The Trinity has been shown by anons influenced by Aquinas to be a rational model of God.

The Trinity has been shown by anons influenced by Aquinas to be a rational model of God.

My question is, why is the Son a son, and a human male? Does he have to be, or can he take on other forms? Are all the pious representations of him true? Can he take on the form of a demon, to be the messiah for demons too?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    I think these are Mysteries

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Coward.

  2. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    the way God chose to show Himself.
    >can he take other forms
    why would He? no, He does not disguise Himself.
    >pious representations true
    can't know. they're all trying to represent God still
    >last one
    answered in the second already. furthermore, demons are angels, who already have a greater knowledge of the future than us. they've forever chosen that and will not repent; they rebelled, knowing what would happen, since they can already know their end. yes, their pride is that great.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      were angels, saying it better.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >why would He? no, He does not disguise Himself.
      Yes he does. He does it all the time in the OT. Why take the form of a burning bush? Was the burning bush the Holy Spirit or Jesus? How do you know Krishna wasn't Jesus (Jn 21:25)?

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        it isn't a disguise. the Father cannot show Himself to man in His perfection, and He clearly states who He is.

        furthermore, you were questioning about the Son.
        a better attempt would be talking about the disciples on the road to Emmaus, which also doesn't work because He shows who He is to them.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yet Abraham still looks away. Don't dodge my question. Was the burning bush God, THS, or Jesus?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            they're all God, so the answer is God.
            if you want the persons of the Trinity, and would rather have written it that way, it's the Holy Spirit.

            furthermore, the whole of the way God showed Himself is pointing to His characteristics.
            here
            >https://www.gotquestions.org/burning-bush.html

            >yet Abraham still looks away
            imagine if God showed Himself in His full majesty then. He says that Moses would die if he did see it.
            Exodus 33:20
            >But He added, “You cannot see My face, for no one can see Me and live.”
            all the ways God shows Himself are indirect, for we could not be in the presence of perfection while being sinful (e.g. the sons of Aaron dying inside the Holy of Holies for sinning, and the priests needing to atone beforehand).
            Christ Himself is clothed in His humanity.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >why would He? no, He does not disguise Himself.
      What? Bro, he literally shows up in different forms a lot of times in the OT and the NT, since he is said to be stting on a throne. The holy Spirit also appears a dove or tongues of fire.
      Jesus himself after his ressurection went and ate with some people before they realised who he was after he left, so he does do it albeit not to deceive since he does it for a bit before revealing himself.

      >why would He? no, He does not disguise Himself.
      Yes he does. He does it all the time in the OT. Why take the form of a burning bush? Was the burning bush the Holy Spirit or Jesus? How do you know Krishna wasn't Jesus (Jn 21:25)?

      >Was the burning bush the Holy Spirit or Jesus?
      Jesus. The angel of the Lord is shown being there and this one is later explained to have God's name within himself, described by the angel of the Lord as wonderful, which fits with one of Isaiah's prophecy of the messiah.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        not to deceive. any other "examples" given do not say they are Him.
        read

        they're all God, so the answer is God.
        if you want the persons of the Trinity, and would rather have written it that way, it's the Holy Spirit.

        furthermore, the whole of the way God showed Himself is pointing to His characteristics.
        here
        >https://www.gotquestions.org/burning-bush.html

        >yet Abraham still looks away
        imagine if God showed Himself in His full majesty then. He says that Moses would die if he did see it.
        Exodus 33:20
        >But He added, “You cannot see My face, for no one can see Me and live.”
        all the ways God shows Himself are indirect, for we could not be in the presence of perfection while being sinful (e.g. the sons of Aaron dying inside the Holy of Holies for sinning, and the priests needing to atone beforehand).
        Christ Himself is clothed in His humanity.

        also.

  3. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >The Trinity has been shown by anons influenced by Aquinas to be a rational model of God.
    HAHAHAHAHAHHAHA no it hasn't.

  4. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >And they say, “The Most Merciful has begotten a son.” You have come up with something monstrous, ar which the heavens almost rupture, and the earth splits, and the mountains fall and crumble, because they attribute a son to the Most Merciful. It is not fitting for the Most Merciful to have a son.
    he begets not nor was he begotten and there is none comparable to him

  5. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's called "the Incarnation" for a reason, brother.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Interesting. So, is there Vedantic literature that shows Jesus was just one of the manifestations of Brahma?

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Vishnu, not Brahma, who in Hindu tradition is the preserver used to represent the Logos: Order Himself. Krishna was merely one of many avatars of the Logos that embodied His will perfectly, Jesus Christ actually *was* the Logos.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Brahma is more essential than Vishnu you dolt. Vishnu is a later god popular with Aryan invaders.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Well, it's Vishnu who is described in that image, but I guess the Gita just isn't oldschool enough for you.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Vishnu is just one of forms of Brahma you dumb poo. Read Rig Veda and Shankara.

  6. 9 months ago
    Dirk

    The incarnation was a precondition for the atonement. He became like us so he could die for us. It also follows that he wasn't already a man prior to the incarnation.

    An angel is literally a messenger, so yes Jesus can be an "angelos".
    Artistic depictions vary, so I'm not sure how one could be true and another false.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Another useless tripgay for the filter.

  7. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Nobody would have listened to Jesus if he was the daughter rather than the son.

  8. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Can he take on the form of a demon, to be the messiah for demons too?
    No, God is too weak to transform into one of Satan's (the superior god) people.

  9. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >literal shitposting about poojeet idols

  10. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >I'm going to reveal myself to humanity, but only in the middle of bumfrick nowhere, and only after 2,000 years does anyone have any clue who I am
    >oh yea, and anyone who DOESN'T know who I am, you go to hell instantly

    If this is "rational" I can't wait to hear what you think "irrational" is.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >anyone who doesn't know who I am
      literally addressed in Paul's letters, along with Christ's mercy to those before Him.

      you're just unkowledgeable, anon.

      remember that God is perfectly good, and perfectly fair in His judgement.
      a man who never heard of Him will not have that held against him, and will be judged accordingly (which will most often be through his actions, and whatnot).

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      also
      >middle of nowhere
      >cosmopolitan people who literally went everywhere and were in the middle of the known world of the time
      read about the travels of each apostle; there's a reason it spread literally everywhere.

  11. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Can Jesus take on other forms while still being the person of the Son? Or does he have to transform into the Holy Spirit to do that?

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      they're different persons of the Trinity, and do not "transform" into one another.
      the rest is already answered.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yes they do. If God gave bodily form to himself in the form of the Son, with substance coextensiveness, since we know Jesus still has full divinity, how is that not turning into another form? Jesus didn't come into existence out of nowhere, and without coextensiveness with God.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          you're conflating Jesus' humanity with His divinity.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Furthermore, his active intellect, aka the Holy Spirit, is him transforming the relevant portion of his mind, and coherently the actional part of his contemplation of himself, with the Son as his object.

            No, as my post I just wrapped up on the Holy Spirit points out. And you're still giving non-answers.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Christ was never "made", He always was. He is God.

          you're trying to say His incarnation shows God somehow "changed" to fit into it.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >let there be light
            >I am the light of the world
            ??????

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Christ was never "made", He always was. He is God.
            That's what I said. Read my post again. Coming into existence and being begotten isn't the same as being created. Duh. Now explain why he can't transform, when clearly he can.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *