Freelancer7
Active Member
I would love to see people share thier view of how they see the TRINITY.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I would love to see people share thier view of how they see the TRINITY.
So the myriad of references in the Bible to Him being "in Heaven" are wrong?God created one or more spirit worlds at a lower level of reality, and God created the material world at the lowest level of reality. Since God created the spirit world called Heaven, God transcends Heaven. This means that God is not in Heaven.
A small piece of God? So you don't believe that He is fully God, but just part of God?Christ is not a separate God, but a small piece of God that came into the world, sort of like a 'chip off the old block.'
My view of the Trinity is that it is a flawed attempt on the part of the fourth and fifth century philosophers and theologians to describe what God is. It's a doctrine that, in my opinion, bears little resemblance to what the Bible has to say about God.I would love to see people share thier view of how they see the TRINITY.
So the myriad of references in the Bible to Him being "in Heaven" are wrong? [/font]
A small piece of God? So you don't believe that He is fully God, but just part of God?
It matters little to most Christians how to understand the trinity.
It is a trap that Great thinkers have argued over for centuries.
The Trinity is one of the great mysteries.
It is self evident that God is singular.
to Christians it is also self evident that the Holy Spirit is amongst us always.
It is also self evident that Jesus came amongst us and returned to God.
The knowledge of exact relationship between the three into one Godhead is less important than believing that it is so.
Church-speak explaining it really is no help, as one needs to be well versed to even start to under stand the words used.
Had the understanding of a God, the Holy spirit and Jesus not been well entrenched, the need to come up with the Trinity may never have been required.
That's and interesting amalgamation of internal contradictions. Wow.
Obviously. I agree with you, but wonder how you would explain Jesus' statement, "I and my Father are one."on a personal note, to me, three seperate entites.
Agreed.The Bible ascribes deity to all three persons yet declares there is but one God.
So what does the word "and" denote? Last I knew, "and" is a conjunction that is only needed when speaking of more than one entity, regardless of whether or not a single "name" is shared by all them.We baptize in the NAME (singular) of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. (Matt. 28:19)
Three-in-one and one-in-three. Now where in the Bible would that be?The three-in-one and one-in-three, and the one in the middle died for me! Oh blessed Trinity.
What does the word "the" denote? Last I knew God in the OT said he would never give his name to another.So what does the word "and" denote? Last I knew, "and" is a conjunction that is only needed when speaking of more than one entity, regardless of whether or not a single "name" is shared by all them.
There is no technical reason why it can't be Matt 28:19 . But each to their own.Three-in-one and one-in-three. Now where in the Bible would that be?
Obviously. I agree with you, but wonder how you would explain Jesus' statement, "I and my Father are one."
Huh?What does the word "the" denote?
Okay, so how is it that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost apparently have the same name? I don't think they do, but I do think that they share the title of "God."Last I knew God in the OT said he would never give his name to another.
Except that Matthew 28:19 doesn't even come close to saying that. This verse clearly states that there is a Father, a Son, and a Holy Ghost. As far as describing their relationship in the terms used by the fourth and fifth century creeds, it just doesn't do that.There is no technical reason why it can't be Matt 28:19.