xero

This other thing I've been reading suggested a need to research claims made because of the tension then and continuing tension now between Jews and Christians (Christians feeling the bus came and the Jews didn't get on it)

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/10/05/wheres-the-biden-executive-order-mandating-the-vaccine/

More along the same lines. https://news.ag.org/Features/Sometimes-a-Rooster-is-Not-a-Rooster

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/so-much-for-vaccine-generated-herd So much for vaccine-generated herd immunity In an Israeli hospital outbreak, 96% vaccination rates (and universal masking) made no difference. And guess who had mild cases? Hint: not the vaccinated.

BTW the apologetic I'm reading has a lot of stuff that's wrong. You can't pick up one of these w/o having someone pump the Jesus is God thing or Hell or the like. I just have to ignore that stuff. I had to do that when I started studying years ago w/the Live Forever book. The pics on pentecost looked silly to me w/the looks on their faces but I told myself "Don't get distracted by the artwork. Focus on the contents." It's hard to do sometimes, but I think it's useful to know what people's arguments are just so long as I understand their intend is to gather and not to scatter. That's the biggest problem I have w/apostates. It's not like they are saying "I found something awesome over here." It's just a bunch of negativism. Even if anything said by a detractor is true, it's spiritual rot to dwell on it. If you turn the same apostate lens on the Bible you burn it all to the ground. And for what? Because people are imperfect? G. K. Chesterton was a Catholic, but I agree w/him (and the sentiments apply to atheists as well as apostates) “We do not admire, we hardly excuse, the fanatic who wrecks this world for love of the other. But what are we to say of the fanatic who wrecks this world out of hatred of the other? He sacrifices the very existence of humanity to the non-existence of God. He offers his victims not to the altar, but merely to assert the idleness of the altar and the emptiness of the throne. He is ready to ruin even that primary ethic by which all things live, for his strange and eternal vengeance upon some one who never lived at all.”― G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy

An apologetic isn't associated w/only Christians, and the link cited isn't an apologetic either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologetics What passage in the link are you having problems with? Nothing struck me as particularly controversial. There certainly weren't any doctrines discussed, simply a biblical trivia investigation. BTW This link is not the apologetic I'm reading. This is: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01HAKH4UG/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 I read a lot of things. Some of the things I read I agree with in part, sometimes a lot, sometimes very little, and at other times none at all.

I'm still not getting how you're getting this as a conclusion: "So I would not call this an apologetic piece for Christians, I would rather call it a piece written against Christians, to disprove the truth of the new testament. "

I'm not sure I'm following your logic here. All I get was that instead of some weird psychic stuff, Jesus knew that there would probably be a room available w/these guys and he could spot the guy because of the water jar thingy. If it was weird for men to carry water, that would make the guy stand out.

So I'm reading yet another apologetic work and this one is coming at things from a Jewish perspective. One thing I just listened to was w/regard to the following passage: 10 He said to them: “Look! When you enter into the city, a man carrying an earthenware water jar will meet you. Follow him into the house that he enters. - Lk. 22:10 This was one of many passages I just sort of never thought about because it seemed like the stater coin fishing thing-tax episode - an Obie-wan Kenobi kind of "these are not your droids" moment. Then he said something a bit like the following: https://preachitteachit.org/articles/detail/little-known-facts-about-the-last-supper/ Only women carried water jars. As to the other things - I don't know.

On the other hand the moratorium on discussion is precisely what you would do if you wanted to foster a climate of suspicion and conspiracy. We had none of this w/regard to any of these other vaccines, just these. Never mind the emergency authorization orders would be invalid should they have been able to present evidence that effective theraputics were available (and there are and have been). This has been a political tool from the beginning. "Three Weeks to flatten the curve!". The same can be said of the 'climate crisis'. If you follow the money you realize that there are people whose motivations are less about health or climate and more about power and money.

These postmodernists only think that those who disagree with them can be hypocrites or inconsistent in their logic.

If I understood, you work in IT as do I and what I've learned in the 43 years I've been doing this is to be suspicious of anyone who says "that's not supposed to happen". The use of that phrase suggests that the person imagines there's a 100 percent correspondence between his understanding and the external world. I've found that things are often complicated and in ways we don't expect. So when an end user says he experienced something it may be the proverbial short between the chair and the keyboard, but it also may be something else. I never let an end user think I think he's an idiot and imagining things because he might not. Take one weird thing that happened years ago in the mainframe days. We had a pc which had the newest tech at that time loaded on it - speech recognition. This was in the 80's. https://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?st=1&c=472 This was on a table in the computer room and behind the glass window there was an IBM 3838 array processor. People would come in and out and we had been getting these random hits on the array processor. I remember going on break, picking up a tech journal which mentioned EMI as the future of interference and noise to be concerned with. It clicked in my head that perhaps when they ran the voice recognition module it might be producing and EMI signal which produced the hits on the 3838. I suggested this to my supervisor who said "that's not supposed to happen". I said "Let's test the theory. If I'm right we can generate a hit on demand." So Juan B. went over, fired up the demo and boom! We got a hit on the 3838. It went away once they moved the desk. So when someone suggests that once in a while someone might not actually getting the shot in the muscle, I think that's a possibility. If I have to get another injection which is supposed to be in the muscle, I'll just ask them to please aspirate to be sure. It only takes five seconds.

Not a throwaway. I think it's passed through a lot of minds. I'm pretty open to reexamining a lot of the future events we're waiting for.

Interesting. Just found out the various vaccines were developed w/the aid of aborted fetal cell lines. https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/fetal-tissues The other interesting thing was this video by a doctor in the UK suggesting the adverse events might be the result of incorrect or inadequate injection protocols. Apparently there's no aspiration of the needle in the protocol at present.

Because I like to mess up threads with things that don't appear to apply. Why aren't atheists concerned with their own hypocrisy? It strikes me as lacking in self awareness. Every time I catch an atheist behaving like a Christian I stop them and say "What a hypocrite! You say you don't believe in the God of the Bible or Christianity and yet here you are, acting like a Christian!" Then they sputter and say things like "You don't have to believe in either of those to do what I just did." Then I say "So you're saying that when a Christian looks like what he just did gives the lie to his profession, he has no excuse, but you do?" Then the atheist sputters more nonsense and I have to shake my head and move on.

The presumption of RTFM as the core issue has many aspects. 1. The person hasn't read it (they may in fact have) 2. The FM may in fact be wrong in its assertions about its products. (Oracle corporation is notorious for this) 3. The FM may be poorly written. (by people who don't know the language they are trying to use) In any case anyone who has questions, whether these questions seem basic or not deserves to have a specific response. It doesn't have to be RTFM. It could be see chapter X in the FM and on page XX paragraph X you should find what you're looking for. (most FM's are 600-800 pages). If it's your job to field these kinds of things you might have something like reasoning book w/the index "scriptures often misapplied". (in the case of biblical issues) Bottom line: A specific question deserves a specific answer. "RTFM" is by definition not specific any more than someone looking down their noses at you from a stack of unquoted and unpacked scriptures.

Your trumpet has been sounding an incredibly indistinct call. I might add that if you are not spending time on Catholic forums or atheist forums or any other religious group which has a forum you don't appear to be sincerely interested in your calling. Let's say you had to cut to the chase and make your point in 30 seconds. Try to do that and you'll know whether you even know what you think you know.

You keep not getting the point. We're talking about YOU, not anyone else. What are YOU doing and why? The proper response is "I am doing ____ because ____". Anything else is weaseling around.

I'll take that as a "No".

Take tech forums, for example. The snarky response to a technical question is RTFM. Quoting a series of scriptures is the biblical equivalent as regards snark.

It's the problem with language. But I was referring to the hour the parousia began, not the denouement or conclusion. "YES...we know the hour and day Jesus was enthroned as King" - You said we know the day and the hour.

I scanned it for the word "hour" and didn't find a number corresponding to the 12 or 24 hour time measurement systems. I was expecting something like 10:31:1914:22:00:00 fmt MM:DD:YYYY:HH:MI:SS.

Can you, without bloviating explain what it is you are doing and why?

Which hour?