| Revision as of 03:38, 9 November 2001 editMichaelTinkler (talk | contribs)2,468 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:49, 9 November 2001 edit undoMichaelTinkler (talk | contribs)2,468 edits relocated portionsNext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| 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 | 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 | ||
| ----- | |||
| These last few sentences are either inaccurate (modalism applied to the Trinity - not accurate Christian theology) or gratuitous (the Buddha bit - what's it doing in a Siva article?): | |||
| :''Siva is no more a name for ] than the ]--Siva is a facet of atman just as the Spirit is a facet of the ]. ] developed ] from Hinduism in an analogous fashion to ] developing ] from ].'' | |||
Revision as of 03:49, 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
These last few sentences are either inaccurate (modalism applied to the Trinity - not accurate Christian theology) or gratuitous (the Buddha bit - what's it doing in a Siva article?):
- Siva is no more a name for God than the Holy Spirit--Siva is a facet of atman just as the Spirit is a facet of the HolyTrinity. Buddha developed Buddhism from Hinduism in an analogous fashion to Christ developing Christianity from Judaism.