High Fidelity said:

Britain for the British is a very nice thought.

France for the French, too.

Yet another terror attack today as a Muslim rimmed 10 people leaving some critically injured before yelling Allah Akbar upon arrest.

Click to expand...

.....

"rimmed"?


uhh........

Apple Sky said:

Then why are you posting on here ?

Click to expand...

I've told you before;
I don't like the implied, or sometimes stated, view that Christians who don't accept flat earth don't read/believe Genesis.
I don't like it when anyone says "the Bible teaches ........" when it doesn't.
Saying that the earth is a specific shape and the Bible backs that up gives the wrong impression to non Christians - although I hope that most are smart enough to realise that anything posted in the Conspiracy section of the forum is nonsense.
And I live in hope - though it grows smaller by the day - that you might stop wasting your time on this, stop laughing at, and mocking, scientific facts, stop posting insults when people don't agree with you and become the woman of God that you were made to be, and can be.

ChubbyCherub said:

I find all of this so interesting but also overwhelming. I don't know what sacraments, apostolic succession, liturgy, creeds and everything else means!

Here is maybe a not so interesting fact: My IQ is 140, for whatever that is worth. I'm university educated. I'm in a white collar, legalistic, professional job.

Despite all of that, I feel overwhelmed by all of these terms and feel like I'll never get to Heaven because I did not study the bible in university.

That's my tantrum done!

Click to expand...

Don’t feel disheartened. I was a nurse who worked in a large research hospital in NYC for years, surrounded by the smartest people alive, but it holds no candle to being in a relationship with Christ. I also was a member of a Christian cult that rejected many mainstream Christian beliefs and had to maneuver through the different religions and beliefs to find one that I believe sticks closely to God’s word. It took a while, and a couple really good friends who could help me interpret scripture so I knew how certain beliefs were or weren’t Biblical. I pray you have some spiritual guidance along the way.

CoreyD said:

The thing is, we note that light reached earth on day one. Genesis 1:3-5
So, before God started creating any living thing, light was available on earth.
What was not yet visible from earth, is the heavenly bodies, and that's understandable considering what might have been involved in the formation of the planet.

Click to expand...

That light wasn't necessarily coming from heavenly bodies. In fact, since the light had to be separated from the dark, that first light must have been full-time, before there was an evening and morning. In other words, it would appear that the light was coming from all directions. The Big Bang Theory postulates a similar event, and starting at a time the fits, in the Photon Epoch. This was about 3 minutes after the Big Bang. That epoch supposedly lasted 240,000 years, but if the big bang timeline is collapsed into just days, That would certainly fit in the first day. I'm not sure exactly what to make of the Big Bang Theory, but it seems like the scientists have made some reasonable conjectures.

CoreyD said:

That is true.
In contrast to the "Ancient of days". Daniel 7:9

Click to expand...

Yes, "Ancient of Days" appears to be a reference to someone who has been around for a very long time, measured in days. That would most likely speak of God's eternality, but only as compared to the people living and the earth itself.

Clare73 said:

Who made that rule?

So those humans who are near to God never sin?

Click to expand...

They sin less; not out there raping, killing, murdering, adultering, stealing, lying like the devil or else they're certainly not His. So it's just the opposite: They're righteousness depends on their nearness. And that nearness is what reconciliation with Him is all about. This is very basic Christianity. And if they do not have and display that righteousness, that virtue, that love to put it most correctly, and growth in it, then they aren't near despite any talk to the contrary.

dogs4thewin said:

what about the fact that the N in SNAP says otherwise? It was not meant to help people buy junk food.

Click to expand...

I don’t care. Worry about what you buy for your household. Don’t worry about what I buy for mine. Why is it any of your business what I buy for groceries?

fhansen said:

It's a matter of who you choose to serve, God or mammon. Nearness to God equates to freedom from sin,

Click to expand...

Who made that rule?

So those humans who are near to God never sin?

Their nearness depends on their own righteousness?

It's not about freedom from sin, which no one born of Adam has, it's about the imputed righteousness of Christ (Ro 1:17, 3:21, 4:5, Php 3:9), which is the only righteousness that passes muster in God's Court.

stevevw said:

As I said, your assuming that it has to be like todays tech and devices. It would be rediculous to say that there was machines and computers like today everywhere. Yes we would definitely find it. We should have found something as its not small and the works are wide spread counting other signatures in blocks ect.

It may have been something similar to a modern machine but made of basic components of stone and copper. Or as some have said a copper cutter embossed with diamonds or some or very hard stone. Maybe aqua power. Most of the components will have been reused, melted down by later people.

