I was going to make a reply but I fell asleep 5 times watching this. I will make a reply to the first video but Man 22 min to deal with a 4 min reply... And then attack me b/c I am not up on metaphysics?
@thunderbolt94 Right, from one claim, you extrapolate that I know nothing about philosophy. I'm so glad no one on the internet makes snap judgements, or resorts to open hostility and bile as a primary response mechanism.
Then don't make retarded statements like "You really can't be "up" on metaphysics, since it's basically magic." It makes you look like a complete fucking idiot.
@thunderbolt94 Ah so the many worlds theroy that the 11 dimensions contain all possible realitys? I thought I did good to defend that with anything that is eternal must do all things. What did I miss?
No you did not do good in defending the idea that the foundation of existence (which we call God) someone must be able to do the logically contradictory.
@thunderbolt94 That's not me that's Christians that claim god can do things that are logically incompatible. I do not believe in infinite or timeless. I just gave Christians what they demanded and I am still a villain.
Hey dude, professional Christian theologians and philosophers don't argue that. I've already gave you a link to CartesianTheist's video that talks about this topic. If you actually want Christians to take what you're saying seriously, you actually have to understand their ACTUAL position, not strawman buddy.
@thunderbolt94 Yes they do, they sugar coat it but this is exactly what they believe. I was a christian for 26 years and was studying to be a preacher. Timeless is the only answer to a infinite god... Yet once they do that god must always do nothing or become a temporal god. God is Just, can not allow sin... However sent his son to die on the cross to appease himself (Yes b/c he wrote the rules)
So if you were a Christian for 26 years, are you familiar with the seven ecumenical councils, the hypostatic union, the eucharist, reconcilliation, baptism, the writings of the early church like Justin Martyr, St. Augustine, St. Cyprian of Carthage, Tertullian, and then writers like Thomas Aquinas? Are you familiar with the theology behind the filioque, the schism of 1054, essence/energies distinction, the didache, the liturgy, the theology behind apostolic succession?
@thunderbolt94 100% man and god, blessed Sacraments, atonement for sins, the visual sign of dieing and being reborn, what would you like from the early church? wether the holy spirit is from the father or son (Silly they are from both as god is father son and holy ghost) Didn't study that as I was a anabaptist and the only true church, Essence is a type of force that never depletes and has a will.Teaching of the 12, works over faith, and. there were only 12 Apostles, c-
@ebilly99 whoops missed the seven Councils is a conference of ecclesiastical dignitaries and theological experts convened to discuss and settle matters of Church doctrine and practice. This is funny as though the catholic church being infallible has changed its mind :P
The hypostatic union refutes your assertion that God sent himself to appease himself. The holy spirit proceeds ONLY from the Father THROUGH the son, and three persons =/= three gods, so you got that COMPLETELY wrong. Read the Nicene Creed as well as that alone refutes your bullshit claim about God sending himself to appease himself bullshit.
@thunderbolt94 God the father son and holy ghost share a essence. though they are 3 individual entities they share a nature. Thus when Jesus says I and the Father are one he is telling the truth. They share one nature. They are the god head. There is but one god in there persons. You know little of the nature of yhwh... and this from a atheist.
And none of that proves your bullshit assertion that God sent himself to appease himself, Stupid. You just summarized the trinity but have failed to establish how that proves your bullshit assertion.
You are once again failing harder than a block of bricks.
@thunderbolt94 Jesus claimed the Organization was a pit of vipers b/c of there actions to the poor. What actions have I committed? Is it b/c I no longer believe in fairy tales?
1) You claimed that the anabaptists were the first Christians (demonstrably FALSE). You misrepresented Christian theology (hypostatic union AND omnipotence). You have done this with willful ignorance.
2) LOL, way to avoid my points. Doesn't address anything I said.
3) I'm not angry. I'm just having fun with you because you obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about, especially when you claim anabaptists were the first Christians. ROFL
@thunderbolt94 Acording only to you. Even if every fact I said was false I would have won this if it were a debate as you have used ad homin attacks.
#2 I believe I answered your questions, what did I miss?
#3 Anabaptist were the first church. Organized under John, Then Jesus. They believed in baptism after salvation. This separates them from Catholics. If you want to call them something else so be it, however Jesus was a anabaptist :P
No stupid. I've actually studied this issue. The anabaptists came straight from the PROTESTANT REFORMATION. That's a fact that you can easily look up in the scholarly papers.
No, I said that didn't address what I SAID, idiot.
LOL, once again promoting your bullshit assertion that anabaptists were the first Christians. BULL-FUCKING-SHIT, retard. Site your sources that they were.
You are clearly more retarded than a bag of rocks, dum-dum.
@thunderbolt94 Insults... Again I have won as you can do nothing but insult me You look like a idiot. (Not calling you a idiot, just claiming you look like one)
I insult because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about and continue to regress in your willful ignorance on not only orthodox Christian theology, but also of church history. And no, you did not win you retard. You just quite simply are full of jack shit who has a fishing pole stuck up his ass.
And you would still be the same uneducated fool even if you still were a Christian, especially considering you still hold to inaccurate and heretical views that cannot be traced within Church.
Do yourself a favor and pick up a book! It'll make you less ignorant and decrease the chances of you saying more stupid crap!
@ebilly99 But you have asked me a lot of questions and insulted me the entire way, let me turn this on you. As a catholic you are aware that evolution is true, then from where did original sin come from. Was it Neanderthal man? The first creature that thought? How about Immaculate conception. Why was it necessary for a evolved creature? Without sin you have entire ideals are garbage.
Man = animal + soul. The animal part evolved. Man stopped dying when he was given a soul until that soul sinned.
Catholic understanding of original sin: the deprivation of original grace. None of what you said demonstrates a contradiction between biological evolution and the doctrine of original sin.
@thunderbolt94 WOW Convoluted much? When is man a man? The moment he uses a tool or understands death? If so the Gorilla is a living soul. How about when they can question existence? Then some of the mentally ill and baby's do not have souls. Homo-Neanderthal Soul or not?
Further evidence you have the intelligence of a retard. You only claim it's "convoluted" because you have have no understanding of the subject you speak of. Your comment is too stupid for a response. It REEKS of moving the goalpost. You tried to argue a contradiction between original sin and evolution, but NOW you say that it raises questions about the soul. My answer has nothing to do with the theology of the soul, only that their is no contradiction.
@thunderbolt94 No logic, You said Original sin means one must have a soul. I asked when did man gain there soul. Why you running. I am not moving any goalpost, I am simply asking a question. You must define what a soul is or it is a meaningless word.
No you dishonest piece of shit. I've explained to you that there is no contradiction between biological evolution and original sin. Me asking me to define the soul after I explained how there is no contradiction IS MOVING THE GOALPOST, you fucking moron! I've already answered your question when I said "Man stopped dying WHEN he was given a soul UNTIL THAT SOUL SINNED. Your question has been answered. Quit moving the goalpost.
@thunderbolt94 Wait man stopped dieing. (Hey joe you better dig up uncle bob) You make claims without evidence, Create magical "Souls" to fill the gaps in you asinine theory and then claim I am moving goalpost? LEARN LOGIC.
You don't even know what Logic is, dipshit! Have you actually taken a philosophy class? Have you taken critical thinking? I bet you a million dollars that I know more about philosophy (which Logic is a part of) than you do, so you shut your ignorant mouth. I answered your question, so go fuck yourself.
"to fill the gaps in you asinine theory"
My "theory" is the orthodox catholic understanding of original sin. Get over it, loser.
@thunderbolt94 Wow coming from you I will take that dipshit as a badge of honer. You already said you would pay for my schooling, I wont make you pay anymore. Ok the Asinine Orthodox theroy. At least we agree with the last part, you blew your mind, just long before you ever met me. I mean I am only half sure you are being serious and the other half sure you are trolling me, as no one is that dumb. Yep I insulted you, and its about time.
The sad fact remains that you are a deluded retard because claiming that the anabapstists were the first christians is like claiming that the Jehovah's witnesses or the Mormons were the first Christians. LMAO, loser.
Cite your sources. I can easily demonstrate to you that the anabaptists were not the first Christians.
Your point does not remain, dum-dum. The anabaptists do not have apostolic succession, hence cannot trace their roots the original apostles, let alone are not the first church or followed the early church. The anabaptists did not exist until years and YEARS later right up until the Protestant reformation. And your failure to accurately represent the hypostatic union is a testament to your failure to understand Christian theology. You = Fail!
You claimed that the anabaptists were the first Christians (demonstrably FALSE). You misrepresented Christian theology (hypostatic union AND omnipotence). You have done this with willful ignorance.
LOL, way to avoid my points. Doesn't address anything I said. I'm not angry. I'm just having fun with you because you obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about, especially when you claim anabaptists were the first Christians. ROFL
@thunderbolt94 First just cuzz he has 2 natures (though really that is silly) his godly nature was shared by him and the father. Also god is but a super powered human so it is silly to even say that he was 100% human and god. Thats the same as saying Superman is 100% man and super LOL
Hey Stupid. Jesus did not share his human nature with the other two members of the trinity, Jesus (the son) was begotten of the father, not the same as the father. Please, quit while you're still ahead.
@thunderbolt94 Jesus was Begoten as in sharing a nature. Jesus had existed from infinite past to infinite future. He was the Angel of God in the old testament. This is just sad.
He shared a divine nature, but was not the same in person as the father, and did not share a human nature with the father, hence why Jesus had two natures.
You are once again failing, retard. God the Father sent the son to die for the sins of the world by destroying the powers of satan and the bondage of sin, not to appease himself. Quit assuming Penal substitution. It's not biblical or historical christianity.
@thunderbolt94@thunderbolt94 Jesus was equal to the father and would not have left heaven unless he wanted to. He also had every chance to avoid the fate of death. According to your way of thinking Satan is = or greater then god? WOW. I always thought Satan was infinity weaker then god. Learn something new every day.
I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't know of anything I just wrote there. Just because you were a Christian for 26 years doesn't mean you were well read or understood the history and theology behind 2000 years of apostolic history.
@thunderbolt94 or the facts that you are using Catholic terminology? however I do believe I did a fair job for a country bumpkin. Before removing the speck from a brothers eye remove the beam from your own eye so you can see clearly.
The Catholic Church is the original church started by Christ. That is why I use "catholic terminology." And you still have false notions about the trinity and about Christian theology and the fact you completely refuse to allow christian theology to speak for itself. You going as far as to claim that Christians "sugar coat" their theology is further proof that you have an axe to grind.
"NO the anabaptist were the first and true church of god, The Catholics were created by Constantine to better control Rome."
BWAHAHAHA! You're kidding me right? Constantine never started a church. The catholic church already existed when Constantine came onto the scene? And the Anabaptists are the true church? LOL
@thunderbolt94 I am sorry you disagree but facts are facts. Anabaptist were first under John the Baptist but went on and followed Jesus after the baptism.
Anabapstist were not the first Christians. Anabaptism is a protestant sect that comes straight out of the 16th century reformation. So right there your assertion is bullshit. And Constantine did not start the Catholic church because the Catholic church already existed before he came onto the scene. Plus, Constantine was NEVER a bishop. Period.
I was going to make a reply but I fell asleep 5 times watching this. I will make a reply to the first video but Man 22 min to deal with a 4 min reply... And then attack me b/c I am not up on metaphysics?
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99 You really can't be "up" on metaphysics, since it's basically magic.
JulianFinn 1 month ago
@JulianFinn
Metaphysics = the philosophical study of different theories of reality.
You = fail!
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Reality=That Which Is Real=Not Subject To Interpretation
You=Snarky Asshole!
JulianFinn 1 month ago
@JulianFinn
That right there is a metaphysical claim, retard.
And yes, I'm an asshole to idiots like you who don't know jack shit about philosophy. Deal with it.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Right, from one claim, you extrapolate that I know nothing about philosophy. I'm so glad no one on the internet makes snap judgements, or resorts to open hostility and bile as a primary response mechanism.
Twat.
JulianFinn 1 month ago
@JulianFinn
Then don't make retarded statements like "You really can't be "up" on metaphysics, since it's basically magic." It makes you look like a complete fucking idiot.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@JulianFinn
And no, I'm not the twat who claimed that metaphysics was the study of magic.
Idiot.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Ah so the many worlds theroy that the 11 dimensions contain all possible realitys? I thought I did good to defend that with anything that is eternal must do all things. What did I miss?
