YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #astronomy #nightsky #newyork #physics #moon #astrophysics #fullmoon #supermoon #planet #nasa #zenith #wolfmoon #moonafteryule #cosmology #coldmoon
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Day mode
  • © 2026 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
New Posts (Home) ChatBox Popular Posts Reels Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore
© 2026 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Living In Faith
Living In Faith
1 y

Truth Points Toward Protestantism
Favicon 
www.thegospelcoalition.org

Truth Points Toward Protestantism

The year I turned 30, after a lifetime as a secular Jew, I experienced a crisis that led me to investigate in earnest the existence of God. As any card-carrying academic would do, I read a lot of books. I read such Christian apologetics as C. S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity (which was intriguing), Tim Keller’s The Reason for God (more powerful), and N. T. Wright’s majestic The Resurrection of the Son of God (most powerful of all). Ultimately, my conversion moment came overnight—literally, as I was stuck in the Amsterdam airport, with a copy of the Gospels to keep me company, on my way home from an academic conference. That moment also didn’t feel intellectual at all; it felt like an out-of-body experience—which, I suppose, it was. Considering in retrospect how thoroughly Protestant my approach was, I was surprised to read in Gavin Ortlund’s book What It Means to Be Protestant: The Case for an Always-Reforming Church that “on the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox side (especially Catholic), there is a huge body of literature, social media presence, and apologetics ministries that are unmatched on the Protestant side” (xv). In this book, he sets out to balance out the field. Apology for Protestantism What about the massive number of books like those of Lewis or Keller, and so many other works of apologetics written by Protestants? Their purpose is different from the kind of apologetics Ortlund does here. Lewis and Keller wrote to skeptics—to people like me at age 30. Their invitation was to mere Christianity, as the title of Lewis’s famous apologetic book indicates. But Ortlund’s audience is different. Rather than skeptics, he addresses Protestants who feel confused and are questioning not God or Christianity but Protestantism, wondering if Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy got things right. Both traditions had been around for nearly 1,500 years by the time Luther nailed up the Ninety-five Theses. What if Luther was wrong? Ortlund addresses Protestants who feel confused and are questioning not God or Christianity but Protestantism. Considering how many prominent converts from evangelicalism to Roman Catholicism dominate the current intellectual and political scene in the U.S. (including J. D. Vance, the vice-presidential Republican candidate), it’s clear something is afoot. Is this something, though, based on truth? This question is at the heart of Ortlund’s popular YouTube ministry, and it undergirds this well-researched book. Convinced the Bible and history provide a clear case for Protestantism over both Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, Ortlund has put a sort of FAQ into this readable and compact volume. This isn’t an academic book that presents an exhaustive analysis of any of the many key doctrines he discusses, on which educated people have vehemently disagreed over the past 500 to 2,000 years. Rather, the strength of this book is that it doesn’t get lost in the weeds; it recognizes that people can investigate those further for themselves. Reformed Catholicity Though Ortlund is obviously arguing for a robust Protestantism, part of his mission is to pursue Reformed catholicity. He argues the reformers weren’t trying to do anything new but instead stripped various accretions and abusive practices (e.g., the selling of indulgences) that had corrupted the medieval church. Rather than trying to split the church and attack its spirit of togetherness—the original sense of “catholicity”—Protestantism aimed to restore wholeness and truth by pointing people back to God and the gospel. Thus, Ortlund argues, “This is the single greatest contribution of Protestantism to the Christian church: its insight into the gracious heart of God revealed in the gospel, by which God offers to us as a free gift the righteousness we cannot attain through our own efforts” (68). The church’s source of authority is at the heart of the Roman Catholic/Protestant divide. Ortlund argues for the authority of sola scriptura over and against the papacy and apostolic succession. There are certainly efficiencies in that model of church government, but we must understand they’re not present in the Bible and arose in fits and spurts. He quotes Anthony Lane’s point: “Sola Scriptura is the statement that the church can err” (72)—but obviously, Scripture can’t. One of the pressing concerns of papal authority against Scripture’s primacy is the obvious development of new Roman Catholic doctrines over time. Ortlund provides two detailed case studies of Catholic doctrines that were historical accretions: the bodily assumption of Mary and the veneration of icons. The novelty of these doctrines provides a potent counterpunch to Roman Catholic accusations of Protestant innovation and to arguments that the papacy functions as a buttress against doctrinal change. Evenhanded Critique What It Means to Be Protestant is obviously making an argument that Protestant Christianity is to be preferred. However, this is no anti-Catholic screed. Even while making the case for Protestantism, Ortlund joins thoughtful evangelicals like Tim Keller and Mark Noll in the affirmation that some Roman Catholics are brothers and sisters in Christ. No less important, in my view, is Ortlund’s discussion of how some contemporary Protestant churches miss the mark. He writes, Many critics of Protestantism will immediately dismiss the interpretation of the Reformation as a historical retrieval and a removal of accretions because of the general sense of historical shallowness in many contemporary Protestant churches. This brings up a point that represents a theme of this book: We must distinguish between particular contemporary expressions of Protestantism versus Protestantism as such. (147) Apologetics as a method of strengthening faith leans on facts and persuasion based on information—not feelings or vibes. This requires educating God’s people much more thoroughly in both theology and history. We need to show Protestantism’s connection with the true center of the Christian tradition. Better biblical literacy is essential too. We need to show Protestantism’s connection with the true center of the Christian tradition. And yet vibes and feelings too often carry the day for decisions in the 21st century. Anemic evangelical understanding of theology got us here, as surveys like Ligonier’s “The State of Theology” remind us. My mantra lately in response to so many contemporary crises has been this: we must all become better theologians. For any evangelicals seeking to understand Protestantism better, Ortlund provides a valuable resource.
Like
Comment
Share
Daily Caller Feed
Daily Caller Feed
1 y

