FreeinChrist said:

Not all officers carried guns. Security officers who manned screening checkpoints do not carry guns. The mob outnumbered the police and security staff. I am still surprised that the officers did not shoot more.

Click to expand...

The tactical team that was there were all armed

DaisyDay said:

What's with the pink splotches?

Click to expand...

I like pink . Good nite

PloverWing said:

Not at all. I thought @Xeno.of.athens had been condemning the Orthodox already, along with Protestants, for the entire 16 screenfuls of this thread. I now believe I may have misunderstood what he was trying to say. See my post immediately above (#307).

Click to expand...

Thank you for clarifying that. I was really perplexed by your apparent hostility towards a fellow liturgical Christian, given your historic friendliness towards all of us, but it is now evident that this was all a great miscommunication.

rjs330 said:

And yet with all thise gun laws people are still dying from them.

Click to expand...

California has the same problem as places like Chicago and Washington, DC. The guns are coming from outside their borders. Most guns used by criminals in California are coming from states with weaker gun laws. California shares a border with Arizona, which has some of the weakest gun laws in the country. This again is another example of why stronger gun laws at the federal level are needed. If every state was required by law to have the same gun laws California has, the number of gun deaths and incidents of gun violence nationwide would fall significantly.

rjs330 said:

Whats rhe acceptable rate of death from guns? Is it California's rate? What's the unacceptable rate? Is it the national.average?

Click to expand...

There is no acceptible rate, but it's unrealistic to expect stronger gun laws to be a cure for all gun violence.

rjs330 said:

Are we talking strictly gun deaths or are we talking gun homicides?

Click to expand...

Both.

rjs330 said:

If you are serious about ending this then Californias actions are not good enough. You have to ban guns. Thats the only way. Otherwise you have to accept that the killing will go on and rhat you have an acceptable rate in order to hold onto the right to keep and bear arms.

Click to expand...

Gun reform is not an all-or-nothing proposal. Cutting the number of firearm deaths by 10%, 25%, or 50% by imposing stronger gun control measures is better than not taking any action and allowing things to continue on as they are.

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

Appeals. Trump already won in the court of public opinion! He won the election IN SPITE of the witch trial lol

Click to expand...

That's only because the court of public opinion doesn't require evidence before returning a verdict.

-- A2SG, though, it should be noted, no appeals court has overturned any of Trump's many fraud convictions....

essentialsaltes said:

My assumption is that they would have been torn to pieces by the mob (minus 7 or 8 dead ones) since they were on the wrong side of that door to be safe.

Click to expand...

There was a tactical team coming up with the crowd. They weren't alone

Oompa Loompa said:

Do you know who the President of the United States is? Do have you heard about how he has deported MS-13 gang members to El Salvador?

Click to expand...

Is that what this is about?

Since when does decrying the lack of due process guaranteed in our Constitution equate to defending criminals? That's what I've heard, I've yet to hear any Democrats defending any proven criminal acts. Are you under the impression that Democrats are somehow defending convicted felons by expecting the right to due process be respected?

-- A2SG, not like they're electing them to national office or anything....

Oompa Loompa said:

Do you know who the President of the United States is? Do have you heard about how he has deported MS-13 gang members to El Salvador?

Click to expand...

Last I heard, they deported the wrong guy, said he couldn't come back, and then brought him back. Seems like incompetence to me.

ozso said:

It's not an illusion because it's actually been taking place. He's given them results they wanted. And at warp speed as well.

Click to expand...

Higher prices, continuing wars, civil unrest?

ozso said:

In a roundabout way that still sounds like the RCC teaches only members of the RCC recive salvation. Because without partaking the sacraments one is not in a state of grace. And and the only valid sacraments are through the RCC. And only Roman Catholics can partake in those sacraments.

Click to expand...

The Church teaches:

The first Sacrament, Baptism, is found outside the Catholic Church. This is the first Sacrament and is necessary for salvation.

The Sacrament of The Eucharist is also found outside the Catholic Church, but not in the protestant communities.

