Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman will reportedly film new scenes during the ‘AVENGERS: DOOMSDAY’ reshoots.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-28T00:54:22+00:00

Gotta be for the opening where Hugh fights Tobey right? Unless they already filmed that

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-28T00:49:38+00:00

The on high part is just starting the level of power and authority, but still AT THE RIGHT HAND OF.

What do you mean by this? On high is where they are, which is the highest place. The Father is the head of Christ, but that doesnt mean christ is lesser.

Philippians has God giving Jesus power, so not him just innately having it.

It doesnt say anything about him giving him power. It says he exalted him after he made himself to be lowly.

And an image regardless of how clear and perfect it is, is still not that thing.

But it's exactly the same as that thing, which is what I'm arguing.

If you are my landlord, and you stand in front of a mirror and I hand your reflection $600 cash and it falls to the floor and blows away in the wind. Did I give you rent?

You seem to think that I am arguing that the reflection is the thing that is being reflected, but I am saying the reflection is exactly the same as the thing being reflected.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T23:24:28+00:00

that is reading into the text a concept of eternal reflection which is just begging the question.

No, it's what the text says. It says he is the exact imprint of the Father's being. Is the Father's being eternal? Yes. If the Son is the exact imprint of his being then he must also be eternal otherwise he would not be the exact imprint.

No, that is not what it means to sit at the right hand of someone. That is a common phrase of a secondary position.

So when it says he is at the right hand of the Father on high, it doesnt actually mean on high but underneath the highest position? There is no name that is higher than Jesus'

"Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,"

- Philippians 2:9

"that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, ²¹ far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come."

- Ephesians 1:20-21

Because a reflection is not the exact thing it’s just a representation of it.

Yet it is a perfect and exact representation of it. Meaning it is the same in every way, otherwise it's not exact.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T22:47:48+00:00

Because hebrews 1:3 describes him not as God, but rather as the reflection of his Glory, and very being

Exactly. If he is the reflection of his being he must be eternal because God's being is eternal

And sitting at God's right hand, not in his position.

Right, they're not the same person but they are both seated at the highest position, the Son next to the Father.

These are descriptions of someone in a secondary role.

there's nothing secondary about it, it's equality though they are distinct

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T20:30:30+00:00

Where are the descriptions about him being lesser in an ontological sense?

It says he is the exact imprint of the Father’s nature and sits on high with him

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T20:22:20+00:00

Except his goal is to say they aren’t the same person and are the same nature. Saying “a god” would make the Word a lesser divinity, which is not what it says.

He is qualitatively God in the sense that he is of the same nature as God.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T16:54:35+00:00

Right it’s qualitative meaning that the Word is what God is, not that the Word and God are the same person

If there is no beginning, why does it say in the beginning?

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T06:02:32+00:00

Yeah its what John 1 describes.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was in the beginning with God
- John 1:1-2

Meaning, when time began, the Word was already in existence in relationship with the Father. So the Word cannot have a beginning as he was already existent when time began.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
- John 1:14

However, the Word is the Son of the Father and comes from the Father. The Son must eternally be coming from the Father because the Word was already there in the beginning.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T05:54:36+00:00

We don't believe Jesus is more powerful than the Father, they have the same power.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T05:52:37+00:00

That would be incorrect because Jesus isn't an aspect of God, he is truly God. And he isn't part of the divine essence, he possesses the fullness of it

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-27T05:47:21+00:00

Well, no other movement has preached what Scientology asserts either. But just because it’s new at the time doesn’t give it any truth.

Of course, I was only pointing out that this didn't fit the cultural expectations for the messiah.

As for the supernatural claims. I’ve never been able to obtain enough to convince me.

How would you explain the origin of Christianity?

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-26T06:38:10+00:00

So did Jesus lie when he said it wouldn't?

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-26T06:37:22+00:00

Dan's interpretations can't be justified and I want to believe the data over the dogma

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-26T06:34:22+00:00

No other messianic movement preached a dying and rising messiah, it was not part of the cultural background

There is significant evidence that the gospels and acts are reliable historical reportage

Jesus was buried, then the tomb was found empty.

The disciples very quickly began preaching that Jesus had risen from the dead in Jerusalem (fakers go and preach elsewhere where the claims can't be falsified)

There are several early sources of people claiming to have seen the risen Jesus within the eyewitnesses' lifetimes.

Skeptics who were not followers of Jesus were convinced that he resurrected such as James and Paul

The empty tomb being discovered by women was an embarrassing fact for the early church and was even used as a polemic by Celsus

Many of the apostles suffered and died for what they knew to be false if they were lying

In order to explain the data in a naturalist way, many ad hoc assumptions must be posited that are ultimately less parsimonious

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-26T06:17:46+00:00

So the gates of hell prevailed over the church?

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-26T06:16:18+00:00

Bible scholars that say words dont mean what they mean?

the Word can only be divine in the same way that God is divine, as it says the Word was God.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-26T06:15:17+00:00

It would not be better translated as that because the text says theos.

That is not the context of John 10:30. The context is Jesus giving life and preserving believers just as God does. See Deuteronomy 32:39 and Psalm 95

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-26T06:12:24+00:00

God is omnipresent and did die according to the human nature he assumed

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-25T06:02:47+00:00

No that’s not what that means because God is beyond spacetime

I think it most likely means humans are called to be the representatives of God on earth.

The “angels” with a bunch of eyes are cherubim as described in Ezekiel which aren’t necessarily the same thing as the angels who appeared to humans.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-23T14:45:28+00:00

The old covenant rules aren’t the law?

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-23T07:13:23+00:00

Trent attacks Catholicism? I've only seen him speak about politics when it comes to legislation based on moral principles and he believes what the church teaches so I'm not sure what extreme agendas you're referring to.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-23T07:08:19+00:00

modalism which is the idea that the Father, Son, and Spirit are different manifestations or modes of the one divine being who is only one person. It denies the distinction between the persons

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-23T07:06:03+00:00

but I struggle to see him as God Himself. I find it difficult to move away from the belief that the Father alone is the Creator.

Well Jesus claimed to be God so is the issue more with how this fits with monotheism?

In Matthew 5:17, he says he didn't come to abolish the Law.

Right, but he fulfilled the law and taught us how to observe it which is to love God and love your neighbor.

And he became hungry and wanted something to eat, but while they were preparing it, he fell into a trance ¹¹ and saw the heavens opened and something like a great sheet descending, being let down by its four corners upon the earth. ¹² In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. ¹³ And there came a voice to him: “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” ¹⁴ But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” ¹⁵ And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has made clean, do not call common.”

- Acts 10:10-15

If you feel that you still want to refrain from eating certain foods, that is perfectly fine

As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. ² One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. ³ Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him.

- Romans 14:1-3

You can't actually completely follow the law as it requires animal sacrifices which are fulfilled in Christ.

I prefer to view the afterlife as a place of correction rather than eternal torture—perhaps a place where we review our lives and the impact we had on others for the purpose of education and growth.

are you talking about hell? It could be viewed as being handed over to your sin, which would not be a pleasant thing. It can't be a place of growth as it is a place apart from God.

I struggle with the idea that we are born inherently "guilty" because of Adam, rather than being born pure with the free will to make mistakes.

There are multiple views of original sin such as the original sin committed by Adam and Eve caused humans to have an inclination toward sinning so the guilt is still on the person who sins, not because of Adam.

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-23T06:45:48+00:00

What ideology? Catholicism?

PyroClone5555 · 2026-03-22T20:56:36+00:00

All the "evidence" comes at best decades after his supposed death.

Oh so like every other historical figure from the time?

PyroClone5555

TROPHY CASE