Why So Much Trinity Bashing?

[walt]

An alternative word the translators could have used instead is ‘MIGHTY HERO’.

Hero’s are mighty ones… so MIGHTY MIGHTY ONES. But yet even might might heroes DIE…!!!

Almighty HERO GOD never dies - Almighty Hero God (YHWH, the Father) is Spirit, and Spirit cannot DIE.

I agree with you, I just don't like to use the word Almighty unless I am talking about The Father, because Jesus gives the credit to his Father for almost everything, and I like to follow Jesus lead. For example John 17:3, Jesus could have taken credit for himself, but instead he gives all the credit to his Father in prayer.

 

[Soapy]

So, you believe in Henotheism. Christian monotheists don't believe in this. We believe that there is only one God. Everything else mentioned in scripture as gods are just rulers, fake gods, wannabe gods, self-made gods, and idols. There can only be One God. One who creates.

Why are you putting labels on me… ?

NO, I do not believe in Henotheism… The truth does not have a LABEL since, as you’ve seen, every labelled belief contain FAULTS, ERRORS, LIMITS to its ideological truth.

There are no ‘FAKE GODS’. ‘GODS’ are what humans BELIEVE on as their SPIRITUAL RULERS. There are ‘FALSE GODS’ though.

False Gods are those who are actually impotent in terms of actual power and authority and rely on ignorance and aggression, force and threats to get their way… and these are all HUMANS calling themselves a ‘GOD’. God of stick, stones, water, etc., are human declared and manipulations. In the scriptures it tells of men who entered the sanctuary of their Gods and eat the food sacrificed to those God to make it seem like those inanimate Gods were eating the food. Obviously these people were found out and severely punished.

But WHATEVER, YHWH GOD said that, ‘I am GOD over ALL whom are CALLED Gods!!’
And the apostle stated, ‘THOUGH THERE ARE GODS… aplenty… FOR US, there is only ONE GOD’. This does not DENY, in fact is emphatic, that there are ONES CALLED ‘GODs’ (MIGHTY ONES, HEROES…!) but nonetheless these are impotent in respect of YHWH, THE ALMIGHTY GOD.

Satan IS A MIGHTY GOD in context of the ANGELS… he is the MASTER and RULER of the DEMONS. But even powerful as he is, YHWH is greater and a TRUE GOD… (as opposed to a FALSE GOD like Satan or a powerful earthly ruler. a ‘Fake God’ is easily found out. Sorry for the deep definition but correct words matter in the long run and for fuller understanding!)

 

[Soapy]

I agree with you, I just don't like to use the word Almighty unless I am talking about The Father, because Jesus gives the credit to his Father for almost everything, and I like to follow Jesus lead.

You are right to only use the SUPERLATIVE ADJECTIVE, ‘ALMIGHTY’, for YHWH GOD.

There is no one EQUAL to the almighty one, let alone above, Him… And there can only EVER be ONE Almighty!!!

Trinity claims that there are THREE ALMIGHTY ONES… how’s that???

Understand the absurdity: ‘Why could there ever be TWO, of THREE who are ALMIGHTY?’
What NEED would there ever be for TWO or THREE Almighty ones when ONE ALMIGHTY can do ALL THINGS BY HIMSELF???

Trinity claims three Almighty ones who are RANKED in order of AUTHORITY and POWER… where ond teaches another and one TAKES from what is another’s…

Confused? ‘You should be’ since it is a nonsense!!

 

[walt]

You are right to only use the SUPERLATIVE ADJECTIVE, ‘ALMIGHTY’, for YHWH GOD.

There is no one EQUAL to the almighty one, let alone above, Him… And there can only EVER be ONE Almighty!!!

Trinity claims that there are THREE ALMIGHTY ONES… how’s that???

Understand the absurdity: ‘Why could there ever be TWO, of THREE who are ALMIGHTY?’
What NEED would there ever be for TWO or THREE Almighty ones when ONE ALMIGHTY can do ALL THINGS BY HIMSELF???

I would actually believe anything!! I just first need Jesus and his Father to instruct me to believe this new way. Jesus explains most every step! Jesus wanted his followers to show more love, so he gave them a new commandment, to love one another and he explains in detail all the different ways we can show love to one another. I think to believe in the Trinity, something that Is supposed to be so important, wouldn't it require a new commandment?

