Was Jesus God?

[Wildgraywolf]

Justice2006:

Mr. Wildgraywolf,

No, Islam is not saying that Trinity means 1+1+1=3
Nor any knowledgeable Muslim will say this because the Koran is telling us do not say God is one of the Three. Because the Koran is refuting what those AnNasaara (Nazarites) used to say at the time of Koranic Revelation.

Now let me clarify the baselessness of your “mathematical logic”.

Lets assume:

The Father=A

The Son= B
The Holy Spirit=C

to say A+B+C=3, all three entities must be equal to one, mathematically/physically. Otherwise the total sum of these entities cannot be three.

In other words, mathematically the equation must be:

The Father=The Son=The Holy Spirit
i.e., A=B=C

and it must be:

A=B, A=C, B=A, B=C, C=A and C=B

You may say, isn’t A=B and B=A is samething? I would say not necessarily. So you must agree with the following premise in order to prove 1+1+1=3 wrong:

A <=> B <=>C

So all these equations ( i.e., A=B, A=C, B=A, B=C, C=A and C=B ) must be assumed true, in order to prove 1+1+1=3 wrong.

Since you don’t believe that A=B, A=C, B=A, B=C, C=A, as such you cannot say that whoever say 1+1+1=3 is wrong. As such you have no right to blame whoever say 1+1+1=3. Because it is you who first coined the idea of Trinity, that led people to think whether 1+1+1=3.

Now. lets see your next proposed theory:

Here, to prove 111=1, you have to agree with these mathematical/physical premise:

A=B, A=C, B=A, B=C, C=A and C=B

Can you agree with all these premises?
If you say yes, then, do you realise what you are actually saying? You are saying:

The Father (A) =The Son (B) =The Holy Spirit (C)

It means:

The Father (A) =The Son (B)
The Father (A)=The Holy Spirit (C)
The Son (B)=The Father (A)
The Son (B) =The Holy Spirit (C)
The Holy Spirit (C)=The Father (A)
The Holy Spirit (C)=The Son (B)

Can you really say all these, as per your ancient Catholic Trinity dogma? [Keep in mind the ancient *Heresies

] Ofcourse you cannot agree with the above uquations because:

Holy Father is not **The Son **neither The Son is Holy Spirit nor the Holy Spirit is The Father

Thus you have no mathematical/physical base/premise at all to use Math…

So your logic to use the formula: 111=1, is failed. Because in order to use Math, you have to agree with all the fundamantals/premises of Math on which you are erecting/wants to erect the building of your Trinity dogma.

.Yeah, you really did miss the point… oh well…

Let’s simplify, shall we? G=1, O=1, D=1. Therefore (GOD)=1. Or try this (at home even)… Buy a camera and take three pictures of your head… Take one showing your smiling face, one showing your profile and one showing the back of your head. Look! The result is seperate, pictures of your one head, correct? But are these pictures really seperate? No, they aren’t they are simply three different views of your one head. Different characteristics in each view of your one head. However imperfect or silly that example is; it shows how three seemingly seperate and distict things are actually in the same.

 

[LilyM]

Justice2006:

The Father=A
The Son= B
The Holy Spirit=C

It means:

The Father (A) =The Son (B)
The Father (A)=The Holy Spirit (C)
The Son (B)=The Father (A)
The Son (B) =The Holy Spirit (C)
The Holy Spirit (C)=The Father (A)
The Holy Spirit (C)=The Son (B)[/INDENT]

Can you really say all these, as per your ancient Catholic Trinity dogma? [Keep in mind the ancient *Heresies

] Ofcourse you cannot agree with the above uquations because:

Holy Father is not **The Son ** neither The Son is Holy Spirit nor the Holy Spirit is The Father

Thus you have no mathematical/physical base/premise at all to use Math…

So your logic to use the formula: 111=1, is failed. Because in order to use Math, you have to agree with all the fundamantals/premises of Math on which you are erecting/wants to erect the building of your Trinity dogma.

Justice - if you’ve been paying any attention you must know that God the Father, Jesus Christ His son and the Holy Spirit, the three persons of the Trinity, are not and never have been literally and exactly the same. Neither are they completely interchangeable. Yet you persist in this false restatement of our beliefs. Your mathematical analogy is thus seriously flawed right from its start.

Give it up Justice. As I’ve said in rightly in another post, which you’ve not bothered to respond to, any belief in any God at all is implausible or at least superfluous to and ridiculous by human logical standards. Belief in your Allah and your Mohammed his prophet is no more sensible than belief in our God or Christ His son or belief in the Hindu pantheon.

