Eclectic Wanderer

@JamesLucasIT Because the post-WWII con of selling addiction-inducing processed foods and over-sweetened confectionary hadn't started then. We are now in the third generation of poisoned westerners.

This is a New York City newsstand in the 1930s Genuine question: why no overweight people?

@peterdamianent1 @dlongenecker1 There are many other spirits who also prompt people, but in their case the prompts are do the exact opposite of God's intention. Feeling a spiritual prompt does not guarantee that it is from the Holy Spirit. That's why we have the Church to keep us on the right track.

@dlongenecker1 Because the Holy Spirit prompts them. Because it is God's intention that we realise (ever more perfectly) that glorious liberty intended for us as children of God. Because patriarchy & misogyny are to be cast down.

The reason to ask a question is to get an answer. In the 1970s the Catholic Church asked if it was possible to ordain women as priests. Eventually she decided that it was not possible. Now that we have the answer why do Catholics still keep asking the same question?

In 1870, a German chemist named Erich von Wolf was analysing the iron content of various vegetables. He made a decimal point error. He recorded spinach as containing 35mg of iron per 100g. The correct figure was 3.5mg. The misplaced decimal sat in the nutritional literature for decades, entirely unchallenged, because nobody particularly felt like re-testing spinach. In 1929, the Popeye comic strip launched. The creators cited the iron content of spinach as the scientific basis for their character's powers. By this point, the decimal point error was already sixty years old and fully embedded in received nutritional wisdom. The error was identified and corrected in 1937. The correction was not issued with anything approaching the cultural reach of the original claim. Popeye continued punching things. The actual iron content of spinach, 3.5mg per 100g, roughly where it was always supposed to be, is further complicated by the fact that spinach is among the highest-oxalate vegetables known. Oxalates bind to iron and calcium in the gut and remove them before absorption. The iron in spinach absorbs at around 1–2%, compared to 15–35% for haem iron from red meat. You would need to eat roughly a kilogram of spinach to absorb the iron equivalent of a 100g beef steak. There is also the kidney stone question. Spinach contains around 970mg of oxalates per 100g: one of the densest plant sources. Chronic high spinach consumption, particularly raw in daily smoothies, is a documented pathway to calcium oxalate kidney stones. The smoothie industry has not issued a correction. Popeye is still a sailor.

@sahouraxo In Talmudic teaching, all non-Jews are less than human. Against that premis, nothing done to them can be a crime against "humanity".

Israel is wiping out critical bridge after critical bridge in South Lebanon. Civilians can’t flee. Ambulances can’t reach the wounded. Entire communities are cut off from food, medicine, and essential supplies. This is intentional. This is a crime against humanity.

@WalkerMarcus There was never a Church "of" England before Henry VIII's rebellion. There was often reference to the Church "in" England, but that is clearly not the same thing. The last canonical Archbishop of Canterbury was Cardinal Reginald Pole, who died on 17th November 1558.

Oh, dear - the Archbishopric of Canterbury, and the Church of England, have been around for much longer than the break with Rome.

@Catholic_bro I think it's a traditional ending to some Jewish prayers, which got carried over into the early Church. Not Christ's own words, of course, but good nonetheless. We use them with a different word order in the Mass, very soon after the end of the Lord's Prayer.

Where do people think “For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory…” at the end of the Lord’s Prayer comes from?

@Joseph_Spurgeon Your definitions of infallible and inerrant seem to be contrived just to suit your argument. They are not genuine, objective definitions, and the distinction you draw is therefore fallacious. Your argument falls down on those faults.

Roman Catholics never seem to understand the doctrine of sola scriptura. Sola scriptura is not the belief that Holy Scripture is the only authority, nor that an individual can infallibly interpret the Scriptures. Rather, it is the doctrine that Holy Scripture is the only infallible authority and therefore has supreme authority over the church. It is not the only authority. The church has real authority, along with other forms of authority in the Christian life. Those who hold to sola scriptura also maintain that Scripture is to be understood within the life of the church. It was given to the church. It guards and defines the boundaries of the church. It shapes the life of the church. The church receives it, interprets it, and works through it, not as a single infallible institution, but as a body that is accountable to the Word. A central problem in Roman Catholic argumentation is their equivocation on the word infallible. They blur the distinction between infallible and inerrant, and then build an entire doctrine on that confusion. Infallible means unable to err by nature. It is not merely that something happens to be correct in a given instance. It means it cannot be wrong. Holy Scripture is infallible because it is the very Word of God. God cannot err, and therefore His Word cannot err. Everything Scripture says carries full authority because it is true without any possibility of error. Human beings, however, can make inerrant statements without being infallible. “Jesus Christ is the Messiah” is an inerrant statement. “My name is Joseph Spurgeon” is an inerrant statement. Even something like the table of contents of Scripture can be correct. The church can recognize the canon without error. But none of that makes the church infallible. It simply means that, at times, it has spoken truly. Infallibility is not something that comes and goes. It is not something that appears in rare moments and then disappears. If a person or institution is infallible, that is a property of what they are, not a temporary condition they enter into under certain circumstances. That is exactly where the Roman doctrine of papal infallibility breaks down. It claims the Pope is infallible only in specific moments, under carefully defined conditions. That is not infallibility. That is a redefinition of the term to protect a doctrine that cannot stand on its own. And historically, this was not some universally held belief quietly passed down from the apostles. In the Middle Ages, the Franciscans, particularly in their disputes over poverty, began pressing arguments that would effectively bind the Pope to prior authoritative statements. They were attempting to lock in earlier papal rulings so that a later pope could not overturn them. In response, Pope John XXII rejected those claims outright. He saw exactly what was happening. To grant that kind of infallibility would place the pope in submission to prior declarations in a way that undermined his own authority. He resisted it, and the idea was not accepted as settled doctrine at the time. Only much later, under very different pressures, was papal infallibility formally defined at the First Vatican Council in 1870. It was not the clear, consistent teaching of the church through the ages. It was a deformation, argued for, resisted, and finally imposed. Sola scriptura cuts through all of this confusion. It locates infallibility where it actually belongs, in the Word of God. Scripture alone cannot err. Scripture alone carries absolute authority. The church has real authority, but it is always a derived and accountable authority. It can speak truly, but it is never incapable of error. Everything must be judged by the Word of God, because only the Word of God is infallible.

@UcheMaryOkoli The first Vatican Council in the early 1870s.

Catholic Trivia!!!! Which council defined the doctrine of papal infallibility? Let me see the real Catholics 😂😂. This is an opportunity to learn.

@DeborahMeaden Not sure a king *can* make a state visit to a nation of which he is already the head of state .... And he was there last year for the state opening of their parliament, shortly after Trump had got all gung-ho about taking over Canada.

Now that’s a good idea…

@cosmosarcive Isn't it about time to upgrade the "light speed" units, so that we get "light kiloyears", "light megayears" etc? Might save us having to count all the zeros ...

These are the REAL distances to distant galaxies from our Milky Way! 1 light year = 9.5 trillion km Watch till the end; the scale will completely humble you. How small do you feel right now?

A Group of guys, all turning 40, discussed where they should meet for lunch... Finally, it was agreed that they would meet at Wetherspoons in Uxbridge because the waitresses had big breasts and wore mini-skirts. Ten years later, at age 50, the friends once again discussed where they should meet for lunch. Finally, it was agreed that they would meet at Wetherspoons in Uxbridge because the waitresses were attractive. The food and service were good, and the beer selection was excellent. Ten years later, at age 60, the friends again discussed where they should meet for lunch. Finally, it was agreed that they would meet at Wetherspoons in Uxbridge because there was plenty of parking, they could dine in peace and quiet with no loud music, and it was good value for money. Ten years later, at age 70, the friends discussed where they should meet for lunch. Finally, it was agreed that they would meet at Wetherspoons in Uxbridge because the restaurant was wheelchair accessible and had a toilet for the disabled. Ten years later, at age 80, the friends discussed where they should meet for lunch. Finally, it was agreed that they would meet at Wetherspoons in Uxbridge because they had never been there before.

@Isaac2003_v2 I think the British system operates on the continent of Europe too.

I hate to say it but the Americans are right on this one. Brits should get off our high horse for once and admit that sometimes, on rare occasions, our cousins across the pond are right

@PaulGolding Many who came here from Caribbean countries in the early 1950s were responding to the British government's invitations, promising jobs. They were particularly attracted by Ministry of Transport adverts, authorised and promoted by Britain's Minister of Transport - Enoch Powell MP

Black people came to Britain in the 1500s, until Elizabeth I expelled every last one of them. Then they came again, uninvited, on the Empire Windrush in 1948. That’s it, the entire history of black people in Britain. This ridiculous video is fiction!

@364690 @364690 That's an ignorant comment. There are thousands of small 1 - 3 bedroom properties in the countryside that have never been connected to gas. The choice is electric heating or oil boilers. Since Trump started his frolic in Iran, domestic oil prices have doubled.

@RichRaho @gareth_gore I've heard of the Church "demoting" saints, eg Ss George & Christopher, but never "undoing" the canonisation.

First-hand account of @gareth_gore’s meeting with Pope. Gareth outlines what he told Leo, including “how the group had used its power and its wealth to cover up the truth and suppress the voices of its many victims.” Gareth urged Leo to re-open canonization of Josemaría Escrivá due to “irregularities” in the process and presented Leo with “documents proving how Opus Dei’s system of grooming, abuse and control had been personally designed by this supposed ‘saint.’”

@ronsterd89 Me

Tell me something in your home that is completely worn out.

@benphillips76 Any man who thinks he's an Alpha Male isn't.

I watched the Louis Theroux documentary on the Manosphere (it’s really good - do watch it). I saw it with my 18-year-old daughter. Five things I learned from viewing it with her:

This is what happens when you attack a large, heavily-armed nation without assessing its military organisation properly. OOPS!

@shanaka86 This is what happens when you attack a large, heavily-armed nation without assessing its military organisation properly. OOPS!

Iran built a military designed to fight without a head. Now it cannot stop fighting because the head is gone. The Mosaic Doctrine divides the IRGC into 31 autonomous provincial commands, one per province, each with pre-delegated authority, local weapons stockpiles, independent decision-making, and sealed orders that activate upon central command failure. The doctrine was formalised after the Iran-Iraq War for one purpose: ensure that the decapitation of Iranian leadership does not stop the Iranian military from fighting. It was designed to survive exactly what happened on 28 February. The Supreme Leader is dead. His successor cannot stand. The defence industrial base is rubble. The communication infrastructure that would transmit a ceasefire has been degraded by 15,000 strikes. And the 31 commands are still firing. Not because someone is ordering them to fire. Because the doctrine orders them to fire until someone orders them to stop, and the someone who would order them to stop is in a hospital bed issuing written statements through a television anchor. The Quds Force overlays the Mosaic with a second network: the proxy architecture. Hezbollah in Lebanon launches hundreds of rockets at Israel. The Houthis in Yemen attack Red Sea shipping and fire at Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Iraqi PMF militias, Kata’ib Hezbollah and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, strike American bases in Iraq and Syria. The coordination flows through secure fibre-optic lines, satellite backups, encrypted applications, and physical couriers carrying cash and operational directives. Funding: $100 to $350 million annually through tunnel smuggling, cryptocurrency wallets, and Hezbollah intermediaries. The proxies have hit American diplomatic facilities. A missile struck the US Embassy helipad in Baghdad. Two Iranian drones hit the US Embassy compound in Riyadh, starting fires. A drone struck near the US Consulate in Dubai. The Kuwait Embassy closed under threat. Three to four verified diplomatic incidents across the region, each producing limited damage but each crossing a line that has governed international conflict since the 1961 Vienna Convention: you do not strike embassies. And then Hamas, the proxy Iran armed and funded for seventeen years, issued a public statement asking Iran to stop targeting neighbouring countries. The organisation that started the war the Mosaic Doctrine is now perpetuating told its patron to stand down. The Axis of Resistance is arguing in public for the first time since its creation. The fracture reveals the Mosaic Doctrine’s fatal design flaw. The system was built for survival, not termination. It ensures that 31 commands continue fighting after decapitation. It does not contain a mechanism for 31 commands to simultaneously stop. Each command fires under sealed orders with local authority. No central node can broadcast a ceasefire because the central node was the target of the first strike. The doctrine that makes Iran impossible to defeat also makes Iran impossible to negotiate with because the entity that would accept terms does not control the entities that would implement them. Hezbollah fires because its orders predate the ceasefire that does not exist. The Houthis fire because their funding pipeline operates independently of any command they would obey. The Iraqi PMF fires because the militias answer to local commanders who answer to a Quds Force whose leader is in a bunker. And the 31 provincial commands fire because the doctrine says fire and nobody with authority has said stop. The war’s most dangerous feature is not what Iran can still launch. It is what Iran can no longer recall. The machine was built to run without an operator. The operator is gone. The machine is running. And the off switch was never installed because the doctrine’s designers believed the machine should never be turned off. open.substack.com/pub/shanakaans…

@Old_But_Gold50s The falsetist was bland. The tenor couldn't decide which note to sing. The baritone had the richest voice, but needs more training to eliminate the cloudiness. The bass was singing too low for his tessitura: a tone or so higher would have let his voice ring more.

Whose voice did you love the most? 🎶💫🧐