• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should we believe in the Trinity Doctrine?

Shiner2

Member
Should we believe in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity?

Statements about the Trinity Doctrine from various sources!
The illustrated Bible Dictionary: "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible. It did not find a place formally in the theology of the Church till the 4th Century."
New Catholic Encyclopedia: "the Trinity is not directly and immediately {the] word of God."

The encyclopedia of Religion: "Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity."
New Catholic encyclopedia says: "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the O[ld] T[estament]."

In his Book The Triune God, Jesuit Edmond Fortman admits: "The Old Testament ... tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit ... There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead ... Even to see in ["Old Testament"] suggestions or foreshadowings or 'veiled signs' of the Trinity of persons is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers."

A dictionary of Religious knowledge notes that many say that the Trinity "is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith." And The Paganism in our Christianity declares: "The origin of the [Trinity] is entirely pagan."

The Encyclopedia of Religion says: "Theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity."
Jesuit Fortman states: "The New Testament writers ... give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are thre co-equal divine persons ... Nowhere do we find any trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead."
The new encyclopedia Britannica observes: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament."

Bernard Lohse says in A short History of Christian Doctrine: "As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity."
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology similarly states: "The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. ‘The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence’ [said Protestant theologian Karl Barth."]

Yale University Professor E. Washburn Hopkins affirmed: "To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the Trinity was apparently unknown; ... they say nothing about it." --- Origin and Evolution of Religion.

Historian Arthur Weigall notes: "Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word ‘Trinity’ appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord." --- The Paganism in our Christianity -

The New International Dictionary of the New Testament Theology tells us: "Primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds."

"The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the [Trinity] idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognised the Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in one." --- The Paganism in our Christianity --

"At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian ... It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the N[ew] T[estament] and other early Christian writings." Encyclopedia of Religion and ethics.

"The formulation ‘one God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the fourth Century. ... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing, nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective." -- New Catholic Encyclopedia

Quite clearly, these Worldly Scholars did not believe this teaching, so, why should any of us, today, believe it? I, for one, certainly do not! Nor would I ever! Why should any today, believe a teaching that neither, the Bible writers, The Christ, nor his early Apostles taught anyone! Shiner2
 

Shiner2

Member
If you're an orthodox Christian, yes!
Sojourner!
No! If your a member of any of the false religious organizations on this earth; and lets face it! Everyone of them is FALSE ! Every one! I do believe that the majority of Religion on this earth today, believe and teach that monstrous lie! Shiner2
 

OmarKhayyam

Well-Known Member
Sojourner!
No! If your a member of any of the false religious organizations on this earth; and lets face it! Everyone of them is FALSE ! Every one! I do believe that the majority of Religion on this earth today, believe and teach that monstrous lie! Shiner2

Really? The majority of religion? You sure you want to defend that position?


Islam
Hinduism
Judaism

They ALL teach a trinity? You want to defend that position - go for it.

We are breathless in anticipation of this demonstration of your wisdom.:rolleyes:
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
Should we believe in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity?

Sure, why not? Where should one draw the line when it comes to believing in imaginative fictions and fantastical speculations? If you're going to buy into one fantasy, what reason is there for not buying into other ones?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Sojourner!
No! If your a member of any of the false religious organizations on this earth; and lets face it! Everyone of them is FALSE ! Every one! I do believe that the majority of Religion on this earth today, believe and teach that monstrous lie! Shiner2
One man's trash is another man's treasure...;)
 

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
Quite clearly, these Worldly Scholars did not believe this teaching
Being worldly is not something I would expect a Christian to admire...

Why should any today, believe a teaching that neither, the Bible writers, The Christ, nor his early Apostles taught anyone!
Because it is the orthodox conclusion of what they taught...
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Sojourner!
No! If your a member of any of the false religious organizations on this earth; and lets face it! Everyone of them is FALSE ! Every one! I do believe that the majority of Religion on this earth today, believe and teach that monstrous lie! Shiner2
You know what? I was just going to side with you on this one, but on second thought, I think I'll just sit it out instead. Your attitude sucks, man.
 
Last edited:

ayani

member
i don't see anything at all wrong with a Christian believing in and affirming the Trinity.

the wod "trinity" may not be in there, but the concept is Biblically sound.

read the Bible and discover that God is certainly God, that Jesus identifies Himself with the One True God, even while saying He is distinct from and under the Father. the Holy Spirit is called the "Spirit of God" and also the "Spirit of Jesus" in Acts 16:7.

all three are shown to be the power, person, and uniqueness of God manifest in real ways, as the Father, the Son Jesus (God incarnate), and the Holy Spirit.
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
One important reason is this false teaching prevents people from accurately knowing the Universal Sovereign, Jehovah God, and from worshiping him in spirit and truth.(John 4:23,24) It also dishonors Christ Jesus. Jesus never claimed to be God, but he repeatedly spoke of himself as “God’s Son.” Even his enemies acknowledged this. (John 10:36; 19:7) Jesus was ever conscious of exalting the Father and subordinating himself to Him, as he confessed: “The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. (John 5:19)


Those who believe this false concept claim to be Christian, thus misrepresenting Christ. So called 'Christian' religions that teach this doctrine have warred against fellow worshipers of the trinity, slaughtering them by the millions in the World Wars. Yet, Jesus plainly said: “By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.” (John 13:35) God’s Word expands on this, saying: “The children of God and the children of the Devil are evident by this fact: Everyone who does not carry on righteousness does not originate with God, neither does he who does not love his brother.” It likens those who kill their spiritual brothers to “Cain, who originated with the wicked one [Satan] and slaughtered his brother.”—1 John 3:10-12.


We should not believe in the trinity doctrine because it is not a Bible teaching, but comes from pagan religions. Jesus said the Father was greater than he is and Christ prayed to his Father, calling him the only true God (John 14:28, John 17:1-3) Jesus said his Father and God knew things Jesus did not know. (Mark 13:32)
We must know God as he really is to serve him acceptably. The Bible is the source of accurate knowledge of God and Christ, and presents a clear and simple picture of their respective positions.
 

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
We must know God as he really is to serve him acceptably. The Bible is the source of accurate knowledge of God and Christ, and presents a clear and simple picture of their respective positions.


This is the belief of many christians post reformation. Before Luther most Christians gave the church councils equal importance with the Bible. In fact why do you not believe that the “Shepherd of Hermas” and the "Memoirs of the Apostles” are scripture, many early orthodox christians seemed to view them as Gods word also. You do know that it was the wishes of the Roman Emperor Constantine that put you cannon in stone. If the councils of early christian leaders pick what your bible should be, should not there views be seen as authoritative.


If this doctrine of Sola Scriptura is true why did the early christians not follow it.
 
Last edited:

ayani

member
rusra ~

i don't reject the concept of Jesus' divinity.

He is certainly the Son of God, and distinct from the Father. at the same time, He identifies Himself with the One True God in unique ways, which would be impossible for Him to do unless He were God, seeming as God is wholly unique in the universe, and He is nothing like His creation.

Jesus is God- not all of God, as the Father still reigned in heaven. yet Jesus is God's power, nature, authority, person made Man in history, and through Him and because of Him we can have a relationship with God, and know Him face to face, and walk with Him.

i can understand how and why many Christians are unsure of this, and decide that Jesus is not God, not divine, and not uniquely holy. yet scripture gives us many clues in the OT and the New about who Jesus is, why He matters, and what a relationship with Him means.
 

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
Before Luther most Christians gave the church councils equal importance with the Bible.
It is kind of humorous, considering that the Bible they use were definitively compiled under councils they don't considered authoritative...

Jesus never claimed to be God, but he repeatedly spoke of himself as “God’s Son.”
"The Father and I are one"

John 5:19
Interesting that you quote John while denying that Jesus is divine... considering that John unequivocably states that Jesus is God... "...the Word was God"...

The Bible is the source of accurate knowledge of God and Christ, and presents a clear and simple picture of their respective positions.
The Bible says that Jesus is God... clearly...
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
It is kind of humorous, considering that the Bible they use were definitively compiled under councils they don't considered authoritative...


"The Father and I are one"


Interesting that you quote John while denying that Jesus is divine... considering that John unequivocably states that Jesus is God... "...the Word was God"...


The Bible says that Jesus is God... clearly...

Many translations of the Bible render John 1:1 "The word was a god or the word was divine, believing the Greek grammar makes this the correct translation. Most people do not know Biblical Greek. So how can we know what the apostle John really meant? Think of this example: A schoolteacher explains a subject to his students. Afterward, the students differ on how to understand the explanation. How can the students resolve the matter? They could ask the teacher for more information. No doubt, learning additional facts would help them to understand the subject better. Similarly, to grasp the meaning of John 1:1, you can look in the Gospel of John for more information on Jesus’ position.
For instance, consider what John further writes in chapter 1, verse 18: “No man has seen [Almighty] God at any time.” However, humans have seen Jesus, the Son, for John says: “The Word [Jesus] was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory.” (John 1:14, KJ) How, then, could the Son be part of Almighty God? John also states that the Word was “with God.” But how can an individual be with someone and at the same time be that person? Moreover, as recorded at John 17:3, Jesus makes a clear distinction between himself and his heavenly Father. He calls his Father “the only true God.” And toward the end of his Gospel, John sums up matters by saying: “These have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God.” (John 20:31) Notice that Jesus is called, not God, but the Son of God. This information provided in the Gospel of John shows how John 1:1 should be understood. Jesus, the Word, is “a god” in the sense that he has a high position but is not the same as Almighty God. Men are called gods, and even Satan is called a god in the Bible.


Jesus did say he and his father are one. Did he mean he was God? If he did, then his followers would also have to be God, since he requested God concerning his followers "that they may be one just as we are one" (John 17:22). In the preceding verse he showed what this oneness means "just as you, Father, are in union with me, and I am in union with you, that they may also be in union with us. " (vs 21).

I did not deny Jesus is divine. To the contrary, he is God's only begotten Son, second only to Jehovah. Further God has exalted Jesus to a superior position..so that every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord (not almighty God) to the glory of God the Father. (Phillipians 2:9-11)

No, the Bible is clear about who God is and who Jesus is and Jesus is not Almighty God. Jehovah alone holds that position.​
 

Man of Faith

Well-Known Member
I believe in the trinity and believe that it is a important doctrine of Christianity and how we can better understand God and our relationship to him.

In Mark 1:9-11, we see the concept of the trinity. We have Jesus being baptised, the Holy Spirit descending like a dove and God's voice in the clouds.

Ephesians 1:3:14 gives us a picture of the trinity and how it relates to our salvation. In verse 4 we see that God chose us, verse 7 Jesus redeemed us and verse 13 the Holy Spirit seals us.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
In Mark 1:9-11, we see the concept of the trinity. We have Jesus being baptised, the Holy Spirit descending like a dove and God's voice in the clouds.
I don't know how that's a concept of the Trinity. Three divine persons and beyond that, nothing. There is nothing in that verse that begins to try to explain their relationship like the creeds do. If Jesus Christ were to read the Athanasian Creed, He'd wonder which lawyer wrote it and who it was about.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Many translations of the Bible render John 1:1 "The word was a god or the word was divine, believing the Greek grammar makes this the correct translation.
Which translations? The Greek transliteration of the sentence there is:
"In beginning was the word, and the word was toward the God, and God was the word."
Think of this example: A schoolteacher explains a subject to his students. Afterward, the students differ on how to understand the explanation. How can the students resolve the matter? They could ask the teacher for more information. No doubt, learning additional facts would help them to understand the subject better. Similarly, to grasp the meaning of John 1:1, you can look in the Gospel of John for more information on Jesus’ position.
Not unless you know Greek, with is the thing in question. Otherwise, you'll end up just as "confused" as when you began. The only way to know what the Greek says is to find out what the Greek says.

Jesus did say he and his father are one. Did he mean he was God? If he did, then his followers would also have to be God, since he requested God concerning his followers "that they may be one just as we are one" (John 17:22).
Have you ever heard the term "reconciliation?"
I did not deny Jesus is divine. To the contrary, he is God's only begotten Son, second only to Jehovah. Further God has exalted Jesus to a superior position..so that every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord (not almighty God) to the glory of God the Father. (Phillipians 2:9-11)
Let's take a look at that passage:
"who, though [Jesus] was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited..."

The Trinitarian concept looks just as viable from this standpoint as your concept does.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
We should not believe in the trinity doctrine because it is not a Bible teaching, but comes from pagan religions.
Many of the OT stories that Jesus would have heard and believed came from pagan religions.
The position of the early Church was not sola scriptura. In fact, there was no Bible as we have it for at least the first 300 years of Christendom.
We must know God as he really is to serve him acceptably.
First of all, we do know God precisely because we know Christ. Second, grace takes care of the "acceptability" clause.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
The early church believed that Jesus was God's son,
They also believed in the Holy Spirit.


They also believed that there was only one true God.

They were well aware that other faiths believed differently.
The Trinity is a rationalization of these facts.
It is accepted in Faith by most Christians.

They could equally have decided that Jesus and the Holy Ghost were simply
God in a different guise, who could co-exist with him at his will.

However Jesus said he was the Son Of God, not God in a disguise.
When Jesus was baptised all three were present at the same time.

Some Christian faiths believe in the corporeal existence of both God and Jesus in Heaven
This is easier for some to believe, but involves a complex reassessment of the nature of Heaven, God, Jesus and our place in the scheme of things.

These are all valid Choices to explain the known facts.

The last alternative is to follow the example of the early Christians.
And believe in God, his Son Jesus and the power of the Holey Spirit;
and make no attempt to rationalise their relationship one to another either as a trinity, or as separate gods.

This allows God in his infinite power and wisdom to assign such status and power as he requires.

This is the situation as we find it; our rationalizations are simply that a Rationalization.

In sending his Holy Spirit to us and having his Son born to a virgin as our Saviour, he has given us an almost impossible situation to fully understand or explain.

The early Church Fathers did their best by establishing the Trinity, But some things about God must be accepted by faith not by vote.

We must believe in God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit , however I am not convinced that believing in the Trinity is essential.
 
Last edited:
Top