# The mystery of the trinity **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 2, 2014, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373 "2014-02-02T20:05:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/261 "2014-04-18T12:18:33Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Look at it this way, God wants to know if His child is ready, are they at the point in their development where they are willing to step out in faith, even disobeying angels, for the purpose of Love. > > Abraham (Abram) failed in this, he only got to 10 and called it quits, Abraham could have went further to the point where Abraham said to God, if there is no one of faith then send me and spare the city, but Abraham was scared and his faith not ready yet. Abraham’s faith would be tested again later with Issac’s sacrifice. > > Lot’s wife OTOH did and the words used to describe what happened relate to things that are associated with glorification, not death. > > The Angels were delivering the rest (Lott’s family), as they were not ready, to their next place. you can keep twisting the interpretation, but it does not fit with the biblical narrative. Which is the problem you keep trying to solve - “God is love, scripture is perfect” is an oxymoron at best. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/262 "2014-04-18T12:31:27Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Then you misunderstood everything I said > Yes God follows what you expect :rolleyes:, that is your issue as I see it, you expect God to follow your rules and even your nonfactual beliefs that you hold as truths and don’t care to hear facts that counter you position of blind faith. > > Though this is common Christian belief this does not equate to anything I have said here. It is not that Jesus gave up a weekend for the salvation of the world. (again the box you like to use as it comforts you even though it is totally inappropriate, it’s all you can accept. > Again I state outright this is your god not mine and I wouldn’t worship it either and do not, so please stop painting my God as the one you know and are running from. I have already stated that I don’t blame you from running from such a god of yours and I would too, but that in no way describes my God. I am going by the book you believe is the word of God and are taking the word of some other human. I don’t care one way or the other if you agree or not I do not consider you any more an authority about Supreme Being than I do. No one in truth ca say anything about what God wants, says or does. Your beliefs (and that is what they are) are yours and yiu have every right to believe what you do, Belief is not fact no matter how you want it to be. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/263 "2014-04-18T12:40:22Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > I am going by the book you believe is the word of God and are taking the word of some other human. I don’t care one way or the other if you agree or not I do not consider you any more an authority about Supreme Being than I do. No one in truth ca say anything about what God wants, says or does. Your beliefs (and that is what they are) are yours and yiu have every right to believe what you do, Belief is not fact no matter how you want it to be. Too late to edit but you get the idea. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/264 "2014-04-18T12:58:36Z")
> [@simster](#): > > you can keep twisting the interpretation, but it does not fit with the biblical narrative. > > Which is the problem you keep trying to solve - “God is love, scripture is perfect” is an oxymoron at best. I never said that scripture is perfect - I said they can not be broken, there is a big difference. I could use the phrase it is perfect in it’s imperfection, which would be true, but the imperfections are teaching tools would be my better explanation. Scripture is a teaching tool that helps one develop the heart of the student, to question things like if God is Love then why the destruction of Sodom, why is the common interpretation of the ‘god of the OT’ so evil, so one would seek out the answers. And also more importantly reject the ‘god of the OT’ as unworthy, and to seek a God who is. In the same way I contend that Lot’s wife questioned the command of the angels. It is the stepping out in faith and love that God wants but only when the child is ready, not us to take the bible as ‘perfect’ (Jesus commented on something very similar). To me at least that is the way God used the scripture in my life. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/265 "2014-04-18T18:20:25Z")
Since I have been questioned for some times I just want to state my starting premises that I am basing my replies on: - - God is Love always, if God is not Love then God is not worth anything and nothing matters, so all other answers to this question don’t matter, and the only solution is God is Love always. So the only God worth acknowledging is a God of Love. 1 - The Bible is nothing special, as every act of creation (including every religious text) is a work of God, and the Bible states it as such. So the Bible is not elevated over other works. 2 - The Bible and other works is a teaching tool, made to be used with God’s help, but that applies to every work of creation 3 - God desired to dwell with man in the flesh of man, that means in man’s works there will be aspects of God and aspects of man mixed together. 4 - Man(kind) is God’s children and can’t help but doing god things because of their nature and oneness with God. 5- It is possible to discern what is of God and what is of man in any work, including the Bible, by interpretation of the work given a loving God (always) and mankind who may have some other motive. This is because of who we are (children of God). 