The Trinity debunked by Jesus himself.

Oh, I realize that the only reason you would post in this section is to make some kind of smartass point, but arguing with yourself in public makes you appear somewhat unhinged.

How is Gen 2:1 supposed to mean that man came before the Earth? What was he standing on?

 

Appear unhinged? Laughable. Anyone with any sort of sense of my position knows that I play with contradictions. Christians cannot even agree one what the Bible says, so why do Christians get offended when they book is quoted?
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/interp/jesus_god.html

Why are you applying logic to the Bible?

 

Apparently this is the sort of thing atheists discuss between Star Trek conventions......just sayin'.

 

Trekkies are all Jews.

 

oi vay!

 

I'm just asking you how you can read Gen 2:1 and interpret it such that man was created before the Earth.

 

I mean the order is opposite.

Two contradictory creation accounts in the same book.

 

Three persons, one nature. This is the belief of the trinity. The son proceeds from the father and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the son. This in itself implies they are separate persons.

 

I thought that's what you meant, but you never said it. It's not either or by the way. Three persons, one nature. If you read the Bible like you are reading the newspaper, you are bound to come across contradictions. This is why fundamentalists reading with only a literal interpretation of the Bible fail to understand what is actually being said.

Have you ever read what any study Bibles have to say on the matter. Obviously the authors of the Bible aren't as obsessed with chronological events as you are. Perhaps they were more concerned with something else?

 

Let the "for" be, then they are each other and it's a very nice poem 4 the trinity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vnYKRacKQc

 

So Beast Mode has dreamed up cockeyed phony premise and thinks he/she is Jesus now?

 

Apparently they were not concerned about two contradicting stories in two successive chapters. LOL

 

You're borrowing from a naturalistic world view. These 'three persons' as you call them cannot possibly be the creators of nature as well as being subject to nature. You're implying that nature presupposes these deities.

 

You might want to get nailed to a cross and brag about it, but I'll be happy to take the 30 pieces of silver and go enjoy some strippers and coke...not necessarily in that order.

 

Well...that is the whole ball of wax isn't it?

FAITH.

The whole concept of FAITH is that a person will believe something when there is absolutely no evidence or proof existing to back up their belief.

And honestly I have NO PROBLEM with that.

What I DO have a problem with is when a person of Faith starts trying to tell other people what they should or should not believe and then some FANATICS AND ZEALOTS take this one step further and ACT in a destructive manner all in the name of some impossible to know or prove Religious Belief.

Even on this forum there exists a few topics in a few specific forums that those who are either Zealots or Ultra-Religious find to be an ATTACK UPON THEIR BELIEFS.

Such topics could be anything from a discussion about Evolution or as in one topic named Tough Questions for Christian's I have noticed that even DISCUSSING possibilities or siting HISTORICAL FACTS that have evidence to back them up....are a call for some Ultra-Religious to CRUSADE against what they feel is an EVIL ATTACK by Non-Believers.

What I find sad is that these people will use circular reasoning such as...It is a truth because it is in the Bible.

That is sort of like me saying....2 + 2 = 5 BECAUSE I SAID SO!!!

AboveAlpha

 

Here's one of my favorite passages:

 

Yeah....that is one VIOLENT AND MURDEROUS PASSAGE!!! LOL!!!

Let's face it...the Bible was written by MAN!!!

IF there was such a thing as a GOD....a GOD would not endorse that passage.

AboveAlpha

 

The thing I find amusing about it is that if we claim that the Old Testiment is at a minimum inspired by god then god clearly ordered the Jews to kill Jesus.

 

The Old Testament is a bunch of STORIES written by ANCIENT MAN who was struggling to come to terms and explain what he did not understand.

Just about every sect of Christianity with the exception of some of the Hardcore Baptist Evangelical Christian Sects...have had their Religious Leaders openly tell Christian's that it is OBVIOUS in this Modern day and age that the stories in the Old Testament and as example such stories as in Genesis....should be considered TEACHING TOOLS and that these Biblical Stories SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN LITERALLY.

Pope John Paul II was the FIRST Christian Leader to announce this and the Pope SMARTLY told Catholics that Evolution was a REALITY and that Catholics should prepare themselves that very soon in the near future groups like NASA might very well find LIFE on other Planets.

Pope John Paul II said this and other Christian sects soon followed with statements of their own.

And what some Christian's have to come to terms with and most already have but specifically still the hardcore Evangelical Baptists still have not come into the 21st Century as such FACTS and REALITIES such as HOW the NEW TESTAMENT was created as the Roman Emperor Constantine created a Biblical Canon of chosen MEN who then over the course of several hundred years CREATED THE NEW TESTAMENT by specifically picking and choosing only 4 Apostles Gospels and not the other 8 Apostles Gospels as they conflicted and picking and choosing which BOOKS to include in the Bible.

This was a completely ARBITRARY SYSTEM and the concept of the Trinity was CREATED BY SUCH MEN.

As well some books such as Revelation was REJECTED AGAIN AND AGAIN as the members of the Biblical Canon thought that Revelation was TOO OUT THERE AND TOO UNBELIEVABLE.... and because of this Revelation was not even actually placed into the New Testament until the year 417 AD.

My point is...MEN WROTE THESE THINGS.....MEN CREATED THE DOGMA....MEN DECIDED WHO'S GOSPELS WOULD BE INCLUDED AND WHO'S GOSPELS WOULD NOT.

AboveAlpha

 

You won't appeal to the religious through facts, history, or any of that because their belief was never centered around those things to begin with. I can't explain why, but they believe for some other reason. Need, identity, or something, but as long as that reason persists, they will continue to adhere to their religions no matter what you show them.

You'll have to find out why they believe...the real why...instead of criticizing the belief. (not pinging on you or anything, it's just that this method has ben tried over and over again and it seems that there is something else that makes the religious adhere to their religion other than misinformation or gullibility)

 

Not all religious people are so crazy.

There are in fact a MAJORITY of Christian's who absolutely understand that stories in the Old Testament are just that stories!!!

It is the Zealots that cannot come to terms with this.

AboveAlpha

 

Yet, they are still Christians. That is the strange thing. They can know the belief is wrong, yet they still adhere to the Christian concept. They know the faith is wrong because they don't follow it absolutely, they pick and chose as their own common sense and personal convictions allows them to, so they aren't really following the faiht, but themselves under the name of a faith. Yet, they still refuse to drop the faith as a nominem.

My question is why do they do this?

 

Comfort....security...etc.

The only real important things are what the lessons are not what the DOGMA is.

AboveAlpha

 

Hahaha! Much cherry picking here for yet another failed premise.

 

Probably. Religion wouldn't be so bad if it was just a group of ideas, but they are ideas that force themselves into society. Not that it's anything new, but when religion starts impeding education, the knives need to come out.