Was it autism?

Was it autism?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw
youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw&t=40s
youtube.com/watch?v=I6YVWI71yQQ
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Why do atheists and Jews have such a hard time understanding such a simple concept? Is it their lack of intelligence?

>lol here's a diagram to explain my nonsensical dogma why no understand u mad bro XDDD

it's revelation.

>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.

Nah it was necessary.

I don't get why the Holy Spirit is considered a separate person from the Father

Except Christians don't understand it either. The orthodox position is that it's essentially a mystery.

>makes a diagram of it just so dumb non-Christians can understand it
>still don't understand it

>doesn't understand a simple diagram

it means they're pagans

No, it's a nonsensical attempt to explain their belief that this guy who was crucified by the Romans was actually God himself.

Sounds like poorly written head canon to fix glaring contradictions in the writing.

If A = D, if B = D, and C = D then why not A = B = C = D?
If the three are totally equivalent to God then they should also be the same, otherwise they are not fully God but only aspects of it (God must be greater than the Trinity) but it's considered a heresy.

The diagram is not actually what the Trinity is really supposed to be, mathematically the diagram imply that the Trinity is part of God but that God is more than the Trinity.

I'll just go ahead and post this for people to argue about:

youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw

So there is even more guys than just three?

I'm not saying that, just that just showing that diagram only imply that things called the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinct things existing into something called God.

The actual explanation of the Trinity involve other concepts like hypostases but they are not implied at all in op's diagram so it's not alone an explanation of the Trinity.

If you can't conceive the Trinity, you are a brainlet.

>Supercenturio Chalmus hope you're ready to accept YHWH, Jesus and the holy spirit
>I thought we were having monotheism
>Oh ho no I said "my new theism" it's a christian dialect.
>Really? Well I met Arius and he never used the term.
>Oh no ot Arius. It's an Athanasius expression.
>I see. You know these 3 gods are quite similar to polytheism.
>Oh ho no. Old jewish prophesies.
>For monotheism?
>Yes.
>Yes. And you call it monotheism despite the fact that they are obviously 3.
>I uhm excuse me.

God is obviously triple sleeving.

Watch Altered Carbon if you want to understand that reference.

>Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.
>one
Deuteronomy 6:4

sneed

Arianism still exists in the form of islam and unitarianism.
I dont know which one is worse.

steam and ice are water in different forms
but steam isn't ice; and ice isn't steam.

No because they are not the same being. It's not Jesus is a god god is a god spirit is a god.

lmao

Haram autism indeed

You forgot Muslims. The central tenet of Islam is that the trinity is bullshit, therefore Christians who don't buy it are closer to Islam than Catholicism

So?

God can't be 3 and also 1.

Jews, Christians, and Muslims, what DONT u understand

>Modalism again
youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw

>whats to argue matie
>just convert, and get drunk to celebrate your conversion

even though catholicism/christianity is complete falsehood, it sure is fun feeling superior and righteous and like an actual decent human being without the yardstick being moved on you all the time like liberalism

Jesus is not God hes a half jew.

yes and only the view of arianism christianity makes sense

>I'm so much smarter than thousands of years of Christian philosophers.

If you think God makes sense to the human mind it is because you are a retard.

Starfilullah

It's almost like logic can't answer every question or something.

Can logic even justify the validity of using logic to arrive at truth?

Implying proddies and Catholics aren't moving the yardstick. With the increasing amount of bible bending ludicrousy that gets taught as "Biblical truth" these days, I wouldn't be surprised if in 10 years, even atheism is considered a way to Heaven. Twerking for Jesus, gay sex for Jesus, and Jesus raves are happening already--i shudder to imagine whats next.


This is why Orthodoxy is necessary

>father
>the holy spirit

Why is there a distinction being made here? Isn't god basically also a holy spirit and refered to as the father?
Two-thirds of that entire diagram isn't even needed. Why couldn't those autists in the past just agree that god is just a sentient power that controls the universe? Why this needlessly convoluted mess?

Congrats for realising that the trinity is incoherent and ultimately a big part of why Christianity ought to be rejected.

>Isn't god basically also a holy spirit and refered to as the father?

Pretty much lol. That's the point. They're the same, but different parts of the same thing.

queue the hebrew mythology cucks' favourite chant: "god doesn't have parts"

What part of the chart is incoherent? You seem to be an expert.

"Aspects of the same essence"

underrated

The chart is not incoherent, the teachings surrounding it are incoherent.

If Christians just wanted to say that there is a God and he has main parts, then it would be fine. "The Son" wouldn't be synonymous with "The Father" or "The Holy Spirit", and vice versa. However, they'd all be subsumed under the category/entity "God".

lol, aspects, like distinct features or parts?

...

>However, they'd all be subsumed under the category/entity "God".
I think that IS actually how it works though. The way I've heard it in Orthodox Churches is "of the same essence." Different parts, different aspects, but the same essence (I.e. they're not synonymous, but they are all God)

I think your main beef is with Protestants (and maybe Catholics), not Orthodox Christians. (I'm not too familiar with Catholic teaching though)

That is not a good representation. Here is a better one.

Here's another one. (Of course, I'm joking here so no one get triggered)

Right, I could have worded it better, I wasn't trying to say that the chart itself contains a contradiction. The three things would have different definitions, and they would be the three main parts of the entity called "God".

So, their god would have at least three main pieces. Or perhaps there are three creatures and the term "god" is the name for the category of these divine entities.

The problem is that it contradicts other claims that Christians make about their god. The first claim made is that he lacks division, but as you can see above...

I just had a revelation. God is a leaf

I guess you would need it to be a category. In the same way you call three books of the same set "a trilogy", one might call three parts of the same Godhead "the Trinity". They're separate, but they are all the same story, in a sense. Each part is distinct and has different characteristics--but it still makes up the Trinity.

The second issue is that of division. You could take one book out of the set, right? Well, in the same way though, if you take "The fellowship of the Ring" away from the remaining books, it is still "the Lord of the Rings". It's fundamental identity is still that of the others.

I don't know if Christians actually think they're inseparable. I can't imagine that that would be the case, if one believes the Bible is true. Why would Jesus reportedly pray to his "Father" if that was the case? If they were truly all the same, inseparable, Jesus wouldn't petition like that. I think that in reality, they are separable, in theory--but that still, their essence is the same. Just like you can take a processor, a hard drive and a graphics card out of your PC, and call it "a computer"

I'm a brainlet though.

That's a clover baka

It is only a guess, but I would think that is is because the transfiguration had not yet occurred. I vaguely remember that after the resurrection, he told someone, don't touch me, I have not yet ascended to the father.

...

I guess we'll need a Christian to come and confirm. Whenever I see a discussion of the trinity, the Christians invariably want to call their God a single entity without parts/division. The wording varies, but it's not uncommon for them to say that God is "The One" or some other variant of monad. It ultimately becomes an incoherent teaching for this reason.

There are other contradictions and issues that commonly come up, too. For example, many Christians also say that God is "The Good", or "The Dao", or "The Word". A brief examination shows that they have to give up all of hebrew mythology if they want to maintain such a position, or otherwise admit that God really isn't synonymous with any of those terms. This is because any agreeable definition for those words will not encompass an entity that can perform various mythological actions.

In regards to God being some sort of encompassing category or essence for three different pieces, there is another thing that I find Christians object to:

Jesus is less than God. The Father is less than God. The Holy Spirit is less than God.

It all follows because God encompasses more than any one of those entities. It's not true to call any of those entities God, so much as "godly". Which goes into a whole new set of issues with the group of Christians who claim that everything is god.

The incoherence of Christian teachings is ultimately rooted in their faith in hebrew mythology. It's as though the Christians recognised the superior teachings of ancient philosophers, and they honestly wanted to adopt the truth, but at the same time they could not stop worshiping the works of man (scripture).

Huh that's interesting. Idk though. Doesn't seem canonical to me

I think OT is seen differently. The modern Christians that I know don't really view Hebrew mythology/OT as factual--many see Genesis as poetry. This makes a lot of sense to me desu. You no longer have to see factual natural selection as a contradiction, etc. (And a lot of it is pretty wack anyways--i.e. nephilim)

I think when God is described as "The Word" it means "the ultimate reality". Not sure about the other stuff

But if you look at Orthodox (who are, in my opinion, the very best Christians, if not the only really smart ones), the basis of their belief system is literally just the nicean Creed. Refreshingly simple and straightforward. There's other stuff too--they still talk about all sorts of theology--but ultimately, they believe that many of these issues (like the Trinity) cannot be known completely. If you believe that there is a God, I think maybe this is the only way to go--to think that you can use logic to completely understand God, in their view, is both arrogant and incorrect. Logic, as some have said before, cannot even justify using logic to come to truth.

Also, I meant to include you in this too. I think maybe there's a difference between "less than" when apart and "part of". If that makes sense

Also there's a difference between pantheism and panentheism. I think panentheism is somewhat more acceptable. But thats my opinion. Look into it, if you can

(See above for my take on Christians and Hebrew mythology)

I don't think that you have it correct . To me it is like your right brain, left brain, and the rest of your body.
They are all part of the same person.
But when they get separated, things don't work right.
Like in split brain surgery. After separation of the right and left brain have different perceptions, concepts, and impulses to act on. Separation of the brain from the rest of the body does not work well either....
But I am a brainlet in this discussion. I could ask my neighbors. I live next to a convent.

>apples are red
>firetrucks are red
>therefore firetrucks are apples

modal/formal logic is tough actually. I couldn't really follow the other user's post.

Are you trained in logic user? Wheres a good place to start?

The difficulty comes from people (I'm using this term loosely here) not understanding that the "is" are arrows instead of equalities, like what this idiot assumed.
The Son, Father and Holy Spirit are nothing more than subcategories (or equivalent thereof) of the ∞-category of God, with the "is" being injective functors.
It's extremely simple concept to grasp but apparently that's not the case for most people (again, I'm using this term loosely).

It's worse, in fact. He is saying they're literally the same, "=". So therefore there would be no difference between the terms Son, Father, Holy Spirit. They're all synonyms and it would be impossible to distinguish them except in the sense that we have three different sounds/symbols (which itself is an error).

why would god pray to himself?

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Matthew 27:46

you got to be dense as fuck if you think that jesus is god. if you read the bible, it's pretty clear that he's not god.

Different parts of the same God, right? Different, communicating parts


Also, you've never had an internal dialogue?

Half? Jews are always all or nothing, based on the status of the mother

It's Christianity 101 desu.

i've never prayed to myself. have you? and god isn't a human with a simple human mind, he's fucking god.

...

Honestly all of this seems convulated, is there really any evidences of the Trinity being the most logical conclusion from the Bible besides tradition?

You do understand Jesus was given a mortal, i.e. limited, form while on Earth, right

>If A = D, if B = D, and C = D then why not A = B = C = D?
But that's not even close to what we're talking about, retard. A closer analogy would be A⊂D, B⊂D, C⊂D so D = {A, B, C} but A≠B≠C.

Inconsistent logics can prove anything and can prove that consistent logics are consistent. Consistent logics cannot be used to prove inconsistent logics correct.

Therefore of the two weeble snarble bloxgrod.

All heresies.

I'm just gonna go ahead and clear up some misconceptions here. The holy trinity is Catholic fan fiction that stems from mistranslations. First off, the holy spirit is not a "person", nor a "being". The holy spirit refers to God's power. His "breath", his "hands" and "fingers" which he used to shape everything. You notice how in the old testament god doesn't really interfere too much? He just sends angels to give messages and every involvement by him is a miracle? Well one of the reasons why Jesus was sacrificed was to connect humans to the "holy spirit". To build a bridge so that god could speak to directly to us (almost like a conscious), and so blessings wouldn't have to be "miracles" but just part of everyday life. And l cannot think of a single place in the original translation where they say Jesus is YHWH. Whether the lines are twisted, or outright ADDED from the original text. "But Jesus isn't YHWH, but he is god". So are angels. The word "El" is used to refer to angels, demons, "other/THOSE people's" gods, etc. He's JUST "God's mortal, begotten son". Perhaps that one descends from all the theories about Jesus being around since the OT, where god is referred to as Elohim (gods (plural). But remember how angels are also referred to as "el/elohim"? More likely it's just talking about the heavenly posse as a whole.

Believe it or not, that's what the original Jewish/Greek texts say. Most of these weird questions/contradictions arise in later translations. I genuinely can't think of anything like that in the original texts.

youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw&t=40s

T. Neoplatonist

>Don't call me good. Only God is good.
whoopsie

>Was it autism?

It was collaborative high treason by devil worshiping demagogues.

youtube.com/watch?v=I6YVWI71yQQ

If you don't like Pope that much why not just convert to one of many established heresies instead of inventing your own?

"Prayer" is a faithful functor from a subcategory into one that contains it as an object. If the underlying category is Set (such as in the case of mortals), then the embedding is not only an full but also representable. In essence prayer is how the arrows of the "larger" category "keeps track" of the arrows of the "smaller" category.
Extremely stupid questions like these is why theologians are never taken seriously.

>autists discussing nonsense
It’s faith. You believe whatever you want to believe. It’s not real and the people who started it didn’t think it through.

from what I understand is that it's bassicly like bodyparts

an arm is part of the same body as a nose but an arm isn't the same thing as a nose

>my opinion is the only thing that can be true and everyone who thinks otherwise is stupid, waah!

You can discuss it all you want, but you will never get to a conclusion because there isn’t one. It makes sense to discuss it from the point of view of the Church, but not as a real concept.

>when retards try to defend the logic of the Trinity, but end up committing heresy
Happens every time. Learn your own religion you fuckwits

Hello, friends. I have all you need to know about this:

"Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created Him from dust; then He said to him, 'Be,' and he was." [3:59]

"O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, 'Three'; desist - it is better for you..." [4:171]

"They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary..." [5:17]

"It is not [befitting] for Allah to take a son; exalted is He! When He decrees an affair, He only says to it, 'Be,' and it is." [19:35]

Lastly, "And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah untruth while he is being invited to Islam. And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people." [61:7]

Remember, Allah (God) is One. It is not comlex but very simple: he is all-knowing, ever-merciful, and created all things. He does not require a long explanation.

It's actually "why do you call me good?"
Baka