Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Holy Trinity: Sound Doctrine or a Man-Made Tradition?
ArticleSeen.com ^ | Aug-28-2011 | Steve-O

Posted on 01/12/2014 7:49:32 PM PST by restornu

The Holy Trinity: Sound Doctrine or a Man-Made Tradition?

Author: Steve-0

The Apostle Paul admonished young Timothy, "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;" (1 Timothy 4:1)

The Greek word that was translated into English as "depart from" is aphistemi (Strong's G868) pronounced ä-fe'-sta-me meaning ...

1) to make stand off, cause to withdraw, to remove a) to excite to revolt 2) to stand off, to stand aloof a) to go away, to depart from anyone b) to desert, withdraw from one c) to fall away, become faithless d) to shun, flee from e) to cease to vex one f) to withdraw one's self from, to fall away g) to keep one's self from, absent one's self from

Some use this portion of Scripture to accuse those of us who embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine, as opposed to the Holy Trinity, as being the ones who are being described above. However, what should be determined is who said and did what ... and when did they say and do it. First off, we know the "foot print followers" of our Lord Jesus Christ had it right! If anybody has ever had it right, they had it right. And, no where do we find where they were authorized to come up with anything other than what Jesus gave them. By the way, Jesus did NOT leave them with a bunch of pages with a lot of blanks on them, which would have to be filled out a couple centuries later, either. Therefore, what they embraced and taught was "first". Any thing other than that came along later, period!

Brother Paul being as bold and blunt as he was, put it this way ... But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8-9)

Again, the Apostle Paul admonished Timothy, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:2-4 The Greek word that was translated into English as "endure" is anecho (Strong's G430) pronounced ä-ne'-kho meaning ...

1) to hold up 2) to hold one's self erect and firm 3) to sustain, to bear, to endure

Many are taught, firmly believe and will adamantly defend a position, that the doctrine of the Holy Trinity comes straight from the pages of the Bible, itself. When, in fact, the word "Holy" is the only part that can be found in the Bible. The word "Trinity" can't be found in a single solitary Scripture in the entire King James Version of the Holy Bible. Neither did anyone in the entire King James Version of the Holy Bible ever refer to God or the Godhead with these words, "One God in three persons", as multitudes do today.

With such a widely accepted belief, and millions just going with the flow, the crowd has to be right, right? Well, let's see what Jesus had to say in Matthew 7:13-14 ... "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."

Folks, it's time for a "gut level" reality check. According to the greatest Teacher ever to walk upon Planet Earth, when it comes to spiritual matters ... THE CROWD IS WRONG!

Not one single solitary person in the entire Bible ever used the following terms ...

"One God in three persons", "God the Son", "God the Holy Ghost (or Holy Spirit) "The Holy Trinity"

So, how and when did the doctrine of the Holy Trinity come into existence? And, why is it so widely accepted, today? Those two questions are certainly valid ones, and deserve serious examination and consideration.

Encyclopedia International, 1975 Edition, Vol.18, p.226 - The doctrine of the "Trinity" did not form part of the apostles' preaching, as this is reported in the New Testament.

New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967 Edition, Vol.13, p.1021 - The first use of the Latin word "trinitas" (trinity) with reference to God, is found in Tertullian's writings (about 213 A.D.) He was the first to use the term "persons" (plural) in a Trinitarian context.

Encyclopedia Americana, 1957 Edition, Vol.27, p.69 - The word "Trinity" is not in Scripture. The term "persons" (plural) is not applied in Scripture to the Trinity.

World Book Encyclopedia, 1975 Edition, Vol. T, p.363 - Belief in Father, Son and Holy Ghost was first defined by the earliest general council of churches. This was the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.

New International Encyclopedia, Vol.22, p.476 - The Catholic faith is this: We worship one God in Trinity, but there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost. The Glory equal - the Majesty co-eternal. The doctrine is not found in its fully developed form in the Scriptures. Modern theology does not seek to find it in the Old Testament. At the time of the Reformation the Protestant Church took aver the doctrine of the Trinity without serious examination.

Life Magazine, October 30, 1950, Vol.29, No.18, p.51 - The Catholics made this statement concerning their doctrine of the Trinity, to defend the dogma of the assumption of Mary, in an article written by Graham Greene: "Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in Scripture... But the PROTESTANT CHURCHES have themselves accepted such dogmas as THE TRINITY, for which there is NO SUCH PRECISE AUTHORITY in the Gospels"

Many use the human reasoning and logic that the non-Biblical words "trinity", "triune" or "persons" (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead) should be accepted just as the word "rapture" is .... or even the word "sandwich" (for that matter). And, even though "sandwich" is not a Biblical word, I know they're real 'cause I ate one yesterday. So, my point ... or my question ... is, what Biblical words could be used in the place of the words "trinity", "triune" OR "persons" pertaining to God and/or the Godhead? I wouldn't have any trouble at all finding Biblical words to use in the place of "sandwich", "rapture" and "Bible". They are: "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book".

Now, if those who embrace the man-made theory of the Trinity can find any words that will do for "truine", "persons" or "trinity" what the words "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book" will do for "sandwich" and "rapture", I would love to see them. Unless or until they can, I suggest that they stop adding to or taking from (depending on how you look at it) the Word of God by embracing, as dogmatically held doctrine, theories which aren't specifically mentioned in the Bible ... and without any Biblical words which could serve as a substitute for such.

While the Bible does NOT authorize a belief in three "persons" who jointly form One God. However, the Bible does accurately describes God as the Father in Creation, the Son in Redemption and the Holy Spirit living in the hearts of believers throughout the New Testament Church Age. But, that is three "forms" of God ... three "manifestations" of God ... three "titles" of God ... three "offices/positions" which God holds and ... three "roles" in which God functions ... BUT NOT THREE PERSONS. NOWHERE can it be found in the Bible which says that is that there is one God "in three persons". That's an "add on" that people would do well to just leave off.

I can very accurately be described as a father, son and husband ... or a teacher, student and minister. While I function in more than one capacity and occupy more than one office, and wear a number of different hats, I am still just ONE person. As a matter of fact, I can be in the same room with, and in the presence of, my mother, my wife and my daughters, and I can speak, act and function as a father, son and husband without anybody getting confused as to how many persons I am or who is talking.

English was my worst subject in school, but I do remember a few things. For illustration purposes only, it is not proper to link the singular pronoun "He", which refers to one "person", to verbs like: "see", "hear" and "warn" ... which would look like this ... "He see", "He hear" and "He warn". When using the singular pronoun "He", it is necessary to use the verbs "sees", "hears" and "warns" ... "He SEES", "He HEARS" and "He WARNS". In order to use the verbs "see", "hear" and "warn", you must use a noun or pronoun which is "plural" and identifies "more" than one person like, "People" ... "People see", "People hear" and "People warn". Yet, intelligent people who know this rule, but who have been indoctrinated to believe that there are three "persons" of God, ignore this rule when it comes to the word "GOD" (the Hebrew word Elohim).

**IF** the word "GOD" (Elohim) identifies more than one "person", as the trinitarians insist, the Bible should read like this, "God SEE", "God HEAR" and "God WARN" ... AND IT DOESN'T! The word "GOD" is never linked to a verb like that. Instead, the word "GOD" is ALWAYS linked to verbs just as the word "He" (a singular person) is ... like this, "God SEES", "God HEARS" and "God WARNS". Again, I use these particular words for illustration purposes only, but I hope I have made my point ... and that it's CLEAR.

Men started "reading" things into the Scriptures a couple centuries or so AFTER Jesus ascended back up into Heaven, and after the "foot print followers" of our Lord had passed on. As a result, there has evolved all sorts of religious beliefs and denominations. However, in order to get people to stop and think about a few things, I use the Clark Kent/Superman analogy quite a bit. Jesus said and did some of the things He said and did to set an example for those who witnessed it to follow, as well as for those of us who would read about it 2,000 years later. At any rate, the reason I use Clark Kent/Superman is because people are familiar with the scenario. And, although Clark Kent/Superman is a fictitious character, I contend that the Incarnate Christ was, indeed, the REAL Superman. And, as a result, Jesus often spoke of the Father as if the Father where someone other than Himself who was way off in another galaxy or solar system.

As a former trinitarian, myself, I understand why those who have been indoctrinated to believe there's two or three of 'em up there believe such, as well as those who interpret ... and try to understand ... the Bible "literally". However, spiritual things are NOT understood with human reasoning and logic. And, Jesus was unlike any one else who has ever walked upon planet Earth. While He possessed the Glory and Power of Deity, He went about as a lowly servant. He had a "human" nature as a result of actually being born of a woman. And, He had a "Divine" nature as a result of Him being God manifested in the flesh. Also, Jesus served as the example ... or the template (so to speak) ... for all Christians to pattern themselves after. And, as a result, He said and did many things for our benefit ... AND to set an example for us to follow. By the way, I am NOT saying Jesus was deceitful, nor that He lied ... far from it. It's just that He could (and did) speak, act and function as any "ordinary" man, at times. And, He also could (and did) speak, act and function as Almighty God, at other times, while here on Earth. Those who have ears to hear, hears what the Spirit saith, and aren't trying to fuel a flawed, man-made, pre-conceived and indoctrinated agenda, will, I believe, come to the understanding as to who Jesus "really" is **IF** they truly hunger and thirst for righteousness. Then, it will be up to them what they do from that point. They can continue on in their traditions and doctrines of men OR they can come out from among them and be ye separate.

Since Isaiah was a MAJOR Messianic Prophet in the Old Testament, my challenge for every "natural" Jew and every professing Christian who believes the man-made theory of the Holy Trinity OR those who believe Jesus was Michael the Archangel or some other inferior subordinate is very simple. I challenge all "natural Jews", all professing Christians who believes the man-made theory of the Holy Trinity, the entire Watchtower Society constituency, the Vatican, and the entire Roman Catholic Church constituency, as well as any and all members and/or associates, past and present, of the various and sundry Protestant denominations, any and all independent Bible students and scholars including the entire constituency of the anything connected to or remotely resembling the Mormon Church ... or anyone else (**IF** I missed anybody) ... to read 11 Chapters in the Book of Isaiah (Chapters 41, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 59, 60, and 63) and then provide me with the Scripture(s) they believe supports the belief that the coming (prophesied and promised) MESSIAH would be someone BESIDES Jehovah/God, Himself.

Those of us who embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine understand something very important: The Incarnate Christ was the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last ... God manifest in the flesh. And, these are just a few of the documenting Scriptures I use ... Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 48:12; Micah 1:2-3; John 1:1-14; John 10:30-33; John 14:6-11; Colossians 2:8-10; 1 Timothy 3:16; Rev. 2:8; Rev. 21:6; and Rev. 22:13.

Yes, the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity is a flawed man-made theory, and is NOT "sound doctrine" at all. Therefore, upon learn this, a person should ask themselves this question, "Do I want Truth in its entirety, or do I want man's flawed theories and traditions?" Whatever you decide, it is entirely up to you. In the final analysis of things, you and I will be justified or condemned not by just our faith and beliefs alone, but also by the words we speak AND our deeds. Silence can be interpreted as consent. There are sins of omissions and sins of commission. And, there will be lots of "good" people in hell. Being "good" is NOT good enough. If you doubt or dispute that, read Acts Chapter 10.

A very closely related subject to this is the words that are invoked at baptismal services. The name that was alluded to in Matthew 28:19 is the precious name of Jesus. Quoting Matthew 28:19 does NOT fulfill the Great Commission. Those who knew how it was to be done, invoked the precious name of Jesus in Acts 2:37-41; Acts 8:14-17; Acts 10:44-48; and Acts 19:1-6. Jesus was NOT telling His disciples what to "say" in Matthew 28:19, He was telling them what to "do". And, besides, nobody was baptized in Matthew 28:19. Nobody in the entire Bible was baptized in the "titles" of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. We are admonished in Colossians 3:17 to do whatever we do in "word AND deed", to do it all of it in the "NAME of Jesus". And, besides baptism, here are a couple other places, and direct "quotes", where the "name of Jesus" was invoked in word and deed instead of the "titles" of Father, Son and Holy Ghost ....

Acts 3:6 Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.

Acts 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

Not only does the Bible reveal baptism in the name of Jesus, but so does history ...

Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (1951). II, 384, 389: "The formula used was "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" or some synonymous phrase; there is no evidence for the use of the trine name… The earliest form, represented in the Acts, was simple immersion… in water, the use of the name of the Lord, and the laying on of hands. To these were added, at various times and places which cannot be safely identified, (a) the trine name (Justin)…"

Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962), I 351: "The evidence… suggests that baptism in early Christianity was administered, not in the threefold name, but 'in the name of Jesus Christ' or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus.'"

Otto Heick, A History of Christian Thought (1965), I, 53: "At first baptism was administered in the name of Jesus, but gradually in the name of the Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (1898). I, 241: "[One explanation is that] the original form of words was "into the name of Jesus Christ" or 'the Lord Jesus,' Baptism into the name of the Trinity was a later development."

Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church (1947), page 58: "The trinitarian baptismal formula,,, was displacing the older baptism in the name of Christ."

The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1957), I, 435: "The New Testament knows only baptism in the name of Jesus… which still occurs even in the second and third centuries."

Canney's Encyclopedia of Religions (1970), page 53: "Persons were baptized at first 'in the name of Jesus Christ' … or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus'… Afterwards, with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, they were baptized 'in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.'"

Encyclopedia Biblica (1899), I, 473: "It is natural to conclude that baptism was administered in the earliest times 'in the name of Jesus Christ,' or in that 'of the Lord Jesus.' This view is confirmed by the fact that the earliest forms of the baptismal confession appear to have been single-not triple, as was the later creed."

Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. (1920), II 365: "The trinitarian formula and trine immersion were not uniformly used from the beginning… Bapti[sm] into the name of the Lord [was] the normal formula of the New Testament. In the 3rd century baptism in the name of Christ was still so widespread that Pope Stephen, in opposition to Cyprian of Carthage, declared it to be valid."

My advice to you is, if you aren't affiliated with one now, that you find yourself a church which embraces, teaches and preaches the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine and baptizes in the precious name of Jesus ... the name that was alluded to in Matthew 28:19 ... and go there, and see (and feel) the difference for yourself.

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. About the Author:
Encyclopedia Internationa

New Catholic Encyclopedia

The King James Bible

Article Source: http://www.articleseen.com/Article_ The Holy Trinity: Sound Doctrine or a Man-Made Tradition?_77437.aspx


TOPICS: History; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: antitrinitarian; fringe; heresy; kook; microsect; minimicrosect; sect; splinter; tradition; trinity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 751-773 next last
I'm a Christian Minister with over twenty years of experience. I work by day and preach by night. However, I ask no salary nor will I charge anyone anything that the Gospel may reach all freely.

Jesus told His disciples to preach His Gospel freely to all the world. The Apostles gave us the salvation formula in the book of Acts. Those who hear and believe the message are to repent of their sins, being baptized into His Name.

Only those who will endure unto the end will be saved. No person is able to work themselves into salvation, nor must a person speak in unknown tongues to be saved. Easy believism also is a falsehood and a lie. We all must apply the whole word of God to be saved. The tribulation is just around the corner, even as all the signs of it (read Ezekiel 38-39, Matthew 24, Mark 13 and the book of Revelations) are all here. The truth will set a person free from sin and Satan, giving spiritual fruits which include peace, love and joy everlasting.

1 posted on 01/12/2014 7:49:32 PM PST by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: restornu

This topic is never resolved if it was in the Bible it would be no issue!


2 posted on 01/12/2014 7:50:42 PM PST by restornu (These things I command you, that ye love one another. John 15:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu

This thread flagged as cultic Mormon spam.

Let the reader beware!


3 posted on 01/12/2014 8:05:28 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Truth is hate to those who hate the Truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu

God is a mystery. We are unable, at this time, to understand much about Him. We know His attributes and His title (Creator) but for anyone to definitively put God in a bottle or book is impossible. It isn’t necessary to believe or not believe in Trinitarism for Salvation, so it really isn’t important.


4 posted on 01/12/2014 8:05:30 PM PST by BipolarBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu
I'm a Christian Minister with over twenty years of experience. I work by day and preach by night.

I didn't know that, all this time, I had thought that you were a Mormon.

5 posted on 01/12/2014 8:05:51 PM PST by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu; All

“Some use this portion of Scripture to accuse those of us who embrace the Apostles’ One God Monotheistic Doctrine,”


I can’t help but to notice that the author of this OP is, in fact, a member of the LDS... and the LDS is entirely polytheistic, not monotheistic, and they do not teach that the holy scripture is, in fact, accurate. They believe the BOM is more accurate. The reason why the Trinity is so clear in scripture is because the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are defined as separate persons, doing different works in the plan of salvation (The Father elects, the Son redeems, the Holy Spirit applies), and even communing one with another, yet all as just ONE single God.

This article is sloppy, rambling, and embarrassing to post, and doesn’t even attempt to face down what we Christians actually teach, just thumping the chest and making assertions, all for nothing. But, it is typical of the opponents of the holy trinity and scripture.


6 posted on 01/12/2014 8:06:55 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Good article...it's amazing how a man made doctrine that was not complete until over 300 years after Christ died is the "criteria" to be a Christian.

You can have the holy spirit of God. You can believe in Jesus. You can love God with all your heart soul and mind and your neighbor as yourself....but by golly if you don't swear allegiance to a man-mad creed there are some who try to convince you you're not a Christian....amazing. :-)

7 posted on 01/12/2014 8:08:49 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BipolarBob
It isn’t necessary to believe or not believe in Trinitarism for Salvation, so it really isn’t important.

A 1000% accurate biblical statement...

8 posted on 01/12/2014 8:10:24 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: restornu
This topic is never resolved if it was in the Bible it would be no issue!

Which Bible? That is always the question/

10 posted on 01/12/2014 8:11:34 PM PST by oldbrowser (discriminating against a culture is not racism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: restornu

It is true the term “trinity” is not used in the Bible. However, there are multiple references to THE Father, THE Son and THE Holy Spirit.

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit [Matthew 28:19].”

“May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all [2 Corinthians 13:14].”

“To God’s elect. . .who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood [1 Peter 1:1-2].”


11 posted on 01/12/2014 8:11:57 PM PST by jimbobfoster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Greetings_Puny_Humans

Besides he’s a teddy bear once you get to know him...well...a teddy bear with rabies... :-)


12 posted on 01/12/2014 8:12:18 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: DouglasKC

Two anti-trinitarians agreeing, what a surprise.


14 posted on 01/12/2014 8:25:07 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC; restornu; All

“You can love God with all your heart soul and mind and your neighbor as yourself....but by golly if you don’t swear allegiance to a man-mad creed there are some who try to convince you you’re not a Christian....amazing. :-)”


Meanwhile, neither the LDS, nor the Armstrong cults, nor the JWs, or any of the others, actually believe this. On the contrary, “love” does not fulfill their law at all.


15 posted on 01/12/2014 8:25:43 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jimbobfoster; restornu

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Matthew 28:19 KJV

Go, and make disciples of all the nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” [[Matt. xxviii. 19.]]

From Proof of the Gospel (the Demonstratio) by Eusebius.

Eusebius (265-339 CE) Bishop of Caesarea around 314 CE

Book III, Chapter 7, 136 (a-d), p. 157

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/eusebius_de_05_book3.htm

also
(2) Book III, Chapter 6, 132 (a), p. 152
(3) Book III, Chapter 7, 138 (c), p. 159
(4) Book IX, Chapter 11, 445 (c), p. 175
(5) Book I, Chapter 3, 6 (a), p. 20
(6) Book I, Chapter 5, 9 (a), p. 24

In ~311 CE Eusebius (265-339) Bishop of Caesarea
In his _Proof of the Gospels_
in Book three chapter seven states

Go, and make disciples of all the nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” [[Matt. xxviii. 19.]]
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/eusebius_de_05_book3.htm

Apparently Matthew 28:19 was changed
after Eusebius wrote his Proof of the Gospel.

shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
16 posted on 01/12/2014 8:26:28 PM PST by Uri’el-2012 (Psalm 119:174 I long for Your salvation, YHvH, Your teaching is my delight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

This thread flagged as cultic Mormon spam.

Let the reader beware!

***

No it isn’t there are all kinds of good folks who can nor fine Trinity not the description in the Bible.

I may be LDS and this is from a Minister who is not LDS so I am not alone on this topic being disputed....

There are many who disagree on this topic not just the LDS there are also mainstream believers in Jesus..

The Trinity folks have every right to believe this but it their opinion, and started by a Tradition not a revelation nor is it in the Holy Bible; Old Testament nor New Testament.


17 posted on 01/12/2014 8:28:42 PM PST by restornu (These things I command you, that ye love one another. John 15:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC

How vivid.

Why would anyone want to come over and compete with that which is already being slung.

Ibtz.


18 posted on 01/12/2014 8:32:30 PM PST by RitaOK ( VIVA CHRISTO REY / Public education is the farm team for more Marxists coming.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

The Truth is...

“This topic is never resolved if it was in the Bible it would be no issue!”

Which Bible? That is always the question

***

The Holy Bible; Old Testament nor the New Testament!


19 posted on 01/12/2014 8:32:36 PM PST by restornu (These things I command you, that ye love one another. John 15:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: restornu
There are many who disagree on this topic not just the LDS there are also mainstream believers in Jesus.. The Trinity folks have every right to believe this but it their opinion, and started by a Tradition not a revelation nor is it in the Holy Bible; Old Testament nor New Testament.

Some of those folks remind me of the Pharisees...THEY define what is proper worship yet at the same time their hearts are black and hateful toward others. You know, like whitewashed tombs but their insides are filled with darkness and death...

20 posted on 01/12/2014 8:33:38 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: restornu

It is in the bible. Apparently your greek and aramaic aren’t good enough to allow you to follow the logic of the trinitarian view point. more’s the shame


21 posted on 01/12/2014 8:34:24 PM PST by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xone

I do believe in the Trinity or 3 just not all in one substance

I am aware of 3 distinct personages.


22 posted on 01/12/2014 8:35:33 PM PST by restornu (These things I command you, that ye love one another. John 15:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: restornu

And if I were you I wouldn’t be using the name Steve O because there is a a ‘comic’ tv guy that uses that handle and he is a hot mess.


23 posted on 01/12/2014 8:36:27 PM PST by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xone
Two anti-trinitarians agreeing, what a surprise.

I'm not anti-trinitarian...I'm pro-bible!

24 posted on 01/12/2014 8:36:45 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: UriĀ’el-2012; jimbobfoster; restornu; All

“Apparently Matthew 28:19 was changed
after Eusebius wrote his Proof of the Gospel.”


Nice try:

“In fact, this command [to baptize in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit] was so well known that many writers alluded to it without naming the specific Gospel from which they were quoting. What this shows is that these Christians assumed that their readers were so familiar with this formula, and already knew in which of the four Gospels this instruction could be found, that they didn’t feel the need to specify the source.

We will look at just a few of examples from these early Christian writings, all of which predate the Council of Nicea.

Didache - Teaching of the Twelve Apostles

Here is some historical background regarding the Didache so that the readers can appreciate the importance of this document:

Since it was discovered in a monastery in Constantinople and published by P. Bryennios in 1883, the Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles has continued to be one of the most disputed of early Christian texts. It has been depicted by scholars as anything between the original of the Apostolic Decree (c. 50 AD) and a late archaising fiction of the early third century. It bears no date itself, nor does it make reference to any datable external event, yet the picture of the Church which it presents could only be described as primitive, reaching back to the very earliest stages of the Church’s order and practice in a way which largely agrees with the picture presented by the NT, while at the same time posing questions for many traditional interpretations of this first period of the Church’s life. Fragments of the Didache were found at Oxyrhyncus (P. Oxy 1782) from the fourth century and in coptic translation (P. Lond. Or. 9271) from 3/4th century. Traces of the use of this text, and the high regard it enjoyed, are widespread in the literature of the second and third centuries especially in Syria and Egypt. It was used by the compilator of the Didascalia (C 2/3rd) and the Liber Graduun (C 3/4th), as well as being absorbed in toto by the Apostolic Constitutions (C c. 3/4th, abbreviated as Ca) and partially by various Egyptian and Ethiopian Church Orders, after which it ceased to circulate independently. Athanasius describes it as ‘appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of goodness’ [Festal Letter 39:7]. Hence a date for the Didache in its present form later than the second century must be considered unlikely, and a date before the end of the first century probable. (Jonathan Draper, Gospel Perspectives, v. 5, p. 269)

He then states in a footnote (op. cit., p. 284), “A new consensus is emerging for a date c. 100 AD.” (Source)

This document twice alludes to the Matthean Baptismal formula, serving as an independent witness that this formula was known and in use by the early Church:

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before. (Roberts-Donaldson translation; source)

Here is another translation of this same passage:

7:1 But concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize.
7:2 Having first recited all these things, baptize {in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit} in living (running) water.
7:3 But if thou hast not living water, then baptize in other water;
7:4 and if thou art not able in cold, then in warm.
7:5 But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
7:6 But before the baptism let him that baptizeth and him that is baptized fast, and any others also who are able;
7:7 and thou shalt order him that is baptized to fast a day or two before. (J.B. Lightfoot’s translation; source)

Ignatius of Antioch (ca. AD. 107-112)

Chapter IX.-The Old Testament is Good: the New Testament is Better.

… The priests indeed, and the ministers of the word, are good; but the High Priest is better, to whom the holy of holies has been committed, and who alone has been entrusted with the secrets of God. The ministering powers of God are good. The Comforter is holy, and the Word is holy, the Son of the Father, by whom He made all things, and exercises a providence over them all. This is the Way which leads to the Father, the Rock, the Defence, the Key, the Shepherd, the Sacrifice, the Door of knowledge, through which have entered Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, Moses and all the company of the prophets, and these pillars of the world, the apostles, and the spouse of Christ, on whose account He poured out His own blood, as her marriage portion, that He might redeem her. All these things tend towards the unity of the one and only true God. But the Gospel possesses something transcendent [above the former dispensation], viz. the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, His passion, and the resurrection itself. For those things which the prophets announced, saying, “Until He come for whom it is reserved, and He shall be the expectation of the Gentiles,” have been fulfilled in the Gospel, [our Lord saying,] “Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” All then are good together, the law, the prophets, the apostles, the whole company [of others] that have believed through them: only if we love one another. (Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians; source)

Chapter II.-Unity of the Three Divine Persons.

There is then one God and Father, and not two or three; One who is; and there is no other besides Him, the only true [God]. For “the Lord thy God,” saith [the Scripture], “is one Lord.” And again, “Hath not one God created us? Have we not all one Father? And there is also one Son, God the Word. For “the only-begotten Son,” saith [the Scripture], “who is in the bosom of the Father.” And again, “One Lord Jesus Christ.” And in another place, “What is His name, or what His Son’s name, that we may know? “ And there is also one Paraclete. For “there is also,” saith [the Scripture], “one Spirit,” since “we have been called in one hope of our calling.” And again, “We have drunk of one Spirit,” with what follows. And it is manifest that all these gifts [possessed by believers] “worketh one and the self-same Spirit.” There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to “baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honour. (Epistle of Ignatius to the Philippians; source)

Rest at link:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/badawi_mt28_20.htm


25 posted on 01/12/2014 8:37:14 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC
THEY define what is proper worship yet at the same time their hearts are black and hateful toward others. You know, like whitewashed tombs but their insides are filled with darkness and death...

No kidding, you should look at some of your black and hateful posts on this thread, you are even pinging people to come to it as you assault them, and assault the rest of us with the language and imagery you are using.

26 posted on 01/12/2014 8:38:31 PM PST by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: restornu

One problem with modalism is the Baptism of the Lord. It would seem that a sort of misleading display is going on when there’s a voice calling IHS “my ... son” and the Holy Spirit descending “like a dove.” I would be interested in the modalist account of this. Three different manifestations at the same time giving the impression of three “actors,” but it’s not really three at all? It seems almost deceptive.

And I always wonder what people think of the word “person” in trinitarian discussions. “Hypostasis” strikes me as marginally clearer.

And as GPH suggests, the article is a kind of confusion of authorities and their interpretation. It startled me to see a quote from the (pseudo-) Athanasian creed, but not set apart by quotes or identified.

I suppose that modern non-trinitarians know as little about 1.7k years of the discussion as trinitarians know about them.


27 posted on 01/12/2014 8:38:52 PM PST by Mad Dawg (In te, Domine, speravi: non confundar in aeternum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu

and which translation are you using...


28 posted on 01/12/2014 8:40:05 PM PST by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: restornu

An arrogant screed without substance, posted by a fake “pastor” who does not understand or believe in the Great Commission.


29 posted on 01/12/2014 8:41:09 PM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Be for the creation who does God love and who does he talk to?


30 posted on 01/12/2014 8:41:25 PM PST by the_daug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu

What’s a “personage”?


31 posted on 01/12/2014 8:42:32 PM PST by Mad Dawg (In te, Domine, speravi: non confundar in aeternum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
THEY define what is proper worship yet at the same time their hearts are black and hateful toward others. You know, like whitewashed tombs but their insides are filled with darkness and death...
No kidding, you should look at some of your black and hateful posts on this thread, you are even pinging people to come to it as you assault them, and assault the rest of us with the language and imagery you are using.

Nah, I love those guys...they're my buddies.... :-)

The Ravenous Wolves of FreeRepublic

32 posted on 01/12/2014 8:43:08 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: restornu; xone; All

“I do believe in the Trinity or 3 just not all in one substance”


Well duh, the LDS is polytheistic. I mentioned this in my post earlier. And your religion also teaches that you will become a God after your death. The Armstrong cults share a similar view.

But it is your view which cannot stand 2 seconds of scripture. Observe:

Against the Mormon idea that God was once a man on another planet who, by being a good enough Mormon, became a God:

“before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” (Isaiah 43:10)

Against the idea that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three separate gods:

“I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.” (Isaiah 44:6)


33 posted on 01/12/2014 8:43:19 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC
I'm not sure why someone who follows the racist preaching of the Armstrongites and their ridiculous "British Israelitism" would be upset by anything being "whited."

DKC, you're well known on this forum for adding pointless heat and zero light.

34 posted on 01/12/2014 8:44:20 PM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC

Two anti-Trinitarians agreeing, what a surprise.

I’m not anti-Trinitarian...I’m pro-bible!

****

Ditto!


35 posted on 01/12/2014 8:45:26 PM PST by restornu (These things I command you, that ye love one another. John 15:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

They don’t have those verses on Kolob.


36 posted on 01/12/2014 8:45:44 PM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: restornu
I'm a Christian Minister with over twenty years of experience. I work by day and preach by night. However, I ask no salary nor will I charge anyone anything that the Gospel may reach all freely.

You are? When did this happen?

37 posted on 01/12/2014 8:49:49 PM PST by Alex Murphy ("the defacto Leader of the FR Calvinist Protestant Brigades")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
I'm not sure why someone who follows the racist preaching of the Armstrongites and their ridiculous "British Israelitism" would be upset by anything being "whited." DKC, you're well known on this forum for adding pointless heat and zero light.

Kind of like this post??

38 posted on 01/12/2014 8:50:41 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

This is not my article if you read it carefully...

But thanks for thinking I could write so well!


39 posted on 01/12/2014 8:51:48 PM PST by restornu (These things I command you, that ye love one another. John 15:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Say as you will, but the Christian church dealt with your Mormon heresy of Arianism long before young joe smith came along.

It is simply Satan’s fashion show. There are only so many ways to pervert the truth and he brings them back regularly to claim a new generation.

I do give the mormonic cult extra credit for combining so many different condemned heresies into one new religion - and then mixing it with New Age thought and more gods than Hinduism.

“Come out from among them and be holy”


40 posted on 01/12/2014 8:52:12 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Truth is hate to those who hate the Truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #41 Removed by Moderator

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Time to call the Flying Inmans! Colofornian, you have the list?

He's got something... :-)

42 posted on 01/12/2014 8:58:35 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Post one isn’t your post?


43 posted on 01/12/2014 8:59:20 PM PST by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Do not be deceived! Here are three verses that declare and identify the triune nature of God. First, God refers to himself as plural. Second, Jesus refers to himself and his father as plural. Third, Jesus refers to the Holy Spirit as another advocate in addition to himself.

Genesis 1:26 NIV

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.

John 14:23 NIV

Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.”

John 14:16-17 NIV

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.


44 posted on 01/12/2014 9:01:49 PM PST by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans; DouglasKC; BipolarBob
Well duh, the LDS is polytheistic. I mentioned this in my post earlier. And your religion also teaches that you will become a God after your death. The Armstrong cults share a similar view.

***

Well duh,

The Bible has more reference to becoming a child of God than it has for the word Trinity which does not exist... At least joint heirs is nothing to moan about...

Romans 8

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Wow if we are good we too will get Eternal bodies of Flesh and Bone and also be glorifies!

Woo Hoo!

Shout for Joy!:)

45 posted on 01/12/2014 9:09:12 PM PST by restornu (These things I command you, that ye love one another. John 15:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
Do not be deceived! Here are three verses that declare and identify the triune nature of God. First, God refers to himself as plural. Second, Jesus refers to himself and his father as plural. Third, Jesus refers to the Holy Spirit as another advocate in addition to himself.

Let's look at actual bible verses that show the Godhead in heaven:

Dan 7:13 "I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him.
Dan 7:14 Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed.

Two, ancient of days, son of man. No such person called holy spirit there in heaven.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.

God and the Word. Two. No person called the holy spirit in the Godhead with them. The two ARE God.

Rev_22:1 And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Rev_22:3 And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him.

Who have thrones? Two. God and the Lamb. There is no throne, ever, for a person called the holy spirit.

Rev 7:9 After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands,
Rev_7:10 and crying out with a loud voice, saying, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!"

Who does this vast multitude of saved people credit for their salvation? God and the lamb. Two. They do not credit a person called the holy spirit up there. Why do you suppose that is?

How about Jesus...what did he think?

Joh_10:30 I and My Father are one."

Oops! What happened here? Jesus Christ did not include a person called the holy spirit as being "one" of God. He only included the two of them.

Heb_8:1 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,

Wait....where is the person called the holy spirit up there with God and his high priest. Again, only two of them.

Verse after verse after verse shows that there are two that make up the Godhead.

I am amazed that people just don't believe what they read and instead will embrace an idea that didn't become part of the official church teaching until nearly 400 years after Jesus died.

How do you explain this?

46 posted on 01/12/2014 9:14:39 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Are you going to clear up the confusion about whether post one is yours?


47 posted on 01/12/2014 9:14:59 PM PST by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: restornu; All

“Wow if we are good we too will get Eternal bodies of Flesh and Bone and also be glorifies!”


IOW, another ‘God,’ since Mormon teaching claims that God has a glorified body of flesh and bone; but you can only make this claim while ignoring Isaiah, and many other scriptures besides.

As for “children of God,” and “heirs,” we are adopted children, not “literal” children, as the LDS or Armstrong cults believe, since they want us to believe that God is literally reproducing more gods. Nor are we inheriting the “fulness” or “nature” of God, as the Armstrong cults teach, but the kingdom that was promised to us as part of the Body of Christ, who is True Israel, and the true heir to all the Abrahamic promises.

Eph_1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Gal_3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.


48 posted on 01/12/2014 9:21:14 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

i am not a mormon and i agree that the “trinity” doctrine is garbage


49 posted on 01/12/2014 9:22:09 PM PST by wafflehouse (RE-ELECT NO ONE !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: restornu

I agree, I too am pro bible. We need to remember that the bible does not try to prove that 1) God exists, 2) that Jesus is his son, 3) that the Holy Spirit exists. It assumes that the reader already knows this.

Hints of the trinity are seen through-out the scripture from Gen 1:1, to Matt. 28:19,(and in other books of the NT as well) and the Father, Son, and Spirit are present all together in one place at one time in Matt 3:16-17, Mk 1:10-11, Lk. 3:21-22, with witnesses present as well.


50 posted on 01/12/2014 9:25:29 PM PST by coincheck (Time is Short, Salvation is for Today)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 751-773 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson