Do people understand the trinity doctrine?

[sojourner]

No it is not logical for him to pray to himself.


*

Jesus isn't the Father. He wasn't "praying to himself." He was praying to the Father.

 

[sojourner]

Moses, Jesus and Mary are persons of significance for Christians.

So are Augustine, Justin and Patrick. They believed in the Trinity.

If they did not need to believe in Trinity then it is a superfluous and fabricated creed invented only to confuse the Christians.

Not necessarily. Moses didn't believe in resurrection either. I suppose that makes resurrection a "false doctrine?"

 

[Ingledsva]

Jesus isn't the Father. He wasn't "praying to himself." He was praying to the Father.

This is BULL.

If they are ONE God - then he is illogically praying to himself.

*

 

[sojourner]

No - we have one Tanakh - in which YHVH tells the people to call him YHVH - and states that that is his name.

One Tanakh -- different authors, each with a different concept of God.

 

[sojourner]

No, but turning ONE God into three beings that exist and hang around together, all at the same time, is.

That's not what the Trinity does. The Trinity acknowledges one God -- one Being. It also acknowledges three persons.

Two separate Gods sitting on thrones in Heaven at the same time, is.

Not two Gods. One God -- three Persons.

This is a total warping of the God YHVH.

It's a valid way of conceptualizing God.

 

[Ingledsva]

So are Augustine, Justin and Patrick. They believed in the Trinity.

ING - They are not part of the story, as Moses, Mary and Jesus were. - They are much later twisters of the story.

Not necessarily. Moses didn't believe in resurrection either. I suppose that makes resurrection a "false doctrine?"

Depends on how you think of resurrection.

The Hebrew believed all went to Sheol to await the Messiah whom brings about the end, and FINAL Judgment of those stuck in Sheol.

Jesus only claimed to be the awaited MESSIAH.

He did not claim to be God, or part of any trinity.

*

 

[sojourner]

Nope.

Well, I'm sorry -- that's what the doctrine outlines. One God -- three Persons.

"Supposedly" for you folks, - this "ONE" God is three for specific purposes - such as Jesus.

No. God is one. Not three. You're insisting on creating a straw man to knock down.

Jesus only claimed to be the awaited Jewish Messiah, - whom brings the end - and Judges those in Sheol.

As this Messiah he gets a special throne beside God. He is not God in this story.

I beg to differ. Clearly, Luke and John view Jesus as Divine.

 

[sojourner]

This is BULL.

If they are ONE God - then he is illogically praying to himself.

They are two Persons, so, not "praying to himself." The Father and the Son are two Persons.

 

[Ingledsva]

One Tanakh -- different authors, each with a different concept of God.

This is false.

Elohiym just means God/Gods.

YHVH is a name.

And we have a verse saying it is the name of the Hebrew Elohiym/God.

 

[sojourner]

ING - They are not part of the story, as Moses, Mary and Jesus were. - They are much later twisters of the story.

Moses wasn't part of "the story," either. In fact, there is no "the story." Moses is in a completely different epic from the Jesus Event.

Depends on how you think of resurrection.

It doesn't matter how I think of resurrection. It matters how Moses and Mary (and Jesus) view resurrection.

The Hebrew believed all went to Sheol to await the Messiah whom brings about the end, and FINAL Judgment of those stuck in Sheol.

Did Moses believe that? Are you sure? What makes you sure? Was there such a concept as the Messiah in the Moses Epic? There wasn't.

 

[sojourner]

YHVH is a name.

...Which is a different concept from Elohim.

 

[Ingledsva]

...Which is a different concept from Elohim.

You said in # 166 - "They aren't used "interchangeably." One writer refers to Deity as YHVH. A different writer refers to Deity as Elohim. They are different writers with different concepts of God."

This is not correct. All the Hebrew writers use Elohiym as it just means God/Gods in Hebrew.

The name of that Hebrew Elohiym/God is YHVH.

*

 

[sojourner]

This is not correct. All the Hebrew writers use Elohiym as it just means God/Gods in Hebrew.

Not every writer used the name, "YHVH." Not every writer used the title, Elohim. The way in which that God is conceptualized is different for the Elohist writer than it is for the Yahwist writer.

 

[Ingledsva]

Moses wasn't part of "the story," either. In fact, there is no "the story." Moses is in a completely different epic from the Jesus Event.

It doesn't matter how I think of resurrection. It matters how Moses and Mary (and Jesus) view resurrection.

Did Moses believe that? Are you sure? What makes you sure? Was there such a concept as the Messiah in the Moses Epic? There wasn't.

NOT SO!

And Jesus claims to be the Jewish Messiah! Obviously that connects him to THEIR doctrine.

As you can see below - Moses believed in Sheol.

Num 16:28 And Moses said, Hereby ye shall know that YHVH hath sent me to do all these works; for I have not done them of mine own mind.

Num 16:29 If these men die the common death of all men, or if they be visited after the visitation of all men; then YHVH hath not sent me.

Num 16:30 But if YHVH make a new thing, and the earth open her mouth, and swallow them up, with all that appertain unto them, and they go down quick into SHEOL; then ye shall understand that these men have provoked the LORD.

 

[sojourner]

NOT SO!

I'm not the one making things up, here.

And Jesus claims to be the Jewish Messiah! Obviously that connects him to THEIR doctrine.

Yes, but Moses had no concept of the Messiah. Find one verse in the Moses epic that refers specifically to the Messiah, and I'll retract.

As you can see below - Moses believed in Sheol.

Num 16:28 And Moses said, Hereby ye shall know that YHVH hath sent me to do all these works; for I have not done them of mine own mind.

Num 16:29 If these men die the common death of all men, or if they be visited after the visitation of all men; then YHVH hath not sent me.

Num 16:30 But if YHVH make a new thing, and the earth open her mouth, and swallow them up, with all that appertain unto them, and they go down quick into SHEOL; then ye shall understand that these men have provoked the LORD.

None of that speaks of any concept of resurrection. Only a concept of death.

 

[Ingledsva]

Not every writer used the name, "YHVH." Not every writer used the title, Elohim. The way in which that God is conceptualized is different for the Elohist writer than it is for the Yahwist writer.

Again this is baloney.

They all use Elohiym because it just means God. Like we might say "God bless you."

This Elohiym/God is named as YHVH in the beginning of their accepted texts - in Gen 2:4.

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that YHVH Elohiym made the earth and the heavens,

The belief in YHVH and Sheol is from the beginning of their Tanakh.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

I'm not the one making things up, here.

Yes, but Moses had no concept of the Messiah. Find one verse in the Moses epic that refers specifically to the Messiah, and I'll retract.

None of that speaks of any concept of resurrection. Only a concept of death.

Good Grief!

They are STUCK in SHEOL - UNTIL - MESSIAH judges them.

Obviously that means some are resurrected from the grave.

*

 

[sojourner]

Again this is baloney.

They all use Elohiym

No. It isn't. The documentary hypothesis is well-accepted among bible scholars.

This Elohiym/God is named as YHVH in the beginning of their accepted texts - in Gen 2:4.

And the Elohist writer in Genesis 1 uses Elohim -- not YHVH.

The belief in YHVH and Sheol is from the beginning of their Tanakh.

Each writer presents God in a different concept. Later redactors and theologians mushed the concepts together.

 

[sojourner]

Good Grief!

They are STUCK in SHEOL - UNTIL - MESSIAH judges them.

Obviously that means some are resurrected from the grave.

*

Not for Moses. There is no Messiah concept in the early stories. Some later Jews had some concept of resurrection -- some did not.

 

[Ingledsva]

I'm not the one making things up, here.

Yes, but Moses had no concept of the Messiah. Find one verse in the Moses epic that refers specifically to the Messiah, and I'll retract.

None of that speaks of any concept of resurrection. Only a concept of death.

Bull to all of that - see my last post.

(MOSES) - Deu 18:15 YHVH Elohiym will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;


(YHVH) Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.


Act 7:35 This Moses whom they refused, saying, Who made thee a ruler and a judge? the same did God send to be a ruler and a deliverer by the hand of the angel which appeared to him in the bush.

Act 7:37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.


(Jesus) Joh 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.


Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary -

Deuteronomy 18:15-22


It is here promised concerning Christ, that there should come a Prophet, great above all the prophets; by whom God would make known himself and his will to the children of men, more fully and clearly than he had ever done before.

Also note what they say Jesus is the SAME - refused/not believed, - and claimed to be a JUDGE over them.

As per my earlier commentary about Jesus claiming to be the JEWISH MESSIAH - and the Elohiym reference back to the Tanakh text calling them JUDGES!!!!!


*