Landon Caeli said:

Well so are we. But you do realize Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson disagreed in similar ways to how you and I seem to disagree on Mamdani. Jefferson saught a slower more controlled immigration policy than Hamilton, to protect the identity of American culture, and I don't think Mamdani is fully assimilated enough into American culture to begin with, considering he's only been here for 17 years. I feel like he's unpredictable, and was elected based on public drunkenness on the Israeli / Palestinian conflict. I feel like they wanted a Palestinian, because that was a hot topic at the time, and Mamdani was the closest they could get.

His economic policy is going to be a disaster, and I think he's going to attract a huge foreign culture to America's "big apple" that's going to clash with our own culture, and cause long term problems in the future.

...So while I'm not against diversity, I'm openly protective over it, just like some of our founders were.

Click to expand...

Evidently you reserve the right to yourself to determine what "American culture' is so you are going to have to deal with more people who haven't "assimilated" than just Muslims--including many of us native born citizens.

Apple Sky said:

I agree but they are set in the firmament.

Click to expand...

Tesla said that they were attached to the firmament.

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. If you want test that theory, just put on a maga hat and walk around downtown minding your own business, and see what happens.

Click to expand...

Still seems like youre being a jerk going to Disneyland with the intent to trigger people.

Its Disneyland. Go there for other reasons.

rjs330 said:

If only the left said the same thing about their own beliefs.

Click to expand...

Live and let live and don't deny the rights you enjoy to others. What a horrible belief.

Switched to Barry's Tea. Orange pekoe got me hooked so I also picked up Irish Breakfast. Coffee is getting pricy up here Canada and tea is better for you, no?

Andrewn said:

The Son of Man in the book of Enoch is identified as Enoch himself, isn't it?

Click to expand...

I always understood The Son of Man to be the Son of God like in John 1:1-3 before the incarnation in this writing.

Always in His Presence said:

What do you think?

Click to expand...

If I wanted AI slop I would go get it directly. I will not be engaging with it here.

Hentenza said:

Gee that inconvenient everlasting word.

Click to expand...

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.

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

Click to expand...

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

stevevw said:

What evidence does a Christian who believes in God use.

Click to expand...

None.

stevevw said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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".

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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

2PhiloVoid said:

Nope, I can't say that I remember it.

Click to expand...

It was a head with a brain showing.

I never agreed with it lol.

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.

Click to expand...

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.

For the curious.

then there is this beauty:


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.

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.

Click to expand...

Thank you for all the info!

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

Click to expand...

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".

essentialsaltes said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Fervent said:

It's not, but the catechisms only create a false picture of unity when there is a great deal of division even within the Catholic church. It's simply that some diversity is tolerated while others are repressed.

Click to expand...

I'd only say that catechisms are meant to set down and clarify core beleifs in a manner that is certainly more exhaustive and categorized and perspicuous than the bible often is. And in that way they seek to produce unity. Luther's Small Catechism should reflect that unity of Lutheran beliefs regardless of whether individuals wearing the name "Lutheran" agree with and hold to them or not.

Rabbi's Daily Devotion ...
If you’re anything like me, some days you awake feeling refreshed, and other days you feel sluggish and unmotivated. On those days, you may not feel like praising God. But I want to encourage you to consciously choose to start your day by blessing the Lord, even when you don’t feel like it, because this decision will affect the course of your day.

This is the law of firstfruits. Giving God the first part of our day orders the rest of it. When we decide to sit before the Lord first thing in the morning and thank Him for His goodness and declare His praise, suddenly our emotions change, and God begins to empower us. We may have had no desire to praise Him just five minutes earlier, but after electing to do so as an act of our will, we soon find ourselves feeling good. We have joy. Our perspective changes. Through transitioning ourselves in the spirit by choosing to put God first, we shifted the atmosphere.

Jesus did not say, “Whosoever feels, come.” He said, “Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.” Beloved one, we can’t control how we feel, but we can control our will. Let’s choose to give God the firstfruits of our day and set our course in Him. The more you do this, the stronger, happier, and more stable you will be.

