Holy Trinity Discussion

“the lamb who was Slain….”
What was the Passover lamb for?

Point of reference.
“Satan” isn’t a name. It simply means “opposition” or “Opposer”. When Yeshua said “behind me Satan” he wasn’t calling his disciple Lucifer. He was saying your in opposition to my goals.
I am sure you already know the Christian answer and are trolling us just a bit 😉

The Passover lamb was foreshadowing Jesus. The slaying of an innocent life to cover the sins of the people and provide liberation for God‘s people. It was not coincidence that the Crucifiction occurred on the Day of Preparation for the Passover. The blood of the lamb was painted above the doorway so that God‘s judgment would pass over that family.
God is an absolute Master Poet. This is one of the many amazing „coincidences“ between Jesus and events of the Old Testament.
 
2 points.
How long was it between “in the beginning “ and “Now”.
And
You know for 3000 years the Jews have taught that G-d was speaking to the heavenly court. Angels and whatnot.
Not once has G-d ever said they were in error

And a 3rd
I’ve found the garden of Eden location interesting too.
A big part of the Jew in me says it’s allegory. But an actual boundary is listed for a real place. It is interesting
Hey, you have already been successful in egging Christians on over the Trinity and now you are bring up the question of a literal seven day creation? Are you TRYING to start an interdenominational holy war? 😂
15867B92-CBE6-41DF-B8CE-79E1C1650400.gif
Before you are done, I fully expect you to bring up predestination, infant baptism, the status of Mary, Papal infallibility, grace vs works, purgatory, and the celibacy of priests.
I know an agent provocateur when Insee one 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
Market share? What, you think this is some sort of popularity contest? I don’t care if only a handful of people believe it. The Truth is the Truth.
And what you call a „silly theological error“ is one of the earliest and most important tenets of the faith.
Jesus Himself said that the path is narrow and there will be few who find it.

It is a popularity contest. When you lose market share your flavor of belief is in jeopardy of being squeezed out by something more popular.

Just ask Mithraism, Catharism, Zoroastrianism, Paganism, Manichaeism, Tengrism, Vedism or Shintoism.

Christianity, many of its tenants, stories and parables are based on the same from its predecessors.
 
I gotta be honest my friend, and I think I told you this before, I do these conversations for me. The topic of when the Trinity creeps in is settled in my mind. And it’s too far after the fact to be a factor in my thinking. I’m more interested in the thinking of Messiah, the 12 and how they practice their service of G-d. It’s ok if you disagree.
I guess the other thing I should say is…and I can explain why from the teachings of Messiah….I believe that my opinion of you is irrelevant at your judgement and your opinion of mine is the same, irrelevant. We will be judged on our own.
You clearly have researched this and drawn your conclusions. That’s a win in my book.

I say all of that to say this. I’ve only briefly studied Ethiopia cannon vs the Protestant and the catholic. I believe I could benefit from that comparison and conversation if you’d like to have it.
Just say the word and we’ll figure it out. You can start or I will.

Gotta be up early tomorrow so I’m out in a couple of minutes.
Shalom friend
I feel like I can go here cause we've discussed it in depth. And we're friends that have yet to meet in person. You say you are Messianic because your family is not of the tribe of Judah. So you're not Jewish. But, your faith is Judaism...to a degree. Makes perfectly good sense. "Jewish" is an ethnicity, not the religion. Thousands of you're own kind could stand to learn that difference. The term seems to be used too loosely. You, by broad stroke of a pen, are Hebrew, which would be of the other 11 tribes, and it can be dialed in from there.

You bring in a heavy dose of Christianity. What you said there, you will not hear from a mainsteamer. What makes you unique is that it's like you are standing on a dyke, with rivers flowing on both sides and you draw water from both pools and blend them for a cool drink. You believe/practice alot of new testament christianity, but at the same time, you have a healthy dose of judaism still in the blood. Kids went to a christian school, etc. It's like your journey has led you to a place where judaism and christianity are coexsting with you, which ideoligically, should not be possible. Maybe it's the Messianic side of Judaism that lends more toward new testament teachings and beliefs, cause I still find it quite interesting that being CoC, we have more in common in our individual beliefs and the basis for them than we have differences. Most of our differences maybe come from things we like to kick around that we have different levels of study in, that have no bearing on our accpted salvation.

The big thing is that salvation comes to us by faith, acceptance and grace via Christ/Messiah unto the Father. No Priest, or Rabbi, or Reverend, or Elder, or Deacon, or Pastor can absolve or intercede and provide that to anyone any longer. That concept and ability was levitical law. Individual, direct access for all peoples...that's new law.

