Talk about the Trinity.

[Not_Now.Soon]

I know the view of this site on the Trinity. And I hope I can post a thread to ask questions or share perspectives on it. I also hope that if I can, do that much, then that this is also the subsection to do it under.

That said, if we can let's get into it.

The Trinity is one of those concepts that is supported, argued against, and holds at least a few different discriptions as to what it really is. So on the get go I'd like to ask what anyone's view of the Trinity is, and whether they believe the Trinity is an accurate concept, or not, based on what you think of it's description. If you can please keep bible references in your thoughts, so that the subject can be as clear as posdible and we have the authority of the bible to temper our own understanding. But that said, one of the critisms of the Trinity is that it isn't mentioned in the bible. The concept exists with strong bible reasoning attached to it, but it itself is not included. So don't be afraid to give your thoughts on the Trinity, even if you don't have scripture to back it up. Just try and keep it mostly scriptural reasoning.

 

[Blake]

John 1:1.

John 10:30.

1 John 5:7.

John 14:9.

John 12:45.

...And my favorite, Matthew 28:19. "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Not names. Name.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

John 1:1.

John 10:30.

1 John 5:7.

John 14:9.

John 12:45.

...And my favorite, Matthew 28:19. "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Not names. Name.

Awesome references Blake. Just to clairify though, the discription of the Trinity that you're going with is that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are one in the same. Not that they are separate indivuals unified by either spiritual means, or unified in their actions and cause. Is that about right?

(I ask because that is one of the discriptions of the Trinity that I am aware of, but not the one. If how you see it is with a different discription please let me know. I really don't want to put words in anyone's mouth. Just trying to clairify.)

 

[WIP]

The opening post does not fit within the guidelines for this A&T forum. Is there a point you would like to make and then defend, Not_Now.Soon?

 

[Brother Mike]

I know the view of this site on the Trinity. And I hope I can post a thread to ask questions or share perspectives on it. I also hope that if I can, do that much, then that this is also the subsection to do it under.

That said, if we can let's get into it.

The Trinity is one of those concepts that is supported, argued against, and holds at least a few different discriptions as to what it really is. So on the get go I'd like to ask what anyone's view of the Trinity is, and whether they believe the Trinity is an accurate concept, or not, based on what you think of it's description. If you can please keep bible references in your thoughts, so that the subject can be as clear as posdible and we have the authority of the bible to temper our own understanding. But that said, one of the critisms of the Trinity is that it isn't mentioned in the bible. The concept exists with strong bible reasoning attached to it, but it itself is not included. So don't be afraid to give your thoughts on the Trinity, even if you don't have scripture to back it up. Just try and keep it mostly scriptural reasoning.

This site is not Worded Trinity, it's Worded Oneness. One God who manifest in 3 distinct persons. So, make sure you know what the Sites TOS states before assuming it's Worded something it's not.

Trinity is 3 beings, who are God of God, Not the same, but are One, through the Mystery of Christian faith.

The Nicene Creed, and the much later publicized Athanasian Creed used no scriptures to make the doctrine. The first made to oppose Arius, the 2nd sort of came into being in the 1600's origin unknown, but parts of the wording in it are similar to manuscripts dated 400AD.
Much Earlier Writings before being put together and proclaimed are in line with Oneness, not Trinity.

Trinity keeps the Father, Son and Holy Spirit seperate in all scriptures, as Jesus and the Father are mentioned the same time in 52 scriptures. Trinity Adds though that they are ONE, and Just One God, and that part is a mystery.

It's Oneness and Modalism that attempt to use scriptures to explain their belief, Trinity clearly says it's a Mystery, the Southern Baptist say it's to hard for the finite mind of man to comprehend, Methodist say there are hints of it, but a Puzzle.

Rome who published the Doctrine stated in 1912 officially that Trinity is not found in scriptures, and again in 1967 they stated that it's not found in scriptures, but believed by faith to be correct.

There are also Trinity Purist who claim the Original is the real doctrine, the 325ad one under Constantine. In that doctrine it assures Jesus is God, Like His father, not His Father, but of the same essence as the Father. The doctrine does not combine them into One. That idea came hundreds of years later. The doctrine also left out the Holy Spirit who was added later in a revised edition 381ad.

Mike.

 

[Free]

I know the view of this site on the Trinity. And I hope I can post a thread to ask questions or share perspectives on it. I also hope that if I can, do that much, then that this is also the subsection to do it under.

That said, if we can let's get into it.

The Trinity is one of those concepts that is supported, argued against, and holds at least a few different discriptions as to what it really is. So on the get go I'd like to ask what anyone's view of the Trinity is, and whether they believe the Trinity is an accurate concept, or not, based on what you think of it's description. If you can please keep bible references in your thoughts, so that the subject can be as clear as posdible and we have the authority of the bible to temper our own understanding. But that said, one of the critisms of the Trinity is that it isn't mentioned in the bible. The concept exists with strong bible reasoning attached to it, but it itself is not included. So don't be afraid to give your thoughts on the Trinity, even if you don't have scripture to back it up. Just try and keep it mostly scriptural reasoning.

The doctrine of the Trinity best takes into account all that the Scriptures reveal about God, whereas every other attempt fails in one way or another. There are numerous passages which either explicitly or implicitly show the deity of Jesus and numerous other passages which either explicitly or implicitly state the humanity of Jesus. There are also some passages which imply the deity of the Holy Spirit. But we must also consider the numerous passages that show the Judeo-Christian God is the only God, that there is no other, and yet other numerous passages which clearly show the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father, and that neither of them are the Holy Spirit.

Only the doctrine of the Trinity best takes all of this into account.

 

[reba]

Moved this thread to the Lounge

 

[antipasta]

St. Patrick explains the Trinity.

Since this is the lounge, I'm assuming Donall and Conall are acceptable.

 

[JLB]

This site is not Worded Trinity, it's Worded Oneness. One God who manifest in 3 distinct persons. So, make sure you know what the Sites TOS states before assuming it's Worded something it's not.

Trinity is 3 beings, who are God of God, Not the same, but are One, through the Mystery of Christian faith.

The Nicene Creed, and the much later publicized Athanasian Creed used no scriptures to make the doctrine. The first made to oppose Arius, the 2nd sort of came into being in the 1600's origin unknown, but parts of the wording in it are similar to manuscripts dated 400AD.
Much Earlier Writings before being put together and proclaimed are in line with Oneness, not Trinity.

Trinity keeps the Father, Son and Holy Spirit seperate in all scriptures, as Jesus and the Father are mentioned the same time in 52 scriptures. Trinity Adds though that they are ONE, and Just One God, and that part is a mystery.

It's Oneness and Modalism that attempt to use scriptures to explain their belief, Trinity clearly says it's a Mystery, the Southern Baptist say it's to hard for the finite mind of man to comprehend, Methodist say there are hints of it, but a Puzzle.

Rome who published the Doctrine stated in 1912 officially that Trinity is not found in scriptures, and again in 1967 they stated that it's not found in scriptures, but believed by faith to be correct.

There are also Trinity Purist who claim the Original is the real doctrine, the 325ad one under Constantine. In that doctrine it assures Jesus is God, Like His father, not His Father, but of the same essence as the Father. The doctrine does not combine them into One. That idea came hundreds of years later. The doctrine also left out the Holy Spirit who was added later in a revised edition 381ad.

Mike.

What does brother Mike believe?

 

[Brother Mike]

What does brother Mike believe?

Hello JLB!!!

Despite my Pentecostal, WOF belief, Which claim Trinity, but most are clueless as they mix Oneness in it, and all kinds of other things.
I do not hold onto the Roman Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity concept found in the Athanasian Creed. I would agree with the Original 325ad Nicene Creed, if I had to choose. Jesus is of the Same substance and essence of the Father. Father and Son, both God.
They are mentioned together in 52 scriptures, and I know how to count. 1+1 =2. I am not the type to Ignore 25, and twist 2.

Good to hear from you Brother.

For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
(1Co 8:5-6)

I agree with Paul, to me there are 2, ONE God the Father Of whom all things consist, and One Lord Jesus Christ BY whom all things consist.

Mike.

 

[Free]

Hello JLB!!!

Despite my Pentecostal, WOF belief, Which claim Trinity, but most are clueless as they mix Oneness in it, and all kinds of other things.
I do not hold onto the Roman Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity concept found in the Athanasian Creed. I would agree with the Original 325ad Nicene Creed, if I had to choose. Jesus is of the Same substance and essence of the Father. Father and Son, both God.
They are mentioned together in 52 scriptures, and I know how to count. 1+1 =2. I am not the type to Ignore 25, and twist 2.

Good to hear from you Brother.

For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
(1Co 8:5-6)

I agree with Paul, to me there are 2, ONE God the Father Of whom all things consist, and One Lord Jesus Christ BY whom all things consist.

Mike.

Also known as polytheism, which is unbiblical.

 

[Brother Mike]

Also known as polytheism, which is unbiblical.

Polytheism believes in a Father and a Son. As in the Scripture I quoted from Paul as He said there be gods many, but to Us there are two.
Polytheism believes Jesus is God the Son, who has a Father who is also God. 52 other scriptures mention them together........ TWO.

The Modern Catholic Trinity Doctrine believes the same exact thing, Two God's, both God of God. Until the Doctrine add's the Mystery part, when magically there is only One God left.

For some odd reason Free, you seem to forget, Trinity says there are 3, Rome never said otherwise, as that would contradict a whole bunch of scriptures. What Rome did though was say those 3 make 1 God. Then Rome called it a mystery. That is the real, and official Trinity Doctrine. Now if you think it's something else, we call that Modalism, Oneness, symbolism, and there are a few others.

So if Paul says to us there are TWO FREE, then Polytheism is biblical, unless you think Paul is wrong. There is also a doctrine out there that do not believe Paul's writings are not canonical.

I can not personally fault anyone who says there are two, because they are mentioned over and over, nor can I fault someone that wants to believe in Oneness, Modern Trinity, Original Trinity, or even mix them. Every major denomination has it's own spin on the whole concept, and it's very confusing Free.

I already know you MIGHT read half of what I posted, but I tried.

Mike

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

The opening post does not fit within the guidelines for this A&T forum. Is there a point you would like to make and then defend, Not_Now.Soon?

I wasn't sure which forum was the best to put the topic in. I meant it just as a means to discuss the topic of the Trinity. Since there are multiple descriptions of it, I thought it'd be benifitual to anyone intreasted to know at least the ways people mean it here. Expecially when some who are Christians say they believe in the Trinity, and others who are Christians say they don't. While others even conclude that the Trinity is polytheistic conclusions. It is a confusing concept sometimes.

 

[Brother Mike]

I wasn't sure which forum was the best to put the topic in. I meant it just as a means to discuss the topic of the Trinity. Since there are multiple descriptions of it, I thought it'd be benifitual to anyone intreasted to know at least the ways people mean it here. Expecially when some who are Christians say they believe in the Trinity, and others who are Christians say they don't. While others even conclude that the Trinity is polytheistic conclusions. It is a confusing concept sometimes.

It is confusing, because the Original did not make just 1 god, and there was a major battle over the Athanasian creed among protestants in the 1600's. Rome had a way to "HELP" people believe what they wanted to believe.
Still, it's a Doctrine that has made it's way into Christian culture and it get's mixed with Oneness which was a Major Push in the 1914, Splitting the Largest Pentecostal church "Assemblies of God" 1928.

Then to make things more complicated, we have a few traditional denominations claim that ROME's Version of the Trinity is Wrong, Despite Rome being the one that invented it.


I'll just stick with scriptures and avoid all the mess. People can believe what they want.


Your insight to the confusion this Doctrine has caused, is impressive. Oneness though was more accepted before 325ad, and both groups claim those writings support their more modern version today. I say whatever.

Blessings.
Mike.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

Here's the thoughts that I've collected so far. Though I wasn't aware of the history or the progression of the thought of the Trinity, so thanks for that Mike. I did think the discription of Oneness was just another version of the Trinity concept.

I'm not a scholar, nor well studied, but from my own bible search and talking to those who want to give their opinions on it.

First is the idea that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are all the same person. In three different bodies but are essentially the same. To that the critisms I've heard is the seperate identity of each of them. Jesus praying to God, so God has to be seperate, and even saying that the time of the end is only known by the Father, not even the Son knows. And with regard to the Holy Spirit, Jesus promises the disciples that He will send the Holy Spirit after He dies and returns to the Father. Having them seperate in identity the description that they are the same does not fit according to that critism. The ideas to support it though are also biblically based. Blake posted several references that support that God and Jesus are one. And those shouldn't just be easily discarded.

John 1:1.

John 10:30.

1 John 5:7.

John 14:9.

John 12:45.

...And my favorite, Matthew 28:19. "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Not names. Name.

The second description I am aware of is about the three being united in action and in thought. They are seperate identies, but one in cause, in thought, and in action. The critism I am aware of for this is that Jesus accepts the worship of followers on behalf of God, and when asked to see God by one of the apostles, Jesus answer that since they have seen Jesus they have also seen God. But to the point that this perspective goes it shows the concept of God being united with Jesus, Jesus being united with the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit uniting us to both God and Jesus. By this concept it connects us all to the same spirit and the same mind. To be one in spirit is the idea, just also counts the discription as a discription of the Trinity as well. There is at least one verse that tells us to be united as one in Spirit. So I wouldn't completely discount this perspective either.

The third discription I am aware of is kind of a combination of the other two. They are all one God, but not wholely. God the Father being the head, also has all the authority and Knowledge. Jesus the Son being the body and part of God is part of God but not wholly God. I guess kind of like saying your arms are different from each other and in that sense are indivuals in a way, but are apart of the same body. The Holy Spirt is part of this body too. Sometimes it's hard to distinguish between each of these parts of the body, so even if they are all mentioned each one is thought to also include the other two. I think this perspective is the closest that I have to the how any why of the Trinity being described as a mystery and connecting all three indivual identies of the Trinity. The critism of it though is that it's not in the bible, and is a man made concept, as well as ridiculing the mystery as part of the answer of the Trinity workings.

Anyways those are the concepts of the Trinity as I've come to understand them. And when someone agrees or disagrees with the Trinity it usually seems to be one of those concepts that is used to agree or disagree with.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

Personally, I'm not sure whether to say I accept or reject the concepts of the Trinity. I think there's merrit in each of them, and I also think trying to find the dividing line between God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is something we will never see a difference between. So regarding the concepts of the Trinity might not be too far off even if they are wrong. If they are wrong.

 

[Brother Mike]

Here's the thoughts that I've collected so far. Though I wasn't aware of the history or the progression of the thought of the Trinity, so thanks for that Mike. I did think the discription of Oneness was just another version of the Trinity concept.

I'm not a scholar, nor well studied, but from my own bible search and talking to those who want to give their opinions on it.

First is the idea that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are all the same person. In three different bodies but are essentially the same. To that the critisms I've heard is the seperate identity of each of them. Jesus praying to God, so God has to be seperate, and even saying that the time of the end is only known by the Father, not even the Son knows. And with regard to the Holy Spirit, Jesus promises the disciples that He will send the Holy Spirit after He dies and returns to the Father. Having them seperate in identity the description that they are the same does not fit according to that critism. The ideas to support it though are also biblically based. Blake posted several references that support that God and Jesus are one. And those shouldn't just be easily discarded.
.

.

Blake Certainly did post some scriptures. Trinity never used any scriptures though, He posted Oneness proof. That's the problem with the doctrine, to prove it, you have to come out sounding like Oneness doctrine.

Oneness and Trinity both come to the same conclusions. 1 God. but both camps hate one another immensely. It's a spiritual demonic hate.

Let's examine Blakes Scriptures. False Doctrine is unable to compare and see other scriptures, but that is what I am here for.

John 1:1 Does not say Jesus and God are 1. You have to assume that Jesus is just some word part of a god, and Rev just says the Name of Jesus means the Word, and In Hebrews Jesus was sent to speak the Word, not become a word. Jesus said I only speak what I hear my Father speak, so Blake's assumption that Jesus is the manifested word part of a god, is Oneness teaching, not Trinity.

John 10:30 I and the Father are One. Already Jesus said there are two of them, but if You seen Him, You seen the Father also.

Watch.
Joh_17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

1Jn_4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

1Jn_4:17 Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.

Mar_10:8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

So, you take in account all the scriptures, not the ones people cherry pick to believe anything they want, you can clearly see Jesus saying you seen me, you seen the Father is not Jesus saying I AM THE FATHER, No more than John is Saying we are Jesus, even though We should get to the place to be as him, have the mind of Chirst, and be no different. That don't make us Jesus.
Jesus said we are One in Him and the Father, that don't make us the Father or Jesus, but the same, and on one accord.

Husband and wife are One flesh, but what effects me, effects the wife, and we are both the same, but not the same People.

This is what false doctrine does, It has to hand pick scriptures, and ignore others. Trinity does not even use these scriptures, Rome admitted this. it's Oneness that uses them to prove there is 1 God that becomes 3 people.
Trinity is 3 people that become 1

1 John 5:7 is very debatable as to being a forgery. so much so, it's not included in a lot of bibles.
However, it says there are 3 that bare record. The Father, Word and Holy Ghost. And these 3 are 1.

Once again, we have to assume the Word is talking about Jesus being some part of a god system, which is Oneness. Trinity says Jesus is the Son of God.

You can see Erasmus did not want to add 1 John 5:7, it was not found until 1500's and there is not one Greek copy with the verse in there, but found in some Latin text.

So you have to be careful how people use scriptures, ALL the scriptures must match, mean the same, as the Word of God is perfect.

I can cover how the "Word" was made flesh, once again, folks are not comparing scriptures that brought that scripture to come about, they have an agenda to protect their doctrines.

Welcome to the forums.

Mike.

 

[JLB]

Hello JLB!!!

Despite my Pentecostal, WOF belief, Which claim Trinity, but most are clueless as they mix Oneness in it, and all kinds of other things.
I do not hold onto the Roman Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity concept found in the Athanasian Creed. I would agree with the Original 325ad Nicene Creed, if I had to choose. Jesus is of the Same substance and essence of the Father. Father and Son, both God.
They are mentioned together in 52 scriptures, and I know how to count. 1+1 =2. I am not the type to Ignore 25, and twist 2.

Good to hear from you Brother.

For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
(1Co 8:5-6)

I agree with Paul, to me there are 2, ONE God the Father Of whom all things consist, and One Lord Jesus Christ BY whom all things consist.

Mike.

I believe the Godhead consist's of Father, Word and the Holy Spirit.

These three are One.

As typified by the family.

Father, Mother and Son.

Ephesians 5:31


JLB

 

[smaller]

Immediately after being born again I could not get enough of The Word, pouring through the pages of the Bible. I probably went through the entirety 4 times in the first 6 months after. Then began the [decades long] studies of various doctrinal positions, the Trinity being first on the list. The foundation laid out by the early church fathers is exceptionally sound. And they were also careful to cover this matter with rightful Mystery. So, though I accept their determinations, I also accept that no amount of study is able to "box" God in Christ, as that is a human flaw and trait that some abuse.

While their determinations were sound, cutting out the tongues of their opponents or killing and persecuting them was not sound whatsoever.

In that they utterly FAILED, regardless of their position.

What good is any doctrine if you end up abusing people over it?

 

[smaller]

.
John 1:1 Does not say Jesus and God are 1. You have to assume that Jesus is just some word part of a god, and Rev just says the Name of Jesus means the Word, and In Hebrews Jesus was sent to speak the Word, not become a word. Jesus said I only speak what I hear my Father speak, so Blake's assumption that Jesus is the manifested word part of a god, is Oneness teaching, not Trinity.

Dividing any portion of the Trinity is considered a foul, such as the above. That is a basic red alert flag, that something else might be amiss.

John 10:30 I and the Father are One. Already Jesus said there are two of them, but if You seen Him, You seen the Father also.

There is no "but." There is God, The Father/Invisible, and His Image, His Expression, His Son, His Word in whom was The Fullness of God Himself.

They are in fact indivisible from each others, as One. Without The Image or Expression of God, we would have no way to connect, hence His Expression. God Expressed Himself in His Own Image.

So, you take in account all the scriptures, not the ones people cherry pick to believe anything they want, you can clearly see Jesus saying you seen me, you seen the Father is not Jesus saying I AM THE FATHER

The Image of God contained the fullness of God, The Spirit without Measure.

John 3:34
For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

Colossians 2:9
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

This is what false doctrine does, It has to hand pick scriptures, and ignore others. Trinity does not even use these scriptures, Rome admitted this. it's Oneness that uses them to prove there is 1 God that becomes 3 people.

Uh, no. There is, very simply, no dividing in any way of any of these members, which is a basic foul.

Trinity is 3 people that become 1

Again, there is no "become" in either quotient above. The Image of God was always God. The "Eternal Characteristic" never changed.

I can cover how the "Word" was made flesh, once again, folks are not comparing scriptures that brought that scripture to come about, they have an agenda to protect their doctrines.

Mike.

The "Appearance" of God is A Great Mystery and is noted as such. It is such, because, men say, how can a Spirit without Measure, Appear?

1 Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.