Peanut Gallery for JoshPantera vs. Endgarcito3

[midniterider]

Ed's only argument is bashing Josh's spirituality. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Ed said,

 

"What does mine mean?  What does yours mean?  Are we only tumors labeled humanity in the cosmic fabric?  Does this scenario match the woo feelings that you are getting?  Because essentially that's all we are Josh......a tiny clusterfuck of perturbations in the fabric......that in the grand scheme of things will wash right back in the fabric and something, somewhere, might look at us as an artifact"

 

He really just shat all over @Joshpantera's spiritual experiences didn't he? It is this condescending view of others spirituality that has lead the church to commit the most horrible acts of violence history has to offer. Christianity is drowning in the blood of countless innocents over the years because of this.

 

Does this reaction alone not prove Josh's spirituality more superior than Endgarcito's?

 

Think about it. In all of Josh's arguments Christianity hasn't been left out of the loop. Christianity is accepted as a conduit for spiritual awareness but more limited in Josh's views. While Endgarcitos views condemn, bash, condecend, and discredit Josh's views and experiences. IMHO that makes Josh's views more superior than ends. 

 

Humans have a wide range of emotional capability. And we react on those emotions. We all know what humans can do when they come together. When we come together in a spirit of acceptance, understanding, and compassion we can change peoples lives for the better. But when we come together in intolerance, condemnation, and hate we are a ruthless bunch that will commit unimaginable transgression and we'll do it and call it good. We'll call it Gods Holy Vengeance or some bullshit like that. 

 

And as we see in the above quote, and @WalterP has already pointed out. End does not prescribe to his claimed religions view of how a spiritual person should be. While that doesn't prove his personal spiritual less than Josh's. It does speak volumes that he is way out in left field and from the looks of it aligns more with Christians in the Spanish inquisition than Christians helping the poor and needy around the world. 

 

Considering those aspects of both participants views in this debate. Which is a better spirituality and which is better able to make a person a better human being?

 

DB

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 hour ago, midniterider said:

Ed's only argument is bashing Josh's spirituality. 

yep he is in complete and total asshole mode now. Here's his last statement. He's not even giving Josh time to respond to his last 3 asshole comments before he posts and even more assholish comment. 

 

Ed said:

"

Now I find myself more realizing why the Japanese sand gardens.....contemplating the fabric and perturbations thereof.  So now I'm Ed that wakes up in the morning with the freedom to exist and disturb the fabric as I see fit.  A freedom.  How do I want to zap the universe today.  I picture myself as Bill Murray at this point..... 

 

Very succinctly Josh, you have nothing superior to argue"

 

 

[WalterP]

Edgarcito,

 

I have to sadly agree with midniterider, Dark Bishop and what the RedncekProfessor said a week ago.

 

You can demonstrate a superior spirituality in the debate, not by knocking Josh's down but by building yours up.

 

I'll even give you a bit of help.

 

 

 

The expression, 'It's a level playing field' is used when there's nothing to choose between two or more competitors, right?

 

So, are the emotions you feel and the physical sensations you experience in your spirituality any different to those felt and experienced by other people in their spiritual models?  The answer, is of course, no.

 

Hindus,  Muslims, Wiccans, Sikhs and people of any spirituality can get the same feelings and experiences you get.  Even if you genuinely believe that your feelings and experiences are different and better than theirs, there is no way that you could demonstrate that in this debate.  All we have to go on is your word.  And, in the spirit of fairness and equality, why would the word of one member be taken over another's?

 

This means that the spiritual playing field is level between you and all those other people.  There's nothing to choose between any of the competitors and no reason to favour you over anyone else.  So far in this debate you haven't described anything in your spirituality that is unique, different or better than anyone else's spirituality.  But, if you want to win this conclusively debate, there's your task.

 

Make the case for your model of spirituality by demonstrating that it is unique and different and better than all the others.  And better than Josh's.  Just believing that it is won't cut the mustard.  Nor will claiming that it is.  You have to go further.  You have to demonstrate it to the satisfaction of those who will judge the debate.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

End said:

 

"And look DB, I'm older and high on caffeine atm.  If I don't write this stuff down while my brain is putting it in or as it becomes in order, then I run a risk of losing it.  There was no intent to not let Josh respond.  I was just thinking out his side of the argument and writing it down as it evolved"

 

Lol that was funny and I can actually sympathize with it. I'm forgetful as shit too lmao !

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

 

[◊ Krowb ◊]

Ed seems to be in a peculiar mood.  Perhaps it's best to leave him be for a while as he works it out.

[midniterider]

I dont think Ed really believes in Jesus. Just some kind of deity-less communion/grace thing. Nothing wrong with that. I'm just not sure why he calls himself a Christian. And spends years with ex-Christians. 

[sdelsolray]

Some posters in this thread are conflating/confusing theology and spirituality.

[Joshpantera]

3 hours ago, sdelsolray said:

Some posters in this thread are conflating/confusing theology and spirituality.

 

For a lot of people the only thing they understand as spiritual is their theology. If they simply believe that all these things really happened as described in a book, that makes them spiritual and non-believers in the book not spiritual. To the extent that Buddhists and Hindus are not really spiritual because only those subscribing to their theology are spiritual. 

 

So it seems like an easy conflation to make. What's the counter argument you're proposing? 

[Joshpantera]

3 hours ago, midniterider said:

I dont think Ed really believes in Jesus. Just some kind of deity-less communion/grace thing. Nothing wrong with that. I'm just not sure why he calls himself a Christian. And spends years with ex-Christians. 

 

It's strange. My guess is that he just can't let it go. As silly as the whole thing is, and as much as he knows the churches are pretty much bullshit, he still clings on to whatever he can still grasp towards. Which is apparently forgiveness, grace, communion, and things that don't add up for such a christ-less, shall we say, character like Ed. 

 

But then again, that's why there's thousands of denominations. Some people can see that at least part of it is bullshit, but they just can't seem to let it go and open their eyes to the full scope of the situation. False, incorrect all the way through. It's scary to let go of the whole thing. Ed seems scared to me....

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

I want to give encouragement to come this way to Ed. But I dont know his life situation. I know that I would still have deconverted, but I probably would have been less vocal about my loss of faith at home and eased everyone into my non belief like I did with mom. 

 

But he would probably make a great exchristian just saying. 

[WalterP]

Christianity is wrong from the outset. Anyone who subscribes to it even just a little, as you do, suffers the CONSEQUENCES of christianity's inherent errors. These are foundational errors that attach themselves to anyone who even casually adhere's to them. The only way out of these fundamental errors to toss them and start over brand new. Trying to avoid the base level, inherent errors themselves in order to operate free and clear of the errors in question. 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I'd just like to address something that Josh has mentioned,

 

The idea that if a foundation is flawed, then everything resting upon that foundation is also flawed.

 

If something that we believe in by faith and which is supported by no evidence is flawed, then there would be no way to ever test the truth of the foundation.

 

It could be true or it could be false, but unless you can test it, how would you ever know either way?

 

And this is the dichotomy between faith and knowledge.

 

With faith you can never really know and with knowledge you don't really need faith.

 

When you go deeper into knowledge there's always the possibility of revising everything you once previously took as true.

 

When you go deeper into faith there's no possibility of revising anything because the foundation you are building on requires that you unquestioningly accept it without the possibility of testing it.

 

Faith appears to offer the solidity and comfort that knowledge doesn't.

 

But that only happens if you give up on knowing and persist in believing.

 

 

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

[Joshpantera]

1 hour ago, WalterP said:

And this is the dichotomy between faith and knowledge.

 

With faith you can never really know and with knowledge you don't really need faith.

 

When you go deeper into knowledge there's always the possibility of revising everything you once previously took as true.

 

When you go deeper into faith there's no possibility of revising anything because the foundation you are building on requires that you unquestioningly accept it without the possibility of testing it.

 

Very good observations! 

 

No possibility of testing it, changing as necessary, or adjusting as needed. That alone strikes me as quite inferior to the possibility of tossing those limitations and restrictions for something far less limited and restricting, or not limited and restricting at all. 

[WalterP]

It's not that I don't understand your viewpoint.  Got it in spades.  Please quit reiterating it over and over and over.  It's hasn't thus far produced any spiritual feelings in me when Anterman and I used to discuss a very similar interpretation years ago, and it doesn't now.  If it does for you, then bam, cool beans.  

 

One thing that worries me severely is your spiritual model doesn't seem to give much emphasis to life Josh.  The totality of my spiritual seems to hinge around Love and life.  Reabsorbing back in to elements, electrons and such just doesn't produce anything at all for me.....regardless of how extravagant we describe it's potential.

 

I appreciate your efforts and the discussion.  We just aren't getting anywhere and I'm not going to be convinced because it isn't in whatever arrangement of matter that I AM at the moment, that produces the affect it has on you.  Superior?  Idk, I'm sure it is for you  and I'm glad.  Truthfully, I hope everyone has a superior spirituality that moves them successfully through this transition.

 

Hopefully we might conclude this unless you have something that you just need to say.

 

Thanks.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Would you view Josh's model in a more sympathetic light if you found it more emotionally appealing, Edgarcito?

 

Walter.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Endgarcito said:

 

"

It's not that I don't understand your viewpoint.  Got it in spades.  Please quit reiterating it over and over and over.  It's hasn't thus far produced any spiritual feelings in me when Anterman and I used to discuss a very similar interpretation years ago, and it doesn't now.  If it does for you, then bam, cool beans.  

 

One thing that worries me severely is your spiritual model doesn't seem to give much emphasis to life Josh.  The totality of my spiritual seems to hinge around Love and life.  Reabsorbing back in to elements, electrons and such just doesn't produce anything at all for me.....regardless of how extravagant we describe it's potential.

 

I appreciate your efforts and the discussion.  We just aren't getting anywhere and I'm not going to be convinced because it isn't in whatever arrangement of matter that I AM at the moment, that produces the affect it has on you.  Superior?  Idk, I'm sure it is for you  and I'm glad.  Truthfully, I hope everyone has a superior spirituality that moves them successfully through this transition"

 

 

I think this is probably the best end to this debate we could hope for. I'd like to thank both @Joshpantera and @Edgarcito for the effort they put forth in the debate. In the end its really all a matter of perspective. How can we truly measure who is more spiritual or even what religion is more spiritual. 

 

I think we can all remember how we felt as Christians. The Bible, the teachers, and the preachers gave us a story to draw from. They painted a vivid emotional tale of a Hero that loved us enough to die for us. And a father that likewise loves us and made it possible for us to be with him. And as a gift for believing in his son he gave us the "Holy spirit" that connects us to both of them. This is the basic story we were taught from our youth. It was an epic of love and life etched unto our minds and we loved it. We connected to it. And we felt connect to God and Jesus through believing all of that. I, and I'm sure a good number of my fellow members at ExC have experience this and seen or even done some pretty crazy stuff while observing former church members or  letting ourselves get "caught up"  in the spirit. Back then it felt powerful, it felt real, it felt Holy. 

 

But realistically, that is what people of all faiths feel. Thinking about the many millenia of human religious belief, let's put ourselves in some other peoples shoes. We could probably imagine people sitting around a fire telling the stories of Hercules going to the underworld to rescue his love, Zeus with his clay figures representing his creations putting them where he wanted or throwing lighting bolts, Thor pounding his hammer during a thunderstorm, epics of the all father Odin and the mischievous Loki. Picture and try to feel how an Ancient American Indian might have felt, running through the woods chasing an animal, killing it, and finding a use for every part so that that animals sacrifice didn't go in vane or a Muslim praying to Allah for guidance or strength. All of these differing forms of spirituality meant something to those people. Non of them being any more or less credible than the last scientifically

 

We as ExChristian know how Christian spirituality felt. But at some point something made us say......... hold on a second, let me look at this a little closer because this doesn't sound right and/or possible. One of the biggest reasons for this is because we are now being educated on facts and provable truths. Christians accuse the sciences of destroying faith. And I suppose there is a valid argument there. But it is only being destroyed because it is provably wrong, as with any of the above mentioned faiths. 

 

The one thing that I feel sets Josh's narrative of spirituality apart from ALL of the above mentioned faiths, and the multitude of those not mentioned, is that his version is based on provable truths. It can completely coincide with science and change with science as new evidences are revealed. It is provable that we are ALL connected scientifically. Even if you have to go down to the subatomic level to explain how my body is made of the same atoms, electrons, and protons that make up everything else just arranged in a different order. My subatomic particles are always in contact with other subatomic particles like the oxygen and other elements that make up the air that we breath or the water we swim in. All those subatomic particles touch other subatomic particles and physically connect EVERYTHING. We are truly all connected. And what is in me is in you, what is in me is a part of the universe, I am the universe and the universe is in me. I may be a small miniscule part of that existence but nevertheless I'm still here. And while I have control of all the subatomic particles that make me me, I am a functional cog in the universe that makes changes in it according to my will as we all are.

 

I can see how an exchristian, athiest, or non-theist in general can achieve the same feeling of spirituality in that belief as someone else in any other faith. But we/they won't ever get disappointed after finding out it isnt real. It is very real and even greater still it is provably real. 

 

Because of this one fact. Josh's form of spirituality being equally as spiritually valid as Ed's but being able to be proven true,  while Ed's is based on provable fallacies that have brought down innumeral extinct religions throughout history. And will most likely eventually bring down even Christianity itself. In my humble opinion, If there is a winner it would have to be Josh. 

 

Great Job guys!!!! 

 

Dark Bishop

[Myrkhoos]

1 hour ago, DarkBishop said:

Endgarcito said:

 

"

It's not that I don't understand your viewpoint.  Got it in spades.  Please quit reiterating it over and over and over.  It's hasn't thus far produced any spiritual feelings in me when Anterman and I used to discuss a very similar interpretation years ago, and it doesn't now.  If it does for you, then bam, cool beans.  

 

One thing that worries me severely is your spiritual model doesn't seem to give much emphasis to life Josh.  The totality of my spiritual seems to hinge around Love and life.  Reabsorbing back in to elements, electrons and such just doesn't produce anything at all for me.....regardless of how extravagant we describe it's potential.

 

I appreciate your efforts and the discussion.  We just aren't getting anywhere and I'm not going to be convinced because it isn't in whatever arrangement of matter that I AM at the moment, that produces the affect it has on you.  Superior?  Idk, I'm sure it is for you  and I'm glad.  Truthfully, I hope everyone has a superior spirituality that moves them successfully through this transition"

 

 

I think this is probably the best end to this debate we could hope for. I'd like to thank both @Joshpantera and @Edgarcito for the effort they put forth in the debate. In the end its really all a matter of perspective. How can we truly measure who is more spiritual or even what religion is more spiritual. 

 

I think we can all remember how we felt as Christians. The Bible, the teachers, and the preachers gave us a story to draw from. They painted a vivid emotional tale of a Hero that loved us enough to die for us. And a father that likewise loves us and made it possible for us to be with him. And as a gift for believing in his son he gave us the "Holy spirit" that connects us to both of them. This is the basic story we were taught from our youth. It was an epic of love and life etched unto our minds and we loved it. We connected to it. And we felt connect to God and Jesus through believing all of that. I, and I'm sure a good number of my fellow members at ExC have experience this and seen or even done some pretty crazy stuff while observing former church members or  letting ourselves get "caught up"  in the spirit. Back then it felt powerful, it felt real, it felt Holy. 

 

But realistically, that is what people of all faiths feel. Thinking about the many millenia of human religious belief, let's put ourselves in some other peoples shoes. We could probably imagine people sitting around a fire telling the stories of Hercules going to the underworld to rescue his love, Zeus with his clay figures representing his creations putting them where he wanted or throwing lighting bolts, Thor pounding his hammer during a thunderstorm, epics of the all father Odin and the mischievous Loki. Picture and try to feel how an Ancient American Indian might have felt, running through the woods chasing an animal, killing it, and finding a use for every part so that that animals sacrifice didn't go in vane or a Muslim praying to Allah for guidance or strength. All of these differing forms of spirituality meant something to those people. Non of them being any more or less credible than the last scientifically

 

We as ExChristian know how Christian spirituality felt. But at some point something made us say......... hold on a second, let me look at this a little closer because this doesn't sound right and/or possible. One of the biggest reasons for this is because we are now being educated on facts and provable truths. Christians accuse the sciences of destroying faith. And I suppose there is a valid argument there. But it is only being destroyed because it is provably wrong, as with any of the above mentioned faiths. 

 

The one thing that I feel sets Josh's narrative of spirituality apart from ALL of the above mentioned faiths, and the multitude of those not mentioned, is that his version is based on provable truths. It can completely coincide with science and change with science as new evidences are revealed. It is provable that we are ALL connected scientifically. Even if you have to go down to the subatomic level to explain how my body is made of the same atoms, electrons, and protons that make up everything else just arranged in a different order. My subatomic particles are always in contact with other subatomic particles like the oxygen and other elements that make up the air that we breath or the water we swim in. All those subatomic particles touch other subatomic particles and physically connect EVERYTHING. We are truly all connected. And what is in me is in you, what is in me is a part of the universe, I am the universe and the universe is in me. I may be a small miniscule part of that existence but nevertheless I'm still here. And while I have control of all the subatomic particles that make me me, I am a functional cog in the universe that makes changes in it according to my will as we all are.

 

I can see how an exchristian, athiest, or non-theist in general can achieve the same feeling of spirituality in that belief as someone else in any other faith. But we/they won't ever get disappointed after finding out it isnt real. It is very real and even greater still it is provably real. 

 

Because of this one fact. Josh's form of spirituality being equally as spiritually valid as Ed's but being able to be proven true,  while Ed's is based on provable fallacies that have brought down innumeral extinct religions throughout history. And will most likely eventually bring down even Christianity itself. In my humble opinion, If there is a winner it would have to be Josh. 

 

Great Job guys!!!! 

 

Dark Bishop

Just that, there is no science with capital S as there no religion with capital R. 

      

       However, I have clear, easily experiental truths about my connection to stuff around me. I breath in, I breath out. I eat, I shit. I drink, I pee. I sweat, I feel rain on me. I touch, feel, smell, see, taste. I feel when my dog feels bad, she feels when I feel bad. Idk if that is spirituality, but it does as sone kind if first point of reflection for me.

    Appeciating love and life seems very narrow as well. Why not appreciate the Sun? I believe the Sun is far more impressive than any biological life. And love is nice and all, but, again the friggin ball of fire in the sky dwarves everything.

 

[Joshpantera]

1 hour ago, DarkBishop said:

Because of this one fact. Josh's form of spirituality being equally as spiritually valid as Ed's but being able to be proven true,  while Ed's is based on provable fallacies that have brought down innumeral extinct religions throughout history. And will most likely eventually bring down even Christianity itself. In my humble opinion, If there is a winner it would have to be Josh. 

 

Great Job guys!!!! 

 

Dark Bishop

 

Thanks DB! 

 

It's great having you back active in the community again. I've taken in much of you and other ex christians who retain some sense of spiritual feelings and presented this argument. I think that all neo-pagans, all pantheists, mystics, and mages, can find a premise to build up from with this knowledge based approach to spirituality. 

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

3 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

Thanks DB! 

 

It's great having you back active in the community again. I've taken in much of you and other ex christians who retain some sense of spiritual feelings and presented this argument. I think that all neo-pagans, all pantheists, mystics, and mages, can find a premise to build up from with this knowledge based approach to spirituality. 

 

 

 

Its been great being back Josh. And its nice not having issues that keep me away from being active anymore. Hopefully I can be of better service to the community now.

 

I really enjoyed watching this argument unfold. You've developed a great outlook on post-religious spirituality. I think we have a good thing going on here at this website for those that are still interested in feeling that connection to something "bigger". You can't get any bigger than the universe. Right ?

 

DB

 

[WalterP]

WHY isn't every scientist specifically a pantheist?  How does your knowledge connect the actual two.  Why aren't men that understand that physics, pantheists?  Shouldn't they understand and then it spiritually resonate to the "deep, superior, fucking level" you do????  It SHOULD, but many physics experts are CHRISTIANS.  Why is that Josh.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

https://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/

 

Regarding Edgarcito's claim that many physics experts are Christians, here's what the stats say.

 

A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.¹ Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power, according to a survey of the general public conducted by the Pew Research Center in July 2006. Specifically, more than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) say they believe in God and 12% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. Finally, the poll of scientists finds that four-in-ten scientists (41%) say they do not believe in God or a higher power, while the poll of the public finds that only 4% of Americans share this view.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[WalterP]

You see the Bible's Spirituality hinging on "literally on sin and death".  No, I see it as hinging in eternal life.  

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

This is demonstrably not true in biblical Christianity.

 

Eternal life is NOT offered to all either freely or unconditionally.

 

According to scripture, the gift of eternal life life offered by Jesus comes at the following cost.

 

1.  Adam and Eve needed to be tricked into disobeying god so that he could cast them out of his presence.

2. God secretly placed the responsibility for the entire universe on their innocent shoulders.

3. God warned them not to disobey him in a way that they couldn't properly understand.

4. God created them in such a way that they couldn't understand the difference between good and evil.

5. God warned them that only they would be punished but secretly extended their punishment (death) to include every man, woman, child and every animal on the planet.

6.  God knew in advance that one of the most powerful archangels ever created by him would trick them into disobedience, but did nothing to protect his innocent and vulnerable children from this ravaging monster.

7.  God intervened time and again to protect the nation of Israel from invading armies, slaughtering them in their millions, but he didn't lift a finger to protect Adam and Eve from Satan.

8.  And all those who choose not to accept god's plan are rewarded with an eternity of suffering in the fires of hell.

 

This is the true cost of eternal life.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[midniterider]

"You didn't answer the question.  Here it is again.  Per the dude in the video, what happens when two interfaces of the eternal come together?  WHY are there two or MILLIONS, BILLIONS actually of separate interfaces (people), that are the "eternal"  First, this represents separation.  Secondly, some of the representation of the universe suggests the universe needs real help.  And third, you have no explanation other than some dude suggesting we smoke weed to the point where are brains are fucked up enough where we might imagine the bullshit.  

 

Answer the specific question because it doesn't agree with your, there are no boundaries.  There are, but apparently I wasn't using the right bs vernacular.....interfaces..  

 

Do tell please sir......scientifically and spiritually."

 

..........

 

When two interfaces of the eternal come together they make little interfaces.  The question is nonsensical. What happens when one piece of the ALL contacts another piece of the ALL? I give up, what happens when my finger touches my toe? Not much. Two people meet for coffee? Not much. 

 

The universe likes having experiences. So it has billions of them. 

 

If the universe needs real help and Jesus is the savior then why does he do nothing?

 

Is the moon bigger than the sun? It sure looks that way. If it looks that way, then it must BE that way, right? 

When I see a rainbow it looks like someone painted stripes in the sky, therefore someone must have actually  painted stripes in the sky, right? No, these are appearances only. Just like the apparent separation of things (which are all made of the basic elements of star dust). 

 

A Christian feels that when he sees two things, there must be two things. Same Christian sees no Jesus but insists there's a Jesus. lol Who's crazy here?

 

Some people smoke pot to be able to imagine complete bullshit. Other people just read the bible and go to church to imagine complete bullshit. At least the pothead has an excuse: he's high. The Christian believes this nonsense while he is completely sober.

[WalterP]

Edgarcito is still making strenuous efforts to build a viable case for his spirituality knock down what Josh presents.

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

7 minutes ago, WalterP said:

Edgarcito is still making strenuous efforts to build a viable case for his spirituality knock down what Josh presents.

 

 

Ed should have left it where he ended it earlier. 

[midniterider]

Hey, Edgar aren't the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost three Gods? They are THREE SEPARATE things, right? Christianity MUST be polytheistic. It has 3 separate gods.

 

What happens when two (or three) interfaces of the eternal come together? Father God (one eternal interface) and Jesus (another eternal interface) come together? These two things represent separation. Hmmm...

 

Certainly Ed doesnt believe in a triune god. Though Jesus said, "I am in the father and the father is in me." If "two" apparent things cannot be the 'same' thing or be of the same essence then the Holy Trinity must be nonsense as well. 

 

I'm not saying that Ed necessarily believes in the Trinity, but I bet he does. And it's a common belief in fundamentalist Christianity.