If Jesus Is God

[Guest end3]

Your going to Heaven for that childlike refutation!!!  Congratulations!!!  See you there brother.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I'll save you a seat, End3!

[Storm]

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

[Guest end3]

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

The problem is Storm, with no disrespect to the Prof, the consensus is that analogous is not real.  End of discussion.  But, yes, a genuine response would be fun.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

 

To begin with, the claim that I have wisdom is a serious accusation for which I'm going to need you to provide proof.

 

That said, I will say that I always preferred the water analogy over the egg or clover analogy.  Firstly, both clover and egg exist in one constant state; but we are invited to believe that god exists in different states (manifestations, personalities, components--take your pick of verbiage here).  Secondly, for whatever reason, I have always been a master at finding four leaf clovers, perhaps because I have come to realize that four leaf clovers are not nearly as rare as are people who have the patience to find them.  Nonetheless, the existence of four leaf clovers belies the analogy.

 

For these reasons, I have always preferred the water analogy for explaining the trinity.  However, the flaw in this analogy has already been pointed out by End3.  Water cannot exist in all three "manifestations" simultaneously.  Some will argue that you can boil ice in a pot and have ice, steam, and liquid water present simultaneously; however, if we are discussing the essence of god, then we should extend the metaphor to include the essence of water: namely, the H2O molecule, which cannot exist in any more than one state at any given point in time.  Thus, as End3 pointed out, the state of manifestation depends upon condition, and in the case of water, the condition required is heat.  Unfortunately, the good book tells us that god is the same yesterday, today, and forevermore.  This means that irrespective of conditions, god does not change.  For me, this is where the water analogy falls flat.

 

It might be fun to start a thread to explore this topic further.

[Guest end3]

 

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

 

To begin with, the claim that I have wisdom is a serious accusation for which I'm going to need you to provide proof.

 

That said, I will say that I always preferred the water analogy over the egg or clover analogy.  Firstly, both clover and egg exist in one constant state; but we are invited to believe that god exists in different states (manifestations, personalities, components--take your pick of verbiage here).  Secondly, for whatever reason, I have always been a master at finding four leaf clovers, perhaps because I have come to realize that four leaf clovers are not nearly as rare as are people who have the patience to find them.  Nonetheless, the existence of four leaf clovers belies the analogy.

 

For these reasons, I have always preferred the water analogy for explaining the trinity.  However, the flaw in this analogy has already been pointed out by End3.  Water cannot exist in all three "manifestations" simultaneously.  Some will argue that you can boil ice in a pot and have ice, steam, and liquid water present simultaneously; however, if we are discussing the essence of god, then we should extend the metaphor to include the essence of water: namely, the H2O molecule, which cannot exist in any more than one state at any given point in time.  Thus, as End3 pointed out, the state of manifestation depends upon condition, and in the case of water, the condition required is heat.  Unfortunately, the good book tells us that god is the same yesterday, today, and forevermore.  This means that irrespective of conditions, god does not change.  For me, this is where the water analogy falls flat.

 

It might be fun to start a thread to explore this topic further.

So the Holy Spirit is not a result of "fire"?  What does the triple point of water look like?  What does God look like?  You are saying that science predicts this "substance" yet because you don't see it in reality, it's false?  Jiminy Crickets Prof. 

 

Let me ask you this, and please be specific.  What happens when those conditions are met exactly?

[Storm]

 

 

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

 

To begin with, the claim that I have wisdom is a serious accusation for which I'm going to need you to provide proof.

2 Corinthians 13:1b : “Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.”

Can I get a Witness!!!!?????

 

 

 

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

 

To begin with, the claim that I have wisdom is a serious accusation for which I'm going to need you to provide proof.

 

That said, I will say that I always preferred the water analogy over the egg or clover analogy.  Firstly, both clover and egg exist in one constant state; but we are invited to believe that god exists in different states (manifestations, personalities, components--take your pick of verbiage here).  Secondly, for whatever reason, I have always been a master at finding four leaf clovers, perhaps because I have come to realize that four leaf clovers are not nearly as rare as are people who have the patience to find them.  Nonetheless, the existence of four leaf clovers belies the analogy.

 

For these reasons, I have always preferred the water analogy for explaining the trinity.  However, the flaw in this analogy has already been pointed out by End3.  Water cannot exist in all three "manifestations" simultaneously.  Some will argue that you can boil ice in a pot and have ice, steam, and liquid water present simultaneously; however, if we are discussing the essence of god, then we should extend the metaphor to include the essence of water: namely, the H2O molecule, which cannot exist in any more than one state at any given point in time.  Thus, as End3 pointed out, the state of manifestation depends upon condition, and in the case of water, the condition required is heat.  Unfortunately, the good book tells us that god is the same yesterday, today, and forevermore.  This means that irrespective of conditions, god does not change.  For me, this is where the water analogy falls flat.

 

It might be fun to start a thread to explore this topic further.

 

 

I agree. I would like to talk theology of Trinitarianism. Count me in.

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

 

To begin with, the claim that I have wisdom is a serious accusation for which I'm going to need you to provide proof.

 

That said, I will say that I always preferred the water analogy over the egg or clover analogy.  Firstly, both clover and egg exist in one constant state; but we are invited to believe that god exists in different states (manifestations, personalities, components--take your pick of verbiage here).  Secondly, for whatever reason, I have always been a master at finding four leaf clovers, perhaps because I have come to realize that four leaf clovers are not nearly as rare as are people who have the patience to find them.  Nonetheless, the existence of four leaf clovers belies the analogy.

 

For these reasons, I have always preferred the water analogy for explaining the trinity.  However, the flaw in this analogy has already been pointed out by End3.  Water cannot exist in all three "manifestations" simultaneously.  Some will argue that you can boil ice in a pot and have ice, steam, and liquid water present simultaneously; however, if we are discussing the essence of god, then we should extend the metaphor to include the essence of water: namely, the H2O molecule, which cannot exist in any more than one state at any given point in time.  Thus, as End3 pointed out, the state of manifestation depends upon condition, and in the case of water, the condition required is heat.  Unfortunately, the good book tells us that god is the same yesterday, today, and forevermore.  This means that irrespective of conditions, god does not change.  For me, this is where the water analogy falls flat.

 

It might be fun to start a thread to explore this topic further.

So the Holy Spirit is not a result of "fire"?  What does the triple point of water look like?  What does God look like?  You are saying that science predicts this "substance" yet because you don't see it in reality, it's false?  Jiminy Crickets Prof. 

 

Let me ask you this, and please be specific.  What happens when those conditions are met exactly?

 

 

End3, I think you misunderstood what I was saying.  I'm trying to say that the water molecule can only exist in one state at one time.  Given the proper temperature, it can go from liquid to gas, from solid to liquid, etc.  But the essential molecule cannot be liquid and gas at the same time.  This conditional nature of relationship fails to hold true in explaining a god who is changeless even in changing conditions.  Yes, science explains the relationship of the different "manifestations" of water; but what we don't see in reality, is god's nature or essence being changeable based on condition.  Does that make sense?

[chrisstavrous]

I think it would be fair to speculate that the will of God in the person of Christ would be specific and have potential limitations.

But not limitations that would make him imperfect.

[chrisstavrous]

 

 

 

 

No, but you could take the bait on the triple point discussion....it's always good for a mental rabbit hole/masturbation.

Okay, I'll (warily) bite. Which is better: one god with three heads, or three gods with one head?

Am referring to the triple point of water....where all states can theoretically exist as one.....and attaching that to the verse in Mark or John maybe that relates the Sprit to water.

 

Am just speculating at that point there would be more potential properties existing as one vs. X properties in one particular state.....state being dependent on condition. And then move this concept back to your trinity discussion.....

 

To your question.....reminds me of the AT&T commercials where the man is interviewing the children..."Which is better". Very intuitive to the children that more is better, and certainly more God properties are better, i.e. Heaven. "Unless you become like little children....."

Yes, but no one needs faith of the triple properties of water.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

 

No, but you could take the bait on the triple point discussion....it's always good for a mental rabbit hole/masturbation.

Okay, I'll (warily) bite. Which is better: one god with three heads, or three gods with one head?

Am referring to the triple point of water....where all states can theoretically exist as one.....and attaching that to the verse in Mark or John maybe that relates the Sprit to water.

 

Am just speculating at that point there would be more potential properties existing as one vs. X properties in one particular state.....state being dependent on condition. And then move this concept back to your trinity discussion.....

 

To your question.....reminds me of the AT&T commercials where the man is interviewing the children..."Which is better". Very intuitive to the children that more is better, and certainly more God properties are better, i.e. Heaven. "Unless you become like little children....."

Yes, but no one needs faith of the triple properties of water.

 

 

Are you saying you no longer worship Poseidon?  ATHEIST!!!

[florduh]

I don't accept the premise that it's possible to explain the Trinity or that anyone should even try; that would imply that it is an examinable real thing. The Trinity is supposed to be an unsolvable mystery and as such is an important part of the mythology. If we could make sense of it, it would be useless to the priest class.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I don't accept the premise that it's possible to explain the Trinity or that anyone should even try; that would imply that it is an examinable real thing. The Trinity is supposed to be an unsolvable mystery and as such is an important part of the mythology. If we could make sense of it, it would be useless to the priest class.

 

Not an unreasonable position, Florduh.  It would probably be of more benefit to discuss Trinity from "The Matrix."  I do enjoy exploring End3's mind, but, point taken and duly noted.

[florduh]

 I do enjoy exploring End3's mind

 

You, sir, are a masochist!

 

Anyway, just my humble opinion that the Trinity concept wasn't designed to be understood.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 I do enjoy exploring End3's mind

 

You, sir, are a masochist!

 

Anyway, just my humble opinion that the Trinity concept wasn't designed to be understood.

 

 

But Trinity from "The Matrix" was designed to be totally hot; on that we can, at least, agree, surely?

[Guest end3]

I disagree Prof. simply because my mind can't agree.  What you are saying in my mind would suggest that there would be conditions contributing to each state.  What if you had one molecule at those conditions? 

[Guest end3]

An equilibrium....what state exists?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I disagree Prof. simply because my mind can't agree.  What you are saying in my mind would suggest that there would be conditions contributing to each state.  What if you had one molecule at those conditions? 

 

If you could show me a molecule of H2O that was both liquid and gaseous simultaneously, then I would be willing to change my mind about the fundamental nature of water.  If you could demonstrate that an H2O molecule could repeatedly be placed in such a state, then the scientific community might even be willing to review your findings.  You might even get a nobel prize, so I certainly encourage you to try.  

 

However, I am compelled by the sacred text to believe that god does not change simply because the environment or the conditions have changed.  According to the text, god is different from water, in that he is the same yesterday, today, and forevermore (which, naturally, doesn't take into account all the times god experienced regret and repentance).  Water changes in form dependent upon the temperature of the environment; god is supposed to be changeless.

[chrisstavrous]

 

 

 

 

 

No, but you could take the bait on the triple point discussion....it's always good for a mental rabbit hole/masturbation.

Okay, I'll (warily) bite. Which is better: one god with three heads, or three gods with one head?

Am referring to the triple point of water....where all states can theoretically exist as one.....and attaching that to the verse in Mark or John maybe that relates the Sprit to water.

 

Am just speculating at that point there would be more potential properties existing as one vs. X properties in one particular state.....state being dependent on condition. And then move this concept back to your trinity discussion.....

 

To your question.....reminds me of the AT&T commercials where the man is interviewing the children..."Which is better". Very intuitive to the children that more is better, and certainly more God properties are better, i.e. Heaven. "Unless you become like little children....."

Yes, but no one needs faith of the triple properties of water.

Are you saying you no longer worship Poseidon? ATHEIST!!!

I just got what you said, jezz I'm slow.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

 

 

 

No, but you could take the bait on the triple point discussion....it's always good for a mental rabbit hole/masturbation.

Okay, I'll (warily) bite. Which is better: one god with three heads, or three gods with one head?

Am referring to the triple point of water....where all states can theoretically exist as one.....and attaching that to the verse in Mark or John maybe that relates the Sprit to water.

 

Am just speculating at that point there would be more potential properties existing as one vs. X properties in one particular state.....state being dependent on condition. And then move this concept back to your trinity discussion.....

 

To your question.....reminds me of the AT&T commercials where the man is interviewing the children..."Which is better". Very intuitive to the children that more is better, and certainly more God properties are better, i.e. Heaven. "Unless you become like little children....."

Yes, but no one needs faith of the triple properties of water.

Are you saying you no longer worship Poseidon? ATHEIST!!!

I just got what you said, jezz I'm slow.

 

 

I didn't see through religion until I was 30, talk about being slow!

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

 

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

 

To begin with, the claim that I have wisdom is a serious accusation for which I'm going to need you to provide proof.

2 Corinthians 13:1b : “Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.”

Can I get a Witness!!!!?????

 

Apparently not, but I don't agree with the premise of 2 Cor. anyway.  It would be relatively easy to get 2 or 3 people to agree with you, irrespective of if your position were true or not.

[Storm]

 

 

 

 

I have to confess that the water analogy in describing the trinity never made much sense to me. In the analogy, despite the state of the elements, they are still the same element. But in the trinity, the godhead is three distinct beings that work in unity, as far as I understand it. The trinity is an obscure thing to glean from the bible, and I have never fully understood its relevance. It always made me curious as to why people prayed to the father and the son, but never the holy spirit. If they are all the same, why would it matter who you prayed to, or for that matter, in whose name you prayed in. Just made little sense to me, and I suppose, to others as well. Professor, care to expound with your vast wisdom on its premise and what you think about it? Inquiring minds would like to know.

 

To begin with, the claim that I have wisdom is a serious accusation for which I'm going to need you to provide proof.

2 Corinthians 13:1b : “Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.”

Can I get a Witness!!!!?????

 

Apparently not, but I don't agree with the premise of 2 Cor. anyway.  It would be relatively easy to get 2 or 3 people to agree with you, irrespective of if your position were true or not.

 

Well, in my opinion you are wise. So that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

In other news, I got to thinking more about the trinity and I realized that I know little about the role of jesus or the holy spirit in the old testament. I have been told that some of the appearances of angelic beings are actually appearances by jesus, but truthfully, I never really studied to verify this claim and just accepted it without thinking (like a good Christian). I cannot think of a reference where the HS is even mentioned in the ot. The only thing I could think of that might fit the Trinitarian belief in the ot is the statement that god made in genesis when he stated "let us make man in our image". Who is the "us" in this statement? I was reading a nice article about what the jews believe about the trinity and the author brought this interesting tidbit up:

 

"Not only are these concepts of a 'composite unity' and 'plural oneness' contradictory and untenable, as well as unbiblical, as we have seen, but there are more than just three manifestations of Gd in the Hebrew Scriptures. There is of course, the Spirit of Gd, as we read in Genesis 1:2:

And The Spirit Of Gd (Ruach Elohm) moved over the face of the waters. [Genesis 1:2]

But there is also an Evil Spirit of Gd, as we read in I Samuel 16:23:

And it came to pass, when The Evil Spirit Of Gd (Ruach Elohm Raah) was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him. [i Samuel 16:23]

There is also a Lying Spirit of Gd, in I Kings 22:23:

Now therefore, behold, the Etrnl hath put a lying spirit (Ruach Sheker) in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Etrnl hath spoken evil concerning thee. [i Kings 22:23]

In Exodus 12:23, we are told that Gd will smite the Egyptians. But later in the same verse, we see that it is the Destroyer who smites the Egyptians.

For the Etrnl will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when He seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, the Etrnl will pass over the door, and will not suffer the Destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you. [Exodus 12:23]

One could claim that the Destroyer should be seen as a Person in Gd, just as the Spirit of Gd is seen as a Person in Gd. To this we could add that the Lying Spirit of Gd should be seen as a Person in Gd, and the Evil Spirit of Gd should be seen as a Person in Gd. This would mean that instead of the trinity in the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit, one should have the Father, the son, the Holy Spirit, the Lying Spirit, and the Evil Spirit, as well as the Destroyer. Should we add to this the Burning Bush?

Why did the Christian community stop at the three of the trinity, when they could have also had more persons in the supposed compound unity of Gd? The reason is that the highest deities in the other religions of the area also came in threes:

Babylon had: [1] Anu [2] Bel and [3] Ena;

Egypt had: [1] Osiris [2] Horus and [3] Isis

India had: [1] Brahma [2] Vishnu and [3] Shiva;

Rome had: [1] Jupiter [2] Pluto and [3] Neptune;

Greece had: [1] Zeus [2] Hades and [3] Poseidon;

And so the Christian community took their own trinity of only the Father, the son and the Holy Spirit, disregarding the Lying Spirit, the Evil Spirit, and the Destroyer, not to mention the Burning Bush."

 

Interesting point of view. I think there may be a lot of Christians that serve the lying spirit and the evil spirit. Just my opinion.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

You're too kind, Storm.

[Guest end3]

And truthfully Prof, I don't think it would make any difference with 1+number of water molecules, the answer should be the same....imo.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

End3, I still think we are misunderstanding each other, which grieves me.