Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

CannibalCorpse,

Oh...the IG or 'InfidelGuy' forums over at thedeepdark.com.




SOMMS

Soma

By ascribing gender to the Trinity you have instantly rendered your version erroneous, considering God has no gender.

CannibalCorpseLC

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas
[B]CannibalCorpse,

Oh...the IG or 'InfidelGuy' forums over at thedeepdark.com.


no i've never been to that site

AJ113

Eh? The Jesus of the New Testament is clearly a man. He even called himself the Son of Man. He also referred to "....my father in heaven....." What do you think he meant by this?

Soma

It means the educated philosophers of the time decided to use a father-son relationship to help convey the relationships between the first, second, and third elements of the Trinity.

In reality, God is neither man nor woman... or perhaps He is both?

the_cave

Welcome, from one newbie to another.

The book you refer to is indeed a classic--and decent--introduction to atheism. But I'm somewhat partial to those who have said they found it a little wanting upon a second or third read...I certainly wouldn't stop with it if I were you (I really shouldn't be giving my opponents advice ) Even though I'm a Christian Theist, I'll admit that much.

I agree: Koy's comments were pretty dead-on.

It's true, if Jesus is to be both God and Son of God, you'll have to use some sort of Trinitarian formulation. But jeez, if I can wrap my mind around Bose-Einstein condensates (which indubitably exist), not to mention the recently discovered large-scale torus-geometry of the universe (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/11/sc...ce/11COSM.html I'm afraid you'll have to log in to read the article), I can certainly come up with some way to apprehend the Trinity. My favorite analogy, which I think I have invented, is the method by which the throat-singers of Tuva can voice two separate notes simultaneously! But I'll leave you to your own devices on that one.

As for the Virgin Birth, most orthodox Christians believe in it. Liberal Protestants generally do not (these are generalizations.) One of my father's favorite questions used to be "where did Jesus' Y chromosome come from?" A very good question. Mostly, the "Virgin Birth" merely signifies that for whatever reason, Jesus did not inherit original sin from humanity. Practically speaking, this means that he always chose to do the right thing--unlike us, who cannot. It's in his nature not to sin, even though he was fully human (remember, according to the Christian narrative, human beings were not created sinful--they were merely created free.)

Well, I'm sure you'll have thousands more questions, but this is certainly an interesting place to explore them. Enjoy.

Infidelettante

Show me the verse in the Bible where your God is refered to as IT. Your Savior was a man was he not? He was the Son of his Father was he not? Your trinity is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is it not? In addition to my Goddess I also worship God. They form a dynamic of polarity which is the power of creation. Where is the female aspect of your religion? Oh I forgot, there isn't one. And just for your information I no longer do anything instantly.

JT

CannibalCorpseLC

we're not created sinful? then tell me what it means when it is said we are all born in sin.

AJ113

I see. So the words attributed to Jesus in the New Testament are not actually his own, but something made up by educated philosophers of the time?

the_cave

Well, actually that means everyone who's "descended from Adam & Eve" is sinful..."they" were not created sinful, they were merely created free, though they chose to sin. But they weren't born in sin.

Now the modern interpretation of this Myth for many Christians is simply that when God created man (or, when man evolved), he merely intended for his creation to be free. So, we were originally free (we evolved into free creatures). But with this freedom we choose to do evil--that's a choice of our own accord, not God's (not all Christians have argued for this through history, but I'd say it's a respectable contemporary interpretation.) So, we were intended to be free, and thus were "created" to be free--but we don't always use that freedom for good.

(In fact, you could argue that our original freedom was due to the fact that we were had not yet evolved human intelligence, and hence were still only very smart animals. It's once we evolved intelligence--or perhaps language--that we began to become aware of the difference between good & evil, and our preferences for both. This is not a widespread belief, but it's one of the ways I think about it, anyway!)