FAITH-IN-HIM said:

Jesus did not mean that before a Christian give water to thirsty, Christian should verify legal status of the thirsty.

Click to expand...

I never said that. Please don't put words in my mouth.

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

When Jesus said give shelter to shelter less, jesus did not mean verify his immigration stratus before you welcome him to your home. When Jesus said take care the orphan, Jesus never meant that the orphan must be natural born citizen of your homeland.

Click to expand...

I never said that, don't put words in my mouth.

As you pointed out the verses you like are only for his followers. They are NOT intended to create governement policy or law. If you believe they were then we must have laws against adultery, fornication, lying and homosexuality.

You either accept ALL of scripture as governmental law and policy or none of it. You do NOT get to pick and choose which scriptures apply to governmental law and policy and which ones don't.

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Click to expand...

Rhats a poem put there by the French. It is not nor ever has been immigration policy. There have been times in our history where we did not allow any immigration.

Its okay, we don't have to. And I actually have no problem with immigration. But we have been allowing people in who are NOT interested in being Americans. They are interested in berating America, attacking America, blaming America. People who hold as much loyalty to their home country as America. People who want to change the towns and cities into the same places they came from. People who desire to live off rhe largess of America while not being American.

We have also allowed millions of illegals who have assisted in raising rhe cost if living in America while at the same time causing wages to stagnate and taking jobs away from Americans.

When we came, we dropped all loyalty to our former country. We didn't ask any Americans to take care of us. We spoke English. We were dirt poor, but never took a dime from Americans. We paid our bills and earned our way. We never asked a single American to bend over backward for us.

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

Throughout American history, minority groups have opposed various waves of immigrants, from the Irish, Germans, and Scandinavians in the early 19th century to Italians, Poles, Russians, Chinese, Jews, and Cubans in later years. Despite this opposition, most Americans have welcomed immigrants, believing that embracing newcomers is central to America's identity and uniqueness. Your story is possible because of this tradition of acceptance.

Click to expand...

It used to be that Immigrants like us came to America to be Americans. They didn't come and proclaim how horrible America is. In those days, they actually came a lot of times wirh nothing and received nothing from America in return. There wasnt freebies and government handouts. There was also a time where we really needed rhe immigrants. They were necessary to grow and build this country. We didn't have enough people to do what needed to be done.

Now we have immigrants who want to continually slam America, demand America give to them. They flat out lie about their circumstances. They work to tear down instead of create. They don't want to be Americans, they want ro be hyphenated Americans. They want their communities not to be American communities but, communities loke where they came from. Transforming American communities into their countries communities.

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

Consider the potential outcomes had the minority group opposing both legal and illegal immigration to America been successful at the time of your arrival. How might this have affected you or your family?

Click to expand...

This is why I'm not against immigration. I'm for controlling it and only allowing people.in who want to be Americans through and through and are interested in building and not taking. Who are interested giving up what they left for the American way. When we came we left everything behind. We wanted to be American.

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

You assert that you have become American; however, I respectfully question this claim. Embracing immigrants and diversity

Click to expand...

No its not. It was never diversity that we were looking for in America. It was unity. Diversity is a weakness not a strength. Diversity is division which is what is going on right now with people coming in. They don't want unity they want division. Their homeland in America. This is how we get places where Americans cannot communicate with others because they demand we speak their language. This is how we get towns that wake up their citizens in America at 5:30 am for the Muslim call to prayer. This is where we get ither countries flags being flown with pride while they burn the American flag. Tho
is is where we get places wanting Sharia Law in America. It used to be America first. Now its America second or third.

I repeat what Teddy Roosevelt said:

In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin,” Roosevelt wrote.

“But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American,” he added.

“There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all.

“We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

fulfills James 5:16

I am not sure a group ritual "prayer" (since it is repetitive, it might be called a chant.) captures the effect of "one to another". The substitution of what is essentially an incantation might not be as honoring to God as one might have been led to believe.

peaceful-forest said:

I have heard that Adam and Eve were in one body before

Click to expand...

Not to assert any particular view of my own, but I can definitely state this is what the Luciferians / Satanists teach their people, and they call it an "androgenous" being. It is in their books and their claim to why they convert their male children into females and females into males at a young age. It is their "religion" and they say that "god" (lucifer / satan / baphomet) is this way and that is their basis for calling themselves "gods" like Satan told Eve that "ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil" (KJV - "ye" meaning her and Adam, plural version of "you" meaning both) in the garden if she ate the fruit. This is also where the baphomet comes from having parts of both genders and being an idol that is a pagan "god." The greeks were notorious for their men dressing as women. You can see this in some of the movies made these days where the men are wearing wigs, and the scenes clearly showing it is a wig depicting them putting it on and taking it off etc.

Some people think God took an actual rib from Adam's side, some assert that God took half of Adam and the translation was inaccurate. It's been so long since I studied it I can't even recall the details on the Hebrew wording and the Septuagint might offer some insight being translated by scholars in the Jewish OT world, but I don't know how much. Christ actually read and taught out of the Septuagint being that it was the prominent language in His time and era while on Earth and they were under Rome. People were more fluent with greek than they were with hebrew at the time and so the Scriptures were greek in the temples (the Septuagint version). I found this out from a passage that Christ quotes about praise being perfected in babes (children). I think He was quoting Psalms ch 8 but don't quote me on it. Would have to reach back into files, I just remember the stun I got realizing the Messiah was reading greek translations of Scriptures and thinking how could I not know this.

peaceful-forest said:

The parts about Adam having freedom to eat from the Tree of Life (before he ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil) and Adam having responsibilities for the Garden of Eden - it's little things like this we miss, and when someone points them out, we have to go back and look.

Click to expand...

Yeah, we often get more insight than we know. This has happened to me a number of times where I go back and while I'm reading God shows me something that "should have been obvious" but wasn't the first umpteen times around the block. I feel confident God showed me (I'm more than confident within myself, but I can't prove it to others so lets just say confident) what the forbidden fruit was. There were a number of different angles that the revelation made sense, but it is kind of "in your face" that once they ate the fruit the snake didn't just "stop talking." More so, he was after that incident inside their head and chirping in their ear accusations and ideas and who knows what, as they were suddenly vulnerable to evil having engaged with it. (like playing with weegee [yes I spell it that way ] board and suddenly evil things start showing up and voices etc)

The nature of evil is to drag others into the evil and then (if there are parents involved, and there is, God the Father) send the children back to their parents with a "token" of what was done to them, or what they were involved in to "stick it" to the parents that they had been corrupted. So when Satan convinced them to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, the next sly move was to tell her that she could cover her nakedness (what they were suddenly afraid of being seen for, realizing they were naked - "knowledge of evil" / "loss of innocence") if she just used leaves from the very tree she had eaten the fruit from (fig). Satan thinks this is funny and gets a good laugh of it, sending the two of them back to God covered in leaves from the tree they weren't supposed to eat from as a jab and statement... "Look what I got your children doing."

Now, like I said, I can't prove this, but I've had a large number of talks about this with God and it gets more interesting the more you start to realize how crazy Genesis is and the kind of situation it was and how much more information is there if we listen to God and open our eyes to details that seemed insignificant. It's downright insane some of the things we miss I think sometimes.

People will say "oh but that is so foolish." Well, yeah, that's kind of the point. They were struck with fear, they had just pulled one foolish move (understatement there) and anyone that has been a child knows what happens once you are terrified because you pulled a dumb stunt... you start to make other dumb decisions because you are consumed by fear. So eh, it can be up for debate but over the years it has just sank in deeper for me.

We also know that Satan didn't scurry off and hide after he pulled the trick on Adam and Eve because God was speaking to Satan right after Eve pointed out that the serpent tricked her and she ate the fruit. So maybe she even pointed to him physically. I almost think he was standing nearby laughing when God showed up. He is said in the Bible to be proud and the only one willing to "stand up" to God, being the pride (or foolishness, thin line right?) that makes him bold and go before God and challenging God like in the book of Job.

Yes, this is one of my more favored subjects, especially because lots of people consider this all metaphorical these days, but I know it isn't. It literally happened just the way it says and the more literal you realize it is, the more details start jumping out and it gets intense. Almost like a drama tv show but a million times better. (not that I like drama, but knowing the truth is addictive once revelations start dropping)

peaceful-forest said:

The part about Adam's condition of "good" not lasting - I'm not so sure about this. It's hard to think that Adam was sinning before he ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. And if it is true, why was God so patient with him and helping him? Don't we tend to view God differently?

Click to expand...

I don't think there was any sin before the tree eating episode, no. Not from my vantage point for sure, I just can't see where that could ever be possible. I believe considering the notion of it leads one down an entire rabbit trail of hypothetical situations that just exist in imaginary land and derail from seeing what was actually going on. God obviously dealt with the situation immediately and showed His necessity to punish (justice) and yet still had mercy (made skins to cover symbolizing Christ's blood being shed for them and us). I think this is a clear portrayal of God's character in the behavior without Him really having to say much at all, being that what He done speaks for itself. He also did help them after they fell as well though, like Cain, God helped him even though he didn't listen to God when God told Cain that if he simply done what God asked (sacrifice of blood / representation of depending on being humble and accepting God's work to save us/them - versus - being prideful and trying to save oneself through offering one's own work to God)

Cain was being helped, but instead of listening to God's advice, he simply got jealous (attribute of Satan, jealousy of God lead to his fall, pride) and got angry, and decided he would kill his brother and get rid of the competition. So with God trying to help Cain, I'm sure He continued to help everyone from Adam and Eve down even after the fall that would turn to Him and who would not outright rebel.

peaceful-forest said:

In both Discussion 1 and 2, I think that Bushnell's analysis on Scripture and what Scripture says itself derails Patriarchy. Patriarchy likes to protect Adam and blame everything on Eve, but God is not one sided and will always judge truthfully and accurately.

Click to expand...

I don't think that it is quite so simple to blame everything on Eve. 1 Timothy 2:12 - 1 Timothy 2:13 - 1 Timothy 2:14 seem to suggest that she is to be blamed by some people, but I don't think it is blame being stated at all but being deceived like it says. If Adam was not deceived then he ate the fruit willingly when given to him by Eve and I don't really know how that could be much better. At one point I considered it the ultimate act of love, that Adam done it purely because he loved his wife. Then later it dawned on me that Eve was suddenly endued with the ability to be deceptive and seductive (knowledge of evil - sinner wants others to sin with - experience teaches this more clearly) and so it seemed she tricked him kind of to me (if reading between those lines in that thought pattern). But the Scripture actually states that it was not Adam who was deceived in 1 Timothy 2:14 meaning from a literal standpoint of interpreting the Scriptures he simply must have deliberately disobeyed God because he was losing his wife who he loved. She must have been afraid and that must have played a part in his choice, because they both were terrified due to being naked and realizing it from eating the fruit, so Eve must have realized this first and been afraid when she showed up to Adam with the fruit. I don't think he was clueless that "something was wrong" and I don't think she was acting normal. I think she was acting like a child does when they have been tricked by another person to do something bad and have awareness that they are going to get caught.

Also, God started with the Serpent in reverse order dealing with them all (opposite of the accusation order - God asked Adam first - then Eve - then Satan). So God goes to Adam first... not Eve, even though she ate the fruit first. It certainly isn't the case that God "didn't know" that Eve ate the fruit first, and yet He asked Adam first, "...called out to the man, "Where are you?" (Genesis 3:9). Then after the accusations, God starts with Satan declaring the consequences and when He gets to Adam the hammer drops. God says it is because of Adam that "the ground" is cursed because of Adam, that the world, the Earth is cursed because of him. Sounds like blame to me, without getting into technical details, just seems a bit obvious. But like mentioned already, I think we all miss even obvious details the first few times around.

Satan - is cursed, goes on belly, eats dust, and hatred between him and the seed of the woman (war) and defeat
(curse is all on the individual)

Eve - pain in childbirth, desire for husband [footnote says or desire to control husband], husband will rule over her
(curse is all on the individual)

Adam - cursed is the ground (Earth / world), will have to work to eat now, thorns now from plants, will return to the ground back to dust
(curse is on the entire world)

I think anyone blaming Eve might be missing God's determination of the situation. I think God is blaming Adam and very clearly so.

keras said:

I made it clear in #11, that the destruction of the AC, is done by Jesus at His Return.

Click to expand...

And do you have a guess as to an identity of said AC?

keras said:

The Lords Day of fiery wrath is years before the Return and it will depopulate the Middle East, also affecting all the world; setting the scene for a One World Government.

Click to expand...

Unlikely.

keras said:

A Coronal Mass Ejection is the only natural event that can literally fulfil the many Prophesies describing that terrible Day.
Why deny it? Many scientists warn about a big CME, something which would dramatically change all the earth.

Click to expand...

The Lord is not a sun spot nor is a coronal mass ejection the Lords Day of wrath

eleos1954 said:

well ... He did appear as a burning bush.

Click to expand...

I'd suppose the bush was already there. Why not next to the bush I wonder?

Luke 6:44
For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.

Dan Perez said:

And do you believe what Heb. 9:18 says ??

It reads , Therefore. , not even the FIRST COVENANT. WAS dedicated WITH OUT BLOOD.

Do you believe verse 18. !!

Put it another WAY. the OLD COVENANT. had to be set aside , WHEN JESUS DIED on. the CROSS and his BLOOD. SHED

THEN anyone meaning GENTILES WERE GIVEN SALVATION

And says that you are BORN AGAIN and BORN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT. is speaking to ISRAEL in EZE 36:25

and EZE 37 :1-28 AND Israel will be BORN AGAIN !!

DAN P

Click to expand...

The people of Israel and all mankind have always been God's children.

Blinded as we all are, in total or in part to the fact, by the covering God placed on us all.

Phil G said:

You lost context again. Why is it that you seem to find it so hard to understand context?

Click to expand...

Because she only sees /hears what fits with her beliefs.

Apple Sky said:

Why do you want to sue me ?

Click to expand...

Don't be daft.

perplexed said:

Why didn't the Biden administration embarrass Steve Bannon by leaking his connection to Epstein? He is a Trump ally.

Click to expand...

I think that God's hand is in American politics in ways most do not imagine. All these negative seeds are coming to harvest. I think God wanted Biden, then Trump in place to show the American people how far off we are from His will. Unlike many I think we are going to roll downhill from here. Hopefully that will set in motion the humility ad discernment that is needed for a true move of God.

Say it aint so said:

For one, Biden and his circle didn't run on a Epstein conspiracy.

Click to expand...

So? The Democrats have been very clear about trying to get rid of him any chance they get. Like I said, anyone with half a brain knows if Trump was involved in a pedophilia ring it would have been used.

Say it aint so said:

Trump et al did.

Click to expand...

No he didn't. That was not part of his platform. We had a reporter who asked him if he would release the files. He said he would have no problem with it. The truth is he also had concerns about it and expressed those concerns as well.

Say it aint so said:

What would be the premise for Garland to reopen up anything Epstein?

Click to expand...

Because other people were involved beside Epstein? Are you telling me they had no interest in pursuing pedophiles? They went after Trump for everything else, why not the one thing that most likely would have prevented him from being reelected? It makes no sense and you know it.

Say it aint so said:

Biden like all presidents pre Trump stayed neutral.

Click to expand...

Lol! So Biden wasn't interested in going after pedophiles they had information on in rhe Epstien files? Are you know admitting they are totally incompetent? Give me a food reason if Trump was involved in pedophilia why Biden wouldn't go after him for it? Not a big enough deal?

mindlight said:

So the obvious question is whether Chinese communism is superior to the current Western system of governance when it comes to strategic decision making?

Click to expand...

Both economic systems have their pros and cons but share the important facets. Toffs at the top Plebs at the bottom and Grifters in between.

Running this one again the second year. Been wanting to talk about guns. My best friend is getting tired of hearing it from me. I don’t know who is going to hear about it though. Didn’t want to start a new thread and then have nothing to say.

Trying to get a new mold for PP. it’s a little larger bullet. Will have to use thinner paper. But that darn gun needs everything custom, for a cheapy. I don’t have any choice but to make it a .451. I don’t think all the paper is going to tear. It’s a .4505 bore and tight. I used a 442 with .oo8 paper and it started to work. Easy to push in bore, tore a couple strips. 443 would still give me 451. But 452 won’t fit in bore, pin gage.

rethink. I had my best group with PP. with cupped base @100. New bullet it might not get out to 200- 30 inch drop, sighting problem. I could accu rise my other new bullet but only to 100. It has a 40 inch drop to 200. You can put more powder with a PPB. Big plus. Which raises pressure for big bullets. Need more experimentation.

partinobodycular said:

That's a very slippery slope indeed, because by using the 'greater good' argument one could justify using AI to indoctrinate children. After all, if it would greatly reduce or eliminate crime then wouldn't taking child rearing out of the hands of amateurs, and putting it in the 'hands' of an AI designed specifically for that task, then wouldn't it be worth it?

Click to expand...

Yes, education is going to be a surely affected. I think AI should be used for subjects that are straightforward, like math. I think though that there has to be a human element to better engage students, be creative and have the intuition that can help in ways AI cannot. I'm thinking too that ai might not be too useful until maybe middle primary, then used more in the upper grades.

I'm wondering if "amateur" child raising is better? Why because it creates diversity and it often is that non-conformity that pushes humanity forward? Other posts might label conformity as control, and they would be right, but the worst control is the unconscious cue that a child might get from a machine that has only computer guardrails. No real experience, trials, or temptation. The whole bible puts humanity in a test. That we learn obedience from the things we suffer. AI seems vastly insufficient to give humans the kind of exposure that God intended of "iron sharpening iron," etc., that only humans can provide.

Apple Sky said:

I have things to do, speak to ya all later

Click to expand...

So let me try to understand this.

Eratosthenes of Egypt proved the earth was a globe in around 200 B.C.

Copernicus and Newton proved the earth is a globe going around the sun.

There is a very long list of astronomers have shown the earth is a globe.

Columbus knew the earth was a globe, but he was wrong about the distances.

A few dozen space agencies have shown that earth is a globe.

Christian astronauts have seen the globe of the earth.

Space probes, like Voyager, have taken pictures of the globe of the earth.

Satellites prove the earth is a globe.

The Southern Cross proves the earth is a globe.

The apex of the “dome” of the atmosphere proves the earth is a globe.

Students of several schools sent up balloons that show the curvature of the earth.

Surveyors can show the curvature of the earth.

Radio operators can show that the earth is a globe.

Airplanes like the Blackbird took photos of the curvature of the earth.

The length of voyage of a cruise ship proves the flat earth map is wrong.

However, I am supposed to believe Rob Skiba. (I watch some of his video.) His refractive arguments don’t help his case.

I’m sorry he died young, but I don’t believe him.

It is not like the discussions of evolution and creationism, where both sides have legitimate arguments and you are dealing with theories with limited scientific proof on both sides. The earth being a globe is something we can see and prove in the present with actual measurements.

essentialsaltes said:

But that would be weaponizing the DOJ for political purposes. That's more a Trump thing, despite all his 'three fingers pointing back' talk.

Click to expand...

Why? If he was involved why would Biden hold back on a pedophile. What would be political about that? Isn't that your guys arguments all the time about how prosecuting Trump for crimes isnt political?

The DOJ sure wasn't concerned about that when they raided Mara Lago.

Apple Sky said:

I have things to do, speak to ya all later

Click to expand...

Running a business, cooking for a crowd, its a wonder you can spare a moment to post on CF.

Always been the plan of the Republicans to get rid of the actual named Affordable Care Act, especially Trump

Apple Sky said:

I know what he said, I'm not deaf.

Click to expand...

Hearing isn't your problem, it's understanding what you are hearing where you have issues.

Apple Sky said:

The litte girl asks Buzz 'why haven't we been back to the moon' & Buzz answers 'Because we did't go there.'

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

Question: "Why haven't we been back to the moon in such a long time?"
Answer: "Because we didn't go there." CONTEXT being for that very long time

You only see what you want to see and it blinds you to the truth.

I have things to do, speak to ya all later

Why do other ethnic Americans generally not want to immigrate to their homelands?

Apple Sky said:

We've been through all this on the moon thread.

Click to expand...

I don't remember seeing any explanation from you on any thread about why NASA would stop Charles Duke from saying that he hadn't really been to the moon, as you maintain, yet allow Buzz Aldrin to say that very thing.

David Lamb said:

So why, in your view, was Buzz Aldrin not punished by NASA? Before, when talking about why Christian astronauts, according to you, lie and say they have been to the moon, you have said that NASA made them sign some document in which they had to agree never to reveal the supposed secret that the moon landings were faked. Now you are saying that Buzz Aldrin publicly said that he had never been to the moon. Do NASA have one rule for Buzz Aldrin, and another for Christian astronauts like Charles Duke?

Click to expand...

We've been through all this on the moon thread.