Trump, greedy narcissistic maniac, but more honest, less corrupt, and better all around than Xi Jinping and his crony CCP.
Pray for the Chinese subjugated by Xi and the CCP.
The Hero, Li Wenliang:
The Villain, Xi Jinping:
The Patsy, Donald Trump:
“A few weeks back it would have been inconceivable that we would soon be living under martial law, but that is essentially what has happened. I believe the government is acting with the best intentions, with the best knowledge available to it, but the staggering power of the state is still alarming: that schools and businesses can be shut, church services closed, and movement outside the home curtailed is extraordinary. What if a government decided to take such steps for less benign reasons than the current ones? Having discovered its own power, can we really be confident that government might not want to flex the same muscles again?”
While others should have done better it is China’s fault. #XiVirus
Pray for those ruled by Xi. Pray all the other victims of the virus from Xi’s China.
On the other hand:
Godwin’d in 1, sometimes the comparison is apt, or: The horrors of progressivism and lopsided accusations of extremism.
-Warnings of slippery slopes not so fallacious.
-Denmark heirs of Mengele
-Although Californian/American progressivism inspired the Reich
When people target abortion doctors, or bomb abortion clinics, pro-choice people exclaim, “See how extreme the pro-life crowd is! They’re insane!” But, no, if abortion = baby murder on par with murdering adults (or five-year-olds), and if there are no effective non-lethal means to stop these murders, then there seem to be very strong presumptive grounds for killing abortion doctors and bombing abortion clinics, according to the commonsense moral doctrine of killing in defense of others. The main normative dispute should really be about the moral status of the fetuses. Otherwise, the dispute would just be over whether killing is necessary (are there equally effective non-lethal means?), or whether the proper targets are being killed (e.g., abortion clinic bombers must avoid killing innocent people when they rightly kill abortion doctors).
-Of false dichotomies
What kind of body will the damned have?
Will they be raised with glorious incorruptible bodies like our risen king’s?
Will they be raised with another perishable body?
It is frustrating enough that we know so little of the future fate of the redeemed, but the future fate of the damned is even more obscure.
Given that none but God is immortal and he is the creator and sustainer of all things, whatever form the dead have will be sustained by God. Given that there is no division between body and soul in man it is not enough to say that the redeemed will be given glorious incorruptible bodies and the dead won’t.
If one holds that the dead will exist conscious yet without bodies until the resurrection will the damned just stay as disembodied spirits capable of suffering? Revelation, the Rich Man and Lazarus, and other teachings on hell don’t paint a picture of ghosts suffering, but physical pain.
And per Luke 12.47-48 suffering will be proportional to knowledge of God’s expectations and degree of violations. Is this a difference in duration of punishment (fewer blows as Jesus says) or intensity of punishment (equal number of but less forceful blows)? And what about John’s apocalyptic imagery which seems to lump all the damned together?
If eternal death is in fact eternal dying and the dead will live forever (just a horrific eternal life) then how will there be a difference in punishment? Will those who could not have converted receive a rational infinity set of blows and those who rejected the gospel receive a real infinity set of blows?1 Or is eternal death actually death without end preceded by proportional punishment-and not painfully dying without end2-as proposed by annihilationists?
Sadly the above link doesn’t return anything useful. I propose a needed feature for wikipedia is to automatically determine the ratio of citations in an article to the number of words so that articles can be sorted on this to find the least well supported articles as targets for improvement.
Certainly the quality of citations trumps the quantity. But those articles with a ratio of zero or approaching zero are easy targets for improvement.
I have proposed this at “the village pump” see below: