The Trinity

[MountainHumanist]

ok. to me scripture is what it is. God bless

Yes. It is what it is. A collection of ancient myths edited, redacted, changed and repackaged over centuries in order to fit preexisting theological preferences.

Your statement basically says to me: "I refuse to weigh the evidence. I have made up my mind and no further data will cause me to reconsider."

 

[sojourner]

Yes. It is what it is. A collection of ancient myths edited, redacted, changed and repackaged over centuries in order to fit preexisting theological preferences.

Your statement basically says to me: "I refuse to weigh the evidence. I have made up my mind and no further data will cause me to reconsider."

I don't know that I would go so far as to say, "to fit preexisting theological preferences." That comes off a little too manipulative. Of course there was a theologcial preference, since the writers were believers. but to say that there was clandestine manipulation going on is silly.

 

[MountainHumanist]

I don't know that I would go so far as to say, "to fit preexisting theological preferences." That comes off a little too manipulative. Of course there was a theologcial preference, since the writers were believers. but to say that there was clandestine manipulation going on is silly.

This "silly" notion is backed up by reams of scholarship. And I am not saying the manipulation was always conscious either.

 

[sojourner]

This "silly" notion is backed up by reams of scholarship. And I am not saying the manipulation was always conscious either.

I'm glad to hear you say that. At first, it sort of reeked of conspiracy theory. I was about to set up a shrine to St. Shackelford the Slippery.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

This "silly" notion is backed up by reams of scholarship. And I am not saying the manipulation was always conscious either.

:biglaugh:

Dan Brown does not count as "scholarship."

 

[roddio]

So the answer to my question is "No." You cannot prove Jesus is still alive via any empirical means.

For a basic primer on Paleontology, go here. We don't have faith that dinosaurs existed we have reasonable confidence due to the vast fossil record and other lines of data that clearly point to the same conclusion.

If you are going to make the claim that direct knowledge is a precursor to learning, you have brought most academic disciplines to a screeching halt. Forget history. Forget astronomy. Forget even a criminal justice system based on contemplation of evidence. If you really want to know if Jesus is alive do this while meditating talk to Him.
Finally, why do you believe something for which no empirical evidence? because I know what believing in Him has done for me, I was a lost soul without a purpose now I know that there is something better for me and I wouldnt trade Him in for nothing in this world. God bless

 

[roddio]

Yes. It is what it is. A collection of ancient myths edited, redacted, changed and repackaged over centuries in order to fit preexisting theological preferences.

Your statement basically says to me: "I refuse to weigh the evidence. I have made up my mind and no further data will cause me to reconsider."

Why would I reconsider for what? let me ask you this youre a budhist correct? so if people started saying that they found all kinds of new information and your faith would you jump to believe it? if you did would you be a true follower? God bless

 

[MountainHumanist]

:biglaugh:

Dan Brown does not count as "scholarship."

I agree. His books are mostly fantasy. In the world of biblical scholarship: Bart Ehrman counts. Robert M. Price counts. Richard Friedman counts. Burton Mack counts. Et. al.

 

[MountainHumanist]

Why would I reconsider for what? let me ask you this youre a budhist correct? so if people started saying that they found all kinds of new information and your faith would you jump to believe it? if you did would you be a true follower? God bless

That is exactly correct. New discoveries require new insight. And again mine is not a faith. I'm not involved in faith-based buddhism. I have confidence the techniques work because they have worked for me.

 

[MountainHumanist]

I'm glad to hear you say that. At first, it sort of reeked of conspiracy theory. I was about to set up a shrine to St. Shackelford the Slippery.

Nah. Humankind is way to disjointed and chaotic as a whole to maintain any long-term conspiracies. But just about everyone I have ever known (and I can extrapolate that to most everyone in history — probably) tends to re-cast religious principles and inherited "scripture" to suit their own biases and worldview. Example: The South and slavery (made it "biblical"). Example #2: The Religious Right recasting Jesus as some kind of American warrior.

"St. Shackelford the Slippery" is that a counterpart to Brother Maynard and St. Attila?

 

[roddio]

That is exactly correct. New discoveries require new insight. And again mine is not a faith. I'm not involved in faith-based buddhism. I have confidence the techniques work because they have worked for me.

what I believe has worked for me. All the searching for this and that to me leads to all kinds of confusion and I serve a God that's not about confusion. God bless

 

[sojourner]

Nah. Humankind is way to disjointed and chaotic as a whole to maintain any long-term conspiracies. But just about everyone I have ever known (and I can extrapolate that to most everyone in history — probably) tends to re-cast religious principles and inherited "scripture" to suit their own biases and worldview. Example: The South and slavery (made it "biblical"). Example #2: The Religious Right recasting Jesus as some kind of American warrior.

"St. Shackelford the Slippery" is that a counterpart to Brother Maynard and St. Attila?

::shifts eyes::
What do you think?

 

[MountainHumanist]

::shifts eyes::
What do you think?

I'll consult the Book of Armaments

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I agree. His books are mostly fantasy. In the world of biblical scholarship: Bart Ehrman counts. Robert M. Price counts. Richard Friedman counts. Burton Mack counts. Et. al.

Bart Ehrman is one of my favorites. I literally ran into him in a hotel in New Orleans last week. We were both trying to get around a quite large plant in the lobby .... hahaha

I got to talk with him - I really like his translations of the apostolic fathers, and complimented him on his youtube stuff as well as his great titles for his books.

 

[sojourner]

I'll consult the Book of Armaments

Dear God! Don't count to 5!!!

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The Trinity is complex enough as it is... three in one...

Can you imagine if we had two or more persons?

 

[sojourner]

The Trinity is complex enough as it is... three in one...

Can you imagine if we had two or more persons?

I thought Brother Maynard said it was five persons...

 

[Gharib]

It is one God all the time. However the Son and Paraclete have temporal parameters although there are pre-figures of each.

wait before i say anithing else i want to ask you, you are a christian that believes jesus is the son of god rathern than jesus being god, is that correct? and what about the holy spirit what is that and how does it come to be in the picture?