Supposedly monotheistic religion

solid, liquid, gas.

Plasma

Earth, Wind, Fire, Water, Steel

That's modalism, Patrick!
youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw

Muhammad was wrong about this too. The trinity was his biggest gripe about christianity. Just think, if he wasn't a fool back then he'd be a christian saint today and the sandpit wouldn't be a third world shithole. Pretty crazy.

Is the holy spirit a person? I thought it was like a substance or something, a transmission of God to people in our world.

The Holy Spirit is a person (hypostasis in trinitarian language). If you read the New Testament you'll note that Christ calls him "he" not "it." The personhood of the Holy Ghost is accepted by all orthodox Christians, only heretics like the Jehovah's Witnesses (who are also heretics of the Arian persuasion) deny it.

Trinity believers are the worst. There's literally nothing about the Trinity in neither the OT or the NT. It was a Greek addition (Trinity is a Greek concept.) Jesus never spoke about the Trinity, that speaks enough.

Also, to end all Trinity believers, just ask them if the Trinity needs any of the other components to be whole. For example, can the Trinity exist without one or the other? The answer is always no and that means that God is not omnipotent as that would imply that God is dependent of another thing to exist. A true God is all powerful and independent of everything and anything.

Attached: 1565225371076.jpg (1242x1237, 819K)

so something like an angel? What does he do, the holy spirit, when does he appear?

was reading shestov and talks a lot about people saying that God can't make something that happened not have happened, or make something irrational like a mountain without a valley. What do you think, does an omnipotent God have to obey the laws of reason?

It's like the question of "can God make a rock so heavy he couldn't move it?" . The question is erroneous as it already posits that there is something God can't do. God can do anything, so if he theoretically did make that rock, he would immediately be able to pick it up

So God the father is not God ultimately, weird literally nowhere in the bible is this mentioned. Just horrid pagan propaganda

Except water is made of different atoms and the state of water, ice, and gas is dependent on temperature.
A real, all powerful God is not dependent of anything and is not made up of more than 1 thing. You believe in a pagan idea and a fundamentally polytheistic Trinity. Keep trying though

fake news, Christians' holding of the doctrine of Divine Simplicity makes it not as simple as you'd think.

No the issue w that question is that God is not infinite, otherwise he would sin and be sin which is contradictory to the definition of sin.
God is all powerful, but the trinity is garbage that Aquinas and Augustine couldn't make heads or tails of and just said take it on faith.
God is God, the son is his son. Colossians 1:15
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians 1:15-20&version=NIV

Cope trinfag

I forgot jesus, on the cross, asked God the father to speak to God ultimate and deliver the message.
In fact why not just do a fusion dance so he could save himself the conversation of talking w himself

Not an argument ;) keep trying pagan
Care to explain on God is not infinite idea? Thanks. I know the Trinity is hogwash

tl;dr we don't know. Early Orthodox Christianity was made up of three major groups:

>Messianic Jews
The Messiah (Yeshua Bar Yosef) has come, and he has re-written the law.

>Godfearers and Zealots
A weird combination of people who worship Yahweh because he'll hurt you if you don't.

>Some kind of weird gnostic (in the sense of revealed information, not actual Gnosticism) cult
This is where the Holy Spirit comes from.

When Christianity codified, it did so appeasing each group. Of course, the Holy-Spirit guys were the smallest, so they were quickly eradicated. Hence why the Holy Spirit is sort of just... There... As part of the Trinity.

Just a heads up but what you're suggesting is Sabellianism, which is a heresy.

>Trinity comes up
>every time
>EVERY
>SINGLE
>TIME
>Christians demonstrate that they know absolutely nothing about Christology
>reinvent several ancient heresies
What a fucking joke of a religion.

So the bible doesn't really talk about the holy spirit?

Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
>No mention of Trinity
Hear O Israel, The Lord our G-d, the Lord is One.” (Deuteronomy 6:4)
>One God hmm! Think they'd at least mention something about the legendary trio? Also inb4 anti semitic judgements, the God of the ot is the same god as nt.

Yeah by definition if God was infinite he must be everything there can be and more. Therefore he must also be sin and sin is literally a going away from god.
I deny God is irrational, or unknowable, as if that's the case we couldn't ever accept or love him, in fact we couldn't know anything.
I say God is the most powerful and he precedes everything he created. That being said I have no issue w accepting we're an extra universal kid's science project (which is a very our universal thing to say and that "kid" would be insanely and infinitely complex). I would drop christianity if it gets in the way of me finding God and I find all religions are right to some degree (I find the lack of meditative teaching in christianity to be an embarrassing eyesore) but I find christianity heads and heels over everything else.

Also, accepting a trinity for truth would necessitate a new logic system where 1+1 must have three equal yet different answers. If you deny that then God jesus and the holy spirit must not be the way of or source of truth, or they're not distinct or they're not equal

The nt does but that's the greek butchered pagan version. However, no Trinity is ever mentioned. If such an important, vital concept to your religion is so necessary, how come not once is it mentioned!! Christians will grasp at straws looking for connections through misquotes and bad translations

Sin is a free will issue unrelated to God. Just because God created me and is infinite, does not mean I am part God myself. That'd be paganism

>There's an infinite number of integers so fractional numbers must be integers

Attached: 1563414746285.png (564x580, 255K)

Perhaps this will help you

Attached: 93D83A07-7641-4825-9D6A-12D5570C4789.jpg (900x820, 137K)

Nope. God is not dependent of anything else so please take your paganism elsewhere.

anyone have like a list of the times it's mentioned?
I found this page
biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/holy-spirit-bible-verses/

Seems that it is mentioned quite a few times, in the OT as well

Ewwww, a pr*test*nt!!!!

The spirit is mentioned but it's never implied that it is a separate entity or belonging to a trio of any sort.

The only thing I could find about that was when Jesus says "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.''

which does seem to be saying that these are the central things of importance in the religion, but it doesn't say they are the same thing

Dreadfully distinct

He's a Spirit. Any further speculation is unwarranted by scripture. Read John 15 and 16, that's all you get.

Mohammed's biggest gripe about Christianity was that he didn't get to be Jesus.

>as you know the New Testament is a Greek heresy, yeah I'm a Christian how did you guess

u wot m8

SNAAAAAAAAAAKKKEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!

>boy band
Boy bands usually have 4-5 members, it’s more like a power trio

>Jesus never spoke about the Trinity
>Matthew 28:19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost

>coping this hard
you literally cannot define your theology without using the word 'three.'

>Book written in Greek (Trinity is a Greek pagan belief) decades after Jesus' death and evidence suggesting that verse was added even much later on
Jesus didn't even know greek. Are we supposed to trust such sceptical "scripture"? Where so often it's barely even alluded. You'd think they'd mention the Trinity much clearer. And I already pointed out OT attributes of God being one and only one. (Please remember ot god is the same as nt God)

God’s triniune existence is implied literally in the first line of the Bible. God did this because it’s so central to His existence.

Genesis 1:1 started: "In the beginning God, created the heavens and the earth"

‘God’ here is translated from Elohim, which is the plural form of El (God), but since there is only one God, it is translated as God (singular) in other languages.

Why the Jews can’t grasp something so simple is beyond me. The writer of Genesis would have just used El instead of Elohim if God was not a triune being, so clearly the writer did this to show God’s divine nature. The rest of the OT also has numerous references to the Father, the prophesied Son, and the Holy Spirit, referred to as the angel of the Lord throughout scripture.

God has different names in the OT because different names call for a different side of God. When he is being merciful he is called Hashem. It is for reference of reputation. Also in the caanite religion and language, "my Gods" meant to mean 1 god. The fact that the ot has much more IMPLICIT verses saying that God is ONE is even much clearer. Keep grasping

It's obviously the majestic plural you brainlet.

Meant explicit not implicit

Cope

Deuteronomy 6:4 states: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one LORD!

But wait a second. Here ‘one’ is translated from ‘echad’. This word comes from a Hebrew root which means "to unify" or "to collect together," a "united one."

Genesis 11:6 used the same word, echad, translated here as ‘one’: And the LORD said: They are one people, and they have all one language.

The definition as used in the Bible is clear that it’s about unity around a central concept. The people are one people. Similarly, God is one God composes of a unity.

Cope harder Christcuck
Echad is the same as the word 'one' in English. It is not just a complex unity (see Deuteronomy 17:6).

