Zorral Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 9 hours ago, Argonath Diver said: I'm not sure how we got here There are books written and published that explain the history of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melifeather Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 On 4/4/2024 at 2:34 PM, Phylum of Alexandria said: We really know nothing about who the real Jesus was. The first available Christian writings aren't concerned with a Jesus who had recently preached in Galilee, but of a cosmic savior coming to bring judgment at the end of days. More like the archangel Michael, or how the Essene's wrote about the high priest Melchizedek. The gospels put Jesus in a specific place and time in Judea, but they came decades later, and their contents are highly symbolic. It's mostly pseudo-history, used by the authors to advance (competing) moral arguments. Not to say that there can't be real historical nuggets embedded in the apocalyptic character, or the gospels. But if there are, the specifics are lost in the fog of history. What the early Christian scriptures tell us most about are the beliefs and concerns of the emerging Christian communities themselves. But even then, not the earliest ones. Paul is our earliest authentic scribe, and he himself admitted he was a latecomer. What we call the early Christians were people who still identified with Judaism. Many of the letters between Paul and the various congregations were clarifications of the law as written in the first 5 books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy) which comprise the Torah. These books dictate how to atone for particular sins and the sacrifices needed in order to receive forgiveness which included animal sacrifices and burnt offerings of grain, etc. Paul instructed these congregations that sacrifices were no longer needed since Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice, but they still requested guidance on a number of practices that were common to the Jewish faith such as abstaining from eating blood or anything strangled, avoiding bigamy and other sexual immorality, and prohibiting idol worship. The early Jews knew of Jesus and believed he was a prophet, but the large majority didn't believe he was the Messiah. The Jews that believed Jesus was their Messiah began referring to themselves as those who followed "The Way". The earliest known use the term Christianity wasn't until 100 years after Jesus's death. Tears of Lys 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormond Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 If you're not into Christian Nationalist Bibles -- my latest Trump email informs that I can get an official Metal Black Trump Card! Quote Spoiler FOR TOP SUPPORTERS ONLY https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/9b/9bca18e4-7c46-4ff5-9e2f-bab70a56ed81/sizes/1000px.png CLAIM YOUR CARD This is the most EXCLUSIVE membership program ever! The official TRUMP BLACK CARD was just released. It’s METAL & ETCHED with my mugshot to show the WHOLE WORLD we will NEVER SURRENDER! CLAIM YOUR CARD Only with your support will we be able to stop Joe Biden’s destruction of our country. Please claim your card today > WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 We live in the dumbest timeline. Ser Scot A Ellison and Prince of the North 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A True Kaniggit Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 33 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said: We live in the dumbest timeline. Second dumbest. You’re forgetting the one where Trump won reelection in 2020. Prince of the North 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 Opinion: The real price tag for Trump’s billionaires’ banquet https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/07/opinions/trump-2024-palm-beach-fundraiser-rich-donors-obeidallah/index.html Quote Or perhaps they believe they can benefit as wealthy friends of an autocratic leader. After all, in Hungary led by Trump’s ally Viktor Orban, his inner circle has profited under his leadership with the funneling of contracts. Of course, the same can be said of Russia under Vladimir Putin, where the oligarchs who gave him their support became even wealthier — until running afoul of him, when some were “forced into exile or died in suspicious circumstances.” A short time after the January 6 attack, Chuck Collins, director of the Project on Inequality and the Common Good at the Institute for Policy Studies, was unstinting in his criticism of Trump’s uber-wealthy backers. “They enabled Donald Trump. They bankrolled his campaigns,” he told the progressive news site Common Dreams. “And they cheered as Trump cut their taxes, swept away regulations that pinched their profits, and packed the courts with judges eager to wink at their transgressions.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 (edited) Just want to remind any possible Republican voters reading today, to stare directly into the eclipse for at least 10 minutes without glasses to get the full experience. Eta: This will ensure you get the MEGA MAGA experience of- Making the Eclipse Great Again! Edited April 8 by DireWolfSpirit Zorral, Melifeather and BigFatCoward 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 2 hours ago, A True Kaniggit said: Second dumbest. You’re forgetting the one where Trump won reelection in 2020. Nah, him winning in 2024 would be dumber. Prince of the North and JGP 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 Quote .... The bond posted by the Knight Specialty Insurance Company—a California-based company owned by the Hankey Group—has since come under scrutiny, with James raising questions about its sufficiency. In remarks to The Daily Beast, N. Alex Hanley, CEO of Jurisco Surety Bonds, said the language is "not common" and may have been included "to limit the liability to the surety. The contract includes a line that if the judgment is "affirmed" or the "appeal is dismissed," the defendants in the case "shall pay to Plaintiff...the sum directed to be paid by the Judgment plus interests and costs or any part of it as to which said Judgment is affirmed," without a guarantee the insurance company would pay. This essentially means that Trump will be required to pay the judgment if he loses the appeal but leaves questions about whether the insurance would pay if he is unable, essentially leaving James in the same position as before Trump secured the bond, according to the report. .... https://www.newsweek.com/letitia-james-gets-bad-news-hidden-donald-trumps-bond-1887992 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 4 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said: Nah, him winning in 2024 would be dumber. So the dumbness of this timeline is yet to be determined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 Nah, the dumbness is chronic, ongoing, and seemingly never-ending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 New York appeals judge rejects Trump’s request to delay his April 15 hush money trial Trump was seeking an emergency stay, a court order that would prevent the trial from starting on time. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/08/judge-rejects-trumps-request-to-delay-hush-money-trial-00151170 Quote NEW YORK — A New York appeals court judge on Monday rejected Donald Trump’s bid to delay his April 15 hush money criminal trial while he fights to move the case out of Manhattan — foiling the former president’s latest attempt to put off the historic trial. Justice Lizbeth González of the state’s mid-level appeals court made her ruling after an emergency hearing in which Trump’s lawyers asked to postpone the trial indefinitely while they seek a change of venue. Trump was seeking an emergency stay, a court order that would prevent the trial from starting on time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 So Trump has put out a video announcement that he is strictly pro state's rights when it comes to abortion, which means he's not strictly pro-life (or pro-choice). He's fine for states to pass laws allowing at will abortion, which is anathema to the evangelical / christian nationalist bloc, and he's basically stated a position (for now of course, which could change before or after his election) that there should be no federal law on abortion. I assume it won't really damage him among pro-lifers, he's the Republican nominee and no one of any note is running against him with a more conservative position, they still hate Biden way more than being pissed at Trump not being as pro-life as they want, so I don't see it as demotivating for them to the point that they won't vote. I guess the question is whether pro-choice voters in swing states might be attracted to his side because he's kind of gone agnostic on abortion. I suppose if the state as a whole is pro-life it won't influence them, because only a pro-choice administration and congress can pass federal legislation to override pro-life state laws (if that's even constitutionally possible). If it's a pro-choice state such voters might feel less worried about voting Trump because they think he won't put federal abortion bans in place. I wonder how many swing voters there are who's main reason to vacillate is because they are pro-choice and were concerned about Trump's position on abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkerX Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said: So Trump has put out a video announcement that he is strictly pro state's rights when it comes to abortion, which means he's not strictly pro-life (or pro-choice). He's fine for states to pass laws allowing at will abortion, which is anathema to the evangelical / christian nationalist bloc, and he's basically stated a position (for now of course, which could change before or after his election) that there should be no federal law on abortion. I assume it won't really damage him among pro-lifers, he's the Republican nominee and no one of any note is running against him with a more conservative position, they still hate Biden way more than being pissed at Trump not being as pro-life as they want, so I don't see it as demotivating for them to the point that they won't vote. I guess the question is whether pro-choice voters in swing states might be attracted to his side because he's kind of gone agnostic on abortion. I suppose if the state as a whole is pro-life it won't influence them, because only a pro-choice administration and congress can pass federal legislation to override pro-life state laws (if that's even constitutionally possible). If it's a pro-choice state such voters might feel less worried about voting Trump because they think he won't put federal abortion bans in place. I wonder how many swing voters there are who's main reason to vacillate is because they are pro-choice and were concerned about Trump's position on abortion. Trump will repeatedly issue diametrically opposed statements on this topic and others over the coming months. He can't help himself. Which Tyler and Tears of Lys 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phylum of Alexandria Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 21 hours ago, Melifeather said: What we call the early Christians were people who still identified with Judaism True. But what else to call them, given that we don't know what they called themselves? "Christian" it is then. Not unlike the "Essenes" of Qumran, it's a term of convenience. As for the rest of your comment, I mostly agree, but it doesn't have anything to do with the substance of my previous comment. Everything I stated still holds true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 11 hours ago, ThinkerX said: Trump will repeatedly issue diametrically opposed statements on this topic and others over the coming months. He can't help himself. He's also lying. As he does. Always. Prince of the North and Ser Scot A Ellison 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrackerNeil Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) 19 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said: I assume it won't really damage him among pro-lifers, he's the Republican nominee and no one of any note is running against him with a more conservative position, they still hate Biden way more than being pissed at Trump not being as pro-life as they want, so I don't see it as demotivating for them to the point that they won't vote. I guess the question is whether pro-choice voters in swing states might be attracted to his side because he's kind of gone agnostic on abortion. I suppose if the state as a whole is pro-life it won't influence them, because only a pro-choice administration and congress can pass federal legislation to override pro-life state laws (if that's even constitutionally possible). If it's a pro-choice state such voters might feel less worried about voting Trump because they think he won't put federal abortion bans in place. I wonder how many swing voters there are who's main reason to vacillate is because they are pro-choice and were concerned about Trump's position on abortion. I am sure this won't damage him on the right. One of the lessons I took from 2016 is that the God Squad has a lot less influence over the GOP than I previously thought. They will line up enthusiastically behind whomever wins the nomination, whether that person is Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin or Yolo Minneapolis. I do think, however, we've seen signficant evidence that abortions drives turnout among voters who often favor Democrats. I confess I didn't expect to see that, but the past few elections have changed my mind. Americans care about abortion, and the majority of them seem to care about keeping it mostly legal. Trump may come to regret bragging that he's the guy who ruined Roe. Edited April 9 by TrackerNeil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 54 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said: I am sure this won't damage him on the right. One of the lessons I took from 2016 is that the God Squad has a lot less influence over the GOP than I previously thought. They will line up enthusiastically behind whomever wins the nomination, whether that person is Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin on Yolo Minneapolis. I do think, however, we've seen signficant evidence that abortions drives turnout among voters who often favor Democrats. I confess I didn't expect to see that, but the past few elections have changed my mind. Americans care about abortion, and the majority of them seem to care about keeping it mostly legal. Trump may come to regret bragging that he's the guy who ruined Roe. The precence of an abortion rights question on the Florida Ballot has made the Presidential election in Florida that much more… interesting. Trump is trying to split the baby. That will not drive away his diehards. But it also, surely, will not attract anyone upset by Roe being reversed. The presence of abortion rights as a serious issue in the 2024 election hurts Trump and the Republicans… it helps Biden and the Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartIheartTesla Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: The precence of an abortion rights question on the Florida Ballot has made the Presidential election in Florida that much more… interesting. Trump is trying to split the baby. The Arizona SC just upheld an 1864 law basically banning nearly all abortions, and I think there is a move there from pro-choice proponents to get a prop on the ballots in November. Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 Just now, IheartIheartTesla said: The Arizona SC just upheld an 1864 law basically banning nearly all abortions, and I think there is a move there from pro-choice proponents to get a prop on the ballots in November. As stated w/o doubt above -- he is a liar. Arizona Supreme Court upholds 160-year-old abortion ban with no exceptions for rape or incest "I am devastated by this decision, and I know many Arizonans are as well," said Gov. Katie Hobbs https://www.salon.com/2024/04/09/arizona-upholds-160-year-old-abortion-ban-with-no-exceptions-for-rape-or-incest/? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts