Latest activity

Bradskii · 2025-11-07T23:30:53-0600

Fervent said:
Nope, relativism denies that there is a real right and wrong and instead is about frameworks and cultural contexts dictating what is wrong in that particular relative frame. Contextualism/situationalism recognizes that there is an objective right and wrong but that what it is isn't always cut and dry and similar actions could lead to opposite conclusions depending on local factors.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, well...that's then down to me. So three times is definitely not going to happen. I'm looking for a conversation.

You know, a kinda debate about the topic at hand. Where people put forward their viewpoints and question the other person on their position. Quite often that might take the form of an example that will highlight the topic and a question as to how the other person might respond. It's not like it's quite common in a debate. It's actually how debates operate.

You have excluded yourself from that until that situation changes.

Fervent · 2025-11-07T23:30:40-0600

I'm not familiar with their view, though William Lane Craig presents an argument that the historical/figurative divide is a false dilemma and that the original audiences would have understood the people and the genealogies to be actual history, which was then couched in etiological myths and theological tales. Essentially it is a preservation of oral histories, which were couched in cultural myths. So Adam and Eve are held to be genuine people, but not the original man and woman. So they are to be read literally, but when "literal" is understood it means in accordance with the conventions of the literary genre that the books exhibit. It's kind of like when a movie says "based on a true story" where there is some historical element, but liberties have been taken to serve a narrative purpose.

A2SG · 2025-11-07T23:29:40-0600

Larniavc said:
I confidently expect multiple threads opened vilifying this guy for reason that will rarely survive the most remedial of fact checking.

It will last at least until MAGA finds something else to distract people from Trump's failures as President.

-- A2SG, it's become a full time job for some of them....

Dan1988 · 2025-11-07T23:26:20-0600

BNR32FAN said:
Except God repeatedly rebukes the Israelites who didn’t obey His commandments, marveling at their unbelief. Why is He rebuking them and marveling at their unbelief if His commandments weren’t for them and He has not enabled them to believe? That would be like marveling at someone not being able to breath underwater.

I'm not sure why you chose to reject the bible doctrines of election and reprobation. I can only assume, it's because your denomination holds to the gospel of Jacob Arminius, instead of the gospel of the Lord Jesus.

Doctrine of election

Basis: God's sovereign, gracious choice, not based on any foreseen merit, faith, or good works in the individual.
Purpose: To save some people to display the glory of God's grace.
Object: Chosen people are "in Christ" and are chosen for adoption into his family.
Result: Those who are elected will be saved through God's effectual calling, regeneration, and other means of grace.

Doctrine of reprobation

Basis: God's sovereign decision to pass over some, which is often described as a negative counterpart to election.
Purpose: To manifest his justice and to highlight the grace of election in contrast to the condemnation of the reprobate.
Object: Those who are not elected. Their punishment for their sins is a result of their own actions, which God has, in his sovereignty, decided to allow.
Distinction: Some Reformed theologians distinguish between election and reprobation by noting that election is an active work of God to change a person's heart, while reprobation is God leaving individuals to their sinful state. God does not actively cause the sin of the reprobate; he simply does not work to create salvation in them

Romans 9:19-21
19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?

1 Peter 2:8 "They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do".

JSRG · 2025-11-07T23:24:03-0600

durangodawood said:
I don think so. Regarding "holding elections"

Time: Tues, or all week - for example
Place: County court houses, or online, etc
Manner: hand counted paper ballots, or various machines, etc

How elections get held is a different question than what things exactly you are voting on. In this case, the thing you are voting for is a representative in congress. Discretion over the mechanics of holding elections should not allow states (nor the congress) to degrade the whole concept of representation.

It is a bit confusing to me as to what you are trying to argue. I pointed out how congress has the ability to set its own rules for House and Senate elections, overturning those of states. You seem to be arguing they can't? Except, once again, as the Constitution says:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

So Congress can overrule them, and it has on various occasions (usually more in the form of establishing general requirements rather than micro-managing things).

