Wowie, Columbia Law! Maybe there are exceptions for the very best and brightest of us JW youths. Us regular kids, we would have picked up some sorta bad habit if we went to college.
Seriously, what a mothafucka
Posts by Sulla
-
13Judah Schroeder?
by Marvin Shilmer injudah schroeder?
today i uploaded a new article to my blog providing the latest information about judah schroeder, former bethelite and son of governing body member albert schroeder (deceased).
judah schroeder grew up at bethel.
-
-
-
6
T. Jefferson was on the money (no pun intended)
by cptkirk injust listen to this excerpt from his book written what 200 years ago?.
"they have been still more disfigured"(christ's words)"by the corruptions of schismatizing followers, who have found an interest in sophisticating and perverting the simple doctrines he taught by engrafting on them the mysticisms of a grecian sophist (plato), frittering them into subtilities and obscuring them with jargon, until they have caused good men to reject the whole in disgust, and to view jesus himself as an imposter.".
wow?.
-
-
Sulla
When I woke up and started reading the bible by myself one the things I loved was the simplicity of Jesus' message and the simplicity of the gospel as preached by the apostles ... I learned not to pay attention to anyone else but just the Word ...
What gospel are you reading? The one I have reports Jesus saying I should pick up a cross; that whoever has much, more will be given while whoever has little, even what he has will be taken away; that he is the way, truth, and life.
That strikes you as simple?
-
6
T. Jefferson was on the money (no pun intended)
by cptkirk injust listen to this excerpt from his book written what 200 years ago?.
"they have been still more disfigured"(christ's words)"by the corruptions of schismatizing followers, who have found an interest in sophisticating and perverting the simple doctrines he taught by engrafting on them the mysticisms of a grecian sophist (plato), frittering them into subtilities and obscuring them with jargon, until they have caused good men to reject the whole in disgust, and to view jesus himself as an imposter.".
wow?.
-
-
Sulla
In so many ways, he was merely a man of his time.
-
95
Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time
by AllTimeJeff inthis 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
Why doesn't it have much theological promise? Good question; let me attempt a very short sketch of why I say that.
At its heart, the idea is really an attempt at rationalizing the orthodox teaching. Maybe not so much rationalizing as attempting to make the ineffable more like something we relate to more easily. Three Persons with One Nature is hard and mysterious, One Being whom we experience differently maps pretty well to our everyday experience.
That doesn't make it wrong, but it does make us wonder how a great simplification might have much promise for theological reflection. For that matter, we know that monotheists like the Jews seem perfectly able to contemplate a single Person without the elaborate (and, according to this approach, ultimately false) metaphor for our own sujective experiences of the divine. It seems, in this way, more like a big step backward than forward.
Moreover, it opens the Christian message up to Nietzsche's criticism, I think. By removing the actual, ontological divinity of Jesus (or else his actual, ontological humanity) we are left with no clear way to deal with the difficult (more like impossible) teachings. All this turning other cheeks and happy, suffering people and picking up your cross becomes crazy talk: perfect examples of the slave morality that pissed Fredrich off so much.
And the reason why Nietzsche's criticism is so on-target is, I think, simply because he is exactly right. Right, except for the claim of the actual humanity and divinity of Christ. Without that, (which is to say: if we make the entire thing the subjective analysis of our own experience), we wind up with a theology that does not engage the world as it is. And the world as it is is simply this: crosses are to be avoided at all cost, suffering sucks, only loosers turn the other cheek. We cant get past these facts on our own or, for that matter, on a subjective experience of God.
And that is basically why I think there isn't much theological promise down that path.
-
95
Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time
by AllTimeJeff inthis 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
Wobble and B.O.R.,
It's perfectly fine, of course, to suppose that when we speak of the Trinity we are mererly grasping to describe God in his various aspects. It would be a mistake to suggest, as Wobble does, that this approach is somehow "modern." It is actually a very old way of looking at Christ. And, of course, it was debated for some time before being rejected by the early Church. Indeed, the idea that modern theology has somehow moved beyond the Trinity is risible.
Which is not to make your belief incorrect. I merely point out that it is not new or cutting edge; instead, it is an old approach that doesn't really have much theological promise.
-
95
Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time
by AllTimeJeff inthis 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 reason you are a moron, ATJ, is that you begin with the premise that arguments about the Trinity are a waste of time and then turn around and insist that a guy who agrees with you make an argument about the Trinity.
That is a level of stupidity so profound that we may wonder how you were never put on the Governing Body. It is stupidity on an epic, historic scale. It is gob-smackingly, traffic-stoppingly, stare-and-pointingly dumb. And you won't stop doing it.
Please go back to the JWs, you are making us apostates look bad.
-
95
Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time
by AllTimeJeff inthis 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
My, my! This board moves so fast! Where were we? Ah, Jeff was insulting me again.
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.
Who ever said that familiarity with the best arguments for the Trinity would necessarily result in belief in it? No I, that's for sure. All I have said is that the lack of understanding of those arguments leads to silly assertions, like that the Trinity is illogical. That is the sort of statement that ignorant people make.
I haven't put out an argument in favor of the Trinity doctrine since, as you may have observed, I have serious reservations about whether such a thing is a useful way to spend time. This is me agreeing with you, but you seem to be a fellow who doesn't like to have people agree with him. And, no, I don't think that makes me dishonest; consistent, more like.
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.
Exactly how stupid is it for you to insist that arguments about the Trinity are a waste of time and then turn around and demand to engage in an argument about the Trinity? You'd have made an excellent JW missionary. Really, I suspect that was your true calling in life.
You on the other hand have shown no inclination to discuss your beliefs. You are the paragon of bullshit.
Uh, ok. Fuck you. Is this getting us anywhere?
The problem isn't with the Trinity.
The problem is if you insist that the Trinity is THE TRUTH ABOUT GOD.
That's all.
This is the opposite, I suppose, of your non-dogmatic approach to the entire question? Don't you listen to yourself?
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.Well, you're the one who offerd us the observation that 1+1+1 =3. If you think that makes you sophisticated with respect to this question, then there is hardly any need for me to point anything out, is there?
-
10
What do you know about Friedrich Nietzsche?
by highdose ini was supposed to study his stuff in collage, i let slip to the elders that i was supposed to study him and they went mental.
like i was about to study the devil himself!.
i was told that he inspired the nazis and that he belived that concentration camps were a great idea.
-
-
Sulla
He produced quite a lot of work. The National Socialists hardly needed Nietzsche as inspiration, but he did focus on the failure of the gospel to provide a meaningful and authentic life. The National Socialists did like very much his preference for a more pagan ethos, but I think they ultimately missed more than they grapsed.
-
95
Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time
by AllTimeJeff inthis 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
I'm glad you've pointed out I have said nothing to defend the teaching of the Trinity. I have not asserted otherwise, of course, but good of you to point it out. I would like to point out that nothing AllTimeJeff has said and implied in no way defends Sting Theory.
In case anybody was wondering.
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.
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.
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, on the other hand, have shown no particular inclination to adopt illogical reasoning at all. I am the paragon of rationality.
So, where do you think the problem lies?
-
95
Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time
by AllTimeJeff inthis 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
AllTimeJeff: It's a shame that the Christian god, whether Triune or monotheistic, is limited to the strong or weak arguments of the person who is arguing for the existence of their god. It is a shame that your Triune god must rely on you for strong arguments Sulla, and others for weak arguments. But I bet your Triune god loves you more for how stunningly awesome you do at explaining the Trinity better then other Trinitarians.
What, precisely, makes you think god must "rely" on me? And what is all this 'God is limited to good arguments' nonsense? You're not even coherent. But what comes through very clearly is naked hostility: I point out the lacunae in your understanding, you get snarky.
I laugh. Seriously, you remind me of superior acting Trinitarians who though comfortable in their arrogance, forget that the teachings of Jesus are more important then the concept of who he is.
If you worship Jesus, whether as part of a Trinity or not, I am pretty sure he doesn't appreciate you acting like a superior, condescending, arrogant ass. Don't get too caught up in the concept, just be a good Christian. I am sure that Jesus will take care of the rest.
I don't think the teachings of Jesus are more important that the concept of who he is. To be honest, I don't much give a damn for the poor or the weak or the sick. And if were just some Jewish prophet telling me I need to, he could go to hell for all I care. Seriously, the dude said I have to pick up my cross and follow him? He's full of it, right?
Unless he is God. That changes things.
As for whether the Lord appreciates me acting the way I do: I expect mostly he does not. On the other hand, try reading a couple of St. Paul's letters; we jackasses are in good company. I haven't even hinted that you ought to go get your dick cut off; guess that makes me a real nice guy.