Chrystal-J said:

Praying!

Click to expand...

Thank you.

I’m so tired of being stuck in this rut. I need all the grace I can get.

Careyap87 said:

Do you have the links for it? I can see you're a Democrat voter lol.

Click to expand...

See link in first post.

Pommer said:

The world’s richest nation decided to burn $0.8 trillion of food rather than it go to people who’d just waste it (by eating it).

And there’s folks here applauding this move.

Click to expand...

And for the utilitarians amongst us, these aid programs also benefit our farmers and food concentrate manufacturers. Tariffs don't pay the farmers nor feed the hungry.

Bro.T said:

The Lord never gave authority to the apostolic to teach his word, instead Paul says in Roman 9: 3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Also
Pauls says in Romans 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. 3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

So this is what the Bible say and (1 Th 4:16-17) is the first resurrection.

Click to expand...

And do you see any resurrections in. 1 These 4:13-17 ?

And I seen at least 3 , so do you see any ?

dan p

Careyap87 said:

Do you have the links for it? I can see you're a Democrat voter lol.

Click to expand...

The link is in the OP, or you can Google it and get more hits.

Pommer said:

The world’s richest nation decided to burn $0.8 trillion of food rather than it go to people who’d just waste it (by eating it).

And there’s folks here applauding this move.

Click to expand...

Rather amazing isn't it?

lifepsyop said:

that's true. you are certainly obligated to work under that framework at work, but not outside of it.

Click to expand...

For sure, otherwise only atheists could be scientists.

lifepsyop said:

Okay, how many objects in nature do you believe were specially created and not the result of gradual natural processes? the stars? the earth? the oceans? life itself? humans? just curious

Click to expand...

I'm going to pass, because the other times I did something like that didn't go well. I hope you understand.

lifepsyop said:

yes, you believe evolutionary history is undeniable truth, i get that.

Click to expand...

I don't know about "undeniable" since lots of people deny it (you for example), but I've never seen anything that would make me doubt it.

lifepsyop said:

because the study was conducted by someone who works with medical journals.

the entire study described the scientific peer-review process generally. there was nothing that suggested those are only problems limited to medicine. such a suggestion doesn't even make sense. why would peer-review *only* be flawed in one single field of science?


have you conducted an actual critical study of the peer-review process?


i don't understand your position. i linked you to a study (from a prestigious journal) that meticulously describes how peer-review is a deeply flawed process with no evidence that it actually works.

your response is "that only happens in medicine" with no argument?



you're probably right about that

but it doesn't change the fact that the evidence shows peer-review doesn't work at all.

Click to expand...

I have to apologize, since I thought the paper you linked to was a different one.

I just read through the full paper and yes, it is very much in the context of medical science. It was published in a medical journal by a former editor of a medical journal and all his specifics and citations are in that context. Plus, the process he describes for how peer review is done is very different (much looser and with significantly fewer steps) than my experiences in the process. Interestingly, that sort of inconsistency in processes is one of his main points and one I agree with. I also agree with his other points about how long it can take and the expense.

The main question I have after reading the paper though is, when he asks if the peer review process works, what does he mean by "work"? He never really says.

So all I can say is no one is arguing that the peer review process is perfect, always produces absolutely accurate results, and can't be improved. But that doesn't mean "it doesn't work at all". Lots of processes aren't perfect, but still work well enough to be useful.

Interestingly though, for those who do not trust anything that comes from the peer review process you have to wonder how much they've really thought it through. So much technology, medicines, etc. in our modern world were in one way or another the result of the process, do these people still use them? If so, that seems hypocritical.

Praying!

[EDIT: Leaving this here for posterity’s sake, $800,000 is bad enough, but no need to inflate it]
The world’s richest nation decided to burn $0.8 trillion of food rather than it go to people who’d just waste it (by eating it).

And there’s folks here applauding this move.

Ophiolite said:

If I have $500 (or pick a number that fits your perception) then I would say I was not wealthy.

Click to expand...

Where you are, perhaps.

Ophiolite said:

If If have $500,000,000 then I would say I am wealthy.

Click to expand...

But it would be >

what you make it . . .
how you take it . . .
just don't fake it!!

Ophiolite said:

An individual dollar is not evidence of wealth.

Click to expand...

It might depend on what you make of it. It could be a key.

And if we sow anything to the LORD . . . it eventually can be a field to harvest. One might develop a perfect seed, then grow more like it until you have fields to harvest, from that starting seed.

It is what God is able to do with it . . . but in sharing with us. He includes us

Ophiolite said:

If I give $500 to each of one million people are any of them wealthy?

Click to expand...

If you mean giving one millionth of the $500 to each person . . . that would be limited, I can see.

Ophiolite said:

Therefore Proverbs is not saying that wealth is good, but is affirming the goodness of distributing wealth,

Click to expand...

Hmm . . . I did not think of this . . . I mean > that Proverbs is not one way or the other about wealth . . . but how well you use it . . . wealth or not wealthy. Either way, you can do very well, especially either way being able to do all the good of what is worth more than money.

