That would be Jumanji. She writes her opinions with ChatGPT. I don't think she can actually read. Her dissent in Dobbs rambles about ostriches a couple times, so on top of using a chatbot to write it she didn't proofread it either. So presumably her clerks can't read either.
Counterpoint. The vast majority of them watched Harry Potter. Most people who claim to have read the books could not tell you a plot point that didn't occur in the films.
The average person reads only well enough to get by and that's it. They are all functionally illiterate in that they could not consume, finish and then explain to you an actual book. Most people have the attention span of an insect.
Just look at the degradation of user interfaces in the last ten years for another example. Stuffed full of symbols and icons and pictures.
So I looked up Scythe and Good Lord does that ever look tankie as fuck. Is it just overtly commie in the gameplay too? Because from reading about it, it is just looks like an infantile fetishization of the early USSR.
Yes. Bergoglio appointed most of the people who will choose his successor. They might, might decide to pull their heads out of their collective asses and choose someone who isn't a useless heretical prog, but I doubt it.
Second Corinthians carries a frequently apologetic tone in and of itself. Paul is talking to them about his intent to not have a painful visit to their church. He's reassuring them and telling them that any affront he may have caused in the past is one that he will "forgive" in turn.
Again, we see a translation problem into English. As you noted, God is not the author of confusion. Man is, and our flawed and limited understanding. Same as that whole "thou shalt not kill" thing, which isn't at all what the Fifth Commandment says. It says thou shalt not commit murder.
Regardless of denominational doctrine, Stephen was a deacon, not a priest.
I'm well aware. Catholics frequently use saints as a means of intercession with God, they being closer to Him than most. A saint is someone with more power and spiritual authority than a normal person. Stephen in that instance performed a miracle, as several of those men who stoned him were converted. Notably Paul the Apostle.
Stephen
I presume you mean Saint Stephen the first martyr.
I would point out that individuals who are representatives of God are different than regular people. It's why priests can offer confession for example. Regular people cannot.
I however am no saint nor priest, nor is Jeff Metcalf.
Christ himself called forgiveness on the unrepentant Roman soldiers
Yes. Something He has the authority to do. He asked the Lord to forgive those men, "for they know not what they do."
You can certainly ask the Lord to forgive someone. I never said otherwise.
Forgiveness is about letting go of your own personal anger, or overcoming it, and being willing to hope for salvation, even for those that wronged you. And Christians do want everyone to find peace.
That is in fact the thing to do, but calling it "forgiveness" is wrong, and an issue with the English translation during the reformation years.
Let me put it this way.
You offer a handshake to another man. He looks, turns around, and walks away.
Did you actually shake his hand just because you tried?
forgiveness is what you do on your end.
Forgiveness means absolution. Save for personal affronts, no mere human being can absolve a damn thing. Furthermore, it is exclusively a two way street.
It's why confession exists. I know Protestants don't have that and all, but the theological basis for it is there nonetheless.
The animal who killed Austin Metcalf is not sorry. How can you be forgiven and absolved, for something you are proud of doing?
Your argument is foolish. You cannot forgive the dead either by the way, that's why the Last Rites exist in the first place.
One side says you don't forgive the unrepentant.
Not the argument being made, and this is a mistake I see frequently.
The point is that the unrepentant CANNOT be forgiven, and by definition that is completely correct. God alone can forgive those who are not sorry for their actions. Man cannot. Saying "you are forgiven" is not something that Jeff Metcalf has the power to do. Because the animal who killed his son did not merely trespass against him, but against the dead innocent and the laws of God as well. Jeff Metcalf has no authority over two of those things, and the pretense towards that is blasphemy.
Man can offer forgiveness for a trespass against us specifically, but if it is thrown back in our faces(and hoo boy it sure has been), well that is the end of it.
I long ago theorized that most liberals don't actually "think" as you or I would consider it to be thought. They simply react to their conditioning and get confused if stimuli falls outside of that.
The other kind are the kind that can't actually "talk" as we think of it. They aren't trying to talk to you when words come out of their mouths, they think they're casting a spell. They're trying to find just the right combination of sounds in the right sequence to make you do what they want.
It's why liberals can contradict themselves multiple times in the same sentence and not skip a beat. They don't believe in anything they say, at any time, ever. They are comfortable with their hypocrisy.
Christ preached personal charity and despised hypocrites.
So naturally liberals think that He would approve of them voting to have other people's stuff taken away, half of it wasted, while calling themselves righteous.
And if you want to talk about killing people for usury, we absolutely can. That'll be a short conversation.
And a meth addict.