It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is the Christian Trinity a Conspiracy ?

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 10:57 AM
Given the fact that the council of Nicaea is considered to be a conspiracy itself, and this is when this doctrine was starting to be established, it does make you wonder?
ATS voted it as 20th top conspiracy of all time, so ATS members know there is something to this.

The Trinity existed before Jesus in other non-jewish religions.
The religious triad, or trinity, was a prominent feature of worship in Babylon. One Babylonian triad was composed
of Sin (a moon-god), Shamash (a sun-god), and Ishtar (a goddess of fertility and war). In ancient Egypt, a god was often viewed as being married to a goddess who bore him a son, “forming a divine triad or trinity in which the father, moreover, was not always the chief, contenting himself on occasion with the role of prince consort, while the principal deity of the locality remained the goddess.” (New Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology)
One Egyptian triad consisted of the god Osiris, the goddess Isis, and their son Horus.
Christendom has its triad—the Trinity. Clerics say that the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit are one God.

Deuteronomy 6:4

Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God; Yahweh is one:

Since Jesus existed in heaven when this was printed, and the Jews were God's chosen people at that time and they only believed in one almighty God, it is something to ponder?

Was there a conspiracy to important that pagan doctrine of the Trinity from older religions that existed before, into Christianity ?
Because if there was, it certainly was a great success.
And if it was succefull, where does that leave a modern christians belief structure ?

Every Christian needs to ask themselves these questions ?

edit on 26-11-2012 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 11:00 AM

Is the Christian Trinity a Conspiracy ?

Maybe it's just the truth. We'll find out for sure when we are dead.

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 11:08 AM
The NT Book of Hebrews discusses this mystery in depth, and even Psalms and Genesis affirms the Trinity. However the Trinitarian Proof Text is 1 John

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (KJV)

Notice 'our image'
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image,

The Belgic Confession explains it this way
Article 8: The Trinity

In keeping with this truth and Word of God we believe in one God, who is one single essence, in whom there are three persons, really, truly, and eternally distinct according to their incommunicable properties-- namely, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father is the cause, origin, and source of all things, visible as well as invisible.
The Son is the Word, the Wisdom, and the image of the Father.

The Holy Spirit is the eternal power and might, proceeding from the Father and the Son.

Nevertheless, this distinction does not divide God into three, since Scripture teaches us that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit each has his own subsistence distinguished by characteristics-- yet in such a way that these three persons are only one God.

It is evident then that the Father is not the Son and that the Son is not the Father, and that likewise the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son.

Nevertheless, these persons, thus distinct, are neither divided nor fused or mixed together.

For the Father did not take on flesh, nor did the Spirit, but only the Son.

The Father was never without his Son, nor without his Holy Spirit, since all these are equal from eternity, in one and the same essence.

There is neither a first nor a last, for all three are one in truth and power, in goodness and mercy.

Article 9: The Scriptural Witness on the Trinity

All these things we know from the testimonies of Holy Scripture as well as from the effects of the persons, especially from those we feel within ourselves.
The testimonies of the Holy Scriptures, which teach us to believe in this Holy Trinity, are written in many places of the Old Testament, which need not be enumerated but only chosen with discretion.

In the book of Genesis God says, "Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness." So "God created man in his own image"-- indeed, "male and female he created them."^6 "Behold, man has become like one of us."^7

It appears from this that there is a plurality of persons within the Deity, when he says, "Let us make man in our image"-- and afterwards he indicates the unity when he says, "God created."

It is true that he does not say here how many persons there are-- but what is somewhat obscure to us in the Old Testament is very clear in the New.

For when our Lord was baptized in the Jordan, the voice of the Father was heard saying, "This is my dear Son";^8 the Son was seen in the water; and the Holy Spirit appeared in the form of a dove.

So, in the baptism of all believers this form was prescribed by Christ: "Baptize all people in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."^9

In the Gospel according to Luke the angel Gabriel says to Mary, the mother of our Lord: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and therefore that holy one to be born of you shall be called the Son of God."^10

And in another place it says: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you."^11

"There are three who bear witness in heaven-- the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit-- and these three are one."^12

In all these passages we are fully taught that there are three persons in the one and only divine essence. And although this doctrine surpasses human understanding, we nevertheless believe it now, through the Word, waiting to know and enjoy it fully in heaven.

Furthermore, we must note the particular works and activities of these three persons in relation to us. The Father is called our Creator, by reason of his power. The Son is our Savior and Redeemer, by his blood. The Holy Spirit is our Sanctifier, by his living in our hearts.

This doctrine of the holy Trinity has always been maintained in the true church, from the time of the apostles until the present, against Jews, Muslims, and certain false Christians and heretics, such as Marcion, Mani, Praxeas, Sabellius, Paul of Samosata, Arius, and others like them, who were rightly condemned by the holy fathers.

And so, in this matter we willingly accept the three ecumenical creeds-- the Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian-- as well as what the ancient fathers decided in agreement with them.

^6 Gen. 1:26-27 ^7 Gen. 3:22 ^8 Matt. 3:17 ^9 Matt. 28:19 ^10 Luke 1:35 ^11 2 Cor. 13:14 ^12 1 John 5:7 (KJV)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 11:11 AM
In Christianity the Holy Spirit is called the uncreated love of God. The Son is who the Father thinks he is. The love of the Father for the Son and the Son for the Father is the Holy Spirit. Basic Christian theology. No idea if it is true.

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 11:14 AM
reply to post by FlyersFan

Let me be succinct so there is no misunderstanding, I personally believe in the Almighty God & his created son, Jesus Christ, not in Christendoms Trinity, which has historic roots linked deeply to paganism.

An agnostic may argue what is the difference anyway?
To that I can only say, if you discover the difference you might not be an agnostic anymore.

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

the trinity is a lie. It is pagan myth. It was taken from the made up Sinai valley where a triple goddess was worshiped , Mary-an-Ishtar.(CANAANITE GODDESSES)... as she is known in some circles. Constantine's mother chose the current Sinai valley, we don't know if it is the original one....The mother of Mary, st. Anne, Who had a virgin birth herself, of Mary....

the divine wedding of an infant and a maiden, and the maidens transformation.

It goes petty deep. The trinity was present in many pagan cultures.

Jesus never spoke of it. All references people make to it are subjective to interpretation and so come from the interpreter.

The Triple Goddess is the subject of much of the writing of Robert Graves, and has been adopted by many neopagans (notably Wiccans) as one of their primary deities .

The term triple goddess is infrequently used outside of Neopaganism to instead refer to historical goddess triads and single goddesses of three forms or aspects. In common Neopagan usage the three female figures are frequently described as the Maiden, the Mother, and the Crone, each of which symbolizes both a separate stage in the female life cycle and a phase of the moon, and often rules one of the realms of earth, underworld, and the heavens.

These may or may not be perceived as aspects of a greater single divinity. The feminine part of Wicca's duotheistic theological system is sometimes portrayed as a Triple Goddess, her masculine counterpart being the Horned God.

The Mother and the Daughter, or Maiden, are typified by

Demeter and Persephone. Indeed, the name De-Meter means simply "God [the] Mother" or "Mother God", while Peresphone was most often known by Her devotees as Kore, which means simply "Maiden" or "Daughter".

We understand at least a little about the Mother and Maiden aspects of the Triple Goddess, but what of the so-called "Crone"? The term "crone" does not originally signify an old woman. Indeed most ancient images of the Triple Goddess do not include an old woman. "Crone" comes from Greek cronos, meaning time. Thus the significance of "Crone" is identical to that of Kali, which comes from Sanskrit kala, also meaning time

God the Mother as Creatrix is a familiar truth. It is She Who has brought all things into being and Who is the Mother of All. When, at the dawn of time, souls became separate from Dea, ceasing to live in perfect union and bliss with Her, it is said that the Light of the Solar Mother became "too bright for us to look upon".

It was then that the Mother gave birth to a Daughter that was one with Her and yet apart from Her, so that the Daughter could take the Light of Dea into those places where Dea was not.

Just as the moon reflects the light of the sun in a gentler radiance, so the Daughter reflected the Mother's Light with a radiance that mortal beings can look upon.

However, there is also a Cosmic function performed by the Daughter: for if the universe were ever truly separated from the Mother, Who is its Creatrix and sole Source of being, it would instantly cease to exist. Thus the Daughter, in mediating the Mother to the created world, is the Preserver of its very existence.

edit on 26-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 11:41 AM
reply to post by zedVSzardoz

Jesus never spoke of it. All references people make to it are subjective to interpretation and so come from the interpreter.

A very interesting statement, and oh so true. People parrot what they have been taught, and many times are either to lazy or apathetic to research these matters, which are more important than they realize.

The Trinity may have been a "Mystery" that humans can't understand so say the Clergy and those that repeat that mantra of dogma, but not in 2012, there is way to much information out there on it, it is no longer a "mystery".
edit on 26-11-2012 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 11:52 AM
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

exactly. Just like if you talk about Jesus not being the messiah to his people, since he didn't fit prophecy. He was NOT of the lineage of King David. Say that and they will crucify you. Jesus was not the messiah, beyond what they made of him.

It is interesting that the places where he was made into the "Teacher/ messiah" are places where the black Madonna made her way through as well in the shadows, sometimes even arriving before Christianity. The grail philosophy, that of Mary Magdalena, (Magdalena= triple tower) A reference to the fertility temple of Ishtar, with its triple towers....

One could argue that the "synagogue of Satan" is the Christian church still worshiping Canaanite fertility goddesses and pagan Idols, going against Gods original teachings. The New testament is arguably a perversion of the old testament books, the torah.

I am not Jewish by the way.

Jesus was probably a Cabala practitioner who strayed too far off the beat and path and pissed off too many of his elders, while at the same time making a separate following of the "profane" that he initiated into occult mysticism later masked with pagan idols when Rome needed a universal religion. Like any religion there is one for the masses, with its understanding and then that of the elite with theirs. All one religion. Like Egypt with the priests and noble class holding certain secrets, or even Judaism with the temple administrators holding certain teachings for themselves. Jesus probably learned much and tried to teach it to the other people who were not supposed to be privy to that info.

edit on 26-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 12:10 PM
reply to post by zedVSzardoz

Jesus was the heir to the throne of David as adopted son of Joseph. He was from the loins of David, through Mary. And a caution for you, saying that he practiced cabala very well might put you in this camp

Matthew 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

Matthew 12:32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

edit on 26-11-2012 by GeneralMishka because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 12:33 PM
reply to post by GeneralMishka

he cannot have the house of David assigned to his lineage by his mother's side. You could be a descendant of Aaron on your mother's side and not have that distinction made. Only the fathers side counts for establishing your lineage. HE had no claim to the throne. Not to mention Josephs ancestors were cursed and so disqualified.

3.He was not descended from the House of David. According to Jewish law, tribal identification comes from the father's side, being Jewish, from the mother's side. According to Matthew 1, Joseph was descended from David (Although there are many contradictions between his genealogy there and that listed in Luke, however according to the same text, Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary, therefore Jesus was not related to Joseph, and not a descendant of King David.

Three answers to this problem are given in classic Christian sources:

a.The genealogy is that of Mary - This is inadequate, since if he is claimed to be the Jewish messiah, and according to Jewish tradition he must be descended on his father's side, Mary's genealogy is irrelevant.

b.He was adopted by Joseph -According to Jewish law, adoption does not change the status of the child. If an Israelite is adopted by a Cohen, (A descendant of Aaron the High Priest), the child does not become a Cohen, likewise if a descendant of David, adopts someone who is not, he does not become of the tribe of Judah and a descendant of David.

c.It doesn't matter, he was a spiritual inheritor of King David - If it doesn't matter, why do Christian scriptures spend time establishing his genealogical pedigree? And if he is claimed to be the Jewish messiah, then according to Jewish tradition it does matter!

Jesus was not the universal messiah, since he was not even the Jewish messiah. He may be to some, but not to all. He may even be just a prophet like Islam says. Maybe that is all there is to any "messiah" (teacher) stuff. A great guy with a good message we can learn from. Not a "magical" God man we give super powers to over time to validate his "godness".

Maybe all this son of God stuff is made up, and we are being lied to. Maybe we judge each other and cast God's wrath upon each other in hopes that we are right and our following his rules will somehow save us from the terrible things we see happen to each other.

Luke and Mathew are contradictory, you know that.

Luke traces Mary back to David, supposedly. The author of Mathew uses Joseph.

Joseph was not the biological father so no blood lineage. AND by tradition the "seed" is passed through the father to establish the tribal lineage.

Mathew also adds five sexually unclean women to the lineage and skips over several Judean kings. He established the lineage of Christ by numerology based on the name of David.

He uses a 14-set genealogy of Jesus in the Greek gospel of Matthew. 14 being the gemmatrical number based on the name of David, DVD 4+6+4. Because that makes sense when establishing blood lineage.....

the 5 unclean women (sexually) are

Rachab the Harlot

Tamar who was raped by her brother Yehudah

Ruth who tried to seduce and have sex with her deceased husband’s cousin Boaz and then lived with her mother in law Naomi in a "questionable" relationship

Then the promiscuous Jebusite (Canaanite tribe) princess, Bath-Shebiti. Her name, Bath sheba lit = daughter of the 7 gods. She was married to Uriah the Hittite and committed Adultery with David and bore an illegitimate son who became the clan chieftain Jedediah

And finally Miryam of Galilee, known to be a whore (unclean)

so with this much lying and sexually compromised women, you have to ask, was Jesus really a Davidic descendant?

I just want to add that I still think that Luke was speaking of Joseph. Why would he not say Mary if it was Mary. Why say "supposedly" and mean a different person. The lineage to me is as much a fabrication of Joseph´s ancestors as Mathews acount. Luke tries to use Jewish law of lineage by the father to link Jesus to David IMO, not Mary.

"Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli."...... and on and on.

Luke 3:23-38

I am not buying it. Why lie? that would not change his message, but you would not be able to try to force convert the Jews is all. (as was attempted by the church for many years).

these many lies and Your version of Jesus looks like an antichrist for lying and being linked to whores in his lineage almost referring to the whore of Babylon and idolatry by linking him to Canaanite tribes who practiced it.

and this, Luke is inaccurate and deviates from the OT lineages and makes stuff up.

Though they both name Joseph as the father of Jesus, they give different names for the father of Joseph (id est, the paternal grandfather of Jesus). Matthew gives Jacob; Luke gives Heli. And thence the lists diverge completely until we come to Shealtiel and Zerubbabel.

Likewise, Matthew and Luke give different fathers for Shealtiel. Matthew gives Jechoniah; Luke gives Neri. And thence again the lists diverge until we come to David. Matthew traces this part of the line through Solomon and the kings of Judah. Luke traces it through Nathan and an otherwise unknown bevy of names.

The matching names from Abraham to David are easily gleaned from the Old Testament, and even in this solid line of descent Luke manages to deviate with the names Arni and Admin. If Arni is the same man as Aram (or Ram), then the problem is alleviated slightly, but I know of no direct evidence for the identification. Admin, on the other hand, is an extra name no matter how one slices it. One wonders what independent tradition Luke could have had access to that he valued more highly than either the LXX or (what was to become) the Masoretic!

All the above is taken from my posts in another thread:

edit on 26-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 12:40 PM
It is interesting that the preferred genealogy of Jesus is Mathews account, which adds all those sexually compromised and unclean women. Referring to the Ishtar priestesses, the sacred prostitutes..........

Once upon a time.....

Jesus was a product of an Ishtar temple birth. Sacred prostitution was practiced by the priestesses and the high priestess was usually in the service of the King. Herod at that time. Herod wanted to kill the infants that might have been his child and a rival to his throne....All the Mary's in the story are a reference to temple prostitutes. Joseph came from a cursed lineage and so his wife being at one time a temple priestess was probably not unheard of, since he was not in good standing with his community anyways. He could have tolerated his wife's pregnancy if it was out of wed lock if he was a Canaanite and practiced idolatry. Yeah.

So that is why a cabalist with daddy issues after his real dad tried to kill him seamed to piss everyone off when he said or was said to be the messiah.

or so the story goes.......

Mamzer acusation of Jesus
John 8:41

You are doing the things your own father does." "We are not illegitimate children," they protested. "The only Father we have is God himself."

Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.

You are doing the things your own father does." "We are not illegitimate children," they protested. "The only Father we have is God himself."


MAMZER (Heb. מַמְזֵר), usually translated as "bastard."


"If she cannot contract a legally valid marriage to this man, but can contract a legally valid marriage to others, her offspring [from the former] is a mamzer. Such is the case when a man has sexual relations with any of the ervot ["forbidden"; see *Incest] in the Torah" (Kid. 3:12; cf. Yev. 4:13).

Thus, a mamzer is the issue of a couple whose sexual relationship is forbidden according to the Torah and punishable by *karet or death. Because of this a marriage between them is void (Sh. Ar., EH 4:13), and thus, for example, the issue of a union between brother and sister or between a man and a woman validly married to another at the time is a mamzer (see *Adultery; Yev. 45b; Maim., Yad, Issurei Bi'ah 15:1; Tur and Beit Yosef, EH 4; Sh. Ar., EH 4:13). On the other hand, in

Jewish law – unlike in other systems of law – the mere fact that a child is born (or conceived) out of lawful wedlock does not make him a mamzer and he is not an illegitimate child, i.e., one whose status or rights are impaired. The parents of the mamzer are indeed unmarried – either in fact or since they are so considered in law because of an absolute legal bar to a marriage between them – but unlike a man and a woman who, from the legal point of view, can marry each other but do not want to, the parents of the mamzer, owing to the said legal bar, cannot marry each other even if they want to.

If one parent is non-Jewish this fact alone does not make the child a mamzer (see *Marriage; Yev. 45b; Maim., Yad, Issurei Bi'ah 15:3; Tur, EH 4; Sh. Ar., EH 4:19).

edit on 26-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 01:08 PM
also Mary was not a virgin.....she was a MAIDEN according to the mystic traditions of her Ishtar temple rights.

"Virgin" is mistranslation...purposely or not. She is a MAIDEN. Of legal marrying age according to Jewish law, or it is an Ishtar temple reference. Daughter of Ishtar, and Jesus is her crone married to her at birth.

[Genesis 24:43] Behold,stand by the well of water; and it shall come to pass, that when the virgin cometh forth to draw [water], and I say to her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water of thy pitcher to drink;

"Behold,¹ I¹ standªº [here] by¹ the wellª of water;ª and the daughtersª of the men²¹ of the cityª come outªº to drawªº water:ª ... And let it come to pass,¹ that the damselª to whom¹ I shall say,ªº¹ Let downªº thy pitcher,ª I pray thee,¹ that I may drink;ªº and she shall say,ªº Drink,ªº and I will give²º thy camelsª drinkªº also:¹ [let the same be] she [that] thou hast appointedªº for thy servantª Isaac;ª and thereby shall I knowªº that¹ thou hast shewedªº kindnessª unto¹ my master.ª" [Gen 24:13-14]

American Standard Version (ASV 1901)
Behold, I am standing by the fountain of water. And let it come to pass, that the maiden that cometh forth to draw, to whom I shall say, Give me, I pray thee, a little water from thy pitcher to drink.

King James Version (KJV 1769)
Behold,º Iº standºº byº the wellº of water;º and it shall come to pass,º that when the virginº cometh forthºº to drawºº [water], and I sayºº toº her, Give me,ºº I pray thee,º a littleº waterº of thy pitcherºº to drink;ºº

Original King James Bible (AV 1611)
Behold,º Iº standºº byº the wellº of water;º and it shall come to passe,º that when the virgineº commeth foorthºº to drawºº [water], and I sayºº toº her, Giue me,ºº I pray thee,º a litleº waterº of thy pitcherºº to drinke;ºº

Brenton Greek Septuagint (LXX, Restored Names)
behold, I stand by the well of water, and the daughters of the men of the city come forth to draw water, and it shall be [that] the damsel to whom I shall say, Give me a little water to drink out of thy pitcher,

Full Hebrew Names / Holy Name KJV (2008)
Behold,º Iº standºº byº the wellº of water;º and it shall come to pass,º that when the virginº cometh forthºº to drawºº [water], and I sayºº toº her, Give me,ºº I pray thee,º a littleº waterº of thy pitcherºº to drink;ºº

edit on 26-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 01:34 PM
You are so confused, you are quoting Scripture about Rebekah not Mary

Genesis 24:15 And it came to pass, before he had done speaking, that, behold, Rebekah came out,

Where do I start with you?

Let me help you so we dont waste 10 posts. Whatever beguiled persons website you are listening to will say, Is 7 is mistranslated for 'virgin'

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (KJV)

To which we answer that the Rosetta Stone of the Hebrew Language (The Septuagint)
translates that word into a Greek word that is unmistakenly 'virgin'

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 01:45 PM
reply to post by GeneralMishka

those were EXAMPLES for the mistranslation of the word "maiden".

Start from the NT being written originally in Aramaic and Hebrew. Don't give me Greek mistranslations.

It is not "virgin". There are MANY examples. But we see how you treat those.....

Please do not try and convince me of anything. I was a devout Catholic, catholic school all the way to my first semester in college. I actually studied and practiced my faith. I went only to Latin mass, learned some Latin, ect....
I never embraced the Novus ordo mass.

I also LOVE history...

I know my is what it is.

edit on 26-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 02:03 PM
Guys maybe you should make a new thread to discuss these topics.

Of note is Emperor Constantine

Constantine's Role at Nicaea

FOR many years, there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to solve the dispute, Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total, actually attended. Constantine was not a Christian. Supposedly, he converted later in life, but he was not baptized until he lay dying. Regarding him, Henry Chadwick says in The Early Church: “Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun; . . . his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace . . . It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians.” What role did this unbaptized emperor play at the Council of Nicaea?
The Encyclopædia Britannica relates: “Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance with the Father' . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.”
Hence, Constantine's role was crucial. After two months of furious religious debate, this pagan politician intervened and decided in favor of those who said that Jesus was God. But why? Certainly not because of any Biblical conviction. “Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology,” says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain.

This history above is really important in understanding the foundation of the Trinity. And why it MUST be questioned by thinking Christians today.

edit on 26-11-2012 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 02:12 PM
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

Disagree with the thesis that the Trinity was a political move to consolidate power in the Empre

A council confirming the Trinity, if anything brought division. It would be like if I brought Scriptural proof that women should only attend Church with their heads covered(which I can). And that proof was used to mandate such coverings. What would happen? Division

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 02:13 PM
reply to post by zedVSzardoz

Did it ever occur to anyone that the pagan religions all had a Trinity figure because within every lie is a seed of truth?

Jesus never spoke of it.

Sure he did.

John 14:6-10

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?

10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Now the Holy Spirit enters into the conversation too...

John 14:16-17

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

John 14:23-26

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

In my opinion, you'd have to be pretty dense not to be able to understand what Jesus is saying here. I think he went into pretty great detail.

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 02:17 PM
A seemingly simple way I've been viewing it is thusly:

Yes, the "trinity" is a poly-theist "conspiracy" of sorts.

So is Mary worship.

And for that matter so is having huge graven images of Yeshua on a cross plastered everywhere.

In my pursuit of a upright walk with my creator, as I have shed much / all of my former buddhist philosiphy, I have taken (basically) the following approach:

Who was the god of the Hebrews?


What was his law(in short form)?

The 10 commandments(also 613 laws of peace that get more specific and have things related to temple proceeding etc but bear with me)

Who was Yeshua?

A hebrew man, born to a hebrew household, who was raised Jewish, went to synagogue, observed the feasts and festivals etc.

What did he teach?

That he did not come to abolish the law(torah) he came to fullfill it(converge or bring it to fuition).

That all the laws of the Father (YHWH) were important and needed, in order to live a pure life that was pleasing to YHWH and caused no harm to the fellow man.

That eternal life could be summed up in
Loving YHWH with all ones heart and soul
Loving(treating) thy neighbor as thyself(equity)

That he equated the Pharisees to be vipers, and spawn of vipers, that they were obscuring the law of YHWH, stopping common people from entering and not entering themselves.

That once he fulfilled his role, nobody would come to the Father YHWH, except through him.

That the Temple of YHWH was/is in each of us.


What I take from that PERSONALLY:

Yeshua tells us that Jew or Gentile can come to the Father now through his fullfillment of his role on earth.
That the TORAH, that is the Law of YHWH has not been done away with and no changes were made to the law(specifically the 10 commandments and the main Festivals)by Yeshua himself.
That all praise should go to the Father YHWH.
That since the Temple of YHWH resides in us all, Yeshua himself had no need for a church to be built in his name. In fact he was really against the "church"(congregation) that he found at and running the Temple. He was against the way the poor and destitute were treated, against the taxation that was being forced upon the common man, he was against the lust of money he found rampant in every corner he visted. There is more but that is the general "gist" I've gotten thus far.

That a just man can follow the law, and find salvation in Yeshua's role on this earth, and he can do it himself and choose to walk the path of righteousness with the Father and the Son, and he will be judged good.

That things added on by church or papal conventions, and things changed (the shabbat etc) by man, are done of man and not of "god" YHWH.

That there is only one true Creator, and that very few will come to him due to works of the Adversary / iniquity
(the narrow gate is the way, not the way everyone is going).

That "about" sums it up for me, and that is how I am walking my path. I try to get better and better at walking that path each and every day.

Hope this helps someone out there, even one, and it was worth doing / saying!

Peace to everyone and glory to the One Eternal Creator, YHWH


posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 02:19 PM
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

I agree,

Though it is all related. Catholic= Universal.

Constantine was more interested in a universal religion for his divided empire. The Christians were growing among the plebe and the old order, the pagan order was threatened by them.

The pagan culture was centered in Rome. So for them he made a secret interpretation and for the Christians another more simple interpretation.

He basically made the religion fit the empire, not the other way around.

The old gods were masked under the new system and were combined into a single universal faith.

Did you know that the statue of "St. Peter" at the Vatican is actually the statue of the pagan god Jupiter. All those Catholics kissing the feet of Jupiter......

The trinity is as pagan as it gets. These little instances of mixing Christian and pagan myth are everywhere.

The Godhead of the Christian faith is mother goddess worship.

Look at the basilica of the immaculate conception. Consecrated to St. Anne, honoring Mary as queen of heaven( Pagan Title), the pope surrendering the papal tiara and sacred objects to it for the decoration of its vaults. Marian worship to the extreme. Largest religious structure in the western world after the Vatican....ect. All devoted to the mother, daughter and as a side not, to the infant king....infant wedding groom of the trio.
Triple goddess.

The triangle behind all the pictures and statues of the "virgin",Ahem, MAIDEN Mary, is in plain sight.

Catholics by worshiping the trinity are worshiping the triple goddess of old. The pagan rights are for the elite of the church, who gave way to the whole slew of Marian worshiping popes, and kings....

edit on 26-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 02:19 PM
reply to post by GeneralMishka

Jesus was the heir to the throne of David as adopted son of Joseph. He was from the loins of David, through Mary. And a caution for you, saying that he practiced cabala very well might put you in this camp

That's why both Joseph and Mary's lineage is listed in the Bible. They both came from David's lineage.

Joseph's lineage is in the book of Matthew and Mary's is listed in the book of Luke.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in