KeithThroop's Profile

Can only white people be racist?

KeithThroop comments on Dec 18, 2020:

My own experience has taught me that racism itself definitely knows no race; it can affect anyone of any race. For example, for part of my childhood I was a member of the only white family in an all black neighborhood. There were a couple of old white ladies that lived in the area, but we were the ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 29, 2020:

@ZuzecaSape You raise good points. For my part, I have forgiven past hurts and moved on, but I do understand that we cannot simply overlook continued spiteful and unforgiving behavior from others involved.

Can only white people be racist?

KeithThroop comments on Dec 18, 2020:

My own experience has taught me that racism itself definitely knows no race; it can affect anyone of any race. For example, for part of my childhood I was a member of the only white family in an all black neighborhood. There were a couple of old white ladies that lived in the area, but we were the ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 29, 2020:

@ZuzecaSape I appreciate the sympathy, but I'm quite fine. I have gotten past the problems I experienced growing up. I now find the memories more helpful than hurtful for the most part.

Funny man Copeland [youtube.com]

coalburned comments on Dec 29, 2020:

Pay no attention to Copeland. Most Christians don't.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 29, 2020:

Right @coalburned. The guy is a heretic.

A number of social work colleagues (angrily) tell me that Jordan Peterson's work is tacitly ...

coalburned comments on Dec 29, 2020:

Tells me they don't know what the alt-right is, but it sounds evil, so they use it to falsely label someone who preaches what they can't grasp...personal accountability.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 29, 2020:

Right on.

Can only white people be racist?

KeithThroop comments on Dec 18, 2020:

My own experience has taught me that racism itself definitely knows no race; it can affect anyone of any race. For example, for part of my childhood I was a member of the only white family in an all black neighborhood. There were a couple of old white ladies that lived in the area, but we were the ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 29, 2020:

@ZuzecaSape That video certainly brings back memories of the time.

US Military PREPPING for MARTIAL LAW!!! [youtube.com]

DaveO276 comments on Dec 28, 2020:

I really don't think Trump will do it, but if there really are these opposing factions in the military preparing to take opposite sides, then for him to do it would mean hot civil war. I'm thinking he will stick with the lawsuits, dueling electors and congressional challenges on January 6, and the ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 28, 2020:

@DaveO276 Good point. If I have it right, Joe Biden is 78 years old now, and Donald Trump is 74. So, in 2024, President Trump would be roughly the same age as Biden is now, although I don't recall when their respective birthdays fall. Frankly, Joe Biden *is* too old at 78, but that doesn't mean that the President would be too old at that age, given that he seems to be in much better physical and mental health now than is Joe Biden. However, at these more advanced ages, physical and mental health can degrade quite suddenly and rapidly sometimes, which makes me all the more concerned that President Trump continue in office now.

US Military PREPPING for MARTIAL LAW!!! [youtube.com]

DaveO276 comments on Dec 28, 2020:

I really don't think Trump will do it, but if there really are these opposing factions in the military preparing to take opposite sides, then for him to do it would mean hot civil war. I'm thinking he will stick with the lawsuits, dueling electors and congressional challenges on January 6, and the ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 28, 2020:

I agree, although I suspect that, even if he does intend to run again in four years, he probably won't end up doing it. He will be too old by then, I suspect.

Nature doesn't make the choice between being conservative and radical.

KeithThroop comments on Dec 26, 2020:

Hmm... Given that "nature" is impersonal, of course it doesn't "make the choice" between anything versus any other thing. And, of course, it also neither "fixes" things, nor does it "get radically creative." If there is any choice being made, anything being fixed, or any radical creativity going on,...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 27, 2020:

@Cecil_J_Twillie Yes, things can go in different directions, can't they? :) We don't always think about the way certain statements will be read by others, especially statements with underlying assumptions. At any rate, I'm guessing you and I would define "personal" and "impersonal" quite differently in such a context.

Nature doesn't make the choice between being conservative and radical.

KeithThroop comments on Dec 26, 2020:

Hmm... Given that "nature" is impersonal, of course it doesn't "make the choice" between anything versus any other thing. And, of course, it also neither "fixes" things, nor does it "get radically creative." If there is any choice being made, anything being fixed, or any radical creativity going on,...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 26, 2020:

@Cecil_J_Twillie Well, it seems that, whatever word you use, if you are attributing intelligence to it, you are speaking of some sort of personal being rather than an impersonal force of some kind.

GOOGLE has fallen! I found an article in THE GATEWAY PUNDIT about an attack on a Proud Boy and ...

DaveO276 comments on Dec 25, 2020:

You cannot trust Google "anymore"? Could they ever be trusted?

KeithThroop replies on Dec 25, 2020:

Good question.

If JESUS was just a Sacrifice – Why study HIS words?

KeithThroop comments on Dec 19, 2020:

I know of no historically orthodox Christian who would ever agree with the assumption that our Lord Jesus was *just* a sacrifice, as if that is all we believe Him to be. It certainly isn't how the Bible presents Him. At any rate, we listen to Him because we believe Him to be the incarnate Son of ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 23, 2020:

@Watchtower Hello again. Although I don't have a lot of time to spend, I can take a few minutes to respond briefly to at least a portion of your latest comment. > 1. The Christian Creed, which you quoted, enshrines the idea of Jesus as the son of God who lives a sinless life on your behalf and is entirely a prerequisite of his sacrifice in order to provide you with eternal life as a vicarious sacrifice. I can't see how the opinion of an orthodox Christian, of whatever stripe, can contradict my point that the Creed entirely is dependent on the human sacrifice of Jesus - that is logically evident. Well, I wasn't actually quoting ant creed. I was merely summarizing in my own words what Christians have believed over the centuries. But, yes, it does align with just about any creed you would find. And you are correct, of course, in observing that we would all see Jesus' sacrificial death as an absolutely essential point of doctrine. I have not denied this; indeed, I have affirmed it. What I have denied is that our doctrine necessarily or logically must view Jesus as *just* a sacrifice, as in *only* and sacrifice or *nothing more than* a sacrifice, such as the meme asserts. This may be your view, but it is not ours. There are a number of things about Jesus that we view as equally essential, without which even His sacrifice would be of no avail, and I have listed some of those things in an earlier comment, so I won't restate them here. Instead, I will highlight just one example, namely the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus. We understand this doctrine to be every bit as essential as the doctrine of Jesus' sacrifice for our sins because it is viewed as such in Scripture. For example, the Apostle Paul teaches that we cannot be justified apart from Jesus sacrificial death when he says the following: > ESV Rom. 3:21-26 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it-- 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 **whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood** [a reference to His death on the cross], to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. [bold emphasis mine] However, later in the same context Paul also goes on to say the following when speaking of the justification of Abraham by faith: > ESV Rom. 4:22-25 That is why his faith was ...

