Arrius had the proper view of thing per Chistology, but the Council of Niceia(sp) in 320 codified the Trinity theology - and condemn Arrius as a Heretic.
'Spiral of Life' represents:
- Unity of body, mind and spirit.
- Interplay of birth, growth, and death
It is a symbolic representation of primordial forces that materialize in magical, mysterious fashion while obeying precise universal laws. The Tree of Life starts with a triad.
From this primordial triangle proceed all of the other figures, shapes, forms, all other numbers, the magic of manifestation.
When Awareness (Father) KNOWS sensation (Mother) Consciousness...the Son is born (Mind) = ALL ONE
Needless to say we have our differences. They seem primarily concerned with the Holy Spirit: a word not mentioned by brahman or DamDontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Mar 08, 2020 8:51 amWhen Awareness (Father) KNOWS sensation (Mother) Consciousness...the Son is born (Mind) = ALL ONE
''Knowing'' is instantaneously known in the moment knowing' arises ONE with the knowing.
The words Awareness/Consciousness/Mind are all aspects of the same ONE idea.
Awareness is a condition, therefore, it cannot know the sensation. Consciousness is a condition too. We have been always conscious since the beginning of times. We are minds.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Mar 08, 2020 8:51 amWhen Awareness (Father) KNOWS sensation (Mother) Consciousness...the Son is born (Mind) = ALL ONE
''Knowing'' is instantaneously known in the moment knowing' arises ONE with the knowing.
The words Awareness/Consciousness/Mind are all aspects of the same ONE idea.
.
I have a simpler understanding of reality. We are separate interacting minds. We are chained by material since we don't know what it is.Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:17 pm My gut feeling is that if modern society opened to understanding what the Triad known in Christianity as the Trinity, the division between science and religion would disappear.
Modern society relies on reason governed by duality: affirmation and denial. Dis is here and dat is dare and the rest is nonsense. The law of non contradiction is the ultimate path to understanding. Yet there are those who wonder why the trinity or union of three forces is so easily accepted in ancient philosophy. Why three? Why not two and leave it alone? Here are how several, including Christianity, of the ancient traditions visualize three forces. Is the dis is here and dat is dare philosophy used by science missing something important?
What is the origin of this deep appeciation for three forces
https://www.speakingtree.in/blog/trinit ... -religions
'Spiral of Life' represents:
- Unity of body, mind and spirit.
- Interplay of birth, growth, and death
It is a symbolic representation of primordial forces that materialize in magical, mysterious fashion while obeying precise universal laws. The Tree of Life starts with a triad.
From this primordial triangle proceed all of the other figures, shapes, forms, all other numbers, the magic of manifestation.
Those concerned with developing to become part of universal meaning and purpose need a workable hypothesis to begin with and understanding how wholeness involves into diversity in a lawful manner in a way that makes the beginning of creation understandable intellectually. If duality works for you, pursue it. It doesn't for mebahman wrote: ↑Sun Mar 08, 2020 11:31 pmI have a simpler understanding of reality. We are separate interacting minds. We are chained by material since we don't know what it is.Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:17 pm My gut feeling is that if modern society opened to understanding what the Triad known in Christianity as the Trinity, the division between science and religion would disappear.
Modern society relies on reason governed by duality: affirmation and denial. Dis is here and dat is dare and the rest is nonsense. The law of non contradiction is the ultimate path to understanding. Yet there are those who wonder why the trinity or union of three forces is so easily accepted in ancient philosophy. Why three? Why not two and leave it alone? Here are how several, including Christianity, of the ancient traditions visualize three forces. Is the dis is here and dat is dare philosophy used by science missing something important?
What is the origin of this deep appeciation for three forces
https://www.speakingtree.in/blog/trinit ... -religions
'Spiral of Life' represents:
- Unity of body, mind and spirit.
- Interplay of birth, growth, and death
It is a symbolic representation of primordial forces that materialize in magical, mysterious fashion while obeying precise universal laws. The Tree of Life starts with a triad.
From this primordial triangle proceed all of the other figures, shapes, forms, all other numbers, the magic of manifestation.
There was no act of creation. The beginning is a matter of necessity. I have an argument for that: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28264Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Mar 08, 2020 11:48 pmThose concerned with developing to become part of universal meaning and purpose need a workable hypothesis to begin with and understanding how wholeness involves into diversity in a lawful manner in a way that makes the beginning of creation understandable intellectually. If duality works for you, pursue it. It doesn't for mebahman wrote: ↑Sun Mar 08, 2020 11:31 pmI have a simpler understanding of reality. We are separate interacting minds. We are chained by material since we don't know what it is.Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:17 pm My gut feeling is that if modern society opened to understanding what the Triad known in Christianity as the Trinity, the division between science and religion would disappear.
Modern society relies on reason governed by duality: affirmation and denial. Dis is here and dat is dare and the rest is nonsense. The law of non contradiction is the ultimate path to understanding. Yet there are those who wonder why the trinity or union of three forces is so easily accepted in ancient philosophy. Why three? Why not two and leave it alone? Here are how several, including Christianity, of the ancient traditions visualize three forces. Is the dis is here and dat is dare philosophy used by science missing something important?
What is the origin of this deep appeciation for three forces
https://www.speakingtree.in/blog/trinit ... -religions
That the Son of God was a separate devine being. literally YHWH's Son. and that the Holy Spirit was the third (lowest of the tier) - the "vioce of god toward humans (conscience?)bahman wrote: ↑Sun Mar 08, 2020 11:29 pmWhat is Arrius view?
Thanks for the information.gaffo wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:35 amThat the Son of God was a separate devine being. literally YHWH's Son. and that the Holy Spirit was the third (lowest of the tier) - the "vioce of god toward humans (conscience?)
Arrius got condemned for not affirming the Trinity theology (back in 200 AD - 380 AD - "christian thought" was evenly split bet Trinitarians and Arrius types) via at the Nicene council of bishops in 320 (he was redeamed and affirmed in his views later 360-ish - in a latter rulling, but died on his way to Jursalem (died in Constaninpole as an old 80 something yr old man - not able to make it to jerusalem to be redeemed in his views).......the rest is history, Arrius is forgotten and the Trinitarians won the day via Christian dogma.
the main point of contention per Arius-types and the trinitarians was about - "did Christ exist before his time on earth" Arius claimed that there is nothing in the bible that states that Jesus existing prior to his birth, (and add the quote in Matt about prophesy - "know one knows when the Kingdom of god will come except the Father" - a quote from Jesus (according to the author of matt) - so jesus did not know when, but assumed his dad did (so two separate beings - thus trinity theology is wrong).
Arrius denied the belief that the Son of God existed as a being before his birth, Trinitarians claimed he did - via the pre-amble of Gospel of John! (and the latter is right - a simple reading of GoJ affirms the theology Trinity/Son of God existed from the first time.
sadly the other Synoptics claim the opposite ;-/.
since i'm an athiest i see not reason for force a circle into a square, and so affirm the theology of John is the outlier per the other 3 gospels (whcih are in agreement Jesus did not exist prior to his birth) of course bet those three Synoptic, Mark is the outlier, affirming via not immaculate birth - was born via a man (Joseph) - prob "Pantera" but whatever................unlike the other two books Luke/Matt - where Jesus's dad is God.
Via Mark, God saw the most rightius man - a man born the usual way with normal parents - and adopted by God.
Luke/Matt claim not so! i.e. all three of synoptics claim Jesus is not God - but litteraly the Son of (so not Trinitarian - as John is) - but Mark denies Luke/Matts claim that Jesus' dad is God.
BTW i do like Gospel of Mark, where Jesus is shown to be a man with emotions like me (as can relate to his travails (unlike gospel of John - where Jesus is more robot than man, with all the answers and with no fear).
I do like the "poetry" of Gospel of John" .............."In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" - nice poetry and i do like its sound. it support Trinitarian dogma BTW
----------
I'm an Atheist, so do not think Jesus is God, nor the Son of - born as or adopted as.
but i do value history, and do assume that there was a man name jesus (joshua) that lived 2000 yrs ago, who did not view himself as God's son,but was a follower of John the Baptist, and like him was killed by the Romans for insurection against Emprical rule, decades later myths were made about the man that expanded - first, via mark - a man adopted my god to be his son, 20 yrs alter a man who's dad is god, 20 yrs latter to a man who was god.