Why So Much Trinity Bashing?

[Rival]

I've noticed on RF there are a lot of heretical (that's the technical term) Christians who disbelieve in the Trinity.

Why?

We've had the creeds since Late Antiquity (Apostolic, Nicaean, Athanasian) and they all include the Trinity, especially the latter, which is all about it. These creeds are regularly read in churches and have been for hundreds of years. If the Trinity were so easily disproven, why would it have held out and been accepted by the orthodox Christians? Why spend so much time fighting the Arians? And why, I'm sorry to ask, is it almost always Protestants? Do you think you know something that everybody in the early orthodox Church failed to grasp?

Why is there so much of this around lately? How do you explain how Jesus is God without the Trinity?

How do you explain the worship of Christ?

And why is it treated in such a light manner?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

We've had the creeds since Late Antiquity ...

Why should that be relevant?

Presumably a Christian creed is the thoughtful consensus of the core beliefs transmitted by the NT. What rule assures that a 325 C.E. consensus is more correct than 19th century reassessment?

 

[LuisDantas]

I have no finger in that pulse, but I do know that certain movements have challenged Trinitarianism while claiming to be part of Christianity for a considerable time. The best known examples would include the Seventh Day Adventists and the Jehovah's Witnesses.

I suspect that there is some measure of willingness to challenge or deemphasize the Trinity in some circles in order to smooth over disagreements of doctrine with other groups in some circles, particularly when there is a goal of finding common ground between Christianity and Islam.

It may have become more of an issue in recent years just because there is more awareness of those disagreements, or there may be something else at work. I don't know.

 

[walt]

Sorry sometimes I really get stuck on Jesus words and agreement with him so much.. I can stay offline some..

 

[PearlSeeker]

I've noticed on RF there are a lot of heretical (that's the technical term) Christians who disbelieve in the Trinity.

Why?

We've had the creeds since Late Antiquity (Apostolic, Nicaean, Athanasian) and they all include the Trinity, especially the latter, which is all about it. These creeds are regularly read in churches and have been for hundreds of years. If the Trinity were so easily disproven, why would it have held out and been accepted by the orthodox Christians? Why spend so much time fighting the Arians? And why, I'm sorry to ask, is it almost always Protestants? Do you think you know something that everybody in the early orthodox Church failed to grasp?

Why is there so much of this around lately? How do you explain how Jesus is God without the Trinity?

How do you explain the worship of Christ?

And why is it treated in such a light manner?

It's not lately. Creeds were written exactly because everything was not so clear from the NT.

 

[Eddi]

I'm not so much into Christianity at this precise moment in time, but the version that I tend to come in and out of is most definitely trinitarian

 

[Hockeycowboy]

You ask some good questions!

The simple answer is, “Because the apostasy became entrenched, soon after the Apostles died.”

The very first Christians worshipped the God of the Hebrews, easily seen when one reads the prayer they gave, recorded at Acts 4:24-30.
The “Sovereign Lord” they addressed their prayer to, wasn’t Jesus. In fact, in the prayer, they called Jesus, God’s “Holy Servant.”

Their worship went to Yahweh, following Jesus’ own words at John 4:23,24… “true worshippers will worship the Father….”.

Jesus certainly wasn’t talking about himself!

We can continue this in PM, if you want.

 

[1213]

Why is there so much of this around lately? How do you explain how Jesus is God without the Trinity?

Maybe it is because nowadays many people can read what is actually said in the Bible.

Jesus himself says in the Bible that there is only one true God who is greater than him.

Jesus answered, "The greatest is, 'Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one: you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment.
Mark 12:29-30
How can you believe, who receive glory from one another, and you don't seek the glory that comes from the only God?
John 5:44
This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ.
John 17:3
Jesus said to her, "Don't touch me, for I haven't yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brothers, and tell them, 'I am ascend-ing to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"
John 20:17

… the Father is greater than I.
John 14:28

That is also what Paul says.

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1 Tim. 2:5

And they say nothing about Trinity.

If you think Jesus is the God, why don't you believe what he says?

 

[blü 2]

I've noticed on RF there are a lot of heretical (that's the technical term) Christians who disbelieve in the Trinity.

Why?

We've had the creeds since Late Antiquity (Apostolic, Nicaean, Athanasian) and they all include the Trinity, especially the latter, which is all about it. These creeds are regularly read in churches and have been for hundreds of years. If the Trinity were so easily disproven, why would it have held out and been accepted by the orthodox Christians? Why spend so much time fighting the Arians? And why, I'm sorry to ask, is it almost always Protestants? Do you think you know something that everybody in the early orthodox Church failed to grasp?

Why is there so much of this around lately? How do you explain how Jesus is God without the Trinity?

How do you explain the worship of Christ?

And why is it treated in such a light manner?

There are two major problems with the Trinity.

The first is that there are four gospel versions of Jesus in the NT and each of the four
(a) expressly denies he's God, and
(b) never claims to be God.

Which underlines that the Trinity doctrine developed out of a political need in the early church, an expedient.

The second is the choice of that expedient. The Trinity doctrine says,"the One God exists as three persons and one substance" but if you read the very fine print on the inside back fold of the label, it says "The Trinity doctrine is incoherent. Hallelujah!" ─ though to be fair, not in those exact words.

The actual words are that the Trinity is "a mystery in the strict sense" ie a clear notch up from your standard mystery; and "a mystery in the strict sense" in that "it can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed." It will have occurred to you that this is an accurate definition of "nonsense".

What is the nonsense? That as a result of the doctrine, the Father is 100% of God and Jesus is 100% of God and the Ghost is 100% of God = 300% = 3 gods, No, says the doctrine, it doesn't ─ you get only the one God.

Now if there's only one God, then the Father, Jesus and the Ghost have only one will. That necessarily reduces them to being three faces of the one entity, rather than three entities (whence three wills), No, says the doctrine, that's not how it works. How does it work? Silence, or more nonsense, follows.

At a more practical level, you have Jesus in the four gospels praying to his God (the one and undivided Jewish God, of course). Why would God do that? And the Jesuses of Mark and of Matthew each cry out on the cross that their god has forsaken them ─ though under the Trinity doctrine that becomes, "Me, me, why have I forsaken me?"

You get the idea.

 

[Starlight]

Jesus was a jew. Jews believe in strong monotheism. It is very unlikely that Jesus believed he was part of a trinity.

 

[PearlSeeker]

The first is that there are four gospel versions of Jesus in the NT and each of the four
(a) expressly denies he's God, and
(b) never claims to be God.

The Gospel of John is different. Jesus is not represented as a mere man.

The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” (John 10:33)

 

[Ebionite]

I've noticed on RF there are a lot of heretical (that's the technical term) Christians who disbelieve in the Trinity.

Why?

I'd argue that it is because the doctrine of the Trinity is not consistent with the Christian Bible.

If the Trinity were so easily disproven, why would it have held out and been accepted by the orthodox Christians? Why spend so much time fighting the Arians? And why, I'm sorry to ask, is it almost always Protestants? Do you think you know something that everybody in the early orthodox Church failed to grasp?

Because Christian doctrine developed to a large extent under Constantine, and Constantine's cult of Sol Invictus had a triad of deities.

It's almost always Protestants because the tend to hold to the doctrine of Sola Scripture. Catholics hold more to tradition.

It's not that the early Christians failed to grasp Constantine's role, it's that they were not in any position to challenge it.

Why is there so much of this around lately? How do you explain how Jesus is God without the Trinity?

Times are changing. People in general are moving away from globalism, which is associated with Rome. The term "God" is ambiguous, there's no point in trying to unwrap that one without clear language.

How do you explain the worship of Christ?

It's always been shaped by the interpretations of the various Christian denominations. Unwrapping it involves looking at the early ideologies that were competing with the Hellenistic view of first century Messianism.

And why is it treated in such a light manner?

Perhaps people are becoming less invested in tradition.

 

[blü 2]

The Gospel of John is different. Jesus is not represented as a mere man.

The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” (John 10:33)

And we have this exchange in John 8:57-58:

The Jews said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am,"​

The "I am" is often taken to be associated with God's naming of [him]self in Exodus 3:14, and thus a claim to be God, but that isn't compatible with John's Jesus's many express and clear denials that he's God eg ─

John 5:30 “I can do nothing on my own authority; as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.”​

​

John 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me ..​

​

John 17:3 “And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.”​

​

John 20:17 “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”​

Instead it identifies John's Jesus with the gnostic demiurge ("craftsman") ─ the Jesuses of Paul and of John existed in heaven with God before coming to earth and created the entire material universe, unlike any of the synoptic Jesuses or indeed what's written in Genesis.

.

 

[Ebionite]

The "I am" is often taken to be associated with God's naming of [him]self in Exodus 3:14, and thus a claim to be God, but that isn't compatible with John's Jesus's many express and clear denials that he's God eg ─

John 17:3 “And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.”John 20:17 “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”

I AM is the name of Elohim. Elohim is not the same as "the only true theos" or to the theos who is the Father.

 

[Rival]

So you guys are saying you know better than the men closer to the Apostles, the men who drew up the creeds and wrote the theological texts?

The men who read the Bible in its original languages?

You know better?

 

[Firenze]

I've noticed on RF there are a lot of heretical (that's the technical term) Christians who disbelieve in the Trinity.

Why?

We've had the creeds since Late Antiquity (Apostolic, Nicaean, Athanasian) and they all include the Trinity, especially the latter, which is all about it. These creeds are regularly read in churches and have been for hundreds of years. If the Trinity were so easily disproven, why would it have held out and been accepted by the orthodox Christians?

Well, the virgin birth is easily disproven, yet it's still accepted as 'gospel'. So yours is a pretty weak argument.

 

[mangalavara]

So you guys are saying you know better than the men closer to the Apostles, the men who drew up the creeds and wrote the theological texts?

The men who read the Bible in its original languages?

You know better?

Although I am not a Christian, I would seek to become a member of the Orthodox Church if I were a believer in the New Testament. This is because the NT is a product of the Church in the sense that the Apostles and disciples who wrote it were members of the Church. Moreover, the bishops of the Church decided what is canon. If the Holy Spirit guided those bishops in deciding what is canon, why would he not guide them in their formulation of the faith?

Anyway, just thought I’d add my two cents. As an idolatrous, hellbound Hindu, I have no interest in debating Christian theology with anybody.

 

[ChristineM]

I was protestant until leaving the church 40 years ago and i will always remember the vicars words after each prayer... "In the name of God the father, God the son and god the holy spirit"

Why i remember this particularly is because us children though it would be more "modern" if he used "big daddy, the late JC and spooky"

Though we never mentioned this to the vicar.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

We've had the creeds since Late Antiquity (Apostolic, Nicaean, Athanasian) and they all include the Trinity, especially the latter, which is all about it.

Because making a creed doesn’t make it true.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

How do you explain how Jesus is God without the Trinity?

I don’t. I no longer believe he is.