Christians, do you actually believe in this "trinity" nonsense?

Christians, do you actually believe in this "trinity" nonsense?

I've been reading, and there is no real evidence for trinitarianism. Obviously what happened is early biblical scholars realized there were numerous passages in the bible that apparently contradicted monotheism. Their solution to this "paradox" was to just claim God is actually three persons in one (which is itself paradoxical), and they hobbled together some passages to make it seem valid. This is despite the fact that there are numerous other passages that invalidate it.

This is a major part of why I reject Abrahamic religions. People do not make arguments by looking at The Bible, Tankh, Quran, etc. holistically. They just pick what they want and ignore what they don't in order to validate any argument they want. I was having a convo with these guys from the religion club who argued to me the existence of "God the Mother" (in addition to "God the Father") by showing me several scriptures (from the beginning of the bible to the end). It was an excellent argument if you accepted the premises on which biblical belief and the kind of argumentation that has kept these religion going for several thousand years.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trimurti
youtube.com/watch?v=CUkhWBKCuXc
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>looking for answers from Sup Forums instead of reading the mountains of work on it that's already been done
>baiting 30 year old virgins on a tanzanian throat-singing board

Not anti-theistic. Don't wear a fedora. Just baffled by how people can just accept really stupid arguments. This isn't about, say, this notion of "faith" used to validate ones own belief in a higher power. This is about bad arguments (trinity was not even a thing until ~400AD).

I started researching it after a convo I had with some religious folk at school. I don't spend much time in religious discussions and this is the first time I developed a somewhat firm opinion on a religious topic.

I'd rather hear what people here have to say rather than passively taking in information.

>implying it requires mountains of "work" to prove something that should be patently obvious to the most casual observer
>not drawing the opposite conclusion, that the mountains of papers and millions of mere words, mere semantic constructions, that are used to support the premise instead point to its fundamental improbability
nigger gay faggot nigger

found the triggered fedora

>Just baffled by how people can just accept really stupid arguments
Yeah dude. Literally 2,000 years of theology by some of the most brilliant men to ever exist and all they've ever come up with are "really stupid arguments."

Have you considered that you're just talking to stupid people - or at least inarticulate and uneducated people?

Go read some actual theology and then, maybe, you can have an opinion.

>I've been reading, and there is no real evidence
oh really?

Most of the arguments for the trinity have been it being a divine mystery. Not the best argument.

If you want to go down that route--there are plenty of people more intelligent than these theologians who claimed their bible and their biblical interpretations were bullshit, since the beginning of history.

I've read enough to see that the notion of trinity has no basis in any logical argument.

>God is actually three persons in one (which is itself paradoxical)
From what I understand, the trinity could be thought of as the various "manifestations / forms?" of God in which God relates with the Creation.

The Father is the Ground of All Being, the Absolute, the metaphysical.

Creation: Unknown -> Big Bang -> Universe -> Earth -> Humans
^^^ All Underlined by God, the Base of Creation ^^^

The Son is how God interacts with Creation.

The Holy Spirit is the active force throughout Creation.

>I've been reading, and there is no real evidence for trinitarianism.
True.
>Obviously what happened is early biblical scholars realized there were numerous passages in the bible that apparently contradicted monotheism
False. Superficially this may appear to be the case, however the examples used all fall into two camps:
1. Angels acting as God by proxy
2. Verses along the lines " I am a jealous God, do not worship these other gods" that do not actually acknowledge these other gods as real, or if they seemingly do, it is in a humouring and/or mocking those who believe in said gods sense, e.g. Elijah saying
>Surely [Baal] is a god! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy, or traveling. Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened.
at the alter challenge on Mount Carmel.
I will offer no further evidence as I am a lazy fedora (former non-trinitarian Christian) and don't care.

you're fugggin stupid ,mate

Trininty is literally a poo in loo tier doctrine btw:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trimurti

>I've read enough to see that the notion of trinity has no basis in any logical argument.
Have you even read the Bible cover to cover?

If the answer to that question is no, stop posting immediately.

Theology and Sanity by Frank Sheed

>a square is always a rectangle
>but a rectangle isn't neccessarily a square

Mathematicians, how can you really believe this nonsense?

This is heresy , but because the feeble mind can not understand god it will do its job

Jesus makes it quite clear he was distinct from God. He never made a direct claim to be God, and even the least indirect alleged claims of Godhood were just inserted into translations--well after the fact--by translators who believed the trinity.

There is no reason why you'd expect to have to go through all these hoops to find out such important properties of The God. The Jews, who were dealing with God for thousands of years before Jesus came along, would have already known. The whole Father-Son relation doesn't even have compatibility with what anyone understands about father and son relationships, which are inherently hierarchical.

A lot of people have difficulty understanding the Trinity, so I will give you the Orthodox rundown.

First off, the biggest issue people with the Trinity is that they don't see how it is meaningfully different from Tritheism (the heresy of three Gods). I will explain that do you: though the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are three distinct existences of God, they have one essence, will and action among them. Everything God does is From the Father, By the Son, and in the Holy Spirit. When you take an action, let's say, reading a book: the book comes from somewhere, and read is reading in somewhere else (like your room), but read BY you. Generally, you only do the by, the from, or the in. God does all three, he is completely self-sufficient.

Now, let's look at how the Son is begotten: this means, that the existence of the Son is eternal, but it is predicated upon the Father's existence, that is the Father furnishes the Son's existence, but he always has. The Spirit's existence is also furnished by the Father, in that the Spirit proceeds from the Father (he is channeled through the Son, but his existence is endowed from the Father). That means that the Father is the bedrock of the entire Trinity. In Roman Catholicism, God's essence is the bedrock, the principle of the Trinity; in Orthodoxy, the Father is the principle (so in a way, Orthodoxy is more existentialist, since the existence of the Father is principle, instead of the essence of the Trinity)

Each person of the Trinity is a distinct existence of one essence, sort of like how if you went back in time and met yourself, there would be two existences of you at the same time, but they'd both be you. Latin terminology would be three subsistences of one substance.
The Trinity has one will and one action. This will comes from the Father, but the other persons of the Trinity are not automatons following his will, the will is as much theirs as his, but the Father is the *principle* of the Trinity's will

Genesis 18 depicts the Trinity

>I've been reading, and there is no real evidence for trinitarianism. Obviously what happened is early biblical scholars realized there were numerous passages in the bible that apparently contradicted monotheism. Their solution to this "paradox" was to just claim God is actually three persons in one (which is itself paradoxical), and they hobbled together some passages to make it seem valid. This is despite the fact that there are numerous other passages that invalidate it.

Early Christianity was not based on the Bible. It was based on the teachings of the apostles. You are thinking too much like a Protestant. In early Christianity, the texts of the New Testament were not complete, and even when they were, there was no official declaration of which were canonical. Trinitarianism was something taught by the apostles; all new Christians were baptised in the Trinitarian formula ('in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit'.) The Church fathers were Trinitarians, although the philosophical exposition of it developed over time.

explain?

In fact, Trinitarianism is one of two doctrines without which there is no way that you can be called Christian. The two fundamental Christian mysteries are:

The Holy Trinity
The Incarnation of the Word

If you don't believe in both of these you simply are not a Christian.

Compare Genesis 18:10 and Genesis 18:14

How does this (attempted) explanation compare to the the Orthodox understanding of the trinity?

Not going to respond to this?

>That means that the Father is the bedrock of the entire Trinity. In Roman Catholicism, God's essence is the bedrock, the principle of the Trinity; in Orthodoxy, the Father is the principle (so in a way, Orthodoxy is more existentialist, since the existence of the Father is principle, instead of the essence of the Trinity)

This implies that there is a doctrinal difference on the Holy Trinity between Orthodoxy and Catholicism. There isn't one, at least not on this point. These are just two theological systems which speculate on the doctrine of the Trinity, but neither is official. You could be Catholic and hold this Orthodox theology (which is more accurately called Cappadocian theology), and you could be Orthodox and hold this Catholic theology (which is more accurately called Augustinian).

Okay, time to debunk this;
God = A
Father = B
Son = C
Holy Spirit = D

According to the graph. A=B, A=C, and A=D, therefore A, B, C, and D all equal the EXACT SAME FUCKING THING.

Who ever wrote this needs to go back to college algebra or something, this math is way off.

when i read it its about 3 angels. God has taken possesion of one angel , after that the 2 angels travel to sodom.

"God" is a title, but can be used as a name--like Lord. This is true in English, Hebrew and Greek. When YHWH is saying no other Gods, he means no one else is to share that title *as it applies to him*, not that there aren't other supernatural entities who are powerful (angels and demons).

Christ is God as in YHWH made flesh. All Three persons of the Trinity are YHWH.

That is heresy, known as Sabellianism. The three persons are not three "states" of God, they are three distinct existences, three distinct subjects. But they all share one will and action, not three wills and action in sync, but one will and action (but each performs a particular function of a given action, the from, by, or in).

No, the official Catholic position, in dogma, is that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as "one principle". The official dogma of the Orthodox Church is that the Holy Spirit proceeds through the Son, but from the Father alone as principle. This is why the Filioque was so controversial.

