Wednesday, December 1, 2010

God Took Human Form (Before the Time of Jesus), part 4 of 5 | True Freethinker

I am really enjoying Mariano's series! This time he includes more Rabbinic objections to the thought of Almighty God taking human form. My main issue that is that scriptures says He did on occasion in the Old Testament whenever He wanted to. Bottom line. It's true whether we understand it or not. I don't understand the confusion or objection that Jesus could not both be God and Man at the same time. Mariano bringing up light in the post is great. I mean we accept the wave/particle duality of light and no one has been able to explain it yet. Would you not expect the infinite God to most definitely defy all attempts of complete quantification even more so than light? I would.


God Took Human Form (Before the Time of Jesus), part 4 of 5 | True Freethinker
Enhanced by Zemanta

8 comments:

  1. He seems to have strayed off topic as the series is not "did god take human form" but "did god take human form: (before the time of Jesus)".

    He's avoided one of the most obvious objections from the christian perspective to god taking human form prior to Jesus. We'll see if he gets to it in the last one, but it doesn't appear he's even remotely headed in that direction.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To be a Trinitarian Christian, you would not have any problem with God taking human form before Jesus - that is if you are orthodox unlike people like Anthony Buzzard. All of Mariano's posts have focused on the Old Testament - Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Off topic, your boy Matthew Flannigan makes some good sense here. You disagreed vehemently with me when I made the same point, but I suspect that was simply because it was me who was making the point...

    666

    ReplyDelete
  4. Funny, what point was that? I don't remember you making any claim about the book of Revelations. Flannigan's understanding of Revelations and 666 is well within in the "pail of orthodoxy". No problem there. It's not a salvation issue, and there is room for other viewpoints.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You said it was most certainly not about Nero. Maybe you've "matured" in your "understanding". It was a while ago and there's no way I'm searching through your hog of a website...

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't remember ever saying anything to you about Nero or Revelations. Obviously, your "understanding" [heh, heh - courtesy laugh] is flawed.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It was a while back. I have a good memory.

    ReplyDelete