Canadiens Land Veteran Superstar Patrik Laine In Blockbuster Trade With Blue Jackets
Favicon 
dailycaller.com

Canadiens Land Veteran Superstar Patrik Laine In Blockbuster Trade With Blue Jackets

The Canadiens are out here making moves
Like
Comment
Share
The Blaze Media Feed
The Blaze Media Feed
1 y

Is the presidential election a simulation? These signs say yes
Favicon 
www.theblaze.com

Is the presidential election a simulation? These signs say yes

The date was July 10 — days before Donald Trump was nearly assassinated and Joe Biden suffered a Harris coup in all but name. I wrote that the near-animatronic Biden — a perfect candidate for digital augmentation or replacement, already the public face of a Borg’s worth of apparatchiks, managers, and functionaries — was beginning to look like America’s last human president. Now, a bit over a month later, the whole election feels increasingly posthuman: a phony, a placeholder — just maybe a simulation. Many technologists and members of the tech fandom like trying to convince you that life itself is one big simulation. It’s easy to do for several reasons, including not only the power of circular logic but the reality that so much of life is occupied with participating in different kinds of simulations (that is, model-based games, both entertaining and serious). But the descent of the most important election of our lifetimes into a simulation grows more terrifying because, with each day that goes by, it makes all the more sense that only a simulated election would arise amidst a simulated existence. What did you expect? Yet the main reason the simulation hypothesis is so potent is that so many people would like to live in a simulation — even if their goal is to try to control it or break out of it — because the spiritual challenge of actually beginning to live properly in a world created for our dominion by a loving God seems too daunting, strange, and lonely. An excellent example of this sad situation is the presidential election itself. Consider how the Harris campaign is openly and transparently committed to running on “vibes,” “joy,” choreographed dancing, etc., and how enthusiastic — how relieved — so many supporters in the grassroots and in the media appear to be. It’s beyond fakeness. The energy surrounding and permeating the campaign comes from the attitude that the old reality has been substituted away with a new artifice, one that takes up all the space where the reality used to be. But the Harris campaign is just one piece of evidence among other facets of today’s uncanny and unsettling campaign season, all of which militate in favor of the hypothesis that the whole election is a simulation. In a real election, Donald Trump’s near-assassination would receive wall-to-wall coverage. We would know everything about the shooter, his past, his associations, what he ate, what he did on the internet, everything. The seriousness of the reality of the situation would weigh like a heavy blanket on the race and the public mood. Heads would roll. Public officials would be up in arms. Instead, the only significant proof that Trump came within a hair’s breadth of his live on-air murder is that he is now encased behind bulletproof glass on the campaign trail — a turn of events that makes the famously visceral Orange Man resemble an action figure in a plastic casing or a crisis actor on a greasy screen. Like the mentally absent bank teller behind the mandatory wall of inches-thick see-through barricade, Trump is becoming less a person and more an idea, a notion, an avatar — much as Biden did during his previous “basement campaign.” The oddly contingent character of the rest of the election’s major figures generalizes the effect. Something is fundamentally off about Tim Walz, compounded by the rumors that dark revelations will force him off the ticket. The not-altogether-thereness of Walz presents JD Vance with a baffling scenario where he can’t really go toe to toe against his opposite number and must endure a disorienting wave of can-they-be-serious attacks driven by mid-00s photos of his youthful self goofing through that bizarro decade. And then there’s Harris herself, who does seem to be publicly drunk as a rule, come to think of it — a damaging issue to wrestle with because … if she’s not drunk … what else is causing this behavior? A vibe of letting Harris twirl while the party scrambles behind the scenes hangs over the whole affair, giving it an outlandish, implausible tenor, all veneer. But what could they be scrambling to do? Isn’t Harris there because only she can tap the Biden war chest? Isn’t it impossible at this late date to make the nomination process any less “democratic”? Do the Democrats even want democracy any more? And, after all, who is really in charge? Anyone? The simulation itself …? Ronald Siemoneit/Getty Images This is the path to madness, no doubt about it, and it’s widening, spreading, appealing to more and more people, from the bottom of the socioeconomic system to the top. Ever more Americans find themselves in the position of merely waiting, for the something that can happen before November to wipe all this pantomime away. And as the waiting drags on, they find themselves hoping … But the descent of the most important election of our lifetimes into a simulation grows more terrifying because, with each day that goes by, it makes all the more sense that only a simulated election would arise amidst a simulated existence. What did you expect? “Welcome to the desert of the real,” Morpheus famously echoes Jean Baudrillard, the grand French theorist of simulation. We’ve succeeded in terraforming so much of our given reality from a garden into a desert. And from a desert we must learn to nurture reality back once again — beginning with the acceptance that it, along with all we have and all we are, is indeed given by a Lord we can never exceed, escape, destroy, or replace.
Like
Comment
Share
History Traveler
History Traveler
1 y

The Legend Of The Bunyip, The Swamp Creature Of Aboriginal Folklore
Favicon 
allthatsinteresting.com

The Legend Of The Bunyip, The Swamp Creature Of Aboriginal Folklore

According to Aboriginal folklore, the bunyip waits in waterways for passing livestock to devour — and sometimes will feast on women and children as well. The post The Legend Of The Bunyip, The Swamp Creature Of Aboriginal Folklore appeared first on All That's Interesting.
Like
Comment
Share
Twitchy Feed
Twitchy Feed
1 y

Nancy Pelosi Admits She Put Old Joe Out to Pasture When He Was No Longer Useful
Favicon 
twitchy.com

Nancy Pelosi Admits She Put Old Joe Out to Pasture When He Was No Longer Useful

Nancy Pelosi Admits She Put Old Joe Out to Pasture When He Was No Longer Useful
Like
Comment
Share
RedState Feed
RedState Feed
1 y

On DNC Night 1, Hillary Clinton Reminds Democrats of What Could Have Been, and What They Hope Will Be
Favicon 
redstate.com

On DNC Night 1, Hillary Clinton Reminds Democrats of What Could Have Been, and What They Hope Will Be

On DNC Night 1, Hillary Clinton Reminds Democrats of What Could Have Been, and What They Hope Will Be
Like
Comment
Share
RedState Feed
RedState Feed
1 y

Jill Biden Leads in to Joe Biden's Farewell Speech With a Re-endorsement of Kamala Harris
Favicon 
redstate.com

Jill Biden Leads in to Joe Biden's Farewell Speech With a Re-endorsement of Kamala Harris

Jill Biden Leads in to Joe Biden's Farewell Speech With a Re-endorsement of Kamala Harris
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Satire
Conservative Satire
1 y

BREAKING: Walls are okay again
Favicon 
genesiustimes.com

BREAKING: Walls are okay again

CHICAGO, IL — In a stunning reversal of their long-standing opposition to border walls, the Democratic National Convention Committee (DNCC) has constructed a massive wall around their convention site in Chicago. The barrier, which spans several city blocks, has led to a surprising realization among Democratic leaders: walls are actually okay—when they’re keeping out the right people. “Let’s be clear, this is not just any wall,” said DNC Chair Jaime Harrison at a press conference announcing the new structure. “This is a wall of unity, a wall of inclusion, and most importantly, a wall of protection from those who might not share our values of open borders and free flow of ideas—except, of course, when it comes to our convention.” The wall, which stands at 12 feet high and is topped with security cameras and razor wire, was erected almost overnight, drawing both praise and ridicule from across the political spectrum. Democratic leaders were quick to clarify that their previous opposition to walls was “totally different.” “Look, the walls that Trump wanted to build were about division and hatred,” explained House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as she inspected the new structure. “This wall, on the other hand, is about love and security. It’s about keeping out the very few, very bad people who might disrupt our message of inclusivity and tolerance.” The irony was not lost on critics, who were quick to point out the blatant hypocrisy. “So, walls are fine when it’s for their own safety, but racist when used to protect the country? Got it,” tweeted one conservative commentator. When pressed on the apparent contradiction, Vice President Kamala Harris offered her own unique spin. “You have to understand, this is not a wall in the traditional sense. This is more of a ‘vertical welcoming zone.’ People will be gently redirected, with love, away from the convention unless they are pre-approved to enter.” The wall has reportedly been a huge hit among DNCC attendees, many of whom expressed relief at the added security. “I’ve always been against walls, but I have to admit, I feel really safe knowing there’s one around us now,” said one delegate, who wished to remain anonymous. “It’s amazing how something as simple as a wall can make you feel protected—who knew?” Local Chicago residents, however, were less enthusiastic about the wall’s sudden appearance. “They preach about inclusivity and tear down walls, but then they come here and build one in our backyard,” complained one local resident. “I guess we’re not the ‘right kind of people’ to be included in their version of unity.” Despite the backlash, the DNCC is standing by their decision, with plans to expand the wall-building concept to future events. “We’re exploring the idea of portable walls that we can take with us wherever we go,” said Harrison. “Because at the end of the day, walls are about keeping people safe, and who could be against that?” In an unexpected twist, the DNCC has already begun selling miniature replicas of the wall at the convention’s gift shop, complete with the slogan “Walls Work—When We Build Them.” Proceeds, naturally, will go towards funding future wall projects for elite events, while the rest of the country can still expect walls to remain the ultimate symbol of oppression. As the DNCC continues to redefine what a wall means in the context of their own security, one thing is clear: walls may be bad, but they’re also very, very good—depending on who’s building them. The post BREAKING: Walls are okay again appeared first on Genesius Times.
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

Texas jury finds school shooter's parents not liable for violence
Favicon 
yubnub.news

Texas jury finds school shooter's parents not liable for violence

A Galveston, Texas, jury on Monday found the parents of a teenager who shot and killed 10 classmates at Santa Fe High School in 2018 not liable for the violence, ending an unusual civil trial. Family…
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

Pentagon: US State Department OKs $3.5B sale of helicopters to South Korea
Favicon 
yubnub.news

Pentagon: US State Department OKs $3.5B sale of helicopters to South Korea

The U.S. State Department has approved a potential $3.5 billion sale of Apache helicopters, related equipment and missiles to South Korea, the Pentagon said Monday. "The proposed sale will improve the…
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 66353 out of 105081
  • 66349
  • 66350
  • 66351
  • 66352
  • 66353
  • 66354
  • 66355
  • 66356
  • 66357
  • 66358
  • 66359
  • 66360
  • 66361
  • 66362
  • 66363
  • 66364
  • 66365
  • 66366
  • 66367
  • 66368
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund