• 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!

Say not "Trinity": desist: it will be better for you

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
I'm sorry my friend, I have to call you on the Zander / Zion / Saldalphon thing. We've talked about it before... do you remember?
I do remember our conversations in detail, I do not understand where you've got confused; especially that Zanda is the spelling of my name, Zander is a prehistoric English fish. ><>

Do you not understand if people don't take prophecy seriously, mankind is over soon in the Great Tribulation. :oops:

Personally believe it is evidential we can prove I'm the person with the name of the Messiah; it is lack of study that can allow us to doubt it.

So like this thread, if people accept me as Zion Elohim, and understand the contexts of that; that El is the Source, Elohim are the Divine Council - we could then create world peace between us on here.

In my opinion. :innocent:
 

Terry Sampson

Well-Known Member
Is your focus on how each of these are portrayed in scripture? Or is it a literal compare and contrast which may include theology as well as the texts?

Whatever I need to make my point, which is that Islam's Allah and Judaism's HaShem are not only NOT identical, they are substantially more different than similar.

P.S. BTW, atheists' and agnostics' votes don't count.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
My comment was made in jest to my atheist Hindu friend Aup.

I have little doubt Jesus and the Apostles taught monotheism based on Judaism while bringing much needed reform and change and a New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31).

There is no direct reference to the Trinity in the New Testament and its importance developed amongst the early church fathers in understanding the nature of the relationship between God the Father and Jesus the Son and later on the role of the Holy Spirit. So perhaps the value of the Trinity doctrine that became more formalised through the 4th century is to draw our attention to these core entities, their interrelationships and our relationship to all three. The value of these interconnections is acknowledged in the writings of my own faith.

Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 113-115

The doctrine of the trinity is not without controversy within Christendom and a problem seem in the Quran appears to be the deification of Jesus where Jesus becomes God incarnate. So theology around the Divinity of Christ and the trinity are two of the core differences between Islam and Christianity.

Whether reconciliation between the two theologies is possible is a key question for Christians, Muslims and Baha’is.

Thanks for your post.
Of course, the term Godhead is used, what does that mean to you ?

The plurality of God is shown in the OT by verses like " let US make man in OUR image", or "let US go down and confuse their language".

It was blasphemy for a Jew to worship any but God. Christ while in human form was a perfect keeper of the Mosaic law. Yet He was worshiped and called God by an Apostle. He gave no rebuke for either identifying Him as God, or for the worship given him.
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
In the Holy Quran the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon Him) has said:

4:171 O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not "Trinity": desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth.

With reference to the Quran and Bible, what did Muhammad teach about the Christian concept of the Trinity? Do Muhammad’s Teachings contradict what the Bible has to say about the Trinity? If so, why? If not, why not?

Was Jesus a Messenger of Allah as spoken of by Muhammad? Arguments based on either the Quran and/ or the Bible are acceptable as this is a discussion and debate about scripture.

Serious question:

...Do you consider yourself one? Or do you consider yourself a duo?

...Because the way I understand it, we are people with bodies, yet we have souls, that can live seperately from our human bodies.

I consider myself one, yet I have two aspects.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Now that we've got that out of the way, let's move on to Judaism's YHWH and Islam's Allah.
However, to avoid the freeway traffic in this thread, I propose we engage in a One-on-One discussion. What say you?
Works for me:)
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
Islam's Allah and Judaism's HaShem are not only NOT identical, they are substantially more different than similar.
Allah is the God Most High (El Elyon), the source of reality, not anything seen in reality, and Yahavah Elohim walked with Adam, eat dinner with Abraham, wrestled with Jacob, Moses saw his back, etc.

Judaism's Hashem is a belief that Yahavah Elohim is the godhead in Heaven, this isn't the case; Yahavah Elohim is Most High over the Earth, and El Elyon is the Most High in Heaven.

The Curse of Moses states it is literally placed on the Children of Israel because of this (Deuteronomy 32:15-22), and Judgement Day soon (Deuteronomy 29:19-27) as people don't acknowledge this Curse is happening - where they reject the Source (EL), and worship the Divine Council (Elohim).

We can show that David defined a difference in the language between 'Yahavah' and 'El Elyon', that is completely being overlooked:

2 Samuel 22:14 & Psalms 18:13 Yahavah thundered from heaven 'and' The Most High uttered his voice. + Psalms 21:7 + Psalms 50:14 + Psalms 78:35 + Psalms 92:1.

Yeshua and John the Baptist (Elijah) came to correct the Jews back to the Father (Malachi 4:4-6); this was ignored so the Curse was placed.

Muhammad came along saying in canonizing the Bible, they'd corrupted the theology even more, and we should only worship the Source (Allah = El Elyon), not its creations (Elohim).

To explain why we should worship the Source, is imagine we're inside a giant computer system; the CPU sustains our quantum physics, reflecting with it provides energy.

In my opinion. :innocent:
 

Terry Sampson

Well-Known Member
To explain why we should worship the Source, is imagine we're inside a giant computer system; the CPU sustains our quantum physics, reflecting with it provides energy.
  1. CPUs do not demand or require worship, nor do they "sustain" quantum physics.
  2. I'm reasonably certain that, if I understood quantum physics, I wouldn't agree with it. If I'm not mistaken, I think that would make me "an anti-CPUist" according to you.
  3. According to Islam, I've been told, Allah requires submission and obedience. I am a really lousy submitter and a slacker when it comes to obedience.
  4. According Judaism, I've been told, HaShem requires trust (Jeremiah 17.5-8.) Trust, I can do. I'm not great at it, but I'm starting to get the hang of it. Fortunately for me, I don't have childhood traumas or PTSD that cause me to have "trust" issues.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
I do remember our conversations in detail, I do not understand where you've got confused; especially that Zanda is the spelling of my name, Zander is a prehistoric English fish. ><>

Do you not understand if people don't take prophecy seriously, mankind is over soon in the Great Tribulation. :oops:

Personally believe it is evidential we can prove I'm the person with the name of the Messiah; it is lack of study that can allow us to doubt it.

So like this thread, if people accept me as Zion Elohim, and understand the contexts of that; that El is the Source, Elohim are the Divine Council - we could then create world peace between us on here.

In my opinion. :innocent:
I stand by my previous objections then. Thank you.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I do remember our conversations in detail, I do not understand where you've got confused; especially that Zanda is the spelling of my name, Zander is a prehistoric English fish. ><>

Do you not understand if people don't take prophecy seriously, mankind is over soon in the Great Tribulation. :oops:

Personally believe it is evidential we can prove I'm the person with the name of the Messiah; it is lack of study that can allow us to doubt it.

So like this thread, if people accept me as Zion Elohim, and understand the contexts of that; that El is the Source, Elohim are the Divine Council - we could then create world peace between us on here.

In my opinion. :innocent:
Nope. The zander is alive and well all over N Europe and I've eaten it in several countries. Very good it is, too: Zander - Wikipedia
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
I agree. I don't see that anyone here has claimed the Christian Bible makes any specific or explicit reference to the Trinity. No one here has ventured to provide an argument for the Trinity based on scripture.
Here is scriptural proof of the Godhead (trinity).

1Cor. 8:6 " yet there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live: and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, from whom all things came and for whom we live."

2Cor 3:17 " Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.

2Cor. 13:14 "May the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ , and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."

Col. 2:9 "For in Christ, the fullness of The Deity lives in bodily form."

Isa. 44:6 " This is what the Lord says, Israels king and redeemer, the Lord almighty, I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God"

Jn. 1: 14 " The word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son who came from the Father , full of Grace and truth."

Jn 10:30 " I and the Father are one."

Rom. 9:5 " of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God."

Matt. 1:23 "The virgin will conceive and give birth to a Son, and they will call him Immanuel , which means God with us."

Matt. 28:19 " Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"

John 14:16-17 "And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever - The Spirit of Truth. The world cannot accept Him, because it neither sees nor knows Him. But you know Him, for He lives with you and will be in you.

Col.,1 15-17 "The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities: all things were created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
What I have believed since I first read that many years ago in 1981, long before Islam was a very well recognized religion here in the States, was that Muhammad's understanding of Christianity was what he was exposed to at the time, applying his perspective to what it was teaching. This is no different than any other person of another religion trying to understand a religion from the outside, then and today, like a Christian trying to understand Hinduism and getting most of it wrong. People's outsider perspective will naturally bring in errors of what that other religion actually believes from the insider perspective.

I don't think that translates into me saying he was "clueless". Misunderstanding, yes. Clueless, no. That's too harsh.

So then I have to ask, if this is not about the Triune formulation of Christianity, why does the passage create this imagined dialog between Allah and Jesus about his followers believing that Jesus and Mary were two gods in addition to Allah, that there are three gods in effect in the minds of Jesus' followers that he, Allah, needs to clear up with Jesus. "Did you teach them that? That you and Mary are two gods along with Allah?"

That's the context that I'm hearing. It's about the perceived beliefs of Christians that needs to be corrected by Muhammad, that Jesus has to say, "No, there is no God but one God! Mary and I are not co-equal gods.". It's about correcting Christian belief. What other Christian belief about Jesus being God is there besides the Trinity doctrine? He recognized they were claiming he was God, and this seems to be trying to correct that belief. And them mistakenly adding Mary in as the third deity in the Trinity was simply a misperception of Christian theology as an outsider to the religion, like the Christian getting stuff wrong about Hinduism does today.

That's how I read it then, and still do now. I certainly could be wrong, but the context of that comment, correcting Christian beliefs, stands out strongly to me. Is there another context I'm unaware of, that would necessitate a conversation with Jesus and Allah to set the record straight? What other than the Trinity doctrine, are they trying to correct here? Is there some belief that Jesus and Mary were gods other than the connection to the Trinity that I am unaware of? As I said, I could be wrong, as I'm no expert on Islam.


Such as including a verse to correct Christians in believing Jesus was God? It seems to me, that verse was very much about correct where they had gone astray. I'm not being cruel here. It's just being rational about it. I don't know how else to read that rationally. What was the context? He clearly believed Christians had gone astray with the Trinity.

And this is a common misunderstanding of what the Trinity is you see again and again by those who are outsiders. To take the Trinity as three gods, or two gods besides the Father, or Allah, is a common misperception. My only point is, Muhammad reflected that same misconception in his dialog between Allah and Jesus. With the information I have, that's what stands out to me logically. Christians had gone astray, and Muhammad needed to have Jesus saying to Muhammad's followers that Jesus did not condone that error. It was to protect his followers, to give them an answer from their prophet ahead of time when they hear Christians speak of the divinity of the Christ.


Why is that verse addressing the divinity of Jesus, that Jesus needs to correct Christians about, if it's not about the Trinity?


It would be a bit of a sideline for me to discuss at length my thoughts about this here, but if you're interested in how I approach this question about the justice of God expressed in religious thoughts, I'll direct you to my thread I started here: How to Read the Bible, and Still be a Christian


According to Christian teachings there is a distinction. Muhammed wanted his followers to believe Christians got it wrong, and he had the authority to override what they believed and correct it for them. Yes? While they pay honor to him, it is a version of Jesus that Christians did not recognize.


I resent the implication that I've "made up my mind". I am a very open minded person, not closed minded. I do however have an expectation that things have to fit the data critically when it comes to something like this. This is a reference to historical information. Did Christians believe Jesus and Mary were gods alongside God? Clearly Muhammad believed they did. Rationally, the only explanation I can see at this point is the one I've stated, and my supporting reasons for what I provisionally conclude what I am. If I can see a possible valid other reason, that can be defended reasonably well, I can and would change my mind.

Don't mistake my expecting reasonable answers, with an a priori dismissal on religious grounds. That's cynicism. I am not a cynic. And to try to cast me as one, is uncalled for.

You seem like a decent guy @Windwalker . However when it comes to Islam we have very different perspectives. I see Him as a Manifestation of God. You see him as a flawed human being who misunderstands Christianity.

I see there are several different but inter-related theological concepts in Christianity Muhammad addresses in the Quran.

1/ The Divinity of Christ
2/ The Sonship of Christ
3/ The Trinity
4/ The veneration of Mary
5/ Idolatry

There are criticisms of all five interspersed throughout the Quran. He’s not speaking to Christians trying to correct them. He’s speaking to His followers (all Arabian) admonishing them not to stray in their beliefs as the Christians had.

For me Sura 5:116 is about the Divinity of Christ and the veneration of Mary, both which had crossed the line into idolatry. It does not address the trinity. Insisting its about the trinity is what the Christian apologetics do with a clear agenda to portray Muhammad exactly as you have. A flawed human who misunderstands Christianity. Admittedly some Muslim scholars accentuate this perception due to their disdain for the Christian scriptures which they see as being corrupt and obsolete.

Muhammad’s use of a story based on dialogue between God and Jesus illustrates His point vividly. The Christians have misunderstood their own scripture and what Jesus said.

You refer to how you understood the verse nearly 40 years ago which sounds much the same as you understand it now. I seem to have hit a nerve in saying you have made up your mind. It is not my intention to offend.

Best Wishes
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Here is scriptural proof of the Godhead (trinity).

1Cor. 8:6 " yet there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live: and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, from whom all things came and for whom we live."

