Trinity: True or False?

[metis]

But why would we want to understand the trinity?....

To learn. It makes no sense for one to disagree with that which they don't understand.

Really not sure where your getting this trinity thing.....

Because of looking at all the Gospel verses that relate to Jesus and God that may give one a clue as to exactly what that relationship is.

When over 1000 bishops back in the 300's reviewed all these verses, and then when they added different interpretations as to what that relationship was and is, the Trinitarian concept made sense, which indeed it does. Now, whether that concept is correct is another question, and I don't weigh in on that one way or another, nor do I lose any sleep not knowing.

BTW, maybe consider reading "How Jesus Became God" by Bart Ehrman, who is a theologian but also an agnostic, and he well explains the confusion in the early Church over this relationship.

To repeat, I'm not saying that the concept is correct, thus I don't believe one way or the other, but that it does make logical sense if one truly understands the question of that relationship and why it was so highly debated, plus the use of the Greek concept of "essence". Ya gotta remember that the Church has been at this for almost 2000 years, so maybe they do have an idea of what seemingly may "work".

 

[moorea944]

To learn. It makes no sense for one to disagree with that which they don't understand.

Because of looking at all the Gospel verses that relate to Jesus and God that may give one a clue as to exactly what that relationship is.

When over 1000 bishops back in the 300's reviewed all these verses, and then when they added different interpretations as to what that relationship was and is, the Trinitarian concept made sense, which indeed it does. Now, whether that concept is correct is another question, and I don't weigh in on that one way or another, nor do I lose any sleep not knowing.

BTW, maybe consider reading "How Jesus Became God" by Bart Ehrman, who is a theologian but also an agnostic, and he well explains the confusion in the early Church over this relationship.

To repeat, I'm not saying that the concept is correct, thus I don't believe one way or the other, but that it does make logical sense if one truly understands the question of that relationship and why it was so highly debated, plus the use of the Greek concept of "essence". Ya gotta remember that the Church has been at this for almost 2000 years, so maybe they do have an idea of what seemingly may "work".

[Because of looking at all the Gospel verses that relate to Jesus and God that may give one a clue as to exactly what that relationship is.]
The Gospel tells us exactly who Jesus is, plus we have the writings of Apostles to tell us that. Jesus is the son of God. Born of a woman, same as us in nature. If you want verses, i'll give them to you.

[When over 1000 bishops back in the 300's reviewed all these verses, and then when they added different interpretations as to what that relationship was and is, the Trinitarian concept made sense, which indeed it does. Now, whether that concept is correct is another question, and I don't weigh in on that one way or another, nor do I lose any sleep not knowing.]
You also have to remember they are coming from a pagan culture of multiple gods, so the trinity would make sense to them. But not to Israel or the Jews, who are God's chosen people.

]BTW, maybe consider reading "How Jesus Became God" by Bart Ehrman, who is a theologian but also an agnostic, and he well explains the confusion in the early Church over this relationship.]
I already know how Jesus became God, man made Jesus God.... There is no reason for Jesus to be God.

[To repeat, I'm not saying that the concept is correct, thus I don't believe one way or the other, but that it does make logical sense if one truly understands the question of that relationship and why it was so highly debated, plus the use of the Greek concept of "essence". Ya gotta remember that the Church has been at this for almost 2000 years, so maybe they do have an idea of what seemingly may "work".]
What was the first church? Or correctly, "ecclesia". Church in the bible is not a four walled building, it's talking about a group of people or believers, nothing to do with a building. Paul writes that the first ecclesia or church was with the children of Israel in the wilderness. The "church" didnt start with Jesus or in the first century... it was with Moses. But that said, it doesnt mean no one didnt believe before that. Adam and Eve where taught by the angels, Noah believed in God, Abraham, etc..... All faithful men (Heb 11)

 

[Wrangler]

I already know how Jesus became God, man made Jesus God.... There is no reason for Jesus to be God.

Agreed! What’s even more, there is a compelling reason JESUS CANNOT BE GOD. He is our ONLY mediator to God.

Jesus, as non-God mediator is irreplaceable in restoring us being in God’s good graces.

Of course, dualistic trinitarians suppose an illogic AND for being a mediator, necessarily means not being a part of either party one mediated for.

 

[metis]

The Gospel tells us exactly who Jesus is, plus we have the writings of Apostles to tell us that.

I have problems with the word "exactly" that you use above, especially since it defies what we know historically dealing with early Church controversies on this subject. Even with the Apostles there was some doubt, such as with Thomas.

You also have to remember they are coming from a pagan culture of multiple gods, so the trinity would make sense to them

This was three centuries later, so no.

I already know how Jesus became God, man made Jesus God.... There is no reason for Jesus to be God.

Jesus is not God but, according to the Trinitarian concept, he is of God, as is also the Holy Spirit.

What was the first church? Or correctly, "ecclesia". Church in the bible is not a four walled building, it's talking about a group of people or believers, nothing to do with a building.

Paul repeatedly says the Church is "one body", and also Jesus' appointment of the Apostles and their subsequent appointees confirm that the Church must be an organization, not just myriads of bodies teaching all sorts of things.

Paul writes that the first ecclesia or church was with the children of Israel in the wilderness.

"Church" means "community", and there are 109 reference to it in the NT, and the only time it is used in the plural is in references to local churches within that "one body". It clearly was never meant to be some sort of theistic free-for-all. Jesus "taught with authority", and he passed this onto the Apostles, and then the Apostles passed this on to their appointees. This process we see rather clearly in Acts and also some of the Epistles.

But that said, it doesnt mean no one didnt believe before that. Adam and Eve where taught by the angels, Noah believed in God, Abraham, etc..... All faithful men (Heb 11)

So? No one is saying that there weren't believers in God back prior to Jesus' time.

 

[Muffled]

That explanation is belief in multiple Gods - Different persons, each of which is God. No matter how much it is denied, that is more than one God.

I believe there is only one God and the Trinity is something He does not what He is.

 

[Muffled]

Correct, but I really wouldnt use the word "installed". Just doesnt sound right.

I believe the body is the "stall" and the Spirit enters in, so I don't see what problem you would have with that.

 

[Muffled]

No - I am just telling you what you are really believing in whether you realize it or not. Just common sense here - if you believe in 3 DIFFERENT persons that are each totally and completely God, that is more than one God.

(Proof: God + God + God does not equal 1 God.)

(Also essence is a man made term not found in the scripture.) The scripture doesn't mention a mystery of the Trinity either.

And the scripture says the Godhead can be understood. Romans 1:20

I believe there is no such thing as God + God + God. That is pure imagination.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I believe there is no such thing as God + God + God. That is pure imagination.

If you know it's pure imagination, then why do you believe in the Trinity? Since the Trinity claims there are 3 different persons in the Godhead, each of which are God.

 

[Inquire of God]

For those who want lots of scripture that teaches what our Most High God intended us to believe about Him and His Word and His Holy Spirit:

Trinity: True or False?

The trinity is true as taught in the Bible, however the Council of Nicaea and other councils and early church teachings by persons such as Polycarp, etcetera, are not backed up in some respects by the Holy Book. What is in the Bible is correct and should be checked against whatever a person is being taught, if it does not jive with the Bible or seems overtly incompatible it is probably an error, misinterpretation or a false or incorrect doctrine.

 

[moorea944]

The trinity is true as taught in the Bible, however the Council of Nicaea and other councils and early church teachings by persons such as Polycarp, etcetera, are not backed up in some respects by the Holy Book. What is in the Bible is correct and should be checked against whatever a person is being taught, if it does not jive with the Bible or seems overtly incompatible it is probably an error, misinterpretation or a false or incorrect doctrine.

[if it does not jive with the Bible or seems overtly incompatible it is probably an error, misinterpretation or a false or incorrect doctrine.]
Wouldnt that be the trinity itself then?

 

[Inquire of God]

[if it does not jive with the Bible or seems overtly incompatible it is probably an error, misinterpretation or a false or incorrect doctrine.]
Wouldnt that be the trinity itself then?

No, not if one believes the trinity to be the Godhead as taught in the Bible.

 

[moorea944]

No, not if one believes the trinity to be the Godhead as taught in the Bible.

The trinity's Godhead is not in scripture. But the true Godhead is in 1 Cor 11v3, big difference!!!

So what would your verse be on the Trinity's Godhead? Just curious.......

 

[Inquire of God]

The trinity's Godhead is not in scripture. But the true Godhead is in 1 Cor 11v3, big difference!!!

So what would your verse be on the Trinity's Godhead? Just curious.......

Yeah, there isn't a one verse gig about that in the Bible, that's why I didn't quote anything.
It is an extrapolation and it is a long extrapolation.

 

[Muffled]

If you know it's pure imagination, then why do you believe in the Trinity? Since the Trinity claims there are 3 different persons in the Godhead, each of which are God.

I believe in the Trinity because it is not imagination. It is Biblical fact. I believe that is person according to an ecclesiastical definition, not the most used definitions.

 

[Muffled]

The trinity is true as taught in the Bible, however the Council of Nicaea and other councils and early church teachings by persons such as Polycarp, etcetera, are not backed up in some respects by the Holy Book. What is in the Bible is correct and should be checked against whatever a person is being taught, if it does not jive with the Bible or seems overtly incompatible it is probably an error, misinterpretation or a false or incorrect doctrine.

I believe sometimes the statements of faith can appear to be wrong because of the wording but I believe the general concepts are correct.

 

[Muffled]

The trinity's Godhead is not in scripture. But the true Godhead is in 1 Cor 11v3, big difference!!!

So what would your verse be on the Trinity's Godhead? Just curious.......

I believe that I Cor. 11v3 says nothing about a Godhead. Since Paul coined the word then we have to look at what He says about it. "Colossians 2:9 is one of the clearest statements of the deity of Christ anywhere in the Bible: “In him [Christ] dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." gotquestions.org. I believe this does not speak of the Trinity but speaks of the essence of God but then it does say the fullness of the essence abides in the body of Jesus so it is partly about the Trinity.

 

[moorea944]

I believe that I Cor. 11v3 says nothing about a Godhead. Since Paul coined the word then we have to look at what He says about it. "Colossians 2:9 is one of the clearest statements of the deity of Christ anywhere in the Bible: “In him [Christ] dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." gotquestions.org. I believe this does not speak of the Trinity but speaks of the essence of God but then it does say the fullness of the essence abides in the body of Jesus so it is partly about the Trinity.

1 Corin 11 v 3 IS the Godhead.
Col 2 "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." And I agree with that. But that is not saying that Jesus is God or co-equal with God. And who is above Jesus? God is. 1 Corin 11v3.

And what do you mean "essence" of God. Not liking talk about words that are not in the bible, like essence, incarnate, God the Son, etc.....

 

[Muffled]

1 Corin 11 v 3 IS the Godhead.
Col 2 "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." And I agree with that. But that is not saying that Jesus is God or co-equal with God. And who is above Jesus? God is. 1 Corin 11v3.

And what do you mean "essence" of God. Not liking talk about words that are not in the bible, like essence, incarnate, God the Son, etc.....

I believe Jesus is God in the flesh but is not the essence of God because Jesus has flesh and God is Spirit.

I am not essentially Glenn. I have had many lives and this is most likely the first one where I am named Glenn. Next life I could be an Ernest.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Aspects, dude, aspects

God as one person with three "aspects" isn't Trinitarianism.

 

[WalterTrull]

God as one person with three "aspects" isn't Trinitarianism.

Uhm... OK