FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-16-2003, 11:22 AM   #71
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tampa Bay area
Posts: 3,471
Default

I have nothing against Muhammed (well maybe I do) I have nothing against Islam. (Well maybe I do) I have an open mind and am willing to learn, however.

As a cherry picking Christian I can also cherry pick Islam as a possible extension of Christianity.

However my first few impressions of Muhammed is that he was a serious nut case. -------- Gawd, he was a pedophile, a warrior and conqueror with no compassion, an egomaniac who believed "do not do what I do ---do what I say".

First impressions-------I kind of like Jesus.

I don't really like Muhammed. I would not let Muhammed anywhere near my children-----especially any prepubescent females.

If Muhammed lived today in the USA, he would be in jail for pedophelia. And being poked in the asss on a daily basis.

Jesus would be on a corner in a slum somewhere being nice to the prostitutes and low life of this world--------but not in jail. (or at least for not longer than a day or two)
Rational BAC is offline  
Old 07-16-2003, 03:30 PM   #72
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 3,794
Default

How do you know Jesus was not a pedophile?

--J.D.
Doctor X is offline  
Old 07-16-2003, 08:52 PM   #73
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tampa Bay area
Posts: 3,471
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Doctor X
How do you know Jesus was not a pedophile?

--J.D.
Why would you think He was?
Rational BAC is offline  
Old 07-16-2003, 09:25 PM   #74
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 3,794
Default

He liked children. . . .

In all seriousness, you cannot make a claim that Mohammed would be in jail and Junior would not because you cannot provide us with a historical figure of any significant detail.

You merely speculate and speculation can lead to the uncomfortable.

--J.D.
Doctor X is offline  
Old 07-17-2003, 10:38 AM   #75
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: PA USA
Posts: 5,039
Default

Trinitarianism is better referred to as tritheism. To say all three deities are really the same deity always struck me as saying 1, 19, and 27.6 are really all the same number, only expressed differently.
joedad is offline  
Old 07-17-2003, 09:08 PM   #76
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tampa Bay area
Posts: 3,471
Default

I have to admit I do not understand the Christian concept of the trinity at all.

And I am a Christian. It definitely seems like 3 separate entities in the Bible. And it takes an awful lot of spin to make them one entity. But why bother with it anyway?

I don't think the idea of a trinity is in any way necessary for Christianity.

There is this silly hang up on monotheism which seems to overwhelm reason as far as Christianity is concerned. And has done so since the 4th century.
Rational BAC is offline  
Old 07-17-2003, 10:01 PM   #77
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rational BAC
I have to admit I do not understand the Christian concept of the trinity at all.

And I am a Christian. It definitely seems like 3 separate entities in the Bible. And it takes an awful lot of spin to make them one entity. But why bother with it anyway?

I don't think the idea of a trinity is in any way necessary for Christianity.

There is this silly hang up on monotheism which seems to overwhelm reason as far as Christianity is concerned. And has done so since the 4th century.
The Trinity actually is a foundation of Christianity. To deny Jesus' divinity, is to call Him a liar.

Here are a few articles on the Trinity. Not sure if it will help any but...

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t002.html

http://www.carm.org/doctrine/whatisthetrinity.htm

http://www.carm.org/doctrine/trinity.htm
Magus55 is offline  
Old 07-17-2003, 10:09 PM   #78
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55
The Trinity actually is a foundation of Christianity. To deny Jesus' divinity, is to call Him a liar.
Then why leave it until the NT to mention? Was YHWH too lazy?
winstonjen is offline  
Old 07-17-2003, 10:19 PM   #79
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by winstonjen
Then why leave it until the NT to mention? Was YHWH too lazy?
Its mentioned in Isaiah and Genesis. It probably wasn't a big inclusion in the OT because the Word of God ( Jesus), hadn't become flesh yet, so there wasn't anything to understand the trinity by. Jesus proved His divinity, and the existence of the Trinity. He wasn't around to do that in the OT.
Magus55 is offline  
Old 07-18-2003, 02:21 AM   #80
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Quezon City, Philippines
Posts: 1,994
Default

Verses please, Magus, and maybe some explanation as to why you think it refers to the trinity, and not something else like polytheism/henotheism.
Secular Pinoy is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:51 PM.

Top

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