The ONE Thread for All Things Omnilogical

Theology
22

Peace to all,

Mary is Not a Part of the Christian Trinity is so logically incorrect.

In Christian theology, the doctrine of the Trinity defines God as one being in three co-equal and co-eternal Persons: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ), and God the Holy Spirit. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is held in high esteem in many Christian traditions, but she is not considered a member of the Trinity.

I say in generalization each are Gods equal and separate in the power of God and together One Holy Spirit Family of God in being One Family becoming again in all. Creation, Immaculate Flesh Immortality Transformation Glorification and Holy Spirit Incorruptible Transfiguration Gods.

sddefault
sddefault640×480 53.4 KB

The foundational understanding of the Trinity is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons who share one divine nature or essence. This doctrine is a central tenet of most Christian denominations, including Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism. The Bible, particularly the New Testament, is the primary source for the doctrine of the Trinity, with key passages pointing to the divinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit and their distinct yet unified relationship.

If they see the Holy Spirit as a person in the Trinity this leaves no room for the Mother and Person of God existing before creation as Mother of God, no one can see the Mother of God, logically in the Trinity. To me the personal relationship with Jesus is more logically seen through The Holy Spirit Family of God.

All one has to do is logically convince all people there is no Mother preexisting in the Family of God before creation together with the Father and the Son in One Family in being One God becoming again in all.

While revered as the “Theotokos” (God-bearer) in Eastern Orthodoxy and the “Mother of God” in the Catholic Church for her role in the incarnation of Jesus Christ, Mary is understood to be a human being chosen by God for this unique purpose. Christian teachings emphasize her faith, obedience, and pivotal role in salvation history, but do not ascribe divinity to her. She is venerated and honored, but not worshiped as God.

It is a traditional belief in the Catholic Church that the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to Saint Dominic in 1208 and gave him the prayers and devotion of the Rosary. This tradition is particularly well-supported within the Dominican Order, which St. Dominic founded. The Dominicans have played a central role in promoting the Rosary throughout history.

Even with these points, the tradition of Mary’s revelation to St. Dominic remains a strong belief within the Catholic Church, especially for the Dominicans. It highlights Mary’s role in guiding the Church to fight heresy and spread the Gospel through prayer.

“My dear Dominic, do you know which weapon the Blessed Trinity has used to reform the world?”

“My Lady,” replied St. Dominic, “you know better than I because next to your son Jesus Christ you were the chief instrument of our salvation.”

Our Lady added: “I want you to know that the principal means has been the Angelic Psalter, which is the foundation of the New Testament. That is why, if you want to win these hardened hearts for God, preach my Psalter.”

St. Dominic returned to the Church and rang the bells to call the people of Toulouse and he began preaching to them about the Holy Rosary. In a very short time, a great change was seen in the city: people renounced their bad habits and began living truly Christian lives. It was by these extraordinary means that God wanted to spread the new devotion of the Holy Rosary and make it more widely known. (St. Louis de Montfort, The Secret of the Rosary)

If they see the Holy Spirit as a person in the Trinity no one can see the Mother of God, logically in the Trinity. The Holy Spirit rationally is the Family of God all together from the beginning, Father Son and Mother and all mankind becoming again One Holy Spirit Family of God, OMNILogically to all generalization.

Mary is not in The Trinity because of 1st and 3rd century Forefathers not seeing the Holy Spirit as a Family of Being and Gods preexisting before creation From the Father through the Mother for the Son in the Christ becoming in all mankind becoming again One Holy Spirit Family of God in all.

Peace always,
Stephen

23

@StephenAndrew, your post is stimulating. Please explain your sentence, “Flesh closes The Bosom for the spirits awaiting The Christ becoming again One Family.” It’s confusing to me.

24

Peace to all,

In all generalization, Animal Sacrifice saves only the spirits in the souls but the flesh is lost. Awaiting in the Bosom of Abraham. God promised and swore by His own name to Abraham and the the descendants eternal life through both natures, spirit and life throughteh flesh of The Christ becoming again in all One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.

Flesh closes The Bosom for the spirits through The Christ becoming again in all one Body in One Family. Even the angels know, were told of the becoming power of Flesh in Heaven, to me, logically.

The New Living Sacrifice saves the souls awaiting even the anges from the Cross and death and resurrection of all from the Bosom of Abraham and through today to rhe New Heaven and Earth, Heaven now fulfilled from the spirit through the souls of all for the flesh, the Body of Christ in two natures Spirit and Life becoming in all mankind One Body becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being, OMNILogocally.

Peace always,
Stephen

25

@Stephen, is it possible for you to summarize your thoughts in just a few ordinary words for the sake of clarity? You lost me about halfway through your long post.

26

Can someone define the word “omnilogical” for me? I can only guess at its meaning, since it’s not in any dictionary that I’ve examined. Where did the word come from? Why do you want to use it, since it’s not in common usage?

27

@Bruce_Leiter

The term “omnilogical” is a rare, non-standard, and largely informal neologism, generally constructed from the Latin root omni- meaning “all” or “every,” and the Greek-derived suffix _-logical from logos (λόγος), meaning “word,” “reason,” or more broadly “study” or “discourse.” Hence, omnilogical can be interpreted to mean “pertaining to all forms of knowledge,” or “concerned with all branches of logic, reason, or understanding.”

Though not found in authoritative dictionaries such as the Oxford English Dictionary or Merriam-Webster, it occasionally appears in niche academic, philosophical, or science fiction contexts. For instance, in some speculative literature or theological writings, omnilogical might describe a being (often divine or artificial) who comprehends all logical systems or total knowledge across all domains—a term roughly aligned with omniscience but with an emphasis on the logical, intellectual, or systematic dimension of that omniscience.

Origin and Formation: The word is likely formed analogously to better-known terms like theological, biological, or epistemological, but using omni- as a universal prefix instead of a specific field. Its construction is etymologically plausible, even elegant in form, but it remains a coined or poetic term rather than a standardized one.

Why might someone use it?
Someone might reach for omnilogical when they are attempting to:

Express the idea of a system, mind, or being capable of synthesizing or integrating all knowledge;

Emphasize a logical universality rather than a merely intuitive or experiential omniscience;

Coin a term to fill a conceptual gap between omniscient (knowing all things) and omnireasoning (a rarer coinage implying perfect rationality in all things);

Or perhaps to inject rhetorical weight or a sense of conceptual magnitude in philosophical, theological, or even computational discussions (e.g., describing an AI that simulates total human reasoning).

Should one use it?
Use of omnilogical should come with a caveat: since it is not a dictionary-recognized word, it risks ambiguity or misinterpretation in formal contexts unless the author defines it clearly in-text. Its appeal is primarily stylistic or conceptual, not lexical. That said, language evolves, and well-defined neologisms can enter discourse if they meet real conceptual needs.

In sum: omnilogical means “pertaining to all logic or knowledge,” a coinage with roots in Latin and Greek, not yet standard, used to convey universal rational comprehension—often poetic, speculative, or metaphysical in tone.

J.

28

Here’s what the summarize thing has to say about the thread:
The discussion titled “The ONE Thread for All Things Omnilogical” centers around Omnilogical theology, which diverges from traditional Christian doctrine. Fritzpw_Admin emphasizes that this thread serves as a centralized space for discussions related to Omnilogical thought to maintain order in the forum. User StephenAndrew presents his beliefs, asserting a unified view of God as a familial structure involving the Father, Son, and a divine Mother, proposing that Mary be considered part of this divine family. He discusses concepts like the Bosom of Abraham , sacrificial atonement, and the nature of salvation as a process of becoming, which he claims has been misunderstood throughout history. However, this perspective draws criticism from SincereSeeker, who decries Stephen’s interpretations as heretical and not aligned with Biblical teaching. SincereSeeker argues that Mary’s elevation to a divine status is contrary to scripture, advocating for a clear understanding of the Trinity as one God in three persons. The exchange escalates, with Stephen maintaining his views despite the rebuttals, while SincereSeeker calls for a return to scriptural truths. Throughout the posts, various interpretations of Omnilogical theology, mysticism,

1 Like
29

Thank you, Johann, for your explanation. It’s roughly what I had guessed it meant. After being an English teacher (8 years) and a pastor (27 years), I’m always thinking about what communicates the best in any situation. That word didn’t do a very good job :slightly_smiling_face: !

1 Like
30

The problem, @SincereSeeker, is not just that “another gospel” is being preached, but that it’s being tolerated, pampered, and platformed. And Scripture doesn’t shrug at that, it rebukes it with fire.

Paul didn’t hesitate: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel, which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ” (Galatians 1:6–7). Then comes the hammer: “If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be accursed” (v. 9). That’s not polite disagreement, that’s anathema.

But here’s the indictment, Paul rebuked the Galatians not just for listening to heresy, but for tolerating it. In 2 Corinthians 11:4, he blasts them: “If someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit… or accept a different gospel… you put up with it readily enough.”

That’s the problem, you put up with it. You nod, you share, you stay silent, and that silence becomes complicity.

Tolerating false gospels isn’t kindness, it’s treason. It’s spiritual appeasement. Jesus told the church in Pergamum, “You have people there who hold to the teaching of Balaam…” and again to Thyatira, “You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess” (Revelation 2:14, 20). What was Christ’s word? “I have this against you.” He didn’t rebuke the heretics first, He rebuked the churches that let them stay.

You want to know why the church is overrun with soft, bloodless gospels? Because we tolerate what we ought to tear down (2 Corinthians 10:5), we welcome what we ought to rebuke sharply (Titus 1:13), and we platform wolves instead of guarding the flock (Acts 20:29–31).

The apostolic call is clear: “Do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works” (2 John 10–11). False teachers don’t need microphones, they survive on your passivity.

The cross wasn’t polite. The Gospel isn’t negotiable. And the church must not be spineless. Where the blood of Christ is replaced with therapy-speak, and repentance is replaced with relevance, don’t just disagree, drive it out (cf. Galatians 2:5). You don’t dialogue with serpents, you crush their heads (Genesis 3:15).

Stay strong in the faith brother.

Johann.

1 Like
31

I literally haven’t heard about omnilogical in theology textbooks or topics. I haven’t even thought that Mary was the third person of trinity, idk why, and I didn’t think abt Holy Spirit family, idk which mysticism ur using, and especially during my intense scrutiny of catholic and orthodox especially Eastern Orthodox theology, I haven’t come across any topics like this..
Stephen Andrew has a site on this..
In other words, this is Hersey and idk which Christian can find scriptural\doctrinal evidence for this..idk, if someone has found any such scriptural or doctrinal evidence pls give below
@StephenAndrew
Peace
Sam

1 Like