Hello. I used to be an athiest after I grew up in a Christian community, but then I became agnostic, and now I'm a deist. One of the main concepts I struggle to understand is the trinity. The trinity worships 3 parts of the same God, but that's polytheism and it's against the ten commandments rights?
>but user, it's just three different parts of the same God
I heard Hinduism believes in the same or there's a variant of it that does, and Hinduism is considered polytheistic.
Other urls found in this thread:
Christianity is inconsistent with the Old Testament it claims to be based on. Paul likely never even read the OT, considering he makes pronouncements that are baldly contradictory to it.
It is God in three different forms.
Think of water for example.
Whether it is ice, a liquid, or a vapor, it is still water nonetheless.
...
>Modalism
That's heresy, you absolute fucking subhuman.
That's modalism, you filthy heretic. God's not a transformer, he doesn't have modes.
Catholics don't worship three parts of the same God; for them, God is three Divine persons (not in the sense of human, it is more or less synonim for essence): The Father, who creates; the Son, who is begotten; and the Holy Spirit, which is like the manifestation of God's power on Earth. Those are three separate entities, but share the same substance, are all eternal and all equal. In other words; every Person is God by itself, but also separate entities which could be considered 'parts' of God. It's not an easy concept to grasp, nor to explain, but i think this is a quick summary.
Enjoy burning in Hell.
Can you explain in simple terms?
>baldly
So those statements lack hair?
>Tritheism
Where's the inquisition when you need em.
It's not three different parts. That's heresy. It is different persons sharing an essence. It won't be hard for you to find theological explanations of what was discussed in Nicea. But above that user, remember that there are mysteries beyond explanation.
There' a difference between "each Person is God by itself" and "each Person is a god by itself", which is what tritheism is about
it's literally logically incorrect if you try to run it through maths, no offense, but you can't really explain it and you just have to accept it if you are a trinitarian christian.
>God is not a transformer
You can't seriously be arguing God is a robot in disguise.
...
bender flying in high with the truthbomb
The only law: Bender is great.
>I don't believe so it must be fact
...
that's actually the perfect analogy here, because the fidget spinner is spinning you can't really see the parts, symbolising the divine mystery
I don't know which one yet, but this has to be a heresy
Blasphemy I guess. With that god there is always a sin happening.
Trinity was inserted long after the original text was written, it's not christian
Trinity got btfo last time that image was posted.
Basically, it violates the principle of non-contradiction. That principle is explained by Hellenic philosophers like Plato and Aristotle. Christians want to say that god is without division and has division, that one entity is 100% another entity but somehow different, etc. Sad!
The trinity has been a dogma of faith for 2000 years, confirmed by the highest authority of the Catholic faith and succesor of Saint Peter. Some of the most brilliant scholars from all over Europe spent their whole lives debating the subject to finally accept it. But I guess that you know better what is christian than all the fucking popes combined because you read the Bible. Congrats
>greek philosophers are 100% correct all the time
Lmao @ your life
>deist here
It stems from a fundamental Christian inability to count.
Just check out Matthew 1, the geneology part.
Abraham->Isaac->Jacob->Judah->Perez->Hezron->Ram->Amminadab->Nahshon->Salmon->Boaz->Obed->Jesse->David
From Abraham to David
David->Solomon->Rehoboam->Abijah->Asa->Jehoshaphat->Jehoram->Uzziah->Jotham->Ahaz->Hezekiah->Manasseh->Amon->Josiah->Jeconiah
From David to exile in Babylon
Jeconiah->Shealtiel->Zerubbabbel->Abihud->Eliakim->Azor->Zadok->Akim->Elihud->Eleazar->Matthan->Jacob->Joseph->Jesus (except not really, of course)
From Jeconiah to Jesus.
He then asserts in 1:17 that there are 14 generations between each important break, despite listing 15 names in the middle set.
Don't try. The trinity doesn't make logical sense at all.
>I believe it so it must be fact
>institutions never fail to correct old mistakes because of the potential embarrassment and inertia
Brilliant scholars have thought a lot of things, many of which have been true, some of which way fucking haven't. And smart people can come up with very elaborate justifications for total bullshit, often without being aware of what they're doing. In fact, the more bullshit the idea, the more ingenious the justification has to be. There are whole fields in academia which exist for that purpose.
For all intents and purposes the rightness or wrongness of the doctrine is irrelevant - regardless of what any one theologian might think, the Church simply isn't free to disaffirm it and hasn't been for a very long time. The hit they'd take to their credibility would be extreme.
And hell, I'm Catholic, and I think the Trinity is a beautiful idea even though it doesn't crop up anywhere in the Bible. But it's not at all unreasonable for somebody to read the Bible, notice that the idea is never once even alluded to, and conclude that it was a bit of mistaken wonkiness that never got corrected until inertia set in and it was too late.
Who were the three men who appeared to Abraham then?
Angels, most likely, assuming you're talking about Genesis 18, considering 18:2 very clearly separates them from how the Lord appeared to him by Mamre.
It is true thqt the trinity doesn't appear on the Bible, but the idea doesn't come oit of thin air either, as it is not common in the new Testament to refer to God in a threefolded way (The most important being the Great commision, in which Christ calls on the apostles to baptize all the nations in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit). None of them are conclusive evidence of the catholic Trinity, but they give some backing to the idea, which I think is a very elegant solution to the problem of the divinity of Jesus.
John 1 says that the Word (Jesus) was with God and was God…..and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
In John 10:30 Jesus said that He and the Father are one.
In John 14:9 He said that anyone who has seen Him has seen the Father.
In Colossians 1:15 Paul wrote that Jesus is the (visible) image of the invisible God.
In Hebrews 1:3 Jesus is called the exact representation of God’s glory
In Hebrews 1:8 God Himself called Jesus God.
God’s Spirit is presumed to be one and the same with God just as your spirit is presumed to be one and the same with you. So if God and Jesus are one and the same, and God and His Spirit are one and the Same, then the three are one.
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.
why is modalism a heresy?
Do neither of you know what a triple point is?
Asking Catholics about God is like asking vegans about prime rib.
Father is God.
Son is God.
Spirit is God.
There is only one God.
It's in the bible, throughout, in fact.
There is no division
>Catholicism confirmed for literally the fidget spinners of religions
>'The OT doesn't contain any references to the Trinity!'
>ignores passages which allude to the Triune nature of God
So which is it
>Texts compiled and edited before Jesus, which nevertheless contain illusions to His divinity and the Spirit of God being distinct from both, are more correct than what Jesus taught the Apostles
OR
>Jesus, who was divine and thus the ultimate source of revelation to humanity, was less correct about God's nature than the Old Testament
Matthew was not displaying an inability to count, but hitting on Jesus' relatives that conferred upon him the right to sit on David's throne.
Further, he puts Abraham in twice, for emphasis.
And he is laying this out to demonstrate to the Hebrews that the virgin birth was necessary to avoid the curse on the line of Jeconiah.
If you want a direct genealogy, go to the man who posted one. Luke.
To the lost, all of the things of God are foolishness, as they are spiritually discerned, and natural man is spiritually dead.
>even though it doesn't crop up anywhere in the Bible.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
1 John 5:8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.
I don't care if you think it makes sense. Dogma does that.
Yes I am perfectly aware of what a triple point is and it doesn't mean modalism is not heretical or that Jesus turns into the Father after you pop him into the kettle or that the Jesus and the Father are the same thing as each other if you manage to get them at exactly the right pressure and environmental state.
Oh so there's just one god, and not a trinity. Great problem solved, glad that Christendom is all on the same page and trinity was just an unfortunate heresy that we've done away with now.
not him but that's the exact line many scholars believe to be a later addition
Jesus and two angels.
Jesus and two angels.
...
Because it misstates the unity of God.
You should care that the things of God make sense to the children of God, who are going to heaven, and are foolishness to the children of the devil, who are going to hell.
You should care deeply about that.
Jesus said I am in the Father; the Father is in me; if you have seen me, you have seen the Father.
There is only one God, who manifested himself to us in three persons so that we may get to know him.
Yes, there is one, triune God.
They believe in manuscripts that were in Alexandria, where Origen the heretic was busy eradicating verses he did not agree with.
No I shouldn't care because of course bullfeces makes sense to the poeple who believe the bullfeces otherwise why would they believe it?
>going to hell
Where is it?
It will be the only thing you care about in a thousand years. The only thing. The most important thing.
Only eternal things are important. Where you will be a trillion years from now is important, whether you know it or not.
Ah, gotcha, so God refers to an entity with three parts. So God has division, great, glad we got through that, we all agree that God is divided into three pieces.
So, Jesus is not God, because Jesus is actually just a constituent piece of God. Like a limb dangling in the mortal realm.
Hell is the outer darkness.
> remember that there are mysteries beyond explanation.
This is such a cop out. If Catholics don't know the answer just they should just say they have no fucking clue instead of trying to half ass an explanation and then backing out when hard pressed.
Modalism is anti-trinitarian, it's a complete non-argument to try and defend modalism by defending trinitrianism.
In what way? Mosalism seems more about unity than saying there are three distinct persons.
God refers to God.
God is a triune, supernatural, eternal spirit being who manifested Himself as a human being in order to save human beings from their condemnation.
If the one is true, the other is false. Trinity is true; modalism is therefore false.
>It will be the only thing you care about in a thousand years. The only thing. The most important thing.
Proofs?
>Only eternal things are important.
Second law of thermodynamics says nothing's eternal bucko
Where is that? Do you mean outer space, bucko?
You said it; "the father is IN me", not "the Father is me". Jesus states that the person of the Father is different from himself, while also aknowledging his owndivinity.
Jesus, the Son, was baptized.
God, the Father, spoke out and said "this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."
The Spirit descended upon Jesus like a dove.
Modalism says that only one person can appear at a time. At the baptism of Jesus, and at the cross, all three persons are there.
You will receive all the proofs your foolish and dark heart desires, when it is too late to change your eternal destiny, you absolute fool.
No, outer darkness. What you call space is merely the second heaven.
The Son and Father are bound as One by the Spirit.
Jesus is in the Father, as the Father is in Jesus.
Stop trying to brute force n dimensional beings you cannot possibly comprehend, and instead, seek your own salvation.
Once saved, you will be provided with the tools you require to understand the things of God.
I agree modalism is heretical to trinitarians. I am glad you have agreed with me.
>You will receive
So you have no proofs to offer, which means you're a waste of my time.
>you absolute fool
Anyone who says "You fool" will be in danger of the kingdom of hell. Doesn't your dogma say that?
Where is that? Answer the question. "Space outside the universe" doesn't make sense.
When two things are mutually exclusive, showing that one is true is the best argument to make that the other is false, would you not agree?
Lot of fancy words with little explanation or clear relation to what was said.
If God has three pieces, then Jesus is not God. Rather, Jesus would be a piece of God.
It looks like you're claiming that God transformed into Jesus in some way. Did he just transform part of his being so as to constitute Jesus, or does the term "Jesus" refer to the entirety of God when God is actively walking the Earth disguised as a mortal?
>Modalism says that only one person can appear at a time.
Where?
The universe.
Jesus rose from the dead.
That's all the evidence required.
When are you going to understand that NOTHING about God makes sense to the children of satan?
No he didn't.
God does not have three pieces.
God does not transform from one person to another.
God is triune.
Seeking your own salvation is understanding the Holy Trinity, it's in the Athanasian creed.
In the definition of modalism.
How does this defend using water as an analogy for the Trinity?
You'll know that he did, a thousand years from now.
I suggest not waiting.
Believing in Jesus is salvation, not comprehending the trinity.
When are you going to understand that bullshit only makes sense to people who believe bullshit? Why should i believe your bullshit over a fucking scientologist? Now fuck off, you're selling, I'm not buying.
At the triple point, H20 is solid, liquid, and gas.
It's not a perfect analogy, but all three, solid, liquid, and gas, are H20.
I believed that before I was saved, when I was a lost, arrogant, narcissistic sinner like you.
I won't, because he didn't.
They obviously can't be entirely "one" if you are recognising that two separate entities. There is some point of distinction, and therefore you are in violation of the principle of non contradiction.
Which goes directly to your next point, which is that apparently nobody can comprehend your doctrine. "Is my doctrine incomprehensible because it is in violation of fundamental principles of reason? No, everyone else is wrong!"
>At the triple point, H20 is solid, liquid, and gas.
Jesus isn't only one with the Father at the right pressure.
And yet He did, changed the world, and you're still talking about him in the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Seventeen.
He obviously can.
Hence the lack of perfect analogies.