Why are so many posters on /his/ anti-trinitarian?

Because it don't make no sense and all of the "explanations" for it are actually heresies.

>>2225284
Elaborate

>>2225280

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Constantinople_(360)
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/trinity-history.html#Intro

because it's historically not Jesus

Depiction of Jesus is idolatry and worshiping of saints is polytheism.

>>2225292
>No account of a trinity in the OT
This is objectively false

>>2225298

you could provide a source to your claims and not be a contrarian dick, peace be with you

>>2225280
Jesus also didn't focus on it and there are far more esoteric aspects to christianity

>>2225318
It's not something that can be proven with one thread. Do your own research.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Q-A-panel/nowhere.html

>>2225333

>ctrl+x ghost, ctrl+x spirit, ctrl+x trinity, ctl+x three

nada dude

also if the trinity exists in the OT, its Jewish and completely unrelated to the teachings of Jesus

http://www.menorah.org/trinity1.html

>>2225352
Please consider putting more thought power into your research than none at all.

>>2225286
just bring a single logic argument that may prove it

>>2225362

I'm Jewish I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about when I say we don't believe in the trinity

I'm interested in Christianity but trinitarians don't make any damn sense in why they focus on an aspect 1. Jesus never emphasized and 2. the Tanak (OT) don't talk about

seeing as this is a historical board I come here for research points of entry, and you're failing me thus far

>>2225383
>>2225396
Non-trinitarian want a verse in the Bible where Jesus says "I'm god worship me". Jesus does not do this but he proves his divinity in other, indirect, ways. Once people stop caring about the stupid "exact word" criteria, actual research can be done.

>>2225401
cewl LOGIC argument

>>2225411
???

>>2225401

>Non-trinitarian want a verse in the Bible where Jesus says "I'm god worship me"

this is implied and most notrinitarians accept this, non-trinitarian's want a verse in the bible where Jesus says "oh and there this third part and there isn't a fourth and the third part is definitely this thing and not something else I might have said"

>>2225396
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm
People need to understand Christianity isn't about autistically following the words in a book but the accumulation of religious, spiritual and philosophical thought spanning millennia and several different cultures. The trinity falls under "not spelled out in the Bible but believed none the less because of these reasons"

>>2225418
i forgot [sarcasm] and [/sarcasm]

i mean nice faggotry anon

>>2225424
Very compelling argument my friend

File: martin luther.jpg (39KB, 636x640px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 636x640px

>>2225422
SOLA SCRIPTURA

>>2225383
>logic argument
>trinity

tho trinity is purely emotional, nothing of logic nor reason appealing

File: 1484005812461.png (344KB, 1000x773px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1000x773px

>>2225441

>>2225446
>God should be logical
>God should be easy to understand

>>2225422

>People need to understand Christianity isn't about autistically following the words in a book but the accumulation of religious, spiritual and philosophical thought spanning millennia and several different cultures. The trinity falls under "not spelled out in the Bible but believed none the less because of these reasons"

>Jesus is the final messenger of God
>Theologians are required to create to understand God

so which is it dude

>>2225422
>multiple conflicting views of the trinity are outlined on this page

perhaps the worst crime of trinitarians is getting hung up on the autistic machinations of papist scribes that result in threads like these, discussion in this thread has led to 0 insight on to the nature of God and the bringing forth of the Kingdom of Heaven, other than that trinitarianism and its discussion is a giant distraction

>>2225441
SOLA
O
L
A

>>2225280

Because most Christians on /his/ are obnoxious retards, and the rest of /his/ tends to rally in an anti-Christian stance. Anti-trinitarianism goes with the territory.

>>2225457
>easy to understand
>not an absolute unity

>>2225465
You do know that you can't be a Christian and a non-trinitarian, right?

>>2225469
Yes, God is an absolute unity but he is also a trinity. If you bother to do any research you would know this.

>>2225470

I don't know who told you that but it probably wasn't Jesus and your hangups aren't doing anything to bring about the Kingdom of Heaven

>>2225471
We already know its an unity, anon.
I meant by absolute unity what islam and judaism already believe about God.

>>2225465
>so which is it dude
Its religion. It really isn't simplified. Jesus himself spoke in parables and is surrounded by mystery.

>>2225470
So who were the people before the trinity was made orthodoxy then?

>>2225479
Heretics

>>2225476
Scripture teaches the trinity.
>>2225477
Islam and Judaism don't teach the trinity, therefore they do not teach god.

File: trinitarian_jesus.jpg (51KB, 615x750px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 615x750px

>>2225478
>this is what papists really believe

>>2225479
the Disciples/Church Fathers

Why are there so many religious nutjobs on /his/? I've seen people quote the bible on non-theological discussions, ridiculous.

>>2225489
Do you refer to anyone who is not you as a papist?

>>2225486
You can't explain trinity by logic, just by feelings because you like to think it so
Probably anti-trinitarism is because no one likes absurd stuff on /his/

>>2225494
>Something divine can't be explained using human logic
God is not meant to be understood 100% by us, otherwise he would not be God.

>>2225486
>>2225492


no one has quoted any scripture mentioning a threefold structure and what each one is yet in this thread

the ultimate reason why /his/ is mostly anti-trinitarianism is because it results in shit threads like this where nothing but language gets discussed, if you want me to believe in the trinity, show me a passage where Jesus talks about it, or tell me how to experience it myself

>>2225496
but we are not involving understanding of God, anon
we are involving mere acknowledge of his existence

>>2225496

>God is not meant to be understood 100% by us

/his/ is about understanding stuff, so I guess you've just answered OP's question

>>2225465
>perhaps the worst crime of trinitarians is getting hung up on the autistic machinations of papist scribes that result in threads like these, discussion in this thread has led to 0 insight on to the nature of God and the bringing forth of the Kingdom of Heaven, other than that trinitarianism and its discussion is a giant distraction
Its because they're honest about it. The whole idea of formulating a religion into easily digestible things isn't really possible when you understand we're dealing what is otherworldly.

A Buddhist Anon put it best when talking about religions in a different thread....

don't forget it was a priest that came up with the big bang. It's not like science is absolutely incompatible with Christendom--in fact it was born from it. That did not stop it from being delegitimized during the second half of the 20th century. So it's more to do with how people perceive what they think is religious belief and if they're willing to pursue it than what the beliefs are themselves--it's not that they wouldn't honestly consider what this or that canon says but that they, to begin with, wouldn't risk reading.

Westerner are obsessed with being convincing and proving things. So to approach them with "religion" you have to tell them something like "yeah see, meditating on pratityasamutpada/Jesus doesn't get you a Ferrari, but it makes your brain release X and Y substance and feel really good". Which goes into your neuroscience question too.

Capitalism has made a market out of the whole planet pretty much. It's all this costs that, it's equivalent to this much, measures this, gets you this and so on. So an experience that is transcendental, which does away with opposition, which is not easily shareable and deeply individual or dependent on personal history, which shows no physical ramification, is hard to sell.

>>2225498
As long as you still hold onto this "exact word" criteria, you will never know the trinity
>>2225503
The trinity is about understanding god...

>>2225517
Actually no, trinity is a way to acknowledge him.
Creeds (that define trinity) are about understanding God.

>>2225517
>>2225512

>0 discussion of history
>0 discussion of philosophy
>0 in-thread explanations of the trinity that mean anything to anyone
>0 practical uses of the trinity

this is not longer a history or philosophic discussion its something everyone comes up with while they're stoned, OP's question has been answered

occultism belongs here

>>>/x/

>>2225531
Elaborate. A trinity can only work in one way. And that way was established at the council of Nicea

>>2225535

Trinity and filioque work to acknowledge God, or at least they're meant to.
Filioque is a mere scriptural interpretation that isn't even implied in every branch (especially orthodoxy), but trinity (which is agreed by most of the branches) is actually an absurd, illogical fallacy with no practical use.
By acknowledging 1+1+1=1 you're not understanding God, you're acknowledging he is (insert X creed's trinidadian explanation).

>>2225556
>By acknowledging 1+1+1=1 you're not understanding God, you're acknowledging he is (insert X creed's trinidadian explanation).
This is heresy and that is not what the trinity is. Please do more research before making bold claims.

>>2225571
I wasn't claiming anything, anon. Just saying trinity wrongly tries to acknowledge god via a fallacious explanation. Which of course had an historical purpose through the imperial church.

>>2225571
>This is heresy

share your experiences of the divine or fuck off papist, go play warhammer 40k

Tfw just noticed anon didn't even counter my argument that he believes it because he likes to do it.

>>2225578
>share your experiences of the divine or fuck off papist
Cringe worthy

>>2225576
You were flaming the trinity is 1+1+1=1. This is heresy
>>2225578
Knowledge of the divine can only be known through devoit faith.
>>2225593
The trinity is in catholic dogma. Therefore it is christian dogma. Therefore it is the truth.

>>2225598
*claiming

>>2225598
>The trinity is in catholic dogma.
>Therefore it is christian dogma.
>Therefore it is the truth.

Stop making silly premises f.a.m.

just acknowledge trinity has no sense but you believe it because you only needs propositions that stimulate the brain to produce oxytocin.

>>2225606
>has no sense
The divine is not meant to be easily understood by people

>>2225613
>acknowledge you believe trinity because you only needs propositions that stimulate the brain to produce oxytocin.

do it low testosterone papist

>>2225613

then discussion of the trinity belongs on

>>>/x/

not here

>>2225422
SCRIPTURA
O
L
A

>>2225614
I believe in the trinity because I believe in God...

>>2225631

you believe in the trinity because some dude or text that (wasn't Jesus) told you about it

>>2225633
Scripture teaches the trinity.

>>2225640

it didn't teach me the trinity, and it didn't teach you the trinity, someone told you the word "trinity" before you found it in the scripture

>>2225640

but doesn't emphasize it

>>2225649
Doesn't matter

>>2225661
it does -> >>2225647
actually you could be excomulgated if you didn't believe it although nothing emphasizes it

File: trinity.png (322KB, 2000x1800px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 2000x1800px

OP got his reply.
Everyone go home.

>>2225669
Scripture teaches the trinity. It's not obvious, but it doesn't matter.

