Servus said:

It's noticeable that media outlets such as MSNBC and CNN have remained silent about this so far. And it's not hard to figure out why.

Click to expand...

Apparently in "The People's Republic of Trump" the sexual orientation of Robinson's partner is front page news - Trump and his supporters, in their infinite wisdom, have managed to turn Kirk's death into a "3 Ring Circus" while elevating him to "SAINTHOOD" status!

Meanwhile its left to the Governor of Utah to act "presidential" - while the President in the White House is fanning the flames of an already incendiary situation, blaming all the nation's problems on "LEFTIST EXTREMISTS" because "RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS" are only interested in enforcing existing laws!

"Trumpworld" is oblivious to the fact that 3 months earlier, on June 14th 2025, a 57 year old Lance Boelter, an Evangelical Christian and Trump supporter impersonated a police office to gain access to the home l of a Democratic Minnesota State Senator - shooting him 9x and his wife 8X as they used their bodies as shields to protect their daughter!

He then proceeded to the residence of a Minnesota State Representative and Head of the Democratic House Caucus where he assassinated both her and her husband!

Boelter then went to a 3rd home, that of another Democratic Minnesota State Senator - fortunately the family was away on vacation!

Undeterred, this assassin went to a 4th resident, the home of another Democratic Minnesota State Senator, but by that time the police had been alerted - they arrived just in time to deter Boelter from continuing with his rampage!

When finally apprehended, police found in his vehicle a list of approximately 70 names, that Boelter had created, of prominent Democrats and Pro-choice supporters that given the chance, he was prepared to eliminate!

While living in Sheboygan Wisconsin, for several years, Vance Boelter and his wife founded an evangelical nonprofit, "Revoformation Ministries!"
They claimed to have "sought out militant Islamists" in the West Bank and Gaza during the Second Intifada "to share the gospel and tell them that violence wasn't the answer".

Right-wing misinformation​

1) many prominent right-wing and far-right figures falsely claimed that the suspect, Vance Boelter, was left-wing, a Democrat, and an ally of the Democratic Minnesota Governor

2) Elon Musk shared tweets saying that "the left" had killed the Minnesota State Representative and Head of the Democratic House Caucus and tweeted, "The far left is murderously violent."

3) U.S. senator Mike Lee tweeted multiple times that the suspect was a "Marxist" and blamed the assassination on the Democratic Minnesota Governor

4) Donald Trump Jr.claimed the suspect "seems to be a leftist" and "was a Democrat".

5) U.S. Senator Bernie Moreno and U.S. representative Derrick Van Orden both suggested that the shooter was a far-left extremist.

6) large right-wing social media accounts began spreading similar misinformation.
-
7) right-wing commentator Mike Cemovich suggested that Minnesota Governor had ordered the assassinations

8) Laura Loomer called Boelter one of "the Minnesota Governor's goons" and called for the Governor to be "detained" and "interrogated" by the FBI.[

9) YouTuber Benny Johnson claimed the suspect was an associate of the Minnesota Governor

10) other posts falsely claimed that a photo of a man at a "No Kings Protest" in Texas was that of the suspect.

11) The Guardian called this "the latest example of a right-wing media ecosystem that swiftly spins up narratives that serve their political agendas after tragic events, regardless of accuracy, and does not correct them after further information shows them to be untrue or incomplete".

12) after it became known that the suspect was a Trump voter, unsubstantiated claims that the killings were a "false flag" by the "DEEP STATE" and a "psyop" spread on social media.
.
13) Alex Jones claimed Boelter was a "patsy" who was "being framed"

14) Laura Loomer suggested that Boelter was not the actual perpetrator.

YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP

FreeinChrist said:

I watched a video the other day where farmer after farmer talked about how Trump has closed markets, and that their farms are going belly up, even though the crop is good. My husband trades on the stock market and thinks, along with his paid advice, that we are already in a recession and that we have stagflation. It will get worse.

Click to expand...

A lot of those now defunct US Aid programs were as much for the benefit of farmers as for the hungry.

Maybe all those containers of open pollinated seeds preppers bought will come in handy if they don't expire.

Bradskii said:

Yeah. Like them.

Pocket Knife Rules & Laws by State

Knowing pocket knife rules and laws specific to each U.S. state is crucial. This knowledge empowers you to responsibly and legally carry your pocket knives in compliance with local regulations. By understanding the nuances and differences in pocket knife laws across states, you can avoid...

www.carved.com

I'm not sure if there's specific laws on buying bombs. Do you know anywhere that sells them? I can then check.

Click to expand...

There are restrictions on who can buy dynamite and other explosives. They also track who buys large quantities of bomb-making supplies such as nitrogen - not necessarily prohibited, but definitely tracked. Don't make the farmers irate!

Servus said:

What does that have to do with debating? Or did you just take what I said and go off on a tangent with it?

Click to expand...

What I meant was that Trump is very effective at convincing his audience and yet lies all the time. Even for a politician, his disregard for the truth is, and has always been, stunning. If he had stuck to portraying the truth, he never would have starred in the Apprentice, he would have been unsuccessful in his presidential bids, he wouldn’t have any criminal convictions, and Ashli Babbitt would still be alive.

But even aside from Trump, the notion that truth is better at persuading people is preposterous. “ A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes”, etc

lifepsyop said:

Leftists show their true colors after Charlie Kirk is shot — and it's absolutely sickening | Blaze Media

When someone shows you who are they are, believe them.

www.theblaze.com

This article doesn't even describe the worst of it.

There are countless social media messages and videos of people laughing, cheering, dancing that Charlie Kirk was assassinated.

This isn't some fringe group hiding in a dark hole in the corner of the internet.

They are school teachers, academics, healthcare workers, government workers, city officials, administrators, members of military, etc.

Hundreds of them, at least, on record proudly expressing their joy over this murder. If you have X you can go watch them now.


The more "moderate" leftists / liberals are running cover for this ghastly reality, as the media desperately tries to churn out reports of "conservatives politicizing the event" "Right-wingers are just as bad!!!"

But we can see the truth.

This is who the Left is - not their fringe but their core. They celebrate violence and death against their political enemies - especially someone like Charlie Kirk, who was just a mainstream moderate conservative guy whose only crime was openly challenging Leftist ideology. To them, that was worse than being a murderer or a rapist, and deserving of death, which they now cheer on.

It has never been clearer that the supposed "moral equivalence between the Right and Left" is an illusion.

The Left / Liberals are going to be working overtime to try and make this reality go away but it's too late - too many people have seen it.

The level of open depravity even shocked me and I had considered myself desensitized to this sort of thing.



We better pray these people never get back into power because they know they've been seen now and will not hold back.

Click to expand...

You know, some people have said some awful things. Things that shouldn’t be said. If they’re said publicly and an employer thinks they’ve crossed a line (because some stuff certainly has) and deserves punishment, then… I mean… That’s (generally) their right. It’s the Internet, not a vacuum. Stuff you say comes back to haunt you and there are consequences.

The doxxing, the lists, the websites tracking people… None of that is ok. It’s quite illegal and it passively encourages retaliatory, violent, harassing behavior. That is highly inappropriate. You go to the law with the comments (if they’re illegal), I guess if you feel so motivated you can inform an employer, but you can’t harass the person who said it, you can’t harass the employer, you can’t break the law in pursuit of retaliation for somebody saying something you don’t like or you find offensive.

And there’s a level of hysteria that goes beyond that which just needs to stop. In one workplace of a family member, a group of people have banded together to bombard the HR with grievances they say attack them and their beliefs personally. Pronoun pins, pride flags, anything they deem “liberal” or “anti-Christian” or “anti-American” they reported saying it creates a hostile workplace where they feel uncomfortable. A place I do freelance contract work for has the same thing happening with conservative employees claiming offense over anything they feel doesn’t reflect their values. I myself got tagged as a violator by two people. Apparently they said because of the “sensitive nature of witchcraft surrounding Charlie Kirk’s death” that my dressing as I do is “inappropriate,” “hostile,” and “makes people uncomfortable.” I wear all black dresses, or jeans with chains and boots and corsets. I wear jewelry with Tarot cards on them, or pewter casts of skulls and animal bones, sometimes an Ouija board planchette, or big crystals and gemstones. Goth girl stuff. The witchiest thing I own is a pentacle with The Charge of the Goddess, a gift from my mother who didn’t know what it was, just thought it was pretty and she bought two: one for her, one for me. I’ve dressed this way for the 15 years I’ve done freelance work… This is not new. In Salem, street preachers are accosting people there to celebrate the season.

Like… For real. Chill.

If you want to be upset about Charlie Kirk, be upset. But don’t use it as an excuse to break the law or harass people, or invent offense where there is none, or generally just be a pest to people who aren’t being disrespectful, but simply aren’t mourning his loss. The man said some really disrespectful, hateful things. Those people who don’t like him shouldn’t use his excuse to be cruel, to make comments that are threatening or violent, but we also can’t attack people who aren’t viewing him as a martyr.

Seraphim . said:

Wanted to edit the post, but the edit window passed, the edited post looks like this:

True, yet they have broken obedience to their parents once already. There must be exceptions occasionally. Obviously some of us don't agree with everything the Catholic Church does in the first place, while having great respect for some aspects of their religious orders within their Church.

According to one of the nuns, she challenges anyone who thinks she is infirm in her body to a race.

Three nuns and a locksmith cause a stir in Austria

A Salzburg monastery dispute like something out of a TV series

english.katholisch.de

If that really is so, why did she get put away in an old people's home when she can probably beat me in a race?

None of us really know the truth here, only the nuns do by praying to God and having him reveal it to them.

Click to expand...

How do you know they broke their obedience to their parents? My great aunt was a nun (Southeast Texas) who told me that way too many girls became nuns because their parents put them in the convent as they couldn't afford to keep them - this would've been back in the fifties around the same time these women became nuns. She explained that was why there were so many bitter nuns.

Lukaris said:

In the 1990s, 31 states had bans on partial birth abortion while Roe v Wade stood.

Click to expand...

If you can find a medical book using that term, I'd be interested to see it. As far as I can tell, it's just a made-up term to get people emotional.

Lukaris said:

Since 1995, at least thirty-one states have enacted laws banning the so-called "partial-birth" abortion procedure.

Click to expand...

You'll note that it says "so-called".

mark46 said:

Do you think that leftists don't try to have list of those who discriminate against leftist students in the classroom? Do both far right and farleft student groups and professors try to remove such teachers?

Sure, they do. Also, comparing such activity to McCarthy is true overkill and tells the reader that one doesn't understand the McCarthy era in American politics. In a sense, it is similar to the constant comparing of Trump and white supremacists to Hitler.

Click to expand...

Sure they do. But just as I don’t think leftist cancel culture advocates should be lauded as advocates of free speech, neither do I think Kirk should be.

2PhiloVoid said:

Or, he really believed his denominational angle, just like you apparently do with yours.

Click to expand...

I think anybody who’s media presence is built around proving themselves smarter than X is doing it for themselves, including a host of people on the left.

FreeinChrist said:

I should mention that there is one Republican people should listen to:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/13/us/politics/trump-kirk-political-opponents.html

Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah, a Republican, took a strikingly different approach during the news conference where officials announced the arrest of a suspect on Friday. Mr. Cox asked for people to lower the political temperature and stay off social media.​

​

“We can return violence with violence, we can return hate with hate, and that’s the problem with political violence — is it metastasizes,” he said. “Because we can always point the finger at the other side. And at some point, we have to find an off-ramp, or it’s going to get much, much worse.”​

Click to expand...

Agreed. Governor Cox has demonstrated the moral leadership that we need in these times.

Someone decided to photoshop one of the pictures of Tyler to add a Trump logo on his shirt and change it red. It smacks of desperation, that someone would intentionally photoshop and deceive people to get them to believe a narrative. I guess if the media has been doing it for years, people will too. But that begs the question... If someone learned it from the media, and they are copying it, then are reprehensible and completely lacking in conscience? Yep. If you have to twist it to your benefit (i.e. cheat to win the debate), truth isn't on your side. The truth comes out anyway in the end.

essentialsaltes said:

I have the liberty to do so.

Click to expand...

But why here? What drew you here?

essentialsaltes said:

Researchers have the academic freedom to follow their own research programs, however this particular question is not the kind of cutting-edge research that requires federal government support, much less personal intervention from the Secretary of HHS.

Click to expand...

Why? The people are growing more and more concerned. Why shouldn’t the government address our concerns? If they don’t, why have democracy?

Fervent said:

That is not to say every, or even a majority, of muslims believe their religion is inherently violent, but that is largely because most Muslims aren't particularly religious(as is true of a majority of Christians)...but as religiosity increases, the likelihood that they will support or even engage in violence increases because doing so is in keeping with the life and actions of Muhammad.

Click to expand...

