Search results

Zero uniformity among philosophers rn. I want to know if you feed each firm's A.I. chat-bot generative large language model machine, the whole content-base for philosophers (every philosopher's writings), and tune them appropriately (just not unreasonably), what do they all say? idk how many...

Luke 1:45 ... before John 2 ---- you were right. Luke 1:45 Dispensationalism. Luke 1: 45 "blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord," that's the first Christian, because Our Lady ... "believed" ... in Jesus ... John 3:16 We use the...

ok.

So you're arguing fornication (pre-marital) should be against the law too then, no? As always.

Good thread, good question, good case made by O.P. (He still around?) It's interpreted more recently to include adding something you don't normally do also, instead of giving up something, sometimes. Like you add doing morning prayers, or something like that. Only speaking for my personal...

No, I'm not. I love guns. They are the key to securing all our rights. But you are violent.

This one's from an oldish thread that I don't want to muck up anymore than I already have: This O.P. (on the same topic as the above) has so many good questions which I would expect generative chat A.I. to answer well, to at least give us all pause, I'm just going to break them up one by one...

You have a very violent mind. I love guns, but you're way more violent than me.

It would be fascinating to see what A.I. thinks about systematic theology. It wouldn't obligate anybody, it would just be interesting, like how before every Super Bowl they have "Madden" (an American football simulator video game) play the upcoming NFL championship game, to see who wins...

@john w was the best I ever saw or interacted with. He just destroyed opposition. Your link is fascinating because it captures part of what the very first generation of social media users experienced, during a brief and limited time. Who knows when that era officially ended, but it's sure...

I guess Catholics believe it started with Our Lady the Virgin Mary. idk what year that would be, but it would be no later than John chapter two. I guess Catholicism would be John 2 Dispensationalism. I guess I need to change my motto. Catholicism has zero problem with that. This is a...

I agree with all that.

Has anybody ever yet fed generative A.I. with the whole Bible and ask the A.I. what the Bible's about?

Barbarian literally destroyed the O.P. in post number two: https://theologyonline.com/threads/how-plumbing-not-vaccines-eradicated-disease.26670/

Another very old thread, a good one: One of the answers I gave in another thread applies: And worth noting that they'd be regulated at, but I can't say at here. Implied profanity or vulgarity or something like that. It's unfortunate when you're censored from saying something. You have to...

Totally agree. Otherwise Jesus committed ad hominem all the time. And that's impossible. We measure logic according to His measuring tape: Whatever we know about logic, we know Jesus Christ is not illogical; So therefore nothing He ever said or did could possibly be illogical, and if it...

That's a nice metaphor. Props. Didn't you just suggest that two-thirds of the angels were not swept away by Satan's tail, and that two-thirds of mankind will perish eternally? Isn't that the same side of the equation? I must be misunderstanding. Where's that "eek" emoji when you need it...

That's fine Clete. But what you can't show because there's no proof of it, is that there were no believers in Corinth before Paul got there, what? like 13 years after Peter pierced the hearts of those present in Palestine on Pentecost in c. A.D. 33? You can't show that, and meanwhile we can...

I think it's the bishops. I think John here is writing not as an Apostle as if he is a towering authority over everybody else, but that he's just another bishop, like how Peter wrote his epistles. He wasn't saying, "Hey, I'm Saint Peter and you're not! Now listen to me!" Peter's epistles read...

Yeah. I think that's basically by analogy the "Constitutional Originalist" postition on the matter: c. It's not open for debate, it's a matter of study and scholarship, not an opportunity to advance your ideology. If you want to advance your ideology, you're going to have to introduce...