wingnut-

He also filed a civil lawsuit for defamation of character that has not been settled, so what I posted still stands. Also, the public apology only hurts D'Souza in that case, but his genuine remorse for causing the man hardship didn't prevent him from doing the right thing and admitting error.

The guy is clearly delusional. I don't think he realizes how much damage he personally caused to his party.

I know, you're innocent. This isn't yet another personal attack to compensate for the weak argument presented or the lack of evidence to support it. No, I didn't mean to say that or I would have, so let's just unpack all that inaccuracies of your claims. D'Souza wrote, "We were assured that the surveillance videos had been linked to geolocation cell phone data, such that each video depicted an individual who had made at least 10 visits to drop boxes. Indeed, it is clear from the interviews within the film itself that True the Vote was correlating the videos to geolocation data." Note that this references more than one. "While the video in the film created an incorrect inference as to Mr. Andrews" And this references a singular video. Oops! “We recently learned that surveillance videos used in the film may not have actually been correlated with the geolocation data.” Uh-oh, plural again. I wonder why? “I know that the film and my book create the impression that these individuals were mules that had been identified as suspected ballot harvesters based on their geotracked cell phone data,” Oh boy, again, he doesn't say this individual, as in Mr. Roberts, once again it is plural. There is a reason for that. D'Souza is facing numerous lawsuits is the answer, and for the record, he has not settled with Mr. Roberts, Salem Media Group did, after they rightfully pulled the plug on the movie and the book. Your argument is still lacking evidence of around 9.8 million votes.

Only because I won't take the bait! Ah yes, your source of information, the infamous 2000 mules. How ironic considering recent events in which Dinesh D'Souza has issued an apology for 'misleading' and 'inaccurate information' that is contained in the book and the film. D’Souza wrote: “During the production of this film, as a supplement to the geolocation data, True the Vote provided my team with ballot drop box surveillance footage that had been obtained through open records requests. We were assured that the surveillance videos had been linked to geolocation cell phone data, such that each video depicted an individual who had made at least 10 visits to drop boxes. Indeed, it is clear from the interviews within the film itself that True the Vote was correlating the videos to geolocation data. " “We recently learned that surveillance videos used in the film may not have actually been correlated with the geolocation data.” “I know that the film and my book create the impression that these individuals were mules that had been identified as suspected ballot harvesters based on their geotracked cell phone data,” Basically, 2000 mules has been completely debunked as it is riddled with inaccurate information. Salem Media Group has pulled the movie from all its platforms, and has extended that to the book which is no longer in publication. You were bamboozled by the far right extremists who masquerade as conservatives, just as Dinesh D'Souza was, and unfortunately for him, he is going to end up paying for it. Rather than adhering to a false narrative that reflects what you want to be true, perhaps you will come to grips with the same reality that D'Souza has, and that individuals like myself tried to warn against.

Why do I suddenly feel like I'm watching another Kamala Harris commercial? She decided to spend most of her campaign telling voters what Donald Trump thought or would do, similar to this attempt of yours to be an expert on me. Unless things have changed on this site, attempting to make me the topic isn't acceptable, and this is why I chose not to address specifics with you. I guess in your mind this gives you free reign to make false assertions and claims about someone. You know absolutely nothing about me, nor will you ever be given the opportunity, and I'll leave it at that.

I reserve my imagination for creative writing, when it comes to real life I'll just stick to reality.

Par for the course, happens for every presidential appointment.

They exercised their right not to vote, as one third of the population does nearly every single presidential election cycle. In 2020, ten million from that one third of the population did decide to vote, most likely because of the ease in which it was made to do so on account of the Covid lockdown. I addressed this in my original post.

If that's what you see then so be it, I'm not an optometrist. I'm not interested in all the back and forth since you still cannot address the elephant in the room, ten million votes. Show me the evidence that reveals ten million instances of cheating, because so far everything you pointed to supports the findings those of us who worked on this uncovered, numbers in the thousands.

I think your own bias blinded you from the words you were reading then. There are several excerpts from my original post, what do you see there? Here in Michigan it was proportionate to the increased number of overall votes, so basically at the same percentage with a slightly higher number. I was one of the many volunteers that participated in the investigation that was done here in Michigan. So I saw all of it. I'm also familiar with the evidence from other recounts that took place across the nation, and the same pattern held true across the board. The numbers were not enough to change the results anywhere, and it came out to numbers in the thousands, not in the ballpark of ten million. I hate to burst another bubble of false assumptions, but I was calling out the main stream media a decade and a half before Donald Trump decided to enter politics. I'm a journalism major, and I used to debate this with liberal flunkies on this very site after pointing out that true objective journalism hadn't been practiced in this country since the media figures of the 70's stepped aside. I haven't watched the main stream media channels or read their papers since the beginning of the 21st century, except of course on two occasions that I couldn't resist. Those were following the election results in 2016 and the recent one, just because I cannot express how much pleasure I get from seeing the looks on their faces as their world comes unraveled by reality.

Exactly my point, cheating always happens. What had never happened before was a "pandemic" in which the population was confined by the government and mass mail balloting took place. You failed to address that, instead appearing confused as to whether I am trying to make a statement opposite of what you clearly recognize I said, cheating has been happening longer than we've been alive. I actually did look at the evidence, and it doesn't add up to ten million votes. So, again, I didn't doubt it since I know it happens, and if I have any bias, it is on the side of the fact that cheating always happens and the democrats are the main source of it since it always revolves around the major cities they control.

It shouldn't surprise you considering that Iran was just exposed for actually orchestrating assassination attempts against Trump. There are forces outside of our country with far more to lose with Trump in the White House than there are within our own country.

The 2020 election was destined to appear as an anomaly because of the unique set of circumstances surrounding it, specifically Covid. The mass implementation of the voting by mail with the early ballots made it ripe for manipulation. While many of the votes were undoubtedly not cast by actual people, this has always been the case, and there are a lot of people who also took advantage of voting from home that otherwise don't usually vote. In my home state of Michigan, it has been well known and proven that from within Detroit there has been cheating going back to the sixties, with not only votes from the dead, but also from cartoon characters. In 2020 the number of voters from Detroit far exceeded the number of people living there according to the census that was done prior to that election cycle, and those numbers were slightly higher than the normal level of corruption. The truth is, aside from votes cast by dead people and cartoon characters, it is impossible for either side to prove that the election was stolen because one third of the population either will not vote at all, or they are part of the inconsistent voter group that may or may not choose to vote in any election cycle.

It will be interesting to see where this investigation leads, but don't dismiss the possibility that this event was orchestrated by outside forces as opposed to domestic ones.

I agree, there was nothing controversial about removing him to anyone outside the establishment, but that's the real problem Trump still faces. The old guard still exists within the Republican party, so don't be surprised when they start submarining some of the changes that are so desperately needed in DC. Personally I'm glad that Gaetz has been removed from the equation, and it has nothing to do with McCarthy, it is because he is a morally questionable individual who has zero qualifications for that position. Having read the Art of the Deal, I suspect he was a red herring all along to pave the way for the other nominations, and Pam Bondi is an excellent choice.

Chaos.

It is hard to imagine worthy without omegaman, for nearly twenty years he was a constant in this place. I will miss his wise council and friendship, especially his quick wit and humility. My heart goes out to his daughters and family in this time of personal sorrow, as well as all those close to him. While I am selfishly filled with grief, I can't help but rejoice for his gain and look forward to the day when I see him again. Gonna miss you until then brother.

Yes, this is a perfect example of what I stated in the previous post, dissecting a prophecy and attempting to render what follows as irrelevant regarding time sensitivity. Jesus stopped reading at the point you ended the bold letters, but that does not negate the rest of the prophecy. And is an inclusive word, it would be like me offering you a peanut butter and jelly sandwich that you accept, only to find peanut butter between the bread slices. He specifically said on "this day is this scripture fulfilled", meaning that exactly what He said was fulfilled on that specific day, it doesn't stop the unfolding of the entirety of the prophecy. How many days are there in the Jewish calendar for a year? I would suggest you consider that within the year of the Lord one should expect a day of vengeance to occur, because that is exactly what the prophecy states. God didn't leave out the jelly, rest assured. Unless you've changed your position on this I believe we have common ground in agreeing that the beginning of chapter 2 is a historical event that was literally a pestilence event. While you and I agree on that, we also both know that many futurists want to transfer all of this as still to come. Problem being, Peter quotes starting from verse 28. 28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: Joel prophesies that afterward the events that Peter declares fulfilled at Pentecost would take place, and that afterward references the first 27 verses of the chapter. So all that preceded it had already taken place by Pentecost. That includes verse 11. 11 And the LORD shall utter his voice before his army: for his camp is very great: for he is strong that executeth his word: for the day of the LORD is great and very terrible; and who can abide it? It also includes these verses which immediately precede it and most futurists claim to refer to the millennium 21 Fear not, O land; be glad and rejoice: for the LORD will do great things. 22 Be not afraid, ye beasts of the field: for the pastures of the wilderness do spring, for the tree beareth her fruit, the fig tree and the vine do yield their strength. 23 Be glad then, ye children of Zion, and rejoice in the LORD your God: for he hath given you the former rain moderately, and he will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain in the first month. 24 And the floors shall be full of wheat, and the fats shall overflow with wine and oil. 25 And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten, the cankerworm, and the caterpiller, and the palmerworm, my great army which I sent among you. 26 And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise the name of the LORD your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you: and my people shall never be ashamed. 27 And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed. In regards to chapter 3, it is clearly stated in the first verse that it is referencing the same time frame as chapter 2, not thousands of years into the future. So as I stated originally, the issues come from people attempting to dissect a prophecy and separate parts into completely different periods of time. One glaring contradiction that is overlooked, is that most futurists, particularly pre-tribbers, cling to the expectation that these armies are going to come and surround Jerusalem and God is going to miraculously deliver them. HUGE problem in regards to Joel's prophecy. Joel 3, verse 1. 1 For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem, Time sensitivity, prophesies contain markers regarding the timing on things, not difficult to see when you examine history. First question one must ask themselves, when did Joel receive this prophecy? Second question one should ask themselves, Joel says shall bring captivity again, meaning it had already happened once, when was that?

Ok, so here is the issue that I have with this. The title of the thread is about a paradigm shift in Christianity over the course of 2000 years. If you don't have enough evidence to substantiate your claim over the course of 2000 years that is a clear indicator that the premise is faulty. I'm not ignoring your comments regarding heaven, I disagree with the broad brush you are using, but for simplification purposes we won't get anywhere if we jump all over the place. For now it is best to stick with the word angel and see if we can't come to some sort of agreement on that example. Ok, so the examples you are referring to regarding this issue are new believers and haven't had enough solid teaching yet. When I was a child and first learned about Jesus I didn't have any idea what Christ meant either, but none of this is evidence of a paradigm shift covering a period of 2000 years, it is simply a matter of growth in the faith. Messenger, or in my experience people often will say a messenger from God or of God. Now as I stated in the previous post, of all the words you mentioned in the OP this one in particular I have heard misused more than any of the others. However, the misuse I continually come across is very specific in that it is always related to a recent loss of a loved one. Specific examples would be people commenting that their dearly departed is now their "guardian angel" or something along those lines, or the other common misuse is in regards to their dearly departed looking down on them from heaven. All such references fly in the face of scripture, but because of the circumstances often go unchallenged because people are not receptive to correction when it comes to grief. All of that becomes irrelevant though because none of this is new, and none of it is related to a paradigm shift going back 2000 years, and this is a fact based on history and scripture itself. The true origins of the misuse of the word angel dates back to Judaism (see the irony?). Angel worship was a historical problem in relation the the Jews and that issue was a continuing problem in the early days of Christianity and is addressed in Hebrews chapter 1. This of course is one of many errors related to Judaism, and another shining example of why Christians should not be looking to those in error for the truth. Does scripture not pose the question, why should the living consult the dead? I'll address the rest of your response in a separate post for the sake of length.

Hey brother, Just needed to say I was surprised to see this from you, if you had at least tagged him it might not have appeared as a cheap shot. Probably not though, stating that a person "can't" read is not very subtle. As far as the words we are reading having changed definitions, you still have yet to provide any evidence for that. I can't say that I have ever known a single christian that thinks "Christ" was Jesus' last name. That is not to say that there aren't any people that do, but I don't see a handful of people believing such a thing as meeting the criteria for redefining a word for all of Christianity. Now in regards to the word angel and its usage, I would agree to an extent that there are many professing Christians that misuse this completely out of context, but again, that still doesn't qualify as a whole to Christianity because more do not misuse it than those that do. One can easily deduce that any prophecy scripture specifically tells us has been fulfilled has indeed been fulfilled. This includes those OT prophecies which are cited in the NT as having been fulfilled. It seems to me the confusion only exists when one tries to dissect a prophecy and claim only the specific portions of it cited have been fulfilled, in spite of the fact the entire prophecy given deals with time sensitive events that cannot be separated from each other. Joel 2 is a perfect example of this as is commonly seen on this forum. Basically what my point is, that you still have not even come close to providing any actual evidence for what you appear to be claiming is a widespread problem for Christianity.

Hebrews 12 Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2 looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.

Psalm 100 Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the earth! 2 Serve the Lord with gladness! Come into his presence with singing! 3 Know that the Lord, he is God! It is he who made us, and we are his; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture. 4 Enter his gates with thanksgiving, and his courts with praise! Give thanks to him; bless his name! 5 For the Lord is good; his steadfast love endures forever, and his faithfulness to all generations.

I assumed he meant early church fathers, which I don't usually count the apostles themselves as typically one would just say the apostles, but in this case it appears that is whom he was referring.

Micah 4 It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and it shall be lifted up above the hills; and peoples shall flow to it,

Thanks for clarifying, I thought when you said ECF you were referring to those that followed the apostles, not the writers themselves. I also just realized this was not the thread I thought it was, so my apologies to the OP because I most likely am off topic. God bless