trinity???

[hanif]

Do not expect the Trinity to be rational because God is irrational .
God is a power that had no begining and has no end .
God was never born and will never die .
God is perfect .
This things are irrational concepts to humans .
Everything we know has a begining and a ending .
Everything we know isn't perfect .
"I know God is perfect" ... No you dont, its an illusion .
In religion there is no such thing as knowing .
In religion there is only beleive and faith .
If God would want us to know he exist he would have appeared .
But God want us to beleive in him thats why he sent prophets first .
Why ? Because beleiving is so much stronger then knowing .

Anyway the Trinity has a purpose, an objective wich is the salvation of human kind .
The Trinity is not a concept to confuse people, it shows humans the way God operate on earth ..

You got Jesus teaching us the way ( past ) , Holy Spirit guiding us ( present ) and The Father will judge us ( future ) .
So you have God teachings us the way, guiding us and judging us .
God is present in the past, present and future .
God is the past, present and future of mankind .

Its an easy idea as God is not the author of confusion .

How can the Trinity be Irrational and easy at the same time ?
The explaition to how the Trinity was "created" or how it works is something only God knows .
The explaition to why the Trinity was "created" or how it affects our life is easy .

 

[Scott1]

How can the Trinity be Irrational and easy at the same time ?

The Trinity is perfectly rational and quite easy when explained well to a WILLING student. ( **ahem**)

The explaition to how the Trinity was "created" or how it works is something only God knows .
The explaition to why the Trinity was "created" or how it affects our life is easy .

Are these questions?

Praise our Merciful and Almightly God,
Scott

 

[finalfrogo]

How do you explain acts 7:55-56? "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God." Stephen saw two beings not one.

It says in the scritpures that blaspheming the Holy Ghost is an unforgivable sin, but blaspheming God the Father and Christ are forgivable. If the Trinity is one, does this mean blaspheming God's hand you'll go to hell for, but blaspheming his leg your fine?

This is what I think about the Trinity, "Although the members of the Godhead are distinct beings w/ distinct roles, they are one in purpose and doctrine. They are perfectly united in bringing to pass Heavenly Father's divine plan of salvation"(True to the Faith).

Like I said... I am not stating my own beliefs. I am not trying to prove anything. I am stating the opinion of general Christianity on the matter.

 

[ashai]

No, but the Christians in the area where Muhammad lived were Christian heretics, and their beliefs were not so far off. I wish I could remember the name of the heresy...it would be helpful about now.

I'm sorry, I'm working from my addled memory here, but I remember reading the context of these verses in some scholarly text on the history of Islam.

Ushta Booko

Sabians?

Ushta te
Ashai

The Doctrine of the Most Wise, is to love mankind
Denkard:dan:

 

[ashai]

i believe misunderstood... there are parts of the bible that have logical fallacies and people jump to conclusions... both god and Jesus is referenced both as individuals and as one being... but the one being is always as a will to do the same... i have never seen it referenced in the bible or other biblical text form the nt documents that referenced God and Jesus as one being both in will and in personages only in will are they referenced the same... i believe and know in one God and that is our father in heaven, his son holding all that his father has, Jesus Christ, and the holy ghost as a messenger to us form god and Jesus also holding all that the father has... so in since if the Holy Ghost gives us a message it is as if God himself is speaking… the will and glory is always to the Father or God… that’s what most people leave out that this earth is in the name and glory of the father or God… I hope this help out a bit…

Ushta PHOTOTAKER

I believe that the theory is that when the father talks and says this is my beloved He is talking an bout the incarnate and thus human Christ, so it is , or so the theory goes , not really two different beings that the passage is talking about.

Now, i don't believe this ( at least not any mopre) but that is the general idea behind the apologetics of this and other similar passages.:bounce

Ushta te
Ashai

The Doctrine of the Most Wise is to love mankind
Denkard:dan:

 

[ashai]

Trinity Is Deviation.god Is Only One There Is No God Except Him.
Trinity Came From Mitraism And The Other Anctic Religions.

Ushta hanif

Sorry but Mithraism does not:tsk: have a trinity!!!! Actually Mithras was an ancient Vedic God who was disowned by Zarathushtra and basically forgotten in India, but came back in Iran, under the guise of a Yazata ( Adorable One) during the backlash that followed Zarathushtra's death

Later he was again de-emphasized by the Sassanians and finally he came to be a symbol of friendlyness and love. In Iran, the Fire temples are still call Dahr e - Mehr That is the Door of Mithras which Iranian Zoroastrians mistranslate as the Door of Love or Friendship

Ushta Te
Ashai
The Doctrine of the Most Wise is to love mankind
Denkard:dan:

 

[ashai]

Is this supposed to be Ancient?

Anyways I disagree, the Trinity came from Jesus... Christianity is the true way.

Ushta Mister Emu

Well according to you!:bounce

Ushta Te
Ashai
The Doctrine of the Most Wise, is to love mankind!
Denkard:dan:

 

[ashai]

Nor is there evidence for jesus! or G-d!

Ushta Alan

Ahh! But there is plenty of evidence for God,:dan: now you may not want to admit it but there is!:bounce

Ushta te
Ashai
The Doctrine of the Most Wise, is to love mankind
Denkard:dan:

 

[ashai]

any g-d who condemns good people to eternal damnation just cause they are on the wrong team is no g-d i ever want to pray to...

Ushta jewscout
:clap :clap :clap Ashem! No is not a typo Its the Avestan word from which the Aramaic word amen comes from:bounce Frubals to you!
Ushta te
Ashai

 

[TashaN]

All this means is that Muhammad was speaking to his audience about the world they knew in thems they would understand.

Doing that does not make the Qu'ran "wrong" as some would have us believe. And it doesn't mean all of Christianity worships Mary as a God either.

Doing that means you are trying to say that Quran is not a miracle and it was only valid for that time which is not true. Quran is valid for all time until the judgment day.

 

[Booko]

Ushta Booko

Sabians?

No, Sabians are followers of John the Baptist who never went on to follow Jesus.

Monophysites, someone reminded me in another thread.

Once upon a time, I knew these things from memory. Now I have 2 kids. Sometimes I think they ran off with my brains.

 

[James the Persian]

Doing that means you are trying to say that Quran is not a miracle and it was only valid for that time which is not true. Quran is valid for all time until the judgment day.

If this is so, can you explain the errors in Muhammed's understanding of Christianity? You see, for me that is the major piece of evidence that the Koran is not a miracle direct from God but rather the writing of a fallible man. God couldn't possibly misunderstand the concept of the Trinity (even if it were incorrect). Mohammed certainly could.

James

 

[James the Persian]

No, Sabians are followers of John the Baptist who never went on to follow Jesus.

Monophysites, someone reminded me in another thread.

Once upon a time, I knew these things from memory. Now I have 2 kids. Sometimes I think they ran off with my brains.

Monophysite Triadology does not remotely resemble that described in the Koran. Monophysitism is purely a Christological heresy characterised by a misunderstanding of the nature of the Incarnate Christ. Their views on the Trinity and the Theotokos were no different to those of any other Christians at the time (in other words, identical to what we Orthodox still believe and almost the same as the RCC).

It's also debatable as to whether there ever really were any monophysites at all. The Oriental Orthodox (who are those condemned for monophysitism) call their Christology miaphysite and it really is closer to Orthodox Christology (though it's very woolly) than to monophysitism. It all seems like a gargantuan misunderstanding of terminology on both sides at Chalcedon, assuming you believe the OOs when they say that what they believe now is what they have always believed.

There may have been a heretical sect in Muhammed's area that believed as described in the Koran, but I certainly don't know who it might have been and they certainly weren't in the majority. Neither the Arians nor the Nestorians (the other big early heresies in the east, at least the latter of which survived into Islamic times) would have had any reason to deify Mary and the former didn't believe in the Trinity at all (what they did believe in was closer to the LDS Godhead). In any case, even if such a heretical sect did exist they would have been a tiny minority and given that Muhammed is known to have been sheltered at St Catherine's monastery in Sinai (which is Orthodox to this day) there's no possibility at all that he was not exposed to Orthodox teaching. The errors in the Koran, then, appear to be wholly down to Muhammed's misunderstanding of Christianity and, hence, I simply cannot believe in the Divine origin of its contents.

James

 

[hanif]

KORAN IS MIRACLE.IF YOU LOOK ALL THE BIBLE IS THE BOOK OF CONTRADICTION AND ABERRATIONS.
SOME SCIENTISTS' COMMENTS REGARDING THE QUR'AN

… There are too many accuracies [in the Qur'an] and, like Dr. Moore, I have no difficulty in my mind that this is a divine inspiration or revelation which led him to these statements.270 (Dr. T. V. N. Persaud, Professor of Anatomy, Pediatrics and Child Health, Obstetrics, Gynecology, Reproductive Sciences at the University of Manitoba)

… It follows, I think, that not only there is no conflict between genetics and religion but, in fact, religion can guide science by adding revelation to some of the traditional scientific approaches, that there exist statements in the Quran shown centuries later to be valid, which support knowledge in the Quran having been derived from God.271 (Dr. Joe Leigh Simpson, Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Molecular and Human Genetics)

As a scientist, I can only deal with things which I can specifically see. I can understand embryology and developmental biology. I can understand the words that are translated to me from the Quran. As I gave the example before, if I were to transpose myself into that era, knowing what I knew today and describing things, I could not describe the things which were described… So I see nothing here in conflict with the concept that divine intervention was involved in what he [Prophet Muhammad (saas)] was able to write.272 (Dr. E. Marshall Johnson, Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Developmental Biology at Thomas Jefferson University)

In a relatively few aayahs [Quranic verses] is contained a rather comprehensive description of human development from the time of commingling of the gametes through organogenesis. No such distinct and complete record of human development, such as classification, terminology, and description, existed previously. In most, if not all, instances, this description antedates by many centuries the recording of the various stages of human embryonic and fetal development recorded in the traditional scientific literature.273 (Gerald C. Goeringer, Associate Professor of Medical Embryology at Georgetown University)
It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the Qur'an about human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to [Prophet] Muhammad [saas] from God, or Allah, because most of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me that [Prophet] Muhammad [saas] must have been a messenger of God, or Allah.274 (Dr. Keith L. Moore, Professor Emeritus, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Toronto. Distinguished embryologist and the author of several medical textbooks)
... Because the staging of human embryos is complex, owing to the continuous process of change during development, it is proposed that a new system of classification could be developed using the terms mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah. The proposed system is simple, comprehensive, and conforms with present embryological knowledge.275 (Dr. Keith L. Moore, Professor Emeritus, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Toronto)
The intensive studies of the Qur'an and Hadith in the last four years have revealed a system of classifying human embryos that is amazing since it was recorded in the seventh century A.D... the descriptions in the Qur'an cannot be based on scientific knowledge in the seventh century... 276 (Dr. Keith L. Moore, Professor Emeritus,

 

[sojourner]

KORAN IS MIRACLE.IF YOU LOOK ALL THE BIBLE IS THE BOOK OF CONTRADICTION AND ABERRATIONS.

FASTER THAN A SPEEDING RUMOR...
MORE POWERFUL THAN A LITERARY CRITIC...
ABLE TO LEAP TALL TALES IN A SINGLE BOUND!
:super:
IT'S ... SUPER BIBLE!!!

 

[Booko]

KORAN IS MIRACLE.IF YOU LOOK ALL THE BIBLE IS THE BOOK OF CONTRADICTION AND ABERRATIONS.

I hope you're not going to complain if anyone makes stupid cartoons with the Prophet in them, because with this one sentence, you just lost any moral right you had to complain about insults to your own religion.

 

[Quiddity]

FASTER THAN A SPEEDING RUMOR...
MORE POWERFUL THAN A LITERARY CRITIC...
ABLE TO LEAP TALL TALES IN A SINGLE BOUND!
:super:
IT'S ... SUPER BIBLE!!!

.........:biglaugh:

 

[Ody]

Ushta Alan

Ahh! But there is plenty of evidence for God,:dan: now you may not want to admit it but there is!:bounce

Not conclusive atleast... :areyoucra

 

[Giovanni20]

The people that believe that Jesus and god are the same person obviously dont read the bible. They read what benifits them and skip pages. How would Jesus pray to himself and call himself another name and say that his father is greater than him???

 

[Giovanni20]

IT IS said that some Bible texts offer proof in support of the Trinity. However, when reading such texts, we should keep in mind that the Biblical and historical evidence does not support the Trinity. Any Bible reference offered as proof must be understood in the context of the consistent teaching of the entire Bible. Very often the true meaning of such a text is clarified by the context of surrounding verses.