Hey I just thought you might be interested to know Dan McClellan elaborated on why he blocked Inspiring Philosophy in a recent video around minute 11.

No, this was in support of my statement that Jesus was a terrible teacher.

John 8 starts with the pericope of the women caught in adultery, one of the edits I mentioned…

Do you know what John 10 doesn’t say?

The father and I and the holy ghost are one, and three, but most of the time one. 3 persons, one being. Like why didn’t he try explaining it to someone that wouldn’t try to kill him, and that was writing things down…

the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins

He says the son of man has the authority to forgive sins. If he is trying to explain that he is god, he is doing a terrible job. To me it seems like he is saying “you think only god can forgive sins, I’ll show you you’re wrong”

If someone were to wrong me, would my child be able to forgive them? Nope.

You’re saying that your omnipotent god can’t authorize someone to forgive sins on its behalf?

Pretty sure he claims to be the son of man.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitarianism_in_the_Church_Fathers

I don’t think trinitarianism was invented at that point, if Jesus is teaching it there he is doing a terrible job.

The rival god that the son was sacrificed to.

Dan McClellan is a textbook example of this. He is known to block people whom responds to his videos. which is bad faith.

I know he blocks people if he decides they are not engaging productively. Like in the video you linked InspiringPhilosphy says that: when Jesus knew the doubters wondered “who can forgive sins but God”… InspiringPhilosphy insists that they were talking about God the father, but trinitarian belief didn’t exist at the time of the composition of the gospel of Mark right? I suspect Dan lost patience with the retrojection of Trinitarianism.

The Bible hasn’t been heavily edited. There isn’t much proof for this, notably, no original “unedited” documents.

These are the first three edits that come to mind: Pericope of the women caught in adultery is absent from all early manuscripts if the gospel of John. Johannine comma being absent from all Greek manuscripts (except for the forgery from like 1000 years later), short ending of Mark. Also the pseudepigraphal letters of Paul, are editing in a sense.

Yahweh was worshipped in a pantheon though, and the Bible records this. But it’s the writings of a monotheistic sect.

What is monotheism? Is it compatible with belief in the power of rival gods like in 2 Kings 3:27?

I guess you’re referring to Dan McClellan. I’ve consumed a lot of his content via YouTube and his podcast.

It generally seems like a pretty impartial, critical analysis of the data, rather than speculation. But given that he has dominated my understanding of the data I recognize I’ve got a pretty big blindspot. Where would you point me to refute the view that the bible seems to be a source that has been heavily edited to remove its polytheistic origins?

Could you be more constructive with your feedback?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Revelation

The book of Jonah revolves around Jonah not wanting his god to forgive Nineveh.

I forget what does the I stand for again?

Yeah I went 80% next which was too high. 72% is very close to the answer in the link.

I did

V=pi×r²×h

and estimated:

r=4 (from some at the top left)

h=12

This gave 603. The link said too high, so realized I’d neglected packing factor. Google said that spheres typically pack at 64% efficiency, so I guessed 386. Too low.

I think the disconnect is the word public. The article’s thesis is:

unashamedly sexual spaces are more important than ever.

My perspective as an outsider/ally: I agree that they are important, but think they are less important than at other times in history.

But again I think the disconnect is the word public: I don’t want to be sitting next to people having sex while on the bus. I don’t think that’s what the author is advocating for, so I just don’t think the word public is the right choice. I think they are advocating for public spaces accepting of sexual diversity, and separate communal places for individuals to have diverse kinds of sex.

Okay, maybe I fell asleep while watching it, what’s your favourite part?

Its just someone mocking people for liking their trucks. Like yeah the trucks are bad and the people must have some sort of cognitive challenge to still like them them even though they’ve been fleeced. But the video is just a smart ass calling people idiots.

I wasnt aware that significant a number of IDF goons had been captured. The modifications to the text summary of the article confused me so I asked a clarifying question. Including my understanding of the words being used.

Who is to be released; civilians, soldiers, spies, or what? Abducted civilians are not prisoners of war, they’re hostages, unless maybe they were seized from illegal occupations in which case I would say they’re prisoners, but not prisoners of war. I really am just trying to better understand what’s happening.

This is not a good video