• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A Trinity of one? - A new thought

Evandr2

Member
dawny0826 said:
I believe and probably will always believe that belief or non-belief in the Trinity rests on biblical interpretation.

These are only a FEW verses which support my belief in the Trinity from a biblical perspective...



For me, there's a spiritual enrichment in understanding and believing in the Trinity. It makes sense to me. I wish that everyone could feel what I do when it comes to my understanding of the Trinity. But...

I wouldn't consider a Christian who doesn't accept the Trinity any less Christian than myself and if one's faith is in Christ...the Bible states that it is in CHRIST that we will be reconciled with the Father.

I cannot remember the details but there is something that really opened my eyes to the lack of authority in the concept of the trinity.

Basically, the author of the thesis which attempts to describe the trinity admitted that the more he contemplated on what he wrote, the less he could understand it himself.

The Lord has never "dummied down" anyone (to my knowledge) after making revelation to them. Especially on something so important as the condition of the Godhead.

I apologize for may lack of reference but I will find it and post it for your consideration.

If any of you know of what I speak you are welcome to update me.

Vandr
 

Evandr2

Member
Mister Emu said:
And the scripture...
I have no scripture about the Trinity, fact is, nobody does because, as the word of the living God, it does not exist.


Mister Emu said:
So because something is hard/impossible to understand it is automatically wrong? Because something is simpler it is true? Maybe you are the one interpreting scripture to go along with your non-Trinitarian beliefs......

Our Heavenly Father is not a God of confusion. You ask if I believe that hard things to understand must be false and easy things to understand must be true. What I ask you is why do easy things to understand that contradict what you believe have to be false while hard things to understand that can be shaped with inconsistencies, shadows, and illogic be sufficient upon which to risk your eternal salvation?


Mister Emu said:
What led to the concept of the Trinity is the teachings of Jesus faithfully recorded is Scripture and Tradition.

Tradition .. Yes - The teachings of Christ .. No - I invite you to show me where Christ supports that He and the Father are one in the same outside the realm of wisdom, intent, and purpose.
Mister Emu said:
Isaiah 45:18

Yes .. God created it but you have yet to show that "God" is not a level of glory which the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost all have claim. The Lord is the Lord who created the earth and all things in the Heavens.. .. .. At the direction of His Father by who's power all things are done.

Mister Emu, I think you place far too much meaning on a phrase that simply states Jesus is the Lord, Jehova, the Christ, and beside Him there is no other. I know it is hard for you to believe but it is really as plain as that computer screen you are looking at, that is - God the Father is the Father and Jesus is His only begotten in the flesh.
 

Evandr2

Member
Throughout the scriptures there can be found many apparent contradictions, not the least of which are those that deal with the nature of God, who God is, what God is and so forth. The great majority of Christianity believes that God is a singular individual with incomprehensible form. We are told that God is the Father (2 Peter 1:17). We are told that Jesus Christ is God (Isaiah 9:6), that Jesus Christ is the son of God (Mark 1:1). We are told that the Father, Son and holy Ghost are the same (John 14:9), that they are different (Luke 3:22), that they are one (1 John 5:8) ...and so on.... and on.... and on.

I have written an entire chapter on my considered views of the nature of God and I will briefly quote from it here. Keep in mind that the chapter which I will quote is not yet published but will arrive in volume three of Faith and Evidence of which only volume one is currently available for free download at my website - www.faithandevidence.com

You may ask “how God can be the creator of heaven and earth and all that exists and still not be singular with regard to the title of God?” First let me ensure that you understand that the absolute truth about such matters while in this mortal state is not necessary for our eternal salvation. Therefore it is not a matter for much thought except to render it clear that possibilities do exist and we should be content with the knowledge that God knows the answer to all questions and will impart his knowledge to us as He deems it necessary. Any explanation given from the mind of mortal man without revelation from on high is conjecture, including this work.

However, I am also convinced that our Heavenly Father did not intend for mankind to conjure up some fantastically confusing, massively contradictory and illogical definition of the nature of God. The Bible does not support such concepts nor can any explanation be conceived that would render such ideas plausible. God is NOT the author of confusion.(1 Corinthians 14:33)

The following two paragraphs will illustrate that mankind does have the ability to put together a variety of scenarios that have the ring of truth and possibility. Remember, these two paragraphs are not derived from the Gospel and have very little temporal evidence to back them up.

First consider that mans knowledge of the nature of existence and the relationship of space, time and energy is extremely limited and that it has been hypothesized that in the universe, different plains of existence (dimensions) are present. If so, it could rightfully be believed that because 2 pieces of matter cannot occupy the same space at the same time, anything that does not exist in a particular dimension does not exist at all for that plain or dimension. When a controlling force enters in upon a given dimension and organizes it, that intelligence or force can rightfully claim that they have created the whole of it.

A second thought puts forth the notion that “matter unorganized” is without form or definition and is not subject to physical law and is without ability to act or react with anything. Such potential needs to be organized and defined into something that has the ability to exist as part of its surroundings. Nothing exists for “matter unorganized” and therefore it can be said that any force or intelligence that organizes such potential into something that can interact with its surroundings and is subject to physical law, has in effect created for such newly organized matter everything else that surrounds it.

There are many such hypothesis that can be born of mortal intellect but none tend to give a reasonable foundation for the apparent confusion about the nature of God without hiding behind mystery and shadows.


The following puts forth a more reasonable explanation of the nature of God and how the apparent conflicts in the Bible can be resolved.

Consider a family wherein:
  • there is perfect harmony of thought and action without controversy
  • one and all members are exalted and glorified
  • when one speaks and/or acts, it is with absolute truth and therefore in perfect harmony with the will and mind of all others in the family
  • There is no conflict in words, actions, or desires of any other family member or with the established laws of creation.
  • to know and understand one is to know and understand all
  • individually glorified beings would be equally glorified and "all powerful"
  • every member would exorcise absolute dominion over that which is their own (just as we are subject to our Heavenly Father and no other)
  • each has obtained perfect knowledge and wisdom
  • there is no vanity
  • no member would (even if they could) seek to excel above another within their exalted sphere
  • what one does has effectively been done by all because they are one in all things, from all eternity to all eternity
Each family unit of this exalted kinship would possess omnipotents and equal glory with every other family unit. When one speaks, the entire family has spoken. To glorify one is to glorify the entire family and to credit the family is to credit each member thereof!
In Fine: Every member is equally glorified because conflict and/or the desire to claim greater glory or enforce dominion over any other member does not exist and there is perfect unity of thought and action without the need for guidance from any save it be truth and righteousness!

In such a family, the addition of a newly exalted being does not in any way diminish any other member of that family. The growth of the family by adding other glorified beings would add glory to the family unit and would be the foundation for the purpose of existence. In fact, it would be by this means and no other that this family could experience eternal increase while already possessing omnipotent power.

I will end my personal chapter quote here. You will have to wait is you want to read the whole chapter.

Vandr
 

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
I have no scripture about the Trinity, fact is, nobody does because, as the word of the living God, it does not exist.
Post #12 for passages that show a duality, and imply a Trinity.

Our Heavenly Father is not a God of confusion.
I agree

What I ask you is why do easy things to understand that contradict what you believe have to be false
First, you never answered my question. Why does difficult to understand = false? Secondly, it is false because my belief is the Traditionaly held one through the history of Christendom, and is the belief passed on from the apostles down. I'll take apostolic authority over simplicity any day.

I invite you to show me where Christ supports that He and the Father are one in the same outside the realm of wisdom, intent, and purpose.
I gave you verses in post #12, the traditional and apostolic interpretation of these verses is Trinitarian.

Yes .. God created it but you have yet to show that "God" is not a level of glory which the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost all have claim.
You have yet to show it is.

Mister Emu, I think you place far too much meaning on a phrase that simply states Jesus is the Lord, Jehova, the Christ, and beside Him there is no other. I know it is hard for you to believe but it is really as plain as that computer screen you are looking at, that is - God the Father is the Father and Jesus is His only begotten in the flesh.
Where does God the Father and God the Holy Ghost come in in this "no other" statement? Since you say Jesus is YHWH are you saying Jesus lied? That contrary to His statements there are in fact two others?
 

Ody

Well-Known Member
Personally i find the trinity itself flawed, there is no need for "the son" there is no need for a middle man between "the father".
 

Evandr2

Member
Mister Emu said:
Post #12 for passages that show a duality, and imply a Trinity.?

I can see the possibility of a duality of thought, purpose, and intent but it is quite a stretch to pull your concept of the out of these scriptures. There is just too much weight against it. Hard to understand, easy to understand, it just does not matter. The concept of the trinity is too full of holes to hold water.


Mister Emu said:
First, you never answered my question. Why does difficult to understand = false? Secondly, it is false because my belief is the Traditionally held one through the history of Christendom, and is the belief passed on from the apostles down. I'll take apostolic authority over simplicity any day..?

Difficult to understand does not automatically equal false. Neither does it equal true.
We need simply look at what we have. A reasonable, objective and unbiased person will see that the evidence against your argument is overwhelming and the scriptures you sited present, at best, a weak argument for your case if any at all. History has shown that the religious views of a few powerful people, right or wrong, can influence the beliefs of large masses of people for many generations, even hundreds of years. Before you or anyone else claims that the Lord would never let so many be so wrong for so long... I respond with a firm "Yes He Would". The Lord is bound by His gift to us of free agency. He will allow the pride and abstinence of mankind to lead them astray. He will be their to help us find the right path is we are humble but He will not force anybody back into His presence. That was the plan of Lucifer and it was rejected.

Please understand that I mean no insult to you or your beliefs. The world is full of fine and intelligent people who hold your views as their own. I commend you for the strength of your convictions and I encourage you to hold fast to them until, if the time ever comes, that you are satisfied that they need to change.


Mister Emu said:
Where does God the Father and God the Holy Ghost come in this "no other" statement? Since you say Jesus is YHWH are you saying Jesus lied? That contrary to His statements there are in fact two others?

No, certainly not, Jesus did not lie. There are several possible meanings that could be attached to the phrase "none else". It could mean no one else is the Christ or no one else created the earth. Maybe no one else can gain salvation but by Him. True you can attach your definition but that is the weakest one of the bunch. It just doesn't wash.

Vandr
 

Squirt

Well-Known Member
Mister Emu said:
For clarity. The people who compiled the Bible didn't have the authority to do so?
Yes, that's right. That's not to say I'm not grateful to them for what they did. I just don't believe any of them held any God-given authority to make the decisions as to what to include in the canon. Heaven knows, it changed enough times before it was "finalized." I believe they did the best they could with what they had -- "what they had" being primarily their own best judgment.
 

dawny0826

Mother Heathen
Evandr2 said:
I cannot remember the details but there is something that really opened my eyes to the lack of authority in the concept of the trinity.

Basically, the author of the thesis which attempts to describe the trinity admitted that the more he contemplated on what he wrote, the less he could understand it himself.

The Lord has never "dummied down" anyone (to my knowledge) after making revelation to them. Especially on something so important as the condition of the Godhead.

I apologize for may lack of reference but I will find it and post it for your consideration.

If any of you know of what I speak you are welcome to update me.

Vandr

Understand that my belief and acceptance in the Trinity doesn't revolve around an individual's thesis.

My belief and understanding comes from personal biblical interpretation as well as the fact that the Trinity makes complete mental and spiritual sense to me.

I couldn't view God any other way.
 

dawny0826

Mother Heathen
Throughout the scriptures there can be found many apparent contradictions, not the least of which are those that deal with the nature of God, who God is, what God is and so forth. The great majority of Christianity believes that God is a singular individual with incomprehensible form. We are told that God is the Father (2 Peter 1:17). We are told that Jesus Christ is God (Isaiah 9:6), that Jesus Christ is the son of God (Mark 1:1). We are told that the Father, Son and holy Ghost are the same (John 14:9), that they are different (Luke 3:22), that they are one (1 John 5:8) ...and so on.... and on.... and on.

There is no contradiction here when you BELIEVE IN the Trinity. Because Father, Son and Holy Ghost are ONE...as they are manifestations of ONE God...yet they are also separate.

Three separate manifestations or roles of God...still ONE God.
 

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
I can see the possibility of a duality of thought, purpose, and intent but it is quite a stretch to pull your concept of the out of these scriptures.
How so?
The verses do not in any way say that they are one "in thought, purpose, and intent" it says they are an unqualified one. To get your interpretation we have to read into the verses and pull out what is not there. Yours is the position without scriptural support.

A reasonable, objective and unbiased person will see that the evidence against your argument is overwhelming and the scriptures you sited present, at best, a weak argument for your case if any at all.
What evidence? I have seen none.

No, certainly not, Jesus did not lie.
Well at least we agree here :D

There are several possible meanings that could be attached to the phrase "none else". It could mean no one else is the Christ or no one else created the earth. Maybe no one else can gain salvation but by Him. True you can attach your definition but that is the weakest one of the bunch. It just doesn't wash
Once again you are trying to reach into scripture to pull out non-existant support for your position. No where do your qualifiers appear. I am not attaching definition, I(this is my standard policy) take scripture at face value unless there is a good reason/evidence not to.

Yes, that's right. That's not to say I'm not grateful to them for what they did. I just don't believe any of them held any God-given authority to make the decisions as to what to include in the canon. Heaven knows, it changed enough times before it was "finalized."
Thank you. Just wondering, has you Church added or subtracted any ancient books to/from the Bible?
 

Evandr2

Member
dawny0826 said:
Understand that my belief and acceptance in the Trinity doesn't revolve around an individual's thesis.

My belief and understanding comes from personal biblical interpretation as well as the fact that the Trinity makes complete mental and spiritual sense to me.

I couldn't view God any other way.

Fair enough, I have made my position known and you have responded with conviction. I respect that. I really shy away from a wishy-washy person and you are not that. Some day one of us will find that we are are wrong because we cannot both be right. I pray that whoever of us is wrong discovers the truth in time to act one it.

Vandr
 

Squirt

Well-Known Member
Mister Emu said:
The verses do not in any way say that they are one "in thought, purpose, and intent" it says they are an unqualified one. To get your interpretation we have to read into the verses and pull out what is not there. Yours is the position without scriptural support.
I disagree. They may not specifically say "in thought, purpose and intent," but they certainly do not say "in substance" either. How, for instance, can you have a single substance that is at the same time corporeal and non-corporeal? We agree that they are "one." What the scriptures unfortunately come out and specifically state is in what way they are "one."
 
Top