>>2225686

And yet numerous non-Christians look at the trinity and decide that scripture teaches no such thing. It's almost exactly like this is confirmation bias, nothing more.

The idea of a God having "parts" or aspects makes no sense, a God would just be one thing.
>this cult leader was also god too! rewrite everything to include him as part of god! kill anyone who disagrees!!!

>>2225702
>this cult leader called himself God, and then when he was killed he came back from the dead! Oh shit, he must have been right!

>>2225712
>this cult material written by cultists claims their cult leader did some impossible thing, I am retarded enough to take this as "proof" and expect others to do so as well, if they don't accept this then I consider them evil and hope they are punished

>>2225693
They're heretics

>>2225702
>>2225712
>>2225730
God is not meant to be easy to understand

>>2225736
Easier to sucker superstitious people if you dress it up in miracles and fanaticism.

>>2225736
Who told you this logically inecessary, convulse premise?

File: 1472604496039.jpg (7KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x241px

>>2225730
>he doesn't believe in the Resurrection

>>2225746
???
>>2225748
Scripture &a God himself

>>2225760
So god doesn't master what he himself created and proved nice

The trinity is a litmus test to see if you can double think enough to believe in Christianity.

>>2225767
No He has. We have not, since we are not God.

>>2225779
Do you hold Tertullian's view?

Really, you can just retcon all of the polytheistic and henotheistic elements of the OT understanding of "God" to actually refer to the Trinity, but other than that there is nothing.

File: yHNLcgGoMoOltQJ.png (188KB, 620x720px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 620x720px

>>2225777
trips of truth

>>2225401
>Why do you call me good? No one is good except for the father.

>>2225297
you're just not supposed to worship the idols, depiction is nothing. veneration of saints is often mild and prayers towards individual ones are often through the belief that Christ has granted them their powers.

last 10 commandents is jewry and not christian.

>>2226014
>veneration of saints is often mild and prayers towards individual ones are often through the belief that Christ has granted them their powers.
And Zeus personally granted Hermes authority over certain aspects of worship, so surely that isn't idolatry?

>>2226007
>I am the Father and the Father is me.

>>2225401
If I recall, he actually tries to deny it in Mark, claiming to be the "Son of Man", but who cares. There isn't supposed to be something in the text to support every idea. The text was constructed by the church. Jesus didn't leave behind the text, he left the church behind.

File: image.jpg (53KB, 400x270px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 400x270px

>>2225280
Behold, I will bless you with my knowledge. Any argument is welcome.

>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...

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

"IT'S NOT CONFUSING"
"Tch, what is the Council of Nicea? What is hundreds of bishops debating about 'What is Jesus?'?"

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 anon. Now tell your friends."

Arius was right

Is the catholic trinity a continuation of the greek-orthodox bios/psyche/zoe trichotomy?
Where
>Jesus = Bios
>Father = Psyche
>Holy Spirit = Zoe

Isn't trinitarianism the belief in the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost being aspects of God, yet not God in the way that they're all each other whilst not being each other, or God not being anything but whole?

File: image.png (18KB, 524x560px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 524x560px

>>2227842
Jesus talking to his disciples:

John 17:21
that all of """"""them(disciples) may be ONE,"""""""

""""""Father, just as you are in me and I am in you."""""""

""""""May they(disciples) also be in us(the Father and Jesus)"""""""""

so that the world may believe that you have sent me.
---------------------------------------

Look, the disciples are 'one', EXACTLY LIKE Jesus in the Father and the Father in Jesus. THEN, the disciples are ALSO IN the Father and Jesus.

A=B=C

Does this mean that the disciples are Gods? No. The phrase "I in them and them in me" are only IDIOM which states that their goals are the same.

NOT oneness like sausage. But oneness in purpose.

>>2227842
Bullshit, where? The only verse that comes close to that is "I'm in the Father and the Father is in me".

Show me where you got that verse.

>>2227944
>Son of Man
You do realize what that means, right?

>>2228039
Probably John 10:30.

>>2228075
Yes, do you?

>>2228075
Yes, it's refers to prophet Ezekiel and David

>>2228093
Yes. This >>2228101

It specifically ties back to David who also was titled "Son of God" which then links up with >>2228080

>>2225702
>a God would just be one thing
>JUST

I'd like to see you tell God what he is and is not allowed to be.

File: image.gif (144KB, 173x180px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 173x180px

>>2228080
Oh, then PLEASE read the copy paste:

John 10:24-30:
24 The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”

25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me,

26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.

28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.

29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.

30 I and the Father are one.”

Now you tell me, what is this one-ness?

Like a sausage? No, it the one-ness in PURPOSE.

But if you doubt me, then John 17:20-21:

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message,

21 that all of them may be ONE, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

So, the disciples is one with each others? Like sausage? Like how the Father in Jesus and Jesus in the Father?

If that is so, then the disciples are also one with the Father as Jesus is one with the Disciples and the Father.

No, it the one-ness in PURPOSE my dear anon, not sausage.

>>2228153
fucking off yourself

>>2228122
How does that link?

File: image.jpg (22KB, 178x180px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 178x180px

>>2228157
FINE, I change my copypaste. Do you have any valid argument that you can give?

>>2228075
It's stated multiple place in the OT. It can also mean that "men in general".

>>2225640
Where?

>>2225297

fucking durka

>>2226014
>last 10 commandents is jewry
Jesus said:

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.

A law abiding Jew comes to Jesus seeking eternal life or salvation. In the words of Matthew:

Matthew 19:16-17
"And behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is God: but if thou wilt enter into life, KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS."

What commandments? Moses's commandments, NOT JESUS'S.

>and not christian
Jesus bringing a new religion? NEVER.

If Jesus really did came to bring a new religion? Why did he HIMSELF said to KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS?

>>2228391
Do you go out if your way to misunderstand scripture? Christ established a new religion and kept the commandments. Is that difficult to understand?

>>2225280
There's a direct relationship between how heretical someone is and how outspoken someone is.

File: image.jpg (677KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

677KB, 1920x1080px

>>2228588
No, anon. Doing both of those things is impossible, since they contradict each other's. Look:

Moses: salvation by keeping the Law
Jesus(according to Christians): salvation by faith alone

Jesus himself said:

Matthew 5:20
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Look, WHOEVER that BREAK Moses's teaching will be called LEAST in the kingdom of Heaven.

Why would Jesus said all of this? If he really did come to die for our sins, why would he told his people to keep the old laws?

I tell you why, because salvation only comes from keeping the commandments, NOT through the blood of Jesus. Look:

Matthew 5:20
For I tell you that UNLESS your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will CERTAINLY NOT enter the kingdom of heaven.

And I tell you anon, how can you enter heaven if you didn't keep the law and commandments? Answer me.

I advice you to read Ezekiel 18:19-24, and you'll see it contradict the very foundation of Christianity.

>>2229886
Neck yourself.

>>2229886
*how can your righteousness exceed the scribes and Pharasees if you didn't keep the law and commandments?

>>2229893
Did you even read my post?

>>2229902
I did and it was retarded. Jesus established a new covenant that overrules the former.

>>2229911
Verse please, I'll look it up.

>>2229917
I'm not going to spoonfeed you verses, you'll just corrupt them like you do in every other one of your copy-past posts. Do your own research that's not just sucking off deedat.

>>2229929
I spent an hour typing those. This is what Jesus said. He comes to fulfill the law of Moses, NOT ABOLISH them. It's not as you said it is.

Look, you can refute my post. Which one of those post that you're not agree with? I'm more than happy to receive it.

>>2229952
You are reprobate. Nothing can change your view regardless of your supposed "openness" to debate. Your future is predestined for hellfire.

File: image.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>2229987
Listen:

Matthew 7:1-2
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged

Don't be like that. You can't judge me like that. You'll also need to stop sucking off the Church teachings and follow what Jesus said.

Let's talk. By talking I mean give me a valid argument. This applies to all of you as well.

>>2230034

Not him, but honestly, assuming that you can "follow what Jesus said" is a bit ridiculous. We have 4 gospels, 3 of which purport to be eyewitness testimony but almost certainly aren't, and one that doesn't even bother at that. We have no direct words of Jesus, only words that other people inserted into Jesus's mouth.

Trying to separate "Jesus" from "The Church" is impossible short of inventing a time machine.

>>2230034
But you are a reprobate. You don't accept Christ as God and you never will because your heart is stone. Reprobates never change their mind so it's pointless to have a ""debate"".

File: image.jpg (68KB, 440x407px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 440x407px

>>2230042
Well... the gospel are not fully Jesus's own words. 21 out of 27 books of the NT doesn't even have one word from Jesus, just from the apostles and others.

Basically:
Jesus's teaching: his own words
Church teachings: NOT Jesus's own words

Look, I agree with you what you said, but let's assume all is legit for the sake of argument.

>>2230053
As Jesus said, don't judge people. I respect Jesus as a man, but not as a god. Jesus himself disclaiming divinity. Why are you so desperate in making Jesus what he's not?

Look, talk man. Refute me. Tell me where have I gone wrong in my post. Tell me where misquote the Bible. Tell me where I take things out of context. Just talk, don't judge. Refute me.

>>2230053
>>2230088
*where I misquote

Oh, see >>2226341

I advice you to read Ezekiel 18:19-24

And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me. (John 8:16)

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:20)

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:26)

>>2230088
>Jesus's teaching: his own words
what makes you think what comes out of his mouth is immune from alteration and fabrication by the church?

2:6
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا سَوَاءٌ عَلَيْهِمْ أَأَنذَرْتَهُمْ أَمْ لَمْ تُنذِرْهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ
SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
Indeed, those who disbelieve - it is all the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them - they will not believe.

2:7
خَتَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ وَعَلَىٰ سَمْعِهِمْ ۖ وَعَلَىٰ أَبْصَارِهِمْ غِشَاوَةٌ ۖ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ
SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and over their vision is a veil. And for them is a great punishment.

File: image.png (806KB, 1280x546px) Image search: [Google]

806KB, 1280x546px

>>2230129
>John 8:16
Let's look at:

John 5:30-31
30. By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me.

31. "If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true.

