Total posts: 8,178
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
You to go to your app store for discord to listen live. Otherwise recordings will be uploaded to YouTube and there's multiple recordings so send me a message for more information or once you have a discord account.
Is there any privacy concerns?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I think GP is russian AI.
Is it pro Trump?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Again, no one said gangs are not a problem. You continue to argue with your own imagination.If you actually cared about steelmanning anyone's position you would not need to be told this repeatedly. When I pointed this out initially you asked why that wasn't addressed regardless of the fact that it was a strawman at the outset. Steelmanning is the opposite of that, the whole idea is that you ask these questions to yourself first not place the burden on anyone else to ask and answer it.
Great advice. Hope he takes it. Is steelmanning a new word?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Sleep and happiness frequencies, I use less often.I admit, its great to be able to turn on some sound and just feel happy, but my main goal is to increase intelligence, which could help me much more in life than just feeling happy right now.
Can’t happiness compensate you for your low intelligence?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Shouldn't we be buying Slovenia? I could use 3 or 4 sex workers.
Trump should have consulted you before he married a Slovenian.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
The early church worshipped one God and believed in a subordinate Son.I'm not sure this fits the constraints you described any more than the Trinity. And most Trinitarians see the Trinity as describing a divine mystery, rather than an explanation. I haven't seen a more specific and consistent explanation that fits all the verses you described, so "divine mystery" is probably as close as anyone can get if they hold the Bible as authoritative.
Divine mysteries are spiritual truths that were formerly hidden but are now meant to be understood. Man's mysteries are something else altogether and can be permanently impossible to understand. Scholars declare the trinity is a mystery that is beyond understanding and we agree!
Trinitarians say the doctrine of the Trinity is a mystery, whereas Unitarians say it is not a mystery, but a confusing compilation of tenets introduced by men ..
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I would actually like to see this bill-or-whatever-you-call-it be enacted in modern day USA and see a hefty chunk of all cops lose their jobs virtually simultaneously.No, seriously. Get better police training. I am not saying I know a way, I am just saying we as members of society need it.
It is too much to ask teachers and police officers to correct a broken morality that leads to increase crime and delinquency.
Created:
-->
@Savant
This is how you get too much funding allocated to athletes, legacies and the children of rich daddies.We have that anyway with limited quotas. Having better online degrees would be a huge economic boost, though there's probably room for corruption in every system.
Online degrees have grown in number after Covid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
People should not be fighting amongst ourselves. Disappointed. Dunno why we have people professionally fighting for money.That sounds like a mercenary, doesn't it?
Boxing is a sport.
Created:
Posted in:
Donald Trump is an ignorant, overconfident, narcissistic, grievance-ridden man — a dumb man, who over time has attracted around him an asteroid field of dumb allies who are but lesser versions of himself.
The president-elect is renewing unsuccessful calls he made during his first term for the U.S. to buy Greenland from Denmark, adding to the list of allied countries with which he’s picking fights even before taking office on Jan. 20.
In a Sunday announcement naming his ambassador to Denmark, Trump wrote that, “For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.”
Trump again having designs on Greenland comes after the president-elect suggested over the weekend that the U.S. could retake control of the Panama Canal if something isn’t done to ease rising shipping costs required for using the waterway linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
He’s also been suggesting that Canada become the 51st U.S. state and referred to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “governor” of the “Great State of Canada.”
Stephen Farnsworth, a political science professor at the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Virginia, said Trump tweaking friendly countries harkens back to an aggressive style he used during his days in business.
Created:
Histrionic Personality DisorderHistrionic personality disorder (HPD) is a mentalcondition that causes people to act in a dramatic and emotional way to getattention. It's characterized by a pattern of behaviors that usuallystarts in early adulthood.
We don’t need to know the diagnoses of your condition. We just need to know you are being treated. Because calling, "Mommy, mommy, look at me, look at me", isn’t going to improve your condition.
Created:
Posted in:
Historical Background of the Trinity
The current mainstream teaching in Christianity is that God is a coequal, coeternal, one-substance trinity, and that Jesus Christ is God. This doctrine is considered by many as the cornerstone of Christianity, but where did this doctrine come from? The historical record is overwhelming that the church of the first three centuries did not worship God as a coequal, coeternal, consubstantial, one-substance three in one mysterious godhead. The early church worshipped one God and believed in a subordinate Son. The trinity originated with Babylon, and was passed on to most of the world's religions. This polytheistic (believing in more than one god) trinitarianism was intertwined with Greek religion and philosophy and slowly worked its way into Christian thought and creeds some 300 years after Christ. The idea of "God the Son" is Babylonian paganism and mythology that was grafted into Christianity. Worshipping "God the Son" is idolatry, and idolatry is Biblically condemned; it breaks the first great commandment of God of not having any gods before him (Exodus 20:3). Then three centuries after Christ the corrupt emperor Constantine forced the minority opinion of the trinity upon the council of Nicea. The Christian church went downward from there; in fact some of the creeds and councils actually contradict each other. The council of Nicea 325 said that "Jesus Christ is God," the council of Constantinople 381 said that "the Holy Spirit is God," the council of Ephesus 431 said that "human beings are totally depraved," the council of Chalcedon 451 said that "Jesus Christ is both man and God." If you follow the logic here then first you have Jesus Christ as God, then you have man totally depraved, and then you have Jesus Christ as man and God. If Jesus Christ is both man and God does this mean that God is also totally depraved? Well maybe the doctrine of the coequal, coeternal, one-substance, mysterious three in one triune godhead is deprived of any historical foundation tying it into the Christianity of the Bible and the Christianity of the first three centuries. However the historical information ties the trinity into various pagan origins.
And yet most Christian churches continue to teach and believe the doctrine that God is a coequal, coeternal, one-substance, mysterious three in one triune godhead, and that Jesus Christ is God, and that the trinity is "the cornerstone of Christianity".
The current mainstream teaching in Christianity is that God is a coequal, coeternal, one-substance trinity, and that Jesus Christ is God. This doctrine is considered by many as the cornerstone of Christianity, but where did this doctrine come from? The historical record is overwhelming that the church of the first three centuries did not worship God as a coequal, coeternal, consubstantial, one-substance three in one mysterious godhead. The early church worshipped one God and believed in a subordinate Son. The trinity originated with Babylon, and was passed on to most of the world's religions. This polytheistic (believing in more than one god) trinitarianism was intertwined with Greek religion and philosophy and slowly worked its way into Christian thought and creeds some 300 years after Christ. The idea of "God the Son" is Babylonian paganism and mythology that was grafted into Christianity. Worshipping "God the Son" is idolatry, and idolatry is Biblically condemned; it breaks the first great commandment of God of not having any gods before him (Exodus 20:3). Then three centuries after Christ the corrupt emperor Constantine forced the minority opinion of the trinity upon the council of Nicea. The Christian church went downward from there; in fact some of the creeds and councils actually contradict each other. The council of Nicea 325 said that "Jesus Christ is God," the council of Constantinople 381 said that "the Holy Spirit is God," the council of Ephesus 431 said that "human beings are totally depraved," the council of Chalcedon 451 said that "Jesus Christ is both man and God." If you follow the logic here then first you have Jesus Christ as God, then you have man totally depraved, and then you have Jesus Christ as man and God. If Jesus Christ is both man and God does this mean that God is also totally depraved? Well maybe the doctrine of the coequal, coeternal, one-substance, mysterious three in one triune godhead is deprived of any historical foundation tying it into the Christianity of the Bible and the Christianity of the first three centuries. However the historical information ties the trinity into various pagan origins.
And yet most Christian churches continue to teach and believe the doctrine that God is a coequal, coeternal, one-substance, mysterious three in one triune godhead, and that Jesus Christ is God, and that the trinity is "the cornerstone of Christianity".
Created:
-->
@sadolite
"Trump could never pass a mental competency test," And you think you could?
The more he fails the closer it brings him to Trump. It’s called going MAGA.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Jesus Christ, Will you moderators get rid of this bot.
Did you check my post?
Trump’s Truth Social is a social media company.
Created:
Posted in:
Christology and the Jesus Predicate Problem
The doctrine of the Trinity, as noted earlier, is motivated by the Christian conviction that Jesus was, in some sense, divine. Jesus however was born, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he did not understand Chinese; he believed that David was the author of all the Psalms. These properties are, it would seem, incompatible with divinity and, indeed, there appear to be a great many predicates that are true of Jesus which, it would seem, could not be true of God and vice versa.
This is the Jesus Predicate Problem: we do not want to ascribe all the predicates that are true of Jesus to God simpliciter or, in particular, to God the Father. We do not, for example, want to hold that the Father suffered on the Cross—the heresy of Patripassionism. God, as traditionally understood is impassible—he cannot be subject to suffering, pain or harm. Moreover God has no beginning in time or end, and is, according to most orthodox accounts atemporal insofar as he is eternalrather than merely everlasting: he exists outside of time in what is, from the perspective of his subjectivity, the eternal now. Jesus however was born at a particular time and lived his life in time, so to maintain God’s atemporality, we cannot allow predicates that assign temporal properties to Jesus to God, or in particular to God the Father. In general, there are a range of predicates that are true of Jesus that, we want to hold, are not true of God the Father or of the Holy Spirit, and which we would hesitate to ascribe to God simpliciter insofar as they appear to be inconsistent with essential features of divinity.
To avoid the migration of Jesus’ predicates to other Persons of the Trinity, we need to create enough logical space between the Persons to block inferences from claims about Jesus to claims about the Father so that, in general, “Jesus Fs” does not entail “God the Father Fs” where “x Fs” says either that x has a property, is a certain kind of thing or does a certain kind of action. The trouble with Monarchian accounts, which make the Trinity “too tight,” is that they obliterate the logical space between the Persons that would block such inferences. Since Monarchians cannot use Trinitarian doctrine to block these inferences they use Christology to do the job—by either adopting very high Christologies or very low ones. The wedge has to be driven somewhere and, if there isn’t enough logical space to drive it in between the First and Second Persons of the Trinity, it has to go in between the Second Person, the divine Logos which is from the beginning with God and is God, and whatever it is that is the subject of Jesus predicates.
The doctrine of the Trinity, as noted earlier, is motivated by the Christian conviction that Jesus was, in some sense, divine. Jesus however was born, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he did not understand Chinese; he believed that David was the author of all the Psalms. These properties are, it would seem, incompatible with divinity and, indeed, there appear to be a great many predicates that are true of Jesus which, it would seem, could not be true of God and vice versa.
This is the Jesus Predicate Problem: we do not want to ascribe all the predicates that are true of Jesus to God simpliciter or, in particular, to God the Father. We do not, for example, want to hold that the Father suffered on the Cross—the heresy of Patripassionism. God, as traditionally understood is impassible—he cannot be subject to suffering, pain or harm. Moreover God has no beginning in time or end, and is, according to most orthodox accounts atemporal insofar as he is eternalrather than merely everlasting: he exists outside of time in what is, from the perspective of his subjectivity, the eternal now. Jesus however was born at a particular time and lived his life in time, so to maintain God’s atemporality, we cannot allow predicates that assign temporal properties to Jesus to God, or in particular to God the Father. In general, there are a range of predicates that are true of Jesus that, we want to hold, are not true of God the Father or of the Holy Spirit, and which we would hesitate to ascribe to God simpliciter insofar as they appear to be inconsistent with essential features of divinity.
To avoid the migration of Jesus’ predicates to other Persons of the Trinity, we need to create enough logical space between the Persons to block inferences from claims about Jesus to claims about the Father so that, in general, “Jesus Fs” does not entail “God the Father Fs” where “x Fs” says either that x has a property, is a certain kind of thing or does a certain kind of action. The trouble with Monarchian accounts, which make the Trinity “too tight,” is that they obliterate the logical space between the Persons that would block such inferences. Since Monarchians cannot use Trinitarian doctrine to block these inferences they use Christology to do the job—by either adopting very high Christologies or very low ones. The wedge has to be driven somewhere and, if there isn’t enough logical space to drive it in between the First and Second Persons of the Trinity, it has to go in between the Second Person, the divine Logos which is from the beginning with God and is God, and whatever it is that is the subject of Jesus predicates.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
The whole ordeal is suspicious. Hours before the Republican coronation oops I mean convention when Project 2025 is at the number one google search,a registered republican nicks Trumps ear whereupon the secret service whose sole purpose is to protect the president,lifts a potus bleeding from the head DURING AN ACTIVE SHOOTING and provides unobstructed multiple photo ops while the crowd is relatively calm. Then again bleeding from the head Trump asks to get his shoes. Huh? Then he's allowed more fist bumps and photo ops which leave his head and torso completely exposed if there was more shooting which they didn't know at this point while he was allowed still more head exposure and fist bumps until he was at last driven away. The whole thing reeks.
Trump would not have passed his own apprentice test. Instead of fight, fight it would have called for him to be fired.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
As for relaxing, well, my days are rather relaxing. I sleep for 12 hours a day.
And you still keep a 22 point program. Good work!
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Money is necessary for life.
So is a proper diet.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I dont know. I dont remember Gp ever leaving the site for so long. Maybe he found a job.
Have you tried messaging him?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I am not vegan, I just admit that it’s about as cheap as it gets unless you have your own farm where you farm sheep or chickens or cows.
Is the money you saved worth the sacrifice?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Canadaparrot
Me either
You haven’t been here long enough to tell the difference.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
I was suggesting that like most tyrants, Hitler preferred the seclusion of Berlin or Bavaria, rather than the Russian front.
The Nazis viewed the Soviets as ideological enemies, seeing communism as a direct threat to their fascist beliefs. This fueled a deep-seated fear and hatred, particularly as the war progressed and the brutality of the Eastern Front became apparent.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Reaching 150 might be your ticket to survival.I just want to know a lot. Kinda like google AI, but not as weird.
Where do you find time to learn relax during your busy schedule.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Well, I think that verification would be self evident.If it weren't, you would have already have been let down.
It wasn’t to Ronald Reagan. Even as president there was an attempt on his life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Showering benefits shampoo and shower gel retailers and manufacturers.And I think that sniffing peoples armpits and arses, is no longer a preferred means of communication anyway.
Smelly armpits and arses are not socially welcoming.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I noticed you didn’t mention workingI dont need to work for a living. Plus, working means you have less time to think about important stuff.What is the point of having an IQ of 150I dont know, but I want it.
Maybe after you reach IQ 150 you will realize you need to work for a living. Reaching 150 might be your ticket to survival.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Now, these 22 are what I do every day. I want to increase my IQ to at least 150 because I dont want to be a 120 IQ retard anymore.
I noticed you didn’t mention working. What is the point of having anIQ of 150 and not being employable.
Created:
Posted in:
What did Jesus say about the Trinity?
He did not specifically refer to the term Trinity but did describe God in what we would call trinitarian terms or formulations. Jesus described God as "the Father", he described himself as God's son, and one with God the Father, and described the Holy Spirit as somehow proceeding from both the Father and himself.
Jesus went a step further.
John 10:30-38
I and the Father are one.”
31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
John 14:9
Don't you know who I am? If you have seen me, you have seen the Father. How can you ask me to show you the Father?
The final catch.
John 1:In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
What does St Thomas Aquinas say about the Trinity?
St. Thomas Aquinas begins his teaching on the Trinity by asserting that "God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy Spirit," and that these are not three but one God. Further, God's Word is also part of his existence. Aquinas calls speech the offspring of the intellect, which he conceives as its father.
What did St. Augustine write about the Trinity?
Augustine states in regard to their work, “Father does some things, the Son other things, and the Holy Spirit yet others” (Augustine Ch. 5.8). The Holy Spirit is the spirit of both the Father and the Son and was not begotten. Just like the Father and the Son, the Holy Spirit has no beginning or end.
What verse explains the Trinity?
John 14:10
Though there is a complete mutual indwelling of the Father and the Son, the Father and the Son remain distinct persons within the Trinity, as does the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14), and the three of them still constitute only one Being in three persons.
What is the simplest way to explain the Trinity?
There is one God, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Trinity, or Holy Trinity, is a way of describing God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
He did not specifically refer to the term Trinity but did describe God in what we would call trinitarian terms or formulations. Jesus described God as "the Father", he described himself as God's son, and one with God the Father, and described the Holy Spirit as somehow proceeding from both the Father and himself.
Jesus went a step further.
John 10:30-38
I and the Father are one.”
31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
John 14:9
Don't you know who I am? If you have seen me, you have seen the Father. How can you ask me to show you the Father?
The final catch.
John 1:In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
What does St Thomas Aquinas say about the Trinity?
St. Thomas Aquinas begins his teaching on the Trinity by asserting that "God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy Spirit," and that these are not three but one God. Further, God's Word is also part of his existence. Aquinas calls speech the offspring of the intellect, which he conceives as its father.
What did St. Augustine write about the Trinity?
Augustine states in regard to their work, “Father does some things, the Son other things, and the Holy Spirit yet others” (Augustine Ch. 5.8). The Holy Spirit is the spirit of both the Father and the Son and was not begotten. Just like the Father and the Son, the Holy Spirit has no beginning or end.
What verse explains the Trinity?
John 14:10
Though there is a complete mutual indwelling of the Father and the Son, the Father and the Son remain distinct persons within the Trinity, as does the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14), and the three of them still constitute only one Being in three persons.
What is the simplest way to explain the Trinity?
There is one God, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Trinity, or Holy Trinity, is a way of describing God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
Created:
Posted in:
Thomas Aquinas' Trinitarian theology has been criticized as proposing an abstract notion of God that is divorced from salvation history and that is supported by tedious and ultimately incomprehensible explication.
Trinity definition provided by the Catholic Church:
The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the “consubstantial Trinity”. The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: “The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God.” In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), “Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature.”
The divine persons are really distinct from one another. “God is one but not solitary.” “Father”, “Son”, “Holy Spirit” are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: “He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son.” They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: “It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds.” The divine Unity is Triune.
Created:
Posted in:
How the Trinity can be proven mathematically.
Trinity and Identity
Can one consistently believe (1) – (7)? It depends on how we read the “is” in (1) – (6). If we read it throughout as the “is” of strict identity, as “=” the answer is no. Identity is an equivalence relation: it is reflexive, symmetric and transitive, which is to say, for all x, y and z the following hold:
Reflexivity: x = x
Symmetry: If x = y then y = x
Transitivity: If x = y and y = z then x = y
In addition, identity is an unrestricted indiscernibilty relation for all properties, which is to say it obeys Leibniz’ Law, understood as the Indiscernibility of Identicals:
LL: If x = y then for all properties, P, x has P if and only if y has P
This is bad news. Suppose we read the “is” as “=” in (1) – (6). Then it follows from (1) and (2), by symmetry and transitivity, that the Father is the Son, which contradicts (4). Put another way, given LL, (1) entails that God has all the same properties as the Father, including the property of being identical with the Father insofar as everything has the property of self-identity. (2) says that the Son likewise has all the same properties as God. It follows that, since God has the property of being identical with the Son, the Son also has the property of being identical with the Father, which contradicts (4).
These formal features of identity are non-negotiable in the way that the four-sidedness of squares is: God cannot evade them any more than he can make a square with only three sides. God can make triangles—and pentagons, chiliagons or figures with any number of sides he pleases—but he cannot make such things squares. So, assuming that “God,” “Father,” “Son” and “Holy Spirit” don’t change their reference, the “is” that figures in (1) – (6) cannot be the “is” of strict identity.
Created:
Posted in:
The Distinctness of Persons
Historically, Monarchianism—in particular Modalism (or Sabellianism), the doctrine that the Persons are “modes,” aspects, or roles of God—has been more tempting to Christians than tri-theism. The fundamental problem orthodox Latin Trinitarians face is that of maintaining a distinction between Trinitarian Persons sufficient to avoid Sabellianism, since orthodox Christians hold that the Persons of the Trinity are not merely aspects of God or God under different descriptions but in some sense distinct individuals such that Father ≠ Son ≠ Holy Spirit.
Christians hold that there are properties that distinguish the Persons. First, there are intra–Trinitarian relational properties the Persons have in virtue of their relations to other Trinitarian Persons: the Father begets the Son, but the Son does not beget the Son; the Spirit proceeds from the Father (and the Son) but neither the Father nor the Son proceeds from the Father (and the Son). Secondly, the Persons of the Trinity are distinguished in virtue of their distinctive “missions”—their activities in the world. The Second Person of the Trinity becomes incarnate, is born, suffers, dies, is buried, rises from the dead and ascends to the Father. According to orthodox doctrine, however, the same is not true of the Father (or Holy Spirit) and, indeed, the doctrine that the Father became incarnate, suffered and died is the heresy of patripassionism.
According to Latin Trinitarians, God, the Trinity, is an individual rather than a community of individuals sharing the same divine nature and each Person of the Trinity is that individual. Given this account however, the trick is to block inferences from the ascription of properties characteristic of one Trinitarian Person to the ascription of those properties to other Persons. Moreover, since it is held that the Persons cannot be individuated by their worldly activities, Latin Trinitarians, whose project is to explain the distinctions between Persons, must develop an account of the intra–Trinitarian relations that distinguish them—a project which is at best speculative.
Historically, Monarchianism—in particular Modalism (or Sabellianism), the doctrine that the Persons are “modes,” aspects, or roles of God—has been more tempting to Christians than tri-theism. The fundamental problem orthodox Latin Trinitarians face is that of maintaining a distinction between Trinitarian Persons sufficient to avoid Sabellianism, since orthodox Christians hold that the Persons of the Trinity are not merely aspects of God or God under different descriptions but in some sense distinct individuals such that Father ≠ Son ≠ Holy Spirit.
Christians hold that there are properties that distinguish the Persons. First, there are intra–Trinitarian relational properties the Persons have in virtue of their relations to other Trinitarian Persons: the Father begets the Son, but the Son does not beget the Son; the Spirit proceeds from the Father (and the Son) but neither the Father nor the Son proceeds from the Father (and the Son). Secondly, the Persons of the Trinity are distinguished in virtue of their distinctive “missions”—their activities in the world. The Second Person of the Trinity becomes incarnate, is born, suffers, dies, is buried, rises from the dead and ascends to the Father. According to orthodox doctrine, however, the same is not true of the Father (or Holy Spirit) and, indeed, the doctrine that the Father became incarnate, suffered and died is the heresy of patripassionism.
According to Latin Trinitarians, God, the Trinity, is an individual rather than a community of individuals sharing the same divine nature and each Person of the Trinity is that individual. Given this account however, the trick is to block inferences from the ascription of properties characteristic of one Trinitarian Person to the ascription of those properties to other Persons. Moreover, since it is held that the Persons cannot be individuated by their worldly activities, Latin Trinitarians, whose project is to explain the distinctions between Persons, must develop an account of the intra–Trinitarian relations that distinguish them—a project which is at best speculative.
Created:
Posted in:
St Thomas Aquinas sees the same sameness in the Trinity.
Aquinas says that the alleged consequence would follow only if the persons were the same both in thing and in concept. But they are not; they are merely the same thing.
This move is puzzling. Aquinas holds that the three are not merely similar or derived from the same source, but are in some strong sense the same, but not identical (i.e. numerically the same) which he appears to understand as sameness in both thing and concept. Even this last is surprising; one would think that for Aquinas “sameness in thing” just is identity, and that “sameness in concept” would mean that we apply the same concept to some apparent things (whether or not they are in fact one or many). Christopher Hughes holds that Aquinas is simply confused, his desire for orthodoxy having led him into this (and other) necessary falsehoods. On Hughes’s reading, Aquinas does think of “sameness in thing” as identity, but he incoherently holds it to be non-transitive (i.e. if A and B are identical, and B and C are identical, it doesn’t follow that A and C are identical), while in some contexts assuming (correctly) that it is transitive (Hughes 1989, 217–40).
Created:
Posted in:
There is only one God
If each Person of the Trinity is distinct and yet fully God, then should we conclude that there is more than one God? Obviously we cannot, for Scripture is clear that there is only one God: “There is no other God besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me. Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other” (Isaiah 45:21-22; see also 44:6-8; Exodus 15:11; Deuteronomy 4:35; 6:4-5; 32:39; 1 Samuel 2:2; 1 Kings 8:60).
Having seen that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, that they are each fully God, and that there is nonetheless only one God, we must conclude that all three Persons are the same God. In other words, there is one God who exists as three distinct Persons.
If there is one passage which most clearly brings all of this together, it is Matthew 28:19: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” First, notice that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinguished as distinct Persons. We baptize into the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Second, notice that each Person must be deity because they are all placed on the same level. In fact, would Jesus have us baptize in the name of a mere creature? Surely not. Therefore each of the Persons into whose name we are to be baptized must be deity.
Third, notice that although the three divine Persons are distinct, we are baptized into their name (singular), not names (plural). The three Persons are distinct, yet only constitute one name. This can only be if they share one essence.
Created:
Posted in:
Theological Constraints
a. Monotheism
Christians claim to be monotheists and yet, given the doctrine of the Trinity, hold that there are three beings who are fully divine, viz. God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The first Trinity puzzle is that of explaining how we can attribute full divinity to the Persons of the Trinity without either compromising monotheism or undermining claims about the distinctness of Trinitarian persons.
Orthodox accounts of the Trinity hover uneasily between Sabellianism—which construes Trinitarian Persons as mere phases, aspects or offices of one God—and tri-theism, according to which the Persons are three Gods. Tri-theism is unacceptable since it is incompatible with the historical Christian commitment to monotheism inherited from the Hebrew tradition.
The fundamental problem for Trinitarian orthodoxy is to develop a doctrine of the Trinity that fits in the space between Sabellianism (or other versions of Monarchianism) and tri-theism. For Social Trinitarians in particular the problem has been one of articulating an account of the Trinity that affirms the individuality of the Persons and their relationships with one another without lapsing into tri-theism.
Nicea opened the discussion of the “theology” of the Trinity, understood as the exploration of the relations amongst Persons—the “immanent Trinity” as distinct from the “economic Trinity,” that is the Trinity understood in terms of the distinct roles of the Persons in their worldly activities, in creation, redemption and sanctification. Nicea cashed out the homoousios claim by noting that the Son was “begotten, not made” indicating that he was, as noted in a parallel formula then current, “out of the Father’s ousia.” Furthermore, the Holy Spirit was declared at Constantinople to have the same sort of ontological status as the Son. So in the Fourth Century, at the Councils of Nicea and Constantinople, and through the work of the Cappadocians, the agenda for Trinitarian theology was set and the boundaries of orthodoxy were marked.
Within these parameters, the Trinity doctrine poses problems of three sorts: first, theological problems in reconciling theological doctrines concerning the character and properties of God with Trinitarian claims; secondly, theological puzzles that arise from Christological claims in particular; and finally logical puzzles posed by the Trinity doctrine itself. It remains to be seen whether it is possible to formulate a coherent doctrine of the Trinity within the constraints of Christian orthodoxy.
a. Monotheism
Christians claim to be monotheists and yet, given the doctrine of the Trinity, hold that there are three beings who are fully divine, viz. God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The first Trinity puzzle is that of explaining how we can attribute full divinity to the Persons of the Trinity without either compromising monotheism or undermining claims about the distinctness of Trinitarian persons.
Orthodox accounts of the Trinity hover uneasily between Sabellianism—which construes Trinitarian Persons as mere phases, aspects or offices of one God—and tri-theism, according to which the Persons are three Gods. Tri-theism is unacceptable since it is incompatible with the historical Christian commitment to monotheism inherited from the Hebrew tradition.
The fundamental problem for Trinitarian orthodoxy is to develop a doctrine of the Trinity that fits in the space between Sabellianism (or other versions of Monarchianism) and tri-theism. For Social Trinitarians in particular the problem has been one of articulating an account of the Trinity that affirms the individuality of the Persons and their relationships with one another without lapsing into tri-theism.