If JESUS was just a Sacrifice – Why study HIS words?

KeithThroop comments on Dec 19, 2020:

I know of no historically orthodox Christian who would ever agree with the assumption that our Lord Jesus was *just* a sacrifice, as if that is all we believe Him to be. It certainly isn't how the Bible presents Him. At any rate, we listen to Him because we believe Him to be the incarnate Son of ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 20, 2020:

@Watchtower You've said a lot here, and I will try to respond to it all as briefly as I can with limited time. > If you look at the points of the creed they are all conditional on the sacrifice of Jesus in human form. Hence my question! I'm not sure what you mean when you say that all the doctrinal points I mentioned are "*conditional* upon the sacrifice of Jesus in human form." His incarnation and sacrifice for our sins are surely necessary aspects of our doctrine, but no more or less necessary that other aspects, such as His deity, His sinless life, or His resurrection from the dead. Thus, my questioning of your premise when you said, "If JESUS was *just* a Sacrifice ...." The point is that no historically orthodox Christian would make such a claim. Nor would we say that all the doctrines mentioned somehow boil down to this one thing. You seem to think it serves your purpose to make it appear as though this is the case, but you are simply wrong about it. What you are asserting here amounts to a straw man. > I'm just trying to understand why people aren't more interested in the historical reality of what the Jesus of History actually said. I don't know who you are talking about here. All historically orthodox Christians have always been intensely interested in what the historical Jesus said and did, and we believe that we have an accurate account of this in Scripture. It appears, however, that you've added at least one apocryphal book to your assessment that no historically orthodox Christian would accept as a part of Scripture, namely the Gospel of Thomas, and you have misunderstood a passage from one book that we do accept, namely the Gospel of Luke. This is apparent in what you say next. > For example: “The Kingdom of God will not come through observation; neither will they say, ‘It is here’ or ‘It is there’ for understand, the Kingdom of God is within you!” Luke :21 and Thomas 70 > > The Church wants its adherents to go ‘out’ to Christ not ‘in’ toward God! Relatively recently, the Church realised the danger of translating this ‘Logia’ correctly. It is now fashionable for biblical scholars to change the traditional translation in order to avoid awkward questions about the logic of their Christology. Most modern translations use, ‘The Kingdom of God is among you’. An even more Calvinist spin can be put on this phrase, ‘The Kingdom of God is within some of you’, if you don’t mind adding a few words. The text from the earliest Greek texts read: > > “Basileia tou Theou entos humOn estin” “Kingdom - of - God - inside - of you - is” > > The truth is, the offending word is ‘Entos’, which can only mean ‘Within/Inside' - nothing more! The King James Bible and the Spanish Reina Valera Bible both ...

If JESUS was just a Sacrifice – Why study HIS words?

KeithThroop comments on Dec 19, 2020:

I know of no historically orthodox Christian who would ever agree with the assumption that our Lord Jesus was *just* a sacrifice, as if that is all we believe Him to be. It certainly isn't how the Bible presents Him. At any rate, we listen to Him because we believe Him to be the incarnate Son of ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 20, 2020:

@Jhonboy I don't know what you are talking about. For example, where does this come from? > So Zakarīya asked God for a son and was given him a daughter. God said her name is Mary and she will carry a son Jesus.

Hi you guys! How are you all going?

Kate_KK2 comments on Dec 18, 2020:

Hi Daisy - saw your comment on Twitter and have joined SLUG just now! Thanks Miss Daisy!! Xx 🎄🎄🎄

KeithThroop replies on Dec 19, 2020:

Welcome!

Rewarding abusive women: the Amber Heard story (wtf is this?) - YouTube

DaveO276 comments on Dec 19, 2020:

Really sad when the "domestic violence survivor" that gets society's support is the perpetrator. Of course the perpetrator survived - hopefully Johnny will survive to one day see his story taken seriously!

KeithThroop replies on Dec 19, 2020:

Although I've never really been a fan of Johnny Depp, I feel sorry for the guy in this situation. I, too, hope he will eventually be treated fairly.

Well, if Camelface is all about spreading joy, rather than spreading STDs as her rise in the ...

DaveO276 comments on Dec 17, 2020:

So Kamala says it's about spreading light and joy, and Ben (an actual ethnic and practicing religious orthodox Jew) says it's about nationalism and religious freedom? Interesting...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 18, 2020:

@KCSantiago You got that right, my friend! 😉

Words Can Be Violence?

tracycoyle comments on Dec 17, 2020:

Can speech be violence? No. Can it cause harm? Yes....although primarily to children. And those like them.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 17, 2020:

Well said. The First Amendment actually assumes that we have a population of adults engaging in it, adults who have a thick skin and an appreciation for the actual pursuit of truth.

Words Can Be Violence?

AnomalousAnon1 comments on Dec 17, 2020:

I propose an experiment to test this theory. You find someone to attack me verbally, and consent to my physical attack in response. At the end of the test, we will see who needs more medical or mental health care. HINT: I will not need either one. I think @KeithThroop summed it up best in his ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 17, 2020:

@AnomalousAnon1 Good point. They have a habit of ganging up on people when they have them isolated. Most of them are cowards.

As they say, "Those who forget their past..." [youtu.be]

KeithThroop comments on Dec 17, 2020:

I found this to be a very interesting discussion of the Book of Genesis.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 17, 2020:

@lawrenceblair I agree that his dating of the text, as well as a few of his points of interpretation showed a liberal bent with which I strongly disagree. But, of course, as a Protestant I also strongly disagree with much of his theology anyway. Still, though, I found the interview interesting, however much I disagreed with some of his underlying assumptions. In the same way, I have found a few of Jordan Peterson's talks about the Bible interesting as well, although he also definitely misunderstands much of it. I would not recommend either of these as good sources for my fellow Christians, however, to learn about the Bible.

Words Can Be Violence?

AnomalousAnon1 comments on Dec 17, 2020:

I propose an experiment to test this theory. You find someone to attack me verbally, and consent to my physical attack in response. At the end of the test, we will see who needs more medical or mental health care. HINT: I will not need either one. I think @KeithThroop summed it up best in his ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 17, 2020:

Thanks! I think your proposed experiment pretty much settles the issue. Perhaps I should suggest such an experiment to the next young man who suggest to me that speech is violence. I'm guessing he won't consent to it but will walk away yelling obscenities at me. LOL

As Trump’s Presidency draws to a close, what grade would you give him? [youtu.be]

TimTuolomne comments on Dec 17, 2020:

Top marks. He is the right guy for Orwellian times, and eventually will be vindicated by the courts as the president-Elect for his second term.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 17, 2020:

I sure hope you are right about the second term. That is what I am praying for, but we will know soon enough.

Mike Rowe: I don't want to pay for your useless college degree- [thefederalist.com]

coalburned comments on Dec 16, 2020:

Amen, Mike. Most colleges and universities have considerable wealth. If you want to eliminate student debt, start there. If colleges don't want to forgive debt, why pass it on to the taxpayer? Did anyone ask me if their kid's 4-year degree was worth $200,000? If nothing else, these students and ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 16, 2020:

Right. They are simply trying to buy votes.

TownHall: Leah Barkoukis: Rush Limbaugh gave an update on his battle with cancer Tuesday.

coalburned comments on Dec 16, 2020:

I'm sad to see Rush in this shape. I know he is despised by many who will no doubt cheer his passing. But he has been a solid voice for conservatism in a time when various forces have tried to silence those who demand liberty and appreciate, shall we say, more traditional values. Yes, he could be ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 16, 2020:

Well said.

Do you have a "line in the sand" regarding political or social change?

KeithThroop comments on Dec 15, 2020:

As I said in a comment below, I took this oath when I enlisted in the U.S. Navy back in 1984: > I, Keith Throop, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 16, 2020:

@tracycoyle You've basically stated almost exactly the sentiments of every veteran I've met who served under Carter.

Do you have a "line in the sand" regarding political or social change?

KeithThroop comments on Dec 15, 2020:

As I said in a comment below, I took this oath when I enlisted in the U.S. Navy back in 1984: > I, Keith Throop, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 16, 2020:

@Admin It seems to me that most in the military over the years have supported presidents who they feel have supported them and who have taken a strong stance for national defense. In my experience, morale in the military always seems to be highest when Republicans are in office. This trend probably began with the Carter administration and continues until now. At least that is my impression looking back on things and speaking with many veterans from the preceding generations (as a member of both the VFW and the American Legion). I suppose it doesn't necessarily have to do with whether the particular president himself ever served in the military. For example, Jimmy Cater served in the Navy and morale was quite low during his administration, and I haven't met any veterans who served under him who thought he was a good Commander-in-chief. On the other hand, Donald Trump never served, but he seems to be quite popular among the military and among most veterans. In between these two, however, the presidents that have been the most popular all served and were Republicans, whereas those who were less popular did not serve and were Democrats. I think rank and file military will always follow lawful orders and try to respect the office, but they don't have much respect for presidents they regard as weak or who they think are selling out the country in some way. Those who serve out of a sense of patriotism and honor and swear an oath to defend the Constitution have little respect for presidents who seek to undermine it and who don't really seem to love our country.

Do you have a "line in the sand" regarding political or social change?

coalburned comments on Dec 15, 2020:

My line in the sand is clearly defined by the constitution. Don't like it? Then change it according to proper process. Would I fight for that? Yep, to the degree an aging boomer can do so lol.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 15, 2020:

I took this oath when I enlisted in the U.S. Navy back in 1984: > I, Keith Throop, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God. Although I am no longer in the military, and thus no longer under the UCMJ, I nevertheless regard my oath to the U.S. Constitution to be binding. I will seek to fulfill that oath in any way that I am able, as you said, given my age and corresponding limitations. For now that means casting my vote, campaigning for good candidates, protesting, signing petitions and collecting signatures, contacting those who represent me, etc.

Forcing Taxpayers to Fund Abortions?

JacksonNought comments on Dec 15, 2020:

Don't see why you care. You don't live in the US, your money isn't funding anything here. However, for those of us who do live in the US, we cannot choose how our taxes are spent. Someone may object to their taxes funding someone's abortion - and currently they wouldn't have to worry, because of ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 15, 2020:

@JacksonNought You said: > Maybe Christians can now experience what it is like to have your taxpayer dollars used for things you object to. There are already plenty of things for which tax dollars are used that Christians object to, starting with much of what is taught in public schools. So, I assure you, we are already well acquainted with what this feels like. But, as it turns out, it isn't just Christians who are for the Hyde Amendment and against tax-payer support of abortions, as @Krunoslav pointed out: > ... 6 in 10 Americans oppose taxpayer funding for abortion, including 42% of independents and one-third of Democrats. However, as I understand it, the Hyde Amendment doesn't prohibit the taxpayer funding of all abortions anyway, since it allows for several exceptions to which most Christians have been apposed all along (e.g. for rape and incest). So, again, we are already quite familiar with what it feels like to have our tax dollars fund things to which we are morally opposed.

Party insiders in the ranks: communists infiltrate Western consulates By Sharri Markson 7:07AM ...

TimTuolomne comments on Dec 14, 2020:

All we have to do is stick to Constitutional principles and we will weather Chinese infiltration just fine.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 14, 2020:

Right on. Sadly, however, too many would rather not bother with the Constitution these days.

Pope Francis and the Vatican enter a "global alliance" with Mastercard, Visa, Bank of America, the ...

timon_phocas comments on Dec 13, 2020:

We'll, Pope Francis might be Catholic, but he seems to be only vaguely Christian.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 13, 2020:

Frankly, you may be giving him too much benefit of the doubt there, brother.

Sky News Australia. [youtube.com]

warminster100 comments on Dec 13, 2020:

Is Joe Biden or the DNC party members?

KeithThroop replies on Dec 13, 2020:

@warminster100 Well, Joe Biden is technically the leader of the Democrat Party right now, so I'm not sure what implications that might have.

Feedback on the new layout for the list of posts?

Krunoslav comments on Dec 13, 2020:

Will have to see how it looks for few days before I can comment.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 13, 2020:

Same here.

Today is the Army-Navy Game. I say, "Go Navy! Beat Army!" [youtube.]

eschatologyguy comments on Dec 12, 2020:

Video deleted

KeithThroop replies on Dec 12, 2020:

Yeah, it was a live feed of the game. I'll replace it with something else.

"One unhappy lesson we've been learning for at least four years, and very intensely of late, is that...

warminster100 comments on Dec 12, 2020:

And do not mistake education for wisdom!

KeithThroop replies on Dec 12, 2020:

Right on.

I like this.

maxmaccc comments on Dec 11, 2020:

I got banned for commenting after Ahmad, a Muslim, justified enslaving enemies in war. He said that the Quran allowed enslaving your enemies to serve as a deterrent to stop any future attacks. This was my comment "Ahmad, a muslim living in the 21st century possess a medieval justification for ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 11, 2020:

Yet, people can say anything they want, no matter how hateful, about Christianity, and that is no problem. Now, although I am a Christian and do not appreciate such things being said about my faith, I'm not trying to imply that people's freedom to say such things should be taken away, only that people should be able to speak freely in criticism of Islam as well.

Why Public Schools and the Mainstream Media Dumb Us Down - YouTube

RitBorg comments on Dec 10, 2020:

I come from a family of teachers and was a teacher as well (I taught 9-12 math). I used to have a lot of faith in the system but by the end of graduate school (2010) I knew that I made a grave mistake. The socialist propaganda was strong and all the things seen in the mainstream narrative are what...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 10, 2020:

@KanjaG One of the common questions about homeschooling involves the issue of the proper socialization of children and the need for them to be around other children for this to happen. This is, of course, a valid concern. As a parent who homeschooled three children (all of whom are adults now and doing very well) I would make two observations. *First*, keep in mind that children don't really learn good social skills primarily from other children; they learn them from their parents. *Second*, despite the truth of the first point, children do need to learn to interact with others of their own age and to develop good friendships with their peers as they grow up. This is why my wife and I, as well as virtually all the homeschooling parents I know of, have always found ways to involve our children with other children. For example, homeschooling has become so popular where we live that there is a pretty large network of homeschooling families that participate in activities together. For example, one talented parent offered an art class for children, another offered a regular PE class for children to learn to be active and take part in various physical activities and sports, one parent offered a very good writing class for junior high and high school kids, etc. Also, our daughters took dance classes and played softball in the parks & rec. leagues through high school, and our son played baseball. It was good for them to learn about competition and teamwork. Also, in our case, as with many other Christian families, our children were involved in all the Sunday school and youth activities of our church. Anyway, we were able to offer lots of opportunities for our children to be with their peers, but in a way which we thought was superior to what they would have experienced in public schools. There was much better adult supervision of the things they were involved in, and we had much better control of the types of families and children they were around. So, for example, although my children certainly did have to learn how to deal with conflict at times, we were usually close at hand to help them, and they were never exposed to the kind of negative influences or bullying that characterized my own experience in school as a child. I hope I have been able to help answer your question. Feel free to challenge anything I've said or ask any further questions. :)

I've just started reading The Ipcress File by Len Deighton. Has anyone esle read any of his books?

Czaidan comments on Dec 10, 2020:

I'm actually not fond of Len Deighton. It's not a "gee that guy sucks" kind of thing, more that his writing just doesn't suit me. I'm a fan of these types of books, and really enjoy Crichton, Grisham, Morell and such so the genre in and of itself does really interest me. I actually came across LD ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 10, 2020:

Thanks for the feedback.

usa closed

tracycoyle comments on Dec 9, 2020:

Not angry at you, but at the mindlessness of the politicians and the masses that follow them blindly....

KeithThroop replies on Dec 9, 2020:

Same here.

This made me laugh.

Naomi comments on Dec 9, 2020:

And pooping from above is an effective aerial attack,

KeithThroop replies on Dec 9, 2020:

I've actually been hit from above twice before. Not a nice way for my country to treat a veteran. LOL!

A QUESTION TO CHRISTIANS How do you feel about this?

Sendndragon comments on Dec 8, 2020:

Then they were not paying attention to Matthiew 10.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 8, 2020:

If you are referring to our Lord Jesus' words recorded in Matthew 10:35 ("Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword"), I think you have missed that the language is figurative, as was the same metaphor in Luke 2:35, where we are told that the prophet Simeon said to Mary, "yes, a sword will pierce through your own soul also," indicating the anguish of heart she would one day experience. Such a metaphorical usage in Matthew 10 is evident in light of the context and especially in light of Matthew 26:51-52.

I've just started reading The Ipcress File by Len Deighton. Has anyone esle read any of his books?

Edgework comments on Dec 4, 2020:

He’s really good. Not as good as John LeCarrè in Britain or Charles McCarry in America, but when he’s on target, he’s worth the effort. His magnum opus was the Cold War series Berlin Game, Mexico Set and London Match, followed by Spy Hook, Spy Line and Spy Sinker. I saw another trilogy, ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 4, 2020:

Thanks for the feedback.

Supreme Court sides with California church on COVID restrictions [electionwiz.com]

TheMiddleWay comments on Dec 3, 2020:

Good decision. Churches should not be singled out. Instead ANY AND ALL places of gathering should be included in said restrictions. If that were done, there would be no constitutional challenge and the order would stand against places of worship, bars, restaurants, weddings, etc. My guess ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 3, 2020:

@TheMiddleWay Just a couple of quick points as I'm thinking about what you've said. *First*, your point about experiencing religious gatherings virtually has actually hit on an issue that is being debated currently among many Christians groups (and I would assume other religious groups as well that may emphasize gathering for worship). It was a debate already occurring with the increasing use of technology and the streaming of religious services online, but the COVID-19 crisis has certainly heightened the debate. I am among those who see virtual observance as problematic and detrimental, although our church met via Zoom through the end of May due to our compliance with the initial shutdown. We began meeting in person again on the first Sunday in June, and everyone was anxious to be together again. We were grateful that we had Zoom and could at least interact to some extent, but there simply is no substitute for meeting together, singing together, praying together, and simply enjoying one another's company in person. Anyway, you have highlighted an issue that will be debated for some time, I fear. *Second*, I certainly appreciate your point when you say that "singling out Church gatherings is absolutely wrong and that is absolutely a violation of the first amendment ... but making wide announcements that any kind of gathering has to be restricted would not violate the first amendment since it's not sure singularly targeting religious people anymore than it's singularly targeting bars or schools etc." As you no doubt could see in my previous comment, I am not entirely in disagreement. I am, however, very concerned that it is a dangerous sort of slippery slope that we need to avoid as much as possible. Such measures, as noted above, should really be *temporary*, but what we are seeing is an attempt to move beyond what can reasonably be referred to as temporary in light of the Constitutionally protected rights that Americans have. *Temporary* is turning into a longer and longer period of time, or such *temporary* periods are being constantly repeated with only brief intervals, and there is virtually no apparent concern among the politicians pushing such lockdown periods for the Constitutional rights of the people upon whom they are seeking to enforce them. I guess what I'm saying is that such periods should be as brief and rare as possible if one takes the Constitution seriously, but that is not the impression I'm getting from far too many politicians. They seem bent instead on seeing how far they can push the envelope. That certainly is what is happening here in the Peoples Republic of Illinois, where our governor has yet to abide by any of the measures he has demanded of others in the state.

Supreme Court sides with California church on COVID restrictions [electionwiz.com]

TheMiddleWay comments on Dec 3, 2020:

Good decision. Churches should not be singled out. Instead ANY AND ALL places of gathering should be included in said restrictions. If that were done, there would be no constitutional challenge and the order would stand against places of worship, bars, restaurants, weddings, etc. My guess ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 3, 2020:

@TheMiddleWay Well, I think you raise some good points, as you usually do, but I think the comparison to a hurricane is good for they way things looked back in, say, April or May. At that time virtually every church fully agreed with the temporary ceasing of gatherings, and they did not think it violated either their consciences in terms of their religious observance or the Constitution in terms of their obligation to the country. I should point out, though, that the analogy pretty quickly breaks down, because mandatory evacuations for hurricanes do not prevent churches from meeting. They can always meet somewhere else. That is not really the case with the current shutdowns, although I think I read that a few congregations have taken to holding meetings in a Walmart, where people can still apparently gather in large numbers. But in such cases I would assume that the Walmart has agreed to allow this, probably in direct opposition to the intent of the lockdown orders. At any rate, my comments above were made with respect to the current situation. Very few people would disagree with your point about *temporary* restrictions under such circumstances as we thought we were in months ago, when we were told, by the way, that *temporary* meant 6-8 weeks at most. We were told that we only needed to "flatten the curve," but then the goal post kept getting moved. So now we have to clearly define just how long *temporary* should be and also make a better case than is currently being made that the danger now is what we thought it was then. The situation we were in -- or thought we were in, depending on how you look at it -- then was probably analogous to a sort of nation-wide hurricane in terms of the danger, which is why so few people balked at the shutdowns then. Now the situation is quite different, and it is very hard to make the case to a great many people in this country that we should continue with shutdowns or even, perhaps, that we should ever have done them in the first place.