One minute with a person who knows how to love does me more good, than a billion universes of gold and silver could. So, wealthy or not makes no real difference.

Ophiolite said:

Therefore Proverbs is not saying that wealth is good, but is affirming the goodness of distributing wealth, till it is so diluted that wealth no longer exists.

Click to expand...

Well . . . I am not sure it means to spread the wealth until it no longer exists. But you ***i~n~v~e~s~t*** it.

The Barbarian said:

Be patient; how fast do you think document shredders are?

Click to expand...

Well dang. There goes the neighborhood.

Ansah said:

I struggle with this. Although our Novus Ordo is extremely reverent, comparatively speaking, the hymnal often contains songs that sound like modern soft pop, and I take a dim view of this departure from the ancient, traditional sacred music.
Generally, if the hymn is very good, the tune at least is older than about 1840. If the copyright says 1978 or something, I presume it's going to be awful, and I'm usually right.

And I definitely dislike the expectation to sing during Communion, so I ignore this completely and try to just focus on the Eucharist.

Click to expand...

I agree. I find the music after holy communion rather distracting. There’s usually two hymns because there’s such a long line.

I noticed a problem. It seems like all singles wanna do is play video games and watch movies. I think that’s all fine in moderation. But there’s way more to life than that. I noticed it a long time ago. I’ve always struggled because I’m always given people that are obsessed with that kind of stuff and I am not. Well, I guess I was at one point, but I kind of grew out of it as I got older and realized it was an addiction

Learning always said:

Trent Horn said there's something wrong about his book "The Universal Christ".

Click to expand...

I have the book. Haven’t read it yet.

Clare73 said:

The kingdom of God is the rule of God, both a present reality and a future hope.

Click to expand...

Well, I'll agree with that. Either way, to see God, and his kingdom, is something that will be much clearer, perfectly clear, in the next life

Clare73 said:

Get legislation passed to seize our pet food for the rest of the world.

Click to expand...

That is a stupid suggestion as no one suggest we deprive US pets.

St. Isaac the Syrian, pray for us!

ViaCrucis said:

Could you share what you know about my church and what it believes? A statement like the one above indicates you have knowledge about this subject, I'm just curious what that knowledge is. Especially if I'm going to engage in further debate on this subject with you, I'm going to want to know what assumptions your bringing to the table about what I and/or my church believe.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Well two points because I’m not going to recite “everything” you and your church believes in. First, as an advisor for this site a few years back, me and the other advisors wrote both the statement of faith and statement of purpose for both Lutheran rooms. Secondly, I grew up Catholic and your church is sort of Catholic lite. Did you loose your aha moment or are you willing to discuss things in equal terms?

Lord have mercy!

When you say its generation that seems to imply social norms that change generationally. But I also think there has been a general trend towards progressive ideas over say the last 60 odd years. We can trace this with the 60s revolutions and especially the the sexual and womens revolutions. This brough the critical theories such as Queer theory.

We see the rise of the gay and lesbian movement and then the bisexuals which made up the LGB part of the now well known acronym pf the LGBTIQ+ community.

Gen Z would be just about right for when the long march through the institutions was spilling into social norms. So they have only known such a worldview.

But with all revolutions they dwindle and new ones come along. There is some truth that you can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time. The whole idea that has been socially engineered and not just SSM but the whole book of feminism, sexual liberty, identity, trans and gender ideology are all engineered ideas about how the world is ordered.

It has taken the LGB to a new level that is beyond what I think the L&G's had in mind. Which was really not to change the world so that everyone seen it their way. But to allow them to exist in the world as it was. Sort of live and let live.

But I also think its a more fundemental issue beyond LGBTIQ+ and a spiritual battle between the ways of the world and Gods Kingdom on earth.

GodDoesListen55 said:

Thank you; you are very kind.

Click to expand...

God bless you!

Tuur said:

What's ironic is that I suspect Obama's friends wouldn't be bothered by the idea of men having gay friends. Let's see how well they do with MAGA friends.

Click to expand...

Why does it matter what someone’s sexual orientation is to begin with? People are people.

PloverWing said:

I am approximately the same age as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. (Obama is my age, and Clinton is a bit older.) A lot of the Christians of my generation went through a journey in the first few decades of our lives regarding same-sex marriage, as we reflected deeply on Scripture and Christian ethics and people's experiences. Following CF rules, I won't talk here about the reflections that went into that journey. But I can imagine that Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton had journeys that were similar to mine, and that they emerged with similar ethical convictions.

It's possible that they were politicians seizing on what was popular, as your post suggests. Politicians do that. But it's also possible that they had a genuine change of heart, as many in my generation did.

Click to expand...

That’s true, thanks for your input

Clare73 said:

And there you have it!

How many thousands are you willing to contribute to its distribution?

Click to expand...

I already contributed thousands through taxes, which were allocated for this but wasted instead of utilized. How many lives are we willing to end because tax breaks for gazillionaires are more important? How many more lives are we willing end because we need even more, bigger, deadlier weapons to pay for?