2Cor 3:17 " Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.

2Cor. 13:14 "May the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ , and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."

Col. 2:9 "For in Christ, the fullness of The Deity lives in bodily form."

Isa. 44:6 " This is what the Lord says, Israels king and redeemer, the Lord almighty, I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God"

Jn. 1: 14 " The word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son who came from the Father , full of Grace and truth."

Jn 10:30 " I and the Father are one."

Rom. 9:5 " of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God."

Matt. 1:23 "The virgin will conceive and give birth to a Son, and they will call him Immanuel , which means God with us."

Matt. 28:19 " Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"

John 14:16-17 "And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever - The Spirit of Truth. The world cannot accept Him, because it neither sees nor knows Him. But you know Him, for He lives with you and will be in you.

Col.,1 15-17 "The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities: all things were created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

There are different interpretations and we need to take into account scripture that discounts Jesus being God incarnate.

1 John 4:12
"No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us."

Mark 13:32
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

1 KIng 8:27
But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?

Malachi 3:6
For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Scripture seems to imply that Jesus can not possibly be God incarnate.

Perhaps it would be better to think of Jesus as being a perfect image or reflection of Gods' divine attributes?

Colossians 1:15 in regards to Jesus
"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature"

John 5:19
Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

John 8:28
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
 

Niblo

Active Member
Premium Member
..........................For me Sura 5:116 is about the Divinity of Christ and the veneration of Mary, both which had crossed the line into idolatry.

Hello again, Adrian.

I write of this matter in my second post to you:

'When Allāh says: 'Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to people, ''Take me and my mother as two gods alongside God''?' he will say: ''May You be exalted! I would never say what I had no right to say – if I had said such a thing You would have known it: You know all that is within me, though I do not know what is within You, You alone have full knowledge of things unseen – I told them only what You commanded me to: ''Worship Allāh, my Lord and your Lord.'' I was a witness over them during my time among them. Ever since You took my soul, You alone have been the watcher over them: You are witness to all things and if You punish them, they are Your servants; if You forgive them, You are the Almighty, the Wise.''' (Al-Ma'ida: 16-118).

The Collyridians, an Arabian female sect of the fourth century, considered Mary to be divine. Geoffrey Parrinder reminds us that they ‘used to offer cakes of bread (collyrida) to her, as they had done to the great earth mother in pagan times.’ (See his 'Jesus in the Qur'an - Makers of the Muslim World'.

It is not Christians who are being condemned for taking Mary as a god; it is the Collyridians – and possibly (this is an assumption on my part, and I could well be mistaken) other pagan Arabs who, knowing that a statue (or icon) of Mary and her son had been placed in the Ka’aba by a Christian visitor to Mecca (in the days before Islam), had assumed – wrongly – that both were gods.

You are correct to say that these verses have nothing to do with the 'trinity'.

Have a great week, and very best regards.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
I agree. I don't see that anyone here has claimed the Christian Bible makes any specific or explicit reference to the Trinity. No one here has ventured to provide an argument for the Trinity based on scripture.

While it is true that Scripture makes no specific reference to the Trinity, the formulation is a development from NT where, some first century Christians held views that concerned the pre-existent divinity of Jesus and personal characteristics of the Spirit and not overlooked when formulating the dogma. Like Christians arguing over the correct number of sacraments when the term sacrament no where appears in NT.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
There are different interpretations and we need to take into account scripture that discounts Jesus being God incarnate.

1 John 4:12
"No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us."

Mark 13:32
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

1 KIng 8:27
But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?

Malachi 3:6
For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Scripture seems to imply that Jesus can not possibly be God incarnate.

Perhaps it would be better to think of Jesus as being a perfect image or reflection of Gods' divine attributes?

Colossians 1:15 in regards to Jesus
"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature"

John 5:19
Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

John 8:28
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
Two points,

Being part of the Godhead does not mean that the independence of it's entities are sacrificed. So, the knowledge of His return being known only by the Father is consistent.

The Father is from whom the Son and the Spirit flow. Yet they and the Father are the Godhead, and one in that context. One God.

With respect, it appears as though you are trying to reconcile the Christian Godhead with other faiths, and the triune nature of God cannot be reconciled with these other faiths.

So either the truth of Christianity stands alone, or it must be denied or modified so it fits with these other faiths.

In Genesis the plurality of God is stated. The first book of the Bible. When Christ said, "before Abraham, I am", He made it clear that He was part of that plurality.

Though the word trinity is not used, the word Godhead is. This word supports the plurality of God.

