This Verse Secretly Undermines All of Christianity
Holy Koolaid | 22 June 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTnQydJ4O4k
3:15 Leprosy is Hansen's disease, can heal in antibiotics cures that take six months.
Any of those scammers did any attempt at instantaneous healing of leprosy?
3:48 The paralysed man was a Jew and the Old Testament included the death and resurrection in symbolic terms.
This means that the man was already in symbolic terms believing Jesus' death and resurrection.
(The position of Judaism once it explicitly rejects Jesus, His death and resurrection is different).
He was forgiven in view of the merits of Jesus on the Cross, precisely as King David was forgiven when he had sinned, after making the psalm miserere. The God to Whom the sacrifice was directed was watching Calvary from all Eternity into all Eternity. That's why the paralytic man could be forgiven before Calvary happened in Time.
4:11 Catholicism doesn't say God is powerless to forgive sins without a sacrifice, but that that sacrifice was the most fitting means of providing forgiveness.
- Druid Riley
- @druidriley3163
- Why is it fitting at all?
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @hglundahl
- @druidriley3163 If God had forgiven sins with no one paying for them at all, the forgiveness would not have shown the seriousness of the sin.
Just as if the seriousness were shown only by people paying themselves, there would be no forgiveness.
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl with no one paying for them at all, the forgiveness would not have shown the seriousness of the sin Are you joking? How did Jesus' death on the cross do that? They were living at a time where Romans were crucifying people regularly. Jesus being strung up was just Tuesday to them. How would that "show" them anything?
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 The Romans weren't the first to believe.
Except one Centurion. Blood and water coming from a side he pierced was not Tuesday to St. Longinus.
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl Except .. Except that's just a story. The name Longinus wasn't even attached to this story for centuries.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 Your TOK / Epistemology is as faulty as your logic.
A story believed by its first audience to be true and about events in the recent past of their group (or even not so recent past), while it may contain error or fraud, it's not likely to be fiction.
4:43 You have totally missed the point that the cause of forgiveness both for the paralytic and for the good robber, St. Dismas, was the sacrifice on the cross.
And that God was watching Calvary even before He created Adam and Eve, so He was always able to forgive in view of that.
But that's a very different thing from there being no Calvary to watch, I am not saying God was making a probable prognosis about it. I say He was watching it. A k a God is outside time and watches all of time at once.
- Druid Riley
- I say He was watching it If he can watch it before it happened, then there is no free will.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 Yes, there is.
Your argument is as bad as if I said "if I see you do sth, it's impossible that you aren't doing it, so, my seeing you do it deprives you of free will" ....
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl is as bad as if I said "if I see you do sth, it's impossible that you aren't doing it Except that isn't my argument. My argument is if god can SEE your actions before they happen, then to god, they've already happened and he knows what you're going to do, that's the "omniscient" part of being god. So, no, you don't have free will if god can see what you're going to do. If we truly had free will, god couldn't see what we're going to do because he wouldn't know what we're going to do.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 "to god, they've already happened"
To God they are happening, as you chose them within the parameters of choice.
God is never in a state of "I didn't know that before, but have learned it now" ...
Therefore, God's omniscience is no annulment of our freedom. Got it this time?
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl God is never ... Agree that is how god is written. That means he's omniscient. Look up the definition of that word, you don't seem to know what it means. Catching on yet?
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 I know well what it means.
You are dense about how it works ... namely in a way which does not take away freedom.
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl You are dense about how it works Oh OK, so YOU explain to me how omniscience works for a supernatural being. I'll wait.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 Here.
If God experienced time in our timeline, then his knowing beforehand would be like us knowing beforehand: we can only really know beforehand if it's a necessity (or revealed by God, quod vide, other story).
God does NOT experience time in our timeline, rather in all of His eternity He has all of our timeline spread before Him. This means God watching me tomorrow, God watching me yesterday, God watching me right now are all not just the same God, but in the same eternal divine moment, meaning, to Him it is simply knowledge by simultaneous observation. It leaves us as free as simultaneous observation by fellow human beings does.
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl You just reiterated that the future is already laid out as god can see it. IOW, no free will. We just THINK we have free will, we don't really have it.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 No, I didn't.
Learn to read.
"already" would refer to our timeline, it's only in God's that it's laid out, but that doesn't change the nature of the choices within it, it's only laid out to Him, because He's outside it.
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl Yes, I can read. Here is your quote from your post He has all of our timeline spread before Him So, like i said, you just reiterated that the future is already laid out and god can see it. So, no free will. If there WAS free will, there would be NO timeline God could see because we haven't made any decisions yet. Period.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 There isn't in our timeline.
5:08 Oh, it did. Converting the Romans to Christians freed Israelites from their oppressors, and the kingdom called the Catholic Church was the spiritual home to Jewish and Samarian Christians, dare I say Jewish and Samarian men of Galilee, even before Constantine, and in it, like in the prophecy, Israelites of both ancient kingdoms were not having standing armies.
So to this day, confer how Zionists claim that Palestinians never had statehood, i e never had an army for the last 2000 years, that being identical for their cousins of Jewish confession, Mitsrahi Jews.
5:21 W a i t .... you pretend Christianity began after the Destruction of the Temple?
By that time, Christians in Rome looked back on the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul, and they had already provided the Christian story.
You suggesting they hadn't is equivalent to pretending the story of George Washington was just invented at last years Fourth of July party.
- Druid Riley
- you pretend Christianity began after the Destruction of the Temple Scholars theorize that's why the gospels were written. To provide Temple centered Jews another way to worship. The only documents we have preceding the destruction of the Temple are Paul's letters. And his Jesus was strictly visionary.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 No, his Jesus was not strictly visionary.
No, it doesn't make sense just because scholars theorise that.
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl No, his Jesus was not strictly visionary In his letters, Paul repeatedly says he gets his teachings directly through visions from Jesus and not from any living person
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 Yes, but once he also states to knowledge of a crucifixion and a resurrection ... and how many of His former disciples, who had known him physically, saw Him risen.
Once Jesus is physically in heaven, visions are how some of us get more recent personal acquaintance, but that doesn't cancel the one prior to Ascension.
- Druid Riley
- @hglundahl and how many of His former ... he didn't meet any, as far as I read. He met someone called Peter (Jesus' apostle was Simon) and a "brother" he calls James. If these were the handpicked apostles of a living Jesus who was the son of god, why does Paul dismiss them, say they are "so-called" and tells his followers that their teachings are not going to affect his? Paul is treating them like they're street preachers like himself.
visions are how some of us ... Visions can also be hallucinations and mental illness.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @druidriley3163 "he didn't meet any, as far as I read."
He briefly met St. Peter in Jerusalem.
He also met his disciples in Antioch (if St. Peter was Simon Niger, St. Paul was probably not aware of it).
As for dismissing and so called, you conflate the above with the episode of Galatian 2. Likely solution, the guys he on that occasion were frauds.
"Visions can also be"
1) Doesn't annul my point that pre-Pauline visions appearances of a strictly physical Jesus are not annulled by later Pauline visions.
2) Visions technically are hallucinations, so are dreams and very intense visualisations in hypnosis. Using this as a criterium for mental illness is very overdone, like the concept of mental illness overall, by enemies of Christianity. It would be very quaint if pathegenic hallucinations falsely taken for messages from a Risen and Ascended Jesus operably coincided with what His previous disciples had known Him to teach.
6:34 Oh, you are pro-death ... and pro-infertility ...
That seems to be a very common value system shared by lots of Atheists, meaning that the idea of you having only one answer in the negative to one single question is very moot ... apart from showing that your objections, if you think through what you just said (hope you didn't) or were involved in some (dito) come from a jerk.
6:37 Young Earth Creationist here ... what was your point again?
6:39 Flat Earth most often doesn't come from Biblical inerrantists and is also not what Biblical inerrantism lends itself to, mostly.
I don't share your disdain for the late Rob Skiba II, btw. He was both a Biblical inerrantist and a Flat Earther.
6:54 The structure of televangelist fortunes (Copeland is Old Earther, more specifically Gap Theory) owes more to the idea of the Reformation in writings like those of Luther and Kings applying them, like Gustav Wasa and somewhat later Henry VIII.
The theory was, fewer preachers with larger congregations could earn more, even if each in the congregation gives less. At the beginning of the Covid epidemic in Alsatia, there was a cluster in a Pentecostal meeting involving c. 5000 people in one single place. In Catholic Europe 500 years before that, each of them would have gone to his Church on a Sunday, often one Church taking as big an area as three or four bakeries, and each Church often offering more than one Mass on Sunday, so each of the priests could celebrate.
Those priests were somewhat poorer. They were heavily regulated by superiors in the Church. That's what some of the guys doing the Reformation (arrived in Strassburg in 1523 btw) found irksome.
Please note, the Catholic Church believed in Biblical inerrancy, and in univocity in the sense given by Dan McClellan. It was Young Earth Creationist. And it didn't allow Copeland type fortunes below the level of a bishop. Most clergy weren't bishops.
7:39 You are perfectly free to use televangelist tactics, like appealing for donations, but don't expect those ones from me.
No comments:
Post a Comment