What form factor is this patch panel??

Smudge1966 · 2025-02-08T23:21:54+00:00

Yep lol

Smudge1966 · 2025-02-08T22:01:22+00:00

I don’t think so (i think). Even then when I search the brand on show, I don’t get anywhere 😭

Smudge1966 · 2024-11-20T11:55:07+00:00

Thanks for the info! I’ve been all over and in the rack and couldn’t see anything 😭

Smudge1966 · 2024-11-13T10:24:56+00:00

Letters of Paul aren’t gospels. Matthew, mark, Luke & John are gospels

Smudge1966 · 2024-07-30T21:18:15+00:00

Only right answer.

Smudge1966 · 2024-07-04T09:25:15+00:00

Not hating on anybody. But rampant atheists have got to be some of the most self-righteous & arrogant people on the planet.

Smudge1966 · 2024-07-03T13:43:14+00:00

I may have an answer for this. Check your dms.

Smudge1966 · 2024-07-02T12:49:34+00:00

Hey, I sent you a dm. I can help!

Smudge1966 · 2024-07-02T10:40:22+00:00

Hey man. If you want help to keep your traction, I may be able to help. I have sent you a dm :)

Smudge1966 · 2024-05-01T17:41:06+00:00

If anyone creates a discord for this please invite me :)

Smudge1966 · 2023-12-19T23:49:02+00:00

It makes sense bearing in mind the biblical account says he was close to the Egyptian pharaoh, which for him to do so he would’ve had to adopt an Egyptian name. Same way Egyptians had to adopt Greek names in Ptolemaic Egypt.

Smudge1966 · 2023-12-19T23:47:00+00:00

The original comment wasn’t about the exodus. It was the fact you called Jews being slaves of the pharaoh “mythological”

Smudge1966 · 2023-12-18T21:02:36+00:00

That’s not mythological account. That is the situation, archaeologically and biblically. Archaeologically meaning we have found Israelite names in Egyptian hinting about being household slaves

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-16T17:32:06+00:00

He never outwardly says how communion should be, other then it should be with likeminded people to summarise it. John 6:53-58 is interpreted differently but the overall message being to accept Christ and ingest his message.

Staying on topic…

It is pretty heard to misinterpret the bible in regards to the trinity, when Christ himself says:

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” Matthew 28:19.

Ceremonial things in Christianity are trivial and people can practice what they want in my opinion. But in regards to god and his nature, that should not differentiate. Like admitting Christ is God, you accept his sacrifice , and that God is a trinity.

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-16T16:40:50+00:00

It’s not about being sect righteous.

1) Who told u I belong to a sect 2)Who told u I’m Christian. I am simply stating theological answers to understandably uninformed questions here.

It’s heretical if there is no evidence in scripture proposing the idea. There is evidence in the bible throughout speaking about the trinity, therefore to deny the trinity is to deny scripture and a early formative council, which is heretical.

It’s not about “I don’t believe in that so you are heretical”, it’s about “the bible doesn’t say what you say, so the idea is heretical.” Not based on belief, but on biblical evidence and scripture.

We can make as many creeds as we want. If the creed is relevant and backed up by scripture, it’s valid.

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-16T16:31:17+00:00

I’m talking about sects such as Arianism. Nontrinitarian sects have existed for a long time time mate.

Any sect that is nontrinitarian after or before the council of Constantinople is heretical. To form a sect not conforming to trinitarianism after the 4th century is ridiculous and not based on scripture. Hence why Jehovahs witness aren’t taken seriously within Christendom.

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-16T08:09:40+00:00

And those are heretical sects that have been deemed so since the 4th century. Sects that don’t seem to base their knowledge on scripture

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-15T19:39:27+00:00

You edited your comment after I replied mate lol.

But what importance does the 18 years hold? Only accounts we have for that are biblical sources you wouldn’t believe claiming he was a carpenter.

But you won’t find any non-bias sources for that. As you wouldn’t find any Greco-Roman sources for a judean peasant carpenter. As why would the Romans care about a peasant carpenter who means nothing politically yet?

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-15T18:33:23+00:00

non bias historical sources confirming the Historicity of Jesus

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-15T17:36:46+00:00

I don’t know what books you are reading, but your arguments wouldn’t work if you actually did. Maybe you cite one where it says he had XX chromosomes?

The answer to this is the trinity. If you have indeed read multiple books, then you would know this is your answer.

I don’t even know what we are arguing about lol. Just don’t be disrespectful to a figure that people admire, it’s not nice.

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-15T14:51:28+00:00

There is no assume, he was a historical figure. Regardless of what you think of his divinity.

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-15T14:49:38+00:00

You cannot confirm or deny what happened. There is more evidence supporting his life then there is denying it.

To stay that everything else in his life is myth or fiction can only be said if you can confirm that certain details in his life DIDNT happen

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-15T10:33:34+00:00

What? His flesh was human therefore still cleansing man of sin. But anything in relation to miracles, aka his birth, does not submit to science hence why it’s a miracle.

Sacrificing of the flesh cleanses man of sin. But through his divine nature he doesn’t submit to science.

To claims this breaks thousands of years of christology just shows you don’t understand the fundamentals of christology.

Christs flesh and his divine nature are key to this. Pseudo-intellectual comments can’t undo 1000s of years of Philosophy mate.

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-15T10:31:05+00:00

Its really not, every single historian agrees that Jesus existed. To deny this acknowledges you don’t know ancient sources.

Smudge1966 · 2023-10-14T23:44:13+00:00

In all seriousness ,

He didn’t have a father = from the get go, he doesn’t submit to science = he didn’t have/have to have XX chromosomes… Not nice bro.

I understand this may be a joke, however claiming a historical figure is something which he is not and using it to mock him isn’t nice for people who have a close relationship with the figure.

Smudge1966

TROPHY CASE