The No true Scotsman Fallacy

[smaneck]

I strongly suspect that the Paraclete was not originally a reference to the Holy Spirit.

When a pronoun is applied to the Holy Spirit it is a masculine pronoun; this is the case in saint John's gospel.

John 16:12-16 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. (13) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, [these] shall he speak: and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come. (14) He shall glorify me: for he shall take of mine, and shall declare [it] unto you. (15) All things whatsoever the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he taketh of mine, and shall declare [it] unto you. (16) A little while, and ye behold me no more; and again a little while, and ye shall see me.​

So while it is true that in Greek "wisdom" is a feminine noun it is not true that the Spirit of God is therefore feminine.

 

[Hammster]

I find myself disappointed that this false accusation is still circulating.

The actual theology is that everyone who has ever existed and who ever will exist is the spiritual sibling of one another.

By extension, this means that Jesus is our Older Brother, and that Satan is unfortunately kin as well.

Some decades back, some random critic of the church decided to split the middle out of the theology and go straight to the "brothers" bit as a shock tactic.

Sure enough, few non-members have actually responded by investigating the claim for themselves.

"The actual theology is that everyone who has ever existed and who ever will exist is the spiritual sibling of one another."

Jesus is the spirit brother of Satan. Exactly what I said.

 

[smaneck]

Nothing of the sort, and that's a Straw Man

There's no proof offered that he thought Wisdom was female. Unless we wish to think all Spanish-speaking folk think desks are inherently female, your point is null and void.

Not in the biblical context. Read Proverbs 9:

9 Wisdom hath builded her house; She hath hewn out her seven pillars:

2 She hath killed her beasts; She hath mingled her wine; She hath also furnished her table:

3 She hath sent forth her maidens; She crieth upon the highest places of the city:

That especially is true, and very intellectually dishonest, when all the pronouns in the passage where the word "Trinity" is used are all masculine,

With this particular writer? I would presume if the Trinity is spoken together it would have to be masculine if even one person is seen as male.

In short, your actual arguments are proven wrong: Trinitarian theology existed earlier than the word "Trinity", the word "Trinity" was used earlier than your claimed date, and your claim that its first use was heretical is also wrong and your claim that the first use of its theology is also wrong.

But no admittance of that fact; just an illogical barb and a wink that is technically a violation. That's the very kind of response the OP is all about and despises.

A violation of what? Interesting that you would find the notion of a Divine Feminine so offensive.

 

[smaneck]

I think you are missing the point. WE don't declare that someone is or isn't Christian. We declare that they have teachings that were never taught in the Bible, and God declares whether they are Christian when we all stand before Him at the end.

Apparently that is not the way the mods saw it. They weren't going to wait that long.

 

[seekingsolace]

You could stop wasting your time posting these deflections. How about that?
If you have nothing to add to the conversations but excuses of why you don't want to participate in the conversation, you can always leave the conversation. Saves us both time.

Explain, what are you doing here then, besides wasting our time. If I address something directly to you relating to 'pagan' or whatever else, I expect you to answer. if you don't want to waste your time, I suggest you ignore the conversation. I'm not interested in your opinion of 'excuses', all pertinent messages have been replied to. Do not expect me to take bait to lead the conservation in a direction of your choosing.

He's not, so stop avoiding the question and answer it. If she is a Christian seeker, why could she not be a Christian?

Define to me 'Christian-seeker'.

 

[smaneck]

You do know what 'targeting' means, right? I have to ask because none of those attacks surrounding the Last Temptation movie "targeted" human beings. They targeted theatres. No people were killed. The Muslim extremists (I have used that word each time) target people.

Of course, they were targeting people? How does teargas hurt a building? And if fourteen people got injured in the Paris attack, the weren't waiting for the building to be empty.

They kidnap people and behead them, or stone them, or throw them off buildings.

No, Christians just burned people at the stake. And shall we have a little conversation about the history of defenestration in Christianity? That is what set off the Thirty Years War.

So tell me why Doggert should have been charged as a terrorist when the others weren't?

So far as I know the only Muslim who engaged in a terrorist attack but was not charged as a terrorist was Major Nidal Hasan. I presume this decision was made so he could be tried in a military court. That certainly did Nidal Hassan no good since he received the death penalty. Doggert, on the other hand, was released on bail and received a slap on the wrist.

 

[morningstar2651]

all messages have been replied to

Here is my reply to your message. This message has now been replied to.

 

[smaneck]

The biggest issue in Christianity seems to be this idea of bible vs. traditions, wherein one side believes that the compilation that is the Bible is the sole depository of truth, and the other believes and uses the word of God but has traditions that they claim were passed on via apostolic succession and unwritten word. Sometimes "ancient Christians" rely too much on traditions, but the "bible only" christians likewise won't admit that they have made traditions of their own.

The way to solve this problem is to find similarities, and build from those.

When Luther insisted on solo scriptura he was not negating the theology of early church fathers. What he was disallowing was the use of canon law as source of authority not patristics. Of course, that is not what modern American Evangelical Christians do, but then their religion is no older than mine, or the LDS for that matter.

 

[smaneck]

Eli was Mary's father, so he was Joseph's father by marriage. You'll find that in the genealogy of Mary.

And since when did father-in-laws become fathers? Do you have evidence that Jews has such a tradition?

 

[smaneck]

There were words used for grandparents. To be the "son of" you just need to be in the lineage.

Ah, I see everyone has a different way of explaining this contradiction. Of course they can't all be true and you would need to find evidence for either one of your explanations. But let's look at another contradiction. After all, there are so many of them!

1KI 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.

2CH 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.

 

[smaneck]

And CS Lewis belies his own argument at the conclusion of his Narnia Chronicles "The Last Battle." Aslan (the Christ-type of the series) appears to a soldier of the long-time enemy Calormenes and says:

"I take to me the services which thou hast done to Tash [the false God]... if any man swear by him and keep his oath for the oath's sake, it is by me [Christ] that he has truly sworn, though he know it not, and it is I who reward him."

I remember that and it is a verse I found striking because there is a verse in the Bhagavad-Gita where Krishna says essentially the same thing.

 

[ChetSinger]

Not in the biblical context. Read Proverbs 9:

9 Wisdom hath builded her house; She hath hewn out her seven pillars:

2 She hath killed her beasts; She hath mingled her wine; She hath also furnished her table:

3 She hath sent forth her maidens; She crieth upon the highest places of the city:

With this particular writer? I would presume if the Trinity is spoken together it would have to be masculine if even one person is seen as male.

While the word "wisdom" is grammatically female in Hebrew, in the New Testament Jesus is portrayed as God's Wisdom.

For example, Jesus quotes from the Wisdom of Solomon in both Matthew in Luke. In Luke he speaks in the third person and attributes the words to "the Wisdom of God", but in Matthew he speaks as the first person.

Also, Hebrews 1:3 applies the attribute of apaugasma (reflection, radiance) to Jesus, employing a word which appears only once in the New Testament and once in the Septuagint, in the Wisdom of Solomon 7:22, where it describes the Wisdom of God.

 

[smaneck]

And a few days ago, a protestant right here in this forum declared that Catholics weren't Christians.

Indeed, but we haven't seen her lately so that may be why.

 

[smaneck]

Is it wrong to tell someone that they are wrong?

Is it wrong to be rude?

 

[smaneck]

When I have a question for you, shall I ask Hammster instead?

<sigh> When you post in a public forum anyone participating may answer. What is all this sniping going on about, anyhow?

 

[bhsmte]

<sigh> When you post in a public forum anyone participating make answer. What is all this sniping going on about, anyhow?

Appears to be a noticeable chip on the shoulder to me.

 

[smaneck]

"The actual theology is that everyone who has ever existed and who ever will exist is the spiritual sibling of one another."

Jesus is the spirit brother of Satan. Exactly what I said.

I believe earlier you said Lucifer which is not the same thing.

 

[PaladinValer]

Not in the biblical context. Read Proverbs 9:

9 Wisdom hath builded her house; She hath hewn out her seven pillars:

2 She hath killed her beasts; She hath mingled her wine; She hath also furnished her table:

3 She hath sent forth her maidens; She crieth upon the highest places of the city:

Fallacy of Equivocation. Different concept of wisdom; one deals with the personification of the idea of wisdom in and of itself, whereas the other deals with God the Holy Spirit, who is constantly referred to with the masculine pronoun in the New Testament.

With this particular writer? I would presume if the Trinity is spoken together it would have to be masculine if even one person is seen as male

That's an admitted Fallacy of Begging the Question.

A violation of what? Interesting that you would find the notion of a Divine Feminine so offensive.

Winking smileys in that context may be a violation of the rules as they were recently amended, particularly when to jab.

And again, no admittance of the argument given being wrong on all four points. I find it the double standard to be very telling.

 

[Hammster]

Ah, I see everyone has a different way of explaining this contradiction. Of course they can't all be true and you would need to find evidence for either one of your explanations. But let's look at another contradiction. After all, there are so many of them!

1KI 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.

2CH 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.

There have been manuscripts that indicate that the 40000 number was a copyist error. Most scholars (Christian and non-Christian alike (it seems that a good percentage of folks who study ancient manuscripts are not believers)) say that it is most likely 4000. That's the good thing about having textual critics. They can get to what was most likely what the original author wrote.

 

[bhsmte]

I believe earlier you said Lucifer which is not the same thing.

It appears that way, in post 123.

" Jesus isn't the created spirit brother of Lucifer. He's the uncreated Creator. That's a gulf so wide between views that it cannot be crossed."