Thread

🛡️
You rejected the Apostle Paul, cited the Jefferson Bible, and pivoted to iconography halos when the argument fell apart. That’s not exposing my myopia. That’s you admitting you don’t have a coherent theological framework, just a grab bag of alternative theories that let you dismiss anything inconvenient. Reformed Christianity has 2,000 years of tested theology, confessional standards, and a coherent hermeneutic. You’ve got Jefferson’s scissors and conspiracy theories about pole flips. Call me railroaded all you want. At least I’m on tracks that go somewhere

Replies (2)

I mean, that's true. I reject Paul. Jefferson had a good idea. It's not the ultimate idea ever but it's a good one. You made no argument whatsoever other than fiat bullshit for why the authority of the apostles is valid. Your myopia causes you to be unable to see that. It's not a conspiracy theory. Maybe you should spend time reading declassified documents. Einstein seemed to think Hapgood's theory was possessed of great scientific merit. It's called doing due diligence. It's called recognizing the law of diminishing marginal returns. You can study King James Bible or whatever version you like till you're blue in the face but until you study every religion looking for common ground under every rock, you'll never know what else is out there. That's the lesson of the camel and the eye of the needle but, again, modern Christians typically don't get that lesson. They say "How the hell could a camel fit through an eye of a needle?" and then move on, harboring confusion.