What are the reasons behind a person wrongfully rejecting the Trinity? (Trinity Christians Only)

Status
Not open for further replies.

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,698
5,614
Utah
✟713,703.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
What are the motivations or reasons behind a person wrongfully rejecting the Trinity?

I am always fascinated behind the motivations behind why people believe they do. I can understand why some people might hold to various beliefs that I think are unbiblical, but when folks reject the Trinity as revealed in Scripture, I am just puzzled. Why do they do this? For there are believers who do not understand the Trinity and yet they accept it by faith it is true (even when they don’t understand it). I admire them for that. For me: I guess I was blessed by the Lord to be able to understand the Trinity right away.

When I speak of how we must obey God's laws: I am referring primarily to how we must obey those commands in the New Testament, and not the Old Testament. Things like the Saturday Sabbath, circumcision, dietary laws, the Passover, etc. are ceremonial laws that are no longer binding upon the life of the believer today under the New Covenant. We should focus on obeying those commands that come from Jesus and His followers.

I find it strange how people dismiss the 4th commandment .... yet uphold all the other ones.

Everything Jesus taught through speech and action is related to the 10 commandments one way or another.

Jesus and His followers kept the 7th day Sabbath!

What was done away with was those associated with the sanctuary system as Jesus is our high priest and ministers from heaven.

The earthly sanctuary was a mini copy (example) of the heavenly one. It shows how the plan of salvation was/is accomplished in Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Dkh587

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 6, 2014
3,049
1,770
Southeast
✟552,407.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
One reason could be because they don’t view the Trinitarian proof-text verses in the same way Trinitarians do.

take Colossians 1:16 for example.

Trinitarians view this as saying Jesus was the one creating everything at the beginning, which is what they would view all things being created “through” Jesus.

a Unitarian may view this as saying that “through” Jesus, everything was created on account of, or because of Jesus, not that Jesus was the one creating, but that Jesus was the reason why God created everything
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
People who adhere to their own personal Bible translations, quite often cherry-pick verses in order to support heterodox interpretations of Scripture.

Notice how often their position on some teaching is defended by reliance upon a single verse while they simultaneously refuse to consider other verses that verify the orthodox view.
 
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,702.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I have read problematic descriptions of the Trinity that sounded more like "three people" or "three personalities", and when someone vehemently disagrees with such a view then it can quickly lead to the rejection of the Trinity itself. Knowing that there is one God only who has one personality may cover the fact that this one God reveals Himself in three different ways.
Does the one God reveal Himself in three different ways at the same time (eternally) or at different times? Does He only reveal Himself as the Son after the incarnation?
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You just proved my point. Regardless of the verses or points I might make, you will present verses that you believe counter the ones I presented. It becomes futile immediately.

There is a tendency for many to accept a position based on a scripture that "appears" to support that position, without really digging deep enough to understand it much more accurately. It takes time, sometimes weeks or months, to come to a more correct understanding of a single verse. And in some cases, it can take years or never happen at all.

There is a deeper and more accurate understanding of each of the verses you presented already, that reveal the truth about that which they speak of, but to review them under the current circumstances would only lead to further disagreement. I'm not interested in doing that. I will, however, be glad to talk about any doctrine in an open-minded, honest, polite, and humble manner with anyone of like mind. There is a time and place for everything.

Having said all that, the fact that you stated,

is a positive statement and not only is it a possibility, but indeed the verse says exactly that. This means all the other verses that "appear" to contradict John 17:3, must be examined much more deeply in order to understand them more accurately and find out how they are in fact in harmony with John 17:3. And in harmony, they must be.

First, my being open to considering an alternative view on John 17:3 does not prove your point. Your ultimate point is Anti-Trinitarianism and I did not prove such unbiblical nonsense. Second, I disproved it by showing 1 John 5:20 that says a similar thing but it refers to Jesus Christ. It says that Jesus Christ is the true God and eternal life. So the Bible is saying there are two true Gods? Are you a Mormon who believes in Tritheism? I also provided other verses that build the truth of the Trinity but you don’t appear to have any answers in explaining them. No doubt, you don’t accept what those verses say at face value. For how can it be true in your view that the Word WAS GOD and also be true for: Word was WITH GOD? The Word is Jesus. Jesus is God.

Three, deniers of the Trinity are not allowed to post here in the Christian section of the forums at CF. So you are in the wrong place to promote your unbiblical view of God, friend.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
I don’t buy it. God is going to hold people accountable for not worshiping Him in the correct way as revealed in Scripture. I believe folks who reject the Trinity are not accepting the whole counsel of God’s Word for their own personal reasons. I don’t believe a person rejects the Trinity because it is what they believe Scripture says. Ignorance only goes so far. A person who rejects the Trinity has to ignore 1 John 5:7, and other verses. It could be that they are lazy and they do not care to search out the matter themselves because they are cozy at their church or it could be that they simply do not understand the Trinity and it sounds illogical to them. There could be many reasons why they reject the Trinity and it has nothing to do with what the Bible says because the Word teaches it clearly. To reject the Trinity is to go against the clear teaching of God’s Word.
Not that I disagree with you concerning this, in principle, but do a search on the Johaninne Comma.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, Arius was a presbyter at Alexandria, but you know who else was a native Alexandrian, and a Copt to boot? Arius' primary theological enemy, HH St. Athanasius the Apostolic.

Either way, it appears an Arian influenced bible from an Arian infested place has been born to spread seeds of doubt of Arianism in most Modern Bibles we have in the English today.

You said:
I don't care about the Critical Text. That wasn't even published until 1898. By contrast, the earliest evidence we have of Greek-Coptic bilingual texts is from the middle of the 2nd century, which more than a century before even the Codex Sinaiticus, and many centuries before the Textus Receptus.

So you and or other scholars say. The true test is by doing what is called… a fruits test. The true test is in Observable science and not solely Historical Science. That is the difference between us. You look at the lens of history only to build your faith on the correct manuscript. I look to the here and now and check to see which Word of God is the most pure and which one passed on the divine test.

You said:
I am not interested in KJV Only-ism.

I know. The Word is offensive to many.

You said:
We don't need a time machine. Many left large corpuses that are still with us in one form or another. Anyone can read HH St. Ignatius, HH St. Athanasius the Apostolic, HH St. Cyril, etc.

Yeah, but guess what. It takes FAITH for you to believe what they wrote was true and that they are not lying and or that somebody else wrote these stories of these people so as to defend their own religion or church. Me… I prefer to believe the Bible alone is the only true and 100% trustworthy historical document. Why? Because of faith. For faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17).

You said:
This is a mighty big accusation from someone who is not a member of the Egyptian Church and isn't showing much knowledge of it. There's nothing 'watered down' in Egyptian, Syrian, or Ethiopian Christianity, and it is highly likely that these peoples were worshipping the Holy Trinity (yes, without the Johannine comma in their Bibles) while your own ancestors were still worshipping rocks and trees. That they don't conform to a 21st century Non-Denominational view of the scriptures is no great surprise or injury, since that view is a relative novelty.

But if such is the case, there has to be reason why. Could be word of mouth by true believers or it could have been an early manuscript with 1 John 5:7 in it that was later destroyed. You don’t know because we were not there to observe it in real time. All you have got to go on is words written by men and they could either be true or they could be false in some way. We don’t know because their words are not inspired by God and they are not without error.

You said:
I did read it. St. Cyprian of Carthage is a better source than Tertullian, not only for the obvious reason (Tertullian left Christianity for Montanism, and Against Praxeas is clearly a Montanist text), but also because it appears to be an actual quote of the verse, rather than a sort of allusion or whatever could be made out of the reference in Tertullian.

The list of historical evidence of 1 John 5:7 stands regardless of your non-acceptance of such evidence. Most will not accept it because they are for Anti-Divine-Preservation-of-God’s-Holy-Word.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Not that I disagree with you concerning this, in principle, but do a search on the Johaninne Comma.

Not my first rodeo on discussing and or researching 1 John 5:7. The lies that are propagated on the removal of this verse is astounding to stay the least. Again, 1 John 5:7 is not in the Critical Text because the Critical Text comes from Alexandria, Egypt. Arianism (Anti-Trinitarianism) also originates from Alexandria, Egypt. So it is obvious that an Arian influenced group removed 1 John 5:7 because that is the evidence that we see. I mean folks agree with the truth of 1 John 5:7 based on their scholarship, but that same supposed scholarship they trust says that it is not in the true original manuscripts that are older and better. But again, doing a fruits test on the Critical Text shows that is inferior 100 times over. By comparing the KJB (Textus Receptus) to Modern Translations (Critical Text) we see an attack on doctrine, Jesus appearing to sin, the watering down of holy living, the deity of Christ is attacked, and the Trinity is attacked, and the devil’s name replaced for our Lord, etc.

Think about this from the perspective of how the enemy seeks to destroy us. Does not the devil seek to corrupt and destroy God’s Word? Would he not seek to do that? If so, what would have to gain by making me believe 1 John 5:7 as being in my Bible? This is why I believe it should be there. The devil is going to want to attack the Trinity and not defend it. He is going to want people to doubt the truth of 1 John 5:7 and not stand upon such a verse boldly in faith. So that way, nobody can declare it as truth even if they agree with what it says.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I have read problematic descriptions of the Trinity that sounded more like "three people" or "three personalities", and when someone vehemently disagrees with such a view then it can quickly lead to the rejection of the Trinity itself. Knowing that there is one God only who has one personality may cover the fact that this one God reveals Himself in three different ways.
Well, that interpretation was long ago condemned by the church as being one more erroneous view of the Trinity.

(That's probably already been mentioned by someone else on this thread)
 
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,702.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Well I think the reason is mindset. Trinitarianism is a very sophisticated position, where you consider the ramifications of various scriptures especially in regards to Christ, and to the lesser degree the Holy Spirit.
Sometimes we talk about the Trinity as if there is one understanding of the Trinity. But I heard strong criticism from EO of the Western understanding. OTOH, EO have been criticized of being Monarchists. And I find the so called Athanasian Creed, which is a Western document often quoted in the CF, particularly problematic. Even reading quotations from the 3 Cappadocians, I don't find their beliefs identical. There are many conceptions.

But it is very easy to be an Arian. It is very easy to get the wrong idea about things, especially scriptures spoken of Jesus during his Earthly ministry before his crucifixion. If you have a proof text mentality, their are a lot of scriptures you can quote to insinuate an Arian view of Jesus, or some other kind of sole monarchy of God the Father.
I've been reading The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus. He is said to be Arian or semi-Arian but I can't find heresy in what he says about Christ, so far. His belief seems to be a lot better that modern Christians who seem to be Tritheists. Even the Nicene Creed says, "I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty,"
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
People who adhere to their own personal Bible translations, quite often cherry-pick verses in order to support heterodox interpretations of Scripture.

Notice how often their position on some teaching is defended by reliance upon a single verse while they simultaneously refuse to consider other verses that verify the orthodox view.

Not all bibles say the same thing. So one has to choose which one is the correct Word of God. If one of them are the perfect Word of God, then guess what? You got no Word of God to trust. For if we cannot trust one word in our Bible, then what makes the rest of it trustworthy? For who gets to decide which words are true or false? You? Me? Joe next door? A true detector machine? Scholars (the i.e. Scribes that Jesus warned us about)? For what did the scribes do? They TRAN-scribed the Scriptures.
But it is my believe in what I have discovered is the perfect Word of God that has led me to believe in the Trinity (of which is a belief we share).
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Not all bibles say the same thing. So one has to choose which one is the correct Word of God. If one of them are the perfect Word of God, then guess what? You got no Word of God to trust.

There are dozens of Bible translations and only a few of them have been proven worth even considering in this regard. The others may "shed light" on some difficult passages or help out people with reading deficiencies, but that's about all they are worth.
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Not my first rodeo on discussing and or researching 1 John 5:7. The lies that are propagated on the removal of this verse is astounding to stay the least. Again, 1 John 5:7 is not in the Critical Text because the Critical Text comes from Alexandria, Egypt. Arianism (Anti-Trinitarianism) also originates from Alexandria, Egypt. So it is obvious that an Arian influenced group removed 1 John 5:7 because that is the evidence that we see. I mean folks agree with the truth of 1 John 5:7 based on their scholarship, but that same supposed scholarship they trust says that it is not in the true original manuscripts that are older and better. But again, doing a fruits test on the Critical Text shows that is inferior 100 times over. By comparing the KJB (Textus Receptus) to Modern Translations (Critical Text) we see an attack on doctrine, Jesus appearing to sin, the watering down of holy living, the deity of Christ is attacked, and the Trinity is attacked, and the devil’s name replaced for our Lord, etc.

Think about this from the perspective of how the enemy seeks to destroy us. Does not the devil seek to corrupt and destroy God’s Word? Would he not seek to do that? If so, what would have to gain by making me believe 1 John 5:7 as being in my Bible? This is why I believe it should be there. The devil is going to want to attack the Trinity and not defend it. He is going to want people to doubt the truth of 1 John 5:7 and not stand upon such a verse boldly in faith. So that way, nobody can declare it as truth even if they agree with what it says.
Lol, don't get me started.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I find it strange how people dismiss the 4th commandment .... yet uphold all the other ones.

Everything Jesus taught through speech and action is related to the 10 commandments one way or another.

Jesus and His followers kept the 7th day Sabbath!

What was done away with was those associated with the sanctuary system as Jesus is our high priest and ministers from heaven.

The earthly sanctuary was a mini copy (example) of the heavenly one. It shows how the plan of salvation was/is accomplished in Christ.

I think you took a step in the wrong thread, friend. This thread is in no way related to the Sabbath.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Lol, don't get me started.

Perhaps if you seen the other side of the corn field or looked at the other viewpoint, things may not appear as you think they do.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
There are dozens of Bible translations and only a few of them have been proven worth even considering in this regard. The others may "shed light" on some difficult passages or help out people with reading deficiencies, but that's about all they are worth.

But again, if no Bible is perfect, then who gets to decide which Words we trust or don’t trust? How do you trust John 3:16 and yet reject another verse you think is an error? The problem then rests in man being the authority and not God. So this is why I believe in Divine Preservation of God’s Word. For Divine Inspiration of the Originals would be a waste of time if the Word was not preserved divinely throughout time. It would mean only the guys in the past had the pure Word of God to trust completely.

Jesus said His words would not pass away. I believe Him.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
One reason could be because they don’t view the Trinitarian proof-text verses in the same way Trinitarians do.

take Colossians 1:16 for example.

Trinitarians view this as saying Jesus was the one creating everything at the beginning, which is what they would view all things being created “through” Jesus.

a Unitarian may view this as saying that “through” Jesus, everything was created on account of, or because of Jesus, not that Jesus was the one creating, but that Jesus was the reason why God created everything

Nope. That does not work. John 1:3 says, “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” It says without Him not anything was made that was made.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Mark Quayle
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Perhaps if you seen the other side of the corn field or looked at the other viewpoint, things may not appear as you think they do.
Been there. Done that.

I didn't grow up Reformed.
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,773
7,919
NW England
✟1,041,799.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That is a good point …One point the Unitarians make, which has been proven true is …You cannot learn the trinity from the Bible... it must be taught to you.

No; the Bible teaches that the Father, the Son and the Spirit were present at the creation of the world, Genesis 1:1-2, John 1:1-2, John 17:5, Colossians 1:15-16 - so they are eternal.
Jesus taught that God is Father, and the Holy Spirit is called both "the Spirit of the Lord", 1 Samuel 10:10, Psalms 51:11, Ezekiel 37:14, Joel 2:28; and the Spirit of Jesus, Acts of the Apostles 16:7.
Father, Son and Spirit are divine, yet there is only one God.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Been there. Done that.

I didn't grow up Reformed.

I am sure some folks did not grow up believing a flat Earth, but they somehow later believed in such a silly thing. I feel Flat Earth is about as silly as Calvinism (No offense of course). It’s just an attack upon God’s good character and it is nowhere to be found in the Bible (Except maybe a surface reading of Romans 9 read out of context). But I highly doubt you believe the way I do about God’s Word being divinely preserved. If I believed there was no perfect Word of God today, I would not be a believer right now. For God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. God moves with the times and He makes available His Word perfectly for even this generation. But many do not like the idea of being under a final Word of authority. It makes them feel uncomfortable. But people fail to understand that it takes faith to believe in the Bible. It’s not faith in modern scholarship. It’s faith in God’s Word.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Mark Quayle
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.