david f,
All reasonable and acutely observed comments. However, there is the air of trying to fit Christianity into all of the other religious movements and hence neutralise it. While I am not sure how religions are "invented" it cannot be said that Christianity was an invention. What happened in the very early church and in the NT were many attempts to understand the meaning of the life and death of Jesus using the materials at hand i.e the Old Testament. The theology thus produced was not invented as such but was a creative effort.

I would like to stick with the Greek that Luke used to describe Mary. The virgin birth may have echoes in culture, what has not? However, Luke uses the virgin birth to tell us that this Jesus does not owe his origin entirely to his biological father. It is out of this understanding that John can identify him with the Word that was with God and was God. Sure, it is a theological device but an effective one if you give up on the literal meaning.

Dear Sells,

Perhaps the Trinity can be seen as a theological realisation of Montesquieu’s theory of government. He recommended separation of government into executive, judicial and legislative branches which together form one government. The Westminster system with the executive and legislative branches combined is dualistic rather than Trinitarian.

Frankly, the Trinity seems like mumbojumbo to me.

Certainly Christianity is just another religious movement. Like all religions it is a human invention. It doesn’t neutralise Christianity to recognise that. Why deny obvious fact? As I pointed in my previous post the narrative of the life of Jesus as described in the Gospels incorporates the pagan mythology of its time. It owes much more to that than it does to the Jewish Bible. Actually the canonical version of the Jewish Bible was finalised after the death of Jesus. The Pentateuch (Torah), as we know it today, was completed during the Babylonian exile, by the time of Ezra. The Neviim (Prophets) were finalized during the Persian era, approximately 323 B.C.E. The conclusion of the last section of the Bible, ketuvim (Writings) is debated; however, most scholars believe its final canonization occurred in the second century C.E.

No one owes one’s origin solely to one’s biological father. We also owe our origins to our biological mother. To claim any other entity is involved is simply more mumbojumbo.

Dear George,

You quoted Benedict XVI: "In the light of our experience with cultural pluralism, it is often said nowadays that the synthesis with Hellenism achieved in the early Church was a preliminary inculturation which ought not to be binding on other cultures. The latter are said to have the right to return to the simple message of the New Testament prior to that inculturation, in order to inculturate it anew in their own particular milieux. This thesis is not only false; it is coarse and lacking in precision."

The thesis seems neither coarse nor lacking in precision. Whether it is false or not is a matter of opinion.

I appreciate your making the distinction between “inculturation” and "conforming with".

DAVID/quote.<<.We also owe our origins..to our biological mother...To claim any other entity..is involved..is simply more mumbojumbo.>

THE matters..of the FLESH...NEED..femail..to make
[co-create../BUT The living sperm to animate...[MAKE LIFE]
but just as mother father child=3..ditto the trinity.of creation creator/ANIMATOR.[THE FATHER AND THE SUN AND THE WHOLLY LIVING SPIRIT.]

daviD..<<Dear George,..You quoted Benedict XVI:
"In the light..[REALISED LIVING [life-LESSONs cumination]..of our [church]...experience..with cultural pluralism,.it is often said nowadays..that the synthesis..with Hellenism..>>

<<>>..:a body of humanistic..and classical ideals/associated with ancient Greece..and including reason,..the pursuit of knowledge..and the arts, *moderation,..civic responsibility,..and bodily development

First Known Use of HELLENISM
1609..>>>

<<>.achieved in the early Church..was a preliminary in-culturE-ation which..ought not to be binding..*on other cultures...>>

sounds fair/look at the culture PROBLEMS..SOME SECTIONS Of the mnuim wrestle with..but THEN AGAIN ..it is so with most if not all .intrest-groups

THE OTHER latter..CULTURE=LATIN?..Roman/greek.english?

<<The latter*..are said to have..the right to return
to..the simple message..of the New Testament..*prior to that inculturation,>>

ITS not onLy permitted/its essential[ie miracles/4000/5000..[not eating]..WITH UNCLEAN hands/as there wern't handwash jars.[on/the\mount...i].between the canna wedding/WASH JAR/AND THE SHEW BREAD/this..reveals THE DECILES KNEW not..the handwash rite/

DO NOT EAT..[in].WITH UNCLEAN HANDS
but..what issues from it..maketh/UNCLEAN

any/FOOD\increase..is human naTURE
[IE SITTING OPPISITE EACH OTHER/EACH would to too afraid..to be seen eaTING anthing/WITH UNCLEAN HANDS./[the extra food was in case any saw the food lATER/AND ACCUSED..Or sharing[agE-OLD/custom]..even if yOU/CANT EAT.

the first..[AT CANNA]..WAS SIMPLY SERVANTS NOT WISHING....THE MASTER TO LOOSE FACE[AND SERVING THE BEST WINE..even if jesus did make toilet water/into wine/..the wash jars are the saME AS A TOILET/NO SERVANT COULD FEED,,champain/from..TOILET JAR WATER/TO GUESTS

[ONLY A SERVAnt..could notice]

I appreciate your making..the distinction
between “inculturation” and "conforming with".?

pease explain?

I don't think either religion or ideology in the sense the author explains are 'essentially bad'. But it is true that to 'pick out' communism - and even fascism - while not mentioning evils committed for the sake of capitalism, and even conservatism - is mistaken and will-fully short-sighted. Atrocities have been committed for the sake of ideologies - including communism and fascism, but also conservatism and capitalism - indeed, even liberalism. (ie: war in the guise of a 'civilising mission') But we have to strive for an ethics... Is the author suggesting that Christians not strive after an understanding of what is right? Also it is technocracy that denies ideology - and dismisses questions of right and wrong...

In a democracy we should all strive for our understandings of 'the good society'. But this needs to be taken in the context of a 'basic consensus' - a grounding in the most basic liberal, democratic and social rights... Such a consensus - and mutual respect for each others' humanity - is how we avoid the 'extreme ends and means calculations' that occurred in the French and Russian revolutions, and also in various manifestations of fascism.

But remember what was done in the name of 'anti-communism' in Guatemala, Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Indonesia etc during the Cold War.. Remember undoubtedly 'extreme ends and means' calculations with fire-bombing and nuclear bombings in World War 2... And also in World War One - the casualties of which were even more than occurred in the Terror of Stalin....

But if we do not ask ourselves ethical questions it is doubtful we will ever learn; More likely history with repeat itself...

tristen/itS FUNNY,,<<..More likely history..with repeat itself...>>

AS I Was reading....that alex jones..said much the same thing[HALF-WAy]
http://rss.infowars.com/20140507_Wed_Alex.mp3

<<>.it is true that..to 'pick out'..communism ..fascism - while not mentioning evils committed for the sake of capitalism, and even conservatism - is mistaken and will-fully short-sighted>>

great point/no one is without sin.
HENCE THE NEED FOR A..PERFECTLY CLEAR Knowing..THE SEPARATION...[di-vide]..OF GOOD From vile..is essential..[TO RECOGNIZE fair measure]..educated choice.....to reject or accept..via reason..

<<>>Atrocities have been committed..>>
so lets ensure no more war
<<>>(ie: war in the guise of..a 'civilising mission')..But we have to strive for an ethics...>>.

moderated WITH GRACE/MERCY/LOVE..NOT CENSURE?

<<>.Is the author suggesting..that Christians not strive after an understanding..of what is right?.>>

im presuming/we arnt to judge
THERE BUT FOR THE GRACE OF GOD GO I

<<Also it is technocracy..that denies ideology>>

HOW SO?

DISMISSED ID*eOLOGY..<<>> -and dismisses questions of right and wrong...>>

IF WE COME ACROSS An accident/do we not act first
think later?..[we must be as cHILDREN/WITH EAGER CURIOSITY AND PASSION
able to forget easY..]

<<>.the context of a 'basic consensus' -a grounding in the most basic liberal, democratic and social rights...>>

YES/THE CHURCH...of love makes a better state
BUT GOVT SHOULD BE LIKE A MOTHERS NURTURE/NOT A FATHers firm hand[but different strokES FOR DIFFERENT FOLKS[there is no one size fits aLL FOR EVERYTHING.nor everyone[god made us each unique/own..FACE/FINGER PRINT/SMELL Dna..eyesign and soul form..ETC

<<>.Such a consensus -life waand mutual respect..for each others' humanity - is how we avoid the 'extreme ends.and means calculations'>>

snt meant to be easy
but it must be lived as we chose
IE WE MUST HAve skin in the game..want for something/specificly/with a passion[for what is salt/lost of flavour

<<>.if we do not ask ourselves ethical questions it is doubtful we will ever learn;..>>

YES...AHHH MEN
dont...miss edward Griffith..IN 2DE HOUR
http://rss.infowars.com/20140507_Wed_Alex.mp3

FASCINATING SEARCH RESULTS
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=JESUTS+CANT+BE+POPE&

Dear Tristan,

The great European empires can be considered capitalist crimes. I believe it was US Justice Jackson at the Nuremberg trials who said that the US should accept being called to account in the future for its crimes. As an American I am disappointed that the US has not ratified the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court and submitted to its jurisdiction.

Australia has been condemned by the UN for its treatment of asylum seekers. It has also been condemned a number of times by the UN for its blockade of Bougainville which cut off medical supplies and other important items when Bougainville was trying to get independence from PNG. Somehow those condemnations were generally not reported in the Australian news.