lismore said:

IMHO the question should be asked that when there are legal means of entering a country, what sort of person enters illegally?

Click to expand...

That might depend on the person's circumstances, how long it takes to go through the legal process, and how likely one is to be approved through the legal process (which may be subject to quotas or require documentation that a person may be unable to provide, through no fault of their own).

A person in desperate straits - whether due to finances, violence, or other causes - is unlikely to be willing (or possibly even able) to wait years for their application to wind its way through the immigration process.

Apple Sky said:

Well it worked for the Antarctic treaty.

Click to expand...

Obviously you have no clue what the Antarctic treaty is. But that is off topic for this discussion.

essentialsaltes said:

Not the oldest person of each gender, but the most recent common ancestor of everyone alive today.

Click to expand...

Most recent common ancestor of everyone alive today by strictly maternal descent (for mtEVe) or by strictly paternal descent (for Y-Adam).

JosephZ said:

That poll is included in the RCP polling average and it shows that 50% approve of Trump on Immigration.

Click to expand...

The margin of error for the total
sample is +/- 2.2 pts on a 95% confidence level.


That looks fairly scientific.

Platte said:

The whole world doesn't flood - only the land floods.

Click to expand...

Actually, it would. You're struggling to find an excuse to explain why you believe in a world-wide flood when God didn't say so. Reflect again on the description of the sky in the flood story, and why it's described as solid with windows in it.

When you figure out that, you'll be troubled no longer by the words God used for the flood.

Aseyesee said:

"In and of themselves" ... the kingdom though (according to Jesus) doesn't come with observation ...

Click to expand...

Apples and oranges. One is a trait of an intellectual, the other is a sign of faith.

God gave me prophetic dreams and visions. The Holy Spirits reacts to everything evil, even when people conceal it. I always know, even without thinking, or observing. But the two are required me in my earthly life, for myself.

JohnB445 said:

Login to view embedded media
I found it for free, going to give it a watch, what should I know? Do you recommend this movie?

Click to expand...

God uses everything related to the Bible, or that is intended to bring honor to His Son. But I wouldn't let it replace any real Bible reading in total. Not that I think you intend such, but just to cover that base while responding.

Regarding good starts, just to assume all meanings since I'm uncertain what kind of "start" is being referred to...

In my personal opinion, I think the book of 1 John is one of the most powerful places to spend reading, followed by the book of Romans (Romans is acclaimed by scholars to be the most profound in their own opinions by a large percentage).

These two books are very simple and powerful and to finish off, anything in the four Gospels is eye opening - and Proverbs is great if you don't have a large attention span or much time in that you can read until a verse strikes your soul or resonates with you, and hold on to that one verse (or two or more) the rest of the day and gain spiritual food with very little time or investment. A single verse from Proverbs can change the direction of one's life in many ways.

Back to the op though...

As far as Biblical media, videos, music, podcasts, etc... If you focus on Christ while consuming such material I absolutely (from my heavy experience in doing just this) know Him to personally speak to me about it and teach me using it, even if something is in error in the content. Typically, once the multimedia I'm consuming creates a curiosity about a particular subject, I'm off to study and on to commentaries and prayer about finding the answer concerning the event or depiction in question and find myself in His Word learning something I would not have otherwise known.

If you find it interesting, and it is generally Biblical, surely God will use it to bring enlightenment to you (Romans 8:28).

1 John 2:27

essentialsaltes said:

Blockading food and aid is not directed at Hamas.

Click to expand...

The zeal with which Hamas leads its own civilian population to the slaughter is so bizarre that it causes intellectual short-circuits in people around the world. Hamas has massive stockpiles of food. They can choose to feed the hostages if they want to. They were also clearly already starving them.

Under normal circumstances, that is, when one side is not deliberately seeking to sacrifice its own civilian population, the parties to a conflict are obliged to allow humanitarian aid to be provided. However, the relevant passage of the Geneva Convention, which recognizes the need to prevent cynical actors such as Hamas from abusing international law, allows for the withholding of aid supplies if there is a credible risk of diversion and legitimate concerns that the enemy party could derive an obvious military or economic advantage from such deliveries.

There is no shortage of evidence of Hamas looting aid supplies.

essentialsaltes said:

You have declared the people of Gaza guilty of 'what they've sowed' and you see their collective misery as just punishment.

Click to expand...

This (my statement, not your interpretation) means that human actions have corresponding consequences. Those who sow evil will experience negative consequences, not as punishment but as deed-consequence-nexus (a principle that acts like a law of nature).

We ought to remember that the Arabs themselves overwhelmingly voted the perpetrators of destruction into power.

In 2006, Hamas won the "Palestinian" parliamentary elections by an overwhelming majority, securing 56 percent of the seats in parliament. The ruling party in the "Palestinian" parliament waged a bitter struggle against Fatah, the (seemingly) less ruthless cartel once led by Yasser Arafat. Hamas fighters stormed hospitals, shot doctors, threw Fatah men off rooftops, and executed them in front of their wives and children.

If any lesson can be learned about the Arabs, it’s that the terrorists are just as happy to kill their fellow Arabs as they are those Jews.

I disagreed with him on many things, but he tried to serve Jesus to the best of his understanding. May he rest in peace in the loving arms of God.

essentialsaltes said:

Dude, the voters will get a chance to consent to this plan in November.

Click to expand...

...and Texas voters? Oh that's right. Texas legislators take their orders from Washington.

JosephZ said:

I don't know why RCP excluded the WSJ poll, but even if the WSJ poll were included, the RCP polling average would still show that most Americans disapprove of Trump's immigration policies.

Click to expand...

That depends on which polls they selectively chose to include in their average.

That doesn't sound very scientific.

BCP1928 said:

I think that's exactly what is wanted. Trump is putting on a show--Law Enfocement Theater. If he was serious about crime there would be federal officers and troops in SE.

Click to expand...

“I’m going to be going out tonight with the police and with the military, of course,” Trump said in an interview with talk show host Todd Starnes.


[he better wear a bread proof vest]

prudent_commenter said:

Without observation, you'll only see half of something. .

Click to expand...

"In and of themselves" ... the kingdom though (according to Jesus) doesn't come with observation ...

The Barbarian said:

So you think God used a word that can mean "local area" instead of the word for the whole world, because He wanted us to meant "the whole world?"

I think we've located your difficulty. So you think that, in the same book, He used words that could be used to describe the sky as a solid dome with windows in it for rain to fall through, that means "open space, not a solid dome?" Or was He using figure of speech like "raining cats and dogs?"

Are you starting to realize what your difficulty is? In what "context" is the sky a solid dome with windows in it? When you figure that out, you'll know.

Click to expand...

The whole world doesn't flood - only the land floods. God was quite clear with his Flood description....but its not meant for everyone to understand it.

public hermit said:

Just a question; I'm curious. Isn't it perfectly acceptable in the RCC to be gay and a priest so long as one is celibate? I take it the scandal is that some are not being celibate. But if homosexuality were prevalent among priests (and more so the higher one goes in the hierarchy), and they were all legitimately celibate, it would not be an issue, right? Or, would it still be an issue?

Click to expand...

Yes. Henri nouwen is one example.

Dale said:

You say that the Marriage Feast of the Lamb is what matters. It seems to me that the Marriage Feast is only one of several ways that we are told of the saved entering Paradise, but we’ll take a look at it. Consider this passage.


Mt. 22:1Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying:
Mt. 22:2“The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a
wedding banquet for his son.
Mt. 22:3He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the
banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come.
Mt. 22:4“Then he sent some more servants and said, `Tell those who
have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen
and fattened cattle have been slaughtered, and everything is
ready. Come to the wedding banquet.’
Mt. 22:5“But they paid no attention and went off — one to his field,
another to his business.
Mt. 22:6The rest seized his servants, ill-treated them and killed them.
Mt. 22:7The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those
murderers and burned their city.
Mt. 22:8“Then he said to his servants, `The wedding banquet is ready,
but those I invited did not deserve to come.
Mt. 22:9Go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you
find.’
Mt. 22:10So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the
people they could find, both good and bad, and the wedding
hall was filled with guests.
Mt. 22:11“But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a
man there who was not wearing wedding clothes.
Mt. 22:12`Friend,’ he asked, `how did you get in here without wedding
clothes?’ The man was speechless.
Mt. 22:13“Then the king told the attendants, `Tie him hand and foot,
and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be
weeping and gnashing of teeth.’
Mt. 22:14“For many are invited, but few are chosen.”
Matthew 22:1-14 NIV

The King represents God the Father, and the Prince, His son, can only be Jesus Christ. The servants of the King are the Apostles, Disciples and later evangelists who bring God’s word to the world. The slaugtering of the oxen and cattle in verse 22:4 are are slightly veiled reference to the Crucifixion of Christ. The Crucifixion has already happened when the Apostles are sent out with God’s word. Verses 6 and 7 tell of God’s messengers being rejected, persecuted, and even killed. God will bring destruction on those who persecute His messengers. In verses 10-12, we are told of the man who is improperly dressed and is thrown “into the darkness.” Here Jesus warns us about hypocrisy. Those who join God’s Kingdom must do so whole-heartedly.

This parable tells us that some who are brought into the King’s great banquet were not thought to be good people before they listen to God’s servants.

There is no promise here that those who respond to God’s invitation will be free from persecution before they get to the wedding banquet. There is the promise of heaven in this passage but there is no promise that God will snatch Christians off the earth before the Second Coming.

Click to expand...

Not to argue with you, but I'd like to offer an alternative interpretation. Nevertheless, I agree that the import of the parable was given to Jesus' Disciples to warn them of a dire need to be ready in a time when they may be distracted, or even coerced away from their mission by persecution.

And I certainly agree that there is no "Rapture"/Snatch of the Church prior to persecution, including persecution by the last Antichrist. There is the idea that Christians will be able to escape the "Wrath of God." But what does that mean? Does it mean that all Christians will be able to avoid persecution if they lead obedient lives? Obviously not!

Does it mean that Christians, in accepting Christ, will be able to avoid Eternal Punishment? Of course! That is the obvious meaning of Jesus' words, since elsewhere he indicated that all those who take up his Cross, ie his followers, will like him be persecuted. They will have to bear their own crosses, so to speak. They will have to endure some form of opposition, since in taking up Christ's mission they also take up the one thing Satan and his followers oppose.

So, I suggest the Marriage Feast is being given in OT terminology, even though it will be fulfilled in the NT era. It is being given in OT terminology because at the time Jesus gave this parable it was still the OT era! The Law was still in effect. Israel was the sole nation being in covenant with God at that time.

So the language is speaking primarily of Israel, many of whom were unworthy in that time but still capable of being changed by Christ's Gospel. The "Virgins" are brides maids, and not actually the Wife of the Groom. Under the Law, Israel was a Servant under a covenant that did not yet allow them to be eternally yoked to God in marriage. They were, in fact, "married" to God under a temporary contract.

So, these 10 brides maids represented followers of Christ under the Law, 5 of whom were choosing to be loyal to the end, and 5 who were being compromised in their commitment. All had "oil," meaning that under the Law they had a valid agreement, with the accompanying anointing for service. They had a measure of faith, and they knew God. But their "faith" would not result in a future Christian Salvation.

But those who did not bring enough supply were compromised and more concerned with their own interests than with this Marriage to God. They would run out of oil, and lose their place in covenant relationship with God.

The 5 faithful brides maids would prove not only that their covenant relationship was good, but that it would transcend the failure of the Law and consummate in an eternal Marriage Covenant with God. Their oil would never run out. Their commitment would never end. And the things of the world would pale in comparison with the joy of knowing and serving their Heavenly Master.

Just a thought. But the idea that one should ignore the full meaning and only hope for the Marriage Supper is unhelpful. It makes it a virtue to cut to the chase, ignoring important biblical details that can help and save us. Nevertheless, this parable of the 10 Virgins has a complete message, and saying that choosing Heavenly Marriage as a primary interest is probably a good thing.

Yarddog said:

The context of what he said doesn't say this. He made a very well informed ruling.

Click to expand...

Ok

Yarddog said:

There should be

Good thing God doesn't follow your values.

Click to expand...

Actually, with God social justice, economic justice, personal justice, public justice, criminal justice, etc., etc., etc. are all the same thing--giving one his due, what he has earned; i.e., the justice God practices.
There are no carve outs for social, economic, personal, criminal etc., all categories of the same thing--giving one his due, what he has earned.

ozso said:

What about calling Holy Communion wine?

Click to expand...

What about it? It’s called the Blood of Christ, or for those who don’t accept the real presence, communion wine.

HARK! said:

I like this Harvard study. I wonder if they took a scientific approach.

A majority of voters gave President Trump’s immigration policies high marks, according to a Harvard CAPS/Harris poll released Monday.

Click to expand...

That poll is included in the RCP polling average and it shows that 50% approve of Trump on Immigration.

Always in His Presence said:

Sure - and here is the answer in their own words:

Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) -

Working towards a better future for all.

www.dsausa.org

Don't forget - I 100% support her running. Alexandria would be the biggest gift the whomever her opponent is that the Republicans could ever hope for. She is good for the Republican Party I support and endorse her campaign running.

Click to expand...

OK those are the DSA policies. How do they compare with the policies the Berniecrats are pushing on the road? Which ones are out of touch with their base?

Vambram said:

Trump did not committ fraud. The banks were happy with the total repayment of the loans. Hopefully, the next level of appeals will completely reverse the lower court ruling of fraud.

Click to expand...

It's not fraud if you get away with it. OK.

Benaiah468 said:

The term collective punishment is a legal term that refers to punishing someone or a group of people for the acts of someone else. It requires an intent to inflict collective suffering on the population because of something that happened to your forces.

That is not the situation in Gaza, where Israel has made clear that its military activity is directed against Hamas with the aim of neutralizing the threat posed by Hamas.

Click to expand...

Blockading food and aid is not directed at Hamas.

As you said yourself:

Benaiah468 said:

The Arabs are now reaping the misery of what they've sowed. Someone should tell that to them.

Click to expand...

You have declared the people of Gaza guilty of 'what they've sowed' and you see their collective misery as just punishment.

Vambram said:

Trump did not committ fraud. The banks were happy with the total repayment of the loans. Hopefully, the next level of appeals will completely reverse the lower court ruling of fraud.

NY appeals court throws out $500M penalty against Trump in Letitia James civil case

An appellate court has thrown out the nearly $500 million civil fraud penalty against former President Donald Trump in the high-profile case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

www.foxnews.com

Click to expand...

The law found he committed fraud.

Of course observers can hold to whatever opinion they prefer.