Christians - even the Bible says that Jesus was not God so why do you say he was ?

[The Grand Nudger]

Start at John 1:1 Jenny?  

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I mention this one as it's one of my personal favorites.  Trinity by route of John is artful, regardless of whether or not it's true. 

You could start earlier, in the beginning proper, as it were.../w Genesis. Truth be told, the trinity is speckled throughout the entirety of the new and old testaments. Though the word itself doesn't appear...it's just a term for the consequences to belief that certain statements made about god in the text lead to. There's no chapter or verse called The Trinity, but there doesn't need to be, because that's just the name that christians came up with to refer to a proposed solution to a rational objection that some of them apparently had.

The trinity is, essentially, a defense against an objection regarding non-contradiction and those comments made in the text. All things being equal, I kind of admire the effort. 3 persons, one nature. If the contents of the text are all simultaneously true, then a trinity is one way to explain what might seem, to some, to be disparities in the text at first sight.

[Delicate]

Don't worry, Christians. OP is nonsense and doesn't know anything about why or how Jesus is taken to be God.

lol

[Hmmm?]

My delicate flower petal, this is for you... just so you know, my sister is awesome and knows lots of cool stuff.

[Delicate]

My delicate flower petal, this is for you... just so you know, my sister is awesome and knows lots of cool stuff.

Thanks. Don't think I can finish all that though. You can share it with me.

[Hmmm?]

Thank you, my friend :•)

[jenny1972]

Start at John 1:1 Jenny?  

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I mention this one as it's one of my personal favorites.  Trinity by route of John is artful, regardless of whether or not it's true. 

You could start earlier, in the beginning proper, as it were.../w Genesis.  Truth be told, the trinity is speckled throughout the entirety of the new and old testaments.  Though the word itself doesn't appear...it's just a term for the consequences to belief that certain statements made about god in the text lead to.  There's no chapter or verse called The Trinity, but there doesn't need to be, because that's just the name that christians came up with to refer to a proposed solution to a rational objection that some of them apparently had.

The trinity is, essentially, a defense against an objection regarding non-contradiction and those comments made in the text.  All things being equal, I kind of admire the effort.  3 persons, one nature.  If the contents of the text are all simultaneously true, then a trinity is one way to explain what might seem, to some, to be disparities in the text at first sight.

yes Tertullian did a good job creating the trinity doctrine to explain the contradictions that was creating a crisis he was effective athough the Catholic church did have other methods of silencing those who disagreed with the trinity doctrine or any other self serving doctrine the Catholic church invented . people have every reason to be highly critical of anything that comes out of this religion and not take anything at face value its over 2000 years old and has gone through several translations before falling into the hands of a highly corrupt very wealthy politically motivated Catholic church that had many reasons to manipulate its contents ...

Christians should be very skeptical just because its mainstream doesnt mean its accurate but of course none of them are going to do that they are just going to believe everything theyre told without question thats what everyone else does

[The Grand Nudger]

I don't think that Tertullian wrote John or Genesis, nor would I give him credit for inventing the trinity.  It took a whole village in funny hats, so to speak, lol.

[GrandizerII]

Sounds like a strawman. You do know "most" doesn't necessarily imply such a high percentage, right? It just has to mean that more of Matthew was repeated/paraphrased by Luke than not.

That definition of most doesn't support your case. If you say, Hey, Luke used 51% of Matthew, so why didn't he use parts of Matthew's nativity account - it is very odd this very clear deviation, you wouldn't get very far. So, you say it's obvious, or point to another chapter with higher concordance, and avoid getting into the real numbers.

Catholic apologetic rubbish adding to the text something that's not there. I thought you were all about Occam's razor.

So going with your "explanation" here, why didn't Luke just mention Mary then? Did he not know that Heli was her father, and not Joseph's?

Possibly because genealogies were patriarchal at the time, so the son-in-law was mentioned rather than the daughter. Possibly, this is another genealogy of Joseph due to Levirate marriage.

If you need a number, make it around 80%. But forget numbers, just look at Matthew and Luke displayed side by side. You want a start, start with Chapter 3 and then move onwards from there. Way too many similarities to not ignore the deviation in all the verses related to the nativity or genealogy.

But I sense you're not open to seeing that right now. Maybe  in the future you might.

Your response on the genealogy thing defies Occam's Razor, mr. Occam's man.

The "as was supposed" bit is referring to the view that Jesus did not have a biological father as Luke believed he was born of a virgin. It has nothing to do with Heli.

Why does Q have to still exist? Lots of texts get destroyed without us getting the chance to have any copies of them.

[Minimalist]

LMAO - you need a better source than that. That's really pathetic.

Funny coming from a jackass who waves his fucking bible around!

[Homeless Nutter]

Don't worry, Christians. OP is nonsense and doesn't know anything about why or how Jesus is taken to be God.

Let me translate this, for those of us, who are not sophisticated masterdebaters, like yourself:

Nah-huh!

Wow. That's an amazing argument - it basically answers everything. I suggest you follow that with "I know you are, but what am I?" and then - if necessary - "I am rubber and you are glue..."  

And christians wonder why no one takes them seriously... smh