Pips 🏆

@CFB_Pat 2017 UGA was the best team in the country. Will go to my grave believing that. Also strange that this person split 2021 when UGA/Bama split the series but gave 2025 to Ole Miss when UGA/Ole Miss split the series....

If only bama and UGA could have played for a natty in 2021

@PrayPuffPlay @Eventzon @AndrewJRParker @BanjoAtheist @Yayay82827 I can grant his decisive shift occurred after Jesus died. I don't think we can establish with any degree of certainty that it was an experience that converted him. Even granting it, bereavement hallucinations are common. What good is citing James to the Corinthians?

During Jesus’ ministry, the Gospels portray him and his other brothers as skeptical… even thinking Jesus was “out of his mind” (Mark 3:21; John 7:5). These embarrassing details, which early Christians had no reason to invent, are reinforced by the complete absence of James from the inner circle—no mention of him at the Last Supper or among the disciples the night before the arrest, for example. After the crucifixion, things changed quickly. The early creed in 1 Corinthians 15:7, dated by most scholars to within a few years of the events, specifically records an appearance to James. By the mid-30s AD, Paul personally knew him as a “pillar” of the church (Galatians 1–2), and James soon led the Jerusalem community (Acts 15). He remained a prominent, accessible figure in Jerusalem until his martyrdom around AD 62 (recorded by Josephus), just as the first Gospel was being circulated. If James had been part of Jesus’ ministry earlier, he could’ve easily corrected the record, but the evidence shows the decisive shift occurred only after the resurrection appearance. The quick turnaround from skeptic to key leader is clear.

The resurrection as a “testable” theory. A Christian apologist backs down quick.

@PrayPuffPlay @Eventzon @AndrewJRParker @BanjoAtheist @Yayay82827 How does the historical method show that?

@pops095 @Eventzon @AndrewJRParker @BanjoAtheist @Yayay82827 Using the historical method, the answer is: after.

@Arsenal_Circuit Yes

Would winning the Premier League alone be considered a successful season for Arsenal?

@PrayPuffPlay @Eventzon @AndrewJRParker @BanjoAtheist @Yayay82827 Did James convert before or after the experience he had that is relayed in 1 Cor 15?

@Eventzon @AndrewJRParker @BanjoAtheist @Yayay82827 Which is why James is so prominently featured in the creed in 1 Corinthians. He went from thinking his brother was a lunatic to being arguably the single most important leader of the early church.

@SouthernTriumph @JackPosobiec None of what I've said is disputed by even the most ardent of shroud supporters.

@pops095 @JackPosobiec Maybe educate yourself and read more

"THIS SHROUD BELIEVED BY MANY TO BE THE VERY CLOTH THAT WRAPPED OUR LORD, HAS NOW BEEN AUTHENTICATED TO THE TIME OF CHRIST HIMSELF"

@SouthernTriumph @JackPosobiec Maybe catch up from the 90s. x.com/i/grok/share/6…

@pops095 @JackPosobiec You really need to read the book and be current on the most recent studies that's all I can say there's there's a lot more evidence that it's real then the other way around

@SouthernTriumph @JackPosobiec It is absolutely true that there is a ton of different DNA on it and that there is a bunch of Indian DNA on it. Much of it is not that surprising given this was an object of devotion for centuries and handled by all kinds of people.

@pops095 @JackPosobiec Not true you need to read about it and study read the Shroud of Turin book and studies as recently as the nineties

@SouthernTriumph @JackPosobiec There's a ton of DNA on the shroud. Like, all kinds. A bunch of Indian DNA. All kinds of plants and animals. Things from all over the world.

@JackPosobiec The original book the Shroud of Turin going back to the '80s I believe contains a lot of verifiable information as well including the fact that there was DNA on the cloth

@MindUnfolding @Gnosisinformant @VW_Manu I didn't say you were a shroud supporter. I said it's a cope that they use. There is no evidence of an invisible reweave.

