Trinitarianism: What Non-Trinitarians Believe

[Free]

Correct me if I am wrong... is it not your belief that there is only "ONE" (numeric) God?

Where as the Bible states the following....

1 JOHN 5
7 For there are THREE (numeric) that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these THREE (numeric) are one (unity).

IF you are not contradicting yourself, tell us who among the three mentioned above not God... the Father; the Word; the Holy Ghost? Please explain yourself and educate me. Thanks

Note: Insertions are mine for presentation.

As I have stated previously, the trinitarian position is that there are three Persons in the one Being who is God. All are God in nature but there is only one God. This is monotheism.

The Bible makes it clear that there is one God and I have provided ample evidence of this. The Bible also states that Jesus is God in nature and that by extension, so is the Holy Spirit.

These are the statements that the doctrine of the Trinity tries to reconcile and, IMO, is the only one to do so adequately.

 

[4given]

As I have stated previously, the trinitarian position is that there are three Persons in the one Being who is God. All are God in nature but there is only one God. This is monotheism.

The Bible makes it clear that there is one God and I have provided ample evidence of this. The Bible also states that Jesus is God in nature and that by extension, so is the Holy Spirit.

These are the statements that the doctrine of the Trinity tries to reconcile and, IMO, is the only one to do so adequately.

First off, if the Son was sent by the Father, were they separate or not? If not, how can you speak of the Father sending the Son? Would it be more correct to say, Father sent, them (Father and Son) since they are inseparable being… ONE BEING?

Second, did the Father send his own BEING with the SON? If not, then the Son was sent by the Father WITHOUT a being. If yes, then the Father sent His OWN BEING with the Son, thus the Father sent the Son with himself (being), correct?

And here's the third. When Jesus said, "Father why have you forsaken me," did the Father really forsake the Son or not? If not, then the utterance of Jesus was a mere charade. If yes, they obviously are separate entities since to forsake is to disunite.

Finally, let me cite my contention against this traditional belief or concept....

Please show us proof that the Bible teaches the concept of.... THE BEING OF THE FATHER IS ALSO THE BEING OF THE SON … AND ALSO THE BEING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT….. THREE PERSONS IN ONE BEING. If you cannot prove that from the Bible then certainly that concept is only man-made and not biblical.

In contrast to that man made concept, here's a biblical proof that the Father & Son have their own self being separate from each other.... even before the world was.


JOHN 17
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

 

[farouk]

'The Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.'

I'm certainly not going to argue with this statement.

 

[cleanfreak]

Correct me if I am wrong... is it not your belief that there is only "ONE" (numeric) God?

Where as the Bible states the following....

1 JOHN 5
7 For there are THREE (numeric) that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these THREE (numeric) are one (unity).

IF you are not contradicting yourself, tell us who among the three mentioned above not God... the Father; the Word; the Holy Ghost? Please explain yourself and educate me. Thanks

Note: Insertions are mine for presentation.

this would be an awesome post if this verse existed in the original Greek manuscripts.

 

[4given]

this would be an awesome post if this verse existed in the original Greek manuscripts.

Correct, that's a very controversial text not found in the original manuscripts, however, that's one of the mostly used text in trying to prove the concept of Trinity (3-1) by those who subscribes to this concept... therefore, I like to be further educated about it... It's Free of charge, isn't it?

Thanks

 

[Free]

First off, if the Son was sent by the Father, were they separate or not? If not, how can you speak of the Father sending the Son? Would it be more correct to say, Father sent, them (Father and Son) since they are inseparable being… ONE BEING?

Second, did the Father send his own BEING with the SON? If not, then the Son was sent by the Father WITHOUT a being. If yes, then the Father sent His OWN BEING with the Son, thus the Father sent the Son with himself (being), correct?

And here's the third. When Jesus said, "Father why have you forsaken me," did the Father really forsake the Son or not? If not, then the utterance of Jesus was a mere charade. If yes, they obviously are separate entities since to forsake is to disunite.

Finally, let me cite my contention against this traditional belief or concept....

Please show us proof that the Bible teaches the concept of.... THE BEING OF THE FATHER IS ALSO THE BEING OF THE SON … AND ALSO THE BEING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT….. THREE PERSONS IN ONE BEING. If you cannot prove that from the Bible then certainly that concept is only man-made and not biblical.

In contrast to that man made concept, here's a biblical proof that the Father & Son have their own self being separate from each other.... even before the world was.


JOHN 17
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

Simply put, again, there is only one God, yet the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all said to be God and are all distinct persons.

 

[4given]

Simply put, again, there is only one God, yet the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all said to be God and are all distinct persons.

Oh... okay then... whatever floats your boat... I guess is good for you! :nod

God Bless

 

[Free]

Oh... okay then... whatever floats your boat... I guess is good for you! :nod

God Bless

It's not a matter of "whatever floats my boat." That is all that Scripture reveals. Too many are going beyond what Scripture reveals.

 

[4given]

Simply put, again, there is only one God, yet the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all said to be God and are all distinct persons.

Is that right???

If so, how do you reconcile your view.... "that there are three Persons in the one Being who is God".... to John 17:5 which suggest that the Father and Son... each have their own self Beings... separate from each other... even before the world was?

JOHN 17
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

I am all ears.... Thanks

 

[mamre]

Did you read why I wrote that? I was responding to your statement: "This may seem a bit outlandish, how can somebody know?I know not of myself, not because I have studied and come to the conclusion."

That's your own admission that your conclusions aren't based on any study. Maybe you meant something else but it sure comes across this way.

It is obvious you understand what I said. You cannot go to the Father and ask without having at least read the scriptures. Of course you need to study. We are commanded to search the scriptures because in them we find eternal life. You study the scriptures and you do it by the spirit, then you ask God to confirm what you have learned with a testimony, a witness of the truth.

We are not to read/study and then debate it to get to a consensus of what is the closest meaning of what you have read to the "official" interpretation. You study the scriptures to get to know the way to life eternal. You will NOT find that in debating, or by your own conclusion.

Satan can counterfeit miracles and can appear as an angel of light, do you really think that he won't give someone the warm fuzzies if it suits his purpose to lead them astray?

I have said the same, and you are just rephrasing what I have said, Satan can counterfeit miracles. But you don't get the truth trough miracles, you get by faith.

Satan CANNOT fake happiness. He cannot bring peace to your heart. He cannot witness of the truth in your heart. He is an angry and bitter being. He is the opposite of peace, and certitude, and faith.

When you pray to the Father with sincerity, He will witness of the truth to your heart. You'll know the truth because receiving the truth in your heart gives you certitude and brings you happiness and joy.

Satan doesn't have the capacity to give you certitude, or peace. Since his objective is to drive you away from God, instead of certitude and peace, you'll have more doubts and fear.

Therefore, you WILL not ever feel what the disciples in the road Emaus felt if it comes from Satan. Simply because THAT feeling cannot be faked by Satan.

So, not only one needs to pray to Father to know the truth, one needs to learn how the Father confirms the truth to us.

No, it isn't. This has been pointed out to you by more than one person. If you are not going to debate, then please leave the discussion. This is a debate forum and not addressing people's points is very rude and inconsiderate. If you only continually push false Mormon doctrine, then you are in violation of the TOS.

Because there are rules for biblical interpretation to keep people from interpreting things incorrectly.

The true followers of Christ welcome anyone who is seeking to know the truth (which I am). Christ never excluded anyone. True Christianity is a religion of inclusion, not exclusion.

That is my point. Somebody made some rules as to how to interpret the word of God? Again, why follow man's rules of interpretation and not ask the Father for the true "interpretation," HIS?

It is a logical conclusion.

Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. (ESV)

If Jesus was created, then this is a false statement.

Yes except that when you favor that scripture you conflict it it with the scripture in Colossians that says that Christ is the firstborn of every creature? Do you see the need to include God in this conversation?

Cut it out with the condescending remarks. I knew you would get caught up on verse 15 which is why I didn't include it. Context determines the meaning of a word. Clearly, since verses 16 and 17 do not allow for Jesus to have been created, the context demands that "firstborn" here not literally mean one who was physically born first.

"Fristborn" can refer to one who has preeminence, the rights of one who is firstborn. And that fits the passage perfectly. It is a clear statement that Jesus is preeminent over creation. We know this because verses 16 and 17 state that everything was created through him and by him.

Nobody is condescending here. You cannot simply conclude arbitrarily that the word "firstborn" means different things in different places just because you favor one scripture over another. The scriptures should not contradict themselves on their own. They are not object of particular interpretation.

What your are doing is just 'creative accounting.' When things don't add up you just "make" it fit by finding another meaning for the word.

The "whole" of the scriptures revolves around Father and Son, Family, generating, offspring, begotten. Therefore, preeminence doesn't fit, it changes the "family" theme of the scriptures. There is a reason that Christ calls God, father, and a reason why He teaches us to pray to "our Father which is in heaven." That is because He is our Father, literally. We are His family, Jesus is the first of His sons (see Colossians). We are all offspring of the Most High God (Psalms 82), the Father, including Jesus Christ. It is in the scriptures.

If you see that the scriptures is contradicting itself, it is not the scriptures that are incorrect. It is because you are "interpreting" it with your own "understanding". Again, that is why you need the help of God to understand what you read.

Again, math does not prove nor disprove the Trinity. As to your first point, my previous analogy to the Triple Point of Water, shows that indeed, a whole can simultaneously exist in three separate parts while remaining a whole. To say that God is 1/3 this and 1/3 that goes beyond what Scripture states.

"Trinity" goes beyond the scriptures because the concept of Trinity is not in the scriptures as it contradicts what Paul says in 1Cor.8:5-6:
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. Are you going to change the meaning of this too to fit your interpretation?

As to your second point, you have no basis for making such an argument. Equal in nature does not mean that Jesus would also have to be the Father.

Your are right, they are equal in nature. But not in familial terms, One is the Father and the Other is the Son, different beings. Trinity, however needs to make them all be in the same level to be able to say they are one God. When you do that you eliminate the family aspect of the Godhead. If that is true, then there are three Gods of the same level as the Father. Which is NOT what the scriptures say.

Again I quote 1Cor8:5-6. We worship THE FATHER, but that doesn't make the Son less than God. Besides when you worship Jesus, you are worshiping the Father because He does the will of the Father perfectly. There is only ONE God to us and that is the Father, there is no need to concoct a trinity doctrine.

You can understand this when you bring it to human level, since humans are made in the likeness of God.

A son has the the same substance as his father, both are flesh and bones, both are men. However, they are different beings, one has generated the other. The son cannot be the father because he cannot generate himself. But they can be one in purpose.

The Father and the Son have the same type of substance glorified bodies, but are different individuals. The Son cannot be the Father because He cannot have begotten Himself. But they are ONE in purpose.

Besides in Hebrews 1:6 the scripture say that: And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. This confirms that Jesus is the first born of all creation.
See it is in agreement with the whole theme of the scriptures "family." We are all, literaly the family of the Most High, Jesus is His firstbegotten. See, no particular interpretation.

I would like to ask you to keep the debate on the subject without accusing me of things I am not doing.

have a great day,
mamre

 

[Free]

Is that right???

If so, how do you reconcile your view.... "that there are three Persons in the one Being who is God".... to John 17:5 which suggest that the Father and Son... each have their own self Beings... separate from each other... even before the world was?

JOHN 17
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

I am all ears.... Thanks

Again, there is one God and there are three distinct Persons who are explicitly or implicitly referred to as God. This verse clearly shows both the unity and the diversity.

 

[JudaicChristian]

this would be an awesome post if this verse existed in the original Greek manuscripts.

I have tried pointing things like that out to Trinitarian believers, but they keep ignoring it. I do not know what their thinking. It is clearly documented in study bibles, that, and more.

 

[Free]

It is obvious you understand what I said. You cannot go to the Father and ask without having at least read the scriptures. Of course you need to study. We are commanded to search the scriptures because in them we find eternal life. You study the scriptures and you do it by the spirit, then you ask God to confirm what you have learned with a testimony, a witness of the truth.

Of course, what this implies is either that you alone on these forums have studied or that you alone have prayed about it. I have done both as have many other trinitarians here and countless ones throughout the centuries past.

We are not to read/study and then debate it to get to a consensus of what is the closest meaning of what you have read to the "official" interpretation. You study the scriptures to get to know the way to life eternal. You will NOT find that in debating, or by your own conclusion.

To think that all we have to do is pray and get a nice warm feeling as a confirmation of the truth is naive and far too simplistic. There are things in Scripture that are relatively easy to understand and things much more difficult. One can come to see the truth of a matter, or at least what is a better understanding, through debate and discussion.

What we are not to do is simply think we have the truth and anyone who disagrees obviously hasn't prayed about it and anyone who does agree has prayed about it. That is false.

I have said the same, and you are just rephrasing what I have said, Satan can counterfeit miracles. But you don't get the truth trough miracles, you get by faith.

My point is that if Satan can counterfeit miracles, he can counterfeit happiness and give a burning in the bosom.

Satan CANNOT fake happiness. He cannot bring peace to your heart. He cannot witness of the truth in your heart. He is an angry and bitter being. He is the opposite of peace, and certitude, and faith.

That is your opinion. And in light of the fact that he can appear as an angel of light, such as Moroni, and can counterfeit miracles, it would seem reasonable to conclude that he could counterfeit happiness and burning in the bosom if it suited his purpose to lead someone astray.

That is my point. Somebody made some rules as to how to interpret the word of God? Again, why follow man's rules of interpretation and not ask the Father for the true "interpretation," HIS?

Again, you are presuming that people are not asking God when that clearly is not the case. Yes there are rules and they must be followed if one is actually a sincere seeker of the truth.

It is a logical conclusion.

Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. (ESV)

If Jesus was created, then this is a false statement.

Yes except that when you favor that scripture you conflict it it with the scripture in Colossians that says that Christ is the firstborn of every creature? Do you see the need to include God in this conversation?

Once again, in context, Col 1:15 is in complete agreement with John 1:3. You cannot simply read that Christ is the "firstborn" and stop there. The context determines the meaning of a word and here it simply cannot mean that he was literally born.

Nobody is condescending here.

This: "Need I say more. I don't need to add anything to this it is so clear a baby can understand," is condescending.

You cannot simply conclude arbitrarily that the word "firstborn" means different things in different places just because you favor one scripture over another. The scriptures should not contradict themselves on their own. They are not object of particular interpretation.

I have shown how the context determines the meaning. It would seem to be you who is arbitrarily assigning a meaning. And the way I have interpreted them does not result in a contradiction whereas yours does.

What your are doing is just 'creative accounting.' When things don't add up you just "make" it fit by finding another meaning for the word.

No, I am doing my due diligence in studying. There are different meanings for "firstborn" and one can't just assign a meaning without justification for doing so.

The "whole" of the scriptures revolves around Father and Son, Family, generating, offspring, begotten. Therefore, preeminence doesn't fit, it changes the "family" theme of the scriptures. There is a reason that Christ calls God, father, and a reason why He teaches us to pray to "our Father which is in heaven." That is because He is our Father, literally. We are His family, Jesus is the first of His sons (see Colossians). We are all offspring of the Most High God (Psalms 82), the Father, including Jesus Christ. It is in the scriptures.

Let's clear this up. The whole of Scripture, that is, the Bible, revolves around Christ as both co-creator and co-redeemer of that creation. Christ is absolutely central. Not family, not generating, not offspring. That is Mormonism, not Christianity.

If you see that the scriptures is contradicting itself, it is not the scriptures that are incorrect. It is because you are "interpreting" it with your own "understanding". Again, that is why you need the help of God to understand what you read.

I have never said that I see the Scriptures as contradicting themselves. It is your understanding of parts of Scripture that I see as contradicting Scripture.

 

[Free]

"Trinity" goes beyond the scriptures because the concept of Trinity is not in the scriptures as it contradicts what Paul says in 1Cor.8:5-6:
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. Are you going to change the meaning of this too to fit your interpretation?

This has been dealt with by Drew elsewhere. I will add that if you take this verse to mean that the Father is exclusively God, then Jesus is exclusively Lord. Not to mention you are once again ignoring the context:

1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)

Notice the parallel. Clearly, if "all things" are from God shows that he is eternal and uncreated, then "all things" through Christ shows that he is also uncreated. Once again, we have a perfect unity in understanding with John 1:3 and Col 1:16-17.

What you have failed to notice, a second time, is that this is a clear statement that there is one God. This is yet another verse that proves your understanding is incorrect.

Your are right, they are equal in nature. But not in familial terms, One is the Father and the Other is the Son, different beings. Trinity, however needs to make them all be in the same level to be able to say they are one God. When you do that you eliminate the family aspect of the Godhead. If that is true, then there are three Gods of the same level as the Father. Which is NOT what the scriptures say.

Again I quote 1Cor8:5-6. We worship THE FATHER, but that doesn't make the Son less than God. Besides when you worship Jesus, you are worshiping the Father because He does the will of the Father perfectly. There is only ONE God to us and that is the Father, there is no need to concoct a trinity doctrine.

What do you mean "there is only ONE God to us and that is the Father?"

You previously stated: "There is no denying that Jesus was the God of the Old Testament, speaking and acting for the Father. He was the God that created everything. But He was not God the Most High, the Father, although He could speak that way as the Father gave Him everything."

"Therefore, there is a God, the Father and another God the Son."

My response was this (all ESV):

Isa 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me,

Isa 45:6 that people may know, from the rising of the sun and from the west, that there is none besides me; I am the LORD, and there is no other.

Isa 45:18 For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!): "I am the LORD, and there is no other.

Isa 45:21 Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me.

Isa 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.

Isa 46:9 remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,

I have yet to get a response from you. Not to mention that "the Father" would have been understood by the Jews, including the disciples, as being the God of the OT. But you state that Jesus was the God of the OT, who is a different God than the Father.

You can understand this when you bring it to human level, since humans are made in the likeness of God.

A son has the the same substance as his father, both are flesh and bones, both are men. However, they are different beings, one has generated the other. The son cannot be the father because he cannot generate himself. But they can be one in purpose.

The Father and the Son have the same type of substance glorified bodies, but are different individuals. The Son cannot be the Father because He cannot have begotten Himself. But they are ONE in purpose.

If they are merely "one in purpose," then why did the Jews accuse Jesus of blasphemy and try to stone him for making himself God (John 10:30-33)?

And no, the Father does not have a body of flesh and bone as he is spirit (John 4:24), nor did he actually, physically beget the Son.

Besides in Hebrews 1:6 the scripture say that: And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. This confirms that Jesus is the first born of all creation.
See it is in agreement with the whole theme of the scriptures "family." We are all, literaly the family of the Most High, Jesus is His firstbegotten. See, no particular interpretation.

Seeing as how Jesus has always existed, he cannot be said to be literally begotten. This must be kept in mind. It can be said that Jesus is eternally begotten. In this case, this is likely speaking of the Incarnation. There is probably much more that can be said about this passage but I will leave it there for now.

We are not all literally begotten of the Father:

Gal 4:4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law,
Gal 4:5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.
Gal 4:6 And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!"
Gal 4:7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God. (ESV)

Joh 1:11 He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him.
Joh 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, (ESV)

I would like to ask you to keep the debate on the subject without accusing me of things I am not doing.

No worries, I will only accuse you if do something and other than that I will be on topic.

 

[4given]

Again, there is one God and there are three distinct Persons who are explicitly or implicitly referred to as God. This verse clearly shows both the unity and the diversity.

I thought so... just like whatever floats the boat... it is obviously unresponsive to the thrust of the question..... :biglol

Oh well... we are all christians anyway... so whatever pleases you bro..

God Bless

 

[JudaicChristian]

1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)

The above verse does not prove a Trinity, but unity. We through Christ are united with the Father. Altogether we are one body of believers united.

 

[Free]

I thought so... just like whatever floats the boat... it is obviously unresponsive to the thrust of the question..... :biglol

I responded to the question. Trinitarianism acknowledges that there are three distinct persons. There are not three Gods.

 

[Free]

1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)

The above verse does not prove a Trinity, but unity. We through Christ are united with the Father. Altogether we are one body of believers united.

In the least it implies the deity of Christ and an argument could be made, and I believe it has been made somewhere, that it also implies a binity.

Notice the parallel. Clearly, if "all things" are from God shows that he is eternal and uncreated, then "all things" through Christ shows that he is also uncreated. Once againwe have a perfect unity in understanding with John 1:3 and Col 1:16-17.

 

[JudaicChristian]

[/SIZE]
In the least it implies the deity of Christ and an argument could be made, and I believe it has been made somewhere, that it also implies a binity.

Notice the parallel. Clearly, if "all things" are from God shows that he is eternal and uncreated, then "all things" through Christ shows that he is also uncreated. Once again we have a perfect unity in understanding with John 1:3 and Col 1:16-17.

Scripture says this world was created by the Father for Yahshua. Saying Christ is uncreated is reading more into scriptures than what is there. Yahwah our Holy Father is not just "one," but He is only. We can not say who is created and who is born in Heaven, because we are not informed of such things.

 

[Free]

Scripture says this world was created by the Father for Yahshua. Saying Christ is uncreated is reading more into scriptures than what is there. Yahwah our Holy Father is not just "one," but He is only. We can not say who is created and who is born in Heaven, because we are not informed of such things.

What does the following mean regarding the Father: "from whom are all things"?