Valletta said:

Bill every member of the Democratic Party for allowing criminals to come into our country and even giving them goods to make their life here easier.

Click to expand...

"Look, squirrel!"

Hentenza said:

Again you misunderstand my argument. I never argued that the explosion of crime in her district is her fault.

Click to expand...

Sure looked like it. Or at least that's what the link in the OP wanted and you didn't notice.

Hentenza said:

I do argue that her negligence and lack of representation in her district speaks volumes on her ability to “represent”. I’m sure she is aware of the tremendous rise in crime but still does not address her constituents or pushes for help from the city leaders.

Click to expand...

And yet you haven't said anything about her work in and with her constituents. All we get are the disingenuous article in the OP link and complaints about her work on the national stage.

Hentenza said:

Of course they are but her constituents are local so while she is trotting along in the federal realm (and with Bernie) her people are facing the brunt of a crime riddled district.

Click to expand...

It's weird how federal legislators get concerned about the rate of tariffs and other federal taxes, the size of the federal budget, whether we go to war or not, and other things concerning our national government. It is almost like that is there job or something.

Hentenza said:

So who would you talk to in NYC. I’m not from there. In Houston we have city managers and a mayor. Maybe that’s what is wrong with New York, no one knows who to talk to.

Click to expand...

New Yorkers have city councilors. You may have noticed the primary election for mayor of the whole city. Collectively they control that police agency no one has ever heard of -- NYPD, I think they call it.

Hentenza said:

BTW- your opinion on my understanding of the topic is not welcomed.

Click to expand...

Your posts have been nothing but an excuse to empty attacks on a member of Congress. Your understanding may exceed that portrayed in your posts, but you still made those posts.

BobRyan said:

2 Cor 5:20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

Rom 6:
2 May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; 7 for he who has died is freed from sin.

8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Gal 2:20
20 I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.

Click to expand...

And none of the verses you posted say anything about the cross being the key to heaven.

Hint:

Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ

Fantine said:

The said part is that Congress gave him a signed BBB (big bad bill) and he sent it back.
Not cruel enough.
Not anti first amendment enough.
What? Poor children might be fed? No!
Not bad enough. SMH.

Click to expand...

I wonder how many people who talk about poor children being fed, send generous contributions to UNICEF and similar. My guess is not nearly enough.

rebornfree said:

Well yes, if it makes him less powerful, but would you want him to represent your country? Would he be able to hold back his views and act graciously and impartially?

Click to expand...

I like him just the way he is. He represents my country, and he's getting things done that have been needing desperately to be done for quite some time. I just hope those things aren't being done too late to matter.

As for his wife, she was born of Eve. Incest wasn't a thing back then.
Keep in mind that when the births are mentioned as to who was born to whom, notice that none of them are women. So it could also be asked where anyone else besides Cain got their wives as well. But women were obviously born, including to Eve. They just aren't mentioned in scripture.

Bradskii said:

Whitlam was a Goth?

Click to expand...

Whitlam was a Gough

Learning always said:

Trent Horn said there's something wrong about his book "The Universal Christ".

Click to expand...

Horn is an apologist who values clarity and simple answers, so of course he might have issues with Rohr, who teaches mysticism and contemplation, which often deals in multivalent, layered symbolism, holistic and associative thinking (vs. linear and analytical), and holds paradox and mystery as potentially sacred or revelatory.

There is a cosmic, participatory dimension to Christian salvation that often isn't as thoroughly addressed in Western Latin Christianity, especially since the Enlightenment (but which was very much part of the medieval Latin spiritual worldview, eg., St. Francis, Hildegard von Bingen)... but it shouldn't be dismissed altogether just because it's unfamiliar or outside the dominant paradigm of what Christianity should look like.

