Total Posts:126|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Explained and debunked.

Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 3:10:43 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
1. Explanations of the trinity doctrine.
http://www.everystudent.com...

2 . Debunking the same doctrine.
https://becomingchristians.com...

There are many more sites for and against the doctrine. Google them if you are interested.
I think both sides of the debate have relevant aspects which need to be considered in the CONCEPT of God.

I will comment on the above links in my following posts.
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 3:18:56 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 3:10:43 AM, Skyangel wrote:
1. Explanations of the trinity doctrine.
http://www.everystudent.com...


2 . Debunking the same doctrine.
https://becomingchristians.com...


There are many more sites for and against the doctrine. Google them if you are interested.
I think both sides of the debate have relevant aspects which need to be considered in the CONCEPT of God.


I will comment on the above links in my following posts.

I wonder if this author knows how ridiculous he sounds. This is a gem. I have to post what he wrote:

Q: "What about the doctrine of the Trinity, the Holy Trinity?"

our A: You and I live in a three-dimensional world. All physical objects have a certain height, width, and depth. One person can look like someone else, or behave like someone else, or even sound like someone else. But a person cannot actually be the same as another person. They are distinct individuals.

God, however, lives without the limitations of a three-dimensional universe. He is spirit. And he is infinitely more complex than we are.

That is why Jesus the Son can be different from the Father. And, yet the same.

The Bible clearly speaks of: God the Son, God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit. But emphasizes that there is only ONE God.

If we were to use math, it would not be, 1+1+1=3. It would be 1x1x1=1. God is a triune God.

Thus the term: "Tri" meaning three, and "Unity" meaning one, Tri+Unity = Trinity. It is a way of acknowledging what the Bible reveals to us about God, that God is yet three "Persons" who have the same essence of deity. Some have tried to give human illustrations for the Trinity, such as H2O being water, ice and steam (all different forms, but all are H2O). Another illustration would be the sun. From it we receive light, heat and radiation. Three distinct aspects, but only one sun.

No illustration is going to be perfect.



Actually, the math according to Christians is 1=3.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 4:06:39 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
1. Explanations of the trinity doctrine.
http://www.everystudent.com...
My comments and opinions are in bold letters to distinguish them from the quotes from the above link.

"God, however, lives without the limitations of a three-dimensional universe."

There is not one scripture in the bible which implies that God lives without the limitations of a 3D universe. There are a few scriptures which IMPLY that God is without limitations but there are also a few which IMPLY that God is everywhere and some which imply that God is within mankind. IF God is everywhere, he must "live" in the universe as well as any other place humans might imagine outside the universe IF such a place existed at all. If God abides within the hearts and minds of humans, he does not live without any 3D limitations because humans are limited 3D creatures WITH whom God lives. If he lives WITH and IN the 3D creatures, he is not living without them or their limitations but rather limiting himself to them.

"He is spirit. And he is infinitely more complex than we are.
That is why Jesus the Son can be different from the Father. And, yet the same."

That is a non sequitur. Just because a spirit is more complex than some humans think it is, is not the reason that a son can be different from a father and yet the be of the same essence. Every son on the planet is of the same essence as his father since they share the same DNA and often share the same attitudes and beliefs ( spirit) .

"The Bible clearly speaks of: God the Son, God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit. "

That is a lie. The bible does NOT CLEARLY speak of ALL the above. It clearly mentions "God the Father" but the terms "God the Son", and "God the Holy Spirit" are nowhere to be found.
Obviously the Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned but they are never preceded by the words "God the" in scripture.
The concept is purely a doctrinal issue dependant on human perception and interpretation of the texts.


"If we were to use math, it would not be, 1+1+1=3. It would be 1x1x1=1. God is a triune God."

The end result obviously depends on how one does the math.
When it comes to scripture, the end result of ones belief also depends on how people "do the math" in the sense that it depends on how they interpret the text in their own minds.

Some obviously perceive Father, Son and Holy Spirit to be 3 separate entities and cannot reconcile "the math" into the three being one entity.


"Some have tried to give human illustrations for the Trinity, such as H2O being water, ice and steam (all different forms, but all are H2O). Another illustration would be the sun. From it we receive light, heat and radiation. Three distinct aspects, but only one sun."

Those simple illustrations make perfect sense and help people to understand how one thing can have different aspects or forms and still be of the same essence.

"But from the very beginning we see God as a Trinity. Notice the plural pronouns "us" and "our" in Genesis 1:26 -- Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over .................."

The plural pronouns do not imply three persons. The only people who see God as a trinity in the words "us" and "our" are those who are looking through their "trinitarian glasses" and can't see past that bias. . "Us" and "our" can imply an infinite number of persons. After all, Man does not consist of only three people. The word "Man" is plural and refers to all mankind of the past present and future. If an infinite number of people are made in the image of God, it could just as easily imply that God is infinite and unlimited, not limited to three of anything.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 4:23:09 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 3:18:56 AM, matt8800 wrote:

Actually, the math according to Christians is 1=3.

Or 3=1
It does seem that way to most outsiders.

However, the concept is not hard to comprehend when you compare the 3 to water, ice and vapour and understand they are simply different forms of the exact same H2O.
Different manifestations of H2O are all the same essence of H2O

Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all the same "essence" which is labelled God.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 4:51:12 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
http://www.everystudent.com...
Though not a complete list, here is some other Scripture that shows God is one, in Trinity:

"Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!" (Deut. 6:4)

"I am the LORD, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God." (Isa. 45:5)

There is no God but one. (1Cor. 8:4)

The above show or imply nothing about a trinity. They simply convey the concept of God being only ONE, not two or three or more

And after being baptized, Jesus went up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens, saying, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased." (Matt. 3:16-17)

That shows or implies nothing about God being a trinity. It simply mentions Jesus, a dove and a voice

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit." (Matt. 28:19)

No implication about God being a trinity there either. It simply mentions Father Son and Holy Spirit in relation to baptism.

Jesus said: "I and the Father are one." (John 10:30)

No trinity implications there either. It mentions only two characters, not three.

"He who has seen Me has seen the Father." (John 14:9)

Again only two characters, not three mentioned.

"He who beholds Me beholds the One who sent Me." (John 12:45)

Again only two characters, not three mentioned.

If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. (Rom. 8:9)

Only one character, not three mentioned.

"Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for that which has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit." (Matt. 1:20)

The three mentioned there are Mary, Joseph and Holy Spirit. No mention or implication of God being a trinity

And the angel answered and said to her [Mary], "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy offspring shall be called the Son of God." (Luke 1:35)

5 characters mentioned there.... An angel, Mary, Holy Spirit, Most High, Son of God. No mention or implication of God being a trinity

[Jesus speaking to His disciples] "And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not behold Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you, and will be in you." ... "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him, and make Our abode with him." (John 14:16-17, 23)

A mention of three characters does not show, prove or even imply that God is a trinity.
The word God is not even used in the text.
Therefore none of the above scriptures shows God is one, in Trinity.
Some merely mention three characters and some only mention two.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 5:20:02 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
2 . Debunking the same doctrine.
https://becomingchristians.com...

From my research the site is a religious site debunking a doctrine which they perceive to be false. The author seems to be promoting the literature which is apparently published by The United Church of God. I therefore presume he is a member of that religion.

"... the word trinity is NEVER found in the Bible and most Bible scholars would ADMIT that this doctrine did not originate from the Bible, but instead has its root in paganism."

Most believers seem to IGNORE or DENY that fact. Only honest bible scholars who have done their own personal research admit the doctrine is based in paganism.

"Throughout the Bible, the Holy Spirit is described as the power of God. It is never addressed as an individual or a separate entity. Here are some of the scriptures that prove the Holy Spirit as the power of God."

Zechariah 4:6 " "" Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the LORD of hosts."

That scripture actually contradicts what the author is trying to prove. It seems to portray power as something separate from the Spirit, not something that represents the spirit. It implies the Spirit is something different than power and does not describe the spirit as anything or prove the Holy Spirit as the power of anything.
The rest of the scriptures relate the Spirit with power or imply a Spirit has power. However, claiming the written texts prove anything is not true. Implication is not proof.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 5:55:03 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
https://becomingchristians.com...

2. The Holy Spirit is likened to different things but not to God.

"Holy Spirit as a wind and fire " "And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting and there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them." (Act 2:2-3)."

The Holy Spirit is likened to wind and fire in the above text but God is also likened to fire in different text. .. Deut 4:24, Heb 12:29
Therefore those who perceive God and Holy Spirit as a fire can easily claim they are the same fire.


3. Jesus never called the Holy Spirit as His Father even if He was conceived by it.

The fact that the character was conceived by it IMPLIES the Holy Ghost is the Father of Jesus.
Besides that, God IS a Spirit according to John 4:24. IF God is NOT the HOLY SPIRIT, is God a different Spirit?


4. Paul"s salutations in His epistles never mentioned the Holy Spirit.
"If the Holy Spirit is a God persona, we should have read Paul mentioning it in his salutations in all his epistles. If he did not, then it will be a great insult to the Holy Spirit! He did not just ignore the Holy Spirit once, twice or thrice, but 13 TIMES! Surely, we should have seen God punishing or even just telling Paul that he forgot someone in the God family, right? If the Holy Spirit is a person, surely God or Jesus should have revealed this to Paul. But NO. We don"t see anything of that happening in the New Testament."

Maybe Paul simply took it for granted as part of the whole persona and felt no need to mention it any more than someone might mention the "spirit of a person" being good or bad, holy or unholy, every time they talk about a person.
Besides that, some believers perceive the mention of the Lord Jesus Christ as a mention of the trinity since in their perception, the word Lord refers to Father, Jesus refers to Son and Christ refers to the Spirit.


5. The Holy Spirit was NOT mentioned in visions

"Another interesting fact is whenever a servant of God has a vision of the throne of God; the Holy Spirit is not mentioned. If ever the Holy Spirit is a member of the Godhead Family, why did the visions of God"s saints never mentioned it? The answer is plain and simple. The Holy Spirit is never a persona in the God Family."

The author must be blind to claim there is no mention of the Holy Ghost in the scriptures he quoted. The very first one mentions the Holy Ghost.
Act 7:55-56 " "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost........
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 12:53:31 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
An incoherent, unrecognisable, unidentifiable, unfalsifiable, untestable, unauthenticated, uncredentialed, uncontactable, unlocatable, unverifiable, unvalidated, unobservable being is THREE repeat ONE.

And the inconsistent counting is all that's worrying us about this statement?
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 9:59:29 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 12:53:31 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
An incoherent, unrecognisable, unidentifiable, unfalsifiable, untestable, unauthenticated, uncredentialed, uncontactable, unlocatable, unverifiable, unvalidated, unobservable being is THREE repeat ONE.

And the inconsistent counting is all that's worrying us about this statement?

I have no clue what is worrying you or others Ruv.
Nothing is worrying me.
I am merely doing my part to educate readers about false doctrines so gullible people will not be led astray by them.

It is a sad thing that so many adults in this world still believe in myths and don't even realise they are being led astray by their own beliefs.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 10:08:23 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
http://www.trinitytruth.org...

"While Tertullian introduced the term "trinity," what he taught and believed is different to what the trinity doctrine is today. And since he introduced this term, than that means the trinity doctrine as taught today did not exist in the time of Tertullian. And if it did not exist in his time, then it could never have existed in the time of Christ and the apostles.
Tertullian however did introduce pagan ideas into the worship service. He taught oblations for the dead and made the sign of the cross on the forehead of worshipers. He also dipped people three times to baptize them. Tertullian freely admitted that he had adopted these ideas from pagan teachings and could not support them from Scripture, but he thought that if Christians adopted some heathen rituals of the pagans that they would find it easier to join Christianity."
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 10:22:08 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
http://www.trinitytruth.org...

"This counterfeit religion ceased for a short time but Semiramis had a brilliant idea of how she could successfully revive her and Nimrod's pagan religion with a new form. It was not long after the death of her husband that Semiramis became pregnant. She claimed that when Nimrod died he went up to the sun, and so the sun then became a symbol of Nimrod. She told the people that a ray of the sun had come to her and impregnated her with a child and that it was actually Nimrod coming back in a reincarnation of the sun god. The child was called Tammuz and these three were worshipped as the personification of the sun god, and this is where we find the first three came into existence. But this mystery religion was nothing more than Satan worship.
"The trinity got its start in Ancient Babylon with Nimrod - Tammuz - and Semiramis. Semiramis demanded worship for both her husband and her son as well as herself. She claimed that her son, was both the father and the son. Yes, he was "god the father" and "god the son" - The first divine incomprehensible trinity." " (The Two Babylons, Alexander Hislop, p. 51)"

.....................

" We also find that this worship of three was carried to all the different cultures that we have today but they took on different names since God had confused the languages.

So in Egypt, their trinity became Osiris, Horus and Isis (top left).
http://www.trinitytruth.org...

In Greece it was Zeus, Apollo and Athena (top right).
http://www.trinitytruth.org...

And in India there was Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva (bottom left).
http://www.trinitytruth.org...

Notice also the yellow halo around their heads which represents the sun god.
The system of Rome adopted the same symbol where you see saints with a halo around their head. Most tend to think that this means they are holy but it actually represents the sun god.
And speaking of Rome, they had Jupiter, Mars and Venus (bottom right)."
http://www.trinitytruth.org...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 2:01:54 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 9:59:29 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/4/2016 12:53:31 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
An incoherent, unrecognisable, unidentifiable, unfalsifiable, untestable, unauthenticated, uncredentialed, uncontactable, unlocatable, unverifiable, unvalidated, unobservable being is THREE repeat ONE.

And the inconsistent counting is all that's worrying us about this statement?

I have no clue what is worrying you or others Ruv.

It's simple enough, Sky. I question the legitimacy of trying to count a conjectured being that cannot be evidenced, communicated with, predicted, falsified, recognised or even identified.

What does 'knowledge' mean in such a case? How can any statement about such a conjecture produce knowledge?
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 4:47:42 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
I didn't bother to read the debunking, because I didn't agree with the first link posted.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:17:05 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 2:01:54 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 6/4/2016 9:59:29 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/4/2016 12:53:31 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
An incoherent, unrecognisable, unidentifiable, unfalsifiable, untestable, unauthenticated, uncredentialed, uncontactable, unlocatable, unverifiable, unvalidated, unobservable being is THREE repeat ONE.

And the inconsistent counting is all that's worrying us about this statement?

I have no clue what is worrying you or others Ruv.

It's simple enough, Sky. I question the legitimacy of trying to count a conjectured being that cannot be evidenced, communicated with, predicted, falsified, recognised or even identified.

Do you think it is impossible to recognise or identity a character in a story as being mythical?
If not, how do you identity or recognise them as mythical?
Obviously not using a scientific method.

It's fair enough to question any being that cannot be evidenced etc.

However, why don't people question the existence of Mother Nature or Father Time in the same way they question the existence of God?
Is it because some mythical characters are taken for granted as mythical in spite of people understanding what they represent or personify?
Take Father time for example. It would be easy to see that character as a trinity too in the sense that he represents the "ghost" of the past, the "ghost" of the present and the "ghost" of the future. Three in one or one in three?

What does 'knowledge' mean in such a case? How can any statement about such a conjecture produce knowledge?

I think it would be the same as what knowledge about Father time or Mother Nature means.
Understanding the characters are mythical representations or personifications of natural things gives a person a certain knowledge about them and a greater insight into the reality they represent than just blindly believing the invisible character is real and cares about humans on Earth. It also help people gain knowledge and understanding of ancient cultures superstitions and myths.

I think in the end, the interpretation of ancient literature depends on how well people understand creative abstract and ambiguous forms of writing which include idioms, allegories, personifications, symbolism etc.
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:26:53 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
I think before you can really even address the Trinity, you have to understand how each part of the trinity is understood theologically.

Then you have to realize that the trinity is intended to describe relational things that ultimately reveal the Oneness of the creator of creation.

The trinity is a teaching tool, not a declaration of God being three. God is One.

What does Jesus mean when he says, "ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you."?
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:35:37 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 4:47:42 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
I didn't bother to read the debunking, because I didn't agree with the first link posted.

Why don't you agree with it? What do you see as being wrong with it?
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:43:51 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 6:35:37 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/5/2016 4:47:42 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
I didn't bother to read the debunking, because I didn't agree with the first link posted.

Why don't you agree with it? What do you see as being wrong with it?

It's not good theology. It misses the whole point.

You aren't supposed explain the trinity. It's a mystery. In fact, if you really do understand it, you'll realize that explaining it is counterproductive to actually getting people to realize it.

Instead, I would probably encourage people to read an epistle or something. The epistles do a better job at explaining Christian theology than any type of mental masturbation over badly understood concepts.

I mean really, how are you even going to approach this if you, for example don't know what "holy spirit" means?

Look at the interpretations in this topic. It's like some Oxford anthropologist going into a jungle, meeting with a lost tribe, and doing a documentary on their entire culture after spending a month with them. It's profoundly disrespectful, disingenuous, and intellectually lazy.

Read the scriptures. If you still don't get it, read them more. If you still don't get it, read them more. Eventually, you'll figure it out if you pull your head out of your arse.

I'd tell that to anyone. =p
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:48:14 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 6:43:51 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 6/5/2016 6:35:37 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/5/2016 4:47:42 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
I didn't bother to read the debunking, because I didn't agree with the first link posted.

Why don't you agree with it? What do you see as being wrong with it?

It's not good theology. It misses the whole point.

You aren't supposed explain the trinity. It's a mystery. In fact, if you really do understand it, you'll realize that explaining it is counterproductive to actually getting people to realize it.

Instead, I would probably encourage people to read an epistle or something. The epistles do a better job at explaining Christian theology than any type of mental masturbation over badly understood concepts.

I mean really, how are you even going to approach this if you, for example don't know what "holy spirit" means?

Look at the interpretations in this topic. It's like some Oxford anthropologist going into a jungle, meeting with a lost tribe, and doing a documentary on their entire culture after spending a month with them. It's profoundly disrespectful, disingenuous, and intellectually lazy.

Read the scriptures. If you still don't get it, read them more. If you still don't get it, read them more. Eventually, you'll figure it out if you pull your head out of your arse.

I'd tell that to anyone. =p
In summary, just believe what you are told, the foundation of religion.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:52:48 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
Here, I'll be more helpful and show dumbo some charity.

https://books.google.com...

I bet you won't read it, because you're full of crap.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:54:03 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
pardon me, wrong topic
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:56:39 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 6:48:14 AM, bulproof wrote:
In summary, just believe what you are told, the foundation of religion.

No, in summary, if I want to learn about something, I go to the source.

You know, because that's how you learn stuff.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 7:13:41 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 9:59:29 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/4/2016 12:53:31 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
An incoherent, unrecognisable, unidentifiable, unfalsifiable, untestable, unauthenticated, uncredentialed, uncontactable, unlocatable, unverifiable, unvalidated, unobservable being is THREE repeat ONE.

And the inconsistent counting is all that's worrying us about this statement?

I have no clue what is worrying you or others Ruv.
Nothing is worrying me.
I am merely doing my part to educate readers about false doctrines so gullible people will not be led astray by them.
And you feel this need out of what? Just be honest sky, you are unhappy.
It is a sad thing that so many adults in this world still believe in myths and don't even realise they are being led astray by their own beliefs.
Yeah, those pesky beliefs adults have about what others believe and how arrogant those are who care enough to attempt to change what others believe. You have unhappy projecting sad person written all over your posts sky. Please move on and get a better cause in life. Feeding the poor or volunteering to serve at soup kitchens will fulfill whatever this emptiness is inside you. Nothing like slapping some mash taters on a hungry persons plate to make you feel like you've contributed something to humanity.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 7:24:52 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 6:26:53 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
I think before you can really even address the Trinity, you have to understand how each part of the trinity is understood theologically.

Not all theological perspectives are the same but I definitely think that understanding different perspectives helps one to gain better insight into other peoples views as well as helping them gain a better overall view of the bigger picture.

Then you have to realize that the trinity is intended to describe relational things that ultimately reveal the Oneness of the creator of creation.

Yes it does but it's still about mythical characters.
Consider what those characters represent in reality and then consider how their relationships work in nature itself.
It is not about some invisible person who has supernatural powers "lording it" over other characters with the same supernatural powers or the three characters working together in authority over all creation.
Existence appears to be self sustaining and works on cyclic principles. No gods are in charge of the forces of nature or the universe. Such god concepts have been carried down through tradition from our superstitious ancestors who believed that natural disasters meant some gods were angry with humans.
No mentally mature adult believes such nonsense today.

The trinity is a teaching tool, not a declaration of God being three. God is One.

Existence is also ONE in spite of being manifest in innumerable forms.
The God of the bible also manifests in far more than just three different forms in the stories. Concentrating on three of those concepts does not make the entity a trinity. The trinity concept actually confines the mythical God to three manifestations.

What does Jesus mean when he says, "ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you."?

That depends on how you interpret the passage in context.
From John 14:15.... the character is talking about sending a comforter whom he calls the Spirit of Truth in verse 17. Then in verse 18 he implies that he IS that comforter, the Spirit of Truth. He also referred to himself as the Truth previously in verse 6.
Verse 19 is basically saying the "world" will never know or see the Truth but the disciples of Truth do see it because it "lives"
Verse 20.. At that day ( the day they realise or see the truth ) ye shall know that I ( the Truth) am in my Father ( The Truth), and ye in me ( The Truth) , and I ( the Truth) in you.

In my perception it means that when people who are searching for Truth see the Truth, they become enlightened by the Truth and realise the Truth is everywhere, in and around them. Truth is reality. When people face Truth they face reality.
Truth begets Truth. Therefore Truth is the Father of Truth as well as the ONLY begotten son of Truth.
It is not about believing in an invisible man with supernatural powers but about understanding and believing a CONCEPT which people call Truth.
As for the world never seeing the Truth ( verse 19) I don't think that is referring to the literal world in general but rather referring to what the scriptures refer to as carnal minded or worldly people who are blinded by the Truth itself due to not believing it to be true and therefore calling it a lie.
An example from the story itself would be the religious Pharisees calling Jesus ( the Truth) a liar ( a Lie).

Ironically it is the religious people in the story who are the blind fools and hypocrites. It is not the commoners or those who the religious consider to be dogs or swine.
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 8:00:18 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 6:56:39 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 6/5/2016 6:48:14 AM, bulproof wrote:
In summary, just believe what you are told, the foundation of religion.

No, in summary, if I want to learn about something, I go to the source.

You know, because that's how you learn stuff.

I think the source to which you refer is a book of fables, folktales and lies ie the bible, am I correct?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 8:23:17 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 6:43:51 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 6/5/2016 6:35:37 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/5/2016 4:47:42 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
I didn't bother to read the debunking, because I didn't agree with the first link posted.

Why don't you agree with it? What do you see as being wrong with it?

It's not good theology. It misses the whole point.

And what is the point that you think it misses?

You aren't supposed explain the trinity. It's a mystery. In fact, if you really do understand it, you'll realize that explaining it is counterproductive to actually getting people to realize it.

Who or what convinced you that you aren't supposed to explain it?
If you aren't supposed to explain it, why do so many preachers go to great lengths to explain it?
How is getting people to realise it productive in any way? What exactly does an understanding of it produce?
It seems to have produced nothing but doctrinal division in religions. Those who believe it and think they understand it come across to others with a "holier than thou attitude" and tend to look down on skeptics of the doctrine as if they were too unrighteous, unholy and unworthy to receive any revelation.

Instead, I would probably encourage people to read an epistle or something. The epistles do a better job at explaining Christian theology than any type of mental masturbation over badly understood concepts.

Any religious texts are subject to the personal interpretation and biases of the readers. Many readers get different things from the texts. If they didn't there would not be so many divisions and religious doctrines in this world due to different interpretations of texts.

I mean really, how are you even going to approach this if you, for example don't know what "holy spirit" means?

What Holy Spirit means to one person could be quite different to what it means to another. Obviously some see the term as referring to an invisible person or ghost. Others don't see it as a person at all but rather as an attitude of holiness, righteousness, goodness, etc in a person.
Both definitions are valid depending on how it is used in context and whether the writers are referring to a mythical character or a human attitude.

Look at the interpretations in this topic. It's like some Oxford anthropologist going into a jungle, meeting with a lost tribe, and doing a documentary on their entire culture after spending a month with them. It's profoundly disrespectful, disingenuous, and intellectually lazy.

And who exactly do you imagine to be that intellectually lazy Oxford anthropologist? Those who think you are not supposed to explain a mystery? Those who are too lazy to explain a mystery? Those who believe that some are not intelligent enough to understand a mystery?

Read the scriptures. If you still don't get it, read them more. If you still don't get it, read them more. Eventually, you'll figure it out if you pull your head out of your arse.

I'd tell that to anyone. =p

I see that as the pot calling the kettles black.
It seems to me that readers see only what they want to see and simply reject anyone who tries to share a different perspective on the concepts found in the stories.
It seems to me that many believers have blinkers on and their view is very narrow minded. They simply don't want to see anything that might destroy their so called faith in their 3 invisible friends.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 8:35:46 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 7:13:41 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 6/4/2016 9:59:29 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/4/2016 12:53:31 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
An incoherent, unrecognisable, unidentifiable, unfalsifiable, untestable, unauthenticated, uncredentialed, uncontactable, unlocatable, unverifiable, unvalidated, unobservable being is THREE repeat ONE.

And the inconsistent counting is all that's worrying us about this statement?

I have no clue what is worrying you or others Ruv.
Nothing is worrying me.
I am merely doing my part to educate readers about false doctrines so gullible people will not be led astray by them.
And you feel this need out of what? Just be honest sky, you are unhappy.

Projecting your own unhappiness onto me won't make you any happier.
I am perfectly happy sharing my perspectives with others. If you are not interested, feel free to avoid my posts.

It is a sad thing that so many adults in this world still believe in myths and don't even realise they are being led astray by their own beliefs.
Yeah, those pesky beliefs adults have about what others believe and how arrogant those are who care enough to attempt to change what others believe. You have unhappy projecting sad person written all over your posts sky. Please move on and get a better cause in life. Feeding the poor or volunteering to serve at soup kitchens will fulfill whatever this emptiness is inside you. Nothing like slapping some mash taters on a hungry persons plate to make you feel like you've contributed something to humanity.

Projecting your own unhappiness and emptiness onto me won't make you any happier or more fulfilled.
Seeing immature people mature and seeing hungry people satisfied, makes me very happy.
How often do you feed the poor and do volunteer work?
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 8:37:14 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 6:17:05 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/5/2016 2:01:54 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 6/4/2016 9:59:29 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/4/2016 12:53:31 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
An incoherent, unrecognisable, unidentifiable, unfalsifiable, untestable, unauthenticated, uncredentialed, uncontactable, unlocatable, unverifiable, unvalidated, unobservable being is THREE repeat ONE.

And the inconsistent counting is all that's worrying us about this statement?

I have no clue what is worrying you or others Ruv.

It's simple enough, Sky. I question the legitimacy of trying to count a conjectured being that cannot be evidenced, communicated with, predicted, falsified, recognised or even identified.

Do you think it is impossible to recognise or identity a character in a story as being mythical?
No.

If not, how do you identity or recognise them as mythical?
Obviously not using a scientific method.
Using the scientific method. A mythical character could be defined as an unevidenced figure such that psychosociological behaviour explain the stories better than historiology does.

It's fair enough to question any being that cannot be evidenced etc.
It's also fair enough to discard as meaningless anything so ill-defined that its conjecture can never produce knowledge.

why don't people question the existence of Mother Nature or Father Time in the same way they question the existence of God?
Notably, there isn't a class of politically-influential professionals whose careers are vested in teaching children that Mother Nature and Father Time really exist.

