(June 17, 2011 at 2:36 am)Ryft Wrote: I have witnessed some extraordinary mental gymnastics here over the years but I cannot even imagine the sort required to argue that "a god" constitutes polytheism. Statler beat me to the punch when he said, "You just proved his point." When you are reduced to stating that "a god" constitutes polytheism, it would seem the confusion is indeed yours.
I laughed when I read this, trying to take in the overwhelming irony of a Christian defending the concept of the Trinity (and citing arguments presented by Statler to boot) accusing a skeptic of "mental gymnastics". You've done some textbook projection here before, Ryft, but this one takes the cake.
Yes, Ryft, you claim to believe in "one god". The part you gloss over is that this "one god" is composed of three separate beings. That's where the polytheism part comes in. It's not the "one god" that's polytheistic. It's the "three separate beings" part. Essentially, Trinitarian Christianity is unique among religions in that it is both monotheistic and polytheistic at the same time. Anyone who seriously tries to defend this concept should not bandy around accusations of "mental gymnastics" and "confusion".
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