Are Twitter and Facebook's new censorship rules racist?

sqeptiq comments on Dec 3, 2020:

The social justice kids insist that it's impossible to be racist to whites.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 3, 2020:

Sad, but true.

Supreme Court sides with California church on COVID restrictions [electionwiz.com]

TheMiddleWay comments on Dec 3, 2020:

Good decision. Churches should not be singled out. Instead ANY AND ALL places of gathering should be included in said restrictions. If that were done, there would be no constitutional challenge and the order would stand against places of worship, bars, restaurants, weddings, etc. My guess ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 3, 2020:

I don't think such an order as you suggest would be Constitutional either. It would still violate the First Amendment: > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. The right to the free exercise of religion must include the freedom to assemble as part of religious observance, but, as it turns out, the right to freely assemble is also a separate right guaranteed in the First Amendment. At any rate, the free exercise of religion cannot be upheld while restricting the right of religious people to meet when this is a part of their religious observance. Now, what the Supreme Court will eventually decide is another matter. These days there is no telling what could happen there, although the current Court appears to be more originalist and may well rightly decide in favor of churches on this point. If not, there will be mass civil disobedience in the offing, and I will be among those disobeying.

FPV 234 - Shocking U.S. Election Hearings, And The Horrifying Big Picture - YouTube

Krunoslav comments on Dec 2, 2020:

A proper speech. Well said.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 2, 2020:

Yes, there was a lot of good stuff in there.

Witness at Michigan Hearing: All military ballots looked like "xerox copies" of each other ...

Rick-A comments on Dec 1, 2020:

Heresy evidence - not going to move the hand one second on the dial. Are these people just placating the people into a dead end. Local police, nothing. FBI, nothing. CIA, nothing. Barr, nothing. What am I going to do? Continue to believe?

KeithThroop replies on Dec 2, 2020:

@Krunoslav You've got that right!

Witness at Michigan Hearing: All military ballots looked like "xerox copies" of each other ...

Rick-A comments on Dec 1, 2020:

Heresy evidence - not going to move the hand one second on the dial. Are these people just placating the people into a dead end. Local police, nothing. FBI, nothing. CIA, nothing. Barr, nothing. What am I going to do? Continue to believe?

KeithThroop replies on Dec 2, 2020:

@Krunoslav I agree that this isn't over yet, but I don't think the Insurrection Act will come into play. If the State Legislatures and the Courts do not do turn the tide, then I think the game is over.

Daisy Cousens: Mainstream Media Is LYING About The Pennsylvania Hearing Like.

Bay0Wulf comments on Dec 1, 2020:

The problem of course is that there are those that “Get Their News” from Mainstream Media and they aren’t about to watch Alternate Media Sources (including DC’s video) unless you get really radical and strap them down and force them to do so ... like Alex in the film A Clockwork Orange. ...

KeithThroop replies on Dec 2, 2020:

Sadly, there seem to me many people such as you describe.

Daisy Cousens: Mainstream Media Is LYING About The Pennsylvania Hearing Like.

KeithThroop comments on Dec 1, 2020:

Another great video! I hope she will keep making U.S. election content. She does a much better job of accurately, clearly, and succinctly presenting information about it than almost any other source here in the States.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 2, 2020:

@TheMiddleWay I don't see the point of name-calling and insulting just because of a disagreement. And, for what it's worth, although you have always been very direct in your comments toward me in the past, I don't think you have ever insulted me, and I don't believe I have ever insulted you either, even though I've tended to be very direct in my responses. Of course, I don't always like having my opinions challenged, but, if I'm going to voice them in a place such as this, I'm inviting challenge, and I expect it. As the old expression popularized by Harry Truman goes, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." If I couldn't take being challenged, I would simply quit posting. But I hope I wouldn't resort to name-calling or insulting. By the way, for those reading this, you might take notice of the fact that, while I'm sure we certainly still disagree about much, @TheMiddleWay did grant my point when I made a good one, as I also granted that he had made a good point. In other words, we listened to each other and came away a bit more thoughtful about our positions as a result. "As iron sharpens iron, So one man sharpens another" (Prov. 27:17).

Daisy Cousens: Mainstream Media Is LYING About The Pennsylvania Hearing Like.

KeithThroop comments on Dec 1, 2020:

Another great video! I hope she will keep making U.S. election content. She does a much better job of accurately, clearly, and succinctly presenting information about it than almost any other source here in the States.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 1, 2020:

@TheMiddleWay Yes, and your point about timing is still well taken. Every day that goes by increases the likelihood that nothing will happen in the courts. Of course, the case to be made in the lower courts is a much more difficult one this time around than in 2000, and it simply takes more time to develop the case to be brought. They are quickly running out of time, however, as you have rightly pointed out.

Daisy Cousens: Mainstream Media Is LYING About The Pennsylvania Hearing Like.

KeithThroop comments on Dec 1, 2020:

Another great video! I hope she will keep making U.S. election content. She does a much better job of accurately, clearly, and succinctly presenting information about it than almost any other source here in the States.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 1, 2020:

@TheMiddleWay Well, I think Bush v. Gore was decided on Dec. 12, 2000, which put it just over five weeks after the election. Things can be fast-tracked a bit in such urgent situations, with the lower courts each granting expedited hearings. If memory serves, that case was a reversal of the Florida State Supreme Court, so it made its way through the state courts rather than the federal courts. I don't know when the case was first brought to court, though. It could actually have made its way to the Supreme Court in about 4 weeks from its initial filing.

Daisy Cousens: Mainstream Media Is LYING About The Pennsylvania Hearing Like.

KeithThroop comments on Dec 1, 2020:

Another great video! I hope she will keep making U.S. election content. She does a much better job of accurately, clearly, and succinctly presenting information about it than almost any other source here in the States.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 1, 2020:

@TheMiddleWay Actually, they have only just gotten started. It is too early to say. As I said, we'll see.

Daisy Cousens: Mainstream Media Is LYING About The Pennsylvania Hearing Like.

