Why So Much Trinity Bashing?

[lewisnotmiller]

So you guys are saying you know better than the men closer to the Apostles, the men who drew up the creeds and wrote the theological texts?

The creeds were written BECAUSE of the variety of positions being taken, though. It's not the case that there was clear belief in the Trinity at the time of the Nicene Creed, and this merely codified it. Rather, it established what was to be considered heresy moving forwards. Earlier creeds were less detailed on the issue (ie. The Apostles Creed) and this resulted in a range of positions being maintained. I think it's worth at least acknowleding the political drivers behind the Trinity, even if you believe it is a fair blending of political pragmatism and theology.

The men who read the Bible in its original languages?

You know better?

It isn't only halfwits on the internet like me who question the Trinity.

 

[SLPCCC]

I have my own interpretation of the Bible, one that makes logical sense.
All things were created through God, and God is before all things, and in God all things consist.

Paul really messed up when He tried to elevate Jesus and make Jesus superhuman, on par with God.

We Christians are not Paul followers. We believe that no one can change God's Word. Those who go deep in their study of Jesus, research the evidence of Jesus' resurrection and the reliability of the scriptures. Not of Paul but of the scriptures. Why not do research on the resurrection?

 

[Brian2]

Not everyone else in the universe, just Christians.
I can't because it is completely illogical to believe that the man Jesus created all things in the universe. That would be logically impossible.
I cannot believe illogical things.

It's not about what you are willing to believe or not, it is about what the English translation is saying.
It was your mother who was an English teacher if I remember correctly, yet you don't seem to be able to understand English.

Not everyone else in the universe, just Christians.
I can't because it is completely illogical to believe that the man Jesus created all things in the universe. That would be logically impossible.
I cannot believe illogical things.

Again it is the same problem. I am talking about what the Bible is saying, what the words mean, and you are denying what the words mean, which means that you are denying the Bible.
It's not a matter of interpretation. It is like if the Bible tells us that the sky is blue but you don't believe that, so you are saying that the Bible does not tell us that.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why not do research on the resurrection?

Q1: Where does one do that research?
Q2: What would it 'matter' if Jesus rose from the dead or not?

Why would it matter if Jesus had risen from the dead?

There have been so many threads being posted about Jesus rising from the dead, so I think it is about time someone asked why it matters so much to people, not only Christians but also atheists. :confused: So what is the significance of Jesus rising from the dead and why is it such a big deal to...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Trailblazer]

It's not about what you are willing to believe or not, it is about what the English translation is saying.
It was your mother who was an English teacher if I remember correctly, yet you don't seem to be able to understand English.

Again it is the same problem. I am talking about what the Bible is saying, what the words mean, and you are denying what the words mean, which means that you are denying the Bible.
It's not a matter of interpretation. It is like if the Bible tells us that the sky is blue but you don't believe that, so you are saying that the Bible does not tell us that.

Give it up for lost. The Bible dies not SAY that all things were created by Jesus, that is ONLY what you interpret the Bible to MEAN.
I interpret the Bible to mean what I said below.
The only thing I deny is your interpretation of the Bible.

Colossians 1

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

• Jesus was the one in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

• Jesus was the image of God, which means that Jesus was not God, since an image is not what it reflects; Jesus was like a mirror reflecting God.

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

• By him (the invisible God) all things were created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth.

Nowhere does the Bible say: For by Jesus were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth,
I am sorry you cannot understand that because your indoctrination will not allow it.
Jesus did not create all things because no man is all-powerful and all knowing. ONLY God could create all things.

 

[YoursTrue]

@SLPCCC - you asked,
Why is it that Jesus says that he will raise himself up when he dies instead of saying that his father will raise him up?

First of all, in order to understand this, I'd have to look at what did Jesus mean by the temple of his body. So please notice he says, temple OF my body. He did not say his body was a temple, but he spoke of the temple of his body.

 

[Brian2]

Give it up for lost. The Bible dies not SAY that all things were created by Jesus, that is ONLY what you interpret the Bible to MEAN.
I interpret the Bible to mean what I said below.
The only thing I deny is your interpretation of the Bible.

Colossians 1

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

• Jesus was the one in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

• Jesus was the image of God, which means that Jesus was not God, since an image is not what it reflects; Jesus was like a mirror reflecting God.

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

• By him (the invisible God) all things were created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth.

Nowhere does the Bible say: For by Jesus were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth,
I am sorry you cannot understand that because your indoctrination will not allow it.
Jesus did not create all things because no man is all-powerful and all knowing. ONLY God could create all things.

It's not a matter of interpretation, it is what the plain English translation says. Ask others what the meaning is. The meaning of John 1:3 and Col 1:15,16 is pretty much the same as that of the following verses.
Hebrews 1:1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

That word "through" is translated "through, or by".
God created everything through the Son, Jesus.

1Cor 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist. And there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist.

Hebrews 1:8 But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.”[e]
10 He also says, (about the Son)
“In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12 You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.”[f]

But yes, Jesus is the image of the invisible God, just as a Son is the image of His Father.
This is not an outer image, it is an inner image. This is said also in Hebrews 1
Heb 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.

 

[Ebionite]

Incest is not the right word to use regarding Adam and Eve and their immediate children.

It is the right word because that is what would have happened. If Adam & Eve were the only two people. The iron implement in Jasher implies that there was already an iron age society at that time.

 

[Trailblazer]

The meaning of John 1:3

2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:3 is clearly referring to God.

 

[YoursTrue]

It is the right word because that is what would have happened. If Adam & Eve were the only two people. The iron implement in Jasher implies that there was already an iron age society at that time.

Sorry, but I'm not going to argue this with you. I will say that whether you believe it or not, it is apparent to me (maybe not you) that mankind was genetically closer to health and physical perfection when they were first created and had children at the start. Bye for now. I hope things go well with you.

 

[Unfettered]

I've noticed on RF there are a lot of heretical (that's the technical term) Christians who disbelieve in the Trinity.

Why?

I believe in God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost, but disbelieve in the Trinity as described/defined in traditional Christianity because I recognize that the latter isn't reality. I am surely a heretic to some, but am indifferent to the label. God never called anyone a heretic; only man does that.

 

[YoursTrue]

The creeds were written BECAUSE of the variety of positions being taken, though. It's not the case that there was clear belief in the Trinity at the time of the Nicene Creed, and this merely codified it. Rather, it established what was to be considered heresy moving forwards. Earlier creeds were less detailed on the issue (ie. The Apostles Creed) and this resulted in a range of positions being maintained. I think it's worth at least acknowleding the political drivers behind the Trinity, even if you believe it is a fair blending of political pragmatism and theology.


It isn't only halfwits on the internet like me who question the Trinity.

Lol I don't think you're a half wit. If there weren't such a struggle among people there would be no need for various sects. And then of course when people were first exposed to read the Bible in their own languages, oh my!

 

[IndigoChild5559]

It is the right word because that is what would have happened. If Adam & Eve were the only two people. The iron implement in Jasher implies that there was already an iron age society at that time.

The book of Jasher is an 18th century forgery. What do you expect?

 

[Brian2]

It is the right word because that is what would have happened. If Adam & Eve were the only two people. The iron implement in Jasher implies that there was already an iron age society at that time.

We do not have the original book of Jasher as far as we know.

 

[Brian2]

2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:3 is clearly referring to God.

You can twist the clear meaning around with that verse but have not mentioned other verses I gave.
BTW Just because "God" is the closest word to "All things were made by him", that means nothing.

 

[SLPCCC]

Q1: Where does one do that research?
Q2: What would it 'matter' if Jesus rose from the dead or not?

Why would it matter if Jesus had risen from the dead?

There have been so many threads being posted about Jesus rising from the dead, so I think it is about time someone asked why it matters so much to people, not only Christians but also atheists. :confused: So what is the significance of Jesus rising from the dead and why is it such a big deal to...

www.religiousforums.com

A1: There are many avenues you can start on. I used to be an atheist, so I started watching debates between historian agnostics like Bart Ehrman and atheists like Richard Dawkins VS Christians Philosophers and theologians like William L. Craig and others. I also listened to debates between Islamic scholars and Christian theologians. I read books from both sides. My journey in this area was long-years, but it was well worth it. There's enough evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, which explains why there are billions of believers.

A2: If Jesus rose from the dead, atheism, Islam, and all other non-Christians are false. It's better to know the truth than to be in ignorance.

 

[SLPCCC]

@SLPCCC - you asked,
Why is it that Jesus says that he will raise himself up when he dies instead of saying that his father will raise him up?

First of all, in order to understand this, I'd have to look at what did Jesus mean by the temple of his body. So please notice he says, temple OF my body. He did not say his body was a temple, but he spoke of the temple of his body.

• The Son - John 2: 19-22 - Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." .... he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.

We know he was talking about the temple of his body. That's not the question. The question is, why does he say, in three days I will raise it up " instead of saying that his father will raise him up. Isn't both the body and temple of his body dead? How can he raise it up?

 

[metis]

I only asked because you stated four

At first there was four but then it says Cain took on a wife, whereas no other woman but Eve is mentioned.

 

[YoursTrue]

• The Son - John 2: 19-22 - Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." .... he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.

We know he was talking about the temple of his body. That's not the question. The question is, why does he say, in three days I will raise it up " instead of saying that his father will raise him up. Isn't both the body and temple of his body dead? How can he raise it up?

Actually to understand that he was speaking of the temple of his body and not his body itself, is very important.

 

[YoursTrue]

A1: There are many avenues you can start on. I used to be an atheist, so I started watching debates between historian agnostics like Bart Ehrman and atheists like Richard Dawkins VS Christians Philosophers and theologians like William L. Craig and others. I also listened to debates between Islamic scholars and Christian theologians. I read books from both sides. My journey in this area was long-years, but it was well worth it. There's enough evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, which explains why there are billions of believers.

A2: If Jesus rose from the dead, atheism, Islam, and all other non-Christians are false. It's better to know the truth than to be in ignorance.

I wonder what @metis thinks of your reply. My experience from turning from atheism to Christianity was not quite like yours, but nevertheless God reached me. Thanks for sharing.