|
The Resurrection
|
 (February 9, 2025 at 8:27 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: It's one of the many facets of Christian theology that never made sense to me. If you're human you're human and if you're divine you're divine, and never the twain shall meet. Famously portrayed by that tiny gap that Michelangelo left between the fingers of God and Adam. I'm not sure I understand your confusion. You're saying you've never heard Christians say Jesus is fully man and fully God, because of a painting from Michaelangelo?  (February 9, 2025 at 10:31 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:(February 9, 2025 at 8:27 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: It's one of the many facets of Christian theology that never made sense to me. If you're human you're human and if you're divine you're divine, and never the twain shall meet. Famously portrayed by that tiny gap that Michelangelo left between the fingers of God and Adam. No, I've heard it said. That doesn't make it sensible. Much like playing 20 questions with somebody who insists that they're thinking of something that's entirely animal, entirely mineral, and entirely vegetable. If I remember properly this is one of the Big Issues that caused one of the rifts in the early Christian church and was addressed with the Council of Nicaea and a little murder.
Ultimately, a christian mystery, like so much else. Credo quia absurdum.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
 (February 9, 2025 at 7:32 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:What matters is that humans exist as objective fact, but there is no objective evidence deities are even possible. However to describe something as fully human, and fully divine is an oxymoron, but then religions abound with such contradictions.(February 9, 2025 at 6:07 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: Then I must assume that you're confused about what it means to be human. Though to be fair there was a drag artist from the 80's who was both human. and Divine.  (February 9, 2025 at 6:45 pm)Alan V Wrote:(February 9, 2025 at 2:07 pm)Angrboda Wrote: So empiricism is confirmed using the methods of empiricism which demonstrates that empiricism is sound if empiricism is sound. Even if what you say were true, it would be beside the point. Why don't you address the point? ![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg) RE: The Resurrection
February 10, 2025 at 10:48 am
(This post was last modified: February 10, 2025 at 10:53 am by John 6IX Breezy.)
(February 9, 2025 at 10:39 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: No, I've heard it said. That doesn't make it sensible. Much like playing 20 questions with somebody who insists that they're thinking of something that's entirely animal, entirely mineral, and entirely vegetable. Because animal and vegetable (plant) are mutually exclusive categories; they're both at the same level of classification (i.e. taxonomical kingdoms). But something can be entirely animal and entirely organic because these exist at separate levels. For Jesus to be unable to be entirely man and entirely God you would have to argue that humanity and divinity exist at the same level of classification, that they're members of the same category, which no one believes. (February 10, 2025 at 10:48 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:(February 9, 2025 at 10:39 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: No, I've heard it said. That doesn't make it sensible. Much like playing 20 questions with somebody who insists that they're thinking of something that's entirely animal, entirely mineral, and entirely vegetable. Really? Google "Divine Antonym". My first three hits were "mortal", "human", and "mundane". So clearly there are people who believe that humans aren't gods and gods aren't human. Imagine that. BTW, it seems like you don't understand how classification works. I'm pretty sure that the domestic housecat isn't an evergreen despite the fact that they're on different taxonomic levels.  (February 7, 2025 at 1:31 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: The abiogenesis argument alone seems to settle the debate. You cannot hold the position that life was able to emerge from a non-living environment, but reject that life is able to re-emerge in a structure with all the components of life present. You also can't hold the position that in the first case life emerged through an unguided process, but that it would not be able to emerge through a guided process. I don't think a corpse reproduces the conditions of the Hadean era during which life first arose. But supposing life could spontaneously appear in a corpse (and survive the microbes already present that would surely find it a good meal), it would be a microorganism in a corpse, not a resurrection. Wasn't the feasibility of doing it with technology your original point?
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
(February 10, 2025 at 10:48 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:(February 9, 2025 at 10:39 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: No, I've heard it said. That doesn't make it sensible. Much like playing 20 questions with somebody who insists that they're thinking of something that's entirely animal, entirely mineral, and entirely vegetable. Could be isn't the same as is. That the categories could be compatible and not mutually exclusive doesn't mean they are. (February 7, 2025 at 3:26 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:(February 7, 2025 at 2:57 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: All of this bringing up abiogenesis, amnesia therapy, and so on comes of as trying to show that Jesus’ resurrection was as least possible, or even plausible. I agree that resurrections being impossible doesn't prove the God of the New Testament doesn't exist; because the God of the New Testament explicitly can do things that are impossible. It must be a very rare line of argumentation because I've been around for a while, paying attention to the arguments that atheists make, and this is the first time I've heard THAT one. But take heart, it's easily refuted as I did above...unless you abandon the idea that it couldn't have happened naturally. In THAT case, you have the burden of demonstrating that it COULD have happened naturally, and then why God still needs to be involved, unless you're willing to abandon that part.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
