4 ms·

Christians, in particular, would believe Christianity man made. After all, God became incarnate and fully human!

by wcarey 6y ago

jacquesm 6y ago
There is a good reason why scammers always filter out for religious affiliation first before spending a lot of of time on their victims. Gullibility is a desirable property in marks.
- wcarey 6y ago
  Can you expand on the claim and warrant you're making there?
  - jacquesm 6y ago
    Sure: https://marginalie.hypotheses.org/181 https://marginalie.hypotheses.org/181 It's been discussed on HN a couple of times as well (though not that particular link as far as I know).
    - wcarey 6y ago
      So, it seems like you're claiming that some scammers believe that some religious people are gullible. That's certainly true, if not particularly interesting! Are you aiming at a broader argument or more expansive claim?
      - jacquesm 6y ago
        You get one leading question per subject.
        tekknik 6y ago
        I would like to know where this master database of email addresses that have information like religious affiliation so that I can perform queries against such a a thing.
chrismorgan 6y ago
That would depend upon a belief in the doctrine of the trinity, which while mainstream is far from universal. As a Christadelphian I refute the doctrine of the trinity: it simply doesn’t appear in the Bible; it was developed over the course of time in roughly 100–325 AD. (Even apart from that I doubt that trinitarians would go along with your interpretation, but the whole thing of the trinity is confusing and depends upon a peculiar form of logic that is widely called a mystery, so I can’t simulate how they collectively would actually respond.)
- pcunite 6y ago
  Extremely insightful observation. How do you feel about Acts 2:38? Do you feel it is pivotal to understanding salvation?
  - chrismorgan 6y ago
    That repentance and baptism are called for upon realising our depth of sin and need for salvation, certainly. (Notwithstanding this, per Ephesians 2:4–10 salvation is by God’s grace, not by works. Yet baptism is commanded, here and elsewhere.) Given the context in this thread I suspect you may be seeking remark upon “the gift of the Holy Spirit”. Of that I would say that in the sense of what might commonly be known as the Holy Spirit Gifts (healing, tongues, and the like) Peter was speaking to those that were there at that time, and that it is not applicable to us. Apart from cases of intervention by the Lord, the Spirit in this sense was given only by the laying on of the Apostles’ hands (Acts 8:14–17, and refer to all other documented cases of receiving the Spirit for further support of this allegation; note that Paul is included in the number of the Apostles, despite his not being one of the Twelve; he was specially ordained as such by Jesus). As the Apostles died out, so did these Holy Spirit Gifts, as there was no one further to bestow them. Instead, by this time we had the New Testament, and so had no further need for those obviously miraculous gifts (1 Corinthians 14:22–25 is slightly related to this idea, though I find it difficult to clearly explain how, in part because Paul writes verse 22 in a way that feels kinda back to front). All that, I say, when referring to the commonly-perceived Holy Spirit Gifts. But please do not take me to be saying that we do not have God’s Holy Spirit with us today; God is with us and sustains us with his power daily (for that is what the Holy Spirit is: the power of God, nothing more, nothing less), including in less obvious abilities we are given. If you look through the list in 1 Corinthians 12:8–10, only a few are obviously supernatural. We all have our own abilities given us by God. If you or anyone else happen to be interested in discussing these or any other things further, email me at bible@chrismorgan.info. I am always glad to talk about the Bible!

Christians, in particular, would believe Christianity man made. After all, God became incarnate and fully human!

by wcarey 6y ago

Christians, in particular, would believe Christianity man made. After all, God became incarnate and fully human!

There is a good reason why scammers always filter out for religious affiliation first before spending a lot of of time on their victims. Gullibility is a desirable property in marks.

wcarey 6y ago
Can you expand on the claim and warrant you're making there?
- jacquesm 6y ago
  Sure: https://marginalie.hypotheses.org/181 https://marginalie.hypotheses.org/181 It's been discussed on HN a couple of times as well (though not that particular link as far as I know).
  - wcarey 6y ago
    So, it seems like you're claiming that some scammers believe that some religious people are gullible. That's certainly true, if not particularly interesting! Are you aiming at a broader argument or more expansive claim?
    - jacquesm 6y ago
      You get one leading question per subject.
      - tekknik 6y ago
        I would like to know where this master database of email addresses that have information like religious affiliation so that I can perform queries against such a a thing.

chrismorgan 6y ago

That would depend upon a belief in the doctrine of the trinity, which while mainstream is far from universal. As a Christadelphian I refute the doctrine of the trinity: it simply doesn’t appear in the Bible; it was developed over the course of time in roughly 100–325 AD. (Even apart from that I doubt that trinitarians would go along with your interpretation, but the whole thing of the trinity is confusing and depends upon a peculiar form of logic that is widely called a mystery, so I can’t simulate how they collectively would actually respond.)

pcunite 6y ago
Extremely insightful observation. How do you feel about Acts 2:38? Do you feel it is pivotal to understanding salvation?
- chrismorgan 6y ago
  That repentance and baptism are called for upon realising our depth of sin and need for salvation, certainly. (Notwithstanding this, per Ephesians 2:4–10 salvation is by God’s grace, not by works. Yet baptism is commanded, here and elsewhere.) Given the context in this thread I suspect you may be seeking remark upon “the gift of the Holy Spirit”. Of that I would say that in the sense of what might commonly be known as the Holy Spirit Gifts (healing, tongues, and the like) Peter was speaking to those that were there at that time, and that it is not applicable to us. Apart from cases of intervention by the Lord, the Spirit in this sense was given only by the laying on of the Apostles’ hands (Acts 8:14–17, and refer to all other documented cases of receiving the Spirit for further support of this allegation; note that Paul is included in the number of the Apostles, despite his not being one of the Twelve; he was specially ordained as such by Jesus). As the Apostles died out, so did these Holy Spirit Gifts, as there was no one further to bestow them. Instead, by this time we had the New Testament, and so had no further need for those obviously miraculous gifts (1 Corinthians 14:22–25 is slightly related to this idea, though I find it difficult to clearly explain how, in part because Paul writes verse 22 in a way that feels kinda back to front). All that, I say, when referring to the commonly-perceived Holy Spirit Gifts. But please do not take me to be saying that we do not have God’s Holy Spirit with us today; God is with us and sustains us with his power daily (for that is what the Holy Spirit is: the power of God, nothing more, nothing less), including in less obvious abilities we are given. If you look through the list in 1 Corinthians 12:8–10, only a few are obviously supernatural. We all have our own abilities given us by God. If you or anyone else happen to be interested in discussing these or any other things further, email me at bible@chrismorgan.info. I am always glad to talk about the Bible!