jonojim1337 said:

They weren’t judged by their flesh.

Click to expand...

References, por favor.

Valletta said:

Think of the millions of completely unvetted people that crossed the border during the Biden administration, where are they?

Click to expand...

They are nowhere, because they don't exist.

Tuur said:

It's not obvious? If the object is the cheapest solution, shivering in the dark is the cheapest of all. If the object is a reliable source of power, you have to do certain things., based on the power source, to provide. it. That's more expensive that shivering in the dark, but much more comfortable. Wind and solar, especially if you're going to have some sort of power storage, isn't going to be the cheapest option. Building wind and solar without storage is less expensive than building it with storage, but by it's very nature it's an unreliable power source.

Whether anyone believes me on this or not, it doesn't change what is.

Now, if the criteria is non-CO2 electricity production, the most reliable is hydro, nuclear, and geothermal. Wind and solar are less reliable, again based on the nature of the power source. So is tidal energy. If you want to use that to replace coal and natural gas generation, you're going to have to have that energy storage. Otherwise, you're going to have to burn something to take up the slack when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine.

Click to expand...

If I understand what you are saying here it would seem to be exemplified by a situation in the Netherlands in which solar & wind energy is overwhelming their power grid.



Per the BBC:


The problem is "grid congestion", says Kees-Jan Rameau, chief executive of Dutch energy producer and supplier Eneco, 70% of whose electricity generation is now solar and wind.

Grid congestion is like a traffic jam on the power grid. It's caused by either too much power demand in a certain area, or too much power supply put onto the grid, more than the grid can handle."

He explains that the problem is that the grid "was designed in the days when we had just a few very large, mainly gas-fired power plants".

So we built a grid with very big power lines close to those power plants, and increasingly smaller power lines as you got more towards the households.

Nowadays we're switching to renewables, and that means there's a lot of power being injected into the grid in the outskirts of the network where there are only relatively small power lines."

And these small power lines are struggling to cope with all the electricity coming in from wind turbines and solar panels scattered around the country.


Netherlands' renewables drive putting pressure on its power grid

Always in His Presence said:

There is no one above the law - a grand Jury of his peers has made the charges.

Click to expand...

Why did Trump hire such an irresponsible official?

Dan Perez said:

And please give a verses ??

dan p

Click to expand...

The Gospel of John

Nithavela said:

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

Click to expand...

I'm sure they'll rectify that soon!

JohnB445 said:

Which sin would be worse than murder

Click to expand...

And there a list in 1 Cor 6:9 and another list in Gal 5:19-21 !!

dan p

Jipsah said:

Hmmm... I doubt my ancestors in Korea ever heard of him, or gave him much thought even if they did.

Click to expand...

Heard of the Yellow Emperor?

ViaCrucis said:

All Nazis vote Republican =/= all Republicans are Nazis.

It's a strawman to claim that he said a hundred million Americans are Nazis. But it does happen to be true that Republicans are the party Nazis side with in this country. And, yes, a lot of Communists almost certainly vote Democrat. Though I suspect many vote for third parties.

This is, of course, a whole lot different than the claim made before that Democrats want open borders, to be soft on crime, or remove parental rights; those are all very untrue statements. That Nazis by and large vote Republican is a very true statement.

This is especially true since the current Republican president and his administration is, objectively speaking, fascist.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

I suspect all Satanists and Witches who promote and practice child sacrifice in the form of abortion vote Democrat. "That is the party they side with in this country."
I am not sure you want to follow that bizarre logic too far.

jonojim1337 said:

Literally everything belongs to Caesar before the rebellers stole it. The titles as well.

Click to expand...

Hmmm... I doubt my ancestors in Korea ever heard of him, or gave him much thought even if they did.

Guojing said:

Why do you use a Pauline passage to understand what the entire Hebrews 11 is teaching the little flock of Israel?

Paul told us today that salvation is by faith alone without works, I agree with you (Romans 4:5).

