The Trinity

[Walkntune]

Worship Plato if you must.

I am not sure what you disagree with? Do you disagree that we are spiritual beings but we are also flesh.
Jesus says God is Spirit and must be worshipped in Spirit and in truth.
Jesus is also God in the flesh? Do you disagree with any of this?
What do you consider being created in the image of God means?

 

[Dunemeister]

I am not sure what you disagree with? Do you disagree that we are spiritual beings but we are also flesh.
Jesus says God is Spirit and must be worshipped in Spirit and in truth.
Jesus is also God in the flesh? Do you disagree with any of this?
What do you consider being created in the image of God means?

I disagree with the notion that we are PRIMARILY or MERELY spirit, that our bodies are incidental, mere meat suits we wear temporarily. If that were so, the whole notion of resurrection, crucial to Christianity, would be puzzling.

Being created in the image of God means that we "mirror" God, we are "like" Him in certain ways, particularly in our capacity for morality and our communal nature. It also means that we have a certain role to play. Specifically, it means that we are to model and implement God's loving dominion to all creation. It has nothing whatsoever to do with our having a spirit (or not). Only a particular affection for Plato would insist on our spirit/soul being the "primary" or most important part of us. Our physical selves are also crucial. However, this particular metaphysical discussion is beyond the scope of this thread, and if you wish to pursue it further, why not start another thread? I'd be happy to elaborate further if need be.

 

[Walkntune]

I disagree with the notion that we are PRIMARILY or MERELY spirit, that our bodies are incidental, mere meat suits we wear temporarily. If that were so, the whole notion of resurrection, crucial to Christianity, would be puzzling.

Being created in the image of God means that we "mirror" God, we are "like" Him in certain ways, particularly in our capacity for morality and our communal nature. It also means that we have a certain role to play. Specifically, it means that we are to model and implement God's loving dominion to all creation. It has nothing whatsoever to do with our having a spirit (or not). Only a particular affection for Plato would insist on our spirit/soul being the "primary" or most important part of us. Our physical selves are also crucial. However, this particular metaphysical discussion is beyond the scope of this thread, and if you wish to pursue it further, why not start another thread? I'd be happy to elaborate further if need be.

I see where you are coming from but i think its still on topic sense it is still an understanding of the trinity.(at least for me)
Well call it frequencies of energy or call it spirit(I believe they are the same).

I googled this bit because it explains my thought from scripture. because it explains why you and your mortal body are separate.possibly you are not a bible believer and this won't mean anything to you.
The body we have in the spiritual world is not the body that we put into the grave. The Bible says that our physical body is corruptible and mortal, which means that it does not last, but rots and dies. "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither does corruption inherit incorruption" (1 Corinthians 15: 50). "We brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out" (1 Timothy 6:7). When we go to our eternal home "then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it" (Ecclesiastes 12:5, 7; compare Genesis 3:19). So our earthly body cannot go to heaven, but when we put off our physical body, our corruptible and mortal life is changed into an incorruptible and immortal life (1 Corinthians 15: 53-54). Evidently when Paul said this, some people were wondering if everyone would sleep a long time in the grave before the resurrection, for Paul reassures people that we will not all sleep, and that it will not take ages but will happen immediately, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet, that is, when we die.

 

[Dunemeister]

I googled this bit because it explains my thought from scripture. because it explains why you and your mortal body are separate.possibly you are not a bible believer and this won't mean anything to you.

I hold to the authority of scripture.

The body we have in the spiritual world is not the body that we put into the grave. The Bible says that our physical body is corruptible and mortal, which means that it does not last, but rots and dies. "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither does corruption inherit incorruption" (1 Corinthians 15: 50). "We brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out" (1 Timothy 6:7). When we go to our eternal home "then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it" (Ecclesiastes 12:5, 7; compare Genesis 3:19). So our earthly body cannot go to heaven, but when we put off our physical body, our corruptible and mortal life is changed into an incorruptible and immortal life (1 Corinthians 15: 53-54). Evidently when Paul said this, some people were wondering if everyone would sleep a long time in the grave before the resurrection, for Paul reassures people that we will not all sleep, and that it will not take ages but will happen immediately, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet, that is, when we die.

I won't get into your exegesis because it would take us too far afield. I'll only say that you (or your teachers) have mishandled some of these texts. The basic Christian story is that there is a two-stage afterlife. After we die, the body of the Christian goes to the earth and the soul goes to God. At some point in the future, God will resurrect Christians. That means that the body that died will be raised to life, reunited with the soul. This new life is qualitatively different from the previous one such that the new resurrection body will never die (among other things). It's MORE THAN physical, but it's not LESS THAN physical. But this FOR SURE goes beyond the intent of this thread.

 

[Walkntune]

I hold to the authority of scripture.



I won't get into your exegesis because it would take us too far afield. I'll only say that you (or your teachers) have mishandled some of these texts. The basic Christian story is that there is a two-stage afterlife. After we die, the body of the Christian goes to the earth and the soul goes to God. At some point in the future, God will resurrect Christians. That means that the body that died will be raised to life, reunited with the soul. This new life is qualitatively different from the previous one such that the new resurrection body will never die (among other things). It's MORE THAN physical, but it's not LESS THAN physical. But this FOR SURE goes beyond the intent of this thread.

I am interested in seeing your scriptures you are interpreting if you don't mind?
In my mind I am still trying to see flesh bodies that has been rotten and eaten by insects and animals and used up as energy in the ground and dissipated as heat from gasses as it transforms in and out of form of energy reuniting with the soul. I remember reading about a new body but I am not familiar with reading about this?
Now i am gathering that you are into metaphysic and possibly see all energy coming back into itself.I'm just trying to see a possibility.

 

[Dunemeister]

I am interested in seeing your scriptures you are interpreting if you don't mind?
In my mind I am still trying to see flesh bodies that has been rotten and eaten by insects and animals and used up as energy in the ground and dissipated as heat from gasses as it transforms in and out of form of energy reuniting with the soul. I remember reading about a new body but I am not familiar with reading about this?
Now i am gathering that you are into metaphysic and possibly see all energy coming back into itself.I'm just trying to see a possibility.

Let's take this to another thread if you really want to follow up. I'd hate to pollute this thread with a different issue altogether.

 

[Composer]

. . . .
Jesus is also God in the flesh? Do you disagree with any of this? . . . .

Although the bible is just a story book it is interesting to compare the story book text itself against the various ideologies of those who ' claim ' to base their religion on it.

Take the above claim and compare that against the story book text itself and the claim just doesn't ' stack up '

i.e. But who is able to build him an house, seeing the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain him? . . . . (2 Chron. 2:6) KJV story book

So in one breath trinitarian story book believers want us to believe that their God is so great that he can not be contained within an astronomically large environment but in the next breath that it can be constrained within the limitations and restrictions of a woman's tiny womb?

 

[Dunemeister]

Let's take this to another thread if you really want to follow up. I'd hate to pollute this thread with a different issue altogether.

Whoops! Got my threads crossed! This is entirely on point. So I'll get my s*** together.

 

[Dunemeister]

Although the bible is just a story book it is interesting to compare the story book text itself against the various ideologies of those who ' claim ' to base their religion on it.

Take the above claim and compare that against the story book text itself and the claim just doesn't ' stack up '

i.e. But who is able to build him an house, seeing the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain him? . . . . (2 Chron. 2:6) KJV story book

So in one breath trinitarian story book believers want us to believe that their God is so great that he can not be contained within an astronomically large environment but in the next breath that it can be constrained within the limitations and restrictions of a woman's tiny womb?

Do you honestly think that Christian theologians have overlooked this little snippet for thousands of years but that now, thanks to your sagacity, we can see the light and repent our error? Or is it more likely your sanguine confidence you have found a contradiction is based on a complete ignorance of the textual, historical, and theological issues involved?

 

[Composer]

Do you honestly think that Christian theologians have overlooked this little snippet for thousands of years

So called christian theologians haven't even got as far as legitimately demonstrating the story book is anything but a story book, so other major blunders based upon a story book content they make are most likely indeed as I proved with this example. (little snippet you called it)

Little snippet it may be to you trinitarians, but it destroys the trinitarian ideology in one legitimate fell swoop!

but that now, thanks to your sagacity, we can see the light and repent our error?

Apart from hypothesising what others MIGHT have done for you, what legitimate evidence do you have to even attempt to refute my point?

Or is it more likely your sanguine confidence you have found a contradiction is based on a complete ignorance of the textual, historical, and theological issues involved?

I have no doubt your trinitarian (ahem!) scholars are guilty of all those accusations you make, hence them ending up trinitarians.

I mean also for starters your (ahem!) alleged early trinitarian scholars and forefathers were so inept, the only way they had to encourage others to embrace their alleged ' trinitarian god of love ' (LOL!) was to torture and burn alive those who wouldn't willingly yield to their (ahem!) scholarly teachings about their alleged trinitarian god of love? ROFL!

Here's an example of your trinitarian god's policy and methods of ' trinitarian god's love ' in action - (Tried to Post Link to Historical records. I am not allowed to provide external Links until after 15 Posts, I shall return and Edit this Post to show intended Link then.)


Excuse me meanwhile whilst I vomit against your trinitarian forefather's methods and the story book trinitarian monster of a god that permitted it.

 

[Dunemeister]

So called christian theologians haven't even got as far as legitimately demonstrating the story book is anything but a story book, so other major blunders based upon a story book content they make are most likely indeed as I proved with this example. (little snippet you called it)

Little snippet it may be to you trinitarians, but it destroys the trinitarian ideology in one legitimate fell swoop!



Apart from hypothesising what others MIGHT have done for you, what legitimate evidence do you have to even attempt to refute my point?


I have no doubt your trinitarian (ahem!) scholars are guilty of all those accusations you make, hence them ending up trinitarians.

I mean also for starters your (ahem!) alleged early trinitarian scholars and forefathers were so inept, the only way they had to encourage others to embrace their alleged ' trinitarian god of love ' (LOL!) was to torture and burn alive those who wouldn't willingly yield to their (ahem!) scholarly teachings about their alleged trinitarian god of love? ROFL!

Here's an example of your trinitarian god's policy and methods of ' trinitarian god's love ' in action - (Tried to Post Link to Historical records. I am not allowed to provide external Links until after 15 Posts, I shall return and Edit this Post to show intended Link then.)


Excuse me meanwhile whilst I vomit against your trinitarian forefather's methods and the story book trinitarian monster of a god that permitted it.

A serious response to this astonishing gush of ignorance and bile would be a profound waste of time. Adieu.

 

[Composer]

A serious response to this astonishing gush of ignorance and bile would be a profound waste of time. Adieu.

In other words you can't legitimately refute my Post.

Still I knew that already hence your trinitarian doctrine remains in tatters at my feet and has done so personally for over 50 years so far and will continue to do so regardless of your pathetic insults and personal attacks in lieu of a shred of credibility for your lost trinitarian cause.

Next trinitarian that wants to try please step forward!

Cheers!

 

[tarasan]

In other words you can't legitimately refute my Post.

Still I knew that already hence your trinitarian doctrine remains in tatters at my feet and has done so personally for over 50 years so far and will continue to do so regardless of your pathetic insults and personal attacks in lieu of a shred of credibility for your lost trinitarian cause.

Next trinitarian that wants to try please step forward!

Cheers!

fair enough i cant be bothered reading all the posts, cause Its 1.30 am here but i waan start so please state your arguement clear so that i can tackle it:angel2:

 

[Composer]

fair enough i cant be bothered reading all the posts, cause Its 1.30 am here but i waan start so please state your arguement clear so that i can tackle it:angel2:

Please see my post Page 5#47

Cheers!

 

[Walkntune]

So in one breath trinitarian story book believers want us to believe that their God is so great that he can not be contained within an astronomically large environment but in the next breath that it can be constrained within the limitations and restrictions of a woman's tiny womb?

Yet God dwells in our heart!
You argue spiritual things carnally and therefore have no understanding.

I have no doubt your trinitarian (ahem!) scholars are guilty of all those accusations you make, hence them ending up trinitarians.

I mean also for starters your (ahem!) alleged early trinitarian scholars and forefathers were so inept, the only way they had to encourage others to embrace their alleged ' trinitarian god of love ' (LOL!) was to torture and burn alive those who wouldn't willingly yield to their (ahem!) scholarly teachings about their alleged trinitarian god of love? ROFL!

Maybe you should drink some water before you post!

 

[Composer]

Yet God dwells in our heart!

Story book none sense and besides your ' imagination ' what actual legitimate evidence do you allege to have to support your hypothesis?

You argue spiritual things carnally and therefore have no understanding.

Hypothetically therefore what is your alleged understanding of how a story book god can not be constrained to within any limitations but allegedly can after all inside a mortal woman's womb?

' My god can do anything (obviously including contradicting itself) ' is a story book speculation, so I'll need more than that typical spurious response and empty opinion from you so called christians?

Cheers!

Maybe you should drink some water before you post!

Nothing washes away or removes the disgusting stench and bitterness of this monster of a trinitarian god / any god.

 

[Dunemeister]

In other words you can't legitimately refute my Post.

No, I just can't compete with cussidness.

 

[Composer]

No, I just can't compete with cussidness.

I have been dealing with trinitarian cussedness for 50 years and I still legitimately prevail.

Best you leave it to some trinitarian that thinks they can credibly justify their claims and is willing to have them scrutinised, instead of you repeatedly embarrassing yourself for making pathetic excuses and casting personal insults instead of attempting to legitimately support your various trinitarian claims with something sadly lacking from trinitarians - Jesus story book ' wanna be ' believers, it's called legitimate evidence?

Cheers!

 

[tarasan]

Although the bible is just a story book it is interesting to compare the story book text itself against the various ideologies of those who ' claim ' to base their religion on it.

Take the above claim and compare that against the story book text itself and the claim just doesn't ' stack up '

i.e. But who is able to build him an house, seeing the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain him? . . . . (2 Chron. 2:6) KJV story book

So in one breath trinitarian story book believers want us to believe that their God is so great that he can not be contained within an astronomically large environment but in the next breath that it can be constrained within the limitations and restrictions of a woman's tiny womb?

1. a. The vital principle or animating force within living beings.
b. Incorporeal consciousness.

2. The soul, considered as departing from the body of a person at death.
3. Spirit The Holy Spirit.
4. A supernatural being, as: a. An angel or a demon.
b. A being inhabiting or embodying a particular place, object, or natural phenomenon.
c. A fairy or sprite.

spirit - definition of spirit by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

God is spirit aka an incorporeal conscious, that is everywhere, so when it says that the heavens cannot contain him it means that his spirit is everywhere and is not just contained within a heavenly realm.

but the spirit can also animate living things, so I dont see why God cannot be contained because of his spiritual nature, and also decide to "aminate flesh" after all its not like a spirit has any mass which means he would not fitinside the womb. I really dont see how this scripture holds up...

unless you have an answer.

 

[Dunemeister]

I have been dealing with trinitarian cussedness for 50 years and I still legitimately prevail.

I also can't deal with incipient triumphalism. ("Legitimately" indeed! You're a riot!)