trinity confusion

What do they believe? What do you think? Talk about religion as it exists today.
Metacrock
Posts: 206
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 2:33 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: trinity confusion

Post by Metacrock » Thu Dec 31, 2015 1:01 pm

theterminator wrote:
because you refuse to understand what essence means. That's the term they and they used it for a reason. it means they three persona share the same essence so they are one God.
honestly the way you describe your god it seems like a company which holds 3 lesser things which are not co equal to the whole.
god itself does not seem like a living or live thing. it is what is inside this god which seems to be 3 conscious living things. the word "god" simply looks like a covering/unconscious nature .
because you are trying to think of the persona in terms of modern autonomous personhood and it's a concept of the
Greeks from before the time of Christ.
http://metacrock.blogspot.com/

Huon
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:21 am

Re: trinity confusion

Post by Huon » Fri Jan 01, 2016 3:18 am

This discussion reminds me of another discussion, between 300 and 325 C.E.. Arius and Sabellius conflicted about the relations of God the Father and Jesus (God the Son). This ended later with a war against the Arians, and a number of killed persons. Much like the religion war of today...

theterminator
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:07 am

Re: trinity confusion

Post by theterminator » Fri Jan 01, 2016 8:37 am

the trinity confusion continues.


the sender (father) is not the sent (son)
and the sent (son) is not the sender (father)
the sent has the same what as the sender, but when the sender is sending, his sending is not what the sent is doing .
each action of each person doesn't mix like their persons do not mix.

the sent cannot be part of the senders action of sending because that would mean the sent sent the sent.

this is christian trinity people. nowadays this is called monotheism, but it clearly seem polytheistic.


what is a person? one who expresses thought

so when metarock prays to the trinity, he must say:

"oh father in heaven, your person is greater than the sons person and the son knows he is lesser than you in rank even though you guys share the same what"
.

Metacrock
Posts: 206
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 2:33 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: trinity confusion

Post by Metacrock » Sat Jan 02, 2016 12:18 am

theterminator wrote:the trinity confusion continues.


the sender (father) is not the sent (son)
and the sent (son) is not the sender (father)
the sent has the same what as the sender, but when the sender is sending, his sending is not what the sent is doing .
each action of each person doesn't mix like their persons do not mix.

the sent cannot be part of the senders action of sending because that would mean the sent sent the sent.

this is christian trinity people. nowadays this is called monotheism, but it clearly seem polytheistic.
why do you need so desperately to have it be a contradiction? you find Christianity so undeniable in every other aspect?

what is a person? one who expresses thought
Remember now Einstein the original term is not person but persona, it's a mask.

so when metarock prays to the trinity, he must say:

"oh father in heaven, your person is greater than the sons person and the son knows he is lesser than you in rank even though you guys share the same what"
where does the creed say one is greater than another?
http://metacrock.blogspot.com/

Huon
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:21 am

Re: trinity confusion

Post by Huon » Sat Jan 02, 2016 1:07 am

Homoousian
Homoousian (ὁμοούσιος from ὁμός, homós, "same" and οὐσία, ousía, " essence, being")
is a theological term used in discussion of the Christian understanding of God as Trinity.
The Nicene Creed describes Jesus as being homooúsios with God the Father — that is, they are equally God.
This term, adopted by the First Council of Nicaea, was intended to add clarity to the relationship between Christ and God the Father within the Godhead.
The term is rendered "consubstantialis" in Latin.

Huon
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:21 am

Re: trinity confusion

Post by Huon » Sat Jan 02, 2016 1:11 am

Homoiousia
Homoiousia (ὁμοιούσιος from ὅμοιος, hómoios, "similar" and οὐσία, ousía, "essence, being") is the theological doctrine that Jesus the Son of God and God the Father are of similar (ὁμοιο- homoio- or homeo-) but not the same substance, a position held by the Semi-Arians in the 4th century.
It contrasts with the homoousia of orthodox Trinitarianism and the heteroousia of Arianism.

Proponents of this view included Eustathius of Sebaste and George of Laodicea. Homoiousianism arose in the early period of the Christian religion out of a wing of Arianism. It was an attempt to reconcile the seemingly irreconcilable views of the pro-Nicene homoousians, who believed that God the Father and Jesus his son were identical (ὁμός, homós) in substance, with the "neo-Arian" position that God the Father is "incomparable" and therefore the Son of God cannot be described in any sense as "equal in substance or attributes" but only "like" (ὅμοιος, hómoios) the Father in some subordinate sense of the term.

Huon
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:21 am

Re: trinity confusion

Post by Huon » Sat Jan 02, 2016 1:16 am

Anomoeans
The Anomoeans, also spelled "Anomeans" and known also as Heterousians, Aëtians, or Eunomians, were a sect that upheld an extreme form of Arianism, which denied not only that Jesus Christ was of the same nature (Homoousian) as God the Father but also that he was of like nature (homoiousian), as maintained by the semi-Arians.

The word "anomoean" comes from Greek ἀ(ν)- 'not' and ὅμοιος 'similar': "different; dissimilar".
In the 4th century, during the reign of Constantius II, this was the name by which the followers of Aëtius of Antioch and Eunomius were distinguished as a theological party.

The semi-Arians condemned the Anomoeans in the Council of Seleucia, and the Anomoeans condemned the semi-Arians in their turn in the Councils of Constantinople and Antioch; erasing the word ὅμοιος from the formula of Rimini and that of Constantinople and protesting that the Word had not only a different substance but also a will different from that of the Father. From that, they were to be called ἀνόμοιοι.

User avatar
lpetrich
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 6:20 am

Re: trinity confusion

Post by lpetrich » Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:41 pm

Metacrock wrote:
theterminator wrote:i still see 3 separate gods.
because you refuse to understand what essence means. That's the term they and they used it for a reason. it means they three persona share the same essence so they are one God.
Sharing divine essence = three divine entities = three gods. But that's officially a heresy: tritheism.

So the Trinity is a big fat confusing mess.

theterminator
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:07 am

Re: trinity confusion

Post by theterminator » Mon Jan 11, 2016 6:34 am

because you refuse to understand what essence means. That's the term they and they used it for a reason. it means they three persona share the same essence so they are one God.
if each is 100 percent person, then how much "god" does each share? you see what you are doing? you are saying that god is no longer a WHO, but a shared what. don't tell me that you worship god, you worship persons which share a what.
.

iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: trinity confusion

Post by iskander » Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:51 am

theterminator wrote:
because you refuse to understand what essence means. That's the term they and they used it for a reason. it means they three persona share the same essence so they are one God.
if each is 100 percent person, then how much "god" does each share? you see what you are doing? you are saying that god is no longer a WHO, but a shared what. don't tell me that you worship god, you worship persons which share a what.
The Triune God is a matter of religious experience ; liturgical. mystical and often poetical. The "Triune God "is no more difficult to understand that the shorter "God".


The God whose face cannot be seen by humans , is the same God that speaks to Moses face to face , if one likes it that way. The God whose face cannot be seen by humans , is the human-friendly manifestation of the same God that speaks to Moses face to face, if one likes it this way...

Post Reply