Or perhaps you are trying to claim that even states can't decide things like congressional districts? But it's obvious that's included, because states have been doing that since the day the Constitution was ratified. The idea that states don't have the ability to set their districts doesn't make sense, that's obviously include in "manner" and is what every state has done since it started holding House elections.

Actually, the requirement of single-member districts is a requirement by Congress, most recently reiterated I believe in the 1970 Uniform Congressional District Act. I think they should get rid of it, which would allow states to experiment with things like multi-member districts or even proportional representation, but for now it is still the law and was an example of how these things can be set by congress.

9Rock9 · 2025-11-07T23:23:51-0600

Fervent said:
Mytho-history is a broad category, with different proponants holding different views. Whose version are you inquiring about?

Well, I am mostly on familiar with Inspiring Philosophy's version of it, but I am open to other views.

FireDragon76 · 2025-11-07T23:21:30-0600

Bradskii said:
I agree. But then we have to decide on what you want the state of affairs to be (the tragedy of the commons springs to mind). So if equality of wealth is the state of affairs then what you ought to do in that case is different if capitalism is the state of affairs.

Isn't that relativism by another name?

Not exactly. Relavists tend to think morality isn't ultimately anything but a socially enforced opinion. I believe morality is real, but it's bound up in human relationships and is therefore more complex than "X is always wrong".

FireDragon76 · 2025-11-07T23:19:32-0600

Reading over this thread... no, I don't think you are all that wierd. I think American society is individualistic, isolated, and paranoid ("stranger danger", the one thing you can't talk about rationally with broad segments of American society).

Fervent · 2025-11-07T23:18:04-0600

Bradskii said:
Isn't that relativism by another name?

Nope, relativism denies that there is a real right and wrong and instead is about frameworks and cultural contexts dictating what is wrong in that particular relative frame. Contextualism/situationalism recognizes that there is an objective right and wrong but that what it is isn't always cut and dry and similar actions could lead to opposite conclusions depending on local factors.

BCP1928 · 2025-11-07T23:16:53-0600

stevevw said:
I think any determinations about reality starts with observations. You can't do anything without observations. The difference is that in science its a 3rd party endeavour. Its looking from the outside in. Or rather removing the subject from the equation.

Whereas ancient and indigenous knowledge is including the subject. When you say by observation and (experience) I don't think science fully captures experience and especially conscious experiences as a layer or aspect of reality. They exclude this and for good reasons.

Science is only looking at one aspect of reality which is quantifiable in terms of a assumption that reality is fundementally physical or naturalistic and measured in terms of matter, particles, fields, forces and even epiphenomena that are caused by the physical such as consciousness.

So already we have a big gap or difference in how the world and reality is seen. Or before what is being measured as to what is reality. Science excludes a big chunk of human experiences and knowledge directly with nature and reality when immersed in it.

Before the age of Enlightenment and especially the further you go back we see a completely different worldview or reality. One governed by God or the gods or spirits or whatever transcedent belief was held. But fundementally the same.

So science cannot in the first place even understand this paradigm let alone make objective claims that all reality is tiny bits of matter and there is nothing beyond.

That is why I used the example of the Christian worldview and how this contains knowledge beyond the scientific material worldview. The observations at least with testimony are the same. Something happened beyond the naturalistic processes. The knowledge is different to the naturalistic explanations.

Thus on this basis unless you want to declare all religions and beliefs in such transcedent knowledge is all conspiracy and whacko. Which I think you can't because the methodology used is not even able to determine that. Then we have another layer of knowledge that is a reality itself and needs to be looked into as a real influence on reality, nature and the world.

Coming full circle now and after a few hundred years of Enlightement and science it seems strange that many areas of science are turning back to this fundemental idea that conscious experience and the role of the subject being immersed in reality which cannot really be seperated from it is gaining attention.

It seems we cannot really know reality when we seperate the subject out as there is always a subjective and transcedent element to it even in science.

So maybe the majority of our history being immersed in nature and reality as subjects and the knowledge that came from this was more real then perhaps what science tells us. Which came along relatively recent and purposely goes about seperating the subject out. Which actually also seperated a big chunk or knowledge about reality that seemed to be the majority of our history.

In fact not only seperates out but actively forces this aspect and knowledge out and thus we see the loss of Indigneous knowledge. Which I think points to this being more about belief than fact or truth ultimately or fundementally. In other words the methodology epistemically is forced over other ways of knowing.

Relegating the ancient and Indigenous knowledge as superstition or make belief when it was probably closer to reality than the material and naturalistic worldview. Or at least an important aspect that gives a deeper knowledge of reality.

Are you going to start dragging that "science is atheistic" crap in here again? It stinks.

Fervent · 2025-11-07T23:15:10-0600

partinobodycular said:
Cite the study please, and explain how it applies to humans.

The most readily accessible and comprehensive discussion of the issue is The evolution of rape: The fitness benefits and costs of a forced-sex mating strategy in an evolutionary context by Apostolou which explains how it seems to have evolved as a way of circumventing parental choice.

And rape is only one example, perhaps the most sensational, that shows that there isn't a straight line between fitness and morality and why the naturalistic fallacy is a fallacy.

Bradskii · 2025-11-07T23:12:22-0600

FireDragon76 said:
Moral judgements aren't statements about a state of affairs as to how they exist, but as how the state of affairs ought to be.

I agree. But then we have to decide on what you want the state of affairs to be (the tragedy of the commons springs to mind). So if equality of wealth is the state of affairs then what you ought to do in that case is different if capitalism is the state of affairs.

FireDragon76 said:
I'm a moral contextualist/situationalist, though, but I do operate from the idea there are moral principles that are better than others.

Isn't that relativism by another name?

Inhocsigno · 2025-11-07T23:10:17-0600

Greetings Cecile,
Quite well said! This is indeed one of the defining drives that draws so many of us to missionary work. It's a connecting thread that links us back to our forebear ministries from thousands of years ago. Continuing to preach and spread the joy of the Good News. It's an extra joy to do so in a community of like-minded souls with the same enthusiasm.

BPPLEE · 2025-11-07T23:08:13-0600

rjs330 said:
If he overstayed, whats the problem with him being picked up? Why is this bad?

Everything ICE does is bad. Enforcing the law is bad. (According to some)

Fervent · 2025-11-07T23:07:36-0600

Stopped_lurking said:
I negate the first part of the sentence.

What do you mean by this?

Stopped_lurking said:
It is I who act on my feelings.

You act to impose your subjective preferences on others. It is not enough for you to comply with your moral sentiments, you act as if others are obliged to comply as well even if that means imposing violence upon them.

FireDragon76 · 2025-11-07T23:05:19-0600

partinobodycular said:
It's not about what we prefer, it's about what survival prefers. We're just involuntary passengers.

Ah, we didn't die. That's pretty much it.

You'll have to take that up with evolution, but the last I checked, it really isn't keen on explaining things to people. We're pretty much left to figure it out on our own.

Actually, if you recall, I'm a solipsist. My whole thing is about reasoning from what little can be known, to whatever inevitably follows. It's that 'whatever inevitably follows' part that you seem to have a problem with.

Moral judgements aren't statements about a state of affairs as to how they exist, but as how the state of affairs ought to be.

BCP1928 · 2025-11-07T23:04:39-0600

BPPLEE said:
Poor people used to buy their groceries from little Mom and Pop stores in their communities. They paid higher prices but the stores were close by and most gave them credit and let them have charge accounts.
Walmart put most of those types of stores out of business about 30 years ago . There were a lot of items like OTC medicine and health and beauty aids that Walmart sold below cost to attract shoppers. Now they charge what they want.

Once upon a time and still in most countries there would be little fruit and vegetable stands popping up in what we now call "food deserts." When I was a kid ('40s and '50s) we bought our vegetables from a man who came around with a horse and wagon selling vegetables he grew himself. That kind of enterprise used to be called a "free market capitalism." Nowadays the only street business with enough cash flow to justify the risk of arrest is drugs. On the other hand, my son lives in the Fruitvale neighborhood of Oakland which is controlled by the Sureños so street businesses flourish under their protection. The street food is fantastic, you can pick up a dinner for four for about ten bucks.

It's what Walmart and similar stores are doing that's now called "free enterprise" and the street businesses, the mom and pop storekeepers and other small-scale enterpreneurs are "socialists."

Fervent · 2025-11-07T23:03:00-0600

Stopped_lurking said:
No.

Oh? So your actions aren't intended to right something that is wrong?

Stopped_lurking said:
How MUST I treat my moral feelings if they are subjective preferences?

To be consistent, you would treat them as if the only person who needs to abide by them is you. If you truly saw them as nothing but subjective preferences, you'd accept that the only person they matter to is yourself.

Bradskii · 2025-11-07T23:02:44-0600

Bradskii said:
That's just got to be the deal breaker. If the GOP want to see Trump's polling fall even further than it is now then all they have to do is reject the offer.

Well, that went south as soon as I posted that. From here: Republicans reject Democrats’ proposal to end longest shutdown in US history

'John Thune, the Senate majority leader, was unmoved by the offer...'

And they turned it down.

GodDoesListen55 · 2025-11-07T23:00:05-0600

GodAndChocolateVanilla said:
Praying for you @GodDoesListen55!! [Hugs]

Thanks so much!

Zceptre · 2025-11-07T22:59:02-0600

peaceful-forest said:
I have a family member that is going through some trouble. He is in his 20s, has money problems, smokes marijuana, and is expecting a baby with his girlfriend.

I have thought about buying this family member a Bible, but I do not know which one to buy him. I believe his current problems are happening and God is allowing them so that this family member will turn to Christ for salvation.

What recommendations do you all have?

Thanks.

I'm a bit late on this, but everyone has an opinion right..

King James Version is high level English, so unless they are extra-gifted with literature this is not good for fast comprehension of the intended meaning of the text.

I personally feel the Berean Standard Bible and English Standard Version are two good translations that are on the more extremely high level accuracy to original text and its meaning, aside from very deep technical studies. They are also incredibly easy to understand.

If I were to suggest particular books to a younger person or new believer, shorter is better and Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, Galatians, and 1st John are slam full of the majority of major concepts a person needs to see the truth. The Gospels of course, are a given, especially the book of John, but are longer reading than the first five listed.

Romans is also upheld by majority of scholars to be the most profound book in the Bible, and most impacting if read consistently. I never leave it out if someone asks what to read, it is usually first on the list or the one I recommend if they want to master a single book.

FireDragon76 · 2025-11-07T22:58:01-0600

Chesterton said:
Oi vey, any Christian who thinks God's covenant was a real estate transaction seriously misunderstands their faith.

Dispensationalism, and the associated Christian Zionism, owe alot to 19th century British fundamentalist biblicism. Alot of early British Zionists wanted to support the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine because they thought it would lead support to fulfillment of biblical prophecies. It has nothing directly to do with salvation as traditionally understood, therefore it shouldn't be something that is demanded of anyone to believe in as an article of the faith.

Fervent · 2025-11-07T22:57:41-0600

Mytho-history is a broad category, with different proponants holding different views. Whose version are you inquiring about?

BPPLEE · 2025-11-07T22:55:44-0600

rjs330 said:
Wait a minute. I smell a rat. This guy supposedly has a seizure while holding his infant? First if all there is a good possibility its a fake one. Secondly, if he is having one, they must get that baby out of his hands. He could really harm the baby if its a real one. I suspect its a fake seizure.

Third, Why is he driving with a baby in the car if he has seizures?
Fourth, Why is the baby in the front seat and not in a car seat?

Bradskii · 2025-11-07T22:55:16-0600

camille70 said:
Chuck Schumer has offered Republicans a deal to reopen the government if they extend the Affordable Care Act subsidies for ONE YEAR.

That's just got to be the deal breaker. If the GOP want to see Trump's polling fall even further than it is now then all they have to do is reject the offer.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page