FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-28-2001, 01:31 AM   #11
ChadD
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: MN, USA
Posts: 140
Post

Amos,
Thank you for the attempt, but in the context of the post that I quoted, I took the poster to imply that he/she held the adoptionism view of Christology. Given this, and that the poster apparently rejects the orthodox view of the Trinity, I am curious to see a clarification on their part (I would guess that they are a modalist, or perhaps a JW?). Regardless, they were not particularly clear.


"The son of God became timeless when he entered the_timeless_state_after_death. Entering the_timeless_state_after_death makes time_without_beginning_or_end the uninterrupted_flow of unbounded_time and time an illusion along with unbounded_existence until time_without_beginning_or_end made unbounded_existence known."

[ October 28, 2001: Message edited by: ChadD ]
ChadD is offline  
Old 10-28-2001, 02:30 AM   #12
Isabeau
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: baltimore
Posts: 10
Post

"3" as such has many spiritual, mystical and symbolic meanings in many cultures and religions world wide. The concept of a trinity is not Christian in origin, although I don't think that should negate its importance to Christianity. The argument that there must only be one God, making the trinity unnecessary, is not helpful and an over simplification of a concept that is at the core of this religion. Such an argument fails to take into account that 'wholeness' is made up of many parts, whether that be a trinity or some other combination that attempts to explain a valuable concept. I repeat the 'trinity' is not Christian in origin, but it should not cause people who consider themselves as true believers in the 'one God' to make it sound as if it smacks of heresy.
Isabeau is offline  
Old 10-28-2001, 05:53 AM   #13
excreationist
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,886
Post

Here's another link about this:
http://www.evolvefish.com/freewrite/trinity.html
excreationist is offline  
Old 10-28-2001, 06:48 AM   #14
Amos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by ChadD:
<STRONG>Amos,

"The son of God became timeless when he entered the_timeless_state_after_death. Entering the_timeless_state_after_death makes time_without_beginning_or_end the uninterrupted_flow of unbounded_time and time an illusion along with unbounded_existence until time_without_beginning_or_end made unbounded_existence known."

[ October 28, 2001: Message edited by: ChadD ]</STRONG>
Hi Chad, nice, but be sure to realize that "death" is restricted to death of the ego only because when the ego raptures that which remains is in heaven. Let me add to mine.

Infinity has no beginning and no end.
Eternity has a beginning but no end.
The temporal has a beginninig and an end.

For the temporal (us) to make infinity (God) known we must become eternal (Lord God) to become the continuity of infinity (God).

We now have two persons of the trinity identified. The third one is the HS which exists because our conscious and subconscious mind are twain instead of twin.

Amos
 
Old 10-28-2001, 07:59 AM   #15
Amos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Isabeau:
<STRONG>"3" as such has many spiritual, mystical and symbolic meanings in many cultures and religions world wide. The concept of a trinity is not Christian in origin, although I don't think that should negate its importance to Christianity. The argument that there must only be one God, making the trinity unnecessary, is not helpful and an over simplification of a concept that is at the core of this religion. Such an argument fails to take into account that 'wholeness' is made up of many parts, whether that be a trinity or some other combination that attempts to explain a valuable concept. I repeat the 'trinity' is not Christian in origin, but it should not cause people who consider themselves as true believers in the 'one God' to make it sound as if it smacks of heresy.</STRONG>
Just by looking at the number 3 should tell us that we are divided and not full circle in either of our minds. Cf 3 and 8.

The number 3 is no more significant than any other number because without the 2 and the story behind its shape the 3 would be meaningless. The number 4 is made up of three singular lines (1's or "like gods" or lesser gods) and the number 5 is the inversion the number 2 again (inversion of faith).

The 6 follows and ends the ying period of life and thus starts parri-nirvana or the first part of yang. Nirvana begins at 9 which is opposite to 6 and so every number is significant. In fact, the entire message of salvation is written on our clock and this does not end with 3 but with 12. The number 3 is just part of the journey of life where most people get stranded to die before they hit the 6.


Amos

[ October 28, 2001: Message edited by: Amos ]
 
Old 10-28-2001, 02:20 PM   #16
Isabeau
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: baltimore
Posts: 10
Talking

Amos,
It's great to see you can read the time in the old-fashioned way - some people can't unfortunately.

I am certainly not a theist, but I have a healthy respect for those who are whether or not they do believe in the significance of particular numbers or whatever.

And, if you've ever bothered to read any scientific papers on the topic - many scientific phenomena have some sort of numerical/mathematical basis (which may or may not lend credence to those who do believe in a divine plan for existence). Who knows? But, I'm not about to hang it on you for not knowing, am I?
Isabeau is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:44 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.