Christians:Is The Trinity Truly Biblical(A Separate Thread)

[Michel07]

I never said anything from myself, I read the words of the people that are in the bible.

Besides who is St Patrick is he greater than christ to you?

St. Patrick to me was a Servant of the Lord. It seems to me you could at least dispense with the criticism and capitalize Christ. Christ, I believe looks after His servants.

 

[uss_bigd]

St. Patrick to me was a Servant of the Lord. It seems to me you could at least dispense with the criticism and capitalize Christ. Christ I believe looks after His servants.

I have Christ's name capitalized in my heart. do you? or do you have ST. PATRICK'S?

where did you find out that your St Patrick is a servant of christ? he believed in unbiblical doctrine. anti-christian actually.

I am sorry, I am just reading the truth in the bible.

" do i offend you because i spake of the truth?"

 

[Michel07]

I have Christ's name capitalized in my heart. do you? or do you have ST. PATRICK'S?

where did you find out that your St Patrick is a servant of christ? he believed in unbiblical doctrine. anti-christian actually.

I am sorry, I am just reading the truth in the bible.

" do i offend you because i spake of the truth?"

You do not offend me. But I am not the one that is important.
I do believe we shall all come to the Truth and some of It shall humble us and some of it shall give us great happiness.

 

[uss_bigd]

You do not offend me. But I am not the one that is important.
I do believe we shall all come to the Truth and some of It shall humble us and some of it shall give us great happiness.

and as you said "The question is how much do we know about it. the important thing is getting the proper veiwpoint"

I am giving you now is a different veiwpoint, what have you go to lose? when as a matter of fact you have everything to gain. trust in the lord, and you will never go wrong. Trust his words in the Bible, trust no one else's.

 

[ChristineES]

I once had this very odd discussion with a non-trinitarian on another Christian site; I told him that the Trinity could be explained by the way of water-- Ice, liquid, and steam-- 3 states, all H2O. He told me that that wasn't a trinitarian explanation but something called modalist (God in three modes). I had never heard of modalist (has anyone here?)

 

[Charity]

I once had this very odd discussion with a non-trinitarian on another Christian site; I told him that the Trinity could be explained by the way of water-- Ice, liquid, and steam-- 3 states, all H2O. He told me that that wasn't a trinitarian explanation but something called modalist (God in three modes). I had never heard of modalist (has anyone here?)

Hi Christine! No I haven't heard of a modalist....but I think that must be a person who definitey discourages the Trinity.........

I am very confused in reading some of these posts as to how St. Patrick, who was the Patron St. of Ireland ended up in the Bible. This just blew my mind......Please someone tell me what He has to do with The Trinity?

 

[Jeremy Mason]

Ok I will try this again, uss-bigd, we agree that Jesus was without sin/perfect.
Hebrews 4:15
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin.

Would you agree that the only Biblical entity that can be perfect is God?
Would you agree that the Father and the Holy Spirit are perfect as well?
If you say that all three are without sin and therefore perfect/ divine then they are one in divinity. Divinity=God

 

[sojourner]

It is not enought that you mention that 'it is significant and discussed in numerrous occassions. you have to biblically prove that the trinity is significant. besides, this is a biblical debate.

Are you saying interpreted the verse incorrectly? how so? and what is the correct interpretation then?

you said "one cultural source'? explain that biblically.


this is a biblical debate, i wish to see verses. thank you!

Please don't try to trap me into a sola scriptura stance. Sola scriptura is a Reformation idea that is not found in the Bible. (Yet you seem to adhere to it!)

I believe there is significant biblical precedent for the Trinity. The doctrine arose directly from scripture, for Pete's sake. If you're looking for the word "Trinity," you won't find it, but that's not particularly important. What is important is that it is part of the apostles' teaching ... which, according to the Bible, we are to hold to.

I, for one, trust what the apostles have said. Do you?

 

[sojourner]

The trinity satisfies the concept that there is ONE god, but it doesn't explain all the many scriptures that indicate that The Father and Christ are separate beings. Any 6-year-old would assume that Jesus wasn't praying to himself and might laugh at anyone who thought he was.
I've always wondered why the trinitarians focus on a lesser amount of verses that sound like The Father, Christ, and the Holy Ghost are one, and ignore the greater amount of scriptures that sound otherwise.
Especially when there's a logical explanation that satisfies ALL the scriptures.

They are separate beings, yet ONE in purpose and mission. If you hear from one, you've heard from them all. One represents the others. They are totally united; just as I am united with my husband. Yet we, and they, are separate beings. Totally logical, yet rejected by mainstream Christianity. Why is that?

And yet, when you married, you became one flesh. "One flesh" certainly sounds like less than a mulitplicity of beings to me... Your children (if you have them) are also part of the one being of what is known as your family, because they are flesh of your flesh. We understand that concept, yet we have trouble with the Trinity???

 

[sojourner]

I am sorry my friend but what you are saying is not true.

Psalms 82:1
"God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods'

I do not think this verse is subject to interpretation, there is more than one God!



St. Patrick? is he biblical? if he coined the trinity then it just authenticates that the trinity is not biblical. coz their is no St. Patrick in the bible.

be carefull not to fall in this verse

Colossians 2:22
Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men?

All scripture is subject to interpretation, because whenever we read something, we engage in interpretation. Are you saying that we shouldn't read this verse?

"Gods," in any case, does not refer to either Jesus or the Holy Spirit, since they were not known by the OT writers. What it refers to is the pantheon of ancient tribal gods (of which YHWH was part). However, as the Hebrew culture emerged and they began to develop their theology with regard to the tribal-god system, they came up with the Shema: "Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God is One." That is the theology that the Bible, as we have it today, is predicated upon.

St. Patrick is not Biblical. Neither are you. But Patrick, I'm sure, read the scriptures and talked about them, just as you do. You aren't Biblical either. The arena where Patrick has a leg up on you is that he was an apostle. That is, he stands in the long line of people who had the authority of the apostles conferred upon them, ultimately by the first apostles (an idea I'm sure you pooh-pooh as "doctrines of men," [yet, it has been practiced since ancient times -- since before the gospels were written, in fact]). In other words, where doctrine is concerned, we trust Patrick more than we trust you.

You really should brush up on your history and ecclesiology (and exegesis, I might add), before you start trash-talking church leaders and basic tenets of Xy.

 

[sojourner]

Oh so true! Why do Christians resist the simple answer? They have to admit it's so easy to understand and scripturally supported.
I think the reason for the resistance might be that to question the trinity, means you then have to question everything about your theology, and many aren't willing to go there. It's just easier to go with the mysteries-of-God attitude.

We resist the pat answers because they're usually wrong. Religion and theology are too deep for simple answers. Our faith requires a great amount of thought and soul-searching.

The Trinity is a good thing, precisely because it does call into question pre-conceived biases and notions, putting them to to test. You're right. Many aren't willing to go there. They'd rather find a "simple answer" to a difficult question. They'd rather have everythiing explained to them than learn to live with mystery, which might indicate that human beings aren't as knowledgeable or powerful as we thought.

Wouldn't the world just be a horrible place if we discovered that God is bigger than we're able to comprehend -- (no one has seen the face of God) -- that there just might be a mystery to God's Being, and that God reconciled us to God's Self by putting a human face on God's Divinity, so that some of the mystery could be dispelled; enough so that we would be able to claim grace? Wouldn't that be horrible? and a rotten thing for God to do to us?

 

[sojourner]

Paul referred to the apostles, which included himself. not st Patrick.

Actually, Patrick is every bit as much an apostle as Paul...

 

[sojourner]

There are no things past down from the apostles that are not in the bible.

You know, if you lift it up any higher, it just might overshadow God...

 

[sojourner]

I never said anything from myself, I read the words of the people that are in the bible.

Besides who is St Patrick is he greater than christ to you?

Everything you say comes from yourself, since you process what you read through your own mind, and assign meaning to it. Who are you trying to kid?

Is the Bible greater than Christ to you?

 

[sojourner]

I hope i was able to show and defend my stance.

The trinity is not biblical.

I'm sorry. We have some lovely parting gifts for you...

 

[Starfish]

And yet, when you married, you became one flesh. "One flesh" certainly sounds like less than a mulitplicity of beings to me... Your children (if you have them) are also part of the one being of what is known as your family, because they are flesh of your flesh. We understand that concept, yet we have trouble with the Trinity???

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, because you seem to agree with me, then maybe not?
Your example of the family is exactly right. We are one unit, yet separate beings. The Godhead is even more united because they always completely agree with each other, as if they were of one mind, as one god. Yet they are separate beings.

Simple to understand.

 

[uss_bigd]

Is the Bible greater than Christ to you?

Christ is in the bible, his teachings are in there and the verses that i read came from him. so, what kind of a question is that?

Everything you say comes from yourself, since you process what you read through your own mind, and assign meaning to it. Who are you trying to kid?

When paul "said keep to what is written" and St patrick is not written in the bible.
and i say patrick is not an apostle becasue he is not in the bible, how is that argument an assignment from an own mind?

Do you have another interpretation to the Paul instruction which is to "keep to which what is written?"

Are you going to say that the instrution "keep to what is written" mean using those that are not written as reference?

Who are you trying to kid?

 

[uss_bigd]

Actually, Patrick is every bit as much an apostle as Paul...

You are assigning you own interpretation. as far as who is an apostle.

Paul said:

1 Corinthians 4:9
For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.

Do you interpret "last" as if it would mean someone will come next?

Your st patrick did not live until 400 AD.

 

[Michel07]

You are assigning you own interpretation. as far as who is an apostle.

Paul said:

1 Corinthians 4:9
For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.

Do you interpret "last" as if it would mean someone will come next?

Your st patrick did not live until 400 AD.

There have been many servants of the Lord after Christ and the first apostles . I find it unfortunate that your slant on scripture would try to keep the Glory of God in such a small box. It really doesn't do God any justice.

 

[uss_bigd]

There have been many servants of the Lord after Christ and the first apostles . I find it unfortunate that your slant on scripture would try to keep the Glory of God in such a small box. It really doesn't do God any justice.

My God specificallly instructed his apostles to "to keep to which that is written".

If you are truelly worshiping The God of the bible, you will follow what is written.

What is it with 'keep to which what is written" that you not understand?

You have not supported your claim with scriptural evidence like i have, the owner of the thread specificall asked if the trinity is biblical.

St Patrick is not biblical, he coined the concept of the trinity, then the trinity is not biblical.

That is what is written, you can call me anything you like, but what i read will never change. Jesus said the "world will pass but my words will not".

Another thing, when Paul said we the apostles were sent last, are you sating the word "last" mean someone will come next?

You are misguided as i once were. remember i was once catholic, my family is still catholic, i live in a catholic nation.

I know a lot of the truth that you claim is true, i know your veiwpoint inside out.

How much do you know about what i present as truth? have you verified my veiwpoint?

Unfortunately, you were misled to believe that catholic doctrine came from the apostles. did you know that Peter was married? and the catholic church has vow of celibacy. how is that consistent?

Acts 26:18
To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me