Tweet
I dont know that I should ss now is not the sopointed tkme
-
"Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
GOTSE DELCEV -
Early Christians debated the notion of the Trinity. Modern Christians do not. If they do, they are not Christians.[/QUOTE]Originally posted by Nikolaj View PostRisto the Great
MACEDONIA:ANHEDONIA
"Holding my breath for the revolution."
Hey, I wrote a bestseller. Check it out: www.ren-shen.comComment
-
Nikolaj
Thank you!Makedonce in reference to Philosophers post I can see why you're skeptical because you have identified a contradiction within the text, but you haven't found an answer for it. I'm not saying you need to have an answer, but the people who have been in your position have made their interpretation; it is a viable interpretation, it doesn't mean it is exactly correct but it is the best one we have so far.On Delchev's sarcophagus you can read the following inscription: "We swear the future generations to bury these sacred bones in the capital of Independent Macedonia. August 1923 Illinden"Comment
-
yes why can't christians debate the trinity is it blind faith without question??THe trinity is another falsehood about god and jesus its nothing more than blasphemy.If you are a student of the bible you notice things amiss.God says in isiah.Mans ways are not godsways.God says he is ruler of the universe he will do whatever he wants.What ever pleases god.So don't ask about silly answers."Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
GOTSE DELCEVComment
-
regarding the trinity.THere is no third person.THere is god the father and god the son.But there is no third person.God the holy spirit is THE POWER OF GOD,ITS NOT A PERSON AT ALL.Stupid people have accepted it hook line and sinker.The whole trinity thing is a hoax and is false religion gone mad.Jesus is born of god the first born the only person to be born at this time.Born of the spirit.THe rest of mankind is dead and is still in their graves.Until the appointed timeme IN A MOMENT IN THE TWINKLING OF AN EYE.FLESH AND BLOOOD CANNOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD.BUT IT MUST BE BORN OF THE SPIRIT.MANS DESTINY IS TO PARTAKE of eternal LIFE AND TO BE AS GOD.AT THE MOMENT MAN IS LOWER THAN ANGELS BUT LATER WILL BE ELEVATED MORE THAN ANGELS>WILL BE MADE POSSIBLE BY A LOVING FATHER FOR HIS CHILDREN.MANKING HAS A WONDERFULL FFUTURE.NO LUCK AT ALL THAT IS WHAT GOD INTENDS TO DO WITH US.
AND GOD SAID LET US MAKE Man IN OUR IMAGE.NOT LET ME BUT LET US.GOD IS A UNIPLURAL WORD.THE US IS LIKE A FAMILY.GOD IS THE GOD FAMILY ONE OF A KIND COMPOSED OF SPIRIT>GOD IS THE FATHER JESUS IS THE SON TOGETHER THEY ARE SO FAR THE GOD FAMILY ONE.I AND THE FATHER ARE ONE>WHOso ever neleives in himSHALL HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE.Think about it GOD is simply reproducing HIS KIND INN man.THAT IS THE STUPENDOUS TRUTH.BELEIVE IT OR NOT>
God says he is a unique GOD there is no other god like him.THe rest is man made religion WHATEVER MAN HAS MADEUP.THE rEAL TRUTH IS THERE FOR PEOPLE TO SEE.BUT Unless you are called by god you are none of his.NOW IS NOT THE APPOINTED TIME.Last edited by George S.; 10-29-2014, 12:58 PM."Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
GOTSE DELCEVComment
-
Vangelovski
[QUOTEI have discussed whether it is possible to have an alternate interpretation of the Trinity with you, but I have never actually discussed an alternative interpretation of the Trinity with anyone on this thread. If you actually think that I have, then you can easily quote where I have done so. I know you know how to quote, so I'm not sure why you keep suggesting I have discussed an alternative interpretation of the Trinity with anyone but refuse to actually quote where I have?
][/QUOTE]
I have said there are other interpretations discussed, not specifically that you have discussed, I'm not suggesting otherwise.
I have read your posts carefully, and yes we agree that everyone is entitled to an opinion - they are also entitled to an interpretation based on what they know. People don't need to undertake an honest study of the bible to have an interpretation, you think they do - that's fine you're entitled to your interpretation.It would help if you read my posts more carefully. We've already established that we both agree that everyone is entitled to an opinion. I've never suggested that people cannot invent alternative interpretations of the Trinity. What I am saying is that anyone who undertook an honest study of the Bible would be very hard pressed to actually develop an alternative interpretation of the Trinity that would stand up against the evidence available in the Bible.
