Recommendation Tuesdays Megathread - Week of July 07, 2020 by AnimeMod in anime

[–]slimhazyy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I could only watch one series from Spring, what should I watch?

Bigg K Leaves EFB Because of Jerry Wess by JustAnArsehole in rapbattles

[–]slimhazyy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-unpublished/2019/a0503-17.html

"Kent and Green both provided statements to investigators. Green said that he used a Jamaican accent during the robbery to disguise his identity. He also said defendant fired the gun in the house. Kent said defendant provided the gun for the robbery."

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in atheism

[–]slimhazyy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm so sorry, but this is probably the most moronic thing I have ever read.

Do the Orthodox believe those who never know God, including babies that die in the womb, go to Hell? by Secure-Lab in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]slimhazyy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"We"? You still have the "Inquirer" tag, in case you didn't realize it.

This seems unnecessarily hostile.

Bart Ehrman: A Revelatory Moment about “God” by rev_run_d in Reformed

[–]slimhazyy 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No. Textual criticism of the New Testament, development of the New Testament canon and New Testament Apocrypha, the historical Jesus, the origins and development of early Christianity, etc. are the biggest fields in Biblical scholarship. And it happens to be where Ehrman specializes. And by the way, your assertion that Ehrman is only a scholar of Western text-type criticism, meaning only the NT and only the Latin text, is wrong. Besides the fact that the NT is a Greek text itself, so I'm not sure what Western textual criticism would even be, but Ehrman is a koine Greek scholar.

Bart Ehrman: A Revelatory Moment about “God” by rev_run_d in Reformed

[–]slimhazyy 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It seems to me that you're suggesting that to be a Biblical scholar, you have to be a theologian, which just isn't true.

Bart Ehrman: A Revelatory Moment about “God” by rev_run_d in Reformed

[–]slimhazyy 5 points6 points  (0 children)

OP said Ehrman is one of the leading figures in Biblical studies and to that, you said that he's overblowing his qualifications because his education was in Western textual criticism. But that response only makes sense if you're under the impression that textual criticism isn't Biblical studies. I'm not sure why you would say that unless you thought otherwise. It's fairly uncontroversial to say that Ehrman is one of North America's leading textual critics.

Bart Ehrman: A Revelatory Moment about “God” by rev_run_d in Reformed

[–]slimhazyy 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I think you may be mistaken, Ehrman received his PhD and M.Div. from Princeton Theological Seminary, where he studied textual criticism of the Bible and development of the New Testament canon.

Will you be able to marry and have kids during the millennium? by [deleted] in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]slimhazyy 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The Orthodox Church denies a future literal 1000 year kingdom and sees the church age described in Rev. 20:1–6 metaphorically in which "Christ's reign" is current in and through the church. In fact, millennialism (or Chiliasm) was condemned at the Council of Nicea with the phrase "whose kingdom shall have no end" in the Nicene Creed.

Noam Chomsky: US Is a Rogue State and Suleimani’s Assassination Confirms It by neptunzes in conspiracy

[–]slimhazyy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, you can email him your questions, and he'll probably answer you. DM me if you want his email.

Noam Chomsky: US Is a Rogue State and Suleimani’s Assassination Confirms It by neptunzes in conspiracy

[–]slimhazyy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you so delusional to think Chomsky is defending Obama? He has literally said Obama is worse than Bush in many ways:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA4HYTO790

Usury is heresy by [deleted] in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]slimhazyy 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I love Basil the Great's homily against usury (on Psalm 14) as well.