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
No you did not do good in defending the idea that the foundation of existence (which we call God) someone must be able to do the logically contradictory.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 That's not me that's Christians that claim god can do things that are logically incompatible. I do not believe in infinite or timeless. I just gave Christians what they demanded and I am still a villain.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
Christians do not believe God can do the logically incompatible or logically impossible. You just misrepresented orthodox Christian thought.
watch?v=-vnLGNLIIK
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Sure they do, Timeless creator
Just and Mercyfull judge.
A Perfect creature creating imperfect things.
Eternal punishment and Eternal Bliss for a Choice and not action will being Just
All powerful and all knowing
ALL POWER-FULL
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
Hey dude, professional Christian theologians and philosophers don't argue that. I've already gave you a link to CartesianTheist's video that talks about this topic. If you actually want Christians to take what you're saying seriously, you actually have to understand their ACTUAL position, not strawman buddy.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Yes they do, they sugar coat it but this is exactly what they believe. I was a christian for 26 years and was studying to be a preacher. Timeless is the only answer to a infinite god... Yet once they do that god must always do nothing or become a temporal god. God is Just, can not allow sin... However sent his son to die on the cross to appease himself (Yes b/c he wrote the rules)
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
So if you were a Christian for 26 years, are you familiar with the seven ecumenical councils, the hypostatic union, the eucharist, reconcilliation, baptism, the writings of the early church like Justin Martyr, St. Augustine, St. Cyprian of Carthage, Tertullian, and then writers like Thomas Aquinas? Are you familiar with the theology behind the filioque, the schism of 1054, essence/energies distinction, the didache, the liturgy, the theology behind apostolic succession?
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 100% man and god, blessed Sacraments, atonement for sins, the visual sign of dieing and being reborn, what would you like from the early church? wether the holy spirit is from the father or son (Silly they are from both as god is father son and holy ghost) Didn't study that as I was a anabaptist and the only true church, Essence is a type of force that never depletes and has a will.Teaching of the 12, works over faith, and. there were only 12 Apostles, c-
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99 whoops missed the seven Councils is a conference of ecclesiastical dignitaries and theological experts convened to discuss and settle matters of Church doctrine and practice. This is funny as though the catholic church being infallible has changed its mind :P
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
The hypostatic union refutes your assertion that God sent himself to appease himself. The holy spirit proceeds ONLY from the Father THROUGH the son, and three persons =/= three gods, so you got that COMPLETELY wrong. Read the Nicene Creed as well as that alone refutes your bullshit claim about God sending himself to appease himself bullshit.
(cont)
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 God the father son and holy ghost share a essence. though they are 3 individual entities they share a nature. Thus when Jesus says I and the Father are one he is telling the truth. They share one nature. They are the god head. There is but one god in there persons. You know little of the nature of yhwh... and this from a atheist.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
And none of that proves your bullshit assertion that God sent himself to appease himself, Stupid. You just summarized the trinity but have failed to establish how that proves your bullshit assertion.
You are once again failing harder than a block of bricks.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 So are you telling me Jesus was not god? Or that the Father was not god? Or that they are different gods?
ebilly99 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Also insults are not what jesus would want. You are supposed to do all things in love. That was not very loving
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
Oh boo hoo, go cry me a river. Jesus also called the pharisees snakes a brood of vipers. Was Jesus not being Christ-like when he did that?
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Jesus claimed the Organization was a pit of vipers b/c of there actions to the poor. What actions have I committed? Is it b/c I no longer believe in fairy tales?
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
"What actions have I committed?"
By saying inaccurate and stupid shit, and doing it with willful ignorance.
"Is it b/c I no longer believe in fairy tales?"
Fairy tale is just another academic term for folk tale that stems from oral tradition. Care to try again?
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 What inaccurate things have been said. If I have said any and you can back it up then there is that.
The bible (OT) was not written down till captivity of the Jews in Babylon. Also Homer wrote the illide and the Odyssey so yeah.
Also Why is it I remain calm and you are so angry? Perhaps you should pray for Patience.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
1) You claimed that the anabaptists were the first Christians (demonstrably FALSE). You misrepresented Christian theology (hypostatic union AND omnipotence). You have done this with willful ignorance.
2) LOL, way to avoid my points. Doesn't address anything I said.
3) I'm not angry. I'm just having fun with you because you obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about, especially when you claim anabaptists were the first Christians. ROFL
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Acording only to you. Even if every fact I said was false I would have won this if it were a debate as you have used ad homin attacks.
#2 I believe I answered your questions, what did I miss?
#3 Anabaptist were the first church. Organized under John, Then Jesus. They believed in baptism after salvation. This separates them from Catholics. If you want to call them something else so be it, however Jesus was a anabaptist :P
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
No stupid. I've actually studied this issue. The anabaptists came straight from the PROTESTANT REFORMATION. That's a fact that you can easily look up in the scholarly papers.
No, I said that didn't address what I SAID, idiot.
LOL, once again promoting your bullshit assertion that anabaptists were the first Christians. BULL-FUCKING-SHIT, retard. Site your sources that they were.
You are clearly more retarded than a bag of rocks, dum-dum.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Insults... Again I have won as you can do nothing but insult me You look like a idiot. (Not calling you a idiot, just claiming you look like one)
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
I insult because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about and continue to regress in your willful ignorance on not only orthodox Christian theology, but also of church history. And no, you did not win you retard. You just quite simply are full of jack shit who has a fishing pole stuck up his ass.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Wow, If this is what I was like as a christian I am glad I left :P
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
And you would still be the same uneducated fool even if you still were a Christian, especially considering you still hold to inaccurate and heretical views that cannot be traced within Church.
Do yourself a favor and pick up a book! It'll make you less ignorant and decrease the chances of you saying more stupid crap!
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@ebilly99 But you have asked me a lot of questions and insulted me the entire way, let me turn this on you. As a catholic you are aware that evolution is true, then from where did original sin come from. Was it Neanderthal man? The first creature that thought? How about Immaculate conception. Why was it necessary for a evolved creature? Without sin you have entire ideals are garbage.
ebilly99 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ebilly99
Man = animal + soul. The animal part evolved. Man stopped dying when he was given a soul until that soul sinned.
Catholic understanding of original sin: the deprivation of original grace. None of what you said demonstrates a contradiction between biological evolution and the doctrine of original sin.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 WOW Convoluted much? When is man a man? The moment he uses a tool or understands death? If so the Gorilla is a living soul. How about when they can question existence? Then some of the mentally ill and baby's do not have souls. Homo-Neanderthal Soul or not?
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
"Convoluted much?"
Further evidence you have the intelligence of a retard. You only claim it's "convoluted" because you have have no understanding of the subject you speak of. Your comment is too stupid for a response. It REEKS of moving the goalpost. You tried to argue a contradiction between original sin and evolution, but NOW you say that it raises questions about the soul. My answer has nothing to do with the theology of the soul, only that their is no contradiction.
Idiot.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 No logic, You said Original sin means one must have a soul. I asked when did man gain there soul. Why you running. I am not moving any goalpost, I am simply asking a question. You must define what a soul is or it is a meaningless word.
ebilly99 1 month ago
Comment removed
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ebilly99
No you dishonest piece of shit. I've explained to you that there is no contradiction between biological evolution and original sin. Me asking me to define the soul after I explained how there is no contradiction IS MOVING THE GOALPOST, you fucking moron! I've already answered your question when I said "Man stopped dying WHEN he was given a soul UNTIL THAT SOUL SINNED. Your question has been answered. Quit moving the goalpost.
You are dense and stupid. Enuff said.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Wait man stopped dieing. (Hey joe you better dig up uncle bob) You make claims without evidence, Create magical "Souls" to fill the gaps in you asinine theory and then claim I am moving goalpost? LEARN LOGIC.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
You don't even know what Logic is, dipshit! Have you actually taken a philosophy class? Have you taken critical thinking? I bet you a million dollars that I know more about philosophy (which Logic is a part of) than you do, so you shut your ignorant mouth. I answered your question, so go fuck yourself.
"to fill the gaps in you asinine theory"
My "theory" is the orthodox catholic understanding of original sin. Get over it, loser.
You are so incredibly stupid it blows my mind.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Wow coming from you I will take that dipshit as a badge of honer. You already said you would pay for my schooling, I wont make you pay anymore. Ok the Asinine Orthodox theroy. At least we agree with the last part, you blew your mind, just long before you ever met me. I mean I am only half sure you are being serious and the other half sure you are trolling me, as no one is that dumb. Yep I insulted you, and its about time.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
The sad fact remains that you are a deluded retard because claiming that the anabapstists were the first christians is like claiming that the Jehovah's witnesses or the Mormons were the first Christians. LMAO, loser.
