ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

Christendom's trinity, written in Article I of The Catholic Faith, is defined as follows:
"There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things both visible and indivisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of ONE SUBSTANCE, POWER, and ETERNITY; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost."


Although there are no scriptures in the Judeo-Christian Bible to support this false teaching, the Trinity dogma has been the central doctrine of Christian churches for centuries. It might surprise some to learn that among pagan nations that did not worship the God of the Judeo-Christian Bible, there were trinity gods in existence centuries before Jesus Christ appeared on earth in the 1st Century AD, and there were pagan trinities in existence during the 1st Century while Jesus was on earth. Below are three such examples, followed by the questions for debate.


1. In the 2nd century B.C.E. (two centuries before Christ came to the earth), Egypt had a triad of gods consisting of (1) Horus, (2) Osiris, and (3) Isis.



2. In the 2nd century B.C.E. (two centuries before Christ came to the earth), Babylon had a triad of gods consisting of (1) Ishtar, (2) Sin, and (3) Shamash.

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbn...5f0bf38aea9d0f


3. In the 1st century C.E., Palmyra, which was an ancient city in Syria, had a triune god which consisted of (1) moon god, (2) Lord of Heavens, and (3) sun god.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. Is the Trinity a Bible teaching?
2. Did Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity teach it?
3. Did his early apostles and disciples who accompanied him teach it?
4. Where does the word "godhead" come from?
5. Does the word "trinity" appear anywhere in the Bible?

Is this the Christian Zeitgeist? Rewrite history as you see fit?

I wouldn't normally bother with your nonsense troll posts (you seriously must have no life man), but this is just too dumb to pass.

Trinity was a result of 300 years of Christian theologial quarreling, disagreement, warring and eventually an almost forced comprose in the Council of Nicaea in 325. It would continue to be a hot potatoe for the next 300-400 years and the disagreement still stands between certain denominations (Jehowas' Witnesseses likely being the best known anti-trinitarians today).

As for "where it is in the Bible", it isn't. However any Christian should do well to remember that singular reliance on the Holy Work is a modern concept for Christianity. If you go back, Christianity in its early history followed the Judaistic tradition of being advanced by debating scholars, not held back by fundamentalists.

4. In the 21st century CE, Taco Bell had a triune god which consisted of (1) Beefy 5-layer Burrito, (2) Doritos, and (3) Pepsi.



Somewhat seriously... If you're going to pursue questions of Catholic trinitarian theology, why not just read the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the trinity?

http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?ti...Trinity%2C_The

In this article, they present a biblical argument for the trinity.

Alter2Ego doesn't do links.

Heretic! The gordita meal deal is better.

In before some a-tacobellist says all fast food sucks.

Alter2Ego,

Do you really find it necessary to start several threads over the course of one week?

ALTER2EGO -to- AARON W.:

Obviously, you haven't caught on from what I said in my opening post. In the very second paragraph of my OP, I wrote the following and then I concluded with questions that are supposed to get people who believe in the trinity to focus on what's actually in the Bible.

In other words, the intent of this thread is to debunk the pagan trinity and expose it as unscriptural.

Nope. I caught it perfectly.

Finding triples of things does not imply anything in particular about other triples of things.

ALTER2EGO -to- AARON W:

I specifically pointed out three separate sets of triune gods in my opening post in which the 3-prong gods from each of the pagan examples are interrelated--just like the triune gods in Christendom are 3 interrelated gods.

The examples of triune gods in my opening post are of gods that were always combined together. They were not combined with any other gods from the same pagan cultures. For instance, although the ancient Egyptians had many pagan gods, their three gods (1) Horus, (2) Osiris, and (3) Isis were connected only to one another and were not connected to any of the other Egyptian gods. If you can't see the significance of that and you have opted to dismiss the implications--by dismissing it as mere triples of "things" rather than triples of interrelated gods, then you will never make the connection that's the intent of this thread.

This is the connection: The Roman Catholics wanted to make Christianity more acceptable to pagans. They did this by inserting long-held pagan beliefs into Christianity. This way, they would increase their membership by assuring the pagans: "No need to give up your false gods. We'll just give them Christian names and you can become Christians."

The Roman Catholics did the same thing with Easter (taken from the pagan goddess of fertility) and with Christmas (taken from the pagan saturnalia/birthday of the unconquered sun celebration). Christmas celebration is a mirror image of the Saturnalia celebrations which included evergreens, lights, gift-giving, drunkenness, merrymaking, feasts, etc. Even the date for Christmas--December 25--was taken from paganism.

Yeah.... no. That's nothing at all what trinitarian doctrine implies. Pretending it means something it doesn't isn't particularly helpful when trying to make a successful argument.

I don't have a dog in the fight, but would you mind explaining your interpretation of what the trinity is?

What A2E posted is the Catholic version, which is pretty much what you'll find in any statement of orthodoxy:

The emphasis is mine for emphasis. This is not a concept of "three interrelated gods." It's one God and only one God. The expression of this one God through three Persons has more to do with the conceptualization of how God expressed his God-ness. We see the one God expressed in three characters/characteristics.

The pagan argument isn't entirely without merit as there are other components incorporated into Christianity, such as parts of Christmas and Easter, which were intended to mesh with pagan customs.

ALTER2EGO -to- AARON W:

You quoted it verbatim and still didn't get it. According to the trinity dogma, there are THREE PERSONS or three gods that can separate themselves from each other and then they can combine into one GODHEAD when they feel like it. For instance, Jesus Christ the Son came to the earth, while simultaneously, Jehovah the Father remained in heaven. And from his position on earth, Jesus prayed to Jehovah the Father and the Father returned answers to him from heaven.

Now, tell me how you are going to pass that off as "conceptualization of how God expressed his God-ness." So are you telling this forum that God was talking back and forth to himself simultaneously between heaven and earth? And who was Jehovah referring to when Jesus Christ came up from baptism in the Jordan River and God's voice said:


"{16} After being baptized Jesus immediately came up from the water; and, look! The heavens were opened up, and he saw descending like a dove God's spirit coming upon him. {17} Look! Also, there was a voice from the heavens that said: 'This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved.' " (Matthew 3:16-17)

So are you telling this forum that God approved himself and proceeded to announce it for all to hear?


Truth be told, the Bible does not teach that Jehovah the Father, Jesus the Son, and the holy ghost/holy spirit are three persons combined into a single god. What is it about that don't you get? Notice once more the quotation of the Roman Catholic's trinity once again, and keep your eyes on the words that are in bold.

Everything about that definition of Christendom's trinity is a lie. The Bible makes it clear that only Jehovah is eternal.

"Before the mountains themselves were born, or you proceeded to bring forth as with labor pains the earth and the productive land, even FROM TIME INDEFINITE TO TIME INDEFINITE you are God." (Psalms 90:2)


Jesus Christ, on the other hand, does not have eternity. An eternal person does not have a beginning and cannot die. Jesus is described in the Bible as the "firstborn of all creation"—meaning he had a beginning. To make matters worse for the trinity dogma, the Bible says Jesus literally died when he was crucified. So there goes the first lie about all three persons in the "godhead" being CO-ETERNAL.


DEFINITION OF "ETERNAL": Eternal means not having a beginning or an end.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/eternal

"He is the image of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN of all CREATION;.." (Colossians 1:15)

Certainly Christianity has moved across cultures in a way that does not make it completely alien from the native culture (this is true even today as Christianity spreads through Africa and Asia). However...

The language "mesh with" is very slippery. It can mean something like religious syncretism (the combining of contrary core beliefs) or it can mean something like inculturation (the adaptation of beliefs so that they are culturally meaningful). I agree (and basically any sane person would agree) that inculturation happened and happens as I've stated above. However, the "pagan argument" is one of syncretism, and there's a lot more work to do if you want to make an affirmative case for this.

Specifically, you would have to show that there is a particular core belief of Christianity that was either added, lost, or significantly modified when it crossed with the specific pagan cultures you're considering. Furthermore, you must also show that the added, lost, or modified belief is due to a specific belief that the pagan culture held.

For Christmas, you need to show that there was a core belief that was absent before the celebration of Christmas, but was added at the same time that Christmas first began to be celebrated. Similarly, for Easter, you need to show that there are beliefs that were introduced to Christianity at the time Easter was first celebrated. For non-example, if the belief that Jesus was resurrected did not exist before Easter was celebrated, but that the corresponding springtime celebration invoked some sort of deistic rebirth myth or whatever, then you would rightly conclude that this was sycretistic.

Right... The transition from "three persons" to "three gods that can separate themselves from each other" is a laughably stupid reading of the words. This would also be odd given that we have things like the Nicene creed saying specifically "We believe in one God" actually meaning "We believe in three gods that can combine when they feel like it."



I'm done playing around with this particular troll.

I think I agree with your assessment here. It would probably be next to impossible to prove that early Christian thinkers, or the prominent members of the Council of Nicea were influenced into a trinitarian position by prior religions. I doubt anyone would have written down the kind of thought process that would show this. The best that can be done is to note similarities, whether striking or fleetingly tangential. A2E raised some (with obvious differences as you point out) which leads to two primary hypotheses: 1) the Christian thinkers were influenced by these other religious archetypes and incorporated them or 2) any similarity is incidental.

Given we certainly have cross-cultural incorporation with things like holiday customs and timing, it's certainly not way outside the realm of plausibility that other religions also influenced some beliefs or manifestations of early Christianity. As you note, however, we can't really draw a causative progression from another religion's beliefs transferred and/or transformed into Christianity. It's highly unlikely we'd ever find such an example documented by any early Christians. It's also possible any influence was mostly subconscious. In the end, we're left to decide for ourselves which is more likely, that similarities of certain beliefs and Biblical stories to other religions is purposeful or incidental. I'd have to do some more research, but I believe there are other quite explicit examples of adoptive beliefs between religions and cultures.

Instead of loose conjencture and guesswork, you can read up on the writings if the time. Trinity is a result of debates on Christ's relation to God and God's nature.

Why use hot air when facts are available?

Discussion, sure....

WTF is with this formatting. it's like we're children

matthew

Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20


debate over

Agreed. I wish the moderators with do something about this.

This just isn't pleasing to the eye.

ALTER2EGO -to- POKERLOGIST:

Not only are there no scriptures in the Bible that says Jesus accepted worship from others--because the only person that should be worshipped is Jehovah--but the scripture you're quoting from Matthew 28:19 amounts to over-reaching.

Tell me, since when does the mere mentioning of three entities in one sentence equate to them being combined into a single person as a trinity "godhead"?

Let me ask you this as well: If someone were to mention former U.S. presidents George H. Bush, Sr.; George W. Bush, Jr.; and Jeb Bush (the son and brother of the two former president Bushes, respectively) does that equate to them being in a trinity where they're combined into one person?

If they are not one being, who are the Son and the Holy Spirit?

1. The pre-human Jesus Christ is the most powerful and the very first angelic Son that was created by Jehovah.

"He is the image of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN of all CREATION;.." (Colossians 1:15)


2. The holy spirit or holy ghost is an extension of Jehovah's power. In other words, the holy spirit/holy ghost is not a person at all. It is a thing.