saxyroze Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 First, let me re-emphasize my premise : 1.Jesus is God 2.Father is God 3.Holy Spirit is God But God is NOT Jesus Since Father is God,does that mean Father is Jesus too ? -NO Since Holy Spirit is God, does that mean Holy Spirit is Jesus too ? - NO Thus, God is Jesus is INVALID. You’re talking logic but religion isn’t logical. When you talk about religion you should talk within the religious philosophy and language. Religion, such as Christianity, focuses on the mystical deity, which would be God. The theistic god is assigned attributes such as being all good, all-powerful, all knowing, eternal, ect. Basic Godly-stuff. Now the Christians get away with believing in the trinity because God is all-powerful and can change forms, be anywhere He wants to be, be anything He wants to be. So God can be Jesus, a human, and Jesus can be God because God is in Him therefore, Jesus is God. God enters the hearts of mankind through the Holy Spirit so God is the Holy Spirit and Jesus had the Holy Spirit therefore Jesus is the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is Jesus. It’s all intertwined with the same thread, God. God is all three and all three are God. Say the Christians anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest testjet Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 So be it. As long as I have already explained it, that s all matter . And another thing, you made one BIG error. Equating something to something using " = " is actually equating the VALUE of that something . Thus, when we say, A = B, we deduce that the value of A is equal with the value of B. Thats why, C has to be equal with A! Thats why using " = " to disaprove my statement is WRONG. And thus, it shows you dun understand the "gist" of the argument. It has got nothing to do with being "100%" ( of course Jesus is 100% GOD). 100% black but all white is pure ILLOGICAL! Its not the same with Jesus is God but God is not Jesus, same with Dhampir is human being but human being is not Dhampir... You figure out urself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 So be it. As long as I have already explained it, that s all matter . And another thing, you made one BIG error. Equating something to something using " = " is actually equating the VALUE of that something . Thus, when we say, A = B, we deduce that the value of A is equal with the value of B. Thats why, C has to be equal with A! Thats why using " = " to disaprove my statement is WRONG. And thus, it shows you dun understand the "gist" of the argument. It has got nothing to do with being "100%" ( of course Jesus is 100% GOD). 100% black but all white is pure ILLOGICAL! Its not the same with Jesus is God but God is not Jesus, same with Dhampir is human being but human being is not Dhampir... You figure out urself... Wow, dude...you just threw me for a fuckin loop. Were you high when you wrote this? When you use abstract variables like A and B, then yes, you are equating the value of something. Dhampir = Human and Human = Dhampir is a false equivocation if they cannot be interchanged, since a Human is not Dhampir in all situations.. Jesus = God is a false equivocation then, since a God is not Jesus in all situations regarding the trinity. If Jesus = God, HS = God, and Father = God, then Jesus = HS, Jesus = Father, and HS = Father. It's simple fucking logic. What you're saying is Jesus = 1/3(God) and 1/3(God) = Jesus What is the point of this anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 What is the point of this anyways? Right. What's the point since 1/3 of nothing still equals nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RHEMtron Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 So be it. As long as I have already explained it, that s all matter . And another thing, you made one BIG error. Equating something to something using " = " is actually equating the VALUE of that something . Thus, when we say, A = B, we deduce that the value of A is equal with the value of B. Thats why, C has to be equal with A! Thats why using " = " to disaprove my statement is WRONG. And thus, it shows you dun understand the "gist" of the argument. It has got nothing to do with being "100%" ( of course Jesus is 100% GOD). 100% black but all white is pure ILLOGICAL! Its not the same with Jesus is God but God is not Jesus, same with Dhampir is human being but human being is not Dhampir... You figure out urself... deduce? one claims A equals B because that's what the symbol "=" means. i think you need to do what you stated.... "you figure out urself." please address my point that i stated earlier in the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Essentially then, what you mean is that Jesus is A god. By your comparison, Dhampir=human (which btw you only assume to be true. I'M THE JUGGERNAUT, BITCH!), you state that while I am human (juggernaut), all things that are human are not necessarily me. However, your comparison fails to take into account (or maybe it doesn't) is that my individual consciousness is simply part of a whole