The Trinity Doctrine is an unnecessary stumbling block

In scripture we never read about people preaching the Trinity or insisting that people believe it in order to have true faith in God.

Over the centuries many Christians have diverged and insisted that people believe in the Trinity as the foundation of true faith in God. While this belief indeed is the Roman Catholic Faith, Christians should never make this doctrine a requirement as it only proves to alienate people from the way.

In scripture we are told that stumbling blocks are inevitable, but woe to the them that lay them. Think about it, if you insist on this doctrine and it keeps a person from receiving the son of God, then you have contributed to blocking the way of salvation to that person.

We should be wise and stick to teaching what is written. God sent his son into the world to save men. He died for our sins, rose from the dead, and is seated at the right-hand of God and interceding for us. This is written.

Keep it simple. Simplicity in Christ. He is the son of the living God, the messiah, and the one whom God made Lord. There is no point in insisting on things that are not written, especially if they become the deal breaker from them receiving the son of God.

This topic is empty.

Viewing 20 posts - 261 through 280 (of 907 total)

←1 2 3…131415…44 45 46 →

Author
Posts
July 7, 2016 at 1:00 am#815633
NickHassan
Participant
Hi hoghead,
There is no trinity.
Seek the God of Israel.
July 7, 2016 at 11:25 am#815651
Proclaimer
Participant
I don’t doubt you have studied some material, I don’t know what, on the Trinity. However, I also do not doubt that you did not give the matter sufficient study. There are simply too many claims you make that do not fit the facts of the case.
Hoghead. I have been debating with Trinitarians in these forums for the last fifteen years (approx). In that time, I have come up against all manner of Trinity and even Binity. It seems you may have a unique Trinity that I have not come across, but perhaps it is just a variant of modalism or oneness which I have also come up against for years now.
I invite you to a debate on the Trinity or your belief. Would you be interested? You can take as long as you like to form your answers. It will not tax your time.
July 7, 2016 at 1:45 pm#815668
hoghead1
Participant
HI, t8,
That may be the problem. You may well have been looking at the Trinity as expressed in these forms. However, that is a long, long way from the Trinity as represented out there, in the real world of doctrine and teachings. The fact you feel unfamiliar with what I have had to say tells me right there there’s a whole world of Trinitarian thought you have yet to explore.
July 7, 2016 at 3:09 pm#815677
AndrewAD
Participant
Dear Hoghead,
What undue name calling did I call you? a simplistic modalist who calls himself a trin? Why are you with your higher education being so theologically and personally sensitive? Am I wrong in my assessment? I could’ve called you much worse and condemned you to eternal flames. You’re personally offended by my theological ribbing? It’s nothing personal. I get the feeling that you’ve never been a fundamentalist? Is that right? But if you want to talk theology you should be prepared to take some heat. Do you know anything of fundamentalist modalists? I laughed when I made that post to you about it last night and I think it was the Trinity that inspired me or maybe just the devil that tempted me? I do understand where you’re coming from about the ignorant or non thinkers to take the front row but your modalism can and does fit that bill too.
Oh and btw your buddy Nick is a former modalist and I am a polytheistic Arian with a seventh grade education.:)
July 7, 2016 at 6:47 pm#815679
hoghead1
Participant
HI, Andrew,
Being sensitive is part of being a good theologian. In the scholarly world, you get marked off, and rightly so, for trying to dump on your opponent’s character. “Heat” is one thing, dumping on someone’s character is something else altogether. Also, your “ribbing” is rude and uncalled for. Save that for some place else, would you please? You could have called me much worse? You shouldn’t be calling me or anyone else here anything. You’re a polytheistic Arian? Where did you come up with that label. it’s silly, because Arius want not a polytheist .
July 8, 2016 at 9:09 pm#815724
Proclaimer
Participant
HI, t8,
That may be the problem. You may well have been looking at the Trinity as expressed in these forms. However, that is a long, long way from the Trinity as represented out there, in the real world of doctrine and teachings. The fact you feel unfamiliar with what I have had to say tells me right there there’s a whole world of Trinitarian thought you have yet to explore.
Why should I care about the Trinity Doctrine in the first place? Why try so hard to prove a variant of the Trinity Doctrine is the truth. No such question is ever posed in scripture. If you research history, you can clearly see that it developed as a doctrine during what can only be described a a dodgy period of time when the Roman Emperor pretty much took over and had the last say, or at least created another Church where he had the last say.
It is an absolute joke that I need to somehow embrace the Trinity. I have already disposed of a long queue of Trinitarians and their views and the queue it seems never ends. This is really quite funny, but also serious. All these people being sold the Trinity and from there, their imaginations conjure up ideas and views that they think are revolutionary. Poor people that feel the need to get others to believe in a doctrine that is not mentioned once in scripture. And worse to make it the foundation of their Church of which most denominations do just shows how entrenched the Trinity is in the minds of many religious.
I haven’t read your particular flavor of Trinity yet, but that is because I likely overlooked it in this maze of topics and posts. Feel free to make it the focus of a new topic and it will be found easily. So long as it is buried away on the ??? page of a topic that may or may not be related to the Trinity makes it hard for me to have an opinion on your doctrine. But if I can find it, then I will surely use scripture to test it. I might even create the topic myself and copy and paste your ideas there for easy future reference.
July 9, 2016 at 6:24 am#815737
kerwin
Participant
Hoghead,
Jesus discussing sources and that is never off topic. If both parties cannot agree on sources a debate there is no basis for a meaningful conversation.
July 9, 2016 at 8:54 am#815738
hoghead1
Participant
Hi, Kerwin,
Afraid I don’t follow your post at all. Jesus discussing sources? What does that mean?
July 9, 2016 at 9:36 am#815742
hoghead1
Participant
Hi, t8,
You have a whoe thread her on the Trinity. Now you tell me you’re not interested in the Trinity. Also, one more post from this forum with foul language in it, and I am going to blacklist your forum.
July 9, 2016 at 10:08 am#815743
kerwin
Participant
It is bad English.
The word Jesus should not of been in the sentence. I got one though mixed up with another and it just fell apart after that. Here is the correction.
Discussing sources is never off topic as agreement on them is necessary to have a constructive conversation. It can become meaningless if not agreement can be had and one keeps attempting to do so.
July 9, 2016 at 10:13 am#815744
kerwin
Participant
Hoghead,
Was there actual bad language or is it just something you are calling bad language? The words “bad language” is generally used for sexually crude language which has become acceptable though unprofessional in our culture.
July 9, 2016 at 11:21 am#815748
hoghead1
Participant
Hi, Kerwin,
Yes, it was foul language. I am sure you can read the post from the Jewpenetrator, which is what I am talking about here.
July 9, 2016 at 11:23 am#815749
hoghead1
Participant
HI again, Kerwin,
Yes, true.
July 9, 2016 at 1:47 pm#815752
Ed J
Participant
Hi, Kerwin,
Yes, it was foul language. I am sure you can read the post from the Jewpenetrator, which is what I am talking about here.
Hi Hoghead1,
He is a new guy, that is his only post so far. Send Admin a text,
he is the one who can do something about the that guy. …[b](Link)[/b]
____________
God bless
Ed J
July 10, 2016 at 9:34 am#815762
kerwin
Participant
Ed,
I read it after I asked the question and see what you see Thank you for contacting the admin.
July 10, 2016 at 11:56 pm#815785
Proclaimer
Participant
Yep, I saw his post. I will let him stay and monitor the situation. He is not beyond help, so will leave it for that reason. If he turns out to be here to cause trouble only, then I can remove him easily enough.
July 12, 2016 at 11:08 am#815845
AndrewAD
Participant
Hell-Oh Hoghead,
“Being sensitive is part of being a good theologian. In the scholarly world, you get marked off, and rightly so, for trying to dump on your opponent’s character. “Heat” is one thing, dumping on someone’s character is something else altogether. Also, your “ribbing” is rude and uncalled for. Save that for some place else, would you please? You could have called me much worse? You shouldn’t be calling me or anyone else here anything. You’re a polytheistic Arian? Where did you come up with that label. it’s silly, because Arius want not a polytheist .”
And just where did I dump on your character my friend? no I dumped on your theology.How is it that you don’t understand the difference? Did your oh so smart and wise Big Ten theology not teach you any better than that? Do you not recall that in the ages of your many so called “fathers”they killed each other for theological differences? Like what supposedly happened to the dear martyr St. Augustine? But I wish you no harm at all.
You call others simpletons yet you cry and cannot handle it when I point out your simplistic modalism? Oh please “being sensitive is part of being a good theologian”? says who? you’re being personally sensitive about theological issues yet you complain that your churches could care less about such things.Isn’t that what you stated? So you come here to talk theology and can’t handle a little criticism of yours? my “ribbing” was theological and not personal. So you take it personal,which only shows all your so called theological and intellectual learning is nothing solid but only personal opinion.
And yes I gave you some fuel by calling myself a polytheistic Arian. And how is it in all your learning you don’t understand what I say? Of course Arius or those of like mind don’t want to call themselves that. But that was the real issue; if Jesus is a created lesser god and is worthy of worship then does that not make two Gods not one? thus polytheism,and the need to somehow make them one-the Trinity. But even your so called” fathers” openly rejected modalism unless you would like to claim Sabellius.
July 13, 2016 at 7:19 pm#815858
Admin
Keymaster
Not sure if it was intentional AndrewAD, but I haven’t seen a speech bubble inside a speech bubble before. I checked out your code. Now I know how to do that too.
July 14, 2016 at 2:46 pm#815885
AndrewAD
Participant
Oh no I didn’t do that intentionally and even wondered why it came out that way. It must’ve been foreordained by the Father and perhaps even by the Son and Holy Ghost.
July 14, 2016 at 7:11 pm#815893
Proclaimer
Participant
🙂
🙂
🙂
🙂
🙂
🙂
🙂
🙂
Author
Posts

Viewing 20 posts - 261 through 280 (of 907 total)

←1 2 3…131415…44 45 46 →

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Recent Replies

Forums

Forum Topics

POPULAR WRITINGS

Study Tools

ABOUT THIS SITE

Navigation