How easy is it for Trinitarians to misread the scriptures?

[sojourner]

Please show your evidence of the term being used to imply deific status for all three persons in scriptures (since the Doctrine you speak of is derived from scriptures, your evidence of deific status must come from the same and not some doctrinal committee addition!)

Since you insist on evidence then we do the same to you. Failure to present evidence that is creditworthy and valid scriptures (Bible chapter and verse) will confer on you full status as disingenuous poster seeing you have been posting for a long time now without presenting any evidence but accusing others of being such disingenuousness posters ourselves.

If one were to read 2 Cor 3, one would discover Paul speaking about God in terms of “Lord.” He then says, “the Lord is the Spirit.” This absolutely identifies the Spirit as God. In Romans 9, Paul refers to Christ as God, and refers to him as Lord in several cases.

 

[rrobs]

Not answering the question. How does one Lord and one God mean that there are three persons of one God?

You gotta stop asking good questions and just take it by faith. Oh, while we're here, I might as well mention God is from the planet Gork. Just take that by faith also. No need for scriptural corroboration.

 

[YoursTrue]

It doesn’t. But the title does imply deific status. It’s significant that the term is used for all three Persons.

The terms in the Bible never say all three persons are equal to each other, and we have covered the idea that "God" doesn't have to mean three persons called God equal to the others. There are so many topics to discuss in reference to these points, but three persons each equal to the others is not a biblically based idea.

 

[YoursTrue]

1) You have yet to prove that the doctrine is demonstrably false.

It certainly is. The scriptures with understanding (and holy spirit) show the doctrine as absolutely, undeniably false.

 

[sojourner]

The terms in the Bible never say all three persons are equal to each other, and we have covered the idea that "God" doesn't have to mean three persons called God equal to the others. There are so many topics to discuss in reference to these points, but three persons each equal to the others is not a biblically based idea.

Again: it doesn’t have to be. It does have to be within the Apostles’ teaching.

 

[sojourner]

It certainly is. The scriptures with understanding (and holy spirit) show the doctrine as absolutely, undeniably false.

No. It doesn’t. John 1 and 2 Cor. say otherwise.

 

[YoursTrue]

You gotta stop asking good questions and just take it by faith. Oh, while we're here, I might as well mention God is from the planet Gork. Just take that by faith also. No need for scriptural corroboration.

Right. And take it by faith that Mary was not a virgin - and eternally. Take a lot of things by faith, as long as the doctrine says it, or someone else says it because they read other things that conflict with the Bible and say it could be based on fairytales, even though they're in whatever religion they are claiming to be Christian, especially. (Thanks.)

 

[YoursTrue]

Again: it doesn’t have to be. It does have to be within the Apostles’ teaching.

Do you mean the succession of apostles, or however it can be explained? You're talking about the co-equality of the three "persons" each and all said to be God?

 

[sojourner]

Do you mean the succession of apostles, or however it can be explained? You're talking about the co-equality of the three "persons" each and all said to be God?

I mean the Apostles' teaching (of which the Bible is part).

 

[YoursTrue]

I mean the Apostles' teaching (of which the Bible is part).

If that's the case, I don't see anywhere in the apostles' teaching that the trinity is either a doctrinal matter, or that it is true as the doctrine states. Can you please show me the apostles' teachings that God is one God, but three coeternal persons, namely one God in three divine persons? When Jesus was on the earth, was he working as three persons? Someone here (a trinitarian) did say he prayed to himself as God. Do you believe that, too?

 

[sojourner]

If that's the case, I don't see anywhere in the apostles' teaching that the trinity is either a doctrinal matter, or that it is true as the doctrine states. Can you please show me the apostles' teachings that God is one God, but three coeternal persons, namely one God in three divine persons? When Jesus was on the earth, was he working as three persons? Someone here (a trinitarian) did say he prayed to himself as God. Do you believe that, too?

Read the doctrine. Formulated by Apostles.

 

[eik]

Someone here (a trinitarian) did say he prayed to himself as God. Do you believe that, too?

Of course not. The essence of the misunderstanding lies in the huge discrepancy between God, who is always one and indivisible, and what comes out from God, namely the son and the Holy Spirit. Whilst they are away from God, they are identifiable by humans as truly separate persons from the Father. When they return to God, they are not perceived separately from the Father because they become part of God, even if we realize that they continue on as separate from the Father, but we cannot perceive or sense it unless caught up in a spiritual vision, and their separateness cannot be articulated except in terms of spiritual concepts.

There is the necessary concept of what returns to God becoming subsumed by God, even if theoretically distinguishable. In other words it is impossible for humans to divide the character of God, but it is also impossible to mistake what comes out from God with the Father.

 

[YoursTrue]

Of course not. The essence of the misunderstanding lies in the huge discrepancy between God, who is always one and indivisible, and what comes out from God, namely the son and the Holy Spirit. Whilst they are away from God, they are identifiable by humans as truly separate persons from the Father. When they return to God, they are not perceived separately from the Father because they become part of God, even if we realize that they continue on as separate from the Father, but we cannot perceive or sense it unless caught up in a spiritual vision, and their separateness cannot be articulated except in terms of spiritual concepts.

There is the necessary concept of what returns to God becoming subsumed by God, even if theoretically distinguishable. In other words it is impossible for humans to divide the character of God, but it is also impossible to mistake what comes out from God with the Father.

Do you understand what someone else here (sojourner) who seems to be an expert in the trinity doctrine and theory is saying that the apostles have formulated the trinity doctrine, but fails to say what is that doctrine formulated by the apostles. Do you know what is the doctrine formulated by, as sojourner says it is, by the apostles?

 

[YoursTrue]

Read the doctrine. Formulated by Apostles.

Hello sojourner. Would you agree with the following? "The essence of the misunderstanding lies in the huge discrepancy between God, who is always one and indivisible, and what comes out from God, namely the son and the Holy Spirit. Whilst they are away from God, they are identifiable by humans as truly separate persons from the Father. When they return to God, they are not perceived separately from the Father because they become part of God, even if we realize that they continue on as separate from the Father, but we cannot perceive or sense it unless caught up in a spiritual vision, and their separateness cannot be articulated except in terms of spiritual concepts." (As explained by elk in a recent post?)

 

[eik]

Do you understand what someone else here (sojourner) who seems to be an expert in the trinity doctrine and theory is saying that the apostles have formulated the trinity doctrine, but fails to say what is that doctrine formulated by the apostles. Do you know what is the doctrine formulated by, as sojourner says it is, by the apostles?

Anyone who claims to be an expert in the trinity is invariably not, as there is no biblical trinity where only the Father is described as "true God" (gospel & epistles of John). Christ is nowhere confused with the Father, and hardly if ever deferred to as God directly, but may be so by implication as he ascended to the right hand of the Father and resumed his place and role as the "word of God" (cf. Rev Ch. 1). So there is no issue with the risen Christ being inferred to be God, as he is one with God and co-eternal with God, but it doesn't infer a trinity within God as such because his divinity is positional to that of the Father and at the command of the Father, inferring conceptual distinctness in order (God is the head of Christ 1 Cor 11:3).

As far as I am aware, the only apostolic trinity doctrine is the same Deut 6:4 definition as before under the Old Testament, with the proviso that it is permissible to continue to talk of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit as a separate "persons" from the Father. A primary point of departure of the philosophical trinity from the biblical trinity is in the 3 x hypostases "on the throne of God". The bible knows of Jesus only as the exact imprint of the hypostasis of God. This is the root problem with the Trinity doctrine: i.e. the attempt to define the throne of God by an anthropomorphic revelation of God, which inevitably borrows from Greek triadism for its divisive philosophical speculations.

We talk of the Holy Spirit because he acts in our lives and acted in the life of Christ. We talk of the son because the son appeared in the world and ascended to the right hand of God. It does not infer separate hypostases.

Every reference to the "son" in the bible is a primary reference to Jesus Christ the man being "sent" (the "Word" is an extended reference or inference from the man himself).

 

[sojourner]

Hello sojourner. Would you agree with the following? "The essence of the misunderstanding lies in the huge discrepancy between God, who is always one and indivisible, and what comes out from God, namely the son and the Holy Spirit. Whilst they are away from God, they are identifiable by humans as truly separate persons from the Father. When they return to God, they are not perceived separately from the Father because they become part of God, even if we realize that they continue on as separate from the Father, but we cannot perceive or sense it unless caught up in a spiritual vision, and their separateness cannot be articulated except in terms of spiritual concepts." (As explained by elk in a recent post?)

No.

 

[sojourner]

Do you understand what someone else here (sojourner) who seems to be an expert in the trinity doctrine and theory is saying that the apostles have formulated the trinity doctrine, but fails to say what is that doctrine formulated by the apostles. Do you know what is the doctrine formulated by, as sojourner says it is, by the apostles?

1) I may "seem" to you to be an "expert" in the doctrine, but I never made that claim.
2) It is a doctrine, but not a theory.
3) It is part of the Apostles' teaching.
4) I have invited, directed, encouraged, yea begged you to read it for yourself. I can't understand why you won't do that very thing and educate yourself?

 

[YoursTrue]

1) I may "seem" to you to be an "expert" in the doctrine, but I never made that claim.
2) It is a doctrine, but not a theory.
3) It is part of the Apostles' teaching.
4) I have invited, directed, encouraged, yea begged you to read it for yourself. I can't understand why you won't do that very thing and educate yourself?

Again, as for the apostles' teaching, are you saying they formulated such a doctrine in the scriptures?
It has to be a theory, even if it called a doctrine, since -- it cannot be proved if God is three persons each and all co-equal with each other, each and all three without beginning. If you think you can prove the validity or veracity of the doctrine, please do so.
I have read the trinity doctrine. However, I will put out a brief summary in print from the initial definition given at wikipedia.
"The Christian doctrine of the Trinity holds that God is one God, but three coeternal consubstantial persons or hypostases--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit--as "one God in three Divine persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature." Trinity - Wikipedia

 

[YoursTrue]

No.

By the way, your picture of a tree and a moon is beautiful.

 

[Soapy]

Of course not. The essence of the misunderstanding lies in the huge discrepancy between God, who is always one and indivisible, and what comes out from God, namely the son and the Holy Spirit. Whilst they are away from God, they are identifiable by humans as truly separate persons from the Father. When they return to God, they are not perceived separately from the Father because they become part of God, even if we realize that they continue on as separate from the Father, but we cannot perceive or sense it unless caught up in a spiritual vision, and their separateness cannot be articulated except in terms of spiritual concepts.

There is the necessary concept of what returns to God becoming subsumed by God, even if theoretically distinguishable. In other words it is impossible for humans to divide the character of God, but it is also impossible to mistake what comes out from God with the Father.

Brilliant... brilliant rubbish!!!

Mankind is made in the image of God... the image comes from God... the spirit of man comes from God and when we die in the body our deathless spirit RETURNS to God....

In your argument: We are also GOD when we die!!!


Amazing....!!

1. - Jesus ascended into Heaven and was seated at the right hand of God
2. - Jesus ascended into Heaven and was seated at the right hand of ESSENCE

Interesting...!!