(3) Why does copper especially migrate to the edges.

Copper does not “choose” the edge in a conscious sense — the edge lights up because physics, metallurgy, and corrosion kinetics all bias copper toward rims and boundaries over long timescales. On an ancient silver coin, the edge is where every relevant process overlaps.

Below is the clean, mechanism-by-mechanism explanation.

---

1. Metallurgical reason: grain boundaries intersect the edge​

Ancient silver coins were:

• Cast or hot-worked
• Cold struck between dies
• Never homogenised by modern heat treatment

This leaves a microstructure with:

• Silver-rich grains
• Copper preferentially segregated to grain boundaries

Grain boundaries:

• Have higher free energy
• Are fast diffusion pathways
• Terminate at the surface, especially at the edge

➡ The edge is where the most grain boundaries are exposed, so copper is already enriched there from the start.

---

2. Mechanical reason: striking concentrates defects at the rim​

When a coin is struck:

• Metal flows radially outward
• The rim experiences:
  • Highest plastic strain
  • Highest dislocation density
  • Microcracking and work hardening

These defects:

• Lower activation energy for diffusion
• Act as pipelines for copper atoms

➡ Copper migrates faster where the lattice is already damaged — the rim.

---

3. Electrochemical reason: copper is sacrificed first​

In a silver–copper alloy:

• Copper is anodic
• Silver is cathodic

In moisture, soil water, or air films:

• Copper preferentially oxidises:
  [
  \text{Cu} \rightarrow \text{Cu}^{2+} + 2e^-
  ]
• Silver is protected

Edges:

• Retain moisture longer
• Are thinner and more exposed
• Have higher oxygen access

➡ Copper at the rim is continuously drawn to the surface and removed as corrosion products, pulling more copper from below.

This is dealloying, not simple diffusion.

---

4. Chemical reason: silver enrichment pushes copper outward​

As copper is removed:

• The surface becomes silver-rich
• This creates a chemical potential gradient
• Copper from deeper regions migrates outward to re-establish equilibrium

Edges have:

• Shortest diffusion distance
• Highest corrosion rate

➡ Copper supply is preferentially drained from the rim.

---

5. Geometric reason: curvature accelerates corrosion​

The rim has:

• Higher curvature
• More exposed surface per unit volume
• More frequent micro-damage

Corrosion rates scale with:

• Surface energy
• Curvature
• Defect density

➡ Even tiny differences become dominant over centuries.

---

6. Why this takes centuries (and why modern coins don’t show it)​

This process is:

• Thermodynamically slow
• Diffusion-limited
• Corrosion-driven

It requires:

• Repeated wet/dry cycles
• Oxygen access
• Long burial or atmospheric exposure

Modern silver coins:

• Are homogenised
• Have cleaner alloys
• Have fewer defects
• Haven’t had 1,900 years

---

7. Why this produces fluorescence specifically at the edge​

Because the edge ends up with:

✔ Copper oxides
✔ Copper carbonates
✔ Defect-rich corrosion phases
✔ Minimal silver quenching

These phases fluoresce under short-wave UV, giving the yellow rim.

---

One-sentence summary​

Copper accumulates and expresses itself at coin edges because grain boundaries, strike-induced defects, electrochemical dealloying, and geometric exposure all peak at the rim, making it the fastest pathway for copper migration and oxidation over centuries.

Click to expand...

If you want, I can also:

• Sketch a cross-section model of a Roman silver coin
• Explain why cracks glow before fields
• Compare this with surface-silvered fourrées

Just say the word.

Click to expand...

Okay it has a LaTex related problem in expressing the reaction Cu -> Cu² + 2e⁻, I will have to do more research on this (on the mechanism not LaTex).
The next post is about I theory I had at the time about how electrolysis removed florescence from a Japanese Yen coin.

truthuprootsevil said:

People choose what is irrelevant to them.

Lack of understanding, being fulfilled doesn't mean it is not still operating.
Did not Christ choose to come through the lineage of Abraham? Is it not the lineage of Abraham that is a blessing to All Nations through Christ his lineage even till now and his return.

Click to expand...

You mean, In your seed shall all nations be blessed, meaning one, and not many? The seed which was prophecied from the beginning?

Robban said:

Catch the mailman when he comes and give them to him, he will post them for you.

Click to expand...

The mailman drives past our mailboxes on the road. I can't walk to the road so I'll have to wait till my daughter takes a notion to visit me. I have postage stamps already.

The apostle Paul, anointed by the Holy Spirit, penned these words to the church in Galatia. He was deeply concerned that so many of them were deserting the gospel of their salvation, and were accepting a different gospel which was not the gospel of Christ. For they were listening to the Judaizers of their day who were convincing them that they had to be more like Jews, and that they had to follow some of the Old Covenant liturgical, ceremonial, circumcision, dietary and Sabbath laws, thus adding on to the gospel.

And we have Judaizers yet today who are trying to convince Christians that they need to be more like Jews, and that they need to adhere to some of the Old Covenant laws and Jewish customs and rituals, and that it will enhance their relationship with God. And some of them (or many of them) are painting the Jewish nation as God’s chosen people still in this generation, even though the Scriptures deny that notion, and they teach that all who reject Jesus Christ are the antichrist, and not part of God’s holy nation.

There is a massive movement in the USA today to convince Christians that they are somehow inferior to the Jews and that they should treat the Jewish people almost like they are gods, in a worshipful kind of way, to where they raise them up above all other people, and they believe that they are to give them their undying loyalty, devotion, and support, praying for God’s blessings upon them, and even opposing all who do not support them. But that is antibiblical, for all who do not believe in Jesus Christ are not of God.

And the Scriptures make it clear that just because someone is physically descended from Israel, and they are physical offspring of Abraham, it does not automatically make them children of God. For all who reject Jesus Christ reject God – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. So all Jews who reject Christ reject the God of their ancestors in favor of the gods of this world. And so they are not the children of promise, the promise given to Abraham and to his seed, Jesus Christ (Galatians 3:16).

[Genesis 17:7-9; Genesis 18:19; John 8:18-19,38-47; Romans 2:28-29; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 8:1-14; Romans 9:4-8,25-28; Romans 11:1-36; 1 Corinthians 10:1-22; Galatians 3:16,26-29; Galatians 4:22-31; Ephesians 2:11-22; Ephesians 3:1-6; Hebrews 3:1-19; Hebrews 4:1-16; Hebrews 8:6-13;1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 2:22; Jude 1:5; Revelation 2:9; Revelation 3:9]

But this isn’t just about Jew worship and treating the Jewish nation as though they are somehow superior to the rest of us, even though, as a nation, they are the antichrist. This is about those who alter and distort the gospel of our salvation which was taught by Jesus and by his New Testament apostles, and in order to deceive the people into following Satan’s lies. For the devil is behind all of this worship of a false god and the false gospels being taught in place of the gospel taught by Jesus and by his apostles.

For Satan wants people believing that their “faith” in Jesus Christ, by lip service only, secures them heaven as their eternal destiny, and forgiveness of all sins, none of which can be taken away from them, even if they totally ignore Jesus Christ and his teachings, and so they continue in deliberate and habitual sin against God and in walks of disobedience to his commands. But Jesus and his New Testament apostles taught the opposite of that. They taught that how we live matters as to where we will spend eternity.

For Jesus Christ taught that to come to him we must deny self, take up our cross daily (die daily to sin), and follow (obey) him. For if we hold on to living in sin and for self, we will lose our lives for eternity. But if we deny self, die daily to sin, by the Spirit, and we walk in obedience to our Lord and to his commands, in his power, then we have eternal life with God. For not everyone who calls him “Lord” will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one DOING (obeying) the will of God (see Luke 9:23-26; Matthew 7:21-23).

For by God-gifted faith in Jesus Christ, which is not of our own doing, we are crucified with Christ in death to sin and raised with Christ to walk in newness of life in him, no longer to live as slaves to sin but as slaves to righteousness in walks of obedience to God’s commands. We are no longer to permit sin to reign in our mortal bodies to make us obey its desires. For if sin is what we obey, it results in death. But if obedience to God is what we obey, it results in sanctification, and its end is eternal life with God (see Romans 6:1-23).

[Matthew 7:13-14,21-23; Luke 9:23-26; John 10:27-30; Acts 26:18; Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:5-10; Romans 3:23; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 8:1-14; 1 Corinthians 10:1-22; Galatians 5:16-24; Ephesians 2:8-10; Ephesians 4:17-32; Ephesians 5:3-6; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 3:1-19; Hebrews 4:1-13; Hebrews 10:19-39; Hebrews 12:1-2; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 1:1-10; 1 John 2:3-6; 1 John 3:4-10; Revelation 2:1-29; Revelation 3:1-22]

So, don’t be fooled by Satan’s lies. Read all these Scriptures noted above. Read them in their full and correct biblical context. And let the Holy Spirit guide you into all truth. And do not give your worship and undying devotion to any human being or people group, but give all your worship and devotion to God alone, to Jesus Christ who is the one who gave his life up for us on that cross so that, by God-persuaded faith in him, we will now die to sin and obey our Lord and his commands in practice, and have eternal life with God.

Mary, Did You Know?

Songwriters: Greene Lee Rufus / Lowry Mark Alan

Mary, did you know that your baby boy
Would one day walk on water?
Mary, did you know that your baby boy
Would save our sons and daughters?
Did you know that your baby boy
Has come to make you new?
This child that you delivered, will soon deliver you

Mary, did you know that your baby boy
Is Lord of all creation?
Mary, did you know that your baby boy
Would one day rule the nations?
Did you know that your baby boy
Is heaven's perfect Lamb?
That sleeping child you're
Holding is the great, I Am

Mary, did you know?

Login to view embedded media
Caution: This link may contains ads

There are Some People Disturbing You
An Original Work / December 15, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

BCP1928 said:

That is your opinion about Scripture and you are welcome to it. Other Christians' mileage may vary. They have opinions, too, just as good as yours.

Click to expand...

No they aren't. Mine are correct where it comes to political usage of scripture for personal political beliefs. Liberal and Conservative Christains are both guilty of it. Jesus didn't come to tell us how government should run and what laws should be passed. He came to provide a way of salvation for those who believe. His kingdom is not of this world. And telling people they should only follow certain portions of Christ's teachings and ignore the rest and turn them into a pet political crusade is a fools errand.

Galations 5 clearly states that the we are no longer under the law so why is there always this argument about the law?

Galatians chapter 5 KJV (King James Version)

Either we believe Paul or we don't.

We can't have things both ways.

This is why it's so hard for anyone to know what the right 'translation' or 'interpretation' is because our own people can't come to an agreement. I truly don't believe following Jesus should be this hard!!! Who has made it this complex and why?

Personally I feel that God created man a few hundred thousand years ago.

I believe that the fruit of the tree of Life gave man long life, if not a form of immortality. Now the church will say or has said man never ate the fruit of the tree of Life. That is not scriptural the Bible never says that man did or didn't eat.

The first commandment that God gave man was not to eat from the tree of knowledge but he could eat of every other tree and the tree of knowledge was centered in the garden. So why would man and his offspring not eat from the tree of life?

I believe Adam and Eve had many, many children before their sin. And the Bible names only the children born after the seduction and sin of Adam and Eve. Though the Bible does not mention children born before Cain and Abel. And if you look at the Bible you find the Bible is basically life after sin.

The Bible does speak about the people who were around, who were told not to kill Cain. Where did those people come from? Since the Bible does not mention and the church teaches that Adam and Eve only had two sons before Cain slew Abel. Where did they come from? What are the assumptions of the church?

Nothing is said of Adam and Eve having daughters, only the two sons, but the church will assume that they did because it agrees with their theology, yet toss out / deny other assumptions. Daughters were not mentioned until Genesis 6.

Who named the Land of Nod? Why is it called The Land of Nod? In those days, lands / tribes / cities were named after their founders. Why does the bible tell us Cain knew his wife after he went to Land of Nod. Is that saying Cain did not know his wife while he was in Eden, or they did not have children while they were in Eden? Or is it telling us Cain found a wife in the Land of Nod? What is taught is Assumptions again, views passed down through the centuries.

The history of man; scientifically, shows man has been here quite a while. So in order to continue to support 6,000 year old Earth as fact, the church has to reject it.

Were the translators correct with their usage (of the definition) of the Hebrew word yom / Yome? The word has several different meanings can be used quite a few different ways, not necessarily a literal 24 hour span, but can be used to said a period in time, a span of time, a space and time. godrules.net/library/strongs2a/heb3117.htm https://share.google/eAkAAbe8rNoDC8upu

Now here's a kicker :::: God did not create the literal 24-hour day until he put the sun and moon in place - Genesis 1:14. Now shouldn't that be telling us the days spoken of before Genesis 1:14 is not speaking of a literal 24-hour day but is speaking more like a day to the Lord is as a thousand years and A thousand years is as a day. Before God put the sun and moon in place there was no time table to use as a literal 24-hour day point, considering the Sun and Moon is to measure seasons, days, years.

There are churches that are beginning to believe the Earth is older than 6000 years. But most churches still adhere to man being here for 6,000 years using genealogies of those written in Scripture. Which maybe fairly close according to those names of descendants written. From what I can see it has been an estimated 6,000 years / a bit more, since the fall of Adam, not his creation.

Apple Sky said:

The globe is not all bad it's just a sphere that has been over inflated & set in motion to orbit our golden sun & wonders lonely as a cloud through dark murky fields of blackness through the infinity of space.

And God said 'Let there be light'.

View attachment 374533

To believe or not to believe that is the question.

Click to expand...

"Overinflated": No. You make it sound like balloon that's about to pop because it has had too much air forced into it.

"Wonders lonely as a cloud": The earth doesn't wonder anything. Even assuming you meant "wanders", that is wrong. Nobody to my knowledge believes that the earth is wandering " through dark murky fields of blackness through the infinity of space." It is orbiting the sun in a fixed orbit.

I agree with, and believe, your bible quote: And God said 'Let there be light'. But that was before the sun was created.

keras said:

More pretentious tripe.

Click to expand...

Why are you saying that God using a star to guide the Magi and appearing to Saul as a bright light from heaven, is pretentious tripe?

keras said:

When many Prophesies say the sun will be darkened on the Day the Lord sends His fiery wrath, a perfectly feasible occurrence; then why deny it?

Click to expand...

Who said I was denying it?
Wouldn't the sun being darkened be a celestial sign?

keras said:

I was referring to the 24th Day of Kislev, mentioned 3 times by Haggai. Which was the 14th December 2025.
It is a significant day in history and yet to happen. Seems we have got away with it once again.

Click to expand...

It's a significant day in history that has already happened many times. It is not "yet to happen", it happens once a year.
IF something is going to happen on that day in the future (big "if") then it hasn't yet been fulfilled. It's not about us "getting away with" anything.

Pommer said:

I’m fairly certain that Muslims believe that Yahweh and Allah are the same Being.
Whatever it is that you, personally, know about the subject, you might not be…correct, based on the fact we’re talking about how other people believe.

Click to expand...

No true Muslim can be a Christian.

Common sense.

They were two big men of middle eastern appearance, with Moslem style beards, massacring people on a Jewish festival, hot on the heels of the Israel-Hamas conflict with widespread death and destruction in Palestine, just over ten years from the Lindt Cafe Siege on the 15-16 December 2014, while Sydney tends to be the centre of anti-Jewish sentiment with a lot of Middle Easterners in the western suburbs.

Reluctant Theologian said:

Thanks, I've read most if not all of the common arguments made in the Egalitarian/Complimentarian/Patriarchy debate - rarely do I encounter something new. And the infamous but decisive 'source' word topic hasn't even been discussed in-depth in this thread yet. But just because I've studied and weighed those 'modern' arguments with some confidence I can say these don't convince me - not because I'm simply clutching to tradition or don't like change, but because the classical Patriarchal view overall fits the big picture much better and make Torah, Yeshua, Paul and Peter and the history of the Church in those two thousands years align well ...

The very fact that only secular instigated feminism triggered the re-interpretation and development of alternative theories to 'explain away' Paul's and Peter's statements as time or culturally localised instructions makes it suspicious .. because the motive is not to get a more honest/better understanding of scripture, but to align our Bible interpretation with the pressures and wishes of modern secular society.

Absolutely - I'm pretty sure I'm wrong about many things; I just don't know which ones - prayerfully I read and contemplate. I avoid turning it into a battle field, what still easily happens as it is such an emotionally charged subject.

Without Paul we would struggle to properly understand many aspects of Christianity; e.g. without Paul's letters we would not really know why Yeshua had to die on the cross (as that is not really addressed in the Gospels theologically). Paul's and Peter's instructions on the role of women in marriage and churches are not vague at all - they're quite clear, and that's precisely the reason why these instructions were not controversial or heavily debated in Christian history (until the 1960's) .. everyone knew with some confidence what it meant. It's just that since the 1960's modern society does not like those instructions because the underlying framework and view on the role of husband and wife is incompatible with modern Western (and certainly woke) thinking.

Connecting the dots between Torah, Yeshua, Paul and Peter .. and observing the theological and cross-cultural arguments made by these, the position that the instructions on this matter are just accidentally local to time and culture without wider universal implications feels artificially forced and unlikely.


About 70-80% of churches in Western countries have moved from the Patriarchal to the Egalitarian view I estimate - your church would be one of those. In those churches speakers would have to generalise or skip entire sections of the NT, or transform any gender-specific instruction into a unisex one ... leaving the worldview and theological framework of the NT writers - and the underlying nuance is lost.

Maybe an interesting question would be: why is it the classical Patriarchal view - the headship of the husband in marriage, or the headship of God over Christ causes discomfort among many believers in Western nations these days? Causes the headship of Christ over man(kind) the same anxiety? Modern theologians might even say that view is wrong altogether universally, but then the problem presents itself how God could have endorsed/guided this view in the NT in the 1st century even in that local culture.

Be blessed .. !

PS: God is a God of order and everywhere in society authority structures are in place to let everything operate optimally. Governments have Presidents or Prime Ministers, companies have CEO's, schools have Principals, air planes have Captains, buses have drivers, armies have Generals ... We all recognise and accept the associated authority of these roles; and no one argues to abolish them because incidental abuse of that authority may occur. But somehow in marriage (a team of two) the Biblically prescribed authority structure is bad since the feminist wave? That should make us think ..

Click to expand...

I really appreciate your continued engagement.

I can't speak for everyone and can only speak for myself so what I'll say is I am not confident in anyone's translation, interpretation etc of the bible. The very fact that it has to be translated at all leaves many things too open. The only thing I can do is pray that God steps in wherever I'm being mislead by myself or others.

If Paul meant what he said to be generalized, I completely understand that but I still won't do it for the reasons I mentioned before. God will either help me with that or judge me for it, but I'm open to whatever His will is, either way.

