New Posts

PTW · 2025-11-07T18:18:40-0600

Johnny Bravo

ThatRobGuy · 2025-11-07T18:18:02-0600

BCP1928 said:
Boy are you ever right. I'm 82, still relatively alert, fit and active for my age, no health problems, no meds, and I could not possibly acquit myself well in a high pressure job like that.

You're lucky to still be in such good health at 82... imagine the stresses of doing that job for a person who's not in great health or is experiencing some mental slipping at that age.

If PubMed/NIH longitudinal numbers are any indicator:
(22.2%) in the United States age 71 years or older had cognitive impairment without dementia. Prominent subtypes included prodromal Alzheimer disease (8.2%) and cerebrovascular disease (5.7%). Among participants who completed follow-up assessments, 11.7% with cognitive impairment without dementia progressed to dementia annually.

When you consider that 1/3 of the Senate and 1/5 of the House of Reps are over that age... The idea that statistically 22% of them are experiencing decline that could progress to dementia is more than just a little concerning.

I realize however, that those folks may not line up with the general population as conventional wisdom would dictate that an election process itself is a sort of "weeding out" of people who are in that state. Although, at that age, a lot can change in the duration of a Senate term.

Then there's also the other metabolic and cardiovascular issues are that all too prevalent among Americans that are over the age of 65.

I don't even understand the mentality behind wanting to the job at that age in the first place. Most of them have healthy bank accounts... they have to really love power in order to keep doing that job as opposed to retiring and enjoying their golden years. My plan is to retire at 58, not work, and focus on doing some traveling (provided the market doesn't take a major dump in the next 15 years)

If one had millions and millions of dollars, insisted on staying in a job until they're 85 where it's nothing but nonsense and half of the country hating them, and then died 18 months later (as opposed to hanging up the hat 65 and enjoying those last 20 years), what a waste.

BPPLEE · 2025-11-07T18:13:57-0600

GoldenBoy89 said:
Yes. That’s their approach towards the undocumented. They deserve the same treatment.

How many have you observed first hand?

Douggg · 2025-11-07T18:13:48-0600

Modern day Israel is no longer the kingdom of Judah, but one reunited nation of the former northern kingdom and southern kingdom.

Fulfilling the reuniting portion of Ezekiel 37:15-28. When Jesus returns, the rest of Ezekiel 37 will be fulfilled when the Jews in Jerusalem welcome Jesus as their King of Israel, Matthew 23:39

camille70 · 2025-11-07T18:11:18-0600

The Trump administration asks the Supreme Court to stop — by 9:30 tonight — the court orders requiring payment of full November SNAP benefits

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5596074-trump-doj-appeals-snap-ruling-supreme-court/

RileyG · 2025-11-07T18:10:40-0600

GodAndChocolateVanilla said:
Hi my Friend/Brother In Christ!! [Hugs]

I am sorry that this has happened to you.

I have also lost a couple Friends.

What I do when I feel I have no one, I just talk to God.

He helps me not feel lonely.
Also you can ask God to help you find new Friends!! God Is Able!!

Or you can ask God to fix the Friendships you already had.

And you can always message me if you want!!

Thank you my friend! Blessings!

BobRyan · 2025-11-07T18:10:40-0600

Dan Perez said:
AND you say that 1 PETER 3:21 that IT means. HOLY SPIRIT !!

read chapter 1.

10 As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful searches and inquiries, 11 seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow

The is the Holy Spirit preaching the Gospel in the OT.

And that chapter 1 statement of fact is context for what we find in 1 Peter 3.

Dan Perez said:
Then you say Peter says that BAPTISM is. the means of. getting the lost rescued. <

"corresponding to THAT, Baptism now saves you".

corresponding to WHAT? He is specifically talking about the flood and the ark and showing how it compares to baptism.

HARK! · 2025-11-07T18:10:34-0600

jas3 said:
Your reading a "clear distinction" into the phrase "as well as" and interpreting the distinction to favor Saturday as being more important.

I didn't say that it was more important. That's a strawman argument. It is however distinct from every other day in the week.

jas3 said:
We've established that Socrates Scholasticus didn't say what you claimed he did,

Who are we; and I haven't seen the evidence of that.

jas3 said:
you abandoned defending your claim and tried to say that he was my source

You cited him as a source here.

jas3 said:
You can't just cry "bare assertion" whenever you're backed into a corner.

I haven't tried that yet; but thanks for giving me permission to exercise that option. It might help break up the monotony of pointing out your unsubstantiated claims.

BobRyan · 2025-11-07T18:05:55-0600

I live in a rather small town , yet even so my home church runs a food pantry giving away food each Sunday and our town has a number of other food pantries open on various days

If you google search you are very likely to find several of them within 20 miles of your home.

In any case , I am praying for you.

SabbathBlessings · 2025-11-07T18:05:20-0600

Hentenza said:
What commandments, statutes, and laws?

When God defines HIS commandments, it doesn't change later in Scripture because they belong to Him. Its God's Testimony, man is not greater than God, never will be.

Fervent · 2025-11-07T17:59:32-0600

Richard T said:
God does love justice. He hates when the scales are imbalanced.

Yeah, though I think we often flatten "justice" to being purely about enforcing a legal code and fail to recognize the weightier matters of the law.

Richard T said:
However, he allows slavery but does not endorse it.

Slavery is an economic institution, God worked with what He had and regulated it because it probably wouldn't have been sustainable to ban it entirely.

Richard T said:
I think God would reject free speech at least as far as the USA gives it. Pornography for instance would never be God's will for protected speech.

This touches on a bigger issue I was hoping would get discussed, which is the operating assumption of the founding fathers was that government's primary function is to preserve individual liberties. Which is the main thing I am wondering if it passes Biblical muster.

Richard T said:
God always seems to support due process. Paul appealing as a citizen of Rome shows that respect. God too has rules of evidence, such as everything being confirmed by two or more witnesses.

Yeah, fair measures is a big concern in the OT law.

Richard T said:
God does give some criminals and foreigners rights too.

Criminals? i'm not so sure. Foregners, widows, the poor...yeah, their rights are a pretty big sticking point in the OT as well as with Jesus.

Richard T said:
I don't see any liberties that Americans would enjoy as being opposed to God, except maybe some exceptions for speech (the right to pornography an exception) and perhaps the right to any religious exercise.

I'm not trying to sort through right by right, but more the overarching concept of government's prime directive.

Richard T said:
To me God gives free will though and while God does not want alternative paths to be worshiped, I think he suppresses that but does not outlaw it in the New Testament period. In the OT, God is quite direct in stamping out some nations that oppose him or are oppressive. In modern times, he allows far more. I think God emphasizes the difference between believers and non-believers, rather than the nations.

Yes, though this is venturing outside of the government angle I had in mind.

Richard T said:
I have seen some to suggest that God judges the church, not the nations in the New Testament. I lean to the former but there are times when God will judge leaders or groups that warrant this. If I consider the love of money in American society as a likely judgment coming, I have to assume that while everyone is effected those who are balanced in this area could actually fare better. Here I consider the low will be brought high, the high will be brought low as a Godly principle. The same goes for the humble versus the proud. So someone walking in humility without the love of money could fare extremely well.

The church is supposed to judge the church, God judges the unbelieving world.

Richard T said:
If I consider a nation that has abortion rights as a major policy. Does God care? absolutely. So that to me is the paradox with Trump. Trump is God's choice because he is a vessel of correction in so many ways. In some things Trump is righteous yet in other things he is a leader in excesses. God is using both parts for America's good. Looking forward to more of your own and other's thoughts on this topic.

Yeah, I'm actually hoping to avoid discussion of specific leaders or policies and instead am curious whether and how much thought others have put into the fundamental questions about what government is responsible for and what its supposed to accomplish.

camille70 · 2025-11-07T17:53:12-0600

Offer to open the govt.

Sen Warnock vid

https://x.com/Sky_Lee_1/status/1986936233839219035

Sen Schumer vid

https://x.com/CalltoActivism/status/1986884460671914148?s=20

BCP1928 · 2025-11-07T17:53:11-0600

Freth said:
I grew up on food stamp assistance. My mother didn't buy junk food. She bought healthy food that she could make meals with to stretch the whole month.

Many SNAP recipients do the same. I take it that she only worked one job, had a stove and refrigerator and some other equipment and at some point in her life had learned how to cook.

GoldenBoy89 · 2025-11-07T17:52:56-0600

BCP1928 said:
Hasn't it dawned on you yet that the Christian Right intends that "Traditional Family Values" should only apply to the working class?

And women, mainly.

BNR32FAN · 2025-11-07T17:51:31-0600

Dikaioumenoi said:
And the John 12:36 point. I've explained twice now why your use of it is irrelevant to the passage's flow of thought, yet you've offered no exegesis in return. You just keep reiterating a claim the exegesis itself already responds to.

At this stage, this isn't a dialogue; it's one-sided labor. So this is probably my last reply to you unless you can start directly interacting with my exegesis. You're repeating claims while ignoring the analysis that challenges them.

No you didn’t explain John 12:36. You explained John 12:32. You never explained how Jesus saying that they had to believe in order to become sons of Light doesn’t contradict your claim that we must be born again before we can believe. Being born again and being a child of God is synonymous.

camille70 · 2025-11-07T17:51:01-0600

Sen Warnock vid.

https://x.com/Sky_Lee_1/status/1986936233839219035?s=20

Fervent · 2025-11-07T17:49:45-0600

Stopped_lurking said:
When I feel moral outrage, I feel a need to try to counteract it, additionally not acting on it feels bad itself. The morals of the perpetrator don't concern me.

And why do you feel a need to try to counteract it? If it's just a subjective preference, then what justification do you have for acting to counteract it? Do you think other people have to abide by your subjective preferences?

Stopped_lurking said:
Where do YOU feel feelings? I can't pinpoint a specific location, they come to me as parts of me.

I am not asking where you feel your feelings but where the wrongness lies.

Stopped_lurking said:
The specific feeling, as I have said multiple times. Some feelings gives me an impetus to act (among them moral feelings), and others don't.

Saying that they're different doesn't explain the difference. What about the feelings gives you an impetus to act? Or are you just blindly being led by pure emotion, and never seek to justify your actions in any way?

BNR32FAN · 2025-11-07T17:42:45-0600

bob121 said:
Grace and peace to you in Christ. Thank you for your comment—“I haven’t been to church in years. I don’t really see a need to.” That names the very question the Lord’s Day presses upon us: Is gathering with the saints truly necessary, or merely optional?

I ask only to understand. Why do you not see the need? One of my own family members says the same—I would like to hear your reason why if you are happy to share.

Jason in Japan

I honor and praise God everyday no matter where I am. And I converse with other brothers & sisters here on a regular basis. I just haven’t found a church that holds my same theology and I often feel pressured by church members to do things I don’t want to do. For example, all the husbands got together and thought it would be a great idea if we all got on stage and sang a song for our wives on Mother’s Day. I’m not a singer. I’ll sing with the congregation in service but I don’t want to get on stage and sing because I have a terrible singing voice and I know it. And all the other husbands were like oh don’t you want to do something nice for your wife on Mother’s Day to show her how much she means to you? As if implying that singing on stage is my only means of accomplishing that. So this isn’t what made me stop going it was a lot of situations like this that made me lose interest. The old if you don’t do it this way then you’re not honoring God or your wife or your family or whatever. I don’t need someone to tell me how to honor God and my family, I can do it just fine on my own. Don’t get me wrong these are really great people and I have absolutely no doubt that the Holy Spirit is at work in them everyday and I do love them they’ve been great friends but they do get pushy sometimes and I choose not to deal with it anymore even tho I do miss them sometimes.

RileyG · 2025-11-07T17:41:55-0600

Chesterton said:
I know this guy. We're not really friends, but we're very friendly with each other. We see each other fairly often in social settings, but in about 10 years there's only been 5 or 6 times when we were alone together.

