Christianity is Morally Bankrupt

They had no reason to invent the Holy Spirit, their whole motivation was to show those ignorant of the Biblical record the truth of the Trinity, which involved defining Jesus as the Divine Son of God first, based on the Biblical references, and the Holy Spirit as biblically both God and separate Person. It's all in the Bible, their job was to show it for the sake of those of us who don't read the Bible as deeply as they did. The non Trinitarians are wrong, and you should learn that yourself.

Here's the doctrine of the Trinity from Blue Letter Bible again, which I'v posted many times before. It's a matter of learning all the separate biblical references since it is not spelled out in one place. So it shows that God is One, and then it shows that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God, all from scripture references. Then it shows that the Father is a separate Person from the Son and Holy Spirit, the Son is a separate Person from the Father and the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is a separate Person from the Father and the Son. Three separate Persons, each of whom has the attributes of God. This is how the Trinity is shown from the Bible to be "One God in Three Persons." Ttrying to understand this without studying the relevant scriptures will get you nowhere.Here's the Blue Letter Bible study of the Doctrine of the TrinityEdited by Faith, : No reason given.

LOLYet the reality is that both Trinitarians and Non-Trinitarians and even Roman Catholics are all still Christians.Christian doctrine is a human creation that has evolved over time and will continue to change and evolve in the future.

Yes; it's called taking pieces parts out of context to support a desired conclusion.We know that.But the fact remains that the Holy Spirit was only included hundreds of years after Jesus and the concept of the Trinity is still not universally accepted.

How could there be any "desired conclusion?" That's idiculous. Not to mention that just happening to find all those parts that together add up to some "desired" conclusion would be impossible, nay -- since they were found --miraculous.No, it's DISCOVERING in the scriptures that certain facts are there that together add up to the Trinity. It's there and they discovered it's there, nobody had any reason to want it to be there, it's just there.Nothing will ever be "universally" accepted. There will always be heretics and apostates. But the doctrine is biblically incontrovertible for those who have an "ear to hear," not to mention an eye to see and a mind to understand what the Bible shows. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

That's easy. Just look at the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. It begins with a desired conclusion and then goes on to make unsupported assertions to justify the conclusion. Look at your own behavior. You begin with the desired conclusion that the Bible is factually accurate and even when it is clear that you cannot present any model, mechanism, method, process or procedure where any flood could produce the evidence that exists in reality you simply admit that you don't care about the details, the facts or reality and go on with your desired conclusion.

I said, "A cynic might think you made Him up, tailored perfectly to suit you." I was referring to the fact that "Christian doctrine", as espoused by Phat, just happens by sheer coincidence apparently, to correspond exactly with what Phat wants to hear. You disagree with Phat's take often enough yourself, so you really have nothing to criticize here.

All I've said is that the Bible happens to get it right in some cases. The same secular humanist view is obvious to almost every religion as well as to secular humanists. Hence, it has nothing to do with the Bible or Jesus. Stop lying about me. I have never said a word about "global unity" or denying people the right to individual wealth. Why don't you read what I write instead of listening to what your right-wing idols say I think?It was Jesus who told you to take up your cross daily and follow Him. He did not say you could follow him by sitting at home on your individual wealth.

So your position is that all of the stories were made up--some at earlier times and some at later times. I always maintain that the SOURCE is important, where you emphasize CONTENT. One would think that the SOURCE of inspiration for a story is somewhat relevant. Also, I see a MOTIVE or INTENTION to be equally useful.The Gospel of John is often criticized for being out of step with the theme of the other Gospels, but I see it as more fully developing a different side of Jesus. Do you believe that any part of the books was divinely inspired? Or would you then ask how we would even be able to test for that? You often are critical of Biblical Christianity, for it presupposes that many of its adherents have had an encounter with the divine and that everyone needs such an encounter. I don't readily agree with your idea that anyone can simply walk into a club and declare themselves a member. Transformation and sanctification are basic Biblical principles. Perhaps where we differ is that you might insist that we change ourselves through what we do, whereas I would say that by God's action of transforming a willing individual, that individual then has the capacity, passion, and direction to do good works.

No Phat.The evidence shows that all of the stories are the creation of one or more individuals and that they reflect the mythos of those authors individual ethos and desires. Yet you never offer any explanation of how the SOURCE might be identified and tested while the Content can be identified and tested. Yet you never offer any explanation of how the MOTIVE or INTENTION might be identified and tested while the Content can be identified and tested.

Indeed. And the secular logic, reason, and reality will eventually teach people to eliminate the habit of accepting unevidenced beliefs. The Biblical Christians will be as the early Christians were...fighting the government. You (meaning the collective secular humanist voice) will advocate a cashless society due to convenience. You will insist that all churches be taxed. Effectively rendering unto Caesar that which is Caesars. The snake was right. Ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil will morph into "You shall be as Caesars(secular humanists with a common government) replacing religion with a secular state. The Biblical Christians will resist being under this control, though there will be few of them. I doubt I would have the guts to sever my umbilical cord from the state----its all I have. But If I see the need, I will pray for the strength to do it. You will mock religion and personal revelation from God. You will call it a fantasy and Biblical Christians will be mocked if they resist consensus with the humanist global authority.I predict tentatively that everything will fall apart (by this I mean the middle class in America will face poverty) as the rest of the world adapts the secular consensus and moves on to a future without religion except a fake inclusive one.

Again Phat you are simple yet again misrepresenting everything anyone has posted. Please quote where any of us have made such a claim. Please quote where any of us have made such a claim. In the Bible, who is it that says we should render unto Caesar that which is Caesars? Thank God we already live in a secularist State thanks to our Constitution. Yet the evidence shows that the middle class in almost other every secular nation is doing better, has better health care, longer lives, and happier people than the US of A.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

m All that does is reinforce my case that it likely will be the poor onetime middle class here in the US, many of them current Trump base, who will actually start WW IIIU because they can't stand a bunch of foreigners getting wealthy while the US suffers. I'm not saying it is very Christian of them, but people will do crazy things in order to survive.

Like that would help them. There is a story about that in the Bible. Have they ever read the Bible? Pulling everything down worked well for Samson IIRC. Yet another example of a truly horrific God character in that story.

I never desired any conclusion at all. The Theologians did a good job of arguing for inerrancy and it makes sense, and that is that.