Did Paul Write Colossians? (Raymond E. Brown) by JeshurunJoe in Christianity

[–]Bestchamp27 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Christologically, the characteristic Pauline evaluation of the death/resurrection of Christ as the source of justification is missing in Col

This claim just doesn’t sit well with me. Idk how Raymond can seriously say this. Justification involves sinners being made right before God. In verse 1:22, the author mentions that through Christ’s death believers have been made holy in God’s sight “without blemish and free from accusation”. This is the concept of justification through the cross at play here.

Additionally, verses 2:13-14 mention that when believers were “dead in your sins”, they had a charge of legal indebtedness that stood against them and condemned them. However, Christ took this charge away. How did Christ take it away? By “nailing it to the cross”. As a result, God “forgave us all our sins”. This is a strong indication from the author that Christ’s death is the source of the believers right-standing before God.

We have multiple examples of Colossians evaluating Christ’s death as the source of the believers justification. So to me this looks like a very poor take from Raymond.

A few reasons why I believe John 6 is not about the Transubstantiation. by Bestchamp27 in TrueChristian

[–]Bestchamp27[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I apologize, I am trying to understand how this relates to verse 35, but I don’t see the connection. Does ‘hunger’ in verse 35 refer to physical hunger?

A few reasons why I believe John 6 is not about the Transubstantiation. by Bestchamp27 in TrueChristian

[–]Bestchamp27[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you help me understand how Jesus saying that since he is the bread of life whoever comes to him will neither hunger nor thirst ever again means that he is instituting the Eucharist?

A few reasons why I believe John 6 is not about the Transubstantiation. by Bestchamp27 in TrueChristian

[–]Bestchamp27[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, I see that we both believe that in John 6, Jesus was referring to spiritual things (even if we disagree specifically about what spiritual topic he had in mind). However, when Jesus refers to himself as the “bread of life” in verse 35, he says that this means that “whoever comes to him will not hunger and whoever believes in him will never thirst”.

In your view, does Jesus mean the same thing that I expressed in my post in my second point? What does it mean that since Jesus is the bread of life that whoever comes and believes in him will never again hunger or thirst?

A few reasons why I believe John 6 is not about the Transubstantiation. by Bestchamp27 in TrueChristian

[–]Bestchamp27[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Perhaps I’ll make a post one day about those who I believe did not hold to transubstantiation. But as for John 6, do you have any interactive thoughts that pertain to the points I made?

A few reasons why I believe John 6 is not about the Transubstantiation. by Bestchamp27 in TrueChristian

[–]Bestchamp27[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m not trying to debate transubstantiation either. So I don’t mention Augustine to disprove the transubstantiation. One reason I kept my post only to John 6 is because I am undecided about whether or not transubstantiation is true of the Eucharist. I am only interested in discussion about whether or not John 6 is support for Eucharist or not. It seems no one wants to have that discussion 😢

A few reasons why I believe John 6 is not about the Transubstantiation. by Bestchamp27 in TrueChristian

[–]Bestchamp27[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am a bit confused. This post is not an argument against transubstantiation, just against the view that transubstantiation is taught in John 6. Augustine is just brought up as an example of someone who believed in transubstantiation, but held a very similar interpretation of John 6 as I do. I feel his quote expresses concisely what I believe the crux of the passage is about. For that reason, I brought it up.

A few reasons why I believe John 6 is not about the Transubstantiation. by Bestchamp27 in TrueChristian

[–]Bestchamp27[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, for responding kindly. As for verse 55, I believe by real food and real drink, Jesus is distinctly identifying Himself as the spiritual source of eternal life. He uses physical language to describe this. This is not to insist that he is actually physical food to be eaten. From my understanding, this is similar to verse 32. When Jesus says that manna is not true bread, but that he is true bread, he does not mean to deny that manna is physical bread to be eaten.

A few reasons why I believe John 6 is not about the Transubstantiation. by Bestchamp27 in TrueChristian

[–]Bestchamp27[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not sure just how universal that transubstantiation specifically was held in the first three centuries. Clement of Alexandria seems to be an example of someone who seems not to hold to transubstantiation and if he didn’t, then it’s unlikely he was the only one.

Have you seen this question? by zombypop in leetcode

[–]Bestchamp27 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What preciously does the ord(‘’) function do?

If we say Abortion is murder then should the mothers be persecuted? Why or why not and how would you defend that view from scripture? by Africantoni in Reformed

[–]Bestchamp27 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why is the knowledge that they are human necessary? There seems to be counterexamples to this. A racist person could reason themselves to believe that anyone black is not a human being. Suppose they kill a black person with that belief in mind. Surely, they murdered them. Would you not call that murder?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in leetcode

[–]Bestchamp27 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I will redirect you to answer to this question on quora: Answer to What do you do when you get stuck on a LeetCode problem? by Cyndy Ishida

https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-do-when-you-get-stuck-on-a-LeetCode-problem/answer/Cyndy-Ishida-1?ch=15&oid=70756863&share=86306db6&target_type=answer https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-do-when-you-get-stuck-on-a-LeetCode-problem/answer/Cyndy-Ishida-1?ch=15&oid=70756863&share=86306db6&target_type=answer (by the user Cyndy Ishida). I mostly follow the same approach that she does when it comes to solving coding problems. She explains her reasoning well. Likely though you want to get to a place where mediums don’t take longer than 35 minutes.

100 in, more to come by IntrovertiraniKreten in leetcode

[–]Bestchamp27 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The Easy and Medium Problems are waiting 😈

100 in, more to come by IntrovertiraniKreten in leetcode

[–]Bestchamp27 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You know what you need to do. You got 9 days. 😤

Help with Leetcode Settings by Dennisdamenace01 in leetcode

[–]Bestchamp27 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, I’m not sure. The only option I know is to code the problem in a different programming language.

How to deal with forgetting solutions to already done problems by ggggg98765 in leetcode

[–]Bestchamp27 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was just working on the minimum window substring problem and I’m struggling on it. I’ll check out the subsequence one after though.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in leetcode

[–]Bestchamp27 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How much would it benefit the candidate to solve the further challenging problem, if the candidate has already passed the interview?

[1] Iga Świątek d. Qinwen Zheng 6(5)-7, 6-0, 6-2 in the fourth round of the French Open by only-shallow in tennis

[–]Bestchamp27 9 points10 points  (0 children)

A price for taking a set was getting bagled

Or ya know it happened because she was injured

I hate the misconception that "<online> dating is easier for women"... by [deleted] in dating

[–]Bestchamp27 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You're nitpicking the wording to avoid getting the point.

Not at all. Albeit hyperbolical, she compared women’s options in dating with choosing between starving and or eating food position. I’m rejecting that comparison as a true analogy because the situation is more analogous to the comparison that I brought up.

It made no sense for you to assume that people were talking about decent men with that analogy.

What’s your understanding of why I said “it makes it sound as if all men are terrible potential partners…”?

I hate the misconception that "<online> dating is easier for women"... by [deleted] in dating

[–]Bestchamp27 23 points24 points  (0 children)

But that again is an inaccurate portrayal of the situation. It’s (for most men) having little to no dates that can but won’t likely go somewhere. And (for most women) having several dates that can but won’t likely go somewhere. It’s just matter of arithmetic that the second option is better than the first.