_________________________________________________

Rabbi Kirt A. Schneider, Entering His Presence (Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, 2023), Used by permission.

d taylor said:

-
​

Well the earth (land/ground) was created in Genesis 1:1 along with the heaven or heavens (depending on what type of Bible you have). So the age is unknowable. That earth created in Genesis 1:1 was restored in Genesis 1: 3 - end of Chapter 1 so that restoration happened around 6000+ years ago.

Click to expand...

Time did not exist until the fourth day of creation week because then the very things we use to measure the passing of our own existence were created. The light on that 1st day was the glory of GOD. The darkness seperated from the light was the separating of GODS kingdom from Satans kingdom. This was indeed the recreation of the Earth after the destruction caused by the Satanic rebellion. The Earth existed before this and in it were giant creatures and vegetation that doesn’t exist today but we do dig up fossils, bones and such. It is impossible to know the age of the Earth.

The Liturgist said:

That’s simply not the case - St. Paul makes use of a vast array of skillful oratorial techniques, even referring to the ancient logical error of Epimenides Paradox in his epistle to St. Titus.

Click to expand...

On this we completely disagree - First, I am not speaking of oratory at all, but what Paul WROTE -

The Liturgist said:

Rhetoric is not evil if used to promote truth; indeed Christ our True God employs skillful use of parable, which is allegory - a classic rhetorical technique of antiquity.

Click to expand...

Scripture is written:

1. Literal (includes historical)
2. Allegory
3. Poetic.

Paul in the verses we are citing is writing literally


It means exactly what it says.

Good to see all the concern on how to better to protect children in churches on this place labeled Christian Forums. Warms my heart.

ChubbyCherub said:

You've explained it well here but still..................I have to pray about it. It's a hard thing to understand

Click to expand...

It is so difficult to understand because it isn’t true. Jesus had a GOD and this GOD was his FATHER. John 17:3 John 2:17 Revelation 3:12 While on Earth and also in heaven Jesus has a GOD. If you believe in the trinity then the FATHER of Jesus was the Holy Spirit not the one called the FATHER. Matthew 1:18-20 The trinity doctrine states that under no circumstances can the three gods be separated yet if one became a human how would that effect their unity. Being distinct makes people or anything else separate from each other. The trinity defies logic and reason. The trinity was developed by the primitive Catholic Church long after Jesus and the Apostles. It is an excellent deception, a definite work of the Devil. Search the scriptures to find direct proof of the trinity, it isn’t there, what “proves” it is scripture by deceived believers giving their own interpretations to define it by quoting scriptures they don’t understand or not confirming the proper meaning of Greek or Hebrew words and the deliberate alterations of scriptures by the Catholic Church. The Apostles knew Jesus was not GOD but the son of GOD and the GOD AND FATHER OF JESUS WAS GOD. Ephesians 1:3 1 Peter 1:3 2 Corinthians 1:3 1 Corinthians 8:6 Any scripture that trinitarians use to prove the trinity is in some way misapplied or misinterpreted or misunderstood. There is only one GOD who is the FATHER of Jesus Christ our messiah . Mark 12:32 Romans 3:30 James 2:19 Jesus is the mediator between GOD and man, the MAN Jesus Christ . 1 Timothy 2:5 but if Jesus was GOD then GOD would be the mediator between GOD and man. The idea of the Trinity creates confusion and scrambles the mind baffles one with bull dung. People who want to believe the trinity will and no one but GOD alone can change that.

zoidar said:

I don't see the problem. Hearing and learning is not the same as receiving Christ. Listening to the prophets enabled one to come to Christ, in other words, you would be drawn. If you ignore the prophets, you would ignore Christ

Click to expand...

Yes, that revelation, itself, is grace, is God working on and then in us, exteriorly and interiorly. And it's not either/or, Him or me, but Him first and then me responding...or possibly not.