No, the above statements are refuting what you implied I said.....without having said it, hence your confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by makedonche View Post
If I was saying people need to read the Bible to provide useful, correct and intellectually honest interpretations of the Trinity, I would have said so, I didn't so stop trying to imply that I did
Quote:
Originally Posted by makedonche View Post
Please show me the part that I said "someone is entitled to give an opinion without reading the Bible"
Do you think the above two statements are in contradiction to each other? I do. And that is why I'm now completely confused as to what you are saying.
There you go again with your assumptions, it was not a rejection of the Trinity. No I said "This appears to say that Jesus is God? Or am I misinterpreting? I was always taught that Jesus was the son of God",Your idea about Jesus was not an alternative interpretation of the Trinity, it is actually a rejection of the Trinity. You said you did not know Jesus was God - how could there be a Trinity without Jesus being God? That is a completely different question.
to be precise therefore:- "It is clear from this analysis that the New Covenant writers proclaimed the "Father" is God; the "Son" is God; and the "Holy Spirit" is God. And yet, the Bible's singular message is that there is one God", I hope this makes it clearer.
No I raised the point based on knowledge etc, and to explain "exactly what constitutes my knowledge etc." is not the issue at hand and I could care less if it has any basis in the Bible. Is it the old or new testament that is the only primary source that concerns itself with the Trinity?But now that you have raised this point as your "alternative interpretation" of the Trinity, can you please explain what exactly constitutes your "education/knowledge/experience" and whether it has any basis in the Bible, which is the only primary source that concerns itself with the Trinity?On Delchev's sarcophagus you can read the following inscription: "We swear the future generations to bury these sacred bones in the capital of Independent Macedonia. August 1923 Illinden"Comment
-
You keep changing your mind about what you have and have not said. I'll ask again, where are those interpretations? Quote them for me.Originally posted by makedonche View Post
I can't believe you would even make this statement!!! At least you can't deny it any more. The Bible is the only primary source that says anything about the Trinity. If you did not base your interpretation on it, how could you possibly be sure of anything in relation to the Trinity????Originally posted by makedonche View Post
It also brings your credibility into question, particularly seeing as you made this comment and denied that it mean't what it obviously does mean:
Originally posted by makedonche View PostIt is the issue at hand. Seeing as the Bible is the only primary source that provides information on the Trinity, studying it is the only way to be certain of what it says about the Trinity. So your "knowledge etc", if it is completely void of anything the Bible says about the Trinity is completely useless. You could make up any thing about the Trinity based on your "knowledge", but if it has nothing to do with the Biblical explanation of the Trinity, then it is nothing more than fantasy.Originally posted by makedonche View Post
Don't forget that the Trinity is a concept only found in the Bible, so I don't see how any knowledge, education or whatever that does not directly use the Bible as a source for its interpretation of the Trinity could hold any validity whatsoever. That is like saying that you have an interpretation of the Iliad, but have never read the Iliad and don't think you need to! How on earth could you interpret the Iliad without actually reading it!?!?! How on earth can you interpret the Trinity without the Bible!
There is no theological difference between the new and the old so its an irrelevant question. Regardless, the concept of the Trinity is found throughout both.Originally posted by makedonche View PostIf my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14
The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution. John AdamsComment
-
Because man does not understand the things of god that's how the trinity came into being.Under the trinity they make out as if god is not one but 3 gods.How silly is that.GOD is ONE as depicted in the bible.People don't know the bible where gods nature is revealed.God is manifested in another personage god the son.It says in the book of john .In the begining was the word(jesus is the word) and the word WAS GOD.How can that be??GOD IS GOD AND ITS POSSIBLE.THat means that jesus has allways existed.It says god made everything by jesus christ.There is nothing that wasn't made.Jesus is god.Jesus is the lord in the god family.Do you realize what LORD means??
Jesus spoke and god by his power made everything.
Do you realize what god as the everliving one.The life giver.GOD HAS ALLWAYS EXISTED.HE NEVER HAD A FATHER OR MOTHER.GOD WAS NOT CREATED he had no begining of days or end of nights.God knows everything.Last edited by George S.; 10-30-2014, 01:55 PM."Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
GOTSE DELCEVComment
-
George S, the concept of a trinity does not deny god being one. I'm not in favour of any of the three Abrahamic religions, but this point is clarified by christians.
It's not silly. On the contrary it's the basis of their faith.Last edited by spitfire; 10-30-2014, 02:01 PM.Comment
-
Your wrong.THe trinity is s mans attempt to define god.YOur wrong .its N ATTEMPTby man
Attempt to justify a fslse doctrine based on mens tradition.Last edited by George S.; 10-30-2014, 05:03 PM."Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
GOTSE DELCEVComment
-
Now I don't want to play devil's advocate here (or god's advocate in this case) but try to think water.
Water can be solid (ice) liquid (water) and vapour (steam). It's still water, it's still H2O.
I hope this helps.Comment
-
George, the Trinity is not claiming there are three Gods. In the spirit of Christian brotherhood, I would ask again where in the Bible do you find your view? We need to question everything we are taught about God and the way we do that is to go to the Bible and see if its true. I've already pointed out some of the references in the Bible to the Trinity. If you think they are wrong, can you explain why? Can you refer to any passages that support your view?Originally posted by George S. View PostLast edited by Vangelovski; 10-30-2014, 06:11 PM.If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14
The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution. John AdamsComment
-
Vangelovski
This is an example of an interpretation, on the forum, there are others if you read through from point #116 onwards.GeorgeS -Your wrong.THe trinity is s mans attempt to define god.YOur wrong .its N ATTEMPTby man
Attempt to justify a fslse doctrine based on mens tradition.
So has GeorgeS undertaken an honest study of the Bible, given his interpretation?I can't believe you would even make this statement!!! At least you can't deny it any more. The Bible is the only primary source that says anything about the Trinity. If you did not base your interpretation on it, how could you possibly be sure of anything in relation to the Trinity????
And it obviously means what?It also brings your credibility into question, particularly seeing as you made this comment and denied that it mean't what it obviously does mean:
[QUOTEIt is the issue at hand. Seeing as the Bible is the only primary source that provides information on the Trinity, studying it is the only way to be certain of what it says about the Trinity. So your "knowledge etc", if it is completely void of anything the Bible says about the Trinity is completely useless. You could make up any thing about the Trinity based on your "knowledge", but if it has nothing to do with the Biblical explanation of the Trinity, then it is nothing more than fantasy.][/QUOTE]
'Completely useless' in your interpretation, statement of fact from my interpretation.
That's correct, 'a concept' the actual word Trinity isn't even mentioned in the Bible, and a concept is:-Don't forget that the Trinity is a concept only found in the Bible, so I don't see how any knowledge, education or whatever that does not directly use the Bible as a source for its interpretation of the Trinity could hold any validity whatsoever. That is like saying that you have an interpretation of the Iliad, but have never read the Iliad and don't think you need to! How on earth could you interpret the Iliad without actually reading it!?!?! How on earth can you interpret the Trinity without the Bible!Which is thus open to interpretation.A concept is an abstraction or generalization from experience or the result of a transformation of existing conceptsOn Delchev's sarcophagus you can read the following inscription: "We swear the future generations to bury these sacred bones in the capital of Independent Macedonia. August 1923 Illinden"Comment
-
George isn't providing an alternative interpretation of the Trinity, he's denying its existence outright.Originally posted by makedonche View Post
That's two you've pointed out that are denying the existence of the Trinity, not trying to explain/interpret it.
What's a statement of fact?Originally posted by makedonche View PostIf my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14
The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution. John AdamsComment
-
The complete shape of the concept of the trinity was formulated in the 4th century A.D.
I had stated very early in the topic the importance of tradition to the faith. This tradition is based in the scriptures in order to explain them. So the trinity concept is faith because it's tradition. The holy tradition for the christians.
You don't have to decipher the meaning of trinity on your own just relying on the scriptures, tradition explains it for you.
However this means that a whole lot of more information has to be taken into account when explaining christianic faith.Last edited by spitfire; 10-31-2014, 02:32 AM.Comment
Comment