John Hammer

1/ The Father is not the Father apart from the Son. The Son is not the Son apart from the Father. Neither is who he is without the Spirit in whom they are given to one another. God is not a solitary self who later acquires relations. The relations are what God is.

Hello Mrs. Owens, You told millions of people that Tyler Robinson "wasn't even there." That you felt "confident stating that Tyler Robinson did not kill murder Charlie Kirk." He was on camera. Prone on the Losi rooftop at 12:22. Shot at 12:23:28. DNA on the screwdriver at 30 quintillion to one. DNA on the rifle at 1.7 octillion to one. He told his family what he did. His parents helped him surrender. He texted his roommate: "I am, I'm sorry." He engraved "Hey Fascist! Catch!" on the ammunition a month before he used it. You said police "didn't even question" Lance Twiggs. He was interviewed twice. FBI the morning after. Joint state-federal team seven months later. His own attorney. Voluntary phone surrender. You laughed when you said it. You told Shawn Ryan a shaped charge killed Charlie. That PETN was in his microphone. The medical examiner says gunshot wound. Bullet fragments were recovered from his body. A .30-06 Mauser with Robinson's DNA was found in the woods. Neither side — not prosecution, not defense — has mentioned explosives. Not once in four days. You said the shot came from below. The Losi building is above the amphitheater. You called Erika Kirk a "clinical psychopath" to an audience of millions. You said the assassination was "an occult ritual." You said Charlie was "sitting in a pentagram." You told people Israel killed him because he refused Netanyahu. You made over a hundred episodes. You built a franchise on a dead man's name. And the hardest fact of all: Tyler Robinson's own defense lawyers — the people whose entire career is on the line to get him acquitted — have refused to make a single one of your arguments. Not one. They're challenging DNA methodology. They are doing their jobs. You were doing something else entirely. Charlie Kirk changed my life. He platformed my work when nobody knew who I was. He had my back when I was doxxed. I was the ten-thousandth most important person in his world and I will never be able to repay him. So I did what I know how to do. I read every transcript. I watched every hour of testimony. I cataloged your claims and I held them up against what was said under oath. Every single one failed. I don't know why you did this. I'm not going to speculate on your motives, because that would make me exactly the kind of analyst I've spent my career refusing to be. But I know what you did. You told people confident lies about a dead man's murder, and millions of them believed you, and some of them turned that belief into threats against his widow. The trial continues. And every day of sworn testimony is another day your words get tested against reality... under oath, on the record, where it counts. I'll be here for all of it... because just as Charlie defended me, I will do what little I can to defend his legacy and @TPUSA and @MrsErikaKirk from evil.

Pentecostal Wins At Scrabble Again By Spelling All Words In Tongues buff.ly/0H97yrL

A creed unites believers. It preserves the truth. It helps form the faith of new believers, and it also connects us to the historic, orthodox, Christian faith.

Gottfried Thomasius (1802-1875), the Erlangen school Lutheran theologian, articulated the most influential version of false kenoticism that has caused so much mischief. His Christi Person und Werk (1852-1861) argued that the Logos actually divested himself of divine attributes like omniscience and omnipotence in the incarnation, a position that effectively dissolves the hypostatic union by making divinity something that can be subtracted from. The problem with this reading is that it treats the Philippians 2 hymn as a metaphysical description of ontological subtraction rather than what it actually is: a description of mode, manner, and movement. We cannot afford to be unfaithful or even sloppy when it comes to the grammar of kenosis. Paul writes that Christ Jesus, existing in the morphē theou (form of God), did not consider equality with God something to be exploited (harpagmon), but heauton ekenōsen (emptied himself), taking (labōn) the morphē doulou (form of a servant). The critical point is that labōn is a participle of means. He emptied himself by taking, not by divesting. The kenosis is not subtraction but addition. The eternal Son empties himself into human nature, taking on what he was not while remaining what he always was. This is descent, not diminishment. When we fail honor what the Tradition actually teaches about the Hypostatic Union and the Logic of Incarnation, it is because we choose to be intellectually lazy. Chalcedon's formula holds that the two natures are united in the one hypostasis (person) of the Logos "without confusion, without change, without division, without separation." The divine nature is not converted into human nature nor mixed with it. The Logos assumes a complete human nature, body and rational soul, into personal union with himself. What this means is that the subject of the Incarnation is always the Eternal Son. When Jesus hungers, thirsts, weeps, and dies, it is the Logos who experiences these things according to his human nature. When he forgives sins, stills storms, and raises the dead, he acts through his human nature while the divine nature remains the ontological ground of such acts. It is a dangerous error to collapse this distinction by effectively making Jesus a Spirit-filled man who just happens to be divine in some nominal sense. But this is precisely what Chalcedon excludes. The one who acts is always the divine person; the natures are the "how" of the action, not the "who." The kenosis that Christ embodies is an emptying INTO not an emptying OUT OF! The directional grammar matters immensely. The Son does not pour out his divinity like water from a vessel. He pours the fullness of who he is into the conditions of creaturely existence. The kenosis is a movement of love, not a transaction of subtraction. This is why "he who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9) holds. Jesus is not a diminished deity trying to get by on Holy Spirit power until the resurrection restores what was lost. He is the full radiance of the Father's glory (Hebrews 1:3), the one in whom the fullness of deity dwells bodily (Colossians 2:9), now expressed through the servant form of genuine humanity. The cross then becomes the ultimate kenotic act: the eternal self-giving love of God poured out completely into creation, absorbing its rebellion and death into himself and returning it as resurrection life. The kenosis that began in Bethlehem reaches its telos at Golgotha, but it is one continuous movement of divine descent, not a temporary suspension of divinity followed by restoration. The error of Gottfried Thomasius and its contemporary iterations are not merely academic. If Jesus did miracles as a "mere man" filled with the Spirit, then the cross is not God bearing the weight of sin; it is a Spirit-empowered human dying sacrificially. This undercuts the entire logic of atonement, which requires that the one who dies be of infinite worth precisely because of who he is, not merely what he is empowered to do.