Am I Trinitarian?

[cajunhillbilly]

"Ermm.. well, I don't think Jesus is God. I think Jesus is a part of the Godhead though and shared in the divine nature of God (hence, we've seen the Father when we've seen Jesus)."

This is actually not even correct SDA theology as they officially believe in the Trinity and the full deity of Jesus Christ. However the way some of their members explain it is questionable. But so is the way most evangelicals try to explain the Trinity

 

[tulc]

Dont mean to spoil your beliefs, but the trinity is a false. Jesus said pray to the Lord, in heaven, HE ISNT GOD. he didnt pray to himself.

That's ok, people say we're wrong all the time, it doesn't even hurt our feelings! Welcome to CF! Hope you are blessed while here!
tulc(one question, didn't you have to say you believed in the trinity to get a Christian icon for this site?)

 

[Gal328]

I've always thought I believed the Trinity, but I just realized I don't even know what the Trinity doctrine teaches exactly.

Here is what I believe:

The Godhead consists of God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I believe that they are each eternal and equal in purpose, but not the same being.

I base this on John 5:7 and 8.

5:7 says: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

This defines the Godhead, of course.

Then the next verse explains the Godhead:

"And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." (Added word in italics)

Now, obviously blood, water, and spirit are not the same substance. It says that they "bear witness in earth." I believe that these are baptisms. We are born of the Spirit, we are baptized in water, and we are cleansed with the blood of Christ. Now these three are not one and the same any more than the Father, Son, and Spirit are: They are however, one in purpose.

So that is my belief and a tidbit from where I got it.

Is that the Trinity doctrine?

We believe in one ( Echad) God, just like the Judiasim does. But we believe that There are three persons in the God Head.
The Father ( the ancient of Days )
The Son ( the word of God made in flesh ) Jesus Christ.

The Holy spirit. ( Ruach )

We believe that all 3 are God. But at the same time One God.

 

[AvgJoe]

Somewhat cryptic but equally short is the angelic hymn:

Holy, holy, holy Lord Sabbaoth (Isa. 6:3)​

I like this one better.

 

[supernova165]

They don't exist that way at the same time, it is either liquid, water or ice. but it isn't in all three states at the same time.

Soz to go back to this, but I would like to point out that I said about H2O too.

Eg: H2O can be gas liquid and solid and also always be H2O.

I know that it can be limited, as it is of this world, but it is sorta close.

 

[oldsage]

There is somewhat of a difference between maintaining heterdox views of the Trinity and not believing that Jesus is God (per the OP).

That's not "non-Trinitarian" that's not Christian.

Yes, but just confessing Jesus is God without belief in it is just fruitless. The person has to believe it to be Christian...not just say they believe it.

I am being redundant.

Respectfully,
Chris

 

[oldsage]

Don't let some quirk in your understanding run you off from this forum or make you change your icon.

But do you agree that you should strive to have correct understanding of the Trinity as opposed to just forgetting it?

Most trinitarians couldn't explain the trinity if pressed. If they tried they'd be guilty of some heresy.

Well, we have already seen many use analogies here which represent one of the early heresies of the church, such as modalism. But we can use words to describe the Trinity.

Many of us can formulate the trinity according to tradition. But, every explanation borders heresy.

Fundamentally, any explanation or analogy I've ever heard that makes any sense at all is guilty of heresy. The only non-heretical position is that it can't be understood (which, to me, is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs).

The Nicene Creed and such correctly formulate the doctrine of the Trinity, so I don't agree that all we say is heretical.

Don't let it bother you that you have an idea that works for you that sets someone elses bells off.

Well, he asked a question and was giving the answer he sought for. He learned he believed in a heretical view and is honest with himself about that view. He didn't seem worried to me about his position, but just wanted clarification on his position.

Anywho, the doctrine of the Trinity is central to orthodox Christianity, now I won't say that someone who doesn't understand it isn't christian, or if someone has an incorrect idea of what it is isn't christian, what I will say is, if you do not believe that Jesus is God, then you are not a Christian because that is one of the essential elements of our faith.

Respectfully,
Chris

 

[oldsage]

"Ermm.. well, I don't think Jesus is God. I think Jesus is a part of the Godhead though and shared in the divine nature of God (hence, we've seen the Father when we've seen Jesus)."

Last I knew the Anglican faith are orthodox in their views and profess the belief in the Trinity.

Now, with the statement about Jesus is 'part of the Godhead'; What does it mean to you that Jesus part of the Godhead? What does it mean Jesus shared in the divine nature? Since what you said can be taken several different ways depending on who is reading them, we would need to to explain what you mean when you say those things.

 

[oldsage]

Soz to go back to this, but I would like to point out that I said about H2O too.

Eg: H2O can be gas liquid and solid and also always be H2O.

I know that it can be limited, as it is of this world, but it is sorta close.

Here is the thing, if you look at the United Penecostal/Apostolic Church, they would use this as an example to illustrate their understanding of who God is and they are modalist, they believe that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are three offices or titles, and God acts in different 'modes' depending on the circumstance. Which isn't the Trinitarian view. in which the Father and the Son and the Spirit co-exist and are co-eternal.
the water analogy has this, the liquid and the gas and the ice doesn't co-exist at the same time, they occur and different times. Making it modalism, because they exist in different modes depending on the circumstances.

Respectully,
Chris

 

[ROGER459]

WHO RAISED THE BODY OF JESUS?


Also = THE TRINITY or The ONE GOD!

A JW came to my door, and I asked them, WHO RAISED THE BODY OF JESUS? They told me that God did! I asked them, ‘Are you absolutely sure?’ And they told me that they were Absolutely Sure!!! Then I asked them, "Do you Believe the Scriptures? They of course said Yes! I asked them, Do you REALLY BELIEVE THE SCRIPTURES?

• 
  [*]Jesus Raised HIS Own Body - (John 2:19-22) Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. (John 2:20) Then said the Jews, Forty and six years [46 years] was this temple in building, and wilt Thou rear it up in three days? (John 2:21) But he spake of the temple of his body. (John 2:22) When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that He had said this unto them; and they believed the Scripture, and the Word which Jesus had said.
  

• (John 10:17)

• Therefore doth My Father love Me, <U>because I lay down My life, that I might take it again.
  

• The SPIRIT raises the Body of Jesus</U> - (Romans 8:11) But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
  

• 
  [*]GOD RAISED the Body of JESUS: - (Act 13:30) But God raised Him [Jesus] from the dead:

Now at this point, the JW will be flustered, and YOU MUST ASK, "YOU TOLD ME – THAT YOU BELIEVED THE SCRIPTURES?" DID YOU NOT TELL ME THAT?
A goodly trained JW will, at this point, tell you that they have to leave OR, they will tell you that "YOU BELIEVE IN THE TRINITY!"
I ASK Them, do you mean, the Satanic Trinity? To that they become even more flustered! I quickly open my Bible [mark yours with sticky notes – the post it variety] and take them to:

(Revelation 20:10) And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

This really does them more Good, for they question their own training! They believe in Soul Sleep, "H0w then are the three – tormented day and night, forever and forever?"Then I tell them that SATAN always tries to COUNTERFEIT GOD! Why would he counterfeit something that Was Not Real?
Then I tell them that We do not Believe in the Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit!
BUT - We as Christians, believe in the Essence of the One God, Isaiah 44:6, there is the Ability to Manifest HIMSELF IN THREE DISTINCT PERSONS, GOD THE FATHER, GOD THE SON, AND GOD THE HOLY GHOST!

• 
  [*](Matthew 3:16-17) And Jesus, when He was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon Him: (Matt 3:17) And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in Whom I [GOD] am well pleased.
  

To that they often answer, the Spirit is not a person! For that you will have to take them to Acts 5, but before you do, ask them, "Can you LIE to an Inanimate object?" Can you lie to a tree or a car? Then you have them read:

• 
  [*](Acts 5:1-5) But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, (Acts 5:2) And kept back [part] of the price, his wife also being privy [to it], and brought a certain part, and laid [it] at the apostles' feet. (Acts 5:3) But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back [part] of the price of the land? (Acts 5:4) Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. (Acts 5:5) And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.
  

One thing them to do, is to ASK THEM WHO ARE WE TO SERVE? They will answer Jehovah! You tell them, "that is Correct!" Then ask them are we to worship anything else? They will tell you No! Then show them these verses!

• 
  [*](Exodus 34:14) For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, Whose Name [is] Jealous, [is] a jealous God:
  

• 
  [*](Luke 4:8) And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
  

They will agree with you, Completely. THAT IS WHEN YOU TELL THEM, "ALL CREATION WAS MADE TO WORSHIP ‘ONLY GOD?’ – And they will agree with you!

(Hebrews 1:5-8) For unto which of the angels said He [God]at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? [ANSWER: None!] And again, I [God] will be to Him [Jesus] a Father [God], and He [Jesus] shall be to me a Son? (Heb 1:6) And again, when He [God] bringeth in the firstbegotten [Jesus] into the world, He [God] saith, And let all the angels of God worship Him [Jesus]. (Heb 1:7) And of the angels He saith, Who maketh His angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. (Heb 1:8) But unto the [Jesus] Son [he God saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of Thy kingdom.
DO YOU SEE, THAT GOD – Commanded All His Angelic Realm "TO WORSHIP JESUS!" Yet in Exodus 34:14 and Luke 4:8 – TO WORSHIP JESUS! ONLY GOD IS TO BE WORSHIPED – SO JESUS MUST BE GOD! Which we who know the Word, DO WORSHIP JESUS!

Thanks, Roger459

 

[Athaliamum]

Rodger are you just copying and pasting your posts .

Here is the thing, if you look at the United Penecostal/Apostolic Church, they would use this as an example to illustrate their understanding of who God is and they are modalist, they believe that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are three offices or titles, and God acts in different 'modes' depending on the circumstance. Which isn't the Trinitarian view. in which the Father and the Son and the Spirit co-exist and are co-eternal.
the water analogy has this, the liquid and the gas and the ice doesn't co-exist at the same time, they occur and different times. Making it modalism, because they exist in different modes depending on the circumstances.

I think you are misunderstanding or limiting the analogy. Just as this analogy could be considered Modalist by some, a trinitarian view could be viewed as Hellenistic or Platoistic by some also. God is not one we can analise through knowledge and philosophy.


The fact is scripture tells us that God, Jesus and Holy Spirit are one - it does not go into detail of how this is only that it is. Each view could jump up and down about who has the right view but realisticly the details are not going to be something we understand until we get there. Making sweeping comments and devaluing others understanding of this complex issue is completely hypocritical as there is no outright scriptual proof for either side. The detail of how the trinity works is not an essiential, the essiential is that there is one God.

 

[oldsage]

I think you are misunderstanding or limiting the analogy. Just as this analogy could be considered Modalist by some, a trinitarian view could be viewed as Hellenistic or Platoistic by some also. God is not one we can analise through knowledge and philosophy.

I disagree, God tells us to reason together, which means to use our mind and knowledge and you have to use philosophy also to understand.

Now, the analogy is classic Modalism, it doesn't represent the Trinity's teaching at all, so, I shoot it down as a good example. I don't think I should agree it is an ok example if I know it to be wrong. If someone views the Trinity as Hellenistic or Platoistic then they are thinking the Trinity is really Tri-theism. So, that would again mis-represent what the Trinity is.

The fact is scripture tells us that God, Jesus and Holy Spirit are one - it does not go into detail of how this is only that it is. Each view could jump up and down about who has the right view but realisticly the details are not going to be something we understand until we get there.

I agree we won't know everything about God not even when we get there because we will never be able to see God as He truly is because we are creation and He isn't. Each view can jump up and down, which is why the church came together and hammered out what and who God is and who Jesus is. Now we know there are many passages in the bible in which Jesus and the Father converse, they interact with one another, so we know they are not the same person, so it knocks Modalism out of the running. Then there is Tri-theism which says there is three gods, but God by definition is outside of time and space, making Him a simple being...only one simple being can exist, there is no division, not experiences of a succession of moments. We know that the Father is called God, we know Jesus is called God and we know the Holy Spirit is called God, so from this we understand that God in His ontos is one with no division, but is three in persona. So Tri-theism is out because it says three dfferent gods. Which leaves us with the Trinity. Granted some do not know how to articulate the doctrine of the Trinity, but when we represent it we need to do it honestly and truthfully without misrepresentation, else when we see it portrayed incorrectly we should correct it. It is the duty of the church to help one another stay in the truths of the bible not turn a blind eye to it.

Making sweeping comments and devaluing others understanding of this complex issue is completely hypocritical as there is no outright scriptual proof for either side. The detail of how the trinity works is not an essiential, the essiential is that there is one God.

I agree a complete understanding of the Trinity isn't essential, but the doctrine should be represented correctly.

Respectfully,
Chris

 

[Athaliamum]

we know there are many passages in the bible in which Jesus and the Father converse, they interact with one another, so we know they are not the same person, so it knocks Modalism out of the running.

Now I'm not saying your wrong or that I don't agree with you but can we have a look at both sides - have you not ever talked to yourself? In fact it seems to me to be a pretty normal thing to do, why not with God? How does God talking to Jesus and vice versa act as a definitive proof of 3 seperate personalities rather then 3 forms? The idea of a multiple-personality God that standard trinity teaching is can cause such confusion that can cause apostesy.

Would God make himself so complex that failure of understanding this theology would cause eternal seperation from him? Do we by arguing such things that are not essiential to salvation hinder the spread of faith? I simply ask because it has been my experience to see those whom seem to need to "correct" a simple understanding of trinity such as a H2O example can cause such hurt and confusion that anothers faith may be shaken. The bible calls us to "be as children", a simple H2O example of trinity so as to illitrate that God, Jesus and Holy Spirit are one does not change the nature of God. In fact Colossians 2:9 says that "For in him, bodily, lives the fullness of all that God is". A H2O example does not deny any of the trinity their divinity, nor does it neccessarily mean that they can only exisit one at a time if you remove laws of science and it doesn't even go near saying there are three God's. In the end the fundemental belief is the same. I don't personally believe that theology based on the fact the Jesus prayed to God is enough proof to correct anyone on whether God is 3 personalities in 3 forms or 1 personalitity in 3 forms.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Thank you, oldsage, for your gracious tone.

But do you agree that you should strive to have correct understanding of the Trinity as opposed to just forgetting it?

I wouldn't recommend forgetting. Contemplating God is one of the most rewarding activities that we can do.

Well, we have already seen many use analogies here which represent one of the early heresies of the church, such as modalism. But we can use words to describe the Trinity.

The Nicene Creed and such correctly formulate the doctrine of the Trinity, so I don't agree that all we say is heretical.

Sure. But try to explain what those words mean.

As to analogies, I think the water/ice/steam works pretty well. Particularly if you insist on specifying the triple-point of water. At 4°C, IIRC, water exists simultaneously as steam (vapor), liquid, and solid -- at least at the right pressure.

But, all analogies fail and all run to heresy.

In short, the trinity is what the trinity is. Any attempt at explanation has someone accusing someone else of heresy. It's a rather frustrating business.

Well, he asked a question and was giving the answer he sought for. He learned he believed in a heretical view and is honest with himself about that view. He didn't seem worried to me about his position, but just wanted clarification on his position.

Perhaps. But, again it is frustrating that divisions arise among Christians because one person's analogy reminds someone else of a heresy. It would be a shame if he were merely being accomodating.

Anywho, the doctrine of the Trinity is central to orthodox Christianity, now I won't say that someone who doesn't understand it isn't christian, or if someone has an incorrect idea of what it is isn't christian, what I will say is, if you do not believe that Jesus is God, then you are not a Christian because that is one of the essential elements of our faith.

Respectfully,
Chris

I certainly that a nicene understanding doesn't determine one's salvation.

It may a central tenet of Christianity. But such tenets aren't very useful if they cannot be discussed without creating division.

God bless.

 

[supernova165]

I simply ask because it has been my experience to see those whom seem to need to "correct" a simple understanding of trinity such as a H2O example can cause such hurt and confusion that anothers faith may be shaken. The bible calls us to "be as children", a simple H2O example of trinity so as to illitrate that God, Jesus and Holy Spirit are one does not change the nature of God. In fact Colossians 2:9 says that "For in him, bodily, lives the fullness of all that God is". A H2O example does not deny any of the trinity their divinity, nor does it neccessarily mean that they can only exisit one at a time if you remove laws of science and it doesn't even go near saying there are three God's. In the end the fundemental belief is the same. I don't personally believe that theology based on the fact the Jesus prayed to God is enough proof to correct anyone on whether God is 3 personalities in 3 forms or 1 personalitity in 3 forms.

Yay, I think someone may be reading what I'm saying and not what they have heard before.

 

[Athaliamum]

I think the biggest issue with describing a tri-une God other then the fact that it is impossible is the fact that either emphasis either way goes too far.

The fact of the matter is that whether God is 1 personaliy 3 forms or 3 personalities - either way God being 1 that when Jesus prayed to God in some shape or form he was talking to himself. The only way that he wasn't is if God is not one!

Instead of analogy though lets just state the facts that we do know:

-God is one.
-He consists of "persons" God father, God Son and God Holy Spirit.
-Each co-exist and are co-eternal.
-Each "person" exists in and for the other.
- They have their being in each other and reciprocaily contain one another
- God is known only in a circle of recipriocal relations. Each permanetly envelops ant at the same time is enveloped by the other.
- The truth of God's personality is just this: through complete immersion with the other.

And lastly they are not seperate. Jesus said that a kingdom divided against inself could not stand. While this was originally said about Santans kingdom the same would apply to any kingdom. The kingdom of God and God's persons are completely united in one - to seperate them into distinct personalities would be to divide that kingdom.

 

[BigNorsk]

Sunrunner,

I think you should not be so rigid in sticking to your interpretation of 1John 5:7-8. First of all because your interpretation is not consistent with other scriptures, but also because the reference to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in that verse is an insertion, not scripture.

That verse is rather famous. When Erasmus came out with the first Greek text in the Western Church in many years it set off quite a flurry of things. One such thing was Martin Luther's translation into German. There were other flurries too though. One was the Catholics complained that the formula for the Trinity was not in his text.

Well, Erasmus said he didn't put it there because he could not find a manuscript that had it. Well just before his third edition came out, such a manuscript was produced and he included it. To this date, only a handful of manuscripts show it at all, several of them in the margin and they are all very late manuscripts. Of all the things in the KJV it is probably most clearly an insertion.

So you really get on shakey doctrinal grounds to rest your arguement on something that doesn't belong in scripture at all.

Your idea that Jesus is not God is not rare, the mistake you are making is that when you read God, you hear God the Father. I would guess that when you read the Old Testament, you think the references to God are references to God the Father.

Many of them probably are, some at least probably reference the whole Trinity and here's one that's a bit different:

NET
Isa 40:3 A voice cries out,
"In the wilderness clear a way for the LORD;
construct in the desert a road for our God.

Now LORD is the translation for YHWH truly God himself. This is quite an important prophecy, it is referenced in all four Gospels. See: Matthew 3:3, Mark 1:3, Luke 3:4, John 1:23

The first chapter of John really makes this clear, I will quote some highlights from theNET

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God.
See, the Word, Jesus is God.

Joh 1:14 Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory — the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.

The Word became flesh, certainly not a reference to the Father or the Spirit but to the Son, Jesus.

Joh 1:15 John testified about him and shouted out, "This one was the one about whom I said, 'He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me.' "
Joh 1:16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another.
Joh 1:17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ.
Joh 1:18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.
Joh 1:19 Now this was John's testimony when the Jewish leaders sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, "Who are you?"
Joh 1:20 He confessed — he did not deny but confessed — "I am not the Christ!"
Joh 1:21 So they asked him, "Then who are you? Are you Elijah?" He said, "I am not!" "Are you the Prophet?" He answered, "No!"
Joh 1:22 Then they said to him, "Who are you? Tell us so that we can give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?"
Joh 1:23 John said, "I am the voice of one shouting in the wilderness, 'Make straight the way for the Lord,' as Isaiah the prophet said."

A passage which spells out who John is and isn't and tells us again more about Christ. It ends in the quote of Isaiah, where we see the voice in the Wilderness is John, and he is to make the way straight for the Lord, now back in Isaiah we see who he is making the was straight for is YHWH. In the New we see that YHWH is referring to our Lord, Jesus.

Joh 1:27 who is coming after me. I am not worthy to untie the strap of his sandal!"
Joh 1:28 These things happened in Bethany across the Jordan River where John was baptizing.
Joh 1:29 On the next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!
Joh 1:30 This is the one about whom I said, 'After me comes a man who is greater than I am, because he existed before me.'
Joh 1:31 I did not recognize him, but I came baptizing with water so that he could be revealed to Israel."
Joh 1:32 Then John testified, "I saw the Spirit descending like a dove from heaven, and it remained on him.
Joh 1:33 And I did not recognize him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'The one on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining — this is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.'
Joh 1:34 I have both seen and testified that this man is the Chosen One of God."

A passage that should make it clear to you that we are talking about Jesus that he existed long before John and indeed that he baptises us with God, that is the Holy Spirit.

It all adds up that Jesus is fully and truly YHWH.

Marv

 

[ttreg]

I talked to Sunrunner for a bit and he saids he believes in a "brinity" ,made it up my self , he beliefes the Father and Son are God but the Holy Spirit does not have a personality but is the presence of the father or son.

 

[Tonks]

Thus the answer to the quesiton posed remains an unqualified "no." Some bizarre theology out there. I hope you've give him some stuff to mediate on and pray over so he can jettison such unorthodox belief.

 

[oldsage]

...but can we have a look at both sides - have you not ever talked to yourself? In fact it seems to me to be a pretty normal thing to do, why not with God? How does God talking to Jesus and vice versa act as a definitive proof of 3 seperate personalities rather then 3 forms?

Yes, I talk things out with myself, but I wouldn't say things like:

ESV John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

The idea of a multiple-personality God that standard trinity teaching is can cause such confusion that can cause apostesy.

This is why we want to teach the Trinity as the church defined it about 1700 years ago.

Would God make himself so complex that failure of understanding this theology would cause eternal seperation from him?

I have said in my post that I would not call someone who doesn't have a correct understanding of the Trinity a non-christian I would say they are incorrect about their view of God.

Do we by arguing such things that are not essiential to salvation hinder the spread of faith?

All this started because I just corrected an error in an analogy used to explain the Trinity. I didn't make it a point to argue about. We have many things in church history which explain the Trinity, like the creeds and councils. The councils corrected the heresies that has rose up in the church. The first seven ecumenical councils corrected heresies which concern who Jesus was/is. All I am doing is looking at the analogy comparing it to what the church teaches about the Trinity and then show the fault. I do believe in being irenic when it comes to studying a topic. I believe we should look at the Modalist view and the Arian view. But let me try and give an example of where I am coming from.

Let me give an analogy of about what a book is;
"it is like elephant throwing water on itself."

Now, you may say this has nothing to do with a book. And that would be correct, the analogy doesn't describe the what I want it to. The same is with the water, ice, steam, analogy it doesn't describe the Trinity. But it does describe Modalism, so if they want to use that to show Modalism, fine, it works, but it has nothing to do with the teaching of the Trinity. This is all I was pointing out.

I simply ask because it has been my experience to see those whom seem to need to "correct" a simple understanding of trinity such as a H2O example can cause such hurt and confusion that anothers faith may be shaken.

If someone came in here and said that 2+2=6 and I corrected them would that shake their faith in mathematics? or would they appreciated it more that they have a correct understanding of the principles which apply?
If someone came in here and said, "I don't believe Jesus is God, am I a Trinitarian?" and I tell them no, you beleive in Arianism an ancient heresy. Don't you think they would appreciate knowing? We cannot hid the truth from people just so it doesn't hurt their feelings. I was raised an atheist. There was no God in my youth. How do you think I felt when I first realized there is a God?

The bible calls us to "be as children", a simple H2O example of trinity so as to illitrate that God, Jesus and Holy Spirit are one does not change the nature of God.

Right, the example of H2O doesn't change who God really is, but it does misrepresent God's nature.

A H2O example does not deny any of the trinity their divinity, nor does it neccessarily mean that they can only exisit one at a time if you remove laws of science

The problem is you said, "IF you remove law of science"(emphasis mine)

Now when one gives an example of something you assume we use laws of science and laws of logic. Now, if you were to say, the Trinity is like H2O, you have water, ice, and vapor co-existing in the at the same time if you remove the laws of science. I would then not have said anything about the example because laws of been thrown out.

In the end the fundemental belief is the same. I don't personally believe that theology based on the fact the Jesus prayed to God is enough proof to correct anyone on whether God is 3 personalities in 3 forms or 1 personalitity in 3 forms.

I used Jesus talking to the Father just as one example, I didn't make it an exhaustive explaination of the Trinity, but just as one example of why Modalism doesn't work.


Now, all this dispute has been over the use of the H2O analogy and how it relates to the doctrine of the Trinity. It has been shown why that analogy doesn't work, in that it doesn't show what it is suppose to represent.

I personally would stay away from analogies and stick with words because we agree mostly on what words mean and that would be the best way, I believe, to explain what and who the Trinity is.

Respectfully,
Chris