# My first GD question, and yes, it's a religious one. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 12, 2002, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929 "2002-10-12T04:59:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2002, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/201 "2002-10-23T23:54:54Z")
Jim says “words on paper vs actual personal experience, hmmmm” ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/202 "2002-10-24T00:06:09Z")
Seriously though **H4E** (and I know we’ve been here before); what is it that makes you so sure that **Lekatt** is wrong and you’re right? the Bible? Great; what makes you so sure that your approach to the Bible (i.e. that it’s a consistent, complete factual document to be swallowed whole) is the approach that God expects of his creation, rather than **Lekatt** ’s somewhat liberal approach (wherein to get to the truth, we must burrow though the layers of prejudice that exist because it was written down by imperfect humans). What makes you so sure that it isn’t **you** that is being decieved into thinking that absolute literal interpretation is important? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/203 "2002-10-24T03:28:17Z")
Near Death Experiences do line up with the teachings of Jesus. They don’t line up with the teachings of fear. ---
**Author:** ![Freyr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/freyr/32/5763_2.png) [@Freyr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freyr)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/204 "2002-10-24T05:37:06Z")
\*\*H4E wrote: I don’t know what you mean by “show us your interpretation is better”. I read sentences that say that He did this for us yet you say it’s not true.\*\* No, I never said it was untrue, I simply asked why I should believe your interpretation of it over someone else’s. I suspect that you never will understand when someone asks you to defend your interpretation. You maintain that your position is the right one (over **Lekatt’s** ). Yet, when asked to defend this or show “why” all you can do is quote Scripture. Can you analyse? Can you deduce? Can you **THINK** and show us the chain of logic that lead you to the conclusion that your version of Scripture is the correct one? From reading all your postings, all I can conclude is that no, you can’t think, or deduce or analyse. All you can do is simply quote Scripture. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/205 "2002-10-24T07:55:25Z")
I think this debate has come down to “what is the correct teaching for Christians?” I say it is what Jesus taught from the Hillsides of Gallilee. His4Ever says it is the doctrine salvation: Jesus was sacrificed for our sins and we must believe that or go to hell. Now, I might be persuaded if someone can answer my question intelligently. When I went to church I was taught that God was a trinity. God the Father’ God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Spirit. Now speaking of the salvation doctrine, we know that the Romans didn’t sacrifice Jesus for the sins of the world because it was against Roman law. We know also that Jesus’ followers didn’t sacrifice Jesus for the sins of the world because they loved Him. So the only one left is God the Father that was powerful enough to do the job. Now here we have God the Father, sacrificing God the Son (jesus) to God the Holy Spirit. Or in other words, God sacrificed Himself to Himself for the sins of the world. Please tell me why this is Biblical and should be taught to Christians instead of the teachings of Jesus. Oh, yes, since He was God, He would have known in advance that people would sin. I personally believe this is not Biblical and really doesn’t make sense. Show me where I am wrong. Please explain. Love Leroy ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/206 "2002-10-24T12:42:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\*When I went to church I was taught that God was a trinity. > God the Father’ > God the Son (Jesus), and > God the Holy Spirit. > > Now speaking of the salvation doctrine, we know that the Romans didn’t sacrifice Jesus for the sins of the world because it was against Roman law. > > We know also that Jesus’ followers didn’t sacrifice Jesus for the sins of the world because they loved Him. > > So the only one left is God the Father that was powerful enough to do the job. > > Now here we have God the Father, sacrificing God the Son (jesus) to God the Holy Spirit. Or in other words, > God sacrificed Himself to Himself for the sins of the world. \*\*I believe I’ve heard this before somewhere, but it seems to me there is a logical step or two missing from your presentations of it. > [@](#): > > **Please tell me why this is Biblical and should be taught to Christians instead of the teachings of Jesus.** Now this is bordering on being a straw man argument; first we have to establish whether this really is what is taught to Christians. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/207 "2002-10-24T21:01:10Z")
Please feel free to fill the steps in for me. It may be that the word trinity does not appear in the Bible, the trinity doctrine is another “made up” belief. Also Jesus was never considered God by those who knew Him nor Himself, just another “made up” doctrine. It is true that not all Christian churches teach the salvation doctrine. Some don’t. It is my intention here to get people to wake up about their Christianity and make sure they know what it is. Christianity exists because of Jesus’ teachings of love, peace and compassion. God is not to be feared, but loved, as He loves us. We have free will to chose whether we will follow the path of fear or the path of love. That is a personal decision. You must make it for yourself with the best evidence. I hope you will choose love. Love Leroy ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/208 "2002-10-24T22:21:30Z")
I’m not sure I can fill in the steps; it’s your assertion, not mine and I’m certainly not going to take it on (although one step that appears missing is how the Holy Spirit gets implicated in the equation (“sacrificing…to God the Holy Spirit”). ---
**Author:** ![\_WIZ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/_/a87d85/32.png) [@\_WIZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/_WIZ)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/209 "2002-10-24T22:33:41Z")
Hello. I can’t say what I think very well, but know of an old indian man who has said some things that seem to express many of my same thoughts. I have included a few of the ones I think are related to the question posted here. Some are a few about a debait between him and a person of the islamic faith. See if you can find any truth in what he has said? Just a Quiz from the_WIZ_ ---
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/210 "2002-10-24T23:06:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Freyr \* > No, I never said it was untrue, I simply asked why I should believe your interpretation of it over someone else’s. > > I \*\* **Freyr and Mangetout** , I obviously can’t prove anything to you guys. I can’t prove to you that I’m right on this particular issue and that **Lekatt** is wrong. He says that Jesus didn’t die for our sins, correct? All I can do is point out where it says that He did die for our sins in God’s word. Now please interpret this sentence for me since you don’t think I have it right : Christ - died - for - our- sins - according - to - the- scriptures. 1 Cor. 15:3. If the words don’t mean what they say, then what do they mean? If it doesn’t mean what it says then the whole Bible is gibberish and how can you understand it at all? Of course, if you don’t believe it’s all God’s word, then for sure I can’t convince you. I know some of you think it’s a collection of old stories, myths, and that the writers put in things they wanted, etc. I don’t share this belief. The God I believe in was and is able to see that we have His word, not the words of men. The words are His written through the pens of men, but they’re still His words, IMO anyway. If you have kids and you tell them to do or not do something, you expect to be obeyed, right? Well, what if they start arguing among themselves about whether you really said what you said? One of them could say I believe Dad meant just what his words said and the other could say; but that’s just your interpretation, what makes your interpretation better than mine and so on and so forth. Another sibling could chime in and say, well maybe Dad meant this or that but surely he couldn’t really mean what he said. It gets rather ridiculous imho. So you guys have fun debating it out, I’m unable to prove to you Jesus died for our sins, but the words are there in the Bible if you care to read them and believe them. It’s called faith. \*\*Lekatt]/b] chooses to put his faith in what he was taught in his near death experience, fine and good that’s his choice. I choose to believe the Bible which says He did die for our sins and those believing in Him have eternal life. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/211 "2002-10-24T23:06:30Z")
**Moderator’s Note:** _ **WIZ** _, please don’t post lengthy exchanges from other message boards or discussion groups. We have no way of knowing if the people you are quoting would want to have their words used here and in this way, or if the place where they posted those words would allow it. The _Straight Dope_ and the Straight Dope Message Board depend on “intellectual property” (people’s thoughts expressed in their words) for their existence, so we try to respect the intellectual property rights of others. If you feel a web page expresses your beliefs better than you are able to do so yourself, you can include a link to that page. Brief quotations are fine (“In the words of St. Augustine, ‘Understanding is the wages of faith.’”) ---
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/212 "2002-10-24T23:47:44Z")
To \*\*Lekatt]/b], I have no idea why I’m bothering to do this but…oh well here goes. Concerning the trinity and Jesus being God: so what if the word “trinity” isn’t in the Bible? It’s simply a word we coined to teach the truth that’s there. We all know the Father is God, Matthew 11:25, Matthew 23:9, Luke 10:21, concerning the Holy Spirit, Acts 5:3-4 (this clearly shows that lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God), and Jesus I’ve saved for last. There are several scriptures that attest to His deity, John 1:1,3,10,14, Hebrews 1:8, and the clearest that it can possibly be, Colossians 2:9 which says "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Tell me, who was God talking to when He said in Genesis 1:26 "Let **us** make man in our image, after our likeness…?? I’ve heard a few different opinions on this such as multiple gods or God is an alien or whatever. I simple believe He was talking to the Son and the Holy Spirit. Jesus has always existed, John 8:56-58 (Before Abraham was, I am: the name God gave Moses of Himself at the burning bush). Also Jesus said in John 14:9 that he who has seen Him has seen the Father. God has chosen to express Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I don’t think this is difficult for someone who is all powerful, all knowing, and can be everywhere at once. I have to go eat supper. God bless, His4ever ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2002, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/213 "2002-10-25T00:30:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by His4ever \* > **I know some of you think it’s a collection of old stories, myths, and that the writers put in things they wanted, etc. I don’t share this belief.** Neither do I. > [@](#): > > **The God I believe in was and is able to see that we have His word, not the words of men. The words are His written through the pens of men, but they’re still His words, IMO anyway.** I don’t find the Bible self-consistent enough to be able to accept that it was transcribed verbatim, or consistent enough with the observed universe to be able to accept that it wholly and solely represents the infallible views of God. I believe that God is _revealed_ in scripture, but that finding him in there is a process akin to archaeology; one must dig down through the layers; through Paul’s misogyny and fiery zeal, through John’s rose-tinted spectacles and so on. ---
**Author:** ![\_WIZ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/_/a87d85/32.png) [@\_WIZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/_WIZ)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2002, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/214 "2002-10-25T01:13:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by _WIZ_ \* > \*\*Hello. > > I can’t say what I think very well, but know of an old indian man who has said some things that seem to express many of my same thoughts. > > I have included a few of the…YADDA, YADDA, YADDA > > the_WIZ_ > > \*\* Sorry bout dat, Mod! Let me try this. Even if it doesn’t work, it’s like Paul newman said in Hud: “Dosen’t matter how you try to pussyfoot around it, the world is so full of B/S you’re going to end up stepping in it sooner or later.” 😉 This is a rush job on HTML and editing, as well as a favor called in. So keep that in mind. Also, everything is quoted with permission. [http://www.geocities.com/hopi\_dreamweaver/PAGES/Post/Posted3.html](http://www.geocities.com/hopi_dreamweaver/PAGES/Post/Posted3.html) the_WIZ_ ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2002, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/215 "2002-10-25T03:25:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mangetout \* > \*\*I’m not sure I can fill in the steps; it’s your assertion, not mine and I’m certainly not going to take it on (although one step that appears missing is how the Holy Spirit gets implicated in the equation (“sacrificing…to God the Holy Spirit”). \*\* You may substitute God the Father if you like. The trinity is a kind of 3-headed God, not real understandable to me. The doctrine of the trinity was put in place by Constantine the Emperior of part of Rome. He notice how calm and peaceful the Christians were in the arena. Most would just kneel and pray. The lions often passed them up. He decided this Christian religion would be good for his subjects and officially adopted it for his empire. The Bible doesn’t contain any clear picture of what the trinity might do in the salvation doctrine. The justification fundamentals use is found in Genesis, it consists of one word “us”. In the Oneness of the spirit world the terms “we” or “us” are used frequently. They do not necessarily mean three. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2002, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/216 "2002-10-25T03:58:49Z")
> [@](#): > > The words are His written through the pens of men, but they’re still His words, IMO anyway. “IMO”, being the key, **His4ever**. I don’t know how I could convince you that Catholicism is not what you believe it is. But I know that you ARE wrong on that. As for whether you’re right or wrong, or whether we KNOW God exists-that’s just it. We don’t KNOW. We BELIEVE. There’s a huge difference. That’s why it’s called faith. ---
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2002, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/217 "2002-10-25T12:22:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\* > You may substitute God the Father if you like. The trinity is a kind of 3-headed God, not real understandable to me. > > The doctrine of the trinity was put in place by Constantine the Emperior of part of Rome. He notice how calm and peaceful the Christians were in the arena. Most would just kneel and pray. The lions often passed them up. He decided this Christian religion would be good for his subjects and officially adopted it for his empire. > > The Bible doesn’t contain any clear picture of what the trinity might do in the salvation doctrine. The justification fundamentals use is found in Genesis, it consists of one word “us”. > > In the Oneness of the spirit world the terms “we” or “us” are used frequently. They do not necessarily mean three. \*\* For anyone who desires to learn about the trinity from the Christian perspective, here are some links. They explain it better than I can. [http://www.joyfulheart.com/scholar/trinity.htm](http://www.joyfulheart.com/scholar/trinity.htm) [http://www.midwestoutreach.org/gwen2.htm](http://www.midwestoutreach.org/gwen2.htm) [http://www.bible.org/docs/theology/proper/trinity.htm](http://www.bible.org/docs/theology/proper/trinity.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2002, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/218 "2002-10-25T16:04:06Z")
A really nice job on the Trinity cites, **His4Ever**. I particularly liked the readability and non-polemicism of the first one. Some historical documentation of the Trinity (which by the way was an evolving doctrine, **not** superimposed by Constantine – his sole action was to insist that the church’s leaders settle on _one_ set of beliefs instead of arguing about it interminably – which simply led them into subsidiary arguments about what the agreement they’d reached really meant. :rolleyes: ) > [@](#): > > **Definition of the Union of the Divine and Human Natures in the Person of Christ** > > _Council of Chalcedon, 451 A.D., Act V_ > > Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance _(homoousios)_ with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer _(Theotokos)_; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the Fathers has handed down to us. > [@](#): > > **Quicunque Vult** > > _commonly called The Creed of Saint Athanasius_ > > Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. > > And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, 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 uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy > Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be both God and Lord, So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion, to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other; none is greater, or less than another; But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity. > > Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also > believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man of the substance of his Mother, born in the world; Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the > Father, as touching his manhood; Who, although he be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ; One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh but by taking of the Manhood into God; One altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth at the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. > > This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved. One key point worth taking into account, however, is that this whole thing is described as a _mysterion_ – something that it is impossible for a human being to wrap his or her mind around, but must accept as an imperfect description of a real thing. Trying to describe the inner anatomy of God is an exercise in futility – which doesn’t stop theologians from trying to do it anyways. Easier to understand than this “essential Trinity” is the “economic Trinity” – which has nothing to do with what Adam Smith and Karl Marx argued about, but rather with how this Triune God interacts with the _oikumene_, the world of men. It’s fairly easy to grasp the idea of a Creator Who is Head Honcho of the Universe – this is the concept advanced both by children when you ask them who God is, and by those who are interested in demonstrating whether or not He really exists. But the Christian teaching is that God reveals Himself not only as Creator and Ultimate High Overlord of All, but also in the human form of Jesus of Nazareth, itinerant rabbi put to death by the Romans at the instigation of a group of Jewish authorities, Whom we believe rose again. And further He reveals Himself also in the divine presence in the lives of Christians prodding them to do the right, strengthening them in adversity, comforting them in sorrow, convicting them inwardly of their sins, and showing them the paths of righteousness and peace. Perhaps the best definition of the Trinity, however, is that attributed to Jesus on the eve of His death by St. John, which I won’t quote in full, as it occupies parts of five chapters (John 12-16, the last chapter being His prayer of self-offering to His Father). Nowhere does He get into how He, His Father, and the Holy Spirit whom He promises to send are three _personae_ in a single godhead; instead He says what each of them is supposed to do for the believer. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2002, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/219 "2002-10-25T21:33:55Z")
Thanks Polycarp for your information on the trinity. I am always amazed at the lengths man will go to describe his beliefs. That which must be held in the mind. However, I think it is more important to describe what one should hold in their heart. In near death experiences, very few actually see God. He is felt, sensed, and sometimes appears as a vague figure or part of a figure. But Jesus can be seen. He appears in many NDEs. They are always thought of as separate individuals by NDEers. In my experience, God was felt, Jesus was seen clearly. I had no knowledge that Jesus was any different than other light beings, other than being more advanced. You can tell by the light surrounding them how advanced they are. The brighter the light, the more advanced. The light is Love energy and if the being is a great deal more advanced, it can not be easily approached. I think this is why God is only felt. I know many do not think NDEers know what they are talking about. But they are always the ones who never had the experience. From reading the Bible and my own experience I have no reason to believe than God is anything other than One. In God we all exist making complete the Oneness of all things. Hard to describe in physical words. Love Leroy ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2002, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929/220 "2002-10-25T21:35:52Z")
Thanks Polycarp for your information on the trinity. I am always amazed at the lengths man will go to describe his beliefs. That which must be held in the mind. However, I think it is more important to describe what one should hold in their heart. In near death experiences, very few actually see God. He is felt, sensed, and sometimes appears as a vague figure or part of a figure. But Jesus can be seen. He appears in many NDEs. They are always thought of as separate individuals by NDEers. In my experience, God was felt, Jesus was seen clearly. I had no knowledge that Jesus was any different than other light beings, other than being more advanced. You can tell by the light surrounding them how advanced they are. The brighter the light, the more advanced. The light is Love energy and if the being is a great deal more advanced, it can not be easily approached. I think this is why God is only felt. I know many do not think NDEers know what they are talking about. But they are always the ones who never had the experience. From reading the Bible and my own experience I have no reason to believe than God is anything other than One. In God we all exist making complete the Oneness of all things. Hard to describe in physical words. Somewhat like God is the ocean, and we the drops of water. Love Leroy [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-first-gd-question-and-yes-its-a-religious-one/131929.md?page=12)