You are very welcome! I'm glad it was useful to you.
It has been argued by folks much more learned on this subject than myself that the opportunity to sin is ever present. Otherwise, why confess? Why take part in the Eucharist? Why pray? Why participate in the Church with any regularity, anyway?
This could be a difference in our faiths (if you are a denomination of Christianity, it's likely we'll disagree on this interpretation), but -- framed simply and as I understand it -- Christ opened the doorway for those who have sinned to be forgiven; breaking open the doors of Hell so that we, too, may not be sentenced to immortal damnation for our sins but rather the immortal life in Heaven. Through theosis we strive to become more Godlike, but we are burdened while on Earth by the first sin and all other sins since. We can only do our utmost, until that day when we stand before the seat of judgement, to live without sin and be as Godlike as possible.
In other words, I think it unfair to say "not true" to someone who is living their life in "faithful obedience to God". We all are, albeit we describe it differently. I could certainly be misinterpreting your words, but... Christianity is not simply an acceptance or a belief that you are saved, it is an active practice of participation. There is nothing passive about Christianity.
For me, if I were to decide to go into politics -- with full consideration of my faith as an Orthodox Christian -- I would ensure that my house is in order. Constantly. This requires prioritization of faith over politics, at all times, because politics over faith is incompatible.
But to your question: "I'm wondering if anyone has constructive, productive arguments to getting more christians involved in politics."
People can be 'influencers' similar to politicians without running for office, too. Write Christian-based novels, screenplays, etc. Make movies. Organize "meet-ups". Lots of options out there. None of these things are necessarily easy, but all require a similar kind of conviction. Your actions don't need to be big to make a big difference.
Food for thought: I also recommend reading up on the lives of various saints instead of just quoting scripture. Scriptural references aren't everyone's cup o' tea, and the lives of saints give many motivation and hope.
Iirc, it has been shown that a correlation exists between the historical start of vaccine scheduling and cognitive diseases. As the schedule has increased (# of vaccines administered), so too has the # of those who suffer from autism, Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's (and probably others). I'll have to find that study...
To say that cognitive decline could be personality based seems lazy, however (not calling you lazy, but whoever wrote the article). Especially if those suffering from cognitive decline are genetically predisposed. For example, what's to say those who are in cognitive decline develop certain personality traits, such as neuroticism and openness? Why is it assumed that neuroticism and openness cause cognitive decline? I'm sure a lot of these sort of questions could be asked.
I enjoy the evocative nature of this article, but it certainly leans more toward sensationalism than actual science (imho). I enjoy stuff like this, though! Thanks for sharing.
Yeah, I just saw the McCarthy audio/transcripts myself. If that's legit, it's pretty damning for McCarthy. Karmic justice, I say, if he's "forced" to resign. I wonder which hurts a politician more, being forced to resign or being censured like Chenney...?
Mitch wouldn't surprise me, though.
I can see this being linked to those who took the vaxx, maybe a CYA? "Oh, look, increases in Parkinson's and Alzheimer's! Must be their personality."
Reality: You got the vaxx because you jumped the gun, freaked out, and didn't wait to find out if the jab would help or not.
Gender Differences in Personality across the Ten Aspects of the Big Five:
Neuroticism:
Neuroticism describes the tendency to experience negative emotion and related processes in response to perceived threat and punishment; these include anxiety, depression, anger, self-consciousness, and emotional lability. Women have been found to score higher than men on Neuroticism as measured at the Big Five trait level, as well as on most facets of Neuroticism included in a common measure of the Big Five, the NEO-PI-R (Costa et al., 2001). Additionally, women also score higher than men on related measures not designed specifically to measure the Big Five, such as indices of anxiety (Feingold, 1994) and low self-esteem (Kling et al., 1999). The one facet of Neuroticism in which women do not always exhibit higher scores than men is Anger, or Angry Hostility (Costa et al., 2001).
Agreeableness:
Agreeableness comprises traits relating to altruism, such as empathy and kindness. Agreeableness involves the tendency toward cooperation, maintenance of social harmony, and consideration of the concerns of others (as opposed to exploitation or victimization of others). Women consistently score higher than men on Agreeableness and related measures, such as tender-mindedness (Feingold, 1994; Costa et al., 2001).
Conscientiousness:
Conscientiousness describes traits related to self-discipline, organization, and the control of impulses, and appears to reflect the ability to exert self-control in order to follow rules or maintain goal pursuit. Women score somewhat higher than men on some facets of Conscientiousness, such as order, dutifulness, and self-discipline (Feingold, 1994; Costa et al., 2001). These differences, however, are not consistent across cultures, and no significant gender difference has typically been found in Conscientiousness at the Big Five trait level (Costa et al., 2001).
Extraversion:
Extraversion reflects sociability, Assertiveness, and positive emotionality, all of which have been linked to sensitivity to rewards (Depue and Collins, 1999; DeYoung and Gray, 2009). Whereas gender differences are small on the overall domain level of Extraversion (with women typically scoring higher), the small effect size could be due to the existence of gender differences in different directions at the facet level. Women tend to score higher than men on Warmth, Gregariousness, and Positive Emotions, whereas men score higher than women on Assertiveness and Excitement Seeking (Feingold, 1994; Costa et al., 2001).
Openness:
Openness/Intellect reflects imagination, creativity, intellectual curiosity, and appreciation of esthetic experiences. Broadly, Openness/Intellect relates to the ability and interest in attending to and processing complex stimuli. No significant gender differences are typically found on Openness/Intellect at the domain level, likely due to the divergent content of the trait. For example, women have been found to score higher than men on the facets of Esthetics and Feelings (Costa et al., 2001), whereas men tend to score higher on the Ideas facet (Feingold, 1994; Costa et al., 2001).
Who probably got the jab(s)? Those who "score higher in neuroticism".
From the article:
(Slay News) – Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) praised Democrats for pushing for President Donald Trump’s second impeachment, according to a new book.
New York Times writers Alex Burns and Jonathan Martin’s new book, “This Will Not Pass,” details what allegedly happened.
Despite the fact that I can see McConnell doing exactly what is described in this article, I'm not going to jump on this news. McConnell is a toady, and he'll go down in history for being completely feckless -- for this or something else. The book and the hype makes me wonder if the MSM is trying to turn our eyes away from the real conspirators in the Trump Impeachment Madness (tm)...
Who is Alex Burns?
Well, he's
an American journalist. He is a national political correspondent for The New York Times and a political analyst at CNN.
Martin is
a national political correspondent for The New York Times. Before joining The Times, he had served as senior political writer for Politico since its inception in 2007.
What stalwarts of journalism, I'm sure!
Stuff like this makes me cringe. They virtue signal their mask when compliance was compelled through mandate, then continue to virtue signal it again when "optional" -- in truth, it was always optional.
The implication is this: she wore a mask, (still) got sick and tested positive for c19, recovered, and then put the mask back on. For "peace of mind". There's no rationale to this, it's pure insanity.
But yeah, glad she recognizes the choice that we already, inherently had...
This "mask" stuff bothers me in the same way "preferred pronoun" speech bothers me; I'm not gonna do it, and I don't care what you wear or call yourself in your own home -- just don't enforce it upon me or anyone else, especially the children.
Novelty mugs like this usually don't contain this character (寿) alone, in my experience. I would suspect a second character next to it, although the cup is turned in such a way I can't see anything. Being a novelty-type of cup, I would suspect it says "sushi".
FWIW:
-
This whole pic looks photoshopped and overall it's weird on so many levels. (The placement of his body and the shadows on the floor don't jive to me -- it looks unnatural). It all looks... hasty. Like someone decent with PS cobbled together a bunch of random objects and put it in a room.
-
The character (寿) does mean various things, such as 'longevity', 'congratulations', and 'best wishes' among others. It's pronounced kotobiki when why itself, although it's pronounced differently depending it's usage (grammatically and when combined with other characters). This could be entirely innocent, as this is a picture of Khan's new role as NYT exec director. A "best wishes" to the new director kind of thing.
-
However, Joe Khan was a journalist in China. Kinda obscure, but the character on the cup can be seen in the name for a Chinese peach (寿星桃・じゅせいとう・jyuseitou）-- which could be an allusion to him being a homosexual -- but as far as I know there's no proof of that. It's a weird coincidence, as far as I know.
[Edit: 4. It might be worth asking those more familiar with Chinese if there's anything about this character that's interesting or sus to them, seeing as that's part of Khan's background.]
Why are sweatpants included? I like my sweatpants...! XD
I LOL'd, thank you! Not because I disagree, but because what you wrote was entertaining.
Some networks are more trustworthy than others, but no network is without issues. I honestly can't name a single one I would label 100%, no-questions-asked "trustworthy" -- not that anyone ever should. What you say makes a lot of sense, fren. (I gave myself a good slap, just in case.)
Appreciate the info!
"Next News Network", though. Is this a trustworthy network? No idea. Feels like a Stew Peters special, tbh, which always raises some red flags.
Follow up: I spoke to the ex-CASA I know. According to her, the leader of her local CASA was writing his own checks, promoting people to the CASA board by his own whims (in other words, no oversight), and was just generally a very corrupt individual. He was ousted, but it really ruined the name of the organization in the area.
Apparently the Judge was solid, though. A really good one, interested and invested in placing these children in good homes.
I get where you're coming from, absolutely. From what I've looked at, PL is a well established, crowd-funded journalist in the area. He's new to us, but he's very much not new to the locals.
Of course, PL isn't the only one reporting these things. It just happens that he's one of the few on-the-ground journalists willing do this sort of reporting, if not the only one.
I'm not suspicious of PL as a source. He could be spinning his coverage, sure, and I will keep an eye on this. But so far his reports don't "bother" me, in the way you mention.
The whole video (the whole channel) is worth a watch, but this is interdasting!
Imagine being a "journalist" and not asking her if she hears herself when she speaks...
Of course! I dunno how helpful that is, but humor usually discomfits the NPC reaction-types.
It's not really about "Q", in the end, y'know? It's about exposing corruption at all levels. These aren't things to be "wrong" about and it's nothing that should ever be "let go". Your son/daughter can see it as nonsense and call it "debunked", but "Q" -- real Great Awakening stuff -- has never been about prophecies or predictions imho. Is their disgust with "Q" because it's been so negatively portrayed by the MSM, or because they honestly believe it dangerous? If so, they should help you understand why they believe that.
Anyway, preaching to the choir! If they're emotional about this (which it sounds like they are), trying to appeal to them might not work no matter how much sense you make. Good luck!
I wrote this big ol' reply, but I'm sure others will say the same -- and probably much better written, too! So instead:
You could always use humor! Laugh off "Q" as a silly notion ("you think I follow that? Ha!"), and simply say that many of your own conclusions seem to align with Q stuff, but really you just do your own homework and due diligence. ("What's so scary about Q anyway, tell me about it.") (And get the convo going)
Worth a try!
I respectfully, respectfully disagree.
I'm Orthodox Christian, so my perspective might be somewhat different, but I truly believe we need to keep church and state separate. I love the US constitution, please don't misunderstand, but we should leave the education of it to the parents and as individual responsibility as US citizens. If I wanted my church Father's opinion on the constitution, I'd reach out to him outside of service.
I go to church to further my relationship with God and work toward the immortal life in heaven. Bringing the constitution into the homily would be distracting.
There are a lot of parallels, however, between Christianity and the values that make up the constitution. Although I can see why someone might want it brought up... being in church, I'd rather stay on topic.
It's easy to say "they were warned" or "they didn't have to" or even "they were just unlucky", but the fact remains that this jab roll-out was poison before it even began. We know this based on patent history (Dr. David Martin), based on the history of mRNA animal trials, and the incomplete human clinical trials. Add to this the sheer pressure from family, friends, co-workers, bosses, doctors, and politicians... well, suffice to say I would not blame or condescend these victims for their choice, uninformed as it was.
It's hard to keep perspective, to be kind, when many of us here at GAW shrug off that pressure and persevere regardless. Even for us, it's hard to keep ignoring that pressure, especially when our jobs are at stake! But I hope to God that these people (and all of us, honestly) get justice, and that this crime against humanity never happens again.
Unless you're Orthodox Christian, yes!
Sauce here.
"The South Dakota House on Tuesday impeached state Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg over a 2020 fatal crash in which he initially told authorities he thought he had struck a deer or another large animal.
Ravnsborg will at least temporarily be removed from office pending the historic Senate trial, where it takes a two-thirds majority to convict on impeachment charges.
Ravnsborg pleaded no contest last year to a pair of traffic misdemeanors in the crash, including making an illegal lane change. He has cast Joseph Boever’s death as a tragic accident."
I think I did!
I can see why she said "evolving". I get a "Time Machine" (HG Wells)-esque feeling when I think about current medicine and social culture. I certainly hope we can stop this "evolution" before it sets in, but for many who took the jabs it might be too late...
I look at my own vaccination history and am disgusted. I should never have taken certain "age-appropriate" jabs, but what did I know? I just wanted to travel.