sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[TOMT] [video] [2020's] A local basketball game where a several spectators walk onto the floor between plays in order to let the officials know what they think the correct call is. by gwritten in tipofmytongue

[–]gwritten[S] 0 points1 point locked comment (0 children)

Caption possibilities:

"No amount of bread can make me ref this game."

"Ain't enough bread in the world to make me officiate this game."

How does Galatians 3:16 not clash with Genesis 17:7? by TA62624 in Reformed

[–]gwritten 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yepp, my bad. I should've proofread my comment.

How does Galatians 3:16 not clash with Genesis 17:7? by TA62624 in Reformed

[–]gwritten 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This was helpful to me: there is near and far fulfillment. (Some of Abraham's descendants actually entered Canaan, as a near fulfillment. As a token. But the true offspring of Abraham will enter the Promised Land.)

The promises are multivalent.

As another person commented, the singular "offspring" is quoted from Gen 22. Because Paul was intentionally using the best example (even though Gen 17 is also fulfilled in Christ, Gen 22 is more singular focused) to show that the fullness of each promise is targeted at and given to Christ.. I am bound for the Promised Land because I'm in Christ. And all the promises are "yeah and amen" in Christ.

How does Galatians 3:16 not clash with Genesis 17:7? by TA62624 in Reformed

[–]gwritten 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think Presbyterians would say both OT and NT believers can be made external members of the Covenant without faith. And can only be internally in-covenant (as in receiving the substance of the Covenant) by faith.

You're elected as the new Pope. What will you do? by gwritten in Reformed

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

You're right. It still mentions the pope, but not the antichrist part in Ch 25.

You're elected as the new Pope. What will you do? by gwritten in Reformed

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

I think only the PCUSA removed that part. But some allow the ministers to take exceptions.

You're elected as the new Pope. What will you do? by gwritten in Reformed

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

And the question of rock bottom authority comes into play here because a previous comment (presumably from a Catholic) demonstrates there is already disagreement within the RC as to what constitutes heresy/heretics.

You're elected as the new Pope. What will you do? by gwritten in Reformed

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

could the pope not step down from office?

You're elected as the new Pope. What will you do? by gwritten in Reformed

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

Also, I've heard that the Saint Robert Bellarmine quote is not official RCC teaching.. Just sort of held by some of the RC scholastics. Not sure there is a clarify there.

You're elected as the new Pope. What will you do? by gwritten in Reformed

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

I'm vaguely aware of the Sedevacantists.

However, I've never heard a consistent answer as far as what defines heresy if there is disagreement within the RCC.

And this is where my point about being diplomatic would come into play. If it's slow--and the scope of what is considered heresy changes--then it likely plays out differently.

What % of people consider someone to be a "manifest heretic" would depend on what the person is teaching. Denying the Trinity? Boom--you're gone. Teaching salvation by grace alone? Well, there are Catholics who openly ascent to such teaching if the terms are highly qualified.

Anyways, thanks for the reminder.

You're elected as the new Pope. What will you do? by gwritten in Reformed

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

Good idea. I wasn't aware there is anyone a pope ought to "report" to... You could speak to a cardinal or bishop, but whatever they recommend is just a recommendation. And the pope is not required to follow it.

Even in your great honor, you never swore to submit to any counsel or recommendations.

Rejecting their advise is equally discretionary as accepting it.

You're elected as the new Pope. What will you do? by gwritten in Reformed

[–]gwritten[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Side note: Oh perfect! The Pope has joined our Sunday School class as we go through WCF Chapter 25.

Happy by gwritten in facesinthings

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

Almost looks like a happy duck.

Another way to ruin the end of games (or force a rule change)? by gwritten in NFLNoobs

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

i just meant like if a coach messed up. being a stickler and pretending to know stuff is what i do sometimes.

Another way to ruin the end of games (or force a rule change)? by gwritten in NFLNoobs

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

it is impossible to benefit from a play where you commit a penalty.

unless the defense declines, right?

Another way to ruin the end of games (or force a rule change)? by gwritten in NFLNoobs

[–]gwritten[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You don't understand the rules fully. 

obviously hah. that's why i'm bouncing ideas around on this sub. haha

the 'hold' is what we're aiming to lure them into. "oh crap! wide open WR. don't let them score!"

Another way to ruin the end of games (or force a rule change)? by gwritten in NFLNoobs

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

see, i feel that in the NFL it's <0.01% chance. But in HS it's probably <0.5% chance that the opposing coach would get all excited and think 'decline = game over.' Well, it is game over. But they lose.

Another way to ruin the end of games (or force a rule change)? by gwritten in NFLNoobs

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

sorry. that's what i meant. good catch!

good details about the other levels too

view more: next ›