The doctrine is arbitrary, not as a result of language-games, but because any number of conflicting positions can be justified according to various passages of scripture. Unless God is directly involved in the divination of this decision, it has no solid theological basis, and instead relies on human agency.
Does God count as being inside the religion? He said that he is a jealous god, so who is he jealous of if not other gods? Then he said to have no other gods before him. That is odd wording unless he thought there were other gods that could be put before him. Now I know that people like you think that the Bibles is not literal and can be interpreted to “meet the times”, but who are you to doubt God’s word? He said, I believe it, case closed.
Being so ultrasensitive that a disagreement over nomenclature “hurts” them isn’t my problem. And the vast majority of them certainly aren’t going to be anything but nasty to me and my fellow unbelievers, so I see no reason to pander to them like you want me to. And following Christianity doesn’t as a rule involve being “good to each other”. Christianity is not and never has been a nice thing to be.
Or in other words, I really don’t care if I hurt the feelings of hypersensitive followers of a nasty guilt-and-death cult who aren’t ever going to like me anyway.
Reading Wikipedia, it seems that the heretical Arius was concerned about a possible re-emergence of the heretical doctrine of Sabellianism, which posited that the Trinity was in the eye of the believer and not a characteristic of God himself. So the 3 in 1 controversy at least predated Arius. (Not that DtC said otherwise).
I agree with the “Conflicting positions can be justified” part, but disagree that “No solid theological basis” exists. That does not follow. By analogy, conflicting passages of law and precedent can be found, but some legal opinions can nonetheless have more solid grounding than others.
What constitutes a solid theological basis?
Oh, man, I needed a new sig quote…
Fuck religion. It’s getting the respect it deserves. And I wouldn’t stir up religious strife just to amuse myself. I’d do it to amuse myself A LOT.
Your mom is beneath contempt.
I did some digging:
Here’s a 1999 SDMB Xtian thread:
What if God was one of us?
2001:
How much do believers believe in what?
2004:
Believers
But here’s a 2005 SDMB Xtian thread:
and
Why do people still believe in God?
Here’s an even-keeled 2007 SDMB thread:
Christian salvation theology; why so complicated?
I’ll opine that Der Trihs has been hostile to religion since his arrival (and probably before!). But perhaps the anti-religious pile-ons are of a more recent vintage. It could be as late as 2007-08. This might be an interesting topic for another thread.
Brian? Czarcasm? Creationists have been roasted here since I’ve joined. But when did a more mainline religious POV become subject to vituperative attack here by multiple posters in a single thread?
Since someone started a thread insisting that an argument over definitions is bigoted, an attack, and dishonest. The OP was insulting and silly, and therefore drew insults and disrespect as return fire.
But seriously… what does it matter whether your religion is a nutty cult that believes in one invisible story-book fantasy, or a nutty cult that believes in a multitude of them? Don’t take it too personally-- none of it makes much sense to thoughtful humans.
I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Either way you’re still basing your life on a ancient fairy-tale and the last laugh is, unfortunately, on you. The details of your misinformed delusions don’t really matter too much, do they?
There is still time to repent. I hope you find the more meaningful life. Seriously.
And, honestly, Second Stone, I truly mean only the best when I wrote those things in my previous post. It is out of the power of Universal Love that I beseech you. I fervently wish only to spread the Good News: You don’t have to be a slave to superstition. There is a Rich and Abundant life out there for you if only you ask forgiveness and for Logic and Rationality to save you.
I know it is not easy, but you have the Power and the Will to find the strength within yourself that you may be Released-- that you will at last be set free. I send you my fervent hopes that you will see the Light and find the one and only Truth.
Dude…I’ll take the State over Religion any day. As fucked up as it may be, it at least exists in the realm of the real.
Can I pit deists who claim that Hinduism is a monotheistic religion?
Please?
To a lot of Christians Islam is polytheistic moon sect worshipping the dual deities of Muhammed/Allah and Judaism is an imperfection only made whole by embracing Jesus. People can believe and say what they want as long as they don’t go into whine mode when they get back the same.
No, open mockery isn’t required for a concept that’s unclear. But that’s not the case in this case; by your own admission in this thread, the concept is illogical and doesn’t make sense. There’s nothing “unclear” about that; you’re quite openly providing the exact terms with which I’d describe your belief.
There’s nothing at all unclear about beliefs that are illogical and don’t make sense; they get mocked all the time.
But I’m not trying to hurt anyone, sure as I’ve never been hurt by people acting under color of Christian authority. In fact, I already rather like the Christian teachings that involve being good, and naturally recommend that you turn the other cheek while forgiving us seven-times-seventy times instead of returning perceived insults with intentional ones.
My problem isn’t Christian morality or Christians who hurt people. My problem is an illogical concept that makes no sense.
What attack? I’m just pointing out what I believe is a problem with the claim that Christianity is a monotheistic religion-the ignoring of its roots, and the wand-waving about angels, devils and sons of a god not being considered minor gods as they would certainly be called if this were just another ancient religion that no one follows any more.
The moon god thing was made up by Jack Chick and has no basis in any real Islamic history or theology. It’s not comparable to the observation that Christianity recognizes more than one deity, because that observation is based on fact, and the moon god thing is not.
[open mockery] Well I’m convinced. [/open mockery]
CMC fnord!
Well, not exactly - by which I mean, not made up out of whole cloth, but just a gross misreading of pre-islamic Arabian history - still, I don’t think Chick was the one that made it up, I think he was repeating Robert Morey’s conflation of Hubal with Allah.
There really hasn’t been much mocking in this thread. Allow me to rectify that. The Second Stone, you might want to skip over this before you get the vapors.
So Tiger Woods, Jesus, and an old man are out playing golf. They’re at the fifth hole–a tricky 5-par. Tiger steps up to the tee. He swings. It’s a beautiful shot! It goes quite far, clearing the trees and the water trap, and landing on the fairway right next to the green. Then Jesus steps up to the tee. He swings. It’s a wonderful shot! The spin is perfect, the angle is sublime, and the power is incredible. It easily clears all obstacles and lands directly on the green, only two feet from the cup. Then the old man steps up to the tee. He swings. It’s a horrible shot! He sliced it way off, low power, and it heads straight for the water hazard. At which point it’s eaten by a fish. The fish jumps up, and is grabbed by an eagle. The eagle flies off, but crashes into a tree, which causes the fish to spit out the ball on the rough. Then a branch breaks off the tree, crashing into the ball and making it jump over the sand trap and right into the cup. Jesus turns to the old man and says, “Way to show off, Dad”.