Oh, for gods’ sake!

Posted on by Ark

As far as my very basic understanding of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity goes – but who really understands it? -the Christian god is one god with three components – Yahweh, Holy Spirit and Jesus.

One of the never ending circular debates about this nonsensical doctrine is whether Jesus is actually Yahweh.

I have often read that Jesus was fully divine and also fully human, and when I have pressed I have always been told by Trinitarian Christians that yes, Jesus is God(Yahweh)

I checked up to make sure.

And according to this site …. https://goingfarther.net/common-questions/is-jesus-god/

Yes, He was fully man, but He was also fully God (For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,Colossians 2:9).

So imagine my surprise to read this during a discussion with a Trinitarian Christian.

*My bold

*Jesus is not God, He is the Son of God.
You not believing in either God or Jesus, that only leaves one place to go. I say this because there are only one of two places any of us will go.

And yes, he confirmed he believed in the Trinity.

 

I’m still going to Hell by the way, but then I suspect he might be too!

Gotta love them Christians.

40 thoughts on “Oh, for gods’ sake!”

  1. God the Father, God the Son and the The Holy Ghost …

    There. What’s hard about that? So God has a multiple personality disorder, and over the years has killed a few thousand million people (and He alone knows how many innocent little lambs) — so what’s hard about that? Live and let live, Ark—for God’s sake. And furthermore: sheesh!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  2. There are Christians who are not Trinitarian. Apostolic and UPC are both Oneness, while affirming the divinity of Jesus.

    Like

    Reply

          1. I think Walt just made a slip. He’s just not willing to admit the minor error in his speaking or explanation. He’s Trinitarian, believes Jesus is god, God the son.

            Like

          2. He was adamant. Jesus is not God. He had numerous opportunities to retract and explain but he did nothing but attack me.
            I know he says he acknowledges the the Father, Holy Spirit and the Son, I just don’t think he fully understands what this means or exactly what it is he believes.

            Like

          3. He either doesnt understand you, or his own doctrine, or how to clearly explain it. Either way, he’s more unwilling to admit he doesn’t understand. Doubling down I think. I also think English is not his first/native language. That could be part of the problem.

            Like

          5. All he said was that he hit the wrong key. He didn’t answer about English. Reading all his comments on that thread, I’m convinced he’s not a native English speaker. He may also be very young and not very ‘versed’ (pun intended) in Christian doctrine or bible.

            Liked by 1 person

          6. True. Would you not inform your interlocutor, however, that any misunderstanding was because you are not a native English speaker?
            And this still does not answer why he was emphatic when he stated Jesus is not God.

            Like

          8. Speaking of pride and arrogance and unwillingness to admit their slip… I got a quick comment on one of my posts from Dax yesterday. Lol

            Like

  3. The blogsite you’ve referenced also said, “He also lived a sinless life (Hebrews 4:15), something no one else has done.

    And yet gotquestions.org says, “We are born with a sinful nature, and we inherited it from Adam. “Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people” (Romans 5:12). Every one of us was affected by Adam’s sin; there are no exceptions. “One trespass resulted in condemnation for all people” (verse 18). We are all sinners, and we all share the same condemnation, because we are all children of Adam.”

    When being questioned about this, the Catholic Church realized “Houston, we have a problem” Not to worry however, like every other question the Church has been confronted with, they just “made up” another answer. This time it was the Immaculate Conception, the idea that Mary (Jesus’ mother) was born without sin. Problem solved !

    Therefore Ark, no need for you to worry either. You can just have the Church decree your Mum was sinless and “Presto” , you are “In” !

    Very simple really, this Church stuff. When something conflicts with something else……change the rules !

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  4. Er. You know how Christians (read Catholics, they started this whole party) go ON about the trinity, and we are not meant to understand, yadda yadda? When I was reading this I suddenly flashed on yet another ancient myth, and it fits, in a strange way. Cerebrus, the three headed dog.

    https://greekgodsandgoddesses.net/myths/cerberus/

    A bit of cosmetic surgery and viola, you’ve got yourself a holy trinity of the mysterious kind. As the priest used to tell us, ‘we are not meant to understand.”

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  6. We need to stop asking them to make sense. It drives them to make more shit up as they go and it is quite amazing how empowered these folks are regarding making bloviations regarding their particular dogma (ignore those officials, I know what is really going on … it was the Deep State in Judea that caused all of the confusion …).

