Kyle Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 I feel really stupid, but I guess I can confess to you folks. I was driving down the road the other day, and out of the blue, a thought occurred to me. During those years that I spent in the church that preaches the trinity, my mind separated old testament god and jesus. Even in my deconversion, I didn't see that for an xian to believe the trinity they must believe that JESUS committed the atrocities in the old testament. It is very convenient to separate the kind, loving figure of jesus from the judgemental god of the old testament. But if jesus is the alpha and omega in the xian belief, he was there all along. I know this is very elementary to most of you, but I felt like is was yet another breakthrough in my deconversion. So I ask this...How have you heard xians reconcile this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Davka Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 The way I've always heard the Trinity explained, Father, Son, and Holy Spook are three unique "persons" who are still somehow "god" when you mix them in a food processor. Or something. Trinitarians will gleefully tell you which "person" of the Trinity did what - like, it was the Holy Spook who did the tongues of fire on Pentecost, and not Jesus. Similarly, it was that mean old Father who did the temper tantrums in the OT, and not Jesus. Don't expect logical thinking from Christians, especially with regard to the Trinity. The Trinity is a "mystery," which is beyond the comprehension of us wormlike humans. The fact that we're the ones who made up the whole thing in the first place ('cause the Trinity sure as hell isn't in the bible) is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 The way I've always heard the Trinity explained, Father, Son, and Holy Spook are three unique "persons" who are still somehow "god" when you mix them in a food processor. Oh, Jesus, you made me spill my coffee! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Davka Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 The way I've always heard the Trinity explained, Father, Son, and Holy Spook are three unique "persons" who are still somehow "god" when you mix them in a food processor. Oh, Jesus, you made me spill my coffee! No, no - that was the Holy Spook, not Jesus. Jesus doesn't do coffee. The contract limits him to spilt milk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted September 30, 2009 Author Share Posted September 30, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
★ Citsonga ★ Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Jesus doesn't do coffee. The contract limits him to spilt milk. Speaking of Jesus and milk, what was going through God's mind when he, as a hungry baby, latched onto the virgin Mary's breast? Hmmmm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Davka Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Jesus doesn't do coffee. The contract limits him to spilt milk. Speaking of Jesus and milk, what was going through God's mind when he, as a hungry baby, latched onto the virgin Mary's breast? Hmmmm.... "Crap! I should've made one side chocolate and the other strawberry!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
★ Citsonga ★ Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Jesus doesn't do coffee. The contract limits him to spilt milk. Speaking of Jesus and milk, what was going through God's mind when he, as a hungry baby, latched onto the virgin Mary's breast? Hmmmm.... "Crap! I should've made one side chocolate and the other strawberry!" Hmmmm.... Flavors aren't exactly what I was thinking.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Jesus doesn't do coffee. The contract limits him to spilt milk. Speaking of Jesus and milk, what was going through God's mind when he, as a hungry baby, latched onto the virgin Mary's breast? Hmmmm.... "Crap! I should've made one side chocolate and the other strawberry!" While you're at it, could you make semen low calorie, nutritious, and taste like chocolate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centauri Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I feel really stupid, but I guess I can confess to you folks. I was driving down the road the other day, and out of the blue, a thought occurred to me. During those years that I spent in the church that preaches the trinity, my mind separated old testament god and jesus. Even in my deconversion, I didn't see that for an xian to believe the trinity they must believe that JESUS committed the atrocities in the old testament. It is very convenient to separate the kind, loving figure of jesus from the judgemental god of the old testament. But if jesus is the alpha and omega in the xian belief, he was there all along. I know this is very elementary to most of you, but I felt like is was yet another breakthrough in my deconversion. So I ask this...How have you heard xians reconcile this? They never acknowledge that any atrocities were committed, it was holy justice. I think one of the beauties of the Trinity is that it paves the way for Christians to employ a form of Good Cop-Bad Cop scenario where God the Father(the Bad Cop) will beat you with his club o' righteousness but Jesus(the Good Cop) comes to your rescue and saves your sorry ass from the wrath of his Daddy, which is really an alter ego. In this way, the same God that strikes terror into human worms can also be their savior, making them totally dependent on this multiple personality deity(and the clergy that understand all "his" quirks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest marabod Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Trinity is a Hellenic concept of 6th century BC, developed by the mathematician Pythagoras of Samos. Strange that people see only Trinity in Christianity - because it is not monotheistic at all, and has an extended Pantheon. At the top are these three, Father being the senior, the Creator, Son being symbol of Material world and (in Christianity only) a god of Abstract Good, and Holy Ghost representing Life as such; however there is also Satan, god of Abstract Evil, and at least one goddess, the virgin Mary. Together it makes 5 supreme deities. In addition there are Archangels, and the lower level of the pyramid is made of various saints. Almost Mt Olympus... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheri butterfly Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I feel really stupid, but I guess I can confess to you folks. I was driving down the road the other day, and out of the blue, a thought occurred to me. During those years that I spent in the church that preaches the trinity, my mind separated old testament god and jesus. Even in my deconversion, I didn't see that for an xian to believe the trinity they must believe that JESUS committed the atrocities in the old testament. It is very convenient to separate the kind, loving figure of jesus from the judgemental god of the old testament. But if jesus is the alpha and omega in the xian belief, he was there all along. I know this is very elementary to most of you, but I felt like is was yet another breakthrough in my deconversion. So I ask this...How have you heard xians reconcile this? How can we determine if Jesus was a loving person when historically and academically we only know that there may of been a dude named Jesus who was crucified by PIlate..Other then that we have zip about this person except the gospels which were written 30-70 plus years after the ... on hearsay and conjecture ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest marabod Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 How can we determine if Jesus was a loving person when historically and academically we only know that there may of been a dude named Jesus who was crucified by PIlate..Other then that we have zip about this person except the gospels which were written 30-70 plus years after the ... on hearsay and conjecture ...... Haha, Sheri - and even this we do not know academically but only presume being so basing on murky scriptures and Nicene Creed. its all abut that invisible thing lurking in the skies and controlling what we do in the toilet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheri butterfly Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 How can we determine if Jesus was a loving person when historically and academically we only know that there may of been a dude named Jesus who was crucified by PIlate..Other then that we have zip about this person except the gospels which were written 30-70 plus years after the ... on hearsay and conjecture ...... Haha, Sheri - and even this we do not know academically but only presume being so basing on murky scriptures and Nicene Creed. its all abut that invisible thing lurking in the skies and controlling what we do in the toilet. agreed We are limited on how much truth value we can assign to the Jesus lore with one miniscule mention by a ancient historical writing that mentioned a dude named Jesus... IMO I think its made up ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest marabod Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Basically all what we know is that currently Jesus is dead - i.e. is in the same state of non-existence as he was before he was born. In the historical scale of 2000 years, some 40 years of being existent is 2% only, so by suggesting he could be living we only make a 2% mistake! Bwahahaha! The longer time passes, the more historical he would become. And if we compare these 40 years with the age of the earth (in scientific sense) then he becomes almost 100% real Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 Marabod and Sheri: I completely agree. I'm not convinced that Jesus ever existed. My original point was that with all the crap I was taught to believe, this split-personality deity thing never occurred to me. It was yet another "how could I have been so stupid" moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HRDWarrior Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I've heard some random excuses by christians to try to put it all together (this was one of those questions I had as a christian), but no one has anything that resembles a good answer to that question, even by christian standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheri butterfly Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Marabod and Sheri: I completely agree. I'm not convinced that Jesus ever existed. My original point was that with all the crap I was taught to believe, this split-personality deity thing never occurred to me. It was yet another "how could I have been so stupid" moment. OMG Kyle,you are anything but stupid, it takes incredible courage and an open thinking mind to let go of religious conditioning..(((HUGS))) marabear and my posts are meant to help, a lot of the christian lore is taken on assumption that is is fact no questions asked as faith is revered ....... at one time I even excepted Jesus no questions asked ... In America critical thinking is not a skill that is cultivated let alone valued by the majority. Many of us are a product of this culture .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 And isn't it disturbing that once you step out of it, it's like your in an episode of the Twilight Zone??? The fairy tale is so ingrained that it's just taken as fact. Things like Hell. My wife (jokingly) tells me I'm going to Hell. I tell her that I will get there as soon as I'm finished in Neverneverland (second star on the right and straight on til morning) And the ASSUMPTION that everyone just HAS to believe in gawd. I should just start talking about the FSM like he's my best friend and he's the one who helped me find my keys and keeps me from choking on my food by blessing it at every meal, blah, blah, blah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 And the ASSUMPTION that everyone just HAS to believe in gawd. This idiotic student in my English class actually said this the other day. He flat out said that everyone believes in God yet he knows the professor himself is an agnostic. Even when I was a Christian, I wasn't stupid enough to believe there were no atheists. Even the bible says that people who don't believe in God are fools but apparently the bible is wrong to assume that there are non-Christians in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 After I fell in with the Baptists I worked on the assumption that everyone believed in God. The way it works is quite simple and it's even "supported" in the bible (but I'm not going to bother trying if anyone asks because I don't care enough anymore). Everyone believes in "god" but they simple DENY/REJECT it on some level. The degree to which they deny it will be how it manifests itself outwardly. So atheists deny the most. So they are angry and on and on. The agnostics sort of deny it. They're not as angry. Then you have people that accept a "god" but it's the wrong one. They're just confused or deceived. It's my understanding that "angry" should be a synonym for "open to hearing about our stupid religion and being converted" or something to that effect. You might hear it called more simply "open minded" compared to "closed minded" or "hard hearted" or "stiff necked" (for those who like the biblical terms for not wanting to listen to bullshit). Angry is not angry per se though you are "angry" at "god" which is why you deny/reject it though you know full well it exists and loves you. This is when they invoke a parent/child concept and the child rejects the loving parent and hates it and so the loving parent does all it can, short of forcing the child of course, to come to its senses. The child is angry and senseless rejecting all that is good and wonderful in its ignorance. At least those who accept the concept of a god kind of get it and might be open to switching to the right team. So I thought that everyone knew and basically believed in God (the real one) but denied it one some level for any number of reasons (usually selfish and arrogant reasons of course). And if they weren't going to humble themselves before it was too late then that pride was going to send them right to hell. How sad for them. All they needed to do was acknowledge what they already knew. Like saying to yourself "The sky is Raspberry" because you refuse to admit to yourself that it's blue. If you just admit it's blue, if only to yourself, then you don't have to live with that lie anymore and you can be a happy person and reap the rewards. But instead you choose to live the lie and deny/reject what you already know. Little did I know that others were thinking similar thoughts about people like me. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest marabod Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 After I fell in with the Baptists I worked on the assumption that everyone believed in God. The way it works is quite simple and it's even "supported" in the bible (but I'm not going to bother trying if anyone asks because I don't care enough anymore). Everyone believes in "god" but they simple DENY/REJECT it on some level. The degree to which they deny it will be how it manifests itself outwardly. So atheists deny the most. So they are angry and on and on. The agnostics sort of deny it. They're not as angry. Then you have people that accept a "god" but it's the wrong one. They're just confused or deceived. It's my understanding that "angry" should be a synonym for "open to hearing about our stupid religion and being converted" or something to that effect. You might hear it called more simply "open minded" compared to "closed minded" or "hard hearted" or "stiff necked" (for those who like the biblical terms for not wanting to listen to bullshit). Angry is not angry per se though you are "angry" at "god" which is why you deny/reject it though you know full well it exists and loves you. This is when they invoke a parent/child concept and the child rejects the loving parent and hates it and so the loving parent does all it can, short of forcing the child of course, to come to its senses. The child is angry and senseless rejecting all that is good and wonderful in its ignorance. At least those who accept the concept of a god kind of get it and might be open to switching to the right team. So I thought that everyone knew and basically believed in God (the real one) but denied it one some level for any number of reasons (usually selfish and arrogant reasons of course). And if they weren't going to humble themselves before it was too late then that pride was going to send them right to hell. How sad for them. All they needed to do was acknowledge what they already knew. Like saying to yourself "The sky is Raspberry" because you refuse to admit to yourself that it's blue. If you just admit it's blue, if only to yourself, then you don't have to live with that lie anymore and you can be a happy person and reap the rewards. But instead you choose to live the lie and deny/reject what you already know. Little did I know that others were thinking similar thoughts about people like me. mwc That's bellissimo, mwc! Thank you for sharing this - to me this is a revelation, I am 52 and never thought someone can actually use such thinking model. So practically what you are saying is that the bolsheviks and Chicoms were right, not wasting time on converting "true believers" but simply shooting them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest marabod Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 It's funny, as a tyke I was so in tune with the OT God (he reminded me of my family) that I couldn't believe his kid turned out so nice. When the Christians really pressed upon me the idea that Jesus was not just the son of God, but God himself, my vague Christianity crumbled. I was somewhere in the 10-13 age range. I thought they were all nuts. Phanta Looks like at that tender age you were a very smart - WHOOPS!boy girl! And observant too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NonXNonExX Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 The trinity concept is actually very simple. The holy ghost is the spy that watches you even when you are in the toilet (be careful not to shake that thing too long!), the father is the one who judges how good or bad you are and punishes the bad people, and JC is the one who hands out the rewards for those are good enough to deserve them. Though they are three different persons, they share one gigantic brain that keeps them in constant contact with each other. Unfortunately, a careless copyist left this part out of the gospels. Hope that clears things up for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeygirl Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 I think its great you posted this because it hadn't clicked with me either. My friends hate when I talk about the OT because they said Jesus changed everything...Jesus wasn't that way. Well if Jesus is God he was there at the beginning and he was telling Moses to do those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts