Questions for non-Trinitarians

[Matthew S Islam]

Hello everyone.

Disclaimer: I am not a Trinitarian or even a Christian for that matter, but I am rather intriguied by the complexities of your religious tradition.

I am really curious to see how non-Trinitarians make sense of these issues, which I cannot help but find problematic:

The Divinity of Christ and the Doctrine of the Trinity was established as the orthodox interpretation and was enforced by the Roman authorities. This resulted in the Trinity's theological supremecy throughout Christian history and up until today.

1) If Christianity is truly from God, then why did God allow a polytheistic doctrine to contaminate the mainstream tradition? What exactly is the wisdom behind the majority of Christians being polytheists--if the religion is ultimately Divine and true?

2) If your theology is in agreement with ultimate truth and reality, then why didn't God make non-Trinitarianism the dominant trend? Isn't God expected to guide and facillitate the true religion?

3) If the Bible as we currently have it is consistent with the Will of God, then how do you justify the wisdom behind how Jesus was portrayed in the New Testament? To be more clear: Why didn't God make the matter so clear and descisive, that folks wouldn't even think of debating it? If God has Divine Knowledge and is also Merciful, then why didn't he continue the Old Testaments trend of clear speech and consistent theology? Don't you believe that God is not the author of confusion?

4) If you're willing to accept that God did not have to ensure the dominance of the correct theology over polytheism, then how are you so confident with Pauline Christianity? What if Paul is how he appears to be--an open heretic? Why 'trust' the Will of God here, when you confidently oppose the 'Will of God' at Niceae and the majority of Christian history?

Thank you!

[marco]

1) If Christianity is truly from God, then why did God allow a polytheistic doctrine to contaminate the mainstream tradition?

Trinitarians, as you know, are not polytheists, there being three persons in ONE God.
As for God "allowing" he appears to be remarkably tolerant of every excess in modern times.

2) If your theology is in agreement with ultimate truth and reality, then why didn't God make non-Trinitarianism the dominant trend? Isn't God expected to guide and facilitate the true religion?

He allowed the world to believe that Jews are God-killers, with disastrous consequences. He didn't resolve the Great Schism when a word or two about "filioque" would have restored peace. We cannot draw conclusions from God's silence as Porphyria's insane lover did in Browning's poem.

3) Why didn't God make the matter so clear and decisive, that folks wouldn't even think of debating it?

Because God loves a riddle. He enjoys seeing man scratch his head over questions about angels and hell. There is little issued from the Divine Office that is unambiguous.

4) What if Paul is how he appears to be--an open heretic?

Well indeed he was a heretic - or an apostate - to his original faith. He was pretty consistent with the Christianity he founded. The poor soul probably never quite recovered from his mental breakdown on the way to Damascus. He might have found it a more dangerous journey today.

[JehovahsWitness]

I am really curious to see how non-Trinitarians make sense of these issues, which I cannot help but find problematic:

As one of JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES I don't believe the God of the bible is trinitarian in nature. I'll try and share the JWs view of your question according to how we interpret scripture.

1) If Christianity is truly from God, then why did God allow a polytheistic doctrine to contaminate the mainstream tradition?

Jesus predicted that what he established as true Christianity during his ministry would be corrupted/contaminated by Satanic forces (See Mathew chaptere 13). The bible indicates God's ultimate purpose cannot be deterred but there is no guarantee in scripture that Satan would not be allowed to attempt to oppose it. Indeed in the garden of Eden God indicated human history would be marked by a struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil, with both forces gaining certain victories. God has allowed this situation to settle central issues raised by mankind's initial rebellion.

Why has God allowed evil & suffering?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 277#381277

The existence of false religion is simply a manifestation of the above. All false religion is identified in the bible as a "whore" (prostitute) called in the bible "BABYLON THE GREAT". The birth of apostated (corrupted/false/compromised) christianity (after the death of the last of the Apostles) is simply a subgroup of false religion a most useful tool of Satan the Devil.

Who or What is "Babylon the Great"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 185#917185




JW

[JehovahsWitness]

1) ...What exactly is the wisdom behind the majority of Christians being polytheists--if the religion is ultimately Divine and true?

False Christianity is far from "divine and true", it is in fact Satanic and untrue and part of Satan's plan to confuse people from the pure teachings of the bible and instread mislead them into believing falsehoods, ultimately distancing them from knowing the True God. The "wisdom" is Satanic but clever: after all, where do you hide a tree? Answer: In a forest. By surrounding true Christianity with false/imitation Christianity it makes truth harder to identify (compare John 8:44).

2) If your theology is in agreement with ultimate truth and reality, then why didn't God make non-Trinitarianism the dominant trend?

Because God is (for the time being) allowing this world to be dominated by Satan the Devil (see 1 John 5:19) . This situation has been allowed to exist in order to settle some central issues raised by the Edenic rebellion. In short this world belongs to Satan and what is good, pure and true will always exist in the minority. Jesus indicated that those on the road to life would be few (compared to the "many" on the road to destruction) and that those on the road to life would have to "find" the route. This indicates that the true religion would not initially be self evident and that being the "dominant trend" would be indicative of the religion being false (compare Mat 7: 13, 14)

Isn't God expected to guide and facillitate the true religion?

• Yes and he does. There is nothing in scripture however to indicate that the majority of people will display a genuine desire for such divine guidance.

[JehovahsWitness]

3) If the Bible as we currently have it is consistent with the Will of God, then how do you justify the wisdom behind how Jesus was portrayed in the New Testament? To be more clear: Why didn't God make the matter so clear and descisive, that folks wouldn't even think of debating it?

Religious disaccord is not necessarily the result of lack of clarity. For example the Israelites were clearly told to avoid idolatry yet within weeks of agreeing to that clear and explicit prohibition, built a golden calf and began to worship it. Jesus clearly identified himself as God's son and there was no confusion about this for first century or indeed early Christians for centuries. The "New Testament" was evidently sufficietly clear and debate is not a matter of insufficient transmission of clear information so much as a deliberate effort to corrupt Christian teachings with a false ideology (see above).

Are the Christian Greek Scriptures clear about Jesus' identity?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 140#858140

Who really are the so-called three persons of the trinity?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 716#875716

3) If God has Divine Knowledge and is also Merciful, then why didn't he continue the Old Testaments trend of clear speech and consistent theology?

He did.

Don't you believe that God is not the author of confusion?

• God certainly is not the author of confusion, but Satan is. All trinitarian "confusion" as to the nature of God is not found in the bible but rather in the non-biblical traditions that were introduced by the leaders of Apostate Christianity born after the death of the last of the Apostles.

What is the origin of the trinity myth?
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/maga ... a-trinity/

[JehovahsWitness]

4) If you're willing to accept that God did not have to ensure the dominance of the correct theology over polytheism, then how are you so confident with Pauline Christianity?

I don't know what "Pauline Christianity" is. There is true Christianity and there is false Christianity (part of Babylon the Great). We can identify which is which, as Jesus said by their "fruits" , ie by what they produce by way of actions and teachings. True Christianity reflects the teachings, principles and directives provided by Jesus. False/Apostate Christianity doesn't.

4) What if Paul is how he appears to be--an open heretic?

Paul doesn't appear to be a heretic. If he had been he would have been identied as such and called out by those in authority in the first century.

4) Why 'trust' the Will of God here, when you confidently oppose the 'Will of God' at Niceae and the majority of Christian history?

The will of God is expressed in his word the bible (compare 2 Tim 3:16). The writings of Paul are part of the bible canon and thus trustworthy. The Council of Nicea holds no such authority. What is called "Christian history" is for the most part the history of corrupted/apostate and deviant organized false religion which is part of what the bible calls the "whore of Babylon". It would be a mistake to look to institutions set up and driven by Satan to mislead people for truth, this would be likened to drinking asenic as a vitamin complement.


How can we be sure the bible is true?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 733#796733



JW

[steveb1]

[Replying to post 1 by Matthew S]

I don't see God or the Holy Spirit as being at all involved in the development of Trinitarian christology - which is nothing but a mis-reading of early Jewish Christian affirmations of Jesus's "divinity" (but not his ontological Deity). The Hellenized non-Jewish Church took the Jewish version of Jesus as theos aner (divine man) as expressed in his identification with the pre-existent, heavenly Son of Man figure, and changed that figure into an ontological, Trinitarian "Son" - changed the figure from the Jewish Son of God to the Hellenistic "God the Son".

In none of this did a divine or supernatural influence act. So it's not a matter of the Spirit inspiring, or God permitting, this Trinitarian paganization of an originally Jewish-monotheistic movement.

Rather, the ontological "God the Son" was a wholly human invention, and the Church councils and Patristic writings leave a sort of "paper trail" of this particular theological crime. Neither God nor Satan created the Trinitarian mess: that was solely the work of over-eager and poorly-informed Greek theologians, bishops...and eventually of the converted Emperors, who, in the decades following Arianism's defeat, increasingly enforced Christianity as the Empire's official religion, and Trinitarianism as Christianity's "one, true" christology.

[Elijah John]

4) If you're willing to accept that God did not have to ensure the dominance of the correct theology over polytheism, then how are you so confident with Pauline Christianity?

I don't know what "Pauline Christianity" is.

Pauline Christianity as opposed to early, Jewish Christianity. Jewish-Christian sects (such as the Ebionites) believed that Jesus was the Messiah, but not Divine.

Pauline Christianity as we have it today is Trinitraianism. In his day, it was nascent Trinitarianism.

Sure, Paul payed lip-service to the notion that the Father alone is God. But his heart was with "Christ". Note his usage, the context where he places "Christ". He speaks of "Christ" as though he was God. He talks of being "in Christ", etc. Substitute the word "Messiah"and you will see what I mean and what a radical notion that is. Does it make any sense to say that one is saved or transformed by being "in the Messiah"?

Or how about being "in Moses". Nonsense and borderline idolatry, right?

Remember at the beginning of his letter to the Romans, Paul expounded on the nearness of the true, living God and said "in him we live and move and have our being". "In God". "In Christ"...for Paul the notions are pretty much synonomous. For all intents and purposes, Paul equates "Christ" with God and lays the foundaton of Trinitarianism to come.

That and Paul's focus on Christ's death and resurrection far more than on his life and teachings.

Notice the Creed, make no mention of Jesus teachings. In that regard the focus of the Church is very much like the focus of Paul.

That is Pauline Christianty. He took the religion of Jesus, and made it the religion about Jesus.

[marco]

Jesus predicted that what he established as true Christianity during his ministry would be corrupted/contaminated by Satanic forces

Nothing to do with Trinitarians who worship God and despise Satan. Jesus guided us here about a house divided among itself. As for going by prediction, Muhammad also predicted his beliefs would be corrupted. And so?

Why has God allowed evil & suffering?
The existence of false religion is simply a manifestation of the above. All false religion is identified in the bible as a "whore" (prostitute) called in the bible "BABYLON THE GREAT".

Call it any name you will, that's not the problem. The problem is identifying those religions that are false. Roman Catholicism has lasted from the first Pope, Peter who was a friend of Jesus. Some modern religions were founded as late as the 19th century. One would go for the religion closest in time to Christ.

Funnily enough the Pharisees made exactly the same accusation against Jesus.

Matthew 12:24-26 24: But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, "It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons." 25 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. 26 If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand?"

The words of Christ that the RC Church relies on are:


"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. " Matthew 16: 18 KJV.

Jesus surely didn't wait till the 19th century to found his Church.

[polonius]

Marco posted:

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. " Matthew 16: 18 KJV.

Jesus surely didn't wait till the 19th century to found his Church.

RESPONSE: The passage you quote was added by Matthew to the Gospel of Mark. There is nothing that says Jesus was going to found a church. In fact, no such word a “Church� existed at that time.

Recall, Jesus said in a number of scriptures that he would return during the lifetime of those then alive. He didn’t of course. So why would there be a "church"?