Anathema

Trinitarians: P1: The divine essence does not possess the property of begetting. P2: The Father possesses the property of begetting intrinsically. P3: Therefore, the Father possesses a property the divine essence does not possess. P4: Whatever possesses intrinsically what the divine essence does not possess AND possesses the properties the divine essence does possess, is greater than the divine essence itself. P5: Therefore, the Father is greater than the divine essence itself. C: Therefore, the Father is God (greatest conceivable being), which means the divine essence, is not God (the greatest conceivable being). -End argument- The sum of the Father's properties (intrinsic personal properties + essence properties) is greater than just the essence properties alone. Think of it as the essence having any number of properties. The Father has all the properties of the essence + 1 (the property and power of being able to eternally generate a divine person with the divine essence), something the essence itself does not possess. Effectively, the Father controls the divine essence, which makes Him more powerful than it. Which makes Him God and the essence, not God. Since if there is something more fundamental and/or powerful than God, that thing becomes God necessarily.

I literally gasped watching this Caleb Hammer asks how this transgender guest paid for his transition surgery, specifically “the boob job” He replies “That was free — Colorado taxpayers” - Transition surgery free - Boob job free - Hormones medications free All this was free, paid for by American taxpayers Again, I want to repeat this. US Taxpayers are paying for boob jobs for transgender men to get implants I had to verify this and it’s all true Colorado’s Medicaid program (Health First Colorado) covers gender-affirming care services, including surgeries like breast augmentation This was recently changed under their Democrat Governor In 2025, Colorado passed HB 25-1309 signed by Gov. Jared Polis. This codified and expanded insurance protections for gender-affirming care across plans, including hormone therapy, breast augmentation, facial surgery, and more It even prevents insurers from denying what transgenders consider medically necessary care. Private insurance plans in the state must also cover these services under essential health benefits rules Absolutely insane

@enesovat22 If Christ is God And The Father is God Then Christ is the Father Welcome to modalism

Christ is God. Thank you for tuning into my Ted talk.

@Fr_RonPG Nothing wrong with being Anathema anymore. Just means you don't buy into their post neo platonic nonsense of the trinity. Literally, who cares? What's thE cHurcH gonna do about it?

Anathema, eh! 😅

@needGod_net Who cares

Dr. Tony Costa spoke lots of facts here when he was on David Wood's stream. Tony: "If you get the gospel wrong, you are under the anathema of God."

@Oluwadaniel_0 @MJKelleyII Bro's best arg is "1st century says it"

@MJKelleyII @anathemashow 🤣🤣🤣

Sons = Plural Son = Single Learn grammar!

@Oluwadaniel_0 @MJKelleyII Fact.

@anathemashow @MJKelleyII Son of God is not God!

@Arinzeoreva @Oluwadaniel_0 @MJKelleyII I meant that to Daniel sorry man

@anathemashow @Oluwadaniel_0 @MJKelleyII Huh, what do you mean?

Angles are never called “The” Son of God. Nice try!

@Arinzeoreva @Oluwadaniel_0 @MJKelleyII Now that was a nail in his coffin Excellent work

@Oluwadaniel_0 @MJKelleyII Honestly

@TacoBellSchitz @JPuncut @Alex_Ortodoxie Dude is the probably the worst online debater I would say and we agree on most. But the modern yt apologist isn't Christian, they're ghettotarian gatekeepers with "x gets destroyed" titles on their channel Just ghetto clout chasers looking to make an extra buck.

I've obtained a live view of @JPuncut running like a COWARD from the biggest debate of his peanut-brained life

@TacoBellSchitz @JPuncut @Alex_Ortodoxie @JayDyer No. Is that ACTUALLY JP?

I guess @JPuncut is too busy with his makeup tutorials to debate @Alex_Ortodoxie or @JayDyer

@Hanak_EL JP is a ghettotarian gatekeeper and his entire business model is built on spectacle and destroying his opponents for entertainment views. It ain't Christian apologetics really

JP doesn't actually want to debate. He wants to give off the illusion that he wanted to debate and place road blocks so that the debate won't actually happen and he can give sone excuse that Orthos are ducking him

@Oluwadaniel_0 @MJKelleyII Sons of God are not God!

@MJKelleyII So? Sons of God are? = Come on you can do it!

God is the author of the uniformity of nature.

@PeacheswuzHere Thanks Peaches 😊

No, that is your position I just call the Father and all the properties he has - God. Not an issue for me Thankyou modalist Not my job to understand or allow contradictions of your bs neo platonic word vomit Don't try that with me lol Your position amounts to you "just saying" things.

So you admit that your Unitarian concept of God has inseparable parts? Then your argument is defeated. This is truly remarkable. I thought that you would be a serious debater with a robust response to the issues. Unfortunately, it seems like you have nothing substantive to say. If you don’t understand the concepts, then say so.

Trinitarians: P1: The divine essence does not possess the property of begetting. P2: The Father possesses the property of begetting intrinsically. P3: Therefore, the Father possesses a property the divine essence does not possess. P4: Whatever possesses intrinsically what the divine essence does not possess AND possesses the properties the divine essence does possess, is greater than the divine essence itself. P5: Therefore, the Father is greater than the divine essence itself. C: Therefore, the Father is God (greatest conceivable being), which means the divine essence, is not God (the greatest conceivable being). -End argument- The sum of the Father's properties (intrinsic personal properties + essence properties) is greater than just the essence properties alone. Think of it as the essence having any number of properties. The Father has all the properties of the essence + 1 (the property and power of being able to eternally generate a divine person with the divine essence), something the essence itself does not possess. Effectively, the Father controls the divine essence, which makes Him more powerful than it. Which makes Him God and the essence, not God. Since if there is something more fundamental and/or powerful than God, that thing becomes God necessarily.

@diego_claramunt @PeacheswuzHere Blah blah blah Still just a part. You saying all of this junk, doesn't make ANY of it true

Your should pay closer attention dude. You’re equivocating between separable & inseparable parts. So your argument is fallacious. God is made up of inseparable parts on your Unitarian view as well; unless you hold to a strong doctrine of divine simplicity, which is incoherent & unbiblical. Furthermore, everything I said is actually consistent with divine simplicity if you take it all as analogical predication as opposed to univocal. Do you believe that God has attributes, like omnipotence, omniscience, aseity, necessity, eternity? Obviously the answer is yes. Well these are all inseparable parts of the divine essence. So even if you think God only has one ego (the Father) then that ego is a concrete ontological constituent of the divine nature. It is a 2nd order faculty, distinct from God’s intellectual, noetic, volitional, & affective faculties. All of these are inseparable parts of the divine mind This is why I said that your ontology is mistaken. This is clear in the original argument you gave where you are using terms that you don’t understand. I gave defined my terms clearly & without contradiction.

@SirFoxFur @Ihunanya_chi It*

@SirFoxFur @Ihunanya_chi I'm just demonstrates that the trinity is false

🚨🚨🚨 Ten things I believe: 1.Jesus is God manifested in the flesh. 2.Jesus is eternal and has no beginning. 3.The entire Bible points to Jesus. 4.Jesus was the One who appeared to Abraham, Moses, Jacob, Joshua, Adam, and the parents of Samson. 5.All the prophets testified about Jesus. 6.Jesus did not begin to exist in the New Testament; He simply revealed Himself in human form. 7.The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are One. 8.Jesus is the Yahweh revealed in the Old Testament. 9.Jesus is alive, and He is coming again soon. 10.Jesus Christ will judge the whole world.

@OverInDover Weak cope. If you can't comprehend him via earthly logic, whatever that is, then you wouldn't be able to tell if he were incomprehensible via the same earthly logic Also, logic isn't earthly It describes things that exist

You're wasting your time and energy on this. God exists outside of (and within, and through) the realms of time and space. You cannot comprehend Him on with earthly logic, so trying to comprehend the relationship to the Holy Spirit and Jesus is an exercise in futility. You don't have to understand it, you only need to believe and obey.

@diego_claramunt @PeacheswuzHere You didn't refute anything You blew up the orthodox and catholic model of the trinity as well God is made up of parts according to you Debate over

I refuted this. Your ontology is mistaken. Do you not understand the unity of substance or the ontology of personal identity? Ontological personal-identity takes the first person indexical “I” as a logically proper name of a primitive, unanalyzable entity that does not admit degree, or change, and is known by direct acquaintance, the self. Therefore the self, i.e. the “ego” or “I” is a concrete constituent of the soul which as a mental faculty, grounds ontological personal identity. This “I” is a primitive which generates “I-thoughts” in the soul, and that entails other properties like cognitive faculties of intellect, volition, affection, and so forth, which are necessary for it to be instantiated. Thus, it would seem to be encaptic, for it stands in internal relations to these personhood supporting, subpersonal cognitive faculties while not being reducible to any of these other properties. Animals are not persons because they lack an “I.” The best ontology of an “I” would be a bare-particular haecceity hybrid ontology for persons. I propose that we conceive of the “I”/ego as a personal haecceity: a primitive personal individuality instantiated within a soul that is different from the primitive thisness of a bare-particular. While bare-particulars individuate substances from each other, personal-hacceities individuate egos within souls. God has one bare particular exemplifying three personal haecceities that are ontologically inseparable parts of one divine essence, where “P is an inseparable part of some whole W =def. p is a particular, p is a part of W, and p cannot exist if it is not a part of W.” This model makes sense subconscious psychological phenomenon like Akrasia. As Aristotle reflected upon the explanation of akrasia, he reasoned that there must be another set of deep beliefs and desires…which are hidden from simple consciousness but are in some way implicit or embedded in the habituated dynamics of the soul…These “deep beliefs and desires,” upon being cued, supplant the initial desires and beliefs of the person, and move the person to act against their better conscious beliefs and desires.