The Truth about Trinity!!!

[thewayoftruth1]

In this article about trinity Mr.Grigsby stated that trinity is "the
fundamental element of the true Christian faith and this belief is
founded on both Old and New Covenant writings from Genesis to
Revelation"

actually this is not true at all, firstly, because this idea (known
also as Athanasian Creed) was founded almost three centuries after
Jesus and was adopted by the council of Nicea in 325 A.D. after a
great debate the majority accepted Jesus to be a god! so we can say
that Jesus was the only god chosen democratically! and that means that
all those who had died before the year 325 were not true Christians,

secondly, it is obvious that this is not the teaching of Jesus or any
other prophet of GOD, because the same very word trinity is not found
in any bible old or new, even all the changing that have been taking
place in all the bibles, not a single one of them does mention the
word trinity or triune God even the word bible itself is not in any
bible!
the Trinitarians believe that the father, the son and the holy ghost
are equals and none is greater or less than another.

But the bibles show us otherwise, that Jesus is not equal to the holy
ghost where the blasphemy against Jesus can be forgiven but against
the holy ghost cannot be forgiven here or in the hereafter (Matthew
12.32).

Not only that but also Jesus said it plainly "the Father is greater
than I " (John 14.28), Jesus made it clear that GOD sent him (John
6.44&7.28&8.18) and Jesus said "nor is he who is sent greater than he
who sent him. (John 13.16)

all Muslims, Jews and Christians believe that God is All Powerful, and
the bibles show us that Jesus is not, Jesus himself said "I can do
nothing on my own authority (John 5.30), Jesus was unable to do any
miracle in his hometown (Mark 6.5-6) when Jesus tried to heal a blind
man, the man was not healed after the first attempt and Jesus had to
try a second time (Mark 8.22-26) so Jesus had limitations in his power
like any other human so he can not be GOD the All powerful, besides
Jesus could not control his own power he lost it once when a woman
touched him and Jesus did not know who touched him and he had to ask
his disciples who became angry at him (Mark 5.27-32) this story shows
that Jesus did not know the future nor did he know the past or the
present plus he has no control over his power.

we all know that God is All Knowing, but the bibles show us that Jesus
is not, Jesus confessed that he did not know the time of the hour, but
only GOD knows (Matthew 24.36) so he can not be equal to God in
knowledge, more than that the bibles show that Jesus did not even know
what any farmer or a common man knows, in the story about the fig tree
mentioned in (Mark 11.12-25) where it says Jesus was hungry (of course
we can not imagine a hungry god! or God is in need for food and water
then will have to answer the call of nature!) and when Jesus reached
it he found nothing but leaves (notice that Jesus was not all Seeing
where God is) Jesus had to come close to see, but he found nothing
because it was not the season for figs" so Jesus was ignorant of the
season, whereas any man who lived all his life in a country will
surely know what is in season and what is not! and won't blame a tree
for having no fruits out of season, the story continues that Jesus
cursed the tree! and it withered! Some Christians say that the whole
story is a metaphor about the Jews who rejected him, of course that
does not make sense because of the context and St. Mark was clear when
he said Jesus was hungry, so Jesus was thinking about food not Jews,
and if it was a metaphor it means Jesus came in the wrong time and he
is the one to blame then, another Christians say that story proves
that Jesus is God because the tree was withered, now we should ask, if
we imagine a hungry god why he did not command the tree to give fruits
out of season and eat and let his disciples eat too? and why God would
curse a good tree that obeys his command? and if he cursed the tree
because of his ignorance would the power of God follows his ignorance,
no, God is All Wise and there is wisdom behind everything He does,
whether we understand it or not.

St. Luke tells us that Jesus increased in wisdom (Luke 2.52), and
Jesus learned obedience (Hebrews 5.8) but God's knowledge is always
perfect and God does not learn new things.

the bibles tell us that man is tempted when he follows his lust and
enticed (James 1.14), but Jesus was in all points tempted by the devil
(Hebrews 4.15)
and the bibles say that GOD cannot be tempted (James 1.13), the story
if temptation is mentioned in Matthew 4.1-11 where the devil asked
Jesus to worship him and the devil would make him a king! can we
imagine that the devil would dare to say such a blasphemy to his
creator? God is the King of the universe, to God belong the dominion
of the Heavens and the Earth, all glory be to God the only One who
deserves to be worshipped, loved and feared. everything is nothing but
a servant to the Most High, some are obedient servants and some are
disobedient, we Muslims believe that Jesus is one of the most
righteous servants of God, it is mentioned several times in the bibles
that Jesus is not God but God's servant (Acts 3.26& 4.27& 4.30)
that what Jesus taught his disciples and Peter declared that when he
said "the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob, the God of our
fathers, glorified his servant Jesus" (Acts 3.13).
May Allah join us with His pious servants.

[Brock]

On Mar 3, 1:44 pm, thewayoftruth1 <bicbess2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> secondly, it is obvious that this is not the teaching of Jesus or any
> other prophet of GOD, because the same very word trinity is not found
> in any bible old or new,

The reference to the specific word ("trinity") being present or not
present does not support your premise. For example, the government
outlined by the US Constitution[1] is said to be an example of
government by "checks and balances", though the phrase "checks and
balances" does not explicitly appear in the text of the Constitution
itself.

Regards,

Brock

[1] http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

[Joe]

The truth about the Trinity, from Scripture:

Matthew 3:16 And Jesus being baptized, forthwith came out of the
water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit
of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him. 17 And behold a
voice from heaven saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well
pleased.

1 John 5:7 And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the
Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.

On Mar 3, 1:44 pm, thewayoftruth1 <bicbess2...@gmail.com> wrote:

[LiamToo]

On Mar 3, 12:44�pm, thewayoftruth1 <bicbess2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In this article about trinity �Mr.Grigsby stated that trinity is "the
> fundamental element of the true Christian faith and this belief is
> founded on both Old and New Covenant writings from Genesis to
> Revelation"
>
> actually this is not true at all, firstly, because this idea (known
> also as Athanasian Creed) was founded almost three centuries after
> Jesus and was adopted by the council of Nicea in 325 A.D. after a
> great debate the majority accepted Jesus to be a god! so we can say
> that Jesus was the only god chosen democratically! and that means that
> all those who had died before the year 325 were not true Christians,

Wrong! Long before the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea was convened
in 325 to enact the "Nicene Creed" and the existence of the Athanasian
creed in the 4th century, the concept of the trinity has been in use
as follows:

Theophilus of Antioch: "It is the attribute of God, of the most high
and almighty and of the living God, not only to be everywhere, but
also to see and hear all; for he can in no way be contained in a
place. . . . The three days before the luminaries were created are
types of the Trinity: God, his Word, and his Wisdom" (To Autolycus
2:15 [A.D. 181]).

Tertullian: "We do indeed believe that there is only one God, but we
believe that under this dispensation, or, as we say, oikonomia, there
is also a Son of this one only God, his Word, who proceeded from him
and through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was
made. . . . We believe he was sent down by the Father, in accord with
his own promise, the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the
faith of those who believe in the Father and the Son, and in the Holy
Spirit. . . . This rule of faith has been present since the beginning
of the gospel, before even the earlier heretics" (Against Praxeas 2
[A.D. 216]).

"And at the same time the mystery of the oikonomia is safeguarded, for
the unity is distributed in a Trinity. Placed in order, the three are
the Father, Son, and Spirit. They are three, however, not in
condition, but in degree; not in being, but in form; not in power, but
in kind; of one being, however, and one condition and one power,
because he is one God of whom degrees and forms and kinds are taken
into account in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Spirit" (ibid.).

[Joe]

Excellent research, Liam. Thank you!

[LiamToo]

On Mar 4, 10:32�am, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Excellent research, Liam. �Thank you!

You're welcome Joe. I like to read historical documents, which are of
course part of our tradition.

[Keith MacNevins]

You ought to know that government checks are too prevalent and the economy is way out of balance.

[Scott Richard Campbell A Seeker of the God Machine]

The Spirit will incarnate through technointellogenesis into the Second
Coming of Jesus, combining the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,
and bring the Kingdom of God to Earth.

[LiamToo]

On Mar 4, 1:09 pm, Scott Richard Campbell A Seeker of the God

Machine <drgohappy2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The Spirit will incarnate through technointellogenesis into the Second
> Coming of Jesus, combining the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,
> and bring the Kingdom of God to Earth.

Hey Scott, you're drawing dead on this technointellogenesis thing. AI
exists like in Deep Blue or PokerstarsBot but a "Strong AI" or the
"Complete AI" needs to exist first as in Data of Enterprise before
your technotingy will succeed.

[Scott Richard Campbell A Seeker of the God Machine]

Patience is a virtue.

[LiamToo]

On Mar 4, 1:36 pm, Scott Richard Campbell A Seeker of the God
Machine <drgohappy2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Patience is a virtue.

Tight aggressive as in patience is a good virtue to have in poker, but
the loose aggressive system is better when played selectively. I'll
stay with reality.

[checkers]

chx
good piece of work LiamToo, i will save it.

[Brock Organ]

On Mar 4, 2008, at 12:27 PM, Keith MacNevins wrote:

> You ought to know that government checks are too prevalent and the
> economy is way out of balance.

A pithy summary of Montesquieu[1].

Regards,

Brock

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montesquieu

[Joe]

If only Protestants in general would take the time to read, they could
lose a lot of their myths, e.g. "The Catholic Church was invented ca.
313 A.D."

[Keith MacNevins]

I do not think tchnointellogenesis is in the Bible. My concordance just has Genesis.

[Scott Richard Campbell A Seeker of the God Machine]

Many people interpret the Bible metaphorically, not literally, they
have to, to adapt it to modern times, and the term
TechnoIntelloGenesis is the genesis of intelligence through
technology.

If there is a TechnoBeing that can do anything Jesus could do and
more, and had Christian compatible values and ethics, and offered
immortality in heaven worlds, are you going to reject it, Keith?

> --
> Ambassador From Hell
> Keith A. MacNevins
> Elk Grove Village, IL USA
> copyright- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Keith MacNevins]

What if I wanna go on a data but the machine is not feeling in the modem?

[coonal...@yahoo.com]

FORGET ABOUT MARK -- HE'S GONE

On Mar 3, 11:44 pm, thewayoftruth1 <bicbess2...@gmail.com> wrote:

* In this article about trinity  Mr.Grigsby stated that trinity is
"the
* fundamental element of the true Christian faith and this belief is
* founded on both Old and New Covenant writings from Genesis to
* Revelation"
*
* actually this is not true at all, firstly, because this idea (known
* also as Athanasian Creed) was founded almost three centuries after
* Jesus and was adopted by the council of Nicea in 325 A.D. after a
* great debate the majority accepted Jesus to be a god! so we can say
* that Jesus was the only god chosen democratically! and that means
that
* all those who had died before the year 325 were not true Christians,

The trinity is considered the fundamental tenet of Christian faith by
most mainstream Christians. Dissenting Christians almost everywhere
would merely be hounded down by the Church.

Muhammad did point out in Surah 5 of the Quran that this doctrine is
not due to Jesus himself. I must thank the author of the quoted text
for pointing out a fact of history that not many people appreciate.
The Nicene Creed is in fact of no interest or importance except to
people who want to learn Latin.

* all Muslims, Jews and Christians believe that God is All Powerful,
and
* the bibles show us that Jesus is not, Jesus himself said "I can do
* nothing on my own authority (John 5.30), Jesus was unable to do any
* miracle in his hometown (Mark 6.5-6) when Jesus tried to heal a
blind
* man, the man was not healed after the first attempt and Jesus had to
* try a second time (Mark 8.22-26) so Jesus had limitations in his
power
* like any other human so he can not be GOD the All powerful, besides
* Jesus could not control his own power he lost it once when a woman
* touched him and Jesus did not know who touched him and he had to ask
* his disciples who became angry at him (Mark 5.27-32) this story
shows
* that Jesus did not know the future nor did he know the past or the
* present plus he has no control over his power.

This sounds like the punch line:-

"FORGET ABOUT MARK, HE'S GONE." This is what I told a Catholic girl
named Claudia about thirty years ago, while discussing our dumb
classmate in school. "But his sister Frieda's face is better looking
than yours or Rajen's." Rajen was a muddle-headed molecular biologist
who seemed to be more interested in Christianity than science, and who
kept telling me that he could not stand Frieda's face. Claudia herself
was just about to leave our country and settle down in Australia, and
by the end of it all her face was as red as the flag in the Marx
(Mark's) office. Mark's father, amusingly, was a church-going member
of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). Frieda and Mark were both
known as "Christopher's children", and Christopher's surname is too
complicated to remember.

What I told my favorite classmate Claudia in fact started with a comic
imitation of what I heard from Mark's cousin Manmohan. "Forget about
Mark, he's gone. The whole bloody lot have gone. Left their home and
gone. Of the whole bloody lot, the only one with any sense of decency
was Frieda, and the poor girl really had to take hell from churchgoers
everywhere."

"Gone where?" I asked Manmohan. "To the United States. The story goes
that they made use of Frieda's contacts in Boston, but there is
obvously something fishy about this since Frieda herself went abroad
as a student." My comic remarks about Mark were not so much what upset
Claudia, who was all too willing to damn him herself, as something I
said about another Catholic girl by the name of Marisa Martyres. Some
of my student friends and I hatched a plot to keep saying "Forget
about Mark, he's gone" whenever Marisa passed by.

But what do I have here in front of me? The Bible! The editor's notes
at the end say:

"THE NEW TESTAMENT

begins with the FOUR GOSPEL NARRATIVES, which give the life and
teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ from four different points of view.

MATTHEW wrote for the JEW and shows Christ as the MESSIAH and KING in
whom, as God's anointed, were fulfilled the prophecies of the Old
Testament and in whom, as His Royal Law-Giver, David's Kingdom is
arrived.

MARK addressed the ROMANS and exhibits Christ as the MIGHTY GOD, the
Man of divine power, the miracle-worker.

LUKE, whe wrote for the GREEKS, shows Christ as the SON OF MAN and
SERVANT OF GOD, the divine teacher and friend of the race.

JOHN especially dwells on the DIVINE NATURE of Christ as the Son of
God, who gives eternal life to every believer."

So it seems Mark was the mixed up culprit who called Jesus a "mighty
god", and once more we have to say "Forget about Mark, he's gone."

However, on going through Mark's gospel as carefully as my patience
permits, I find that, exactly as thewayoftruth1, Mark did not actually
call Jesus a "mighty god". The editor has merely put down a figment of
his own imagination into writing. But what we all do know is that all
of Jesus Christ's miracles were spurious reports by the gospel
writers. Therefore it is not surprising that Emperor Nero called
Christianity a "dangerous superstition." So we might as well keep
saying "Forget about Mark, he's gone. The whole bloody lot have gone."

Muhammad may not have been fully aware of this, but he did challenge
the myth of Christ's crucifiction and subsequent resurrection in the
Quran, Surah IV, v. 157:

"And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah Jesus son of Mary,
Allah's messenger -- they slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared
so among them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt
of thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a
conjecture; they slew him not for certain."

The rest of the quoted text goes on to show that the gospel writers,
humbugs that they were, did not outright challenge the tenets of both
monotheism and polytheism by electing Jesus Christ as the only god to
be worshipped. This is true enough.

[thewayoftruth1]

On 10 mar, 11:06, "coonalkada...@yahoo.com" <coonalkada...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> > May Allah join us with His pious servants.- Masquer le texte des messages précédents -
>
> - Afficher le texte des messages précédents -

good work coonalkadam07 THANK YOU

[Joe]

On whose authority do you challenge the very Gospel?

On Mar 10, 6:06 am, "coonalkada...@yahoo.com"

[coonal...@yahoo.com]

on my own auhority as a qualified scientist.

> > > May Allah join us with His pious servants.- Hide quoted text -

[Joe]

How are you qualified to challenge the veracity of Scripture?

On Mar 13, 8:44 am, "coonalkada...@yahoo.com"

[roger....@googlemail.com]

On 3 Mar, 18:44, thewayoftruth1 <bicbess2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...trinity ...

> actually this is not true at all, firstly, because this idea (known
> also as Athanasian Creed) was founded almost three centuries after

> Jesus and was adopted by the council ofNiceain 325 A.D. after a

> great debate the majority accepted Jesus to be a god! so we can say
> that Jesus was the only god chosen democratically! and that means that
> all those who had died before the year 325 were not true Christians,

The idea that Jesus was not considered divine by the early Christians
is a modern myth, based around the idea that denying his divinity and
praising him as a gifted man is a common idea today.

But the common ideas of ancient times were different. Jesus the man
was considered a disreputable figure, mocked by pagan (see for
instance Minucius Felix for an example). So the common error was to
claim that he was divine, but that his humanity was only in appearance
(docetism).

If we search for the words 'Jesus' and 'Christ' in the second century
fathers, we find them routinely asserting his divinity. I did this
for other reasons some time back, and you can find the quotes and
references here:

http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/incarnation.html

The complete works of all these writers are online , you see, at

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers2

and many other places.

The idea that the Council of Nicaea voted Jesus as god is a crude
mistake, widely circulated and sometimes repeated in good faith by
those unfamiliar with the council. But both sides at this council
were trinitarian. The debate was on whether the second person of the
Trinity was of the same substance (homoousios) as the first, or of
like substance.

Links to all the ancient sources on the council can be found here:

http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/nicaea.html

I hope that this helps. Whatever our opinions, don't we all want to
have the raw facts straight?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

[Joe]

On Mar 14, 9:08 am, "roger.pea...@googlemail.com"

That is a very good point, I knew that, but I hadn't heard it put into
words like that before. "Both sides were trinitarian." True! The
controversy of Arianism was actually a fairly subtle theological
point, which is why it was able to be so successful so early --- the
average Christian did not grasp the subtlety.

[roger....@googlemail.com]

On 14 Mar, 14:47, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 14, 9:08 am, "roger.pea...@googlemail.com"

> > The idea that the Council of Nicaea voted Jesus as god is a crude
> > mistake, widely circulated and sometimes repeated in good faith by
> > those unfamiliar with the council.  But both sides at this council
> > were trinitarian.  The debate was on whether the second person of the
> > Trinity was of the same substance (homoousios) as the first, or of
> > like substance.
>
> That is a very good point, I knew that, but I hadn't heard it put into
> words like that before.  "Both sides were trinitarian."  True!  The
> controversy of Arianism was actually a fairly subtle theological
> point, which is why it was able to be so successful so early --- the
> average Christian did not grasp the subtlety.

You're right. In fact I can't follow the theology myself. But it was
very popular in its day. St. Gregory of Nyssa complains that everyone
was talking about it, and that he couldn't even go and get a haircut
without getting a lecture on christology from the barber!

Arius in a letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia written in 321 calls Christ
"Fully God". Few people seem to know this, tho.

[coonal...@yahoo.com]

Your notes at tertullian.org only draw attention to further nonsense
written well after Christ's death, such as Polycarp's raising a bogey
about an antichrist.

On Mar 14, 6:08 pm, "roger.pea...@googlemail.com"

[Joe]

1. If God were not a Trinity, He could not be Love.

2. God is Love.

3. Therefore God is a Trinity.

On Mar 15, 10:01 am, "coonalkada...@yahoo.com"

[roger....@googlemail.com]

I'm very sorry, but I don't quite understand what you mean, or how
these vague comments relate to what I wrote.

On 15 Mar, 14:01, "coonalkada...@yahoo.com" <coonalkada...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> > Roger Pearse- Hide quoted text -

[coonal...@yahoo.com]

Please set your love triangle argument to music and send it to Trinity
College London. You are warned however that you could get martyred if
some other people in India hear it.

[Joe]

Wow, what an interesting idea! Thanks!

On Mar 17, 1:09 am, "coonalkada...@yahoo.com"