Trinity

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Feb 23, 2011
1,708
13
0
#21
I believe in One God who dwelt in One Lord Jesus, for Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with God, equal in the sense that the Son of God was the express image of his person, the revelation of the word of God made flesh. For that bread that came down from heaven is the Holy Spirit of whom is all things, and all life proceeds from the light that lighteth every man that enters the world.

His name is the word of God, and Yeshua ha' mashiach is God that saves, the annointed one, the Holy One of God.

If you really believe that Jesus is God, then why don't you get baptized in his name? Acts 2:38, will not the bride take on the name of her husband? You don't even understand the power in his name, for his name is ONE, and the Lord is One, and his name means salvation.

Jesus is God Almighty manifested in the flesh and came to tabernacle among men, and when he ascended on high, he gave gifts to men and baptized them in his Holy Spirit which is the Spirit of Christ in you the hope of glory. I worship only one God who is the everlasting Father according to Isa. 9:6
YES! Preach THAT!!
 
Feb 23, 2011
1,708
13
0
#22
I am not character assassinating, I am pointing out that you can't reject what the bible teaches just because it doesn't seems to make sense to you. Otherwise you are allowing your pride to get in the way of trusting that God's Word is true.
"The Bible" doesn't teach Trinity. Trinity is a formulation of man by inference. You're making a doctrinal formulation central to salvific faith.


1 I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at[a] His appearing and His kingdom: 2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. 5 But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.
Yes, Trinity is a fable; so stop propagating untruth.
 
Feb 23, 2011
1,708
13
0
#23

Yes the word trinity is not in the Bible but it is a word that is used to describe what IS in the Bible. One of the most intelligent men of his time Augustine spent 19 years studying the concept and said "
if you deny the trinity you lose your soul, if you try to explain it lose your mind."

The problem I have with that explanation is how does a spoken word become flesh?
I can tell you in great detail how God's spoken word became flesh. You will reject it because you don't understand it; which is what you're saying someone else ought not do.

Briefly... The spoken word is comprised of two parts; rhema and logos. Rhema is the subject matter spoken ABOUT; logos is the thought AND speaking forth OF that subject matter. God's Rhema is the entirety of His own Divine self being pondered; God's Logos is the eternal external expression of that Rhema subject matter. God, by His breath (Spirit), spoke forth the complete substance and identity of His OWN self; which also brought forth the created realm in which the Logos would be embodied in a man by divine procreation. When Mary's faith-substance believed the Rhema-content substance spoken to her by the angel, the power of the Most High overshadowed Mary and the uncreated life of God's Logos was joined to Mary's ova and implanted in her womb.

The Transcendent God spoke forth the substance and identity of Himself to be believed by the faith-substance of the Virgin; thus becoming an Immanent Man with a human spirit-soul in a body. Yet His soul was propagated by God as His Father. Once spoken, the Logos divided-asunder God's vivifying Spirit from His Soul (Self) to indwell the Son and, ultimately, believing mankind. The Transcendent God spoke forth the divine substance and identity of Himself to be embodied as an Immanent Man. Two realms... One "Who". The Son inherited all that is the Father's, including His Soul and Spirit.

Jesus is the complete tangible, now glorified, embodiment of God's intangible substance and identity; and is the finite point of presence for His omnipresence. The image of the invisible God.

God is Spirit-Soul-Body of One Divinity.
 
B

barukhmalachi

Guest
#24
The pharisees had jesus right in front of them telling them the truth in plain words. They called that heresy as well. With any comments from anyone on this site you have to try it by the spirit. You have to listen to god not people. And sometimes that means stepping away from everything you have been taught or heard. 20 years of bible school can't make you an expert on god. I won't argue with people about things not affecting salvation or judge based on personal opiniin. Bottom line it don't matter if we know the answer to this question we will know someday. A question was presented and an answer given. Those who don't accept it, fine then don't. If your not a bible scholar and a certain answer bears witness with you fine. Christians should be working together teaching and lifting each other up not persecuting each other. Churchs drive people away for that reason. People no longer fear god they fear people and their judgements.
 
G

GraceBeUntoYou

Guest
#25
this is how i see it,

word = God's word

Holy Spirit = God's Spirit

Father = God's mind

the same became flesh, Jesus Christ.

nowhere in scripture does it say trinity.
It is absolutely fallacious to conclude that because the term "Trinity" is not found in the pages of Scripture that it must not be true. No where in Scripture do the words, "Bible," "monotheist," "omnipresent," "omnipotent," "omniscient" appear, so then obviously by the same rule of thumb God is not all-powerful, the "Bible" can't be true, nor is Monotheism for that matter. The sign of a failed argument is its inconsistency.
 
B

Brigitte

Guest
#26
And once again this thread proves how, no matter what the Scriptures say, man twist them to make them say what he believes.

The Trinity is real and is obvious when we read the Scriptures.
 
M

mori

Guest
#27
It is absolutely fallacious to conclude that because the term "Trinity" is not found in the pages of Scripture that it must not be true. No where in Scripture do the words, "Bible," "monotheist," "omnipresent," "omnipotent," "omniscient" appear, so then obviously by the same rule of thumb God is not all-powerful, the "Bible" can't be true, nor is Monotheism for that matter. The sign of a failed argument is its inconsistency.
Depends on the fidelity of your translation, I suppose. For example, bible is a loanword from the Greek biblia. Omnipotence is a Latin version of the Greek pantokrator. Omniscience is another Latin word. 1 John says that God is all knowing; more accurately, it describes God as "know<ing> all things." It's not a single adjective, granted.

Etc. At best, we can conclude that there are no Latin or English words derived from Latin in the scriptures, but in the same way there aren't any Chinese words there either, so this is a little boring.

I conclude, and I don't think it's too heretical, that there's no succinct phrase in the scriptures, call it X, which fits into the analogy "omnipotent is to pantokrator as Trinity is to X." This doesn't mean the Trinity isn't correct, but it explains what a lot of people mean by "the Trinity isn't in scripture."
 
Last edited:
Feb 23, 2011
1,708
13
0
#28
And once again this thread proves how, no matter what the Scriptures say, man twist them to make them say what he believes.

The Trinity is real and is obvious when we read the Scriptures.
Trinity is inferred, not "obvious"; and is propagated as default indoctrination. Man twisted Scripture to insert "persons" from pagan and Gnostic influences.

God is not three "persons", and Scripture doesn't say He is. It's inference and indoctrination.
 
Feb 23, 2011
1,708
13
0
#29
Depends on the fidelity of your translation, I suppose. For example, bible is a loanword from the Greek biblia. Omnipotence is a Latin version of the Greek pantokrator. Omniscience is another Latin word. 1 John says that God is all knowing; more accurately, it describes God as "know<ing> all things." It's not a single adjective, granted.

Etc. At best, we can conclude that there are no Latin or English words derived from Latin in the scriptures, but in the same way there aren't any Chinese words there either, so this is a little boring.

I conclude, and I don't think it's too heretical, that there's no succinct phrase in the scriptures, call it X, which fits into the analogy "omnipotent is to pantokrator as Trinity is to X." This doesn't mean the Trinity isn't correct, but it explains what a lot of people mean by "the Trinity isn't in scripture."
SO well said.
 

cronjecj

Banned [Reason: ongoing "extreme error/heresy" Den
Sep 25, 2011
1,934
13
0
#30
It is absolutely fallacious to conclude that because the term "Trinity" is not found in the pages of Scripture that it must not be true. No where in Scripture do the words, "Bible," "monotheist," "omnipresent," "omnipotent," "omniscient" appear, so then obviously by the same rule of thumb God is not all-powerful, the "Bible" can't be true, nor is Monotheism for that matter. The sign of a failed argument is its inconsistency.
REV 19:6

TRINITY MAKES IT SOUND THAT THERE ARE THREE GOD'S OF THE GODHEAD. <FALSE>

the LORD is one. Deuteronomy 6:4 (KJV)

there is no such thing as trinity.
 
B

Bloodwashed

Guest
#31
Well I must say I find this all very interesting. I'v got a few questions for any that wish to give me an answer. For the Jesus Only Brother I ask, "Can one have saving faith & believe in The Trinity?"---"Who spoke from Heaven @ Jesus's baptism?"---"How is it that Jesus will sit down @ The Right Hand of God?"-- How do you see , 1 Corinthians 15:24-28, for that matter, how do you trinitarians see that passage? OK, for you Trinitarians, " Is it possable to be Born Again & hold the Jesus Only Doctrine? I may have more questions later, but that will do for now! In His Love Mark!
 

cronjecj

Banned [Reason: ongoing "extreme error/heresy" Den
Sep 25, 2011
1,934
13
0
#32


Mark have some coffee with a flower in it.
 
B

Bloodwashed

Guest
#33
TY! I'v drank my limit of coffee today!
 

cronjecj

Banned [Reason: ongoing "extreme error/heresy" Den
Sep 25, 2011
1,934
13
0
#34
when Jesus spoke of His Father, he meant His godly state as it was from the beginning.

Jesus Christ was made a little lower then the angels for a while therefore He left His glory state as Father God and became a servant in flesh form for a while.. Hebrews 2:7 (KJV)

Jesus Christ is God Almighty in flesh form.

Jesus Christ sits on His throne in His glorified bodily form as the father RIGHT NOW. Hebrews 10:12-13 (KJV).. it says on His right hand but that is a sign of authority for there is only one throne and that is the one Christ sits in. His Spirit dwells in His chosen.

Jesus Christ is still God Almighty today. Rev 1:8 (KJV), Rev 1:18 (KJV)
 
G

GraceBeUntoYou

Guest
#35
Depends on the fidelity of your translation, I suppose. For example, bible is a loanword from the Greek biblia. Omnipotence is a Latin version of the Greek pantokrator. Omniscience is another Latin word. 1 John says that God is all knowing; more accurately, it describes God as "know<ing> all things." It's not a single adjective, granted.

Etc. At best, we can conclude that there are no Latin or English words derived from Latin in the scriptures, but in the same way there aren't any Chinese words there either, so this is a little boring.

I conclude, and I don't think it's too heretical, that there's no succinct phrase in the scriptures, call it X, which fits into the analogy "omnipotent is to pantokrator as Trinity is to X." This doesn't mean the Trinity isn't correct, but it explains what a lot of people mean by "the Trinity isn't in scripture."
The poster never said, "the Trinity isn't in Scripture," "the Trinity isn't taut in Scripture," or "the Trinity isn't expressed in Scripture." Let me remind you what this individual said, and that is, "No where in Scripture does it say, 'Trinity.'" In your observation you only prove the point that I was attempting to raise, and that is, that although the words "monotheist," "omnipotence," and "Trinity" (which is derived from the Latin "Trinitas"), aren't explicitly spelled out in Scripture, this is not to say that God's omni attributes, and His Triune nature are not taut explicitly in the Scripture.
 
Feb 23, 2011
1,708
13
0
#36
The poster never said, "the Trinity isn't in Scripture," "the Trinity isn't taut in Scripture," or "the Trinity isn't expressed in Scripture." Let me remind you what this individual said, and that is, "No where in Scripture does it say, 'Trinity.'" In your observation you only prove the point that I was attempting to raise, and that is, that although the words "monotheist," "omnipotence," and "Trinity" (which is derived from the Latin "Trinitas"), aren't explicitly spelled out in Scripture, this is not to say that God's omni attributes, and His Triune nature are not taut explicitly in the Scripture.
Explicitly? Hardly! Implicitly at most, by interpretation. Default entitlement and ignorant indoctrination of Trinitarians is bafflingly amazing.

Trinity is most certainly NOT explicitly taught in Scripture, Mr. Semantics. It's inferred.
 
M

mori

Guest
#37
Hrm? I show that those words are in there explicitly, merely in Greek rather than English. Pantokraton is a counterexample to your claim, as it means nothing other than omnipotence.
 
J

Joe90

Guest
#38
Well I must say I find this all very interesting. I'v got a few questions for any that wish to give me an answer. For the Jesus Only Brother I ask, "Can one have saving faith & believe in The Trinity?"---"Who spoke from Heaven @ Jesus's baptism?"---"How is it that Jesus will sit down @ The Right Hand of God?"-- How do you see , 1 Corinthians 15:24-28, for that matter, how do you trinitarians see that passage? OK, for you Trinitarians, " Is it possable to be Born Again & hold the Jesus Only Doctrine? I may have more questions later, but that will do for now! In His Love Mark!

1) God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit is clearly false.

You cannot be your own father.

2) 'Jesus Only' is also false.

You cannot be your own father.

Trinitarianism and Jesus Only concepts are false for the very same reason, which is kind of ironic when you think about it.
 
G

GraceBeUntoYou

Guest
#39
Depends on the fidelity of your translation, I suppose. For example, bible is a loanword from the Greek biblia. Omnipotence is a Latin version of the Greek pantokrator. Omniscience is another Latin word. 1 John says that God is all knowing; more accurately, it describes God as "know<ing> all things." It's not a single adjective, granted.

Etc. At best, we can conclude that there are no Latin or English words derived from Latin in the scriptures, but in the same way there aren't any Chinese words there either, so this is a little boring.

I conclude, and I don't think it's too heretical, that there's no succinct phrase in the scriptures, call it X, which fits into the analogy "omnipotent is to pantokrator as Trinity is to X." This doesn't mean the Trinity isn't correct, but it explains what a lot of people mean by "the Trinity isn't in scripture."

[FONT=&quot]Byblos[/FONT][FONT=&quot], the inner core of the papyrus plant which Egyptians used to make parchment, is the Semitic word from which the English term “Bible” is derived, and later became known as biblos by the Greeks. You seem to be blurring the line of distinction here between the word “biblos” as it was known, and “Bible” as it is commonly known today. Although the term is mentioned from which the word “Bible” is derived, you seem to be taking the English word “Bible” as we know of it and define it today, that is, the contents of Old and New Testament, and importing it back into the word from which it is derived that means no more than “papyrus,” “book,” or “scroll,” and was commonly used of any form of writing [/FONT][FONT=&quot](Acts 19:19; Matthew 19:7).

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So the point remains that nowhere in the Old Testament are the sacred writings ever referred to as what we commonly call today, “the Holy Bible,” “Holy Books,” “the sacred Books,” but more importantly, nor does the New Testament. Rather, [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Christ and His apostles often times referred to the writings of the Old Testament as the[/FONT][FONT=&quot]&#947;&#961;&#945;&#966;&#8053; (“Scripture”), and &#947;&#961;&#8049;&#956;&#956;&#945; (“writings”),[/FONT]
“and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings (&#947;&#961;&#8049;&#956;&#956;&#945;) which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”

“And again another Scripture (&#947;&#961;&#945;&#966;&#8053;) says, ‘THEY SHALL LOOK ON HIM WHOM THEY PIERCED.’"
It wasn’t until the 3rd century that “Ta Biblia” (“The Books”) emerged to exclusively describe the Christian collection of Scriptures. And though this point is only miniscule, it only proves the initial point: Just because a word isn’t present in the text and used to describe the nature and characteristics of God, it doesn’t disqualify it from being true, because by the same token the very title that we commonly use to describe the Scriptures is in no place throughout the Scriptures attributed to the Scriptures.
 
G

GraceBeUntoYou

Guest
#40
1) God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit is clearly false.

You cannot be your own father.

2) 'Jesus Only' is also false.

You cannot be your own father.

Trinitarianism and Jesus Only concepts are false for the very same reason, which is kind of ironic when you think about it.
[FONT=&quot]How can Trinitarianism and Oneness concepts be false for the "very same reason," when they don't even believe the very same thing? Trinitarians affirm that Jesus is not the Father, but by His instrinsic nature is equal to the Father.

Prior to the incarnation, that is, before the birth at Bethlehem, Christ did not have a beginning, rather, He pre-existed (John 1:29-30, 8:23, 8:58) from eternity at the side of the Father
[FONT=&quot][not "as the Father"] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot](John 1:1-14, John 17:5), where He participated in the Genesis creation as co-creator (John 1:3, 10). And John not only depicts Christ in such ways, but also ascribes to Him the very titles, "God" (John 1:1, 18; 20:28), "the Alpha and the Omega" (Revelation 22:13), "the First and the Last" (Revelation 2:8, 22:13), "the Beginning and the End" (Revelation 3:14, 22:13), who just so happens to also be the recipient of prayer (John 14:14; 1 John 5:10-15; Revelation 22:20-21), which in its highest sense is a form of worship. We are not only told that the Father raised Christ from the dead, but that the Son Himself was also active in the participation of His own physical resurrection (John 2:19, 10:17-18).

[/FONT]