KeithThroop comments on Dec 1, 2020:

Another great video! I hope she will keep making U.S. election content. She does a much better job of accurately, clearly, and succinctly presenting information about it than almost any other source here in the States.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 1, 2020:

@TheMiddleWay Well, the Constitution is readily available to read, and so are many articles and writings from various points of view on the Constitution. We'll see what happens as things unfold. I'm assuming our top Constitutional scholars will be forced to weigh in -- well, at least *nine* of them will probably be forced to weigh in.

Daisy Cousens: Mainstream Media Is LYING About The Pennsylvania Hearing Like.

KeithThroop comments on Dec 1, 2020:

Another great video! I hope she will keep making U.S. election content. She does a much better job of accurately, clearly, and succinctly presenting information about it than almost any other source here in the States.

KeithThroop replies on Dec 1, 2020:

@TheMiddleWay Well, in this video she is offering a critique of the MSM coverage of the Pennsylvania hearing, so all she really had to do in order to assess whether or not they had covered it fairly is to actually watch all the hearing and compare what she actually saw and heard with the coverage of it, which she did. As for her assertions that states' election results can be de-certified by the courts or the state legislatures, she rightly pointed out that it only takes a "little bit" of research to find this out, including reading the Constitution, which places control over Presidential electors in the state legislatures and gives the courts the job of deciding if things have been done legally and in accordance with the Constitution. Her point in this regard, however, is that the MSM either didn't bother to do any basic research about the process, or they were deliberately lying. I agree that the latter is the more probable option, given how easy it really is to find out about the process. Oh, and by the way, they have the internet not only in the U.S. but also in Australia, which I'm assuming is the primary means she used for her research, just as it usually is for me and most other people these days.

What are black people superior at?

KeithThroop comments on Nov 20, 2020:

The CUT video might be one of the most racist things I've ever seen. It is a really sad thing that it is condoned by so many. I think maybe those people in the video need to read the @BlackoutNJ article entitled "Fighting Racism with Racism is Inexcusable." ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 30, 2020:

@ZuzecaSape That was really hard to watch.

I am so happy to be celebrating my 34th wedding anniversary to my wife, Kim, today.

KanjaG comments on Nov 30, 2020:

Happy Anniversary Keith! ♥️

KeithThroop replies on Nov 30, 2020:

Thank you so much. :)

I am so happy to be celebrating my 34th wedding anniversary to my wife, Kim, today.

guru comments on Nov 29, 2020:

Happy anniversary!!

KeithThroop replies on Nov 29, 2020:

Thanks!

Holy bastard child of Mary. Is this an ACTUAL free speech forum for people with real opinions?

lawrenceblair comments on Nov 27, 2020:

So you are an analyst. Maybe you should go see an analyst. You just exercised your free speech, now do you feel fulfilled; you have attacked a person you evidently know nothing about and slandered Him. Is that what free speech means to you, the right to slander.When I consider the slander you just ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 29, 2020:

@JoeArrow In defense of @lawrenceblair, the author of the post says in another comment that he was raised a "fundamentalist Christian," so he must know that using the name of Jesus as a form of exclamation in the way he did -- almost like a swear word -- is considered blasphemous by Christians. And he must also have known that calling Jesus a "bastard child" in the process would be seen as offensive as well. So, no one needs to have any special knowledge in order to arrive at the conclusion that he was attempting to be provocative. In fact, one doesn't really even need to know the author's claimed background. All one needs is a basic knowledge of the way his words were used in the context in which he used them. His question that immediately followed this exclamation, "Is this an ACTUAL free speech forum for people with real opinions?," can easily be seen, then, as basically asking, "If this is a real place for free speech, can I get away with saying the provocative thing I just said?" This is apparently the way @lawrenceblair understood the author's words, and it is the way I understood them as well. I just didn't bother to respond directly to them because I saw them essentially as trolling, and I usually just ignore such things. It’s not that I don't find the words as offensive as @lawrenceblair finds them to be. I do. I just typically prefer not to waste time engaging with someone who likes to start conversations that way. I don't typically find them very interested in really listening to what others of an opposing point of view might have to say.

A poet dares be just so clear and no clearer.

KeithThroop comments on Nov 28, 2020:

“Poetry appeals more directly to the whole person that prose does. It stimulates our imaginations, arouses our emotions, feeds our intellects and addresses our wills. Perhaps this is why poetry is the preferred mode of communication of the prophets, whose purpose depends on capturing the attention...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 28, 2020:

@Krunoslav Well, we will of course differ on the precise nature of Biblical history and poetry. As for Plato, I certainly appreciate your perspective just as I can appreciate his, but I don't think I can fully agree with either of you. Thanks for sharing. You hardly ever fail to get me thinking in a deeper way, which is part of your goal, I suspect. :)

A poet dares be just so clear and no clearer.

KeithThroop comments on Nov 28, 2020:

“Poetry appeals more directly to the whole person that prose does. It stimulates our imaginations, arouses our emotions, feeds our intellects and addresses our wills. Perhaps this is why poetry is the preferred mode of communication of the prophets, whose purpose depends on capturing the attention...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 28, 2020:

@Krunoslav I don't think I can agree with Plato on that point. Of course, what often passed for history writing in his day certainly makes one appreciate his perspective a bit more, but I would argue that either form can communicate truth effectively, especially if one makes proper genre distinctions when writing and reading these forms.

Questions everyone should ask themselves before buying something : 1) At what frequency will I ...

KanjaG comments on Nov 25, 2020:

I’m also into the idea of spending a little more for an item that will last me a lifetime rather than cheaper items to aren’t made to last.

KeithThroop replies on Nov 25, 2020:

Same here. I'd rather spend a bit more money initially that more money over the long haul.

Hillbillies & White Privilege Hillbilly Elegy was released Tuesday on Netflix and promptly ...

Letemdangle comments on Nov 25, 2020:

Looks like its worth a look.

KeithThroop replies on Nov 25, 2020:

Yes, it does, but I won't be watching it on Netflix.

SHOCKING EXCLUSIVE: WE CAUGHT THEM! Pennsylvania Results Show a Statistically Impossible Pattern ...

Edgework comments on Nov 24, 2020:

Read them all. Gateway Pundit has 9 or 10 articles, starting with this one, all outlining the statistical anomalies everywhere you look. Mostly in Philadelphia, ‘Milwaukee, Detroit and Atlanta.

KeithThroop replies on Nov 24, 2020:

@Rick-A Make that 32! 😉

Minimize and Maximize! We did this 3 years ago and it was the best thing we ever did.

KanjaG comments on Nov 24, 2020:

I could be pretty happy with this:

KeithThroop replies on Nov 24, 2020:

@KanjaG I also find that reading on screens hurts my eyes more than reading a book does.

Minimize and Maximize! We did this 3 years ago and it was the best thing we ever did.

