4
formerdemfortrump 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think maybe he means scientists need a strong moral foundation.

But yeah certainly the problem with science today is that it is controlled and open ended inquiry is largely stifled

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

There really are too many smart people who are simply not digging enough, or even reading between the lines.

But if that affects whether someone is saved or not, that would mean that faith in Jesus's death and resurrection would not be sufficient for salvation, which would be a problem for Evangelical theology.

For Catholicism, which has a works element in addition to a faith element, this view would also not work. (being naïve is not a mortal sin).

5
formerdemfortrump 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yeah, agreed. I don’t think that’s what’s going with these vaccines. But there’s a lot of other bad things to be said about them

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

I actually think some of Freud’s methods of analysis are helpful in understanding aspects of how the media works.

Like how Freud understands dreams, I think there are elements of reality mixed in with lots of distortion in some media narratives.

When you see the media talking about one thing, one might profit from looking at other stories that are getting much less coverage.

Or if the event they are covering is worth paying attention to, what is presented as the trivial parts might be where we should put our attention. (Like Freud’s “displacement” concept).

The way Q and others analyze symbols is more fitting of Jung’s approach I suppose, but I think there’s something to think about every time a politician or reporter misspeaks — a potential Freudian slip to analyze. (“They just put John McCain to death last week” — Kasich).

All this being said, most of what today’s psychoanalysts have to offer is utter drivel. No useful methods to gain from it; agenda pushing drivel.

Just some things that came to mind.

9
formerdemfortrump 9 points ago +9 / -0

From my understanding of evangelical/Protestant and Catholic theology, a person in this hypothetical scenario who receives the Mark of the Beast from a vaccine unknowingly would not be damned because of it.

That would imply some sort of salvation scheme where specialized knowledge factors, which would make Christian faith a form of Gnosticism.

So I think Christians do not need to worry about the vaccine from this angle.

Just my two cents

10
formerdemfortrump 10 points ago +10 / -0

You’re right it isn’t. Certainly wouldn’t be my way to go out.

A good, properly set up hanging is very arguably a more humane execution. And very effective.

2
formerdemfortrump 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah I've heard him on a few occasions.

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

Which Pompeo tweet are we talking about here? One from June 8th?

3
formerdemfortrump 3 points ago +3 / -0

It looks like in terms of academic rigorousness, after his "The Standardization of Enzyme Activity Measurement" it's all down hill. LMAO

Went off the deep end

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

The only thing I wonder about is with this theory is: what would be the point of allowing this to carry on?

2
formerdemfortrump 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes me too. Look at Q post with that number and it complicates the picture.

2
formerdemfortrump 2 points ago +2 / -0

NFW. . . I wish I could say I was shocked.

Do you have the clip?

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm agnostic as to some aspects of God's nature at the moment, so I suppose I'd say I'm a general theist that does not at the moment adhere to an organized religion. But the Scripture or Christian talk in the Q community does not bother me. Nor does this post. My impression is that this is a military operation, but many great military men have received great inspiration from their Christian faith and scripture. And the most heinous practices of the DS should be ridiculed by all.

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think the way to address your concern is to keep in mind:

  1. Q likely did not intend this to denigrate belief in Jesus as Savior and that
  2. Q meant that the military would save us from the DS, but that his comment wasn't meant to extend to the realm beyond this one. (i.e.,

So I wouldn't worry that Q was denigrating people's faith in Jesus as Savior. At the end of the day, the plan is a military operation. An intelligence-counterintelligence operation, black hats and white hats.

I think Q likely has helped many people's faith grow. And there could indeed be spiritual forces at play here. But the plan is at heart a military operation, and not a distinctly religious project.

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

In my opinion, From Worst to Most tolerable:

Poppy Bush W. Obama Clinton Carter

It's a tough call for me how to order Clinton and Obama. Clinton was a more effective president in some ways than Obama, but I think he was likely more even more corrupt.

My impression is that Carter was ineffective, but not part of DS himself.

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yeah, it is funny how that works. I know quite a few people who call themselves Catholic and also say they are pro-choice. And, of course, many Catholic Dem politicians. It's very puzzling. One way of looking at I guess is that there are nominal Catholics much like there are nominal Jews. There's a cultural dimension to it. Joe Biden, who apparently does attend Mass every Sunday -- the cognitive dissonance is astounding. His stances on the Hyde Amendment, his views on late term abortion, how can he keep a straight face sitting in the pews is beyond me.

1
formerdemfortrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, very much.

3
formerdemfortrump 3 points ago +3 / -0

Who installed this Florida company is the most important question.

White Hats or Black Hats?

4
formerdemfortrump 4 points ago +4 / -0

How did those responsible for JFK's assassination get away? How did those responsible for the attacks on 9/11 get away.

Sad strange world we live in.

by v8power
3
formerdemfortrump 3 points ago +3 / -0

Absolutely. I certainly don't believe that all human attributes are unchangeable. The "feel stupid become stupid" one is a good example.

I'll even grant that some behaviors that most see as being part of one's "gender" are shaped by social influences --certain customs and attitudes. And that sexuality is based partially on innate predisposition but also shaped in early childhood (=psychological factors, environment, etc.).

But the idea that we can (or should) change all aspects of ourselves might be based somewhat on the fact that we aren't grateful for what we are given as you say.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›