Do INTjs think that the "Holy Trinity" is logical?

[science as magic]

But the earth is not the centre of the Universe. (Or is it?)

That was my point. There are advantages and disadvantages to different hermeneutics. By careful which one you apply, how, and for what reason. Make sure you know what you know.

[diamond]

Hi folks, i've been wanting to reply but there's so much here and I don't have time. I will try soon!

(not that you all were waiting or anything!)

[Hugo]

CREATION FROM CLAY

In the Qur'an, Allah (God) reveals that the creation of the human is a miracle. The first human being was created by Allah shaping clay into human form and breathing a soul into it:

Your Lord said to the angels, "I am going to create a human being out of clay. When I have formed him and breathed My Spirit into him, fall down in prostration to him!" (Qur'an, 38:71-72)

Then inquire of them: Is it they who are stronger in structure or other things We have created? We created them from sticky clay. (Qur'an, 37:11)

When the human body is examined today, it may be discovered that many elements present on the earth are also to be found in the body. Living tissues contain 95% carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulphur, with a total of 26 different elements. In another verse of the Qur'an we are told:

We created man from an extract of clay. (Qur'an, 23:12)

The Arabic word "sulala," translated as "extract" in the verse, means "representative example, essence." As we have seen, the information revealed in the Qur'an 1,400 years ago confirms what modern science tells us-the fact that the same elements are employed in human creation as those found in the soil.

[metaiwan]

Now I'll say off the bat I'm a very non-religious person, but aren't you stretching it quite a bit?
But I don't want to turn this into a religious thing...

[science as magic]

I just find it funny that this is in the "Holy Trinity" thread...

[Hugo]

People were questioning the existence of God (Allah) in this post. I therefore thought that it would be useful to provide proof for the existence of God.

[Kristiina]

Even as a biology student (in a university) I really do believe that God exists. But I also agree that the existance can not be explained without redefining God. My vision of God is complex, unique and quite weird. But I don't want to continue the debate about the existance of god so I won't try to explain it. The topic at hand is the Holy Trinity.

I am female INTJ. I was really suprised to find this thread on the internet because I have had a problem with the Holy Trinity for a few years now. Even if you ignore the illogical aspects of it, you must consider the fact that there is no proof of it. I don't think that any important people have even mentioned it in the Bible. The whole part about the holy trinity is just some ancient theologists theory.

Quite many people wrote the Bible. I haven't studied it word by word, but I suspect that everyone describes God and its being differently. If I would study the Bible closely, I probably could find quotes of God being both a "father", "the holy spirit" and as some think, also "the son". Jesus does refer to God as a "father", but most christians also do that. I don't think he ever says that he is The Son of God. He is considered holy, so that also makes Bible-freaks assume that he is the son of God. And as we all know, assuming is not good.

Imagine this - you think that every word and every sentence of the Bible is pure gold. It is all written by God himself. In different psalms the Bible says that that God is a father, a holy spirit (God is everywhere, can see and hear everything) AND a son (assuming that Jesus called him father for a reason other than respect). That means that God must be all of the above.

Holy Trinity is just a sign that someone misunderstood the Bible, so I see no reason for believing in it. I have found no proof myself, so I think it's a theological theory gone wrong.

[science as magic]

I won't touch the Holy Spirit for the moment but I think you have to include the historical context in which the words are recorded.

Example:

5 Now a certain man was there who had an infirmity thirty-eight years. 6 When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he already had been in that condition a long time, He said to him, "Do you want to be made well?" 7 The sick man answered Him, "Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up; but while I am coming, another steps down before me." 8 Jesus said to him, "Rise, take up your bed and walk." 9 And immediately the man was made well, took up his bed, and walked. And that day was the Sabbath. 10 The Jews therefore said to him who was cured, "It is the Sabbath; it is not lawful for you to carry your bed." 11 He answered them, "He who made me well said to me, 'Take up your bed and walk.'" 12 Then they asked him, "Who is the Man who said to you, 'Take up your bed and walk'?" 13 But the one who was healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had withdrawn, a multitude being in that place. 14 Afterward Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, "See, you have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon you." 15 The man departed and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well. 16 For this reason the Jews persecuted Jesus, and sought to kill Him, F19 because He had done these things on the Sabbath.
17 But Jesus answered them, "My Father has been working until now, and I have been working." 18 Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. 19 Then Jesus answered and said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will. 22 For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, 23 that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

An example of commentary on the greek:

Answered (apekrinato). Regular aorist middle indicative of apokrinomai, in John here only and verse Mark 19, elsewhere apekriqh as in verse Mark 11. My Father (o pater mou). Not "our Father," claim to peculiar relation to the Father. Worketh even until now (ewß arti ergazetai). Linear present middle indicative, "keeps on working until now" without a break on the Sabbath.
...
And I work (kagw ergazomai). Jesus puts himself on a par with God's activity and thus justifies his healing on the Sabbath.
...
But also called God his own Father (alla kai patera idion elege ton qeon). "His own" (idion) in a sense not true of others. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See Romans 8:32 for o idioß uioß, "his own Son." Making himself equal with God (ison eauton poiwn twi qewi). Isoß is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means equal. In Philippians 2:6 Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ isa qewi, "equal to God" (plural isa, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be isoß qewi because in John 14:28 he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in John 14:7 that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in John 10:33; John 19:7. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses John 19-47).

Basically the arguement here is that Christ is claiming equality with God based on several things.

1. He claims to do the work that only God can do.
2. He claims special relationship with the Father.
3. He claims work on the Sabbath is the continuation of work on the Sabbath as the Father works on it.
4. When the Pharisees "misinterpret" Christ by saying He claims to be the one with the Father He does not correct them.
5. Expounds on why He is of the Father in the proceeding verses by claiming to be in charge of final judgement.
6. Makes a claim to the same eternality of life that is in the Father.

In conclusion there is a lot of scholarship on why Christ is "God the Son" and on why there is a Trinity. These are not the only verses I can site or commentaries/interpretations that are available on the subject but to do an analysis of the whole thing would take up several books and I do not have the time. Study some more and then dismiss it.

[Hugo]

Althought the Holy Bible is the book of God (Allah), but it has not come down to us in its original form so that we may benefit from its pristine message. As a result, the book we called the Bible today is not identical in content to the Bible that Jesus (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) brought.

The same can be said for Jewsih scriptures.


Christian Scriptures

Jesus (pbuh) conveyed orally to the people the Bible which God originally revealed to him. His disciples, too, propagated it among the people by the spoken word in such a manner that they presented an admixture of their Prophet's life-story and the revealed verses of the Bible. None of this material was put into writing during the lifetime of Jesus (pbuh) or even in the period following him. It fell to the lot of the Christians whose vernacular was Greek to transform these oral traditions into writing. It must be borne in mind that Christ's native tongue was Syriac or Aramaic and his disciples spoke the same language as well.

Most Greek-speaking authors heard these traditions in the Aramaic vernacular and committed them to writing in Greek. None of these writings is dated prior to the year 70AD; there is not a single instance in these works where the author has cited an authority for an event or maxim attributed to Hadrat Isa (pbuh) in order that we might construct a chain of transmission. Furthermore, even these works have not survived. Thousands of Greek manuscripts of the new Testament were collected, but none of them is older than the fourth century AD; the origin of most of them does not go beyond the period spanning the 11th to the 14th centuries.

Some scattered papyrus fragments found in Egypt can lay claim to no greater antiquity than the third century. We cannot say when the Bible was translated from Greek into Latin. Nor do we know the writer's name.

In the fourth century AD, the Pope commissioned a review of the Latin translation. In the sixteenth century, this version was discarded and a fresh translation from Greek into Latin was prepared. The Four Bibles were most probably rendered into the Syriac language from Greek in 200 AD, but the oldest Syriac manuscript extant was written in the 4th century. A handwritten copy dated back to the 5th century AD contains, in frequent parts, a different version.

Among the Arabic translations made from the Syriac none is known to have been prepared before the 8th century AD. It is curious that some seventy different versions of the Bible were prepared, four of which were approved by the leaders of the Christian religion, while the rest was rejected. We have no information concerning the grounds for their approval or rejection. But can this material be credited to any extent with authenticity as regards the character and message (gospel ) of Jesus (peace be upon him)?


The Jewish Scriptures and the Prophets (pbut)

It is said that an account of Moses and the later Prophets (pbut) and of their teachings is contained in the Old Testament. But consider the Bible from the historical viewpoint. The original text of the Torah, as revealed to Hadrat Moses (pbuh), had been destroyed at the time of the sack of Bait-ul-Maqdas in 6 BC, and along with it the scriptures of the former Prophets (pbut) had perished. In 5 BC, when the tribe of Israel arrived in Palestine after their release from the Captivity in Babylon, the Prophet Ezra (pbuh), assisted by some venerable collaborators, prepared an account of the life of Moses (pbuh) as well as a history of the tribe of Israel. In this work were incorporated in appropriate places such verses of the Torah as were readily available to the author and his associates.

In the period falling between the fourth and second century BC, Various authors penned down the Scriptures ( from which sources we know not) of those Prophets who had preceded them by several centuries. In 300 BC, to cite an instance, an unknown writer wrote a book in the name of Hadrat Yunus (pbuh) and incorporated it in the Bible, despite the fact that Hadrat Yunus was a Prophet of the 8th century BC. The Zubur (Psalms) were committed to writing five centuries after the death of Hadrat Daud (pbuh) and to them were added sonnets composed by some hundred poets. We have no knowledge of the sources from which the compilers of the Zubur (Psalms) had gleaned those Sonnets.

Hadrat Sulaiman (pbuh) died in 933 BC, and Amsal-i-Sulaiman ( An Anthology of Soloman's Proverbs) was compiled in the year 250 BC which also incorporated the maxims of several other sages.

In short, no book of the Bible bears an authentic connection with any Prophet to whom it is ascribed. Furthermore, even these books of the Jewish Bible perished at the second sack of Bait-ul-Maqdas in 70 AD, leaving only their Greek translation extant, a translation dating back to the period falling between 258 BC and the first century BC.

In the second century AD, the Jewish scholars prepared a Jewish Bible with the help of manuscripts which had survived the vicissitudes of time. The oldest copy of this Bible now extant dates back to 916 AD. Apart from this, no other Jewish manuscript exists anywhere today.

The Jewish scrolls discovered in the cave of Qumran on the Dead Sea are not older than the first and second century BC, and even those contain a few scattered fragments of the Bible.

The earliest manuscript comprising the first five books of the Bible current among the Samaritans was written in the eleventh century AD. The Greek translation prepared in the second and third century BC was marred by countless errors. A retranslation from Greek into Latin was done in the third century AD. By what standard can we judge this material as an authentic source of the life-histories and teachings of Moses (pbuh) and the later Prophets of the Jews?

Finally, there were certain unwritten legends known as oral law, current among the Jews. For a span of thirteen or fourteen centuries they remained unwritten until, in the later part of the second and the beginning of the third century AD, a priest known as Yahuda B. Sham'un committed them to writing under the title of ' Mishnah.' Commentaries on this work by the Palestinian Jewish scholars under the name of ' Halaka' and by Babylonian scholars under the title ' Haggada ' appeared in the third and fifth century respectively. The ' Talmud' is, in fact, an anthology of these three works. Significantly, authoritative evidence which may reveal the chain of transmission is lacking in the case of all traditions incorporated in these books.

[science as magic]

I've actually studied Islam quite extensively with (I hope) an unbiased judgement. It just doesn't seem to have a historical philosophical reason for the "transition" from Christ to Mohammed. No offense or anything I find myself relating much more to people of sincere religiosity than those of the modern world.

[Hugo]

I've actually studied Islam quite extensively with (I hope) an unbiased judgement. It just doesn't seem to have a historical philosophical reason for the "transition" from Christ to Mohammed. No offense or anything I find myself relating much more to people of sincere religiosity than those of the modern world.

Thanks for your comment Pedro. Please allow me to clarify. Islam teaches that Jesus (may Allah's peace and blessing be upon him), is in fact a Muslim, and that the message he brought was Islam. This is what is said about all the prophet of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessing be upon them), beginning with Prophet Adam (pbuh). There is no "transition". Jesus and Muhammad (pbut) both had the same mission, and Muslims do not discriminate between the two (pbut).

It is a misunderstanding that Islam came with Muhammad (pbuh), but as I said before Islam teaches that Prophet Adam (pbuh) was a Muslim and taught Islam.

[science as magic]

Yes I understand but I mean I just do not see the line of prophets in quite the same way I guess. I think the concepts involved are not to be found in the old testament as such rather they are extrapolated. The thing I do like about Islam (far more than most modern Christianity) is it's hatred of idolatry.

[Hugo]

Yes I understand but I mean I just do not see the line of prophets in quite the same way I guess. I think the concepts involved are not to be found in the old testament as such rather they are extrapolated. The thing I do like about Islam (far more than most modern Christianity) is it's hatred of idolatry.

As mentioned before, the Old Testament that exists today is not identical in content to the original Old Testament.

Islam does not teach idolatory. Islam does not allow Muslims to force people that practice idolatory to stop practising idolatory:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion" (Qur'an 2:256)

[science as magic]

I just know they are anti-idols which I agree with no making of the image of God. It's just too bad we disagree about who God is.

[Hugo]

It's just too bad we disagree about who God is.

Christianity teaches that there is one God and so that Islam.

According to Islam, the Trinity is not the teaching of Jesus (pbuh).

We believe that Jesus isn't the son of God.

Say: He is Allah, the One and Only! Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not nor is He begotten. And there is none like unto Him.
(Holy Qur'an 112:1-4)

Having a child is a human attribute. By saying that Allah can have a child is like saying that Allah has a human attribute.

For Allah to be Allah, he does not resemble humans in any way, as the Qur'an provides in the above verse.