// Required code

Announcement

Collapse

General Theistics 101 Guidelines

This area is open for nontheists and theists to interact on issues of theism and faith in a civilized manner. We ask that nontheist participation respect the theistic views of others and not seek to undermine theism in general, or advocate for nontheism. Such posts are more suited for and allowable in Apologetics 301 with very little restriction.

The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

My brief (and polemical) thought about Christianity...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    Hulk think demi talk funny.
    Is there discussion among the mods about having him curb the baby talk on the forum? It's pretty trolly behavior, and I believe CP mentioned a thread about it. I suppose I could just set him on ignore, but was just curious if you folks were doing anything about it.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Adrift View Post
      Is there discussion among the mods about having him curb the baby talk on the forum? It's pretty trolly behavior, and I believe CP mentioned a thread about it. I suppose I could just set him on ignore, but was just curious if you folks were doing anything about it.
      Yes there is a discussion going on. I am hoping demi will just stop it on his own accord. It's not like anyone is buying his fake "russian accent" here. It makes his posts nearly impossible to parse and makes him look like a moron.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Seeker View Post

        The logic is simple: if it is true it can't be self-contradictory. Or it is 1, or it is 3. 1 and 3 at the same time cannot be true.

        (If you still don't get it, that was a reference to the Trinity).
        I have a book called "Science and the Bible" written by Henry M. Morris and he explains the concept of the Trinity. I cannot type the Trinity section without getting written permission by the publisher, but I found an article written by Henry M. Morris that might help you.

        https://www.icr.org/article/tri-universe

        Clip: "Skeptics can deride the Trinity doctrine as mathematically impossible. One plus One plus One does not equal One, but three. Nevertheless, the Bible reveals God to be a Trinity—one God in three Persons. Are we naïve and credulous to believe such a thing?"

        "Consider: The created universe is actually a tri-universe of Space, Matter, and Time, each permeating and representing the whole. However, the universe is not partly composed of space, partly of matter, and partly of time (like, for example, the three sides of a triangle). A trinity is not a trio or a triad, but a tri-unity, with each part comprising the whole, yet all three required to make the whole. Thus, the universe is all Space, all Time, and all Matter (including energy as a form of matter); in fact, many scientists speak of it as a Space-Matter-Time continuum.

        Furthermore, note the parallels between the divine trinity and the tri-universe in terms of the logical order of its three components. Space is the invisible, omnipresent background of everything in the universe. Matter-and-Energy reveal the reality of the universe. Time makes the universe understandable in the events occurring in it. Note that exactly the same sentence will apply if the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit replace the words, Space, Matter, and Time.

        Space itself is also a tri-unity, comprised of three dimensions, with each dimension permeating all space. The reality of any portion of space is obtained by multiplying the three dimensions together (the "mathematics of the Trinity" is not 1+1+1=1, but rather 1x1x1=1). Further, Space is identified in the first dimension seen in the second dimension, experienced in the third dimension. The same sentence could be used with Father, Son, and Spirit replacing first, second, and third dimensions.

        Similarly, Time is future, present, and past. The future is the unseen source of time, manifest moment-by-moment in the present and understood in the past. Again substitute Father, Son, and Spirit."

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          Yes there is a discussion going on. I am hoping demi will just stop it on his own accord. It's not like anyone is buying his fake "russian accent" here. It makes his posts nearly impossible to parse and makes him look like a moron.
          It was kind of amusing for a time. That time has passed.
          Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

          Beige Nationalist.

          "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

          Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

          Comment


          • #20
            I rarely involve myself in apologetics discussions, and you will see why.

            1) If we're reduced to invoking Henry Morris for support, we're in trouble.

            2) Honestly -- and I'm saying this as a thoroughgoing Trinitarian -- I have never ever heard an analogy, metaphor, parable, whatever that made "logical" sense of either the Trinity or the Incarnation. I can easily see why a rationalist could never be convinced of the doctrine logically, and why such a person would forever remain an infidel, apart from supernatural intervention. (Of course, it would probably be fair to say that NO ONE becomes a believer apart from supernatural intervention.)
            Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

            Beige Nationalist.

            "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

            Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
              I rarely involve myself in apologetics discussions, and you will see why.

              1) If we're reduced to invoking Henry Morris for support, we're in trouble.

              2) Honestly -- and I'm saying this as a thoroughgoing Trinitarian -- I have never ever heard an analogy, metaphor, parable, whatever that made "logical" sense of either the Trinity or the Incarnation. I can easily see why a rationalist could never be convinced of the doctrine logically, and why such a person would forever remain an infidel, apart from supernatural intervention. (Of course, it would probably be fair to say that NO ONE becomes a believer apart from supernatural intervention.)
              Two words: Holy Spirit.
              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                Is there discussion among the mods about having him curb the baby talk on the forum? It's pretty trolly behavior, and I believe CP mentioned a thread about it. I suppose I could just set him on ignore, but was just curious if you folks were doing anything about it.
                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Seeker View Post
                  I mean the claims are circular. What evidence from outside can be verified to validate the truth claims? And I am using the usual definition of truth from Philosophy. The only functional definition of truth is the correspondence between mental and supposedly factual contents; that is what I meant by ''truth is the relation between description and that which is described''.
                  I'm just going to grant this point, because I don't see what the problem is. Yes, internal discussions of Christian theology are dependent on Christianity being true, and their verification may not be possible on the level of absolute certainty, but how many things are? Whether something can be validated or proved with 100% certainty does not, technically speaking, have anything to do with whether it is true.
                  "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                    In hindsight, demi surprised New Atheism had such yuge hype as big threat, cos turned out so very, very shallow.
                    You think my post is somehow representative of New Atheism ideas? How did you come to that conclusion?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Seeker View Post
                      You think my post is somehow representative of New Atheism ideas? How did you come to that conclusion?
                      Don't bother taking anything demi-conservative says seriously. He's only here to troll.
                      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                        Don't bother taking anything demi-conservative says seriously. He's only here to troll.
                        He reminds me of the old spaghetti western Indians --- "him in heap big trouble".
                        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                          I rarely involve myself in apologetics discussions, and you will see why.

                          1) If we're reduced to invoking Henry Morris for support, we're in trouble.

                          2) Honestly -- and I'm saying this as a thoroughgoing Trinitarian -- I have never ever heard an analogy, metaphor, parable, whatever that made "logical" sense of either the Trinity or the Incarnation. I can easily see why a rationalist could never be convinced of the doctrine logically, and why such a person would forever remain an infidel, apart from supernatural intervention. (Of course, it would probably be fair to say that NO ONE becomes a believer apart from supernatural intervention.)
                          I don't like using analogies for the Trinity because they all seem to eventually fall apart. Some are horrible like water, steam and ice.

                          I thought Morris's explanation was a place to start.

                          Seeker said: "Or it is 1, or it is 3. 1 and 3 at the same time cannot be true."

                          We don't know what seeker really means by his statement. Some people think the Trinity is three Gods; it doesn't. Some think "three persons" means three people; it doesn't.

                          Seeker needs to clarity what he thinks the concept of the Trinity is.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Christian3 View Post
                            I don't like using analogies for the Trinity because they all seem to eventually fall apart. Some are horrible like water, steam and ice.

                            I thought Morris's explanation was a place to start.

                            Seeker said: "Or it is 1, or it is 3. 1 and 3 at the same time cannot be true."

                            We don't know what seeker really means by his statement. Some people think the Trinity is three Gods; it doesn't. Some think "three persons" means three people; it doesn't.

                            Seeker needs to clarity what he thinks the concept of the Trinity is.
                            Just an aside, I was talking with some pastor friends about expository preaching, and one of them mentioned the notion that, if you only preach expository sermons - going through the Bible book by book, verse by verse -- you will never preach on the Trinity.
                            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                              I rarely involve myself in apologetics discussions, and you will see why.

                              1) If we're reduced to invoking Henry Morris for support, we're in trouble.
                              Just because he was woefully ignorant in matters related to science doesn't mean that he's an idiot about everything else

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                JP Holding's short e-book on the Trinity explains it in a way that even I can understand. (Though the obvious question is that if his interpretation is correct, why did the early church fathers have so much trouble understanding it?)
                                "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X