Take Father time for example. It would be easy to see that character as a trinity too in the sense that he represents the "ghost" of the past, the "ghost" of the present and the "ghost" of the future. Three in one or one in three?
How many Robin Hoods are there? How many King Arthurs?

The question isn't meaningful, because you can't actually identify them.

What does 'knowledge' mean in such a case? How can any statement about such a conjecture produce knowledge?
I think it would be the same as what knowledge about Father time or Mother Nature means.
Myths are arbitrary fictional narratives. There's no sense in which a Robin Hood story can be 'wrong', and likewise there's no sense in which some theologian can't claim that God isn't one being with three faces, or that Jesus wasn't a girl who dressed as a boy her whole life.

Understanding the characters are mythical representations or personifications of natural things gives a person a certain knowledge about them
A fictional character is just a name to which stories attach -- and stories can change.

I think in the end, the interpretation of ancient literature depends on how well people understand creative abstract and ambiguous forms of writing which include idioms, allegories, personifications, symbolism etc.
Yhwh was what happened when Canaanite polytheism met Zoroastrian monotheism. The Trinity was what happened when Christian revisionists wanted to give their saviour the authority of a god, but keep Judaic monotheism.

Stories are what stories do. There's point interpreting their 'true' meaning. Religious stories are chosen for psychosocial effect.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 4:12:25 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 5:55:03 AM, Skyangel wrote:
https://becomingchristians.com...

2. The Holy Spirit is likened to different things but not to God.

"Holy Spirit as a wind and fire " "And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting and there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them." (Act 2:2-3)."

The Holy Spirit is likened to wind and fire in the above text but God is also likened to fire in different text. .. Deut 4:24, Heb 12:29
Therefore those who perceive God and Holy Spirit as a fire can easily claim they are the same fire.


3. Jesus never called the Holy Spirit as His Father even if He was conceived by it.

The fact that the character was conceived by it IMPLIES the Holy Ghost is the Father of Jesus.
Besides that, God IS a Spirit according to John 4:24. IF God is NOT the HOLY SPIRIT, is God a different Spirit?


4. Paul"s salutations in His epistles never mentioned the Holy Spirit.
"If the Holy Spirit is a God persona, we should have read Paul mentioning it in his salutations in all his epistles. If he did not, then it will be a great insult to the Holy Spirit! He did not just ignore the Holy Spirit once, twice or thrice, but 13 TIMES! Surely, we should have seen God punishing or even just telling Paul that he forgot someone in the God family, right? If the Holy Spirit is a person, surely God or Jesus should have revealed this to Paul. But NO. We don"t see anything of that happening in the New Testament."



Maybe Paul simply took it for granted as part of the whole persona and felt no need to mention it any more than someone might mention the "spirit of a person" being good or bad, holy or unholy, every time they talk about a person.
Besides that, some believers perceive the mention of the Lord Jesus Christ as a mention of the trinity since in their perception, the word Lord refers to Father, Jesus refers to Son and Christ refers to the Spirit.


5. The Holy Spirit was NOT mentioned in visions

"Another interesting fact is whenever a servant of God has a vision of the throne of God; the Holy Spirit is not mentioned. If ever the Holy Spirit is a member of the Godhead Family, why did the visions of God"s saints never mentioned it? The answer is plain and simple. The Holy Spirit is never a persona in the God Family."

The author must be blind to claim there is no mention of the Holy Ghost in the scriptures he quoted. The very first one mentions the Holy Ghost.
Act 7:55-56 " "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost........


Why do you bother to spend so much time trying to study something only to give up and fail.
You did that with Christianity only to admit you failed and quit. All you know is your bible study and even that you could not get it to work in your life. You must be profoundly stupid to throw away 30 years of your life's work in scriptures to spend your next 30 years attacking what you as a believer then vigorously promoted. You can only see the world as black or white. It was all white for 30 years, now it is all black. You must be a total wreck after investing 30 years of your life teaching the bible only to turn around and reject all that you believed and taught. Any wonder why you are so filled with bitterness, you are a failed Christian trying to use the scriptures against itself and failing miserably because no Christian will accept your distortions of scriptures. From singing to the choir you are now attacking the same choir. What a misguided loser.

You wrote:" I married a Christian man and had 4 children which we brought up as Christians because we believed it was the right thing to do. We were in the religion for about 30 years before we left. The reasons for leaving were varied so I won't go into them now but suffice to say our eyes were opened to the false doctrines, hypocrisy and idolatry. "

Now read what your posts are about. You equate God the creator to Mother Nature, spirit as forces, God is energy and even deny the Trinity math that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. You still see God as a personification a supernatural mythical character, yet all that it represents is true. Can what a thing represents be true and the thing itself be false?
By your logic E = MC2 represents what is true (Energy, Mass, Acceration). But the formula itself is mythical.

Here is your quote:" I believe Energy and matter is all that exists. I believe God is merely a personification of all of it, the same as Mother Nature is merely a personification of Nature. The character is a myth. The thing the character represents is very real.
God is a personification of E=MC2"
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 4:34:02 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 4:12:25 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 6/4/2016 5:55:03 AM, Skyangel wrote:
https://becomingchristians.com...

2. The Holy Spirit is likened to different things but not to God.

"Holy Spirit as a wind and fire " "And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting and there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them." (Act 2:2-3)."

The Holy Spirit is likened to wind and fire in the above text but God is also likened to fire in different text. .. Deut 4:24, Heb 12:29
Therefore those who perceive God and Holy Spirit as a fire can easily claim they are the same fire.


3. Jesus never called the Holy Spirit as His Father even if He was conceived by it.

The fact that the character was conceived by it IMPLIES the Holy Ghost is the Father of Jesus.
Besides that, God IS a Spirit according to John 4:24. IF God is NOT the HOLY SPIRIT, is God a different Spirit?


4. Paul"s salutations in His epistles never mentioned the Holy Spirit.
"If the Holy Spirit is a God persona, we should have read Paul mentioning it in his salutations in all his epistles. If he did not, then it will be a great insult to the Holy Spirit! He did not just ignore the Holy Spirit once, twice or thrice, but 13 TIMES! Surely, we should have seen God punishing or even just telling Paul that he forgot someone in the God family, right? If the Holy Spirit is a person, surely God or Jesus should have revealed this to Paul. But NO. We don"t see anything of that happening in the New Testament."



Maybe Paul simply took it for granted as part of the whole persona and felt no need to mention it any more than someone might mention the "spirit of a person" being good or bad, holy or unholy, every time they talk about a person.
Besides that, some believers perceive the mention of the Lord Jesus Christ as a mention of the trinity since in their perception, the word Lord refers to Father, Jesus refers to Son and Christ refers to the Spirit.


5. The Holy Spirit was NOT mentioned in visions

"Another interesting fact is whenever a servant of God has a vision of the throne of God; the Holy Spirit is not mentioned. If ever the Holy Spirit is a member of the Godhead Family, why did the visions of God"s saints never mentioned it? The answer is plain and simple. The Holy Spirit is never a persona in the God Family."

The author must be blind to claim there is no mention of the Holy Ghost in the scriptures he quoted. The very first one mentions the Holy Ghost.
Act 7:55-56 " "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost........


Why do you bother to spend so much time trying to study something only to give up and fail.
You did that with Christianity only to admit you failed and quit. All you know is your bible study and even that you could not get it to work in your life. You must be profoundly stupid to throw away 30 years of your life's work in scriptures to spend your next 30 years attacking what you as a believer then vigorously promoted. You can only see the world as black or white. It was all white for 30 years, now it is all black. You must be a total wreck after investing 30 years of your life teaching the bible only to turn around and reject all that you believed and taught. Any wonder why you are so filled with bitterness, you are a failed Christian trying to use the scriptures against itself and failing miserably because no Christian will accept your distortions of scriptures. From singing to the choir you are now attacking the same choir. What a misguided loser.

You wrote:" I married a Christian man and had 4 children which we brought up as Christians because we believed it was the right thing to do. We were in the religion for about 30 years before we left. The reasons for leaving were varied so I won't go into them now but suffice to say our eyes were opened to the false doctrines, hypocrisy and idolatry. "

Now read what your posts are about. You equate God the creator to Mother Nature, spirit as forces, God is energy and even deny the Trinity math that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. You still see God as a personification a supernatural mythical character, yet all that it represents is true. Can what a thing represents be true and the thing itself be false?
By your logic E = MC2 represents what is true (Energy, Mass, Acceration). But the formula itself is mythical.

Here is your quote:" I believe Energy and matter is all that exists. I believe God is merely a personification of all of it, the same as Mother Nature is merely a personification of Nature. The character is a myth. The thing the character represents is very real.
God is a personification of E=MC2"


Deeply spiritual, chump.
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 6:55:19 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/5/2016 8:00:18 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/5/2016 6:56:39 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 6/5/2016 6:48:14 AM, bulproof wrote:
In summary, just believe what you are told, the foundation of religion.

No, in summary, if I want to learn about something, I go to the source.

You know, because that's how you learn stuff.

I think the source to which you refer is a book of fables, folktales and lies ie the bible, am I correct?

Let it be the manifest truth, that the devil comes only to kill, steal, and destroy.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,