The socalled "holy trinity" is not only illogical, but quite irrational. Many refer to god as a mystery and a spirit and divide him into thirds. One part they call the father, another part the son, and the third part the holy ghost, which makes the three, one. This is contrary to both nature and mathematics. The law of mathematics will not allow us to put three into one. A ghost can not manifest material.

Oh but it is not contrary.

The word "god" means being(s) of authority. When it speaks of "God" it is not referring to a singular being it is not referring to a being at all in specifics.

The english version of the scriptures does not contain the father's name. It uses a generic term of "God". But that causes confusion when someone just roughly reads a passage here or a passage there.

That is why Jesus is OUR God, yet he never refers to his father as OUR God, only refers to his father as HIS God.

And there is God, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. But they are all one "God". They all have the same amount of authority over us, they are all one in how they work, what they desire, their love for us, and so on.

Cowboy, you are missing my point, truth or fact does not rest on anyones achknowledgment of truth or facts. It does not matter if they believed the world to be flat or not. The planets true circumfrence already was what it is. Them believing one thing did not hinder the fact. Fact is not fact because we believe it or not, truth and fact have there own place, does NOT believing in god negate your belief? Does an atheists disbelief negate your belief? I doubt it.

No you missed my point.


I agree just because someone accepts it as fact doesn't make it so. I was only using the world being flat as an example to show that this world doesn't truly know as much as they think they know. It is only seen as being "known" because it has been accepted by people.

Because all in all, this world could very well be flat for all you know for sure. Because the only knowledge you have on anything comes from a third party that you have placed faith in as being true.

You have placed your faith in science being true and I have placed my faith in God being true.

Well said, however contrary to logic. According to the dictionary of the bible: Teman, a son of Esau by Adah, (Gen. 36: 11, 15, 42) and in 1 Chron. 1:36, now if Habakkuk saw god come or coming from the sons of Esau (Elipphaz), then God must be a man not a ghost. If Habakkuks (3:3) prophecy refers to some country , town , or city, if there be any truth at all in this prophacy, then we can say that this prophet saw god as a material being belonging to the human family of the earth and not to a spirit.

I have absolutely no idea what you been reading. But Habakkuks is not a book in the Holy bible.

So you can not compare Habakkuks with Genesis, the two have nothing to do with one another.

And 1 Chronicles 1:36 is giving reference to a family blood line along with most other verses in that chapter.. says so and so begat so and so ect.

The laws of mathematics (gods language) go totally bare witness to the firmaments of the circunfrence. My third party need not require faith, but mathematical logic. But consider this, what source does one get knowledge from ? Man, or ghost?

Neither, all knowledge comes from God.

Laws of mathematics is man made my friend. Man has flaws, we/they do not know everything. If we knew everything, there would be no longer any need for the use of "science".

Sorry, but the bible I have has the book of Habakkuk in the Old testament, what are you reading?

Faith defines your logic, now who is God and where did he come from?

Interesting, did not know you read the Hebrew bible. Seems Habakkuk was one of the 12 minor prophets.

This book is not included in the King James version of the scriptures, I assume because it is one of the "minor" prophets. One single book can not contain all the scriptures we have on God. Please, lets stick with the major disciples/books and not get into the minor books, for there is a reason they are considered "minor", possibly authenticity or any number of reasons.

God is the one whom created everything, God is whom is in charge of us. God didn't "come" from anywhere. He has always existed and always will. He has no beginning nor any end, he is the beginning and the end. Because there was no before God and again nor any after God.

I asked where does one get knowledge? Man or ghost? You replied neither, yet you believe in the holy ghost, is not the holy ghost a third of gods charactoristics, if so, how can a ghost holy or not manifest knowledge? A ghost as an abirition has no mind, due to no brain, logic suggests this to be illogical. Therefore knowledge does not come from a ghost which is how many interpret god.

IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD, AND THE WORD WAS WITH GOD, clearly this suggests that all scripture is of the word thereby negating any concept of "minor" prophets. All the prophets are and were worthy messengers of god, this is according the contemporary scholors. Who defined minor roles to prophets, and why does one bible have more credence then the other? They are corrupted. And if one contains gods word, id think they would be pertinent in all scripture.

God does have a begining, God indeed came from somewhere, he supposebly said, " I am the alpha and the omega, the begining and the end, this saying the BEGINNING clearly suggests a starting point. The begining is symbolic of the origins of mental consciousness.

"I am the Alpha and the Omega" the begining and the end. This clearly suggests that God has a beginning which would contradict your position and belief that he always was. The end also suggests that he has an end, as do all things.

Yes in the beginning was the Word and the Word was God. This "Word" is not referring something that comes out of someone's mouth, nor is it referring to something written on a piece of paper with letters from the alphabet. I have explained many times why the term "Word" is used, if you wish to find any further look it up. If you refuse to, I might entertain you with this. But no the Word is not referring to the word of God as in the scriptures, there was no scriptures written in the beginning. The scriptures, the different books of the bible are a first hand account of a person(s) with God in one way or other. The only two that arean't specifically that is Genesis and Revelations, which one is history information on how everything came to pass and the other is prophecies. Again, to make sure we're clear on it. When it refers to the Word in the beginning, it is not referring to God's word eg., the bible or any form of scripture. That is why it is capitalized, it is referring to a proper noun, a name/title of a specific being.

Does not contradict anything. He IS the beginning, there is no before God. Because again God has always been. He IS the beginning and he IS the end. There is no before God and will be no after God.

Here is one person's explanation looking at word origins and things of that nature explaining why the term "Word" is used in reference here.

The gospel of John begins with a series of declarations about Jesus’ deity and eternal nature. The apostle, through the direction of the Holy Spirit, expresses this making use of an expression that was well known in the ancient world but unknown in Scripture (in exactly the same way) prior to this. John speaks of Jesus as “the Word,” who was “with God” and “was God” (1:1). John then tells us:1. “all things were made through Him” (1:3a); 2. “without Him nothing was made that was made” (1:3b); 3. “in Him was life” (1:4). This “Word,” John continues: “became flesh and dwelt among us” (1:14); “He came to His own” (1:11a) yet, “His own did not receive Him” (1:11b). Sometime later, to refute false teaching which denied that Jesus came in the flesh, in his first epistle, John begins by referring to Jesus simply as “the Word of life” (I John 1:1).
The Greek word which is translated “Word” in this text is the word logos . Five hundred years before Christ came into the world, the Greek philosopher Heraclitus used the word to describe what he envisioned as a universal force of reason which governed the universe. He felt that “all things happen according to this Logos” (Fr. 50, from Hippolytus, Refutation of all Heriesies, IX, 9, 1). Later, the philosophical school known as the Stoics expanded and popularized this idea in the ancient world.
Among Greek-speaking Jews the Logos came to be viewed as a force sent from God. In the Apocryphal book called the Wisdom of Solomon, the Hellenistic Jewish writer describes the death of the firstborn in Egypt saying - “thine Almighty word (logos) leaped down from heaven out of thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war into the midst of a land of destruction” (18:15, KJV). The first century A.D. Alexandrian Jew Philo blended Greek and Jewish ideas together. In writing about the creation of the universe, Philo compared God’s creation to the building of a great city. The orderly arrangement of this great city, Philo attributed to “the Logos of God” (On the Creation, 24).
As early as the first century A.D. interpretations (or paraphrases) of religious passages known as Targums, began to be written down in Aramaic for Jews who no longer spoke Hebrew. In the Targums the Jews used the Aramaic word memra meaning “word” as a personal manifestation of the presence of God. When Exodus 19:17 tells us that - “Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet with God” the Targums interpret this to mean that he brought them - “to meet the Word (memra) of the Lord.” When Psalm 2:4 declares - “He who sits in the heavens shall laugh” the Targums interpret it to mean -“And the Word (memra) of the Lord shall laugh them to scorn.”
What the apostle John appears to do in the use of this common term is much the same thing that Paul did in speaking to the Greeks in Athens. As he speaks to the wise men of the Areopagus he declares -“... I was passing through and considering the objects of your worship, I even found an altar with this inscription:TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Therefore, the One whom you worship without knowing, Him I proclaim to you” (Acts 17:23). Paul was not sanctioning all that they taught or practiced in their worship of the “UNKNOWN GOD,” instead he was teaching them the truth, using their own misconception as a starting point.
The apostle John does the same thing in His reference to Jesus as the Logos of God. Unlike the Greek notion of the Logos as an impersonal ordering force, John declares that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14). Throughout his gospel he goes on to explain that this One who is the Logos of God was a personal entity who lived and taught among His creation. While the Jews perhaps were closer in their concepts of the Logos, John also clarifies their misconceptions. The Word of God was not simply a personified manifestation of God, John tells us that the Logos was the creative force of God, which was with God but was God Himself (John 1:1). Most often in Scripture, the phrase “word of God” refers simply to what God declares, John uses Logos at the beginnings of the gospel and his first epistle in a special way to teach both Jews and Greeks the truth about who Jesus is.

Nonsence, illogical, irrational and ignorant. To suggest that god was always hear and always will be is contrary to common sence and logic. If this is fact, then proof of that fact can be presented. The Universe is all material, your god is a mystery, ghost and unseen. If he is a holy ghost, then he has no brain, if he has no brain he then has no mind, if he has no mind he has no consciousness, if he has none of the above then he has no power to create the material universe. Whomever created the universe was of flesh, not an unseen ghost.