Free Republic

They should have been expelled.

Why?

There are college/universities that have been indoctrinating students with Marxist, anti-America and anti Judeo-Christian values for decades. Their students who've learned to embrace and espouse an anti-America, anti-Judeo-Christian world view are celebrated; they are not prevented from graduating. Reprobate faculty and administrations at some of these institutions have allowed for and even participated in the demonization and ostracized of Christian, MAGA and now Jewish students.

What I see in Harvard's decision is selective outrage at a position (pro-Hamas) that offends many Harvard supporters/donors - particularly its multi-millionaire Jewish alumni and donors.

Being a private institution, Harvard has every right to decide who it graduates. However its selective outrage will likely result in many civil suits, which it can cover with its $40 billion endowment.

Our government institutions cover for one another. If we had a true ‘justice’ system Ashli Babbitt’s murderer and others like him would be in prison for life. How many U.S. citizens have been murdered by policing agencies who know they can use deadly force with impunity? We repeatedly see the courts and ‘independent investigators’ cover for these jack-booted thugs and their bosses.

California Senate passes ban on parental notification for TK-12 gender changes.

It's way past time for sane people to leave that wicked state.

Hopefully the teacher is fired.

Fired !?

What the so-called teacher did was assault and battery against a minor. The "teacher" should be prosecuted and placed in prison. The school district should be sued.

Every generation is the last generation - for that generation.

Neither of us are anti-Christian.

The use of the word anti as in anti-Christ or anti-Christian means "over against, opposite, instead of". Those who are not in Christ are in/into something else. "Instead of Christ" I believe (fill in the blank). Anti-Christian doesn't necessarily mean a person hates Christians or Christ (although many do). It simply means that a person adheres to a belief, someone or something other than Christ - rejecting Christ as Messiah, the Son of God.

The Greek in scripture for anti as in "anti-Christ" means: "473 antí (a preposition) – properly, opposite, corresponding to, off-setting (over-against); (figuratively) "in place of," i.e. what substitutes (serves as an equivalent, what is proportional)." re: https://biblehub.com/greek/473.htm

“Let’s be clear, I do not have the ick. I just can’t read him and I really, really want to go on a second date,” she wrote." Someone else replied and said the problem with the 35-year-old’s text is that it was too sterile.

Not everyone w/in a generation thinks or believes the same. My advise for anyone seeking a spouse would that you ask Christ into your life and by doing so - be indwelt by the Holy Spirit; Read the Word for identity and truth; join a church where you cab be edified and challenged to live an abundant full life in Christ. The Holy Spirit is who speaks truth to an individual's heart and mind.

In Christ, you can find a good spouse. Outside of Christ, you (and your spouse) will live with a person who possesses a worldly, anti-Christian worldview.

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me." Jesus speaking in John 14:6

Is the Pope and other so-called Christians explaining/sharing this Truth with their Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu ..... associates/friends?

Jesus didn't attempt to "get along" with the religious, legalistic and blind Jewish leaders of His time. Jesus' personifying and speaking/being Truth is what drove the Jewish leaders to have Him crucified.

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." - 1 Cor 1:18

I wouldn’t trust Haley as far as I can throw her, she is still hoping that Trump gets convicted ....

Completely agree!

Carville: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Will Hurt Trump More than Biden

I'm thinking - are democrats planning to pervert/change ballots that vote for Trump into ballots that vote for RFK Jr? If so, this would be a cheating method they can use to help 'explain' why Trump lost.

What explains his willing destruction of his own reputation as a judge?

Like Biden - the corporate media, democrat party and liberal oligarchs will run cover and make a Merchan out to be a saint. He's a Manhattan judge for Pete's sake. His reputation amongst all libs will be enhanced by this trial. However, if he has aspirations outside outside of liberal la-la land - that could be a problem.

Fani Willis suggests creation of Georgia prosecutorial oversight panel is racially motivated

Of course ! .../s

Here's a solution..LOL!

Raccoon Tacos: https://www.themeateater.com/cook/recipes/raccoon-tacos

The article contains virtually no truth about the position of Evangelicals and what they think and believe.

Proverbs 26:4-5 - a word for all of us!

No argument using facts - just name-calling. Sadly, lib politicians know it works with their stupid and ignorant constituents.

Back at ya

The following is from a reviewer of the Amazon book you cited. Unlike the book, the reviewer cites history not Catholic apologia:

"Based on Simple Historical Error Reviewed in the United States on September 11, 2010 Though many non-Catholics might well do a double-take when they see the words "Modern Guide" and "Indulgences" in the same title, it is well to consider that our cultural moment, vis-a-vis the billion or so Catholics in the world. cannot be understood without them. As with so many aspects of Catholic praxis historically, a lot of work by diligent intellectuals has gone into presenting it in the most palatable light in the modern world. The extent of that diligence may surprise some, but not those who watch the trends of Catholic intellectual life with a wary eye. One of the most salient trends has been what can only be called a historically fantastical one. No person of goodwill wants to limit others' beliefs per se. But in our shared cultural-intellectual world it is reasonable to expect a basic intellectual honesty in what purports to be serious scholarship. On one of the most central issues pertaining to indulgences this book contains simply false information. That is, it is false within the implied assumption of the book: Namely, that there is continuity between of modern beliefs on indulgences and their long history in Western culture. This is an important level of focus. Once again, if modern Catholics one to believe and define their ideas now in particular way it is no one else's business to stop them. But it is quite another thing to present their current understanding as if it were congruent with our long shared history of Western development, in which the Catholic Church of course played a very definitive role. Here is a crucial case in point that clinches this matter. After an introduction by a professor named Fastiggi treating the history of Indulgences and in every way evincing that there is such a continuity between current understanding and the past, the author Edward Peters really enters into the realm of sheer historical fantasy and revision. He says the following on p. 13, "Indulgences are applied only to sins that have been forgiven so that there should be no misunderstanding that indulgences "'let people off' without admitting that they have done something wrong and seeking forgiveness for it..." Now, I don't think that one even needs to be a devoted scholar of religious or even general cultural history to see the pure error in this when applied to the matter as part of the historical understanding of the Roman Catholic Church. Once again, if this is what Catholics want to believe now that is fine. But to present this idea as if it were the view that generally obtained historically -- and what other conclusion can one draw after the didactic historical introduction of Fastiggi- -is pure nonsense and an insult to even basically educated people. There is simply no question historically that, on the whole, the view of indulgences that obtained everywhere was the reverse. Indulgences were so enormously profitable precisely because, inter alia, they did forgive sins that had not officially been forgiven. This dovetails very well with the cultural phenomenon of rising scrupulosity in the general climate of the age leading up to the Reformation. People were simply worried about being condemned for sins they had simply forgotten to seek forgiveness for. One marvels that the author, Edward Peters, can assert this when it a simple fact of historical detail of the general history of the Reformation no less, either from a Catholic or Protestant perspective! And the wan mention by Fastiggi that there were "abuses' hardly gives anything like accurate focus. This matter is not a subject of debate amongst historians. This error is so great that one can only assume that it is part of a more sad general trend amongst Catholic intellectuals. The effort to simply rewrite their own history, and to do so by establishing their own quasi-intelligentsia to do it. But this is not a matter of religious freedom. It is a matter of historical responsibility. If books like these are to function at the same level as silly perfervid blogs, with sheer propagandistic intent then that should be an alert for those outside the Catholic world. The alert tells us that what is being undertaken is simple violence to the facts of our shared cultural history. That is simply an unforgeable sin in scholarship."

And Christ is not eternally hanging on the cross, perpetually dying. He rose and is now seated at the right hand of the Father. He doesn't belong on the cross and keeping Him there denies His death and resurrection and the work of redemption that He said was finished. Keeping Him on the cross says that His atonement is not finished. Also, suffering does not cleanse from sin and Jesus's suffering is not redemptive. His death/finished work, past tense, is and the proof of that is the resurrection.

Just a 'personal' observation. Much of the Catholic vs Protestant discussion (if you want to call it that) on FreeRepublic is conflation of doctrine(s) and/or omitting doctrine(s) to support an argument. I've been guilty of this. I believe this is done either intentionally or ignorantly to win an argument. While Muslims are cutting Christian (Catholic and Protestant) heads off and the demon possessed and Marxists are mutilating our children, Christians on FR argue among themselves. Satan loves this.

You say Catholics believe Jesus is perpetually dying on the cross. The Catholic church as well as other Christian churches understand that God and heaven are outside of time and space as we understand it. The Mass is a 'representation' of the crucifiction. - re: https://www.ncregister.com/blog/is-jesus-re-sacrificed-at-every-mass

The sins of man, past, present and future were laid on Jesus (His body and soul) for our redemption. If we believe this then it stands to reason that the crucifixion is a sacrifice that incudes priest and victim, which spans eternity.

"He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed." - 1 Peter 2:24

No cross/crucifiction - no salvation!

I've said in past posts - Christians are to celebrate Christ's life, death and resurrection.

Indulgences - at least those actually authorized by the Church - did not, nor could not, “sell salvation”.

Suggested reading: https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1902/medieval-indulgence--martin-luther/

Martin Luther is in Hell according to St Padre Pio.

I'm thankful that I won't be judged by Father Pio or any other man save Christ. "But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear Him, which after He hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear Him." - Luke 12:5

"Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." - John 3:18 explains in the simplest terms who will go to heaven and who will go to hell.

1. The debate will be moderated by 2 TDS moderators - Tapper and Bash. They will do all in their power to help Joe and hurt Trump. 2. Joe will have the debate questions before the debate. 3. Joe will be spoon fed information/directions to his hidden ear piece. 4. Joe will be filled with a cocktail of drugs that keep him semi-coherent for 2 hours.

I wouldn't put it past CNN to put the debate on time delay so they can delete/edit both Biden and Trump to Biden's favor.

Why Trump didn't insist on at least 1 objective moderator and other things is beyond me. Trump is leading in the polls. He's taking an unnecessary gamble IMHO.