Let's have a discussion on the Trinity.

Author: Tradesecret

Posts

Total: 18
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
no abuse. no derogatory abuses or language. 

The Trinity as understood by the church is that God is ONE God.  Yet three persons.  

The three persons are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 

The Father is not the Son is not the Holy Spirit.

Jesus is not the Father.  Jesus is not the Holy Spirit.  


n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,015
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
Trinity is a paradox or mystery. Jesus is god and the father is god but Jesus is not the father. I accept the trinity but either it isn't logical not that it's suppose to be or it needs modified. Maybe all three equal god? I'm open minded to new thinking given it don't make sense to humans
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@n8nrgim
Trinity is a paradox or mystery. Jesus is god and the father is god but Jesus is not the father. I accept the trinity but either it isn't logical not that it's suppose to be or it needs modified. Maybe all three equal god? I'm open minded to new thinking given it don't make sense to humans
That's one of the interesting ironies I see when discussing the Trinity. Some people want God to be so easily definable that they can grasp him in all that he is. Others of course - suggest that such simplicity would demonstrate he is not god.

The concept of God - in particular as understood as the Trinity is to be both simple and complex.  And that is what it is. 

The Trinity is ONE and yet three. the Trinity is I would say the basis of all things.   And is the only God capable of restoring all things to himself - and balance if you like to the universe and common sense.  

The one and the many.  The balance that brings harmony to questions of the end v the means. Of the individual v the community.  Of tolerance within exclusivity. Of absolute v relativity.  

The epistemology is sound.  It is both simple and complex.  It contains both western and eastern logic.   Water and rock for wants of different terminologies. 

This is why it is a good discussion to have.  
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Tradesecret
I call the whole question entirely irrelevant to Christianity.  If Christ  thought it was important for people to perceive him as a magic triplet god, he would have said so.  It's only important to people who want to focus on the doctrine of monotheism and scriptural precision instead of listening to and believing in the Sermon on the Mount.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
#1.

Yep.

All very confusing.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@oromagi
I call the whole question entirely irrelevant to Christianity.  If Christ  thought it was important for people to perceive him as a magic triplet god, he would have said so.  It's only important to people who want to focus on the doctrine of monotheism and scriptural precision instead of listening to and believing in the Sermon on the Mount.
Christ NEVER thought it was important.  Christ is not the Trinity.  Christ is the mediator between God and Man.   Is there a reason that you are unaware of these things or are you just postulating thoughts?   Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ.  He died as the Christ.  Yes he was fully Man and fully God.  But he was never the Trinity. As I state above - the Son is not the Father.  

The Trinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  God is one.  But the Father is not the Son.  And the Son is not the Father. And none of the three persons are the Trinity by themselves.  And yet all three together are the Triune Godhead.  It does not have to be logical to our minds.  I never said it was and I am not pretending otherwise. 

But I will keep to the parameters of how the bible describes God. 

As for the concept of the Trinity being important to Christianity, yes it is.  It is what distinguishes it from non-Christian religions. It is also what distinguishes it in the main from cults.  JWs for instance deny the Trinity as do the Mormons.  And for what it is worth so does every cult that has ever existed.  Hence it is important. Did the Christ believe it to be important? 

Yes, he did.  Hence why his dialogues in the gospel of John are so important.  He wanted them to know that God had come amongst them and tabernacle with them as a real person.  Without him making this plain - all of the Jews would have missed this, whereas many saw and turned to him in faith.  

Scriptural and doctrinal precision are good things to aim for.  We won't hit good things if we don't aim. 

I'm sorry you don't see the relevance. But given you don't proclaim to be a Christian, I guess that probably explains that somewhat. 

Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
#1.

Yep.

All very confusing.
I'm sure it is for you Zed.  Why don't you stay and play? 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
To be honest, on second reading not confusing at all.

Because a GOD concept is just that, and is only bounded by the limits of human imagination.

So GOD is a person then?.....As I thought....An imaginary person who multitasks.....Omni as it were.

And Jesus may or may not have been real...And if he was, we have know way of knowing who is real dad was, maybe it was daft Joe, but I'm guessing it was some slick Arab.  But he certainly wasn't his own dad.

And if I remember correctly, said biblical character never fathered any children.....In fact, one could  propose that given the characters behaviour, the biblical authors were probably hinting at a sort of LGBT scenario. Especially given that the bible is rife with sexual metaphors.

Interesting how humans acquired intellect and then overthought procreational urgency.

As for holy spirit....Gin, whiskey, vodka or goose-bumps.....Take your pick.



So:

GOD the Arabian lothario.

GOD the son of someone, obviously.

And GOD the one that gave Mary goose-bumps.


The trinity in a nutshell.



My imaginative  interpretation of the biblical mythology, which may differ from your imaginative interpretation of the biblical mythology.


7 days later

BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret

.
THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 2022


!!!!!!!!!   UPDATE ON MISS TRADESECRET’S COMICAL AND LAME EXCUSES TO RUN AWAY FROM YOUR LOGICAL BIBLICAL QUESTIONS PRESENTED TO HER BECAUSE SHE CAN’T ADDRESS THEM AND REMAIN INTELLIGENT LOOKING IN THE AFTERMATH, “OTHER THAN TO RUN AWAY FROM THEM AS SHOWN BY THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTED EXAMPLES”   !!!!!!!!!!



MISS TRADESECRET RUNAWAY EXCUSE #1: Tradesecret will call you a “bully,” for making her the Bible fool, or for asking questions that she could not answer, even though the questions asked were logically valid and biblically axiomatic!

MISS TRADESECRET RUNAWAY EXCUSE #2: Tradesecret will accuse you of “stalking” her if you repeat more than once why Tradesecret hasn’t addressed your questions in the first place! 

MISS TRADESECRET RUNAWAY EXCUSE #3: Tradesecret will use the ruse of “attacking them personally,” by name calling, which has nothing to do with the questions asked to her. Where the irony is she performs this act as well. Can Tradesecret spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E?  Sure she can.

MISS TRADESECRET RUNAWAY EXCUSE #4: she will just go “SILENT” to your questions in the hopes that you will forget about the fact that you presented them to her in the first place!  

MISS TRADESECRET RUNAWAY EXCUSE #5:  she will give you “cutesy” excuses and images to try and take your mind off of the FACT that she is running away again from your valid axiomatic biblical questions! Child-like, but what did we expect. :(

MISS TRADESECRET RUNAWAY EXCUSE #6: Now if you want to make her the continued Bible fool, she “may” answer you if your question or statement to her is “properly presented to her!“ LOL!

MISS TRADESECRET RUNAWAY EXCUSE #7:  She will tell you that you are not interpreting the scripture correctly, even though it is LITERAL in nature. She disagrees with the literal presentation of any passage or narrative that embarrasses her, then she will come up with another ungodly "convenient interpretation" of said verse to make you wrong!
  
MISS TRADESECRET RUNAWAY EXCUSE #8:  She will tell you that what you have found regarding her ungodly and despicable nature is because you have "hacked" into her DA account, and changed her posts to disgusting posts to further embarrass her! Priceless runaway tactic.

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #9: She will divert the attention away from her in failing to prove her point by calling you a “creepy old man or a dunce.”

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #10”:  She will use the term that you “Distract and Attack” to save her from further embarrassment to her outright Bible stupidity and ignorance that has no bounds!

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #11: She will say that she is not answering personal questions even though she at times presents personal things of hers in her posts, like showing us she is an admitted SEXUAL DEVIANT!  https://www.imagebam.com/view/MEBCZRV

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #12:  When you challenge her to a debate like I did, she will  tell you that you argue like a 12 year old girl or boy and have not matured enough, therefore she will RUN away from debating you, because in essence, she can't debate you in the first place!

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #13:  She will tell you that you don’t have a brain and that you are a fake, and you don’t have the background to discuss religion with her. 

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #14:  She will tell you that you look “dumb” and that you couldn’t really grasp the subject matter, therefore she will RUN AWAY from your posst to her and hide. 

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #15:  Zeus forbid if you are an Atheist who outright owns her Bible stupidity, because she'll send up a smoke screen to prevent the Atheist from further embarrassing her regarding the Bible, she will call you names and blanket unwarranted claims about your denying any God.

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #16:  Her computer tells her that she should not open up webpage links it does not recognize that you have posted to her, therefore releasing her from further biblical embarrassment!  LOL! 

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #17:  If you make a derogatory comment to her it is enough for her to not address your question, BUT, she makes these same remarks to other members, can we say HYPOCRITE, sure we can!

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #18: She will call your posts to her as LIES, therefore there is no need for her to discuss your posts, yes, this is true! Can we call Miss Tradesecret the habitual RUNAWAY? Sure we can! 

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #19:  She will tell you that your posts are “not worth it” to respond too, in once again showing her outright Bible ignorance to run away from them!

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #20:  She will tell you that she doesn’t give a “toss” about your stupid ideas of a post you’ve directed to her, again, in running away from it as usual.

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #21:  When she opens a previous link that was directed to her, and after opening it and it showed her that she was wrong in her perceived biblical knowledge, she will tell you that she DID NOT open said post because she could care less in what you proposed!  LOL

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #22:  She will tell you that you don’t have enough “integrity” to take her time in debating you or answer your questions as a little crybaby!

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #23: If she knows you will easily “own her Bible stupidity,” and allegedly you are using a fake personna, she will not debate you or answer your questions, other than to run away and HIDE from them! 

MISS TRADESECRET EXCUSE #24: She will answer questions that she wants to answer, and not other questions that makes her the Bible fool! 



We can only assume that poor ol’ Miss Tradesecret, in being the #1 Bible stupid runaway fool of this forum, at one point will have so many excuses piled up not to address questions posed to her, that she will not be able to be in this forum anymore because the MANY EXCUSES that she has will cause her to be SILENT!  LOL!


Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Hello Brother, 

you are getting frustrated aren't you? Well hopefully soon you will stop being so silly and start discussing things maturely. 

Your comments above about me do not have the ring of truth about them.   In other words, if what you were saying was true, then this would be a consistent MO for me for everyone I engage with on this forum.  The startling and shocking fact for you of course is I engage with EVERYONE else on this site whether they disagree with me or not - or whether their arguments are stronger than mine.  I don't accuse anyone else - except Stephen  - of being a bully.  Or of telling lies. 

The only two persons I get into issue with are you and Stephen.  No one else.  I disagree with SecMerlin often. But the same MO is not there with him. I disagree with rosends - but the same MO is not there.  I disagree with Zed, but the same MO is not there. I disagree with Bones but the same MO is not there. I disagree with poly but the same MO is not there. I disagree with almost everyone - yet the same MO is not there.  

Surely even you are not so blind that you cannot see that the only persons I respond to with any of the comments above are with you.  and with Stephen.

Hence, your continued repeating and regurgitating what everyone else knows is simply thuggery is all that it is.  

I suggest you grow up - stop being such a little boy and just interact with everyone - including me - with some respect.  the first thing you ought to do is stop playing a part which you ACTUALLY don't believe. 


40 days later

MonkeyKing
MonkeyKing's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 49
0
0
5
MonkeyKing's avatar
MonkeyKing
0
0
5
-->
@Tradesecret
The trinity I find to be problematic personally. I see two main issues.

1. If we take the trinity at face value and say that there are three beings and one God, we run into issues of polytheism which is a big no-no for Catholics and Protestants alike. It would mean that all three physically exist and if they are to be interdependently operating, as they are named and treated differently as one would different physical beings, then there are in fact more than one God. I've been told the basic explanation concerning how they are one God and with God all things are possible, etc. However, if we accept the strange premise that all three physically exist separately yet are one God, then God is schizophrenic and feels the need to create additional versions of himself. A self that, mind you, biblically is perfect, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent who wouldn't have any need to do so. He could simply introduce himself as himself, not calling himself his own father, son, and a spirit. It makes no sense and it's all kinds of counterintuitive and contradictive.

2. The entire idea of the trinity is built from Catholic precedent which means either A. You are a protestant and apostate from the Catholic(or other Protestant) church yet continue to follow their beliefs under the premise it needs reformation as a result of corrupt or imperfect men and so new protesting religions were created by (sometimes) corrupt and (always) imperfect men in an attempt to rectify holes in doctrine. Does this mean if I, or you, or anyone who doesn't like what we see from a particular protestant belief such as trinitarian doctrine and attempt to correct it without some level of divine intervention are correct in doing so? Or possibly are we making the same mistake that we are attempting to correct ourselves? It's all self-defeating and results in pulling doctrine from a previous group that they would condemn themselves as a result of the ideas of men. or B. You are a Catholic pulling this belief from the Councils of Constantinople and Nicaea whose ideas did not come to pass as a result of unanimous agreement but rather through vote and possible intimidation as some simply did not sign and, not to disparage Catholics, but very rarely is Catholic doctrine built upon scriptural precedent but rather cultural and traditional circumstance.

As a whole the trinity just lacks any sense of realism regarding God and if anything seems like an excuse or attempt to avoid associating with polytheism. That, or to appease existing belief that has perpetuated over the years and folks aren't all the interested in hearing they've been thinking about God all wrong their whole lives so everyone just nods their heads, smiles, and accepts that God is three different people but one God but physically has three different guys going around doing different things who talk to each other who are all one God and one of the three is the son of the other but they're the same and the different ones are referred to with differing levels of reverence but they are equal but one is charge of all of them and us and they all have their own names but are all God. Yeah.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@MonkeyKing
The trinity I find to be problematic personally. I see two main issues.

HI MonkeyKing, thanks for your thoughts.  You hav only two issues? You are clearly much wiser than most of us - even though who believe in the Trinity have more than two issues with the concept. Let me respond as I see it. This is not a comprehensive response. I am not attempting to persuade you of anything.  I am merely indicating that this is how I perceive the issues and how I have come to terms with it. 


1. If we take the trinity at face value and say that there are three beings and one God, we run into issues of polytheism which is a big no-no for Catholics and Protestants alike. It would mean that all three physically exist and if they are to be interdependently operating, as they are named and treated differently as one would different physical beings, then there are in fact more than one God. I've been told the basic explanation concerning how they are one God and with God all things are possible, etc. However, if we accept the strange premise that all three physically exist separately yet are one God, then God is schizophrenic and feels the need to create additional versions of himself. A self that, mind you, biblically is perfect, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent who wouldn't have any need to do so. He could simply introduce himself as himself, not calling himself his own father, son, and a spirit. It makes no sense and it's all kinds of counterintuitive and contradictive.
The Christian understanding is ONE God, THREE Persons.  It would only be polytheistic is there were more than one God.  Interestingly, many Catholics and some Protestants aren't that concerned about the idea of many gods.  In some quarters, there is a suggestion that the Roman Catholic Church actually is a celebration of any gods and that the hat the pope wears is actually an honour to the fish god.  Nevertheless, church doctrine would avow ONE God, THREE persons.  Many Protestants too understand that in Heaven there is "the Sons of God", and although not God per se, are beings of such nature that are clearly not heaven. For instance, in the Story of Job, the Sons of God are possibly the jury to whom God is appealing in his defence of Job from Satan. Again, church doctrine would probably in most instances affirm this to be angelic beings. 

Three persons operating together and interdependently might be considered strange, yet, not too many people on this planet understand every human and every animal, let alone have enough of an understanding of a Deity they have never seen, to be jumping to how this works or doesn't work.  The way I see it, we use his Word, and attempt to see how it fits together. Do we do a good job? Not all the time.

Basically, what you are saying is that the Trinity does not make sense to you on a rational or logical basis. It is too complex.  Ironically, some people think God is too simplistic.  Others that God is too complex.   I think therein lies part of the solution.   God is One and God is Three.  Ought we be able to understand God completely and perfectly? Ought we be able to put God under a microscope and determine His parts?  I for one, would think that if we could do that, then it would contradict everything I thought I knew about God.  For me, the Trinity is probably the only concept I have ever come across that potentially provides solutions to many of the most divisive issues in society.  A God who is One, such as the Muslim version would not be able to achieve such a position and nor would the Hindu god system of polytheistic, to the extent of pantheism.  Atheism as a construct tends towards a polytheistic approach, every individual is their own god. The Trinity is mind boggling and yet it is deceptively simple. It embraces both the ONE and the MANY within a construct that is helpful and illuminating. 


2. The entire idea of the trinity is built from Catholic precedent which means either A. You are a protestant and apostate from the Catholic(or other Protestant) church yet continue to follow their beliefs under the premise it needs reformation as a result of corrupt or imperfect men and so new protesting religions were created by (sometimes) corrupt and (always) imperfect men in an attempt to rectify holes in doctrine. Does this mean if I, or you, or anyone who doesn't like what we see from a particular protestant belief such as trinitarian doctrine and attempt to correct it without some level of divine intervention are correct in doing so? Or possibly are we making the same mistake that we are attempting to correct ourselves? It's all self-defeating and results in pulling doctrine from a previous group that they would condemn themselves as a result of the ideas of men. or B. You are a Catholic pulling this belief from the Councils of Constantinople and Nicaea whose ideas did not come to pass as a result of unanimous agreement but rather through vote and possible intimidation as some simply did not sign and, not to disparage Catholics, but very rarely is Catholic doctrine built upon scriptural precedent but rather cultural and traditional circumstance.
Respectfully, that logic is premised in an idea that the Roman Catholic Church is the Catholic Church.  Before the RCC ever became a thing, there was the early church of the Apostles. A church which was conceived in eternity but was born at Pentecost.  The ideas that came to Nicaea and the council to be formulated officially, were circling along in the church from the very beginning.   It was not the RCC who determined the Trinity or who made it up or who borrowed it from some pagan sect.  

The Christian Religion self-consciously claims to be the true heirs of the ancient Jewish System.   The Ancient system believed in ONE GOD, yet its writings confirmed over and over that the GodHead was unique and not altogether as we would expect.  Even in the first chapters, God talks to himself - and makes humanity in "our image".   How can a singular god make anything in its image and refer to itself as a plural? This has led some to think that there were more than one god.  Others have suggested God was using the royal we.  Some has thought he was talking to the angels. Yet this is not the only time that God refers to himself as "we" or "our".  When God destroyed Sodom and Gomorra He appeared to Abraham, as three angels.   Or did three persons of the Godhead appear as three men. Or were there just one - "pre-incarnate picture of Christ" and two angels?  The OT has many occasions where this idea of God being plural arises.  In the beginning of the book of Ezekiel with all the wheels and machinery, a human head is put on God. In Daniel 7, the Son of Man who is in blazing glory appears to himself as he is described in Revelation 1.  Do any of these things say "Trinity"? Perhaps not. But do any of these contradict the idea? No. 

The Christian message is that God reconciles himself to humanity through Christ.   Christ in the Christian message is another contradiction.  Fully God and Fully Man.  A true mediator had to be both God and Man.  Not just a god. Not just a man.  A man's death would not and could not atone for the sins of the world.  Yet a God could not truly represent humanity in mediation.  

For the early Christians, this however was a mystery.  And the early church literature is full of the questions pertaining to this mystery.  No one wanted to be a heretic.  Everyone wanted to have integrity with the truth.  People fought over it and many died. Factions took place.  These factions still exist in the world today in one form or the other.  The Christians knew Jesus was God - for him not to be God made no sense and a mockery of their salvation - and yet - how could Jesus be God if there was only one God.   That made no sense either.  Nevertheless, just because for many people it did not make sense, did not mean that they would just throw it away as too hard.  When the Holy Spirit was thrown into the mix - and the Spirit was clearly more than just a power - but someone with emotions and someone with thoughts, it became even more difficult.   

I also reject the idea that everything within the Catholic Church was bad or terribly thought out - or should be rejected.  Even Martin Luther was saved from within the Church.  Unless, he was able to access the truth of God, his conversion would never have occurred. 


As a whole the trinity just lacks any sense of realism regarding God and if anything seems like an excuse or attempt to avoid associating with polytheism. That, or to appease existing belief that has perpetuated over the years and folks aren't all the interested in hearing they've been thinking about God all wrong their whole lives so everyone just nods their heads, smiles, and accepts that God is three different people but one God but physically has three different guys going around doing different things who talk to each other who are all one God and one of the three is the son of the other but they're the same and the different ones are referred to with differing levels of reverence but they are equal but one is charge of all of them and us and they all have their own names but are all God. Yeah.
I don't agree. I think the Trinity has more realism than most other things and that is because it is the only concept that is covenantal in basis.  The One and the Many. The individual v the whole.  The ends and the Means. The destination and the journey.   It is the epistemological concept which explains why every nation in the world is neither completely command nor market - but a mixed economy.   It is the only concept which gives meaning to freedoms and boundaries.  To life and to death.  

Yes, it is not easy to explain. Is it a contradiction? Only if you wish to rely upon Platoistic methodology and reason.  The Eastern methodology has more creative ways of expressing logic than the West.   But even here we need to appreciate the differences between rock and water logic.  Is it any surprise that the notion of the Trinity arose - at least historically in the Middle East.   Neither the West nor the East would have been able to conceive of it.  It is unique. And as such it needs to be explored with a more nuanced model that either Western Logic or Eastern mysticism.


MonkeyKing
MonkeyKing's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 49
0
0
5
MonkeyKing's avatar
MonkeyKing
0
0
5
-->
@Tradesecret
I'd like to respond, but I messed up my hands at work and they are all taped up so I am typing with my pinkies. Give me a day or two and I'll get to you

12 days later

Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Tradesecret
@BrotherD.Thomas
The trinity as one God exists as or in three equally divine “Persons”, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is not supported anywhere in the Bible. 

Jesus always prayed to the Father
Jesus said the Holy Spirit would come only “after” he left.


John 16:7 But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8 When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: 9 about sin, because people do not believe in me; 10 about righteousness,because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; 

But the trinity or threesome that produced Jesus is well documented in Luke.

Luke 1:35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.

The Holy Spirit or sperm donor came on Mary. The Most High overshadowed (overpowered)  Mary and held her down. Mary was gang raped and the threesome or trinity produced Jesus.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
There's absolutely nothing in the Old Testament that indicates that the God of Abraham would be willing to share power with any other beings. Not Jesus, not the Holy Spirit, he commands every being in the Old Testament. He would never allow two other beings to be of equal status with him, never.
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
There's absolutely nothing in the Old Testament that indicates that the God of Abraham would be willing to share power with any other beings. Not Jesus, not the Holy Spirit, he commands every being in the Old Testament. He would never allow two other beings to be of equal status with him, never.
Throughout the Bible God is seen needing the help of prophets and messengers to  spread his message.
Nowhere is it clearer than in the conception of Jesus.
God sought the help of a virgin (Mary) , the Holy Spirit (to come on Mary) and the threesome produced Jesus.

The trinity or threesome that produced Jesus is well documented in Luke.

Luke 1:35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.

The Holy Spirit or sperm donor came on Mary. The Most High overshadowed (overpowered)  Mary and held her down. Mary was gang raped and the threesome or trinity produced Jesus.

Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Shila
Nothing but lies and the theft of the Jewish religion.
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Nothing but lies and the theft of the Jewish religion.
The Similarities Between Judaism & Early Egyptian Religion

The religion of ancient Egypt included numerous gods and goddesses, belief in the afterlife and a well-defined hierarchy of celebrants and priests. Early Judaism had many of the same attributes. Writers have made much of these similarities, maintaining that Judaism borrowed elements of its beliefs from Egypt. More recent scholarship has shed light on that concept, clarifying developmental timelines of the two cultures. Egypt was an ancient civilization long before bands of Stone Age nomads became the Israelite society. It comes as no surprise that a culture as powerful as Egypt would influence others in the region.

Civilization timeline.

The 7 ancient civilizations?
1 Ancient Egypt. ...3100BC
2 Ancient Greece. ...
3 Mesopotamia. ...4000BC
4 Babylon. ...1800BC
5 Ancient Rome. ...
6 Ancient China. ...3000BC
7 Ancient India.4000BC

Note Israel is not even on the list.