KanjaG comments on Nov 24, 2020:

I could be pretty happy with this:

KeithThroop replies on Nov 24, 2020:

I could never fit all of my books in one of those. But, I guess with modern computer technology, I could get most of my library on a laptop. 🤔

THE PHARISEE AND THE PUBLICAN LUKE 18:10–14 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a...

KeithThroop comments on Nov 23, 2020:

Here is an article I wrote some time ago on this parable. https://reformedbaptistblog.com/2014/12/31/parable-of-the-pharisee-and-the-tax-collector-luke-189-11-teaching-outline/

KeithThroop replies on Nov 23, 2020:

@lawrenceblair Thank you for the encouraging word, brother. This passage always reminds me that I'm just the kind of material with which our Lord likes to work for His glory: > For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. 27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; 28 and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, 29 that no flesh should glory in His presence. 30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God-- and righteousness and sanctification and redemption-- 31 that, as it is written, "He who glories, let him glory in the LORD." (1 Cor. 1:26-31 NKJ)

THE PHARISEE AND THE PUBLICAN LUKE 18:10–14 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a...

KeithThroop comments on Nov 23, 2020:

Here is an article I wrote some time ago on this parable. https://reformedbaptistblog.com/2014/12/31/parable-of-the-pharisee-and-the-tax-collector-luke-189-11-teaching-outline/

KeithThroop replies on Nov 23, 2020:

@lawrenceblair Frankly, I've read lots of your posts here, and I think you communicate very well.

I've always enjoyed this one, true the art is beautiful but if you've ever been an alkie, well then ...

KeithThroop comments on Nov 22, 2020:

It reminds me of a night I spent drinking wine and playing Crazy 8's with a group of old guys on the sidewalk in Philadelphia many years ago. I was a 20 year old sailor, and I met them a few blocks from Penn's Landing. They were running low, and I offered to buy a bottle, which led to several more....

KeithThroop replies on Nov 22, 2020:

@MikeHunt Well, those were my BC days (before Christ). He saved me when I was 20 years old, and I credit Him for the strength to quit.

Is it me, or Christians are merely libertarians a.

dd54 comments on Nov 22, 2020:

There are many Christians throughout the Republic but their is no jihad call in the New Testament to as you put it *aloha-snackbar* non-believers. In addition to that we have this pesky issue about *law and order* to contend with. That said, the *Word* also says there is a time for all things under ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 22, 2020:

Well said.

Tis be the season again folks, and the left is griping again over what Santa Claus supposedly ...

timon_phocas comments on Nov 22, 2020:

Nicolas of Bari wasn't necessarily a white person. He, like Jesus of Nazareth and Moses, was Middle Eastern.

KeithThroop replies on Nov 22, 2020:

Good point.

How many "Christian leaders" have you come across arrogating the title "apostle" to themselves?

KeithThroop comments on Nov 22, 2020:

I am in agreement with your point. There are no more Apostles after those who initially served as a foundation for the church, and Rev. 21:14 certainly does denote a special place for the original twelve (no doubt assuming the twelfth is Matthias rather than Judas Iscariot). However, I would observe...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 22, 2020:

@eschatologyguy Well said!

How many "Christian leaders" have you come across arrogating the title "apostle" to themselves?

KeithThroop comments on Nov 22, 2020:

I am in agreement with your point. There are no more Apostles after those who initially served as a foundation for the church, and Rev. 21:14 certainly does denote a special place for the original twelve (no doubt assuming the twelfth is Matthias rather than Judas Iscariot). However, I would observe...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 22, 2020:

@eschatologyguy Setting aside the issue of the birth of the Church, no one is arguing with Rev. 21:14. We are just taking into account other passages of Scripture as well. Other passages clearly indicate that there were a few other Apostles besides the original twelve, and Rev. 21:14 does not actually say that there were no other Apostles than the twelve, even if it obviously does refer only to the original twelve as having a special role in the New Jerusalem. In other words, we must interpret Scripture by Scripture, and there is a simple way to do so in this case.

To Kill a Mockingbird and other classics banned from Californian schools - YouTube

turnerjolene48 comments on Nov 21, 2020:

This is very sad for the children being denied good educations by the politicians that control the curriculum of their schools.

KeithThroop replies on Nov 22, 2020:

@guru The secularist Left has been dominating the education system for some time, yes, which is why we homeschooled all three of our children. *We* decided what our children would or would not read.

WashExaminer: Mark Levin is leaving FB for Parler.

KeithThroop comments on Nov 21, 2020:

I've been on Parler for some time. I think I originally heard about it from Candace Owens. I haven't been as active there as I would like to be, but I went there and left Twitter (which I have blocked via mt Cleanbrowsing app).

KeithThroop replies on Nov 21, 2020:

@eschatologyguy "Slug Republic"? What does "Republic" refer to?

Many years ago I understood something about myself and decided that for my own welfare I would pack ...

KeithThroop comments on Nov 21, 2020:

Are you saying, however, that *you* have accepted the truth? Are you claiming that the position you are espousing here is *the truth*? I should note that I'm not trying to imply that I disagree with your perspective. As a Christian, I believe you have described the attitude of fallen human beings...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 21, 2020:

@tracycoyle > I want to be VERY picky about word choice, "the truth". THE is a very specific meaning in the context you are speaking of THE Truth. As if there were only one, or the superior one of 'truths'. I understand your reference and generally truth is capitalized when written in such a context. Good point. Thanks for the thoughtful post and for responding. :)

HEAVEN IS FOUND USING THE BIBLE Just before dying on the cross, Jesus said this: “Truly I ...

KeithThroop comments on Nov 19, 2020:

Unless you believe that one text had to do with His spirit and the other had to do with His body, assuming the Biblical teaching of man as made up of both body and spirit, with the spirit departing the body at death and being reunited to it in the resurrection. Then there is also the Biblical ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 21, 2020:

@Zteph It appears that you have cited the King James Version, which has led you to the mistaken notion that this verse is speaking about *hell*. You would be hard pressed to find any more recent translations, however, that agree with that understanding. In fact, I know of no reliable modern translation or reputable Hebrew scholar these days that would agree with it. The Hebrew word is actually *she’ōl*, which was a pretty vague term that simply referred to the place where dead people go or to the grave. It really meant nothing specific beyond that, and there are no Old Testament texts which clearly define it for us beyond that. The Septuagint used the Greek word *hádēs* to translate it, adapting it for that purpose without carrying over any of the Greek mythological notions. This Septuagint usage is then carried over into the New Testament, where *hádēs* basically refers to the intermediate state of the dead that I've mentioned in previous comments. The term for *hell* as the place of final judgment, which first appears as a clear doctrine in the New Testament, is *géhenna*. You are right, however, to see Psalm 16:10 as foretelling and therefore referring to Jesus' resurrection. It is, in fact, cited in this regard by the Apostle Peter: > NKJ Acts 13:32-37 And we declare to you glad tidings-- that promise which was made to the fathers. 33 God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.” [Ps. 2:7] 34 And that He raised Him from the dead, no more to return to corruption, He has spoken thus: “I will give you the sure mercies of David.” [Isa. 55:3]35 Therefore He also says in another Psalm: “You will not allow Your Holy One to see corruption.” [Ps. 16:10] 36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell asleep, was buried with his fathers, and saw corruption; 37 but He whom God raised up saw no corruption. At any rate, I know of no Biblical passage teaching that Jesus' body was anywhere but in the grave between His death and resurrection. I hope this discussion has been helpful to you. :)

WashExaminer: Mark Levin is leaving FB for Parler.

KeithThroop comments on Nov 21, 2020:

I've been on Parler for some time. I think I originally heard about it from Candace Owens. I haven't been as active there as I would like to be, but I went there and left Twitter (which I have blocked via mt Cleanbrowsing app).

KeithThroop replies on Nov 21, 2020:

@coalburned I'm in the process of making a move away from Facebook myself. I'm trying to time it with a number of family and friends.

Would moving state borders reduce the chance of civil war?

lawrenceblair comments on Nov 21, 2020:

Changing the state configurations requires and act of their legislatures and no politician wants to relinquish control and lose tax money. For instance Parts of Eastern and Southern Oregon would like to succeed from Oregon and form their own states. Oregon is controlled by the big cities in the ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 21, 2020:

@Admin Good point. :)

Would moving state borders reduce the chance of civil war?

lawrenceblair comments on Nov 21, 2020:

Changing the state configurations requires and act of their legislatures and no politician wants to relinquish control and lose tax money. For instance Parts of Eastern and Southern Oregon would like to succeed from Oregon and form their own states. Oregon is controlled by the big cities in the ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 21, 2020:

Right. It is the same thing here in Illinois, where occasionally there is proposed legislation to force the northeast corner of the state -- Chicago and the surrounding area -- to form a new state. But it will never happen because the majority of the states' population is there, and they will never allow the rest of the state to leave and lose even more tax dollars for their liberal policies which have bankrupt the whole state.

HEAVEN IS FOUND USING THE BIBLE Just before dying on the cross, Jesus said this: “Truly I ...

KeithThroop comments on Nov 19, 2020:

Unless you believe that one text had to do with His spirit and the other had to do with His body, assuming the Biblical teaching of man as made up of both body and spirit, with the spirit departing the body at death and being reunited to it in the resurrection. Then there is also the Biblical ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 21, 2020:

@Zteph Who said anything about Jesus' body being in *hell*? It was in the tomb (e.g. Matt. 27:57-60).

Ok Trumpers, explain to me how and why the Democrats so cleverly stole the Presidential election, ...

DaveO276 comments on Nov 21, 2020:

Yes, keep exclusively following your echo chamber MSM that tells you there is no evidence and cuts away from press conferences as soon as anything comes up that may prompt some viewers to question the narrative! I'm not saying there's no way Biden legitimately becomes POTUS at the end of all of ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 21, 2020:

Right, and they probably already thought they had the Senate won, just as they thought they would pick up seats in the House of Representatives, but they had to know, despite the line being given to the public, that their poll numbers regarding the president were wrong.

JP hits the nail on the head ... repeatedly. [youtube.com]

REN777 comments on Nov 20, 2020:

From comedy to political commentary.

KeithThroop replies on Nov 20, 2020:

He's been doing both pretty well of late.

A decent article for those who are just beginning their journey out of cognitive dissonance: ...

Krunoslav comments on Nov 20, 2020:

After clicking on the link, this showed up for me. Any idea why and do you see the same?

KeithThroop replies on Nov 20, 2020:

Hmm ... I had no problem seeing the article.

What are black people superior at?

KeithThroop comments on Nov 20, 2020:

The CUT video might be one of the most racist things I've ever seen. It is a really sad thing that it is condoned by so many. I think maybe those people in the video need to read the @BlackoutNJ article entitled "Fighting Racism with Racism is Inexcusable." ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 20, 2020:

@coalburned Yes, I'm looking forward to reading his forthcoming book.

HEAVEN IS FOUND USING THE BIBLE Just before dying on the cross, Jesus said this: “Truly I ...

KeithThroop comments on Nov 19, 2020:

Unless you believe that one text had to do with His spirit and the other had to do with His body, assuming the Biblical teaching of man as made up of both body and spirit, with the spirit departing the body at death and being reunited to it in the resurrection. Then there is also the Biblical ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 20, 2020:

@Zteph Well, the first text records the words of Jesus while hanging on the cross, in which He promises the thief who had believed in Him that, "Today you will be with Me in paradise." Although you mentioned that He said this "before dying on the cross," you failed to see the full significance of this fact for the interpretation of His statement. If He was going to be with the thief in paradise that day, in a manner in which they would both be aware of it (otherwise why make the promise at all), then it would have to be as disembodied spirits that this would happen. After all, Jesus Himself had foretold that His body would not be resurrected until the third day (e.g. Luke 9:22). Hence, my previous mention of the Biblical view of man being a spirit/body duality that is separable at death as being essential to understanding Jesus' meaning of these passages. The second text records a reference by Jesus that is focused more specifically on the resurrection of His body and employs figurative language in order to create a parallel with the text of the Book of Jonah. The emphasis not only on being "in the *heart* of the earth" (note the figurative language) but also on the "three days" ties it to His other prophecies of His bodily resurrection. So, although in both passages Jesus was referring to His death, He was nevertheless speaking of His death from different points of view, an important factor that must be kept in mind, just as His obvious adherence to the idea of a conscious intermediate state must be kept in mind, in which the spirit is temporarily separated from the body until the resurrection. It is also worth noting that nothing in the context of either passage indicates that Jesus was attempting to give the location of heaven. This is true even if His mention of "paradise" is taken to refer to heaven (a point with which I agree, by the way).

HEAVEN IS FOUND USING THE BIBLE Just before dying on the cross, Jesus said this: “Truly I ...

KeithThroop comments on Nov 19, 2020:

Unless you believe that one text had to do with His spirit and the other had to do with His body, assuming the Biblical teaching of man as made up of both body and spirit, with the spirit departing the body at death and being reunited to it in the resurrection. Then there is also the Biblical ...

KeithThroop replies on Nov 20, 2020:

@Zteph My reasoning is derived from a wholistic understanding of the Bible's teaching, of the overall context of Jesus' teaching in particular, rather than simply pulling a couple of passages out of context and misapplying them. Of course, it helps that I have been studying and teaching the Bible for my entire adult life and that I actually teach a graduate course in Biblical hermeneutics. So I guess you could say that I've had a lot of experience interpreting it.

SJW Feminists Are Stealing International Men's Day 2020 - YouTube