Latest activity

BCP1928 · 2025-12-04T09:37:17-0600

Hentenza said:
But that is the point. There is no Christian motivation here only personal. This is not a collective group’s opinion but individual personal opinion.

Which they offered as Christians.

Hentenza said:
I don’t get uppity but I do think that you are confusing personal opinion of a few with those of all Christians. You do know that is a fallacy right?

No, I am not. I am only talking about those Christians who support the killing of those two men as a moral act.

Hentenza said:
Then you need to talk to quite a few more to make such a sweeping determination. Your “survey” is hardly conclusive.

It includes all of those Christians I have spoken to who support the killing of those two men as a moral act. That group includes you. Right now I am talking to you and want to know how you as a Christian support the killing of those two men as a moral act.

Coolerranch · 2025-12-04T09:36:59-0600

PloverWing said:
The books do not mention God directly, to the best of my memory.

Do you think the books would have been stronger if the author had made some of the characters explicitly religious and had them comment on how God would view their situation? Alternatively, would you put God's point of view into the narrator's voice? How do you envision changing the books?

Okay. How does God value our lives? Can you answer that? Afterwards, how does that apply to the book (or not) if you read it.

iluvatar5150 · 2025-12-04T09:34:14-0600

ThatRobGuy said:
While the phenomenon may not exist to the degree it did in example I gave of the early church...

I think you're underestimating the degree it does exist.

Close to three in four students (72%) say that they believe their professors have influenced students’ political viewpoints.
26% say a professor has changed their opinion on a political or social issue.
49% say they have participated in social activism due to a professor.

72% of College Students Believe Professors Influence Political Views - Intelligent

54% of students say some or many of their professors express their political views in class

www.intelligent.com

There's still a certain level of reverence there.

"Influence" is a far lower bar than what you described earlier:

"I would disagree, there is that period of time where you put College instructors on a pedestal and feel like they're the "smartest people you've ever met", and that creates an inclination to want to mimic them in ways that aren't affiliated with their area of subject matter expertise."

Of course they're going to influence their students; that's why they're there.

ThatRobGuy said:
But which factors played the roles of cause and effect?

Did conservatives abandon it first? (leaving it to become a more liberal echo chamber after all of the conservatives bailed)
Or did the universities take a sharp left turn first that alienated conservatives from wanting to participate in that system?

You're conflating academia with "the 'intelligence' vote."

If you're talking about academia, sure, there's probably some amount of a feedback loop / chicken-and-egg thing. But that's not "the 'intelligence' vote," which is more a set of ideas, policies, and processes through which you execute your work. Regarding the latter, conservatives absolutely abandoned it.

American conservatism has had an anti-intellectual wing for at least a century and its prominence within the broader right has waxed and waned over time. At some point in the early 90's, technology and legislation converged to make it financially lucrative and politically expedient to continually stoke and exploit the anger smoldering within this wing. Over time, the "intelligent" leadership in the party failed to deliver what the growing populist base wanted, so they were eventually voted out and replaced with a cadre of elected officials who, if not part of the populist anti-intellectual wing themselves, are at least willing to pander to it.

The right did this to themselves.

You can take a look at the right-wing media ecosphere and see the same sort of thing. I like using the Ad Fontes Media Bias chart to illustrate this. Look at the difference in distribution between outlets that skew left and those that skew right. If you zoom in on the yellow box near the top, which is outlets that focus on fact reporting and/or fact-dense analysis with modest-or-less levels of bias, the right side is almost empty, whereas the left side is packed with all of your big, establishment media names. The right side is skewed much more heavily towards the bottom corner, which is where the lower quality, more inflammatory and biased op-eds go.

There's more than enough money on the right to create high-quality, fact-focused media outlets; but they don't, because there's no market for it.

ThatRobGuy said:
Warp speed for covid was, at least in part, an endeavor of the Trump administration was it not?
"No Tax on Tips" was something from the Trump admin
The First Step Act

I think those were all decent ideas (and had some bipartisan support)

I said I was leaving out crisis responses because they weren't planned for ahead of time. They also tend to be handled a bit differently by both sides, with more bipartisanship and less polemicism.

That shows me that the parties are capable of such work; they just find it advantageous to not do it in normal circumstances.

The First Step Act was good, but as far as I'm aware, was pretty bipartisan in its origin. It wasn't a big "Republican" idea. When it passed, there weren't many No votes, but they all came from Republicans. (and it originated from Congress, not Trump)

No Tax on Tips is just a tax cut, which has been Republican orthodoxy for 45 years. That's not a new idea.

ThatRobGuy said:
Doesn't that drift a bit into that very same "tone of elitism" that can put some people off?

We're talking about appealing to the "intelligence vote". How do you talk about that without giving off some tone of elitism? Of course you're going to come off as elitist when you describe somebody else's way of doing things as stupid.

ThatRobGuy said:
"If they wanted to appeal to intelligence, they would've focused on the things my people think are important"

No, those aren't pet issues that only matter to a handful of activists. They're large, widespread issues that affect and are cared about by large segments of the population.

Regardless, my comment was less about specific policies and more about process. "Intelligent" people try to idenfity problems, analyze them, and come up with solutions. They don't fall back on tired, rehashed tropes the way that Republicans and especially MAGA have been doing for a long time.

CoreyD · 2025-12-04T09:31:52-0600

I did not realize Unity was this popular.

I think I will start using the Engine now, since my making progress with my program is lagging behind time.

bling · 2025-12-04T09:30:33-0600

Dave... said:
What are the spiritual mechanics of being born again?

I'll give my thoughts on this matter and we'll go from there. Just for the record, if I'm speaking of baptism, it's the spiritual baptism that I'm speaking of unless otherwise noted. I'll tell you if I mean water baptism.

If you ask someone what being born is, they're likely to respond with something like the wind blows where it wills, all from John 3, etc. But I think the Bible does give us some insight and that insight helps tremendously in interpreting Scripture over all.

When we are placed into/immersed/baptized into Christ, we receive everything at once, all the ingredients to be saved. Thus we are complete "in Him" and lacking nothing (Col. 2:10-14). This is the Church, the Body, that the placing into, or the baptism with the Holy Spirit spiritually unites us with. By receiving the indwelling as a result of our faith, we are placed into Christ, becoming one with Him. Setting aside the legality of our salvation, that is, being saved/delivered from the penalty of sin, the focus in this thread will mainly be in our being saved/delivered from the power of sin. This is the practical side of being saved and is called being born again, which not only frees us from the power of sin, but also allows us to begin to be conformed to Christ likeness (Gal. 3:2-3).

Being born again is the result of being placed into Christ.

When the Bible speaks of our being raised up with Him, or raised up in Christ, it's speaking of our being born again. When it speaks of being crucified with Christ, dying with Him, that is the necessary death that must precede being raised up with Him. When we are placed into/immersed/baptized into Christ, we're also placed into/immersed/baptized into His death, and raised up with Him, thus we are born again.

These are verses that I believe are speaking of being born again, though they do not use the typical language. These are all speking of the Spirit baptism, known as the baptism with the Holy Spirit by Jesus.

Romans 6:3-11 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Col. 2:10-14 and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power. In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

Gal. 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; 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 for me.

Gal. 3:2-3 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit (baptism with the Holy Spirit) by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? ---- *(added by me)*

26-27 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized (with the Holy Spirit) into Christ have put on Christ. ---- *(added by me)*

Ephesians 2:5-6 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

1 Peter 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Being born again is simultaneous to being placed into Christ, also being placed into Jesus' death and raised up with Him.

The Bible tells us that we are saved/delivered through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I believe this is saved/delivered both judicially and being born again. But when the Bible speaks of being 'raised up with Him', like Ephesians 2:6, I believe that it's specifically speaking of our being born again.

Do you recognize this Scripture of speaking of being born again? Is this a metaphor, or does this really happen spiritually when we receive the Holy Spirit.

Dave

I fully agree with the idea of the indwelling Holy Spirit being our guarantee of God fulfilling all of his other promises.

I also believe prior to being “born again” we do not have Godly type Love and the only way we obtain this gift is by humbly accepting God’s Love in the form of forgiveness as pure undeserved charity (Luke 7) We have to accept being forgiven of an unbelievable huge debt to automatically obtain and unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love).

I think your missing the reason and value to water baptism:

New Christians may not tap into everything that is available to them to help them experience the transformation:

I do not know of any Christian group, who believe the water itself saves you, since all believe it is God who saves and God is not limited by water.

Water baptism is not a “requirement” for salvation, since God does the saving, but is something Christians get to do to help them and others.

I know that I needed everything God could provide to assure me of my conversion, both outwardly and mentally. God wants you to physically feel the experience of what is going on Spiritually.

You would like to add to your conversion a definite time place and physical experience, which God has provided for you.

Adult believers water immersion is to be a physical outward representation of what had or is happening spiritually in the person being baptized. It is mainly to help the individual being baptized to better grasp what is going on, but it can “witness” to others observing the baptism. It has the elements of going down under the water (burying the old man), placing your dependence in another; the person baptizing you (surrendering your life to God), being washed (having your sins washed away), rising out of the water (rising from the old dead body), and stepping forth out onto the earth (a new person). The person is walking out into the hugs of his new family. It is also a sign of your humility, since it is a humbling act anyone can simple allow someone to do to them (so not a work) and since humility has been shown in the accept of charity (God’s free gift of undeserving forgiveness) it should just support and add to the memory of that acceptance. To refuse Christian water baptism when it is readily available might mean you are not ready to handle other responsibility like having the indwelling Holy Spirit and you are hurting yourself.

Christian Baptism replaced John’s Baptism and not circumcision, since circumcision went on at the same time as John’s baptism and it is not in the Bible where, Jewish Christians cease circumcising their boy children after baptism became available. Circumcision was a physical visible daily reminder to all Jewish boys and men that they were a Jew. The indwelling Holy Spirit is our literal daily reminder that we are Christians. The indwelling Holy Spirit replaced circumcision and is for both men and women.

RDKirk · 2025-12-04T09:26:07-0600

Gene2memE said:
I've been listening to some US national security lawyers on this topic. What's been interesting is the differences between the military lawyers and the intelligence community lawyers.

The former have universally been of the opinion that the strikes are illegal and most have condemned them.

The most commonly cited legal objections are that there's been no Congressional approval, that drug smuggling is a quintessential criminal activity not a military one, that there are reasonable and readily available alternatives to lethal strikes and that the classification of these groups as 'narcoterrorist' organisations is legally dubious (at best).

The intelligence community lawyers have been much more circumspect and seems to be more split about the legality and the necessity. S

ome argue that 'something' needed to be done and this 'sends a message' and while the strikes are likely illegal that misses the point and the law needs to catch up. Others point out that basic thresholds like 'response to armed attack' or 'acting in self-defense' - which are present in both US and international law - are absent and that without a Congressional Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) the whole thing here is illegal (because drug smuggling clearly doesn't even come close to the established legal definitions of terrorism under the US code).

A former IC community lawyer pointed out that if the current US position is found legal then a country like Venezuela could designate Lockheed Martin, RTX and Boeing as 'terrorist organisations' and proceed to legally blow up passenger jets with their employees on board.

I'm arguing from the perspective of an ordinary troop on the front line. What will that person be held accountable for by a court-martial?

The discussion about whether ordering strikes falls under a Congressional approval or not is 'way above the ordinary troops heads and will not affect them. What they will be accountable for is the situation in front of them when they pull their triggers. Granted, my argument is more for the "Kelly" thread.

CoreyD · 2025-12-04T09:21:34-0600

JohnClay said:
Also there are holy hand grenades and the "Body Hacker" (hacks into the Matrix/simulation)

Holy hand grenade???
How far we have fallen.
Satan loves to make what is bad good, and the scriptures warn... Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who turn darkness to light and light to darkness, who replace bitter with sweet and sweet with bitter. Isaiah 5:20

What do you think about this:

Oompa Loompa · 2025-12-04T09:19:28-0600

Good by diesel exhaust fluid.

The Barbarian · 2025-12-04T09:19:24-0600

President Donald Trump's Cabinet sang his praises during a televised meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 2
As the president appeared to be frequently closing his eyes, his secretaries showered him with compliments on everything from his sacrifices for the American people to his apparent influence on the weather.
"Sir, you made it through hurricane season without a hurricane," Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said, as Trump quietly said, "Yeah."
"Even you kept the hurricanes away. We appreciate that," she continued.

https://people.com/kristi-noem-tells-donald-trump-he-kept-hurricanes-away-11860541

CoreyD · 2025-12-04T09:14:32-0600

JohnClay said:
BTW in the Roman Colosseum the crowds also loved violence... "Executions by beasts were popular among plebeians, who saw them as thrilling entertainment".

Exactly! That's where WWE and WWF came from, as well as all the other blood sports. Mortal Kombat is a modern day Roman Gladiator game.

JohnClay said:
That is far too shocking for my tastes though.

It sounds like your heart is talking, John.
“The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately wicked; Who can know it? Jeremiah 17:9
Suppressing the conscience, will make the heart more hardened to sin. Proverbs 28:14; Hebrews 3:7-13
Pharaoh was a bad example of one who hardened his heart.

seeking.IAM · 2025-12-04T09:10:11-0600

Interesting video. For those who don't want to take 13 minutes to watch it...instructor placed on administrative leave; University decision that her "0" will not be averaged into her final grade for the class. University posted messages that it will not tolerate religious discrimination.

bling · 2025-12-04T09:08:40-0600

BelieveItOarKnot said:
IF you believe that is the case THEN Matt. 4:4, Luke 4:4 and Deut. 8:3 are all WRONG

or, your reasoning is off

I fully believe what Jesus said: Look at the context of Mark 4: 15 starting with Mark 4: 13 Then Jesus said to them, “Don’t you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable? 14 The farmer sows the word. 15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. 16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18 Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19 but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20 Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown.”

By Jesus’ own words: not everyone hears the word the same way every time.

Jesus explains Mark 4:4 in context Mark 4:13-20 and even in Mark 4 he says some and not all.

What are you trying to get Luke 4: 4 to say, since it only says: Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’”

How does: “Deut. 8:3 He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your ancestors had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord.” Support your idea satan lives within all of us all the time?

BelieveItOarKnot said:
IF all have sin, (we do) and sin is of the devil, (it is) then Mark 4:15 applies to everyone

All mature adults have sinned and sin is of the devil, but the scripture says we sinned and does not say: the devil inside of each of us sinned, making it the devil’s fault.

BelieveItOarKnot said:
IF we are tempted in mind/heart, (we are) then Mark 4:15 is true again

Mark 4:15 is true, that is not in question, but Jesus says it applies to only “some” and not all people all the time since there are other types of soils (people’s hearts).

BelieveItOarKnot said:
I could go on, but if you exempt yourself from Mark 4:15 then you are basically rejecting the Word of God

That is a straw man. I am not “exempting” myself from any scripture, just point out people are different at different times in their lives and do not always act like solid ground (harden hearts).

BelieveItOarKnot said:
And of course we know who does that don't we?

The balance of your reply is self justification, which I can't do in light of the above

Oh, and btw I do believe in eternal hell, for the devil and his messengers so that question is off the table

That is a copout response.

essentialsaltes · 2025-12-04T09:03:45-0600

essentialsaltes said:
‘Bears no inherent connection’: Trump can’t use presidency to dodge Capitol Police officer lawsuits, appeals court says

Trump asserts executive privilege to thwart document release Jan. 6 lawsuit

The Justice Department disclosed Trump’s secrecy claim Wednesday in a hearing related to that five-year-old lawsuit, brought by police officers injured while attempting to repel the violent mob that day.

It’s unclear precisely which records Trump is attempting to keep out of the hands of the plaintiffs in the Jan. 6 lawsuit. However, a White House spokesperson confirmed Wednesday that the president has decided to fight disclosure of some material subpoenaed from the National Archives and Records Administration last year.

Among the things asked for:
"All Documents and Communications regarding efforts to get Defendant Trump to issue statements regarding violence"
"All Documents and Communications regarding briefing materials provided to the White House regarding the potential for violence [on Jan 6]"
"All Documents and Communications generated after November 6, 2021, regarding any strategy to overturn the results of the November 2020 Presidential Election, or for enabling then President Trump to remain in office as President after January 20, 2022"

yadda yadda the story so far...

Trump appealed, prompting a D.C. Circuit ruling in 2023 [previous post] that sent the cases back to Mehta for fact-finding to determine whether Trump’s actions that day were official or unofficial. The judge said Wednesday he plans to hear arguments later this month on that issue and others related to the cases.

Apple Sky · 2025-12-04T09:03:19-0600

David Lamb said:
Just wondering - is it known whether the designer of the UN logo was a Freemason?

Google it

Yarddog · 2025-12-04T09:01:13-0600

Aldebaran said:
Well, he is their Commander-in-Chief, so it's a reasonable expectation.

He's not the CIC for Kelly and the others. He's the President. Being CIC does not make him an infallible leader. It's the military's duty to obey the UCMJ, not the President.

Apple Sky · 2025-12-04T08:54:37-0600

Strong in Him said:
Why are you listening to anything a Freemason says?

I'm not, you asked who was Albert Pike & I told you.

Nithavela · 2025-12-04T08:53:53-0600

Sounds like maybe a good idea that will help people in a couple of decades.

essentialsaltes · 2025-12-04T08:52:51-0600

President Donald Trump on Tuesday said at the White House that his administration is looking into an Australian-style retirement program.

“We’re looking at it very seriously,” Trump said. “It’s a good plan. It’s worked out very well.”

Superannuation, or “super” for short, is Australia’s flagship retirement savings program.

Employers are required to fund employees’ savings accounts, which are invested in select funds — known as super funds — that are locked up until retirement. The employer-funded contributions are made on top of paying employees their regular income. Employees can also contribute to their own savings account.

Employers must contribute the equivalent of 12% of an employee’s income into these super funds.

There is also a government pension program that serves as a safety net for people who need additional support. However, “super” is increasingly the primary retirement savings vehicle.

--

An interesting idea, sort of a mandatory 401k, but of course we need a lot more details to see how this would actually work, and who the winners and losers are compared to existing Social Security. And exactly how the transition would be made.

The 12% is similar to the 12.4% paid into Social Security. Of course with Social Security it's split evenly between employer and employee, whereas this would fall all on the employer.

The main problem (as I see it) is that one's balance is directly proportional to income, and so the benefits will be as well. For Social Security, as I understand it, there is a formula used to help spread the pool out -- aiding lower income people. [On the flip side, the very wealthy only pay Social Security tax on the first $176K of salary.]

The main problem (as corporations see it) is that it (on paper anyway) shifts the entire burden onto them.

Latest activity

Latest activity

‘Bears no inherent connection’: Trump can’t use presidency to dodge Capitol Police officer lawsuits, appeals court says​

Trump asserts executive privilege to thwart document release Jan. 6 lawsuit​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

‘Bears no inherent connection’: Trump can’t use presidency to dodge Capitol Police officer lawsuits, appeals court says

Trump asserts executive privilege to thwart document release Jan. 6 lawsuit