As for me personally, I try to discern if aspects of "the Trinity" (which I trust we all know is a term not even found in the Bible) have perhaps eluded me my entire Christian life,
Although the word "Trinity" is not found within the Scriptures, the word "Godhead" is used instead (
Acts of the Apostles 17:29) (
Romans 1:20) (
Colossians 2:9).
The Trinity is told to us in one verse.
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” (
1 John 5:7).
Romans 1:20 says,
"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"
Meaning, even nature itself declares the Godhead (or the Trinity).
Atoms = Nucleus, Protons, Electrons.
Water Molecules = Hydrogen Atom, Hydrogen Atom, Oxygen Atom.
Man Made in God's Image = Physical Body, Spirit Body, Soul.
This does not make any sense if the word Godhead exclusively means divinity as many teach.
You said:
as well as the doctrinaire pedants and self-appointed gatekeepers of Christian doctrine down through the ages.
For example there's this verse --
"No one know the Son except the Father and no one knows the Father except the Son, and those whom the Son chooses to reveal Him"
So an immediate question arises -- where is the Holy Spirit in all this? Not that I don't believe the Holy Spirit exists, but the above seems to be implying an exclusive and unique relationship between the Father and the Son from eternity past that the Holy Spirit is not privy to.
Making an argument from silence or from not looking at the whole counsel of God’s Word on the matter is a poor way to make a conclusion, friend.
John 15:26 says, “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father,
even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:”
You said:
Well then I discover that in KJV it doesn't say "No one" but rather "No man", but then that's implying that God the father is a man I guess, so maybe "No one" is the correct translation.
Not sure how you are confused on Matthew 11:27. It is saying basically that no man can accurately know about God the Father without the Son, and no man can accurately know about the Son without the Father. This is proof of their connection to each other as one God. They are 2 being distinct persons within the Trinity. Jesus said, I and the Father are one (John 10:30). The two are one according to John 10:30. Yet, we know
1 John 5:7 KJB says, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”. So it’s 3 and 1. We see the three mentioned together in many places in Scripture. Teach all nations baptizing them in the NAME (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19).
You said:
Then there's the fact that God the Father is a Holy Spirit, and God the Son is a Holy Spirit (i.e. "the last Adam [Christ] became a life-giving Spirit" -- 1 Cor) In John, Christ says to the apostles, "I will not leave you as orphans, I will come to you." And elsewhere in the N.T. it talks specifically about the "Spirit of Christ" dwelling in you. Well what if the Holy Spirit is just the Spirit of Christ? He also tells the apostles, that it is to their benefit that he goes away, because otherwise the Holy Spirit cannot come. Paul says that now Christ fills the whole universe. So is he the Holy Spirit?
I believe at times the Bible can refer to using similar names to different persons of the Godhead. But that is not proof that the different persons are just God the Father putting on a mask or mode (as some teach these days). Jesus says, “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you
another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;” (John 14:16). Who was the first comforter? It was Jesus. Another Comforter suggests a different person of the Godhead or Trinity (i.e. the Holy Spirit who is the third person of the Trinity).
You said:
Then there are other verses that seem to imply a distinct identity to the Holy Spirit, e.g. "baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit", etc.
Not sure how you believe Matthew 28:19 is in reference to an identity of the Holy Spirit. Where in that verse do you think it says that? What context suggests that?
You said:
And then on a side note, there is a definite distinctness between the three persons of the trinity (if that concept is valid), e.g. God the Father did not die for the sins of mankind. God the Father did not become a man. So in that regard God the Son seems superior to God the Father. So I can certainly entertain the possibility of three coequal entities -- each having unique attributes the other two do not possess -- existing in absolute equality for all eternity. So in that view you really do have three coequal and distinct Gods for all eternity -- but acting in concert.
They are coequal in substance as one God.
God is spirit (John 4:24); And…
“…there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” (
1 John 5:7).
You said:
But then, what do you do about the OT saying over and over and over that there is only one God? And what of the possibility of the God of the Old Testament actually being God the Son, because he's constantly appearing as a man -- that's the form he took repeatedly to Moses.
Yes, I believe Jesus is the One who showed His back parts to Moses in Exodus chapter 33. I know this is the case because we have 33 bones in the back of our spine. I am also aware of many of the pre-incarnate appearance of Christ as the Messenger of the Lord, as well (in the Old Testament).
You said:
And then on the question of Christ, I am absolutely convinced from my own research, that whenever it talks in the New Testament about "the only begotten Son of God" it is absolutely referring first to his physical incarnation and birth, and secondly to his resurrection after the crucifixion -- to become equal with God!
Can you give me the exact words in those verses that leads you to that odd conclusion?
You said:
So, I make a proposition that God the Son did have a beginning -- it was his resurrection to "Heaven" at the end of the gospels. But then he extends both forwards and backwards in time for eternity.
Hebrews 7:3 speaks of Jesus and says this of Him:
“Without father, without mother, without descent,
having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.”
Yet, you say that his beginning was at the resurrection and this changed time somehow. Where in the Bible does it say that?
You said:
And note that all this speculation on my part is so that I personally will come to a correct understanding of all this -- not so that I can browbeat other people and exclude them off of forums.
Rules exist on the forum for a reason. I may not always agree with all the rules, but I do strive to play ball by those rules in order to post here. I do happen to agree with their rule on how only those agree with the full deity of Jesus Christ should be allowed to post in the Christians Only section of this forum. For Jesus is from everlasting (Micah 5:2).
You said:
I'm not gonna debate any of the above -- they're all propositions. I don't fully sign off myself on everything I said above.
But how could Salvation be contingent on correctly understanding "the trinity". Those who think they do are the truly deluded ones.
We worship anything other than how God reveals Himself in Scripture is to worship a false god. We cannot make God into our own image or liking. The Israelites in Exodus 32 decided to make a golden calf and say that these were the gods that delivered them out of Egypt. They did not want to wait upon the Lord anymore. Moses did not return. So they made their own god(s) to worship.
.
