-Removed-I'd like elaboration on this:
Page 2 top - "People are humans. Persons do not have to be humans."
Next post - "This may be a similiar idea, however, in God's case there is order
verses disorder and there is no mental illness or amnesia since
each person is completely aware of the others and thus they
work in harmony.
Woz dat all aboot? 😀 😀
I never saw 2 simple contradictions in closely following posts, or did I miss the plot?? 😕
-m.
-Removed-He said, he believes the three persons of God are distinct, but NOT separate. I agree.
I must say, reading more of your postings since I arrived here, I think of you as having a more fundamentalist bent at heart, and yet you do say some things which are off the beaten path of fundamentalism, like the idea that Trinity is a pagan concept. I'd expect that more from the JWs, actually.
Originally posted by mikelomSounds kinda reasonable to me.
I'd like elaboration on this:
Page 2 top - "People are humans. Persons do not have to be humans."
Next post - "This may be a similiar idea, however, in God's case there is order
verses disorder and there is no mental illness or amnesia since
each [b]person is completely aware of the others and thus they
work in harmony.
Woz dat all aboot? ...[text shortened]... saw 2 simple contradictions in closely following posts, or did I miss the plot?? 😕
-m.[/b]
1. "Persons do not have to be humans."
Then,
2. "In God's case there is order verses disorder and there is no mental illness or amnesia since each person is completely aware of the others and thus they
work in harmony."
Now I'm probably one of the last persons to defend RJH at times, but I see no discrepancy between these two statements. "Each person" in #2 refers to God, which validates #1.
I see no contradiction here.
-Removed-When I first became a Christian, I wondered about this Trinity business also. I must admit, I did not piece it together from my readings. But when I did learn more about it, the more sense it made, given what I had read in numerous spots in the Bible and it did just fall together at that point. I do not claim a denomination, and I was not raised within a denomination. Unfortunately, my walk in Christ has been mainly a solo effort.
And yes, there are stacks of "written documents" ("evidence" seems to be too generous) claiming trinitarianism is pagan in origin, but like jaywill says, I also believe this is because of the insufficiency of human language to describe God. People jump on the whole "three persons" idea and scream "multi-theism". I'm not convinced God can be pigeonholed like that. (For the record, I agree about Christmas, the days and months, and other secular icons, as you say.)
I also admit to being somewhat short-tempered with those who call themselves "fundamentalist". I've used the word in a derogatory manner as well. I admire your desire for Christians to get more "back to basics" (or >gasp< "fundamental" ), but the fact is that "fundamentalists", whether Christian or Islam, are firmly in the American subconscious as being a bad thing. Not without some reason, for in my short experience on this planet, those who call themselves "fundamentalists" are ignorant, ill-mannered, self-important "soldiers for God" who don't care who gets hurt as long as they uphold "God's will", the true understanding of which usually eludes them. They are the people who kill abortion doctors, who disallow their kids to get proper medical attention, who think we should eliminate science from our schools, thus handicapping our kids forever. I know. I understand this is all part of the stereotype, but I've seen it with my own eyes in the media and in the flesh. As a Christian, it's very troubling. Perhaps people like you need to coin a new phrase for what should be a noble cause.