One of my hindu friends once said that christianity has a lot in common with hinduism. On first glance i was truly skeptical but in essense doesnt christianity teach plurality of gods same as hinduism

True there are only 3 Gods Father Son and The Holy Spirit. I have always wondered why Mary got left behind. Maybe 3 is an easier number to worship or remember as decided by council of Nicea.

The point is hinduism has also a concept of tripartite gods. Hindus pray before idols. I have seen this is pretty common in the christian community too where people pray in front of statues of jesus.

Shouldnt 3 gods in christianity in essense make it a polytheistic belief.

Any thoughts.

How about Father, Mother and Son? Osiris, Isis, Horus.

imo Holy Spirit = Mother

I already made a similar thread to this called 'Early Christianity and Judaism - Monotheistic?'

As far as the Holy Spirit is concerned, in Hebrew it is called the Shekinah and is female. The word for God useds in Genesis when he said 'I will make man in our image' is Elohim. Elohim is plural male and singular female. It should also be remebered (contrary to the few that believe it was JESUS who created the world when Genesis, Jubilees and 2 Enoch quite clearly state it was GOD, and He had NO ASSISTANCE whatsoever) that Jesus did NOT exist in ANY form before He was born on Earth. He was a later addition, the Son doesn't come before or simulatenous to the Father. The Father comes first, chicken before the egg.

The answer to your question though is NO. Early Christians and followers of Judaism believed ANGELS were lesser gods, and the OT quite clearly states by God that 'I will make ye gods' referring to the angels, the Sons of God. Also, prior to Jesus they were the ONLY Sons of God.

I've heard that Hinduism is actually sort of monotheistic. I mean, they have all these hundreds of gods, but, they are all just different faces of the one god Brahma. It's not really a clear cut line between monotheism and polytheism. The same can be said with Egyptian and Christianity.

I know you said Ashley that it makes it clear that the Archangels aren't gods, and I know they weren't viewed as them. I always had the idea in my head from a small child that they used those names and use of words just to try and cover up (for lack of better phrase) the polytheism in Christianity and Judaism.

well early Vedic religion is more polytheistic, the Rig Veda is very polytheistc (first of the vedas), but over time hinduism has gained some monotheistic aspects, which is one of the reasons there are so many different interpretations

Like Hinduism I believe that the Trinity in the bible is a manifestation of one force or power which is God. God and Brahman are the same. However many Christians worship and conceptualize the trinity as though they were three separate things or pay all attention to one at the exclusion of the other.

My interpretation is as so:

Father: Absolute Godhead, Self, Inifinite Consciousness

Holy Ghost: Grace

The son: The Guru, Avatar or incarnation of Godhead.

The son teaches you how to open yourself or detach yourself from the ego so you can recieve grace or the holy ghost and this in effect gives you the awareness of who you truly are which is the Godhead (The Kingdom of heaven is within & I and the Father are one).

The majority of Christians are Trinitarian, and regard belief in the Trinity as a test of orthodoxy. Opposing, nontrinitarian positions that are held by some groups include Binitarianism (two deities/persons/aspects), Unitarianism (one deity/person/aspect), the Godhead (Latter Day Saints) (three separate beings) and Modalism (Oneness).

The doctrine of the Trinity is the result of continuous exploration by the church of the biblical data, thrashed out in debate and treatises, eventually formulated at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD in a way they believe is consistent with the biblical witness, and further refined in later councils and writings. The most widely recognized Biblical foundations for the doctrine's formulation are in the Gospel of John.

The earliest Christians were noted for their insistence on the existence of one true God, in contrast to the polytheism of the prevailing culture. While maintaining strict monotheism, they believed also that the man Jesus Christ was at the same time something more than a man. This belief is reflected, for instance, in the opening verses of the Letter to the Hebrews and the Gospel of John, which describe him as the brightness of God's glory and the exact imprint of God's nature, through whom all things were created and are upheld. In addition, the discourse recorded in chapters 14 through 17 of John, assures the presence, instruction and power of the Holy Spirit, through whom the Father and Son are promised to dwell in those who belong to the Son. The Epistle to the Colossians further states that "in [Jesus] lives all the fullness of Deity bodily" (Colossians 2:9).

The importance for the first Christians of their faith in God, whom they called Father, in Jesus Christ, whom they saw as the Son of God, the Word of God (Gospel of John), King, Saviour (Martyrdom of Polycarp), Master (First Apology of Justin Martyr), and in the Holy Spirit is expressed in formulas that link all three together, such as those in the Gospel according to Matthew, the Great Commission: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19); and in the Second Letter of St Paul to the Corinthians: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all" (2 Corinthians 13:14).

The doctrine of the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit was developed by Athanasius in the last decades of his life.[13] In 325, the Council of Nicaea adopted a term for the relationship between the Son and the Father that from then on was seen as the hallmark of orthodoxy; it declared that the Son is "of the same substance" (ὁμοούσιος) as the Father. This was further developed into the formula "three persons, one substance.” The answer to the question "What is God?" indicates the one-ness of the divine nature, while the answer to the question "Who is God?" indicates the three-ness of "Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

The Council of Nicaea was reluctant to adopt language not found in Scripture, and ultimately did so only after Arius showed how all strictly biblical language could also be interpreted to support his belief, that there was a time before Jesus was created when he did not exist. In adopting non-biblical language, the council's intent was to preserve what they thought the Church had always believed that Jesus is fully God, coeternal with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

There is evidence indicating that one mediaeval Latin writer, while purporting to quote from the First Epistle of John, inserted a passage now known as the Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7) which has often been cited as an explicit reference the Trinity. It may have begun as a marginal note quoting a homily of Cyprian that was inadvertently taken into the main body of the text by a copyist.[14] The Comma found its way into several later copies, and was eventually back-translated into Greek and included in the third edition of the Textus Receptus which formed the basis of the King James Version. Erasmus, the compiler of the Textus Receptus, noticed that the passage was not found in any of the Greek manuscripts at his disposal and refused to include it until presented with an example containing it, which he rightly suspected was concocted after the fact.[15] Isaac Newton, known mainly for his scientific and mathematical discoveries, noted that many ancient authorities failed to quote the Comma when it would have provided substantial support for their arguments, suggesting it was a later addition.[16] Modern textual criticism has since concurred with his findings; many modern translations now either omit the passage, or make it clear that it is not found in the early manuscripts.

The Trinitarian view has been affirmed as an article of faith by the Nicene (325/381) and Athanasian creeds (circa 500), which attempted to standardize belief in the face of disagreements on the subject. These creeds were formulated and ratified by the Church of the third and fourth centuries in reaction to heterodox theologies concerning the Trinity and/or Christ. The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, revised in 381 by the second of these councils, is professed by the Eastern Orthodox Church and, with one addition (Filioque clause), the Roman Catholic Church, and has been retained in some form by most Protestant denominations.

Nontrinitarianism is any of various Christian beliefs that reject the doctrine that God is three distinct persons in one being, (the Trinity).

The notion of the Trinity is not of particular importance to most nontrinitarians. Persons and groups espousing this position generally do not refer to themselves affirmatively by the term, although some nontrinitarian groups such as the Unitarians have adopted a name that bespeaks of their belief in God as subsisting in a theological or cosmic unity. Modern nontrinitarian groups views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

Various nontrinitarian heresies, such as Arianism, existed alongside what is now considered mainstream Christianity before the Trinity was formally defined as doctrine in AD 325. Nontrinitarianism was very rare for hundreds of years. It surfaced again in the Gnosticism of the Cathars and in the Enlightenment and Restorationism.

All nontrinitarians argue that the doctrine of the earliest form of the Church was not Trinitarian. Typically, nontrinitarians explain that the Church was altered as a direct and indirect consequence of the edicts of Constantine the Great, which resulted in toleration of the Christian religion, and the eventual adoption of Trinitarian Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire. Because it was at this time of a dramatic shift in Christianity's status that the doctrine of the Trinity attained its definitive development, nontrinitarians typically find the development of the doctrine questionable. It is in this light that the Nicene Creed is seen by nontrinitarians as an essentially political document, resulting from the subordination of Church to State interests by the leaders of Catholic Church, so that the Church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire.

In addition, the Trinity and the Nicene Creed were doctrines established over 300 years after the time of Christ on Earth as a result of conflict within the early Church. It is curious to note that Jesus had forewarned the reader in Matthew "beware the doctrines of men". Jesus is not mentioned as God in the old testament

Many nontrinitarians have long contended that the doctrine of the Trinity is a prime example of Christianity borrowing from pagan sources. According to them, very early in the Church's history a simpler idea of God was lost and the incomprehensible doctrine of the Trinity took its place due to the Church's accommodation of pagan ideas. In support of this, they often compare the doctrine of the Trinity with notions of a divine triad found in ancient pagan religions and even in modern Hinduism.

My assessment after going through information on the internet and after reading your posts is basically christianity can be anything you like it to be. Depending on variations in your basic christian beliefs one can make it into what he or she chooses.
If someone wants monotheism it can be monotheistic if someone wants polytheism it can be polytheistic.

It appears you can even be christian even if you dont believe in trinity or Jesus as divine entity!! according to the information above.

The Catholic Church is the one that pushes Trinity more than others. There are many Christians that don't accept the Trinity.

I don't know if there is an easy way to put it, and I don't even know if it is true. But in a sense you kind of need to believe in it if you are a Christian right? Otherwise how could Jesus die for the sins of the world if he were just all man and no God.

Best analogies I have heard are like three seperate flames. Like if you took three candles and put all of the wicks touching to make on flame in unison, I guess that works.

But also I've heard it said to be like water: solid, liquid, gas... all water, in three seperate forms.

And a professor actually told me once that I shouldn't try and understand it, because God is above me and I'll never understand his mysteriousness, Granted that is true, but I don't see how you can just take doctrine for granted without rolling it over in the brain chamber for a good-long time.

As for the Nicene criticism the first instance of the Trintiy was introduced by Paul and later, by the Apostles of Jesus, in the apostles creed. The creed was actually instated to refute claims of Christianity being a polytheistic religion in the Nicene creed. And it evolved more in depth through the Athanasian creed. But the first creed that dealt with trinity was the apostles creeed, only dealing more heavily on the humanity and yet God form of Christ.

Not all Christians believe in a trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Some, like me, hold to Father, Mother & Son. And the Son and the Father are one.

Peace,

RadicalGnostic

An ancient theological concept that found its way into Christianity.

This is something that Consummate Deist posted a year or two ago:

The Trinity
The Creed of Nicea defines the Trinity of Christianity as a merging of three distinct entities in to one single one, while remaining three distinct entities. These three gods must be regarded as one because they are co-eternal, co-substantial and co-equal, though only the first has a life of his own! The others emanated from him.
Of course this doctrine is Neo-Platonic and pagan not Jewish; since the Old Testament makes up a large part of the Christian Bible, it is heretical (Isaiah 41:10) to imagine the Trinity as three separate gods. This mental gymnastics arises because the first bishops tried to merge nascent Christian sect of Judaism with paganism. Most ancient religions were built upon some sort of threefold distinction. Ancient deities were always trinities of some sort or consisted of successive emanation in threes.
Classical Hinduism dating back to at least 500 BCE with roots extending back as far as 2000 BCE has the oldest and probably original form of the Trinity. The Hindu doctrine call Tri-murti (Three-forms) describes the divine trinity as consisting of Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva: Brahma being the Father or supreme God, Vishnu being the incarnate Word and Creator, and Siva, the Spirit of God/Holy Ghost. It is an inseparable unity though three in form. Worshipers are told to worship them as one deity.
In the Puranas (one of the Hindu bibles), more than two thousand years ago, a devotee addressing the Trinity of gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, saying that he recognized only one God. He asks the Three Lords which is the true divinity that he might address to him alone his vows and adorations. The three Gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, becoming manifest to him, replied, “Learn, O devotee, that there is no real distinction between us. What to you appears such is only by semblance. The single being appears under three forms by the acts of creation, preservation and destruction, but he is one.”
Hindu worshippers had no problem accepting such a concept, they were quite used to worshipping curious gods; Ganesh had the body of a man and head of an elephant, Hanuman was monkey-faced and gods and goddesses had 4, 6 or 8 arms. Their gods were strange entities, so a 3 in 1, 1 in 3 god was simple to accept.
To quote Sir William Jones:
Very respectable natives have assured me, that one or two missionaries have been absurd enough to in their zeal for the conversion of the Gentiles, to urge that the Hindus were even now almost Christians; because their Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesa (Siva), were no other than the Christian Trinity.

By an almost unanimous decision, the Church fathers declared the concept of the Trinity as a leading tent of the faith, a doctrine directly revealed from heaven. Yet a pagan religion over 2000 years older than Christianity had long accepted and practiced the tenet of the Trinity. Quite independently the Brahmins, Persians, Chaldeans, Chinese, Assyrians, Phoenicians, Scandinavians, Druids, Siberians, Peruvians, Mayans, Aztecs and Greeks held the doctrine of the Trinity long before the council of Nicea of 325 CD officially recognized God’s Trinitarian nature.
A Trinity was worshipped by the pagan Romans, after an oracle declared that there was First God, then the Word, and with them the Spirit. Once again, we see the distinctly enumerated, the Father, the Logos, and the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost, this time in ancient Rome, where the most celebrated temple of this capital—that of Jupiter Capitolinus—was dedicated to three deities, which were honored with joint worship!
Those sages of the ancient world, the Egyptians, also worshipped a trinity. The wing, the globe and the serpent together stood for the different attributes of their god. The Buddhists of China and Japan (Chungkuo and Nippon)worship Fo, a name for Buddha. When they worship his, they say “Fo is one god but has three forms.” This trinity of Vajrapani, Manjusri and Avalokitesvara is a divine union of three gods into one god – Buddha.
St. Jerome pointed out that all the ancient nations believed in the Trinity.
The Greeks also had their trinities. When making their sacrifices to their gods, they would sprinkle holy water on the altar three times, they would then sprinkle the people three times also. Frankincense was then taken with three fingers and strewed upon the alter three times. All of this was done because the oracle had proclaimed that all sacred things ought to be in threes. An ancient Greek inscription on the great obelisk at Rome read: The Mighty God, The Begotten of God, and Apollo the Spirit. The Greeks had a first God, and second God, and third God, and the second was begotten by the first. And yet for all that they considered all these one.
The Christian Trinitarian nature of God was primarily based on the philosophy of the Greeks. This was done through the writings of the Greek philosopher Plato, who set forth the doctrine of the Trinity in his Phaedon, written four hundred years BC. His terms conform most striking with the Christian doctrine on this subject. Plato's first term for the Trinity was the Agathon, the supreme God or Father. Next was the Logos meaning the Word and then Psyche meaning the soul, spirit or ghost, the Holy Ghost. The first person was considered the planner of the work of creation, the second person the creator and the third person the ghost or spirit which moved upon the face of the waters, and infused life into the mighty deep at creation. The three names of the Christian Trinity, Father, Word, and Holy Ghost are given as plainly as possible. If Plato expressed the Christian Trinity four hundred years BC, how then was it divinely originated with the incarnation of Jesus?
The works of Plato were keenly studied by the Church Fathers. The passage : “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word Was God” is a fragment of Platonic philosophy. A Christian bishop wrote several centuries ago: Such a similitude of Plato's and John's Trinity doctrines bespeaks a common origin. St Augustine agreed that he had found the beginning of John's Gospel in Plato's Phaedon. So even Christian saints concur that the doctrine preceded Christianity. Amelius, a Pagan philosopher, says it is strictly applicable to Mercury who was the Logos. A Christian writer of the fifth century declared: The Athenian sage Plato marvelously anticipated one of the most important and mysterious doctrines of the Christian religion - meaning the Trinity. The gospels of the bible were called the Greek gospels not just because they were written in Greek but also because they entertained Greek philosophy. Either both are from heaven or both are pagan. If the former, then revelation and paganism mean the same. If the latter, then Christianity is pagan. Applying the title Word or Logos to Jesus is a pagan amalgamation with Essenism, and was not fully accepted until the middle of the second century. The Trinity is a pagan doctrine.
Divine Trinities were male Gods. No female was admitted into the triad of Gods composing the orthodox Trinity. Plainly there can never be males without females, so the whole idea is an obvious Patriarchal variant of an earlier belief in which one of the spirits in the Trinity must have been female. The truth is that the Trinity grew from a belief in the feminine principle as the mother and therefore creator of everything. The Patriarchs imposed a male Supreme god relegating the female principle to the role of his assistant as, his spirit, Word or Wisdom. That was not sufficient however and the divine son was introduced. Finally the female principle, now reduced to the Holy Ghost, the Word having been allocated to the Son, had a sex change and became masculine or neuter. Once again, we see that very little of Christianity is original.

I miss Consummate Deist ... He was a wise bloke.

Again, this just shows how the judeo/christian faith evolved... and how it's still evolving.

There has been evidence that the iserialites were onces polythiestic, that streamlined their pantheon to just one god (and they picked the war god of all things)... however, through the ages they could never shake the need to toss in a few more things.

The Trinity is the main huge example, and Catholisism had taken it a step farther with the worship of Mary. (Who many believe is just the replacement of The Goddess)

True, many christians out there say they don't worship the Holy Spirit and Jesus, but only god, but then, would the absence of worshipping Jesus mean that they are not christians? Or is the following of Jesus's words the same as worshipping him, but to save themselves from that blurry line of polytheism, they just simply say they don't worship him, only God. Then that get's tricky.

To be honest... to be truely monotheistic, is to not worship anyone but a single god. Don't follow the words of any other person, but that of the one god you choose to follow. Don't follow the teachings of Jesus, or of Muhammud... just the words of a single god. Which the Jewish were sort of getting on to, save there's Moses. Again, he was the one the Iserialites were depending on while following the one God....

>.> bleh.. monotheism is to confusing...

this might cause the fog to settle.

in truth its not 3 but 4.

yes the father and the son but the mother is the 3rd and it is the holy spirit that gives these three form as one,

and it was the son that looked back and acknowleged this with the chamber of marrige.

eve did't see this chamber and went off and created man without here consorts knowing in secret ,but it was crooked not straght and in truth.

the jews were fatherless and looked to there mother for there earthly wants.

the many gods or demi-gods is from the jews , jesus showed he is one with god our father when he died on the cross and it is that cross that shows this.

Christians are followers of Jesus because he is the king of kings and only through him can we see or talk to god

Christians are followers of Jesus because he is the king of kings and only through him can we see or talk to god and the Holy spirit is like the host it serves as a way of communicating

This type of thread comes up a lot. Jesus never came to introduce a new religion, but to fulfill his role as God's servant being the Messiah. If you study the role of the Messiah you will see precisely who Jesus was and is according to scripture. He is called the High Priest that interceeds between men and God. He is called the second Adam because the first one blew it so bad that redemption was required.

To me Christianity only has one god. Jesus, Satan, and the Holy Spirit are classified as demi-gods, sub-gods, or whatever you call them. Christians are only so pose to worship God alone. The Holy Spirit, Jesus, and Satan don't have any 'super powers' like God either...any power they have it was given to them by God, they don't hold any power of their own.

Agree with you on this MD (but not the whole statement)

Don't get me wrong, I am not arguing, just pointing out that several other so-called resurrecting savior gods, such as Mithra, Krishna and Osiris, would need to be added to that list of sub-gods/demi-gods.

Depends how you look at it I guess. Lets take Jesus for example, he wasn't that much different from a regular human, he had a degree of 'enlightenment' and some cool special powers but he wasn't the creator, he wasn't all knowing, all powerful, etc.

Its like saying that Super-man is a god because he has super powers and has that 'boy scout' attitude towards everything.

I think this article lends an interesting pov, to the discussion. Christian Pantheon