No Trinity in the NT

[blü 2]

What is the Trinity?

The Trinity began to take shape as a doctrine of the early church in the 3rd century CE, and appears in the Apostles’ Creed c. 390. (The word itself doesn’t appear in the NT, of course. Its earliest known use is by Theophilos of Antioch in 180, as Greek τριάς, but not with its present meaning.)

The doctrine states: ‘The One God exists as three persons and one substance’ (Oxford Dict. of the Christian Church) also phrased, ‘In the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another’ (Catholic Encyclopedia).

This is incoherent, of course, and not just incoherent but acknowledged to be so. OxDCC calls it ‘a mystery in the strict sense’ ie the doctrine ‘can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed’. The Cath. Encl. calls it an ‘absolute mystery’: ‘An absolute mystery is a truth whose existence or possibility could not be discovered by a creature, and whose essence (inner substantial being) can be expressed by the finite mind only in terms of analogy, e.g. the Trinity’ (which is compatible with the first but not so bravely put).

If this incoherence hasn’t already struck you, you might gain illuminating confusion from the diagram on Wikipedia’s page ‘Trinity’ (the sixth image).

(The Cath Encl also says that such incoherence is ‘not against reason but above reason’. Nice one!)

What does the NT say about the Trinity?

Nothing.

Worse, Jesus makes a number of statements which can’t be reconciled with his being a member of the Trinity, and none that support it. (That makes sense, since he’s a 1st cent. Jerusalem Jew, whereas the doctrine is devised by 4th and 5th cent Christian politicians (‘bishops’), whose purposes are altogether different.)

So what does Jesus say that can’t be reconciled to the Trinity doctrine (which, as we saw, can’t be reconciled to reason anyway)? Here’s a selection, each of which is phrased as a denial by Jesus himself that he is god, whether on earth or (Matt. 24:36, John 5:30, 6:38, 8:42. 14:10 &c) in heaven –

Mark 12:
29 Jesus answered, "The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one;" ... 32 And the scribe said to him, "You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that he is one, and there is no other but he;

Matthew 20:
23 "to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father."

Matthew 24:
36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only."​

Luke 18:
19 "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone."

John 5:
19 "the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing"

John 5:
30 "I can do nothing on my own authority; [...] I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me."​

John 6:
38 "For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me"

John 8:
42 "I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me."

John 10:
29 "My Father [...] is greater than all".

John 14:
10 "The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works."

John 17:
3 "And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."

John 20:
17 "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."​

Heading one off at the pass

There’s one argument I may as well have before it starts. In John 10:30 Jesus says “I and the Father are one.” Some say that notwithstanding the unambiguous words above to the contrary, this means Jesus claims to be god. However this passage is explained in John 17:

20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.​

In other words, says John's author, the oneness is of a kind available to all believers, not an equality with Yahweh.

So ...

The doctrine of the Trinity is incoherent. The church agrees that it's incoherent ('is a mystery').

Jesus (to his credit) gives it not the slightest support.

But despite all that, experience shows that those who’ve grown up with, find it hard to let go.
.

 

[Muslim-UK]

Trinity is the Church's biggest self inflicted wound, one it has not managed to bandage up for 2,000 years.

 

[Augustus]

The Trinity began to take shape as a doctrine of the early church in the 3rd century CE, and appears in the Apostles’ Creed c. 390. (The word itself doesn’t appear in the NT, of course. Its earliest known use is by Theophilos of Antioch in 180 (as Greek τριάς) but not with its present meaning.

Seems very late.

While the trinity concept probably took a bit longer, 'Jesus as God' dates back to the 1st C.

Not quite sure when the Holy Spirit popped into the equation though.

Trinity is the Church's biggest self inflicted wound, one it has not managed to bandage up for 2,000 years.

Given that it is still the world's largest religion after 2000 years, it clearly hasn't been as much of a hinderance as you seem to suggest.

It's probably one of the most popular ideas in history, pretty much the opposite of a 'self-inflicted wound'.

 

[Muslim-UK]

Given that it is still the world's largest religion after 2000 years, it clearly hasn't been as much of a hinderance as you seem to suggest.

It's probably one of the most popular ideas in history, pretty much the opposite of a 'self-inflicted wound'.

Perhaps as someone from a Christian background you can show the Trinity is coherent and makes sense? If so, I have a question or two to get things started.

 

[Tumah]

Perhaps as someone from a Christian background you can show the Trinity is coherent and makes sense? If so, I have a question or two to get things started.

I don't think you understood @Augustus 's response to your comment. You described the doctrine of the trinity as the church's biggest self-inflected wound. Augustus is (and I think correctly) disagreeing with that observation, based on the fact that Christianity remains the world's largest religion. In other words this doctrine doesn't seem to have hindered Christianity at all. On that basis, calling it a wound doesn't seem like an accurate description.

 

[Augustus]

Perhaps as someone from a Christian background you can show the Trinity is coherent and makes sense? If so, I have a question or two to get things started.

It was simply an objective observation, not an endorsement.

It could be the most ridiculous idea ever made and it still wouldn't change the fact that it was a bedrock of the most successful religion of all time.

In what possible way could a core belief of the most successful religion in history be described as a 'self-inflicted wound'?

 

[Muslim-UK]

GOD Almighty is a mystery to us, but He has revealed Himself through Scripture, and He tells us He is not the author of confusion. Historically those most likely to follow a Prophet of God were the poor, oppressed and underprivileged. Simple folk with a desire to understand the purpose of life. To these people the concept of God would need to be straightforward and simple to understand, so they could pass on a coherent doctrine to future generations.

The Church seeing this and other issues as a problem, banned ordinary people from owning a Bible for 1,000 years. Only those vetted and approved by the Church were permitted to 'teach' their often poorly educated congregation the meaning behind Bible verses and stories.

After the Enlightenment period of Western thought and culture, Scholars started to study the Bible in earnest with a critical eye, and ever since their studies were made popular, there has been a steady decline in people adhering to Christianity. In the 21st Century, Bible writers have all but removed references to Hell, and modern Christians are told to accept Christ, and not worry about core doctrines.

For these reasons, if you watch any discussions from non believers on the Doctrine of the Trinity, they end up being contradictory and defy common sense. In all this one doctrine is a self inflicted wound that will always be a thorn in the side of Christianity.

I agree Christianity is and will likely always be the largest Religion on the Planet, but who would expect anything less from something that says, accept Jesus pbuh as Lord and Saviour, and do nothing more to be saved. Christianity today is nothing like the Christianity of old, even set times of prayer have been abolished in the main.

 

[Kemosloby]

It could be a complete mystery or just a plain old a lie. Paul makes it very plain the Father and Son are separate.

 

[metis]

The Catholics call it "the mystery of the trinity", therefore if it all was cut & dry, the word "mystery" wouldn't have been included.

 

[Augustus]

This thread about the mystical nature of the Trinity in the Orthodox tradition is very interesting.

Well worth a read for anyone interested in the idea and history of the Trinity. One of the most informative series of posts I've ever read here.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What is the Trinity?

The Trinity began to take shape as a doctrine of the early church in the 3rd century CE, and appears in the Apostles’ Creed c. 390. (The word itself doesn’t appear in the NT, of course. Its earliest known use is by Theophilos of Antioch in 180, as Greek τριάς, but not with its present meaning.)

The doctrine states: ‘The One God exists as three persons and one substance’ (Oxford Dict. of the Christian Church) also phrased, ‘In the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another’ (Catholic Encyclopedia).

This is incoherent, of course, and not just incoherent but acknowledged to be so. OxDCC calls it ‘a mystery in the strict sense’ ie the doctrine ‘can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed’. The Cath. Encl. calls it an ‘absolute mystery’: ‘An absolute mystery is a truth whose existence or possibility could not be discovered by a creature, and whose essence (inner substantial being) can be expressed by the finite mind only in terms of analogy, e.g. the Trinity’ (which is compatible with the first but not so bravely put).

If this incoherence hasn’t already struck you, you might gain illuminating confusion from the diagram on Wikipedia’s page ‘Trinity’ (the sixth image).

(The Cath Encl also says that such incoherence is ‘not against reason but above reason’. Nice one!)

What does the NT say about the Trinity?

Nothing.

Worse, Jesus makes a number of statements which can’t be reconciled with his being a member of the Trinity, and none that support it. (That makes sense, since he’s a 1st cent. Jerusalem Jew, whereas the doctrine is devised by 4th and 5th cent Christian politicians (‘bishops’), whose purposes are altogether different.)

So what does Jesus say that can’t be reconciled to the Trinity doctrine (which, as we saw, can’t be reconciled to reason anyway)? Here’s a selection, each of which is phrased as a denial by Jesus himself that he is god, whether on earth or (Matt. 24:36, John 5:30, 6:38, 8:42. 14:10 &c) in heaven –

Mark 12:
29 Jesus answered, "The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one;" ... 32 And the scribe said to him, "You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that he is one, and there is no other but he;

Matthew 20:
23 "to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father."

Matthew 24:
36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only."​

Luke 18:
19 "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone."

John 5:
19 "the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing"

John 5:
30 "I can do nothing on my own authority; [...] I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me."​

John 6:
38 "For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me"

John 8:
42 "I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me."

John 10:
29 "My Father [...] is greater than all".

John 14:
10 "The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works."

John 17:
3 "And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."

John 20:
17 "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."​

Heading one off at the pass

There’s one argument I may as well have before it starts. In John 10:30 Jesus says “I and the Father are one.” Some say that notwithstanding the unambiguous words above to the contrary, this means Jesus claims to be god. However this passage is explained in John 17:

20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.​

In other words, says John's author, the oneness is of a kind available to all believers, not an equality with Yahweh.

So ...

The doctrine of the Trinity is incoherent. The church agrees that it's incoherent ('is a mystery').

Jesus (to his credit) gives it not the slightest support.

But despite all that, experience shows that those who’ve grown up with, find it hard to let go.
.

The trinity is taught through the body of christ not the physical bible. Catholics didnt use the bible and many parishes if not all dont have bibles unlike protestant non liturgical churches do.

As a result, what a JW sees as "not following scripture" is actually living scripture or trinity tather than studying and quoting it.

For example, "my father and I are one" is used a lot. Although a child can see there are two separate people or ideas joined by a conjunctional word, nonprotestant christians (NPC) dont see the literal part and stick with the analogy mixing the meaning as if an analogy means literal even though they are polar opposites.

In Lurtigical Churches (LC), the person of worship, like above NPC, is christ. When the physical body come together, christ is present. When they take the eucharist, they live, suffer, and rise in christ passion.

Christ/body and I (god) are one unit/one in god when the bidy comes together in christ name.

The brothers/sisters of christ, when come together, they become christ. When they become christ (in christ name) as a group they are seen well in the fathers eyes. They become children of god.

They become one.

Its taught in practice. Its not in scripture.

-

Jesus, as the body, is not equal to the father they worship or it wouldnt be worship. So al reference ls that "the father is greater than i" is saying that the father (the whole) is greater than its parts (the body) but together they "are one."

It ties with OT laws and stories of people worshiping and saving people in groups. Most LC get that. NLC, I noticed do not.

When I experienced "christ worship" in the church, it was actually worship IN and AS thr actual body/unit of chrisr.

Individually, many older catholics and priests especially cant tell the difference is because they are told that worship christ is worshiping an actual person (body/blood literal). But in practice, they are worshiping "in christ name" and because to get to god is to get through christ,

You can only do that through the trinity.

The father (creator)

The son (creation)

The holy spirit (the breathe of life)

The creator breathes life into creation and to whomever comes together in the name of its body/family (or some cultures last name), are one with the creator who gave it.

That is the trinity.

Evangalists make it so literal it looses its meaning. But its there. Scripture isnt all written. Ironically, scripture says that too.

 

[Fool]

What is the Trinity?

The Trinity began to take shape as a doctrine of the early church in the 3rd century CE, and appears in the Apostles’ Creed c. 390. (The word itself doesn’t appear in the NT, of course. Its earliest known use is by Theophilos of Antioch in 180, as Greek τριάς, but not with its present meaning.)

The doctrine states: ‘The One God exists as three persons and one substance’ (Oxford Dict. of the Christian Church) also phrased, ‘In the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another’ (Catholic Encyclopedia).

This is incoherent, of course, and not just incoherent but acknowledged to be so. OxDCC calls it ‘a mystery in the strict sense’ ie the doctrine ‘can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed’. The Cath. Encl. calls it an ‘absolute mystery’: ‘An absolute mystery is a truth whose existence or possibility could not be discovered by a creature, and whose essence (inner substantial being) can be expressed by the finite mind only in terms of analogy, e.g. the Trinity’ (which is compatible with the first but not so bravely put).

If this incoherence hasn’t already struck you, you might gain illuminating confusion from the diagram on Wikipedia’s page ‘Trinity’ (the sixth image).

(The Cath Encl also says that such incoherence is ‘not against reason but above reason’. Nice one!)

What does the NT say about the Trinity?

Nothing.

Worse, Jesus makes a number of statements which can’t be reconciled with his being a member of the Trinity, and none that support it. (That makes sense, since he’s a 1st cent. Jerusalem Jew, whereas the doctrine is devised by 4th and 5th cent Christian politicians (‘bishops’), whose purposes are altogether different.)

So what does Jesus say that can’t be reconciled to the Trinity doctrine (which, as we saw, can’t be reconciled to reason anyway)? Here’s a selection, each of which is phrased as a denial by Jesus himself that he is god, whether on earth or (Matt. 24:36, John 5:30, 6:38, 8:42. 14:10 &c) in heaven –

Mark 12:
29 Jesus answered, "The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one;" ... 32 And the scribe said to him, "You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that he is one, and there is no other but he;

Matthew 20:
23 "to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father."

Matthew 24:
36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only."​

Luke 18:
19 "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone."

John 5:
19 "the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing"

John 5:
30 "I can do nothing on my own authority; [...] I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me."​

John 6:
38 "For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me"

John 8:
42 "I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me."

John 10:
29 "My Father [...] is greater than all".

John 14:
10 "The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works."

John 17:
3 "And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."

John 20:
17 "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."​

Heading one off at the pass

There’s one argument I may as well have before it starts. In John 10:30 Jesus says “I and the Father are one.” Some say that notwithstanding the unambiguous words above to the contrary, this means Jesus claims to be god. However this passage is explained in John 17:

20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.​

In other words, says John's author, the oneness is of a kind available to all believers, not an equality with Yahweh.

So ...

The doctrine of the Trinity is incoherent. The church agrees that it's incoherent ('is a mystery').

Jesus (to his credit) gives it not the slightest support.

But despite all that, experience shows that those who’ve grown up with, find it hard to let go.
.

the idea is borrowed from the thrice great hermes.

there are three eternal substances forming the ONE.

they are God

1. is mind -
2. is body - matter
3. is spirit - dynamic or mutable

in another term they are called the mind, body, spirit = complex(singular)



they are also alchemical principles for the transmutation requiring sulphur, mercury, and salt. alchemy comes from egypt again associated with hermes. the word chem was the ancient name for egypt and it was noah's son chem that was the father of the great nation that would become egypt and moses introduction into the mysteries.


hermes was a previous incarnation of the Spirit that was known as Adam, elisha, melchizedek, asaph, joshua, hosea, yeshua.

its actual influence was in the early beginnings.

The Naasseni went even further, and the retention of the Hebrew name shows that their belief represents the oldest stage of the heresy. "Whoever says that the All proceeded from the One, errs; but whoever says, from Three, speaks truth and can explain the All. The first of these three is the blessed nature of the sainted higher man, Adamas [strangely explained as "diamond"]; the second is the death below; the third is the unruled race that had its origin above, and to which belong Mariam, 'the sought one' (ἡ ζητσυμένη), Jothar (Jethro), the great sage, Sepphora, the seeing one, and Moses." The three words "Kavlakav," "Savlasav," and "Zeer Sham" (taken from Isa. xxviii. 10), they declare, indicate Adamas above, death below, and the Jordan flowing upward (Hippolytus, "Philosophumena," v. 8), and present the threefold division of the realm of blessedness or immortality which forms a part of all Gnostic heresies—the world of spirits, the corporeal world, and redemption. The "Naas" is the primal being and the source of all beauty (ib.v. 9)—the spiritual principle. Side by side with it exists chaos, or matter. The human soul leads a troubled existence between chaos and spirit until redeemed by Jesus.


John 3:14
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up,

it is the difference between nachash and nehushtan

the Nicholaitans were a gnostic group.

 

[blü 2]

Carlita

The trinity is taught through the body of christ not the physical bible.​

Thanks for your notes.

they are told that worship christ is worshiping an actual person (body/blood literal). But in practice, they are worshiping "in christ name" and because to get to god is to get through christ​

I agree that in the gospels Jesus' message is that he's the door to Yahweh.

 

[blü 2]

Fool

the idea is borrowed from the thrice great hermes.​

I wouldn't be surprised. A number of sayings attributed to Jesus are from Stoic and Cynic philosophy, and what became the eucharist was an ancient Greek ceremony in which the wine (Dionusos) represented drink / vivacity and the bread represented Ceres.
.

 

[eldios]

What is the Trinity?

The Trinity began to take shape as a doctrine of the early church in the 3rd century CE, and appears in the Apostles’ Creed c. 390. (The word itself doesn’t appear in the NT, of course. Its earliest known use is by Theophilos of Antioch in 180, as Greek τριάς, but not with its present meaning.)

The doctrine states: ‘The One God exists as three persons and one substance’ (Oxford Dict. of the Christian Church) also phrased, ‘In the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another’ (Catholic Encyclopedia).

This is incoherent, of course, and not just incoherent but acknowledged to be so. OxDCC calls it ‘a mystery in the strict sense’ ie the doctrine ‘can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed’. The Cath. Encl. calls it an ‘absolute mystery’: ‘An absolute mystery is a truth whose existence or possibility could not be discovered by a creature, and whose essence (inner substantial being) can be expressed by the finite mind only in terms of analogy, e.g. the Trinity’ (which is compatible with the first but not so bravely put).

If this incoherence hasn’t already struck you, you might gain illuminating confusion from the diagram on Wikipedia’s page ‘Trinity’ (the sixth image).

(The Cath Encl also says that such incoherence is ‘not against reason but above reason’. Nice one!)

What does the NT say about the Trinity?

Nothing.

Worse, Jesus makes a number of statements which can’t be reconciled with his being a member of the Trinity, and none that support it. (That makes sense, since he’s a 1st cent. Jerusalem Jew, whereas the doctrine is devised by 4th and 5th cent Christian politicians (‘bishops’), whose purposes are altogether different.)

So what does Jesus say that can’t be reconciled to the Trinity doctrine (which, as we saw, can’t be reconciled to reason anyway)? Here’s a selection, each of which is phrased as a denial by Jesus himself that he is god, whether on earth or (Matt. 24:36, John 5:30, 6:38, 8:42. 14:10 &c) in heaven –

Mark 12:
29 Jesus answered, "The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one;" ... 32 And the scribe said to him, "You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that he is one, and there is no other but he;

Matthew 20:
23 "to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father."

Matthew 24:
36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only."​

Luke 18:
19 "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone."

John 5:
19 "the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing"

John 5:
30 "I can do nothing on my own authority; [...] I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me."​

John 6:
38 "For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me"

John 8:
42 "I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me."

John 10:
29 "My Father [...] is greater than all".

John 14:
10 "The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works."

John 17:
3 "And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."

John 20:
17 "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."​

Heading one off at the pass

There’s one argument I may as well have before it starts. In John 10:30 Jesus says “I and the Father are one.” Some say that notwithstanding the unambiguous words above to the contrary, this means Jesus claims to be god. However this passage is explained in John 17:

20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.​

In other words, says John's author, the oneness is of a kind available to all believers, not an equality with Yahweh.

So ...

The doctrine of the Trinity is incoherent. The church agrees that it's incoherent ('is a mystery').

Jesus (to his credit) gives it not the slightest support.

But despite all that, experience shows that those who’ve grown up with, find it hard to let go.
.

The first witness of God's servants and many of God's chosen believers were killed by the religious pagans who started the Roman Catholic Church and the governing body called the Papal, or Vatican. Christianity flourished after these pagans began stealing the words from God's servants who were preaching the gospel of God.

 

[Fool]

Fool

the idea is borrowed from the thrice great hermes.​

I wouldn't be surprised. A number of sayings attributed to Jesus are from Stoic and Cynic philosophy, and what became the eucharist was an ancient Greek ceremony in which the wine (Dionusos) represented drink / vivacity and the bread represented Ceres.
.

most ideas are recyclables. there is nothing new under the sun.

 

[DavidFirth]

The NT implies the trinity, it doesn't state it outright.

God the Father,
Jesus the Son,
The Holy Spirit is both.

Read Hebrews Chapter 1. Jesus is "The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven."

From this verse alone the trinity is implied.

 

[Muslim-UK]

Christ/body and I (god) are one unit/one in god when the bidy comes together in christ name.

One in purpose, one in mission. Confirmed when we read on...

The brothers/sisters of christ, when come together, they become christ. When they become christ (in christ name) as a group they are seen well in the fathers eyes. They become children of god.

They become one.

Its taught in practice. Its not in scripture.

There we have it, those that obey the Messenger are obeying God, thus one in purpose.

This is exactly how Muslims understand it.

Jesus, as the body, is not equal to the father they worship or it wouldnt be worship. So al reference ls that "the father is greater than i" is saying that the father (the whole) is greater than its parts (the body) but together they "are one."

When you group the bodies together physically, you enter the realm of confusion.

It ties with OT laws and stories of people worshiping and saving people in groups. Most LC get that. NLC, I noticed do not.

Yes with God alone sending his Prophet to guide and save the people.

You can only do that through the trinity.

The father (creator)

The son (creation)

The holy spirit (the breathe of life)

This makes sense, and in Islam the Holy Spirit is often the Arch Angel Gabriel, on whom be peace.

The creator breathes life into creation and to whomever comes together in the name of its body/family (or some cultures last name), are one with the creator who gave it.

That is the trinity.

Even with this it would be easy for people to worship Jesus pbuh rather God.

Evangalists make it so literal it looses its meaning. But its there. Scripture isnt all written. Ironically, scripture says that too.

Your understanding is closer to the truth than the Evangelical position. But unfortunately not half as much fun than listening to Christians attempting to explain it...

 

[Unveiled Artist]

One in purpose, one in mission. Confirmed when we read on...

There we have it, those that obey the Messenger are obeying God, thus one in purpose.

This is exactly how Muslims understand it.

When you group the bodies together physically, you enter the realm of confusion.


Yes with God alone sending his Prophet to guide and save the people.


This makes sense, and in Islam the Holy Spirit is often the Arch Angel Gabriel, on whom be peace.


Even with this it would be easy for people to worship Jesus pbuh rather God.



Your understanding is closer to the truth than the Evangelical position. But unfortunately not half as much fun than listening to Christians attempting to explain it...

Haha. Thank you. I appreciate your post.

Yeah, I practiced Catholicism as an adult for four years and understood it better than any protestant non lurtigical church Ive visited my whole life.

I havent heard an evangelical explain it without reference to the bible and poetic language. Even some catholics tell me "you got it!" with a puzzle look and priests just say "I havent thought of it like that before."

Let me ask, the Arch Angel Gabriel, how does he compare to the holy spirit? The closest definitional experience of holy spirit is receiving clarity of mind, heart, and a repentent soul. Rather than god, its literally "the breathe". How does an angel be breathe where to trinitarians, only god/holy spirit can give?

I understand if refering to angels as saints or similar but not in a role to give life only given in christian trinitarian view by the holy spirit.

 

[Muslim-UK]

Let me ask, the Arch Angel Gabriel, how does he compare to the holy spirit? The closest definitional experience of holy spirit is receiving clarity of mind, heart, and a repentent soul. Rather than god, its literally "the breathe". How does an angel be breathe where to trinitarians, only god/holy spirit can give?

I understand if refering to angels as saints or similar but not in a role to give life only given in christian trinitarian view by the holy spirit.

As you say, Christians receive the Holy Spirit to give them understanding and clarity by having communion with God, but this is nothing more than having a gut feeling, a conviction in one's heart of being sure about their faith or a certain question they need answers to; is this the right Church for me; am I understanding this passage correctly etc

So how does Islam understand the Holy Spirit:

He is the trusted Angel of Allah, swt (The Most Glorified, The Most High) sent to aid Prophets, and the really pious, so for example Jesus pbuh could have requested the Holy Spirit aid his Companions/Prophets in their mission after he was taken up.

The “Holy Spirit” (Rooh al-Qudus) is Jibreel (peace be upon him). Shaykh al-Shanqeeti said: “The words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning), ‘and [We] supported him with Rooh al-Qudus’ [al-Baqarah 2:87] refer to Jibreel according to the most sound view. This is indicated by the words (interpretation of the meaning): ‘Which the trustworthy Rooh has brought down’ [al-Shu’ara’ 26:193] and ‘then We sent to her our Rooh’ [Maryam 19:17].”

Allaah said (interpretation of the meaning):

“O ‘Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Remember My Favour to you and to your mother when I supported you with Rooh ul Qudus [Jibreel (Gabriel)]…”

[al-Maa’idah 5:110]

Allaah supported the Messiah (peace be upon him) with Rooh al-Qudus as He mentions in this aayah. In al-Baqarah Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And We gave ‘Eesa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), clear signs and supported him with Rooh-ul-Qudus [Jibreel (Gabriel)]

[al-Baqarah 2:87]

“Those Messengers! We preferred some of them to others; to some of them Allâh spoke (directly); others He raised to degrees (of honour); and to ‘Eesa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), We gave clear proofs and evidences, and supported him with Rooh ul Qudus [Jibreel (Gabriel)]”

[al-Baqarah 2:253]

This is not limited only to the Messiah; others were also supported in this way. (The scholars) mentioned that Dawood said, “Do not stop supporting me with Rooh al-Qudus.” And our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to Hassaan ibn Thaabit, “O Allaah, support him with Rooh al-Qudus.” According to another report: “Rooh al-Qudus will be with you so long as you are defending His Prophet.” Both versions are narrated in al-Saheeh.

According to the Christians, the “Holy Spirit” dwelt in the Disciples, and according to them the “Holy Spirit” is something experienced by all of the Prophets. But Allaah says in al-Nahl (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad) Rooh ul Qudus [Jibreel (Gabriel)] has brought it (the Qur’aan) down from your Lord with truth, that it may make firm and strengthen (the Faith of) those who believe, and as a guidance and glad tidings to those who have submitted (to Allaah as Muslims)”

[al-Nahl 16:102]

“Which the trustworthy Rooh [Jibreel (Gabriel)] has brought down

Upon your heart (O Muhammad)”

[al-Shu’ara’ 26:193]

“Whoever is an enemy to Jibreel (Gabriel) (let him die in his fury), for indeed he has brought it (this Qur’aan) down to your heart”

[al-Baqarah 2:97]

So it is clear that Rooh al-Qudus here refers to Jibreel… No one suggests that Rooh al-Qudus means the life of Allaah; nor is this indicated by the wording and this phrase is never used in that sense.

Who is the “Holy Spirit”? - islamqa.info

Umar ibn al-Khattab said: One day when we were with God's messenger, a man with very white clothing and very black hair came up to us. No mark of travel was visible on him, and none of us recognized him. Sitting down before the Prophet, leaning his knees against his, and placing his hands on his thighs, he said, "Tell me, Muhammad, about submission."

He replied, 'Submission means that you should bear witness that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is God's messenger, that you should perform the ritual prayer, pay the alms tax, fast during Ramadan, and make the pilgrimage to the House if you are able to go there."

The man said, "You have spoken the truth." We were surprised at his questioning him and then declaring that he had spoken the truth. He said "Now tell me about faith."

He replied, "Faith means that you have faith in God, His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Last Day, and that you have faith in the measuring out, both its good and its evil."

Remarking that he had spoken the truth, he then said, "Now tell me about doing what is beautiful."

He replied, "Doing what is beautiful means that you should worship God as if you see Him, for even if you do not see Him, He sees you."

Then the man said, "Tell me about the Hour"

The Prophet replied, "About that he who is questioned knows no more than the questioner."

The man said, "Then tell me about its marks."

He said, "The slave girl will give birth to her mistress, and you will see the barefoot, the naked, the destitute, and the shepherds vying with each other in building."

Then the man went away. After I had waited for a long time, the Prophet said to me, "Do you know who the questioner was, 'Umar?" I replied, "God and His messenger know best. "He said, "He was Gabriel. He came to teach you your religion. "

You decide which concept and understanding of the Holy Spirit makes more sense.