Just because your Koran tells you he neither begets nor is begotten you believe it. Just because your Koran tells you He made Mohammed His prophet you believe it. Just because your religion teaches that the Bible has been deliberately corrupted you believe it. Yet you deride our beliefs as if they’re not at least just as possible and plausible as yours, as has been shown time and time and time again. What exactly are you trying to achieve by staying here?

 

[JimG]

Before you try to argue against the idea of the Trinity, you should at least state the concept correctly.

Father, Son, and Spirit are distinct persons, not distinct entities. A person is not a separate thing from the entity whose personhood is expressed.

God’s one divine nature is expressed in three persons, not three entities. Three persons, not three separate essences. Three persons, not three beings, not three natures.

One being, one essence, one nature, which is expressed in three persons.

You ought to spend some time trying to familiarize yourself with the concept and the underlying philosophy before starting to just attack it

 

[Ignatius]

Justice2006:

To Trinity Dogma Holders:.

Peace be with you.

Forgive me, but you misunderstand the Trinity. There is but one God. The Trinity is simply a discussion of the nature of Almighty God.

 

[Philthy]

JimG:

Before you try to argue against the idea of the Trinity, you should at least state the concept correctly.

…
You ought to spend some time trying to familiarize yourself with the concept and the underlying philosophy before starting to just attack it

You are assuming he is intending to arrive at Truth. If he is, you are correct. However if he has placed an agenda, bias or perceived need above the Truth then his manner of disingenous attacks, though ultimately doomed to fail, is as sensable as any other.

Probably the most effective means of refuting the pseudo-Sola Scriptura attack that he is proffering is to simply re-emphasize that it is not AN interpretation of the Bible per se that constitutes our faith. Rather it is a living faith, guided by the Holy Spirit, proteced in the Church. Its as simple as this: Does the catechism of our Church teach that Jesus is divine? Yes it does, and very clearly. Then the party is over. The rest of the debate he should take to a Protestant forum where, at least, his method will have some validity and perhaps even be appreciated. Here, it is pointless.

 

[Justice2006]

Philthy:

Does the catechism of our Church teach that Jesus is divine? Yes it does, and very clearly. Then the party is over. The rest of the debate he should take to a Protestant forum where, at least, his method will have some validity and perhaps even be appreciated. Here, it is pointless.

Mr. Philthy,

You should be more concerned about whether the idea of Trinity has firm roots even in the unreliable texts of the various versions of the Bibles (I am not talking about the *pick and choose * English or other language translations…I am talking about those numerous Greek manuscripts…of whom no two are identical).
The so-called verse about Trinity 1 John 5:7 is thrown out by your Catholic Church and many other Bibles as an interpolation Your latest Catholic official Bible–**The New Americna Bible ** refused to keep it. In the older **Douay Rheims Bible ** this verse was there.

Just check this verse out 1** John 5:7** (Verse 7 of Chapter 5 of First Epistle of John) in **Douay Rheims ** and New American Bibles.

Here are the links for your convenience:

Douay Rheims Bible: drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=69&ch=5&l=7&f=s#x

The New American Bible:usccb.org/nab/bible/1john/1john5.htm

---

 

[Justice2006]

Wildgraywolf:

Yeah, you really did miss the point… oh well…

Let’s simplify, shall we? G=1, O=1, D=1. Therefore (GOD)=1.

LOL
You must be a joker.
How about the word “Wildgraywolf”? Are then 12 persons in ONE, in one personality of yours?

The name of God is Elohim too in the OT. So God has Six persons then? How abpout ELOI? Remember…we are told that when Jesus was on the cross and cried out to his God, he said “ELOI, ELOI why has thou forsaken me?” So if ELOI is God’s name then are there 4 persons in ONE. (We don’t know how many letters are in Aramaic word of ELOI).

Now all this is no more than a joke.

But you should ask, why you want to restrict/limit only Three forms of your God? Why not **inifinite forms ** thus accept HIndu Pantheistic view? Hindus seem more reasonable than you. Why should a HIndu reject infinite forms of his Infinite God and accept mere three forms whcih are not even equal. (i.e, The Father is not equal to The Son neither the The Son is equal to the Holy Ghost nor the Holy Ghost is equal to the Father…These are always three different mental pictures/persons as per your belief, No?).

Lets say there are three triplets-- A, B and C. If the Person A commit a murder, can you hang the Person B or C for the crime of Person A? Ofcourse not. Why not? You would say: Person A is a different person though he looked-like Person B and C. So, what makes Person A different than B and C? You will say: All three have different personalities, existence. Thus you cannot punish Person B or C for Person A’s crime.

See, even this analogy of triplets fails. Why don’t you just get rid of all these foolish ideas of God becoming a man by adopting what Torah/Judaic traditions say?: God is not a man. God is Eternal. He is immortal and Invisible. Then you don’t have to break your head in “explaining” your trinity which has not understood in last 2000 years because it is not a fact. It is an idea of some people’s mind and not of God.

Wildgraywolf:

Or try this (at home even)… Buy a camera and take three pictures of your head… Take one showing your smiling face, one showing your profile and one showing the back of your head. Look! The result is seperate, pictures of your one head, correct? But are these pictures really seperate? No, they aren’t they are simply three different views of your one head. Different characteristics in each view of your one head. However imperfect or silly that example is; it shows how three seemingly seperate and distict things are actually in the same.

Well If I take the three pictures of your head from TOP, SIDE and ELEVATION, though all three views are of your head as long as I see only in pictures and not in real. When I see you in-person and hang you while just looking at one view, say ELEVATION, and if you die then what happens? The rest two REAL views (TOP and SIDE) of yours too die simultaneously because what I saw your ELEVATION area of your head was inseperable part of your head’s two other views (TOP and SIDE).

So, if you use this analogy, then if Jesus who is always 2nd person in your Trinity dogma, indeed die on the Cross then the rest tow “persons” of the Trinity (The Father and the Holy Ghost) must die because according to your premise all three are ONE, though distinct persons.

Did you realise the foolishness of your picture analogy?
or
you want to try it by killing yourself from one view to see if other two views of your head die or not ?

.

 

[exoflare]

Justice, I don’t even know why you bother coming here. You’re only wasting everybody’s time.

Again, I can think of no clearer way to say it. The Muslim logic behind the Trinity is the same as trying to say that a triangle having three different sides must mean each side is its own triangle.

Only MUSLIMS will claim that “person” = “God”. They’re only projecting their own novel doctrines like this onto us to refute, because they can’t wrap their heads around any other conclusion but that each “person” of the Trinity must be its own separate God.

 

[Justice2006]

exoflare:

Justice, I don’t even know why you bother coming here. You’re only wasting everybody’s time.

Again, I can think of no clearer way to say it. The Muslim logic behind the Trinity is the same as trying to say that a triangle having three different sides must mean each side is its own triangle.

Only MUSLIMS will claim that “person” = “God”. They’re only projecting their own novel doctrines like this onto us to refute, because they can’t wrap their heads around any other conclusion but that each “person” of the Trinity must be its own separate God.

O.K let me just take you away for a while from the dilemma of your Trinity.

Contemplate on these verses:

Mark 2: 13-20
The New american Bible
**Once again he [Jesus] went out along the sea. All the crowd came to him and he taught them. As he passed by,he saw Levi, son of Alphaeus, sitting at the customs post. He said to him, “Follow me.” And he got up and followed him.

While he was at table in his house, many tax collectors and sinners sat with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many who followed him. Some scribes who were Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors and said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” Jesus heard this and said to them (that), “Those who are well do not need a physician, but the sick do. I did not come to call the righteous but sinners.” The disciples of John and of the Pharisees were accustomed to fast. People came to him and objected, “Why do the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?” Jesus answered them, “Can the wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them they cannot fast. But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast on that day.” **

---

 

[exoflare]

Justice2006:

O.K let me just take you away for a while from the dilemma of your Trinity.

Contemplate on these verses:

Mark 2: 13-20
The New american Bible
**Once again he [Jesus] went out along the sea. All the crowd came to him and he taught them. As he passed by,he saw Levi, son of Alphaeus, sitting at the customs post. He said to him, “Follow me.” And he got up and followed him.

While he was at table in his house, many tax collectors and sinners sat with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many who followed him.** Some scribes who were Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors and said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” Jesus heard this and said to them (that), “Those who are well do not need a physician, but the sick do. I did not come to call the righteous but sinners.” The disciples of John and of the Pharisees were accustomed to fast. People came to him and objected, “Why do the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?” Jesus answered them, “Can the wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them they cannot fast. But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast on that day.” - - - - -

I don’t know what your point is copy-pasting huge chunks of text again, but I really don’t care either. Try to stick to the same subject for at least two consecutive posts maybe?

 

[murtad]

Justice2006:

The name of God is Elohim too in the OT. So God has Six persons then? How abpout ELOI? Remember…we are told that when Jesus was on the cross and cried out to his God, he said “ELOI, ELOI why has thou forsaken me?” So if ELOI is God’s name then are there 4 persons in ONE. (We don’t know how many letters are in Aramaic word of ELOI).

As Hebrew language is a consonantal language, the vowels are immaterial as different dialects of Hebrew pronounce Elohim differently. Please do not deliberately change the topic as language is immaterial here.

