The trinity

[Erinome]

---

Within the broad contours of proto-orthodoxy, then, one can see development and variety. As time progressed, theologians became more entranced with the mystery of the Trinity and developed a more highly refined vocabulary for dealing with it. But that was long after the major issues had been resolved, of whether Christ was man but not God (Ebionites; Theodotians), God but not man (Marcionites, some Gnostics), or two beings, one man and one God (most Gnostics). The proto-orthodox opted for none of the above. Christ was God and man, yet he was one being, not two.

Once that was acknowledged, the details still had to be worked out. And they were worked out for centuries. If it were easy, it would not be a mystery. Theologians began to be obsessed with the question of how and in what way Christ could be both human and divine, completely both. Did he have a human soul but a divine spirit? Did he have a divine soul instead of a human soul? Was his body really like everyone else’s body? How could God have a body? Was he subordinate to the Father, as in Origen? If he was not subordinate to the Father, why was he the one sent, rather than the other way around? And so on, almost ad infinitum.

In this earlier period, however, the debates were both more basic and more fundamental. As a result, the alternatives within the proto-orthodox tradition—as opposed to the alternatives that separated the proto-orthodox from everyone else—were less clear and less obvious. All that was to change when the protoorthodox found themselves to be the last ones standing and were forced then to move forward into the orthodox forms of Christianity of the fourth and fifth centuries.


--Bart Ehrman, Lost Christianities pgs 156-157

---

[Minimalist]

The only thing that scares the, Alei, is that the money may dry up. Then these preaching fucks will have to go do something useful....like drive a truck or something.

Jesus was born before 4 BC and after 6 AD at the same time.

Could be one of them there miracles that your believers are always prattling on about, YHWH?

[Cinjin]

The trinity explained:

God is a title and not a name as in Mr.. President, or Doctor.
-or-
God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Three distinct separate but equals deities but only One God.

How does this work? Because the title God describes a governing bodies, and not an individual deity. For instance there is only one Governing body in control of the United States, subdivided into three branches. One government three incarnations of said government. A similar division is found in the God head.

Awesome. This little analogy doesn't offer any kind of answer or clear up the confusion around the trinity in any way shape or form.
The three branches of the government are not made up of the same fucking people. The president doesn't double as a Senator and a Congressman doesn't suddenly get to play President for a day. This is just a version of the three different forms of water argument. Only worse ... if that's possible.

You actually would be better off, just saying, "god is omnipotent, and human's frail minds just simply can't understand." And as stupid as that answer is, it's at least honest from your own brainwashed perspective.

FAIL

[Undeceived]

It's a long and tedious process, inventing a deity.

And you would know? I suppose that's what everyone wants: to figure out how Christianity came about without a trace of foul play, and with answers to every arisen question. Believers multiplied by the thousands within ten years of the man Jesus' death, and we're wondering how a scam could happen so fast. Holy Communion appears in early 2nd century books, and we ask, "How does a tradition start without an event to kick it off?" Jesus had to die, but how was his resurrection faked? And who would care if he 'resurrected' unless he was also an influential man? Why would they name him the Messiah unless the title came from his own lips? How did Jesus (or his writers) manage to fulfill 300+ old testament prophecies, proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls to have been written prior? How does one add to the Bible without the express consent of every church in the area, and have it copied by hundreds of dedicated scribes? Why were there martyrs unless Christians were so convinced as to override their human duty to self-preservation? Why does the Bible include imperfect people? Why are historically "unreliable" women used as witnesses to the self-proclaimed greatest event in the Bible? How did the idea of salvation by grace originate, when it does not exist in any other religion or philosophy? Why is there no positive evidence against the legitimacy of the Bible, such as third-party written charges of fraud or competing manuscripts?

Maybe everyone was just more gullible back then, and the writers were geniuses. Or maybe we are overstepping logic when we accuse people 2000 years closer to a historical event of being wrong about that historical event.

I love ambiguous history, don't you?

[Cinjin]

And you would know? I suppose that's what everyone wants: to figure out how Christianity came about without a trace of foul play, and with answers to every arisen question. Believers multiplied by the thousands within ten years of the man Jesus' death, and we're wondering how a scam could happen so fast. Holy Communion appears in early 2nd century books, and we ask, "How does a tradition start without an event to kick it off?" Jesus had to die, but how was his resurrection faked? And who would care if he 'resurrected' unless he was also an influential man? Why would they name him the Messiah unless the title came from his own lips? How did Jesus (or his writers) manage to fulfill 300+ old testament prophecies, proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls to have been written prior? How does one add to the Bible without the express consent of every church in the area, and have it copied by hundreds of dedicated scribes? Why were there martyrs unless Christians were so convinced as to override their human duty to self-preservation? Why does the Bible include imperfect people? Why are historically "unreliable" women used as witnesses to the self-proclaimed greatest event in the Bible? How did the idea of salvation by grace originate, when it does not exist in any other religion or philosophy? Why is there no positive evidence against the legitimacy of the Bible, such as third-party written charges of fraud or competing manuscripts?

Maybe everyone was just more gullible back then, and the writers were geniuses. Or maybe we are overstepping logic when we accuse people 2000 years closer to a historical event of being wrong about that historical event.

I love ambiguous history, don't you?

jesus fucking christ that was stupid.

[Erinome]

It's a long and tedious process, inventing a deity.

And you would know?

Yes, actually. My children and I do an exercise in which we make up deities. It's easy to see how yours was invented when you do such things. All it takes is some imagination, and unlike the inventors of jesus, my kids and I don't plagiarize what we're not creative enough to come up with ourselves.

I suppose that's what everyone wants: to figure out how Christianity came about without a trace of foul play, and with answers to every arisen question.

We've already figured that out, first of all. Why wouldn't sane people want answers to every arisen question? DUH.

Believers multiplied by the thousands within ten years of the man Jesus' death, and we're wondering how a scam could happen so fast.

That's not true at all. Christianity didn't gain momentum at all until around 400 B.C.

I know how it spread quickly. Check out my signature. Hypatia was just one example, not only to the people living during her time, but to modern folks of what happened to people who didn't worship jesus.

You wonder how/why it spread? People didn't want to be mutilated and killed. Once again, DUH.

Holy Communion appears in early 2nd century books, and we ask, "How does a tradition start without an event to kick it off?"

People made it up.

Jesus had to die, but how was his resurrection faked? And who would care if he 'resurrected' unless he was also an influential man? Why would they name him the Messiah unless the title came from his own lips?

All stupid questions unless you can prove that he ever existed in the first place. Can you? Didn't think so.

How did Jesus (or his writers) manage to fulfill 300+ old testament prophecies, proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls to have been written prior?

Prove it.

How does one add to the Bible without the express consent of every church in the area, and have it copied by hundreds of dedicated scribes?

Oh, I dunno... Someone said to do it or off with their heads?

Why were there martyrs unless Christians were so convinced as to override their human duty to self-preservation?

There are just as many, if not more martyrs who were so convinced by the Qur'an that they did the exact same thing... and who knows what else.

So... what's your point?

Why does the Bible include imperfect people? Why are historically "unreliable" women used as witnesses to the self-proclaimed greatest event in the Bible? How did the idea of salvation by grace originate, when it does not exist in any other religion or philosophy?

Why don't you make up some answers to those inane questions? That would be acceptable amongst your kind, obviously.

Why is there no positive evidence against the legitimacy of the Bible, such as third-party written charges of fraud or competing manuscripts?

Why is there no evidence for the legitimacy of the bible. The content itself is the evidence against it.

And who knows what was in the Library of Alexandria, which was destroyed by heathen atheists... oh, wait, nope... that was the christians. My bad.

Maybe everyone was just more gullible back then, and the writers were geniuses.

People were just as gullible now as they were back then, obviously. The writers were not geniuses, they weren't even really good writers. Have you read that piece of shit? Twilight is a quality piece of lit compared to that disaster.

Or maybe we are overstepping logic when we accuse people 2000 years closer to a historical event of being wrong about that historical event.

Oh, let's not overstep logic now!



If you're going to use that kind of logic about jesus, then you have to be willing to accept that those who wrote about the birth of Siddhartha Gautama close to the time that it happened were right to say that Maya was carried away by four devas to a lake, bathed, anointed, and inseminated by a white elephant with a lotus flower.

They wrote that it was the buddha who came to earth and inseminated his own mother with himself. They were closer to the time it happened, so they must be right... using your own logic, of course.

[Tobie]

Why is there no positive evidence against the legitimacy of the Bible, such as third-party written charges of fraud or competing manuscripts?

Pretty much every other holy book is a competing manuscript, in case you hadn't realised that you can't have more than one "one true god".

These definations are ambigous, and don't confirm or deny anything in of themselves.

Your definition of god doesn't confirm or deny anything either. Let's face it, you don't have any reason for rejecting Cthulhu's definitions beyond "It makes my argument look even more wrong, so they're wrong".

[Epimethean]

And you would know? I suppose that's what everyone wants: to figure out how Christianity came about without a trace of foul play, and with answers to every arisen question. Believers multiplied by the thousands within ten years of the man Jesus' death, and we're wondering how a scam could happen so fast. Holy Communion appears in early 2nd century books, and we ask, "How does a tradition start without an event to kick it off?" Jesus had to die, but how was his resurrection faked? And who would care if he 'resurrected' unless he was also an influential man? Why would they name him the Messiah unless the title came from his own lips? How did Jesus (or his writers) manage to fulfill 300+ old testament prophecies, proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls to have been written prior? How does one add to the Bible without the express consent of every church in the area, and have it copied by hundreds of dedicated scribes? Why were there martyrs unless Christians were so convinced as to override their human duty to self-preservation? Why does the Bible include imperfect people? Why are historically "unreliable" women used as witnesses to the self-proclaimed greatest event in the Bible? How did the idea of salvation by grace originate, when it does not exist in any other religion or philosophy? Why is there no positive evidence against the legitimacy of the Bible, such as third-party written charges of fraud or competing manuscripts?

Maybe everyone was just more gullible back then, and the writers were geniuses. Or maybe we are overstepping logic when we accuse people 2000 years closer to a historical event of being wrong about that historical event.

I love ambiguous history, don't you?

jesus fucking christ that was stupid.

Cue Bill O'Reilly.

[Welsh cake]

The devil is not a deity in any way shape or form.

Sure he is. You also have god the father, son, holy ghost and the devil. What? Is your god not THE god? The god of good and evil?

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Who is the master of the underworld where the fallen are sent for eternal torment?

Since we're on the subject of fiction. This guy:



He kicked hell's arse several times and eventually got fed up of leaving just to return to slay more demons, so decided to rule over the place and make Satan his little bitch.

Cool story, no?

Hell is a void or the absence of God. Emptiness does not need a care taker.

Interesting, so your god exists in hell. The endless eternal void. A void he can never fill. He created the fairytale of "reality" in his own mind as a means of distraction. We're all imaginary. He's trying to ignore the fact that he's truly all alone, surrounded by hell. That's why he punishes. He wants us to taste a little of the suffering, the agony he's endured since before time began.

Intriguing hellgod myth you have there.

That is why you have been given this life. For not all want to spend eternity with God.

What if we say spending *any* time with your god was too much? What he is going to do about that huh? What if we say one existence in your deity's diabolical design was one too many? How will he remedy or fix that particular injustice may I ask?

[Drich]

[quote='Cinjin' pid='293956' dateline='1338704170']

Awesome. This little analogy doesn't offer any kind of answer or clear up the confusion around the trinity in any way shape or form.The three branches of the government are not made up of the same fucking people.

Who said anything about the same people?
Take your time this time and read what was written again;
God is a title and not a name as in Mr.. President, or Doctor.
-or-
God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Three distinct separate but equals deities but only One God.

Now that you realize I am saying there are three deities who comprise the one God, and before you assume you are the first person who has asked the next question your going to ask. Read what some of the others asked, and I have already answered.