/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>720971

>14:05

>"This is why that statement "Mother of God" is a dumb statement. It's not a Biblical statement. Okay, you're not gonna find in the Bible that term "Mother of God," that's a man-made term. Man's philosophy came up with that idea by saying "well, if Mary's the mother of Jesus and Jesus is God then Mary's the Mother of God" Hey, why don't we just call Mary "Mary?" Why don't we just call her "The Virgin Mary" instead of coming up with this weird unbiblical term that's misleading? Because of the fac- cause you can say "well technically it's correct because Jesus is God she's the Mother of G-" okay but it's a misleading term because it makes it sound like Mary is senior to God. Or that she predates God, when you start calling her the "Mother of God""

>45:10

>Just glosses over verse 1:43 which disproves what he said earlier

Luke 1:43 "And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?"

>>720987

>>720986

Modalism isn't Arianism, modalism is Sabellianism, another ancient heresy from around the same time.

>>720971

Finally, we can all interpret the Bible how we want.

>rape is now legal

>>720987

>Arianism was literally a reaction to Modalism

<Modalism is a brainlet version of Arianism

>>721022

Anderson made a documentary about anime saying it's a vengeful Japanese kamikaze attack to destroy America by turning everyone gay

>>721022

>fundamentalist

>posts anime

Pick one.

>>721030

t. Brainlet

>>721032

One of the least ridiculous things he's said.

>>721033

Please explain how posting pictures in a certain style is unbiblical

>>720986

People have no actual clue about history since all they go off of are second hand(or worse) accounts.

I’m with you, man.

They hear “Arianism is nontrinitarian”. They don’t read where Arius refers to the Godhead as a “Triad.” So they think it must be moralism.

>>721049

Modalism*

>>720982

Good think Luke 1:43 isn't Christ speaking.

>>721056

>“The entire Bible is God’s word. I want to release a “redtext” version of the Bible but the whole thing is in redtext, cause it’s all the word of God” -Steven L Anderson

Not to mention, he claimed it was unbiblical and never mentioned in the Bible, but actually it is in Luke 1:43. Even if he wants to argue Elisabeth was wrong, that doesn’t mean it’s suddenly never in the Bible

>>721056

Mother of my lord =/= mother of the Eternal Christ, Alpha and Omega

>>721070

Are you saying Mary isn't the mother of the eternal Alpha and Omega?

>>721082

That would imply Mary existed before the Eternal (so without a beginning) Alpha and Omega

I'm catholic and I venerate Mary but this is basically turning Mary into God if we take things this far.

>>721032

broken clock is right twice a day

>>721085

You know, alot of people will object to the phrase "mother of God" on this board, and they will be called Nestorians, even if the reasons they give are completely different than Nestorius' reasoning, or even orthodox. But that post was one of the few which was an authentic case of Nestorianism, namely in that it says Mary gave birth to a man who is our Lord, but who is not "the Eternal Christ, Alpha and Omega". Yes, Mary did not birth the eternal nature of the Son, but He whom she bore is none other than the eternal Word of God the Father, for the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us. If in fact the man our Lord Jesus were another than our God the eternal Alpha and Omega, who creates and destroys, then it would be indeed proper to say there are two Sons of God, because both the man and God are called Son of God. The man Jesus of Nazareth was begotten before all ages.

>>720971

Why do Baptists hate Mary?

Can someone please, please explain to me why they hate Mary Mother of God?

>>721094

Thanks. This is clearer now and it makes sense. Good post anon

>>721098

Nobody hates Mary. He's wrong about Catholics "worshiping" Mary, but that doesn't mean he hates Mary, he hates "mariolatry," he hates what he thinks Catholics are doing

Pastor Anderson is a good face for Christianity tbh. High T levels

To anyone here talking about Nestorianism, Mary, etc:

BIRTH DOES NOT IMPLY GENERATION

>>721085

>That would imply Mary existed before the Eternal (so without a beginning) Alpha and Omega

It just implies that Mary is the Mother of God, nothing more nothing less.

>>721153

>>721085

Look, there are two basic facts here. There is one person, the Lord Jesus Christ, and he is both fully divine and fully human, that is, he has both a divine nature and a human nature. Mary is not the mother of a nature. She is the mother of a person who is fully divine and fully human. Christ existed before Mary from eternity, yet Mary pre-exists Christ with respect to his humanity. Christ existed before Mary, but his humanity only exists after he was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary.

Objecting to the title "Mother of God" because it's open to confusion by the ignorant misses the point entirely. It's supposed to sound shocking and paradoxical. But it is true. This title draws us into deeper contemplation of the mystery of the Incarnation.

>>721049

Arianism is a heresy, repent.

>>720971

>1hr

tl:dw

>>721153

>She is the mother of the incarnation of God, which is not the fullness of God.

Filtered for literal heresy

>>721142

This. Mothers dont even create their owm children, God creates everyone and gifts mothers with their protection. There is no implication at all that Mary is the greater than God based on the title "Mother of God".

I assume everyone is being ironic in their love of this guy.

His KJO fanaticism is hysterical.

James White destroyed him in an argument and oh boy did he get salty about it.

>>721324

I love the guy. Need more preachers like him.

>>721324

He was punching way above his intellectual weightclass on that one

>>721389

*theological weightclass dang it

>>721324

White's criticism against circular reasoning was moronic and self refuting. There is no belief on this earth that doesn't become circular if you question it down to it's fundamental presuppositions. If you questioned White's views enough you would put him in the position of circular reasoning. Anderson is just more honest about being circular than most people are.

>>721305

Did she give birth to the Eternal Christ, who existed before her? Did she give birth to the Eternal Father? Did she give birth to the Eternal Holy Ghost?

Jesus’ incarnation was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, and if fetus Jesus didn’t need sperm to be conceived, he probably didn’t need an egg either.

>>721442

>Did she give birth to the Eternal Christ, who existed before her?

Yes she did, and because Christ is fully God, there is no need for her to give birth to the Father, Holy Spirit, or the trinity as a whole

>The Word of God is God, not in a Jesus Christ "The Word became Flesh" kind of way, but in a "The Word became ink and paper in the KJV" kind of way

>You have to literally hear the KJV being read to you by another saved person in order to be saved, just reading it yourself isn't enough, and hearing any other translation isn't enough

>Catholics and Orthodox, and anyone else who follows apostolic tradition is of the devil and perverts the teachings of God with the teachings of man and is completely incapable of understanding the KJV correctly, any conclusions they make about it are wrong.

Therefore, absolutely everyone is damned to hellfire (Even Pastor Anderson himself) because the first people to preach from the KJV couldn't have been saved because they hadn't heard someone else who was saved preach from the KJV. There isn't a first saved person to start the chain.

>>721407

>White's criticism against circular reasoning was moronic and self refuting.

>refuting circular reasoning is itself a form of circular reasoning

woah….my mind is blown….

>>721662

Pointing out circularity isn't a refutation unless you want to say every belief is refuted. Only brainlet atheists think saying something is circular makes it inherently false.

>>721670

>saying fallacious reasoning is a fallacy is in itself a fallacy

whoa…

>>721672

that isnt what i said but go off king

>>721683

i'm not your king, pal

>>721094

Except Baptists literally use the same arguments Nestorius use all the time. Literally read Cyril's Ad Nestorius and you can see how Nestorius is shown using the same arguments Baptists are using

1 ==I(Nestorius) often asked them (that is, those who contradict him), ‘Do you say that the Godhead has been born of the holy Virgin?’== At once they pounce on the phrase, ‘And who,’ they say, ‘is so sick with such a blasphemy as to say that in her who gave birth to the temple, in her was God conceived by the Spirit?’ ==Then when I reply to this, ‘What is wrong, then, about our advising the avoidance of this expression and the acceptance of the common meaning of the two natures?==’ then it seems to them that what we have said is blasphemy. ==Either admit clearly that the Godhead has been born from the blessed Mary==, or if you avoid this expression as blasphemous, why do you say the same things as I do, yet pretend that you are not saying them?18

From:Against Nestorius, quoted from Norman Russell's "Cyril of Alexandria"(pg.132)

Literally the same as Baptist objections

>>721966

What’s with all the ==s? Makes it hard to follow?

>>721407

>There is no belief on this earth that doesn't become circular if you question it down to it's fundamental presuppositions.

>fundamental presuppositions

An argument is not circular if it has a fundamental presupposition, by definition. A circular argument uses its own conclusion as a premise, making such a premise a derived one and not presupposed.

>>721980

I'm talking about people using their presuppositions to justify their presuppositions which is a position anyone can be put in. Logic itself would be dismantled if circularity was an automatic debunk since we rely on the system of logic to justify our logic.

>>722024

>people don't attempt to justify logic with logic

>people don't attempt to justify reality with reality itself

>existence and logic aren't basal assumptions

Heh.

>>722061

>justifying logic with logic

No. Those are the rantings of an incoherent epistemology. Even the atheist will admit that he accepts logic as a primary based on agreement/coherence.

We as Christians have a much strongest epistemology: one that justifies logic as being rooted in the nature of God. There is nothing cyclical about it.

>>722082

>one that justifies logic as being rooted in the nature of God

And what system do the atheist and the christian use you reach that conclusion? Logic obviously. There is no way to justify anything as being true without using logic.

>>722090

>And what system do the atheist and the christian use you reach that conclusion? Logic obviously.

>"reach that conclusion"

You are attempting to move the goalpost. The validity of the laws of logic existed before anybody thought of an explanation as to why they do.

<The law of non-contradiction

<The law of the excluded middle

<The law of identity

There are no logical derivations of these laws; they are primaries, existing as part of the very fabric of reality.

Somebody post the copypasta. You know what copypasta I'm talking about.

>>721032

Wasn't that japan documentary about how pooh up japan is in general for being a secular country?

>>721064

> it is in Luke 1:43.

He explains it in his Luke 1 sermon

>>722090

>Justify

Well maybe to an incredulous third party, but it doesn't follow that one cannot KNOW the truth without reaching said conclusion using logic, since you can accept priors as self-evident as >>722100 said, or you could have been metaphysically "implanted" with true, certain knowledge. Obvious examples of this are the divine revelations.

>>721145

>Anime teaches cuckoldry

Opinion discarded. Based nippon made me a right wing extremist through their positive portrayal of the Amestrian Nationalist Elric brothers. They also showed me the truth that whites are descended from the ancient Nordic aliens who came to this planet from Vegeta.

>>730007

31 minutes is the time stamp for those who haven’t heard it.

Once again, he glosses over thar verse and doesn’t acknowledge that Luke 1:43 confirms Mary is Mother of God

>>721085

>I'm catholic

>denies Mary is the Mother of God

>thinks for that to be true she had to exist forever, and not because she literally give birth to Jesus which happens to be God

You're not a Catholic. Even Lutherans are more Catholic than you in that regard.

Stop larping as a Catholic pastor Anderson.