The Trinity

[Right Divider]

Trinitarianism is nothing more than man's attempt to describe God.

More like a legitimate attempt to understand Him based on His Word.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

More like a legitimate attempt to understand Him based on His Word.

2,000 years of schisms and counting.

 

[Right Divider]

2,000 years and counting.

Whatever that means.

 

[keypurr]

Key, Hebrews 1:4 happened upon Christ's ascension. Not an act of creation.

He was higher than the Angels before he came to us. He created the angels. On his ascension he was made Lord of all creation by his God.

Ah roseripper.
Keypur is anathema.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

Sent from my A622GL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Rosenritter]

All of Christendom is triune, and for a very good reason. Stop being inept, self-centered, shallow, and more in love with yourself than Him and His church.

Have you ever read Justin Martyr's "Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew?" Justin wasn't Trinitarian. Trinity hadn't been invented yet for that matter, but Justin said there were two Gods. The God of the Old Testament which was Jesus, and a secret God that was "the Father" that Jesus referred to. Are you prepared to say Justin was not part of Christendom? Can you able to say that after reading what he writes in "Dialogue with Trypho?"

 

[Rosenritter]

More like a legitimate attempt to understand Him based on His Word.

I believe "Trinitarianism" can be a legitimate attempt to understand God. But I don't think that God approves of backbiting and schisms and condemnations for other legitimate attempts to understand God. When you look at the gospels and how Christ says he will judge between the sheep and the goats, does he judge between which doctrinal subset scored the highest on their exam score? Or does he judge based on how we behaved towards each other, and say that in doing so, we acted towards Him?

 

[Right Divider]

I believe "Trinitarianism" can be a legitimate attempt to understand God. But I don't think that God approves of backbiting and schisms and condemnations for other legitimate attempts to understand God. When you look at the gospels and how Christ says he will judge between the sheep and the goats, does he judge between which doctrinal subset scored the highest on their exam score? Or does he judge based on how we behaved towards each other, and say that in doing so, we acted towards Him?

That's an interesting mix of apples and oranges.

 

[Lon]

Have you ever read Justin Martyr's "Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew?" Justin wasn't Trinitarian. Trinity hadn't been invented yet for that matter, but Justin said there were two Gods. The God of the Old Testament which was Jesus, and a secret God that was "the Father" that Jesus referred to. Are you prepared to say Justin was not part of Christendom? Can you able to say that after reading what he writes in "Dialogue with Trypho?"

1) He wasn't 'anti-' Trinitarian and that's an important difference today. 2) We are well after the councils and so efforts to disrupt them better have VERY good reasons. Lone rangers? :nono: Sorry, this is a fact and if you can't see the difference between this and the time of Justin Maryr, there is problems with today's kind of 'individual' theology amateur hour.' Justin Martyr didn't have the councils or orthodox systematic theologies. There is little excuse for this today. Don't try to excuse misbehavior, though I love your misplaced heart. It is indeed better err on the side of love if you don't see the problem as starkly and clear as the church does.

I believe "Trinitarianism" can be a legitimate attempt to understand God. But I don't think that God approves of backbiting and schisms and condemnations for other legitimate attempts to understand God. When you look at the gospels and how Christ says he will judge between the sheep and the goats, does he judge between which doctrinal subset scored the highest on their exam score? Or does he judge based on how we behaved towards each other, and say that in doing so, we acted towards Him?

Again, judge justly. These are cultist lone-rangers and malcontents attacking the doors of the church and not vice versa. Am I being mean in response? No, not at all. I am however, 'rightly' assessing who is being disruptive and purposefully antagonistic, arguing vehemently, and poorly suited for it at that. It is a little like blaming a Jew for being persecuted... There are some stronger languages toward them that are inappropriate, but I don't believe I can apologize for anything I've said and not even if I said "Vipers!" (something about being bitten and picked a fight with on one's own turf)

 

[keypurr]

Have you ever read Justin Martyr's "Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew?" Justin wasn't Trinitarian. Trinity hadn't been invented yet for that matter, but Justin said there were two Gods. The God of the Old Testament which was Jesus, and a secret God that was "the Father" that Jesus referred to. Are you prepared to say Justin was not part of Christendom? Can you able to say that after reading what he writes in "Dialogue with Trypho?"

I considered this at one time.
Still think there might be something there.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Lon]

Trinitarianism is nothing more than man's attempt to describe God.

I'd be disappointed too if I spent 40,000 dollars and still didn't have a handle on Him.

Or worse, not spent a penny at all and think one does have a handle? I'll take the former. My prowess is well-informed as to what I can and cannot assert from scripture. Worth every penny.

 

[keypurr]

I believe "Trinitarianism" can be a legitimate attempt to understand God. But I don't think that God approves of backbiting and schisms and condemnations for other legitimate attempts to understand God. When you look at the gospels and how Christ says he will judge between the sheep and the goats, does he judge between which doctrinal subset scored the highest on their exam score? Or does he judge based on how we behaved towards each other, and say that in doing so, we acted towards Him?

Good post friend

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Lon]

I believe "Trinitarianism" can be a legitimate attempt to understand God. But I don't think that God approves of backbiting and schisms and condemnations for other legitimate attempts to understand God. When you look at the gospels and how Christ says he will judge between the sheep and the goats, does he judge between which doctrinal subset scored the highest on their exam score? Or does he judge based on how we behaved towards each other, and say that in doing so, we acted towards Him?

Sad to see you shucking doctrine for gooey-feely pseudo-theology after I've corrected you on this already:

For me: John 4:23 The conflict, in my estimation, was over 'what is more important? love or truth?' Now certainly I'm reading a bit into it with 'love' but the Samaritan woman was asking if bad doctrine (being a 'despised' Samaritan not worshipping quite right) was a deal-breaker. For me, and I recognize the disagreement, the answer Jesus gave was "yes." However, I would also agree that pure (true) doctrine must certainly love. Another way of understanding Jesus' affirmation, would be: "Both" imho (In order to love God, knowing Him is important, thus doctrine is important and according to my understanding of Jesus' words, essential).

Certainly by love for one another BUT we must recognize Matthew 7:21-23 so I agree with this last line but cannot agree on the former premise. To my understanding "spirit" and "truth" amount to love-in-action and being as well as correct knowledge, thus again: "both."

Does love cover a multitude of sins? Yes indeed. Jesus didn't despise the Samaritans, and in fact showed them love and used them to shame Jews with the Good Samaritan, in which your point is well noted that the righteous one was the one who cared for the injured enemy. We Christians often treat our enemies contemptibly. I'd like to think we have some growing up to do but I've also seen many mature in Christ deal gently with adversity. We all need to spend a LOT more time in scripture and prayer than internet forums and entertaining ourselves. We are a distracted people...and I'm off on a bit of a tangent, but one I think worth a moment... The answer, to the best of my understanding is that 'true believers must worship the Father [both] in Spirit and in Truth. -In Him

Truth IS important. More than your casual nod. Again, love your heart but Christ will not look past your being theologically lazy either. Read Him some more. He said 1) to listen to the Pharisees, for instance, just 'act' differently. 2) above He said that doctrine was important. Simply 'loving' is not a bad thing, but if you have to lie or compromise, He will not be pleased with that. Don't compromise HIs truth for anybody. Our FIRST call is to love God THEN to love man. You can't do the latter if you aren't a champion and lover of His truth, imho.

 

[Rosenritter]

Sad to see you shucking doctrine for gooey-feely pseudo-theology after I've corrected you on this already:


Truth IS important. More than your casual nod. Again, love your heart but Christ will not look past your being theologically lazy either. Read Him some more. He said 1) to listen to the Pharisees, for instance, just 'act' differently. 2) above He said that doctrine was important. Simply 'loving' is not a bad thing, but if you have to lie or compromise, He will not be pleased with that. Don't compromise HIs truth for anybody. Our FIRST call is to love God THEN to love man. You can't do the latter if you aren't a champion and lover of His truth, imho.

Tell me then Lon, Can I believe Isaiah 9:6 and 1 John 5:7? How can you explain the total lack of "Trinitarian dogma" in the whole scripture if such a teaching was really intended? The temple veil was torn from top to bottom, the separation between us and God was removed, we no longer have need of priests to intercede for us because we have a high priest in the heavens. We are not to be shackled to priests, and councils, and decrees of men, because we have been granted direct access to God if we will open our hearts and listen. Knock, and it shall be answered, he says. Ask wisdom, and it shall be granted liberally. I see no instructions from Jesus that we should be beholden to decrees. Why are we given scripture if we are dependent upon someone else for interpretation?

You speak of "lone rangers" as being something evil, but God's prophets have never been popular or accepted. They stoned and killed the prophets, it is written. Martyrs have been burnt and reformers scorned and slain. I could be exacting and demand answers for all the questions I ask that are set aside, but I am willing to grant that God values the heart above knowledge. Knowledge can be granted when we stand before God, but a hardened heart is a different matter.

 

[Notaclue]

Greater does not negate "I and the Father are one." Logic better, or better yet, stop doing it and just believe all of scripture. If you don't 'assume' you'll wind up a Trinitarian like the rest of us.

Jn.17:9 I pray for them(disciples): I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.
11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.



Jn.17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.


Can we become......God?


Peace.

 

[Rosenritter]

Jn.17:9 I pray for them(disciples): I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.
11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.



Jn.17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.


Can we become......God?


Peace.

I think that passage has to be a bit confusing for anyone, unless you allow that perhaps the analogy being used is not perfectly perfect.

 

[Notaclue]

Key, Hebrews 1:4 happened upon Christ's ascension. Not an act of creation.

Col.1:18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.

19For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him,

20 and through Him to reconcile all things to(into) Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.


Rev.1:5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood—



Is.65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

18But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy.

19And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying.


He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead,



Acts2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.



Peace.

 

[daqq]

Jn.17:9 I pray for them(disciples): I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.
11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.



Jn.17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.


Can we become......God?


Peace.

That is indeed what the bulk of modern Trinitarian Christiandom is actually teaching while most of the time not even recognizing it. They by default claim to be Gods, and by their atonement doctrine it was only made possible for them because God died in their place, so that they could switch places with him and themselves become Gods. This actually comes out in even more of their arguments than simply this one. There are other places where it is blatantly obvious that if one upholds both the Trinitarian dogma and the scripture at the same time then there is no choice but to understand that they essentially claim to be Gods because that is the end result of their doctrine. If God has a God and God's God is not the only God then they too are Gods with a God, because they worship their Elder Brother who was not ashamed to call them brethren, and by becoming the brethren of God they too are God by default, (it's about as complicated as the Trinity, lol). Do they claim to have the Logos of God? Has the Logos of God come to them? Then likewise the scripture says that they are Gods and the scripture cannot be broken. I suppose it all depends on what one wishes to capitalize or minimalize, and emphasize or de-emphasize for his or her particular bias, but the original writings did not have such things as capitalization. However there is no way to avoid this problem when making a man into God by seeing Elohim or Theos as only ever meaning God Almighty, (which is absolutely not how Elohim is used throughout the whole scripture).

 

[daqq]

Trinitarianism is nothing more than man's attempt to describe God.

I'd be disappointed too if I spent 40,000 dollars and still didn't have a handle on Him.

:thumb: And once that 40,000 or more has been paid the natural man who paid it will generally never admit that he wasted his money; and so the doctrine sticks, like it or not, because the pride and prestige of a highly valued education must be maintained. It would be like Hal Lindsey apologizing for his false statements in the Late Great Planet Earth: if he did so how many people would have continued buying his books? Aint gonna happen when the almighty dollar is in play.

 

[Lon]

Let me start here with your last sentence:

Peace.

Truly? Most cults come here for only one thing. I'm not in a cult, but if I were, I'd not wish to 'fight' for dominance. The church was never built that way. Martin Luther nailed 95 thesis BUT, he had the credentials, first off. He didn't do it lightly, nor just to 'do it my way.'

Unless I were convinced over a salvific issue against the church at large, I'd keep quiet about my divergence, not willing to go against the Lord's command to build unity and be one with His church.

Jn.17:9 I pray for them(disciples): I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.
11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

"as." the emphasis will probably be lost on you. Most cultists are just as bad with English as they would be if they took another language. It is that 'smarter than you' without really being actually 'smarter.' It is sad when C- grades think they can do better than I. Frankly... :nono:

Jn.17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

Most cultists never pay attention to me, but listen: Jesus is praying for a 'specific' oneness. You cannot simply assert that all of the Godhead is the exact same. For instance, in Ephesians 5, Paul compares a man's loving sacrifice to the loving sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ BUT 'as' in this case is talking about something very specific in the way that a husband loves his wife AND Christ loves the church: Sacrifice. So, please understand this (I won't try again if you are contentious and arrogant): "I pray they are one as you and I are one." Simple question with a simple answer: Is Jesus talking about EVERY way the Father/Son are one OR is He very specifically talking about a unity in love and doctrine?

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Great. Is it true that the way I am one flesh with my wife is different than the way I am one way with the body, the church but that there are certain aspects that are the same especially regarding self-less love that they are the same such that "as" is appropriate when comparing to sacrificial love and commitment, but not other aspects that are exclusive? Yes?

24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

:up: See the exclusive relationship here? There are aspects of it we can and need to share in. There are others that are very exclusive. He is the "only begotten" and One Whose very name will cause knees to bow. It would be and is, imho, a great sin to minimize the differences and dethrone the Lord of Glory. Surely "I never knew you" is reserved truly for those who 'never knew Him?"

Can we become......God?

No. "Friends" of God rather.

For those who are contentious "we have no other teaching." 1 Corinthians 11:16 Romans 2:8

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Or worse, not spent a penny at all and think one does have a handle?

I've wasted more than I've ever spent righteously.

Proverbs 8:11
For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it.

I'll take the former. My prowess is well-informed as to what I can and cannot assert from scripture. Worth every penny.

I know.