trinity idea

[razeontherock]

Yet the first word for G-d in the Bible is a uni-plural noun. You should spend more of your time being surprised at G-d's innovations ...

 

[Booko]

Thought someone already replied, the Arabic language "We" or "Us" refers to a royalty usage. Unlike English or other languages, it many not represent pluralism.

Yeah, that was me. It kinda goes along with being married to an English prof. We talk shop at the dinner table constantly.

 

[ToHoldNothing]

Absolutely!

Then add specific things such as 1) Jesus died for our sins, 2) the Holy Spirit is divine, 3) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not the same; each is God; and God is One; and 4) Jesus has a dual nature--of God and man.

Just those alone create a problems for many sects that claim to be Christian.

These only presume that they are necessary by virtue of common or institutional norms and such enforced by the system of orthodoxy contrasting with heresy and blasphemy

I do agree with you at least in part; but theologically speaking, we must actually look at the criteria within the Bible. Jesus and the Apostles tell us what the requirements are. In general terms, if one is not born again, he is not of God. The question becomes what determines who is born again. That is not always easy to determine by looking outwardly towards behavior. Even some people will answer yes to a series of questions but are far from being born again; but in general, we can tell upon closer examination. When looking at individual groups, their creeds become central to determining whether that group is Christian or not. The Nicaean Creed is a very good litmus test.

It's a cultural artifact that persists because people submit to authority in religious matters determined by humans more than any distinguishing internal assent that motivates religious piety apart from people condoning the behavior. In short, creedal determinations of religion are hardly what should determine what serves as characteristics of a religious tradition, since even Maimonides, back as far as the 11th or 12th century, noted that belief is not just saying you believe, but behaving with the internal conviction you allude to.

But, this has more to do with dogma than scripture. In general, both Protestants and Catholics agree to a minimum amount of requirements stipulated by the Bible and early Church creeds as do other orthodox Christians. We are saved by God's grace through faith in Jesus Christ. Faith in Christ is not just repeating some creed, but the internal acceptance of who Jesus is and what He did for our salvation and how He dealt with our sins. If they don't believed that Jesus saved us from our sins, then they are not Christians since they have no mind and will to accept Him. They have not confessed Christ as their savior. No Christ--no salvation--no Christian.

I would challenge you to demonstrate how Mormons or the like don't confess Jesus as their savior. Just because one group considers Jesus as part of a Godhead, another as Michael the archangel, doesn't mean they aren't Christians in the sense of believing that believing on Jesus' name and resurrection brings salvation.

But can one be a Buddhist and not accept Buddha? I am sure there are some set of minimal requirements to be a Buddhist. If not, then the door is open for many types of beliefs.

It seems to have the same difficulties as being a religious Taoist or philosophical Taoist. One can believe in BUddha as a historical figure and be a philosophical Buddhist. To be a religious Buddhist might be said to require more of a regard towards Buddha as a teacher of spiritual truths. Albeit there are always variations in Buddhist traditions, such as Zen which honestly you might say reveres Buddha as one of many who have attained enlightenment through history. The fact that he started the historical movement is only so relevant to one who focuses on attaining enlightenment through a tradition that evolved in Japan and China, not so much in India.

Exactly! Isn't there an agreed upon set of minimal requirements?

One difference in Christianity is that Salvation only come through Jesus; so, one way or another--no matter what differences one may have with another--no one can claim to be a Christian without accepting Christ and His salvific works. There is no way around it! The other stuff that we call differences, heretical, etc. doesn't matter at that point. Our foundation rests upon who we believe Christ to be. The Apostles make it quite clear who Christ is. Apostle Paul makes is very clear that any teaching of Christ different from what has been preached by the Apostles is not of Christ. We do have those teachings available to see and read.

Again, this seems to hinge on how seriously you take human authority as opposed to genuine authority and revelation from your God, particularly as the Holy Spirit. Why should you take what other people experience as exactly the same as what you as an individual experience? Perhaps God has something different in mind for you?

There were difficulties at the beginning, but they were worked out as we see from the various meetings undertaken by the early Apostles and Church elders along with the help of the Holy Spirit. Even some of the very early Church councils helped to shape understanding of who was a Christian. They did a lot of the ground work for us today.

Ground work in reinforcing a structure that seems to be far too stringent and authoritarian for many people's taste. It's no wonder that people even my parents' age, let alone my brother and myself's age are just distancing themselves more and more from any kind of organized religion, preferring individual mindful spiritual study of the Bible and such.

I do agree with you about the difficulties that may be present in identification of groups, but we have criteria to separate the various sects from orthodoxy. The reality is that some sects are marginal and are not as easily to separate because they agree very closely with establish creeds, but deny something that may or may not be deemed as essential; however, denying Christ and His salvation is not one of those negotiable ones.

Separating them from orthodoxy is irrelevant to a student of religious studies like myself. If I was a theologian of a particular group of sorts, that might be relevant. But since I have in mind studying Christianity or any religion, as a cultural phenomenon and not as something that I already believe to be something of more spiritual and existential significance as an individual, any group saying that a Mormon or a Jehovah's Witness is not a Christian because of their attachment to creeds as ends in themselves to faith is irrelevant to me.

Denying Jesus's salvific power is what distinguishes many other Abrahamic religions or such related. And they tend to admit already that they are separate, such as Judaism and Islam, as well as Baha'i.

 

[Truth light]

If God was trinity,

why didn't he said:
worship me as trinity (3=1)
I am trinity
I am father and son and holy spirit ?

 

[razeontherock]

Why did G-d reveal Himself as "the Spirits of the Lord?"

 

[razeontherock]

It's a cultural artifact that persists because people submit to authority in religious matters determined by humans
Again, this seems to hinge on how seriously you take human authority as opposed to genuine authority and revelation from your God

The Apostles had genuine authority from G-d to reveal the New Covenant. Really basic stuff there ... anyone reading it on their own would find that impossible to miss! As well as the fact that if you "decide G-d has something else for you," you make yourself accursed.

 

[peaceful soul]

originally posted by Truth light

If God was trinity,

why didn't he said:
worship me as trinity (3=1)

If He did, would you do it? I doubt it. Why? Because you don't believe it to begin with. God would not need to make such a pronouncement because we don't know this in order to obey and worship Him.

I am trinity

Would you accept it? Probably not. Why? Because you were not raised to believe it. Again, we don't need to know this in order to obey and worship Him.

I am father and son and holy spirit ?

Actually this part is documented in many passages. That is how we conceived of Trinity. That is why we are speaking this to you right now. If it wasn't there, then, we would not have any evidence for it.

Have you logically thought out your question? Had you done so, you would have to confess that your knowledge of Allah is incomplete, even now; therefore, we could ask the same of you. The conclusion is that one needs not to know specifics about God in order to understand what He wants from us and what we should do in order to obey Him. It is rather silly to think otherwise. We only need to know as much about God as He freely reveals to us. To ask anything more is to overstep our boundaries.

 

[peaceful soul]

If God was trinity,

why didn't he said:
worship me as trinity (3=1)
I am trinity
I am father and son and holy spirit ?

I forgot to ask if you read the link I provided for you.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7510076-17/#post56077532

Please read it and look at the specific references before further commenting. It will help you to get rid of some of your ignorance hopefully. Just repeating your Islamic position does nothing to help you to understand the Christian position. Remember that.

 

[Montalban]

you need a creed after more than 300 y to obey

Christianity's a living religion.

 

[peaceful soul]

originally posted by Truth light

yes, you don't need because he didn't !

According to your Islamic understanding, but not for Christians.

The point stands: we don't need to know it in order to obey.

you need a creed after more than 300 y to obey

The Creed didn't teach us to obey? That is silly.

Are you listening or just want to keep parroting your Islamic mantra? The creed was a response to heresy, mainly Arius and those who held a belief about Jesus that although He was divine, He was not eternal; for, He was created. Read the history behind it rather than perpetuate your ignorance.

Actually you don't

I will repeat what I stated. It stands correct.

Actually this part is documented in many passages. That is how we conceived of Trinity. That is why we are speaking this to you right now. If it wasn't there, then, we would not have any evidence for it.

The evidence is within the scripture. Deal with it! I gave you one source explaining how the Holy Spirit is God. There are similar evidence for the Father and Jesus being God. Do you care to examine for yourself? Or, do you just want to remain ignorant?

that's what i am saying
"We only need to know as much about God as He freely reveals to us. To ask anything more is to overstep our boundaries"

God revealed in the NT that He is one and yet, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That is why we believe as we do. The Qu'ran spends lots of time giving polemics against such concepts that we see upon reading.

If he told you what you pretend he did i would be happy to know.
i refered to link. Do you think that it's an evidence revise it and tell me any word asking you to worship

I don't think that I completely understand what you are saying. God doesn't have to ask us to worship Him. We do that because of Who He is. We don't need quote from scripture to tell us to do such a thing.

that's what you asked to read.
actually trinitarians are who need to read what they told to constitute so called-evidence for their doctrine again

OK, stay closed minded and repeat your Islamic teachings. You can't make your claims until you investigate matters outside of your Islamic paradigm. As long as you remained trapped by them, you can't expect to understand our POV.

 

[student ad x]

- MOD HAT ON -

Hey folks, a reminder: For those outside the Christian faith, questions about Christianity and the things of God are okay to discuss. The promoting of another religion other than Christianity is not allowed. Those who are professing Christians engaged in discussion, may not post contrary to the Christian Forums Statement of Faith. Those who do post contrary to the Nicene Creed, will be actioned per the Promotion and Proselytizing rule.


Carry on........

- MOD HAT OFF -
​

 

[Montalban]

If God was trinity,

why didn't he said:
worship me as trinity (3=1)
I am trinity
I am father and son and holy spirit ?

He did. He said he and God the Father are the same.

 

[ToHoldNothing]

That only proves Binitarianism or Modalism at best. Trinitarianism would require a third entity or person posited in this supposed relationship of oneness and separation, which on a somewhat unrelated note seems like the same logic that kept African Americans from drinking at the same water fountains or having the right to vote. Separate but equal.

 

[Montalban]

That only proves Binitarianism or Modalism at best. Trinitarianism would require a third entity or person posited in this supposed relationship of oneness and separation, which on a somewhat unrelated note seems like the same logic that kept African Americans from drinking at the same water fountains or having the right to vote. Separate but equal.

I John 5:7
“There are those that bear record in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one”


You want a fuller range of quotes then?
Philippians 2:5-7 "Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing."

Jesus said John 10:38
But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”

They are of one accord
John 5:21
For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.

Jesus is equal to God
Colossians 1:19
“For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him”

Jesus has the power and wisdom of God
1 Cor 1:24
“...Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.”

Jesus is eternal like God
Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.


Jesus Himself commanded
Matthew 28:19
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
In this passage, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are said to share one name (notice that the term “name” is singular, not plural), and that name is almost certainly Yahweh, the personal name of God in the Bible. We know this because the name Yahweh is applied to both the Father and the Son in the New Testament.

There's heaps on the Holy Spirit being a person too
a. He is spoken of as He and Whom by Jesus (John 14:16,17,26, 15:26, 16:7,8,13-15).
b. Has a name (Matt 28:19).
c. Is a revealer of future events (Acts 1:16).
d. Is an inspirer of prophecy (Heb 3:7).
e. Bears witness to us through Old Testament prophecy (Heb 10:15).
f. Is God (Acts 5:3,4).
g. Descended in bodily form as a dove (Matt 3:16).
h. He is sent by the Father in Jesus' name (John 14:26).
i. He is sent by Jesus (John 15:26).
j. Is a sender of persons (Acts 10:19,20).
k. Appoints overseers (Acts 20:28).
l. Is a decider of decrees (Acts 15:28).
m. He convicts the world (John 16:8).
n. The world does not behold Him or know Him (John 14:17).
o. Can be grieved (Eph 4:30).
p. Can be spoken against (Matt 12:32).
q. Can be put to the test (Acts 5:9).
r. Can be blasphemed against (Mark 3:29).
s. Can be lied to (Acts 5:3).
t. Can forbid one to speak (Acts 16:6).
u. Gives testimony to persons (Acts 20:23).
v. Bears witness with a Christian's spirit that he is a child of God (Rom 8:16).
w. Intercedes in prayer for Christians (Rom 8:26).
x. Distributes gifts to Christians (1 Cor 12:11).
y. Speaks in Christians for their defence (Matt 10:20).
z. He is a counsellor (John 14:16).
aa. He teaches a Christian all things (John 14:26).
ab. He brings to a Christian's remembrance all that Jesus said (John 16:13).
ac. He guides Christians into all the truth (John 16:13).
ad. He bears witness to Jesus (John 15:26).
ae. He glorifies Jesus (John 16:14).
af. He takes of what is Jesus' and discloses it to Christians (John 16:14).
ag. He hears (John 16:13).
ah. He is a helper (John 16:7).
ai. Is one with whom to have fellowship (2 Cor 13:14).
aj. Is a comforter (Acts 9:31).
ak. Jesus' disciples know Him (John 14:17).
al. He abides with Christians (John 14:17).
am. He will be with Christians forever (John 14:16).
an. With the bride says, “Come!” (Rev 22:17)

So much then for being a mere 'active force'! You have to ignore a lot of the Bible for this one.

Similarities between the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Pharisees: Both deny the Trinity and the Deity of Christ
Both deny the physical resurrection of Christ and salvation by grace alone.

My thanks to the following sites...

http://www.gksa.org.za/evangelisasie/jwe.htm#hg
A Biblical Response to Jehovah's Witnesses | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
http://www.equip.org/free/DJ535.htm

 

[ToHoldNothing]

Honestly, I'm not the one you need to convince about Non Trinitarian positions being wrong, since honestly, I'd be hard pressed to even believe in a single entity with that much power, since polytheism would make more logistical sense by that admission of such immense power being vested and possessed by one entity. But that's another story, isn't it?

And who brought in Jehovah's Witnesses? Not me..

 

[Montalban]

Honestly, I'm not the one you need to convince about Non Trinitarian positions being wrong, since honestly, I'd be hard pressed to even believe in a single entity with that much power, since polytheism would make more logistical sense by that admission of such immense power being vested and possessed by one entity. But that's another story, isn't it?

It is another story. You wanted evidence from the Bible for a Trinity.

Since you raise it polytheism makes sense only if you have one set of gods, but when pagan Romans have a 'supreme god' and Celts have a 'supreme god' and they have different attributes it makes no sense at all - competing claims

And who brought in Jehovah's Witnesses? Not me..

I apologise it's from a post I wrote to a JW a while back - I cut 'n' pasted from my own post.

It was lazy editing on my part

 

[ToHoldNothing]

It is another story. You wanted evidence from the Bible for a Trinity.

Since you raise it polytheism makes sense only if you have one set of gods, but when pagan Romans have a 'supreme god' and Celts have a 'supreme god' and they have different attributes it makes no sense at all - competing claims

Trinity-like ideas doesn't necessarily mean you can't take them metaphorically, but I digress from that.

Polytheists don't tend to make as big a deal about varying pantheons, since they already accept that they are simply variations on each other, names, characteristics, behavior and areas of influence, but they aren't necessarily starkly opposed to each other by a modern "pagan" understanding.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

This thread will remain closed.
Debating against the Trinity is contrary to Christian Forums' Statement of Faith, and is a violation of the Promotion and Proselytizing rule ​