• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Why the Trinity is a False Doctrine

Status
Not open for further replies.

Wgw

Pray For Brussels!
May 24, 2015
4,304
2,075
✟15,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
This is also a false doctrine. The scripture says "the angel of the LORD appeared to Moses". This was indeed an angel demonstrating itself as a fire in a bush.

We should in this case assume that it refers to the Holy Spirit, and that the use of the word angel is somewhat of an inexact rendering or expression.

Because God has given me understanding and wisdom, and even without having been baptized in holy spirit just yet, I can still perceive those that not of Christ and those that are.

One cannot know fully what something entails, without having direct personal experience of it. I contend, as someone who has in fact been baptized in the Spirit, that when you yourself are blessed with the same sacramental grace, you will at that time understand the doctrine of the Trinity and will indeed supoort it.
 
Upvote 0

Wgw

Pray For Brussels!
May 24, 2015
4,304
2,075
✟15,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
I am led by the Holy Spirit. Been 'born again'. Recognize 'The Spirit' when it exists in others.

But of course, you would venture to call me a tell me I'm simply confused. So too were the apostles falsely accused and persecuted. Should i expect any less if I am 'not a part of this world'?

Blessings,

MEC

I have no intention nor wish of persecuting you or personally besmirching your intelligence; I simply disagree with your understanding of the doctrine, and the arguments you use to promote your understanding.
 
Upvote 0

Wgw

Pray For Brussels!
May 24, 2015
4,304
2,075
✟15,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
You are correct, this angel is indeed a holy spirit, as holy spirits are indeed angels.

Whereas angels are holy spirits, the Holy Spirit is not an angel. Furthermore, your exegesis assumes plurality where none is indicated.
 
Upvote 0

Aelred of Rievaulx

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2015
1,399
606
✟19,731.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
It only takes a cursory study of history to plainly see that 'trinity' was created by 'men'. The word itself is never offered once in scripture.
Scripture was written by men, maybe women too. What's your point? The reason we have Scripture is that it was read in the liturgies of the early Church and understood to be inspired.

It is my firm contention that if 'trinity' were 'so' important, it would certainly have not only been mentioned, it would have been outlined in detail like everything else the Bible offers that is 'important' for us to follow.
That's a false contention. The same people who debated and selected the Scriptures held canonical are the ones who taught and defended Trinitarian theology.

Please, such statements make me 'laugh' out loud. That someone needs to be 'trained' to read the Bible.
Well, I do believe that the Bible requires specialists in order to properly understand it. Most currently teach in universities and seminaries, those who teach JW religion teach it in the context of new religious movements not biblical exegesis.

Now, show us where God granted 'you' such authority. Show us the scriptures that warn the layman 'not to read His Word'. If you can't, then maybe you shouldn't try to make such indications.
Lay people can understand the Bible. It doesn't take a genius to understand "love God and love your neighbour"; this is the basis of Christian practice. When it comes to things that require specialists, they are required. It's not bad that you think you can understand what specialists are saying about the bible, but it is important to recognise what academics term peer review.

These are doctrines that are truly based on scripture, so certainly Jesus and the apostles believes these things, as they themselves wrote these things. Also anyone truly having holy spirit anywhere in the world has these same doctrines, as they are doctrines that come from God. There are a few men I've encountered believing these things.
Ridiculous. This is purely just another way to say that there was a great apostasy wherein every Christian from Jesus to you having believed errors.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,106
9,047
65
✟429,805.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Those that don't believe in the trinity have a serious conundrum. If Jesus is not God then he was lunatic. And if that is the case then he was not worthy to die for our sins and be our salvation. Jesus was a sinner thus incapable of dying for us and being our salvation. Why? Because he accepted worship reserved for God alone which makes him a sinner. He also accepted Thomas' declaration of him being God. Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with God. How dare he do that if he is not God. He is an egotistical maniac with a God complex. Or he is God. How dare the writer of Hebrews state of the son of God "Thy throne Oh God is forever". Either he is God or he is insane. There is no other answer.
 
Upvote 0

Wgw

Pray For Brussels!
May 24, 2015
4,304
2,075
✟15,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
Those that don't believe in the trinity have a serious conundrum. If Jesus is not God then he was lunatic. And if that is the case then he was not worthy to die for our sins and be our salvation. Jesus was a sinner thus incapable of dying for us and being our salvation. Why? Because he accepted worship reserved for God alone which makes him a sinner. He also accepted Thomas' declaration of him being God. Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with God. How dare he do that if he is not God. He is an egotistical maniac with a God complex. Or he is God. How dare the writer of Hebrews state of the son of God "Thy throne Oh God is forever". Either he is God or he is insane. There is no other answer.

Indeed. I believe CS Lewis said something along those lines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrBubbaLove
Upvote 0

cgaviria

Well-Known Member
Nov 23, 2015
1,854
184
38
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Visit site
✟30,853.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Whereas angels are holy spirits, the Holy Spirit is not an angel. Furthermore, your exegesis assumes plurality where none is indicated.

Plurality is indeed indicated, does Paul not say that each prophet has a distinct holy spirit?
The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. (1 Corinthians 14:32 NIV)

The word for "spirits" in this verse is "pneumata", which is the same word used to refer to angels who are also made into ministering spirits,
Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation? (Hebrews 1:14 [NIV])

Each believer in Jesus Christ, who is given holy spirit, is indeed given a distinct spirit that is holy, yet all operate as one.
 
Upvote 0

Wgw

Pray For Brussels!
May 24, 2015
4,304
2,075
✟15,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
Plurality is indeed indicated, does Paul not say that each prophet has a distinct holy spirit?

He does, but it is not relevant to my point regarding Exodus 3:2.

The word for "spirits" in this verse is "pneumata", which is the same word used to refer to angels who are also made into ministering spirits,

Exodus 3:2 is singular "Angel," whereas you said "angels."

Each believer in Jesus Christ, who is given holy spirit, is indeed given a distinct spirit that is holy, yet all operate as one.

Incorrect. Canonical scripture, which you of course reject (Matthew 28:19 for example, which is attested to by all ancient Greek manuscripts, but other verses actually) clearly indicates the Spirit, the Paraclete, the Comforter, is one entity.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Carpe Chaos
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
144,404
27,056
56
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,939,122.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
MOD HAT ON



The thread was cleaned because of flames. I'm sure I mused some, and some were borderline. It's really easy to start insulting others when they reject your obvious truth (a matter of perspective). But really try not to do so. And don't call professing believers unbelievers. Or imply such. That's flaming as well.


MOD HAT OFF
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wgw
Upvote 0

Harfelugan

Newbie
Nov 12, 2010
137
44
✟24,553.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
So then explain the verse saying, even the heaven of the heaven cannot contain you, much less a temple I have built?

I know that your patience is being tried so bear with me. Omnipresent, there is no place that God isn't. I'm not saying that God is contained but God is there. God is spirit, not needing anything physical to maintain presence at or in any place.
 
Upvote 0

Harfelugan

Newbie
Nov 12, 2010
137
44
✟24,553.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
They are different pronunciations for one name that was given, so therefore they are not the same. It is the Jehovah's witness claim that the name of God is spelled as "Jehovah", which in analyzing the tetragrammaton and learning from actual Hebrew experts that know their own language, it becomes obvious it is not.

Jehovah is a German corruption of the name Yahweh. Jehovah and Yahweh are both representative of the same name. In the original Yahweh is the personal Hebrew name of God. The English equivalent Lord is our personal name of God and everywhere you see Lord in Scripture you could replace it with Yahweh. El is the Hebrew generic name for God, Elohim is the plural of God. Which has been translated as angels or the Heavenly Court. You can change languages, pronouncing the name in a different language and it still be speaking of the same being. Peter is also called Simon and Cephas. They are the same person except the language has changed.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DrBubbaLove

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist
Site Supporter
Aug 8, 2004
11,336
1,728
65
Left coast
✟100,100.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
P..............
So my post and your reply have been removed. As I recall your focus was on objecting to what someone else had posted and none of my questions were addressed. So I will try again.

You have stated that Jesus is a created being, and that there was a "time before" when there was no Jesus/Son of God. Saint John calls the Son of God, the Word of God and you have admitted the Word was there in the beginning, active in creation (just "after" He Himself was created according to you). So,

How do you understand God, the Father being without His Word "before" your understanding of when His Word was created?

You have repeatedly suggested the traditional orthodox view of the Incarnation of God represents a "containment" of God in the flesh of the Man Jesus, which is of course impossible. Kindly stop misrepresenting the orthodox view of Who the Mother of God carried in Her Womb, which is of course Jesus and He both God and Man - two natures not a commingled hybrid. In that construct it is not possible to suggest that God is "contained" in a earthly body.

How is your view of all these "image of God" creations (including the Son of God) being in some sense deities/divine. lessor gods I believe you said, how is this not polytheism?
 
Upvote 0

7xlightray

Newbie
Jun 30, 2013
515
29
✟22,956.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Hi cgaviria,

I perceive you are studying, and seeking the truth, and not so concerned what man thinks.

It is more then easy to prove Jesus could not be God, but not easy to believe, as I'm sure you have found as well sharing the word.

What I would like to show though, is that Jesus had his beginnings at birth, and not before he was born, as before the foundation of the world, because there is no place where it is said Jesus created heaven and earth, but he is before the new creation, the foundation of, the beginning of, the firstborn [from the dead] over all creation. He is before all things because all things consist in him, for he is high priest, chief king, in the kingdom of many priest and kings, this list could go on, for nothing could be without him towards the new creation, and the ages to come. - I am referring to Heb. 1:2 “by whom also he made the worlds (165. aión – ages)” As it also speaks in Eph 2:6-7 ...and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that in the ages to come..., and compare to Col 1:15-18 For by (1722. en – in) Him all things were created. We have this age, then age of 1,000 years, end of which all enemies are put under his feet, and then when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father.

Psalm 22 is speaking of Christ, and you will notice it is the spirit of Christ speaking, I'm referring to words on a page, not a person. This is the Psalm which we know speaks of Christ where it says, Jesus speaking “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me”[Psalm 22:1].

...then... “they shake the head, saying, he trusted in the LORD, let Him rescue him; let Him deliver him, since He delights in him!” [Psalm 22:7,8].

Now if you will notice the next two verses 9 and 10 it says, “But You are He who took me out of the womb; You made me trust while on my mother's breasts. I was cast upon You from birth. From my mother's womb You have been my God.” [Psalm 22:9, 10]

From the womb God has been Christ's God, not before. John 1:14 ...the word (3056. logos - a word, being the expression of a thought; expressing the thoughts of the Father through the Spirit) became flesh, not a person became flesh, and 1 John 1:1 the word (3056. logos) of life, which they handled and seen.

Then Isaiah 45, you will notice also speaks of Christ. This is what verses 4 and 5 have to say “For Jacob My servant’s sake, and Israel My elect, I have even called you by your name; I have named you [compare with Luke 1:31 “...and shall call his name Jesus.”; or Matt 1:21], though you have not known Me. 5 I am the Lord, and there is no other; there is no God besides Me. I will gird you, though you have not known Me.” - God put a hedge around him, that he may prosper, then allowed the hedge to be removed, taking all from him, then allowing him to suffer greatly.

This states when God named Jesus, Jesus did not know God before this time.



Angels, or spirits are immortal, they cannot die, Jesus died. Jesus had the fallen nature of his mother, for he was tempted, but had the character of his Father, being holy being born of the holy spirit; this is how he overcame the flesh, temptation. He did not receive the nature of his Father until after his resurrection (Heb 1:3-4) when he received immortality, and destroying sin in the flesh, now no longer tempted by sin in the flesh.

God's Spirit is His power and His word [compare Luke 1:35 and John 1:14; Ephesians 6:17 – in the Greek “word (neuter) - 4487. rhéma - a spoken word” points to “Spirit (neuter),” not to “sword (feminine)”, so in other words it could read, “...and the sword of the word...”].

Sometimes to understand the New Testament, we must turn to the Old Testament. The Berean Jews searched the Old Testament scriptures to see if what the apostle taught were true. So, what the apostles taught must be in the O/T, as Paul declared in Acts 26:22-23.
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
30,735
9,654
NW England
✟1,276,262.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
They are different pronunciations for one name that was given, so therefore they are not the same.

I didn't say they were the same pronunciation, I said they are they are the same NAME - and you have just agreed with this.
Peter and Pierre are the same name; one is English and one French. A man who is called Peter does not suddenly become a different person if he goes to France and gets called Pierre. Saul and Paul are the same name - one Hebrew and one Greek.
And pronunciation varies; I know people who pronounce Biblical names and books differently from the way I pronounce them. Eg I say "Thess a lon ica", some people say "Thess alon I ca". That doesn't mean they are two separate places.
 
Upvote 0

Imagican

old dude
Jan 14, 2006
3,028
431
64
Orlando, Florida
✟52,551.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
7x,

It would seem that you have placed quite a bit of thought into what you offered. But I can't help but ask this: "How is one that doesn't yet exist, 'sent' to do something?

For over and over Christ stated that He was 'sent' by the Father. I don't understand how one that doesn't yet exist can be 'sent'.

And we also have the words offered by Christ that the words He offered were not His own but given Him by the Father. And that the things that He did were things He had witnessed of the Father. Both these indicative of Christ existing in Heaven previous to becoming 'flesh'.

And then we have the 'clincher': the Bible states that Christ witnessed Satan being 'cast out' of Heaven. Watched him fall like a 'shooting star'. Don't know how that would be possible unless He preexisted in Heaven. Preexisted His physical birth.

Blessings,

MEC
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wgw
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
30,735
9,654
NW England
✟1,276,262.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The scripture does not say that Jesus existed before the beginning of creation. It says that he existed in the beginning of creation.

All things were created by, through and for Jesus, John 1:1-2; Colossians 1:15-16; Hebrews 1:1-2.
For something to have been created by and through Jesus, he must have first been present - i.e the Creator before the created.

No, all these things were created by the Father first, then Jesus began speaking things into existence.

That's not what Scripture says. Genesis says "and GOD said, 'let there be light' and there was light" etc. It doesn't say " God created light and then Jesus spoke it into existence."
Besides, how can you speak into existence something that has already been created - i.e that already exists?

You can't really pull me up for saying something that is not in Scripture, and then make a statement yourself which is not in Scripture.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.