Trump celebrated Thanksgiving with Epstein during his first term in office
Not so long as the Constitution stands. He's done. This fiasco is his last stand.85 million people are going to vote for him again anyways.
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.
Not so long as the Constitution stands. He's done. This fiasco is his last stand.85 million people are going to vote for him again anyways.
LOL. It was brought you by Trump's own conspiratorial base and Trump, Bannon, Patel, aka his circle ran with it.Epsteingate, from the people who brought you Russiagate.
It's not about His limitations, it's about man's reluctance. And 2 Pet 3:9 is not about just the elect, either, but about all men, as Paul understood as well:You're answering the question. "Means" refers to the way of achieving something. God's patience concerns the temporal unfolding of what He has eternally decreed. His decree includes not only the fact that the elect will repent, but when and how they will. Regeneration and faith occur in time, not from eternity. God's patience, then, is His longsuffering toward the elect prior to that appointed moment, not hesitation or limitation in His power to bring it about.
You’re not wanting to understand. The arguments I've submitted are sound. God provides the ability to come. You’ve determined that the drawing is decisive as in necessarily completing its job, God’s intention. But God can certainly fail if He chooses to associate man with the work of His grace, as has been taught, if man’s participation to one degree or another is desired, IOW.Yes, you keep repeating the same point without engaging what I am actually saying. It's like you have in mind responding to a particular argument, rather than paying attention to what argument it is I have actually made. You are conflating two issues here. Let me clarify the distinction, once more:
- The drawing as enabling is decisive. You've suggested that the Father's drawing (ἑλκύω) can fail. But John 6:44 explicitly ties the ability to come to being drawn: "No one can come to me unless the Father draws him." The drawing is the act that makes coming possible. If the Father's drawing could fail, then coming would not be possible for that person. The very point of the conditional is that enablement (the drawing) is necessary; failure here means impossibility. Your repeated objection -- "enabling does not mean causing" -- misses this entirely, because the verse is about enablement itself, not human response. How is one able to come to Christ at all, if the enablement (ἑλκύω) can fail?
- Grammar connects enablement to salvation. This is a separate issue! It is only with the addition of the final clause that we get anything relevant to the question of whether or not those drawn actually come. This is a separate issue to the above. I have not once argued that ἑλκύω itself tells us that one actually will come. The argument concerning the meaning of ἑλκύω is that it does not fail to bring about enablement (which is why your argument that it can fail does not help your position; this is the point I have been trying to press). The argument that ἑλκύω implies that the enabling act is effectual in actually producing faith is a grammatical one based on how the final clause ("and I will raise him up on the last day") relates to what came before it. The argument there is that, grammatically, the text equates the one enabled to come (the "him" drawn") with the one who will actually be saved (the "him" raised). The verse itself assumes that all whom the Father draws (i.e., all who are enabled) will come and be saved. There is no distinction made in the grammar between those enabled and those actually raised on the last day. Thus, in addition to point #1 above, it is also the case that the act of drawing, by virtue of its grammatical linkage to the raising, cannot "fail" in achieving its intended outcome. Nevertheless, this conclusion is not implied by ἑλκύω itself. It is an additional grammatical point.
This is not grammatically defensible. The "him" in the drawing and the "him" in the raising are grammatically identical. There is no conditional or caveat in the Greek tying the raising to "remaining" or "producing fruit." Those are theological interpretations imposed on the text. Grammatically, all whom the Father draws will be raised. Anything else is reading something into the text that the language itself does not say. You can say, if you want to, that remaining and producing good fruit do indeed occur in true salvation (and I'll agree with you on that much), but what the grammar of the text will not allow is the conclusion that the one drawn might not do this.
"No one can come to me (-Q) unless the Father who sent me draws him (-P), and I will raise him up on the last day (R)."
= -Q if -P and R, which, stated formally, is (-P --> -Q) ^ R, the contrapositive of which is (Q --> P) ^ R, which reads:
"If he is able to come to me, then the Father who sent me has drawn him, and I will raise him up on the last day."
If Sam is able to come to Christ, then it is because the Father has drawn Sam, and Jesus will raise Sam up on the last day.
ἀναστήσω is a future indicative. There is a promise here to raise someone up on the last day. Who is that someone? It is the same individual throughout the verse: the one drawn; the one able to come. Thus, the text is making two claims, one explicit, one implicit:
- The explicit: the Father's drawing MUST succeed in order for it to be POSSIBLE for someone to come to Christ.
- The implicit: being drawn by the Father one-to-one results in being raised up on the last day. Thus, the Father's act of enablement is effectual in bringing about the intended outcome.
Like the one transferred to a Club Med prison and will be pardoned by Trump in ....5..4..3..2...Regarding Epstein what sort of Trump underlings are you referring to?
This world will be at peace immediately before the start of the Trib (the 7-year Tribulation). The state of the world immediately before the Trib is revealed in 1 Th 5:1-3.
The AC starts the Trib that officially begins in Rev 6:1-2. The AC is set in motion for the timeframe from the start of the Trib through Rev 19:20, when the AC is killed.
Rev 19:21 precedes Matt 24:29, the official end of the Trib.
The seal judgments through seal 6 take up all of Rev 6. The 7th seal begins in Rev 8:1.
Rev 7 is an interlude within Rev. We know from Rev 7:16 (famine and scorching heat) that Rev 7 spans from the 4th seal (famine) in Rev 6:8 to the scorching heat in the 4th bowl in Rev 16:8-9.
Rev 7 truly spans most of the Trib from the 4th seal to the 4th bowl (great tribulation). To further validate this, “great tribulation” is cited in Rev 7:14, which is two verses before Rev 7:16 and its scorching heat that is only found in the 4th bowl.
I’m pointing these facts about Rev 7 to simply prove its time range stems from the seals through to the bowls. That is the width and breath of Rev 7. That is why it’s called an interlude because its timeframe does not fit between Rev 6 and Rev 8.
In summation: The AC is put in motion, starting the 7-year Trib, in Rev 6:1-2. The AC is active until he’s killed in Armageddon in Rev 19:20.
The Trib ends in Rev at Rev 19:21. Then, Matt 24:29, the official end to the Trib. Then, the 2A (2nd Advent) In Matt 24:30.
He didn’t use a measuring tape nor does the earth have a cornerstone. This is symbolic language and we talked about this a couple of weeks ago.It's flat & level.
Job 38:4-11
Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. / Who fixed its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched a measuring line across it? / On what were its foundations set, or who laid its cornerstone.
You can't stretch a measuring line across a ball.
Nonsense. You are only saying this because of doctrinal bias. The NIV has one of the better translations of that verse because it shows that the Israel of God refers to all who follow the rule of being a new creation in Christ with neither circumcision (being a Jew) nor uncircumcision (being a Gentile) having anything to do with it.To avoid misinterpretation of Galatians 6:16, avoid the NIV.
No, it's a fact that you just can't "see"/understand. That's how it is.No I can't, so the sun is 93 million miles away this is just plain folly.
?? We weren't talking about water.I said, 'why does water always find it's own level' ?
The "good reason" is that you refuse to accept them.No I can't & for good reason.
The world that God made - how about you?The world you think you live in is a fairy tale world.
What world do you live in ?
The only facts that have changed recently in your world is that you no longer believe Charles Duke; in fact you think he is a liar.Facts have changed especially in my world.
Of course. Fannie as an agency exists without employee conduct guidelines.it is? Please - where is it apparent? You have a link showing that, or it is your assumption.
I'm not defending anyone -
I'll bet they are interesting. Mine are not and very few and have to do with learning vocational skills--not a subject which Steve is interested in. Maybe he should read my MA thesis. That would put him in a very, very small but select group.My peer review documents are confidential and in XXX ZZZ physics, not archeology, so they aren't the documents you want.
Proof requested please.Tertullian also wrote about the affects of Purgatory.
I do not consider the cultural issues less significant. What I object to is the use of these issues as a tool to divide the workforce. For instance, that we can't have single-payer health care because it's "socialist" and everybody knows that the end goal of socialism is to turn your kids gay. Whether gays can get married or drag queens can read to kids, even abortion, have nothing whatever to do with the economic well-being of the working class. They are separate issues.No one is dividing into anyone. No one is distracting anyone. Voters themselves are involved in these cultural conflicts.
Political parties engage in cultural conflicts because most Americans, regardless of their political affiliation, like cultural debates. The majority of evangelical Christians believe that the pro-life movement takes precedence over economic issues. Similarly, progressives consider matters such as pro-choice or civil rights for LGBTQ individuals to be significantly more important than US debt crisis.
It is your prerogative to consider cultural issues less significant in life. However, others may view these topics more important than anything else.
Phil G has experience of the subject so he therefore knows; you don't so you can only "believe" or "reckon".
No - it is just as accurate an opinion as yours is..You said he didn't want his name on a failing venture which is why it was called the ACA. That is false.
Speaking truth to power is seldom comfortable - they held their constituents hostage - openly saying they were using their suffering for leverage - millions of people effected and in the end got ZERO - nothing.Johnson apologized by blaming Democrats. Real character.
You can't see how we get heat from a sun that is 93,000,000 miles away.
You can't see how the earth could turn and we don't all fall off.
You can't see how satellites could orbit in space.
It has been said to you many times; the facts don't change/go away because you "can't see" or don't understand them.
And what are the facts proving it?To those with selective attention (aka denial issues) maybe.
turncoats? That is terminology that authoritarian governments use against those that do not walk in lock step with dear leaders...If tax credits are not extended for the ACA, these turncoats will have to walk the walk of shame--along with 53 Republicans--for betraying their constituents.
Of course he will. The Party has spoken - they kill their wounded. (Politically speaking) Just like removing a sitting President from his re election ballot against his will. Democracy in action? I think not.Schumer will lose to AOC in the next primary.
Donald Trump told Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell to stop plucking young girls from the spa at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort to groom and sexually abuse.
Awesome! You write any short stories or just novels?