co-authors are other participants quoted. I haven't changed content of thr replies, but quoted it part by part in my replies, interspersing each reply after relevant part. Sometimes I have also changed the order of replies with my retorts, so as to prioritate logical/topical over temporal/chronological connexions. That has also involved conflating more than one message. I have also left out mere insults.
- Other blogs, same writer
- A thread from Catholic.com (more may be added)
- Answering Steve Rudd
- Have these dialogues taken place? Yes.
- Copyright issues on blogposts with shared copyright
- I think I wrote a mistaken word somewhere on youtube - or perhaps not
- What is Expertise? Some Things It is Not.
- It Seems Apocalypse is Explained in a Very Relevant Part
- Dialoguing Mainly with Adversaries
- Why do my Posts Right Here Not Answer YOUR Questio...
Tuesday, April 11, 2023
Tovia Singer is Acting For Antichrist
Mainly sharing because Trent Horn does good apologetics here:
REFUTING a Rabbi on the Resurrection (REUPLOAD)
The Counsel of Trent, 10 April 2023
But also to defend Christians from Singer's pro-psychiatric tyrannies:
13:25 [About Tovia Singer] An evil man who praises haldol ... it's a chemical torture instrument.
The idea of someone hallucinating is heavily over-used in order to be able to apply haldol and other tortures.
But he misses the point further, because none of the exorcism accounts matches a classical clinical account of psychosis. Neither in the stage when a person is still possessed, nor in the stage when the demon is or has been driven out.
I have seen people argue that the young man who was thrown into water and fire was suffering epileptic fits - seriously? How would epileptic fits be so selective as to throw someone specifically into water and fire?
Either way, Tovia Singer is totally in the Soviet (and probably Israeli) tradition of politically Antichristian abuse of psychiatry. A curse on him.
Tovia Singer is also wrong to state that madness as distinct from demonic possession was not considered a thing.
Daniel 4 doesn't say anything of demonic possession. And yet, arguably, Nebuchadnezzar was not just treated but described as mad.
Trent Horn makes one bad concession to Jews, Jesus supposedly not having fulfilled Isaiah "11 and 25" ... for 25, I haven't checked so far.
21:53 You didn't say "Isaiah 11:25" - does not exist - you said "Isaiah 11 and 25" ...
Now, Isaiah 11, from verse 10 on, already has been fulfilled from the Resurrection, up to when Egypt and Mesopotamia became Christian countries as opposed to Kemetist and Caldanist/Zuist ones.
Posted by Hans Georg Lundahl at 12:59 AM
Labels: The Counsel of Trent
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment