Well this week have been kind of surprising for me, i saw someone write that he believed the deity (in greek "the state of been God" of Jesus christ yet he didnt believe that Jesus is God. I asked myself how can someone believe that Jesus is in the state of Godhood yet believes that he isnt God. It is like say ubenedictus possess the human nature but he isnt a human, i had to ask myself, how can i have d human nature and be anything but a human being? How did this guy form this idea? How did he concieve it and how can a reasoning mind hold such. Ofcourse it was surprising, he was trying to deny the trinity yet was also trying to make sense of scripture. He was saying christ was deity but christ couldnt be God because in his mind that would make God two instead of one as the bible says.
Wow it show how far one can go to hold ideas even though he has totally contradicted himself. I donot wish to continue that debate nor to fault it instead i wish to present another perspective.
Hilary lived around 300AD was bishop of potiers, he was a student of scriptures like most nairaland christians, this is his thoughts on christ http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/330203.htm . I would love to see each persons thoughts of the above work, please i would prefer a polite discussion rather than a heated debate and please i would prefer if ideas are discussed not peoples insulted.
Peace

Hello Ube ...
"Jesus is God, but Jesus is not God."
"That should not be read literally, is a parable"
Are typical expressions of Christianity.
It is not my intention to offend, but Christianity is not a doctrine.
Jesus never spoke of trinity.
The first record on the Trinity, was at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AFTER DEATH OF JESUS​​.
I think that explains everything.
My respects.

Ptolomeus:
Hello Ube ...
"Jesus is God, but Jesus is not God."
"That should not be read literally, is a parable"
Are typical expressions of Christianity.
It is not my intention to offend, but Christianity is not a doctrine.
Jesus never spoke of trinity.

Jesus also never said the word "bible" it was written after he died, that doesnt mean that the bible isnt part of christianity, ur arguement is bogus.

The first record on the Trinity, was at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AFTER DEATH OF JESUS​​.
I think that explains everything.
My respects.

the first record of trinity isnt nicea, tertullian already did many years before nicea. The first mention of bible was even after d trinity was mentioned, when d name was first recorded isnt an arguement, the arguement is whether of not the apostles taught that d fada is God the son is God and d holy spirit is God and that God is one. That is the arguement. Ur post above doesnt even touch it.

I believe that the issue about trinity will never be solved like many other contentious bible doctrine,belief and teachings. Because the bible points at different direction for people with opposing views to follow, i wish individuals who claim to have been to heaven/hell and came back could use that opportunity to ask jesus or the angels if the idea of trinity is heavenly accepted. I guess some wouldn't believe though

Femmymata2: I believe that the issue about trinity will never be solved like many other contentious bible doctrine,belief and teachings. Because the bible points at different direction for people with opposing views to follow, i wish individuals who claim to have been to heaven/hell and came back could use that opportunity to ask jesus or the angels if the idea of trinity is heavenly accepted. I guess some wouldn't believe though

When you read the bible with the lenses of scripture it points to only one direction.

If you try reading it with the lenses of tradition it points to about 40,000 denominational creeds

frosbel:

When you read the bible with the lenses of scripture it points to only one direction.
If you try reading it with the lenses of tradition it points to about 40,000 denominational creeds

Ofcourse, that could be true. But i don't really care, if jesus is God or the begotten son of God or God the son or not God at all. I wish we had a God or supernatural being who could communicate directly with us and deal with our everyday issues. I've read about many Gods but none is worthy of anything but just to debate,argue,insult about it. They are that useless, they can't speak for themselves except through money demanding, jet-flying,mansiön living,expensive suit wearing, hell threatening, tithe/offering collecting,poor exploiting,dubious,cunning,viscious,desperate men and women of God. These Gods are useless when a mother and infant look onto them when they're about to be cut into pieces and burnt, these Gods with perfect knowledge,almighty power,presence everywhere can't use it to help those kids dieing of hunger,disease,abuse e.t.c These Gods are powerless,useless and only have the thinking, behaviour,imagination of those who created and worship them.

frosbel:

When you read the bible with the lenses of scripture it points to only one direction.

If you try reading it with the lenses of tradition it points to about 40,000 denominational creeds

are u kidding me? The protestant church claims to follow scriptures alone they have 40000 denomination in about 500yrs of existence, the last time i check those wu followed the word of God reveal thru scripture and tradition havent reach 100 in 2000yrs. Next time make research before u start spining d above arguement.

Femmymata2: Ofcourse, that could be true. But i don't really care, if jesus is God or the begotten son of God or God the son or not God at all. I wish we had a God or supernatural being who could communicate directly with us and deal with our everyday issues. I've read about many Gods but none is worthy of anything but just to debate,argue,insult about it. They are that useless, they can't speak for themselves except through money demanding, jet-flying,mansiön living,expensive suit wearing, hell threatening, tithe/offering collecting,poor exploiting,dubious,cunning,viscious,desperate men and women of God. These Gods are useless when a mother and infant look onto them when they're about to be cut into pieces and burnt, these Gods with perfect knowledge,almighty power,presence everywhere can't use it to help those kids dieing of hunger,disease,abuse e.t.c These Gods are powerless,useless and only have the thinking, behaviour,imagination of those who created and worship them.

and wu says dieing is an evil that must be stopped and avioded at all cost?

Ubenedictus: and wu says dieing is an evil that must be stopped and avioded at all cost?

Well, its just kind of human to be appalled at killing of men,women,children and infants in the name of defending a powerless God. Even though this people will eventually die of something someday, we can't but condemn those terrible acts. Imagine someone insinuating that Dieing in a plane crash for some people is God's plan to take them to heaven. Though it might not sound bad at first but taking a look at the infants and kids above that flight be burnt along there parents with no one to rescue them is quite horrific. Ofcourse, (end justifies the means) they'll make heaven thats what matters most. Fck heaven

Femmymata2: Well, its just kind of human to be appalled at killing of men,women,children and infants in the name of defending a powerless God. Even though this people will eventually die of something someday, we can't but condemn those terrible acts. Imagine someone insinuating that Dieing in a plane crash for some people is God's plan to take them to heaven. Though it might not sound bad at first but taking a look at the infants and kids above that flight be burnt along there parents with no one to rescue them is quite horrific. Ofcourse, (end justifies the means) they'll make heaven thats what matters most. Fck heaven

if u are talking about fanatism, i do not wish to argue. Comiting suicide in the name of God isnt my idea of religion. People died of human or mechanical error in a plane, how come God takes the blame?

Ubenedictus: if u are talking about fanatism, i do not wish to argue. Comiting suicide in the name of God isnt my idea of religion. People died of human or mechanical error in a plane, how come God takes the blame?

its common sense to attribute a plane crash to human or mechanical but i'm sorry to bore u with my rantings on the role God played in those events i mentioned. I grew up believing in christian doctrines that i now strongly abhor, i'm a little frustrated about the evil i see and hear around me everyday cuz i believe it could me. It angers me when someone talks about a God somewhere. if such diety exist, humans deserve better than we have now

Femmymata2: its common sense to attribute a plane crash to human or mechanical but i'm sorry to bore u with my rantings on the role God played in those events i mentioned. I grew up believing in christian doctrines that i now strongly abhor, i'm a little frustrated about the evil i see and hear around me everyday cuz i believe it could me. It angers me when someone talks about a God somewhere. if such diety exist, humans deserve better than we have now

im a bit surprised. What has humans done right that make u think we deserve better? We are in a world where we dorminate, if we wish and if we arent selfish our world would be a paradise. What i see around me are peope wu have refuse to take dominion over themselves not to talk of making a better world. Actually all we need to be better has been given to us, we have failed to apply it, we has refused to apply our God given talent and we blame God for our own failure. Wow, that doesnt seem right.

Ubenedictus:
1. Jesus also never said the word "bible" it was written after he died, that doesnt mean that the bible isnt part of christianity, ur arguement is bogus.

2. the first record of trinity isnt nicea, tertullian already did many years before nicea. The first mention of bible was even after d trinity was mentioned, when d name was first recorded isnt an arguement, the arguement is whether of not the apostles taught that d fada is God the son is God and d holy spirit is God and that God is one. That is the arguement. Ur post above doesnt even touch it.

1. You should know that the biblical stories predate Jesus
Jesus was Jewish, was not Catholic. Neither Jesus established the Catholic Church ... I think you're not understanding the thread.

2. No. You should study the issue and then comment.
At the Council of Nicea

Result of the debate

The Council declared that the Son was true God, co-eternal with the Father and begotten from His same substance, arguing that such a doctrine best codified the Scriptural presentation of the Son as well as traditional Christian belief about him handed down from the Apostles. Under Constantine's influence,[38] this belief was expressed by the bishops in the Nicene Statement, which would form the basis of what has since been known as the Nicene Creed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea


Excuse me, but is positive read review before.

My respects.

Ptolomeus:

1. You should know that the biblical stories predate Jesus

really? Jesus said "before abraham i was" which stories predates him?

Jesus was Jewish, was not Catholic. Neither Jesus established the Catholic Church ...

it seems u are joking, Jesus said "upon u (peter) i will build my church" so why did u get the idea that christ didnt establish d church?

I think you're not understanding the thread.

2. No. You should study the issue and then comment.
At the Council of Nicea

Result of the debate

The Council declared that the Son was true God, co-eternal with the Father and begotten from His same substance, arguing that such a doctrine best codified the Scriptural presentation of the Son as well as traditional Christian belief about him handed down from the Apostles. Under Constantine's influence,[38] this belief was expressed by the bishops in the Nicene Statement, which would form the basis of what has since been known as the Nicene Creed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea


Excuse me, but is positive read review before.

My respects.

wow did u read the bold part? You just made an arguement against urself, the nicea father say that the trinity is the best codification of the biblical revealation and that the trinity is a christian belief handed on thru d ages.
I rest my case

Jesus was a Jew of the Jewish religion (you know that?)
You think Jesus knew Moses? Abraham? David? and all other adulterers?

Jesus never spoke of the Catholic Church. You try to confuse with a phrase. Be honest in the discussion.

The Council of Nicaea in 325, officially accepted the trilogy.
Before that, the Catholic Church did not accept the trilogy.
You read the article, you give reasons, and avoid being in ridícuo.
No rest, educate yourself.

Ptolomeus: Jesus was a Jew of the Jewish religion (you know that?)
You think Jesus knew Moses? Abraham? David? and all other adulterers?

it seems you aim is to offend, mission accomplished u have succeeded is ending any meaningful discussion.

Jesus never spoke of the Catholic Church. You try to confuse with a phrase. Be honest in the discussion.

and yet he spoke of building his church on peter.

The Council of Nicaea in 325, officially accepted the trilogy.
Before that, the Catholic Church did not accept the trilogy.

you are totally joking, the bishops of nicea said "we believe" they werent making doctrines, they were stating in clear term the faith that has been handed to them and they wish to hand it on. You should read up on christian history before making these dubious claims.

You read the article, you give reasons, and avoid being in ridícuo.
No rest, educate yourself.

which article?