another_lost_guy said:

Why do we get mad at people for dressing up as Hitler or Nazis for Halloween but we don't get mad at people for dressing up as Satan or demons? People genuinely believe Hitler is worse than Satan today and it's ridiculous.

Click to expand...

I don't understand how a Christian can agree with people dressing up supposedly as Satan. (Of course, the usual red creature with horns, a tail, and holding a huge toasting-fork is certainly not the way the bible describes Satan anyway.)

lismore said:

Yes. It's amazing that even highly intelligent people can be reluctant to ditch nutty but strongly held views. Just look at the number of people clinging to the fable of evolution.

Click to expand...

...

Wait, what?

You have a problem with fables?

9Rock9 said:

Can a genuine Christian believe Jesus died on Wednesday, as long as he still agrees that he rose again three days later?

Click to expand...

Yes.

In the grave before sundown on the 6th day, and rising at an unknown time before sunrise on the first day, is not 3 days and 3 nights in the grave.

There were multiple calendars being used at that time. The Pharisees had their calendar. The Sadducees had their calendar; and the sons of Zadok were using the Enoch calendar.

Here is a reference to the sons of Zadok.

(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.

The sons of Zadok (The true priesthood) , were in Bethabara, beyond the Jordan, in wilderness, where there had been constructed very large mikveh pools fit for baptizing the masses. John the Baptist was a rightful priest in that same area, currently renamed as Qumran by Islam.

Yahshua would not violate the authority of the sons of Zadok (thereby YHWH), by honoring the Pesach by the Pharisee calendar.


Notice which day the Pesach meal is eaten on the Enoch calendar.





The Pesach is slaughtered on the 3rd day; and it is eaten that evening, which begins the 4th day.

The last supper begins on Tuesday night by the Gregorian calendar; but sundown on Tuesday night, by the Gregorian calendar begins the 4th day by the Enoch calendar.

Yahshua hosted the Pesach meal at the beginning of the 4th day, also known as the 1st day of Hag Matzot, by the calendar of authority.

He was murdered during the day on the 4th day. He was buried during the day on the forth day.

Day one

The sun goes down on the 4th day, beginning the 5th day.

Night one.

The sun rises on the 5th day.

Day 2.

The sun sets on the 5th day

Night 2

The sun rises on the 6th day.

Day three.

The sun sets on the sixth day, beginning the 7th day shabbat.

Night 3


(CLV) Jn 20:1
Now, on one of the sabbaths, Miriam Magdalene is coming to the tomb in the morning, there being still darkness, and is observing the stone taken away from the door of the tomb.

(CLV) Mt 12:8
for the Son of Mankind is Lord of the sabbath."

The Master of the Shabbat was risen on the Shabbat.

I have more evidence that John the Baptist and Yahshua followed the Enoch calendar; but this is a good start.

Oompa Loompa said:

Test question. Is this a cat or a human?

View attachment 373894

Click to expand...

Is this a pass/fail test, or are we graded on a curve?

-- A2SG, worried about my grade point average....

As 'pants' means underwear, this side of the Atlantic, I certainly hope they put some on!

As an elderly female, a Cary Grant lookalike, in suit and tie, would be a more appealing companion than a man in joggers and tee shirt. However I thought I'd heard that casual loose clothing was more suitable when flying. Is it something to do with circulation?

Um, no, I cannot oblige.

CNNOT

Nutritious food

Stop the useless platitudes.

PLLT

This screenshot is gold.

Nithavela said:

I don't know if you're thinking of Canada and the supposed mass graves of native american babies, but the atrocities of the mother and baby homes in Ireland are well documented and acknowledged by the protestant church of ireland and the irish government.

Click to expand...

You're mistaken. The mass grave story of 400 or so and the septic tank story were hoaxes. Realize that both Al Jazeera and the New York Times have an anti-Judeo/Christian bent and sadly are not above publishing fake religious tales.

Is there something in the text here that references Daniel 2? I'm more interested in how John merges bits of the other beasts into one uber-beast. It's saying Rome is more powerful than all the previous empires. But it's also very universal in appeal - as in - this is Rome - but it could be any government that threatens God's people.

Click to expand...

The ten horns are the ten toes. The connection between Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 is explicit. Revelation 13 references it directly. Daniel 7 shows that the ten horns would come after the fourth beast. The fourth beast was the Roman Republic (W). It became the Roman Empire when it conquered Egypt (S), Anatolia (N), and Syria (E). In this way, the ten horns are an empire stretching over the entire world.

You sound like a reasonable person committed to reading God's word in context, and with reference to sensible theology. (And not just playing subjective "pin-the-tail-on-the-anti-Christ" like others here.)

Click to expand...

I appreciate that! I'd rather not look outside the context of the original audience. Unfortunately, silence is rare in my life. If I can read it instead of watching it, it would be easier to flex to those rare moments.

Absolutely. Wasn't there a new tribune installed at some point, and people required to turn up and swear allegiance?

Click to expand...

There was. It began in 250 with the Decian Persecution, but it wasn't specifically targeted at Christians like the Diocletian Persecution was in 303. Speaking of the Diocletian Persecution, it should have been called the Galerian Persecution because Galerius was the main antagonist. Diocletian set up a tetrarchy in attempt to stabilize the Roman Empire after the Crises of the Third Century. The Roman Empire was split into East and West, with each having its own Augustus and its own Caesar. The Eastern Empire, with its capital in the Pontic city of Nicomedia, leaned heavily into the imperial cult as a means to restore Roman esprit de corps. Like the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11, the Christians were blamed for the prior crises and were persecuted. The Oracle of Apollo at Didyma told Diocletian that she could not give oracles from Apollo because "the just upon the earth" hindered his prophecies. Galerius insisted persecuting the Christians would enable the oracle to hear Apollos prophecies again. Since imperial cult was so strong in Anatolia, the Eastern Empire was ground zero for Roman Tribune. The Eastern Empire was, as Revelation 13 called it, the beast from the earth. To your original question, the tribune was the image of the beast having a statue of Diocletian presented before the herald.

Across 2000 years? I'm not sure causation is demonstrated - but history certainly rhymes now and then.

Click to expand...

This lends itself to the pattern.

Hmmm - I'm not sure I've seen that as a pattern. The people I read seem to see Revelation as covering a multitude of themes, not necessarily linked in that way? Could you just add the chapters where you see this pattern emerging?

Click to expand...

This is probably the best conversation I have had on this topic. Thanks!

All themes are encompassed in Revelation 1 and 22. These are the inclusio, a parenthetical bracket around all the text within. Revelation 1:6 shows us who the Two Witnesses are. Like Joshua the High Priest and Zerubabbel the governor in Zechariah 4, Christ's blood has made us to be priests and a kingdom. They were called out of Babylon (Zech 2:6, Rev 18:4), the worldly attempt to serve two masters. By keeping the testimony of Jesus and obeying His commands (Rev 1:2, Rev 12:17), they build the Church under constant peril by the enemy, just like when the Edomites assaulted the Jews when they rebuilt Jerusalem's wall in the days of Nehemiah. The lamp stands, fueled by God's Spirit (Rev 1:10, 4:5), continue that mission until Christ returns and every eye sees Him (Rev 1:7, Rev 19:11-18). You can find these themes repeated multiple times throughout Revelation. I think they get missed often because of the mysteries presented in the book that are intended to get the believers to look introspectively and ask themselves who they most identify with. That revelation shows us which message to seven churches in Asia Minor we as a universal church must adhere to. I would definitely like to discuss this further.

Cheers, good chatting with you

Click to expand...

Likewise!

keras said:

It ain't over until the fat lady sings.

Click to expand...

Um, I think in your case you're just making it up as you go along, and changing your mind as your previous "ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY" crashes into history.

You've got less than 100 days for Israel to build a temple for the AOD! ​

Oh, and if you changed your mind somewhere along the way - what happened to it being a vision from God? To you being an OT prophet? To your "ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY"!?

"It ain't over till the fat lady sings - and she sung - but she changed her mind - now she's singing again - oh look! She's about to walk off stage. She's turned around. No - she's just motioning to someone. Now she's back at the microphone - having another go! Phew, now she's finally bowed, and is walking off stage. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the fat lady has finally.... oh no. Spoke to soon! She's turned around. She's walking back to them microphone! She's having ANOTHER go! She wants everyone watching her - and she's singing AGAIN! Won't someone tell her to stop!?"

You futurists are ALL absolutely certain that your navel gazing daydreaming has spat out the future - and it's absolutely clear and certain to you! And EVERYONE needs to stop and gape in awe! If they don't, they're not REALLY trying to follow God - or something!



Futurists like this are a dime a dozen.
It's all so "Ho hum, been there, done that."
Why do you think you're any different?

Especially when you've demonstrated time and again that your biblical theology is just so messed up!?

hedrick said:

You're talking about praise choruses. Traditional Protestants have the same reaction. Luther contrasted a theology of glory with a theology of the cross. If you look at the hymns in mainline Protestant churches, you'll find plenty about the cross, and about our own death. Our churches typically use the liturgical calendar as a way to make sure we cover the whole of Jesus' life. Of course wallowing in suffering is just as unbalanced as nothing but praise choruses. The NT writers are confident that God will win in the end, and Christ will be all in all.

Click to expand...

When I was in the Presbyterian Church we had music before and during the service.

The music before the service was usually from the "Scripture in Song" series and they could be regarded as "praise choruses".

But during the service itself the hymns tended to be more solemn, and usually came from the hymn book, of which I still have a copy.

Hans Blaster said:

[Note to other readers: Yeah, this doesn't have anything to do with Mamdani or mayors,

Click to expand...

In the overall scheme of power vacumes its human nature to fill that void with some sort of philosophy in how we should order society and the world.

It has everything to do with this whether its mainstream Socialism, Progressivism, Liberalism, Communism, Conservatism, Christian Nationalism or Fascism. It use to be Christian and biblical norms now its a different set or basis.

Hans Blaster said:

but it is absolutely about the moral panic centered in the OP.

Click to expand...

Why is it moral panic. Is it not unusual that a socialist type leader is elected in modern times. Especially in one of the most capitalist cities in the world. People are merely reacting to Mamdanis own words that framed this as some sort of moral situation in stopping the bad guys.

Hans Blaster said:

I'm going to break my response to this extensive list of errors into one on culture and one on politics. Scroll past if you're looking for socialist mayor content. Cheers.]

Influence and control are different things, Steve. You wanted to know who "controls" society. I gave the only answer that makes sense: No one. This is because no one person or group "controls" society, certainly not the government. Societies evolve under a wide variety of influences. When authoritarians *try* to control societies, their efforts break eventually. Now lets look at some other ways you were wrong about this:

Click to expand...

I am still disagreeing with this premise that no one controls society. Sometimes an individual can have control over how something is ordered ie money. Money buys power.

But also groups have power over the government. Then you have all the academic idologues who managed to take advantage by being in positions of power. Head of Universities pushing an agenda and ideology that it influences policies and laws. Then theres lawfare.

So within this dynamic there are forces that continually jossel and have their 15 minutes of power control. But also individuals and groups that are controlling the outcomes over time. Even with the control of information through legacy media.

Hans Blaster said:

There are popular movements, fads, celebrities, influencers (old style and new), propagandists, advertisers, etc. They all "influence" society, but they do not "control" it.

Click to expand...

How do you know. If these forces band together than they are a strong force controlling society. Often it is the groups like say BLM who wield power along with those influenced by this ie celebs and activists groups echoing the same ideology that then influences policies and laws.

But also social norms to the point where people are ostrised and suffer real consequences. So there are situations where all these forces can work together to actually change or socially engineer society in a certain direction.

Hans Blaster said:

What are you talking about?!?
On to social norms...

Click to expand...

You don't know the history of the 'Long March through the Insitutions'. It actually relates to the OP and socialism and such ideas permeating today where a lot of young people have been brain washed under Cultural Marxism being pushed in the Insitutions like Universities.

The children of the Revolutionaries such as the Feminist and Civil Rights movements became the academic ideologues that were in positions of power and influence that engineered the institutions through the Critical theories.

That then became the basis for the institions and agencies that brought all the Woke, PC and Cancel and Deplatforming culture of certain beliefs and opinions. A form of brainwashing and propaganda.

A SILENT REVOLUTION The intellectual origins of cancel culture

The Genesis of Critical Theory and Cancel Culture

Hans Blaster said:

They kind of change a lot, and not just the parts that are freaking you out in the last half of the century, so the only short answer I can give is: various things that changed.

Click to expand...

What does that mean. I think if we look at the 20th century we can see a major cultural shift in terms of say religious, traditionalist and conservatism. To more liberal and progressive social norms.

Maybe some of that is natural in the sense of modernisation. But as the norms are so different and in a short time this shows they were engineered to do exactly what they achieved. Which was a counter culture.

Hans Blaster said:

Assumptions that abortions were mostly had by sexually promiscuous unmarried young women.

Click to expand...

But this was a well founded assumption by the fact that abortions increased with the breakdown of the insitution of marriage. You do realise that for the church and Christian ethics that any sex outside marriage is a sin, is being promiscuous. That is the extent of how these two positions are conflicting.

Hans Blaster said:

(That and "baby killing" were the two things they tried to sell us on in church in the 80s.)

Click to expand...

Why is saying abortion is baby killing as being wrong. Its the exact truth of what abortion represents to biblical Christians. Now some churches may have used the wrong language and politicised this truth. But its a biblical truth that abortion is murder.

Hans Blaster said:

[First "long march", now "cultural revolution", do you live to close to China down under where you see all "bad thing" as some how "Maoist"? Weird.] I don't know why you keep labeling women's liberation as "revolutions", 'tis very odd.

Click to expand...

I think this is conflating all 'Revolutions' as Chinas communist revolution. Giving new meaning or rather your meaning to the word 'Revolution'.

Hans Blaster said:

That liberation is from bad husbands and the "tut tut" clucking of the town scolds. It is critical that the earlier decision on access to birth control products is based on a right to privacy in ones life.'

Click to expand...

This all sounds like the very complaints the ideologues of the social revolutions are complaining about.

Hans Blaster said:

As for what was "held by society for generations" I would suggest reading a history on the topic (birth control/abortion) than just assumming that "society" was universally condemnatory until some magic "revolution" came.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter.. We were Christian nations and not Muslims or pagans ect. The bible was part of our fabric so we knew the bibles position on abortion and when we did toy with laws they were never pro abortion. Even social norms were anti abortion as it was hidden and tabood. The same with sex outside marriage and homosexuality.

The changes in the 20th century and especially the later part and into the 21st are profoundly different and this is conflicting with those long held norms. The fact we have all these culture wars over this and the same biblical/Christian norms are being used in defense against the progressive norms is evidence for this.

Hans Blaster said:

Social norms and laws are very much not the same thing.

Click to expand...

Once again an extreme claim that requires strong evidence for which you have not shown. The fact that the political has become the personal means that the policies and laws are very much intertwined with social norms.

Hans Blaster said:

So many possible things to respond here. Can't make up my mind...

There is "Christianity is just a variant of the non-Western religion of Judaism ."

Click to expand...

Man you sure make some far out claims without any reasoning or support. Even the claim "Christianity is just" seems dismissive.

Christianity is so much more than just a variant of Judaism.

Hans Blaster said:

or "When the Christians got control of Rome it fell", but I think I'll go with:

Much of the best stuff "the West" has came from pre-Christian Rome and Greece or was revived from pre-Christian Rome and Greece during the Renaissance and Enlightenment.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding lol. Surely this is the view of someone who is not a Christian lol.

If Christianity came from say Roman philosophy and belief then why did the Romans persecute the Christians and want them to bow to their pagan gods. Why did their norms of sex outside marriage and for men to take lovers and prostitution ect conflict with Christian beliefs.

Hans Blaster said:

You can find the same moralizing about sex and family from various non-Christian Classical writers and philosophies. Even the stuff you want to focus on has non-Christian antecedents. The rest is just which god you worship, and I don't care.

Click to expand...

This is a bias view and one that wants to deny the massive influence God, Christ and the bible has had on humankind. Deminishing it to the same or even less than other beliefs and morals.

Christian ethics revolutionised Roman philophy at the time with social norms like all are equal slave and free, man and women and marriage and sex within marriage.

Hans Blaster said:

I'm not concerned about "the west" (unless you're talking hemispheres, then, like Jim Morrison wrote "the west is the best, baby".) only about discussing the US. I don't need to waste my time building meta-narratives that span so many different societies. You realize there are more actual atheists in the US than Muslims and Hindus combined, right, right?

Click to expand...

But why was the west the best baby. Unlike Muslim or communist nations. Why was the west the best.

Hans Blaster said:

In what way do you know "behavioral sciences"? I've never seen evidence of this and behavioral science isn't relevant to our topic as we are discussing history and political science which don't fall in that grouping.

Click to expand...

Political science is related to political philosophy and ideology. These are beliefs which influence behaviour. Primarily behavioural science is mind and psychology. Sociology is the bigger picture of the philosophies and ideologies and sociology of the society.

Especially in that the very ideologies who are now pushing the culture wars are the ones who made the poilitical the personal. Thus bringing in ideological beliefs and morals as the central justification.

Hans Blaster said:

I don't how you can say I don't understand when you are clearly wrong. Unlike you, I live in the land regulated by the US government, and I can say unequivocally that the US government does not regulate my beliefs. I get to decide those for myself.

Click to expand...

Surely this is subjective and depends on what beliefs and situation. If your beliefs align with the State then you will not experience any conflict. But then tell that to say Christians who may want to implement their beliefs in public and are told they cannot.

Hans Blaster said:

They aren't.

Click to expand...

So are abortion or marriage laws underpinned by any ethics. Surely it depends on whether the policy or law has some ethical connection. Its not like we are merely dealing with particals or rocks.

Hans Blaster said:

Morality is subjective, but the government is not in control of it or controlled by it.

Click to expand...

If they decide that abortion is legal they just gave the OK for abortion. They cannot detach themselves from their moral obligation and responsibility.

Hans Blaster said:

But they don't. The State is not an entities with moral opinions because it is not alive. It's just a big bag of laws, people trying to enforce the laws, and other people making the laws.

Click to expand...

Ok so it is those who represent the State and fill that void with their political ideologythat brings the morals in. It is the system that allows people to lobby politicians in positions of power that can implement ideological agendas.

Hans Blaster said:

This is falsified by the two principle abortion decisions in the US Supreme Court in 1973 and 2023. The 1973 decision put the right of decision on the pregnant woman based on her personal privacy during the period when the fetus was not viable to live outside the uterus -- overriding the power of the individual states to have restrictions beyond those.

Click to expand...

How is this not a moral position. The State is more or less making a moral determination that abortion is ok before the cut off time. Thats a moral determination. In fact the very point that there is a cut off time shows we are talking about a moral determination.

Hans Blaster said:

The 2023 decision was that the states had the power to regulate abortion since women were free to exercise their privacy rights to abortion by going to other states. This is a legal decision based on personal rights versus devolution of powers to states (federalism) and as it has in both eras flipped from and then back to "states rights" in a manner roughly consistent with other rulings of the period.

Click to expand...

Its still a moral determination one way or the other. Even the idea of allowing the freedom of individuals to make their own decisions is a moral issue as to whether the State can over rule people or not.

Hans Blaster said:

I believe you are alluding to the clinic protection law. The right to protest abortion clinics is not taken away, but the protestors are prohibited from interfering with the rights of the patients to enter. Are you not aware of the "flying fist" analogy for the competition of individual rights. The short version goes like this: "my right to thrust my fist ends at your face".

Click to expand...

But there are no fists involved. Its a case on one right and moral determination over riding another. The State chose to side with allowing abortions and thus the need for abortion clinics.

The right to practice a belief and to protest is also a right. Why is it the right for one and not the other. Because ultimately when you have a society that tries to be all things to all people and allow conflicting beliefs someone is going to be denied when the beliefs conflict.

Hans Blaster said:

Two? We've got more than two and all have the same legal status.

Click to expand...

I said "two or more" please read my words. But evenso that makes it even more complicated and will eventually either cause conflicts or make some bow down to something they disagree with in certain situations.

Hans Blaster said:

I don't think you appreciate how diverse in morality, belief, religion, lifestyle, etc., the US has always been. We had radical abolitionists and slavedrivers;

Click to expand...

Abolitionists was a movement coming from Christian ethics that all were equal in Christ. Wilberforce was a great Christian abolitionist.

Hans Blaster said:

free-love communes and local theocracies; isolated communities with their own language and neighborhoon "melting pots" and so many more and I'm only talking about the 1840s and 50s.

Click to expand...

I think primarily western nations were more united and had a stronger identity about who they were and what they stood for. Though we had generous immigration programs people primarily integrated into the western life.

I don't think its any coincident that the more we have allowed unbridled immigration of ideas and beliefs that are different the more we have destablised society.

Hans Blaster said:

It sure can. (I assume you meant "without".)

Click to expand...

Yes as argued above the State cannot divorce itself from the moral responsibility of its social policies.

Hans Blaster said:

This is the problem with your binary thinking. You speak as if there only two sides when there are many just as there are many gods worshiped by the people. This is why the best policy is religious neutrality in government. We try to keep it that way, though there are some...

Click to expand...

You are creating a strawman. I did not say there were just two. I specified there were "two or more". But primarily there is for the sake of the core issues only two positions. Either abortion is ok or not and either marriage is biblical or not and the same for most social issues.

It does not matter if pro abortion is because of a number of reasons and moral positions. Its still a binary choice of it being allowed or not. Or is a biblical marriage or not.

The insistence on their being more than 2 positions on belief and morals actually makes it worse. Now society has to accommodate many possible conflicting positions. What people forget is part of belief and morals are for people to actually live out and live under their beliefs. Otherwise they being denied that belief.

Yarddog said:

Sadly, many of these individuals grow up bullied by others and have issues dealing with society.

Click to expand...

I agree. We must treat ALL with compassion and respect. We must love as Christ loves.

FaithT said:

Michie, I was thinking of you recently because I absolutely love anything that sparkles. I was at Hobby Lobby several weeks ago (and again today, too). And bought a sparkly crystal, (or maybe it’s glass), box to put some of my jewelry in. The lid is in the form of a sparkly lotus flower and catches the light any way I turn it. I thought of you and this thread when I bought it.

Click to expand...

I think that's fine! Liking sparkly things isn't a sin! I like them too!

Important medical note: You need to drink water (or another liquid) to survive. Don't try to go 40 days without water.

If you're planning to go 40 days without food, I recommend checking with your physician to make sure it will be okay for you.

Depending on what you have in mind, there are lesser fasts that you can observe for long periods. For example, the Orthodox abstain from meat, eggs, and dairy during Lent. This is sustainable for a multi-week period without risking health.

What is your goal for this time of fasting? Are you looking to withdraw from everyday chores and pleasures so you can concentrate more fully on prayer? Something else?

Lady Bug said:

I don't know if it's the ketchup being an abomination, but the hotdog

Click to expand...

I eat my French fries with BBQ sauce or 1000 island dressing! NEVER ketchup! Ketchup is an abomination

May God bless him abundantly!

PloverWing said:

A small note: In the chart in the previous post, the first column should read "Protestant Bible", not "Christian's Bible". (Noting, of course, that some Protestants find value in the deuterocanonical books, but "Protestant" will do as a brief heading that fits in a chart.)

The larger point is correct: the various branches of Christianity have not been able to agree on exactly which books belong in the Old Testament portion of the canon.

The points alluded to in the last paragraphs -- reconciling apparent contradictions, whether the text is inerrant, and how to apply Scripture to our modern context -- are separate from the question of what belongs in the canon.

Click to expand...

Oh! Yes!

Agreed. Some Protestants, notably Anglicans/Episcopalians and some Lutherans, revere the deuterocanonical books even though they don't consider them inspired Scripture. It's interesting to note that in the Book of Common Prayer (Anglican/Episcopalian), readings from the deuterocanonical books are often included in their offices.

*Generally, Protestant Bible refers to the 66 books of their canon.

I'm just a theological nerd!

boughtwithaprice said:

I have found YouTube videos that appear real but are stating questionable things. Like bishop Barren giving a talk saying priests can be married and the celibacy rule is lifted
If we rely on AI or YouTube videos alone, we can be deceived. I always check the Vatican news to see what the magisterium is really teaching

I would say AI is dangerous in that it can be used to deceive by looking so offical yet be so wrong sometimes.

Click to expand...

It's happening all the time! It's VERY concerning!

Wyoming is a beautiful state! Haven't visited in roughly 16+ years!

Thanks for posting!