Trinity Myth

[EnhancedSpirit]

Ok. This I'm taking from Jewscout, in another thread.

To accept that HaShem is made up of parts and not whole within Himself would be to take away from His infinite nature, for something that is made up of parts is something that can become finite, that is something that HaShem can not be.

I agree. The trinity is a false whatever. Doctrine? It was explained to me that when Saul decided to spread the word of Christianity. (The one who didn't believe in Christ till after his death). He went to convert the Greeks to Christianity. How do you get a group of people who believe in many Gods to change their mind and believe there is only one? Well, he took the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and used it as a tool to convert the Greeks.

The Qabalah teaches of the 72 names of God, and these are each aspects of the whole. But these are not God. They are words used to try to describe the Almighty. The trinity was used to try to describe the One God to people who believed in many Gods.

And even so, The holy-trinity of "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" is wrong as it had been interpreted from a male point of view. The trinity that is used to discribe God is Father, Mother, child. That is God.

Male-Female-Next Generation.

Not Male Father, Male Child, Male Ghost

 

[Katzpur]

Ok. This I'm taking from Jewscout, in another thread.
I agree. The trinity is a false whatever. Doctrine? It was explained to me that when Saul decided to spread the word of Christianity. (The one who didn't believe in Christ till after his death). He went to convert the Greeks to Christianity. How do you get a group of people who believe in many Gods to change their mind and believe there is only one? Well, he took the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and used it as a tool to convert the Greeks.

The Qabalah teaches of the 72 names of God, and these are each aspects of the whole. But these are not God. They are words used to try to describe the Almighty. The trinity was used to try to describe the One God to people who believed in many Gods.

And even so, The holy-trinity of "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" is wrong as it had been interpreted from a male point of view. The trinity that is used to discribe God is Father, Mother, child. That is God.

Male-Female-Next Generation.

Not Male Father, Male Child, Male Ghost

Hi, Spirit.

I agree with you that the doctrine of the Trinity is a false one, and I'm even a Christian. (At least I consider myself to be a Christian.) I think you've sort of over-simplified your explanation of how this doctrine came into existence, however. This is actually one of my favorite topics to discuss and to study. My understanding is that during the first few centuries after the Savior and His Apostles died, Christianity began to evolve into something quite different than it had originally been. Greek philosophical thought corrupted such basic doctrines as the true nature of God and man’s relationship to Him, as learned but uninspired men sought to make this new religion more acceptable to the masses, and especially to the non-Jewish convert.

Jesus Christ stated that His own personal mission was to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" -- i.e. the Jew. However, He specifically commissioned His Apostles to take His gospel to "all nations" -- i.e. the Gentile. This was more easily said than done. Greek philosophy and education were pervasive at that time, and were the foundation of all theological thought. That is a fact and there is abundant proof of it. Anyone who had a Greek education, as was the case with most of the early Gentile converts, knew what God "could and could not be." Neo-planonism, in other words, defined God in terms of what that philosophy said God would have to be in order to be God. What the Bible actually said about God became secondary.

Kathryn

 

[EnhancedSpirit]

I am pleasantly surprized to know there is another christian out there that feels this way. I usally get ignored on this topic. It seems as if the truly devout Christians say something like this "oh no, the holy trinity is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. That's what the bible says and that's what I believe. God is male-male-male."

I have been simplistic because sometimes I feel like I'm talking to children. Children who believe the stories of the boogie man. God, the one almighty Creator, created us in his image, male AND female. Even a small part of God was two big for one human form and had to be split in two. Two equal parts that come together to form the third, which is also equal to the first two. And it happens again and again thousands of times a day, a piece of God manifests in another body, and all the millions of parts that have become incarnate, these do not add up to the whole of God. For God is even greater than that.

 

[true blood]

I do not believe in the holy trinity as well.

 

[SK2005]

Check out this website...
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm#II

I think of the trinity as a Snickers bar. Three parts, but all in one.

 

[michel]

Check out this website...
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm#II

I think of the trinity as a Snickers bar. Three parts, but all in one.

Susan,

Thank you for the link; it's as clear as mud to me - although 'snickers' bars were known as 'marathon' bars here in England. I don't think anyone will ever be able to instill the idea of the Trinity in my obtuse mind, but thank you for trying.

 

[SK2005]

No, problem. That is why it is called a mystery.

 

[michel]

No, problem. That is why it is called a mystery.

Ah, now I understand.............:jam:

 

[may]

many trinitarians quote this scripture to prove the trinity is in the bible. 1 john 5;7-8 .but after doing research i have found out that this scripture was added to the KJB . other translaters have not put it in realizing that it should not be there. i wonder what God thinks about adding words to the bible, all to try and make a manmade doctrine appear as if its in the bible

 

[Scott1]

Oy vey.... where to start?

And even so, The holy-trinity of "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" is wrong as it had been interpreted from a male point of view. The trinity that is used to discribe God is Father, Mother, child. That is God.

Male-Female-Next Generation.

Androcentric language aside.... Father, Mother, child is three... a Trinity.... so, your view of the Trinity is correct, but everyone else is wrong, is that it?

My understanding is that during the first few centuries after the Savior and His Apostles died, Christianity began to evolve into something quite different than it had originally been.

Wow.... and you figured this out two thousand years later?
It's too bad those ignorant early Christians were so deceived.

 

[Katzpur]

Wow.... and you figured this out two thousand years later?

Well, we didn't exactly just "figure it out" on our own. Somebody "reminded" us.

It's too bad those ignorant early Christians were so deceived.

How "early" is "early" to you? I believe the first century Christians believed exactly as I believe today. Can you provide any evidence to convince me that I'm wrong? If there are any documents dating from the Apostolic period that describe the Trinity (i.e. as defined in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds), I'm certainly not aware of them.

God bless,
Kathryn

 

[fromthe heart]

:162: Pray first,

Ok I'm jumping in on this one...call me ignorant but I believe in the Trinity. Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Jesus prayed to the Father many times...was He praying to Himself then?? You seem to feel the Trinity doesn't exsist because there is no mention of it in the Bible...The Holy Ghost was mentioned by Jesus to NEVER speak bad of or you wouldn't be forgiven it...although you could speak what you'd choose of Jesus and it would be forgiven......Let's see Jesus spoke of the Holy Ghost,and the Father...it also stated He was the Son of God...what does it take to show you better why some believe in the Trinity?

When a man and woman become married they are said to become one flesh...no longer two but one. So if once married I'm one with my husband perhaps the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are of one mind but in three persons? I've looked many times to see why this is an issue with some christians...It frankly surprises me that you don't see this correlation. The words Trinity may not be there but they really don't have be to spell that out.

To say there isn't three in one( the Trinity) would be to say you have just body and no soul/spirit...In that case you would be IMPO wrong as well. There is a lot that the Bible doesn't come right out and say but that doesn't mean it's not something to pay attention to.

I respect your opinion but just had to state mind as well.

 

[EnhancedSpirit]

The Holy Ghost was mentioned by Jesus to NEVER speak bad of or you wouldn't be forgiven it...although you could speak what you'd choose of Jesus and it would be forgiven......

According to most Christians, a Holy Trinity would mean that Jesus would be EQUAL to the Holy Ghost. So why can we speak against Jesus and be forgiven, but not the Holy Ghost?

I do not mean to use the word "wrong". I guess a better word is mistaken. But in my studies I learned about Saul, who became Paul after Christ's crucificition. He used the trininty as a tool to convert a multi-god nation to Christianity. So I studied the trinity. And what I found was that the Holy Ghost, is the divine feminine. So what Jesus was saying was "you can talk about me, but don't say anything about my holy mother."

Christianity did start out very different. Jesus did not say go out and kill everyone who refuses to believe in me, yet many were. Constantine turned Christianity into a blood bath. And Hitler was Catholic and believed he was doing God's work by killing those who didn't believe as he did. So which Christianity do you follow? The one Jesus taught, or what man taught? The mere fact that there are so many different Christian denominations is proof that something is amiss.

 

[EnhancedSpirit]

Check out this website...
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm#II

I think of the trinity as a Snickers bar. Three parts, but all in one.

I checked out the link, and this is what I am talking about. The whole webpage refers to the Holy Ghost as He and Him. I have been reminded of the truth. The Spirit of Truth is upon us, just as Jesus promised. Many didn't believe the truth about the earth being flat, so I don't expect the whole world to drop what has been taught to them for 1000's of years, but this is the truth, wether you believe it or not.

But to continue to deny the divine feminine, you deny that which is God. You believe in part of something.

 

[cardero]

I am pleasantly surprized to know there is another christian out there that feels this way. I usally get ignored on this topic. It seems as if the truly devout Christians say something like this "oh no, the holy trinity is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. That's what the bible says and that's what I believe. God is male-male-male."

The Trinity was a mystery that was probably interesting in theory at the time but became a doctrine that was difficult to sustain or refute with future generations of understanding. I do believe there is some symbolic meaning but I believe it applies to physical entities. The Trinity to me symbolizes our mind, body and soul and the attention and balance that need to be given to these human aspects.

 

[michel]

The Trinity was a mystery that was probably interesting in theory at the time but became a doctrine that was difficult to sustain or refute with future generations of understanding. I do believe there is some symbolic meaning but I believe it applies to physical entities. The Trinity to me symbolizes our mind, body and soul and the attention and balance that need to be given to these human aspects.

Well, at least that is a concept that my mind can cope with; I wonder though if your 'definition' would upset those who really accept the Trinity 100%, as portrayed in the Bible ?

 

[Katzpur]

:162: Pray first.

Excellent advice! I like that.

Ok I'm jumping in on this one...call me ignorant but I believe in the Trinity. Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Jesus prayed to the Father many times...was He praying to Himself then?? You seem to feel the Trinity doesn't exsist because there is no mention of it in the Bible...The Holy Ghost was mentioned by Jesus to NEVER speak bad of or you wouldn't be forgiven it...although you could speak what you'd choose of Jesus and it would be forgiven......Let's see Jesus spoke of the Holy Ghost,and the Father...it also stated He was the Son of God...what does it take to show you better why some believe in the Trinity?

I'm not sure whether your remarks were addressed to me, to another poster, or to no one in particular, but I'm really intrigued by what you've said. You see, you say you believe in the Trinity, but when you start elaborating, you use many of the same arguments I'd use -- and I don't believe in the Trinity. I'm thinking that maybe it's the terminology that's the issue; maybe we're talking right past each other. I also believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. I believe that Jesus prayed to His Father and that He most certainly wasn't praying to Himself. I believe that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost cannot and will not be forgiven and that Jesus made a distinction between Himself and the Holy Ghost. When it gets right down to it, I believe everything the Bible has to say about God. I believe in the Godhead described in the scriptures.

When a man and woman become married they are said to become one flesh...no longer two but one. So if once married I'm one with my husband perhaps the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are of one mind but in three persons? I've looked many times to see why this is an issue with some christians...It frankly surprises me that you don't see this correlation. The words Trinity may not be there but they really don't have be to spell that out.

Again, you essentially took the words right out of my mouth -- but you're arguing the opposite point of view! Doesn't that strike you as odd? I've used that same analogy myself many times in discussions with Trinitarians. When I say I don't believe in the Trinity, what I mean to say is that I don't believe in the Trinity as defined by the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. I don't believe that the "oneness" of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is of "substance" or "essence." I believe their "oneness" to be in will and purpose -- one "of one mind" as you say. The three are perfectly (beyond our comprehension) united in every way that really matters, but they are three distinctly individual beings physically.

The Son frequently prayed to His Father, as you pointed out. On many, many occasions, He spoke of His as being "in Heaven." I don't believe, nor do I see how anyone else can believe, that a single substance can be both corporeal and non-corporeal at the same time. Jesus was here on earth; His Father was in Heaven. They are not one and the same physically.

The Creeds defined God in terms the Bible never, ever uses. They do not summarize what the Bible has to say about Deity, but define Deity in terms of what the neo-platonist philosophers of the time said that God must be. They used words and phrases that Jesus never attributed to either Himself or to His Father, and turned a simple Father-Son relationship into a mystical union that is impossible for the human mind to comprehend. So, people say "It's a mystery. We're not supposed to understand it." Why aren't we supposed to understand it? Jesus never said we weren't supposed to understand it. He wanted us to understand, as completely as human beings can -- and that's not perfectly, of course -- who He was and who His Father was and who the Holy Ghost was. Read the Creeds. Start out with the Apostles Creed. Then go to the Nicene Creed and finally to the Athanasian Creed. With each one, God becomes more and more unknowable and more complex. He becomes progressively less and less personal every time man starts trying to improve of the simplifity of the God of the New Testament.

To say there isn't three in one( the Trinity) would be to say you have just body and no soul/spirit...In that case you would be IMPO wrong as well. There is a lot that the Bible doesn't come right out and say but that doesn't mean it's not something to pay attention to.

Well, I'd be the last person to say that everything that God has ever done and everything that Jesus ever taught found its way into the pages of the Bible. I just think that when we seek to know God, we follow your initial advice: First pray.

I respect your opinion but just had to state mind as well.

Thank you for doing so. Likewise, I also respect yours.

Kathryn

 

[fromthe heart]

Excellent advice! I like that.

I'm not sure whether your remarks were addressed to me, to another poster, or to no one in particular, but I'm really intrigued by what you've said. You see, you say you believe in the Trinity, but when you start elaborating, you use many of the same arguments I'd use -- and I don't believe in the Trinity. I'm thinking that maybe it's the terminology that's the issue; maybe we're talking right past each other. I also believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. I believe that Jesus prayed to His Father and that He most certainly wasn't praying to Himself. I believe that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost cannot and will not be forgiven and that Jesus made a distinction between Himself and the Holy Ghost. When it gets right down to it, I believe everything the Bible has to say about God. I believe in the Godhead described in the scriptures.

Again, you essentially took the words right out of my mouth -- but you're arguing the opposite point of view! Doesn't that strike you as odd? I've used that same analogy myself many times in discussions with Trinitarians. When I say I don't believe in the Trinity, what I mean to say is that I don't believe in the Trinity as defined by the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. I don't believe that the "oneness" of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is of "substance" or "essence." I believe their "oneness" to be in will and purpose -- one "of one mind" as you say. The three are perfectly (beyond our comprehension) united in every way that really matters, but they are three distinctly individual beings physically.

The Son frequently prayed to His Father, as you pointed out. On many, many occasions, He spoke of His as being "in Heaven." I don't believe, nor do I see how anyone else can believe, that a single substance can be both corporeal and non-corporeal at the same time. Jesus was here on earth; His Father was in Heaven. They are not one and the same physically.

The Creeds defined God in terms the Bible never, ever uses. They do not summarize what the Bible has to say about Deity, but define Deity in terms of what the neo-platonist philosophers of the time said that God must be. They used words and phrases that Jesus never attributed to either Himself or to His Father, and turned a simple Father-Son relationship into a mystical union that is impossible for the human mind to comprehend. So, people say "It's a mystery. We're not supposed to understand it." Why aren't we supposed to understand it? Jesus never said we weren't supposed to understand it. He wanted us to understand, as completely as human beings can -- and that's not perfectly, of course -- who He was and who His Father was and who the Holy Ghost was. Read the Creeds. Start out with the Apostles Creed. Then go to the Nicene Creed and finally to the Athanasian Creed. With each one, God becomes more and more unknowable and more complex. He becomes progressively less and less personal every time man starts trying to improve of the simplifity of the God of the New Testament.

Well, I'd be the last person to say that everything that God has ever done and everything that Jesus ever taught found its way into the pages of the Bible. I just think that when we seek to know God, we follow your initial advice: First pray.

Thank you for doing so. Likewise, I also respect yours.

Kathryn

Hi Kathryn..sounds like we may be in the same church but different pew...lol I've always thought the Trinity meant Father,Son,and Holy Ghost...so if you believe as I do and don't believe in the Trinity where are we located in this same church? Does the Trinity mean something to one person and something different to someone else? You spoke of the different creeds...God is hard to understand that's why we aren't supposed to question Him in things...our human mind will NEVER comprehend God. Thus came Jesus...who we can more associate with on a more personal level...I think that's why the saying 'What would Jesus do' became so popular...we try to associate with His teachings in the New Testament. I'm glad for your sharing with me your prespective.

Respectfully...FTH

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

I agree. The trinity is a false whatever. Doctrine? It was explained to me that when Saul decided to spread the word of Christianity. (The one who didn't believe in Christ till after his death). He went to convert the Greeks to Christianity. How do you get a group of people who believe in many Gods to change their mind and believe there is only one? Well, he took the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and used it as a tool to convert the Greeks.

As far as Paul is concerned, although I would like to know what you mean by "until after his death", I am suprised that you did not bring up the Council at Nicea as most opposers of the doctrine of the trinity do. We can look at what another Apostle who did not have as much of an obligation to "convert the greeks to christianity". Namely the Apostle Peter and what he thought of Paul's letters. One thing that should also be noted is that Paul and Peter had sort of a falling out when Paul rebuked Peter for acting like a hypocrite when it came to dealing with his fellow Isrealites verses gentiles(Gal. 2:11-21). Another thing to note is that these two were both devout Jewish believer in Jesus Christ. With that being stated, it is interesting to note how Peter treats Paul in 2 Peter 3:15-16 : " and regard patience of the LORD to be salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote to you, as in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as the do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." So obviously Peter knew of Paul's letters and what was being taught in them and despite the fact that peter remained in Isreal at the time so there was no real obligation to appease "the greeks", He still gave Pauls letters along with the teachings in them just as much weight as the "rest of the Scriptures". In conclusion, if you are going to blame Paul, you might as well blame Peter and Luke to start off with.

And even so, The holy-trinity of "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" is wrong as it had been interpreted from a male point of view. The trinity that is used to discribe God is Father, Mother, child. That is God.

I'm going to address this one the same way I addressed the issue of Zondervan Publishing feeling the need to come out with a "gender sensative" Bible. Firts off, when the Bible speaks of God in a male sense, it is not in the same sense that we think of as male. Take for instance, nowhere in the Bible does it state that God has male reproductive organs, etc. On top of that, the Bible deals with this issue in verses like Gal. 3:27-28 " For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Unfortunately, there have been Christians who were also male schovinists which is why people bring this issue up, but I highly doubt that the interpreters of the bible who were so intent on interpreting from a "male point of view" somehow accidently translated that verse correctly and missed it's intended message. You see, when people start insisting that we recognize God in different genders, they place themselves in just as bad of a possition as the male schovinists they are trying so hard to oppose, especially when you consider how as Christians we need to look at the spiritual aspect of things rahter than the physical. Concentrating on genders is a side track issue that the Bible already deals with.

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[may]

What​

is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?


​

The​

New Encyclopædia Britannica says: "Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.


​

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: "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 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.​

In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: "Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.​

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, "The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions."—(Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.​

John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: "The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are G[ree]k philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians."—(New York, 1965), p. 899...
oh dear it seems to me that it is not a bible teaching and those who claim to represent God on Earth will have a lot to answer for in the coming Great tribulation (judgement from God)Oh well we dont have to be a part of it because we can get out of false religion just as revelation tells us to.
And I heard another voice out of heaven say: "Get out of her,(BABYLON THE GREAT THE WORLD EMPIRE OF FALSE RELIGION) my people, if YOU do not want to share with her in her sins, and if YOU do not want to receive part of her plagues. For her sins have massed together clear up to heaven, and God has called her acts of injustice to mind(REVELATION18;4-5)Christendom is more deserving because she claims to represent the God of the bible but takes on babyilonish teachings not a good thing at all so i am out of there while we still have the chance. i am going to conceal myself while there is still time

Before [the] statute gives birth to [anything], [before the] day has passed by just like chaff, before there comes upon YOU people the burning anger of Jehovah, before there comes upon YOU the day of Jehovah’s anger, seek Jehovah, all YOU meek ones of the earth, who have practiced His own judicial decision. Seek righteousness, seek meekness. Probably YOU may be concealed in the day of Jehovah’s anger(zepheniah2;2-3)i know whos side i want to be on in the day of Jehovahs anger