Having said all that, it would be important to know that being Messianic is neither jewish, nor christian. It is a blend of both worlds. A messianic accepts that Jesus/Yeshua/?? was the Messiah. A Hasidic/Traditional/Orthodox etc. practitioner is still waiting on the Messiah and does not believe he was the King they asked for. Mainstream sects do not accept Yeshua as Messiah, whereas Messianics do. Keeping it brief, Messianic is what derived from the early christians. They were the early converts, that also felt it was ok to still practice some jewish traditions in the daily life, yet accpet Yeshua as Messiah and salvation. That would help some maybe know why sometimes you sound like a jew, and sometimes you sound like a nut.
 
Hey, you have already been successful in egging Christians on over the Trinity and now you are bring up the question of a literal seven day creation? Are you TRYING to start an interdenominational holy war? 😂
View attachment 714984
Before you are done, I fully expect you to bring up predestination, infant baptism, the status of Mary, Papal infallibility, grace vs works, purgatory, and the celibacy of priests.
I know an agent provocateur when Insee one 😂
And he would laugh while he was doing it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
It is a popularity contest. When you lose market share your flavor of belief is in jeopardy of being squeezed out by something more popular.

Just ask Mithraism, Catharism, Zoroastrianism, Paganism, Manichaeism, Tengrism, Vedism or Shintoism.

Christianity, many of its tenants, stories and parables are based on the same from its predecessors.
But there is one MAJOR difference. Christianity is REAL. If it is real and is supported by God, it will continue even if there is only one believer left.
Christianity‘s „obituary“ has been written countless times, especially since the French Revolution, but we‘re still here and will continue to be, even if 99.9% of the world says we are crazy.
44073B31-B25C-48B9-B259-54C65E5F84ED.jpeg
Consider this….you are in Judea in 33 AD and come across a small group of 11 uneducated Galaleian fishermen and other lower middle class men huddling in fear in an upper room. Their leader has just been betrayed by one of your own and executed as a criminal by the state. What odds would you put on that group surviving 2000 years and becoming one of the world’s major religions? The only rational explanation is that they had a VERY powerful force behind them.
 
Last edited:
But there is one MAJOR difference. Christianity is REAL. If it is real and is supported by God, it will continue even if there is only one believer left.
Christianity‘s „obituary“ has been written countless times, especially since the French Revolution, but we‘re still here and will continue to be, even if 99.9% of the world says we are crazy.

Consider this….you are in Judea in 33 AD and come across a small group of 11 uneducated Galaleian fishermen and other lower middle class men huddling in fear in an upper room. Their leader has just been betrayed by one of your own and executed as a criminal by the state. What odds would you put on that group surviving 2000 years and becoming one of the world’s major religions? The only rational explanation is that they had a VERY powerful force behind them.

Every religion and its followers believe theirs is real.

What makes your god any "realer" than those that came before your flavor? Because some bronze age fisherman got the ball rolling? What if you're wrong?
 
Last edited:
Every religion and its followers believe theirs is real.

What makes your god any "realer" than those that came before your flavor? Because some bronze age fisherman got the ball rolling? What if you're wrong?
It is of course totally possible that I am wrong. It is also totally possible that I am right. Every person has to look at the evidence and arguments and come to their own conclusion.
But it should be quite obvious that Christianity was and still is, very „improbable“. The same can also be said of Judaism. Now what do those two religions have in common 🤔
All I can say definitely is that my faith (and what I see as the object of my faith) have made my life better, more fulfilling, and hopeful. It has also made me a better person as I continue to see more and more flaws that need mending (including how mean I get to certain people on VN at times).
So I think that these are all good things.
All I can do is recommend Christ to others. As the Christ and the Apostles were fond of saying when questioned about the Kingdom of God „Come and see“.
 
Every religion and its followers believe theirs is real.

What makes your god any "realer" than those that came before your flavor? Because some bronze age fisherman got the ball rolling? What if you're wrong?
whatever god or power is out there probably doesn't care if people tried to be nicer to each other based on some wrong information and assumptions. I mean I guess it could be Kali Mah as the one true god, and he might be pissed that we haven't been ripping hearts out of people, but that is a far more dangerous assumption to make.

and if there is nothing, well then, oh no some group of people tried to be nicer to each other based on some wrong information and assumptions.
 
It is of course totally possible that I am wrong. It is also totally possible that I am right. Every person has to look at the evidence and arguments and come to their own conclusion.
But it should be quite obvious that Christianity was and still is, very „improbable“. The same can also be said of Judaism. Now what do those two religions have in common 🤔
All I can say definitely is that my faith (and what I see as the object of my faith) have made my life better, more fulfilling, and hopeful. It has also made me a better person as I continue to see more and more flaws that need mending (including how mean I get to certain people on VN at times).
So I think that these are all good things.
All I can do is recommend Christ to others. As the Christ and the Apostles were fond of saying when questioned about the Kingdom of God „Come and see“.

And that's all well and good, you can have your faith - but stating that it's not a popularity contest flies in the face of the 3,000 or so other religions that were voted off the island.
 
why is it illogical? to me its more illogical to expect a being far beyond our compression to fit not totally defined concepts we created. God must obey our rules and understanding of the existence around us because???

in science you only use terms and accept definitions from the relevant science. we don't apply physics to chemistry. we don't apply physics to quantum. why do we apply physics to God, or some higher being?

The problem with this line of thinking is that it undercuts the core of theology. The foundational cornerstone of theology is that God, God's nature, and God's will is comprehensible by humans.

On a related secondary point, when competing with other religions/sects for market share, an apologist will quickly point out illogical aspects of competing frameworks. Thus, this line of thinking acts as insulation from skepticism via special pleading.
 
whatever god or power is out there probably doesn't care if people tried to be nicer to each other based on some wrong information and assumptions. I mean I guess it could be Kali Mah as the one true god, and he might be pissed that we haven't been ripping hearts out of people, but that is a far more dangerous assumption to make.

and if there is nothing, well then, oh no some group of people tried to be nicer to each other based on some wrong information and assumptions.

You and I have very different understanding of religion if you believe one of its tenants is to be 'nicer.'

I'd wager that more people have been oppressed and killed in the name of religion than for any other singular reason. Please don't try and conflate "the good" of a Southern Baptist potluck and clothes drive for the needy as offsetting the tens of millions in murder and genocide done in the name of religion.
 
The problem with this line of thinking is that it undercuts the core of theology. The foundational cornerstone of theology is that God, God's nature, and God's will is comprehensible by humans.

On a related secondary point, when competing with other religions/sects for market share, an apologist will quickly point out illogical aspects of competing frameworks. Thus, this line of thinking acts as insulation from skepticism via special pleading.

Well stated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PKT_VOL
The problem with this line of thinking is that it undercuts the core of theology. The foundational cornerstone of theology is that God, God's nature, and God's will is comprehensible by humans.

On a related secondary point, when competing with other religions/sects for market share, an apologist will quickly point out illogical aspects of competing frameworks. Thus, this line of thinking acts as insulation from skepticism via special pleading.
there is a difference in what we currently comprehend vs what is compressible. One of the core tenant's of Christianity is that humans eff up and aren't perfect. so pointing out flaws in us isn't actually attacking the religion. granted many of the believers don't understand that.

did I attack another religion on illogical aspects? you are avoiding the actual discussion point and deflecting.

but to this point, how accurate the creation story is is remarkable for a stone age culture to be illogical about. certainly other belief systems have creation stories that get things right too, but I have yet to find one as accurate to our current understanding.
 
You and I have very different understanding of religion if you believe one of its tenants is to be 'nicer.'

I'd wager that more people have been oppressed and killed in the name of religion than for any other singular reason. Please don't try and conflate "the good" of a Southern Baptist potluck and clothes drive for the needy as offsetting the tens of millions in murder and genocide done in the name of religion.
ah so without any of those religions none of the associated murder and genocide would have happened. a very naive argument.

we would have killed each other just the same. The Crusades are a great example, it didn't even start as an actual theological issue. it might have been sold that way, but that's not what actually started it. The Byzantines went to the pope to retake land in Turkey. theoretically that is also what the pope set out to do too. When the Christians took the holy land in the first crusade, they didn't just burn down the mosques and kick out the arabs, they also took the land, installed their own laws and traditions.

there is always going to be some reason to fight, trying to make it an issue of religion is just lazy.
 
The Trinity is professed by the Catholic Church, all of the Protestant denominations, and both the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches. How does one do anything other than "double down" on a belief that has been at the core of the faith for 2 millenia?

It depends on what we define as a "core" belief of the faith. There have been other "core" beliefs of the faith for millennia that have went by the wayside (Earth being the center of creation, literal interpretation of Genesis, etc.).

I would argue that Modalism (or some form thereof) or polytheism (or some form thereof) would still capture the core essence of Christianity without committing a silly unforced theological error.
 