You have it backward; study after study done on the subject of Islamic extremists and why they join extremist groups shows that the majority lack even a basic understanding of Islam. While it's true that many of the leaders of these organizations are well versed in Islam, they only use their extensive knowledge of Islam to deceive those who are ignorant in order to get them to join their ranks and carry out atrocities in the name of Islam.

From the UN:

UN study finds foreign fighters in Syria 'lack basic understanding of Islam'
“Most saw their religion in terms of justice and injustice rather than in terms of piety and spirituality,” said the authors of the report, which was based on interviews with 43 people from 12 countries.
“Religious belief seems to have played a minimal role in the motivation of this sample,” the report found, saying economic factors had become more important as terrorist groups promised wages, homes and even wives.

From MI5 in the UK:

Research, carried out by MI5's behavioural science unit, based on in-depth case studies on "several hundred individuals known to be involved in, or closely associated with, violent extremist activity" ranging from fundraising to planning suicide bombings in Britain found that far from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.

In the Philippines:

Cocoy Tulawie, a politician and member of an influential family in Sulu, said this has long been the norm and local government officials have been in connivance with Abu Sayyaf for decades.
He said younger members are ignorant of Islam, yet they are extremely fanatical about representing it. Their version of Islam is flawed simply because the dawas - or Islamic schools - are usually in the main towns and they do not get the chance to study the Quran "properly".
That ignorance, he said, is what makes them dangerous.


And a couple more reports:

Thousands of leaked Islamic State documents reveals most of its recruits from its earliest days came with only the most basic knowledge of Islam. A little more than 3,000 of these documents included the recruits’ knowledge of Shariah, the system that interprets into law verses from the Quran and “hadith” — the sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad.
According to the documents, which were acquired by the Syrian opposition site Zaman al-Wasl and shared with the AP, 70 percent of recruits were listed as having just “basic” knowledge of Shariah — the lowest possible choice. Around 24 percent were categorized as having an “intermediate” knowledge, with just 5 percent considered advanced students of Islam.
The group preys on this religious ignorance, allowing extremists to impose a brand of Islam constructed to suit its goal of maximum territorial expansion and carnage as soon as recruits come under its sway.


From Cradle to Grave: The Lifecycle of Foreign Fighters in Iraq and Syria

Combating Terrorism Center at West Point United States Military Academy

Less than 15% of fighters coded by religious background had any formal religious education. Additionally, individuals who made the decision to become a foreign fighter tended not to be lifelong strict adherents to Islam, but also rarely appeared to be recent converts. Those who were Muslims since childhood (but not overly religious), as well as those who were converts (but not too recent), were well-represented in the data.

One other way to parse out the role of religion is to try to assess the level of each fighter’s religious education. In an attempt to code religious education, we asked coders to code both formal types of religious education (at a madrasa or other religious institute of higher education) as well as informal types (indications that they had been part of a study group or sought religious guidance at a local mosque). Much like the data related to the coding of an individual’s conversion to the Islamic faith, the sample in the case of religious education was also very small (n = 203). The results of this breakdown can be seen in Figure 3.9, which shows that a small minority of the foreign fighters had any formal religious education (less than 15%), while the majority of them had no religious guidance (or just basic guidance) before their travel.

Both findings indicate that the majority of the foreign fighters had limited familiarity with the tenets of the Islamic faith. This is consistent with the findings from the CTC’s earlier report, which showed that very small numbers of foreign fighters reported having any religious education and that approximately 70% of fighters reported having a basic knowledge of Shari`a law.

Given these findings, it seems that the ability of the foreign fighters to develop an emotional and cognitive attachment to the jihadi community is based on other factors, which may be more related to cultural and political dimensions of their identities as Muslims in non-Muslim societies than religious triggers. The ability of jihadi groups to recruit foreign fighters is thus based on creating a narrative that is focused on the ongoing deprivation of Muslims, both in specific Western polities, as well as in the international arena. While convincing them that joining the jihadi movement based on specific religious imperatives may be important, it seems to play a secondary role. Moreover, our findings also correspond with primary sources indicating that jihadi groups in general prefer to recruit individuals who have limited religious education since they are less capable of critically scrutinizing the jihadi narrative and ideology, in addition to being less familiar with contrasting Islamic schools of thought.

While it is difcult to ascertain whether the recruiter or potential foreign fighter initiates the connection, it seems that religious figures play a relatively minimal role in this process, a fact that provides support for previous findings indicating that political and cultural aspects of jihadi ideology play a greater role in the radicalization of foreign fighters than strictly religious ones.


