue.

She goes on to make clear that this has nothing to do with giving illegals healthcare. Because it doesn't.

Branding the affordable care act "obamacare" has been a brilliant move by the GOP.

Apple Sky · Oct 16, 2025

Strong in Him said:
You haven't.
You've gone straight to YouTube and posted links to videos or pictures - some of which you've got wrong or not watched yourself.

Haven't I go back & take a look then.

Strong in Him said:
No, you said only that Satan likes to imitate God.

Yes - which he does, the 12 are part of his work.

Strong in Him said:
saying something cannot be "anymore truer" doesn't make sense - not doubt you mean that this doesn't make it any the more true.

Another English lesson again - Thank you very much.

Colo Millz · Oct 16, 2025

Hentenza said:
You are guilty of the fallacy of fallacious reductio ad absurdum.

The answer is simple, do the rest in light of scripture.

Like the ECFs.

They are at least as reliable as your average Sunday sermon, I'd say, and we should pay attention to them to the same degree.

Brightfame52 · Oct 16, 2025

If Christ died for our sins according to the scripture, the following things are true:

That we were sinners dead in sin without hope, and could do nothing to save ourselves. Matt 1:21; Eph 2:12

It means that God has chosen us in Christ Jesus before the foundation Eph 1:4 and wherein Grace was given to us in Him for the purpose of saving 2 Tim 1:9

It means that God has forgiven us all our sins and will not never charge them to us, lay them to our account ! Rom 4; 8;

If Christ died for us we have the Righteousness of God through Christ charged to us 2 Cor 5:21; Rom 4

If Christ died for us, His redemptive death secured our salvation from the curse of the law. Gal 3:13

If Christ died for us, we shall be given Spiritual life by the Spirit Gal 4:4-6

If Christ died for us, God will send to us the Gospel of our salvation. Eph 1:13; 2 Thess 2:13-14

If Christ died for us, God will preserve us unto eternal glory ! 2 Tim 4:18 6

Latest activity

Latest activity

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene breaks with the GOP on Obamacare, calling to avoid premium hikes​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene breaks with the GOP on Obamacare, calling to avoid premium hikes