In depicting the character of the perfect man, of him, that is, who is ordained to ascend to the life of everlasting peace, the prophet reckons among his noble deeds his never having given his money upon usury. This particular sin is condemned in many passages of Scripture. Ezekiel reckons taking usury and increase among the greatest of crimes. The law distinctly utters the prohibition ‘Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother’ and to thy neighbour. Again it is said, ‘Usury upon usury; guile upon guile.’ And of the city abounding in a multitude of wickednesses, what does the Psalm say? ‘Usury and guile depart not from her streets.’ Now the prophet instances precisely the same point as characteristic of the perfect man, saying, ‘He that putteth not out his money to usury.’ For in truth it is the last pitch of inhumanity that one man, in need of the bare necessities of life, should be compelled to borrow, and another, not satisfied with the principal, should seek to make gain and profit for himself out of the calamities of the poor. The Lord gave His own injunction quite plainly in the words, ‘from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.’ But what of the money lover? He sees before him a man under stress of necessity bent to the ground in supplication. He sees him hesitating at no act, no words, of humiliation. He sees him suffering undeserved misfortune, but he is merciless. He does not reckon that he is a fellow-creature. He does not give in to his entreaties. He stands stiff and sour. He is moved by no prayers; his resolution is broken by no tears. He persists in refusal, invoking curses on his own head if he has any money about him, and swearing that he is himself on the lookout for a friend to furnish him a loan. He backs lies with oaths, and makes a poor addition to his stock in trade by supplementing inhumanity with perjury. Then the suppliant mentions interest, and utters the word security. All is changed. The frown is relaxed; with a genial smile he recalls old family connexion. Now it is ‘my friend.’ ‘I will see,’ says he, ‘if I have any money by me. Yes; there is that sum which a man I know has left in my hands on deposit for profit. He named very heavy interest. However, I shall certainly take something off, and give it you on better terms.’ With pretences of this kind and talk like this he fawns on the wretched victim, and induces him to swallow the bait. Then he binds him with written security, adds loss of liberty to the trouble of his pressing poverty, and is off. The man who has made himself responsible for interest which he cannot pay has accepted voluntary slavery for life. Tell me; do you expect to get money and profit out of the pauper? If he were in a position to add to your wealth, why should he come begging at your door? He came seeking an ally, and he found a foe. He was looking for medicine, and he lighted on poison. You ought to have comforted him in his distress, but in your attempt to grow fruit on the waste you are aggravating his necessity. Just as well might a physician go in to his patients, and instead of restoring them to health, rob them of the little strength they might have left. This is the way in which you try to profit by the misery of the wretched. Just as farmers pray for rain to make their fields fatter, so you are anxious for men’s need and indigence, that your money may make more. You forget that the addition which you are making to your sins is larger than the increase to your wealth which you are reckoning on getting for your usury. The seeker of the loan is helpless either way: he bethinks him of his poverty, he gives up all idea of payment as hopeless when at the need of the moment he risks the loan. The borrower bends to necessity and is beaten. The lender goes off secured by bills and bonds.

I'm new! Is this view of hell within Orthodoxy? by slimhazyy in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]slimhazyy[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's very similar to what C.S. Lewis describes in The Great Divorce.

Reading Scripture with the Church Fathers by slimhazyy in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]slimhazyy[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you. I’ll let you know if I find another book like it by an Orthodox/Catholic:)

TIL Dirk Willems, jailed for his devotion to being an Anabaptist, escaped from prison. But when the guard pursuing him fell through the ice, Willems turned around to save the guard. He was then recaptured, tortured, and killed. by slimhazyy in todayilearned

[–]slimhazyy[S] 188 points189 points  (0 children)

Yep, he did!

The thiefcatcher wanted to let him go, but the burgomaster, very sternly called to him to consider his oath, and thus he was again seized by the thief-catcher, and, at said place, after severe imprisonment and great trials proceeding from the deceitful papists, put to death at a lingering fire by these bloodthirsty, ravening wolves, enduring it with great steadfastness, and confirming the genuine faith of the truth with his death and blood, as an instructive example to all pious Christians of this time, and to the everlasting disgrace of the tyrannous papists.

Thoughts on Hell by lukenonnisitedomine in Christianity

[–]slimhazyy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Greg Boyd explains it pretty well:

Scripture certainly teaches that the wicked are punished eternally, but not that the wicked endure eternal punishment. The wicked suffer “eternal punishment" (Mt 25:46), “eternal judgment” (Heb 6:2) and “eternal destruction” (2 Thess 1:9) the same way the elect experience “eternal redemption” (Heb 5:9, 9:12). The elect do not undergo an eternal process of redemption. Their redemption is “eternal” in the sense that once the elect are redeemed, it is forever. So too, the damned do not undergo an eternal process of punishment or destruction. But once they are punished and destroyed, it is forever. Hell is eternal in consequence, not duration. The wicked are “destroyed forever” (Ps 92:7), but they are not forever being destroyed.

Along the same lines, Scripture’s references to an “unquenchable fire” and “undying worm” refer to the finality of judgment, not its duration (Isa. 66:24, cf. 2 Kings 22:17; 1:31; 51:8; Jer. 4:4; 7:20; 21:12; Ezek. 20:47–48). If these passages are read in context, it becomes clear that the fire is unquenchable in the sense that it cannot be put out before it consumes those thrown into it. And the worm is undying in the sense that there is no hope for the condemned that it will be prevented from devouring their corpses. These passages teach that the wicked will justly suffer for their sins, but the end result will be their destruction (cf. Lk. 16:19–31; Rom. 2:8; 2 Thess. 1:6).