Nicea opened the discussion of the “theology” of the Trinity, understood as the exploration of the relations amongst Persons—the “immanent Trinity” as distinct from the “economic Trinity,” that is the Trinity understood in terms of the distinct roles of the Persons in their worldly activities, in creation, redemption and sanctification. Nicea cashed out the homoousios claim by noting that the Son was “begotten, not made” indicating that he was, as noted in a parallel formula then current, “out of the Father’s ousia.” Furthermore, the Holy Spirit was declared at Constantinople to have the same sort of ontological status as the Son. So in the Fourth Century, at the Councils of Nicea and Constantinople, and through the work of the Cappadocians, the agenda for Trinitarian theology was set and the boundaries of orthodoxy were marked.
Within these parameters, the Trinity doctrine poses problems of three sorts: first, theological problems in reconciling theological doctrines concerning the character and properties of God with Trinitarian claims; secondly, theological puzzles that arise from Christological claims in particular; and finally logical puzzles posed by the Trinity doctrine itself. It remains to be seen whether it is possible to formulate a coherent doctrine of the Trinity within the constraints of Christian orthodoxy.
Created:
Posted in:
Catholic view on the Trinity.
"Now this is the Catholic faith: We worship one God in the Trinity and the Trinity in unity, without either confusing the persons or dividing the substance; for the person of the Father is one, the Son's is another, the Holy Spirit's another; but the Godhead of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is one, their glory ...
St. Thomas Aquinas begins his teaching on the Trinity by asserting that "God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy Spirit," and that these are not three but one God. Further, God's Word is also part of his existence.
What Shila posted about the Trinity.
For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is all one. … So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.
1 John 5:7
There are three in heaven who prove it is true. They are the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit. These three are one.
God is a spirit, he appears to us as the Holy Spirit. But the two are one. God also came to earth as Jesus.
John 1:In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning.
John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
So god is a spirit, he appears to us as the Holy Spirit, he also appeared to us as Jesus. But the three are one.
Note the three concepts are the same.
Created:
Posted in:
Why is the Trinity hard to explain?
The doctrine of the Trinity poses a deep and difficult problem. On the one hand, it says that there are three distinct persons— Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—and that each of these persons “is God.” On the other hand, it says that there is one and only one God. So it appears to involve a contradiction.
The doctrine of the Trinity poses a deep and difficult problem. On the one hand, it says that there are three distinct persons— Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—and that each of these persons “is God.” On the other hand, it says that there is one and only one God. So it appears to involve a contradiction.
The Trinity
Christians believe that God is a Trinity of Persons, each omnipotent, omniscient and wholly benevolent, co-equal and fully divine. There are not three gods, however, but one God in three Persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Prima facie, the doctrine more commonly known as the Trinity seems gratuitous: why multiply divine beings beyond necessity—especially since one God is hard enough to believe in? For Christians, however, the Trinity doctrine is neither gratuitous nor unmotivated. Claims about Christ’s divinity are difficult to reconcile with the Christian doctrine that there is just one God: Trinitarian theology is an attempt to square the Christian conviction that Jesus is the Son of God, fully divine yet distinct from his Father, with the Christian commitment to monotheism. Nevertheless, while the Trinity doctrine purports to solve a range of theological puzzles it poses a number of intriguing logical difficulties akin to those suggested by the identity of spatio-temporal objects through time and across worlds, puzzle cases of personal identity, and problems of identity and constitution. Philosophical discussions of the Trinity have suggested solutions to the Trinity puzzle comparable to solutions proposed to these classic identity puzzles. When it comes to the Trinity puzzle, however, one must determine whether such solutions accord with theological constraints.
Created:
Finally we have the formula for the Trinity identity.
Trinity and Identity
Can one consistently believe (1) – (7)? It depends on how we read the “is” in (1) – (6). If we read it throughout as the “is” of strict identity, as “=” the answer is no. Identity is an equivalence relation: it is reflexive, symmetric and transitive, which is to say, for all x, y and z the following hold:
Reflexivity: x = x
Symmetry: If x = y then y = x
Transitivity: If x = y and y = z then x = y
In addition, identity is an unrestricted indiscernibilty relation for all properties, which is to say it obeys Leibniz’ Law, understood as the Indiscernibility of Identicals:
LL: If x = y then for all properties, P, x has P if and only if y has P
This is bad news. Suppose we read the “is” as “=” in (1) – (6). Then it follows from (1) and (2), by symmetry and transitivity, that the Father is the Son, which contradicts (4). Put another way, given LL, (1) entails that God has all the same properties as the Father, including the property of being identical with the Father insofar as everything has the property of self-identity. (2) says that the Son likewise has all the same properties as God. It follows that, since God has the property of being identical with the Son, the Son also has the property of being identical with the Father, which contradicts (4).
These formal features of identity are non-negotiable in the way that the four-sidedness of squares is: God cannot evade them any more than he can make a square with only three sides. God can make triangles—and pentagons, chiliagons or figures with any number of sides he pleases—but he cannot make such things squares. So, assuming that “God,” “Father,” “Son” and “Holy Spirit” don’t change their reference, the “is” that figures in (1) – (6) cannot be the “is” of strict identity.
Created:
Posted in:
Sidewalker is on a dog leash held by Elon Musk.
He tried to get his mommy’s attention by crying out loud “"Mommy, Mommy, look at me, look at me."
Created:
Posted in:
and one with God the FatherWhich simply means in agreement/ on the same side..Note even Jesus calls God the Father.Indeed . Clearly indicating both to be separate beings. And also note that Jesus often refers to himself clearly as the "son of man".If this not be the case, why do we have verses such as " My god why have you forsaken me"? "Jesus prayed to his father"? "Father take this burden from me"?Surely we are not to believe that Jesus was pleading with himself? Prayed to himself ? And asked himself to be unburden, himself?
Jesus went a step further.
John 10:30-38
I and the Father are one.”
31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
John 14:9
Don't you know who I am? If you have seen me, you have seen the Father. How can you ask me to show you the Father?
The final catch.
John 1:In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
What did Jesus say about the Trinity?
He did not specifically refer to the term Trinity but did describe God in what we would call trinitarian terms or formulations. Jesus described God as "the Father", he described himself as God's son, and one with God the Father, and described the Holy Spirit as somehow proceeding from both the Father and himself.
Created:
Posted in:
That's possible. I have found several more of these videos though on YouTube and just posted what I thought was the best one. Most have an average of less than 100 views and people in the comments are like "praise Jesus" .
Can you please check the authenticity of the videos before posting them. That is the least you can do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Thats a great argument. A logical axiom.Police officer = person who doesnt break the lawPerson who breaks the law = isnt a police officerYay!
That is a very high bar. Even the president Trump is a convicted criminal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Not that I'm advocating for Dictatorship,But I assume Dictatorships have a greater chance to occur in the less developed world.Not only by the states own conditions,But for the conditions in outside states, I think states find value in outside enemies,Weak third world dictatorships would be ideal for such a role, thus there would often be a lack of motivation for the first world states to 'change the third world states.
But America elected a convicted criminal Trump who loves dictators and needs them to help him stay out of prison.
Created:
I'm afraid I didn't read all 900 pages of your Project 2025 Plan, was there a section where an unelected foreign billionaire can buy the Presidency and install himself as leader?
That part was waiting for Elon Musk to show up. Or Putin would have played that role.
Created:
Posted in:
Shila, please take a hike from my threads I've started, as you now quote people and don't tag them, as you continually just want to pollute my threads with you content.Please do me a respectful favor and back all the way off from my threads with toxic pollution.
I don’t even reply to his posts. Yet he has been stalking me. He should follow his own advice and back off.
Created:
Posted in:
The main motivation behind this is the belief that the colonization of Mars allows humanity to become multiplanetary and therefore secures the long-term survival of the human species in case of Earth being rid of human life. Elon Musk at the 2006 Mars Society conference.
It was not to co-exist with other intelligent species.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
From the comments, I gathered that Mall's argument was if a police officer breaks the law, they are no longer a police officer (since the job of the police is to enforce the law). Audience seemed less than convinced.
It depend on the seriousness of the crime committed or a light reprimand is warranted.
Created:
-->
@Savant
That would be a positive effect of immigration. From your comments, I'm not sure what your position is, so we might agree.
immigrants added a total of $2.2 trillion to the U.S. economy yearly. They are a great asset.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
I get it, you saw the word mammal in the title and that's everything you can grasp about the thread, you haven't read the article posted, so you don't understand anything about the thread, and even less about what I posted. You still have your head up your ass and are still desperate for attention, so blah blah blah, non-sequitur nonsense is all you can comprehend."Mommy, Mommy, look at me, look at me."OK, now it's your turn to say something really stupid.
The word mammal is found in the article posted.
It is research on the embryos of mammals. See excerpt:
The international team of researchers has built a comprehensive atlas of early mammalian morphogenesis -- the process of an organism developing shape and structure -- analyzing how mouse, rabbit, and monkey embryos develop in space and time. Based on this atlas, they see that individual events such as cell divisions and movements are highly chaotic, yet the embryos as a whole end up looking very similar to one another. With this dataset, they propose a physical model that explains how a mammalian embryo builds structure from chaos.
Created:
-->
@Savant
If the price increase reaches equilibrium it's not technically a shortage. That aside, why is a lower price "better" overall? It's better for buyers, sure, but also worse for sellers.
Demand for housing contributes to the economy.
Created:
-->
@Savant
. If the value of real estate plummets, there will also be winners and losers, and people will complain that the economy is doing terribly. I know you can cherry-pick the effects of immigration (especially short-term) and find negative impacts for some people, I'm just not convinced those impacts remain negative in the aggregate.
Immigrants drive up the demand for housing. Thereby creating a shortage of availability and hence followed by price increases.
Created: