House Democrat exchanged texts with Epstein during 2019 congressional hearing
- American Politics
- 5 Replies
House failed its censure vote of Plaskett.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
As is expected, you're ignoring my flagging the principle of abrogation and citing a verse from the Medina period. Though this is not the thread for getting into the ins and outs of Islamic jurisprudence.The Quran does not allow the execution of those who refuse to convert.
There shall be no compulsion in religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. (Qur'an 2:256)
(There is no compulsion in religion), meaning, "Do not force anyone to become Muslim, for Islam is plain and clear, and its proofs and evidence are plain and clear. Therefore, there is no need to force anyone to embrace Islam. Rather, whoever Allah directs to Islam, opens his heart for it and enlightens his mind, will embrace Islam with certainty. Whoever Allah blinds his heart and seals his hearing and sight, then he will not benefit from being forced to embrace Islam." (Quran 2:256 Tafsir Ibn Kathir)
Those who believe, and those who are Jewish, and the Christians, and the Sabeans—any who believe in God and the Last Day, and act righteously will have their reward with their Lord; they have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve. (Qur'an 2:62)
“The truth is from your Lord. Whoever wills, let him believe. And whoever wills, let him disbelieve” (Qur'an 18:29)
Muhammad didn't use the threat of conversion or death against the people of Mecca
The Prophet Muḥammad’s Covenant with Yūḥannah Ibn Ru’bah and the Christians of Aylah
In accordance with the Qur’anic admonition that there is to be no coercion in matters of faith, the Prophet Muḥammad did not force the Christians he encountered to convert to Islam, nor did the Prophet belittle or ridicule their religion.
Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah - The Life of Muhammad Translated by A. Guillaume
The apostle had instructed his commanders when they entered Mecca only to fight those who resisted them, except a small number who were to be killed even if they were found beneath the curtains of the Kaʿba.
Whoever lays down his arms is safe, and whoever locks his door is safe.
When the apostle prayed the noon prayer on the day of the conquest he ordered that all the idols which were round the Ka'ba should be collected and burned with fire and broken up... [The] Quraysh had put pictures in the Ka'ba including two of Jesus son of Mary and Mary (on both of whom be peace!)... The apostle ordered that the pictures should be erased except those of Jesus and Mary.
"O you people of Quraysh! What do you think of the treatment that I am about to accord to you?"
They replied:
"O noble brother and son of a noble brother! We expect nothing but goodness from you."
Upon this, the Messenger of Allah -peace be upon him- said:
"I speak to you in the same words as Joseph spoke unto his brothers: 'This day, there is no reproof against you; go your way, for you are freed ones!'"
Virtually anything in the universe is possible.Ya can't say that it's not possible.
No, δύναμαι is not an atmospheric term. It is a predicate of the person. Someone either is able or is not able. That's an expression of an actual capacity possessed or not possessed by the person -- two positions, or states -- not a mere external "possibility" detached from the subject.Nope, it doesn't change the position...it is the act of drawing itself which creates the possibility, not any metaphysical change in the object being drawn.
Because you (and fhansen, first) found it relevant. I was responding to fhansen's comments on semantics, making the point that it's not relevant to the issue. You then chose to chime in, so I responded to you as well. In my first response to you, I explicitly distinguished the relevance of the semantics from what my argument is.So why did you spend such energy arguing the semantics?
They are the same question. You're misrepresenting what the question entails. You're claiming:One conditions the presence of drawing on the success of the act, and the other speaks only to whether the drawing is what makes salvation a possibility. These are not the same question.
If you read his tweets, it's pretty easy to spot his lies. It's not complex. Sometimes he says stupid stuff too ("Pharmaceuticals are going down 600%"). You can count that as stupid or a lie....hard to tell for sure.IMO, you are believing who you want to believe.
The Quran does not allow the execution of those who refuse to convert.Properly understood, it absolutely does. But that takes engagement with Islamic scholarship and the Sunnah material, where it is clear that Muhammad used the threat of conversion or death against the people of Mecca when he overthrew the city. And forms that deny death for apostasy are the exception, whereas it is the prescriptive punishment by pretty much all mainline divisions(sunni, shia, sufi)
In the case of the falsified documents, it's not possible. Trump didn't argue that they were fakes. They were his business documents, and the defense tried to unconvincingly explain them into non-falseness.Ya can't say that it's not possible.
Considering the evidence the prosecution had, and given the high profile of the case (and the defendant), with the scrutiny that entails, the possibility of faking that evidence to frame Trump is so unlikely, well, the Kubrick story seems downright plausible by comparison.Try one of the 3,300 such cases. If one can't bare to consider something that's possible, as a possibility, they've lost their ability to reason objectively.
Yes, we're responsible for more than the 10 C's. Christians already do this and more, because with the completion of the NT, we know and "have the mind of Christ" (1Co 2:16); which they did not start with (this isn't competing with Israel but just stating truth, as Christians started with the Gospel, and which already covers what Israel did with the 10 C's - Rom 2:14,15).You are right that the law cannot save, it shows us our sins, not just the Jews.
True! Romans 2:14-15 indicates that Gentiles, who do not have the law, can naturally do what the law requires, showing that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts. This suggests that they are already following moral principles similar to those found in the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments).The law shows us we are sinner and our need for Jesus to save us from our sins Mat1:21 (not in them), we need to be willing to come to Him and repent, which means a change of heart and in direction, turning from what is wrong and doing what is right through love and faith. John14:15 Exo20:6
Johnson and Trump aren't too happy that the Senate passed it without any amendments.Democrats unite the nation (and even Congress)
House votes to approve releasing the Epstein files by a near unanimous margin
The measure passed by a vote of 427 to 1.
"I'm all for it," Trump said from the Oval Office
Trump does not need legislation in order to approve the files for release
[Rep Clay Higgins R-LA was the lone Nay.]
ETA: Passed the Senate with a unanimous consent vote.
You are missing the fact that Paul mentions Circumcision in respect to Titus not being circumcised, Judeans not living as the Gentiles live but as do the Jews, and being separate from those who are not Jews in chapter 2 of Galatians. All of these are laws which are within the Book of the Law that is mentioned in verse 3:10. Ergo the law mentioned that does not justify is the Book of the Law. As it is written, the just (the righteous) live out of faith vs 11, the faith that establishes the law. The faith Abraham had. For the word, the commandments and statutes contained in the Book of the Law is in our heart and in our mouth that we do it. That is the word of faith that we preach and must hear. The Law, the commandments and statutes contained in the Book of the Law are in our hearts and minds. He has given us His Spirit to cause us to walk in in His way. For the written Law on Stone and parchment made no one righteous, not one. But the Lord has said, I will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed. The circumcision made without hands, cutting away the sins of the flesh, that we can serve the living God. Not by the letter, the knowledge of sin. But by the Spirit. For the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life..Paul is explaining to the Gentiles that the Blood of goats and the Priesthood "Works of the Law" is not why they received the Spirit of understanding. It was their obedience to God, as Peter also teaches, which is called "Faith". When the same Gospel was given to the Israelites, most of them didn't believe God, and subsequently didn't "obey Him". Here is what God said about them.
And, Jesus does save all people, you know, being the Savior of the world, so there's that as well.
The video is 14 years old, but Hovind's out of jail (again), so I guess we can look forward to something new from him.Kent Hovind? In the year of Our Lord 2025? Really?
Are these pic's really from the south or are they really all from the north ?
Thank you - I corrected itThat's not what "avoiding subpoenas" means. "Avoiding subpoenas" is dodging process servers.
sp:dr (spelling patrol; didn't read)What the Clintons (no apostrophe)
Not perhaps - they are intentionally using delays - what are they scared of?are doing is negotiating a deposition date (and perhaps intentionally delaying it).
Re-read the article - it says the depositions were scheduled for OctoberThe article implies the negotiations began before the demanded date, so they didn't do that other thing that sometimes happens "failed to appear".
Yes, you ought to be shocked. The Bible doctrine of hell, is a very sobering and shocking doctrine to fresh converts and new commers. But I'm sure you will eventually come to the table. You can deny the doctrine, all, you want, but that will never change the truth of the matter.
The constitution protects from unreasonable searches and seizures. It is not a blanket protection from law enforcementYou need to stop your Strawman. No where did I call ICE racist. It seems that you have a standard reply to anyone that disagrees with you. I’m not from the left. My issue is with the trampling of the 4th amendment. You know, the constitution? The same constitution that you should be defending?
Respectfully, I'm not here for your entertainment. I've specifically challenged you on this already and you've not engaged that argument. If you are unwilling to do so, that says enough about the strength of your position.
But how is that different from my statement, "All who come have been drawn [enabled to come]..."This reads:
"If he is able, then he has been drawn, and I will raise him up on the last day."
Compare that to what you said:
"All who come have been drawn, and I will raise them up on the last day." (My emphasis)
Your paraphrase collapses ability (q) into actual coming, thereby reading into the verse what John did not say. Yes, of course those who come have been drawn (theologically true), but the grammar of John 6:44 is not framed as "those who come"; it is framed as "those who are made able to come." The final clause then identifies the enabled person as the one Christ will raise.
I would like to know for sure whether or not this is Catholic doctrine. The two points of particular interest are 1) that acting according to what you believe to be true, even if what you believe to be true is not true in fact, substantiates a claim that God should save you, and 2) that God saves a person based on a judgement that the person acted consistently with his beliefs (no matter how trivial those actions and beliefs were).If you know the Lutherans got it right but you stay a Methodist because all your friends are there then you could be in big trouble. Follow the truth. Follow it as best you know it. If you don't, if you know something to be true but you don't follow it, how can you make the claim that God should save you?