Why So Much Trinity Bashing?

[Brian2]

Thanks. Do you have any evidence (other than tradition) that any of them knew any of the apostles?

That's a bit like asking whether there is evidence that Cleopatra knew Julius Caesar.
There are documents which connect various apostolic fathers to apostles.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Thanks. Do you have any evidence (other than tradition) that any of them knew any of the apostles?

I googled, and here is what I found for you:
Irenaeus mentions that he met Polycarp, who had known John and at least one other apostle, as he refers to "apostles" in the plural being known to Polycarp (Against Heresies 3.3).

What is the basis for the belief that Ignatius of Antioch knew the Apostle John?

What is the basis for the belief that Ignatius of Antioch knew the Apostle John? This seems to be a traditional belief. For example, The Catholic Encyclopedia entry from 1910 says "It is also

christianity.stackexchange.com

 

[Brian2]

I know Jesus was fully man. He was born for a reason in the likeness of Adam, a perfect man. For someone to have special gifts as Jesus did, there are surely those that would classify him in a 'god' status. It is also written that God said, "Let us make man in our IMAGE..." And they were to be given dominion over the animals. "Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." (Genesis 1:26,27)
May I ask how you feel about the fact that God "created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."
There are a few things there to be discussed, but wonder how you feel about those scriptures. First of all, it says God created male and female in his own image. (That's two anyway, not three.) So it requires understanding.

The image of God here seems to mean that we were made to rule over the earth and not to be a servant to the earth and the animals etc.
I think that "male amd female" means that both the males and the females are human, made in the image of God. The female is not a lesser creation.

 

[YoursTrue]

The image of God here seems to mean that we were made to rule over the earth and not to be a servant to the earth and the animals etc.
I think that "male amd female" means that both the males and the females are human, made in the image of God. The female is not a lesser creation.

Although we depend upon the earth and what's in it, we were made to have dominion over the animals. Humans were made different from the animals because after the animals were made, God said Let us make man in our image. Now I believe God was speaking to one other person. Obviously they worked together. Just as Adam and Eve were supposed to.

 

[Ebionite]

Although we depend upon the earth and what's in it, we were made to have dominion over the animals. Humans were made different from the animals because after the animals were made, God said Let us make man in our image. Now I believe God was speaking to one other person. Obviously they worked together. Just as Adam and Eve were supposed to.

You're conflating humans with men. Humans have human rights, but men have natural rights.

 

[Sargonski]

You're conflating humans with men. Humans have human rights, but men have natural rights.

No e ain't .. and wat that have to do with price of tea in china ??

Although we depend upon the earth and what's in it, we were made to have dominion over the animals. Humans were made different from the animals because after the animals were made, God said Let us make man in our image. Now I believe God was speaking to one other person. Obviously they worked together. Just as Adam and Eve were supposed to.

Who was this other God that God was speaking to ... as God is not speaking to a "Person" - a critical take away. Regardless of how many individuals God is speaking to .. all of them are Gods.

Second .. while it is possible from the text that God was speaking to only one other God .. Enlil perhaps speaking to Enki - that is not what an Israelite believed. They believed the "Like US" "in Our Image" referred to many Gods .. cause that is how the story of the creation of man went.

 

[Димитар]

No, I don't. It is an irrational idea.

And i have told you previously that rationality comes from irrationality.

One of the most basic rules of logic is that something cannot be X and Not X at the same time.

Of course , by human logic.But we know according to various passages in Scripture that God's and human logic are not the same.
'God is not a man,that he should lie'

Thus, there is no such thing as something being 1 an 3 at the same time.You can have 1 thing that has three parts. You can have 1 thing that has three modes.But you cannot simultaneously have something that is 1 thing and 3 things.

I will ask @exchemist to look at what i stated in post #406.

I consider this an argument of ignorance

 

[Димитар]

This didn't stop the early church from incorporating aspects of his earlier religion into Christianity.

Christ as Sol Invictus - St Peter's Basilica

View attachment 89005

Of course,the sun god.

We don't celebrate the sun god , we celebrate the one who created the sun.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

And i have told you previously that rationality comes from irrationality.

And if you are going to make irrational statements like that, it becomes impossible to have a reasonable conversation with you. Be well.

 

[YoursTrue]

You're conflating humans with men. Humans have human rights, but men have natural rights.

? Men (including Adam and Eve) were created in God's image and were given dominion over the animals. Jesus is said to be in God's image. What are you trying to say, that these things are not true?

 

[YoursTrue]

The image of God here seems to mean that we were made to rule over the earth and not to be a servant to the earth and the animals etc.
I think that "male amd female" means that both the males and the females are human, made in the image of God. The female is not a lesser creation.

Hello. God saw that Adam needed a helper, so He made Eve. They were both made in God's image. I'm pretty sure that doesn't mean Adam and Eve looked like God, so the image must mean their responsibilities, maybe not a good way of putting it but that's the best word I can think of now.

 

[Ebionite]

We don't celebrate the sun god

And yet most Christian denominations worship on Sunday, the Roman day of the sun.

 

[Ebionite]

? Men (including Adam and Eve) were created in God's image and were given dominion over the animals. Jesus is said to be in God's image. What are you trying to say, that these things are not true?

Where does the Bible refer to anything about humans? The closest it gets to that is the texts that are about paying tribute to Rome.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Everyone knows that , what else?

Do you not belive that three can be one?

For example ,let's look at the three seperate structures of nitrate
One molecule of nitrate is all three resident structure all the time , and never just one of them, the three are separate , but all the same, and they are one , they are three in one.

Any question?

So you are essentially saying each of the three persons is only 1/3 of God - right?

in your example there is just One molecule. Are you saying each of the three separate structures is a molecule? - Answer: No.
Each of those structures is a PART of the molecule. So are you going to say each of the 3 persons is only a part of God?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

So you have a Modalist View? I don't accept this view for the following reasons:

• Jesus speaks of fulfilling the Father’s will and following his commands.
• In the beginning, Jesus (the Word) was there with God (the Father).
• Jesus looked up and prayed to the Father.

The flesh was fulfilling the will of the eternal Spirit.

The Greek word Logos means plan/thought/idea/concept. So the plan was in the beginning with God and the plan was with God. And when it came time for the plan to be fulfilled, God took on flesh and the plan came to fruition.

The flesh had to be obedient to the Spirit in order to be that perfect sacrifice. The flesh was weak just like we are, and had to look to the Spirit for strength. That doesn't mean it was two different persons. (It was flesh and Spirit)

 

[TrueBeliever37]

That's what is expected from an all-powerful Being. No one can explain how the Trinity works. It's a mystery. But if God is all-powerful and nothing is impossible for him, then being three persons in One shouldn't surprise us if it's true. He can be whatever He is and we with our limited comprehension should just accept that somethings we just can't fully grasp.

Romans 1:20 says the Godhead can be understood.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

ok, will do, but I was thinking also of this scripture at Genesis 1:26, when God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
(Note: They (Father and Son) made man in their image...and gave them dominion over the animals, etc. on the earth.)

I believe God had already made the angels in his image, and was letting the angels know that he was going to create man in that image and give man dominion over things here on this earth.

Once again there is a difference between being made in the image of God like man was; and actually being the image of the invisible God like the messiah was.

 

[Димитар]

And if you are going to make irrational statements like that, it becomes impossible to have a reasonable conversation with you. Be well.

Ofc it will be irrational.Everything is irrational when you are confronted..
Never mind , be well..

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Where does the Bible refer to anything about humans? The closest it gets to that is the texts that are about paying tribute to Rome.

What in the world are you talking about? It talks about humans in hundreds of places. For example Psalm 8:3-8

 

[Ebionite]

What in the world are you talking about? It talks about humans in hundreds of places.

The Greek word anthropos conflates human with man. The Latin word for human originally referred to a group of men, not to men in general.