The problem is you are not rightly dividing the word of truth when you read scripture (2 Timothy 2:15)

A simple example to show you misunderstood the Hebrews 11 passage,

If Noah believed God that there is a flood but did not do the work to build an ark as commanded (Genesis 6:14, Hebrews 11:7), would his faith alone save him?

Click to expand...

Noah was a righteous man because He believed God. Noah was not saved by his work. God would have got someone else to build the ark. Noah would have died physically in the flood, if he was alive at that time, and gone to heaven.

Acts 17:25 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us: NASU

God put Noah and Abraham in the at the time and place to get the results He needed at that time. There was no chance that they would not do what He wanted done. They were saved because they believed God and not by the works they did.

Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. NASU

This passage says that God left all sins committed prior to Jesus unpunished so He would not be unrighteous by justifying people who believed in Jesus after he died for the sins of the world. He judged people on if they believed that God would send a redeemer.

John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. NASU

Above is the standard for people who die physically after Jesus died on the cross. Those who believe in Him are not judged for works. It is basically the same standard He used for those who died prior to Jesus' sacrifice. If they believed that God would send a redeemer, they believed in Jesus before He came, and Jesus saved them and gave them a new birth as spirits after He died. Then He took them to heaven with Him as spiritual beings.

And now countries ushering in a new area with mandatory electronic ID's

fhansen said:

What orthodoxy? What legalistic perspective? You didn't really addreasss my post which simply stated what should be obvious-that those here on this thread going by Scripture alone are seriously disagreeing with each other on what constitues orthodoxy to begin with! Now, if we were going to talk about Eastern Orthodoxy, I'll pretty well agree with them on the doctrine of justification all day long, a doctrine which Luther correctly identifed as the crux of the Reformation. The real need for the Reformation was scandal, however, which was why it began. When the change was made to correcting basic doctrine the door opened for all kinds of error, error which continues to multiply and metamorphose to this day.

Click to expand...

Let me remind you that your church has the dubious title of being the first denomination. There are differences in interpretation among the orthodox churches, and no, I’m not talking about the EO. All churches that accept the Nicene Creed are orthodox. There is no debate about that. Your opinion of what constitutes an Orthodox Church is of little value to me.

Abraham1st said:

was that reply to me, Jesus came for all, to save from death, and give life, your words bring that, if they do good for you, if not, bad for you.

obeying Jesus Christ is to believe in HIs example, of laying HIs life down for the world, Moses cant do that, he had no such feelings, so there is one left to believe in, what Moses had, was not good enough, and the law to put people to death, surely is far from good enough too. Now there is holy and harmless, our high priest, and of we believe in Him, we are too.

law talk is great if you want to talk, but if you want action, you have to leave the law behind and follow Christ, but that was what the scriptures that answered you say, and if you say different, then say on to who wants to talk. ( as you have for many many years, God Bless.)

Click to expand...

Well, yes, that was a direct reply to your post. Didn't get that last sentence in your post above, however. Anyway, keep praying, studying, seeking, etc. The truth will evetnaully prevail.

Not yet a tattoo... Next step called a Digital ID system...

The Liturgist said:

There literally is. I am aware of no language where Messiah, Christ or Annointed are written with out an i. For instance, Christos, Cristo, Moshiach… Indeed his first name Jesus*, in Hebrew Joshua and in Aramaic, Yeshua, means “I AM saves” referring to the meaning of YHWH

*Also often spelled with an I; indeed in antiquity there was no letter J. Thus Iesous in Greek, Isha and Isho in the Eastern and Western dialects of Classical Syriac Aramaic, and Isa in Arabic, and in Latin before the invention of the letters U and J, IESVS.

Click to expand...

Good points.

ARBITER01 said:

The Holy Spirit has already witnessed the truth to me on this subject decades ago, so I'm not the least bit interested in others trying to persuade me otherwise.

Go evangelize someone else.

Click to expand...

Ask Him to give you a little more insight. Never hurts to ask-we're enjoined to do so, in fact.

eclipsenow said:

But a third of Americans voted for Kamala. Do the GOP not think ANY of those people deserve SOME compromise? It was only a slither of a third more voted for Trump - and a third were so upset by both choices - they didn't even vote!

Does the budget they are trying to pass even make sense for America?
It really sounds like government of the billionaires, by the billionaires, for the billionaires. (BBB!)
You see - I thought America was already favouring the rich over the poor - and already vastly disproportionate - and already punishing the poor who have to work 2 jobs each and hardly see the kids just to make rent. I thought Americas healthcare was already one of the most expensive and punitive regimes in the OECD. But I was WRONG! It turns out MAGA can punish the poor even more, while rewarding the rich so much more! (The top 0.1 percent get $390,000 more each year, but those under $17,000 a year get robbed another $1000 they just cannot afford to lose!)

There's going to be Civil Disorder if this goes through!

When you can get past the regime's outright LIES - this bill is REVOLTING!

What you need to share about the “one big beautiful” ugly horrible bill​

Angry Bear | May 23, 2025 7:00 am​

...​

​

Robert Reich: The old professor in me thinks the best way to convey to you how utterly awful the so-called “one big-beautiful bill” passed by the House last night actually is, would be to give you this short 10-question exam. (Answers are in parentheses but first try to answer without looking at them.)​

1. Does the House’s “one big beautiful bill” cut Medicare? (Answer: Yes, by an estimated $500 billion.)​

2. Because the bill cuts Medicaid, how many Americans are expected to lose Medicaid coverage? (At least 8.6 million.)​

3. Will the tax cut in the bill benefit the rich, the poor, or everyone? (Overwhelmingly, the rich.)​

4. How much will the top 0.1 percent of earners stand to gain from it? (Nearly $390,000 per year.)​

5. If you figure in the benefit cuts and the tax cuts, will Americans making between about $17,000 and $51,000 gain or lose? (They’ll lose about $700 a year.)​

6. How about Americans with incomes less than $17,000? (They’ll lose more than $1,000 per year on average.)​

7. How much will the bill add to the federal debt? ($3.8 trillion over 10 years.)​

8. Who will pay the interest on this extra debt? (All of us, in both our tax payments and higher interest rates for mortgages, car loans, and all other longer-term borrowing.)​

9. Who collects this interest? (People who lend to the U.S. government, 70 percent of whom are American and most of whom are wealthy.)​

10. Bonus question: Is the $400 million airplane from Qatar a gift to the United States for every future president to use, or a gift to Trump for his own personal use? (It’s a personal gift, because he’ll get to use it after he leaves the presidency.)​

Most Americans are strongly opposed to all of these things, according to polls. But if you knew the answers to these 10 questions, you’re likely to be in a very tiny minority. That’s because of:​

(1) distortions and cover-ups emanating from Trump and magnified by Fox News and other rightwing outlets;​

(2) a public that’s overwhelmed with the blitzkrieg of everything Trump is doing and can’t focus on this; and​

(3) outright silencing of many in the media who fear retaliation from the Trump regime if they reveal things that Trump doesn’t want revealed.​

Please do your part: Share this as widely as possible.​

Robert Reich, “What you need to share about the “one big beautiful” ugly horrible bill.”​

Click to expand...

Your post is filled with left wing liberal talking points and misinformation and false information.

Hentenza said:

Really? You are comparing the legalistic perspective to orthodox understanding? Sorry my friend but your church does not have the exclusivity on orthodox doctrine. I am equally concerned about your church reliance on extra biblical sources. Maybe a reason for the reformation.

Click to expand...

What orthodoxy? What legalistic perspective? You didn't really addreasss my post which simply stated what should be obvious-that those here on this thread going by Scripture alone are seriously disagreeing with each other on what constitues orthodoxy to begin with! Now, if we were going to talk about Eastern Orthodoxy, I'll pretty well agree with them on the doctrine of justification all day long, a doctrine which Luther correctly identifed as the crux of the Reformation. The real need for the Reformation was scandal, however, which was why it began. When the change was made to correcting basic doctrine the door opened for all kinds of error, error which continues to multiply and metamorphose to this day.

