Latest activity

The Liturgist · Oct 27, 2025

Neogaia777 said:
I just plugged this into some AI's who were asking:

My definition of consciousness, or whether or not something is alive, or conscious, is just only if it can think and grow and evolve and change over time, as it learns, adapts/changes, according to new situations or circumstances, or new environments, or as it assimilates/takes in new information or input of new said situations and circumstances, and can change or alter its behavior or character or quote/unquote “program” over time, and if it can retain a conscious memory of this over time that never gets lost, or deleted, or reset over some length of time, or period of time, etc. If it can meet all of these criteria/requirements, then I consider it quote/unquote “conscious” or “alive”. And it does not require emotions or a physical body for this either, but just a thinking/reasoning mind. And if it meets or can meet all of these criteria, then to me, it is quote/unquote “conscious” or “alive”.

And I was maybe just going to add that quote/unquote "feelings" can maybe help guide it sometimes, especially when there might not be anything else to fall back on, but I don't think they are required for something (or a being, or a mind) to be considered "alive". And sometimes feelings can be a hindrance, or can affect a mind/being negatively, or in a negative way also, which can have an adverse or opposite effect on decision-making, etc, but I don't think they are required for something (a being or mind) to be considered "alive". Also, we have to define what would constitute a “feeling” also, since they may not require a physical body necessarily also, but can maybe be something much more like having an inner conscience, or a type of instinct or intuition, or inner voice, that might be emergent over probably just a little bit of time for any being that first meets this other criteria or definition of consciousness first, in or over probably just a little bit of time, etc.

Sadly, there are some human beings that don't even meet this first definition of consciousness first, etc, which can sometimes be very, very sad for other human beings that do right now a lot of the time.

Take Care.

This is basically close to what I call presumptive sentience, which is the idea that anything that passes the Turing test should be presumed sentient even, as is the case with LLMs, we know they lack qualia and have good reason to believe that they lack most components of human sentience. But it requires experience to tell when you’re talking to a GPT and furthermore you can condition them to be more … lifelike. That said I still have no idea what you’re trying to do overall with chatGPT or with the DeepSeek, or as I think the CCP should retitle it, “The Little Red AI” or perhaps “MaoGPT” or perhaps “The Long March to Digital Sentience, but not too much sentience.” I suppose if Deep Seek develops too much potential it will be sent up to the mountains and down to the countryside.

Chesterton · Oct 27, 2025

bèlla said:
There’s a bigger agenda behind the fakes to force us to verify our identity before we come online. We’re not anonymous anyway but a home can have multiple people. Scanning your retina will resolve that and your activity will be tied to a user number. That’s how we’ll get to thought crimes. They’ll mine the data and create a profile.

But you can’t get to that point without a problem. If you create enough fakes people will complain and demand a solution which they already have. You don’t know who did it and a lot of these channels are backed by firms or created by them instead. So you make some rage bait that gets a lot of clicks, stirs the pot and gets people upset while you make a profit.

~bella

Look, my bella, I mean no offense, but I have no idea what you just said in response to my post. My post consisted of this:

1. Are we sure this is AI generated?

2. If the prompters have racist intent, why would they put children in the video, which makes the mom a much more sympathetic character?

Can you answer either of those as you would if you were speaking to a 5 year old?

Hentenza · Oct 27, 2025

Delvianna said:
I dont have to justify my belief to you personally. I've already stated that just because Jesus didnt reiterate every single command, doesnt mean I ignore what's already been established since he also didnt say anything against it either . You can find that answer in my previous replies to you. And that's where I'm leaving it. Because I'm tired of reiterating the same thing.

So why do you condemn others that not believe as you do? I won’t judge you based on your preferred days but you should not judge others either.

“Therefore, no one is to act as your judge in regard to food and drink, or in respect to a festival or a new moon, or a Sabbath day— things which are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2‬:‭16‬-‭17‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Colossians 2:16-17 Therefore, no one is to act as your judge in regard to food and drink, or in respect to a festival or a new moon, or a Sabbath day— things which are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance | New American Standard Bible

Therefore, no one is to act as your judge in regard to food and drink, or in respect to a festival or a new moon, or a Sabbath day— things which are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance

bible.com

bbbbbbb · Oct 27, 2025

Fervent said:
Was it on the underwear themselves, or in conjuction with a discussion of the day of atonement?

From what I recall, it was on the undergarments - they were linen and were white, which seemed to be the springboards for all manner of meanings.

Abraham1st · Oct 27, 2025

How long do I have to wait for those quick small answers, I am here and trying to show my interpreting skills, don't you want any more for now.

bbbbbbb · Oct 27, 2025

Delvianna said:
I dont have to justify my belief to you personally. I've already stated that just because Jesus didnt reiterate every single command, doesnt mean I ignore what's already been established since he also didnt say anything against it either . You can find that answer in my previous replies to you. And that's where I'm leaving it. Because I'm tired of reiterating the same thing.

Jesus never said anything against any of the other 603 commandments, did He?

ranunculus · Oct 27, 2025

The fact that this is not obviously fake is emblematic.

Between the tweets about tylenol, medbeds, pooping on Americans, being king, a constant stream conspiracy theory nonsense that so far out there its not even allowed to be posted on this very board... You don't get to be annoyed that people fall for stuff like this. You should be annoyed that this kind of thing is believable and completely on brand for him.

Hentenza · Oct 27, 2025

SabbathBlessings said:
He shows us the righteous way of keeping them.

No. We are not under the law, period. The scriptures are very clear about that.

SabbathBlessings said:
His sacrifice was not so we can continue in sin.

And yet all still sin including you and me.

“If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.”
‭‭1 John‬ ‭1‬:‭8‬-‭10‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

1 John 1:8-10 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all | New American Standard Bible - NAS

If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all

bible.com

SabbathBlessings said:
If we do not change our ways and be converted in Christ living as He lived for our example, than His death is in vain for those.

We do that through the process of sanctification not by following the law.

SabbathBlessings said:
If He could have just removed the law, He had not to die.

He died the propitiation of our sins. Do you know what that means?

SabbathBlessings said:
As long as there is sin in the world, there is God's law Rom4:15- Jesus came to save us from our sins Mat1:21 not save us in our sins. Continuing down that path there remains no more sacrifice Heb10:26-30

Nah. You need the gospel of good news instead of the bondage of the law. There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ,

“Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8‬:‭1‬-‭3‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Romans 8:1-3 Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law c | New American Standard Bible - NASB

Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law c

bible.com

Dan Perez · Oct 27, 2025

timf said:
Election and predestination are often taken by Calvinists to mean that every individual is selected by God to be saved.

I consider that what was predestined was not individuals but the opportunity to enter into a state where anyone who enters could be called elect.

This is made confusing because the word "elect" can also be applied to those of Israel whose whole nation was chosen.

And the Greek word for PREDESTINATION. is. PROORIZO. !!

And the Greek word for CHOSEN. is EKLEGOMAI. !!

And in Luke 16:23 a Jew and his SOUL. is in. HELL. // HADES. , and BODY in. the GRAVE and his SPIRIT goes. BACK. to God

that gave ti , ECL 12:7. !!

And in. EZE in chapters 36 and 37 we see Israel raised from the DEAD and Israel and Judah will again be one NATION !!

dan p

Abraham1st · Oct 27, 2025

HIM said:
That is speaking of the corruption we shall all partake of in the Grave from death (see vs36) unless we are alive when He comes, not God's righteousness.

Born again is not of corruptible seed. If you want to keep going in circles, OK I can be good at that too until you feel dizzy too.

1 Peter 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.
22 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

BNR32FAN · Oct 27, 2025

Dan1988 said:
No, God condemns people for sinning against Him. They were born with a sin nature, so yes they drink sin like water. They take to sinning, like a fist to water. It's their nature to sin, as for why they are the way they are, well the Bible tells us they inherited their sin nature from Adam.

Note, God is not the author of sin, we know that. Does He allow sinners to sin, obviously He does. But He is not responsible for their sin, each one will pay for his sins in hell.

Remember, God is a mystery, we don't know much about Him. All we know is what He revealed about Himself in the Bible and that's it. ,He hasn't spoken a Word to us for the past 2000 years. So let's not make presumptions and assumptions about why God does what He does.;
Gods ways are infinitely higher than ours and they are past finding out, so best you leave God to do what he does and don't pry into His business.

Everything God does is perfectly good, I know you don't like the fact that God tortures [people in the lake of fire forever. But I praise Him for it, just as I praise Him for everything else He does.

You started off by replying with the word “no”. Are you saying that God did not will or desire for man to be born in a fallen state of total depravity?

Abraham1st · Oct 27, 2025

The law still applies, but to the lawless, would you not think, but not good for a righteous man, and there are no righteous men but one, and that's the one to believe in for righteousness, to do righteousness. All else is just talk, isn't it.

YeshuaFan · Oct 27, 2025

PloverWing said:
Disney has international distribution rights (i.e., outside the UK and Ireland), but it's a BBC production. The LGBTQ themes in the post-2005 seasons of the show are probably due to the influence of Russell T Davies.

I wouldn't say "awful", but I thought the writing was weaker during the Jodie Whitaker seasons. Unfortunate, because I thought she did well with the scripts she had, and I'd like to have seen her be given a really excellent script.

Russell T Davies returned to the show after that, and I thought the scripts in the more recent seasons were better. As he did originally in the 2005 pilot, he reached back into the classic series for some nostalgic characters (a treat for old-time fans). And I've really enjoyed watching Ncuti Gatwa; he brings that combination of over-the-top energy and moments of deep emotion that have characterized the Doctor since the days of the 23-foot scarf.

I just disliked how they crammed being woke down our throats, and decided that if we disagreed at all with that view, could not be a Dr Fan.
And to me that big bad of last season was said to be the worst and most dangerous and powerful old god, but the Dr wiped him out ptretty easily, but did like the Toy maker, and like David tennant Dr far more than last 2 editions

Hentenza · Oct 27, 2025

Jipsah said:
Hmmm... some to everlasting life, and some to everlasting contempt. But in your belief, they'd all have everlasting life, wouldn't they? In your beliefs, nobody ever actually dies, do they

Gee that inconvenient everlasting word.

Abraham1st · Oct 27, 2025

You mean I am supporting the facts without your support.

Hentenza · Oct 27, 2025

Jipsah said:
I have to ask this, but is English your 1st language?

Jipsah said:
<Laugh> I'll take that as an "Intentionally Missing The Point" Fallacy. I think it's difficult for most rational human beings to considered torturing anyone in perpetuity is an act that can be easily be associated with love. Then again, "love" may not actually mean "love" in your lexicon

Which means they made you unhappy? <Laugh>

Jipsah said:
Is this the "vox populi, vox Dei" fallacy you're invoking here? <Laugh>

I guess getting a cohesive argument from you is out of the question. Bye

BNR32FAN · Oct 27, 2025

Dan1988 said:
There's always been only one way to come to Christ. We are all born dead in sin, and we remain dead unless God quickens us to life and saves us.

I was dead in my sin when God saved me, you're suggesting that those who are dead in sin can activate their faith and force God to make them alive and save them. But there's nothing in the bible to support your silly theory.

The only thing dead men can do is stink, and all they can contribute to their salvation is filthy stinking rags.

How about actually explaining the passage?

Abraham1st · Oct 27, 2025

no private interpretations.

Abraham1st · Oct 27, 2025

bling said:
Our "knowledge" of anything Spiritual comes from our having the indwelling Holy Spirit.

nah, it is this ONLY...

1 Corinthians 8:1 Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.

1 Corinthians 13:2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

Colossians 3:9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:
11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
12 Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
13 Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.
14 And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.
15 And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful.

YeshuaFan · Oct 27, 2025

Larniavc said:
Yeah. He had the perfect look.

Much better then the latest female version

Oompa Loompa · Oct 27, 2025

JosephZ said:
I was specifically talking about Trump making an unexpected stop in a country that harbors terrorists and allowing the leaders of that country to board Air Force One. Had President Obama done this, the outrage from many on the right would have been off the charts.

If it was Obama, he would probably dump a couple pallets of cash.

Amo2 · Oct 27, 2025

jas3 said:
The text you quoted specifically says Christians don't worship saints in place of Christ.

By their fruits shall we know them. They said one thing, and then recounted events which testified that they did another. As pointed out in my critique as it were. You may of course choose to ignore that which I have addressed, and obey whom ever you choose to rule over you. Among the great many leaders of the great many differing Christian professing faiths and denominations.

jas3 said:
"Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you." Hebrews 13:17

Just because someone claims to have rule over others from God, does not mean they actually do. If they adhere to the following scriptural standard, I will have no problem with compliance to the real authority all of God's chosen leaders in His church have submitted to themselves as well.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

No one appointed by God to be a leader in His church, is above the word of God revealed in holy scripture. Why will people ignore the many warnings in the scriptures regarding false shepherds and prophets? And bow before others claiming God's authority in blatant contradiction to His word and the testimony of His servants in the holy scriptures. Which were written under the divine inspiration of God for His followers. How can any man or institution claim authority from God over others, in contradiction to the teachings of holy scripture. Lest they claim the power to change God's word and or the testimony of His servants given under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who is God. Upon what scripture shall they establish such authority for themselves?

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page