The Sacrament of Marriage is also found outside the Catholic Church.

In the end of the day, I guess one can interpret that you needed to be Part of His Body "The Church" in order to be saved.

Further, he is not eligible for parole, so his testimony grants him no "legal" advantage.
If he continues in his faith, it is the real deal.

BPPLEE said:

Then why didn't those officers guarding the doors open fire? Why did they move out of the way?

Click to expand...

Not all officers carried guns. Security officers who manned screening checkpoints do not carry guns. The mob outnumbered the police and security staff. I am still surprised that the officers did not shoot more.

Always in His Presence said:

Trying to understand how that relates to my question

Click to expand...

If your opponent is making a mistake, like Trump is, you let him.

Always in His Presence said:

• If the President uses a spray tan

Click to expand...

What do you mean "if" ?


Login to view embedded media

ozso said:

It's actually a very real official medical report:

Memorandum from the White House Physician

www.whitehouse.gov

And it shows that Trump is indeed in excellent physical condition.

Click to expand...

They would not hesitate to lie if they thought it would help them.

Vambram said:

She is not and she was not a criminal.

Click to expand...

Yeah, she was. She was defying the Capitol police and part of a mob attacking and breaking into the Capitol for the purpose of stopping the certification of the election.

The unsupported statements that you make come off as as "nuh-uh".

This is speciation that scientists have directly observed, genetically confirmed, and can still see in nature today.

o_mlly said:

The claim begs for a precise definition of "species".

Click to expand...

That's one of the many huge problems for creationism. If creationism were true, there would be nice definable separations between species. But instead, as Darwin predicted, we see all sorts of intermediate cases. Reproductive isolation defines species. But even that isn't perfect. In the case of clines or ring species, the extinction of a part of the population could retroactively make microevolution into macroevolution. Would you like to learn how?

o_mlly said:

Hybrids are microevolution events.

Click to expand...

Usually. But sometimes, it results in a reproductively-isolated species. Would you like to learn about how that works?

Scientists have directly observed macroevolution. Even many YE creationists admit the evolution of new species, genera, and sometimes families. They just moved the goal posts farther out to change the definition of macroevolution.

o_mlly said:

So you have not observed a speciation event but now claim others have.

Click to expand...

I haven't observed a volcanic eruption either. But I'm pretty sure they are a fact. Just like macroevolution.

Words mean things. If you don't use them as others do, you're never going to communicate effectively.
BTW, all definitions are tautologies, a phrase or expression in which the same thing is said twice in different words.

And of course, it's instructive. I just showed you what the word means.

o_mlly said:

But words that tell us nothing new are meaningless tautologies.

Click to expand...

In this case, "macroevolution" is defined as speciation. So, it points out that evolution not resulting in reproductive isolation is not macroevolution. Which seems like an important concept to me. But then, I've spent a lifetime studying biology. So your take might be different.

o_mlly said:

For example, "All triangles have three sides."

Click to expand...

Kinda like "all macroevolutionary events involve speciation." Your example strikes me as informative. Math teachers would think so. But then, they've spent years studying math.

o_mlly said:

Contrast it with the statement, "No triangle has any diagonals," which not a tautology.

Click to expand...

Contrast it with the statement "No macroevolutionary event happen without speciation." Which is not a tautology.

I don't think you've given this matter enough thought.

Vambram said:

She is not and she was not a criminal.

Click to expand...

She was trying to assassinate elected officials. We know because they said so.

peaceful-forest said:

I know this will sound bad, but I haven't gone to church in 6 years. After I had left the Southern Baptist church I had been a member of for years, I did try a church that was the Evangelical Free Church of American denomination, and I liked it, until they had a sermon about baptism that left me confused.

I've heard from others to try other denominations, but I do not feel right about going to churches that affirm homosexuality.

During my physical church absence, I've been listening to Charles Stanley. I used to read study guides from David Jeremiah. And now I've been reading from various authors to grow my faith, like Philip B. Payne, Beth Allison Barr, Sheila Wray Gregoire, etc.

I don't know if I'll ever go back to church.

Click to expand...

This is why it is important for a Christian to study scripture to know the truth. I think you did the right thing. I wouldn't have stayed in a church that goes against what the Bible says, whether it be on baptism, affirming homosexuality, or some other point of doctrine.

One litmus test for churches is to go to their website and test their stated beliefs with scripture. It won't cover every doctrine they believe, but it'll go a long way toward understanding what the church believes at its core, so you can make an informed decision whether or not to attend.

I recommend YouTube for a broad spectrum of Christian content. So many churches stream their services live, and post regularly. You can see what the various denominations and individual churches are like. I watch sermons and seminars and use my computer to take notes while following along in the Bible. It has helped me to learn and grow, and I have a collection of notes. (I also keep my scriptural forum posts as notes.)

Speaking of reading... My denomination has hundreds of books and periodicals written by our church pioneers (and a long history of study guides) going back to the 1800's. I grew up reading some of them, but I didn't have a real appreciation until I revisited them in adulthood. This led me to want to put together a Christian library with references, commentaries and what not.

I started to visit my local used book stores, looking for books to add to my library. I didn't limit myself, I picked up books from various sources, not just my own denomination. In my search, I found that books from that era (the 1800's and early 1900's) are some of the best Christian books ever written. The authors knew their subject, and they were meticulous. Such joys to read. There is a wealth of knowledge in those vintage books.

I understand the need to be in a place where you share beliefs with others. There are people out there who share your beliefs, and there is a church out there for you. I have no doubt that the Holy Spirit will lead you where you need to go.

In the meantime, I have no idea whether or not we share the same beliefs, but I do know we are of one body. You are not alone.

God bless!

essentialsaltes said:

My assumption is that they would have been torn to pieces by the mob (minus 7 or 8 dead ones) since they were on the wrong side of that door to be safe.

Click to expand...

Either that, or they were in on it.

Ophiolite said:

No. Read my lips. The scientific method has an outstanding record of success. The "alternative" approach does not. It is, unfortunately real, but has a woeful record of success and practitioners who are wholly unable to critique their own position. As evidence for the latter I submit your numerous posts in this thread.

Click to expand...

I think this is creating an either and or ie science is outstanding and any alternative is woeful. Whereas I think its not so black and white. For example science cannot tell us about conscious experiences. Sometimes a conscious belief that persists even despite the empiricle evidence is real.

It may be empiricle science is describing some superficial dimension of something deeper. For example science cannot explain belief or conscious experience. Science can be used to completely refute God and belief as unreal and a by product of the naturalistic processes.

Science can tell us all the data of what happens during conscious experiences such as brain activity and claim consciousness is just a byproduct of the physical brain, an epiphenomena. .

Yet it could well be that there is a God reality and consciousness goes beyond the brain yielding some deeper knowledge of reality that science cannot measure.

Its the use of science to extinguish these other possible ways of knowing reality that is the issue ie there is no God or consciousness beyond brain that yeilds deeper knowledge and only the empiricle evidence can determine the truth or reality.

Not that science is not good at accounting for the limited aspect of reality which are within the empiricle naturalistic realm. But that its applied dogmatically to everything over other ways of knowing reality. Thus deminishing or denying them altogether.

Larniavc said:

In the UK it is very rare that you go to a university anywhere near where you live. For example I grew up near Oxford but went to University and London, Plymouth and Liverpool.

Do Americans really stay in the same state when they go to uni? If that is the case it might explain a lot.

Click to expand...

Iluvatar's given a great answer. Some of it may also be a matter of scale (depending on the state). My move from Orange County California to UCLA is almost the same as the distance from London to Oxford.

If I had gone to UC Berkeley instead, that would be like the distance from London to the Shetlands.

BPPLEE said:

Then why didn't those officers guarding the doors open fire? Why did they move out of the way?

Click to expand...

My assumption is that they would have been torn to pieces by the mob (minus 7 or 8 dead ones) since they were on the wrong side of that door to be safe.

Kathleen30 said:

.

Click to expand...

What's with the pink splotches?