mike_decock

Actually, the earliest manuscripts do not have that sentence in Luke 23:34 ("Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing"). Many believe (including myself) that it was a later interpolation to absolve the Roman soldiers of blame, especially considering that there would have been sufficient motive in marketing Christianity to a Roman community.

This also serves to place the blame directly on the Jews who knew better than to accept the Messianic claims about Jesus.

-Mike...

Rousseau_CHN

Magus said:
Jesus is God, and God is, of course, God. Now, are you saying Magus that during that brief separation, there was actually two Gods. This would imply of course that Christianity was in a short span of time a polytheistic religion with two gods--for what else is the meaning of being separated.

Now to Sabine's interpretation that Christ was God becoming Man.
Thus, this mean that there was a time when the throne in heaven was unoccupied. And the devil did not take advantage of it. If the devil didn't then he is no great deceiver but the stupidest thing alive..

(God the spirit, Christ the human and the H.S. is the spirit again.

Sabine Grant

Hello again.. I doubt non believers would say " God said so" or use the " Eve and Adam's tricks" ( christians are the only people who use the devil as an escape from personal accountability) to avoid accountability in their choices of actions. I specificaly referred to biblical notions to illustrate accountability and that should in no way be " offensive or arrogant" to a non believer. Maybe a second reading of my initial post will place things back in the context and how they should have been understood.

It is quite simple... personal accountability prevails. I do not see any fault in Christ pleading for the forgiveness of those soldiers. The fact they were tools in the process of the crucifixion does not dispense them from accountability. Now if God had given them a personal revelation in which He commanded them to " implement" His Will by giving them specific instructions, I could see how pleading for their forgiveness would be pointless.

Goliath

It does in a field of characteristic 2.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Sabine Grant

Hello Rousseau... ah Jean Jacques! What I meant is that Christ is the human form of God...indeed the christian belief relies on 3 different states of God yet He remains intact. In other words, as an element can have three states, so can God and yet remain the same. His Omnipresence does not dissipate as He manifests Himself under three identities. So , while present among mankind as Christ, Elohim ( Creator of the Universe) still reigns in Heaven.
As far as " the devil" is concerned, pride can indeed engender stupidity.

Mageth

Space: Space in its basic form ( not getting into 4th+ dimensions) has height, width, and depth, yet all 3 aspects are still space.

If you're talking about a room, or using mathematics, height, width and depth can be assigned as the axes of a three-dimensional space. But if you're floating, say, a million miles out from earth, height, width and depth have no real meaning.

In any case, none of the three are space, either alone or in combination. And none are the same. They are three attributes arbitrarily assigned to a space.

Sabine Grant

Salut Mageth... I am glad you mentionned the relativity of reality as we know it or can percieve it. One of my arguments in another thread a while back was to point to the possibility of the divine existing in another reality we have yet to percieve. I used " water" as a demonstration of an element endorsing 3 states. It is a fact though that in another space submitted to different physical laws, water may not turn into vapor or ice.

Mageth

It is a fact though that in another space submitted to different physical laws, water may not turn into vapor or ice.

I don't know if I'd go so far as to call that a "fact". Hypothesis, perhaps.

Biff the unclean

One of my arguments in another thread a while back was to point to the possibility of the divine existing in another reality we have yet to percieve.

Now I know that Ron Serling made a good career out of just this sort of thing but when I hear it from the religious I have to wonder who they think that they are fooling? The divine is dumped in some sort of Twilight Zone but it wasn't just a minute ago. A minute ago there were believers in our reality, claiming that the divine acted in our reality. "… another reality we have yet to percieve." That word "yet" conveys two things. One is a hope that it may be perceived. The second is an admission that in all of human history up to and including the present moment it has never been perceived by anyone at all. Which means that no one could possibly know a single thing about it…which contradicts every Xian here.

Sabine Grant

First of I have no earthly idea who Ron serling is. Second " the religious" is quite a generalizing term which again deprives people from their individuality. Third, the concept I presented leaves an open door to metaphysical consideration which does not necessarly implies that only the " religious" would meditate on the possibility of other realities yet to be percieved by our senses ( that is visual, auditory, tactile...) Often the challenge is presented to the " religious" as " do you believe in invisible unicorns"... it appears that confirmation of a possible reality would be affirmed by visual, auditory and tactile senses.
It is prudent IMO to consider the possibility of other realities yet to be discovered unless one can claim that he or she has knowledge of all possibilities contained in the universe.