True Christians don't believe in the trinity

The Trinity concept pre dates Christianiaty. Jews don't belive in a trinity.


The Trinity may have been incorporated into Christian thought from Celtic beliefs. Perhaps when St. Paul visited the Galatians.

In Catholic legend, St. Patrick is shown using the shamrock to teach the Celtics about The Trinity, in truth, it was the Celts who brought in the concept to the Christians.

The Trinity carved below is a neolithic device. This is Newgrange, Ireland.

 

clearly yahweh is the kami of the israelites

i guess jesus is the kami of the christians

what is mary the kami of?

 

i am sorry

i forget the names

what is the holy ghost [not mary] the kami of?

 

Have you lost your kamis?

 

Plenty of things have been added to the church for a plethora of reasons. Mostly political and monetary reasons. Take the notion of pergatory...Simply thought up by the catholic church when they needed a little extra cash. They told people that loved ones souls were held captive because of their sins on earth. If their relatives paid the church a certain amount, the deceased's soul would then rise to heaven. Talk about sacrilig.

 

Source it.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120121.htm Scroll down to chapter 13. Augustine talks about a firey punishment for sins of the faithful way before paid indulgences.

While it is not a full fleshed out idea of "purgatory", it shows that the idea of a temporal state after death and before final judgement existed in the church from early on.

 

Ah the patron saint of brewers. Was not aware that he talked about purgatory, what about a millenia before the idea of paid indulgences?? Very interesting indeed. Im not sure I would have reached the same conclusions he did interpreting the scripture, so I might still consider this as something having been added after the fact so to speak, by the church. But point well taken. I will try to do some research and post when I have the time.

 

Well, one of the reasons I asked was out of curiosity, and another was for method of explaining the trinity (or the formulation of the doctrine) as I see it. If you accept that Jesus was divine/God, the Father is God (as well as the holy spirit), then an enigma arises. How can god be both the Father and the Son. There are three solutions. One is that Jesus and the Father are the same thing, different modes (if you will) of the same essence. Well then that implies that god can change. sometimes God is the father, sometimes he is the son. It also raises the question of how the son can pray to the father (he would be praying to himself).

The second option is that Jesus and the father and the HS are three parts of one thing. But then it implies that God can seperate, and become a partial being. Jesus ceases to be fully divine.

The third option would be to unite them one being, one substance. Coexistant, coeternal. Distinct yet together.

 

Hi Hryhorii,
While the Bible does call Jesus divine or a god, it doesn’t say that he is Almighty God.

Which to me would seem to indicate that Jesus although having god like qualities (which seems to be confirmed by the Bible saying he is the image of God) is not Almighty God but what Jesus himself said he was, the son of God (which seems to be confirmed by the Bible calling Jesus the first born of all creation).

This seems to indicate a Father and Son relationship, where the Father created the son and they are two separate beings just like in any Father Son relationship. Thus many of the problems brought up by the trinity are solved.

How can God be both the Father and the Son?
They aren’t

The implication that God can change.
He doesn’t

The question of how the son can pray to the father (he would be praying to himself).
He isn’t

 

The first chapter of johns gospel identifies Jesus as the Word though. The divine Logos that is with God from the beginning, and was God. It seems to me that this would set up Jesus as the almighty God.

So by your account, is Jesus divine that became man, or man that became divine, or neither? I am still trying to wrap my head around your ideas of what Jesus' nature is. Also, the Holy spirit, or is that pretty straight forward making the Holy Spirit equal to the almighty god but not distinct from the Father.

 

so is it real or a hoax?

 

Hi Hryhorii,
The first chapter of johns gospel identifies Jesus as the Word though. The divine Logos that is with God from the beginning, and was God. It seems to me that this would set up Jesus as the almighty God.

You would not be alone in thinking so.
But the debate rages on between Greek scholars and Bible translators as to what the absence of a definite article means in the translation of John 1:1. Should it be translated as, and was God, or, and was a god, or, and was divine. So the jury is still out on whether this scripture shows that Jesus was Almighty God or not. I personally wouldn’t use it one way or another.

So by your account, is Jesus divine that became man, or man that became divine, or neither? I am still trying to wrap my head around your ideas of what Jesus' nature is. Also, the Holy spirit, or is that pretty straight forward making the Holy Spirit equal to the almighty god but not distinct from the Father.

The Bible does not go into great detail about the nature of spirit beings or the transference of Jesus into human existence. The Bible does seem to indicate that Jesus was the first of God’s creations making Jesus, God’s first born son and that all other things were created by Jesus under God’s authority. When the way had been prepared and the time was right, God transferred his son’s life into a women thus allowing Jesus to be a human and when he died he was dead for three days before God resurrected him back to heavenly life.

As for the holy spirit it appears to be what God uses to do things it’s like the hand of God.

 

My hunch is hoax.

 

I don't think either of us is going to be swayed in any sort of direction, but I do enjoy this discourse.

I think for me the most convincing part of john 1 is the part where it talks about the pre-existence of the Divine Logos (In the beginning...). Before all of creation, the son existed so in that sense Jesus is not created. Can you find the passage that refers to Jesus as first among all of creation?

 

This is gettin deep... I Like. I Like it alot.

 

Hi Hryhorii,
I don't think either of us is going to be swayed in any sort of direction, but I do enjoy this discourse.
This is something I posted in another thread:
“Some people see debating as a battle to be won, I think that the winner in a debate is the one that comes out of the discussion with a better understanding of both sides.”

Sure, I admit that I would like to sway you over but I would be happy to have a good discussion!

I think for me the most convincing part of john 1 is the part where it talks about the pre-existence of the Divine Logos (In the beginning...). Before all of creation, the son existed so in that sense Jesus is not created. Can you find the passage that refers to Jesus as first among all of creation?
The one I was talking about was Rev. 3:14 there it uses the phrase; the beginning of the creation of God
Also Col. 1:15 uses the phrase; first born of all creation
John 3:16 uses the phrase; the only begotten
And some believe that in Pr. 8:22 in the Phrase; brought me forth as the first of his works, that the “me” refers to Jesus

PS I'm not trying to take them out of context, I figured that you would look them up and read them for yourself in context, so I just mentioned the salient phrases.

 

Oi... I have so many questions to ponder after that post But they are all off Topic.

For the record ... I have no Studies in Christology. But i believe that The Christ Consciousness that was Jesus is the glue of all time and space. The energy that keeps the entire universe in perfect balance. If you look on this planet at all around you you'll notice the only thing that binds living things is LOVE. Hence my belief that the soul of the universe incarnated in the person of Jesus was ABSOLUTE LOVE in it's Purest Form. If that is the first thing created in this entire universe I can live with that.

But Of course who am I to conclude that The Christ Consciousness is the fabric of all space and time... I could be wrong

 

I have yet to look at them all in context (it is late), but I will tackle John 3:16 right now. Trinitarians do not deny that Jesus is begotten from the Father, we deny that Jesus was "created" (The phrase I often see used in the Nicene Creed which outlines the Trinitarian doctrine is "not made" which addressed Arianism)

 

The Israelites were God’s people for thousands of years and all that time they were monotheistic in contrast to the majority of the nations around them who where polytheistic and had trinities in their worship.

Did God leave his people in the dark about his nature for thousands of years? That is hard to believe. If it were true then when Jesus came would he not have been more direct in teaching a people with such a history about the trinity?

Was Jesus not sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel? If that is so then wouldn’t letting them know that they that they had been mistaken about the nature of God for thousands of years be high on Jesus list of teachings for the Israelites. Jesus did not shy away from controversial issues. So one would expect maybe a whole speech on the matter but the Bible is amazingly mute on the subject. In fact it seems that the Bible is so enigmatic on the subject that it takes about 200 years for it to be made church doctrine.

Hardly what one would expect of a major church doctrine that was needed to try to change what the Israelites believed for thousands of years!

 

My guess is that two influences were at work: the influence of Greek pagan thought, especially neoplatonism (the Logos); and the need to resolve disputes among the faithful over the nature of their departed leader. Was Jesus just another Prophet like Elijah, or was he the Messiah, or possibly something even better?