Latest activity

essentialsaltes · Wednesday at 9:46 AM

essentialsaltes said:
Trump White House wants investigation into stopped escalator at UN
Press secretary Karoline Leavitt called for firings if foul play took place.

...But one man’s technical glitch is another man’s conspiracy theory, as Watters showed Tuesday on Fox News’ talk show “The Five.” He asserted that Trump’s troubles were the result of sabotage and that those malfunctions were in fact “an insurrection.”

“What we need to do is either leave the U.N. or we need to bomb it,” Watters joked. Co-hosts Dana Perino and Greg Gutfeld groan-laughed, if there is such a thing.

Watters then said, “[The U.N. headquarters] is in New York, though, right? Could be some fallout there. Maybe gas it?”

“Let’s not do that,” Perino said.

Watters acquiesced, then said, “OK, but we need to destroy it. Maybe can we demolish the building? Have everybody leave and then we’ll demolish the building.”

He continued: “This is absolutely unacceptable, and I hope they get to the bottom of it, and I hope they really injure, emotionally, the people that did it.”

--

As for the teleprompter, the Associated Press reported that the White House was responsible for operating the teleprompter for the president. And a person with knowledge of the situation revealed to the Daily Beast that delegations are allowed to bring their own laptops and teleprompter operators, and the U.N. was not running it for Trump’s speech.

RileyG · Wednesday at 9:46 AM

Hail Mary,
Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
pray for us sinners now,
and at the hour of our death.
Amen

RileyG · Wednesday at 9:46 AM

MarkRohfrietsch said:
Most likely, daily.

That’s my understanding, too.

RileyG · Wednesday at 9:45 AM

Cockapoos

Niels · Wednesday at 9:44 AM

Login to view embedded media

PloverWing · Wednesday at 9:41 AM

Thank you for bringing this up.

My K-12 and undergraduate education was in Evangelical Protestant schools. Thus, my time in grad school was my first time in a setting where my fellow students were from a variety of faith backgrounds (Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, and agnostic, along with a few Christians). At that time, I was still in transition from the evangelism-oriented Baptist tradition of my childhood to my current religious tradition, and the evangelism imperative from my former church was still nagging away at me. Shouldn't I be trying to convert all the people around me? That's what the church says...

I found, though, that this attitude had me thinking about all the people around me as targets to be conquered. For every single person, I'm supposed to evaluate whether they're a Christian (and if they're Christian, are they a nominal Christian or a real Christian, because if they're only "nominal", then they're a target too). Then I look for openings, and steer the conversation, and -- this is CF, most of you have probably been through these evangelism classes.

What I found is that this attitude is incompatible with genuine, respectful friendship. It felt deeply wrong. Looking back on my life, I can identify a handful of times when I think that God gave me a firm nudge, saying "don't go that way; go this way instead", and I think this was one of those times. I set aside the whole evangelism-target thing and went for honest friendships instead. No proselytization, just living side by side in a multi-faith world. There's more integrity down this path.

NxNW · Wednesday at 9:39 AM

National Parks got trashed during the Trump 1 shutdown.

Maria Billingsley · Wednesday at 9:38 AM

ViaCrucis said:
I could have put this in a Christians-only section, but I wanted this open to non-Christians.

Somewhat recently I had an experience at my work; for context I work at a popular retail warehouse store, I don't work for them but I do work in that warehouse, along with vendors of other companies who operate in the same space. A lot of people from different companies all operate within the same space, and naturally we interact with one another on a regular basis. As such I've built up friendly relationships with a lot of people who I interact with regularly.

Over several months I have interacted with a certain individual, it's always casual always friendly, but they work for a different company than I do. However several weeks ago this individual gave me a card, it had a pretty picture of sunflowers on it, and I didn't think much of it, I smiled, thanked them, made a comment about needing more sunshine in my life, that sort of thing. I slipped the card away and didn't really take a look at it until after work. Well, it was a Gospel tract disguised as a card.

Receiving religious material isn't the weirdest thing that's happened to me at my job, but usually it's customers leaving things on a cart, or slipped between food items to be found by a random passerby.

But this particular experience gave me pause and a thought: Has this individual's actions and behavior toward me, their demeaner, their friendliness (etc) been part of an attempt at proselytizing. I mean, I'm a Christian and the card/tract was generically Christian enough that I have no idea what denomination they are part of. I wasn't offended obviously, but it led me to wonder to what degree their interactions with me came from sincere comradery, or whether it is a kind of "missionary" tactic.

I may not have thought this except that, growing up in a particular kind of Christian environment, missionary-friendship and missionary-relationships were considered a valid "tactic" at trying to make converts. So that background does mean that I am aware that this is something that exists. It's not part of my current religious practice, but it was in the background I was raised in.

And I guess here's the point: When I thought about this, I felt a kind of betrayal. As though this person had been insincere in their interactions with me, I felt like a target, or an objective--not a person. And again, I wasn't angry, I wasn't particularly offended, but I felt dehumanized--even if just slightly.

As I was thinking about all of this again this evening, I wanted to open up this topic more broadly. Because I have a feeling many people--especially people outside of my religion--know exactly the feelings I felt, and I thought this could be a good topic of discussion. And ideally, a way for Christians like me to learn more, take feedback, and consider the ethics of religious outreach.

A secondary thought I had in all this: In some ways I feel like I would prefer a total stranger leaving a tract or pamphlet than someone who has been regularly interacting with me. There is a sense in which now I question and doubt the sincerity in friendliness of this person that I didn't before. And that's kind of an awful feeling to have. I'm not angry with them, or offended, but I now doubt their authenticity toward me. And I feel like this experience I had might provide me with a slight amount of insight and empathy with those who experience this more regularly.

-CryptoLutheran

I think I am confused, why did you not think anything of it? Obviously it was a conversation starter and if you had taken the time to look at it you would have realized it was a Christian tract. Now would it not have been nicer to acknowledge a fellow brother in Christ right at that moment rather than feel as you do now? I'm sorry, I really don't understand your reasoning here. I receive tracks, look at them and acknowledge that I am a fellow Christian. How beautiful is that?

Sorry for being so candid.

Blessings

Delvianna · Wednesday at 9:37 AM

This isn't the first time the government shut down because of the failure to agree on a spending bill.

Here's an article that shows it happened 14 other times since 1980 Link

What ends up happening? Nothing.. the US doesn't fall apart, the economy doesn't fail... just nothing gets done. They'll come to an agreement at some point, they always do. Blaming the Democrats or Republicans isn't doing any good, nor is it that simple... you're just continuing the hate train. Please stop.

iluvatar5150 · Wednesday at 9:31 AM

seeking.IAM said:
Constitutions can be amended. I missed the part in the Bible where God said it is our right to have guns. Chapter & verse?

Two Corinthians 14:88

seeking.IAM · Wednesday at 9:28 AM

Hazelelponi said:
Firearms are a constitutional right. You don't get to remove those from people, they are God given and it is to government to protect that right, not to dole it out.

Constitutions can be amended. I missed the part in the Bible where God said it is our right to have guns. Chapter & verse?

Niels · Wednesday at 9:26 AM

Login to view embedded media

rambot · Wednesday at 9:25 AM

Servus said:
Participating in euphemistic "empathy" means cooperating with and supporting certain practices, ideologies, and agendas. Towards whatever group that has managed to get itself onto the list of victims in need of progressive liberal advocacy. Might as well have empathy for the devil who misleads Christians in this manner.

View attachment 370917

What about "weaping with those who weap and mourning with those who mourn"?

An AI generated picture like this is just dumb. That a topic like empathy gets co-opted into an evil shows how scared some people are of the world.

rambot · Wednesday at 9:22 AM

As an outsider...help me understand what kind of power the Dems have in this situation at ALL.

What do "dems and repubs." have to agree on?

GoldenBoy89 · Wednesday at 9:20 AM

I hope they stick to it. Putting the brakes on this out of control government that has been weaponized against the American people who don’t subscribe to the warped MAGA version of reality is the right thing to do.

essentialsaltes · Wednesday at 9:19 AM

essentialsaltes said:
Both the Democratic front-runner, Adelita Grijalva, and her Republican challenger, Daniel Butierez, have publicly expressed their intent to provide the deciding signature on the discharge petition to circumvent Johnson and force a House vote on releasing the Jeffrey Epstein files.

There's been some rumbling about this, but now it appears to be real, albeit temporary (we trust).

House Speaker Johnson delays swearing-in of Arizona Rep. Adelita Grijalva

Newly elected Arizona Rep. Adelita Grijalva's swearing-in is being delayed by House Speaker Mike Johnson, a move Democrats suspect is an effort to block a vote on releasing the Epstein files.
Grijalva would be the 218th and final signature needed on a petition to force the vote, and Democrats are pointing to Johnson's previous actions of quickly swearing in other new members as evidence of a double standard.
The House was scheduled to be in a pro forma session Tuesday, but Johnson canceled it, prompting Democratic Whip Katherine Clark to write a letter questioning the delay.
The next 'real' session is October 7th. Presumably, she will be sworn in then.

rambot · Wednesday at 9:17 AM

BPPLEE said:
You haven't seen the women on Tik Tok and Twitter who are doing just that I take it

I just rolled my eyes at those ladies.

Frankly, ANYONE who trolls people (including the president) gets eye rolls from me.

Belk · Wednesday at 9:15 AM

Vambram said:
Too many times, career bureaucrats don't enact the will of their political bosses.

I'm a "career bureaucrat". How exactly have I failed to enact the will of my political bosses? You are long on accusation and short on evidence.

Maria Billingsley · Wednesday at 9:12 AM

Xeno.of.athens said:
Did God create the Dinosaurs and if he did then why did they go extinct millions of years before human beings came into the world?

Of course He did.
Genesis 1
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

essentialsaltes · Wednesday at 9:11 AM

rjs330 said:
Except PBS and NPR are political.

Not very, according to media bias folks

Ad Fontes Media rates PBS in the Middle category of bias and as Reliable, Analysis/Fact Reportingin terms of reliability.

Reliability: 43.29

Bias: -4.33 (on a scale from -42 to +42)
so it's slightly left of center, but pretty close to 0.

NxNW · Wednesday at 9:10 AM

Even though Trump controls all branches of the government, somehow it's the Dems' fault!

What to know about the government shutdown:

The federal government began to shut down overnight after Democrats and Republicans failed to come to an agreement to extend government funding ahead of the Oct. 1, 2025, deadline.
As many as 750,000 government workers could be furloughed, according to the Congressional Budget Office, and they will not be paid until Congress appropriates funding and the shutdown ends. Workers deemed to be essential will stay on the job, although they, too, will not be paid until Congress reaches a funding deal.

Monthly jobs numbers will not be released during shutdown

According to the Labor Department's contingency plan, the September jobs numbers will not be released Friday, as scheduled.
"Economic data that are scheduled to be released during the lapse will not be released," the plan says, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics will suspend its operations during the shutdown. It will also not be conducting surveys for next month's report.

The jobs report is closely watched by investors and by the interest rate-setting Federal Reserve, which last month signaled it was monitoring the labor market for signs of weakness as hiring slowed in the last two months. In August, employers added 22,000 jobs, well short of the 80,000 jobs economists had expected.

So the economy is worsening under Trump (as usual), but at least we don't know exactly how much.

BCP1928 · Wednesday at 9:10 AM

Oompa Loompa said:
She said, "I am here to protect the interests of Somalia from inside the U.S. system." What on earth do you think she meant by "Somalia?"

A clear reference to the people of Somalia who are the subject of her and her constituents' concerns. She wants to protect the interests of Somalia, not the Somali government--unless they are the same, of course. Why is that a problem for you? Members of Congress have often taken a position on foreign policy based on the ethnicity of their constituents. Is a Congressman who supports Israel because of his and/or his constituents' faith declaring his loyalty to the Israeli government?

rambot · Wednesday at 9:07 AM

Servus said:
I'm spelling out that "empathy" and "radical empathy" as it's being used by the left is really a euphemism for cooperation and support.

