Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Holy Trinity - The Devil's Doctrine


reyb

Recommended Posts

Galloglasses' Alt

Jeez I completely forgot. I'll ask him when I get back to school... In the middle of class. In front of everybody.

And I agree with you, he's a good person, too d[i]a[/i]mn proud to admit it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1736771' date='Dec 28 2008, 09:35 AM']ARRRRGH!!!

WHAT [i]discussion[/i]????!

You didn't even give a simple honest answer! This entire thread is pointless precisely because you refuse to engage in an honest conversation! I have never ever seen such high & lofty levels of obfuscation! Such convoluted ramblings! The whole thing must be some sick joke! Are you actually Sacha Baron Cohen? Is this for an upcoming movie???[/quote]

[indent][post="1735711"]Simple honest answer to your mulltiple choice? Your multiple choice lead into just one answer, God is a loving God but not love itself. [/post][/indent]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Galloglasses' Alt' post='1736772' date='Dec 28 2008, 10:10 AM']For some reason Reyb's conduct is reminding me ALOT of that parliamentary tactic known as a Filibuster. Or Obstructionism.[/quote]

[indent]Can you please explain to me why you said these things?Just give me your honest opinion.[/indent]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1736826' date='Dec 28 2008, 01:50 PM']i think the title of this thread is blasphemous...can't one of the moderators change it?

and reyb, the only "doctrine" i see scantily explained throughout this thread is your very own personal thoughts on God...your very own "doctrine"...

...and so, by the title of this thread, am I to believe you are calling yourself the devil?[/quote]

[indent]I know it seems like the above comment but, I am hoping you will consider my inquiry.[/indent]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='reyb' post='1737022' date='Dec 28 2008, 06:10 PM'][indent][post="1735711"]Simple honest answer to your mulltiple choice? Your multiple choice lead into just one answer, God is a loving God but not love itself. [/post][/indent][/quote]
The Scriptures disagree. God is love. 1 John 4:8. GOD IS LOVE. If God is not love, then the New Testament is wrong. If the New Testament is wrong, we know nothing about Jesus Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1737080' date='Dec 28 2008, 07:40 PM']The Scriptures disagree. God is love. 1 John 4:8. GOD IS LOVE. If God is not love, then the New Testament is wrong. If the New Testament is wrong, we know nothing about Jesus Christ.[/quote]

[indent]We all know that God is love because it is written in 1 John. But to prove that God is love using the 'Trinity theory ' is irrational. From where, you are trying to tell us that this trinity theory is the best and rational theory to prove that God is love itself. In trinity theory it proves that God is a loving God who loves himself but, not love itself.[/indent]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JM + JT

[quote name='reyb' post='1737126' date='Dec 28 2008, 08:40 PM'][indent]We all know that God is love because it is written in 1 John. But to prove that God is love using the 'Trinity theory ' is irrational. From where, you are trying to tell us that this trinity theory is the best and rational theory to prove that God is love itself. [b]In trinity theory it proves that God is a loving God who loves himself but, not love itself.[/b][/indent][/quote]
You obviously haven't been reading the posts where we've addressed this.

If you don't agree with what we've said to that statement then refute it, don't just ignore it and repeat the statement over again.

Edited by salterrae
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1736888' date='Dec 28 2008, 03:46 PM'][img]http://www.lutheransonline.com/lo/930/FSLO-1142772930-111930.JPG[/img]
along the lines of "is not" you can replace it with "loves" and see that this is not self seeking love and thus is true love.[/quote]


[indent]From your 'graphical presentation of the Trinity' you said replace the word 'is not' with 'love'. Therefore, it becomes, The Father love The Son, The Son love the Spirit and so on and so forth...how come it proves that God is love itself with rational explanation?.
[/indent]

Edited by reyb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='salterrae' post='1734799' date='Dec 24 2008, 11:57 AM']JM + JT


Err... And how do you know this? Are you God's conscience?

God IS love because He is the perfection of love, and perfect love is always freely given... that's why it's perfect.

And how/why is it that God would give us free will when He Himself does not have that?[/quote]

[indent]Let me give a comment about your previous post (to make it clear) ---to summarize, 'God is love- a perfect and selfless love'. I agree with it. Okay?[/indent]

Edited by reyb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='salterrae' post='1735218' date='Dec 25 2008, 11:08 AM']JM + JT


I must disagree.

If you know that God is love then you know how to love because God is the perfect example of love. How is He the perfect example of love? The Trinity. (He can only BE love if He was ALWAYS love so He had to be love even before creation.)[/quote]

[indent]
Now, after you said that God is love. You tried to rationalize the statement 'God is love' by using the trinity theory. It seems that without the trinity theory, you will not believe that 'God is love' anymore. am I correct?[/indent]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I should repeat a very important factor again; the Trinity is beyond our reason but not against our reason. While God is infinite and we are finite, how do you expect to grasp something infinite with our finite limitations?

by saying it is the Devil's Doctrine IS wrong and where you are in error. (not to mention, by making the claim, you are seriously walking along Anti-Catholicism territory; people who don't debate, just seem to say nothing but really loudly)

Frank Sheed puts it simply: "God did not reveal mysteries simply that we might ignore them. They are the richest food for the intellect, not like a blank wall stopping all progress but like an endless gallery—the mind can go deeper and deeper, yet never can come to the end. . . . The mind may eternally grow on a mystery precisely because it cannot be exhausted."

While you are free to disagree with our view, you have yet to show your true understanding of our faith and call out any type of error specifically (evidenced by your many posts) only by erroneously calling it "the Devil's doctrine" which is uncharitable.

“If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal” (1 Cor. 13:1)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Winchester' post='1734499' date='Dec 23 2008, 07:04 PM']You're precious.

No, you've caught us. We don't believe it comes from God. We think it makes us mysterious. Jesus, during His "Lost Years," encountered the mystical religions of the East and felt that Judaism wasn't bizarre enough, so He made up the Trinity thing so Christian rock stars could try to be more cool, like the Buddhist rock stars. It didn't work, of course, Christian rock stars are dorks.

But nice try, right?[/quote]


[size=7]AHHHH HAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!![/size]

Knew it>.>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='jmjtina' post='1737214' date='Dec 28 2008, 09:22 PM']I think I should repeat a very important factor again; the Trinity is beyond our reason but not against our reason.[/quote]

Sure it is. 3 distincts persons, a father, a son and a holy spirit, having exisitng eternally? :mellow:

That's against reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Galloglasses' Alt

[quote name='reyb' post='1737029' date='Dec 28 2008, 05:18 PM'][indent]Can you please explain to me why you said these things?Just give me your honest opinion.[/indent][/quote]
I said this because your debating tactic is not only circuler, but it also criss crosses, whereby you jump from one form or part of your arguement to another, or backtrack to a certain point, or redirect your oponents to somthing you type earlier in an, (apparently), effort to either confuse your opponents, wear them out or, the most likely course of action, stringing out a gnat by dragging this arguement as far as it can go by going ove each and every possible particular without really giving any answer. It reminded me aot of what some parliamentarians do when they want to delay bills being passed.

This isn't an accusation, and I am not accuing you of deliberate obstructionism, but it surely looks like it. Especially the exasperated attitudes of your opponents.

Edited by Galloglasses' Alt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...