Hi
- By St. Helens
- Introduce Yourself
- 7 Replies
Welcome to CF. Enjoy your stay here and I look forward to your contributions to this site.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Of course they do. Indeed, they exercise what amounts to national sovereignty over large territories. The trouble is, that if we are waging an actual war against them on that basis, killing those two men in their wrecked boat would still be illegal.I do think the major Mexican and South American cartels do all four.
Tell that to cancer and transplant patients who survive, or the military who use weapons designed by science.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki are pretty impressive results, wouldn't you say?
Or multiple trips to the moon?
(Oh, wait, you think that's fake).
That's exactly what they are.
I don't believe Christ ever existed,
... just as you don't believe Zeus, Ra, or Dionysus or a thousand other gods never existed.
You do know I think Zeus is real, do you not?
Forget it. The fact is that two helpless men were killed after they survived the destruction of their boat. That is a fact, even the Trump administration cannot honestly deny it. The conservative Christian position (and yours) seems to be that it was a righteous act. I put it to you that you cannot reconcile that position with the Gospel of Christ. You have nothing to offer us except moral bankruptcy and we don't have to have the "moral high ground" to tell you so.Yes and thats part of the problem. You assume certain demographiscs with certain beliefs and positions. Classic IP.
What exactly about what I said was dogmatic.
What exactly was said that was not in line with the expert opinion. See this is where my lack of knowing what sources are stereotyped themselves. I just go by the content of what was said. If that happens to be a source you don't like thats not my problem.
The content is in line with the experts and that why I linked it. Purely on what was said and not where it came from. I don't care where it came from because the whole idea of certain sources being good or bad is itself a subject and often biased opinion.
No not the other posters but the experts. That is where I am getting my information. Its not the worse or any subjective qualification. Its the facts.
The point is you don't have to be an American to know American politics. You can know American politics from Americans who know American politics and then you use your senses to take that info in. I do understand english and what words mean lol.
When they say the evidence shows that massive fraud has been committed and show the evidence I can be informed. Then refer to that as counter evidence to someone who claimed that Trump was a fraudster. That they have no moral ground to stand on.
Most of this is not about American or Australia or any nations politics. Its plain right and wrong. The moral truth, commonsense, reality, whatever you want to call it.
And my point was that this was a sub thread over moral hypocracy. About the same people that are morally outraged have double standards and thus bias.
From what I was seeing with people making all these extreme claims about Hegseth and TRump being murderers and commiting war crimes. That same old extreme narratives ike Kirk and Trump are Nazis ect. It was my point that these same people have been quiet happy to allow 10 times worse bad behaviour and have no moral leg to stand on.
This was also based on the fact that the language was implying guilt in doing something morally wrong without the intel. This showing a willingness to jump to the negative due to political bias and partisanship.
This was reality. I am am merely pointing this out. I have not said anything about the right or wrongness of the situation. Just pointing out howw the usual Trump haters are quick to jump the gun (pardon the pun) lol.
I was not making a case for Trump being a Christian or that this is about Christ v non or Dems v Rep or Left v Right or anti immigration or anything.
I was simply using those examples of the hypocracy of how the Dems under Biden and Obama did all that they accuse Trump of and have no moral leg to stand on. That it was their now proven extreme bias that causes people not to trust a word they say.
So when people start jumping the gun again and making all these assumptions of guilt and extreme claims of war crimes its history repeating itself. So its right to point it out.
You can't help yourself can you. Doubling down now on IP. Us Aussies must be dumb, they could not possibly know anything. That bad old Fox News.
Did you notice at I mentioned that "even the Australian experts agreed". I said they were agreeing with the American experts
It does not matter because everyone will pick a side and both sides are as bad as the other lol. But usually when people are so fixated on the opposition [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] political.
But even if its moral there are mmore than one position. So when someone starts claiming "shoulds" then we can say that they have jumped the gun because they don't have the facts. Thus exposing their bias in assuming a wrong for that particular situations when similar ones or other views are just as relevant.
If someone states that what happened is X and this "should not" have happened as its morally wrong. Then they are declaring their position. We can read a lot from the actual words that come out of peoples mouths lol. Its the most direct way of knowing what they think and believe.
Thats unless you think what people about a situation or themselves cannot be trusted.
Actually I am going to bow out. I don't see any point and I have said all I can say on the issue. It will be a continual back and forth of peoples subjective moral beliefs on the situation without the clear facts. Which are yet to come out.
In thinking about this further I have expanded my view. I agree that the two most obvious churches that are closest to the original or were at least built on that original format. Is the Catholics and Orthodox.
Primarily I could see them unifying out of all churches and denominations because they are at least open to supporting the fundemental ways the early church worshipped. Especially the sacrifice of the bread and wine, the body and blood of Christ.
This is the one factor I think of all things that will unite. Just like the early church it was central and really apart from some prayers and praising and readings this was it. There was no Ted Talk or profound sermon. It was fellowship in the body of Christ.
But unlike some denominations who have no chance of uniting because they are divided. They either dismiss it or reimagine it into how they think it should be done. A modernisation to conform with the world more than Christ.
In saying that I think there are many within all denominations who are of Christ church. They may either partake in it with an honest heart if their church offers it. Or are willing and wanting to do so.
This is where I think Gods spirit comes in. As this is so fundemental and a truth I think all Christians know. But for whatever reasons have been side tracked or denied this. But as the spirit can come over people and then the church I think this can bring Christ spirit to existing groups of Christians who have strayed who will want to go back to partaking of the bread .
On the other hand there will be churches and denomionations which become more worldly and lose their way and we can tell by the fruits and know that we should stay away. We too could be blinded and fooled if not strong in the faith.
I was only thinking this as I am starting to go to a local church associated with a Homeless Hub I work at. A few of the homeless guests go there and they also provide a meal.
I am thinking wow how is this not reflecting Christ church even though they are not Catholic or Orthodox. They are very basic, some bible readings and a bit of a sermon. But not a preachy one and just a down to earth one about lifes struggles and how God offers hope and salvation.
I think these smaller churches or gatherings are probably capturing more closely the essense of sharing the bread of Christ. They just don;t specify it or state the need for it. Certainlt the sharing of a meal beforehand is sort of the same. So I sometimes wonder where the line is.
Its hard to know and Gods spirit works when two or more are gathered. But I sort of believe that Christ is with this small church, they are living His words. Even though they are not practicing this the same way as the Catholics or Orthodox.
Did you need an AI overview for that? Really?
No, 4 to 5 times as many people were crossing the border and that number is down 96% under Trump. Under Biden most of those people were given an order to appear in court and released into the countryIt's a graph of expulsions of people attempting to cross the border. As your numbers indicate, Biden caught and expelled a lot more than Trump. I'm still trying to figure out why you think that's a bad thing.
And you think Biden should have gone down there and broken up the demonstration? How would that work? As you see,Biden was focusing on stopping illegal immigrants from crossing the border. As your numbers indicate, he was 4 to 5 times more effective than Trump in this effort.
Well you didn't say you weren't using AI to help your posts and your style has completely changed. You are not giving me what the Text actually says, you left out a lot of context. I can put this argument into AI and it would give me a different version than you're getting. I always prefer prayerfully study more than anything.I’m not “removing the He who said”—I’m simply letting all of Scripture speak, including the parts that explicitly define the 10 as the Sinai covenant (Deut 4:13) and the parts that explicitly say that covenant is now obsolete and passing away (Heb 8:13), Just because you refuse to acknowledge it doesn't mean man is deciding what is moral. That is the New Testament interpreting the Old.
Quoting or referring to the 10 in the NT doesn’t mean the Sinai covenant still governs Christians. The NT quotes lots of OT laws and moral teachings without putting believers under those covenants. Moral truth continues and covenant structure changes. That is the distinction Hebrews and Paul make repeatedly. No one is “deciding for God” which commands matter. The NT itself says Christians obey Christ, walk by the Spirit, and fulfill the law through love (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14). That's not replacing God’s law, it’s following the administration of the new covenant God Himself established.
As for “debating AI”, I’m just giving you what the text actually says, not what anyone tells me to argue. You and I simply read the covenant passages differently, and that’s fine. You’re welcome to move on, and I’ll leave it here too.
Not "atheistic". Atheism is the rejection of gods, not the supernatural. (It's too bad you aren't arguing with the me from 30 years ago.)Yes this is the atheistic and materialistic view of alternative knowledge.
That isn't what I am saying.Because the only true knowledge is material ie matter, particles, forces and fields. There is nothing else and even the alternative knowledge is the byproduct of the material.
For someone who gets most of their "ideas" from YT videos, you seem rather oblivious to it.What is YT lol.
Putting some "fun math" into the design of an object does not qualify as "transcendent knowledge". It is just math. Could it be a signal that they knew math we didn't know they knew? Absolutely. But that doesn't embue it with magical properties. (I thought "lost knowledge" was the whole theme of your thread.)Yes those specific investigators mainly look at the physical evidence of out of place stuff. But that also includes maths and geometry and other ideas about transcedent beliefs that were associated with some of those practices. You cannot seperate them out as this is part of how they claim to have achieved their knowledge.
For someone not rejecting methodological naturalism, you certainly spend a lot of words rejecting methodological naturalism and confusing science with belief. (If "alternative knowledge" is real, then it will be "knowledge" (just like with medicine). As it stands this "alternative knowledge" you present is nothing but wild-eyed speculation.No I am not rejecting methodological naturalism but its abuse. Its use to snuff out alternative knowledge. Thats when it becomes a belief and not science.
Not thats you belief. Your assumption.
"Simulation theory" is speculative and it is not science, certainly not "solid science."The idea may be spectualtive but the basis is solid science.
Yes, and I think we might be over-complicating things a bit. Should we prefer to be socially unjust? And yet we necessarily live in societies, societies where injustices often occur due to the avarice and general selfishness of man. Social justice concepts at their best strive to identify and rectify those actions and systems that foster inequalities between our fellow man. With the onset of the industrial revolution, for example, labor was often woefully exploited, with low pay, poor and unsafe working conditions, sweatshops, etc. Some churches spoke out in support of unions and the right to strike. Were they being hypocritically judgmental against the poor industrialists? Similiarly the Geneva convention was a matter of setting forth social justice policies as they can be applied to the tragedy of war. Political involvement is sometimes morally demanded.Thi
This is a good point. We are incapable of righteous judgement unless we have been born again and are walking after the spirit.
Perhaps a righteous judgement would have us avoid the popular movements of social Justice in the world today and promote the Justice of God found in the cross alone.
Jesus did not come to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved.