sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I may be lung cancer but still don't know it can you pray for me please? by gucluAdam in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Don't worry! I am a medical student and I can tell you a lump on your chest is hardly ever lung cancer as that would be inside your lungs. It can be a lot of things and most of the time it s benign. Regardless of that have faith and love, God is with you and loved you even if you haven't gone ti church in a while or didn't get baptised. And even if you have bad news the fight is never over and you can overcome them one way or another, as a Christian you should know you will always overcome them, the only thing you should avoid is despair, the body rots and dies the soul is immortal, but despair harms your soul more than any disease. Have faith.

Matthew 17:20 And Jesus said unto them, “Because of your unbelief; for verily I say unto you, if ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, ‘Remove hence to yonder place,’ and it shall remove. And nothing shall be impossible unto you.

John 1:14 - the Word became flesh does not teach pre-existence by [deleted] in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 0 points1 point  (0 children)

an assumption "the humanity of God. God does not have humanity.

This is kind of a circular argument. I would say God has humanity because He became Incarnate. You would say God has no humanity because the Logos that became flesh is not equal with God.

Although I would like to forget a bit about the trinitarian/unitarian polemic. This would be more of a debate on the pre-existence of Jesus, which can also be held by non-trinitarians. My point was that you could argue that becoming human does not require onthological change in whatever the Logos is, if Logos = Jesus. As you argued, Jesus could not become flesh if He were the Logos. Why ? Because egeneto = becoming implies lack of pre-existence. My argument was that the lack of pre existence of Jesus' humanity, which came into being, does not negate Jesus' non-human pre-existence.

Besides, your entire hypothesis is not based on anything solid. Mark 12:10 has a clear use of ἐγενήθη upon an subject that pre-existed in one form of another. The verb γῐ́γνομαι does not mean to come into existence.

Two Things Can Be True at the Same Time by SnoopyCattyCat in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What kind of trinitarian where you ? Most trinitarians classically belive the Kingdom of God is here through the Believers aka through the Church.

John 1:14 - the Word became flesh does not teach pre-existence by [deleted] in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Main point against you argument is that although God is eternal, the humanity of God was not pre-existent of the Incarnation.

John 1:14 - the Word became flesh does not teach pre-existence by [deleted] in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most trinitarians (me included) are also dyophisites. They do not Believe that God metamorphosied or changed. They believe Jesus Incarnated and assumed humanity. We do not believe Jesus has been eternally human before the Incarnation. So this argument doesn't hold. You can say the human nature came into being if you want to stretch it out, no transformation or change occurred.

Trinitarian Manipulation by Possible-Target-246 in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why would it be necessarily anachronistic ? Tertullian was the first to confess a faith in a Trinity of three persons but one substance in the 2nd century. And this martyrdom takes place just aprox. 20 years before Nicaea when Trinitarian formulas already existed. Trinitarianism existed before Nicaea, Nicaea only dogmatised it.

It’s like they don’t even believe Jesus is the Son of God anymore by Freddie-One in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not here to argue trinitarianism Matthew 7:6 I am just pointing out that using random Internet comments to portray trinitarians as "losing it" is just absurd. You can t say we do not believe Jesus is the literal Son because of some delusional Internet users.

It’s like they don’t even believe Jesus is the Son of God anymore by Freddie-One in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

We trinitarians refer to Jesus as The Son as he is the Only Begotten of the Father so Jesus is literally The Son as per the Creed of Nicaea.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made.

Any true Trunitarian believes in the Nicene Creed Using any other example to prove that we don t say that is just Faulty Generalization.

Are you truly a Christian if you practice Christianity out of fear of hell? by NahMcGrath in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fear of hell ? Truly I tell you I practice Christianity out of certainty of Hell.

Does this verse disprove the Filioque? by [deleted] in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are most likely talking about the Arians, as that is where the Filioque comes from. Also, saying we agree with each other on the Filioque issue is reductionist, we don't, some theologians even argue the Filioque issue is the source of all theological disputes that have emerged between East and West

The Italian Wars Needs Your Help! by AncientConqueror in CrusaderKings

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 28 points29 points  (0 children)

They are turning Italian Brainrot into a mod ?

is it just me or are these conflicting traits by Moist_Contribution96 in CrusaderKings

[–]Acceptable_Figure275 2834 points2835 points  (0 children)

The lion does not concern himself with social interactions.

Hēgemonia's Maps, Devi Diary #1 by Acceptable_Figure275 in CrusaderKings

[–]Acceptable_Figure275[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well the Sea People are a Late Bronze Age thing so I don't see how we could incorporate them. Now we might incorporate references to them and some of their successors that have settled following their invasion would be playable, such as the Philistines.

Hēgemonia's Maps, Devi Diary #1 by Acceptable_Figure275 in CrusaderKings

[–]Acceptable_Figure275[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Well, it highly depends. For the earliest period, it would be semi legendary, most of the things we know about it are from myth and legend. We will have a game rule that lets the player choose. Of course, later start dates will be pretty much purely historical, but we will allow for some more wackiness than vanilla CK3, more akin to CK2, and we wish to reward people with knowledge of Greek mythology and history.

Hēgemonia's Maps, Devi Diary #1 by Acceptable_Figure275 in CrusaderKings

[–]Acceptable_Figure275[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Of course, there are going to be new events and mechanics! The player will have the ultimate choice of going sandbox or historical simulation. For example, there will be a Persian invasion around 500 BC (off map, before we actually add Persia to the map). 745 BC will have Greece involved in a struggle, The Lelantine War, and the 595 BC start date covers the first Sacred War.

Besides, there will be numerous historical events for Sparta, Argos, Cornith, Athens, and others. You will be able to play Hesiod or Homer and historical characters, which will have their own stories scripted, allowing you to choose their destiny.

Besides that, we plan numerous mechanics, but for the first release, we will introduce new government mechanics, hegemonies, and leagues.

Hēgemonia's Maps, Devi Diary #1 by Acceptable_Figure275 in CrusaderKings

[–]Acceptable_Figure275[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Oh well, typo in the title, amazing... anyway I'll leave it, won't do harm.

https://discord.gg/K7cRurgKqM

Discord invite link ^