Is The Christian Trinity Real?
February 29, 2008 47 Comments
Hi daymore,
In response to your Feb. 28, 2008 reply:
I am posting a reply to you in a regular column. I hope you don’t mind.
You write to my question of the trinity: “About trinity I can’t explain it to you. I can’t explain how telepathy works either. But I know it works. I live with many other mystries in life. Do you have answers to all questions about life that you live with, like how the food that you eat becomes blood and marrow? If you decide to eat only after you could explain fully how metabolism works, I bet you’ll never be able to eat.”
I don’t need explanation for digestion; that has been explained very adequately by doctors. Nor for telepathy, as I swear my wife can read my mind. The Trinity has not been.
You are basically saying to me that the Trinity is a mystery and could not be explained to me. I don’t care for the mumbo-jumbo I have been given as an answer to this question by you and others… I mean that in a nice way…perhaps I might explain it to you. 🙂
Matt. 26:39, “Going a little farther he [Jesus Christ] fell on his face and prayed, ‘My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.”
If the Father and the Son were not distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father’s will.)
John 8:17, 18, “[Jesus answered the Jewish Pharisees:] In your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I bear witness to myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me.”
So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father.
Acts 7:55, 56 reports that Stephen was given a vision of heaven in which he saw “Jesus standing at God’s right hand.”
John 14:28, “[Jesus said:] If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.”
Matthew 27:54, But the army officer and those with him watching over Jesus, when they saw the earthquake and the things happening, grew very much afraid, saying: “Certainly this was God’s Son.”
The fact is, the word “trinity” does not even once occur in the Holy Bible. Nor are such expressions as “one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit,” or “one substance with the Father,” found in the Bible. To the contrary, the Bible speaks of Christ as “the beginning of the creation by God,” and says, “The head of the Christ is God.” (Rev. 3:14; 1 Cor. 11:3) Thus, the New Catholic Encyclopedia says of the Trinity: “It is not, as already seen, directly and immediately the word of God.”-Volume 14, page 304.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia also states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”-(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.
The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”-(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.
The Encyclopedia Americana says: “Christianity derived from Judaism, and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road that led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”-(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.
My interpretation of all of the above is that there is no “Trinity,” it is all made up; and men, specifically Early Catholic hierarchy, were the makeupees. This was done in the 4th. century AD, is not mentioned in either testament…I doubt it’s true.
Now perhaps you could try again. There are too many discrepancies going on in that Bible, or at least people seem to keep making them up.
Also, where in the Bible does it mention “rapture?” But, that’s for another time.
About the word of me
The Word of Me... 
I have researched this concept, and I would like to share it. There is a separate Father, son and holy spirit. THere is only one God. Somehow, this concept got distorted into 3 gods.
See what you think about what I wrote. Maybe it is not 100% right, if I have missed something. But maybe there is food for thought there.
thanks
marianne
Hi Marianne,
I’ve only had time to scan about 8 pages so far, but I will say that yes, I agree with you. Too much evidence that trinity was made up by earthlings. 🙂 Will read more when I can, and get back to you. Leaving link…hope appropriate people follow it.
Sorry couldn’t disagree with you more.
You don’t seem to distinguish between substance and person.
“So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father’
Yes He is a distinct person as is the Father, but they are distinct only in relationship to one another. Fatherhood, Sonship and passive spiration.
“If the Father and the Son were not distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father’s will.)”
Well you’d make a good Arian with that reasoning. Jesus has both a Human and Divine nature as well as a human and Divine will. The passage addresses Jesus human will conforming to the Divine will.
“The fact is, the word “trinity” does not even once occur in the Holy Bible.”
And your point? If it’s all beliefs are required to have the words and terms defined in the bible; then I guess we should have a list from God on what books are required to be in the bible, which itself wasn’t finalized for centuries after the Apostles. For that matter, were does is say Jesus required the apostles to write down anything.
The term rapture comes from the Latin Vulgate – rapiemur
Hi thewordofme,
Thank you for inviting me to explain trinity.
You said the word trinity is not found in the Bible. But did you not know the biblical word for that is ‘God-head’? By the way, why do you appeal to the Bible since you don’t believe in its authority any way?
Since you don’t accept the authority of the scripture which I do, we have no common grounds to stnad on. I do accept the authority of the Bible as the Word of God.
You might call me a fool for doing it. But I wish to tell you that I do it on the authority of Christ who said, “not an iota will pass away from the law until every thing is fulfilled”.
That then takes you to the question of the person of Christ Himself. Why I accept His authority is simply because He is a risen saviour. If indeed He is risen, we all are answerable to Him for He said, “the words I speak to you will judge you in the last day”.
To me the greatest evidence of the resurrection of Christ not merely the empty tomb, but the martrydom of ten of His disciples in ten parts of the world. Do you think people would allow themselves to be cruelly killed for a lie which they themselves have made-up? I think, such a ‘lie’ is to be believed. What do you think?
Tell me now, should I waste my time talking to some one who would close his/her eyes to naked facts of life?
So, I will have further discussion on this issue if you would accept the authoirty of the Bible based on the autoriy of Christ as a risen saviour attested by the mrtrydom of His disciples. I have sufficient reason to believe that the Bible teaches clearly the doctrine of Trinity. And I take classes to PG students on several subjects of my field of studies.
You might ask me then why I came to comment in your blog. The simple reason is that it appered on my desk-top and since it was a topic of my interest, I read it. You said,”leave a comment” at the bottom. Hence my comment. If you talk negatively about some thing which I hold very precious, then I might comment again.
If you tell us about your trip to Alps or about a Himalayan hike, or even about cricket or some tips for daily living, I might enjoy it with you. I too am a blogger and I vowed to myself never to talk negatively about any thing in my blogs. But if some one asks for a comment, then I do tell them what I believe to be true. Don’t you think it is right?
The moral of this tlak is PLEASE BLOG POSITIVELY always as you said you are a positive thinker yourself.
Thanking you and wishing you very best in blogging as in all areas of life.
Bye.
Hi,
Thank you for coming in and thanks indeed for your comments.
you said, it only proves that there is a higher power. Great. That is true.
Millions around the world testify that that power which transformed them as individuals and as societies, is the power of Jesus. To me the greatest evidence for the resurrection of Christ is the martrydom of ten of His disciples in ten parts of the world. Will any one die for a lie which they themselves have made-up? If so, such a ‘lie’ is to be believed, is in’t it? What do you think.
Then you said that one has to agree that all gods are true.
Not necessarily. It only proves that there is a hunger in human heart for ‘god’ which is there by nature and that man has been seeking after it. All religions of the world are trying to reach that god with some success. Basically every religion says that good deeds will be followed by good results and vice versa.
About my experiences in prayer. I told you clearly where I got that power from. As any one would work eight or ten hours daily in an office, I spent the same amount of time every day for around six months in my prayer-closet and the results emerged as a concrete building. I do not think I,or any one else for that matter, would have been able to produce the same or similar results with out the Bible and prayers to Him.
Thank you once again for coming in. Do come in again, if you please.
Bye.
Hi quickbeamoffangorn,
I totally expect people to disagree with me, no problem at all. 🙂
Substance is: Noun; The real physical matter of which a person or thing consists. Person is: Noun; a human being.
>>“So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father’
Yes He is a distinct person as is the Father, but they are distinct only in relationship to one another. Fatherhood, Sonship and passive spiration.<<
You have me at a disadvantage there with the “passive spiration,” I looked it up in the Catholic dictionary and it’s not there; so I’ll guess it’s a typo. I never did trust the Catholic exegesis of the Scriptures. I have in the past talked with priests and their answers never did satisfy me. A lot of it seemed to be mumbo-jumbo. Yes, of course Jesus had brothers and sisters, Mary was not a perpetual virgin. Now don’t take me wrong here, I think individual Catholics are fine people, but the institution of Catholicism is very scary. Anyone or thing who seriously claims to be infallible, you have to watch out for.
I’m not even close to being an arian–Sikh’s are weird. That whole mustache and beard thing is creepy. 🙂
Of course Jesus would be of two natures, being half human half God, but the point still stands. If Jesus were not a separate distinct being, he wouldn’t be praying and talking to and about his father—God.
The Trinity was fought over for years before it was canonized; it was a human thing. Were it a God-driven message, there would have been no opposition. Remember, God was supposed to be directing this thing. People were tortured for their non-belief in the Trinity. Does that seem like a Godly enterprise?
Regarding my using Bible literalism for exposition—Hey, priests and ministers have been doing it for centuries. I think if this were indeed real (Trinity, Dualism, etc.) that there would not be the dichotomy we see in Scripture. There should not be a special class of priests necessary to explain God’s words or meanings.
Again, where is rapture? Is the cult of “rapture” the true meaning of God’s word, or is it just one interpretation of Many?
Hi daymore, Nice to speak to you again.
You know, I can’t find God-head in the Bible either. Perhaps I don’t have the right editions. Could you tell me which edition you use?
I am using passages from the Bible because you are basing your knowledge and faith on it. It would not do to use an authority you did not know. I am sure your knowledge of it far exceeds mine, but nonetheless I know some, and I have excellent searching resources. I may take a long time to answer sometimes, but it is because I am researching.
We share humanity and a thirst for knowledge. That, to me is very good common ground. I call no one a fool for professing to believe in something—after all I may be wrong.
You write: >>“That then takes you to the question of the person of Christ Himself. Why I accept His authority is simply because He is a risen saviour. If indeed He is risen, we all are answerable to Him for He said, “the words I speak to you will judge you in the last day”<<
You accept his authority–of what? That he was written about 2000 years ago. Authority over your life? How so? Must you kneel in front of him and swear your obeisance every day? Must you worship him? What kind of being demands supplication in order to like you? What is it with this worship thing? “Love unquestioningly and uncritically or to excess; venerate as an idol.
If someone were to start worshiping me (Ha!!) I would tell them to “get a life.”
You write: “To me the greatest evidence of the resurrection of Christ not merely the empty tomb, but the martrydom of ten of His disciples in ten parts of the world. Do you think people would allow themselves to be cruelly killed for a lie which they themselves have made-up? I think, such a ‘lie’ is to be believed. What do you think?”
Yes, it’s happened through history, and the Muslims are doing it even as we “speak.” Martyrdom is a waste, but it happens.
You write: “Tell me now, should I waste my time talking to some one who would close his/her eyes to naked facts of life?”
I truly believe my eyes are more open to truth than are yours. I like “talking” to you here, but of course you are free to follow your heart.
You write: “So, I will have further discussion on this issue if you would accept the authoirty of the Bible based on the autoriy of Christ as a risen saviour attested by the mrtrydom of His disciples. I have sufficient reason to believe that the Bible teaches clearly the doctrine of Trinity. And I take classes to PG students on several subjects of my field of studies.”
I’m sorry daymore, I cannot accept the Bible as authority over me. I believe it to be an exceptionable work of early humanity and of course many people swear by it. But, I find it a fascinating thing to study not a thing to worship.
You write: “You might ask me then why I came to comment in your blog. The simple reason is that it appered on my desk-top and since it was a topic of my interest, I read it. You said,”leave a comment” at the bottom. Hence my comment. If you talk negatively about some thing which I hold very precious, then I might comment again.”
I have always looked forward to your input. I do not dis-respect you.
You write: “If you tell us about your trip to Alps or about a Himalayan hike, or even about cricket or some tips for daily living, I might enjoy it with you. I too am a blogger and I vowed to myself never to talk negatively about any thing in my blogs. But if some one asks for a comment, then I do tell them what I believe to be true. Don’t you think it is right?”
Ah yes, I wish I were going to the Alps or Himalayas. You are right though, I do tend to stay on one subject, but at the time it’s the one I have the most words of in my head.
May your life be good…
thewordofme.
hi guys….there is no “godhead” The bible distinctly says that there is only one God, the Father, Creator…..and then there is the Lord Jesus Christ. The Father is officially God….Jesus is the spirit son who pre-existed with the Father in heaven before he came, and he is back there now.
there is no proof that the Father son and holy spirit are equal in the bible….Jesus said…”the father is greater than I”…the holy spirit is only called a “helper”…now, both Jesus and the holy spirit have divine natures, to perform their roles, but only the Father is God.
marianne
Amen Marianne. 🙂
Just casual reading of the Bible tells me you are right.
Sorry, if I may it’s the casual reading that’s at issue IMO.
On Spiration, sorry I didn’t explain. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07409a.htm
Third bullet it’s the method of proceeding from the Father & the Son. There’s numerous tomes which I won’t bore you with on it.
“I never did trust the Catholic exegesis of the Scriptures. I have in the past talked with priests and their answers never did satisfy me. A lot of it seemed to be mumbo-jumbo.”
Given the times we live in and the almost complete lack of religious education and disinformation, it doesn’t suprise me. Not your fault on that mark.
“Yes, of course Jesus had brothers and sisters, Mary was not a perpetual virgin.”
Sorry this is simply a misreading of the scriptural data. The former point isn’t proven at all. You are free to hold the latter if you chose, but frankly if one places themselves in St. Joseph’s shoes; I don’t think you’d be keen on bedding down with a women who was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. Of course if you dismiss the bible as historically inaccurate then that goes out the window, but then there’s no point in having a discussion either if that’s the case.
“I’m not even close to being an arian–Sikh’s are weird. That whole mustache and beard thing is creepy. :-)”
LOL, I don’t know if your having a bit of fun at my expense on this one or not. Arianism don’t have to do with Sikh’s. It was the heresy that rocked Christianity in the 4th century.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01707c.htm
“Of course Jesus would be of two natures, being half human half God, but the point still stands.”
Your position is almost classic Arianism and if I held to a strict sola scriptura position, I’d agree that your position would be valid. But as a Catholic I don’t. Yes Jesus has two natures, but it’s not half and half, it’s fully God and fully Man.
“If Jesus were not a separate distinct being, he wouldn’t be praying and talking to and about his father—God.”
Now here you appear to move into what appears to be a Monothelites position (one will) another heresy only that was condemned in the late 7th century.
“The Trinity was fought over for years before it was canonized; it was a human thing. Were it a God-driven message, there would have been no opposition.”
Wasn’t Jesus ministry itself opposed by religious humans? Does it follow that His ministry is therefore human driven? I don’t think that point stands.
” Remember, God was supposed to be directing this thing. People were tortured for their non-belief in the Trinity. Does that seem like a Godly enterprise?”
Agreed. This was political then anything else. The Trinitarians were tortured, beaten, exiled and killed by the Arian emperors and when Trinitarian emperors came to power they in turn applied the same method to the Arian believers. Their rational was to create political stablility as a unifying principle for the empire.
Most of history used that principle. The church isn’t excused in going along with the states methods, but that does not invalidate it either IMO.
“Regarding my using Bible literalism for exposition—Hey, priests and ministers have been doing it for centuries. ”
Selectively yes. I’m not saying it hasn’t been used, I simply saying it’s flawed.
“I think if this were indeed real (Trinity, Dualism, etc.) that there would not be the dichotomy we see in Scripture.”
Again this goes back to the reformation idea of sola scriptura. Your free to chose that position, just be aware it’s a 16th century creation.
“There should not be a special class of priests necessary to explain God’s words or meanings.”
Easily understandable given the times we live in. As the secular world increases and the influence of Christianity continues to decline, the quality of all the Christians will increase, because true sacrifices will be required of them- especially in first world countries.
The next generation after us will be worth of your angist.
Blessings.
Hi guys,
For those of you who do not see the word ‘godhead’ in the Bible, I will request you to check the following verses in the original. Acts17:29; Rom.1:20 and Col.2:9. You will find in each case a different word than ‘theos’ (which is the normal word for God) is used in the above verses. Any translation fromKJV to NKJV which want to keep an affinity to the words of the original text uses the word ‘godhead’ in most cases. YLT has ‘godhead’ even in Ps.8:5.
About the question of worship: any one who has ever seen Him, worshipped Him. You can not but worship Him if you ever happen to see Him. If there is an avertion in you to worship Him, it is simply because you have not seen him! Do you blame any one else who has had a higher vision of life?
News paper reported of a former Bristish prime minister who went to see the Taj Mahal. At the awe- inspiring sight of it he stood there for minutes unmoved forgetting himself and the entire enviornment around him. That is a picture of worship. Worship is simply human response to divine revelation. It is not so much demanded as it is simply given! Ofcourse there is a command to worship but that is in the context of the worship of other gods, as man has a tendency to worship so you shall not worship other gods but Him only.
Have a great discussion.
Hi quickbeamoffangorn, Please see today’s column:)
Hi daymore—good to speak to you again.
“For those of you who do not see the word ‘godhead’ in the Bible, I will request you to check the following verses in the original. Acts17:29; Rom.1:20 and Col.2:9. You will find in each case a different word than ‘theos’ (which is the normal word for God) is used in the above verses. Any translation fromKJV to NKJV which want to keep an affinity to the words of the original text uses the word ‘godhead’ in most cases. YLT has ‘godhead’ even in Ps.8:5.”
Acts 17:29 NKJV Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. No Godhead there.
Romans 1:20 NKJV For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse There it is.
Colossians 2:9 NKJV For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily There it is again.
Psalms 8:5 NKJV For You have made him a little lower than the angels, And You have crowned him with glory and honor.
No Godhead there.
Psalm 8:5 Hebrew Elohim, God; Septuagint, Syriac, Targum, and Jewish tradition translate as angels.
My apologies daymore. I did not use the KJV or the NKJV version; I used the NIV and NASB. This kind of illustrates another point I have troubles with. The Christians are making constant small changes and interpretations, and then they go and make a whole different subdivision of Protestantism out of it.
“About the question of worship: any one who has ever seen Him, worshipped Him. You can not but worship Him if you ever happen to see Him. If there is an avertion in you to worship Him, it is simply because you have not seen him! Do you blame any one else who has had a higher vision of life?”
From what I have read in the Bible man/woman can see and interact with God, or they will die if they look upon God. Who knows what to believe? One organization says one thing; another says different.
“News paper reported of a former Bristish prime minister who went to see the Taj Mahal. At the awe- inspiring sight of it he stood there for minutes unmoved forgetting himself and the entire enviornment around him. That is a picture of worship. Worship is simply human response to divine revelation. It is not so much demanded as it is simply given! Ofcourse there is a command to worship but that is in the context of the worship of other gods, as man has a tendency to worship so you shall not worship other gods but Him only.”
I have looked into the Grand Canyon and been awestruck, I have looked upon ancient ruins in America and Thailand and been awestruck, I have looked upon awesome sunsets in Hawaii and been blown away. So far I have not gazed upon God. I keep looking for the Guy, but can’t seem to find Him. He’s not hiding in my heart, and I don’t have a hard heart.
Hi thewordofme,
Thank you for your answers. Whether any translation has that word ringt or not, in the original the word is clearly different and that settles the issue for me.
The New Testament knows no organized religion like we have in the present Christendom. They have deviated from the Scriptures, I think, for political purposes. I have nothing to do with any of the organized groups of religious sects. I go back to the NT to base my understanding of my my walk with God.
Please do not believe what any organization tells you.
We have God’s unchanging Word with us. Jesus said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not”. Have you come accross similar words in any literature, ancient or modern, religious or scientific text books? No one could ever possibly make a statement of that sort in their right seses. What do you think?
No one can indeed look at deity with their naked eyes and be alive. That is true. Could you possibly look at the mid-day sun with your naked eyes and not get hurt?
Whe the Bible talks about seeing God, it is only talking about a spiritual vision. Do you think that man is just a physical being? What do you think of man’s moral traits? Don’t you think every man, theist or atheist, has a conscience to live by? Does that not make man different from other animals around him?
By reading your experiences at the various awe-inspiring spots around the world, I see that there is genuine worship in you as in every man. Until now you have only tried to see the physical world around you. I suggest you try to look at the inner man within you. There is one in there.
God is so real. For a whole life I have had communion with Him. I did it because I believed in the Scriptures. Just as you and I are communicating to each other through a machine, may I suggest that faith is the ‘machine’ which will link you to God. Have a try. Take the NT for what it says and go on.
See you later. Have a great day.
this is the wonderful discussion about trinity i have ever seen
Hi ranjith, Thank you for your comment 🙂
ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT GOD IS NOT A PERSONALITY AS A HUMAN THOUGHT GOD IS LIKE A SEA, ENDLESS SEA.
MAN IS VERY LIMITED AND GOD IS UNLIMITED SO ITS IMPOSSIBLE FOR HUMAN TO UNDERSTAND GOD (DONT USE HIM) THERE IS ONLY A SINGLE WAY TO REACH GOD.
Hi faisal, thanks for writing.
Ahha…. now here’s a man who’s seen God and can describe him. Tell us what you know faisal.
Of course the very definition of God is unlimited power. How might I reach this Being…I have a few matters to discuss with Him.
BIBLE HELPS US TO REACH TO GOD AND IT ENABLE US TO FEEL AND TALK TO GOD. ON EVERY MATTER. JUST MAKE YOU CRAZY FOR GOD WITHOUT ANY MIS CONCEPITION WITH CLEAR HEART.
Hi faisal,
Yes….can you go on?
hi GOD BLESS YOU yes i was saying that the word “GOD” contains a unlimited power,wisdom,life,love,truth and much more…..so we are life a ant before the endless sky ok. now the matter is how we can reach to him first let us know that from where we came? so it is clear that GOD made us but how GOD made us BIBLE helps us to know it that how it was? in the first book it is said that GOD made man with mud,soil but GOD induced his soul in man then he called living being. so GOD’S part of soul made us alive. we were GOD’S soul part.
as we were part of GOD therefore man was able to talk to GOD face to face but after doing a sin oh me stoping. FIRST OF ALL DEAR (thewordofme) TELL ME ABOUT YOUR SELF SOME THEN I WILL TALK YOU MORE
Hi faisal,
Go to the “About” tab at the top of this page and click on it…my “quickie bio.”
Jesus said the Father and I are one! (John 10:30) He gave no indication that there was a trinity of any sort. Jesus said you believe in God believe also in me,(John 14:1) Here too no reference to a trinity! Jesus said I have, the power to give my life, and the power to take it up again!(John10:18 Here He demonstrates that He Himself( not necessarily the Father) raised Himself from the dead indicating Jesus is God, even the Father Himself if you will, because Jesus is the everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6! Again, also no mention of a trinity! Jesus said that He Himself alone gives eternal life!(John 10:28.(John 16:31) He is silent in regard to any trinity! Scripture states believe in the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved, (not believe in the trinity and you shall be saved!) Jesus not a trinity, is the way truth and the life!(John 14:6) etc. etc. etc.. Neither Jesus or His disciples ever made reference to a trinity as it is traditionally taught, first by the roman catholics and now catholic protestants too.
Hi Right Extreme Ministry,
I agree with you totally. I see absolutely nothing in the Bible to indicate that Jesus was God. The early church stumbled along for a little over 300 years without a trinity. And when they finally decided they needed one, they had to kill a few people to convince them of their seriousness.
And later they had to kill a few more to convince them that you had to be Christian, not secular…and so on, and so on.
On the contrary there absolutely are many things in the Bible to indicateThat Jesus is indeed God! One of them is that in Isaiah 43: 11 God the Father Himself, declares that He is the only Saviour. The word Saviour means JESUS! Therefore JESUS IS GOD THE FATHER AND GOD THE FATHER IS JESUS CHRIST! Jesus is God the Fathers’ name as God in the flesh as a man! Again though when it comes to God as a trinity there is no such concept! It’s just a traditional man made doctrine or dogma!
Hi Right Extreme Ministry,
I remind you of the words from scripture that I wrote of in my post.
John 8:17, 18, “[Jesus answered the Jewish Pharisees:] In your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I bear witness to myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me.”
So, Jesus himself definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father.
Acts 7:55, 56 reports that Stephen was given a vision of heaven in which he saw “Jesus standing at God’s right hand.”
Jesus and God were standing side-by-side says Stephen.
John 14:28, “[Jesus said:] If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.”
Here Jesus is saying that he is going to his father who is greater than him.
I can’t see how anyone could interpret these examples to say He and God were the same.
Of course this is only a few bits from scripture, there are more, and they pretty much all speak to Jesus being himself–not God. God spoke and Mary was pregnant…she carried him to term and gave birth to a human…with Godly spirit…not God himself.
Are you talking ”of one substance” as the Catholics talk of it?
Interesting how history repeats itself. Gentlemen its not like you were the first to discover these passages. If this was the 4th century you would infact be in the majority opinion.
You would be Arians. They controlled the empire both at the Augustus level and most of the Senate. You use the secret police, the imperial guard, and the army to imprison, tortue, bribe, burn, exile to the salt mines, rape and other wonderful things to force this doctrinal view down Catholics throats.
Your also attempting to use another view establish by the revolt in the 16th century called sola scriptura. Scripture wasn’t created as a catechism and that’s why it isn’t the exclusive source for the church. If it was then your Arian position would be just as valid as the Catholic position.
The historical difference is that Catholic’s for centuries were willing to bleed and die for their view. The Arians by and large were not.
Jn 1:1 – the Word was with GOD, and the Word was GOD
Clearly the Word is distinct from God(the Father), yet still God. Therefore there are either multiple gods (in which case there is no God), or there is a distinction btwn the Person Jesus and the Father only.
Jesus is God – John 1:1; 5:18; 8:58; 10:30-33; 20:28; Titus 2:13 cf. Col 2:9
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are personal and distinct (Matt 28:19; 2 Cor 13:14; John 14:16ff, 26; 15:26; 16:7ff), yet ONE God (1 Tim 2:5).
Hello again quickbeamoffangorn, very glad to hear from you again. I hope you are well.
I know of course that this particular argument has been going on for about 1700 years or so. I think I would make a fine Arian, because I find the argument for trinity to be…now don’t take this the wrong way…ridiculous. 🙂 Of course I don’t have the credentials that the early fathers of the church had and I am far from proficient in the ways of Catholicism so my arguments to you must seem silly.
“You would be Arians. They controlled the empire both at the Augustus level and most of the Senate. You use the secret police, the imperial guard, and the army to imprison, tortue, bribe, burn, exile to the salt mines, rape and other wonderful things to force this doctrinal view down Catholics throats.”
I’ll have to read my history more; I had always thought that that was what happened to the Arians after the council of Nicea, not the other way around. I bow to your superior knowledge on this matter…I’m not making fun here…I mean it. I will study more on this matter. Oh, and the Catholics truly made up for their being tortured by the Arians when they literally wiped out some millions of heretics throughout the dark ages.
I have always heard that the Christians as a group were willing to die for their religion…not just Catholics. Although the Catholics arose from the group of Christians who existed from 33AD to 313AD I don’t think that was all the Romans persecuted…the religion was not homogenous at that time…many things going on…splinter groups and such.
I find that in my journey down through the history of Christianity I am mostly at odds with Catholic thought and practices. From what little history I know so far the early leaders, popes, bishops, etc. were not in any way godly or pious. Now I’ve only been studying for a few years and I really haven’t got into Catholicism yet so my opinion doesn’t mean a hill of beans, but one hears things.
>>“Jn 1:1 – the Word was with GOD, and the Word was GOD
>>”Clearly the Word is distinct from God(the Father), yet still God. Therefore there are either multiple gods (in which case there is no God), or there is a distinction btwn the Person Jesus and the Father only.”<<
Perhaps when you have time you might explain what you mean here. I’ve had a dozen people trying to explain this and I have never understood it. Contrary to what I may sound like in my blog and replies I do wish to learn.
Great talking to you again.
And I hope you are well too.
I think its normally better to open discussion using a Socratic Method since those that want to inquire on their own will look for the truth and weigh it themselves. However in this case you’ve opened up several fronts and I’ll have to provide a bit of ground work.
“I find the argument for trinity to be…now don’t take this the wrong way…ridiculous. :-)”
Well it is in the final analysis beyond human understanding. So I understand why your have difficulty.
“I’ll have to read my history more; I had always thought that that was what happened to the Arians after the council of Nicea, not the other way around”
Well the Arians lost the arguement at that council, but there were several councils after that in which the emperors sided with the Arians and forced the Catholics out of the churches.
The Council of Rimini – 357 was the height of Arians influence. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13057b.htm
“Oh, and the Catholics truly made up for their being tortured by the Arians when they literally wiped out some millions of heretics throughout the dark ages.”
Couldn’t resist could you;>)
I’d suggest a review of this period as well. After all the dark ages end around 470 A.D(last western roman emperor). The papacy didn’t have an army ,was living in poverty under pagan and Arian rulers from 50 A.D. to around 600 A.D. when the Visigoth ruler finally converted to Catholicism. So I doubt very much the papacy had much say or control over peoples physical lives.
Perhaps you meant the middle ages 470- 1453 A.D.?Since your Scot-Irish I will assume that you have been educated with the concept of the Black legend. The british have always been excellent in spreading disinformation for political advantage. And this was used greatly to their advantage.
“I have always heard that the Christians as a group were willing to die for their religion…not just Catholics. Although the Catholics arose from the group of Christians who existed from 33AD to 313AD I don’t think that was all the Romans persecuted…the religion was not homogenous at that time…many things going on…splinter groups and such.”
Well I use Catholic and Christian interchangeably. Indeed its redundant to say Catholic Christian, or worse to say I’m not Christian, I’m Catholic.
I wrote a piece on the term on my blog if you care to look -http://quickbeamoffangorn.wordpress.com/2008/02/11/what-does-catholic-historically-mean-christian-is-my-name-catholic-my-surname/
You also have the crpyt of the pope from 230 A.D.
http://www.arsmar.com/ce_his1.htm
So they were clearly around prior to 313.To buy into the Black legend again that the catholic Church rose after Emperor Constantine came to power is to ignore history.
Pagan Germanic law replaced Roman Law at the start of the middle ages. Under Roman Law anyone who opposed the beliefs of the emperor was an enemy of the state. Under German law you fight it out and the winner was favored by God. This lasted for hundreds of years.
The early period of the inquistion was to contain the Catharism and Waldensians. The Cathar were polythesitic and created political strife in France. The pope sent a representative to speak with them and naturally they killed the guy. So the Pope asked the King of france to assist and the King ran with it and view it as an opportunity to achieve political unity over southern France. Recall that under Roman Law an offense against the church was an offense against the state.
The famous Spanish inquistion was under the King and Queen of Spain with papal authority given them. However the Spanish Inquisition were condemned by Popes Sixtus IV, Leo X, Paul III and Paul IV for there excesses.
Most of the propraganda was produced by Foxe’s Book of Martyrs (1554) and a leaflet published in 1567 by a supposed Inquisition victim named Montanus.
You can easily find numbers up to 9 million as the number killed during this period. None of it is backed by any facts. The most famous grand inquisitor was Bernard Gui. He found 930 people guilty of heresy and 42 of them were executed by the state.
From what I’ve looked into the matter its probably closer to 20,000 persons over a 500 year period. The overwhelming majority of them were executed by the state. Not that this justifies anything, but we murder 1.3 million of the unborn per year. I would love to see how societies view us in 500 years from now. I’m sure they will balme the catholic church for not doing enough to prevent it.
“From what little history I know so far the early leaders, popes, bishops, etc. were not in any way godly or pious”
Well that would again be a great mistake. Now if your talking about 1300 to 1750 I’m right there with you. there are currently only 2 popes that I know of that are being considered for Sainthood. That doesn’t mean that all the others were evil, but most were very worldly. The pope of the first 300 years almost all died violent deaths by the states hands.
“Now I’ve only been studying for a few years and I really haven’t got into Catholicism yet so my opinion doesn’t mean a hill of beans, but one hears things.”
Well if you live in Britian its no wonder. With Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor at the helm over there its a wonder any one is Catholic.
Personhood defines nature,but is not nature.
Example your mother gave birth to you a human being -nature. But no one goes around saying that, she gave birth to “The word of me(Tom,Dick or Harry).
A Human Person is comprised of Body (Nature) and Spirit (what we directly receive from God).
Christ the Person is both Human (Nature) and Divine(Nature) Human & Divine (Will & Spirit)called the Incarnation.
As your aware the Catholic church proclaims that Mary is the Mother of God. She gave birth to the Person Jesus Christ.
Protestants will object to this because they think in order to give birth to God one must be God as well. However the whole point with this doctrine was back in the 5th century attempting to explain how many natures and how many persons Christ is.
To attempt to divide the human and divine natures of Christ you either divide the Person or denie one of His natures.
All three Persons of the Trinity are involved in every action of God. Nonetheless, it is appropriate to think of some actions as distinctive actions of one person of the Trinity. For example: creation as the work of the Father; redemption as the work of the Son.
You can look up these terms as well, you’ll get both Catholic and Orthodox views on it.
Perichoresis (Greek) = circumincessio (Latin) = “mutual interpenetration
Heresy on the Trinity:
Modalism- affirms exculsively the unity of God
Tritheism-affirm the distinctiveness of the three persons of the Trinity but not the unity.
Sabellianism- Father as exclusively Creator, then He becomes the Savior, then He becomes the sanctifier
One of the first things to understand is what are the characteristics of God?
The leading church father on the matter of the Trinity is St John Damascene -The Orthodox Faith. He is recognized by both the Latin and Orthodox churches.
So I will use his definition of God:
“We believe, then, in One God, one beginning(8), having no beginning, uncreate, unbegotten, imperishable and immortal, everlasting, infinite, uncircumscribed, boundless, of infinite power, simple, uncompound, incorporeal, without flux, passionless, unchangeable, unalterable, unseen, the fountain of goodness and justice, the light of the mind, inaccessible; a power known by no measure, measurable only by His own will alone (for all things that He wills He can(9)), creator of all created things, seen or unseen, of all the maintainer and preserver, for all the provider, master and lord and king over all, with an endless and immortal kingdom: having no contrary, filling all, by nothing encompassed, but rather Himself the encompasser and maintainer and original possessor of the universe, occupying(1) all essences intact(2) and extending beyond all things, and being separate from all essence as being super-essential(3) and above all things and absolute God, absolute goodness, and absolute fulness(4): determining all sovereignties and ranks, being placed above all sovereignty and rank, above essence and life and word and thought: being Himself very light and goodness and life and essence, inasmuch as He does not derive His being from another, that is to say, of those things that exist: but being Himself the fountain of being to all that is, of life to the living, of reason to those that have reason; to all the cause of all good: perceiving all things even before they have become: one essence, one divinity, one power, one will, one energy, one beginning, one authority, one dominion, one sovereignty, made known in three perfect subsistences anti adored with one adoration, believed in and ministered to by all rational creation(5), united without confusion and divided without separation.”
Since God is unchangeable, to say that the Son came after the Father is to introduce change into the very subsistance of the Father, moving from not being Father to becoming Father. He therefore could not be God, since He would be changeable. The only why we understand the First Person of the Trinity is via His relationship with the Second Person of the Trinity (Father & Son).
Hopefully that will give you plenty of reading to prevent insomnia;>)
Hi quickbeamoffangorn,
Yes indeed this will take some digestion.
As always very nice to speak to you.
The trinity is a doctrine or dogma thought up and formulated by man! Neither Jesus or His disciples taught such a concept or belief much less made it a major tenet of the genuine and true Christian faith! This doctrine raised its head I believe the earliest about 96 A.D. by the so called third bishop of Rome, Clement! Why did’nt the first and second bishops of Rome mention this supposed major belief of the Christian faith? Why did it show up after those who would more than likely vehemently oppose such a pernicious idea? Probably because there is no such thing or teaching in the Holy Bible, and more importantly from JESUS or HIs disciples up to the time of Clement’s misinformed opinions and dictates on the subject and many who would have rightly disagreed were long dead and gone! The Bible does not support such a concept, and any honest study of the scripture will show that it is not really Biblical but rather pure conjecture at its best and confusing at its worst and paganistic in its underpinnings!
Right Extreme Ministry,
Well the first issue would be there is nothing in your bible that states that Jesus required anything let alone everything that He said to be written down.
Nor does your bible say anything in your bible about who was inspired to write it.
You don’t even know who wrote the first, second or thrid Gospel without refering the Catholic historians in the second and third century. Same can be said of other New testament writtings like the book of Hebrews.
Next there’s nothing in your bible that states all beliefs are required to be included in the bible.
Next you had wonderful emperors like Diocletian who burn both believers and their scriptures. So it was expecsive to write an preserve anything and it was costly to ones life in many cases as well.
And if your bible only has 66 books in it you don’t agree with the Apostles because they used the Greek & Syriac translations of the Old testament, in which case your simply following Luther & Calvin 1500 years after the fact.
Sorry but your simply not a Christian if you denie the Trinity.
hi i just wanted to say that people who dont believe in the trinity are very correct because the father the sona nd the spirit are 3 seperate beings. trinitarians use that doubting thomas scripture alot as well as john 1:1 so they use the same scripture over and over again no matter how many times you show them that its not true. if you want real insite on the trinity talk to a jehovahs witness
hi i just wanted to say that people who dont believe in the trinity are very incorrect because the father the sona nd the spirit are 3 seperate beings. trinitarians use that doubting thomas scripture alot as well as john 1:1 so they use the same scripture over and over again no matter how many times you show them that its not true. if you want real insite on the trinity talk to a jehovahs witness
Hi scott, thanks for writing.
Right about the JW’s not believing in the trinity concept. Those particular passages in scripture that are saying that Jesus and God are separate beings are interpreted as they should be by JW’s
Its some of their other interpretation that are, to put it kindly…a little weird.
They believe that they are the sole religious group that is approved by God and the probable inheritors of the earth after the Armageddon rigmarole. Of course the no blood transfusions.
They seem to be saying that the earth was formed by God, but each day was an age, maybe millions of years in time, but mankind’s time on earth is only about 6,000 years.
They are Bible literalists. i.e. God made Adam and Eve in 4027 BC, the Flood of Noah was 2370 BC and so on.
Seriously need to update their world view, but probably won’t.
twom
YEAH WELL YOU FORGET ABOUT THE MOST IMPORTANT SCRIPTURE DISPROVING THE TRINITY ACTUALLY THERE ARE 2 SCRIPTURES THAT DISPROVE THE TRINITY JOHN 3:16 GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD HE GAVE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON NOW HOW COULD THE BEGOT BE THE BEGOTTEN AND HOW COUL THE SENDER BE THE SENT AND HOW ABOUT THE SCRIPTURE WERE JESUS WAS BAPTIZED AND JEHOVAH SPOKE HE SAID THIS IS MY SON WHOM I HAVE APPROVED GOD SAID THAT AGAIN ON MT ZION I BELIEVE. JOHN 1:1 and all those other scriptures people use are the same old trinatarian scriptures where there are many scriptures that clearly state that the father and the son are 2 seperate beings. now i will give you this i do believe that Jesus and god are some hoe connected but not how the trinity puts it.
Hi scott,
Don’t scream, I’m on your side on the trinity question.
also about the witness they go by whats in the bible they dont use science i would agree that they have been wrong on there past prophecies you dont need to tell me about that however they seem to be the only religion that follows the bible i mean so many people believe we go to heaven or hell but infact we dont. i actually read the kjv and i still agree with the witnesses. here is a good question for you when it comes to hell. why would a loving god such as jehovah condem us to hell for eternity over 70 or 80 years of life. Secondly if we all go to heaven or hell then whats happens to the earth when there are no more inhabitants i am sure god did not spend all this precious time creating us and the earth to just throw it all away. are orignal plan was to live forever on earth but that was messed up when adam and eve sinned sin was then born into the world. so we already know we were created and meant to live forever not in heaven not in hell but on earth. so do you think that god changed his mind and wants us to now occupy heaven or hell. there is a scripture look it up its “For the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything, nor have they any longer a reward, for their memory is forgotten.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5) also the other scripture that says when a man dies his thoughts and memorys perish with him. well we would have to have some sort of counscious to be in heaven or hell and the bible clearly states that we are not here anymore nor or we coinscious of anything so you tell me
There is no heaven or hell so don’t worry…it’s all BS
also you say that you are not a true christian if you deny the diety of the christ. no you are not a real christian if you spend your time defending the diety of the christ. Do you think that jesus wants us to argue over a doctrine such as the trinity if he was the true almighty god show me the scripture were he comes right out and says you know what i am the almighty god i transformed into human bred my self through mary womb and now live among you i am jehovah you cant sho me that s cripture because it does not exist. but i can show you all kinds of scriptures were jesus calls god father i can show you a scripture that says no man has seen the father. i can show you a scriture that says god is love and justice and fair and equal, but no where does it say he is confusing. no where does it say i will start a war on a doctrine and let humans decide if jesus is god or not no it says follow christ be christ like love your neighbor love your self but above all put god and the only way to the father is threw the son. Dont rebuddle with any crazy jehovah witness comments either i am not a witness so there is no need that is straight bible literature and all this was quoted from a bible other than a jw bible i got it off the internet so it did not come from a jw bible
i want a bible from u,p.o.boxtt9temanew town.0-0233.ghana. i need a
bible send it through the address above.thanks
If u really beleive that the trinity is not real then why does John 10:30 say that I and the father are one?? How can u go against what the bibles tells u to beleive
Did you read any of the Biblical quotes that were in the post? Here are some more for you to check.
John 12:48-50 He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him-the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.
49 For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.
50 And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.” (Jesus speaking at Last Supper).
John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever (Jesus speaking at Last Supper)
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (Also Jesus speaking at Last Supper)
John 15:9-10 As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.
10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love. (Says Jesus)
All above are quotes from the KJV Bible.
The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”-(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.
The Encyclopedia Americana says: “Christianity derived from Judaism, and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road that led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”-(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.
That darn Jesus and His people. They just don’t seem to get the idea. Somehow we’ve got to get word to Him and His followers that we humans have updated the theology. Jesus just can’t seem to understand that He is also God and the Holy Spirit. He keeps speaking in the improper tense and Denying that He is God.
The trinity was made up by the Catholic Church around 300 to 400 AD. Protestants keep it in there when they broke away from the Catholics in the 1500’s AD.
Well i disagree…
If you go to Matthew 28:9 and 28:17 in both of them Jesus is worshiped indicating that he is God but when you go to —Isaiah 44:8,“Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any”KJV Bible so whats heppening here? youre readin something out of context whithout seeing what the rest of the bible has to say.
Yea your points and arguments are valid but needs clarification( note i came to the conclusion whith my studies of my bible).If you go to john 1:1 what or who is the word? and why is it saying it was God?There is an error that many people commit when looking at jesus of the new testament and its saying that Jesus was a regular prophet or difrent person from God Whitch is not true. The son(Jesus) the Father and the holy spirit are the same why the should we baptise in the name of them?matthew 28:19
Now why did Jesus said all of those things?Jesus prayed to the Father because as a man, under the Law (Gal. 4:4), The Bible teaches that he was both God and man (Col. 2:9; John 8:58 with Ex. 3:14). Also, Jesus has two natures. Therefore, we will see two types of scripture concerning Jesus: those that seem to focus on His divine-side, and those that seem to focus on His human-side.
You are right that the word trinity is not foun in the bible a single time but its a made up ”WORD” to explain something that happens in the bible.
I Hope my point of view helps you and that maybe one day we may all follow the same idea =D
Have a nice day
me,i’ve been looking for the truth and i’m still looking for it but i was baptised in a chritian church where they tough to me about trinity but they did not give me an accuracy about it up until now our chritians they dont want to seek the truth. we all+jesus belong to God our Father the trinity is not real col1:3