Can someone explain the Trinity please...

[Yes]

well, I'm a former theist...so...lol
it is how I remember it, though.

when you believe, you just believe. you don't require everything to fit perfectly.
such is faith.

I do not agree. The Truth definitely matters. I only want God's Truth, not some religion's truth.

We are to add to our faith goodness with knowledge.

The knowledge of the Lord is peace.

 

[Desert Snake]

I went and found what we were arguing about. You would not say there are three. I do not understand why you will not say there are three.
As for the trinity...different churches that say they believe in the trinity doctrine all agree that they believe the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit are separate.

'Trinity' means three. We already know there is three 'something'. Pointless to say that. The issue is, what is the 'three', not is there a three.
According to definition we have in this thread, three separate entities, no I don't believe that. I'm not a 'trinitarian'.

 

[sojourner]

I explained what the trinity doctrine says.
I also explained why it is false.

You explained its falseness by a faulty explanation of the doctrine. You don't understand the doctrine, judging by what you've posted here.

 

[sojourner]

That is what sojourner said to my post where I said this about the trinity doctrine: "No way is Jesus distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit. Jesus is not separate, and distinct (which means different) from the Father. God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit are exactly the same." See post #197.

Sojourner was rude by telling me to read the doctrine, as if I had not. Then sojourner went on deceitfully as if not corrected, instead of admitting to be in error about the trinity doctrine.

Except I wasn't in error about the doctrine. but it's apparent that you don't understand it, judging by your posts here.

 

[sojourner]

You posted information about the trinity doctrine which says God the Father and Jesus are NOT interchangeable.

I will prove easily that God the Father and Jesus Christ are interchangeable.

Who will we bow to?
Who is the Shepherd?
Who is the Redeemer?
Who is the Savior?
Who is the Rock?
Who is the First and the Last?
Who gives life?
Whose works are they?
Who lives inside those saved?
Whose commands are they?
Who pours out the Holy Spirit?
Who raised Jesus from the dead?

That "proves" nothing. Except a faulty concept of the Trinity.

 

[Deidre]

I do not agree. The Truth definitely matters. I only want God's Truth, not some religion's truth.

We are to add to our faith goodness with knowledge.

The knowledge of the Lord is peace.

you only have an idea of what a god's truth would be.
there is no actual proof of it.
when I was a practicing Christian, I said the same thing...
I believe in God, but I didn't put forth that I had objective truth. Because I didn't.
You can believe it to be absolute truth (for you) but without proof, it is just YOUR truth.

 

[Yes]

'Trinity' means three.

Trinity means three separate and different.

We already know there is three 'something'. Pointless to say that. The issue is, what is the 'three', not is there a three.

It is not pointless to say there are three. Many teach that there is only One.

The three are One and the same.

According to definition we have in this thread, three separate entities, no I don't believe that. I'm not a 'trinitarian'.

I am glad to hear that. However, the use of the word trinity suggests that you are a trinitarian, for that is from where the word comes.

 

[Yes]

You explained its falseness by a faulty explanation of the doctrine. You don't understand the doctrine, judging by what you've posted here.

You are not speaking truth. I will not discuss with someone such as yourself anymore.

 

[Windwalker]

When you said trinity though, it is about a doctrine that claims they are separate and different.
The trinity doctrine does not make sense...it even claims it is not explainable.

There are three, and the three are One and the same.

A few things here. The Trinity formulation does not say they are separate anymore than Modelism makes that distinction. Modalism, or "Oneness" theology, says he is "Father in creation, Son in redemption, Holy Spirit in emanation (or in the church, as some put it)." It clearly makes a distinction of role and function here, so much so that you have Jesus praying to the Father in heaven. Yet, of course, you have him saying "I and the Father are One". So you have distinction, as well as Unity.

It is straining at an infinitesimally small gnat to make a gulf of infinite divide over these minor distinctions, while all the while not even fathoming what the Trinitarian formulation is actually about. It's not about defining God, but describing the very function you think makes Modalism such a "Revelation". I am very well familiar with it's rebirth in the 1900s, leading to the formation of the Assemblies of God in 1914 to differentiate itself theologically from the "Oneness" movements, who in 1945 came together to forum the UPC and various other offshoots that emerged, all claiming to have the restored Truth.

Anyway, I have a great deal I can contribute to your understanding if you are open to it. It's interesting to revisit this for me.

 

[budha3]

I think that the philosopher Origen of Alexandria has the best answer (Google "On First Principles" by Origen) on the Trinity.

 

[Yes]

you only have an idea of what a god's truth would be.
there is no actual proof of it.
when I was a practicing Christian, I said the same thing...
I believe in God, but I didn't put forth that I had objective truth. Because I didn't.
You can believe it to be absolute truth (for you) but without proof, it is just YOUR truth.

You are badly mistaken.
Jesus says we can know him. Jesus tells us how. You just did not do what Jesus said to do.

 

[sojourner]

You are not speaking truth. I will not discuss with someone such as yourself anymore.

Of course not. You're losing the argument, so you're picking up your marbles and going home. Prove that I'm "not speaking truth." I dare ya.

 

[Desert Snake]

I am glad to hear that. However, the use of the word trinity suggests that you are a trinitarian, for that is from where the word comes.

Good thing I don't use that term then. (?)

 

[Yes]

A few things here. The Trinity formulation does not say they are separate anymore than Modelism makes that distinction.

The trinity doctrine says they are separate and distinct. Distinct means different.

Modalism, or "Oneness" theology, says he is "Father in creation, Son in redemption, Holy Spirit in emanation (or in the church, as some put it)." It clearly makes a distinction of role and function here, so much so that you have Jesus praying to the Father in heaven. Yet, of course, you have him saying "I and the Father are One". So you have distinction, as well as Unity.

It is straining at an infinitesimally small gnat to make a gulf of infinite divide over these minor distinctions, while all the while not even fathoming what the Trinitarian formulation is actually about.

You are badly mistaken. There is a major difference between modalism and trinitarianism.

It's not about defining God, but describing the very function you think makes Modalism such a "Revelation". I am very well familiar with it's rebirth in the 1900s, leading to the formation of the Assemblies of God in 1914 to differentiate itself theologically from the "Oneness" movements, who in 1945 came together to forum the UPC and various other offshoots that emerged, all claiming to have the restored Truth.

Anyway, I have a great deal I can contribute to your understanding if you are open to it. It's interesting to revisit this for me.

Modalists say there are three, but they say the three are not separate and distinct, they say they are the same. The modalists err when they say the three do not exist at the same time.

I am no more a modalist any more than I am a trinitarian.

 

[Yes]

Good thing I don't use that term then. (?)

You said trinity means three.

Trinity means more than just three. It means three separate and distinct.

There are three, but not as the trinity doctrine states.

 

[Windwalker]

You are badly mistaken. There is a major difference between modalism and trinitarianism.

Not from my understanding of both.

The modalists err when they say the three do not exist at the same time.

Then you know nothing of what you speak. They say no such thing. As you are fond of saying, you are "badly mistaken". Indeed, you are.

I am no more a modalist any more than I am a trinitarian.

Then what pray tell do you espouse? You sure speak as a modalist, even though you are "badly mistaken" as to what modelism actually is.

 

[JayJayDee]

You said trinity means three.

Trinity means more than just three. It means three separate and distinct.

There are three, but not as the trinity doctrine states.

Good grief is there an echo in here???? I keep hearing this faulty reasoning over and over.....

Where in all of scripture is the notion that the one God of Israel had three faces? (Deut 6:4) Where did Jesus ever say that he was equal to his Father either in heaven or on earth? He is a created, subservient son who is not and never was equal to his superior Father. He calls his Father "my God" even in heaven. (Rev 3:14) Can God worship himself.....what nonsense!

 

[Yes]

Not from my understanding of both.

Then you are badly mistaken.

Then you know nothing of what you speak. They say no such thing. As you are fond of saying, you are "badly mistaken". Indeed, you are.

They do say the three do not exist at the same time. If your denomination did not say that...or if you are mistaken about what they say...I care very little about that. I want to speak about God's Truth.

Then what pray tell do you espouse? You sure speak as a modalist, even though you are "badly mistaken" as to what modelism actually is.

Again, I am not mistaken about what modalists believe. I get that from trinitarians too, until they are faced with their error, and sometimes they still won't admit it.

 

[Windwalker]

Good grief is there an echo in here???? I keep hearing this faulty reasoning over and over.....

Where in all of scripture is the notion that the one God of Israel had three faces? (Deut 6:4) Where did Jesus ever say that he was equal to his Father either in heaven or on earth? He is a created, subservient son who is not and never was equal to his superior Father. He calls his Father "my God" even in heaven. (Rev 3:14) Can God worship himself.....what nonsense!

And then there's Arianism. So many years, and still debating how many angels can stand on the head of a pin.

 

[Yes]

Good grief is there an echo in here???? I keep hearing this faulty reasoning over and over.....

Where in all of scripture is the notion that the one God of Israel had three faces? (Deut 6:4) Where did Jesus ever say that he was equal to his Father either in heaven or on earth? He is a created, subservient son who is not and never was equal to his superior Father. He calls his Father "my God" even in heaven. (Rev 3:14) Can God worship himself.....what nonsense!

How many times do you have to be shown this scripture?

Philippians 2:6 who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped,