Where does the conceptualization of the Holy Trinity come from? Take this quote for instance:

Where does the conceptualization of the Holy Trinity come from? Take this quote for instance:
"27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one."

It is meant metaphorically, far as I can tell. There is no literal connection there that outright states "Jesus is God incarnate". It says he's a shepherd, like unto God, nothing else.

This is, far as I know, the basis of the claim that Jesus is actually God. But I confess that I haven't studied the scriptures rigorously, and I would like to pass this idea around. Also, where does the Holy Ghost thing originate from?

Other urls found in this thread:

thegreatcourses.com/courses/how-jesus-became-god.html
earlychristianwritings.com/churchfathers.html
youtube.com/watch?v=BR4NXfkI0jQ
youtube.com/watch?v=OaXjVU05odE&index=4&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TWpnOJV09MuEAwbbQNCS6Qf
youtube.com/watch?v=BNt5NKSse0Y&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TWpnOJV09MuEAwbbQNCS6Qf&index=5
youtube.com/watch?v=OHdquQpVPiU&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TWpnOJV09MuEAwbbQNCS6Qf&index=6
youtube.com/watch?v=xrmTjifCmw8&index=7&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TWpnOJV09MuEAwbbQNCS6Qf
youtube.com/watch?v=d-aVQ8MELeg
youtube.com/watch?v=VzBesvLK5bE
youtube.com/watch?v=XM0Pjbkp3E4
answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/trinity_isaiah_1.html
newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm
answering-islam.org/Shamoun/q_jesus_good.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TXf-YyDFKXw90izlvLZ14ka
summaphilosophiae.wordpress.com/2007/03/15/perfect-being-theology/
patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2012/09/failed-prophecy-psalm-22/
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_man
answering-christianity.com/john1_1.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

The book of John. It all starts there.

>Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

Faith without tradition, is like soup without water. The theological formations of the Trinity lie in oral form, ancient text and a myriad of other sources. Why don't you look some of them up?

Not an expert on Christianity, but I believe they think Jesus is the son of God because of his conception. All the Jewish prophets had a human mum and dad but Mary got a bit of God dick in her so jesus was better

>www.thegreatcourses.com
>search: how jesus become god by sheik bart al-ahrmani

This. Op is a Jew or atheist.

for the lazy:
thegreatcourses.com/courses/how-jesus-became-god.html

a good introductory course on the subject

trinities appear in hindu and egyptian religion
also in slav ancient religion (tribog or triglav)
really fires my neurons

Thanks all for the responses.

Where at? I'm interested but wouldn't know where to begin.

I've seen a book by that title in book stores but didn't think about it too much. Time to pick up a copy I think.

I was actually Mormon before I left the church and gravitated towards certain rabbis, lol. But no Christian, Jew nor atheist would share my beliefs. They're personal too, so don't ask.

earlychristianwritings.com/churchfathers.html

Writings of the Church Fathers.

ty bro

So you are Jewish? Reformed or traditional?

The course is a good start I would say, more easy going than the book or more serious academic papers. Just know that the guy is an agnostic beforehand, but take or leave his argument after you are done with the course.

If I were a Jew I would be a reformed one. I don't care about the ceremonies. But I have respect for traditional Jews, so who knows. My belief is in philosophers, but I take the scriptures at face value nevertheless.

God bless you user. I thought I was the only one trying to spread Jesus's word. Godspeed user. You're the MVP. I'll help contribute to the thread if I've some free time.

Here, listen to Peter:

Acts 2:22:
"Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a """""MAN"""""" accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.

youtube.com/watch?v=BR4NXfkI0jQ

Wow, really makes you think.

>REGARDING TRINITY

The RSV is based on ancient Bible manuscripts closest to the time of Jesus(or Disciples), closer than the KJV.

Now, 32 Christian Biblical scholars backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations remove the Trinity verse(John 5:7)

there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.

As history tell us, this Trinity verse contradicts 1 Corinthians 14:33:

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

So either one of these must be fabrication, because they both cannot be right. In this case, it is the Trinity verse.

So, any of you have anything to say? Remember, the most intellect among of you Christians took out this verse.

B-but this verse isn't the only verse that support Trinity.

Tch, SHOW me where in the Bible where it said "the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are ONE".

S H O W
H
O
W

>".... teach in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost."

Tch, I mean SHOW where it is SAID in the Bible where those THREE ARE ONE!!!

"T-there's none in the Bible."
"Yes, I'm proud of you user. Now tell your friends."

ancient indo-european mysticism
the trimurti comes to mind
but trinities are sacred in mysticism of many different cultural traditions
imo, it boils down to the trifore of man, nature, and god

man as the conscious being, sentient nature
nature as consciousness without individuation/ego
and god as the Prime Directive of both, or as the gate of transcendence or supreme end of both

Just to add:

The idea of many gods in Christianity came from the Greek culture. The Greeks believe in many gods(Zeus, Jupiter, ect). Jesus introduced God's teaching to the Jews, Paul teach it to the Greek, Greek introduced many Gods, and spread the Trinity concept to the West.

The Indo-European trinities represented three social estates, clergy, military aristocracy, and commoners. I don't see what it has to do with the Christian trinity.

lol, love it.

Will peep it, seems interesting.

the vedic trinity, and we know that the vedic religion is the oldest indo-european religion recorded, it represented the principles of destruction, creation/generation, and sustenance.

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

I literally cannot see just because your tiny mind cannot conceive of the Trinity this contradicts 1 Corintians 14:33.

Also Matthew 28:19

Yeah, sure bud. You can lie all you want. But all the "explain Trinity to me" threads on Veeky Forums has been nothing but gibberish.

I'm just being honest.

>Mattheww 28:19
So? That verse has nothing to do with those three are one.

>Where does the conceptualization of the Holy Trinity come from?
From Bible you uneducated, illiterate son of devil
Here have New Testament trinity
youtube.com/watch?v=OaXjVU05odE&index=4&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TWpnOJV09MuEAwbbQNCS6Qf
Here have Old one
youtube.com/watch?v=BNt5NKSse0Y&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TWpnOJV09MuEAwbbQNCS6Qf&index=5
If you have objections
youtube.com/watch?v=OHdquQpVPiU&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TWpnOJV09MuEAwbbQNCS6Qf&index=6
youtube.com/watch?v=xrmTjifCmw8&index=7&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TWpnOJV09MuEAwbbQNCS6Qf
Even Jews knew this before get uberbutthurt over Jesus
youtube.com/watch?v=d-aVQ8MELeg

Woah woah woah, no need to be a dick. The OP ask a valid no question.

user, can't you make your own simple valid statement?

>The OP ask a valid no question.
And I gave him valid answer
>The OP ask a valid no question.
And I gave him valid answer
>Giving material that is plain, easy to understand and pretty much don't leave questions about topic of "Where did Trinity came from" (It doesn't answer question "why?" but It wasn't a question in the first place) in way that I couldn't do because of lack of language skill
>Not valid
Really?

Tch, fine. I'll watch it when I get home.

IMPORTANT:

Jesus speak Hebrew. In the Hebrew language, there're two types of plural.

Plural of number and

PLURAL OF RESPECT

GOD is sometimes referred to as PLURAL OF RESPECT, it's the genius of Hebrew language.

Mentioning three things in the same sentence doesn't make them the same thing.

>Holy Trinity

Most autistic concept in human history

>Jesus speak Hebrew. In the Hebrew language, there are two types of plural.
He also spoke Greek. And his native language was Aramaic (See, Cephas).
Also in Hebrew Langue, when God is refere as one it doesn't mean unitarian fyi

What? No, he speaks Hebrew. He speaks among the Jews, never to the gentile. Listen to what Jesus said:

Matthew 15:24:
He answered, "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel(Jews)."

In the mission of preaching and healing, Jesus said:

Matthew 10:5 :
These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "DO NOT GO among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.

Also he cried out during Crucifixion:

Eli eli lama sabachthani?(Hebrew)

Do you have basis for your claim? Besides, I'm also referring to the Old Testament.

Watched a little bit, and it sounds like bollocks to me. An "angel of the lord" in the OT is supposed to be Jesus now, or something? Why was it never EXPLICITLY stated then? The passage I quoted was perhaps the most explicit thing you'll find, but it doesn't mean what you think it does. Jesus can be "one" with the father without being God. Everyone can. And that's the point.

I don't necessarily repudiate the trinity btw, I just think it's bollocks in terms of defining God completely. A few aspects of God perhaps, a divine trinity that shows a certain perspective of God. However Jesus was a necessary sacrifice, nothing more. Dirt, grime, filth, that was Jesus' life. He wallowed in it, and was crucified by it as thanks. How could such a being be God incarnate? The resurrection too, is a point I should probably dispute. Anyways, how is Jesus one with the father? As God incarnate, he performed his duty, I see that. But what if his duty was not nearly great enough? God's plan was to replicate the flea beetle to infinite? I see more than that on the horizon, I suppose. Jesus is one with the father in his poverty of the spirit. Jesus is a foe of power.

I love the scriptures. That is why I intend to get to the bottom of this. But a Christian I am not, so it's not like I intend to be heard by any ears here. Well, let's hope it was at least entertaining.

>What? No, he speaks Hebrew.
Cephas, Rock name that he gave Simon is Aramaic.
Talitha kum, "Little Girl, I say to you, get up" is Aramaic.
Ephphatha, which is 'be opened' is Aramaic.
Abba which is "Father" is Aramaic.
Raca which is "Fool" - Aramaic.
And so on and so on.
He also used Greek when he spoke to romans, Pilate and amny others. He also quoted exclusively from Septuagint, Greek old testament, because Hebrew was dead languge and there was not one, complete Hebrew old testament. I doubt if even Torah was in original language by that time.
>He speaks among the Jews
Who spoke Aramic which is recoded in Bible and in Josephus work "Jewish history"
>never to the gentile
>Samaritan Woman
>Roman centurion
>Shittone of random listeners IN ROMAN EMPIRE
>No gentiles

>Matthew 15:24
It itself is spoken to gentile woman. Let's read more
But she came and adored him, saying: Lord, help me.
Who answering, said: It is not good to take the bread of the children, and to cast it to the dogs.
But she said: Yea, Lord; for the whelps also eat of the crumbs that fall from the table of their masters.
Then Jesus answering, said to her: O woman, great is thy faith: be it done to thee as thou wilt: and her daughter was cured from that hour.

Jesus spoke primaly to Jews, sure. But not exclusively. Read Acts 10 and 15 for more. Prophet Amos is also nice read.

>Matthew 10:5
Same shit. If you read whole chapter you will see why he did it - to gather Jews under new, Christian covenant.And what he will do them if they won't obey them. After his resurection, when law was fulfiled he spoke " Going therefore, teach ye A L L NATIONS"
for there was no more Jews, no Greek, they all were one in Christ.

>Eli eli lama sabachthani?
It's arameic. That's one. Second, you quoted to diffrent verions at once. In Mathew it's "Eli, Eli, LEMA sabachthani?". Version with "lama" is in Mark but it's "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?". In Hebrew it would be "ēlī ēlī lāmā ‘azabtānī"

First, thanks for link. I respect civilized argument.

Now, NOWHERE in the link stated that THOSE THREE ARE ONE.

They just cherry picked those verses. I can also cherry pick my verse, for example, Jesus disclaiming he is god:

John 5:30;
I can of mine own self do nothing.

Now, let's look at the John 5:7 in RSV:

For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and the three AGREE in one.

They only AGREE, not they're one.

Unless you can show me where in the bible where those three are one, then Trinity is just a fabrication.

>Jesus's language
Ok, I take your word for it. Thanks f.a.m.

>gentile
Jesus said himself, "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel."

The woman's child only heal because of her faith, Jesus never said he'll heal that child.

The bread are for the Jews, not for you and me.

>Watched a little bit, and it sounds like bollocks to me.
Watch it again, maybe with dictionary.
> An "angel of the lord" in the OT is supposed to be Jesus now, or something?
Yes. "Angel" is not "kind" of something - it mean just "messenger". It is also synonyms to "Memra of YHWH" which is "Word of Lord". Watch last video.
>Why was it never EXPLICITLY stated then?
Why is not exactly stated that God is all-powerful? Why is not exactly started that God is omnipresent? Why is not exactly started that water is wet? Because inspired authors didn't comprehend stupidity of this claim that's why.
>The passage I quoted was perhaps the most explicit thing you'll find, but it doesn't mean what you think it does. Jesus can be "one" with the father without being God. Everyone can. And that's the point.

The passage that you quote states that a) Jesus is Son of God hence "he is greater than me" (note: Greater here means no difference in essence but in function) b) Jesus is God hence "I and My Father are one", "neither shall anyone snatch them out of MY hand" and immediately after that "no one is able to snatch them out of MY FATHER'S hand" and ofcourse " And I give them eternal life" (I i.e. Jesus do that only God can - giving eternal life). Watch this youtube.com/watch?v=VzBesvLK5bE
> How could such a being be God incarnate?
He was literally perfect human. If God can dwell in a fucking bush of fire he can dwell in perfect, sinless human who is God's Image. In fact, it make more sense.
Listen you sound like muslim so I will give you something for muslims youtube.com/watch?v=XM0Pjbkp3E4
>But what if his duty was not nearly great enough?
>Literally perfect, ultimate sacrafice
>not great enough
If I was Satan, I would give you standing ovation for such heresy
>Jesus is a foe of power.
Do you even New Testament? Revelation to be precise.

>Now, NOWHERE in the link stated that THOSE THREE ARE ONE.
Przetłumacz

Do you have reading problems? Are you fucking deluded? Or are you just a dirty fucking muslim that is trained to not having logical process in your mind? ALL of those videos stated CLEAR and SIMPLE - TRINITY IS AS BIBLICAL AS GOD HIMSELF. For love Jesus' foreskin who can you don't understand it? It was so simply explained that even a nine years old would understand it.
>John 5:30
Jesus is Son of God. He is eternally begotten. He IS "The Son". It's literally in nicene creed.
If you would read whole chapter you would see that Jesus clearly, and I mean as clear as fucking crystal water states - he is divine.
>1 John 5:7 (not Jhon 5:7)
>AGREE in one.
In greek εἷς
Definition: one
Same word is used in Matthew 19:17 "There is only One who is good."
Also Douay-Rheims>RSV. And Vulagte>Any other translation. And orginal>Any transaltion.
>Unless you can show me where in the bible where those three are one, then Trinity is just a fabrication.
Isaiah 48. Whole chapter. Here, have comentary on it answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/trinity_isaiah_1.html

You are deluded faggot who is jest deluded twat. I will give one last source that deal with it's matter. Read it and vade retro newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm

It is said somewhere that God knows every little hair on our heads. If that's true, then that's probably it for "omnipresent" or whatever, and even "all-powerful", as he knows everything because he shaped it all himself. And even these are issues that should probably be explicitly talked about as well. Where's the evidence for God being all-powerful? Who says he can't be overthrown? Why battle Satan at all even, if nothing's at stake? Why create him if so omnipresent and all-knowing? Did the authors comprehend that as well? Just wanted to point it out; I don't trust doctrines of Christianity, for good reason I feel. I don't trust much of anybody to read into complex sentence structures and metaphors and perfectly understand much of anything, and that's why I expect explicitness. It's nothing personal, I just don't much care for most people.

>angel
Are you saying that angel is Jesus? Remember, the Trinity is Father, JESUS and holy ghosts.

>son of God
user, there're many Son of God. Look pic related.

Adam, Israel(another name for Prophet Jacob, Genesis 35:10), Ephraim, David, Jesus and the people in pic.

David is even called 'begotten' by God.

IMPORTANT:
There's a fabrication in John 3:16:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

The word 'begotten' is TAKEN OUT, because it wasn't supposed to be there in the first place.

SO, God only have one "begotten" son, THAT IS DAVID, NOT JESUS.

>eternal life
This refers to life in heaven. If you righteous things(which is Jesus's teachings), then heaven is a place for you.

Ezekiel 18:21:
"But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die(eternal life)."

I already explained it. Go read WHOLE Gospels and WHOLE acts. Then come back, repent and apologise for sin against your own intellect.
You ask meaningless questions, really. It's logically impossible to God not to be omnipresent, all-powerful and all that divine shit. It's logical. You can read shitone of philosophical explonation why. Aquinas five ways are good for it.
For the same reason God cannot be nottriune. I will try to explain it for ya, but I recomed to read De trinitate by St. Richard of Saint Victor for he explains it better than I.
>There is God (insert here shittone of arguments that can proove it logically)
>God created Heaven and Earths.
>To be creator of everything God must be ultimately perfect.
>If God is ultimately perfect then he have to be One becouse nature of ultimate perfectness demands it and laws of Logic apply to God too.
>To create something God had to have reason for it for if he is ultimate perfectness he don't do anthing unnecessary.
>The only reason for creation is Love.
From this we can couclude that:
1) God cannot be untarian for if he was he would be depend on his creation to feel love
2)He cannot be unitarian for even if he wasn't depend on his creation to feel Love then he would be
a)Selfish, and selfish love is not perfect love and cannot not be perfect in his atributes
b)There wouldn't be reason to God to create anything at all for he would be selfsustaining in his Love
Thus God cannot be untarian. He still have to be One though so only conclusion is that God is multipersonal (which would als fit in fact that he is greater in all atributes than his creations)
>If God was only Two Divine Persons then his Love for himself would be exclusive
Thus God cannot be Duoune.
>If God is Three Divine Persons then his love isinclusive and he could create anything.
>If God is more than Three then his inclusiveness wouldn't be greater and since He is perfect there is nothing not necessary in him.
Therefore God is Triune

>Are you saying that angel is Jesus? Remember, the Trinity is Father, JESUS and holy ghosts.
No. Trinity is Father, Son (Logos) and Holy Spirit. Messenger (Angel) can b reffer as (Logos). Not to mention that names are non-issue.
>user, there're many Son of God. Look pic related.
First of all Jesus acknowledge it. "Son of God" is not divine title. "Son of Man" hoever is. Read Daniel
>This refers to life in heaven.
I know to what is referse you dummy. My point was Jesus is GIVER of Life. GIVER. Atribute of God and noone besides him.

>przetlumacz
As I said, I can also cherry pick my verse, for example, Jesus disclaiming divinity, Mattheww 19:17.

>Mattheww 19:17:
And he said unto him, Why do you call me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if you will enter into life, keep the commandments.

Look closely, Jesus said "why do you call me good? There's none good but God". According to Jesus, he's not even worthy to be called good, much less a god. For that, I respect the man.

God is good, Jesus(according to him) is not worthy to be called good. This show that Jesus reject himself to be divine.

>link
>Isaiah 48
...too long. Can you give me the gist of it?

>son of god
Yes, Jesus acknowledged he is the Son of God. But so what? Listen to Jesus,

John 10

>34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
Meaning in the Old Testament that the people are called gods(Exodus 7:1, psalm 82:6, 2 Corinthians 4:4)

>35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
If people are even called gods in the Old Testament, then why do the Jews should find fault in Jesus claiming to be JUST the Son of God?

>Giver of life
So what? It's just a miracle given to Jesus. Prophet Isaiah dry bone give life to a dead body, but is Isaiah a god? No.

>dummy
I'll kick you in the ribs if you used that filthy fucking language again.

How can you call this philosophy? Where does it follow from that God must be perfect? Someone pulled it out of his ass. This shit is hilarious. It would be ideal for that particular "philosopher" for God to be perfect and to demonstrate perfect love, but nowhere does it follow logically that God has to be perfect. I mean, it's fun to read and whatever, but simply not true. The concept "God" merely means ultimate power. This is what I'm talking about. No Christian has any common sense. I mean I know I asked for it, but it's all so trite that I cannot bring myself to slog through it at this point. Maybe after I get some sleep.

Oh, and just to add. The Jews are always looking for a fight. Any excuse will do? As the saying, "if you're looking for a fight, look around the corner".

Again, I respect your civilized argument.

Bruh, He created the universe. He created us, a very complex organisms that have awareness. If He's weak, then no way He can do all this thing.

He merely adapted us from what was already there, actually. I know because I saw it, or so it would seem. And it's true that it's likely that over infinite "time" that God would have eventually come to perfection, but we have no idea of the mechanics of what went on to speculate. We can only look at evidence around us, and say Yes to it, as if it were perfect.

>Mattheww 19:17
Absolutely does not prove your point
answering-islam.org/Shamoun/q_jesus_good.htm
>...too long. Can you give me the gist of it?
Oh I see that zou are a faggot. READ IT YOU DIP OF SHIT OR NOT ENAGE IN DISCCUSION.
>Yes, Jesus acknowledged he is the Son of God. But so what? Listen to Jesus,
I told you that you illiterate fuck. Song of God is NOT divine title. SON OF MAN IS. Read fucking Book of Daniel.
>So what? It's just a miracle given to Jesus. Prophet Isaiah dry bone give life to a dead body, but is Isaiah a god? No.
Prophets never claim to be giver of life. Jesus claimed that he himself is Giver of Life. Thus Jesus Claimed divinity.
>I'll kick you in the ribs if you used that filthy fucking language again.
Oh srry you illiteate dumpass. Not my falut that you cannot read becouse you are fucking singaporean fuck that listen only to his faggot prophet Muhhamed :^)
>Again, I respect your civilized argument.
You don't since you ignore arguments and don't know how to read.

>How can you call this philosophy? Where does it follow from that God must be perfect?
Watch this for exemple youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TXf-YyDFKXw90izlvLZ14ka
Or read this summaphilosophiae.wordpress.com/2007/03/15/perfect-being-theology/
Or read Summa Theologica.
Or any fucking book abot philoshopy of theology and stop acting like a fucking nigger.

There is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 45:5-6). Yet there are three persons presented as deity in Scripture: the Father (John 6:27; Colossians 1:3), the Son (John 1:1-3, 14; 8:24; 20:28-29; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2 Peter 1:1; Hebrews 1:10-12) and the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17; Acts 5:3-4; 2 Samuel 23:2-3; 2 Corinthians 3:18). Lastly, these three are presented as distinct persons (John 8:16-18; Luke 11:1; 3:21-22; Galatians 4:6). Thus from Scripture we learn that although there is one God, there are three distinct persons who are deity. So the Trinity is the biblical position to hold to once one examines what Scripture teaches.

>the Trinity is Father, JESUS and holy ghosts.
Why do you know more about the Trinity than Allah, who claims in the Koran that the trinity is the doctrine that Jesus, God and Mary are three gods, when the trinity is that The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are the same God?

Jesus is a man, both God and man, the God-man

The trinity is ONE GOD. There are not many gods and not many lords, but one God the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ

>No, he speaks Hebrew.
And Greek (He spoke to Pilate) and Aramaic, and every other language because He is God in the flesh
>I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel(Jews)
You're not even being fair to Matthew, since his gospel ends with a command to preach to all nations
>These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "DO NOT GO among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.
See above
>Eli eli lama sabachthani?(Hebrew)
No, that's Aramaic. He's quoting from the Psalms

Two souls and the energy they are made of. Separate but connected. The strength of people who understand the soul and the afterlife.

The Pslam DOESNT even refer to Jesus. See:

patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2012/09/failed-prophecy-psalm-22/

Just wake up, I may or may not reply to all of you, depending on my stress level.

*woke

Father/God is the absolute, the truth. Thesis
Son is the one who fully abides by God. The perfect Antithesis.
The Holy Spirit is the resolution, how God will react. The Synthesis.
Those who are a conflicting antithesis to god face a shitty synthesis.

i was reading on this thread earlier and i came up with this after thinking about other stuff. comment subscribe and smash that mofuckin like button.

You're a good guy dude. I appreciate the posts, even the ones I disagree with. The ontological argument makes perfect sense, actually. But.

Premise 1: Life maintains itself by feeding on other life.
Premise 2: God is alive.
Premise 3: God is evil. He eats his lambs so to speak.

The style isn't exactly proper, but this ontology stuff is merely common sense anyways. Just trying to show that the "hurrr he's god so must be a nice guy" argument is faulty.

Muslims should be shot

The link are 404 now

Yeah, sorry f.a.m., still confusing. It contradict 1 Corinthians 14:33:

For God is not the author of confusion...

Also look No, the Koran never said Trinity is the doctrine of Jesus. Jesus said, when ask 'which commandments is the first of all':

Mark 12:29:
"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

>why?
...I don't want Jesus to cast you away:

Matthew 7:
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Is he talking to the Hindus? Muslim? Jew? No, the one who heals the sick in the name of Jesus is you Christians. That's why I want to talk.

>Giver of life
Please elaborate

>Son of man, Daniel
ctrl f 'Daniel 7:13' in
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_man

Besides, that Son of Man will be given everlasting dominion, which Jesus doesn't:

John 18:36:
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world...

>not reading argument
Which one? The link are still 404, sorry.

>not being fair
Look, you're also not being fair. You can't disregard Jesus's saying that he's ONLY sent to the lost sheep of Israel. The Father sent Jesus, to spread and fulfill the law of Moses to the Jews, NOT bringing a new religion:

Matthew 5:17:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Oh, and also, partialism is blasphemy, according to your Church.

You're one of the most dishonest posters this board has ever had, put a bullet in your brain

Maybe you're right. Part of me wants you to burn in hell.

BUT there's also part of me wants to break bread with you.

Let's break bread and talk. That's all I'm asking.

Angel can be referred to as Logos? Where? Wasn't Logos is a title given ONLY to Jesus? Are you saying that that angel is Logos?

>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

this is a nice starting point for you.

Jesus never existed, bro, Paul called Peter 'Cephas', we have no idea if that was his real name or just a name given to him because he was a leader of a religion.

I just leave this here:

answering-christianity.com/john1_1.htm

There's a firstborn angel that Philo called Logos

Wait... angel having coitus and begets children? Sorry, but that's nonsense. Also, please show me where in the bible.

What is the Council of Nicea?

Show me where in the Bible where Jesus doesn't exist

Genesis 6:4

There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

>Where does the conceptualization of the Holy Trinity come from?

1 John 5
This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

Read it again.

"the name"

not "the names"

Catholic rubbish.

Philo never wrote of Jesus.

When Jesus is referred to as The Angel of The Lord in the OT, that does not mean that Jesus is an angel, or that Jesus is a created being.

Anything can be a messenger; "angel" means "messenger".

That's not the point he's trying to make. The council of Nicea exist because there're separation in the Christians community regarding whether Jesus is God, human or semi-god.

If Trinity doesn't contradict the 1 Corintians 14:33, then how come the Christians are divided?

user... angels doesn't coitus and beget. Those are people, not angel. I agree with . Not to be rude, but whenever it suit you, you translate 'Logos' as 'angel' or 'messenger'. It's like you're playing fast and loose with the Bible.

...sorry. I fuck up my greek. But still, those are still people, not angels. Did philo call them 'Logos'?

Damn, I misunderstood. I meant that can you show me where the angel are refer to as 'Logos' in the bible. Again, sorry for the misunderstood.

Also, I doubt that 'angels' came in the daughter of men. Angels are spiritual, doesn't have flesh and bone. I doubt that they can produce sperms.

Paul's letters, all he is, is a preexistent being from Heaven

It was in Jewish angelology, you idiot
Oh, is that why there were people who argued that Jesus was a created being?

>user... angels doesn't coitus and beget.

Literally the reason for the Flood. Literally.

Genesis 6:9
This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God.

Perfect in his generations.

Pure human.

nobody cares what muslims think

Those are not people.

Those are fallen angels. Demons. Who mated with human women and made the nephilim.

Giants.

And God's men (like Joshua, Caleb and David) are giant killers.

Numbers 13

33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

funny, it's from that same Catholic rubbish you retarded protestants get your Bible.

That primarily comes from a profound misunderstanding of what "the firstborn of all creation" means.

It's a position, a status; Jesus is the heir to all creation.

It does not mean Jesus was a created being; Paul makes that clear in his letter to the Colossians:

Colossians 1:16 For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Jesus created this universe, lost this universe, redeemed this universe, and will destroy this universe, taking all who want to go with him into a new one.

Premise 1: Does not include spirit beings. God is a spirit beings. Spirit beings have no need to eat live things.

Premise 2: God is alive. He is also eternal. As a spirit being, he has no need to eat any live beings, nor were there any live beings to eat prior to him making them.

Premise 3: When you think God is evil, you have a problem with God. You are listening to the devil about God, and the devil only lies.

God does not eat his lambs, he adopts them into his family as children.

By him all things were created, meaning he was a pre-existent being and god's agent of creation

No, there were some gnostics running about saying that Jesus did not come down from heaven in the flesh, and could not be God.

Even Catholics can tell gnostics are full of shit.

Christians are divided due to the lingering carnality of human beings in our flesh; Paul said as much.

True Christians are not divided at all, but unified as one by the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

And if people want to worship God in the Spirit in different ways, I don't see the problem.

its realy old

they started by conceptualising god and his ''essence'', which mattered for reasons, like if god manifests on the material plane like gods often do in myths, is it realy god, or just a manifestation of what god is

then there was the whole egiptian thing, where you had god, the thought of god, the breath of god, the word of god, all personified as different entities

so you get to the son of god, being either his thought or his word, not that it makes much difference in the context

then the greek notion of logos comes in

then the whole idea of a divine spirit, permeating all

eventualy it gets systematised into a trinity

in a sense its a way to represent the divine as a personal self, since a self cannot be unles it relates to itself

Angels are never "logos"; John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.....and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

Jesus is the Word of God.

Bible was finished centuries before there were any catholics to bastardize it, add books to it, etc.

Nice try though.

It means Jesus is God; Jesus is the Creator.

the gnostic ''jesus'' was a divinity, a aeon, separate from christ, aeons cannot die, they can only fool around pretending to be humans but thats a illusion

gnosticism isnt realy about the same stuff monotheist abrahamic religion is about so their definition of god isnt realy the same

the abrahamic god is a fool to them, a sort of cosmic autist that cant help fucking shit up

Gnostics do not, nor does anyone else, have a right to make up their own Jesus.

john is heavily influenced by gnosticism, people even call it a gnostic gospel

in that context christ is the word of god, as in christianity jesus-christ is the word incarnate

that all things were created by him and without him nothing was created means all things are the manifestation, incarnation, of the word

in that sense we are all incarnations of the word, same as jesus