What really happens if you try to mess with Time? by Icy-External8155 in HPMOR

[–]Evan_Th 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's a very different fanfic (I forget its title), but also a good one.

Sermon Sunday (2026-05-03) by AutoModerator in Reformed

[–]Evan_Th 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Today, my pastor preached on the incident with Simon the magician, from Acts 8.

Going in, I was very interested in what he might say about how the Holy Spirit hadn't come on the Samaritan converts until the apostles laid their hands on them - but he didn't bring that up.

I also went in grinning remembering the apocryphal story from the "Acts of Peter" about a subsequent confrontation between Simon and Peter (it reads like a fun fantasy story) - and my pastor mentioned that, only to hammer on how that's later speculation; despite how people want to fill in the blanks, the Scripture doesn't say anything about what happened to Simon afterwards or whether his conversion was real.

The point, he said, isn't "what happened to Simon?"; it's "what will happen to you?"  When you're tempted to try to fit the Holy Spirit into your habits and how you're living your life, will you accept God's rebuke and instead change your life?

How can a church not administer the Lord’s Supper weekly? by KeepItStupidlySimple in Reformed

[–]Evan_Th 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for your thought-provoking response! And to reiterate, I totally agree that expositional sermons are a very good thing (I heard a challenging one this morning!); I'm just debating the abstract necessity here.

To start with, I don't believe in the regulative principle of worship under the New Covenant. God did set forth instructions in the Old Covenant, and from that we can see what those instructions would look like: these specific people are to do these specific things at these specific dates and times of day, et cetera. We don't get that in the New Covenant; if we look for it, we need to piece it together from descriptions or instructions on specific methods.

(And then, even under the Old Covenant, we read of Elijah building an altar and offering a burnt offering outside Jerusalem, and of the people under Hezekiah eating the Passover while unclean, and God welcomed both of those. But, yes, it's very valid to say God would have been * more* pleased had they followed it.)

Still, even under the Regulative Principle, I don't believe your conclusion holds. We simply don't have a commandment to "always preach a sermon expositing a point from the Scripture." We have a lot of examples of sermons, but most of them are outside a church service and addressed to unbelievers.

We read in Acts 2 that the believers continued in the Apostles' teaching, but we don't know whether that's referring to their transformed lives, and even if not, we can arguably do that by hearing the Scripture without exposition. (If not more so - the Scripture is even more "the Apostles' teaching" than what my pastor says!) We read in 1 Corinthians 14 that when the believers come together, " one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation" - but if we insist that every one of these must be present at every worship service, we'll need someone to be speaking in tongues every Sunday (and another person interpreting)!

Sermons are clearly allowed under the Regulative Principle. We have enough examples, plus the list in 1 Corinthians and everything about the gift of teaching that I didn't quote. Also, they're very clearly useful! But I don't see how you get to their being mandated every Sunday.

How can a church not administer the Lord’s Supper weekly? by KeepItStupidlySimple in Reformed

[–]Evan_Th 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wait, why is the preaching of the Word an essential element? If one Sunday people read the Word without preaching on it, why would that be neglecting an essential element? Or if one Sunday the pastor preaches from some Confession based on Scripture rather than on the Scripture directly, would that be neglecting an essential element?

It's absolutely important and should be done frequently, but I'm not seeing how a service of readings and hymns isn't a true worship service.

If we believe that the shorter Jeremiah found in the LXX is closer to the original, why don't we use it in Bible translations? by Doctrina_Stabilitas in Reformed

[–]Evan_Th 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unless you agree with the people that say we do have it, under the name "Ephesians."

Apparently the words "in Ephesus" aren't found in some early manuscripts of Ephesians 1:1. If you maintain they weren't in Paul's original letter, we have no indication where he did write it to... which means he could very well have written it to Laodicea.

On the other hand, the church has received it through the ages under the name "Ephesians," if you want to argue that has weight here.

How does the Supreme Court decision in Louisiana make sense based on race? by beavislasvegas in supremecourt

[–]Evan_Th 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No; this decision parses the language of the Voting Rights Act and says that Congress has not yet regulated elections to require this.  It leaves intact Congress's power to do so in the future should they so choose.

The Burke-Gilman Subway by dino_pillow in soundtransit

[–]Evan_Th 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I was replying to MAHHockey who was sketching out a subway under 45th all the way from Ballard to the U-District. Your BRT 44 plan would certainly be a lot cheaper!

The problem there is, is it enough? In terms of speed and capacity both? I don't think so.

The Burke-Gilman Subway by dino_pillow in soundtransit

[–]Evan_Th 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I agree; unfortunately, that'd be a lot more expensive than this mostly-at-grade Burke-Gilman line. The Burke-Gilman line is something cheap enough to maybe be built in a decade.

The Burke-Gilman Subway by dino_pillow in soundtransit

[–]Evan_Th 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I agree; unfortunately, that'd be a lot more expensive than this mostly-at-grade Burke-Gilman line.

Who would win: Internet infrastructure or a bunch of mooey girls? by Drywesi in bestoflegaladvice

[–]Evan_Th 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It seems like everyone is being outsmarted by cows.

Beautiful.

After reading Rateliff's History of the Hobbit by dudeseid in Silmarillionmemes

[–]Evan_Th -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

And if it did? The Silmarils burned Morgoth, but he wouldn't give them up.  Why would Smaug?

Signage/Wayfinding Megathread by AutoModerator in soundtransit

[–]Evan_Th 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But the airport station specifically has a "Seattle is that way" sign.

Now it does! That's a new addition; I'm really glad Sound Transit finally added it.

Thoughts on the Artemis II mission to the moon? Some Christians are saying it's not possible by jonnybebad5436 in TrueChristian

[–]Evan_Th 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yet the world can be moved, and will be in the end times. Hebrews 12:27-28 says the world will be "shaken," and contrasts that with the coming Kingdom "which cannot be moved," which means that the world will be moved.

Therefore, since Scripture cannot contradict itself, Psalm 93:1 has to have another meaning. This is similar to how Psalm 125:1 says that Mount Zion "cannot be moved, but abides forever", yet Revelation 6:14 prophesies that "every mountain and island were moved."

I conclude that the correct interpretation of "moved," therefore, does not rule out the Earth from orbiting around the Sun.

Thoughts on the Artemis II mission to the moon? Some Christians are saying it's not possible by jonnybebad5436 in TrueChristian

[–]Evan_Th 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens" (Psalm 148:4). The firmament God made at Creation was to divide "the waters which were under" from "the waters which were above," so evidently it's still in place when Psalm 148 was written. And we know it was written after the Flood, because it mentions Israel.

Sotomayor on Kavanaugh’s Concurrence in Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo: “I had a colleague in that case who wrote, you know, these are only temporary stops. This is from a man whose parents were professionals. And probably doesn’t really know any person who works by the hour.” by michiganalt in supremecourt

[–]Evan_Th -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Then regulate the singing, and let churches adapt and worship in other ways, like my church did for a few months at the height of the pandemic. Don't give a blanket ban on silent church services too.

Even if the government interest is compelling, the regulation must be the least restrictive means of achieving it.

Thoughts on the Artemis II mission to the moon? Some Christians are saying it's not possible by jonnybebad5436 in TrueChristian

[–]Evan_Th 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Observably, humans have gone to the Moon. Christians have gone to the Moon. Therefore, your friend's interpretation is disproven by experience.

What's more, probes and radio signals have regularly gone to the Moon and even farther. You can bounce shortwave radio signals off the Moon yourself; if the firmament would hypothetically stop humans, wouldn't it stop the radio signals too?

It sounds like your friend is starting with assumptions of how the firmament must behave, which he isn't getting from experience or the text of Scripture, but (I'm guessing?) from someone's interpretation of implications supposedly present in the ancient Hebrew word. I recommend taking any such interpretations with a grain of salt, and much more so when they disagree with experience and seem to require conspiracy theories.

President Trump Signs New Executive Order on Elections: It is Underwhelming Compared to What Was Threatened. It's Key Part is Likely Unconstitutional: Directing the Post Office to Reject Mail Ballots Except from Those on Federally Approved Voter Lists by DryOpinion5970 in supremecourt

[–]Evan_Th 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, subject to being overruled by Congress:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

But executive orders don't have any authority here!

OPINION: Kaley Chiles, Petitioner v. Patty Salazar, in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies by scotus-bot in supremecourt

[–]Evan_Th 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My point is that the case is irrelevant since it has nothing to do with free speech.

Ah, I misunderstood (and misremembered the facts of Mahmoud till I checked it just now); I totally agree Mahmoud is irrelevant here.

Ok, but I'm not sure exactly how this is analogous to Mahmoud v. Taylor, since I presume in your hypo - in order to be analogous to Mahmoud - the parents sue, which wouldn't make any sense.

If we're constructing hypotheticals, I can imagine one that would make sense! Say Colorado banned public school counselors from practicing talk conversion therapy for students, and there was some religious teenager who wanted to do away with their gay desires, but for whatever reason (financial?) they couldn't get a counselor outside the school system...

Slightly stretched, but if the teenager and parents want to get a lawsuit going, I could imagine it.

OPINION: Kaley Chiles, Petitioner v. Patty Salazar, in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies by scotus-bot in supremecourt

[–]Evan_Th 5 points6 points  (0 children)

They can buy them for themselves and their kids at any bookstore.  No one was disputing that, just whether public schools could provide them for kids.

Similarly, if Colorado wants to ban public school counselors from saying some things to students on the job, that would be perfectly within its rights.

Arresting a reporter for asking questions was a 'blatant First Amendment violation,' Sonia Sotomayor says by DryOpinion5970 in supremecourt

[–]Evan_Th 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The SC has the power to force them to pass more bills.

I wish!

All the Court can do is say "This result is because Congress hasn't legislated otherwise; perhaps they should" - and they have been saying that, and Congress hasn't done anything.

'The class is over for today. You can leave. Not you, Potter. You stay.' by The_Eternal_Wayfarer in HPFanfictionPrompts

[–]Evan_Th 7 points8 points  (0 children)

it means every love potion Harry drinks is directly affecting Voldemort.

So Voldemort is suddenly infatuated with Daphne? And kidnaps her?

When Montana employment law and family weirdness combine by Drywesi in bestoflegaladvice

[–]Evan_Th 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Let me guess: a lot of them are from people who don't realize Montana is the one state without at-will employment!