The Sperm of God

[Syntax]

But the bible says he has a generally human shape!

where?

 

[Syntax]

But the bible says he has a generally human shape!

and your nit-picking says you’re generally bored

 

[Schn]

and your nit-picking says you’re generally bored

But it does say it. Why are you contradicting the bible?

 

[Syntax]

But it does say it. Why are you contradicting the bible?

Where? Are you prepared to provide sufficient textual “evidence” that does not also contradict the unanimous opinon of what most scholars theist and non-theist alike agree about what the text actually says? I seriously doubt you are prepared to engage in Biblical hermeneutics citing your expert knowledge of past and present Judeo-Christian theology, social context, culture, grammar, syntax, Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic language. And what set of heuristic devices and interpretive models do you propose to use? You claim God the Father has a body. The burden is on you to show that from the text.

 

[Syntax]

Man… what a question!!! Just wow.

Prove it! You would have me believe that Jesus has a physical body and took it to Heaven, the Spirit has a physical body all around it… why wouldn’t the Cause be similar to the effect?

I could have looked him straight in the face a couple thousand years ago, apparently… AND SHAKEN HIS HAND!!

I look at other children of God on a daily basis.

HAHA… God had intestines, a stomach, a colon, and a rectum!! Some people would have you believe that God defecated but did not use his sexual organs. And if he urinated, technically he DID use his sexual organs… if Jesus were really God.

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

-]So divinely human that he doesn’t defecate?? /-]

That is quite the point. Man… I love this question.

Where does it say this?

This entire thread started out with one individual’s mentioning an analogical metaphor, and now you are taking the Bible’s spiritual theology out of the context in which it sits as a historical and religious document. No religio-historical text is intended to be a scientific abstract or philosophical treatise; it is written to express deeper spiritual realities. It doesn’t require any special skills to tear apart any religious doctrine at your whim, only a willed deafness to real Biblical hermeneutics and and a desire to insult the beliefs of others. It is plain you have no desire to understand because you know very well there are better places to look than on a Catholic forum for the answers to your questions.

 

[Syntax]

Man… what a question!!! Just wow.

Prove it! You would have me believe that Jesus has a physical body and took it to Heaven, the Spirit has a physical body all around it… why wouldn’t the Cause be similar to the effect?

I could have looked him straight in the face a couple thousand years ago, apparently… AND SHAKEN HIS HAND!!

I look at other children of God on a daily basis.

HAHA… God had intestines, a stomach, a colon, and a rectum!! Some people would have you believe that God defecated but did not use his sexual organs. And if he urinated, technically he DID use his sexual organs… if Jesus were really God.

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

So divinely human that he doesn’t defecate??

That is quite the point. Man… I love this question.

Where does it say this?

If your only means of making a very trivial point is to reduce yourself this low to talking about Christ’s bowl-movements, then you clearly don’t have anything intelligent or constructive to offer other than disrespect, mockery and insult. It is plain to everyone that you have no desire to understand Catholic Theaching, so I suggest you find yourself an Anarchist Pig-Forum where you can discuss all the urine, bile, and vomit that you want with other minds as shallow and childish as your own.

 

[Syntax]

Man… what a question!!! Just wow.

Prove it! You would have me believe that Jesus has a physical body and took it to Heaven, the Spirit has a physical body all around it… why wouldn’t the Cause be similar to the effect?

I could have looked him straight in the face a couple thousand years ago, apparently… AND SHAKEN HIS HAND!!

I look at other children of God on a daily basis.

HAHA… God had intestines, a stomach, a colon, and a rectum!! Some people would have you believe that God defecated but did not use his sexual organs. And if he urinated, technically he DID use his sexual organs… if Jesus were really God.

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

So divinely human that he doesn’t defecate??

That is quite the point. Man… I love this question.

Where does it say this?

If your only means of making a very trivial point is to reduce yourself this low to talking about Christ’s bowl-movements, then you clearly don’t have anything intelligent or constructive to offer other than disrespect and insult. I suggest you find yourself an Anarchist Pig-Forum where you can discuss all the urine, bile, and vomit that you want with other minds as shallow and childish as your own.

 

[Schn]

Where? Are you prepared to provide sufficient textual “evidence” that does not also contradict the unanimous opinon of what most scholars theist and non-theist alike agree about what the text actually says? I seriously doubt you are prepared to engage in Biblical hermeneutics citing your expert knowledge of past and present Judeo-Christian theology, social context, culture, grammar, syntax, Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic language. And what set of heuristic devices and interpretive models do you propose to use? You claim God the Father has a body. The burden is on you to show that from the text.

No, I said he has the same general shape.

You know, Genesis 1:27. It’s pretty explicit and straightforward.

 

[Syntax]

No, I said he has the same general shape.

You know, Genesis 1:27. It’s pretty explicit and straightforward.

That’s not straightforward at all as it stands. The Genesis passage only vaguely says that God created man and woman in his “image,”–not specifying explicitly in what that resemblence consists; and it doesn’t explicity say that God is a man or that God is a woman. Further, John 4:24 directly contradicts your interpretation. Christ himself explicitly says God the Father is spirit, not that he has a spirit like human beings do–so the statement is one of identity, not one of possessing a property. But if a being is incorporeal, that being cannot even be partly physical, because “pure spirit” is what incorporeal means. So it is more reasonable to think God the Father is purely incorporeal lacking a body, than merely corporeal having a spirit. So I don’t sympathize with your reading at all.

 

[grndslm]

If your only means of making a very trivial point is to reduce yourself this low to talking about Christ’s bowl-movements, then you clearly don’t have anything intelligent or constructive to offer other than disrespect and insult. I suggest you find yourself an Anarchist Pig-Forum where you can discuss all the urine, bile, and vomit that you want with other minds as shallow and childish as your own.

I find that response lacking intelligence. What was the purpose?

If you say that the God-man, Christ Jesus is 100% man and he eats, drinks, defecates, & sleeps… I just don’t know why he couldn’t have used his sexual organs.

Someone’s response was that he had sexual organs and did not use them. Well… what does that prove? “What does it prove that God used his anus?” is the correlation of the question.

 

[Syntax]

I find that response lacking intelligence. What was the purpose?

You don’t have to be so crass in making such trivially true points. It’s your manner I find offensive, not the content of your beliefs. I’m simply asking for a little propriety and **tact **before you decide to post about Christ’s Human Nature. I’'m sure you’re smart: find other more appropriate ways of making the point. If I began talking so liberally and gracelessly about someone else’s bowl-movements and sex-organs that you happened to love and cherish in your own life, you’d certianly be offended too.

 

[Syntax]

I find that response lacking intelligence. What was the purpose?

You don’t have to be so crass in making such trivially true points. It’s your manner I find offensive, not the truth of your statements. I’m simply asking for a little propriety and **tact **before you decide to post about Christ’s Human Nature. I’'m sure you’re smart: find other more appropriate ways of making the point. If I began talking so liberally and gracelessly about someone else’s bowl-movements and sex-organs that you happened to love and cherish in your own life, you’d certianly be offended too.

 

[Rv_Cain_Spencer]

Man… what a question!!! Just wow.

Prove it! You would have me believe that Jesus has a physical body and took it to Heaven, the Spirit has a physical body all around it… why wouldn’t the Cause be similar to the effect?

I could have looked him straight in the face a couple thousand years ago, apparently… AND SHAKEN HIS HAND!!

I look at other children of God on a daily basis.

HAHA… God had intestines, a stomach, a colon, and a rectum!! Some people would have you believe that God defecated but did not use his sexual organs. And if he urinated, technically he DID use his sexual organs… if Jesus were really God.

You sound very excited about this, okay here goes;

…go out and find God, bring him to me and let me shake hands with him. Then and only then will I agree with you regarding this conversation.

 

[Rv_Cain_Spencer]

Hm . . . actually, God can be found everywhere, right? But He can’t be contained or properly perceived by mortal senses in a complete way. That is to say, we cannot say with all certainty “God is here and only here; we’ve found all of him”, like we can for a human being enfleshed in a body.

This pretty much covers it.

 

[Schn]

That’s not straightforward at all as it stands. The Genesis passage only vaguely says that God created man and woman in his “image,”–not specifying explicitly in what that resemblence consists; and it doesn’t explicity say that God is a man or that God is a woman. Further, John 4:24 directly contradicts your interpretation. Christ himself explicitly says God the Father is spirit, not that he has a spirit like human beings do–so the statement is one of identity, not one of possessing a property. But if a being is incorporeal, that being cannot even be partly physical, because “pure spirit” is what incorporeal means. So it is more reasonable to think God the Father is purely incorporeal lacking a body, than merely corporeal having a spirit. So I don’t sympathize with your reading at all.

I guess there’s a contradiction in the bible then.

 

[Syntax]

I guess there’s a contradiction in the bible then.

Then show it, because I don’t see it. In case you don’t know what a contradiction is, the conclusion you deduce from the Bible’s own claims will be expressed in the following schema

1. P
2. ~P
3. Therefore, P and ~P.

So put your money where your mouth is.

And if you think the contradiction is lying within the doctrine of the Trinity itself, you’re wrong. The problem with the Trinity is found in its apparent violation of a metaphysical principle of numerical identity–but even the results of quantum physics violates that: it’s called the phenomenon of “quantum non-locality and superposition.”

 

[Schn]

Then show it, because I don’t see it. In case you don’t know what a contradiction is, the conclusion you deduce from the Bible’s own claims will be expressed in the following schema

1. P
2. ~P
3. Therefore, P and ~P.

So put your money where your mouth is.

And if you think the contradiction is lying within the doctrine of the Trinity itself, you’re wrong. The problem with the Trinity is found in its apparent violation of a metaphysical principle of numerical identity–but even the results of quantum physics violates that: it’s called the phenomenon of “quantum non-locality and superposition.”

1. God made man in his image.
2. God has no image.
3. Therefore P and ~P

 

[Syntax]

1. God made man in his image.
2. God has no image.
3. Therefore P and ~P

Again, you assume “image” means “physical image.” Besides, where does it say God has “no image” at all? Your responses are very trite and you know it.

 

[Schn]

Again, you assume “image” means “physical image.” Besides, where does it say God has “no image” at all? Your responses are very trite and you know it.

Ahh, so it’s not physical but looks like humans. How does that work.

 

[Syntax]

Ahh, so it’s not physical but looks like humans. How does that work.

It’s pointless discussing this with you.