This is what made me think:
To which you answered:
Huh? What trichotomies? (Or did you mean tracheotomies, as in “going for the jugular”? :D)
“Judaism has Satan merely as an agent of God whose job it is to try and seduce man away from God. There is no dualistic nature, both good and evil are presented to man by God for man to choose as he will, Satan is merely doing the job God created him for. No rebellion, no heavenly battle, no angelic opposition to God.”
(Plaintively) Could someone explain the sitra achra to me, please? In the things I’ve read, it always seemed like an active war of destruction.
Just to be confusing, (reaches lazily for Book of Common Prayer)from the Creed of Athanasius,
Now the Catholic Faith is this, that we
worship one God in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity;
Neither confusing the Persons, nor
dividing the Substance.
For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son,
another of the Holy Ghost;
But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal,
the majesty co-eternal.
Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and
such is the Holy Ghost;
The Father uncreated,the Son uncreated,
the Holy Ghost uncreated;
The Father infinite, the Son infinite, the
Holy Ghost infinite;
The Father eternal, the Son eternal,
the Holy Ghost eternal;
And yet there are not three eternals, but one
eternal…
I’m sure that didn’t help at all. 
“…The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, the Holy Ghost incomprehensible;
And yet there are not three incomprehensibles, but one incomprehensible…”
(Not a joke; in some translations it’s really in there!!) 
dichotomy: a division or the process of dividing into two contradictory groups or entities
So, trichotomy: a division or the process of dividing into three contradictory groups or entities, i.e., philosophizing about the Trinity. And yes, I mades it up (and it’s a stretch in the first place). I’m a mod, I can do that.
**
Sitra achra? Never hoida it. Where would I find it?
Zev Steinhardt
Jews and Christians share a belief in one-and-only-one God, the God of Abraham, Moses, and Isaac. Though believers may express the Holy Trinity in different ways — and by analogies that, like all analogies, are flawed — they each and every one proclaim that the Lord our God, the Lord is One. My point was intended for nothing more than to explain to Zev that we do NOT believe that God is split into three parts, and that Jesus taught that the place where God dwells is in our hearts.
At any rate, many Christians do not believe in a Trinity anyway, and, as you know, this Christian believes in an Infinity. It’s a trifling matter that ought not to divide us from one another.
It means “The Other Side”…it’s a kabbalistic doctrine. It refers to the metaphysical realm where G-d is absent, and it represents wickedness in general. I think Reb Nachman of Breslov talked about it.
Yes, I think it’s Hassidic. Thanks, Captain Amazing. Did the Baal Shem Tov speak about it?
I’m very fond of the Athanasian Creed.
“For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity
to confess each Person by himself to be
both God and Lord,
So we are forbidden by the Catholic Religion to
speak of three Gods or three Lords.”
Nope, doesn’t say “incomprehensible” in my Prayer Book… but I do think I’ve seen that version before. Ah well.
“For us there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.”- Obligatory T.S. Eliot quote.
Libertarian, you clearly use a far broader definition of Christian than some would be comfortable with. I’d have a severe problem considering non-Trinitarians to be Christian in any real sense, as would my Church (whose opinion is what matters, not mine).
Kirk
No idea…you’d have to ask a Chassid. It’s really more kabballistic than specifically Chassidic, though, I believe, but I’ve never studied kabbalah, and I’m not Chasid, so I’m not the best person to ask on the subject.
Then Islam could be described as a sect of Judaism, right? I’m assuming that Judaism accepts that there might be more prophets in the future and that God could still reveal more to mankind. It’s not like Christianity that has elements that are directly contradictory to Jewish doctrine.
Well, no, actually I think there are some directly contradictory elements, although there may not be quite as many of them as there are vis-vis Christianity.
Just as one example Muhammed did something sort of similar to Paul ( or Jesus ) - Tossed the Mitzvot and replaced them with his own ( or God’s own, depending on your viewpoint ) set of religious laws. Now the Muslim set has some similarity to the Jewish set in certain respects ( prohibition on eating pork, for example ), but it is also different in a number of particulars ( I don’t have an exhaustive list handy, but I’m sure this is the case - Zev or others might be able to go into greater detail ). So at least by the test of strict orthodoxy, Muslims are no longer Jews because they do not recognize the same set of religious commandments. Of course it’s possible that with Reform Judaism that particular issue might be just a little muddier, I don’t know. But even in the case of Reform Jews, I believe they at least recognize the same set of Mitzvot as the Orthodox, even if they are a bit more flexible in terms of observance ( but corrections on this issue are welcome ).
- Tamerlane
People may define it in whatever way they wish, but this is the definition I favor: “By this will all men know that you are my disciples, that you love one another.” — Jesus
No mention of a Trinity there.
Oh, sure. Set an unattainable standard, why don’t you?
Badtz Maru:
Not really, because Jews were not originators of it. To be a “sect” implies that it began within Judaism and then gained a distinct identity somehow; Islam was separate from the beginning.
Chaim Mattis Keller
Ah, but if Mohammed taught that the God of Abraham was the one true God, and that the sons of Ishmael were to follow Him as the sons of Isaac already were – and then was rejected by the Jews of Mecca – which is, according to Islamic tradition, what actually happened – then one has a slightly different perception of the situation, CMK.
Well, just to confuse the issue, mankind is also a trichotomy (yes, that’s a word). Since the Bible mentions mankind made in God’s image, and Christain faith holds God as a trinity, man is made in a similar trichotomic (is that a word?) image. (I believe this is mentioned in Thessalonians, though, I don’t recall.) Other animals, on the other hand, only have a soul and a body, they lack the immortal spirit.
The three parts of man (from the Greek texts) were the pneuma (immortal spirit), the psuche (soul), and the soma (body).
The body is just what it sounds like. It is the wholly mortal flesh of a human. It corresponds to the God the Son (Jesus) aspect. Jesus was crucified and died as a mortal being. Once the body of man dies, that’s about it for that.
Next up we have the psuche, the soul. This is the link between the body and the spirit. This is the element of all animals that makes up their personality, their feelings, their rationale, etc. Basically it is the “mind” (hence, where we get the prefix “psych-” from). It is essentially what gives humanity its “humaness.” It is also where spiritual battles take place (if you believe in spiritual warfare). Like the body, it feels pain, but of an entirely different sort. Essentially mortal, it is the link in humans between the body and the spirit. It corresponds to God the Holy Spirit, which represents the link between God the Son and God the Father (and humanity and God).
Finally we have the pneuma, the immortal spirit. The part of humanity that will exist beyond this world. It corresponds with God the Father, in that it is everlasting. Humans are the only animals with this aspect. The way I unerstand it is that it’s rather hard to define what exactly it is, but it most likely contains some aspects in common with the soul, but is invulnerable to the things that effect the soul.
Be that as it may, Polycarp, if it didn’t begin within Judaism, it can’t be said to have been a sect of it, even if Mohammed’s original (and never successful) conversion attempts were to Jews.
But of course, all this is really just semantics, unless the point of this thread has come to define what a “sect” is.
Chaim Mattis Keller
You think that’s something, His moral imperative was “Be perfect.”
Why does this surprise or shock you? What else would he have suggested to do, go out into the world and just sin a little?! That wouldn’t be much of a religious teaching philosophy, now would it?