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!

What are the benefits of the trinity?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Ronald, Aug 1, 2004.

  1. HelpMe

    HelpMe ·´sociopathic meanderer`·

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Ratings:
    +61
    if that proves the trinity, or even the fact that the son could pardon transgression, then i ask just what ex23:20,21 proves
    "Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.Take ye heed before him, and hearken unto his voice; provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgression: for my name is in him"

    sry to not be able to continue at the moment, as you may imagine, i am busy.and i've been extensively over john8:58,59 and ex3:14, all of which you seem to or may of ignored, btw it was an 'angel' in the bush in ex, and what he said did not mean "i am", at least not how it was translated elsewhere throughout the ot(hebrew).i would say check some interlenier(sp),hebrew dictionary, and lexicons but i know you're not searching for answers, you know everything.


    --S
     
  2. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +952
    HelpMe,

    Very pleasant attitude you have........ did I offend you somehow by posting my opinion?.............. :eek:

    Lighten up.:p

    My opinion: is that there is a BIG difference between the OT and the NT. If you want to use the OT as a proof, you gotta carry that logic all the way through.

    140 The unity of the two Testaments proceeds from the unity of God's plan and his Revelation. The Old Testament prepares for the New and the New Testament fulfills the Old; the two shed light on each other; both are true Word of God.

    137 Interpretation of the inspired Scripture must be attentive above all to what God wants to reveal through the sacred authors for our salvation. What comes from the Spirit is not fully "understood except by the Spirit's action' (cf. Origen, Hom. in Ex. 4, 5: PG 12, 320).

    I see you ignored the writing of the early Church Fathers..... I think they would know better than you (or me for that matter).

    They were a generation removed from Christ.......... not 2,000 years.

    I think all would agree that they would have a better understanding of what Christ and the Apostles tought.

    Hope this helps.

    Peace be with you.
    Scott
     
  3. HelpMe

    HelpMe ·´sociopathic meanderer`·

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Ratings:
    +61
    who said that in 140?what year were the 66books canonized?

    depends on how early you want to go, age does not give anything validity btw.

    do you mean to say the ot is not applicable?because some guy said so or because the nt said so?hmm...

    i suspect that 140 and 137 refer to the years the statements were made?unless you forgot/intentionally to specify just how early these statements were made.the parenteses after the 137 statement could lead one to believe the statement was from 320 but then, what is the 137 for?and what is the year/author of the first statement?

    the writings of church fathers, really, and honestly have little to no effect whether they agree or not with me.for they are/were mere men as i am.there words were not inspired.the scriptures is what i lean my beliefs on, i wonder if this makes sense to you because i know of catholics whom told me their church(rcc) is above the 'bible'.


    --S
     
  4. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +952
    true blood,


    We seem to have a bit of confusion here.... I apologize.

    The quotes in green with number in front of them like this: 140 Are from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.



    66? You seem to be using the canon changed in AD 70 by JEWS...... not Christians.

    Rrrrrrrrrrright... and Peter and Paul were just men. Seems you forget that they passed on the Holy Spirit by the laying of hands to those they chose to help deliver the Gospel to the ends of the Earth.

    Those same "men" that you dismiss are the ones who built your faith..... without those "men" and men like them..... YOU WOULD HAVE NO BIBLE.

    Or did your Bible fall from heaven?

    Now I get it. You profess to be wise, when you are in fact ignorant about my faith.

    From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
    82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."

    And all this time I bet you thought you knew what you were talking about..... :eek:

    I would be happy to help you with your misunderstanding of the Catholic faith.... just ask!

    Peace be with you,
    Scott
     
  5. Ronald

    Ronald Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,392
    Ratings:
    +51
    It would please me very much if someone would get back to the topic and tell what benefits accrue from believing in a trinity, namely Father Son and Holy Ghost.
    Shalom.
     
  6. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +952
    Hiya Ronald,

    Well, to truly understand the Trinity, is to understand its "benefits".

    I am not sure what you are trying to determine with your question.

    Do you think that all doctrine should be based on what benefits will accrue like some theological savings account?

    Christian believers believe in the Trinity, but they can never understand it fully.

    I have asked this several times here before, but to no avail..... I would just like to know how something can be "part" God, or "half" God???? Please tell me..... It just does not make any sense to me, and it seems like an insult to the divine nature of the Creator.

    Let me sum things up by going over a few "benefits":

    234 The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the "hierarchy of the truths of faith".56 The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, reveals himself to men "and reconciles and unites with himself those who turn away from sin".57

    236 The Fathers of the Church distinguish between theology (theologia) and economy (oikonomia). "Theology" refers to the mystery of God's inmost life within the Blessed Trinity and "economy" to all the works by which God reveals himself and communicates his life. Through the oikonomia the theologia is revealed to us; but conversely, the theologia illuminates the whole oikonomia. God's works reveal who he is in himself; the mystery of his inmost being enlightens our understanding of all his works. So it is, analogously, among human persons. A person discloses himself in his actions, and the better we know a person, the better we understand his actions.

    237 The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the "mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God". To be sure, God has left traces of his Trinitarian being in his work of creation and in his Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But his inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel's faith before the Incarnation of God's Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.

    http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p2.htm

    Hope this helps,
    Scott
     
  7. Ronald

    Ronald Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,392
    Ratings:
    +51
    No! Scott,
    No help at all, I'm not much for Mystery Religion. I'm more into "Hear O Israel: The Lord our God is one;" No mystery here, just a clear statement of fact.
    Scott, I am fully aware of the verses in which, men want to prove a trinity, but like those statement in you posts, there is no clear factual statement in the New Testament to prove a trinity. Just an accept it, "I said so!"
    Since I don't believe in a triune God. Will I be with you as a saved person or not?
     
  8. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +952
    Hiya Ronald,

    How would I know? I am not God.... but I read His book:

    Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

    I don't think God lies.

    I'll post a thread over in the Catholic forum if you would like some futher teaching about the Trinity.

    Your friend in Christ,
    Scott
     
  9. HelpMe

    HelpMe ·´sociopathic meanderer`·

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Ratings:
    +61
    yes, unless the scriptures state otherwise, they were mere brothers like you and me.
    the scriptures are a gift of the almighty, not a product of men.so in a sense, yes they 'fell'(hypothetically) from heaven.

    again, practices of your church, not of the 'bible'.the 'bible' actually speaks against holding traditions of men.you wouldn't need references would you?


    explain the inquisition, explain the fading out of true worship with that of the sun.


    --S
     
  10. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +952
    A sick woman on my way to work today touched my shadow, and ya know what........ she was NOT healed.
    Hmmm, maybe the Apostles were a bit different than you and I.... but I'm sure you don't need Scripture references.

    As long as you can show me where the divine created your Jewish canon in 70AD, then I'll agree with you that they "fell from heaven".

    The first question= sin, the second question you'll have to educate me about..... we worship the sun?????? :rolleyes:

    I can't wait to hear this..... maybe you can quote St. Augustine in this thread.....:eek:

    Peace
     
  11. HelpMe

    HelpMe ·´sociopathic meanderer`·

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Ratings:
    +61
    are you serious?do you believe in the power of a shadow?or in faith?did this woman have complete faith that if she touched your shadow, she would be healed?thought so

    so you believe in the kjv?and the Apocrypha?

    and, what makes you think i was referring to those books?i said scriptures, intending to mean w/e was inspired.
    it's that simple?so you have no christ on earth then?

    The heads of Saints didn't really glow as is so often portrayed in religious art. The use of the halo, or nimbus, originated with the pagan Greeks and Romans to represent their sun god, Helios. Later artists adopted it for use in Christian images.

    remember the changing of the sabbath?to ...SUNday?was this scriptural?

    Today, the names that are used for the days of the week are all named after the sun, moon, or pagan gods. Sunday ("sun" day), Monday ("moon" day), Tuesday ("Tiwe's" day), Wednesday ("Woden's" day), Thursday ("Thor's" day), Friday ("Frie's" day) and Saturday ("Saturn's" day) are all pagan in origin.

    Throughout The Bible, the days of the week were identified by number, from first to seventh. Only the seventh day was given a name, the Sabbath:

    The Fourth Commandment is to observe the seventh-day Sabbath. All of the righteous people of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, including Jesus Christ Himself (e.g. Luke 4:16), observed the Sabbath. No where in the Bible, including after Christ's resurrection, will you find people observing the first day of the week, Sunday, as a replacement for the Sabbath.

    This reality was freely admitted by Roman Catholic Cardinal Gibbon in his Faith Of Our Fathers: "But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify."

    Essentially, Sunday worship is supposedly justified because of the assumption that Christ was resurrected on the first day of the week. Without a Sunday resurrection, there is no justification what-so-ever for observing Sunday as a day of Christian worship, as Sunday-keeping theologians readily admit.

    But, was Christ resurrected on a Sunday?

    We know that Christ was crucified on the day before a Sabbath, the "preparation" day (e.g. Mark 15:42). Many have assumed that meant Friday, and commonly refer to it as "Good Friday." But the Bible record doesn't say that He was crucified on the day before the regular weekly Sabbath. He was crucified before the annual Sabbath, the Passover (i.e. John 19:14). That preparation day was not a Friday. "Good Friday" never happened.

    Further, Christ said that the only proof that He was the Messiah was that He would be in the tomb for 3 days and 3 nights (Matthew 12:39-40), which is 72 hours. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning is barely 36 hours, only 2 nights and 1 day. Friday to Sunday doesn't work. If someone deliberately shortchanged you like that at the supermarket, you could have them arrested.

    When Peter, John and Mary of Magdala arrived at the tomb early that Sunday morning, the resurrection had already occurred. It was long before sunrise because it was still dark, but the tomb was then already empty. (John 20:1).

    We know that Christ was placed in the tomb in late afternoon near sunset (Matthew 27:57), and would arise 72 hours later as He said. He would therefore have arisen also on a late afternoon, near sunset, 3 days later. Since He was already gone by Sunday morning, He had to have arisen the previous afternoon near sunset, on Saturday, not Sunday.

    Gradually, the Roman empire that persecuted Christians began to adopt Christianity, or rather, its own self-serving version of Christianity, which was a blend of politics and religion, a little truth, but mostly outright Roman paganism - which included worship of the Roman sun god. Sunday worship came about as a pagan corruption of God's holy seventh-day Sabbath.

    By the fourth century, only Jews (by then, God's Sabbath was becoming known as the "Jewish" Sabbath), and a relatively few true Christians, continued to observe the seventh-day Sabbath as God commanded everyone. There is only one true God, and one true Sabbath.

    In 321, the Roman emperor Constantine issued an edict which outlawed work on the "venerable day of the sun," Sunday, and within 3 years the corrupted version of Christianity had become the official religion of the Roman empire. From that, the Roman Catholic Church, and its many Protestant daughter churches, got the commonly-accepted Sunday observance of today - utterly pagan in origin, and completely contrary to God's command.


    that's only the sabbath, do you want holidays,saints,clergy abstinence,the pope's infallibilty,words, and more?i think i'll let you explain this one first.

    here's a teaser in case you want more.
    "The Catholic Encyclopedia says, "Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church. Irenaeus and Tertullian omit it from their lists of feasts." Wherefrom does this Christmas on 25 December originate? Sir James Frazer says, "The largest pagan religious cult which fostered the celebration of December 25 as a holiday . . . was the pagan sun- worship, Mithraism . . . This winter festival was called . . . 'the Nativity of the SUN.' Mithraism was the fastest growing cult just prior to the year 321 and was the major rival of Christianity. Franz Cumont, perhaps the greatest scholar of Mithraism, wrote, quoting Minucius Felix, "The Mithraists also observed Sun-day and kept sacred the 25th of December as the birthday of the Sun. Many scholars have pointed out how the Sun- worshipping Mithraists, the Sun-worshipping Manicheans and the Christians were all syncretised and reconciled when Constantine led the take-over by Christianity, even if it meant the latter's surrender of most vital Scriptural truths, especially its Hebrew roots."

    In his 33d Sermon he says: 'I was already Bishop of Hippo, when I went into Ethiopia with some servants of Christ there to preach the Gospel. In this country we saw many men and women without heads, who had two great eyes in their breasts; and in countless still more southly, we saw people who had but one eye in their foreheads'" (Taylor, Syntagma, p. 52).

    ??


    --S
     
  12. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    If anyone proclaims to be Christian then you should read and learn Matthew Chapter 7 because you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus so why are we arguing? Shouldn't these forums be like an opportunity to speak good of all men especially unto them who are of the household of God? Is God a respecter of persons? What does it matter if you say there's a trinity and another says no? If Jesus Christ the Son of God is your Lord aren't we suppose to be of one body, edifying each other?
     
  13. HelpMe

    HelpMe ·´sociopathic meanderer`·

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Ratings:
    +61
    "To instruct especially so as to encourage intellectual, moral, or spiritual improvement."
    syn=brief,inform,teach,correct,advise,educate,enlighten,educate,ect.

    yes


    --S
     
  14. Christy

    Christy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2004
    Messages:
    35
    Ratings:
    +2
    So, HelpMe, in your humble opinion....is Yeshua God?
     
  15. Ronald

    Ronald Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,392
    Ratings:
    +51
    Amen, Scott;
    Now that salvation is established by faith in HaShem.
    There is no requirement to believe in three beings as one God, to be saved.

    Now, I can introduce my point, the only benefit of trinity is to be accepted by trinitarians as godly folk, but Yeshua warns in MANY different verses the penalties for False Witness and causing someone to sin.
    No penalty for one God, penalty for precepts of men. Put a Red Herring on one side of balance scale and nothing on the other. The Herring is heavy, but nothing is weightless.

    As you said "I don't think God lies." God said, There is no other God.
    The Lord Is One. :)
     
  16. iwilliam

    iwilliam Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    25
    Ratings:
    +0
    The trinity is a another part of the religous spell to blindfold innocent people. The trinity was an added verse,that did not appear in the original hebrew bible. Have you all ever wondered why the mother was excluded from this false trinity concept. Religon discriminates against women. The mother in any other birth is just as important as the father. Lol!!!!
     
  17. Green Gaia

    Green Gaia Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,780
    Ratings:
    +1,929
    Hmmm... That's a legitimate point. Why is there no female incarnation of god in the Christian religion? Why are they all perceived as male?
     
  18. iwilliam

    iwilliam Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    25
    Ratings:
    +0
    They wan't be able to,because it doesn't make any since. You can't put 3 in to 1. That is mathematically impossible.
     
  19. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +952
    Hi Ronald...

    Read Romans 14........... apply that concept to the Trinity, and you have my take on the subject.

    Peace,
    Scott
     
  20. Ronald

    Ronald Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,392
    Ratings:
    +51
    Really, I've had this one thrown at me for a sundry of things, but never as a benefit of trinity.
    Since you have a triune God(not Biblical) and Rev. 1:4 has seven spirits of God. Why not say, God is a perfect TEN?
    The trinity is a stumbling block to our Hebrew brothers.
     
Loading...