(June 5, 2012 at 4:51 pm)Drich Wrote: Maybe you should take the time to read any one or all three defination I left for one of the other posters on this page, before you dig yourself any deeper.

Understand the word "deity" is not limited by the way you have chosen to use it.

Again I have shown my work if you wish to contest what I have said show me yours.

How about clicking on any of the link you provided as to the definition of a deity. Did you even read them?

Deity = a god
3 deities = 3 gods
three = multiple
multiple = poly
3 deities = polytheism

You lose.

And STILL waiting for you to answer the other problem, how the Synoptics depict a Jesus subordinate to his father-god.

Not holding my breath...

(June 5, 2012 at 4:59 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: How about clicking on any of the link you provided as to the definition of a deity. Did you even read them?

Deity = a god
3 deities = 3 gods
three = multiple
multiple = poly
3 deities = polytheism

You lose.

And STILL waiting for you to answer the other problem, how the Synoptics depict a Jesus subordinate to his father-god.

Not holding my breath...

But don't you see..... they're three beings that share the same title! So even though there are three of them, there is only one deity!

(June 5, 2012 at 4:45 pm)Thor Wrote: I fail to see where you're going with this....

How many goverment/s have control over the United States?

The answer is one.

Is the Legislative branch considered to be a form of goverment? Yes. Is it a goverment unto itself? no, it is only apart of a greater whole, even though you can accuratly Call any part of the three branches 'goverment' Goverment, it does not mean any single branch embodies the entire system that the united states Goverment comperises of. Meaning there are not three goverments that control the united states. there is only one, Why? Because the word Goverment is not a specific branch name it is a description or title of what all three branches repersent.

The same is true with God.

No one deity is God in of Himself. Yet all three are apart of the God Head. Even though it is ok/correct to refer to them as God indivisually because they in fact are all apart of what makes up YHWH or God. How can this be so because YHWH is not an indivisual deity's name, it is a collective title they share.

If you are still having trouble with the illustrations provided the simply chew on this.

The word God or "YHWH" in the Hebrew is a title and not an indivisual deity's name. I left three links to common english dictionaries if you are haveing trouble reconsiling the word deity on page 13. Putting it all together; if God is a title and not a name then any number [which happens to be three in Christianity] of deity can share the title of God.

---

(June 5, 2012 at 5:05 pm)Thor Wrote:

(June 5, 2012 at 4:59 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: How about clicking on any of the link you provided as to the definition of a deity. Did you even read them?

Deity = a god
3 deities = 3 gods
three = multiple
multiple = poly
3 deities = polytheism

You lose.

And STILL waiting for you to answer the other problem, how the Synoptics depict a Jesus subordinate to his father-god.

Not holding my breath...

But don't you see..... they're three beings that share the same title! So even though there are three of them, there is only one deity!

Again page 13 and the defination of Deity.

Deity in all cases is not synomous with the title God.

This is something popular christianity has done apart from what is described in the bible.

3 deities. all share the one title of God.

---

(June 5, 2012 at 4:59 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(June 5, 2012 at 4:51 pm)Drich Wrote: Maybe you should take the time to read any one or all three defination I left for one of the other posters on this page, before you dig yourself any deeper.

Understand the word "deity" is not limited by the way you have chosen to use it.

Again I have shown my work if you wish to contest what I have said show me yours.

How about clicking on any of the link you provided as to the definition of a deity. Did you even read them?

Deity = a god
3 deities = 3 gods
three = multiple
multiple = poly
3 deities = polytheism

You lose.

And STILL waiting for you to answer the other problem, how the Synoptics depict a Jesus subordinate to his father-god.

Not holding my breath...

Seriously?
Deity does not always mean God.

merriam-webster: 1, a: the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity

This defination shows The word deity is not always synomous with the personage of a single being, nor does it always have to describe one singular being. Deity as it is being used in this thread describes the Rank or essential nature of a being. Then once you understand that deity is not the same as saying a God. the three deity or three beings with the essentual nature of God [identified as the trinity] can be established, I simply pair that understanding with the term the bible uses to describe the union these three deity are known under. "God."

That inturn makes the word God a title and not a name.

Right. God Prime, God One and God Whatsit.

Three of them.

Bold emphasis mine:

(June 5, 2012 at 5:05 pm)Drich Wrote: 3 deities. all share the one title of God.

3 deities.
Multiple deities.
Multiple gods.
Polytheism.

You lose, sir.

Quote:Deity does not always mean God.

merriam-webster: 1, a: the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity

I see you cherry pick and come up with obtuse interpretations of more books than just the Bible in order to manufacture support for your previously held convictions.

Read the whole page, found here

Quote:Definition of DEITY

1
a : the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity
b capitalized : god 1, supreme being
2: a god or goddess <the deities of ancient Greece>
3: one exalted or revered as supremely good or powerful
See deity defined for English-language learners »
See deity defined for kids »
Examples of DEITY

<to the ancient Greeks, Zeus was the deity who ruled over the sky and weather, and Poseidon was god of the sea>
<we prayed to the Deity for guidance>
Origin of DEITY

Middle English deitee, from Anglo-French deité, from Late Latin deitat-, deitas, from Latin deus god; akin to Old English Tīw, god of war, Latin divus god, dies day, Greek dios heavenly, Sanskrit deva heavenly, god
First Known Use: 14th century

Your obtuse interpretation of the cherry picked very first half of the very first definition doesn't save you. In context, the term "rank" is understood to be what we call a being that is a god, a deity. Same as "general" or "president" is a rank. If we had three persons holding the office of "president" we would still have "three presidents".

Any progress yet on the Synoptic verses I provided? Get back to me on that sometime, won't you?

[/size]

(June 5, 2012 at 5:45 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: I see you cherry pick and come up with obtuse interpretations of more books than just the Bible in order to manufacture support for your previously held convictions.

Read the whole page, found here

I would challenge you to do the Same Option a is for the word deity
Option B is for the word when Capatalized.

My thread my choice we are using OPTION A

Quote:Definition of DEITY

1
a : the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity
b capitalized : god 1, supreme being

[quote]Your obtuse interpretation of the cherry picked very first half of the very first definition doesn't save you. In context, the term "rank" is understood to be what we call a being that is a god, a deity. Same as "general" or "president" is a rank. If we had three persons holding the office of "president" we would still have "three presidents".

Read the defination again, Did you not see or understand the conjunction 'or' in the context of this defination? The rank OR [size=medium]Essential nature of God.

Again my thread and I am telling you how to interperate the words I have used in the context in which I am using them. To which there is little to nothing you can say or do to challenge my usage of these words.
(that is why I have asked you to show your work, because you need to understand there is nothing you can do to change the nature of what I have described here. Nothing I have said is up for debate nor interpertation. I have given you a legitmate defination and the context in which it was used.)

Quote:Any progress yet on the Synoptic verses I provided? Get back to me on that sometime, won't you?

You mean the mess of miss-quotes of Isa and John?
Asked and answer one or two post down from your orginal post.

(June 5, 2012 at 6:06 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:Any progress yet on the Synoptic verses I provided? Get back to me on that sometime, won't you?

You mean the mess of miss-quotes of Isa and John?

Isaiah and John are not part of the Synoptic Gospels are they?

Synoptic Gospels = Mark, Matthew, Luke.
You were asked direct questions about them. Now answer me.

From post #116 in case you've forgotten in your attempts at obfuscation:

Quote:2. It can't be reconciled with the Synoptic Gospels

Do I really need to quote them again for you? In these Gospels, Jesus is separate from and subordinate to Yahweh, with a lesser body of knowledge, a subordinate will and a different frame of experience evidence by speaking to Yahweh in 2nd person and of him in 3rd person.

Tell me how "same substance god" can be reconciled with the verses I previously quoted:
Mark 15:34
Matt 24:36
Luke 22:42

I'm rest my case with our discussion on whether or not your Godcorp is a polytheistic notion. I'll leave it for the readers to judge who won that exchange.

---

Reposted from an earlier post so you have no opportunity for more intellectual dishonesty:

From page 11:

Quote:Jesus and Yahweh speak to each other in 2nd person and of each other in 3rd person:

Quote:Mark 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Jesus doesn't know all that Yahweh knows:

Quote:Matt 24:36 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, neither the Son but my Father only.

Jesus has a separate will which is subordinate to his father's will:

Quote:Luke 22:42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

(June 5, 2012 at 6:15 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Isaiah and John are not part of the Synoptic Gospels are they?

Synoptic Gospels = Mark, Matthew, Luke.
You were asked direct questions about them. Now answer me.

From post #116 in case you've forgotten in your attempts at obfuscation:
2. It can't be reconciled with the Synoptic Gospels

Do I really need to quote them again for you? In these Gospels, Jesus is separate from and subordinate to Yahweh, with a lesser body of knowledge, a subordinate will and a different frame of experience evidence by speaking to Yahweh in 2nd person and of him in 3rd person.

Tell me how "same substance god" can be reconciled with the verses I previously quoted:
Mark 15:34
Matt 24:36
Luke 22:42

I'm rest my case with our discussion on whether or not your Godcorp is a polytheistic notion. I'll leave it for the readers to judge who won that exchange.

the dishonesty is strong with this one. Lets take an honest look at post 116:

Quote:1. Sorry, it's still polytheism.

Even if three deities were a hive mind, you still have three deities. 3 = multiple = poly. Ergo polytheism.

Add as much gloss as you like.

2. It can't be reconciled with the Synoptic Gospels

Do I really need to quote them again for you? In these Gospels, Jesus is separate from and subordinate to Yahweh, with a lesser body of knowledge, a subordinate will and a different frame of experience evidence by speaking to Yahweh in 2nd person and of him in 3rd person.

I have not ever repersented "God" to be a hive mind. therefore the conclusion you made, and the effort of post 116 does not apply to my arguement in any way shape or form. Matter of fact you and your verses support God being a title and not a name. [which happens to be my arguement.]

(June 5, 2012 at 6:41 pm)Drich Wrote: the dishonesty is strong with this one.

...says the stinking liar who resorts to obtuse interpretations of a word in order to defend an equally obtuse theology that says that "3 deities =/= polytheism".

At this point, I'll let an English professor school you on the proper use of the word "deity" and how obtuse your interpretation of that word is. I'm done with that part of our debate.

Quote:Lets take an honest look at post 116:

...he said before totally misrepresenting post 116. (bold emphasis added)

Quote:

Quote:...Even if three deities were a hive mind, ...

(problem # ) 2. It can't be reconciled with the Synoptic Gospels

Do I really need to quote them again for you? In these Gospels, Jesus is separate from and subordinate to Yahweh, with a lesser body of knowledge, a subordinate will and a different frame of experience evidence by speaking to Yahweh in 2nd person and of him in 3rd person.

I have not ever repersented "God" to be a hive mind. therefore the conclusion you made, and the effort of post 116 does not apply to my arguement in any way shape or form. Matter of fact you and your verses support God being a title and not a name. [which happens to be my arguement.]

Notice how he first ignores the "even if..." part of problem #1 (I never accused you of saying that) and then claims it means he doesn't have to answer problem #2, even though problem #2 is a completely different point.

Next time you lie like that, do it in a forum where you can't be exposed so easily.

---

I guess now we know what the flower avatar is for. To cover the stink of his bullshit.

There aren't enough flowers in the world for that.