How Can Trinity Believers Explain This

quote:

---

So it is used figuratively only when it contradicts you but if I were to bring out these verses where it states that god was never seen.

---

No, I never said that. Wow, it is amazing how my words get turned, no wonder it's so confusing. No, what I said was if you read what comes before and after you would see that it is figurative. You obviously didn't read the chapter, you did a search on when Gods face was seen. Now, with that said, like I said before, you haven't answered my question, so why should I waste my time on yours. I actually put thought into these posts, and I would appreciate the same from you. Listing a list of scripture, and omitting what comes before and after, when it IS relavent, in no way answered my question. Now if you could show me, just one instance in the Bible that actually says that they seen Gods face, not face to face, because we are talking face to face figuratively, but His actual face.

quote:

---

Hang on my dear. The claim that god is never seen rests with you and it is yours to defend so please show how each of those instances are only figurative since I do suspect you are picking and choosing support for your views.Show the means by which you reason this out.

---

On the contrary, I proved my point, and you decided that you could prove that His face had been seen, so on that note, I would say the 'proof' should rest on your shoulders.

---

Angel

quote:

---

I find this absurd, particularly when you happily accept that the same being is the creator of everything and can do whatever it wants.

---

Not half as absurd as someone thinking that the Creator would pray to Himself, talk to Himself as a second person, etc.

quote:

---

You say that the Bible points to three different beings, but you fail to show how.

---

See messages 1 and 15; though in all honesty, I have yet to see or hear anyone put it so beautifully as Scott Anderson, and am waiting anxiously to see the replys on that.

---

Angel

Angel This is a verse that follows after a ritual sacrifice and a bit before god and Moses left for the mount for the making of the ten commandments. Seventy three people saw god and you say they did not. What gives? This occurs after the descent of the cloud pillar upon the tabernacle which Moses had entered.They discuss the prospect of Moses responsibility for these people under him and he wishes to know who will be sent with him and god agrees be present with him.
God spoke with him face to face as a man speaks to a friend.I personally look my friends in the eye and how do you interpret it otherwise? Can you show me where you showed us verses from the bible that stated that he has never been seen? And can you explain why there is contradiction between these two points of view? The bible states both as being the fact.

---

"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
--Don Hirschberg

quote:

---

This is a verse that follows after a ritual sacrifice and a bit before god and Moses left for the mount for the making of the ten commandments. Seventy three people saw god and you say they did not. What gives?

---

Where does it mention seeing His face? I am confused, I don't see that? Can you point that out to me?

quote:

---

This occurs after the descent of the cloud pillar upon the tabernacle which Moses had entered.They discuss the prospect of Moses responsibility for these people under him and he wishes to know who will be sent with him and god agrees be present with him.
God spoke with him face to face as a man speaks to a friend.I personally look my friends in the eye and how do you interpret it otherwise?

---

Obviously that is meant to be figuratively, like I said before, otherwise Ex. 33 would not be. Moses never seen Gods face.

quote:

---

Can you show me where you showed us verses from the bible that stated that he has never been seen? And can you explain why there is contradiction between these two points of view? The bible states both as being the fact.

---

I have already posted that SEVERAL times. There is no contradiction, one is figurative, the other isn't, that is not a contradiction.For instance, though my picture is on here (pretend that it isn't), we are talking face to face, one after the other, with each other. But I can't see your face. Does that mean that we are not communicating? No, it simply means that you can't see me.

---

Angel

Hi Angel, the concept of the Trinity defys logic and explaination.
During early church history the church ran into a problem, the scriptures referenced God as more than one. In order to prevent the church from reverting back to paganism or polytheism this matter must be addressed. There was a church sect that was teaching that Jesus was one with the "Father/God" different substance. This was hotly opposed by Rome who subscribed to Jesus being one with the Father/God same substance. In the greek form of the written word it was called a 'iota'. But that slight difference between (same substance) and (different substance) was tremendous in it's religious implications. The Pope decided to get everyone together and hammer out the issue at the council in Nicea. Same substance won out. Hence the concept of the Trinity. The church has since basically said it is what it is. The Holy spirit guided the council and thats that. Now regardless of if you believe it or want evidence, or logical explaination does not matter, The fact that it makes no sense does not matter. All that matters is that the faithful believe it because the church has ruled. Period.
The church states that man can not rationalize or define God. Period. So there you have it believe it or not. But to give you an example of how these things work, the King of England formed his own religion because the Church would not grant him a divorce. Hence the beginings of Protistant reformation. This is all merely my own humble opinion. edit change won to ownThis message has been edited by 1.61803, 11-11-2004 12:33 PM

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

Angel Where does it specify face? It doesn't.It also does not specify his hair his arms his trunk,back legs or anything else for that matter.Oh I get it.When the bible says something it does not mean that it means something else.Right. Obviously my lady? How is it obvious? Does it state that it is not literally but figuratively? That it conflicts with Ex.33 is the problem. The bible is contradictory. Can I quote you on that because that is so ludicrous as to be worth a laugh.We are not talking face to face as the bible could have possibly meant it.Unless you are going to claim that they had other than person to person contact {i.e. internet telephone} then I must insist you retract that arguement.I feel you are fitting the verse to avoid dealing with the contradiction.

---

"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
--Don Hirschberg

quote:

---

The fact that it makes no sense does not matter. All that matters is that the faithful believe it because the church has ruled. Period.

---

Yes, I agree. I am fortunate, in the sense, that I wasn't raised in a church, so I had to learn everything for myself. What may be easy for me to see, might be nearly impossible for them to see. I have found that this discussion is more of me explaining (which I have no problem with), then them explaining. If it is their faith and belief, so be it, I merely wanted to understand why? I guess it is simply unanswerable.

---

Angel

Angel, the problem is that the church has painted themself into a corner with the Trinity. Rather than admit it was illogical (ie) 1+1+1=1 they came out and said believe it because God moved within the council at Nicea to provide the answer. Aristotilian thinking and metaphysical calastintics make the Trinity sound plausible. But I do not believe that 1+1+1=1.

quote:

---

Where does it specify face? It doesn't.It also does not specify his hair his arms his trunk,back legs or anything else for that matter.Oh I get it.When the bible says something it does not mean that it means something else.Right.

---

No, wrong again, never said that! It is becoming obvious that you care nothing about discussing the trinity, now if you want to make a new topic, and the admins. will allow it, please do, then if I feel your post has no meaning, I will not feel obligated to reply.

quote:

---

Obviously my lady? How is it obvious? Does it state that it is not literally but figuratively? That it conflicts with Ex.33 is the problem. The bible is contradictory.

---

The copies of the Bible do have contradictions in them, I never said that they didn't. However again, this is ANOTHER topic. Changing the subject doesn't explain your position, if you can't explain, again that's fine with me, but don't turn it into a whole new topic, by avoidance.

quote:

---

Can I quote you on that because that is so ludicrous as to be worth a laugh.We are not talking face to face as the bible could have possibly meant it.Unless you are going to claim that they had other than person to person contact {i.e. internet telephone} then I must insist you retract that arguement.

---

Sure you can! It was figuratve, which is how I know for a fact now, that you can't tell the difference. God talked through angels too, but again, another topic. My question to you? What does ANY of this have to do with proving or disproving a trinity?

quote:

---

I feel you are fitting the verse to avoid dealing with the contradiction.

---

Yes, and I feel that not only are you going off topic to avoid the topic, but you can't tell the difference between something that is figurative, and something that is literal. BTW there is a topic for this.... What is to be taken literally?

---

Angel

Author,But wouldn't the church want everyone to know the truth? Surely they are aware that it isn't so. After all these years, it seems that at least one would come forth. Has there been any instances of this that you are aware of?Thanks

---

Angel

AngelI do agree that this should be discussed in another topic and I shall endevour to put one together later.In the meantime please accept my aplolgies for derailing the discussion of the trinity.Bye for now.

---

"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
--Don Hirschberg

Yes, but as far as they were concerned that WAS the truth. And that IS the truth. The Holy Roman Catholic church in my opinion has always historically attempted to preserve and interpret matters of faith. If the Bible has contradictions, then the church will have contradictions as well. How can the bible have contradictions? Is what the church had to ask itself. And the answer was there are no contradictions. Its like that old sign: rule #1 the boss is always right. rule #2 if the boss is wrong see rule #1. Unfortunately most Christians today worship the Bible as God. The Bible was always considered to be the unerring word of God. Unfortunate that there are many things that dont add up. Like 1+1+1= 1.

quote:

---

Not half as absurd as someone thinking that the Creator would pray to Himself, talk to Himself as a second person, etc.

---

You seem to be unable (or unwilling) to understand the Hypostatic Union doctrine. What is absurd about Jesus (the man) praying and talking to God ? Here, Jesus' Two Natures , this might help!

quote:

---

I have yet to see or hear anyone put it so beautifully as Scott Anderson, and am waiting anxiously to see the replys on that.

---

what was so beautiful about Scott's post? can you help me out here? maybe you can pick on a specific point and we can discuss that (it was a rather long post!)

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

quote:

---

You seem to be unable (or unwilling) to understand the Hypostatic Union doctrine. What is absurd about Jesus (the man) praying and talking to God ? Here, Jesus' Two Natures , this might help!

---

Well, of those two chooses I would say unwilling. Though I am aware of it's teaching, I tend to believe what the Bible actually says, over it.

quote:

---

what was so beautiful about Scott's post? can you help me out here? maybe you can pick on a specific point and we can discuss that (it was a rather long post!)

---

The whole entire post was beautiful! But, I think you might want to pick and choose (no pun intended), what you would like to discuss. I am not going to repost, his post.

---

Angel

quote:

---

You seem to be unable (or unwilling) to understand the Hypostatic Union doctrine. What is absurd about Jesus (the man) praying and talking to God ? Here, Jesus' Two Natures , this might help!

---

Well, of those two chooses I would say unwilling. Though I am aware of it's teaching, I tend to believe what the Bible actually says, over it.

quote:

---

what was so beautiful about Scott's post? can you help me out here? maybe you can pick on a specific point and we can discuss that (it was a rather long post!)

---

The whole entire post was beautiful! But, I think you might want to pick and choose (no pun intended), what you would like to discuss. I am not going to repost, his post.

---

Angel