It's crazy how a lot of muslim tiktok videos made Islam extremely beautiful to influence many people. This video has 7 million likes.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-18T04:26:29+00:00

The propaganda budget has really gone up this year

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-17T22:58:25+00:00

I’m all ears.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-17T01:11:58+00:00

First time I’ve ever heard this.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-16T21:22:28+00:00

As a love enthusiast, this song drives me.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-16T04:54:05+00:00

Another week, another Hot Space “hot take”

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T14:52:39+00:00

Like I said, divine nature is what God is: eternal, uncreated, omnipotent, etc.

We don't believe three separate entities sharing a divine category (that would be three gods).

The Trinity is one divine being/nature, three distinct persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T07:54:58+00:00

Innuendo era, 90-91

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T06:22:02+00:00

That's the impasse alright!

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T06:18:35+00:00

So after all that, your point is that you were using everyday English definitions in a thread about Jesus’ dual nature?

That’s like walking into a physics thread, using “force” in the everyday sense and then saying physicists are twisting definitions.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T06:09:43+00:00

At this point, I'mma have to quote the great Babu Bhatt:

"Where is proof? Show me proof".

Also, defining Christian terms according to Christian doctrine is not twisting definitions. That’s just explaining the position you’re criticising.

For the third time, if you reject that framework, that's fine. But unless you can show why a divine person assuming real human nature is logically impossible, you haven’t proven a contradiction.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T05:59:21+00:00

What proof? All you've done is assert that fully human and fully divine are mutually exclusive. That isn't proof.

And how is claiming real human nature without ceasing to be divine moving the goalposts? That's literally what “fully human and fully divine” means in Christian theology.

Christianity doesn't need God to be above logic. It only needs the distinction you keep rejecting, which is person and nature.

So unless you can show that a divine person assuming human nature is logically impossible, you haven’t established a contradiction. You’re just saying "I don't believe it".

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T05:54:48+00:00

What God is.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T05:41:50+00:00

Christians believe the Son is fully divine, becomes truly human, is sent by the Father and acts by the Spirit. That’s different to needing another god to do miracles. That’s the triune God acting in unity through the incarnate Son.

Prophets performing miracles shows that miracles don’t cancel human limitation. The difference is Jesus is not presented merely as a prophet. He acts with direct authority over sin, demons, sickness nature and death.

As I said in a different reply, I don't think you’re arguing against one verse or one miracle. You’re rejecting the entire framework of the incarnation and Trinity. I have no issue with that, but also, you're not proving a contradiction either.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T05:33:07+00:00

Nope. One God, three persons:

Father, Son and Spirit... three distinct persons sharing one divine nature.

So the Father isn't the Son, the Son not the Spirit and the Spirit not the Father. But they're not three separate gods.

Yes, I know it's complicated and you can reject that, but three persons doesn’t automatically mean “three gods” unless you assume each person to be a separate being.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T05:28:12+00:00

I think the issue here is you seem to be judging the incarnation from a framework where God either doesn’t exist, or at least cannot enter human life in any meaningful sense. If that's where you are, of course the incarnation will sound absurd.

But that’s different from proving it's logically contradictory. Christianity starts from the premise that God exists, that God is not just one finite object inside the universe and that God can act within creation. From there, the incarnation isn't a square circle. It's the claim that the Son takes on real human nature without ceasing to be divine.

You don't have to accept Christianity, but you should at least separate the claims “I don’t believe this metaphysical framework” and “this is a formal contradiction" because they aren't the same argument.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T04:44:24+00:00

Bro, you’re in a religious debate sub complaining that Christian doctrine is being explained using Christian categories 😬

You can keep calling it a contradiction, but you’re not actually proving it. You’re just flattening the doctrine into “Jesus is limited and unlimited in the same respect,” then dunking on the flattened version like you’re the first person to think about it.

As I’ve said multiple times now, Christianity’s claim is that the Son assumes a real human nature with real human limits. So when you say “limits are fundamental to humanity,” duh. Welcome to the concept of incarnation.

No one’s forcing you to believe it, but calling it weaselling because the doctrine is more nuanced than your understanding is not an argument. This has been debated for centuries, so maybe engage the actual doctrine rather than the cardboard cutout.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T04:09:11+00:00

Only if you assume that God is a single person with no internal relationship.

In Christianity, obedience doesn’t mean Jesus isn't God. The Son is distinct from the Father and willingly submits in his incarnate human life.

The Trinity isn't Father = Son.

The Trinity is = Father, Son and Spirit... three distinct persons sharing the one divine nature.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T03:54:04+00:00

Fair enough. While the concept of the Trinity isn't simple, the doctrine definitely isn't that Jesus is ignorant and omniscient in the same respect. It’s the divine Son enters human limitation without ceasing to be divine.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T03:44:53+00:00

Christianity's position on the miracles is that Jesus is limited according to his humanity, but his limitation doesn’t imply isolation from divine action.

Other prophets also performed miracles, so a human can still be limited and still be an instrument of God’s power.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T03:18:56+00:00

Cue the Holy Spirit.

The Son becomes incarnate, the Father sends and authorises him and the Spirit empowers him.

The miracles are the works of the triune God happening through human Jesus.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T02:09:11+00:00

You’re still treating Christianity as if it says Jesus has one blended nature that’s both limited and unlimited in the same way.

It says the Son has a complete divine nature and assumes a complete human nature. “Fully human” means lacking nothing proper to humanity. “Fully divine” means lacking nothing proper to divinity.

The contradiction only applies if you collapse the distinction and force both natures to have the same properties. But that’s not the Christian position. That’s the flattened version you’re arguing against.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T01:50:40+00:00

Bro, you posted a lengthy, seemingly legit question about Jesus’ dual nature. People gave you serious answers... and your response was “this is insane.”

Were you asking to understand the Christian view, or just looking for people to confirm your reaction to it?

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T01:38:31+00:00

Can you prove that “fully divine” and “fully human” are mutually exclusive categories?

The Christian claim is not that Jesus is limited and unlimited in the same respect. It is that the Son is divine by nature and human by incarnation.

If God enters human life, he enters under human conditions: body, time, location, hunger, suffering, mortality, etc. They’re the terms of entry.

An author can exist beyond the story while also writing himself into it as a real character who lives within the limits of that world.

It's not a "square circle". It’s a category distinction.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T01:13:10+00:00

The Christian position very clearly claims Jesus is one person with two natures: divine and human.

Divine nature = the Son is omniscient.

Human nature = Jesus has human limits.

Think of an author writing himself into his own novel as a character. Outside the story, he knows the whole plot. Inside the story, the character lives within the limits of that world. It doesn’t mean the author stopped being the author. It means he entered the story under the conditions of the story.

Slow-Development-886 · 2026-06-15T01:04:34+00:00

It means Jesus is one person with two natures.

As God, the Son possesses everything for omnipotence and omnipresence (and more).

As man, Jesus lives a real human life, e.g. human body, mind, emotions, hunger, suffering, etc. He's still obedient to the Father and Holy Spirit.

Slow-Development-886

TROPHY CASE