Lily Philips - can she be a 'true' Christian?

[mids2019]

https://www.premierchristianity.com/opinion/lily-phillips-has-been-baptised-i-pray-its-accompanied-by-change/20772.article

This article made me think about what it means to be Christian especially about the concepts of sin, judgment and redemption.

In my view Lily of course is a Christian being baptised but to not give up a lucrative adult film career possibly does cause angst amongst more traditional Christians.

We are taught not to judge 'Let those without sin cast the first stone' and to accept the universal unconditionally of forgiveness. (We pray every day about the forgiveness of sin) so it is difficult thologically to condemn others.

However does any fellow Christian need to remind Lily she makes money from a profession where many women with less choice are coerced and manipulated for thr gratification of men? Wr have moved away from a less judgmental Christianity but how do you view participation in Christian life with such a job?

@OtterlyAstounding I'm not actually bothered at all

So why make a Three Act Drama about it ?

as petty and cruel as the God you worship.

You mean the God that doesn't exist ?

As I said; God doesn't have to exist for your statements to be very telling of the sort of person that you are. Not a very nice one, which I suppose makes sense.
So I'll leave you to it.

@OtterlyAstounding God doesn't have to exist for your statements to be very telling of the sort of person that you are.

What sort of crazy logic is that ? You compare me to some bloody and vengeful G/god who approves of rape and murder then say that he doesn't exist !
And why are you bothered anyway as IYO I won't be punished for any horrible things I say because there is no H/hell ?

If you can't understand that what you choose to believe in and worship (real or not) reveals your nature, and if you can't understand that directly and passive aggressively wishing terrible ill on someone (whether it will happen or not) is also revealing of your nature, I don't think you can be helped.

Despite that, I genuinely wish you well.

If I say "Aw, my mum is like Molly Weasley, warm and caring but with a fierce streak when her family is threatened" does that comparison of a real person's traits to those of a fictional character leave you entirely baffled?

@RedTagAlan

I also think it's worth making the point that the Psi Encyclopedia is an online Encyclopedia (similar in nature to Wikipedia) that is intended to serve as a compendium of parapsychology and a thorough introduction to the topic.

We aspire to provide a comprehensive introduction to academic parapsychology, which studies the range of psychic experiences collectively termed ‘psi’. The existence of psi phenomena – and the related idea that consciousness is independent of the physical body and so may survive death – is strongly disputed by materialist scientists, yet parapsychologists are convinced they have evidence for these things. The Psi Encyclopedia presents this evidence in nearly 750 signed articles by over 80 authors, many of them senior academics, arranged in categories and subcategories that highlight the major interests of the field.\

As far as I know, it is run entirely by volunteers. They state that AI is used in editing as well as article summaries and highlights. The information on the various pages are not AI generated in their entirety, as far as I can tell.

The Psi Encyclopedia volunteers have access to an extensive amount of experimental research; it looks like they use AI to help partially relieve a significant workload.

One of the PE's volunteers relates their reasoning for using it here:

AI Assists with Editing at Psi Encyclopedia | Psi Encyclopedia posted on the topic | LinkedIn

Uploaded 15 June 2026 "Our Use of AI": AI came to the Psi Encyclopedia (PE) after General Editor James (Jim) Matlock and I had a Messenger conversation about how it might help with editing. Having decided to add to each PE article an introductory summary of about 45 words and three highlights of less than 20 words each, Jim was anticipating spending months writing 725+ of these. I suggested that we have ChatGPT (5.4, Extended Thinking) do it instead.

I don't think that the above is an unreasonable use of AI, and it seems clear that the majority of writing in the articles is produced manually.

I think it is also useful to note that the Psi Enclopedia has not produced this evidence. They are presenting it in an Encyclopedia format. The evidence was produced by the experiments and research from parapsychology.

And the use of AI in constructing (what seems to be a relatively small) part ofthe write-ups says nothing in itself about the nature or quality of the evidence. If the fact that AI has been used means you won't read any of the articles, then you aren't in a position to assess them.

I would try to provide direct links to the articles themselves (rather than just the encyclopedia) but that involves a lot more effort on my end and sometimes the articles are not accessible for viewing by the general public. (Many are from academic parapsychology journals) and sometimes a paid subscription is required to access them directly.

Quote " If the fact that AI has been used means you won't read any of the articles, then you aren't in a position to assess them."

Is that what I said ?

Listen, as a bit of light reading etc, no problem them using AI. But to use it as a compendium of evidence, whatever it is evidence for, then using AI is not on. And fair play to them for noting that they use AI. If you are using anything on there as evidence, then that is up to you.

If you were to pick an article to read, and you said "wow", this is evidence, then presented it to me as evidence, how am I supposed to unpick what is AI and what is not. I could spend ages trying to check something and it turns out to be an AI hallucination.

That's probably why they have that note there.

As an experiment, pick an article you consider as evidence, and we will have a look. We have already done the medium and the murder.

@RedTagAlan

Is that what I said ?

No, you didn't specifically say that, but I would argue that you quite strongly implied it when you said earlier: "why should anyone take the time to read it."

But to use it as a compendium of evidence

I would dispute that AI is being used as a compendium of evidence overall. I would see that as an accurate descriptor if the articles in their entirety were created by AI, but that's not the case.

I also think there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding when it comes to the definition of evidence as a whole. Definitions of evidence include testimonies, accounts, as well as experimental data, which is what the PE has. Quality or strength are not required in order for something to be accurately defined as evidence.

You don't need to consider any particular form of evidence to be of good quality, but that doesn't negate the fact that it is correctly defined as a form of evidence. Whereas you say "I consider it as evidence", I say - it is evidence. The question is, whether we consider it to be evidence of decent quality. That depends entirely on us and our own standards.

As an experiment, pick an article you consider as evidence

I'll see about it (although I'm wondering if it might be better to see if I can directly access a paper for a study itself, rather than an article summary from the PE.) It might take me some time, though, and this thread is rather long, so I can't guarantee I'll get anything back before this thread potentially closes.

Well Big G has taken his eye off the ball again - dozens killed in Indonesia in earthquakes. Nothing man made or free will involved

This so called loving and caring worshipped god has been neglectful yet again.

Why did god make his word so frustratingly hard to understand? And why has it been that in all the years since Jesus died that scholars have pontificated and argued endlessly about what the Bible actually means? What was God's deal here? Why do we have to have endless arguments about his meaning? Surely, he had/has the power to make his points clear to everyone, especially the everyday person.?

Jesus, son of Mary and Joseph. Normal guy but got into trouble and was killed- not so different from news stories today. End of story. The rest is myths and fabricated stories.

Yes, but why has there been so much confusion and arguments, for many years, over what the Bible actually means. Surely God being all seeing, knowing etc, he would have made it clear from the outset ..and made his word worldwide, not dependent on missionary work, etc? It's confusing to me.

How about I start another thread on this board. I will pick something at random from your compendium site. Some to do with religion of course. Pagan perhaps. There is Pagan thread running, but as a rule, I tend not to interrupt if it is religious talking to religious.

I was thinking this morning about the creation story and some people see it as symbolic or literal. There are probably other ways to see it to. I like to see it as a literal story.

1. The serpent was a voice from Satan using the serpent.
2. Eve was spoken to directly by a serpent and the devil using its limited powers tricked Eve through a serpent.
3. The serpent acted on its own
4. Eve had an evil thought of her own coming from negativity which is evil.
5. God knows but he has given us an account of creation which he thinks is right for us. Whatever you decide on I don't make an issue of it with others where this is concerned. It is not like trying to argue that Jesus' literal miracles etc were not true when they were true.

I think that they want us to understand a bit more. Some of the parables they were not simply understood, so I had to dig a bit more and got to understand more and the learning was good. Trust is important to in the faith if you don't understand something you have an option to trust them and try seeing it in context. If struggling try and keep it simple and focus on love and forgiveness as Jesus taught if interested in the faith.

In my opinion the bible is part fiction with some historical context.God(s) do not exist - no one has provided any evidence or proof.
Some people believe in it all (up to them) in the same way as children believe in Father Christmas and the tooth fairy - it’s just a belief but we know it’s not true

That doesn't really answer my question tho.

Which was why did God make it so frustratingly complex? The Bible has been pored over for many years and different people have come to different conclusions. Why didn't God make it more easily understood for the common person, like myself? Surely, it was, supposedly, a word, to be understood by the common person. Why has it been studied and argued over for feck knows how long and yet, even today, nobody knows what actually the truth is? For me,, it makes no sense. If God, being supposedly all seeing,, all knowing etc..he woukd have actually done this and made his word, all seeing, all knowing
Why the confusion?

Perhaps some others may have some answers. I will add though It does seem that some try and study the Bible and figure too much at times. Learning is good but picking apart a faith I wouldn't want to do it and I studied religion to some degree at university but we didn't completely pick the different religions apart..

I meant to write but left out that some people try and figure out the Bible.

What do you mean tho justmereach?
You haven't really answered my question.

Are you saying there really isn't an answer?

I have just got the impression that online at times some discussion has seemed like over scripture that some people have attempted to take a close up lens to scripture and really taken it apart to try and understand it. When having a faith if you do this all the time it may not be very pleasant. Also, it may make one question more doing this style,. Everyone has their own style though but is a thought I have had in the past but have not stated it in this manner. If you read scripture and have an understanding may be try and go with it then seeing what others make of it and trust your perception a bit more.

What do you mean tho? You didn't answer my questions about why would an all seeing, all knowing God do the things he does or really prescribe what he does in the Bible. Why does he change his mind from the ot to the nt. It doesn't make sense to me

In the Old Testament believers used to make sacrifices to God through animals. This stopped when God sent his Son Jesus Christ into the world. God sent his Son because it was to express God’s divine love to humanity with the giving of his son for forgiveness of sins to those who believed in him. Jesus came to bring God’s law to its logical end and his birth was on the cards in the Old Testament- In Isaiah the birth of Emmanuel is foretold . Immanuel/Emmanuel is another name we know for Jesus. God was Holy and his standard could be different and a way to come to him had to be through his Son.

This was always part of God’s story and It had to fall into the timeline. Some people say that Jesus was there in heaven from the beginning.
In Psalm 51 it didn’t seem that blood sacrifice would be something long term. It was all about getting to Jesus Christ.

This has always read to me that animal sacrifice would come to an end-

“For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem. Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.”

Sorry but??!!

I am tying to be polite here...but your very long post does in no way way answer my question. In fact, it totally confuses and has confounded me. I feel absolutely dumbfounded

Maybe, it's just me.

Maybe you could be a bit more specific?

Sorry about that-I tried being as clear as I could. Sending Jesus was a new way of being able to us to have a relationship with God that was always on the cards in the Old Testament to happen. You asked why did God change his mind. I said he never did because Jesus was on the cards to come and that was always his plan for all of us and not just his chosen people. It's been a while that I have read about animal sacrifice in the Temple in a journal so my memory isn't the best. If you don't get an answer I would suggest searching Why did Temple sacrifice end. I don't know if this would prove helpful but it might be useful.