Or it could be something completely outside the box like stone weakening or softening. Then hardly any tools or machines are needed. Am ordinary spatula or shovel can dig out or shape the stone. More about changing the material than needing powerful tools to cut such hard material. To me this makes the most sense.

The point is not to assume any particular tech or device was used and especially that it worked like modern tech. Their modern tech may have been in a completely different ball park. Something more natural perhaps and toying with the structures and makup of rocks themselves perhaps.

But I am not saying this is a fact. Only that we should not assume that over 100s of thousands of years and especially say in the last 12 to 14,000 years that knowledge and tech did not peak several times and was los. Then people began again. Some continue and others disappear. All sorts of alternative knowledge could have been around and lost.

THis is the exact testimony the peoples of the later cultures were saying. That their ancestors or people that came before them had advanced knowledge and it was lost. That they found their works and inherited them. Don't you believe them.

Click to expand...

An absolute load of bunk and bull.

I don't give a flying fig if the tech is the same as it looks now or if it looks totally different but functions the same way or looks totally different and functions a totally different way, the bottom line is that when you and others like you who claim that the ancients had advanced tech greater than anything we say they had, you present NOTHING of said tech existing. You always go with just saying "Oh, they created these things! That's evidence enough!", but when pushed by any skeptic to present evidence for the tech that created the so-called evidence, you suddenly go deaf, blind and dumb.

I don't give a care about groups who said that their ancestors had advanced knowledge and lost it, because it's just a 'just-so' story to explain something they couldn't explain back then. And it's such a brilliant example of hypocrisy from you, especially since you've shown that you ignore the traditional workmanship of others who actually know their craft and just go "But they couldn't do it!"

Why couldn't they do it? Simple: because your entire argument is nothing more than an argument from incredulity. You can't personally imagine how it could be done, therefore no-one knows how it could be done, so you have to use such extraordinary claims to fill in the gaps in your own knowledge and ignore what other more intelligent people, are telling you time and again.

Again: you want to make the claim that the ancients had advanced technology? Then present the evidence of the technology existing; either the technology itself or actual contemporary artistic depictions of said technology. Because the fact that the latter fails to exist is suspicious, but coupled with the fact that in over a century of exploration and discovery in Egypt and other places linked to so-called 'advanced ancient cultures', we have not found a single shred of actual advanced tech existing, it's pretty damning that your claims are bunk.

Graham Hancock must be someone you look up to, I bet.

BCP1928 said:

Along with a $21,000 increase in average wages.

Click to expand...

Where would that money come from?

Always in His Presence said:

Mamdani appears smiling, arm-in-arm with unindicted ‘93 WTC bombing co-conspirator and terrorist apologist​

The Democratic frontrunner to become the city’s next mayor was seen laughing and grinning while standing arm-in-arm with Siraj Wahhaj at the imam’s Bedford-Stuyvesant mosque in a photo the socialist posted to X a day after the first mayoral debate.​

​

​

Click to expand...

Why is that problematic? Do you believe that when you appear in a picture with someone it means you automatically share all their values?

iluvatar5150 said:

I thought I’d start a repository for some of the more disgusting attacks on Mamdani. Not stuff about his being a socialist, but rather stuff that doesn’t have anything to do with his policies. Here’s one from Rudy Giuliani:
View attachment 372757

Rudy W. Giuliani on Instagram: "It breaks my heart."

21K likes, 2,385 comments - therudygiuliani on November 5, 2025: "It breaks my heart.".

t.co

Click to expand...

why is anyone surprised?

Hans Blaster said:

The question is on single-payer which is the opposite of direct responsibility on individuals.

Taxation is dependent on income level and tax rates can (and for income tax, do) depend on income level.

One calculation would be to assume that it would be funded by increasing the current Medicare tax on wages up to a cap. To do so you'd need the total cost of private health insurance, subtract insurance company profits, and the current Medicare tax revenues and estimate how much it would need to increase. Alternatively, you could take that increase and apply it to personal income tax revenue and find the proportional increase in income tax required to cover the cost using the existing tax base. Or you could add corporate taxes.

There are many possibilities, but translating directly to a per capita tax burden is not good math. We don't have any per capita taxes.

Click to expand...

I used per capita math to simplify a complex issue, but I agree it doesn't capture the complexity of universal health care.

Americans would pay more taxes to fund healthcare under either a progressive or flat system. My current yearly insurance premium is about $6,000, but with universal healthcare, my taxes would likely increase, while families earning $28,000 may pay less due to lower tax brackets. I am willing to pay higher taxes to support lower-income families, though everyone would still contribute through taxation. Ultimately, taxes would rise for all income levels.

I'm not opposed to it. If all Americans agree to higher taxes, it's feasible. However, universal healthcare supporters often claim that only the top 1% or high earners will pay more, and eliminating insurance companies will save money. These points are myths, not realities.

All Americans must pay higher taxes to fund universal health care. Senator Sanders and supporters of universal health care do not typically acknowledge this point. They often repeat the statement that the top 1% will be responsible for funding it.

Clare73 said:

Then your will is not free to choose to be sinless.

Click to expand...

It's a matter of who you choose to serve, God or mammon. Nearness to God equates to freedom from sin, If we sin, then we've exercised our freedom to remain apart from Him, as John's letters so eloquently emphasize.

Strong in Him said:

Nothing about flat earth has any substantial value.

Click to expand...

Then why are you posting on here ?

probinson said:

This time. When someone shows me that they're willing to toss their values aside in one instance, it makes it had for me to believe they wouldn't do it again in different circumstances.



That's one way to look at it. Another is to realize that if Democrats were to vote for a clean CR, the government would be operating on the same budget that was approved under Biden.

Click to expand...

Is that the one that had all the cuts to Obamacare?

[Insert biggest eye roll ever] Right... the white house just had a wing full of children and puppies... uh huh....

essentialsaltes said:

Trump just bragged about Walmart’s cheaper Thanksgiving dinner, but here’s what he conveniently left out​

“Walmart just announced that Prices for a Thanksgiving Dinner is now down 25% since under Sleepy/Crooked Joe Biden, in 2024,” Trump wrote Wednesday. “AFFORDABILITY is a Republican Stronghold. Hopefully, Republicans will use this as irrefutable fact!”

A community note on X pointed out that this year’s meal featured fewer brand-name items and six fewer items overall. The Turkey cost nine cents more [per pound] compared to last year, and 2024 items like a [2 pound Marie Callender's] premade pie, cranberry sauce and onions were dropped entirely.

View attachment 372766

Click to expand...

normal Trump
--------
cut out the pecan pie, whipped topping marshmallows, corn muffins, sweet potatoes, fresh onions, celery, poultry seasoning
Substitute lots of mac and cheese
make your own cranberry sauce
count on Walmart to absorb the 70% increase in turkey prices

jas3 said:

Do you have any evidence that this "clear distinction" is anything more than a rendering of καί?

Click to expand...

Would you care to explain your conjecture?

jas3 said:

I'd think you'd be at least a little surprised that your own source contradicts you.

Click to expand...

I haven't seen the evidence that my source contradicts me.

Are you acquainted with the fallacy of bare assertions?

Hentenza said:

According to your interpretation

Click to expand...

(CLV) Ezk 44:15
Yet the Levitical priests, sons of Zadok, who kept the charge of My sanctuary when the sons of Israel strayed from Me, they shall come near to Me to minister to Me, and they will stand before Me to offer to Me the fat and the blood, averring is my Lord Yahweh.

(CLV) Ezk 44:23
They shall direct My people to distinguish between the holy and the profane, and they shall inform them the difference between the unclean and the clean.

(CLV) Ezk 44:24
In a controversy it is they who shall officiate in judgment; in accord with My ordinances, thus they will judge it; My laws and My statutes shall they observe at all My appointed times, and My sabbaths shall they hallow.

Always in His Presence said:

Mamdani appears smiling, arm-in-arm with unindicted ‘93 WTC bombing co-conspirator and terrorist apologist​

The Democratic frontrunner to become the city’s next mayor was seen laughing and grinning while standing arm-in-arm with Siraj Wahhaj at the imam’s Bedford-Stuyvesant mosque in a photo the socialist posted to X a day after the first mayoral debate.​

​

​

Click to expand...

Thanks for another example.

Hentenza said:

The whole of the law hangs in these two commandments. Notice that the second is like the first.

Click to expand...

Notice that the "whole law (Torah) hangs" on these two.

Again, if we love Yah: we will obey his Torah. This means that will will love our associate, as it is in the Torah:

(CLV) Lv 19:18
You shall not avenge nor shall you be resentful against the sons of your people. You will love your associate as yourself: I am Yahweh.

So by fulfilling the greatest; we will fulfill the the rest by obeying the rest.

(CLV) Jn 14:15
If you should be loving Me,you will be keeping My precepts.

Hentenza said:

This is the last time that I am going to ask you to whom are you addressing your random verses.

Click to expand...

It's not random. It's right in line with the rest of the scripture that I posted regarding doing Yah's will.

Yahshua addressed it to those who are called to do Yah's will.

The Torah was not nailed to the pale with Yahshua. Yah forbid! It was dogma that was nailed to the pale.

But.... this issue goes to 11.