Can someone explain the Trinity please...

[Muffled]

the ancient pagan Babylonian Mystery Religion believed in a trinity. when those pagan ideas were introduced to the great modern universal church in the 2nd or 3rd century they were accepted because the modern church is a reflection of all the pagan mysteries from years before. if God knows everything, why would there be so many mysteries in His church? because it is a false church hiding behind the mask of Christianity

I believe there are a myriad of trinities but only one Biblical Trinity.

I don't believe there is any evidence to support this notion.

I believe God likes to surprise people and a good mystery entices the person to seek rather than ignore.

I don't believe there is any evidence for this.

 

[Muffled]

No, not at all. Nowhere, does the bible say that Jesus was "given" a human nature. He already had it. David was his father too. Scripture tells us that many times. Jesus even tells us that in Rev. Jesus was made (born) like us, his brethren. Heb 2.

He had to be like us, the Son of God and the son of man. The trinity is man-made and has nothing to do with the bible.

"Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one!"

"I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me:"

Trinitarians says that wrong! There are Gods beside our God. God the son and God the Holy Spirit. Wow......

I believe the evidence in the Bible is contrary to this statement.

I believe you are incorrect. I have never heard a Trinitarian say that it is wrong.

I believe I don't know who would say this certainly not any orthodox Christian.

I believe the Father, Son and Paraclete are one God.

 

[Muffled]

Matt 3:16 talks about the Spirit of God. God Himself IS a spirit and He is holy. this does not mean that there is a separate part of God called the Holy Spirit it means that God's own spirit is holy. men also have spirits but they are not holy. no one would say that a man's spirit is a separate "being" or "person". a man's spirit is what gives him life and existence. God's spirit what gives Him power and not a separate part of God. the false trinity idea forever limits God to three "persons" but God says those who are worthy will be adopted as His children so the God family may someday contain many "persons". the trinity idea goes back to pagan times and is intended to hide God's true character and prevent people from seeing that they can become part of God's family just like Jesus

I believe the idea of three persons is misunderstood. The theologians do not mean three human beings and they do not mean three spirits but what they mean is that God is personal and each member of the Trinity has its own attributes that don't define God but do define that member of the Trinity.

I believe the statement ist hose who receive Jesus will become His children.

I believe there is no evidence to support this notion.

 

[sojourner]

most Christian theology was formed by human people who are not always the best sources for religious information because Satan is busy at work twisting their minds to do just the opposite of what God would want

Poisoning the well doesn't wash here. All theology is formed by human beings. The great theologians of the church were and are the best sources we have.

 

[sojourner]

when those pagan ideas were introduced to the great modern universal church in the 2nd or 3rd centurythey were accepted because the modern church is a reflection of all the pagan mysteries from years before.

The concept of the Trinity was around before the second century.

if God knows everything, why would there be so many mysteries in His church?

Because human beings are not capable of completely grasping God.

because it is a false church hiding behind the mask of Christianity

A conclusion based on facts not in evidence.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

the idea of a trinity goes back to pagan times. it is a pagan idea that was picked up by the pagan influenced church that started around the third century and was forced on people by the Roman government

 

[sojourner]

the idea of a trinity goes back to pagan times. it is a pagan idea that was picked up by the pagan influenced church that started around the third century and was forced on people by the Roman government

BZZZZZZZZT!!! I'm sorry, that's an incorrect answer. But thanks for playing! We're going to send you home with some lovely parting gifts, including the home version of our game, "Everything You Know is Wrong." you may now turn around and tell our studio audience, "I am not smarter than a 6th grader!"

The idea of Trinity is biblical -- probably equates to similar, pagan ideas of the time the texts were written, but that was in the first century -- not the third, and certainly before the church became the official religion of the Roman government. The idea of the Trinity wasn't "forced" on anyone. It was solidified by the ecumenical council that met at Nicea in 325. IOW, it was a consensus decision.

 

[outhouse]

It was solidified by the ecumenical council that met at Nicea in 325

These replies are not to argue with you as much as fill in details for others


Not really But I guess its how we use the term solidified lOl

I think clarity need to be addressed



What was settled in the month long debate was the definition of jesus in relation to the father. It paved the way for the trinity, but as far as I know the trinity evolved and was not really dogma until just after 400 CE.

By 325 the concept was becoming more popular and a way to tie in all text together in some circles, but was far from being agreed on at that time.

Misconceptions

Trinity


Nicaea dealt primarily with the issue of the deity of Christ. Over a century earlier the use of the term "Trinity" (Τριάς in Greek; trinitas in Latin) could be found in the writings of Origen (185–254) and Tertullian (160–220), and a general notion of a "divine three", in some sense, was expressed in the second century writings of Polycarp, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr. In Nicaea, questions regarding the Holy Spirit were left largely unaddressed until after the relationship between the Father and the Son was settled around the year 362.[69] So the doctrine in a more full-fledged form was not formulated until the Council of Constantinople in 360 AD.[70]

 

[moorea944]

BZZZZZZZZT!!! I'm sorry, that's an incorrect answer. But thanks for playing! We're going to send you home with some lovely parting gifts, including the home version of our game, "Everything You Know is Wrong." you may now turn around and tell our studio audience, "I am not smarter than a 6th grader!"

The idea of Trinity is biblical -- probably equates to similar, pagan ideas of the time the texts were written, but that was in the first century -- not the third, and certainly before the church became the official religion of the Roman government. The idea of the Trinity wasn't "forced" on anyone. It was solidified by the ecumenical council that met at Nicea in 325. IOW, it was a consensus decision.

But it doesnt make it right. Trinity is not biblical. There were multiple gods everywhere. Why not bring it into Christianity in the time of Constantine?... Yahweh is not a mystery. He is one. How did Moses understand that? Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one!. Do you think he said, I dont understand that ? It's too confusing for me!! Or do you think he understood that God is one. There are no Gods beside me. Mainstream Christianity says thats wrong. There are Gods beside our God. See the point?....

 

[outhouse]

It was solidified by the ecumenical council that met at Nicea in 325. IOW, it was a consensus decision.

consensus? ill add clarity.

Constantine did want unification no matter what the outcome may have been. He called the council because he was upset the bishops made it public after the problem grew so large.

The popular vote did win, but it was far from consensus. Only a small number of bishops even showed up, and the Arian controversy was not small by any means. The Council of Nicaea did not end the controversy either.


Constantine is believed to have exiled those who refused to accept the Nicean creed.

Emperors considered themselves responsible to the gods for the spiritual health of their subjects, and after Constantine they had a duty to help the Church define orthodoxy and maintain orthodoxy.

I understand that his use of force is stated as myth. BUT

In his opening address to the Council at Nicea Constantine referred to God using him to put away "the impious hostility of the tyrants," bringing peace to God's people.

Remember he just got done judging the Donatist crisis years earlier.

http://www.churchhistory101.com/century4-p7.php

A statement was read (perhaps written by emperor) welcoming the bishops and rejoicing that the empire had come to peace. Now it was the intention of the emperor that the Church of the Lord be filled with peace. Rufinus records that Constantine had an attendant bring in an armful of scrolls and letters sent to him from all over the empire. It was announced that these communications were letters of accusations and complaints sent by bishops against other bishops. Constantine then let the bishops know that he had not read any of them and instructed his attendant to burn them on the altar, saying that he wanted all grievances settled during their council.


This is pretty clear he was judge and jury here, and demanded peace.


Constantine did introduce, argued for and eventually insisted that the term homoousias be used in a creedal formula from the council that would definitively state the universal position of the Church

Though the emperor was filled with great optimism, many bishops were not as thrilled. A novice in the faith had pushed for a creed that had contained a key non-scriptural term and had not been well thought-out.

 

[outhouse]

Yahweh is not a mystery. He is one

Not true.

He is El and Yahweh, and who knows how many other text were redacted into just one god when the government forced change.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Constantine was a pagan who saw much of the pagan ideas in the new religion using the name Christian but still keeping much of the pagan beliefs. He accepted this new religion and forced people to accept it or face death. the word trinity is not in the Bible. the new religion decided not to follow the Bible in all matters but just make up traditions to explain things.

 

[outhouse]

Constantine was a pagan who saw much of the pagan ideas in the new religion using the name Christian but still keeping much of the pagan beliefs. He accepted this new religion and forced people to accept it or face death. the word trinity is not in the Bible. the new religion decided not to follow the Bible in all matters but just make up traditions to explain things.

Bud, that sounds more like a rant then anything knowledgeable on the topic.

Constantine was also a Christian who refused then adopted Arianism. Much like you, you follow Arianism a bit don't you?


You also cannot follow the bible in all matters as the bible is not a single piece that is unified in all matters.

 

[Milton Platt]

I was talking to a Lutheran Pastor the other day and he said God provided the greatest gift when he offered himself up as Jesus on the cross. But from what I read in the Bible, when Jesus was on the cross, he spoke to God in heaven. How then can he be God at the same time? Please explain. Thanks

The Jesus thing is very simple....
It was god sacrificing himself to himself to save himself from himself.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

the problem is that people use the word "God" to mean different things. sometimes "God" means the Father and sometimes "God" means more than just the Father. The word "God" should be used like the word "family". you can have one family but that family has more than one member. God is a family that has more than one member. right noe there is a father and a son. the Father has a spirit or power that He can use to do things. this spirit or power is not a third member of the family. Harry Potter has a magic wand that he can wave and make something happen. the wand is not another person. The Heavenly Father can blink an eye or wave a finger and His power or spirit can make something happen. this is not another person. there is the Father and the Son and the Father has a spirit or power. two persons in one God family. not three in some trinity. When Jesus was on the cross He was one part of the God family and he spoke to His Father , another part of the God family. two separate persons in one family called God. but the power or spirit that the Father has does not make three persons in the family.

 

[outhouse]

the problem is that people use the word "God" to mean different things. sometimes "God" means the Father and sometimes "God" means more than just the Father. The word "God" should be used like the word "family". you can have one family but that family has more than one member. God is a family that has more than one member. right noe there is a father and a son. the Father has a spirit or power that He can use to do things. this spirit or power is not a third member of the family. Harry Potter has a magic wand that he can wave and make something happen. the wand is not another person. The Heavenly Father can blink an eye or wave a finger and His power or spirit can make something happen. this is not another person. there is the Father and the Son and the Father has a spirit or power. two persons in one God family. not three in some trinity. When Jesus was on the cross He was one part of the God family and he spoke to His Father , another part of the God family. two separate persons in one family called God. but the power or spirit that the Father has does not make three persons in the family.

YOUR missing the point and its why I posted my replies above.


This was debated 1700 years ago, and your side lost. Sorry. You don't have to accept it or follow it. But that is how the religion has defined the concept.



NO matter how much you kick and scream, your side will not be viewed as accurate.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

I am not concerned what man thinks of my side. the doctrine was made by man and is not Biblical. I will take my side anytime and let man think what he wants. yes it was debated 1700 years ago but who can say the right side won. the side that won was headed by a pagan Roman emperor who forced the decision on people at the point of a side. that may have made people accept it but it did not make it right. if the idea of a trinity is so important why is it not clearly spelled out in the Bible? Oh yes, the same church that forced it on people also decided that it did not have to follow the Bible but could make up traditions to explain things.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

I am not concerned what man thinks of my side. the doctrine was made by man and is not Biblical. I will take my side anytime and let man think what he wants. yes it was debated 1700 years ago but who can say the right side won. the side that won was headed by a pagan Roman emperor who forced the decision on people at the point of a side. that may have made people accept it but it did not make it right. if the idea of a trinity is so important why is it not clearly spelled out in the Bible? Oh yes, the same church that forced it on people also decided that it did not have to follow the Bible but could make up traditions to explain things.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

the original post asked the question can someone explain the trinity. the answer is that it was made up 300 years after Jesus died and was forced on people by a pagan Roman government that left no room for debate.

 

[outhouse]

I am not concerned what man thinks of my side. the doctrine was made by man and is not Biblical

What you may fail to know Is that the gospels are all man made creations by the same type of people.

You should be concerned of man, only man has written every word in any biblical text every written by all religions worldwide.