• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Islam's Fatal Denial of the Trinity?

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
If you say this with the same sincerity Muslims wish peace upon people like Moses - it is an empty sentiment as if Muslims truly wished 'peace' upon Moses they would actually pay consideration to what he wrote in his books.

Of course upon doing so they would discover that Muhammad not only violated every one of the Ten Commandments, but turned women into subservient slaves unto sexually degenerated men as Muhammad was.

So naturally I take your former as given but the latter as empty - peace is manufactured from within, and I am already in peace because I know where it comes from. Trying to make 'peace' an external solution as Islam does by using the sword is backwards (in proper Muhammadan fashion) which has resulted in the death of ~270 000 000 people (and counting).

So, my polite approach is scorned. :( **** off.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
I would say arguing in a framework created by the opposition is a fools errand since they invented the cut and paste.

Sorry I don't understand - opposition "invented" cut and paste? How even say you so?

I would say, rather, it is the orthodox that "invents" cut and paste:
Christians cutting and pasting "Jesus is the Truth, the Way, and the Life"! and "Nobody comes to the Father but by him"!
repeated ad nauseum for almost 2, 000 years now.
Muslims cutting and pasting "There is no god, only Allah! And Muhammad is the messenger of Allah"!
repeated ad nauseum for nearly 1, 400 years now.

...and hundred of millions of people are dead.

Sorry I do not understand - "opposition" cut and paste? How even think you so?

I would say, rather, it is the institutions of:
Christianity and
Islam

...and billions of followers who "cut and paste"; repeating ages old dogmas and "BELIEF"-based assertions.
What are Christians? "Believers"
What are Muslims? "Believers"

I would say, then, that "believers" work the fools errand as copiers and pasters that argue in a framework created by repetitions of ones "BELIEF".

What is true may not be pleasant (to "believers")
and what is pleasant ("to believers") may not be true.
I don't care about what others "believe";
I care about, seek and find what is "true".

Is the testimony of Christ Jesus dying on a cross for the sins of mankind (Christianity) TRUE or FALSE?
Is the testimony of Muhammad being the final messenger of (the) 'God of Abraham' (Islam) TRUE or FALSE?

This is, was, and shall be again answered by Moses and the books attributed to him:

לא תענה ברעך עד שקר
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Because if the two aforementioned testimonies are FALSE (which I argue they are), it stands that the institutions of Christianity and Islam are both heretical and not a product of (the) 'God of Abraham' but rather of man and man alone. This renders the Sharia Law - the "law of god" (alleged by the Muslims) a wholly man-made law which is being implemented through the UN and via such multi-million dollar industries as the "Islamophobia" industry which criminalizes criticisms of Islam for being the "man-made" religion that it is in accordance with the man-made Sharia Law.

Where exactly do you propose I am "copying and pasting" this from?
 
Last edited:

9-18-1

Active Member
So, my polite approach is scorned. :( **** off.

Sorry - no offense intended. I just needed a proof that enmity is generated from within (rather than without) and your response provided it.

I have not enmity for anyone - when one knows the institutions of Christianity and Islam are man-made, and that adherents are subscribing to a lie, one can only be motivated to release them from such bondage.
 

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
I'm guessing he took one look at your avatar and jumped to a conclusion about your religious identity rather than just looking at the religion field to the right.

:handpointright:

My religious life is chaotic and I like it that way. I'd be full on devout Muslim were it not for their confusion about Jesus the Christ. AND, I don't think the Bible permits him to be shouty at me. :)
 

9-18-1

Active Member
3. 'Creation' according to Genesis and TORAH

I will advance the argument that the sephirothic Tree of Life is (can be) derived by a careful analysis of Genesis 1:1.

The total gematria of Genesis 1:1 is 2701 which is 37 x 73. Adding 3 and 7 produces 10: a head of '3' governing '7'. This is precisely how the sephirothic Tree of Life is constructed:

Tree-of-Life-2.0-plain.jpg

___________________________________________________________________________
IMAGE: www.gnosticteachings.org -For visual aid only
Not an endorsement and/or solicitation of the site and/or its contents.


The very structure of this tree can likewise be derived from Genesis 1:1 which would require an intensive investigation into Genesis 1:1 (which I can/will do if requested). The synthesis of this derivation is provided in the following graphic:

AdamKadmonComboC8nov01a.jpg

_______________________________________________________________________________________
IMAGE: www.meru.org -For visual aid only

Not an endorsement and/or solicitation of the site and/or its contents.


The three topmost sephiroth (in the graphic named Kether, Chokmah and Binah) produce the basis of the typical Christian Trinity (not argued here):
Kether = God the Father
Chokmah = God the Son
Binah = God the Holy Spirit

Kether literally means 'crowned'.
Chokmah literally means 'wisdom'.
Binah literally means 'understanding'.

