Central to Christian belief is the claim of a Blessed Trinity or the Trinitarian theology. This is, essentially, the belief that from one god, two other divinities (deities) emerge and co-exist or in theological terms, they are a, One that is All and All that is One, a consubstantial existence of equality and eternal being. It is a belief that states God is of the Son, God is of the Holy Spirit, distinct, but yet one.
Such a trinitarian belief cannot be found in any Jewish text, a belief system that possibly dates to around 1200 BCE and, of which Christianity is based. The first hint of such a belief does not emerge until after 324 CE and The Council of Nicaea orchestrated by Constantine, a non-Christian. It was the Nicene Creed arguably developed by either the first or second Council that officially denotes the profession of faith in the Holy Trinity. For some 60 years following more Christians were killed by Christians, fighting over this Profession of faith then were killed by the Romans in the three hundred years preceding.
A trinitarian concept of god or a duality of gods is not original to Christianity, but is rooted in the antiquity of Babylonian and Sumerian cultures of around 4000 BCE. Not only is the concept of dual gods rooted to such pagan beliefs, but the story of creation found in Genesis is also from this culture in the ex nihilo myth.
Are Christian claims of the greatest truth of Christianity, the trinity, a simple fraud of simple people?
The Trinitarian doctrine is blown way out of proportion on both sides.
The concept denotes three separate entities with the same mind. God the father is the head mind. He gave that mind to Jesus to illustrate in flesh. The holy spirit is the name of that mind. It is the mind of God the father and his son.
We receive that mind when we say yes.
I am happy for you if it gives you strength. Just don't call it a truth.
Why not? I am sure it is. Why can't I express my opinions?
To call something a truth, it must be defended as such. Can you take this to a court of law and submit your case? If not, it is a belief, nothing more and you are welcome to it.
I speak to you biblical truth. It is written. Much proof of what I am speaking of.
If there is much proof about what you're speaking of, can you please present it?
Please keep in mind that the Bible is not proof of God - it is proof that people who believed in a specific God wrote things down. The Bible is the CLAIM of that God. It is not the evidence of it.
If you're saying that there is further proof, then that needs to be presented and demonstrated before it can be either accepted or rejected.
Can you practice floating techniques without water?
Can you speak algebra without letters? Can you speak breathing without mentioning air?
I cannot speak about my God without the bible just the same.
I didn't say you couldn't use the bible - I said that the Bible is not evidence of that God - it's the claim of that god. If you think the Bible is the evidence of God and not the claim, then do you similarly think that the existence of the Koran is evidence of Allah, which contradicts your god? Are holy books evidence of the God they claim? Or just yours? If it's just yours, it's special pleading, and you have to demonstrate why.
Awww boy ... here we go with the chains that bind again.
Listen, I had to do some special pleading with my father to get this stuff... you think for one second, that I will not demonstrate that for you??? Think again.
What I say is "truly" written in scripture. it's all the truth I got for now.
See me after the rapture.
And here we go again with giving non specific answers and avoiding questions entirely.
Fun times ahead
I feel that if we continue to completely ignore one another (like when I addressed the idea that the bible is not evidence enough-and you completely disregarded my response and stated that I did not respond, and worse "avoided" the question- as if... ); there will be no fun times.
But we'll muddle through.
Guess you will have to point out where in the comment below you addressed that the bible was not evidence enough.
While you are at it, maybe you can also point out where you answered the questions from JMC's comment in regards to holy books. I would be happy to amend my comment after you do.
That would seem to indicate that the writings of man, the descriptions given there, ARE your god. Yes?
You're right. If what she believed was that the Bible WAS god, and worshiped it, not the deity it describes, then what she would be saying would be logically consistent, and I would have to admit that get god (the Bible, not the deity described within it) existed. I still would not, however, worship or devote my life to a book.
We would still have to argue about which Bible was god, since there are hundreds of different translations that don't say the same thing, and there are no originals, etc.
God is God. And everything in the bible agrees with him. Now we are speaking, God of Abraham.
Fallacy, define it using other words.
How do you know?
Can we speak about God of Ahura, meluhas, Norse...?
For although there are ones called gods, either in heaven or on earth (as there are indeed many gods and many lords), for you only there is one god the father and one lord jesus..
How long have you known me??? It seems as if we've just met.
As I honestly remember you being present when I was just "genaea" and had Hubs.
I have a million ways to say that God is God.
My faith makes me sure. And yes. ? There is but one.
It's been three years!
The bible says many (god) and christians says three.
The bible says that there are many gods; only 1 true God. Stop getn it twisted, and real it all. You gotta finish the thought so you may come to know how Jesus thinks. He thinks like God. In that sense, he is God. They agree like they have the same mind. and they do...
I'm glad you remember 3 years. you like me; I just know it!!!
You were present in my very first conversation here. You, Emile, and Rad rode me for weeks about the definitions of various words. Lol...
Here we are today... ♡
"as there are indeed many gods and many lords", is the words from bible, but for "us" only two - one god(the father) and one lord(jesus who is not god)."
Jesus thinks like God doesn't make him god. So is jesus god?
Did you read all of it? The bible attests to 1 "true" God. We make gods of all types of junk. There are possibly millions by now.
Jesus is (the illustration of) God in the flesh. He is Lord, because that is his given title. He earned it... (obj... )
The bible is not one book but a collection of books. Some of the books got into "canon" some didn't. Paul clearly say two. OT(generally) say one with no mention of jesus. First gospel say jesus as son of man and only the last one adopt Philo and exalt him to the status of god. .
Not exactly, he doesn't count jesus as a god but only the first born.
"Paul clearly says two" what???
Jesus is "a" god. Just not THE God. He made that crystal clear.
When I hear people say that God came down as Jesus, it boils my aorta. Jesus made clear, their distinction.
So jesus is only "a" god?(According to paul, one among many and a creation). OK. But then the gospels and most of OT are wrong because they say only one god.
Where are you going? Your literary Swan Lake to The Nutcracker soundtrack is killing me. Lol...
There is one true God. One true son. One true spirit.
What you think the bible says, seems replete with erroneous mindset.
I do want us to come to an understanding but it is not imperative for me if you like your made-up production.
Is the son and spirit god?
If not, why bother as OT says gid has many sons.
What you seem to do is ignoring those books of the bible that doesn't conform to your views.
Cgenaea,"There is one true God. One true son. One true spirit." is what you believe. You cannot put that out as an absolute "truth." Your opinion might state the truth, but neither you nor anyone else can substantiate it as absolute truth.
You can only offer your belief so that others can accept it or reject it as they so wish. Then step back and alllow for what others find acceptable.
If what you contend is in fact the absolute truth but which others cannot see, then disagreement surely would not change your "absolute truth."
However, there is one incontrovertible truth which does not change and each of us is subject to:
"Change" itself. Without change, without difference, without black or white, big or small, loud or soft, then or now, we could not be conscious of anything. When we embrace Change and live with its reality, then the Infinite possibilities open up to us.
Your "God" will then be something that is just not worth arguing about.
I say my bible IS absolutely true. Like it, or not.
I cannot be subjected to the whims of man to find what absolute truth is for me. I believe God did it already. I believe he had it written for a specified purpose. So all will know, or at least hear.
It is difficult to accept, for most. And it is not my mission to convince.
Truth of the bible as given to me is what I speak on. Take it, leave it, dress it up and take it to a party, put suntan lotion on it and bake it no ay...
Truth of the bible.
Our possibilities are in fact limited, we're mortal with limited vision.
Not worth arguing about??? ... nevermind...
Yes, you can say your bible is absolutely true. Unfortunately you cannot provide the slightest bit of evidence for much of it, and basic biology, chemistry and physics CAN provide extensive evidence it is false.
Bit of a problem for people searching for truth but still wanting to believe, isn't it? Seems the only solution is to ignore centuries of study, research and learning, clinging to millenia old stories told by peoples ignorant of the most basic facts of science.
Listen... what is perceived as evidence is in actuality, good guesses. I have no problem if ones with formulae, data, and tests that you or I may not perform if we wanted to, scream/resound louder.
It's not a fight or an argument in my eyes, but delivery of some words. See...perception is key.
If the words are perceived by you to be nonsensical, then it seems as if you've wasted a good portion of your time convincing yourself.
I would not go to a Spider-Man convention daily, to shame the "idiots" for becoming so devoted to a drawing. ...chew...
One day everything will be subject to change, regardless of your beliefs. There is nothing you nor I can do to prevent change.
Which book of the bible? Like it or not each book is different and sometimes contradictory, that is cannot be true at the same time.
I say my veda IS absolutely true. Like it, or not.
Congratulations! You have found a god.
I have a forum about biblical contradictions.Please post the ccontradictions I have not be seeking them out. But every time I hear an alleged contradiction, it is simply, misinterpretation.
Yes, just a concept conceived and invented by humans.
You yourself said one
You said there are two gods at the least jesus and yahweh. Isaiah says there is only one god and there is none besides him. John in his opening para says there is one besides him (with no difference like a and the) while paul says there are many. Mark(mark's jesus) says jesus is only son of MAN.
See??? You don't even understand one speaking directly to you. much harder to understand one from eons ago whose words may also be twisted and misshapen without he himself here to defend his position.
It is actually hopeless, unless he becomes part of you.
He can do that upon request, but it seems that most recent callers want to cut out only a lil piece of him for themselves. But he don't do that.
Yet you say you understand it and believe it.
It is simply that, a collection of stories by ancients who didn't know better, their mistaking psychology for divine interference. Those where written by ignorant fools who didn't agree with each other and taught different things. If it was a single person who had written all those he would be considered insane.
Just like Harry Potter can be part of onself?
It simply means you are making up things and denouncing others who do.
Fiction or hallucination?
Call it what you like... for now. It is apparent to me that the truth stands in all fierce storms.
Harry Potter is barely known to me. I am NOT into the sci-fi genre one iota. But if he works...
I understand the bible because I have come to know God. Jesus was very instrumental in that. He was such a good example.
I will not be mad at you if you say no, or if you tease me, tar and/or feather. It weighs on me naught.
My God has assured me; many times over. I cannot forget.
The Harry Potter books are pure, simple fun.... not sci-fi. However, they do have as much authenticity as that god (sorry, those gods and miracles) in the bible.
If Scripture Reading Circles would just read their bible as a source of fun and amusement, (and a bit of inspiration, nothing wrong with that), instead of a book with which to bash others, then I suggest this world would be a better place.
Absolutely no coerce. No bash.
Truth of the bible.
There is no more truth in the bible than in Harry potter or veda.
Then try Harry Potter, you might get a better god.
No thank you, I can do without god. I have no psychological deficiency that need to be filled by fiction nor drugs.
You understand bible because by your owm admission that is the only book you know and you ignore a major part of it.
If you need a good example try Gandhi or Martin Luther or Lincoln, at least they lived.
"Then try Harry Potter, you might get a better god. No thank you, I can do without god. I have no psychological deficiency that need to be filled by fiction nor drugs."
As I've said before, evangelism is not this crowd's cup of tea...
And what is this occasional interjection about drugs??? You holdn somethin back???
That's ok, just keep worshiping the god of your own choosing. I am reminded of one verse in that song of The Seekers:
"We'll build a world of our own
that no one else can share.
All our sorrows we'll leave far behind us there.
And I know you will find
there'll be peace of mind
when we live in a world of our own."
Beautiful catchy tune, beautifully sung, fresh, melodic, sticks in the ears and lulls us into a false sense of dreaming. A world that no one else can share! A sort of escapism.... That presumption of people who believe they can escape all the godly retribution of this world, just by believing in a mythical figure.
Not for me, definitely, but if you find it ok, who am I to deny you that freedom?
I can imagine that world, and I can see how you may enjoy it. But it's not for me, thanks. I wanna live in God's world to come. Got no time for making up one where "I" am king. Where I know everything and can do whatever I want without consequence.
Nice song though.
That is not what the bible says at all. The bible makes no distinction. Just that your Invisible Super Being is scared of people worshiping other gods.
My God knows not fear. Not even Jesus knew fear. Bible says he suffered as we do and has suffered every pain. But fear??? Nah... he knows too much.
He wants our attention. He doesn't like to be back-burnered.
He seems scared to me - judging from you anyway.
Almose maid me loose AWL my grammer trainin' on THAT whopper. lol...
So you don't think they're the same person then?
So he's very needy then? Not a very attractive personality issue.
You are not readn Rad... you know I consistently report that God and Jesus are NOT the same person, but the same spirit/personality.
Aaaaand... No. He knows WE'RE needy. He only awaits our realization. He knows that we cannot know what is right, lessen he tells us. which means that he must remain foremost.
You should really check the reasoning portion of your reading. You KNOW I aint never said that Jesus and God were the same, "even" in my post I differentiated.
Sooooooo...they are the same spirit and personality, but not the same person.
So Jesus was bipolar or had a split personality then.
How can they of the same mind if one knows something the other doesn't? So you pray to more than one God then which I believe is against the ten commandments. I think we know what is right for us just fine. The bible certainly doesn't know what is right for us, but we do.
I rather enjoyed the accent in your post "lessen" "I aint never said".
Linguistics from Shakespeare to Shaft. I'm glad you enjoy. There'll be plenty more. Lol...
Are you reasoning? I have a feeling that you know that you and I may think alike w/o having the same info. Dont you??? Maybe I am erroneously crediting but I hope not. You seem such a reasonable man.
I pray to one God. His son often intercedes.
No "truth", just a belief and for 1700 years enforced with a sword. A truth would not need such savagery.
What other truth requires force?
Not that the earth is round. Not that it isn't the center of the universe. Not that the sun isn't actually a god, travelling across the sky.
Again, and again, and again I say, "my God does not force belief in anything." He offers himself. If you say no, he does not force the issue. He allows you you... but you only have your lifetime to do "you". If it be well with you, it be well with him.
Wilderness, well said and I agree with you.
I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that Coca-cola is a tastier beverage than Pepsi, but thank all the gods in Valhalla nobody is demanding proof, 'cause even if that proof did exist, some Pepsi fanatic out there would feel obligated to devote countless hours meticulously denouncing my belief as baseless, illogical and against the laws of science almighty. And goodness knows I'd hate to contribute to anyone's OCD.
You start my asking questions of what you believe to be true, as I did some 55 years ago. Research material and people who disagree with your point of view and find out why they disagree. Do not accept their rational or statements, but research it. This process will lead to a reasoned confirmation of what you already believe; it is truthful or that what you believed is only a belief.
Got it! Thanks. I asked a lot of people. I must've gotten the right ones. Research done!
Please do not forget that there are many books contained within the bible. 66, sometimes 71 to be exact. So, I researched a lot.
As understood by me, you cannot find out how to make a chocolate mousse cake in any book written by O.J. Simpson. I will not ask him.I'm calling on Julia Childs.
When I wanna know about Jesus, I research HIS material.
I will make it easy on you. Provide just two points of your truth that would stand up in a court of law.
Now shall we talk about Harry Potter truth, it is written you know?
If you believe Harry Potter, and you have faith in all which was written of him...fire away.
Faith is key.
Render unto Caesar that which belongs to him. Unto God, what is God's.
Faith NEVER stands up in court; though i have only tried it once. However, it works rather fine at the "gate".
Decide yea o nay and be done. He'd rather us hot or cold anyway. He don't like lukewarm.
What is your motive behind this self deception? Is it protection from uncertainty?
Self-deception??? You go first... what is your motivation?
I guess the fortress does protect me from uncertainty. But that is only a small part or side-effect. I got tons of "motivation". Did I tell you about my dreams? The prophecies? The revelations? The unknown people who spoke to me, answers to secret questions I had? The countless hours I spent "with" God???
I believe because my faith made me to seek after his truths. I knocked. And just like that... the door opened. I got more faith among the other benefits.
Truth does not emerge in court, plausibility does. I appreciate your confidence in the certitude that truth belongs to you.
If you do not have facts and evidence, you cannot take a case to court and expect to win or even be taken seriously.
I would imagine that was CJ's point...
The Defense needs no evidence or even facts, it is the Prosecution that carries the burden of proof.
If CJ's point wasn't about truth than why use the word "truth" and why use a court as if that is where truth emerges. I repeat and stand by my assertion, court is not where truth emerges, only plausibility. One is not convicted by the truth, one is convicted by the strength of a plausible story. The shadow of a reasonable doubt does not mean "all doubt." Truth leaves little room for doubt as it is absolute.
....and when there is no such thing as "absolute," because it depends upon the eye of the beholder what is perceived as "truth."
The only "perpetual energy" that exists in this world is the energy that goes into infinite argument....IMHO
People are not sentenced to death due to a plausibility factor. Your appreciation is noted, but not needed or required.
So religious truth is a monopoly? Moses and Gilgamesh - look out Jews. An inflexible mind blanches at the subtleties of human existence, stretch and reach and grasp.
Now god is out of his mind, as he gave it to genea
Thanks for the laugh.
So many misconceptions.
http://vimeo.com/17960119 Lengthy but worth your time if you will watch it.
Thanks Sir Dent, but I do not do third party conversations. Pro or con, for me, any comments needs to come from you. It is to difficult otherwise to hold someone to a particular point.
How many eyewitnesses does it take to convince anyone that something is true?
Where are these eye witnesses and can we put them in a court of law and on a witness stand? If this is your argument, you have none.
Historians have certain criteria they need to meet in order to determine if something is true or not, yes?
Historians have been noted to lie and rewrite history for a political or religious end.
In the short space allotted; the history that I outlined is verifiable. The primary people who do biblical research are theologians with a definite bias.
Who is not biased toward their personal belief structure? We all see what we want to see and none of us have verifiable universal truths to offer.
Then I would suggest that religious belief is no longer referred to as a truth, that gods exist, that one can be punished in hell for not believing. Based on your post it would seem that you would agree.
I do. But, that would be my belief. I cannot verify it as a universal truth. I oftentimes wonder why we pit ourselves against other beliefs; since we can all agree they are no more than beliefs.
Can't you leave the forums then "instead of pitting your beliefs against others"?
Are you asking me to leave? Would that not be acquiescing to your belief? Why should I?
" I oftentimes wonder why we pit ourselves against other beliefs; since we can all agree they are no more than beliefs."
Your words not mine. I have come here to pit my "beliefs" against others. Or do you practice hypocrisy?
But, am I here to pit my beliefs against yours?
If you chose to see it that way, you see hypocrisy. That is your choice. I am not responsible for your thoughts.
That is what you do, pitting your beliefs against each and every person in the forums.
You are not responsible for your words either!
Your inability to comprehend the meaning of my words is, again, not my fault.
I am not pitting my beliefs against yours. I am simply stating an opinion. If you choose to see it otherwise; that is your choice. It does not reflect on my intent. It reflects, solely, on you.
Your inability to use your words correctly, of course, is my fault.
Of course when you state, it is an opinion while when others do, it's belief.
You have admitted you are pushing your beliefs. I have admitted I recognize mine as simply opinion. I do not feel the need to push my opinion. You have admitted to a desire to push your beliefs.
The difference here is you present your belief as fact others should agree on. I don't care if you agree with me, or not.
There is a clear difference.
for the sake of clarity, and i'm genuinely not trying to be argumentative, can you please clarify the meaning of these three terms?
Fact is something we can test and agree upon the results of.
A belief is something you think to be true, through personal experience; but the results cannot be demonstrated in such a manner as to convince others to agree on it, universally, as fact.
An opinion is acceptance of the fact that each person has beliefs and no belief can be proven with a greater degree of certainty than another.
We can certainly (and should) argue over the nature of actions claimed as the result of beliefs. But, questions such as there is a God, there is a trinity, there is no God cannot be answered with any certainty. What does it matter to me what you believe? What matters is what you do with it. Because belief isn't about what a God is, or isn't. It's about how you justify who you are.
Does something have to be agreed upon to be a fact? For example, the earth is round. That is a fact. Yet there are still people who fervently assert that the earth is flat. Does that make the earth not round, because it is not universally accepted as such? What percentage of people have to agree on something in order for it to be factual - or is something factual whether or not people agree with it?
I agree with your first half of the definition of belief. I don't think agreement is a necessity for fact - if something can be demonstrated to be true (like the fact that the earth is round or that gravity exists) then it doesn't matter if people accept it or not - it's still true.
You gave an example of an opinion - not the meaning of an opinion.
I agree with your last statement, but I still think the conversations are important. For one reason, if some are to be believed, there is a lot at stake. For another, understanding beliefs becomes important to understanding people with differences of beliefs. If someone is going to assert that their beliefs are absolute fact with 100% certainty, they are making a claim that needs to be proven. If someone simply tells me that it is their belief that these things are true, I have no problem with that. When they tell me that they're absolutely true and that I need to believe them too or face potentially eternal consequences yet they can't prove them, we have a problem. When the people doing that are making and enforcing laws, there is more of a problem.
I don’t know of anyone who fervently asserts that the earth is flat. But, for the sake of discussion, I’ll pretend there is. If we agree on the definition of flat, then someone asserting that the earth is flat doesn’t fall into the parameters of belief. The earth can be observed. The shape of the earth is verifiable. They have made the choice to ignore an observable fact. If, say, the majority of people consider the earth to be flat under those same circumstances then I would say you would have to rethink your understanding of the word flat.
That is strange, because I didn’t assert that agreement equated to fact. As I said, belief (cosmically speaking) is an assumption of knowledge of things that cannot be known universally. It is simply conclusions drawn from observation and experience by the individual. You keep bringing up the shape of the earth. The shape of the earth has nothing to do with belief. The shape can be observed by all, simultaneously and easily seen in the same way.
Fair enough. But, an opinion is merely a state of mind. I have an opinion because I do not think any belief on a cosmic scale can be proven; therefore no belief of a cosmic nature is of any less value than another. As I said; what you do with your belief is all that matters.
I, of course, have beliefs. We all do, whether we chose to admit it or not. I simply understand that my belief is not provable and should not be taken as anything more than an opinion garnered from my life’s experience; which does not mimic the life experiences of others.
As do I. But, ‘pitting your beliefs against another’s’ as Jomine has made it clear he is here for; is what the discussion was about. How does pitting your beliefs solve anything? If we pit our beliefs (which cannot be proven) against beliefs which cannot be proven what have we accomplished? Unfortunately the sides who remain entrenched appear to be here to share their beliefs. Not find new ones.
I agree that there is a lot at stake which is why I am of the opinion that the primary avenue toward progress is acceptance of others not a search for avenues of conflict. Conflict does not promote understanding. It promotes discord.
But, you understand that you make the choice to have a problem. You have made the choice to listen and become troubled. If it is your choice, how is it then their problem?
That is an entirely different conversation. None of us here are making laws.
Fact is fact irrespective of whether we can test or prove it.
Here is a group of people who say earth is flat.
and is "proving" it.
A belief is simply a confidence in the truth of a statement, an opinion. Some beliefs can be tested indeed.
It is only my belief that the glass will fall to the ground when I drop it based on my previous experiences.
An opinion is a "view" or appraisal or judgment. Belief is also an opinion. In fact all theories and hypothesis are opinions.
Questions about god can be answered with certainty provided one define god and avoid fallacy of equivocation and use ones words correctly.
It is only your belief that the question cannot be answered which your are pushing in the guise of stating an opinion.
Yes, yes simply stating the opinion over and again is not pitting it against and certainly not pushing it because you don't care whether others agree to it, but when others do it it certainly is pushing their beliefs and not "pitting against" and certainly not stating it.
What others do is state opinions as facts while what you do is merely stating the opinion (which are not facts) just to enlighten us who cannot differentiate from opinions and beliefs.
Thanks to the great one, now I know how to differentiate opinion from belief. Thank you Emile.
Hey wait, where does "fact" fits in all these?
You should probably practice for a while. You still appear to be pushing your belief as fact.
But you are the one who push it repeatedly, I only asked you why you are here. So what fact are you talking about? You are pushing your "belief" on me now.
I said pit against, I put belief in inverted commas as you seem not able to differentiate between an argument, belief and opinion.
You are absolutely right about a universal truth, we do not have. What is important here is the desire to be reasonably objective and not ascribe to assertions that are based upon tradition, culture, fear, guilt or other emotions.
Nothing objective in the bible. Some majick of course. but us modern humans tend not to believe majickal claims.
No different from basing it on mahabharata or the "his dark materials".
Hold it! Had you said what the bible said in the spirit of which it was said you would've been totally NOT a lie. But you swerved.
Hold it! Had you said what the ramayana/his dark materials said in the spirit of which it was said you would've been totally NOT a lie. But you swerved.
Howdy? I can also calim as you do that it says what it not says.
You put your faith where you like... and I willdo the same.
I say what it means most often instead of what it says because some people misinterpret the saying.
There is one God AND one bridge to him (Jesus) and they gave us a smidgen of themselves as a reminder of things they said, in the spirit of which they said it.
I have no desire to reach into the "dark" in search of either of them. Light and dark are NEVER in the same spot at the same time
There are many books in the bible and each say entirely different things and sometimes evn contradict.
So you can only say that it is how you interpret it or say you consider only that books which fits your interpretation.
So jesus is only a bridge?
Is he god?
What indeed is a god if jesus is "a" god and another one is "the" god?
We just found, the other day, both John and Mark told the story of Jesus' first day back after being crucified. They did have the same story, however, John gave details that Mark had not.
"Ma!!! I fell and busted my face!" Can be viewed differently from, "Ma!!! I was walking across the stree and I tripped on a skate but when I went to catch myself, a man on a bike drove past fast and nudged me so I rolled down the hill and smashed my face on a broken bottle at the bottom of it. See the difference. In both stories, a face was busted. Lol...
They have the same story only in the basic outline otherwise entirely different in its settings and theology. In that case Romulus, Isis and Osiris are all gospel stories - same basic outline. You also forgot gospel of Thomas, barnabas....
The stories will be different if one says I fell down and busted my face on tuesday and another says I was attacked and my face was busted on Wednesday.
Again pushing your beliefs?
Truth is merely an opinion.
Well, I think cosmic truth exists. We just have no way of knowing what it is.
Truth doesn't exist, (truth is an opinion) but there is a "universal" fact - things exist, things with which we are all made of.
Actually, I think exactly the opposite. That's interesting. I think facts, at this level of existence, are opinion. 'Facts' have changed over the millenium. Facts are simply opinions you find the greatest consensus on. We observe, we think, we come to conclusions and we seek consensus on those conclusions. When we achieve it we then stamp the 'fact' brand on it. What is accepted as fact changes over the course of time.
Truth would be a constant, imo. One universal truth would be that things exist, things with which we are all made.
You have interchanged the meaning of truth and fact. Truth means in accordance with fact.
Fact is objective, irrespective of what we see or prove or form concensus or stamp as fact. Fact is that which is there or happened. What we are trying to prove is our "opinion" about fact or truth.
The fact, things exist, do not change. Rest are all opinions.
Since the idea of a Triune God hinges on the Father,Son and Holy Spirit, it is natural that Judaism would not accept the concept as there is no "Son" in Judaism.
What is your point? If you have a position state it clearly and we can take it from there. Would you argue the Council of Nicaea, its purpose, author or outcome? Do you hold that an omnipotent deity exists. If so, make your case, as I am always willing to take a lesson. Snide and off handed remarks are usually a hallmark of those who lack substance.
My final word on this thread.
All religions around the world have one thing in common, except for Christianity. They all seek to find God. They search for Him on a daily basis. In Christianity, God seeks man. That is a very big difference in beliefs.
There are not three Gods, but one God. The Word of God is God and Jesus is the manifestation of the Word of God. Notice He was born in the flesh, walked in the flesh, and talked in the flesh, (God seeking man).
Christianity did not stem from Judaism but from Jesus Christ Himself. Many call Jesus a Jew but only His mother was a Jew, His father was something other than a Jew.
Jesus did many things in His ministry that had never been done before. Many recognized that it was the power of God working through Him while others attributed His miracles to the devil.
The Holy Ghost is a living force that indwells believers in Christ. It guides believers into all truths. He enables believers to be bold and gives them power over the enemy.
The ball is in your court. Believe or don't believe, the choice is yours.
I choose not to believe your claims and if you are an example of "a living force that indwells believers in Christ" I reject it completely. I don't care how bold or powerful you claim to be.
Jesus lived his life and died as a Jew. The Last Supper was a Seder Dinner as required during Passover. He observed and taught in accordance with Jewish Law. His entire ministry was rooted in Jewish scripture. The Jewish prophets spoke of him before he was born. Christianity is in all its roots, Jewish. I wonder why anyone is uncomfortable with the Jewish nature of Jesus. Bris and Bar Mitzvah made him a Jew, his ministry made him a Rabbi, as his own disciples often called him. Christians need to get comfortable with the Jewish man who is our Savior.
Uh, if my Good Times serves me correctly... Jesus is Black!
Lol... ok, I just had to say it once. Lol... sorry.
Jew don't bother me none. King, Shepherd, Love of my life, all the same.
Race seems to be a touchy American subject. The Jewish population possibly has a story or two. But mine is yet a step or two down that particular ladder.
but I think the point was, Jesus turned from even Judaism. He preached a different message than they were used to at the time. He was Jewish via his mom. But his family are they who believe him. I don't think they did.
LOL, the entire world might be a better place if Jesus was a black man. I mean why not? Adam was most certainly a black man in Africa. You go girl.
Where did Jesus turn from Judaism? The Judaic roots of Christianity remained intact until Christianity became and international affair. The uncircumcised Greeks presented a problem for the Jewish Christians. A little church history might help.
As Jesus vehemently pointed out on more than one occasion, the Jews were wrong.
They had the wrong mindset and tried hard to live out the will of God with fleshy thinking.
Rites were added; people were stoned to death for similar offenses as they who stoned; God was not in their hearts (which brings us to Godly thinking patterns) he was in the open perfection of ritualistic behaviors which Jesus knew did not work.
He tried to straighten their thinking behind the scriptures. They refused him and kept on waiting for the messiah their way.
He came from among them. He told them, "Hear me! Follow my commands."
He did not follow them.
The Jews who God chose as his very own, refused him.
Jesus began his very own ministry, in which God was well-pleased. They were ordered to follow him. But they did not.
I hope this answers your question. If not... I'm here.
That explains that the Jews had an opportunity to follow Jesus, he did not turn away from them, but they from Him.
I will take my answer here:
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/ … e-catholic
He turned away from their ways of doing, yes he did... He said, "Halt! 180!" In so many words.
They stayed on the road that they were on... Jesus turned and they didn't turn too.
They refused his message. He was the loner; doing things differently.
He said, "I am the son." They said, "No you aint!"
He began his very own ministry, based upon the same word of God, correctly.
I do not seek Catholic ministers for my answers. I go to the bible. Or my mom.
Jesus went a different way from them. He preached a different message. They did not follow.
So either way, they were separated.
Then you know,
In Matthew 5:17-18, Jesus says "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."
Acts 11:25-26 "And he (Barnabas)left for Tarsus to look for Saul; and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch And for an entire year they met with the church and taught considerable numbers; and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch."
The word Christian does not appear until after Jesus' death and He says quite plainly that he is there to fulfill the Law and the Prophets, sounds Jewish.
I do look to Catholic theologians.
We definitely won't "argue" about to whom we both go for counsel. not necessary. Do you; I'll do me.
Accomplished. What does that word mean? Possibly "finished". Jesus finished it perfectly.
He brought a new agreement with him. The church calls it a new covenant. The bible calls it the new testament. But in each instance, the word NEW sticks out. See???
He said, "Follow me." They didn't turn too. They stayed on their own man-made doctrine's path.
You're saying that the old testament and the old covenant was man-made, and not directed by god?
According tothe Bible itself Jesus was sent to the Jews, and remained a jew, following Jewish law his entire life. His earliest followers were Jews, and Paul and Peter had arguments over whether or not a new believer had to convert to Judaism and then Christianity and follow Jewish law. Peter said yes, Paul said no. Paul won. That's the reason you are not a Jewish Christian today. Can you point to any passage that describes the new covenant or explicitly says that the old laws are gone? Do you know why? Because it's doctrine. Do you know nothing about the new testament aside from the gospels or early church history?
"You're saying that the old testament and the old covenant was man-made, and not directed by god?"
Really?!?!? Really?!?!? Lol... that's what you received from what I said???
For the sake of clarity, the old was God, misunderstood by the Jew. He (the Jew) added to and hypocrisized it.
My point was mainly that Jesus did not do Judaism like the Jews. Ok???
Once all were welcomed, it then makes no sense to call the house of God Jew (anything) wouldn't you say?
Now, the kingdom is made up of everyone.
Jesus brought a new covenant with ALL people who believe him.
I mean, since they didn't follow, they did not lose their Jewish heritage. They are still Jews. Jesus was too. But they went their separate ways.
He also said He wasn't there to change the law, and never mentioned the word "new" in connection with his teachings.
Only the church did that, including when it wrote the bible. Better cut out the shellfish.
It is not that which goes into a man that defiles him... -Jesus
He did not come to change the law but to complete it. He did that.
He said, "Follow me."
"Not one word will pass from the law.....
U N T I L it is finished." Member he said, "It is finished." Right when the sun went away that day??? He accomplished the law. Then a LOT simply "changed".
Nope - that is Cgenaea speaking, not God, presumably because she likes shellfish. Jesus did not change one thing in the old law, and never indicated he was bringing new laws with him.
Better cut out the shellfish.
You should thank the heavens, or whatever you thank... for Google.
You are missing out.
I don't quote genaea.
The Acts of the Apostles makes plain the change in behavior expected of Christians as explained in Acts 10:9-16
Cgenaea, take your focus off the Jews. They are simply representatives of us humans in the way they had attitude and made mistakes. We ALL do it. Every culture, every group of people, we are guilty of pointing the finger, trying to lord it over others, presenting a hypocritical face of our selves.
All those lessons that we can learn from ancient writings are useless if we can't apply them to our individual selves and then make a difference for the better. IMHO
I was not focused on the Jews alone. And yes, they are like the rest of us. The only question that remains is, do we follow them or Jesus?
What do we apply? How do we apply it correctly? You wanna say what "better" is deemed to be? Or should we skip it for now?
This nit-picky sh*t is funny.
I will not be chopping up anybody's post to answer/respond to each and every minute detail contained therein. K?
As for the other books, they are not my books. I have chosen the BIBLE. Those others are the choices of other beings. You must approach them with questions about them. My choice is the bible. Questions about others may not cross my desk. I don't know enough of any of them.
Lol... now you may consider the question disregarded without doubt!
I already looked it up.
I LOVE the English language. But my faith in God is importanter.
I saw it on my FB feed for education and guitar. I really lol...
It fits here, hilariously.
How odd that you continue to abuse the English language then. Oh well no surprises I suppose. Thanks for the reminder.
I do not ABuse her!!! I've got much too much respect...
She my ho'.
I USE her, to my advantage. She lets me do anything I want to her...and she STILL loves me in the morning.
Be thou UNtwisted! Lol...
Yes that was in response to your comment.
And yes... I know.
Funny, I've read the bible and I don't remember reading where Jesus said it was okay to start eating shellfish and or pork. I'm not really a big fan of either, but I've been known to BBQ some goooooddd ribs.
Somebody say bacon!!!
Jesus said, and I quote from THE quote, "What's goes into a man does not make him unclean, but the stuff coming out."
Stark contrast, huh???
Jomine, Jesus is a God. God definition from the top of my head is something worshipped and adored having power over us. We've got many god-Cadillacs; god-children; god-spouses; god-pastors; god-porn collections; god-houses; god-bank accounts, god-Beyoncés.
THE God is Lord of ALL, whether we choose to accept it or not. He has more power than the entire world.
And he did not tell Jesus his return date.
So there are many gods, jesus, yahweh, baal, el, visnu.... and even money.
So Christianity is polytheistic with two gods yahweh and jesus. What about the spirit?
Ha!!! This is getn funny, Jomine. Polytheism is the wrong term for Christanity. Jesus and shoes are gods. But there is ONE TRUE GOD. Will you please tell me that you understand the number 1. Lol...
I do believe that even the Lord Jesus gave word that only his father is to be "worshipped" I will check on it. But Christian sects are commanded that NO God comes before the ONE we woworship.
What is the difference between "a" god and "true" god?
Polytheism is the wrong word, the correct word is henotheism.
I aint gone even look it up. I know what my God said, shoot! Lol... Thou shall have NO...
I gave what my definition of god was earlier. Something you worship, a force of control. Or something like that.
Can you imagine the infinite possibility of choices?
Man cannot serve God and money. (That is a bible scripture). God-money is worshipped all over the land. Got WAY more followers than Christ.
The one true God is the ultimate in control. But he, ever so gently, refrains most often. He said, "you chose." The one true God (Big Banger himself). Jehovah be da name. and NO, I am not a ... Witness.
According to your definition even money is god. And baal and vishnu have power over humans, the power created by humans belief in them, no different from jesus and as they too are worshipped they are also gods. And as they don't recognize jesus, jesus should be a false god.
I can imagine, but that will be just an imagination. Are you telling me that your god is just a figment of your imagination?
If jehova is one true god who is "elyon" who gave jehova israel(deutronomy) as his inheritance?
And you still haven't told me the difference between "a" god and "true" god.
God- anyone/thing you worship, give devotion to, pursue with your heart, magnify in your mind, do anything for, love VERY much, has some control over how you behave.
True God- the one we should hold dear above all others. The maker, the mercy provider, the law giver (moral code), the one who sees our very thoughts, the all-powerful, Father etc...
We make gods of many things. The actual God should be above all else.
If that is Vishnu for some, no problem here. But even he will bow if he was ever given life.
That doesn't need him to exist provided we are ready to worship and think it exists.
That means if I decide someone as a true god it is a true god.
Just like yahweh or jesus?
A response to what you said. You response in simple sentence was this 'god is what you worship and true god is what you worship above all others'.
So you take the true God and place alongside others? As taking what I say to nullify? thank you, no.
You are asking me to place your opinion about god above other's opinion, that your opinion be given special status all the while rejecting others though your's have no merit over others. In short you are asking me to believe you and discard others whose views that don't confirm to your views.
I don't see any difference between your "true" god and your neighbors "true" god.
It's only your opinion which you cannot substantiate nor stand in a court of law. You already acknowledge your inability to prove, so it's nothing more than your opinion and wish.
You do not ask me any questions concerning my neighbors god. You don't really seem to care at all. My God-Jehovah is a constant focus for you, however... you sure you have not already bumped my God a few pegs up the pole???
Ha!!! You have found the secret!!! I have NO idea how to test anything to find out the age of anything. And yesterday, I forgot my own age for a sec.
But it is the same with the kingdom of heaven. Background and training work wonders in understanding. But God is the trainer. Best darn trainer ever.
One must put a certain level of faith and trust in the one who reports that he "knows" something. Half the time, i feel like they could be just writing numbers, lines and squigglies. It would be extremely helpful to the kingdom of God if just one scientist would admit to cheating if only just once. and you KNOW people cheat all the time! I bet some peer reviewers just add their signature at lunch with no intention on reading the material.
For it to be so precise and exact, it eludes and eludes me to no end. I really do not see how ANYONE alive can trust it... but when people say what i like, i tend to side in their favor. A lot of us humans do that...
cjhunsinger gets it wrong again. Like so many other biblical literalists, he doesn't understand what the true meaning is.
The trinity was never written about in the Bible. Someone added it later and made a big deal out of it.
The Father is the unknowable source of the entire universe. The Son is one of the spiritual adepts who transcended above self-concern and found the power of our birthright. And the Holy Ghost is the spiritual component within each of us -- that which needs to be "saved" or "reawakened" or "reborn."
He doesn't get anything wrong. That comment represents ego raising its ugly head. His interpretation is as valid as is your own. For him. Our perception of cosmic reality is driven by a desire to satisfy our perceived needs. The greater your need, the more detailed and confining the interpretation. The less far reaching it becomes in answering individual questions.
Conformity isn't, apparently, meant to be adhered to on spiritual questions. The more we seek conformity the further we move from the answers. IMO.
by Claire Evans2 days ago
This topic is old, I know, but I'd like to ask it anyway. Many Christians will ask an atheist, "Why are you here if you don't believe God (should it be a Christian thread)?" Some will answer,...
by Brittany Williams2 years ago
Atheism only means the lack of a belief in God. Why is it so hard for Christians to realize that we dismiss their religion for the same reasons that they dismiss all other religions? It doesn't make us horrible people,...
by Nicole Canfield4 years ago
Why is it that Christians believe that Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans, Native Americans, etc. are all wrong in their beliefs and that they'll all go somewhere horrible when they die? Why can't we just accept that other...
by Claire Evans4 years ago
It's easy to deconvert to atheism because they are disappointed, hurt or because they have lost their faith due to God making sense. It's harder to suddenly make a rational atheists convert to Christianity, which...
by grinnin15 years ago
I'm just interested in the answer to this question. Sometimes I think we become so defensive about what we believe (I've been following some particularly nasty threads this evening) that we stop asking questions,...
by Mark Knowles6 years ago
It is my contention that the Christian religion (and specifically following Christ) is guaranteed to cause conflict, wars and ill will.As proof - I cite the last 1800 years - including the hubpages forums as evidence....
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.