Uh... no Monkey Man.
Sometimes, parents make the natural selection, and other times, we do it to ourselves.
It's nice to be able to pick out the idiots from afar.
i know this post will bring out all those who love to criticise and rebut.
the following information is timely and very plausible.
in view of recent posts and special announcements to be taking place in the organization i found the following to have credibility.
Uh... no Monkey Man.
Sometimes, parents make the natural selection, and other times, we do it to ourselves.
It's nice to be able to pick out the idiots from afar.
i know this post will bring out all those who love to criticise and rebut.
the following information is timely and very plausible.
in view of recent posts and special announcements to be taking place in the organization i found the following to have credibility.
Hey, did I pick a good day to come and read up a bit?
Fear not lurking Jehovah's Witnesses. You too, pissed off apostates.
We can't help people from themselves. If someone wants to believe this shit, then let's give them the latest copy of the National Enquirer and mark them for induction on your respective Darwin list.....
..... i still take myself a wee bit too seriously sometimes..... i look back at all i have written since i came here... what a ride!.
i clearly like to argue.
i think i have stated this before, but generally speaking, i don't argue in person.
Hey Totally ADD. Work is the only thing that would keep me from coming... :)
..... i still take myself a wee bit too seriously sometimes..... i look back at all i have written since i came here... what a ride!.
i clearly like to argue.
i think i have stated this before, but generally speaking, i don't argue in person.
Sometimes, I am a bit naive about people. Comes from the residuals that come from looking for "unity" all the time.
It's good to be disagreed with and to have it implied you are an idiot. Just a reminder that such a reality is the truth.
I still wish I could laugh some people off as opposed to talking about them. My latest debate on the Trinity wasn't a debate at all, just a disagreement as to his/her assesment of their personal belief system.
Oh well. I think it's time for coffee and bacon now.
..... i still take myself a wee bit too seriously sometimes..... i look back at all i have written since i came here... what a ride!.
i clearly like to argue.
i think i have stated this before, but generally speaking, i don't argue in person.
..... I still take myself a wee bit too seriously sometimes....
I look back at all I have written since I came here... What a ride!
I clearly like to argue. I think I have stated this before, but generally speaking, I don't argue in person. I suffer on occasion from bouts of "being really brave behind a keyboard."
I respect theists and Trinitarians generally, though I really don't agree on many things. I do like to debate though.
Having said that, I am not apologizing for what I say. It is authentic and in the moment.
I wish I knew better how to state my opinions while being more respectful of others who differ in their views from me.
But I don't. Maybe I should just get used to the fact that people will differ, etc etc etc.
Anyway, ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
this isn't meant to be a shit stirring topic, just a thought or two, a memory really, from my jw days.
because i know i have more experience then most on debating the veracity of the trinity..... there are two camps, people of faith, and people of math.. people of faith will always be more convinced of the trinity every day, because for the most part, the teachers of the trinity are very up front about the fact that it is a mystery.. so the more you point out how illogical it is, the more a mystery the trinity becomes, and thus, it also becomes more real.
awesome!
Shamus, dude, you and Sulla have something in common... ;)
this isn't meant to be a shit stirring topic, just a thought or two, a memory really, from my jw days.
because i know i have more experience then most on debating the veracity of the trinity..... there are two camps, people of faith, and people of math.. people of faith will always be more convinced of the trinity every day, because for the most part, the teachers of the trinity are very up front about the fact that it is a mystery.. so the more you point out how illogical it is, the more a mystery the trinity becomes, and thus, it also becomes more real.
awesome!
The problem isn't with the Trinity.
The problem is if you insist that the Trinity is THE TRUTH ABOUT GOD.
That's all.
I have beliefs (purposely not disclosed) that are good enough for me. I don't think them weird, just my own personal views on spirituality, not unlike how the Trinity can ground a believer for his life and worldview. Fair enough.
So Sulla, believe all you want. But please don't think that with me, you will get away with maintaining that it is THE way to view god, or that criticism of it comes ONLY from the (easy) bludgeoning of "weak" arguments.
What are the strong ones?
I keep saying that because, while you keep trying to change the conversation to a superior "if you only knew" argument, you still haven't shared what you know.
The only certainty you have expressed is that I don't know what I am talking about. I suppose if that is good enough for you....... But trust me, I feel the same you about you. You don't know what you are talking about either.
Anyway, I hope all Trinitarians hold a nice, hand holding, Trinitarian party tonight and feel good as a result!
this isn't meant to be a shit stirring topic, just a thought or two, a memory really, from my jw days.
because i know i have more experience then most on debating the veracity of the trinity..... there are two camps, people of faith, and people of math.. people of faith will always be more convinced of the trinity every day, because for the most part, the teachers of the trinity are very up front about the fact that it is a mystery.. so the more you point out how illogical it is, the more a mystery the trinity becomes, and thus, it also becomes more real.
awesome!
Sulla, the journey continues.
You are a very difficult fellow to agree with, Jeff. Like I said, I'm in substantial agreement with your observation that the Trinity is not usefully discussed on boards like this. I happen to think that is mostly because people on your side don't bother to educate themselves about what it is they disagree with. And because they have a fudamentally dishonest approach to things where they prefer to engage the weakest arguments of their opponents instead of the strongest arguments.
So, if people only educated themselves on the Trinity like you did, they would believe? Ok. Duly noted. Still haven't heard any arguments from you, as you put out this odd "strong/weak" dichotemy. You just say that "we" Trinity debunkers take pot shots at the weak arguments. Yet you haven't put out a strong or weak argument. However, if you have, let me/us know. Thanks in advance! As for your dishonest approach, you haven't given anyone here an alternative. So frankly, you are the dishonest one.
Look, I see that you now say you've studied the matter extensively and still conclude it is illogical. I don't believe you. I think, if you had, you would not toss out things like 1+1+1~=1 or the amazing observation that, in humans, natures and persons are not separable. You'd be entitled to think the same of me if I tried to defend the teaching with some H2O example, or egg example, or clover. I didn't, of course, and wouldn't because I know that those are not compelling arguments. Anybody who would be convinced by those arguments for the Trinity is probably not engaging the question at a very high level.
So what is your high level argument again?
But, back to you. I think this thread has generally supported my viewpoint that anti-Trinitarians like you prefer cheap shots to real discussion. And I think this thread has shown a high level of bad faith from your side: you keep changing the subject: for example, asking me to offer up a strong argument for the Trinity (how many times do I have to agree with you that there isn't much point in that sort of discussion?). And I think this thread has shown how you mis-understand things like the observation that the Trinity is a mystery, preferring to suppose that means those who believe it accept illogical arguments.
I don't really give a rats ass what you think this says about me. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS COMPLAINED ABOUT WEAK ARGUMENTS YET HAVEN'T PRESENTED A "STRONG" ONE. What I think this says about you is that you would rather frame the argument instead of joining in it.
I, on the other hand, have shown no particular inclination to adopt illogical reasoning at all. I am the paragon of rationality.
You on the other hand have shown no inclination to discuss your beliefs. You are the paragon of bullshit.
So, where do you think the problem lies?
That you will not present any argument at all and insist that all any anti-Trinitarians do is take pot shots at the "weak" arguments.
So you Sulla, our local Trinitarian hot shot, where is your "strong" argument again?
Thought so......
this isn't meant to be a shit stirring topic, just a thought or two, a memory really, from my jw days.
because i know i have more experience then most on debating the veracity of the trinity..... there are two camps, people of faith, and people of math.. people of faith will always be more convinced of the trinity every day, because for the most part, the teachers of the trinity are very up front about the fact that it is a mystery.. so the more you point out how illogical it is, the more a mystery the trinity becomes, and thus, it also becomes more real.
awesome!
Unless Sulla wants to continue the conversation, I would like to say that while I honestly don't, never have, and likely never will believe in the Christian Trinity, I don't have a problem with people believing it.
In Sulla's case, I just pointed out that all Sulla has said and implied in no way defended the Trinity.
This thread was a comment by me, and I knew it would upset some, but that can't be helped.
For the record, I have studied the Trinity extensively, to the point where I realize that 1) The Trinity is in no way how JW's describe it, and 2) It still is illogical, thus making it eligible as an article of faith.
That's all.
this isn't meant to be a shit stirring topic, just a thought or two, a memory really, from my jw days.
because i know i have more experience then most on debating the veracity of the trinity..... there are two camps, people of faith, and people of math.. people of faith will always be more convinced of the trinity every day, because for the most part, the teachers of the trinity are very up front about the fact that it is a mystery.. so the more you point out how illogical it is, the more a mystery the trinity becomes, and thus, it also becomes more real.
awesome!
Do you take a check Shamus? What are you going to do with the money, buy the Maple Leafs some players so you can lose in the first round of the playoffs next year? ;)