Why the Trinity is a False Doctrine

[Goatee]

Can you point me to the post? I must have missed that somehow

Another thread:

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...on-of-the-father.7930476/page-2#post-69198728

 

[Fireinfolding]

Do you want to discuss privately through private message? My name is Christian by the way.

Hi Christian, its nice to know you by name, my name is Kim.

And sure if you would like to for whatever reason, what would you like to discuss?

 

[nomadictheist]

Another thread:

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...on-of-the-father.7930476/page-2#post-69198728

Ah...

Thanks for the link. I wonder, then, why he didn't answer when I asked him directly about the subject.

I can only pray it's because his conscience will not allow him to speak the words "I have no sin..."

 

[cgaviria]

Hi Christian, its nice to know you by name, my name is Kim.

And sure if you would like to for whatever reason, what would you like to discuss?

Nothing specific, just share scripture with a fellow believer outside of this "arena". lol. I believe you would need to initiate a private conversation.

 

[Goatee]

Nothing specific, just share scripture with a fellow believer outside of this "arena". lol. I believe you would need to initiate a private conversation.

Are you trying to start your own denomination?

 

[Fireinfolding]

Nothing specific, just share scripture with a fellow believer outside of this "arena". lol. I believe you would need to initiate a private conversation.

Sorry bout that Christian, I think I do have just about everyone blocked from any sort of contact

Sounds good.

I have to take care of something first and then I will drop you a PM and we will chat

 

[cgaviria]

Sorry bout that Christian, I think I do have just about everyone blocked from any sort of contact

Sounds good.

I have to take care of something first and then I will drop you a PM and we will chat

Sounds good!

 

[Goatee]

Sounds good!

Thats really nice. God bless you buddy

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Exact image does not mean exact copy. Hence why Jesus Christ affirmed he was lesser. Exact image means all the attributes and nature of the Father is conveyed in the Son, and to the fullest extent possible in creation. This is why he is more image of God than we are. Its a simple thing to understand, its not a mystery. You just need to unlearn whatever things you've been taught to gain wisdom on this matter.

In English exact means exact - it does not mean "fullest extent possible". Since clearly the promoted view against the alleged "false" doctrine has Jesus as a lessor god, am unclear what the problem is with acknowledging that such a view CANNOT hold that Jesus (as a lessor god) is the exact image of what is being called the supreme god. The very definition of "lessor" precludes using "exact" as a modifier for "image".

Am unclear how it would be wise to adopt a polytheistic view of reality. There are too many OT references against polytheism and for monotheism to even consider wanting to unlearn what is essentially at least 5000 years of documented monotheism. Besides am unaware of any Christian teaching ever that supports polytheism. We certainly have had people deny the Divinity of Jesus, making him not a "lessor god" but just a man. Also have had people deny He is a man, but a manifestation of God. Other than the Mormon concept of progresion (creating "lessor gods") am unfamiliar with any Christian faith promoting polytheism.

 

[Strong in Him]

Yes, cgaviria has said he is sinless.

Oh.

Well judging by some of his comments on this thread, I'd say he might have blown it.

 

[cgaviria]

In English exact means exact - it does not mean "fullest extent possible". Since clearly the promoted view against the alleged "false" doctrine has Jesus as a lessor god, am unclear what the problem is with acknowledging that such a view CANNOT hold that Jesus (as a lessor god) is the exact image of what is being called the supreme god. The very definition of "lessor" precludes using "exact" as a modifier for "image".

Am unclear how it would be wise to adopt a polytheistic view of reality. There are too many OT references against polytheism and for monotheism to even consider wanting to unlearn what is essentially at least 5000 years of documented monotheism. Besides am unaware of any Christian teaching ever that supports polytheism. We certainly have had people deny the Divinity of Jesus, making him not a "lessor god" but just a man. Also have had people deny He is a man, but a manifestation of God. Other than the Mormon concept of progresion (creating "lessor gods") am unfamiliar with any Christian faith promoting polytheism.

Listen, either Jesus Christ is an exact copy of the Father, or he is a lesser image and expression of the Father. Scripture teaches he is the latter, so take it or leave it.

 

[nomadictheist]

Alright. If you wish to gain wisdom and see scripturally how I am right about Jesus Christ being birthed into existence, then read my study on it, http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2015/12/1...-also-began-only-the-father-has-no-beginning/ . Learn well.

Based on your "blog," it would appear to me that your forum posts on this site are no more than promotions of your offsite blog. I also can't help noticing that you use your offsite blog as your source for interpreting the Bible. I'm not entirely sure that self-promotion in the form of "threads" is the purpose of this website or of the "controversial theology" forum.

 

[cgaviria]

Based on your "blog," it would appear to me that your forum posts on this site are no more than promotions of your offsite blog. I also can't help noticing that you use your offsite blog as your source for interpreting the Bible. I'm not entirely sure that self-promotion in the form of "threads" is the purpose of this website or of the "controversial theology" forum.

I am clearly on here taking the time out of my day replying to you people, so I'd hardly call it "self promoting". I do happen to have a blog, and whatever I post here I also post on my blog and vice versa, and I follow the guidelines of this forum and have had no problems doing that. If you don't want to go to the blog, then dont go to it. I am not forcing your fingers to type in the URL to it on your browser, now am I?

 

[nomadictheist]

I am clearly on here taking the time out of my day replying to you people, so I'd hardly call it "self promoting". I do happen to have a blog, and whatever I post here I also post on my blog and vice versa, and I follow the guidelines of this forum and have had no problems doing that. If you don't want to go to the blog, then dont go to it. I am not forcing your fingers to type in the URL to it on your browser, now am I?

No. You're posting frequent links to your blog material in the forums. But I'm not a moderator. This is just a comment on your practices in debating. When you pull in links from the outside, they don't involve scholars or experts - just your own posts elsewhere and occasional greek lexicon notes.

 

[cgaviria]

No. You're posting frequent links to your blog material in the forums. But I'm not a moderator. This is just a comment on your practices in debating. When you pull in links from the outside, they don't involve scholars or experts - just your own posts elsewhere and occasional greek lexicon notes.

I'll link to whatever source is necessary for a discussion, sometimes biblehub, sometimes another thread, or sometimes a page on the blog. Not going to argue over my methodology. I do as I do.

 

[nomadictheist]

I'll link to whatever source is necessary for a discussion, sometimes biblehub, sometimes another thread, or sometimes a page on the blog. Not going to argue over my methodology. I do as I do.

Indeed you do.

 

[Strong in Him]

Because what you have been saying isn't true. I'll like what you're saying once you start speaking the truth.

Sorry, but I'm afraid I could say the same to you.

Before I either get dizzy from going round in circles, or give up with this thread completely; it seems that your position, from posts on this and other threads, could be summarised as follows, (correct me if I'm wrong):
1. Jesus was created by God the Father. The Father made him to be a god, but he was created and is lower than the Father.
2. The Father and Jesus - who is actually the Spirit mentioned in Genesis 1:2 - created the universe.
3. Jesus was born of Mary and conceived by the Holy Spirit. He is God; so there are two gods. But Jesus is not literally one with his Father, because there is only one, true God.
4. The stars, which are actually angels, were created on day 4.
5. Angels are spirits. They are from God so they are holy, and they help and minister to people, so there are many Holy spirits, and each person can have their own.
6 The trinity exists but it is an unequal trinity.

Someone else wrote a thread in this forum saying that the trinity cannot be true because it is difficult to understand and something that is "convoluted" cannot be from God. With respect, it is a lot easier to understand the trinity than your teaching, which is, at times, contradictory, not to mention unscriptural.

And by the way, "Scriptural" does not mean that you find a verse, take it out of context, interpret it a certain way and then say, "it's ok; it's in the Bible." Otherwise we could say that committing suicide is a scriptural teaching; "then Judas went and hanged himself", Matthew 27:5. "Go and do likewise", Luke 10:37. "What you have to do, do quickly", John 13:27. Do you see? I have just given Scriptural teaching for taking your own life!
(In case anyone is in any doubt, by the way, I do NOT believe this and do NOT recommend treating Scripture this way - I did this only to make a point.)

If a teaching is scriptural, it means that it is taught, repeated, proclaimed and held to in Scripture - not just once or twice in selected verses, but often.
For example, I said that it is a Jewish belief, taught in the OT, that there is only one God. There is plenty of evidence for this - not just the Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4, but the fact that the nation was punished again and again for rejecting the God who saved them and appeared to them at Sinai, and going after false gods. God's servants were told to tear down the altars belonging to these false gods and urged the people to repent; Elijah gave a brilliant demonstration of the power of God on Mt Carmel. The Jews have always believed this; Jesus did as well, because he was a Jew.

When it comes to a doctrine like "God created Jesus", you may have found a verse, or two, that could be interpreted in that way; but does that fit with the rest of Scripture; God's revelation of himself to us? I don't believe so, for the reasons, and Scriptures, I have quoted. The mainstream churches don't believe so either; anyone who presented with the beliefs that you hold, and said they wanted to become a member of that church, would be enrolled in Bible classes or very quickly given some 1-1 tuition. If anyone approached me on the streets with those views, I would almost certainly feel they belonged to a cult and, if I didn't feel able or led to argue, I would ignore them.

I am certain that you are very sincere in what you believe and maintain that it is has a scriptural basis; but you have to understand that very, very few others share your view - and there is a VERY good reason for that.

 

[Berean777]

So you believe God's word of truth has a beginning? Instead of all beginnings coming from His word? You don't believe God's word of truth is eternal, having no beginning or end? Could it be that you perceive His word as beginning, when in reality His word is eternal, having no beginning or end? Could it be that you are wrong and God is right?

These are important questions to work out.

Excellent post!

God's truth was not begat, nor did it have a beginning, because John as an apostolic witness is adamant that God's word is eternal, even before the beginning of creation.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

The Living Word before his incarnation and before he ascended up to sit on the right hand of the Father, had coeternally and coequally the glory to begin with, albeit when he came into the world, he would put that aside momentarily.

Philippians 2:6-8
6Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; 7rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness. 8And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a cross!

And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began. (John 17:5)

Some want to choose to believe that the Living Word was begat and had a beginning and that his glory also had a beginning at his ascension, when he sat on the right hand of the Father. This assertion could not be further away from the truth. It is conceivable that for one to make such assertions, they need to ignore scripture in totality, by making these fantastical claims that do not hold when scrutinised.

 

[Tiny Bible]

Most of us believe in the Trinity because we know what Scripture says - about the Father, Son and Spirit all being divine and yet there is only One God - and we do believe it.

I understand that they do believe it. And yet they don't consider the application of the world, "Monotheism" , as pertains to that category in which Christianity falls.
Yes, Jesus did exist as God incarnate. Jesus was the son of God because that terminology refers to a sire.God is a Holy Spirit so that covers what some imagine are two separate entities of states of being in scripture. Jesus came as God in flesh to show that this material world is transitory and those who are imbued, or basically for those who are born of mortals, channel the power of God through the imbuing of the Holy Spirit can do all that Jesus did. As Jesus told people.

Further, the plural pronouns aren't used in scripture so as to truly identify a three fold being. Jesus was flesh which he cast off after death so as to show his spirit, the spirit of God, for 40 days after his resurrection. Resurrection. Yeshua("deliverer") conquered the flesh. He did that because he was God wearing flesh.Jesus' father was God. He was delivered through a mortal woman, Miryam. (מִרְיָם).
Jesus was not a man. He was God appearing as a man. The Old Testament informed one cannot look upon God, a spirit if we also recall scripture, and live. Quite the predicament if God intends to offer salvation to the lost mortals on earth by delivering his new testimony, testament, in person.
However, encased in flesh it was accomplished.

Jesus=Yeshua stated in first person in John 6:51,”I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever;” ["I am", is found also in John 8:23,John 14:6, John 15:5, *More scriptures*)
A man can't promise that. But God did. And when we recall the Old Testament and Exodus 3:14 God refers to himself first "person" so that Moses could understand. "I am that I am..." . Jesus=Yeshua was reiterating what the Jews of his time would know was scripture in that "Old Testament".
He wasn't saying, "I'm Jesus, a mere man, and I am the living bread...." . No man was or is. Only God is the bread of life. The Biblical meaning of bread is the food of life. Which is God.

Yeshua=Jesus then as the son of man is exactly that. He appeared as the son of Joseph and Miryam/Mary. But he was telling people in his preaching that he was I am. And God being a spirit, of course a holy spirit, was Jesus wearing flesh. Therefore while there was one man delivering God's message it was actually the spirit of God delivering his holy message to man. There was only one. Otherwise, it is a fallacy for any Christian to claim Christianity is monotheistic. (a single all powerful God).

Here's a worldly secular example anyone here can relate to. What's your name? What do you do for a living? Do you have a family?
OK. So, let's sum those up then. (Example) "You" (impersonal 'you') are Steve Fakeperson, who has a wife and three children and works for General Motors as an Executive Officer.
Steve Fakeperson
Husband-Father
Executive Officer

Are you three people? Or are you one who is in relationship with three other duties?

Yeshua=Jesus in the New Testament told his disciples he always spoke in parables so that not all would understand. Jesus also said in other scripture that the well do not need a physician only the sick. Paraphrasing of course.
Those who needed him were those for whom his words would have meaning. He spoke in parables, riddles of sorts, so that those who were chosen by him(God), which was related in other scripture as The Elect, would find their way to him. (no one comes to the Father save through ...the Father ...who sent himself. I.E. John 14:6)

What is sad is that in discussions like this it doesn't remain an impersonal debate or dialog concerning Exegesis. Rather, while every Christian who enters into such a discussion is personally involved in faith, it seems to become an adversarial situation wherein it is inferred what is actually taking place is an attempt to reduce, alter, or revoke, someone's personal faith. Be it in matters of this subject, those who hold the Trinity is true and Biblical. Or those who do not believe the Trinity is true and supported by scripture.

I think that is why very often it happens that such threads are closed. Because what should remain impersonal and simply a dissection if you will of Exegesis invariably evolves into an adversarial stand off among participants.

For my part, Trinity is man-made due to errant or even intentional misunderstanding, or distortion respectively, of scripture. Not by those in this thread I must emphasize. But rather of early forefathers of the churches, or those invested in the exclusive pursuit of teaching the Trinity doctrine.

This isn't to say I'm here thinking I'll change Trinitarian's mind. Rather, I think what is important, and as far as my participation goes, is that we look behind the words and to the spirit of I am's message.
If we accept that the ancient Hebrew scripture was the origin of our Christian faith today, because the Messiah in the Hebrew sacred texts was fulfilled according to our faith in the coming of Yeshua=Jesus, then we have to, I think, accept the method that was used in the writing of the ancient Hebrew scripture.
Meaning, words weren't simply words.

Words had meaning, numbers had meaning, names had meaning. And they all painted a picture for the faithful that unfolded in a perfect tapestry of truth in the message behind what was written on the scrolls.

There was a reason Yeshua=Jesus walked the earth for 40 days after he resurrected from the grave that should have been the end for the flesh.
There was a reason he fasted for 40 days, etc... It's the meaning of 40 in the ancient Hebrew Tanakh.
Recalling Jesus saying, again, why he spoke in parables I think we have to look deeper than what we imagine is simply a relating of the number 3 in matters of days in the tomb, when Jesus was in the tomb for three days. Why there were three women bearing witness of his crucifixion at the foot of the cross. And then the Trinity (3) doctrine and what the difference is to mean between those 3's for us as Christians.

(I realize I wrote a book there but the spirit moved me and it had to be said. If you've read this far, respect. And thank you for your patience.)

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I understand that they do believe it. And yet they don't consider the application of the world, "Monotheism" , as pertains to that category in which Christianity falls.
Yes, Jesus did exist as God incarnate. Jesus was the son of God because that terminology refers to a sire.God is a Holy Spirit so that covers what some imagine are two separate entities of states of being in scripture. Jesus came as God in flesh to show that this material world is transitory and those who are imbued, or basically for those who are born of mortals, channel the power of God through the imbuing of the Holy Spirit can do all that Jesus did. As Jesus told people.

Further, the plural pronouns aren't used in scripture so as to truly identify a three fold being. Jesus was flesh which he cast off after death so as to show his spirit, the spirit of God, for 40 days after his resurrection. Resurrection. Yeshua("deliverer") conquered the flesh. He did that because he was God wearing flesh.Jesus' father was God. He was delivered through a mortal woman, Miryam. (מִרְיָם).
Jesus was not a man. He was God appearing as a man. The Old Testament informed one cannot look upon God, a spirit if we also recall scripture, and live. Quite the predicament if God intends to offer salvation to the lost mortals on earth by delivering his new testimony, testament, in person.
However, encased in flesh it was accomplished.

Jesus=Yeshua stated in first person in John 6:51,”I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever;” ["I am", is found also in John 8:23,John 14:6, John 15:5, *More scriptures*)
A man can't promise that. But God did. And when we recall the Old Testament and Exodus 3:14 God refers to himself first "person" so that Moses could understand. "I am that I am..." . Jesus=Yeshua was reiterating what the Jews of his time would know was scripture in that "Old Testament".
He wasn't saying, "I'm Jesus, a mere man, and I am the living bread...." . No man was or is. Only God is the bread of life. The Biblical meaning of bread is the food of life. Which is God.

Yeshua=Jesus then as the son of man is exactly that. He appeared as the son of Joseph and Miryam/Mary. But he was telling people in his preaching that he was I am. And God being a spirit, of course a holy spirit, was Jesus wearing flesh. Therefore while there was one man delivering God's message it was actually the spirit of God delivering his holy message to man. There was only one. Otherwise, it is a fallacy for any Christian to claim Christianity is monotheistic. (a single all powerful God).

Here's a worldly secular example anyone here can relate to. What's your name? What do you do for a living? Do you have a family?
OK. So, let's sum those up then. (Example) "You" (impersonal 'you') are Steve Fakeperson, who has a wife and three children and works for General Motors as an Executive Officer.
Steve Fakeperson
Husband-Father
Executive Officer

Are you three people? Or are you one who is in relationship with three other duties?

Yeshua=Jesus in the New Testament told his disciples he always spoke in parables so that not all would understand. Jesus also said in other scripture that the well do not need a physician only the sick. Paraphrasing of course.
Those who needed him were those for whom his words would have meaning. He spoke in parables, riddles of sorts, so that those who were chosen by him(God), which was related in other scripture as The Elect, would find their way to him. (no one comes to the Father save through ...the Father ...who sent himself. I.E. John 14:6)

What is sad is that in discussions like this it doesn't remain an impersonal debate or dialog concerning Exegesis. Rather, while every Christian who enters into such a discussion is personally involved in faith, it seems to become an adversarial situation wherein it is inferred what is actually taking place is an attempt to reduce, alter, or revoke, someone's personal faith. Be it in matters of this subject, those who hold the Trinity is true and Biblical. Or those who do not believe the Trinity is true and supported by scripture.

I think that is why very often it happens that such threads are closed. Because what should remain impersonal and simply a dissection if you will of Exegesis invariably evolves into an adversarial stand off among participants.

For my part, Trinity is man-made due to errant or even intentional misunderstanding, or distortion respectively, of scripture. Not by those in this thread I must emphasize. But rather of early forefathers of the churches, or those invested in the exclusive pursuit of teaching the Trinity doctrine.

This isn't to say I'm here thinking I'll change Trinitarian's mind. Rather, I think what is important, and as far as my participation goes, is that we look behind the words and to the spirit of I am's message.
If we accept that the ancient Hebrew scripture was the origin of our Christian faith today, because the Messiah in the Hebrew sacred texts was fulfilled according to our faith in the coming of Yeshua=Jesus, then we have to, I think, accept the method that was used in the writing of the ancient Hebrew scripture.
Meaning, words weren't simply words.

Words had meaning, numbers had meaning, names had meaning. And they all painted a picture for the faithful that unfolded in a perfect tapestry of truth in the message behind what was written on the scrolls.

There was a reason Yeshua=Jesus walked the earth for 40 days after he resurrected from the grave that should have been the end for the flesh.
There was a reason he fasted for 40 days, etc... It's the meaning of 40 in the ancient Hebrew Tanakh.
Recalling Jesus saying, again, why he spoke in parables I think we have to look deeper than what we imagine is simply a relating of the number 3 in matters of days in the tomb, when Jesus was in the tomb for three days. Why there were three women bearing witness of his crucifixion at the foot of the cross. And then the Trinity (3) doctrine and what the difference is to mean between those 3's for us as Christians.

(I realize I wrote a book there but the spirit moved me and it had to be said. If you've read this far, respect. And thank you for your patience.)

Sounds like modelism