observer Posted December 20, 2007 Report Share Posted December 20, 2007 Wonder if they'd swallow that one at the CSA?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted December 20, 2007 Report Share Posted December 20, 2007 Since only humans are dealt with by the CSA, no! Besides, 'Sonship' in Jesus' case is a metaphor for Him being a Hypostatic living thinking eternal projection of His Father- a kind of a living mind within a living mind yet coming from it and sent out by it. Hence why the carol 'Oh come all ye faithful' says: "God of God Light of Light Lo, He abhors not the Virgin's womb Word of the Father, Begotten not Created" Besides, the CSA would have another problem: Jesus' physical body was conceived by the Holy Spirit. Plus, before He was ever human, Jesus turned up as God on several occasions in His Angel of the LORD function: Walking in Eden in the cool of the day Disguised along with two angels as a weary human traveller coming to Abraham and debating about the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah The wrestler who fought Jacob and karate chopped him on the hip The flame in the Burning Bush A pillar of smoke by day and a pillar of fire by day The 'Shekinah Glory'- the glowing presence of God over the Ark of the Covenant which spoke to Moses- note that Exodus 33:7-13 speaks of Moses' relationship with the Son and the rest of the chapter is about Moses' relationship with the Father. He's allowed to see the Son 'face to face' but cannot see the Father the same way. The Commander of YHWH's army who appeared to Joshua. Jesus said, "Before Abraham was, I AM." And, "He who has seen me has seen the Father." Not that you would believe any of this. Which is of course the whole point of the banter over the CSA. [ 20.12.2007, 23:12: Message edited by: GUNNER ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 20, 2007 Report Share Posted December 20, 2007 So he seems to have been good at multi-tasking: so perhaps "he" was in fact a "she"?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted December 22, 2007 Report Share Posted December 22, 2007 But to do that would pander to pantheism and fertility cults or polytheism in general- so, no- being a she is ruled out. But women are made in God's image just as much as men in that they are in the image of men. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted December 22, 2007 Report Share Posted December 22, 2007 So, does that make him/her a transvestite? :confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted December 23, 2007 Report Share Posted December 23, 2007 I've already answered that question. How can someone be transvestite if they are Spirit? Being made in God's image is therefore nothing to do with our bodies but our spiritual, moral, ethical, creative, intellectual natures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted December 23, 2007 Report Share Posted December 23, 2007 Sometimes God does say He gave birth to Israel, and Jesus did identify Himself with lady Wisdom (a mere metaphor for Himself the real living Wisdom of His Father), saying He wished to gather the Jews under Him as a hen gathers her chicks, but the feminine symbolism is reserved for Israel and the Church. Israel is the bride of the Father, YHWH describes Himself as Israel's husband, while the Church is the Bride of Christ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Posted December 23, 2007 Report Share Posted December 23, 2007 And this thread was about Paganism, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonymaillman Posted December 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 23, 2007 I'm soooooooooooooo glad I started this thread :biggrinbounce: :biggrinbounce: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted December 25, 2007 Report Share Posted December 25, 2007 And Merry Christmas to you too, Mary! TMM licks his finger and rubs chest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Originally posted by GUNNER: I've already answered that question. How can someone be transvestite if they are Spirit? Being made in God's image is therefore nothing to do with our bodies but our spiritual, moral, ethical, creative, intellectual natures. but didnt you say there was tons of evidence that jesus (the man) existed ? I'm not disputing this, there probably was a profet called jesus, but like much of the bible so many contridictions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Legion, you are confusing Jesus the man's masculinity with the transcendent, supra-sexual Spirit of Jesus the eternal Second Person of the Trinity. 100% God from all eternity and 100% man from conception in Mary's womb in 7 BC is not a contradiction. Think of Jesus' pre-human epiphanies in the OT and ultimately the Incarnation, and the future Second Coming as the Infinite One concentrating Himself at a sharp finite point of existence where eternity meets time, so that we who only see in 3D get a finite 3D view of the Infinite. As for Bible contradictions... [ 02.01.2008, 19:17: Message edited by: GUNNER ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayC Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Gunner Give it a rest man you are like a dog with a bone, you have your beliefs stop trying to sound superior by driving them down peoples throats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 If someone makes a point to me in any discussion then I am entitled to answer it. It's called... Democracy. Translation: "Gooner, I, JayC, am superior to you and am telling you what to do. You have no democratic rights and only everyone else has a right to any opinion. You are not allowed to make any points. I'll emotionally blackmail you by pretending you are trying to be superior and by using the cliche 'ramming down people's throats." In other words, hypocrisy, yada, yada, yada... [ 02.01.2008, 21:51: Message edited by: GUNNER ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Goonerman. JayC is entitled to comment without you jumping back at him like that.(It's called Democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Yip. It's called democracy. [ 02.01.2008, 22:57: Message edited by: GUNNER ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Peter, do you really exist? Or are you just a hologram called Fred projected by Gary as a prank? Did United really win all those titles? Old Trafford isn't a football stadium. And I'm a six foot dragon called Binky. All hail the great new philosophy- Fundamentalist Post-Modernism! With this kind of philosophy Fundamentalist Islam can never be defeated. Or Nazism. Or any kind of lies and propaganda, nor will the nation wake up and smell the coffee in time before Democracy has died. Peter, I suggest you set up a petition for the abolition of all History faculties in Universities round the world and the abolition of all law. That's why we end up with all the stupid diecisions being made, as Post-Modernism makes the West descend intellectually to the level of a fruit. I've every right to be serious. This is potentially one of the darkest periods of human history, and it won't be the likes of me who'll plunge the world into a new Dark Age, which is precisely where it is heading unless humanity wises up. I give up. [ 02.01.2008, 22:59: Message edited by: GUNNER ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Quote: Plus, since most people in the UK believe that religion is evil and harmful, it's important to research it, as ultimate questions are a matter of life or death Where do you get that idea from? I would suggest that money and media have replaced Religion for the time being, BUT people still go to church, so all is not lost. And the congregations will start growing again when people realise how shallow and false their lives are. How come you're so tetchy these days? Not like you at all. You should know by now that my barometer is what dictates my posts and nothing else. I sometimes think that serious subjects become overly serious and that people then get misunderstood. Also, I have probably met more posters from this site than anyone else, and therefore have a feel for their personality. perhaps because of your angst, you missed my irony. And it's no good running off to your blog. I don't have the spare time to look at blog sites. Tooooo busy on a new project, engaging the Community. Go have a pint of the Black Stuff and cheer up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayC Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Gunner. Thank you I have problems sleeping over the holidays ,if I had known how boring you can be I would have read you rantings more often , so once again thank you for the restfull nights, NOW thats Irony. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonymaillman Posted January 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Democracy ? ........ does it still exist then ? Gunner - as regards the term 'Dark Ages', I thought you'd have known better than to use that saying [ 03.01.2008, 12:50: Message edited by: tonymailman ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 I know that, TMM. It's because we are in the dark due to terrible chronicling in that period. But I wasn't thinking of the 'Dark Ages', ie Early Medieval Period. I was thinking more of an age of ignorance when two extremes of fundamentalism on the one hand, coupled with its rival mirror image the New Atheism, in conflict, and a self-caricatured middle of the road all views are right which is impossible. All views cannot be right. A better 'Dark Ages' was the Greek one. There was one problem though with the period of Early Medieval History. The jockeying for power after Rome fell, a classic post-colonial problem which Africa is suffering from now. Of course, there are huge differences too. Yes, Peter I have been on edge, and still am, for reasons I cannot go into until everything is settled. I'm in a strange transitional period, and I will be on tenterhooks until the final outcome becomes clear. And yet I have not lost my sense of humour. In one of the other sections I am going to try something which I am not sure has been done on this site before. Perhaps it can lead to the creation of a new section to complement the poetry section....? I'll take a look at the categories before I decide. What would be the best section to do a serial fanfic story???? [ 22.01.2008, 20:55: Message edited by: GUNNER ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonymaillman Posted January 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2008 The Anglo-Saxon and Viking period don't really fall into 'medieval' .......... reference to the medieval period only usually starts after the Norman invasion of 1066, it's academically well known Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted January 26, 2008 Report Share Posted January 26, 2008 And there you find yourself in disagreement with: MK Lawson Frank Barlow David Douglas David Bates Warren Hollister WL Warren and various others who advise readers to refer to the 'Dark Ages' as the Early Medieval Period, including the Anglo-Saxon and Viking eras. Although the Norman Conquest took place in 1066, the influence of the Normans really begin under Emma of Normandy, Queen to Ethelred the Unready and Cnut, and more so in the reign of Edward the Confessor. That said, England was more orientated towards Scandinavia than the rest of Europe. 'Medieval' is simply shorthand for the middle period between the end of the Western Roman Empire and the so-called Modern Era which began with the Renaissance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonymaillman Posted January 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2008 Can't accept real opinions and admit being wrong can you Gunner ?? and you always seem to want to give history lessons to those who already know all the things you reply with [ 27.01.2008, 00:08: Message edited by: tonymailman ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goonerman Posted January 27, 2008 Report Share Posted January 27, 2008 That's not the case. Read the books published by Tempus and Yale University Press for example and you will see that they are right, it's got nothing to do with me being right or wrong. PS Look at these sites for example: http://www.lacma.org/islamic_art/emp.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Ages (Not that I think Wikipedia is really a scholarly tool! ) http://www.pastexplorers.org.uk/fun/the-early-medieval-period http://www.the-orb.net/textbooks/muhlberger/early_society.html http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/medieval_kings_and_queens.htm The last one agrees with you, saying that Medieval History starts in 1066 with William the Conqueror, but bizarrely shoots itself in the foot by including Edward the Confessor and Harold Godwinsson. And why does it claim that Medieval History end in 1377? Very strange. I think the 1066 goof-up is a lingering legacy of the time when it was considered that somehow English History began in 1066 and that the Anglo-Saxon and Danish Kings of England did not matter. The websites were just plucked out at random; saves me wasting time garnering every quote on the matter in the books I have, and the historians there explicitly make it clear that the term 'Early Medieval' is precisely the proper alternative to the 'Dark Ages'. [ 27.01.2008, 09:40: Message edited by: GUNNER ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.