Latest activity

Jipsah · 2025-11-25T10:48:41-0600

Hentenza said:
Gee that inconvenient everlasting word.

Everlastng versus everlasting contmpt. Not everlasting life or everlasting life with contempt. Your lot are still stuck with the notion that everybody lives forever no matter what. Scripture never says any such thing, which y'all have to conveniently ignore.

Apple Sky · 2025-11-25T10:48:34-0600

Strong in Him said:
Water doesn't have an edge.

Water can have an edge when it meets ice.

Strong in Him said:
Whatever they are, they're not attached to the firmament

I agree but they are set in the firmament.

Genesis 1:16
God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night. And He made the stars as well. God set these lights in the firmament of the sky to shine upon the earth, to preside over the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.

Always in His Presence · 2025-11-25T10:47:40-0600

From AI is a valuable - easy reference system, similar to using Google, but faster to "I despise AI’s instant citations — they rob me of my noble art of winning debates through trivia hoarding and grammar policing, the true pillars of intellectual dominance."

Thoughts?

The AI system I use includes citations, so I'm pretty confident on the material.

What do you think?

fhansen · 2025-11-25T10:45:10-0600

Michie said:
With Millennials and Generation Z leading the way, particularly among men, Bible reading among U.S. adults in 2025 is at its highest level in the last 15 years, according to new data from the "State of the Church" initiative.

The initiative by Barna Group and Gloocollected data from 12,116 online interviews conducted between January and October of 2025. The research revealed that approximately 50% of self-identified Christians report reading the Bible weekly, the highest level of Bible reading among Christians in more than a decade.

Weekly Bible reading among all U.S. adults reached its lowest point in 15 years in 2024 when it hit 30%. In 2025, the figure rebounded 12 percentage points to 42%, according to the latest data.

"Bible reading is rising again across generations, marking a reset to faith engagement levels we haven't seen in a decade," David Kinnaman, CEO of Barna Group, said in a statement. "People aren't just curious about faith — they're opening Scripture for themselves. This trend aligns with other signs of renewal we've seen in our research, like growing commitments to Jesus and increased church attendance."

Continued below.

More Americans are now reading the Bible but fewer believe it’s 100% accurate: study

With Millennials and Generation Z leading the way, particularly among men, Bible reading among U S adults in 2025 is at its highest level in the last 15 years, according to new data from the State of

www.christianpost.com

The world's been growing darker, which has the benefit of attracting more of us to the light. The bible separates and distiunguishes between the two and offers an answer, the triumph of light over darkness. At the same time, knowledge has increased and there are good reasons for doubting the absolute perspicuity or scientific accuracy of Scripture. This need not be a problem; God's voice, the voice of Truth and Love, can be heard throughout the bible either way, I appreciate a teaching I'm familiar with here:

107 The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."72

RocksInMyHead · 2025-11-25T10:43:38-0600

Servus said:
They said trigger, not harass. From the right's point of view the left is so easily triggered that just being there will set them off. Nothing more is needed.

In my experience, people expressing an explicit desire to "trigger" someone or a group of people generally intend to take active measures to ensure that the desired person(s) are triggered.

Jipsah · 2025-11-25T10:39:40-0600

Dan1988 said:
No, nobody would ever suggest something so ridiculous. Hell is eternal torment in fire, I don't believe anyone is crazy enough to jump into a lake of lava voluntarily. No, the Bible tells us that Jesus casts sinners into the lake of fire while they beg for mercy, but He shows them no mercy.

So the truth is far from anyone choosing to jump into the lake of fire, they are thrown in there against their will.

The plain speaking is refreshing, anyway.

Dan1988 said:
I'm not going to get into this futile discussion around why God didn't chose to save everyone.

It's not so much His not saving everyone, it's that He has designed it so that most of those He ever creates are condemned to hell before they ever draw breath. To some of us that's an impossible idea to believe. The idea that our Lord, God Incarnate, came to save sinners from the horrific results of a system He designed Himself.

Now the Bible makes a clear distinction between those who are given the gift of eternal life, and those who are not. The damnationists belief is that everone who ever lived has eternal life, for some to be enjoyed in paradise, but for most to be tortured forever for having failed to make the cut.

The non-damnationist belief is that the saved live forever in bliss, while the unsaved cease to ever have lived, I.e., God "never knew them". But Scripture would at least suggests that the number of those not "saved" is either very very small, or zero.

Dan1988 said:
It's none of my business and it's none of your business either. It's Gods business alone,

Making up rules for God is folly, but ignoring what God has revealed of Himself is even more presumptuous, or to be less charitable, stupid.

Dan1988 said:
He has not revealed His reason for not saving everyone. He has in fact hidden most of what He does from us.

And a great deal of what He hasn't hidden at all we ignore if it doesn't fit what we already believe. For instance, doesn't the idea that God has predetermined that most people who He has created will live a brief life on earth and then be tortured without mercy forever seem a bit out of character? Scripture says that He wants everyone to be saved (1 Timothy 2;4, 2 Peter 3:9), but here;s a doctrine that says "Nah, He's already condemned the majority of those who'll ever live to eternal life under torture". Hmmm.... Somehow it's a little difficult to reconcile those two positions, don't you think?

Dan1988 said:
If you seek to get into the mind of God, then you are guilty of practicing Witchcraft.

Nice bit of well-poisoning there (which, com to think of it, is a pretty witchy thing to do, innit?) I think most of us would say that the best way to know the mond of God is to read His Word and try to understand what it tells us.

Dan1988 said:
We know what happened to Saul

Who actually consulted a witch, as I recall.

Dan1988 said:
I advise everyone I know, not to dabble in Witchcraft Necromancy.

I'll make a note of it.

BCP1928 · 2025-11-25T10:32:48-0600

stevevw said:
What evidence does a Christian who believes in God use.

None.

stevevw said:
Or a scientists who supports the idea of consciousness beyond brain.

Can't help you there. I suppose you are talking about substance dualism, which is not a fundamental Christian doctrine and not one I have a particular opinion about. So far, the scientific evidence suggests monism will turn out to be sufficient explanation for "mind" but it is not, to me, an important question.

stevevw said:
Because the evidence your talking about (empiricle and naturalistic) or material in nature. Is impossible to use to prove ideas like God or other immaterial beliefs. If it was verifiable by science then it would no longer be immaterial or supernatural. Or imatterially based such as consciousness beyond brain.

Science will relegate consciousness as a physical epiphenomena caused by the physical brain. So how can it possibly even entertain possibilities that are based on immaterial causes that have no physical processes to measure. Or who interpret even miracles as some physical explanation that cannot be explained. Still physical in nature.

Of course. Let me give you an example: The Bible tells us that God spoke to Moses out of a burning bush which was not consumed by the fire. The event is regarded as a miracle. Now science has discovered a plant in the region, Dictamnus Albus, which exudes a volatile oil which will sometimes spontaneously combust and burn off without harming the plant. Does that mean to you that science denies the miracle?

stevevw said:
Ok so how can it be used if its completely indifferent. It would be like using physics to explain the experience of beauty and love.

You just agreed that "When someone uses material science to refute immaterial possibilities they are imposing a metaphysical belief and not science".

When someone tried to do that, they would be misusing material science. But since no one here is trying to do that you may be should find someone who is and argue with them. But you will have to develop some cogent arguments first.

stevevw said:
So if this is the case when you dismiss ancient or indigenous knowledge as unreal or make believe this is using material science to impose a material metaphysics on those who believe in a immaterial metaphysics as the basis for reality.

I don't dismiss ancient or indigenous knowledge as unreal or make believe. In fact I have, we all have, shown a great deal more respect for it than you do.

stevevw said:
This automatically discounts and dismisses all explainations such as knowledge from belief, spirituality, conscious experiences of nature and reality as unreal and make believe.

Nope.

stevevw said:
This is not science but belief. This is imposing one metaphysical belief over another epistemically and ontologically ie the only true and real reality is a material one and the only way we can know reality is by material sciences or methological naturalism.

Nope. What you are talking about is metaphysical materialism which is a religious opinion, not a scientific one.

stevevw said:
Its only murky if you want to restrict everything to the material and naturalistic worldview. Of course it will be because anything that cannot be measured in material terms will be unknown and unexplained.

Unknown and unexplained by science. That's fine. Explaining or refuting that for which there is no physical evidence is not their particular gig. If you want knowledge of the supernatural you will have to get it in some other way.

stevevw said:
But thats not because its unreal or does not exist. Only that the wrong method or paradigm is being used to understand this. Its like trying to use biology to understand psychology of the mind. Even worse, like using math to work out whether love is real.

Just like you using a science like archaeology to work out your own theology so you can prove others' theology is wrong.

Hentenza · 2025-11-25T10:31:18-0600

2PhiloVoid said:
Nope, I can't say that I remember it.

It was a head with a brain showing.

I never agreed with it lol.

rambot · 2025-11-25T10:30:53-0600

Landon Caeli said:
She's also wrong to oppose ME intervention. She does not grasp that support of a Western ally (Israel) helps America. Her priorities and ideas shift back and forth like an adolescent learning for the first time as she goes.

...She's unreliable. Inexperienced.

Her ideas do NOT shift back and forth. As she saw more first hand accounts of Israeli atrocities, she responded by shifting her opinion in on direct.

I am absolutely no MTG fan, but to think that "changing your mind after a preponderance of evidence that contradicts your opinion" is somehow a bad thing, I can't help you.

essentialsaltes · 2025-11-25T10:30:17-0600

For the curious.

Trump to end temporary protected status for Somali immigrants in Minnesota

Move could affect hundreds of Somalis who fled civil war in their home country

www.theguardian.com

Always in His Presence · 2025-11-25T10:29:50-0600

then there is this beauty:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/jones111498.htm

Clinton Settles Paula Jones Lawsuit for $850,000

President Clinton reached an out-of-court settlement with Paula Jones yesterday, agreeing to pay her $850,000 to drop the sexual harassment lawsuit that led to the worst political crisis of his career and only the third presidential impeachment inquiry in American history.

After more than 4 1/2 years of scorched-earth legal warfare, Clinton and Jones brought a sudden end to the case with a four-page deal in which he acknowledged no wrongdoing and offered no apology. The agreement, which will be filed with a federal appeals court considering whether the lawsuit should go forward, requires the president to pay within 60 days.

FunkDocktaXXVII · 2025-11-25T10:29:49-0600

Valletta said:
You should definitely speak to the priest at your local parish, but here's my best shot at an overview. A Catholic is supposed to get married by a priest or have special permission by the Church to have a ceremony elsewhere which it sounds like your wife did not. If your wife decides to become a practicing Catholic again, and this is the first marriage for both of you, she goes to confession and then the next step is to get your marriage "convalidated." It's a short private ceremony usually with just a few witnesses to "bring your marriage into the Church." First there's some paperwork, some questions, you would have to agree to raise the children as Catholic and comply with Catholic teaching. They would ask for your baptismal record and your wife's. The children would get baptized. Again, it is essential to talk to a priest because there may be exceptions, but that should give you a rough idea of the kinds of things to expect.

Thank you for all the info!

FunkDocktaXXVII · 2025-11-25T10:28:17-0600

linux.poet said:
Welcome to CF!

I recommend reviewing the information pinned to the top of this subforum: One Bread, One Body - Catholic

You can also ask questions about Catholicism there. However, since you are not Catholic (yet) please use the [posting in fellowship] tag for all posts that are not questions, and do not get into a debate or object to anyone’s theology in that subforum. You are there to learn, not object. (More details about this policy can be found here: Statement of Faith - OBOB Statement of Purpose I strongly suggest reading it - it also contains Catholic information too.)

If you do have objections, concerns, or disagreements with any new Catholic theology you learn, please start a new thread here: Denomination Specific Theology When in doubt, play it safe.

Hopefully these resources will help you on your journey with your new faith.

Thank you for directions so i can read up and digest more info

essentialsaltes · 2025-11-25T10:28:05-0600

Landon Caeli said:
Wow! I never knew the left was so supportive of religious expansion in the U.S.

We are into freedom and diversity, just like the founders who set it up that way.

durangodawood · 2025-11-25T10:27:40-0600

Always in His Presence said:
Brilliant - may I use that?

Why ask?

Just have AI rewrite it for you.

rambot · 2025-11-25T10:25:25-0600

ThatRobGuy said:
I suppose you could, as long as you don't mind basically admitting "I don't like quickly retrievable, cited information that my opponents can use in debates, because that challenges my ability to beat them in 'the court of public opinion' based on factoid memorization exercises and correcting their grammar"

If there are no links or sources given for the information, why should I trust an AI? And frankly, UNCITED AI seems to be the most common type of AI I see on CF. It seems kinda rare to see citations peppered into AI.

I advocated for AI to be cited whenever it is used on this site because it makes sense.

AFAIC, AI has as MUCH crediblity as any other rando on line who does not cite their source and there's no reason for me to think differently.

...not to mention, just in terms of a personal preservation strategy, those who reject AI as a valid tool will likely be unemployed in a few years.

There was ways it is a valid tool and ways it is not a valid tool. There are things AI is doing well and things it is not. IMHO there are also something things AI may never do well but I'm a NOT a computer expert and can't really have that discussion in a meaningful informed way.

Always in His Presence · 2025-11-25T10:20:43-0600

NxNW said:
No they don't.

yes - they do.

Bill Clinton 'rape' victim Juanita Broaddrick tells of lasting trauma of 1978 'attack' and claims another 'victim' has told her: 'There are more of us out there'

Juanita Broaddrick, now a 73-year-old grandmother, claims Bill Clinton, now 69, raped her in a Little Rock hotel room in 1978
Clinton's lawyers have called Broaddrick's claim 'categorically false'
Broaddrick has detailed the trauma she's faced since the alleged attack
The Arkansas woman first made her claim that Clinton had raped her in 1999, more than two decades after it allegedly happened
She says she remembers hoping 'that evil man' would die during his 2004 quadruple heart bypass surgery.
She said she is happy to see Clinton looking 'so terrible, like death warmed over', as he campaigns for his wife

Strong in Him · 2025-11-25T10:19:45-0600

Strong in Him said:
Duplicate post.

Strong in Him · 2025-11-25T10:18:36-0600

Apple Sky said:
Does a flat circle have edges ?

Yes because a circle is a defined shape. The edge is the circumference.
If you pick up a CD you can pick it up by the hole in the middle, or hold it by the edges. You can stand a coin on its edge.
Water doesn't have an edge. If someone talks about going to the water's edge they mean the riverbank or where the sand meets the sea. If they talk about the edge of the pool, they are probably referring to the side of the swimming baths/pool.

Apple Sky said:
How do you know what stars are ?

Whatever they are, they're not attached to the firmament - like they're dangling from it with long pieces of invisible string.

DaisyDay · 2025-11-25T10:18:35-0600

essentialsaltes said:
Have you seen his Truth Social feed? If the shoe fits...

Was his name or office mentioned?

Answer: it is not

Was that said?

Answer: no

The actual president of the United States has called for these people to be hanged. Killed. Executed. I agree with you that this qualifies as "lashing out". :doh:

Landon Caeli · 2025-11-25T10:17:40-0600

rambot said:
And what made her unworthy?
She wants to expose the Epstein list.
That's all.

In all other aspects she was 100% sycophantic to Trump.

I repeat, the MTG episode is exposing the misogynists who support Trump.

She's also wrong to oppose ME intervention. She does not grasp that support of a Western ally (Israel) helps America. Her priorities and ideas shift back and forth like an adolescent learning for the first time as she goes.

...She's unreliable. Inexperienced.

GoldenBoy89 · 2025-11-25T10:16:26-0600

essentialsaltes said:
Especially when the president explicitly threatened to cut off federal money to NYC.

You see the same with how Newsom deals with him. He’s got no problem giving Trump a bit of what he always wants in any interaction with anyone, if it means the president doesn’t take it out on the people of his state.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Bill Clinton 'rape' victim Juanita Broaddrick tells of lasting trauma of 1978 'attack' and claims another 'victim' has told her: 'There are more of us out there'​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Bill Clinton 'rape' victim Juanita Broaddrick tells of lasting trauma of 1978 'attack' and claims another 'victim' has told her: 'There are more of us out there'