Baxter Williams

At least this is my impression.

Going back to lots would essentially be a form of rejecting the presence of the Holy Spirit within individuals in the church.

The idea of the spiritual gifts is that the Holy Spirit is residing in a person, so lots aren't needed ever since pentecost.

Because Christianity brought with it a living church that can give guidance in place of non-living lots, and protestants didn't object to that concept, they just thought the living church wasn't solely in the Roman hierarchy.

Wouldn't it be based on the book the toys are from?

I've met Jewish Christians who earnestly believe that the flood was God correcting mistake he made.

But I've only ever met individuals who think things like that, not denominations.

Life is definitely life'n today.

A person in magenta clerical robes and a white collar sits at a panel table with a microphone, wearing pink bunny ears on a headband. A wooden staff stands upright behind them. On the table are a water bottle, a glass, and papers. Another person in blue is partially visible beside them. The setting appears to be a conference or religious panel. The bunny ears add a playful contrast to the formal attire.

I love my bishop 😂🐇 #ecmn #episcopalconvention

Every time I visit my dad, the tv is on and turned to fox news. Doesn't matter if he isn't in the room. Doesn't matter if he is paying attention. It is always on. It's the equivalent of brainrot behavior from that generation. Makes me sad.

How in the world is IKEA nonprofit?

Are non profits just not allowed to have a savings account or something? Their spending has to equal their revenue every year?

I still don't understand the difference between a for-profit corporation and a nonprofit corporation.

Both seem to be able to pay their executive leadership any amount they want from revenue.

I'm so tired of confident answers from both theists and skeptics when I'm looking up historical questions or linguistic questions.

Where's my uncertain scholars at? We need more Dale Allison jrs in the world.

Either they don't remember church in the 90s, or this is a classic case of "times were great when I was 5 years old"

The older you get, the more you realize you're not going to convince anyone of nearly anything, on any subject.

Only if they're intentionally trying to find new options.

thanks for spreading this letter

a screenshot of the settings page in BlueSky where it shows that I have muted the word "epsteim" for 7 days.

I'm only here to talk about nice, calm, non-controversial subjects like God and religion.

I have alts for politics, thank you very much.

not your bad! It was very easy to read it the way you read it!

I just don't know if I could psychologically sustain it. I would have to come up with a plausible account of why Paul and the synoptics thought Jesus didn't like divorce and remarriage if Jesus never said anything like it.

image from Instagram from an account called "thesimplecatholic" posting a meme from the office. Above the image it says "Priests preaching on the feast of the Most Holy Trinity who accidentally commit heresy be like:" and then the caption of Michael Scott says "sometimes I'll start a sentence and I don't even know where it is going"

Sorry, not trying to be anti-Christian. Just trying to poke fun at how easy it is to be a heretic 😅 (clearly not getting the tone across that I meant to)

I've seen orthodox Christians laugh at memes like this one

"Hi, yes, I'm red letter only. No, not those red letters. Only these ones. Wait, where are you going?" 🙃

Could I be a "John-only" Christian???

Is such a position psychologically sustainable?? Would any reasonable church host me??

Just realized that John doesn't mention Jesus’s commandments on divorce and remarriage.

Paul and the synoptics all mention it, so I just assumed John did as well, but he doesn't.

Fascinating...

Rigorously systematic hope and trust.

I hope for parts of Christianity.

This is why I currently don't hope for Christianity to be true. It is because I believe Christianity to entail things that I don't hope for.

If A entails B, then hoping for A entails hoping for B.

If you don't hope for B then you don't really hope for A either.

Since Jesus told people to pluck out their eyes if the eyes were causing them to sin, I'm guessing he would not be on the side of "have sex with your husband to give him an out for his lust".

You could remove "who've fallen for the AI grift" from this sentence and it would still be true.

Many pastors are little more than conscious, so I stand by my argument 😉

Sorry, I don't type as fast as you, I should probably finish my thread before hitting post.