«Home

The Trinity Doctrine Revisited: Is Jesus=God=Holyspirit?

Consider the following:

Avatar
Newbie
17 answers

^^^ It is telling that pagans believed such long before it was suddenly imported into Christianity, no?

WHERE in the bible is there even a faint suggestion of ANY Triad?

SHOW ME.

That it was not there is what inspired the fraud in 1 Jn. 5 v 7 KJV which has since been removed.

0
Avatar
Newbie

^^^

Really doesn't prove much except that pagans believed such. But from the biblical perspective I would see it as a perversion of the truth. Man has been in descent right from the garden of Eden, therefore his religions will be a distortion of the truth. Case in point, consider the accounts of Gilgamesh and Deucalion (Babylonian and Greek), which are a corruption of the story of Noah.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Jesoul - beware that that which you claim to "know" by faith is a very ancient pagan dogma which early christianity knew nothing about.

Even if you wish to argue that Jesus is God, note that there isn't the faintest suggestion of a three-way personage anywhere in the scriptures.

That idea was imported from Babylonian and Egyptian triads of gods, aside from other ancient triads of Gods which the Romans were influenced by -

0
Avatar
Newbie

This is saying exactly nothing.

By faith, the followers of Olumba Olumba also know that Olumba Olumba is God.

By faith, Hindus also know that cows are divine.

Like. . . ? ? ?

Please don’t be clever by half.

There can be no conceivable “evidence” that Jesus is God.

Best stick to your “faith” reply dear.

Which anybody can use as an excuse to believe anything, by the way.

Sometimes you guys make me want to scratch my hair out.

A Jewish Rabbi is Almighty God. And you claim to have “evidence” for this? Heaven help me. Perhaps she’s gonna post a video recording of the transfiguration.

I am a compound and complete trans-dimensional magnetic element that is the only reality that exists: my nature means that infinite forms inherent in my compound and eternal mind are ceaselessly spawned from my intangible essence. In other words, I cannot stop creating. You may say I spawn things ceaselessly and this is also quite involuntary for me. Spawning endless realities is as natural to me as breathing is to you.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I cant draw like you guys but God is the exclusive intersection of 3 sets- Father, Son, Holy Spirit.

0
Avatar
Newbie

^^^

Let me put something to you.

Has it ever occurred to you that the real question is not -

- Could it be the case that such a thing as the Trinity can exist?

But -

- Does it in fact exist?

Could Jesus be God? Its possible. Anything is possible since our knowledge is limited. I might be God too. You cannot claim that you know everything - so it is possible that I too am God - and that this transcends your knowledge or understanding.

So the correct question in fact should be - Is Jesus in fact God? Is Deep Sight in fact God?

And not an explanation of how it could be possible. Because we already know anything might be possible.

Let me ask you particularly if you are aware of the origin of the doctrine of the trinity.

0
Avatar
Newbie

For one moment pause and close your eyes dear Jesoul.

Good. Now open them and read the statement above again.

How can you honestly be at home with such spin?

I weep.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Well lets have a look sir.

I would strongly suggest to you that YOU should be the one to look closely at the diagram again.

You stated that – “the diagrams were designed to arrive at the same value. There was no supposition that suggested contrary”

- Which is eminently bizarre given that the diagram specifically states and I quote “5 – 4 IS NOT 2 – 1” : Thus it is clear that the diagram DOES INFACT state that the one is not the same as the other – which is eminently FALSE because both simply reflect THE SAME VALUE of 1 (ONE).

- It can hardly be my fault, sir, if you failed to see the words “is not” appearing thrice within the diagram and it thus begs belief that you could suggest that the diagram does not suggest a false difference in values.

No sir. No, No and thrice No again!

5 – 4 IS NOT different from 3 – 2.

Both represent a value of 1 (One) and this is incontrovertible.

What is the very purpose of inserting a subtraction sign between the figures if not to arrive at a result? The ineluctable result is the figure 1 in all three cases and thus they are THE SAME and the assertion in the diagram that they are not the same is a blatant and unacceptable falsity.

The diagram is designed to explain away the inanity of a pagan concept which you slavishly adhere to contrary to all reason and commonsense.

Sadly, it fails in its mission.

IF THIS WAS THE CASE THEN IT SHOULD BE CLEAR THAT JESUS IS THE HOLY SPIRIT – AS THEY ARE BOTH SIMPLY ALMIGHTY GOD MANIFESTING DIFFERENTLY, NO? SO WHY DOES THE DIAGRAM SAY THAT JESUS IS NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT? ? ? YOU ANSWER ME YOURSELF – IS JESUS THE HOLY SPIRIT? ? ?

Simple enough logic –

1. God is Jesus

2. God is the Holy spirit.

3. Both Holy Spirit and Jesus are God.

4. Thus Holy Spirit and Jesus are the same person.

5. So why does the diagram specifically state that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are different people?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Well, I sort of feel uneasy about Athanasius', because I think we cannot do better than what is written in scripture. Moreover, the diagram shows four nodes, which seems to detract from the unity of God. Much like the family of Smith, comprising John, Jane and John Jnr: All separate and distinct but all of them Smith (sort of like the Mormon concept of God). See. . .

0
Avatar
Newbie

I am not saying that there are four persons in the Godhead, only that the diagram is a flawed illustration of the nature of God. I believe that Jesus is God, as the scriptures both OT and NT affirm. It remains then that we can only accept this by faith (believing God). We cannot know but because God says so, then we believe.

Jesus was very clear as to who He was.

There were other occasions where Jesus affirmed his identity as Deity.

This is difficult for the human mind to comprehend and we often try to rationalize it by using word pictures, diagrams and the like, but it's like trying to put all the oceans in a bottle.

We can only remember this: God has permitted us to know some things.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I ve expected the post of my swt since morng&couldnt concentrate much at work. Thk God sha.

would respond fully in support of trinity after watching the europa football match. Take this Acts 20vs 28 talks about relationship of blood of God&christ as same.

0
Avatar
Newbie

  It is meant to be an illustration that attempts to visually describe the trinity doctrine. I was hoping those on both sides may agree on something. So, no-o, not proof at all. And I don't think this "quadrinity" or "pentanity" can be biblically supported as this Trinity diagram can . . . abi I miss something? lol

0
Avatar
Newbie

@JeSoul

If your diagram is taken as proof of the doctrine of trinity (as DeepSight seems to see it) then it is flawed because I could as well provide a four-sided or five-sided polygon showing a "quadrinity" or "pentanity". As an illustration, I am sorry to say that my opinion is that it is inadequate.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Both diagrams do NOTHING except show in bold relief the patent, manifest and inescapable irrationality and falsity of the pagan doctrine of the trinity.

5 - 4 = 1

And -

2 - 1 = 1

And -

3 - 2 = 1

Thus the supposition that all three sets of values do not represent the same value is eminently false.

They represent the exact same value and this is ineluctable and absolutely beyond cavil.

Thus the image on the left is similarly flawed even on the mathematical suppositions of the image on the right.

If God IS the Holy Spirit, and God IS Jesus, then inescapably - Jesus and the Holy Spirit are the same person - God.

The implication in the left diagram that Jesus is not therefore the Holy spirit automatically shows that God could not be both Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

This is iron clad and indisputable in absolute terms.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Can we come to an accord that there can be no accord in accordance with the accord of the Christian to make an accord out of the patently disconcordant?

0
Avatar
Newbie

-The first diagram is The Athanasian Creed, generally thought to have been penned by Athanasius of Alexandria, a catholic theologian

from around 300AD. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed)

-The second diagram is more of a modern/numerical spin-off from the original that I think helps illustrate the point further.

I think we can all agree that there are verses that have been used for and against the trinity doctrine. Can we come to an accord that the above may satisfy both camps?

0
Avatar
Newbie
Your answer
Add image

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.