 

[Soapy]

I would actually believe anything!! I just first need Jesus and his Father to instruct me to believe this new way. Jesus explains most every step! Jesus wanted his followers to show more love, so he gave them a new commandment, to love one another and he explains in detail all the different ways we can show love to one another. I think to believe in the Trinity, something that Is supposed to be so important, wouldn't it require a new commandment?

But no one taught anything about a trinity in the early years. There is no such thing as a trinity so it’s a pointless argument to try to set a possible justification for it.

Think of it like this: Rogue sects in the new church desire to baptise and proselytise more people into the new church to make a name for themselves. They play on the religious beliefs of nations and tribes whom they encounter where all of them believe in multiple Gods as they’d rulers. WHAT BETTER and EASIER way to proselytise them than to INCORPORATE THEIR BELIEFS with the new church belief of ONE GOD.

So, their MANY GODS become several deities BUT JUST SAY ‘they are ONE GOD’. The people say, ‘Yeah, we can go with that… fine, we’ll accept the new belief…. Ha ha ha.. one person doing EVERYTHING… ha ha ha… what nonsense - but several deities doing all things - yeah, sure!!’

Now read the Athanasian creed: ‘There is God the Father, there is God the Son, and there is God the Holy Spirit - but though they are three yet they are only ONE GOD’… what did I say in that anecdote above?

Both sides are satisfied… Those who believe in polytheism with three Gods, and the new belief that there is only one God… Bingo - the deception is complete…. Except that others have twigged the deceit and call it out (By the way, I’m not a supporter of Arianism, either!!). Then begins the bogus excuses why nothing works:

• Where did the Son come from - all sons come from a Father!
• Why is Jesus a man when he is God?? How did he ‘Empty himself’ yet still remained exactly what he was?
• How did the son die yet he was God who cannot die? How was he raised up from the dead BY God if he IS GOD?
• Why is the third God SO MUCH LESS than the others, even ‘Taking of what is ‘ of the second in rank - can equality have a rank order?
• Why didn’t the Father come as man instead of the Son?
• Is the Father equal to the holy Spirit - and the Son?
• How does an equal SEND another equal…??? Why…? That absolutely smacks of a greater sending lesser. The Father SENDS both the Son AND the Holy Spirit?
• Why does the Son AWARDED to rule over creation BY THE Father if he (Jesus) created it?
• The Holy Spirit does not sit on s throne in Heaven… How, if it is God, it has no ‘seat’ of rulership??
• More…….

 

[Soapy]

I would actually believe anything!! I just first need Jesus and his Father to instruct me to believe this new way. Jesus explains most every step! Jesus wanted his followers to show more love, so he gave them a new commandment, to love one another and he explains in detail all the different ways we can show love to one another. I think to believe in the Trinity, something that Is supposed to be so important, wouldn't it require a new commandment?

GOD and Jesus are speaking to you now in what I’m saying to you!!!

By the way, Brian2 is doing an absolute classic deception. He is pitching his BINITY belief against the TRINITY belief and getting himself not an awful tangle.

So, to offset this, he is trying to get you to answer for trinity beliefs and putting anti-trinity to you at the same time so you are completely as confused as he is…. It’s easy to confuse others because he himself is confused.

Do not be drawn into questioning him about things you are not sure about as he will see you are unsure and use that against you as he has done in his next post to you.

He has been caught out many many times but thinks of you as new blood to suck any truth out of and spit it on the ground.

 

[Brian2]

You could find 100 scriptures that seem to prove a belief. So can I find 100 scriptures. This could go on forever.

Jesus and his Father will explain what I believe: John 3:16, 17:3, Luke 9:35, Matthew 17:5

So you don't know how to answer what I said and think that if you can find your beliefs in the Bible then that means you don't need to answer what I said.
I believe the verses you chose also. Jesus is God's Son and was sent by God for us to put our faith in Him. Trinitarians don't believe that the Father is the Son btw.
But that is not all that the Bible says and you seem to want to ignore what I gave from the Bible.
You say you don't want proof texts and you go ahead and give your proof texts while ignoring what I said.

Can you fully explain all the words that define the Trinity belief, by quoting Jesus and his Father's words alone?

The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit are one God. These three are co-equal
co-eternal and co-existent. --This is the short version.

By quoting Jesus and His Father's words alone, does that mean that you don't accept quotes from the epistles a nd apostles etc?
I find that when I quote the Bible many people either twist the meaning or ignore it. You are ignoring the Bible passages I gave and I know that if you answered it would be to twist the meaning.
Actually the passages I gave do show that Jesus is YHWH, and that is well on the way to the trinitarian belief.

 

[Brian2]

So God doesn't have one will, you say? Then how many wills does God have?

I did not say that God does not have one will. I was saying that I did not agree with your reasoning and conclusions.

Not so. As I keep mentioning, there are five Jesuses in the NT with three main models, namely Mark's adopted ordinary human on the model of David, Matthew's and Luke's absurd virgin story, and Paul's and John's Jesus who pre-existed in heaven with God and created the material universe, unlike the other three.

Then we disagree on what the New Testament teaches. You have Jesus as either this or that, depending on the gospel etc and I have Jesus as both this and that.
Your way of doing it is like people to say that Mark knew nothing about the virgin birth because he did not mention it, or that the things that Matthew includes in the birth narrative did not happen because they are not in Luke,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, or vice versa. It's not logical thinking.

If pointing out what the NT actually says is, as you say, "just another way to discredit the unity of the Bible as the Word of God" then the word of God is something not found in the bible.

Instead it appears to be a quality wished on it by particular readers for their subjective reasons ─ if that's wrong, please correct me and explain the actual situation.

I explained the situation above and you no doubt have heard it many times before. Different versions of history include or omit different things and that does not make any of them wrong.

Where does any NT version of Jesus say that?

Heb 1:1-4

Which words of it do you say asserts that Jesus is equal in nature to God?

Hebrews 1? What words are you pointing to there, exactly?

They both say God's in charge, not Jesus, as far as I can make them out.

Heb 1:3 talks of the nature of Jesus in many translations.
Heb 1:1 shows that the Son was the Son at the creation.
Phil 2:6 shows Jesus equality with His Father, as does John 5:18.
The very idea of God having been the Father of Jesus shows the equality of nature.
But the Father is the Father and the Son is the Son and the Son always submits to the will of His Father even when a man on earth and facing torture and death.

 

[SLPCCC]

YHWH (Yaweh) + the Word was a god = Polytheism/Henetheism

YHWH (Yaweh) + the Word was God = Monotheism
​

Believe what the scriptures say, not what men leaders tell you. The polytheistic teaching of having a heavenly God the Father and a heavenly Mighty God goes against the clear teaching of the scriptures that there is only one God. Changing John 1:1 to fit a teaching (adding "a") should be a red flag that the change is nefarious!!

1. "I am He, And there is no god besides Me;" Deut 32:39, NASB
2. Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me. Isaiah 43:10
3. Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.'" Isaiah 43:10
4. "I am the LORD, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God. Isaiah 44:8

• John 1:1 it reads, In the beginning, was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

**Just because you don't understand how Jesus and the Father is the same God doesn't mean that it's not possible and false. Nothing is impossible for God.

 

[SLPCCC]

So did the first-century Christians.
Acts 2:42. They were very organized, as the Greek Scriptures reveal. They had to be, to follow Christ’s command @ Matthew 28:19,20.

How could the counsel about unity at 1 Corinthians 1:10 be applied, without organization?

Jesus established a church for worship and to teach, not an organization. So what if they organized at a house church to make a decision. That doesn't mean that they established an organization. You get taught by an organization about the bible. I go to a church to worship and get spiritual food from the bible.

• 1 John 2:27 . . . "You don't need anyone to teach you the truth. But since his anointing teaches you about all things (it's true and not a lie), remain in relationship to him just as he taught you.

• John 16: 13- 15 “When the Spirit of Truth comes, he will guide you in all truth. He will glorify me, because he will take what is mine and proclaim it to you . . . Everything that the Father has is mine. That's why I said that the Spirit takes what is mine and will proclaim it to you.”

• John 14:26 shows that the Spirit teaches, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit… will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.

 

[walt]

So you don't know how to answer what I said and think that if you can find your beliefs in the Bible then that means you don't need to answer what I said.
I believe the verses you chose also. Jesus is God's Son and was sent by God for us to put our faith in Him. Trinitarians don't believe that the Father is the Son btw.
But that is not all that the Bible says and you seem to want to ignore what I gave from the Bible.
You say you don't want proof texts and you go ahead and give your proof texts while ignoring what I said.



