FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-24-2006, 09:01 AM   #11
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbaii View Post
The need for a third part of the Trinity seemed to me to be more numerology than theology. Wasn't three considered the perfect number because it had a beginning, a middle and an end?

Chili: What is the source of the term "inner child" religiously speaking? It sounds like modern psychology. And the only connection Gabriel supposedly had with the incarnation of God was as the messenger announcing it to Mary.
Yes I may have borrowed it from modern psychology because it is works well for me but this child is the image in which we are created as animal man prior to our second identity that was created by our faculty of reason but never took form (we only have one body). This would be our persona, or mask, that gives us an identity of our own. To this nature Judaism was added to first lead the persona astray and later redeem the prior nature wherein we are God (man is basically good).

Gabriel is exclusive to God which means that Joseph's rebirth was incipient from God instead of carnal desire as per Jn.1:13.

The number 3 shows that we lost our free will and do not come full circle in our God or ego identity. This makes us a stranger in a foreign land.
Chili is offline  
Old 09-24-2006, 09:08 AM   #12
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scifinerdgrl View Post
I don't get why Jesus was considered God's "son" while Adam wasn't.
Jesus was created by God and formed as man while Adam was conjectured in Gen. 3 after fall of man. The "who told you that you were naked" identifies this persona.
Chili is offline  
Old 09-24-2006, 09:10 AM   #13
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Posts: 15,576
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesBannon View Post
Adam rebelled against God's authority and hence was cast out relinquishing any claim. Jesus could be looked upon as a replacement for Adam since he came to fulfill the law but that's not an orthodox interpretation. Orthodox believers would contend that Jesus is god, eternally present and so forth.
Claims always lose all force when they appeal to special pleading. Sonhood is determined by birth. You can't relinquish or retract your lineage. But naturally someone will tell you that you have to look at it from a Christian perspective.

Soul Invictus is offline  
Old 09-24-2006, 09:15 AM   #14
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesBannon View Post
It has always been my opinion that the doctrine of the trinity is an offshoot of Pythagorean mysticism via Plato's forms (Plato was much influenced by Pythagoras in this regard).
I would argue that the forms (episteme) are like our daily masses wherein the trinity (onoma, logos and eidelon) leads us to the final form or Christ-mass where the trinity finally collapses in the eidos. Aristotle called this the parousia wherein all ousia's are consolidated but I am not sure if he was.
Chili is offline  
Old 09-24-2006, 09:53 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Clark County, Nevada
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbaii View Post
The need for a third part of the Trinity seemed to me to be more numerology than theology. Wasn't three considered the perfect number because it had a beginning, a middle and an end?

Chili: What is the source of the term "inner child" religiously speaking? It sounds like modern psychology. And the only connection Gabriel supposedly had with the incarnation of God was as the messenger announcing it to Mary.
The same Gabriel that was also supposedly Mohammad's messenger?
aguy2
aguy2 is offline  
Old 09-25-2006, 06:26 AM   #16
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aguy2 View Post
The same Gabriel that was also supposedly Mohammad's messenger?
aguy2
Yes, except that he has Gabriel mixed up with Raphael who is the angel of light and not the true light.

God is first cause and the Annunciation is God's only message. The angel of the Lord in Zachariah's case is not the same angel because Lord God and God are not the same. Zachariah's message reflects the greatness of the Lord in the life of Joseph whereupon Mary finds favor with God because she was the suffering servant in the life of Joseph the upright Jew.

Gabriel is not a slave to the light. Raphael is the slave also called angel of light and therefore not the light itself.

Notice that the transition is from Gabriel to Mary who is the queen of angels because she is the woman who presides over the Tree of Life that contains the dowry in the form of wisdom as the reign of God to enlighten the believer.

It may be fun to baffle believers with angel talk but I think that Mohammad got impregnated by the angel of light (or should I say fucked?).
Chili is offline  
Old 09-25-2006, 01:00 PM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: big bad Deetroit
Posts: 2,850
Default

I thought Muhamed was the messenger and the Koran was the message.

Whoa, whoa. The Lord God and God are not the same? How so?
sbaii is offline  
Old 09-25-2006, 07:33 PM   #18
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbaii View Post
I thought Muhamed was the messenger and the Koran was the message.

Whoa, whoa. The Lord God and God are not the same? How so?
God is infinite and Lord God is eternal and eternally the essence of God made manifest . . . wherefore it is said that "without me God could no longer be."

The difference between eternity and infinity is that eternity has a beginning but no end and infinity has no beginning and no end. This would be how eternity is the continuity of infinity, continually procreating the essence of God after the image of God.
Chili is offline  
Old 09-26-2006, 01:27 AM   #19
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

i love the way words are dumped into discussions with an assumption that their meaning is agreed upon. Take infinity - which one? That of natural numbers, prime numbers, odd numbers, fractions....

Funny that, more than one infinity! So what does "God is infinite" mean? Might it be meaningless mumbo jumbo?
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 09-26-2006, 01:55 AM   #20
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 9,159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
And if Jesus was god's only begotten son, how could Jesus have been of the seed (sperma) of David?
Logically, David must be God.

Of course, that just opens up another problem or two.


Hope all is well with you, spinmeister. :wave:
rlogan is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:22 AM.

Top

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