Why the Trinity is a False Doctrine

[Imagican]

And that's what the focus should be on. God through Christ. instead of 'making up' what we want to believe, there is enough offered in scripture to keep us busy for a lifetime without trying to interject our own personal interpretation. Most is simply read and simply understood.

Christ is the Son of God and not a single person who truly believes in Christ can argue the point. There is only one true God. That is without dispute as well. So why would someone interject an 'idea' that is so confusing no one can even understand it?

It's so simple a child can understand it: God is the Father of Christ. So the Father IS God. Christ is the Son of God. So He is God's Son. Nothing complicated here.

But the idea that God is triune in nature???? Show us this 'triune' nature offered in the Bible. Show us where a single apostle noted this 'triune' nature. Show us where Christ alluded to this 'triune' nature. Just one line.

Since it cannot be confirmed through the Bible, why have so many allowed it to become 'so important' in their belief system? Certainly not from a Biblical perspective. So that only leaves their 'churches' to blame. And the 'idea' that it is 'so important' to so many that they would go the extreme and start insisting that those that don't believe as they do are 'not Christian'?????? Absurd.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Goatee]

What defines a 'Christian'? A man made set of laws? Or someone that professes to believe in Christ and treats their neighbors as themselves?

See, you are trying to say that men can define what a Christian is according to their own beliefs. Yet I have found this to be the same manner in which one group finds another to be 'lesser humans' than themselves. You know, like Hitler insisting that his 'race' was better than all others and because of this, all other races should be their 'slaves'.

I have never found that particular teaching in the Bible. What I have found is Christ stating, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

Maybe instead of taking the stance, "We know the truth and everyone else is lost", you may find it more beneficial to pay attention to those others so that you may learn from them as well.

And it is this I have stated over and over that most attempt to deny: Denominationalism does this very thing: it insists that 'it' is the only correct path and all others are 'lost'. While they won't openly state it in public like has been offered here where two have actually accused others of being 'non Christian' because of their differences in belief, it is the only logical conclusion. Why else would there be 'more than one denomination' if it weren't for 'each' believing their 'way' is correct and everyone else's path is 'wrong'?

So in essence, denominationalism does more to 'separate' than it does to unite. And it's like a virus that once it takes hold, it's almost impossible to get rid of. Raise someone in a particular denomination and they will often separate themselves from their families or friends than abandon their denomination.

And the example we have here: One group labeling another 'non Christian' simply because the other group doesn't follow their 'man made theology'. What a shame. Treating the 'children of God' in a vicious manner simply because one group doesn't follow the same 'men' as themselves.

Blessings,

MEC

Well, i dont know if you know but Jesus started the 'Catholic' Church. The 'Universal' church. Then, at some point people just decided they could not go along with the teachings of the Holy Spirit led church and made up their own denominations!

I am not saying that other denominations are bad etc just that some people cannot stick to what can sometimes be 'strict' teachings / rules. They have to find an 'easier' way rather than the 'narrow' way. Jesus did say it would not be easy!

People throughout history have chosen the scripture that suits their needs. They have interpreted it, to suit their needs / views. This is why there are 1,000s of denominations! 1,000s of different interpretations of scripture.

Following Jesus can be very hard. He did say it would not be easy. He did say the Holy Spirit would dwell in the Apostles, who as we know helped to take the church out into the wider world. Many fought against their teachings. It was just too hard for people to live the life of Jesus! They wanted it easy and fast. A fast way to get to heaven.

Who better to interpret scripture than the original, Holy Spirit filled / guided Catholic church? The true church started by Our Lord Jesus Christ. The Church he said he would be with until the end of time.

 

[Goatee]

And that's what the focus should be on. God through Christ. instead of 'making up' what we want to believe, there is enough offered in scripture to keep us busy for a lifetime without trying to interject our own personal interpretation. Most is simply read and simply understood.

Christ is the Son of God and not a single person who truly believes in Christ can argue the point. There is only one true God. That is without dispute as well. So why would someone interject an 'idea' that is so confusing no one can even understand it?

It's so simple a child can understand it: God is the Father of Christ. So the Father IS God. Christ is the Son of God. So He is God's Son. Nothing complicated here.

But the idea that God is triune in nature???? Show us this 'triune' nature offered in the Bible. Show us where a single apostle noted this 'triune' nature. Show us where Christ alluded to this 'triune' nature. Just one line.

Since it cannot be confirmed through the Bible, why have so many allowed it to become 'so important' in their belief system? Certainly not from a Biblical perspective. So that only leaves their 'churches' to blame. And the 'idea' that it is 'so important' to so many that they would go the extreme and start insisting that those that don't believe as they do are 'not Christian'?????? Absurd.

Blessings,

MEC

http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=11699

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-trinity

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm

 

[Strong in Him]

So you say. But you say it's scriptural but are unable to produce one line of scripture that defines 'trinity'.

I've said that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Spirit is God - yet there is only one God, not 3.

I can show clearly where the Son is not equal to the Father.

Jesus is the eternal logos (John 1:1) who was with the Father in the beginning (John 1:3, John 17:5), is the image and exact likeness of God (Colossians 1:15; Hebrews 1:3)and became flesh, (John 1:14) Jesus was fully God and fully man while he was living on earth - otherwise, the Gospel is weakened.
If Jesus had been only a man, then he fully inherited our sinful nature and would have been a sinner, just like us. If this was the case, then the devil wasted his time in trying to tempt him in those specific ways - he should have just waited for him to sin, as we all do. If Jesus was only a man with our sinful nature, then it was only a man who died on the cross. And how can we be sure that he died for our sins; he would have been punished for his own. If Jesus was only a man, then he was a deluded one - he claimed to be equal with his Father, he used the name of God revealed to Moses, he claimed to be greater than Abraham and was crucified by the Jews for blasphemy. I'm sure there are people who are so entrenched in their delusion that they will die for it, but when you consider Jesus' life, miracles and teachings about love and compassion, do you believe that he fell into that category?
Jesus is the second person of the Trinity. He is not lesser than the Father or below him; they have different roles.
Yes of course its difficult to fully explain - we are talking about trying to understand an awesome, majestic, infinite, God, with human and finite minds. An illustration that I sometimes use is that of my brother. He is a husband, a father and a son, yet he is one man. He does not relate to his children in the same way as he does his wife - he can't marry them! And if he tried talking to our mother in the way that he talks to his children, he'd no doubt be in trouble. If all the family were together, he'd be fulfilling all 3 roles at the same time. He doesn't stop being a son when he is a husband talking to his wife - and so on.
Or think of all of us - human beings with a body, mind and spirit; one person, made in the image of God.

I can show that the Son Himself was abandoned by God while hanging upon the cross.

Jesus was made sin for us. While he was on the cross he had the full weight of our sin upon him, and he no doubt felt completely cut off, isolated from a Holy God, who cannot tolerate the presence of sin. But he didn't stop being God.

Yet you cannot offer a single line of the Bible that defines 'trinity'.

There is one God, that is very clear from Scripture. The Son and the Spirit were both with God the Father at the creation of the universe, (Genesis 1:1-2;John 1:1-3;Colossians 1:16-17), which means that they are eternal. In the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus asked to receive the glory that he had had with his Father before the world began, (John 17:5). In Genesis 1:26 God says "let US create man in OUR image" - the name of God here is plural - and in Isaiah 6:8 he says, "who will go for US?" Clearly there is more than one person involved here.
As discussed, Jesus is the eternal Word who became flesh. The Spirit is also eternal and divine - often being referred to as the Spirit of the Lord, or the Spirit of God. It is the Holy Spirit who assures us that we are children of God - born of God - and the Spirit explains to us the things of God. How could he do that if he were not God, but just an angel or some other created spirit?

Without the trinity the Gospel doesn't make sense and isn't especially Good News.

 

[Strong in Him]

What defines a 'Christian'? A man made set of laws? Or someone that professes to believe in Christ and treats their neighbors as themselves?

Muslims believe in Jesus - as a very important prophet from God - and no doubt accept his teaching to treat others as they would like to be treated.
Humanists may believe that Jesus was a good teacher and moral person, and try to live good lives and do good deeds.
Nominal church goers may believe in Jesus - i.e that he existed - try to treat others well and love their neighbours.

That definition does not make someone a Christian.

 

[Strong in Him]

You guys are certainly taking a lot upon yourself in making such bold statements. First, I do believe that it is against the TOS to say someone is not a 'Christian' that claims to be a 'Christian'.

It is. But the forum's statement of faith says

"Faith groups that deny the full, eternal deity of Jesus Christ or His incarnation whereby He, as God, took on human flesh (becoming fully God and fully man in one person), are considered non-Christians at CF."

It would be wrong for someone who believes that Jesus was, and is, not God to use the Christian faith icon. Use of that icon denotes belief in, and acceptance of, the Nicene creed.
So if someone displays a Christian faith icon but posts that Jesus is not God, it is reasonable to challenge them on it.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

It is. But the forum's statement of faith says

"Faith groups that deny the full, eternal deity of Jesus Christ or His incarnation whereby He, as God, took on human flesh (becoming fully God and fully man in one person), are considered non-Christians at CF."

It would be wrong for someone who believes that Jesus was, and is, not God to use the Christian faith icon. Use of that icon denotes belief in, and acceptance of, the Nicene creed.
So if someone displays a Christian faith icon but posts that Jesus is not God, it is reasonable to challenge them on it.

Does it matter if it is relevant to a person If God and Christ are the same since they deem that information above them and only care about serving the lord in every way they can. If God and Christ are the same then they are the same. The bible says there is only one way and the rest of this is so confusing it's incredible. I never heard this outside of what I heard that came out of the Catholic church. I don't even know the rest of the Christian denominations believed that until I came here and read it myself.

I just Googled the Nicene creed and If I didn't miss something It said nothing about the trilogy. Can someone help me, please. I feel like I'm floundering here.

 

[Strong in Him]

Does it matter if it is relevant to a person If God and Christ are the same since they deem that information above them and only care about serving the lord in every way they can.

Well, personally, it matters to me a great deal.

Jesus said that he was one with the Father and that is the disciples could see him then they had seen the Father. He said that no one had been to heaven, except the Son of Man who came from heaven. He asked God to glorify him with the same glory that he had shared with God before the world began, (John 17:5.) He used God's holy name about himself and the Jews wanted to kill him for blasphemy.
If he wasn't God, then he was lying or deluded.
Jesus was the Good Shepherd who lay down his life for the sheep. He was perfect, so he offered his perfect life in exchange for our sinful ones. He took the punishment that we deserved - separation from God, which happened on the cross. John the Baptist said that Jesus was the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, (John 1:29) and Peter called him the spotless lamb, without blemish or defect, through whose blood we have been redeemed, (1 Peter 1:19-30).
If Jesus wasn't God, then he was a sinful man who was dying for his own sins, not ours.

If Jesus did not offer his perfect life as a sacrifice for our sin, in what way has he saved us from our sins, as the angel told Joseph that he would (Matthew 1:21)? And if he hasn't saved us, isn't our Saviour but was only a very good, moral man, or some kind of angel or spirit, then why do we need to acknowledge him as the Lord of our lives? How is he our Lord?

The Nicene creed was drawn up to counter a particular heresy that was being taught at the time; namely that Jesus was not God, or maybe that he became divine at his baptism and stopped being divine just before he was crucified. Which is why the creed includes the lines, "God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made; of one Being with the Father."

 

[Strong in Him]

The creed also says that the Holy Spirit is the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, and with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified. Go to the "Statement of faith" at the top of the forum to see the full creed with relevant Scriptures.

 

[Justme]

The creed also says that the Holy Spirit is the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, and with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified. Go to the "Statement of faith" at the top of the forum to see the full creed with relevant Scriptures.

The verse that has always leaned me toward the trinity is this one:
Matthew 1:20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

Never could I see two different entities there.
Justme

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

The verse that has always leaned me toward the trinity is this one:
Matthew 1:20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

Never could I see two different entities there.
Justme

Well at least I know who stole my name. lol. I tried to register with that name after I left Secular Cafe and found it already taken. lol. How are you doing anyway?

 

[cgaviria]

The verse that has always leaned me toward the trinity is this one:
Matthew 1:20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

Never could I see two different entities there.
Justme

This verse doesn't affirm the trinity, it merely just affirms that a separate being, holy spirit, was involved in the conception of Jesus. The same holy spirit that conceived Jesus, is the same holy spirit that rebirths believers, so already, is the rule of the "trinity" broken when seeing that holy spirit is involved in the birthing of more beings than just Jesus.

 

[cgaviria]

The creed also says that the Holy Spirit is the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, and with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified. Go to the "Statement of faith" at the top of the forum to see the full creed with relevant Scriptures.

The giver of life is Jesus, as all life came through him. This creed is erring by making this statement.

 

[Strong in Him]

The giver of life is Jesus, as all life came through him. This creed is erring by making this statement.

No, Genesis says that God breathed his breath into Adam and he became a living being, Genesis 2:7. In the valley of the dry bones, Ezekiel 37, the bones came together to form a skeleton, but it was only after the wind, or breath, had entered them that they lived. The word for breath, wind and Spirit is Ruarch.
Jesus said that he IS the life, and the giver of life - eternal life - also.

It is your opinion that the creed is in error. Several posts back you said, in answer to a question, that that is how you interpret various verses. The fact is that the church, clergy, theologians, most of us here and the Mods and creators of this forum, don't. The fact also is that the forum rule states that to use the Christian faith icon, means that you agree with and accept the Nicene creed, and that anyone who denies the deity of Jesus Christ - that he was fully man and fully God, and is God - cannot use that icon or be identified as a Christian.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

The giver of life is Jesus, as all life came through him. This creed is erring by making this statement.

I asked a preacher about this and he pointed to the scripture where it says, "Let Us make man in our image." That's a plural no matter how you look at it. He told me that this was one of the signs that are a suggestion of the Trinity. I have been pondering this but I can't refute his wisdom on this. Why would he be using such language since God is the only one how has the power to create life. I can't see why he would use that manner of speech if he was talking to someone who couldn't perform that miracle.

 

[cgaviria]

Waw!! Think this is you buddy! I really dont know where you get your statements from? Your interpretations from?

Is it not said?

All through him existed, and apart from him existed not even one thing which exists. (John 1:3 [ABP])

This is speaking concerning Jesus, that all life came through him. Therefore, calling holy spirit the giver of life is not spoken accurately, because the giver of life is Jesus, not holy spirit. Holy spirit operates under the command of Jesus, and thus acts as a guide, a comforter, and as a ministering spirit to whoever actually has holy spirit inside him.

 

[cgaviria]

Yes, well with respect, it is your opinion that I have "darkened understanding about the Father". He knows that I know him, and what I believe - and so do I. You're entitled to disagree.

And it's a subject for another thread but God does not predetermine all things; he gave, and gives, us free will. If God can choose - and I presume you are saying that he has chosen some to be "elect" and not others - then we too can choose, because we are made in his image.
God did not create Adam and Eve and decide in advance that they were going to disobey him, cause him pain and ruin his creation. He knew that they would, and still gave them the freedom to do that, but he didn't make them disobey - just as he didn't create them as pre-programmed robots, or puppets, who were incapable of disobeying.

I suggest you read a study I did on predetermination. Free-will is a false doctrine. http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2015/12/19/god-preordains-predestines-chooses-rejects-and-foreknows/ .

 

[cgaviria]

I asked a preacher about this and he pointed to the scripture where it says, "Let Us make man in our image." That's a plural no matter how you look at it. He told me that this was one of the signs that are a suggestion of the Trinity. I have been pondering this but I can't refute his wisdom on this. Why would he be using such language since God is the only one how has the power to create life. I can't see why he would use that manner of speech if he was talking to someone who couldn't perform that miracle.

When God, or rather, Jesus, said let "us make man in our image", he wasn't speaking to the Father, as Jesus already had the directive from the Father to create man, he was instead speaking to an angel, commanding him to form man and to breath in him the breath of life. If you notice in the Genesis account, the first utterances in Genesis 1, including this one, were made by "God" alone, but then when you come to Genesis 2, in the more detailed account of the 6th day of the creation of man, you then read that man was formed by "LORD God", which is distinct from just "God" in Genesis 1. This "LORD God", is actually an angel by whom even thousands of years later the Law of Moses was passed down by, as it is said that the Law was indeed given by angels. "LORD" is not the name of the Father, because the Father does not have a name, as he is uncreated, and is referred to as I AM, but rather, the LORD God refers to the highest ranking angel concerning the old covenant of Moses, and then "God" in Genesis 1, refers to Jesus, who is higher than even LORD God, because LORD God himself came into existence by the speech of Jesus, who is referred to as God. So in Jesus saying, "let us", he is indeed referring to himself and to an angel, both of which are also images of the Father. This is why the name of the LORD was no longer used by Jesus, nor even the apostles, because it isn't the name of the Father, but rather, "Jesus", is the new name given to us that is highest above all names, even higher than the name of YHWH, which was given to Moses and is rendered as "LORD".

 

[Goatee]

When God, or rather, Jesus, said let "us make man in our image", he wasn't speaking to the Father, as Jesus already had the directive from the Father to create man, he was instead speaking to an angel, commanding him to form man and to breath in him the breath of life. If you notice in the Genesis account, the first utterances in Genesis 1, including this one, were made by "God" alone, but then when you come to Genesis 2, in the more detailed account of the 6th day of the creation of man, you then read that man was formed by "LORD God", which is distinct from just "God" in Genesis 1. This "LORD God", is actually an angel by whom even thousands of years later the Law of Moses was passed down by, as it is said that the Law was indeed given by angels. "LORD" is not the name of the Father, because the Father does not have a name, as he is uncreated, and is referred to as I AM, but rather, the LORD God refers to the highest ranking angel concerning the old covenant of Moses, and then "God" in Genesis 1, refers to Jesus, who is higher than even LORD God, because LORD God himself came into existence by the speech of Jesus, who is referred to as God. So in Jesus saying, "let us", he is indeed referring to himself and to an angel, both of which are also images of the Father. This is why the name of the LORD was no longer used by Jesus, nor even the apostles, because it isn't the name of the Father, but rather, "Jesus", is the new name given to us that is highest above all names, even higher than the name of YHWH, which was given to Moses and is rendered as "LORD".

Lord God is an angel? Is 'your' Bible the only one in the world? I mean, no other copies?

 

[cgaviria]

Lord God is an angel? Is 'your' Bible the only one in the world? I mean, no other copies?

Have you not read....

Who received the law by disposition of angels, and kept it not. (Acts 7:53 [ABP])

The law was indeed given by angels. And then even in the burning bush passage,

And appeared to him an angel of the LORD in flaming fire from out of the bush. and he saw that the bush burned with fire, but the bush did not incinerate. (Exodus 3:2 [ABP])

This being in the burning bush, was indeed an angel, and he was indeed the being named YHWH, as then it is written,

And as the LORD saw that he neared to see, the LORD called him from out of the bush, saying, Moses, Moses. And he said, What is it? (Exodus 3:4 [ABP])

This angel, named YHWH, saw, called, and spoke to Moses. And then this angel goes to say,

And God said again to Moses, Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, The LORD God of our fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob sent me to you... (Exodus 3:15 [ABP])

So this angel is indeed identified as God, with the name of YHWH, yet is lesser than the one being, Jesus, who is higher and is also called God, that spoke all beings into existence, including this angel, which is why we now do all things in the name of Jesus, because this is the highest name given to us in order to be saved,

And there is not deliverance in no one other; for neither is there another name under heaven being given to men by which we must be delivered. (Acts 4:12)