GoldenBoy89 said:

There you go. Your response shows just how empty is the GOP’s concern is for the impact of the government shutdown.

Click to expand...

If the Democratic Party was really concerned about the impact of the government shutdown, then there would not have even been a shutdown.

d taylor said:

-
​

Born of water is a person's physical birth.
Born of Spirit is a person's spiritual birth, which happens when the person believes in Jesus for Eternal Life.

Click to expand...

And please give a verses ??

dan p

Clare73 said:

"Such as these" children, is not "these" children.

Click to expand...

What does that mean?

Clare73 said:

"Such as these;" i.e., not the wise and learned (Mt 11:25, 18:3, 19:14), but the trusting and unpretentious.

Click to expand...

Again, you are not being clear, which is almost always the case. Your doctrine says that people are objects of God's wrath right from birth, so how could Jesus say that the kingdom of heaven is made up of people such as those little children that Jesus said to come to Him? Those little children who you say were born as children of God's wrath. Explain that and stop being so vague.

Clare73 said:

Eph 2:3 is quite clear and needs no interpretation,

Click to expand...

LOL. Please don't say ridiculous things like this. You should know better. It's obvious that there are many times when things are clear to someone, but not clear to others. This kind of comment is useless. I don't care if you think that Ephesians 2:3 is clear and matches your understanding of it. I disagree with your interpretation of the verse. To deny that it needs any interpretation is completely disingenuous and ridiculous.

Clare73 said:

only belief of what it states; i.e., we are "by nature, objects of wrath."
We are born with our nature, born objects of wrath.

Click to expand...

See what you did there? You talk about what the text states and then you say something that the text does not state. It does not state that we are "born objects of wrath". Your are inserting your own ideas into scripture that are not taught, so, ironically, you don't just stick to what the text actually states like you think you do.

In your view people are dead in their sins from birth, but Paul said that he was not dead in sins until he became aware of what sin is by way of the law.

Romans 7:9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me.

You say that people are born dead in their sins.

Paul said: "I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died".

I will go with what Paul said over what you say every time. He was not born dead in sins, but became dead in sins when becoming aware of sin at which point "the commandment came, sin revived and I died". You don't understand that being born with a sinful nature does not mean that people are condemned from birth, but, rather, means that people will eventually sin when they are old enough to do so. But, no one sins right from birth. No one is condemned from birth. That idea is completely ridiculous. People are condemned for a reason. They are condemned for not repenting and believing. Babies and little children are not capable of doing that, so you have them being condemned for no reason at all. God's wrath is not against people for no reason, as you believe. His wrath is on a person when they sin and rebel against Him and refute to repent and believe. But, He gives people the opportunity to repent and believe so that His wrath is no longer on them. His wrath is not on anyone who is not even capable of sinning or knowing what sin is.

Clare73 said:

The baby rattlesnakes in my backyard where my children play are as much my enemies as are the adult rattlesnakes there.
Being babies make no difference in one's nature (poisonous, or sinful) in either rattlesnakes or humans.

Click to expand...

Babies cannot sin. So, what exactly are they condemned for? For being born? That's ludicrous. John 3:18 talks about people being condemned for rejecting Christ. Babies can't reject Christ.

Clare73 said:

All those of Adam are born with the sin of Adam accounted/charged/imputed to them (Ro 5:17), which is the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the righteousness of Christ imputed to all those of Christ (Ro 5:18-19).

There are only two groups of people on earth, the condemned (Eph 2:3) and the saved through faith in Jesus Christ (Jn 3:18).
Even the elect stand condemned until they come to saving faith in Jesus Christ (Jn 3:18).

Click to expand...

Babies are not able to come to saving faith in Jesus Christ, so I guess this means that you believe all babies who die are condemned to hell?

ThatRobGuy said:

Are you sure these are the "trusted voices of reason" you want to prop up in order to make your argument?

Click to expand...

You mean the people that worked with him, worked for him and had a better understanding and first hand knowledge of Trumps character?

Yeah. Those people.