As a Christian, it is clear to me that Christ was God incarnate on earth. When He said "no man comes to the Father, but by me", the exclusivity of the Gospel is firmly established. One cannot come to the Father by Mohammed, or in fact by any other faith if one accepts Christ at His word.

Christ was either insane, a charlatan of the highest order, or exactly who He said He was.

Denying His words, like "if you have seen me, you have seen the Father" or " I and the Father are one", and all the other evidence for His being God incarnate, makes him out to be either an insane liar, or a crooked one.

This may make Christ more acceptable to other faiths, but He made clear that their acceptance of Him as anything other than but who He truly is, is irrelevant.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Serious question:

...Do you consider yourself one? Or do you consider yourself a duo?

...Because the way I understand it, we are people with bodies, yet we have souls, that can live seperately from our human bodies.

I consider myself one, yet I have two aspects.

I consider myself a human being with a soul that progresses beyond this mortal life. I’m not sure how that helps me know if there is a triune god or not.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
While it is true that Scripture makes no specific reference to the Trinity, the formulation is a development from NT where, some first century Christians held views that concerned the pre-existent divinity of Jesus and personal characteristics of the Spirit and not overlooked when formulating the dogma. Like Christians arguing over the correct number of sacraments when the term sacrament no where appears in NT.
As I understand it, there were increasing divisions amongst Christians during with the first few centuries. The question was how best to understand the nature of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and their interrelationships? There were several schools of thought and one led by Arius became a catalyst for a series ecumenical councils. This in turn led the establishment of core Christian doctrine during the 4th century including a modified Nicene Creed where the trinity formula was incorporated.

It could be argued the councils along with their doctrines brought some respite from the disunity. As Christianity attained real power through its establishment as the official religion of the Roman Empire, corruption set in.

Personally I can take or leave the trinity. It could be a vehicle to better understanding
of the nature of God and His relationship with the Son and Holy Spirit. It could also stifle creative thought and expression that’s genuinely inspired by the Holy Spirit. It must have been hard centuries ago pushing the boundaries if the consequences were to be labeled a heretic, cast out or executed.

So despite all the work and toil establishing the trinity doctrine does it make any difference to the progress of the soul in either this world or the next?

How does the Catholic Church view the doctrine of the trinity and its necessity for salvation?
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
As I understand it, there were increasing divisions amongst Christians during with the first few centuries. The question was how best to understand the nature of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and their interrelationships? There were several schools of thought and one led by Arius became a catalyst for a series ecumenical councils. This in turn led the establishment of core Christian doctrine during the 4th century including a modified Nicene Creed where the trinity formula was incorporated.

It could be argued the councils along with their doctrines brought some respite from the disunity. As Christianity attained real power through its establishment as the official religion of the Roman Empire, corruption set in.

Personally I can take or leave the trinity. It could be a vehicle to better understanding
of the nature of God and His relationship with the Son and Holy Spirit. It could also stifle creative thought and expression that’s genuinely inspired by the Holy Spirit. It must have been hard centuries ago pushing the boundaries if the consequences were to be labeled a heretic, cast out or executed.

So despite all the work and toil establishing the trinity doctrine does it make any difference to the progress of the soul in either this world or the next?

How does the Catholic Church view the doctrine of the trinity and its necessity for salvation?
There are some myths circulating about the Apostolic and immediate post Apostolic Church that are not supported by the documentation. The alleged conflict over the Godhead is one of these.

There were serious issues, like the gnostics, but the earliest documentation, from Polycarp as an example, show no issues with the doctrine regarding the Godhead. Polycarp was a student of the Apostle John.

The council of Nicea addressed the issue because of Arius. He had, for a long time, been proclaiming his doctrine of Christ being a created being. He had a large following.

The Church defined the doctrine at this council, and made it official Church doctrine.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
Personally I can take or leave the trinity. It could be a vehicle to better understanding
of the nature of God and His relationship with the Son and Holy Spirit.

Or as a model for living 'relationally', We never actually say that we believe in the Trinity. The Trinity is not a doctrine next to other doctrines of the faith; it is the only doctrine, and all the others are expansions and explanations of it. In the First Letter of John, God is self gift, and from that metaphor spins out the whole of Trinitarian theology.
The Trinity is a perfect model of communion in love from which to build our daily human relationships.
Belief in the Trinity does not depend wholly on the explanation from the world of antiquity, but must be penetrated anew, in language and concept what the patristic dogmas truly signify.
 
Top