How do you explain the Trinity to kids?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Perhaps why there are 4 X's on a ton of spirits to declare the three are joined by another in a Shadowy way of learning about alien'stuff ...

Consume the fifth and you will be the fife coming forth ... and not knowing how you got there ... as a piper or Pan! Tubal kahn-nous ... a dog of a metaphor ... the second ithchii is said to be more impressive? B 'ithchii dais mons ... vere-lye flighty with emotions!
 
redhead said:
and the author of Acts and Revalations is the same author according to most Biblical historians
Click to expand...

What? Can you cite one? I'm not being sarcastic. If you've come across a biblical scholar who says that I'd like to know, because I've never heard of it, nor do I personally see anything in the two books you mention that would link them to a common author.

Luke-Acts, yes.

John-Revelation, yes.

But Luke-Revelation?
 
John was a daemon in the wilderness ... a common thing those days in the middle east that the Europeans were trying their best to control to get their hans on the camel roots ... You did know that daemon is a code name for Lucifer ... or the Black Lady as rendered to Luce-I? The deviate I is what got that Elysium lass in trouble with the laws controlling sects ... a patriarchal thingy! The women of the times were not to run industrial businesses ... especially Never on Sundays! However the weelasses knew the nature of the business better than the male half that lost their minds over the incidents ... that came to be known as peddling of the lesser powers ...
 
Hermann said:
In the early days of Christianity, quite a few Christian were Arians (followers of the Alexandrian Christian teacher Arius) The Germanic tribes that overran the Roman Empire (Visigoths, Ostrogoth, Vandals, and others) were Arians. There even was an Arian Bible written in Gothic language and script by the Arian Bishop Wulfila.

One of Arius' writings was a gospel written in the form of a prose poem named "Thalia." When Arianism was declared a heresy by the Roman Church, the writings of Arius were banned and burned, but fragments of the Thalia survived in quotes of others. From these fragments Friedrich Schiller wrote a poem entitled Lied der Freude (Ode to Joy) which Beethoven set to music and incorporated into his 9th Symphony. The Ode to Joy has become somewhat of an international anthem, a piece of Arianism that survived to this day.
Click to expand...
Interesting history around Beethoven's 9th Hermann.

This history of Arius wouldn't be the first time the Church declared something they didn't agree with to be heresy. There is no religion higher than truth, and that includes the Roman Catholic religion.
 
Joy, you spark of godly beauty, daughters of Elysium,
We will enter, drunk with fire, Heavenly, your Heavendom.

-from the Ode to Joy
 
Hermann,
Does this phit with Alice doesn't live here any moor?

For all the celestial hoot'rs are set free like the tenth insight ...

You sometime hear them whirr 'ding in the dark as in Hebrews 4:7 the cleavage can sometimes been imagined as backward ... perhaps why the young folk perpetuate this plummer's arse thingy!
 
Kimmio said:
So what does it mean that even Jesus said he wasn't good, and that only God alone is good? (it has me thinking of the Jewish definition of 3 - one being unity and simplicity...2 tension, complexity...3 the synthesis of two opposites). Was Jesus human and imperfect? If he said he is "not good" does that still make him sinless? If only God is good, is "God" the synthesis of two opposites making one unified whole?
Click to expand...

Jesus never said He is not Good , Jesus was addressing the people , not Himself
 
Still sacred in Hebrew mythology as that flaw in the desert donkey ... something is missing that requires input!

Some gyne-oz came up with it ... as a mental exercise when in a' sexual state and far from heaven ... plate onyx love when dreaming of the vacuous cow out there ... may require a stretch of mind into the abstract!
 
But Jesus had the "goods" on the unknown God ... people didn't wish to know ... the black and white of varied spirits ... including the Shadow ...
 
revsdd said:
What? Can you cite one? I'm not being sarcastic. If you've come across a biblical scholar who says that I'd like to know, because I've never heard of it, nor do I personally see anything in the two books you mention that would link them to a common author.

Luke-Acts, yes.

John-Revelation, yes.

But Luke-Revelation?
Click to expand...
How does one determine who wrote what in the Bible these days? There is so much information out there it's mind boggling! Looking at the Sinai Bible which is supposed to be the oldest Bible known, we are told there is no mention in it of the virgin birth, Mary, the resurrection, etc.....

http://www.codex-sinaiticus.net/en/

Then during the Council of Nicea there were supposedly many "correctors"....so how would we really know who wrote anything?
 
Waterfall said:
How does one determine who wrote what in the Bible these days?
Click to expand...

Not much differently than in the past.

Waterfall said:
There is so much information out there it's mind boggling!
Click to expand...

Well, yes and no.

Waterfall said:
Looking at the Sinai Bible which is supposed to be the oldest Bible known, we are told there is no mention in it of the virgin birth, Mary, the resurrection, etc.....
Click to expand...

I don't know who you are hearing that from Codex Sinaiticus included the birth narrative of Matthew which includes the affirmation that Mary is a Virgin.

Mark does not contain a birth narrative.

Luke refers to the virginity of Mary at least twice in Luke 1: 27 and 34 both of which are found in the Codex Sinaiticus

John doesn't contain a birth narrative opting instead to place Jesus at Creation.

All of the resurrection accounts found in the four gospels (particularly Mark's longer ending) are found in the Codex Sinaiticus.

Not sure what the etc. is supposed to be referring to. At any rate your source about what the Codex Sinaiticus contains is in error with respect to Mary's virginity and the resurrection.

Waterfall said:
Then during the Council of Nicea there were supposedly many "correctors"
Click to expand...


Redactions were made to copies of texts. When Canon was being set all Bishops attending the council were to bring what Gospels and/or Epistles they had in their possession. Likely none had any original manuscripts and all were working with copies of originals.

The first step was basically to work through the check list. Who has Genesis show of hands and on through the remaining books. Once they had established canon it would then be a matter of making sure that everyone's copy of Genesis was the same so they would have poured over every chapter, every verse, every word working out which manuscripts were closest to the original Corrections would be made to the text at this point. Specifically, removing what was felt did not belong and adding what was felt did belong and the provenance of the documents would have played a key part in that work.

For example, so and so was the disciple of a disciple of John and their copy of John's Gospel would be seen as most authentic and other texts would have been edited to reflect precisely what the most authentic text said.

Authorship was a similar process. Who wrote this book, Everyone would weigh in on where the books in their possession came from.

Authorship is not hotly contested for most books.

Most heat and light is reserved for what should or shouldn't belong to the actual text.
 
revjohn said:
Not much differently than in the past.



Well, yes and no.



I don't know who you are hearing that from Codex Sinaiticus included the birth narrative of Matthew which includes the affirmation that Mary is a Virgin.

Mark does not contain a birth narrative.

Luke refers to the virginity of Mary at least twice in Luke 1: 27 and 34 both of which are found in the Codex Sinaiticus

John doesn't contain a birth narrative opting instead to place Jesus at Creation.

All of the resurrection accounts found in the four gospels (particularly Mark's longer ending) are found in the Codex Sinaiticus.

Not sure what the etc. is supposed to be referring to. At any rate your source about what the Codex Sinaiticus contains is in error with respect to Mary's virginity and the resurrection.



Redactions were made to copies of texts. When Canon was being set all Bishops attending the council were to bring what Gospels and/or Epistles they had in their possession. Likely none had any original manuscripts and all were working with copies of originals.

The first step was basically to work through the check list. Who has Genesis show of hands and on through the remaining books. Once they had established canon it would then be a matter of making sure that everyone's copy of Genesis was the same so they would have poured over every chapter, every verse, every word working out which manuscripts were closest to the original Corrections would be made to the text at this point. Specifically, removing what was felt did not belong and adding what was felt did belong and the provenance of the documents would have played a key part in that work.

For example, so and so was the disciple of a disciple of John and their copy of John's Gospel would be seen as most authentic and other texts would have been edited to reflect precisely what the most authentic text said.

Authorship was a similar process. Who wrote this book, Everyone would weigh in on where the books in their possession came from.

Authorship is not hotly contested for most books.

Most heat and light is reserved for what should or shouldn't belong to the actual text.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected. Always helpful to have a learned minister around here. Thanks.

I do note that it must be upsetting to those that think the bible is unchanged as it appears there have been whole books taken out of our modern bibles?

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...t-does-it-reveal-about-the-bible-1734439.html
 
Waterfall said:
I do note that it must be upsetting to those that think the bible is unchanged as it appears there have been whole books taken out of our modern bibles?
Click to expand...


Not so much.

[FONT=Open Sans, sans-serif]Armenia was the first state to formally adopt Christianity as its state religion. The Armenian Apostolic Church participated in the first ecumenical councils called by Constantine. There was a formal break between the Armenian Apostolics and the Roman Catholics around 370 AD. There would be further divisions and distinction in this branch of the Christian familiy which is typically labelled "Oriental"

Later there was the East-West Schism which broke into the Roman West and Orthodox East.

Then during the Reformation there was further fracture of the Roman Catholic branch to produce the various Protestant traditions.

Each time the new Church family revisited the notion of Canon and typically eliminated books rather than adding books.

Oriental and Orthodox Churches may have as many as 90 books in their Canons, Roman Catholics tend to have 72 books while Protestants tend to recognize only 66.

While the Protestant traditions have rejected whole books they are still available for reading.[/FONT]
 
Revjohn, if it is a fact that the ending of Mark in our current Bibles is a forgery, why haven't the churches removed it from the Bible?
 
Waterfall said:
Revjohn, if it is a fact that the ending of Mark in our current Bibles is a forgery, why haven't the churches removed it from the Bible?
Click to expand...

Neither fact nor forgery.

The fact is that earlier manuscripts deemed to be more reliable, do not carry the longer ending. Normally that would be enough to seal the deal on whether it does or doesn't belong.

A lot of other manuscripts do have the longer ending. Normally when we have an abundance of manifestations over a number of different manuscript families it is also enough to seal the deal.

In this instance the deals being sealed are in conflict with each other so . . . .

Most Bibles carry the notation that the following verses do not appear in in certain manuscripts.

In truth there are three endings to Mark and not two.

In some manuscripts Mark ends midway into v 8. In others Mark ends at the end of v 8. and then in still others it continues on to v 20.

Translators have thousands upon thousands of manuscript and manuscript fragments to work from.
 
If I may.

John has already deal with Codex Sinaiticus. So - ditto.

As to the ending of Mark's Gospel - again, John beat me to it. He's fast! I would agree that the end of Mark's Gospel is not a forgery, since no authorship is attributed by the Gospel we know as the Gospel of Mark; neither was it original.

As to books being taken out, that's not really true. Nicaea didn't really take things out. Although a proto-canon had been forming, it wasn't consistent from one Christian community to another. The question at Nicaea was coming up with common Scripture, and so the issue was really what should be included, not what should be taken out, since something new was being established. Some of their decisions were theological; some were political. Many were controversial, and remained (and, I guess, to some extent, remain) controversial.
 
"Children know that their future will be different than their present. Change may bring instability and pain -- youth can be a fearful time. But there is often an accompanying sense that the changing future will be theirs to engage with a personal power that increases, gradually, day-by-day. The dawning of ambition to "become" an adult of substance in the world to come.

This is seen in childrens' storytelling tastes -- the fantasy and science fiction that are sometimes dismally dismissed as "childrens' literature" by minds that have lost all flexibility and that cling desperately to an illusion of static "eternal verities." Young people know less, but they are certain that change will come. And they are much more courageous about facing it."

--david brin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top