@pops095 @Gnosisinformant @VW_Manu I’m a shroud supporter? 😂 Run along. Be more curious in life.

The shroud of Turin is one of my personal IQ tests for Christians. Taylor fails. The idea that it just pops up in the 14th century in Europe undetected prior makes this an IQ test for dumb people. Shrouds don’t make full body images. This would be a miracle in itself but nobody records this in the gospels or any early church fathers or sources. You have a LOW IQ with terrible historical methodology if you think the shroud of Turin is real.

@MindUnfolding @Gnosisinformant @VW_Manu Saying "they tested a repaired part" is not a question. Its a cope shroud supporters use to dismiss a test that is known to be reliable. For me, the C14 dating is enough to say reliably that the shroud did not cover the historical Jesus.

@pops095 @Gnosisinformant @VW_Manu I don’t have answers. I have questions. We’re not the same. You seem sure. I’m never sure. Always curious. We’re not the same.

@MindUnfolding @Gnosisinformant @VW_Manu Ahhh, the old "invisible reweave" theory.

@Gnosisinformant @VW_Manu They tested the repaired part which was damaged in a fire.

@SpeedWatkins This is simple like God is simple: it doesn't take many words to describe it.

Simple

@LatFilosof @PAHoyeck @RafaRuizdeLira Well, that's the way conversations with him go.

@pops095 @PAHoyeck @RafaRuizdeLira Oh god I just read that conversation. It hurt.

Since a lot of people got confused about the argument for the existence of God I posted yesterday, here's one that's even more obviously valid: P1. God exists. P2. If God exists, then God exists. C. Therefore, God exists.

@PAHoyeck @RafaRuizdeLira Had this same conversation before. Valid arguments can be, and often are, absolutely useless. x.com/i/status/17821…

@RafaRuizdeLira Omg great minds. Except that I've got people actually claiming this isn't a valid argument. My life is a nightmare.

@stigmacher1 @NuanceRational @ThoughtfulCafe @Mathenvarghese @AStrasser116 This is, as I've noted, the position of many current defenders of finitism. Pruss, Koons, Craig, etc. They note a past infinite is not logically contradictory in the strict sense. They argue it is metaphysically impossible.

@stigmacher1 @NuanceRational @ThoughtfulCafe @Mathenvarghese @AStrasser116 The abstract is all that is required! This is the point. We are talking logical possibility in the strictest sense. That in the abstract case it is possible shows logical consistency. Whether it can be so in the actual world is a different question entirely.

My favorite takeaways from arguing on Twitter today: 1. Atheism isn't a claim so it can't be wrong 2. Physics is witchcraft so there isn't any evidence for a finite past 3. Contingency contradicts cause and effect

@AStrasser116 @ThoughtfulCafe @stigmacher1 @NuanceRational @Mathenvarghese Indeed. The theist and atheists are making strange bedfellows here. Lion and lamb almost. Perhaps I should reevaluate my naturalism! 😂

@pops095 @ThoughtfulCafe @stigmacher1 @NuanceRational @Mathenvarghese More agreement than most of this thread haha

@AStrasser116 @ThoughtfulCafe @stigmacher1 @NuanceRational @Mathenvarghese I do indeed. But if you have a response that shows why it fails, Id love to read it. I haven't seen one but I admit I haven't looked.

@pops095 @ThoughtfulCafe @stigmacher1 @NuanceRational @Mathenvarghese Do you like the unsatisfiable pair diagnosis for grim reapers?

@AStrasser116 @ThoughtfulCafe @stigmacher1 @NuanceRational @Mathenvarghese And this is why I leave these things to the metaphysicians and physicists, although Im not sure what good metaphysicians are. 😅 But hey, we agree on at least one narrow point.

@pops095 @ThoughtfulCafe @stigmacher1 @NuanceRational @Mathenvarghese def not a logical contradiction, but I am a finitist & team 'actual infinite past = metaphysically impossible'. I think that cardinal properties or things like topological equivalence are inadequate ways of comparing past and future