Latest activity

Hentenza · Sep 3, 2025

fhansen said:
Just me. I still strugge with sin IOW, And sin is to continue to be prideful, covetous, etc, in some way or another, still challenged to value or be attracted to lesser, created things above God at times.

“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
‭‭1 John‬ ‭1‬:‭9‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

bible.com

All of us struggle with sin.

fhansen said:
This really means that I'm not perfected in love which means that the bond between myself and God is not as sure or complete as it could and should be. This doesn't mean that I'm not His, it only means the door is open.

No one is perfected in this life. But you have already been justified.

“Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we also have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we celebrate in hope of the glory of God.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭5‬:‭1‬-‭2‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Romans 5:1-2 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we also have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we | New American Standard Bible - NASB

Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we also have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we

bible.com

“But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭10‬:‭8‬-‭10‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Romans 10:8-10 But what does it say? “THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your | New American Standard Bible - NA

But what does it say? “THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your

bible.com

Do you believe in your heart that God raised our Lord from the dead? If you do then what does the verses say?

fhansen said:
Meanwhile I do the best I can with the gifts He's given me to strive to do His will and grow nearer to Him. I know He's perfectly trustworthy and true and has only my highest interest at heart, ever-seeking to draw and keep me nearer but I'm the potentially weak link in the relationship. And this is why, for example, we're told to 'work out our salvation', or to 'make our calling and election sure'.

You can never do your best. You already told me at the beginning of your post that you still sin. You will continue to sin (albeit not live in sin) until you are perfected in the next state. As you can see you can not and will not be good enough to save yourself by your works. You and me are getting better as we work out our sanctification not our salvation. We work from salvation because we will never be good enough to work for salvation. Enter Jesus rest.

RDKirk · Sep 3, 2025

essentialsaltes said:
The patrol that haunts me wasn’t in Baghdad; it was in Dupont Circle
Dupont Circle isn’t some remote corner of Washington. It’s a hub — lined with embassies, think tanks, coffee shops, bookstores and crowded sidewalks. On any given day, you’ll find students debating politics over lattes, diplomats heading to meetings and activists gathering in the park that anchors the neighborhood.

This Sunday, I retired as a command sergeant major. In nearly three decades of wearing the uniform, I never carried a government-issued weapon into civilian spaces in the States. Even convoys between installations were tightly regulated. Civilians didn’t see us walking into Krispy Kreme or boarding public transit with pistols on our hips. What I saw last week didn’t resemble the disciplined Army I know.

That should unsettle us.

While no doubt these Guardsmen are proud patriots, they aren’t seasoned veterans. Most are teenagers, far from home, trained for battlefield tasks but not for the unpredictable realities of a major city. In D.C., much like most large cities, you don’t just encounter commuters. You encounter people in crisis — homelessness, addiction, untreated mental illness. A local might avert their eyes or walk around. But what happens when the person in crisis steps aggressively toward an 18-year-old with a pistol on his hip and limited training in de-escalation?

This is not what the Guard was built for. Its mission is to respond to disasters, provide logistical support and back up civil authorities — not to serve as an armed show of force on city streets. Yet that is how they are being deployed in the nation’s capital, as they were in Los Angeles earlier this summer.

The sight of troops with weapons patrolling sidewalks, boarding trains and standing post outside coffee shops has now spread from the nation’s second-largest city to the nation’s capital. What was once extraordinary is quietly being treated as routine.

That should alarm us all.

I’ve seen what that looks like in failed states abroad: checkpoints that divide neighborhoods, convoys that intimidate civilians, armed patrols that blur the line between protector and occupier. Those societies didn’t collapse overnight. They eroded slowly, as citizens became accustomed to soldiers carrying out tasks once reserved for police or community leaders. By the time people realized the cost, trust was gone.

Command Sgt. Maj. Eric Chastain is an adjunct professor at USC’s campus in Washington, where he teaches social analysis. He served as the Army’s first senior enlisted advisor in the White House.

There is a reason that command sergeant major is concerned.

We are told that all National Guard members are trained in things like civilian crowd control. Okay, yeah, they got a couple of hours at some early point in their training along with a lot of other stuff.

I'm reminded when we were getting troops prepared to deploy to Kuwait for DESERT SHIELD facing for the first time an adversary known to use chemical weapons.

"Um, sergeant. Sargent!"
"Waddaya need Private Jones?"
"Remember that chem training we had last year?"
"Yeah, why?"
"Well, umm, can we get that training again? Some people might not have been paying attention."

Always in His Presence · Sep 3, 2025

And it is not just Republicans speaking out about his push:

Below are statements from various sources explicitly opposing California Governor Gavin Newsom’s bid to gerrymander congressional districts, as outlined in the provided references. These statements reflect criticism from political figures, organizations, and commentators who argue against Newsom’s proposal to redraw California’s congressional maps in response to Republican-led redistricting efforts in Texas.

Assembly member Alex Lee, Head of the State Legislature’s Progressive Caucus: “Trying to save democracy by destroying democracy is dangerous and foolish. By legitimizing the race to the bottom of gerrymandering, Democrats will ultimately lose.”
Anonymous Democratic Political Consultant: “The idea of taking away the power from the citizens and giving it back to the politicians — the optics of that is horrendous and indefensible.
Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger: “I hate the idea of the Republicans redrawing the district lines in Texas, as much as I hate what the Californians are trying to do. We are not going to go into a stinking contest with a skunk. We are moving forward.” Schwarzenegger’s chief of staff, Daniel Ketchell, added: “His position is that two wrongs don’t make a right. He is still committed to independent redistricting in every state around the country. He thinks we have to get rid of gerrymandering to get rid of gridlock and have politicians who actually care about what the people think.”
California Republican Party Chair Corrin Rankin: “Now, Newsom wants to take that power back, rush through secret maps, and spend hundreds of millions so he and his friends can choose their voters instead of voters choosing their representatives. He calls it transparent and temporary but it is really a calculated power grab that dismantles the very safeguards voters put in place.”
Assemblymember Tom Lackey: “No matter what the justification is, why would we engage in behavior that is considered unacceptable by those who elected us?”
Assemblymember Alexandra Macedo: “We will defeat this, if it’s not here in the Capitol, it will be in a courtroom or it will be at the ballot box.”
Assemblyman Carl DeMaio: “The public cannot have a voice if they do not know what’s going on. What Governor Newsom and the legislators are trying to do is prevent the public from knowing what’s going on before it’s too late.”
California Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher: “We’re going to do everything we can to stop this Gavinmander from moving forward.”
National Republican Congressional Committee Spokesperson Christian Martinez: “Gavin Newsom’s latest stunt has nothing to do with Californians and everything to do with consolidating radical Democrat power. [It’s] a pathetic 2028 presidential pipe dream.”
Charles Munger Jr., Donor and Architect of California’s Independent Redistricting Commission: “Any attempt to undermine the nonpartisan California Redistricting Commission will be strongly opposed in the courts and at the ballot box.” Munger’s Protect Voters First campaign included messaging arguing that gerrymandering “suppresses minority thought, and racially discriminates against Black, brown, and other politically underrepresented neighborhoods.”
Russell Yee, Republican Member of California’s 2020 Redistricting Commission: “While he understood Newsom’s frustration, the only solution is redistricting reform at the federal level.”
Senator Shannon Strickland: “Governor Newsom, this is nothing more than a power grab. The Golden Gate Bridge toll was supposed to be temporary. You’re still paying the toll.”

These statements highlight opposition from both Republicans and some Democrats, focusing on concerns about undermining California’s independent redistricting commission, the risk of escalating a partisan gerrymandering war, and the perceived threat to democratic principles. Critics argue that Newsom’s plan contradicts the voter-approved nonpartisan redistricting process established in 2008 and 2010, and some see it as a politically motivated move tied to his potential 2028 presidential ambitions.

o_mlly · Sep 3, 2025

The Barbarian said:
The Wikipedia articles have links to the actual sources. If you doubt the information, why wouldn't you just check the original sources I gave you?

A serious researcher does his own research. A weak attempt at deflection.

The Barbarian said:
Feel free to count the number of actual doctorates in biology named "Steve"; there aren't many. On the other hand, Project Steve has (Barbarian checks) 1504 Steves who have doctorates in biology or a related field and accept evolutionary theory. The DI list has 4 Steves with Doctorates in biology or a related field.

Why would I? The study is a joke. No serious scientist would take a poll to take a stand.

The Barbarian said:
Well, let's see... 4 divided by 1054... roughly 0.4%. Seems to me that 99.63% is rather overwhelming agreement. You get an "F" in math, as well as in biology.

GIGO. Sound familiar?

sfs said:
The principle as normally understood in no way prohibits a gain of functionality. If you have some other understanding of the principle, you haven't explained it.

On the contrary, I understand them quite well, and know that evolutionary biology falls squarely into the latter.

Nope. Your posts show otherwise. Feel free to educate yourself and get back to me.

sfs said:
Out of 8 million scientists in the world?

I did not claim that the majority of scientists have serious questions on evolution theory. The cards are presently stacked against that, for now. Stay tuned. All science claims are merely provisional -- all science has a future.

Always in His Presence · Sep 3, 2025

Having more Democratic control in the State doesn't seem to be a good thing for Californian businesses

Example:

Statement from Marcus Lemonis, Executive Chairman of Bed Bath & Beyond

MURRAY, Utah--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Beyond, Inc. (NYSE:BYON) has issued the following statement from Marcus Lemonis, Executive Chairman of Bed Bath & Beyond:

We will not open or operate retail stores in California.

This decision isn’t about politics — it’s about reality. California has created one of the most overregulated, expensive, and risky environments for businesses in America. It’s a system that makes it harder to employ people, harder to keep doors open, and harder to deliver value to customers.

The result? Higher taxes, higher fees, higher wages that many businesses simply cannot sustain, and endless regulations that strangle growth. Even when the state announces a budget surplus, it’s built on the backs of ordinary citizens who are paying too much and businesses who are squeezed until they break.

At Bed Bath & Beyond, our responsibility is to our customers and our shareholders. We will not participate in a system that undermines both. Instead, we are investing in a California strategy that works: 24–48-hour delivery, and in many cases, same-day service. Californians will continue to get the products they love through BedBathandBeyond.com — but without the inflated costs created by an unsustainable model.

We’re taking a stand because it’s time for common sense. Businesses deserve the chance to succeed. Employees deserve jobs that last. And customers deserve fair prices. California’s system delivers the opposite. That’s why Bed Bath & Beyond will serve California customers directly through BedBathandBeyond.com, on our terms, and with their best interests at heart.

— Marcus Lemonis
Executive Chairman, Bed Bath & Beyond

fhansen · Sep 3, 2025

Clare73 said:
As the pastor could have. . .

And so?? The point is that he could have... and he could not have.

" If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us." 1 John 1:9-10

FAITH-IN-HIM · Sep 3, 2025

A New Dawn said:
laws passed during/after the George Floyd riots that made it OK to loot and destroy property because no one is getting hurt.

If you are making this claim, please provide a citation for the law that has been enacted.

Always in His Presence · Sep 3, 2025

Remember we are talking about minority on minority crime, since the good mayor took office:

Total Estimate (May 15, 2023 – September 3, 2025):

Victims:
- 2023 (May 15–Dec 31): ~1,591 victims.
- 2024: ~2,125 victims.
- 2025 (Jan 1–Sep 3): ~1,120 victims.

That is 4,836 victims

Hentenza · Sep 3, 2025

A New Dawn said:
Who is George?

George95 our long time CF techie. We worked with him back when we were on staff.

Say it aint so · Sep 3, 2025

probinson said:
And too frequently. And without evidence of benefit.

Not really. People have been conditioned with the neanderthal-like approach of VACCINE GOOD! MORE BETTER! This flies in the face of science and evidence. But it sure is beneficial to the bottom line of the pharmaceutical companies if people believe more injections benefit them.

This simplistic view and dismissal of evidence really is the issue. Some people may benefit from an additional dose. Others may not. This has always been the case and is why blanket mandates were ill-advised, non-scientific nonsense.

There is no question that in a study of >50,000 employees at the Cleveland Clinic, there was a perfect correlation between an increased number of doses and an increased number of infections. The study's authors called this finding "unexpected". It's not just "unexpected". It is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what one would expect to see from an "effective" vaccine.

The study also references three other studies that found an association between increased infections and increased doses. Just a month or two ago, another study came out showing increased number of infections correlated with increased number of doses. If we were "following the science", this would cause us to stop and think. Maybe increased vaccine does aren't providing the benefit that is assumed. Indeed, that is EXACTLY what the Cleveland Clinic study stated.

But we've long ago abandoned any kind of evidence-based recommendations. All we need is a media article that says "SURGE!" and a small contingent of people are ready for yet another dose without any evidence it will provide them any benefit.

Yes. About when and who. Not that it is junk science. You and I both know we can go to Lancelot and pull up studies promoting booster shots in general use. What this is; is a disagreement which, low and behold, is part of science. To suggest people are "making science up" in the same manner as RFKjr is doing is quite the thing.

NewLifeInChristJesus · Sep 3, 2025

Clare73 said:
Correct. . .and that faith is a gift (Php 1:29, 2 Peter 1:1, Ac 13:48, 18:27, Ro 12:3).

And everyone has that gift (Romans 10:8).

FAITH-IN-HIM · Sep 3, 2025

A New Dawn said:
Says the person who likely voted for Obama (who hired 87,000 people to work in the IRS to take more of your money) and Biden (or his shadow government) (who increased government employees by 130,000 workers). And who is now likely angry that Trump is trying to make the federal government smaller by getting rid of agencies that are not working out or who are creating regulations bearing the force of laws.

Your points about President Obama and President Biden are accurate. Democrats generally support a larger federal government and reduced local government control.

however, for six decades, conservative policy has advanced the principles of limited government, reduced federal oversight, and increased local autonomy. However, recent actions by the Republican administration include hiring thousands ICE agents, transferring military judges to roles in immigration enforcement, and deploying the National Guard for local law enforcement purposes against the will of local government. These measures indicate a substantial transition from a limited federal government to one that assumes a prominent position as an advocate for liberal policies.

essentialsaltes · Sep 3, 2025

Valletta said:
I'm somewhat surprised the liberal establishment in Colorado decided to drop the lawsuit in exchange for him resigning. You would think this is the kind of guy they would enjoy seeing in prison for a long time.

Well, it's not like the state wanted money or something.

The law allows violators to be fined but Weiser’s lawsuit only seeks a judge’s order declaring that Zwinck’s actions violated the law and barring him from such actions in the future.

It would seem he will be unable to take such actions in the future, now that he's resigned.

A2SG · Sep 3, 2025

A New Dawn said:
I gave you names to look up - you refused.

You mentioned an English philosopher who died more than a century ago and a socialist, neither one of whom seems to have any say in current crime statistics, nor in prosecution of any crime. You'd need to explain their relevance to the subject.

A New Dawn said:
I suggested videos to watch that demonstrate the mindset/intelligence level of many on the left -you refused.

You provided no videos to check out. Am I expected to do your research for you?

A New Dawn said:
I watch every video someone posts and every article written that someone posts during the course of a discussion,

As I've read every video and article you've posted. It wasn't difficult, I gotta say.

A New Dawn said:
whether I agree with it or not, then I google every video or article that speaks to that subject just to see if it is real or interpreted correctly or if it is clipped from it’s context, etc. just so I know where the other side is coming from. I’ve even changed my stance on certain topics because of searching it out. I guess that is just too much to expect others involved in the discussion to do for themselves.

If I'm to do any research on whatever point you're trying to make, I need a better idea of exactly what that point is. So far, you've made some vague accusations that don't seem to make any point I can discern clearly.

You want to have a discussion? I'm game. Make your point better, and we'll see where that takes us.

-- A2SG, otherwise, I'll take you as seriously as I feel you deserve....

Always in His Presence · Sep 3, 2025

essentialsaltes said:
It is not illegal to shoot agents of the federal government? ICE raids are gonna get a lot more exciting.

Never said that - try reading the 2nd amendment - also stay within the scope of the question -

A2SG said:
Yup, I did say "sending in armed military troops does seem to line up with the goals and objectives of the NRA so it does seem on brand."

Correct and I provided the link to their website where their goals and objectives are plainly stated and there is ZERO about sending military's troops anywhere -

A2SG said:
The goals and objectives of the NRA include the promotion of guns. More guns are out there. Mission accomplished.

ah.... seems like taking two different things and because they both mention guns, but one never even mentions sending the military anywhere - there is an obvious connection. 1+1=Banana

BTW - you are the one who brought it into the conversation - you can't just drop an unfounded and now demonstrably false statement and then try to back out because you realized you made an off topic accusation.

Here is a hint - how about we both stay on topic?

Jerry N. · Sep 3, 2025

A New Dawn said:
Thanks for insinuating that I don’t know how to read and understand things and that anything said at any point in time past, what?, 100 years?, 200 years? isn’t worth attending to, but all I get from you is that you will say and do anything to cling to your cherished belief that you have to be responsible for your own salvation.

I mean, forget that PAUL PREACHED IT in the Bible. Forget that many errors entered into the Catholic Church, to the point that the church needed reforming. I mean, perhaps you should consider that so many things the early church fathers said that were just downright wrong should speak to how much stock you you should put in them.

Clement (150 A.D. to 215 A.D.) was not Roman Catholic in the post Nicene sense. He was even removed from the list of saints in 1586. He probably understood the teaching of Paul and the other apostles more than we can.

Clare73 · Sep 3, 2025

fhansen said:
Persistence in such sin, as Scripture tells us, results in death, non-inheritance of the kingdom

As Peter's sin would have. . .

fhansen said:
as it reveals and consitutes a heart turned away from God and love regardless of any talk to the contrary. And that pastor claimed to be in close contact with the HS. And perhaps he was...previously. And...perhaps he repented and returned to God later.

Always in His Presence · Sep 3, 2025

Larniavc said:
The US economy is being meddled with by a bloke who went bankrupt running casino.

And we are getting better off than the last bloke who needed rescuing by the Easter Bunny at an egg roll.

Thank God we have a President who knows how to negotiate with trans national leaders.The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that tariffs imposed in 2025 could reduce the federal deficit by $3.3 trillion over the next decade, with an additional $0.7 trillion in savings from lower interest payments, totaling a potential $4 trillion impact. Through August 22, 2025, tariffs and customs duties brought in $156 billion, nearly double the $78 billion collected over the same period the previous year. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) notes this revenue is "meaningful" and could slow the growth of the $37 trillion national debt,

A New Dawn · Sep 3, 2025

Hentenza said:
Good question. Maybe we should ask George.

Who is George?

A New Dawn · Sep 3, 2025

I have found that the autocorrect program doesn’t initially show the word I am misspelling and often “corrects” it to the wrong word, but after using it several times it seems to use that word as one of the suggestions.

I haven't used autocorrect for God, but then I don’t often misspell it, and I never rely on the predictive text to write things.

Belk · Sep 3, 2025

Valletta said:
As to President Trump and the Republican Party, I think they have gone out of their way to avoid being vindictive. They could have launched civil lawsuits from every Republican state to tie up the major Democrat candidates for office.

Then I think you view is delusional and not to be taken seriously.

Say it aint so · Sep 3, 2025

Is this a long term solution or a short term?

Strong in Him · Sep 3, 2025

MarkRohfrietsch said:
As Scripture says, they failed to discern the body and blood of Christ, therefore, there is no communion.

No it doesn't say that.
No doubt you are thinking of 1 Corinthians 11:29. Read it in context.
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:18 he has heard that, when they come together as a church, there are divisions among them. When they come together to eat 1 Corinthians 11:21, some go ahead with their own private suppers, which means that some of the believers go hungry and some get drunk. They are not sharing with one another or in fellowship together. 1 Corinthians 11:22, "do you despise the church of God by humiliating those who have nothing?" They are eating and drinking in an unworthy manner; selfishly.
So the context for verse 29 is - you are not united, one body, looking out for each other.

Somehow that has become; "if you are not eating the Lord's body in a discerning manner and believe that it really is his body and not a symbolic piece of bread, you are not in communion."
In communion with who - the Lord? That's nonsense. We are in communion, or fellowship, with him every day when we talk to and spend time with him. No one can snatch us out of the Shepherd's hand nor separate us from his love - therefore, we cannot be out of communion with him.

MarkRohfrietsch said:
It is that simple.

No - see above.
No human has the right to tell anyone that they are out of communion, or fellowship, with God. Or that Jesus won't be with them because they are not eating and drinking in the "right way".

Clare73 · Sep 3, 2025

fhansen said:
He obviously had a change of of heart.

As the pastor could have. . .

probinson · Sep 3, 2025

Say it aint so said:
Yes. They were concerned about boosters being administered too soon as you're article notes.

And too frequently. And without evidence of benefit.

Say it aint so said:
This is just odd.

Not really. People have been conditioned with the neanderthal-like approach of VACCINE GOOD! MORE BETTER! This flies in the face of science and evidence. But it sure is beneficial to the bottom line of the pharmaceutical companies if people believe more injections benefit them.

Say it aint so said:
And yes, the vaccine will keep people alive.

This simplistic view and dismissal of evidence really is the issue. Some people may benefit from an additional dose. Others may not. This has always been the case and is why blanket mandates were ill-advised, non-scientific nonsense.

There is no question that in a study of >50,000 employees at the Cleveland Clinic, there was a perfect correlation between an increased number of doses and an increased number of infections. The study's authors called this finding "unexpected". It's not just "unexpected". It is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what one would expect to see from an "effective" vaccine.

The study also references three other studies that found an association between increased infections and increased doses. Just a month or two ago, another study came out showing increased number of infections correlated with increased number of doses. If we were "following the science", this would cause us to stop and think. Maybe increased vaccine does aren't providing the benefit that is assumed. Indeed, that is EXACTLY what the Cleveland Clinic study stated.

But we've long ago abandoned any kind of evidence-based recommendations. All we need is a media article that says "SURGE!" and a small contingent of people are ready for yet another dose without any evidence it will provide them any benefit.

Latest activity

Latest activity

The patrol that haunts me wasn’t in Baghdad; it was in Dupont Circle​

Statement from Marcus Lemonis, Executive Chairman of Bed Bath & Beyond​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

The patrol that haunts me wasn’t in Baghdad; it was in Dupont Circle

Statement from Marcus Lemonis, Executive Chairman of Bed Bath & Beyond