That doesn't preclude you from participating in empathy

Clare73 · Wednesday at 9:06 AM

tdidymas said:
This question is only for those holding to Reformed Theology. In the Westminster Confession (or London Baptist 1689) it mentions that infants who die are "regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit." But in my mind this is vague and possibly conflicts with scripture in implications; but sounds more like speculation to work around the "Original Sin" issue that even infants are guilty due to Adam's sin being imputed to them. I question this doctrine with a series of questions below.
I was prompted to this question by R.C. Sproul's survey results on the question "Are we born innocent" wherein 64% of evangelicals agreed. I was not appalled at that result (as Ligonier was), because I question the doctrine of imputed sin to people who have not sinned (infants). Essentially, I question the idea that Adam's sin is imputed to mankind, as distinct from Adam's sin nature is inherited by mankind.
These questions are all related, so there may appear some redundancy. I'm trying to get a handle on what the scripture actually states about the issue.

1. I don't see the scripture teaching the imputation of Adam's sin, but I do see it teaching the inheritance of the sinful nature (traducianism). If Augustine (and the confessions) mean these issues to be the same thing, then I think it imposes some confusion about the spiritual state of infants. Are these issues the same, or not?
2. If infants are guilty by imputation, then how do you interpret Rom. 7:9 and Rom. 4:15? It looks like these verses imply the innocence of infants (people who have not yet learned right and wrong). Exegesis would be helpful, or a link to interpretive commentaries.

Ro 4:15 - if infants are innocent, why do they die? Death is the result of sin (Ro 6:23); i.e., their imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 18-19).

Ro 7:9 - Paul is speaking of his own experience from the vantage point of his present understanding.
Before he realized that the law condemned him to death, he was alive.
"When the commandment came;" i.e., when Paul came to the realization that he stood guilty before the law and was condemned to death.

tdidymas said:
Ro 4:15
Rom. 7:9 -
3. It appears to me that innocence does not mean "basically good" or "not having a sin nature." In the teachings I have read on the subject, there appears to me some confusion, that teachers seem to make no distinction. So then, "having a sinful nature" does not necessarily mean a person is guilty, because "through the law comes the knowledge of sin." It seems to me that a person must know moral law, that is, know right from wrong, in order to be guilty of wrongs committed (per Rom. 4:15 and 7:9). If this is the case, then children too young to know right from wrong really are innocent. What do you think of this?
4. Do the confessions that say infants are regenerated, do they mean all infants, or does it mean only those who die? If it means only those who die, or even limited to only those elected to salvation, then when does the regeneration happen - before or after they die?

There is an implication here. If they're saying that all infants are regenerated, then how can a regenerated person become spiritually dead after sinning? This is inconsistent with the idea that regenerated people are saved and can't lose their salvation. And if not all infants who die are regenerated, then how can God send them to hell when they have not sinned?
a. If infants are regenerated, then which ones are, and when does it happen?

That is a question not answered in Scripture.
According to the principles revealed in Scripture, the elect are regenerated before their physical death.

tdidymas said:
b. If some infants who die are not regenerated, where do they end up and why?

All mankind is born condemned already (Jn 3:18) by the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17)--which is the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputed righteousness of Christ--and by nature objects of God's wrath (Eph 2:3).
Their only salvation from that condemnation is through faith in the blood of Jesus Christ (his atoning work, Ro 3:25).

Latest activity

Latest activity

Trump White House wants investigation into stopped escalator at UN​

House Speaker Johnson delays swearing-in of Arizona Rep. Adelita Grijalva​

What to know about the government shutdown:​

Monthly jobs numbers will not be released during shutdown​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Trump White House wants investigation into stopped escalator at UN

House Speaker Johnson delays swearing-in of Arizona Rep. Adelita Grijalva

What to know about the government shutdown:

Monthly jobs numbers will not be released during shutdown