| Revision as of 03:37, 9 November 2001 editMichaelTinkler (talk | contribs)2,468 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:38, 9 November 2001 edit undoMichaelTinkler (talk | contribs)2,468 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| ---- | ---- | ||
| my goodness. This '''is''' an exceptionally inaccurate treatment of Christianity, which makes me wonder how accurate a treatment of Shaivism it can possibly be! --MichaelTinkler | my goodness. This '''is''' an exceptionally inaccurate treatment of Christianity, which makes me wonder how accurate a treatment of Shaivism it can possibly be! 'Facet'-language for the Holy Spirit is modalist, I ''think'' the author to mean. In which case it is not a correct presentation of orthodox Christian theology, but some sort of reinterpretation. --MichaelTinkler | ||
Revision as of 03:38, 9 November 2001
"Siva is no more a name for G-d than the Holy Spirit" ---
Except of course, that a lot of christians do think that 'Holy Spirit' is a name for G-d.
Indeed. See the entry for the Athanasian Creed for the historical understanding of the Trinity held by Catholic,
Eastern Orthodox, and many Protestant Christians.. It's not at all clear to me what the author means by saying the Holy Spirit is a 'facet' of God, or by saying that Christ 'developed' Christianity from Judaism.
my goodness. This is an exceptionally inaccurate treatment of Christianity, which makes me wonder how accurate a treatment of Shaivism it can possibly be! 'Facet'-language for the Holy Spirit is modalist, I think the author to mean. In which case it is not a correct presentation of orthodox Christian theology, but some sort of reinterpretation. --MichaelTinkler