Cite your sources. I can easily demonstrate to you that the anabaptists were not the first Christians.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Ok Anabaptist followed the early church, not the first church. However my point remains.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
Your point does not remain, dum-dum. The anabaptists do not have apostolic succession, hence cannot trace their roots the original apostles, let alone are not the first church or followed the early church. The anabaptists did not exist until years and YEARS later right up until the Protestant reformation. And your failure to accurately represent the hypostatic union is a testament to your failure to understand Christian theology. You = Fail!
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
Comment removed
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@ebilly99
You claimed that the anabaptists were the first Christians (demonstrably FALSE). You misrepresented Christian theology (hypostatic union AND omnipotence). You have done this with willful ignorance.
LOL, way to avoid my points. Doesn't address anything I said. I'm not angry. I'm just having fun with you because you obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about, especially when you claim anabaptists were the first Christians. ROFL
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@ebilly99
"They share one nature."
No, stupid. Jesus had two natures: a divine nature and a human nature. You are failing once again. Are you trying to promote your heresy? ;)
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 First just cuzz he has 2 natures (though really that is silly) his godly nature was shared by him and the father. Also god is but a super powered human so it is silly to even say that he was 100% human and god. Thats the same as saying Superman is 100% man and super LOL
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
Hey Stupid. Jesus did not share his human nature with the other two members of the trinity, Jesus (the son) was begotten of the father, not the same as the father. Please, quit while you're still ahead.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Jesus was Begoten as in sharing a nature. Jesus had existed from infinite past to infinite future. He was the Angel of God in the old testament. This is just sad.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
"Jesus was Begoten as in sharing a nature"
He shared a divine nature, but was not the same in person as the father, and did not share a human nature with the father, hence why Jesus had two natures.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 Ok. Jesus sent himself to appease himself? What am I missing. Jesus is the judge anyway.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
"Jesus sent himself to appease himself?"
You are once again failing, retard. God the Father sent the son to die for the sins of the world by destroying the powers of satan and the bondage of sin, not to appease himself. Quit assuming Penal substitution. It's not biblical or historical christianity.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 @thunderbolt94 Jesus was equal to the father and would not have left heaven unless he wanted to. He also had every chance to avoid the fate of death. According to your way of thinking Satan is = or greater then god? WOW. I always thought Satan was infinity weaker then god. Learn something new every day.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't know of anything I just wrote there. Just because you were a Christian for 26 years doesn't mean you were well read or understood the history and theology behind 2000 years of apostolic history.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 or the facts that you are using Catholic terminology? however I do believe I did a fair job for a country bumpkin. Before removing the speck from a brothers eye remove the beam from your own eye so you can see clearly.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
The Catholic Church is the original church started by Christ. That is why I use "catholic terminology." And you still have false notions about the trinity and about Christian theology and the fact you completely refuse to allow christian theology to speak for itself. You going as far as to claim that Christians "sugar coat" their theology is further proof that you have an axe to grind.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 NO the anabaptist were the first and true church of god, The Catholics were created by Constantine to better control Rome.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
"NO the anabaptist were the first and true church of god, The Catholics were created by Constantine to better control Rome."
BWAHAHAHA! You're kidding me right? Constantine never started a church. The catholic church already existed when Constantine came onto the scene? And the Anabaptists are the true church? LOL
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@thunderbolt94 I am sorry you disagree but facts are facts. Anabaptist were first under John the Baptist but went on and followed Jesus after the baptism.
ebilly99 1 month ago
@ebilly99
Anabapstist were not the first Christians. Anabaptism is a protestant sect that comes straight out of the 16th century reformation. So right there your assertion is bullshit. And Constantine did not start the Catholic church because the Catholic church already existed before he came onto the scene. Plus, Constantine was NEVER a bishop. Period.
thunderbolt94 1 month ago
@ebilly99 Stop trying to delude yourself into thinking you know anything about Christianity. You have shit for brains.
Randomicity912 1 month ago
ONE HOUR AND TWENTY-ONE MINUTES!!!
RomaZeal 1 month ago