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

  7. This is so confusing. I think religious mysteries are meant to confound. Had people understood them say, as they understand math, most except for those in unstable places would quit

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

      1. You should have also warned me it is too long. But I like it.
        Most people hardly adopt their religions after a comparative study of other religions and finding the evidence leaning towards the truth of their pick

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

  8. Having to debate every friggin word in circles is part of the distraction. Who can attend to any type of reality when the debate ranges around 10,000 years of unanswered questions by even the best thinkers? Keep trying. The world is on fire, but was god one or three takes center stage. It’s obvious even from their own text Christianity is a form of polytheism. It’s important to steer clear of that for the sake of ultimate authority.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  9. And as I’ve presented to dem Chrissy-ians so hyped-up, pumped up about Jesus the Son of God, 1/3rd of the Almighty vexing, paradoxical, contradictory, and in perfect harmony God-head born immaculately without sin from sinless Mary and omnipotent as an infant/child to escape The Massacre of the Innocents… all of that, hoop-lah around the world that EVERYBODY in the hemisphere sees the Supernova in the night sky ushering in the King of all Kings… (am I making my point yet?) 😉 …

    Suddenly vanishes, WHOOSH, gone, right from under the very noses of ALL Roman authorities, Praetorian guards, and Roman spies everywhere hunting this child/boy down… moves a simple one province over into Galilee, for a minimum of 17-years, and not one single Roman or Jew, even a highly paid Jewish traitor gives him up, gives one hint to ANYBODY where this King of all Kings from a Supernova is hiding!!!???? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Right. The 3-headed dog(s) Judy mentioned, Cerebrus(?), is more believable than utterly stupid Romans never finding Jesus right under their noses for 17-years. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. In other words, Jesus the baby, child, and boy WAS NEVER what the unreliable Gospels claim in their fantastical fairy-tales in the first place! Hello you dense people!!!?

      Like

      Reply

  10. I addressed this issue in my book under the sub-title, Mystical Math.

    Couple of excerpts:
    —The doctrine of the trinity was not taught by the early Christians, nor is the word found anywhere in the Bible. Further, the original Hebrew language does not denote a “uni-plural” god.

    —It was not until the late second century when Theophilus of Antioch wrote his Apology to Autolycus that the word was actually used.

    –The gods of many ancient religions also came in threes — yet Christians discount them because they’re not “joined” into one substance as with the trinity.

    IOW, it’s just one more made-up story that has no basis in fact but helps add to the deeeep mystery of Christianity.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

    1. Hey Nan, not criticing you, rather the Christians who discount them because they’re not “joined” into one substance as with the trinity.

      In Hinduism, the trinity (Trimūrti, or The Three Forms) is of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. These three-in-one are called “the Hindu triad” or the “Great Trinity”

      In the Hindu Puranas there is this passage:

      ‘O ye three Lords! know that I recognise only one God. Inform me, therefore, which of you is the true divinity, that I may address to him alone my adorations.’

      In response, the three-gods-in-one (Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva [or Shiva]), replied,

      ‘Learn, O devotee, that there is no real distinction between us. What to you appears such is only the semblance. The single being appears under three forms by the acts of creation, preservation, and destruction, but he is one.’

      And Toaists teach of The Three Pure Ones who are regarded as the pure and singular manifestation of the Tao and the origin of all sentient beings. They are also called the Three Pure Pellucid Ones, the Three Pristine Ones, the Three Divine Teachers, the Three Clarities, or the Three Purities.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. You know and I know, John, the Christians will justify their every belief with SOME kind of statement of “fact.” The problem arises when people like you do the ACTUAL research and shoot their reasoning to smithereens.

        Liked by 3 people

        Reply

  11. Bat plus Shit = Bat-shit CRAZY which is truly what this trinity tripe is. Absolute hogwash, yet billions give money to churches that promote it every Sunday. And here I thought humans were an intelligent animal.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  12. The common definitions that God must be omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent are easy enough to follow. That is the job description. What is harder to understand is how the firm conviction is arrived at that God must be singular (much less male). Logic dictates that there must be a single creator of all things, or a single starting point. Or does it? Why? Why not have any number of creators all doing their thing? Or is God the creation of Man on the principle that what is believed in comes into existence?

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

Leave a comment