Which religion is the true religion? (gospel, Jesus Christ, Judaism, spirit)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, whether it is these days or not, it certainly wasn't prior to 325 A.D. If you can find any evidence otherwise, I'd be interested in seeing it. And when I say, "it," I mean evidence that in the years prior to the Council at Nicaea, Christians believed in a three-in-one God, a single substance that was somehow three persons. Show me any apostolic writings that taught a thing.
Tertullian wrote about the Trinity around 200 AD. Origen accepted the concept but struggled with some of the logical conclusions the idea of the trinity produced.
Justin Martyr (ca 150 AD) mentioned the father, son and holy ghost, but 1) we do not know if he was referring to the trinty, he could have been talking about 3 separate beings, and 2) we can not be sure if this was an addition or 'correction' from a later copyist.
Well, whether it is these days or not, it certainly wasn't prior to 325 A.D. If you can find any evidence otherwise, I'd be interested in seeing it. And when I say, "it," I mean evidence that in the years prior to the Council at Nicaea, Christians believed in a three-in-one God, a single substance that was somehow three persons. Show me any apostolic writings that taught a thing.
do we have to talk about things past "died, woke up, and flew for our sins"? or "born sinners" or "gayness is evil"?
does it matter what words were used? does it matter what langue or when? who would defend those notion?
why don't religions just change the words to correct themselves. Religions seem like they are driving down the road and when they realize they are going the wrong way they justify it by saying "well I was told to go this way."
That doesn't surprise me, but what exactly did He write?
Quote:
Origen accepted the concept but struggled with some of the logical conclusions the idea of the trinity produced.
Do you want to be a little more specific? Like by quoting him, maybe?
Quote:
Justin Martyr (ca 150 AD) mentioned the father, son and holy ghost, but 1) we do not know if he was referring to the trinty, he could have been talking about 3 separate beings, and 2) we can not be sure if this was an addition or 'correction' from a later copyist.
Well, then that's a moot point. I'd say most Christians believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and recognize that they are "one" in some way. It's the way in which the Trinity doctrine says they are "one" I find to be problematic.
Tertullian is the kind of person that some people would disagree with anyway. So why should they regard his opinion just because he was around back then? There were differing views in the early days of Christianity, just like today.
Tertullian is the kind of person that some people would disagree with anyway. So why should they regard his opinion just because he was around back then? There were differing views in the early days of Christianity, just like today.
I think some people toss these people at each other because they don't know how to form a belief based on observations. or they don't want too. "atheist/theist perspective" is more important than 'content" I guess.
The problem with some historians debating religions is that when we move onto describing how the universe works they are not equipped. again, not a problem, but like the bible folks, they tend to try and force a "deny all "they deem "god-ish" on the rest the rest of us.
its really simple. lay out what one knows, form a belief and move on. it doesn't matter what guys said about things that do not match observations 1500 years ago. any more than person 15000 years ago telling me the earth is flat.
"died, woke up, and flew away for our sins" just doesn't match any observations we have today. It doesn't matter who said it in 300 ad in greece or 13 ad in rome. its wrong in any langue at any time.
the trinity, "mind, body, spirit" is totally logical. it works. there in one person(body), with one brain (mind) and a "spirit" (how they feel). its really no big deal. titration writing about it is irrelevant. we can say the same for some volumes of the universe. There is a physical universe (body), it is processing information (processor), there is a spirit (subjective experiences of the processor). its flat simple.
the trinity being valid for discussion doesn't make "died, woke up, flew away for our sins" any more true. It does tell me about the person that would say "trinity works" so "woke up and flew away is true".
I will point out that the second link is probably edited by the more fanatical of Christians so some of the claims may need to be verified.
Google will help if you wish to investigate further.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
Well, then that's a moot point. I'd say most Christians believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and recognize that they are "one" in some way. It's the way in which the Trinity doctrine says they are "one" I find to be problematic.
Tertullian is the kind of person that some people would disagree with anyway. So why should they regard his opinion just because he was around back then? There were differing views in the early days of Christianity, just like today.
Because we know there where differing views in the early days of Christianity precisely because we do NOT disregard his, or any other early Christian's opinion.
That is how history is done. What do you want us to do, ignore history and just make things up?
Because we know there where differing views in the early days of Christianity precisely because we do NOT disregard his, or any other early Christian's opinion.
That is how history is done. What do you want us to do, ignore history and just make things up?
absolutely not. but we are talking about religions magical claims, not what happened historically.
there are differences today in christianity, there were differences back then in christianity, and there was no christianity before 2000 years ago.
does it change the fact that there is no died, woke up, and flew away for our sins? Does it change that fact that we should help the less fortunate in our ranks? Does it change the fact that gayness is biological?
one doesn't need a history lesson, about this type stuff anyway, to form a solid belief system.
One of the biggest flaws in the human species is the ease at which this species can be sweet talked, over whelmed or subverted by other hard wired tendencies, which are often times described as right of reason, is indeed worrisome.
When an entire country can be convinced that carrying out genocide is acceptable, that should be a clear indicator of how easily people can be indoctrinated into following the wrong path.
A few blatant examples of what I'm taking about.
Jim Jones who was instrumental in having 913 people commit suicide.
Claiming that your religion and your god is the one truth is another example.
Last edited by Matadora; 12-09-2018 at 12:31 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
