Is the Christian Trinity a Conspiracy ?

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by truejew

 

Alright what about this one ?

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (KJV)

This was even on pg 1 of this thread.

edit on 9-12-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

1 John 5:7 is viewed as a questionable verse. Meaning it may not be Scripture. Even if it was, there is no mention of the Father, the Word, and Holy Spirit being a holy trinity.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by truejew

 

Alright what about this one ?

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (KJV)

This was even on pg 1 of this thread. Do we right John off as a liar ?

Narrowgate

Guess it's all yours again Narrow.

edit on 9-12-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

Oh no I am done.

We have provided ample evidence, at this point anyone who doesn't see that is simply refusing to.

I am wondering if he is going to say that Jesus is not the Word though.... never know when people decide for themselves which pieces of scripture are inspired by the Holy Spirit and which pieces are fraudulent entries.

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by truejew

 

We have provided ample evidence, at this point anyone who doesn't see that is simply refusing to.

I do not see providing no Scripture as evidence.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by truejew

 

We have provided ample evidence, at this point anyone who doesn't see that is simply refusing to.

I do not see providing no Scripture as evidence.

I call hoax.

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by truejew

 

I call hoax.

You were asked to show a Scripture where the trinity is taught. The only one you provided said nothing about your three gods/persons doctrine and it is even questionable that Jesus spoke it as written.

reply to post by truejew


We provided multiple pieces of Scripture. Since we do not worship 3 God's and only one you will not find any.

Talk about looking way too hard for conspiracy.

You can't be serious....

So the Father and Son are one, but you are having trouble with the Holy Spirit or what??

there is no importance to any 3 parts of god over the infinite parts of creation.

If god has 3 forms he also has 11, 65, 47.5, 98, 1284, as well as 6 parts.

it is all crapola made to appeal to pagans so as to up converts.

reply to post by truejew


If there is only one, why do you address it as three? Every meal, people cross themselves to indicate THREE THINGS: Forehead (Father/Mind), Chest (Body/Son), and the Shoulders (Holy Ghost/Spirit). It's also indicative of the overlap between earth and heaven, man and god, mortality and divinity.

None of this sounds like a monotheistic faith. A father, a ghost, and a son cannot be the same thing unless you're watching a Doctor Who episode - or a severely tripped out Futurama episode. Therefore, they are the three sides representing one CONCEPT. Hence the pyramid, in which so much occult knowledge is visualized.

When I see Christianity, I see three gods representing the entirety of a concept. What concept is that? Perfection. Not that we would know anything about such an idea. Perfection is beyond us, because we have not yet accepted who we are. We are never satisfied, because we are always afraid. Have you never wondered why we are always afraid? Because fear is an excellent control mechanism.

Hence, Christianity.

reply to post by NarrowGate


You did not provide any verse that describes God as the three gods/persons taught by your church.

I can provide Scripture where He is described as the Holy One. Where is He described as a holy trinity?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by truejew

 

If there is only one, why do you address it as three?

I don't. There is one God, Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

Every meal, people cross themselves to indicate THREE THINGS: Forehead (Father/Mind), Chest (Body/Son), and the Shoulders (Holy Ghost/Spirit). It's also indicative of the overlap between earth and heaven, man and god, mortality and divinity.

That is a catholic thing.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

None of this sounds like a monotheistic faith. A father, a ghost, and a son cannot be the same thing unless you're watching a Doctor Who episode - or a severely tripped out Futurama episode. Therefore, they are the three sides representing one CONCEPT. Hence the pyramid, in which so much occult knowledge is visualized.

The Father is Spirit. The Father is Holy. The Father is the Holy Spirit. The Son is the Father manifest in flesh. These are three roles that God has to bring us to salvation. The catholic trinity of three gods/persons is a perversion of these roles.

reply to post by truejew

I don't. There is one God, Jesus Christ.

Then you may as well stop talking about the Father and the Holy Ghost, because there's no need for them if Jesus is the one and only god.

That is a catholic thing.

Catholicism and Christianity are very closely related. They share many of the same beliefs, and they both cross themselves in the name of the trinity.

The Father is Spirit. The Father is Holy. The Father is the Holy Spirit. The Son is the Father manifest in flesh. These are three roles that God has to bring us to salvation. The catholic trinity of three gods/persons is a perversion of these roles.

So the cosmic prince was his own father? Seriously, what Stephen King novel was this stuff pulled out of? It would make a fantastic sequel for the Dark Tower series! In all of history, on one single isolated occasion a self-engendered cosmic prince came to save the world, promised he would be back one day, and advised that we all give our souls to him or we'll burn for all of eternity.

Remind me how this dude is so much greater than "Satan"? Seems like for someone so obviously benevolent and loving, he goes a little out of his way to show us that he cares (just like a politician would) and then declares that for the price of our soul, we can live forever (again, just like a politician). Furthermore, if we refuse, then we get incarcerated indefinitely. Once again, sounds remarkably like a politician.

Meanwhile, "Satan" sits and says nothing. He doesn't tick "God" off, he doesn't show himself to the world, he doesn't make repeated attempts to usurp the human race...seriously, why are we so afraid of this guy? Because someone says we should be? I've seen and heard more evidence that "God" is the bad guy than "Satan" ever was.

And while his creator is being worshipped, despite being the progenitor of everything dark and sinister, Mr. Satan being demonized for behaving exactly as he was created to. No wonder he's hacked off at everything. I would be too!

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I refer you to the Catechism. It has answers to all of your questions and misconceptions.

I have adequately provided evidence that Catholics only worship one God. That God has 3 aspects, they are called The Father (who is actually not male), the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are a part of the same entity but distinguishable from one another.

Similar to how your mind, body, and soul are distinguishable from one another yet a part of the same entity.

People will believe what they want to I guess.

As for the topic of the fall of Satan, you obviously have never bothered to look into it. Look to the Catechism.

God does not ever take away free will.


edit you also have misconceptions about Hell. If you do not want to be with God, you go to Hell. There are different levels of hell, and it is nothing more than eternal separation from God. Of course, you have to deal with demons and Satan who are also being cast into hell.

reply to post by NarrowGate


In matters of omniscience and omnipotence, there are only two choices:

1. There is an opportunity at some point along a particular timeline. "God" prevents it.

2. There is an opportunity at some point along a particular timeline. "God" allows it.

At any given moment in any given timeline in any given place, both choices belong to "God" and "God" alone. Any illusion of choice in our lives results from his having made one of the two choices above. Nothing can happen unless one of those two choices is made.

In this sense, free will is an illusion for every single creature and object that isn't "God". All choices pass through his screening process before we are ever aware of the opportunity to make those choices, but we think we have free will because we can't miss a choice we never had. And "God", knowing this, is laughing all the while.

I look at it like a circle of dots. If you see the whole circle, you can choose one at random and count all the way around until you reach it again. But if you only see a small portion of it at a time, twenty dots become an infinite number because your perception leads you to believe that there is still more dots to be followed. Because of your limited perception, you remain ignorant of the reality of the circle, and you chase yourself in circles for your entire existence, because you never realize you're tracing the same path. Now say a loop extends from that circle, leading back around to it. You follow that loop and you believe you've found an entirely new circle. Sometimes, it changes color just to sustain that illusion. But it's still the same circle.

That's called the illusion of free will. You see it everywhere, if only you can peek outside the little box of your limited perception. It's possible, but you have to be willing to accept what you find. If you don't want answers, don't ask questions.

And most people don't want answers anymore. They just want reassurance because they've lost faith in the answers. They want a pillow to cry on and a song to help them sleep. That's all.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Thought provoking but the whole set up is false. I will come back for this one, it is just now getting interesting.

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

I refer you to the Catechism. It has answers to all of your questions and misconceptions.

The catechism is the same as the Watchtower, Book of Mormon... To me. If your evidence is not Scripture, it is not evidence.

Originally posted by NarrowGate

I have adequately provided evidence that Catholics only worship one God. That God has 3 aspects, they are called The Father (who is actually not male), the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are a part of the same entity but distinguishable from one another.

I know that Catholics believe that their three gods/persons are one god, but they are deceived.

Originally posted by NarrowGate

Similar to how your mind, body, and soul are distinguishable from one another yet a part of the same entity.

They don't have vocal conversations though. If yours do, that is not normal and you should seek help for that.

reply to post by truejew

The catechism is the same as the Watchtower, Book of Mormon... To me. If your evidence is not Scripture, it is not evidence.

I disagree. If it was written by ignorant sheepherders, it's IRRELEVANT. If it was written by a society whose understanding of the world would take up a page or less in Word Doc, after being combed for superstition and folklore, then it's IRRELEVANT. If it's written through influence of a mythological figure whose presence is yet undetermined in the modern world, even despite our technology and scientific understand, then it's IRRELEVANT.

I do, however, entertain the possibility of its veracity purely for educational purposes. After all, you cannot truly understand the light unless you venture into the dark.

I know that Catholics believe that their three gods/persons are one god, but they are deceived.

From what I have observed, all across ATS and their respective relations with the world, as well as in my own separate lifetime, it seems that Christianity and Catholicism and Baptism and Lutherans and Evangelists have all fractured into tributary churches, each choosing what it wants to believe and conveniently ignoring the rest by means of technicalities or pointing out where someone said such and such and therefore this is invalid.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the truth only have one version? One version that remains the same no matter where it goes? The same people do the same thing and say the same stuff and establish the same rules and possess the same nature and think the same way. And yet, we have dozens and dozens of different churches all emphasizing and brow-beating about different angles and perspectives, all of which culminate if a hundred different styles of the same exact truth which has now evolved into a plethora of flavors that counter act and conflict at varying junctures.

That doesn't sound like truth to me. That sounds like people who can't agree on which version of history they can all be satisfied with. But perhaps that's because everyone wants something different from their religion, and so they rework it until they have it. And then, voila! A dozen different denominations all offering something different, something more palatable.

And that's reason #52 for not trusting the Bible.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

I refer you to the Catechism. It has answers to all of your questions and misconceptions.

The catechism is the same as the Watchtower, Book of Mormon... To me. If your evidence is not Scripture, it is not evidence.

Originally posted by NarrowGate

I have adequately provided evidence that Catholics only worship one God. That God has 3 aspects, they are called The Father (who is actually not male), the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are a part of the same entity but distinguishable from one another.

I know that Catholics believe that their three gods/persons are one god, but they are deceived.

Originally posted by NarrowGate

Similar to how your mind, body, and soul are distinguishable from one another yet a part of the same entity.

They don't have vocal conversations though. If yours do, that is not normal and you should seek help for that.

You just compared my mind body and soul to God. WOW. gg no re. I was using an analogy, that was an actual comparison where the dynamics are compared.

I will be back for AfterI, you did post something that I must reply to but I do not have the time to write a full response to something so complicated right now.

Originally posted by NarrowGate

You just compared my mind body and soul to God.

You were the one who did that.

bible.cc...

It would be wonderful if we could just get passed emotion and just research. Let the answer change us, not us the answer.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

I. It is missing in all the earlier Greek manuscripts, for it is found in no Greek manuscript written before the 16th century. Indeed, it is found in only two Greek manuscripts of any age - one the Codex Montfortianus, or Britannicus, written in the beginning of the sixteenth century, and the other the Codex Ravianus, which is a mere transcript of the text, taken partly from the third edition of Stephen's New Testament, and partly from the Complutensian Polyglott. But it is incredible that a genuine passage of the New Testament should be missing in all the early Greek manuscripts.

II. It is missing in the earliest versions, and, indeed, in a large part of the versions of the New Testament which have been made in all former times. It is wanting in both the Syriac versions - one of which was made probably in the first century; in the Coptic, Armenian, Slavonic, Ethiopic, and Arabic.

III. It is never quoted by the Greek fathers in their controversies on the doctrine of the Trinity - a passage which would be so much in point, and which could not have failed to be quoted if it were genuine; and it is not referred to by the Latin fathers until the time of Vigilius, at the end of the 5th century. If the passage were believed to be genuine - nay, if it were known at all to be in existence, and to have any probability in its favor - it is incredible that in all the controversies which occurred in regard to the divine nature, and in all the efforts to define the doctrine of the Trinity, this passage should never have been referred to. But it never was; for it must be plain to anyone who examines the subject with an unbiassed mind, that the passages which are relied on to prove that it was quoted by Athanasius, Cyprian, Augustin, etc., (Wetstein, II., p. 725) are not taken from this place, and are not such as they would have made if they had been acquainted with this passage, and had designed to quote it. IV. The argument against the passage from the external proof is confirmed by internal evidence, which makes it morally certain that it cannot be genuine.

Its not that hard.

reply to post by truejew


How do we know for sure that JESUS IS GOD? We do not know this!!! He could just be a prophet, Jesus said there is only one father, we are his children and with the help of the Holy spirit and JESUS name is the only way can go to the father who is GOD

So Trinity is mentioned, but not as one person.