Is the trinity a pantheon?

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2003-04-20 03:49am

And just for the record, I don't believe that the KJV would be the most accurate version. It is a possibility, but let's not forget that it was translated from the Vulgate (the original versions even contained the Apocrypha) and some Catholic versions were translated from the Greek. So there is room for debate.

Hethrir · Post by **Hethrir** » 2003-04-20 03:59am

I might be stepping in a little bit above my head...i'll consider things first.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-04-20 04:38am

Well, as someone who is entirely third-party (not a Christian or a Hindu), the two concepts sound precisely the same to me, just with different terms describing them. Tomayto, Tomahto.

And what's a Holy Ghost?

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-04-20 05:13am

Superman wrote:Well, how much did Constantine of Rome have to do with settling the nature of the Trinity debate? There were Bishops at the time that were definately against it. If Constantine, who was a practitioner of Roman pantheonism, decided that the trinity is truly a trinity, the it is possible.

He didn't. He sided with the Catholic side of the debate as opposed to the Arian Heresy.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-04-20 05:15am

Sokar wrote:Most definatly not a pantheon, Catholic dogma is fairly strict as this entire argument damn near caused a massive internal schisim in the Church around the 1100's(IIRC).

It has caused schisms in the Church. Repeatedly. Some were stamped out, but the Monophysites of the Middle-East and North Africa are the lasting result of one of those schisms.

Johonebesus · Post by **Johonebesus** » 2003-04-20 05:28am

Superman wrote:And just for the record, I don't believe that the KJV would be the most accurate version. It is a possibility, but let's not forget that it was translated from the Vulgate (the original versions even contained the Apocrypha) and some Catholic versions were translated from the Greek. So there is room for debate.

Actually, the KJV was translated out of Hebrew and Greek, which were the original languages of the two testaments, respectively. The attempt was to make a clean break with the Vulgate, which is still the Catholic Bible, though the version most often read by English speaking Catholics is the New Jerusalem. The Apocrypha was not originally separate, but was separated out by Protestants because the Jews had by that time rejected as cannon the Greek Septuagint and the Hebrew versions that the Vulgate was based upon. Also, the King James translators were likely not quite as skilled translators as modern linguists, especially with Koine Greek.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2003-04-20 06:21am

So, why would anyone think that KJV is most accurate anyway? I know some religious groups use it and it alone, but why?

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2003-04-20 10:36am

Superman wrote:So, why would anyone think that KJV is most accurate anyway? I know some religious groups use it and it alone, but why?

It's hardly accurate to the original texts, i've seen entire documentaries on all the bits that have been found to be wrong with it so far. As for why do people use it and it alone...well some people just refuse to acknowledge alternate routes of learning. I call these people ignorant and often willfully stupid.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-04-20 12:35pm

Robert Treder wrote:And what's a Holy Ghost?

Jesus mentioned the "Holy Spirit:"

John 14:25-26
25 "All this I have spoken while still with you.
26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
(NIV)
There we see that Jesus tells of sending the Holy Spirit to us to act as a guide -- one could say sort of a conscience adjuster (it should be noted that while the Holy Spirit can guide someone, that person yet has free will and can choose to ignore such guidance)...

Matt 12:32
32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Mark 3:29
29 But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin."
(NIV)
(I believe those passages refer to the rejection of the Holy Spirit -- i.e. rejection of Christ in this life -- as the one unforgivable sin.)

Mark 13:10-11
10 And the gospel must first be preached to all nations.
11 Whenever you are arrested and brought to trial, do not worry beforehand about what to say. Just say whatever is given you at the time, for it is not you speaking, but the Holy Spirit.
(NIV)
In that passage, Jesus is speaking of those who are arrested for teaching the Gospel. He says the Holy Spirit will give them the words they need when they are brought to trial for that purpose.

Matt 28:19
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
(NIV)
There we see that Jesus includes the Father, Son and Holy Spirit all in the same breath -- thus the Trinity (three in one).

Acts 8:15-17
15 When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit,
16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.
17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
(NIV)
There we see the reference of baptism and the Holy Spirit. From this we can see that water baptism is symbolic only, and the true baptism is from the Holy Spirit. I believe the placing of hands in order to receive the Holy Spirit was done only during the time of the apostles. I've never seen it done by anyone in the church in my lifetime, unless they're praying for healing or some other special need.

Acts 9:31
31 Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers, living in the fear of the Lord.
(NIV)
Again, there we see that the Holy Spirit is described as a helper and a source of encouragement to the church (the church being a body of believers -- not a physical building).

1 Cor 6:19
19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
(NIV)
From that we can see the image of the Holy Spirit living in us.

Eph 1:13
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
(NIV)
There we see that the Holy Spirit comes into the one who believes in Christ.

There are many more passages in the Scriptures about the Holy Spirit, but all point to the Holy Spirit being sent to those who receive Christ as Lord and Savior. The Holy Spirit is then a guide and ever-present helper to the Christian.

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2003-04-21 01:29am

Superman wrote:So, why would anyone think that KJV is most accurate anyway? I know some religious groups use it and it alone, but why?

I don't know. Most theologians use the NRSV, since it tends to be accurate to the Hebrew and Greek (though we have spotted three Hebrew errors in the Prophets alone. Two are synonyms, but not the general usage of the word). KJV is just...bleh. Too many thees and thous and thys, makes it hard to understand. I'll read any, but I'll always compare the texts, and I'm trying to get copies of the Septuagint and the Stuttgart manuscript of the Hebrew Bible.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-04-21 04:34am

So basically the Holy Spirit/Ghost is at once the telepathic guidance that god offers you and the religious mood/mentality/spirit in general. And this spirit is the same thing as god, who is the same thing as Jesus.