Posts by slimboyfat

14

Narcissist challenges culture ingrained with the concept of “saving face” to perform humiliating retreat

by slimboyfat in

oh yeah, this is going to end well.

hold on to your seats, folks, we’re on the front row of history for, as the chinese might say, “interesting times”.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rgkkl7v8lo.

slimboyfat

Oh yeah, this is going to end well. 😮

Hold on to your seats, folks, we’re on the front row of history for, as the Chinese might say, “interesting times”.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rgkkl7v8lo

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

The apple analogy is not a good one anyway, and has been denounced by (thinking) Trinitarians as a way to divide and read scripture for very good reasons. It’s simply impossible to divide all scriptures into a human Jesus versus a divine Jesus. Many verses won’t fit into those orthodox slots.

Take John 10.18 itself for example. Trinitarians say Jesus is speaking as God when (as they claim) he says he somehow resurrected himself. But they say he is speaking as a human when he says he is commanded by God. So which is it, the human or the divine Jesus talking in this verse? It doesn’t work.

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

slimboyfat

I asked ChatGPT if it could be done in 12 minutes, or how long it would take a human to write the text. The response:

A well-read human with good writing skills and no need to fact-check could maybe crank this out in 90 minutes, 2 hours is more realistic, and 3+ if they’re careful or it requires research.

So 12 minutes? Still fantasy land.

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

slimboyfat

I asked ChatGPT if a human could have written the above post in 10 minutes. This is what it said:

No, a human didn’t write that from scratch in 10 minutes — not unless they’re some kind of cyborg. And even then, it’s pushing it.

🚫 Why that’s unrealistic:

Way too long
It’s over 2,000 words. Writing that much clear, structured content in 10 minutes would mean churning out 200+ words per minute without stopping, thinking, or making mistakes. That’s not writing — that’s copy-pasting or AI-spewing.
Loaded with technical theology
The text drops terms like hypostatic union, eternal generation, economic Trinity, homoousios, Chalcedonian definition — not casual Sunday-school stuff. That kind of theological name-dropping doesn’t happen in a flash unless the person is just regurgitating stuff they’ve read or had pre-written.
Too polished, too fast
It’s got a clean structure, smart analogies (the apple/basket thing), Scripture lined up on cue, and zero rabbit trails. Real humans writing fast make mistakes, meander, or go off-topic. This feels algorithmic, not spontaneous.
Feels like a cut-and-paste job
If someone says they wrote this in 10 minutes, they either:
- Had a draft already sitting around, or
- Used ChatGPT or similar, or
- Are lying to sound impressive.

🧠 Reality check:

This is the kind of content someone produces after hours of writing, or seconds of prompting. It's not coming out of one guy's head fully formed in 10 minutes, unless he’s just copying something and pretending he didn’t.

So no — a regular human didn’t do this solo in 10 minutes. But an AI absolutely could.

4o

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

slimboyfat

I don’t think it’s efficient to outsource your thinking to a machine. 😉

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

slimboyfat

You read my post and composed that 1700 word response in less than 12 minutes. 🤔

A fast typist can type 80 words per minute. (Not taking into account having to compose the text as well as type it) 12 x 80 = 960

So you managed to type nearly twice as many words as a fast typist in 12 minutes not even taking into account the time it takes to compose the text in the first place. 🤔

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

slimboyfat

Imagine somebody made the following statement:

God took back his life because he was commanded to do so.

It doesn’t make any sense, because there are two major problems with that, 1) God can’t give up his life in the first place and 2) God can’t be commanded to do anything by anyone.

Yet Jesus gave up his life and took it back because he was commanded to do so in John 10.18. Draw your own conclusion.

Jesus explicitly claims active authority in His own resurrection.

Jesus explicitly stated that he was given all authority by God. (Matt 28.18) Where is the verse where God says “all my authority was given to me”. Clearly this is something God would never say. The fact that Jesus says it is again proof (as if it were needed) that Jesus is separate from and subordinate to God in the NT.

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

slimboyfat

“I can do nothing on my own authority. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.” John 5.30

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

slimboyfat

Why miss out the last part of John 10.18 which says that Jesus was commanded to take back his life by his Father?

Jesus receives his life back from his Father in John 10.18 under his Father’s instructions.

No man takes it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. This commandment I received from my Father.”

It’s the same Greek verb used twice in the verse, yet many (Trinitarian) translations use “take” in the first instance and use “receive” in the second for some reason. 🤔

226

The point of existence and how it refutes the Trinity

by slimboyfat in

rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?

as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.

that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.

slimboyfat

After reviewing extensive evidence from rabbinical sources, Philo, early Christian and Gnostic writings, Alan Segal concludes:

Therefore we should continue to assume that the Christians were but one of a number of apocalyptic or mystical groups who posited a primary angelic helper for God. Page 262.

This view of Christ was persisted until the fourth century when it was replaced by Nicene Trinitarianism.