Conversation

Notices

1. ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️ (supersnekfriend@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 17-May-2024 23:12:11 JST ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️

   • EdBoatConnoisseur
   This is a more accurate picture of an ophan angel than that retarded, Reddit-tier "Biblically accurate angels" meme.
   
   RT: https://poa.st/objects/0e74be04-8fe4-40d6-a5a0-90e0d41a7825
   • gentooP (gentoop@social.mikutter.hachune.net)'s status on Friday, 17-May-2024 23:12:08 JST gentooP

     in reply to

     • :letter_g:oalkeeper :yotsuba_happy:
     • EdBoatConnoisseur

     @Goalkeeper @EdBoatConnoisseur @SuperSnekFriend You'd have to settle for daughterwife. Making moves on a Angel means fire and brimstone from what I've heard.

   • :letter_g:oalkeeper :yotsuba_happy: (goalkeeper@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Friday, 17-May-2024 23:12:09 JST :letter_g:oalkeeper :yotsuba_happy:

     in reply to

     • EdBoatConnoisseur

     I'M MAKING AN OBSERVATION

   • :letter_g:oalkeeper :yotsuba_happy: (goalkeeper@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Friday, 17-May-2024 23:12:10 JST :letter_g:oalkeeper :yotsuba_happy:

     in reply to

     • EdBoatConnoisseur

     Also way more fuckable. 😏

   • ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️ (supersnekfriend@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 17-May-2024 23:12:10 JST ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️

     in reply to

     • :letter_g:oalkeeper :yotsuba_happy:
     • EdBoatConnoisseur
     @Goalkeeper @EdBoatConnoisseur They're taken already. :jahy_pout:
   • ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️ (supersnekfriend@poa.st)'s status on Saturday, 18-May-2024 02:20:30 JST ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️

     in reply to

     • nugger
     • EdBoatConnoisseur
     @nugger @EdBoatConnoisseur >I DID NOT ASCRIBE FORMLESSNESS, EXHAUSTIVE AND ETERNAL INVISIBILITY, OR UNREAL AND INNATELY DECEPTIVE APPEARANCES TO SPIRITUAL THINGS
     Then why are you denying my statement? Sexuality is not purely an attribute of physicality and material composition. The Biblical laws like Deuteronomy 22:5 or 1 Corinthians 14:35, and statements like "In that day the Egyptians will be like women" (Is. 19:16) or "gentle and quiet spirit" (1 Peter 3:4) would not make sense otherwise.
     
     >DEPICTIONS OF SPIRITUAL ENTITIES IN A MATERIAL WAY ARE NECESSARILY CRUTCHES
     Okay, so you do believe that formlessness and exhaustive and eternal invisibility are necessary attributes of spiritualness because you believe the opposite can only occur with the physical. So why are saying you don't believe that. Which is it?
     
     >THE SIMPLE WITHOUT PARTS STUFF IS IFFY AT A GUT CHECK, WON'T EVEN PROBE
     Divine simplicity is a necessary attribute of God and spiritual creatures and creations. God especially must be God through and through without any parts, where otherwise one can say, "this part is a thing that can exist a part from God Himself," or "God is bound to how this part of Him interacts with Himself or another part." The whole reason we can say God is "not material" is because of this simplicity. Material creatures and creations are made of many parts and elements, binding them to the interactions of those parts.
     
     >IF YOU'VE EVER PLEDGED ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG YOU'VE FORFEITED THE RIGHT TO SAY THIS PHRASE AND MEAN IT
     THERE ARE NO MERE SYMBOLS
     I said "mere symbol" contrasting to the Biblical descriptions of the angels in Ezekiel being their form and ontological reality, as well any symbols God intended to be ascribed from that reality. Don't put words in my mouth.
   • ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️ (supersnekfriend@poa.st)'s status on Saturday, 18-May-2024 02:20:32 JST ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️

     in reply to

     • nugger
     • EdBoatConnoisseur
     @nugger @EdBoatConnoisseur >ANGELS HAVE NO PHYSICAL BODIES
     It doesn't matter. Being without any form, no matter the composition, is not a necessary attribute of spiritualness. Being spirit refers to spiritual things' composition and substance which is simple or without parts among other attributes, which is contrasted to physical matter and energy that is made up in parts.
     >ALL DEPICTIONS OF THEM SYMBOLICALLY SIGNIFIES SOMETHING INSTEAD OF SHOWING THEIR MATERIAL REALITY
     To portray oneself falsely as a real ontological being for a mere symbol and appearance that is not readily apparent to all audiences of the vision, both the ones receiving the visions and the readers both ancient and modern, that has no basis whatsoever on one's actual ontological status is breaking the 9th Commandment, and neither God nor His faithful angels can do so being the Father and messengers of Truth.
     >LIVING IN THE INVISIBLE AIR BETWEEN MATERIAL THINGS
     Whenever the Bible mentions the "invisibility" of God and spiritual things, it is referring only to the inability of human people living on Earth to regular experience and perceive those things, as God put a hard demarcation between the spiritual and the physical. it does not refer to inability to whatsoever for all eternity to perceive a true form of spiritual things. This demarcation is removed at the end of history and is a promise for believers (Rev. 22:1,3). To say otherwise or make merely symbolic voids that promise and call God a liar.
     
     Moses saw the form and appearance of the Lord:
     "With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly, and not in riddles, and he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?" (Num. 12:8)
     
     Even when the Israelites did and could not for their sinfulness and faithlessness:
     "Therefore watch yourselves very carefully. Since you saw no form on the day that the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,
     beware lest you act corruptly by making a carved image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female, (Deut. 4:15-16)
     
     Therefore you cannot ascribe formlessness, exhaustive and eternal invisibility, and unreal and innately deceptive appearances to spiritual things.
   • nugger (nugger@poa.st)'s status on Saturday, 18-May-2024 02:20:32 JST nugger

     in reply to

     • EdBoatConnoisseur
     @SuperSnekFriend @EdBoatConnoisseur I DID NOT ASCRIBE FORMLESSNESS, EXHAUSTIVE AND ETERNAL INVISIBILITY, OR UNREAL AND INNATELY DECEPTIVE APPEARANCES TO SPIRITUAL THINGS
     
     I SAID THAT SPIRITUAL ENTITIES ARE NOT MATERIAL, AND DEPICTIONS OF SPIRITUAL ENTITIES IN A MATERIAL WAY ARE NECESSARILY CRUTCHES
     LIKE VERBAL OR TEXTUAL POETIC DESCRIPTIONS OF A PERSON, OR A MAP OF A PLACE IN RELATION TO THE PLACE
     
     THE SIMPLE WITHOUT PARTS STUFF IS IFFY AT A GUT CHECK, WON'T EVEN PROBE
     
     >MERE SYMBOL
     IF YOU'VE EVER PLEDGED ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG YOU'VE FORFEITED THE RIGHT TO SAY THIS PHRASE AND MEAN IT
     THERE ARE NO MERE SYMBOLS, SYMBOLS ARE NOT CARDBOARD CUTOUT STAND-INS FOR SOMETHING REAL
     THAT'S "MONEY IS JUST PAPER" TYPE STUFF
     
     >GOD CAN'T DO THING
     HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
     
     >9TH COMMANDMENT
     IF I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND SOME ASPECT OF YOUR POST THAT WOULDN'T MEAN YOU BORE FALSE WITNESS AGAINST ME
     
     
     HAMG ON THE TEXTBOX IS BREAKING
   • nugger (nugger@poa.st)'s status on Saturday, 18-May-2024 02:20:33 JST nugger

     in reply to

     • EdBoatConnoisseur
     @SuperSnekFriend @EdBoatConnoisseur NO ITS NOT
     ANGELS HAVE NO PHYSICAL BODIES
     ALL DEPICTIONS OF THEM SYMBOLICALLY SIGNIFIES SOMETHING INSTEAD OF SHOWING THEIR MATERIAL REALITY (THEY AIN'T GOT ONE)
     EVEN THE STANDARD DUDE WITH WINGS ANGEL IS A DUDE WITH WINGS ONLY TO SHOW THAT AN ANGEL IS A REASONABLE BEING LIKE A DUDE, EXCEPT AN IMMATERIAL SPIRIT HENCE WITH WINGS, LIVING IN THE INVISIBLE AIR BETWEEN MATERIAL THINGS
   • ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️ (supersnekfriend@poa.st)'s status on Saturday, 18-May-2024 02:20:55 JST ❄️:padoru: SantaSnekFriend :padoru:❄️

     in reply to

     • nugger
     • EdBoatConnoisseur
     @nugger @EdBoatConnoisseur >GOD CAN'T DO THING
     >HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
     Yes, He literally cannot lie in any way. He is the Truth. It's against His very nature and character to lie. it's a logical contradiction and blasphemy to say otherwise.
     "...in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began..." (Titus 1:2)
     
     >IF I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND SOME ASPECT OF YOUR POST THAT WOULDN'T MEAN YOU BORE FALSE WITNESS AGAINST ME
     I didn't say being hard to understand is what makes the liar. I said representing oneself as an ontological being when the appearances and forms have no bearing whatsoever on the ontological reality is what constitutes a lie.
     The part about not understanding the symbols of one's appearance, which I never denied the elements of Ezekiel visions being symbolic as well as ontologically real, is to show that the intention of God appearing to Ezekiel cannot be to only symbolize some ephemeral and abstract thing about Himself, since the symbolic meaning are never explained or referred to by anybody in Scriptures, not even Ezekiel, the Lord, or the Spirit of God that carries Ezekiel away, and the ancient Hebraic audience would not have taken Ezekiel's vision to be merely symbolic.
     I gave suggestions to Branman what some of the elements of that vision could symbolize, but that does not mean that the sole purpose of the ophanim is to symbolize God's attributes nor that what I said to Branman is what the ophanim actually symbolizes, if they do symbolize anything. It was an educated conjecture.