Which Would You Personally Prefer...

[JimL]

The universe is in evidence. The universe is in evidence of it being caused. Existence [uncaused] needs no evidence. And God is the [uncaused] Existence. Atheism is based on nothing except denial of evidence. Evidence is dependant on there being Existence.

Just saying stuff doesn't make it true 37818. The universe is evidence of nothing other than it's own existence. Whatever lies outside of our universe, if anything, is something you can have no knowledge of. Stop pretending that you know, or that by knowledge you came to that conclusion.

[37818]

Just saying stuff doesn't make it true 37818. The universe is evidence of nothing other than it's own existence. Whatever lies outside of our universe, if anything, is something you can have no knowledge of. Stop pretending that you know, or that by knowledge you came to that conclusion.

What evidence do you have that the universe is uncaused being self-existent?

[Sparko]

Jesus is talking to himself, is he? No doubt god-the-father and god-the-son had many good conversations together. So much to do: a universe to run, a self-sacrifice to plan for to appease his own wrath......etc etc etc.

No Jesus was talking to the Father.

[Sparko]

are not three distinct persons but rather three modes or forms of activity (the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) under which God manifests himself. Definition of Modalism by Merriam-Webster

This is what I understood Sparko to be saying.

Admittedly, every attempt to explain the doctrine of the Holy Trinity falls into heresy, because it is essentially contradictory in and of itself. Even the official explanation (the Athanasian Creed) only works because it contradicts itself every second clause, e.g.: "10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. 11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal......."

It's a riot.

I said they were distinct persons, dimwit.

they are plural persons not entities. God is one God revealed in three distinct persons. Each person is fully God. One God, not three.

[Doug Shaver]

What evidence do you have that the universe is uncaused being self-existent?

I need no evidence for what I do not say, or for your idiosyncratic interpretations of what I do say.

[JimL]

What evidence do you have that the universe is uncaused being self-existent?

What evidence did ancient theologians have that the universe was not uncaused, that it was not itself, self existent. Nada, zilch, none, and yet that didn't stop them from assuming it was created. There is no evidence that anything can come from, can be created from, absolutely nothing, and that is evidence that it didn't come from nothing which in turn is evidence that it wasn't created.
So, what evidence do you have that something can come from, can be created from, out of nothing?

[JimL]

No Jesus was talking to the Father.

What were they talking about if their minds were completly in sinc, as you say? Why was Jesus asking the father; "why have you forsaken me?"

[JimL]

I said they were distinct persons, dimwit.

Which makes no sense, dimwit.

[Tassman]

I said they were distinct persons, dimwit.

You said the persons of the Trinity were "revealed in three distinct persons", which is Modalism...a heresy. They are three distinct persons according to the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The problem is that this doctrine is self contradictory, it makes no sense whatsoever. It only came about when strict Judaic monotheists wanted to say that Jesus was God too. Hence the mess of Trinity dogma and the hypostatic union, whereby Jesus was simultaneously fully god and fully man.

[37818]

What evidence did ancient theologians have that the universe was not uncaused, that it was not itself, self existent. Nada, zilch, none, and yet that didn't stop them from assuming it was created. There is no evidence that anything can come from, can be created from, absolutely nothing, and that is evidence that it didn't come from nothing which in turn is evidence that it wasn't created.
So, what evidence do you have that something can come from, can be created from, out of nothing?

God spoke to them. And so it is written that was what was done. Oh, BTW, genuine Christians know God today. Again, as a reminder, Jesus is cited to have argued, "My teaching is not Mine, but His [God's] that sent Me. If any man will do His will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it be of God, . . ."

Now do you even remember what God's will is that Jesus was talking about?

[JimL]

God spoke to them.And so it is written that was what was done.

This is what I mean when I say "you are using the bible, or what the authors wrote, as evidence of its truth." If I told you that I walked on water, would you believe it? Of course you wouldn't!

Oh, BTW, genuine Christians know God today.

Well, they are all familiar with the image of god that they each hold in their respective imaginations.

Again, as a reminder, Jesus is cited to have argued, "My teaching is not Mine, but His [God's] that sent Me. If any man will do His will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it be of God, . . ."

Now do you even remember what God's will is that Jesus was talking about?

You've gone off the rails. This is about the Trinity, remember?

[37818]

This is what I mean when I say "you are using the bible, or what the authors wrote, as evidence of its truth." If I told you that I walked on water, would you believe it? Of course you wouldn't!

The issue is what is claimed of those writings.

Well, they are all familiar with the image of god that they each hold in their respective imaginations.

The true God is invisible and omnipresent.

You've gone off the rails. This is about the Trinity, remember?

There are three Persons who are God. And God is One.

[JimL]

The issue is what is claimed of those writings.
The true God is invisible and omnipresent.

There are three Persons who are God. And God is One.

Okay, obviously you have no argument to make, just the assertions of your belief.

[Sparko]

What were they talking about if their minds were completly in sinc, as you say? Why was Jesus asking the father; "why have you forsaken me?"

Jesus had two natures: God and Man. He was speaking from his human nature, in pain, being crucified on a cross.

[Sparko]

You said the persons of the Trinity were "revealed in three distinct persons", which is Modalism...a heresy. They are three distinct persons according to the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The problem is that this doctrine is self contradictory, it makes no sense whatsoever. It only came about when strict Judaic monotheists wanted to say that Jesus was God too. Hence the mess of Trinity dogma and the hypostatic union, whereby Jesus was simultaneously fully god and fully man.

What I said is NOT modalism. You posted the definition above. Modalism is believing there is ONE person who plays different roles. The Father comes down and becomes Jesus, the son, then acts as the Holy Spirit. Play acting different roles. That is not what the Trinity is, and I said that by describing them as three distinct persons.

If you can't even grasp that simple fact then you have no business debating the Trinity in the first place. You have to understand a topic before you can debate it.