2:34:00 Paul Alan says Christians take Christianity too seriously! What are Christians supposed to take seriously if not Christianity? Each other?
What does it say about you as a Christian if you refuse to call out heresy when you hear it?
Is Paul saying Christians should be Cultural Christians?
Aren't Cultural Christians people who deny the Trinity and even God?
Are people who deny the Trinity even Christians?
Is Sam Tideman Christian if he denies the Trinity?
If you deny the Trinity, haven't you taken yourself out of the fold of Christianity making yourself Noahide or even proto-Muslim?
If you worship neither the Trinity nor God and don't even believe in the afterlife, are you not in fact atheist? Why should Christians take the views of atheists seriously?
2:35:00 "Relational" - Christian fellowship which can only be sustained when Christians agree to disagree with each other by never calling out each other's heresies eg Christian Universalism - identified as heretical since the 6th century.
Christian universalism was officially condemned as heresy at the Fifth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople in 553 A.D. This council, convened by Roman Emperor Justinian, specifically targeted Origenism, anathematizing the doctrine of apokatastasis (the ultimate restoration of all souls) alongside other speculative teachings attributed to Origen, such as the pre-existence of souls.
2:36:00 Mark says Christians disagreeing with each other produces "horrible outcomes".
Does this mean he thinks Christians should *never* discuss Christian doctrine or ever call out heretics?
If no heresies are ever called out, doesn't this mean Christianity can be anything anyone claiming to be Christian say it is?
If they disagree with each other, doesn't it mean that it will be the most powerful Christians who get to say what Christianity is?
Are the most powerful Christians always honest, reasonable and fair in their conclusions and actions?
Are Luke Thompson and Jedidiah Paschall reasonable men if they refuse to have an honest and civil discussion about Christian Universalism while always using overpopulated streams to hide their untenable propositions?
Luke Thompson even admitted that his tactic of posting, ghosting and blocking is his way of getting away with his heresy.
Does PVK have a religious duty to call out heresy or is his purpose just to collect people who only want to pretend to be Christian who care nothing about Christian doctrine?
In TLC it is Luke Thompson who is most powerful - apart from PVK - because he has the most live viewers.
What does it say about TLC if the most powerful member in this internet community is neuro-divergent and incoherent with more hatte-watchers than the others?
Historically, aren't the most powerful Christians absolute monarchs supported by the Pope?
Didn't the Founding Fathers absolutely reject absolute monarchy?
500 years later, isn't it about time Christians discussed what could have prevented the Wars of the Reformation, the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, the end of Christendom and the replacement of patriarchy with matriarchy?
The Founding Fathers read Edward Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Gibbon attributed the decline and fall of the Roman Empire to Christianity. Acting on Gibbon's thesis, the Founding Fathers separated the church from their state with the First Amendment supported by 2:256 of the Koran. (This is my most important proposition directly affecting Americans which it seems no American wants to discuss because they cannot get beyond how much they hate my proposed legal system which would in fact solve all their economic, social and political problems.)
2:36:00 CLAIRE KHAW joins to discuss the ugly truth which doesn't care about your feelings. Is it so wrong of me to insist in relating to members of TLC as honest and reasonable people operating on facts and logic?
2:42:00 Jews, Christians and Muslims - adherents of the Abrahamic religions - can agree that there is only one Abrahamic God, however much they hate each otheer. This means that Jews, Christians and Muslims only disagree with each other on God's nature and attributes. Jews and Muslims think He is one and do not associate anything with God eg Jesus or Mary. Christians think He is Jesus. If Jews and Muslims took their own religion seriously, they would have to agree on a position to take on Christianity. However, because Christians are the ones with the three global empires who have the biggest bombs, armies and navies, these Jews and Muslims are afraid and ignore their religious duty to explain why idolatry is a bad thing even if God does not exist to punish anyone for anything.
I am hoping to be given the opportunity to explain the harm of idolatry even if God does not exist to punish anyone for anything.
2:43:00 My converting to Islam is not going to make Secular Koranism an easier sell to atheists and nihilists.
2:44:00 Secular Koranism adoopts a literal but permissive interpretation of the Koran.
2:43:25@βρεττςIt helped you if you actually believed in what you’re pushing. But you don’t believe in God no one will follow you as a leader.
I believe in the logic of my propositions. I also believe that most Westerners do not operate on facts and logic which is considered by the wise to be a survival strategy. Why is a survival strategy in the course of being banned by the matriarchy? It is the matriarchy that is foolish and it is Paul Alan who refuses to engage in the world of ideas. He calls Islam unethical and refuses to explain how and why claiming he does not want to hurt my feelings or the feelings of Muslims.
If he thinks there is something unethical about Islam, why won't he define what he understands by ethics? If he is saying that Islam is immoral, let us hear him define morality.
2:44:23@shari6063Propositions can always be true but the opposite can also be true. And people don’t derive meaning from propositions. Just information. Which doesn’t bring repentance. Which is transfiguration.
How about the proposition that God exists to reward good and punish evil in this life and the next, measure for measure?
How about the proposition that the purpose of our life is to pass the examination of showing that we know the difference between good and evil in theory and in practice?
How about the proposition that everyone seems to think they know the difference between good and evil while being utterly unable to define it?
How about the proposition that people who refuse to take the afterlife seriously are in fact functionally atheist however much they talk about Christianity and Jesus?
No comments:
Post a Comment