• 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!

Why is the Trinity so controversial?

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The Trinity is not polytheism because the nature of the Godhead is the same.
It depends on how you go about defining the Trinity. If you define it the way that theologians define it, no it is not polytheism. However, if you try to say that the Trinity are three persons in one family, THAT is polytheism.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
You obviously don't understand the meaning of the word essence. In fact, you should actually look up the word homoousios in Greek, since that is the word in the actual language that the Nicene creed is written. It has no direct English translation, but the closest are essence or substance. A family is only a group of relatives.

I disagree the word essence, and it has a broader meaning in Greek than you assert. Yes, Trinitarians do try to use the word in a specific unique way to justify the Trinity, but I disagree that a Hellenist Roman view of God based on a Nicene Greek interpretation is legitimate way to describe the God of the Tanakh in Hebrew.

The justification of the Trinity is rather tortured logic even when first established in the Nicene Creed. Of course, traditional Christians describe the Trinity as Monotheistic, and they believe it is true, but circular reasoning does not justify the belief especially when one selectively interprets the Tanakh in Greek concepts to justify their belief. Ones own belief is not justified, because that is what they believe.
 
Last edited:

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Who is carm.org? Why do they have any more authority than anyone else to decide?

I dont believe in Jesus because of Carm.org. I believe in Jesus being God and part of the Trinity but not that thats polytheism because it the idea of three persons in one essence is what I have faith in.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Whether it is in the Bible or not is for you to argue with other Christians. For me as a Jew, I think the whole Trinitarian thing is utter nonsense. I'm simply stating that the family metaphor does not adequately represent Trinitarian doctrine. If you completely separate the father, son, and holy spirit, you end up with polytheism, which runs counter to the teaching of the Torah: "Hear O Israel, the LORD is God, the LORD is one."

At any rate, since you are defending Trinitarianism, I suggest you research the Nicene creed which establishes it, specifically the word homoousios, which is usually translated as essense or substance.
Thank you. I do NOT defend the trinity idea. I completely agree that there is ONE God. But Genesis ( which I believe is in the Torah) says that in the beginning the Word was with God and the Word was God. I believe this indicates two "beings" who both together are God. Not two Gods. A human husband and wife are two people but make one family. I see no reason God cannot be the same.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
I dont believe in Jesus because of Carm.org. I believe in Jesus being God and part of the Trinity but not that thats polytheism because it the idea of three persons in one essence is what I have faith in.
I would ewally like to see something in the Bible that says anything about one essence.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I disagree the word essence, and it has a broader meaning in Greek than you assert. Yes, Trinitarians do try to use the word in a specific unique way to justify the Trinity, but I disagree that a Hellenist Roman view of God based on a Nicene Greek interpretation is legitimate way to describe the God of the Tanakh in Hebrew.

The justification of the Trinity is rather tortured logic even when first established in the Nicene Creed. Of course, traditional Christians describe the Trinity as Monotheistic, and they believe it is true, but circular reasoning does not justify the belief especially when one selectively interprets the Tanakh in Greek concepts to justify their belief. Ones own belief is not justified, because that is what they believe.
Well at this point I'm going to bow out. It's just turning out to be too much trouble to discuss a doctrine I don't even believe in.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Thank you. I do NOT defend the trinity idea. I completely agree that there is ONE God. But Genesis ( which I believe is in the Torah) says that in the beginning the Word was with God and the Word was God. I believe this indicates two "beings" who both together are God. Not two Gods. A human husband and wife are two people but make one family. I see no reason God cannot be the same.
Actually you are quoting the gospel of John, which not only is not in the Torah, it is not even in the Tanakh (OT). There simply is not a concept of God being more than one being in the Torah or Tanakh.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Daniel never ever saw Jesus. I'm not even sure what passage you are talking about. Are you talking about the "son of man" passage? That is about the nation of Israel, not the messiah.
The Bible verse where Daniel and other people saw Jesus. The verse is a reference to a spiritual being not Israel.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
A husband and wife function as two but are one.
A husband and wife TWO people but function as ONE family. Nothing about "essence". The Father and Son are TWO "persons" but function as one God. So simple and yet people refuse to see it because of all the false made up ideas pushed at them by the churches.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Actually you are quoting the gospel of John, which not only is not in the Torah, it is not even in the Tanakh (OT). There simply is not a concept of God being more than one being in the Torah or Tanakh.
Sorry, I was thinking of the wrong verse. But in Genesis it does say that God said "let us make man in our image". This sounds like more than one person. How do you interpret this?
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Sorry, I was thinking of the wrong verse. But in Genesis it does say that God said "let us make man in our image". This sounds like more than one person. How do you interpret this?
God is talking to the heavenly court, the angels etc. This is the traditional understanding of the verse.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
What about it? This is a claim from the Christian perspective. It is not shared by the Jews, whose scripture you are citing.

The spiritual being Daniel saw is described as like a son of man. Jesus described himself as the son of man. The book of Isaiah describes the Messiah as a suffering servant. That reminds me of when I learned about the stations of the cross in church. Bible Study: Daniel 10 – Jesus Christ visits Daniel

The passages also explain 7 descriptions of the man in the vision.

  1. Clothed in linen
  2. Girded with gold of Uphaz
  3. Body like beryl
  4. Face like appearance of lightning
  5. Eyes like torches of fire
  6. Arms and feet like burnished bronze in color
  7. His sound of his words like voice of a multitude.
The above descriptions closely resembles the descriptions of Jesus Christ mentioned by John in the book of Revelation.
Rev 1:13-16 and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band. His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire; His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters; He had in His right hand seven stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength.

Heavenly Warfare
(Dan 10:7-14) And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, for the men who were with me did not see the vision; but a great terror fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves. Therefore I was left alone when I saw this great vision, and no strength remained in me; for my vigor was turned to frailty in me, and I retained no strength. Yet I heard the sound of his words; and while I heard the sound of his words I was in a deep sleep on my face, with my face to the ground. Suddenly, a hand touched me, which made me tremble on my knees and on the palms of my hands. And he said to me, “O Daniel, man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak to you, and stand upright, for I have now been sent to you.” While he was speaking this word to me, I stood trembling. Then he said to me, “Do not fear, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart to understand, and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard; and I have come because of your words. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days; and behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left alone there with the kings of Persia. Now I have come to make you understand what will happen to your people in the latter days, for the vision refers to many days yet to come.”.

The above passages are the narration of the event, which is the interaction between the man in the vision and Daniel. From the above passages, we understand Daniel is greatly beloved in the sight of God. We also understand the following passages.


  • The Lord heard Daniel’s prayer on the first day itself.
  • The man came because of Daniel’s words
  • The Prince of Persia withstood 21 days.
  • Michael is one of the chief princes
  • Michael came to help the man in the vision because he was left alone with kings of Persia.
  • The man came to make Daniel understand what will happen to Israelite people in latter days.
The above points mentioned by the man in the vision is one of the most puzzling information found in the Bible.

We find a similar war in heaven:

Rev 12:3,7-9 And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great, fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. .. And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them in heaven any longer. So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Dan 10:21 “But I will tell you what is noted in the Scripture of Truth. (No one upholds me against these, except Michael your prince.

Here the dragon which is represented as the Roman Empire and the devil, the old serpent who is the power behind it. Michael is the prince for the Israelite people an he is fighting for God’s people in heaven with the accuser. Similar to the war mentioned in Revelation 12, Daniel also mentions an event in heavenly realms. Because the prince of Persia and Greece are not on the side of one of the chief prince, the archangel Michael, these princes of the kingdoms could be the fallen angels.
 
Top