Praying to god, jesus, and the holy spirit?

95 posts / 0 new
Last post
jamalt's picture
This concludes creation of

This concludes creation of Heaven and the Earth and everything in between and on it.

Quran says in Chapter: 25 , Verse: 59

"He who created the heavens and the earth and all that is between, in six days, and is firmly established on the throne (of authority): Allah most gracious: ask thou, then, about him of any acquainted (with such things)."

Bernard's picture
Be patient, the whole quran

Be patient, the whole quran will soon be published here ....

CyberLN's picture


Jeff Vella Leone's picture
Since there seems to be a

Since there seems to be a happy quoting appetite.

"BTW, I say this guy, because I firmly believe, looking at these results, that IF there is a god, IF there is a god, it has to be a man."
No woman would, or could ever fuck things up like this!"

-George Carlin

jamalt's picture
I made cake from Floor and

I made cake from Floor and Milk
1. I made cake from floor
2. I made cake from Milk

Bernard's picture
Some elementary logic to help

Some elementary logic to help you out : not((F)and(M)) == (not(F))or(not(M))

No (flour and milk) == (no flour) or (no milk) ; hence no cake

There may be many believes but only 1 logic

jamalt's picture
Quran talks about people

Quran talks about people trying to find contradiction in it. You still have provided any logical contradiction. That it says God did something and then says He didnt. 1400 years ago there was no literature or communication workshops or writing classes. still the Quran has been so beautifully revealed by God that it surpasses any other writing till now.

Im not here to argue or fight over anything. Im here to tell everyone how beautiful is life when you find the truth. we all need a purpose we are not animals. We feel and think and share and develop. We must find our true path. I care about everyone as much I care about myself. Im here to show you the right path.

may Allah swt guide us all. Ameen

watchman's picture


I have provided several examples of contradictions in the Quran..... you deny they are contradictions ....... impasse !

I am happy to let my examples stand for themselves.....

while you ,if I may say so , seem a little less than sanguine with regard to your denials....... you seem to be trying to shift your approach from blatant proselytising by trying to disguise it as some sort of altruistic endeavour on your part inspired by your faith by trying to show us a "true path" and a "right path".....

as an aside......just what the hell do you mean by ,"1400 years ago there was no literature "..... buffoon !...
The Greeks ,the Romans ,the Byzantines ,the Egyptians ,the Babylonians ,the Persians ,the Indians ,the Chinese ...ALL had writing systems ... ALL had rich ,colourful literary heritages..... books on history ,books on science ,books on medicine ,books on philosophy.......

while the Arabs didn't even have a fully functioning written language..... this ,I have been told is why the Quranic verses were originally passed on as recitations.....(with thanks to Mariam..late poster here.)

You go on ,with the familiar claim ,"still the Quran has been so beautifully revealed by God that it surpasses any other writing till now.".......

Nonsense !
What of the early variations....those before the so called Uthmanic version had been perfected .... where the Quran was still a work in progress...

... and not "so beautifully revealed by god" as you would have it.....

a great many of the things you have been told are false.
The Quran was edited ,worked on ,re-ordered men ..... the work we have today is not as it was originally..... claims to the contrary are pure hyperbole and hubris.

Do'nt take my word for it..... I ,after all, am a godless atheist......go check for yourself.... ask your own research books . Use your brain.

Sorry .... can't final point....

It is not customary to use "floor" to make cakes...... most people use flour.

jamalt's picture


Jeff Vella Leone's picture
Logical contradictions in

"That it says God did something and then says He didnt."
Those are not logical contradictions but conflicting claims that are indeed illogical.
Logical contradictions are contradiction in the claim that are illogical like creating shadows before creating light.

Logical contradictions in what he is saying are far worse then just conflicting claims, since those can be dismissed as mistranslated.

"Im not here to argue or fight over anything. Im here to tell everyone how beautiful is life when you find the truth."

You came here to preach your evil war-monger god to us, by just claiming he is a good god that does evil actions.

Excuse us if we do not like this kind of behavior.

We are people who love the truth and question everything to find it.
You came here insulting our intelligence by preaching things you believe are the truth without even questioning them.

To make it worse you insulted the most precious of gift of all, the art of questioning.

" I care about everyone as much I care about myself."

If you did you would die of hunger by now, since you would share everything you have with the people dying of hunger every single day around the world and die with them soon after.

This is another very obvious example of hypocrisy with yourself.

You think you care, but you don't, though you surly love to think you are.
This is the level of arrogance we sane people see in you when you speak.

We understand ourselves better then you would ever be able to.

We know that we are incapable of loving everybody like ourselves and made peace with our limitations.
you have still to grow up and realize it.

That is the problem of your religion, it messes with your head and it does not let you grow up to truly understand the reality you live in or even yourself.

jamalt's picture
So atleast everybody agrees

So atleast everybody agrees we(muslims) have ONE GOD! We ask from only one GOD. We dont associate any partners with ALLAH. Thats the best thing and thats the only Religion that says so. Deny it? Can you? Any of you?


“And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Surah(Chapter) like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (if there are any) besides Allah if your (doubts) are true.” (2:23)

Allah says in Surah no 17 Verse No 88 “Say: if the entire humans and jinns join together to produce anything like this Quran, they will not (be able to) come up with anything like it, even if they assist one another.”

But if you do it not, and you can never do it, then fear the Fire (Hell) whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the disbelievers)

Surah 2 Al Baqarah Verse 23-24

And when it is said to them (hypocrites): "Believe as the people (followers of Muhammad peace be upon him, Al-Ansâr and Al-Muhajirûn) have believed," they say: "Shall we believe as the fools have believed?" Verily, they are the fools, but they know not. Quran Al-Baqara [2:13]

(Alif Lam Ra. (This is) a Book, the verses whereof are perfect (in every sphere of knowledge, etc.), and then explained in detail from One (Allah), Who is Wise and well-acquainted (with all things)) (11:1)

If you believe in science then believe in everything that science has proven in Quran. And thus science proves everything in Quran and Quran is a proof of One God. ALLAH.

watchman's picture


So you've given up even trying to answer questions.....and taken refuge in just spouting quotes from your fabricated "holy book"...

Never mind.....but you still seem intent on revealing your intellectual weakness.....

you posted ," Thats the best thing and thats the only Religion that says so. Deny it? Can you? Any of you?"

If you are saying that Mohammedanism is the only religion to worship one god.....then I can and do deny it....

As far as I know ...

1/The Jewish faith worships one god
2/The Sikh faith worships one god
3/The Bahai faith worships one god

You also say....

"We dont associate any partners with ALLAH.".....

True enough.......for now...

BUT in the past Allah was associated with a triumvirate of Meccan goddess' known collectively as the three Cranes, at one time supposed to be his daughters.( Al-Lat ,Al-Uzza & Menat)

There seems to have been a further possibility the the god ,"Hubal " was at one point considered to be part of Allah's family along side the three cranes. (although this seems to have been short lived and only ever expressed in a small geographic area ,as both Hubal and Allah are personified as the ultimate deity)


jamalt's picture
Allah says :

Allah says :

“Even if We did send unto them angels, and the dead did speak unto them, and We gathered together all things before their very eyes, they would not believe, unless it is in Allah’s Plan: But most of them ignore (the truth).” 6:111

Where did we come from?

“Were they created of nothing, or are they themselves the creators?” 52: 35-36

And where are we going?

“Where are you going?” 81:26

Maybe we’ve been tricked!

“Do not let the chief-deciever(Satan) deceive you about Allah.”

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
"send unto them angels, and

"send unto them angels, and the dead did speak unto them"

I tell you what, send them, please send the president Kennedy back, I would love to ask him a few questions.

Most people would believe if only 1% of the Quran wasn't bullshit and false promises.

Deliver the angels and Kennedy and the Muslim faith would have the evidence required to be questionable.

Right now, it is full of false promises, failed prophecies and unsupported claims, thus has less credit then a porn magazine.(at least you don't find under age marriage in there)

Somehow I feel you will disappoint us like all the preachers before you.