Whilst I felt emotional from being verbally disrespected by my father, the ongoing issue with my parents and how to explain this all to my daughter according to Paul, I don't feel emotional or impassioned about this subject, one way or the other, because I'm not an emotional person. I'm usually compared to Spok from Star Trek by most people. I don't overthink it to know if it's an insult, neutral or a compliment to be viewed this way. Sometimes, things are just what they are!

Have a great day x

if being fundamentalist is taking God morals and scripture seriously then Jesus all the apostles, etc were fundamentalists.

JosephZ said:

It doesn't, as I explained in this response to you back in October.

Click to expand...

Yes it does. Your explanation is incorrect.

JosephZ said:

Those practices predate Islam and occur in non-Islamic cultures as well.

Click to expand...

Yes some do. But it IS STILL an Islamic practice. As you showed in your experience Islamism is radical and teaches subjugation of women.

JosephZ said:

tribal traditions, not the teachings of Islam, that led to their deaths

Click to expand...

Tribal traditions based on Islamist thought and instruction.

JosephZ said:

Under tribal - not religious - tradition, marriages are carefully arranged by elders. Marrying without permission is considered an affront to the honour of the tribe.

Click to expand...

They are simply trying to downplay the religious aspect of it, by denying things that are occurring because of Islamist teaching. Honor killings are a part of Islam.

JosephZ said:

Honor killings predate Islam and occur in Pakistani Christian families as well.

Click to expand...

Honor killings are part of Islam.

JosephZ said:

As you can see from those verses, Muslims can be friends with those who do not fight against them or mock them.

Click to expand...

All those things are from the Quran. Did yoi notice the war like stance in all of it? These things are all used by Islamists to be violent and antagonistic to non-believers. According to the Quran when we speak out against the call to prayer in yhe middle of American towns, disturbing the peace of those who don't and aren't interested in their religion, they consider us enemies.

And we all know what they do to their enemies.

I've heard enough of this nonsense regarding a clearly authoritarian religion that seeks to take over places with violence or by political means in the NAME of their false religion. And those who have come out of this religion have told us what really goes on. You should these things. They are authorized to do whatever it takes to obtain power. And that is what they are doing.

I do freestyle poems that aren't poems. I'm making this thread just to have a collection of my journey to actually knowing what I'm doing.

Apostolic Succession

The Cross of God has the Scripture
To have the Holiness explained
A Blessing of the Crucifix
To listen and Love within
The Godly and Ordained
This Beautiful love of Life
Spoken in the time of Christ

Christ Jesus praise

As You encompass Light
Your Skies They enlighten my love of Life
This journey brightly put as the Horizon to my Soul
Our Hero is the Prominence of our Whole
For our Faith and Belief in Christ
We have come to live by Life

Time's running out


How long do we belong?
To a world of the passing?
Our belongings rot
Our earthly desires fade
No longer alive
Will come to this day
And when our ego is on fire
What should we say?
The curtain has closed

Doesn't the women's face veiling unveils some kind of morale male mediocrity, or some fatalism before this phenomenon ? And subsequently, does this veiling help them to mobilize to tackle this (*)?
If no (*), is it God's will men don't try and convert themselves to sacrify pulsion towards women, from a true love and respect for the body God gives them ?

My questions are open, for i'm truly looking for a moral motive to veil, but have failed, up to now

O-o-h thanks for the pictures. It’s a mzldr, with the. Long barrel. I’m in the market for one. Does this one have any difficult gunsmithing for you to do. My skills are limited. But with the price of mzldr these days a fixer upper might be a good idea. Where did you find it?

sorry about the picture but I think it’s a google or apple picture. Neat back yard shot. We can’t have open fires here- chaparral- fire prone. Every 50 years it turns into spontaneous combustion. But we have had them started by the electric company too. Thanks I guess I’ll switch gears and do a search on gunbroker. This year promises mild, probably no snow and not enough rain. 50s this week. But you’re tough. Did you hunt this year?

Nikola Tesla didn't have one single "life equation," but he often spoke of life as an "equation incapable of solution, but it contains certain known factors," emphasizing universal principles like **vibration, frequency, energy, and his fascination with the numbers 3, 6, and 9, suggesting these divine numbers held the universe's secrets and keys to understanding reality and consciousness. He believed humans are automata responding to the environment, but focused on harnessing these universal constants.

Key Concepts in Tesla's "Equation"

The Unsolvable Nature: Life is complex, a puzzle beyond a simple formula, yet manageable by understanding core elements.

The Power of Vibration & Frequency: Tesla believed everything is energy, and understanding frequencies (sound, light, electricity) unlocks the universe's secrets.

The 3, 6, 9 Key: He thought these numbers revealed cosmic patterns, linking to growth, creation (like cell division), and hidden dimensions.

Mechanistic View: Humans are complex machines (automata) responding to external forces, implying we can control our destiny by mastering our environment and internal state. - Google Search

Mixed Races

ARBITER01 said:

I do plan on revisiting the spirit of Christ and The Holy Spirit differences in this thread some time here. I decided to make this a fellowship thread so I can get rid of the riff raff that occurred in the discussion thread I opened up a few months back.

What I'm looking at currently is the identification of our born again experience, being that it is an immersion into The Holy Spirit. That immersion adds us to the body of Christ, not some sort of change of mind.

Click to expand...

i believe you could be christian and saved and not be filled with the Holy spirit.
But people are missing greatly because of bad theologies like 'everyone gets filled at believing'
Things, like 'seeking constantly God, and reading and praying lets you enjoy the fullness of the Spirit'
Is not like that, it could a 1 second blink of an eye event where the Holy spirit fills your inner being, like a glass that was empty and now it has something filling it.

Jipsah said:

Exactly. I use the normal English meaning, while you have an ad hoc definition to make it suit your doctrine.

Click to expand...

You’re insisting on using your ‘normal English’ meaning, but that’s exactly where annihilationist's go wrong. The Bible defines life and death, not your personal dictionary. Scripture makes it clear: life is union with God through Jesus, death is separation from Him. John 17:3: ‘Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.’ Romans 6:23: ‘The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.’ To be with Jesus is life; apart from Him is death. So stop twisting definitions to suit your argument and start letting God’s Word define life and death.

I'm old fashioned!

Secular - I love White Christmas and Walking in a Winter Winderland.

Christian - I like nearly all the carols, especially O Little Town of Bethlehem, Silent Night and Hark the Herald Angels Sing. The words "born to raise the sons of Earth, born to give them second birth" are wonderful. Also Mary Did You Know and O Holy Night. But my favourite has to be:

Login to view embedded media

The search for the shooter continues.

Factotum said:

I don't think Exxon Mobil nor Shkreli showed up to sit at any defendant's table, in this similar circumstance:

"Trump and his lawyers said his financial statements weren’t deceptive, since they came with disclaimers noting they weren’t audited. The defense also noted that bankers and insurers independently evaluated the numbers, and the loans were repaid... Trump’s lawyers argued that many of the case’s allegations were too old... The defense also contends that James misused a consumer-protection law to sue Trump and improperly policed private business transactions that were satisfactory to those involved." Trump's massive civil fraud penalty for exaggerating financial statements is thrown out by appeals court


You can do better research next time, to avoid excluding vital info.

Click to expand...

That's completely irrelevant. You claimed New York had "never...experienced this type of crime until Trump was charged with it." I showed you the law, and two recent examples of prosecutions based on that law. Neither Trump's defense in that case nor that the judgment against Trump was tossed changes anything, Trump was still found guilty of fraud under New York Executive Law § 63(12), just as Shkreli was.

New York Executive Law § 63(12) is not some obscure law that has not been used in 105 years, as you asserted.

-- A2SG, nor has that law anything to do with the failed indictments of Letitia James....