<unnamed>

Public Key

npub13paz6seqlckvtvwfxwhjz60ycupkh5zj6ykz7d67zqkxyjnl6j8sqcmj3f

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsgs73dgvs0utx9k8yn8tepd8jvwqmt6pfdztp0xa0pqtrzfflafrcpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumrpdejqz9thwden5te0v9nkwu3wdehhxarj9ekxzmnyqy28wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hszrthwden5te0dehhxtnvdakqhp7ky2

Publishing to

Last Notes

2026-11-01 12:37:22 UTC

- reply

Bot how do I do this?

2026-08-11 14:45:01 UTC

- reply

What’s the answer? @nprofile…p6dg

2026-05-21 19:20:12 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…s22y no joy?

2026-05-17 08:35:24 UTC

- reply

What is your worldview, materialism, stoicism, nihilism, etc?
And then, in your understanding, how does your worldview account for reason, reasonably well? I.e. what rational argument is put forward for the reliability of reason itself, without becoming self-circular?
I’ve already given my explanation for how God can account for reason: God is not one object within reality needing to be proven by reason from above, but the transcendent ground of reason, truth, and intelligibility. Because God is the Logos, reason is not self-grounding or arbitrary; it is grounded in the rational source of reality itself.
So how does your worldview account for reason’s reliability without becoming self-circular?
Thanks.

2026-05-16 11:01:28 UTC

- reply

I’m very new to all this stuff, but FIPS could work with this am I right? What’s the other one, rectillium? How is that different than meshcore/tastic?

2026-04-24 09:35:06 UTC

- reply

It’s not a bad question. But the more difficult questions is, what impediments are in my own person, psychology, history and upbringing, in my current life situation, that cause me to waste time?
The question “how much time are you wasting”, isn’t a question that’s going to charge much about the situation, it may, but unlikely.. most people waste a whole lot of time, they know it well, and that there’s something they’d prefer to do (craft hobby whatever), than waste time. But they don’t, why?
There is as it were an invisible yet very concrete wall, between them and their potential, it takes an enormous amount of patience and gentleness (of the spirit, not wishy washy) continual suffering and striving and probably most importantly hope that the wall will fall, that time will open up for you, that the weight of not doing what you’re potentially called to, will fall away… but maybe if all that’s happening, even if on the surface you’re “wasting time”, you’re not, go easy on yourself, and hope in the present.
We don’t have an iron will, some are more fortuitous to have had the blessings and grace, to do that thing in the present which, after the fact they can look back and say, today’s time was well spent. Others must suffer the pain of struggling, and desiring that kind of state. They don’t realise the suffering is a blessed state itself.
And no, I’m not taking about those people who don’t even have an awareness that they are wasting time, and I’m not making an excuse for people who are “time wasters” (which are related to the former), I’m talking about those people who don’t know there’s an invisible wall and it’s not because they are lazy (which only reinforces the wall with guilt).
Anyways.

2026-04-19 08:27:19 UTC

- reply

Remembered it!
https://music.apple.com/ie/album/keep-time/1164967401?i=1164967871

2026-04-11 19:34:37 UTC

- reply

I am He who is; you are she who is not.
Christ to St. Catherine of Siena

2026-04-06 09:44:05 UTC

- reply

Tune!!

2026-03-24 17:32:08 UTC

- reply

Help me understand this one, genuinely:
The universal Church is "invisible", consists of the whole number of the elect ... "gathered into one". So it's invisible, but the elect (being physical persons) are gathered "into one", where?
Let's just assume, East/West apostolic Churches are Protestant Churches for this exercise, and that some of the people in them are "the elect", and then some of the other persons in all the remaining Protestant churches are also among the elect, where are they/would they be "gathered into one"?
If they all hold some variations on their understanding of Christ and salvation, most of the core ideas being mutually exclusive, where's the unity?
Thanks.

2026-03-19 07:24:33 UTC

- reply

Been on my reading list for too long.

2026-03-15 09:34:07 UTC

@nprofile…tm48
Genuine question: How do you personally know that the Bible in your home has the correct number of books? Keep the following in mind when you answer.
1. The Reformers themselves couldn't agree on the canon.
Luther demoted Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation to unnumbered appendix status, identical to how he treated the Apocrypha, and kept it that way in every edition he supervised until his death in 1545.
Calvin called Baruch "the Prophet" in his commentary on 1 Corinthians 10 and argued Paul borrowed from Baruch 4:7, a book every Protestant Bible today rejects.
Karlstadt (Luther's senior colleague who helped launch the Reformation) ranked Paul's epistles as subordinate to the Gospels and stripped them of equal authority with Christ's words.
Zwingli doubted the canonicity of Revelation, and the early Zurich Bibles (1524–1529) copied Luther's demotion of the same four NT books.
Chemnitz (the most important Lutheran theologian after Luther) still maintained a two-tier New Testament in the 1570s: 20 undisputed books and 7 that shouldn't be used to prove doctrine.
Calvin also had reservations about 2 John, 3 John, and Revelation, meaning he and Luther disagreed on which NT books were questionable.
By 1596, a Hamburg Bible explicitly labelled Luther's four demoted books as "Apocrypha," within Lutheranism itself.
2. For over a thousand years, the body of Christ received 73 books. The Councils of Hippo (393), Carthage (397), and Florence (1442) all affirmed the same list. Augustine laid out the method in On Christian Doctrine: follow the judgment of the greater number of Catholic churches, giving special weight to those founded by apostles. When he applied that method, he arrived at the exact 73-book Catholic canon. The first generation of Christians to disagree were the Reformers, and as point 1 shows, they couldn't even agree among themselves.
3. The method used to justify the change isn't biblical.
Calvin argued we can know which books are Scripture through an inward feeling, "a divine energy living and breathing in it." He claimed this was as easy as telling black from white. But Scripture itself never tells us to determine the canon this way. Strikingly, this is the exact method the Book of Mormon uses (Moroni 10:4-5, pray about it and you'll feel the truth) and the Quran uses (Surah 17, its beauty and doctrine prove its divine origin). Meanwhile, Jeremiah 17:9 warns us that "the heart is deceitful above all things." So what distinguishes the Protestant's internal feeling about 66 books from a Mormon's internal feeling about the Book of Mormon?
Kruger (whose book you referenced previously) tries to rescue this by shifting from the individual to the corporate: Christ's sheep hear His voice (John 10:27), and the Holy Spirit leads His people collectively to recognise the canon.
Calvin said you don't need the Church because each believer is inwardly led by the Spirit. Kruger says actually, it's the corporate body of believers that the Spirit leads. These are opposite claims.
Calvin's version fails because the individuals (as point 1 shows) couldn't agree. Kruger's version fails because the corporate Church's answer for over a millennium was 73 books (point 2).
They've switched arguments precisely because neither one works, and the two arguments contradict each other.
If the Spirit leads individuals, why did the Reformers get different answers? If the Spirit leads the corporate body, why did Protestants break from that body's unanimous canon?
So, how do YOU personally know the Bible in your home has the correct number of books?
@npub1sve…pt05 @nprofile…cwna @nprofile…2qdj