A Question about Christ [W 77, 186]

[Logicman]

Re: A Question about Christ [W 77]

You can interpret it your way, Other can interpret it their way. In Judaism, it's not hell. That is actually one of the clues that the Book of Daniel was written in the 2nd century bce, rather than the 6th century bce... because of the apocalyptic theology, and one reason it's in teh scriptures, not the prophets.

That was quite the twisting you had put on Daniel 12:2 to make your view fly, but it wasn't even close.

 

[Logicman]

Re: A Question about Christ [W 77]

No, I'm not, which is why you have to dishonesty try and misrepresent what I stated. I made no such change.

Have you ever considered posting honestly? The bible recommends it, so I can see why you'd not be familiar with it.

Pity you can't face what the bible clearly says.

 

[Logicman]

Re: A Question about Christ [W 77]

No Jewish authority would ever call that passage as referring to hell.

Maybe, maybe not. Messianic Jews certainly might. I just asked what non-Messianic Jews call that place in Daniel 12:2 where there's "shame and everlasting contempt"? Do you know?

In fact, in Judaism shame is a concept meant to persuade those Hebrews that disobey God.

The fact is the passage says some will "awake" to it and evidently have to live with it forever.

Quite the contrast to Psalm 23, where David will "dwell in the House of the Lord forever".

 

[ALiberalModerate]

An interesting question:

Why did Jesus come into the world?

Christianity 101: God sent himself > to sacrifice himself > to himself > to save us all from himself.

 

[Logicman]

Christianity 101: God sent himself > to sacrifice himself > to himself > to save us all from himself.

Let me help you with your confusion:



Do you update your theology when something is clarified for you?

 

[RAMOSS]

Let me help you with your confusion:

View attachment 67224788

Do you update your theology when something is clarified for you?

That diagram contains several items that violate the law of non contradiction.

 

[LesGovt]

Christianity 101: God sent himself > to sacrifice himself > to himself > to save us all from himself.

Yes, but check John 18.

 

[LesGovt]

That diagram contains several items that violate the law of non contradiction.

It doesn't contradict; unless, one wants it to contradict.

 

[RAMOSS]

It doesn't contradict; unless, one wants it to contradict.

Why yes.. it does.. unless one wants to ignore the rules of logic.

If you replace the various symbols with a b , c and d, and use the following notation

A = D
B = D
C = D
then logically, by definition and the rules of logic
A = B = C = D.

Therefore, that diagram as an explanation is not logical.

 

[Daisy]

Christianity 101: God sent himself > to sacrifice himself > to himself > to save us all from himself.

That is what many Christians believe...I do not...Jehovah sent his only begotten son, Jesus Christ, to sacrifice his perfect human life to save us all from sin and death our original human parents sentenced us to...

 

[LesGovt]

Why yes.. it does.. unless one wants to ignore the rules of logic.

If you replace the various symbols with a b , c and d, and use the following notation

A = D
B = D
C = D
then logically, by definition and the rules of logic
A = B = C = D.

Therefore, that diagram as an explanation is not logical.

God = Father
God = Son
God = Holy Spirit

Logic at its best.

 

[RAMOSS]

God = Father
God = Son
God = Holy Spirit

Logic at its best.

Which then means, if you follow the logic correctly that Son= Father = Holy Spirit. .. which of course it against what the trinity is claimed to be. Therefore, that model/representation of what the trinity is has contradictions in it.. if you go purely by the logical equivalents. Perhaps it is better not to try to use that kind of logical expressions for religious concept.

 

[Daisy]

Which then means, if you follow the logic correctly that Son= Father = Holy Spirit. .. which of course it against what the trinity is claimed to be. Therefore, that model/representation of what the trinity is has contradictions in it.. if you go purely by the logical equivalents. Perhaps it is better not to try to use that kind of logical expressions for religious concept.

Exactly, Ramoss...I think this particular doctrine makes it more complicated/difficult to understand than it really is...a doctrine that was not introduced into the congregation until the 4th century AD...not what Jesus or his apostles taught while they were on earth...

 

[LesGovt]

Which then means, if you follow the logic correctly that Son= Father = Holy Spirit. .. which of course it against what the trinity is claimed to be. Therefore, that model/representation of what the trinity is has contradictions in it.. if you go purely by the logical equivalents. Perhaps it is better not to try to use that kind of logical expressions for religious concept.

I guess I just look at this differently from you.

God exists
God is our Father
God came into the world in human form as His Son to save us because we were fallen.
God gives us the Holy Spirit, so we can have God in our heart and guidance from the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps, others can explain this in a better format that I can.

 

[LesGovt]

I guess I just look at this differently from you.

God exists
God is our Father
God came into the world in human form as His Son to save us because we were fallen.
God gives us the Holy Spirit, so we can have God in our heart and guidance from the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps, others can explain this in a better format that I can.

Adding a bit to this:

Romans 5:5 And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

1 Corinthians 6:19 Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;

 

[RAMOSS]

I guess I just look at this differently from you.

God exists
God is our Father
God came into the world in human form as His Son to save us because we were fallen.
God gives us the Holy Spirit, so we can have God in our heart and guidance from the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps, others can explain this in a better format that I can.

I don't think they can. OF course, I come from a different religious tradition, and I am not Christian at all.. so several of your axioms that are essential to your religion are foreign to my thinking. The 'Son' doesn't exist, we are not 'fallen', and the holy spirit is just an euphemism for God.

 

[Logicman]

That diagram contains several items that violate the law of non contradiction.

Nonsense.

 

[RAMOSS]

Nonsense.

Yet, you have not been able to counter the specific example I pointed out.
When I break that down using standard math symbols, the contradictions are plain to see. That shows that particular diagram is not useful for explanation.

 

[LesGovt]

I don't think they can. OF course, I come from a different religious tradition, and I am not Christian at all.. so several of your axioms that are essential to your religion are foreign to my thinking. The 'Son' doesn't exist, we are not 'fallen', and the holy spirit is just an euphemism for God.

It is obvious to me that, if you worship a god, it is different from the Christian God.

 

[Logicman]

Which then means, if you follow the logic correctly that Son= Father = Holy Spirit. .. which of course it against what the trinity is claimed to be. Therefore, that model/representation of what the trinity is has contradictions in it.. if you go purely by the logical equivalents. Perhaps it is better not to try to use that kind of logical expressions for religious concept.

You butchered that again. They're three distinct and separate beings. All you have to do to understand that is to look at them as a species - God. Piece of cake. And that's why your argument fails.

 

[RAMOSS]

It is obvious to me that, if you worship a god, it is different from the Christian God.

Well, yes, I do not believe in the concept of the way the Christian God is presented. Then again, I am not Christian.

 

[RAMOSS]

You butchered that again. They're three distinct and separate beings. All you have to do to understand that is to look at them as a species - God. Piece of cake. And that's why your argument fails.

Yes, that is the claim. However, the law of non contradiction gets violated when you say the are all seperate beings, yet they are all a singular god.

 

[Logicman]

Yes, that is the claim. However, the law of non contradiction gets violated when you say the are all seperate beings, yet they are all a singular god.

Flush. One exclusive species called God, with three distinct individuals. That blows your non-contradiction nonsense right out of the water.

 

[RAMOSS]

Flush. One exclusive species called God, with three distinct individuals. That blows your non-contradiction nonsense right out of the water.

If god were a species that would make Christianity polytheistic.. so that analogy is incorrect. Your explanations fall short , since that does not appear to what to me what Christianity is trying to say. those explinations do not make Christianity appear to be consistant.

 

[it's just me]

If god were a species that would make Christianity polytheistic.. so that analogy is incorrect. Your explanations fall short , since that does not appear to what to me what Christianity is trying to say. those explinations do not make Christianity appear to be consistant.

That shield is derived from the Athanasian Creed:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed