Are these questions actually problems inherent with the doctrine of the Trinity?
1) If the Father is Spirit, (and according to John he is) and the Holy Spirit is Spirit, doesn't that make two Spirits? Why the distinction between the two?
2) Does a person recieve the "Risen Christ" or does a person recieve the Holy Spirit when a person becomes a Christian? Who "knocks on the door" of our heart? Who empowers the Christian to do the will of God? Who leads and guides the believer?
3) And if we consider that Jesus is (according to the Creed) is "eternally begotten of the Father" and had a pre-existance, doesn't that make three disctict Spirits in the Christian pantheon? How is that not three Gods?
4) Was Jesus full of the Holy Spirit, annointed of the Holy Spirit, and led by the Holy Spirit? If Jesus was already God, why would he need this?
In addition to the whole 3 in 1 "mystery" do these questions further illustrate that the doctrine of the Trinity causes more problems than it solves?
The Trinity.
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Savant
- Posts: 12235
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
- Location: New England
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
The Trinity.
Post #1 My theological positions:
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: The Trinity.
Post #11Short answer is yes. Mikvah's, ritual cleansing of sin, were a very old practice of Isreal. The Jews still practice it today. John and Christ brought something not new, but very old. Baptism was already in practice under its Hebrew name.postroad wrote: [Replying to post 6 by ttruscott]
All baptisms are valid regardless of what is believed?
-
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Re: The Trinity.
Post #12[Replying to brianbbs67]
“So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.�
However, never should we only read parts of the Bible. The Bible should be read as a whole.
The religion problem is in thinking/believing the Bible alone is our authority, when in fact no where in the Bible does the Bible say the Bible is our sole authority. In fact, the Bible says we are to listen to the Church (Sacred Tradition). In fact, the Church (Sacred Tradition) preceded the Bible. Therefore it is wrong, illogical, and unscriptural to say Sacred Tradition contradicts Sacred Scripture. We are to follow/listen to both and neither can contradict each other. Of course, if one only listens to one (say Sacred Scripture) and denies Sacred Tradition, well then he would be in error.The religion problem we face is not The Word of God, but the doctrine and traditions of men which cause the Word to seem to conflict.
That would be an incomplete instruction. Although one would see when doing that . . .I implore everyone who have interest to just read the bible as a whole in complete harmony and stop after the 4 Gospels and write down every instruction of our messiah , keep those in mind to rectify and harmonize the rest with it.
“So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.�
However, never should we only read parts of the Bible. The Bible should be read as a whole.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3170
- Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 1:18 pm
Re: The Trinity.
Post #13[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]
The question presupposes that the Trinity developed along purely logical/philosophical lines; as if the first users of any term that might be translated (English) into Trinity were TRYING to come up with a Triune God.
They were not. Any study into the history of early Christian thought will be confronted with this:
On the one hand, the early Christian thinkers inherited from the apostles (as well from their philosophical traditions) monotheism. There can be only one God.
On the other, the language of the apostles also attributed to Jesus and the Spirit divine attributes, while STILL CLAIMING MONOTHEISM.
That was the complex package left the early philosophers of the church.
From this arose the doctrine of the Trinity.
All attacks against the Trinity should first start with exegesis the N.t., for that is where the doctrine itself began.
The question presupposes that the Trinity developed along purely logical/philosophical lines; as if the first users of any term that might be translated (English) into Trinity were TRYING to come up with a Triune God.
They were not. Any study into the history of early Christian thought will be confronted with this:
On the one hand, the early Christian thinkers inherited from the apostles (as well from their philosophical traditions) monotheism. There can be only one God.
On the other, the language of the apostles also attributed to Jesus and the Spirit divine attributes, while STILL CLAIMING MONOTHEISM.
That was the complex package left the early philosophers of the church.
From this arose the doctrine of the Trinity.
All attacks against the Trinity should first start with exegesis the N.t., for that is where the doctrine itself began.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: The Trinity.
Post #14RightReason wrote: [Replying to brianbbs67]
The religion problem is in thinking/believing the Bible alone is our authority, when in fact no where in the Bible does the Bible say the Bible is our sole authority. In fact, the Bible says we are to listen to the Church (Sacred Tradition). In fact, the Church (Sacred Tradition) preceded the Bible. Therefore it is wrong, illogical, and unscriptural to say Sacred Tradition contradicts Sacred Scripture. We are to follow/listen to both and neither can contradict each other. Of course, if one only listens to one (say Sacred Scripture) and denies Sacred Tradition, well then he would be in error.The religion problem we face is not The Word of God, but the doctrine and traditions of men which cause the Word to seem to conflict.
That would be an incomplete instruction. Although one would see when doing that . . .I implore everyone who have interest to just read the bible as a whole in complete harmony and stop after the 4 Gospels and write down every instruction of our messiah , keep those in mind to rectify and harmonize the rest with it.
“So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.�
However, never should we only read parts of the Bible. The Bible should be read as a whole.
And when one finds mother church is wrong and unbiblical, should we then follow it anyway? Or should we follow as God instructs? Especially when we find by reading the entire bible, Neither Christ nor God instructs to practice as is practiced in Christianity today?
Their no such thing as Sacred tradtion of men. There is Sacred tradition of God. Given by Him directly to us in the Bible. He tells us how to live and what to celebrate. He also tells us not to celebrate as the pagan do.
So, in your opinion we are to follow men, because they have established the tradition? My oh my!
I never said don't read the whole bible. Read it all. read it a million times. Read a million times what Christ instructs us. Write it down. memorize it. Then examine Paul and the rest of the NT. If Paul or anyone contradicts Christ, they are false. However, they don't. Paul is never persecuted for teaching christianity, but rather teaching against the Law. Peter even defends him and Paul says he teaches the law and prophets. So, unless Paul is a liar, he taught as Christ did. The Law. Christ 's sacrifice only freed us from the curse of the law. Not following the law as heaven and earth still stand.
-
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Re: The Trinity.
Post #15[Replying to brianbbs67]
Yes, and given by Him via His Church. Exactly as the Bible tells us—“He who hears you, hears me.� “Whatever you bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven.� The church is ‘the pillar and foundation of truth’.
Can you provide an example? So far, she hasn’t been, because quite frankly she can’t be – Christ promised to remain with His Church.And when one finds mother church is wrong and unbiblical, should we then follow it anyway?
The Church has never contradicted God. If you think otherwise, please provide an example.Or should we follow as God instructs?
Again, please be specific. What are you talking about?Especially when we find by reading the entire bible, Neither Christ nor God instructs to practice as is practiced in Christianity today?
Their no such thing as Sacred tradtion of men. There is Sacred tradition of God. Given by Him directly to us in the Bible.
Yes, and given by Him via His Church. Exactly as the Bible tells us—“He who hears you, hears me.� “Whatever you bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven.� The church is ‘the pillar and foundation of truth’.
True dat.He tells us how to live and what to celebrate. He also tells us not to celebrate as the pagan do.
Jesus Christ established His Church and told us to listen to her. Besides, by listening to Sacred Scripture you are in fact listening to the Church. It is the Church who gave us the Bible.So, in your opinion we are to follow men, because they have established the tradition? My oh my!
Of course.I never said don't read the whole bible. Read it all. read it a million times. Read a million times what Christ instructs us. Write it down. memorize it. Then examine Paul and the rest of the NT. If Paul or anyone contradicts Christ, they are false.
Correct.However, they don't.
Uuummm . . . again, I have no problem with this. Therefore, neither should you with Christ’s Church.Paul is never persecuted for teaching christianity, but rather teaching against the Law. Peter even defends him and Paul says he teaches the law and prophets. So, unless Paul is a liar, he taught as Christ did. The Law. Christ 's sacrifice only freed us from the curse of the law. Not following the law as heaven and earth still stand.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: The Trinity.
Post #16[Replying to post 15 by RightReason]
The Sabbath, Christmas and Easter come right to mind. Holidays are Holy Days. Holy Days are given by God. Not by "christianizing" pagan rituals.
Right there, the church calls what is unholy, holy. There was no command by God. In fact God says His law and feast are for mankind and eternal and not a burden.
"and when you conquer these nations, do not think to worship Me as they worshipped their gods. They are an abomination to Me. They throw there children into the fire."
The old and new Testaments tell of us worshipping God as He decided. So, you say, 'we kept the sabbath and feasts and after the cross we don't have to, and then in the end we do?'
The Sabbath, Christmas and Easter come right to mind. Holidays are Holy Days. Holy Days are given by God. Not by "christianizing" pagan rituals.
Right there, the church calls what is unholy, holy. There was no command by God. In fact God says His law and feast are for mankind and eternal and not a burden.
"and when you conquer these nations, do not think to worship Me as they worshipped their gods. They are an abomination to Me. They throw there children into the fire."
The old and new Testaments tell of us worshipping God as He decided. So, you say, 'we kept the sabbath and feasts and after the cross we don't have to, and then in the end we do?'
-
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Re: The Trinity.
Post #17[Replying to brianbbs67]
You misunderstand these things greatly (if only God had established an earthly authoritative church to help us understand )The Sabbath, Christmas and Easter come right to mind. Holidays are Holy Days. Holy Days are given by God. Not by "christianizing" pagan rituals.
Are you implying Christ established an unholy church?Right there, the church calls what is unholy, holy.
There most certainly was. “And I tell you thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.�…There was no command by God.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: The Trinity.
Post #18You misunderstand that Peter ever was in Rome. Historically, the rumors don't happen till 200 ad. The bones found were mixed with animals and no dna can be matched. A friend of the Pope just said they were Peter's.RightReason wrote: [Replying to brianbbs67]
You misunderstand these things greatly (if only God had established an earthly authoritative church to help us understand )The Sabbath, Christmas and Easter come right to mind. Holidays are Holy Days. Holy Days are given by God. Not by "christianizing" pagan rituals.
Are you implying Christ established an unholy church?Right there, the church calls what is unholy, holy.
There most certainly was. “And I tell you thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.�…There was no command by God.
You also misunderstand the direction apostlistic succession went. It was a family run synagogue. James ran it first. Then Simeon and then Jude. All brothers of Jesus. Then Rome sacked Jerusalem and all synagogues. The authority was grabbed in a vacuum by Rome and Hebrew religion of christ's followers became slowly Romanized until we have what we have today. Rome had no authority. It came not from Peter but Rome itself. Consequently, we are all taught to be the least in the kingdom, at best.
Re: The Trinity.
Post #19These four questions all seem to be various ways of restating the whole 3 in 1 “mystery.�Elijah John wrote: In addition to the whole 3 in 1 "mystery" do these questions further illustrate that the doctrine of the Trinity causes more problems than it solves?
If it creates or solves more problems depends on your view of what makes something a problem.
Understand that you might believe. Believe that you might understand. –Augustine of Hippo
- Filthy Tugboat
- Guru
- Posts: 1726
- Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:55 pm
- Location: Australia
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: The Trinity.
Post #20[Replying to post 6 by ttruscott]
Dictionary.com wrote: Perfect:
conforming absolutely to the description or definition of an ideal type:
"a perfect sphere; a perfect gentleman."
excellent or complete beyond practical or theoretical improvement:
"There is no perfect legal code. The proportions of this temple are almost perfect."
Perfect unity implies they could not be any more united. I am not only a group of limbs and organs or cells and atoms, I am one person. The things that make up my being unify to make me, well, me. Would you say that I am many different entities or would you say I am one entity made of many unified parts? If this is an understanding of unity when reflecting upon identity what does "perfect unity" mean? To me it does not seem to reflect well on the Trinity concept regardless of who knocks or how many hands they use to do so.Dictionary.com wrote: Unity:
the state of being one; oneness.
a whole or totality as combining all its parts into one.
the state or fact of being united or combined into one, as of the parts of a whole; unification.
absence of diversity; unvaried or uniform character.
oneness of mind, feeling, etc., as among a number of persons; concord, harmony, or agreement.
Religion feels to me a little like a Nigerian Prince scam. The "offer" is illegitimate, the "request" is unreasonable and the source is dubious, in fact, Nigeria doesn't even have a royal family.