|
|
Post by bigwhiskey on Sept 5, 2018 20:37:57 GMT
Typical tool response Arlon. It needent be reversed-and at what cost and not the way it ought to be-if it wasn't performed in the first place. Did that motherfucker really just say circumcision was “reversible”?  I have him on ignore, so I don’t get gems like that unless someone quotes him. But that’s among his richest comments yet! Intriguing. My hilariously brain-damaged father would say the same thing; his mangled and laugh-inducing deformed arm trying the scratch your eyes out, his hot and red eyes regarding you with a coy smile. Then the wheelchair he sitting on collapses and down he goes - withering around on the floor like a bloody dickhead. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Sept 5, 2018 22:22:47 GMT
Typical tool response Arlon. It needent be reversed-and at what cost and not the way it ought to be-if it wasn't performed in the first place. Did that motherfucker really just say circumcision was “reversible”? I have him on ignore, so I don’t get gems like that unless someone quotes him. But that’s among his richest comments yet! I get over reading his s<>t too. If its not a long winded and hollow rhetorical spiel that is born out if his own delusion, it is a short and smug arrogant statement that is equally asinine and inane and yes, the thought process does border on the retarded like Shapiros'. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 1:41:31 GMT
Again, what is the difference between the two if neither believe in the divinity of Jesus? The difference is that Unitarians are Christians, and Unitarian Universalists are Humanists. Unitarians believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ, and that he is the redeemer of sin. Unitarian Universalists believe in multiple religious interpretations, and multiple paths for redemption (that begins with us). So they really have nothing to do with each other. The only thing they have in common (besides the name Unitarian) is that both reject the doctrine of Trinity. They must have common roots though. I'm assuming they grew out of the same liberal non-Trinitarian Christian movement. Am I correct? |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 1:45:45 GMT
I'd actually be shocked if there any Hasidic atheists. They are great people though. I worked for a company which sold products to Hasidic business in NYC. Nice people. My favorite writer when I was in elementary school and still one of my favorites is Chaim Potok. He is most famous for The Chosen. It was made into a movie. I have never seen the movie, but I recommend the book and all the several books by Potok. Sadly, he passed in 2002. Several of his books are likely in your local library. Remember libraries? I still like holding a leather bound book in my hands when I read it. We actually have some very good public libraries in Los Angeles where I live. And they're usually crowded at nights and on the weekends. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 1:53:07 GMT
There is also the confusion between "Jewish" as a religion and "Jewish" as an ethnic group. When a Jewish man like Karl Marx is a bona fide materialist and atheist, does he cease to be a Jew? I think not. It's also an ethnicity evidenced in one's DNA. So what is be the difference between a Jewish atheist who aligns himself with the Reconstructionists and a Jewish atheist who disavows any connection to religion? I always saw Jewish as a religious descriptor. Wouldn't Hebrew be a more accurate label if we were talking about the ethnicity of the descendants of Abraham or first believers? But you never hear Jewish people refer to themselves as "Hebrew". Take a well known Jew like Woody Allen or Larry David. I doubt they ever describe themselves as Hebrew. I wish a Jewish fool here could clarify. I think Hebrew just refers to the language and the ancient tribe from which it came. Ashkenazi and Sephardic ethnicities are called Jews even if they are not religious. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 6, 2018 2:21:11 GMT
The difference is that Unitarians are Christians, and Unitarian Universalists are Humanists. Unitarians believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ, and that he is the redeemer of sin. Unitarian Universalists believe in multiple religious interpretations, and multiple paths for redemption (that begins with us). So they really have nothing to do with each other. The only thing they have in common (besides the name Unitarian) is that both reject the doctrine of Trinity. They must have common roots though. I'm assuming they grew out of the same liberal non-Trinitarian Christian movement. Am I correct? I don’t know for sure. But that would be my assumption as well. Why? |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 2:30:21 GMT
They must have common roots though. I'm assuming they grew out of the same liberal non-Trinitarian Christian movement. Am I correct? I don’t know for sure. But that would be my assumption as well. Why? I look at these things academically. I find it interesting. When I was a Christian and if I was still a Christian I would reject the trinity as well. In fact, I don't see that anywhere in the Bible it says there are three gods in one. It's a disingenuous invention of Rome. I respect the few Christian sects which reject the trinity. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 6, 2018 2:49:46 GMT
I don’t know for sure. But that would be my assumption as well. Why? I look at these things academically. I find it interesting. When I was a Christian and if I was still a Christian I would reject the trinity as well. In fact, I don't see that anywhere in the Bible it says there are three gods in one. It's a disingenuous invention of Rome. I respect the few Christian sects which reject the trinity. I don’t respect any of them, because they are all just different levels of nonsensical. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 3:08:02 GMT
I look at these things academically. I find it interesting. When I was a Christian and if I was still a Christian I would reject the trinity as well. In fact, I don't see that anywhere in the Bible it says there are three gods in one. It's a disingenuous invention of Rome. I respect the few Christian sects which reject the trinity. I don’t respect any of them, because they are all just different levels of nonsensical. Meh, it seems religion is intrinsic to the human experience. 99.9% of all humans since the cavemen have had some sort of religion. I view it dispassionately but with interest like reading a history book. Too many atheists seem to take it personal. I don't. |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Sept 6, 2018 3:14:30 GMT
I don’t know for sure. But that would be my assumption as well. Why? I look at these things academically. I find it interesting. When I was a Christian and if I was still a Christian I would reject the trinity as well. In fact, I don't see that anywhere in the Bible it says there are three gods in one. It's a disingenuous invention of Rome. I respect the few Christian sects which reject the trinity. St. Matthew chapter 28, verse 19. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 3:41:14 GMT
I look at these things academically. I find it interesting. When I was a Christian and if I was still a Christian I would reject the trinity as well. In fact, I don't see that anywhere in the Bible it says there are three gods in one. It's a disingenuous invention of Rome. I respect the few Christian sects which reject the trinity. St. Matthew chapter 28, verse 19. That merely lists the three Christian gods. It does not say they are the same god. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Sept 6, 2018 3:55:25 GMT
I don’t respect any of them, because they are all just different levels of nonsensical. Meh, it seems religion is intrinsic to the human experience. 99.9% of all humans since the cavemen have had some sort of religion. I view it dispassionately but with interest like reading a history book. Too many atheists seem to take it personal. I don't. That was due to ignorance about the world and science. There is no need to bury ones head in the sand anymore. Religion is politics and it has also been used by narcissistic and psychopathic rulers and power trippers to keep the masses at bay and keep the status quo intact. The games are over now Gamey and time to wake up. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 6, 2018 4:09:53 GMT
Did that motherfucker really just say circumcision was “reversible”? I have him on ignore, so I don’t get gems like that unless someone quotes him. But that’s among his richest comments yet! I get over reading his s<>t too. If its not a long winded and hollow rhetorical spiel that is born out if his own delusion, it is a short and smug arrogant statement that is equally asinine and inane and yes, the thought process does border on the retarded like Shapiros'. Poor people who went to inferior public schools venting their frustrations with reality on virtually anonymous discussion boards. It's more sad than amusing really. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 4:16:07 GMT
Meh, it seems religion is intrinsic to the human experience. 99.9% of all humans since the cavemen have had some sort of religion. I view it dispassionately but with interest like reading a history book. Too many atheists seem to take it personal. I don't. That was due to ignorance about the world and science. There is no need to bury ones head in the sand anymore. Religion is politics and it has also been used by narcissistic and psychopathic rulers and power trippers to keep the masses at bay and keep the status quo intact. The games are over now Gamey and time to wake up. Oh, I'm an atheist possibly a pantheist. I'm in transition. So I don't believe in anthropomorphic gods. But to view religion with anger and hostility is as silly to me as getting mad at Africans who do a tribal dance to bring rain. It's just an aspect of culture. I find religion to be interesting the same way I'm mesmerized by Greek or Teutonic mythology. I believe religion speaks to archetypal ideas and symbolism. It's fascinating. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Sept 6, 2018 4:16:41 GMT
I get over reading his s<>t too. If its not a long winded and hollow rhetorical spiel that is born out if his own delusion, it is a short and smug arrogant statement that is equally asinine and inane and yes, the thought process does border on the retarded like Shapiros'.
It's more sad than amusing really.Case point example, with the arrogant s<>t you spew. Yes, you are sad Arlon, when you carry on like a dork and there is nothing amusing about it. |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Sept 6, 2018 4:24:22 GMT
St. Matthew chapter 28, verse 19. That merely lists the three Christian gods. It does not say they are the same god. Yet, since worshipping more than ONE GOD was strictly forbidden in Judaism & subsequently, Christianity too, Christ Would not Have Instructed His Apostles & disciples to Baptize in the names of 3 gods; Only One God. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 4:38:34 GMT
That merely lists the three Christian gods. It does not say they are the same god. Yet, since worshipping more than ONE GOD was strictly forbidden in Judaism & subsequently, Christianity too, Christ Would not Have Instructed His Apostles & disciples to Baptize in the names of 3 gods; Only One God. Yes, and that's why Rome went through acts of contortion to claim that the Father, the Son and the Paraclete were one god. Judaism is monotheistic. It's very clear that Christ considered the Father separate from himself. The New Testament condemns idolatry and worshiping "other" gods. Why logically can't there be three separate deities in Christianity? |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Sept 6, 2018 4:51:00 GMT
Yet, since worshipping more than ONE GOD was strictly forbidden in Judaism & subsequently, Christianity too, Christ Would not Have Instructed His Apostles & disciples to Baptize in the names of 3 gods; Only One God. Yes, and that's why Rome went through acts of contortion to claim that the Father, the Son and the Paraclete were one god. Judaism is monotheistic. It's very clear that Christ considered the Father separate from himself. The New Testament condemns idolatry and worshiping "other" gods. Why logically can't there be three separate deities in Christianity? Did He...? Gospel according to St. John chapter 10, verse 30: "I and the Father Are One." Gospel according to St. John chapter 14, verse 9: "Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father." Gospel according to St. John chapter 8, 58: "Before Abraham was, I Am." |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 6, 2018 4:55:59 GMT
Yes, and that's why Rome went through acts of contortion to claim that the Father, the Son and the Paraclete were one god. Judaism is monotheistic. It's very clear that Christ considered the Father separate from himself. The New Testament condemns idolatry and worshiping "other" gods. Why logically can't there be three separate deities in Christianity? Did He...? Gospel according to St. John chapter 10, verse 30: "I and the Father Are One." Gospel according to St. John chapter 14, verse 9: "Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father." Gospel according to St. John chapter 8, 58: "Before Abraham was, I Am." What about "all for one and one for all"? Oh wait, that was the Three Musketeers. Never mind. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 6, 2018 5:11:12 GMT
Yes, and that's why Rome went through acts of contortion to claim that the Father, the Son and the Paraclete were one god. Judaism is monotheistic. It's very clear that Christ considered the Father separate from himself. The New Testament condemns idolatry and worshiping "other" gods. Why logically can't there be three separate deities in Christianity? Did He...? Gospel according to St. John chapter 10, verse 30: "I and the Father Are One." Gospel according to St. John chapter 14, verse 9: "Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father." Gospel according to St. John chapter 8, 58: "Before Abraham was, I Am." The first means one in purpose, not physically one. It's like if you say something like "me and my wife are one." The second one speaks again of purpose. It's not literal. It's also translated from Greek which originally put the Aramaic words on paper. Common sense is not thrown out the window here. Of course God the Son existed before Abraham. He pre-existed humans. No one says he never existed before his birth to Mary. God by definition, Father or Son, must be eternal. |
|
