1. 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!

Trinity Myth

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by EnhancedSpirit, Apr 21, 2005.

  1. EnhancedSpirit

    EnhancedSpirit High Priestess

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,852
    Ratings:
    +490
    Until we stood up and demanded equal rights, all men were shovinistic. This is not just Christianity. Women were property of their fathers then their husbands. The world's history was all written from a male point of view. Otherwise, there would have been female writers of the Bible. Peter had a really hard time understanding Jesus's message, and the tension between him and Mary Magdelene were well noted in the bible. He did not believe that Jesus would tell her things that he did not tell the apostles in person. He was a shovinist. It's the way the world was then, and still is in many countries.
     
  2. EnhancedSpirit

    EnhancedSpirit High Priestess

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,852
    Ratings:
    +490
    There is a lot of evidence that shows the the Trinity was added, later, and not Christ's teaching. My point is this. God made us in his image "both male and female". I did not say there was not a "Father, son, and Holy Ghost", I am saying that we have been wrongly taught this to be an all male trinity. The Holy Ghost is the Divine Feminine. I am not saying that we should all refer to God as Female. I am saying that to deny the Divine Feminine is to deny part of God. I am saying that history has made us view God as a male. We assume God thinks like a man. This is not true. We must relize that God is the perfect 'male-female'. God has just as many female 'qualities' as male. Who ever said we are mistaken by trying to make God a certain gender is 100% correct, because we cannot imagine how perfect we would be if we were not seperate males and females. We can only see the differences, and argue over them. However, God is ALL of these, not male sometimes, or female other times. But ALWAYS he is BOTH. And more.

    The two shall become one flesh. This is having children. The two become one. My child is part me and part her father. Our two flesh become one in our child. And this is the Trinity. This is the miracle of God. Father, Mother, Child, and everything that is connected with that, love, compassion, understanding, grace. The family unit is the perfect mirror of what God is. It is not all male.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. cardero

    cardero Citizen Mod

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    11,110
    Ratings:
    +1,669
    This is how I believe the first century Christians may have coped with it. The doctrine of the Trinity was first concieved by the humanization of God, by defining Jesus (the human aspect) as one of the three.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. jewscout

    jewscout Religious Zionist

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    9,497
    Ratings:
    +927
    i don't think you have to be a telepath to know what i think of the trinity...i've never been able to get next to the idea...
     
  5. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    Just a small point, the word is actually Chauvanist:-Main Entry: chau·vin·ism
    Pronunciation: 'shO-v&-"ni-z&m
    Function: noun
    Etymology: French chauvinisme, from Nicolas Chauvin, character noted for his excessive patriotism and devotion to Napoleon in Théodore and Hippolyte Cogniard's play La Cocarde tricolore (1831)
    1 : excessive or blind patriotism -- compare [size=-1]JINGOISM[/size]
    2 : undue partiality or attachment to a group or place to which one belongs or has belonged
    3 : an attitude of superiority toward members of the opposite sex; also : behavior expressive of such an attitude
    I hadn't actually realized that the word has now been redefined to include '3' : the other slight objection I have is "Until we stood up and demanded equal rights, all men were were shovinistic.". It seems to me that more often than not, I come across some women who are also Chauvenistic!:)
     
  6. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    The trinity doctrine that christendom have taken on is a manmade doctrine and nothing to do with the bible it is just what the bible foretold would happen

    The Trinity doctrine has not honored God by bringing people closer to him. Instead, it has grossly misrepresented God. Thus it is apparent that those responsible for its development have apostatized from true Christianity.(galatians 1;8)

     
  7. EnhancedSpirit

    EnhancedSpirit High Priestess

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,852
    Ratings:
    +490
    Thank you for the spelling lesson, Michel :D And I agree, women can be chauvenistic, but only very recently in our history were we allowed to be this way. Funny, you don't seem to like it. How do you think women felt for 1000's of years.
     
  8. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    Pretty mad, I guess, but there's no need to make all men in my generation suffer for the sins of our forefathers!!!!:jiggy:
    I'm sorry, but I was brought up to be courtious; if I open a door for a lady, I don't expect her to give me a dirty, condescending look. When I was younger, I always gave up my seat on a bus for any woman who was standing; now I am disabled, the only people who seem to offer me their seat are mostly men. I was out today, taking a couple of books back to the library; I passed a young woman who was having a real fight, trying to get a baby's buggy into the entrance of a shop. I helped her by picking up the buggy and carrying it over the sill (which was a bit stupid of me, because I was regretting it after, when in pain).
    After I had helped her, she didn't even thank me - I did not do it for the thanks, but.........well, maybe it's just me.:eek:
     
  9. SoliDeoGloria

    SoliDeoGloria Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    468
    Ratings:
    +65
    Can you please specifically validate this statement?

    Sincerely,
    SoliDeogloria
     
  10. SoliDeoGloria

    SoliDeoGloria Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    468
    Ratings:
    +65
    [​IMG] WOW !!! All those "ivory tower" referrences and not one of them seem to agree with what the origins of the trinity are. One states that it "developed gradually over several centuries" , another states "The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one." as if the concept never came up until Nicea. One states "Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.", another states "This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions." as if the concept has always been there. So which one is it? Which one do you agree with or can you try and reconcile all of them as if they agree? Can I add a couple of "ivory tower" referrences that were conveniently excluded from this list, like the "Evanglical Dictionary of Theology", "New Twentieth-Century Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge", or the "Baker's Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics" so we can see even more referrences that disagree with each other?

    Sincerely,
    SolideoGloria
     
  11. EnhancedSpirit

    EnhancedSpirit High Priestess

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,852
    Ratings:
    +490
    I'm sorry, I have experienced rudeness like that up north (damn yankees:rolleyes: ) But like I said before, I am a southern girl. And we have this thing known as Good Ole Southern Hospitality. I always say thank you when a gentlemen holds the door for me. Even when it's the homeless guy at the corner store.

    She is foremost as a witness to Jesus’ death according to all four Gospels (Mark 15:40-41, 47; Matt. 27:55-56, 61; Luke 23:49, 55-56; John 19:25), to the empty tomb (Mark 16:1-6; Matt. 28:1, 6; Luke 24:1-3, 10; John 20:1-2), and in receiving the news or appearance of the risen Christ to tell to the disciples (Mark 16:6-7; Matt. 28:5-9; Luke 24:4-10). According to Luke the women’s testimony was not believed but was later vindicated (24:11, 22-48). According to John 20:11-18 the risen Jesus appeared first to her and talked with her about his coming ascension. She rivals Peter in that she receives revelations from the risen Christ to pass on to the rest of the apostles. The Gospel of Thomas even quotes Simon Peter as saying, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life."
     
  12. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    Jesus Christ is the Son of God not God the Son, therefor the "trinity" is pagan doctrine.
     
  13. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    Yes the trinity is a bit mixed up isnt it . at least the bible itself is not confused.in fact the trinity has its roots in ancient Babylon and i think babylon means confusion.In the ancient world, as far back as Babylonia, the worship of pagan gods grouped in threes, or triads, was common. That influence was also prevalent in Egypt, Greece, and Rome in the centuries before, during, and after Christ. And after the death of the apostles, such pagan beliefs began to invade Christianityno wonder that the book of revelation speaks of (Babylon the great) most religions have babylonish teachings in them

     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. SoliDeoGloria

    SoliDeoGloria Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    468
    Ratings:
    +65
    Thanks for validating that. I wasn't sure what exactly you meant by the statement. You actually bring up a very interesting point. You are most definitley right about how women's testimonies were treated back then, not just by Peter, but by everyone during that period in history. As a matter of fact, William Lane Craig, in his book "Reasonable Faith", points out that womens' testimony "was regarded as so worthless that they could not even testify in a court of law. If a man committed a crime and was observed in the very act by some women, he could not be convicted on the basis of theri testimony, since their testimony was regarded as so worthless that it was not even admitted into court. Women occupied a low rung on the Jewish social ladder. Compared to men, women were second class citizens. Consider these Jewish texts: ' Sooner let the words of the Law be burnt delivered to women." The fact that you indeed are right about Mary being first to witness Jesus as being resurrected just shows that these males who were so intent on writting and/or translating the Bible from a male perspective had absolutely no problem recording this despite how embarrassing it was to them to admit that the truth was that Mary had indeed been the first to witness the resurrected Jesus. In truth it actually destroys you arguement for the Bible being a strictly male book.

    As far as quoting the gospel of Thomas goes, I am very drawn back at the fact that you would even quote it with supposed quotes of Jesus like " Every Woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven". I'm not even going to get into all of the arguments that prove the gospel of Thomas to be unworthy of cannonization when compared to the gospels in the cannonized Bible.

    Sincerely,
    SoliDeoGloria
     
  15. EnhancedSpirit

    EnhancedSpirit High Priestess

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,852
    Ratings:
    +490
    The Roman Catholic church made every attempt to discredit Mary Magdalene, to the point that her being first witness was irrelevent to the believers. They were told by the church which details were important. Here, read this with an open heart, hear the truth:

    I will stop there, if you would like to learn more, search for yourself. Knock on doors, and they will be opened.
     
  16. Ziroc

    Ziroc Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Ratings:
    +7
    The imagery that you have given to us might be considered right, but not accurate. Suppose that I'm holding a snickers. I ask you, is the snickers bar itself a snicker? Yes. Is the nut itself a snickers? No. Is the caramel itself a snickers? No.

    Same logic applies here: Is the Father the God? Yes. Is the son the God? No. Is the ghost the God? No.

    If you say that the nut itself is not a snickers and the caramel itself is not a snickers bar, thus it is clear that Jesus is not God neither is the ghost.

    Unless that you say that the nut itself is a snickers and the caramel itself is a snickers, than you might conclude that Jesus is God and the ghost is God.

    So what do you say? Is Jesus God? Still believe in trinity?
     
  17. Melody

    Melody Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,261
    Ratings:
    +558
    Michel,
    *Real* women are not threatened by men who open doors or offer them their seats. *Real* men aren't either. I've opened doors for men when I'm going through first, offered them a seat on the train when it's obvious I'm far more capable of standing than they are and send flowers to my husband. I appreciate it when the courtesy is returned.
     
  18. Melody

    Melody Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,261
    Ratings:
    +558
    No, the chocolate itself is not a snicker's bar. Without the nuts and caramel, it's just a plain ol' generic chocolate bar. Beyond that, I'm having difficulty with the candy bar analogy.

    I look at the God/Christ/Holy Spirit as similar to my role as Me/Mother/Wife. They're all me but just different aspects of my existence.

    God needs no explanation. Christ is the physical human manifestation of God. The Holy Spirit is the spiritual manifestation of God sent to the Apostles.
     
  19. Ziroc

    Ziroc Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Ratings:
    +7
    I'm sorry, that was a typo. What I was actually going to ask is: is the snickers bar a snickers? Yes. Is the nut itself a snickers? No. Is the caramel itself a snickers? No.
     
  20. Ziroc

    Ziroc Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Ratings:
    +7
    Looking it at that way is inaccurate as well.You are looking each of it from a different point of view. For the You/Mother/Wife, you are someone to someone outside of you: You the you, mother of your son, wife of your husband. But for Father/Son/Spirit, each of it is something to something inside of it: Father the God, son of God, spirit of God.
     
Loading...