Also, some of the differences with Rohr are due to posture more than substance or material heresy. Rohr's audience are mostly upper-middle-class spiritual seekers or people dissatisfied with institutional religion. Some are alienated from traditional religious communities, or involved in their communities but with spiritual needs that transcend the ordinary institutional presentation of the faith. Some are older lapsed Catholics turned off by a focus on overly rigid, propositional approaches to the faith, and so forth. So it's often a question of audience, context, etc.

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

OK. The last part is that all the surrounding countries were made from land they got the same way Israel did. Your example is not really relevant because the US is a country and so is China. The land in the US is part of the US.

Click to expand...

Not all countries surrounding Israel were formed in the same way. Egypt has existed for ~5000 years in roughly the same place with few gaps (and once controlled all of what is Israel today, about 3300 years ago). Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon were formed through mandates to Britain (Jordan) and France (Lebanon and Syria) that Israel and Palestine were. That does not justify a war of conquest.

When the normal man goes through fire, they usually become a denizen. When a Believer does, we come out something quite different.

"And they said to Him, “Grant that we may sit, one on Your right and one on Your left, in Your glory.” But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?”
And they said to Him, “We are able.”

And Jesus said to them,

“The cup that I drink you shall drink...

and you shall be baptized..

with the baptism with which I am baptized."

He didn't say count the cost for no reason, and when you cross the threshold.. and the Adversary know you aren't coming back, you find out what it's like when hell pours out it's fury on you.
But... on the other side of that fire, you become a refined Creature equipped in a whole new way.
Hang in there, the sun will rise again!

The children of ethnic Israel are not the children of God. Only the believers and followers of the promised Seed are the children of God. The children of the flesh are those who have denied Jesus Christ, following the wrong paths, the children of the promise are the only ones who have the Holy Spirit anointing in their lives and their birthright in God. Romans 9:8

Most Jews may have descent which comes from their lineage of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. But when they turned from their true inheritance and embraced the Babylonian Talmud, they lost their birthright in God. Matthew 21:43

Jesus came to redeem the lost sheep of the house of Israel, the Northern 10 tribes. But we know from the whole message of the New Testament, that salvation is open to people of every race, nation and language, who believe in Him. John 3:16

Luke 1:68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for He hath visited and redeemed His people. Jesus came to bring redemption to the sons of Judah, but instead they cried out, "Crucify Him! Crucify Him!" The Jews have suffered the consequence of this rejection ever since.

When Jesus spoke of Israel, it was always in the positive. When He spoke of the Jews, it was always in the negative. The separation that happened in King Rehoboam’s time still remains to this day. The great spiritual and physical rejoining of Christian Israel and Messianic Jewry, prophesied in Ezekiel 37, awaits fulfilment.

When Jesus walked the earth those who were His enemies were the religious Jews. There were three main sects of the Jewish religion: the Sadducees, the Pharisees and the Herodians:
The Sadducees were the keepers of the ancient laws. The name Sadducee means "righteous." They did not believe in the resurrection of the body, nor did they believe in retribution in a future life. The Jewish priests embraced the Sadducee's religion.

The name Pharisee means "separatist." The main tenets of this religion is that the soul will never perish and the wicked will be punished with eternal torment. In other words, they believe the lie the serpent spoke to Eve in the garden that "Ye shall not surely die." The scribes embraced the Pharisee's religion.

The Herodians were those who loved the Greek way of life and followed the dictates of Herod (secular government). They did not adhere to the Jewish law. Their only loyalties were to Rome.

These same three beliefs have infiltrated the church system today. The religious Sadducees today, no matter what name they go by, still want to keep the old law. They keep the Sabbath, observe the ritualistic holidays and dietary laws.

The religious Pharisees are those who are separatists, teaching the eternal lost soul of the wicked, believing they are the only righteous ones, and have made doctrines and creeds to live by. If their people go to any other church, they are reprimanded.

The religious Herodians are those who think mankind can bring about a utopian society by their own efforts and shun all teaching of righteousness with their "if it feels good do it" attitude, but still maintain their belief in a God. Call ‘him’ Gaia or ‘her’ Mother Earth, they all follow ancient paths of Satanic deceit.

Matthew 23:13-15 But woe unto you, scribes, Pharisees, all hypocrites! For ye shut up the Kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

This certainly describes the modern Jews who have closed up the Kingdom of God to their people. As Jesus stated they would not enter in themselves, and they hinder all those who want to go into the Kingdom realm.

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, you make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

PloverWing said:

I am approximately the same age as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. (Obama is my age, and Clinton is a bit older.) A lot of the Christians of my generation went through a journey in the first few decades of our lives regarding same-sex marriage, as we reflected deeply on Scripture and Christian ethics and people's experiences. Following CF rules, I won't talk here about the reflections that went into that journey. But I can imagine that Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton had journeys that were similar to mine, and that they emerged with similar ethical convictions.

It's possible that they were politicians seizing on what was popular, as your post suggests. Politicians do that. But it's also possible that they had a genuine change of heart, as many in my generation did.

Click to expand...

Yeah, most, especially on the left, abandoned Christian sexual morality and embraced the morality of the sexual revolution. I have no doubt that most progressives went through that journey. Doesn't justify it though.

eclipsenow said:

Except - it's all made up by those evil Democrats! That would make it one of the biggest political scandals in American political life - one of the dirtiest, most muck raking bottom-of-the-barrel schemes imaginable. Books and documentaries and history teachers should be talking about it for generations.

Oh - but it's also really boring - why are people so obsessed with it?

Which one is it Donald?

One of the dirtiest political misinformation conspiracies in American history - or boring?


Also - he says he doesn't draw?

Then what's all this?

View attachment 367559

Click to expand...

There's been one devastating case of the century against Trump after another, that was going to ruin him and put him behind bars for sure. None of which went anywhere. They've all been nothing burgers. I've been saying that along with many others for nearly 10 years. "But he was convicted of 34 felonies!" But he was never sentenced. Therefore that had zero effect. How could anyone be surprised that many dismissed "he's totally guilty, but we're going to let him walk" as a nothing burger? All of the other detrimental cases that surely would've ruined him and put him behind bars, were dropped. Since the judicial system lets him slide, why shouldn't the public? Donald Trump is going to finish out his term as President, for a second time, and then retire in luxury. And none of this sort of stuff is going to change that in any way whatsoever.

Hentenza said:

I guess you do need the glasses. Tell me which unbiased news source would print a diatribe at the end of their article titled “at this dangerous time of dissent”. The guardian is nothing but a bull horn for the far left. They wouldn‘t know what unbiased is even if they ran smack into it.

Again, compare the guardian article to the one I posted. Your emotional fear is unfounded and typical.

Click to expand...

I would suggest that you concentrate on the facts. But I guess that maybe you think that an opinion which you don't like renders them invalid.

It doesn't.

You might invest in a DAW, where you can get your ideas down and develop songs you want to get out.

BCP1928 said:

Careful--you're beginning to sound like Bernie

Click to expand...

Nah. When I say fair wage it doesn't mean the same thing as Bernue and others like him.

RileyG said:

Click to expand...

Thank you; you are very kind.

Fantine said:

And every dollar taken away from both groups is a win-win for the billionaires' coffers

Click to expand...

Actually not, because homelessness adversely impacts property values. Anyone invested in real estate has a vested interest in helping the homeless.

BobRyan said:

Your article notes that the Nicene creed changed nothing in the Bible and added nothing to it.

"proof" for any given doctrine is not "The creed", it is scripture.

The fact that the Trinity - Triune God head is in scripture - is itself sufficient. The fact that the Nicene creed affirms it - is "good for the Nicene creed" but that is not what proves that the Trinity doctrine is correct.

Click to expand...

Apparently not, since the Arians using the same canon of Scripture embraced a totally heretical doctrine. Which is why the Creed was promulgated - to differentiate between Christianity and Arianism and to ensure no Christians acquainted with the Creed would fall for the heresy of Arius. This is why most churches read the Nicene Creed, the Apostles’ Creed or the Athanasian Creed every Sunday, usually the Nicene.

Fervent said:

Perhaps, but are we sure that God has a specific intention for every trivial decision we make? It seems to me doing God's will is more about maintaining our integrety and preserving our witness rather than following a specified path. As for whether or not an event like your car breaking down falls under God's will for your life, that's a question that has done little good other than to foment division. If we lived as if everything that happened was God's will, we'd have no motivation to do anything because any action we take might put us at odds with God's will. So what does God will? Good for all who love Him and are called according to His purpose.

Click to expand...

Excellent points. Some do say they hear the trivial. Perhaps so, sometimes God may just want to fellowship with you, give someone the assurance of something small to build their faith for something later, or just to love on them. I admit too that the main path to hearing God is to let the word of God show you your character and conduct. Still, if there are some significant decisions, of course ask the Lord.

CoreyD said:

JohnClay said:

So those other things have overwhelming evidence but the most important part has no obvious evidence? BTW in all other instances kings have a power over the world. It seems your saying that in this instance there is nothing happening that non-believers could detect. I mean actions besides war, famine, and pestilence - unless Jesus the king is responsible for that.

Click to expand...

You did not understand correctly.
The evidence is there - overwhelmingly so. Like a fingerprint.
I'm saying to you that Jesus' followers are looking for it, as opposed to skeptics, and it is them Jesus gave it to.

Are you trying to find out who killed O.J. Simpson's wife? Neither I.
So I won't be looking for any evidence. Detectives will.
If I did take an interest though, I could examine that evidence, and determine what it says, but I need to get that information from the detectives, wouldn't I.
I could then go about the investigation, and accumulate more evidence if there is any.

I'm saying you aren't in such a position, but Jesus followers are.
I'm saying that there is no video tape for those looking for such, but any additional evidence will indeed be found by those detectives.
Jesus followers have that evidence.
They don't need a video tape, and neither does anyone else.

Click to expand...

So you're saying Jesus has been ruling as king since about 1914. How have the lives of Jesus' followers changed since 1914? I don't just mean changes due to war, famine, pestilence and lawlessness. I mean due to something else - Jesus ruling as king. Or maybe there has been no change and saying that Jesus has been ruling as king doesn't really involve any changes at all.

CoreyD said:

Are you sure these can be considered miracles?

Putting a cover on wrong is a mistake, isn't it?

Click to expand...

Perhaps covers of Bibles are put on upside-down in 1 in 1000 Bibles. But I got a sealed one about a day or two after I read a Bible upside down. And that was within weeks of that Connect 4 set event. Like I said skeptics would just explain that it was coincidence, etc, so that my belief in a non-obvious intelligent force is strengthened. Other parts of the Bible are significant - it was an NIV 2013 version which is the same one that my church had. It had red letters for Jesus words but John 7:53—8:11 was in black instead of red.
In the text itself, not just in the footnotes, it says:
[The earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53—8:11. A few manuscripts include these verses, wholly or in part, after John 7:36, John 21:25, Luke 21:38 or Luke 24:53.]
If it wasn't for that Bible I might not have realised that the story of the stoning of the adulteress didn't seem to be part of Jesus' history.
That Bible also is against a key Trinity verse:
The footnote says:
1 John 5:8 Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the fourteenth century)
People like Jack Chick say that that trinity verse was part of the original Bible/text.

CoreyD said:

CoreyD said:

Jesus said...

“Unless you people see signs and wonders, you will never believe.” John 4:48

Click to expand...

JohnClay said:

It says "see" i.e. be an eye witness - not hear about them third or fourth hand, etc. Well I guess that is ambiguous.

Click to expand...

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

Click to expand...

Jesus apparently performed miracles. People "saw" them and believed. I haven't "seen" the miracles that Jesus performed.