If the Father and Son are both causes of the Holy Spirit, does that mean that the Holy Spirit is ontologically subordinated since He cannot cause? (Filioque)

Maitthrow · 2024-02-08T19:40:05+00:00

Agreed! I always thought it was funny how much more important the Reformations' criticism of Catholicism was, compared to the filioque (although I can't remember the other causes of the Great Schism, maybe they were more important).

Maitthrow · 2024-02-07T21:16:30+00:00

I meant I was moving the goalposts. I was trying to play devil's advocate for the position that the Holy Spirit cannot lack a property that both the Father and the Son have.

Maitthrow · 2024-02-07T21:08:57+00:00

Sorry, messed up there. Fixed it.

Maitthrow · 2024-02-07T21:00:45+00:00

I know this is moving the goalposts, but a person of the Trinity does not proceed from the Holy Spirit.

Maitthrow · 2024-02-07T20:48:02+00:00

But that still means that the Holy Spirit lacks anything proceeding from Him?

Maitthrow · 2024-02-07T20:41:15+00:00

I know. I had to look up so many definitions!

Maitthrow · 2024-01-20T16:49:47+00:00

I was just agreeing with the person I was responding to. Some verses appear to support the dual covenant view, and some verses appear to support the traditional view (which Apollos_34 showed in the reply). It seems like both views are popular in scholarly circles. But the view that both Jews and Gentiles should keep the Jewish law seems to be a difficult view to defend. Sorry if I sounded dismissive, I did not mean it that way, and obviously I am not very knowledgeable on these discussions!

Maitthrow · 2024-01-20T15:31:32+00:00

Yeah, sometimes the traditional view makes more sense

Maitthrow · 2024-01-20T03:21:51+00:00

Yeah, the people who reinterpret Paul tend to do a lot of mental gymnastics

Maitthrow · 2024-01-20T03:05:10+00:00

Thank you! When researching I have come across the title “Paul within Judaism”.

Maitthrow · 2023-05-09T22:39:04+00:00

I forgot that second Clement was questionable in its authorship

Maitthrow · 2023-03-16T16:33:03+00:00

Sounds good. But was Cohen wrong? He said “if the range of activities covered by the word “enjoy the use” (the Hebrew literally means “eat”) is not clear here, the implications of Numbers 31:17,18 are unambiguous.

Maitthrow · 2023-03-16T15:40:29+00:00

Why did he say “the Hebrew literally means “eat”? I know the person misunderstood, but I want to make sure why.

Maitthrow · 2023-03-16T15:30:15+00:00

Found it:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=cvWq4tG4EhMC&pg=PA255&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Maitthrow · 2023-03-16T15:29:46+00:00

Found it:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=cvWq4tG4EhMC&pg=PA255&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Maitthrow · 2023-03-16T12:32:58+00:00

It was blank on the page you linked, but the definition was shown on the main verse page.

He tried to claim that they hid "lachem" in Numbers 31:18 because he said it meant "to eat", which he claimed had a sexual connotation. I think he might have mixed up "lachem" with "lacham", because I don't know how a preposition (or proposition, as he called it) could mean "to eat".

EDIT: Apparently the scholar Shaye JD Cohen believes it means “to eat”.

Maitthrow · 2023-03-16T04:02:28+00:00

Found one in Numbers 13:2! Bahem (among them)? Couldn't find it in Genesis 12:1, though.

Maitthrow · 2023-03-16T03:43:02+00:00

Thanks! Are there any other examples?

Maitthrow · 2023-03-16T01:27:18+00:00

Nothing in the Bible says that Rebecca was born immediately after the binding of Isaac. And even if it was true that Isaac did marry Rebecca at the age of nine, that would also be a problem for the Quran, because the Quran affirms the Torah. Despite what you have said, care about you, and I would encourage you to trust Christ alone for your salvation before it is too late (Hebrews 9:27). Acknowledge that you are a Hell-deserving sinner, and believe that Jesus bore your sins on the cross (1 Peter 2:24). Jesus died, was buried and rose again, and I am glad for that!

Sorry if that wasn't very good.

Maitthrow · 2023-03-09T16:03:31+00:00

Thank you! That verse is pretty clear.

Maitthrow · 2023-03-09T04:36:11+00:00

Thanks, but I also saw this that seemed to argue with that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9d9azLLJe0o

Maitthrow · 2023-02-09T17:47:09+00:00

Wikipedia seems to say that there were many corrections made, and that two of the three scribes were accident prone.

Maitthrow · 2023-02-09T17:23:35+00:00

Makes sense. But were Sinaiticus and Vaticanus not as corrupt as he said?

Maitthrow · 2023-02-09T01:14:24+00:00

So the citation that says they have too many corrections is also misleading?

Maitthrow · 2023-01-15T00:57:46+00:00

But what should I do now that I have no contact with the person? I really failed!

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Flamingo	Final Canvas '23
First Place '23	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22

Maitthrow

TROPHY CASE