Latest activity

fhansen · 2025-12-14T08:24:33-0600

Hentenza said:
The writings of Ellen White, a prophet of the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and will reject the seal of God. In other words, the vast majority of Christians are doomed for worshipping our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday.

Here are her writings:

Reception of Mark of the Beast Future—The change of the Sabbath is the sign or mark of the authority of the Romish church. Those who, understanding the claims of the fourth commandment, choose to observe the false sabbath in the place of the true, are thereby paying homage to that power by which alone it is commanded. The mark of the beast is the papal sabbath, which has been accepted by the world in the place of the day of God’s appointment. Ev 234.1
No one has yet received the mark of the beast. The testing time has not yet come. There are true Christians in every church, not excepting the Roman Catholic communion. None are condemned until they have had the light and have seen the obligation of the fourth commandment. But when the decree shall go forth enforcing the counterfeit sabbath, and the loud cry of the third angel shall warn men against the worship of the beast and his image, the line will be clearly drawn between the false and the true. Then those who still continue in transgression will receive the mark of the beast. Ev 234.2
With rapid steps we are approaching this period. When Protestant churches shall unite with the secular power to sustain a false religion, for opposing which their ancestors endured the fiercest persecution, then will the papal sabbath be enforced by the combined authority of church and state. There will be a national apostasy, which will end only in national ruin.—Manuscript 51, 1899. Ev 235.1
When Seal of God Is Refused—If the light of truth has been presented to you, revealing the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, and showing that there is no foundation in the Word of God for Sunday observance, and yet you still cling to the false sabbath, refusing to keep holy the Sabbath which God calls “My holy day,” you receive the mark of the beast. When does this take place? When you obey the decree that commands you to cease from labor on Sunday and worship God, while you know that there is not a word in the Bible showing Sunday to be other than a common working day, you consent to receive the mark of the beast, and refuse the seal of God.—The Review and Herald, July 13, 1897. Ev 235.2
As a Result of Disregard of Light—God has given men the Sabbath as a sign between Him and them, as a test of their loyalty. Those who, after the light regarding God’s law comes to them, continue to disobey and exalt human laws above the law of God in the great crisis before us will receive the mark of the beast.—Letter 98, 1900. Ev 235.3
Caution in Presenting the Sunday Question—[We are] not to provoke those who have accepted this spurious sabbath, an institution of the Papacy in the place of God’s holy Sabbath. Their not having the Bible arguments in their favor makes them all the more angry and determined to supply the place of arguments that are wanting in the Word of God by the power of their might. The force of persecution follows the steps of the dragon. Therefore great care should be exercised to give no provocation.—Letter 55, 1886. Ev 235.4
Let the Truth Do the Cutting—Satan’s efforts against the advocates of the truth will wax more bitter and determined to the very close of time. As in Christ’s day the chief priests and rulers stirred up the people against Him, so today the religious leaders will excite bitterness and prejudice against the truth for this time. The people will be led to acts of violence and opposition which they would never have thought of had they not been imbued with the animosity of professed Christians against the truth. Ev 236.1
And what course shall the advocates of truth pursue? They have the unchangeable, eternal Word of God, and they should reveal the fact that they have the truth as it is in Jesus. Their words must not be rugged and sharp. In their presentation of truth they must manifest the love and meekness and gentleness of Christ. Let the truth do the cutting; the Word of God is as a sharp, two-edged sword, and will cut its way to the heart. Those who know that they have the truth should not, by the use of harsh and severe expressions, give Satan one chance to misinterpret their spirit.—The Review and Herald, October 14, 1902. Ev 236.2
A Call to Enlighten the Masses—I have been shown that Satan is stealing a march upon us. The law of God, through the agency of Satan, is to be made void. In our land of boasted freedom, religious liberty will come to an end. The contest will be decided over the Sabbath question, which will agitate the whole world. Ev 236.3
Our time for work is limited, and God calls us as ministers and people to be minutemen. Teachers as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves must come to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty. There are many who do not understand the prophecies relating to these days, and they must be enlightened.—Letter 1, 1875. Ev 237.1

Evangelism

Presenting God’s last warning message to a doomed world is the “highest, greatest work” ever given to human beings. This comprehensive handbook on ev…

egwwritings.org

Is Ellen White correct? Are those that worship our Lord on Sunday doomed to receive the mark of the beast?

No. And if she cared about truth enough to know history, she’d have known that the change to Sunday gathering and worship finds its roots at the beginnings of Christianity, followed by the churches in both the east and the “Romish” west.

RDKirk · 2025-12-14T08:24:01-0600

mark46 said:
The open question is how much should Christians try to have the state regulate non-Christian sexual habits and mores.

Perhaps it is truly better for Christians to try to have the state provide for the poor and the weak (to provide for the general welfare).

I submit that Christians can have much influence in having government support the weakest among us. Soup kitchens and a church charities just isn't enough.

The answer to your question is that the Body of Christ should not be interested in using the sword of Ceasar to perform any of the mission that Jesus has set for His Body.

By the sword Caesar keeps order.

By the sword Caesar extracts taxes to do good or to do evil.

The only way Caesar does anything is by the sword.

The first mission of the Body of Christ is to proclaim the gospel. The first mission is not to make sure all the poor of the globe are provided for.

But we are commanded to make sure everyone in the global Body of Christ is provided for--when it is evident that there is no scarcity of resources within the Body of Christ, when every Christian on the planet is fed, housed, and clothed--that demonstrates the power of Jesus to the world.

We are commanded to make sure peace and justice prevails in the global Body of Christ, and when it is evident that peace and justice prevails within the Body, that demonstrates the power of Jesus to the world.

If we can't do those two things within our own Body, why are we trying to use Caesar's sword to force it to happen outside the Body?

We haven't yet removed the log from our own eye.

Akita Suggagaki · 2025-12-14T08:20:13-0600

Always in His Presence said:
Who pales in comparison to his predecessor

I do not defend Biden nor Trump. They both get it wrong in different ways. But I can inform my senators and house Representatives of my opinions and hope they will speak up for me instead of just acquiescing to a party line or intimidating leader.

Jerry N. · 2025-12-14T08:20:02-0600

Servus said:
There's nothing weird about people sitting in front of a dead tree while eating candy out of socks.

As long as the socks are clean.

Oompa Loompa · 2025-12-14T08:17:21-0600

Belk said:
You believe that. Do you have any evidence? We have had waves of immigrants for hundreds of years and do not seem to have lost our cultural identity yet.

What is our cultural identity?

Jerry N. · 2025-12-14T08:15:36-0600

The question seems to be, “What is a human?” I am a creationist, but I have no idea what a “day” is in Genesis 1. If you believe science, all of the humanoids were human, but the Bible says Adam was the first man and seems to have been created 6000 or so years ago. The logical conclusion is that the humanoids were not what we think of human, even if they could interbreed with the decedents of Adam. The humanoids could also have been the source of Cain’s wife. My guess is that Adam received a soul or spirit in the image of God, and that made him different. Certainly, Neanderthals were not capable of sin, but Adam was. The fact that civilization became prevalent 6000 years ago seems important.

RDKirk · 2025-12-14T08:15:33-0600

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:
God's politics belong in church. And I don't see electing Trump, would be what God wants. God's just probably in shock. About both sides.

Not shock--that requires surprise.

Sadly unsurprised is more likely.

fhansen · 2025-12-14T08:11:45-0600

A teaching from an institution that I’ve come to appreciate:

2820 By a discernment according to the Spirit, Christians have to distinguish between the growth
of the Reign of God and the progress of the culture and society in which they are involved. This
distinction is not a separation. Man's vocation to eternal life does not suppress, but actually
reinforces, his duty to put into action in this world the energies and means received from the
Creator to serve justice and peace.

Another, from an insitution member:

Justice is trampled underfoot by weakness, cowardice and fear of the diktat of the ruling mindset. Evil draws its power from indecision and concern for what other people think.
--Joseph Ratzinger

BCP1928 · 2025-12-14T08:10:51-0600

stevevw said:
This is a false equivelance. Your assuming its the exact same as our state now. It will not be. If it was then we will still be in a fallen state. The fact that we never get sick, suffer or die is fact its not the same. So stop making false comparisons.

stevevw said:
But this is not the only way in which early Christians understood the Mind and Body divide. They clearly understood that this physical world was different to the spirit. That the physical world was different to their spiritual knowledge and selves.

So where does Christianity tell us that we are going to have a conscious mind without any kind of a body when we die?

stevevw said:
But the biblical account demands belief in supernatural ideas. This is when the material atheists or anyone who uses science to beat down God or the bibles stories as unreal and make believe. Theres no difference.

Its still a material paradigm claiming an epistemic and ontological truth by demanding we show evidence. Otherwise its all rubbish. That is the very aim of skeptics when they come onto Christian forums lol. To make the delusion believers enlightened so they can get over their delusion of God and creationism lol.

That's what happens when you make testible statements about objective reality. Have you ever wondered why the conversations in Creationism forums always line up the same way? Biblical Christians on one side and everybody else on the other? Atheists, sure, but also mainline Protestants,Tradiitonal Christians, and all other theists together on the other side? Why do you think all those believers are siding with atheists to "beat down God?"

The same thing has happened in this thread. I wonder why?

stevevw said:
But its not a misrepresentation of how some use science and naturalism to defeat those who believe in Gods creation. I guarentee skeptics are coming to show how the science is superior and shows that God is not needed for creating life. Thats the who idea on threads like this lol.

Its philosophical in nature and not a misrepresentation. It is exactly highlighting that when it comes down to argueing the case its a matter of belief and not science.

If you have no idea about what I am talking about then I suggest you do some research because this is actually fairly well known within the philosophy of science. Ever heard of Kuhn. Surely you must have.

Naturalism and Science

Naturalism and Science – Metanexus

metanexus.net

Thomas Kuhn's concept of paradigms, introduced in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, revolutionized the philosophy of science by proposing that scientific progress isn't linear but occurs through revolutionary "paradigm shifts," where an established worldview (paradigm) is replaced by a new one, challenging the idea of pure objectivity and highlighting the community's role in defining scientific truth.

Kuhn: paradigms and revolutions in scientific development | IBSA Foundation

In “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”, Kuhn analyzes the history of science and its various implications in all areas of research.

www.ibsafoundation.org

Of course I've read Kuhn. He is controversial amongst philosophers of science. I didn't find him convincing;

HIM · 2025-12-14T08:05:38-0600

SabbathBlessings said:
No you added Jesus “became”, which is not there.

Hentenza said:
Because He was not a man before and the sabbath was made for man.

You like scholars so much. Show one that supports your thinking please in respect to Matt 12:1-8, Mark 2:23-28, Luk 6:1-5 thanks.

Hentenza said:
Again, the vast majority of translations do not translate it your way. You are not a Bible scholar with full competency in Greek so I’m going to go with the experts. In fact I find it quite interesting that the KJV and NKJV differ although both are translated using the same text.

Doesn't matter truth is truth. Neither you nor they can refute it.

And the truth is, there is only one way to translate the Greek correctly to which the New Testament is from. Both the Byzantine Text type and the Alexandrian read the same in respect to the word in question, "IF". First the TR from of the Byzantine text type.

Heb 4:5 καὶ And ἐν In τούτῳ This ' Place ' πάλιν Again Εἰ If εἰσελεύσονται They Shall Enter εἰς Into τὴν κατάπαυσίν μου My Rest.

Here is the WH from the Alexandrian:
Heb 4:5 και εν τουτω παλιν ει εισελευσονται εις την καταπαυσιν μου

Here is how the word in question is defined. First from Thayer then from Strongs.

- Original: εἰ
- Transliteration: Ei
- Phonetic: i
- Definition:
1. if, whether
- Origin: a primary particle of conditionality
- TDNT entry: None
- Part(s) of speech: Conjunction

- Strong's: A primary particle of conditionality;
if whether that etc.: - forasmuch as if that ([al-]) though whether. Often used in connection or composition with other particles especially as in G1489 G1490 G1499 G1508 G1509 G1512 G1513 G1536 and G1537. See also G1437.

So why translate the Hebrew from Psalm 95 that way? Because when the writer thought of Psalm 95 HE thought of the Greek LXX which translates the Hebrew the same way as does the TR and the WH. Here is that translation. I will put the TR and the WH below it so you can see for yourself.

The LXX:
Ps 95:11 ὡς ὤμοσα ἐν τῇ ὀργῇ μου Εἰ εἰσελεύσονται εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσίν μου.

The TR: Heb 4:5 καὶ And ἐν In τούτῳ This ' Place ' πάλιν Again Εἰ If εἰσελεύσονται They Shall Enter εἰς Into τὴν κατάπαυσίν μου My Rest.

Here is the WH from the Alexandrian:
Heb 4:5 και εν τουτω παλιν ει εισελευσονται εις την καταπαυσιν μου

Couple that with the fact that the verse 3 makes no sense any other way. It would be a contradiction within the text itself if the if which is in the text was not translated so. For how could we who do enter into rest, enter therein if God sworn in His wrath that we shall not?

Heb 4:3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

And that is the truth. THERE is NO REFUTING IT. If there was you would have said something other than, "Again, the vast majority of translations do not translate it your way. You are not a Bible scholar".

rockytopva · 2025-12-14T07:54:00-0600

Michie said:
A gunman who opened fire on students at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, killing two and injuring nine others during a final exam review, remained at large late Saturday as hundreds of officers searched for him. Police said the suspect fled on foot.

The attack began around 4:05 p.m. EST inside a first-floor classroom during a final exam review for a large economics course, according to The New York Times. Law enforcement described the suspect as a man dressed in dark clothing, possibly in his 30s, last seen leaving the area without his face visible on security footage.

Authorities released video footage showing the man leaving the engineering building, but said his face was not clearly captured.

Investigators asked anyone who might recognize his gait or outfit to come forward.

Continued below.

Brown University shooting: 2 students killed, 9 injured, suspect at large

A gunman who opened fire on students at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, killing two and injuring nine others during a final exam review, remained at large late Saturday night as

www.christianpost.com

Person of interest in Brown shooting detained at RI hotel with 2 guns, ABC reports

Two people died after a shooting near the campus of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island.

www.wcvb.com

PloverWing · 2025-12-14T07:51:57-0600

First snow of the season, here. It's lovely, but I don't think we're going to make it to church this morning.

rockytopva · 2025-12-14T07:50:31-0600

Looks like they got him!

Person of interest in Brown shooting detained at RI hotel with 2 guns, ABC reports

Two people died after a shooting near the campus of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island.

www.wcvb.com

Strong in Him · 2025-12-14T07:48:49-0600

Kathleen30 said:
Yet you continue to want to make a mountain out of Mole hill.

So you've written a long post - complete with pink oblongs - to explain why I am making a mountain out of a molehill?
As Apple Sky would say,

I'll answer your post in detail if you like, but it would only be prolonging the, rather circular, discussion.

Hentenza · 2025-12-14T07:40:24-0600

SabbathBlessings said:
Just a game.

It gets sorted out soon enough.

Not a game from my side. All you have to show is that the law was given to the gentiles collectively and that the Christian is required to keep the Sabbath by posting a post resurrection verse that teaches that. Also that anyone kept the sabbath prior to Moses. You guys claim sola scriptura so post the verses.

jonojim1337 · 2025-12-14T07:38:47-0600

ViaCrucis said:
Which Americans get to decide who is an American? Because "We Americans" have a pretty bad track record.

Here are some people who "We Americans" have historically decided weren't American:

Black people
Irish people
Italians
Jews
Chinese people
Hispanic people
Muslims

Revelation Lad · 2025-12-14T07:31:08-0600

CoreyD said:
How you arrived at an age of 5,786 is of interest to me, as well as the OP, and perhaps a few other.
Would you mind sharing the mathematical equation (figures, or numbers, and calculations) with us?

I'm not seeing any figures applied to Genesis 1:1, 2, and from Genesis 1:3-2:4, the days are longer that a regular day.
However, from day 7 until now, we calculate a period of about 5,820 years.

That would mean the heavens and the earth are far much older than 5,820 years, since they existed before Genesis 1:3, and the period of time it took for God to complete his work, according to Genesis 2:4, is never given.

I googled "What is the current year on the Jewish calendar. There ae several sites which have the number. The process Judaism uses is to start with creation beginning the first year. Then they use the genealogies until you have an historical figure which can be tied to an historical event such as the destruction of the Temple. Then they use the secular history from that year on.

I'm willing to accept their results because they take Genesis as fact and do not believe in gaps. As I said I would not be dogmatic about the precision of 5,786. Personally I believe their methods are correct, but for discussion purposes 6,000 is acceptable. When you use numbers like 5,786, people can ask how do you know it's not 5,787 etc.? So using 6,000 as a round number is better.

Genesis 1:1 is a summary statement. Hebrew narratives often begin with a summary of the entire event before giving any details (Genesis 28:10). The first "work" is Genesis 1:2 which can be placed on the first day IMO. This implies darkness was created on the first day (looking at Isaiah 45:7). I believe God omits the creation of darkness to give emphasis on light. Science says "darkness" is real, dark energy and dark matter. Fine. Since darkness is connected to evil, knowledge of darkness is something man was not to have. Isaiah 45:7 is factual, but the complexity of the issues it raises are not appropriate for Genesis.

If you wanted to arrange the events of Genesis 1 in chronological order, the first would be 1:26 where God, Father, Son, Spirit self-identify when explaining their plan on how man will be made. This is placed on the sixth day, but obviously it had to be in the mind of God before starting. There is an objective reality to this as well. Man will have certain authorities in creation. Since man will be created last, everything before must be made such that man will be able to exercise the authority planned.

Hentenza · 2025-12-14T07:26:46-0600

SabbathBlessings said:
I did and I have also read the Bible and this is the instructions our Lord and Savior said on the subject for our instruction and correction. If you note, there is not an exception that we can add our words to God's Word, if we are leaning on our own understanding. Notice there are no exceptions.

So Jesus is not the Lord of the sabbath?

camille70 · 2025-12-14T07:25:49-0600

JSRG said:
I wouldn't call the claims about Project 2025 a "conspiracy" exactly, but a bunch of people definitely did exaggerate what it said or just plain made claims that weren't even true when trying to attack Trump with it. One can find more commonality between Trump's policies and Project 2025 when one is comparing the actual content of Project 2025 rather than the exaggerations.

However, the idea that Project 2025 (actual Project 2025 or exaggerated version) was some kind of secret blueprint for Trump has problems with it. Project 2025 was a manifesto by a Republican-aligned group (the Heritage Foundation) and Trump, guess what, is a Republican. One can find a bunch of commonality between the Green Party platform and stuff Biden did, it doesn't mean Biden was following the ideas of the Green Party, it just means that because they're both liberals you're going to find some crossover.

As is well explained here (this was from much earlier this year, but the general points still hold up), footnotes omitted:

Take-ing on the New Administration

A Trump hot takes megapost. (Once. As a treat.)

decivitate.jamesjheaney.com

...many point out that Project 2025 suggested things that President de facto Trump later commanded through executive order—often using language that closely echoes language from Project 2025—so we are already living in a Project 2025 regime (and it sucks!). Hence Politico’s “37 ways Project 2025 has shown up in Trump’s executive orders.” These articles are used to vindicate last year’s conspiracy theory that, despite Donald Trump’s repeated repudiation of Project 2025, Project 2025 was nevertheless the secret blueprint of his administration. (I wrote about these and other P2025-related conspiracy theories last year.) Yet the presumption of all these articles is that, if Project 2025 suggested doing something and Trump subsequently did it, Project 2025 must be where the idea originated. That’s not remotely the case.

In fact, for some ideas, it’s exactly the opposite: the first Trump Administration had an idea, then Project 2025 adopted it into their framework! Even though Trump later did these things, he obviously didn’t get the idea from Project 2025. In most cases (like DEI rollbacks), he actively ran on these ideas, and the American people voted for it.

For many ideas, Trump and Project 2025 were both drawing on long-standing conservative commitments. For example, it is true, as Politico alleges in a scandalized tone, that Project 2025 recommended Trump impose the Mexico City Policy to block U.S. subsidies for international abortion providers… and Trump did! However, it’s perfectly obvious Trump didn’t do it because Project 2025 suggested it; he also imposed the Mexico City Policy at the start of his first term… and so has every other incoming Republican president since Ronald Reagan. This is just something Republican presidents do. Treating this as proof that Donald Trump is secretly following Project 2025 is just as silly as treating it as proof that George H.W. Bush was secretly following Project 2025 more than thirty years before Project 2025 was written!

This gives us a fairly simple heuristic you can use to see whether it’s even plausible that Trump got one of his ideas from Project 2025:

Did he do it in his last term, before Project 2025 existed? If yes, then it obviously didn’t come from Project 2025.

Did he actively campaign on it in 2024, the same campaign where he repudiated Project 2025? If yes, then it obviously wasn’t a secret he foisted on an unsuspecting public, and he probably didn’t get the idea from Project 2025 at all!

When you go through the 37 executive orders Politico cites as “evidence” that Trump was lying on the campaign trail, this simple heuristic eliminates 35 of them.

What’s left? What Trump policy proposals may have actually originated from Project 2025? Spicy stuff, believe you me:

Closing the OFCCP (Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs)

I doubt President Trump knew then, nor knows now, what OFCCP is. It’s an anti-discrimination enforcement office, so it was in trouble no matter what, but it’s plausible that the idea to close it came from P2025.

Shifting FEMA burdens to the states, with FEMA playing only a support role

Note that Trump already hated FEMA, and it’s easy to imagine Trump asking the office, “Hey, how can I crush FEMA under my heel,” and a P2025 staffer saying, “You know, I wrote down some ideas about that.”

I did always say that, since Project 2025 is very much a part of the (very small) conservative policy wonk world, it was inevitable that Project 2025 would have some influence in the Trump White House, as one faction among many. These data points seem to bear that out.

The Democratic process (or, at least, the primary process) was bypassed to promote Harris. It might have been unavoidable to not bypass at that point (there was absolutely no time to do primaries), but it was still bypassed.

I do think that, with the hand the Democrats were dealt with Biden dropping out, quickly rallying around Harris was the decision that made the most sense. There was no time for a primary, they didn't want the convention to get taken over by arguments over who the delegates should vote for (especially because the convention wasn't planned to be a contested convention), and it made the most sense to rally around the person who was the Vice President. In hindsight we can see that didn't work out, so maybe it would've been better to do it differently... but with the information available at the time, and the situation they were in, I think quickly rallying around Harris was the best decision.

Of course, while I said "it might have been unavoidable to not bypass at that point" we should put emphasis on the words "at that point". Because if Biden hadn't run for re-election, they could've had a real primary (they technically had a primary but as is normal for a sitting President, Biden was so strongly favored they might as well not have). I can definitely see frustration for being told endlessly "Biden's actually totally fine, ignore all claims that he isn't! No need for any real primary!" only to then later on be told "okay, Biden actually isn't in that great of a shape, but there's no time for a primary now, so it's Harris whether you like it or not."

I agree it was no secret. It wasn't even a new publication. It was published for all to read but half the people who worked on it are or were in his administration.

I don't think Trump knows a fraction of what is even in it, however the people in his administration have their own agenda and are manipulating him. It's been reported he was shown footage of the George Floyd protests to get the national guard in Portland. He's actually made comments people can't shop because of violence there that isn't actually taking place.

From 2024. Ties to his campaign.

The Many Links Between Project 2025 and Trump’s World (Published 2024)

Former president Donald J. Trump has attempted to distance himself from Project 2025, the conservative policy initiative. But well over half of its contributors have worked for him, and many of its policies overlap with his.

www.nytimes.com

Factcheck.org P2025 series.

Project 2025 series Archives - FactCheck.org

www.factcheck.org

As far as the election, there is an argument to be made that Biden shouldn't have ran, but he was pushed out. Pelosi and others didn't want Harris and helped apply pressure with donors. I personally don't think he should have stepped down, but with his later cancer diagnosis maybe it was for the best.

None of the other candidates who ran were serious. None of them were on ballots in all 50 states. Most who ran were spoilers to dilute the dem vote.

The delegates didn't have to vote for Harris, and not all did, but no other candidate would have stood a chance. They didn't have name recognition in all 50 states. The money raised by the Biden campaign couldn't go to anyone but Harris. The deadlines in most of the states had passed. No one else would have been able to get on the ballot, and I can promise GOP ran states were not going to extend any grace. There was no way to fundraise, do voter outreach and all that needs to be done.

I believe that all things work together for good tho.

More than ever I'm motivated to get rid of citizens united. The way Biden was treated made me FURIOUS. Top dollar donors shouldn't have so much influence so that a handful of donors can hold more influence than the entire dem base. Harris proved that a campaign doesn’t need them.

If Trump hadn't won, the foreign influence from Russia and other places wouldn't have been exposed. Many weaknesses in our system of governance wouldn't have been exposed. We have a lot of norms and gentlemen's agreements that aren't actually enshrined in laws that a person who has no respect for our institutions are willing to gleefully trample. Hopefully, once dems get power again, some of those loopholes get closed. I also hope there is a public effort to recognize influence campaigns, ai etc.

Also, the hypocrisy of the Church has been exposed. The next time someone says so and so can't hold a position because they are divorced, an adulterer, a criminal, a known liar, uses profanity or vulgar language, doesn't attend church regularly, all we have to do is point to evangelical support of Trump who have said the end justifies the means.

We've learned the GOP doesnt really care about states rights or even the rights of citizens. We've learned that the next dem president can fire whomever he wants and do whatever he wants if it's a goal their base supports and even if they don't. He just has to move quickly enough so that by the time the courts catch up, whats broken cannot be repaired and there is no legal remedy to those who were harmed. He can take money from any institution that doesnt line up with his agenda. Occupy any state he wants. Withhold money from any state that defies them. Lax gun laws? It would be a shame to have something happen to that infrastructure funding.

The dem base has been a bit slow. They still think we have a rulebook. Hopefully dem leadership has learned a different lesson.

jonojim1337 · 2025-12-14T07:21:45-0600

Secular or not (though I doubt there was such a thing in the 1500s), it’s the same bloodline.

I.e. to have any title in the Empire you need to have ’the blood’.

Always in His Presence · 2025-12-14T07:20:13-0600

partinobodycular said:
That's a beautiful sentiment, but it comes at an amazingly high cost, because that freedom means that some people are going to have opinions that tear at the very core of your sense of right and wrong, nonetheless you're going to have to respect their right to hold them, because to do otherwise is to judge them for that which you also do.

'Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us'... that's a tough bugger to live up to.

Sure will, but they have not done anything against me. And I am not the author of Romans.

Postvieww · 2025-12-14T07:18:37-0600

wing2000 said:
Jesus never addressed the nations or cultures of man. And as Paul wrote, "there is neither Jew nor Greek." In Christ, we are one. There is no American or Somali in His kingdom.

We are not yet living as a world in Christs kingdom. It was God himself that separated the nations and created the frame work for different cultures. It is nonsense to try define this presently fallen world by trying to use kingdom principles that Christ himself has not yet implemented on this entire planet.

Always in His Presence · 2025-12-14T07:17:06-0600

Fantine said:
I don't know. I'll defer to someone who's an expert at it--the current president.

He is pro life and has ended a lot of the perverse things that Biden, a supposed Catholic supported.

Remember when Biden’s own church refused to give him communion?

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page