27% of Evangelical Christians rarely or never attend Church services

[Jenna]

Douchechills.

I dont have a dog in this but
I can never take anything you write seriously because I realize it’s written by an obese ”man” in his mid 30s that regularly scrolls tmz and is obsessed with a disney actor marketed to 12 year olds.

Hey I don't scroll TMZ! I subscribe to the Fauxmoi subreddit for my celebrity gossip!

https://old.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/

90% of it is just "they cast a nonwhite actor in a role and the internet is OUTRAGED" clickbait anyway. This week it's a black actress playing Juliet and an Indian gal playing Rapunzel. Honestly, the whole race-swapping bit is one of the funnier ones the Hollywood Jews have come up with. You can already picture the youtube thumbnails - Disney SLAMMED for WOKE Rapunzel!!!!!!!

 

[Turry]

Who says to pray to Saints and to call humans Father?

I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. 15 For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.”
— 1 Corinthians 4:14-15

Oopsie doodles. NB comes up against St Paul yet again. Who to trust?

I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I write to you, children, because you know the Father. 14 I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one.”
— 1 Jn. 2:13-14

Et tu, St John the Theologian? How will you answer to the learned NB for this little paux fas?

 

[Faggot Boqposter]

There's not a single poster here that this doesn't apply to. If someone tags @Faggot Boqposter you're rushing to that thread to see what they're saying about you. Nice pretending you're above messageboard culture, stupid.

Fair point. I really have no issue with you other than you used to be funny. Now you seem like you’re on your period all the time and this dog piling by faggots has actually affected you. Be funny again.

 

[Turry]

Fair point. I really have no issue with you other than you used to be funny. Now you seem like you’re on your period all the time and this dog piling by faggots has actually affected you. Be funny again.

Are you saying he needs to go back to the way he used to be?

 

[Faggot Boqposter]

Are you saying he needs to go back to the way he used to be?

I’m not up on the literature about detransitioning. I wouldn’t feel comfortable making that recommendation

 

[1950'sSpaceProgram]

Once Daddy Donald is out of the public eye none of these faggots will be "religious" anymore. All meme shit these days.

 

[Bam's Wrinkled Thumb]

It’s not a non sequitur, nothing else has to be said. You are a scorned gay man. Warhammer is my only pop culture vice and there’s nothing pedoish or degenerate about it like say marvel or Star Wars is.

Jenna is a Jewish gay pedophile. There is no defence squad, I’m not allowed in any chats anymore in fact. Nobody is going to side with a Jewish pedophile who sounds like a transsexual over anybody else, that’s all it is.

Wrong again child, there is a defense squad, but you're not allowed to be in it

 

[Bam's Wrinkled Thumb]

Literally name one thing I've been sensitive about. Just one.

Remember when @quasi101 called you a retard and you cried

 

[Lamont & Tonelli]

I YAM THAT YAM

 

[quasi101]

You think in false dualities. I.e that if one is one it cannot be the other. I’m not even looking at this from a theological POV. You’re assuming if something is defined as “separate” it is ALWAYS separate, or even that it cannot be separate and the same at the same time.

this is all wrong lol

nigga that's literally called the law of excluded middle. its one of the 3 laws of classic logic.

Contradiction (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

plato.stanford.edu

This entry outlines the role of the law of non-contradiction (LNC) as the foremost among the first (indemonstrable) principles of Aristotelian philosophy and its heirs, and depicts the relation between LNC and LEM (the law of excluded middle) in establishing the nature of contradictory and contrary opposition. §

You're confusing (P ∨ ¬P) with predicate logic modifiers. Those being existential or universal.

Existential quantification - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In predicate logic, an existential quantification is a type of quantifier, a logical constant which is interpreted as "there exists", "there is at least one", or "for some". It is usually denoted by the logical operator symbol ∃, which, when used together with a predicate variable, is called an existential quantifier ("∃x" or "∃(x)" or "(∃x)"[1]). Existential quantification is distinct from universal quantification ("for all"), which asserts that the property or relation holds for all members of the domain.[2][3] Some sources use the term existentialization to refer to existential quantification.[4]

The problem arises when you say " it cannot be separate and the same at the same time." . In reformed Christianity, that's heresy. This is why i mentioned that one way to sidestep the logical problem of the trinity is to invoke a "divine logic" or a "divine counting method". In classical logic if you're predicating then due to the law of excluded middle, if jesus and the father are separate in any sense at any time they are two gods. Which obviously is heresy.

 

[quasi101]

If you are saying the father/son distinction is just an invention of the mind because the essence is the same I can understand that, but I don't think that is the Church 's view. Are you and your father different? I suppose you could say in a "cosmic" sense it's all a mind manifestation and we're the same, but again, I don't think that's the church's position.

But I might be dead wrong. And I may have completely misunderstood what you said.

(I'd post a Fetterman shrugging picture here if I knew how.)

Yeah that's also a heresy.

 

[quasi101]

There's only one man who's perfect and that man is already the head of the church. A body can't have two heads.

 

[Turry]

View attachment 192605

Quiet, you

 

[Bam's Wrinkled Thumb]

Quiet, you

He fucked your shit up so bad I had to go back and car crash.

I'm so sorry

 

[Turry]

He fucked your shit up so bad I had to go back and car crash.

I'm so sorry

He knows which fallacies he committed to his mouth and/or ass

 

[Suetonius]

The problem arises when you say " it cannot be separate and the same at the same time." . In reformed Christianity, that's heresy. This is why i mentioned that one way to sidestep the logical problem of the trinity is to invoke a "divine logic" or a "divine counting method". In classical logic if you're predicating then due to the law of excluded middle, if jesus and the father are separate in any sense at any time they are two gods. Which obviously is heresy.

Fawwk well thats why I opened my ramble with “removed from a theological point of view”. The one counter I would make is refer to what I said about separation. That something can be separate yet the same, essentially existing in both states at once. To try to put this back into the theological concept jesus and the father are “separate”, such as in their physical presentation, but the same as god. Just because god comes in different forms does not mean each form is some separate entity, even if those entities exist at the same time, or in different forms. I think thats what I was getting at and have no idea if it even relates to the concept at hand.

 

[quasi101]

Fawwk well thats why I opened my ramble with “removed from a theological point of view”. The one counter I would make is refer to what I said about separation. That something can be separate yet the same, essentially existing in both states at once. To try to put this back into the theological concept jesus and the father are “separate”, such as in their physical presentation, but the same as god. Just because god comes in different forms does not mean each form is some separate entity, even if those entities exist at the same time, or in different forms. I think thats what I was getting at and have no idea if it even relates to the concept at hand.

The issue is the churches position. You can make the logic work , but it will always fall under a heretical view. The "different states" concept is sabellism or modalistic.

The classic example is vapor,ice,liquid are all modes of water. or expressions.

The Trinity is like waterâ¦and other bad analogies

For those, like myself, who are not from a highly-liturgical denomination, it may come as a surprise that June 11 was ‘Trinity Sunday’.

christiantoday.com.au

“Well I’ve heard that the Trinity is like water: water can be liquid, gas (steam), or solid (ice), but it’s still the same water”.

“That’s Modalism!”

Why is it wrong? An explanation that is so common, and seemingly does elucidate how something can simultaneously be three and one—can it really be that bad?

Well the issue is, the water analogy is akin to the heresy of Modalism. Modalism, or Sabellianism, denies the three distinct Persons of the Trinity and claims that God is one Person who appears in different ‘modes’ at different times—in the Old Testament He appeared as the Father, in the Gospels He appeared as the Son, and from Pentecost onwards He appears as the Holy Spirit.

Below is literally why I say my position is. I just say that language is insufficient. Not that analogies might be.

So if all of these explanations are heretical, what is a good analogy? Unfortunately, an analogy from the limited realm of creation may not be sufficient in explaining God’s nature.

Perhaps we must be content to admit that we cannot fully understand God’s nature in our finitude. What we can understand and accept is that God exists eternally as one divine nature, substance, or essence, comprising three co-equal, co-eternal and consubstantial persons—the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Each person is fully the one God, but is also distinct.

People always due this motte and bailey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy) where they say you need to fully understand it but when pressed retreat. I don't need to fully understand it i need the language to make sense. I don't need to know exactly how a combustion engine works , to say i understand cars. But you tell me that when i press the gas and the brake at the same time it both speeds up and slows down at the same time. I'll say i don't know what that things is.

 

[Farmer Brown]

Fawwk well thats why I opened my ramble with “removed from a theological point of view”. The one counter I would make is refer to what I said about separation. That something can be separate yet the same, essentially existing in both states at once. To try to put this back into the theological concept jesus and the father are “separate”, such as in their physical presentation, but the same as god. Just because god comes in different forms does not mean each form is some separate entity, even if those entities exist at the same time, or in different forms. I think thats what I was getting at and have no idea if it even relates to the concept at hand.

They are not different "forms" of the same God. Each "form", is in actuality (according to the Trinity), a separate entity.

 

[Turry]

The issue is the churches position. You can make the logic work , but it will always fall under a heretical view. The "different states" concept is sabellism or modalistic.

The classic example is vapor,ice,liquid are all modes of water. or expressions.

View attachment 192623

The Trinity is like waterâ¦and other bad analogies

For those, like myself, who are not from a highly-liturgical denomination, it may come as a surprise that June 11 was ‘Trinity Sunday’.

christiantoday.com.au

Below is literally why I say my position is. I just say that language is insufficient. Not that analogies might be.


People always due this motte and bailey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy) where they say you need to fully understand it but when pressed retreat. I don't need to fully understand it i need the language to make sense. I don't need to know exactly how a combustion engine works , to say i understand cars. But you tell me that when i press the gas and the brake at the same time it both speeds up and slows down at the same time. I'll say i don't know what that things is.

 

[chocolatehellhole]