Non-Trinitarians: What's wrong with the Trinity?

[Eddi]

(This is for people who consider themselves some kind of Christian but who reject the trinity)

Many find it mind-boggling and consider it a mystery, and leave it as that

Others are quick to dismiss it as non-sensical rubbish

Some have a major problem with "The Son" part of it

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

And why are some people so quick to reject it?

It makes perfect sense to me, I have no problem accepting it

Each element of God (each part of the trinity) is a dimension of God which is distinct from any other dimension/element, although all these (Father, Son, Spirit) are consubstantial with the central emergent property - "God"

I understand God as being triangle shaped, as having three equal sides, neither of which make sense alone

So, non-Trinitarians - what's wrong with all this? (pic related)

What are your problems with it?

Why are you non-Trinitarian?

Please tell

 

[leov]

(This is for people who consider themselves some kind of Christian but who reject the trinity)

Many find it mind-boggling and consider it a mystery, and leave it as that

Others are quick to dismiss it as non-sensical rubbish

Some have a major problem with "The Son" part of it

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

And why are some people so quick to reject it?

It makes perfect sense to me, I have no problem accepting it

Each element of God (each part of the trinity) is a dimension of God which is distinct from any other dimension/element, although all these (Father, Son, Spirit) are consubstantial with the central emergent property - "God"

I understand God as being triangle shaped, as having three equal sides, neither of which make sense alone

So, non-Trinitarians - what's wrong with all this? (pic related)

What are your problems with it?

Why are you non-Trinitarian?

Please tell

View attachment 35880

Non essential information that very few can relate to. It is confused.

 

[Eddi]

Non essential information that very few can relate to. It is confused.

May I ask, how is it confused?

 

[leov]

May I ask, how is it confused?

There is no separate offices. It misunderstanding of ancient concept of God and The First Thought. "the Word was with God, and the Word was God. "

 

[Wu Wei]

Each element of God (each part of the trinity) is a dimension of God which is distinct from any other dimension/element, although all these (Father, Son, Spirit) are consubstantial with the central emergent property - "God"

Well then, since we are all children (sons and daughters) of God then we are all part of the trinity and thereby also God, or are daughters excluded since they are not sons?

And I don't believe that because I do not agree with the Trinity. And any questions I have asked religions folk about it in the past generally end up in vagaries or they get offended since I do not take it all on "faith" and ask for an understandable description.

It makes no sense and it never will. My big question is why is it so important to a Trinitarian that we all accept this? If one believes in or worships God is that not enough and is the Trinity then not superfluous?

I likely will not get into this much, religious discussions of this type generally divide into us against them.

 

[leov]

Well then, since we are all children (sons and daughters) of God then we are all part of the trinity and thereby also God, or are daughters excluded since they are not sons?

And I don't believe that because I do not agree with the Trinity. And any questions I have asked religions folk about it in the past generally end up in vagaries or they get offended since I do not take it all on "faith" and ask for an understandable description.

It makes no sense and it never will. My big question is why is it so important to a Trinitarian that we all accept this? If one believes in or worships God is that not enough and is the Trinity then not superfluous?

I likely will not get into this much, religious discussions of this type generally divide into us against them.

After Constantine Christ Principle was replaced with Jesus Principle.

 

[Wu Wei]

After Constantine Christ Principle was replaced with Jesus Principle.

That right there is my point, that makes no sense to me and I have no idea what that means

 

[leov]

That right there is my point, that makes no sense to me and I have no idea what that means

It is just spiritually dead are trying to explain spiritual matters, 'flesh and blood' construct.

 

[columbus]

It makes perfect sense to me, I have no problem accepting it

"Monotheistic Trinitarianism" was one of the irrational concepts that started me questioning the Catholic Christianity I was born and raised in. I knew it was an oxymoron before I even knew that word.

How could Abraham, Moses, Samuel, & Co. possibly not know about this?
How can Christianity be anything but totally blowing off the 1st Commandment? I understand that Islam is more of a variant, it's still utterly monotheistic...
Christianity is a whole new theological concept. A heresy. One that would have gotten you stoned to death for much of Biblical history.

When I was about 12 or so, I got hold of a Bible I could read for myself. I expected to find something, somewhere, to explain this. But it didn't happen, it's just not there.
Trinitarianism is not Scriptural.
Tom

 

[Wu Wei]

It is just spiritually dead are trying to explain spiritual matters, 'flesh and blood' construct.

I can see this is going the same way every discussion about the Trinity goes.....vagaries
Thanks, I'm out

 

[pearl]

When I was about 12 or so, I got hold of a Bible I could read for myself. I expected to find something, somewhere, to explain this. But it didn't happen, it's just not there.
Trinitarianism is not Scriptural.

No it is not and no one claims that the word Trinity or Trinitarian formulation is found anywhere in Scripture.

 

[Katzpur]

(This is for people who consider themselves some kind of Christian but who reject the trinity)

Many find it mind-boggling and consider it a mystery, and leave it as that

Others are quick to dismiss it as non-sensical rubbish

Some have a major problem with "The Son" part of it

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

And why are some people so quick to reject it?

It makes perfect sense to me, I have no problem accepting it

Each element of God (each part of the trinity) is a dimension of God which is distinct from any other dimension/element, although all these (Father, Son, Spirit) are consubstantial with the central emergent property - "God"

I understand God as being triangle shaped, as having three equal sides, neither of which make sense alone

So, non-Trinitarians - what's wrong with all this? (pic related)

What are your problems with it?

Why are you non-Trinitarian?

Please tell

View attachment 35880

@Eddi, I find nothing wrong with your picture. As a matter of fact, as a non-Trinitarian, I'd have to say that it pretty well describes my understanding of the relationship between the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. What I cannot accept is the language of the early creeds, particularly the Athanansian Creed. For me, it doesn't clarify the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; it makes it more complicated. It sounds like a legal document and uses so much neo-platonic verbiage that trying to make sense of it is enough to bring on a migraine.. I feel as if the Bible explains sufficiently well who the three members of the Godhead are.

 

[Katzpur]

My big question is why is it so important to a Trinitarian that we all accept this? If one believes in or worships God is that not enough and is the Trinity then not superfluous?

That's my big question, too.

 

[metis]

IMO, to understand the Trinity one must understand the use of the Greek concept of "essence" that is heavily used in not only the early Church but also used in the NT since it was written in Greek.

In philosophy, essence is the property or set of properties that make an entity or substance what it fundamentally is, and which it has by necessity, and without which it loses its identity... The concept originates rigorously with Aristotle (although it can also be found in Plato), who used the Greek expression to ti ên einai (τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι, literally meaning "the what it was to be" and corresponding to the scholastic term quiddity) or sometimes the shorter phrase to ti esti (τὸ τί ἐστι, literally meaning "the what it is" and corresponding to the scholastic term haecceity) for the same idea... --Essence - Wikipedia

Therefore, Jesus is of God the Father but not God the Father.

 

[nPeace]

(This is for people who consider themselves some kind of Christian but who reject the trinity)

Many find it mind-boggling and consider it a mystery, and leave it as that

Others are quick to dismiss it as non-sensical rubbish

Some have a major problem with "The Son" part of it

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

And why are some people so quick to reject it?

It makes perfect sense to me, I have no problem accepting it

Each element of God (each part of the trinity) is a dimension of God which is distinct from any other dimension/element, although all these (Father, Son, Spirit) are consubstantial with the central emergent property - "God"

I understand God as being triangle shaped, as having three equal sides, neither of which make sense alone

So, non-Trinitarians - what's wrong with all this? (pic related)

What are your problems with it?

Why are you non-Trinitarian?

Please tell

View attachment 35880

There is a are problems with it.
For one thing, before the Word was, there was God, and his holy spirit... alone. There was no father.

After the Word began to exist (begotten. by God - enter the father), some time later, the Word ceased to exist.

For another, the holy spirit is with the father, with the son, with the saints. and with individual faithful one.
That's a lot of apportioned holy spirit.
Holy spirit is part of him, just like love, power, wisdom, etc.

So evidently, there is never a time, when there is three. Not three (no Trinity). God is one, and always was.

 

[Katzpur]

IMO, to understand the Trinity one must understand the use of the Greek concept of "essence" that is heavily used in not only the early Church but also used in the NT since it was written in Greek.

In philosophy, essence is the property or set of properties that make an entity or substance what it fundamentally is, and which it has by necessity, and without which it loses its identity... The concept originates rigorously with Aristotle (although it can also be found in Plato), who used the Greek expression to ti ên einai (τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι, literally meaning "the what it was to be" and corresponding to the scholastic term quiddity) or sometimes the shorter phrase to ti esti (τὸ τί ἐστι, literally meaning "the what it is" and corresponding to the scholastic term haecceity) for the same idea... --Essence - Wikipedia

Therefore, Jesus is of God the Father but not God the Father.

Clearly, then, I am never going to be able to understand the Trinity!

 

[columbus]

IMO, to understand the Trinity one must understand the use of the Greek concept of "essence" that is heavily used in not only the early Church but also used in the NT since it was written in Greek.

How about explaining it like this:
Christianity is paganized Judaism. Polytheism and demigods and such were quite well accepted by pagan cultures, like the Greeks and Romans and Egyptians. As a result, the ethics of Christianity spread(slowly) as the pagan theology became accepted. But due to it's Judaic roots, Christian theologians felt a need to include monotheism.

That's what I think happened.
Tom

 

[74x12]

(This is for people who consider themselves some kind of Christian but who reject the trinity)

Many find it mind-boggling and consider it a mystery, and leave it as that

Others are quick to dismiss it as non-sensical rubbish

Some have a major problem with "The Son" part of it

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

And why are some people so quick to reject it?

It makes perfect sense to me, I have no problem accepting it

Each element of God (each part of the trinity) is a dimension of God which is distinct from any other dimension/element, although all these (Father, Son, Spirit) are consubstantial with the central emergent property - "God"

I understand God as being triangle shaped, as having three equal sides, neither of which make sense alone

So, non-Trinitarians - what's wrong with all this? (pic related)

What are your problems with it?

Why are you non-Trinitarian?

Please tell

View attachment 35880

i'm non-trinitarian because I believe it makes God into multiple personalities. After all they even use the words "three persons" So that is a personality. I don't think so.

God is one personality and one person. He's just manifested in different ways. The Son of God was the human manifestation of God. The Father is who He is in creation and in fatherhood as in relation to His offspring. Since the Son of God was begotten; that means He has both the created human nature and yet; in Spirit He is the eternal God. This is why He's both God and man. Both created and uncreated.

And the holy Spirit is what God is. God is a Spirit and God is holy.

So these aren't 3 personalities of God. They're just the same God manifested in different ways. And there are other manifestations of God as well.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

And why are some people so quick to reject it?

It seems like dragging logic through the mud to avoid polytheist accusations.

Why are you non-Trinitarian?

It's nothing like how gods were viewed early on. El was the Daddy, Yah/Yahweh was a Son or Son-in-law, there were lots of other gods, and Jesus is just some guy who tried to reform some elements that weren't working out but his Temple Tantrum among other things got him in legal trouble.

 

[TJ1]

(This is for people who consider themselves some kind of Christian but who reject the trinity)

Many find it mind-boggling and consider it a mystery, and leave it as that

Others are quick to dismiss it as non-sensical rubbish

Some have a major problem with "The Son" part of it

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

And why are some people so quick to reject it?

Hello Eddi,

The simple reason why I reject the Trinity is because it is not taught anywhere in the Bible, either explicitly or implicitly. The history of how that doctrine developed over the centuries is long and somewhat complicated, but it is entirely absent from scripture itself. Jesus refers to his Father as "the only true God" which would not be a simple, true statement if the Trinity is true. (John 17:1, 3)

As for why many find it difficult to understand or why it has been called a 'mystery' is because it often leads to different absurdities and word games when the implications of it are examined carefully. For example, one of the prominent definitions of the Trinity is that God exists as three 'persons' and yet only one 'being' (in line with your picture). So in this explanation, "God" seems to be reduced to a mere ontological state of being that is shared by 3 people, somewhat akin to the vague 'humanity' that we share, and yet the Bible consistently portrays "God" rather as a single individual with a single identity, i.e. one who speaks and acts. So the definition and reality don't really match very well.

If the Trinity doctrine was really the central teaching of Christianity, one would expect it to be taught plainly and often in scripture. But as The New Encyclopædia Britannica observes, “Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament.”