The trinity debate - Is it monotheism?

[sojourner]

Nice. I think you are looking for an argument of your making. You can go ahead and open a new topic.

Peace.

No, it's a matter of understanding the doctrine. By all appearances, you do not. If you're going to argue the doctrine, you should at least understand it.

 

[Soapy]

Maybe its like paganism. Maybe its an irrelevant argument.

One day i asked a little fella out of two VGA card options which one is better! He replied "Both are bad".

True. But my question is "Which one is better". If you want to discuss "both are bad" as a topic thats not relevant to this, maybe another new one.

Peace.

Two false ideologies... when asked ‘Which is better / Truer’, there is a trinity expectation that the answer must be one or the other...

This ‘no choice’ designed question is what is typically used against JW’s... Unfortunately (No... Fortunately!!) I am not a JW... so it doesn’t work - does not deceive me.

The answer is exactly as your VGA Board friend say, ‘NEITHER’.

The deception provided by a demand of the choice between two wrongs goes a long way to show that any and all trinity style ideologies are completely wrong and disingenuous.

It is by necessity that the trinitarian must deny all truths set before him. Anything that shows a truth must be immediately dismissed without consideration... Moreover, even if the truth is believed, where is that trinitarian to go... he can no longer enter into the house that has been cleansed of insanity and irreligiousness. So he must sustain himself by a blanket denial...

Each time I ask a question about trinity, I’m met with defensive arguments - not answers.... pure vehemence that, should the ideology be truth, would illicit a palatable response.. evidence that is credible and verifiable from scriptures without adulteration of wording or meaning... comprehensible and fitting into all other aspects the ideology...

But, of course, that cannot he so since trinity is not an end-to-end ideological belief. It is a hotch-pot of beliefs that do not form a piece-ful picture. A jigsaw puzzle that cannot never be seen in a completed state as pieces do not fit... Trinitarians Re-define words in vain attempts to credit the ideology... nothing truthful requires redefinition.

There are truly difficult words in the scriptures because Tindale struggled with concepts foreign to the English (or Latin) mindset. And there are pseudo-deliberate confusions - unintended but none the less create openings for trinity fallacies.
For instance:

• The name, ‘Jesus’ is actually ‘Joshua’
  • Jews named their children after an ancestor - notice the episode with John the Baptist and his Father, Zacharias.. but Joseph had no problem because he/Mary has ancestors called ‘Joshua’
• ‘Lord’ and ‘LORD’
  • ‘LORD’ is ‘YHWH’. How easy is it for a copier to set it as ‘Lord’ (p.s. The Lord Yhwh DELEGATED his ‘Lordship’ to Jesus... we call Jesus, ‘Lord’ but it does not imply being ‘YHWH’... Acts 2:36 tells exactly this...!
    • “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah."
• ‘God’
  • German word!! And ONLY MEANS: ‘Ruler’, ‘Highest in order [by context], mightiest... it is a TITLE, not a NAME
• ‘Firstborn’ and ‘First Born’
  • These are different things... the first means: ‘Most beloved of the Father’, the other is chronological birth in time
• ‘Begetting’
• ‘One’ and ‘Only’
  • Almighty God did not say he was ‘One God’. He said he was ‘The ONLY GOD’
• ‘Word [of God]’ and ‘word of God’
• etc.

A typical confusion is regarding ‘Firstborn [of/Over] Creation’. And ‘First born of the dead’.
It is no doubt that Jesus is ‘FIRST resurrected from the dead’ - permanent resurrection. Jesus raised up the dead as shown by scriptures ...?but these people still later died!!!! In fact, the miracles of Jesus were performed by others before him. Elijah and Elisha, both raised up a widows son, each. Leprosy was cured by priests... Moses parted a sea and ‘took the place of God’ with his brother, Aaron, as his high priest... do you say that Moses WAS GOD?

more....

 

[firedragon]

No, it's a matter of understanding the doctrine. By all appearances, you do not. If you're going to argue the doctrine, you should at least understand it.

Wrong argument.

 

[firedragon]

Two false ideologies... when asked ‘Which is better / Truer’, there is a trinity expectation that the answer must be one or the other...

This ‘no choice’ designed question is what is typically used against JW’s... Unfortunately (No... Fortunately!!) I am not a JW... so it doesn’t work - does not deceive me.

The answer is exactly as your VGA Board friend say, ‘NEITHER’.

The deception provided by a demand of the choice between two wrongs goes a long way to show that any and all trinity style ideologies are completely wrong and disingenuous.

It is by necessity that the trinitarian must deny all truths set before him. Anything that shows a truth must be immediately dismissed without consideration... Moreover, even if the truth is believed, where is that trinitarian to go... he can no longer enter into the house that has been cleansed of insanity and irreligiousness. So he must sustain himself by a blanket denial...

Each time I ask a question about trinity, I’m met with defensive arguments - not answers.... pure vehemence that, should the ideology be truth, would illicit a palatable response.. evidence that is credible and verifiable from scriptures without adulteration of wording or meaning... comprehensible and fitting into all other aspects the ideology...

But, of course, that cannot he so since trinity is not an end-to-end ideological belief. It is a hotch-pot of beliefs that do not form a piece-ful picture. A jigsaw puzzle that cannot never be seen in a completed state as pieces do not fit... Trinitarians Re-define words in vain attempts to credit the ideology... nothing truthful requires redefinition.

There are truly difficult words in the scriptures because Tindale struggled with concepts foreign to the English (or Latin) mindset. And there are pseudo-deliberate confusions - unintended but none the less create openings for trinity fallacies.
For instance:

• The name, ‘Jesus’ is actually ‘Joshua’
  • Jews named their children after an ancestor - notice the episode with John the Baptist and his Father, Zacharias.. but Joseph had no problem because he/Mary has ancestors called ‘Joshua’
• ‘Lord’ and ‘LORD’
  • ‘LORD’ is ‘YHWH’. How easy is it for a copier to set it as ‘Lord’ (p.s. The Lord Yhwh DELEGATED his ‘Lordship’ to Jesus... we call Jesus, ‘Lord’ but it does not imply being ‘YHWH’... Acts 2:36 tells exactly this...!
    • “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah."
• ‘God’
  • German word!! And ONLY MEANS: ‘Ruler’, ‘Highest in order [by context], mightiest... it is a TITLE, not a NAME
• ‘Firstborn’ and ‘First Born’
  • These are different things... the first means: ‘Most beloved of the Father’, the other is chronological birth in time
• ‘Begetting’
• ‘One’ and ‘Only’
  • Almighty God did not say he was ‘One God’. He said he was ‘The ONLY GOD’
• ‘Word [of God]’ and ‘word of God’
• etc.

A typical confusion is regarding ‘Firstborn [of/Over] Creation’. And ‘First born of the dead’.
It is no doubt that Jesus is ‘FIRST resurrected from the dead’ - permanent resurrection. Jesus raised up the dead as shown by scriptures ...?but these people still later died!!!! In fact, the miracles of Jesus were performed by others before him. Elijah and Elisha, both raised up a widows son, each. Leprosy was cured by priests... Moses parted a sea and ‘took the place of God’ with his brother, Aaron, as his high priest... do you say that Moses WAS GOD?

more....

So what do you say?

Is it monotheism or polytheism?

 

[firedragon]

No, it's a matter of understanding the doctrine. By all appearances, you do not. If you're going to argue the doctrine, you should at least understand it.

Alright. So fine. Lets say i donnt understand the doctrine and you understand it better. Fine.

Is it monotheism or polytheism?

 

[sojourner]

Alright. So fine. Lets say i donnt understand the doctrine and you understand it better. Fine.

Is it monotheism or polytheism?

It's monotheism. The doctrine plainly states "one God."

 

[firedragon]

It's monotheism. The doctrine plainly states "one God."

Relevance finally.

Peace.

 

[Soapy]

So what do you say?

Is it monotheism or polytheism?

As I said, it is neither. The attempt to put a defined label to something that does not fit the definition cannot be answered with the predefined answers.

Polytheism is the belief that many Gods control the existing world, physical and spiritual. Examples are Norse, Greeks, Hindu, Egyptian, Philistine, and any number of those others encountered by the Israelites such as the Canaanite. Each individual ‘God’ has a name as a personal identifier.

Monotheism is the belief that the world and all within was created and is maintained by only one God. BASIC Examples are Muslim (Islam), Judaism, Christianity.

Of these three latter beliefs, Christianity diverges from the normal ‘Only God’ definition in that it claims that:

• Though it believes there is only one God, this one God is actually THREE PERSONS
• And ‘God’ is not a person but ESSENCE and NATURE ‘in which the three persons share co-equally’
• But they actually do not share co-equally because they RANKED in a hierarchical order with one person being FATHER of another one (the Son), and EMANATING the third (the Holy Spirit)
• In addition, though the Son is said to be completely, 100%, full of the ESSENCE AND NATURE of God, he is actually GIVEN that essence and nature BY the Father, to whom the essence and nature BELONGS... to wit, it is the Third member/person.
• And, this third member appears to have no name, and is under the orders of the other two persons: It is SENT by both to humanity as a PROVIDER, an Advocate, an intelligent reminder, positive inducer, Guide, gift giver. It also RECEIVES from the Son, who himself, RECEIVES from the Father...
• Furthermore, the Son is claimed to have ‘EMPTIED HIMSELF’ (though nothing is said of exactly what he emptied himself of!!) and become MANKIND in order to save mankind from the sin of the first man.. but even as he was man he was still GOD 100%. Not withstanding the fact that Spirit God and flesh man cannot integrate, the ‘not knowing things’ aspect of the man grates against the ‘know all things’ of God: how it the man, though God, was ignorant, even to not knowing his own, God-destiny!??
• And above all, the Son... died... yet trinity says he DID NOT!!!! But yet was raised up (from not being dead!!??) again by GOD... even though he IS GOD...! And again, GOD IS ESSENCE SND NATURE, so it has to be assumed it was one of the Other persons OF God who raised him up.., and if he was NOT DEAD why was he in a grave for three day and nights?
• And added to this, he is taken up to heaven BY GOD, though he is God... and seated NEXT TO GOD... though he is God... and given power to rule AS GOD.., even though he already is God... and then he gives the power back to GOD.. even though he is God... and then sits down on the throne of a human king to rule over creation ...even though he is God who rules over EVERYTHING (creation bring a tinsy limited part in the endless spirit world (The son says he will prepare a ‘ROOM’ in his father’s mansion for the elite of godly mankind ... it is not even his (the Son) but yet the Son is God who owns everything!!!

Truly, Trinity Christianity does not fit a label of ‘Mono-Theism’. It certainly is MORE LIKE POLYTHEISM... because of its THREE PERSONS, even if trinity claims they are not three GODS... they still are THREE RULERS (trinity claim) ACTING in the TITLE of ONE GOD...

So, once again. Trinity Christianity is neither Mono nor Poly... it is a hybrid that makes no sense and is actually blasphemous to the ONLY GOD of the Scriptures.

If push comes to shove, I would declare it as Polytheism seeing that:

• It defines MORE THAN ONE who controls the world
• Thought it declares the three as co-equal, the reality is quite different: they are NOT EQUAL AT ALL
• There is a clearly defined HEAD (the Father) who gives - no co-equality system has a LEAD performer. And certainly co-equality requires no giving from one to another
• Poly systems are heirachial - so is trinity, undeniably

 

[Soapy]

sojourner Said:

It's monotheism. The doctrine plainly states "one God."

One GOD but THREE RULERS.

But which takes precedence: God or Ruler (seeing that ‘God’ means ‘Ruler’)

 

[firedragon]

As I said, it is neither. The attempt to put a defined label to something that does not fit the definition cannot be answered with the predefined answers.

Polytheism is the belief that many Gods control the existing world, physical and spiritual. Examples are Norse, Greeks, Hindu, Egyptian, Philistine, and any number of those others encountered by the Israelites such as the Canaanite. Each individual ‘God’ has a name as a personal identifier.

Monotheism is the belief that the world and all within was created and is maintained by only one God. BASIC Examples are Muslim (Islam), Judaism, Christianity.

Of these three latter beliefs, Christianity diverges from the normal ‘Only God’ definition in that it claims that:

• Though it believes there is only one God, this one God is actually THREE PERSONS
• And ‘God’ is not a person but ESSENCE and NATURE ‘in which the three persons share co-equally’
• But they actually do not share co-equally because they RANKED in a hierarchical order with one person being FATHER of another one (the Son), and EMANATING the third (the Holy Spirit)
• In addition, though the Son is said to be completely, 100%, full of the ESSENCE AND NATURE of God, he is actually GIVEN that essence and nature BY the Father, to whom the essence and nature BELONGS... to wit, it is the Third member/person.
• And, this third member appears to have no name, and is under the orders of the other two persons: It is SENT by both to humanity as a PROVIDER, an Advocate, an intelligent reminder, positive inducer, Guide, gift giver. It also RECEIVES from the Son, who himself, RECEIVES from the Father...
• Furthermore, the Son is claimed to have ‘EMPTIED HIMSELF’ (though nothing is said of exactly what he emptied himself of!!) and become MANKIND in order to save mankind from the sin of the first man.. but even as he was man he was still GOD 100%. Not withstanding the fact that Spirit God and flesh man cannot integrate, the ‘not knowing things’ aspect of the man grates against the ‘know all things’ of God: how it the man, though God, was ignorant, even to not knowing his own, God-destiny!??
• And above all, the Son... died... yet trinity says he DID NOT!!!! But yet was raised up (from not being dead!!??) again by GOD... even though he IS GOD...! And again, GOD IS ESSENCE SND NATURE, so it has to be assumed it was one of the Other persons OF God who raised him up.., and if he was NOT DEAD why was he in a grave for three day and nights?
• And added to this, he is taken up to heaven BY GOD, though he is God... and seated NEXT TO GOD... though he is God... and given power to rule AS GOD.., even though he already is God... and then he gives the power back to GOD.. even though he is God... and then sits down on the throne of a human king to rule over creation ...even though he is God who rules over EVERYTHING (creation bring a tinsy limited part in the endless spirit world (The son says he will prepare a ‘ROOM’ in his father’s mansion for the elite of godly mankind ... it is not even his (the Son) but yet the Son is God who owns everything!!!

Truly, Trinity Christianity does not fit a label of ‘Mono-Theism’. It certainly is MORE LIKE POLYTHEISM... because of its THREE PERSONS, even if trinity claims they are not three GODS... they still are THREE RULERS (trinity claim) ACTING in the TITLE of ONE GOD...

So, once again. Trinity Christianity is neither Mono nor Poly... it is a hybrid that makes no sense and is actually blasphemous to the ONLY GOD of the Scriptures.

If push comes to shove, I would declare it as Polytheism seeing that:

• It defines MORE THAN ONE who controls the world
• Thought it declares the three as co-equal, the reality is quite different: they are NOT EQUAL AT ALL
• There is a clearly defined HEAD (the Father) who gives - no co-equality system has a LEAD performer. And certainly co-equality requires no giving from one to another
• Poly systems are heirachial - so is trinity, undeniably

Wrong. It is either this or that.

And in your thesis, you have vehemently tried to prove that the Trinity is a form of polytheism. But then again, you have listed Islam, Judaism, and Christianity as monotheism.

Sorry brother. I cant see where you are going and you seem to contradict yourself. I appreciate your time.

 

[Soapy]

Wrong. It is either this or that.

And in your thesis, you have vehemently tried to prove that the Trinity is a form of polytheism. But then again, you have listed Islam, Judaism, and Christianity as monotheism.

Sorry brother. I cant see where you are going and you seem to contradict yourself. I appreciate your time.

Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all have the same root. All three are ‘horns’ protruding from the one ‘head’. Perhaps there is a prophecy that declares this... I don’t know but it would be very interesting to find out!

I, myself, declared that the answer was ‘Neither’, and I gave my reason... did you miss that!!!?

But I went further. I explained where the error was in the question and the deficiency of the limited answers requested. Did you miss that!!?

I outlined that [there are many Christians beliefs of which] TRINITY is discussed here seeing it is the predominant belief [coming out of the staunch ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH underwritten by Emperor Constantine and bishop Athanasian].

Though we all call ourselves ‘Christian’, in that we believe we are following ‘Christ’ Jesus, there are clearly vast differences between what our complete belief is regarding exactly who we think he is.

What I showed you was that a Polytheistic belief puts Jesus Christ as a RULER within a ‘God’[head] peer group. And this peer group includes ‘The Father’, and ‘The Holy Spirit’.

A monotheistic belief has ONLY ONE LEADER ... no PEER GROUP... no ‘God’[head] group!! Just ONE LEADER... one ONLY!!!

TRINITY CHRISTIANITY is a MULTI-LEADER belief... POLY... MULTI...

I said that, though trinity claims it has ONE GOD, that ONE GOD is actually a GROUP... a group of THREE RULERS...

Three rulers is POLYTHEISM.

Trinity Christianity realised that this three ruler group posed a problem against scriptures: ‘only God’. So they changed ‘only’ to ‘ONE’... ‘one God’.

The Athanasian Creed has to go to pains to SHOUT LOUDLY that:

• ‘Though there are three who are God...’
  • Polytheism!!
• ‘...there are not three Gods, but one God...’
  • Monotheism!!!
• ‘...each co-equal... etc’

So, the creed tries desperately to cover over the confusion of what it claims it is saying.
No scriptures goes to any such pains to state this trinity claim because there was never any need to make a claim that God is ONE.

No! God did not say he was ‘One God’... he said he was their (his people’s) ‘Only God’. And as their only God they were to worship ‘HIM ONLY’ and only to HIM are they to offer sacred service’

It is impossible to worship THREE PERSONS and offer sacred service to THREE PERSONS in truth and righteousness.

No one ever ‘worships’ the Holy Spirit... so trinity is broken right there!

Jesus was NEVER worshipped... by anyone... The trinity translators used the word, ‘worship’ because it is very similar to ‘obeisance’ (now down to). Notice that the Jews were seeking reasons to arrest Jesus and his supporters. They witnessed the disciples and others ‘bowing down’ before Jesus yet did not arrest him nor those paying ‘obeisance’ to him... because... it was not worship!!!

Yet, in order to create a false identity, trinity still claims that ‘Jesus accepted worship’ and ‘didn’t stop anyone worshipping him’.

Well, seeing that Jesus nor the person bowing down, nor the Jews, regarded the act as ‘Worship’ ..why would it be commented on...

So, no, Jesus is not God... Jesus even stated himself that he did not call himself ‘God’ yet trinity says he did...

So who do we believe... Jesus or Trinity??

My conclusion was that, given that it is proven that there is no trinity, but that the Father, ALONE, is God, Christianity SHOULD BE MONOTHEISM, BUT that TRINITY Christianity, since it believes in a GROUP called ‘God’ with three co-equal leaders/Heads/Rulers, can only be classed as POLYTHEISM.

Conclusion of the conclusion comes back to my original answer of:

• NEITHER

But if I had to put a label as the question asked, then the obvious response is:

• Polytheism (because it expresses multiple rulers!

You cannot deny that trinity expresses its rulership as a GODHEAD... which mean, ‘a group of rulership heads’)

 

[firedragon]

Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all have the same root. All three are ‘horns’ protruding from the one ‘head’. Perhaps there is a prophecy that declares this... I don’t know but it would be very interesting to find out!

I, myself, declared that the answer was ‘Neither’, and I gave my reason... did you miss that!!!?

But I went further. I explained where the error was in the question and the deficiency of the limited answers requested. Did you miss that!!?

I outlined that [there are many Christians beliefs of which] TRINITY is discussed here seeing it is the predominant belief [coming out of the staunch ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH underwritten by Emperor Constantine and bishop Athanasian].

Though we all call ourselves ‘Christian’, in that we believe we are following ‘Christ’ Jesus, there are clearly vast differences between what our complete belief is regarding exactly who we think he is.

What I showed you was that a Polytheistic belief puts Jesus Christ as a RULER within a ‘God’[head] peer group. And this peer group includes ‘The Father’, and ‘The Holy Spirit’.

A monotheistic belief has ONLY ONE LEADER ... no PEER GROUP... no ‘God’[head] group!! Just ONE LEADER... one ONLY!!!

TRINITY CHRISTIANITY is a MULTI-LEADER belief... POLY... MULTI...

I said that, though trinity claims it has ONE GOD, that ONE GOD is actually a GROUP... a group of THREE RULERS...

Three rulers is POLYTHEISM.

Trinity Christianity realised that this three ruler group posed a problem against scriptures: ‘only God’. So they changed ‘only’ to ‘ONE’... ‘one God’.

The Athanasian Creed has to go to pains to SHOUT LOUDLY that:

• ‘Though there are three who are God, there are not three Gods, but one God... each co-equal... etc’

No scriptures goes to any such pains to state this trinity claim because there was never any need to make a claim that God is ONE.

No! God did not say he was ‘One God’... he said he was their (his people’s) ‘Only God’. And as their only God they were to worship ‘HIM ONLY’ and only to HIM are they to offer sacred service’

It is impossible to worship THREE PERSONS and offer sacred service to THREE PERSONS in truth and righteousness.

No one ever ‘worships’ the Holy Spirit... so trinity is broken right there!

Jesus was NEVER worshipped... by anyone... The trinity translators used the word, ‘worship’ because it is very similar to ‘obeisance’ (now down to). Notice that the Jews were seeking reasons to arrest Jesus and his supporters. They witnessed the disciples and others ‘bowing down’ before Jesus yet did not arrest him nor those paying ‘obeisance’ to him... because... it was not worship!!!

Yet, in order to create a false identity, trinity still claims that ‘Jesus accepted worship’ and ‘didn’t stop anyone worshipping him’.

Well, seeing that Jesus nor the person bowing down, nor the Jews, regarded the act as ‘Worship’ ..why would it be commented on...

So, no, Jesus is not God... Jesus even stated himself that he did not call himself ‘God’ yet trinity says he did...

So who do we believe... Jesus or Trinity??

My conclusion was that, given that it is proven that there is no trinity, but that the Father, ALONE, is God, Christianity SHOULD BE MONOTHEISM, BUT that TRINITY Christianity, since it believes in a GROUP called ‘God’ with three co-equal leaders/Heads/Rulers, can only be classed as POLYTHEISM.

Conclusion of the conclusion comes back to my original answer of:

• NEITHER

But if I had to put a label as the question asked, then the obvious response is:

• Polytheism (because it expresses multiple rulers! You cannot deny that trinity expresses its rulership as a GODHEAD... which mean, ‘a group of rulership heads’)

Thanks for the definitions.

But i didnt ask for them brother. I seriously cannot figure out why you cannot understand "relevance".

Cheers.

 

[Soapy]

Thanks for the definitions.

But i didnt ask for them brother. I seriously cannot figure out why you cannot understand "relevance".

Cheers.

Ok, what are you after?

What is it you think I haven’t said?

The trinity debate... DEBATE...

Is trinity monotheism?

I said it is neither monotheism nor polytheism because it expresses a confused a desperate ideology.

However, if push comes to shove, and you demand an answer, then I would have to say it was Polytheism because it expresses three RULERS.

I gave in-depth reasoning - twice... and yet you say I don’t understand ... so... I ask again, what is it you would like me to say?

 

[firedragon]

Ok, what are you after?

What is it you think I haven’t said?

The trinity debate... DEBATE...

Is trinity monotheism?

I said it is neither monotheism nor polytheism because it expresses a confused a desperate ideology.

However, if push comes to shove, and you demand an answer, then I would have to say it was Polytheism because it expresses three RULERS.

I gave in-depth reasoning - twice... and yet you say I don’t understand ... so... I ask again, what is it you would like me to say?

Okay great. Thanks a lot for taking your time.

Peace.

 

[Soapy]

And in your thesis, you have vehemently tried to prove that the Trinity is a form of polytheism.

Not ‘tried’... PROVED.

Poly means ‘many’... and trinity is ‘many’... three many!!

In trinity, ‘God’ is a wrapper element for the three RULERS.

Three RULERS means THREE HEADS...

Trinity wraps this as GODhead of three...

In paganism, where there are three RULERS, this term is used:

• A triumvirate (Latin: triumvirātus) is a political regime ruled or dominated by three powerful individuals known as triumvirs (Latin: triumviri). The arrangement can be formal or informal. ... In the context of the Soviet Union and Russia, the term troika (Russian for "group of three") is used for "triumvirate".

A ‘Dictator’ is a single ABSOLUTE RULER. There can be no such thing as an Absolute Ruler which is also a triumvirate.

Do you regard Almighty God as a ‘Dictator’?
No?... well he IS. The problem is that ‘NOWADAYS’, the title of ‘Dictator’ is abused down to meaning a single someone in authority of a bad demeanour - single lawmaker and upholder of his own laws which work against the common good.
This ‘Dictator’ is thus the ‘God’ of such a system, ALMIGHTY GOD of such a system.

 

[sojourner]

Not ‘tried’... PROVED.

Poly means ‘many’... and trinity is ‘many’... three many!!

In trinity, ‘God’ is a wrapper element for the three RULERS

You’ve managed to misrepresent the doctrine. “God” isn’t a “wrapper element” for the three.

 

[ClimbingTheLadder]

The trinity is in the belief that the father, the son and the holy spirit are one person. God. Even if it was 10 different entities it is still the one God. Thus, does that mean it's monotheism? Lets not mix this up with idolatry as many Muslims would because this question is not from an Islamic perspective but purely from Aqal or reason where if you take the Quran, have you questioned if it actually makes the trinity polytheism?

Also if one believes that Paul was a believer in the trinity as we perceive now, he also made a distinction in his usage of idolatry. For him idolatry is another sin and depicts an image worship.

Others would argue that its not monotheism because there are several entities. Though it is one God there are actually three different entities thus it becomes polytheism.

What do you perceive?

With absolute certainty, no it's not Monotheism. And it is unabashedly a form of Polytheism according to the Torah, which is very explicit.

 

[ClimbingTheLadder]

It seems to me that if many Muslims can believe that Allah has a face and a hand then they should for consistency also be comfortable with the Christians who also believe in Allah having a face, hands etc.

That is SHIRK

As The Holy Qur'an says:

Therefore do not give likenesses to Allah; surely Allah knows and you do not know. (Surah 16:74)

He Is Allah, Allah, The One, The Eternal and Absolute, He begets not nor is begotten, and there is nothing like him (Surah 112)

The phrase "nothing like him" (to him there is no likeness) also appears in famous Ayah like Surah 42:11.

Once you describe a being or entity, you describe an idea of something created but not the creator, because the creator is incomprehensible to creation because creation only has itself as a reference point. This is also why mysticism is so important but that's another topic.

Regardless of what one choices to worship, the ground of reality will always remain unlike what it manifests.

 

[firedragon]

Not ‘tried’... PROVED.

Poly means ‘many’... and trinity is ‘many’... three many!!

In trinity, ‘God’ is a wrapper element for the three RULERS.

Three RULERS means THREE HEADS...

Trinity wraps this as GODhead of three...

In paganism, where there are three RULERS, this term is used:

• A triumvirate (Latin: triumvirātus) is a political regime ruled or dominated by three powerful individuals known as triumvirs (Latin: triumviri). The arrangement can be formal or informal. ... In the context of the Soviet Union and Russia, the term troika (Russian for "group of three") is used for "triumvirate".

A ‘Dictator’ is a single ABSOLUTE RULER. There can be no such thing as an Absolute Ruler which is also a triumvirate.

Do you regard Almighty God as a ‘Dictator’?
No?... well he IS. The problem is that ‘NOWADAYS’, the title of ‘Dictator’ is abused down to meaning a single someone in authority of a bad demeanour - single lawmaker and upholder of his own laws which work against the common good.
This ‘Dictator’ is thus the ‘God’ of such a system, ALMIGHTY GOD of such a system.

Great. Thank you very much.

 

[firedragon]

With absolute certainty, no it's not Monotheism. And it is unabashedly a form of Polytheism according to the Torah, which is very explicit.

I must agree.