Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Page 8 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Davelaw on Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:18 pm

I was more aware of it from this POV; not all art-just the depiction of saints

Beeldenstorm



Relief statues in the Cathedral of Saint Martin, Utrecht, attacked in Reformation iconoclasm in the 16th century.[1]





One hallmark of the Reformation was the belief that excessive commemoration of the saints and their images had become idolatry. Efforts to end it led to the iconoclasm of 1566 (the Beeldenstorm)
– the demolition of statues and paintings depicting saints. This was
associated with the ensuing religious war between Catholics and
Protestants, especially the Anabaptists.
avatar
Davelaw

Posts : 1684
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Houston Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by TPaine on Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:19 am

Davelaw wrote:I was more aware of it from this POV; not all art-just the depiction of saints

Beeldenstorm



Relief statues in the Cathedral of Saint Martin, Utrecht, attacked in Reformation iconoclasm in the 16th century.[1]





One hallmark of the Reformation was the belief that excessive commemoration of the saints and their images had become idolatry. Efforts to end it led to the iconoclasm of 1566 (the Beeldenstorm)
– the demolition of statues and paintings depicting saints. This was
associated with the ensuing religious war between Catholics and
Protestants, especially the Anabaptists.

That war in France culminated in 1572 in what became known as the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre although the persecution of the Huguenots did not end until 1787 when Protestants were granted full citizenship. In England the Catholic/Protestant war ended with the Glorious Revolution and the abdication of King James II, although it still continues in Northern Ireland even today. It Germany it ended officially with the unification of 1871, but had unofficially ended more than a century or more before. Then again the Lutherans were not as doctrinally different from the Catholics as the Calvinists and Anabaptists were.
avatar
TPaine

Posts : 650
Join date : 2009-04-13
Location : Southeastern Tennessee

Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Daldianus on Mon Aug 03, 2009 1:47 am

John A. Cancienne wrote:
Celsus wrote:I'm all for thinking outside of the box.

I'm calling bullshit on that one, Daldi. I know this is a thread you began, but look at how your obsession has derailed it thus far. Somehow, you can't wrap your mind around the possibility that there could possibly exist another thought process that is alien to your's. And the idea kills you. This goes for spiritual beliefs as well. You would rather argue with a fence post than accept the fact that people can and will rationalize whatever they want for whatever reason they want. You can't imagine a universe or accepted logic outside of your own tiny sphere, and you have a melt down at the prospect that others could. Look at how long this one idea has possessed you. It's borderline insane for you to have argued it this far, much less side tracking a thread to do it. Why is it so impossible for you to accept the fact that there are others out there who will have a different concept of their reality than you? It's my not so professional position that this is what has gotten you into so much trouble in other debates.

Have you overlooked the fact that what Dave offered was an abstract idea? Nothing set in concrete, and certainly nothing to obsess over as you have? Most definitely nothing to accuse another poster of being irrational, or telling a lie. You are so intent that your logic has to be the norm, that you yourself have taken on the role of a raving lunatic. These days, I have more pleasure in watching post your pointless arguments over some abstract idea another poster has, which really has no value at all, except to pose an interesting hypothesis.

You wouldn't know thinking outside the box, if the box hit you on your noggin.

This is not about 'my' logic. It's about logic. And nobody has come up with an explanation as to how logic could not be universally true.

Again: if there are 4 objects and somebody claims there are 5 objects then he or she is lying or delusional.

And I don't think that one has to allow the possibility for just about everything to be able to think outside of the box. Please do notice that I'm not arguing that there couldn't be an invisible unicorn on Mars right now, or that there can't be a God or Gods, or that we're living in a Matrix, etc. Maybe these things are true, who knows?

But such assumptions are inherently different from formal logical statements.

_________________
Eternity is really long, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
After your death you will be what you were before your birth. - Arthur Schopenhauer
Do check this out: Ideas worth spreading and radioLab!
avatar
Daldianus
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1039
Join date : 2009-07-25
Location : Luxembourg

Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Guest on Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:42 am

Celsus wrote:
John A. Cancienne wrote:
Celsus wrote:I'm all for thinking outside of the box.

I'm calling bullshit on that one, Daldi. I know this is a thread you began, but look at how your obsession has derailed it thus far. Somehow, you can't wrap your mind around the possibility that there could possibly exist another thought process that is alien to your's. And the idea kills you. This goes for spiritual beliefs as well. You would rather argue with a fence post than accept the fact that people can and will rationalize whatever they want for whatever reason they want. You can't imagine a universe or accepted logic outside of your own tiny sphere, and you have a melt down at the prospect that others could. Look at how long this one idea has possessed you. It's borderline insane for you to have argued it this far, much less side tracking a thread to do it. Why is it so impossible for you to accept the fact that there are others out there who will have a different concept of their reality than you? It's my not so professional position that this is what has gotten you into so much trouble in other debates.

Have you overlooked the fact that what Dave offered was an abstract idea? Nothing set in concrete, and certainly nothing to obsess over as you have? Most definitely nothing to accuse another poster of being irrational, or telling a lie. You are so intent that your logic has to be the norm, that you yourself have taken on the role of a raving lunatic. These days, I have more pleasure in watching post your pointless arguments over some abstract idea another poster has, which really has no value at all, except to pose an interesting hypothesis.

You wouldn't know thinking outside the box, if the box hit you on your noggin.

This is not about 'my' logic. It's about logic. And nobody has come up with an explanation as to how logic could not be universally true.

Again: if there are 4 objects and somebody claims there are 5 objects then he or she is lying or delusional.

And I don't think that one has to allow the possibility for just about everything to be able to think outside of the box. Please do notice that I'm not arguing that there couldn't be an invisible unicorn on Mars right now, or that there can't be a God or Gods, or that we're living in a Matrix, etc. Maybe these things are true, who knows?

But such assumptions are inherently different from formal logical statements.

Since when does thinking in an abstract form mean it has to be logical? Haven't you ever colored outside the lines before? Ever?! Come on Daldi, take a deep breath and get over the fact not everyone thinks in such black and white terms as you.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Daldianus on Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:56 am

John A. Cancienne wrote:Since when does thinking in an abstract form mean it has to be logical? Haven't you ever colored outside the lines before? Ever?! Come on Daldi, take a deep breath and get over the fact not everyone thinks in such black and white terms as you.

I still don't see why I should accept illogical premises and statements as true or possible Smile

And I've yet to see arguments that prove me wrong on this.

_________________
Eternity is really long, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
After your death you will be what you were before your birth. - Arthur Schopenhauer
Do check this out: Ideas worth spreading and radioLab!
avatar
Daldianus
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1039
Join date : 2009-07-25
Location : Luxembourg

Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Davelaw on Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:19 pm

thats because you have defined the question in terms of your desired result- we would to use logic to prove to you that not all things or all universes are based on logic

but consider the following:
if logic was based on a democratic vote it would lose-because there are far more people that have retained illogic and non-rational parts to their lives than those who live solely on reason

also until randomness was to taken into account in mathematics-we could not accurately depict nature in CGI; randomness is part of nature -where is the logic and reason in that? yet at the same time-this randomness forms a pattern-how does that make sense?
avatar
Davelaw

Posts : 1684
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Houston Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Guest on Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:40 pm

Celsus wrote:
John A. Cancienne wrote:Since when does thinking in an abstract form mean it has to be logical? Haven't you ever colored outside the lines before? Ever?! Come on Daldi, take a deep breath and get over the fact not everyone thinks in such black and white terms as you.

I still don't see why I should accept illogical premises and statements as true or possible Smile

And I've yet to see arguments that prove me wrong on this.

And who in hell asked you to accept anything, Daldi?! That may be the core of your entire problem..... just because someone says it, is no indicator you or anyone else has to accept it. Get off your horse. Your arguments now are just becoming plain silly. And your obsession over an abstract thought is even worse.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Guest on Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:45 pm

Davelaw wrote:thats because you have defined the question in terms of your desired result- we would to use logic to prove to you that not all things or all universes are based on logic

but consider the following:
if logic was based on a democratic vote it would lose-because there are far more people that have retained illogic and non-rational parts to their lives than those who live solely on reason

also until randomness was to taken into account in mathematics-we could not accurately depict nature in CGI; randomness is part of nature -where is the logic and reason in that? yet at the same time-this randomness forms a pattern-how does that make sense?

I could have said that, if I had thought of it that is....... Smile

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Daldianus on Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:48 pm

Davelaw wrote:thats because you have defined the question in terms of your desired result- we would to use logic to prove to you that not all things or all universes are based on logic

but consider the following:
if logic was based on a democratic vote it would lose-because there are far more people that have retained illogic and non-rational parts to their lives than those who live solely on reason

also until randomness was to taken into account in mathematics-we could not accurately depict nature in CGI; randomness is part of nature -where is the logic and reason in that? yet at the same time-this randomness forms a pattern-how does that make sense?

Is there really randomness? Or isn't there rather unpredictability? In that case we're simply not yet capable of identifying the underlying pattern.

_________________
Eternity is really long, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
After your death you will be what you were before your birth. - Arthur Schopenhauer
Do check this out: Ideas worth spreading and radioLab!
avatar
Daldianus
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1039
Join date : 2009-07-25
Location : Luxembourg

Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Daldianus on Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:48 pm

John A. Cancienne wrote:
Celsus wrote:
John A. Cancienne wrote:Since when does thinking in an abstract form mean it has to be logical? Haven't you ever colored outside the lines before? Ever?! Come on Daldi, take a deep breath and get over the fact not everyone thinks in such black and white terms as you.

I still don't see why I should accept illogical premises and statements as true or possible Smile

And I've yet to see arguments that prove me wrong on this.

And who in hell asked you to accept anything, Daldi?! That may be the core of your entire problem..... just because someone says it, is no indicator you or anyone else has to accept it. Get off your horse. Your arguments now are just becoming plain silly. And your obsession over an abstract thought is even worse.

Your opinion has been noted.

_________________
Eternity is really long, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
After your death you will be what you were before your birth. - Arthur Schopenhauer
Do check this out: Ideas worth spreading and radioLab!
avatar
Daldianus
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1039
Join date : 2009-07-25
Location : Luxembourg

Back to top Go down

Re: Who 'died' at the cross? The Son or The Trinity?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 8 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum