metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That I didn't catch, so thanks for the clarification.Two: I never said "the catholic church", but "the state" .
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
That I didn't catch, so thanks for the clarification.Two: I never said "the catholic church", but "the state" .
In my opinion, you almost nailed it. As you probably know, I propose God to be a duality. So, if y0u eliminate the holy spirit, and make the son equal to the father, you would have a duality.Trinity Sunday is the only day in our church calendar where we are called first to consider a teaching of the church rather than a teaching of Jesus. The word “Trinity” never appears in the Bible. We wouldn’t expect it to. It derived from early Christian efforts to make sense of what they read in Scripture and throughout their own experience of the divine. As the early movement of Christ followers organized and became a Church – and with that as teaching and theological identity formed – there was a growing sense that God existed not as singular and static, but in multiple ways.
Like in the first chapters of Genesis. Almost every line is astounding and inspiring, but in the midst of the story of God’s good creation is a statement that seems to expand who we understand God to be and interrupt the monotheism we see throughout the Hebrew Bible. In vv. 26-27 of chapter 1 we hear, “Let us create in our image…” YHWH – God – twice uses the plural pronoun, precisely in this moment of creating humankind in the divine image.
It’s the same image of plurality and relationship that we hear as the risen Christ prepares to depart to the Father, but first commissions his disciples – and all of us who have followed him since – in the name of God the Father, Son and Spirit. Baptize in this way. Go forth in ministry and mission with this image.
In all of their attempts to explain or internalize, some of them came to embrace it with a certain image. A word that came from Greek theatre. Perichoresis. Peri – “around” from where we get perimeter. And Choresis – from where we get the word choreography, dance. God is like a circular dance, they came to understand. God is the flow and the swirling between these three. God is a constant movement of love flowing in an around itself, then finally outward to draw all people in.
It’s there from the very beginning. God swirling above the waters and creating humankind. This same dynamic, loving God moving in the lives of every one of us, and sending us out in that same movement, empowered by the spirit to call others into the flow. Sometimes we forget the dance in our refusal to serve God and our denial of the community God offers. We’ve been stumbling and tripping over ourselves since the Garden itself. Yet, through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, we are always called back in. As Father Rohr has said, “God is not a dancer. God is the dance itself.”
The theologian Karl Rahner once produced a classic study called The Trinity, in which he says that “Christians are, in their practical life, almost mere monotheists.’” That is, if Christianity ended up dropping the doctrine of the Trinity, he suggested, the day-to-day lives of Christians would remain largely unchanged. Because so often our lives bear no evidence of this community we see in our God in three persons. We don’t operate with this sense of interrelatedness that testifies to the creative God who binds us all together in love.
“The Trinity is a mystery, not a puzzle…” the theologian Justo Gonzalez has said, “You try to solve the puzzle, but you stand in awe of the mystery.”
“The Dance of God: A Sermon on Trinity Sunday” A Sermon by Alan Sherouse | First Baptist Church Greensboro
Logic. I am a human only. I speak a human.language. I live equally a human. Human is my beginning human is my.end. I live I die human.When we reply to an idea, it's a retort, unless one can defend it as otherwise. We may or may not have scientific insights, but if its logical, it may be realistic, or it may be reasonable. Whatever it may be, it must have a predicate, or a subject for review. If you drop a hammer on glass, the glass breaks. You can't fix the glass with a feather. Nor can you fix it with a contrary idea. Words may be feathers, unless they have substance, or concrete ideas. The idea of God is concrete when the idea cannot be refuted. To refute God, one must have proof, and proof can be scientific, for the existence of the universe without God. After God created the universe, he didn't have to show up and prove he did it. He assumed there would be intelligent people on earth to prove he did it. So, for all atheists, where is the proof God didn't do it.
So, later, after God created the universe, he created paradise, which he and his angels enjoyed. I use the word God when I mean "God is a Duality." Then, God selected his holy people and attempted to establish a holy order on earth. Then, after everything went astray, God came into the world as Jesus. Then, again, everything went astray. Now, without God in our world, we are stumbling along hoping it will work out.
Poor God, nothing works out. The key for understanding God's dilemma, is "obedience." God requires "obedience to his commandments." It is a freewill issue. Why did I post all of this? I just like to post what I know, even though it may be an exercise in futility. I will, however, forgo my theological argument and revert back to "basic logic" to refute false ideas. Without logic, we have irrational rambles about almost anything, and an open door to fantasy land.