Matthew Heyne's picture
This can be explained when

This can be explained when you look at the social factors around the time of the creation of the Bible.
Back when the Roman Empire adopted Christianity as it's one official religion, most of Rome's people were polytheistic and believed in a range of deities. It was decided that the empire's new belief system should be monotheistic in order to unify all of the empire's people under one god. This proved difficult as at the time as the population followed a variety of faiths including pagan beliefs of both Greek and Roman origin, early Christianity, which had previously been a banned practice, and Judaism.
This is likely the origin of the concept of the holy trinity. The father being the god of Abraham, sourced from Judaism along with the books of the old testament. The son is the embodiment of Jesus of Nazareth, the tales of his life forming the basis of Christian faith and the New Testament. Last but not least, the holy spirit. This ever present and unseen entity is likely sourced from the Pagan beliefs, who worshipped gods that were largely personifications of the invisible forces of nature seen in the day night cycle, the changing of the seasons, the tides, the weather; you name it.
The same goes for the patron saints, the angels and demons, even satan. Most replacing the myriad of minor deities, each worshipped for the amazingly narrow scope of their given speciality, like Erasmus (AKA Elmo), the patron saint of abdominal pains.
Hope that helped.

Chica__2009's picture
Who people pray to depends on

Who people pray to depends on who or what they believe. Christians pray to God/Jesus/holy spirit.
The holy spirit is a helper that Jesus gave his disciples when he left earth. He gives the holy spirit to every other believer as well. The holy spirit is very important in producing the fruits of the spirit because as you can prob. tell these gifts comes from the spirit. The holy spirit is also important in healing.

I don't personally pray to Mary etc. That's prob a dif religion than mine. But I do believe in things like the people who have home before us interceeding on our behalf. It's a scary and beautiful what if.

Don Wall's picture
I often have thought similar

I often have thought similar to you and made jokes that the holy ghost was the stepchild of the trinity. But actually, there is another way of looking at it. As one posted there were the Pagan similarities that might explain it, but there is another completely inside the Bible. Simple answer on the holy ghost is that in some scripture that is the power of God coming into man. So when you get saved in Christianity it is the holy ghost that comes inside you...not Jesus or Yahweh.

As Dr. Bart Ehrman explains on his historical analysis of the Bible, the role of Jesus was not clear. In Mark, Jesus didn't become God until after death. In Matthew & Luke, Jesus became God after being born. This is why those two have genealogies for Joseph which is meaningless if Jesus was not Joseph's child. John then portrays Jesus as eternal just like Yahweh and born of a virgin. John's view became standard in the Council of Nicea (325AD) but it carries with it a problem, how can you have the one God of the Hebrew Bible and have Jesus also being eternal? If you follow ideas like in the synoptic gospels, you are adding a God to the mix (Jesus) and so you are violating the old single God idea. And what about Jesus praying/talking to Yahweh? If they are the same, then you have a conflict. So it seems the trinity idea was formed to help explain this inconsistency so that God is one concept but there are 3 points in an attempt to solve scripture conflicts. I'm still thinking its a weird idea to have Jesus praying or talking to God if he is also omniscient but maybe 2000 years ago people didn't ask the right questions. Or maybe they tried to argue different levels of omniscience and power. Probably was linked to the Pagan ideas too, so much of religion does take from the other religions.

There are several inconsistencies though. If God was only one, what are the angels, demons and Satan? I believe Satan is referred to as God of the that contradicts. The holy spirit might be what enters into you, but there is scripture that says to talk smack on the holy ghost is the only unforgivable sin. So that implies he is more revered than Yahweh or Jesus since that can be forgiven. Why do we have multiple references to the one God, but then rules to say don't put other Gods before me? Simply, even with the trinity it's pretty hard to reconcile all this multi-God thing with various scriptures. So you haven't solved the problems in the Bible, only sort of sidestepped them with a really bad answer if someone asks the question.

Obviously you wonder why they didn't just rewrite this stuff out, but you can see that old-timers would feel that is tampering. There are all kinds of known tampering but it had to be done in a way to not just delete the problem entries.

jonthecatholic's picture
To the OP, this is actually

To the OP, this is actually one of the ideas that isn't fully understood by many people including many Christians. I will try, however.

Christians believe there is one God in 3 persons. This is what we call the doctrine of the holy trinity. Most people say this doesn't make sense since it may be inconceivable to have a single being be more than 1 person. A counter argument I've seen for this is it's actually very conceivable for us to imagine a being that's not a person (0 persons) say a non-living being like a rock or a mountain. And it's also conceivable to us to have a being that's a person (1 person) like you or me. From this then, we cannot say that there's a one-to-one correlation between being and personhood. Christians simply believe that there is one God (one being) in 3 persons (Father, Son [or Jesus], and the Holy Spirit).

As different persons, they may do different things and you may just pray to one of the persons, or all of them but to Christians, you're simply praying to one God. An example of the different persons of the trinity doing different things would be that Jesus came down to earth and died for our sins. That's solely something that Jesus did and the Holy Spirit nor the Father did. Another example was the Holy Spirit descending upon the apostles (on Pentecost). That's not something Jesus nor the Father did but only the Holy Spirit. In any of these cases, however, it would still be accurate to say that God came down and died for our sins or that God descended upon the apostles on Pentecost.

That's just a rough sketch of the doctrine of the trinity.

"And I don't get why some people actually believe in intercessions and asking god for something through Mary, Peter, Paul, or whichever saints and martyrs they could think of."

- This case of people asking for intercessions simply means people are asking other people to pray for them to God. Like how Christians will ask other Christians to pray for them, some Christians (mostly Catholics) will ask prayers from the saints in heaven which include the ones you've mentioned. The idea being that they have achieved absolute separation from sin and thus are able to pray more earnestly on our behalf. That's basically all it is. It's in no way implying they are God. If it were, then every Christian who asks another to pray for them is actually viewing other Christians as God.. This isn't the case, however.

David Killens's picture


Prayer has been proven to be ineffective, flipping a coin gives better odds.

The "power of prayer" is built on ignoring the misses and celebrating the hits.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ JoC

@ JoC
That is the Pauline viewpoint JoC.
There is little evidence for Trinitarianism until the late 2nd Century CE. In fact not until after the Council of Nicea and later when the Nicene creed was established by force as the ONLY way to worship was it considered 'mainstream'.

Before then the Gnostic and Adoptionist creeds of the early churches held much more influence outside of Rome. Outside of Rome of course is where the majority of the Christians resided.

The doctrine of the trinity has to be one of the most ridiculous ideas ever foisted upon an unwilling congregation, indeed it required massacres and unprecedented destruction of texts and churches to establish it as the dominant creed in christianity. It is a tortuous fraught philosophy to explain a ridiculous premise. Something that even a 5 year old has to suspend personal reality to accept as anything but fantasy.

Much of the gospels regarding the birth and death (and genealogy) of the Jesus character was retro fitted to fit the "divine model" (prophecy of Isaiah) "fathered by god"...the gnostic and adoptionists needed no such far fetched nonsense to be christians.

So much energy has been expended by great minds to defend this patent nonsense of the Three in One (god, not oil) that it truly baffles anyone of average intelligence and a grasp on reality.

arakish's picture
And now you know why I have

And now you know why I have said "HeSheItThey" when talking about God. This is the first posting, but I have always said it when in an FTF discussion.

Besides, think of it this way:
He = God
She = Jesus
It = Holy Spirit/Ghost
They = all the other angels


jonthecatholic's picture
You always throw out these

You always throw out these allegations and I've simply taken them as that. Please, though, cite your sources. What I merely answered in this thread was the OP asking what's the difference between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I gave the answer. You call it the Pauline viewpoint. fair enough. But that's the defining doctrine of Christianity. The trinitarian view of God.

You throw out these allegations that this is a ridiculous idea foisted upon an unwilling congregation. You obviously have no idea most Christians (even today) work. If a certain view of God was forced on me, I would leave. In almost all Catholic churches, you're free to leave and come back whenever. The door is always open.

"indeed it required massacres and unprecedented destruction of texts and churches to establish it as the dominant creed in christianity"

- Asserted without evidence... dismissed without evidence.

calhais's picture
But that's the defining

But that's the defining doctrine of Christianity. The Trinitarian view of God.

Ha! That's certainly the defining doctrine of Trinitarian Christianity, but many Protestants and Protestant sects reject the trinity. Catholicism can get pretty nasty.

jonthecatholic's picture
Fair enough. Though it must

Fair enough. Though it must be said that up until the 1500s, this view was universal to all Christians and any view that didn't was considered heretical.

calhais's picture
No. The churches contemporary

No. The churches contemporary to the events in Acts do not seem to have held an explicitly Trinitarian view of the Holy Spirit. I agree that there were times and places at which it was considered heretical to reject an explicitly Trinitarian view, and I agree that the 1500s contained some of those times. I suspect that the Trinitarian view was considered normal in most western Christian churches between 900 and the 1500s.

jonthecatholic's picture
I would agree with you as

I would agree with you as well. The fact is, the trinity is never expressed explicitly in the Bible as "the trinity". I agree with you. And it's also quite possible that the nature of the trinity wasn't as fully understood before Nicaea. But this doesn't preclude it from being believed in by the early Church simply because they didn't have a word for it then. Even back then, the church was baptizing using the trinitarian formula and we have positive evidence of this from the Bible.

calhais's picture
Having been raised in a

Having been raised in a Protestant interpretive tradition, I'm tempted to argue that what you call `the nature of the Trinity' was invented at Nicaea.

What, exactly, does the modern Trinitarian `formula' for baptism entail, and why is it that way?

jonthecatholic's picture
Under code of canon law for

Under code of canon law for Catholics, we consider a baptism valid if it was done using water. Water is to be poured or the person is to be immersed. And they should be baptized, "In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." with the understanding that Father, Son and Holy Spirit is one God in three persons. Matthew 28:19 has this formula spelled out though not explained in its entirety.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ JoC

@ JoC

For once I am in agreement with Calhais and you are very much in error.
The Bishop of Rome in 492CE issued the edict banning all the Adoptionist and Gnostic gospels, texts, preaching and practice. There was indeed 'blood on the streets' as there had been a hundred years earlier at the declaration of the 'Arian Heresy'and then the Nicene Trinitarian creed was enforced without mercy. It is documented quite explicitly, but I am tired of giving you historical research lessons JoC. Look it up for truth's sake. ..why do you think the Nag Hammani texts were buried and hidden? Only found again in 1947...

If you cared to have a look around JoC and read some even recent history you would find your loving, welcoming Catholic church has tortured, executed, massacred anyone who dared disagree with it. The last person BURNT AT THE STAKE for heresy was only in 1829...a Spanish schoolteacher who dared to reiterate the Arian 'heresy'.

That you dare bring this nonsense about 'loving church' when its excesses and murderous history is available for the reading is quite beyond me.

jonthecatholic's picture
A quick and careful review of

A quick and careful review of what the early church documents and the early church fathers say about this topic reveal otherwise.

The Didache (written in AD 50) affirms the Trinitarian view of God and says so in how we baptize.
Ignatius of Antioch writes to the Ephesians in 110 AD also calls the Father and the Son (Jesus) as God and hinted (though not explicitly) at the divinity of the Holy Spirit.
Theophilus of Antioch (AD 181) says this:
"The three days before the stars were created are types of the Trinity: God, his Word, and his Wisdom."
- I believe this is the first mention of the word trinity in early Christian writings.
Irenaeus of Lyons (Against Heresies 1:10:1 in AD189) says this even before Nicaea:
"[The Church believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and the sea, and all things are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit,"

Other early Christian writings before Nicaea include the following:
Tertullian of Carthage (Against Praxeas 2 in AD 218)
Origen of Alexandria (Fundamental Doctrines in AD 225) says, "whereas statements regarding the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are to be understood as transcending all time, all ages and all eternity."
Novatian of Rome (The Trinity 11 in AD 235)
Pope Dionysius (Against the Sabellians 1 in AD 262)
St. gregory Thaumaturgus (Declaration of Faith in AD 265)
St. Augustine of Hippo (The Trinity 1:4:7 in AD 408) - this is after Nicaea but still before your 492 date.

So no this trinity didn't simply pop up randomly. It's been there since the early days of Christianity and has endured until today.

As to your claims about the church burning people at the stake, I've repeatedly looked into these claims and seen that this simply isn't true. Look into that case and you'll see that it was a secular court (in the case you provided, most likely the Spanish courts) which carried out the trial and the punishment. In many cases even during the height of the Spanish Inquisition, it was the secular courts that were killing more than the religious courts.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.