Five or six years ago, in conversation I happened to mention to him that I enjoy watching the Little League World Series. I told him that I like youth sports better than professional or college, because there's no money involved, and I feel like kids are playing a game for fun as you should. He then mentioned that his young son had started playing (American) football. I said something to the effect of "I'd love to see that" or "can I watch him play sometime?" I don't recall what was said next, but nothing came of it for over five years.

Fast forward to last week. We were talking about whatever, and I asked him if his son was still playing. The son is in the 8 to 12 age range, I estimate. He said yes, he's got a game coming up. I asked "Could I come watch?", and he gave me what I felt was a very strange and insulting response.

He just said no. I asked why not. He said "you're not family" and then added "but you can hang around us here" (here meaning where we often socialize with others usually including his wife and kids).

I should also mention that years ago, I was riding in his car when we needed to go to his house to pick some things up. He parked on a crossroad near his street, and had his petite wife walk down the sidewalk carrying the items. I thought that was strange. Did he not want me to know which house he lives in?

Am I being weird or is he? I have zero interest in "hanging around" his family, and have never said or done anything to indicate that I do, other than asking about watching his son play ball. I've spoken very briefly with his wife a couple of times, but I've never said a single word to any of his children, not even a "hi". I don't even remember his two girls' names.

Was it weird of me to ask to go watch his son play? Or is he weird for treating an innocuous request as if I'm a pedophile or stalker or something?

Well? Many parents are very protective of their children and would do anything to keep them safe. Perhaps he sees it as a family affair? To him you might just be a casual acquaintance and nothing more.

I’ve learned some of my so called “friends” weren’t friends at all and I ceased having contact with them. I really realize it was for the best.

Gregory Thompson · 2025-11-07T17:41:55-0600

Delvianna said:
Okay, lets just say for sake of argument that's all true, but I don't understand how that links to being in a tribe. Maybe I'm missing your point but essentially my question is how would a gentile fit into a list of tribes? There's a distinct number in each tribe list (12,000) so how does that fit with the idea of spiritual israel? Like, Sara is signed and sealed as part of the 144,000 as a gentile, so what tribe list is she placed in? She would have to take up a slot.

The 144,000 are unmarried men, virgins. So they don't represent anything other than the tribe they fit in.

In the parallel, each apostle has a Gate in the city of God in revelation .. but determining which "tribe mirror" one belongs to is more for God to do.

If the 144,000 is a group of "christian" witnesses, then the mirror will be the manifestation.

There is no gentile tribe of the original Israel. There is a gentile mirror to the entire genealogy, but it is based on the blood of Jesus and being spiritually born again.

DragonFox91 · 2025-11-07T17:41:43-0600

I believe a Christian who is no longer a believer was never a Christian in the first place.

They may've wanted a miracle, they may've never faced trial, they may've just been doing it b/c others were, it's a long list

chevyontheriver · 2025-11-07T17:41:30-0600

Always in His Presence said:
pssst... we're talking about the new Mayor of NYC - not the GOP or Trump - those boogey men aren't part of the conversation.

They are ALWAYS part of the conversation. Nazi bogeymen are always germane.

DragonFox91 · 2025-11-07T17:40:36-0600

We are as sure as an anchor.
You can know.

I never liked the term 'believe' for Christianity, like 'we believe we can do it' like 'maybe we can, I think we can, I believe we can.' No, that's not right. We can know absolutely

RileyG · 2025-11-07T17:35:27-0600

seeking.IAM said:
There is no uniform way churches count membership, nor is there a uniform way churches purge inactive members from their roles. Attendance figures or pledging units are better measures in my opinion.

I agree.

People often church hop around. That’s also not uncommon, imo.

johnnypapa · 2025-11-07T17:34:08-0600

Convert from Judaism - Marcus Grodi with Debbie Herbeck

Watch the whole show, it's great, but at 48:50 she talks about going to Mass for the first time.

Login to view embedded media

New Posts

New Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page