Aristotle's influence over the field of Science, by virtue of the weight of his authority and reputation, was so powerful that it actually retarded the growth of science for almost 2,000 years. His law of motion was:
Any object in motion will not continue in motion unless acted upon perpetually by an outside force. (Aristotle)
This law was widely accepted until Isaac Newton came up with his first law of motion which said precisely the opposite, namely...
Any object in motion will continue in motion perpetually unless acted upon by an external force. (Sir Isaac Newton)
The point we are making here is not that Newton made a massive contribution to physics when he invented Newtonian Dynamics. It is that by raising the status of dead academics or theologians to that of human God's we become idolaters of them, and we freeze mankind's advancement. We fossilize our understanding. Unquestioned human authority has no place in sincere scientific or in theological research. It was not the scientific brilliance of Aristotle's daft law of motion that held it in acceptance by mankind for 2 millennia. It was his status, his reputation, his authority, his stature in the pantheon of mummified idols worshipped by the mediocre mafia of science and theology.
There was a fantastic episode of Star Trek Next Generation (Season 6, Episode 11, Chain of command II), where Captain Jean Luc Picard was captured by the Cardassians and tortured for information by Gul Madred. The procedure that the Cardassians employed was very simple. They shone 4 lights at him and asked him: How many lights do you see? He said: Four. Gul Madred falsely represented that there were 5. The aliens would then give him pain and torture every time Picard said that there were 4 lights, and then ask him the question again. To cut a long story short he never broke and continued to represent throughout the entire process that there were precisely four lights. When he was rescued by his ship mates they all congratulated him on his unbreakable will power and strength and told him what a great captain he was, and what a wonderful example to the crew he had set. But Jean Luc confided to one of the crew just how much he desperately wanted to convince himself that there were 5 lamps. He said that he was minutes away from cracking and agreeing that 4 was 5. Of course once he agrees to that, he has lost his objectivity and it is game over. You can get anything you want from him. The plot is an adaption of George Orwell's 1984 where O'Brien tortures Winston by holding up 4 fingers in front of his face and then insisting that there are 5.
The Trinity Doctrine that began with the Catholic church and spread to many other churches is just that process. The trinity is the abolition of the number 2. The victim is asked to accept that 1 is 3 and 3 is 1. The Catholic Encyclopedia, the trinity section of which can be found at: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm defines the trinity as follows:
The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion -- the truth that in the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another. Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed:
"The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God."
In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This, the Church teaches, is the revelation regarding God's nature which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her whole dogmatic system.
This is illogically defined and therefore not defined and therefore non existent. For any reader trained in Pure Mathematics that is the end of the matter, there is no Trinity. But for the sake of the less logically experienced among us, please read on. There are 3 inconsistencies in the definition:
1. That God is three independent beings who are one being, so that 3 is 1 and
1 is 3. This abolishes the number 2 - which is a bad idea.
2. Jesus is God and the father is God. So the Father is the Son
3. The Son is uncreated
|1||It is not possible for three oranges to be one orange.|
|2||It is not possible for a Father to be a Son, this contradicts the definitions of both father and son. The son is defined as an offspring of a father not an 'onspring' as it were.|
|3||Sons are by definition created by their fathers, a son cannot be uncreated.|
Basically the Trinity is defined as a number that is both less than two and more than two. Obviously there is no such number. The Trinity is like a hotel in North London which is situated South of the Thames. Obviously there is no such hotel. But when the poor uneducated, logically uninitiated, spiritually naive, churchgoer complains, saying: How can this be? He is told by his priest: Aha! that is the mystery of God. God can put a hotel which is in North London in a South London postcode. God can make a number that is larger than 2 actually be less than 2. At which point the poor naive churchgoer gives up and says to himself. Wow! I will never understand God, I had better leave the understanding of him to my priest. I can never have a relationship with a God like that, whom I simply cannot understand. I had better have a relationship with the priest instead. This is of course precisely the effect that the priest wants. Now he can continue to play God to his congregation. So the churchgoer becomes an idolater of his priest rather than a worshipper of God. It is not possible to have a relationship with a person who cannot be known. So the churchgoer is prohibited by the trinity doctrine from having a relationship with his dad.
The trinity is therefore a 'Brainwashometer'. If the victim is prepared to believe that one is three and that a father is his own son and that a son is uncreated, then he is prepared to believe anything at all and so he is fully brainwashed. Once he is in this condition, his logic is removed, his objectivity has gone, he is mentally defenceless, so he or his family can be pumped for money, sex, status, worship, whatever the priest wants.
So by making the trinity doctrine the central doctrine of the Roman Catholic faith, that church was auto selecting brainwashed people. The control freak only wants brainwashed people. He cannot permit free thinkers to enter the congregation, they might see through his little game and liberate his brainwashed victims. It is a pleasure to be able to reveal the truth behind this despicable mind game that the Roman Catholic Church has relied on for 1700 years.
Just for fun, we list 13 scriptures that prove that Jesus was not God and that the Holy spirit was not Jesus and not God...
32 For example, whoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it will be forgiven him, but whoever speaks against the holy spirit, it will not be forgiven him, no, not in this system of things nor in that to come (Matthew 12).
So the holy spirit and the Son are not co-equal and are different beings.
15 He said to them: You, though, who do
you say I am?
16 In answer Simon Peter said: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 In response Jesus said to him: Happy you are, Simon, son of Jonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal [it] to you, but my Father who is in the heavens did (Matthew 16).
So God revealed it not Jesus, so they are two different spirits.
23 He said to them: You will indeed drink my cup, but this sitting down at my right hand and at my left is not mine to give, but it belongs to those for whom it has been prepared by my Father (Matthew 20).
So God and Jesus have separate possessions.
18 Jesus said to him: Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God (Mark 10).
So God is good and Jesus is not, so they are different people with different characters and different levels of righteousness.
36 Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father (Matthew 24).
So God knows things that Jesus does not know. So they have no 'unity of Godhead'.
1 Do not let your hearts be troubled.
Exercise faith in God. Exercise faith also in me (John 14).
Two different beings to put your faith in.
28 You heard that I said to you, I am going away and I am coming [back] to you. If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going my way to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am (John 14).
So the two of them are not co-equal then.
42 saying: Father, if you wish, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, let not my will, but yours take place (Luke 22).
So God and Jesus have two different wills. So there is no 'unity of Godhead'.
41 Therefore they took the stone away. Now Jesus raised his eyes
heavenward and said: Father, I thank you that you have heard me.
42 True, I knew that you always hear me; but on account of the crowd standing around I spoke, in order that they might believe that you sent me forth (John 11).
So God sent Jesus forth, and God himself remained entirely in heaven whilst Jesus was on the earth.
9 You must pray, then, this way: Our Father in the
heavens, let your name be sanctified (Matthew 6).
Jesus himself was entirely on earth and God was entirely in heaven when he said this!
46 About the 9th hour Jesus called out with a loud voice, saying:
Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
One cannot easily forsake oneself can one! The Father was God of the son. The son was not God of the father. This was one of Sir Isaac Newton's anti trinity arguments.
As a final argument, if it is true that Jesus and God are the same person, then Jesus talked to himself in public, and prayed to himself in private and so was in fact a schizophrenic. This is plainly a false insult both to God and to his Son.
16 The one alone having immortality [aqanasian],
dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no one of men has seen, nor is able to
see (1 Timothy 6).
Literally aqanasian means 'without death'. So God has not died and will never die. Whereas of course Jesus has died. Therefore Jesus is not God - QED.
5 So too the Christ did
not glorify himself by becoming a high priest, but [was glorified by him] who
spoke with reference to him: You are my son; I, today, I have become your
6 Just as he says also in another place: You are a priest forever according to the manner of Melchizedek.
7 In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear.
8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered;
9 and after he had been made perfect he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him,
10 because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of Melchizedek (Hebrews 5)
One cannot be a priest of oneself. Jesus must be a different person to God in order that he can be God's priest. Just as Melchizedek was a different person to God. God became Jesus' father again by saving him out of death, by resurrecting him.
23 But each one in his own
rank: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the Christ during
24 Next, the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power (1 Corinthians15).
How do you hand over something to yourself?
10 I was cast on You from the womb, from My mother's belly, You are My God (Psalm 22 - GLT)
David is speaking as Jesus here (hence JP Green uses a capital Y for 'you'. Jesus does not say: I am my God. He says: You are my God.
18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him]. (John 1 KJVi)
18 No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him. (John 1 NWT)
18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares [Him]. (John 1 GLT)
18 God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare. (John 1 YLT)
18 God no one has seen ever; the only-begotten son, that being in the bosom of the Father, he has made known. (John 1 ED)
18 God no one has seen at any time; only-begotten god the (one) being into the bosom of the Father that (one) explained. (John 1 KIT)
18 qeo.n ouvdei.j e`w,raken pw,pote\ monogenh.j qeo.j o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro.j evkei/noj evxhgh,satoŇ (John 1 UBS4)
18 qeo.n ouvdei.j e`w,raken pw,pote\ o` monogenh.j ui`o.j o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro,j( evkei/noj evxhgh,satoŇ (John 1 TIS)
18 qeo.n ouvdei.j e`w,raken pw,pote\ o` monogenh.j ui`o,j( o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro.j evkei/noj evxhgh,sato (John 1 STE)
18 Qeo.n ouvdei.j e`w,rake pw,pote\ o` monogenh.j ui`o,j( o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro,j evkei/noj evxhgh,satoŇ (John 1 SCR)
18 Qeo.n ouvdei.j e`w,raken pw,pote\ o` monogenh.j ui`o,j( o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro,j( evkei/noj evxhgh,satoŇ (John 1 BYZ)
18 Qeo.n ouvdei.j e`w,raken pw,pote\ monogenh.j qeo.j o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro.j evkei/noj evxhgh,satoŇ (John 1 NA27)
18 Qeo.n ouvdei.j e`w,raken pw,pote monogenh.j qeo.j o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro,j√ evkei/noj evxhgh,satoŇ (John 1 TRE)
18 qeo.n ouvdei.j e`w,raken pw,pote\ monogenh.j qeo.j o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro.j evkei/noj evxhgh,sato (John 1 WHO)
18 qeon oudeij ewraken pwpote monogenhj qeoj eij to kolpon tou patroj ekeinoj exhghsato (John 1 SCSa)
18 qeon oudeij ewraken pwpote monogenhj qeoj o wn eij ton kolpon tou patroj ekeinoj exhghsato (John 1 VatB)
The term only begotten (literally - only generated) God sinks the trinity completely unless you buy the concept that a son can be begotten/generated without being created which is an abuse of language.
The Sinaiticus, the VaticanB and the Syriac Peshitta have only begotten God. The Alexandrinus has only begotten son. The Codex Bezae has John 1:17 to John 3:15 missing and comes in with the only begotten son of John 3:16 - How convenient!
The Alexandrinus is 5th century, whereas the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus are 4th century codices. The Syriac Peshitta is 5th century but was translated from the Hebrew is the 1st or second century it is believed. http://www.dukhrana.com/peshitta/analyze_verse.php?verse=John+1:18&font=Estrangelo+Edessa&size=150. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peshitta
No one corrupts a text to fit a doctrine that they do not have. So it must be the Alexandrinus that was corrupted to fit the trinity doctrine.
The trinity defines God as being three persons in one being. But this is 3 spirits in one soul which is demonic. Also God is a spirit said Jesus, and we must worship him in spirit and truth. Jesus did not say that God is 3 spirits!
24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth. (John 4 KJVi)
24 God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth. (John 4 NWT)