Latest activity

stevevw · Oct 11, 2025

Bradskii said:
How can you say that murder is an act qualified by the context and then say there's no contextualising?

Because its already qualified as murder. The context is always going to be that its murder. There is no context that can change murder into not murder.

Bradskii said:
Here's a question: I killed someone yesterday. Was it morally acceptable or unacceptable?

You have the context lol. We are no longer talking about murder.

Bradskii said:
We'll save some time and I'll tell you what you're going to invariably say. Which will be that you can't tell because there's no context. It might be me killing someone just for fun or me acting to protect myself. Please pay close attention to this next statement:

Yes but thats a different thing altogether. Murder is murder. Your not comparing apples with apples. One is murder and the other is killing or killing in self defense. They are different situations.

Murder will always be murder and there is no context that can ever make it not murder. For the very reason the context is specific. But then thats the only time it can every be murder and immoral.

Bradskii said:
Absolute morality means that acts are wrong regardless of context.

Yes so murder is always wrong because it is called murder and not killing. There will be no context that can undo the context that murder is murder. In that sense its absolute.

But its not immoral because there is a conext where people can kill in self defense. That is a seperate moral issue which is another moral that is the basis for why it is what it is. A moral of preserving life. Not a contextualised murder that can somehow be justified.

Bradskii said:
But to tell me if I was being immoral or not you need the context. It therefore cannot be defined as absolute morality by the very definition of the term. So when it's me killing to protect myself, 'killing' is the act and 'to protect myself' is the context. Obviously a case of relative morality. Because the morality would change if the context changes. If we change that context to 'just for fun' then it becomes immoral.

Yes in the overall scheme of morality because it never works in isolation from other morals that its the context in which it happens. But I think its not as simple as each moral is either absolute or contextual. I think the moral itself is the context that has already been established and its either always wrong or not.

So in the case of murder its context is always its immoral. You don't need to envoke other contextes because its already intrinsically wrong. Theres no way around it.

But if you do envoke other context your really envoking a completely different moral rather than the same moral being contextualised. That being self defense is a different moral situation about preserving innocent life. If you don't then you are culperable of wrong by ommission.

I cannot relate killing in self defense as a context for which murder is ok or related that somehow makes the same act not murder. Its a category destinction. Its like compromising murder into ok killing. Rather than grounding non murder in a completely different moral basis that gives weight to why each are completely different morals rationals. But both can be absolute because they have their own basis for why they hold such moral status.

Bradskii said:
The fact that we have a term for both of those acts, being 'murder' and 'self defence' doesn't change anything.

I think it does. Its all in the label we have given it. We call it murder for a reason. Its already qualified. Otherwise we call it self defense to destinguish its not murder but something else.

Bradskii said:
Is lying morally acceptable? Well most people would say it would be ok if it was to save the family in the basement. That is a classic case of relative morality.

Why. How is it relative. What are the options. Lie and save the family or don't lie and allow the Nazi to take the family. For which I might add would breach the whole point of hiding the family in the first place. So its not relative. Either saving or condeming the family to death.

The whole idea of whether its ok to lie is a red herring. The moral situation was already determined as the moral that we must save life as we would want to be saved. Basic humanity and the Golden Rule. Its one of the most basic morals humans know.

The moral was already set and the issue of lying had been negated and irrelevant. It was a greater moral that was grounding the actions. Not that its ok to lie depending on some relative opinion or belief about the context.

Bradskii said:
Now if we had a word for 'lying to save a family in the basement from the Gestapo' - let's say it's 'zeitblinter',

Does it have to be German lol. my German is not good. What about Sauerkraut. I like Sauerkraut.

Bradskii said:
then to then say that zeitblinter is always wrong, therefore is an example of absolute morality, is absolute nonsense.
If explaining the situation in a few words is an example of relative morality then how in heaven's name does explaining the situation with one word change it to an example of absolute morality?

That's crazy town.

My point is not that there is no contextualisation because obviously lying to the Germans to save the life of humans is different to lying for selfish gain that harms others.

I am saying that within each context there is an objective and even absolute moral truth that can never be contextualised out of being morally ok to do.

The idea of realtive morality often fuels the idea that morality is itself relative and subjective. The reason being is because the fact that morals can be contextual but also absolute and objective within each situation. There will always be a moral truth to be found that can never be contextualised or rationalised away.

Tuur · Oct 11, 2025

More to the point, will Democrats now turn on Dominion? Will we see now see forums dominated by Democrats complaining about the machines? Will they now question the results of any election where polling is done with Dominion machines?

Speaking of questions, have you used a Dominion machine to cast a ballot or have you see one used?

Mihai1995 · Oct 11, 2025

I want to make myself clear. I didn't want to judge these people while discussing this with my father, but my discussion with my father fluctuated as thoughts fluctuate, so these words ("evil people") were probably spoken in my rush to make my father understand what I was talking about.

BelieveItOarKnot · Oct 11, 2025

Hentenza said:
Oh no. The perp messes with everyone

Well, consider that we moved closer to the facts

Perhaps then, seeing how the perp messes with YOU (and I) how the Words of God describing the perp's exposure, demise and finality could apply directly to our own faces, just as Jesus rebuked Satan speaking from Peter

In other words the CONDEMNATION/WRATH/JUDGMENT/LoF scriptures are in fact our Best Friend

Surprise!

Normandt · Oct 11, 2025

Sunday, October 12 2025

28th OT

2 Kings 5:14-17

I invite us to read the complete story of King Naaman and Elisha. Here, we only have the end. It is worth the joy of reading this story starting from verse 1. 2 Kings 14:1-17

Naaman was a general, and a leper.

He was sent to Elisha, who did not receive him, but sent a servant to tell him to bathe seven times in the Jordan River.

Naaman became very angry. Elisha did not do as the general had previously said, with oil and healers. So he refused to bathe.

But his servants said to him, "If the prophet told you to do something extraordinary, would you not do it? All the more since he told you, ‘Wash, and be clean’?" Naaman went and bathed.

We too often think that the spiritual life must be difficult. There is nothing difficult with God. It's too easy.

As Saint Pope John XXIII tells us: "Let us simplify complicated things and not complicate simple things."

2 Tim 2:8-13

"If we persevere we shall also reign with him."

It is not necessary to endure temptation to reign. The reign of God is gentle and simple. Let us become more ourselves, balanced in God's Love, and the radiance (reign) of God’s will touch and rejoice the hearts around us.

Luke 17:11-19

The purified man replies to Jesus:

"This foreigner returned to give thanks to God!"

And yet, it is so simple to give glory, to give thanks to God. Every time we experience joy and peace, let us give thanks, and give glory to God.

Every time we do something good, let us give glory to God, for it is He who gives us the goodness to be good. This will also remind us that God is with us at every moment.

Biblical texts: NAB-RE

Normand Thomas.

Strong in Him · Oct 11, 2025

Kathleen30 said:
Hentenza when thinking upon the witness testimony. You mention of the 12 astronauts that supposedly landed on the moon . I can think of a recent case where over 50 people many with high rank standing testified in a written and signed document by them all that the lap top from hell was mis information. Their testimony was accepted as truth by many . But it was finally realised that they had lied and that the computer did indeed belong to Hunter . So people do lie .

But no one has ever come forward and said that it was all a lie, or a con.
Some of these men have since become Christians; born again believers who belong to the Truth and have the Spirit of Truth within them.
Charles Duke gives talks about his walk on the moon and has said that it was nowhere near as important as his walk with Jesus.
Is that a lie too? Would God allow the Gospel to be preached on the basis of a lie?
If anyone gave their lives to Christ as a result of hearing Duke's testimony, would it be valid if the testimony which moved them had been untrue?

camille70 · Oct 11, 2025

eclipsenow said:
How are private companies even in charge of all this?
Live saving healthcare should be a human right - and guaranteed by government.
There should be enough government owned and operated hospitals to guarantee all Americans receive healthcare.

Outside of VA care for veterans and Medicare/Medicaid everything is private insurance or out of pocket.

If people dont have healthcare they only go to the hospital as a last resort, so problems are only identified in late stages where care is more expensive or where it's too late to treat. Hospitals charge more to make up for people who don't have health care and can't pay or are slow to pay and because Medicare/Medicaid doesn’t reimburse at decent amounts. A couple of hospitals have already decided to close because they won't have enough money to cover operating expenses as a result of the "BBB" passed.

When hospitals charge more, health insurance companies charge more, so this affects everyone's cost.

I'm one of those people who would just stick it out and suffer or use home remedies when I didnt have insurance. Home remedies sre still my first go to. If it wasn't for Obamacare I probably wouldn't be here. My insurance is through my employer but they weren't offering it to employees who were classified as part time. Once the ACA passed I was able to sign up again.

I got insurance that Jan and finally felt so bad I went to the emergency room early Feb. I didn't have a primarily care physician. I had been having issues for months with a persistent cough and ankles swelling. I thought I would be given a diuretic and sent home. They kept me 3 days. I had HBP which led to congestive heart failure. The cough was due to fluid build up in my lungs and the swollen ankles from fluid retention also.
My kidneys were failing, but once they got my HBP down they recovered ok. If I hadn't got insurance I wouldn't have gone because I couldn't have afforded it. As it was, I ended up with a bill for several thousand dollars. I was able to get a payment plan via the hospital though.

I have to have insurance for doctors visits and to cover the cost of the prescriptions. If I can't afford to keep my healthcare I may have to get another doctor. He requires payments up front to receive care if you dont have an insurance copay.

I won't be nearly as bad off as thousands of other people, though. Too many people are treating this as a red vs blue issue, supporting their own team, instead of an American issue.

There was a comment I heard several months back that said as Christians we tend to value HEALING but we don't value HEALTH. That rang true, for me at least, so I've been taking better care of myself.

The GOP didn't announce a repeal of Obamacare this time. They are trying to give it a slower death by starving it. They thought the effects wouldn't be felt until after next years midterms but it's being felt now as hospitals do budgets months in advance, hence some of the closures. I hope common sense will prevail and the GOP with do the right thing for the sake of it being the right thing. Barring that, I hope they are willing to do it for the self benefit of keeping their job.

johnnypapa · Oct 11, 2025

It should not take too much insight for any follower of Christ to figure out that the greatest spin doctor / manipulator in the world is the devil. He distorts and blurs moral situations with trigger words, falsehoods, and ideas he has already injected into our society. In so doing, Satan successfully pulls gullible, ill-prepared, and lukewarm Christians into his shell game of moral and eternal doom.

Distraction and Misdirection: The Demonic Shell Game – Catholic Stand

catholicstand.com

Kathleen30 · Oct 11, 2025

Hentenza said:
He received all of the telemetry and was in Mission Control when they landed. Twelve astronauts landed on the moon and all twelve have given testimony. The evidence is overwhelming and undeniable.

Again, you are turning my argument into an ad populum argument which is not. My argument is that the thousands of people would have to lie if the missions did not land on the moon. The chances of that are nil.

NASA did not do black projects, that was the CIA. NASA was very much into showing the world its accomplishments. Every single mission was fully covered by the media.

Hentenza when thinking upon the witness testimony. You mention of the 12 astronauts that supposedly landed on the moon . I can think of a recent case where over 50 people many with high rank standing testified in a written and signed document by them all that the lap top from hell was mis information. Their testimony was accepted as truth by many . But it was finally realised that they had lied and that the computer did indeed belong to Hunter . So people do lie . Often under the oaths they have taken. I guess it comes down to this you have your 12 astronauts or 18 if we count the other 6 up yonder manning the module and I have Van Ellen’s Belt of which I call Mt Impassable before me. 6 hours of radiation all up 3 hours each way. Honey to me that’s a long time to fry

johnnypapa · Oct 11, 2025

Evil is not exclusively the absence of good. It is a distortion, corruption, and falsification. Evil functions not simply as a void but as a perverse mimicry: it counterfeits the good, while at the same time denying the truth of what is.

Evil Is Not the Opposite of Good, It Is the Opposite of Truth - Catholic Exchange

Our common-sense moral imagination often assumes that there are two opposite forces in the world: good and evil, locked in perpetual conflict, like twin

catholicexchange.com

johnnypapa · Oct 11, 2025

It is impossible to receive the love that God wants us to experience without understanding the mercy and love of the Father for us. God loves us and has forgiven us unconditionally. We must claim forgiveness by confessing our sins through Reconciliation and surrendering to God’s love.

Our Heavenly Father Offers Us Mercy - Catholic Journal

catholicjournal.us

David Lamb · Oct 11, 2025

Apple Sky said:
There not liars, just people who have been fooled or brainwashed into believing this farce.

However do you think anybody could brainwash them all into believing that they had left their families, undergone months of training, and travelled to the moon and back? The "brainwashers" would need to brainwash not only the astronauts, but their families and friends, and everybody who worked on the various moon landings - thousands of people. And all for what purpose? The Americans would also have needed to convince the Russians that they had actually been to the moon, and this was back in the days of the USSR. Russia and America were in a race to land someone on the moon. It is only a farce to you because you don't believe it happened, and have to invent tales of brainwashing to account for the experiences of the astronauts. Before, you claimed that they were paid to say that they had been t the moon, or their families threatened if they said they hadn't been.

Strong in Him · Oct 11, 2025

Apple Sky said:
1. NASA

NASA are employing scientists, training astronauts, building rockets and spending millions of dollars trying to FOOL people?
Why?
Come on - use your brain. WHY would NASA want to make people believe that they sent 12 men and hundreds of space craft to the moon?
Has it made for world peace? No.
Has it ended hunger? No.
Has it made Christians abandon their faith/trust the devil? No.
What purpose has it served? Are NASA going to, one day, say, "fooled you" and everyone will laugh hysterically?

Apple Sky said:
2. All the world leaders are in on the scam,

Nonsense.
There was a race to get to the moon - the US and Russia were rivals.
You think the Russian leader, in 1969, said to Nixon - "ok, we'll let you make it look as though you got to the moon first. You can get all the praise, recognition and any awards or book deals which come from this. We don't mind if you make lots of money - it's a scam anyway."

Ridiculous.
I don't think you realise how paranoid you sound.

Apple Sky said:
the same way that they were all in for the for the signing of the Antarctic Treaty, all the leaders of every nation signed this treaty.

I don't know what this treaty was about but I would guess that people signed it after days/months of discussion and/or negotiation. They probably did it a) because it was to their advantage or b) because they desired to make the world a better place.

There is no evidence that all the leaders of the world would come together for something which they knew to be a lie, or from a desire to lie to others.

David Lamb · Oct 11, 2025

Apple Sky said:
But being up there with all the stars you wouldn't exactly miss them.

You'd be just as like not to be looking at them if you were concentrating on the spacecraft, and communicating with Houston and those on the moon, as a driver on the M4 at night would.

timewerx · Oct 11, 2025

bèlla said:
It was really bizarre and I understand why companies are investing heavily. Competitive players spend a lot and being on a team is like a second job. They’ve captured their attention and the platforms are milking it by offering perks in the beginning and reducing them over time while raising prices.

I saw the same with physical games. We were huge fans of The Sims and had several editions and expansion packs. But every update included a little less which required another purchase. By the third release I was done. The fourth was gutted and I refused to support the company anymore.

I grew up with Atari and Nintendo and my mother used to take us to the game room and played as well. There were two consoles that came before Atari that we used to play as well. I understand the draw but I’ve seen the same unfold in other areas online. Watching people get sucked into worthless things or destroy their lives keeps you levelheaded.

They're exploiting a human weakness irresponsibly. The need to get somewhere or to be "seen". Something that's may not be easy to accomplish in the real world outside of the game or internet.

This is why people also get addicted to social media. And also because our world rewards irresponsible behavior.

As for influencers, it was never a draw and my business coach warned us against it. The majority aren’t entrepreneurs in the traditional sense with products and the like. They work for brands and the bulk of their income is derived from pushing their products. But budget cuts can reduce their earnings significantly. We witnessed this with pride day campaigns.

Influencer content comes in three varieties: aspirational, informational and entertainment. All of the channels I follow are educational and I’m always learning something or increasing my proficiency. I’m not into escapism and I was late to YouTube. I don’t look at Tik-Tok, Instagram or X.

I realized it early on and felt the practice too devious for my taste. I just hope more people realize that.

I'm youtube-only as well. I prefer watching / following influencers with relatively low views in their content (Less than 20k views per video). The quality and "connection" is better.

Influencers who have reached "viral" status or have lots of viral content seem to let the quality go (from an objective perspective) and start behaving like someone losing touch with reality.

The influencer space seems to reward the dumbest/mindless contents the most.

If you take what he said at face value it isn’t possible. The human spirit is resilient when applied. If Ai eliminated jobs a portion of those impacted will seek alternatives. But the ones who don’t are the people he’s referring to. Their willingness to accept government support in place of employment is problematic from their perspective. Because work is a spiritual act at its core. The free time won’t allow them to do xyz and we saw that with covid. The people who used that period productively were doing it elsewhere. That’s the society they want.

I don't think this is going to happen any time soon. I've used LLMs at work, and mostly google Gemini which seems to be the best at it. The quality of human work is still better than AI work. AI can do the work at a small fraction of the cost but quality goes down the drain.

I have more faith of the "exploit" I found will bring much bigger changes to the world and individual quality of life than AI. Ironically, even AI technology will massively benefit from it.

I heartily support hobbies and don’t believe a relationship should be anyone’s orbit. That position belongs to God and the kingdom is inclusive. We’re meant to impact our home, church, community and so on. When the pairing is balanced you welcome those opportunities.

Time with God.
Time with your spouse.
Time with your children.
Time with your family.
Time with friends.
Time with believers.
Time with neighbors and the community.

But that’s predicted on the principle of seeking the kingdom first (step one) and its righteousness (step two) that establishes our priority. Which is the governing influence of heaven on earth in everything and the right alignment/positioning with its authority. That‘s our compass. Once we comply the “rest” will be added. We were never meant to pursue it.

~bella

My main hobby now is skating but I avoid spending any time outside of the activity itself like researching upgrades etc. I even stopped learning new skills (just enough to be good at it) to save even more time. I now treat it as pure exercise and social activity (meeting other skaters on Sundays for only 2 hrs). It doesn't eat on my time at all because I really do need the exercise for health. Just enough to stay in shape.

I still play games where there's absolutely nothing else I can do like I'm outside and not talking to anyone and unable to work. Simple games on my phone that children might be also be playing. These games don't tend to be addictive because it's usually single player.

You're absolutely right what you said there. People tend to get lost in their hobbies, especially men. Maybe I'm only seeing this contrast in my country in Asia. Women are much less likely to play around and more mature/responsible and men tend to be the problem in relationships. It's the same pattern in both rich and poor but richer couples seem to have worse problems with infidelity and substance abuse, gambling, gaming, etc.

Dan1988 · Oct 11, 2025

Studyman said:
I was setting you straight concerning my belief that you are promoting to others..

I was showing you God's Inspired Words that I believe, which show that in "death", the kind all mortal humans come to experience, we cease to think, do anything or know anything. But as I said, something exists as God will raise up who I am, just as HE will raise up who Adam was, and judge them according to that which they had done, "before" this death.

It seems important to seek the understanding of "God's teaching" concerning the death that "ALL" mortal humans shall enter, for all have sinned, except One.

I believe in this perfectly. And in my view, God's prophesy shown to us here, has surely come to pass as both Adam and Eve did die, and remain dead just as God Promised them. I have no reason to question God concerning the moment this destiny was placed on them. Clearly it happened when they "Ate" that which God commanded them not to eat.

I'm not sure why you would imply that I never came across this, clearly my posts would inform you otherwise, had you read them..

I believe what is written;

6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and "they knew that they were naked"; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Clearly the "death" this God was speaking to, isn't the "death" you are speaking to. This is shown pretty clearly in the Scriptures I posted, that you judged as irrelevant.

Ecc. 9: 5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

Perhaps if you were to be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and join yourself to this God, as Jesus promotes, you will come to be on the same page with Him concerning Adam and Eve. Of course, it is a choice you must make.

Can you show me the Scriptures where it is said that God is the God of the Dead, and not the Living? Please show me where God teaches in His Word that all human children are "born dead".

I am a student of of His Word, but I have never seen where Jesus is the Lord of the Dead, or that God is the God of the dead. Perhaps you might consider to start listening to the Jesus "of the Bible", and turn away from the religious system of this world.

John 8: 24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye "believe not" that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Luke 13: 3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

If they were already "dead", as defined by the Spirit of Christ that was in the Author of Ecclesiastics, then how can they "Believe" or "repent" or "turn to God"?

Clearly, if a man doesn't do these things, in the time a longsuffering, Patient and Merciful God gives them, after they sinned, they shall surely die.

As this same God teaches you, if you would just believe Him.

Ez. 18: 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

21 "But if" the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.

23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?

In your religion, isn't this good news? And who make this possible?

My God isn't the God of the Dead, but the God of the Living. Your god creates dead people. I can say for certain that the Holy Scriptures do not represent your god.

Well I, and David, and Isaiah disagree with your religious philosophy. And in all due respect, the Spirit of Christ that inspired these Prophets teach me about death, this Christ died, but you have never died. So it seems to me that I would be better off Trusting the God that Inspired the bible, than to trust you or this world's religions you have adopted, given you don't believe the graves of this world are filled with dead people that don't even know they are dead.

"Living dead", God creates "dead people"! Are you actually listening to your own preaching here? If a person that is spiritually dead, can never "know anything" about God, then you, who you preach to the world was born dead, have no hope?

This is true.

Please understand that you have already miss-represented my beliefs and posts on a public forum. So it would be foolish to just ignore Scriptures, and take your word for it. Perhaps if you were to show me where my posts contradict my theology, this would be more helpful.

John 8: 24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Luke 9: 59 And he said unto another, "Follow me". But he said, Lord, "suffer me first" to go and bury my father.

60 Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.

61 And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee; but "let me first" go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.

62 And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.

So let these men who refuse to repent and turn to God, who will die in their sins, bury others who also refuse to repent, who will die in their sins.

But if these unrepentant men would humble themselves, while they are still alive, and "yield themselves" to God in repentance, and "Follow the Jesus" of the Bible, they will still die, but Jesus Promises to raise them from the dead, and give them the gift of eternal life.

Abraham was given the same instruction.

Gen. 12: 1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of "thy country", and from "thy kindred", and from "thy father's house", unto a land that I will shew thee:

2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. 4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

You might notice that Abraham didn't say, "Wait God", I will follow you, but let me first go back and honor my earthly father".

Instead of using a verse here and there to justify an adopted religion, perhaps you might consider turning away from the religion of your fathers, and Follow Jesus' instruction. "Seek ye FIRST the Kingdom of God and His Righteousness". And let this world's religious promoters bury this world's religious promoters.

Clearly, even my 12 year old grandson can see that these men were destined to death, and not already dead. Just as Jesus teaches, "You shall die in your sins". In your religion, Jesus was talking about men who refused to eat His Flesh, Yes? Men who have "No life" in them? And what of Jesus' Words to the rich man?

Matt. 19: 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but "if thou wilt enter into life", keep the commandments.

And concerning Lazarus;

John 11: 12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

Did the dead bury the dead here?

The problem and difference here between us is that you are here to justify your religion, and you cherry pick Scriptures for that purpose, as is clearly evident. While I, a no body, am seeking to know God, as Jesus wanted, that I might grow in the knowledge of God. To do this, it is imperative to consider "ALL" that is written.

I posted Solomons understanding of the death that befalls all men. I posted David's understanding and Isaiah's understanding. But they can't be used to support, defend or further your preaching that God created "dead" people. So you don't believe them.

According to God and Jesus, I can deliver myself from a Spiritual Death, by "Turning to God".

Ez. 18: 31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? 32 For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.

Paul taught the same thing;

Acts 26: 19 Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision: 20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

But I only have this life in which to "Yield myself" to God. Because as it is written, "The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence." And "For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

It seems prudent to study so as to know the truth about this death, VS. being "dead in trespasses and sins".

It seems you are pitting one verse of God against another to prove your "God creates dead people" philosophy. I'm hoping you might reconsider, but the choice is yours.

I asked you to explain why you don't believe what God said about death, in the verses I referenced. But you responded by listing a bunch of unrelated verses in an effort, to use them to destroy the verses I referenced.

As I have previously mentioned, you can't use Gods Word to destroy Gods Word, when it exposes your denominations teachings. You have never addressed or refuted a single verse I mentioned, all you have done to defend your denomination, is ignore the verses I referenced and jump to other unrelated verses, then misapply them to where they contradict what Gods Word says in the verses I referenced.

You have used many of the same verses as we already considered and found that you interpretation contradicts what God said about the matter. You have not defended your denominations interpretation, when it contradicts Gods Word.

I would be glad, if you could set me straight by showing me scriptures to support your views. But all you have offered up so far, is unbiblical doctrines which are not supported by any scripture at all.
You make many assumptions and presumptions, but the bible doesn't support a single one of them.

You keep describing "death" as if there was only one kind mentioned in the Bible, but I have shown you that there are several different kinds of death. But you reject what Gods Word has to say about it and instead pluck verses out of their intended context and apply your denominational narrative to them and attempt to pass them of as Biblically correct.

It's not true to say that everyone experiences the death of the body, because we see billions are living on the earth when Jesus comes back. His elect will be transformed into His likeness without experiencing bodily death. So there again you have made a false statement.

Your opinion about those who experienced the death of their body, not being able to think is also false. We find those who died the bodily death talking to each other and Abraham, you have Lazarus and the rich man and Abraham. The rich man was in hell begging for a drop of water to cool his tongue, but your denomination told you the dead can't talk but Jesus said they do, so again you place your trust in your priest but I place mine in the Lord Jesus.

I can list many more verses, but if you don't believe what Gods Word says, then it's a waste of time.

God said, "in the day you eat of it, you shall surely die". But you say no God, what you meant to say is "in the day you eat of it, you will die 900 years after that day". Can you see how your interpretation is makes no sense at all.

So when you read, "the dead know nothing", that means those who are still dead in their sin know nothing about spiritual things or what it means to be indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The "natural man" those who are not born again, are carnal creatures, they are spiritually blind, they are as brute beasts.
They can't choose to believe because spiritual things are foolishness to them, and as dead people they can do precisely nothing to make themselves alive.

Ephesians 2:1 "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins."
This verse confirms that the natural spiritual state of humanity is one of death from birth, and they remain dead unless God regenerates them.

Romans 5:12 "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned."
This verse also confirms that sin and spiritual death are inherited from Adam, affecting all humanity.

Romans 8:8 "Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God."
This verse shows that humanity's sinful nature, in its natural state, prevents it from having the spiritual capacity to please God.

Psalm 51:5 "For behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me."
This psalm is a declaration of the inherent sinfulness that is present from the very beginning of human life.

Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." This verse emphasizes the universality of sin, with the implication of spiritual death for everyone.

Benaiah468 · Oct 11, 2025

essentialsaltes said:
US is sending about 200 troops to Israel to help support and monitor the Gaza ceasefire deal
The coordination center will be staffed by about 200 U.S. service members who have expertise in transportation, planning, security, logistics and engineering, said the official, who noted that no American troops will be sent into Gaza.

Those who dream of martyrdom seem to fear for their lives. The US is to act as guarantor to convince Hamas of Israel's tactical retreat without the organization having to fear that Israel could immediately launch another military strike after the hostages are released. Hamas is already regaining control of areas from which Israel has withdrawn. It will regroup and rearm from the very first minute of the ceasefire. Israel reserves the right to respond immediately to any threat. Hamas, and it must be said cynically, can be relied upon. And because this is the case, there is no alternative: the terrorist organisation must be crushed once and for all.

stevevw · Oct 11, 2025

linux.poet said:
I would think that said millions of believers aren't going to fund a policy that leaves a woman with a non-viable 17-week miscarriage to die of sepsis. If the only reason to change the funding is to dodge a law that's meant to save a woman's life, I can't say that I'm going to support that.

We both know that there are ways to put a marketing spin on the situation to sweep the truth under the rug, but the truth comes out eventually and the wise will know. We're not glorifying God by taking money away from other things to fund evading the law.

The simplist way would be for the Catholic hospital to adjust their polcies and procedures to ensure that situation doesn't happen again. It was an oversight that they did not consider that now needs to be adjusted.

Often when something like this happens and it exposes a weakness in the policies and procedures. So its a case of writing into the P & P's how to deal with this situation accordingly. Memo sent out to all departments.

If situations happen enough then sometimes a region wide or State wide change or adjustment is required. If its law then you have to abide by the laws and regulations and reflect them in the P & P's.

Apple Sky · Oct 11, 2025

Strong in Him said:
Who is doing all this brainwashing?
And why don't they brainwash the leaders into believing something important

1. NASA
2. All the world leaders are in on the scam, the same way that they were all in for the for the signing of the Antarctic Treaty, all the leaders of every nation signed this treaty. If they can all come together to sign this treaty, they can certainly all come together to back the biggest lie in human history.

HIM · Oct 11, 2025

ARBITER01 said:
That's an interesting question completely out of left field.

My answer is no, you can't be living in willful sin and be following Jesus,....

26 ¶ For if we sin willingly after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remaineth a sacrifice for sins,

Let me ask you a question completely out of left field also,... do you own an 83 f250 with a 460 in it? if not, why not?

Left field? No, but when we are posed something that is contrary to what we perceive to be truth and while engaging with someone we are sinning if we do not stand for said truth. Then again one could of have a changed heart. And what they thought was true they found out was not. In that case they are sinning if they do not share that they see differently now.

Strong in Him · Oct 11, 2025

Apple Sky said:
But being up there with all the stars you wouldn't exactly miss them.

If they were enormous, mega bright and right in your path, no, you wouldn't.
He probably saw them but didn't actually notice, or pay any attention to, them

Strong in Him · Oct 11, 2025

Apple Sky said:
There not liars, just people who have been fooled or brainwashed into believing this farce.

Wait a minute; world leaders and world's media were brainwashed, and then they decided to brainwash others?
They - who have been fooled themselves, all got together and said "how can we fool others"?

Who is doing all this brainwashing?
And why don't they brainwash the leaders into believing something important - like, they really want world peace and should try to end hunger - rather than "this man walked on the moon", which affects no one?

Try to answer using the logic that you claim to have, and giving real evidence of their motives.

stevevw · Oct 11, 2025

bèlla said:
The government isn’t responsible for supporting christian causes. If they want to rest on their beliefs they need to raise the money. There’s millions of believers. They have more than enough to draw from.

I don't mean actively supporting Christian organisations. But rather allow them the same rights as other groups in society who also hold worldview beliefs. Take an even hand to all groups who hold different beliefs as far as allowing them to practice their beliefs in the public square.

ie not say that because a religious groups holds to a belief that abortion or SSM is wrong and want to open up facilities accordingly. They should recieve government funding regardless of their belief. Because all beliefs are suppose to be able to practice their beliefs in the public square.

bèlla said:
The state represents government interests foremost not religion.

This is the problem. There is no such State that is neutral when it comes to religious type beliefs. The ontological position that abortion or SSM is ok is a belief in itself.

So if the State endorces such a belief over the other beliefs that say abortion is not ok they are descriminating against the beliefs of those who say abortion is wrong. The State wins and gets to enforce this metaphysical belief that is not backed by the science or fact over others.

bèlla said:
They need some tea drinking southerners to educate them on the principle. You’ve forgotten your place. You’re a beggar seeking funding like the rest. Don’t allow your religion to confound you. For a people supposedly endowed with the Holy Spirit you function a lot like sinners.

That’s what happens when you seek the devil’s kitty for funds. Where’s your followers gifted in leadership and administration? They’re going to pull the rug eventually.

Yes you have to play by their rules or else.

bèlla said:
How can you believe in Christ and post that? Stop making excuses for their laziness and omission of creativity.

Can you elaborate. I am not sure whether you are jesting or not lol.

bèlla said:
It doesn’t matter what they do. You have more than a billion followers to draw from. Why haven’t you done that?

I am speaking about truth and justice, fairness. I am taking secular societies own norms and morals and ideology and using their own standards to hold them to account. Their own ideology claims that all beliefs are equal and allowed to be expressed in society without bias or favour.

That includes any belief that is ideological and claiming an ontological reality for society. Because the denial or relegatio of particular beliefs is itself based on a belief. A belief that all beliefs can co exist neutrally. A belief that there is no truth of belief and moral laws.

That by the very nature of humans we use beliefs as the basis for how society should be ordered and its not about equality but an ideological beliefs about whether or not there is a God or not. So when the world or State actor who stand on the worldly ideologies that are rejecting God rule they are actually enforcing their belief and not whata is just, right and fair based on truth or fact.

I am not sure you get my point. Maybe I am bad at explaining things.

bèlla said:
More excuses.

You don't get what I am saying then. I tend to do this in speaking the third parties in first persons lol. I am not advocating one side or religious freedom that it can breach what is a fundemental truth principle even for Christians that we care for those in need when presenting as a medical emergency. Forget about ethics its a medical emergency that requires intervention fullstop.

Thats one thing. Thats the truth of the matter and fact supported by commonsense health. That pain, complications with pregnacy (water broke) red flag that intervention is required right away. As the science has already told us thats bad medical situation.

I was pointing out the bigger picture. There is obvious moral outrage and fair enough. But I was pointing out in the bigger picture that we can find examples where a belief rather than fact or truth the basis for policy and laws that are unfair and unhealthy and even dangerous to health.

This relates to the idea that all beliefs should be considered for the basis of policy and law so long as they also conform with the facts and truth of the matter. Not that is is an excuse for the specific example. But that we should be fair and consistent with matters of health as to what is best even if it goes against different ideological groups beliefs.

That is the real problem. The inconsistency and ambiguity about what is best which is distorted by ideological beliefs one way or the other.

bèlla said:
Your answers largely reflect the reason I will never support christian organizations. You provided a litany of excuses and finger pointing which removed the responsibility from where it belongs. They’re a disgrace to the Most High.

Then your misunderstanding what I say. As I said I am not disputing or excusing the specific example. Fact is fact.

bèlla said:
We’re accountable for our gifts and talents. Irrespective of the world or circumstance you’re expected to perform. I’d rather fund the arts than a bastardization of truth sorely needing a reality check.

~bella

I am sort of the same. I think art in its various forms expresses truths, experiences and realities that conventional forms of knowing cannot do.

But at the same time I am a pragmatic realist. I deal with the reality happening before me as it presents. A big part of that is the level of knowledge and experience one has and especially that which is grounded in objective reality lol.

But humans are more than this and its when we get into the higher needs such as the more transcedent realities like spirituality, morality, self fullfilment and creative ideas and beliefs.

So I understand the full hierarchy of human needs. I work by this holistic approach. I understand when pragmatically someone is presenting at a hospital with an emergency medical problem its the act place they should expect help regardless of religious belief.

But I also understand that behind this is a higher aspect or reality that is the basis for the whole religion verses secular beliefs cultural phenomena. The ultimate right way society and the world should be ordered. Which worldview you subscribe to determines how you see the higher aspects of reality.

Douggg · Oct 11, 2025

DragonFox91 said:
A false "Christian" church

Your view is that the Antichrist will be a false "Christian" church ?

sjastro · Oct 11, 2025

stevevw said:
You have not begun well then. I would never hear such a derogatry word used in a formal paper about another formal paper. That would have immediated disqualified you from even submitting anything lol. Remembering that when you say "your nonsense" your actually speaking about the researchers paper.

This explains why your posts are incoherent, you do not even comprehend basic English.
"Your nonsense" pertains to you not the researchers, it explains why you are confused in being unable to distinguish who the criticisms are directed against.

stevevw said:
Never said that. I am just linking the screen shots of the stages of how the analogy was done. You can see those screen shots in context. I am not hiding anything. However the researchers done the tests and analysis is how I want to relay their work. As you say I don't know as I am not an expert.

Once again this indicates your failure to understand simple English, in this case the word 'context'. If your screen shots were in context and defined accordingly they would not be so misleading.

stevevw said:
All I am intested in is relaying as best I can what the researchers are saying. It is fact they developed a new software to handle these vases. As I am not familar with different applications I could not even tell lol. But I am not saying that spoecific pages are what they developed. Just that they had to develop or adjust a software application to properly handle these vases. Thats exactly what was said.

Nope, just relaying exactly what was said in the article. In fact its almost word for word if you watch the video at the points I mentioned.

This is another logical fallacy a non sequitor. Obviously as mentioned this is unfunded research. Like all researchers you are on a budget and have to find other ways. Karoyl even makes as he says an unabashed appeal to any tech companies to help. Which has been the case in other projects. If it was not for the connections with Dunn and others in the Aerospace industry UnchartedX would not have access to the tech either.

But the fallacy that somehow finding a way around this issue by creating your own softward to specifically handle these unprecedented vases is somehow going to produce false results does not follow. Karoyl also states that they addressed the alignment issue and consulted experts and not just the 3 scientists you once again use another logical fallacy as being somehow unqualified because they are part of something you don't like the results of.

Given you do not understand what the word 'your' means I'm afraid there is very little hope of you comprehending multiple words such 'logical fallacy' and 'non sequitor'. Your motivation for such terms is described by a word which you will clearly struggle to understand it's called 'projection'.

stevevw said:
They also consulted Zeiss and other specialist to develop the software. For all you know it may end up being groundbreaking and pioneering work.

And this a term that you will really struggle with as it involves Latin, it's the 'argumentum ad ignorantiam' fallacy.

stevevw said:
I have noticed all these red herrings and little unfounded complaints about method. Which tells me you acknowledge that there is precision in these vase. Your just trying to reduce that precision anyway you can.

This has got to be one of your stupid comments.

stevevw said:
Ok so I have three independent testers who have actually done tests and formal analysis and published the work. As opposed to someone on social media making a lot of logical fallacies. I know which way I will go. You will have to do better than that to convince me lol.

Just the tone of your posts and the name calling disqualifies you from any formal credibility.

This encapsulates (sorry for the big word) what happens when you struggle with simple English.
I asked a very simple question show me the test results of these three independent testers for me to be the judge.
While a six year old may not understand the technical background, they will understand the sentence construction and meaning, you clearly don't.

Latest activity

Latest activity

US is sending about 200 troops to Israel to help support and monitor the Gaza ceasefire deal​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

US is sending about 200 troops to Israel to help support and monitor the Gaza ceasefire deal