Religious arguments go back to the reason we are having them. Satan rebelled in heaven, God created the universe and imprisoned Satan inside, and, then humans came into being. Assuming a chain reaction, Satan started it! Let's get the culprit. Oh, God did that. The universe is Satan's prison. What a revolting development this is! Now, we're stuck in this world, Satan's prison, not knowing the ending.
Well, a semi-coherent statement. I don't indoctrinate, and I am not a machine. Like y0u, I make freewill decisions. Attributing words to a machine, allows us to avoid responsibility for those words.Logic. I am a human only. I speak a human.language. I live equally a human. Human is my beginning human is my.end. I live I die human.
Human human human.
I am a being I am told by man human you too are human...wo man.
I am so.indoctrinated by you I know you better than yourself.
Science all states you are not as human possessed you. In your mind in your designs in your daily moment by moment thinking controlling machines.
All thoughts in life of science as machines.
Focus. Your focus.
You said my brother is the destroyer. Yet you all look.at your brother.
In my life we are brother and sister. I look directly at you knowing you are wrong.
I didn't bother challenging your beliefs for nothing.
Well, a semi-coherent statement. I don't indoctrinate, and I am not a machine. Like y0u, I make freewill decisions. Attributing words to a machine, allows us to avoid responsibility for those words.
If all beings were machine functioning automatons, Satan, or all evil creatures would not be evil. We would say they were poorly designed by the "creator." Oh, who created the creator? Discussion gets messy when no one takes responsibility.
If I am wrong, by what criteria do you condemn me? You are wrong for confusing everyone with unfathomable language.
Relevantly here, it means you're not your maternal grandfather and he isn't you ─ that's to say, the number of individuals here is two. With Father, Jesus and the Ghost, either they have separate wills and are three in number, or they have only one will and are one person with three masks.I have been told many times that I am of the "essence" of my maternal grandfather, but that doesn't mean we were exactly one and the same but more that our personalities were so similar. Thus, "essence" does not mean nor imply "exact".
What they found inconvenient to take into account were the outright denials ─ by each of the Jesuses of Paul, Mark, Matthew, Luke and John ─ that he was God, and the failure of any of them ever to claim to be God. As a small sample ─The early Church fathers well knew that Jesus had said things about God to show that they were not "exactly" the same, such as when the end of times would be.
No, they're not the same ─ thus, for example, only one of them is God (see above).When he referred to God being his "Father", that logically cannot imply that they're exactly the same.
Just so. But that was because they were looking for ways to elevate Jesus to God status without opening themselves to the charge of polytheism.The Greek philosophers had a major impact on the composition of the NT writings in Koine Greek, especially Aristotle who designed the concept of "essence".
See my post above.The problem is church fathers were hung up with pagan gods. They never considered God's duality. It was easier for them to ignore Jesus, a man with ambiguities, and find Jesus, the son of God, a perfect theological solution, one compatible leadership bias. Which pagan god, and in which way should it be presented? So, they decided on a politically correct solution. It became a happy family. Dad has his son close by, and mother becomes the holy spirit to keep peace. It's a perfect family solution. The problem is it doesn't exist. Oh, maybe one of those flying saucers up high in the sky is the solution. Why not! We can ask a perfect family from outer space to replace all of those pagan gods, including unproductive pagan rituals.
The best reference for this problem of misinterpretation is found in Burton L. Mack's book, The Lost Gospel Q, in this scholarly book, Mack documents the transition of Jesus sayings and narratives from Jesus a sage or wise leader to Jesus the son of God. In short, we have scholarly information which allows one to conclude the Christian story about Jesus did not derive primarily from literal translations of gospel stories, but from a figurative interpretation by NT authors over a period of several decades. In short, if Jesus was the son of God, then why didn't NT authors find it in early gospels, and why did they propose narrative stories not found in those gospels. The most convincing evidence for false narratives is the evolution of those stories when Jesus wasn't the son of God to stories when Jesus became the son of God. In his scholarly book, Mack illustrates how Jesus stories changed over a period of about forty-five years from a wise or sage man to the son of God. If Jesus was truly the son of God, why wasn't it discovered in original books or writings about Jesus?
O stone ark is first O gods natural body of flesh as rock.Revelation 11 about the two witnesses is about God (Duality) giving testimony to his chosen people. In Rev. 11, which I claim to be the story about God (two witnesses), we have direct evidence for God's duality. It is in the last few verses of Rev. 11. "Then Gods' temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant." (Rev. 11:19). We know there are two angels facing one another on the top of the "ark of the covenant." Those two angels represent God's duality. The ark is a literal interpretation for God's duality. Therefore, it would be appropriate for it to be mentioned in relationship to the "two witnesses" (God) in Rev. 11. It can't get any better than that for direct evidence!
Imagine humans in heaven! There would be condemnation, they wouldn't like God as a duality. They would say, where is Jesus the son of God. Then, when the son doesn't show up, they would say it isn't so. Oh, no, we can't do that. The problem is the two Gods in a sphere will never change. What happens to humans who don't like God as a duality? Do they file a petition to the supreme court of heaven? We can only guess.A human adult father theist is first. Man and men. Group agreement human.
His own man son is not sperm in his balls. Says consciousness human. The theist. Life he says is sex sin owner. Sexual conception gives life it's inherited sin.
Biologist medical teaching. Science first did not own a science thesis a human to life existing future...human sex did. Taught advice life is a female mystery.
O ovary ova bio cell female is life continuance honour mother baby son said the human sacrificer father self of both lifes in satanic nuclear science causes.
Fallout irradiation burning to death by gas alight sciences light constant. Man wanted machines reaction not life to own light.
Jehovah teaching why the son baby of man was life sacrificed with his human mother.
The human man father caused it.
All humans who live argue live in the heavens.Imagine humans in heaven! There would be condemnation, they wouldn't like God as a duality. They would say, where is Jesus the son of God. Then, when the son doesn't show up, they would say it isn't so. Oh, no, we can't do that. The problem is the two Gods in a sphere will never change. What happens to humans who don't like God as a duality? Do they file a petition to the supreme court of heaven? We can only guess.
Maybe, they would seek a linguistic expert to inform them of what was being said.
O stone ark is first O gods natural body of flesh as rock.
It's two witnesses. Space womb. Heavens.
Three said the law owner Rome advisor no man is God. Do not give God a name. Especially a female unholy mother name. Destruction by maths.
Kept all evidence and knew our science brother would try to destroy life on earth again.
Possessed mind review. Causes.
Said to me by memory. I attended the Catholic church aligned reason. Interactive advice. As a child. What memory is involved interactive history.
I was baptised and honoured in life. Correct human review. Holy water over my head.
Said as the order I once owned a Secret brotherhood who murdered the life threatened. By satanic theists.
I then murdered them. As we owned no other choice.
Teaching. Memories.
We could have had Galileo killed for treason against life. Instead we jailed him as evidence of proof. Knowing historic is always sought. Looking back advice.
Lie gaol equals the science man answer. Why we imprisoned him. Sun nuclear theists. For future evidence.
Why we kept a non decomposing human body. Proof science had changed earths heavens killing microbe bacterias good energy in biology in water. Non decomposition a chemical cause.
We kept the shroud proving life was unnaturally irradiated by the heavens conditions.
So that science would not claim it was scientific.
1000 year Satan star return. Fallout.
Reason science also activated fall out.
Activated into burning as a cold holy star by earth sciences overheating leaving hot metals in space. That ignite the wandering star direct earth cause.
We kept all evidence for proof as he always lies.
Believe in what you want to, I guess, but you're continuing to ignore the ramification of how "essence" can be and is applied within the Catholic tradition.The churches acknowledge this problem by attempting to hide it by labeling the Trinity "a mystery in the strict sense". A "mystery in the strict sense" "cannot be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason once it has been revealed" (their words, not mine). And if you unpack them, you'll agree that they say "a mystery in the strict sense" is the same thing as "a nonsense".
I understand the idea of 'essence' / 'substance', and I think it's untenable as a description of reality.Believe in what you want to, I guess, but you're continuing to ignore the ramification of how "essence" can be and is applied within the Catholic tradition.
The issue of the "Mystery of the Trinity" as said within the CC deals with that this is not something us mortals cannot fully understand. However, I cannot speak for other denominations. Thus, personally I don't lose any sleep over this.And the Trinity notion is not only incoherent as it stands, but as I pointed out, acknowledged by the churches to be so