Stereotyping & Religion

Like I said If you were to read the bible with out a preconceived idea you would never think there was a trinity.>>>

Thanks Copperman In my estimation it is man made and really makes no sense.>>>

Trinity

Definition: The central doctrine of religions of Christendom. According to the Athanasian Creed, there are three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), each said to be eternal, each said to be almighty, none greater or less than another, each said to be God, and yet together being but one God. Other statements of the dogma emphasize that these three “Persons” are not separate and distinct individuals but are three modes in which the divine essence exists. Thus some Trinitarians emphasize their belief that Jesus Christ is God, or that Jesus and the Holy Ghost are Jehovah. Not a Bible teaching.

What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?

The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.

In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: “Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, “The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.”—(Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.

John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: “The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are G[ree]k philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians.”—(New York, 1965), p. 899.

Even though, as Trinitarians acknowledge, neither the word “Trinity” nor a statement of the Trinitarian dogma is found in the Bible, are the concepts that are embodied in that dogma found there?

Does the Bible teach that the “Holy Spirit” is a person?

Some individual texts that refer to the holy spirit (“Holy Ghost,” KJ) might seem to indicate personality. For example, the holy spirit is referred to as a helper (Greek, pa‧ra′kle‧tos; “Comforter,” KJ; “Advocate,” JB, NE) that ‘teaches,’ ‘bears witness,’ ‘speaks’ and ‘hears.’ (John 14:16, 17, 26; 15:26; 16:13) But other texts say that people were “filled” with holy spirit, that some were ‘baptized’ with it or “anointed” with it. (Luke 1:41; Matt. 3:11; Acts 10:38) These latter references to holy spirit definitely do not fi

No problem Mike. I understand you . You are right about the idea of wrapping a conscious mind around a concept that make no sense. In any form . I know the analogies ice water steam yadda yadda. A very shallow explanation. Does anyone know where this idea came from ? I'm truthfully curious about it .>>>

CIAK,

I'm not trying to offend you or be lackluster. I did not understand your previous post. I didn't understand what you were asking me, and I have a hard time commenting on a lot of your writings because our brains appear to be wired very differently and I just don't comprehend much of it. It's like I expect you to turn right, but you turn left, and my head flies out the window. Sorry man. Sincerely.

Pot,

As I seem to recall, and I've been really busy here of late, and don't recall what I had for dinner, let alone the content of 320+ lost posts, I thought your interpretation of the trinity was three distinct beings and that Christ was not diety. I would say that what I read points toward Christ being God, in flesh, and while equal in one sense, not equal in another, yet still the same. Fur shur a concept that is impossible to wrap a three dimensional mind around. A concept that takes faith, for reason could never explain it.

If I was wrong, I apologize for the mix up.>>>

Mike I'll just have to let it be . Maybe you'll cozy up and hear me maybe not. " i dunno " I'll just keep posting .The only comment you get after a sincere reaching out is the same lackluster. Had a insincere I don't care . It is a real stretch The Trinity three Gods in one . I just can't wrap my mind around that concept I know some Christian use it as a sign post whether your real or(evil). I liked egg's singing analogy . That resonates Does anyone know the history of the Trinity ? Where did it start in recorded history. Verifiable history . What were it's origins . >>>

Pot, That first verse just leaves me all the more confused as to why you would reject the concept of the Trinity. Funny how two people read the same thing and walk away with completely different interpretations.Your text here

I'm sorry Mike , if I give any hint of rejection of the trinity....maybe. What is your idea of the trinity? Possibly we see the Trinity as two different things?

Mine is this....that there are 3 in the....what I consider as the Trinity,or the Godhead, and that those 3 are, Father,Son,Holy Ghost.

Where did I give an indication of otherwise?>>>

If one read the bible without a preconceived idea of a trinity you would not think there is one after you read it. This would be even more apparent if you were to used a bible that has God's name in it instead of replacing it with Lord. One has to ask Why did they do that?>>>

Egg,

I gotta admit, that the few times I've hand nailed shingles left me with the clear impression that becoming a master at it was something I had no desire for. While I admire your passion for the tap=TAP tap-TAP tap-TAP, ..................... well, that's about as far as it goes. Sorry friend. I'll post an obigatory atta-boy on the thread if you like. ;)

CIAK, Like I said before, I don't comprehend most of what you wrote/write. Your last questions to me left me feeling :S and That little yellow dude looks bewildered to me.

Pot, That first verse just leaves me all the more confused as to why you would reject the concept of the Trinity. Funny how two people read the same thing and walk away with completely different interpretations.>>>

I'm guessing it's closely related to humanity's innate desire to sing. I guess hand-nailing just doesn't pluck most people's heartstrings.>>>

So you're thinking there's a raw nerve being touched here?>>>

Mexican workers 721 views 26 replies New Years resolutions 756 views 26 replies Double paper 473 views 35 replies Hand nailing shingles 447 views 27 replies Stereotyping & Religion 434 views 319 replies

>>>

Supper time ........gotta go>>>

Isiah 9

6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, the everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Mike , it has been awhile since we were into this thread. I'll try to pick up where we left off , maybe?

Many times in the Bible God and Jesus are described as equals, they have the same attributes, Jesus is sometimes referred to as God in the flesh. They are so much alike that we in our natural state , probably couldn't tell them apart.Your text here

I believe they are 2 separate individuals myself, for instance.........not counting the Holy Ghost...

I John ch5v7 7. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.......meaning , they see everything alike.....they are like triplets,they don't disagree on anything....the only thing that God knows that is not known by Jesus and the Holy Spirit is when time is going to be ended.

There are religions among us that hinge their belief on one scripture or verse, and not taking into consideration the rest of the scriptures,or verses. The following verse tells me that we can't base all on one verse. 2Pet.1 20. Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

The scriptures must be rightly divided....or properly interpreted....towards a harmonious meaning from verse to verse... 2Tim. 2 15. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

When the scriptures are rightly divided or interpreted there will be no confusion between them, they will be in harmony with each other.

ICor. 14 33. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Does this help? I know I get lengthy on these subjects ,I hope it doesn't confuse more than explain. To me ,the Bible is to be taken from front to back. The more I think about a subject at hand the more comes to mind to try to identify with what is involved with that current subject.

I try to be simple in my terms of explanation, even if it doesn't come off that way.

>>>

Mike What is the disconnect ? I don't have to assume it is me. My take on this some how doesn't resonate with you. I don't know why I'm not being understood . To me it is clear and precise . I'm not offended . I am more curious than anything. The truth which I perceive is the truth. Help me out here so our discourse can continue with clear, precise expressions, concise .>>>