And that's all well and good, you can have your faith - but stating that it's not a popularity contest flies in the face of the 3,000 or so other religions that were voted off the island.
Many are called but few are chosen. Jesus warned His followers that we would never be overly popular but instead persecuted. And no, I am not claiming that Christians in the US are being openly persecuted.
 
Market share? What, you think this is some sort of popularity contest? I don’t care if only a handful of people believe it. The Truth is the Truth.

Of course it is a popularity contest. No one knows for certain, hence why subjective faith is foundational.

Billions of dollars are spent every year by each of the major religions/sects to at least retain and hopefully increase their market share via marketing, solicitation, missionary work, etc.

And what you call a „silly theological error“ is one of the earliest and most important tenets of the faith.
Jesus Himself said that the path is narrow and there will be few who find it.

Is it really the most important tenet of the faith? If a hypothetical truly omniscient AI interface devised by God himself told you that the Trinity was a misunderstanding (for example that Modalism was more accurate), would you suddenly stop believing in the rest of Christianity?
 
Of course it is a popularity contest. No one knows for certain, hence why subjective faith is foundational.

Billions of dollars are spent every year by each of the major religions/sects to at least retain and hopefully increase their market share via marketing, solicitation, missionary work, etc.



Is it really the most important tenet of the faith? If a hypothetical truly omniscient AI interface devised by God himself told you that the Trinity was a misunderstanding (for example that Modalism was more accurate), would you suddenly stop believing in the rest of Christianity?
Why would God NEED an AI interface? He has revealed Himself in exactly the way He meant to.
2442FE91-DAC1-4DEA-9D48-C383A04D98B3.png
 
It is of course totally possible that I am wrong. It is also totally possible that I am right. Every person has to look at the evidence and arguments and come to their own conclusion.
But it should be quite obvious that Christianity was and still is, very „improbable“. The same can also be said of Judaism. Now what do those two religions have in common 🤔
All I can say definitely is that my faith (and what I see as the object of my faith) have made my life better, more fulfilling, and hopeful. It has also made me a better person as I continue to see more and more flaws that need mending (including how mean I get to certain people on VN at times).
So I think that these are all good things.

All I can do is recommend Christ to others. As the Christ and the Apostles were fond of saying when questioned about the Kingdom of God „Come and see“.

That is a sufficient reason enough to believe. Life of Pi.

On a societal level, organized religion did a great job at providing a natural moral buttress and the West's abandonment of Christianity has accelerated the building blocks of our society unravelling.
 
Of course it is a popularity contest. No one knows for certain, hence why subjective faith is foundational.

Billions of dollars are spent every year by each of the major religions/sects to at least retain and hopefully increase their market share via marketing, solicitation, missionary work, etc.



Is it really the most important tenet of the faith? If a hypothetical truly omniscient AI interface devised by God himself told you that the Trinity was a misunderstanding (for example that Modalism was more accurate), would you suddenly stop believing in the rest of Christianity?
And yes, the Trinity IS among the most important pillars of the Faith. As expressed in the Nicean creed long before the Catholic/Orthodox split and over a thousand years before the Protestant reformation. So this is core doctrine, on the very Trunk of the Christian family tree as it were.

We believe in one God, the Father, the almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father.
 
The bold is true is more ways than just the Trinity. It constantly amazes me how little mainstream Christianity takes Jesus at his word.
its an interesting challenge of any long held idea by humans. progress is always challenged.

for Christians, if Jesus legitimately came back, would most of us who claim to be Christians recognize and follow him?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PKT_VOL
there is a difference in what we currently comprehend vs what is compressible. One of the core tenant's of Christianity is that humans eff up and aren't perfect. so pointing out flaws in us isn't actually attacking the religion. granted many of the believers don't understand that.

Humans created theology on the premise that the divine was knowable. If humans are too effed up to comprehend the divine, theology (and subsequently any possible theological errors) ceases to have any meaning.

did I attack another religion on illogical aspects? you are avoiding the actual discussion point and deflecting.

That wasn't the point. Since, again, the foundational concept of theology is that the divine is comprehensible. Thus, apologists of all flavors attempt to point out the flaws of competing frameworks under the assumption that truth of the divine is logically comprehensible by the human mind.

but to this point, how accurate the creation story is is remarkable for a stone age culture to be illogical about. certainly other belief systems have creation stories that get things right too, but I have yet to find one as accurate to our current understanding.

Given that we don't really have a clue about creation, it is impossible to assess who was accurate past let's say the creation of the Solar System.

A literal interpretation of Genesis just isn't accurate. Geocentrism is not accurate. Once you get get to looser interpretations, it can get more accurate the less literal and more figuratively you interpret it.
 

VN Store



Back
Top