Jesus and the Trinity

[gort]

2ducklow quotes:

We know that god is a spirit from scripture. I find it no giant leap of logic to say a spirit is a being. i.e. something that exists. Do you not believe God exists? that is the primary def. of being.

Then we're into semantics.

yes we can, god is a spirit.

John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

a spirit is something that exists therefore it is a being. it be. And a person is something that exists, it be too.

I meant in the context of a total definition of God.

true but your engineers that may act childish in some ways don't design automobiles with one wheel or no engine or no steering wheel. Likewise a theologian who resorts to such illogic as jW is really hard to fathom. it would be like an auto mechanic putting a starter in for a transmission.

Or may act boneheaded. And yes, engineers make mistakes, and bad ones. Auto mechanice may very well replace the starter instead of a transmission, as some are known as parts changers, replacing many good parts till the faulty part is found. Or the doctor who cut a leg off, when the patient went in for something else.

I would say that the boiling point probably depends on the atmospheric pressure. at any rate there is a reasonable logical explanation for it not an illogical irrational nonsensical explanation for why that happens. god wants us to make sense out of his word not nonsesne.

Nehemiah 8:8 So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

Give the sense of scripture and people will understand the reading. give the trinity explanation of scripture and no one will understand the reading.

The boiling point is dependent upon temperature and pressure.

I have no problem understanding many explanations of trinity. Those of JW (as far as I can tell from what you've posted) I don't understand. I've not gone to the link you provided. Maybe I will.

<><

 

[Balthasar]

God is most accurately defined as a/the Being.


In answer to Moses’ question of God at the burning bush, El’Shad-dai’ reveals to Moses His sacred name. Rendering this in English at the point of our interest, it reads: ‘And the God spoke to Moses, saying, &#949;&#947;&#969; &#949;&#953;&#956;&#953; &#959; &#969;&#957; (=ego eimi ho on; I AM THE BEING, ); and He said, Thus shall ye say to the
children of Israel, ho on (= The being) has sent me to you... This is my name forever."

Anybody denies God is The Being?

 

[Balthasar]

John 1:2 says nothing about Christ being the "Creator of all things"; rather, it attributes a mediatorial role to Christ, like we see in 1 Cor. 8:6 and Hebrews 1:2. An active sense is not given to Christ when it comes to creation, but a passive sense is clearly seen in Scripture, particularly the use of EKTISTHE in Col. 1:16. Philippians 2:6 says nothing about Jesus being "equal" with God, but how he gave up his divine form and took on humanity, INSTEAD OF seeking equality with his God (Rev. 3:12), which is the course taken by Satan

 

[2ducklow]

have no problem understanding many explanations of trinity. Those of JW (as far as I can tell from what you've posted) I don't understand. I've not gone to the link you provided. Maybe I will.

I understand the trinity doctrine as well. 3 persons who are one god. but understanding the concept is impossible because it is a contradiction. 3 beings cannot be one being, 3 things cannot be one thing. 3 houses cannot be one mansion. 3 fords cannot be one chevrolet. 3 women cannot be one man. everyone can understand these statements I made but no one can understand the concept because it is a contradiction. trinity is a contradictory concept and therefore cannot be understood.

Or may act boneheaded. And yes, engineers make mistakes, and bad ones. Auto mechanice may very well replace the starter instead of a transmission, as some are known as parts changers, replacing many good parts till the faulty part is found. Or the doctor who cut a leg off, when the patient went in for something else.

Engineers make mistakes but when they are pointed out to them they correct them. A number of trinitarians in this forum have praised that JW definition of trinity and said they fully understood it, but of course they refused to explain what it meant. I pointed out the mistakes to other people in this forum and they refused to discuss it. they refused to explain what it meant even after I showed them what it meant. it seems they wanted to keep it obscure so as to have an explanation of trinity that apparently made sense. I think this is probably what was going on with JW. He purposely kept it obscure, not out of malice, but out of the force driving him to explain a contradiction. the only thing that works is to obfuscate so strongly that no one knows what you mean. he failed in not obfuscating enough. in not useing enough vague terminology. in not using enough misnomers, and most of all he failed by stating that 3 beings is one being is a contradcition. most trinitarians will not admidt that because it traps them even though that is one of the major objections to trinity by non trinitarians.

Then we're into semantics.

well that's one way out of having to say whether or not God exists. If god exists he is a being. everything that exists is a being. it be. if god is not a being as you apparently believe that means god doesn't exist.

 

[2ducklow]

God is most accurately defined as a/the Being.


In answer to Moses’ question of God at the burning bush, El’Shad-dai’ reveals to Moses His sacred name. Rendering this in English at the point of our interest, it reads: ‘And the God spoke to Moses, saying, &#949;&#947;&#969; &#949;&#953;&#956;&#953; &#959; &#969;&#957; (=ego eimi ho on; I AM THE BEING, ); and He said, Thus shall ye say to the
children of Israel, ho on (= The being) has sent me to you... This is my name forever."

Anybody denies God is The Being?

It is only because of the trap of having to say 3 beings (persons of god) are in one being (God) that people say god is not a being. on this issue the only thing that works for them is to obfuscate. they know god is a being. they know god exists. and everyone knows a person is a being as well. obfuscate is the only thing that works on that end as well. welll a person of god isn't really a person but person is as close as we can come. ever heard that? so they call it a person of god but it isn't a person ofgod is some undefined thing. then they say 'well tertullian used the latin personna which means mask" then why don't they call it the 3 masks of god? because obfuscate is the modus operindai when explaining concepts that are illogical and contradictoy. it's the only thing that works.

 

[2ducklow]

Ofcourse it's not the divine name "I am", "Ego Emi".. Even the blind man Jesus heals says "I am", "Ego Emi". Is he God too? Besides the Hebrew "I am that I am" is in a different tense than the Greek "I am", and means something completely different. But that's a whole different story.

the reason I can't completely rule out "I AM" as being the divine name in john

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for except ye believe that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

John 8:58-59 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am. They took up stones therefore to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple.

Why would they stone him if they did not believe he was claiming to be Jahweh? Perhaps because of the entirety of that discourse. such as their perception that Jesus was elevating himself to a lofty status of god's right hand man. I just can't rule out completely the possiblility that Jesus was invoking the divine name. On this issue I believe my church teaches that Jesus was invoking the divine name, but they interpret it to mean that Jesus was saying he was the one Jahweh foretold of through his prophets even before abraham. for me the jury is out.

 

[gort]

2ducklow quotes:

I understand the trinity doctrine as well. 3 persons who are one god. but understanding the concept is impossible because it is a contradiction. 3 beings cannot be one being, 3 things cannot be one thing. 3 houses cannot be one mansion. 3 fords cannot be one chevrolet. 3 women cannot be one man. everyone can understand these statements I made but no one can understand the concept because it is a contradiction. trinity is a contradictory concept and therefore cannot be understood.

And this is why we are into semantics, over the definition of 'being'. the word 'being', to me falls short of defining God. Yes, 'being' can somewhat define God. I would liken perfectly understanding 'being' in relation to God, as I can understand the distance of the entire universe from end to end. And yet, I'll get lost in 5 minutes in the big city to the north of me.

Therefore, I don't see God as one being in 3 persons.

I see 'God' revealed as 3 persons as God.

Do you see the difference?

God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. All 3 having the distinct perfect personification of the Nature, characteristics and likeness of God revealed in the totality of Scriptures.

Engineers make mistakes but when they are pointed out to them they correct them. A number of trinitarians in this forum have praised that JW definition of trinity and said they fully understood it, but of course they refused to explain what it meant. I pointed out the mistakes to other people in this forum and they refused to discuss it. they refused to explain what it meant even after I showed them what it meant. it seems they wanted to keep it obscure so as to have an explanation of trinity that apparently made sense. I think this is probably what was going on with JW. He purposely kept it obscure, not out of malice, but out of the force driving him to explain a contradiction. the only thing that works is to obfuscate so strongly that no one knows what you mean. he failed in not obfuscating enough. in not useing enough vague terminology. in not using enough misnomers, and most of all he failed by stating that 3 beings is one being is a contradcition. most trinitarians will not admidt that because it traps them even though that is one of the major objections to trinity by non trinitarians.

Regarding engineers, because it does relate somewhat to what you say, I'll say that for 30 years, I've been a refrigeration mechanic and have seen a lot of real dumb things engineered and architected. Some things are just designed for failure way before their time.

Some will cop to mistakes, and some just won't.

Perhaps this is the case with JW, and he don't cop to his errors, but I have to read what he says first. Some will bluff their way thru it, plain and simple.

well that's one way out of having to say whether or not God exists. If god exists he is a being. everything that exists is a being. it be. if god is not a being as you apparently believe that means god doesn't exist.

It's semantics. Your definition of 'being' against mine. Refer to what I put in a 'cloud' above regarding to my def of 'being'.

be·ing ( P ) Pronunciation Key (bng)
n.
The state or quality of having existence. See Synonyms at existence.

Something, such as an object, an idea, or a symbol, that exists, is thought to exist, or is represented as existing. The totality of all things that exist. A person: “The artist after all is a solitary being” (Virginia Woolf).
All the qualities constituting one that exists; the essence.
One's basic or essential nature; personality.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=being

All these things I highlighted would be included in my definition of 'being'.

The triune God exhibits all of these as God, singular.

<><

 

[Deraj]

My understanding is that when it is said in scriptures that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God, it is in their purpose and will etc. I do not believe however that it is the same being taking different forms, although i respect why it is a controversial subject, as it is very difficult to argue indefinately one way or the other.

 

[Balthasar]

[/size][/font]
3 beings cannot be one being, 3 things cannot be one thing. 3 houses cannot be one mansion. 3 fords cannot be one chevrolet. 3 women cannot be one man. everyone can understand these statements I made but no one can understand the concept because it is a contradiction. trinity is a contradictory concept and therefore cannot be understood.

I think it was Adolph Hitler who once remarked that the more outrageous the lie, the more readily it is believed. The same mantra repeated long enough becomes truth in man's minds and hearts because they love traditions more than the truth of God. In George Owell's Animal Farm, the leaders utilized slogans as propoganda techniques; four legs good, two legs better. The Chinese people sincerely believe Westerners are barbarians, even though technologically we're far superior to them and arguably our human rights record is better than theirs. Brain washing by tradition is hard to wash off indeed. For example, the term God the Son is unscriptural but millions of Catholics and trinitarians think it is God's revealed truth simply because their institutions have thrown this term around for public consumption for centuries.

best wishes,

 

[Balthasar]

Deraj,

My understanding is that when it is said in scriptures that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God,

Scripture doesn't say that!

it is in their purpose and will etc.

I could go along with the notino that christ is one in will with the Father. Sounds kosher. I disagree with you in that the holy spirit is not a person at all! As far as I can tell there is no trinity of persons in the bible, not even conceptually.The holy spirit is a force or power.

best wishes

 

[Balthasar]

Hi daneel,

All these things I highlighted would be included in my definition of 'being'.

The triune God exhibits all of these as God, singular.

In other words you would say the godhead is the being. Am I correct?

 

[Deraj]

Deraj,

My understanding is that when it is said in scriptures that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God,

Scripture doesn't say that!

Sorry, i meant there are scriptures which say that the Father, and the Son are one, such as;

John 17:11 - And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

Obviously I interpret that as being that they are one in purpose, not one being, but trinitarians would interpret it the other way.

 

[Balthasar]

Hi 2ducklow,

the reason I can't completely rule out "I AM" as being the divine name in john

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for except ye believe that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

John 8:58-59 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am. They took up stones therefore to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple.

Two points:

(1)

The immediate problem with these "ego emi" refrences is (a) they are in the Greek and all identifiers with the Hebrew "I am" are speculatory non-linearsemantics. (b) To render the Hebrew "I am" as "Ego Eimi" is gramatically wrong, in the first place.The problem is that "Eheieh" (the word usually translated "I AM") is not translated in the Greek as is.

So let's look at the Hebrew (transliterated as best I can--I still can't get the Hebrew tags to work).

Vayomer Elohim el-Moshe eheyeh asher eheyeh vayomer koh tomar livnei Yisrael eheyeh shlachani aleichem.

As a word for word translation, it would be thus:

And-he-is-saying God to-Moses "I-shall-be who I-shall-be." And-he-said "Thus you-shall-say to-sons-of Israel: 'I-shall-be, he-sent-me to-you.'"

So yuo can see the difference for yourself.

(2) Even the blind man in John 9:9 says, "Ego Eimi". Why don't you think he was God or harkening the name of God? I think you're falling into the trinitarian trapyourself by grafting 4th century trinitarian theology ( which your reject) into 1st century biblical exegesis. Such is it's power!

Why would they stone him if they did not believe he was claiming to be Jahweh? Perhaps because of the entirety of that discourse. such as their perception that Jesus was elevating himself to a lofty status of god's right hand man.

That's exactly correct. Remember they even stoned people for breaknig the Sabbath. The context of 8:24 and 8:58 is to be seen in 8:25. "Who are you" they asked". "Just what I have been claiming all along", Jesus replied. And what had Jesus been claiming all along? Jesus had been claiming to be Messiah all along. The Jews didn't think so, thought it blasphemy, and wanted to kill him for it.See the high priest's and Sanhedrin's reaction in Matthew 26 when Jesus tells them he is the Messiah! jesus as Messiah was the overriding concern of John's Gospel.

John 20:30-3

"In his disciples presence Jesus performed many other miracles which are not written down in this book. But these have been written in order that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and through you faith in him you may have life. "

just can't rule out completely the possiblility that Jesus was invoking the divine name.

You had better completely rule it out.

IOn this issue I believe my church teaches that Jesus was invoking the divine name, but they interpret it to mean that Jesus was saying he was the one Jahweh foretold of through his prophets even before abraham. for me the jury is out

Not that Jesus ever invoked God's name and attributed it to himself, but it seems to me the angel of the Lord used this name several times in the OT. Was this angel God? Actually trinitarians think this Angel of the Lord was an pre-incarnate manifestation, an epiphany of Christ. Go figure. They accuse JW's of making Christ into an Angel, but themselves do it, and do worse. For they make an Angel into God Almighty.


best wishes,

 

[Balthasar]

Hi Deraj,

Sorry, i meant there are scriptures which say that the Father, and the Son are one, such as;

John 17:11 - And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

Obviously I interpret that as being that they are one in purpose, not one being, but trinitarians would interpret it the other way.

Excellent! I'm in complete agreement with you.

In John 17:11, which your highlight, Jesus prays that the apostles also be one as he's one with the Father. So clearly the trinitarian interpretation is false.

best wishes,

 

[2ducklow]

I think it was Adolph Hitler who once remarked that the more outrageous the lie, the more readily it is believed. The same mantra repeated long enough becomes truth in man's minds and hearts because they love traditions more than the truth of God. In George Owell's Animal Farm, the leaders utilized slogans as propoganda techniques; four legs good, two legs better. The Chinese people sincerely believe Westerners are barbarians, even though technologically we're far superior to them and arguably our human rights record is better than theirs. Brain washing by tradition is hard to wash off indeed. For example, the term God the Son is unscriptural but millions of Catholics and trinitarians think it is God's revealed truth simply because their institutions have thrown this term around for public consumption for centuries.

best wishes,

Being oneness, i had for a long time said that Jesus was god but I meant it in a certain theological sense. Jesus was god by virtue of the fact that all the fullness of the divinity indwelt him so that he functioned as god, but not that he was literally god. however, while I still believe that to be true, I do not say Jesus is god, because it is confusing. Jesus is the son of god and he isn't his daddy. The reason for this, and I think this prevails though out christendom, is that most all christians believe Jesus is god and believe that you have to believe Jesus is god in order to be saved. It was a force I had to recon with and trust the scriptures and reject the traditions of men. I think the same reluctance or actually fear exists in most christians and prevents them from accepting the truth that Jesus is the son of god and not god. They are afraid that if they become convinced that Jesus is not god they will loose their salvation. So they become afraid to reason through the scritpures on this issue. I mean can 95 percent of all born again christians be wrong? I think it's a toughee to overcome.

 

[Balthasar]

Hi 2ducklow,

They are afraid that if they become convinced that Jesus is not god they will loose their salvation. So they become afraid to reason through the scritpures on this issue. I mean can 95 percent of all born again christians be wrong? I think it's a toughee to overcome.

Actually from my experience most people who come from a Catholic/trinitarian background find it almost impossible to give up the notion that Jesus is God even if they are so inclined because they fear persecution.
Put yourself in their shoes. Can you imagine loosing in one foul swoop your Church, your trinitarian friends, your family members, your girlfriend? Can you imagine being suddenly banned from posting at "Christians only forum" and labelled a heretic by your friends because they realize you're no longer a trinitarian? And this is just the beginning trials and tribulations these people face. But if God wills it He will empower them.

And yes 95% of all "Christians" can be and are wrong. Jesus said wide is the road that leads to distruction and many there are who follow it, but small is the road to life and few find it. Throughout God's history, only a remnant are saved.



best wishes,

 

[Snashin]

Hi all,

I recently joined ChristianForums to talk about a couple of things I have been thinking about recently - one of which is the subject of whether God's Kingdom was already established in the year 70AD - you can see this topic in this Unorthodox Theology section. I tried to bring this up in the Eschatology section but was relegated to the bottomless pit, or the Halls of Heresy, as some have called it. Well, that's OK with me - I'm just trying to rationalize what I read in the Bible versus revered tradition. So, that's why I'm here now with my $0.02. I don't mean to be messin where I shouldn't be messin - so please let me know if I don't belong here.

The word Elohim is often used to translate the word God - in Genesis and other areas, this takes on a whole new meaning.

Obviously, when it says 'create in our image' there is more than one.
In John it says 'in the begininning was the word, and the word was God' - which we say is Jesus.

Elohim has reluctantly been defined as 'plural, masculine, feminine, group, and family'. I say reluctantly because of the significant connotations that result from referring to God as a family.

This makes perfect sense to me. I don't think it's just Father and Son - I think Mother is in there as well.

If you have not read the Apocryphon of John - then you have missed something. It presents an interesting picture of what was going on before the heavens and earth were created. It is an early Christian/Gnostic writing. It sheds new light on the Bible - it helped me to understand things in a whole new way. If the link I provided doesn't work - just go to comparative-religion.com and search for it. I think the reason some of the early Christian writings that were not included in the Bible - were due to the lack of understanding on the part of the early readers. I don't necessarily say it should have been included, that remains to be determined (at least in my mind) - but it certainly does clear up a few things.

On the trinity, I'm not ready to say that Jesus is not God, maybe He is of God/Elohim. Maybe it should be Father/Son/Mother instead of Father/Son/Holy Spirit? (no blasphemy intended - just looking for understanding, that's all). As a woman, I cannot understand why there is the total lack of reference to women in this description. How can you have a son without a mother? If we are the Bride of Christ, if Mary is the Mother, ...it just doesn't make sense.
Part of me also wonders if Jesus was not the 'son of God' until he was born again. In other words, maybe He was born a normal birth, of a normal mother, but was chosen by God to be His son - through the Holy Spirit.

OK, there I said it. Let the shock and awe begin.

 

[Balthasar]

Hi Snashin,

So, that's why I'm here now with my $0.02. I don't mean to be messin where I shouldn't be messin - so please let me know if I don't belong here.

You belong here, as does everyone else.

Well, that's OK with me - I'm just trying to rationalize what I read in the Bible versus revered tradition.

Good that you're thinking for yourself instead of trying to fit 4th century Athanasiun theology into your gospel exegesis.

Obviously, when it says 'create in our image' there is more than one.
In John it says 'in the begininning was the word, and the word was God' - which we say is Jesus.

Please note that in John 1:1 when it says "the word was God" the Greek Theos is used for God. Theos is also used of humans in John 10:34 and even of Satan, in 2 Cor 4:4 when he is called ho Theos . So if Jesus is God because he's Theos then so is Satan I suppose! Origen the church father gave us a good lesson in this regard in his commentatory on the gospel of John, Book 2. Also note the past tense , it says "the word was God" instead of the "word is God". In addition John 1:1 says "the word was with God". How can God be with God?

This makes perfect sense to me. I don't think it's just Father and Son - I think Mother is in there as well.

I suppose. Once you go down the slippery slope of the family of God -- Father, Son and Holy Spirit, what's to stop mother from snuggling in as well eh? Actually Catholics of the Marion cult are not averse to your point of view. Many of them think Mary is co-redemptrix. The late pope John Paul II was a hardcore devotee of Mary(So is the present Ratzinger.) John Paul II even visited a priestess of the Goddess Kali in India , was blessed by her, "tikka" on his head. Did you know the priests of the goddess Kali worked closely with mother Theresa of India and donated vaste property to her so she could help house the poor? They saw the Virgin Mary of Catholicism as an appelation of their Kali and were smitten by her.

On the trinity, I'm not ready to say that Jesus is not God, maybe He is of God/Elohim. Maybe it should be Father/Son/Mother instead of Father/Son/Holy Spirit? (no blasphemy intended - just looking for understanding, that's all).

I don't find this any more ridiculous than saying God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. So go for it if you think it's truth. Personally I do not.

As a woman, I cannot understand why there is the total lack of reference to women in this description. How can you have a son without a mother?

How about Mary Mother of God? If Mary is the Mother of God as Catholics insist then she must be of God essence, must she not? Hey, if this brings "peace" to you. But I don't buy it.

In other words, maybe He was born a normal birth, of a normal mother, but was chosen by God to be His son - through the Holy Spirit.

That would make him a bast-ard woudn't it, since the bible clearly says Joseph was not the father?

OK, there I said it. Let the shock and awe begin

Is this what you call shock and awe? You used up all the shock and awe when you told me Jesus is God!

best wishes,

 

[Balthasar]

By the way Snashin,


While we are on the topic of the Goddess, what do you think of the following?

http://www.spiralgoddess.com/Mary.html

Mary is celebrated around the world as the Divine Feminine by millions of people, many of them Catholics. Those who are devoted to Mary, honor Her as the mother of Jesus. The Blessed Virgin Mary is known as the dispenser of mercy, the ever patient mother, and protectress of humanity. She is the special protectress of women and children.

Many believe that with the rise of Christianity and papal power, the Goddess slowly disappeared from westen culture and faded into the Mists of Avalon . . . . So great was devotion to the Goddess that She was ressurected in the hearts of the people by a new Goddess, Mary, Mother of Jesus, the Christian version of the GreenMan.



Visions of the Virgin Mary have appeared to thousands of people around the world. Her sacred shrines are atLourdes in France and Guadalupe in Mexico, as well as many other places. Her apparitions are often to children.

Mary was declared to be the "Mother of God" by the Christian church in the 5th century at Ephesus, Turkey. Ephesus was the home of a magnificent temple to the Goddess, Artemis Diana, one of whose titles was "Queen of Heaven".

The Christian church also conferred the Goddess's title on the mother of Jesus. They called Her,"Mary, Queen of Heaven" and "Mary, Queen of the Angels."

The Madoona and child have been revered since the earliest times. Isis and Her son Horus, Mary and Her son Jesus, Demeter and Her daughter Kore, all have attracted a devout following. Long before Isis, and long before Mary or Demeter, the human psyche fashioned Madonna and child icons and placed them in sacred shrines.

Through time, the names and sometimes the images of the Madonna nad child have changed, but the location of these shrines, and the wide devotion to them has remained constant.

One of the most beloved images in all Christianity is the The Black Madonna. Devotion to the Black Virgin has never been stronger, Her shrines attract thousands of worshippers each year. The Black Madonna is revered througout the world, particularly in France, Poland, Italy and Spain. She is the Blessed Virgin Mary of the Crusades and holy pilgrimages.



The Black Madonna is honored as a true Goddess figure, and has been since Christianity entered Europe. She is honored by many as Isis, Gaia, Kali, Mary, "the Other Mary" (Mary Magdalene), Diana, Sheela Na Gig, and the Ancient Primal Earth-Mother Goddess.

For many European Christians, the blending of their ancient Goddesses with the Blessed Virgin Mary has been a well accepted fact of their faith for centuries, there is no conflict. The Black Madonna, be She called Isis, or Mary, or Kali, or Diana, embodies all the aspects of Female Divinity for many millions of people.

Pope John Paul II was deeply devoted to the Blessed Mother and did much to bring honor and a vitality to Her worship. His deep devotion to Mary is shared by many millions of Catholics around the world. It is because of the love for Mary that the Church considered elevating the Blessed Virgin Mary to the role of Co-Redeemer.​

 

[Bananna]

Balthasar ,
what verse clearly says that Joseph was not Yeshuah's Father? "As was supposed" is added to the English texts, but was not in the greek texts I read.
Just curious.
bananna