In terms of the Trinity argued in this thread, its association(s) is thus:
Kether = Neutral/passive (will) o.perative
Chokmah = Positive/generative (to bestow) g.enerative
Binah = Negative/dissolving (to receive) d.issolving

Because "will" in and of itself requires the generating/dissolving principle (masculine/feminine) as all creation requires, it is shared by both:
Kether = (the will to)
Chokmah = bestow
Binah = receive

Because this argument borrows from kaballah terminology, the word "kaballah" literally means "to receive". This is all it means. It does not mean anything aside from "to receive". To receive "from what?" is precisely the beginning of the search in ones own inner being to discover what that "what" is - I can not point a finger to it aside from stating it is found only from the inside. It is not found from the outside.

As such I would therefor argue that the books of Moses are not to be read as an outside-in (literal/historical) perspective, but an inside-out (metaphorical) perspective. The Ark of Noah to be built is simply a metaphor for establishing the basis of the body: the tree of life (which is the same autz hayim as in the book of Genesis) and constructing it within such that it will serve for the remainder of the work to come. I have a separate thread dealing with this here:

The Ark of Noah

To relate this back into the Trinity: the principle framework through which even the Elohim create as according to the first book of Moses (will; bestowal; receiving) is precisely the same framework any 'creator' must use. This is precisely why eating from the tree of knowledge (in the right way) is a bestowal of becoming "like" Elohim which is to 'know' purity and impurity (good and evil). This knowing of 'good and evil' I have a separate thread dealing with this here:

Nature of 'Good and Evil'

The three governing sephiroth (will; bestowal; reception) symbols that depict (attempt to illuminate) the three-in-oneness of creation: just as one can not create without seed (+) and womb (-), one can not create without will to bestow (+) and receive (-). Whereas YHVH (the name of god in Chokmah) bestows through Elohim (denoted YHVH Elohim in Binah) to create Adam (mankind), so too does mankind (man and woman) come together to produce life. The synthesis of will>>>bestowal>>>reception is a 'constant' that is virtually immutably ranging all the way from (the) 'God of Abraham' right down through to humankind and likewise through to animals. The process/framework of g.o.d. applies to all because it virtually *is* *the* framework operates.
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
In many public foras, one cannot consider themself even Christian while denying the Holy Trinity.

And rightfully so, IMO.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
I'm guessing he took one look at your avatar and jumped to a conclusion about your religious identity rather than just looking at the religion field to the right.:handpointright:

I used the examples because I knew they would relate to the poster but was aware of the religion denoted as 'Radical Christian'. I too found it strange that the universal symbol for man-dominated ownership (hijab) were to be dawned by a Christian.

My religious life is chaotic and I like it that way. I'd be full on devout Muslim were it not for their confusion about Jesus the Christ. AND, I don't think the Bible permits him to be shouty at me. :)

Well Jesus was not a real person. Again - this is idol worship. Jesus is a symbol of the Son as related to Christianity. In terms of kaballah, this is simply 'wisdom'. In other words:

The Father is Kether - Will....................Truth
The Son is Chokmah - Wisdom...........Way
The H/S is Binah - Understanding........Life

So when Jesus states "I am the truth, the way and the life," idol worshipers attribute that to him. What he is actually saying is: "I am crowned wisdom and understanding". That "crown" and "wisdom" are one thing and nobody comes to the Father (Truth; crown) except through wisdom.

That is because Kether Chokmah Binah are not three separate things: they are one thing. Kether (will) contains Chokmah (bestowal) and Binah (reception) as this is precisely how the Elohim work in creation:

This pattern is established from the onset of Genesis 1:3:
ויאמר אלהים יהי אור ויהי אור
And [Elohim] said Let there be light and there was light

Herein we find the three modalities [g.o.d.] that are a characteristic of the Trinity:
[g] Let there be light
[o] And [Elohim] said
[d] and there was light

In other words: understanding (Binah) gives rise to wisdom (Chokmah) gives rise to Truth (Kether). So, one must develop understanding in/of themselves to derive wisdom which leads to (the only) truth.

As such the Christian stance on Jesus is wrong (Jesus is/was not god) but so is the Islamic stance because they don't know what he taught and neither did Muhammad. We are not talking about an historical person - we are talking about whether or not what he (allegedly) states is: TRUE or UNTRUE. Truth has no polarization due to emotional/psychological fixations suffered by worshipers of something.

This is why I argue: Christianity and Islam are idol worship that prevent people from seeing what is true.

Ps. People hated Jesus and constantly attacked him. He essentially came to the world and called out the fornicators/adulterers and scribe/pharisee liars/hypocrites. If what Jesus said was TRUE, is what was TRUE two thousand years ago also TRUE now?

Truth is not subject to time: truth is truth no matter when/where.
 
Last edited:

9-18-1

Active Member
Do you know what the difference between eisegesis and exegesis is?

Yes - I also know how to spell them.

Yes, three separate things. G-d is inseparable, or indivisible. Unlike a triangle. All you are doing is shifting focus away from the division by pointing out their commonality. But that doesn't negate the existence of the division they contain.

No, not three separate things. In order to create you require a will, bestowal, and reception. These work cooperatively toward one end. Like the angles of an equilateral triangle: they are equal (A=B=C) and each require one another to form 'one' triangle. All YOU are doing is shifting away from the UNITY by pointing out their DIFFERENCE. But that doesn't negate the existence of the UNITY they contain.

Stop casting left: cast right.

This is the difference between your way of thinking: division (Binah) and my way of thinking: unity (Chokmah).
You are the one dividing, not me. Casting to the right yields 153 fish (9). What is (9) if not the number of truth (as you may well know).

No, it is three angles of 60 degrees. One angle of 60 degrees is called an angle, not a triangle. Tri- angle - three angles.

No, it's one angle of 60 degrees expressed three times. One angle of 60 degrees is called an angle, not a triangle (correct!). Tri- angle - three angles (incorrect!): EQUILATERAL triangle. Difference? The value of all angles are EQUAL to one another: A=B=C 60=60=60. Equuaalllllllateral.

And they are divided in that they are disparate parts that are needed to form that one triangle.

Not divided: expressions of one another. You divide them. Equilateral triangle divides not. How do you divide an equilateral triangle? Let's try:

Angle A = 60
Angle B = 60
Angle C = 60

A/B=1; A/C=1; B/C=1,

Hmmm... 1! What about side lengths?

Side A = x
Side B = x
Side C = x

x/x=1

Hmmm... does an equilateral triangle fit in one perfect circle? Yes it does.

You are the one dividing - not me. An equilateral triangle is 1. Any other triangle is 3.

No, the relationship that Kether has to Chochmah and it to Binah is one of causation. They do not form a triangle because they do not exist in space any more than do numbers.

Right: will. Will is the basis of causation.

Kether=will
Chokmah=to bestow
Binah=to receive

Read your Torah man.

This pattern is established from the onset of Genesis 1:3:
ויאמר אלהים יהי אור ויהי אור
And [Elohim] said Let there be light and there was light

Herein we find the three modalities [g.o.d.] that are a characteristic of the Trinity:
[g] Let there be light [CHOKMAH] (to bestow)
[o] And [Elohim] said [KETHER] (will)
[d] and there was light [BINAH] (to receive)

I know. Otherwise you wouldn't have used that phrase.

I am glad my bestowal is well received.

Understanding that the Tetrgrammaton has four letters, any explanation that you're going to give to indicate a trinity, is going to be you selectively choosing an interpretation to suit the outcome you want.

The Tetragrammaton only contains three letters: one of them is repeated. Heh (womb/matrix) is one 'thing' but can manifest as pure/impure. There are not two different hehs in the aleph-bait, there is only one. Y-H-V are the three letters used in the construction of the Tetragrammaton: the fourth is a repeated heh.

No, your model works just fine. The division of a god concept into separate principles or processes is idolatrous in Judaism. G-d in Judaism is indivisible.

You are quite the idol worshiper then - not only of creating division where none exists, but fixating on attempting to project your own division outward and accuse me of it. Once again - mark of Kayin.​
 

9-18-1

Active Member
Only God can make that distinction.

Actually human beings are capable of making this distinction. Exporting such things up to "God" absolves one of pursuing knowing what is not known and is arbitrarily passed off.

This is precisely why "belief"-based systems are a detriment. These institutions teach that "belief" is a virtue. It is not - it is institutionalized ignorance that prevent people from seeking/knowing.

Don't be afraid to 'know' stuff - I recommend it.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
3. 'Creation' according to Genesis and TORAH (as applied to modern SECULAR SCIENCES)

Argument RE: Biblical Patriarch of (the) 'God of Abraham': Noah

This argument is very simple and synthesizes directly with g.o.d. argued in the OP.

The Hebrew name rendered in English as Noah is spelled with only two letters: nun and chet.

נֹחַ

The Hebrew letter nun נֹ is the 14th letter of the Hebrew aleph-bait and has a value of 50.
The Hebrew letter chet חַ is the 9th letter of the Hebrew aleph-bait and has a value of 8.

Nun denotes a fish; sperm; (living) seed.
Chet is a combination of the two letters preceding it:
vav (man) and zayin (woman) and denotes the
relationship/interaction between the two.

As such, the name Noah נֹחַ is a synthesis of g.o.d.:
g.eneration: man (Adam)
o.peration: seed (will)
d.issolution: woman (Eve)

This fundamental framework of g.o.d. can be applied universally (axiomatically) not only within the context of the 'God of Abraham' but also more broadly such as in electromagnetism:
g. Male (+)
o. Ground (n)
d. Female (-)

and in molecular formation/bonding/dispersal:
g. Proton (+)
o. Neutron (n)
d. Electron (-)

and in cyclical (life) systems:
g. Birth (+)
o. Growth (n)
d. Decay (-)

I thus argue to deny the 'Trinity' is to deny the following:
1. Construction (presence) of the three principle centers of the human body (head/heart/sex).
2. Properties of all matter/energy and electromagnetism.
3. General rolling system of birth/growth/death.

This is precisely why I overtly refuse to argue the existence of a/the 'Christian' "Trinity" as such a handling of the most basic/fundamental 'Trinity' that I do argue for is imbued (by the former) with mythological narratives/symbols that actually do not apply directly to the essence of the (only) 'Trinity' I am arguing.

Consequently the House of Islam's denial of there being a 'Trinity' by virtue of the central idol Muhammad denying it (and Muslims "believing" his authority to being effectively equal to that of "Allah") necessarily denies the most fundamental precepts not only found in (the) 'God of Abraham' but also denies fundamental sciences that describe the observable cosmos.

As a consequence I thus hold:
1. The Qur'an is a product of "man" rather than (the) 'God of Abraham'.
2. Muhammad is/was not a prophet of (the) 'God of Abraham'.
3. Islam is not a religion of 'peace' but of perpetual conflict.

and argue that the balance between man and woman was/is *upset* by the House of Islam (rather than balancing it) wherein women were/are degraded and men are elevated. Such a system is inherently unstable and will (as has) manufacture human suffering in many forms that is rooted in coveting (manifest as covering) of women. Such behaviors will lead into the observation of the Ten Commandments that allude directly and specifically to the coveting of women, honoring of mother and father and not making images (idols) in the heavens (head) earth (heart) and waters (sex) as the House of Islam has ad absurdum.
 

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
While I do not and will not argue in favor of any particular religious institutions' handling of a (the) 'Trinity' (such as Christian teachings/precepts hold), I do however affirm the presence of an immutable 'Trinity' and will argue its existence ad infinitum.

You explicitly deny the Christian Father Son Holy Ghost understanding of the Trinity.

'Trinity': the (single) immutable framework through which all of 'creation' employs a first principle process(es) comprised of:
generating principle (positive)
operating principle (neutral)
dissolving principle (negative)
which, while seemingly distinct, conjunctly behave as one whole
(which herein henceforth will be termed g.o.d.).

And affirm your own specific understanding of the Trinity.

Thank you - it is interesting, but the heart of the matter I wish to stick to is Muhammad's denial of there existing a Trinity.

And have the audacity to assert Muhammad's denial of the Trinity.

Say what Trinity Muhammad has denied: Is it the Christian Trinity or your own version of the Trinity?
 

9-18-1

Active Member
You explicitly deny the Christian Father Son Holy Ghost understanding of the Trinity.

And affirm your own specific understanding of the Trinity.

And have the audacity to assert Muhammad's denial of the Trinity.

Say what Trinity Muhammad has denied: Is it the Christian Trinity or your own version of the Trinity?

Yes I do.

It's a good point raised but if Muhammad had *known* what the real 'Trinity' is, he would not have denied there being one - because one can not deny it and be correct at all.

I am going to make a more detailed argument in its own post but for now: the 'Trinity' I am speaking of is woven into Genesis 1:1 itself.

The original Torah did not have marking/spacing. There are Jews who believe that the spaces/marks they find in a traditional Torah are from G-d.

When we look at Genesis 1:1 without spaces and take basic roots:

בראשיתבראאלהיםאתהשמיםואתהארץ

bar............................................................**SON**............(child)
esh...........(-)..........................................(with fire)
iys.....................................................(passes in time)
...................................................................l.l.l.l.l
..................................................................VVVVV
bara...........................................................{verb}
el............(+!)..............................................**FATHER**...(seed)....................................
ohim.....(-!).............................................**MOTHER**..(womb)..................................
es..........................................................{direct object}
ha..................................................................the
shem.........(+).............................................fire (in)......................................................<-hashem = the name
aiym.........................................................the waters (of the sea/womb)
v'es........................................................{direct object}
ha'aretz......(-)......................................the earth(creation)

BAR-ESH-IYS............................The Son (with fire) passes in time
BARA..........................................to create
Elohim.........................................[Father](+)(-)[Mother]
ES...............................................{direct}
HASHEMAIYM..............................the fire in waters (of the sea/womb)
V'ES ...........................................{direct}
HA'ARETZ...................................the earth/creation.

Elohim is a fusion of masculine and feminine in that 'el' is the masculine energy that gives the erection and 'ohim' is the moisture (fire) of a womb. Hashemayim literally means "fire in water" (translated in English as "heavens") and requires both man and woman to create, just as the sexual act is required to make life (children). Mother and Father creating Son (child) is a product of the 'Trinity' and/or g.o.d.

The son (fire; life force of any being) is indefinitely suspended in the cosmic womb of creation wherein he/she is constantly "creating" within it based on g.o.d.:

g. (+) Bestow
o. (n) Will to
d. (-) Receive

So while:
"In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth." is technically not "incorrect", it's based on spacing that was chosen by someone in the past. When you read without spaces you get essentially what is above which is:

g. (+) Father
o. (n) Son*
d. (-) Mother
*wherein when Son is suspended in the cosmic womb his own "fire" becomes positive, the womb negative, and they give "birth" to creation.

Now Christianity is actually based on this 'Trinity' but casts a blanket of its own Greek mythology and Church orthodox ("God the" Father "" Son "" Holy Spirit and/or Joseph/Mary/Jesus etc.) - these are but a garment (complete with scriptures/churches) sitting on top of the 'Trinity' I am arguing.

The 'Trinity' I am arguing has no scriptures, no dogma, nothing to read, nothing to buy, nowhere to go etc. Just a basic understanding of how there is only *ONE* fundamental 'Trinity' and/or triune relationship that applies microscopically/axiomatically/globally/cosmically (no matter what scale). This is what I argue here as g.o.d. being *the* 'Trinity' which Muhammad denied there being one because he didn't *understand* it.

If he did understand it, he would not have spread his own seed out among multiple women (and a child A'isha) in fornication as elohim must necessarily be the union of one man and one woman as *one* thing. Muhammad had 11 wives and spilled blood by day, spilled seed by night with his many wives and sex slaves. He also told his own followers to take up to 4 wives which severely upset the balance of men/women. That's why there are human trafficking rings on the planet - degradation of women. Religions such as Christianity/Islam completely neglect/destroy the feminine aspect of G-d which is not LESS neither MORE than man. Muhammad did not understand this balance as he is the one responsible for upsetting it.

Nowhere is it written from Adam's own rib (seed) was derived 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 Eves. Imagine Islam conquers the planet, men women are even in numbers but all men feel entitled to four women. That is guaranteed to create alpha male competition, war, bloodshed etc. and it will never stop until men and women are balanced and back in harmony which is ... 'peace', right?
 
Last edited:

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
The 'Trinity' I am arguing has no scriptures, no dogma, nothing to read, nothing to buy, nowhere to go etc. Just a basic understanding of how there is only *ONE* fundamental 'Trinity' and/or triune relationship that applies microscopically/axiomatically/globally/cosmically (no matter what scale). This is what I argue here as g.o.d. being *the* 'Trinity' which Muhammad denied there being one because he didn't *understand* it.

Muhammad warned the Christians not to take their understanding of Trinity to excess. Both Jesus and Mary were being worshiped as deities. Perhaps you deny that people were worshiping Jesus and Mary. Or perhaps you believe that worshiping Jesus and Mary was correct.

If he did understand it, he would not have spread his own seed out among multiple women (and a child A'isha) in fornication as elohim must necessarily be the union of one man and one woman as *one* thing. Muhammad had 11 wives and spilled blood by day, spilled seed by night with his many wives and sex slaves. He also told his own followers to take up to 4 wives which severely upset the balance of men/women. That's why there are human trafficking rings on the planet - degradation of women. Religions such as Christianity/Islam completely neglect/destroy the feminine aspect of G-d which is not LESS neither MORE than man. Muhammad did not understand this balance as he is the one responsible for upsetting it.

The custom of taking many wives did not begin or end with Muhammad.

I am going to make a more detailed argument in its own post but for now: the 'Trinity' I am speaking of is woven into Genesis 1:1 itself.

On one hand you say your Trinity has no scriptures and on the other hand that it is woven into Genesis! I think it is difficult to say anything about something so unclear. Are you sure you understand? If you quote Genesis, then quote Qu'ran. If you count wives, then count them all - including the ones that were 'put away' by their husbands. Then say where and how the religions disagree. Don't mix and match like it doesn't matter!
 

9-18-1

Active Member
Muhammad warned the Christians not to take their understanding of Trinity to excess. Both Jesus and Mary were being worshiped as deities. Perhaps you deny that people were worshiping Jesus and Mary. Or perhaps you believe that worshiping Jesus and Mary was correct.

People still worship Jesus and Mary. That is part of the problem: idol worship. But I do not crudely associate idol worship with physical objects as Islam treats them: idols are not physical objects - they are constructions of/in the mind. Jesus is a psychological construct. Mary is a psychological construct. Muhammad is a psychological construct. These are all idols.

As such my own argument can be taken further (and I will/do if necessary) to suggest Christianity and Islam are both fundamentally idol worship and discarded as such entirely. Both utilize a central figure (image) imbued with fantastical qualities (likeness) and hundreds of millions of people are dead MEANWHILE:

לא תעשה לך פסל וכל תמונה אשר בשמים ממעל ואשר בארץ מתחת ואשר במים מתחת לארץ
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above or that is in the earth beneath or that is in the water under the earth

both institutions CLAIM that Moses is a prophet of the 'God of Abraham'. This 'commandment' is written in stone. Look how they break it:

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Idols like Jesus and Muhammad
or any likeness
and their respective "pattern(s) of conduct"
of any thing that is in heaven above
in the psychology / mind of "worshipers"
or that is in the earth beneath
creates emotional attachment(s)
or that is in the water under the earth
generating behaviors that are exploited by (the) idolatrous institutions (of Christianity and Islam) and of the world.

It happens to be that Christianity at least RECOGNIZES there is a 'Trinity' whereas Islam / Muhammad denies it. I would argue AGAINST the 'Christian' trinity because it is not real. However, it doesn't change the fact (I use "fact" here) that Christianity is absolutely built on the principle g.o.d. proposed herein:

g.eneration (Father) which is denoted by Joseph
o.peration (Son) which is denoted by Jesus
d. issolution (Holy Spirit) which is denoted by Mary

In Christianity, Mary is a "virgin" - it is a symbol of the fundamental necessity in order to be as pure as possible with sex. One who is i. conscious of and ii. protecting the vital (it's of a sexual nature) energy (not fornicating) is one who is acknowledging the "divine mother" which is denoted by Mary. Mary itself/herself is not real - it is a finger pointing to the moon (and is idolatry). The "divine mother" of creation always has a "divine father" as these two principle polarities (masc. and fem.) are what "makes" life:

בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ

The third word here is comprised of five letters traditionally written in English as 'elohim'. This is the original 'word' Moses (granting he is a prophet of the 'God of Abraham' based on Christianity/Islam claiming him to be one which I accept for the sake of argument) used to denote what is translated into the English as GOD.

It contains two words:
אל - EL
הים - HA'YIM

'EL' is the male-polarized generative (bestowal) vital (life) energy in all its possible forms.
'HA'YIM' is the female-polarized dissolution (reception) vital (life) energy in all its possible forms.

but the two words are NOT TREATED AS TWO SEPARATE "things". It is ONE thing. Male and female but acting as one 'thing' - not two, or three, or more, but one. So whereas within the word itself it is plural (the 'im ending indicates plural) when it becomes an 'object' being called by another word (such as the next word 'bara') it is "treated" as a singular "thing" - not plural like the word itself suggests. That detail can only be seen when reading in the original Hebrew due to its design.

The religions of Christianity and Islam are examples of when institutions systematically subjugate women such that 'El' and 'Ha'yim' are not balanced. How that happens is precisely talked about in the books of Moses after the creation account.

The custom of taking many wives did not begin or end with Muhammad.

I don't give a f*** when/where it came from. What are you now trying to defend polygamy? Balancing man with woman is exactly what the name of 'GOD' means: masculine and feminine as one. That means: polygamy is infidel - no matter when/where it came from, and because Muhammad was a (major) polygamist (as others have been and are) his 'image' is false and 'likeness' is infidel.

Observe to what degree Muslims "defend" Muhammad and his infidelity. They are filled with enmity and desire to spill blood: a product of IDOL WORSHIP (Kayin) that, if they weren't idol worshipers in the first place worshiping Muhammad (their own feelings, their own attachments) they wouldn't desire to spill blood and perhaps this thousands-of-years-war-of-the-'God of Abraham' can END. Christianity and Islam are both idol worship, and until 'Worshipers" SEE that they will always be fighting over BOOKS and IDOLS, there will never be "peace" as Islam itself claims to be. It is the opposite: perpetual imbalance/conflict and it is over the balance of man and woman. Christianity/Islam don't even use the language/name אלהים to indicate the 'God of Abraham': they use a NAME nowhere appearing in the books of Moses. Islam calls the 'God of Abraham' "Allah" which, of course I argue, is certainly not anywhere near of the same "nature" as אלהים the 'God of Abraham' due to Muslims worshiping a man whose likeness was literally infidel according to the word אלהים itself.

The name אלהים can be understood as the highest (unattainable) degree of fidelity to which a man and woman come together as "soulmates" and become like אלהים which is to know "good and evil" and/or how the "two" polarities are actually one - precisely to the same degree that man and woman are "one".

On one hand you say your Trinity has no scriptures and on the other hand that it is woven into Genesis! I think it is difficult to say anything about something so unclear. Are you sure you understand? If you quote Genesis, then quote Qu'ran. If you count wives, then count them all - including the ones that were 'put away' by their husbands. Then say where and how the religions disagree. Don't mix and match like it doesn't matter!

No it is the other way around: Genesis is attempting to describe the 'Trinity' that exists. It's not "woven" into Genesis in the sense that it comes from the text. That's wrong. Rather, the text is woven around the 'Trinity'. It describes it - it is not 'it'.

It is very simple:
g.eneration (the heavens)
o.peration (In the beginning אלהים created)
d.issolution (the earth)

The "operator" here is אלהים which is if/how masculine/feminine is balanced. That is the only "solution" for "peace" and/or harmony on this planet. Christianity and Islam, rather than working TOWARDS balancing these, they are the CAUSE of the IMBALANCE.

The fact alone that Muhammad had 11 wives (total) and engaged one sexually when she was nine years old (and worshipers of Muhammad attempt to defend this in several ways) sets the precedent for "worshipers" to "imitate" his likeness/pattern of conduct, which included PEDOPHILIA and GENOCIDE. Worshiping of him (Islam) and/or related idols is precisely why these "things" happen on the planet - because "Allah" allowed it for Muhammad (Muhammad and Allah are actually the same "thing" and/or idol) people use that as justification for what is otherwise (animal) behavior rooted in sexual lust - bestiality, pedophilia, rape, abuse etc. as its all fundamentally rooted in subjugating women and institutionalizing it.
 
Last edited:

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Agreed; however I am unsure as to your understanding of what 'idolatry' is. Are we talking the kind of idolatry wherein a central figure (graven image; pattern of conduct of) a man is used as the basis of an entire empire such as Christianity/Islam (Jesus/Muhammad)? If so, I am in agreement with you.

If not, I invite you to provide a working definition of 'idolatry' and how/why this applies to the Trinity which I haven't even argued 'what' it is yet.

Those who are attempting to dismiss something which has not even been argued yet only do so using their own understanding of what the Trinity is - which are derived from models which I too reject.

Idolatry is connected to subjective affect that is induced by good art. A good work of art can move a person and/or make them feel something. The actual dynamics is connected to the unconscious mind becoming active and semi-conscious through the emotional induction triggered by the art. The Confederate statues being destroyed in the USA is an example of this unconscious idol worship. They are unaware the problem is within them, but rather worship these idols in destructive ways due to unconsciousness.

If one is unconscious; unaware, of this unconscious connection, the feeling induced by the art can be mistaken as stemming from the art. This makes the art appear magical as though alive. The Golden Calf of Moses fame was a good and expensive work of art, that could move the audience and induce unconsciousness, which was mistaken for a god in the golden calf.

The entire materialist world of goods; capitalism, is based on the idol affect. If one possesses the new iPhone X, the god in the machine gives one prestige and status. These are not gods, but part of one's own psyche being projected into the object to make it semi-conscious, but not conscious enough to break the projection attachment that inflates the ego. Most people idol worship without even knowing it.

The natural man senses and feels the aura and beauty of nature within the plants and animals; nature spirits. This is similar to idol worship except the unconscious induction affect is natural and induced with natural objects, through our sensory systems, to trigger instincts and imagination.

Real idol worship is more based on man made objects that have a connection to the creative process within art. The Catholic Church has some of the finest art in world. The creators of the art had a creative and working connection to their unconscious psyche. Michelangelo would unconsciously see the art object trapped in stone, and he would simply let it out. This creative unconsciousness becomes imbedded in his art, to create an induction bridge to the unconscious psyche of others. The unconscious goal is to push certain unconscious buttons as a way to induce command lines for the brain; induce the religious affect.

It is not always easy to induce the religious affect with abstraction, only. This creates a closed loop inside a person; introversion, that can be contaminated with personal matters. The extroverted affect, connected to art and objects is more natural; sensory based, and is often used in conjunction with internal abstractions, help reinforce the abstraction; Jesus on the Cross. Art also helps to anticipate the future as well as define the present, making the abstraction more real time and alive.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
Idolatry is connected to subjective affect that is induced by good art. A good work of art can move a person and/or make them feel something. The actual dynamics is connected to the unconscious mind becoming active and semi-conscious through the emotional induction triggered by the art. The Confederate statues being destroyed in the USA is an example of this unconscious idol worship. They are unaware the problem is within them, but rather worship these idols in destructive ways due to unconsciousness.

If one is unconscious; unaware, of this unconscious connection, the feeling induced by the art can be mistaken as stemming from the art. This makes the art appear magical as though alive. The Golden Calf of Moses fame was a good and expensive work of art, that could move the audience and induce unconsciousness, which was mistaken for a god in the golden calf.

The entire materialist world of goods; capitalism, is based on the idol affect. If one possesses the new iPhone X, the god in the machine gives one prestige and status. These are not gods, but part of one's own psyche being projected into the object to make it semi-conscious, but not conscious enough to break the projection attachment that inflates the ego. Most people idol worship without even knowing it.

The natural man senses and feels the aura and beauty of nature within the plants and animals; nature spirits. This is similar to idol worship except the unconscious induction affect is natural and induced with natural objects, through our sensory systems, to trigger instincts and imagination.

Real idol worship is more based on man made objects that have a connection to the creative process within art. The Catholic Church has some of the finest art in world. The creators of the art had a creative and working connection to their unconscious psyche. Michelangelo would unconsciously see the art object trapped in stone, and he would simply let it out. This creative unconsciousness becomes imbedded in his art, to create an induction bridge to the unconscious psyche of others. The unconscious goal is to push certain unconscious buttons as a way to induce command lines for the brain; induce the religious affect.

It is not always easy to induce the religious affect with abstraction, only. This creates a closed loop inside a person; introversion, that can be contaminated with personal matters. The extroverted affect, connected to art and objects is more natural; sensory based, and is often used in conjunction with internal abstractions, help reinforce the abstraction; Jesus on the Cross. Art also helps to anticipate the future as well as define the present, making the abstraction more real time and alive.

It is a profound answer and I am in agreement.

I would thus argue that these "man-made objects" spoken of in your second-to-last paragraph need not be limited to "physical man-made objects" as I argue that the "idols" of Jesus and Muhammad are man-made. They are obviously not "physical" insofar as excluding actual physical objects carrying symbolism alluding to them, but nonetheless are man-made "objects". As such, adherents of Christianity/Islam adopt their image/likeness and employ them as their own; use of them as justification for ones own thoughts/feelings/actions which coincide with that which the idol(s) purports.

In the case of Jesus adherents have it etched into their minds that he was crucified and resurrected for their sake (sacrifice) and as such they are eternally "indebted" to him (which religious institutions exploit to the benefit of the institution itself) and in Muhammad his polygamy and treatment of women sets a precedent for others to behave similarly. This is all "idol worship" and it escapes the minds of those who partake.

The crux (no pun) of my argument lends itself to the eventual decapitation (okay some pun) of the institutions' heads by virtue of the fact they are constructed upon an idolatrous model (central figure which serves as the role-model whom to regard as authoritative and/or imitate) wherein adherents are "bound" to that idol and its image/likeness. Once again I argue even from a position that if granted Moses was a prophet of the 'God of Abraham' such behavior is forbidden:


לא תעשה לך פסל וכל תמונה אשר בשמים ממעל ואשר בארץ מתחת ואשר במים מתחת לארץ
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above or that is in the earth beneath or that is in the water under the earth

both institutions CLAIM that Moses is a prophet of the 'God of Abraham'. This 'commandment' is written in stone. Look how they break it:

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Idols like Jesus and Muhammad
or any likeness
and their respective "pattern(s) of conduct"
of any thing that is in heaven above
in the psychology / mind of "worshipers"
or that is in the earth beneath
creates emotional attachment(s)
or that is in the water under the earth
generating behaviors that are exploited by (the) idolatrous institutions (of Christianity and Islam) and of the world.

which, to tie back into the purpose of this thread, Islam (Muhammad) by virtue of the fact he denied there being a trinity (which necessitates the balance between masculine/feminine) lends itself to how/why he actually upsets the balance between these by giving a "model" that is structured to upset it in the first place: polygamy, concubines (sex slaves) and taking of them in jihad, committing genocide etc. This is not the work of a "holy" man but rather a very sick one.
 

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
I don't give a f*** when/where it came from. What are you now trying to defend polygamy? Balancing man with woman is exactly what the name of 'GOD' means: masculine and feminine as one. That means: polygamy is infidel - no matter when/where it came from, and because Muhammad was a (major) polygamist (as others have been and are) his 'image' is false and 'likeness' is infidel.

I think you need to take a deep breath, a step back, and consider that your animosity towards Islam and Christianity isn't merely about some Trinity symbology you've constructed.

Whether it is Moses with his two wives who told men to put away their old wife before they take a new wife, or Jesus with no wives who told people not to think sexual thoughts about women, or Muhammad with his eleven wives who told people to take responsibility for ALL their sexual relationships. You're going to go astray as long as you see this as some sort of religious pissing contest.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
I think you need to take a deep breath, a step back, and consider that your animosity towards Islam and Christianity isn't merely about some Trinity symbology you've constructed.

It's not something that can be illicitly "constructed". It just "is" - I am only pointing toward it.

In its most fundamental (crude) form it is the principle of continuous creation via generation/operation/dissolution and/or bestowal/will/reception. It's the same between proton/neutron/electron. I didn't "construct" these things - they just are. Again; the g.o.d. acronym is the finger pointing at the moon.

For example a Hindu perspective of this would be Brahma/Vishnu/Shiva. A Christian perspective would be Father/Son/Holy Spirit. The ancient Egyptian perspective would be Osiris Horus Isis. A kabbalistic perspective would be Kether/Chokmah/Binah etc. These are all garments on the surface of the principle 'Trinity' which underlies all things (what I am arguing for) - I did not "construct" it. It just is, has been, and ever shall be regardless of how many traditions are built upon/around it and/or how well (or poorly) they attempt to "indicate" it.

Whether it is Moses with his two wives who told men to put away their old wife before they take a new wife, or Jesus with no wives who told people not to think sexual thoughts about women, or Muhammad with his eleven wives who told people to take responsibility for ALL their sexual relationships. You're going to go astray as long as you see this as some sort of religious pissing contest.

Well first of all the books of Moses are mythology - they are not literal. The narrative adapted to it is again a blanket/garment that conceals the meaning. The Hebrew language is not only linguistic (right hemisphere of brain), it is also numerical (left hemisphere) and is constructed on the basic relationship(s) between masculine and feminine (which makes it a "living" system). There was not an historical Moses as Moses is a simple word which means "fire (born) from water". Jesus did have a wife - Mary Magdalene - and Muhammad instructed his followers that spilling the seed (fornication) is acceptable which directly contradicts the teachings of Jesus. I'm not sure what you are referring to when you say "religious pissing contest" as I'm only making the argument that (as it pertains to this thread) Muhammad's Islam is essentially heretical by virtue of its denial of a trinity. Creation literally can not function without it and requires the balanced relationship between masculine and feminine which is precisely what the word אלהים indicates which, according to the first book of Moses, created the heavens and the earth rather than "Allah".

It is this fundamental neglect of the feminine aspect of אלהים which the institutions of Christianity and Islam willfully and woefully either conceal and/or ignore. Creation can not happen without the woman/womb no more than it can without the man/seed. Genesis 1:1 (28-letter string) describes a 3, 10 Torus field knot which is essentially centered about a seed producing a womb within which the seed grows and/or is constantly reborn. This is the fundamental essence of אלהים and is found in the original books of Moses which is why (I must necessarily) grant that Moses was a prophet - Christianity and Islam are the ones claiming it, and accordingly both vehemently neglect what Moses actually wrote. The 'Trinity' is present right from Genesis 1:1 onward and is utilized by אלהים in order to "create". To deny this is literally to deny that Moses was a prophet which is obviously detrimental to Christianity/Islam.
 
Top