By quoting Jesus and His Father's words alone, does that mean that you don't accept quotes from the epistles a nd apostles etc?
I find that when I quote the Bible many people either twist the meaning or ignore it. You are ignoring the Bible passages I gave and I know that if you answered it would be to twist the meaning.
Actually the passages I gave do show that Jesus is YHWH, and that is well on the way to the trinitarian belief.

I think you and me and most everyone commenting in this forum, have one thing in common? We all love Jesus and His Father and we all find scriptures We believe strongly about!
What would happen almost immediately if we all tried our best to love one another no matter what they believe? I think something very valuable will begin to grow in so many ways! Does anyone have any advice they could add?

 

[metis]

Jesus established a church for worship and to teach, not an organization.

But it was and still is an "organization" as well.

 

[walt]

So you don't know how to answer what I said and think that if you can find your beliefs in the Bible then that means you don't need to answer what I said.
I believe the verses you chose also. Jesus is God's Son and was sent by God for us to put our faith in Him. Trinitarians don't believe that the Father is the Son btw.
But that is not all that the Bible says and you seem to want to ignore what I gave from the Bible.
You say you don't want proof texts and you go ahead and give your proof texts while ignoring what I said.



By quoting Jesus and His Father's words alone, does that mean that you don't accept quotes from the epistles a nd apostles etc?
I find that when I quote the Bible many people either twist the meaning or ignore it. You are ignoring the Bible passages I gave and I know that if you answered it would be to twist the meaning.
Actually the passages I gave do show that Jesus is YHWH, and that is well on the way to the trinitarian belief.

For example.. Say a person has a belief in the Trinity.
Does Jesus and his Father give us details that instruct us to believe this way?

I too have a belief and every detail is explained by Jesus and his Father combined, to support my belief.

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. --John 3:16

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. --John 17:3

A voice came from the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him.” --luke 9:35

While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!” --Matthew 17:5

Not all scriptures can explain fully, every detail of a person's belief 100%.

If you have any suggestions or a better way? I am open to learning anything that will help me better understand Jesus words.

 

[YoursTrue]

You speak as if you think I believe Jesus is the Father and that Jesus would not be submitting to His Father after His resurrection.
But the Father is the Father and the Son is the Son and the Son, esp when He is also a man, submits to His Father, His God.
Yes the Father is the God of the Son in the Bible and I believe that. He became Jesus God when Jesus became a man, as Psalm 22:10 tells us.

Please explain how Psalm 22:10 says that Jesus became a "godman" or God in the flesh equal to the other two supposed members of a Trinity?. Thank you for referencing that Psalm though.

 

[YoursTrue]

But it was and still is an "organization" as well.

Although we have different beliefs, I agree that a church is definitely an organization.

 

[SLPCCC]

A religious organization is man-made. The Church that Jesus established is more like a body—a grand and glorious organism of the body of Christ, composed of many different members who have been supernaturally added by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Church is an Organization​	Church is an Organism​
It would be created by men.	It would be created by the creator.
It would have a human head with some haughty title like Grand Poohbah, elders.	It would have a godhead the Lord Jesus Christ who died for the sins of the world.
It would be organized by man-made rules, regulations, by-laws, and creeds that evolve over time.	It would be living with the life-giving power that flows from the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ
You could join the organization, change organizations, or leave at any time that was convenient for you, but you will be shun.	You would have to be supernaturally added to the organism by the power of the Holy Spirit
There would be lots of organizations to account for different understandings of doctrine, different styles of worship, and different opinions about everything else	There would be only one body of Christ composed of all the members who are as different from each other as the eye, mouth, hand, and foot of the body
The members would struggle with one another for preeminence	The members would care for one another with genuine love
You could be excommunicated from an organization if you disobeyed its laws	You would be a permanent part of the organism that rejoices with each other and suffers with each other

 

[blü 2]

I did not say that God does not have one will. I was saying that I did not agree with your reasoning and conclusions.

But you haven't addressed the question. The Trinity doctrine says God is one substance and three persons, and that results (as I've mentioned) in nonsense.

Since (it appears) you disagree that the Trinity Doctrine is nonsense, please explain to me whether (a) each of the Father, Jesus and the Ghost has a will distinct from the other two, or (b) does not, resulting in only one will between them (which results in them being all aspects of a single entity).

If those options don't cover your view, please explain why not and what instead, so that I can understand what you're arguing.

Then we disagree on what the New Testament teaches. You have Jesus as either this or that, depending on the gospel etc and I have Jesus as both this and that.

I read the texts using usual principles of historians. The writings of Paul are not fully settled, but there's a central body of his letters that are taken to be authentic. Each of the four gospels has a distinct author. On certain points the gospels copy or paraphrase Mark, the first gospel written. On other points they go their own way.

So the NT has five versions of Jesus which disagree with each other on various points. Any attempt to pick and choose a favored "unified reading" results in a sixth version which doesn't agree with the other five but simply the editor's personal view. That may be convenient for the Christian sales department, but it's nonsense from a historian's views.

Your way of doing it is like people to say that Mark knew nothing about the virgin birth because he did not mention it,

Absolutely correct. We have zero reasons to think that Mark knew anything of the virgin birth tale, AND his version is incompatible with it. His Jesus is an ordinary Jewish young male until his baptism, and then and only then does God appear and adopt him as [his] son, exactly as [he] had earlier adopted David as [his] son in Psalm 2:7. EITHER there was a virgin birth announced by angels to Mary (Matthew, Luke) and her resulting child was raised accordingly OR Jesus was simply a Jewish human until his adoption (Mark).

I mean, that's hardly rocket science ─ simply what the texts say.

or that the things that Matthew includes in the birth narrative did not happen because they are not in Luke,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, or vice versa. It's not logical thinking.

I repeat what I said above.

I explained the situation above and you no doubt have heard it many times before. Different versions of history include or omit different things and that does not make any of them wrong.

You can't logically attribute knowledge to someone simply because you'd like to. All you have is the evidence of what they said and what they didn't say.

And as I've pointed out, this results in three distinct and incompatible versions of Jesus.

Heb 1:1-4
Heb 1:1 shows that the Son was the Son at the creation.

That would be compatible with the Jesuses of Paul and of John, but not with the other three.

Also lacking is any way of reconciling the claim, in Paul and in John that their Jesuses pre-existed in heaven with God AND created the material universe with the Genesis account to the contrary.

Phil 2:6 shows Jesus equality with His Father, as does John 5:18.
The very idea of God having been the Father of Jesus shows the equality of nature.

That would make God a young unmarried Jewish male who never once claimed to be God and went out of his way to make sure he was put to death by the Romans. So I respectfully disagree.

But the Father is the Father and the Son is the Son and the Son always submits to the will of His Father even when a man on earth and facing torture and death.

Therefore Jesus (exactly as all five versions of him said) is NOT God, but the trusted envoy of God.

 

[walt]

Therefore Jesus (exactly as all five versions of him said) is NOT God, but the trusted envoy of God.

I believe saying this you agree with the majority of everything said in the Bible. At the same time I have the deepest respect for people that believe in the Trinity, a lot of scriptures sound Trinitarian, it seems very confusing. I used to believe in the Trinity and would defend it tooth and nail. So I know how it feels to be on both sides of the fence!

 

[blü 2]

I believe saying this you agree with the majority of everything said in the Bible.

In the present context my argument is about what the bible actually says. It gives three irreconcilable versions of Jesus. It's not possible for more than one of them to be right, but it's possible, as a matter of history, for all three to be wrong. However, history as such isn't the topic on the table at this point of the conversation.

At the same time I have the deepest respect for people that believe in the Trinity, a lot of scriptures sound Trinitarian, it seems very confusing. I used to believe in the Trinity and would defend it tooth and nail. So I know how it feels to be on both sides of the fence!

Fair comment. Outside of the debate forums of RF, I don't mind what people believe ─ instead I care about whether they try to do no harm and to treat others with decency, respect, inclusion and common sense.

 

[YoursTrue]

I believe saying this you agree with the majority of everything said in the Bible. At the same time I have the deepest respect for people that believe in the Trinity, a lot of scriptures sound Trinitarian, it seems very confusing. I used to believe in the Trinity and would defend it tooth and nail. So I know how it feels to be on both sides of the fence!

How very interesting, walt, thank you for sharing. Since I never took seriously before I believed in God anything about a trinity (or hellfire for that matter), I am happy to better understand what the Bible says, and why God is NOT a triune combination of three separate and distinct but equal to the other individuals said to be one God. It didn't make sense before I believed in God, and it doesn't make sense now.