As can be seen in the above articles, Most recruits of Islamic extremists groups are not well versed in Islam and ignorance of Islam is a common theme.

Fervent said:

It's not simply about being able to explain it, as I said it's not just that violence exists within the Koran. It's that the "best of people" according to Islam embraced the violence when he had the power to, and that the context and proper interpretive framework(where ayah conflict the later ayat abrogates the earlier one) renders the violent verses the final word on the matter.

Click to expand...

The Muslims that were being spoken to in the Qur'an lived in a different culture, at a different point in time, and were facing unique situations. You can't read the Qur'an from a modern perspective, you have to read it through a historical lens, if not, you will continue to misinterpret what it's saying.

The violent verses found in the Qur'an don't abrogate the verses of peace because of the context they were written in. There are certain situations where the verses of peace apply, and others where the verses of violence apply, therefore, each verse has a specific context and application. In other words, each verse in the Qur'an is to be applied to its appropriate situation. For example, when Qur'an 9:5 says "When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. And capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush," it is dealing with a specific event at a point in history when Meccan pagans were breaking their peace treaties and declaring war on the Muslims, so that verse would not negate the peaceful verses in the Qur'an since it is very specific to it's intent and the point in history it was to be applied.

Textual and historical context are key to interpreting religious scriptures, and if someone reads them without knowing the backstory, they will almost certainly misinterpret their true meaning.

Fervent said:

I am not saying this based on an ignorant appraisal of how a minority of Muslims act, but based on actually reading the koran, hadiths, and sira. It's not that violence is present in the texts, but that everything the terrorists do are in keeping with the life and teachings of Muhammad.

Click to expand...

Fervent said:

Muhammad was a warlord, and is taken to be the best of humanity by Islam. He tortured people for wealth, took slaves by violence, had multiple sex slaves, beheaded people for not recognizing his prophecy and accepted converts at the threat of beheading. In short, Muhammad was everything that Islam is criticized for.

Click to expand...

Fervent said:

You keep avoiding addressing my main point as if it isn't there, which is that the "correct" version of Islam is always going to be the one practiced by Muhammad, and anyone with knowledge of the hadith and sira knows that Muhammad was a very evil man who used Islam to satisfy his every evil desire.

Click to expand...

Fervent said:

No, I'm pointing out that the central figure of Islam, Muhammad, acted far more in line with the terrorists than with those who don't wage war.

Click to expand...

Muhammad and his companions were warriors. If we look at Muhammad and his actions through a historical lens, while they appear bad from our modern perspective, they were normal for the point in history at which he lived. In other words, he was no worse than anyone else who was in a position of leadership in his day, whether they be Jew, Christian, Muslim, or Pagan.

The verses found in the Qur'an were revealed during specific battles that took place during the 7th century. There's not a command found anywhere in the Qur'an that instructs Muslims to kill non-believers forever; once the battles during the days of Muhammad were over, that was it. That point in history and those being spoken to have long passed, and the verses commanding that unbelievers be killed or converted to Islam are no longer applicable to Muslims today.

Fervent said:

There can be no harmony between Christ and Belial. Islam, at its core, is a violent religion.

Click to expand...

Since there aren't millions of Muslims going around killing people, we know this statement isn't true. If Islam taught as you believe it does, there would be countless Muslims taking whatever weapons they could get their hands on to kill non-believers every single day in every corner of the globe. This is not happening. Instead, what we see is Muslims living in peace and harmony with their neighbors, working and playing together with non-Muslims, fighting against violence and extremism in tandem with non-Muslims, and working alongside non-Muslims in their communities to address poverty, homelessness, and other injustices through charitable giving and advocacy.

Hans Blaster said:

Not if you don't write more clearly.

Click to expand...

With all do respect, everyone knows what I meant, but moving on

Hans Blaster said:

To physics? It would seem so. They did not mention god in their scientific writings.

Click to expand...

No, but they believed in the Christian God (or some version) and therefore must have believed that he could control physics

Hans Blaster said:

Science doesn't include supernatural effects. It is literally part of the definition of what science is -- the study of the natural world.

Click to expand...

If God exists can he control physics

Hans Blaster said:

No, of course not.

Click to expand...

Then why are you on Christian forums and not Reddit? Are you seeking to proselytize?

Hans Blaster said:

They should and do.

Click to expand...

Then again

Hans Blaster said:

For a very long time. That's how we know what doesn't cause autism -- vaccines.

Click to expand...

I meant people are not trusting doctors

Hans Blaster said:

It gets boring. There are other things to study, other aspects of the problem to examine.

Click to expand...

So what if it’s boring, it’s their job. If they want people to be vaccinated, end the discussion with facts and evidence

Hans Blaster said:

There is no clear value in this study and I don't trust Robert Kennedy in the slightest, so I suspect a pre-rigged

Click to expand...

Why don’t you trust kennedy? Who would you trust?

Servus said:

It's about winning over the audience. And truth usually wins over the audience better than malarkey.

Click to expand...

LOL, certainly not.

"Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it.” -- Jonathan Swift 1710

I have found that truth is usually less credible than a lie because the truth is absolute--the truth is what it is, regardless what any individual believes.
But a lie is explicitly crafted to fit into the beliefs its intended audience already holds...so the lie sounds more credible.

1Tonne said:

I have added a pole that has the question "What holds you back most from sharing the Gospel?
I just voted:
Fear; because I think everyone will struggle with this. I do go out and share, but I am always worried about what will happen and who will react badly.
Family/work; because I have a big house that needs a lot of painting every year. This takes up much of my time which frustrates me.

Click to expand...

Like Jesus I am held back by only being able to do what I see the Father doing...

1Tonne said:

Is not....what?

Click to expand...

Is not what 2 Tim 4:2 is saying.

prodromos said:

All sides.

Click to expand...

Think about that.

Nithavela said:

You "don't have time" for the greatest invention of human history?

Click to expand...

Another person in my place could probably work two jobs, take care of a child as a single parent, lead community activities, and work on the invention at the same time. I just not that person I'm unable to focus on many things at once, it's my weakness. I have prayed to the Lord about it over and over, to give me strength and energy, tried my best to have faith but He's not granting me that prayer. Maybe the Lord have other plans for me.

NewLifeInChristJesus said:

I take this to mean that after years of being progressively sanctified that you are materially more like Jesus in holiness, righteousness, purity, faithfulness, integrity, and love? And after years of self-reflection you are not more convinced today than ever before that the gap between your holiness and His is wider than you ever imagined before?

Sin does not have power over us even thought the flesh is a slave to sin. We are not slaves of sin because we are in the Spirit, not in the flesh. That's why people must be born of the Spirit.

I think we are talking about different powers. Certainly we have the power "to walk in the Spirit" (or "respond to its guidance" as you put it). That power is an innate ability that everyone in whom the Lord lives posesses. And when they excercise that power and walk in lock step with the Spirit, they do not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. That is because the desires of the flesh and the Spirit are in adversarial opposition to one another so that carrying out one's desires prevents the other one's desires from being fulfilled.

But this is not the power that releases us from slavery to sin. Otherwise, we would have to give up on the idea that in Christ we are slaves of God and of righteousness. How can we look at who we are in Christ and conclude that we vacillate between sin and righteousness? Do you not see that struggle to be between your flesh and your spirit that pull you in opposite directions and do you not consider you yorself to be on the spirit side of the battle?

The flesh is a slave of sin, and the new man is a slave of righteousness. How can you say that's not true?

It is true that I am trying to help you see something that I see that you do not see. But just because you don't see it, that does not mean the Bible does not speak of it. If what I'm saying is not real, and is just a figment of my imagination, then you would be right.

Hmmm... "we are surrounded by sin, it has power over us" and "sin still has power over us even after we are regenerated", but "We are NOT slaves to it after we have been redeemed". That's not very coherent, and it does not explain how we are slaves of God and of righteousness. I'm telling you the truth when I say these things only make sense if they are spiritual.

Click to expand...

You are moving the goalposts to suggest there is more to salvation than the issue of sin and how God deals with it.

Jesus’ sole mission was to redeem a people for the Father. To free His people from their sins. Yes, He was a teacher that also taught us how to live and respond as a disciple of His, but that has a direct correlation to sanctification (the second aspect of salvation).

It seems very contradictory of you that you argue that we are slaves to sin, but sin doesn’t have any power over us. How does that work, exactly? And if sin doesn’t have any power over us (as believers), why do we need to have the presence of the Holy Spirit to help us conform to the image of Christ? Or why do we need to confess and repent from our sins if we don’t sin? You can’t on one hand say we are slaves to sin IF that sin has no power over us.

This is making me feel old, lol.