1 edit
Originally posted by tim88yes and calling them idiots is way worse, not to mention an offence under the terms of service of this site!
What does the bible say about judging other people?
http://www.timeforchess.com/help/index.php?help=forumguide
Calling another poster an "idiot" will leave a post subject to immediate removal.
such lawlessness, doesn't bode well for our Suzzi
Originally posted by sonshipIts irrelevant, we are concerned with the historicity of the trinity and its emergence from paganism, which you have failed to explain.
TYPO:
I meant this
Modalism is [a] [edited] theological grappling with the mystery of the Father - Son - Holy Spirit. But it says the three are modes which are not simultaneously in existence but follow one another.
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59I think we can both admit that Hinduism appears to be huge subject. In the time I have been doing a bit of backround reading I have ascertained that there are numerous schools and interpretations of Hinduism.
No.
My knowledge of Hinduism is sufficient for the requirements of teaching
Religious Education up to Year 6 in English State Schools - that's all.
But I do know that a Trinity is not unique to Christianity.
Three is the magic number you know!
It is not enough for me to recognize that three is a number utililized here and there in various pagan beliefs. Stopping at the number three and proclaiming that one has found another " trinity "will not be enough to prove your point.
Plenty of threes can be uncovered in many pagan belief systems. Three names, three principles, three states do not for me merit announcing "Hey, I found the Trinity over here too."
I would like to see the equivalent of Shiva speaking with Brahman and Brahman speaking with Shiva yet Shiva being called the other. Or one living in the other so that what any one of the three does also the operation of the other two.
I see Hinduism discribed as "monotheistic polytheism." The Christian Gospel is about monotheism - period.
I would like to see in the Hindu sacred liturature the three mentioned together as "Us" ie. Genesis 1:26 followed immediately or at least elsewhere, referring to the same action with a singular pronoun.
For example - "And God said, Let Us make man in Our image ... (v.26)... And God created man in HIS own image ; in the image of God HE created him ... " (v.27)
But you would have to know the sacred texts of Hinduism pretty well. Maybe Dasa could be of help.
But just pointing to three something/s is not quite enough.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAs as I can see you did not step up to the plate but let wolfgang59 do your homework for you.
Its irrelevant, we are concerned with the historicity of the trinity and its emergence from paganism, which you have failed to explain.
Failure was on your part to furnish examples of a trinity in paganism.
There is no "emergence" of the teaching of the Trinity from paganism. That is perhaps one of the reasons you halted and brought up no examples from your impressive sounding reference to "Egypt or Bablylon or Assyria" or whatever the three empires you mentioned.
Your attack on the Trinity is the same as that as Arius centuries ago. Its goal is mainly to deny that Jesus Christ is God incarnate. Your attack on the Trinity is not for some revulsion of pagan beliefs. It is primarily to deny the incarnation of God in Christ.
Now Hinduism is a huge subject. If you want now to throw your support behind the "Trimurti" as some call it, better get busy studying Hinduism.
3 edits
Originally posted by sonshiphardly, in fact, i was busy and came back to see your paltry assertions of being rescued, which I inwardly mocked!
As as I can see you did not step up to the plate but let wolfgang59 do your homework for you.
Failure was on your part to furnish examples of a trinity in paganism.
There is no "emergence" of the teaching of the Trinity from paganism. That is perhaps one of the reasons you halted and brought up no examples from your impressive sounding reference to ...[text shortened]... to throw your support behind the "Trimurti" as some call it, better get busy studying Hinduism.
I have produced quotations and references none of which you have the honesty nor the decency to address and instead produce the usual subterfuge of nothingness, well, thanks anyway, did I expect anything else, well perhaps I had better go for a reality check.
The trinity is clearly of pagan origin as the quotations and examples that I gave clearly demonstrate. Truth has a potency all of its own, reality is not optional.
1 edit
Of Interest to those who are concerned with reality
The ante-Nicene Fathers were acknowledged to have been leading religious teachers in the early centuries after Christ’s birth. What they taught is of interest.
Justin Martyr, who died about 165 C.E., called the prehuman Jesus a created angel who is “other than the God who made all things.” He said that Jesus was inferior to God and “never did anything except what the Creator . . . willed him to do and say.”
Irenaeus, who died about 200 C.E., said that the prehuman Jesus had a separate existence from God and was inferior to him. He showed that Jesus is not equal to the “One true and only God,” who is “supreme over all, and besides whom there is no other.”
Clement of Alexandria, who died about 215 C.E., called God “the uncreated and imperishable and only true God.” He said that the Son “is next to the only omnipotent Father” but not equal to him.
Tertullian, who died about 230 C.E., taught the supremacy of God. He observed: “The Father is different from the Son (another), as he is greater; as he who begets is different from him who is begotten; he who sends, different from him who is sent.” He also said: “There was a time when the Son was not. . . . Before all things, God was alone.”
Hippolytus, who died about 235 C.E., said that God is “the one God, the first and the only One, the Maker and Lord of all,” who “had nothing co-eval [of equal age] with him . . . But he was One, alone by himself; who, willing it, called into being what had no being before,” such as the created prehuman Jesus.
Origen, who died about 250 C.E., said that “the Father and Son are two substances . . . two things as to their essence,” and that “compared with the Father, [the Son] is a very small light.”
Originally posted by wolfgang59Christmas has nothing to do with Christianity and is full of pagainistic traditions that are not bible based.
Do you put up any of these at Yuletide?
Holly
Ivy
Fir tree
Mistletoe
Why?
The bible makes it clear that a Christian is to be "no part of the world" and to not defile ones bible based beliefs with untruths.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRobbie, I admire your sophisticated writing vocabulary. You have an impressive delivery.
hardly, in fact, i was busy and came back to see your paltry assertions of being rescued, which I inwardly mocked!
I have produced quotations and references none of which you have the honesty nor the decency to address and instead produce the usual subterfuge of nothingness, well, thanks anyway, did I expect anything else, well perhaps I had bette ...[text shortened]... es that I gave clearly demonstrate. Truth has a potency all of its own, reality is not optional.
However, your well worded diatribes are wrong.
In what way are they wrong? They are wrong in that the belief that God is Father - Son - Holy Spirit was copied, derived, ripped off or otherwise imitated from Pagan religion.
Pointing to Virgin and Child pictures, for example, which emerged AFTER the Roman Catholic Church amalgamated pagan beliefs into Christiandom does not make the case that the Father -Son - Holy Spirit as God is NOT stated in Scripture.
Alexander Hislop's book "The Two Babylons" was a classic analysis of the permeation of pagan practices into the Catholic Church to make the Gospel palatable to the masses of the Roman Empire.
Opportunists like yourself seek to exploit that historical fact with a view to twisting the very Scriptures themselves which predated the formation of the RCC.
Constantine the Emperor did not insert Isaiah 9:6 into the Hebrew Bible. Nor did he write the 14th chapter of the Gospel of John.
You're trying to exploit the history to push your Arian teaching.
What quotations you refer to I have yet to see.
I can produce plenty of quotations too.
But the most important quotations are in the Scriptures themselves. And there the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipthen i suggest you read chapter two of Hislops book, The two Babylons, entitled Trinity in Unity
Robbie, I admire your sophisticated writing vocabulary. You have an impressive delivery.
However, your well worded diatribes are wrong.
In what way are they wrong? They are wrong in that the belief that God is Father - Son - Holy Spirit was copied, derived, ripped off or otherwise imitated from Pagan religion.
Pointing to Virgin and Child pict ...[text shortened]... Scriptures themselves. And there the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.
http://ldolphin.org/PDFs/The_Two_Babylons-Alexander_Hislop.pdf
Originally posted by galveston75Galveston,
Christmas has nothing to do with Christianity and is full of pagainistic traditions that are not bible based.
The bible makes it clear that a Christian is to be "no part of the world" and to not defile ones bible based beliefs with untruths.
Is Robbie Carrobie your Jehovah's Witness friend or am I thinking of someone else ?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt will take some time for me to examine these quotes which I think you said I had not the decency to examine (?).
Of Interest to those who are concerned with reality
The ante-Nicene Fathers were acknowledged to have been leading religious teachers in the early centuries after Christ’s birth. What they taught is of interest.
Justin Martyr, who died about 165 C.E., called the prehuman Jesus a created angel who is “other than the God who made all things.” He ...[text shortened]... ings as to their essence,” and that “compared with the Father, [the Son] is a very small light.”