which calls itself humanity. It's basically saying that the aspects of the trinity are really complete individuals that call themselves 'God'. Kinda like how each member of the Lantern Corps calls itself Green Lantern, yet all 10,000 or so of them are merely parts of the corp, and their lantern powers draw on the infinite Green Lantern. You are basically admitting that god is a 3 person pantheon which collectively and individually call themselves...well, god. But of course, that's all irrelevant, since nothing in the bible explicitly states trinity, and the very idea of a trinity came about in a conclave, concieved by a bunch of guys exactly like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest testjet Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 I know what you're saying. You want God to be the institution and not a being, while the Father, Son and HS are the beings or the gods in the club that is called "God". That constitutes a polytheism, which you say you don't have problems with. But your religious predecessors would have a serious issue with it. The whole concept of "trinity" is that it is supposed to be the magical "tri" and "unit", three and one at the same time. Three gods and one god. Three beings and one being. That is not covered with your formula. God is an element in the set, but God is also the set with the elements. G = { G, G, G } That is by tradition the mystery. No, from your understanding, I dun think you know what i am saying. No one tries to make God as an institution nor making the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit as the three gods that constitute the bigger G-O-D. The understanding is totally wrong. It shows your understanding on the Holy Trinity is very poor... And ur knowledge on the history on Holy Trinity is even poorer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Actually, I just found this site which explains testjet's idea of the trinity quite well. Of course, what it amounts to is basically nothing different from what we have all known from our time in christianity. The site and the accompanying diagram says it explains the trinity, but what it really does is explains how they concieve the trinity. What it fails utterly to do is explain how it's either logical or possible. Much the same way that testjet here does(n't). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest testjet Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Essentially then, what you mean is that Jesus is A god. By your comparison, Dhampir=human (which btw you only assume to be true. I'M THE JUGGERNAUT, BITCH!), you state that while I am human (juggernaut), all things that are human are not necessarily me. However, your comparison fails to take into account (or maybe it doesn't) is that my individual consciousness is simply part of a whole which calls itself humanity. It's basically saying that the aspects of the trinity are really complete individuals that call themselves 'God'. Kinda like how each member of the Lantern Corps calls itself Green Lantern, yet all 10,000 or so of them are merely parts of the corp, and their lantern powers draw on the infinite Green Lantern. You are basically admitting that god is a 3 person pantheon which collectively and individually call themselves...well, god. But of course, that's all irrelevant, since nothing in the bible explicitly states trinity, and the very idea of a trinity came about in a conclave, concieved by a bunch of guys exactly like you. This is the typical argument from the Non believer forummers, They tend to make simple things to complicated one.The want to argue for the sake of arguing. If you dun want to admit that you are not 100% "human being", so be it. Yes, the persons in the Godhead of Trinity is completely INDIVIDUAL and yet they are INTER DEPENDANT. The Father called the Son - God, and the Son called the father - God, so does the Holy Spirit. The Father is God, The Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God, yet we dont say 3 gods, but ONE GOD, why - because they have one divine essence - GOD, while when we says 3 gods , it means these gods have their own divine essence and NOT INTER DEPENDANT from one another. That s the difference between polytheistic gods and the Holy thrinity Godhead. I know ur understanding on the Holy Trinity is very very weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 If you dun want to admit that you are not 100% "human being", so be it. ... ... ......*gulp* That. Was. A. Joke. A joke based on this, you smug, fart smelling retard. Secondly, your consistent descriptions of your outlook lend only to the interperetation that we seem to have all come up with, and yet for some reason, you refuse to clarify, or elaborate further upon your premise, saying 'ur understanding is poor' repeatedly. If our understanding is poor, how's about saying something other than 'ur understanding is poor'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 The Father is God, The Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God, yet we dont say 3 gods, but ONE GOD, why - because they have one divine essence - GOD, while when we says 3 gods , it means these gods have their own divine essence and NOT INTER DEPENDANT from one another. That s the difference between polytheistic gods and the Holy thrinity Godhead. I know ur understanding on the Holy Trinity is very very weak. [/color] First, your equation doesn't add up, testjet, as stated previously. If F = G, S = G, HS = G Then F=S, F=HS, HS=S If you're going to use terminology where = does not mean =, then don't use a word that fucking implies equality! I know your understanding of basic logic is very very weak, but we can get through this, I promise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 First, your equation doesn't add up, testjet, as stated previously. If F = G, S = G, HS = G Then F=S, F=HS, HS=S Also, if F=G, S=G, HS=G means that F=S, F=HS, HS=S, then who's to say that T-J-I't-A-F-M ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest testjet Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 linguistically and logically speaking, saying "Clark Kent IS Superman" is the same as saying "Superman IS Clark Kent". but for your logic is "Clark Kent IS Superman" is the same as saying "Superman IS NOT Clark Kent". The problem is Clark Kent/ Superman does not exist at all......So why do I need to waste my time talking about Logic or illogic on something that doesnt exist at all. Strawman argument... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Yes, the persons in the Godhead of Trinity is completely INDIVIDUAL and yet they are INTER DEPENDANT. The Father called the Son - God, and the Son called the father - God, so does the Holy Spirit. So are each of them omnipotent and omniscient? The Father is God, The Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God, yet we dont say 3 gods, but ONE GOD, why - because they have one divine essence - GOD, while when we says 3 gods , it means these gods have their own divine essence and NOT INTER DEPENDANT from one another. That s the difference between polytheistic gods and the Holy thrinity Godhead. Biblical proof from the OT please. I know ur understanding on the Holy Trinity is very very weak I know ur knowledge of the bible in this issue is very very weak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 No, from your understanding, I dun think you know what i am saying. No one tries to make God as an institution nor making the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit as the three gods that constitute the bigger G-O-D. The understanding is totally wrong. It shows your understanding on the Holy Trinity is very poor... And ur knowledge on the history on Holy Trinity is even poorer You truly are trying to upset me are you? First of all, I never called you anything, and I tried to be nice to you. But you respond in personal attacks a second time. Right now, I think you're a troll and nothing else. And you're getting a warning and a one day hold. C'ya tomorow. TTFN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 linguistically and logically speaking, saying "Clark Kent IS Superman" is the same as saying "Superman IS Clark Kent". but for your logic is "Clark Kent IS Superman" is the same as saying "Superman IS NOT Clark Kent". The problem is Clark Kent/ Superman does not exist at all......So why do I need to waste my time talking about Logic or illogic on something that doesnt exist at all. Strawman argument... Because it's a fucking analogy. Jesus Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white_raven23 Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 The problem is Clark Kent/ Superman does not exist at all......So why do I need to waste my time talking about Logic or illogic on something that doesnt exist at all. Strawman argument... So? Biblegod/DivineJesus don't exist at all either. They only appear in a book. And just because lots of people choose to believe in the book, this does not increase the reality of character featured in said book. Faith doesn't = reality. That makes yours the Ultimate Strawman Argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend AtheiStar Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 First, let me re-emphasize my premise : 1.Jesus is God 2.Father is God 3.Holy Spirit is God But God is NOT Jesus Since Father is God,does that mean Father is Jesus too ? -NO Since Holy Spirit is God, does that mean Holy Spirit is Jesus too ? - NO Thus, God is Jesus is INVALID. Ah, the confused polytheism of the Christian. They believe in many gods and goddesses, yet like to pretend they only believe in one. Let's go over the many deities of Christianity: Yahweh: King of the Gods Mary: Queen of the Gods Jesus: Prince of the Gods Holy Spirit: Mighty Morphin' Power God Satan: God of the Underworld Saints: Minor gods and goddesses dedicated to various subjects -- just like the deities of earlier mythologies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 TestJet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend AtheiStar Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 TestJet: lol... Troll-be-gone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts