The Trinity

[_Roger Morrison]

Guys, yer irreverent relevance has me a-gast... Is there something in the wind??? Roger :-)

[_Jason Bourne]

Guys, yer irreverent relevance has me a-gast... Is there something in the wind??? Roger :-)

Tee hee!!!

[_JAK]

The doctrine of the trinity is pure flatulence.

As are other religious doctrines as a collection of contradictions.

JAK

[_JAK]

Or the Homer Simpson one: "Can God microwave a burrito so hot that not even he can eat it?"

The correct response is that omnipotence is able to do anything that is not intrinsically impossible (I.e. that you can make nonsense into sense by adding God to it).

Nehor’s statement is a declaration limiting his God to a higher power.

Hence, God notions are irrelevant. What is relevant is information.

Superstition, religious dogmas (really a part of superstition) are irrelevant to fact.

I recall the question earlier in my exchanges:

Can God make a rock bigger than he (note the sex) can throw?

A favorite response for the irrationally inclined (embraced by God myth believers is a resounding YES..

Why? Well, the answer is simple and simplistic. God can do anything he (more sexual reference) pleases. So if the question is: Can God do it?, the answer is always yes.

JAK

[_JAK]

I've been wrestling with accepting the Trinity lately. I think part of me doesn't want to accept it as a last hold out to hang onto the church (yes I know I'm confusing.. :P ) but are there any websites or books or anything that deal with the basic traditional trinity teachings that you would recommend?

Have any of you gone through this?

Out of curiosity, why do you equate your resistance to the doctrine of the Trinity with "hanging onto" the LDS church? There are non-LDS Christians who reject the Trinity for being the man-made horse crap that it is. Maybe you should consider those versions of Christianity. I'll try to find you some links.

TM79,

See these:

Early Christians Scroll down and link to websites.

[url=http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/why-is-belief-that-god-is-a-trinity-so-hard-to-understand-1.html] Is the Trinity Biblical?
[/url]

Trinity Doctrine Rejected


There are many others.

JAK

[_Mercury]

(I.e. that you can make nonsense into sense by adding God to it).

So God, in a sense is able to do the impossible but is not actually able to act on it?

[_The Nehor]

(I.e. that you can make nonsense into sense by adding God to it).

So God, in a sense is able to do the impossible but is not actually able to act on it?

I mistyped, I meant that you can't turn nonsense into sense by adding God into the equation. God is omnipotent but we can't throw 'God does' in front of nonsense and pretend we're talking about anything. You're asking God to both do and not do something at the same time. It would be like me telling someone that they don't have the ability to walk if they can't walk and not walk at the same time.

[_The Nehor]

Nehor’s statement is a declaration limiting his God to a higher power.

Hence, God notions are irrelevant. What is relevant is information.

Superstition, religious dogmas (really a part of superstition) are irrelevant to fact.

I recall the question earlier in my exchanges:

Can God make a rock bigger than he (note the sex) can throw?

A favorite response for the irrationally inclined (embraced by God myth believers is a resounding YES..

Why? Well, the answer is simple and simplistic. God can do anything he (more sexual reference) pleases. So if the question is: Can God do it?, the answer is always yes.

JAK

How does not doing the intrinsically impossible make God subject to any higher power? Reality doesn't have contradictions within it....it just does what he tells it to do. That someone can play with words and make up insanity is not a strong evidence against (or for) God.

[_msnobody]

I think one of the best ways of seeing the Trinity is delving into the names of God which IIUC are His character and attributes. Things such as Jehovah Jireh, Jehovah Tsidkenu, Jehovah Nissi, Kadosh, El Roi (in Genesis, marks landmarks and event, so cool)!, soter, etc.

Here is a link to a site with the names of God http://www.ldolphin.org/Names.html

JEHOVAH-TSIDKENU "The Lord Our Righteousness" Jer. 23:5, 6, 33:16. From "tsidek" (straight, stiff, balanced - as on scales - full weight, justice, right, righteous, declared innocent.) God our Righteousness.

Rom. 10:3 Christ is the righteousness of God.

I'd say dig in biblical Scripture and compare God's attributes in the Old Testament to those of Christ in the New Testament. May you discover the Majesty of Him.

[_JAK]

...but there is something else going on there, a mystery I have barely begun to crack.

Also see the mystery of trying to think of a word that rhymes with orange or the following thought experiment:

"Can God create a rock big enough that he cannot lift it?"

Or the Homer Simpson one: "Can God microwave a burrito so hot that not even he can eat it?"

The correct response is that omnipotence is able to do anything that is not intrinsically impossible (I.e. that you can make nonsense into sense by adding God to it).

Nehor’s statement is a declaration limiting his God to a higher power.

Hence, God notions are irrelevant. What is relevant is information.

Superstition, religious dogmas (really a part of superstition) are irrelevant to fact.

I recall the question earlier in my exchanges:

Can God make a rock bigger than he (note the sex) can throw?

A favorite response for the irrationally inclined (embraced by God myth believers is a resounding YES..

Why? Well, the answer is simple and simplistic. God can do anything he (more sexual reference) pleases. So if the question is: Can God do it?, the answer is always yes.

JAK

How does not doing the intrinsically impossible make God subject to any higher power? Reality doesn't have contradictions within it....it just does what he tells it to do. That someone can play with words and make up insanity is not a strong evidence against (or for) God.

Since no evidence has been provided for God claims, you have no point of clarity. What is “reality”? There are major contradictions in the various God claims. That means some of those claims are wrong. But since there is no objective analysis, study, test, there are no reliable conclusions about those claims.

The problem for you is you fail to provide credible evidence for God. The burden of proof lies with the one who makes a claim. YOU make a God claim. Who is playing with words? You are. You make claims offer no evidence in support and merely continue the claims.

That’s playing with words, AND making it up.

JAK