Lol echad implies unity correct but they didn't use "Yachid" because God can't be measured. God transcends time and space. Just like we use "one" to mean single or a group of people, you're arguing semantics unfortunately and there's more references to God being only 1 in the OT :) God can only an absolute unity, not a composite unity since prior to creation, such measurements did not exist. Keep trying

>Jesus didn't even know greek
There are accounts in the Gospel where Jesus engages in conversations with people not native to Ieudea. He probably knew some Koine Greek. The Gospel of Matthew was written by the Apostle Matthew, a tax collector. A requirement for that job was written fluency in both Aramaic and Greek. Papias of Hierapolis (AD c. 100–140) stated that Matthew collected the sayings of Jesus in Hebrew (presumably meaning the language then spoken by Hebrew people in the area, Aramaic) and translated them (presumably into Greek) as best he could, resulting in what we today call the Q Document, which scholars agree Matthew and Luke both used as a source for their Gospels. Note that the Q Document and its Aramaic original both predate the Gospel of Matthew, and so must have been written sometime closer to Christ's ministry. (Personal anecdote: I can recall things that I experienced decades ago.) So Matthew knew Jesus and understood both Aramaic and Greek when he wrote his Gospel. He seems qualified to translate Jesus' sayings accurately.

White christianity is just pagan anonymous. No surprise that they invented witch hunt ,AA and televangelism.

The fact remains that echad was used and not yachiyd. “Because God can’t be measured” is not a convincing argument because the Hebrews believed in one God, and yet peppered various seemingly grammatical inconsistencies throughout scripture implied in Elohim and the used of echad when referring specifically to God, as in Deuteronomy 6:4.

But you can believe what you wish. It’s not like that argument is going to help you on the day of judgement. I am merely showing you the way to the truth.

It's not an inconsistency when scholars all agree of its use to not mean plurality. Only coping Christians use it as a defense. You're grasping at straws. The Trinity was never even mentioned until 300 AD at the council of nicea. That's a hard cope from Christians, to follow messed up translations and add ons from a supposed holy scripture. How many times has the NT been translated and edited? The ot has never lmao. It remains the same from day 1. Face it, Christianity to Judaism is the same as Mormonism to Christianity. A bastardization.

>BUT THEY THE SAME DUDE

It's not used because yachid refers to quantity, while echad refers to substance. As said, God is not quantifiable.

Absolutely based and very redpilled on the Hebrew Bible. "Elohim" is translated "gods" in every instance it refers to the pagan gods, but the Jews (and nowadays by extension almost all Christians) translated it as "God" whenever it appeared referring to YHWH and substituted in singular verbs to match. But properly it should be consistently translated "gods" and "Gods."
The Shema itself demonstrates the plurality of Gods in the Bible. There's no point in saying "YHWH our God, YHWH is [only] one" since no one believed otherwise. Any pagan off the street would gladly accept this statement by itself and worship YHWH as another individual god in his pantheon. Moses' declaration is meaningful because it is exactly the opposite--"YHWH our Gods, YHWH are [only] one." Multiple Gods, all enjoying some perfected unity, and thus that can be loved with all one's heart without competing for devotion (as in the next verse).
One should see also Psalm 45:6-7, where God is addressed, and God's God is referred to subsequently (the Messiah and the Father, respectively).

I’ll put my trust in the Holy Spirit, not in fallible “scholars” who bend over backwards to make the scripture say something it doesn’t or who try to get around biblical prophesies about the Messiah and when he would arrive, as stated in Daniel 9:24-27. If Jews believe in biblical prophecy at all, how do they get around the fact that that prophecy says the Messiah would come around the time of what we now know as 1 AD? Obviously, exact tests are impossible to discern, but that prophecy makes it clear how much time would lapse from the time that prophecy was written until the Messaih’s arrival.

Lol retard it's already been established that the Caaninites referred to "Gods" to mean one God. Nice way to butcher translations for your own use

Bruh you put your trust in a pagan religion. At least admit to that polytheistic device. Then once you admit that, your entire bible is not trustworthy and simply incorrect. A God can't be multiple entities. That's the straight fax coming at you. There is only 1 prime mover. You're telling me that when Jesus was a baby, people had to wipe his ass and feed him? You're telling me that God was periodically demoted to being a fucking dependent child who cries when needs to be fed and learns to speak and act? That's extremely ridiculous to think. God could never be a person, ever. The NT never even mentions the Trinity, keep COPING.

The Abrahamic religions want to be polytheistic, they just don't want to admit it. All three are obsessed with saints, daemons and angels getting into more shenanigans than the Greek pantheon, possessed with divine powers that the average human can draw from, yet when pushed on the subject they'll just tell you "no no, it's all God's power/will/plan".

This doesn't mean anything. Like, at all.

I was arian before I even knew what arianism is. It doesn't make sense to me otherwise.

holy based

>the actual literal mental gymnastics that Christians are willing to go through
The "your god" is the messiah's god, not "God's god." God is not being addressed; it's the messiah, thus it says "God blessed you" (v. 3). Your reading only makes sense if you already assume the messiah was supposed to be God incarnate, an idea that would have been completely foreign to the Jews.

>He is a plural therefore he has to be three

What if He's the whole universe, huh?

That's literally what it means. God, before creation, was everything and anything. It's not like there was a random blank space where God was absent. Aka why the scripture says "unity." Not unity in the way humans or modern translations think of unity like pieces to a puzzle or car parts to an entire vehicle. Unity as in actually everything. Christians love coping. But God is not everything like we are God too.

The trinity is later confirmed in other parts of scripture, so the plurality of God implies three-in-one and not “the whole universe”. God is outside is time and space. He is not part of time and space, therefore he is not “the whole universe”.

>later to be confirmed to be part of a trinity
>"God, why have you forsaken me!"

Why was he talking to himself?

Periodically? It happened only once. Consider this: Christianity is the only religion where its God incarnates as a human child that must grow up. All other religions that mention a god incarnating as a human just has them appearing as fully-formed adults. Why would Christianity be the sole exception to this? Why would Christians make this up if it is, as you imply, so hard to believe? Where would this idea even come from? As I said, there was no precedent for this in other religions before Christianity and no other religion had gone with this specific narrative since.

Yes, v. 3 is certainly the Messiah, but v. 6 is God, and this God is the antecedent of "thy God" immediately following in v. 7. I'm not sure you got what I meant, but it doesn't make sense for the antecedent of "thy" in v. 7 to be the messiah in v. 3. If you can elaborate or correct me I'll engage with you in good faith though, I won't get mad (can't say the same for the other poster I'm replying to).
Way to engage with the argument. My entire point is that Elohim as "God," singular, makes no sense in the context of Deut. 6:4. The Shema actually has meaning when Elohim is read as plural.

What is a triangle but a series of lines, which is itself a series of points. woah dude

Now look, I'm as Christian as the next guy, but I'm pretty sure Tammuz (son/reincarnation of Nimrod) did that too.

>God must grow up
Wow... Just let that's sink in for awhile. I also don't believe in human sacrifice, which Jesus served as atonement. I would never think that a merciful God would punish someone who is not guilty of a crime. If a man killed someone, should his baby also be jailed? That's the death of Jesus .
It's not singular as in God encompassed everything before creation.

Jesus was actually quoting psalm 22, which is all about the Messaih’s crucifixion and death.

The trinity is not subject to dialectic tensions. It's that simple.

>The trinity is not subject to dialectic tensions
>three but one

ok mate.

>The trinity bis a Greek concept
Jesus never spoke about the Trinity, that speaks enough.
Wut pretty dumb post.

You'd think your lord and savior would mention it if it was such a vocal point in your religion. Can you read

>you need to be monist to be a monotheist

Its called being a subsistent relation you retard.

Attached: 1432773678112-1.png (200x268, 145K)

>drops to knees and worships at the statute of a saint asking for divine intervention
>I'm not a larping pagan, I promise!

Can you have the Trinity without one another? Do all three depend on each other to be one? They can't be alone, therefore they are not independent and because they are dependent, they cannot be the all powerful God.

I don't think you know what "worship" means.

If sin has nothing to do with God then ure not Christian

That doesn't at all follow from wat I said cope

Protestants are trinfags

That doesn't mean they all combine to become God himself. That's heretical. Jesus is the son of God, he's not God

Wouldn't the Q doc imply most of what is in the synoptic gospels to be a literary forgery, after all the consensus of which parts of them are Q is of very reduced quantity

>That's heretical
According to whom? Gospel of John stresses multiple times that Jesus is God.

Colossians 1:15

The gospels were chosen politically

Jesus is God. The Son of God. Not God the Father. Different person in the same Godhead.

Seeing as how we have an early 2nd century Church Father on record writing within a lifetime of the Crucifixion (Jesus was crucified in the AD 30s not AD 1) saying that both the Q Doc and the Gospel of Matthew were written by the same person, Matthew the Apostle, if that claim is true then you must have a very funny definition of forgery.

Jesus spent his entire ministry dropping hints and speaking in parables. He didn't come to give us a complex theological doctrine worked out to hairsplitting autistic detail. He knew the Church Fathers would do that for him. He came to give us a faith.

>implying I'm a Catholic

Sources indicate that the Apostle Matthew died in 74 ad, and the gospel was written in 85 ad, also whoever he was undoubtebly used Mark and q as sources

>Dude yeah there are like three godly entities I worship but I am not a polytheist because they are actually the same.
I believe catholics just have some special mother complex for Mary so they could not accept her not being a virgin so Jesus had to be god.

>Tree but one.
Yea of course that is how it is. Adding Aristotles categories to God does not work and it's dumb. The moment stop putting dialectics into the Trinity it all makes sense. If you put dialectic tensions you end up as a Muslim.

>think critically about the trinity
>become muslim
Honestly based. The Islamic creed regarding the nature of God is actually coherent, and in tune with the OT - pure monotheism. These Roman ("Christian") heresies are just paganism desperately trying to look monotheistic

>These Roman ("Christian") heresies are just paganism desperately trying to look monotheistic

Attached: 1564232220015.png (454x520, 13K)

If you ignore the fact that Allah had three daughters, but sure.

>Yea Forums is making fun of christianity again
i'm telling God on you guys

Attached: Jan.png (303x377, 178K)

>i know, ill post soijack
>that will defend my holy ghost!
Are you actually this ignorant? The Quran explicitly reprimands the pagan Arabs for claiming that God has children.

>>i know, ill post soijack
>>that will defend my holy ghost!
I was trolling you, idiot Jew, and you fell for it, hook, line and sinker.

Attached: 59535952_140008863748918_2794783655468725338_n.jpg (649x648, 52K)

Cope. It's never mentioned anywhere and the OT explicitly spells out 1 god

Yes, one god in three persons. Too dense to process this? I'm LMAOing at your puny Arab brain.

If any of the OT prophets heard you talking about three persons, they would stone you for a blasphemer. God sent messages for thousands of years, and the tradition is clear - He does not have multiple personality disorder, He is not made up of three parts (where one part was limited in power, knowledge, and time. How come Jesus didn't know when the Hour is?). He is One, Eternal, and complete. Take this Roman paganism out of here, cross worshipper

gonna draw an analogy to my own metaphysical beliefs, keeping in mind that I believe in a mixture of pandeism and panpsychism rather than Christianity. I used to think the trinity was contradictory, but coming to my current beliefs actually ended up making me realize how close Christians actually got to the truth
taking as givens that everything in existence is somewhat self-aware and that sufficiently complex systems attached to processing power (for instance, a brain) can become go past mere awareness and become sentient, we have to ask questions about composition and identity. in the case of the former, how can the atoms, molecules, cells, and tissue that make up the brain have their own awarenesses when they comprise not only a greater awareness but a full sentience? in the latter, which part of the brain, exactly, do we attach personhood to if we accept that every level is independently aware?
the solution is that only awareness can be nested, not sentience, and that sentience is strictly defined to the system. you are not your brain and its constituent neurons, you are the patterns in which the latter interacts among themselves and with the nervous system. side note, these patterns can also be called a soul if you want, I don't care
extending this logic to the trinity, God is the patterns in which the Father, Son, and Spirit act individually and with each other. they are, individually, non-sentient awarenesses that come together into a sentient system called God. that's why nobody prays to the members of the trinity individually rather than God as the whole, just as nobody would treat two halves of the same brain to be different people
I'm hoping this isn't too schizo, but odds are it will be. oh well

This. is an idiot. Imagine pic related but a stinky Arab.

Attached: 1565336782691.png (785x1000, 254K)

Half the shit you're saying is unfounded, and the other half is nonsensical. Why would God make our salvation dependent on weird intellectual gymnastics like this, rather than simple truths that all humans can understand and agree with? The monotheism of the OT and the Quran is simple, and clearly spelled out. This nonsense of yours is neither simple, nor spelled out. Did Moses believe in this understanding of God? Did Abraham? Do you know God better than those He spoke to directly, and who represented Him on earth?

As soon as you allow yourself to think critically about this concept, you understand how it has to be false. That is why the old Church fathers insisted it be taken on faith, and called people heretics for trying to explain and understand it rationally.

you know I'm not Christian, right?
>Half the shit you're saying is unfounded, and the other half is nonsensical.
I would have properly set up my ideology, but firstly, there's a character limit, and secondly, I have better things to do than to write out an essay-length post in a thread that's going to be deleted anyway
>salvation
reminder that I believe that the closest thing to a deity in existence is the universe itself, that's what pandeism means
>Moses didn't say it so it's wrong
ok
>think critically and it will self-evidently be seen as false
within a Christian framework, yes, but again, you're not talking to a Christian
>muh old Church fathers, muh anti-rationality
ok

>mock people for saying God is one
I'd probably repent for this stuff, dudes, cause it seems very sin-like to me

Never have I said that God is not one. There is one triune God.

Venom

>Did Moses believe in this understanding of God? Did Abraham? Do you know God better than those He spoke to directly, and who represented Him on earth?
yes they believed in that understating of God, the old Testament is clutial to understanding the New, its full of references to Jesus. even genesis 1and 2 reference Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

gradients, bitch

What does Tawhid even mean in the Salafi sense? How is negative Monism distinguishable from Atheism? How does an ever-imploding God differ from no God? The ultimate irony being that claiming absolute faith by putting yourself absolutely at odds with God is precisely Trinitarian Dialectic.

Attached: index.jpg (225x225, 5K)

>Nope. God is not dependent of anything else so please take your paganism elsewhere.
I like the way you confuse the way that God is and the way that you believe God should be. It proves you are a sinful man and therefore nobody should pay attention to your heretic posts.

>reductionism
Hahahaha

Attached: 7147e2b6ae4250a4aaa9199f5f370d068b96847e15a977e8a87456891adb3c4f.jpg (1920x1080, 571K)

>There is only one God
wrong
Heresy within JudeoChristianism. There are Yhvh and Elohim. You're just LARPers

Why can't they be alone?

>If any of the OT prophets heard you talking about three persons, they would stone you for a blasphemer.
The people who crucified Jesus for saying that he is the Son of God are the same people who likewise murdered the prophets. Jesus himself said so.

>God sent messages for thousands of years, and the tradition is clear - He does not have multiple personality disorder,
Are you suggesting that multiple personalities can exist within a single being in the case of humans?

>He is not made up of three parts
That would be a heresy.

>(where one part was limited in power, knowledge, and time. How come Jesus didn't know when the Hour is?).
Do you forget that Jesus, being fully God, is also fully human? Does this mean that his human mind came to knowledge as a human mind does?

>He is One, Eternal, and complete.
Amen.

>Take this Roman paganism out of here, cross worshipper
It seems to be that you are an idolater, because your idea of the Christian God is nothing but a strawman.

I'm gonna pray to Odin, wear an Odin medallion, make pilgrimages to Odin sites, but I'm actually worshiping Jesus because I ask Odin to pass it all along to him

That's why the best reconciliation is to declare all gods, spirits, angels, humans, dogs, and cats to be self-existing and eternal but worship the Lord of Hosts anyway because he's the best

Attached: salt-lake-temple-a-light-in-the-storm-cropped-brent-borup.jpg (900x720, 140K)

Attached: unnamed.jpg (640x640, 150K)

Then whose Allat, Manat and Uzza?

That's not making the case that you're not polytheists at all, you could make that argument for Shinto.
>I'm not worshiping the spirit of the mountain! It's got God in it!

its Orthodox doctrine based on Theosis. So just because you try to slide it into something different does not make it so.

Orthodox doctrine based on polytheism envy. "My priests and doctors said it was different" doesn't make it different.

>supposedly monotheistic religion
>believes that God is actually God plus a book

Attached: PokemonTypes.png (1802x1080, 443K)

>The Islamic creed regarding the nature of God is actually coherent, and in tune with the OT - pure monotheism.
Bullshit. Islam believes that the Quran is co-eternal with Allah and uncreated. (!!)

That's not monotheism by any definition.

why does the bible say its ok to have slaves

how can you believe something without evidence just on faith? you can use faith to believe in anything whether its true or not, therefore faith is an unreliable path to the truth

It's monotheism by most definitions, except the idiotic Thomistic idea that if something is eternal you must worship it.

>why does the bible say its ok to have slaves
because it is

So is the Quran co-eternal and uncreated? Yes or no answers, please.

And if it is uncreated, does that mean that the Arabic language existed before the Universe did?

Waiting eagerly for an answer, lol.

Not a muslim and I don't care, but even if it was, even if the Arabic language was eternal and uncreated and the physical laws of the universe were calibrated to generate planets that generate life that generate beings that speak suicide bomber, that would not make the koran a god or Islam polytheist or the worship of the myriad saints monotheist.

youtube.com/watch?v=Q-HupYg69P0
this is now a traumprinz thread

>Then whose Allat, Manat and Uzza?
Pre Islamic deities the Arabs worshipped, that Islam removed. Do not speak of things you know nothing about.
>So is the Quran co-eternal and uncreated? Yes or no answers, please.
>And if it is uncreated, does that mean that the Arabic language existed before the Universe did?
>Waiting eagerly for an answer, lol.
The physical nature of the book (the ink and papers) are not eternal, and the mouth-sounds of the words are not eternal, but the Word of God is eternally part of God

>but the Word of God is eternally part of God
In fact, this is part of why the Christian heresies arose. They thought Jesus, being the word of God, had to be the Word of God.

It’s actually quite simple to understand. As St. John said, God is Love. How is this so if God is a single, eternally existent being? Love requires three elements which in union are Love. These are a lover, a beloved, and a relationship between the two. Love given, Love received, Love reciprocated, in an everlasting union. And it is One.

Understanding this makes it clear how we are to relate to God. We are born into this world with essentially no knowledge of God’s love, but of course he loves us from the start. Gradually we come to know this love, and if we choose to receive it and reciprocate it, we shine our love back up at God, creating a chain reaction so that his love burns within us. This is the fire that is so often associated with the Holy Spirit that dwells within all true believers.

Another point I’ll make is that a simple monistic God rather than triune cannot possibly be a God of Love, since such a god could never himself be the source of love. He would have had to learn love by creating the angels or humanity or something along those lines, in which case he is obviously not the true Almighty God.

Another aside: the fact that God is Love is why the Eastern Church is incorrect in the argument about the filioque.

>all these mental gymnastics
>not just admitting that you are technically polytheist

Attached: 1565180513011.png (248x204, 13K)

/thread

Christianity is just a regular polytheistic religion, with the "Heavenly Father" archetype exaggerated to ridiculous proportions.

It saddens me that you guys can’t put the effort into seeing the truly radical beauty of the trinity. Once you see it, it can’t be unseen, and it will change your life. I hope and pray that you will continue to ponder these mysteries and come to a fuller, less impoverished understanding of God.

>ugh! monotheism sucks!!
>we should return to polytheism or something..
>christianity is actually polytheism

What beauty? Are you referring to this post: ?

I am referring to all aspects of the mystery of the trinity, though that post is a good beginning.

I honestly see no beauty or good in the concept. In truth, it feels offputting and ugly to me. The idea of God has always been simple and easy, and as accessible to the most ignorant as to any philosopher. Every time I read about the trinity, though, it is shrouded in contradictions and unclear play with words. If it were the truth, I would be willing to accept it, but I have seen no reason to believe it to be true. I will stick to the teachings of Abraham

You simply haven’t tried hard enough. I’m saddened by your weakness, but it’s to be expected in the times we live in.

Stay sad, faggot. You've been conned your whole life.

What's the difference between a person and a being?

if you just ignore what the trinity is, yeah, I could see a retard thinking its three separate persons

>the trinity is not three separate persons
What new heresy is this then? Cause it is definitely not Christianity