6 With this discernment we can tell in any work what aspect is from God and what is from man. It also allows us to questing things that don’t agree with other acts of God’s Love demonstrated such as: Act of Love: God says someone is the salt of the earth (Glorification) Act of Love: God makes someone a pillar in His temple (Glorification) What act of Love comes from making Lott’s wife a pillar of salt, My answer glorification, any other answer given negates a God of Love. Once a act of Love has been established it is a characteristic of God (as God is Love and God is one, and God is indivisible all love is God, even Love in man(kind). But if a act is not of Love, it is not of God by of man’'s nature (mankind’s nature). This fits into the mystery of the trinity, God of Love desires to dwell in the flesh of man, even with man’s sometimes unloving aspects, but in Love they are one with each other. And that is how you can tell what parts of the Bible are of God and what parts are of man alone. IMHO (Please take ‘man’ as ‘mankind’) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/266 "2014-04-18T18:33:24Z")
A religious view so fragile that it dare not touch reality lest it shatter into a thousand pieces. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/267 "2014-04-18T18:35:03Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Your interpretations are glaringly heterodox. There is no body of scholarship behind it, only your own, sole, solitary, individual fancy. Your ideas will not be published in any major theological journal. Even Harold Camping had some minimal critical acceptance of his ideas. Your ideas are more far out than his ever were. This I felt I should address directly. Your statement here is in my world is of demonic origin and can be rejected outright. Not that you are demonic (as you are a child of God), but it is evident for this that I have upset some high level demon somewhere (‘My feet hurt and my pack is wet, what else is new’ :D). It is the equivalent of the Wizard of OZ stating to the Dorthy’s group ‘don’t pay any attention to that man behind the curtain’. It is so blatantly obvious as such. And my answer is that is not your decision to make, thank God. If you can prove your statement otherwise please do, specifically this: > [@](#): > > your ideas will not be published in any major theological journal. Which I totally reject based you have not establishing any authority what so ever in prevent it. Or in SDMB talk cite please What you stated is not in the spirit of Love and is not of God and can be safely ignored, knowing God decides, not **Trinopus**. I can continue on the path of Love that God has shown me with this being irrelevant and a attempted distraction to my path. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/268 "2014-04-18T18:39:04Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > A religious view so fragile that it dare not touch reality lest it shatter into a thousand pieces. I seek to shatter both religion and conventional view of reality so fragile into a thousand pieces. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/269 "2014-04-18T18:49:17Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > […] Your statement here is in my world is of demonic origin and can be rejected outright […]. Does not compute with all your ‘rules’ about your God view - [QUOTE=kanicbird] 1 - The Bible is nothing special, **as every act of creation (including every religious text) is a work of God**, and the Bible states it as such. So the Bible is not elevated over other works. 2 - The Bible and other works is a teaching tool, made to be used with God’s help, but that applies to every work of creation 5- **It is possible to discern what is of God and what is of man in any work** , including the Bible, by interpretation of the work given a loving God (always) and mankind who may have some other motive. This is because of who we are (children of God)… [/QUOTE] Which 1 and 3 conflict with each other as well. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/270 "2014-04-18T18:57:11Z")
> [@simster](#): > > Does not compute with all your ‘rules’ about your God view - > > Which 1 and 3 conflict with each other as well. Does it if not everything is a act of creations but could be a act of repetition? ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/271 "2014-04-18T19:16:38Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Does it if not everything is a act of creations but could be a act of repetition? non-sequitor - you cannot repeat something that has not been created. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/272 "2014-04-18T19:18:23Z")
> [@simster](#): > > non-sequitor - you cannot repeat something that has not been created. I believe not, please continue? ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/273 "2014-04-18T19:35:18Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > I believe not, please continue? If its being repeated - the original thing was created. Every act of repetition - is a new thing - there fore it is created. If it was never created - it cannot be repeated. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/274 "2014-04-18T19:40:03Z")
> [@simster](#): > > If its being repeated - the original thing was created. > > Every act of repetition - is a new thing - there fore it is created. > > If it was never created - it cannot be repeated. I see where you are getting at, but it is a mater of semantics, or at least deception. I could say that ‘I created’ ‘God is Love’ and combined 2 things to ‘create’ 3rd, but all I did was copy and place out of context for the purpose of deception 2 things. So in my humanness I have created nothing In the God sense (in the sense of Love), I did create, a lesson of how to interpreter what I have said, that God is Love and I did not create that. So yes and no ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/275 "2014-04-18T20:09:27Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > . . . Which I totally reject based you have not establishing any authority what so ever in prevent it. > > Or in SDMB talk cite please. . . . It isn’t I who prevent your publication in any respected theological journal. You have to know I don’t have that kind of power. I don’t even know your real name; how could I conceivably persuade editors not to accept papers from you? You’re descending into paranoia. Your publication in any respectable theological journal is implausible because of the grotesquely absurd nature of the claims you make here. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/276 "2014-04-18T20:20:27Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > I see where you are getting at, but it is a mater of semantics, or at least deception. > > I could say that ‘I created’ ‘God is Love’ and combined 2 things to ‘create’ 3rd, but all I did was copy and place out of context for the purpose of deception 2 things. > > So in my humanness I have created nothing > > In the God sense (in the sense of Love), I did create, a lesson of how to interpreter what I have said, that God is Love and I did not create that. > > So yes and no non-sequitor a) you said God created everything - full stop. [QUOTE=kanicbird - above] **as every act of creation (including every religious text) is a work of God** [/QUOTE] b) in the act of combining two things - you created a third thing - regaurdless of your intent. c) If your intent is deception with your creation - and if ‘God’ creates everything (thru you or anytyhing else) then God created deception. d) deception is never love. God hates deception and lies (look it up, its in your unbreakable scripture). ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/277 "2014-04-18T20:48:05Z")
Stepping back from the baseless speculation part of this thread now. > [@Mr\_Quatro](#): > > God is easy to understand … God is God > > Jesus is easy to understand his words are all in red in most New testament bibles > > Jesus said in a prayer to the Father in St John 17: 11 NCV… Not most New Testament Bibles, just the Red Letter Editions and, [according to this Wiki article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_letter_edition) > [@](#): > > Because the original texts do not have quotation marks, it is often up to interpretation as to what words were spoken by Jesus, as opposed to explanatory text that followed. For example, a footnote in the New International Version for John 3:21 explains “Some interpreters end the quotation after verse 15.” In addition, some publishers have chosen to print the words spoken by Jesus after his Ascension to Heaven in red (for example in the words spoken to Saul on the road to Damascus in Acts 9, as well as words spoken to John of Patmos in Revelation 1-3). Thus, red-lettering may not match the quote marks, and may vary from edition to edition. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/278 "2014-04-18T21:01:17Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > You’re descending into paranoia. Or perhaps calling you out in your megalomania, since you stated it and I called you out on it, stating powers I know you don’t possess, and you later admit you don’t possess. Pretty cut and dry here please don’t try to blame shift, it’s not going to work. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/279 "2014-04-18T21:11:34Z")
> [@simster](#): > > non-sequitor > > a) you said God created everything - full stop. > > b) in the act of combining two things - you created a third thing - regaurdless of your intent. > > c) If your intent is deception with your creation - and if ‘God’ creates everything (thru you or anytyhing else) then God created deception. > > d) deception is never love. God hates deception and lies (look it up, its in your unbreakable scripture). I fully pick up what you are putting down here. For instance even if every word you ever speak was spoken before, because you used them in a unique combination you have created something i.e. God. That is part of the nature of the ‘trinity’, or perhaps more descriptive God with us, dwelling in us as part of us. This also ties into the nature of the Bible and every other work… Since God dwells in us and with us, what is God’s part and what is man’s part? God’s part is anything intended in Love (as everything Love is God, as God is Love) This btw is also one with humans as part of the oneness of God in us, one spirit, etc. But what about stuff not done in love, but of human nature, is that not too a creation. Yes, but what is it’s purpose. that goes back to the intent of who created the work. If it is a human (god child) and not done in Love it is used by Love (God) to teach and instruct (the reason why the scriptures state they are good for instruction). So yes combining things together can create something new, but God’s part in this, why it is allowed is to teach what is love and what is not. So the combining as a act of creation is still God, but the deception remains as a teaching tool, and the reason God allowes it. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2014, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373/280 "2014-04-18T21:41:00Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > […] If it is a human (god child) and not done in Love it is used by Love (God) to teach and instruct […] So - Hitler - was part of the trinity and everything he did was part of God’s loving plan to teach us something about love. God needs to think this thru. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mystery-of-the-trinity/680373.md?page=15)