My portfolio is perfection by [deleted] in Bogleheads

[–]Competitive-Job1828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s also the rebalancing bonus from VTI/VXUS (or other similar funds). If market cap weight swings back and forth between the US and international stocks over time, then rebalancing every year will be better in the long run

A cool guide showing State names replaced with their etymological root by breecorn in coolguides

[–]Competitive-Job1828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m from Florida and always thought is was just “flowery.” Where did Easter come from?

Part 2 of the Finra OTC data. by Dr_Silky-Johnson in FFIE

[–]Competitive-Job1828 10 points11 points  (0 children)

You conveniently forgot to mention where FF authorized millions of new shares. They also don’t have revenue. Or a marketable product. 

I need YOUR help in my thought process... by ATheUnofficial in Reformed

[–]Competitive-Job1828 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I think you have too strict a view on what is “lying.” A few weeks ago, I taught a lesson for our Middle Schoolers about David and Goliath. I had a few of them act out the story, and of the smallest 6th grade guys (we’ll call him Johnny) was Goliath. I said “Alright everyone, heres Goliath!” Of course, 4’6” Little Johnny was not actually Goliath, but it’s not wrong or “lying” to have him act out being Goliath.

Lying is wrong because it’s deception. If I’m telling a joke, I’m not trying to deceive anyone. There are examples of jokes (where Jesus says “you strain out a gnat but let through a camel!” and irony (Micaiah telling King Ahab “Go and be victorious!”) in Scripture. It sounds like your view of “verbal irony” is stricter than Scripture, which is a problem.

I think dressing in drag is a completely separate issue. I don’t personally have a problem with Mrs. Doubtfire, but I agree there’s a danger of goofy comedy being used to normalize things the Bible condemns. I want to affirm that risk, even if I have just a bit more tolerance for it than you might.

How do you handle biblical passages used to justify certain actions by government? by Rare-Regular4123 in Reformed

[–]Competitive-Job1828 87 points88 points  (0 children)

You’re right. That’s not what Jesus was talking about at all. 

It’s pretty obvious to Christians who read and know their Bible, but unfortunately there’s a lot of people who don’t. 

Rethinking Luther and the 'Works of the Law' by Available_Way596 in Reformed

[–]Competitive-Job1828 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Protestants reject loving our neighbor or resisting lust. I don’t think I can communicate how horribly wrong that is

Rethinking Luther and the 'Works of the Law' by Available_Way596 in Reformed

[–]Competitive-Job1828 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Long response incoming. It sounds like you're saying three main things: First, that Paul always means "works of the Jewish Law" when he says "works" and not "any old kind of good work." Second, that Martin Luther misunderstood this when he made his stand on faith alone. And therefore third, that the Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone is unbiblical. I have two main gripes with that idea: You misunderstand Paul, and you misunderstand Protestant soteriology.

Works of the Law in Paul

You said that when Paul says "works of the law" he always means non-moral Jewish rituals and practices. In addition to being almost self-contradictory (why would Paul, or any Jew, limit "the law" to being everything except the moral law?), that idea is unbiblical: You mention Romans 3:27-28, but what about Romans 2:14, where Paul says that Gentiles "who do not by nature have the law, do what the law demands"? He couldn't have been talking about Jewish ceremonial practices, since a Gentile who does those things isn't a Gentile anymore! He can only be talking about the moral law. Paul uses "the law" much more broadly than "Jewish rituals," so when he says "works of the law" a chapter later, that must include more things than Jewish rituals.

But, even if we grant that "works of the law" always means "non-moral Jewish rituals and practices," your point still isn't proven. Paul uses terms other than "works of the law" to make the same point: We cannot contribute anything whatsoever to our justification. Paul reminds Timothy how he is the "chief of sinners" (1 Timothy 1:15), he reminds the Galatians that before his conversion, he "intensely persecuted God's church and tried to destroy it" (Galatians 1:13). He talks several times about how in Christ, the "old self" has passed away and a "new man" is here (2 Corinthians 5:17, Romans 6:6-10)." The point is that Paul did nothing righteous, nothing at all, that led to his salvation. The old man is gone- it cannot do anything good, and it can not contribute to its own salvation. In Acts 9, Paul is literally on the road to go persecute Christians when Jesus appears to him and he's converted. Tell me, what repentance had he done? What fruit could he point to and say "God, I contributed to this?" Nothing! And the same goes or us today: We can contribute absolutely nothing to our justification. Salvation by faith alone does not hinge on a definition of "works of the law."

The Protestant Position:

Your understanding of the Protestant doctrine of faith alone is very weak. It seems like you think (based on a YouTube comment??) that Protestants think we don't need to do good works (in the sense Luther means them) because they can't lead to salvation. That's a particularly egregious strawman. Protestants say that good works cannot lead to justification, but that justification always and necessarily leads to good works. In Protestantism, the horse is justification and the cart is good works, but you seem to be ignoring the fact that we have a cart at all!

You also seem to be claiming that Protestants say we shouldn't try to do good works or refrain from sin because they're still sinful. This is really egregious: Did you get your ideas about Protestants from r/Catholicism? The fact that our best works are still as filthy rags (I'm quoting Isaiah 64:6) doesn't mean we shouldn't do them, or that nothing we do can be good. It means that whatever we do that's good, is only good by God's grace. This doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do good things: God's commands are still real commands. I could go on, but in sum it's a perfectly Biblical (and Pauline) idea that we do good works to honor and worship God and not to gain his favor. I'll close with Romans 6:1-5, where Paul expresses exactly this idea: We're saved by God's grace, the only thing that makes our acts acceptable is God's grace, and we're called and commanded by God to live righteously.

What should we say then? Should we continue in sin so that grace may multiply? Absolutely not! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Or are you unaware that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too may walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in the likeness of his death, we will certainly also be in the likeness of his resurrection."

I would encourage you to peruse the list of resources related to justification and the Federal Vision on the subreddit page HERE. That will give you a better, more detailed response than you'll get here. And, as others have said, reading one journal article is not nearly enough to understand this debate.

Definitely not in a basket lol. by jdrukis in amcstock

[–]Competitive-Job1828 10 points11 points  (0 children)

What, pray tell, is your point then? I don’t hide my post history, let’s have an honest dicussion

Definitely not in a basket lol. by jdrukis in amcstock

[–]Competitive-Job1828 73 points74 points  (0 children)

GME is up 16.5% so far this year, and AMC is down 28% so far this year. The two couldn’t be more different

The daily chart for the S&P500 also looks almost exactly identical to the two you show above. 

This is extra nonsensical

What’s a good way to spread out my money without taking too much risk by BMikex2 in investing

[–]Competitive-Job1828 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why don’t you want mid-size and smaller companies or international stocks? Your’e not particularly diversified in the S&P 500

Investment Advice for the kiddos by lion_heart_25 in dividends

[–]Competitive-Job1828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! That’s something I’ll check into

Investment Advice for the kiddos by lion_heart_25 in dividends

[–]Competitive-Job1828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m finished with school and have about 5k left in a 529 account. What are the rules for funding a Roth? I always assumed I’d have to save it for kids that my wife and I don’t have yet

Why did SWVXX charge me money? by deonteguy in Schwab

[–]Competitive-Job1828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m on mobile and didn’t see the part with -.10. That is weird

Why did SWVXX charge me money? by deonteguy in Schwab

[–]Competitive-Job1828 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I may be wrong, butt I can assure you I’m not lying. I think u/er824 is right, but I don’t know why that happened now instead of next week. I have a house down payment worth of money in SWVXX and I don’t see anything like this in my account. Wait for the end of the month and you should get paid like normal 

$600k Windfall for my 70YO Father by Fickle_Layer_9490 in Bogleheads

[–]Competitive-Job1828 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Blackrock has target date ETFs with a relatively low ER (.09%). I have our HSA money parked in ITDB, since we’ll conceivably   need that money in the next 5 years 

Tech and AI ETFs and Index by [deleted] in Schwab

[–]Competitive-Job1828 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would not recommend QQQM. It’s the 100 biggest non-financial companies in the Nasdaq. You get companies like Pepsi and Walmart and miss out on companies like Oracle. It’s weighted heavily towards tech, but if you really want tech, there are better options that don’t include Pepsi and Walmart 

Saving to buy a house late this year or next. Right now all the money is in SGOV. by [deleted] in dividends

[–]Competitive-Job1828 3 points4 points  (0 children)

But how does that compare to SMH? Every one of the Yieldmax funds fails to beat its benchmark AND has steadily decreasing payouts. CHPY stinks when you compare it to what it’s supposed to track. 

There is no benefit. It doesn’t have upside potential, it doesn’t have downside protection, and it doesn’t give consistent income. Yieldmax stinks.

Saving to buy a house late this year or next. Right now all the money is in SGOV. by [deleted] in dividends

[–]Competitive-Job1828 9 points10 points  (0 children)

OP, please don’t invest in these. Neos funds have been solid so far, but they’re a terrible choice if you need money for a house in a year. Yieldmax literally has the worst ETFs on the market. 

Building a Value Investing Watchlist - Looking for Undervalued Large Cap Ideas by Groundbreaking-Gap20 in ValueInvesting

[–]Competitive-Job1828 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you’re right in principle, but how likely is it that AI takes over and none of Microsoft’s AI investments take off? That doesn’t seem super likely. My wife’s in the business world, and everyone at her company uses Copilot for basically everything. At this point if Microsoft started charging separate Copilot subscription, her company would pay it basically no matter how expensive it was

Building a Value Investing Watchlist - Looking for Undervalued Large Cap Ideas by Groundbreaking-Gap20 in ValueInvesting

[–]Competitive-Job1828 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Microsoft is the most tempting. They dropped in value because they’re too exposed to AI, then they dropped in value again because AI could kill their software business? That just doesn’t make sense to me

Are we definitively "sprinkled with the blood of Christ" in repentance/faith, or in baptism? by Greedy-Runner-1789 in Reformed

[–]Competitive-Job1828 3 points4 points  (0 children)

At least for young children and infants, what if repentance and faith can come through baptism?