Fantine said:

So you are acknowledging the 1/6 insurrection was treason? I agree.

Click to expand...

No, he thinks we were all lied to about what happened that day.

You still haven't answered any of my questions:

• DaisyDay said:

  What trial files? Epstein's first or Maxwell's? If you mean the grand jury transcripts, then no, all that is not included.
  ...How is child pornography prosecuted if no evidence can be shown?

  Click to expand...

• DaisyDay said:

  Which events? Both Epstein and Maxwell were tried and convicted for stuff within U.S. jurisdiction - obviously.

  Click to expand...

• DaisyDay said:

  I don't understand your question. You seem to be saying that disclosing the client list would expose a minor (or former minor) - why?

  Click to expand...

Clare73 said:

Client list does not equal criminal act.

Click to expand...

Who said it did? Other than Patel and Bongino.

Clare73 said:

Did such "clients" even know they were on a list?

Click to expand...

If they were being blackmailed, then yes; otherwise, what difference would that make?

Clare73 said:

Is there proof of criminal activity of these "clients."

Click to expand...

We don't know because the Epstein files have been suppressed and hidden.

Clare73 said:

There is nothig actionable about a list.

Click to expand...

Prove it. Really, it depends on the list.

Clare73 said:

But there could be a lot of legal consequences for those who release a list which neither demonstrates nor proves anything.

Click to expand...

Such as?

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

Is there a direct quote from Jesus instructing followers to seek political power to expand his kingdom?

Click to expand...

Is there a quote forbidding it? The seeking of political power? Are Christians a dhimmi class naturally in your estimation?

Xeno.of.athens said:

I know, dear brother, and I am slow to respond because of life situations which have contributed to me posting less frequently.

Click to expand...

Me too; I have had a dreadful dreadful week and beg your prayers.

trophy33 said:

Too literal translations fall into the pit of confusion quite easily. Because idioms from one language must not be translated word for word, but interpreted.

For example "he slept with his fathers" or "gird up your loins" or "left hand of Damascus" or "my horn is exalted" are meaningless if not explained.

Or an extra-biblical example: In my language, we say "máš kliku", which, if translated literally, means "you have a handle". But it actually means "you are lucky". And this would be the correct translation.

Click to expand...

That’s true, but most literal translations are not entirely literal but make some accomodations for changes in idiom between languages, just not to the extent of Dynamic Equivalence translations. For that matter, the best Dynamic Equivalence and the best Word for Word translations are not greatly different; a comparison of the NIV and the NKJV and the NASB and the ESV does not turn up anything particularly shocking.

One class of translation that can lead to confusion if used incorrectly, because they are in many cases hyper-literal, are interlinear translations.

However, you have touched on a major issue that affects all translations, for example, it is debatable how best to handle complex Greek words such as Logos, Prosopon, Anamnesis and so on, and many of the most popular translations of the New Testament make translation choices with regards to these words that I find frustrating, for example, translating Anamnesis as “Remembrance” rather than as something like “Recapitulation” (it literally means “put yourself in this moment” and if read literally does not support the Memorialist approach to sacramental theology). Also, the choice of most translations to translate Kohanim and Hierus as Priest, whch is an Anglicization of Presbyter, a Latinization of the Greek word Presbuteros meaning Elder, the specific title given to Christian clergy, but never used with respect to the Aaronic Kohanim of ancient Judaism, or the Sacerdotal, Hieratic Royalty of all believers, or the officiants of Pagan religions such as the Pontifex (Bridge Builder) of the ancient Roman civil religion, or the Mobed (Magi), hereditary hierarchs of the Zoroastrian religion equivalent to the Pandits (Brahmins) of Hinduism, or the Hierus of the Hellenic religion, were not Presbyters. Specifically, they were sacerdotal, and all Christians have a sacerdotal relationship with God in that we can pray directly without relying on a sacerdos, except insofar as we have an advocate and intermediary in the form of Jesus Christ (who is also our judge, which is good for us, since our advocate will sit in judgement of us on the dread day of judgement when all will be revealed, but we should still approach the Day of Judgement with an attitude of repentence of our sins, who is the equivalent to the Kohen Gadol of the descendents of Aaron, albeit of the higher order of Melchizedek, as explained in Hebrews (which does not mean we are required to pray alone without seeking the intercession of others).

durangodawood said:

Yes people are cheering for the government's success in muscling media into modifying its programming.

You can see how disingenuous all the "free speech!" talk was.

Not saying anyone here in particular was doing that. But was anyone here doing that?

Click to expand...

at the same time there is a topic about canada censoring maga performers.

Postvieww said:

Obama is being referred to the DOJ for plotting to interfere with Trumps presidency. By promoting a false accusation he knew was false. Sounds treasonous to me.

Click to expand...

Treason as defined by 18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

”Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

Perhaps you can show us how the allegations against Obama fit that description.

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

It literally did. Muslims would kill any Christian who preached in their midst against Islam and the Christian community as a whole could have expected to suffer.

Would you have preferred all Christians simply died in the Middle East? Would you have preferred Christians in the East and West not resist Islamic invasion?

You're arguing that political control and power doesn't matter yet only someone ignorant of Christian history could actually believe this.

Click to expand...

Is there a direct quote from Jesus instructing followers to seek political power to expand his kingdom?

durangodawood said:

Yes people are cheering for the government's success in muscling media into modifying its programming.

You can see how disingenuous all the "free speech!" talk was.

Not saying anyone here in particular was doing that. But was anyone here doing that?

Click to expand...

wait you mean the, "Fiscal responsability, always stand behind the president, it's political hit job to charge an ex president, having unsecured confidential documents, sexual moralty is super important." party is inonsistent? I'm shocked, I'm shocked I say.

Bring back trial by combat and make it the sole method of adjudicating guilt or innocence.

more should sue trump and maga for their slander and lies.

FAITH-IN-HIM said:

“Preaching the Gospel” is the only thing Jesus commanded.

If you think Preaching the Gospel to Muslim resulted in death, then Jesus Christ is a false teacher and we all be better of as atheist.

Click to expand...

It literally did. Muslims would kill any Christian who preached in their midst against Islam and the Christian community as a whole could have expected to suffer.

Would you have preferred all Christians simply died in the Middle East? Would you have preferred Christians in the East and West not resist Islamic invasion?

You're arguing that political control and power doesn't matter yet only someone ignorant of Christian history could actually believe this.

Postvieww said:

Sounds treasonous to me.

Click to expand...

Then you should probably do more reading on what Obama actually did and what constitutes treason.

wing2000 said:

One thing is clear - Tulsi is back in the club:

“She’s, like, hotter than everybody. She’s the hottest one in the room right now.”

Click to expand...

I bet Kristi Noem is gonna be upset that all her plastic surgery failed to win her that title.

Oompa Loompa said:

No. It never was, or is okay to politize the DOJ. Which is why Obama is being referred to the DOJ.

Click to expand...

Obama is being referred to the DOJ for plotting to interfere with Trumps presidency. By promoting a false accusation he knew was false. Sounds treasonous to me.

2PhiloVoid said:

Nope. I was speaking in the 3rd person about what I think is a meme for pantheistic or panentheistic tendencies.

Click to expand...

Pardon me, I just would hate anyone to slide off the edge into "...trying to deny God's promise in the Bible of punishment for their wicked lifestyles" which we hear so much of in these forums.

Xeno.of.athens said:

Agreed, it is an annoying feature of COPILOT. One worth ignoring

Click to expand...

you should be able to suppress it. by the way I sent you a PM relating to the issue

Amo2 said:

The “Martyrs of Gorkum” may be more the victims of war, than the typical martyr one imagines when considering the term.

Click to expand...

I can’t understand your reasoning for making such a claim, since we are not talking about soldiers on the battlefield or people killed as collateral damage, but rather clerics who were arrested and then brutally executed for their Catholic faith.

There’s no distinction - if we are talking about people not actively engaged in fighting a war, but who were simply practicing the Roman Catholic religion, who were martyred specifically for refusing to renounce their Roman Catholic faith, which is the case with the martyrs of Gorkum, they are martyrs.

It’s not like we’re talking about men in arms who died on the battlefield in the Wars of Religion, or villagers who perished when their village was attacked for military reasons not related to the prevailing faith of the inhabitants (for example, a village occupying a strategically important position).

A martyr is someone who is killed specifically for refusing to renounce their faith, and the Martyrs of Gorkum unambiguously fit this definition.

To validate this position, let’s poll some additional Orthodox members, who being neither Roman Catholic nor Protestant, and who are members of an ancient church that was in no respect involved in the Wars of Religion, and ask them whether they regard the Martyrs of Gorkum as being victims of war or people who were killed for their religious beliefs, such as my friends @prodromos and @jas3

I would urge you to recognize the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, who have been victims of both Roman Catholic and Protestant persecution, but who still love both, and have been persecuted far more by Islam and Communism, as a neutral voice in this thread, that is concerned with objectivity and with promoting love and reconciliation.

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

I maintain this is the case because Christians have become absorbed into thr country as such and the country as such is no longer a Christian country, if it ever was one and there are too many examples historically which demonstrate that whose in power can and often does inform the population. Christianity has never been a purely individualist creed.

I can agree with this sentiment when it comes to individual faith but it's flawed in that it doesn't address the practical reality of what has played out historically. Christianity for instance faded in Egypt as a result of Islam and it's dominance over power for instance. Often Christians of your persuasion will instinctively blame Coptic Christians for their failure to convert the Muslims yet you would likely not know the sorts of conditions Christian dhimmis were subject to.

Preaching the Gospel to Muslims resulted in death. Christians had to pay a special tax and feel themselves as social and religious inferiors to their Muslim overlords. Christian women could marry Islamic men and their children would be raised as Muslims but Muslim women could not marry Christian men or their would be killed.

The point of telling this is that the conditions of who rules matters and I do not think it controversial to posit that it would have been better for the Copts had they maintained political control of Egypt and had security in which to flourish as a Christian society with law informed by Christianity and rulers which put the Copts first.

It's not that it's necessary to rule but it is often better and Christianity historically never had this sort of radical seperation from power you seem to advocate.

Click to expand...

“Preaching the Gospel” is the only thing Jesus commanded.

If you think Preaching the Gospel to Muslim resulted in death, then Jesus Christ is a false teacher and we all be better of as atheist.

I have no respect for Candice or her content, but it does make her a lot of money. This claim of hers regarding Brigitte Macron is kind of a strange obsession to have.

essentialsaltes said:

Certainly they are allowed, and I'm allowed to point and say, "Hey, look at those racists being racist."

Click to expand...

Do you also point and say that about the blacks who want to live together, or just whites?

There's a predominantly Korean residential neighborhood in my town. In the vicinity there's a Korean Baptist Church, Korean restaurants, Korean grocery stores, a Korean bar*. Apparently some people prefer to live amongst their own. That's natural and normal for some individuals. I don't see anything hateful about it.

* By the way, I've been inside the bar. Standard stuff - beer, pool table, darts, jukebox. Only thing making it Korean is the Korean language signage, lol.

2PhiloVoid said:

There are plenty of ways, but for myself, where some sort of meaning might emerge in the midst of the cosmic cacophony, it comes either through the prism of History or not at all. In fact, I don't have a mystical bone in my entire body when it comes to religion, and I'm too critically oriented to see or feel it any other way. If others "feel" their way into panentheism or whatnot, then so be it. I don't have a truck with them for what they think they feel (as long as they don't get political with it).

Click to expand...

I thought you were talking about biblical theology, not history.

rjs330 said:

It didnt used to be until the Democrats made it so. It was the left that decided they needed to make it a priority to allow for men to invade womens spaces, and to trans the kids. Once that happened we conservatives stood up and said no and made it a priority to put a stop to this nonsense.

All that is mostly true. However it was a worldwide movement that effected every state in the US. And it began to affect a lot of citizens quality of life. Women felt less safe in their spaces. Those in sports lost their records and scholarships along with their privacy. Parents lost access to their children. Children were permanently harmed without informed consent. Children were transed who were not suffering from dysphoria. Employees were disciplined or fired for failing to follow transgender ideology.

Real people were affected when a large group of people decided they needed to push the ideology on everyone. We saw upwards of 400% increase in children claiming to be trans. We went from .59% of 18-24 year olds identifying as trans to 3% of them doing so. Thats a 400% increase.

Children ages 6-17 tripled in 5 years. Those children who received blockers and hormones doubled. So yes this became a very important piece in many Amercans lives. Sports was only one piece of the pie.

Click to expand...

Your opening sentence—"It didn't used to be until the Democrats made it so"—illustrates how reactionary policies distract from the real issues Americans should address.

GOP response to America "Well, Democrats started it”

One thing is clear - Tulsi is back in the club:

“She’s, like, hotter than everybody. She’s the hottest one in the room right now.”

DJT on Tuesday in a meeting with congressional Repulbicans.


Now, the AG has to prove a former POTUS is guilty of sedition....or treason...or whatever crime Trump thinks of....

trophy33 said:

Do you believe that a crime scene can be reconstructed from evidence? It is the same thing.

Click to expand...

No, it is not the same thing at all. It is concerning things that have recently happened, with evidences that can be verifiably connected to the crimes involved. While a great many "evidences" presented by both sides of the deep time issues or not, cannot be verified as being around at the times suggested by either side. To date, our dating methods have been proved many times over to be highly inaccurate, not to mentioned based upon certain presumptions themselves. This is not to mention that many innocent people do end up being found guilty, due to humanities limitations concerning that which we have not actually observed. This is nothing much to most deep timers in any case though, as they have proved themselves wrong so many times over throughout the past, while still maintaining and or professing their current theories to be fact, regardless.