>everything is a math problem
there's where you went wrong

A is tasty
B is tasty
C is tasty
But A, B and C are not interchangeable

It's not that hard

Yes, but that is a separate issue. The original issue is on the relations of God's essence to God's Persons, not the relations between the Persons which is the Filioque controversy. Cappadocian and Augustinian theology precede the Filioque controversy by centuries.

Abraham refers to them as "Lord" in the singular. (Genesis 18:2)

>And he said, I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him.

>Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son


i dont see jack shit about the trinity

What are you going to do with eternity Sup Forums? How long do you think you will make it before you reincarnate?

Watch this. Long but very, very interesting.
youtube.com/watch?v=CUkhWBKCuXc

Why should it be obvious? Reality is often very non-obvious and quite weird and paradoxical. See modern physics.

I think Jesus had to dumb it down a bit, but said just enough for some of the underlying reality to be discerned.

Augustinian Triadology wasn't translated into Greek until long after the controversy. Suffice to say, while the Orthodox consider Augustine a saint, we see is Triadology as erroneous. We just didn't encounter it until the Filioque.

If Y is X, that means Y has all the properties associated with X, and none of the properties NOT associated with X. As long as it is H2O, it is water, as that is what defines water, regardless of state.

But the properties of God include being omnipotent and omniscient, something Jesus was not, but The Father is.

John 16:15

Nah nice reading it that way, but the angels are gods servants so he does not greed them , he only kneels for the lord


>22And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD.

who went to sodom?

>1And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them;

the 2 angels who left abraham

The the graph needs to be written as A = B but B ≠ A and so on and so forth, because right now it's as incoherent as the entire Bible.

"Baptisez les au nom du Père, du Fils et du Saint-Esprit". AU nom, au singulier.
Qu'est-ce que vous comprenez pas ?

You genius, you're right, that would obviously be so much easier to understand.

Case closed then, glad I solved Christianity.

I used to wear the fedora.

Look at the world around you and tell me this isn't the end of days...

If they are distinct existences with distinct wills and actions, they are as separate as you and I are as far as any meaningful understanding of individuality is concerned. "Essence" is not meaningful. I don't understand your reading analogy.

In your description of The Father, The Son, and Holy Spirit's dynamic, there is clearly a hierarchical relationship with one at the top and the other two at the bottom. Again, there is no way to make this compatible with how we understand individuality. Things cannot be ranked differently yet be the same. They can all be components of one machine, but they are not all the machine.

Your time travel analogy is not useful because we don't have any understanding of how time travel would actually work in the physical world.

well done, collect your medal at the door.

>not drawing the opposite conclusion, that the mountains of papers and millions of mere words, mere semantic constructions, that are used to support the premise instead point to its fundamental improbability

They respond as one in Genesis 18:5, not just one of them.

Genesis 18:21-22 says the Lord is saying he will go down, and then says they go down.

I don't know of the two angels have anything to do with the three here, especially since none of the three are called angels, and there is a time lapse (they greet Abraham in "the heat of the day", but the two visit Sodom at evening, and it wasn't just angels taking a long time to walk).

Belief in Jesus as the savior and his teachings are the only beliefs necessary to be considered Christian as far as mainstream theologians are concerned. In fact, you're saying that early Christians weren't Christians.

They have one will, but are distinct subjects. That is, they each "experience" distinctly, so to speak. Christ's humanity, for instance, was only experienced by the Son.

Early Christians certainly believed Jesus was God and that the universe was created by Jesus.

Based on what I remember from my Catholic school classes, you're not supposed to understand these things, you're just a lowly human and can't always understand God's ways. That's where true belief comes in.

Early Christians were Jews who believed Jesus was the messiah they had been waiting for. Jews certainly did not and do not believe The Messiah is God.

If they have distinct experiences, they are distinct individuals. If they are all God, they all have properties that define God, which can only be defined in a polytheistic way, which contradicts a fundamental property of Christianity.

It's been the end of days since the first century AD. The world is and has always been fuck ed up. We've just become more efficient in doing it now.

John 1:3

Hebrews 1:8

John 20:28

John 14:9

The big hint that Christ is God, is that he regularly says I AM in the Gospels. Most blatantly in John 8:58

They have distinct experiences, but they have one will and action. Not three wills and actions, but one will and action.

>1I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.

oke that one is a mystery ,


>I don't know of the two angels have anything to do with the three here,

2 men walk to sodom when they arrive they are indentified as angels and not as men anymore

The three go down during the heat of the day, you think it took them until evening to arrive? Doesn't it make more sense to just assume a different visit?

There are plenty of Christians and Christian groups who do not believe in the trinity.

Like? Are you talking about Mormons and JW's?

trinity is mind body and soul, its all rehashed paganism and astrology

Jesus did not even know The "day of the lord" and specifically says only The Father knows. He was certainly not omniscient. He knew less than The Father.

Jesus is both God and perfect man. That means he was fully human in everything, right down to a human mind taken on with the incarnation. The perfect man does not presume to know this, so neither does Christ. If Christ claimed to, it would impair his humanity and his role as the perfect man who redeems all of humanity.

>16And the men rose up from thence, and looked toward Sodom: and Abraham went with them to bring them on the way.

I dont know how long the walk took from abraham to soddom

>22And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom,

but it seems they where walking

maybe the angels were possesed by jesus and the holy ghost when they were at abrahams

>I dont know how long the walk took from abraham to soddom
The three leave before Abraham does, and the two are said to arrive in the evening

God having "distinct" experiences is entailed by the fact that he is omniscient and omnipresent. If there is only one will and one action, we're dealing with only one actor, and thus the whole of notion of trinity is unnecessary. We're in the exact same place in understanding the properties of God with than without it.

The issue comes in the fact that Jesus and God do not have the same properties. They are not both omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent, so it is nonsense to say there is one will and one action.

Essentially you're saying Jesus was God but he did not have the properties of God, which is obviously nonsense.

One actor with three distinct subjects who each perform distinct functions of each action, yes.

All three persons of the Trinity has all those properties. Christ, in addition to his function as God, must ALSO (not ONLY, but ALSO) be a perfect man.

I'm saying he had the properties of both man and God, and experienced them simultaneously.

Annunaki

I found about Spinoza God - now I know what I believe.

But in general I'm still agnostic.

Christian dogma and theology is pretty autistic to be honest.

>tfw you're an all powerful loving creator but you create a universe where you need to exist in such a retardedly convoluted way that makes people not even take you seriously

Nestorius did nothing wrong

There's no real evidence for God whatever that means outside the brains of the people, don't even know why you why to argue about it, you just believe or you don't that's it. There's tons of apologetic work about it like this guy says , go and read about it.

Water doesn't exist in three states at one time

If being a perfect man means not being God, the perfect man Jesus was NOT God. You cannot simultaneously be omnipresent and not-omnipresent. You cannot be a man, who is limited by the laws of physics, but at the same time turn water into wine or cure lepers with your touch.

"distinct functions of each action" makes no sense.

>This is a major part of why I reject Abrahamic religions.

Hey user, you know how pol has deep geniuses lurking in it....

Think of religions as economic systems, look up roman trust law.

Dont come back here until you get an education.

chick in the background is fucking melting.
'da pope is in for some wang-tang-sweet-poontang tonight!

WHY ARE YOU GUYS SLIDING THIS WW3 CAN BEGIN THANKS TO FUCKING TURK ROACHES

Yes it does. See triple state point

God is dead people, we killed him 100 years ago. If you still believe christianity then you're out of your mind

Oh the mental gymnastics. They should have a religious olympics for trying to make sense of all their illogical bullshit

no you heretic JESUS is the LORD God himself in the form of the Father the Son and the Spirit
Jesus the LORD is definitely NOT a lying dirty jew
he is the LORD GOD of everyone so bow down and kiss his feet

...

I ASSUME THAT THE Son os a three-dimensional projection of a four-/multi-dimensional entity which is the Lord; Holy Spirit, I guess, could be viewed as "idea" or "energy".

There was this guy in Roman Empire once, called Augustine. Great guy, one of most important theologians that ever walked on Earth. He too tired to understand it deaply, more than Church already taught. He was a genius but he still couldn't grab this idea as whole. Until one day he was on a beach and saw a little kid that had a seashell and with it he digged a litte hole and started to transfer water to it. So Augustine asked "What are you doing kiddo?" "I tranfer ocean to this hole" kid said "But this is impossible!" "I will do it before you will understand the Mystery of the Trinity" and then kid vanished. And Augustine stopped to try it.

tl;dr we will never understand it fully so it's pointless to even try. We know that Trinity is True and that God is one in three persons and it's only confirmed thing about it.

>We know that Trinity is True
"we" don't, asswipe

This is heresy (mortalism), You are saying God comes in three distinct forms of the same thing rather being 3 unique persons. The trinity is not meant to be understood by us, and it can only be understood with faith

>typical jewish scam
goy, you've been jewed

/thread

>thinking works written on the gibbering garbage of the Bible will actually make it make sense

>Implying that I would ever associate with non-Christians
Skisłem

Also, you are this autistic Brit that cannot accept that was tricked by Jews in antichristianisms arent you?

fuck off faggot
jesus is a filthy hebrew and always will be
no amount of your absurd whitewashing will make jesus a white man
he was and always will be a faggot cuck kike
just like you

We discussed it already my dear cuck. And you lost. Many times. So get over it jewish shill.