It’s not even about CNN. The way it works is there isn’t even supposed to be room for error, it’s a one way system where humans are presumably only involved in transporting the drives or whatever. For vote switching or votes disappearing to occur there has to be malicious intent behind it. You could also read the Navarro report or the report done on Michigan’s voting machines.
Oh and uh... you think people would say something? We did, but apparently nobody cares.
There is still hope... but if Biden and Harris do take power, then America is basically through. He’s saying that maybe God isn’t willing a second Trump term. People get the governments they deserve. It was maybe a long shot to hope that America could get a real president again.
Exactly what I was thinking. I thought we were talking about him being Texas or Camp David and he sends out a video from the WH? I couldn’t shake the feeling that I was getting faked out. Same way I feel when I look at the news.
Yeah I’ve been thinking this whole time... if Trump has been so confident he’d win and would let it hinge on Pence and Congress? Then it’s all a show. And if we think a massive demonstration like yesterday would get the commies to bow down and give up their power, pipe dream. I’m extremely proud of what we did yesterday, but if Trump had an ace it wasn’t gonna be a tweet.
With Trump being blocked from social media outlets and all this shenanigans, it seems the establishment is either extremely confident in their victory or scared shitless of what Trump could do next. This is America’s final stand.
Fancy term for complete and total. In terms of the Constitution, when a power is considered plenary it means it can be exercised to its full extent and without restraint. Still up in the air whether Pence’s power to reject electors is plenary, but hold on!
You make good points, and while I don’t think the House GOP was necessarily in on it, I’m sure Democratic stronghold states with all mail-in elections had the time, will, and resources to rig the whole ballot. So while I’m not saying every particular race was rigged, I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that the presidential race wasn’t the only one stolen.
Have to agree with you here. As much as I hate Walmart, pulling this sort of thing just hurts the wrong people. It’s like BLM going around and destroying businesses, including the black-owned businesses. Boycotting Walmart is one thing but inconveniencing random teenagers doesn’t do much good imo.
I figured you were a Calvinist, and if you interpret Scripture in order to support your presuppositions, I suppose that is all that you will see. The implications of your ideology are absurd; if people are only wicked because God hates them, is it not God then who makes them wicked? You are wholly discounting people's ability to choose the good. If it is only God who grants repentance, then God is to blame for all evil in the world. And we know this cannot be the case. I preferred not to address each of your verses particularly simply because your overall message runs so counter to the Bible that it can be refuted simply by applying logical principles to the nature of God to deduce that God does not cause evil. God didn't make Adam and Eve eat the apple! How sick do you think God is? Why call sinners to repentance if they can only repent if God allows them to?
God freely gives people the grace to repent from sin and reject heresy, but they must cooperate with this grace. When God "grants repentance," it is not that God forces them to repent, but that God gives them the grace to repent. If you do not believe in free will, then this means that man is not held responsible for sin, as it was not his choice. And thus the wicked do not choose to be wicked, but God makes them so. And thus God creates evildoers forcibly to make them wicked and throw them into the pits of hell. Now, let us take another look at the second epistle of Paul to Timothy.
"In a large household there are vessels not only of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for lofty and others for humble use. If anyone cleanses himself of these things, he will be a vessel for lofty use, dedicated, beneficial to the master of the house, ready for every good work." 2 Timothy 2:20-21
So now it is the person who cleanses himself, and this is merely a few verses before that which you interpret to mean that people only repent if God somehow forces them to. Now let us heed Paul's warning to Timothy.
"Remind people of these things and charge them before God to stop disputing about words. This serves no useful purpose since it harms those who listen." 2 Timothy 2:14
It seems neither of us will change our minds. But simply, believing in predestination distorts understanding of the will of God and the nature of free will, implying that all evil persons are left evil by God and that we have no agency in our actions. And because you wanted to simply repeat verses you already used, I will do the same.
"The Lord does not delay his promise, as some regard 'delay,' but he is patient with you, not wishing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:9
Perhaps you should tell Peter to word his letter better, since God desires a very many to perish eternally and grants repentance only to his select few. As to your excerpt from John 6, the chapter in context is about Jesus' flesh as the bread of life, which I presume you do not even believe in. Only by grace may we believe in these great Christian truths that flesh alone cannot comprehend, but this does not mean we have no choice in the matter.
But it seems our discussion is unfruitful and we are both unwilling to change our minds. God love you, and I pray that you will consider whether the Bible in context supports your notion of God, or whether you are reading the Bible merely to confirm your presuppositions.
I appreciate you taking the time to reply to me in so many words. Rather than refute your points with narrow interpretations of Scripture, I will merely argue with some fundamental principles of the nature of God, the nature of God's will, and whether Christ's message is consistent with that you preach.
God is perfect, God is love, and God is all-good. God can accomplish everything logically possible, which of course excludes the forced salvation of those who knowingly, willfully, and freely reject Him. God cannot force people to love him, for then it ceases to be love! So when the wicked are damned, it is not merely because God "hates" them, but it is a just punishment and consequence of their willful rejection of Him! Does God desire that all men be saved? In a way, yes, as he sent His Only Begotten Son to die for our sins that we may have hope of salvation. Are all men actually saved? Almost certainly not, as we can reasonably expect those who knowingly and willingly reject God receive their just consequence absent extraordinary circumstances. Consider the Parable of the Lost Sheep.
“What man among you having a hundred sheep and losing one of them would not leave the ninety-nine in the desert and go after the lost one until he finds it? And when he does find it, he sets it on his shoulders with great joy and, upon his arrival home, he calls together his friends and neighbors and says to them, ‘Rejoice with me because I have found my lost sheep.’ I tell you, in just the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance." Luke 15:4-7
Would God not rejoice if the wicked renounced their ways, repented, and followed Him? Did Jesus not call us all to repent that we may be saved? As to your contention that God does not desire us all to come to a knowledge of the truth, consider that God is Truth, and that Jesus Himself commissioned us to "make disciples of all nations" (Matthew 28:19). If Jesus only died for His "friends" as you claim, it seems inconsistent that He would want to spread the Gospel, which is the truth. Indeed, why would the early Christians desire to spread their faith at all if they could simply trust that God would save His friends and not everyone else? We are commissioned to evangelize and spread the truth, for through the truth men come to know God and be saved. To suggest otherwise is simply blasphemy.
By this same line of reasoning and without narrow interpretations of Scripture, we can see that Jesus did die that all would have the opportunity for salvation. God rejoices in our repentance and when the wicked change their ways and come to him. Matthew was a tax collector, Mary Magdalene an adulteress. Peter denied Christ and Paul persecuted Christians. Jesus came not to call the righteous, but the sinners! You and I are sinners as well! What do you think is the difference between those whom God loves and those whom God hates? Is it not simply that they either follow His Commandments or not? And is this not dependent on their free will rather than some personal vendetta on the part of God?
God hates evil, but not necessarily the evildoer. For why would an all-loving, all-good God create people whom He desires to damn eternally? Hell is eternal separation from God! Why would God create anyone with the express desire of separating them from Him forever? It is inconsistent and contrary to the Gospel message. People are damned not because God, who is all-good, desires that people be wicked! They freely choose that and reject God! If Jesus died only for His chosen people, we'd be damned! But Christ came to call sinners that they may repent and follow Him. Jesus desires the repentance of sinners though most of them would rather freely live in darkness than live in the light of Christ.
I am not claiming all are saved. Far from it. But Jesus died that all men would have the chance to repent and be saved, God desires that all repent even though most do not! But this is their doing and not the Lord's! I entreat you to have the humility to recognize that without the sacrifice of Christ, almost nobody would be going to heaven by their own merits. You cannot claim to follow Christ while contradicting His message. The picture you paint is that of a vengeful God, not one who would send His Son to die for the sins of mankind. God does love everyone; this is the whole point of creation! God doesn't need any one of us and could have spent eternity simply with Himself, but God created us out of love. Whether we choose to follow Him or not is up to us, and we suffer the eternal consequences of our actions. But the notion that God came to call the few and damn the many is against the message of the Gospel. God rejoices at the repentance of sinners and the wicked, and indeed calls upon us to spread the Good News that others may come to repentance.
I invite you to consider whether the God you believe in is one of mercy, of love, and of perfect goodness. When you claim that Jesus did not die for all, you belittle His divine sacrifice through which we may all be saved. God is love, God loves all, and those who are damned go to hell as a result of their rejection of God, not God's personal vendetta or hatred against them. If you believe yourself to be saved and to be one of Jesus' "friends," perhaps you should spend more time considering whether the God who sent His Son to die for our sins also desires that most people reject Him and be eternally separated from Him. And I ask you to humble yourself and consider why Jesus would die for you and not for others. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled; but whoever humbles himself will be exalted. (Matthew 23:12) For God desires that all men change their ways and come to Him, but only by their doing are they eternally damned.
And if all this is not clear enough to you, I could have simply replied with this one verse:
“The Lord does not delay his promise, as some regard ‘delay,’ but he is patient with you, not wishing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” 2 Peter 3:9
If you deem yourself to be a Bible-believing Christian, perhaps you should accept the obvious message of the Gospel rather than jumping through every hoop to support the notion of a vengeful God.
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.” John 3:16-17
“The Pharisees and their scribes complained to his disciples, saying, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” Jesus said to them in reply, “Those who are healthy do not need a physician, but the sick do. I have not come to call the righteous to repentance but sinners.”” Luke 5:30-32
Here are a couple more verses to illustrate my point. Again, I’m not saying God is neutral in all this, or that God is a huge fan of the Democrats or the RINOs. They will receive eternal punishment. But God sent Jesus to die for everybody, and those who are not saved willfully choose that path. We can’t say Jesus only died for the righteous, because He didn’t. We’re all sinners, we just happen to be on the right side of history this time.
Perhaps we’re just going to engage in a semantical battle. Of course God hates evil, and you can interpret that verse as God simply loving Esau less. But the only reason we are kept in existence at any given moment is because of God’s love, for God does not need us, and at any instant could erase all creation. God wants us all to be in relationship with Him, but very many of us willingly reject Him. But that does not mean He does not love us. If you believe “love” is just some stronger version of “like”, then I can understand your confusion. But God’s love is beyond even our comprehension.
I’m not denying that God hates evil and doesn’t “love” evildoers in the way we’d normally conceive of love. Going as far to say that Jesus did not die for everyone is too far though. Not everyone will be saved, and in fact most people are surely going to hell. But this is their doing, not a result of ill will on God’s part.
“But to you who hear I say, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. To the person who strikes you on one cheek, offer the other one as well, and from the person who takes your cloak, do not withhold even your tunic.” Luke 6:27-29
“If anyone says, “I love God,” but hates his brother, he is a liar; for whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.” 1 John 4:20
“Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do.” Luke 23:34
Look, we already know God is on our side, because God is Truth and the other side kills babies and spreads lies. But God is Love, and although these sick people are willfully rejecting Him, leave it up to God. Please don’t spread falsehoods about Christianity and Christian teaching. Christ taught us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. Christ did die for everybody, but not everybody is willing to accept His sacrifice. But that does not mean He does not love everyone. You can love those who hate you; that’s the Christian way of life.
Sex isn't wrong as such, but that's not the point. The biblical evidence points to Mary's perpetual virginity and immaculate conception. Just look at Luke 1:34: "But Mary said to the angel, 'How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?'" A simplistic interpretation may lead you to believe that she just hadn't had sex with Joseph yet, but it is actually consistent with Mary having taken a vow of virginity in order to dedicate herself to the Lord. Another way to think about it is, why would she be confused if she could simply have sex with Joseph that night? The angel Gabriel literally just tells her she will bear a son, and she's already betrothed to Joseph. Why would she be confused, unless she had taken a vow of virginity?
The other evidence is that upon Jesus' death and crucifixion, he entrusted Mary to John. Besides the fact that the "brethren of Christ" are nowhere found in the Bible other than one vague, ambiguous passage, why would Jesus entrust Mary to John if Mary had other children?
The next one you probably have never heard before is that the Protoevangelium of James (written around 120 AD) records Mary having taken a vow of perpetual virginity to serve the Lord, and her betrothal to Joseph was merely so he could be her protector. It was close enough to the time of Christ that people who had personally known the apostles could have still been alive. Even if you don't believe this on the spot, it's still another piece of evidence in support of Church teaching on Mary.
All I'm saying is, you seem to be under the misconception that the Catholic Church just made up these things about Mary at some point that have no biblical basis. The idea that Mary was not a virgin, though, really only has a basis in people's intuitions and no biblical support. And if you find it pitiful that Mary would be a perpetual virgin after marriage, even considering the fact that she bore Jesus and was wholly dedicated to God, I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree. Catholics don't deify or worship Mary, we should give her the honor she deserves as the one through whom Christ entered the world. If Mary had said no, which she freely could have, we'd all be going to hell.
You seem to have a misguided view of the nature of Catholic doctrine on papal infallibility. While he is the leader of the visible Church on Earth, not every word he utters is infallible. Popes do not change Catholic doctrine as they go, in fact they cannot. Catholic doctrine cannot change, it merely develops, just as you are the same literal person today as you were many years ago although you have more knowledge and experience. And it sounds like you also have a rudimentary view of how the Catholic Church even works, as if there is just the pope and then there are Catholics. Catholics develop doctrine and reject heresies through councils, and it's interesting that you trust the "hive mind" of Protestants when the only thing they can definitively agree on is that the Catholic Church is wrong. Besides that, it's every man for himself.
Catholics do not deify Mary. We recognize that she is a creature and not God, but she was chosen from all time to be the woman through whom Jesus Christ entered the world. We honor and venerate Mary because Christ did; do you not remember the miracle at the wedding of Cana? Mary made a request to her Divine Son, and He fulfilled it. When you belittle Mary, you belittle Christ, and you misunderstand the relationship Christ had with His own mother. Additionally, we do not pray to saints that they may grant our wishes as if they were divine on their own, but we ask for their intercession. Saints are merely people in heaven, and as such are perfectly united to God in a way that we are not. We know that the prayers of the righteous are very powerful, and thus we may pray to saints that they may intercede for us, not granting our wishes through their own power, but bringing our prayers to the Lord.
I am also confused as to how you are so certain that Mary was not a virgin. The verse you are likely referring to, which mentions the "brothers and sisters of Jesus," used a term that was ambiguous; it could have meant cousins or kinsfolk, essentially. Belittling Mary, again, belittles Jesus, as you seem to be implying that the Son of the Most High would enter the world through an impure vessel. Mary is the mother of Jesus, and thus the Mother of God, and speaking of her as though she were just a random woman from the street is quite disrespectful to the Lord.
Okay, riddle me this. Where in the Bible does it tell you that the Bible is the supreme and sole authority of what it means to be a Christian? And you must understand that logically, if two interpretations conflict, then at least one of them must be false. Why would Christ give us a Bible and allow us to interpret it fallibly to our whims? And even more fundamentally, Christianity predates the Bible; the New Testament came from Christianity, and more specifically, was itself canonized by the Catholic Church. If you don't trust the Catholic Church, why do you trust their canonization of the New Testament? I speak to you as a fellow brother in Christ, but I believe you should consider some very odd logical conclusions of your faith. Why would Christ, who is the Truth, want there to be many conflicting interpretations of His Word? And why would you subscribe to an idea of sola scriptura when it is found nowhere in the Bible and is itself a relatively new idea?
I will leave you with this. What is the pillar and foundation of truth? Your answer is likely the Bible. But read 1 Timothy 3:15: "if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth." I would encourage you to spend time in prayer to deeply consider whether Protestantism is true and perhaps reevaluating your prejudices against the Catholic Church. You disparage what you perceive to be man-made traditions, but Protestantism itself is a man-made tradition. God bless you.
That’s not what he meant. Why are they frantically trying to impeach him if he’s presumably on his way out? If they have total control of everything, why the panic?