Jay

The BBQ Principle isn’t a system, It’s the floor everything else stands on. Group debates don’t change the order, they just add noise on top of it. Everyone still has to notice something before they argue about it, panels, forums, crosstalk, it’s all interpretation piled on the same first step. And that’s why the boundary shows up even clearer in chaos, the second you point back to recognition, everyone drops to the same ground floor. You cut through the noise because every person, on every side, is already moving through the same sequence: recognize.. interpret... respond. Crowds don’t escape it, they just forget the ground they’re standing on.

@MyCup0verFlows @DrPoulose @FightofFaith @AnointedPosts @stevens26737 @ChristIsComing5 @ColorsNme4Ever @Pontifex_es A belief isn't "adding to scripture" simply because scripture doesn't explicitly discuss it and The Trinity isn't stated in one verse either. Now answer the question.

@bbqchips221 @DrPoulose @FightofFaith @AnointedPosts @stevens26737 @ChristIsComing5 @ColorsNme4Ever @Pontifex_es Show me where we are allowed to add to Scripture.

Praying Rosary is Unbiblical. ❤️🙏🏻✝️ Growing up in a Catholic family, I vividly recall praying Rosaries every day during my childhood and teenage years. For Catholics, praying the Rosary is an emotionally profound experience, and I can completely relate to that sentiment. While the Bible acknowledges Mary, the mother of Jesus, as a blessed woman, there isn’t a scriptural pattern that encourages us to ask her to pray to God on our behalf. After I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, I stopped praying the Rosary for several reasons. Here are a few of them: 1. The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is the sole mediator between God and Man. “For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,” I Timothy 2:5-6 NKJV 2. The Bible asserts that Jesus Christ intercedes for us in heaven, and His intercession is sufficient. “Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.” Hebrews 7:25 NKJV 3. Jesus never taught us to pray to His mother. The pattern He gave us is different. ““And in that day you will ask Me nothing. Most assuredly, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in My name He will give you. Until now you have asked nothing in My name. Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full.” John 16:23-24 NKJV A biblical, Christian prayer should be addressed to the Father, in the name of Jesus with the help of the Holy Spirit, according to His will, which is revealed in His word. 4. The apostles never prayed to Mother Mary. Here is a pattern of apostle Paul’s prayer. “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height— to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.” Ephesians 3:14-19 NKJV 5. The martyrs in heaven pray to God. “When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held. And they cried with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?”” Revelation 6:9-10 NKJV 6. Rosary evolved much later and the Acts of the Apostles, which includes roughly 35 years of church history does not show any Rosary prayers. 7. Rosary is a pattern of prayer developed by the Catholic Church. Here is a brief Grok summary. Early Roots (3rd–12th Centuries) • Christians, influenced by Desert Fathers (3rd–4th centuries), used knotted ropes or beads to count prayers like the Jesus Prayer or all 150 Psalms (a practice called a “Psalter”). en.wikipedia.org • This drew from pre-Christian bead use for counting prayers and Jewish traditions of reciting the 150 Psalms. • By the 11th–12th centuries, laypeople and monks recited 150 Hail Marys (the “Marian Psalter”) as a parallel to the Psalms, often in groups of 50. The Hail Mary itself combined biblical greetings from Luke’s Gospel (Gabriel’s and Elizabeth’s words), with the “Holy Mary…” petition added later. franciscanmedia.org Association with St. Dominic (Early 13th Century) • Tradition holds that around 1208–1221, St. Dominic (founder of the Dominicans) received the Rosary in a vision from the Blessed Virgin Mary while combating the Albigensian heresy in southern France. She reportedly gave it as a spiritual weapon for conversion. franciscanmedia.org

@cyber7878_ @SlavlandStalker @dmoonlives Eve being deceived once is not a doctrine about all women, so Adam sinned with full knowledge. If we're generalizing from individuals, men come out looking worse in that story.

@SlavlandStalker @dmoonlives Last point flat out contradicts what the bible actually says, everything else except women seeing the resurrection first is false too. Eve was the one who was deceived in the garden, and Adam was punished for having listened to her (what you claim people should be doing).

Christian men are told not to kiss their girlfriends while Christian women are told it’s okay to have a body count. Male sexuality is demonized by the church more than Satan himself.

@nicoraytruth @DakariusAshby The Creed doesn't say my mother stops being my mother either. Resurrection assumes continuity of persons, you're turning silence into a doctrine.

Show me where. Not your intuition, the actual doctrine. Where does creedal Christianity teach that your child is still your child, that the people you love are still the people you love, as specific persisting relationships? The creed promises resurrection of the body and life in the world to come. That’s it. The Catholic Catechism talks about communion of saints in vague terms. Protestants default to “we’ll be focused on God.” Orthodox theology centers theosis, union with the divine. None of them promise your six-year-old is still your six year old. None of them promise the friendships persist as friendships. You’re not quoting your tradition. You’re quoting Joseph’s and crediting it to yours. That’s the post’s whole point.

Most Christians already believe in a Mormon heaven. Stand at any funeral and listen, “I’ll see her again,” “he’s waiting for me”, they mean it the way Joseph meant it. Her actual face. Him, recognizably him. But that’s not what their churches teach. The creeds promise union, vision, dissolution into glory. Joseph Smith is the only one who promised you the person. And the only one who built an explicit path to keep them.

@primeargument @IndoKatholic @natanarayana Are you sure about that?

@IndoKatholic @natanarayana There is no evidence Jesus was a historical person. Let alone the resurrection myth.

Nobody thinks Daniel was teaching "lion attack prevention." The point is that Scripture is about trust, obedience, suffering, deliverance, meaning, judgment, mercy, and God acting in history. Reducing it to "self help" first, then mocking the reduction, just attacks a caricature you invented yourself.

It is a self help book, if you get attacked by a Lion: Then the king gave orders, and Daniel was brought in and cast into the lions’ den. The king spoke and said to Daniel, “Your God whom you constantly serve will Himself deliver you.” And just like that I am saved from a Lion attack.

THE BIBLE IS WORTH MORE THAN A COLLEGE EDUCATION. 100%

Looking back, "Oxford Immune System" was already hiding inside the original sequence. Recognize -> Interpret -> Respond. If recognition becomes self protective at Step One, the rest of the system can remain perfectly "logical" while still becoming profoundly inhuman. That is the danger. A person recognized as burden, threat, abstraction, hallucination, bias, or inadmissible anomaly can now be interpreted away with clean intellectual language. The response will feel rational because the fracture happened before reasoning even began, the immune system activated at recognition.

The first sin was inversion, the serpent did not begin with rebellion, he began by recording the sequence. Interpret before recognizing, choose before submitting. That was the Fall. Every later sin repeats the same move, and the self steps ahead of what is given. And Judgement replaces witness, negotiation replaces obedience, the collapse began when the order flipped. God speaks -> the command is given -> reality is already defined. The serpent intervenes by forcing interpertation first, then choice, before trust. That is why Scripture treats this as deadly, not minor.

Morality doesn’t start at reasoning or rules, it starts at what we see first when we face another human being.

"Oxford Immune System" The moment intelligence stops functioning as an instrument of discovery and starts functioning as a defense mechanism against inadmissible reality. High status rationality used to quarantine transcendence before the encounter is even allowed to happen.

A framework begins dying the moment it values self preservation more than discovery. That is the real danger of closed systems, Eventually "reason" stops asking, "is this true?" and starts asking, "Can my perimeter survive this?" At that point, labels replace recognition, "Hallucination." "Delusion." "Bias." "Heretic." The category swallows the person before the encounter even begins because the materialist protects the closure of the physical. The ideologue protects the closure of the moral, different language, same immune response. And maybe that is why the Resurrection remains so disruptive. Because if Christ rose, reality is not sealed, Nature is not ultimate, Death is not sovereign, And human beings are not the source of meaning, only participants within it. That possibility threatens every system built on interpretive sovereignty, because now the question is no longer, "Can I explain this away?" The question becomes, "What happens to my autonomy if this is true?"

Jay Dyer was one of the strongest that represented tag, He took it beyond what others couldn't. He improved the vantil, but improvement stays inside step two, it doesn’t change the order TAG begins in.

Richard Dawkins would love this because it never asks him to believe, it only exposes the move he already makes. Keep the event, drain it of authority, call the refusal intellectual honesty. Sure that posture feels neutral, It protects autonomy, the sign still stands, the responsibility still arrives, only the meaning gets quarantined.

The issue was never whether every Father agreed on every detail so the issue is who preserved, defended, transmitted, and recognized the apostolic faith across generations. Even Scripture comes through the Church they're minimizing, and "the Fathers disagreed" quickly once Protestants disagree on nearly every major doctrine themselves.

Very good points here. I love and respect many of the early church fathers. But their teachings and writings must always be viewed as below scripture. Not equal with it.

Miracles do not argue for God, they expose the observer, first comes recognition. Something happens in the world that breaks the ordinary pattern, this part is shared, friends and enemies see the same event. Next comes interpretation, meaning gets assigned, authority gets located or resisted and this is where conflict begins. Finally comes response, following, rejection Rejection, Hostility and Silence. Denial rarely takes the form of disbelief, it takes the form of reinterpretation. "He healed, but it means nothing." "It happened, but it proves nothing." "The event stands, but the authority disappears." That move protects the observer from the response the dominant interpretation demands. Recognition -> Interpretation -> Response Miracles do not compel belief, they clarify responsibility, that sequence is why miracles never leave anyone neutral.

The funny part is that several items on this list are not uniquely Roman. Confession, intercession, sacramental realism, apostolic authority, and prayers for the departed are all ancient Christian realities. So this is not just an attack on Rome, it is an attack on much of historic Christianity.

Except the gospel, the sufficiency of Christ, the canon of scripture, Mariology, purgatory, indulgences, confession, the treasury of merit, intercession (necromancy), and transubstantiation just to name a few things the Catholic Church is verifiably wrong about.

Acts 15 gives you apostolic council authority, it does not give you later papal supremacy. The apostles and elders gather, debate, judge, write, and the whole Church receives the decision. That is conciliar authority in action. So yes, Christ founded a Church with authority. You still have to prove Rome alone possesses it universally.

@Joshua_M_Hump That is actually a very stupid statement. That’s like saying the Bible gives you authority to teach infallibly, when there are countless people arguing about the interpretation of Scripture. Christ founded a Church with authority, we see this authority in action in Acts 15:

If you left Protestantism for Catholicism, that’s not a move upwards but a fall from biblical authority.

@Torquat28352878 @WesleyLHuff No, Arianism,Nicaea drew the line against the denial of Christ’s full divinity, the filioque is a later controversy, so bringing it up here is another dodge.

@bbqchips221 @WesleyLHuff Heresy? What heresy? The Filioque?

Did Emperor Constantine coerce the Christian leaders when he called the Council of Nicaea? As I explain in this clip, standing in front of the Victory Arch of Constantine in Rome, the evidence speaks for itself.

@Torquat28352878 @WesleyLHuff The Creed did not fail because heresy continued, It did what truth always does, it exposed error, drew the line, and made the division visible.

@bbqchips221 @WesleyLHuff You all can't even agree on what the Trinity is. And the entire point of the creed was to combat Arianism. It wound up dividing the church instead. Big fail.