re: According to a new survey, only 16% of Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity

On misled Christians or corrupt churches or hypocrites or liars or deniers or what ?

yeah.. Few of us are really who we claim to be none of us are who we pretend to be

I'm a sinner

I don't understand why babies die.. why assholes are rich.. why my best friend on this board is gay,,,

I lost an unborn child,, 2 divorces,, the stroke

Im the best I can be,, and Ive failed more often than Ive succeeded,, Im human. I sinned, according to my belief system, one I really believed in.
But I think Ive made God laugh,,a lot
He cant be mad at someone that made him laugh that much

According to Copilot, 31% of the world’s population (2.4 billion people) are Christians.
My holy math says 384 million people believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. My holy math also says 5.3 billion people are neither Christian nor believe in the doctrine of the Trinity.

Makes me wonder about two things:
1. Was Jesus intended for the entire world?
2. Does God have culpability in low %?

quote:

---

In what way does accepting only certain aspects of a religion become a problem for anyone?

---

I drive 2 miles in either direction from my house and can point to 4 different churches along those 2 miles (each) with different Christian denominations.

Some do not see it as a problem but obviously more as an opportunity.

quote:

---

I stand by my statement. In what way does accepting only certain aspects of a religion become a problem for anyone?

---

If the religion is the truth and someone doesn't accept all of it, that's a problem for them.

I know it's strange for many people because we live in a post-modern, post-duty society in which we are conditioned to view everything as something for us to consume at our whim and there is no Truth, only "my" truth.

But religions are not supposed to be extended self-help courses that exist for people to pick and choose from like an all you can eat buffet. They are supposed to teach the actual Truth of life. What the nature of human beings are, what the nature of God is. How to live correctly. What happens to us when we die. Etc.

It seems rather obvious that if a religion is teaching the Truth about those things and some or all of them are rejected, that's problematic for the person rejecting them. Especially if there are consequences for not living life correctly.

Now, if what the religion teaches is not the Truth, then why waste your time in the first place?

John 1:1, which in Greek reads:

“?? ???? ?? ? ?????, ?a? ? ????? ?? p??? t?? Te??, ?a? Te?? ?? ? ?????.”

The key phrase in question is “?a? Te?? ?? ? ?????” (“and the Word was God”). Some scholars suggest that “Te??” (theos) here should be understood in a broader sense, like “divine” or “a deity,” rather than equating the Word directly with God (as in monotheistic identification).

This interpretation is largely based on the fact that “Te??” in this clause lacks the definite article “?” (which is used earlier in “p??? t?? Te??”, referring to “the God”). Some argue this means the Word shares God’s divine nature but is not necessarily the same person as “God” (the Father).

Edit- Guess TD can’t read Greek

Most Christians know next to nothing about the Bible other than a vague reference to John 3:16 or accepting Jesus in their heart.

quote:

---

Most Christians know next to nothing about the Bible other than a vague reference to John 3:16 or accepting Jesus in their heart.

---

You describe a segment of Protestants in the Southern US—the same ones that don’t know what a Protestant even is.
Think globally, and you’ll come to a different conclusion.

quote:

---

If Christ was real and lived in current times, he would be labeled a piece of shite socialist cuck by the same people who claim to follow him and practice the religion named after him.

---

Pretty true

quote:

---

But there are so many religions. They can’t all be true.

---

Absolutely, in fact, if we're talking about major world religions really only one can be true or they can all be false. There are too many truth claims in them all that contradict each other for any other possibility to exist.

However, there is also only one correct answer to a math problem and literally an infinite number of incorrect answers.

Does that mean the answer isn't really the answer, or that the problem is invalid?

Because there are an infinite number of incorrect answers to the problem 2 + 2 =______, does that mean that I should laugh at someone who says "4?" as though they are absurd for thinking that any answer could be correct when so many incorrect answers are possible?

Of course not.

quote:

---

Religion is for a spiritual connection.

---

But again, I reject this premise. I don't think religions exist to provide a feeling for someone.

I think religions exist to provide truth. Metaphysical truth. Just like science exists to provide physical truth. Being well versed in science might make someone feel a certain way (confident maybe), but that's not the purpose of it. Same with religion. It may end up providing a certain feeling, but that's not the purpose of it IMO.

quote:

---

You’re making that up in the same way that all religions are completely made up.

---

I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. If I'm making up what I think religion is for, then so are you, and therefore my definition is as valid (or not) as yours.

quote:

---

Because if someone is seeking truth from something completely made up by fellow humans, it cannot be truth.

---

Balderdash—there are all sorts of things completely made up by fellow humans that contain truth. Art, literature, etc. I assume you think your post contains truth. You made it up all by yourself, yeah? Should I assume that there is no truth in it because you are a human being and you made it up?

quote:

---

It’s not a waste of time if someone finds what they are looking for in a religion.

---

Again, it is if your assumption is incorrect and there is a religion which is true.

Someone pursuing an incorrect religion when a true religion existed would be like someone in science who will not stop looking to alchemy to provide answers instead of chemistry. They would, indeed, be wasting their time. Even if they liked alchemy and felt satisfied with the answers it was giving them.

Because ultimately they would find those answers unworkable. They wouldn't conform to reality no matter how they made the person feel.

Chemistry, on the other hand, would provide workable answers that conformed to reality.