Look, the only reason that Jesus's judgement is true because he judge according to the Father's will, NOT through his own will.

For if it is Jesus's own will, then his testimony is not true. Thus disclaiming himself as god.

>>2230151
Jesus is from the Father, while the disciples aren't from the Father. So I assume Jesus's words are less likely to be corrupted compare to the disciples'.

Again, I'm not saying that it's all legit, but for the sake of making things easier.

>>2230157
Anon, here are the commentary:

http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=2

Let's focus one thing at a time.

File: SteveReeves1-clouds.jpg (44KB, 300x450px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 300x450px

tfw the only thing i believe in is myself

File: Hierarchy (Jesus Approved Edition).png (264KB, 747x1592px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 747x1592px

Daily reminder

The foolish man conceives the idea of 'self.' The wise man sees there is no ground on which to build the idea of 'self;' thus, he has a right conception of the world and well concludes that all compounds amassed by sorrow will be dissolved again, but the truth will remain.

>>2230341
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

- 2 Thess 2:4

File: StJohnClimacusWithInscription.jpg (532KB, 900x1106px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 900x1106px

God is supremely good. Of all creation that is capable of rational thought and free will, some are friends to God, some are His true servants, some are estranged, and there are others who, despite their weakness, take their stand against Him. We might imagine that God's friends are those angelic beings which surround him (Seraphim, Cherubim etc...). His true servants are those who sincerely attempt to do His will to the best of their ability. The estranged are those who have not yet met Christ. His opponents are those who go out of their way to attack Him and those who believe.

Lets focus on His true servants because that is all humanity can ever hope to be. In order to be His servant we first must attempt to know who He is. God is the life of all free beings. He is the salvation of all, of the just or the unjust, of the pious or the impious, and of the young or the old. He is like the sun's warmth which is the same for everyone without exception (Rom 2:11). An impious man is a rational being, one that must die, who willingly runs away from life. A Christian is one who attempts to imitate Christ in thought, word and deed to the best of their ability.

File: 419px-The_Ladder_of_Divine_Ascent_Monastery_of_St_Catherine_Sinai_12th_century.jpg (100KB, 419x600px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 419x600px

>>2230366
The angelic friends of God live in a higher plane of existence which is uncorrupted by sin. These beings are capable of rational thought and attempt to influence our plane of existence when they can. Of course they are not omnipotent so their influence is limited to what God permits. The blessed man attempts to mirror his life to those angelic beings (who are themselves imitators of Christ). In his mind, the Christian attempts to spiritually raise himself up to heaven and perceive the world as Christ did, then act accordingly. We are incapable of perfectly achieving this goal, but the mere act of striving for it is a key to our redemption. The blessed sincerely believes the validity of God's commandments and does all that he can to obey them even through failure. Attempting to live righteously is a constant struggle within one's consciousness but by simply engaging in it we begin to imitate God Himself. Rejecting earthly values is the willing acceptance of ridicule in exchange for a spiritual kingdom.

Christians have many reasons to reject the world; either for the hope of things to come, or because of the number of their sins, or simply because they love God. Without these objectives, denial of the earthly pleasures would make no sense. We believe God will judge us if we do not prepare for Him and will likewise reward us if we love Him (Heb 11:6).

Those of us who wish to escape this worldly prison, to free ourselves from Pharaoh, need our own version of Moses to be our intermediary with God, to translate His will for us. Those who believe in God but attempt to serve Him on their own terms, without a leader, are deceiving themselves. We need someone to teach us how we can best serve God.

File: Icon_24-Version-2.jpg (666KB, 1400x831px) Image search: [Google]

666KB, 1400x831px

>>2230372
Christ is our leader and although we fail Him, let us try our best to follow His example because He truly knows how to make us happy. His teachings are those of our Creator Himself, it would be arrogant and foolish to reject them. Let all those considering this marvelous, tough and painful yet paradoxically easy leap of faith remember that Christ promised to help us and that our rewards are peace and happiness.
If we decide to take the leap, we must prepare a fertile soil from which Christ's vine can grow. Therefore, a Christian will attempt to turn away from worldly pleasures in order to pursue heavenly ones. Innocence, abstinence and temperance are a thrice-firm foundation upon which we can pursue our faith. Let all infants to Christian life begin with these virtues, taking real infants as their example; for among young children no evil is found, nothing deceitful, no insatiable greed or gluttony, no flaming lust. A Christian must remember that we are all children before the Lord.

It is detestable and dangerous for a wrestler to be slack at the start of a contest, thereby giving proof of his impending defeat to everyone. Let us have a firm beginning to our spiritual life, for this will help us if slackness comes later. A bold and eager soul will be spurred on by memory of its first zeal and new wings can thus be obtained.

When the soul betrays itself, when our innocence becomes blemished and our happy warmth grows cold, the reasons for such a loss ought to be carefully sought and, once found, ought to be combated with all possible zeal. The man who turns away from worldly pleasures out of fear is like burning incense, which begins with fragrance but ends in smoke. But the man who leaves the world because he loves God has taken fire from the start and ignited his heart creating warmth wherever he goes.

File: 125.jpg (86KB, 769x608px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 769x608px

>>2230375
Some people build their house trusting in masonry. Others raise pillars up from the ground. The blessed builds his house with Christ as the cornerstone (Ephesians 2:20). A subtle mind will understand this analogy.

Let us run our spiritual race eagerly for we are summoned to do so by God Himself. Our time is short; for what is a man's life compared to eternity. Let us not be found barren on the day of harvest and perish in hunger. Instead, let us please the Lord as soldiers please an emperor; for we are at the mercy of our commander in chief. We should fear God in the way we fear wild animals because God and His creation are both sublime. I have seen men do wickedness with no fear of God and these same men become afraid of a police dog. Such blindness is the precursor to spiritual death.

We should love the Lord as we love our friends. I have seen people casually dismiss God and I have seen these same people resort to every device, plan and plea to mend a broken friendship. If we can afford such love to our friends, how much more can we love our Creator?

In this world when our employer summons us to obedience, we answer the call without excuse. We had better be careful then not to refuse the summons of our God. Someone caught up in the affairs of the world can make spiritual progress, if they are determined, but it will be difficult. Just as a man in chains can still walk, so too can a worldly person undertake the spiritual journey. But both will often stumble and injure themselves.

Some people living carelessly in the world asked a saint: "How can we who are married and have careers aspire to the spiritual life?"

The saint replied: "Do whatever good you can. Speak evil of no one. Tell the truth and do not steal. Despise no one and carry no hate. Go to church. Be compassionate and avoid all scandals. Love your spouse. If you do all this, you will not be far from the kingdom of heaven."

File: 1450223081296.jpg (627KB, 1500x1610px) Image search: [Google]

627KB, 1500x1610px

>>2230378
Let us pursue our spiritual lives joyfully and without fear of our enemies. They are unseen but can sense the disposition of our heart. A fearful and despairing soul is easily lead into darkness. Therefore, let us be brave and walk our spiritual paths confidently fully trusting in our Lord to deliver us.

The Lord wisely eases the struggles of spiritual novices so that they will not be driven back into the world. Let us then rejoice always in the Lord because He even chooses the adversities we overcome and will never give us more than we can handle. God identifies courageous souls and allows them to become embattled from the very beginning, so that they may be rewarded sooner.

Having accepted God's grace, it would be tragic to leave the spiritual kingdom we have inherited to go worry about something which cannot aid us in the hour of death. This is what our Lord meant when He told us not to turn back and not be found useless for the Kingdom of Heaven. God knows that we are very susceptible to turning back to the world at the start of our spiritual life. He also knows that some of our relationships can tempt us to give up on our spiritual quest. When the eager man said to our Lord, "Let me go away to bury my father," He replied, "Let the dead bury the dead" (Mt 8:22) because the world is dead compared to the spirit. There are also spiritual entities which attempt to convince us to return to our worldly ways. They make us envy those who have worldly and spiritual successes. They make us regret that we seemed deprived of these virtues.. Their goal is to make us give up in false humility or to cause us despair during our journey. Vanity can lead us to mock the secular life or secretly despise those who do not pursue spiritual paths.

File: Orthodox Monk.jpg (2MB, 1900x1796px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1900x1796px

>>2230380
However, when we are afflicted with worldly desires, we should remember the courage of the saints who have gone before us. We should investigate why these blessed people chose to endure slander and violence. Why they accepted fasting and kept vigils. Why some choose to withdraw from the world entirely and enter into monastic life. Surely these great people were driven by something to not only endure, but to joyously accept hardship. Meditating on the zeal of those who have embraced the spiritual life can inspire us to follow their example. If God answered the prayers of the saints, He will certainly answer our prayers as well.

There are three renunciations we can take which will aid us greatly in our spiritual journey. We can turn away from the world's expectations, from the appraisals of men, by remembering that only God judges us. Having turned our back to the world, we can then let go of our own expectations for ourselves because we are often our own worst critics. Having success with the first two, the third step is to rebuke the vanity that comes with obedience. As we make spiritual progress and begin reaping some fruits from our labor, it becomes very tempting to view ourselves as superior to those who have not received the same grace. Just as the devil himself was first among the angels, we must remember that "pride goes before destruction" (Proverbs 16:18).

We should pray to attain a state of holy exile; an irrevocable renunciation of everything in one's familiar surroundings that hinders one from attaining virtue. Holy exile is a disciplined heart, unheralded wisdom, an unpublicized understanding, a hidden life, masked ideals. It is private meditation, prayers for humility, a wish for simplicity, the longing for what is divine. It is overflowing love, a rebuke against vanity, a deep silence.

File: Hagia Sophia.jpg (2MB, 873x1000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 873x1000px

>>2230385
The Lord says that every prophet is without honor in his own country (Jn 4:44). We then must remember that our act of renunciation is not for empty honor. Holy exile is a spiritual separation from everything, in order that one may hold on totally to God. It requires great sacrifice. A holy exile is a fugitive, running from all that tries to distract him from God. Do not wait for souls that are still enamored with the world when you are pressing on your spiritual journey. Even our loved ones may not understand the spiritual task we are undertaking but we must wish them well and not let their doubts distract us from our eternal glory. Many set themselves on rescuing the indifferent and become lost themselves. The flame within them is dimmed by their environment. So, if you have the fire, run, since you never know if it might be doused, leaving you stranded in darkness. Not all of us are summoned to rescue others. "My brothers, each one of us will give an account of himself to God," (Rom 14:12) Paul reminds us. Again, he declares: "You teach someone else, but not yourself" (Romans 2:21). Paul is admonishing us for being so preoccupied with teaching others that we forget that God is the teacher and that we are all His students.

Once we are operating from a place of holy exile it becomes possible to liberate ourselves from attachments. Once you have left the world, there is no need to reach out for it; the Lord provides for you now.

We must beware the ways and guiles of demons. They come with the suggestion that we should not really abandon the world. They tell us of the riches that await us if we pursue worldly passions. We must not give in to their lies, in fact we must use the power of prayer to oppose them.

>>2230385
>>2230380
>>2230378
>>2230375
>>2230372
>>2230366


Hey Constantine. Long time no see. Where have you been? Did they ever finish the operation?

File: Skulls.jpg (108KB, 719x480px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 719x480px

>>2230386
Some of us manage for a time to live away from worldly desires. We practice a little piety, compunction, and self-control, but then we are harassed by empty thoughts telling us to turn back. They might tell us that we are a lesson for others, that we are such a shining example of righteousness that we must parade ourselves about for the sake of others. Especially crafty demons will tell us that we would be great rescuers of souls and teachers to the world if only we bring our mind back down to earthly things. These lying thoughts tell us these things that they might scatter abroad the spiritual treasures we are accumulating for ourselves in private. Let us remember Lot's blessed example and flee the dying world without looking back. A soul that has tasted freedom but turns back to the world will be like salt that loses its flavor and becomes a useless ingredient. Run from Egypt, run and do not turn back. The part of you that yearns for worldly pleasure will never reach paradise, allow God to free you from it.

It is better to offend your parents rather than God. He, after all, created and saved us, while they, despite their best intentions, have occasionally sinned against us (as we have against them).

A true holy exile sits quietly amongst worldly men as one who speaks a different language.

File: Exalted.jpg (214KB, 796x900px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 796x900px

>>2230400
If we want to live spiritual lives that does not mean we have to give up our familiar relationships, we simply must be aware to avoid any harm which may come from them. Here, as in everything, Christ is our teacher. It often looked as if He were trying to rebuke his earthly parents. Some people said to Him, "Your mother and your brothers are looking for you," and Christ gave them a detached response that was nonetheless free from any harsh feelings: "My mother and my brothers are those who do the will of my Father in heaven," (Mt 12:50). So let your father be the one who is able and willing to labor with you in bearing the burden of your sins, and your mother the remorse to wash away your iniquity. Let your brother be your companion and rival in the race that leads to heaven, and may the constant thought of death be your spouse. Let your children be the joy in your heart. May your body be your servant, and your friends the holy angels who will always help you if you are true to them; "This is the generation of those who seek the Lord" (Ps 23:6).

Your love for God will eclipse the love of your family. Your love for them is not diminished but simply reoriented to its source. Only the deceiver tries to convince us that we must place our family's expectations above those of God: "No one can serve two masters" (Mt 6:24). "I did not come to bring peace on earth," says the Lord, knowing how parents would rise up against their children who chose to serve Him. "It was for war and the sword" (Mt. 10:34), to separate the lovers of God from the lovers of the world, the spiritually-minded from the materially-minded, the humble from the proud, the sheep from the goats.

File: 1459235563020.jpg (2MB, 1280x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x1920px

>>2230403
Contradiction and dissent are pleasing to God when they arise from love of Him; do not let parents or friends distract you from your spiritual birthright. When we are surrounded by doubts and images of those we care about imploring us to give up our spiritual quest, let us think of death so as not to forget the holy reward that awaits us. The deceiver can even use friends and our own families to detain us from the noble contest and draw us back into the world. We had better withdraw from such temptations lest we turn into pillars of salt.

God gave us the greatest example of renunciation through Abraham's faith when he heard the command: "Leave your country and your family and the house of your father" (Gen 12:1). Obediently, he went to a foreign country where the language was different. We should be inspired by Abraham's faith and trust that God will provide for us when we leave our familiar way of living.

When we find that God blesses us and we become successful like Joseph amid Pharaoh's courts, we must arm ourselves with a shield of humility. When demons or men lavish praise on us for our successes as if they are some great achievement, let us remember God's infinitely superior achievements which He allows us to enjoy. Let us remember the hands that fastened Orion's belt and set the seasons in motion. Let us remember how He came down from Heaven for our benefit and exiled Himself to earth because He loves us. Let us then offer up our achievements to the ultimate achiever and rejoice that such a Being cares for us.

File: image.png (43KB, 360x354px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 360x354px

>>2230129
>Mattheww 18:20
What about one? What about four or more? If Jesus is truly a god, then shouldn't he be 'in the midst of us' regardless the number?

No, this is talking about chirch displine. Please read the whole context Mattheww 18:15-20. Regarding the "two or three", it's refers to the witness in:

Mattheww 18:16:
16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of """""""two or three witnesses""""""""" every word may be established.

Jesus said that if you have a brother who sins against you, then you need to go to him and try to work it out. If he refuses to acknowledge his fault, then you bring one or two more witnesses to help work things out. So including you, that would make two or three witnesses.

If the sinning brother did not make things right in the presence of two or three witnesses, then the case was to be brought before the church.

If he refused to listen to the church’s decision, then he was to be thrown out of the congregation. This is what Jesus commended the Christians to do.

It is with this in mind that Jesus said that the Father would grant the request of two or more who gather together in Christ’s name and are in agreement. Agreement on what? On disciplining the erring brother.

SO, Mattheww 18:20 DOESNT mean literally that Jesus is 'in the midst of us'.

Again, if Jesus really is god, the he should be with us regardless of the number, NOT "two or three". And reading the context, this is far from the case.

>>2230420
e m i n a

>>2225422
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.

File: calvin-servetus.gif (200KB, 566x405px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 566x405px

>>2225465
Anti-trinitarians are less Christian than Catholics
We used to burn you heretics

>>2225647
Scripture is clear that there is one God and three distinct divine persons

>>2230435
Even better. This being said, my point still stands.

>>2230441
The LORD's Word still burns them.

The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children. (Matthew 18:20)

File: image.jpg (46KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 500x500px

>>2230129
>REGARDING COMFORTER
This Comforter is NOT the Holy Spirits.

John 16:7
Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

Look, it's EXPEDIENT for Jesus to go away, otherwise the Comforter WON'T come.

But the Holy Spirits are with Jesus during his lifetime. The spirit is also with Elizabeth, which is before Jesus birth.

In that verse, the Holy Spirits is said "he shall teach you all things". What things? The incomplete things. According to:

John 16:12
I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now.

Meaning that Jesus have the solution to all humanity problem, but the disciples can't bear them now. The Comforter will teach them ALL THINGS.

Tell me anon. What's one NEW thing that the Holy Spirits gave the Christians to solve humanity problem? Nothing.

SO, the Holy Spirit in that verse is a wrong translation, which I'm not going to go deep into it today because it's a vast topic.

>>2230426
What is this meme?

>>2230537
>This Comforter is NOT the Holy Spirit
Yes He is
>Look, it's EXPEDIENT for Jesus to go away, otherwise the Comforter WON'T come.
The Comforter came on Pentecost. After Jesus ascended
>are
It's Holy Spirit, singular
>In that verse, the Holy Spirits is said "he shall teach you all things"
The Holy Spirit guides the saint in all truth
>Meaning that Jesus have the solution to all humanity problem
Where is that in the text? It isn't
>NEW
Where does it say it's new things? It doesn't

>>2230441
Anon.... See >>2227965

>>2230556
No. Neck yourself you dishonest worm

>>2227998
heretic

File: Based St. Nick.jpg (200KB, 519x720px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 519x720px

>>2227998

>>2225441
Happy birthday Dr. King!

>>2230567
epin

>>2230537
>the Holy Spirit in that verse is a wrong translation
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/14-26.htm

>>2229886
>For I tell you that UNLESS your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will CERTAINLY NOT enter the kingdom of heaven.

Pretty sure that's a dig at the Pharisees and teachers of law.

And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. (John 3:13)

>>2225280
Just the Muslims, Atheists, the French JW, and Protestants, OP.

>>2225297
>Depiction of Jesus is idolatry
Christ Himself is the living icon of God. Get rekt, Muslim.

>>2230316
>but for the sake of making things easier
it doesn't make things easier at all. Jesus didn't write the gospels for fucks sake, they were created by the same community that wrote the epistles. even if we suppose that the original copies were faithful to his words, the church had the opportunity to edit/make up passages for their convenience. to say that assuming Jesus's words had some mystical protection around them should be done to "make things easier" is asinine. the only think that it makes easier is your ability to feel that your particular beliefs are supported. it won't hold up in debate with non-believers or even other believers

File: image.gif (2MB, 181x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 181x200px

After this post, I'm taking a break.

>>2230555
>>2230609
>came on Pentecost
Anon, no. The Holy Spirit was with Jesus during his ministry, was with the disciples during the mission of preaching. Was with John the Baptist and Elizabeth.

Even before he ascend. Jesus said to his disciples:

John 20:22
...Receive ye the Holy Ghost

Did they receive it or did they not AT THAT TIME? It doesn't make sense if Jesus told this WAY BEFORE ascension and give it to them after ascension.

Also, Luke 3:22, Luke 2:26, Luke 2:25, Luke 1:67

>singular
sorry

>new things
>humanity problem
Jesus said that he has yet MANY things to say on to the disciples, but they CANNOT bear them now.

Look, what's this "many things"? What's is Jesus's trying to say?

After that verse;

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into """"all"""" the truth....

So, in John 16:12, Jesus says he has yet many things to say(which means he HAS NOT say yet).

After the verse, the spirit of truth WILL guide to ALL TRUTH(saying what Jesus HAS NOT spoken).

So, new things, which all the 33000 churches denominations, each claim to have the Holy Spirit, HAS NOT GOTTEN EVEN ONE NEW THINGS after 2000 years.

So, the Comforter is not the Holy Spirit.

>>2230678
You mean like bashing? I don't think so, since the verses really heavily emphasis on keeping the Law of Moses.

>>2225556
>Filioque
Heresy, you mean. It was brought about by Charlemagne's arrogance and ignorance.

>>2230710
Anon... It's a vast topic to discuss. And it's not on the topic right now.

Besides, the people in this thread are believers, not non-believers. The believers hold the Bible as the true words of God. It should be enough for them to take this as a valid argument.

>>2230717
*the verses before heavily

>>2230739
yes, they take the whole bible as the word of god. you are arbitrarily putting weight on Jesus's words and completely disowning anyone else who's words were inspired by the holy spirit according to most christians. and sorry anon, /his/ isn't a safe space where you can't completely ignore counter arguments about the validity of certain parts of the biblical texts by non-believers

>>2230747
*can

>>2230747
Well.... I'm not completely ignoring their arguments. I say it isn't such and such according to Jesus, their own master.

Yes, I heavily emphasis on Jesus's words because Jesus is the Christians master, not the epistles.

Again, not all the Bible is legit, just like you said, so it's impossible to please all sides.

>>2230717
>the 33000 churches denominations
Congrats to all you papists for contributing to blasphemy from muslims!

>>2230717
>Anon, no
Why do you keep pretending to care what the bible says? Blow your brains out kike
>Receive ye the Holy Ghost
Future tense
>Did they receive it or did they not AT THAT TIME?
He came on Pentecost.
>Jesus said that he has yet MANY things to say on to the disciples, but they CANNOT bear them now.
Yes, at that particular moment
>After the verse, the spirit of truth WILL guide to ALL TRUTH
Yes, He does guide the Christian in all truth
>saying what Jesus HAS NOT spoken
Where does it say that? It doesn't, stop twisting the scripture to your own destruction
>all the 33000 churches denominations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdXJzgtiM4E
>So, the Comforter is not the Holy Spirit
Except Jesus explicitly said it is

File: image.png (61KB, 173x180px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 173x180px

>>2231070
>pretending to care
What do you mean pretending? I put Jesus OWN words at the HIGHEST POSITION, as it is DESERVE to be.

>regarding Holy Spirit is already with them

>before the creation of Earth
Genesis 1:2
>before Jesus(I think)
1 Samuel 10:10, 1 Samuel 11:6
>during Moses
Isaiah 63:11
>with John the Baptist, Zacharias, Siemon and Elizabeth
Luke 1:15, Luke 1:35, Luke 1:41, Luke 1:67, Luke 2:25, Luke 2:26
>during Jesus time
Luke 3:22, John 20:21-22

Look, the Holy Spirit are there all the time. Even before Jesus. Jesus said he MUST go, or else the Comforter WON'T COME. So, the Comforter is NOT the Holy Spirit.

>future tense
What? It's present. It's like someone said:

>"Receive this money."
>*give two months later*

It doesn't even make sense. It's only make sense if they received the Holy Spirit right then and there.

>all truth
>HAS NOT SPOKEN
>twisting
Look, I've already made myself clear >>2230717.

>I have """"""""YET"""""""" many things to say(meaning there's still something that's incomplete)
>*next verse*
>the Comforter WILL TEACH you ALL THINGS(will complete what Jesus hasn't finished)

NO ONE NEW THINGS from the Holy Spirits gave to Christians after 2000 years.

File: image.jpg (143KB, 960x544px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 960x544px

>>2231070
>Jesus explicitly says
Look, the Bible we have now is based on the many many many ancient manuscripts. Most of them AREN'T even identical to each others, and many contains errors. ctrl f 'identical' in:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_manuscript

Ancient manuscripts of John 14:26 has many versions. Many(not all) of them says "Comforter is spirit", and NOT the Holy spirits, just "spirit".

Why I think that the "Comforter is spirit" and not the "Holy Spirit" is because of many reasons, my post is one of the examples.

Another example:

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

There's SIX """""he""""", which is SIX masculine pronouns, more masculine pronouns than any place in the Bible. It ill-befitted a Holy Spirit.

Also, he will """""tell"""" you what is yet to come, NOT INSPIRED.

Pair this with my previous post we can conclude that it's NOT the Holy Spirit.

>>2231755
*more than any verse in the

File: image.jpg (86KB, 550x393px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 550x393px

>>2231070
>>2231031
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations

What are denominations to you anons? Are they different? All of them are claiming to have the Holy Spirit, yet are all... different? Wasn't the Holy Spirit to guide them to one path? Instead of multiple paths?

>>2225396
The Tanakh mentions the "Spirit of God" many times, and how it rests on the Israeli soldiers in times of need and guides people to righteousness.

Jews/Muslims will tell you that this is simply referring to the one God by a different name and that it isn't a separate entity. Christians will tell you that these passages are referring to God, but as an entity that is separate from the Father (the angry sky man that led Moses and the Jews through the desert).

The Holy Ghost is the spirit of God, and thus is God, just without the ego and personality. The Father is also God, obviously. Jesus of Nazareth was the Word of God made flesh, and thus also God. These are three distinct entities, but all of them are God. If it helps, try thinking of the Spirit as an auto-pilot system made of God's essence that was left behind to manage affairs on Earth.

It's a silly concept, but it's not hard to understand.

File: image.png (379KB, 612x701px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 612x701px

>>2225401
Please refer to >>2226341

>image.jpg
>anime
Kill yourself, please, or just leave this place.

File: image.jpg (43KB, 400x413px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 400x413px

>>2232075
FIRST
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH ANIME

TWO
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH ANIME

THREE
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH ANIME

FOUR
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH ANIME

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

>>2230366
>>2230372
>>2230375
>>2230378
>>2230380
>>2230385
>>2230386
>>2230400
>>2230403
>>2230406
What the hell is this?

>>2225318
Who was God speaking to when he was creating the universe
also
>the spirit of God hovered over
>spirit
>holy spirit
think of it like an egg 3 seperate parts that make one delicious meal

>>2233642
I think of it like God the Father as an hallowed authority outside human perception, the Holy Ghost as of a heavenly substance and the Son as the spirit of man materialized on earth.

trinity worship is just another pagan syncreticism lazily adopted to make the catholic meme easier to absorb by natives

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triskelion

>>2233642
>Who was God speaking to when he was creating the universe

The other members of the semitic polytheism he came from.

>think of it like an egg 3 seperate parts that make one delicious meal

That's a partialist heresy. Each of those components would have to be entirely the dish themselves.

>>2233672
I've entertained that notion myself. It seemed kind of convenient that it would be a trinity when some its primary converts came from religions obsessed with the number three.

Naturally some Christian loony will just assume that means God was super secretly talking to them all along.

File: rage.jpg (21KB, 229x343px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 229x343px

Arguing science is like arguing over photograph, arguing philosophy is like arguing over an impressionist painting that borders on the abstract.

Arguing theology is like arguing over a blank piece of paper. Was a man born of a virgin and capable of walking on water? Or did a man go to a mystical realm on the back of a flying horse?

Where do you even begin with this shit? Why is it taken seriously at all when it doesn't start with material evidence or a logical starting point. Why does Christianity get a tradition of apologetics when the twitter account of Tila Tequila will not?

>inb4 fedora or some other tired meme
>inb4 read the Bible

Went to a Christian middle and high school where I was taught the Bible from Lutheran pastors who all spent the better part of a decade learning the shit in its original language. Still don't see why it is not immediately dismissed like scientology, mormonism, or cargo cults.

>>2233706
>Naturally some Christian loony will just assume that means God was super secretly talking to them all along.

Well, he was.

>>2233739
You know what gets me? The fucking philosophical attempts at defending the idea of God. The prime mover and such. Because they define God as some incredibly abstract thing that could be just as easily a non-sentient force to make the concept seem plausible, and the entire thing is basically just a ruse so you'll let them get their foot in the door and start jamming in all the shit that doesn't have a sound philosophical defense.

>the universe has a first cause because all motion started with another motion, meaning their must be a first mover that was itself unmoved and outside reality
>Also this unmoved mover spent thousands of years involved in the tribal politics of an area smaller than Texas, killed 42 kids with bears, and couldn't forgive humanity unless he sacrificed himself to himself and even then requires that you take this absurd story on faith otherwise he'll cast you into a lake of fire to suffer for all of eternity.

It's a fucking motte and bailey argument of the most frustrating dimensions.

>>2233752
>Well, he was.

There's absolutely no reason to think that.

>>2233739
Because it's all real. That's the point, it's not made up.

>no evidence

That's what the New Testament is, it's testimony by those who were there.

>>2233788
*tips fedora*

>>2233788
>its all real

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

>its testimony by those who were there

Written decades after the fact? With virtually nothing else to back it up? How many historians honestly believe that it is mostly a factual account rather than rehashing the old testament?

File: image.jpg (106KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1280x1024px

>>2233642
What? In Hebrew language, there's two types of plural, plural of number and

"""""plural of respect"""""

God sometimes referred to Himself as such. Now let's look:

Genesis 1:26-27
26 And God said, Let us make man in """""""""our""""""""""" image....

27 So God created man in """""""""his"""""""""" own image...

The Hebrew on the former is plural, but the latter is singular. It doesn't make sense from literal English perspective, UNLESS this is a plural of respect.

Consider the following (don't believe in religion at all, don't care if you don't like my reasoning):

Jesus is fully God and fully man, right? He is defined by his physical body while being God, became flesh and dwelt among us and all that shit.

However, the power of the Holy Spirit is also emphasized as bringing people to faith and being a key part of this new Christian community. Jesus said wherever two or more come together in his name, he is there.

Is Jesus invisible in every Church, just standing in a corner hoping no one will feel his body or smell him? No, but the Holy Spirit is clearly present.

Him and the Holy Spirit being the same entity of God makes perfect sense considering this

>>2233807
Just to add, if there are more than one god, then it should be 'their image', NOT 'his image'.

>>2233739
>Where do you even begin with this shit?
It starts with being impressionable and being told that this is real and important by trusted authority figures like parents or pastors. Growing up with this reinforcement onto adulthood makes it relatively permanent. As adults when the indoctrination is no longer enough, the smart ones begin theology, the stupid ones argue on the internet.

>>2233800
Well, what evidence would satisfy you?

>>2233872
Actually see revelation? Experience the supernatural, not something considered spiritual but readily explained by science. At least more documents describing the whole Jesus debacle to make the Gospels seem more credible.

>>2225280

Most of the posters here are lost, and the trinity cannot be comprehended or apprehended by the lost. It is spiritually discerned, and does not lend itself to human "wisdom".

>>2233800
Anon, it's the best we got. Stop being an asshole and suck it. Don't make me start another atheist scientific discussion on a Christian board.

>>2225284

John 1:1 says that the Word (Jesus) was with God and was God.
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.

>>2233896
What about Josephus?

Or what about documented instances of faith healing, to go the other direction?

>>2225352
>its Jewish and completely unrelated to the teachings of Jesus

Jesus taught the Law of Moses and is the Jewish messiah promised to Israel.

File: 1028eba19ce33375f25642a67d1743c3.jpg (100KB, 460x288px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 460x288px

>>2225280
>Tfw you realize that the 7 deadly sins are for edgelords.
>Tfw you realize that the 7 heavenly virtues are for fedora's
>Tfw you have to endure the 7 boring bullshit.
>Tfw...

>>2233807
From a Christian point of view, God being plural and singular at the same time makes perfect sense.

>>2233872
Some miracles happening in front of cameras and in scientific laboratories.

>>2233909
>What about Josephus?

An interpolated document that only sort of affirms that a preacher vaguely matching the description did indeed exist.

>Or what about documented instances of faith healing, to go the other direction?

None of those have ever held up to scrutiny and the placebo effect is well-documented as a psychological phenomenon.

>>2233842
Correct.

And the Holy Spirit is as much a person as Jesus is; you can lie to the Holy Spirit, blaspheme the Holy Spirit, grieve the Holy Spirit, talk to the Holy Spirit, talk through the Holy Spirit, etc.

>>2225280
Because the concept of one person being three persons while not actually being three separate persons is as nonsensical as all other theist claims. It gets the most attention because it's just more obviously stupid, that's all.

>>2233858
Correct.

Likewise, Jesus said to baptize people in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Not "the names". Singular. I Am. YHWH.

>>2233896

Wow. Stick around and you will see all of this. Really weird to want to.

You rely on your eyes a lot.

File: image.png (39KB, 178x180px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 178x180px

>>2233902
Anon, no. Here >>2227965. God is not the author of confusion. Do you think He would lie when saying that?

>understand by faith
Anon, the Council of Nicea members isn't dumb. They're Bishops, which have lots of faith. Yet hundreds of them are debating whether Jesus is god, semi-god or a man.

>>2233941
I stopped responding to demon possessed posters a long time ago. If they want to be evil, as you apparently do, you're welcome to it. I'll abstain.

None of you gave a valid argument

>>2233960
Meant for >>2233953

>>2233960

There is no argument to be made. You either take Jesus up on his new covenant, believe he is who he says he is, and gain eternal life

or not

>>2233963
Christians are stupid and gullible, and expect everyone else to be as stupid and gullible as they are.

File: image.gif (162KB, 346x450px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 346x450px

>>2233931
>>2233918
What? No. It's a clear cut evidence of "royal plural".

As I said, Trinity doesn't exist(>>2227965).

>>2233963
Tell that to the hundreds of BISHOPS in the Council of Nicea.

>>2233907
Hebrews 1:8
But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever....

What throne? The Jews was siting on the throne, not Jesus.

>>2234057
>Trinity doesn't exist
enjoy hell

>>2234191
Do you even read >>2227965 ???

>>2233807
Problem is you don't use a plural when talking to yourself because people who talk to themselves are insane. The only being who created is God, which means God is talking to God
>The Hebrew on the former is plural, but the latter is singular
And this is further proof of the trinity

>>2234200
>because people who talk to themselves are insane

Is that why basically everyone does it?

>>2231733
>Look, the Holy Spirit are there all the time
The Spirit existed before the creation of earth, yes. Did the Spirit indwell anyone before pentecost? No
>So, the Comforter is NOT the Holy Spirit
HE EXPLICITLY SAID IT IS
>What? It's present
No, it's vague in English and could be interpreted as either present or future, but it is future
>Look, I've already made myself clear
Yes, you have made it very clear you have either no credibility or intelligence
>NO ONE NEW THINGS from the Holy Spirits gave to Christians
The New Testament is from after Jesus
>>2231755
>Look, the Bible we have now is based on the many many many ancient manuscripts. Most of them AREN'T even identical to each others, and many contains errors
Don't bother with your bullshit you've no doubt stolen from Bart Ehrman or some other libshit atheist, I actually know some things of textual criticism
>Ancient manuscripts of John 14:26 has many versions
'no'
>the Spirit of truth
The same person as the Holy Spirit
>>2231790
Fuck off autist, you have been refuted by the video I posted
>>2233858
There is one God
>>2233941
>God is not the author of confusion
That means confusion does not come from God, not that things that some people are confused by are not from God. For example, Christianity is from God, but your refusal to even try to be honest and instead choose to be confused is not from God.
>Yet hundreds of them are debating whether Jesus is god, semi-god or a man
Retard. Arius invented a novel doctrine teaching that Jesus wasn't God, even though everyone before him believed Jesus is God. Jesus is both fully God and fully man.
>>2234199
Yes I did, it is utterly horrible and demonstrates your dishonesty because I refuted it repeatedly in the past

>>2234256
>Is that why basically everyone does it?
If you talk to yourself you should see an exorcist. I have never talked to myself

>>2234263
Then you're not a normal person. Normal people talk to themselves and think out-loud quite regularly.

>>2234286
See an exorcist, you have a demon

File: image.jpg (87KB, 564x564px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 564x564px

>>2234200
What is 'royal we'?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we

Not just the Jews, but also french, urdu, arabic and other semitic race use these kinds of plural.

Look, the Jews as a whole NEVER worship multiple gods, but only one God.

>further proof of Trinity
Stop making me link my post, but see >>2227965.

Other evidence that there's no Trinity:

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

When are asked what is the first commandments, Jesus answered:

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

Why aren't Jesus said "that there are three gods, and these three are one? I tell you why, it's a fabrication.

>>2234293
See a psychiatrist, you have a textbook delusion.

>>2234301
>What is 'royal we'?
Not something done when talking to oneself
>but see
No.
>Why aren't Jesus said "that there are three gods, and these three are one?
Because there is one God
>I tell you why, it's a fabrication
Indeed it would be, if it weren't a blatant strawman. I worship one God, not three.

>>2234324
>Indeed it would be, if it weren't a blatant strawman. I worship one God, not three.

God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. That's three gods.

>>2234293
Not that guy, but I'm a Christian and I talk to myself regularly. I don't confuse it with demonic possession.

I do think I've encountered an evil "presence" in my lifetime, also, so I think I'd know the difference.

>>2234330
No, that's three persons. Three persons, one God. They are the same being, they share the same essence

>>2234340
No, that's three gods. They each have a distinct identity and are thus separate entities, hence you are a polytheist.

>essence

There's no reason to believe in essentialism.

>>2234345
>No, that's three gods
No that's three persons. You are assuming it is impossible for God to be three persons yet one being.
>thus separate entities
No, they are the same entity

Do you think it is impossible for God to create a multi-personal being? If not, why would God have a limitation that creatures do not, and if yes why do you deny God's omnipotence?

>>2234358
>>2234345
>>2234340
>>2234338
>>2234330
Why are you fighting? It's simple and easy to understand.

>>2234368
Yes, very easy. The trinity is pure monotheism

>>2234358
>You are assuming it is impossible for God to be three persons yet one being.

That would follow sense.

>No, they are the same entity

They have separate wills and are thus separate entities.

>Do you think it is impossible for God to create a multi-personal being?

If it's impossible for him to make a rock so heavy he couldn't lift it, yes. It's pretty well-accepted that God can't make absurd, logically contradictory bullshit.

>If not, why would God have a limitation that creatures do not

No creature can be a multi-person being that is composed of multiple selves that are each distinct yet wholly them.

>if yes why do you deny God's omnipotence?

God being limited by a higher, universal principle is the most effective way to resolve theodicy. The Abrahamic God is also one of the silliest expressions of God we've ever thought up.

>>2234368
No, it's contradictory and stupid. There's a reason it's considered a "divine mystery."

>>2234373
It's monotheistic in the way the sects of Hinduism that hold their gods to be aspects of one of their gods are monotheistic. I.E. it isn't.

>>2234384
>That would follow sense
No
>They have separate wills
No
>If it's impossible for him to make a rock so heavy he couldn't lift it, yes
Person =/= being. Stop assuming your conclusion
>logically contradictory
Why is 1-x 3-y contradictory? It would be a contradiction if it was 1-x 3-x or 1-y 3-y, but it isn't.
>No creature can be a multi-person being
Why? Why do you define God by His creation? You are making a creaturely god
>>2234390
>It's monotheistic in the way the sects of Hinduism that hold their gods to be aspects of one of their gods are monotheistic.
No it's not. They believe in multitudes of gods, Christians believe in one God.

>>2234415
>No

Nice argument, you lazy cretin. The concept doesn't make sense in the same was the problem of omnipotence doesn't make sense.

>No

Jesus prays to god to spare him and then cries out "my god, my god, why have you forsaken me?" on the cross. God kills his ass anyway. Those are separate wills.

>Person =/= being.

Person absolutely equates to being.

>Why is 1-x 3-y contradictory?

Has no bearing on this discussion. God cannot be three beings yet one being at the same time. That is a direct contradiction.

>Why? Why do you define God by His creation? You are making a creaturely god

You're the drooling retard who brought up his creatures supposedly not being limited in not being able to be a three beings that are all entirely them yet distinct you goddamn worthless dipshit.

>No it's not. They believe in multitudes of gods, Christians believe in one God.

Those sects of Hinduism believe that those gods are all just aspects of a single central deity, you know exactly how you believe that the trinity expressions are all just aspects of a single central deity. The only thing that differs in this regard is the number.

>>2234440
>The concept doesn't make sense
Only if you force God to be a creature
>Jesus prays to god to spare him and then cries out "my god, my god, why have you forsaken me?"
Jesus was quoting the psalms
>Those are separate wills
No. Jesus has 2 wills, one human and one divine.
>Person absolutely equates to being
Why? You are not defending your claims you merely assume your conclusions.
>God cannot be three beings
I said He isn't. He is one being, three persons.
>You're the drooling retard who brought up his creatures
Yes, but He didn't make any multi-personal creatures. I was using a hypothetical, you are forcing God to be like His creatures. The only reason the trinity is offensive to logic is because God did not make anything like Himself. If God didn't make any creatures with the same number of persons as Himself why should we expect to comprehend Him? We have no frame of referance.
>three beings
ONE BEING
>Those sects of Hinduism believe that those gods are all just aspects of a single central deity
And that's nothing like the trinity. That's more like the heresy of Partialism. The Father, Son and Spirit are not aspects of God, each is God in and of Himself.

1 Corinthians 14:33 is a straight out fabrication? Remove when?

>>2234497
>Only if you're not an idiot willing to swallow contradictory bullshit.
Has a contradiction been demonstrated? No.
>He was begging for his life.
He was quoting Psalm 22
>Is that why he only ever acts on one?
He only acts on one because His perfect human will is fully in agreement with His divine will.
>Because a person is an accumulation of their knowledge, personality, experiences, and will
No, a person is a center of conciousness
>There is no reason to believe in a being distinct from one's person
If all persons are beings and all beings are persons how do you explain the Jellyfish, which is an a-personal being?
>There is no being distinct from personhood.
Yes there is
>Demonstrate a reason to think otherwise
Demonstrate it is impossible for there to be a multi-personal being
>No, you made a stupid argument
It was a hypothetical argument. I infallibly interpret my own words, thank you.
>No, I am not forcing God to do anything
You are forcing creation onto the creator. If you just want a creaturely god that's fine, I want the true God.
>God is, and can only be understood in logically consistent principles
One being three persons is logically consistent because they are different categories. Only a literal retard with an inability to understand category distinctions disagrees.
>your emotional investment in Christianity
euphoric
>three wills, three beings
No.
>those gods are each entirely their own self, they're just aspects of that first god
So exactly what I said. If there was a parallel each god would be fully Shiva in and of themselves.
>Fucking Christians and their fucking word games
Sorry logic is too hard for your tiny human brain

>>2234527
>implying

>>2234530
I really just wanted to be done with this because I was turning into an asshole.

>Has a contradiction been demonstrated?

Yes, Three cannot be one, one cannot be three.

>He was quoting Psalm 22

I don't feel like digging up my bible. Which part: the part where he's begging for God to not go through with this, or the part where he's asking why God forsook him?

>He only acts on one because His perfect human will is fully in agreement with His divine will.

Well isn't that awfully convenient?

>No, a person is a center of conciousness

That's a fucking stupid definition.

>If all persons are beings and all beings are persons how do you explain the Jellyfish, which is an a-personal being?

They're not beings if they don't experience. It's as simple as that. A rock is not a being. If they experience, they're beings. Person is a subset of being which can be summed up as having abstract experiences and thoughts, IE personality, but your personhood is still not distinct from your being.

>Demonstrate it is impossible for there to be a multi-personal being

Demonstrate that there can. Three is three and one is one, how can three be one at the same time?

>It was a hypothetical argument.

It was a very stupid one.

>I infallibly interpret my own words, thank you.

You're human. You don't so much as infallibly wipe your own ass, like the rest of us.

>You are forcing creation onto the creator. If you just want a creaturely god that's fine, I want the true God.

Nope. I am just explaining God. This has nothing to do with creatures at this point. Three cannot be one.

>One being three persons is logically consistent because they are different categories. Only a literal retard with an inability to understand category distinctions disagrees.

Personhood is a subset of being, but it is not distinct from being.

>euphoric

Kay. But the fact is, you, like everyone else, pick your ideals primarily from sentiment.

>>2234530
>No.

Linked wills don't beg for their lives when the other being is choosing to kill them.

>So exactly what I said. If there was a parallel each god would be fully Shiva in and of themselves.

Each god is fully themselves and Shiva is fully Shiva and they are all aspects of the same divinity.

>Sorry logic is too hard for your tiny human brain

No, you're just engaging in the proud tradition of semantics that seems to be standard to Christian philosophical attempts to justify God, and it's fucking obnoxious because it is, as I said, just a dog and pony show to cover the fact you've accepted a "perfect" god that saw fit to kill 42 kids with bears because they made fun of a bald guy.

>>2234574
>Kay. But the fact is, you, like everyone else, pick your ideals primarily from sentiment.

Bull-fucking-shit! Christianity is a fucking solid religion, which entitles even Hitler himself to heaven.

Can you ask for more greater love? Never.

>>2234530
>>2234574
>That's a fucking stupid definition.

To further clarify on this, it's a fucking stupid definition because it excludes primary aspects of personhood, namely a store of knowledge and fundamental components of personality that interact with the the center of consciousness, our ego.

>>2234590
As solid as any other religion and belief system. You still have to take a fundamental leap in logic to accept its premises, but you have to do that with everything.

Christianity is just distinct in that you take a couple more leaps in the process.

>>2234530
>Psalm 22
It doesn't even refer to Jesus

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

>>2234590
ARE YOU CHRISTIANS SERIOUS? HITLER GOING TO HEAVEN? REALLY?

>>2234605
Well, in theory, we don't know the state of Hitler's soul, or anyone's. That is only for God to know.

So he COULD have gone to Heaven. Maybe he sincerely repented on his deathbed and God forgave him.

>>2234631
Wouldn't he have lacked sufficient time to be justified by works?

>>2234574
>Yes
No
>I don't feel like digging up my bible. Which part: the part where he's begging for God to not go through with this, or the part where he's asking why God forsook him?
Epic shitposting!
>That's a fucking stupid definition
No
>They're not beings if they don't experience. It's as simple as that. A rock is not a being. If they experience, they're beings. Person is a subset of being which can be summed up as having abstract experiences and thoughts, IE personality, but your personhood is still not distinct from your being
Are Jellyfish beings? Clearly they are poison to you, because they are beings without person
>Demonstrate that there can
The burden of proof is on you
>how can three be one at the same time?
It can't. Which is why I keep insisting on accurate categories.
>but it is not distinct from being
Yes it is
>>2234585
>Linked wills don't beg for their lives when the other being is choosing to kill them.
Psalm 22
>Each god is fully themselves and Shiva is fully Shiva and they are all aspects of the same divinity
So it's Partialism, and not the trinity
>No, you're just engaging in the proud tradition of semantics
It's not semantics, it's logic
>"perfect" god that saw fit to kill 42 kids with bears because they made fun of a bald guy.
Those kids should be grateful they weren't born into the lake of fire, they all deserved it.
>>2234605
>It doesn't even refer to Jesus
Yes it does
>patheos.com
Might as well link rationalwiki.

>>2234641
Justification is by faith alone

>>2234652
Uhh how do you think jellyfish sting? Poison.

>>2234652
>No

Three things cannot be one thing.

>Epic shitposting!

Just read it. So, it didn't address the part where Jesus prays to God to spare him if that's potentially within his plans.

>Are Jellyfish beings?

As far as I know, they don't experience. They're pretty fucking close to plants as far as animals go.

>Clearly they are poison to you, because they are beings without person

At best, they are beings that don't qualify as persons. But personhood is not distinct from being.

>The burden of proof is on you

No. The trinity is the extraordinary claim. One cannot be three without just being three.

>It can't. Which is why I keep insisting on accurate categories.

There is nothing accurate about these categories you're using. Personhood is the quality of being a person, IE possessing the thoughts, experiences, and abstract thinking of a person; it is a subset category of being, which is the quality of existing as an experiencing entity.

>Psalm 22

See above.

>So it's Partialism, and not the trinity

No, they are not components of a single divinity, they are all each aspects (another word would be expressions) of this singular divinity.

>It's not semantics, it's logic

No, it's semantics. Most of this argument has been you trying to make personhood something distinct from being. Why don't you demonstrate a reason to believe in this essentialism you suggest?

>Those kids should be grateful they weren't born into the lake of fire, they all deserved it.

You're a fucking monster.

>>2234655
Faith is nothing without works.

>>2234655
*clap clap clap*
After slaying 6 million Jews, Christians still saying that Hitler is entitled to salvation.

I'm proud. Truly I am.

>>2234652
>>2234698
Also while we're on the note of the burden of proof, it's not a rule of logic. It's simple a rhetorical tactic.

The "burden" of the burden of proof is merely the burden of convincing an audience. It has no place in dialectic.

>>2234652
Psalm 22:

12 Many bulls surround me, strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
13 Roaring lions that tear their prey open their mouths wide against me.

21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions; save me from the horns of the wild oxen.

Ah yes, who doesn't remember the bulls, oxens and lions attacking Jesus during crucifixion.

>>2234698
>Three things cannot be one thing
I agree. Can we move forward mr shitposter?
>As far as I know, they don't experience. They're pretty fucking close to plants as far as animals go
Atheist "logic"
>At best, they are beings that don't qualify as persons.
So then we've established that being doesn't imply person?
>The trinity is the extraordinary claim
No, the claim a multi-personal being is impossible is the extraordinary one.
>One cannot be three without just being three.
I have now affirmed this fact multiple times. Can we now move past it?
>There is nothing accurate about these categories you're using. Personhood is the quality of being a person, IE possessing the thoughts, experiences, and abstract thinking of a person; it is a subset category of being, which is the quality of existing as an experiencing entity.
Jellyfish.
>See above.
No
>No, they are not components of a single divinity, they are all each aspects (another word would be expressions) of this singular divinity.
THAT'S PARTIALISM
>Most of this argument has been
You shitposting
>>2234702
>Faith is nothing without works.
Works flow from faith
>>2234703
I don't know if Hitler was saved, only God knows that.
>>2234729
>i'm a retard who thinks everything is extremely literal

Because history doesn't support any of the most important claims of christianity yet christians still constantly yell IT'S A HISTORICAL FACT YOU CAN'T DENY!

>>2234261
What about Moses, John the Baptist, Zacharias, Siemon, Elizabeth and Luke 3:22?

>>2234712
Ultimately these discussions of God are always tuned to an "audience", either of anonymous people hypothetically reading our words, or to ourselves as a way of gauging the power of our words to convince. Discussion of religion cannot be within the realm of logic because it's premises must be taken as axiomatic. From a logical standpoint both sides would recognize the different starting premises and conclude the discussion immediately since it is fruitless to go further without reconciling the start. Since no one actually recognizes this and stops, that signals that we don't actually want a logical analysis, we want to convince ourselves or others regardless of how pointless it is.

One symptom of this condition is the abundance of empty assertions. Not intended to demonstrate or convince, but simply to allay our own need to affirm what we believe. These comforting yet pointless displays are the hallmark of disingenuous and pointless "debate".

>>2234775
>I'm a literal retard that can't read somethings so fucking obvious

>>2234785
What about them?

>>2234807
Holy spirit was there

>>2234813
The Comforter being given has to do with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Read Acts 1 and Acts 2

>>2234775
>I agree. Can we move forward mr shitposter?

Only if you admit that three gods can't be one god, and that three separate sensoriums and inner experiences constitute three entities.

>Atheist "logic"

Not an atheist, just not a Christian (nor a Jew or a Muslim before you start lashing out in the bigoted manner that's so typical of these discussions).

>So then we've established that being doesn't imply person?

I'll admit I said personhood equals being, but being does not equate to personhood.

>No, the claim a multi-personal being is impossible is the extraordinary one.

No. The claim that a multi-personal being exists at all is the extraordinary one. One being cannot be also three beings while also being one being.

But again, the burden of proof is not a rule of logic.

>I have now affirmed this fact multiple times. Can we now move past it?

No, because you're still playing stupid semantics games.

>Jellyfish.

Are neither beings nor persons. What's your fucking point about them? They don't experience, they don't learn, they don't have personalities. A better example would be ants, which are beings but don't qualify as persons. But much like fingers, and how not all of them are thumbs yet all thumbs are in fact fingers, not all beings are persons, yet all persons are beings and these two qualities are inseparable.

>THAT'S PARTIALISM

No, it is not, unless they're taking from a limited pool of divinity in so doing.

>You shitposting

Cry more. I've done a bit, mostly in getting kind of rude, but is has not being mostly me shitposting. An argument you can't counter is not shitposting.

Also a perfect god would not be so insecure as to take offense enough to kill 42 kids with bears for making fun of his BFF. Insecurity is a failing, perfect beings don't have those.

>>2234816
But Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit

>>2234775
>psalm 22
Bruh you serious? Lions, oxens and bulls of Bashan.

Bashan

Bashan

Bashan

Bashan

Bashan

Bashan

Bashan

Bashan

>>2234822
>Only if you admit that three gods can't be one god
I have done that about a dozen times now
>and that three separate sensoriums and inner experiences constitute three entities.
No
>bigoted
>>>/r/eddit
>I'll admit I said personhood equals being, but being does not equate to personhood
So then there can be a multi-personal being?
>The claim that a multi-personal being exists at all is the extraordinary one
I am claiming a multi-personal being can exist. If I prove that then I prove Christianity is monotheist. I have proven that.
>One being cannot be also three beings while also being one being
Like a broken record
>Are neither beings
Atheist "logic"
>No, it is not
Yes it is. The fact you have to strawman the trinity is striking. Truly reveals how false your position is.
>Cry more
Woah wicked awesome troll bro!!
>Also a perfect god would not be so insecure as to take offense enough to kill 42 kids with bears for making fun of his BFF
Those children deserved eternal hellfire simply for being born, it was merciful God ever allowed them to draw breath

File: *tips*.png (203KB, 479x455px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 479x455px

>>2234841
>hurrrr

>>2234261
What do you mean you refuted this anon >>2227965? I think his 'Council of Nicea' statement is new.

>>2230709

Sure thing, better paint his image and worship it.

>>2234848
Oh you naughty tiger

*wink*

>>2234857
>What do you mean you refuted this anon
It's a copypasta he's posted before
>I think his 'Council of Nicea' statement is new
His council of Nicaea statement has no substance to argue against

>>2234845
>I have done that about a dozen times now

No, you've dodged addressing that by trying to claim personhood is distinct from being.

>No

Then what constitutes a separate entity?

>So then there can be a multi-personal being?

No. Personhood is just a subcategory of being.

>I have proven that.

You've done nothing of the sort.

>Atheist "logic"

In what way are they beings?

>Yes it is. The fact you have to strawman the trinity is striking. Truly reveals how false your position is.

How is it partialism?

>Woah wicked awesome troll bro!!

You're the one who started crying about shitposting.

>Those children deserved eternal hellfire simply for being born, it was merciful God ever allowed them to draw breath

Do you lack basic human empathy or something? Am I talking with a person who lacks a fundamental component of what it is to be human?

>>2234863
It valid. In history, we learned that hundreds of Bishops are debating about 'what is Jesus?'. These are bishops, not normies, even they got confused with Trinity. Thus, contradicting that Colossian verse.

>>2234865
>No, you've dodged addressing that
I have affirmed that several times. You've gotten an answer it's just not the answer you want
>trying to claim personhood is distinct from being
I'm not trying to claim that, I have successfully proven that.
>Then what constitutes a separate entity?
A different being with a different essence
>Personhood is just a subcategory of being.
Yep. Why does that imply numerical equality?
>You've done nothing of the sort.
I have, you've just repeated yourself in response like a drooling retard
>In what way are they beings?
Atheist "logic"
>How is it partialism?
It denies those lessar deities are fully Shiva in and of themselves. The Father, Son and Spirit are each fully God in and of themselves.
>Do you lack basic human empathy or something?
I have empathy, I also have a sense of justice and recognize that it is good and holy to punish evil with the punishment it deserves

>>2234876
>If someone opposes truth at some point that means that topic is unknowable non-truth
Postmodernist pls go

>>2234882
>m not trying to claim that, I have successfully proven that.

In what way?

>A different being with a different essence

Ah, we're back to essentialism. What reason is there to believe in essentialism?

>Yep. Why does that imply numerical equality?

Because personhood is just a particular type of being. It is in no way distinct from being.

>I have, you've just repeated yourself in response like a drooling retard

Where?

>Atheist "logic"

Answer the question, please.

>It denies those lessar deities are fully Shiva in and of themselves. The Father, Son and Spirit are each fully God in and of themselves.

Jesus is not fully the father, neither is the holy spirit. They are all fully god. This is no different from the explanation of the Hindu gods.

>I have empathy

No, clearly you don't. Because you can't fucking empathize with those kids well enough to understand that having them mauled to death by bears and tortured for all of eternity is not a fitting punishment for throwing rocks at a dude and making fun of them.

Your notion of justice is fucking barbaric and I hope you're someday subject to it.

>>2234885
>someone
It the early fathers, bishops and people that are inspired by the Holy Spirit, which is all of them.

Yet they are all confuse.

>at some point
Yeah, the point where modern Christianity is established

>>2234894
>What reason is there to believe in essentialism?
"Hurr prove to me things exist!"
Atheist "logic"
>It is in no way distinct from being.
Yes it is. Are you going to make an argument or just repeat your refuted claims ad infinitum?
>Jesus is not fully the father, neither is the holy spirit
Jesus in no way the Father or the Holy Spirit
>They are all fully god
They aren't just fully God, they are fully God in and of themselves.
>This is no different from the explanation of the Hindu gods
Yes it is
>No, clearly you don't
Yes I do
>No, clearly you don't. Because you can't fucking empathize with those kids well enough to understand that having them mauled to death by bears and tortured for all of eternity is not a fitting punishment for throwing rocks at a dude and making fun of them.
>Your notion of justice is fucking barbaric and I hope you're someday subject to it.
I'm sorry i'm not some hippy that thinks evil should go unpunished. Every child deserves what they got, consider yourself lucky that you didn't.

>>2234909
>It the early fathers
No, the early fathers were all trinitarian
>people that are inspired by the Holy Spirit
'no'
>Yeah, the point where modern Christianity is established
The council of Nicaea was not in 33 AD anon

>>2234922
>"Hurr prove to me things exist!"

Yes, indeed. I wouldn't mind you providing a good reason to believe in essentialism, because as I see it, being is a matter of experience, knowledge, personality, and consciousness, of which personhood is a specific form of. Perhaps you can advance your own position, maybe exercise a bit of philosophical rigor.

>Yes it is.

In what way?

>Are you going to make an argument or just repeat your refuted claims ad infinitum?

Where did you refute them?

>They aren't just fully God, they are fully God in and of themselves.

Semantics.

>Yes it is

No. They're all just expressions of the same divinity, just like the trinity.

>I'm sorry i'm not some hippy that thinks evil should go unpunished. Every child deserves what they got
>evil
>Making fun of a bald man and throwing rocks at him in childish insolence is evil worthy of being torn apart by bears and tortured for all of eternity.

As I said, you lack basic human empathy. Also a sense of proportional justice.

>consider yourself lucky that you didn't.

Haha. I consider myself lucky that I got to see you make this much of a moron of yourself and represent your beliefs so poorly.

You still haven't explained how jellyfish qualify as beings.

File: not an argument.jpg (237KB, 598x792px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 598x792px

>>2234952
>I can't make an argument
>I'll just repeat the refuted falehoods
BTFO
T
F
O

>>2234962
Danth's law.

>>2234928
>'no'
That's their claims

>all trinitarian
Highly unlikely

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitarianism_in_the_Church_Fathers

The point anime-anon trying to make is that if Trinity isn't confusing as the Christians are claiming, then how come a large parts of the council members are differs in opinion about 'what is Jesus?'?

People don't dispute over simple things, only complicated things, which is the case for Trinity.

Large groups are debating with another large group over somethings simple? No. This only happened when somethings confusing comes into discussions. Thus, Trinity is confusing.

Keep in mind that they are all elites.