Justice2006:

But you should ask, why you want to restrict/limit only Three forms of your God? Why not **inifinite forms ** thus accept HIndu Pantheistic view? Hindus seem more reasonable than you. Why should a HIndu reject infinite forms of his Infinite God and accept mere three forms whcih are not even equal. (i.e, The Father is not equal to The Son neither the The Son is equal to the Holy Ghost nor the Holy Ghost is equal to the Father…These are always three different mental pictures/persons as per your belief, No?).

Infinite forms is paganism. Both Islamism and Hinduism is pure paganism for both believe God can be represented in infinite number of forms, even as pigs and dogs! Every year there are new Hindu gods appearing, for example, Hare Krishna

Christians are not pagans and we believe there is only one God who exists eternally as three co-equal yet distinct persons, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, each fully God. This is Trinity and it is very simple concept.

Father represents creationist person in God, while the Son of God represents the judge person in God, and the Holy Spirit represents comforter person in God.

Christians on this forum when witnessing to a Muslim may use Qur’an to point out to Muslims the Trinity in the Muslim Holy Book.

In the first Chapter, Al-Fatiha, reads:

In the name of Allah, Al-Rahman, Al-Rahim

Allah is the Father, the first person of Trinity
Al-Rahman is the Son of God, the second person in Trinity
Al-Rahim is the Holy Spirit, the third person in Trinity

Our Lord Jesus is Al-Rahman, the Word of God is fully God.

In the first Chapter, the Quran confirms the Trinity and this proves God is three co-equal yet distinct persons, Father, Son and Spirit. The Son of God, our Lord Jesus is fully God according to Quran.

Of course, Quran is not a reliable book as it is full of contradictions. Sometimes it calls Jesus eternal God, other times it condemns Christians for taking Jesus and Mary as God. This is why I renounced Islam and embraced the Christian Catholic faith as I want a logical religion.

The Bible and the Cathecism of the Catholic Church are much more realiable documents without contradictions.

 

[pro_universal]

In the name of Allah, Al-Rahman, Al-Rahim

Allah is the Father, the first person of Trinity
Al-Rahman is the Son of God, the second person in Trinity
Al-Rahim is the Holy Spirit, the third person in Trinity

I’m reading this thinking “he can’t be referring to the arabic that Muslims speak before prayer or reciting the Koran, can he?”

Because if you were, this would just be silly. Maybe you think that by making muslims laugh you will convert them. I don’t know, but this is just plain wacky.

It’s like saying christianity has a holy duet, because after all, "God is the Alpha and the Omega…

Alpha=dad
Omega=mom"

As a Catholic, I’m tired of seeing my fellows display so much blindness. The Koran should be required reading for anyone who wants to evangelize Muslims, lest we embarrass ourselves like this.

 

[Justice2006]

murtad:

In the first Chapter, the Quran confirms the Trinity and this proves God is three co-equal yet distinct persons, Father, Son and Spirit. The Son of God, our Lord Jesus is fully God according to Quran.

Of course, Quran is not a reliable book as it is full of contradictions. Sometimes it calls Jesus eternal God, other times it condemns Christians for taking Jesus and Mary as God. This is why I renounced Islam and embraced the Christian Catholic faith as I want a logical religion.

The Bible and the Cathecism of the Catholic Church are much more realiable documents without contradictions.

LOL

Mr. murtad, the above post of yours is a BIG JOKE. I was laughing as I read it.

This shows how ignorant you are as far your knowledge of Islam is concerned. It means you never was a Muslim nor you have basic knowledge of Islam…

Even if I assume that you was a Muslim for the sake of argument, then it is good for Islam and Muslims that you left it because your stay in Islam as a Muslim is meaningless to the muslims.

Now that you have found a “logical religion”–Christianity, then why you are looking back again and want to use the Koranic verses to prove the so-called Trinity dogma? Can’t you just stick to your Bible/church views and prove by using 1 John 5:7 from the New American Bible?

Murtad, Just check this verse -1 John 5:7 in the New American Bible and compare it in the Douay Rheims Bible.

Again…I am laughing how far a person can in his mindlessness while qouting/interpreting the Koran. LOL

.

 

[joshua_b]

If you ask me, what is mindless is putting faith in a book such as the Quaran, which is obviously FULL of false information. My favorite “truth” of the Quaran is the proclamation that the Catholic concept of Mary is that of a goddess. If a book can’t even get correct something that has been matter of obvious public record for 2000 years, then that leads me to believe that maybe I shouldn’t pay too much attention to what it has to say. Insistently believing in something that is so obviously and verifiably incorrect on a merely FACTUAL basis is what is truly laughable.

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

This thread is now closed.

Rachel